This Is Illinois
Monday, Apr 11, 2016 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Lead is shaping up as the big water quality issue…
An Associated Press analysis of Environmental Protection Agency data found that nearly 1,400 water systems serving 3.6 million Americans exceeded the federal lead standard at least once between Jan. 1, 2013, and Sept. 30, 2015. The affected systems are large and small, public and private, and include 278 systems that are owned and operated by schools and day care centers in 41 states. […]
In Galesburg, a community of 31,000 about 200 miles southwest of Chicago, lead levels have exceeded the federal standard in 22 out of 30 testing periods since 1992. City officials say their ground water and water mains are lead-free, but the toxin enters the supply in service lines that deliver water from the streets to 4,700 homes. Lead-based plumbing fixtures that were common in homes built before 1980 also contribute.
The city discovered its most recent problem last fall, when 7 out of 40 samples came back at unacceptable levels. The city followed EPA guidelines by informing residents of the situation two months later. Its notice said that a chemical added to the water since 1993 has been effective in reducing the lead levels and resulted in “lead compliance since 2010,” a misleading statement since no testing was required in 2013 and 2014.
The notice added that recent testing showed the standard had been exceeded “by a narrow margin.” In reality, lead levels were 1.5 times the standard.
* News Gazette…
According to data from the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, tap water in the Champaign County village [of Sydney] has exceeded the national “action level” for lead three times since 2010. […]
There is no safe level for lead exposure — especially for young children, who could suffer behavioral and learning disabilities from the neurotoxin.
* The state EPA is taking some action…
Following the crisis in Flint, Michigan, Illinois regulators want to increase their speed when it comes to notifying water customers of systems that exceed the federal lead standard.
The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency and the Illinois Department of Public Health have decided on a 10-day deadline to let customers know about the lead violations.
That is significantly quicker than the federal standard that states homeowners must be notified within 30 days.
Good for them. That 30-day notice requirement is way too long.
* But, Illinois being Illinois, one hand at the IEPA wants action while the other hand at the IEPA is cutting off funding…
A university water-system operator training program is on the chopping block due to a lack of federal student loan money and state funding, even as headlines about the disastrous effects of negligent water system operators continue to appear daily.
The Environmental Resources Training Center at Southern Illinois University Edwardsville is one of the few of its kind in the nation. The year-long program certifies personnel in the operation, maintenance and management of drinking water and wastewater treatment systems for work in Illinois and Missouri. […]
With or without loans, the program may have to be scrapped altogether if the state’s budget impasse is not solved. Gov. Bruce Rauner has not released funds to the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, which takes money from the U.S. EPA and gives it to the program for operating costs. The funds are mostly used for salaries.
Thus, the program will not receive the “hundreds of thousands of dollars” it is owed by the agency until the governor releases the funds, supposedly when the budget impasse comes to an end, said Marci Webb, program office manager. […]
“This program trains water operators who could help solve some of those problems you’ve seen up in Flint and Chatham,” he noted in reference to disastrous effects of lead-poisoned water in Flint, Michigan, and a new treatment plant in Chatham, Illinois, that has left residents questioning the village’s water quality.
Ugh.
- 47th Ward - Monday, Apr 11, 16 @ 3:12 pm:
Don’t pediatricians typically screen children for exposure to lead as part of routine examinations? Are health professionals required to report incidents of high concentrations of lead in any patient? It seems like public health systems should be able to determine whether there are localized rates of lead exposure which might indicate a problem with water supply?
Call me goofy, but I thought this was already happening. If not, why not?
- Muscular - Monday, Apr 11, 16 @ 3:13 pm:
Bruce Rauner is getting blamed for the closing of this program, but he does not have the authority to release funds. Mike Madigan won’t agree on a budget and the other Democrats go along.
- Rich Miller - Monday, Apr 11, 16 @ 3:21 pm:
=== Mike Madigan won’t agree on a budget===
They haven’t even gotten to the budget yet, dude.
- Johnny Pyle Driver - Monday, Apr 11, 16 @ 3:29 pm:
I used to work in the Lead/Copper program.
As I’m sure is the case with a lot of these issues with bureaucracies, there’s a lot of confusion around a lot of this.
I don’t believe a town is required to notify residents of every single instance of high Lead levels. In fact, I don’t believe they’re triggered to do ANYTHING unless more than 10% of the samples exceed the limit. The limit, by the way is 15 parts per billion. So, exceeding the level by 1.5 sounds like a lot, but it’s still just 22.5 parts per billion. Or 37.5 if I’m interpreting that wrong
Another odd thing about this sampling program is that the towns basically get to pick which houses they sample. There are Tiered recommendations, but I can assure you in the small towns it typically comes down to what the operator can get to, which in many cases is his own house, they mayor’s, and those of the trustees.
“Compliance” can mean all sorts of things. You can be in compliance if you exceed the levels but take the necessary corrective actions, I believe.
Galesburg is tricky because they were very proactive at addressing a problem they knew existed. They even had a program to help homeowners who were found to have high levels. That’s crazy proactive compared to what I saw going on in other parts of the state, where operators would routinely chose where to sample based on the results they knew they could achieve, instead of on the basis of trying to determine if a problem exists.
- Huh? - Monday, Apr 11, 16 @ 4:41 pm:
Years ago, my wife demanded that we get a RO filter for radium in our municipal water supply. The filter removes 99% of dissolved minerals, bacteria and other contaminates.
A big part of the problem with lead is the pipe that makes the connection between the watermain and the house. Depending on where you live, that pipe belongs to the homeowner and not the city.
- Mama - Monday, Apr 11, 16 @ 4:51 pm:
- 47th Ward @ 3:12 pm -
Having a doctor test the kids for lead in their system is a good idea, but it only works for families who have health insurance. There may be communities where very few residents have health insurance.
- NoGifts - Monday, Apr 11, 16 @ 7:06 pm:
My kids were required to have a led test as part of their kindergarten health exam. Western suburbs and that was 17 years ago.
- PENSIONS ARE OFF LIMITS - Monday, Apr 11, 16 @ 8:26 pm:
IEPA might need some spending authority one of these days soon.
- plutocrat03 - Monday, Apr 11, 16 @ 8:47 pm:
So the short term plan is to train the water system operators. (should they not already known what todo?)
Who waves the magic wand to replace the service lines which are privately owned?
- Madison - Monday, Apr 11, 16 @ 9:14 pm:
I’m an ERTC grad and a former operator. ERTC is the only decent source of education for both fresh and wastewater operators in IL. A shame.
You won’t hear it but the dirty little secret of the Flint situation is that had they treated the water for corrosion it never would have happened. Lead lines have been used since they were first installed, and if the water deposits a calcium scale, like good water should, it protects the customes or in this case, their kids.
- Judgment Day - Tuesday, Apr 12, 16 @ 8:08 am:
“Who waves the magic wand to replace the service lines which are privately owned?”
———-
Property owner. That can get to be expensive.
It’s also why so many homeowners/occupants are unwilling to get their water tested by the governing entity (not just municipalities, but water districts).
If they find out there is an issue and they are working to sell the residence, that information would have to be disclosed.
Disclosure that there is lead in the water tends to disrupt the market for the property.