### MEMORANDUM

TO: Samantha Lewis, EPA

Paul Shriner, EPA

FROM: Lori Weiss, ERG Meghan Kandle, ERG

DATE: June 9, 2005

SUBJECT: VCCA Industry Trade Group Meeting

EPA staff and their contractors met with representatives from industry trade associations to discuss the possible revision of th e national effluent guidelines regulations for the vinyl chloride and chlor-alkali (VCCA) manufacturing segments. Appendix A contains a list of the attendees. Both EPA and the trade associations provided a list of questions for discussion prior to the meeting which can be found in Appendix B. This memorandum summarizes the meeting discussion points.

General Discussion

1. Mary Smith, EPA, provided a brief introduc tion about the development of revised regulations for the VCCA manufacturing segment.

2. Bob Elam, ACC, provided an overview of the trade associations represented at the meeting and their responsibilities.

Questions from ACC to EPA

1. Questionnaire schedule - ACC asked about the schedule for the industry questionnaire. Samantha Lewis stated EPA plans to do a census questionnaire that will be mailed in the Spring of 2006. EPA is planning to work with the trade associations on the development of the questionnaire this summer. The questionnaire will be more comprehensive than the 308 questionnaire that was sent to eight companies during the 304m effluent guidelines planning process.

2. Site visit and sampling program - ACC asked about the timing and number of site visits. Members of the Vinyl Institute expressed concern about the support needed from facilities since EPA is currently conducting enforcement inspections at EDC/VCM and PVC facilities. EPA said the details of the site visit and sampling program have not been finalized. The number of sites EPA will visit will depend on the extent of available sampling data. Currently, EPA expects to visit six facilities, and would like to conduct site visits with potential grab sampling this summer and fall. Multi-day sampling would occur next year. EPA estimates that site visits without sampling would take about a halfMemorandum

9 June 2005 Page 2

day to complete. EPA anticipates sending a group of about five people to each site to tour the relevant operations and wastewater treatment at the facility, including potential sampling point locations. EPA would also lik e to collect any operating data or sampling data collected by the site.

3. Toxic Weighting Factors (TWFs) - The trade groups are concerned about the TWFs used in EPA’s calculations. They would be interested in having a third party review of the factors and suggested using support from the Water Environment Federation to review the TWF and calculation methodology. Lynn Zipf stated EPA will be conducting a peer review of the TWFs and methodology. EPA hopes to have this completed prior to finalizing the 2006 304m Effluent Guidelines Program Plan. EPA will use independent, third party reviewers that will be identified. The trade groups asked if stakeholders will have an opportunity to provide input on the selection of reviewers for the Peer Review. Mary Smith said that EPA may consider allowing stakeholders to provide comments.

4. Technical Support Document data - The trade groups are concerned that some of the data in the TSD may be in error. The trade groups will be alerting their members to review the data and provide any comments to EPA. EPA stated companies should provide any additional data they have to EPA to help with the data review.

5. ACC asked if EPA has considered any voluntary initiatives or non-regulatory options. EPA is interested in hearing ideas for consideration from industry. At this time, they will be proceeding with the regulatory development process for this industry.

Questions from EPA to ACC

6. Form 2C data and permit collection - EPA plans to collect permits, permit application, and Form 2C data for each facility. EPA asked the trade groups if they would be able to supply any of this information. ACC said th at they could provide contact information for individual companies. The trade groups suggested that EPA’s permit collection efforts should begin by contacting Region VI . Dow Chemical mentioned that Dow Freeport is currently preparing a permit application and asked EPA which version of the application they would like. EPA said that they would like the most up-to-date version of Dow’s permit application.

7. Dioxin discharge data - EPA asked if the trade associations have any additional data on dioxin discharges. CCC confirmed that the dioxin data presented in the TSD is the most up-to-date.Memorandum

9 June 2005 Page 3

8. Dioxin sources in EDC/VCM and PVC processes - EPA identified the chlorine condensate stream in chlorine manufacturing and the oxychlorination quench stream in EDC manufacturing as potential sources of dioxin. EPA asked the trade groups if there are any additional process streams that may be contributing to the dioxin discharge. The Vinyl Institute stated that aside from source water the oxychlorination reaction is the only step in the EDC manufacturing process that was identified as having potential for dioxin formation. The Vinyl Institute identified potential sources for dioxin formation based on temperature, chlorine source, carbon source, and the presence of the copper chloride catalyst. EPA asked the trade groups about dioxin sources in stand-alone PVC manufacturing. The Vinyl Institute identified source water and PVC incinerator scrubber wastewater as potential sources of dioxin. EPA asked if industry was implementing any new technologies or process changes to control dioxin. The Vinyl Institute stated that the current practices include solids removal and good incineration practices.

9. TRI reporting - TRI allows manufacturers to report non-detects of dioxin as zero rather than half of the detection limit. EPA asked the trade groups how VCCA facilities report dioxin to TRI. The trade groups stated that TRI reporting is not consistent from facility-to-facility. Some facilities report one -half the detection limit for non-detects of dioxin and some facilities report zero.

10. Pollutant reductions in other media - EPA asked the trade groups if there are any new technologies being installed for the reduction of pollutants in other media (e.g., air) that will impact wastewater discharges. The trade groups mentioned that wet air control technologies may be implemented to meet MACT standards.

11. Site visit recommendations - EPA asked the trade groups to recommend potential locations for EPA to site visit that represent various manufacturing processes and treatment technologies. ACC suggested EPA focus its site visits on facilities that contribute the majority of dioxin discharges. The trade groups also suggested that EPA visit facilities located in Region VI since there is a concentration of facilities. The trade groups expressed a concern about EPA’s collection and handling of confidential business information obtained from these visits. The trade groups also stated facilities would want to collect a duplicate sample at all EPA sampling locations.

12. Health and safety training - EPA asked the trade groups what type of health and safety training will be required for EPA personnel to visit the site. EPA asked if they would need to attend a site-specific training session before each visit and what level of PPE will be required for visits that do not require sampling. The trade groups said that most facilities will require, at a minimum, a brief health and safety orientation prior to touring the site. EPA should bring appropriate shoes. Facilities will provide any additionalMemorandum

9 June 2005 Page 4

PPE required for specific sampling points. The PPE and safety requirements will vary by both site and sampling point. In-process sampling would be the most difficult and would most require site personnel to collect the sample.

13. Sampling points - EPA would like to characterize process streams to determine the potential source of dioxin through sampling. The data collected routinely varies by facility and therefore the trade associations do not have information about streams currently sampled.

14. Questionnaire - EPA asked the trade groups if they had a preference on the format of the questionnaire. ACC said that an electronic, non-web based questionnaire format is preferred. ACC mentioned that Rick Collyer in the Office of Air is creating a CD ROM questionnaire. EPA will follow up with Rick Collyer to see if they may use this questionnaire as a starting point.. Appendix A

Attendee List

Name Organization Telephone Email

Mary Smith EPA/EAD (202)566-1056 Smith.maryt@epa.gov

Samantha Lewis EPA/EAD (202)566-1058 Lewis.samantha@epa.gov

Paul Shriner EPA/EAD (202)566-1076 Shriner.paul@epa.gov

Marla Smith EPA/EAD (202)566-1047 Smith.marla@epa.gov

Ken Wood DuPont (302)774-8023 Kenneth.n.wood@usa.dupont.com

Lori Weiss ERG (703)633-1658 Lori.weiss@erg.com

Meghan Kandle ERG (703)633-1684 Meghan.kandle@erg.com

Mary Bachynsky Formosa (973)716-7342 Mbuchynsky@fpcusa.com

Frank Borrelli Vinyl Institute (703)741-5665 Frank.borrelli@plastics.org

Tom Berger Keller and Heckman

LLP (202)434-4285 Berger@khlaw.com

Bob Elam ACC (703)741-5242 Robert_elam@americanchemistry.

com

Fred Andes B&T (312)214-8310 Fandes@btlaw.com

Art Dungan Chlorine Institute (703)741-5764 Adungan@clz.com

Jim Williams Dow (304)747-3756 Jim_bob@dow.com

Jeff Longsworth B&T (202)408-6918 Jlongsworth@btlaw.com

John Westendorf Oxy (972)404-3229 John_westendorf@oxy.com

Mindy Gampel EPA/OPEI (202)566-0059 Gampel.mindy@epa.gov

Cindy Roberts EPA/ORD/OSP (202)564-1999 Roberts.cindy@epa.gov

Lynn Zipf EPA/EAD (202)566-1429 Zipf.lynn@epa.gov

Erik Helm EPA/EAD (202)566-1066 Helm.erik@epa.gov

Todd Abel CCC (703)741-5856 Todd_abel@americanchemistry.co

mAppendix B Questions Provided Prior to Meeting

Questions for American Chemistry Council, the Vinyl Institute, and the Chlorine Chemistry Council May 13, 2005

Overview

Section 304(m) of the Clean Water Act requires EPA to publish a plan every two years to

establish a schedule for the annual review and re vision of effluent guidelines required by Section 304(b). During the 2003 annual review, EPA select ed the Organic Chemicals, Plastics, and Synthetic Fibers (OCPSF) Point Source Category (40 CFR Part 414) for further review because it ranked highest in terms of toxic, priority, and nonconventional pollutant discharges among all industrial point source categories. One of the pollutants driving the pollutant loadings in the screening analysis was dioxin. EPA identified the manufacture of ethylene dichloride (EDC), vinyl chloride monomer (VCM), and polyvinyl chloride (PVC) as possible sources of dioxin and conducted a detailed study of these manufacturing processes during the 2004 annual review.

EPA refers to EDC, VCM, and PVC manufacturi ng collectively as vinyl chloride manufacturing. In addition, because many chlor-alkali operations are co-located with vinyl chloride manufacturing and because these operations discharge significant quantities of pollutant, EPA also selected the chlor-alkali industrial segment of the inorganic chemical industry for possible revision. The results of the study were published in Technical Support Document for the 2004 Effluent Guidelines Program Plan (http://epa.gov/guide/304m/tsd.pdf).

EPA is considering possible revision of the national effluent guidelines regulations for the vinyl chloride and chlor-alkali manufacturing segments. Both of these industries have been identified as discharging significant quantities of toxics as measured by “toxic weighted pound equivalents” (TWPEs). Of particular concern is the quantity and toxicity of dioxin discharges in

treated wastewater.

Data Collection

EPA will be collecting information on vinyl chloride and chlor-alkali manufacturers through site visits, sampling, and an industry questionnaire. EPA is conducting an initial review of discharge information reported to the Permit Compliance System (PCS) and Toxic Release Inventory (TRI). EPA would appreciate any information on the following topics for use in the industry evaluation:

General Industry Questions

15. EPA would like to collect permits, permit application, and Form 2C data for each facility. Can the trade associations supply any of this information?Manufacturing Processes and Wastewater Discharge

16. Do the trade associations have any additional data on dioxin discharges?

17. EPA identified the chlorine condensate stream in chlorine manufacturing and the oxychlorination quench stream in EDC manuf acturing as potential sources of dioxin. Are there any additional process streams that may be contributing to the dioxin discharge? What is the source of dioxin for plants manufacturing only PVC?

18. TRI allows manufacturers to report non-detects of dioxin as zero rather than half of the detection limit. How are VCCA facilities reporting dioxin to TRI?

Treatment

1. Are any new technologies or process changes for flow or pollutant reduction currently being adopted by this industry?

2. Are any new technologies being installed for the reduction of pollutants in other media (e.g., air) that will impact wastewater discharges?

Site Visit and Sampling Questions

1. Please recommend potential locations for EPA to site visit that represent various manufacturing processes and treatment technologies.

2. What health and safety training will be required for EPA personnel to visit the site? Will EPA need to attend a site-specific training session before each visit? What level of PPE will be required for visits that do not require sampling? What other safety concerns should EPA evaluate before site visits and sampling?

3. EPA would like to characterize process streams to determine the potential source of dioxin through sampling. What process streams are currently sampled?

Industry Questions for EPA

1. What is the planned level of detail and content of the questionnaire?

2. What opportunities will there be for industry input on the questionnaire design?

3. What is the schedule for completing the 308 questionnaire for Vinyl Manufacturing?

4. Will the 308 include site sampling visits? If so, how many and which facilities will be

involved?

5. Will sites be allowed to review this plan early in the process and give input?Questions on the Technical Support Document:

1. Member companies have reviewed the Technical Support Document, and wish to discuss. Will EPA accept corrections to the TSD?

2. We recommend a study of Toxicity Weighting Factors by WERF or other third party. Will EPA support this recommendation?

Questions on Longer Term Issues:

1. How will EPA consider data on voluntary reductions which have already been achieved?

2. What types of incentives are being considered?

3. Voluntary incentives through existing EPA programs could accomplish significant emission reductions. Would EPA be interested in participating in a discussion on the incentives and obstacles for voluntary reduction?