P. 1 

# OAR Box 1834 Prepped byKeeia Richards



### Document

Number: 

# 43 ) IV-F-01 Docket Number: 

# A-90-07

Printed 11/10/20082:14:35PM

Sheet 43 of 61

### P. 2 

### )V-f- o l UNITE DSTATE S OF AMERIC A ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENC Y

INTH E MATTE ROF : [* ' Fuel s an

d Fue l Additive s Registratio n) EP AAi r Docke t Regulations : Propose d Rul e _ T _ ) Docke t #A-90-0 7

Publi c Hearin g o f th e Environmenta l Protectio nAgenc y in th e above-entitle d matter , hel d a t Bes t Wester nDomino' s Farm s Hote l and Conferenc e Center , AnnArbor , Michigan , o n Thursday , May28 , 1992 .

APPEARANCES : RICHAR D WILSO N Director , Offic e o f Mobil e Source s Charle s Gray Director , Regulator yProgram s and TechnologyDivisio n GLEN NPASSAVAN T Chief , Specia l Regulator yProject s Branc h JUD YGRAY Projec t Manager , Specia l Regulator yProject s Branc h JUD YGRAHA

M Offic e o f Researc han d Developmen t MAR YELLE NLEVIN E Offic e o f Genera l Counse l

Wester nWayn e Cour t Reportin g Servic e

Plymouth , Michiga nI ND E X

INTRODUCTIO N Richar d WiIso n P. 3

Pag e

CHEMICA L MANUFACTURER S ASSOCIATIO N Charle s Kelle r Discussio n 6 2 3 AMERICA

NPETROLEUMINSTITUT E John Sepes i Discussio n 4 4 5 7 SOLVAL L CORPORATIO N Ke nWhitte t Discussio n 6 4 6 5 ALKEN-MURRAYCORPORATIO N John Turka l Discussio n 7 2 8 6 AMOC O OI L COMPANY Phili p Bus h 

### 9 2P. 4

AnnArbor , Michiga n Thursday , May28 , 199 2 - 9:0 0 a . 

### m . MR . WILSON : Goo d morning ; m ynam e i s Dic k Wilson , and I' d lik e t o welcom e yo u t o thi s publi c hearin g o n EPA' s propose d regulation s fo r th e registratio n o f fuel s and fue l additives . A s Directo r o f th e Offic e o f Mobil e Sources , I wil l b e servin g a s th e presidin g office r fo r today' s hearing . O nth e pane l wit hm e todayare : Charle s Gray , t o m

yright , Directo r fo r Regulator yProgram s and Technology ; Glen nPassavant , down th e tabl e and Jud yGrayo f th e Regulatio n Developmen t and Suppor t Division ; JudyGraham fro mth e Offic e o f Researc hand Development ; an d MaryElle n Levin e fro mEPA' s Offic e o f Genera l Counsel . Th e purpos e o f thi s hearin g i s t o accep t publi c testimonyan d commen t concernin g th e Notic e o f Propose d Rulemakin g o n Fuel s and Fue l Additive s Registration , whic h appeare d inth e Federa l Registe r o n Apri l 15th . Fo r thos e wh o nee d them , copie s o f th e Federa l Registe r notic e and th e pro pose d regulator ytex t ar e availabl e a t th e bac k o f th e room . EPA' s authorit yt o requir e th e registratio no f moto r vehicl e fuel s and fue l additive s i s containe d i n Sectio n 21 1 o f th e 197 0 Clea nAi r Act , and producer s hav e bee nrequire d t o registe r thei r fuel s an d f .-' additive s wit hth e EPAsinc e 1975 . Th e existin g registra

-P. 5

regulation s requir e producer s t o submi t som e basi c informatio n o n th e identification , compositio nand purpose-in-us e o f thei r fuel s and additives . Thes e regulation s implemen t Section s 211(a ) and 211(b)(1 ) o f th e Act . Th e propose d rul e w e ar e her e t o discus s todaywoul d implemen t th e additiona l registratio nprovision s containe d i nSection s 211(b)(2 ) an d 211(e) , whic hrequir e health , welfar e and emissio ncontro l syste m tes t result s and othe r informatio nt o b e submitte d t o EPAa s par t o f th e registratio n process . I ndevelopin g th e propose d rule , w e hav e ha d t o resolv e manycomple xand sometime s controversia l issue s and hav e trie d t o find th e mos t appropriat e balanc e betwee n th e demand s o f science , publi c polic yand practica l economics . W e believ e th e propose d requirement s ca nfurnis hth e informatio n EPAneed s t o evaluat e th e possibl e advers e effect s associate d wit hfue l and additiv e us e i nmoto r vehicles , whil e offerin g a numbe r o f provision s designe d t o circumscrib e th e potentiall yvas t scop e o f th e progra mand t o kee p th e relate d cost s and burden s a t reasonabl e levels . Whil e w e believ e th e proposa l provide s a useful , balance d an d feasibl e approac ht o a comple xregulator y area , manyissue s remai nt o b e resolve d befor e th e rul e ca n be finalized . Th e proposa l discusse s a numbe r o f alternativ e provision s fo r consideratio n an d ask s fo r publi c commen t o nP. 6

numerou s subjects . Pleas e not e tha t w e ar e preparin g thi s rul e unde r a consen t decree , whic hcall s fo r th e Fina l Rul e t o b e complete d abou t on e yea r fro mnow . Durin g th e nex t fe w months , w e wil l b e makin g a numbe r o f difficul t technica l and polic ydecisions . W e sincerel ywelcom e you r suggestions , whethe r a t today' s hearin g o r in th e subsequen t writte n commen t period . Attendanc e sheet s wer e availabl e in th e lobb ya s yo u arrive d thi s morning , an d i f yo u hav e no t signe d in , pleas e d o s o a t you r convenience . Aseparat e sign-i n shee t fo r presentin g testimonywa s als o availabl e i nth e lobby . I f yo u ar e plannin g t o testif yand hav e no t ye t signe d up , pleas e d o s o a s quick l a s possibl e s o tha t w e ca n anticipat e you r statemen t an d mak e sur e yo u ar e give na tim e slot . Ou r pla ni s t o receiv e th e testimonyin orde r o f sign-up . Th e hearin g wil l continu e throughou t th e dayunti l everyon e wh o wishe s t o giv e testimonyha s bee n heard . I f necessary , w e wil l brea k fo r lunc ha t a convenien t tim e and reconven e afterward . Acour t reporte r i s her e today t o recor d th e proceedings , and anyon e wishin g t o receiv e a copymaymak e individua l arrangement s wit hher . Acopywil l als o b e place d inth e publi c docket . I f ther e ar e an

yquestion s fro mth e 

### vP. 7

audienc e regardin g th e testimonypresente d today , pleas e writ e the m o n a shee t o f pape r and pas s the mforwar d t o th e EPA pane l fo r consideration . Th e writte ncommen t perio d fo r thi s propose d rul e end s o n Jun e 30th . Writte ncomment s shoul d b e addresse d t o Publi c Docke t Numbe r A-90-0 7 a t th e EPA' s Ai r Docket . I t woul d als o b e helpfu l i f a copycoul d b e forwarde d t o u s inAnnArbor , t o th e attentio no f CarolynKrueger . Befor e w e begin , ar e ther e an yquestion s fro mth e audienc e regardin g today' s hearing ? I woul d mentio n tha t on e o f th e participant s aske d t o videotap e th e hearing , s o unles s somebodyobjects , we'l l d o that . An yothe r question s o r comment s befor e w e begin ? I f not , th e firs t witnes s inorde r o f peopl e signin g u

p toda yi s John Turkal . MR . TURKAL : I ha d originall yrequeste d tha t I woul d b e th e las t t o testif yafte r th e variou s associations , AP T and th e Chemica l Manufacturers . I telephone d i n tha t las t week . MR . WILSON : Fine ; nex t the ni s Charle s Keller . MR . KELLER : I' mCharli e Kelle r an d IP. 8

wor k fo r Exxo nChemica l Company , bu t todayI'l l b e representin g th e Chemica l Manufacturer s Associatio nan d presentin g comment s o nbehal f o f th e CMA' s PetroleumAdditive s Panel . Th e Pane l represent s majo r manufacturer s o f per formanc e additive s fo r gasolin e and diese l fuel . Ou r member s includ e manycompanie s tha t you'l l recogniz e includin g Amoco , BASF , Chevron , DuPont , Ethyl , Exxon , Lubrizol , Nalco , Mobile , Texaco , Shell , Shel l International , Roh mGmbH , Roh

mand Has s and Witc o Corporation . Th e manufacturer s represente d o n th e CM A Pane l produc e virtuall yal l o f th e non-oxygenat e fue l additive s use d inU.S . gasolin e and diese l fuel . We'v e bee n activel yparticipatin g in thi s rulemaking , and o f cours e w e remai n vitall yintereste d in it s outcome . Fue l additive s ar e critica l t o th e operatio n o f moder n emission-controlle d vehicles , and w e believ e tha t additive s wil l gai n i nimportanc e a s th e 199 0 Clea n Ai r Ac t i s implemented . Therefore , w e believ e tha t an y fue l additiv e regulation s unde r Sectio n211(b ) shoul d encourage , and certainl yno t interfer e with , th e us e and developmen t o f fue l additive s whic har e essentia l t o achievin g thes e critica l objective s unde r th e 199 0 Clea nAi r Act . I n ou r revie wo f th e Apri l 1 5 NPRM , w e note d a broa d spectrumo f technica l and procedura l issue s tha tP. 9

w e wil l addres s late r i nou r detaile d writte ncomments . Today I' d lik e t o focu s m ypresentatio no njus t a fe wo f wha t w e conside r t o b e th e reall yfe wke ypoint s tha t ar e raise d i n th e propose d rule . First , whil e w e woul d lik e t o reall y complimen t EPAo n it s effort s thu s far , and I thin k there' s bee n a lo t o f progres s mad e fro mth e ANPR Mi nterm s o f gettin g th e issue s o nth e tabl e and focusin g o nwha t w e thin k ar e th e keyissues , w e d o believ e tha t th e proposa l leave s a numbe r o f critica l issue s unresolved , and certainl yI thin k th e NPRM recognize s tha t a s wel l i nterm s o f raisin g option s and question s abou t wha t th e bes t approac hmaybe . I thin k I ca n characteriz e ou r comment s int o tw o majo r area s whic hI'l l b e workin g today . First , an d mos t importantly , an yrule

makin g unde r Sectio n 211(b ) shoul d no t b e a nimpedimen t t o achievin g critica l objective s o f th e 199 0 Clea nAi r Act . Th e additive s industr yi s concerned , and i nfac t I woul d sayvery concerned , tha t regulator yoption s identifie d inth e proposa l coul d stifl e produc t innovatio n and registratio no f ne w additive s tha t ca n advanc e clea n ai r objectives . I n particu

lar , w e fea r tha t som e aspect s o f thi s propose d rulemakin g coul d adversel yaffec t implementatio no f regulation s unde r Sectio n211(1) , th e Detergen t Additiv e Specificatio nP.1 0

requirements , and Sectio n 211(k) , Reformulate d Gasolin e o r RFG . Th e additiv e industr ybelieve s tha t th e Sectio n 211(b ) registratio nrequiremen t mus t b e consisten t wit hthes e tw o ne w developin g regulations , bu t a t thi s junctur e w e thin k tha t EPA i s considerin g option s tha t ar e reall yincompatibl e wit hth e goal s o f th e tw o regulation s I've noted . Secondly , th e Pane l support s EPA' s genera l approac ho f groupin g fuel s base d upo ncharacteristic s o f th e rawproduc t and o nth e us e o f a tiere d approac hfo r submittin g emission s and biologica l data . I naddition , w e think th e Agenc yha s appropriatel yfocuse d th e rulemakin g o nth e collectio n o f emission s informatio n rathe r tha n o nth e rawfuel s and fue l additives . Althoug hw e suppor t thes e tw o genera l concept s o f wha t I'l l cal l groupin g and tiering , th e Pane l doe s hav e a numbe r o f concern s regardin g th e specifi c proposal s in th e propose d rule , and w e wil l b e suggestin g som e modification s t o th e groupin g and tierin g procedures . I' d lik e t o emphasiz e tha t w e think tha t bot ho f thos e concept s ar e goo d ideas , an d it' s no wreall yanissu e o f ho wthos e wil l b e implemente d and actuall yho wth e procedure s wil l wor k unde r th e regulations . A s I g o throug hthis , you'l l se e tha t ther e ar e som e area s wher e we'v e take nagreemen t wit hth e propose d rule s and som e area s where , I think , w e coul d characteriz e i t a s aP.1 1

disagreemen t wit hth e tac k take nin th e rule . I hop e tha t ou r comment s ar e constructive . I don' t mea nan yo f the mt o b e take nnegativel yo r personally . On e o f th e Panel' s principa l concern s i s tha t regulatio n unde r Sectio n211(b ) mus t b e consisten t wit h othe r curren t rulemakin g unde r th e Clea nAi r Act . Whil e w e hav e no t participate d i n th e Sectio n211(k ) RF GRegulator y Negotiation , w e hav e observe d tha t th e curren t RF Gproposa l take s an entirel ydifferen t regulator ytac k t o qualifyin g fuels . Th e RF Grulemakin g relie s upo nwha t EPAconcede s i s a massiv e bod

yo f dat a o n automotiv e emission s t o creat e mathematica l model s fo r predictin g combustio nemission s fro m gasoline s o f varyin g composition . Fro mth e existin g data , EP A ha s alreadyderive d what' s no wcalle d a "Simpl e Model " fo r RF G emissio nand wil l b e issuin g a Fina l Rul e fo r a "Comple x Model " withi n nin e months . Now , simila r model s hav e no t ye t bee n develope d fo r diese l fuels , bu t w e believ e ther e i s probabl y als o sufficien t dat a o ndiese l fue l emission s relativ e t o fue l composition . Th e databas e mayno t b e a s extensiv e a s i t i s fo r gasoline , bu t w e fee l there' s a lo t o f dat a ou t ther e o n diese l fue l and diese l fue l emissions . I n th e RF Grulemaking , EPAha s expresse d a stron g regulator ypreferenc e fo r usin g mathematica l model s 

### 1 0P.1 2 •* 1

rathe r tha n actua l vehicl e emission s testing . I nfact , th e propose d RF Grul e allow s fo r testin g onl yunde r verylimite d and circumscribe d condition s an d fo r a limite d tim e period , a t whic hpoin t th e mathematica l mode l mus t b e used . I n th e cas e o f th e RF Grule , EPAha s clearl yindicate d tha t th e massiv e quantit yo f existin g dat a linkin g fue l compositio nand emission s i s a mor e reliabl e predicto r tha nanemission s testin g progra mo nan ysingl e fue l and a singl e emission s test . No wi ncontrast , and recognizin g ther e ar e slightl ydifferen t regulator yobjectives , th e curren t proposa l fo r Sectio n211(b ) regulatio nfocuse s upo nfuel s an d fue l additive s testin g i npreferenc e t o us e o f existin g data . Whil e th e propose d rul e indicate d tha t existin g dat a ca n b e submitte d inlie u o f Tie r I I tes t data , w e believ e tha t EPA ha s structure d th e Propose d Rul e and it s timetabl e s o tha t n o manufacture r woul d tak e th e ris k o f havin g thei r fue l o r fue l additiv e registration s voide d i f EPAwer e t o decid e tha t th e existin g dat a submitte d inTie r I di d no t mee t th e regulator y requ i rements . Th e Pane l strongl yurge s EPAt o conside r focusin g th e 211(b ) regulation s mor e precisel yo r strongl yo n existin g emission s data , rathe r tha ncreatin g a regulator y scenari o tha t essentiall yforces, and I thin k inadvertentl y



## : I_L _P.1 3

forces , manufacturer s t o conduc t testing , eve ni f equivalen t and sufficien t informatio nalreadyexists . Thi s i s a situatio n o f risk-taking . I don' t thin k an ymanufacture r i s goin g t o b e willin g t o tak e a ris k withou t knowin g tha t you'l l accep t Tie r I existin g dat a and potentiall yvoi d a fue l o r fue l additiv e registratio n tha t coul d essentiall ywip e hi mou t o f th e market . S o i t essentiall yforces , eve nthoug hth e rul e allow s fo r th e submissio no f Tie r I data , w e don' t thin k tha t tha t allowanc e create s a leve l playin g field . No wa critica l timin g issu e fo r ou r Pane l i s th e effec t o f Sectio n211(b ) rulemakin g o n implementatio n o f th e Detergen t Additiv e Specification s and RFG . EPAi s currentl ydevelopin g regulations , and th e statut e require s tha t al l gasoline s contai nadditive s t o mee t thes e specification s b

yJanuar y1 , 1995 . Sinc e i t i s anticipate d tha t th e Fina l Rul e fo r 211(b ) wil l no t b e issue d unti l Mayo f 1993 , thi s woul d giv e additiv e manufacturer s a maximumo f 1 8 month s t o develo p dat a fo r registratio no f a ne wadditive . W e believ e thi s i s impossible . W e don' t thin k i t ca nb e don e fo r a numbe r o f reasons , whic hwe'l l ge t int o mor e detai l in ou r technica l writte ncomments . Hence , additive s manufacturer s wil l b e unabl e t o registe r ne wadditive s whic hwil l b e neede d t o mee t th e requirement s o f th e 211(1 ) Detergen t Additiv e regulation s whic hwil l b e takin g effec t i n'95 . 1 2P.1 4

Whil e i t i s a littl e prematur e t o mak e an yabsolut e statements , w e als o believ e tha t ne wadditives , and henc e ne wadditiv e registrations , wil l b e require d fo r RFG , whic hi s mandate d als o fo r Januar yo f 1995 . RF Gwil l resul t in additiona l produc t performanc e challenge s fo r th e additive s industry , sinc e reformulate d gasolin e i s differen t fro m curren t conventiona l gasoline , and a s wit hth e 211(1 ) requirement s I note d before , Sectio n 211(b ) coul d imped e o r eve n preven t u s fro mrespondin g wit hth e bes t additiv e product s fo r RFG . W e believ e thi s timin g effec t o f th e Sectio n 211(b ) regulation s o nfuel s and fue l additive s complianc e wit h211(1 ) and (k ) i s a very , veryseriou s issu e wit hpotentiall ydisastrou s consequence s fo r ou r industry . Th e 211(b ) regulation s coul d resul t i nwha t woul d amoun t t o an unintende d moratoriumo nth e registratio no f ne wproducts , jus t a t a tim e whe n thes e ne wproduct s ar e neede d t o mee t Clea n Ai r Ac t initiatives . Th e additive s industr ystrongl ybelie. e tha t th e highl ypositiv e environmenta l benefit s o f th e RF Gan d th e Gasolin e Detergen t Additiv e regulation s shoul d no t b e compromise d b

yregulation s unde r 211(b) . Clearly , w e thir t EPAmus t carefull yconside r thes e broade r consequence s i n : • s 211(b ) rulemak i ng .P.1 5

I' d lik e t o shif t gear s jus t a littl e bi t and tal k abou t th e availabilit yo f facilitie s fo r doin g th e Tie r I I biologica l testing . No wthi s als o constitute s anothe r critica l timin g issu e i n th e availabilit yo f testin g facilitie s fo r Sectio n 211(b ) testing . Whil e w e believ e tha t ther e ar e contractors , contrac t labs , capabl e o f conductin g emissio n speciatio n testing , w e believ e ther e ar e n o contractor s wh o currentl yar e capabl e o f bot hgeneratin g combustio nemission s and conductin g biologica l testin g o n thos e emissions . Ther e ar e lab s tha t d o engin e testin g tha t ca n generat e combustio n emissions , and ther e ar e othe r lab s tha t ca nd o a grea t jo bwit htoxicolog ytesting . Unfortunately , non e o f thes e lab s ar e connecte d togethe r and in fac t i nou r revie wo f th e availabl e facilities , ther e are a n o lab s currentl ytha t d o both . W e thin k th e EPAcome s t o th e sam e conclusio nin th e propose d rule , tha t thes e facilitie s currentl yjus t don' t exist , and thes e test s hav e no t bee n run a s specifie d i n th e NPRM . No wgive nth e lac k o f facilities , w e ar e veryconcerne d wit hth e propose d timetabl e fo r Tie r I I dat a submission . Whil e w e recogniz e you r statutor yconstraint s unde r 211(e) , we'r e afrai d tha t n o independen t laborator ywil l b e abl e t o construc t facilities , develo p protocol s and , mos t importantly , validat e th e testin g withi na tim e fram e whic h
1 4P.1 6

woul d allo wus , th e industry , t o submi t dat a withi nth e thre e yea r statutor y211(e ) window . W e believ e EPAmus t mor e thoroughl yevaluat e laborator yavailabilit yand gai n an understandin g o f th e effor t require d t o develo p th e workin g protocol s and especiall yt o validat e thes e protocol s i nactua l engin e toxicolog ytesting . Yo u reall ynee d t o becom e mor e familiar , I think , wit hth e challenge s tha t ar e goin g t o b e face d in term s o f doin g thes e kind s o f studies , and w e think they'r e substantial . I' d no wlik e t o commen t o n EPA' s propose d approac ht o testin g and dat a submission , and thi s i s ou r genera l suppor t o f th e groupin g and tierin g concepts . A s I indicate d earlier , th e Pane l support s EPA' s proposa l t o group fuel s an

d t o utiliz e a tiere d approac ht o testin g and dat a submission . W e believ e th e groupin g and tierin g proposals , incombinatio nwit hth e focu s upo nevaporativ e combustio nemissions , ar e a sensibl e solutio nt o collectin g informatio n fo r thousand s o f registere d fuel s and fue l additives . W e agre e wit hEPAtha t fue l grouping , accordin g t o th e compositio no f th e ra wuncombuste d fuel , i s a nappropriat e basi s fo r testin g and registration . W e als o agre e tha t th e tiere d approac ht o dat a submissio n allow s fo r th e mos t effectiv e us e o f resources , ye t allow s fo r a professional , scientifi c revie wo f th e dat a and fo r a nassessmen t o f furthe r j 

### 1 5 

### IP.1 7



### testin g and dat a needs . Eve nthoug hw e strongl ysuppor t thes e tw o genera l concept s o f groupin g an d tiering , th e additive s industr yha s severa l specifi c concern s whic hI woul d lik e t o briefl ydiscuss , and we'l l b e submittin g mor e detaile d comment s fo r th e Docke t o neac ho f thes e issues . Th e firs t issu e i s tha t baselin e fuel s shoul d includ e typica l additives . First , w e believ e tha t gasolin e and diese l fue l additive s tha t mee t 21 1 sub-si m criteri a shoul d b e explicitl yinclude d i nth e baselin e fue l formulatio n fo r eac hfue l family . Fo r gasolin e additive s w e believ e tha t th e additiv e o r additive s i nth e baselin e fue l shoul d mee t th e upcomin g requirement s o f 211(1) , th e Detergen t Fue l Additiv e regulations , sinc e al l gasolin e wil l b e require d t o mee t thi s performanc e standar d i n199 5 and beyond . Thi s become s essentiall ybaselin e fue l in'95 . I naddition , w e believ e tha t baselin e gasolin e shoul d als o contai n additive s necessar yfo r rus t protectio n and othe r essentia l functions . Th e 211(1 ) detergen t regulation s reall yaddres s onl yon e specifi c aspec t o f gasolin e and gasolin e additiv e performance . Ther e ar e man y othe r essentia l function s in gasolin e whic har e necessary . Similarly , baselin e diese l fuel s shoul d contai nadditive s typicall yuse d i ncommercia l fuels , suc ha s lowtemperatur e

i 6 IP.1 8

flo wimprovers , cetan e improver s and corrosio ninhibitors . CM Aoppose s a specifi c requiremen t tha t th e tes t fuel s contai n eithe r th e minima l require d additiv e o r th e maximum concentratio n recommende d b yth e manufacturer , sinc e w e believ e bot ho f thes e case s mayno t b e representativ e o f commercia l fuels . W e believ e reall ytha t th e additiv e trea t fo r a particula r baselin e fue l shoul d b e se t takin g tha t fue l int o consideratio n a s wel l a s what' s bein g commerciall yuse d in th e marketplace . We'r e no t sur e tha t concept s a s simpl e a s maximum

recommende d concentratio n o r minima l require d additiv e reall yhav e muc hmeanin g i nterm s o f th e rea l world . Asecon d point , CM Abelieve s tha t th e curren t proposa l o ntiere d submissio no f dat a need s t o b e modifie d inligh t o f th e unavailabilit yo f Tie r I I biologica l testin g facilitie s and th e timin g proble mwit hregistratio no f ne wadditive s neede d fo r complianc e wit h211(k ) and (1) . I t i s no t possibl e t o conduc t and submi t Tie r I I testin g i n tim e fo r eithe r th e 199 5 implementatio n o f (k ) and (1) , o r befor e th e thre e yea r statutor y211(b ) deadline , wha t we'r e termin g th e timin g effects . CM Abelieve s tha t EPAmus t reconside r th e schem e fo r Tie r I I testin g and th e timetabl e fo r submissio n o f thi s data . W e suggest , and thi s i s a step-out , bu t we'r e goin g t o sugges t i t anyway , tha t rathe r tha n requir e !__ _P.1 9

submissio n o f bot hTie r I and Tie r I I data , tha t onl yth e Tie r I informatio n b e require d withi n th e thre e yea r tim e frame . EPAcoul d the nevaluat e existin g o r ne wemissio nspeciatio n tes t dat a fo r eac hfue l grouping , comparin g i t t o baselin e fuel s and t o existin g dat a suc ha s th e extensiv e testin g bein g conducte d unde r th e Auto/Oi l Program , whic hi s bein g use d fo r developmen t o f th e comple xmode l unde r th e RF Grule . Base d upo nthi s assessment , EPAcoul d the nrequir e Tie r I I testin g i f emission s characterizatio n indicate d tha t a particula r fue l ha d a nemission s profil e whic hraise d potentia l healt h concerns . Recogniz e als o tha t Tie r I dat a submission s wil l includ e a verycomprehensiv e searc ho f th e existin g healt h effect s and toxicologica l informatio nthat' s bee npublishe d and unpublishe d s o tha t Tie r I wil l b e a prett ycomprehensiv e vie wo f wha t i s ou t ther e now . However , w e believ e a revie w o f Tie r I informatio nwil l indicat e tha t ther e i s n o nee d fo r additiona l testin g o f sub-si mgasolin e and diese l fuels . That' s ou r own expectatio n base d upo nwha t w e thin k i s ou t there . I t mayno t b e EPA' s conclusio nafte r reviewin g th e data , bu t w e though t we' d tel l yo u wha t w e expect . CM Abelieve s thi s alternativ e approac h woul d b e mor e consisten t wit hothe r Clea nAi r Ac t regulations , wit hexistin g dat a and wit hth e statu s o f currentl yavailabl e facilitie s and testin g protocols , and w e als o think i tP.2 0

satisfie s you r statutor yrequirements . Th e thir d poin t we' d lik e t o make , CM A believe s tha t EPAshoul d tak e a broade r vie wo f existin g dat a submitte d in Tie r I a s alternative s t o specifi c Tie r I I tests . I gues s we'r e a littl e bi t concerne d abou t som e o f th e wordin g i nth e preambl e and som e o f th e discussio ninth e preambl e discussin g th e sufficienc yo f Tie r I dat a i nlie u o f Tie r I I data , and w e thin k EP A shoul d accep t existin g Tie r I dat a whic hmayb e equivalent , bu t no t necessaril yidentica l t o Tie r I I protocol s whic har e specifie d i n th e propose d rule . No w thi s i s a commo nprocedur e unde r TSCA , wher e TSCAfo r submissio no f premanfacturin g notice s wil l accep t wha t I cal l read-acros s dat a o nsimila r materia l o r wil l accep t non-GO P protocol s wher e ther e wa s evidenc e o f adequat e scientifi c conduc t o f th e studies , jus t non-complianc e wit hspecifi c GO P requirement s o nrecord-keeping , bu t wher e th e validit yo f th e studywasn' t questioned , fo r example . I naddition , wha t we'r e talkin g abou t i s th e us e o f epidemiologica l studie s o r huma n exposur e studies , th e kind o f thing s tha t you' d us e i n a ris k assessmen t typ e o f situation . No wEP A recognize d tha t there' s a lo t o f existin g dat a i n th e RF Grulemaking . Th e curren t Sectio n211(b ) rulemakin g als o recognize s thi s existin g informatio n b

yrequirin g submissio n o f existin g dat a i n th e Tie r I literatur e searc han d submission . However , th eP.2 1

propose d rul e woul d see mt o requir e Tie r I I tests , unles s thes e precis e test s wer e submitte d inTie r I . W e think th e Agenc yshoul d tak e a littl e bi t broade r vie wo f this . I naddition , w e believ e ther e ar e substantia l dat a availabl e o nemissio nspeciatio no f sub-si m fuel s and tha t additiona l Tie r I emissio ntestin g mayno t b e needed . Again , thi s i s ou r expectatio no f what' s ou t there , and yo u mayo r mayno t agre e whe n i t finall ycome s down t o it . W e believ e th e curren t approac hi s to o narro wanapproac han d tha t EPAneed s t o conside r al l th e availabl e dat a usin g a weigh t o f th e evidenc e approac hi nassessin g Tie r I dat a and what' s neede d unde r Tie r I I o r eve npotentiall yTie r III . Th e fourt hpoint , CM Astrongl ysupport s EPA' s suggestio ntha t testin g coul d b e conducte d b y manufacture r consortia . W e believ e tha t dat a submission s wil l in fac t b e handle d b yconsorti a and reques t tha t EPAinclud e in th e regulation s provision s whic hsuppor t thi s approach . However , w e woul d lik e th e industr yt o b e allowe d t o form testin g consorti a withou t direc t Agenc yinvolvement . S o wha t we'r e askin g for , I think , i s encouragemen t and no t regulator y barrier s t o th e formatio n o f thes e consortia . Akeyt o succes s o f th e consorti a approac hwil l b e a workabl e mechanis mfo r dat a compensation . Whil e th e NPRMnote s th e TSCASectio n4 , that' s th e existin g 2 0P.2 2

chemical s testin g procedure s fo r cost-sharing , w e d o no t believ e tha t TSCAprovide s th e bes t mode l fo r obtainin g fundin g fro m

non-participatin g companies . I nfact , th e NPRM note s tha t thi s mechanis mexists , and I think i t als o note s tha t it' s actuall yneve r bee nimplemented , and on e o f th e reason s fo r tha t i s becaus e th e approac hreall yi s s o burdensom e o n thos e payin g fo r th e studie s tha t it' s no t wort h th e effor t t o tryt o ge t non-participant s t o chi p in wha t may b e a relativel ysmal l amoun t o f mone yo nth e orde r o f ten s o f thousand s o f dollars . S o I gues s withi nth e industr ywe'r e no t quit e s o sur e tha t th e Sectio n4 dat a compensatio n mechanism s reall ywor k verywell . We' d lik e t o propos e an alternat e approac hinou r writte n comments , bu t quit e frankly , w e haven' t com e u p wit hon e yet , s o we'l l wor k o nthat . Beyond th e nee d fo r a dat a compensatio n mechanism , w e believ e EPAshoul d allo windustryt o form consorti a withou t Agenc yinvolvement . W e think tha t th e fre e marke t reall ywork s prett ywel l i nthi s regard , and that' s bee n tru e unde r TSCA . I thin k mos t companie s ar e prett y satisfie d wit hTSCASectio n4 group dat a submission s and th e waythat' s bein g handle d withi ntrad e associations . Nex t point , w e strongl ysuppor t inclusio n Optio nB fo r oxygenate d fuels . No wth e EPA requeste d comment s o n th e inclusio no f oxygenate d fuel s and _ 1 _P.2 3

th e baselin e formulatio nclas s fo r gasoline . Additiv e manufacturer s strongl ysuppor t th e inclusio no f wha t EPAha s identifie d a s "Optio n B. " W e believ e emissio ntestin g dat a generall ysuppor t inclusio n o f al l oxygenate d fuel s int o a singl e group , wit hth e cavea t tha t w e hav e note d tha t thi s issu e i s no wbein g addresse d in th e Supplementa l NPRMfo r RFG , and tha t ther e mayb e som e oxygenate d fuel s whic har e exception s t o th e statemen t whic hI jus t made . I thin k th e Auto/Oi l progra mand som e additiona l testin g unde r th e RF G wil l probabl yfles hou t exception s t o th e oxygenat e rule . Fo r th e non-oxygenat e sub-si m performanc e additive s tha t w e actuall ymanufacture , w e d o no t believ e ther e i s an ypoin t t o conductin g separat e testin g o f thes e additive s wit heac htyp e o f oxygenate d fuel . W e believ e a singl e tes t o f thes e additive s i n a baselin e formulatio n i s sufficient , a s i t i s expecte d tha t sub-si madditive s wil l no t adversel yaffec t emission s a t th e concentration s tha t they'r e bein g used , th e type s o f additive s tha t ar e bein g used , e t cetera , e t cetera , al l that' s include d i nth e sub-si m definition . I' ma t th e poin t o f summarizin g now ; whil e th e additive s industr ygenerall ysupport s th e overal l approac ht o fuel s and fue l additive s testin g propose d in th e Apri l 1 5 propose d rule , w e ar e concerne d abou t som e o f th e 2 2P.2 4

specifi c procedure s and requirements . Ou r greates t concer n i s tha t th e propose d regulatio n woul d hav e th e effec t o f inadvertentl ystiflin g th e innovatio nrequire d t o mee t othe r Clea n Ai r Ac t fue l requirements . W e d o no t believ e tha t th e very , veryimportan t objective s o f th e 211(k ) RF Grul e and th e 211(1 ) Detergen t Additiv e rul e shoul d b e compromise d o r eve n pu t a t ris k fo r wha t w e thin k ar e th e muc hmor e modes t objective s o f thi s Sectio n211(b ) rulemaking . We , therefore , urg e EPAt o reconside r som e o f th e issue s raise d i nthi s proposa l in ligh t o f th e RF GReg-Ne g outcom e and th e principa l goa l o f improvin g fue l and fue l additiv e performance . W e believ e tha t Sectio n 211(b ) rulemakin g ca n b e consisten t wit hthes e other , mor e critica l Clea n Ai r Ac t objectives , and tha t th e genera l approac h outline d i nth e propose d rul e i s stil l applicable , a s long a s keymodification s ar e mad e i n th e groupin g an d tierin g procedures . Mos t importantly , w e believ e thi s ca nb e accomplishe d withou t compromisin g an ysignifican t environ

menta l o r healt hobjectives ; than k you . MR . WILSON : Than k yo u verymuc hfo r comin g and fo r you r testimony . MR . GRAY : Coul d yo u explai na litt' e mor e specificall yth e sens e o f th e conflic t tha t yo u se e «-*. n th e othe r Clea r Ai r Ac t fue l requirements , take , fo r exa^c'- .P.2 5

th e reformulate d gasolin e requirement ? I understan d th e concept s tha t yo u pu t across , bu t I don' t quit e ge t you r poin t o f i t i n a specifi c cas e ho wi t woul d reall yb e inconsistent ? MR . KELLER : I s thi s th e timin g effect , yo u mean ?

t o time , MR . GRAY : I assume d yo u wer e relatin g

MR . KELLER : Yes . MR . GRAY : Yo u wer e talkin g abou t th e timin g o f th e program , bu t stil l i f yo u coul d giv e u s a n exampl e mayb e t o b e sur e it' s clearl yunderstood ? assumptio n gasoline , ne wfuel s assumptio n MR . KELLER : Okay , let' s wor k o n th e

tha t RF Go r 211(1 ) detergen t additiv e fuel , wil l requir e ne wregistration s o f ne wadditive s o r in orde r t o mee t th e RF Gand 211(1 ) requirements .

MR . GRAY : I s tha t a critica l 

### ? MR . KELLER : Yes , it' s a critica l bu t a ver yreasonabl e assumption . Fo r a t leas t som e o f ou r membe r companies , certainty . goin g t o h that' s anabsolut e certainty , and I mea nabsolut e

RF Ggasoline s ar e no t no wregistered . They'r e av e t o b e registered . They'r e goin g t o hav e t o contai nfue l additive s whic hi nal l probabilit ywil l b e d i fferent . No wth e Detergen t Additiv e Performanc e rul e ha s 

### 2 4P.2 6 

### 1

no t ye t eve n reache d th e propose d rul e stage , s o we'r e no t sur e wher e th e performanc e specification s ar e goin g t o be set . MR . GRAY : I think that' s a keypoint . You'r e no t sayin g tha t i t ha s t o b e anentirel yne wfuel , bu t tha t sinc e it' s a ne wrequirement , ther e ma yb e certai n companie s tha t wil l fee l in th e marketplac e t o b e competitiv e o r wha t hav e you , tha t the ywil l nee d t o offe r a ne wproduc t i norde r t o b e abl e t o reall yparticipat e inth e marke t fo r thos e ne wrequirements . MR . KELLER : That' s a certaint yfo r som e gasolin e marketer s wh o ar e no t selling , fo r instance , gasolin e whic hno wmeets , say , th e 211(1 ) detergen t additive s standards . I think yo u kno wi nothe r rulemakin g discussion s we'v e state d tha t wher e w e thin k tha t standar d i s goin g t o end u p i s probabl yme t b yth e majorit yo f gasoline s currentl y bein g sol d in 1992 , bu t there' s a minorit yo f fuel s whic hd o no t mee t th e expecte d 211(1 ) standard s a s o f toda yand probabl ywon' t mee t the munti l th e requirement s tak e effec t i n '95 . S o fo r thos e fuels , the ywil l requir e ne wregistration s wit hne wadditives . No wthos e mayb e alreadyexisting , regis

tere d additives , bu t a t leas t th e fue l maynee d registration . I naddition , o nth e additive s sid e we'r e prett ysur e tha t we'r e goin g t o hav e t o registe r ne wadditive s fo r 211(1 ) and fo r 211(k) . The ymayb e reformulation s o f
2 5P.2 7

existin g components , bu t unde r curren t rule s they'r e goin g t o requir e ne wregistration . S o I thin k it' s a virtua l certaint y tha t bot h211(1 ) and 211(k ) ar e goin g t o requir e ne wadditiv e an d ne wfue l registratio nfo r virtuall yever ycompany participating . I t mayb e differen t fo r eac hcompany . I can' t stat e wit han

ycertainty , bu t it' s a certaint ytha t ne w registration s wil l b e required . S o takin g tha t a s a baselin e assumption , le t m e mov e int o th e timin g effect . Th e proble mbecome s tha t effectiv e wit hthi s rul e w e wil l no t b e abl e t o registe r an y ne wadditives , and wit hth e expecte d effectiv e dat e of , say , Jun e 1 , 1993 , fo r example , w e woul d no t b e abl e t o registe r an yne wadditive s afte r tha t dat e unles s w e submitted , a s propose d here , Tie r I and Tie r I I data . Wha t we'r e sayin g is , w e canno t generat e Tie r I I dat a becaus e existin g facilitie s d o no t exist . W e don' t eve nthin k w e ca ngenerat e i t withi n th e thre e yea r windo wthat' s allowe d unde r 211(e) , neve r min d th e 1 8 mont hwindo wtha t we'r e goin g t o hav e fo r commercializatio n o f thos e product s fo r 211(1 ) and (k) . S o we'r e saying , it' s a virtua l impossibilit yfo r u s t o b e abl e t o registe r ne w additive s t o mee t RF Gand detergen t additiv e requirement s unde r (1 ) and (k ) b yJanuar y1 , '95 , and w e don' t eve n t h••-,; < w e ca nmee t th e thre e yea r windo wfo r wha t amount s t o re registratio n o f existin g additive s whic har e i nth e mari-e

-P.2 8

plac e prio r t o nex t June . That' s th e timin g effect , and it' s a very , veryseriou s effec t becaus e i f thi s fall s out , a s I've jus t described , i t coul d caus e som e sever e dislocation s withi n th e industr yfo r wha t w e se e a s very , verymodes t environ

mental , healt hand environmenta l safet yobjectives . W e reall y thin k yo u nee d t o tak e a har d loo k a t tha t timin g effec t an d wha t happen s inth e rea l world . MR . GRAY : S o i nessenc e it' s reall ya n argumen t tha t an

ycompanytha t need s t o b e abl e t o respon d t o on e o f th e othe r regulation s wit ha ne wproduc t reall ybe , fairnes s suggests , shoul d b e give na nopportunit yt o b e abl e t o registe r i t unde r thes e provision s i norde r t o no t b e preclude d fro mth e initia l marke t that' s create d b yth e othe r regulations . That' s inessenc e wha t i t i s becaus e fro m a technica l standpoin t ther e mayb e som e companie s tha t coul d compl ywit halreadyregistere d compounds , bu t sinc e it' s a ne w requirement , othe r companie s mayno t hav e bee nparticipatin g tha t mayno wwan t t o and mayb e precluded , yo u think , fro ma timin g standpoint ? MR . KELLER : Yes , that' s th e critica l issue . Th e secondar yissu e i s tha t i f th e testin g unde r Tie r I I can' t b e complete d withi nth e thre e yea r window , w e coul d b e a t a situatio n wher e ther e woul d b e n o on e i ncomplianc e

___ _P.2 9

thre e year s afte r th e implementatio n o f 211(b ) simpl ybecaus e w e couldn' t ge t th e testin g facilitie s constructed , validate d and th e testin g don e intime . MR . GRAY : Bu t that' s a broade r issue . MR . KELLER : Right , I think I've note d before , tha t mean s tha t servic e station s wil l b e sellin g brea d and mil k instea d o f gasoline . S o I thin k that' s a seriou s concer ntha t w e have , and obviousl yEP Aisn' t goin g t o voi d th e registratio no f ever ygasolin e i nth e countr ybecaus e i t wa s impossibl e t o ge t th e testin g don e becaus e n o facilit y existed . S o i n reality , th e mor e sever e situatio nw e se e i s th e marketplac e impac t tha t thi s coul d caus e i nuneve n playin g field . Asecondar yeconomi c consideratio n i s tha t we'r e alway s changin g additive s and additiv e formulations , and I thin k yo u onl ynee d t o as k Ji mCaldwel l abou t ho wmanyregistration s ar e file d t o kno wthat . That' s no t don e becaus e w e lik e t o fil e paperwor k wit hth e EPA . It' s becaus e we'r e i n a verycompetitiv e marke t situatio n wher e bot hcos t and performanc e ar e critical . S o w e hav e t o kee p filin g ne wregistration s t o ge t bette r performanc e fo r ou r oi l companycustomer s and lowe r cost s fo r them . I f thi s block s al l registration s effectiv e Jun e 1 , 1993 , fo r example , we'r e no t goin g t o be 2 8P.3 0

abl e t o mak e thos e cos t benefi t improvement s i nou r additive s fo r som e perio d o f time . That' s th e moratoriumI referre d to . No wtha t ha s economi c impac t o nth e sal e o f fue l an d fue l additive s and o nth e genera l economy . I t ma no t b e a multi

billio n dolla r impac t lik e RFG , bu t ther e i s a measurabl e impac t there . S o I thin k that' s a secondar yconcern . MR . GRAY : I' msur e som e o f th e othe r peopl e o nth e pane l wil l ge t int o i t i nmor e detail , bu t jus t fro ma broade r perspective , wha t i s you r estimat e o f a reasonabl yaggressiv e tim e fram e tha t woul d b e stil l feasible ? MR . KELLER : I'l l tel l you , I can' t honestl ysay . We'v e talke d t o on e potentia l contrac t labwh o w e fee l i s probabl yth e mos t capabl e o f conductin g thi s typ e o f testin g unde r Tie r I I and reall ydon' t hav e a goo d fee l i n havin g had on e day' s wort ho f meeting s wit hthe ma s t o wha t w e coul d actuall yd o i nreality . Th e proble mtha t w e fac e i s tha t nobody ha s reall ydon e thi s testin g befor e wit ha chassi s dynamomete r and a heavy-dut ystand engine , and yo u end u p wit ha lo t o f issue s tha t go t raise d a s t o ho ww e woul d d o this . Fo r example , I don' t kno wi f an yo f yo u hav e bee ni nth e sam e room wit ha heavy-dut yCummin s diese l runnin g ful l til t o r eve n three-quarter s til t o na dyn o o r o n a stand . Tha t engin e throw s of f a lo t o f hea t and a lo t o f vibration , an d th eP.3 1

feelin g is , i f we'r e goin g t o hav e t o d o an ykind o f neuro-to x testin g o r neuro-to xassessment , tha t tha t engin e tes t stand i s goin g t o hav e t o b e ina separat e buildin g o na separat e foundatio n o r th e animal s ar e goin g t o b e vibratin g fo r eigh t hour s a day , seve nday s a wee k and tha t th e neuro-to xtesting , th e functiona l observationa l battery , wil l b e meaningles s give n th e fac t tha t we'v e bee n shakin g thes e animal s fro m th e effec t o f thi s te nlite r diese l engin e goin g u p and down fo r eigh t hours . S o I thin k that' s a tota l unknownfo r u s a t thi s point , and w e don' t kno who wmuc ho f a proble mthat' s goin g t o 

### be , MR . GRAY : Ar e yo u suggestin g tha t vibratio n emission s mayb e a critica l — MR . KELLER : Yes , I thin k w e are . I thin k an

yneuro-toxicologis t coul d sayi f yo u pu t somebodyo n a vibratin g platfor meigh t hour s a day , he' s probabl yno t goin g t o respon d to o normall yt o an ystimulu s afte r that . It' s goin g t o tak e a t leas t a fe wstron g belt s o f bourbo n t o ge t hi m

bac k t o an

ysemblanc e o f normal . MR . GRAY : I t probabl yi s surprisin g tha t th e vibratio nload s ar e sometime s te nt o a hundre d G s a t th e engines , MR . KELLER : Yes , and there' s hea t effects . Yo u know , a heavy-dut ydiese l i s throwin g of f aP.3 2

tremendou s amoun t o f BTUs . Ho wmuc hcoolin g ar e w e going t o hav e t o do ? Ar e w e goin g t o hav e t o pu t in , fo r instance , a coolin g syste mo n th e exhaus t jus t t o ge t th e exhaus t temperature s in th e chambe r t o somethin g tha t th e animal s ca n survive ? I mean , w e wer e jokin g abou t cookin g th e mic e and rat s jus t fro m

th e hea t o f th e diese l exhaust . Thes e engine s thro wof f tremendou s amount s o f heat . MR . GRAY : Well , certainl yyou' d hav e t o isolat e th e generatio no f th e emission , whic hwoul d b e a n engin e dynamometer , fro man ytestin g environment , and tha t get s bac k int o a questio no f ho wlong tha t woul d take . MR . KELLER : Right . MR . GRAY : And peopl e hav e don e that , s o yo u hav e a bas e o f knowledg e abou t wha t woul d b e involved , an d s o it' s reall ybringin g togethe r th e tw o type s o f testin g expertise , yo u migh t say , i s reall ywha t you'r e gettin g at . MR . KELLER : That' s right , that' s wha t we'r e gettin g at , tha t wha t w e think i s lot s o f testin g expertis e fo r runnin g heavy-dut ystand s and runnin g chassi s dynamometer s fo r light-dut yvehicles , and w e thin k there' s technolog yavailabl e t o d o tha t and t o speciat e th e exhaus t righ t now , tha t that' s no t a problem . That' s bein g don e i n Auto/Oil , and i t wouldn' t b e a proble mt o exten d tha t t o diesel . I t woul d tak e a littl e bi t o f technologyo nth eP.3 3

sampling , e t cetera , e t cetera , bu t it' s no t a problem , i t ca nb e don e Th e proble mi s hookin g tha t int o anima l exposure s and int o th e chamber s wher e there' s a lo t o f engineerin g and othe r concern s tha t woul d hav e t o b e worked . Peopl e kno who wt o d o inhalatio ntoxicolog yexperiments . They'v e jus t neve r don e i t wit hthi s kind o f configuratio n in thi s scope . S o it' s a n engineerin g proble mfo r th e mos t part , and there' s goin g t o b e th e issu e o f jus t validatin g th e testing , and that' s no t somethin g tha t ca nb e don e i n a mont h o r two . It' s goin g t o tak e tim e t o design , engineer , construc t and the nvalidat e th e testing , includin g emission s generation , emission s samplin g i nth e chamber , a lo t o f thing s lik e that . Tha t can' t b e don e in1 8 months . I mean , i t can' t b e don e in1 8 months , and w e don' t thin k i t ca nb e don e in thre e years , MR . GRAY : O f cours e ther e ar e som e experiment s i ninhalatio n testin g with , i nfact , diese l exhaus t and a certai namoun t o f dat a that' s bee ncollecte d ove r th e las t fe wyear s i ntha t area . MR . KELLER : Right , bu t I thin k from wha t we'v e seen , that' s al l bee nwit hlight-dut ydiesel . Th e wor k tha t I've see nha s bee nwit ha 1. 6 lite r Volkswagen , it' s a Gol f diese l engine , and that' s a differen t situatio n tha n aP.3 4

te no r a 1 3 lite r Cummin s o r tak e you r pick . MR . GRAY : I understan d you r position . I thin k certainl yin thos e area s w e hav e experienc e to o tha t ca naddres s th e lengt ho f tim e i t take s t o pu t th e facilitie s together . I jus t wante d t o giv e yo u anopportunit yt o addres s wha t yo u sawa s th e critical , sor t o f lead tim e perspectives . I t sound s lik e you'r e suggestin g tha t fron t end lead tim e t o ge t capacit yi nplac e i s on e componen t o f it , an d the nthere' s a separat e componen t o f turn-aroun d tim e o f informatio n fro m suc ha facility . Wha t abou t th e latter ? Onc e facilitie s ar e i nplace , what' s you r sens e o f ho wlong i t woul d tak e t o reasonabl yge t thi s Tie r I I information ? MR . KELLER : I've bee nmanagin g o r supervisin g th e managemen t o f toxicolog ytestin g fo r 1 2 years , an d t o d o a Tie r I I progra mfro mcontrac t negotiatio n t o contrac t signin g in a consorti a typ e situatio nwher e you'v e go t a lo t o f companie s involved , wher e you'r e dealin g wit ha contrac t lab , assumin g wha t we'r e doin g in9 0 days , sub

chroni c studywit ha neuro-to xadde d o na t th e end , plu s th e reproductiv e studies , that' s no t somethin g tha t ca nb e don e i n 1 2 months , and I thin k wha t yo u nee d t o d o i s yo u nee d t o look a t ho wlong it' s take n t o d o simila r kind s o f program s unde r TSCASectio n 4 . Th e allowanc e fo r tim e ther e i s a lo t mor e tha n 1 2 month s o n aninhalatio nstudyo f 9 0 day s plu s repr cP.3 5

tests , yo u know . It' s no t eve n clea r tha t yo u ca nd o th e repr o testin g simultaneously . Th e othe r issu e is , becaus e o f wha t w e think ar e goin g t o b e substantia l capita l investmen t cost s jus t t o pu t th e facilit yin , ther e mayb e n o mor e tha n on e facilit ycapabl e o f runnin g on e tes t a t a time . S o wit h multipl e fuels , multipl e engines , I don' t kno wtha t we'l l b e lookin g a t a situatio nwher e thes e thing s woul d b e testin g simultaneously . I t mayb e tha t they'r e goin g t o hav e t o b e teste d sequentiall ybecaus e o f th e capita l investmen t and engineerin g tha t throw s thi s i s pur e wh o w e coul d

answere d th e

woul d b e yo u t o saytha t 211(e) ? investmen t u p front . al l kind s o f problem s l yspeculatio na t thi s g o t o righ t

MS . I f that' .

int o th e > point , ; no wwh o ca n GRAHAM : question s tha t I had .

MS . LEVINE : r lega l rational e fo r Tie r I woul d

MR . I

I d o t h thin k 3 th e case , timetables . sinc e there ' i s test . I mean ,

Again , s nobody

you'v e already

wante d t o as k yo u interpretin g Sectio n b e sufficien t fo r

KELLER : I th e whol e debat e o r discussio nthat' s reall ymandate s and wha t require . Th i s i s obviou s 211(b ) s a y s l yyou r cal l thin k

bee n satisfyin g

tha t bring s ha d o n wha t i n term s o f the , , wha t 211(e ) Sectio n

u s int o 211(e ) ma yals o i n OG C a s t o wha t th e 3 4P.3 6

statutor yrequiremen t i s o n EPA . I don' t wan t t o presum e t o interpre t th e Clea nAi r Ac t fo r EPA , bu t I'l l jus t read th e 211(b ) sectio n whic hi s relevant . I t says : fo r th e purpos e o f registratio n o f fuel s and fue l additives , th e Administrato r mayals o requir e th e manufacture r o f an yfue l o r fue l additiv e t o conduc t test s t o determin e th e potentia l publi c healt h effect s o f suc hfue l o r additive , includin g bu t no t limite d to , carcinogenic , teratogeni c o r mutageni c effects . Tha t par t o f 211(b ) doesn' t specif ywha t kind s o f tests . I t says , may als o requir e tests , and emission s speciatio ntest s t o deter

min e th e typ e o f emission s i ncombinatio nwit ha literatur e searc hand availabl e literatur e dat a o nth e toxicit yo r hazar d o f thos e speciate d emission s coul d constitute , a t leas t in m y ownpersona l view , th e tes t tha t th e EPAcoul d also , mayals o require , unde r 211(b) . I don' t think that' s a stretc ho f th e statutor ylanguag e a t al1 . I thin k that' s consisten t wit hth e statutor ylanguag e and wit hth e requiremen t fo r th e thre e yea r implementatio n unde r 211(e) . I gues s wha t I' msuggestin g i s tha t EPAneed s t o tak e a loo k a t wha t reall ydoe s nee d t o b e require d withi n th e thre e yea r windo wand whethe r th e Tie r I I testin g ha s t o fal l unde r th e statut e withi nth e thre e yea r window . MS . LEVINE : Ho wcoul d yo u reconcil e tha t languag e wit ha literatur e searc htha t give s n oP.3 7

informatio no n th e thre e endpoint s specifie d i nSectio n 211(b) ? MR . KELLER : N o information ? MS . LEVINE : Right . MR . KELLER : Well , n o informatio n woul d b e toug ht o reconcil e it , bu t ther e i s no t goin g t o b e n o information . I mean , i f yo u loo k a t th e availabl e dat a an d th e sens e tha t w e recommen d it , i n a littl e bi t broade r sens e tha n what' s addresse d i nth e curren t NPRM , and conside r structur e activit yrelationship s and read-acros s and everythin g els e that' s ou t there , I don' t thin k th e Agency' s goin g t o reac hth e conclusio ntha t n o informatio nexists . Again , th e positio ntha t we'v e take nin ou r comment s i s no t tha t Tie r I I testin g won' t b e needed . It' s tha t w e don' t thin k it' s goin g t o b e neede d i nth e cas e o f sub-si m

fuel s and fue l additives , bu t tha t i f th e Agenc y doe s thin k it' s needed , tha t i t coul d follo wi nth e tiere d approac ha s Tie r II I currentl ydoes . S o wha t we'r e sayin g i s tha t i t jus t doesn' t fi t withi nth e thre e yea r windo win term s o f feasibilit yand becaus e o f th e impac t tha t thi s ha s o n 211(1 ) and (k ) compliance . MS . LEVINE : I woul d encourag e yo u t o conside r tha t inyou r writte n comments , particularl yin ligh t o f th e thre e yea r explici t statutor ymandat e i nSectio nP.3 8

21 1 ( e

thos e ) . We' d b e intereste d i nlo o 

### M S . GRAY : I comment s shoul d als o addres s an d additive s whic hhav e element s sinc e ther e may 

### M R king a t that .

' d jus t lik e t o ad d tha t th e non-sub-si m

additive s thing s tha t w e hav e terme d atypica l verywel 1 KELLER : no t b e applicabl e testing .

I' mno t sur e tha t th e CM A comment s wil l addres s th e atypicals . Th e manufacturer s o nou r pane l unde r

mak e < them .

manuf < | indi v group ar e almos t exclusivel yconcerne d wit hwha t no wfall s sub-sim . 

### M S GRAY : I tha t clea r becaus e w e hav e t o



### MR . KELLER : acturer s o nou r group wh o may hop e you r comment s wil l b e concerne d abou t al l o f Right , ther e ar e som e choos e t o respond iduall yo n th e atypica l classes , bu t I thin k thu s fa r th e ha s focuse d o nsub

- •si madditives , th e non-oxygenate d sub-si m additive s specifically . poin t 

### MR . tha t I wante d t o a s PASSAVANT : Yo u bega n t o touc ho n a > k yo u t o expan d upo n whe n yo u respond bac k t o u s and tha t i s exactl ywh o tota l that . woul d broa d additiv e market , a r Yo u probabl yhav e i d I thin k doe s CM

Arepresen t i n thi s yo u starte d t o touc ho n som e literatur e o r somethin g tha t giv e u s a roughide a o nthat . ide a o f wh o we'r e r We'r e tryin g t o ge t a tearin g from , and base d upo n ho wman y
3 7P.3 9

companie s ar e registere d inth e database , ther e seem s t o b e a lo t o f companie s ou t ther e tha t yo u don' t represent . S o i t woul d hel p u s ou t t o kno wthat . MR . KELLER : M

ycommen t tha t w e manufactur e th e vas t majority , w e don' t hav e a goo d figur e o n that , bu t i t certainl yi s i nth e nineties , interm s o f 9 0 percentag e rang e up . I t mayb e muc hhighe r tha nthat , o f th e non-oxygenate d fue l additive s sol d inth e U.S . Som e o f ou r companie s als o manufactur e oxygenate s a s well . I thin k you'v e recognize d som e o f th e bi g chemica l companyname s i n ou r petroleumaffiliate s a s bein g majo r manufacture s o f oxygenate s a s well , bu t thi s group i s focusin g primaril yo nthos e non oxygenate d sub-sims . No wthere' s manycompanie s tha t ar e essentiall yre-labeler s o r re-registrant s o f product s tha t w e make . They'l l combin e ou r additiv e product s bough t fro m severa l o f u s int o on e produc t and sel l tha t i nth e retai l market , and there' s som e re-labeler s ou t there . S o th e actua l produc t that' s bein g manufactured , almos t al l o f i t in th e marke t in th e U.S . i s comin g fro mon e o f th e CM Apane l companies . MR . PASSAVANT : O npag e fiv e o f you r comments , yo u encourag e th e Agenc yt o mak e maximumus e o f existin g informatio n and tha t i f w e don' t com e forwar d wit h

^__

_3 3P.4 0

somethin g tha t allow s yo u t o d o that , tha t you'r e goin g t o fee l force d t o d o testing . I nyou r comment s woul d yo u pleas e giv e u s som e feed-bac k o nwha t criteri a yo u thin k w e shoul d conside r a s par t o f tha t process ? Tha t wa s on e o f th e thing s tha t w e wrestle d with , wa s a nadequat e leve l o f specificit yin th e NPRMversu s wha t w e think , wha t yo u think , wha t other s think , migh t reall yb e required . S o i f yo u coul d hel p u s wit h that , i t woul d hel p u s bette r t o perhap s allo wyo u t o mak e thos e kind s o f decisions . MR . KELLER : We'l l try , bu t w e recogniz e tha t thi s i s a problem . Ho wd o yo u specif ywha t amount s t o a scientifi c proces s and us e o f professiona l judgment , and it' s somethin g tha t th e Agenc yalway s struggle s with , and it' s somethin g tha t w e alway s struggl e with . There' s many , man y conference s and symposium s bein g hel d o nris k assessment , an d it' s verydifficul t t o ge t peopl e t o agre e wha t th e step s ar e in a generi c sense . It' s a lo t easie r t o d o i t in th e cas e o f specific s wher e yo u hav e a pil e o f dat a i nfron t o f yo u and a specifi c situation . It' s muc heasie r t o ge t agreemen t o n ho wt o d o tha t whe nyou'v e go t a nactua l case , bu t i n term s o f a generi c approach , withou t a specifi c cas e i nfron t o f you , it' s reall ydifficul t t o pu t th e scientifi c proces s downo n paper .P.4 1

MR . PASSAVANT : W e agre e wit hthat , an d that' s wh

yw e wer e unabl e t o reall yjus t b e rea l specifi c righ t now . MR . KELLER : Right . MS . LEVINE : Anothe r alternativ e approac hi s t o com e u p wit hsom e kind o f performanc e standard s i nplac e o f th e guidelines , and w e woul d b e intereste d in lookin g a t genera l performanc e standard s a s analternativ e way o f providin g certai ndata . MR . KELLER : Right . MR . PASSAVANT : O n pag e nin e i n you r comments , thi s i s inth e are a wher e you'r e talkin g abou t basicall ymakin g Tie r I tha t require s submissio nwithi n thre e years , ar e yo u ultimatel ysuggestin g somethin g tha t th e Agenc y considere d tha t w e woul d hav e t o hav e tw o rulemakings , on e rulemakin g tha t woul d jus t requir e th e submissio no f th e Tie r I dat a and the nanothe r whic hwoul d regroup and the ng o forwar d wit hth e Tie r I I requirement s base d upo nwha t w e learne d fro mth e Tie r I submissions ? MR . KELLER : I gues s w e haven' t though t i t throug htha t far . I don' t kno wWhethe r we'r e suggestin g tha t you' d nee d t o d o that . Yo u mayb e abl e t o d o i t in on e rulemaking . Mayb e i t woul d mak e mor e sens e t o d o i t in two . I gues s w e haven' t reall ythough t abou t ho wyo u woul d d o it .

• » : iP.4 2

W e jus t though t we' d propos e thi s a s a possibl e alternativ e t o wha t you'v e go t righ t no wtha t seem s t o addres s th e timin g issu e and th e facilitie s issue . MR . PASSAVANT : I t does . On e fina l poin t tha t give s m e a littl e bi t o f concer ni s earl yin you r testimonyyo u giv e a prett ygoo d emphasi s o nth e us e o f mathematica l modelin g wit hn o emissio nresults , an d I expec t you'r e focusin g tha t mor e o nth e sub-si mproblem ? MR . KELLER : Yes . MR . PASSAVANT : Obviousl yth e dat a doesn' t exis t fo r th e non-sub-sims , and als o I hav e a broa d concer na s a matte r o f toxicology , no t bein g one , bu t under

standin g som e o f you r game , tha t on e o f th e reason s w e fel t i t wa s importan t t o requir e th e emissio nspeciatio nt o b e don e i s tha t you'r e goin g t o us e tha t sam e vehicl e t o actuall yexpos e th e animals . I f I wer e th e toxicologis t doin g thi s testing , I wouldn' t wan t t o kno wwha t I wa s puttin g i nthos e cage s befor e I di d i t and durin g whe n I di d i t and whe nI wa s don e doin g it , jus t sor t o f som e kind o f a histor yo f wha t tha t exposur e look s like , and t o rel yupo nmathematica l mode l fo r tha t woul d probabl yno t giv e m e th e adequat e informatio nt o b e abl e t o reall yhav e tha t caus e and effec t lin k tha t I woul d b e looking 

### at . MR . KELLER : Yes , I don' t wan t t o ge tP.4 3

int o writin g a protoco l u p her e righ t now , bu t I think i f w e wer e movin g int o Tie r I I testing , w e wouldn' t us e a mathematica l mode l t o predic t anima l exposures . I mean , w e wouldn' t hav e an

yconfidenc e i n tha t either . We' d wan t t o kno wwha t thos e animal s woul d b e expose d to . Wh o know s wha t coul d g o wron g wit hth e ca r and yo u wouldn' t pic k i t u p wit h norma l operatin g parameters . You' d wan t t o follo wa t leas t som e o f th e emissio n components ' constituent s i nth e exposur e chamber . I mean , yo u migh t no t wan t t o tryt o follo wo n a dail ybasi s th e entir e Auto/Oi l characterizatio no f whateve r i t is , 140 , 15 0 constituents , bu t you' d probabl ywan t t o follo wth e critica l ones , certainl ycarbo nmonoxid e and carbo n dioxide . I t woul d b e critica l t o follo wthos e two . MR . PASSAVANT : And I gues s th e Auto/Oi l studie s o f th e model s tha t ar e comin g ou t ar e no t lookin g a t a rea l broa d spectrumo f toxi c pollutants , it' s hal f a doze no r so , and we'r e talkin g abou t a lo t o f other s tha t ar e o f potentia l concer nher e tha t ar e o f much , muc hsmalle r concentration s tha ntha t hal f doze n o r s o quote d there . MR . KELLER : Well , th e Auto/Oi l i s lookin g a t a long list . MR . PASSAVANT : Bu t they'r e no t modelin g afte r those , i s wha t I' msaying . MR . KELLER : Right , th e RF Gi s lookin g 4 2P.4 4

a t currentl yregulate d plu s th e toxics . That' s i nth e model , no t th e entir e scop e o f Auto/Oil , s o i t i s a narrowe r list . Bu t I thin k wha t w e wer e suggestin g wa s i s tha t th e RF Grul e i s takin g a differen t approach , an d w e think tha t a t leas t som e o f tha t i s applicabl e here . Give nthos e differen t regulator yobjectives , o r slightl ydifferen t objectives , w e thin k yo u nee d t o thin k abou t tha t a littl e bi t mor e becaus e w e think ther e wa s a lo t o f validit yintha t RF Gapproac han d mayb e som e o f tha t ca nrubof f her e a s well . MR . PASSAVANT : Well , I' mjus t saying , I' mno t s o sur e tha t th e dat a ther e i s adequat e t o mak e th e kind o f determination s tha t w e woul d nee d t o mak e becaus e her e we'r e talkin g abou t a hal f a doze npollutants , th e dat a bein g adequat e fo r hal f a doze n pollutant s versu s perhap s many , many other s tha t woul d b e o f concer n i f w e wer e gettin g int o thi s leve l o f testing , that' s all . MS . GRAHAM : I hav e a questio n tha t wa s raise d inon e o f you r answers . Yo u spok e earlie r abou t an expectatio n tha t in manycases , i f no t mos t cases , tha t th e Tie r I literatur e searche s wer e goin g t o revea l muc ho f th e informatio n neede d i nTie r II , and indee d i f that' s th e case , that' s goo d fo r everybodyconcerned . Bu t yo u mentione d tha t insom e case s ther e wil l no t hav e bee ntestin g o f th e whol e emission s a s required . I' mno t familia r wit han ypub!icat • . - sP.4 5

yet , particularl yo n som e o f th e alternativ e fo r reform s an d eve ni n term s o f som e o f th e mor e conventional . Yo u mentione d structur e activit ytesting , mayb e informatio ninindividua l compounds . I don' t kno wi f you' d wan t t o commen t her e o r perhap s inyou r writte ncomments , you r view s o nho w representativ e th e informatio n o nstructura l activit yo r individua l chemica l i s o f tha t whol e combustio nmixture . MR . KELLER : I thin k w e ca n commen t o n that . Jus t le t m e mak e sur e yo u understand , th e commen t tha t I mad e o r th e observatio n tha t I mad e tha t I though t ther e wa s existin g dat a in Tie r I already , reall yapplie s t o sub-si m fuels . I don' t mea n tha t t o appl yt o alternativ e fuels . I don' t mea n tha t t o appl yt o atypica l fuels . I' msaying , fo r sub-si mfuels , conventiona l o r baseline , howeve r yo u wan t t o sayit , tha t there' s a lo t o f dat a ou t there . S o ou r comment s ar e focuse d o n thos e sub-si mfuels , no t o neverythin g else . MR . WILSON : I thin k that' s al l th e questions . Than k yo u verymuch . MR . KELLER : Than k you .
Sepes i MR . WILSON : Th e nex t witnes s i s John

MR . SEPESI : M

ynam e i s JohnSepesi , an d I wor k fo r Shel l Oil , bu t toda yI'l l b e representin g AP I in discussion s o nth e fue l an d fue l additiv e rule . Joinin g m e a t 

### 4 4P.4 6

th e tabl e i s Phi l Bus hwh o work s fo r Amoc o and i s als o representin g AP I inthi s discussion . We'r e her e toda yo nbehal f o f AP I t o respond t o th e propose d regulation s fo r Fuel s and Fue l Additive s unde r Sectio n21 1 o f th e Clea nAi r Act . API , a s mos t o f yo u mayknow , i s a nationa l trad e associatio n wit h ove r 25 0 membe r companie s tha t represen t al l aspect s o f th e petroleumindustry . AP I member s accoun t fo r th e vas t bul k o f fuel s manufacture d and markete d i nthi s county . I' d lik e t o divid e m ypresentation , whic hmos t o f yo u have , int o severa l sections , an d th e firs t sectio n we' d lik e t o tal k abou t i s th e overview . I n th e overview , ther e ar e thre e majo r principle s tha t w e believ e shoul d b e applie d in th e fuel s and fue l additive s rulemaking . Numbe r one , becaus e th e propose d regulatio ngoe s t o th e hear t o f th e petroleum

industry' s busines s —makin g fuel s fo r automotiv e vehicle s — w e believ e tha t i t shoul d encourage , and no t interfer e with , th e manufacturin g o f reformulate d gasolin e mandate d unde r th e Clea n Ai r Ac t Amendment s o f 1990 . A n al l ou t effor t shoul d b e mad e t o avoi d timin g conflict s wit hth e recentl ypropose d reformulate d gasolin e rule , a s wel l a s othe r keyregulation s tha t wil l follow . T o avoi d duplicatio n o f effor t an d assur e consistenc yo f definition s and requirements , th e Fuel s and Fue l Additive s Regulatio n

4 5P.4 7

shoul d buil d o n existin g regulator yprograms , suc ha s EPA' s "substantiall ysimilar " regulations . Numbe r two , th e rul e mus t b e crafte d t o allo wmanufacturer s t o tak e ful l advantag e o f th e us e o f existin g informatio n o nemission s speciatio nand potentia l publi c healt himpacts . W e fee l strongl ytha t th e rul e shoul d recogniz e th e substantia l emission s speciatio ndat a develope d unde r th e multi-millio n dolla r Auto/Oi l Ai r Qualit y Improvemen t Researc hProgram . Tha t progra mha s develope d state-of-the-ar t capabilit yinemission s speciatio nand shoul d no t b e exceede d b yth e requirement s o f thi s rule . Likewise , scientificall yvali d and relevan t to xand exposur e studie s don e i n th e pas t mus t b e abl e t o b e use d t o fulfil l Tier s I and I I requirements , and no t b e limite d b ywha t w e believ e i s anunnecessaril yrestrictiv e definitio no f wha t constitute s adequat e dat a that' s i nth e propose d rule . Numbe r three , reasonabl e requirement s mus t b e se t s o tha t manufacturer s ca ncompl ywithi nth e thre e yea r tim e fram e withou t sacrificin g scientifi c integrity . I canno t conve yto o emphaticall yth e reservation s tha t AP I ha s o n thi s poin t becaus e o f th e lac k o f curren t facilities , an d wha t mayb e eve n mor e significant , th e lac k o f accepte d scientifi c method s t o perfor msom e o f th e studie s proposed . AP I feel s strongl ytha t an ytestin g fa tP.4 8

i s require d unde r thi s rul e mus t confor mt o accepte d scientifi c method s and protocols , s o tha t resultin g dat a wil l stand u

p t o scientifi c peer-revie wand b e capabl e o f integratio n int o th e existin g testin g information . I t shoul d als o b e researc hthat , o n it s face , add s valu e t o th e bod yo f knowledg e o nth e subject , wil l assis t EPAi nevaluatin g potentia l advers e effects , and i s specificall ydirecte d t o th e determinatio no f whethe r furthe r ris k assessmen t o r regulator y actio ni s neede d unde r Sectio n211 . Addin g dat a requirement s fo r purpose s tha t ar e inconsisten t wit hthi s statutor ygoa l is , a t best , inappropriate , and a t worst , anunacceptabl e wast e o f th e nation' s environmenta l researc hcapability . AP I endorse s man

yo f th e concept s inth e propose d rul e suc ha s th e tiere d testin g approac hand th e fuel s groupin g option , Optio n B , whic hplace s sub-si mand waivere d fuel s an d additives , includin g reformulate d gasoline , RFG , inth e baselin e group . W e believ e tha t th e correc t focu s o f th e rul e i s o ntailpip e exhaus t rathe r tha nrawfuels . Ou r comment s wil l contai nsuggestion s fo r som e revision s t o th e proposa l tha t w e believ e wil l improv e implementatio n o f th e rule . AP I wil l fil e extensiv e writte ncomment s inJune . * Th e fue l and additive s groupin g i s th e sectio n I' d lik e t o commen t o n next . Th e propose d rul e present s tw o majo r option s fo r groupin g o f fuels . AP I 

### vrHr . Stpesi . t'n«-_Wti4tA fl yLi^ 4 a_> a, _._&-»-A. 4 h 

### * prcs*n.-fu ,



### _io> t fcM. of |W5 tfrojrlsoripts . rv\r . Stfts i toisfc-d. bt-

-h u <*u 4 til

-tU *IX.'ir% I_, . . i

_ I• - . »__

_._ ! * ( 

## otftaaj public ntordi.P.4 9

strongl ysupport s Optio nB . Thi s woul d allo wth e "substantiall ysimilar " regulation s fo r fuels , a regulator y progra mwhic hi s i nplac e and working , t o b e th e basi s fo r Baselin e grouping . Base d o nth e experienc e tha t EPAha s wit h tha t program , a s wel l a s th e researc hfinding s t o dat e fro m th e Auto/Oi l Ai r Qualit yImprovemen t Researc hProgram , ther e i s n o technica l o r scientifi c nee d fo r reformulate d gasoline s t o b e include d i na Non-Baselin e category , especiall ysinc e RF Gwill , b

ydefinition , hav e lowe r toxi c emissions . Inclusio n o f RF Gi nth e Baselin e categor ywil l avoi d unnecessar yduplicatio no f testin g essentiall ysimila r materials . Furthermore , suc hgroupin g woul d avoi d potentia l timin g conflict s fo r reformulate d fuel s and additive s tha t wil l b e "sub-sim " o r "waivered, " bu t ma yno t b e registere d b y th e tim e thi s regulatio nbecome s final . W e believ e tha t an ygasolin e o r diese l fue l o r additive , whethe r i t i s currentl ymarketed , whethe r i t i s reformulated , o r whethe r i t i s registere d befor e o r afte r thi s regulatio nbecome s effective , shoul d b e include d i n th e Baselin e categor ybase d solel yo n it s conformanc e wit hth e definitio n o f "sub-sim " o r "waivered. " An ytes t substanc e shoul d represen t bot hth e fuel s and th e additiv e packag e tha t i s withi nth e Baselin e definition . Ther e i s n o appreciabl e differenc e i nth e emission s amon g thi s broa d groupin g tha t 4 8P.5 0

woul d warran t a mor e comple xgroupin g system . Th e Non-Baselin e categor yi s properl y hel d fo r product s containin g onl ybaselin e elements , bu t in concentratio nlimit s tha t excee d substantiall ysimila r o r waivere d criteria . W e concu r wit hEPAtha t th e atypica l categor yshoul d b e fo r fuel s and additive s tha t contai n uniqu e chemica l element s beyond thos e recognize d b yth e "sub-sim " rul e an d tha t hav e bee nintentionall yadded .

Th e nex t sectio n deal s wit hth e definitio n o f dat a ca n b e use d t o sho w"adequac yo f existin g data. " Th e healt heffect s informatio nand toxicolog ydat a i s wha t we'l l concentrat e on . I nSectio n211(e)(3) , Congres s authorize s EPAt o tak e existin g informatio nint o accoun t t o avoi d duplicativ e testin g requirements . AP I believe s tha t th e propose d rul e contain s suc ha narro wdefinitio no f wha t constitute s "adequat e existin g testing " tha t th e purpos e o f th e regulatio n become s on e o f require d testing , and no t o f determinin g potentia l advers e publi c healt heffects . EPAi s proposin g tha t existin g studie s ca n onl yb e relie d upo nin lie u o f Tie r I I test s i f the yconfor mt o o r ar e "reasonabl y comparabl e to " th e guideline s fo r Tie r I I tests , a s outline d inth e proposal . W e believ e thi s i s anunnecessaril yrigi d approach , particularl ybecaus e mos t o f th e propose d testin g methodolog ybreak s ne wscientifi c ground , and therefore , fromP.5 1

tha t perspective , prio r studie s coul d wel l b e judge d no t t o conform . Thi s limitatio n i n us e o f existin g dat a i s i ndirec t contras t t o EPA' s propose d literatur e searc h strategy , whic hi s quit e broa d and inclusive . I t include s historica l revie wand studyo f individua l emissio nproduct s a s wel l a s whol e exhaust . A s proposed , i t require s analysi s o f al l relevan t scientifi c information , includin g emission s speciation , tha t mayshe d ligh t o nth e potentia l healt hand welfar e effect s o f th e fuel/additiv e i nquestion . I n establishin g th e adequac yo f existin g data , registrant s mus t b e abl e t o us e thi s sam e approach . Al l vali d and relevan t scientifi c informatio n that , take ntogethe r a s a body , allow s aninforme d assessmen t o f th e potentia l healt hris k o f exposur e t o vehicl e emission s mus t b e considered . Th e definitio n o f wha t constitute s adequac ywoul d als o preclud e al l bu t studie s o f whol e emissions . But , i t shoul d b e note d tha t ther e ar e substantia l amount s o f dat a o n th e majo r constituent s o f moto r gasolin e and diese l fue l emissions . Thi s informatio ni s sufficien t t o mak e reasone d scientifi c judgment s a s t o th e potentia l fo r toxicit yo f th e define d endpoints . I t i s especiall yrelevan t whe non e consider s tha t th e ambien t urba nconcentration s fo r thes e constituen t hydrocarbon s ar e i nth e parts-per-bi1 1 ionP.5 2

range . Eve n in th e exhaust , the yar e a smal l fractio n o f th e total . Suc hexistin g informatio n i s mos t certainl yrelevan t t o th e issue s a t hand , eve n thoug hit' s conducte d o n th e constituents , becaus e i nreviewin g ambien t ai r monitorin g dat a on e ca nonl yconside r constituents . Mos t studie s conducte d b y EPAand other s t o asses s ambien t environment s ar e base d o n concentration s o f specifi c constituents . Goin g t o th e emission s speciatio n data , th e propose d rul e contain s detaile d and comple xrequirement s fo r th e speciatio no f emissions , in bot hth e fue l grouping s and th e emission s generatio n sectio n o f th e proposal . Ther e i s a significan t researc hprogra munderwa yinthi s countr y tha t addresse s thes e speciatio n question s i ngrea t detail , an d tha t researc hrepresent s th e state-of-the-ar t inemission s speciation . I t i s th e Auto/Oi l Ai r Qualit yImprovemen t Researc hProgram , jointl yfunde d b yth e petroleumand automotiv e industries . Thi s researc hshoul d provid e th e gasolin e emission s speciatio ninformatio nrequire d unde r thi s program . Furthe r speciatio n a s prescribe d i nth e proposal , w e believe , i s beyond curren t technology . W e believ e als o tha t th e propose d testin g goe s beyond th e state-of-the-ar t i nmethod s and qualifie d testin g facilities , and thi s poin t wa s certainl y mentione d b

yMr . Kelle r i n hi s earlie r testimony . AP I i sP.5 3

greatl yconcerne d tha t muc ho f th e toxicolog ytestin g bein g propose d involve s untrie d scientifi c method s and unverifie d protocols . Eve n incase s wher e ther e ar e establishe d protocols , th e generatio n o f emission s an d deliver yo f controlle d dose s t o animal s pos e significan t difficulties . Example s o f som e o f th e majo r technica l problem s are : Th e dilutio nfacto r necessar yt o delive r th e tes t substanc e t o th e anima l i s no t known , and trial s wil l hav e t o b e conducte d t o determin e wha t i s appropriate . Th e standar d eight-fol d dilutio nfacto r suggeste d inth e proposa l mayn o longe r b e appropriat e becaus e o f change s i nemission s contro l systems . Ametho d o f coolin g th e exhaus t and controllin g th e oxyge n suppl ywil l nee d t o b e develope d and tria l teste d s o tha t th e appropriat e environmenta l condition s ca n b e maintaine d t o suppor t th e tes t animals . I naddition , th e deliver yo f th e tes t substanc e t o th e animal s mus t b e accomplishe d directly , tha t i s fro mth e runnin g vehicl e t o th e animal . Thi s mean s th e facilitie s mus t b e i nproximit yand tha t confoundin g variable s o f nois e and vibratio n mus t b e engineere d ou t befor e a vali d studycoul d b e run . Th e availabilit yo f testin g facilitie s wil l b e a majo r problem . T o th e bes t o f ou r knowledge , 5 2P.5 4

testin g facilitie s wil l hav e t o b e constructed . Ther e ar e existin g laboratorie s tha t generat e emissions , and ther e ar e existin g laboratorie s tha t perfor mto xresearch , bu t w e kno w o f n o testin g facilit ytha t i s prepare d no wt o conduc t thes e studie s a s proposed . Testin g unde r thi s propose d rul e woul d requir e thos e tw o capabilitie s t o b e integrated , an d tha t mean s appropriat e tes t facilitie s wil l nee d t o b e constructed . Ther e ar e companie s tha t w e believ e ca n develo p th e capabilit yo f conductin g thes e tests , onc e th e method s ar e developed , bu t the yd o no t currentl yhav e th e facilitie s necessar yt o perfor mth e studie s a s proposed . Th e desig nand constructio n o f laborator yfacilitie s i s costl yan d seem s no t t o hav e bee nconsidere d i nEPA' s cos t estimate s fo r thi s regulation . W e d o no t believe.tha t i t wa s Congressiona l inten t fo r registrant s t o buil d ne wlaborator yfacilitie s an d develo p ne wmethod s in orde r t o fulfil l registratio n require

ment s tha t mus t b e complete d i n th e thre e yea r tim e frame . Th e nex t sectio n deal s wit hth e scientifi c method s and protocols , th e nee d fo r verificatio n and bein g accepte d withi nth e framewor k o f goo d scientifi c practices . Anytestin g tha t i s conducte d unde r thi s regulator yprogra mmus t stand u p t o scientifi c scrutiny . Testin g result s o f ou r product s ar e o f critica l importanc e t o th e industry , and w e ar e concerne d tha t usin g untrie dP.5 5

scientifi c method s and abbreviate d tes t protocol s wil l rende r studyresult s meaningless . Whil e w e appreciat e th e Agency' s opennes s t o innovativ e tes t protocols , w e believ e th e tim e and mone ysave d b

ysuc hchange s wil l b e minima l and b e fa r out weighe d b

yth e cos t o f developin g method s and buildin g facilities . AP I doe s no t believ e tha t Congres s intende d t o compromis e scientifi c method s i norde r t o mee t th e thre e yea r tim e frame . W e d o no t wis ht o se e a fina l rul e tha t woul d develo p tes t guideline s outsid e th e accepte d practice s o f th e scientifi c community . I' d als o lik e t o addres s th e timin g issue , a s Mr . Kelle r di d i nth e testimonybefore . Ther e ar e severa l timin g issue s o f concer nin th e propose d rule . I n additio n t o th e potentia l conflict s fo r RFG , th e othe r timin g issue s ar e relate d t o th e timin g o f Tier s I and I I review , especiall yfo r thos e fuel s and additive s tha t ar e registere d whe nth e rul e become s effective . Congres s allowe d thre e year s fo r submissio no f data . Whe n Congres s include d th e thre e yea r tim e fram e fo r submissio n o f initia l information , w e believ e tha t the yenvisione d requirement s tha t coul d b e complete d withi n tha t period . Indeed , wit hcommoditie s suc ha s fuel s and additives , tha t seem s th e onl yeconomicall ywis e interpretation . EPAha s discretio nt o determin e wha t 

### 5 4P.5 6

"requisit e information " shoul d b e submitte d t o th e Agenc y withi nth e thre e yea r tim e frame . W e believ e tha t wha t i s now propose d goe s wel l beyond th e capabilit yo f wha t ca nb e accomplishe d i n thre e years . W e hav e addresse d th e absenc e o f facilitie s and th e nee d t o develo p and t o tes t ne winhalatio n to xmethod s t o perfor msom e o f thes e studies . Th e cos t t o d o thi s i s no t accounte d fo r i nth e rule , no r i s th e time . Development , constructio n an d testin g canno t occu r i n thre e years . Furthermore , i f registrant s wan t t o rel y o n existin g dat a whic hw e d o believ e i s "adequate, " th e thre e yea r tim e fram e i s s o shor t tha t w e coul d no t gambl e o n EPA' s approva l withou t conductin g som e back-up testin g i norde r t o ensur e tha t registratio nwil l no t b e withdrawna t th e end o f th e thre e yea r period . Finally , th e initia l requirement s appl y t o al l fuels/additive s registere d i nth e sam e tim e frame , makin g th e availabilit yo f tes t facilitie s eve nles s likely . I f testin g o nmor e tha non e endpoin t fo r mor e tha non e fue l o r additiv e ha d t o b e don e concurrently , i t i s eve nmor e unlikel y tha t th e thre e yea r deadlin e ca n b e met . Clearly , th e propose d requirement s fo r th e initia l thre e yea r perio d surpass : one , th e capabilit yo fP.5 7

curren t scientifi c methods ; two , th e availabilit yo f facilities ; and three , th e abilit yfo r EPAt o analyz e Tie r I submissions , whil e stil l allowin g tim e fo r subsequen t testing . Thes e ar e critica l matter s withi n th e rule , becaus e th e penalt youtline d —principall yth e withdrawa l o f th e righ t t o marke t —i s substantial . I n conclusion , ther e ar e a numbe r o f importan t issue s w e hav e no t addres s i nthi s hearing . Fo r example , diese l fue l registratio ni s quit e importan t t o th e petroleum

industry , bu t w e hav e focuse d primaril yo ngasolin e becaus e o f th e Clea n Ai r Ac t Amendment s o f 199 0 whic hwil l affec t formulatio nand marketin g o f gasolin e i nth e nea r future . W e hav e no t addresse d evaporativ e emission s and d o no t believ e ther e i s an ynee d fo r furthe r evaluatio no n evaporativ e emission s becaus e o f th e existenc e o f othe r legislative/regulator yrequirement s t o reduc e and contro l suc h emissions . W e agre e wit hEPAtha t evaporativ e emission s fro m diese l fue l ar e no t significan t du e t o th e lowvolatilit yo f thi s material . Ou r writte n submissio n i nJun e wil l provid e detaile d comment s o n th e ful l rang e o f topic s outline d i nth e preamble . I t i s ou r inten t t o wor k wit hEPAt o mak e thi s a reasonabl e regulator yprogram . W e wil l strongl yresis t effort s t o mak e i t a testin g progra mfo r whic hth e result s d o 5 6P.5 8

no t add valu e t o ou r abilit yt o asses s potentia l publi c healt h o r welfar e risk . W e strongl yencourag e th e Agenc yt o mak e ful l us e o f th e ongoin g Auto/Oi l researc han d o f existin g regulator yprogram s suc ha s "sub-sim " an d th e wavie r program , s o tha t th e fuel s registratio nproces s doe s no t provid e a barrie r t o th e developmen t o f ne wand cleane r fuels . MR . WILSON : Thank s verymuc hfo r tha t testimony . MS . GRAY : I hav e a fe wquestion s concernin g som e o f th e comment s her e o nth e adequac yo f existin g data , th e botto mo f pag e fou r and th e to p o f pag e five . W e d o wan t t o b e abl e t o mak e fre e us e o f th e availabl e information , and that' s wh yI wondere d i f you' d car e t o expan d o n som e o f th e point s tha t yo u mad e here ? O npag e fiv e a t th e top , yo u expres s concer n tha t w e hav e a nunnecessaril yrigi d approac hbecaus e mos t o f th e propose d testin g methodolog y break s ne wscientifi c ground . I nterm s o f breakin g ne w scientifi c ground , ar e yo u referrin g t o th e inhalatio n exposur e technologyo r th e healt hprotocol s themselves ? DR . SEPESI : Mostl yt o th e technolog yo f deliverin g th e substanc e t o th e animals ; i f yo u hol d t o th e guideline s tha t woul d hav e t o b e develope d i norde r t o accomplis hthat , muc ho f th e existin g information , becaus e 5 7P.5 9

it' s neve r bee n don e before , woul d addres s tha t guideline . MS . GRAHAM : I thin k tha t pick s u p o n a poin t yo u mak e a coupl e paragraph s down . Ar e yo u tryin g t o mak e a cas e her e tha t i f w e hav e knowledg e abou t a coupl e o f th e constituent s o f th e mixtur e tha t we , therefore , understan d th e mixtur e in term s o f it s healt heffects , i s tha t you r point ? DR . SEPESI : Wha t I' mtryin g t o sayi s tha t th e constituent s o f th e mixtur e ar e certainl yrelevan t in considerin g th e toxicit yo f th e mixtur e itself , and th e guide

line s fo r adequac yo r th e proposa l fo r adequacy , a s i t i s written , see m

t o preclud e on e fro musin g tha t constituen t information , and that' s wha t w e disagre e with . MS . GRAHAM : I hav e a questio n o n pag e six , and thi s i s wher e yo u g o int o som e question s abou t th e inhalatio nexposur e aspects . A s yo u know , inth e bod yo f th e propose d rul e w e shar e you r concer nabou t the - availabi1it yo f testin g facilities , bu t inth e verybeginnin g her e o f th e testimony : AP I i s greatl yconcerne d tha t muc ho f th e to x testin g bein g propose d involve s untrie d scientifi c method s and unverifie d protocols . I gues s I don' t quit e understan d wha t yo u mean . Whe n I thin k o f th e wor k tha t Lovelac e ha s done , tha t EPAdi d manyyear s ago , tha t th e Japanes e hav e done , tha t th e Fraunhofer-Institu t ha s done , I gues s I don' t understan d

____ _P.6 0

th e words , untrie d and unverified . DR . SEPESI : Tha t mainl yconcern s wit h th e possibilit yo f usin g som e o f th e 4 2 daymous e reproductiv e studie s tha t hav e no t bee ntried , an d w e appreciat e you r willingnes s t o b e innovativ e wit hthos e protocol s an d sav e 4 2 days , bu t that' s no t veryimportan t whe nyo u hav e t o buil d a facilit yand develo p th e whol e method . That' s th e poin t w e wer e tryin g t o mak e there . MS . GRAHAM : Okay , tha t clarifie s a lot . That' s a goo d point . I thin k tha t sam e poin t i s rais e o n pag e seven , s o I thin k tha t answer s m yquestions ; than k you . MR . PASSAVANT : John , thank yo u fo r you r comment s thi s morning . I hop e ther e wer e som e thing s i n her e yo u liked . I d o hav e a coupl e o f thing s I' d lik e t o as k yo u t o respond to . On e is , give nth e thre e yea r tim e fram e tha t we'r e constraine d t o her e and give nther e i s flexibilit yw e ca nwor k with , wha t woul d b e you r exper t opinio no r API' s exper t opinio no nho wlong thi s woul d actuall ytak e t o d o thi s program ? DR . SEPESI : Glenn , a s I' msur e yo u realize , ther e wer e manypeopl e tha t contribute d t o writin g thes e comments , al l o f whic hcanno t attend , bu t wha t I ca n d o i s tak e tha t specifi c questio n whic hyo u als o aske d Charli eP.6 1

and mak e sur e tha t w e addres s tha t i nou r writte ncomments . MR . PASSAVANT : Okay , tha t woul d b e usefu l becaus e I thin k yo u realize , a s w e sai d inth e proposal , tha t w e ar e workin g wit ha statut e tha t wa s somethin g o n th e orde r o f 1 3 year s old , and ha d thing s bee n writte ni n 199 0 instea d o f 1977 , i t migh t hav e bee ndon e differently . DR . SEPESI : That' s exactl yright . MR . PASSAVANT : S o we'r e constraine d b y tha t t o som e degree . On e o f th e flexibilitie s w e d o hav e i s i nth e are a o f adequat e existin g information , and in you r write-u p yo u mentione d tha t and talke d abou t th e constituent s a s a possibl e surrogat e fo r som e o f thes e things , and i nou r conversation s wit hCharli e w e talke d abou t sor t o f th e difficult yo f tryin g t o prescrib e u p fron t wha t w e woul d conside r t o b e adequate . I to o woul d lik e t o as k yo u and you r folk s t o giv e som e though t t o wha t w e migh t b e abl e t o d o t o dra wa bo xaroun d tha t fo r yo u s o tha t w e coul d fee l lik e we'r e givin g yo u criteri a tha t yo u ca nunderstand , you'l l fee l comfortabl e with , and yo u won' t fee l lik e EPAi s goin g t o hol d th e proverbia l swor d o f Damocle s ove r you r head s regardin g ou r revie wo f you r products . Ther e woul d b e muc hbette r certaint y o n bot hend s i f w e coul d hav e that . Thos e ar e reall ym yonl y

— —P.6 2

tw o points ; than k you . MS . GRAY : I hav e on e questio n abou t you r comment s abou t th e groupin g syste mo npag e four . Yo u say ther e i s n o appreciabl e differenc e inemission s amon g th e broa d groupin g whic hwoul d includ e reformulate d gasoline s in th e baselin e unleade d gasolin e category . I kno wthere' s lot s and lot s o f dat a fro mth e Auto/Oi l studies . Ar e ther e dat a availabl e tha t compar e th e emissio n product s o f differen t re formulate d gasoline s tha t 

### DR . abou t thi s durin g Charli e us e differen t oxygenat e compounds ? SEPESI : I amcertainl y—w e talke d s testimony . Yo u referre d t o a hal f a doze n o r s o compound s in th e Auto/Oi l tha t hav e bee n speciate d inth e emission s section . Ther e ar e 150 . 

### MS . species , fo r example . 

### DR . MS . GRAY : Ther e ar e a 15 0 hydrocarbo n

SEPESI : Right . GRAY : I mean , comparin g on e reformulate d gasolin e t o anothe r reformulate d gasoline , regardles s o f rawconstituents , th e oxygenate , fo r example , tha t i s involve d i ntha t reformulatio nprocess , I' mwonderin g abou t you r statemen t tha t 

### DR . gasolin e tha t use s MTB E a s the yar e al l alike ? SEPESI : Certainl ya reformulate d > th e oxygenat e versu s on e tha t migh t us e ETB E a s anoxygenat e woul d hav e MTB E i non e an d ETB E i

n
6 4 —P.6 3

th e other , bu t that , I think , ca n b e handle d wit hth e constituen t data . Phil , d o yo u hav e an ythough t o n wha t exactl ywa s i nth e Auto/Oi l speciatio nemissions ? MR . BUSH : I don' t kno wcategoricall y tha t eac ho f th e oxygenate s tha t Auto/Oi l ha s looke d a t hav e al l bee n speciated . I' mjus t no t tha t knowledgeabl e abou t tha t program , bu t certainl ymos t o f the mhave . There' s dat a availabl e bot hther e and othe r place s inth e literatur e o n speciate d emission s certainl yfro methanol , MTBE , methano l products . MR . PASSAVANT : I nothe r words , I thin k th e poin t her e i s tha t yo u wer e makin g th e suppositio ntha t thes e ar e similar , and we'r e tryin g t o say , i s th e dat a ther e t o prov e tha t supposition ? That' s reall ywha t i t come s down to . MR . BUSH : Well , th e on e significan t differenc e i s tha t yo u mayhav e thi s ne wcompoun d whic hi s th e oxygenat e itsel f presen t in th e evaporativ e emission s o r in th e exhaust , and tha t incrementa l effec t ca nb e judge d fro m knowledg e abou t tha t constituent . MS . GRAY : D o w e kno wtha t th e combustio n emission s woul d b e th e same ? MR . BUSH : Pardon ?

___ _P.6 4

MS . GRAY : D o w e kno wtha t the ywoul d no t diffe r in term s o f th e combustio nemissions ? MR . BUSH : I t i s a critica l factor . The ywil l diffe r in mas s emissio n rate s o f som e o f th e constituents , bu t that' s no t particularl yimportan t t o thi s rulemaking . Wha t shoul d trigge r o r brin g u p a significan t concer n inEPA' s min d i s th e appearanc e o f ne wcompounds , and on e goo d cas e i npoin t i s th e aldehyd e emissions . Formaldehyd e i s presen t ingasolin e tha t ha s n o oxygenate . It' s ther e i n a differen t leve l wit hethano l present , differen t leve l wit hMTBE , bu t al l o f tha t fall s wel l withi n th e rang e o f differen t concentration s o f emissio nrate s yo u ge t jus t wit hplai ngasoline . Yo u haven' t significantl y change d an

yo f th e fact s you'r e goin g t o us e fo r you r ris k assessmen t proces s jus t becaus e th e emissio nrate s hav e change d a littl e bit , DR . SEPESI : I naddition , i f yo u loo k a t th e ultimat e purpos e o f th e rule , whic hi s publi c healt h effects , thos e difference s o n parts-per-bi1 1 ioninth e atmosphere , parts-per-mi1 1 ion i n th e exhaust , and thos e difference s woul d certainl yb e encompasse d b yan yhigh , medium o r lowdos e tha t woul d b e in a to xstudy . MR . WILSON : Than k yo u verymuch . Th e nex t witnes s i s Ke n Whittet .

& • *P.6 5

MR . WHITTET : Goo d morning , m ynam e i s Ke nWhittet , and I' mth e presiden t o f Solval l Engineering , a smal l busines s tha t manufacturer s fue l additives . M ysale s averag e abou t hal f a millio ndollar s a year . I hav e concern s o n thi s regulation , propose d regulation , tha t quit e frankl y ca nforc e closur e o f m ybusiness , tha t th e cos t o f doin g thi s wil l b e s o hig htha t they' d b e wayou t o f th e capability , th e economi c capabilit yo f m ycompanyt o payfor . I rea d i n th e Federa l Registe r tha t th e cos t o f testin g anadditiv e woul d b e o nth e orde r of , fo r Tie r I and Tie r II , o f $800,00 0 pe r additiv e i f I wen t i t alone , and i t woul d b e o nth e order , i f I wa s i na pool , o f somethin g lik e $25,00 0 pe r additive . I mayb e readin g thi s wrong , bu t I wa s thinkin g ther e coul d b e - - I've talke d t o othe r smal l additiv e companie s tha t ar e m ycompetitor s i nth e Northeast , and the yal l expresse d concern . I don' t kno wi f an yo f the m ar e her e today , bu t the yal l expresse d som e concer nove r thi s too . Ther e wer e som e companie s tha t ha d additive s a s a division , and the ysaid , well , w e won' t sel l the man ymore , and s o wha t ar e the ygoin g t o d o fo r th e peopl e tha t wer e workin g in tha t division ? D o the ypu t the mi nothe r part s o f th e company , d o the yla ythe moff ? S o I thin k th e impac t i nterm s o f joo s o n smal l busines s mayb e mor e sever e tha ni s describe d i n t--- . s

. *±P.6 6

Federa l Re q th e peopl e suggestion s

poss i bi1it y mayb e subs i tha t come s provisio n f iste r publishe d o n Apri l

tha t I mad e contac t wit h

MR . WILSON : 

### ? MR . WHITTET : i s th e SB

Acom e u

p wit h diz e som e o f thi s stuff . t o mind . MR . WILSON : 15 , base d o ntalkin g t o

. D o yo u hav e specifi c

I think wha t coul d b e a som e grant s fo r a group , That' s on e possibilit y

Hav e yo u looke d a t th e o r companie s t o ge t togethe r wh o ar e makin g simila r additive s and jointl yfund - -

in m ymin d exac t sam e woul d b e t h MR . WHITTET :

o n tha t i s o nth e formu l formula s o r substantial ! Yes , bu t anothe r questio n as , d o al l hav e t o hav e th e ysimila r formulas ? Wha t e criteri a fo r a substantiall ysimila r formul a in her e tha t woul d appl ywit hth e EPA ? and concer n

woul d b e i f reasonabl e fo r cos t s h w e hav e a s wel1 . MR . GRAY : I tha t groupin g wa s suc h Tha t wa s anothe r questio n

think th e questio n stil l tha t i t wa s includin g a rang e o f additives , i s th e proces s o r th e concep t arin g a goo d approac hf o tha t yo u raise ?

that ? MR . WHITTET : r dealin g wit hthi s proble m

Woul d yo u pleas e repea t

& £ —P.6 7

MR . GRAY : Yo u raise d a questio n tha t sai d tha t there' s som e uncertaint yi nyou r mind a s t o how broa d th e parameter s woul d b e o n groupin g simila r additives . MR . WHITTET : Exactly . MR . GRAY : I f tha t groupin g wa s sufficien t t o includ e severa l differen t simila r compounds , i s th e concep t thoug hfo r sharin g cost s a reasonabl e concept ? MR . WHITTET : I thin k i t woul d be , yes , bu t als o th e thin g is , I've go t abou t 90 0 diese l additives , and a lo t o f the mar e similar . Alo t o f the mhav e fue l colorant s i nthem , and I gues s there' s anothe r re g that' s comin g u

p nex t yea r o nth e colorin g o f fuels , s o tha t wil l mak e th e gree ndiese l additiv e and th e blu e diese l prett ymuc h obsolet e t o begi nwith . S o I stil l hav e th e re d diese l additive , whic ha s I ca nse e i n th e regulations , i t look s lik e it' s a prett ysur e be t tha t re d diese l fue l wil l stil l b e allowed , bu t no t an ymor e gree n diese l o r blu e diese l fuel , no wtha t heatin g oi l i s suppose d t o b e dye d gree no r blue , bu t I d o hav e blends . Anothe r questio nI ha d wa s abou t blends . Alo t o f m

yblend s hav e additive s tha t ar e mad e b yth e majo r manufacturers . They'r e jus t blende d int o a broa d spectrum additive , let' s say , it'l l add detergenc ycharacteristics , flo wimprovemen t o r cetan e improvement , and I wa s als oP.6 8

wonderin g if , say , yo u hav e thre e approve d additive s an d teste d additives , yo u blend the mtogether , doe s tha t mak e a ne wadditive ? Also , th e treatmen t level s i nm y additive s ar e al l abov e this , I think the ycal l i t th e d e minimu s level , whic hmean s tha t th e treatmen t level s ar e usuall ylik e a thousan d part s pe r millio no r less , lik e a thousan d part s pe r millio no r fou r thousan d part s pe r million , and goin g on , there' s a thin g i n her e tha t talk s abou t yo u ca n ge t som e kind o f exemptio ni f there' s 2 5 hundre d part s pe r millio no r les s concentratio no f th e additiv e i nth e fuel , bu t I' m no t sur e exactl yho wthat' s goin g t o happen . S o I hav e question s here . MR . PASSAVANT : Mr . Whittet , sinc e you'r e talkin g diesel , tha t whol e are a i s a nare a that' s unde r developmen t righ t now . W e ar e workin g o na separat e progra m and a substantiall ysimila r rul e fo r diese l whic hwill , I think , hel p t o resolv e a lo t o f thes e kind s o f question s tha t yo u have . Give ntha t o u ar e a smal l company , probabl yon e o f th e mos t usefu l thing s tha t yo u coul d do , fo r yo u and fo r us , woul d b e fo r yo u t o tel l u s wha t i t i s abou t you r companyand companie s lik e your s tha t woul d hel p u s t o bette r defin e wha t i s a smal l fue l additiv e manufacturer . I f 6 7P.6 9

yo u loo k nea r th e end o f th e proposa l yo u hav e there , w e di d a studytryin g t o sor t o f d o lik e a nindustr ycharacterization , and w e go t t o th e poin t o f finishin g th e characterization , and th e on e thin g w e couldn' t find wa s a commo nelemen t amon g you r companies , othe r tha n thei r botto mlines , and i t wa s reall y har d t o writ e a se t o f rule s fo r smal l manufacturer s tha t sai d i f yo u hav e les s tha n thi s muc hrevenue . Tha t kind o f stuf f woul d b e th e mos t usefu l thing , I think , i nterm s o f allowin g u s a too l b

ywhic ht o identif ywh o a smal l companyi s and , therefore , t o writ e a specia l rul e fo r you . Th e la wallow s u s t o d o that , bu t w e jus t nee d t o b e abl e t o hel p t o bette r identif yit . MR . WHITTET : Wha t woul d b e th e amoun t o f sale s i n a yea r o r — MR . PASSAVANT : Anytyp e o f information , sales , almos t anything ; yo u ca n tal k t o you r othe r folk s and se e wha t i t i s abou t you r companie s tha t make s yo u small . B e i t sale s o r tha t you'r e offerin g you r product s cheaper , thing s tha t w e ofte n se e tha t hel p ou t volumetri c sales , ho wmany gallon s o r ho wmanypint s o f give nproduc t tha t yo u sell , and yo u coul d submi t i t t o u s confidentially , i f tha t woul d b e usefu l fo r you . MR . WHITTET : Okay . MR . PASSAVANT : Tha t kind o f stuf f i s

fiAP.7 0

probabl yth e keymissin g ingredient , i f yo u will , in ou r analysi s fo r smal l businesses , tha t w e couldn' t figur e ou t wha t i t wa s tha t mad e yo u small , othe r tha nth e fac t tha t yo u didn' t ge t a lo t o f dollars . Also , i f yo u hav e a lo t o f specifi c questions , w e ar e mor e tha nwillin g t o si t downwit hyo u eithe r o n th e phon e an yo f thes e thing s o r i nperso nand tal k t o you , wit hyou . I t i s reall ycomp l there' s n o doub t abou t that .

and Mr . Graypicke d I thin k anothe r thin g tha t u p o nit , i s th e fac t tha t w e yo u t o understan d bette r wher e perhap s you' d fi t groupin g schem e and and wil l b e sub-si m muc hless .

additive s —

fuel .

element s othe r tha n sulfur ? whethe r o r no t you r additive s i n whic hcas e th e effect s w i

MR . WHITTET : Okay , sub-si m

MR . PASSAVANT : Loo k jus t 1 tal k throug h icated ,

woul d help , nee d t o hel p i n th e ar e sub-si m 1 1 b e much ,

mean s

ik e diese l

MR . WHITTET : Tha t don' t hav e an y carbon , hydrogen , nitrogen , oxyge n an d

MR . PASSAVANT : Bu t that' s definition . We'r e workin g o n a diese l definitio n th e gasolin e righ t now 

### * a
-P.7 1

whic hmayo r mayno t hav e th e sam e element s t o it . MR . WHITTET : Okay , i n diese l fuels , numbe r tw o oil , there' s al l kinds . I thin k ther e woul d probabl yb e a lo t mor e trac e element s indiese l fue l tha n ther e i s i n gasoline . MR . PASSAVANT : Yes , ther e would . MR . WHITTET : I kno wi nheatin g oil , ofte npeopl e hav e troubl e wit hvenadium . I t occur s in som e heatin g oil s and numbe r four s and numbe r si xoils . MR . PASSAVANT : S o I think tha t a s w e wor k ou r waythroug hthi s process , tha t kind o f informatio n wil l b e usefu l t o us , and w e stand read yt o wor k wit hyo u o n it . MR . WHITTET : Okay , that' s great . MS . GRAY : I' d lik e t o as k also , th e Chemica l Manufacturer s Associatio n tha t Charli e Kelle r represente d earlier , and h e mentione d som e o f th e companie s tha t belon g t o tha t trad e organizatio nand manyo f th e one s h e mention s a t leas t ar e quit e larg e companies , w e don' t hav e a goo d ide a t o wha t exten t smalle r companie s lik e your s and th e othe r peopl e you'v e talke d t o ar e represente d b ytrad e organi

zation s tha t coul d mayb e assis t i n you r grouping s practice s t o lowe r th e pric e t o eac hcompanyveryconsiderably . MR . WHITTET : I thin k that' s th e wayi tP.7 2

woul d hav e t o b e done , i s ther e ha s t o b e mor e involvemen t wit ha lo t o f these . Mos t o f thes e additiv e companie s tha t I've talke d t o apparentl ydidn' t belon g t o an yorganizations , an d they'r e sittin g ou t there , and I don' t know , the ythink , well , it' s no t goin g t o happe n t o me , o r they'r e jus t swampe d wit hal l kind s o f othe r stuff , o r they'r e stickin g thei r head s in th e sand . Bu t I've bee n tryin g t o say , hey , thi s affect s al l o f us ; we'v e go t t o ge t togethe r and formo r w e shoul d form anassociatio n and hav e th e testin g don e o r joi n an associatio nlik e wha t I belon g to . I belon g t o CSMA , Chemica l Specialtie s Manufacturer s Association . W e al l ough t t o joi n u p wit hCSM

Aand ge t som e kind o f a testin g progra mdon e i f it' s required . MS . GRAY : Yes , i neffec t ou r propose d groupin g syste m

woul d allo wadditiv e manufacturer s t o group wit hfue l manufacturer s i f the yfal l int o th e sam e groupin g definition , and al l tota l th e groupin g syste mi s on e o f ou r majo r provision s t o lowe r th e cost . S o I thin k i t woul d behoov e smalle r companie s t o for massociation s o r joi n in wit h existin g one s t o wor k togethe r o n it . It' s prett ycomple xt o g o i t alone . MR . WHITTET : O r jus t ge t on e hug e on e going ; probabl yth e mor e peopl e ge t int o a group , th e lowe r th e cos t wil l go .
£ 4 —P.7 3

know .

righ t now , MS . GRAY : Absolutely . MR . WHITTET : Th e mor e th e merrier , yo u

MR . WILSON : Anyothe r comments ? MR . WHITTET : Non e tha t I ca n thin k o f

MR . WILSON : W e appreciat e you r comin g We'l l follo wu

p wit hyo u t o mak e sur e tha t w e understan d you r busines s and mak e sur e yo u ca nhel p u s b e sur e we'r e communicatin g wi tryin g eithe r t o ge t th

ge t int o int o or formour what' s th e best , sam e tim e b e th e

wor k wi

Turkal . t hyou .

I' mher e a t th e represen t and a l a f i r m tha t ha s t hother s



### MR . e morgani z a group o r owngroup se e wha t mos t cos t 

### MR . i n simila r situations . WHITTET : I starte d doin g that , e d s o w e ca nge t int o a group , loo k fo r th e bes t group t o joi n

, chec k ou t al l th e option s and se e wil l fl ywit hth e EPAand a t th e effective . WILSON : Well , we'l l b e happyt o Thank s verymuc hfo r coming . 

### Th e

MR . reques t o f s o wor k a s las t witnes s w e hav e liste d i s John

TURKAL : M

ynam e i s John Turkal . Alken-Murra yCorporatio nwh o I a consultan t for . Aiken-Murra y ove r 6 0 year s experienc e i nth e fue l addit i 

### i s v e 7 ?P.7 4

business . They'r e a smal l firm , hav e bee nknownt o manufactur e fo r other s throug hre-blending , and unfortunately , th e documentatio n di d no t specif yth e diese l folk s didn' t hav e t o sho wu

p o r I wouldn' t b e here , bu t mayb e it' s jus t a s well . Th e firm , fo r th e audience , i s a woman-owne d firm , an d some time s th e perceptio no f th e CEO , wh o i s a woma nwh o run s anothe r aspec t o f th e companycalle d Fento nFarms , he r intuitio n sometime s amaze s me , wh yI ge t picke d fo r thes e assignments , I hav e her e a lette r tha t I woul d lik e t o read becaus e I thin k i t convey s a small/mediumfirm' s attitud e toward s som e o f th e testin g that' s t o b e conducted , and especiall yfro mtha t o f th e newl yemergin g managemen t that' s comin g ou t ther e i nsmal l business . I t wa s writte n b y Ms . Valeri e Ann e Edwards , wh o i s th e presiden t o f th e corporation , "A s th e Presiden t o f a Ne wYor k harbor

base d firmwit hnearl ysixt yyear s experienc e manufacturin g fue l additives , I woul d lik e t o contribut e ou r observation s and opinion s o f you r propose d ne wtestin g protocol s fo r moto r fuel s and fue l additives . First , ou r experience d personne l hav e observe d tha t th e finishe d petroleumproduct s brough t int o th e harbor s fro mBosto n t o Baltimore , throug hth e spo t marke tP.7 5

alone , woul d involv e testin g hundred s o f shipload s o f oil . Th e Easter nseaboar d use s th e larges t percentag e o f finishe d petroleum

product s refine d throughou t th e world .

Second , a s a small , woman-owne d firm , w e woul d lik e t o expres s tha t th e cost s yo u hav e estimate d fo r th e propose d testin g woul d enforc e a financia l hardshi p o n us . W e do , however , agre e tha t emission s testin g shoul d b e requ i red . Third , ou r boar d o f director s i s expressl yoppose d t o anima l testin g unles s ther e i s n o viabl e alternativ e fro mwhic ht o gathe r require d data . W e believ e tha t yo u wil l find dat a o n th e fuel s and additiv e component s fro m previou s studie s mad e b yautomobil e manufacturer s and others . T o endlessl yrepea t studie s tha t requir e th e sufferin g and deat ho f animal s i s morall yreprehensible. " Th e las t paragrap hidentifie s m e a s he r representative , and sh e ha s signe d it . No wou r comment s ar e broke ndown int o 2 4 sections . A s previousl yindicated , Aiken-Murra yi s a firm tha t ha s ove r 6 0 year s experience , specificall yinth e area s o f additives , and D- 1 and D- 2 additives . I d o hav e persona l experienc e wit hgasoline . W e wis ht o poin t a s a smal l firmtha t th e "Toxline " databas e list s ove r 3 0 studie s o nth e effect s o rP.7 6

organometal1i c toxicit yi n diese l exhaust . Thes e studie s includ e us e o f rats/mous e mammal s i n th e test s fo r reactio n t o diese l exhaus t inthei r atmosphere . Thes e studie s wer e funde d b yagencie s o f th e U.S . government . The yar e th e Departmen t o f th e Interior , U.S . Ai r Forc e and NIOSHA . Othe r studie s wer e conducte d fo r th e Societ yo f Automotiv e Engineers , als o b yth e Volkswagenwerk s o f Germanyand als o b yth e Nationa l Healt hInstitute s o f Franc e and th e Sovie t Union . Third ; w e ar e concerne d tha t th e EPA staf f i s no t considerin g thi s dat a relevan t du e t o th e fac t th e Agenc yitsel f ha s no t conducte d th e testing . W e fee l tha t thi s coul d b e prompte d b ya fea r tha t acceptanc e o f th e dat a woul d downgrad e th e propose d testin g progra mb yth e Agency . Fourth ; w e hav e n o doub t tha t product s o f combustio n ca nhav e som e potentia l harmfu l effect s o n th e environment . Ou r poin t i s tha t dat a exists . Diesel s hav e difficult yobtainin g 10 0 percen t combustion . Additive s use d fo r improvin g combustio nreduc e tota l emissions . A s it' s numbe r on e priority , w e believ e tha t th e EPAshoul d b e focusin g o nexhaus t emission s and no t th e redundan t testing . Five ; testin g categorie s fo r D- 1 an d D-2 , whic hi s baseline , d o no t reflec t th e marketplace . Actua l diese l fuel s markete d i n th e U.S . varydu e t o crud e source , refinin g proces s and blendin g procedure s o f th e

—. ^5_ _P.7 7

wholesaler/pipeliner . T o categoriz e a D- 2 a s a bas e fue l i s unrealistic . Th e Ne wYor k Spo t Marke t ha s historicall y provide d # 2 fue l oil s fo r th e diesel/hom e fue l oi l marke t tha t rang e fro mheav

ykerosen e t o ligh t ga s oil . B yligh t ga s oil , I ca n refe r yo u t o Algeria n manufacture d products . I n ou r opinion , AP I criteri a fo r fuel s shoul d b e use d fo r baselin e testin g o f fuels . Fuel s shoul d be teste d a t al l AP I gravities . Th e testin g criteri a shoul d includ e variou s fue l and combustio n ai r temperatures , humidity , variou s engin e design s and fue l blend s markete d throughou t th e tw o majo r weathe r seasons . Fuel s shoul d com e fro m al l majo r market s o f th e Nort hAmerica ncontinent . A registere d fue l doe s no t retai n th e sam e chemica l compositio n throughou t th e year . Seventh ; w e believ e th e EPAshoul d develo p thi s dat a fo r baselin e o n stationar yengin e dynamometer s withou t animal s t o establis hit s baseline . Combustio ndat a shoul d confir mth e informatio nfro m"Toxline. " Eighth ; al l fuel s a t som e poin t ar e expose d t o additive s use d b ypipelines , tank farm s and refiner s t o protec t thei r employee s and facilitie s fro m corrosion , hydroge n embriddlemen t and bacteri a amon g others . Thes e product s ar e generall yamines , biocide s and emulsio n breakers . Thes e woul d b e presen t i nbaselin e fuels , and I' m

7f iP.7 8

o f cours e referrin g t o a t th e retai l o r wholesal e market . W e feel , numbe r nine , additive s fo r diese l fuel s shoul d hav e specifi c categories . W e hav e broke n the m down b

yapplication : Pou r Point/Col d Flo wImprovers ; Cetan e Improvers ; Combustio nImprovers ; Anti-Stats ; an d ou r fift hcategor yi s Multipl e combinations . I t i s ou r opinio ntha t previou s testimonygive nb yengin e supplier s i s generall yoriente d towar d Cetan e Improver s and Combustio nImprovers . Th e matur e supplier s o f diese l additive s recogniz e tha t over-dosag e o f nitrogen-base d additive s wil l adversel yaffec t th e metallurg y o f engin e components . Pou r Poin t o r Col d Flo wImprover s woul d b ythei r natur e b e use d bot hi n hom e fue l oil s and D- 2 fuels . Thi s i s determine d b yth e fue l distributo r and location . Thes e product s themselve s woul d b e virtuall yindistinguishabl e fro m th e fuel s eve n i f ga s chromagraphywa s use d and th e fue l wa s heavil ydose d a t 1:25 0 gallons , o r 400 0 parts-per-mi1 1 ion . Combustio nImprover s ar e th e clas s o f additive s whic hw e fee l wil l respond t o th e testin g procedure s advocate d b

yth e Agency . I nth e cas e o f on e material , Manganese , w e alreadykno wfro mpreviou s wor k performe d b y othe r agencie s and th e SA E tha t particulat e filter s wil l remov e thi s and othe r organometal1ic s fro mth e exhaus t o fP.7 9

diesel . W e d o no t se e an ylogi c i ntestin g al l additive s and fuel s t o se e whic hi s mor e likel yt o b e potentiall yharmful , rathe r w e advocat e wor k i nth e are a o f filtratio nan d improve d engin e design . Anti-Stat s ar e additive s use d i n lighte r fuel s whic har e use d fo r blendin g D- 1 and D- 2 fuels . Thes e additive s ar e prove n t o preven t explosion s du e t o stati c electricit yi n pumping , tanke r traile r loadin g and switc h loading . Whe nused , thes e product s woul d no t normall yb e distinguishe d fro mth e fuel . W e adde d a highligh t tha t i n on e cas e a nylo njacke t create d enoug hstati c electricit yt o blo w u p an Ai r Forc e storag e tank . W e d o no t believ e th e foca l poin t o f thi s regulatio ni s t o tes t al l additive s i nal l type s o f fue l used . Asmal l manufacture r lik e Aiken-Murra yCorporatio n canno t affor d thi s typ e o f expense . W e rel yo ngovernmen t agencie s t o se t acceptabl e standard s base d upo nth e need s o f industr yand th e country . Th e FD Astandard s fo r boile r wate r treatmen t i s a n example . Generally , smal l and larg e firm s in th e additiv e industr yhav e proprietar yformulations . Any procedur e whic hmaygiv e a competito r a nedg e i s closel y guarde d against . T o paten t a produc t i nmanycase s i s t o giv e i t away .

____ _P.8 0

Th e nex t commen t i s base d fro ma smal l corporation , no t someon e wh o ha s a partne r inJapan , lik e a Monsan o o r Petrolite . W e recentl ywer e requeste d t o suppl ya specifi c additiv e t o Japanes e industries . Prio r t o ou r produc t bein g accepte d i n Japan , ou r formula s had t o b e give n t o th e Japanes e EPA , and the ywoul d determin e i f an yJapanes e firm s manufacture d a "simila r product " usin g th e sam e components . Experienc e ha s shown tha t whe nanAmerica n firm fall s fo r thi s explanatio ntha t a Japanes e fir malway s show s u p wit hth e product . W e fee l tha t eve na ninnocuou s discussio nbetwee na membe r o f th e EPAstaf f and anothe r company' s technica l staf f wit ha statemen t phrase d i n th e manne r of , "Hav e yo u eve r hear d o f anyon e usin g component s X , J and A, " coul d caus e u s irreputabl e har meconomically . Technolog yi s alreadyover-takin g th e fue l industry . Du e i npar t t o th e effort s o f th e U.S . and Europea nscientists , vegetabl e oil-base d gasoline s and diese l fuel s hav e passe d thei r commercia l trial s i nbot hareas . Tw o refinin g plant s ar e no wbein g constructe d i nEurop e t o manufactur e thi s product . W e alreadykno wtha t use d cookin g oil s fro mrestauran t fryer s ca n b e successfull yuse d in Volkswage n diesel s whe n th e combustio no f ai r i s enriche d wit h methano l vapor . Thi s i s bein g done , b yth e way, inAlbany .P.8 1

Ne wYork . Th e U.S . militar yha s historicall ypurchase d vehicle s whic hca n runo nvariou s fuels . Th e availabl e o f thi s ne wfue l woul d hav e kep t it s multi-fue l truck s in production , and ou r curren t databas e fo r commercia l flee t woul d hav e bee nalreadyavailable . Som e additive s wil l and shoul d b e grand

fathere d in . Pou r Poin t o r CF I and Anti-Stat s shoul d receiv e thi s protection . Preceden t wa s se t b yth e FD

Awhic hpermitte d th e continue d us e o f phenolic-base d demulsifier s i na frot ho f th e extractio n proces s fo r penicilli nmanufacturing . Thi s wa s don e simpl ybecaus e productio nwoul d b e reduce d 8 0 percent , and n o othe r produc t wa s eve r develope d tha t coul d replac e it . N o trace s o f thi s produc t wa s eve r develope d tha t coul d replac e it . N o trace s o f thi s produc t wer e found — excus e me , I los t m

yplace ; non e o f thi s produc t wa s found t o hav e cause d symptom s inpatient s wh o ha d t o us e penicillin . Th e manufacture r ha s a representativ e here ; that' s th e Petrolit e Corporation . Twenty ; eve n thoug hAlken-Murra y Corporatio n recognize s tha t th e us e o f smal l animal s i s periodicall yneede d i ntestin g potentiall ytoxi c material s t o protec t th e huma nrac e and t o acquir e knowledge , i t i s th e opinio n o f th e Boar d o f Director s tha t i nthi s cas e mor e tha n sufficien t dat a exist s t o mak e th e exposur e o f smal l mammal s 8 0P.8 2

totall yunnecessary . Alken-Murra yCorporatio ndoe s no t relis h th e prospec t o f it s nam e bein g associate d wit hthes e type s o f tes t procedures . Thi s i s du e t o th e fac t tha t ou r corporatio n i s als o associate d wit hth e pet , anima l husbandr yand aqua cultur e industrie s throug hou r Clear-Fl o products . Ou r companydoe s hav e a reputatio namon g breeder s o f smal l mammal s and hors e breeder s whic hi s impeccable . Technicall yspeaking , w e find tha t th e exclusio n o f off-the-roa d and marin e application s t o mak e th e underlyin g reaso nfo r testin g thes e additive s suspect . I n ou r experienc e throug hth e actua l applicatio no f th e technologie s unde r question , th e similarit yo f engines , combustio n efficiencie s and us e o f additive s wil l appl yt o al l area s o f diese l and gasolin e technologies . I' d lik e t o mak e a commen t specificall y t o th e marine , pleasur e craft , diese l o r gasolin e additives , tha t w e ar e als o a wate r treatmen t firm . Befor e w e pu t a biocid e o nth e marke t fo r a coolin g towe r o r ai r conditionin g system , w e hav e t o run fis hkills , and a s I tel l th e kid s a t home , 5 0 percen t o f th e guppie s bette r die . W e fee l tha t whethe r it' s gasolin e o r diesel , tha t unles s yo u ar e goin g t o conside r th e marin e application s and conside r th e effec t o f exhaus t o f additive s i n fuel s o n a marin e environment , tha t th e whol e purpos e o f thi s reall yi s no t relevan t becaus e w e
& 4 —P.8 3

no wkno wsinc e th e tim e thi s wa s passe d tha t th e Grea t Lake s i n particular , especiall yher e i nMichiga nwher e i t i s a tremendou s economi c resource , i s adversel yaffecte d b y discharge s o f industry , and i n thi s cas e als o woul d b e an y typ e o f marin e vesse l o r emission s whic hhav e com e down wit h an ytim e o f mineralogica l discharge , whethe r i t b e sno wo r rain , T o continue , i nou r opinion , th e project' s relevanc e ca nonl yb e evaluate d whe nal l application s o f th e fuel s and additive s ar e addressed . Th e EPAshoul d conside r aquati c test s fo r pleasur e craf t and off

the-roa d equipmen t use d i nforeste d o r natura l area s i n conjunctio nwit hothe r tests . Thes e ar e onl ysom e o f th e reason s w e conside r filtratio n o f exhaus t a priority , no t testin g o f compounds . Th e saying , " Aros e i s a ros e i s a rose, " ca n b e applie d t o th e applicatio no f fuel s and fue l additive s i n manycases . Th e acquirin g o f vehicle s and usin g a baselin e o f mile s befor e testin g appear s unnecessary . Engin e manufacturer s ar e capabl e o f providin g engine s wit hth e require d amoun t o f hour s o n them . Dynamomete r test s shoul d provid e th e dat a require d t o fil l i ngap s lef t fro mpreviou s testing . Aiken-Murra yCorporatio n woul d b e

____ _P.8 4

willin g t o discus s fundin g fo r test s oriente d towar d combustio nefficiencie s and particulat e removal , a s long a s th e test s di d no t includ e smal l mammals , a s propose d i n th e document . Th e Agenc yoffere d th e opinio n tha t dosage s unde r 1:25 0 gallons , o r 200 0 parts-per-mi1 1 ion , mayb e exclude d fro mthi s testin g progra mi f th e produc t i s onl yuse d i nthes e amounts . Thi s polic ywould , excep t i non e case , remov e ou r product s fro mth e testin g procedure . Th e maximum dosag e recommende d fo r th e singula r produc t i s 1:25 0 gallons , whic hi s 400 0 parts-per-mi1 1 ion . Generall yspeaking , th e dosag e rate s appl yt o th e entir e produc t and no t th e activ e ingredients . I f thi s rul e applie s t o activ e organometal1i c ingredients , i n ou r cas e ou r entir e lin e woul d probabl yb e remove d fro mth e testin g procedur e alon g manycompetitors . We'v e als o includ e fo r yo u jus t copie s o f ou r MSDAsheets , I believe , on e tes t tha t w e di d wit hD- 1 i nBoston . I wa s originall yno t goin g t o com e u p here , that' s wh

yI requeste d last , unti l th e othe r gentlema n wh o i s a smal l busines s fir mcam e up her e and yo u aske d hi m som e o f th e questions . W e would , unde r anothe r name , o n occasion , i f h e kne wwh o w e were , provid e th e produc t fo r him . W e hav e bee n known unde r differen t name s becaus e w e ar e a 93 _P.8 5

re-blende r beside s doin g ou r own . Som e o f th e thing s tha t hav e bee n brough t u

p todaytha t I'l l addres s fo r you , numbe r one , ther e probably , yo u wil l find , i s no t a goo d wayo f gettin g t o th e smal l manufacture r o r re-blende r o f thes e products . Yo u wil l hav e t o g o throug ha variet yo f organizations . Ironically , th e America n Wate r Treatmen t Associatio ni s goin g t o b e th e bes t sourc e because , generall yspeaking , mos t smal l firm s tha t ar e involve d inthi s als o a t som e poin t o r anothe r ar e involve d i nwate r treatment . S o the yhav e a differen t focu s tha n woul d b e a nAmoco , Exxo no r eve nNalco , wh o als o retail s bu t a t a large r leve l tha n wha t the ydo . Th e documen t di d no t reall yinfe r tha t thi s wa s fo r a gasolin e typ e package . I t wa s interprete d t o mea ngasolin e and diesel , and th e reaso nI wa s aske d t o thi s i s tha t a t on e tim e I worke d fo r a fir mcalle d Petrolit e an d treate d boatload s o f fue l oi l tha t cam e i nfro moverseas . Whe n I sawth e term , baseline , I though t tha t tha t wa s a very nic e jok e becaus e wha t come s int o th e harbor s fro mBangor , Main e downt o Nort hCarolin a ha s n o similarit yt o th e product s tha t wil l b e refine d i n a refiner ylik e wher e I work , Sun Oil , Toledo . Th e qualit yisn' t there . Th e cos t and technolog yfo r manyyear s wasn' t there , whic hth e AP I advocate d her e in th e states . There' s rea l garbag e tha t show s up . Th e firmI' m

3 4P.8 6

wit hand manyo f th e smal l firm s ar e basicall yEas t Coas t f i rms . Whe n yo u star t reall ygettin g int o this , whoeve r i s doin g th e tes t i s goin g t o hav e aninquirin g mind , and th e inquirin g min d i s goin g t o g o ou t and begi nt o gra b samples . Fo r a firmlik e Aiken-Murray , yo u coul d potentially , i f yo u find ou t you r baselin e dat a i s wrong , whic hi t wil l b e th e wayyo u propos e it , find tha t someon e lik e Aiken-Murray , le t alon e Nalco , i s goin g t o ge t ou t o f busines s becaus e an additiv e o r a combinatio n o f additive s int o 30 0 potentia l dif

feren t type s o f fue l oi l comin g int o th e harbor s o f th e Eas t Coas t i s somethin g tha t eve nyou r Agenc ycan' t affor d t o do . Fro mth e technica l thing s o f designin g thes e things , I' ma pip e designer , there' s nothin g mechanicall ytha t can' t b e designe d i f you'r e patient . W e fee l thoug htha t th e wor k that' s bee ndon e i s mor e tha n adequat e and tha t al l we'r e doin g here , and no wI' mtalkin g 1ik e a politicia n becaus e I d o si t o na governmenta l boar d o n occasion , i s tha t it' s no t you r fault , okay , bu t someon e dragge d thei r heel s fo r te n year s and no wwe'r e i ncrisi s management . Privat e industry , othe r governments , othe r agencie s o f th e governmen t di d no t g o wit hcrisi s management . The yassume d tha t withi n thre e t o fou r year s o f th e origina l passag e o f th e la wtha t yo u folk s woul d b e havin g thi s 8 5P.8 7

meeting , s o they'v e don e a lo t o f you r homework . W e fee l tha t th e emphasi s shoul d b e t o fil l i n th e smal l gap s and g o wit hth e wor k tha t wa s don e b y th e Burea u o f Mine s fo r diese l exhaus t i nmine s and ge t o n wit hfiltratio nand als o wit hth e developmen t o f bette r processes . Ther e ar e peopl e her e wh o aren' t goin g t o testif y wh o ca n tel l yo u tha t i t isn' t a matte r o f worryin g abou t th e additives , it' s a matte r o f makin g sur e tha t a lo t o f th e ra w materia l i s availabl e i n th e worl d aroun d t o mak e thes e product s i nth e future . MR . WILSON : Than k yo u fo r comin g and fo r tha t information . I gues s I had on e questio no n you r filtratio n point . Ar e yo u suggestin g tha t rathe r tha n reviewin g additives , w e shoul d requir e technolog yo n th e engine s t o captur e whateve r wa s comin g ou t o f them ? MR . TURKAL : And tha t wor k ha s already begun . We'r e a ver ysmal l firm . Unlik e som e o f thes e firm s wh o hav e mor e PhD s tha noffices , w e hav e mor e office s tha n PhDs , s o w e hav e t o rel yo ntha t littl e miracl e calle d a computer , and w e plu g int o thing s lik e "Toxline. " I n thi s cas e th e Burea u o f Mines , alon g wit hth e Canadia ngovernmen t and SAE , ha s alreadydon e testin g o ncerami c filter s fo r diese l emissions . Eve n wit hth e wor k don e b yVolkswage nfo r th e Germa nlabs , the ywer e anticipatin g this . Th e Germa n 8 6P.8 8

studie s wer e don e fo r th e America nmarket . The yweren' t don e fo r Germany . MR . WILSON : W e hav e separatel ya fairl y aggressiv e progra mi n term s o f reducin g particulat e emission s fro mdiese l engines . MR . TURKAL : Whe na smal l fir mpunche s int o "Toxline " t o ge t a database , you r nam e doesn' t sho wup , and that' s th e aspec t tha t yo u hav e t o remembe r wit hsmal l business , i s tha t we'r e actuall yuse d t o friendl ygovernmen t agencies . No wtha t ma ysound craz yt o som e people , bu t le t m e ge t t o th e fac t tha t th e wate r treatmen t industr yi s o n very good , amicabl e term s wit hth e FD Aand th e USDA . The ygiv e u s standards . The ydon' t com e and say, w e wan t yo u t o fund tests . The yhav e develope d th e standards . The yrealize , a s yo u should , tha t althoug hever yon e o f thes e me nand wome n i n thi s roo m

represent s a retai l nam e o f a nadditive , tha t basicall yinstea d o f havin g a hundred , w e stil l ar e bac k t o fiv e o r te n o r mayb e 2 0 basi c additiv e ingredients . Th e on e tha t scare s th e smal l additiv e manufacture r reall yi s manganese , whic hcome s ou t wit hparticulat e filters . Ou r focu s is , and you'r e no t goin g t o ge t anothe r lette r o nthi s unles s Valeri e want s one , i s very simpl ytha t yo u shoul d b e testing , no t product s A , B , C an d 0 , becaus e i t look s lik e empir e buildin g t o th e smal l additiv e
8 7P.8 9

manufacturer , and i t i s empir e building . Yo u shoul d b e goin g afte r th e bas e compound s whic hth e manufacturin g associatio n ca n provid e you , mak e a generi c solutio nbecaus e that' s al l w e do . Whe nw e nee d a ne wformula , wh o d o w e call ? W e cal l thes e guy s up ; hey , I wan t t o d o this , wha t d o I d o —well , wh ydon' t yo u us e X , Yand Z . I nou r case , on e o f ou r own peopl e found ou t tha t i f yo u add Aand B t o it , i t work s eve n better , bu t w e didn' t tel l them . Yo u ca nd o wha t yo u wan t t o d o withou t puttin g a financia l hardshi p o n thes e people , whethe r they'r e verylarg e o r onl ysellin g a hal f a millio ndollar s a year , b y sittin g down and lookin g a t th e actua l application s and under

standin g wha t th e additive s ar e use d fo r becaus e I perceiv e fro mth e cove r lette r o f th e Federa l Registe r and fro myou r question s tha t ther e i s n o rea l understandin g o f th e application s o f additives , i nwha t w e conside r i nth e industr y t o b e additives . I doub t i f I wil l find anyon e i nyou r organizatio n wh o ha s gon e down t o a rea l exper t o nwha t happen s wit hadditive s in engine s and talke d t o on e yet . An y goo d diese l mechani c wit h1 5 year s experienc e ca ntel l yo u what' s goin g t o happe nfro madditive s and eve ntel l yo u wha t brand i t i s almost . And yo u wil l invariabl yfind tha t a lo t o f th e problem s ar e goin g t o b e wit hcetan e improver s and als o wit hcombustio nimprovers , ovei—use. 

### 8 8P.9 0

You r regulatio ni s wonderfu l fo r thes e peopl e here , bu t i n th e rea l worl d that' s no t ho wadditive s ar e added . I nAmeric a w e hav e a philosophywhe ni t come s t o usin g chemicals . I f a littl e bi t i s great , a lo t mus t b e a hec k o f a lo t better , and thi s i s veryprevalen t inever ybu s garag e in a schoo l system , an ytruc k departmen t tha t yo u wan t t o g o to . Whethe r i t b e Yello wTransi t o r Roadway , yo u ar e goin g t o find that' s wher e you'r e havin g you r particulat e problems . Also , w e hav e th e philosophy , and th e governmen t i s responsibl e fo r this , i s yo u actuall ywan t th e cheapes t fuel . Yo u writ e a spec . I don' t kno wi f you'v e eve r bee n o n a governmen t contract , bu t I thin k yo u shoul d tak e th e tim e t o d o it , and yo u woul d com e bac k t o you r ownAgenc yand say , w e hav e t o star t wit hprocuremen t first , becaus e it' s no t thes e folks ' fault . T o ge t gasolin e o nth e market , you'r e goin g t o tak e a retailer , and he' s goin g t o bu ya goo d 8 7 octan e gasolin e fro mAmoc o o r Sun Oil . He' s goin g t o cal l u p anothe r fir m

wh o sell s hi mrapenat e (phonetic) , and the n he' s goin g t o blend of f hi s goo d octane , and the nhe' s goin g t o thro wsom e ethano l i n it , and yo u ar e no t goin g t o hav e a fue l tha t yo u thin k yo u thin k you'v e regulate d becaus e h e coul d car e less . Onc e h e get s tha t number , he' s go t a licens e t o sel l wha t h e wants .

- _P.9 1

That' s wha t ou r whol e approac ho n th e diese l additiv e is , i s tha t i nth e Ne wYor k market , th e Ne w Yor k Spo t Market , al l yo u hav e t o d o i s si t downwit han y buye r o f fue l oil s in th e Ne wYor k Spo t Market , whethe r i t b e Seril l (phonetic ) Brothers , o r Axl e Johnso nfro mSweden , o r an yo f th e large r firms . Yo u hav e n o consistenc yi n fuel s a s use d i nth e automotive , hom e fue l oi l or marine , ligh t marin e industry . It' s no t there . Truthfully , i f yo u wan t t o establis ha baselin e jus t fo r th e Eas t Coast , yo u can' t d o i t infiv e year s withou t th e anima l testing . Yo u canno t d o it . Yo u wil l hav e t o tes t th e product s o f ever yrefiner yi n th e worl d becaus e i t goe s throug htha t harbor . That' s wha t thi s gentlema n fro mNe w Englan d i s talkin g about . I f h e i s fro mNe wEngland , h e see s thing s com e o nth e marke t tha t th e AP I wishe s neve r showe d u p becaus e the ydon' t know . He' s liabl e t o ge t somethin g and find minnow s flowin g ou t o f it . I've treate d oi l tha t cam e u p fromSout hAmerica , wher e w e ha d t o pu t demulsifier s in i t a t a on e t o a hundre d jus t s o tha t w e coul d ge t ri d o f th e 2 0 percen t wate r tha t ha d bee npicke d u p b yth e tanker . Wh o know s wha t trac e elements , wha t complexitie s happe nwhe n yo u ge t int o situation s lik e this ? Thi s happen s al l th e time . I'l l relat e on e inciden t t o yo u becaus e I di d d o a lo t o f additiv e treatmen t o nth e Eas t Coas t fo r 

### 9 0P.9 2

Axl e Johnso nCorporatio no f Swede n a t thei r Ne wEngland refinery . I go t a cal l o nMonda ytha t I wa s t o trea t a tanke r load , whic hi s a ship , o f oi l refine d i nth e Crime a fro mth e Sovie t Union . Whe n i t wa s clos e enoug hfo r the mt o fl ya helicopte r ou t t o ge t a sample , the ygo t a bette r bu yo n a shiploa d o f oi l comin g ou t o f Texas . Tha t boatloa d wen t bac k somewher e i nEurope . Th e boa t fro mTexa s ha d a leak in it s hold , and tha t stoppe d of f i n Sout hCarolin a fo r hi s othe r refinery , and wha t I ende d u p wit hwa s tw o boatload s later . The ydidn' t kno wunti l th e shi p showe d
u p wher e i t cam e from , wha t compositio ni t was , wha t grad e o f diese l i t wa s o r hom e fue l i t was , and i t wa s a 2 9 gravit y diesel , whic heveryon e her e wil l tel l yo u wa s close r t o a numbe r fou r oil , o r a t leas t th e ol d grad e o f numbe r three . I ha d exactl ytw o hour s t o run al l th e CFI s o ntha t o r pou r poin t tests , and the n I treate d tha t entir e ship , 250,00 0 gallon s o f diese l fuel , a s i t wa s pumpe d of f th e ship . S o I varie d th e amoun t o f additiv e I ha d t o us e wit htha t on e load , dependin g o n wha t wa s comin g ou t o f eac ho f th e differen t section s o f tha t ship . Tha t i s th e worl d o f additive s a t th e retai l end , and that' s wha t confront s peopl e wh o wor k wit h importe d oi1 . Wha t you'r e doin g i s verynic e fo r th e America n manufacturers , bu t I think tha t yo u hav e t o si t down 

### 9 1P.9 3

i nNe wYor k harbo r and ge t som e rea l dat a o nwha t i s comin g int o thi s countr yand wha t yo u think i s a registere d fue l and wha t i t reall yis , becaus e jus t th e differenc e i nfuel s wil l thro wtha t entir e testin g progra myo u hav e righ t down th e sinkhol e becaus e i t doesn' t exist . I thin k you'r e bette r of f takin g a rang e o f fuels , takin g th e data , making , base d o n th e bas e manufacturer' s recommendation , maximumconcentration s fo r tha t additiv e and runnin g you r tests . Te nyear s fro mno w you'l l hav e som e dat a tha t thes e gentleme nca nwor k with . I thin k you'r e fa r bette r of f goin g afte r filtration , removin g th e particulate s and wor k o n alternat e fue l technology . MR . WILSON : Than k yo u verymuc hfo r comin g today ; w e appreciat e it . W e d o hav e on e othe r witness , I guess . Phi l Bus hwoul d lik e t o mak e som e comment s specificall yfo r Amoco . I s ther e anybodyels e tha t w e don' t hav e wh o wante d t o testif ytoday ? MR . BUSH : Goo d morning , m ynam e i s Phili p Bus hand I wor k in th e Plannin g Departmen t o f Amoc o Oi l Company . Certainl ythi s regulator yprogra maffect s u s an d ou r products , and I amno t a toxicologist , s o todayI wan t t o addres s m

ycomment s mor e toward s thos e aspect s o f th e proposa l havin g t o d o wit hth e dat a that' s currentl yavailabl e in .-. .P.9 4

literature , adequac yo f Tie r I , relativ e t o vehicl e emission s and speciatio n suggestions . No ww e appreciat e th e progres s that' s bee n mad e sinc e th e prio r proposa l inmovin g thi s toward s wha t w e think i s a mor e manageabl e progra mb yth e concept s o f tierin g and baselin e categor ywhic hi s fairl ybroad . W e think there' s som e verygoo d technica l reason s fo r that . W e ar e veryconcerne d that , a s proposed , thi s progra mha s th e potentia l t o seriousl ydisrup t som e othe r program s w e thin k ar e mor e importan t and shoul d hav e highe r priorit yfo r bot h protectin g healt hand th e environment . I wan t t o dea l wit h thes e wit hsom e fairl ybroa d concept s whic hw e thin k answe r a lo t o f th e question s raise d i nth e preambl e and inth e regulation s and jus t us e ver yspecifi c example s t o illustrat e th e point s W e thin k th e Agenc yha s a ver ydifficul t tim e inmakin g th e judgmenta l decision s tha t the yhav e t o mak e a s th e focu s o f thi s rulemaking . W e certainl ysympathiz e wit h that . W e thin k thi s publi c forumregulator yproces s goe s a long waytoward s bringin g al l th e issue s ou t i nth e ope n wher e everybodyca ndiscus s them , and I wan t t o pu t fort hsom e concept s todayprimaril ybecaus e I wan t peopl e t o addres s the m in thei r writte n comments , a s t o whethe r they'r e appropriat e o r not . S o th e publi c phas e i s ver yimportan t i nhelpin g th e 

### 9 3P.9 5

Agenc yt o identif yth e issues , focu s th e progra mwher e i t need s t o g o and elici t prope r responses . I wan t t o disagre e wit hon e remar k mad e earlie r b

yMr . Kelle r i ntha t h e sai d w e kno who wt o d o speciation . I nmos t o f ou r judgments , yes , w e do , bu t certainl yt o n o wher e nea r th e exten t that' s bein g propose d in thi s rule . Ther e ar e significan t technica l proposal s in her e whic har e jus t straigh t infeasible . Le t m e illustrat e wit h on e example . Th e proposa l i s tha t w e b e require d t o identif yin speciatio nand quantif yal l hydrocarbo ncompound s o f C-1 2 and less . No wwhe n yo u g o t o th e literatur e and loo k a t a studyo f engin e combustio n wher e the ytoo k a singl e chemica l compoun d a s th e fue l and the ypas s i t throug hth e combustio nprocess , tha t molecul e get s broke nu p int o al l th e possibl e sub-fraction s tha t yo u ca nconceiv e of , and som e o f thos e re-combin e t o creat e ne wand eve nlarge r molecule s tha n wer e ther e t o star t with . I remembe r on e studywher e the ytoo k a singl e liqui d fuel , passe d i t throug hth e combustio n and identifie d 4 0 differen t specie s i n th e exhaust . No wi f that' s a goo d rul e o f thumb , yo u ge t 4 0 fo r eac ho f th e compound s in th e origina l liqui d fuel , the n gasoline , fo r example , wher e ther e mayb e 100 , 20 0 o r mor e compound s i nth e liqui d fue l 

### 9 4P.9 6

itself , we'r e talkin g abou t ther e bein g specie s i nth e exhaus t o f fou r t o 10,00 0 o r more . W e canno t feasibl yidentif yan d quantif yal l thos e species , and w e nee d no t inthi s rule . Th e reaso n tha t thos e ar e no t highpriorit yconcerns , o r shoul d no t be , i s they'r e extremel ysmall . Hydrocarbon s in tota l a s a fractio no f exhaus t i s ver ysmall , and th e bi g constituent s ar e methane , whic hw e kno wi s prett ybenign , and o ndownth e 1 ine . Technica l feasibilit ys o fa r ha s bee n demonstrate d b

yAuto/Oil , wher e they'v e manage d t o identif y somethin g i n th e neighborhoo d o f 15 0 o f thes e potentiall y thousand s o f compounds . I f th e Agenc yreall ythink s there' s a stron g nee d fo r al l o f thi s detail , the nwe'r e no t goin g t o ge t i t don e in thre e years . Nobodyi nth e worl d know s ho wt o measur e al l thos e things . It' s jus t impossible . S o w e nee d t o focu s bac k o nsomethin g w e thin k i s mor e practica l fo r routin e registration . W e propos e tha t fo r th e Tie r I criteria , th e Agenc yalreadyha s i nit s possessio nsufficien t speciatio n dat a fo r sub-si mfuel s and additives . It' s com e primaril y fro m th e Auto/Oi l program , bu t i nadditio nt o that , there' s a lo t o f olde r studie s tha t hav e bee n don e b yth e Agenc yitself , b yothe r category . A s long a s th e definitio no f adequac y allow s u s t o brin g tha t prio r knowledg e and us e i t in thi s 9 5P.9 7

rulemaking , and le t m e poin t t o on e othe r specifi c proposa l tha t eliminate s that , agai ni n th e speciatio nrequirement s th e Agenc yi s suggestin g tha t eac hspeciatio nmeasuremen t b e mad e i ntriplicate . Tha t wasn' t necessar yfo r Auto/Oil . Th e dat a that' s goin g t o b e use d fo r developin g th e whol e reformulate d gasolin e progra mwa s no t measure d i ntriplicat e and almos t never was . S o tha t requiremen t b yitsel f eliminate s th e possibl e us e o f almos t al l o f th e prio r knowledg e that' s in th e library . Thos e type s o f thing s nee d t o b e reassessed , reevaluate d a s t o wha t th e criteri a shoul d b e use d i n term s o f adequacy , s o I thin k thi s i s a larg e problem . Again , I suggeste d tha t th e speciatio n dat a tha t w e alreadyhad , i f we'r e allowe d t o us e i t and i f it' s adequat e fo r th e Agency' s needs , i s alreadyther e in th e literature . S o ther e shouldn' t b e a majo r focu s withi n th e propose d rule s requirin g a lo t o f peopl e t o g o ou t an d d o a lo t o f speciatio n measuremen t whic hisn' t goin g t o add t o ou r curren t knowledg e i na usefu l way . I wan t t o tur nand loo k a t mas s emissio n rate s becaus e thi s questio ncam e up earlie r eve nhere , and tal k jus t a littl e bi t abou t wh ywe , i nou r minds , hav e determine d tha t tha t typ e o f informatio nha s verylittl e us e t o th e Agenc ywithi n wha t shoul d b e th e focu s o f thi s rulemaking . 

### 9 6P.9 8

Whe nyo u d o toxicolog ytests , yo u alway s overdos e th e animals , and yo u d o i t b ymany , many , man yorder s o f magnitude . Again , th e result s o f thi s rulemakin g ar e goin g t o b e use d t o determin e huma n ris k assessmen t o f th e compound s inambien t ai r a t subpart-per-mi1 1 iontyp e level , and ye t we'r e goin g t o dos e th e animal s wit hsomethin g lik e ra w exhaust , probabl ydillute d s o tha t there' s som e oxyge n in there , we' d lik e t o kee p th e animal s aliv e fo r a while , whil e w e d o th e test , and coo l it , bu t yo u typicall ydos e th e animal s wit ha thousan d times , 10,000 , 100,00 0 time s th e leve l you'r e reall ytryin g t o ge t at , and yo u d o i t a t thre e level s s o yo u ge t a dos e respons e curve . Yo u the ntak e tha t curv e and yo u extrapolat e i t backward s downtoward s reality , and i f that' s wha t you'r e doin g i n th e ris k assessmen t toxicolog y par t o f thi s program , i t doesn' t mak e an ydifferenc e whethe r th e emissio nrat e o f tha t specie s ou t o f th e actua l tailpip e wa s tw o milligrams , fiv e milligrams , te no r a.hundred , becaus e yo u teste d i t manytime s tha t level . Whe nyo u loo k a t th e ris k assessmen t part , agai n wha t peopl e ar e expose d t o i s th e ambien t leve l concentratio no f th e species , and that' s th e basi s and th e controllin g facto r o nwher e yo u end u p a s anestimat e fo r your overal l ris k assessment . S o ambien t ai r concentration s are quit e valuabl e t o tha t process , bu t wha t emissio ncam e o_ *P.9 9

a specifi c ca r o na nartificia l tes t i s no t veryuseful . I f y© u ge t tha t number , yo u the n tryt o extrapolat e i t t o wha t i t mean s t o th e rea l urba nare a ambien t concentration . Yo u star t factorin g i n factor s lik e som e car s ou t ther e ar e missin g catalysts , and thi s multiplie s thos e emissio nrate s b ylarg e factors , and tha t multiplicativ e interpretatio ni s les s well

knowntha n th e emissio nrates . And i n othe r part s o f th e ris k assessmen t proces s ther e ar e area s tha t ar e les s wel l defined , and w e alreadykno wabou t th e emission s o f thos e specie s ou t o f th e cars , s o w e shouldn' t b e focusin g a whol e lo t o f manpowe r and effor t tryin g t o defin e veryprecisel ywha t an emissio n tes t wa s o n a specifi c ca r runnin g o ntha t fue l on e time , whic hi s no t ver yusefu l fo r th e overal l purpose . S o th e requiremen t fo r triplicat e speciatio nfo r mas s emissio n measurement s a t al l withi n thi s rulemaking , w e think , ca n be eliminated . I t doesn' t nee d t o b e ther e a t all . Th e nex t poin t I wan t t o mak e i s comin g bac k t o th e descriptio n tha t I gav e earlie r tha t yo u ca n tak e a singl e liqui d fue l and pas s i t throug hth e combustion , and yo u ge t a whol e rang e o f compound s there . Onc e yo u hav e a fairl ywid e rang e o f compound s i n th e liqui d fuel , mor e tha n jus t one , yo u ge t essentiall yth e sam e speciatio nlis t o f compound s i n th e exhaust , prett ymuc hregardles s o f wha t th e 

### 9 8P.10 0

specific s o f th e fue l wer e withi n th e categorie s o f sub- s 

### im . And I thin k i f yo u loo k a t th e Auto/Oi l dat a and th e speciate d dat a wher e you'v e take na loo k a t a verywid e rang e o f fue l parameter s fo r 1 8 fuels , tha t certainl ycover s mos t o f th e availabl e commercia l gasoline , yo u find tha t ne wcompound s ar e no t appearin g and disappearin g in tha t speciatio nlist . Th e concentration , th e emissio n rat e maychange . Again , th e emissio nrat e i s no t particularl y relevan t t o what' s reall ytryin g t o b e accomplishe d here . I think wha t shoul d rais e th e concer n o f potentia l healt hissue s and b e focuse d o n i s th e appearanc e o f ne wcompounds . Certainl ywhe nyo u g o int o a n atypica l categor ywher e you'v e brough t i na ne wheav yelemen t t o a nadditiv e o r th e fuel , I mean , tha t deserve s muc hmor e scrutiny , partl ybecaus e w e kno w tha t a lo t o f element s hav e toxi c consequences . S o intha t par t o f th e rul e yo u nee d mor e prescriptio na s t o wha t yo u wil l d o t o evaluat e thos e ne w compound s tha n yo u d o fo r sub-sim . W e thin k there' s a very extensiv e databas e tha t shoul d b e allowe d t o b e use d t o judg e curren t fuels , and I thin k a lo t o f tha t dat a ca nb e extrapolate d t o a lo t o f th e alternativ e fuel s comin g down th e line . Certainl ysom e o f th e studie s don e o ngasolin e woul d adequatel ycove r compresse d natura l gas . W e expec t compresse d natura l ga s a s a vehicl e fue l t o b e cleane r and , i f anything , 

### 9 9p. 1

hav e a lo t les s potentia l problem s and concern s tha n gasoline . S o I don' t thin k it' s desirabl e her e u p fron t inth e rulemakin g t o requir e an awfu l lo t o f manpower , facilitie s expense , goin g ou t and tryin g t o nai l downthos e specifics , unles s there' s a usefu l nee d t o i t fo r th e Agency . We' d lik e t o focu s bac k o nth e dat a tha t w e alreadyhave . I thin k I wan t t o brin g up a poin t fo r Tie r I , i f w e ar e allowe d t o us e al l th e extensiv e dat a tha t we'v e alreadydeveloped . Jus t th e on e smal l categor yo f diese l particulate , healt heffect s and regulatio ni s a hug e volum e o f material . I t certainl yshoul d b e applicabl e t o th e diese l fue l judgmen t b yth e Agenc yo f whethe r anythin g furthe r i s needed . How , i n a practica l sense , d o w e and th e Agenc y handl e tha t mas s o f studie s and availabl e literatur e and ge t i t organize d int o a fashio n tha t coul d b e use d i na practica l sens e and tha t peopl e coul d refe r t o and understan d wha t you'r e referrin g to ? I n m ymind , wha t tha t drive s yo u t o i s th e conclusio ntha t th e Agenc yneed s t o buil d a libraryand organiz e th e availabl e dat a s o tha t i t ca nb e use d b yevery bod yand use d i neve nth e othe r categories . W e thin k Tie r I informatio nin th e publi c literatur e and wha t th e Agenc yalreadyha s i s sufficien t fo r sub-si mfuels . Wha t w e woul d sugges t i s tha t EPAtak e thei r curren t registratio nform , and it' s include d in 10 0P. 2

th e packe t and ther e wer e som e handout s i nth e back , and thi s registratio nfor mask s fo r quit e a bi t o f informatio nabou t aeromatic s levels , olefins , saturates , trac e element s tha t migh t b e i n gasolin e i n eve n th e highest , lowes t and averag e typ e concentration , and als o w e identif yth e method s o f analysi s fo r thes e variou s thing s tha t w e us e t o generat e thos e numbers , Rei d vapo r pressure , distillation , octan e number , e t cetera . Thi s informatio ni s sufficien t t o decid e whethe r thi s ne wfue l tha t we'r e comin g i nt o registe r fit s withi nth e definitio nand categor yo f baselin e and substantiall ysimilar , and w e thin k thi s i s al l that' s neede d t o mak e tha t initia l assessment , certainl yfo r th e baseline , baselin e fuels . Th e nex t ste p seem s t o b e tha t w e nee d t o ti e th e availabl e healt hliteratur e o f Tie r I t o th e specifi c registratio n proces s tha t Amoc o i s comin g in t o do , and Amoc o ha s abou t 2 5 differen t fuel s registere d wit hth e Agency . I thin k wha t accomplishe s tha t i s t o simpl yadd a sectio nt o thi s formwhic hask s i f th e availabl e data , numbe r one , whethe r thi s fue l fits , i nou r opinion , th e definitio n o f substantiall ysimilar , and mos t everythin g will , excep t fo r ou r alternativ e fuels , fo r bot hth e definition s o f gasolin e and diesel , and the nas k th e registran t whethe r th e dat a tha t th e Agenc yalreadyhas , and m yconcep t agai ni s tha t th e 10 1P. 3

studie s ar e sittin g her e i na library , and EPAha s mad e a determinatio ntha t the yappl yand satisf yth e Tie r I require

ments , doe s thi s appl yt o thi s particula r produc t o f gasoline . Tha t seem s sufficien t fo r th e routine , day-to-da yregistratio n process . I t avoid s th e possibilitie s o f havin g t o brin g in duplicativ e reports , t o appl ythe mt o differen t categories . W e coul d hav e a healt hstudywhic hi s applicabl e t o bot h diese l and gasolin e and methano l o r anM-8 5 typ e category . W e shoul d d o tha t b

yreferenc e t o thi s baselin e se t o f data . W e wil l b e addressin g thes e sam e issue s i nou r writte n comment s i nmor e detail , and we'l l tryt o poin t ou t eac hand ever yplac e i n th e propose d regulation s wher e w e thin k they'v e gon e beyond what' s technicall yfeasibl e certainl yand beyond wha t i s neede d fo r purpose s o f thi s particula r program . Bu t w e wan t t o ge t th e concept s ou t o f wha t drive s yo u t o certai nconclusion s i nanswerin g th e question s tha t hav e bee nraised . I than k you . MR . WILSON : Than k you . Tha t conclude s th e peopl e wh o wante d t o testif ythi s morning , s o wit hthat , I'l l than k al l o f yo u fo r comin g and fo r th e tim e and effor t pu t int o th e comment s w e go t today . W e loo k forwar d t o hearin g fro mal l o f yo u durin g th e commen t period , and wit htha t we'l l clos e thi s hearing ; thank yo u again .P. 4



### (Proceeding s conclude d a t 11:5 5 a.m. )

STAT E O F MICHIGA

N) COUNTYO F WASHTENAW )

I , Susan Beale , Cour t Reporter , do hereb ycertif ytha t thi s transcript , consisting o f 10 3 pages , i s a complete , tru e an d correc t record o f the Publi c Hearing o f the Environmenta l Protectio n Agency , Inth e Matte r of : Fuel s an d Fue l Additive s Registratio n Regulations ; Propose d Rule , EP AAi r Docke t #A-90-07 , hel d a t the An n Arbo r Regen t - Bes t WesternDomino' s Farms Hote l an

d Conferenc e Center , An n Arbor , Michigan , on Thursday , Ma

y28 , 1992 . 

# sA / 

### y-Cttf ^ SusanBeale , CSM

R274 1 Western Wayn e Cour t Reporting Servic e Plymouth , Michigan (313 ) 453-723 2

10 3P. 5



### acceptedscientific methods an dprotocols , so tha

t resulting dat

awillstan du p t o scientific peer-review an

dbecapableo

f integrationint

o th eexisting testing information . I t shoul d als o beresearchthat , o

nits face , adds valuet

o th ebod yo f knowledgeo

nth esubject, wil

l assist EP Ai nevaluating potentia

ladverseeffects , an

di s specificall

ydirectedt

o th e determinationo

f whethe r furthe r risk assessmen

t o r regulator yactioni s neede

dunde r Section21 1 (c) . Adding dat arequirements fo

r purpose s tha

t ar einconsisten

t wit hthi s statutor ygoa lis , a t best, inappropriate , an

da t worst, a nunacceptablewast

eo f thenation' s environmenta

lresearchcapability . AP Iendorse s man

yo f th econcepts i

nthepropose

drulesuc

has th etieredtesting approach , an

dthefuels groupin

g optio n(Optio nB ) whic

hplace s al

l"sub . sim. " an

d waiveredfuels an

dadditives , including reformulate dgasoline(RFG) , i

nth ebaseline group . W ebelievetha

t th ecorrect focus o f th erulei s o ntailpipeexhaust

rathe r tha nra w fuels . Ou r comments wil

lcontai nsuggestion s fo

r som erevision s t

o theproposa

ltha t w e believewil

limproveimplementationo f th erule . AP

Iwil lfileextensivewritte

n comments i

nJune . 

### h.' s priu.rba.hM-fbrAft. f ti' it*.kfi A {UrUXJUf

fnDirv vo. WW-<f

*» * 6*W r III . NEE

D TO NO TINTERFER

EWIT HCA AAMENDMENT

S Concurren t wit hthi s rulemaking , EP

Ais als o developing regulation s fo r Reformulated GasolineCertificationRequirements unde r th eClea nAi r Ac t Amendments o

f 1990 . I t i s acomplicatedmatte

r base do nprinciple s agree

dupo ni nthelength

yregulator

y 4P. 6



### negotiation . I

t establishedprocedure s fo r certifyin g reformulatedgasolineb yvehicle testing o r useo f apredictivemodel . Eithe

r th esimpleo r comple xmode lca nbeuse dfo r certificationo

f RF Gfro m1995-1997 . Th

ecomple xmode li s th eonl yallowablemode

l fro m1997 onward . Th

euseo f th ecomple xmode li s aparticularl

yimportan

t par t o f tha t rulemaking becaus ei

t wil lprovid eth eflexibilit ynecessar yfo r refiners t o produceRF

G i nacost-effectivemanner . Becauseo f th etimetablefo

r th eregulation s o

nthecomple

x model , AP

Ii s concernedtha

t thi s registrationrulemigh t limi t theabilit yo f fue lan d additivemanufacturers t

o mov eforwar dspeedil ywit htheentranceo

f RF Gint o th e market . O

f particula r concer ni s tha t healt heffect s datafo r Tiers Ian

dI Imust b e presentedt

o EP Abefor eregistrationwil

lbegrantedt

o an yfue ltha t i s no t registeredb

y June1,1993 . Becaus eth

ecomple xmode lfo r ne w RF Gwillno t beavailableuntilMarc

h 1993 , a t theearliest , i

t woul dbemost difficul t t o registe r a nRF Gunde r thecomple

x mode lbefor etheJune1 deadline . IV . FUELAN

D ADDITIVES GROUPING Theproposedrulepresents two majo r option s fo

r grouping o

f fuels . APIstrongl

y supports OptionB . Thi s woul dallo w th e"substantiall

ysimilar " regulation s fo

r fuels , a regulator yprogra mwhic hi s i nplacean dworking , t

o beth ebasi s fo r Baselinegrouping . Basedo ntheexperienc etha

t EP Ahas wit htha t program, as wel

la s theresearchfindings t o dat efro mtheAuto/OilAi

r Qualit yImprovemen

t Researc hProgram , ther

ei s n o technica lo r scientific nee

dfo r reformulate

dgasoline s t

o beincludedi

naNon-Baseline