ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

November 6, 1975

VILLAGE OF GLENDALE HEIGHTS,

Petitioner,

v.

)

PCB 75—180

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,

Respondent.

MR. KENNETH GUMBINER, appeared on behalf of Petitioner;

MR. JOHN T. BERNBOM, appeared on behalf of Respondent.

OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD (by Mr. Dumelle):

Petitioner filed a variance request on April 29, 1975 seeking

a variance from the Board Order in Enders v. Village of Glendale

Hei~hts, PCB 72—252 5 PCB 683 (October 17, 1972). Specifically,

Petitioner wishes to be excused from that portion of the Board

Order requiring preparation of a survey and report concerning

the bacterial arid viral impact of Petitioner’s sewage treatment

plant. The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, (Agency)

filed a Recommendation to grant the variance on June 5, 1975.

A hearing was held on August 11, 1975.

Petitioner alleges that has complied with the previous

Board Order in PCB 72-252 with the exception of conducting the

bacterial and viral survey required by Paragraph 5 of that

Order. The Village alleges that the cost would be excessive

for it to bear. Petitioner states that only one firm, International

Minerals and Chemicals Corporation, in cooperation with Bio-Labs,

presented a proposal for the type of survey requested by the Board.

Subsequently this firm allegedly indicated its unwillingness to

proceed with the survey. Petitioner states that following the

filing of an enforcement action in circuit court to compel compliance

with the Board’s Order, that Petitioner contacted Dr. W. R. Martin,

a microbiologist at the University of Chicago, “to advise it on

the study ordered by the Board”. Dr. Martin concluded that,

19— 

228

—2—

“not only is the probability of any danger to health

near zero even if one assumes the existence of airborne

bacteria or viruses, but there is really no reasonable

tests which could be devised to measure such an effect

in any event” (page 2 of Respondent Exhibit C).

The Agency states that Petitioner has complied with the

previous Board Order with the exception of filing the requested

Bond and preparation of the viral and bacterial study. The

Agency states that it has not received a odor complaint in

over 18 months concerning Petitioner’s facility. The Agency

states that it supports Petitioner because it has conducted

a literature search which has shown that employes of sewage

treatment plant are no more unhealthy than other classes of

workers and that the incidents of illness among sewage treatment

plant ernployes is no greater than other workers (See Public

Works, N. Wells, August, 1971; and Journal of the Water Pollution

Control Federation, Dixon—McCabe, 36, 984, 1964).

However, the Agency further states that it recognizes

that activated sludge treatment processes such as used by

Petitioner may have a significant potential to emit aerosol

particles in the air above aeration tanks and clarifiers.

In a study cited by the Agency, conducted by King, Mill, and

Lawrence, it was found that bacteria common to sewage disposal

plants have been detected 100 feet downwind of a 10,000,000 gallon

per day activated sludge plant. A comparison of the upwind

and downwind sampling stations indicated a greater number of

bacteria colonies downwind by a factor of over 100. This

study concluded that, “the number and type of bacteria found

in the waste stream and subsequently downwind suggest a possible

health hazard to plant workers and nearby residents” (supra at

54)

The Agency questions whether the cost of conducting a

viral and bacterial study should be borne by individual

petitioners. The Agency states that a school of public health

of the University of Michigan is presently conducting a study

which involves a sampling of large volumes of air around sewage

treatment plants. The Agency believes that such studies are

currently in the research phase and that it would be

extremely difficult for Petitioner to successfully conduct

a meaningful study. The Agency further states that the study

could reasonably be considered to cost approximately $50,000.

19— 229

—3—

Based on these points the Agency recommended that the variance

be granted.

The requirement of the viral and bacterial study was originally

imposed by the Board to determine if a hazard existed at the school

located extremely close to Petitioner’s sewage treatment plant.

The Board notes that the present variance is requested approximately

2-1/2 years after the Board entered the previous Order. It is

apparent that the filing of an enforcement action by the Attorney

General to enforce the previous Board Order has led to the present

variance request. The Board is not convinced by Dr. Martin’s

testimony that it would be impossible to conduct a meaningful

study. This conclusion is based upon the study utilized by

King, et al and the study being conducted by the University of

Michigan. At the hearing two citizens appeared and testified

in regards to Petitioner’s sewage treatment plant and the

requested variance. The vast majority of the testimony concerns

the allegation that Petitioner’s facility was emitting odors and

violating Section 9(a) of the Environmental Protection Act (Act).

This testimony is not relevant to the issue at hand. It should

be noted that an independent enforcement action is currently

pending which raises that issue (Enders v. Village of Glendale Heights,

PCB 75—283).

We find based upon this record that Petitioner should be relieved

at this time from conducting such a viral and bacterial survey because

of cost considerations and similar research being conducted elsewhere.

This is not a conclusion by the Board that such a study is not feasible

or entirely unwarranted in this case. Petitioner’s facility is lo-

cated in extreme proximity (less than six feet) to a public school.

Those responsible for the welfare of those children attending the

school should be constantly aware of any incidence of the outbreak

of the so—called water—borne diseases such as hepatitis, dsyntery,

typhoid, cholera and polio. Mr. Mohan Grewal, environmental

protection engineer for Respondent, stated in a discovery deposition

that he interviewed the principal of the elementary school,

three or four teachers and some students. He testified that the

principal stated that based on the record of absenteeism in the school

that it was the principal’s opinion that the “plant is not disturbing

or interfering with the health of the students” (p. 24 of Petitioner

Exhibit A). The facts upon which the principal based his opinion

are not known.

The Board asks that the Agency closely monitor the results

of the study currently being conducted by the school of public

health at the University of Michigan which it referred to in

paragraph 13 of its Recommendation. The Agency may want to propose

siting regulations for sewage treatment plants to the Board based

upon such studies.

This Opinion constitutes the Board’s findings of fact and

conclusions of law.

—

230

—4—

ORDER

The Village of Glendale Heights is hereby granted a variance

from the previous Board Order in PCB 72-252 to the extent that

it is no longer required to submit a bacterial and viral

survey as set forth in paragraph E of that Order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Christan L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control

Board, hereby certify the above Opinion and Order were adopted on the

_______day of November, 1975 

a vote of ~/..-p

CQ~L~oe~1C  

k

Illinois Pollution Co ol Board

—

9~1