THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
IN THE MATTER OF: )
)
PROPOSED NEW AND UPDATED )
RULES FOR MEASUREMENT AND ) R 03-09
NUMERICAL SOUND EMISSIONS ) (Rulemaking – Noise)
STANDARDS )
AMENDMENTS TO 35 ILL. ADM. )
CODE 901 AND 910 )
NOTICE OF FILING
TO: Ms. Dorothy M. Gunn Division of Legal Counsel
Clerk of the Board Illinois
Environmental Protection Agency
Illinois Pollution Control Board 1021 North Grand Avenue East
100 West Randolph Street Post Office Box 19276
Suite 11-500 Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276
Chicago, Illinois 60601 (
VIA FIRST CLASS MAIL)
(VIA ELECTRONIC FILING)
(PERSONS ON ATTACHED SERVICE LIST)
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on October 3, 2005, I filed with the Office of the Clerk of
the Illinois Pollution Control Board by electronic filing the FURTHER COMMENTS BY PAUL
SCHOMER on behalf of the Village of Bridgeview, a copy of which is hereby served upon you.
Dated: October 3, 2005 Respectfully submitted,
By: /s/ Patricia F. Sharkey
One of its Attorneys
Patricia F. Sharkey
Mayer, Brown, Rowe & Maw LLP
71 South Wacker Drive
Chicago, Illinois 60606-4637
(312) 782-0600
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, OCTOBER 3, 2005
* * * * * PC #19 * * * * *
THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Patricia F. Sharkey, an attorney, hereby certify that I have served the attached
Further
Comments by Dr. Paul Schomer, Ph.D., P.E.
, upon:
Dorothy M. Gunn
Clerk of the Board
Illinois Pollution Control Board
100 West Randolph Street
Suite 11-500
Chicago, Illinois 60601
(Electronic Mail)
Marie Tipsord
Hearing Officer
Illinois Pollution Control Board
100 West Randolph Street
Suite 11-500
Chicago, Illinois 60601
(U.S. Mail)
Howard O. Chinn
Chief Engineer
Office of the Attorney General
188 West Randolph Street, 20
th
Floor
Chicago, Illinois 60601
(U.S. Mail)
Kyle Rominger
Division of Legal Counsel
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
1021 North Grand Avenue East
Post Office Box 19276
Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276
(U.S. Mail)
Thomas G. Safley
Hodge, Dwyer, Zeman
3150 Roland Avnue
P.O. Box 5776
Springfield, IL 62705-5776
(U.S. Mail)
Robert C. Wells
Wells Environmental Systems
2225 Sanctuary Court
Gurnee, IL 60031
(U.S. Mail)
N. LaDonna Driver
Illinois Environmental Regulatory Group
3150 Roland Avenue
Springfield, IL 62703
as indicated above, by electronic mail or by depositing said document in the United States Mail,
postage prepaid, in Chicago, Illinois on October 3, 2005.
/s/ Patricia F. Sharkey
Patricia F. Sharkey
Patricia F. Sharkey
Mayer, Brown, Rowe & Maw LLP
71 South Wacker Drive
Chicago, Illinois 60606-4637
(312) 782-0600
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, OCTOBER 3, 2005
* * * * * PC #19 * * * * *
This Document Has Been Printed on Recycled Paper
BEFORE THE
ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
IN THE MATTER OF: )
)
PROPOSED NEW AND UPDATED RULES )
FOR MEASUREMENT AND NUMERICAL ) R 03-09
SOUND EMISSIONS STANDARDS
) (Rulemaking - Noise)
AMENDMENTS TO 35 ILL. ADM. CODE )
901 AND 910 )
October 3, 2005
Further comments by Paul Schomer
Due to illness, I was unable to attend the recent hearing on this matter in Springfield, but the
following is the gist of what my testimony would have been.
I was asked by the City of Bridgeview to perform an analysis of the Board's proposed rule
changes and, frankly, had given little thought to the technical issues involved prior to this present
undertaking. I have used scientific curiosity and engineering skills to delve into these issues in a
rigorous fashion. I find that there are several incontrovertible points:
My first point deals with qualifications. There is one way to correctly perform measurements and
a multitude of ways to mess them up. Good measurements are not an accident. They must
follow ANSI approved procedures using ANSI approved methods and instrumentation. The
technician or engineer must understand the physics and mathematics of sound. They must be
trained and experienced, and they must be properly supervised. There is a means to determine
whether an engineer has the training and experience to perform or supervise accurate acoustical
measurements: Board Certification by the Institute of Noise Control Engineering. This is the
closest vehicle there is to a license in Acoustical Engineering. A wastewater plant analysis
requires a licensed civil engineer, a bridge analysis requires a licensed structural engineer, an
HVAC analysis requires a licensed mechanical engineer, etc. Acoustical engineering has similar
complexities. Minimally, a Board Certified Noise Control Engineer should be required to
perform or supervise measurements. Who would accept an analysis that a bridge was safe by an
untrained layman? No court would allow purported factual and objective scientific data into a
legal record without assuring itself of the credentials of the person who obtained the data.
Acoustical engineering is one more engineering discipline. It requires the same rigor and respect
-- no more, but certainly no less.
My second point deals with instrumentation. Measurements made with a "Radio Shack" type of
device are worthless. It is only the naïve layman who would choose such an instrument. These
instruments, by their specifications and features, are clearly best used for indoor measurements
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, OCTOBER 3, 2005
* * * * * PC #19 * * * * *
This Document Has Been Printed on Recycled Paper
of sound levels that may cause hearing damage. Indoors there is no wind and the levels of
concern are 80 dB and above. But what about outdoor environmental noise measurements? The
Radio Shack meter has an electrical noise floor of 50 dB. This noise floor renders all readings
below about 55 dB as worthless. Lack of a windscreen further limits the "acceptable range" to
still higher levels. Add to this, the lack of on-site calibration verification and the result is a
measurement with virtually zero probability of acceptable accuracy. In most cases there is NO
accuracy at all; the measurement result is simply not correlated with the sound in question.
My third point deals with maintaining the efficacy of the Board's rules. Many valid nuisance
noise instances may not be detected by poor instruments. "Radio Shack" type instruments do not
measure sound in individual octave bands. But there may be excess noise in low-frequency
bands such as 31 or 63 Hz that barely measure on the A-scale. This excess noise will be missed
because of the A-weighting. So inaccurate measurements, typically made by the naïve using a
"Radio Shack" type of meter, can result in either overstating or understating true noise levels by
many decibels and mislead the Board as to the noise source. Accepting a report of 50 dBA
(which is the Radio Shack instrument floor rather than an actual noise measurement) does
nothing to address the Board's procedures or validate its decisions. It also does nothing to
diagnose the true problem, which is the only way to get to a valid engineering solution. The
octave-band nature of the Board's rules is a positive feature not to be squandered by substituting
A-weighted measurements of questionable validity. Octave-band noise levels are measurable
and distinguishing octave band noise allows tailored and effective engineering solutions to
nuisance problems. The nuisance provision works best for all parties when objective,
reproducible and accurate information supports or rebuts the nuisance claim. Inaccurate noise
measurements only mislead and make finding the true facts harder.
I hope you find these thoughts useful. My former written comments for the record provide more
background on the above. I regret having missed the opportunity to address the Board directly at
the September 1, 2005 hearing. I will be pleased to respond with further written comments to
any questions that may arise within the Board based on these or my earlier comments.
Very sincerely,
Paul Schomer, Ph.D., P.E.,
Member, Board Certified, Institute of Noise Control Engineering
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, OCTOBER 3, 2005
* * * * * PC #19 * * * * *