Cumberland Chapter / Sierra Club

                                 Please reply to:

                                                                                    12907 Sunnybrook Drive

                                                                                    Prospect KY 40059

                                                                                    573-636-6067

October 2, 2006

Mr. John Gowins

Supervisor, Evaluations Section

Kentucky Division for Air Quality

803 Schenkel Lane

Frankfort KY 40601

COMMENTS ON THE PROPOSED SIPS FOR CAIR

Dear Mr. Gowins:

The proposed rules for Kentucky’s State Implementation Plan show some careful work by the staff of the Division for Air Quality.  However, we note that they do not stand alone as a comprehensible part of the Kentucky Administrative Regulations.  Despite the statement in 401 KAR 51:001 that it contains all the definitions for Chapter 51, 401 KAR 51:210 and 401 KAR 51:220 contain a number of terms which are not defined.  These include the terms “CAIR Nox unit,” CAIR NOx Ozone Season unit(s),” and “control period.”

These rules create a trading system under which specified amounts of air pollution can be emitted.  The KAR contain a schema of allocating NOx allowances by heat input.  Allocating by heat input, particularly for Electric Generating Units, tends to reward inefficient facilities.  Those units which are more efficient at generating electricity with less pollution emitted are not rewarded.  If anything, they are penalized by this system.  Allocation by Kwh output would be better than by heat input, because it would encourage efficiency, and encourage minimizing the amount of pollution per electrical output.

The KAR rule for the CAIR SOx trading program, 401 KAR 51:230, consists of essentially nothing but references to Federal regulation.  This rule therefore can fairly be characterized as a rubber stamp version of the model rule that was proposed by the EPA.  We ask the question: Does promulgating a rule that is rubberstamp of the Federal model rules provide full and appropriate protection from air pollution for the citizens of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, suitably tailored to the unique circumstances of this state?  Or is it choosing the course which generates the fewest complaints from industry, rather than fighting for the best interests of the citizenry?  We would like to see the responsible Kentucky officials think carefully about that question.

Thank you for considering these comments.

Sincerely,

Wallace McMullen

For the

Cumberland Chapter, Sierra Club

Cc:       Gerry Ennis, KDAQ

            Ray Barry, Sierra Club

            Betsy Bennett, Sierra Club