ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    May
    13,
    1982
    IN THE MATTER OF:
    )
    CITY OF ALTON CHAPTER
    3
    )
    R82-7
    SITE—SPECIFIC RULE PROPOSAL
    )
    ORDER OF THE BOARD
    (by 3.
    Anderson):
    On April
    15,
    1982,
    the City of Alton filed a site—specific
    rulemaking proposal pursuant to Procedural Rule 203.
    In its
    proposal Alton requests
    a)
    a “limited exemption”
    from the effluent standards
    of Rules 403,
    404,
    405 and 408 of Chapter
    3, as they relate to
    discharges from the Piazza—State Street sewer
    b)
    a “limited exemption” from the combined sewer overflow
    (CSO) requirements of Rule 602(a,
    c,
    d)
    of Chapter 3,
    c)
    and establishment of
    a new Chapter
    3,
    Rule 404 effluent
    limitation of 20 mg/i BOD5 and 25
    rng/l suspended solids
    for its
    treatment works outfall sewer.
    Procedural Rule 204 requires the Board to authorize
    a hearing
    on such a proposal unless
    it determines that “the proposal
    is
    plainly devoid of merit,
    or deals with a subject on which a
    hearing has been held within the preceding six months,
    or is
    not accompanied by an adequate statement of supporting reasons”.
    This petition satisfies these minimal requirements.
    However,
    this petition is troublesome in certain respects.
    It
    is indicated that the Piazza—State Street sewer problem
    would in large part be obviated by construction of a new Lock
    and.
    Dam 26 by the Army Corps of Engineers, and that construction as
    well as improvements to the Alton sewer system necessitated by
    the Corps’
    dam construction “are tentatively scheduled for about
    1986”.
    This would appear to be,
    then,
    a short-term compliance
    problem susceptible to variance relief.
    The revision of the BODç and TSS limitations
    is requested
    because of the location of Alton’s sewer outfall, which discharges
    into Wood River, downstream from a Corps low water channel dam.
    Alton states that its current NPDES permit provides for limits of
    20/25, based on Agency assumption that discharge below the low
    water channel dam was equivalent
    to discharge to the Mississippi
    River.
    Upon application for a revised NPDES permit,
    Alton states
    that the Agency “has indicated that they ~y
    now require”
    a 10/12
    limit, because discharge is not directly into the Mississippi.
    47-117
    —2—
    The rule change proposal, then,
    is based on a permit decision
    which has not been,
    and may not be, made,
    and which could be,
    if
    made,
    adjudicated in a permit denial appeal.
    Finally, the combined sewer overflow portion of the petition
    states environmental effect and economic impact conclusions which
    are sufficient to send the request to hearing, but the petition
    does not indicate that Alton has detailed studies and engineering
    testimony to present at hearing to support these conclusions, or
    that Alton has considered measures alternative to complete treat-
    ment which would achieve some or all
    of the goals
    of the existing
    rules’s treatment requirements.
    (In its Initial Opinion in
    the
    pending R81—17 proceeding,
    the Board,
    in proposing an “exception
    procedure” as an alternative to site—specific rulemaking regarding
    CSO compliance problems, detailed some of problems of site—specific
    rulemakings concerning CSO treatment strategies.
    In addition,
    the
    Board reminds Alton that while a variance proceeding has a ~)0
    day
    decision deadline,
    site specific rulemakings may take
    a year or
    more to come to decision, because of APA and economic impact
    and.
    hearing requirements.)
    This petition,
    in short, does not indicate
    that Alton is prepared to address these concerns at hearing.
    It
    does,
    conversely,
    indicate that a request for variance relief
    might be appropriate to allow for compiling necessary information.
    Alton is accordingly directed to review its petition
    and
    situation in light of this Order.
    Hearings will be scheduled
    upon
    receipt of a written affirmation of Alton’s desire to proceed.
    in
    this matter.
    IT IS SO ORDERED.
    I, Christan
    L. Moffett,
    Clerk of the Illinois Pollution
    Control Board hereby certify that the above Order was adopted on
    the
    /~
    day of
    __________________,
    1982 by a vote of
    Christan
    Illinois Pollu
    Board
    47-118

    Back to top