ILLINOIS
POLLUTION
CONTROL BOARD
August
3,
1978
ATWOOD GRAIN
& SUPPLY CO.,
)
)
Petitioner,
vs.
)
PCB 77—279
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
)
Respondent.
MR. RAYMOND LEE
APPEARED
ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER.
MR. STEPHEN T.
GROSSMARK, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, APPEARED
ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT.
OPINION
AND
ORDER OF THE BOARD
(by Dr. Satchell):
On October
28,
1977 Petitioner filed a petition for a
continuation of a previous variance, PCB 76—62,
23 PCB 133
(1976).
On November 10,
1977 the Board ordered that more information was
needed.
On December 16, 1977 this information was filed.
The
Environmental Protection Agency
(Agency)
filed a recommendation
on January
13,
1978.
A hearing was held in this matter on
March
20,
1978.
Although citizens were present, none testified.
Several letters of objection were received by the Board.
None
of these objections were received within 21 days after the
December 16,
1977 filing.
There is a discrepancy between the variance petition and
the recommendation and the earlier variance concerning the
location of the
chutes
in question.
The Agency recommendation
also appears
to be in conflict with the variance petition and
the hearing concerning the amount of time the chutes and augers
are used
(Pet.
at
5,
Rec.
at
3,
R.
19-21).
The Board further
notes the Petitioner already has
a variance
(PCB 76-62,
23 PCB
133
(1976))
for its augers until March
1,
1981 granted under the
same conditions as recommended now by the Agency; consequently
there
is no need to give further consideration to the augers.
In considering the discrepancies the Board will consider the sworn
testimony given at the hearing as the determining factor concerning
the location of the chutes and the hours of use.
Petitioner operates an elevator in the rural community of
Atwood, Illinois, which has
a population of 1100.
The company
operates
as
a cooperative serving some 350 farm families who farm
approximately 30,000 acres of farm land in western Douglas
County, eastern Piatt County, and the northeastern Moultrie
County area.
The company has 306 patron-stockholders.
31—169
—2—
Currently the company has an investment in plant and equip-
ment which has
a replacement cost of approximately $2,400,000.
The storage capacity of the elevator and other storage facilities
is 1,060,000 bushels.
The company employs eight employees with
a payroll of $153,000.
For the fiscal year ending June 30, 1977,
the company handled over one and one—half million bushels of
grain valued at $5,600,000.
Figures for the fiscal year ending
June 30,
1978 are estimated to be well in excess of the quoted
amounts.
This business, located in Atwood since its organization
in 1918,
is the largest business in the Village.
In 1975 the five steel chutes at the east end of the site
were replaced at a cost of approximately $12,500
(R.
11).
These
chutes have a useful life of five to eight years
CR.
11)
Petitioner contends that a substitute for the present chutes
that would adequately attenuate sound cannot be purchased.
The
Agency does not agree.
The Agency is of the opinion that
wrapping the chutes
is
a technically feasible approach to reducing
grain chute noise.
This method was used by Atwood on several of
their other chutes.
The installations are the first in Illinois
and have not proved entirely satisfactory.
A variance would
permit additional time to further monitor the experimental chutes
both from a noise attenuating and weathering basis
(p.4).
The
Agency estimated the cost of lagging these chutes at $8,000 to
$10,000.
The chutes
in question are in use
20 to 25 days per year
CR.
13).
The Agency’s investigation shows that one household
is affected severely, with approximately 10 other households
affected to succeedingly lesser degrees.
At 1000 feet the chute
and auger sound level
is below the expected ambient level.
The
use of the chutes does not occur during nighttime hours.
The Agency
recommends a variance be granted from Rules 102 and 202 with cer-
tain conditions.
The Board does find that a variance
is warranted in this
case.
Petitioner,
as noted in PCB 76—62,
has spent a substantial
sum of money in wrapping chutes and moving equipment to attenuate
its noise.
The cost of wrapping the chutes
is a substantial part
of the original cost of the chutes, which have already been used
nearly half their useful life.
Several of Petitioner’s neighbors
will suffer from the noise levels, but considering the relatively
short time period of use and the large cost involved the Board
finds that
a variance from Rules
102 and 202 should be granted
subject to the Agency’s conditions.
This Opinion constitutes the Board’s findings of fact and
conclusions of law in this matter.
31—170
—3—
ORDER
It is the order of the Pollution Control Board that Atwood
Grain and Supply Company is granted a variance from Rules 102 and
202 of Chapter
8,
Noise Regulations as to the operation of the
elevator leg and five associated chutes located west of the bin
known as Bin No.
2 at the east end of the elevator site
(as
shown on the site plan attached to the petition for variance and
designated as Site Plan No.
1) up to and including March
1,
1981,
or the replacement of the chutes whichever comes first upon the
following conditions:
1.
That except for sounds emitted by said elevator leg
and five associated chutes and said portable augers,
sounds emitted by Petitioner shall at no time exceed
the numerical limits of Rule 202.
2.
That the operation of the said elevator leg and five
associated chutes shall
at no time emit more noise than
that shown in Petitioner’s Exhibit No.
1, being
measurements taken on Ocbober
5,
1977.
3.
That said elevator leg and five associated chutes shall
not be operated between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and
7:00 a.m.
local time.
4.
Within forty—five
(45)
days of the date of this Order,
the Petitioner shall submit to the Division of Noise
Pollution Control, Enforcement Section, Illinois
Environmental Protection Agency,
2200 Churchill Road,
Springfield, Illinois 62706, an executed Certification
of Acceptance and Agreement to be bound to all terms
and conditions of the variance.
The forty-five day
period herein shall
be stayed during judicial review of
this variance pursuant to Section 31 of the Environ-
mental Protection Act.
The form of said certification
shall be as follows:
CERTIFICATION
I
(we), _____________________________________having read the
Order of the Pollution Control Board in PCB 78-141, understand
and accept said Order, realizing that such acceptance tenders
all terms and conditions thereto binding and enforceable.
SIGNED
TITLE
DATE
31—l~~-
4
Petitioner’s variance request for its augers
is dismissed
as unnecessary in light of PCB 76—62.
I, Christan L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution
Control Board,
hereby1 certify the above Opinion and Order were
adopted on the
3~
day of
______________,
1978 by a
vote of
i~-o
.
~
~-.
-m~#~
“~
Christan L.
Moffett, Cle~
Illinois Pollution Control Board
31—172