A public hearing of the Louisville Metro Air Pollution Control Board (Board) was called to order March 31, 2004, at 9:04 a.m. in the Board Room of the Louisville Metro Air Pollution Control District, 850 Barret Avenue, Louisville, Kentucky, by the Chair, Karen Cassidy
The chairman read the opening announcement, rules, and purpose of the hearing of the Louisville Metro Air Pollution Control Board, which was to review options to reduce allowed emissions in the Kentucky State Implementation Plan (SIP), which included two Agreements and emission reduction credit for one regulation that is already approved into the SIP.
Mr. Trout explained that when the VET Program ended and the District made its SIP submittal, the EPA suggested that the District needed to offset the emission increases from closing the vehicle emission testing (VET) program. This public hearing is being held to explain the various options for offsetting emission increases from ending the VET Program. The document that was part of the public comment period entitled Options for Replacement Reductions to Offset Close of Vehicle Emissions Testing Program in Jefferson County, Kentucky included the amount of increased VOC and NOx emissions from dropping the VET Program for the years 2005 through 2012 because there are projected inventories in the District’s 1-hour ozone maintenance plan for those years. The figures were expressed as NOx equivalents because the EPA allows NOx reductions to offset VOCs if the proper ratio of NOx to VOC is used. In the worst case over the years that were looked at, there would need to be a replacement of 8,671 pounds, or a little more than four tons, per day of NOx equivalent. This could be accomplished by either VOC or NOx reductions, or a combination of both. The first option being proposed, Option 1-a, would include emission reductions from the Louisville Gas and Electric Company (LG&E), the Kosmos Cement Company (Kosmos), and Regulation 6.18. Option 1-b would include LG&E and Kosmos without the VOC reductions from Regulation 6.18. Options 2-a and 2-b would use emission reductions from LG&E but not Kosmos with or without Regulation 6.18.
a. Agreement with Louisville Gas and Electric Company Mill Creek Generating Station
Mr. Trout explained that LG&E had completed installation of selective catalytic reduction (SCR) control devices on two of the four units at Mill Creek by last summer, but that the SCR units had not yet been fully operational. This summer, the new SCR units will greatly reduce NOx emissions. The other two Mill Creek units have combustion modifications that will also reduce NOx emissions, although not as significantly as the SCR units will. The proposed Agreement included four options for reductions from LG&E, each option representing a different amount of required NOx emission reduction. In addition, LG&E would have the option of deciding from which specific units the reductions would come.
b. Agreement with Kosmos Cement Company
Mr. Trout explained that Kosmos had changed operations by instructing its operators to operate the cement kiln uniformly, rather than allowing each operator to adjust the controls to his or her own preference. This significantly reduced emissions by reducing the upsets caused by the changes in operating parameters made by each kiln operator at the beginning of each shift The District proposed to reduce the allowed emissions rate for the cement kiln to reflect this reduction in emissions.
c. Recognition of reductions from Regulation 6.18 Standards of Performance for Solvent Metal Cleaning Equipment, Version 6, adopted March 15, 2002
Mr. Trout explained that Regulation 6.18 has had several Board-adopted changes, starting in 2000, that lowered the vapor pressure for solvent cleaning materials, which resulted in VOC emission reductions. While the 2002 version of Regulation 6.18 was approved into the SIP, the District did not identify any emission reductions associated with the changes to this regulation in the 2000 and 2002 versions, therefore no VOC emission reduction credit is reflected in the SIP.
Ms. Embry asked for clarification on what percentage of these reductions were realized prior to the close of the VET Program and prior to last ozone season. Mr. Trout responded that Kosmos made the change a year ago in January. LG&E began last summer to install and work with the new control equipment. Some reductions were seen last summer, but there will be significantly more reductions this summer. The NOx SIP call required LG&E to drop its average NOx emissions across all of its units in Kentucky to 0.15 pound per million Btu, but it did not require reductions at any specific location or from any specific unit.
Ms. Smith asked whether there were any numbers to define “significant” reductions from LG&E. Mr. Trout responded that the District has requested information from LG&E on the pound per million Btu level the units are expected to operate at this summer. From the NOx RACT level, if LG&E reduced emissions to 0.15 pounds per million Btu at all seven units at Cane Run and Mill Creek, there would be an approximate NOx reduction of 50 tons per day.
Mr. Trout noted that in a public hearing, the District is required to specify the recommendation that the District intends to make on the issue at hand. However, the District will not recommend that the Board take any action at today’s meeting. The EPA’s comments on these proposals will be discussed at the Board meeting.
Winnie Hepler, REACT - Justice Resource Center, stated that she was very concerned that we have a good ozone reduction program. She doesn’t think that using the credits will do anything for our air. Since we are already in violation, we have to have new reductions.
Donna Mancini, member of Stop the Vet and the Chairman of the Libertarian Party, stated that the people of this community have spoken about the VET. They have taken the proper channels and gone through their representatives. They feel very confident that cars are cleaner than they were when the VET was started. They do not feel that this test does anything at all to promote clean air in our community. Discussions are coming out into the public about all the industrial pollution in our community. The discussions that have taken place are all generated by computers and are not founded in reality. There are plenty of obvious ways to reduce pollution in our community. She hopes the Board will do the right thing and implement the will of the people, which is to stop the VET. In response to a question from Ms. Smith, Ms. Mancini stated that she would like to see the Gene Snyder complete the loop around the community, which would take people away from the center of downtown Louisville. She said that it does not make any sense to put another bridge through the middle of downtown Louisville over I-65 when traffic needs to be diverted away from the city. Also, buses should have a way to pull off and not stop traffic, which would eliminate a lot of idling and increased pollution. All Metro employees should have to ride the bus as a requirement of their employment. Finally, traffic lights need to be synchronized to eliminate a lot of stopping.
Tom FitzGerald, Director of the Kentucky Resources Council, stated that he understood that the public hearing today is not a forum to debate the wisdom of the Board’s action in unilaterally and unlawfully shutting down the VET program, but rather to discuss the sufficiency of the alternative SIP revision that has been submitted to the EPA. The Kentucky Resources Council believes that eliminating inspection and maintenance programs for mobile sources is ill-advised, particularly in light of the impending determination by the EPA of this community’s status under the 8-hour ozone rule, which is expected in the middle of April. It is a matter of discretion on the part of this Board whether to require other sources of ozone precursors to overcompensate to address the lack of maintenance obligations on motor vehicles. If the Board accepts the suggestion of this administration that the SIP revision be submitted without an inspection and maintenance program, the proposed options on the table should be addressed.
Mr. FitzGerald said that he was surprised that the staff did not describe in more detail the comments that were received on March 19th from the EPA. Among these, the EPA suggested that Regulation 6.18 was not an appropriate option. Options 1-a and 2-a, according to the EPA’s preliminary comments, are not appropriate because those reductions were already mandated and claiming credit for them belatedly does not result in meeting the requirement of reductions that are surplus, quantifiable, enforceable, and permanent. He suggested that the benchmark should be, “Will the air be cleaner due to these proposed reductions than it would have been otherwise,” in order to offset the loss of the VET and the resultant increase of approximately four tons per summer day of emissions. Kosmos had made the reductions and installed its technology for reasons entirely independent of the VET being shut down. Similarly, LG&E’s reductions were part of an overall compliance strategy. The EPA has already indicated that before a state can claim credit for reductions that would have occurred anyway, the state needs to demonstrate that they are surplus reductions. LG&E has a compliance strategy of over-complying at some sources in order to avoid having to install controls elsewhere. It is a statewide and region-wide goal of NOx reductions the company is trying to meet. The EPA has stated that if a state is going to take credit for that, the state needs to reduce the overall NOx budget for the state to show that these reductions are surplus. Additionally, they have to be permanent reductions.
Mr. FitzGerald said that this package is incomplete. It lacks the air quality demonstration that the EPA requires. It lacks quantified reductions from Kosmos. Once a complete package is put together, he requests that it be resubmitted for public comment. The lack of completeness of the package goes back to the 15% reduction plan that was developed to meet the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments. LG&E demonstrated at that time that upper level reductions in NOx would not appreciably reduce ground level ozone. The EPA has requested that this issue be addressed. Mr. FitzGerald would like to incorporate what LG&E put into the record, in the 15% reduction plan and the SIP Advisory Panel, and asked that the Board and District staff review this. If the VET is going to remain closed and shift the cost of the air pollution reductions from vehicle maintenance to other sources, the reductions should be real, surplus, enforceable, and permanent reductions.
Sarah Lynn Cunningham said that in a civilized society, protection of public health should be on a pedestal and not be the puppet of politicians. The Board stands at that divide. The stories she read two weeks before showed that the Board members realized that they are supposed to stand up for public health, and they stood up and did the right thing. They encoded what had been gentle persons’ agreements and made them enforceable. The focus of that was on 1,3-butadiene, which has been determined to be the largest toxics contributor to our air. She pointed out that one of the industries involved puts out nearly twice the 1,3-butadiene that automobiles do. It would be coherent and consistent to encode some sort of reductions out of tailpipe emissions just as the Board did to industries. The five-page document that went out for public comment is confusing and contradictory and shouldn’t be the basis of public policy. She said that we should strive to go beyond the bare minimum, and not just do what we absolutely have to do.
The Reverend Fred Withers deferred to Ruben Pulliam, REACT, who said that he has never heard anyone mention the percentage of cars that flunk the VET. To his knowledge it is between 2% and 3%, which is not a big percentage of pollution in the air. It seems that there is too much focus on the VET. He would like for somebody with the credentials to explain to him and others what are the credits that the corporations can use. Mr. Trout responded that the issue at hand does not relate to the District’s emission reduction credit banking program but about the SIP and the identified emissions and emission reductions in the SIP.
Ray Pierce, President of the Flowervale Leemont Pierce Neighborhood Association, said that there is not a person here who is promoting breathing dirty air. He has attended these meetings and made suggestions to try and make a difference in our air. Since we are looking for ways to clean the air or generate credits, there has been data collected since 1984 on automobiles, so we should be able to identify the cars that have a serious problem passing the VET test. There should be a list printed of the cars that have a tough time passing the VET test and give that to the community so they know that a particular car is a polluter. We should be able to take credit for the 5 million miles a year that we eliminated by not having to drive to VET testing. We should be able to take credit for the 33,000 criminal summons we took out of the court system every year. Also, the airport is never on the table, and everything they do contributes to pollution. Everything they do burns fossil fuel. They do not manufacture anything. He asked the Board to take into consideration some of his suggestions about notifying the public about automobiles that do have a problem. They can be eliminated without VET testing them.
John Riley, member of Stop the Vet, was pleased that Mr. Pulliam brought up the issue of credits. There is not a clear explanation of credits. He said that this issue is confusing. To him, the emission test has only been an effort to obtain pollution credits so another Title V permit can be issued to an industrial polluter somewhere. The bill that called for the VET to end was passed in the 2001 legislative session. There were 18 months to submit a plan that was acceptable to the EPA. All the statements that have come out of this agency say that if we end the emission test, we have to provide offsetting reductions. His understanding is that this is not what was submitted to EPA. The offsetting reductions were not submitted until the first plan was rejected. The federal court suit was totally unnecessary. Mr. Riley said the emissions test needs to end.
Roosevelt Roberts, REACT, said the Board made a turn-about three weeks ago, which he commended them for. If the VET is brought back, the people who can least afford to get their automobiles fixed and repaired will be the people who will be issued the warrants and drug through the court system. Let’s not use the VET as a scapegoat to bring it back and say we’re doing a complete job. United Parcel Service is not on the table because they are the largest employer in the city. We have got to get some dialogue going between government and business in this community and do what is right for the people.
Bonnie Avery, citizen, stated that the VET is one important part of keeping our air clean. New cars perhaps should be exempted because they are cleaner burning, but there are plenty of cars out on the road that are polluting badly. The money from the VET testing should go back into the city to be used to clean our air. Ms. Avery said that we need to do all we can to make the air cleaner, for ourselves and for the earth.
The public hearing adjourned at 9:59 a.m.
_______/signed/_______
Karen Cassidy
Chair
_______/signed/_______
Jonathan L. Trout
Secretary-Treasurer