ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

March 11, 1976

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,

)

Complainant,

v.

)

PCB 75—386

FRANKLIN ELEVATOR, INC.,

)

Respondent.

Mr. M. Barry Forman, Assistant Attorney General, appeared on

behalf of Complainant.

Mr. J. Edward Flynn appeared on behalf of Respondent.

OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD (by Dr. Satchell)

This case comes before the Pollution Control Board (Board)

as a result of a petition from the citizens of the Village of

Franklin to the Environmental Protection Agency (Agency) on, or

about, July 13, 1974. The elevator is located in the Village of

Franklin in Morgan County, Illinois, a village with about 600

inhabitants. Complainants Exhibit No. 1 shows the elevator to

be located in the southern part of town and to be adjoined by

areas described as “predominately residential” (R.46). The

Environmental Protection Agency filed a complaint against

Franklin Elevator, Inc. (Respondent) on October 8, 1975. The

Agency alleged that Respondent runs an elevator operation for

handling and drying grain and that Respondent did run its grain

dryers during grain drying season since September 1, 1972, in-

cluding but not limited to October 16, 1974 and February 14, 1975,

so as to cause or allow emission of fugitive particulate matter

visible by an observer looking generally toward the zenith at a

point beyond the property line of the emission source, in violation

of Rule 102 and 203(f) (1) of Chapter 2 Pollution Control Board’s

Air Pollution Control Regulations and Section 9(a) of the

Environmental Protection Act, Ill. Rev. Stat. Oh. 111 1/2,

§1009a (1973)

---

—2—

At the hearing there was entered a Settlement and Com-

pliance Plan. in addition there

was

testimony from several

citizens of Franklin, the Agency, and L. E. Bergschneider,

President and sole stockholder of Franklin Elevator, Inc.

The citizen testimony indicated that in the past during

the drying season, early fall through late winter, the operation

of the grain dryers caused fugitive particulate matter in the

form of “bees wings” to he emitted from the elevator. “Bees

wings” is a term used in the trade to designate the lemma and/or

palea which are thin membranes subtending the corn kernel. They

are very light (1.061 pounds per cubic foot) and can be blown

considerable distances. They have a mean diameter of about 300

microns and would be included in the more general term “chaff.”

These bees wings then settled on neighboring residences. This

caused cleaning and laundry problems plus the bees wings were a

nuisance during fall season outdoor activities. The bees wings

may also have contributed to health problems although no con-

clusive evidence concerning health problems was presented. The

testimony also pointed out that the situation had improved

recently,

Mr. Bergschneider testified that the changes in the pro-

posed compliance plan had already taken place (R.57,58). The

Settlement and Compliance Plan stipulated the Respondent

admitted its grain drying operation was in violation of 9(a)

of the Environmental Protection Act and Rules 102, 203(f) (1)

and 203(f) (2) of the Pollution Control Board’s Chapter 2 Air

Pollution Regulations. Respondent agreed to replace its

Randolph-Clipper rack type dryers with Zimmerman column type

dryers and to run only those dryers after replacement. Both

the Agency and Respondent agree that this will remove particulate

matter with greater efficiency so that respondent will be within

the Act and the Regulations. Respondent also agreed to pay

a penalty of $2,000 for the admitted violations. The Board

finds the terms and conditions of the Stipulation and Compliance

Plan acceptable.

The emission of particulate matter through several drying

seasons without effort towards abatement affected the general

welfare of the residents of the Village of Franklin. The “bees

wings” fall about 2 inches per 100 horizontal feet in a two-

mile-an-hour wind and would thus be at least a nuisance to

practically all residents. The Board does not find the approxi-

mately 20-week delay in delivery and installation of controls

persuasive since the emissions were present for two years prior

to the solicitation of bids.

---

—3—

The Franklin Elevator has an annual through-put of about

one million bushels (R.6) and is thus of significant economic

value.

The Franklin Elevator has installed a new drying system

at a cost in excess of $120,000 which is in operation (R.58).

The new system in addition to adding drying capacity (R.59)

will as stipulated by the Agency and the Respondent anticipate

and comply with R72-18 Amendments to Chapter 2, Air Pollution

Regulations for Grain-Handling and Grain-Drying Operations.

This Opinion constitutes the Board’s findings of fact and

conclusions of law in this matter.

ORDER

1. Respondent, Franklin Elevator, Inc., is hereby found

to have violated Section 9(a) of the Environmental Pro-

tection Act, and Rules 102, 203(f) (1), and 203(f) (2) of

the Pollution Control Board’s Chapter 2 Air Pollution

Regulations. Respondent shall pay the sum of $2,000 to

the State of Illinois. Payment shall be made by certified

check or money order within 35 days of this order to:

State of Illinois

Fiscal Services Division

Environmental Protection Agency

2200 Churchill Road

Springfield, Illinois 62706

2. Respondent will comply with all terms and conditions

of the Stipulation and Compliance Plan.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

I, Christan L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution

Control Board, her~bycertify the above Opinion and Order were

adopted on the

Jj~’ day of

__________,

1976 by a vote

of

4-o

Illinois Pollution trol Board