ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    January 21,
    1988
    MT. VERNON ASSOCIATION, INC.,
    Petitioners,
    v.
    )
    PCB 87—56
    ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
    PROTECTION AGENCY,
    Respondent.
    OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD
    (by
    J.
    Anderson):
    This matter comes before the Board
    on
    a petition by the Mt.
    Vernon Association,
    Inc.
    (Association)
    for variance from a
    compliance schedule imposed by the Board
    in a November 21,
    1985
    enforcement Order
    (PCB 84—84)
    against the Mt. Vernon Water and
    Sewer Corporation
    (Corporation).
    The Association intends to
    purchase the public water
    supply system and wastewater treatment
    plant
    from the Corporation.
    Amended petitions were filed
    on June
    29,
    1987 and October
    1,
    1987 in
    response
    to Board “more information” orders of May 14,
    1987 and July 16,
    1987 respectively.
    The Agency filed
    its
    Recommendation on October
    22,
    1987 in support of grant of
    variance with conditions.
    The Association waived its request for
    hearing on January 11,
    1988 to facilitate the process and with
    the condition that the Association would be able to request a
    hearing were
    it to have
    a problem with the Boardts action taken
    this day.
    The Board accordingly will decide this matter without
    hearing.
    The petition involves only the wastewater treatment plant
    SWTP)
    as the water supply is
    in compliance.
    The facilities are
    located
    in Jo Davies County.
    The STP treats an average flow of
    20,000 gallons per day from 108 households.
    The plant consists
    of only an inlet structure,
    a single cell lagoon and an outlet
    structure.
    There are no lift stations, as the sewage
    flows by
    gravity
    into the lagoon, where the retention time varies
    according to the flows.
    The unchlorinated effluent discharges
    to
    an unnamed tributary
    of the Mississippi River.
    The Association asserts that the lagoon
    is non—aerated and
    of inadequate size
    (First Amend, pet.
    p.
    3).
    The Agency asserts
    that the facilities have had
    a long history of extremely poor
    operation.
    (Agency Rec.,
    p.
    2)
    The present NPDES permit, which
    expires on December
    1,
    1989, contains effluent limits as
    85—163

    follows:
    BOD
    =
    10 mg/l monthly av.; TSS
    =
    12 mg/i monthly av.;
    feáal coliform not to exceed 400/100 ml daily max.;
    pH 6—9 and
    ammonia nitrogen 1.5/4.0 mg/i when downstream ammonia nitrogen
    water quality limits are violated.
    On May 5,
    1986 the
    Corporation was granted
    a lagoon exemption allowing 30/37 mg/i
    BOD/TSS effluent limits once the facilities
    are upgraded.
    The
    Corporation Discharge Monitoring Reports between June,
    86 and
    May,
    87 show the following effluent ranges and overall averages.
    BOD
    TSS
    F.
    Coli
    Ammonia—Nitrogen
    (mg/i)
    mg/l
    (#1100 ml)
    (mg/l)
    range
    43—182
    8—51
    20,000—1,400,000
    12—65
    average
    93.3
    27
    35.5
    The Association also submitted
    a monthly lagoon effluent analysis
    by the City of Dubuque Waste Water Lab showing similar
    exceedances
    for 1985,
    1986 and 1987 (through August)
    (2nd Amend.
    Pet. Ex.
    A)
    Regarding the STP,
    the Board’s Order
    in PCB 84—84 required
    the Corporation to comply with the following conditions:
    1.
    The Corporation
    shall pay
    a
    $1,500.00 penalty
    in three equal
    installments.
    2.
    By
    August
    30,
    1985,
    submit
    a
    permit
    application
    to the Agency to dispose of sludge
    from the lagoon.
    3.
    The
    Corporation
    shall
    construct
    a
    new
    lagoon
    cell and appurtenance
    (Phase
    I)
    in accordance
    with the following schedule:
    A.
    Commence design by August
    1,
    1985.
    B.
    File a permit application with the Agency
    by December
    1,
    1985.
    C.
    File
    a
    rate case with
    the
    ICC
    by August
    15, 1985.
    D.
    File
    a
    lease
    approval
    application
    with
    the ICC by October
    1,
    1985.
    E.
    Commence
    Phase
    I
    construction
    by
    May
    1,
    1986.
    F.
    Complete Phase
    I
    construction by June
    1,
    1986.
    85—164

    4.
    Phase
    II
    (existing
    lagoon
    restructuring)
    is
    dependent
    upon
    actions
    by
    the
    ICC
    and
    IEPA,
    but
    is
    to
    start
    on
    August
    1,
    1989
    and
    be
    completed
    by July 1,
    1990.
    The Agency asserts that,
    although the Corporation has
    complied with some
    of these conditions,
    including paying the
    penalty,
    the Corporation
    is
    in noncompliance with the enforcement
    order
    in some other respects.
    The permit application was filed
    over six months late and, most important,
    construction has not
    begun as required.
    The Corporation also filed
    three months late
    for
    its Illinois Commerce Commission
    (ICC)
    rate increase.
    On the
    other hand,
    the Corporation has spent $50,000 for engineering
    fees and on the rate increase and has obtain its construction
    permit.
    On October
    1,
    1986,
    the ICC granted sewer and water
    increases that would,
    for
    a family of 3.5 persons using 100
    gal/cap., potentially increase their combined water and sewer
    bills from $40.08/mo.
    to
    $74.11/mo.,
    an increase of about
    185.
    (Agency Rec.,
    4,5)
    The Association,
    a non—profit corporation consisting
    of 90
    of the property owners of the Mt. Vernon Subdivision, believes
    that it can, by combining Phase
    I and Phase
    II
    of the PCB 84—84
    Order,
    come into full compliance faster than would have
    the
    Corporation,
    and
    at less overall costs.
    The Agency agrees
    (Agency Rec.,
    p.
    5).
    The Association also
    is seeking an FmHA
    loan.
    As of October,
    1987,
    the Assocation had already pre—
    applied
    to the Farmers HomeAdministration
    (FmHA)
    and was
    proceeding
    to the application stage.
    The Association has had
    a
    “clear
    indication
    “that the loan will be approved upon completion
    of FmHA informational requirements and verification of purchase
    (2nd Amend.
    Pet.,
    p.
    2,3).
    The Association estimated that
    the
    average
    cost per customer would be reduced
    from $62.79/monthly
    ($95.00/mo.
    for seven years
    to pay for Phase II construction)
    to
    $41.47/month.
    (2nd Amend. Pet. Ex.
    B)
    The purchase offer
    is
    contingent upon an extension of the PCB 84—84 construction
    timetable
    (2nd Amend. Pet.
    Ex.
    C,
    p~
    4, Paragraph 11).
    The proposed upgrading, presently Phase
    I,
    involves
    construction of
    a second lagoon cell,
    a rack filter and
    chlorination equipment.
    The existing lagoon, presently Phase
    II,
    would be completed concurrently with Phase
    I and involve dredging
    and restructuring.
    Regarding environmental
    impact,
    the petition does not
    provide environmental detail,
    but asserts that accelerating final
    compliance will be environmentally beneficial
    (1st Amend.
    Pet.
    p.
    4).
    The Agency asserts that,
    while it has no recent water
    quality data,
    based on the poor quality effluent data combined
    with the fact that the receiving stream is
    a zero low flow
    85—
    165

    stream,
    it may be assumed
    that the discharge
    is hardly benefiting
    the stream.
    The Agency has noted that as far back as 1973 there
    have been sludge deposits
    in the stream and,
    until upgrading,
    the
    situation will continue.
    The Agency also noted that the Board,
    in PCB 84—84,
    made findings of violation against the Corporation
    as to offensive discharges and unnatural sludge.
    Regarding hardship,
    the Agency notes
    that the substantial
    rate increase required to finance system improvements
    is still
    hardly the highest
    in the State and that
    the affordability
    question was presumably part of
    the ICC review.
    The Agency notes
    that the FmHA staff in Princeton indicates that the upgrading
    would cost $400,000
    to $500,000, assuming no improvements in the
    water system are needed.
    They expect the utility bills for water
    and sewage
    to be $45—$50/month, assuming
    FmHA assistance.
    The
    Agency also noted
    that the residents are currently paying the new
    higher rate with extra
    funds being escrowed
    for construction.
    Finally the Agency sees no federal law impediment.
    (Agency Rec.
    p.
    6,7)
    Board Discussion:
    The Board believes that the hardship question must be viewed
    more broadly than the economic considerations discussed by the
    Agency.
    The Association
    is not,
    as
    is usual
    in
    a variance
    petition,
    requesting more time
    to come into compliance;
    it
    is
    proposing earlier completion dates.
    Rather,
    much
    of the
    Association’s hardship is that
    it cannot, obviously,
    now comply
    with the now past dates contained in the Board’s steps
    of
    progress ordered of the Corporation in PCB 84—84.
    Denial
    of variance would essentially create an enforcement
    exposure that the Association cannot ex post facto remedy,
    and
    would frustate its transfer of ownership.
    Additionally, this
    record indicates that the non—profit Association will be more
    likely than the Corporation
    to have the resources
    to pay for
    necessary construction and to operate the facilities properly at
    potentially less cost
    to the users.
    Under thesecircumstances,
    including the positive environmental considerations,
    the Board
    finds that the Association would suffer an arbitrary or
    unreasonable hardship were the transfer
    of ownership to be
    frustrated by denial of variance.
    The Board agrees with the conditions proposed by the Agency
    and, with some timing adjustments, will order
    them.
    The Board
    notes that the Agency’s October
    22,
    1987 recommended “steps of
    progress” dates precede this grant
    of variance.
    The Board will
    adjust forward the dates accordingly,
    and will lengthen the
    recommended final compliance date somewhat.
    The Board also notes
    that the Association has already complied with some of
    the steps,
    and may have completed others since October.
    Others appear to
    involve little
    time,
    such as the transfer of ownership and
    85—166

    permits.
    Since
    the record has provided less than clear guidance
    for these adjustments, the Board will consider any desired
    adjustments
    on
    a motion for reconsideration.
    Finally,
    the Board will grant variance from the same
    provisions of
    the Act and Board regulation as that granted to the
    Corporation
    in PCB 84—84.
    This Opinion constitutes the Board’s findings of fact and
    conclusions of law in this matter.
    ORDER
    Mt. Vernon Association,
    Inc.
    is granted
    a variance from 35
    Ill.
    Adm. Code 309.102;
    35
    Ill. Adm. Code 304.120(c);
    35
    Ill.
    Mm.
    Code 304.l04(a)(3);
    35
    Ill. Adm. Code 304.106;
    35
    Ill.
    Adm.
    Code 304.105
    as
    it relates to 302.203;
    and 35 Ill. Adm. Code
    312.101; Sections 12(a)
    and 12(f)
    of
    the Environmental Protection
    Act, subject to the following conditions:
    1.
    Variance shall expire on July 1,
    1990 or upon completion of
    the upgraded facilities whichever occurs
    first.
    2.
    Petitioner shall comply with the following schedule to
    upgrade the sewage treatment facilities:
    A.
    By February
    15,
    1988,
    Petitioner shall complete
    the
    purchase of
    the utility.
    B.
    At the time of purchase, Petitioner shall have a
    properly certified operator
    under
    its employment to
    adequately operate and maintain the sewage treatment
    facilities.
    C.
    By March
    1,
    1988,
    Petitioner shall apply to the
    Environmental Protection Agency to transfer construction
    and NPDES permits from Mt. Vernon Water and Sewer Corp.
    to itself.
    D.
    By March 15,
    1988, Petitioner shall complete and submit
    an preapplication for an FmHA loan to FmHA.
    E.
    By July
    1,
    1988, Petitioner shall secure loan funding.
    F.
    By August
    1,
    1988, Petitioner
    shall commence
    construction of upgrading the facilities.
    G.
    By August
    1,
    1989, Petitioner shall complete facility
    construction and rehabilitation sufficient
    to allow the
    facilities to operate in compliance with what.
    85—167

    3.
    Should Petitioner fail to receive FmHA loan assistance by
    July 1,
    1988,
    then Petitioner shall comply with
    the following
    adjustment
    in the schedule as stated
    in Paragraph
    2 above:
    By November
    1,
    1989, Petitioner shall complete
    construction and rehabilitation.
    4.
    Petitioner
    shall
    submit monthly progress reports to the
    Agency at
    the following addresses:
    Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
    Division of Water Pollution Control
    Compliance Assurance Section
    2200 Churchill Road
    Post Office Box 19276
    Springfield, Illinois
    62794—9276
    and
    Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
    Division of Water Pollution Control
    Region #1
    4302 North Main Street
    Rockford,
    Illinois
    61103
    Progress
    reports shall be due the 15th of the following
    month and,
    after purchase
    of the facilities,
    may be submitted
    with the facilities’
    DMRs.
    5)
    Within
    45 days
    of the date of
    this Order, Petitioner shall
    execute and forward
    to Thomas Davis, Enforcement Programs,
    Illinois Environmental Protection Agency,
    2200 Churchill
    Road,
    Springfield, Illinois 62794—9276,
    a Certification
    of
    Acceptance and Agreement to be bound
    to all terms and
    conditions of this variance.
    The 45—day period shall
    be held
    in abeyance during any period that this matter
    is being
    appealed.
    The form of said Certification shall be as
    follows:
    CERTIFICATION
    I,
    (We), _____________________________,
    having read the
    Order of the Illinois Pollution Control Board,
    in PCB 87—56,
    dated January 21,
    1988, understand and accept the said Order,
    realizing that such acceptance renders all terms and conditions
    thereto binding and enforceable.
    Petitioner
    85—168

    By:
    Authorized Agent
    Title
    Date
    Failure
    to execute and forward the Certificate within 45
    days renders this variance void and
    of
    rio force and effect as
    a
    shield against enforcement
    of rules from which variance was
    granted.
    Section~41 of the Environmental Protection Act,
    Ill.
    Rev.
    Stat.
    1985 ch.
    111 1/2 par.
    1041, provides for appeal
    of final
    Orders
    of the Board within 35 days.
    The Rules of
    the Supreme
    Court of
    Illinois establish filing requirements.
    IT IS SO ORDERED.
    I, Dorothy M.
    Gunn,
    Clerk
    of
    the Illinois Pollution Control
    Board, hereby certify that th
    above Opinion and Order was
    adopted on the ~
    day of
    _______________,
    1988, by a vote
    of
    7—0
    .
    Dorothy M.
    Gunn,
    Clerk
    Illinois Pollution Control Board
    85—169

    Back to top