ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
August 18,
1982
In the Matter of:
)
)
AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 3:
)
R77-12
WATER POLLUTION (Effluent
)
Docket 0
Disinfection)
)
DISSENTING OPINION
(by J.D. Dumelle):
My reason for dissenting
in this matter is my concern
that swimmers and water skiiers on the major rivers of Illinois
will become ill with gastroenteritis or shigellosis
(dysentery).
The majority opinion
(pp.9—il) seems to indicate that
fecal coliform standards which are used to measure contamination
at beaches and
in swimming pools are not the best measure.
Let’s look at the record on the question of adequacy of
fecal coliform water standards.
The following county or city
health agencies are on record supporting the use of fecal
coliform standards:
Peoria City/County Health Department
Tazewell County
Grundy
“
McHenry
“
“
Lake
“
ft
H
City of Chicago
Suburban Cook County—-Du Page County
Health Services Agency
In addition, the Woodford County Board
(which may not
have a health department)
is on record against dropping disin—
fection.
The 1980 census populations for the jurisdictions
listed above are as follows:
Peoria County
(200,466);
Tazewell
County
(132,078); Grundy County (30,582); McHenry County
(147,724);
Lake County (440,372); City of Chicago (3,005,072); Suburban
Cook County (2,248,118); Du Page County
(658,177);
and Woodford
County (33,320).
They total
to 6,895,849 or 60.4
of the 1980
population of Illinois of 11,418,461.
Can those many professional
health departments,
many of which are headed by medical doctors
or holders of the Master’s
in Public Health degree,
all be wrong
on such an important matter?
I think not.
And I think the Pollution Control Board should
have given much more weight and credence to the professional
opinion of these health agencies representing 60.4
of Illinois
citizens.
47-577
—2—
Fecal coliforms are used by the Illinois Department of
Public Health as a measure of swimming pool safety.
A count
of one, repeat one,
is sufficient to close a swimming pool.
Doe~he Board Th~lthat IDPH should not use fecal coliforms
to test for swimming pool safety?
On p.10
(bottom)
of the majority
opinion the Board points out that shigella (which causes dysen-
tery) or pathogenic viruses have not been used for swimming
health standards.
Thus,
it seems to me, the fecal coliform standard
is still
the best one to use and must be used until something far better
is developed and accepted.
The economic impact study
(EcIS) done by Huff and Huff,
Inc. was a major factor in the majority’s decision.
Mrs.
Linda
Huff, the principal witness,
is a chemical engineer with an
MBA degree.
She is not a microbiologist or an MPH or a physi-
cian by training.
She arrived at her conclusions by devising
a shigella standard.
(Bloomington hearing, July 17,
1981,
R.113—
115).
The majority in its opinion (bottom of p.1°)rightly rejects
shigella as a measure of water quality for protection of swimmers.
Should not Mrs. Huff’s opinion as to the public health safety
of dropping disinfection also have been rejected?
How valid is the 500 fecal coliforms per 100 milliliters
used now by the City of Chicago to close beaches?
That number
represents a partial
loosening of the 200 fecal coliforms
per 100 milliliters water quality standard set by this Board
in
1972.
The 200 figure apparently was originally derived from
the Albert H.
Stevenson report titled “Studies of Bathing Water
Quality and Health” published in May 1953 in the American
Journal of Public Health.
If one goes through that report and
rearranges the data in Table
5
(p.537) the following correlation
appears
(note:
total
co.iforms
are assumed to be 10 times fecal
coliforms):
Fecal Coliforms per 100 ml.
Three—Day Illness Rate
per 100 swimmers
3
8.7
4
8.5
73
9.9
230
12.2
To me, this shows a positive correlation between fecal
coliforms and illness to swimmers.
If the fecal coliform stan-
dard is now thought to be inadequate then a better standard ought
to devised.
The Board had before it in this record an estimate of
fecal
coliform levels that would occur along the Illinois River if
disinfection at sewage plants were dropped as
is now to be done.
Compare these predicted levels (second column) with the present
level for closing Chicago beaches on Lake Michigan
(500 fecal
coliforms per 100 milliliters).
47-578
—3—
Predicted Fecal
Coliforms/100 ml.
Ratio to Chicago Standard
Morris
28,700
57.4
Marseilles
17,400
34.8
Ottawa
12,300
24.6
La Salle—Peru
6,880
12.8
riennepin
2,992
6.0
Lacon
1,370
2.7
Peoria
534
1.1
Thus it is predicted by using generally accepted die-off
equations that the William G.
Stratton State Park at Morris
(a major waterskiing center) will have fecal coliform levels in
the Illinois River which are 57.4 times the level
at which Chicago
beaches are now closed!
Does this not give one pause?
The predicted fecal coliform densities above come from
Table
4,
p.31, of the report dated December 14,
1981 done by
Dr. Charles
N.
Haas,
Dr.
Haas is a graduate microbiologist and
an assistant professor of environmental engineering at Illinois
Institute of Technology.
Persons who swim
(and
I include water skiiers in this
category)
are most likely to contract gastroenteritis from
polluted water.
This illness has “Montezuma’s Revenge” symptoms
of diarrhea,
etc.
Since it is not an illness required to be
reported by physicians, an increase in its incidence will probably
go undetected.
A water skiier at the William
G. Stratton State
Park might get ill
a few days later and perhaps not even connect
it
to the earlier polluted water exposure.
Much more serious is shigellosis
(dysentery).
A study
in
this record titled “Shigellosis From Swimming” appeared in the
Journal of the American Medical Association in October 1976.
Two of the authors are medical doctors:
Dr. Mark L.
Rosenberg
and Dr. Kenneth K. Hazlet.
Of the 45 cases of shigellosis
contracted in this outbreak,
32 were traced to swimming in the
Mississippi River
5 miles below a sewage treatment plant which
was not disinfecting.
The fecal coliform level was 17,500 per
100 ml
in this case study.
The predicted levels by Dr. Haas
given above show that fecal
coliforin levels at Morris will be
28,700 and at Marseilles,
17,400.
The symptoms experienced in
the Dubuque, Iowa outbreak included diarrhea (100),
fever
(80),
abdominal pain (80),
chills
(55),
headache
(55),
nausea
(51),
vomiting
(49),
and bloody diarrhea (24).
Two
children “who had played together at the river’s edge”
20
miles below the sewage plant also got ill with shigellosis
(p. 1850
)
Under the regulation adopted today,
sewage plants will be
able to discharge untreated wastes to the major rivers of Illinois.
A letter
in this record from Dr.
David Kenney, Director of the
Illinois Department of Conservation states that
waterskiing
is done on
the
Illinois River, the Mississippi River, and the
47-579
—4—
Wabash River.
A waterskiier may well take a spill right in the
undiluted effluent plume of
a sewage plant where the fecal
coliform level may be as high
(or higher), than the 500,000
level per 100 ml used by Dr.
Haas as coming from the Metropolitan
Sanitary District of Greater Chicago’s plants.
There are other aspects which have not fully been considered
by the majority.
While
the opinion
(p.16) concludes that there
is
“little risk” to cattle and hogs it does not address the calf
typhoid potential.
The report titled “Health Effects Due to the
Cessation of Chlorination of Wastewater Treatment Plant Effluent”
by Janet Holden of the School of Public Health of the University
of Illinois at Chicago is in this record.
On p.74 of it the
reference is given to calf typhoid occurring from hay grown on
ground flooded by a stream polluted with sewage.
The bacteria
deposited on the grass were shown to survive natural drying and
remain virulent in the winter.
It is important to maintain the distinction between “disin-
fection” and “chlorination”.
If chlorine residuals as such do
pose environmental threats to fish or to humans (from trihalo—
methanes) then an alternative disinfection method could be
required.
The Bergen County, N.J. research showed that ultra-
violet disinfection is as effective as chlorination and no more
costly.
The majority opinion does not mention ultra—violet’s
proven advantages over chlorination of having no chlorine
residual and not creating chlorinated organics——all at the same
cost.
The majority opinion mistakenly equates a “case-by—case”
determination with the need for 1,500 separate, site—specific
rulemaking proceedings (pp.18-19).
All that was needed was
to retain a water quality standard for swimming and water skiing
areas
(the major rivers of Illinois and lakes and reservoirs).
The IEPA’s permit process would do the rest.
IEPA, using gener-
ally accepted decay models for bacteria (pp.ll—12) would simply
make the computation and require disinfection if needed as a
permit condition.
In air pollution control, air quality standards
must always be met.
IEPA does far more difficult air modelling
now when issuing air permits.
My preference,
in this proceeding, would have been to first
drop winter chlorination (from November 15 to May 1).
Then
actual
field measurements of fecal coliform levels could have
been made in April and in November.
Once these data were gathered
the Board could make
a further determination on modifying summer
chlorination.
There is a public health risk even in dropping winter chlor-
ination.
Edwin
E. Geldreich,
the noted research microbiologist
at the U.S. Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory in a
November 6,
1981 letter states:
47-580
—5—
“While ingestion of water through drinking may be the
major vehicle of transport to the intestinal
tract,
body contact in recreational use of water cannot be
ignored.
This would include swimming, skiing,
and
canoeing in a river since in these forms of recreational
activity, hands and mouth will come in contact with the
water.
If the water in contact contains pathogenic
organisms, these organisms will reach the mouth
directly or by hand to mouth transfer and be ingested.
This transfer of pathogen exposure from water to
person is not unlike the acknowledged transfer of
pathogens in person to person contacts (sneezing,
coughing,
hands, body).”
Thus,
it seems to me, that even hunters and fishermen will
be at some risk with the dropping of winter disinfection.
A
fisherman will be handling his lines and any fish caught in a
polluted stream.
His hands will be
a potential source of pathogen
transfer when he eats lunch.
The hunter may wash his hands in
a polluted stream and thus unknowingly ingest pathogens when he
eats his sandwiches.
The dropping of winter chlorination will also increase
virus
levels in the waters of Illinois.
Potable water systems
have expressed a concern about enteroviruses (February
9,
1982,
R.
236).
Some viral diseases are hepatitis and polio.
The Lake County Health Department, in its
letter of Sep-
tember 30,
1977 by Eugene Theios, M.P.H. then director of the
environmental health division, points out that people swim at
private beaches and in lakes and along rivers.
Also,
“swimming
holes” exist in parks that are unofficial bathing areas.
He
also points out that swimming may take place before May
1 or
after September 30 if the weather is warm enough.
The public,
at any of these locations and times of the year would obviously
not be protected.
And how would they ever know that they were not
protected?
Mr. Richard
A. Wissell,
M.P.H., Public Health Administrator
for the McHenry County Department of Health,
in his letter in
the record of February 9, 1982 states;
“All up and down the Fox
River in our County, people water ski and swim from the banks of
their property.”
Messrs.
Theos and Wissell are both stating that people will
swim and water ski in the rivers and lakes of Illinois.
We
cannot and should not prevent that entirely legitimate and desir-
able recreational use of our waters.
But we should protect the
health of those users.
As the public learns that Illinois rivers,
lakes, and
reservoirs may not be safe to swim or water ski upon, tourism
is bound to be adversely affected.
These adverse economic
impacts were not considered in this proceeding.
47-581
—6—
The Second Notice enacted today by the majority is much
looser
(more lenient) than the First Notice enacted by this Board
on October 8,
1981.
That First Notice would have protected the
entire reach of the Illinois River from the Stratton State Park
at Morris to the confluence with the Mississippi River.
It
also would have protected all “lakes”.
The intent is using the
word “lakes” was to define that as meaning bodies of water on
which water skiing was possible.
The legal argument then exists that the Second Notice goes
far beyond First Notice.
The million or so people in Central
Illinois who look to the Illinois River for recreational usage
can legitimately assert that they did not participate nor object
to the First Notice because
it did not purport to affect
them.
Similarly,
residents and users of all lakes and reservoirs could
say the same thing.
Earlier in this statement it was mentioned that 6,895,849
people of Illinois have objected to the action of the Board
majority.
But it is really more than that in numbers.
The
Illinois Section of the American Water Works Association in their
testimony of February 9,
1982
(Michael Curry) expressed their
concerns for the safety of potable public water systems
(R.225-
251).
Most of the Illinois population is served by potable public
water supplies
(as against individual wells).
Thus about 10,000,000
people in Illinois
(the customers) were represented by the AWWA
group and its statement of concern.
The Illinois Department of Public Health represents all
11,418,461 Illinoisans.
Its then Director, Paul Q.
Peterson,
M.D., in
a statement in this record, stated:
“The Department of Public Health wishes to point out
that in IEPA’s effort to have fecal coliforms removed
as an indicator of water quality, it does not offer
any alternative indicators
for the Department’s use.
Granted, there are
a variety of specific organisms which
can be tested for, but none correlate with water quality
any better than fecal coliforms,
and are more difficult
and costly to monitor as well as interpret...The Department
will continue to use fecal coliforms as an indicator of
water quality,
and recommends that the Pollution Control
Board continue to retain
feca.
coliform as an indicator
until such time that a more suitable parameter is found.”
(underlining added).
The majority in today’s action has not “retained fecal coli-
form as an indicator.”
I would have kept a water quality standard
of 500 fecal coliforms per 100 ml
(the Chicago beach closing
standard)
in force for the summer swimming and water skiing season.
Perhaps it all was said best by Janet Holden of the School
of Public Health of the University of Illinois at Chicago.
In
her conclusions she stated;
47-582
—7—
“Swimming in waters that have been contaminated by sewage
or wastewater treatment plant effluents has been directly
implicated
as
the cause of infectious disease,
The
concentrations of pathogenic organisms which are needed
to cause such diseases
is not known.
Thus, neither the
concentration
of
indicator
organisms
needed
to insure
safe
swimmable
waters
not.
‘the
distance
from
a
wastewater
outfall
needed
for
a
body
of
water
to
purify
itself
sufficiently
for use for swimming
is
known.”
(p.88)
The
majority
decision
is
not
logically
consistent,
It
purports
to
protect
swimmers
at
licensed
beaches
but
completely
neglects
to
protect
swimmers and
water
skiiers
not
at
licensed
beaches.
And, in fact,
if Dr.
Haas is
correct,
the
majority’s
new rule may not even protect through the “20 mile” distance.
I would urge concerned counties and cities to
(a)
do water
quality testing for fecal coliforms after disinfection ceases,
(b) try to get additional river,
lake, and reservoir beaches
licensed in order to trigger the partial protection of the 20 mile
distance and
(c) bring this matter back to the Board again with
new data on water quality and illness incidence.
I,
Christan L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution
Control Board, here~certify that th
above Dissenting Opinion
was filed on the~~day of
~(
_______,
1982.
(
Christan L. Moff
,
Clerk
Illinois
Pollution
ontrol
Board
submitted,
47-583