Finally, this legislation comes on the heels of the massive chemical record keeping and reporting requirements authorized less than a year ago by Congress as Title III of the Superfund reauthorization bill. We believe that if Congress truly desires to create a comprehensive air toxics regulatory program, it would be premature to do so now without benefit of the data soon to be collected under the new Superfund requirements. Statement for the Record Re: Committee Working Paper dated July 10, 1987 Subcommittee on Environmental Protection Committee on Environment and Public Works on behalf of the National Paint & Coatings Association by Thomas J. Graves, Associate General Counsel and Robert H. Lamb of McGuire, Woods, Battle & Boothe August 21, 1987 Introduction The National Paint and Coatings Association, Inc. (hereafter referred to as "NPCA" and headquartered at 1500 Rhode Island Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C.) is a voluntary, non-profit industry association originally organized in 1888 and comprising today over 800 member companies which manufacture consumer paint products and industrial coatings and the raw materials used in these products. The NPCA membership collectively produces about 80% of the total dollar volume of consumer paints and industrial coatings produced in the U.S. The paint and coatings industry consumes over 2.30 billion pounds of material and synthetic resins in the production of over 1 billion gallons of paint and coating products per year. Overview In light of the numerous complex matters contained in the committee working paper dated July 10, 1987 and the adoption by the Subcommittee on July 29, on the occasion of reporting the working paper to the full Committee, of a complete substitute for Title V (relating to hazardous air pollutants), we will focus our comments on a few provisions of particular concern to us. However, we wish to strongly emphasize that our concentration on some issues does not reflect approbation for the rest of the working paper, which we believe to be seriously flawed. The Committee working paper, if enacted, would fundamentally alter the structure of the Clean Air Act and dramatically increase regulation of solvent based coatings. The portions of the paper that would have a particularly dramatic impact on the paint and coatings industry are SS 102(b), 304 and 402. Section 304 of the paper would add a proposed section 130 (relating to hydrocarbon emission controls) to Part A of Title I of the Clear Air Act. In essence, this section inappropriately would require EPA to promulgate regulations establishing emission limitations, standards of performance, or standards for product composition or application for hydrocarbon emissions associated with commercial solvents, consumer solvents, architectural coatings, pesticide application, traffic marking coatings, and metal parts coatings in military specification applications and aerospace industry applications. With respect to existing sources or activities not subject to section 111 (standards of performance for new stationary sources) or section 173 (permit requirements for nonattainment areas), the regulations under proposal section 130 would require the degree of emission reduction or control, at a minimum, of reasonably available control technology as newly defined. A discussion of S$ 102(b) and 402 is necessary because they impact directly on S 304. Comments 1. S 102 (b) New Definition of Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) RACT would continue to be "reasonably definition it would be more accurate to describe it as MACT, or "maximum achievable control technology." In the scheme of the Clean Air Act, RACT is intended to be a means available to the states for achieving compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. The language in the proposed definition requiring EPA to take into account the "potential toxic character" of hydrocarbon emissions is inconsistent with this purpose, and will make RACT determinations infinitely more "potential toxic character" of emissions would entail is unclear, and the weight to be given to this factor is not indicated. Control of air toxics is, and should continue to be, addressed separately in the Clear Air Act; it is irrelevant to the ozone attainment issue and would simply constitute unnecessary baggage for the nonattainment program. Under the current regulatory definition of RACT at 40 CFR § 51.1(o) state agencies are directed to consider social and economic impact, and alternative means of attaining standards. RACT is also tied to the concept of "reasonable further progress". Under the - 3 |