ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

May 19,

1983

MAPLE LAWN HOMES,

)

Petitioner,

)

v.

)

PCB 83—37

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY AND CITY OF

EUREKA,

)

Respondent.

OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD

(by J.

Anderson):

This matter comes before

the Board on the petition filed

March 14,

1983 by Maple Lawn Homes

(MLH) seeking variance from

35 Ill.

Adm.

Code 309.241

(formerly Rule 962 of Chapter

3: Water

Pollution).

Pursuant to Orders of the Board,

amendments

to the

petition were filed April

5 and May 11~, 1983.

MLH

variance to allow for issuance of construction and

operation permits from sanitary sewers to serve a planned 22

unit senior citizen’s housing addition to the facility.

MLH

alternatively requests that the 33

P.E.

flows from these units

be allowed to be treated either

A) by the existing Maple Lawn

Homes Treatment Plant

(MLH STP) or

B) by the City of Eureka

Treatment Plant

(Eureka STP).

As part of Option

B, MLH

additionally requests authority to convey all

or part of the

wastewater currently treated by the MLH STP to the Eureka

STP.

By the Board’s Order of March 24,

1983 the City of Eureka

(Eureka) was joined as a necessary party, which was aligned as

a party respondent in the May 11 amendment to the

MLH

petition.

On May 2,

1983 the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency

(Agency)

filed a Recommendation in support of grant of variance

with conditions.

On May 17, the Agency advised the Board that

it would file no amended Recommendation.

Hearing was waived,

and none has been held.

This matter is being given expedited

consideration pursuant to the MLH March 14 request.

Maple Lawn Homes,

a not—for—profit retirement community

owned by the Mennonite Church,

is located on the north edge of

the City of Eureka in Woodford County.

The MLH facility consists

of an apartment building

(120 residents),

a health care center

(80 beds),

an administrative center,

21 cottages, and a day care

center (licensed for 40 children).

The current resident popu-

lation is approximately 255.

MLH has a full—time equivalent

employment of 75.

52-235

---

2

Wastewater from the facility is currently treated by the

MLH STP, which consists of two waste stabilization ponds in

series.

The average daily flow to the STP, based on 1982

records,

is estimated at 17,300 gallons per day.

The Agency reports that this STP was constructed and first

permitted in 1964 to serve a 150 bed nursing home.

Since that

time, the STP has never discharged to the receiving waters

identified in the permit-—the East Branch of Walnut Creek,

a

tributary of the Macmaw River.

It is assumed that the wastewater

infiltrates

into the ground, based on the creek’s 7—day,

10-year

low flow of zero, and the fact that

in the area evaporation equals

rainfall.

It

is unknown where the wastewater migrates after

infiltration, but the parties agree that some quantity could be

surfacing in Walnut Creek, which is about 700 feet from the

stabilization ponds.

The MLHSTP

is currently permitted to treat

a daily average

flow of

.02 million gallons per day, or 20,000 gpd, and is

required to meet effluent limitations of 10 mg/i BOD and

12

mg/l

TSS on a 30 day average.~

MLH

believes that

if its STP discharged

treated wastewater, rather than having

it “disappear” by

evaporation and infiltration, that

permit

conditions would likely

be violated.

The Agency notes that addition of flows of 33

P.E.

(3,300

gpd)

to the STP would result in average daily flows of 20,600

gallons,

a hydraulic overload.

Even without the proposed 33 P.E.

addition, the STP is considered to be organically overloaded,

as

is.

Based on the Illinois Recommended Standards for Sewage Works,

organic loading to the

MLII STP should be no more than 26 pounds!

acre/day.

This would

limit use of the STP to 153 residents,

although the current population at MLH is already 255.

MLH estimates believes that it would cost about $300,000 to

upgrade its facilities to allow for issuance of permits for its

planned 22 unit expansion.

This expenditure

is alleged to

be

cost prohibitive.

MLH asserts that its long list of applicants

for senior

citizens’ housing justifies its desire to expand its independent

living/cottage program.

It further alleges that its proposed

expansion will result in

a $1.3 million privately—funded

construction project which will

help relieve

local unemployment

in the construction industry.

MLH believes that the best long-term compliance option would

be connection of its entire sewer system to that of Eureka,

for

treatment of flows by the Eureka STP.

However,

the Eureka STP is

not currently judged to be capable of accepting additional

flows

absent grant of variance.

The STP was placed on critical review

by the Agency March

5,

1979,

as the tributary waste

load was

found to be within 84

of the system’s design capacity;

52-236

---

3

notification of impending restricted status was issued October 12~

1982

on the grounds that the STP is being operated within 101

of design capacity.

The Agency reports that Eureka’s consulting engineers claim

that the flow data used to calculate the hydraulic loading may be

inaccurate due to a malfunctioning flow meter resulting

in high

readings,

and that faulty sewer rehabilitation work by a con-

tractor may have failed to prevent excess infiltration and inflow.

The City is, however, involved in upgrading its facilities

through the construction grants program.

The Agency affirms that

the City has completed sewer system rehabilitation,

and has been

awarded a Step

1,

2,

3 grant

for sludge handling facilities

(Phase

A), and

for STP expansion

(Phase B).

A flow monitoring study has been underway to determine what,

if any,

flow monitoring discrepancies and/or STP capacity exists;

this would determine whether

in fact Phase

B work would be

necessary.

Phase

A design work is anticipated to be submitted to

the Agency in May,

1983,

a contract to he awarded

in August,

1983,

and ~workcompleted in July,

1984.

Interim results of the flow monitoring study will

be

submitted to the Agency in June,

1983,

and

the

study’s completion

is scheduled for October,

1983.

Based on interim results the City

believes Phase B work may be needed.

If

so, design work would be

estimated to begin in November,

1983, with a contract

to be

awarded July,

1984 and construction to be completed in July,

1985.

However, Phase B work would be contingent on a grant

amendment for funding of the Phase B work.

The City “supports

Maple Lawn Homes’ programs” and agrees that the proposed

expansion “will relieve th demand for elderly housing.”

The

City’s position is that

“it would welcome Maple Lawn Homes as a sewer user

at such times as adequate capacity is available, or

when a grant amendment has been approved to fund

Phase

B.

The legal,

administrative,

and financial

details of connection to the City system have yet

to be resolved.”

(Letter of March

7,

1983.)

Concerning the

MLII hardship claims, the Agency notes that

the acknowledged housing hardships

to the elderly and the economic

hardship to the community at large are to some degree offset by

MLFI

failure to investigate whether Eureka had sufficient capacity

at its STP.

The Agency’s position overall

is aptly stated in its

Recommendation:

This variance petition presents

a choice between

transporting additional wastewater to an already over-

loaded inadequate treatment system at the nursing home

52-237

---

4

or transporting additional wastewater to the City’s

activated sludge treatment system which may or may not

be overloded,

is providing treatment within effluent

standards and is expected to have Phase A work done

by the end of this year which may provide all the

capacity needed to accommodate Maple Lawn Homes and

other development.

The Agency thinks

it

is better to

transport the wastewater to Eureka now where

it will

receive adequate treatment as opposed to sending

it

to

the

lagoon

system

for

inadequate

treatment

and

then

six

months

from

now

connecting

to

the

Eureka

system

anyway.

As

a

second

choice

the

Agency

would

find

it

acceptable

to

allow

wastewater

from

up

to

153

resi-

dents

to

the

Maple

Lawn lagoons with the remainder to

be

transported

to

Eureka’s

system.

(Rec.

at

7—8).

Variance

is

therefore

recommended

subject

to

conditions.

The

Board

finds

this

petition

to

he

an

even

closer

judgment

call

than

most, as MLH has apparently not fulfilled its duty to

investigate

STP

treatment

capacity,

and

is

operating

an

organically

overloaded

plant.

If

variance

is

granted,

MLII

would

anticipate

occupancy

of

the

homes

by

December,

1983,

which

would

result

in excess

flows from the expansion alone going

to the

Eureka

plant

for

between

7

and

19

months,

depending

on

whether

Phase

A

work

alone

or

Phase

A

and

B

work

are

needed

to

solve

the

City’s

problems.

On

the

other

hand,

the

economic and housing

hardship

cannot

be

ignored,

and

connection

to

the

Eureka

plant

would

clearly

be

the

most cost—effective means of

solving the

actual

or

potential

odor

and

water

pollution

problems

stemming

from

the

additions

to

overloaded

lagoons.

On

balance,

the

Board

finds

that

denial

of

variance

to

allow

MLH’s

expansion

would

impose

an

arbitrary

or

unreasonable

hardship.

The

Board

cannot

allow

transport

of

additional

flows

to

the

MLH

lagoon.

Variance

will

be

granted

to

allow

immediate

connection

of

the

proposed

addition

to

the

Eureka

system,

with

the

conditions

that

the

existing

overloaded

lagoon

system

he

operated

in

the

best

manner

practicable.

The

Board

notes

that

in

granting

variance,

that

it

is

not—-which

it

cannot-—requiring

Eureka

to

accept the MLH flows.

Respondent Eureka will therefore be

required to certify its willingness to accept MLH flows.

The Board agrees with the Agency’s feelings that the lagoon

system should be phased out of service as rapidly as possible,

and

that

ultimate connection to the Eureka system seems to be the

solution to the lagoon problem.

However,

immediate connection of

the average 17,300

gpd

loadings received by the lagoon to the

Eureka STP would considerably increase the hydraulic loading to

a

plant

which

is

more—likely-than-not

hydraulically

overloaded,

based

on

interim

information.

The

additional

flows could also

cause

the

plant

to

fall

out

of

compliance

with

the

effluent

standards

it

is

currently

meeting.

52-238

---

5

At this time, the information provided concerning the

capacity of the Eureka plant, and even Eureka’s willingness

to

accept MLH flows, are just too sketchy to justify grant of

variance at this time.

The Board encourages MLH and Eureka to

submit

a joint petition for variance at such time as final

flow

monitoring information is available.

This

Opinion

constitues

the

findings

of fact and conclusions

of

law

of

the Board in this matter.

ORDER

Petitioner,

Maple

Lawn

Homes

(MLH),

is

granted

a

variance

from

35

Ill.

Adm. Code,

§309.241

subject

to

the

following

conditions:

a)

This

variance

authorizes

the Agency to issue to MLH

permits

to construct and to operate a sanitary sewer extension

to

the City of Eureka Treatment plant,

to serve the

22 unit elderly

housing units discussed in the Board’s Opinion.

MLII shall apply

for said permits within 35 days of the date of this Order.

Grant

of this variance does not relieve MLH of its obligation to obtain

and

to

submit

to

the Agency the City of Eureka’s certification of

willingness

to

accept

the

33 P.E.

flows the expansion will ~ntai1~

b)

MLH

shall

operate

its

overloaded

treatment

plant

in

the

best manner practicable.

c)

Within forty—five days of the date of this Order,

Petitioner shall execute and forward to Steve Spiegel, Enforcement

programs, the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency,

2200

Churchill Road,

Springfield,

Illinois 62706,

a Certificate of

Acceptance~and Agreement to be bound to all terms and conditions

of this variance.

This forty-five day period shall be held in

abeyance for any period this matter is being appealed.

The form

of the certificate shall be as

follows:

CERTIFICATE

I,

(We),

____

_____

____________

____,

having read

the Order of the Illinois Pollution Control Board in PCB 83—37,

dated

_____

_______________,

understand and accept the

said Order,

realizing that such acceptance renders all terms and

conditions thereto binding and enforceable.

52-239

---

6

~:

Title

Date

IT IS SO ORDERED.

I,

Christan

L. Moffett,

Clerk of the Illinois Pollution

Control Board, hereby qertify that the above Opinion and Order

was adopte~onthe

4~(j~

day of

,

1983 by

a vote of

.0.

Christan L. Moffe~,f~erk

Illinois Pollution ~trol

Board