ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    March
    5,
    1981
    ‘rRIVOLI PUBLIC WATER DISTRICT,
    )
    )
    Petitioner,
    v.
    )
    PCB 80—208
    ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
    )
    Respondent.
    OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD
    (by J.
    Anderson):
    This matter comes before the Board on the petition of the
    Trivoli Public Water District
    (Trivoli) filed November 12,
    1980
    as amended December
    1,
    1980.
    Trivo.i
    seeks variance from the
    2.0 maximum fluoride concentration limit of Rule 304(B)
    of Chapter
    6:
    Public Water Supply.
    The Illinois Environmental Protection
    Agency (Agency) recommended a grant of variance with conditions
    on December 15,
    1980.
    Hearing was waived and none was held.
    Trivoli, which
    is located in an unincorporated area in Peoria
    County,
    delivers water with an average fluoride concentration of
    3.85
    rag/i
    to 105 homes and businesses.
    Trivoli was previously
    granted variance from the 2.0 mg/i fluoride limitation in PCB
    79—198,
    36 PCB 141
    (november 15,
    1979), which record has been
    incorporated in this action.
    Trivoli asserts that fluoride re-
    moval equipment will necessitate an initial capital expenditure
    of $124,000,
    and an annual operating cost of $2,900,
    “which is
    completely beyond
    its
    ability to pay at this time.”
    Trivoli
    explains that it must repay the FmHA approximately $123,000
    loaned to it for the construction of its system,
    and that it
    already charges water rates substantially higher than surrounding
    communities
    to meet its current loan and operating expenses.
    Trivoli thinks it likely that if it is required to install
    fluoride removal equipment and to pass on the resulting costs,
    that some of its customers will discontinue receiving its service
    and return to use of their private wells.
    As Trivoli was formed
    to replace dependence on private shallow wells of questionable
    quality,
    it believes that disconnection from its service would
    prove a greater threat to the health of its customers than
    consumption of its water, since consumption of water with 3.85
    mg/i fluoride has not been proven harmful.
    The Agency concurs with all of the facts and beliefs presented
    by Trivoli, including its assertion that consumption of its water
    presents no danger to the public health of its customers.
    The
    Agency therefore supports a grant of variance until the deadline
    41—39

    date for exemptions under S1416 of the Safe Drinking Water Act
    (SDWA),
    S300(g)-5.
    This deadline was recently extended by
    Congress in PL96—502 from January
    1,
    1981 until January
    1,
    1984.
    In its previous Opinions concerning variance requests from
    small public water supply systems such as Trivoli,
    the Board
    has
    granted full five year variances
    (e.g.
    City of Minonk,
    PCB 80—136,
    October
    2,
    1980,
    and cases cited therein at p.
    3).
    The extension
    of the SDWA exemption deadline does not change the Board’s pre-
    viously expressed reasoning or result.
    The Board finds that
    Trivoli has demonstrated existence of an arbitrary or unreasonable
    hardship, and grants variance for a five year period,
    subject to
    the conditions in the attached Order.
    This Opinion constitutes the Board’s findings of fact and
    conclusions of law in this matter.
    ORDER
    1.
    Petitioner,
    the Trivoli Public Water District,
    is granted
    a variance from the
    2.0 mg/i maximum fluoride concentration limit
    of Rule 304(B)
    of Chapter
    6:
    Public Water Supply for five years,
    subject to the following conditions:
    A.
    Beginning on or about June
    1,
    1981, and at six month
    intervals thereafter, the Petitioner
    shall communicate with the
    Agency
    in order to ascertain whether fluoride removal techniques
    specifically applicable to small systems have been developed and
    identified.
    B.
    As expeditiously after identification of a feasible
    compliance method as is practicable, but no later than January
    1.,
    1984,
    Petitioner shall submit to the Agency a program (with
    increments of progress) for bringing its system into compliance
    with fluoride standards.
    C.
    Petitioner shall take all reasonable measures with its
    existing equipment to minimize the level of
    fluoride in its water
    supply and shall not allow the fluoride concentration to exceed
    an average of 4.0 mg/i.
    D.
    Pursuant to Rule 313(D) (1) of Chapter
    6, on or before
    April 30,
    1981 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
    2.0 mg/l maximum fluoride standard by the Pollution Control Board.
    The notice shall state the average content of fluoride
    in samples
    taken since the last notice period during which samples were tal;en.
    2.
    Within forty—five days of the date of this Order,
    Petitioner shall execute and forward to the Illinois Environmen-
    tal 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
    41—40

    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,
    (~~e),
    ,
    having read
    the Order of the Illinois Pollution Control Board in
    PCI3
    80—208,
    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 ce~tifythat the above Opinion and Order
    were adopted on the
    ______
    day of
    ___________,
    1981 by a vote
    of
    ~
    Christan L. Moff~~,Cler1~
    Illinois Pollutj5~r’Contro1Boar-I
    41—41

    Back to top