Document EaOR3Rr2K91ERXBYZXpr4Y0n

EMC-120-1 CHEMICAL MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION MINUTES OF MEETING ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE OCTOBER 22, 1987 CMA - Terrace Conference Room Washington, DC V, J. Marchesani, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 8:. a.m. The following individuals attended: MEMBERS PRESENT V. J. Marchesani, Chairman C. T. Seay, Vice Chairman R. D. Bradford Jr. P. F. Cash* R. F. Curran R. A. Dennis J. C. Edwards J. K. Grant L. P. Hughes R. T. Jackson L. D. Johnson R. R. Kienle P. M. King M. A. Pierle AFFILIATION . ICI Americas Inc. Exxon Chemical Americas Olin Corporation Mobil Chemical Company CIBA-GEIGY Corporation American Cyanamid Company Tennessee Eastman Company Mallinckrodt, Inc. Mobay Corporation Union Carbide Corporation Rohm and Haas Company Shell Chemical Company PPG Industries, Inc. Monsanto Company D. W. Carroll, Staff Executive CMA PRESENT BY INVITATION T. F. Burns* B. A. Chidester* J. A. Curvan* G. Drigs* K. M. Kastner A. M. Mason* F. McNeice* K. J. Neale* J. M. Reamy* CMA CMA CMA The Networks CMA CMA ICI Americas Inc. CMA CMA *Part-tirae CMA 082035 EMC-120-2 1.0 Minutes of Meeting. - V. J. Marchesani 10.0 of the September 16, 1987, minutes are to be modified by adding a second sentence -- The CMA Legal Department was requested to provide information on the financial obligations associated with EMC related litigation. The minutes of the EMC's September 16, 1987, meeting, EMC-119, were APPROVED as modified. 2.0 Budget Management Report - C. T. Seay 2.1 The Committee reviewed the present status of the EMC's FY 87/88 budget. The Committee reconfirmed the continuing need to review priorities of possible priority projects. The Committee requested that sponsors identify as early as possible .when remaining projects will be brought forward for action. C. T. Seay noted that the EMC's budget presently does not include any funds for Section 313 activities. The Committee indicated they may need to request supplemental funds for Section 313 activities from the Board of Directors in January. 2.2 The Budget Management Subcommittee will meet at the Hyatt Regency (Arlington) the afternoon of November 18, 1987, after the planning session ends. 2.3 Plans for the planning session, location, and agenda (including a brief EMC business meeting) were discussed. CMA staff was directed to contact the other hey Committees chairman/vice chairman/staff executives inviting them to the EMC planning session. 2.4 The Committee reviewed the Environmental Update sessions. It was the sense of the Committee that the sponsors need to closely oversee the development of the presentations to assure they follow the presenter's guidance and include briefing materials for the Update book. Any comments on the presenter's guidance should be sent to C. T. Seay. 3.0 Six Month Critical Issues Update - V. J. Marchesani The Committee discussed how best to update the critical issues list/priorities. The Committee agreed to reevaluate it after the planning session. (A copy of the list is to be included in the planning session meeting book). 4.0 Liaison/Sponsor Reports 4.1 All sponsors/liaisons present made reports on their group's progress on achieving goals and objectives. 4.2 R. Curran indicated that the Environmental Monitoring Task Group might need outside purchased services funding to analyze revised Section 304(h) analytical methods on November 1, 1987. The funding would come from the SW-846 project. The EMC agreed to conduct a letter ballot to authorize funding if the EPA documents were received and needed to be analyzed before the next EMC meeting. CMA 082036 --T EMC-120-3 4.3 M. A. Pierle indicated that the Air Legislative Issues Task Group needed a broader membership. Staff was requested to send out an environmental alert on this matter. 4.4 The EMC asked that they be alerted to the cities where the waste minimization live interviews will be conducted. 4.5 L. Hughes advised the Committee that the waste minimization legislative positions would be presented at the November EMC meeting, 4.6 R. Bradford advised the Committee that the groundwater protection plan project would be included as part of the planning session. The Committee asked that the Proposition 65 technical support document be voted on as part of the EMC's November business meeting. 4.7 The Committee agreed to alternate months for sponsor/liaison reports, and review of the EMC's goals and objectives. 5.0 API/CMA Budget Coordination Meeting - R. R. Kienle R. Kienle reviewed the API/CMA meeting. The Committee agreed that after our preliminary budget review a second meeting with API should be held in December to further discuss joint efforts.. The sponsors were all asked to identify potential projects for the joint API/CMA activity. The EMC agreed to consider this activity as a potential new EMC goal. 6.0 Funding Proposals 6.1 The Committee APPROVED $30,000 to develop a secondary emissions estimating protocol. 6.2 P. M. King brought forward the Air Quality Policy Task Group's request for $20,000 to be used to develop a data base for comparison of the 1986 and 1987 survey results. After some discussion P. M. King amended his proposal requesting $15,000 for the data analysis project and to explore all possibilities of how to handle the work. The EMC APPROVED on a 10-3 vote the modified proposal. 7.0 RCRA Litigation Recommendation - R, T. Jackson/K. M. Kastner 7.1 The EMC APPROVED a recommendation, on a 10-2 vote, to litigate the RCRA point of disposal issue in the California List land disposal regulation. 7.2 The EMC APPROVED a recommendation to intervene against the Hazardous Waste Treatment Council's challenge to the California List land disposal prohibition regulations. 8.0 Waste Minimization Legislative Principles - L. P. Hughes L. Hughes provided the Committee with a status report on the Waste Minimization Task Group's development of legislative principles. Draft (see attachment) was distributed for Committee review and CMA 082037 4 EMC-120-4 feedback to L. Hughes by October 27, 1987. The revised principles will be presented to the EMC at the November meeting. 9.0 Legislative Update - T. F. Burns/K. J. Neale T. Bums and K. Neale briefed the Committee on key environmental legislative matters (waste minimization, Clean Air Act amendments). 10.0 Clean Air Act Amendments Legislative Support - M. A. Pierle/A. M. Mason 10.1 M. Pierle provided highlights on the acid rain impact analysis. 10.2 The Committee after a preliminary discussion indicated that it needed to further discuss a CMA nonattainment alternative at the November and/or December meeting. 10.3 M. Pierle distributed a flow chart of CMA's alternative and modified Title V air toxics legislation. The Committee discussed the difference between the modifications to Title V and the CMA Title V alternative. Before voting on the modifications to Title V, the Committee requested narrative language be prepared and distributed. 11.0 Ad Hoc Community Health Guidelines Group - P, M. King P. King briefed the Committee on the ad hoc group's progress in developing community exposure guidelines. The group will meet again on November 10, 1987, to review identified methodologies. The ad hoc group has targeted January's Board of Director's meeting to make a formal recommendation. The group is considering, at a minimum, of developing a booklet of options. If a company has a methodology it desires considered it should be forwarded to P. King and A. Mason as soon as possible. 12.0 Ad Hoc EMC Section 313 Group - C. T. Seay 12.1 C. T. Seay reported on the meeting of the ad hoc EMC Section 313 group. The purpose of the meeting was to tie together a more cohesive Section 313 plan in preparation for a Title III status report to be made to the Board of Director's in January 1988. The meeting also identified potential funding and other resource needs to successfully carry out CMA's Section 313 member support activities. (See attachment). 12.2 C. T. Seay indicated that G. Rodenhausen has prepared a first draft of an integrated workplan. C. T. Seay reviewed with the Committee potential EMC work products and identified several activities that presently are not being addressed. C. T. Seay surfaced the question of whether the existing task group structure can respond to all the activities that may be needed to effectively address Section 313. 13.0 SCAN Program Presentation - R. D. Bradford/B. A. Chidester/G. Drigs 13.1 R. Bradford indicated that one of the EMC's goals is to improve the communication of environmental data to and from the CMA member companies. B. Chidester and G. Drigs made a ""T r> i EMC-120-5 presentation on the existing SCAN program's capabilities on regulatory tracking and for compliance. It was indicated that the new data group that SCAN will be using will have access to both federal and state environmental regulations. 13.2 The EMC agreed to further discuss at the November or December EMC meeting whether the SCAN program or some modifications of it would meet the EMC's environmental data goals. 14.0 Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 2:30 p.m. /' A, .. . David W. Carroll Director' Env-ronraental Programs " DWC/jac Attachments MINUTES SUBJECT TO APPROVAL November U, 1987 ... Distribution: Environmental Management Committee Environmental Management Contacts Task Group Leaders H&SC Chairman 4 Vice Chairman CMA 082039 A ATTACHMENT 1 i PRINCIPLES FOR EVALUATION PROPOSED WASTE MINIMIZATION LEGISLATION CMA member companies have a long-term commitment to minimize wastes associated with their operations. Based on a recent survey of its members, the amount of solid hazardous waste generated by the survey respondents decreased 50 percent between 1981 and 1985, while chemical industry production increased 17 percent. In addition to these acheivements, CMA has adopted a program of increased emphasis on waste minimization to accelerate existing efforts at reducing wastes. Various waste minimization legislative proposals have been introduced in Congress. CMA will evaluate these proposals based on the following principles: o Waste minimization should be encouraged through voluntary programs rather than through mandatory programs in legislation or regulations Strong incentives, such as rising disposal costs and large potential future liability, already exist to encourage waste minimization. Existing legislative frameworks including RCRA, the Clean Water, Act and the Clean Air Act, all address reduction in waste. a The definition of "waste minimization" should be broad, preferably with a hierarchy of: - Source reduction - Recycling - Treatment to reduce volume and/or toxicity o CMA supports the minimization of all wastes that pose hazards to human health and the environment. o CMA supports the development of a sound, practical national data base of waste reduction and waste management information. The tracking of individual wastes however, is neither desireable nor feasible. In establishing such a data base, the EPA should make every attempt to use existing data, such as the revised biennial survey, state surveys, industry surveys, and Section 313 of Title III of the Superfund Amendment and Reauthorization Act (SARA). CMA opposes any attempt at this time to reopen Title III of SARA in order to collect additional waste minimization data. o CMA supports efforts by EPA to develop an information clearing-house on waste minimization and to provide technical and financial assistance to states in order to encourage waste minimization activities. CMA 082040 "T Principles for Evaluating Proposed Waste Minimization Legislation Page 2 o CMA opposes attempts to require the use of mass balance to calculate emissions data. Similarly, we oppose requirements to provide a production index that divulges specific production yields of materials in chemical manufacturing. o CMA opposes attempts to fund waste minimization programs through the creation of any new taxes or fees. Such programs are properly funded from general revenues. o CMA has significant concerns with using the SARA Section 322 confidentiality test rather than the confidentiality tests specified in Section 3007(b) of RCRA, Section 114(c) of the Clean Air Act or Section 308(b) of the Clean Water Act. o CMA supports use of a panel of experts, including industrial representatives, to provide input on the streamlining of data collection and promoting minimization principles. o CMA supports efforts to identify and correct legislative and regulatory obstacles to waste minimization. CMA 082041 MODIFIED TITLE V FLOW CHART ATTACHMENT 2 TECHNOLOGY-BASED STANDARDS Candidate List (drawn from Sec 313 list) Based on criteria developed by Administrator after notice and comment. \/ List of Pollutants to be Regulated \/ Identification of sources that emit regulated chemicals in significant amounts \/ Development of emissions standards based on maximum emission reductions achievable, considering cost and other factors. \/ \/ \/ Comply at construction \/ Compliance within three years, with possible two year extension. cMA 082042 Petition MODIFIED TITLE V FLOW CHART Health-Based Standards Administrator establishes the Candidate list of HAPs \/ \/ List as HAP, including initial list of eight substances; arsenic, asbestos, benzene, beryllium, coke oven emissions, mercury, radionuclides, vinyl chloride. \ \ \_\ / 1 Not listed as a HAP; no regulation warranted. \/ Set emission standards for all significant source categories, -- Review and Revise Standard. \/ \/ New sources compliance. Effective on promulgation. Existing sources compliance 112(c) (waiver- 2 years) CMA 082043 l TIME L IN E - SUBSTITUTE T IT L E V :it* -e in i; r 1-s *5 *-- * s* tt X g it -- - f:i!; Is5 1 * 5;'*) -g li 4 % Lif1 CMA 082044 A CMA SARA 313 PLANS ATTACHMENT 3 Results of EMC Initiated 10/13/87 Meeting George Rodenhausen clearly agrees with need for comprehensive overall plan integrating components with key check points and clarification of roles, - He seems to think this would be done with staff help in the ad hoc coordinating committee though the issue management responsibilities of this group remains unclear. - Reluctant to embrace project manager concept but won't fight it if suitable candidate made available. Agrees on need for more work on communication strategy x Stepwise guidance for plant managers x Possible* consultant advice on how best to get message out x More definitive plans George seems to agree on need for January Board review. Timely from standpoint of their interest. - Will probably need to request additional funds. - Thinks this may be an appropriate issue for Board's Public Perceptions Committee to adopt (not sure of ramifications). Unresolved was extent to which SARA 313 should be managed as a separate issue versus current approach of handling as an integral part of overall Title III Program, George not sure what role CMA special programs have to play; he is concerned about getting too many organizations involved, Next meeting of George's ad hoc coordinating committee has not been scheduled but he agrees one is needed soon to address these issues. Concern that Community Awareness portion of CAER may being neglected with legislated establishment of local ER committees. General agreement on most of the other improvements proposed (agenda attached). CMA 082045 2 CMA SARA 313 Plans Suggested. Follow jib Get clarification of Executive Committee expectations. Discuss strategy with Ned Griffith and solicit his help in cultivating support. Get Bob Roll and on board. Vince Marchesanni contact with George Rodenhausen re future plans. Seek agreement for Increased effort at next ad hoc coordinating group meeting.' - Further develop proposed action plans prior to meeting. x EMC specific plans x Overall program plans - Develop first pass budget. List of candidates for Project Manager position. Specific EMC Effort Communications emphasizing importance of air Quality Control Policy implementation. EPA reporting requirements advocacy. Reporting workshop planning. Fugitive emission protocol use, Guidance on estimating secondary air emissions. Industry trend data or releases to air and water. Recommendations on Community Exposure Guideline development. CMA 082046 CMA SARA 313 Plans Specific EHC effort (continued) Support of EPA Common Ground Project on risk communications. Preparation of guidance material for ambient air and surface water monitoring. Recommendations on geographic areas of industry concentration where industry monitoring would be desirable. Collection of available data from previous monitoring studies, Decision on need to develop program to collect member company emissions data. Advice on how to respond to fate questions. Update on other trade association plans. CTS:kmc 10/15/87 CMA 082047 CMA SARA 313 PLANS October I? >-13.87 Reason for meeting: Insure CMA's programs are optimally designed and organized to meet challenges posed by SARA 313 reporting requirements. - Potential adverse impact: loss of industry credibility, diminished CAER program effectiveness and onerous legislation aimed at zero discharge, mass balance reporting, mandated waste minimization and prescribed process safety controls, - Difficult to manage, cross-cutting Issue. - Concern that some companies may not be taking issue seriously enough; industry in genera still learning communication skills necessary to be effective In new RTK era. - Compressed timeframe for response. Meeting objectives - Gain more complete understanding of CMA's current and planned programs, - Reach agreement on potential improvements (programmative elements, integration and future management). - Define required folowup for plan development, reviews and approval. CMA program objectives - Assist member companies In complying with statutory requirements and achieving effective communications with employees, customers, neighbors, general public and politicians. - Work with member companies, CIC's and other trade associations to develop effective communications on a regional and national basis. Review of current CMA programs - Implementation of air quality control program - Reporting requirements advocacy and guidance - Guidance on estimating fugitive emissions - Development of community exposure guidelines (just getting underway) CMA 082048 2 Review of current CMA programs (continued) - Risk communication guidance - Developing community trust through CAER and Local ER committees * Industry trend data on releases to air and water 9 Understanding of other CMA program plans - Member company workshops - Media communication plans * CIC role development - Coordination with other trade associations - Laymen's language USDS' Potential improvements (straw man) - Increased emphasis on air quality control policy implementation - Collection of ambient air and surface water data - Expedited effort to develop community exposure guidelines - Early design of an easy to understand, step-wise communications program for plant managers to implement with target audiences. - Early collection of release data by member companies and possibly CMA - Delisting assistance - Response to fate questions - Comprehensive overall plan Integrating components with key check points and clarification of roles. - Industry volunteer as project manage and additional workers - Expanded ad hoc coordinating committee role (more issue management responsibility) - Increased management Involvement and support --- elevate to major program -status Conclusions Required followup CTS:kmc 10/15/87 CMA 082049 T 2 PREMISES: 1. CMA is primarily driven by large companies. 2. EMC needs more "sweat equity" resources. 3. There is room for improvement in effective utilization of existing resources (quality vs. quantity) 4. EMC needs to reach small companies, therefore needs feed back from them. 5. Smaller companies lack resources to participate in "monthly" meetings. 6. Smaller companies are compliance driven rather than advocacy driven. IDEAS FOR RECRUITMENT: GENERAL 1. Motivate CEO's and executive contacts. 2. Sell benefits of more participation by improved communication of the "stakes" of the issues. 3. Focus company involvement on their specific interests (take inventory from available data). 4. Consider suppositorial management approach for more resources from companies who already provide resources. CMA 082539 -3 (LG^A IDEAS FOR RECRUITMENT: GENERAL (cont'd) 5. Re-examine effectiveness of present utilization of resources. 6. Re-examine QUALITY vs. QUANTITY of participants. SMALL COMPANIES 1. Structure for "quarterly" participation. 2. Accept generalists vs. specialists. 3. Aim at Plant Manager or higher level. 4. Take issues to them - get reaction - follow up. 5. Invite them to participate as speakers/discussion leaders at seminars, work shops, work group meetings. 6. Consider holding meetings at closer locations (not always at CMA, Washington). 7. Provide a mechanism to obtain more effective small company perspective on issues. 8. Provide more value from existing resources. 9. Offer option of sweat equity vs. dues. CMA 082540 11/25/1989 12=23 MOBPY BLDG. 5 PGH PA. Mobay 412 777 4744 P.02 Mobey Corporation November 22, 1989 mwoMwi wunwwr Awmtm Hr, David Carroll Chemical Manufactures Association 2501 K Street Northwest Washington, D.C, Dear David: Per your request at our EMC Planning Session, please find attached the listing of Barriers to Implementing Responsible Care (for small companies). This listing also Includes a lot of Items which are also applicable to the larger companies. Also attached are the listings of CMA Conanitnent Needs and EMC Resources Required. In summary, It was felt that the key area for CMA to Initially concentrate on Is the commitment Issue. Without securing a Iftil commltaent from both the small and large companlas this program will falter. Once the commitment 1$ secured, then CKA needs to assist By providing implementation aids for the companies which will help ease the resource crunch at the individual companies. If there Is any clarification required on the listings, please let me know. My understanding Is that Paul wants to have a follow-up on this at next EMC, so specific suggestions can be pursued further. Sincerely, , / LPH508 slg Attachments CC: P. King L. P. Hughes, Director Corporate Environmental Control CMA 082541 Writer s Direct Diet Numb,' (412) .777-2221 1C' AM I. SUHHARY Understanding a. Faculty Directed b. Workshops c. "How To" Manuals COMMITMENT (1* Priority) "What Can Do For Me" Outside Prossuras (Public (CMA Companies) a. CEO Appreciates b. Follow-up/Follow-up c. Why a. tlC Organizations b. Buy-1n-by*Publ1c RESOURCES Time People a. List Resource Data (Outside CMA) b. Resource Center c. Help Center d. Facilitator a. To Than Directly b. T.V. Tapes c. Need to be Provided Money a. Show Profits b. Consider Long Term Benefits c. Law/Ref. Implications d. Research Focus CMA 082542 11/26/1989 12=24 MOBAY BLDG. 5 PGh Pft, 412 777 4f44 r. *>4 II. HARRIERS TO IHPLEHEHTINB RESPONSIBLE CARE (Small Plants Small Companies) Time 1. Resources Peoplia _ None available Right people (shills required skills) Honey 2. Code understanding 3. Multiple responsibilities per persons 4. Commitment not there 5. Lack basic skills within small companies 6. Don't know why this Important ' 7. link to bottom line and not always seen 8. Long term viability of business not understood 9. Outside pressures t 10. Correspondence may be written for large corporation direction 11. Current CMA guidance not there 12. Level/Type training different for smell vs. large companies 13. Impact of doing public outreach difficult for small company (CMA may do) 14. All sections of practice codes may not be appropriate. Clarification needs could take exception to It. 15. Lack of response from CMA specifically directed to small company needs 16. Small companies could be compared to larger and could lose incentive 17. Difference In opinions for small plant that make code Implementation . difficult 16. laws and regulations discourage "Running too fest" 19. Sheer volume of correspondence to handle 20. Basic sharing of resources Is not standard mode 21. Lack of acceptance of overall small company assistance commitment by large companies 22. How do small companies handle their costs 23. Hesitancy to share Information with public/employees et al 24. Competing efforts (CICs et al) CMA 082543 11/20/1969 12=24 MOBPY BLDG. 5 PGH PA. 412 77? 4744 P.05 III. CMA C0HHI1l.j^Ir NEEDS 1. Improve executive outreech sessions . Content b. Attendance by top 2. CMA needs to well understand barriers and Impacts on program and react accordingly. 3. Need concurrent outreach to the R.C. facilitators (different levels) regional 2*3 hour workshops 4. Direct mall Information to levels that are Implementing R.C. a. Session . b. V.C.R. 5. Adopt a company concept of management through regional council directed to facility managers 6. Evaluate CKAs ability to: Use other organizations Support/Promote elements of programs (l.e., CICs as mechanism to) And "How to do" 7. Follow-up with companies who didn't attend executive contact sessions (one-on-one) 8. Simplified manual directed at getting small companies commitment (and How to for executives ring binder <CE0, PLT Hgr. 9. For companies also have "How To* work plan that goes with each code (not just list of requirements) CMA 082544 IV. EHC RESOURCES REQUIRED 1. Better mix drafters (small company Increase) .2 Evaluate priorities/resources currently allocated 3. Developed Implementation nlan for WARR/WAME (and coordinate with other groups by 1/31/90) 4. Executive letter Inclusion 5. Evaluate liaison needs with other TGs (l.e., Ann Nason Press to TGs by 1/31/90 .6 Develop pre-workshop "survey* needs What PI ace Who-Comaltment 7. Tailor workshops so can be smller 6. Develop responsible care facilitators list on regional basis (EMC +) Individual feedback Staff support received Iaiplenenters 9. Feedback to companies on R.C. Implementation (How companies using to Improve) (General and targeted) 10. Mechanism to communicate Why (Commitment) How ("How To") How Know (Measure) and Promote with workshop (G.E. Program) .11 Fol1ow-up/Follow-up/Fol1ow-up .12 Mechanism beyond survey to Improve program (How To) 13. R/D & Marketing focused workshops 14. Integration plan for environmental Issues within organization 15. Issue measurements reports of overall company status and feedback which could move toward "Safety Award" type of "Waste Reduction Award" 16. Reinforce WARR with report of progress of which companies report to individual Board of Directors (l.e., Start No's) (Can do by Inclusion within survey?) CMA 082545 4 BREAKOUT SESSION SUMMARY By: Carl Mattia, NL Chemicals, Inc. Definition of Neada o Time Critical information and impact from CMA o Key issues agenda major difference at State level o Determination of what is important o Who makes determination o How is it determined to be key issue o Communication within CMA o Communication within member companies Definition of Initiatives o State driven usual precursor to federal regulation o Federal initiatives that State must follow o Reverse federal initiative is a plant need in States on future federal initiative Definition of Problem o divergent interests in issues at state level by member companies o Poor internal company communication o Very short time line to inform, comunlcate and react o Insufficient human resources Rei i--uudatlan: o EMC show with State Affairs priority list of key issues o State Affairs show EMC thair listing of key issues o Liaison development and possible Joint meeting with State Affeirs/EMC o Development of listing of reference materials, l.e. catalogic of position papers and studies - monthly report of comments o Development of resources in Task Group's similar to water group with member eseigned States of interests (Task Groups) o EMC role to be technical support CMA 082546 define process to initiate activity o Who dtraiHM an? istuca? o How ar th*y d*t*rma*d? CMA 082547