ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
July 10,
1980
THOMAS
F. BROGAN,
JOANNE BROGAN,
)
BON
FT.
KOO, KAREN
100,
JAMES HAYES, HELEN HAYES, and
ROBERT CHAMBERLIN,
Complainants,
v.
)
PCB 79—11
CITY OF PALOS HILLS, et
al,
Respondents.
MRS.
JOANNE BROGAN APPEARED PRO SE.
ROBERT EMMETT NOLAN, ESQUIRE
(NOLAN, O’MALLEY
& DUNNE) APPEARED ON
BEHALF OF RESPONDENTS.
OPINION AND
ORDER
OF
THE BOARD
(by I.
Goodman):
This matter
is before the Board upon the January 12, 1979
complaint of Thomas
E.
Brogan, Joanne Brogan, Bon H.
Koo, Karen
100,
James
Hayes, Helen Hayes and Robert Chamberlin
(Brogan)
alleging that the City of Palos
Hills, Illinois
(City) has
violated certain provisions of Chapter
3, the Board’s Water
Pollution Control Regulations
(Rules).
Four hearings have been
held in this matter.
At the end of Complainants’ case in chief,
Respondents moved the Board to dismiss the action.
The motion
is
denied.
The subject of the complaint herein
is a lift station owned
and operated by the City which is located on the northwest corner
of Brogan’s property on Stratford Lane in a subdivision of the
City known as Runnynede.
The lift station
is a part of the
City’s sanitary sewer system,
servicing twenty-three buildings
through a gravity sewer system and wet well and discharging
against
a head of approximately twenty-five
feet to another
segment of the City’s sewer system
(Respondent’s Exhibits
1 and
2).
Brogan alleges that due to poor planning and maintenance the
lift station has overflowed, causing
an unsightly and odoriferous
discharge onto one respondent’s property which poses a health
hazard to the community and
in particular to this respondent’s
children.
The City responds that
it has done and continues to do
everything possible to abate the overflows and denies
responsibility
for their occurrence.
A considerable part of the hearing record consists of the
—2—
discussion of such matters as trespass,
easements,
fraud and
deception,
etc.
The
Board has neither the power nor the
inclination to address these issues as they pertain to this case
and shall consider only the issue of environmental harm caused by
violation of the Board’s Rules.
Brogan alleges that the City has violated Rules
601(a) and
(h) and 602(b).
Rule 601 addresses system reliability
including
malfunctions and spills.
Rule 602 addresses combined sewers and
treatment plant by-passes; part
(b) thereof specifically
addresses infiltration and overflows from sanitary sewers.
The
City acknowledges the allegation of a violation of Section 12(a)
of the Illinois Environmental Protection Act
(Act).
At the hearings Mr.
Koo,
who lives next door to the lot
which contains the lift station, testified that the lift station
overflowed through his backyard to
a forest preserve which
contains a small
lake
(R.60).
He testified that the lift station
had overflowed numerous times between 1972 and 1978 and that he
had notified the City of the problem.
Mr.
1oo’s
best estimate of
the number of times the lift station had overflowed was three to
four times a year
(R.67).
The witness described the raw sewage
as “shooting out of the manhole” atop the lift station wet well
(R,69).
The witness indicated that a good portion of his backyard
and part of a neighbor’s backyard have been covered by the discharge
at times.
The witness appeared to be certain concerning the
overflows up to 1978 but was somewhat unsure concerning overflows
during 1979,
Although not stated in direct testimony by Mr. Koo,
the record generally indicates that he had dug a ditch to
intercept the overflow and direct
it
off of his property some
time prior to 1978.
Witness Chamberlin, who lives in the vicinity of the
lift
station, stated that he had become involved with the problem
in
1977 and had attended four or five different Palos Hills City
Council meetings at which the problem concerning the lift station
was discussed
(R.106).
Chamberlin also stated that he had noted
that the lift station had been without a lock for a period of
three to four months (R.109).
Witness Thomas Brogan testified regarding an overflow which
occured in 1978.
He
stated that he and a number of other
neighbors saw the water and other residue flowing out of the
sewer
(R.138).
Witness Joanne Brogan testified that her daughter became
quite
ill and that she attributed the
illness to the sewer
overflow problem
(R.386-400).
The witness testified that Mr.
Ioo
had indeed dug
a ditch to contain the overflow of the sewage but
that,
subsequently,
fill had been placed
so as to create a
“cesspool” in her yard
(R.401),
During cross—examination the
witness stated that the last overflow that she had noted occurred
on October
29,
1978
(R.415).
This particular overflow was
documented by photographs contained in Complainants’ Group
—3—
Exhibit
9.
Witness Gizewski of the Cook County Department of Public
Health testified that that Department had been contacted
concerning the overflows,
had made an investigation, and had
notified the City.
Witness Shlensky,
Health Officer for the
City,
testified that he had no knowledge of the problem of the
lift station, had never been informed of the problem of the lift
station, and had never talked to anyone concerning the problem
with the
lift station
(R.457).
Cross—examination of this witness
indicated that the City apparently has two Health Officers who
maintain separate records.
Other witnesses called by Brogan testified generally to the
lift station overflow problem and that the City had indeed been
on notice concerning the overflow problem touching the various
properties.
Several witnesses raised issues outside the scope of
this action;
such testimony
is not considered.
The general conclusions from the testimony and the report
which
is Complainants’
Exhibit
3 herein are that the
lift station
type is outdated,
has deterioration of its concrete components,
and is in need of a system to warn the City when it was out of
service.
The report, produced for the City of Palos Hills
subsequent
to the filing of this complaint,
specifically
concludes that:
1.
the existing control
system should have an upgraded
maintenance schedule or should be replaced with a more modern and
more reliable type of control;
2.
a high water alarm installation consisting of a
battery—operated alarm
light,
to be operated in conjunction with
an existing telephone alarm, should be installed;
and
3.
a new wet well for the existing lift station should be
constructed approximately 35 feet north of the existing wet well
location.
It was estimated that instituting these recommendations
would cost in the vicinity of $12,000.
Other options specified
by the report include moving the entire existing lift station to
any other location and in the alternative installing a new type
of lift station
in
a remote location (the cheapest of which
options appears to cost $2,800).
Another option is a permanently
mounted generator set with an automatic transfer switch to
provide power
for the lift station in the event of interruption
of the normal power supply
(estimated to cost between $15,000 and
$18,000).
The report notes that the City of Palos
Hills is
adequately protected by portable stand-by units and does not
suggest installation of the emergency generator set.
Advantages ascribed to the recommended changes were
replacement of the deteriorating wet well, access to the well
location for additional connection, the relocation of an apparent
—4—
illegal connection into the wet well, and removal of the overflow
situation from the area of the residential property to an
adjacent area.
The engineer for the City of Palos Hills testified that he
had started working for the city in October, 1978 and had found
neither internal nor external defects in the lift station system
when he inspected it one week before the hearing
(R.736).
In
addition, the city engineer testified that a telephone alarm
system had been installed since he had become city engineer and
that the city had purchased a portable power generator.
It was
the engineer’s opinion that the system as
it now exists
is
adequate; he would not recommend that it he moved.
An electrical engineer for the city testified that he had
installed the alarm system.
The electrical
engineer’s testimony
was somewhat confused; however, he did state that overflow
resulting from
a power outage would not be recorded
“...
because
it wouldn’t be our fault”
(R.800).
Upon review of the record in this case there appears to be
a
gross
lack of communication between departments of the City of
Palos Hills.
It appears that everyone responsible had
independent knowledge of the overflows at the lift station with
the exception of one of the Health Officers.
The maintenance
department failed even to record the overflows because someone
decided that it was not their fault.
Most certainly,
some
agent
or employee of the City of Palos Hills
is responsible for
investigating and resolving this situation.
Whether or not an
overflow should be recorded based upon a determination of fault
does not constitute good faith compliance with the Act or the
Board’s regulations.
If,
as the City of Palos
Hills contends,
the overflows are caused by power outages, then the problem has
long since graduated from one of an isolated occurrence to one of
an engineering problem which demands the attention of the City of
Palos Hills.
There is sufficient evidence
in the record to find that
overflows occurred at the subject lift station and that the City
was on notice of the problem.
The evidence also supports
a
finding that the City did not respond
in a reasonable manner
after it had been made aware of the problem.
The Board,
therefore,
finds the City in violation of Rules
601(a) and
(b)
and 602(b) of the Rules.
The City will he ordered to cease and
desist from further violations of the
Rules and any violations of
the Act.
The Board finds that the recommendations in Complainants’
Exhibit
3 make good sense.
Although the City may well want to
construct a new wet well
for the lift station for its own
purposes, the Board feels that that action is not necessary to
achieve compliance with the Rules.
Lift stations such as the one
here,
if
designed, constructed,
and maintained correctly, are
capable of operating without causing overflows.
The Board will,
—5--
therefore,
order
the City to install the mercury switch activated
control system and the battery—operated alarm system proposed in
the exhibit and to establish and execute
a suitable maintenance
program for the lift station, including the keeping of records.
The Board finds that this violation demands a penalty as an
aid to enforcement of the Act.
The City of Palos Hills will pay
the sum of $1,000 for its violations found herein.
All counts of the complaint are dismissed as to all of the
individual respondents herein.
This Opinion constitutes the findings of fact and
conclusions of law of the Board in this matter.
ORDER
1.
The City of Palos Hills
is found to be in violation of
Rules 601(a),
601(h),
and 602(b) of Chapter
3 of the Board’s
Water Pollution Control Rules and Regulations.
2.
The City of Palos Hills
shall cease and desist further
violations of these rules and regulations.
3.
The City of Palos Hills shall install
a mercury switch
activated type control system and
a battery—operated alarm system
on the Runnymede lift station pursuant to the recommendations
in
Complainants’ Exhibit
3 herein.
4.
The City of Palos Hills shall establish and execute
a
suitable maintenance program for the Runnymede lift station,
including the maintenance of suitable records reasonably designed
to apprise the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency of
progress toward compliance.
5.
The City of Palos Hills shall pay a penalty in the amount of
$1,000 for the violations found herein, payment to be made by
certified check or money order within
45 days to:
Fiscal Services Department
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
2200 Churchill Road
springfield, Illinois
62706
6.
The individual Respondents herein are dismissed.
I, Christan
L.
Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
Board, hereby cert~fythat the a ove Opinion and Order was
opted on the
~
day of
______________,
1980 by a vote of
Illinois Pollution
ntrol Board
