This page lists comments sent to APCD during the formal comment period on the January 2005 proposed changes to APCD regulations to implement the Strategic Toxic Air Reduction (STAR) Program. The linked documents are in Adobe Acrobat (PDF) format. The file size is given if the file is larger than 100 kilobytes.

See also the formal comment/response document (734 KB, 349 pages) for APCD's responses to these comments.

1. The following are detailed comments on the proposed STAR Program regulations received by the District.

• American Chemistry Council
• American Lung Association of Kentucky
• American Synthetic Rubber Company
• Arkema, Inc. (formerly ATOFINA Chemicals) (129 KB)
• Associated Industries of Kentucky (141 KB)
• Borden Chemical, Inc. (4.9 MB)
• Brown-Forman
• Caldwell Tanks, Inc.
• Dupont Dow Elastomers LLC (2.0 MB)
• DuPont Fluoroproducts (120 KB)
• Engelhard Corporation
• EPA — see US EPA below
• Environmental Integrity Project (EIP) (342 KB)
  • MARAMA Study (966 KB)
• Ford Motor Company (167 KB)
• Formaldehyde Council (605 KB)
• GE Consumer and Industrial (153 KB)
• Greater Louisville Incorporated (GLI) (186 KB)
  • GLI Tab 1 (3.5 MB)
  • GLI Tab 2 (1.9 MB)
  • GLI Tab 3 (648 KB)
  • GLI Tab 4 (6.3 MB)
  • GLI Tab 5 (4.3 MB)
• Kentuckiana Engineering (352 KB)
• Kentucky Paint Council
• Kentucky Resources Council
• The Libertarian Party of Kentucky (825 KB) (Attachments are available only on paper.)
• Linebach Funkhouser, Inc.
• Louisville Chemistry Partnership (LCP) comments and attachments 2 and 3 (2.5 MB)
• LCP Attachment 1 (12.3 MB)
• LCP Extension Request
• Louisville Gas & Electric Company (1.0 MB)
• Louisville Medical Center
• NAACP (239 KB)
• National Paint & Coatings Association
• Noveon, Inc. (123 KB)
• Oxy Vinyls, LP (130 KB)
• Plantmix Asphalt Industry of Kentucky
• Rubbertown Emergency Action (REACT)
• Rohm & Haas Company
• Sierra Club, Greater Louisville Chapter  (Three attachments are available only on paper.)
• The Solae Company (154 KB)
• Subra Company
• Süd-Chemie, Inc. (168 KB)
• US EPA Region 4
• University of Louisville (330 KB)
• UPS (United Parcel Service, Inc.)
• West Jefferson County Community Task Force
• Zeon Chemicals, LP

2. The following comments on the proposed STAR Program are more general in nature and summarized below or else were received as paper letters or cards. Please contact APCD by e-mail or at (502) 574-6000 if you would like to inspect any of these comments.

A. Written comments from the following individuals expressed general support for adoption of the STAR Program:

Back to top

B. Written comments from the following organizations or businesses expressed general support for adoption of the STAR Program:

Back to top

C. Written comments from the following individuals or businesses expressed general concern with adoption of the STAR Program:

• Jalonda K. Blanford 40218
• Betty Moorman 40108
• Kimberly K. Reilly
• Cindy Federico
• The Argus Company
• HyKlas Paints
• Joe Baker

Back to top

D. 3,689 cards with the following text were received:

Everyone should be able to breathe safe and clean air!

The EPA has rated Louisville’s air as the unhealthiest in the southeast region of the United States. The time has come for the city of Louisville to get rid of the label of having the unhealthiest air in the southeastern region and become a city willing to accept the challenge of creating a clean and safe environment for its people.

Given that the highest priority of city government, its agencies and its boards is to protect the health and safety of city residents, we call on you as members of the Louisville Metro Air Pollution Control Board to:

• Approve the Strategic Toxic Air Reduction Program before January 1, 2005.
• Pass a board resolution that recommends local control over our local air.
• Approve the Strategic Toxic Air Reduction (STAR) program.

[Note: Only the first two points were included on some cards and only the third point was included on the other cards. There was a slight difference in the wording of the text between the two different versions of these cards.]

Back to top

E. 179 cards from Zeon employees, spouses or other family members of Zeon employees, or friends of Zeon employees with the following text were received:

My employer, Zeon Chemicals L.P., will be dramatically impacted by the proposed STAR air toxics regulations. While I support appropriate regulation of air toxics in Louisville Metro, any program must be reasonable. The STAR regulations, as currently drafted, are not reasonable. A few among many reasons are as follows:

• The Zeon Chemicals L.P. - KY Plant has reduced emissions of our acrylonitrile (AN) and 1,3-butadiene (BD) by over 71% since taking ownership of the facilities in 1989. While I agree that further reductions may be necessary, preliminary STAR modeling indicates that we may now have to reduce AN and BD by more than an additional 97%. This is not reasonable regulation of our emissions.
• The APCD has estimated that most required emission reductions can be made for $5,000 to $10,000 per ton of reduced emissions. Using EPA cost estimating tools, just one of our main dryer lines could cost over $250,000 per ton to control AN and BD. This is not reasonable regulation of our emissions.
• The regulatory framework for applying good health research information is far too conservative. Two examples: STAR residential risk levels are applied anywhere outside plant fence lines, regardless of whether or not people live in such areas; and more specifically, STAR deems ethyl acrylate to be a carcinogen, something that other major references (ACGIH, IRIS, NTP) do not indicate. This is not reasonable regulation of our emissions.

I urge the APCD Board to direct further work on the STAR regulations into a true multi-stakeholder development process. Through such a process, our health and that of our neighbors will be protected by the most reasonable means available.

Note: The specific issues raised are addressed in the comment/response document, identifying the "179 cards."

Back to top

F. Ten letters, as identified below, with the following text were received:

I am concerned about the proposed STAR package. Please consider these comments and concerns:

• The West Louisville Air Toxics Risk Assessment Report only identified 18 chemicals of concern. There is no basis for local regulation of the additional 173 chemicals as proposed under STAR. Regulating only those chemicals for which a local risk has been identified would minimize any economic disadvantages to the local business community and help Louisville remain a viable community for business growth. At the same time, the risks associated with emissions of the targeted toxic chemicals would still be reduced.
• The Risk Management Plan developed for the West Louisville Air Toxics Study was not followed to identify specific sources of toxic emissions and develop viable solutions. As a result, the STAR program will not have the desired effect of targeting specific, cost effective, air toxic emission reductions of the chemicals actually presenting the risk.
• The STAR regulations should equally address all sources of air toxics (vehicles, area sources such as dry cleaners, gas stations, and auto repair shops as well as stationary sources) so the chemicals of concern may be effectively controlled throughout Louisville.
• The formulas proposed in the regulations contain conservative, built-in safety assumptions that will overestimate the risks from industrial sources. Use of these formulas will require actions to reduce an imaginary risk with no actual increase in the protection of public health. The regulated cancer risk value should be changed to require action for risks calculated at greater than 1 in 10,000, consistent with EPA risk protocol.
• It is appropriate to evaluate the risk where people actually live, not on adjacent industrial property, at a fence line, parking lot, or street.
• The County-wide emissions cap requirements found in Regulation 5.21 Sections 2.8 and 4.8, should be removed. It is not appropriate for the District to penalize one business for the emissions from another business by adding up the County-wide emissions, reducing the total, and then arbitrarily cutting up the remaining "emission pie". As a result, more restrictive emission limits will be assigned to companies that may have already invested in costly emission reduction equipment.

Greater Louisville, Inc. had developed a revised regulatory package that addresses these and other concerns. I urge the Air Pollution Control Board to substitute it for the existing draft STAR package.

Thank you for your consideration,

Note: The specific issues raised are addressed in the comment/response document, identifying the "ten letters."

Back to top

G. 77 cards with the following text were received:

I am concerned about the proposed STAR package. Please consider these comments and concerns:

• The West Louisville Air Toxics Risk Assessment Report identified only 18 chemicals of concern. There is no basis for local regulation of the added 173 chemicals proposed by STAR.
• A scientifically defensible plan specifically directed at the 18 chemicals of concern was not followed to identify specific emission sources and develop appropriate solutions. The proposed STAR program does not provide for cost effective reduction of emissions of the chemicals causing the actual risk.
• The STAR regulations should equally address mobile, area and stationary sources of air toxics so the chemicals of concern may be effectively controlled throughout Louisville.
• The formulas proposed in the regulations contain conservative, built-in safety assumptions that will overestimate the risks from stationary sources. Use of these formulas will require actions to reduce an imaginary risk with no actual increase in the protection of public health. The regulated cancer risk value should be changed to require action for risks calculated at greater than 1 in 10,000, consistent with EPA risk protocol.
• It is appropriate to evaluate the risk where people live, not on adjacent industrial property, at a fence line, parking lot, or street.

Greater Louisville, Inc. had developed a revised regulatory package that addresses these and other concerns. I urge the Air Pollution Control Board to substitute it for the existing draft STAR package.

Thank you for your consideration,

Note: The specific issues raised are addressed in the comment/response document, identifying the "77 cards."

Back to top

For additional information or questions about these comments, please e-mail STAR or call (502) 574-6000.