ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL 

BOARD

October 17, 1972

JOSEPH T. ENDERS

#72—252

V.

)

VILLAGE OF GLENDALE HEIGHTS

JOSEPH T. ENDERS, PRO SE, ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER

PEDERSEN

& HOUPT, BY RICHARD V. HOUPT, ON BEHALF OF VILLAGE OF

GLENDALE HEIGHTS

OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD (BY SAMUEL T. LAWTON, JR.)

This was a citizen’s complaint filed against Respondent in

its capacity as owner and operator of the Glendale Heights Sewage

Treatment Plant located in the Village of Glendale Heights.

The complaint alleged that Respondent was responsible for the

discharge of foam entrainment into the air and the emission of

noxious odors, which have taken place on five specified occasions,

over a period of months. The complaint further alleged that the ef—

fects of the odors included depriving the citizens of the enjoyment

of certain outdoor activity such as cooking and eating in their yards,

and may constitute a health hazard, and caused air pollution thereby

violating Section 9 (a) of Title II of the Environmental Control Act

(Ill. Rev. Statutes, Ch. 111-1/2, §1009(a)).

The village authorities have experienced difficulty in control-

ling the emission of odors from municipal sewage treatment plants

since the Village was incorporated in 1959. The original unit 

was

replaced with a new facility in 1965. That facility was designed

for capacity of 1,000,000 gallons per day. Within five years, that

capacity had proved inadequate. (See Environmental Protection Agency

v. Village of Glendale Heights, #70-8). The current plant expansion

has increased the capacity to 3,000,000 gallons per day and was

completed in November of 1971.

Adjacent to that facility is a “polishing lagoon” which was

used in the treatment of sewage and controlled by Respondent. The

pond was to have been completely filled in and covered by October,

1972 (R..329). At various times, including subsequent to the com-

pletion of the existing facility, the lagoon has been used as a

dumping ground for various materials including sludge, deposited

by Respondent (R. 182)

—

683

Respondent has argued that it has committed no violation of

the

Act because:

1. The alleged violations were not the result of the opera-

tion of the treatment facility but instead, emanated

from the adjacent lagoon;

2. That any emission of noxious odors or foam was due to

the normal “break-in” for the new facility and would

be eliminated as soon as the operators became familiar

with its operation;

3. That the complaints were from a small mir~orityof citizens

who lived adjacent to the plant and impliedly had consented

to the “normal” operating odors of a sewage treatment

facility; and

4. That the operation of the plant in no way constitutes

a health hazard or restricts citizens in use of their

property or reduces the quality of life.

We find the manner in which Respondent has operated its municipal

sewage treatment facility constitutes a nuisance depriving citizens

of the use and enjoyment of their property and violates Section 9(a)

of the 

Environmental

Protection Act.

The record contains evidence of allergic reactions attributed

to the odors of the plant. Further, the plant’s operation has inter-

fered with school classes and the ability of the children to use the

outdoor facilities (R.lOO and 132). Discomfort seems dependent on the

direction of the wind but the responsibility of Respondent should not

be obviated simply because only a portion of its citizenry is discom-

forted at any given time. The present operation constitutes a nuisance.

The pond has been suggested as a possible source of odor. It

is being eliminated by landfill, though the procedure used seems no

better than that employed to minimize other discomforts to the resi-

dents. Testimony by the Environmental Protection Agency indicates that

sludge has been allowed to remain on the ground for an inordinate

period of time (R. 180—182). Dumping has apparently taken place

without receiving permits (R. 198). Respondent’s attempt to distin-

guish violations pertaining to the pond from those pertaining to the

treatment facility will not be accepted.

Foam has blown out of the treatment tanks and into the surround-

ing school and residential area (R. 100, 138, 183 and 329—30) 

The

presence of foam in the streets, on playgrounds or on residential

—2—

—

684

property may be sufficient, in itself, to constitute a nuisance.

Complainant’s exhibit number four establishes the existence

of such a condition (R. 19-27) 

We are concerned with the

health impact that foam entrained from the aeration tanks may

cause. Such foam could contain raw sewage which, upon contact,

might be capable of causing a wide range of bacterial and viral

diseases. The possibility therefore exists that the foam en-

trainment may exceed the nuisance situation and pose serious

health consequences for the community.

The Village of Glendale Heights must comply with the En-

vironmental Protection Act and the Regulations, not only in the

furnishing of adequate facilities, but in their operation as well.

While the 1965 addition made by the Village may have the capacity

to serve the community for many years in the future, adequacy of

capacity is not the only responsibility of Respondent to its

citizens and the people of the State. Only through adequate

management and operation of the facility will those responsi-

bilities be met.

The record is filled with suggestions by Agency witnesses

and city officials as to what can be done to eliminate the

present problems and assure adequate, lawful operation in the

future (R. 218-235 and 326-364). These proposals range from

obtaining a permit for dumping sludge into the pond to improve-

ment of procedures for monitoring the plant’s operation.

(The plant presently is operated without full-time on-plant

supervision.) This would serve to eliminate the effects com-

plained of, if due to over aeration of the tanks and overflow

from the splitter box. The sludge

pump needs only to be monitored

to eliminate spillage. Splash. shields on the tanks and throttling

down the pump have been recommended. (R. 232).

Respondent is apparently capable of taking these steps as

well as installing an alarm and surveillance system, adjusting

the flow to the aeration compartment (R. 335-339) 

monitoring

the use of the diffusers (R.342) and balancing the air flow to

each tank CR. 355-357)

We suspect that “sloppy housekeeping” is at the root of much

of the current problem. This includes a toleration of certain condi-

tions such as those cited in the complaint (periodic odor and foam

—3—

—

685

entrainment) that are, at the least, negligent. The Environ-

mental Protection Agency has stated that the odor is related to

the inadequate policing of sewage splashed over the tanks, and

overflowed sludge (R. 178-189, 193). Testimony indicates that cer-

tain officials have failed to appreciate that a sewage treatment

plant can,

and should, operate in such a manner that its operation

can be tolerated by those who live in its proximity (R. 189). This

facility is closely bounded by residential housing and its tanks abut

upon a school playground. In such circumstances,

the responsibility

is upon the operators to insure the safety of the plant’s operation.

A “trial and error” approach (R.342) is inappropriate. Because the

operation has resulted in a 

nuisance and potentially endangers the

health of the residents, we impose a penalty of $200. Were this not

a municipality, a larger penalty would be in order. However, in this

case, we recognize that it will be the citizens of Glendale Heights

who will bear its burden.

Complainant proposes that we order the Village of Glendale Heights

to cover the sewage treatment tanks and scrub the gasses emitted.

We feel that such an order would be unnecessarily harsh, if the plant

is operated as intended. We expect that such operation will commence

immediately. Respondent has indicated in the record that it is aware

of the shortcomings of its operation and intends to take steps to

correct them (R.269 and 342). Because of the present difficulties

in plant operation, we require that Respondent proceed with installa-

tion of its planned surveillance system immediately. Steps should be

taken to assure the proper operation of all equipment such as the

sludge pumps and the splitter box. We will order that a plan for

splash shields or other methnd of eliminating the entrainment of foam

be submitted to the Board and the Agency within twenty days and that

the condition be abated within 60 days from the date of this Order.

We will require that a bond in the amount of $10,000 be filed with the

Agency to assure that this program will be undertaken.

This opinion constitutes the findings of fact and conclusions

of law of the Board.

1. Respondent, Village of Glendale Heights, shall cease and

desist the causing of air pollution in violation of Sec-

tion 9(a) of 

the Environmental Protection Act from the

Glendale Heights Sewage Treatment Plant. Respondent shall

cease and desist the causing or allowing of the emission

of noxious odors from the plant, pond and other areas

under its control

and cease and desist the causing or

allowing of entrainment of foam and the splashing and

dispersal of raw sewage and sludge on or about its

premises. The pond shall be fully covered within 20

days from the date of this Order.

—4—

5

—

68~i

2. A penalty in the amount of $200 is assessed for

violation of Section 9(a) of the Environmental Protec-

tion Act, as found in this proceeding. Penalty payment

by certified check or money order payable to the 

State

of Illinois shall be made to: Fiscal Services Division,

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, 2200 Churchill

Drive, Springfield,

Illinois 62706.

3. Respondent is ordered to install and maintain an alarm

and surveillance system giving 24—hour mechanical or

electronic surveillance,

assuring adequate control

and operation of all aspects of the treatment plant.

4. Respondent shall submit to the Environmental Protection

Agency

and the Board a plan for abatement of foam en-

trainment from its treatment tanks, within 20 days from

the date of this Order and shall abate such condition

pursuant to such plan as submitted, within 60 days

from the date of this Order.

5. Respondent shall cause

the preparation of a survey

and report by a recognized independent consultant,

setting forth the bacterial and viral bontribution,

if any, from the sewage treatment plant to the abut-

ting school yard area. The survey and report shall

be submitted within three months from the date hereof

to the Pollution Control Board and the Environmental

Protection Agency, and the Pollution Control Board

retains jurisdiction of this cause for such further

proceedings as may be necessary, based upon said

survey and report.

6. Respondent ‘shall post with the Environmental Protec-

tion Agency, within 10 days from the date of this Order,

a bond or other security in the amount of $10,000, in

form satisfactory to the Agency, which shall be forfeited

in the event such deadlines provided in paragraph 4 of

this Order are not met.

The bond shall be mailed to:

Fiscal Services Division, Illinois Environmental Pro-

tection Agency, 2200 Churchill Drive, Springfield,

Illinois 62706.

I, Christan Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control Boa~d,

certify that the above Opinion and Order was adopted on the 

/7 ~

day of October, A. 

1972, by a vote of j~ to C~.

~4I

/Y) ~

—5—

5

—

687