### MEMORANDUM

TO: Record

FROM: Samantha Lewis, EPA

DATE: November 29, 2005

SUBJECT: CCH Industry Trade Group Meeting

EPA staff and their contractors met with representatives from industry

trade associations on November 16, 2005 to discuss the status of the site visit and sampling program and the revised project scope. Appendix A contains a list of the attendees. This memorandum summarizes the meeting discussion points.

EPA Update

EPA gave a brief overview of the project schedule. EPA plans to conduct two sampling episodes in the spring of 2006. EPA will conduct a second round of sampling at up to four additional sites in the fall of 2006. EPA will conduct multi-day composite sampling rather than one-day grab sampling. The sites will be selected from the facilities that have been visited; therefore, not all sites will be selected for sampling episodes. EPA will select the sampling points from those discussed during the site visits; it is possible that not all sampling points will be selected.

EPA would like to conduct five additional site visits in Louisiana in December. Trade group personnel stated that would be difficult due to holiday schedules at the plants, possible turnarounds, and residual staffing difficulties due to the increased need for staff during the hurricane recovery effort s. Since the November 16 meeting, EPA has decided to move the Louisiana site visits until January.

EPA will provide the trade associations with a draft version of the industry questionnaire in early December. The trade associations will have two weeks to provide comments to EPA. EPA plans to publish the first federal register notice which will contain a draft questionnaire for public comment in January of 2006. EPA is still planning for a proposal date of March 2008.

EPA also discussed the proposed project scope change. The project will be renamed Chlorine and Chlorinated Hydrocarbons (CCH). All chlorine manufacturers will be included in the scope. EPA will also include facilities that produce chlorinated hydrocarbons using direct chlorination, oxychlor ination, and dehydrochlorination that are currently regulated under OCPSF. EPA will provide a list of the facilities that fall under the new scope along with the questionnaire in early December.Trade Association Update

The trade associations (John Westendorf, OxyVinyls) presented areas of concern for the review of the vinyl chloride and chlor-alkali industry. Appendix B contains the handouts industry provided during the meeting. Their primary areas of concern are:

1. Use of TWPE – The trade associations have concerns with the toxic weighting factors applied which EPA used to rank hazards. Appendix B contains TRI data showing the release of dioxins and furans in water has been decreasing.

2. Small number of facilities – Only a fraction of the facilities in the industry group report releasing dioxin.

3. Data collection – Data collection will be difficult due to CBI issues and the difficulty of obtaining representative sampling results.

The trade associations proposed using a voluntary approach to reduce hazardous discharges from this manufacturing segment. A voluntary approach would reduce EPA’s rulemaking burden and could be implemented faster than a rulemaking approach. The trade associations have used voluntary approaches with EPA for other efforts (e.g., the PBT initiative with OPPT). EPA (Jan Goodwin) stated that EPA would be interested in hearing any industry suggestions but would continue with the CCH program in the

interim.

Mary Bachynsky, Formosa Plastics, presented the trade associations concerns with collecting sampling data. The primary areas of concern are:

1. High Variability – Difficult to obtain representative samples due to varying process conditions.

2. Sample Site Locations – Certain points may be a safety risk or may impact production. Industry believes they already know the source of dioxin and therefore in-process samples are not needed.

3. Sample Integrity – Samples will have unique collection, handling, preservation, and shipment issues.

4. Analytical Methods – The trade associations would like a list of available test methods and accredited laboratories. Only a few laboratories can test for

dioxin/furan.

5. High Cost-to-Benefit Ratio – The trade associations feel that manpower requirements, production losses, and analysis costs should be factored into EPA’s sampling decision.EPA stated that they would work through sampling issues with the sites selected. The sites will receive a detailed sampling plan that will discuss the selected sampling points, analytes, safety issues, and any other special considerations.