ILLINOIS
POLLU TI ON
CONTROL
BOARD
June
10,
1982
ILLINOIS
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
)
Complainant,
)
PCB 81—196
)
WESTPORT
WATER
SYSTEMS,
INC~,
)
an Illinois
Corporation,
and
LEO SWITZER, JR~,
Respondents.
MR.
WILLIAM
E.
ELAKNEYV
ASSISTANT
ATTORNEY
GENERAL,
APPEARED ON
BEHALF
OF
THE COMPLAINANT~
MR.
LEO
SWITZER, JR. APPEARED
PRO
SE,
OPINION
AND ORDER OF THE BOARD (By N~E.Wernerh
This
matter comes before the Board on the December
15,
1981
Complaint
brought by the
Illinois
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(“Agency”).
The Complaint alleged that the
Respondents
operated
their public water supply system in
such a manner as
to fail to:
(1)
maintain the appropriate
free or
combined
chlorine
residual
in its distribution system;
(2)
feed fluoride
and
maintain a
fluoride concentration
between 0.9 mg/i and
1.2 mg/i;
(3)
submit
the
requisite
operational
records to the
Agency pertaining to
fluoride
and
chlorine treatment;
(4)
have a properly
functioning water meter on the
system’s finished
water supply;
(5) equip the system~sdischarge
piping with an
air valve with
piping terminating in
a downward direction above
the natural ground level;
(6)
have openings
in the fluoride
solution tank which
were constructed to
exclude the entrance
of outside contamination;
(7) obtain valid
written approval
from
the
Agency
before
completinq
construction
of
its
water
supply
system;
and
(8) have
a
certified water
supply
operator.
Accordingly,
the Respondents are allegedly
in
violation
of
Section
1
of
“An
Act to Regulate the Operating
of a Public
Water
Supply”,
Ill.
Rev.
Stat.,
Cli. 111
1/2, par, 501 et
~
(“Public
Water
Supply Act’);
Rules 212,
302, 306,
and
310A
of
Chapter
6:
Public
Water Supplies
(‘~Chapter6”);
and Sections
15
and
18
of
the
Illinois Environmental Protection
Act
(“Act”).
A hearing was held on
April
22, 1982.
The
parties filed a
Stipulation and Proposal
for Settlement on
May
6,
1982.
47~249
Westport
Water Sjste’n~
::r~,
~
~3t~ort~
)
owns and
operates
a
public
water
supply
system
~h~ch
cutr.iier
water
to
the
Westport
Section
III
Subdivision
and
is
located
in
an
unincorporated
area
near
the
city of Galeshur~,En~xCounty,
Illinois.
The
system,
which
has
an
estimated service population of 161 people,
includes
one
rock
well
which
was
installed
in
1974
and
has
a
pumping
rate
of
52
gallons
per
minute,
one
pressuY:e
tank
which
has
a
gross
capacity
of 9,000 gal:Lons; and
a
dietribution system
which
was
installed in
1970.
(Stip~
2~’3)~Respondent Leo
Switzer,
Jr.
is the
President,
Secretary,
official custodian,
and
operator
of
Westport.
(Stip.
2),
The
proposed
settleirent agreement provides that the
Respondents
admit the violations alleged in the Complaint
and
agree
to
follow
a
specified
::onpliance program and
schedule
to:
(1)
obtain
a
properly
certified
operator;
(2)
retain
a
consulting
engineer
to
prepare
and
submit
to
the
Agency
the
requisite
“as~’huilt’~pi~uis for
:Le
cytom;
C3)
provide
and
utilize
the
appropriate
cI11o:~Lk1at.1c.,nand
fluoridation
equip-
ment
to
insure
that
Westport’s
water
supply
is
properly
chlorinated
and
fluoridated;
(1~install
a
properly
functioning
master
meter;
(5)
cover
the openings in the
solution
tank;
(6) extend
the
discharge
piping c~irvalve to a point
18
inches
above
the
natural
ground
level, a~dth.en terminate it in a
downward
direction;
(7)
main:aiii daily
operational
records
and
promptly
submit
all
necessary
.reports to the
Agency;
and
(8)
pay a
stipulated
penalty of $1,500.
(3tip,
5—6).
At
the
hearing,
Mr.
Lao Switser, Jr. stated that:
(1)
a
certified operator has already
Lee’:.
L~.red;
(2)
a
consulting
engineer
will
be
retained;
(3)
the master meter has
been ordered
at a cost
of
$320;
(4)
the
openings
in the solution tank
have
been covered;
and
(5)
the
discharge
piping
air
valve
has been
properly
modified,
(R,7~’8).
M~ George Broch,
a member
of the
Westport Home
Owners4 Association,
also made some comments
at
the hearing
which were primarily in regard to an unrelated
Inter-
state Commerce
Commission rate increase
hearing involving the
Respondents.
(R,11—18),
After Mr.
Broch
reviewed
the
Stipulation
itself, he had
no
comments
on,
or
oblections
to,
the
Stipulation.
(R.18).
In evaluating
this enforcement action and proposed
settlement
agreement,
the Board has
taken
into
consideration all the facts
and circumstances in light of
the specific
criteria delineated in
Section 33(c) of the Act,
The Board finds the settlement agree-
ment acceptable under Procedural Rule 331 and Section 33(c) of
the Act.
The Board finds
that
the Respondents, Westport Water
Systems,
Inc. and Leo Switzer, Jr., have violated Section 1 of
the Public Water Supply Act; Rules 212,
302,
306, and 310A of
Chapter
6; and Sections
15
and
18
of the Act.
The Respondents
will be ordered to follow their compliance plan and schedule
and to pay the stipulated penalty of $1,500.
47-250
This Opinion
constitutes the Board’s findings
of
fact
and
conclusions of law in
this matter.
ORDER
It
is the Order of the Illinois Pollution
Control Board
that:
1.
The
Respondents,
Westport
Water Systems,
Inc. and Leo
Switzer,
Jr.,
have
violated
Section
1 of the
Public
Water
Supply
Act; Rules
212,
302,
306,
and 310A
of
Chapter
6:
Public Water
Supplies; and
Sections
15
and
18 of
the
Illinois
Environmental
Protection Act.
2.
Within
45 days of the date of this Order, the
Respondents shall,
by certified check or money order payable
to the State
of
Illinois, pay the stipulated penalty
of
$1,500
which is to
be sent to:
Illinois
Environmental Protection
Agency
Fiscal
Services
Division
2200 Churchill Road
Springfield, Illinois 62706
3.
The
Respondents
shall comply with
all
the
terms
and
conditions of the
Stipulation and Proposal for
Settlement
filed on May 6,
1982,
which is incorporated by
reference as
if fully set
forth herein,
I,
Christan L. Moffett,
Clerk
of
the
Illinois
Pollution
Control Board,
hereby
certify
that
th~above
Opinion and Order
were adopted
on
~the4~j~
day ~
)
,
1982
by a vote of
‘~—O
A
Christan L. Mof~1,~i,Clerk
Ililnoas t~’o~lutionControl
Board
47~251