P. 1 

# /0/Y/o)FPR~^-/ 0 

# Z ^

CHEMICA L MANUFACTURER S ASSOCIATIO N

Septembe r 4 , 198 6

Ms . Barbar a Hostag e Sr . Projec t Office r Offic e o f Emergenc y Respons e U S Environmenta l Protectio nAgenc y 40 1 M Street , S.W . Washington , D C 2046 0

Dea r Ms . Hostage :

CM A appreciate s th e tim e yo uan

dyou r associate s too k wit hCM A staf f an

d membe r compan

y representative s o nAugus t 2 0 t o discus s Comprehensiv e Environ menta l Response , Compensation , an dLiabilit y

Ac t (CERCLA ) reportin g issues . Give nyou r inten t t o draf t propose dclarifyin g regulation s i nthe nea r future , CM A wishe s t o submi t the followin g informa l suggestion s fo r you r considera tion . Sinc e th e followin g i s base donl y o nou r discussion s wit hth e Agenc y an dno t o ndraf t regulations , w e hop e CM A wil l have additiona l opportunitie s t o continu e thi s dialogu e a s th e regulator y developmen t proces s progresses .
We believ e ther e ar e thre e type s o f curren t an demergin g uncertaintie s regard ing the reportin g o f release s unde r Sectio n103(a ) o f CERCL A tha t nee dregula tory clarification . Specificall y thes e are :
1 ) Whic hrelease s ar e exemp t a s "federall y permitted" ; 2 ) Ho w

doe s on e determin e whe nnon-exemp t release s ar e continuou s an d therefor e exemp t fro m dail y reporting ; an

d 3 ) Wha t shoul db e th e relationshi pbetwee nreportin g requirement s unde r existin g Sectio n103(a ) o f CERCL A an dSectio n31 3 a s i t appear s o n th e CERCL A

Reauthorizatio nConferenc e report .

FEDERALL YPERMITTE D RELEASE S

CM A believe s tha t Congres s intende da broa dinterpretatio no f th e "federall y permitte dreleas e exemptio n(Sectio n101(10))" . Clea nWate r Ac t NPDE S exempte d release s includ e an y discharg e "i ncomplianc e wit hpermi t unde r Sectio n40 2 o f the Federa l Wate r Pollutio nContro l Act,.. . discharge s resultin g fro m circum stance s identifie dan dreviewe dandmad e par t o f the publi c recor dwit h respec t t o a permi t issue do r modifie dunde r Sectio n40 2 o f th e Federa l Wate r Pollutio nContro l Ac t an dsubjec t t o a conditio no f suc hpermit,.. . continuou s o r anticipate dintermitten t discharge s fro m a poin t source.. . whic har e cause d b y event s occurrin g wit hthe scop e o f relevan t operatin g o r treatmen t systems. "

Formerl yManufacturin g Chemist s Association—Servin g th e Chemica l Industr ySinc e 1872

. 250 1 M Street , N W • Washington , D C 2003 7 • Telephon e 20 : 387-110 0 • Tele x8961 7 (CM AWSH )P. 2

UI C injectio ninclude s "an y injectio no f fluid s authorize dunde r federa l undergroun dinjectio ncontro l program s o r stat e program s submitte dfo r Federa l approval..." . Ai r emission s includ e "an y emissio nint o th e ai r subjec t t o a permi t o r contro l regulatio nunde r Sectio n111 , Sectio n11 2 Title I Par t C , Titl e I Par t D , o r stat e implementatio nplan s submitte di naccordance " wit h Sectio n11 0 o f th e Clea nAi r Act..." . Legislative histor y fo r th e ai r emis sio nsectio nalon e i s more expansiv e requirin g tha t som e specificatio nt o contro l o r limi t emission s o f a designate dhazardou s o r criteri a pollutan t be embodie di nth e permi t o r regulation .

We believ e tha t Congres s deliberatel y chos e thes e word s wit hthe inten t tha t the contro l o f criteri a groups , (i.e. , VOC's , TSS , BO D etc. ) coverin g a numbe r o f substance s unde r eithe r a permi t o r a regulation , b e considere da s "federal ly permitted" . Further , us e o f th e qualifyin g term s "any " an d"subjec t to " appea r fa r broade r i ninten t tha nthe "specificall y name dan

dlimite di na permit " qualifier s suggeste db y some i nth e Agency . CM A believe s tha t wit h thi s language , Congres s wa s attemptin g t o identif y release s no t already subjec t t o contro l authorit y unde r othe r statute s an dt o avoi da redundan t informatio ngatherin g authority .

CM A urge s EP A

t o closel y

conside r Congressiona l inten t i nenactin g Sectio n10 3 befor e proposin g regulations . CM A believe s tha t inten t wa s t o provid e informa tio nfo r respons e purpose s an dno t t o creat e a dat a base . Th e developmen t o f a nationa l data-bas e o f informatio nregardin g release s i s a differen t nee d whic hCongres s i s no w addressin g i nTitl e II I o f the Superfundamendment s recentl y

complete db

y the Conferenc e Committee . Sectio n31 4 o f tha t titl e appear s directl y

intende dandbette r suite dfo r the developmen t o f a nationa l data-base . Further , th e inten t o f a repor t require dt o be made unde r Sectio n 103(a ) t o th e Nationa l Respons e Center , (NRC) , i s made clea r b y th e name give n the Center , an

dth e rol e assigne di t elsewher e i nth e statut e - namel y re spons e . T o requir e reportin g o f release s subjec t t o regulatio nbu t no t specificall y

limite di npermit s woul dinundat e the Cente r wit hthousand s o f report s - eve nwit hthe reduce dreportin g provide db y Sectio n103(f)(2) . Suc h reportin g woul dhinder , no t help , th e importan t functio no f th e NRC .

I naddition , CM

A question s whethe r any significan t benefi t woul dbe derive d fro m suc hreportin g i ntha t the grea t majorit y o f release s o f concer nar e already

reporte di nsom

e for m t o the Agenc y

o r authorize dstate s unde r othe r statutor y

authoritie s (VOC emissio ntally , priorit y pollutan t reports , RCR A groundwate r reports , etc.) . CM A caution s th e Agenc y no t t o mi xrespons e need s wit hdat a collectio nneeds . CM A recommend s tha t i f enacted , th e EP A use Titl e II I o f th e Superfundamendment s t o develo pa nationa l data-bas e an dresume Sectio n103(a ) fo r reportin g onl y whe na respons e i s necessary .

CONTINUOU S RELEAS E REPORTING :
Wit hregar dt o "continuou s release" , w e understan dtha t th e $66 9 millio n annua l saving s EP A ha s estimate da s th e effec t o f planne dcontinuou s release rule s i s base do nth e curren t reportin g o f suc hrelease s an da nassume d high-no ncomplianc e rate . We believ e tha t th e curren t lo w reportin g rat e (fo r continuou s releases ) i s no t a matte r o f non-compliance , bu t rathe r a reflec tio no f realisti c interpretatio no f th e "federall y permitted " exemptio nb y EP AP. 3

regiona l office s an dindustry . I naddition , i t shoul db e recognize dtha t man y emissio nrate s ar e calculate do na long-ter m average basis , man y usin g EP A emissio nfactors . Thes e factor s accoun t statisticall y fo r a naverag e percent ag e o f potentiall y leakin g sources . Ther e i s n o practica l wa y fo r the facil ity operato r t o determin e i f a reportabl e quantit y ( a ver y

smal l volume compare dt o thos e processed ) ha s o r ha s no t bee nrelease di nany give n2 4 hou r perio dfro

m othe r tha nepisodi c situations .
Severa l examples , discusse di nmor e detai l i nou r Augus t 2 0 meeting , ma y hel p t o bette r understan dthi s point . I nan y comple xorgani c o r petrochemica l proces s ther e ar e hundred s o f valve stems , pum pseals , pip e flanges , tank vents , wastewate r basins , etc . tha t coul demi t regulate dsubstance s i nsmal l quantities . Any

on e o r a combinatio no f suc hsource s coul demi t a reportable quantit y

i nany

give n2 4 hou r perio dwithou t th e knowledg e o f th e operator . Thes e "fugitive " o r "secondary " emissio nsource s ar e no t amenabl e t o continu ou s monitorin g andth e monitorin g tha t i s performe di nmos t instance s i s no t quantitative . The onl y metho dcurrentl y availabl e t o measur e mas s emission s fro m suc hsource s i s t o "bag " th e sourc e an dsampl e th e content s o f th e ba g afte r a measure dperio do f time . Thi s ver y involve dtechniqu e wa s develope d an d use db

y EP A t o generat e th e factor s use di ndeterminin g long-term average emission s bu t i s impractica l fo r routin e use . Shor t o f enclosin g the entir e proces s an

dmonitorin g a singl e vent , a costl y an dimpractica l alternative fo r mos t processes , exac t emission s fro m suc hsource s canno t b e determine do na day-to-da y

basis . Episodi c release s fro m suc hsource s ar e detectabl e b y are a workplac e monitor in g andalarms , ambien t monitoring , visua l observation , proces s instrumenta tion , etc . Thes e release s ar e routinel y reported . Whe ndefinin g th e ter m "continuous" , w e urge the Agenc y t o incorporat e re lease s tha t ar e actuall y continuou s a s wel l a s thos e release s tha t ar e pre dictabl e an

danticipate ddurin g th e norma l operationa l cycle .
CM A believe s tha t the non-parametri c metho dEP A i s considerin g t o determin e "statisticall y

significan t increases " i ncontinuou s release s generall y i s a sound approac ht o defin e reportabl e excursion s - particularl y wit hth e optio n t o propose alternativ e methods . However , th e metho dwoul dno t be a cur e fo r the reportin g problem s tha t woul dbe create db y a narro w

definitio no f the "federall y

permitted " exemption . Th e dat a require dt o use th e metho di s rarel y availabl e o r obtainable . Therefore , the metho da t mos t woul db e o f limite dpractica l utility .

W e als o offe r fou r specifi c comment s regardin g the non-parametri c method . First , w e note dtha t th e firs t sentenc e o f the metho ddescriptio nstate s tha t the metho dwa s "base do na 95 % confidenc e interval" . We believ e tha t a confidenc e leve l ca nonl y be expresse drelativ e t o a range o f values . Second , th e draf t woul dallow substitutio no f alternat e method s whic har e a t leas t 60 % sensitive . W e d o no t believe a sensitivit y o f a statistica l metho dca nbe determine dunles s th e even t t o be detecte di s specified . The student s " t test" , fo r example , i s use dt o compare dtw o variable s anddetermin e i f on e i s statisticall y

greate r tha nth e other . Thus , w e ar e unsur e ho w th e sensitivit y o f th e propose dmetho do r any propose dsubstitut e ca nb e determine dfo r a singl e variable . Third , th e propose dmetho dwil l produce a naverage o f on eP. 4

repor t ever y

2 0 day s fo r a randoml y changin g stabl e variable . Finally , some guidanc e mus t b e develope dfo r interpretin g repor t frequency . Fo r example , on e repor t ever y

2 0 day s coul dindicat e n o chang e an don e pe r day

woul d indicat e steady

chang e (increase) , bu t wher e i nbetwee nwoul dactio nb e indicated ?

CM A woul dlik e t o sugges t tw o Idea s tha t emerge dfro m ou r revie w

o f th e propose dmetho dfo r the Agency' s consideration . Ou r firs t ide a i s t o limi t reportin g t o thos e change s equa l t o o r exceedin g a reportabl e quantity . Thi s woul dreduc e reportin g an dwoul dmor e closel y kni t th e continuou s reportin g metho dt o the episodi c criteria . Anothe r approac hi s base do na range o f emissio nrate s anticipate ddurin g a norma l operatin g cycle . Wheneve r ther e wa s knowledge tha t the emissio nexceede dthe to pen do f the range by a nRQ , a NC Rrepor t woul dbe required .

SUMMARY :

I nsummary , CM

A recommend s that :
1 . the federall y permitte dexclusio nb e clarifie di nth e forthcomin g guidanc e t o limi t reportin g t o thos e release s potentiall y requirin g a respons e an

dno t regulate do r subjec t t o regulatio nb y othe r statutes .
2 . i f enacted , the reportin g requirement s unde r Titl e II I o f th e Superfundamendment s (particularl y Sectio n30 4 an

dSectio n313 ) be considere dprio r t o proposin g guidanc e unde r 103(a ) t o avoi doverla p betwee nthe two . Fo r example , Sectio n103(a ) coul db e limite dt o release s requirin g a response , wherea s Sectio n31 3 coul dbe use dt o develo pa comprehensiv e nationa l data-base . 3 . the continuou s releas e regulation s be propose di nthe contex t o f providin g mor e explici t guidanc e fo r the limite dreportin g properl y takin g plac e (a s oppose dt o "saving " $66 9 millio nannuall y ove r reportin g whic h"shoul dbe taking place") .
I f yo uhave any

question s pleas e cal l m e a t 887-1313 . 

### Sincerely , 

# <7-f ^ M 

# /fL~ ^

Jeffre y

M . Ream

y / Manager , Soli dWast e Program s /

CC : Mr . Joh nRiley , Branc hChief , Emergenc y Respons e Divisio n Ms . Elizabet hLaPointe , Office o f th e Asst . Adm. : OSWE R Ms . Carrie Wehling , Office o f Genera l Counse l