0h~
    JO
    CO~i~ObBOARD
    C
    2
    7/
    PCB
    77~5O
    OPIN
    F
    PP~
    by
    0Ir~
    Zoung)
    hi
    ~
    c
    m~
    ~ore
    oe
    Bcar~
    on
    the
    petition
    filed
    or
    r
    b~
    ti
    2
    ty of Peru
    seeking
    variance
    ii
    4
    1
    1
    L
    o~ Chap~er 3
    Water
    Pollution
    to
    a
    i~larçj
    c
    n
    its
    water
    treatment
    plant~.
    The
    Th
    c
    o c
    at
    ~a ocable to t ie qrant
    of
    the
    variance
    s
    t
    o~Manc
    19
    1.
    t c
    al
    r treaLmen
    p~an~.has
    a 1.4 MGD
    L
    d
    ~
    ~
    S
    t
    ocese includes
    aeration,
    chemical
    a
    if catscn
    sedimentation,
    recarbonation,
    ii
    t
    ti
    i
    a
    ncecL~cn
    ne wastewater
    discharges
    to the
    film
    mc
    ~r
    ~c u~ethe 3U,00J gallons per
    day filter back—
    wor
    c~C~dsolda
    content of 2,500
    mg/l,
    and the
    15
    1
    r
    I y lure C1Ld
    disco ~ge
    having a pH of
    gr
    cm
    tn
    LI
    ~
    ani
    a
    cus ended solids
    ontent
    of 40,000 mg/i.
    Rule
    49
    ~
    ires that these discharges rol exceed a
    15 mg/l
    susoc~der
    ~
    I.
    ÷
    iitd
    the
    pH r
    uired to
    fall in the
    raros
    a
    10
    ~ ~ctu e~ ur
    s
    ~ha~ it will
    cost
    $243,000.00
    to
    b
    iq
    ~o
    orr
    am
    with tIc
    regulations,
    The
    Cl’
    is
    r 1~u~La I
    talL
    this uroenliture at
    present
    because
    a
    Ld
    iii
    i
    P
    -
    cur
    ~
    urn
    prepared
    for
    its
    wastewater
    tramsoo
    t
    an~ t
    ea
    i
    t
    c-ens
    Jo
    FaAlities
    Plan,
    due
    in
    Fei
    i
    r7
    )f~
    a
    8
    ~zJ
    a drsss foe environmental
    soundness and
    cost
    ef~ntivc
    cur
    )~
    rar~ort rg th~water filtration
    plant
    ~ewurme
    i~at~&
    ~
    for joint
    handling
    with the
    seiag~ ur dges
    iur ass I
    no
    1-Ign costs involved
    and
    to avoid
    ave 1a~ ~q sy
    toni,
    the City
    s ates that it would
    be
    more
    rea~oiabe
    o~c
    ie deursicn an the compliance
    program
    until
    suci’
    ti
    t a
    a
    ji
    ~ie~
    ar
    available,
    In
    recognition
    of
    ~
    ur
    )tanoc
    ard
    ur arur of the high dilution
    ratio
    provide
    5.
    ii’
    I
    Jr ci s River
    tie Agency agrees
    that it would
    25
    415

    S a Faci ities Plan
    o
    I
    The Agency
    rca
    ~o rLcommend a
    4
    t
    ctmtioner had
    ~ar14 would not
    ~motmhits
    the
    S
    uS
    toe
    applicable
    I ntmol Act Amendments
    a
    Jactical Control
    aurl urSes that U,S E,P,A~
    -
    -
    14
    o’ ants on a case~by~
    P~A, has yet to
    am
    discharge.
    Burro
    is disposed to
    -
    eltioner
    to make
    ~‘
    the Agency,
    m
    Iron Rules 409 and
    Ecl~dfrom Rules
    203(a)
    tO
    Act, this relief
    ~c consistent with
    or
    P
    liution Contro1~
    -
    a
    I. uurgs
    of fact
    and
    -
    t~÷May 1,
    1978,
    to
    us
    s of the Federal
    al
    from Rules
    203(a),
    a regards pH and
    from
    its water
    o luLes
    409 and 410
    t
    -
    -
    ~ois Pollution
    o
    a
    ‘uro
    and Order werç
    -
    9
    a~a vote ~
    o147k~9,
    lerk
    r~
    ontrol Board

    Back to top