Retur n Receip tRequeste d 709 9 340 0 000 9 746 1 495 1 SOLUTI A

Februar y18 , 200 4 Soluti a Inc
.

73 0 Worceste rStree t Springfield , Massachusett s 0115 1 7e/413-788-691 1

Kare n L
. Rega s DEP/BWP/Busines s Complianc e Divisio n On e Winte rStreet , 8 t h Floo r Boston , M A0210 8 Attention : 310CMR7.0 0 Comment s Soluti a appreciate s th e opportunit yt o provid e comment s o n thes e propose d regulations
. Solutia' s Springfiel d facilit yi s th e Commonwealth' s larges tchemica l manufacturin g facility , an d wil l b e significall yimpacte d b ysom e o fth e propose d revision s t o 310CMR7.00
. Soluti a i s concerne d byth e potentia l impact o fth e followin g propose d revisions
. Chang e o fSSEI S Submitta l Dat e Soluti a oppose s th e majo rchang e t o th e submitta l dat e fo rSSEI S reports . Th e propose d revision s t o 31 0 CM R 7.1 2 (2 ) chang e th e deadlin e fro m Apri l 15 t h o f eac h yea rt o Marc h 1 s t , reducin g th e availabl e tim e t o prepar e th e reportfro m 1 4 week s t o onl y8 weeks
. A s a majo rsource , wit h man yemissio n points , Soluti a require s al l o fth e availabl e tim e t o prepar e an d verif you remission s numbers , an d has , i n th e past , requeste d an d receive d extension s i n orde rt o b e abl e t o submi ta n accurat e an d complet e report . Nearl yhal fo fth e propose d eigh t week s wil l b e necessaryt o obtai n final , yea ren d use , throughput , an d financia l data
. Thi s informatio n i s th e startin g poin tfo rcalculatin g emissio n data
. Fro m thi s poin ti ttake s week s o feffortt o identif yan d calculat e emissio n estimate s an d then additiona l week s o feffortvalidatin g an d confirmin g th e emissio n value s t o b e reported
. Eliminatin g si xweek s o fth e curren tsubmissio n tim e seriousl y impact s th e abilit yt o provid e accurat e an d complet e informatio n tha t th e Departmen trequires
. Soluti a strongl yobject s t o th e reductio n o fSSEI S reportin g deadlin e fro m Apri l 15 t h t o Marc h 1 s t , an d request s tha tthi s chang e no tb e incorporate d i n th e fina l rule
.Presumptiv e Approval s fo rLPA s

Soluti a oppose s th e propose d requiremen tt o have a Professiona l Enginee r(PE ) sig n an d sea l al l LP Asubmittal s t o th e DE P (31 0 CM R 7.0 2 (4)(d ) 6 )
. Ou r facilit ydoe s no troutinel yus e th e service s o fa P E fo rLP Apreparatio n an d submittal , s o thi s requiremen twoul d mea n tha tw e woul d b e force d t o paya substantia l fe e t o a consultan tenginee reac h tim e a n LP Ai s submitted
. Thi s wil l greatl yincreas e th e cos to fthes e submittal s t o th e facilit yan d caus e delay s whil e th e P E review s an d sign s th e document
. Fo rmino rchange s tha tinvolv e smal l emissio n increases , suc h a s change s t o productmi xo rmino rdebottlenecking , wher e a n LP Ai s appropriate , P E supporti s no tneeded ; thi s i s especiall ytru e sinc e th e emission s increas e i s base d o n potentia l an d no tactua l emissions
. Typically , th e actua l emission s increas e i s substantiall yles s tha n th e potentia l emission s increase fo rchanges
. Whil e i ti s tru e tha tthi s revisio n wil l shorte n th e approva l tim e t o 6 0 day s fro m th e curren tmaximu m tim e o f9 0 days , i ti s quit e possibl e tha tth e actua l approva l tim e wil l increas e compare d t o previou s experience
. Th e propose d revisio n ensure s tha tth e approva l tim e wil l b e n o les s tha n 6 0 days
. I ti s ou rexperienc e tha tfew , i fany , LPA s utiliz e th e full , current , 9 0 da yrevie wperiod , an d mos t wer e approve d i n muc h les s time , ofte n les s tha n 6 0 days
. Therefore , no t onl y wil l LPA' s cos tSoluti a more , bu tals o wil l increas e th e tim e t o approva l i n contras tt o th e statemen tmad e i n th e Backgroun d Document , Sectio n III , Economi cImpacts
. Visibl e Emission s Soluti a woul d als o lik e t o mak e a suggestio n wit h regard t o th e regulatory requirement s describe d a s visibl e emissions
. I n 31 0 CM R 7 "smok e densit y indicators " ar e require d o fman ysources , whic h i n practic e ar e al l opacit y monitors
. Ou rpowe rgeneratio n facilit yuse s a , PS- 1 complian topacitymonito rt o determin e complianc e wit h visibl e emissio n requirements , althoug h w e d o no t hav e a definitiv e corrolatio n betwee n opacityan d 'th e Chart'
. Th e Chart , o r Ringleman n Scale , i s a simpl e five-poin tscal e tha tcorrelate s t o opacity , bu ti s no topacity
. Soluti a believe s tha t ou rcurren t approac h o fcontinuou s opacit y monitorin g wit h a PS- 1 mete ri s i n th e bes t interes to fcomplianc e an d th e environment , an d woul d lik e t o reques ttha tth e regulatorylanguag e b e update d t o reflectactua l practic e an d curren t technolog yan d specif y'opacity ' an d eliminat e reference s t o 'smok e density'
.

Pag e 2 o f3Alon g thes e lines , w e woul d lik e t o mentio n curren t practice s fo rdeterminin g

complianc e byth e agency . DE P enforcemen tpersonne l ar e traine d i n EPA' s Metho d 9 , a visua l observatio n techniqu e t o determin e opacit ylevels
. The yd o no tus e 'th e Chart'
. Accordingly , th e Departmen ti s no tmeasurin g complianc e agains tth e visibl e emissio n regulation s fo rsmoke
. Soluti a request s th e tha t Departmen tmak e change s t o 310CMR7.06(1)(a ) s o a s t o eliminat e an y referenc e t o 'h e Chart' , an d instea d mak e th e regulatio n relat e t o th e acua l fiel d practic e o fregulatin g opacity
. Thi s wil l hav e th e associate d benefi t o fmakin g clea rwha tth e complianc e standar d i s fo rpurpose s o fcertifyin g complianc e wit h a Titl e VOperatin g Permit
. Sincerely , Ro yP
. Har

t Soluti a Inc
.

Pag e 3 of3