P. 1



# OAR Box 1338 Prepped by Ollie Stewart



## Document

Number: 

# 16 ) ll-F- 1

Docket Number: 

# A-89-1 0

Printed 6/17/20081:48:06

PM Sheet 16 of 105P. 2



# m Tuesda y Apri l 25 , 198 9



# B ffi B D Wft

I JU L » T198 9 EP A AI R DOCKE T

.-•.•.,* • *

. .'*:*..

. 

# Par t X 

# Environmenta l —

. Protectio n Agency Inten t t o For m a n Advisor y Committee t o Negotiat e a Ne

w Approac h fo r Contro l o f Volatil e Organi c Chemica l Equipmen t Leaks ; Notic eP. 3

ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTIO N AGENC Y j [FR L 3562-6 1 Intentt o For

m a n Advisory Committe e t o Negotiat e a New Approach fo r Contro l o f

Volatil e Organi c Chemica l EquipmentLeak s SUMMARY : EP

A i s considerin g establishin g a n Advisary Committe e unde r th e Federa

l Advisory Committe

e Ac t(FACA) . Th e Committee' s purpos e woul d b e t o negotiate issue s leadin g to a ne w approac

h fo r regulatio n of equipmentleak s unde

r Section s U l and 11 2 o f th e Clean Ai r Ac ta s amended . Th e Committee woul d consis tof representatives o

f partie s thatar

e substantiall y affecte d b y th e outcome o f th e propose d rule . EP A requests publi c commen to n whethe r

• I tshoul d establis h a Federa l Advisor y Committee ; • I tha s properl

y identifie d interests i t believe s ar

e affecte d b y th e ke y issue s liste d above ; • Regulator

y negotiatio n i s appropriat e fo r thi s rulemaking, an d th e exten tt o whic h th e issues , and procedures ar e adequate and appropriate . Thi s notic e als o announce s tha ta n informationa

l meeting wil l b e hel d o n Ma y 1 5 fro m 1 0 a m t o 4 p m atth e Hal

l o f States , 44 4 N . Capito

l St , roo m 337 , Washington , D C t o discus s tiie issue s involve d i n the regulation o f equipmen t leaks , and whethe r th e Committe e , shoul d b e formed an d negotiation s * v proceed. * ''"

. . " , ; Thi s meetin g i s ope n an d an y partie s intereste d i n th e negotiatio n ar e ,-. : - .• • encourage d to attend . ~ DAT E EP A mus treceiv e comment s an d suggestion s b y Ma y 10,1989 . - %: , r. ; AOORESS : Comment s shoul d b e submitte d (i n duplicate , i f possible ) t o Ai rDocke t(LE-131 ) Roo m M-1500 , Environmenta l Protectio n Agency , Attentio n Docke t#A89-10,401 M Stree t S W „ Washington . D C 20460 . A cop y shoul d als o b e sen tt o Bo y Ajax , MD-13 , VS. EPA , Researc h Triangl e Park , N C 27711 . Docke t#A89-10 . containin g . material s relevan tt o thi s rulemakin g (PM-223)

. 401 M Stree t SW.

. iWashington . DC . 2046

0 (202 ) 332-5495 . Fo r informatio

n pertaining t

o th e regulation o

f equipmen

tleak s and th e regulator y issue s t o b e addresse d i n th e negotiation , contac tBo

b Ajax , MD-13 , U.S . EPA . Researc

h Triangl e Park

. N C 2771 1 (919

) 541-5579 . . S H T SUPPLEMENTAR Y INFORMATION : "' " Outlin e o f Notic e ^; 5 ^ L EPA' s Regulator y Negotiatio n Projec t""'.J.. IL Volatil e Organi c Chemica l Equipmen t\ Lea k Fugitiv e Emission s : v;' / A . Nee d fo rRul e Revisio n ••-.'%? ' B . Selectio n a s a Negotiatio n Ite m *'•< ••.-. C Ke y Issue s fo rNegotiatio n D . Potentia l Interest s an d Participant s ;i l % DL Formatio n o f

th e Committe e ' --•'••••"-• • •A . Procedur e fo rEstablishin g a n Advisor y - Committe e %- j?~,r. B . Participant s . : '; 4 £ " C Request s fo rRepresentatio n \'- .?' • '•« : *-. . D . Fina l Notic e ;..'. : A^-s,- ^ E . Tentativ e Schedul e '^T;'. :

- ' '~ "**?• . IV . Negotiatio n Procedure s ~ ^>;: - sL : A Facilitato r£?"•'" * •& ? RGoo d Fait h Negotiatio n =•; ! C Administrativ e Suppor tan d Meeting s . . D . Committe e Procedures ' • '^;S.:i4j; . & Definin g Consensu s ^iiiS.- i F . Failur e o f th e Committe

e t o Reac h Consensu s .... . S^<S55- : tJ.Recot a o f Meeting s i:^S:i-j7 r L EPA' s Regulator

y Negotiatio n Projec

t EP A establishe d th e Regulator y

. ,v .Negotiatio n Projec

ti n 198 3 t o explor e ; f an d demonstrat

e th e valu e of

^'... : . .: : ; : negotiatio n and othe r consensus ^ '-'•"'•• Y ^buildingtechnique s for developin g ••j;-.**-.- ? •' * ''•bette r regulation s whic h coul d b e . C implemented i n a les s adversarial

r u.. . setting . .*•.•.-. . : ..:•/-'. : .' ~ Negotiation s ar e conducte d throug h

- ' Advisory Committees chartered under :•- - -th e Federa

l Advisor y Committee Ac t * (FACA) . th e goa

l of th e Committee i s to ^-reach consensu s o n th e languag e o r - issue s involve d i n a role. I f consensu s i s reached, iti s use d a s th e basi s o f th e

_ : . Agency' s proposa l Al l procedura l " ; ~ requirement

s o f th e Administrativ e Procedur e Ac tand othe r applicable".' " statute s continue t o apply . EP A ha s develope d criteri a for : ! : "

_ evaluatio n o

f potential item s for ; • - TM ; ' negotiation . T

p qualif y unde r EPA' s ma y b e inspecte d a

tU A EP A b*v^en> ^^7^?

. a n item mus t aon . an d 4 p.m. o

n weekdays , and l j Vfleplanne d fo r proposal ; •

• reasonable fe e ma

y b e charged fo

r C v Hav e a relatively slmal l numbe r o f copy** 1 * } •> ' " J identifiabl e parties , i n a n appropriat

e R> R FURTHE

RINFORMATIO

N CONTACT : balanc e an d mix , wh o hav e a gbod fait h Fo r informatio

n pertaining t

o thaiVy , J interes ti n negotiating ; "'" L "" v .-*.*- »•-*-•

—- f

• Presen

ta limited numbe

r o f related «^4s8ues , fo

r whic h sufficientinformation i s availabl e fo

r resolution; and * - - • Hav e a tim

e facto r thatlend s som e urgenc y t o reaching consensus . The seve n negotiation s conducte d t o establishmen to

f the negotiatio n committe e an

d associate d \ administrativ e matter

s contact:-D-sSora

h Dalton . Deput

y Diroctor,*ifegulafbr

y Negotiatio n Project

^ Iraoi-a-natio

n an d Regulator y System Division . U.S . EP A dat e hav e aide d th e Agency in bette r defining th e issue s en d in craftin g bette r approaches . The seve n regulatory

. negotiation s were :

- * * Nonconformanc e Penaltie s unde r th e Clea n Ai rAc ta s amended ; Pina l

. rule : Augus t30,198 5

• • Emergenc y Pesticid e Exemption s

. unde rth e Federa l Insecticide , Fungicid e a n d Rodenticid e Ac t(FIFRA) ; Fina l rule :

. Januar y 15.198 6

- * Farmworke

r Protectio n Standard s for Agricultura

l Pesticide s unde r th e Federa l Insecticide , Fungicide an d

•• • Rodenticid e Ac t(FIFRA) ; Proposed rule : Jul y 8,198 8

- • Asbesto s Containing Material s i n School s unde

r th e Asbesto s Hazar

d Emergenc y Responsibilit

y Ac to f 1988 (AHERA) ; Fina

l rule : Octobe r 30.198 7 ".•': . • Ne w Source Performanc e Standard s fo r Woodbuming Stove s unde r th e dea n Ai r Ac tFina

l rule : Februar

y 28 , 'M98 8 ^•Undergroun d Injectio n o f /Hazardou s Wast e unde rth e Hazardou s ...an d Soli d Wast e Amendment s o f 1984 . 1 Fina l rule : Jul y 28,198 8 '"•-• ' • Mino rPermi tModification s unde r t h e Resourc e Conservatio n an d Recover y Ac t(RCRA) ; Fina l rule : Septembe r28,198 8 I n Decembe r1986 , th e Progra m -Evaluatio n Divisio n o f

EPA' s Offic e o f : Policy Planning an d Evaluation "

... . complete d a n assessmen to f th e ^regulator

y negotiation s program. Th e stud y confirme

d tha tnegotiatio n i s especiall y appropriat

e i n situation s -whic h involv e th e resolutio n of a limite d

. numbe r o f related issues , none of

whic h involv e fundamenta

l question s of

valu e

: o r extremel y controversia l nationa l

- policy . Th e stud y furthe rconclude d tha t

• Negotiate d rulemakin g ca n produc e

. rule s tha tar e mor e pragmati c wit h - bette renvironmenta l results whil e stil l

.. meetin g statutor y requirements.

• Negotiate d rule s ar e als o mor e • likel y to b e acceptabl e t o th e affecte d

• A industries , th e publi c interes tsector , an d stat e an d loca l government s involve d i n developin g them . • Negotiatio n ma y als o resulti n earlie rimplementatio n o f a rul e b y •reducin g th e tim e i ttake s t o procee d fro m propose d t o final rulemaking .

- : EP A believe s tha tth e benefit s t o al l partie s o f regulator y negotiatio n ar e substantial , an d I s committe d t o

. continue d us e o f

regulatory negotiatio n ' en d othe rconsensus-base d processe s fo rrulemakin g whe n appropriate .P. 4

Federa l Rente r /

Vo L 54 , No . 7 8 /

Tuesday , Apri l 25 . TO89 / Notice s 1794 5 I L Volatil e Organi

c Chemica

l Equipmen

t Lea k Fugitive Kadssions A. Need for Rule Revision Fugitiv e emission s of

volatil e organic compound s (VOCs) from equipment leak s (valves , etc ) contribut e significanti y t o ai r qualit

y problems . Curren tregulations adopte d unde r section s 11 1 an d XIX

o f th e Clea n Ai r Ac tan d i n State Implementation Plans (SIPs) hav e bee n effectiv e bx heightenin g awarenes s of

th e significanc e o f

(U s sourc e an d l a ethnntstin g contro l efforts . Th e rule s basicall y requir e ma t; equipmen ti n plac e b e JBBpecto

d quarterl y fa r leek s with a portabl e - hydrocarbon detectoc . I

f ooaoentetioa s i n exces s o f

10.00 0 pp m ar e found, th a ' ~coBopooeaib identifie d a s a leake r aa d maintenanc e i s required. EP A stadie s l a th e ead y 1980s showe d thattypical refinerie s and chemical plant s hav e a n uncontrolle d lea k frequency e f 1 1 l o 1 2 percen tMaintenanc

e studte s indicate : - thi s ca n b e reduce d b y abou t60-7 0 percentwit

h the cunen tlea k detectio n an d repai r program

. However , th e actua l frequency rate, an d associate d emission s i n particular, var y widel y and ' ar e bettere d to b e a foncHo

a o f origina l desig n (e ^ numbe

r o f valves ) an d ag e -*.

' of th e proces s uni tequipmen tselected , * nnnlit y fr f wfflrn f ffp***^***, standard operating procedures use d b y th e company , trainin

g provide d t o employees , an d motivation . Recentdat a for highly tood

c chemical s demonstrat

e : tha tfrequencies te th e O

O l o X percent ' range ca n b e achieve d I n aom a situations . Howevet , a o on e i s sur e wha t combinatio n o

f {actors guarantee s such result s no r ho w t o requir e the m throug h enforceabl e regulations . . Mor e importantly,regulatory

.''•..'

. approache s currentl

y bein g use d d o no t provide for quantificatio n o f emissions . I Specifie d quantified emissio n estimate s ' level s ar e necessary t o establis h a base lin e an d EP

A need s residual emission s and risk assessment s t o mak e regulatory decisions . Fo

r example , th e analyse s of EP A propose d rules tha

twoul d limit benzen e emission s (F

RVo L 53 , N a 145 , Jul y 28,1988 ) ar

e base d o n eiurssk

m estimate s from leak frequencies typical - o f the refinery industry . Thes e may significanti y overestimat

e emission s o f benezene . • '•••••'••••••.• . EP A see s 1b e see d for a «0 w •-'•••'**•'"" • regulator y approach , base d o n - ^ : ..-r ' perfonnance and/o r emissions , that-vri H resulti n quantifiable emissio n levels . *._ ; giv e creditfo

r origina l plantdesig n aa d motivat e innovation . Develaiq g such a n approachusing EPA' s traditiona l data gatherin g an d analysi s approac

h woul d b e very difficul tcostly , tim e consumin g and controversial . Initia

l contact s sugges ttha tth e majo r Industria

l organizations , environmenta l group s sn d stat e governmen

tassociation s wfl

l b e receptive , en d mer e i s goo d potential fo r Identifyin

g ite^ v approache s thiuiqp i negotiatio n ma

tare compatibl e with on

r need s an d th e complexit

y o f the . problems . Th e negotiatio n woul d addres s primaril y technical issue s an d woul d no t b e polic y oriented . Th e specifi c goa l o f th e negotiatio n woul d b e to develo p a ne w regulator

y approac h thatcoul d b e a n alternativ e t o o r replacemen tfor th e curren t4 0 CF R61 . Subpar

tV equipment lea k tides . Th e negotiatio n woul d addres s th e form o f

th e approac

h an d di e relationship betwee n I tand actua l emission s bu twoul d no taddres s stringency . Dependin g upon di e timin g aad tiegre e o f

success , th e results com d b e use d to implemen

tth e Agency' s upcoming decisio n o n benzen e equipmen tleaks . 5 thi s i s no tpossrole . •• ' th e results woul d b e use d i n th e nex t equipmen tlea k standard , whic h wi n probably b e th e hazardou s organi c National Emissio n Standard s for : Haxaidoo s Ai r Pollutant

s (NBSHAFs) . B^Selecticsmas*mNegoticdiomUem .••..•;- . EP A believe s thatth e equpmen tlea k regulations na y b e appropriat e for developmentthroug

h tiie regulatory negotiatio n process . EP

A ha s mad e a prefiminai

y toqidry o f

potential partie s and representative s o f

identifie d interests t o determin e ff

thi s Ite m satisfie s EPA' s selectio n criteri a for ' negotiate d ndemaldng . O n th e basi s o f thi s preliminar

y inquiry , EP

A believe s tha tthi s ite m meets it s selectio n criteri a an d thatnegotiation s ca n b e successfuL Affecte d interest

s are smal l i n number

, an d EPA' s initia l contact s indicate tiiat . a n appropriat

e balanc e an d mix o f group s wil l b e wiltin g t o participat e i n goo d faith . EPA' s lea d progra m offic e ha s identifie d a numbe

r o f bas k issue s fo r whic h sufficien

tinformation i s i n han d (or wf

B b e develope d dnrin

g th e neogltetions ) for resolution . C Key Issues

forNegotiation EP A anticipate s th e ke y negotiatio n question s wff

l focu s o n ho w t o establis h a regidatoiy approac

h tha twill : 1 . Achiev e predictable , quantifiabl e emissio n results 2 . Resul tin th e applicatio n o

f th e bes t availabl e technology •...*•-• . ..*-' . 3 . B e enforceabl e 4 . Exhibi tmaximu

m regulatory consistent ^ (e.g. , wit

h state permitting requirements.-SAR

A reportin

g requirements ) 5 . Provide Incentive s Ja

r bette r design s (e.g. . design s tha

tinvolv e fewe r component s tha thav e the potentia l t o leak ) 6 . Provid e maximu m flexibilit

y I n achievin g specifie d result s 7 . Minimiz

e admlnlstativ e burden s 8 . Provide for predictabl e complianc e 9 . Provide time tha

tma y b e neede d to identify , assess, an d implemen twork practices , equipmentan d design s that •wil l meetemissio n goals . EP A expect s t o addres s th e following specifi c questions : 1 . I s leak detectio n an d repair a n appropriat

e approach ? I

f so , ho w ca n th e results b e quantified ? Shoul d th e definitio n o f

a lea k b e lowered ? Z Shoul d lea k detectio n an d repair b a require d for flanges and . if

ao , wha t frequenc y an d lea k defintio n shoul d b e applied ? 3 . I s a a emissio n Umi

t(o r a limi to n th e numbe

r o f leakin g components ) a n appropriat

e approach ? Ho w shoul d suc h a n approac

h b e implemented ? 4 . I s a a emissio n limi to n a pe r componen

tbasi s (o r a limi

to n percen t leakin g components ) a

n appropriat

e approach ? Ifo w shorr

M strc b a n . . . approac h b e implemented ? .

<

. S.j s ther

e a n effectiv e approac

h dia l 1 B a cassbinatio n o f

th e above ? D. Potential

Interests and

Participants EP A ha s tentatively identifie d di e followin g lis to f

possibl e interests an d parties : —Chemica

l manufacturin

g industry . . —Petroleu

m refining industr

y —iodnstrie s ou thandl e organi c - • chemical s I

n equipmen

ttha tinclude s valves , pump* , compressions , flanges o r open-ende d line s —Environmental.InterestCroup s —Stat e and loca l ai r pollutio n control agencie s —Manufacturer

s o f pump s an d valve s —Consortin

g firms involve d i n plan t desig n and equipmentspecificatio n —Contractor

s involve d i n constructio n o f

chemical plant s an d petroleu m refinerie s . —Labo r tmloh s —Othe r Federa l agende s m . Formatio

n o f Ifa a Negotiatin g Comaoitte e A. Procedure

forEstablishing an

. Adrieoty Committee A s a genera

l rule , aa agenc y of

th e Federa l governmen

ti s required t

o compl y wit h th e requirements o

f FAC A whe n I testablishe s o

r use s a grou

p whic h include s non-federal members a s a sosxe e o f advice . Unde

r FACA . a n Advisor y ConmrfUe

e i s establishe d onl y

: after bot

h consultatio n wit

h GS A en d receipto f a charter . EP

A ha s prepared aP. 5

1794 6 Federa l Registe r / Vo L 54 . No . 7 6 /

Tuesday . Apri l 25 . 198 9 / Notice s charter and ha s initiate d the requisite consultatio n process . Only upon th e successfu l completio n o f

thi s proces s and th e receipto

f the approved charter wil l EP A for m th e Committee an d . commence negotiations . ......:.. . , •

_ B. Participants Th e numbe

r of participant

s i n th e grou p i s estimate d to b e abou t1 5 an d shoul d no texcee d 2

5 participants . A numbe r larger tha

n thi s coul d mak

e i t difficultto conduc

teffectiv e negotiations . One purpos e o f tiiis notic e i s t o hel p detenninm e whethe r th e standar d dia tEP

A i s developin g woul d ~ substantiall y affec

tinterest s no t adequatel y represente d b y th e propose d participants . W e do notbeliev e that eac h potentiall y affecte d organizatio n o r individua l mustnecessaril y hav e it s ow n representative . However , w e firmly believ e tha

teac h interes tmus tb e adequatel y represented. Moreover , w e - mus tb e satisfie d thatth e grou p a s a • • • " whol e reflects a prope

r balanc e an d mix o f interests . < :

- C Requests for Representation If , i n response to thi s Notice , a n additional individua

l o r representativ e o f a n interes trequest

s membershi

p o r representatio n i n the negotiatin g group , th e Agency , i n consultatio n with th e facilitator , wil l determin

e whethe r tha

t individual o r representative shoul d b e adde d t o th e group . EP

A wil l make dia t decisio n base d o n whethe r th e ~ individual o r interes t" - - • Woul d b e substantiall y affecte d b y th e rule ; • I s alread y adequatel y represente d i n th e negotiatin g group . u D. Final Notice Afte r evaluatin g the results of th e informationa

l and organizationa

l meetings , and reviewin g an y comment s o n thi s Notic e an d requests fo r representation , EP

A wil l issu e a final notice . Tha

tnotic e wil l announce th e establishmen to

f a Federa l Advisor y Committee and th

e dat e o f th e first meeting , unles s (1 ) EP

A decides , base d o n comment

s and othe r relevant considerations , tha

tsuch actio n i s ' - inappropriate , o r (2

) in th e even tEPA' s charter requesti s disapproved . Th e negotiatio n proces s wil l begi n onc e the Committee i s appropriatel y chartered an d notic e i s publishe d i n th e Federa l Register . E. tentative Schedule ,': . •EP A wil l hol d a

n informationa

l meetin g o n May 16,1989 (10 am) until completion , atThe Hal

l of States . 44

4 N . Capitol St , Washington , D C Thi s meetin g i s open , and potential participant

s ar e encouraged to attend . Th e purpos e of

thi s meetin g i s to : discus s whethe r negotiation s shoul d proceed , an d i f

so , conside r wha tissue s and topics shoul d and shoul d no tb e covered , answe r questions , an d addres s an y othe r procedura

l issue s whic h ma y arise . .•..*.• : I f a n adequate mi x an d balanc e o f partie s attendin g th e informationa l meetin g ar e intereste d i n participatin g i n a negotiation , EP

A wil l hos ta n organizationa

l meetin g withi n tw o week s to discus s ho w th e negotiation s woul d procee d an d ho w th e Committee woul d function . I

f th e organizationa

l meetin g i s successfu l an d charte r . approved , EP

A woul d hol d di e firs t meetin g o f

th e Advisory Committee withi n three week s of

th e organizationa

l meeting . A tthi s meeting , participant s woul d complet

e actio n o n an y procedura

l matters outstandin g from th e organizationa

l meeting , determine ho w bes tt o addres s th e principa

l issues , an d begi n t o addres s them . •-..._;.. ; . . Subsequentmeeting s of

th e * Committee woul d b e hel d onc e o r twice ; a mont h eithe r i n Washington , DC , o r i n Researc h Triangl e Park

. NC , a s determined b y di e Committee , r . .'•'• . r ".;:.• ' Thoug h EP A ha s no tse ta final deadlin e fo r completio n of th e negotiation , i texpect s di e negotiation s ma y las tu p t o si x months . Th e Agenc y . intend s t o terminat

e th e activitie s o f

th e Committee i f

i tdoe s no tappea r likel y t o reach consensu s o n a schedul e tiiatis consisten twith Agenc y rulemaking : •- . needs. . •• / IV . Negotiatio n Procedures Th e followin g procedure s an d guideline s wil l appl y to tiie Committee , if formed , unles s the y ar

e modified a s a * resul tof comment s received o n tiii s Notic e o r durin

g th e negotiatin g process . A. Facilitator EP A wil l us e a neutra

l facilitator . Hi e facilitato r wil l no tb e involve d with th e substantiv e developmento r enforcement o f th e regulation . Th e facilitator' s rol e i s -.-to : -o . •. . • *-V ' .,.: . • Chair negotiatin g sessions ; • Hel p th e negotiatio n proces s ru n smoothly ; an d

• Hel p participant

s defin e an d reach consensus . B. Good Faith Negotiation Sinc e participant

s mus tb e willin g t o negotiat e i n goo d fait

h and b e authorized t o d o s a eac h organizatio n mus tdesignate a senio r officia l t o represen tit s Interests . Thi s applie s t o EP A a s weU . an d Bo

b Ajax . Chief

. Standard s DevelopmentBranch . Office of Ai r Qualit

y Plannin g and Standards , wil l b e EPA' s representative. C Administrative Support and Meetings EPA' s Informatio

n an d Regulator

y System s Divisio n wil l supply logistical , administrativ e and managemen t suppor tMeeting s wil l b e hel d i n th e Washingto n are a o r i n Research Triangl e Park

. N C a tth e convenienc e o f th e Committee . T o suppor tth e negotiations , EP

A ha s pledge d fund s t o a resourc e poo l whic h di e National Institut e fo r Dispute Resolutio n wil l administer . EP

A expect s dia tfund s from privat e foundation s migh

tals o b e available . Th e partie s ma y us e di e fund s fo r such activitie s a s training , technica l support, an d othe r assistanc e whic h th e Committee deem s usefu

L T o giv e committe e member

s maximu m freedom, subjectt o an y applicabl e legal constraints , die y wil l determin e di e procedure s unde r whic h requests for funds wil l b e mad e an d approved . D. Committee Procedures . , Unde r th e general guidanc e an d - . directio n of

th e facilitator , and subjec t t o an y applicabl e lega l requirements , th e member s wil l establis h di e detailed . procedure s for Committee meetin g whic h the y conside r mos tappropriate . K Defining Consensus . . . Th e goa l o f

th e negotiatin g proces s i s consensus . In th$.negotiation s . complete d to-date, consensu s ha s mean t tha teac h interes tconcur s i n di e resul t W e expec tth e participant s t o fashio n thei r ow n workin

g definitio n of

tiiis term . F. Failure of

Advisory Committee to '. Reach Consensus I n th e even tth e Committee i s unabl e t o reach consensus , EP

A wil l procee d t o ' develo p it s ow n approach . Parties t o th e negotiatio n ma

y withdraw a tan

y time , if thi s happens , th e remaining Committee shoul d continue . G. RecordofMeetings In accordanc e with FACA' s

. requirements , EP

A wil l kee p a record o

f al l Advisory Committe

e meetings . Thi s record wil l b e place d i n th e publi c docketfo r thi s rulemaking . EP

A wil l announce Committee meeting s i n th e Federa l Register . Suc

h meeting s wil l b e ope n t o the public . Dated* Apri

l 21,1089 . Rober tHWayiand , Acting Assistant

Administrator, Office of Policy, Planning and

Evaluation. (F RDoc . 89-1006

3 Filed 4-24-89 ; 10:1

7 am ] saia w coo s tese so- «P. 6



### > » 

### f .* 

# I

S3 

# I Tuesda y Apri l 25 , 198 9



# •o.i O .»

' J ? j

•tri e 

# «•> • II I '•^"A^iD.QCKf

v



# Par t X 

# Environmenta l ^ Protectio n Agency Inten t t o For m a n Advisor y Committee t o Negotiate a Ne

w Approac h fo r Contro l o f Volaffl e Organi c Chemica l Equipmen t Leaks ; Notic eP. 7

1794 4 Federa l Registe r / Vol . 54 , No . 7 8 /

Tuesday , Apri l 25 , 198 9 / Notice s



### P. "

l»f" *

•»•--• ! ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTIO N

AGENC Y i [FRLS562-S ] Inten tt o For m a n Advisor y Committe e t o Negotiat e a Ne w Approac h fo r Contro l o f

Volatil e Organi c Chemica l Equipmen tLeak s SUMMARY : EP A i s considerin g establishin g a n Advissr y Committe e unde rth e Federa l Advisor y Committe e Ac t(FACA) . Th e Committee' s purpos e woul d b e t o negotiat e issue s leadin g to a ne w approac h fo rregulatio n o f equipmen tleak s unde rSection s 11 1 an d 11 2 o f th e Clea n Ai rAc ta s amende d Th e Committe e woul d consis to f representative s o f

partie s tha tar e substantiall y affecte d b y th e outcom e o f th e propose d rule . EP A request s publi c commen to n whethe r

• I tshoul d establis h a Federa l Advisor y Committee ; • I tha s properl y identifie d interest s i t believe s ar e affecte d b y th e ke y issue s liste d above : • Regulator y negotiatio n i s appropriat e fo rthi s rulemaking , an d th e exten tt o whic h th e issues , an d procedure s ar e adequat e an d appropriate . Thi s notic e als o announce s tha ta n informationa l meetin g wil l b e hel d o n M a y 1 5 fro m 1 0 a m t o 4 p m a tdi e Hal l o f States , 44 4 N . Capito l St . roo m 337 . Washington , D C t o discus s di e issue s •. - involve d i n th e regulation o f equipmen t leaks , an d whethe rth e Committe e , . shoul d b e formed an d negotiation s * - . proceed. ; .; ; -•.. . —...• ' Thi s meetin g i s ope n an d an y partie s intereste d i n di e negotiatio n ar e r . : - -- . encourage d t p attend . '. . ' " DAT E EP A mos treceiv e comment s an d suggestion s b y Ma y 10,1989." . -.- : v '.•*.'.- V ADDRESS : Comment s shoul d b e * submitte d (i n duplicate , i f possible ) t o Ai rDocke t(LE-131 ) Roo m M-1500 , Environmenta l Protectio n Agency , Attentio n Docke t#A89-10,401 M Stree t SW „ Washington , D C 20460 . A cop y shoul d als o b e sen tt o Bo y Ajax , MD-13 , US. EPA . Researc h Triangl e Park . N C 27711 . Docke t#A89-10 , containin g . material s relevan tt o thi s rulemakin g \ A ma y b e inspecte d atU A EP

A bdtw^e n 8 SK2taEffi"« . item mus t tun. and 4 pjn . o n wwkdays^nrf a j V Baplanne d fo rproposal ; * reasonable fe e ma y b e charge d for C . Hav e a relatively srnal l numbe ro f town*- } ay"\ \ identifiabl e parties , i n a n appropriat e FO RFURTHE RINFORMATIO

N CONTACT : balanc e an d mix . wh o hav e a goo d fait h Fo rinformatio n pertainin g t o the\ ^ J interes ti n negotiating ; establishmen to f

th e negotiatio n -v. f

• Presen ta limite d numbe ro f relate d committe e an d associate d \ v ^ /.^issues , fo r whic h sufficien tinformatio n administrativ e matters'contactUabora h u availabl e fo rresolution ; an d *"' " Dalton . Deput y Directof.ifegulap>r y • Hav e a time facto rtha tlend s som e Negotiatio n Project ^ Iniorinatio n an d urgenc y to reaching consensus . • ' - • • Regulator y Syste m Division , VS. EP A Th e seve n negotiation s conducte d t o (PM-223) . 401 M Stree t8W „ L Washington , D C 2046 0 (202 ) 382-5495 . Fo rinformatio n pertainin g to di e regulatio n o f

equipmen tleak s an d di e regulatory issue s t o b e addresse d i n di e negotiation , contac tBo b Ajax . MD-13 , U.S . EPA . Researc h Triangl e Park . N C ' 27711(919)541-6579 . j£'%%" : " SUPPLEMENTAR Y INFORMATION : Outlin e o f

Notic e -*?" f

^ L EPA' s Regulator

y Negotiatio n Project H . Volatil e Organi c Chemical Equipmen t Lea k Fugitiv e Emission s v:'/ ' A . Nee d fo rRul e Revisio n --%'•' " B . Selectio n a s a Negotiatio n Ite m C . Ke y Issue s fo rNegotiatio n D . Potentia l Interest s an d Participant s v*.^.- * DL Formatio n o f

th e Committe e ' A . Procedur e fo rEstablishin g a n Advisory . Committe e » • jf '.._•. ' B . Participant s ; \ C Request s fo rRepresentatio n ;'•'.' - D . Final Notic e ..*£s&;-i... : :'.: :

- E . Tentativ e Schedul e ' : Cr : - ??*• • IV . Negotiatio n Procedure s " ;•*?••;.•- * &-'•' - A Facilitato r£r' : " s? ^ a Goo d Faith Negotiatio n - b; , C Administrativ e Supportan d Meeting s .. . D . Committe e Procedure s "'ai«jj.*i>i>';* v E . Definin g Consensu s ' ~M:.;£*~>v F . Failur e o f

th e Committe e t o Reac h Consensu s ...

^ V'.^f&sZ.ZC G . Recor d o f

Meeting s til^^f?-'- L EPA' s Regulator y Negotiatio n Projec t EP A establishe d th e Regulator y Negotiatio n Projec ti n 198 3 t o explor e . an d demonstrat e th e valu e o f '.'iV. : .: : . '.'VI negotiatio n an d othe rconsensus ^ /•buildingtechnique s fo rdevelopin g ;- - ,*; • ''-bette rregulation s whic h coul d b e implemente d i n a les s adversaria l setting . y : ' Negotiation s ar e conducte d throug h Advisor y Committee s chartere d unde r; ,• • di e Federa l Advisor y Committe e Ac t (FACA) . Th e goa l o f

th e Committe e i s to --reac h consensu s o n th e languag e o r : issue s involve d i n a rule . I f consensu s i s reached , i ti s use d a s th e basi s o f di e

_ •: . Agency' s proposa l Al l procedura l I•'•' requirement s o f

th e Administrativ e Procedur e Ac tan d othe rapplicable'.' "

. statute s continu e t o apply . EP A ha s develope d criteri a for . 'evaluatio n o f

potentia l item s fo r••'•?:••?": negotiation . T o qualif

y unde rEPA' s dat e hav e aide d di e Agenc y i n bette r

definin g di e issue s an d i n craftin g bette r approaches . Th e seve n regulator y negotiation s were : •" . • Nonconformanc e Penaltie s unde r th e Clea n Ai rAc ta s amended ; Fina l

. rule : Augus t30,198 5

• • Emergenc y Pesticid e Exemption s

. unde rdi e Federa l Insecticide , Fungicid e an d Rodenticid e Ac t(FIFRA) ; Fina l rule :

. Januar y 15.198 8 ••'*-. • • Farmworke rProtectio n Standard s for Agricultura l Pesticide s unde rth e Federa l Insecticide . Fungicid e an d Rodenticid e Ac t(FIFRA) ; Propose d rule : Jul y 8.198 8

• Asbesto s Containin g Material s i n School s unde rth e Asbesto s Hazar d Emergenc y Responsibilit y Ac to f 198 8 (AHERA) ; Fina l rule : Octobe r30,198 7 •'•' . • Ne w Sourc e Performanc e Standard s fo rWoodbumin g Stove s unde rdi e Clea n Ai rAc tFina l rule : Februar y 28 , 0198 8

' » Undergroun d Injectio n o f Hazardou s Wast e unde rth e Hazardou s an d Soli d Wast e Amendment s o f 1984 . : •• ; Fina l rule : Jul y 28,198 8 ''•• * •" • Mino rPermi tModification s unde r d i e Resourc e Conservatio n an d Recover y Ac t(RCRA) ; Fina l rule : Septembe r28,198 8 I n Decembe r1988 , th e Progra m "Evaluatio n Divisio n o f

EPA' s Offic e o f : Polic y Plannin g an d Evaluatio n complete d a n assessmen to f di e regulator y negotiation s program . Th e stud y confirme d dia tnegotiatio n i s especiall y appropriat e i n situation s whic h involv e th e resolutio n o f a limite d numbe ro f

relate d issues , non e o f

whic h -Involv e fundamenta l question s o f valu e o rextremel y controversia l nationa l

• policy . Th e stud y furthe rconclude d tha t

• Negotiate d rulemakin g ca n produc e

, rule s tha tar e mor e pragmati c wit h * bette renvironmenta l results whil e stil l

- meetin g statutor y requirements.

• Negotiate d rule s ar e als o mor e likel y to b e acceptabl e t o th e affecte d

- .industries , th e publi c interes tsector , an d stat e an d loca l government s involve d i n developin g them . • Negotiatio n ma y als o resulti n " earlie rimplementatio n o f a ride b y reducing th e time i ttake s t o procee d fro m propose d t o final rulemaking . : EP A believe s tha tth e benefit s t o al l partie s o f regulatory negotiatio n ar e

. substantial , an d I s committe d t o continue d us e o f

regulatory negotiatio n a n d otha-j rconsensus-base d processe s fo rrulemakin g whe n appropriate .P. 8

1794 6 Federa l Registe r / Vo L 54 . No . 7 8 /

Tuesday , Apri l 25 , 198 9 / Notice s charter and ha s Initiated di e requisit e consultatio n process . Only upo n th e successfu l completio n o f

thi s proces s and th e receip tof

the approved charter wil l EP A for m di e Committee and . commence negotiations . u '•

_ B. Participants The numbe

r of participant

s i n th e grou p i s estimate d t

o b e about1 5 and shoul d no texcee d 25 participants . A numbe r larger tha

n thi s coul d mak

e i t difficultt o conduc

teffectiv e negotiations . One purpos e o f thi s notic e i s t o hel p determinm

e whethe r th e standard matEP

A i s developin g woul d ' substantiall y affec

tinterests no t adequatel y represente d b y th e propose d participants . W e d o no tbeliev e tha t eac h potentiall y affecte d organization o r individua l mustnecessaril y hav e it s ow n representative. However , w e firml y believ e tiiateac h Interestmus tb e adequatel y represented . Moreover , w e mustb e satisfie d tha

tthegrou p a s a whol e reflects a prope

r balanc e an d mi x of interests . C Requests forRepresentation If , i n response to thi s Notice , a n additiona l individua

l o r representativ e o f a n interes trequests membershi p o r representatio n i n th e negotiatin g group , th e Agency , i n consultatio n wit h di e facilitator , wil l determine whethe r tha t individua l o r representative shoul d b e adde d t o th e group . EP

A wil l make tha

t decisio n base d o n whethe r th e individua l o r interes t' * •Woul d b e substantiall y affecte d b y th e rule ; • I s already adequatel y represente d i n th e negotiatin g group . y D. Final Notice After evaluatin g the results o f th e informationa

l and organizationa

l meetings , an d reviewing an y comment s o n thi s Notic e and requests for representation. EP

A wil l issu e a final notice . Tha

tnotic e wil l announce di e establishmen to

f a Federa l Advisor y Committe e an d th e date o f

th e first meeting , unles s (1 ) EP

A decides , base d o n comment

s an d other relevant considerations , tha

tsuch actio n I s inappropriate , o r (2) i n th e even tEPA' s charter reques ti s disapproved . Th e negotiatio n proces s wul begi n onc e di e Committee is appropriatel y chartered and notic e i s publishe d i n m e Federa l Register . E. Tentative Schedule EP A wil l hol d a n informationa l meetin g o n May 15,1989 (10 am) unti l completion , a tTh e Hall o f States . 44

4 N . Capitol St , Washington . D C Thi s meetin g i s open , an d potential participant

s ar e encouraged to attend . Th e purpos e of

thi s meetin g I s to : discus s whethe r negotiation s shoul d proceed , and i f

so , conside r whatissue s and topics shoul d an d shoul d no tb e covered , answe r questions , an d addres s an y othe r procedura

l issue s whic h may arise .

- I f aa adequat

e mi x and balanc e o f partie s attendin g di e informationa l meetin g are intereste d i n participating i n a negotiation . EP

A wil l hos ta n organizationa

l meetin g withi n tw o week s t o discus s ho w th e negotiation s woul d procee d an d ho w di e Committee woul d function . I

f th e organizationa

l meetin g i s successfu l an d charter . approved , EP

A woul d hol d th e first meetin g o f

th e Advisory Committe

e withi n thre e week s o f

th e organizationa

l meeting . A ttins meeting , participant s woul d complet

e actio n o n any procedura

l matters outstandin g fro

m th e organizationa

l meeting , determine ho w bes tto addres s th e principa l issues , an d begi n t o addres s them . . ; Subsequentmeeting s o f

th e : • Committe e woul d b e hel d onc e o r twice ; a mont h eithe r i n Washington , DC , o r i n . Researc h Triangl e Park

, NC , a s - determined b y th e Committee. : ,'•' • - ':: Thoug h EP A ha s no tse ta final deadlin e for completio n of th e negotiation , i texpect s th e negotiation s ma y las tup t o si x months . Th e Agenc y intend s to terminate th e activitie s o f th e Committee i f

i tdoe s no tappea r likel y t o reac h consensu s o n a schedul e tha ti s consisten twith Agenc y rulemaking •• - needs. . .••'•..•••. . IV . Negotiatio n Procedures Th e followin g procedures and guideline s wil l appl y to th e Committee , ff formed , unles s the y ar

e modified a s a ~ resul tof comment s receive d o n thi s Notic e o r durin

g th e negotiatin g process . A. Facilitator EP A wil l us e a neutra

l facilitator . Th e facilitato r wil l no tb e involve d wit h th e substantiv e developmento r enforcement o f th e regulation . Th e facilitator' s rol e i s --to : :* . • -.I.* ' .... . • Chai r negotiatin g sessions ; . • Hel p th e negotiatio n proces s ran smoothly ; and

• Hel p participant

s defin e an d reach consensus . ; B. Good

Faith Negotiation Sinc e participant

s mus tb e willin g t o negotiate i n goo d fait

h and b e authorized t o d o so , eac h organizatio n mus tdesignate a senio r officia l t o representit s Interests . Thi s applie s t o EP A a s weU . and Bo

b Ajax . Chief

. Standard s DevelopmentBranch . Office of Ai r Qualit

y Plannin g and Standards , wil l b e EPA' s representative . C Administrative Support

and Meetings EPA's Informatio

n an d Regulator

y System s Divisio n wil l supply logistical , administrativ e and managemen t suppor tMeeting s wil l b e hel d i n th e Washingto n area o r i n Research Triangl e Park

, NC , a tth e convenienc e o f th e Committee . T o suppor tth e negotiations , EP

A ha s pledge d fund s t o a resource poo l whic h di e National Institut e for Disput

e Resolutio n wil l administer . EP

A expect s dia tfund s fro

m privat e foundation s migh

tals o b e available . Th e partie s ma y us e di e fund s fo r such activitie s a s training , technical support , and odie r assistanc e whic h th e Committe e deem s usefu l T o giv e committe e member

s maximu m freedom , subjec tt o an y applicabl e lega l constrainto , the y wil l determine th e procedures under whic h requests for funds wil l b e mad e an d approved . D. Committee Procedures Unde r di e genera

l guidance an d •*•.

* directio n o f

di e facilitator , an d subjec t to an y applicabl e lega l requirements, th e member s wil l establis h th e detaded . procedure s fo r Committee meetin g whic h die y conside r mos tappropriate . E. Defining Consensus

. . Th e goal o f

di e negotiatin g proces s i s consensus . I

n th e negotiation s ' complete d to-date , consensu s ha s mean t thateac h interes tconcur s i n di e resul t W e expec tdi e participant s t o fashio n thei r ow n working definitio n o f thi s term . F. Failure of

Advisory Committee to . Reach Consensus I n di e even tth e Committee i s unabl e t o reac h consensus , EP

A wil l procee d to develo p it s ow n approach . Partie s t o di e negotiatio n ma

y withdraw a tan y time , i

f thi s happens , di e remaining Committee shoul d continue . G. RecordofMeetings I n accordanc e wid i FACA' s

. requirements . EP

A wU l kee p a record o

f al l Advisory Committee meetings . Thi s recor d -wil l b e place d i n th e publi c docke tfo r thi s rulemaking . EP A wil l announce Committe

e meeting s i n th e Federa l Register . Such meeting s wil l b e ope n t o the public . Dated ; Apri

l 21,1989. Rober tRWayUnd . Acting Assistant

Administrator, Office of Policy, Planning and

Evaluation. (F RDoc . 80-1000 3 File d 4-34-89 ; 10:1

7 am ] SMJJN O COO S IP. 9

Federa l Relato r /

Vo L 54 . No . 7 8 /

Tuesday , Apri l 25 . 196 9 / Notice s 1794 5



# it i

f-r* -

£EU.^T * F

L Volatil e Organic Chenuca l Eqtdpmeaf

t Lea k Fugtttv s Baissfon s A. Need for Rule Revision Fugitive emission s o f

volatil e organi c compounds (VOCs ) fro

m equipment leak s (valves , etc ) contribut e significantiy to ai r quatit

y problems . Curren tregulations adopte d oade r section s 11 1 an d li to f

th e dea n Ai r Ac tan d m Stat e Implementation Plan s (SIPs) hav e bee n effectiv e fatheightenin g awarenes s o

f rb e significanc e o f

thi s source aa d l a attenuating control efiorta . Th e rule s basicall y requir e that eqatpmen ti n plac e b a inspecte d quarterl y for leak s with a portabl e - hydrocarbon detector . I

f concentration s i n exces s o f

10,00 0 pp m ar e fooad, th a '" compooet i i s identifie d a s a leake r an d maintenance i s required . EP A stadia s s a th a earl y 1980s showe d mattypical refineries and chemical plant s havaa a uncontrolled lea k frequency o f t l l o 1 2 percen tMaintsnnnrs studte s indicat e - thi s ca n b e reduce d b y abou tSO-7 0 percentwit

h th e curren

tlea k detectio n and repair program. However , th e actua l frequenc y rale , an d associate d emission s i n particular , var y widel y and ' ar e befeered t o b e a functic a o f origami desig n (eg ^ numbe

r o f vahree ) aa d ag a of the prores s unit, equipmen tselected , quaht y o f maintenance , standar d operatin g procedures use d b y th e company , trainin

g provided t o employees , an d raotivadoB. Recentdat e fo r highl y toad c chemical s demonstrat

e : thai frequencie s t a th e 0J

0 to tpercen t ; rang e ca n b e achieve d t

n som e situations . However , n o on e i s sur e wha t combinatio n o

f factors guarantee s suc h results nor ho w to requir e the m throug h enforceabl e regulations. . Mor e importantly , regulatory ' approache s currentl

y bein g use d d o no t provide fo r quantificatio n o f emissions . Specifie d quantified endssio n estimate s level s ar e necessary to establis h a base lin e an d EP

A need s residual emisetoa s and ris k assessment s t o mak e regulatory decisions . Fo

r example , th

a analyse s o f EP A propose d rule s tha

twoul d limit benzen e emission s (F

RVo L 53 , N a 145 , Jul y 28,1988 ) ar

e base d e n emissio n estimate s from lea k frequencie s typica l - o f the refiner

y industry . Thes e an y significantiy overestimate emission s o f benezeae . . . EP A sea s th e nee d fere ne w •-'' - ^ " regulator y approach , base d o n - performanc

e and/o r emissions , tha twaH i resultin quantifiabl e emissio n levels . . giv e creditfo

r origina l plan tdfsjg a an d motivat e innovation . Develoiq g suc h a n approachuslng EPA' s traditiona l dat a gatherin g an d analysi s approac

h woul d b e very * difficul tcostly , time consumin g and controversial , initial contact s sugges ttha tth e major Industria

l organizations , environmenta l group s and stat e governmen

tassociation s wn l b e receptive, an d (here i s goo d potentia l for identifyin g ne w approache s throug h negotiatio n ma

tare compatibl e wtti i ou r need s an d d w complexit

y o f th e problems . Th e negotiatio n woul d addres s primaril y technical issue s an d woul d no t b e polic y oriented . Th e specifi c go d o f th e negotiatio n woul d b e to develo p a ne w regulatory approac

h tiiatcoul d b e a n alternativ e to o r replacementfor th a curren t4 0 CF R61 , Subpar

tV equipment lea k ndes . Th e negotiatio n woul d addres s di e fonn o f

th e approac

h an d di e relationship betwee n n and eutiia " emission s ba twool d no taddres s stringency . Dependin g upon 1fa e timin g and d egre e o f

success , di e results coul d b e use d to implementth e Agency a upcomin g derisio n o n benzen e equlpmm tleeks . B thi s i s no tpossible , di e results woul d b e use d i n BI B nex t equipmen tlea k standard , which wf u probably b e th e hazardou s organi c National Emissio n Standard s for - HazarrjoraAfrPirfhitanta-tf'-raSHAPs') . B-Selectioaas a Negotiation Item .. - EP A believe s tha

ttire equpmen

tlea k regulations na y b e appropriat e for developmentthroug

h th e regulator

y negotiatio n process . EP

A ha s mad e a prefinanaiy inquir

y o f potential parlie s and representative s o f

identifie d interests t o determin e ff tiiis item satisfie s EPA' s selectio n criteri a for negotiate d rulemaking . O n th e basi s o t thi s preliminar

y inquiry , EP

A believe s tha tthi s item meet s it s selectio n criteri a and tha tnegotiation s ca n b e successful . Affecte d interests are smal l i n number , and EPA' s initia l contact s indicate tha t a n appropriat

e balanc e an d mi x o f group s wfl l b e wffim

g t o participat

e i n goo d farm . EPA' s lea d progra m offic e ha s Identified a numbe

r o f basi c issue s for whic h sufficientinformation i s i n hand (o r wff

l b e develope d durin

g tha neogitations ) fo r resolution. CLKey Issues

forNegotiation EP A anticipate s th e ke y negotiatio n question s wff

l focu s o n ho w to establis h a regirratory approac

h thatwfl h 1 . Achiev e predictable , quantifiabl e emissio n result s 2 . Resulti n th e applicatio n of (h e bes t availabl e technology •

. a. B e enforceabl e 4 . Exhibi tmaximu

m regulator

y consistenc y (e.g. , wit

h slat e permitting requirements; SAR

A reportin

g . requirements) 5 . Provid e Incentive s for bette r design s (e.g. . design s tha

tinvolv e fewe r component s dia thav e di e potentia l t o leak ) 6 . Provid e maximu m flexibility I

n achievin g specifie d result s 7 . Minimize adminlstativ e burden s 8 . Provide for predictabl e complianc e 9 . Provid e time tha tma y b e neede d to Identify, assess , an d Implemen twor k practices , equipmen

tand design s tha

t wil l meetemissio n goals . EP A expect s t o addres s di e following specifi c questions : X. I s leak detectio n and repair a n appropriat

e approach ? I

f so . ho w ca a th e resulU b e quantified ? Shoul d U M definitio n o f

a lea k b e lowered ? Z Shoul d lea k detectio n an d repai r b e require d for flanges and . i

f ao , wha t frequenc y an d lea k deflatio n shoul d b e applied ? A . I s a a amissio n Uml

t(o r a limi to n th e numbe

r o f leakin g components ) a n appropriat

e approach ? Ho w shoul d aud i a n approac

h b e implemented ? 4 . I s a a amissio n limi to a a pe r componen

tbasi s (o r a limi

to n percen t leakin g components ) a n appropriat e ' approach ? Ha w shoid d such a n . . . approac h b e impforaented ? .<'•'

.

. &J s tiiere. a n effectiv e approac h cha t toacoatbinatianoftiMabove? * D. Potential

Interests and

Participants BP A ha s tentatively identifie d di e followin g Us

tof possibl e interest s an d parties : —Chemica

l manufacturin

g hjflitslr y —Petroleu

m refining industr

y —Indastrieedtetliandf

o organi c • - chemical s i n equipmen

ttha tinclude s valves , pampa. compressions , flange s o r open-ende d line s —Environmenta

l .InterestGroups —Stat e and focal ai r pollutio n control agencie s —Manafactarcr

s o f pump s an d valve s —Consortin

g firms involve d i n plan t desig n and eqirfpmen

tspecificatio n —Contractor

s involve d t n constructio n o f

chemical plants and o petroleu

m refinerie s . —Labo r lmfoh s —Odie r Federa l agende s D L Formatio

n o f d w Negotiatin g nouiaiitie e • A. Procechirv

forEstablishing an Adfievty Committee A s a genera

l rute . a a agenc y o f

th e Federa l governmen

ti s require

d t o compl y wit h th e requirement

s o f FAC A whe n itestablishe s o

r use s a grou

p whic h include s non-federal uxmoer s a s a som e of

advice . Under FACA . a n Advisor y Committee i s establishe d oaiy afte r bot h consultatio n wit

h GS A en d receip to f a charter. EP

A ha s prepare d a