ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
August
24, 1978
CITY
OF SALEM,
)
Petitioner,
v
)
PCB 78—167
)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
)
)
Respondent.
OPINION
AND
ORDER OF
THE
BOARD
(by Mr.
Dumelle):
The City of Salem
(Salem)
filed its Petition for a Variance
from Rule
602(b)
of Chapter
3:
Water Regulations on June 6,
1978.
On July
6,
the Board denied the Agency’s request that this pro-
ceeding be consolidated with an enforcement proceeding filed by
the Agency against Salem
(PCB 78—137).
The Agency
filed its
Recommendation advocating denial of the variance on July
25,
1978.
Salem has waived its right to a hearing in this matter.
Salem is
a muncipality of approximately 7,300 people located
in Marion County.
Salernts sewage treatment plant is
a contact
stabilization variation of the activated sludge process followed
by rapid sand filters and chlorination.
Under normal operating
conditions
(no rainfall),
the plant discharges less than
10 mg/i
BOD and 12 mg/i suspended solids into Town Creek,
a tributary to
Crooked Creek,
a tributary to the Kaskaskia River.
Upon a rainfall
of one inch or more,
the plant becomes flooded and fails
to meet
its effluent standards.
During the flooding period,
the flow
exceeds
5 MGD which is twice the plant’s rated capacity.
The
flooding picks
up high solids sludge from the plant and washes it
to the creek.
Often
it takes
a period of two weeks for the plant
to regain treatment efficiency.
Salem requests the variance in order to construct a bypass
which would carry the excess
flow during flooding, with at least
minimal chlorination, directly to the creek.
Salem feels that
this immediate control method
is needed because of the potential
hazards created by flooding.
In the meantime, Salem is awaiting
approval of its
I and I Study, which indicates the need for a
Sewer System Evaluation Study
(SSES).
Funds for testing and
construction dictate a schedule of completion in 1980.
31—305
—2—
The Agency’s opposition to granting the variance is based on
Salem’s continued violations of its NPDES effluent limitations for
BOD and suspended solids.
The Agency has not yet certified an
SSES for Salem, but notes that Salem’s grant priority number will
make Salem eligible for Step III funding.
However,
the Agency
notes,
Salem has not indicated in its petition that the discharge
from the proposed bypass would meet the effluent limitations for
secondary treatment as required by Section 301(b) (1) (B)
of the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act
(FWPCA).
The Board agrees with the Agency that Salem has failed to
demonstrate compliance with FWPCA requirements.
Since the Board
is limited by Section
35 of the Illinois Environmental Protection
Act to granting variances within the confines of standards set by
the FWPCA,
the Board cannot grant the requested variance unless
Salem can show compliance with Federal standards.
See, City of
Springfield v. EPA, PCB 77-185, December
8,
1977.
The Board also
notes that Salem failed to provide information on the downstream
effects of its proposed bypass.
For these reasons,
the Board
dismisses Salem’s petition without prejudice.
This Opinion constitutes the findings of fact and conclusions
of law of the Board in this matter.
ORDER
It is the Order of the Pollution Control Board that the
Petition for Variance filed by the City of Salem be dismissed
without prejudice.
I, Christan L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
Board, hereby certify the above 0 inion and Order were adopted
on
~
day of
,
19
75
by a vote
Christan L. Moff
1,t,
Clerk
Illinois Pol1utiox~ontrol Bo~
31—306