ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
January
22,
1981.
VILLAGE OF
HANNA CITY,
Petitioner,
v.
)
PCB 8O~-2O6
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
)
Respondent,
OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD
(by
J.
Anderson):
This matter comes before the Board on a petition
for
variance
filed November
10,
1980.
The
Village of Hanna City seeks
variance
from the 2,0 mg/i
maximum
fluoride concentration limit and the 15
pCI/i maximum
gross alpha
particle activity limit of Rule 304(B)
and
(C)
of Chapter
6:
Public Water Supply.
The Illinois Environ-
mental Protection Agency (Agency) recommended a grant of variance
with conditions on December 9,
1980,
Hearing
was waived,
and none
has been held.
The Village of Hanna City (Village), which
is
located
in
Peoria County,
daily supplies
approximately
115,000 gallons of
water
to its 1400 residents (460 customers).
The water is pumped
from two deep
(1850 feet) wells.
The
Agency
has notified the
Village at various times
during
1976—1979 that the average fluodde
content of
its
water is 2,5 mg/i;
by letter
of October 17,
1980
the Agency informed the Village that the gross
alpha particle
activity was 24.7 pci/i.
The attachments (B1-4) to the Ageney~sRecommendation
document
the excess fluoride findings,
but do
not
specifically provide
recent results of radiological testing.
This omission is troubling,
in light of the Agency~sadmission
in
çi~y
of
Minonk,
PCB
80~l36,
October
2,
1980, p.l—2,
that
its radiological testing
methodology
had an “accuracy problem.”
The
Board therefore declines to grant
variance from Rule 304(C) on this evidence, as
the
Board has not
been advised of
the date of the test and
whether the accuracy
problem has been solved.
Submission
of
more than a single test
result for this parameter,
particularly under these circumstances,
would be advisable.
The Village states,
without
elaboration, that an engineering
investigation completed in 1980 determined that there were no
alternative surface
water or shallow well sources of better quality
to replace
or sufficiently supplement the Viilage~sdeep well
40—349
2
supply.
Conseau~riy, the Village sees lime softening as the
most
feasible method for removing fluoride
(as well
as radioactive
contaminants) froi its water.
The capital cost of
the treatment
plant is estimated to be $441,600, and the annual operation,
maintenance
and finance costs
(exclusive
of special waste handling
of
the resulting ~‘ludge)to be $63,120 a year.
The additional
monthly
cost
FO
it~
60 water customers would therefore be $11.43.
The Village
add~ hat this would be especially
burdensome to
its
customers
because water rates must also be raised by $10.60 per
month
to finance other necessary improvements to its water
treatment plan
~‘
The Agenr’y
ncui3 with all of the facts and beliefs
presented
by
the
Village
including its assertion that consumption
of
its
water
presents no darger to the public health of its residents.
The
Agency therefore supports
a grant of variance until the
dead-
line
date for exeirptions under §1416 of the Safe Drinking
Water
Act
(SDWA),
§300(ci
‘5.
This deadline was recently extended
by
Congress in PL96~~502from January 1,
1981 until January
1,
1984,
In its previous Opinions concerning variance
requests from
small
public water supply systems, the Board has granted full
five
year varian~’es(e.g.
p~~_~inonk,
PCB 80—136,
October
2,
1980,
and cases cited therein at p.
3).
The extension
of the
SDWA
exemption
leadline does not change the Board~spreviously
expressed
reasoning or result,
The Board finds that the
Village
had
demonstrated oxistence of an arbitrary or unreasonable
hardship,
and
gra:ts variance for a five year period,
subject to
the
conditions in the attached Order.
This Opinion ~onstitutes the Board~sfindings of fact and
conclusions of i~ in this matter.
ORDER
1.
Petit~ocr, tne Village of Hanna City,
is granted a
variance from the 2.0 mg/i maximum fluoride concentration limit
of
Rule 304 of CI~apter6:
Public Wat~rSupply for five years,
subject to the fo lowing conditions’
A.
Beginn no 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 expedi~~.iousiy
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,
40—350
3
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 2,5 mg/i.
D.
On
or before March 30,
1980 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 2.0
mg/i maximum
fluoride standard.
The notice shall state the
average
content of
fluoride in samples taken since
the last
notice period during which samples were taken.
2,
Variance
from the
15 pCi/i radiological quality
standard
of Rule 304
is denied as being unproven based on the
evidence
before the Board.
3.
Within
forty—five days of the date of this
Order,
Petitioner
shall execute and forward to David L.
Rieser,
Technical
Advisor,
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
80—206,
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.
Dr.
Satchell concurred.
I,
Christan L.
Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois
Pollution Control
Board,
hereby
certify that
the above
Opinion and Order
were adopted
on the
i~
day
of
~
1981 by a vote
of
____
7
./~//~/~
~1erk
Illinois
Pollution Control
Board
40—351