2

Pertaining to Definitions, Measurement Procedures, and Sound Emission Standards Relating to

Certain Noise Sources, R91-25 (Oct. 24, 1991)). An inquiry hearing based on the document was

held on November 25, 1991, in Chicago, Illinois, in which testimony was presented. The

Board’s proposal was based on revising the noise measurement procedures at Section 900.103(b)

and the impulsive sound standards at Section 901.104. In addition, the Board proposed

incorporating Agency noise measurement procedures found at 35 Ill. Adm. Code 951 into Board

regulations at 35 Ill. Adm. Code Part 910, by modifying the Part 951 language to incorporate the

recommendations contained within the Schomer reports. In 1992, the Board closed the R91-25

docket before proceeding to first notice with proposed changes to the Board’s noise rules.

 

The need to update the Board’s noise rules to conform to current scientific procedures has

become more apparent during the past ten years. The Board has identified necessary

improvements in several areas. In the instant rulemaking, the Board proposes changes in Parts

901 and 910. In Part 901, the Board proposes to revise the impulse noise standards and replace

the references to the Standard Land Use Coding System (SLUCM) codes with the more

appropriate Land-Use Based Classification System. New rules in Part 910 are proposed to

incorporate Agency noise measurement procedures found at 35 Ill. Adm. Code 951.

 

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

 

The Board opened this rulemaking through issuing a draft for public comment on

February 20, 2003. The Board elicited comments on the draft prior to first-notice publication

from the public and those involved in prior rulemakings involving noise regulation. Individuals

who were on the notice list were sent drafts and the hearing dates. In addition, the proposed rule

was posted on the Board’s website. The Board held two hearings in this matter. The first was

held in Springfield, Illinois on May 1, 2003, and the second in Chicago on May 15, 2003. There

were no members of the public in attendance at the Springfield hearing and one person testified

on behalf of the Illinois Attorney General in Chicago. During the pre-first notice phase of the

proceeding, the Board has received two public comments. One from the Illinois Attorney

General (PC 2) and one from Dr. Paul Schomer (PC 1).

 

Dr. Paul Schomer filed a comment questioning the Board’s language in Sections 910.106

and 910.107. Dr. Schomer indicated that the language was nearly identical to the language

contained in ANSI S12.9 Part 3-1998 (R2003) (ANSI standard). Dr. Schomer stated that the

material in ANSI standard was copyrighted material and asked that the language be removed. In

response to the comment, the Chairman of the Board (by a letter dated March 21, 2003 and

included in the record of this proceeding) notified Dr. Schomer that the language as used in

Section 910.106 and 910.107 was based on language included in an Illinois Department of

Energy and Natural Resource’s study

Proposed Revisions to Property Line Noise Source:

Measurement Procedures

(ILENR/RE-ES-91/10). The Chairman’s letter pointed out that the

study was published in 1991 and that the materials were included in a prior public record. The

Board therefore declined to remove the language.

 

The Illinois Attorney General filed a comment and provided testimony. In the comment,

the Illinois Attorney General applauded the Board’s decision to update the amendments to the

noise rules. PC 1 at 1. The Illinois Attorney General indicated that the updating of the noise

---

 

3

rules is a significant regulatory update that will provide a state-wide uniform program for noise

pollution enforcement by state and local governments.

Id

. The Illinois Attorney General

suggests adopting a five-minute measurement period rather than the current one-hour

measurement period. PC 1 at 2.

 

The Board held two hearings in this matter. The first was held in Springfield on May 1,

2003, and the second in Chicago on May 15, 2003. No members of the public attended the

Springfield hearing. Two members of the public attended the Chicago hearing: Joel Sternstein

and Howard Chinn of the Illinois Attorney General’s Office.

 

Mr. Chinn, chief engineer for the Environmental Bureau of the Illinois Attorney

General’s Office, testified at the Chicago hearing. During his testimony Mr. Chinn made two

points. First, he testified that the regulations should explicitly state that neither one-hour

averaging nor an integrating meter is required. Tr. at 9. Second, Mr. Chinn suggested that the

Board set statewide regulations to limit the hours of operations for all types of lawn care

equipment and set limits on the sound levels for the equipment. Tr. at 9, 13.

 

FIRST NOTICE

 

On July 25, 2003 pursuant to the Board’s order of July 10, 2003, the Secretary of State

published the required first notice of the proposed updated regulations governing noise found in

35 Ill. Adm. Code Subtitle H. The Board received five public comments from Scot Forge (PC

3), Vaughan and Bushnell Manufacturing (Vaughan) (PC 4), Illinois Association of Aggregate

Producers (PC 5), Boughton Trucking and Materials Inc. (PC 6), and Intermet Decatur Foundry

(Intermet) (PC 7). These comments can be dichotomized as either requesting a site specific rule

modification or requesting another hearing to discuss concerns with the proposed rule.

 

First, Scot Forge, Vaughan and Intermet request modifications to previous site specific

rules. Specifically, Scot Forge requests an increase of forging hammer use, modification of

operating hours and change in name from the Hellstrom Corporation. Vaughan wishes to

include the ability to add one forging hammer and expand hours of operation by twelve.

Intermet notes that they are no longer forging and that Section 901.113 is not needed and should

be eliminated. Each of these requests for site-specific modifications can not be incorporated in

this instant rulemaking because the effected sections were not addressed within the proposal.

Each company is urged to proceed expeditiously to seek the site-specific modifications necessary

by formally asking that the Board open proceedings to address their concerns.

 

Second, Illinois Association of Aggregate Producers (Producers) and Boughton Trucking

(Boughton) note substantive problems with the first notice draft and requests an additional

hearing. Producers question that Part 910 “does not require that non-agency personnel who

conduct sound measurements be trained and experienced in sound measurement technique and

equipment.” They argue that previously agency personnel (IEPA) who measured sound were

trained and experienced. Producers propose adding a Section requiring training and experience.

 

Producers believe that Section 910.104 compounds the reliability problem by allowing

the complainant to merely follow the instructions of the sound pressure measurement equipment

---

 

4

manufacturer when conducting sound pressure measurements and offering Section 910.105 as

guidance. They argue that sound pressure measurements taken by personnel who do not have to

comply with either Sections 910.105 or 951.104 will be unreliable. Boughton agrees with the

arguments outlined by Producers. The Board notes that the proposed modifications are a

codification of current discussions which allow the public to measure noise to corroborate other

evidence and that Part 910 merely provides guidance and standards for the measurement of

noise.

 

 

Both Producers and Boughton request pursuant to Section 5-40 of the Administrative

Procedure Act (5 ILCS 100/5-40) an additional public hearing regarding 35 Ill. Adm. Code Part

910. The Board notes that it has held hearings on the potential economic impact and technical

reasonableness of the proposed rules and has requested a study from DCEO. However, the

Board will schedule and conduct another hearing to both consider substantive changes and

economic impact.

 

 

CONCLUSION

 

 

Based on the record developed to date in this matter, the Board finds that holding this

proposal and scheduling an additional hearing to consider both substantive changes and

economic impact is warranted under Section 5-40 of the Administrative Procedure Act.

Therefore, the Board will hold at least one additional hearing in this matter

 

ORDER

 

 

The Board directs the hearing officer to proceed expeditiously to notify the public and

hold another hearing prior to second notice.

 

 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 

 

I, Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control Board, certify that the Board

adopted the above order on October 16, 2003, by a vote of 7-0.

  

  

  

  

  

 

 

  

  

  

  

  

 

Dorothy

M.

Gunn,

Clerk

Illinois

Pollution

Control

Board