ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

May 20,

1976

OBEAR-NESTER GLASS CO.,

)

Petitioner,

V.

)

PCB 76—67

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,

)

Respondent.

OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD

(by Mr.

Zeitlin):

This case concerns a Variance Petition submitted to the Board

on March

4,

1976 by Petitioner Obear-Nester Glass Company (Obear-

Nester),

a division of Indian Head,

Inc.

The Petition seeks relief

for a period of

cine year from the noise pollution limitations

in

Rule 202 of Chapter

8:

Noise Pollution,

of the Board’s Rules and

Regulations.

A Recommendation was received from the Environmental

Protection Agency

(Agency) on April 21,

1976.

No hearing was held

in the matter.

Obear-Nester’s Lincoln,

Illinois plant manufactures glass

containers for the food and beverage industries on a round-the-clock

basis.

As a part of the manufacturing operation it is necessary

to use both compressed air and high-velocity cooling air.

To provide

such air, four Buffalo industrial exhauster fans are used, each with

a capacity of 20,000 CFM and 22-1/2 inches of water column static

pressure at 70°F.

These fans are the noise sources for which a

Variance

is sought.

Attached to Obear-Nester’s Petition were the results of Agency

noise monitoring tests indicating that Obear-Nester had a significant

noise problem at its Lincoln plant.

Taken on November

7,

1975,

the

noise tests indicated that various continuous sources of noise at

the Lincoln plant caused violation of the Rule 202 daytime limits

for noise passing from Class C to Class A land at all but one of the

pertinent octave band center frequencies.

In addition,

the Lincoln

plant had serious problems with impulsive noise from its truck

loading docks and the dumping of cullet

(rejected glass containers)

with a front-end loader.

Since the time of those tests, Obear—Nester has taken several

steps

to alleviate the noise problems

--

noise barriers have been

erected to control noise from various fans and other sources; dock

plates used as bridges between the plant’s loading dock and adjacent

trucks have been redesigned to include rubber pads below the plates;

self-dumping hoppers with forklift trucks have replaced the use of

front—end loaders for cullet dumping.

These improvements were all

scheduled to be completed by April

1,

1976.

21 —479

---

—2—

Obear-Nester has not, however, controlled the noise emissions

from the four fans which are the subject of this Variance.

Obear-

Nester states in its Petition that the design of any noise barrier

for use with those fans

is very important,

and must be such that

it does not interfere with the volume and pressure of air required

for those fans.

The company feels that a one—year periodis neces-

sary for the design and construction of the necessary abatement

device.

The Agency’s Recommendation agrees that

a Variance is warranted

in this case.

The Agency notes that Obear—Nester has taken signifi-

cant steps during 1975 and 1976 to prevent noise pollution.

The

Agency also feels that the steps taken and proposed by Obear-Nester

will be effective.

With regard to the effect of a Variance grant, the Agency inter-

viewed various residents adjacent to the Obear-Nester plant.

Although

some opposed the grant of the Variance, most agreed that it should

be granted, especially if compliance would result by the end of the

period,

(Rec.

Ex.

4-13).

Although the Agency did not agree that no

injury would result from the grant of the Variance

(Rec.

Ex.

15,

p.

4), the Agency did agree that there would be no physical injury

in the sense of hearing loss,

(Rec.

Ex.

16,

p.

1).

The Agency also

felt that the adverse effects of the grant would be found in nuisance,

interference with speech, etc.,

(Rec.

Ex.

16, 16);

in combination

with ambient noise levels as high as 30-40 dB(A), Obear—Nester’s

operation could result

in noise levels as much as 24 dB(A)

higher

than the day or night noise limitations,

(id).

However,

the Agency

also felt that the actions already taken to reduce other noise

emissions from the plant would attentuate these high noise levels.

The Agency also agrees with Petitioner that the failure to

obtain the Variance would impose

a severe hardship.

While the cost

of compliance with the pertinent Regulations would not be too great,

(approximately $5,000 to $10,000),

the fans for which the Variance

is sought must operate properly for the plant to continue operation.

A hastily constructed barrier could easily cause operational inter-

ference.

Obear—Nester has, the Agency feels, proposed a reasonable

time for the planning and construction of abatement methods that

will not interfere with the continued operation of the fans, but

which will provide for complete compliance.

Weighing the likelihood of environmental damage against the

hardship pleaded by Petitioner,

we agree with the Agency’s Recom-

mendation and with the qualifications on

it.

As conditions,

the

Agency recommends that we impose

a more detailed compliance schedule

than proposed in the Petition; that we require the submittal of

comprehensive reports on the compliance steps taken to date,

and

on the progress of its compliance program under the Variance.

A

standard certificate of compliance will be required,

along with a

performance bond of $10,000.

21—480

---

—3--

This Opinion constitutes the findings of fact and conclusions

of law of the Board in this matter.

ORDER

IT IS THE ORDER OF

THE

POLLUTION CONTROL

BOARD

that Petitioner

Obear—Nester Co. be granted a Variance from Rule 202 of Chapter

8:

Noise Pollution,

for its Lincoln,

Illinois glass container manufac-

turing facility’s four

(4) Buffalo industrial exhauster fans, more

fully described in the foregoing Opinion, for a period of one year

from March

1,

1976 until March

1,

1977, subject to the following

conditions:

1.

To assure the completion of the work required under this

Variance, Petitioner shall submit,

in

a form acceptable to the

Environmental Protection Agency,

a performance bond in the amount

of Ten Thousand Dollars

($10,000.00).

Said bond shall be submitted

within thirty

(30) days of the date of this Order to:

Environmental Protection Agency

Control Program Coordinator

Division of Noise Pollution Control

2200 Churchill Road

Springfield,

Illinois

62706

2.

Noise or sounds emitted by the fans in question shall

not be increased in intensity during the term of this Variance,

so

as to exceed the measurements taken by the Environmental Protection

~gency on November 7, 1975.

3.

Petitioner shall conform to the following schedule for

the attainment of compliance by the subject fans:

a.

By May 1,

1976:

Employ the services of

a noise consultant,

person or firm under such con-

tractual conditions as to require said consultant(s)

to prepare a recommendation and conceptual plans for

noise abatement by August 15,

1976, and to prepare

detailed plans and specifications within forty-five

days of being notified to do so by said Petitioner

upon Petitioner’s selection of one or more of the

recommendations by said consultant.

21— 481

---

—4—

b.

By September

1,

1976:

Choose one or more

of the methods proposed and direct consultant(s)

to

submit detailed plans and specifications for noise

abatement within forty-five days.

c.

By November

1,

1976:

Order all materials

not presently on hand required by said detailed plans

and specifications and contract for all specialized

work not within the capabilities of Petitioner.

d.

By December 1, 1976:

Commence construction.

e.

By January 15,

1977:

Complete construction.

f.

By February 1, 1977:

Complete noise testing

and such re-working as is required.

g.

By March 1, 1977:

Achieve compliance with

Rule 202.

4.

Petitioner shall submit written progress reports to the

Environmental Protection Agency within ten

(10) days of each of the

dates specified

in Paragraph

3 above.

5.

Petitioner shall secure all applicable permits from the

Environmental Protection Agency.

6.

Petitioner shall report to the Agency within ten days of

the Order herein as to the effectiveness of

(a)

the forklift and

self-dumping Roura Hopper, which will be used to collect and trans-

port cullet

(rejected glass containers);

(b)

its loading dock noise

abatement program;

and

(c)

its program to abate noise from other

sources by erecting barriers.

7.

Sounds emitted by

all sources

at Petitioner’s Lincoln,

Illinois plant, other than said fans,

shall at all times conform

with Part 2,

Chapter

8 of the Board’s Rules and Regulations.

8.

Petitioner shall execute and forward to the Illinois

Environmental Protection Agency, Division of Noise Pollution Control,

Enforcement Section, 2200 Churchill Road, Springfield, Illinois 62706,

within twenty-eight

(28) days after the date of the Board Order

herein,

a Certificate of Acceptance and Agreement to be bound to

all the terms and conditions of the Variance, the form of said

Certification to be as follows:

21 —482

---

—5—

I,

(We),

_________________________

having read

the Order of the Illinois Pollution Control Board

in case No.

PCB 76-67, understand and accept said

Order, realizing that such acceptance renders all

terms and conditions thereto binding and enforceable.

SIGNED

TITLE

DATE

I, Christan L. Moffett,

Clerk of the Illinois Pollution

Control Board, her~bycertify the above Opinion and Order we e

adopted on the

~p

~‘day of

1976,

by a vote of

—O

~JLUt1Ofl

Co

1

Board

21

—