ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
January
7,
1982
VILLAGE
OF
BARTLETT,
Petitioner,
PCB 81-~l09
Respondent.
EDWARD MRAZ, VILLAGE ATTORNEY, APPEARED ON BEHALF
OF PETITIONER.
OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD
(by J,
Anderson):
This matter comes before the Board on the petition for
variance filed
by
the Village of Bartlett
(Village) on June
29,
1981 as
amended September
11,
1981.
The Village seeks
variance
from the 1.0
mg/i
maximum barium concentration limitation of
Rule
304(B)(4) of Chapter
6:
Public Water Supplies.
On October
26,
1981
the
Illinois
Environmental Protection Agency (Agency)
filed
its Recommendation in
support of grant of variance.
Hearing
was
held November
2,
1981 pursuant
to timely filed objections,
although neither objector
appeared at the hearing.
The Village of Bartlett, population over 6,500,
is located
in Cook and DuPage Counties,
The Village operates and maintains
six public water supply wells, and proposes to operate a seventh,
Proposed Well
#7,
DuPage County, has been drilled but
is not yet
operational, and has a barium content of 2,54 mg/l.
Well
#7 is
expected to provide 25,4
of the DuPage County Zon&s water needs.
The waters from the three wells
(Wells #1,
2,
3)
located in
the Village~sCook County Zone cannot practicably be blended with
waters of the wells located in the DuPage County Zone,
DuPage
County Wells #4 and #6 are currently being blended to reduce Well
#4~s2.54 mg/l barium level and Well #6~siron level,
However,
waters from Wells #4 and #6 cannot practicably be blended with
waters from Well
#7.
Well
#5 has a hydrogen sulfide ~prohlem”,
but its waters could be blended with those of Well
*7.
However,
Well #5~spast performance leads the Village to believe that
Well
#5 cannot produce sufficient quantities of water to create
a blend which
will comply with the 1.0 mg/I barium standard,
This
conclusion is also based on the fact that Well #7~spumping
capacity
is
750 gpm, while that of Well
#5 is 300 gpm,
which
would
cause problems of control in the mixing ratio
(R.
10),
45*43
2
Dale
Marting,
Village Engineer, and designer of
Wells
#4,
5,
6, and
7, has explored the
possibility of lime softening to bring
Well
#7 into compliance.
The initial capital cost of
such a
system is
estimated
to be at least $1.3 million and
possibly as
much as $5 million, with
annual operating costs estimated to be
$61,900.
Depending on an
individual~svolume of water usage,
installation of the lime softening
system would
impose a rate
increase of between $6 and $33 per quarter
(R. 10~11, Ex.
3).
Mr. Marting testified that some inquiry had been made
concerning an ion exchange
system.
However,
a detailed evaluation
of the costs of this system
were not made once it
was learned that
such systems are generally
more costly and more
difficult to
operate than are lime softening
systems
(R.
12).
The Village presented
testimony of George
Andrae, Senior
Environmental Engineer for the
DuPage
County
Health Department in
support of its assertion that grant
of
variance would not impose
a risk to the health of its water
users.
Mr. Andrae calculated
that,
because the waters of Well
#7 have
a sulfate content of 28
mg/i, the formation of insoluble
barium sulfate
reduces the
concentration of ionized
barium
in the Village’s
water to only
.07 mg/i.
Since barium sulphate cannot
be
assimilated by the
body,
Mr. Andrae believes that consumption of water from Well
#7
poses no risks to health
(R.
17).
The Agency did not appear or
present
testimony at hearing.
In its Recommendation,
it agreed
with all
of the Village’s
assertions.
The Agency has recommended grant of variance until
January
1,
1984,
consistent with Section 1416 of the Safe Drinking
Water Act.
The
Board finds that
denial of variance would impose
an
arbitrary or unreasonable
hardship, based on the costs
of com-
pliance, and the lack of
threat to public health.
Variance is
accordingly granted until
January
1,
1984,
subject to
conditions.
This Opinion
constitutes the Board~sfindings of
fact
arid
conclusions
of law
in
this matter,
ORDER
1.
Petitioner,
the Village of Bartlett,
is granted a
variance from the 1.0
maximum barium concentration
limit of Rule
304(B) (4) of Chapter 6:
Public Water
Supply until January
1,
1984
subject to the following
conditions:
a)
As expeditiously
after
identification of a
feasible compliance method as
is
practicable, but no
later than January
1,
1983,
Petitioner shall
submit
to the Agency a program
(with increments
of progress)
for bringing its system into compliance with barium
standards,
45—44
3
b)
Petitioner
shall continue to take all
reasonable measures with its existing equipment to
minimize the level of barium in its finished water.
c)
Pursuant to Rule 313(D) (1), on or before
March
30,
1982 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 1.0 mg/l
maximum
barium standard by the Pollution
Control Board.
The
notice
shall state the average content of barium in
samples taken since the last notice period during which
samples were taken.
2.
Within forty—five days of the date of this Order,
Petitioner shall execute and forward to the Illinois
Environmental
Protection Agency,
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 81—109,
dated _____________________________________, understand and accept
the said Order,
realizing that
such
acceptance renders all
terms
and conditions thereto binding and enforceable.
IT
IS SO ORDERED,
I,
Christan
L,
Moffett,
Clerk of the Illinois
Pollution
Control Board, her~bycertify
that the above
Opinion and Order was
adopted oi~,the
‘7
day of
~
1982 by a
Petitioner
By:
Authorized Agent
Title
Christan L.
Moffei
Illinois Pollution
Date
C
itrol Board
45—45