I
IflI\
J.~_)
~
i~~_J.L
C~
S
I
J
LJC
ILIr.J
I
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLIJTION CONTROL BOARD
Ct1~M’S
MJ~R18
2003
STATE OF IWNOIS
CITY OF AUBURN
)
Pollutton
Control
Bøard
Petitioner,
)
).
‘v.
)
PCBO3-/’~
)
(Provisional Variance)
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
)
PROTECTION AGENCY,
)
)
Respondent.
)
NOTICE
Dorothy
Gunn,
Clerk
Joseph M. Powell, Mayor
illinois Pollution Control Board
City of Auburn
James R. Thompson Center~
Suite 11-500
324
West Jefferson
100 West Randolph Street
Auburn, Illinois 62615
Chicago, IL 60601
Please take notice that I have todayfiledwith the Office ofthe Clerkofthe Illinois Pollution
Control Board
the
original
and
nine
(9)
copies
of the
PROVISIONAL
VARIANCE
RECOMMENDATION ofthe illinois EnvironmentalProtection Agency, a copy ofwhich
is served upon you.
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
BYAthØlfr~
~
Deborah J.
illiams
Assistant Counsel
Division ofLegal Counsel
Date:
March
18, 2003
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
1021
North
Grand Avenue East
P.O. Box
19276
Springfield,
IL 62794-9276
217/782-5544
THIS FILING IS
SUBMITTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
IIr-II:LcJ~j~..I
£~
~iJ.
~5
I
I
BEFORE THE JLLIN~ISPOLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
CITY OF
AUBURN
)
)
Petitioner,
)
v.
)
PCBO3-
)
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
)
PROTECTION AGENCY,
)
)
Respondent.
)
ILLINOIS EPA RECOMMENDATION
The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (“Illinois EPA~’)
recommends that the
requested provisional
variance
be
granted subject to the conditions set forth in paragraph
nine
(9)
below.
ACTION
MUST
BE
TAKEN
BY
THE
ILLINOIS
POLLUTION
CONTROL
BOARD
(~BOARD~)
WITHIN
2
DAYS
OF
NOTIFICATION
OF
THIS
RECOMMENDATION FROM THE ILLINOIS EPA.
1.
On March 13, 2003, with an amendmenton March
17, 2003, the Illinois EPA
received a
request for a provisional
variance
from
the City of Auburn.
The provisional
variance request letter is attached and incorporated as Exhibit A.
Petitioner is requesting a
provisional
variance
from
effluent
limits
stated
in
its
National
Pollutant
Discharge
Elimination
System
(“NPDES”)
permit
1L0022403,
which
requires
a
carbonaceous
biochemical oxygen demand (“CBOD”)monthly average of25 milligrams per liter (“mg/i”)
and total
suspended solids
(“TSS”) monthly average of 37 mg/i.
The requested variance
would aUow the petitioner to
1) pump wastewater from lagoon #2
into Sugar Creek a few
feet downstream of the NPDES permitted outfall and 2) relax CBOD
and TSS permitted
limits.
The pumping duration is
expected to be three to
five days with
daily sampling of
I IflI\
jr..)
~CJt_J...)
SC..
CIA.
C..4.
I I
NPDIES
permit parameters.
This will lower the water level in lagoon #2,
allowing for the
inspection and repair of the rocl
filter laterals, intake pipes and valves.
During the pumping
oflagoon #2 and the repair ofthe rock filter, wastewater will be treated in lagoon #1, then
diverted around lagoon #2 to the NPDES permitted outfall. Duringnormal plant operation,
lagoon
#1
removes 75
ofTSS and
CBOD.
Effluent from the permitted outfall
will be
sampled weekly until the project’s completion.
Thework is expected to be complete in
45
days.
2,
Petitioner
owns
and
operates
a
two-cell
aerated lagoon
system
with unit
operations and processes including rock filtration and flowmeasurement.
Theaverage daily
inflow is
300,000
gallons per day and
designed average flow of 620,000
gallons per day.
The facility is located 15 miles southwest of Springfield in Auburn~
Illinois.
The effluent is
discharged to
Sugar.Creek which is
tributary to
Lake Springfield
(approximately 7 miles
away).
3.
In describing the need for provisional variance, petitioner explains that the
variance will enable the petitionerto empty, inspect and repair one ofthe two
lagoon cells.
At the present time,
the plant’s rock filter (located in cell #2)
is not
functioning correctly,
resulting in extremely low outflow and a higher than desired lagoon level.
Due to the rock
filtefs design, any inspection oftherock filter piping and controlvalves is impossible under
normaloperating conditions.
This high waterlevel and the inability to regulate wateroutfall
create potential forwastewaterto overflow into one ofthenearby tributaries of SugarCreek.
An overflow could also result in thewashing away ofthe pond’sberxn, allowing wastewater
to
flood the surrounding area.
Many homes are scattered along Sugar Creek downstream
from the plant.
Thewastewater would eventually flow to Lake Springfield, the main source
rI~rSi~~J~J._)
j~IJj
I
ILJC...II_ILII
.
C.A.
I
r..I~__~_ICII
of water forthe Cityof Springfield, Illinois.
In addition to the environmental impact, the city
would be faced with the
cost of berm reconstruction.
4.
The petitioner states that due to plant design, operating on only lagoon #1
is the
appropriate course ofaction~No other alternative method
is available for this procedure.
5.
The Petitioner has indicated, and the Illinois EPA concurs, that denial of the
provisional
variance request would impose sri arbitrary and unreasonable
hardship on the
Petitioner.
The first hardship on the community would be the potential flooding ofhomes
along Sugar
Creek.
The second hardship for the community would
the breaching of the
berm, causing severe leaking.
This would necessitate extreme repairs and possibly several
months ofnon-compliant discharge due to treating from only one cell.
6.
The environmental impact on the receiving stream (Sugar Creek) causedby this
variance request is expected to
minimal.
The relief requested may result in an increase
in
CBOD
to
50 mg/L and TSS to
70 mg/L during the draining oflagoon #2
and
35
mgiI.1
for
CBOD
and
55
mg/L TSS for the remaining time ofthe variance.
7.
There are no federal laws, which would preclude the grantingofthis provisional
variance.
8.
The Illinois EPAbelieves that no public water supply willbe adverselyaffected
by granting this provisional variance. Onebasis forthe Illinois EPA’s recommendation is to
allowmaintenance to be conducted in a timely manner to prevent the danger ofwashing out
ofa lagoon cell’s berm which could adversely impactthe public water supply intake atLake
Springfield.
9.
The Illinois EPA recommends that the Petitioner be granted a variance from
TSS and
CBOD
limits of its
NPDES
Permit
1L0022403.
This
variance
will
allow the
I Ill’
SL—I
~
SC~
CIA.
petitioner to discharge waste material
from cell #2 into Sugar Creek and increase TSS and
CBOD
effluent levels.
The variance shall be
subject to the following conditions:
a.
This
variance shall begin on March
24, 2003
and continue for forty-five
(45)
days from that date or until completion oftheproject, whichever occurs earlier.
b.
During the
45
day
variance period, the
Petitioner
will not
exceed
a
CBOD
monthly average limit of50 mg/L and a TSS monthly average limit of70 mg/L.
c.
Petitionershall complete the inspection and repairrelated workon its rock filter
system as expeditiously aspossible.
During theprovisional variance period, the
Petitioner shall operate the facility in
such a manner so as to
produce the best
effluent possible.
d.
Petitioner
shall continue to
monitor and
maintain
compliance with
all
other
parameters
and
conditions
specified
in
NPDES
Permit
No.
1L0022403.
Petitioner shall conduct daily sampling
ofthe pumping conducted pursuant to
this provisional variance and weeklysampling ofthe effluent from its permitted
outfall during the period of the provisional variance.
e.
Petitioner shall notif~’
Jay Baimer ofthe Illinois EPA by telephone at 2 17/782-
9720, whenrepairs are complete.
Written confirmation shallbe sent withinfive
(5) days to the following address:
Illinois
Environmental Protection Agency
Bureau ofWater, Compliance Assurance Section
1021 North Grand Ave. East
P0. Box
19276
Spring~eId,
Illinois
62794-9276
Attn: Jay Baimer
f.
Within ten (10) days ofthe date oftheBoard’s order, thePetitionershall execute
a Certificate ofAcceptance and agreement which shall be
sent to Jay Balmer at
the address indicated above.
Respectfully Submitted,
ILLTh~OISENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
U
Deborah J. Williams
Division ofLegal Counsel
Date:
March 18,2003
1021 North Grand Ave. East
P.O. Box 19276
Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276
217/782-5544
I IflIN
IL_i
Ct.JItI~.J
IC.
LIC
CJ.
I
I
I_IC.
_II_JL’
I
Exhibit A
I
IflI\
IL)
C.LItJ._J
A.C~ L)C.
C.A.
I
I
LJC._iLJL)
City
of Auburn
Second
Ward
JOSEPH
M.
POWELL,
Mayor
Fourth
Ward
MARK KESSLER
GALE
P~U
ITT, City Clerk
VIC DEVOS, JR.
JrMHILUG0SS
WAVDERATHGEBER
GERALDINE BOYL~,
CUy
Treasurer
~I
March
11,2003
M~132
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
Division of Water Pollution Control
2200 Churchill
Road
Springfield,
XL 62706
Re: Auburn Wastewater Treatment Plant
NPDES permit No. 1L0022403
(Request for Provisional Variance)
To Whom It May Concern:
The City ofAuburn, is hereby requesting a “Provisional Variance” be granted, under
section 3
5(b)
of the Environmental Protection
Act (IL. Rev.
Stat.
1979,
Cl-I.
III, Par.
1035(b), for a period of45
days.
We offer the following information as outlined
in section 180.202 of the requirements for
the application, which
are as follows:
1.
We hereby request that the present NPDES permit requirements of25mg/L
CBOD
(monthly
avg.)
and 37 mgIL TSS (monthly avg.) be relaxed to a level of 45rng/L
CBOD and
65
mg/L TSS, along with the monthly average and weekly average
respectfully relaxed for load limits
(LBS/day) for these parameters.
These
readings are based upon data from lower~levelsof cell #2.
After cell #2
is
drained
and taken offline plant effluent should be closer (yet still exceed) the current
permit requirements.
2.
The City’s treatment plant consists of two aerated lagoons ran in series
(please see
attached map) with an average daily inflow of 300,000 gallons per day (during dry
weather) and
a designed average flow of620,000 gallons per day.
At the present time the plant’s rock filter (located in Cell #2) is not functioning
correctly, resultingin extremely low outflow and a higher than desired pond level.
Due to
the design,
any inspection of the rock filter piping and control valves
is
impossible under normal operating conditions.
This high water level arid inability
324 W.
Jefferson,
Auburn, Illinois
62615
Telephone: (21 7) 436-61
51
Fax:
(21 7)
435-3724
I
IflIl
I Li
C_LILI..J
IC.
I_IC.
C.A.
I
I
LJL_
..‘I_JLi
I
to regulate water outfall create potential for wastewater to overflow
into one of the
nearby tributaries. An overflow could also result in
the washing away of the ponds
berm, allowing even more wastewater into the surrounding area.
In addition to the
environmental impact the city would
be faced with rebuilding the berm, which
would no
doubt be very expensive.
The tributaries, located on the north and east sides of the plant quickly find their
way into Sugar Creek.
Many homes are scattered along Sugar Creek downstream
from the plant.
The creek eventually (approximately 7 miles)
finds its way into
Lake Springfield, the main source ofwater for the City ofSpringfield.
We request a start date ofMarch 24, 2003.
This is
due to availability ofequipment
and
in an effort to
complete the inspection and any needed repairs ahead ofthe
expected spring rains.
Hopefully sparing any undue hardship to the plant and
surrounding environment.
Sequence ofinspection
and repair is as follows:
A.
During drawdown ofCell#2
and while any repairs are being made wastewater
will be treated in
Cell #1
and routed though a 20” bypass line to the effluent
structure.
Cell #1
holds
approximately sixteen million gallons ofwastewater
and removes
75
ofsuspended solids and CBOD during normal plant
operation.
B.
Once Cell
#1
has been routed to the effluent structure, Cell #2
will be isolated
and drawn down using a six-inch trash pump.
Drawdown is expected to take
3
to
5
days (depending upon how many hours per day the pump will run)
before the water level is low enough to allow inspection.
Pumped wastewater
will be allowed to flow along the grass in
a sheet ofwater before reaching a
storm water intake that sends the waterjust a few feet downstream from the
plants outfall pipe.
Samples will be obtained from the pump discharge as
drawdown occurs.
C.
After Cell
#2 has been pumped down to about three feet from the bottom,
12” pipe plugs will be removed to
allow a televised inspection ofthe rock
filter laterals and intake pipes.
The two telescoping valves that regulate
pond’s level will also be inspected as will piping below the valves.
D.
Hopefully this inspection
will reveal what repairs are needed and those
repairs
will be made during the 45 day provisional
variance.
The discharge point will remain
the same throughout the inspection and during any
repairs.
Discharge normally flows into Sugar Creek and into the Sangamon County River
Basin.
2
IrIrS
J.C~
~.I~J_J
£ ~
~I.
I
I
I_~.
iLiLi
I
C.
~
LiC.
.iLILi
I
I
•
.1.
~
3.
Pursuant to the necessary procedures as previously outlined above, the present
treatment efficiency will be reduced, thereby making it impossibJe to meet effluent
criteria as required by the city’s currentNPDES Permit.
4.
The City ofAuburn currently operates under NPDES permit No. 110022403.
5.
Due to plant design we feel operating on only Cell #1, while inspection
arid repairs
take place,
is the most appropriate course ofaction.
We see no other alternative
method available for this procedure.
6.
At the
present time there are
no other
board orders in effect regarding the City of
Auburn’s activities, nor any other matters currently before the board related to the
City
of
Auburn.
7.
The City ofAuburn requests that the effective date ofthe provisional variance be
flexible so that our repair procedures, if necessary due to
any unforeseen
circumstances, will be able to utilize the full 45 days requested.
The
city will
notit~i
the
EPA
the day our efforts begin.
Hopefully, with this variance and quick action by the City ofAuburn, the necessary
repairs can be made before the spring rains come.
This would prevent a dangerous
overflow condition and
a costly repairjob.
Ifany further information should be required to allow the variance
to
be granted, please
feel free to contact me anytime.
Sincerely,
Mayor
City ofAuburn
3
First Ward
Third
Ware
CAROLY?*~NSERO&A
Oty
of Auburn
JOSEP~l
M.
POWELL
Mayor
MARK KESSLER
GALE
PRLJ~TT,
City
CI~rk
VIC D?YOS,
JR.
tM
1-HLUGOSS
WAYt)~
RATHCESER
GERALDINE ~OY0,C~tyTreasurei~
March
11,2003
RECEIVED
fllinois Environmental Protection
Agency
~4R
1
7 ZO~
Division of
Water Pollution Con~ol
2200
Churchill
Road
SpringField,
IL 62706
Re~
Auburn
Wactewater TreaLment Plant
NPDES
permit
No. TTA)022403
(Request for Prov~s~onal
Variance)
To Whom It May Concern:
The City ofAuburn, is hereby requesting a
Provisional Variance” be granted, under
section 35(h)olt.hc Environmental Protcction
Act((r.~.
R~v.Stitt.1979. Cii.
111, Par.
1035
(b). Jbr a period
of
45
days.
We olThr the following information as outlined in section
180.202
of
the requirements for
thc application, which
arc as follows:
1.
We hereby requestthat the present NPDES
permit requirementsof 25mg/L CBOJ)
(monthly
avg.)
and 37 mWL
TSS
(monthly
avg.) be
relaxed to a lcvcl
of
SOmg/L
CBOD
and
70 mg/i.
TSS. along with the
monthly
average and
weekly
average
respectfully relaxed
for load
limits (LBS/day)
for
these parameters.
These
readings
are
based upon data t~rn
lower
levels ofcell
#2.
After
cell ~2 is drained
and taken
offline plant effluent should
be
near
3Smg/L C30D
and
S5mgfL TSS.
Samples will be taken daily during drawdown ofeel) ~2 and weekly thereafter.
2.
Auburn is
located
15 miles southwest ofSpringfic~d
and has a population
of
4300.
The City’s treatment plant consists
of two
aerated
lagoons ran
in series (pk’.asc soc
attached map) with an average daily inflow of300,000 gallons per day (during dry
weather)
and
a
designed average flow of620,000 gallons
per
day.
At the present time the plant’s
rock
fifler
(located
in
Cell *~2)i~
not functioning
correctly, resulting
in
extremely low outflow and a higher than desired pond level.
Duo to the design, any inspection ofthe rock filter pipingand control
valvos is
324 W. Jefferson, Auburn, Illinois
6261 ~
Tolcphonc: (217) 438~61
51
Fax;
(21
7) 438-3724
I ru
\
4.
LI
~
.1_
~
C_iC_
I
I_iC
_i!__I~_,I
~_
S
I
I
I_Ji_..
._~I_~iK_J
I
I
•
4.-i
impossible under normal operating conditions.
This high water lcvcl and
inability
to
regulate
water
outfall create potential thr wastewater to overflow into one ofthe
nearby tributaries.
An overflow could
also
result in
the washing away
of the
ponds
berm.
allowing even morewastewater
into
the
surrounding are&
In
addition
to
the
environmental impact
the
city would be faced with rebuilding
the
berm,
which
would no doubt
be
vcry expensive.
The tributaries, located
on the
north and east
sides
ofthe plant quickly find their
way into Sugar
Creek.
Many homes are scattered along SugarCreek downstream
from the planL
The
creek eventually (app oximatoly 7 miles) flnd~
its way
mb
Lake Springfield. the main source of waler for the City ofSpringfield.
We
request a
start dale ofM~rcb
24,
2003
This
iS
due
to availability of equipment
and
in
an effort
to complete
the inspection and any needed repairs
ahead of the
expected spring
rains.
IiopeF1illy
sparing
any
undue
hardship to the plant and
surrounding environment.
Sequence
of
inspection and repair
is as
follows:
-
A.
During drawdown of Cell#2 and
while any repairs are being
made wastcwator
will
be treated
in Cell
#1
and
routed though a
20”
bypass line
to the
effluent
Structure.
Cell #1
holds approximately sixteen million gallons
of
wastewater
and removes
75
of
suspended solids and C1301)
during
normal
plant
operation.
B.
Once Cell #1
has been
routedto
the effluent suucture, Cell
#2 will be isolated
and drawn
down
using a
six-inch
trash pump~Drawdown is expected to take
~3to
5
days (depending upon
how
many
hours
per day the pump
will
run)
before
the waxer
level
is
low
enough
to
allow inspection.
Ptimped wastewater
will be
dischargedwaxer just a few feet do~istreain
from
the
plants outfall
pipe.
Samples will be obtained from
the pump
discharge as dxawdown
occurs.
C
After Cell #2 has been pumped down to about three feet from the bottom,
12”
pipe plugs will be removed to allow a televised inspection
of the rock
filter laterals and intake
pipes.
The two telescoping valvcs that regulate
pond’s level will also be inspected as will piping below the valves.
D.
This inspection will reveal what repairs arc nccdod
and
those
repairs will be made during the
45
day provisional variance.
The
discharge point will remain the same throughout
the
inspectionand durL~g
any
-
repairs.
Discharge normally flows
into
Sugar Creek and
intothe Sangeinon County River
Ba.sin.
f~ECE1VED
MA~1
7
Z003
IIr,.LC~~U~-J-.J
~
ILJLJ~I
-
-
3.
t~ursuant
to
the necessary procedures
as previously
outlined
above, the present
treatment efficiency will
be reduced,
thereby
making it impossible
to meet effluent
criteria
as
required by the cuys current
NPDES
Permit.
4.
The
City
of Auburn
currently operates under NPbES permit
No.
1L0022403.
S.
Due to
plant design
we feel
operating on
only
Cell #l~
while inspection and repairs
take place. is the most appropriate course
of
action.
We see no other
alternative
method available
for
this procedure.
6.
At
the
present time
there are
no other board orders
in
cifeci regarding (he City of
Auburn’s activities,
nor
any
other
matters currently before the board related to
the
City ofAuburn.
7.
The City
of Auburn
requests that
the effective date
March 24, 2003
for the
provisional variance to begin.
Hopefully. with
this
variance and
quick aeiion
by the City of
Auburn, the necessary
repaiz~
can
be made before the
spring rains
come.
This would
prevent a dangerous
overflow
condition and a costly repairjob.
Ifany
further
infonnation should be required
to allow the
variance
to
be
granted,
please
feel
free to contact me anytime.
Sinccrely~
~Q4~
wvrr~
City
ofAuburn
I IflI\
I
I_)
Cr_JLJ,J
.1.
C.
~It~tWard
~O~M~&N
BRA~O
c’~
t
CA~OLTN~
BEROLA
Seee~
W~r~
MARX
KESStER
ØM ~1LICO~
Thi~rd~~rd
ot
A
unurn
F~wth
Ward
V1C DEVOS. ~
WAYt~E
~ATHCEa~
FACSI~IL.ECOVER
s1~Err
TO:
CQ~rFANt:
PHONE;.
FAX;.
~c7~
J~7
•1
FROM:_________
cD~PAJrrz
AuP~Vtn
City~f~f1~~..
PflO1(~
FAX;
-
DATE:.
(217)
438-61S1~
(917)
£~A—!~~’~4
:2?~~~-
/~7~-
d3
TOTAL
PAGF~.
CO~11Ewrs
R
324
W.
)efferson0
Auburn, lllinoi~6261
5
Telephone:
(21 7)
438~61
51
Far: (217) 438-3724
JOS~P~4
M.
POWE1..L,
Ma~or
•CALE PRtJtff,
City cler¼
cLD~NE
sOYc’. City
Tr~surer
/e.- ~
/4~’~/~f
~F/~o9
~~—:-—~~-
--~-—~—
~
CL
I
I
I
/LL/J~O/5
-~
~
/~.
,k’~7.
z~ ck~2
~
-
001/
1•
27~’
s~’½-~?~,s—
c2/7~
y
o~
~
o7~/
~/~SC/~9eS
~
7½/s
~
-
~i~e~~-qe
/~0/?7’
c~-9,-~
~j-n~_~-~
//
7’ç~ec/
/?~P’~~9c~____________________
o/~’
c~~5cJz~t9ec~
I,. ~
-
La~”,V~’~
;~23~:oo”
‘7/7~-~a~
~4~5,”
~
_~P?7~/
9~~YP?Of~
~
3~Slp
t/
.
___
~
~
~
/
~a~,o//t~’
L
~
~
~
~,
~L
(//?/~Le~/
~7?,c?//n~y
Lo~97’/oT?
~
~
~
~
I
Ir-1I\
I
i)
C~Je,I,)
IC
FACILITY:
tLNUN~P:
OUTFALL:
DATE
INFL 1~LOWEFF FLOW
AVE
MAX
AVE
MAX
8/31/2001
0.481
0.620
0.48!
0.620
9/39/2001
0.361
1.022
0.36!
1022
10/31/200$
0.599
1.894
0.S~9
1.894
11/30/2001
0304
1.5
0.504
1.5
12/31/2001
0.929
2.800
0.929
2.800
1/31/2002
0.579
3.68
0,579
3.68
2/28/2002
09S9
2.6
0.959
2.6
313112002
1.20
2.6
1.20
2.6
4/3012A302
1.5
4.6
13
4.6
5131/2002
2.6
6.1
2.6
6.1
6/3012002
1.3
4.9
1.3
4.9
7/31/2002
0481
1.2
0,481
1.2
8131/2002
0.417
0.820
0,417
0.820
9/30/2002
0.353
0.800
0.353
0.800
10/31/2002
0.279
0.407
0.279
0.401
111/30/2002
0.23!
0.326
0.231
0326
12/31/2902
0.219
0.470
0,219
0.470
pH
ISS
WIN
MAX
INF AVE
MAX
-
6.9
7.2
78
38
49
7.0
7.5
78
40
55
73
7.9
124.5
43.5
78
7.2
7.5
.
51
6.5
11
7.5
8.6
19
J.3
1.1
7.6
7.7
-
44
3.8
-
5.8
7.4
1.8
84
135
16
7.3
7.8
84
14
17
7.4
7.7
79
9
16
7,8
7.8
26
17.25
17.5
7.7
8.0
34
2.9
3.3
7,8
7.9
197
4.2
6.7
7.7
7.9
197
5.6
7.0
7.7
7.9
158
8.6
17.5
7,9
7.9
158
12
20
7.3~
7.8
171
9.75
17
7.9
8.0
222
29.5
31
12
12
181
8.5
9.0
191
9.5
10
177
10
12
183
9.3
11.0
154
13
16
191
17
17
lOS
18
18
105
14
14
84
12.5
13
73
11.3
12.5
76
9.3
10.5
186
84
9.6
123
8.75
12.5
218
10.9
15.8
-
230
8
8.5
181
12.6
14.3
IS
3
-I
~.
:~
Friday.
Februnrv
28,
20D3
AUBURN STP
1L002240.3
0010
DMR SUMMARY
CBOD
IMF
AVE
MAX
BOO
AMMONIA
CHLORINE
FECAL
NO
EXCESS
IMP AVE
MAX
AVE
MAX
AV~
MA)(.
~
Flige
I of I
11/7/2001
I
2/5/2001
1/812002
2/8/2002
3/6/2(302
413/2002
5J2/2002
6/5/2002
7110/2002
6/6120(12
9/9/2002
10/7/2002
11/1212002
12/312002
3
MG/i.
15
MGJL
4
MG/I.
8.MG/L
B
MG/I
6
MG/I.
10
MG/L
17
MG/I
12
MG/I..
30
MG/I.
10
MGIL
12
MG/I.
8
MG/L
25
MG/I.
~
MG/I..
27
MG/I.
9
MG/I..
16
MO/I
7
MG/I
.
1~
MG/I
3
MG/I..
10
MG/I
6
MG/I.
21
MG/I.
6
MG/I.
22
MG!L
9
MG/I.
32
MG/I.
DWPC/FOS
-
Grab Sampling Data
Springfield Region
7.8
UNITS
0.41
MG/I..
~.U
UNITS
10
MGII.
7.9
UNITS
12
MOn..
7.7
UNITS
9,9
MG/I.
8.0
UNITS
7.3
MG/I.
7,9
UNITS
.
8.6
MG/I
7.9
UNITS
2.2
MOlt.
8.1
UNITS
3.4
MG/I..
7.8
UNiTS
2.1
MG/I
7.9
UNITS
1.6
MG/I.
7.9
UNITS
-
1.7
MG/I.
6.0
UNITS
1.1
MO/t
7.8
UNITS
5,8
MG/I.
8.0
UNITS
10
MG/i.
Samp’e
ROE
Type
EFFL
EFFL
EFPL
EFFL
EFPL.
EFFL
EFFL
EFFL
EFFL
EFFL
EFFL
EFFL
EFFL
EFFL
EFFL
EFFI.
FacII8ly
NPDES:
AU9URN
IL0022403
QutfaII~
001
DAlE
B006
CBOD5
Tot.
Svsp.
L2bpH
Ammonl
Nllrates
01412001
2
MG/I.
8
MG/I
7.8
UNITS
2.5
MG/I
1013/2001
3
MG/I
8
MG/I
7.8
UNITS
1.1
MG/I
Oil .Greose
1’
0
0
jI_
C
C
ID
ULirnbe!
811838500
811842200
131
2105300
1312250600
820057400
1320242400
820305090
8206527(30
020793200
820008000
1321257300
B21404700
821733400
13216
98900
1322170100
822270100
C
2/28/2003
Page
1
————--
—
—
k~V1cI ~
I-
I
I
I_Ic
I
ILJC..ILJC.JI
I’I~r~Io~CJCJ..)
j~CJ..)
STATE
OF ILLINOIS
COUNTY OF SANGAMON
)
)
)
PROOF OF SERVICE
I, the undersigned,
on oath state that I have served
the attached PROVISIONAL
VARIANCE upon the persons
to whom it is directed, by placing a copy in an envelope
addressed to:
Ms. Dorothy M.
Gunn,
Clerk
Illinois Pollution Control Board
James R. Thompson Center
100 West Randolph St. Suite 11-500
Chicago, Illinois 60601
(FAX
and OVERNIGHT MAIL)
Joseph M. Powell, Mayor
City of Auburn
324 West Jefferson
Auburn.
Illinois
62615
(FIRST CLASS MAIL)
arid
mailing
itfrom Springfield, illinois on March
18.2003, with sufficient postage
affixed as indicated above.
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME
this
(~ay
of
March,
2003
~BI&DA
Notary
Public
OFNCIAL
SEAL
BRENDA BOEHNER
~ NOTARY PUBLIC,
STATE OF ILLINOIS ~
~MY COMMISSION
EXPIRES
11.14~2005X
THIS FILING IS
SUBMITTED ON
RECYCLED PAPER
TOTAL
P.20
