ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL
    BOARD
    May 27, 1982
    COUNTY OF DuPAGE,
    )
    Petitioner,
    )
    V.
    )
    PCB 82—24
    ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
    Respondent.
    OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD (by 3. Anderson):
    This matter comes before the Board on the March ii, 1982
    petition for variance filed by the County of DuPage (County).
    The County seeks variance for “at least one year” from the 15
    pCi/i gross alpha particle activity limitation of Rule 304(C) (1)
    of Chapter 6: Public Water Supply. On April 5, 1982 the I1.iinots
    Environmental Protection Agency (Agency) filed its Recommendation
    in support of grant of variance until January 1, 1984. Hearing
    was waived and none has been held.
    The County, through its Department of Public Works, supplies
    drinking water to the 5,425 residents (1981 Agency estimate)
    (1,550 service connections) of the Rosewood Trace Subdivision,
    which is located in an unincorporated area of southeastern DuPage
    County adjacent to the Village of Burr Ridge. The County seeks
    variance to continue use of deep (1,610’) Rosewood Trace No. 1
    Well and its distribution system. A composite of four quarterly
    distribution system samples taken between September 24, 1980 and
    July 14, 1981 showed a gross alpha level of 22.0 ±4.45 pCi/i.
    However, single samples taken from two points
    in
    the distribution
    system on September 24, 1980 and December 21, 1981 showed gross
    alpha levels in pCi/i, respectively, of 7.11 ±2.74 and 10.8 ±
    3.55. The Agency also notes the existence of a shallow (300’)
    well, which “is on standby”. The pumping capacity and the gross
    alpha particle activity levels of each well have not been provided.
    The County states that it has received no test results concerning
    radium 226 and 228 levels.
    In support of its petition, the County states that it has
    considered three compliance options. One option would be to
    construct treatment facilities, construction costs for which are
    estimated to be $133,000. Another option would be to replace
    the well water by, for instance, Lake Michigan water, for which
    the County has received an allocation (the size and initial
    availability of which was not specified). The petition indicates,
    47-157
    2
    without elaboration, that Lake Michigan water would be delivered
    by the DuPage Water Commission, but no timetable or cost estimates
    concerning this option were provided, A third short term solution
    would be a blending approach, in which water from (unspecified)
    other wells would be used to dilute the water of Well No. 1, with
    estimated construction costs of $25,000 and an estimated implemen-
    tation timetable of 5 months, The County intends to obtain, hut
    has not yet done so, professional services “to assist in reviewing
    and evaluating this situation and to prepare recommendations for
    resolving this problem”. Subject to receipt of a professional
    recommendation, the County states that it “presently anticipates”
    implementation of a blending program to achieve compliance.
    The County asserts that denial of variance would impose an
    arbitrary or unreasonable hardship because “there is a great need
    for the expansion of the Rosewood Trace water distribution
    system in order to serve the domestic and fire protection
    requirements of the local population”; however, the Village does
    not provide any details supporting these bare conclusions. The
    Village believes that to require the expenditure of funds for
    immediate installation of treatment facilities would not be in
    the public interest, particularly since such facilities “would
    probably” be abandoned when Lake Michigan water is obtained.
    The Agency generally agrees with the facts asserted in the
    petition, and states its belief that grant of variance “will not
    result in an unreasonable risk to health”. The Agency therefore
    recommends grant of variance until January 1, 1984 subject to
    conditions, including engagement of professional consulting
    services.
    While the two single samples indicate compliance with Rule
    304(C)(1), the Board finds that the result of the test of the com-
    posite sample is determinative of non—compliance for the purposes
    of justification and need for Board consideration of the County’s
    variance request (see Village of Round Lake v. IEPA, PCB 82—17,
    May 13, 1982). The Board does not find the peti?T~n’slack of
    data concerning compliance options to be a fatal deficiency in
    light of the Village’s asserted willingness to develop such
    information.
    The Board finds that to require immediate compliance would
    impose an arbitrary or unreasonable hardship, particularly since
    there would appear to be little immediate risk to health from
    consuming the Village’s water if variance is granted (see Villaae
    of Lemont v. IEPA, PCB 80-48, April 30, 1981). The Board will
    therefore grant a short—term variance until June 1, 1983, subject
    to conditions, during which time the County shall investigate
    blending and other compliance options. (The County should note
    that should it join a regional water supply system such as the
    DuPage Water Commission, variance relief is available through
    January 1, 1986.)
    47-158
    3
    The Board notes that this is the second recent case in which
    the gross alpha readings as indicated by tests of composite samples
    is significantly higher than tests of single samples (see Viliaqe.
    of Round Lake, supra), It is discomforting that the discrepancies
    were explained in neither case and the Board is concerned that
    these results may indicate flaws in the technique for holding or
    analyzing composite samples. Given the divergent sample results,
    it is even more than usually important that gross alpha testing
    continue, and that radium testing commence, and the Board will so
    order.
    This Opinion constitutes the Board~s findings of fact and
    conclusions of law in this matter.
    ORDER
    1. Petitioner, the County of DuPage, is granted a variance
    from the 15 pCi/I gross alpha particle activity limit of Rule
    304(C)(1)(b) of Chapter 6: Public Water Supply to allow continued
    operation of Rosewood Trace No, 1 Well until June 1, 1983, subject.
    to the following conditions:
    a. 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 22$ shall be commenced.
    b. On or before September 15, 1982 the Petitioner
    shall secure professional assistance (either from present
    staff or an outside consultant) in investigating compliance
    options, including the possibility and feasibility of
    achieving compliance by blending water from its shallow well
    with that of its deep well. On or before October 15, 1982,
    evidence that such professional assistance has been secured
    shall be submitted to Wayne Weirnersiage, Enforcement Programs,
    at the address stated in paragraph 2, below.
    c. As expeditiously after identification of a
    feasible compliance method as is practicable, hut no later
    than April 1, 1983, Petitioner shall submit a program (with
    increments of progress) for bringing its system into
    compliance with radiological quality standards to the Agency’s
    Division of Public Water Supplies, FOS, at the address sLated
    in paragraph 2, below.
    d. Pursuant to Rule 313(D) (1) of Chapter 6, in i~.s
    first set of water bills or within three months after the
    date of this Order, whichever occurs first, and every t.hree
    months thereafter, Petitioner will send to each user of its
    public water supply a written notice to the efEect that
    Petitioner has been granted by the Pollution Control Board
    a variance from the 15 pCi/l maximum gross alpha particle
    activity standard. The notice shall state the average
    content of gross alpha particle activity in samples taken
    since the last notice period during which samples were taken.
    47-159
    4
    2. 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
    shall be as follows:
    CERTIFICATE
    I, (We),
    ,
    having read
    the Order of the Illinois Pollution Control Board in PCB 82-24,
    dated __________________________________, understand and accept the
    said Order, realizing that such acceptance renders all terms and
    conditions thereto binding and enforceable.
    Petitioner
    By: Authorized Agent
    Title
    Date
    IT IS SO ORDERED.
    I, Christan L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution
    Control Board, hereby certify that the above Opinion and Order
    was adopted on the ~
    day of
    _________________,
    1982 by
    a vote of
    ?-(~ .
    I
    ~
    1.
    ~
    .~ ~
    Christan L. Mof~ett, C~rk
    Illinois Pollution Conl~rol Board
    47- 160

    Back to top