fU~LUlION

CONTROL BOARD

~eb~uary

16, 1978

H

\GENCY,

b~ore

the Board on a variance

petition

~7

by

the City of Monticello,

requesting

ions

of Chapter

3 as applied

to

the

Part

of

the City.

In particular,

variance

~pForus

standard of Rule 203(c)

and

equ

rertents of Rule 203(f).

On

January

~ed a

Recommendation

favorable

to

the

~ub~ect

to

certain conditions;

the City

n~aring

in this matter.

trec~

and

ar

~nc

exist

mill

4

which

disch

-

tionc

of th

gallo~

stre

rr

mati

dase

in

q

‘E’

mittci

qual.

pO4~

culat

-

Agenc

C).

phos

exceca

respa

ri).

~t

,

the owner and operator of the sewage

iat

it

cannot meet the current

phosphor~is

er

quality standards of Chapter

3~

The

arfes

a daily load of approximately

one

inrimed

tributary in Piatt County,

Illinois,

~e

J~e

Sangamon River;

the Sangamon

Riter

~tu~

in

Macon County, Illinois.

The

Peti.’-~

day

10-year zero low flow classification

u~th

exhibits indicating that

two

~rallio.~

~-~re

discharged five days per

week

up—

~t

ant.

facility

(Pet,

Att. B), but

this

infor

t~i~

fact

that the plant effluent

in

this

~ duty standards for these two

pararreters

~

iariance

petition, Petitioner

has

sub-

i

nthly

Agency monitoring reports of

effluent

f~Monticello facility for phosphorus

as

ccc

(as

NH3).

The City also presented

caF-

n~entrations

for the same parameter~

using

nillion

gallon dilution factor

(Pete Att.

3

a

~he

Board

can assume that the levels

of

-fri

drnrronia

nitrogen

(NH4-NH3 as N)

most probably

y

3tandards of 0.05 mg/i and 1.5

mg/~

CIT’x

)i

)

PCB 77—305

ENVIP

OPINJC

ilL

POARD

(by Mr.

Young):

file

~I

relief

wast

is

rca

the

3,

J_)

grart

has

29—231

---

The

Pc

that

relief

i

protection

‘

faci1ity~ ~

Rule 402.

the Board

gre

c~’

203(c)

and

ru

from 203Cc

an

discharge wr

tion is

suh~e

limitatio

the Envirn c

-

~f

or

supports

~iae adequate

r

he Mouticelio

required from

20.

i97~’).

~ion

to Rule

~na relief

ires that any

aaality viola-

-~neffli eat

LO

Title

9 or

In

li7

ment p’art

-~

filter and

however,

d

-

to a corxcen

ir

On December

planning gri.

recommending

Order in thir

i

‘

l~npr

x~ P

Fy10

C

S

ar-to

jr-;

fac~

1

37

~

onsiol

~n

d issu’~s I

ei

The

Bo~

other petlU

the

Board

l~,

nitrogen

hr

respectivep

modi~icatro.

it would be p

to spend ar

now

under

O\~C.

~oe tn~sand

its.

Ci:reit

~

3nd

crllnorLi

~

an

~

ay res

It

aite

,L

rite

Mon

41.

5

)~

tee nolon

On

Oc

ministratcr

chargers.

from

NPDE~

with a~pli~~

Act

as

amc

~

arbitrary

a

prove,

anc

the varia.~

FWPCA.

Iir

i~s

C.

grant v~r~inr~

36

1T

c)Upl1~

lu~~

r, ~.or~r

esh~ ‘re

)

u.~tplea I

ax

I

aerd tion

t~a

vis~on~P

The

so.-

before

th

Chapter

3;

for examp.Le

priate 5ee

variance

with

any

~

Recovery

A~

or

1

rricl

c

C.

otlie~ ~.Pr

o..~Recu~

ane

~th

aL

aopro

render-I,

~rr-t

or

ccr-p~ience

~e.ve~

rn

c3fC.

~

~ct a

tIe-

---

—3—

In

additim-

to these Federal

requirements,

the Board

must

be assured

that Petitioner’s

NPDES

permit is consistent

with

directives

~

Order

In this

case,

the Agency

recommends

that the

Board, pursuant

to Rule

912(a)

of Chapter

3,

order

certain

inodilli tLans

..n Petitioner~s

NPDES permit.

Rule 912

(a)

contemplates a comalaint not

evident here and requires

the

finding

of a violation before

the

Board may modify,

suspend,

or revoke

an

IPDFS pei±nit.

R.ile

914 of Chapter

3,

on

the other

hand,

provid-u,

the rnecharr.~m

for

such changes in the

permit as

are

necessary

rere

Upon issuance

of a variance,

the

Board is

authorized

t

tiler

t’~

sgency

to

issue

or

modify

an

NPDES

p~rmit

consistent

wit?c

lie

.~.dOrder

as

well

as

the

FWPCA,

NPDES regu-

lations,

and.

.e

~

Accordingly,

the

Board

will

direct

th~

Agency

to isj.

di

red NPD~S

permit

to

Petitioner

co ~~tent

with

the

cond

Li

rs

uP

tue

Order

and to include such

interi

i

effluent

ii

at

or

-~smay

reasonably be achieved

through

the

application

ue~t

practicable

operation and maintenance

tctetices

in the

existi.n

‘cXCI

55

AccordL

g

to

~e

tition

and

the

Agency

Recommendation,

the

Monticello

P

ea-~

~it

a

11it~

is

currently incapable of

meo~-ir~g

the

phosphorus

aid

cmi

aia

nitrogen

water

quality

limitations,

the

Agency

recormc

cli

k-fat

a variance be granted provided

that

the NPDES

perait is

~odjfied and

the Petitioner agrees

to all

provisions

of tuic

( .d

r.

Tha

Board has previously

granted

a

number

of

va

once

~ha

a

the

ahosphorus and ammonia

nitrogen

water

quel. y s~-

ttu.

n

phosphorus variance

proceedircis,

the

Board

ha~

P

i

d

ttr~

plorphorus

control

is technically

feasible

but

ccc

Xli-

a

lv

mpractical.

c4~2~~ooe~on,

.tCB

76-234,

24 P~P 44r

inernIflinoisUniversit~atEdwardsvi’le,

PCB

77-111

~

).

1

5

~

Water

Company,

Inc.,

PCB

77-146,

25

PCB

289.

..

a

~

of

cases

involving

the

ammonia nil-rogen

requirement,

‘~e

~ a

has granted

a

variance

provided

that

petitioner

ar-i

C

-

.

ly with

prospective

ammonia

nitrogen

regulatory

c

av

e~

~dcuted

by the

Board

in R77-6.

ç~9~Can-

ton, PCB

77-2

L

~

‘tot

23,

1977);

village of Arthur,

PCB

77—266

(Dec~ e~

21

~.‘77),

In

view

o~

..e

toieqothq,

the

Board

finds

that

Petitioner

would

suffer

cr

crf

rciry end

unreasonable

hardship

without

relief

from

F.

~

213

..)

and 402

as

applied

to

phosphorus;

to

require

PetH-

~-o

mresent

a showing of the

unreasonabieness

of

their

ret

L

.nce

w1-r.

Rules

203(f)

and 402 ammonia

nitrogen

standards

at

I

s

time

would

merely duplicate what the

Agency

has

under

a~c.r-.

c demonstrate in

R77-6.

The

Board

will,

there-

fore,

grarL

110

t.

~lio

sewage

treatment plant relief from Rules

203(c),

20i(t

rtnd

402

as

each aoplies

to phosphorus

and

ammonia

nitrogen

su;

Cr-C

to the

conditions of this Order.

This

0,

nlin constitutes

the Board’s findings of

fact ard

conclusions

or law

in this matter.

29

—

233

---

1,

The

CIty

operation

of

al-s

w

~-~-

and

402

of

C~

p4ai

~

and Regulatior~s‘-e~

subject

to

tt~

Polio

a)

lii~

1(

adopt

~ci

cf

thr

tue

I

lit1

to

u~

In

dat

i~

)

hail

Li~

~r eq

C.-

t

2.

The

~

operation

of

~ts

and

402

o

li

i.

tcw

and

Regilatio~s

1978,

subject

3,

Pc

shall

rca teL

~crencj

to

incorporat

cli

s granted a

variance

for

the

c~L-ent

plant

from

Rules

203(c)

atiori, of

the

Board’s

Rules

~ r

-~

untir

January

19,

1983,

oY,iC~

lerminate

upon

~

01

-,

modification

~:

water

quality

-litations

and the

~ at.

i

revised

regu—

U’

Board.

r

‘a

~

become available

t

i~

variance,

the City

-‘sign

and specifica-

he

installation

of

phosphorus

-

practicable

treat-

-cr-oval

of phosphorus

ci

acted a

variance

for

the

clant

from

Rules

203(f)

a

of the

Board’s

Rules

‘rogen until

December

31,

or

terminate

upon

x-

ci

icy

modification

r

.‘.-ogen

water

-

-

cent

limitations

-r

with

such

revised

v

the

Board.

1rt

funds

become available

s variance,

the City

i.

v dosign

and

specifica-

~c

for the

installation

~cval

of

ammonia

nitro—

‘ci

tt.r-

best

practicable

lii

the

removal

of

ammonia

of

the

works.

-

v~ of the

date

of

this

Order,

or NPDES

Permit IL 0029980

he variance

set forth

herein.

a

ci

‘ci

art

---

—5—

4.

The Agency, pursuant to Rule 914 of Chapter

3,

shall

modify NPDES Permit IL 0029980 consistent with the conditions

set forth in this Order including such interim effluent limita-

tions

as may reasonably be achieved through

the

application

of

best practicable operation and maintenance practices

in

the

existing facilities.

5.

Within

forty-five

(45)

days

of

the

date

of

this

Order,

the Petitioner shall submit to the Manager, Variance Section,

Division of Water Pollution Control,

Illinois Environmental

Protection Agency,

2200 Churchill Road,

Springfield, Illinois,

62706,

an

executed

Certification

of

Acceptance

and

Agreement

to be bound to all terms and conditions of the variance.

The

forty-five day period herein shall be suspended

in the event

of judicial review of this variance pursuant to Section

4L

of

the

Environmental

Protection

Act.

The

form

of

said

certification

shall be

as follows:

CERTIFICATION

I,

(We),

____________________________

having

read

the Order of the Pollution Control Board in PCB 77-305,

understand

and

accept

said

Order,

realizing

that

such

acceptance renders all terms and conditions thereto

binding and enforceable.

SIGNED

TITLE

DATE

IT

IS

SO ORDERED.

I, Christan L.

Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution

Control Board, her by certify

the

above Opinion and Order were

adopted

the

_____

day of

___________________,

1978 by a

~stanL.off~~~

Illinois Pollution

o trol Board

29

—