A public hearing of the Air Pollution Control Board of Jefferson County was called to order May 16, 2001, at 9:02 a.m. in the Board Room of the Air Pollution Control District, 850 Barret Avenue, Louisville, Kentucky, by the Chairman, Dr. Robert Powell.

General Statement, Rules, and Purpose

The Chairman read the opening announcement, rules, and purpose of the hearing which was to review the Request for Redesignation to Attainment for the 1-hour Ozone Standard.

Request for Redesignation to Attainment

Mr. Trout introduced Martin Luther with the Kentucky Division for Air Quality (Division) and stated that this public hearing is a joint hearing with the Kentucky Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet for the Kentucky portion of the Louisville 1-hour ozone nonattainment area. This nonattainment area includes portions of Bullitt and Oldham Counties as well as all of Jefferson County. Mr. Trout explained that 1999 is the base year for the maintenance plan; 2002, 2005, and 2008 are interim years for which emission projections were made, and 2012 is the last year of the maintenance plan. The District and the Division believe that all of the criteria for redesignation were met.

Mr. Trout said that there would be a correction made to the 1990 Area Source VOC emissions total for the nonattainment portions of Bullitt and Oldham Counties in Table 6.2, changing the value from 2.02 to 1.91 tons per summer day. This reflects the delisting by the EPA of perchloroethylene as a volatile organic compound (VOC). He also indicated that a revision to the redesignation document will reflect the District’s retraction of its negative declaration letter for the synthetic organic chemical manufacturing industry (SOCMI) Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG) category and adoption of proposed Regulation 6.49 Standards of Performance for Reactor Processes and Distillation Operations Processes in the Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry.

Comments regarding the proposed redesignation, maintenance plan, and regional mobile source emission budgets, dated May 15, 2001, were received from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). A copy is attached to the original minutes. Mr. Trout indicated that changes to the redesignation document will be made as a result of the EPA’s comments. The two most significant comments are as follows:

1. The EPA stated that on page 49, Table 8.1, the State chose to include a safety margin of 14.89 tons per summer day in the regional VOC motor vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs). The transportation conformity regulations allow for a safety margin to the extent that the projected emissions are less than the baseline emissions. As presented in table 7.2 on page 43, Kentucky’s VOC emission estimates for 2012 are projected to decrease from 1999 levels, indicating that the area is expected to maintain the air quality standard for at least 10 years into the future after redesignation. However, when the VOC safety margin is included in the 2012 projections, the 2012 projected VOC emissions exceed the 1999 baseline. To the extent that the regional VOC MVEB, when added to the other emissions projected for 2012, exceeded the 1999 baseline, the MVEB must be revised by decreasing the available safety margin prior to final submission. The District and the Division agree that the VOC safety factor can be no greater than 12.13 tons per summer day. The final document will be revised to decrease the VOC safety factor to 12.13 tons per summer day.

2. The maintenance plan and MVEB rely on reductions from the federal Tier 2 regulations. Because the MOBILE5b model doesn’t address reductions from these Tier 2 regulations, the Commonwealth must commit to revising the MVEBs within one year after the EPA releases MOBILE6, or alternatively, within two years provided that transportation conformity is not determined during the second year without adequate MOBILE6-based MVEBs.

The EPA stated that these two changes must be subject to an adequate opportunity for public comment. The EPA further stated that this requirement can be satisfied by announcement at the May 16^th joint public hearing of Kentucky’s commitment to revise the SIP and associated safety margin and MVEB, extension of the comment period on these two changes by at least one week, and documentation of this commitment in a letter to EPA Region 4. Mr. Trout, speaking on behalf of the District, the Division, and the Kentuckiana Regional Planning and Development Agency (KIPDA), indicated that all three agencies have committed to making the changes as required by the EPA and said that the written comment period on these two issues will be extended until noon, May 29, 2001. Mr. Luther (Division) and Mr. Randy Simon (KIPDA) both indicated concurrence with these commitments by their respective agencies.

Mr. Trout stated that written comments were also received from the Sierra Club.

Statements:

Leslie Barras, representing River Fields, said that River Fields was encouraged by the improvements in air quality in the Louisville 1-hour ozone nonattainment area as reflected by the document. However, she stated that there seems to be an inconsistency between travel demand model vehicle miles traveled (VMT) reported in the redesignation request and the Ohio River Bridges Project Purpose and Need Statement (PNS). If the VMT forecasts in the PNS are used, emissions will be higher than estimated in the redesignation request. River Fields wants to ensure that implementation of the maintenance plan does not allow any backsliding in terms of mobile or stationary source emissions and that there is a continued assessment of the conformity of the area transportation plans. She indicated that River Fields was submitting technical questions in their written comments.

Ms. Barras also asked how the May 4, 2001, EPA notice of inadequacy of the motor vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs) in the Federal Register affected the redesignation.

Mr. Trout replied that the EPA’s notice of inadequacy has no effect on the redesignation. The 2003 MVEBs (the 2003 budget) that were found to be inadequate had been submitted to the EPA in 1999 as part of the attainment demonstration. This attainment demonstration, which was based on EPA’s NO_x SIP Call, showed how attainment would be met by the year 2003. The EPA’s notice of inadequacy indicated that the NO_x SIP Call reductions were now not required until the year 2004; thus, reductions by the year 2003, and the resulting ambient ozone concentration reductions, could not be assured. However, since the Louisville area has now monitored attainment of the 1-hour ozone standard, these future NO_x emission reductions are no longer needed to attain this standard. The EPA action of finding the 2003 budget inadequate means that the 2003 budget will not be used for determining transportation conformity. As a result, until the 2012 maintenance plan regional MVEBs are approved, the previously-approved MVEBs, which have been used in the recent past since court action stayed implementation of the NO_x SIP Call, will be used for transportation conformity purposes. The EPA has already posted the 2012 maintenance plan regional MVEBs on its conformity web site for public comment.

David Coyte, representing the Coalition for the Advancement of Regional Transportation (CART) expressed concern that the Kentucky application for redesignation to attainment may be somewhat premature. Section 4.0 makes specific references to the rounding down of numbers from 0.124 to 0.12 which would make these instances attainment. He indicated that the EPA needs to review these instances to see how marginal the Kentucky claims of attainment may be. Table 4.1 contains several notes on adjustments made to exceedance readings. These were alleged to be justified as a result of transport conditions from fires in Mexico. Similarly, the removal of an exceedance from Table 4.2 of the most exceedance-prone monitor in the network seems questionable when it is being used to justify a change in designation. Under Section 5.2.2 it is noted that this area does not have an approved 15% ROP Plan. Designation of attainment will excuse this area from completing or implementing that plan. This is particularly worrisome given the thin margin of attainment and the need for long-term maintenance.

Mr. Coyte said that KIPDA continues to focus on single-occupant vehicle (SOV) capacity expansion. He also said that improvements in the 20-year plan, specifically high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes, that have been modeled into the conformity analysis are not going to be built. He continued that it appears that the Kentucky SIP and long-range transportation plans may be for the benefit of friendly numbers rather than results. These concerns should be seriously investigated before granting a redesignation. The proposed contingency measures in Section 7.7 seem too slow, too vague, and too unconnected to the ongoing planning processes to have any real impact in insuring long-term compliance. Mr. Coyte recommended that additional time and a more confident level of attainment be achieved before redesignation of the Louisville Metropolitan area. He also asked that a more careful analysis of the functional conformity of the KIPDA long-range transportation plan be made prior to redesignation.

Mr. Randy Simon, representing KIPDA, indicated that the region’s long-range transportation plan is supportive of transit and other non-SOV projects. He cited the T² (Transportation Tomorrow) light rail project as a recent example of such projects. Concerning the projects that are included in the third (last) phase of the long-range plan, these projects are more conceptual than those in earlier phases, which is normal given the uncertainty of funding and changing travel conditions. The third phase is included to fulfill federal regulations that require that the transportation plan have at least a 20-year planning horizon. To ensure conformity with the goal of improving air quality, a conformity analysis is conducted to ensure that each phase of the transportation plan provides for emission levels within the motor vehicle emission budgets provided in the SIP. Therefore, the inclusion of emission reduction projects in the third phase of the long-range plan does not negate the requirement for an acceptable conformity analysis for all phases of the long-range plan.

Adjournment

The hearing adjourned at 9:40 a.m.

_____________________________
Robert W. Powell, MD
Chairman

_______________________________
Jonathan L. Trout
Secretary-Treasurer

_____________________________
Martin Luther
Kentucky Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet