ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

May 28,

1981

CITY OF MINONK,

Petitioner,

v.

)

PCB 81—32

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,

)

Respondent.

OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD

(by J. Anderson):

This matter comes before the Board on the petition for

variance of the City of Minonk

(City)

filed March

2,

1981.

The City seeks variance from the 15 pCi/l

gross alpha particle

activity limitation of Rule

304(C)(1)(b)

of Chapter

6:

Public

Water Supply.

The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency

(Agency)

supports grant of variance in its Recommendation,

filed April

1,

1981.

Hearing was waived and none has been

held,

no objections requesting

a hearing having been filed.

The City of Minonk,

located in Woodford County, had earlier

requested variance from the radiological quality standard.

Variance was denied as unnecessary

at

that

time,

as the Agency

had stated that it had no “reliable data base for radiological

constituents” due to accuracy problems with its testing

methodology.

A 5—year variance from the fluoride standard was,

however, granted (City of Minonk,

PCB 80—136, October

2,

1980,

p.

1—2).

The City has incorporated the prior record by reference,

arid

further states that one accurate test result shows that the water

in its distribution system

shows qross alpha activity of 39.0 ±

11.8 pCi/i.

Tests

for radium have not been done,

The City reiterates its earlier assertion that it presently

knows of no alternate source of water to replace its two deep

wells,

in spite of continuing investigations in search of

replacement sources begun

in 1946.

It sees its only option as

installation of a lime softening process at a capital cost of

$230,000, with operation and maintenance costs expected to be

$18,000 annually.

This would result in an increase in monthly

charges to its 910 users of

$5.00, bringing the total monthly

charge for water and sewer service to $17.00.

The City asserts

that the extent of this economic hardship is highlighted by

considering that the charge was only $6.00

15 months ago.

41—489

---

2

Finally,

the

City points out that the

radium standard is

currently under review by the USEPA.

It states that if the stan-

dard for gross alpha particle activity was in fact raised to 90

pCi/i,

that the City would be

in

compliance

(but see Village of

Lemont

V.

IEPA,

PCB 80—48,

April

30,

1981 citing testimony that

the standard would more appropriately be raised to

30 pCi/i).

It has observed no adverse health effects among its users

traceable to consumption of its water.

The Agency does not challenge the City’s facts and assertions.

It recommends that variance be granted until January

1,

1984,

the

deadline date for “exemptions” under

§1416 of the federal Safe

Drinking Water Act

(SDWA),

The Board finds that the City has proven that immediate

compliance with the radiological quality standards would impose

an arbitrary or unreasonable hardship.

The Board believes that

there will be little effect on the health of the City’s users

from drinking water at the

City’s gross alpha level

if this

variance

is granted,

The Board again concludes that the period of variance relief

is not limited to the deadline date for SDWA “exemptions.”

Lime

softening as a treatment technique is no more “reasonably available

(taking costs into consideration)”

to the City’s small

system than

was the fluoride removal techniques considered in PCB 80—136.

The

Board again finds that the City is entitled to variance relief

consistent with §1415 of the SDWA, which provides for “variances”

and which has no deadline.

In the interests of the administrative

convenience of all parties, variance from Rule 304(C)(1)(b) of

Chapter

6 is granted until October

2,

1985, the date of expiration

of the fluoride variance granted in PCB 80—136.

The

conditions of

this variance are outlined

in the attached

Order~

This Opinion constitutes the Board’s findings of fact and

conclusions of law

in this matter.

ORDER

Petitioner, the City

of Minonk,

is granted variance from the

gross alpha particle activity

limitation

of Rule 304(C)(1)(b)

of

Chapter

6:

Public Water Supplies, until October

2,

1985 subject

to the following conditions:

1.

Petitioner

shall,

in consultation with the Agency,

continue its sampling program to determine as

accurately as possible the level of radioactivity

in its wells and finished water.

Testing for

radium 226 and radium 228 shall be commenced.

2.

Petitioner shall investigate

the possibility and

economic feasibility of

a) developing additional

water sources to be used to replace its well water

41—490

---

3

supply,

and

b) developing additional water sources

to blend with its current well sources, to reduce

the radiation level in its finished water.

A

report of its findings shall be submitted to the

Agency on or before January 1, 1982.

3.

In the event that replacement or blending is not

feasible, petitioner shall communicate with the

Agency at least every six months to determine

whether landfill sites are available to accept

wastes generated by the line softening process.

4.

As expeditiously after identification of a feasible

compliance

method

as is practicable, but no later

than

January 1,

1984, Petitioner shall

submit

to

the

Agency

a program (with increments of progress)

for bringing its

system

into compliance with

radiological quality standards.

5.

Pursuant to Rule 313(D)(1) of Chapter 6,

in its

first set of water bills or within three months

after the date of this order, whichever occurs

first, and

every

three months thereafter,

Petitioner will send to each user of its public

water supply a written notice to the effect that

Petitioner has been granted a variance from the

gross alpha particle activity standard by the

Pollution Control Board.

The notice shall state

the average gross alpha particle activity level,

including available results from samples taken

since the last notice period.

6.

Within forty—five days of the date of this Order,

Petitioner shall execute

and

forward to the Illinois

Environmental Protection Agency,

PWS

Enforcement

Programs, 2200 Churchill Road,

Springfield, Illinois

62706, a Certificate of Acceptance and Agreement

to be bound to all terms and conditions of this

variance.

This forty—five day period shall be

held in

abeyance

for

any

period

this

matter

is

being appealed.

The form of the certificate

CERTIFICATE

I,

(We),

,

having read

the Order of the Illinois Pollution Control Board in

PCB

81—32,

dated _________________________, understand and accept the said

Order,

realizing

that

such

acceptance

renders

all

terms

and

conditions

thereto

binding

and

41—491

---

4

i~7:

Authorized Agent

Title

Date

IT

IS SO ORDERED.

I,

Christan

L. Moffett, Clerk

of the Illinois Pollution

Control Board, hereby ce~tifythat

the above Opinion and Order

were adopt~don the

~

day of

~

,

1981 by

a

vote of

~‘_c~

.

—

____

~

~t/,_j~~--”..

~LT.

~

Christan L.

Moffett~.glerk

Illinois Pollution Co~trolThou~1

41—492