ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
June
10,
1981
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
)
PROTECTION AGENCY,
)
Complainant,
v.
)
PCB 80—197
CITY OF JACKSONVILLE,
a municipal corporation,
)
)
Respondent.
MR. VINCENT W. MORETH, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, APPEARED ON BEFIALF
OF THE COMPLAINANT.
RAMMELKAMP, BRADNEY,
HALL, DAHMAN, KUSTER & COLLINS, ATTORNEYS AT LAW
(MR.
THEODORE
C.
RAMMELKAMP, OF COUNSEL), APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE
RESPONDENT.
OPINION AND ORDER OF THE
BOARD
(by N.E.Werner):
This matter comes before the Board on the October 28, 1980
Complaint brought by the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
(“Agency”).
Count
I of the Complaint alleged that,
from August
1,
1978
until October
28,
1980, the Respondent intermittently discharged
effluent from its wastewater treatment plant
(“plant”) which
contained excessive levels of BOD5 and total suspended solids in
violation of its NPDES Permit No.
IL 0021661, Rules 410(a)
and 901
of Chapter 3:
Water Pollution Control Regulations
(“Chapter 3”),
and Section 12(f)
of the Illinois Environmental Protection Act
(“Act”).
Count II alleged that, intermittently from June 13, 1978 until
October 28,
1980, the City of Jacksonville (the
“City”) discharged
effluent from its plant which caused,
either alone or in combination
with other sources, the waters of the Mauvaise Terre Creek,
a navigable
Illinois water,
to contain less than 5.0 milligrams per liter
(“mg/i”)
of dissolved oxygen and to contain levels of ammonia nitrogen
(as N)
in excess of
1.5 mg/l in violation of Rules 203(d),
203(f),
402,
and
901 of Chapter
3 and Section 12(a) of the Act.
Count III alleged that,
beginning on October 18,
1979 and ending
on October 19,
1979,
the City allowed its plant to discharge aj~prox—
imately 200,000 gallons of raw untreated sewage into the Mauvaise
Terre Creek
(the “creek”), thereby polluting the water and causing
42—37
the death of 6,938 fish valued at $2,305.65 in violation of
Rules 203(a),
402,
403,
and 901 of Chapter
3 and Section 12(a)
of
the Act.
A hearing was held on January
7,
1981 and the parties filed a
Statement of Stipulated Settlement on January
26,
1981.
However,
on February 19, 1981,
the Board entered an Interim Order which
rejected the Statement of Stipulated Settlement because of ambiguities
in the penalty provisions of the proposed stipulation.
A second hearing was held on May
8,
1981 and the parties filed
a Revised Statement of Stipulated Settlement (“Stip.”) on May
14,
1981.
The City’s wastewater treatment facility, which discharges
effluent pursuant to NPDES Permit No.
IL 0021661,
is located in
Morgan County,
Illinois.
The City has admitted that it intermittently
committed the violations alleged in the Complaint, but the City has
also made explanations of some of these admitted violations.
Although
the Respondent asserts that unintentional violations of the NPDES
Permit interim limits
for BOD5 and total suspended solids
“were
primarily due to unexpected situations” such as “an extraordinary
increase in industrial waste, delay
in obtaining necessary grant
funds needed to improve its sewage treatment facilities, and current:
plant design”, the Agency contends that the City should have
“required its industrial dischargers to limit their discharge of
pollutants
(both type and volume)
to levels the City’s sewage
treatment plant could effectively treat”.
(See:
Stip.
6-9; Exhibit 3).
It is stipulated that the City’s wastewater treatment plant
was not “designed to remove the ammonia nitrates”
(sic) which were
formerly discharged by industrial manufacturing operations.
(Stip.
7).
However, the Agency believes that “the City could have
reduced the levels of Ammonia Nitrogen
(as N) by vigorously enforcing
its industrial wastes ordinance and/or closely monitoring its
industrial dischargers.”
(Stip.
7—8).
It is the Respondent’s position that the unintentional discharge
of about 200,000 gallons of raw sewage
“was unavoidable because the
plant’s inlet line became clogged with rags and wood causing raw
sewage to discharge through an emergency stormwater overflow into
the Mauvaise Terre Creek”.
(See: Exhibit 4;
Stip.
7).
On the other hand, the Agency maintains that:
“The City should have carefully monitored the plant so
as
to prevent
(during a 30—hour period) approximately
200,000 gallons of raw sewage to be discharged into the
Mauvaise Terre Creek.
Based on the fact that it took
30 hours before anyone noticed the discharge, the Agency
finds this is indicative of negligence and poor management
on the City’s part.
It took only minutes to correct the
situation which had a potential
to cause even greater
environmental harm than what occurred.
This shows how
easily the discharge could have been prevented if
the City
had been properly monitoring its plant.
This also shows
how easily it can be prevented in the future...
42—38
...The Agency’s reports and investigations in support
of its position revealed that approximately
10 miles of
the Mauvaise Terre Creek was polluted as a result of
the
30 hour bypass which ended on October 19,
1979.”
(See: Exhibit
6;
Stip.
9—10).
The City contends that although “the discharge lasted approxi-
mately 30 hours before it was discovered and immediately corrected”,
“the Mauvaise Terre Creek prior to the October
19,
1979 discharge
was in such a poor condition due to its
low water volume and water
quality, that it could not have supported the number of fish
estimated by the Department of Conservation to have been killed in
its Revised Fish Kill Report.”
(See: Exhibits 4—5;
Stip.
7—8).
However,
the Agency believes “that the Department of
Conservation report relative to the number of fish killed is
correct.”
(Stip.
9).
It is indicated “that on October 22,
1979 the plant experienced
an electrical outage which caused an unknown amount of sewage to
bypass the plant and discharge into the Mauvaise Terre Creek.
This
discharge lasted approximately 70 minutes.
The City has an alternative
feed source
for electrical power, but it took seventy minutes to shift
over.”
(Stip.
7—8).
The Agency noted that,
as a result of this
October 22,
1979 discharge,
severe water pollution occurred, dissolved
oxygen levels plummeted, and nearby residents were inconvenienced by
the offensive odors.
(See:
Exhibit 6; Stip.
10—11).
The Revised Statement of Stipulated Settlement provides that
the City will follow a detailed compliance program to prevent any
future discharges of raw sewage and to eliminate any future water
quality violations.
Moreover, the City shall:
(1) have a Class
I
certified operator to directly supervise and oversee operations;
(2) promptly “install a 24-hour automatic monitoring device at the
influent sluice gate that will warn operators at the plant of any
overflow into the emergency outlet”;
(3) file all necessary reports
with the Agency in a timely manner;
(4)
“vigorously enforce its
industrial waste ordinance”;
(5)
“vigorously enforce
the
contracts
the City has with all industrial dischargers
so as
to require said
dischargers to limit their discharges to contract limits and plant
capabilities”;
(6) pay $2,305.65 into the Wildlife and Fish Fund
of the State Treasury as reimbursement for the reasonable value of
the 6,938 fish which were killed in the creek;
and
(7) pay
a
stipulated penalty of $1,994.35
.
(Stip.
11—14).
In evaluating this enforcement action and proposed settlement
agreement, the Board has taken into consideration all the facts
an.~i
circumstances in light of the specific criteria delineated
in
Section 33(c) of the Act and finds the Revised Statement of Stipulatod
Settlement to be acceptable under the Board’s Procedural Rule 331.
The Board finds that the Respondent, the City of Jacksonville,
has violated the conditions of its NPDES Permit No.
IL
0021661;
Rules 203(a), 203(d),
203(f),
402,
403,
410(a), and 901 of Chapter
3:
42—39
—4
Water Pollution Control Regulations, and Sections 12(a) and 12(f)
of
the Illinois Environmental Protection Act.
A payment of $2,305.65 as
reimbursement for the reasonable value of the fish killed will
be
assessed against the Respondent.
Additionally, the stipulated penalty
of $1,994.35 will also be imposed on the City of Jacksonville.
This Opinion constitutes the Board’s findings of fact and
conclusions
of law in this matter.
ORDER
It is the Order of the Illinois Pollution Control Board that:
1.
The Respondent, the City of Jacksonville, has violated the
conditions of its NPDES Permit No.
IL 0021661; Rules 203(a),
203(d),
203(f),
402, 403,
410(a),
and 901 of Chapter 3:
Water Pollution
Control Regulations, and Sections
12(a) and 12(f)
of the Illinois
Environmental Protection Act.
2.
Within 30 days of the date of this Order, the Respondent
shall pay the
sum
of $2,305.65 to the Game and Fish Fund of the
State Treasury
(as reimbursement for the reasonable value of the
fish killed), payment to be made by certified check or money order
which is to be sent to:
State of Illinois
Fiscal Services Division
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
2200 Churchill Road
Springfield, Illinois
62706
3.
Within 30 days of the date of this Order, the Respondent
shall, by certified check or money order payable to the State of
Illinois,
pay the stipulated penalty of $1,994.35 which is to be
sent to:
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
Fiscal Services Division
2200 Churchill Road
Springfield,
Illinois
62706
4.
The Respondent shall comply with all the terms and
conditions of the Revised Statement of Stipulated Settlement filed
May
14,
1981, which is incorporated by reference as if fully set
forth herein.
I, Christan L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
Board,
hereby certify that the above Opinion and Order wer~adopted
on the
(bk’
day of
_____________,
1981 by a vote of q~~ô
Christan L. Moff~~jClerk
Illinois Pollutioh’~ontrolBoard
42—40