MEMORANDUM

DATE: October 12, 2012

TO: Docket ID No. EPA

- HQ

- OAR

- 2008

- 0334

FROM: Nick Parsons, EPA

SUBJECT: Summary of U.S. EPA Discussions with Industry Representatives to Discuss the

Chemical Manufacturing Area Source Reconsideration Proposal

The purpose of this memorandum is to summarize a series of meetings between representatives of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and industry representatives from the American Chemistry Council (ACC) and Society of Chemical Manufacturers and Affil iates (SOCMA). The topic of these meetings was the proposed reconsideration of the National Emission Standards for Hazard Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Chemical Manufacturing Area Sources (40 CFR part 63, subpart VVVVVV).

Participants Nick Parsons, U.S. EPA

Paul Versace, U.S. EPA

Lorraine Gershman, ACC

Leslie Hulse, ACC Roger Martella, Counsel for ACC

Dan Moss, SOCMA

Jamie Conrad, Counsel for SOCMA

Dates of Discussions

March 8, 2012 April 24, 2012

Topics of Discussions The purpose of these meetings was to discuss comments submitted by ACC and SOCMA on the January 30, 2012 reconsideration proposal for the Chemical Manufacturing Area Source (CMAS) rule (77 FR 4522).

ACC and SOCMA representatives presented their concerns with the proposed changes to the 0.1%/1.0% applicability threshold of the CMAS rule, in which the EPA had proposed to determine applicability based on collective Table 1 HAP concentration, rather than individual Table 1 HAP concentration. The key concern for industry was that this change would significantly broaden the applicability of the CMAS rule and was placed under the “technical corrections” section of the preamble rather than a full discussion of the implications of this change. Industry representatives were also concerned that facilities would no longer be able to determine applicability based on the use of material safety data sheets (MSDS), which are only provided for chemicals at concentration s greater than 0.1%. They also stated that determining applicability based on collective concentration would go against to the EPA’s decision to basethe applicability of the CMAS rule on the 0.1%/1.0% thresholds used in the Toxics Release

Inventory (TRI). ACC and SOCMA urged the EPA not to promulgate this revised applicability requirement.

ACC and SOCMA also expressed concern with the EPA’s decision to continue to require certain synthetic area sources to obtain a title V permit. They brought up the recen t reconsideration proposal by the EPA to not require sources subject to the NESHAP for Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers Area Sources rule (76 FR 80958, Dec. 23, 2011). ACC and SOCMA urged the EPA not to promulgate the requirement for certa in sources to obtain a title V permit.

The EPA stated that the proposed revisions to the 0.1%/1.0% thresholds was intended only to clarify applicability of the CMAS rule and that broadening of its applicability was inadvertent.

The EPA also stated that th e decision to not require title V for boiler area sources had no implications on the decision to require title V in the CMAS rule, as the decision to require title V in the CMAS rule was based on the specific facts associated with the CMAS categories.