ILLINOIS
POLLUTION
CONTROL
BOARD
December
20,
1984
IN
THE
MATTER
OF:
)
)
PETITION OF MOLINE
FORGE
)
R83—33
FOR
A SITE-SPECIFIC
)
OPERATIONAL
LEVEL
PURSUANT
)
TO 35
ILL.
ADM,
CODE
)
901.105(d)
)
ADOPTED RQ~4. FINAL OPINION
AND
ORDER.
OPINION ANDflORDER OF
THE
BOARD (by J. Marlin):
In its Proposed Opinion
and
Order of August 2, 1984, the
Board proposed to adopt a new rule,
35
Ill.
Adm.
Code 901.114.
First notice of this proposal was pibliiEd at 8
Ill. Reg. 15274,
on August 24, 1984.
The Administrative Code Th~itsubmitted a
comment
on
September
10,
1984,
concerning Illinois Register first
notice
format.
No
other
comments
were received.
The
Board
made
a
non-substantive
change
in
the
wording
of
the
proposed
rule.
By
order
of
the
Board
dated
October
10,
1984,
the
proposed
rule
was
submitted
to
the
Joint
Committee
on
Administrative
miles
(“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 rulemaking
was
initiated
on
November
23,
1983,
when
Moline
Forge
petitioned
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
mile
206
of
Chapter 8).
The
Illinotitvironmental
Protection
Agency
(“Agency”)
filed its response on January 24, 1984.
A piblic hearing was
held
in
Peoria,
Illinois
on March
12,
1984.
No
members of the
piblic
or
press
attended.
This
hearing
was
scheduled
with
three
other
similar
forging
noise
cases
involving
central
Illinois
shops
in
order
to
conserve
the
time
and
funds
of
all
the
parties
involved.
A
negative
declaration
was
filed
by
the
Illinois
Department
of
Energy
&
Natural
Resairces
on
April
27,
1984.
The
Economic
and
Technical
Advisory
Committee
concurred
on
July
18,
1984.
The
Board
appreciates
the
contribution
of
Kevin
F.
Duerinck
who
assisted in drafting this Opinion.
62-77
Section 901.105(d)
allows an
existing
forging
shop
to
petition
the Board for
a
site~specific
operational plan which will limit
noise emissions from the shop~
Petitioner must demonstrate that
it
is technically and economically infeasible
for its shop to
meet the numerical
limits,
Petitioner must also propose measures
to
reduce impulsive noise where possible and assess the conse-
quential
health
and
welfare
impacts
on the surrounding community.
Moline Forge is located at 4101 Fourth Avenue, Moline,
Illinois.
Its complex
covers
two square blocks.
To the north
are
railroad
tracks,
residences and the
Mississippi
River,
To
the
east
and
south
are
commercial
and
then
residential
property.
To
the
west
is
scattered
residential, commercial
and
industrial
property.
Significant noise
sources
in the
area.
other
than
trains
include
trucks using Highway 92 just
south
of
tbé~5~orge.
All
the
property
surrounding the
forge
when
it
was
b~ilt
in
1918
was
vacant
or
used
for
farmland.
The
forge
shop
itself
is
marked
as
~miilding
X
on
ExhiJ~ii:. B
to
the
petition.
The
buald~ng
is
265
feet
long,,
120
feet
wide
and
55
feet
high.
It
produces
mainly
forgings for the
agricultural
industry.
The
forge
shop
contains
nine
forging
hammers
weighing
2,500
to
8,000
pounds
apiece
and
nine
furnaces.
The
heat.
from
the
furnaces,
2200°
to
23500
F,
raises
the
temperature
of
the
shop
to
120°
to
130°
F.
Windows
and
roll-open
doors
draw
fresh
air
into
the
b.iilding
and
a
new open roof system with two fans draws warm air out.
When
the outside temperature
is over 100°F,
the work force is composed
of volunteers because temperatures
inside
are
extremely
hot.
The forging hammers current operate from
6:00
a,m.
to 2:30
p.m.
five
days
per
week,
Historically,
at
peak
capacity
the
hammers have operated two shifts from October
1
through
April
30,
from
6:00
a.m. until
11:00 p.m~, five days per week,
with oc~
cassional
work
on
Saturday
from
5:00
a.m,
until
3:30
p.m.;
and
one
shift
from
May
I
through
September
30,
from
6:00
a.m~ until
3:30
p.m.
five
days
er
week
with
occassional
work
on
Saturday
from
6:00
a,m.
until
3:30
p.m0
~t.
peak
capacity
85
to
90
people
were
employed
compared
with
the
uurrent
65
people.
Moline
Forge
requests
that
it
be
allowed
~u
cu~.te
its
nine
hammers
six
days
per
week,
from
6
:
00
a .m.
unti
11
00
~
m
Monday
through
Friday
and
from
6:00
a.:m.
until
3:30
:o~m.~
on
Saturday
(Petition
at 10),
Production
decreased
from
:1980
through
1982
as
will
he
shown
by
the
table
below.
This
resulted
in
less
hammer
blows
and
less
impulsive
noise.
The
decline
is
expected
to
level
off
in
1983.
(Petition
at
5).
Total
no.
of
No~
of
Tonnage
of
all
~mers
~n~3
1980
1,015,000
9 p642,500
4,060
1981
972,000
9 ~2:~o~,OOO
3,644
1982
558,000
S~58O,030
2,790
j
permissible impulsive
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 exceet
58.5
Leq
during
the
day
or
53.5
Leg
at
night.
As
to
commercial
establishments
(Class
B),
the
level
cannot
exceed
64.5
Leg.
Based
upon
actual
noise
level
measurements,
Exhibit
A
to
the petition shows
that
the maximum noise level
is 70
Leg.
Approximately 418 residences
potentially could be exposed to sound levels
in excess of 53.5
Leq.
The
noise
level
and
the
number
of residences exposed
to
a
certain noise
level vary
depending
on
wind velocity and
direction.
Additionally, the nighttime
violations
would not occur
if there
was no
nighttime
shift,
as
in
the
present
situation,
Even
though
there
are
418
residences
theoretically
exposed
to the maximum noise level,
there
have
been
no
noise
complaints
within the last eight years.
When
Moline Forge had operated late
at
night
in
the
summer,
it
had
received
three
complaints
from
residents,
The
complaints
terminated
once
Moline
Forge
reduced
its
summer
hours.
Various
measures
have
been
proposed
to
reduce
the
sound
levels
at
Moline
Forge.
The
ETA
report
prepared
in
a
prior
Board
proceeding
(R76~14) suggested
that
sound barriers could be
installed
between
the
forge
shop
and
Class
A
residents
to reduce
the
sound
levels,
The
author
of
this
report
was
and is the sound
consultant
for Moline Forge herein.
He
stated at hearing that this report
was compiled and suggestions made before he had ever seen the
plant
(Tr,
33).
Upon a tour of the plant he now states that
installation
of
these
barriers
would
impede
and
in
some areas
halt the
flow of traffic to
the
forge
shop
(Exh,
E
to
the
petition),
thus
impairing
productivity.
He also proposed five
measures
that
would
reduce
the
sound
levels
from
the
forge shop
by
l7dBs (See Response filed
7/29/84),
which included rebuilding
the
side
walls
with
brick
or
glass
block
and
enclosing
the
forge
shop
in
a
new
warehouse,
In
addition,
the
forge
shop
roof
will
not accept
the
weight
of
additional
fans
and
silencers
(Exh,
D
to
Petition),
Moline
Forge
cites
a
cost
of
over
$1
million
for
this
project.
The
president
of
Moline
Forge
stated
that
it
would
have
to
shutdown
operations
if
faced
with
such
compliance
costs
(Tr,
30),
Moline
Forge
tried
to
control
excessive
noise at its
forge
shop.
Warehouse
and
die
storage
huildings
were
biilt
between
the
forge
shop
and
Class
A
residences,
This
did
not
effectively
reduce
the
noise
level,
however,
Petitioner
has
continued
to
support
the
research
conducted
by
the
Forging
Industry
Education
and
Research
Foundation,
The
Board
will
grant
Moline Forg&s site~specific
operational level
for nine hammers, two shifts Monday through
Friday
and
one
shift
on
Saturday.
The
consultant
does not fore-
see
any
adverse
health
effects
from
70
Leg
(Petition at 32).
The
Agency
states
that
there
would
be
no
danger
of
hearing
loss
to
area
residents (Agency
Response
at
4),
Although no specific numerical
noise level
limitations are
being
imposed,
it is assumed that noise levels will approximate
those testified to by
Moline
Forge
and its witnesses,
Moline
Forge
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
following operational
plan
as
set
out in the
attached
Order
will
be
incorporated
into
35
Ill,
Adm,
Code 901,114,
Moline Forge will
be
required
to
comply
upon
the filing
of
the
rule
with
the
Secretary
of
State
of
Illinois,
ORDER
The Board hereby adopts
the
following rule,
to be codified
as
35
Ill.
Adm, Code 901,114,
and instructs the Clerk to file this rule
with the Secretary of State:
TITLE 35:
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
SUBTITLE
H:
NOISE
CHAPTER
I:
POLLUTION
CONTROL BOARD
PART
901
SOUND EMISSION STANDARDS AND LIMITATIONS
FOR PROPERTY LINE-NOISE-SOURCES
Section
901.114
~
Moline For e and future
owners
of
the
for
in
facility
located
~rt
Avenue
Mo
inelinois
sa
com
wit
te
~win
site-s
ecificoerational
level:
a)
~
one
time;
and
~
~
its
for
in
hammers
on?
betwe
n
thehour
s
~00a,m.untilll:00~.m.MondathrouhFrida
~as,
IT
IS
SO
ORDERED,
I,
Dorothy
M.
Gunn,
Clerk
of
the
Illinois Pollution Control
Board,
hereby
certify
that
t,~e above
Opinion and Order was adopted
on
the
~
day of
_~L~2L
~
1984 by a vote of
Dorothy
M,
nn,
Clerk
Illinois
Pol
ution
Control
Board