[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 138 (Monday, September 30, 1996)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1830-E1831]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                      COMMENTS ON EPA CLUSTER RULE

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. BOB GOODLATTE

                              of virginia

                    in the house of representatives

                      Saturday, September 28, 1996

  Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to join with a number of my 
fellow colleagues in commenting on the EPA Cluster Rule for the pulp 
and paper industry. Specifically, I wish to comment on EPA's July 15 
Federal Register notice as it relates to the two technology options for 
final guidelines for bleached papergrade kraft and soda mills based on 
best available technology [BAT].
  First, I want to note that this industry is extremely important to 
the economy of my Congressional District and to much of the 
Commonwealth of Virginia. Many of my constituents are employed in a 
paper mill located in the district. This particular facility employs 
approximately 1,900 men and women and contributes nearly $400 million 
annually to the economy of western Virginia in payroll, taxes and 
purchases of raw materials and services. Included in this figure is an 
expenditure of $30 million for the annual operating expense of the 
mill's various environmental systems.
  Since this rule is so important to a major industry in my district, I 
have closely monitored EPA's progress on its development. On several 
occasions, I have urged the Agency to seek creative ways to provide the 
fullest possible protection to the environment while at the same time 
ensuring that the final rule will not place an unreasonable cost burden 
on this industry.
  I am therefore pleased with the direction that EPA has taken and 
commend them for the work that has been accomplished to present a more 
balanced approach to the Cluster Rule.
  In their July 15 notice, EPA notes that their data supports complete 
substitution of chlorine

[[Page E1831]]

dioxide for elemental chlorine used in the pulp bleaching process. They 
identify complete substitution as Option A. The Agency also notes that 
Option A should be given equal weight with the so-called Option B--
process known as oxygen delignification coupled with complete 
substitution--as the possible technology basis. According to EPA, 
Option B could cost this industry $1 billion more than Option A with 
only minuscule additional environmental benefit. Option A makes good 
environmental sense and accomplishes the desired environmental 
objective without imposing more expensive technology.
  In commenting on the Cluster Rule, I want to express my very strong 
support for Option A and to urge the EPA move forward as quickly as 
possible to promulgate the final Cluster Rule.

                          ____________________