ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL

BOARD

December 20,

1984

IN THE MATTER OF:

CORNELL FORCE, HAMPSHIRE DIVISION

)

R83-26

PETITION FOR A SITE-SPECIFIC

OPERATIONAL LEVEL PURSUANT TO

CHAPTER 8,

RULE 206(d)

OF THE

)

RULE AND REGULATIONS OF THE

ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

ADOPTED RULE.

FINAL OPINION

AND

ORDER.

OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD

(by B.

Forcade):

On August

2,

1984,

the Board proposed to adopt a new rule,

35

Iii. Adm. code 901,115, which provides site-specific relief

from the Board’s noise regulations.

First notice

of this proposal

was piblished at 8

Iii.

Reg.

15274,

on August 24, i984~ The first

notice comment period expired on October

8, 1984.

The Administrative

Code

Unit

submitted

a comment

on

September 10,

1984, regarding

Illinois

Register

first notice format.

No other comments were

received.

The

Board

made

a

non-substantive

change

in the wording

of

tI’e

proposed

rule.

By

order

of

the

Board

dated October 10,

1984,

the proposed

rule

was

submitted

to

the Joint Committee

on Administrative Rules

(“JCAR”).

JCAR

second

notice

review

commenced

on October 22,

1984.

JCAR

issued

a

Certification

of

No

Objection

to

this

rulemaking on

November

8,

1984,

ending

the second notice

period,

This

matter

comes

before the Board on

a petition filed

on

November

15,

1983,

by Cornell

Forge,

Hampshire Division (“Cornell”),

for

a site—specific operational

level

for its forging shop as

an

alternative

to

compliance

with

the noise limits contained

in 35

Ill.

Adm.

code

901.105

(old

Rule

206

of

Chapter

8)~,

A

public

hearing

was

held

on

March

29,

1984,

in

Hampshire,

I1:iinois.

Two

members

of

the

piblic,

Robert

Kudlicki,

the

village president and

Frederick

G.

Modde,

the

township supervisor,

testified

in

support

of

the

petition.

No other piblic testimony

or

comments

were

received.

The

Board

appreciates

the contribution of David

G~Mueller

who

assisted

in

drafting this Opinion.

---

2

The

Department

of

Energy

and

Natural

Resources

Y~DENP~)

issued

a

statement

of

negative

declaration

oi

economic

impact on

April

19,

1984,

obviating

the

need

for

an

economic

impact

state-

ment.

On

July

18,

1984,

the

Economic

and

Technical

Advisory

Committee

concurred

with

the DENR’s finding,

The

regulatory

scheme

for

existing

forging

operations requires

that the Petitioner either

(1) comply with the noise prohibitions

contained

in Table

F of Rule 206(c)

no later

than fifteen months

following the effective date of the Rule,

or

(ii)

seek

a permanent

site-specific operational level

as provided in Rule 206(d),

These rules have been recodified as 35 Ill~Mm,

Code 901,905(c)

and

(d).

The noise prohibitions in §901.905(c) vary for different

classes of receivers and for daytime and nighttime periods,

z~

petition under §901.905(d)

must demonstrate that it is technically

and economically infeasible

for

its shop to meet the numercial

limits of §901.905(c).

A petition must also propose measures to

reduce impilsive noise where possible and assess the consequential

health and welfare impacts on the surrounding commcnity~

Cornell

is located on Walker Road

in Hampshire,

Illinois,

Cornell’s operation occupies six acres and is surrounded on

all

four sides by land zoned

for farming.

The sole noise receiver is

a farmhouse located approximately 1,000 feet northeast of the

Cornell

facility (R. 25).

The farmhouse is

a Class A receiver,

The Cornell

facility was built in 1953 and has beeh in operation

since that time

(R. 25).

The facility consists of three

one-story

buildings.

The forging hammers and furnaces are located in

a

single one-story building that runs north and south of the

property.

The building’s lower levels are composed principai:Iy of

a structural

frame with sheet steel

sides.

The roof is made entirely of sheet

steel.

The

sheet

steel

sides open like garage doors

arid the roof

also can be

opened

(R.

36).

The building houses

seven impact

forge hammers and seven furnaces,

There

are two

I ~50O :b~, hammers

and five 2,000 lbs. hammers

(R. 28).

Cornell

eurrentdLv employs

28 people at its Hampshire facility (R.

41).

The forging process consists of heating cari~onor al~Ioy

steel

in furnaces to approximately 2350 degrees

Fahrenheit.

arid

then forcing the heated pieces between two dies~

The upper die

is attached to a guided

rain and the lower

die

is attached to the

forge.

The metal

is shaped through pressure exerted by the ram

or

forge hammer,

forcing the workpiece into the impression

on the

dies.

The sound produced through this process~is :Lm~uisiveand

originates primarily from the impact between the upper

and lower

die and the workpiece.

There is a constant flow of materials

between the furnace,

forge,

and cooling area

(R~. 49).

Cornell

forges golf club irons and various commercial

and industrial

parts

(R.

33).

The nature of the forge operation creates an extremely hot

work environment.

The furnaces require

a tremendous amount of

oxygen and emit a great deal

of

heat.

The cooling workpieces

---

3

~

so

radiate

heat

into

the

forge

shop.

Consequently,

the

shop

requires

extensive

ventilation

which

is

provided by the garage-

type

side

doors

and

the

ability

of

the

roof

to open.

This system

creates

a

“stack

effect”

whereby

air

flows

through the open

sides

of

the

building

and

is

drawn

up

and

out

through the roof

(R.

67-68).

This natural ventilation system is effective and

widely

utilized

by

the

forging

industry.

The

open

sides of the building

also

facilitate

the

free

movement

of

material

in and out of

the

forge

shop.

Noise escapes through these

roof

and side

openings

(R. 68).

Cornell currently operates from

7:00

a,m,

to 4:30 p.m.,

five

days

per

week

with

daily

and

Saturday

overtime,

Historically,

Cornell has

operated

two shifts from 7:00

a,m,

to 12:00 p.m.

The

Petitioner,

in a post—hearing submittal,

requests

a site-specific

level

that would allow them to operate no

more than seven hammers

at any one time for

a maximum period of 17

hours per day, Monday

through Saturday.

Petitioner proposes to

operate

in two shifts;

one from

7 a.m.

to 3:30 p.m.

and

the other

on

an alternating

basis, either from 3:30 to 12:00 midnight

or from 10:30 p.m.

to 7:00

a.m.

Cornell’s president testified that

the company could

sig-

nificantly reduce its electricity bill

if

it were allowed to

operate a nighttime shift.

Cost savings would

amount to 80

of

Cornell’s $60,000 to $65,000 annual

demand

charge

for electricity

(R.

53).

Production has fluctuated over the last

few years.

Production

levels have declined slightly

since 1981 as

is shown by the

table below.

The volume of production in 1983 is expected

to be

the

same

as

in

1982.

Total

No,

of Forgings

No,

of

Tonnage

of

all

on hammers

-

1980

3,133,000

13,158,000

1,005

1981

3,426,000

14,388,000

1,123

1982

3,352,000

14,079,000

1,011

The

regulations

of

the

Board

define

two methods

of measuring

sound.

The

definition

of dB(A),

or A

—

weighted sound in decibels,

is

found

in

35

Ill,

Adm.

Code 900.101,

as

is the definition of

Leg,

or

equivalent

continuous

sound

pressure

level

in decibels,

Essentially,

dB(A)

measures

the

noise

level

at

the peaks while

Leg

measures

the

average

noise

level

over

time,

including

peaks

and

background

noise,

Permissible impilsive

sound

levels

for

existing

forge

shops

are found

in

35

Ill.

Adm, Code 901,105.

The

impulsive sound

level emitted to residences (Class A-land)

cannot exceed 58.5

Leg, during the day or 53.5 Leg at night.

Actual measurements

of

sound were taken around

the

Cornell

facility by George

F.

Kamperman,

an

expert

in

the

area

of

noise-control

engineering.

Based on

these measurements, Kamperman predicted that the highest level

at

the

nearest

receiver

would

be

approximately

62 Leg (R,

72),

This

62-45

---

4

receiver,

the

farmhouse,

is

the

only

relevant

noise

receiver

in

terms

of the regulations.

But for the existence

of this farmhouse,

no petition

for site—specific relief would be reouired,

No

citizen complaints have

been

received

about

the noise

from

Cornell’s

facility

(R. 46).

Cornell

has investigated several methods of compliance with

the

Board’s noise regulations.

Cornell’s consultant and expert

witness testified that the most economical

and efficient method

of compliance would require closing

all roof vents,

rebuilding

the north entrance of the building to make

a sound lock-type

vestibule, replacing the present fiberglass

wall

panels

with

more

substantial glass or cement asbestos board,

and

sealing

the

roof

vent system with thick cement asbestos board.

A

mechanical

ventilation

system would then have

to

be

installed

to

exhaust

the

heated

air

from

the

building

(R.

47-48).

These

modifications

would

result

in

an

approximate

10dB

reduction

(R. 97)

and would

achieve

compliance

with

the

regulations.

The

capital cost for

these modifications are $225,000.

The building itself would

require structural

strengthening to support the new vent system

and

roof silencers at

a cost of $88,000.

Electric power

for the

new vent system would cost $14,000

for one

year

(Ri. 99—100).

Cornell’s expert testified that other types of control methods

such as external grade-level

sound barriers would be acoustically

ineffective

and would impede the flow of materials into the forge

shop

(R

69—70).

The

proposed

changes

also

affect

the

flow

of

materials

and

would

create

an

undesirable

“closed-in”

feeling

for

the employees (P97-98).

Cornell has not implemented any control measures at this

time.

Cornell’s president testified that denial

of

site-specific

relief would not result in the immediate closing

of

the

Hampshire

facility.

Eventually,

however, the facility would he phased out

of operation

(R. 54).

The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (“Agency9),

in

their written comments on the proposal

filed January 18,

1984,

did not challenge Cornell’s qualification for site-specific

relief on the basis that it is an “existing impact

forging

aer-

ation,” nor did they question the fact that the

Petitioner

was

violating

Rule

206(c).

The

Agency

stated

that

while

technolog-

ically

feasible

noise

reduction

measures

existed

for

forge

shops,

these

measures

were

not

technically

feasible

or

economically

reasonable

for

Cornell.

The

Agency

also

stated

that

granting

the

proposal

site-specific

operational

level

would

not endanger the

hearing

of

area

residents.

The

Board

will

grant

the

site-specific

operational

level

requested

by

Cornell.

Cornell

is

an

existing

impact

forging

operation

which

is

presently

in

violation

of

901,105(c).

While

compliance

is

technically

possible,

its

extremely

high cost

makes

it

economically

unreasonable

for

Cornell

at

this

time,

On

a

practical

level, compliance measures would decrease production by

impeding the flow of materials within the forge

shop,

create

an

62-46

---

5

unacceptable work environment for the employees and

result

in

the

eventual closing

of the facility.

The record

indicates

that

there have been no citizen complaints about the

noise

from

the

forging operation and that there

is no danger

of

hearing loss to

area residents.

The site-specific operational

level will be

limited to seven hammers that may operate a total

of 17 hours

per

day,

Monday

through

Saturday.

Two

shifts

will be allowed;

one

from

7:00

a.m.

to

3:30

p.m.

and

the

other

from

either

3:30

to

12:00

midnight

or

from

10:30

to

7:00

a,m,

No

specific

numerical

noise

level

limitations are

being

imposed,

although

it

is

assumed

that

noise

levels

will

approximate

those testified to by Cornell

and its witness.

Cornell

should

make

efforts

to

lessen

noise

levels

in

the

future

as

equipment

is

replaced and new technology for

noise

suppression becomes available.

In

the

event

that

noise

levels from the forge shop

become

excessive,

citizens have the right to initiate proceedings to change the

rule which accompanies this opinion.

The operational plan set out

in this Order will

be incor-

porated into 35

Ill,

Adm,

Code 901.115.

Cornell will

be required

to

comply

upon

the

filing

of the rule with the Secretary of State

of

Illinois.

ORD ER

The Board hereby adopts

the following rule, to be codified

as 35

Ill.

Adm, Code 901.115,

and instructs the Clerk to file

rule with the Secretary of State:

TITLE 35:

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

SUBTITLE

H:

NOISE

CHAPTER

I:

POLLUTION CONTROL

BOARD

PART 901

SOUND ~4ISSION STANDARDS AND LIMITATIONS

FOR PROPERTY LINE-NOISE-SOURCES

Section

901

.

115

~

~Level

llFor~,j!arn~hireDivisionandfutureownersofthe

~~n~cilitl

ocatedat~~o~,Hamshir~Il1inois,

shall ~

level:

a)

~

~y~one

time;

and

~

~

~hSathrdabetweenthehoursof7:00a,m.

~30

,m,

wi

th an

additional

S

hift

that

ma

her

3: 30

,

m.

to 12: 00

m.

or

fr om

~0,m.to7:00a.m,

62-47

---

6

IT

IS

SO

ORDERED.

I, Dorothy M. Gunn,

Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control

nion and

Order

was

adopted

Board,

hereby certify t

on the

~

day

of

~~bove~pi

,

1984

by

a

vote

of

—

.

Dorothy M.

~nn,

Clerk

Illinois Poilution Control

Board

R2~.4R