# Polaroi d

Joh n P . LeFebvre , P E Polaroi d Corporatio n Corporat e Environmenta l Manage r126 5 Mai n Street , W2-M Z Waltham , M A 02451-171 4 Februar y 12 , 200 4 M A Departmen

t o f Environmenta

l Protectio n On e Winte r Stree t Boston , M A 0210 8 I n Re : Propose

d Change s t

o Regulations 31 0 CM R7 , et

. seq . Dea r Si r o r Madam : Th e Polaroi d Corporatio n i s please d t o offe r

th e followin g comment

s wit h regar

d t o th e referenced actio n b y the Massachusett s Departmen

t o f Environmenta

l Protectio n ("DEP " or

"th e Department") . Presumptiv

e Approval s fo r LPA' s Polaroi d opposes th

e Department' s pla

n t o replac e th

e curren t LP A approval s wit h presumptive approvals . Whil e the state d intentio n i s certainly laudable , th e actua l proposa l wil l generat e th e opposit e result , and/o

r a n increase d incidenc e o f

noncompliance . Th e obviou s disconnect

betwee n DEP' s assertio

n o f favorabl e economic impac t i s th e propose d requiremen

t fo r aprofessiona

l engineer' s certification . Currently , LPA' s ar e sufficientl y eas

y t o prepar

e tha t numerou s facilitie s ar

e abl e to d o s o in-house . Th

e requiremen

t fo r aP E stam p wil l forc e the mt o hire ou t wha t the y ca n currently d

o fo r themselves . For

thos e alread y outsourcing thi s typ e o f activity , th

e P E requiremen

t ma y wel l ad d apremiu mcharg

e a s i t elevate s th

e leve l o f individua l aconsultan

t ca n assig n t o th e effort . Th e les s obviou s issu

e tha t agitate s against

thi s proposa

l i s on e o f federa l enforceability , or eve n simply stat

e enforceability . I t

i s thi s hidde

n issu e tha t w e believ e wil l result

i n significantl y greate r cos t an d tim e fo r

th e regulate d community , a s wel l a s mor e time an

d effor t fo r th e Department . Th e curren t syste mallow s fo r

an y installatio n t o qualif

y fo r treatmen t a s a n LP A a s lon g a s th e resultan t approva l limit s th e emission s belo w 5 ton s pe r year . Unde

r apresumptive system , th e installatio n wil l have t o have atru e potentia l t o emi t o f les s tha n 5 ton s pe

r year . W e suspec t tha t no on e ha s th e actua l historica l dat

at o judg e wha

t portio n o f

existin g LPA' s woul d fal l int o thi s category , but

base d o n ou r ow n experience an

d discussion wit h ou

r peers , w e believ e i t

i s a smal l fraction . I t

i s Polaroid' s opinio n tha t fo r th e mor e astut e amongs

t th e regulate d community , time an

d cos t fo r approval s thu s increase a s former LP A application s ar

e force d int oComment

s o n Propose d Change s t o 31 0 CM R7 , et . Seq

. Februar y 12,200 4 Pag e 2

th e CP A category . For

th e les s astute , unles s save

d fro mthi s error

b y thei r P E certifier , the

y wil l b e creatin g enforcemen

t liabilit y whe

n the y assum e tha t apresumptiv e LP A i s stil l adequat e fo r th e sam e type s o f

installatio n tha

t i t ha s historicall y served . An di f the P E does hi s jo b properly , mor e application s ar

e dumpe d into th e CP A category . No t

onl y wil l tim e an

d cost s increase fo r th e regulate d community , th e Department' s effort s wil l increas e a s well . N o Departmen t resource s wil l be saved . I f th e Departmen

t i s trul y interested i n reducin g it s leve l o f effort , i t need s t o loo k a t th e way i t review s ver

y simpl e applications , an

d th e approva l letter s tha

t i t generates . Thes

e bureaucratic amalgamation s ar

e wel l i n exces s o f

th e environmenta

l benefi t they deliver . Presumptive LP A approval s wil l onl y delive r th e saving s tha

t DE P project s i f

ther e i s acorresponding increase t o th e lowe r threshol d fo r

CPA's , ideall y t o th

e federa l NS Rthresholds . On e othe r chang e ha s bee n propose

d relativ e t o LPA' s tha t wil l onl y serv

e t o increase bureaucratic cost

s b y eliminatin g aver

y reasonabl

e allowanc e fo r

th e mos t closel y regulated facilitie s i n the state . Th e Departmen

t ha s proposed th

e eliminatio n o f

31 0 CM R7.02(4)(c) , whic h permit s facilitie s holdin g a n Appendi x C permi t

t o foreg o th

e submitta

l o f LPA' s fo r modification s t o th

e facility , a

s lon g a s amino r modificatio n t o th

e Appendi x C permi t

i s applie d fo r pursuan t t o Appendi x C(8) . Th e Department' s background documen t justifie s thi s b y expressin g aconcer

n tha t BAC T requirements ma y no t be satisfie d unde

r the curren

t scheme . Rathe r tha n increas e th

e cost s an d effor t fo r mino r modification s t o heavil y regulate d sources b y requirin g tw o application s fo r th e sam e activity - a

s th e mino r modificatio n applicatio n i s stil l require d b y Appendi x C - th e Departmen

t ca n ad d asentenc

e t o th e end o f th e curren t 7.02(4)(c ) t o th e effec t of : "The applicatio n mad e pursuan t t o 31 0 CM RAppendi x C(8 ) shal l demonstrat e tha t th e BAC T requirements o f

31 0 CM R7.02(4 ) ar

e satisfied. " Visibl e Emission s - Let' s Cal l Opacity , Opacit y Before gettin g int o th

e pit h o f th e opacit y matter , le t

u s mak e asuggestion fo r

aseemingl

y obviou s but

un-proposed modificatio n t o th e regulations . For

decade s bot h th e regulators an

d regulate d hav

e spoke n i n term s o f

opacit y wit h regar

d t o visibl e emissions . Elsewher e i n 31 0 CM R7 "smok

e densit y indicators " ar

e require d o f

man y sources , whic h i n practic e ar e al l opacit y monitors . Yet , nowher e i n th e visibl e emission s regulatio n i s the ter mopacit y applie d t o source s o f

smoke . Instead , th

e regulation s refer

archaically t o "th

e Chart. " Th

e Chart , bette

r know n a s th e Ringleman

n Scale , i s asimple five-point scal e tha t correlate s t o opacity , but i s no t opacity . DE P enforcemen

t personne

l ar e traine d i n EPA' s Metho d 9 , avisual methodology fo r evaluatin g opacity . The y d o no t possess , no

r ar e the y certifie d i n the use of, equipmen t t o evaluat e visibl e emission s i n accordanc e wit h th e Chart . Accordingly , th e Departmen

t i s no t reall y capabl

e o f enforcin g th

e visibl e emission regulation s fo r smoke . Polaroi d strongly encourage s th

e Departmen

t t o mak e th e necessar

y changes t o 31 0 CM R7.06(l)(a ) s o a s t o eliminat e an y referenc e t o th

e Chart , an

d instea d mak e th e regulatio n compor

t t o th e actua l fiel d practic e o f

regulatin g opacity .Comment

s o n Propose d Change s t o 31 0 CM R7 , et . Seq

. Februar y 12 , 200 4 Pag e 3

Visibl e Emission s - N o Nee d fo r Complexit y Polaroi d view s th

e proposed changes t o the opacit y regulatio n a

t 31 0 CM R7.06(l)(c ) a

s a n unfortunat

e exampl e o f a n overl y bureaucrati c response to a n environmentally insignifican t issue . Mor

e tha n ten year

s ago , industr

y source s and representative s bega n approachin

g the Departmen

t wit h thei r

concern s abou

t th e visibl e emission s regulation s - i n particula r 31 0 CM R 7.06(l)(a ) - i n ligh t

o f th e Titl e V requirements t o b e promulgate d unde r th e 199 0 Amendment

s to th e federa l Clea n Ai r Act . For

year s th e Departmen

t rebuffe d industry' s attempt s t o avoi d a situatio n whereb

y industr

y woul d hav

e t o certif

y non-complianc e wit h visibl e emission regulations , on adail y basis , fo r th e norma l operation s o f

their facilities ; operations , moreover , o f whic h th e Departmen

t ha d alway s bee

n awar e and foun d acceptable . Th e Departmen

t indicate d tha t the y didn' t se e wha t th e proble mwas . A s industr y cam e t o learn , Departmen

t headquarter

s wa s unawar e o f wha t transpire d o n adail y basi s out i n th e field. Eventually , du

e t o persistence o n industry' s part , th e Departmen

t wa s persuade

d t o tak e actio n o n thi s issue . Afte r literall y year

s o f effort , acompromise , unsatisfyin g but functiona l t o industry' s need

s wa s reached , an

d 31 0 CM R7.06(l)(c ) wa s create d i n Augus t

o f 2001 . Unfortunately , th

e EP A Regiona

l Offic e neglected thei r

responsibilities , failin g t o infor mth e Departmen

t ma t the y foun d the ne

w regulatio n unacceptabl e unti l i t appeare d i n adraf

t operating permit . Tha

t i s wha t bring s u s t o thi s latest

attempt t o fix somethin

g tha t shoul d neve

r hav e bee n broken . W e hav e th e opportunit

y befor e u s t o resolv e thi s visibl e emission issu e i n arelativel y simple an d effectiv e manner . Al l tha t i s require d i s th

e wil l t o d

o tha t whic h i s simple , rathe

r tha n tha t whic h i s complicated . Th e overwhelmin g approac

h o f regulator y limitatio n i s t o simpl y provide anumber, o

r se t o f numbers , t o b

e met . S o shoul d i t

b e here . 31 0 CM R7.06(l)(a ) an

d (b ) eac h simpl y provid e tw o number s tha t shal l no t b e exceeded . 7.06(l)(c ) should assum

e the sam e format . Th

e numbers , 15 % an

d 27% , ar e alread y presen t a s ar e th e condition s t o whic h the y apply . Th

e so-calle d pla

n o f Good Operating Practic e serves n o vali d purpose . I t

canno t be logicall y argued tha t adetaile d Pla

n tha t describe s operationa

l methodologies , an

d employed technologies , an d variou s contingencie s i s necessar y t o addres s a point o f environmenta

l insignificanc e an

d t o whic h th

e Departmen

t ha s show n historical indifference . I t

canno t be s o argue d when th e overwhelmin g bul k

o f 31 0 CM R7 persists withou t suc h requirements . Even thos e requirements tha t d o cal l fo r Plans d o no t automatically requir

e suc h level s o f

effor t an d dept h o f detail . Polaroid' s NO xRAC T Plans wer e fa r simple r tha n thes e opacit y plans , i n essenc

e simpl y statin g tha

t w e woul d mee

t the numerica

l limits . An d i t

canno t b e argue d tha t thi s leve l o f

effor t i s require d b y these fe w sources when , know n t o th e Department, th

e requirements o f

31 0 CM R7.06(l)(a ) continue t o go unme t on adail y basi s b y sources not

subject t o th e Appendi x C permittin g program . A s wit h NO xan

d VO C RACT , ther

e ma y be aver

y fe w individua l sources technically incapabl e o f meeting th

e stipulate d limits . Then , an d onl y then , should a

n Opacit y Pla n com e into play , individuall y negotiate d wit h the Departmen t t o addres s site-specifi c condition s an d establish site-specifi c performanc e limits .Comment

s o n Propose d Change s t o 31 0 CM R7 , et . Seq

. Februar y 12,200 4 Pag e 4

Polaroi d request

s tha t the Departmen

t giv e seriou s though

t and consideratio n t o these comments . W

e as k tha t the proposed paragrap

h 31 0 CM R7.06(l)(c) l en d wit h th e phrase "notif y th e Departmen

t i n writin g o f

suc h intention. " W

e furthe r as k tha t th e balance o f

th e propose d ensuin g language begi n ane

w paragrap

h an d that , i n conjunctio n wit h th e additiona

l propose d language , be crafte d t o creat e a n exception proces s fo r

facilitie s simpl y incapable o f satisfyin g th

e criteri ao f

15 % an d 27% . Finally , we request tha t the proposed paragrap

h 7.06(l)(c) 4 b

e eliminate d altogether . I t i s entirel y inappropriat

e tha t agrou p comprise d o f

som e o f th e bes t managed , best

maintaine d an

d bes t operate d facilitie s i n th

e Commonwealth , subjec t to th e most stringen t oversigh

t b y virtu e o f

Appendi x C applicability , i s require d t o mak e notificatio n o f

environmentall y insignifican t exceedance

s withi n asingle busines s day , whil e facilitie s regularl y exceeding 7.06(l)(a ) an d (b ) limit s hav

e n o suc h obligatio n (no r

shoul d they) . Moreover , these ver

y sam e exceedances wil l necessaril y b e reported t o th

e Departmen

t anyway , o n asemi-annua

l basi s pursuan

t t o th e requirements o f

their Appendi x C permit . Polaroi d thanks the Departmen t fo r th e opportunit

y t o offe r

thes e comments . I t

i s ou r intentio n to mak

e additional comment

s regarding th

e proposed regulatio n changes befor e th e conclusio n o f

th e publi c commen

t period . Those comment s wil l addres s othe

r aspect s o f th e Department' s proposals , an d ma y include additiona

l comment

s o n th e subjects o f

presumptiv e LPA' s an dvisibl e emissions .

Sincerel y