ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
January
24,
1974
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY,
Complainant,
v.
)
PCB 71-25
CITY OF MARION,
Respondent.
CITY OF MARION,
)
Petitioner,
v.
)
PCB 71—225
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY,
)
Respondent.
William
J. Novick, Attorney for the City of Marion
Larry Eaton, Assistant Attorney General for
the EPA
OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD
(by Mr.
Henss)
The Agency’s Complaint
(#71-25) charged the City of Marion
with discharging inadequately treated sewage to
a tributary of
Crab Orchard Creek and missing some deadlines for
construction
of sewage plant improvements.
The City’s Petition for Variance
(#71-225)
requested a delay in compliance with the Regulations
pending installation of the required improvements.
On October
28,
1971, the Illinois Pollution Control Board ordered the City of
Marion to comply by September 30, 1972 with the treatment and
effluent standards of SwB-14 which had been adopted by the former
Sanitary Water Board.
The City of Marion sought administrative review in the
Appellate Court of
Illinois, Fifth Appellate District.
Subse-
quently, on March
7,
1972
this Board adopted Water Pollution
Regulations, which in some respects, vary from requirements of
the former Sanitary Water Board.
Cities over 10,000 in population
were granted to December 31,
1973 to meet
the Water Quality
11
—3
—2—
Standards.
The City of Marion contended that it would be a
discrimination against the City to require it to meet the
Standards by September 30,
1972 when all other municipalities
over 10,000 in population would have until December 31, 1973
to meet the Water Quality Standards.
The Appellate Court found that the City of Marion should
have the benefit of the changes in the law which had occurred
while the case was pending on review.
The Court said:
“Justice requires therefore that the City of
Marion be entitled to all the terms and provisions
of the new Regulations.
The record, having been
compiled previous to the promulgation of
the new
Regulations,
is inadequate
to fully establish the
nature of the appropriate order that should be
entered in this case...”
The case was remanded with directions requiring this Board to
conduct further hearings and determine in what manner the new
Regulations applied to the City of Marion and to determine what
steps,
if any, are necessary for the City of Marion to obtain
compliance with the new Regulations,
This~Boardis to strike
that portion of its Order relating to future compliance dates
and substitute an appropriate Order requiring compliance with
the current Regulations.
In compliance with the Appellate Court Order we order the
following:
1.
A hearing shall be conducted at an early date
to determine whetheror not the City of Marion
is in compliance with, or in violation of, the
new Regulations;
to determine the manner in
which
the new Regulations apply to the City of
Marion; and to determine what steps, if any, are
necessary for the City of Marion to obtain
compliance with said Regulations.
2.
The Board Orders of October 28,
1971 and March 14,
1972 are modified in the following respects:
Paragraphs
1,
2,
3,
4,
5,
6,
7 and 9 are stricken.
3.
Appropriate orders will be made following the
hearing which has been ordered regarding compliance
with the current Regulations.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
11
--4
—3—
I, Christan L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
Board, hereby certify the above Opinion and Order was
dopted
this
c~V’~
day ~
,
1974 by a vote of _to
~