PtNNSVLUANI A CHEMICA L INDUSTR Y COUNCI L Pennsylvani aChemica l Industr y Counci l 2 0 N
. Marke t

St. , Suit e 80 0 Harrisburg , P A 1710 1 717.232.668 1 - 717.232.468 4 (fax )

www.pcic.or g 

# 261 9 

# I ]

Septembe r

10 , 200 7 

# ^ m
Honorabl e Kathlee n McGint y l] : • i ; R~~ ~ Chairperso n s; f H

i *\
. Environmenta

l Qualit y Boar d ''k$-- 5 .< > j I | P.O
. Bo x 847 7 '^ d ,'. % [ Harrisburg , P A 17105-847 7 ' u i RE
. Propose dHazardou s Wast e Regulation s

Publishe dJul y 14 , 200 7 Dea r Chairperso n McGinty : Th e member s o f

th e Pennsylvani aChemica l Industr y Counci l (PCIC ) hav e reviewe dth e propose dchange s t o th e Hazardou s Wast e Regulation s an do n behal f o f th e ove r sixty-fiv e member s o f

PCIC , th e enclose dcomment s ar e offered
. PCI C i s generall y supportiv e o f th e Department' s effort s i n th e propose dregulation s t o streamlin e an d provid e consistenc y betwee n th e state an dfederal hazardou s wast e programs . Ther e ar e thre e area s o f th e proposa l however , that

rais e great

concer n an dwhic h w e oppose . Thos e thre e element s o f

th e propose dregulation s are : 1
. Th e eliminatio n o f

Subchapte r

H
. Financia l Requirements
. PCI C ha s me t with Departmen t

personne l t o discus s th e reason s for

th e propose deliminatio n o f aprogra mtha t

ha s ha donl y on e exampl e o f a proble mdurin g th e entire histor y o f th e program . Th e ability t o provid e acorporat e guarante e fo r closur e an dpost-closur e i s use dsafel y i n othe r state s a s wel l a s o n th e nationa l level
. 2
. Th e eliminatio n o f

Sectio n 264a
. 195
. Thi s proposa l wil l caus e unnecessar y cos t increase s for

certai n manufacturer s withou t

an y increase denvironmenta l protection
. 3
. Th e additio n o f

paragrap h (vi ) t o Sectio n 270a.60(b)(2)
. Thi s prohibitio n i s inconsisten t with federa l regulation s an di s counte r t o curren t

PADE P practice
. PCI C an dit s member s stan dread y t o assis t th e Departmen t

i n craftin g aregulatio n tha t will mee t

th e need s o f th e department , bu t

whic h als o reflect s appropriat e financial instrument s availabl e t o th e regulate dcommunit y o n th e federal leve l a s wel l a s i n man y othe r states , provide s federal consistency , an dwhic h provide s fo r necessar y operationa l flexibility
. Sincerely ,
Pamel aA
. Witme r Presiden t Enclosur e
cc : Representativ e Camill e Georg e Representativ e Scot

t Hutchinso n Senato r Mary J o Whit e Senato r Raphae l Must oPennsylvani aChemical Industr y Counci l 2 0 N
. Marke t

St. , Suit e 80

0 Harrisburg , P

A 1710 1 | C 717.232.6681-717.232.468 4 (fax ) UNNsuLUiN H www.pcic.or g CHEMICA L IwnuSTn vCOUNCIL

. 

### PENNSYLVANI A CHEMICA L INDUSTR Y couNc m COMMENT S O N DEPARTMEN T O F ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTIO N PROPOSE D HAZARDOU S WAST E REGULATION S

Submitte d Septembe r

10 , 200 7
Introductio n PADE P ha s propose dto mak e anumbe r o f change s t o th e hazardou s wast e managemen t progra m regulation s a

t Pa
. Cod e 260 a- 270a
. Th e Pennsylvani aChemica l Industry Counci l (PCIC ) support s man y o f

thes e change s becaus e the y wil l eithe r eliminat e outdate drequirement s o r provid e consistenc y wit

h th e federal regulation s i n othe r area s o f th e existin g regulations
. Ther e are , however , thre e change s tha t th e PCI C member s oppose . Th e first propose dchang e i n th e regulation s whic h PCI C strongl y oppose s i s th e propose d eliminatio n o f

Sectio n 264a.Subchapte r

H , it s counter-part

i n Sectio n 265a.Subchapte r H , an d propose dne w Sectio n 267 aSubchapte r H , th e financia l tes t

an dcorporat e guarante e optio n fo r closur e an dpost-closur e o f permitte dhazardou s wast e facilities
. I f thi s sectio n o f

th e propose d regulatio n i s adopted , the n thos e companie s utilizin g th e existin g financial tes t an dcorporat e guarante e woul dinstea db e require dt o obtai n commercia l insuranc e or us e on e o f

th e othe r instruments
. Rathe r

than eliminatin g th e financial tes t an dcorporat e guarante e an dreplacin g i t wit h closur e insurance , DE P shoul dcreat e a n environmentall y protectiv e progra mb y adoptin g b y rul e th e full federa

l requirement s fo

r financial assuranc e a

t 4 0 CFR26 4 , 26 5 an d26 7 Subpart H whic h include s th e corporat e guarante e andfinancia l test . Currentl y an di n th e pas t ther e ar e som e significan t

difference s i n th e way DE P applie s th e rul e an dth e federal requirement
. Th e secon dare ao f

th e propose dregulation s whic h PCI C oppose s i s th e propose dchang e t o Sectio n 270a.60(b)(2)(vi)
. Unde r th e proposa l therma l treatmen t activitie s ar e no t

ar e eligibl e t o operat e unde r

th e generato r

treatmen t i n accumulatio n containers , tank s an dcontainmen t building s pennit-by-rule
.Lastly , PCI C i s concerne db y th e propose drescissio n o f Sectio n 265a
. 19 5 Inspections
. B y eliminatin g thi s sectio n ther e wil l b e ne w requirement s place do n manufacturer s withou t an y appreciabl e environmental gai n an dpossibl y anegativ e environmental impact
. 1
. CORPORAT E GUARANTE E AN D FINANCIA L ASSURANC E TES T Backgroun d Th e corporat e guarante e an dfinancial tes t are use dt o provid e fund s for accidenta l occurrence s and/o r closur e an dpost-closur e costs . Financia l stron g corporation s utiliz e th e corporat e guarante e an dfinancial tes t a s acos t effectiv e alternativ e t o bondin g for

securin g potentia l hazardou s wast e liabilities
. Hazardou s wast e permitee s ma y no t

onl y b e thos e wh o manag e hazardou s wast e fo r othe r companie s (commercia l TSDF) , but

als o manufacturin g companie s that generat e thei r

ow n hazardou s wast e (captiv e TSDF)
. I t seem s tha t

PADE P i s proposin g th e eliminatio n o f th e corporate guarante e an dfinancial assuranc e tes t

ou t o f concer n tha t th e Commonwealt

h may fac e unfunde dobligation s t o cleanu p ahazardou s wast e sit e i f

th e compan y goe s bankrupt
. Th e departmen t ha s produce dver y littl e dat ademonstratin g significan t failure s th e financial tes t di dno t identif y whe n properl y applied
. Yet , ther e continue s t o b e amisperceptio n tha t th e curren t

system , whic h ha s bee n i n plac e nationall y for

ove r twenty years , i s fraught

with weaknesse s an dvulnerabilities
. Befor e change s t o an y financial assuranc e mechanism s ar e made , i t i s pruden t

tha t athoroug h investigatio n an d analysi s tak e plac e to ensur e tha t thes e change s ar e addressin g rea l existin g problem s an dtha t examine s th e impact s thes e change s ma y hav e o n th e regulate dcommunity
. Alterin g and/o r removin g th e us e o f

th e corporat e guarante e an dfinancial tes t coul dhav e unintende dan d significan t

consequence s t o bot h th e regulate dindustrie s an dth e public
. Th e corporat e guarante e althoug h use dwith th e financial tes t i s als o use dfor

al l th e othe r instrument s availabl e fo

r financial assurance . I f

acompan y i s a

. subsidiary o r

siste r o f acompan y an dbecaus e o f

it s lega l structur e i s unabl e to obtai n credi t o r insuranc e o n it s own , the n i t wil l tur n t o aparen t

o r siste r compan y for

financial assurance . If#i e paren t compan y secures , e.g. , a suret y bond , the n th e paren t compan y mus t

mak e acorporat e guarante e t o th e Commonwealth
. Withou t acorporat e guarantee , man y subsidiarie s woul db e unabl e t o provid e financial assuranc e o f an y kin dsinc e thei r

financial result s ar e rolle du p int o th e parent' s financia l results
. Removin g th e corporat e guarante e woul dseriou s har mth e complet e financia l assuranc e program . Ther e ar e currentl y 1 6 companie s utilizin g th e corporat e guarante e an dfinancia l tes t optio n a t 2 3 treatment , storage , an ddisposa l facilitie s (TSDFs ) i n th e Commonwealth
. Thes e 1 6 companie s ar e primaril y manufacturin g companies
. Wast e managemen t i s no t thei r primar y busines s an d th e abilit y t o utiliz e th e financial tes t provide s neede dflexibilit y t o support

manufacturing
. Requirin g thes e 1 6 companie s t o secur e commercia l insuranc e woul db e atransfe r o f capita l ou t o f th e respectiv e companie s t o financia l institution s rathe r tha n remainin g i n th e manufacturin gSinc e th e curren t Pennsylvani afinancia

l assuranc e programwa s adopte di n 199 9 ther e ha s bee n onl y on e company , utilizin g adepartmen t approve dfinancial test , whic h filedfor bankruptc y . withou t providin g adequat e financial resource s t o addres s thei r environmenta l liabilities
. Thi s company , Bethlehe mSteel , operatin g unde r curren t PADE P regulations , provide dinformatio n accordin g to th e Commonwealt h for mavailabl e a

t th e time
. Unfortunately , th e Commonwealt h for mwa s no t

identica l i n man y aspect s discusse dbelo w to th e federal for ma s publishe da

t 4 0 CFR264.15 1 (f

) an dthereb y resulte di n insufficient informatio n availabl e t o evaluat e th e financial test . Attachment s A an dB ar e th e form s that

wer e i n us e a

t th e tim e o f

Bethlehe m Steel' s filings. Attachmen t C show s th e federa

l form
. Not e that

ther e ar e difference s i n th e tw o Alternativ e test s I an dII
. Additionally , i t i s very importan t

t o not e tha t

PADE P di dnot

follo w stat e regulation s fo

r reviewin g an dactin g upo n areques t for us e o f th e financia l tes t

i n tw o different years . I f th e departmen t

ha drequeste dth e informatio n whic h i s stipulate db y th e regulations , Bethlehe mStee l woul dlikel y no t hav e me t th e requirement s o f

th e financia l tes t

an d woul dhav e therefor e bee n denie dth e reques t fo r usin g th e financial tes t

an dthereb y avoidin g th e potentia l ris k

t o th e Commonwealth
. I n th e year s prio r

t o th e issuanc e o f

th e revisio n o f

200 6 questio n # 5 o n pag e 5 o f for m2510

- FM-BWM0079 A (Attachment s A an dB ) di dno t reques t th e applican t

t o submi t

sufficien t informatio n a s require db y th e PADE P rul e t o determin e i f i t coul dmee t

th e ratio test s of

: liabilitie s t o ne t

worth , ne t

incom e t o tota l liabilities , an dcurren t asset s t o curren t

liabilities
. Th e regulation s requir e that

a n applican t

mus t b e abl e to pas s tw o o f

th e thre e financia l tests . Ha d tha t informatio n bee n requested , Bethlehe mStee l woul dno t hav e qualifie dfor

acorporat e guarante e i n 199 9 o r

i n 2000
. Thi s evaluatio n i s base dupo n th e SE C 10 K filing s for

Bethlehe m Stee l fo r th e year s 200 0 an d200 1 whic h precede dthei r filin g fo r bankruptc y i n 2002
. Th e secon dproble mwit

h th e PADE P financial tes t i s tha t Bethlehe mStee l (an dal l othe r filers ) wa s no t require dt o sho w environmenta l liabilitie s suc h a s UI C an dRCR A liabilitie s i n othe r state s fo r whic h coverag e i s demonstrate dusin g th e financial test . I t i s ver y clea

r for th e federa l instruction s an dform s that environmenta l liabilitie s mus t b e disclose do n lin e 1 o f bot h th e Alternativ e I an dI I financial tests . Thi s conditio n still s exist s today , eve n thoug h som e member s hav e advise dPADE P that thei r applicatio n o f

th e financial tes t

i s unique
. Departmen t

staf f ha s indicate dtha t

ther e hav e bee n othe r

problem s wit h th e program , bu t hav e no t bee n abl e to identif

y any othe r

companie s whic h eithe r

wer e utilizin g o r

ar e currentl y utilizin g th e corporat e guarante e andfinancia l tes t whic h hav e gon e int o bankruptc y an dar e unabl e to provid e adequat e fundin g t o mee t liabilities
. I n fact , Boeing , Inc
. i s a n exampl e o f

th e succes s o f th e financial tes t

program . Boein g ha s utilize dafinancial tes t an dcorporat e guarante e fo r it s closur e an dpost-closur e activitie s andwil l mee t al l o f it s obligation s unde r

th e progra mi n approximatel y on e year . Ther e hav e bee n example s o f companie s whic h hav e no t provide dadequat e bondin g (Industria l Solvents) , companie s whic h hav e no t me t th e requirement s fo

r aphase ddeposi t

(Berkle y Industries) , or

bondin g companie s whic h hav e gon e int o bankruptc y thereb y impactin g thei r client s (Safet

y Kleen) , bu t

thes e example s shoul dno t b e confuse dwith th e financial tes t and corporat e guarantee .Corporat e Guarante e an dFinancia l Tes t Purpos e an dBackgroun d Th e financial tes t

wa s develope dto maximiz e th e protectio n o f th e publi c whil e minimizin g th e cos t t o privat e industry
. Th e goal o f th e tes t wa s t o develo p amean s o f determinin g th e financial viabilit y o f

acompan y postin g financial assuranc e t o pa y for it s closure , post-closur e an d correctiv e actio n cost s throug h revenu e generation
. Th e conservatis mbuil t int o th e tes t minimize s th e likelihoo do f aqualifyin g entity goin g bankrup t withi n three-year s o f

passin g th e financial test . Studie s b y EP A whe n th e financia l tes t wa s originall y implemente di n 198 2 (Apri l 7,1982 , 47F R15032) , a s wel l a s mor e recen t studie s performe dunde r

contrac t with EP A (ICF , 1996 , se e http://www.epa.gov/garbage/finance/fame) , indicat e that th e likelihoo do f

acompan y passin g th e financial tes t

an dthe n goin g bankrup t

withi n ayea

r are extremel y low
. Th e predictiv e natur e o f

th e tes t i s suc h tha t

acompan y tha t

ma y fail th e tes t

stil l ha s th e financial ability t o secur e alternativ e financial assurance . DE P suggest s tha t

us e o f th e financial tes t

expose s taxpayer s t

o asignifican t

rjs k o f default
. Thi s vie w fail s t o reflec t

th e carefu l analysi s tha t

EP A performe dbefore promulgatin g th e financial tes t an dha s sinc e reviewe dseveral times
. Th e financia l tes t mechanis mwa s adopte db y EP A onl y afte r acarefu l analysi s o f

competin g consideration' s supportin g evidence
. Fo r example , EP A decide dt o us e fairl y simpl e measure s to evaluat e financial performanc e for th e purpos e o f determinin g whethe r

acompan y woul db e abl e t o cover it s cleanup obligations
. Thes e simpl e measure s ar e als o quit e conservative : eithe r abon dratin g o f

investmen t

grad e plu s tangibl e ne t worth o f si x time s tota l closur e an dpost-closur e liabilitie s (Alternativ e II ) o r meetin g tw o o f thre e rati o factor s plu s th e sam e ne t tangibl e wort

h requiremen t

an dals o ne t

workin g capital (i.e. , liqui dassets ) o f

si x time s tota l remediatio n obligation s (Alternativ e I)
. Puttin g asid e fo r a moment th e other factor s include di n th e Alternativ e I , thes e are very conservativ e measure s for evaluatin g whethe r

acompan y ca

n pa y it s debt s a s the y com e due
. EP A als o conclude dtha t

acompan y meetin g th e require dthreshol do f $1 0 millio n i n tangibl e ne t wort h was extremel y unlikel y t o declar e bankruptc y a t an y tim e i n th e nex t

thre e years . I f

a compan y wa s unabl e t o mee t th e financial tes t

requirements , the n wit h atwo-yea r "loo k ahead " remaining , acompan y woul dhav e sufficient resource s a

t tha t tim e t o secur e othe r

instrument s t o us e for thei r financial assuranc e obligations
. I n othe r words , $i e financial tes t

i s constructe dt o scree n out

companie s tha t

hav e asignifican t

ris k o f declarin g bankruptc y a

t an y tim e i n th e nex t three-years
. Thi s three-year "loo k ahead " aspec t

i s acentra l feature o f

th e financial test , but

i t ha s bee n overlooke di n th e polic y debat e o n financial assurance . EPA' s origina l analysi s o n th e financial tes t ha s bee n revisite do n severa l occasion s andit s validit y ha s bee n reaffirme deac h time
. (Se e Federa l Registe r 17.706 , 17.715-1 8 Apri l 10 , 1998 ) Wha t happen s Whe n A Compan y Ca n N o Longe r Qualif y fo r Financia l Assurance ? A s previousl y discussed , th e financial tes t wa s specificall y designe dt o cove r athre e yea

r "look

ahead " period
. EP A determine dtha t companie s qualifyin g for th e financial tes t

ar e highl y unlikel y t o see k

bankruptc y protectio n o r otherwis e defaul t

ove r th e nex t thre e years . Becaus eth e company mus t re-qualif y agai n every year

i f i t wishe s to kee p usin g th e financial test , ther e i s alway s a t leas t atw o yea

r "look-ahead " perio ddurin g whic h adefaul t i s highl y unlikely
. Eve n i n asituatio n wher e acompan y ca n n o longe r

pas s th e financial test , ther e wil l stil l b e sufficient financial wherewithal t o purchas e afinancial assuranc e mechanis mdu e t o th e conservativ e desig n o f

th e financial test . Ther e i s ahug e middl e groun di n whic h companie s ar e abl e t o affor dletter s o f

credi t or other , mor e liquid , instruments , eve n thoug h the y ma y n o longe r qualif y fo r th e financial tes t

du e t o change dcircumstances
. Fo r example , acompan y tha t ha s bee n usin g th e financial tes t fo r a$1 0 millio n cleanup liability , bu t n o longe r

qualifies , woul d nee dt o pa

y approximatel y $100,00 0 t o $300,00 0 fo r alette r o f credit
. I t woul db e surprisin g indee di f acompan y that

wa s stron g enoug h t o pas s th e financial tes t - whic h require s ane t tangibl e wort

h o f si x time s total remediatio n liabilities , or a t leas t $6 0 millio n i n thi s exampl e - suddenl y founditsel f

wit h liqui dasset s insufficien t t o cover a$300,00 0 expense . Th e financia

l tes t wa s set-up conservativel y enoug h tha t onc e acompan y ca n n o longe r qualif y unde r th e test ; th e compan y wil l stil l b e financiall y stron g enoug h t o acquir e a n alternativ e for

m o f financial assurance . Cos t an dCompetitivenes s Th e departmen t

need s t o seriousl y conside r th e potentia l cos t

an dimpac t

t o th e competitivenes s to industry i n th e Commonwealt h tha t wil l resul t

fro mthi s propose drul e change. Whil e th e departmen t

ma y loo k a t thi s propose drul e chang e a s impactin g onl y ahandfu l o f companie s wit h RCR A closure an dpost-closur e permits , i t i s logica l tha t

thes e sam e rule s wil l b e applie dt o CERCLA Superfun dcleanup s an dt o RCR A Correctiv e Actio n remediation s onc e th e stat e receive s authorizatio n fo

r that program . I f

RCR A Correctiv e Actio n facilitie s wer e brough t unde r th e propose dprogram , ther e woul db e approximatel y 10 5 companie s impacted
. (Se e attache dEPA ECH O databas e for TSD' s i n P A only ) It i s assume dthat

eac h o f th e othe r mechanism s fo

r financial assuranc e wil l stil l b e allowe db y th e department
. Perhap s th e mos t affordabl e mechanis moutsid e th e financial tes t woul db e a lette r o f credit
. Whil e th e cos t

o f alette r o f credi t ca n rang e from0.5 % t o 6 % or greater , i t

i s expecte dtha

t o n averag e th e credi t

woul db e aroun d1 % to 3 % annua l for th e amoun t

bein g assured
. Whe n on e look s a t no t jus t th e cos t estimate s fromclosur e an dpost-closure , bu t add s CERCLA andRCR A remediatio n t o th e equation , i t i s eas y t o se e that

th e cost s o f

athir dpart y mechanis mca

n b e very hig h o n companie s whos e primary busines s i s manufacturing
. PCI C maintain s that

thes e cost s ar e unfounde dan dadrai n o n th e workin g capita l an d competitivenes s fo

r companie s tha t

qualif y fo r a n already conservativ e corporat e guarante e throug h th e financial test . Every dollar spen t o n duplicativ e an dunnecessar y financial instrument s i s adolla

r that i s n o longe r

availabl e fo

r capital improvement s suc h a s ne w an d expande dmanufacturin g plants , produc t development , proactiv e investmen t i n pollutio n contro l equipment , an dcapital expenditure s necessar y fo r aPennsylvani afacility t o remai n competitiv e with it s sister

facilitie s i n other

state s a s wel l a s increasin g pressur e fro moversea s competition
. Thi s i s no t

onl y amatte r

o f decrease dretur n t o shareholder s o n thei r investment ; i t

als o affect sth e amoun t

o f mone y availabl e to ru n th e business
. Thes e are cost s tha t competitor s ar e not incurring
. Suggeste dAlternativ e Rathe r tha n eliminatin g aprogramthat provide s flexibility an dwhic h ha s no t bee n prove n unsafe , PCI C propose s that th e Departmen t

enhanc e th e existin g corporat e guarante e an d financial tes t

progra mthereb y makin g i t mor e robust
. Whe n PADE P adopte dth e corporat e guarante e an dfinancial tes t program , th e departmen t

di d no t adop t th e complet e federa

l rul e an dcorrespondin g form s an drequirements
. PCI C propose s tha t th e Environmenta l Quality Boar d(EQB ) adop t th e federa

l rul e i n it s entirety a s i t

pertain s t o th e corporat e guarante e an dfinancial assuranc e test . Th e existin g PADE P corporat e guarante e an dfinancial assuranc e tes t onl y require s tha t companie s provid e informatio n t o th e departmen t reflectin g thei r

Pennsylvani aliabilities
. Thi s financial tes t

doe s no t provid e enoug h informatio n t o allo w th e departmen t t o make a

n informe d decisio n o n th e viability o f th e compan y i n relationshi p t o it s obligations
. Hadth e complet e federal corporat e guarante e an dfinancial assuranc e progra mbee n i n plac e i n Pennsylvania , Bethlehe mStee l woul dno t hav e qualifie dfo

r th e financial test . I f th e complet e federal corporat e guarante e an dfinancial assuranc e tes t .wer e adopte db y th e EQB , companie s seekin g t o us e th e corporat e guarante e an dfinancial tes t woul donl y b e eligibl e i f the y ha dane t

worth o f $1 0 millio n an dcoul dmee t th e tangibl e ne t

worth t o liabilit y ratio o f si x time s for

th e requisit e environmental liabilitie s i n th e Unite dStates , no t jus t thos e i n Pennsylvania
. Thes e includ e liabilitie s incurre dunde r th e Nuclea

r Regulatory Commission , EP A CERCL A an dRCRA program s for correctiv e actions , Undergroun dStorag e Tanks , TSCA , stat e require dprogram s suc h a s NJ' s ISR A sit e clean-u p program , an dconsen t decree s an dothe r
Whil e PADE P ma y no t

believ e the y hav e th e financia l expertis e t o mak e adeterminatio n o n a company' s financial statu s i t i s importan t

t o not e tha t

th e departmen t

i s already makin g tha t determination , bu t

withou t th e mos t complet e informatio n available
. Likewise , th e federal Environmenta l Protectio n Agenc y offer s trainin g session s fo r state s o n ho w to ru n th e financial assuranc e program . I f PADE P eliminate s th e corporat e guarante e an dfinancial assuranc e program , Pennsylvani awil l b e th e onl y stat e withou t

acorporat e guarante e an dfinancial assuranc e test . Underscorin g th e efficac y o f th e federal corporat e guarante e an dfinancial assuranc e tes t program , i t

i s importan t

t o understan dtha t

ther e hav e bee n tw o recen t comprehensiv e review s o f th e federal EP A program . Th e first revie w wa s complete di n 200 6 b y a n advisory boardt o EPA , Environmenta l Financia l Assuranc e Boar d(EFAB)
. Th e secon dwa s undertake n b y th e stat e o f Californi abecaus e the y wer e considerin g droppin g thei r corporat e guarante e an dfinancial assuranc e test . Bot h review s resulte di n recommendation s fo r th e continue dus e o f

th e EP A corporat e guarante e an dfinancia l assuranc e test .2
. PERMITS-BY-RUL E

Backgroun d Currentl y th e departmen t

allow s agenerato r

treatin g it s ow n hazardou s wast e i n containers , tank s o r containmen t

building s to operat e unde r apermit-by-rule
. Unde r th e draf t regulation s i n Sectio n 270a.60(b)(2)(vi) , th e departmen t woul dn o longe r

allo w thos e generator s utilizin g processe s tha t ma y mee t

th e definitio n o f

therma l treatmen t

o f hazardou s wast e t o operate unde r th e permit-by-rul e option
. Concer n Therma l treatmen t

i s broadl y define di n 4 0 CFR260.1 0 an dcoul dpotentiall y includ e an y for m o f treatmen t that use s "... adevic e whic h use s elevate dtemperatures... " t o trea t ahazardou s
B y singlin g ou t

thermal treatment , whic h i s broadl y defined , i t coul dlimi t

option s fo

r reclaimin g usabl e materia l fromth e wast e and/o r contaminate dsoi l viaus e o f therma l desorptio n o r

othe r processe s tha

t us e elevate dtemperatures . Suggeste dAlternativ e PCI C suggest s that

th e departmen t

eliminat e paragrap h 270a.60(b)(2)(vi ) an dmaintai n th e sam e requirement s fo

r therma l treatmen t

tha t th e EP A ha s pu t

i n plac e andwhic h th e departmen t currentl y regulates
. Hence , i f agenerato r

i s allowe dt o thermall y treat aparticular

hazardou s wast e unde r

th e federal regulations , i t shoul db e allowe dunde r

P A regulations
. Conversely , i f th e therma l treatmen t

i s afor mo f treatmen t tha t EP A woul dregulat e unde r 4 0 CF RPar t

26 5 Subpart O (incineration) , or

Subpart P (therma l treatment ) o r

Par t 26 6 Subpar

t H for hazardou s wast e derive dfuels , the n it wil l stil l b e subjec t

t o thos e provision s a s incorporate db y referenc e i n th e PADE P section s o f RCR A (Titl e 25 , section s 26 0 throug h 270 ao f th e P A Code )
3
. INSPECTION S Backgroun d Sectio n 265a
. 19 5 wa s originall y adde dan dinterprete db y PADE P andEP A Regio n II I a s onl y requirin g inspectio n o f

atank holdin g wast e materia l onc e ever y 7 2 hour s whe n the

facility wa s no t operating
. Som e facilities , whic h d o no t operat e o n a24/7 basi s an dwhic h als o d o no t accumulat e alarg e volum e o f wast e materia l on. afrequen t basis , utiliz e tank s t o safel y stor e materia l unti l suc h tim e a s i s appropriat e t o mov e of f sit e fo r disposal
. PADE P ha s consistentl y interprete d"i n operation " to mea n whe n th e plan t i s i n operation , whe n processe s ar e runnin g tha t

ma y contribut e t o accumulatio n o f materia l i n atank
.Concer n

With th e eliminatio n o f

Sectio n 265a
. 19 5 an dre-interpretatio n o f 'I n operation " thos e facilitie s no t operatin g seve n day s awee k an dwhic h do no t

accumulat e wast e materia l o n afrequen t basi s woul db e require dt o perfor ma n inspectio n o n adail y basi s wheneve r an y materia l i s i n atank
. Thi s wil l mea n that

i n order t o compl y with th e 24hou r regulation , tank s wil l requir e inspectio n o n overtim e ever

y weeken dan devery day durin g holiday s unles s tank s ar e completel y emptie d every wee k

regardles s o f

volum e accumulated
. Companie s i n thi s situatio n mak e every effor t t o kee p accumulate dvolum e dow n prio r t o an ddurin g thes e holidays , but the y wer e neve r

bee n require dt o hav e the mcompletel y empty . PCI C i s concerne dtha t rescissio n o f

Sectio n 265a
. 195 , wil l resul t i n on e o f tw o negativ e effects
. Eithe r significan t

overtim e woul db e require dt o provid e for

a n inspecto r

Every Saturday , Sunday an dholiday , or tank s woul dhav e t o b e completel y emptie dever

y Frida y an dbefor e every holiday
. Th e late r resul t i s counte r

t o wast e minimizatio n efforts
. Wast e materia l woul db e take n ou t o f saf e an dsecur e secondary treatmen t an dtransporte dove r

th e highway , burnin g excessiv e fue l an dproducin g additional ai r emissions
. Transportin g thes e unnecessaril y smal l partia l load s wil l driv e disposa l cost s u p considerabl y b y eliminatin g economie s o f scal e fo r full loads
. I n addition , transportatio n cos t

woul dincreas e thre e t o fou r fold
. On e company's wast e minimizatio n effort s t o dat e hav e resulte di n reduction s fromonce-a-wee k bul k liqui dload s t o onc e amonth
. Nearl y al l th e cos t

saving s fromthos e effort s woul db e completel y negate db y th e requiremen t t o shi p partia l load s ever

y wee k to kee p tank s empt

y o n weekend s whil e reducin g safet y an dincreasin g ai r pollution
.

Conclusio n Whil e PCI C support s man y o f th e propose dchange s t o th e PADEP Hazardou s Wast e Regulation s a s publishe di n th e P A Bulleti n o n Jul y 14 , 2007 , w e strongl y oppos e th e propose d eliminatio n o f

Sectio n 264a , Subchapte r H , an dit s counter-part

i n Sectio n 265a
. Subchapte r H , an di n th e propose dne w Sectio n 267 aSubchapte r H th e corporate guarante e an dfinancial assuranc e tes t

with th e propose dreplacemen t o f commercia l insurance , th e propose dadditio n o f paragrap h (vi ) t o Sectio n 270a.60(b)(2)(vi) , an dth e rescissio n o f Sectio n 265a
. 19 5 PCI C strongl y urge s that

th e Environmenta l Quality Boar dinstea dadop t complet e federa l rul e for corporat e guarante e an dfinancial assurance . B y adoptin g th e federal rule , th e EQ B wil l b e providin g astronge r

se t o f tool s for PADE P t o mak e appropriat e decision s regardin g a n applicant' s ability t o mee t th e financial criteri aa s wel l a s continuin g t o provid e importan t flexibility for

thos e companie s whic h can mee t th e standard
. Likewise , PCI C strongl y advocate s th e eliminatio n o f paragrap h Sectio n 270a.60(b)(2)(vi ) regardin g th e ability t o obtai n apermits-by-rul e for therma l treatmen t

o f hazardou s wast e i n certai n containmen t

a s i s currentl y permitte dunde r federal regulation
.B y eliminatin g Sectio n 265a.l95 , PADE P wil l creat e anegativ e impac t o n th e environmen t throug h increase dtransportatio n with resultin g air pollution
. PCI C i s concerne dtha t

eac h o f thes e thre e subjec t

area s wil l resul t

i n th e additional los s o f competitivenes s fo

r Pennsylvani amanufacturin g b y drivin g u p cost s withou t an y positiv e environmental impac t

andwithou t

sufficient justificatio n for

th e proposal s b y th e department
.Pag e 1 o f 1 

# 261 9 Tate , Michel e From : Pa m Witme r[pam@pcic.org ] Sent : Monday , Septembe r10 , 200 7 8:5 0 A M To : RegComments@state.pa.u s Subject : P

A Chemica l Industr

y Council-Propose d Hazardou s Wast e Regulatio n Amendmen t Comment s Dea rChairperso n McGinty

. Attache d ar e comment s t o DEP' s propose d amendment s t o th e Hazardou s Wast e Regulation s bein g submitte d b y th e Pennsylvani a Chemica l Industr y Council

. O n behal f o f th e ove r6 0 membe rcompanies , I a m mor e tha n happ y t o answe ran y question s yo u o rth e membe ro f th e Environmenta l Qualit y Boar d may have

. Best regard s Pa m Witme r

Pamel a A

. Witme r Presiden t Pennsylvani a Chemica l Industry Counci l 2 0 N

. Marke t Sq. , Suit e 80 0 Harrisburg , P

A 1710 1 717-232-668 1 717-232-468 4 (FAX

) pam@pcic.or g

9/11/200 7