A public hearing of the Air Pollution Control Board of Jefferson County was called to order October 16, 2002, at 9:05 a.m. in the Board Room of the Air Pollution Control District, 850 Barret Avenue, Louisville, Kentucky, by the Chairman, Joseph Vibbert. Karen Cassidy, Lewis Hammond, and Lee Howard were present.
The Chairman read the opening announcement, rules, and purpose of the hearing, which was to review a new Board Order.
Ms. Phelps explained that the purpose of the proposed Board Order with Akzo Nobel Coatings, Inc. (Company) is to resolve alleged violations of the Company’s Title V operating permit (permit). Ms. Phelps said that during an inspection of the Company’s facility located on Crittenden Drive in June 2001 the District discovered that certain monitors were not installed and certain records were not kept, as are required by the Company’s permit. After conducting follow-up inspections and record reviews, the District determined that the Company failed to comply with many of the monitoring and record keeping requirements of the permit that was issued in 2000. In addition, the Company failed to submit daily calculations of emissions of particulate matter (PM) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Further, the Company submitted an annual compliance certification erroneously stating that the facility was operated in compliance with its permit in 2000.
Ms. Phelps indicated that during June 2002 the Company installed all of the required VOC and PM monitors, began keeping the required records, and submitted the required PM and VOC calculations to the District. However, some of the calculations submitted by the Company suggest emissions in excess of the permit limits. Therefore, the District is requiring the Company to conduct stack tests, prior to March 2003, to determine whether the facility is operating in compliance.
Ms. Phelps said that the agreed administrative settlement for the alleged monitoring and record keeping violations is for the amount of $222,700. The Company has made a payment to the District of $55,700. The Company has agreed to implement ISO 14001, an environmental management system, for which the District has agreed to credit $20,000 as a supplemental environmental project (SEP). The remaining $147,000 of the administrative settlement may be expended towards additional SEPs. The Company has agreed to conduct a pollution prevention audit of its facility within 120 days. One or more proposals for projects may be submitted for approval by the District as SEPs. The District will consider any submitted proposals within 30 days and will advise the Company as to the amount of SEP credit that would be approved for each project. The Company must decide within 180 days from today whether to accept the approved credits and implement the SEPs and pay any remaining balance of the $222,700 total settlement amount.
Ms. Phelps stated that the Company has agreed to the terms of the Board Order.
Dr. Cassidy requested an example of a supplemental environmental project. Ms. Phelps replied that implementation of the ISO 14001 environmental management system, which could cost $200,000, is likely to improve environmental compliance, but specific emission reductions cannot be quantified. Therefore, the District believes that only $20,000 of SEP credit is appropriate. Thus, without a direct effect on reducing emissions, dollar-for-dollar credit is not appropriate. The Company is hoping that by conducting a pollution prevention audit, some projects that would produce quantifiable emission reductions would be developed.
No statement was made.
The public hearing adjourned at 9:12 a.m.
_______/signed/_______
Joseph D. Vibbert
Chairman
_______/signed/_______
Jonathan L. Trout
Secretary-Treasurer