A public hearing of the Louisville Metro Air Pollution Control Board (Board) was called to order July 21, 2004, at 9:03 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 one Agreed Board Order with Ford Motor Company, Kentucky Truck Plant.
Mr. Goldsmith explained that the proposed Agreed Board Order (ABO) alleges that the Ford Motor Company, Kentucky Truck Plant (KTP) violated its Title V Operating Permit. The ABO would require the KTP to pay an administrative penalty and allow for the implementation of one or more supplemental environmental project (SEP). The KTP has agreed to the terms of the ABO.
Mr. Goldsmith said that in August 2002, the District discovered, during inspection of the KTP vapor recovery systems for the vehicle fueling operations, that a nozzle had been altered and the daily inspections did not recognize that there was a problem with the nozzle. In February 2003, the District discovered that the KTP had failed to calculate and record the average daily particulate matter emissions. The KTP replaced the defective nozzle in October 2002 and began calculating, recording, and reporting its PM2.5 emissions immediately upon discovery. The KTP is now in compliance with these requirements. The District and the KTP have agreed to a $15,750 settlement. The Company has paid a $3,950 fine and the remaining $11,800 of the administrative settlement may be expended toward the implementation of one or more SEP.
Mr. Goldsmith said that the District intends to recommend that the Board adopt the proposed Agreed Board Order with the KTP, pending evaluation of any comments made at today’s Public Hearing.
No statement was made.
Dr. Al-Shami asked for clarification as to how the District calculated the amount of the penalty. Mr. Goldsmith responded that the District follows a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) guideline for the amount of the penalty, which includes consideration of the type of violation, the longevity of the violation, and the environmental impact.
Ms. Smith asked for clarification as to whether implementation of a SEP is required. Mr. Goldsmith responded that the KTP has agreed to conduct a pollution prevention audit of its facility in the next 120 days after this ABO is adopted. The KTP will then submit a proposal for one or more SEP. If the District approves a SEP, the applicable cost of the SEP will be deducted from the remaining $11,800 penalty. Any amount not approved by the District for a SEP will be paid in cash to the District.
Mr. Williams added that the District follows the EPA’s guidelines for SEPs. These guidelines establish the types of projects that may be suitable and the amount of penalty that may be offset for a SEP.
The public hearing adjourned at 9:10 a.m.
_______/signed/_______
Karen Cassidy
Chair
_______/signed/_______
Jonathan L. Trout
Secretary-Treasurer