ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

May 26,

1971

Environmental Protection Agency

)

PCB 71-28

Danville Sanitary District

Mr. F. Daniel Welsch, Assistant Attorney Genera?

for the Environmental Protection Agency

Mr. Frank J. Meyer, Acton, Baldwin, Bookwalter & Meyer

for the Danville Sanitary District

Opinion 

the Board (by Mr, Dumelle)

On February 26, 1971 the Environmental Protection Agency (Agency)

filed a complaint alleging that the Danville Sanitary District (Distric t)

from approximately July 1, 1960 to the date of the hearing had operate~

its sewage treatment facilitieb so as to allow the discharge of un-

treated or insufficiently treated sewage into the Vermillion River

which resulted in the pollution of the river in violation of Section lIe

of tie Environmental Protection Act (Act) and Rule 1,08 (10) (b) of

regulation SNB-9, Further the complaint alleged that the District was

in violation of Rule 1,08 (l2)~ofSWB~9by (1) failing to submit plans

and specifications for required plant improvements by January 1,1970

and (2) failing to award a contract for construction of the required

facilities by July 1, l970~ The complaint also averred that from

July 1, 1970 to the date of the hearing the District had operated its

sewage treatment facilities in such a manner so as to create obnoxious

odors causing air ~~llution in violation of Section 9(a) of the Act,

On Agril 19, 1971 a hearing was held in this matter. At the

commencement of the hearinc counsel for the District stated that the

parties had agreed to stipulate that the averments in the complaint wera

all true and that the District desired to present testimony in miti~

qation (R~5) At that point the Agency rested its case (R,7)

The District proceeded by introducing Dr, Cecil Lue—Hing, a

consulting sanitary engineer who had undertaken a study of the District

starting in November or December, 1970 (R,9)  Dr. Lue—Hing outlined

the organization and operation of the District, He stated that the

facilities were constructed in 1936 and were operated at that initial

capacity until l958~ The physical plant was expanded in 1958 increasinç

the capacity for secondary treatment. In 1967 there was a second

expansion~ The plant was nodified and made larger with unit processes

similar to those already in existence, namely secondary treatment,

sludge digestion and sludge lagooning, At that time the capacity of th

plant was increased to handle the waste from ~apopulation equivalent

of 165,000, The plant could handle up to 8,000,000 gallons a day for

dry weather conditions and up to 20,000,000 gallons a day during period

of storm, The plant performed satisfactorily until about l963~ During

that year the performance deteriorated ~until the State required that

corrective measures be taken, There was a further expansion in 1967,

The performance of the plant was satisfactory for one year after that

expansion but then again the plant~s performance deteriorated (R~9—l2)

~6I9

Dr. Lue-Hing testified that 

the

residential population served

by the plant had 

not changed since 

the middle 

1940’s. Back then 

the

population 

was

about 40,000 and currently the population is just ynder

41,000. The District~s problem very 

obviously was not from domestic

waste but resulted from handling industrial wastes (R.l3,24,37,55)

The decline in the performance of the system manifested itself in

terms of unsatisfactory effluent quality, unsatisfactory sludge diges-

tion and the generation of odors of the type 

associated with 

hydrogen

sulfide and other malodorous substances (R,l2)

Subsequent to the expansion completed in 1967 a number of

studies were conducted, Dr. R. Dick in 1970 studied 

the digestion

aspect of the plant and concluded that the failures were due to

excessively high concentrations of sulfates in the raw waste. He

concluded that 88 of the total sulfur in raw wastes originated~at a

single industrial source (R.14, Ex, 4, p. 33) 

An earlier study by

Dr. J. Goeppner in 1964 had reached a similar conclusion (R,l4).

Another study by Dr. W,D. Hatfield in 1969 suggested operational charges

to alleviate some of the difficulties (Ex,2)

The present performance of the plant indicates that the population

equivalent (PE) of BOD from domestic sewage is 40,000 and the industrial

peaks are a PE of 1,000,000, thus at times a 1,040,000 PB is being put

through a system designed to handle a PB of 165,000 (R.l5-16).

For suspended solids the domestic load is 40,000, the industrial

normal is approximately 60,000 and the.industrial peak about 700,000.

Thus at peak times there is a through put FE of suspended solids of

740,000 while the design capacity is for a FE of 90,000 (R.16-l7)

Dr. Lue-Hing stated that after determining that the principal

problem was the handling of industrial wastes of a carbohydrate type,

.his efforts have been directed toward establishing a program to upgrade

the quality of the plant’s effluent, One of his recommendations to

the District was to revise the industrial waste ordinance to redistri-

bute the cost of treatment. Conferences are being scheduled with the

major industrial waste dischargers and a plan has been submitted to the

Agency and a permit applied for to install facilities for the upgrading

of the quality of the effluent (R.l8-25).

Dr. Lue-Hing testified that the District can take almost immediate

steps to abate the water pollution and tO bring the trOatment facilities

into compliance (R,39—40) 

He stated unequivocally that the District

is proceeding to install temporary ficilities which would bring the

effluent concentrations (BOD, suspended solids) within the regulation

by June 1, 1971 (R.26-27). The temporary abatement plan was described

asan interim chemical pre—treatment system and basically is a system

to adjust the raw waste pH to 9.5 with installation of a chemical

addition system for the application of both lime and sodium hydroxide.

Dr. Lue—Hing~s report stated that lab tests on the maintenance of such

chemical environment showed that it was hostile to the proliferative

growth of filamentous organisms and resulted in improved effluent

I *

620

quality wibh BOD values in the range of 3-15 mg/i and suspended

solids concentrations in the range of 3-46 mg/i (Ex.6) 

Apart from

this temporary expedient the District has only incomplete plans

for permanent facilities (R.26-29). The EPA in their complaint asked

for submission of plans by August 

1,

1971 and for the award of con-

struction contracts by November 

1,

1971, Dr. Lue—Hing testified that

it was not reasonable to have the plans completed by the requested

date because conferences with the several industrial waste dischargers

must first be completed (R.29) 

Dr. Lue-Hing stated, however, that

the date requirement in SWB-9 for chlorination of the final effluent,

July 1972 could be met ~(R.29)

Dr. Lue-Hing further testified that the interim system will

bring the BOD within the regulation but will not operate upon the

dissolved solids. His report on the lab tests performed, however, as

noted above, indicated that at times the suspended solids will not he

within the maximum allowable,~ Thus, the temporary expedient may

only partially alleviate the District’s problem. We will require that

the BOD standard of 20 mg/I be met and that the suspended solids be

reduced to 50 mg/l or less. For the long range solution of the problem

the District, he stated will look to the industrial waste dischargers

to pre—treat their effluents and reduce dissolved and suspended solids

and organic material as well as other contaminants (R.40—42)

For a permanent solution the District placed great confidence

in (1) the enactment of a new and more effective industrial waste

surcharge ordinance and (2) the installation of pre—treatment facilities

at the industrial sites prior to discharge into the District’s receiving

sewers (Ex.6), yet there is testimony going to the question of con-

struction of new permanent facilities, The record is simply not complete

enough on this very important point. We will therefore order the Dis-

trict to crystallize their plans and fully apprise the Board and the

EPA of all the pertinent details including the nature and extent of

new physical plant and the extent of industrial pre-treatment.

To abate the water pollution which the District freely admits to

we are going to hold the District to their sworn word and help them

along by supplying dates where they have been unable to fix them, It

is true that a problem cannot be solved without first knowing what the

problem is and it is equally clear that the District is now fully

apprised of the extent of their treatment problem (R.3l-32). We should

not make complicated that which has a clarity of line, it is not

unreasonable to expect the District to be working on finalizing long

range plans even today before all of their conferences with industrial

users are complete, They can provide for contingencies which may result

from the conferences and can also use their finalized plans to persuade

their conferees of their wisdom. We will require the District to submit

final plans, specifications and schedules to the EPA by September 1, 1971.

In its complaint the Agency had alleged and the District admitted

that the District violated Rule 1.08 (12) of SWB—9 by failing to submit

plans and specifications for construction of updated sewage facilities

by January 1, 1970 and by failing to award contracts for construction

by July 1, 1970 (R.6—7) 

The nature of the facilities for which the

deadlines were missed is unclear from the record. Apparently they are

advanced waste treatment facilities of some sort; some type of tertiary

621

treatment. We will order both parties to brief this point and fully in-

form the Board of the violations involved, If the requirement is for

tertiary treatment we must be fully apprised of the legal support of the

contention. We will ask for these briefs 

no

later 

than 

July 1,1971.

Until the District is operating its facilities in compliance with

the regulations regarding the BOD and 

suspended solids effluents 

we will

allow no new sewer connections which 

would burden the District~s

facili-

ties which are presently so greatly 

overloaded. As 

we

have 

stated

previously in    

~

v. North Shore Sanita~

District (PCB 70—7,12,13,14; March 31, 1971), EPA 

v,

~~of~endale

~~hts  (PCB 70-8; February 17, 1971), and ~p~~elanitar     

District

EPA (PCB 70-32; January 27, 1971), to allow any new sOurce of wastes

to ff~connected to the present system or to a1lo~any existing source

to increase the quantity or concentration of its wastes would be tanta-

mount to condoning the discharge of raw sewage from the plant. Such

an order is imperative if we a~e to ayoid increased water pollution and

serve the purposes of the Act. We cannot allow the situation to deterio-

rate further, even though this order may cause considerable inconvenience

for those persons who had expected to build or occupy new buildings.

It should be noted that here we are speaking of a rather short

time; the District has stated that they will be in conoliance by

June 1, 1971. The’District need only demonstrate that, in fact,

it is in compliance a~d there will be no prohibition on new

hook-ups.

it is clear that the odors from the District’s treatment facilities

constitute air pollution as contemplated by ±heAct.’~ The peculiar

nature of the industrial waste burden on the District’s treatment

facilities has resulted in a local air pollution nuisance. Obnoxious

odors whfch emanate from the digesters ~and sludge lagoons prevail in the

area. The influent has an inordinately high concentration of dissolved

solids, principally sulfates, which are acted upon by’the biological

treatment resulting in hydrogen sulfide digester emission concentrations

which one of the District’s consultants reported to be on the order of

550 times the maximum allowable concentration in air for humans (Ex,4,

p.34),I

Air2 pollution is defined in Section 3(h) of the Act:

(b) “Air Pollution” is the presence in the atmosphere of one or

more contaminants in sufficient quantities and of such

characteristics and duration as to be injurious to human,

plant or animal life, to health, or to property or to

unreasonably interfere with the enjoyment of~life or property;

A contaminant is defined in Section 3(d);

(d) “Contaminant” is any solid, liquid, or gaseoua matter, any

odor, or any form of energy, from whatever source,

2   The standard to, which the digester gas concentrations were com-

pared was not specified in the report. I’llinois presently has no

numerical standard for ambient hydrogen sulfide concentrations but

other jurisdictions specify a one hour standard of 0.~lppm e.g.

Calif., N.Y. (See Texaco, Inc. v. EPA, PCB ‘70—29, Feb. 29, 1971.)

—

622

Several citizens have complained of intense sensory irritation

as a result of the plant’s odors. Mr. Oliver Davis, a resident of

Danville and drive-in restaurant operator in the vicinity of the

District’s plant, testified that an odor problem has existed for four

years. He stated that his business had decreased 30—35 in the last

3 years and attributed the loss to the odor from the lagoons (R.58—60).

Seven other residents testified as to the character of the odor and

described it as obnoxious, nauseating and unbearable.

Dr. Lue-Hing testified that the air pollution problem should be

abated by May 21, 1971 (R.26-27). He testified that the air pollution

odor problem from the sludge lagoons will be dealt with by sterilization

and the digesters will receive chemical treatment to prevent the

generation of offensive odors. The predominant odor problem is the

conversion of dissolved sulfates being converted to hydrogen sulfide

by biological action. Almost all of the sulfates are received from one

industrial discharger and after pre-treatment is required of that

industry the odor problem should be solved on a permanent basis

(R.43—44,46)

The control of odors requires diligent effort. Although we do

not know precisely from the record by what mechanism the District plans

to abate the obnoxious odors coming from the plant we know that they

are confident of doing so starting the third week in Nay. We shall

require them to stay alert to the problem by noting the odor condition

in their daily operational log. The human nose, in more than one

expert’s opinion, is the best known device for detecting and identifying

odors. The District must proceed to abate the odors for which they

are responsible and must go further and submit a monthly report on the

odor condition at the plant to both the Board and the EPA,

The District admitted their guilt in causing both air and water

pollution but the important question of what is going to be done to

correct the situation remains incompletely answered. Concrete ideas

and plans were discussed at the hearing although the financing of the

corrective projects was hardly discussed at all, There was testimony

that the assessed valuation of the District is $125,043,312 and that

the District has a 5 statutory debt limit, Presently the District

has almost $6,000,000 worth of bonds outstanding and only $323,541

remains of its statutory bonding authority. In 1971 it will retire

$367,000 worth of bonds. The bonding power as of January 1, 1972

will be $691,476 (R.l7-l8), Is this balance of bonding authority

sufficient to allow the District to proceed? We know not, but to

insure that there is adequate financing of the required projects

—

623

we will order the District pursuant to Section 46 of the Act31after

July 1, 1971, 

to issue bonds if necessary to go forth with construction

of permanent facilities 

to abate the pollution violations. The Board

has the authority to order the issuance of bonds in excess of the

statutory limit, the Board being restricted only 

by the language of the

Illinois Constitution. See League 

of Women Voters 

et al. v. North

2ani2ist~!~  

(PCB 

70—7,12,13,14; March 31, 1971) 

EPA v.

~

(PCB 70—8; 

February 17, 

1971), ~~fie1~

~

EPA (PCB 70-32; 

January 27, 

1971), and~_~f

Mattoon v. EPA (PCB 71-8; April 14, 1971). After July 1, 1971 the

State will have a new constitution which does not contain the 5

limitation of the 1870 Constitution. We are not unmindful of the state

of this record which is deficient on the question of the cost of

facilities. We are therefore ordering the District to submit detailed

affidavits by September 1 estimating the cost of the needed treatment

correctives. After consideration of that information 

and

any other

information which the Board may find necessary to further order, we

will decide on the amount of bonding authority which may be necessary

to abate this pollution. We noted in the North Shore Sanitary District

case where we have previously used the power to order the issuance

of bonds beyond the 5 limit that this power is to be used with great

caution and discretion. That is what we mean to do here. We will

await the submission of the District regarding the funding of their

proposed projects before we act.

This opinion constitutes the findings of fact and conclusions

of law by the Board,

3   Smbtion 46 ~e  

Act provides as follows:

Any municipality or sanitary district which has been directed

by an order issued by the Board. 

.to abate any violation of

this Act or of any regulation adopted thereunder shall unless

said order be set aside upon petition for review, take steps

for the acquisition or construction of such facilities, or for

such repair, alteration, extension or completion of existing

facilities, or for such modification of existing practices as

may be necessary to comply with the order.

If funds on hand or unappropriated are insufficient for the

purposes of this section, the necessary funds shall be raised

by the issuance of either general obligation or revenue bonds.

If the estimated cost of the steps necessary to be taken by

such municipality or sanitary district with such order is

such that the bond issue, necessary to finance such project,

would not raise the total outstanding bonded indebtedness of

such municipality or sanitary district in excess of the limit

imposed upon such indebtedness by the Constitution of the

State of Illinois, the necessary bonds may be issued as a

direct obligation of such municipality or sanitary district

and retired pursuant to general law governing the issue of

such bonds. No election or referendum shall be necessary

for the issuance of bonds under this section.

—

624

ORDER

The Board, having considered the complaint, transcript and

exhibits in this proceeding hereby enters the following order:

1.  Temporary Treatment Facilities: The District shall proceed forth-

with with its plans to improve the quality of the effluent 

s,o

as to be in compliance with the regulation as regards BOD and

suspended solids to wit: the District shall install a system

to add sodium hydroxide and/or lime to continuously adjust the

pH of the raw wastes between 9.0 and 9.5. These temporary

treatment facilities shall be operational by June 1, 1971 and

shall be operated in such a manner so as to reduce the effluent

concentration of BOD to 20 mg/l and suspended solids to 50 mg/l.

2.  Sewer Connections: The District shall make no new sewer connec-

tions to increase the load on 

th~

treatment facilities and 

it

shall not allow existing connections to increase the quantity

or concentration of their discharge until the monthly average

BOD effluent concentration has been reduced to 20 mg/l and the

suspended solids concentration has been reduced to 50 mg/i.

3.  Permanent Treatment Facilities: The District shall by 

September 1,

1971 submit to the EPA cbmpiete plans, specifications and schedules

detailing the proqr~mfor the permanent solution of the District’s

water and air pollution problems. The program shall include but

not be limited to an estimate of the amount and type of industrial

pre-treatment 

to be 

achieved, additional facilities, 

if

any, 

to

be constructed at the plant and a sworn report detailing the pre-

sent balance of bonding authority of the District and estimating

the cost of 

any required corrective measures. With the exception

of

the plans and specifications, the Board shall receive 6 copies

of

all of the foregoing materials 

by

September 1’, 1971,

4.

~

The District shall submit monthly reports

to the Board and the EPA detailing progress to date and shall

fully explain any deviations or modifications from the schedule

and plans referred to in No. 3.’

5.  Air Pollution: The District shall proceed forthwith with the

installation of odor control facilities to abate the nuisance

caused by the hydrogen sulfide type odors emanating from the

plant by June 

1,

1971.

6.  Air Pollution Reports: In addition to the reporting require-

ment in No. 4 the District shall submit to the Board and the

EPA a monthly statement relating to the efficacy of the

odor cleansing system. The District shall note the general

odor situation daily in its operating log and summarize

this information along with other’ pettinent information’

relating to odors in its monthly statement. The first state-

—

625

ment shall be for the month of 

June 

1971 and shall be submitted

in a reasonable time after the end 

of

the calendar month (hut

not more than 10 days into the new month) 

Each subsequent

statement shall cover the calendar month and be submitted in a

reasonable time after the start of the new month. No furth?~r

statement shall be required after the statement for the calendar

month of November 1971.

7.  Bond: The District shall post with the EPA a,security.bond or

other adequate security in an amount to be determined by the

Board after its consideration of the submissions required in

I\Io, 3 which said security shall be forfeited to the State of

Illinois if the District operates 

its

plant with inadequate

treatment facilities and an effluent which is 

not

ir. compliance

with the applicable regulations after a date to be determined

by the Board in its further order.

8.  Briefs: Both parties shall by 

July 

1, 1971 submit to the Board

briefs on the nature of the violation alleged and admitted

and the effluent requirements involved 

in

that part of the com-

plaint dealing with the deadline dates January 

1,

1970 and

July 1, 1970; the first date 

being the 

date for submission of

plans ar:d the second being

the

date 

for the award of the con-

struction contract.

9.

Further Order: This proceeding shall remain open for such

further order of

the

Board

which 

may be made subsequent

to

the

written submissions required by nos.

3

and, 

I conc

:r/Aissent:.-m./~

/~

I, Regina E. Ryan, Clerk of

the

Illinois

ce~tify that the Board has approved,,,the~bove

day of May, 1971.

Pollution Control Board,

Opinion and. Order on

Regin~iE. Ryan, Clerk

Illinois

Pollution Control Board

—

626