ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

February 7, 1974

VERN ANDERSON

OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD

(by

Dr~Odell)

Petitioner, Vern Anderson, filed a petition for variance,

which was received by the Iiiin~isPollution Control Board

(hereinafter Board) on October 11, l973~ Petitioner seeks

relief from Order Nos~6(c) and 6(d) of North Shore Sanitary

District v~ Environmental Protection Age~~~

PCB 541,

~ in order to obtain a sewer connection ~ermit for a 2-unit

apartment building located at 1112 McAree Road, Waukegan, Lake

County, I1linois~ This request for a variance resulted from a

Notice of Violation to Petitioner on August 31, 1973, from the

Lake County Health Department, that effluent from Petitioner~s

septic system was “being discharged to the qround surface,u

which was “in violation of Lake County Health Code •ordinances~

and “a hazard to public hea1th~” This Notice of Violation also

instructed Petitioner to make repairs to his septic system to

prevent effluent discharge to the ground surface or petition

for a variance for a sanitary sewer donnection~

On October 18, 1973, the Board ordered the Petitioner to

file additional information indicating whether the proposed

connection would be tributary to a sewer with inadequate trans~

port capacity~ On November 6, 1973, the Board received a response

from the Petitioner indicating that (a) the proposed

connection

would be tributary to the Judge Avenue sewer and (b) the septic

system does not function properly “because of the

lowness of the

grounds

On December 13, 1973, the Board requested

from the

Petitioner

more detailed information on

the

topography of

the

subject land, with special reference to

the

availability

of

land

of such elevation into which a new septic tank distribution

system could be installed in such a manner as. to achieve ade~

quate percolation and avoid health hazards, including

during

wet periods. Information on the feasibility of such changes in

the septic distribution system was also requested~

11

—

181

---

Or November 29, 1973 the Board received from the

Envrron~enta3 Protection Anenc’ (herein~fte~Agenc~7 a

Recommendatio~ concerr ng the variance request b3 the

Petitioner ?astes fror t~ieproposed sewer conrector ~

be trans~ort~dto the Waukegsn sewage treatment ~lart

v

a ~

Judge Averu~sewer The fo lowing a a from the I~ontbl.

Operstions Reports indicate tre perfor~nanceof tie Vai~e~

sewage treat-rent p1ant~

Solids

Septeir er ~91

I ~l3

August 19 ~

33 5~

July, 1973

14 53

June, 197~

17.16

May, 19~3

21 ~6

April 1973

22.60

Hatch 1973

21.49

I~ebraary, l9~33

16.68

January 1913

18.8~

December, l97~

November 197

October, 1972

In its Order of January 31, l9~2,as amended March 2, 19 2 in

~6horeSanitarDistr~ctv.Environmenta1ProtectionAenc

PCB 71-343, the Board granted the North Sfrre Sanitary District

(hereinafter District) a variance from Order No. 7 of PCB 70-~

-1

,

—13 and -14. Specifically, the Board granted the District

permission to add a total of 13 333 population equivalents to tfr

sewers fributary to the Waulcegar sewage treatment plant The

above variance was extended by trc Board to March 2 19 in

PCB 72-451, thereby allowing the District to continue allowing

connections to the waukegan sewage treatment plant.

However, subparagraphs 6 ‘c and 6 d) of the above-mentioned

Order PCB 73—343, imposed the fo1lowi~erelevant condtions on

the issuance of perrcits

c no connections shall be allowed if any part of the

down-stream sewer system

15

incapable of adequately

transportirg

the

additional cr new waste to the District~

treatment works;

d within 30 days o~ the ertry of this order the ~~‘ency

shall indicate to the District tHose sewers or sewer

lines wnich it finds incapable of adequately transport

ing wastes; the District shall not approve any permfrs

which would add or

i creas~

cry waste source to any

sewer line or sewer so des;gnabed

---

The allotment of sewer connections has not ceen ~x austed for

the Waukegan sewage reatment plant, and ordinar I

the

PetitIoner could be ~se~d a ~ernfr ~ut of the r~a~n~rg

allotuent However, ~he ~geJcy indicates that e Judge Avenue

sewer is ~hydraulicallv ~rerloaded and ic ub~e’t ~o ex~essive

flows from storm ‘ater runoff luring eer~odsci re~ eather

~h s runoff results n he fryoassi g f untreatee castes into

yeoman Creek and in the flooding f basererts in ie rca. irer~

tore ‘on ection pernits cannot ~e i~suedby the ~ Ic ~nd the

igency because or ‘~he iracequate transport cepa ity o~ the

sewer to qhich the subject buiidinj woc’c be tr~bitary Accord-

ing to the Agency, ~tte ‘icy ‘f Waukegan presen ly has no definite

~ans to cr~rrect the exict_nC p~oL~ewwith ~nd oncrease the

~ydraulir capacity of the ~idgeAvenue sewer.

Petitioner~s hardship relates to the inadequacy of the

ceptic system presently serving the building, and especially

to ~ne health hazard. Phe Board ras granted a variance in those

cases where a petitioner has shown that a pu~1ichealth hazard

exists ir regard to the peration of a septic system and this

health lazard cat-rot

be

eliMinated through improved maintenance

or relatively minor repairs of the system. (See e.g. Elsa J.

Millet v. Environmental Protection Agency, PCB 73-43~

Jamei~

~

PCB 73~37’ wThi~rv,

~

PCB 71-334; and Robert J.

Bartell v Environmental Protection Agenc

,

PCB

72t-~l72). The

Board f~ndsthat the Petitioner has Lane

to

show that the

health hazard

cannot

be el-iminated through

improved maintenance

and reratively minor repairs to

the system, that

the

possibility

of such repairs has been investigated, or

that unsuccessful

repairs

have

been attempted in

the past. The Petitioner has

failed to provide

~iore information concerning some

of

these points

in response to the

Board Order of December 13,

1973.

On January

4,

1974, the Petitioner filed a

verbal 60-day waiver in this

matter and agreed to submit additional information, but none has

been

received

by

the Board. Since the Petitioner has not shown

that

he

has explored possible alternatives to solve his septic

system problem, the Board is not justified in granting this

variance for a sewer connection, Granting this variance would

shift Petitioner’s problem to others attached to the Judge Avenue

sewer, especially in flooded basements during periods of excessive

runoff of storm water, An alternative solution to this problem

is for the City of Waukegan to rehabilitate or enlarge the Judge

Avenue sewer so that it can properly service the Petitioner plus

others

in

the neighborhood who have flooded basements during

heavy rains.

This Opinion constitutes the findings of fact and conclusions

of law of the Board.

11

—

183

---

ORDER

IT IS THE ORDER of the Pollution

Control

Board that

Petitianer~s recuest

for variance

is denied without pre~1udice~

I, ChriLstari 1. Moffett, Clerk-of the Illinois

Pollution Control

Board, certify that the above Order was adopte~1 on this ~

day of

~

1974, by a vote of

J’

to

c)

i~1

—