P. 1



# OAR Box 1338

Prepped by Ollie Stewart



## Document

Number: 

# 18 ) ll-J- 1

Docket Number: 

# A-89-1 0

Printed 6/17/20081:48:06

PM Sheet 18of 105P. 2

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

Tuesday , Apri l 25 , 

# A-89-1 0

ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTIO N AGENCY [FRL3562-« ] Inten t t o For m a n Advisory Committe e t o Negotiat e a Ne wApproac h fo r Contro l o f Volatil e Organi c Chemica l Equipmen t Leak s SUMMARY

: EP A i s considerin g establishin g a n Advissr y Committe e unde r th e Federa l Advisor y Committe e Ac t(FACA) . Th e Committee' s purpos e woul d b e t o negotiat e issue s leadin g t o a ne w approach fo r regulatio n o f equipmen tleak s unde r Section s 11 1 an d 11 2 o f th e Clea n Ai r Ac ta s amended . Th e Committe e woul d consis to f representative s o f

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

• I tshoul d establis h a Federa l Advisor y Committee ;
• I tha s properl y identifie d interest s i t believe s ar e affecte d b y th e ke y issue s liste d above ;
• Regulator y negotiatio n i s appropriat e fo r thi s rulemaking , an d th e exten tt o whic h th e issues , an d procedure s ar e adequat e an d appropriate . Thi s notic e als o announce s tha ta n informationa l meetin g wil l b e hel d o n Ma y 1 5 fro m 1 0 a m t o 4 p m a tth e Hal l o f States . 44 4 N . Capito l St , roo m 337 , Washington , D C t o discus s th e issue s involve d i n th e regulatio n o f equipmen t leaks , an d whethe r th e Committe e shoul d b e forme d an d negotiation s proceed . Thi s meetin g i s ope n an d an y partie s intereste d i n th e negotiatio n ar e encourage d t o attend . DAT E EP A mus treceiv e comment s an d suggestion s b y Ma y 10,1989 . ADDRESS : Comment s shoul d b e submitte d (i n duplicate , i f possible ) t o Ai r Docke t(LE-131 ) Roo m M-1500 , Environmenta l Protectio n Agency , Attentio n Docke t#A89-10.401 M Stree t SW. , Washington , D C 20460 . A cop y shoul d als o b e sen tt o Bo y Ajax . MD-13 , U.S . EPA , Researc h Triangl e Park , N C 27711 . Docke t#A89-10 , containin g material s relevan tt o thi s rulemakin g ma y b e inspecte d a tU.S . EP A betwee n 8 a.m . an d 4 p.m . o n weekdays , an d a reasonabl e fe e ma y b e charge d fo r copying . FO R FURTHE R INFORMATIO N CONTAC T Fo r informatio n pertainin g t o th e establishmen to f

th e negotiatio n committe e an d associate d administrativ e matter s contact : Debora h Dalton , Deput y Director , Regulator y Negotiatio n Projec tInformatio n and . Regulator y Syste m DivisionJLJ^rEPA ^ (PM-223) . 401 M Stree tSW. , Washington , D C 2046 0 (202 ) 382-5495 . Fo r informatio n pertainin g t o th e regulatio n o f

equipmen tleak s an d th e regulator y issue s t o b e addresse d i n th e negotiation , contac tBob Ajax , MD-13 , U.S . EPA , Researc h Triangl e Park , N C 2771 1 (919 ) 541-5579 . SUPPLEMENTAR

Y INFORMATION

: Outlin e o f

Notic e L EPA' s Regulator

y Negotiation Projec

t II . Volatil e Organi

c Chemica

l Equipmen

t Lea k Fugitiv e Emissions A . Nee d fo

r Rul e Revisio n B . Selectio n a s a Negotiatio n Ite m C . Ke y Issue s fo

r Negotiatio n • D . Potentia

l Interest s an d Participant

s HI . Formatio n o f th e Committe

e \ A Procedur

e fo r Establishing a

n Advisor y Committe e B . Participant

s C. Request

s fo r Representation D . Pina l Notice B . Tentative Schedule IV . Negotiation Procedure

s A Facilitato r B . Goo d Fait h Negotiation C Administrativ

e Suppor tan d Meetings O . Committe

e Procedure

s E . Definin g Consensu s F . Failur e o f the Committe

e t o Reac h Consensu s G . Recor d o f Meetings L EPA' s Regulator y Negotiatio n Projec t EP A establishe d th e Regulator y Negotiatio n Projec ti n 198 3 t o explor e an d demonstrat e th e valu e o f negotiatio n an d othe r consensus buildin g technique s fo r developin g bette r regulation s whic h coul d b e implemente d i n a les s adversaria l setting . Negotiation s ar e conducte d throug h Advisor y Committee s chartere d unde r th e Federa l Advisor y Committe e Ac t (FACA) . Th e goa l o f

th e Committe e i s t o reac h consensu s o n th e languag e o r issue s involve d i n a rule . I f consensu s i s reached , i ti s use d a s th e basi s o f th e Agency' s proposal . Al l procedura l requirement s o f

th e Administrativ e Procedur e Ac tan d othe r applicabl e statute s continu e t o apply . EP A ha s develope d criteri a fo r evaluatio n o f

potentia l item s fo r negotiation . T o qualif

y unde r EPA' s selectio n criteria , a n ite m must :
• B e planne d fo r proposal ;
• Hav e a relativel y smal l numbe r o f identifiabl e parties , i n a n appropriat e balanc e an d mix , wh o hav e a goo d fait h interes ti n negotiating ; • Presen ta limited numbe

r o f related issues , fo r whic h sufficien

tinformatio

n i s availabl e fo

r resolution ; and ^ ^ | Haye. a tim

e facto r tha

tlend s som e •^ n urgenc^to^reachin

g consensus . vi^-Th e seve n negotiation s conducte d t o II-J- 1 approaches . Th

e seve n regulator

y negotiation s were :

• Nonconformanc e Penaltie s unde r th e Clea n Ai r Ac ta s amended ; Fina l rule : Augus t30,198 5

• Emergenc y Pesticid e Exemption s unde r th e Federa l Insecticide , Fungicid e an d Rodenticid e Ac t(FIFRA) ; Fina l rule : Januar y 15,198 6

• Farmworke r Protectio n Standard s fo r Agricultura l Pesticide s unde r th e Federa l Insecticide , Fungicid e an d Rodenticid e Ac t(FIFRA) ; Propose d rule : July 8,198 8

• Asbesto s Containin g Material s i n School s unde r th e Asbesto s Hazar d Emergenc y Responsibilit y Ac to f 198 6 (AHERA) ; Fina l rule : Octobe r 30,198 7

• Ne w Sourc e Performanc e Standard s fo r Woodburnin g Stove s unde r th e Clea n Ai r Ac tFina l rule : Februar y 26 , 198 8

• Undergroun d Injectio n o f Hazardou s Wast e unde r th e Hazardou s an d Soli d Wast e Amendment s o f 1984 . Fina l rule : Jul

y 26,198 8

• Mino r Permi tModification s unde r th e Resourc e Conservatio n an d Recover y Ac t(RCRA) ; Fina l rule : Septembe r 28,198 8 I n Decembe r 1986 , th e Progra m Evaluatio n Divisio n o f

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

relate d issues , non e o f whic h involv e fundamenta l question s o f valu e o r extremel y controversia l nationa l policy . Th e stud y furthe r conclude d that :

• Negotiate d rulemakin g ca n produc e rule s tha tar e mor e pragmati c wit h bette r environmenta l result s whil e stil l meetin g statutor y requirements .

• Negotiate d rule s ar e als o mor e likel y t o b e acceptabl e t o th e affecte d industries , th e publi c interes tsector , an d stat e an d loca l government s involve d i n developin g them .
• Negotiatio n ma y als o resul ti n earlie r implementatio n o f a rul e b y reducin g di e tim e i ttake s t o procee d fro m propose d t o final rulemaking . EP A believe s tha tth e benefit s t o al l partie s o f

regulator y negotiatio n ar e substantial , an d i s committe d t o continue d us e o f

regulator y negotiatio n an d othe r consensus-base d processe s fo r rulemakin g whe n appropriate .P. 3 

# \r

Federa l Registe r / VoL S4 , No . 7 8 /

Tuesday . Apri l 25 , 196 9 / Notice s 1794 5
0 . Volatil e Organi

c Chemica

l Equipmen

t Lea k Fugitive Emission s u4 . Need for Rule Revision Fugitiv e emission s o

f volatil e organic compounds (VOCs) fro

m equipmen

t leak s (valves , etc. ) contribut e significantly t

o ai r qualit

y problems . Curren tregulations adopte d unde r section s il l and 11 2 o

f the Clea n Air Actand i n State Implementation Plan s (SIPs) hav e bee n effectiv e in heightening awarenes s o

f th e significanc e of

thi s source and i n stimulating contro l efforts . Th e rules basicall y requir

e tha t equipmen ti n plac e b e inspecte d quarterl y fa r leak s wit

h a portabl e hydrocarbo

n detector . I

f concentration s i n exces s of

10.00 0 pp m are found , th e componen ti s identified a s a leake r and maintenance i s require d EP A studie s i n th e early 1980s showe d tha ttypical refineries and chemica

l plants hav e e n uncontrolled leak frequenc y o f n to 1 2 percen tMaintenance studie s indicat e thi s can b e reduced b y abou t80-7 0 percentwit

h th e curren

tleak detectio n and repair program. However , th e actua l frequenc y rate , and associate d emission s i n particular, var y widel y en d ar e befieve d t

n b e a function of

origina l desig n (e-g * umbe r of

valves ) and ag e o f th e proces s uni tequipmen tselected . qualit y o f maintenance , standar

d operatin g procedures use d b y the company , trainin

g provide d t o employees , an d motivation . Recentdat a fo r highl y toxi c chemical s demonstrat e tha tfrequencies in the 0J

) t o 2 percen

t rang e ca n b e achieve d i n som e situations . However , n o on e i s sur e what combination o

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

y approaches currentl

y bein g use d d o no t provide fo r quantification of

emissions . Specifie d quantified emissio n estimate s level s ar e necessary t

o establis h a base
lin e and EP

A need s residual emission s an d ris k assessment s t

p mak e regulator

y decisions . Fo

r example , th e analyse s o

f EP A proposed rules tha

twoul d limit benzen e emission s (F

RVol . 53 , No . 145 , Jul y 28,1988 ) ar

e base d o n emissio n estimate s from lea

k frequencies typica

l o f the refiner

y industry . Thes e ma

y significantly overestimat

e emission s o f benezene . EP A see s th e nee d fo

r a ne w regulator y approach , base d o n performanc

e and/o r emissions , tha

twff l resul ti n quantifiabl e emissio n levels , giv e creditfo

r origina l plantdesig n and motivat e innovation . Develoiin

g such a a approachusing EPA' s traditiona l data gathering an d analysi s approac h woul d b e ver y difficul tcostly , time consuming and controversial . Initia

l contact s sugges ttha tth e majo r industria

l organizations , environmenta l groups and stat e governmen

tassociation s wil l b e receptive , an

d ther e i s goo d potentia

l fo r identifying ne w approaches throug h negotiatio n dia

tar e compatibl e wit

h ou r aeeda an d the complexit

y o f th e problems . The negotiatio n woul d addres s primaril y technica l issue s and woul d not b e policy oriented . Th

e specifi c goa

l o f the negotiatio n woul d b e t o develo p a ne w regulator

y approac h tha tcould b e a n alternativ e t

o or replacemen

tfor th e curren t4 0 CF R61 , Subpar

tV equipmen

t lea k rules . The negotiatio n woul d addres s the for

m of the approac

h an d th e relationship betwee n i tand actua l emission s bu

twoul d no taddres s stringency . Depending upon th e timin g and degre e o f success , the result

s coul d b e use d t o implemen

tthe Agency' s upcomin g decisio n o n benzen e equipmen tleaks . I f thi s i s no tpossible , the result s woul d b e use d i n the nex t equipmen tleak standard , whic

h wif i probabl y b e the hazardou s organic Nationa l Emissio n Standard s fo r Hazardous Ai r PoBtrtant

s (NESHAPs) . B. Seledioa aa a Negotiation Item EP A believe s diatth e equpmen tlea k regulations may b e appropriat e for developmentthroug

h th e regulator

y negotiatio n process . EP

A ha s mad e a pre&ntasr

y inquir y o f potentia l partie s and representative s o f

identifie d interests t o determine if

thi s item satisfie s EPA' s selectio n criteria for negotiate d rulemaking. O

n th e basi s of thi s preliminar

y inquiry , EP

A believe s tha tthi s item meet s it s selectio n criteri a and tha tnegotiation s can b e successfu l Affecte d interests ar

e small i n number

, and EPA' s initia

l contacts indicat

e tha t a n appropriat

e balanc e and mi

x o f group s w-8

1 b e willin g t o participat

e i n goo d faith . EPA' s lea d progra m office ha s identified a numbe

r o f basi c issue s fo r which sufficien

tinformatio

n i s i n hand (or wil l b e develope d durin g th e neogitations ) for resolution . C. Key Issues

forNegotiation EP A anticipate s th e ke y negotiatio n question s wil l focus o n ho w t o establis h a regulator

y approac h thatwil h 1 . Achiev e predictable , quantifiabl e emissio n results 2 . Resulti n th e applicatio n o f th e bes t availabl e technology 3 . B e enforceabl e 4 . Exhibi trnaximn m regulator

y consistenc y (e* . wit

h stat e permittin

g requirements; SAR

A reportin

g requirements} 5 . Provid e incentive s far bette r design s (eg , design s tha

tinvolv e fewe r component s tha thave the potential t

o leak ) 6 . Provide maximu

m fiexfhflity in achievin g specifie d results 7. Minimiz

e admlnistative burdens 8 . Provid e fo r predictabl e compliance 9 . Provid e time tha tma y b e neede d t

o identify , assess , an

d implemen

twor k practices , equipmen

tand design s tha

t wil l meetemissio n goals . EP A expects t

o addres s th

e followin g specifi c questions : L I s lea k detectio n an

d repair a n appropriat

e approach ? I

f so , ho w can th e result s b e quantified ? Should th e definition o

f a leak b e lowered ? 2 . Should leak detectio n an d repair b e required fo

r flange s and , i

f so , what frequency and leak deflatio n should b e applied ? 3 . l a a n emissio n limit(or a limito n th e numbe r o f leakin g components ) a

n appropriat

e approach ? Ho w shoul d suc h a n approac h b e implemented ? 4 . l a a n emissio n limito n a per componen tbasi s (or a limito n percent leaking components ) a

n appropriat

e approach ? Ho w should such a n approac h b e implemented ? 5 . b ther e a n effectiv e approac

h ma t i s a combination o

f the above ? D. Potential

Interests and

Participants EP A ha s tentativel y identifie d th e followin g lis tof

possibl e interests and parties : —Chemica

l manufacturin

g industr y —Petroleu

m refining industr

y -industrie s mathandl e organi c chemical s i n equipmen

ttha tinclude s valves , pumps , compressions , flanges o r open-ende d line s —Environmenta

l InterestGroups —Stat e and loca l ai r pollutio n contro l agencie s —Manufacturer

s of pumps an

d valve s —Consdtln g firm

s involve d i

n plan t desig n and eqidpmen

tspecificatio n —Contractor

s involve d i n constructio n o f

chemica l plant s and petroleu m refineries —Labo r union s —Othe r Federa l agencie s m . Formatio

n of th e Negotiating A. Procedure

forEstablishing an Advisory Committee A s a genera

l rule , a a apnc y o

f th e Federa l governmen

ti s required t o comply wit

h th e requirements of

FAC A whe n itestablishe s o

r use s a grou

p which include s non-Federa l member s a s a some s o f

advice . Under FACA . aa

> Adstees y Committee i s establishe d onl y after bot h censwfaatio

a artt h GS A aa d receip to f a charter. EP

A has . prepare

d aP. 4

1794 6 Federa l Registe r / Vol

. 54 , No

. 7 8 /

Tuesday , Apri l 25 , 198 9 / Notice s
charte r an dha s initiate dth e requisite consultatio n process
. Onl y upo n th e successfu l completio n o

f thi s proces s an dth e receipt

o f th e approve dcharte r wil l EP A for mth e Committe e an d commenc e negotiations

. B. Participants Th e numbe r

o f participant s i n th e group i s estimate dto b e abou t 1 5 an d shoul dno t

excee d2 5 participants

. A numbe r large r tha n thi s coul dmak e i t difficul t t o conduc t

effectiv e negotiations

. On e purpos e o f thi s notic e i s t o hel p determinm e whethe r th e standar dtha t

EP A i s developin g woul d substantiall y affec t

interest s no t adequatel y represente db y th e propose d participants

. W e d o no t

believ e tha t eac h potentially affecte dorganizatio n o r individua l mus t

necessaril y hav e it s ow n representative. However , w e firmly believ e tha t

eac h interes t

mus t b e adequatel y represented

. Moreover , w e mus t b e satisfie dtha t

th e group a s a whol e reflect s aprope r

balanc e an dmi x o f interests

. C. Requests for

Representation If , i n response t o thi s Notice , a n additiona l individua l o r

representativ e o f a n interes t

requests membershi p o r representatio n i n th e negotiatin g group , th e Agency , i n consultatio n wit h th e facilitator , wil l determin e whethe r tha t individua l o r

representativ e shoul db e adde dt o th e group
. EP

A wil l mak e tha t decisio n base do n whethe r th e individua l o r

interes t

• Woul db e substantiall y affecte db y th e rule ;
• I s alread y adequatel y represented i n th e negotiatin g group
. D. FinalNotice Afte r evaluatin g th e results o

f th e informational an dorganizationa l meetings , an dreviewing an y comment s o n thi s Notic e an drequests fo r representation , EP

A wil l issu e afinal notice

. That

notic e wil l announc e th e establishmen t

o f aFedera l Advisory Committe e an dth e dat e o f th e firs t meeting , unles s (1 ) EP

A decides , base d o n comment s an dothe r

relevant considerations , tha t

suc h actio n i s inappropriate , o r

(2 ) i n th e even t

EPA' s charte r request i s disapproved

. Th e negotiatio n proces s wU

l begi n onc e th e Committe e i s appropriatel y chartere d an dnotic e i s publishe di n th e Federa l Register

. E. Tentative Schedule EP A wil l hol da n informational meeting o n May 15,1989 (10 am) unti l completion , a t

Th e Hal l o

f States , 44

4 N

. Capito l St , Washington , D C Thi s meetin g i s open , an dpotential participant s ar e encourage dt o attend

. Th e purpos e o

f thi s meetin g i s to : discus s whethe r

negotiation s shoul d proceed , an di

f so , conside r

wha t issue s an dtopic s shoul dan dshoul dno t b e covered , answe r

questions , an daddres s an y othe r procedura l issue s whic h may arise

. I f a n adequat e mix an dbalanc e o f partie s attendin g th e informational meetin g ar e intereste di n participatin g i n anegotiation , EP

A wil l hos t

a n organizationa l meetin g withi n tw o week s t o discus s ho w th e negotiation s woul dprocee dan dho w th e Committe e woul dfunction

. I

f th e organizationa l meetin g i s successfu l an dcharte r approved , EP

A woul dhol dth e firs t meetin g o f th e Advisory Committe e withi n thre e week s o

f th e organizationa l meeting

. A t

thi s meeting , participant s woul dcomplet e actio n o n an y procedura l matter s outstandin g fro mth e organizationa l meeting , determin e ho w bes t t o addres s th e principa l issues , an d begi n t o addres s them

. Subsequen t

meeting s o

f th e Committe e woul db e hel donc e o r twic e amont h eithe r i n Washington , DC , o r

i n Researc h Triangl e Park , NC , a s determine db y th e Committee

. Thoug h EP

A ha s no t se t afinal deadlin e fo

r completio n o

f th e negotiation , i t

expect s th e negotiation s may las t u p t o si x months

. Th e Agenc y intend s t o terminat e th e activitie s o f th e Committe e i

f i t doe s no t appea r likel y t o reac h consensu s o n aschedul e tha t i s consisten t with Agenc y rulemakin g needs

. IV

. Negotiatio n Procedure s Th e followin g procedure s an d guideline s wil l appl y t o th e Committee , i f formed , unles s the y ar e modifie da s a result o f comment s receivedo n thi s Notic e o r durin g th e negotiatin g process
. A. Facilitator EP A wil l us e aneutra l facilitator

. Th e facilitato r wil l no t b e involve dwit

h th e substantiv e developmen t

o r enforcemen t o f th e regulation. Th e facilitator' s role i s to :
• Chai r negotiatin g sessions ;
• Help th e negotiatio n proces s ru n smoothly ; an d

• Hel p participant s defin e an dreac h consensus
. B. Good Faith Negotiation Sinc e participant s mus t

b e willin g t o negotiat e i n goo dfait

h an db e authorize dt o d o so , eac h organizatio n mus t designat e asenio r

officia l t o represent it s interests

. Thi s applie s t o EP A a s well , an dBo

b Ajax , Chief

, Standard s Development Branch , Offic e o f Air Quality Plannin g an dStandards , wil l b e EPA' s representative

. C. Administrative Support and Meetings EPA' s Informatio n an dRegulator y System s Divisio n wil l suppl y logistical , administrativ e an dmanagemen t suppor t Meeting s wil l b e hel din th e Washingto n are ao r

i n Researc h Triangl e Park , NC , a t

th e convenienc e o

f th e Committee

. T o support th e negotiations , EP

A ha s pledge dfund s t o aresource poo l whic h th e Nationa l Institut e fo

r Dispute Resolutio n wil l administer

. EP

A expect s tha t

fund s fro m privat e foundation s migh

t als o b e available

. Th e partie s ma

y us e th e fund s fo r suc h activitie s a s training , technica l suppor t an dothe r

assistanc e whic h th e Committe e deem s useful

. T o giv e committe e member s maximu mfreedom , subjec t t o an y applicabl e legal constraints , the y wil l determin e th e procedure s unde r

whic h requests fo

r fund s wil l b e mad e an dapproved

. D. Committee Procedures Unde r th e genera l guidanc e an d directio n o

f th e facilitator , an dsubjec t t o an y applicabl e legal requirements, th e member s wil l establis h th e detaile d procedure s fo

r Committe e meetin g whic h the y conside r

mos t appropriate

. E. Defining Consensus Th e goal o

f th e negotiatin g proces s i s consensus
. In th e negotiation s complete dt o date , consensu s ha s mean t tha t eac h interes t

concur s i n th e resul t W e expec t

th e participant s t o fashio n thei r ow n workin g definitio n o f thi s term

. F. Failure of

Advisory Committee to Reach Consensus In th e even t

th e Committe e i s unabl e t o reach consensus , EP

A wil l procee dt o develo p it s ow n approach

. Partie s t o th e negotiatio n may withdra w a t an y time , i

f thi s happens , th e remainin g Committe e shoul dcontinue

. G. Record

of Meetings In accordanc e with FACA' s requirements , EP

A wil l kee p arecordo

f al l Advisory Committe e meetings

. Thi s recordwil l b e place di n th e publi c docke t fo r thi s rulemaking

. EP

A wil l announc e Committe e meeting s in th e Federa l Register

. Suc h meeting s wil l b e ope n t o th e public

. Dated : Apri

l 21,1989 . Rober tH. Wayland , Acting Assistant

Administrator, Office of Policy, Planning and

Evaluation. [F RDoc . 89-1006

3 File d 4-24-89 ; 10:1

7 am ] MLUN Q CO M tSS O I H M