![](media/image1.png){width="7.000694444444444in"
height="1.301388888888889in"}

> February 10, 2006

The Environmental Protection Agency

EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC)

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.

Washington, DC 20460

Attn: Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OPA-2005-0001

**RE: Comments on Oil Pollution Prevention; Spill Prevention, Control,
and**

**Countermeasure Plan Requirements---Amendments; Proposed Rule**

IPC - Association Connecting Electronic Industries - is pleased to
submit the following comments in response to the Environmental
Protection Agency's (EPA's) above referenced proposed rule to amend the
Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan requirements
to reduce the regulatory burden for certain facilities.

IPC is the national trade association for the electronic interconnection
industry, and represents more than 2,200 member companies. IPC members
manufacture printed circuit boards and electronic assemblies, which are
used in a variety of electronic devices including computers, cell
phones, pacemakers, and sophisticated missile defense systems. The
industry is vital to the U.S. economy, employing more than 350,000
people and exceeding \$44 billion in sales. Although IPC members include
electronic giants, such as Intel, Hewlett Packard, and IBM, sixty
percent of IPC members meet the Small Business Administration's (SBA's)
definition of "small business." The typical IPC member has 100 employees
and has a profit margin of less than four percent.

IPC appreciates that EPA addressed a significant number of the
electronic interconnect industry's concerns as highlighted in our
previous comments on the SPCC Notice of Data Availability. EPA's
proposed SPCC amendments that seek to provide "Qualified Facilities" and
"Qualified Oil Filled Operational Equipment" optional streamlined SPCC
requirements will provide regulated facilities much needed clarification
and regulatory relief.

IPC supports EPA's proposal to provide an option allowing
owners/operators of facilities that store less than 10,000 gallons of
oil and meet other qualifying criteria to self-certify their SPCC Plans,
in lieu of review and certification by a Professional Engineer (PE). The
current one-size-fits-all approach to the SPCC requirements,
particularly the PE certification and site visit requirements, pose an
unnecessary and significant burden on certain facilities, usually small
facilities, which store small amounts of oil. These facilities pose a
low risk of oil spill but are still subjected to costly SPCC
requirements.

Facilities with small oil capacity have a minimal risk of oil spill
because of the low volumes they store and use. The SBA Office of
Advocacy's analysis of EPA's 1995 survey data showed that facilities
with less than 10,000 gallons of storage capacity accounted for less
than 0.2% of the total volume of oil spilled. Further, the current
requirement that all covered facilities have a PE certified plan and
site visit not only fails to account for small facilities low level of
risk, it also places a disproportionate cost burden on them. SBA's
analyses showed that "small businesses incur compliance costs that are
roughly equal to those paid by large businesses even though they present
a lower oil spill risk."

IPC believes that EPA's proposed establishment of alternate streamlined
requirements for facilities with a storage capacity of 10,000 gallons or
less and that have had no oil spills to navigable waters in the prior
ten years is warranted given the low risk they pose. This volume-based
approach would reduce the regulatory impact on certain facilities
handling smaller amounts of oil while still providing suitable
environmental protections. In fact, it provides incentive for facilities
to reduce unnecessary oil storage. This tiered approach would also help
to balance the playing field between small and larger facilities by
reducing the costly burden of PE certification and site visitation on
smaller facilities.

IPC further supports EPA's proposal to exempt qualified oil filled
operational equipment from secondary containment requirements. IPC
member facilities, along with the many other manufacturing facilities in
the U.S., have oil--filled operational equipment containing oil in
quantities greater than 55 gallons. Nearly all operational equipment is
located in buildings containing concrete floors and drainage systems to
catch and treat any spill, which limits potential release of oil to the
environment. Further, facility employees work in close proximity to this
equipment. Personnel would readily observe and quickly respond to any
leaks. Therefore, IPC supports EPA's proposed amendments to the 2002
SPCC regulations that oil filled operational equipment be exempted from
secondary containment requirements.

IPC believes that EPA has not sufficiently addressed how facilities
regulated under SPCC should address oil-filled electrical equipment in
SPCC threshold determination and regulation. Electrical equipment,
particularly electrical transformers, containing oil in quantities
greater than 55 gallons, is usually owned by the local electric utility
company, not the manufacturing facility. The manufacturing facility does
not typically have direct access to such equipment. Since the facility
does not own or maintain such equipment, oil contained in electrical
equipment should not be counted towards the SPCC threshold or covered by
SPCC regulation. Although EPA has stated they do not believe a facility
would be responsible for equipment they do not own or maintain, this
should be explicitly stated in the preamble to the rule.

There are also serious occupational health and safety concerns with
requiring facility personnel to respond to oil-filled electrical
equipment spills. A facility employee responding to an incident,
assuming they have direct access could receive an electric shock or be
electrocuted without proper equipment and training. Only trained
electric utility personnel should respond to oil-filled electric
equipment incidents.

Given the lack of direct access and safety considerations associated
with oil-filled electrical equipment, EPA cannot expect facilities to
meet the SPCC requirements for this equipment. Furthermore, EPA must
take into account the low risk of spills associated with oil-filled
electrical equipment. IPC continues to urge EPA to amend the 2002 SPCC
regulations and/or provide guidance that such electrical equipment
should not be considered in a facility's SPCC threshold determination or
plan.

IPC supports EPA's proposal to amend the SPCC requirements to provide
alternate streamlined regulatory requirements for qualified facilities
and qualified oil filled operational equipment. This will provide
regulated facilities much needed SPCC clarification and relief from
overly burdensome regulatory requirements. However, IPC continues to
urge EPA to exclude from SPCC electrical equipment a facility does not
own or maintain. If electrical equipment must be covered, EPA should
provide clear guidance on how regulated facilities should address the
electrical equipment under SPCC requirements.

IPC appreciates the opportunity to submit these comments. Should you
have any questions, feel free to contact me by email at
<fabrams@ipc.org> or by phone at (703) 522-0225.

Sincerely,

Fern Abrams

Director of Environmental Policy