ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
June
28,
1977
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
Comolainant,
v.
)
PCB 76—320
VILLAGE OF HOMEWOOD,
a municipal corporation,
Respondent.
OPINION AND ORDER
OF THE BOARD
(by Mr. Young):
This matter comes before the Board on the Complaint filed
on December 16,
1976, by the Environmental Protection Agency
charging that on June
7,
1976,
the Village of Homewood discharge~i
an effluent from its sewage treatment facility containing a
biochemical oxygen demand exceeding five times the numerical
standard prescribed by Rule 4~04(c) and hence
in violation of
Bule 401(c) of Chapter
3:
Water Pollution Regulations,
arid in
further violation of Section 12(a)
of the Environmental Protection
Act.
The Complaint further charged that on June
7,
1976,
the
Respondent caused or allowed the discharge of effluent containing
settleable solids,
floating debris, sludge solids, scum, and
color in violation of Rule 403, and further that this discharge
caused the receiving stream to become contaminated
in violation
of Rule
203 and in violation of Section 12(a)
of the Act.
Hearing
was held in this matter on May
13,
1977, at which time
a Stipulation
and Proposal for Settlement was entered into
the
record.
In the Stipulation, the Respondent admits
to the violations
charged in the Complaint.
The parties agree that the harmful
discharges were caused
in part by the accumulation of sludge
in
the primary pond
at Respondent’s facility to such an extent that
the sluciqe prevented
the
primary pond from providing any
treatment
and that the discharges were caused by the surfacing of accumulated
sludge which was carried to the secondary pond and was then dis-
charged to Butterfield Creek.
The parties also agree that certain
operational
arid equipment deficiencies at the facility contributed
to the admitted violations and that improvements in the
methods of
operation,
and the repairand replacement of certain equipment would
improve the quality of the effluent therefrom.
Respondent has
entered into a contract with a consulting engineer
to prepare a
facilities plan for submission
to the Agency by June
30,
197?,
which will include
a study of the alternatives
to bring the facility
into compliance with the Act and regulations.
26
—
49
—2—
The Stipulation provides the specific steps which the Re-
spondent will take to ensure compliance with the Act and regula-
tions.
Because the Agency believes Homewood has demonstrated
its willingness to take the actions necessary to comply with the
Act and regulations and to that end has cooperated with the Agency
since the date of the admitted violations, the Agency recommends
that no penalty be assessed in this case.
The Board will accept
the Agency Recommendation and defer the penalty that would other-
wise be assessed for the admitted violation because of the financial
limitations of the Village and the compliance program undertaken.
In view of the foregoing and the Stipulation and Proposal
for Settlement, the Board finds that Homewood caused the violations
as charged.
The Board also finds the terms of the Settlement
acceptable and will require that the parties adhere to all pro-
visions the±ein.
This Opinion constitutes the Board’s findings of fact and
conclusions of law in this matter.
ORDER
I.
Respondent, Village of Homewood,
is found to have violated
Rules 401(c),
203 and 403 of Chapter
3:
Water Pollution Regulations
and Section 12(a) of the Environmental Protection Act.
2.
Respondent, Village of Homewood, shall adhere to all pro-
visions of the Settlement Proposal, which
is hereby incorporated
by reference as
if fully set forth herein.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
I, Christan L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Con-
trol Board, hereby certify the above Opinion and Order were adopted
on the
~
day of
_________________,
1977 by
a vote of
____
Christan L. Moff1~, Clerk
Illinois Pollution Control Board
26-50