TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS 

HERITAGE REPORTING CORPORATION

Official Reporters

1220 L Street, N.W., Suite 600 

Washington, D.C. 20005-4018 

(202) 628-4888 

contracts@hrccourtreporters.com 

IN THE MATTER OF: ) 

 ) 

SSM SIP CALL -- SUPPLEMENTAL ) 

PUBLIC HEARING ) 

 REVISED AND CORRECTED TRANSCRIPT

Pages: 1 through 45 

Place: Washington, D.C. 

Date: October 7, 2014 
1 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

 BEFORE THE U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

IN THE MATTER OF: ) 

 ) 

SSM SIP CALL -- ) 

SUPPLEMENTAL PUBLIC ) 

HEARING ) 

 Room 1117A 

 William Jefferson Clinton 

 East Building 

 1201 Constitution Avenue, N.W. 

 Washington, D.C. 

 Tuesday, 

 October 7, 2014 

 The parties met, pursuant to the notice, at 

9:19 a.m. 

 BEFORE: JOSEPH DOUGHERTY 

 Hearing Officer 

 PARTICIPANTS: 

 GEOFFREY WILCOX, EPA Office of General Counsel 

 ILAN LEVIN, Environmental Integrity Project 

 SARAH HODGDON, Sierra Club 

 JOSHUA BERMAN, Sierra Club 

 RITA HARRIS, Sierra Club 

 HILTON KELLY, Sierra Club 

 YUDITH NIETO, Sierra Club 

 ELIZABETH MILTON, Sierra Club 

 THERESA LANDRUM, Sierra Club 

 TERRY MCGUIRE, Sierra Club 

 KRISTIN COOK, Sierra Club 

 JOSÉ DE ARTEAGA, Sierra Club 

 KATE COLARVILLI, Sierra Club 
2 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 P R O C E E D I N G S 

2 (9:19 a.m.) 

3 MR. DOUGHERTY: Good morning. My name is 

4 Joe Dougherty, and I am representing EPA's Office of 

5 Air Quality Planning and Standards. I'll be chairing 

6 today's hearing. Joining me on this hearing panel is 

7 Geoffrey Wilcox of EPA's Office of General Counsel in 

8 our Air and Radiation Law Office. 

9 We're holding this hearing to take comment 

10 on EPA's Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

11 entitled "State Implementation Plans: Response to 

12 Petition for Rulemaking; Findings of Substantial 

13 Inadequacy; and SIP Calls to Amend Provisions Applying 

14 to Excess Emissions During Periods of Startup, 

15 Shutdown and Malfunction; Supplemental Proposal to 

16 Address Affirmative Defense Provisions in States 

17 Included in the Petition for Rulemaking and in 

18 Additional States." 

19 This Supplemental Notice of Proposed 

20 Rulemaking, also called an SNPR, was signed on 

21 September 5, 2014, and posted on the internet the same 

22 day. The notice was published in The Federal Register

23 on September 17, 2014, at page 55919. 

24 We are here today to listen to your comments 

25 on EPA's proposed action. The purpose of this hearing 
3 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 is to listen to your comments, but not for Mr. Wilcox 

2 or me to expand upon, discuss, or debate the SNPR. 

3 Today's hearing is just one opportunity for the public 

4 to comment on EPA's SNPR, and you may also submit 

5 written comments. 

6 A four-page fact sheet for the SNPR is 

7 available in the registration area and also online. 

8 It summarizes the SNPR, and it also includes detailed 

9 information for submitting written comments. The EPA 

10 invites public comments on specific elements of the 

11 SNPR as well as on any other issues raised by the 

12 proposal. 

13 The rule when finalized would ensure that 

14 states have plans in place that require industrial 

15 facilities across the country to follow air pollution 

16 rules even during times when the facility is starting 

17 up or shutting down or when a malfunction occurs. Air 

18 pollution emitted during these periods of startup, 

19 shutdown, or malfunction, periods that collectively 

20 are often referred to as SSM for short, may adversely 

21 affect the health of people nearby and may contribute 

22 to smog and other problems in communities that are 

23 further downwind. 

24 As explained in our fact sheet, the EPA 

25 issued a proposal in February 2013 that responds to a 
4 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 petition for rulemaking filed by the Sierra Club. The 

2 petition includes interrelated requests concerning the 

3 treatment of excess emissions when industrial 

4 facilities are starting up, shutting down, and 

5 malfunctioning, specifically how these emissions are 

6 treated in State Implementation Plan, or SIP, 

7 provisions that the EPA approved in the past. Many of 

8 these state plans are outdated and are not consistent 

9 with current rules and court decisions. 

10 In response to a federal court decision 

11 issued subsequent to that February 2013 proposal, the 

12 EPA reconsidered its earlier interpretation of the 

13 Clean Air Act, and so in the SNPR we are proposing to 

14 change our policy on approvability of affirmative 

15 defense provisions in SIPs. An affirmative defense 

16 would shield the facility from monetary penalties but 

17 not from the responsibility to take action to limit 

18 future problems. Affirmative defense provisions have 

19 frequently been included among SSM provisions in SIPs. 

20 The SNPR reflects the court's opinion that 

21 affirmative defense provisions cannot be applicable to 

22 violations of Clean Air Act requirements even if the 

23 violations resulted from malfunctions. The SNPR does 

24 not change what the EPA proposed in the February 2013 

25 notice for any other issues. 
5 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 Also in this SNPR the EPA proposes to issue 

2 findings that SIPs for certain states do not meet the 

3 requirements of the Clean Air Act with respect to 

4 affirmative defense provisions. The EPA is proposing 

5 a SIP call for each of these 17 states, covering 23 

6 statewide and local jurisdictions. The 17 states are 

7 named in the fact sheet that I mentioned earlier. 

8 Under the SIP calls, the EPA would direct 

9 the affected states to remove affirmative defense 

10 provision from their SIPs. As proposed, affected 

11 states would have 18 months to correct and submit 

12 their SIP revisions to the EPA, and the 18-month clock 

13 would start when EPA takes final action on the 

14 February 2013 proposal in this SNPR. 

15 Before we open the floor for testimony, 

16 allow me to explain how this hearing will operate and 

17 how to comment. Today we will be accepting oral 

18 comments on our Supplemental Notice of Proposed 

19 Rulemaking. We will be preparing a written transcript 

20 of this hearing. The transcript will be available to 

21 the public as part of the official record for this 

22 rule, and EPA will consider both oral comments and 

23 written comments as we move forward in the rulemaking 

24 process. As noted in the SNPR, we will accept written 

25 comments on the SNPR that are received by November 6, 
6 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 2014. 

2 For those who will be providing oral 

3 comments today, I will call each scheduled speaker to 

4 the microphone, which is standing across right there. 

5 When it is your turn to speak, please state your name 

6 and your affiliation. It will help the court reporter 

7 in preparing our transcript if you also spell your 

8 name. If you wish to speak but have not already 

9 registered to do so either through the pre10 registration or today at the registration desk, please 

11 check in with our staff at the registration table 

12 located just outside the entrance to this room. 

13 We ask that you limit your testimony to not 

14 longer than five minutes. After you finish your 

15 testimony, Mr. Wilcox or I may ask you clarifying 

16 questions to be sure that we and others in EPA 

17 understand your comments. If in addition to the 

18 transcript you would also like to put the full text of 

19 your written comments into the docket, please be sure 

20 to give a copy of any written comments to our staff at 

21 the registration table. 

22 We intend to stay until either 6 p.m. this 

23 evening or one hour after the last registered speaker 

24 has spoken, whichever is earlier. I'd like to thank 

25 you again for participating today. Let's get started. 
7 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 I'd like to call Ilan Levin and Sarah 

2 Hodgdon. Mr. Levin. 

3 MR. LEVIN: Thank you. I'm Ilan Levin, 

4 I-L-A-N, L-E-V-I-N. I'm with the Environmental 

5 Integrity Project. And good job pronouncing my name. 

6 That's quite a feat. 

7 We're here to make two points. The first is 

8 that we support the proposal but with a caution. 

9 That's the second point. EPA will need to carefully 

10 review SIPs to make sure that rogue states, like Texas 

11 where I live, don't create new loopholes. And Texas 

12 is a real-world example because for about a decade the 

13 State of Texas has had rules on the books that are 

14 being implemented, have been implemented for quite 

15 some time that provide an affirmative defense for 

16 upsets and for what Texas calls unplanned startups, 

17 shutdowns, and maintenance activities. 

18 For what Texas calls the planned startups, 

19 shutdowns, and maintenance, which are the routine or 

20 reasonably foreseeable startup/shutdown emissions, 

21 Texas has issued permits. So let me first say a few 

22 words about how the affirmative defense has played out 

23 in Texas, and then I'll say a few words about the 

24 permits that have been issued. 

25 The affirmative defense, as I mentioned, has 
8 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 been on the books in Texas for a little over 10 years. 

2 It was approved by EPA into the SIP in 2010, and it 

3 acts as a shield against enforcement. That's what the 

4 affirmative defense does. Despite what EPA says, and 

5 EPA, when the agency approved Texas's affirmative 

6 defense, EPA was quite clear that all exceedances of 

7 emission limits during periods of upsets are 

8 violations but that the affirmative defense, if all 

9 the factors are met, can be a bar against penalties 

10 only but that the facility still needs to fix the 

11 problem. And that was clear in the Fifth Circuit in 

12 approving that affirmative defense into the Texas SIP, 

13 was very clear about that too. 

14 But despite what EPA clearly told the State 

15 of Texas and despite what the Fifth Circuit clearly 

16 understood, the affirmative defense is used to shield 

17 companies against all enforcement and citizen suits. 

18 One example is a recent case that we brought 

19 on behalf of Sierra Club against a large power plant 

20 in Texas. The company had exceeded SIP limits, had 

21 reported those exceedances and had filed their reports 

22 kind of checking the boxes for all the factors for the 

23 affirmative defense. The State of Texas issues a 

24 boilerplate response called an investigation report 

25 that says you meet the affirmative defenses, therefore 
9 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 no violation. 

2 And when we tried to enforce the Clean Air 

3 Act, we had a District Court judge in Texas tell us 

4 "I'm not going to second-guess the Texas Environmental 

5 Agency." And so that's what, despite the law, the 

6 black letter law, when you walk into a courthouse in 

7 Waco, Texas, judges are going to be inclined to not 

8 second-guess the agency and defer to the agency. 

9 So we support the proposal to get rid of 

10 affirmative defenses because they're unnecessary and 

11 they're illegal. So that's kind of a no-brainer. 

12 The second point I want to talk about which 

13 I think is a lot trickier is what do you do about all 

14 the planned or the routine startup/shutdown emissions 

15 because, as you know, for many years-sources were 

16 never really required to make a distinction, and so 

17 anything that was an upset, a startup, a shutdown, 

18 even routine maintenance, has always just been kind of 

19 swept under the rug, and sources claim either an 

20 exemption or in states like Texas that have the 

21 affirmative defense on the books just say -- they 

22 claim a blanket affirmative defense. But the planned 

23 or the routine emissions need to be either permitted 

24 or somehow analyzed, and they have to be treated as 

25 potential to emit, and that's where we're urging EPA 
10 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 to pay very close attention as proposed SIPs start 

2 coming in to comply with this rulemaking. 

3 We urge EPA to pay really close attention to 

4 what states are going to be doing with respect to the 

5 non-upset events, the routine or foreseeable 

6 emissions. They're part of a source's potential to 

7 emit, and as such, those emissions need to be 

8 evaluated, air quality impacts need to be measured, 

9 sources need to meet best available control technology 

10 to reduce those emissions, and this all needs to be 

11 reflected in permits. And that may sound right 

12 theoretically and make sense theoretically, but what's 

13 happened in Texas -- a couple of examples in these 

14 permits. 

15 The permits that we've seen define 

16 planned -- again, that's just the Texas term, but it 

17 may be reasonably foreseeable, routine, whatever the 

18 word is -- these permits define planned startups and 

19 shutdowns as pretty much whatever the permittee wants. 

20 For example, in Texas, they usually list -- they have 

21 a nonexhaustive list of activities at the facility 

22 that are sort of the planned events, and then we see 

23 little footnotes in the permits that say "and any 

24 other boiler startups or any other maintenance." 

25 And so defining these events very broadly in 
11 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 the permits allows companies to claim coverage really 

2 under the startup/shutdown permit for pretty much 

3 anything they want. 

4 And then also another example, the permits, 

5 the permit terms themselves exempt sources from 

6 compliance with SIP limits during these events, and 

7 that needs to stop. So under no circumstances should 

8 EPA allow alternate limits in place of health-based 

9 limits. There may be times when a company can't meet 

10 a technology-based limit, BACT or MACT, for example, 

11 during periods of startup, shutdown, and maintenance. 

12 But under no circumstances should sources be allowed 

13 to be exempt from compliance with health-based limits 

14 like SIP limits. A lot of SIP limits are nuisance15 based limits, for example, and those have a cushion in 

16 them that account for startup, shutdown, maintenance, 

17 and so those should not be excused under any 

18 circumstances. Thank you. 

19 MR. DOUGHERTY: Thank you very much. 

20 MR. WILCOX: Mr. Levin, will you be 

21 submitting written comments as well -- 

22 MR. LEVIN: Yes. 

23 MR. WILCOX: -- and detailing these points? 

24 MR. LEVIN: Yes. 

25 MR. WILCOX: Thank you. 
12 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 MS. HODGDON: Good morning. My name is 

2 Sarah Hodgdon, S-A-R-A-H, H-O-D-G-D-O-N. And I'm 

3 Sierra Club's National Program Director visiting from 

4 our headquarters in San Francisco. 

5 On behalf of our 2.4 million members and 

6 supporters in all 50 states, Puerto Rico, and the 

7 District of Columbia, I'm here to strongly support the 

8 startup, shutdown, malfunction supplemental proposal. 

9 Sierra Club supports this action because the Sierra 

10 Club stands with our allies and members across the 

11 country fighting environmental injustices and 

12 corporate abuses of power, and this rule will go a 

13 long way in helping protect those that need it most. 

14 The Sierra Club and our allies in working 

15 with fence-line communities across the country have 

16 seen first-hand what families living beside big 

17 polluters experience on a daily basis. From 

18 Birmingham to Detroit, from Memphis to Dallas, 

19 communities that live in the shadows of facilities 

20 like oil refineries and coal-fired power plants are 

21 truly suffering. Simply put, they need your help. 

22 We stand with these communities as they 

23 fight for clean air and water, but often we and they 

24 have little recourse because of these existing SSM 

25 loopholes. They often must also contend with state 
13 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 environmental agencies that can't or won't act to hold 

2 polluters accountable and protect health and well3 being. 

4 So we applaud you for taking action. We 

5 think this is a critically important step forward, and 

6 we want you to know that as you move forward with 

7 finalization of this critical rule Sierra Club will 

8 support you. Thank you for all of your work and thank 

9 you for the opportunity to testify today. 

10 MR. DOUGHERTY: Thank you very much. 

11 Josh Berman and Rita Harris. 

12 MR. BERMAN: Good morning. My name is 

13 Joshua Berman. I'm a staff attorney with the Sierra 

14 Club, and I'm providing these comments on behalf of 

15 the Sierra Club. We are also going to be submitting 

16 more detailed written comments on this same topic, but 

17 I'm going to be touching on the same affirmative 

18 defense issue that Ilan just talked about. 

19 MR. WILCOX: Could you bring the microphone 

20 closer? 

21 MR. BERMAN: Closer? Absolutely. 

22 As a public interest attorney 

23 representative, I applaud EPA's supplemental finding 

24 that the affirmative defense provisions are 

25 inconsistent with the Clean Air Act. Many states have 
14 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 affirmative defense provisions that allow facilities 

2 to avoid any penalties for violations of their permit 

3 limits. As the D.C. Circuit has held in the Cement 

4 Kiln decision, these provisions are inconsistent with 

5 the statute because they limit the court's ability to 

6 assess penalties for violations of the Act under 

7 Section 113(e)(1). Courts, not EPA, must determine 

8 civil penalties. 

9 No matter how narrowly tailored EPA tries to 

10 craft affirmative defense, in litigation these 

11 defenses act as a loophole that prohibit any citizen 

12 enforcement of large pollution events, which is 

13 exactly what Ilan was saying. In litigation, 

14 polluters attempt to expand the defense to cover 

15 planned emission exceedances that the defense was not 

16 supposed to cover. They also attempt to expand the 

17 defense to cover injunctive relief even though it is 

18 only supposed to apply to civil penalties. The Sierra 

19 Club has seen this occur first-hand in litigation. 

20 Despite EPA's intentions, polluters, 

21 sometimes condoned by the state air regulator, have 

22 shown that they will make full use of the malfunction 

23 defense to raise the cost of citizen litigation, 

24 confuse the courts, and avoid both injunctive relief 

25 and civil penalties. As a result, the supposedly 
15 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 narrowly tailored malfunction defense threatens to 

2 swallow the rule that emissions limitations must apply 

3 on a continuous basis, in clear contravention of 

4 statutory mandates. 

5 Again, thank you for the opportunity to 

6 provide these oral comments, and we will be providing 

7 more detailed written comments on this topic. Thank 

8 you. 

9 MR. DOUGHERTY: Thank you. 

10 MS. HARRIS: Good morning. I am Rita 

11 Harris. I am senior organizing representative with 

12 the Sierra Club, and I work in the Memphis, Tennessee, 

13 area. I'm here this morning to speak in support of 

14 the proposed SSM rule. 

15 Tennessee is one of 38 states that have 

16 allowed the polluting industry to dump vast amounts of 

17 toxic substances into neighborhoods, putting the 

18 health of children, pregnant mothers, and those with 

19 breathing problems as well as the elderly at risk. 

20 Memphis is ranked number two among all the other 

21 states as an asthma capital. This is according to the 

22 Asthma and Allergy Foundation. Memphis is majority 

23 people of color, mainly African-American, and largely 

24 low-income. 

25 I come here today to applaud the EPA for its 
16 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 proposed startup, shutdown, malfunction rule. Closing 

2 up these kinds of loopholes are way overdue. Without 

3 this SSM rule, low-income and people of color 

4 communities are essentially held hostage by facilities 

5 that are able to defend themselves or exempt 

6 themselves from clean air laws using these maintenance 

7 periods of starting up and shutting down as a defense. 

8 Polluters should never get a free pass to pollute and 

9 endanger our health. 

10 I speak on behalf of the many low-income and 

11 people of color communities that stand in the shadows 

12 of the Tennessee Valley Authority coal plant in 

13 Memphis, Tennessee. For over 54 years the TVA coal 

14 plant has enjoyed doing their business freely, 

15 belching out higher than normal amounts of toxins into 

16 the air during the startup, shutdown, and so-called 

17 malfunction periods. 

18 In addition, less than five miles from the 

19 TVA coal plant in Memphis stands the Valero Oil 

20 Refinery, which is another facility nearby 

21 environmental justice neighborhoods, and they have to 

22 contend with this daily. Just last week the refinery 

23 reported that it had discovered, through enhanced 

24 monitoring daily releases of hydrogen cyanide almost 

25 equal to the annual TRI emissions they reported in 
17 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 2012. These emissions once they are thoroughly 

2 investigated might be classified as a malfunction. 

3 They have spewed out vast amounts of highly toxic 

4 chemical substances into the air daily. They have way 

5 underreported. 

6 This is an alarming revelation, and 

7 loopholes allowing this type of exposure and level of 

8 exposure must be stopped. We hope the new SSM rule 

9 will stop these exposures and in turn protect the 

10 health and quality of life of those who are living 

11 near these facilities. 

12 One of the things that must be decided is 

13 how states will interpret the rule and enforce it. We 

14 in the communities want to know how a malfunction is 

15 determined and whether situations like the Valero 

16 Refinery's excessive hydrogen cyanide emissions can be 

17 deemed a malfunction or could be deemed as a 

18 malfunction. 

19 Because of the health threats, many of which 

20 are largely unknown, the EPA is correct in declaring 

21 states cannot allow facilities to be exempt any longer 

22 from being responsible for large amounts of pollution 

23 emitted during these times of maintenance. The fact 

24 is industry needs to minimize emissions during these 

25 so-called malfunction periods to better protect the 
18 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 health of their workers as well as the general public. 

2 We believe hazardous chemicals released 

3 during startup, shutdown, and malfunction periods can 

4 cause and exacerbate long-term chronic illnesses. If 

5 the coal industry and others are serious about 

6 following the law and doing the right thing, they will 

7 not fight to keep these loopholes which allow them to 

8 keep putting vulnerable populations in danger from 

9 hazardous emissions. 

10 We need hazardous air monitors supplied by 

11 the industry placed inside of the fence line of 

12 communities and be monitored by the state or EPA, 

13 especially in the case of repeat offenders or bad 

14 actors. Those are the companies that have many 

15 violations and excessive reporting of so-called 

16 malfunctions. I believe this SSM rule once put in 

17 place will help demonstrate that EPA is serious about 

18 protecting the health of those in vulnerable 

19 communities. 

20 And lastly, the Sierra Club Environmental 

21 Justice Program supports EPA's supplemental rule which 

22 will not allow states to include affirmative defense 

23 provisions any longer. We commend EPA for all of its 

24 efforts to better protect the health and quality of 

25 life of our communities in Tennessee and all across 
19 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 the country. Thanks for proposing a rule that will 

2 protect near neighbors of major polluters. Industry 

3 should report. They should be responsible for bursts 

4 of pollution that occur at night and other times. 

5 Thank you. 

6 MR. DOUGHERTY: Thank you very much. 

7 Yudith Nieto and Hilton Kelly. 

8 MR. KELLY: Good morning, everyone, and 

9 thank you for this opportunity, Environmental 

10 Protection Agency. 

11 My name is Hilton Kelly. I'm the founder 

12 and director of the Community Empower and Development 

13 Association located on the Gulf Coast in southeast 

14 Texas. My home is home to more than five oil 

15 refineries, seven chemical plants and two major coke 

16 facilities which take the waste from refineries and 

17 ship it overseas and sometimes process it and use it 

18 for cheap fuel. 

19 We are very excited about this startup, 

20 shutdown, malfunction rule, and we are in total 

21 support of the Environmental Protection Agency for 

22 this rule. For more than 14 years our organization 

23 has been fighting to push to stop the startup and 

24 shutdown issue simply because for many years 

25 industries have been using this as a way to dump 
20 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 dangerous toxic chemicals into the environment so that 

2 they wouldn't have to pay the costs of getting rid of 

3 it legally, and we commend you guys for stepping up 

4 and finally doing something to eliminate this 

5 loophole. 

6 Why? Because we on the average see at 

7 least three or four people from our community die from 

8 respiratory problems, liver and kidney disease, and 

9 cancer due to overexposure of the toxic chemicals from 

10 the refineries and the chemical plants. 

11 Whether these emissions that are dumped into 

12 the air during startup or shutdown or malfunctions are 

13 legal or illegal, it still has a negative impact on 

14 the health of our children, our elderly, and our 

15 families in our low-income communities. We literally 

16 live on the fence line of these industries. 

17 We have the Motiva Oil Refinery in our 

18 community. The Motiva Oil Refinery went from 

19 producing 285,000 barrels of oil per day to 620,000 

20 barrels of oil per day. We have the largest oil 

21 refinery in the Northern Hemisphere right outside my 

22 front door, right outside. 

23 Almost on a monthly basis we smell the odors 

24 of sulfur, benzene, hydrogen sulfide, sulfuric acid, 

25 and many times we don't even know how we're being 
21 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 impacted. It's one thing to understand the impact of 

2 benzene. We know it's a known carcinogen. But what 

3 about the cumulative impact? How is that impacting my 

4 children? How is this impacting my grandkids? How is 

5 this impacting my neighbor? 

6 And for at least 15 or 16 years we have been 

7 pushing to try to get a cumulative impact study done, 

8 but more must be done to help protect the human health 

9 because this is a good step. It's a step in the right 

10 direction. The startup and shutdown, malfunction rule 

11 is critical to helping to reduce the chemicals that 

12 many citizens across this nation are being exposed to, 

13 so we commend you for that, but we can't stop there. 

14 Let's continue to find ways in which we can 

15 work together to hold these industries accountable and 

16 to push them to do better. If you're allowed to 

17 operate a refinery or a chemical plant anywhere in the 

18 world, you should be more responsible in handling 

19 those chemicals and the operation of those facilities. 

20 Thank you, EPA, for what you're doing. We 

21 commend you. But let's continue to work together to 

22 see what we can do in the near future to continue to 

23 protect human health and our babies. Thank you. 

24 MR. DOUGHERTY: Thank you very much. 

25 MR. WILCOX: Mr. Kelly, will you be 
22 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 submitting additional written comments? 

2 MR. KELLY: Yes, I can submit that. 

3 MR. WILCOX: Okay. Thank you. 

4 MS. NIETO: Hello. My name is Yudith Nieto, 

5 and I am from Houston, Texas. I come from a small 

6 community called Manchester, near the ship channel. I 

7 grew up in this community and growing up there I 

8 witnessed the industry growing around me. I suffer 

9 from asthma and different respiratory issues as well 

10 as the children in my community also do. 

11 I recently learned about the EPA's proposed 

12 startup, shutdown, malfunction rule, and I have to say 

13 I agree with it because my community is already 

14 bombarded with at least seven different cancer-causing 

15 chemicals on a daily basis, and the way that the 

16 industry is allowed to emit so much toxins into the 

17 air at once is just, it's a bit crazy to think that 

18 that could actually be allowed. 

19 So I commend the EPA as well. We need to 

20 continue these connections and these communications of 

21 agencies and the parties involved. And I appreciate 

22 the hearings as well because I went to a hearing in my 

23 own community and in Houston during the Executive 

24 Order 13650, which allowed community members to put 

25 their input in what should be said and done when it 
23 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 comes to the EPA to improve chemical facility safety 

2 and security. 

3 So this rule will definitely help my 

4 community benefit in the sense that we'll have at 

5 least less chemicals to worry about on a daily basis. 

6 We feel it in our bodies. We see it happening. It 

7 always happens when it rains or it gets really dark or 

8 at night when you can't tell that that's happening, 

9 and we also have no notification that that is 

10 happening. 

11 So when I say communication between agencies 

12 and parties involved, I'm talking about the industry 

13 as well. We need to notify our communities that this 

14 is happening so that they have the choice to either 

15 leave or seek shelter somewhere else because they can 

16 no longer take more toxins into their bodies. These 

17 people are getting sick, and we are one of the highest 

18 numbers of uninsured peoples in these communities 

19 which are low-income, communities of color, and 

20 disenfranchised. 

21 I would also like to mention the Richmond 

22 community that suffered from the Chevron explosion not 

23 too long ago. They were not able to be here, but 

24 through our affiliation with the West County Toxic 

25 Coalition they could have shared their story, and I 
24 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 could have also learned how it is that they're dealing 

2 with what is going on there and the way that they're 

3 building this -- what is the Contra Costa Model that 

4 seems to still include the environmental justice 

5 language, and we need that in other communities, and 

6 we need that in the states that have yet to find the 

7 political will to issue these kind of regulations and 

8 standards. 

9 So, again, I'd like to mention that we need 

10 to find a way to harmonize all the pieces that are 

11 coming out, and the EPA, you know, is being commended 

12 by all the community members and the organization 

13 leaders here today, and I'm pretty sure that we still 

14 want to continue working with the EPA. 

15 As a youth member, as an environmental 

16 justice youth organizer, I have to go back into my 

17 community and talk to the youth and give them faith 

18 that the agencies that are set in place to protect 

19 them are doing all they can to do that. So I leave 

20 you with that. I want to continue to have faith in 

21 the EPA and the agencies that we are committed to also 

22 support, and to keep in mind that there's future 

23 generations that will inherit these kind of 

24 regulations and this kind of pollution and things that 

25 they'll have to deal with in their lifetime, and I 
25 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 just, I have to ask, you know, how are we going to 

2 harmonize the pieces that we're all bringing here to 

3 the table today and that the EPA continues to work 

4 with community groups and community organizations. 

5 And thank you, thank you for having this hearing. 

6 MR. DOUGHERTY: Thank you very much. 

7 MR. WILCOX: Thank you. 

8 MR. DOUGHERTY: Elizabeth Milton and Theresa 

9 Landrum. 

10 MS. MILTON: Good morning. My name is 

11 Elizabeth Milton, and I'm from the City of Detroit, 

12 and as a certified asthma educator in Detroit, I know 

13 that every emergency room visit, hospitalization, and 

14 death as a result of asthma is preventable. Still I 

15 know kids that die from asthma attacks every single 

16 day. I even have watched a five-year-old suffer with 

17 chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, COPD, not being 

18 exposed to cigarette smoke but being on the fence line 

19 of dangerous industry. I see kids like this suffer 

20 needlessly and live compromised quality of life 

21 because of the air we breathe. 

22 The City of Detroit and nearby downriver 

23 communities are classified by the Michigan Department 

24 of Community Health as the epicenter of the asthma 

25 burden. The American Lung Association reported in 
26 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 2014 that Wayne County has the highest number of 

2 pediatric asthma cases and we also have the highest 

3 number of children that live in poverty in the State 

4 of Michigan. 

5 Detroit is home to the highest polluters in 

6 the State of Michigan, and needless to say we have a 

7 Michigan Department of Environmental Quality that is 

8 not necessarily enforcing the laws that are on the 

9 book and protecting our health. We also have 

10 organizations like Michigan Department of Community 

11 Health that is in a silo and doesn't necessarily talk 

12 with MDEQ. So this concerns us and we would like for 

13 the EPA to kind of help mandate some type of 

14 communications across the board. 

15 Combined, these highest polluters in the 

16 State of Michigan, they emit and produce billions of 

17 toxic air pollution, contributing to poor health, 

18 quality of life. And our asthma death rates, of 

19 course, in the City of Detroit is about two to three 

20 times higher than the State of Michigan. 

21 We know exposure to environmental toxins in 

22 a very short period of time, such as five minutes 

23 exposure to SO2, sulfur dioxide, can have a 

24 significant impact on human health, causing 

25 aggravation of asthma and other respiratory illnesses. 
27 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 Unfortunately for our community, we are exposed 24/7 

2 because we live, we work, we play, we worship in our 

3 communities. 

4 There's only so much I can do as an asthma 

5 educator. There's only so many windows that I can 

6 close and I can adjust so many events in the 

7 environmental walk-through. Something must be done, 

8 and thankfully, EPA, the proposed SSM rule would have 

9 an immediate and measurable benefit for our children 

10 and families in my community. 

11 The EPA's SSM rule is an important safeguard 

12 that will close a major loophole that has for decades 

13 allowed big polluters to dump huge amounts of toxic 

14 air pollution onto my neighboring communities. 

15 Currently during periods when facilities in my state 

16 and my community come online, shut down or are 

17 experiencing a malfunction, polluters are allowed to 

18 emit huge amounts of pollution but are not held 

19 accountable for that. So we're thankful for the SSM 

20 rule that is proposed to make them accountable for 

21 what they do. 

22 But the one thing that we lack in our 

23 communities is enforcement. Polluters should never 

24 get a pass at the expense of public health. This rule 

25 will help to protect the most vulnerable communities, 
28 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 and that is mine, because we live adjacent to power 

2 plants, refineries, and other polluting facilities. 

3 My community lives under the shadow of these big 

4 polluters and, yes, my community is of color and, of 

5 course and unfortunately, 50 percent of our children 

6 live below the poverty level. 

7 EPA's proposed rule is a major step forward 

8 in addressing critical air pollution problems and will 

9 help our state achieve the intentions of the Clean Air 

10 Act. And I just wanted to remind us about the rule in 

11 the Clean Air Act about safe chemicals and safe 

12 technology. Somehow we've got to incorporate this and 

13 enforce that in our community because a lot of our 

14 equipment in our chemical plants is antiquated, a lot 

15 of them are not using the best available technology, 

16 and we're not replacing some of the most harmful 

17 chemicals with some of the safer chemicals that we 

18 have and we know that are available. 

19 One of the things that EPA can do is to make 

20 that information available to the states; not only 

21 that, but to first responders. We have a lot of first 

22 responders that are stepping into situations ignorant 

23 of the chemicals that they're being exposed to and 

24 they're perishing because of it. 

25 So those are my comments and I thank you for 
29 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 your time and thank you for the SSM rule. Thank you. 

2 MR. WILCOX: Ms. Milton, will you be 

3 submitting additional comments? 

4 MS. MILTON: Oh, sure. 

5 MR. WILCOX: Okay. 

6 MS. LANDRUM: Good morning, and thank you 

7 for this opportunity to come before the EPA. My name 

8 is Theresa Landrum. That's T-H-E-R-E-S-A, Landrum, 

9 L-A-N-D-R-U-M. I come to you on a personal level 

10 because I am what I call a victim of a lot of these 

11 large industries that are emitting pollutants over the 

12 amount of the regulatory standards. 

13 I live in the shadows of Marathon Oil 

14 Corporation, the only oil refinery in the State of 

15 Michigan and one of the largest in the nation. My ZIP 

16 code, 48217, has been deemed by the EPA as the most 

17 polluted ZIP code in the State of Michigan. My county 

18 has and is still in nonattainment for SO2 emissions 

19 coming from surrounding industries, such as U.S. Steel 

20 Corporation, Marathon Oil Corporation, DTE coal power 

21 plants, and Service Star. 

22 At this particular time my community is one 

23 of the communities that have, out of 27 heavy 

24 polluting industries in the southwest Detroit area, 

25 not the state, we have and are home to 13 of these 
30 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 industries. Often we see on a daily basis the 

2 emissions coming from these stacks, not from one 

3 industry but from various industries on a daily basis. 

4 We support this SSM rule. It will show the 

5 people that the United States EPA is working on behalf 

6 of the communities. It will also empower our state 

7 Michigan Department of Environmental Quality help do 

8 their job. Often we see that the people are 

9 distrusting of the regulatory agencies, but with this 

10 rule, this SSM rule, it will give us hope and 

11 assurance that the United States EPA is working on our 

12 behalf. It will also empower and give our MDEQ the 

13 tools to do their job to better monitor these 

14 industries that use the startup, shutdown, 

15 malfunctions as an excuse to overinundate communities 

16 that are already heavily burdened with pollutants. 

17 We support the EPA's rule. It will also 

18 strengthen the Clean Air Act and allow the Clean Air 

19 Act to do what it is supposed to do, and that is 

20 protect the environment, the people, and the greater 

21 United States of America. 

22 I just wanted to share with you that we have 

23 cancer that is off the chart, we have asthma off the 

24 chart. We see the hospitals calling our schools, 

25 telling our schools that they are seeing a high rate 
31 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 of students coming in. The hospital calling the 

2 schools. That tells us that something is wrong. 

3 We want to work with the industry. We want 

4 to work with our regulatory agencies to better benefit 

5 our land, our air, and our quality of life, thus 

6 improving it for overall people in general, and we 

7 feel that this SSM rule will help further reduce and 

8 help reduce exposure to the people that are most 

9 vulnerable, that are the pregnant women, children, and 

10 seniors. We feel that this SSM rule will be a 

11 precaution to help govern the industry better. 

12 We also would like to ask the EPA if they 

13 ever review the malfunction reports to see what the 

14 communities are being exposed to, not just on a daily 

15 basis but an hourly basis. The excuses must stop. 

16 The excuses must end. And we, the people, as well as 

17 our regulatory agencies must work towards a better 

18 regulatory governance of these industries that use 

19 this excuse to overburden and increase pollutants 

20 during these times of these malfunctions. 

21 April 2013, we in the community of 48217 

22 experienced a catastrophic event when Marathon had an 

23 explosion. It rocked the community to its core. The 

24 fear of what we were and are going to continuously be 

25 exposed to is always constantly on our mind. We would 
32 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 like this SSM rule to be put in place because then 

2 guess what? It would help us better be able to 

3 monitor the drift, because pollution has no 

4 boundaries, and the impact on our communities and 

5 other surrounding communities across this nation need 

6 this rule to better protect the impoverished and 

7 people of color communities. 

8 We thank you for this opportunity and we 

9 support you 100 percent. It will also allow for these 

10 things to work in conjunction with the fence-line 

11 monitoring, the SSM, the Clean Air Act, and the 

12 executive orders that have been put into place. We 

13 know that you are short-staffed and short-financed, 

14 but these kind of rules will give us the power and the 

15 tools to be able to help you do your job and help us 

16 to be better educated on the things that we need to 

17 know to protect our communities. Thank you so much 

18 for this opportunity. 

19 MR. DOUGHERTY: Thank you very much. 

20 Terry McGuire. 

21 MR. MCGUIRE: Hello. I'm Terry McGuire. 

22 I'm a Washington representative with the Sierra Club. 

23 I'm actually going to be reading comments from one of 

24 our allies in Montana who couldn't be here today but 

25 wanted their testimony submitted into the record. So 
33 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 I'm speaking on behalf of Anne Hedges, H-E-D-G-E-S. 

2 She's the deputy director for the Montana 

3 Environmental Information Center. 

4 Anne says: The Montana Environmental 

5 Information Center appreciates EPA's efforts to 

6 provide sideboards to the startup, showdown, 

7 malfunction rule. MEIC is a member-supported, state8 based advocacy organization dedicated to protecting 

9 and restoring Montana's natural environment. On 

10 behalf of our 5,000 members in Montana and around the 

11 country, we support EPA's proposal. 

12 Nearly two decades ago MEIC encountered the 

13 unfair nature of the SSM rule in Montana when we were 

14 investigating continual compliance problems at two 

15 cement kilns that were seeking permission to burn 

16 hazardous waste. Montana's SSM rule is unduly broad 

17 and allows for nearly any volume of pollution to be 

18 put into the air during supposed SSM events. These 

19 events can last minutes, hours, or even days and still 

20 be excluded from permitted emission restrictions. 

21 Over the years MEIC has reviewed thousands 

22 of malfunction reports submitted to the Montana 

23 Department of Environmental Quality from a wide range 

24 of industries -- excuse me -- a wide variety of 

25 industries. There is a consistent theme when 
34 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 reviewing those documents. Regardless of the reported 

2 reason for the malfunction or whether a particular 

3 excess emission event should legally fall within the 

4 legal definition of a malfunction, industry always 

5 dismisses excess emissions as malfunctions or as 

6 exempted under the rubric of a startup or shutdown. 

7 The state very rarely follows up with any 

8 investigation even when there are hundreds of hours of 

9 malfunctions or startups/shutdowns within a short 

10 period of time. These SSM periods of time can allow 

11 unmitigated hazardous pollutants or harmful pollutants 

12 into the air and cause distress for those with 

13 respiratory illness. 

14 The State of Montana does not have the 

15 resources to install many ambient monitors for the 

16 small number of pollutants that can be monitored in 

17 that way, so there is no guarantee during these 

18 reported SSM periods that public health is not in 

19 jeopardy. 

20 This provision in Montana law has become a 

21 "get out of jail free" card for large industries 

22 across the state. It is past time EPA puts some 

23 sideboards on state programs like Montana's that do 

24 little or nothing to verify the veracity of SSM 

25 claims, let alone find an emission violation because 
35 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 of harmful and avoidable air pollution. This type of 

2 catch-all excuse leads to weak internal control 

3 programs at facilities because they know that they 

4 will not be penalized for excess emissions as long as 

5 they are reported as a startup, shutdown, or 

6 malfunction. MEIC urges you to close this loophole 

7 and protect public health. 

8 And I have a copy of this. I can also make 

9 sure it's submitted into the record for Anne. 

10 MR. DOUGHERTY: Great. Thank you very much. 

11 MR. MCGUIRE: Thank you. 

12 MR. DOUGHERTY: We're going to take a brief 

13 recess until our next group of speakers get here. 

14 (Whereupon, a short recess was taken.) 

15 MR. DOUGHERTY: All right. We're going to 

16 reopen the hearing. I'm sorry, what was your name? 

17 MS. COOK: Kristin Cook. 

18 MR. DOUGHERTY: Hi, Kristin Cook. 

19 MS. COOK: Hi. Okay. Thank you for the 

20 opportunity to speak in favor of the EPA's SSM SIP 

21 Call Rule. As I said, my name is Kristin Cook, and I 

22 live in nearby Maryland with my three children and 

23 husband. 

24 As you know, this new safeguard will 

25 apparently close one heck of a loophole that's allowed 
36 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 big polluters to spew and dump toxic pollution on its 

2 neighboring communities without any penalties or 

3 culpability. 

4 Thank you, I thought there would be my 

5 Sierra Club friends here, but thank you, Sierra Club, 

6 for recognizing this pattern and fighting for the need 

7 to prohibit states from including these affirmative 

8 defense provisions for startup and shutdown, 

9 malfunction events in the various state implementation 

10 plans. 

11 Truly quite a loophole this was. Those 

12 affirmative defense provisions were like a plan to 

13 fail and how profoundly unfair that that darn loophole 

14 was to all those people who don't have the money to 

15 live anywhere else but close to an asthma-inducing, 

16 cancer-causing power plant. 

17 So this is a very short speech. I ask the 

18 EPA, you and everyone here, to keep strong in its 

19 mission to protect the health of its citizens and 

20 finalize this new rule. The polluters and their 

21 politicians will make lots of excuses as to why they 

22 can't or shouldn't comply, but don't they always. 

23 So thank you and congratulations on making 

24 substantial progress towards a more just and viable 

25 world. That is all I have to say today. 
37 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 MR. DOUGHERTY: Thank you very much. 

2 MS. COOK: You're welcome. Now I can go 

3 have breakfast. 

4 (Pause off the record.) 

5 MR. DE ARTEAGA: That was 10:55, right, my 

6 time? 

7 MR. DOUGHERTY: Yes. 

8 MR. DE ARTEAGA: And what time is it now? 

9 MR. DOUGHERTY: It is 10:56. 

10 MR. DE ARTEAGA: Okay. 

11 MR. DOUGHERTY: So, no, you're on time. 

12 MR. DE ARTEAGA: No problem. 

13 MR. DOUGHERTY: Thank you, Mr. de Arteaga. 

14 You can start whenever you're ready. 

15 MR. DE ARTEAGA: Oh, sorry. 

16 MR. DOUGHERTY: No, no, please. No rush at 

17 all. 

18 MR. DE ARTEAGA: Great, thanks. Okay. 

19 Okay, good morning. 

20 MR. DOUGHERTY: Good morning. 

21 MR. DE ARTEAGA: I'm José de Arteaga. I'm a 

22 resident of Washington, D.C. and I'm a proud volunteer 

23 of the D.C. Chapter of Sierra Club, and thank you for 

24 the opportunity to speak at the U.S. EPA regarding 

25 your proposed startup, shutdown, and malfunction rule 
38 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 pursuant to the Clean Air Act. 

2 In our federal system it's critical that the 

3 EPA assure we have strong, effective individual state 

4 implementation plans, and I embolden the U.S. EPA to 

5 give voice to the vulnerable and voiceless and not to 

6 the powerful few corporations. 

7 The U.S. EPA works for the people, not the 

8 polluters, so please close the loopholes that allow 

9 big polluters to dump deadly toxins into our 

10 communities. 

11 I've been fortunate enough not to ever live 

12 directly in a fence-line community and do not know if 

13 there's anyone in this panel or in this room that has, 

14 and we, that is, volunteer citizen lobbyists, are 

15 consistently encouraged to incorporate personal 

16 narratives regarding how these rules affect us when 

17 engaging the executive, to include as the press would 

18 call feature stories. 

19 In this instance, my message is simply this 

20 is an opportunity to help others; not that we are not 

21 aware of the injustices of living in a fence-line 

22 community, there are illustrations everywhere where 

23 poor, mostly minority communities stomach the daily 

24 onslaught of toxic discharge and other pollution as 

25 the result of being the neighbor of a corporate 
39 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 polluter. Communities like Norco, Louisiana, and 

2 neighborhoods like right here in River Terrace in 

3 Washington, D.C., where poor folks live near the 

4 plants and facilities and the more affluent work at 

5 the companies but, of course, don't live next door. 

6 Let's correct this injustice and replace 

7 fence-lines with green belts. Let's not pit 

8 communities against each other and the false 

9 dichotomies that favor industry. It's not a jobs 

10 versus regulations narrative, or as long as the fence 

11 line is over there by them and not here by us, where 

12 do we want the job-creating industrial plant in this 

13 state or that developing nation. Those are all false 

14 dichotomies. Those are all divisive false narratives 

15 produced or promulgated by the polluters. 

16 Alternatively, an enlightened agency could 

17 build a regulatory infrastructure and system that 

18 creates economic fairness and environmental justice 

19 not just because it's the morally right thing to do 

20 but because it is in fact, as the data has shown, 

21 economically the right thing to do. The math is 

22 simple. It's tons more expensive to prevent 

23 corporations to externalize the cost of production 

24 onto the public generally and into the homes of fence25 line communities specifically than it is to formulate 
40 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 a smart regulatory legal scheme that internalizes the 

2 true cost of production prior to the product entering 

3 the market unsubsidized. 

4 We need to educate folks that it is more 

5 expensive to permit polluters to literally dump onto 

6 our communities and subsidize pollution and its 

7 associated costs than it is to prevent and regulate 

8 it. 

9 For too long government itself has permitted 

10 the polluters to control that false narrative, which 

11 has not only flooded our communities with deadly 

12 particulates and toxins but flooded our democracy with 

13 dirty and political cash. Currently local communities 

14 have to fund the costs of toxic cleanup, pollution 

15 amelioration, lost revenue associated with depressed 

16 real estate values, and public health expenditures, 

17 monies that ought to be used for education and 

18 greening our economy and communities. 

19 Conversely, healthy air, greener local 

20 communities thwart corruption and waste in government, 

21 prompt innovation and entrepreneurialism, and build a 

22 consumer base for the products and services of 

23 corporations. Reconnecting the disconnected starts 

24 with toxic-free neighborhoods and people that don't 

25 need inhalers to make it through their day. Eliminate 
41 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 the SSM loopholes and create a level playing field. 

2 The civil rights and justice issues 

3 implicated by the SSM loopholes are huge. What 

4 message do we send to the next generation and to the 

5 world if the USA has a codified legal system where 

6 polluters are permitted to emit huge amounts of 

7 harmful pollution and are not policed, prosecuted, 

8 supervised, or held accountable? 

9 Yet the level of policing, supervision, 

10 judicial, and other forms of official state 

11 involvement in these fence-line communities would 

12 never be tolerated by these corporations or more 

13 affluent communities. These communities don't get to 

14 externalize their costs. Don't let the corporations 

15 do it either. If the rule of law and law and order 

16 are American values for individuals and for ordinary 

17 communities, then these same values ought to apply to 

18 corporations and polluters. 

19 Let's replace fence lines with green belts, 

20 stop writing rules that permit polluters to 

21 externalize their costs, and most importantly let's 

22 create a legal regulatory system that will help 

23 protect some of society's most vulnerable communities, 

24 those that live adjacent to power plants, refineries, 

25 and other polluting industries. Those that live under 
42 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 the shadow of these big polluters are frequently low2 income and are communities of color. Let's model 

3 fairness and opportunities, eliminate all SSM 

4 loopholes from the U.S. EPA rules. Thank you. 

5 MR. DOUGHERTY: Thank you very much. 

6 Hi, come on up, please. 

7 MR. DE ARTEAGA: Have a good day. 

8 MR. DOUGHERTY: Thank you. You too. 

9 MS. COLARVILLI: I'm also with The Sierra 

10 Club. I think you're going to get a bunch of us 

11 today. Should I just go ahead? 

12 MR. DOUGHERTY: Yes, please. 

13 MS. COLARVILLI: Okay. 

14 MR. DOUGHERTY: Just say your name for the 

15 formal record. 

16 MS. COLARVILLI: Hello. I'm Kate 

17 Colarvilli. I'm with The Sierra Club's Beyond Oil 

18 Campaign, and speaking about how this rule impacts 

19 refineries. 

20 A colleague of mine said something recently 

21 that stuck with me. He said, "I'm here out of love 

22 for my children and desire to protect their health and 

23 their future." And then he continued and he said, 

24 "But I'm also here out of love for your children, for 

25 the children of refinery executives and for oil 
43 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 workers. I'm here to protect your children's health 

2 and your children's future." 

3 The EPA shutdown, startup, malfunction rule 

4 is an important safeguard that will close a major 

5 loophole that has for decades allowed big polluters to 

6 dump huge amounts of toxic air pollution into 

7 neighboring communities. By doing so, this rule will 

8 help protect some of society's most vulnerable 

9 communities, those that live adjacent to power plants, 

10 refineries, and other polluting industries. Those 

11 living under the shadow of these big polluters are 

12 frequently low-income families and are communities of 

13 color, but they also include the workers in these 

14 facilities. 

15 As responsible adults and community 

16 decisionmakers, we need to be able to look at our kids 

17 in the eyes when they ask us what we did to protect 

18 their health and their air. EPA's SSM rule will have 

19 meaningful and measurable results. 

20 We cannot be fooled when the industry claims 

21 that SSM events and resulting pollution are 

22 unavoidable. I have seen oil refinery management do 

23 everything they could to avoid modernizing their 

24 equipment, simply because it made them money. 

25 Companies who care about their neighboring communities 
44 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

1 have shown that the industry can do better. Better 

2 management practices and improved technologies can 

3 help reduce the pollution burden that falls on the 

4 shoulders of vulnerable communities as well as the 

5 refinery workers. 

6 As a national organization with millions of 

7 members and supporters, Sierra Club is dedicated to 

8 protecting the health and environment of all 

9 Americans. No community member should be prevented 

10 from living a healthy and full life because of the 

11 burdens of industrial pollution. We praise EPA's SSM 

12 rule as common-sense and necessary to protect our 

13 health and environment. Thank you. 

14 MR. DOUGHERTY: Thank you very much. 

15 MS. COLARVILLI: Thanks again. I appreciate 

16 it. 

17 MR. DOUGHERTY: Thank you. Thanks for 

18 coming in. Thank you. 

19 (Whereupon, a recess was taken.) 

20 MR. DOUGHERTY: It is 3 p.m. and we have not 

21 had a speaker in over an hour, so we are closing the 

22 hearing for today. Thank you. 

23 (Whereupon, at 3:00 p.m., the hearing in the 

24 above-entitled matter was concluded.) 

25 // 
 45 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 (202) 628-4888 

 

 REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE 

DOCKET NO.: N/A 

CASE TITLE: SSM SIP Call -- Supplemental Public 

 Hearing 

HEARING DATE: October 7, 2014 

LOCATION: Washington, D.C. 

 I hereby certify that the proceedings and 

evidence are contained fully and accurately on the 

tapes and notes reported by me at the hearing in the 

above case before the U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

 Date: October 7, 2014 

 

 LaShonne Robinson 

 Official Reporter 

 Heritage Reporting Corporation 

 Suite 600 

 1220 L Street, N.W. 

 Washington, D.C. 20005-4018