ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
April 16, 1981
VILLAGE OF ARLINGTON HEIGHTS,
)
Petitioner,
v.
)
PCB 80—229
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
)
Respondent.
OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD (by J. Anderson):
This matter comes before the Board on the petition filed
December 18, 1980 as amended February 11, 1981 for an extension
of the variance granted from the 15 pCi/i gross alpha particle
activity limitation of Rule 304(C) of Chapter 6: Public Water
Supply in Village of Arlington Heights v. IEPA, PCB 79—132, 37
PCB 13 (December 13, 1979). The Illinois Environmental Protection
Agency
(Agency) filed its Recommendation in support of grant of
variance January 22, 1981, and amendment thereto on February 23,
1981. Hearing was waived and none has been held.
The Village of Arlington Heights, located in northwestern
Cook County, supplies water to the “great majority” of its 71,000
residents from its eleven deep wells. In compliance with the
requirements of its earlier variance, the Village commissioned
Metcalf and Eddy, Inc. to prepare a “Report to the Village of
Arlington Heights on Radioactivity in the Water Supply” (Pet.
Ex. 3). Tests of the ten wells then operational during the test
period revealed that the levels of alpha activity in the wells
ranged from a high of 42.8 ±6.5 pCi/l to a low of 6.8 ±2.0
pCi/l, with eight wells exceeding the standard and two within it.
Wells 13 and 15 were also tested for radium 226 and 228.
Wells #13 and 15 violated the combined radium 226 and 228 standard
of 5 pCi/i, with readings in pCi/i for Well
No.
13 of 4.70 ±0.08
for radium 226 and 4.2 ±1.4 for radium 228, and for Well No. 15
of 3.59 ±0.07 and 4.9 ±1.2. The report notes that the “relation-
ship of alpha activity to radium 226 levels indicates other wells
would also
exceed
the radium standard.” Since 51 of all alpha
activity is from radium 226 and about 24 of all beta activity
is from radium 228, compliance with the 5 pCi/i combined radiun
standard would result in compliance with the gross alpha standard
(Pet.
Ex. C,
p. 1—2, 4—6, Tables A—i to A—3). Although the Villaqe
has petitioned only for variance from the alpha activity standard
of Rule 304(C)(1)(b), in the interests of administrative economy
the Board will construe the petition as also seeking variance f~orri
the radium standard of Rule 304(C)(1)(a).
4 1—261
Test results indicated that the standards cannot be met by
“mixing or blending,” as all wells exceed various parts of the
standard (Pet. Ex. C, p. 1—2). Also, use of shallow wells would
not provide enough water for adequate blending (Pet. Ex. C, p.
5—9).
Eight possible water treatment processes were considered:
sodium zeolite ion exchange, hydrogen cycle zeolite ion exchange,
continuous countercurrent ion exchange, greensand zeolite ion
exchange, lime softening, reverse osmosis, electrodialysis, and
distillation. The cost analysis of the most appropriate of these
various methods —ion exchange or lime softening— would result in
a range of capital expenditures from $5,844,000 to $14,200,000,
with costs for water treatment ranging between $0.78 per thousan~1
gallons and $1.75 per thousand gallons. The most cost effectiv~?
treatment, sodium ion exchange, might produce finished water with
an unacceptable sodium content, so that a hydrogen cycle ion
exchange system at slightly higher capital and operating costs
might prove necessary (Pet. Ex. C, pp. 1—3, 4, 6—1 to 14).
The Village has, however, long been seeking an alternative
water source. It has received a Lake Michigan water allocation
to begin in 1984, which water will be delivered from the City of
Evanston via a pipeline to be laid by the Northwest Suburban Water
Commission, of which Arlington Heights is a member (Pet. 3). Under
these circumstances, the Village believes that to require immediat’~3
and costly installation of compliance equipment useful for only
3 years would impose an arbitrary and unreasonable hardship, par-
ticularly given the Board’s previous finding that the risk to the
health of its water users is low, assuming compliance
is
reached
in the near future.
The Agency does not dispute the Village’s assertions, and
recommends that the requested variance until January 1, 1984 be
granted. It does however note that had the Village supplied more
information concerning its membership in the Northwest Suburban
Water Commission, that it might be entitled to variance until
January 1, 1986 consistent with the deadline for exemptions under
the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), 42 U.S.C. §1416, as recently
extended by P.L. 96—502, for water supplies that have binding
commitments to become part of a regional water supply.
The Board finds that the Village had demonstrated that
denial of variance would impose an arbitrary and unreasonable
hardship. The Board takes official notice that the text of the
Northwest Suburban Water System Agreement was recently supplied
it and is part of the record in Village of Hanover Park v. IEPA,
PCJ3 80-221, March 5, 1981. Arlington Heights is shown to have
authorized execution of the agreement by ordinance #78—77 dated
June 16, 1978 (p. 20). The Board therefore finds, as it did in
Hanover Park, that the Village’s entry into the Agreement satis-
fies the SDWA requirement. Variance from Rule 304(C)(1)(a) and
(b) is therefore granted until January 1, 1986 subject to the
conditions outlined in the attached Order.
4 1—262
j
This Opinion constitutes the Board’s findings of fact an~1
conclusions of law in this matter.
ORDER
1) Petitioner, the Village of Arlington Heights, is hereby
granted variance from the gross alpha particle activity and radiin
standards of Rule 304(C)(1)(a) and (b) of Chapter 6: Public Water
Supplies until January 1, 1986, subject to the following conditioni:
A) Petitioner shall continue to perform its obligations
as outlined in the Northwest Suburban Water System Agreement, is
it may be from time to time amended, and shall replace its current
water supply with Lake Michigan water as expeditiously as is
practicable.
B) Pursuant to Rule 313(D)(1) of Chapter 6, on or
before June 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 by the Pollution
Control Board a variance from the above listed radiological
quality standards. The notice shall state the average content o~
gross alpha particle activity and radium 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 David L. Rieser, Technical
Advisor, Envorcement Programs, Illinois Environmental Protection
Agency, 2200 Churchill Road, Springfield, Illinois 62706, a Cer-
tificate of Acceptance and Agreement to be bound to all terms and
conditions of this variance. This forty—five day period shall he
held in abeyance for any period this matter is being appealed.
The form of the certificate shall be as follows:
CERTIFICATION
I, (We),
,
having read
the Order of the Illinois Pollution Control Board in PCB 80—229
dated ____________________________, understand and accept the said
conditions thereto binding and enforceable.
Petitioner
By: Authorized Agent
Title
Date
41—263
4
IT IS SO ORDERED.
I, Christan L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
Board, hereby certify that the above Opinion and Order were adopted
on the
~
day of
__________________,
1981 by a vote of
L~(~
~t~’~
Christan L. Moffett, Cl~k
Illinois Pollution Control Board
41—264