ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
September
6,
1984
IN THE HATTER OF:
)
)
THE PETITION OF WAGNER CASTING
)
COMPANY FOR A SITE—SPECIFIC
)
R83-35
OPERATIONAL LEVEL PURSUANT TO
)
35 ILL.
?~DM,CODE 901.105
)
ADOPTED
RULE.
FINAL
OPINION.
FINAL OPINION OF THE BOARD
(by 3. Marlin):
On November 29,
1983 Wagner Casting Company
(Wagner)
petitioned for
a site—specific operational level for its forging
shop as an alternative to compliance with the noise limits
contained in 35 I1.
Adm. Code 901.105
(old Rule 206 of Chapter
8).
A public hearing was held in Peoria, Illinois on February
15,
1984.
The Honorable Gary K. Anderson, Mayor of Decatur
was the only member of the public who attended and he testified
in support of the petition.
Two
public comments in support
of the petition were also received.
This hearing was originally
scheduled with those of four other similar forging noise cases
involving central Illinois shops in order to conserve the
time and funds of all involved parties.
Due to a scheduling
error the other four had to be rescheduled.
Wagner requested
that its hearing proceed in Peoria since considerable delay
would occur if the hearing was moved to Decatur.
Rule 206(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 consequential health and welfare impacts on the surrounding
community.
Wagner is located at the southeast corner of Jasper and
Sangamon Streets in Decatur, Illinois.
Railroad switching
yards are located to the west, south and southeast of the
forge shop.
Wagner’s foundry operations are to the east.
Corporate offices and parking facilities are to the north
and northeast.
The Torrence Park urban renewal area is north
of the parking lot.
The Decatur Boys Club is northwest of
the forge,
located at the northwest corner of Jasper and Sangamon
Streets.
A recreational area i~westand northwest of the
Boys Club.
The nearest residences to the northeast and northwest
of the forge are over 300 yards distant.
Those to the south
are screened by
the
railyards and numerous commercial buildings.
80-59
—2—
The forge shop operated at the location since 1926 under
a former owner.
Wagner bought the forge shop in August, 1979
and operated it until September, 1981 when operations were
suspended for economic reasons.
The equipment was mothballed
in anticipation of reactivation.
Wagner is continuing its
foundry operations.
It intends to sell the forge shop.
The forging facilities are in one building which includes
9 furnaces,
5 coining presses, and
9 Erie drop hammers in
the following sizes:
1,500 lb.(3);
2,000
lb.
(4); and 4,000
lb. (2).
The forge building itself was built in 1926 and
is
con~tructcd
of corrugated
steel siding
azid
brick.
The shop
requires extensive ventilation for cooling where the furnaces
reach 2600cF.
There are approximately
5 large door openings
and
2 smaller doors
to the outside.
There are
3 large roof
ventilators which draw hot air out of the building.
Ten
ventilators at wall level draw fresh air into the building.
Noise escapes through these openings.
Wagner requests that it be allowed to operate
3
shifts
at the site and add a hammer in the future.
Hours of operation from 1979 through 1981 were 5:00 a.m.
to 1:30 p.m. and 1:30 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Although the potential
buyer of the forge testified that initially there would be
1 to
2 shifts, the petition is for allowing
3 shifts.
Page
12 of the petition requests
3 shifts with starting times of
6:00 a.m.,
2:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m.
The potential buyer testified
he would prefer to start at 5:00 a.m.
In a post—hearing letter
filed March 13, Wagner reiterates that if the Board does not
grant the
3 shift relief, that it allow the first shift to
begin at 5:00 a.m.
Production decreased from 1979 through 1981, as will
be shown in the table below.
This resulted in less blows
of the hammers which resulted in less noise
(Pet. at 5~6,
7).
Total no. of forgings
No. of
Tonnage of all
on hammers
blows/yr.
forgings
—
1979
3,986,934
29,098,578
4,390
1980
2,894,374
20,717,350
3,620
1981
1,089,596
7,939,768
2,180
The regulations of the Board define
2 methods of measuring
sound.
The definition of dB(A), or A—weighted sound
level
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 Leq measures the average noise
level over time, including peaks and background noise.
60-60
—3—
Permissible impulsive sound levels for existing forge
shops are found in
35 Ill. Mm. Code 901.105.
The impulsive
sound level emitted to residences
(Class A land) cannot exceed
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.
Actual measurements were taken in 1980 by ETA Engineering
Inc.
for the former owner of the forge shop
(Exh E to the
petition).
These dB(A) readings were placed on a contour
map of the area (Exh C to the petition).
An expert for Wagner
transformed the dB(A) readings to Leq readings and compiled
another contour map (Exh D to the petition.)-~ Referring to
Exhibit
D1 the southeast corner of the Boys Club (Class
B)
will be subjected to 80 Leq.
The building will face levels
between 70 and 75 Leq.
This is approximately 6-10 Leg over
the 64.5 Leq limitation for Class B land.
The many residences
listed on Exhibit C have been eliminated through the city’s
Torrence Park urban renewal project
(R at 10).
Wagner asserts
that no residences are exposed to sound levels in excess of
Rule 206(c).
The
3 residences at the intersection of Orchard
and Lowber Streets are expected to be subject to the nighttime
level of 53.5 and no more.
During night time the background
noise, which includes the railyards and busy highways, should
be lower, reducing the Leg sound level(Pet. at 10).
The ETA report
(Exh.
E to the petition) developed
4 proposals
for reducing noise emissions by 5,
10,
15 and 2OdB(A)
(Exh
E at 15).
The recommendation for a 5dB(A) reduction includes
closing all exterior doors and installing additional roof
and sidewall fans.
Wagner states that this would interfere
with proper ventilation for the shop and affect the worker~s
health
CR at 64).
The shop doors are open all of the time
in the summer
CR at 48).
Other ETA suggestions for successive
5dB(A) noise level reductions were to install silencers
(2800 lb.
a piece), use 3/8 inch thick asbestos board and
1/8 inch thick steel panels, and install baffles
(Exh B to
Pet. at 15).
If the ventilators were installed it is
highly likely that the building would require reinforcement
at additional cost in order to bear their weight
(R at 80,
81).
To date,
no abatement measures have been implemented
by Wagner.
The corporate office was constructed between the
forge and residences to the north and northeast, which may
or may not give incidental relief to those residences.
Testimony
has shown that barriers inside the plant would impede the
flow of airr traffic,
and movement of materials
CR at 83).
The ETA report addressed the cost to reduce noise emissions
LThe conversion formula used was SLB
=
Leg
+
5dB(A),
found on page
8 of Wagner petition, which refers to Exh.
E,
p 5.
60-61
—4—
by SdB(A)
EExh.
B at 11-141.
To reduce the noise level by
SdB(A),
$234,000 would be spent
(Pet. at
14) while the forge
facility is worth only 1/2 to 3/4 million dollars
CR at 52).
The Department of Energy and Natural Resources issued
a negative declaration on March 7, 1984 obviating the need
f-or an economic impact statement.
The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
(Agency)
has concerns, some of which are the following:
(1)
whether Wagner i~an “existing”
or a
~
forging
facility;
(2)
whether nighttime operation noise levels will truly
be within the applicable limits;
(3)
whether economic reasons are enough to reject the
abatement measures.
This forging facility is a property—line—noise--source
according to 35 Ill. Mm.
Code
900.101.
The forge also
is
an existing property-line—noise source as defined in
35
111.
Mm.
Code 900.101 for
2 reasons.
First, the facility was
built prior to August
10,
1973.
Second,
its C land use
classification did not change since it was only temporarily
shut down.
Therefore, Wagner is subject to noise limitations
of 35
Ill. Adm. Code 901.105(c) unless site—specific operational
relief is obtained.
The record contains evidence that nighttime
operations will meet the sound limitations.
The economic
cost of
a noise abatement program is clearly prohibitive~.
The only apparent noise violation will occur at the Boys
Club.
The Club is built on land donated by Wagner at a time
when the hammers were operating (R at 12).
The Club wanted
the land so as to be next to the outdoor recreational area.
The Club opened in late 1983
CR at 21).
The Club~sbuilding
is constructed of brick and the
2 walls facing the forge shop
are without windows.
The City of Decatur has actively planned an urban renewal
project in the area to act as a buffer between industry and
residences.
The City supports Wagner as does the Macon County
Board
(R at
9;
Exh.
6).
The operation of the forge shop is,
therefore, consistent with the planned use of the area.
Wagner~s
expert testified that operation would not pose a threat to
the public health
CR at 133).
There have never been any citizen
complaints
(R at 42); Agency Rec.
at 1).
The additional jobs
C40—50 for
2 shifts) will help the economy of the City of
Decatur.
The sound abatement m&asures appear to be economically
unfeasible.
60-62
—5—
The Board proposes granting Wagner’s site specific operational
level for three shifts and the operation of
9 hammers at one
time.
Section 23 and 25 of the Environmental Protection Act
evince an intent to lower noise emissions rather than add
to them.
Ill.
Rev.
Stat.
1983,
ch.
111½, pars.
1023,
1025.
Rule 206(d) provides that petitioner propose measures to reduce
impulsive noise.
The Board is constrained to limit the number
of hammers operating at one time to nine.
Under this provision
Wagner could operate up to
9 hammers of any size at one time.
During the first notice period Wagner and the Agency are asked
to provide written comment on the following:
whether the replacement of
1 or more existing hammers
with
1 or more hammers of varying size would cause the
petitioner to exceed the estimated noise levels stated
in prior testimony.
No specific numerical noise level limitations are being
imposed, although it is assumed that noise levels will approximate
those testified to by Wagner and its witnesses~ Wagner 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 9Ol.ll3~
Wagner and future owners of the forging facility will be required
to comply with the plan upon filing with the Secretary of
State of Illinois.
I,
Dorothy M.
Gunn,
Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
Board, h~rebycertify that.~the above Opinion was
adopted
on
the
~~-
day of
________
_____
1984, by a vote
_____________
I
~
,~/.
____
~
Dorothy~Th~~ci.
Illinois Pollution Control Board
60-83