ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    January 4
    ,
    1979
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
    Complainant,
    V.
    )
    PCB 78—43
    DALE
    F.
    STRALEY,
    )
    Respondent,
    MR. DOUGLAS P. KARP, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, APPEARED ON
    BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT.
    MR. FRED L.
    WHAM, ATTORNEY AT LAW, APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE
    RESPONDENT.
    OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD
    (by Dr. Satchel?):
    This matter comes before the Board upon a complaint filed
    on February 10,
    1978 by the Environmental Protection Agency
    (Agency).
    The complaint alleges that Respondent has owned and
    operated a grain drying facility in the Village of Winnebago,
    Winnebago County,
    Illinois in violation of Rules 102 and 202
    of the Chapter
    8:
    Noise Pollution Regulations
    (Regulations).
    A hearing was held on November
    3, 1978 at which time a stip-
    ulation and proposal for settlement was presented for the
    Board’s acceptance.
    No interested public testified.
    The stipulation provides that Respondent does own the
    grain drying operation in question.
    The facility operates
    approximately two months
    a year principally in the fall while
    the aeration fans operate intermittently for a
    period ranging
    from 6 to
    8 months.
    The dryer operates from 6:00 a.m.
    to 10:00
    p.m.
    and the aeration fans may run for 24—hour periods or longer.
    The facility is adjoined by land used as residential property.
    Respondent’s facility constitues a property—line-noise-source
    located as
    a Class C land use.
    The main sources of the sound
    emitted from the facility are an M-C grain dryer and two
    aeration fans.
    The parties stipulate that on November 4, 1976,
    June 9,
    1977, October 13, 1977 and August
    23,
    1978 Respondent caused
    or allowed noise emissions in violation of Rule 202 of the
    Regulations.
    The Agency further asserts that if a hearing
    were held testimony would be given
    to show that sound emitted
    from Respondent’s property caused interference with sleep, rest
    and relaxation,
    conversation and general use and enjoyment of
    32—339
    —2—
    property, therefore placing Respondent in violation of Rule
    102 of the Regulations.
    Respondent does not refute these
    statements.
    Respondent has cooperated in attempts to curb the sound.
    Between June 9,
    1977 and October 13, 1977
    Respondent installed
    plywood baffles near the grain dryer and around the gear box.
    Silencers were installed on each of the fans on August 23,
    1978.
    However, these efforts were not enough to resolve the noise
    problems.
    Respondent between August 23,
    1978 and August 28,
    1978 replaced one of the belt driven fans with a direct drive
    fan and a silencer.
    Tests on this fan revealed no further
    violations.
    The Agency contends that sound
    emissions can be reduced to
    a reasonable level at the facility through the application of
    known and readily available technology which would require only
    a reasonable expenditure.
    The parties believe the stipulated
    compliance program and schedule will bring the facility into
    compliance.
    The compliance plan includes
    a noise barrier
    around the holding bins,
    silencers on the aeration fan,
    and
    noise barriers around the aeration fans.
    All modifications
    must meet certain specifications and requirements.
    The Agency
    will test the results of the modifications and further work
    may be required.
    The Respondent has further agreed to pay a
    penalty of $350.
    The Board finds this stipulated agreement acceptable under
    Procedural Rule 331, and Section 33(c) of the Environmental
    Protection Act.
    The Board finds Respondent in violation of
    Rules 102 and 202 of the Regulations.
    A penalty of $350 will
    be assessed.
    Respondent will be required to complete the
    stipulated compliance plan.
    This Opinion constitutes the Board’s findings of fact and
    conclusions of law in this matter.
    ORDER
    It is the Order of the Pollution Control Board that:
    1.
    Dale F.
    Straley is found
    in violation of Rules 102
    and 202 of the Chapter
    8:
    Noise Pollution Regulations.
    2.
    Respondent shall comply with all the stipulated settle-
    ment incorporated by reference as
    if completely set
    forth herein.
    32—340
    —3—
    3.
    Respondent shall pay a penalty of $350 within 35
    days of this Order.
    Payment shall be by certified
    check or money order payable to:
    State of Illinois
    Fiscal Services Division
    Environmental Protection Agency
    2200 Churchill Road
    Springfield, Illinois 62706
    I, Christan
    L.
    Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution
    Control Board, hereby c~tify the above Opinion and Order
    were adopted on the
    i~
    day of
    ,
    1979 by a vote
    of
    ~
    .
    Christan L. Moffe
    lerk
    Illinois Pollution
    ontrol Board
    32—341

    Back to top