ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    October 4, 1978
    EDWARD J. SVOBODA and
    DORIS SVOBODA, his wife,
    )
    Complainants,
    V.
    )
    PCB 77—328
    DUPAGE PUBLIC WORXS DEPARTMENT,
    )
    Respondent.
    MR. DONALD MESSENGER APPEARED ON BEPALF OF COMPLAINANTS.
    MR. CHARLES RUTH APPEARFD ON BEHALF OF RFEPONDENT.
    OPINION AND ORDER OF THE
    BOARD
    (by Mr. Young):
    This matter arises out of a Citizens’ Complaint filed
    by Edward and Doris Svoboda on December 9, 1977, against the
    Respondent DuP~gePublic Works Departnent (Department). An
    Amended Complaint against the Department was filed on January
    18, 1978, and charged the Respondent with violations of
    Rules 601 and 602 of Chapter 3: Water Pollution Rules, and
    Section 12(a) and (h) of the Environmental Protection Act.
    The Amended Complaint alleged that Respondent failed to
    minimize rralfunctions which caused or allowed excessive
    infiltration into and overflows from its sanitary sewers
    which b~ckedup into Complainants’ basement on August 8,
    1977, and on September 1, 1977. After reviewing the ~mended
    Complaint
    arid
    Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss filed on December
    23, 1~77, the Board denied Respondent’s notion and scheduled
    the matter for hearing.
    It is a well-established principle that public works
    departments within this State are responsible for the pollu-
    tional consequences of overflows from the combined and sani-
    tary sewers under their control. EPA v. City of Champaign,
    PCB 71—51C, 9 PCB 233 (1973); Hull v. City of Griggsville,
    330 N.E.2d 293 (1975). This requirement is derived from
    Section 12 of the Environmental Protection Act and Rules
    601 and 602 of Chapter 3: Water Pollution Rules and Regula-
    tions. Section 12(a) and 12(d) of the Act prohibit the dis-
    charge of contaminants into the environment or their deposition
    on land so as to cause water pollution or to create a water

    —2—
    pollution hazard. Section 12(b) of the Act requires that
    pollution control equipment be installed and operated in
    accordance with their permit conditions ~to prevent violations
    of the Act or Rules.
    In Chapter 3, the applicable provisions of Rule 601
    require the owners and operators to construct and maintain
    their sewage treatment works and associated facilities so
    as to minimize violation of the Act and the Rules during
    periods of flooding, adverse weather and power or equipment
    failure. Rule 602(h) expressly prohibits overflows from
    all sanitary sewers and also requires that excess infiltra-
    tion into sewers be eliminated and the maximum practicable
    flow be transported to their treatment facilities.
    Before considering the merits of this case, the Board
    must deal with Respondent’s objections to evidence and to
    certain exhibits offered by the Complainants which were
    reserved to the Board by the Hearing Officer. The Board
    has reviewed these objections and will overrule Respondent’s
    objections to testimony concerning the extent of damages
    (R. 23—24); the amount of damages (R. 90); and to the intro-
    duction of Exhibits 1, 2, 3, pictures depicting the extent
    of the back-up into Complainants’ basement on August 8, 1977
    (R. 35) in that each is relevant to the allegations of water
    pollution against the Fespondent.
    In this case, Complainants are one of twenty-eight resi-
    dents in Argonne Ridge Estates and Hinsdale Timber Lake Estates
    serviced by an eight-inch sanitary sewer line which is tributary
    to a lift station at Argonne Ridge Drive that pumps the sewage
    through 285 feet of four-inch force main to a ten-inch sanitary
    sewer line under Birnarr Trail Road (IL 52, 95—96). While this
    lift station is designed to handle maximum loadings of 85 gallons
    per minute and to serve population equivalents of forty—eight,
    the Complainants experienced sanitary sewer hack-ups into their
    basement of 15 inches on J\ugust 8, 1977, and two inches on
    september 1, 1977, both immediately after heavy rains (fl 11,
    24, 27, 28, 98). The record also indicates that this sewer line
    has overflowed into the half-basement of Mr. Filippi on July
    12, 1977, and into other basements on this sanitary line under
    similar conditions (IL 56—57, 113).
    The Respondent Department stipulated that it is directly
    responsible for the operation of the sanitary sewer line and
    the lift station at Argonne Ridge Drive and that as a result
    of the cessation of operation of the lift station on August
    8,
    1977, and on September 1, 1977, Complainants’ basement filled
    with discharges from the sanitary sewer (P.. 10). Complainants’
    witnesses raised the issue that storm water inflow caused or
    contributed to the lift station malfunction and to this sanitary
    sewer overflow problem.

    —3—
    The principal witnesses for Complainants include Edward
    Svoboda and Lorence Filippi who testified at length with
    respect to the sanitary back—ups into their basements and
    the circumstances surrounding the separate occasions. Both
    witnesses testified that they experienced back—ups in their
    basements after heavy rain storms without power failures when
    the flashing light alarm mechanism at the Argonne Ridge Drive
    lift station indicated a malfunction (R. 27, 31, 32, 41, 56—57,
    101). Mr. Filippi had observed the flashing light at the
    lift station after heavy storms and, on a few occasions, during
    good weather (IL 60). On August 8, 1977, Mr. Filippi testified
    that storm water from heavy rains had flooded Argonne Ridge
    Drive at 5:00 a.m. because the storm sewers were clogged with
    construction debris (R. 79). Soon thereafter, Mr. Svoboda
    experienced water “boiling” out of his floor drain until it
    attained a height of fifteen inches at 8:30 a.m. (R. 20, 24).
    Robert Hadley, Superintendent of DuPage County Public Works
    Department, testified that failure of the pumps and normal use
    of the sewer would not cause the sewage to gush up into Com-
    plainants’ basement (R. 130). In addition, Mr. Hadley stated
    that inflow could be the result of illegal connections not
    presently known to the Department which are contributing to
    or causing overflow problems faced by the residents in the
    Argonne Ridge Drive area CR. 108, 131—132).
    According to the Respondent, the Argonne Ridge Drive lift
    station is inspected routinely three times per week (R. 140).
    Raymond Borowski, the Department’s Field Supervisor, testified
    that when a malfunction occurs personnel are dispatched to
    correct the malfunction or failure as quickly as possible (R.
    142—48). Mr. Borowski claimed that the malfunctions at the
    Argonne Ridge Drive lift station on August 8, 1977, and on
    September 1, 1977, were the result of momentary power outages
    or electrical fluctuations which caused the pumps to cease
    operation until manually reset (R. 140—41). In other testimony,
    Mr. Borowski stated that the alarm mechanism at the lift station
    is activated by either pump malfunction or when the level of
    liquid in the wet well exceeds the normal level (IL 140—41, 152-
    58, 160).
    In view of the evidence surrounding these occurrences,
    storm water inflow into the system is causing or contributing
    to the back-ups experienced by the Complainants. Itis also
    apparent that the Department has failed to take corrective
    action to identify inflow sources causing or contributing to
    these sanitary sewer overflows and implement reasonable measures
    to prevent their recurrence. While Complainants’ witnesses do
    not provide direct evidence of specific points of inflow or
    infiltration into the Argonne Ridge sanitary sewer line, the
    Board finds the evidence before us is sufficient to constitute
    31—SP’

    —4—
    violations of Rules 601(a) and 602(b) of Chapter 3 and Sections
    12(a) and 12(b) of the Act by the Department for causing or
    allowing overflows into Complainants’ basement on August 8,
    1977, and on September 1, 1977.
    At the conclusion of Complainants’ case—in—chief, Re-
    spondent moved to dismiss this action against them (R. 84).
    Having reviewed the evidence in the record at that point,
    the Board will hereby deny Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss.
    After considering the provisions of Section 33(c) and
    other factors in mitigation, the Board finds that no useful
    purpose will be served at this time by the assessment of a
    penalty. The Board will, however, grant relief sought by
    Complainants and will order the Department to cease and desist
    violations of the Act and Rules by adopting a program for
    remedial action for the modification, improvement or changes
    necessary to upgrade the sanitary sewer system or the lift
    station to eliminate future sewer overf1o~s into the basements
    of those residents serviced by the Argonne Ridge Drive lift
    station.
    This Opinion constitutes the Board’s findings of fact and
    conclusions of law in this matter.
    ORDER
    1. The DuPage Public works Department is found to have
    violated Rules 601(a) and 602(b) of Chapter 3: water Pollution
    Rules and Regulations and Sections 12(a) anc 12(b) of the
    Environmental Protection Act on August 8, 1977, and on Sep-
    tember 1, 1977.
    2. The Department shall cease and desist from the opera-
    tion of the Argonne Ridge Drive lift station and the sanitary
    sewer connected thereto in a manner which causes or contributes
    to sanitary sewer back-ups in violation of the Act and the Rules.
    3. The Department shall conduct an investigation to deter-
    mine the precise cause and any factors contributing to the back-
    ups in the sanitary sewer line tributary to the Argonne Ridge
    Drive lift station. The investigation should include the
    following: an infiltration and inflow study of the sanitary
    sewer line, a study of the design and operational reliability
    of the lift station at Argonne Ridge Drive, inspection of all
    manholes on the line, and such other inquiry as may be necessary
    to identify the causes of these back-ups. The conclusions and
    recommended action derived from the investigation shall be sub-
    mitted to the Complainants and the Illinois Environmental Pro-
    tection Agency for approval within ninety days from the date
    of this Order. The Department sha1~. initiate the necessary
    corrective action thirty days after approval by the Complainants
    and the Agency and the issuance of any required permits.
    3l—cRR~

    —5—
    IT IS SO ORDERED.
    Mr. Goodman abstained.
    I, Christan L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution
    Control Board, hereby certify t e pbove Opinion and Order were
    adopted on the
    a~1~\
    day of
    ___________________,
    1978 by a
    vote of
    4—~
    Christan
    6AU~S~J
    L. Moffet~~ierk
    ~4’
    Illinois Pollution Control Board
    3J-—~89

    Back to top