ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
March 14, 1974
NATIONAL CASTINGS DIVISION,
MIDLAND-ROSS CORPORATION,
Petitioner,
vs.
)
PCB 73—531
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
Respondent.
Mr. John J. Pallarn, Attorney, on behalf of Petitioner;
Mr. Peter B. Orlinsky, Attorney, on behalf of Respondent.
OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD (by Mr. Seaman):
On December 14, 1973, National Castings Division,
Midland-Ross Corporation, filed its Petition For Variance,
seeking therein variance for a period of one year from the
provisions of Rule 203(a) of the Air Pollution Regulations.
Rule 203(a) governs particulate emission standards and
limitations for new process emission sources. A hearing was
held in this matter on February 25, 1974.
On January 24, 1974, the Agency recommended that
the Board deny the variance, or in the alternative, dismiss
the Petition with leave to file an Amended Petition. The
Agency’s recommendation was based upon the absence of a firm
and viable compliance program. On February 4, 1974, Petitioner
filed its Amended Petition For Variance, including therein
its schedule of compliance. Based upon this compliance
schedule, the Agency has recommended that the variance be
granted, subject to certain conditions.
Petitioner is the operator of a steel foundry lo-
cated in Meirose Park, County of Cook, Illinois. Petitioner
manufactures 400 tons per week of steel castings and employs
350 persons.
Petitioner’s facility utilizes a 20 ton electric
arc furnace, 2 core sand mullers, 4 core ovens, 4 mold sand
mullers, a shakeout operation,~ a sand reclaimer and other
related sand handling and finishing operations. The Agency
states that, ~ith the exception of the uncontrolled shakeout
11 — 587
—2—
operation, the other operations are apparently adequately
controlled with respect to particulate emissions.
Petitioner~s shakeout operation is the subject
of its Petition For Variance, The poured castings in
the sand molds are conveyed to the shakeout area. This
operation utilizes a vibratory floer to separate the sand
from the castings. The dust generated from these big
vibrating floors is collected. by a side-draft hood with
two 60,000 CFM fans. After being shaken out the castings
are pulled away and the sand fails down through the floor.
The dust (sand) emissions generated from the
shakeout operation are ducted directly to the atmosphere
through the roof. A type of deflector cap has been added
above the exhaust vents for the purpose of knocking some
of the dust emissions out of the airborne plume and onto
the roof. This was observed by the Agency to have a rather
limited degree of effectiveness.
Petitioner processes 2O~000 lbs. per hour of steel
castings and 105,000 pounds per hour of 98,8 silica sand
and 1,2 clay through its shakeout facility. The shakeout
area operates during the day shift and stack tests have
revealed emissions to be 54,8 pounds per hour. Allowable
emissions are 21 lbs/hr, not 44~6lbs/hr as stated in the
Petition. Because Petitioner was in violation of the par-
ticulate regulations prior to April 14, 1973, it is conse-
quently subject to Rule 203(a)
Petitioner has indicated to the Agency that until
recently it was not aware that its emissions were in excess
of those allowed by Rule 203 which became effective
December 31, 1973. There are no published emission factors
for shakeout operations similar to that of Petitioner. In
July, 1973, Petitioner conducted a stack test, the results
of which demonstrated that shakeout emissions were excessive.
Petitioner immediately hired the Purity Corporation to conduct
an engineering study in order to establish a control program.
The results of that study led to the proposed installation
of a Pentapure Impinger to control particulate emissions.
Petitioner’s compliance schedule is as follows:
Present to 2-1-74
Obtain quotes from:
I. Purity Corporation
2.
American Air Filter
3, Kirk and Blum, ~nc.
—3—
3-1-74
Release contract for
pollution equipment
3-1—74 to 6—1-74
Engineering
6—1—74 to 9—1—74
Installation
9-1-74
Startup and debug
Petitioner’s compliance program states that the
date for startup and debugging of the pollution control
equipment is September 1, 1974. Petitioner has, however,
requested a variance for one year. The Agency states
that the proposed control equipment will bring Petitioner
into compliance with Rule 203(a). The Agency believes
that a one year project completion schedule is more rea-
listic than one which envisions startup by September 1, 1974.
Petitioner estimates the installation cost of the proposed
control device to be $150,000.
The nearest residential area is approximately
200 feet to the east of Petitioner’s facility. A number
of residents were contacted from this area. In general,
the people contacted reported either no problems or minor
dust problems. Not one resident contacted objected to
granting of the variance..
This Opinion constitutes the findings of fact
and conclusions of law of the Board.
IT IS THE ORDER of the Pollution Control Board
that Petitioner be granted variance from the provisions
of Rule 203(a) of the Air Pollution Regulations i.antil
December 31, 1974, subject to the following conditions:
1. Commencing 30 days from the date of this
Order, Petitioner shall submit quarterly reports to the
Agency detailing its progress toward compliance. Said
reports shall be addressed to:
Environmental Protection Agency
Division of Air Pollution Control
Control Program Coordinator
2200 Churchill Road
Springfield, Illinois 62706
2. Petitioner
shall apply for all necessary con-
struction and
operating permits from the Agency.
-4-
3. Within 30 days from
the completion of installation of
the subject pollution control equipment, Petitioner shall have
performed a stack test acceptable to the Agency.
The
Agency shall be
notified at least
5
days prior to the testing, and shall be allowed
to have representatives present to observe the testing. The results
of all tests shall be submitted to the Agency.
4. Within 35 days from the date of this Order, Petitioner
shall post a performance bond in a form satisfactory to the Agency
in the amount of $25,000, guaranteeing the installation of the subject
control equipment.
I, Christan L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
Board certify that the a ove Ooinion and Order was adopte on this
/44 ‘
day of
fr~
1974 by a vote of
______________