ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
October
14,
1976
LAKELAND
PARK
WATER
COMPANY,
)
Petitioner,
v.
)
PCB
76—206
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY,
)
Respondent.
oP:ENION
AND
ORDER
OF
THE
BOARD
(by
Mr.
Goodman):
On
July
22, 1976,
Petitioner Lakeland Park Water Company
(Lakeland
Park)
filed
a
“Motion
for Modification of Final Order”
under
the
caption
PCB
74-85 and PCB 74—194.
The Board construed
the “Motion”
as
a variance petition and assigned it the above—
captioned number.
The Environmental Protection Agency
(Agency)
filed its reconrnendation on October
5,
1976.
The Board received
two citizen objections to the grant of this variance;
Mr.
La Verne
Hromec filed an objection on September 27,
1976,
and Mrs. Audis
Bowling
filed
an objection on September 2C~1976.
No hearing has
been held
in this matter.
Lakeland Park seeks variance from certain provisions
in
the
previous Board Order
of October
30,
1975 in PCB 74-85 and PCB 74-194
consolidated
(19 PCB 123).
The pertinent terms of that Order re-
quired Lakeland Park
to undertake one of
three proposed improvements
to the system to abate red water problems should the Agency determine
that initial measures taken by Lakeland Park were unsuccessful.
One
of the initial measures to be taken by Lakeland Park was the feeding
of polyphosphate as an iron sequestering agent.
The Agency determined
that Lakeland Park’s initial abatement efforts had been unsuccess-
ful and informed Lakeland Park of its determination on January 13,
1976.
According to the terms of the Board Order, Lakeland Park was
to make its choice among the three alternative methods of compliance
within thirty
(30)
days after being notified by the Agency that such
24
—
91
—2—
choice was necessary.
In order to avail itself of the possible benefits of a proposed
study of the effects of polyphosphate on iron in Lakeland Park~s
distribution system,
Lakeland Park now seeks an extension of time
from the requirement of making a choice among the three abatement pro-
cedures.
The proposed study is to be conducted by Dr. John O~Conner
of the University of Missouri.
The particular aims of Dr. OtConnerts
study are set forth in the variance petition.
Based upon its past experience,
the Agency
is pessimistic about
the success of polyphosphate sequestration on the Lakeland Park
system.
However,
the Agency welcomes
further research into the effects
of polyphosphate in
a distribution system.
In
particular,
the Agency
indicates that it favors the study proposed by Lakeland Park, both
because of the high regard in which it
holds
Dr. O’Conner and because
Lakeland Park’s system provides
a very
good field test situation.
Lakeland Park alleges, and the Agency
agrees,
that the determination
of new treatment methods which would make polyphosphate sequestration
effective at Lakeland Park would represent significant cost advantages
to the company and ultimately to its customers.
The objections filed by Mr.
Hromec and Mrs.
Bowlin,
as well as a
poli of the system’s customers conducted
by the Agency,
indicate that
the water distributed by Lakeland Park
remains
unacceptable to a
significant portion of its customers,
However,
the proposed study of
polyphosphate sequestration is of great
potential
value not only to
the customers of Lakeland Park’s system
but to the
people of the
State of Illinois as a whole.
As
indicated by the Agency,
further
research is needed into the effects of
polynhosphate in
a
distribu-
tion system,
and this proposed study
provides the
citizens of the State
with
the
opportunity
for
the
benefits
of
such
research.
The Board,
therefore,
finds that the benefits to
the public
from
the
grant
of
this variance outweigh the burdens such
that denial
of the variance
would impose an arbitrary and unreasonable hardship.
The Board, however,
recognizes that Lakeland Park’s customers
have been subjected to unacceptable water and that the study may prove
unsuccessful and may simply result in further delay.
We,
therefore,
will require Lakeland Park to submit to the Agency within 90 days of
the date of this Order plans and specifications for one of the three
abatement methods listed in the Board’s October
30,
1975 Order.
If,
after reviewing the results of Dr. O’Connerts study,
the Agency
approves of the use of polyphosphate as
a treatment technique, Lake-
land Park may submit to the Agency plans
and
specifications for such
a project as
a substitute for one of the
original three abatement
alternatives.
Implementation of the program finally approved by the
24
—
92
—3—
Agency shall be completed by July
31,
1977.
This Opinion constitutes the findings of fact and conclusions
of law of the Board in this matter.
ORDER
Lakeland Park Water Company is granted variance from the
compliance schedule set forth in PCB 74-85 and PCB 74-194 consoli-
dated, subject to the following conditions:
1.
Lakeland Park shall select one of the three means of
upgrading its system listed in the Board’s Order in PCB 74-85
and PCB 74-194 consolidated and shall submit plans and speci-
fications for
the project selected to the Agency for review
and approval within 90 days of the date of this Order;
2.
If use
or access to land not controlled by Lakeland Park
Water Company is necessary for the completion of the project
undertaken, within the same 90-day period Lakeland Park shall
provide evidence to the Agency that such use or access will
be available
to the company;
3.
If Dr. O~Conner’sstudy shows to the Agency’s satis-
faction that the use of polyphosphate at Lakeland Park’s
supply can be an effective treatment technique, Lake—
land Park may
submit plans and specifications for such a
project to the
Agency for review
and approval as an alterna-
tive
to the three methods outlined in the Board’s previous
Order;
4,
Lakeland Park Water Supply shall fully implement the
abatement
method chosen and approved of by the Agency by
July 31,
1977;
5.
Within
14 days after the date of the Board Order herein,
Lakeland Park
shall execute and forward to the Illinois
Environmental Protection Agency, Manager, Variance Section,
Division of Public Water Supplies,
Illinois Environmental
Protection Agency,
2200 Churchill Road,
Springfield,
Illinois
62706 and to the Pollution Control Board a Certification of
24
—
93
—4—
Acceptance and agreement to be bound to all terms and conditions
of the variance.
The form of said certification shall be as
follows:
CERTIFICATION
I
(We),
_____________________________
having read and fully
understanding the Order of the Illinois Pollution Control Board in
PCB 76-206 hereby accept said Order and agree
to be bound by all of
the terms and conditions thereof.
SIGNED
__________
TITLE
______________
DATE____
____
_____________________
I,
Christan
L.
Moffett,
Clerk
of the Illinois Pollution Control
Board,
he,~ebycertify t~ie1aboveOpinion and Order were adopted on
the jq~day
~
1976 by a vote of .~.O
U~_~L~
in
~
Christan
L.
Moffett,~C~e~k
Illinois Pollution Control Board
24
—
94