ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

January 8,

1976

NORTH SHORE SANITARY DISTRICT,

)

Petitioner,

v.

)

PCB 75—301

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,

)

Respondent.

OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD (by Mr. Goodman):

This matter comes before the Board upon petition for

variance by North Shore SanitaryDistrict (NSSD), filed July

30, 1975. In its petition and subsequent amendment, NSSD

requests that it be granted~variance from a sewer ban im-

posed by the Board in PCB 70-7, 12, 13., and 14, said var-

iance to be a further extention of that granted in PCB 71-

343 and subsequently amended in 72—451, 73—502, and 74—344.

The variance is requested for NSSD’s Waukegan treatment

plant. In the aforementioned prior variances, NSSD has been

granted permission to issue sewer permits totalling 13,333

population equivalents (P.E.), of which approximately 700

remain unissued at this time. In its petition, NSSD re-

quests an additional 5,000 P.E. be granted to their Waukegan

plant, or in the alternative that consideration be given to

terminating the sewer ban In connection with the Waukegan

Plant.

The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (Agency)

filed a recommendation on September 24, 1975, proposing that

variance be limited to the extension of the existing var-

iance and its approximately 700 unused P.E. The Agency,

based upon information provided by NSSD, feels that the

Waukegan plant is in a .state of hydraulic overload and that

the operational resultsfailed to consistantly maintain

standards required by the NPDES permit granted to the Waukegan

Plant and previous Board orders.

A hearing was held in this matter on Novemb~r 19, 1975,

at which NSSD presented testimony and exhibits in support

of its position that the information upon which the Agency

had based their recommendation was in error. The evidence

presented by NSSD indicated that the. flow meter utilized to

present total flow information to the Agency was deterior-

ating and had given inaccurate .flow rates for some months.

In addition, itwas indicated that a new analyst had been

hired in April of 1975 and that erroneous data, due to

19—

589

---

(2)

incorrect analyzing procedures by this new chemist, had been

presented to the Agency. Petitioner’s Exhibit No. 1 in-

cluded a re-evaluation of the allegedly erroneous data

alleging that the NSSD had not experienced the serious

hydraulic overloading as had been previously indicated and

that their effluent was within the applicable limits.

The Agency, in its brief, reiterated their original

contention that the NSSD was hydraulically overloaded and

did not meet the applicable effluent standards. The brief

also indicated that the NSSD had presented reasonable ex-

planations of the factors which may have given rise to

erroneous results. The Agency is concerned that there now

exists no accurate data upon. which to make a reasonable

evaluation. The Agency is, however, willing to re-evaluate

the situation upon receipt of current reliable data.

There appears. to be two issues of fact presented by the

parties in their briefs.. First, the issue of whether the

Waukegan Sanitary Treatment Plant is hydraulically overloaded.

MUch argument was presented by both sides concerning whether

the various recirculation flows should be subtracted from

the reported plant flows. The Board, based upon the testi-

mony and record, finds that these flows are so small as to

not materially effect the load status on the plant and,

therefore, will not be considered in the Board’s determina-

tion of this question. The Board finds the apparent dis-

crepancy between the influent and effluent meter readings to

be of far greater importance. The arguments by NSSD on the

subject suggest that the use of potentially unreliable

effluent meter readings may have unduly prejudiced the

Agency’ s recommendation.

The second issue of fact presented concerns the actual

pollutant concentrations in Waukegan Sanitary Treatment

Plant’s effluent. The Agency argues that Waukegan is not

fulfilling its requirements based upon the information

presented by NSSD from their records and. from grab samples

taken by the Agency. NSSD now claims .that the information

it provided the Agency concerning effluent concentrations

was in error due to the new chemist hired in April, 1975,

and considers the grab samples, taken by the Agency, to

have no weight due to their instantaneous nature. The

Board agrees that a single grab-type sample carries little

weight in a sanitary treatment plant process and agrees that

there may have been some erroneous data used by the Agency

in their recommendation.

19—

590

---

(3)

The Board, however, finds the Agency’s reluctance to

consider short term revised data to be reasonable, at least

in so far

.as

the possible lifting of the entire sewer ban at

the Waukegan plant. The Board finds that there is not,

at this time, sufficient evidence in the record to indicate

that the 1ffting of the ban on the Waukegan plant would

not result in harm to the environment. On the other hand,

the hardship. imposed on the people of the district who are

presently paying for services they cannot receive from NSSD,

due to the ban, is certainly a heavy burden.

The Board finds that the evidence in this case supports

the grant of a limited variance to the Waukegan plant. The

fact that the new, substantially completed, installations at

Waukeqan will be totally completed by November, 1976, carries

great weight in this decision. The Board will, therefore,

grant variance of an additional 1500 P..E. from January 1,

1976, until December 31, 1976. The 1500 P.E. is the Board’s

best estimation of the minimum extra sewer .capacity required

by the district for 1976, based upon the record herein. In

addition, at the end of April, 1976, NSSD will present a

summary of their effluent results for the previous 12 months

to the Board and the Agency. The Agency, after review of

this data,.will present its recommendation to the Board

with regard to:

1. The possible increase of the 1500 P.E. to 5000 P.E.

for the time remaining on the variance; and

2. The possibility of lifting the sewer ban at Waukegan,

taking into account the progress made toward completion of

the new facility.

The Board retains jurisdiction in this matter for the

purpose of this review.

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:

1. Variance be and is, hereby, granted from January 1,

1976 through December 31, 1976, for the NSSD to connect not

more than 1500 Population Equivalents to Waukegan’s Sewage

Treatment Plant.

19—591

---

(4)

2. On or before April 15, 1976, NSSD shall submit to

the Board and the Agency a summary of the data they have

collected in the past 12 months concerning NSSD’s effluent

concentrations and effluent flows.

3. On or before May 15, 1976, the Agency shall submit

its recommendation to the Board based upon the information

received under paragraph 2 above concerning:

a) The expansion of the total additional population

equivalents from 1500 to 5000; and

b) The possiblity. of removing the sewer ban on

the Waukegan Sanitaty Treatment plant.

4. NSSD shall submit status reports concerning the

construction at the Waukegan Plant including but not limited

to timetables for completion and resulting plant capacity

to the Board and the Agency on or before March 1, 1976 and

September 1, 1976.

5. All applicable conditions of PCB 73—502 shall

remain in full force

and

effect.

6. The Board retains jurisdiction in this matter for

the purposes stated herein.

Mr.

Young

abstains.

I, Christan L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution

Control Board, hereby ce,j~tify the above Opinion and Order

were adopted on the

______________

day of

_____________

1975 by a vote of ~

~

Illinois Pollution trol Board