March 20, 2002
A public hearing of the Air Pollution Control Board of Jefferson County was called to order March 20, 2002, at 9:02 a.m. in the Board Room of the Air Pollution Control District, 850 Barret Avenue, Louisville, Kentucky, by the Chairman, Joseph Vibbert.
General Statement, Rules, and Purpose
Chairman Vibbert read the opening announcement, rules, and purpose of the hearing, which was to review a proposed new regulation and recommendation to modify the Jefferson County ambient air monitoring network.
1. Regulation 6.50 NOx Requirements for Portland Cement Kilns, Version #1, Draft #1 - Proposed, January 26, 2002
Jon Trout stated that the Kentucky Division for Air Quality (DAQ) adopted a set of regulations, including 401 KAR 51:170 NOx requirements for cement kilns, in response to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) NOx SIP Call. The purpose of the NOx SIP Call is to reduce the transport of ozone precursor emissions. The only Portland cement kiln in the Commonwealth is Kosmos Cement, located in Jefferson County. By adopting this proposed regulation, the District would be able to enforce the DAQ’s requirements. The only change in requirements from the DAQ’s regulation is that records would be required to be kept for five years instead of the two years specified in the DAQ’s regulation. Kosmos Cement is currently required to keep these records for five years pursuant to the NOx reasonably available control technology (RACT) plan and the Title V Operating Permit program.
Mr. Trout indicated that comments were received from the DAQ and the EPA. Both agencies commented that the cross reference in section 3.2 should read section 3.1 rather than section 1.1. The District agrees to make this technical correction. The EPA also recommended that the District refrain from the use of the term “affected facility” due to the confusion of the use of this term in the DAQ’s NOx SIP Call regulations. After discussions with the EPA, Mr. Trout indicated the EPA agreed that the term “affected facility” was clearly defined and acceptably used within the context of Regulation 6.50. The District recommends that this term be retained. Kosmos Cement did not submit any negative comments and had indicated that the company was in support of regulation. A representative of Kosmos Cement was in attendance at this public hearing.
Mr. Trout said that the District intends to recommend that the Board adopt, at the meeting today, the new proposed Regulation 6.50, with the correction to section 3.2, pending consideration of any comments made at the public hearing.
Statements
There was no statement.
2. Changes to the Jefferson County ambient air monitoring network
Cynthia Lee explained that the EPA is placing more emphasis on identifying specific pollutants that may cause health problems. The national ambient air monitoring strategy is focusing on health related issues and accommodating the changing monitoring needs and priorities of the community and the nation. Two decades of ambient air monitoring have helped identify sources of concern at the local and national level.
Beginning in 2000, the air monitoring staff of the District operated and maintained 14 toxic monitoring sites, containing 42 specific monitors, and acquired over a year’s worth of data. The EPA is currently evaluating regions for high risk areas, one of which has been preliminarily identified as Jefferson County, Kentucky. The EPA is formulating a comprehensive toxics monitoring program addressing urban and rural population’s exposure to air toxics.
In 1997, the District added five PM2.5 Federal Reference Method monitors and in 2001, added two PM2.5 speciation monitors and four continuous PM2.5 monitors. In these four years, the District has increased the monitoring staff’s workload by two full-time equivalents (FTEs), but did not increase the monitoring staff.
As a result of the most recent EPA audit of the ambient air monitoring program, the EPA had recommended that the District “rightsize” the Jefferson County ambient air monitoring network. After reviewing five years of monitoring data and comparing the monitored concentrations to the federal national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS), the District concluded that a reduction in the number of some monitors could allow the reallocation of approximately one FTE to meet the increasing federal grant commitments. In developing its recommendation, the District used the EPA’s siting criteria, requiring focus on areas with the highest concentrations and population exposures.
Ms. Lee indicated that the District recommends changes in the monitoring network for PM10, carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, and oxides of nitrogen. The District is not recommending any changes to the PM2.5 or ozone monitoring networks.
Statements
Carolyn Embry, Director of Environmental Affairs, American Lung Association of Kentucky, encouraged the Board not to authorize the District to make the changes in the air monitoring network despite the EPA’s. Ms. Embry acknowledged that focusing on air toxics and fine particulate monitoring is a worthy goal, but strongly recommended the continuation of the current air monitoring network. With the possibility of the state legislature eliminating the VET program along with increased vehicle miles traveled, Jefferson County could be in a situation of nonattainment for several pollutants. By reducing the number of monitors, a violation of the standard could occur but not be monitored. As a result, emissions would not be reduced to improve the air quality to an acceptable level.
Karen Cassidy asked Ms. Lee for an update on the status of developing the quality assurance plans for all of the different monitors. Not having the quality assurance plans finished would be an even greater concern if the monitoring network were downsized. Ms. Lee responded that most are in place even though critical analyses have not been performed. After the plans are finalized, each site will be tested for compliance.
Regarding the proposed plan, Ms. Lee explained that a statistical data and trend analysis for the past 5 years was performed. Sites proposed to remain were the highest under the EPA’s specific criteria: population exposure and/or maximum concentration. The monitoring sites proposed for removal are showing less than 60% of the standards. No site chosen for removal has a realistic expectation of having an exceedance; the sites proposed to be retained have historically had the highest monitored concentrations.
Adjournment
The public hearing adjourned at 9:20 a.m.
_______/signed/_______
Joseph D. Vibbert
Chairman
________/signed/_______
Jonathan L. Trout
Secretary-Treasurer