ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

September 15,

1976

CITY OF

OTTAT~k,

)

Petitioner,

V.

)

 PCB 76—187

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,

)

Respondent.

OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD

 (by ~1r. Young):

This matter comes before the Board on the variance petition

filed June

28,

 1976, by the City of Ottawa seeking relief from

Rule

 602(d) (3)

 of Chapter

3:

 Water Pollution Rules and Regula-

tior-is.

 An Agency Recommendation was filed with the Board on

August

12,

 1976;

 no hearing was held in this matter.

Rule 602(d) (3) establishes a compliance date of December

31,

1975 for Rule 602 Cc), which requires in part that all combined

sewer overflows shall be given sufficient treatment to prevent

pollution or

 a violation of applicable water quality standards.

The City of Ottawa owns and operates

 a sewage treatment plant

which

 has a design average flow of 4.0 MGD, and an average daily

flow of 2.5 MGD.

 Although the plant has a design maximum flow of

8.0 MGD,

 during periods of heavy precipitation flows in excess of

5.5

MGD are diverted to a three cell storm lagoon which has a capa-

city of fourteen million gallons.

 When the third cell of the storm

 lagoon becomes full,

 its contents are redirected

 to the chlorine

contact tank for chlorination and admixture with the plant’s

 final

effluent.

 The City’s wastewater collection system consists of

both

comb

i

nod

and

san

i.

~ary sewers

A

t.

Lhoucjh

mos

t

Lhe

sewers

constructed

prior

1956

were

combined

sewers,

Lhc

City

aileqes

t-

!hi

t.

s

I nce

1

()

56

has

been

coiis

L ruc

S0)d

~.‘

~ewc

 r:~ ~n

flew

developments

and

installing

storm

relief

sewers

existing

develop-

ments.

There

are

eighteen

overflow

points

the

 collection system

which discharge directly to the Illinois or Fox Rivers when the

system becomes hydraulically overloaded during periods of wet

 weather.

The City alleges that it has been diligently working

 to bring

its system into compliance.

 On June

3,

 1975,

 the City was awarded

a Step

I

grant to prepare a Facilities

 Plan for the City.

 At the

same time, the City was awarded a Step

 II and III grant to separate

storm and sanitary flows within a specific area of the City, the

Central District.

 Construction on this project has been initiated

and is expected to be complete in 1977.

 The Agency expects that

—

521

—~,—

the City’s Facilities Plan, which will focus on remaining com-

bined sewer overflow points, will be submitted within the month

and

the Agency will

 then consider the award of additional Step

II and III grants.

 In view of the high cost of improvements,

the City alleges an arbitrary and unreasonable hardship would be

placed upon it if

it

were forced to proceed with sewer improve-

ments prior to obtaining assistance from existing grant funds.

The Agency and the Board have recognized the fact that many

municipalities and sanitary districts throughout the State have

not met and cannot presently meet the 602(d) (3) compliance date.

On December 22, 1975,

 the Agency filed an Amended Petition for

 Regulatory Change

 (R75—15) with the Board specifically requesting

the compliance date be extended, provided the discharger has

applied

 for a grant and is diligently pursuing the grant program.

Although the Board has not taken final action on this proposal,

at its May 20,

 1976 meeting,

 the Board authorized for publication

a proposed final draft of the Rule Change which would adopt the

substance of the Agency’s proposal.

 The economic impact hearings

were conducted on August 26, and September

1,

 1976.

In view of the foregoing,

the

Board is disposed to grant the

City of Ottawa the relief requested.

 We believe an arbitrary and

unreasonable hardship would be placed on the City by requiring the

massive capital outlays necessary for compliance without first

allowing the City

 to obtain assistance from existing grant program

and particularly so when the City would be precluded from any reim

bursement from State/Federal grant

 funds if the City were to proceed

in advance of a particular grant award

 (The Clinton Sanitary Distric~-

PCB 75-498;

 The Sanitary District of Elgin, PCB 75-501).

This Opinion constitutes the Board’s findings of fact and con-

clusions

 of law in this matter.

ORDER

1.

 The City of Ottawa is granted variance from the compliance

(Ia

t:e

for

the

 trea

men

t;

 o I comb

 i nod su~o

r

OV(

r

1

1

ow~

~ S

(‘S

 1 ~ib

1.

shod

by

!~ti

Jo

 602 (d

) (3)

Lhc

WaLer

 1~()1

I.

Ut.

Ion

Ru

 1 os

~nitI

1~O(JII

1

L

ions

Such

r i ance

i s

q

ran Led

un

Lii ~July

I

I

977

 or un ~

I

 Llic

board

takes final action

 in consideration of Regulatory Proposal R75-15,

whichever

 is earlier.

2.

 During the period of the variance the City shall main-

tain optimum plant operating efficiency and convey as much com-

bined sewer flow to its plant as is practicable.

3.

 This variance will immediately terminate

 if the City

is

offered a State or Federal grant during this period and the City

does not respond with appropriate action to bring the combined

 sewer system into compliance.

—

522

—3—

IT IS SO ORDERED.

I,

 Christan

 L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution

Control Board, hereb

 certify the above Opinion and Order were

adopted on the

day

__________________,

 1976 by a

vote of

______

Illinois

Pollution

 trol Board

—

523