Document mmMwqwJ6B4YaKyaDzMYEEYED0

2291 MINUTES of Che chree hundred fourth meeting of Che Board of Directors of the Chemical Manufacturers Association, Inc., held at Che Ricz-Carlcon Hotel (Ball room IV), Laguna Niguel, California, on Monday at 8:00 a.m. and Tuesday at 9:00 a.m., September 9 and 10, 1985. There were present: Directors: George J. Sella, Jr. - Chairman Harold A. Sorgenti - Vice Chairman Robert A. Roland - President Arthur E. Biggs Hans H. Kopper Robert D. Cadieux Sidney M. Leahy Carlyle G. Caldwell Carl W, Lorentzen Paul W. Chellgren Robert H. Malott W. H. Clark, Jr. H. Eugene McBrayer Harry Corless Keith R. McKennon Ralph S. Cunningham Robert L. Mitchell Keith H. Edmondson (1) L. John Polite Robert B. Fell (1) Seymour S. Preston, III F. Jack Fitzgerald Thomas E. Reilly, Jr. Robert C. Forney M. Whitson Sadler P. W. Ifland Charles E. Stewart Ray R. Irani (1) S. Jay Stewart John W. Johnstone, Jr. J. R. Street Robert D. Kennedy Konrad M. Weis Secretary: Treasurer: General Counsel: By Invitation: Charles W. Van Vlack Gary C. Herrman David Zoll Stuart T. Allen, SOCMA, E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Company William M. Bellamy, Jr., Union Carbide Corporation Frank W. Berryman, Chevron Chemical Company Geraldine V. Cox, CMA Kenneth E. Davis, Rohm and Haas Company (I) Wells Denyes, Eastman Kodak Company Garth F. Fort, Monsanto Company Gary S. Furman, American Cyanamid Company Edward D. Griffith, ARCO Chemical Company Jon C. Holtzman, CMA E. Hamilton Hurst, Nalco Chemical Company Thomas W. Mooney, The Procter & Gamble Company (2) Leslie F. Nute, Dow Chemical U.S.A. (I) Ray E. Olsen, Exxon Chemical Company Vernon R. Rice, E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Company Allan J. Spilner, Rohm and Haas Company William M. Stover, CMA Jullane H. Van Egmond, American Cyanamid Company James P. Watkins, American Cyanamid Company William T. Wood, Jr., E. I, du Pont de Nemours & Company (1) (1) Monday only (2) Tuesday only CMA 012657 acutely toxic materials and low-level exposures to substances over lono periods of time; and, that CMA is prepared to help Congress design r appropriate legislation while continuing to develop and implement new initiatives to control hazardous air pollutants. Also during the June hearings, "Congressman John Dingell (D-MI) voiced strong opposition to h r 2576. At the other day of hearings, there were industry witnesses, representing aluminum, electric power, motor vehicles and consumer products. An effort to affix portions of H.R. 2576 to the Superfund legislation failed during mark-up in the Energy and Commerce Committee. Even if Waxman succeeds in getting a bill out of his subcommittee, full committee consideration seems unlikely. Senate Activity. In the Senate, committee hearings might get under way this fall on clean air amendments as a whole. 2. Regulatory Developments and Response Revised Particulate Matter Standard. The Air Pollution Effects Task Group developed comments on EPA's proposed revisions to the particulate matter national ambient air quality standard. CMA's comments highlight several scientific and technical deficiencies in the proposal. The final standard will be the basis for states revising the state implementation plan for particulate matter. Mew Source Performance Standards. The Process Emissions Regulation Task Group developed comments on EPA's proposed air oxidation processes an? distillation operations new source performance standards. These comments were in response to EPA's reopening the comment period and requesting additional comments on its TRE regulatory model. CMA was generally supportive of EPA's proposed approach on its cost-effectiveness model, although we offered several technical recommendations to improve its applicability. vinyl Chloride NESHAPS Judicial Intervention. The Environmental Management Committee authorized CMA's intervention in a judicial suit supporting EPA's proposed revisions of the vinyl chloride hazardous air pollutant standard. This litigation will resolve the question of whether EPA is properly interpreting Section 112 of the Clean Air Act in developing standards that assure an "ample margin of safety". 3. Technical and Research Activities Dingell Survey Report. The Process Emission Regulations Task Group and its Monitoring Work Group have completed the analysis of a survey requested by Congressman Dingell of chemical industrial plant air monitoring. The survey was conducted in three distinct areas -- New Orleans-Baton Rouge, Niagara Falls, and Philadelphia-WilmingtonSouth New Jersey. The final report will be submitted to Congressman Dingell and to the Office of Technology Assessment. Air Task Groups Sunsetting. The Environmental Management Committee disbanded the Air Regulations Task Group and the Toxics Integration Task Group. The activities of the Air Regulations Task Group will be conducted by a work group of the Process Emission Regulations Task Group. The Page 18 CMA 012658 activities of'the Toxics Integration Task. Group will be conducted by a work group of^the Air Pollution Effects Task Group. 4. Litigation and Related Activities Vinyl Chloride Litigation. CMA has moved to intervene in a court suit brought by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) challenging EPA's emission standards for vinyl chloride under section 112 of the Clean Air Act. This case will probably be the first to decide the meaning of the "ample margin of safety" test of section 112. NRDC contends that section 112 requires EPA to set "zero-risk, zero-emmissions" standards for all carcinogens. CMA and the American Petroleum Institute, who also intervened, will argue in support of EPA's position in the case, that the Agency is authorized to take cost and feasibility into account in setting emission standards under section 112. NRDC filed its brief on June 17, with EPA's response submitted on July 25. The CMA/API brief will be filed on August 19. A decision is expected by the spring of 1986. I, Clean Water 1. Congressional Developments and Response Clean Water Legislation. The Senate approved S. 1128 by a vote of 94-0 on June 13th. In the House, Congressman Robert Roe (D-NJ) worked out a block of committee amendments to H.R. 8 which CMA and industry representatives discussed with Roe. On July 23, the House passed H.R. 8 by a vote of 340-83. Despite the threat of a White House veto because of construction grant funding, it appears possible that Congress will complete work on S. 1128 before this session ends. S. 1128 and the House-passed version reflect CMA efforts for extensions, modifications deletions and report language clarifications. The bills are improved over original proposals in several areas CMA sought including: extended compliance deadlines; increased protection against citizen suits relative to administrative penalties; affirmative defense under criminal penalties; narrowing of the mandatory reopener requirements in NPDES permits; affirmation of the Fundamentally Different Factors (FDF) variance although with some procedural limitations; and a provision improving stormwater Wn-off requirements. CMA currently is preparing for conference activity In September. Regulatory Developments and Response Pretreatment. The Effluent Guidelines Task Group developed comments EPA's proposed revisions to its pretreatment regulations. The sal revises the definitions of "interference" and "pass through" for *es of determining extent of pretreatment control necessary. CMA's ts generally supported the changes since they brought the tions more in line with our original views on this matter. Biomonitorinq. The Water Quality Criteria and Standards Task ^eloped conroents on EPA's biomonitoring study conducted in Lima, A requested CMA to peer review the study. CMA's conments were CMA 012659 ' age 19