ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

June 7,

1973

VILLAGE OF

ANTIOCH

)

#73-125

v.

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

)

OPINION

AND

ORDER OF THE BOARD

(BY SAMUEL T. LAWTON,

JR.):

The Village of Antioch seeks a variance from Rule 404(f)

of the

water Pollution Regulations which limits discharges of BOD to

4 mg/i

and suspended solids to

5 mg/i subsequent to December 31,

1973.

The

Agency believes that this implicitly includes a variance from Rule

407(b), limiting phosphorus discharge to

1 mg/i and Rules 921(d) and

1002(a) respecting project completion schedules.

Petitioner’s present sewage treatment plant consists of an acti-

vated sludge plant and tertiary lagoon system.

Final chlorinated

effluent is discharged to Sequoit Creek,

an intermittent stream having

a dilution ratio of less than one to one, discharging into Lake Marie

and the Fox-Chain-Of—Lakes within the Fox River basin.

Agency surveil-

lance indicates that petitioner’s effluent presently complies with Rule

404(a)

limiting BOD to

30 mg/i and suspended solids to 37 mg/i.

Petitioner’s grab samples indicate an average flow of .736 NGD, an

average BOD of

5 mg/i and an average suspended solids of

9 mg/i, suggest-

ing a very high quality of effluent even at the present time.

Agency

grab samples, while somewhat higher, likewise indicate compliance

with present regulations, but inability to meet the standards provided in

Rules 404(f) and 407(b).

In addition, fecal coliform counts are ex-

tremely low.

Petitioner has embarked on a program of upgrading its treatment faci-

lity.

On December 7,

1972,

the Agency issued a permit for improvement

and expansion of the treatment plant.

The estimated cost is $525,000.

Petitioner has $100,000 on hand and an. approved revenue bond issue

of $257,500.

Because of the current~status of the Lake County region-

alization plan,

the proposed project has not been approved for State

and Federal

grants.

Accordingly,

revised engineering plans were sub-

mitted and a revised State and Federal grant application filed.

At the

time of the issuance of the Agency permit, petitioner did submit an

approved project completion schedule,

in anticipation of State and

Federal grant approval.

The delays that have now arisen are attributable

to the requirements of grants and regionalization and, accordingly,

the project completion schedule previously filed is no longer achiev-

able.

8

—

233

---

The Agency recommends that in consideration of the foregoing

and the high quality of petitioner~spresent effluent, a six-month

variance be granted to the Village of Antioch from Rules 404(f)

and

407(b)

and 921(b).

While the recommendation proposes the variance

be for a period of six months from the date of the Order, we believe

what the Agency intended was that it be six months from the operative

date of Rules 404(f)

and 407(b); otherwise, the variance would have no

significance.

The Agency also recommends that

a variance be granted

with respect to Rule 1002(a)

to enable the submission of a project

completion schedule showing a completion date later than December 31,

1973.

We concur.

The hardship imposed on the petitioner by insisting

on compliance with the foregoing Rules greatly outweighs any burden

on the community from the grant of the variance as requested.

This opinion constitutes the findings of fact and conclusions of law

of the Board.

IT IS THE ORDER of the Pollution Control Board:

1.

That the Village of Antioch is granted

a variance from

Rules 404(f),

407(b)

and 921(d)

of the Water Pollution

Regulations until June

7,

1974;

2.

Variance is granted to the Village of Antioch from Rule

1002(a) to enable petitioner to file a project completion

schedule showing

a completion date no later than June

7,

1974.

I, Christan Moffett, Clerk of the Pollution Control Board, certify

that the above Opinion and Order was adopted on the Jday

of

June,

1973, by a vote of

4

to

___________

—2—

8

—

234