TSCA Chemical Inventory Reset Program: Notice of Public Meeting

Dear Document Control Officer: The American Petroleum Institute (API) is pleased to present the attached comments to EPA in response to question number 9 in EPA's November 25, 2008, document Background Discussion Piece: EPA's TSCA Inventory Reset. API is the primary trade association of America's oil and natural gas industry and represents nearly 400 members involved in all aspects of the industry. In summary, API recommends the following basic framework for a TSCA Inventory reset effort, if EPA decides to go ahead with it: •EPA should start with the list of chemical substances on the TSCA Inventory but not reported during the past two IUR periods as those eligible for potential removal. •There should be a simple online process for manufacturers, importers, and processors to report/certify that they have manufactured, imported, or processed a chemical in the past five years, or intend to do so in the coming five years. •After the initial reporting/certification period, EPA should publish the list of chemicals it intends to remove from the TSCA Inventory and allow another chance for reporting/certification for those chemicals. •The list of removed (inactive) chemicals should be publicly accessible online, and a streamlined process should be available for reinstating an inactive chemical. Finally, as stated in our previous comments, the petroleum process streams at 40 CFR 710.46(a)(4) should be automatically included on the reset Inventory, i.e., not eligible for removal. There has been significant continuity in petroleum refining operations in the years since the TSCA Inventory was assembled, and this list is an accurate and useful inventory of petroleum process streams in commerce today. Sincerely, Derek Swick

The American Petroleum Institute (API) is pleased to present comments to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or the Agency) on its implementation of the Chemical Assessment and Management Program (ChAMP). API is the primary trade association of America's oil and natural gas industry and represents nearly 400 members involved in all aspects of the industry. API and its member companies have been stakeholders in numerous chemical management initiatives, including the High Production Volume (HPV) Challenge Program and all of the major rulemakings under the U.S. Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). API supports the evolution of EPA's longstanding program to evaluate chemical substances and the Agency's use of available statutory authority to address potential risks to human health and the environment. We appreciate that EPA is approaching ChAMP through a stakeholder process and encourage the Agency to continue its efforts in a transparent and collaborative manner. In the attached letter, API offers general comments on the implementation of ChAMP and specific comments on the 3 elements of ChAMP – SPP chemical assessment commitments; TSCA Inventory Reset effort; and Inorganic High Production Volume (IHPV) Challenge Program. Our main comments can be summarized as follows. •API encourages EPA to include more transparency, clarity and notice in its program to assess chemicals under the U.S Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) chemical commitments. EPA needs to publish the underlying methodology the Agency is using to assess chemicals. EPA should publish and give notice of the groups of chemicals it will assess, similar to the "Batch" notices provided under Canada's Chemical Management Program. EPA needs to develop a user-friendly online repository – docket – for each chemical (or category of chemicals) so stakeholders can review and comment on the various SPP documents; this process needs to be transparent. •API encourages EPA to design a TSCA Inventory reset program that minimizes disruptions in the marketplace and burden for both industry and EPA. EPA's plans for how it might operate a reset process are problematic and would likely result in "delisting" chemical substances that are actually in commerce in the U.S., significantly disrupting the market for chemicals. Moreover, the benefits of an Inventory reset would be small, because EPA is already prioritizing HPV and MPV chemicals, which would not be affected by the reset (because they were by definition manufactured recently). However, the burden and confusion that would result from such an effort would be very high. Finally, any reset effort should include an exemption of the petroleum process streams listed at 40 CFR 710.46(a) (4) because they are known to be in commerce and we do not consider any of them to be obsolete. •Inorganics are relatively well-characterized by the OECD HPV Challenge Program , and any Inorganic High Production Volume (IHPV) Chemical Challenge Program should make full use of existing data before moving on to any other phase of data-gathering and testing. Given that much data is already publicly available on inorganics, it is appropriate for EPA to do the initial screening of inorganics and to develop a short list of inorganics that may need to be addressed through an IHPV program.