P. 1


# OAR Box 1338 Prepped by Ollie Stewart



### Document

Number: 

# 4 ) ll-E-1 5 Docket Number: 

# A-89-1 0

Printed 6/17/2008 1:48:05PM

Sheet 4 of 105P. 2

LA W OFFICE S PHILI PJ . HARTE R

SUIT E 40 4 230 1 M STREET . N.W . WASHINGTON , D.C . 2003 7 

# A-89-1 0

(202 ) 887-103 3 FAX : (202 ) 887.103 6

Februar y 27
. 199 0 II-E-1 5

" 6 F

. J >.. 

# li p
: 

## » F B IJH9 9 |j^ : '.' \ A ; ;' t l^r' 

### MEMORANDU M
To : EP A Negotiate dRulemaking Committe e o n Fugitive Emission s fro

mEquipmen

t Leaks andIntereste d Partie s Fr : Phili

p J
. Harter Facilitator 

# (S

Re : Minute s o

f Februar y 22-2 3 Meeting ; Future Meetings ; Workgrou p Meeting I enclos e the minute s o

f the Februar

y 22-2 3 meeting tha

t were prepare db

y Radia n Corporation
. A s before , th e material s tha

t wer e distribute dat

the meetin g ar e attached
. I hav e als o enclosedatentativ e agendafo r th e meeting
. The Batc hProcessing workgroup wil l mee t a t 11:0 0 on Monday , March26 a

t the Gues t Quarter s Hotel (formerly th e Picket

t Suit e Hotel) , 251 5 Meridia

n Parkway , Researc hTriangl e Park , NC ; 919-361-4660 , i n th e sam e roomwhere th e ful

l committe e wil

l mee t the followin

g day
. Fo

r additiona l information , contac t

Cheryl Sutterfiel do

f PM A at 202-835-3548
. A s always , all Committe e member s andtheir designee s ar e welcome
. Th e next meetin g o

f th e Committe e wil

l b e on Marc

h 27-2 8 at

th e Gues t

Quarter s Hotel , 251 5 Meridia n Parkway , Researc hTriangl e Park , NC ; 919-361-4660
. Thi s i s the sam e hotel wher

e w e hav e been meeting ; i t change dit s name fro

mPicket t Suite s on Februar

y 1
. Since it

reduce s th e pric e o

f the meeting rooms , pleas e identif

y yourself a s a n EPA Fugitive whe

n making reservations
. Th e followin

g meetin g wil

l b e on Apri l 25-2 6 at

Th e Conservatio n Foundation , Suit e 500 , 1250 24t

h Stree t NW , Washington , DC
. Sinc e w e wil l no t b e meetin g at

ahotel , w e hav e no t

booke dany room s fo

r thi s meeting
. T o facilitat

e you r findin g C Fan da

n appropriate hotel , I enclos e ama p indicating CP s location (i t i s tw o block s du e nort

ho f th e Bristo l Hote l where w e me t las t time ) an dalis t

o f hotel s i n th e area . Sinc e tha

t i s "Eart hWeek" , you ma

y b e wel l advise dt o mak

e you r reservatio n early
. Al l th e meeting s wil

l begin at 10:0 0 o n th e first da y and9:0 0 on th e second
. They wil l run until about 5:0 0 o n the first da y andabou t

4:00 on th e second
. A s th e experienc e thi s tim e indicated , w e ma

y wel l need all th e tim e scheduled , s o pleas e com e prepare dt o sta

y fo r th e duration : thing s ofte

n ge t interestin g andtim

e consuming a

t thi s stage .P. 3

ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTIO N AGENC Y NEGOTIATIN G COMMITTE E FO R CONTRO L O F FUGITIV E EMISSION S FRO M EQUIPMEN T LEAK S 

### AGEND A FO RMEETIN GO FMARC H 27-2 8
Administrativ e

• Introduction s

• Revie w o

f th e Agenda : additions , subtractions , orde r

• Minute s o

f Februar y meeting : An y major heartburn s Scop e o f th e Standar d

• Source s include din th e negotiation s

• Source s exclude dfro mthi s standar d Dat a

• An y ne w dat afo r

th e Committee' s consideratio n

• Discussio n of

dat a

• An y additiona l dat abein g develope do r tha t i s essentia l fo r

th e Committee' s deliberation s Th e Standar d

• MAC T

• Respons e factor s

• Phasin g

• Incentive s

• D e minimi s cutof

f

• Miscellaneou s point s raise da t prio r meeting s

• Equivalen t

approache s Repor to f

th e Batc h Processin g Workgrou p Emissio n Factor s

• Statu s of

modellin g approac h

• Matri x approac h

• Correlatio n curve s Approache s t o assessin g th e cos to f th e standar d Discussio n o f

th e Strawma n Rul e Schedule : Futur e Meetings , Workgroup s

## r\r\ +Jf-r> 

### UO * 

## Th e Conservation Foundation P. 4

Th e Conservatio n Foundatio n

1250 Twenty-fourt hStreet
. N

WWashington
. D C 2003 7 US A 202/293-480 0 Telex : 64505 PAND A Affiliated with World

Wildlife FundP. 5



## Th e Conservation Foundation

: Septembe r 198 9 Hotel s nea r Th e Conservatio n Foundation' s Office s Carlyl e Suite s Hote l 173 1 Ne wHampshir e Avenue , N W 202/234-320 0 (10-bloc k wal k t o th e office ) Rate : $6 9 (mentio n C F o r WW F whe n calling ) Dupon t Plaz a Hote l 150 0 Ne wHampshir e Avenue , N W 202/483-600 0 (7-bloc k wal k t o th e office ) Rate : $125-$14 5 Governmen t Rate : $78-$9 8 Embass ySquar e Suite s (Qualit yInn ) 200 0 NStreet , N W 202/659-900 0 (4-bloc k wal k t o th e office ) Rate : $110-12 5 - includin g continenta l breakfas t Governmen t Rate : $7 8 (mentio n C F o r WW F whe n calling ) Embass ySuite s 125 0 22n d Street , N W 202/857-338 8 (1-bloc k wal k t o th e office ) Rate : $16 4 includin g full-breakfas t an d "happy-hour " Governmen t Rate : $8 7 - $13 9 Hampshir e Hote l 131 0 Ne wHampshir e Avenue , N W 202/296-760 0 (4-bloc k wal k t o th e office ) Rate : $9 0 (mentio n CF' s nam e whe n calling ) Governmen t Rate : $7 5 On e Washingto n Circl e 1 Washingto n Circle , N W 202/872-168 0 (4-bloc k wal k t o th e office ) Rate : $99-$15 0 Governmen t Rate : $7 8

1250 Twenty-fourt

hStreet , N WWashington , D C 2003 7 US A 202/293-4800 Telex : 6450 5 PAND A Affiliated with World

Wildlife FundP. 6



### Ramad a Renaissanc e 114 3 Ne wHampshir e Avenue , NW 202/775-080 0 (4-bloc k wal k t o th e office ) Rate : $150-$15 5 Governmen t Rate : St . Jame s Hote l 95 0 24t h Street , N

W 202/457-050 0 (3-bloc k wal k t o th e office ) Rate : $11 5 includin g continenta l breakfas t (two-nigh t minimu m stay ) Governmen t Rate : $77.2 5 Tabar d Inn 173 9 NStreet , N

W 202/785-127 7 (7-bloc k wal k t o th e office ) Rates : $79-9 9 includin g breakfas t Washingto n Marriot t 122 1 Twenty-Second Street , N W 202/872-150 0 (2-bloc k wal k t o th e office ) Rate : $16 5 Governmen t Rate : $8 5 Westi n Hote l M an d 24t h Streets , N

W 202/429-240 0 (Next-doo r t o th e office ) Rates : $165-19 5 Governmen t Rate : $11 0P. 7

REGULATOR YNEGOTIATIO N MEETINGO

N FUGITIV E EQUIPMEN T LEAK S FEBRUAR Y22-23 , 199 0 WYNDHA M BRISTO L HOTE L WASHINGTON , D.C . DRAF T MEETINGMINUTE S

Thes e meetin g note s summariz e issue s discusse dan dprovid e a

ninforma l recor do f administrativ e an dlogistica l decision s mad e onschedule s an dactio n items . Al l presentatio nmaterial s distribute ddurin g th e two-da y meetin g ar e attached : Attachmen t Attachmen t Attachmen t Attachmen t Attachmen t Attachmen t Attachmen t Attachmen t Attachmen t Attachmen t Attachmen t 1

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 Meetin g Agend a Attendee s Februar y

23 , 199 0 Revision s t o Januar y

17-1 8 meetin g note s Compariso no f Emission s an dEmissio nFactor s Summar y o f Dat a Qualit y

Workgrou p Percen t Leaker s a t Variou s Lea k Definition s Summar y o f TAC B Equipmen t Survey s Pum pSeal s Informatio n

Approac ht o Approac ht o Approac ht o th e

th e th e Standar d Standar d Standar d Attachmen t 1 2 Attachmen t 1 3 Attachmen t 1 4 Conceptua l

Conceptua l Conceptua l Agencie s Emissio nFactor s Versu s Lea k Frequenc y Summar y o f Batc hProcesse s Workgrou p EPA Strawma nEquipmen t Leak s Regulatio n Harte r AP I NRD C an dStat e

Minute s o f Previou s Meetin g

Ms . Kare nFidle r o f CM A submitte dinwritin g CMA' s suggeste d change s t o th e minute s o f th e previou s ful l committe e meetin g (Januar y .17-18 , 1990) . Change s i nth e minute s ar e containe di n Attachmen t 3 . Scop e o f th e Standar d

Mr . Bo bAja xo f EPA

describe dth e rol e tha t thi s regulator y negotiatio nwil l play i nth e Agency' s promulgatio no f a Hazardou s Organi c NESHA P (HON) . Unde r th e HON , th e Agenc y intend s t o promulgat e standard s fo r controllin g toxi c emission s fro m equipmen t leaks , wastewater , proces s vent , storage , an dtransfe r operation s fo r a s many a s 15 0 sourc e categories . Th e negotiatin g committe e wil l develo pth e generi c equipmen t leak s standard . Th e Agenc y wil l estimat e environmental , cost , an deconomi c impact s o f th e resultin g combine dgeneri c standard s an dpromulgat e th e standard s unde r Titl e II I o f th e expecte dClea nAi r Ac t revisions .

cao.027 aP. 8

Dat a Th e Agenc y wil l distinguis horgani c chemica l processe s locate di n refinerie s o r o

nrefiner y

property , whic hwoul db e regulate dunde r th e HON , from

petroleum

refiner y

processe s tha t woul db e exclude d fro m th e HON . Mr . Larr y Goodhear t o f AP I offere dt o assis t EP A i n definin g petroleum

refiner y

processes . Mr . Aja xinitiate da discussio no f a d e minimi s stream concentratio ncutof f belo w whic hequipmen t woul db e exemp t fro m th e negotiate dstandard . Mr . Aja xstate dtha t th e concentratio n cutof f o f 1 0 percen t (b y weight ) specifie di nexistin g equipmen t leak s regulation s shoul db e lowered , sinc e lowe r concentratio n stream s dominat e th e equipmen t lea k emission s inventor y a s tighte r control s hav e bee nplace donhighe r concentratio nstreams . Usin g some o f th e emissio nfactor s liste dinAttachmen t 4 , Mr . Aja x presente da

ninforma l analysi s indicatin g tha t th e bul k o f equipmen t lea k toxi c emission s inSOCM I processe s ar e attributabl e t o thos e stream s containin g greate r tha non e t o fiv e percen t toxi c organies ; however , th e same conclusio nma y no t b e applicabl e fo r organi c chemica l processe s inrefineries , wher e man y stream s contai nles s tha n1 0 percen t toxi c organies . Severa l committe e member s expresse dconcer ntha t th e emissio nreductio nachievabl e b y controllin g ver y

lo w concentratio nstream s ma y no t justif y

th e cost s o f control .

Mr . Ric k Colye r o f EPA summarize dth e conclusion s o f th e workgrou p meetin g tha t wa s hel dinJanuar y t o identif y

usabl e butadien e (BD ) an dethylen e oxid e (EO ) screenin g dat a (Se e Attachmen t 5) . Th e committe e agree dt o us e dat a inwhol e o r inpar t from te nB D an

d nin e EO plants . Th e EP A correcte dth e usabl e dat a t o adjus t fo r th e respons e facto r o f eac hmonitorin g instrument , an dpresente da revise d analysi s showin g th e percen t leaker s b y componen t typ e fo r variou s lea k definition s (Se e Attachmen t 6) . Some committe e member s expresse dconcer ntha t respons e facto r correctio nma y b e difficul t t o perfor m

simultaneousl y

wit hequipmen t screening , especiall y fo r mixed'HA P streams . Mr . Aja xsuggeste dtha t th e highes t respons e facto r from

al l stream s withi na plan t ma y b e use da s a defaul t respons e factor . Whil e some committe e member s objecte dt o thi s suggestion , consensu s wa s reache dtha t a naccurate , easy-to-us e methodolog y

fo r adjustin g actua l screenin g value s fo r respons e facto r shoul db e develope ddurin g futur e negotiatio nmeetings . Mr . Le s Montgomer y

o f TAC B presente da summar y o f equipmen t screenin g survey s fro m thre e plant s currentl y complyin g wit ha regulatio ninth e stat e o f Texa s tha t require s quarterl y lea k detectio nan

drepair , directe dmaintenance , an da 50 0 ppm

v lea k definitio nan

dtrigge r fo r maintenanc e (Se e Attachmen t 7) . Th e result s indicate dtha t al l thre e plant s wer e abl e t o mee t th e requirement s o f th e regulatio nwhil e simultaneousl y lowerin g th e

cao.027 aP. 9

numbe r o f leakin g gas/vapo r andligh t liquidvalve s andligh t liqui dpum

pseals . Some committe e member s wante dt o examin e th e TAC B dat a i ngreate r detail , includin g whethe r o r no t th e screenin g value s wer e correcte dfo r respons e factors .

. Severa l committe e member s expresse dconcer nabou t th e appropriatenes s o f usin g dat a fro m a limite dnumbe r o f chemica l productio nprocesse s t o se t a standar dreflectin g maximum achievabl e contro l technolog y (MACT ) fo r al l 19 1 chemical s liste d i nth e propose dClea nAi r Ac t (CAA ) amendments . Mr . Aja xidentifie dth e typ e o f pum pseal s use da t eac ho f th e B D andE O plant s tha t th e committe e i s usin g t o se t th e leve l o f th e standar d(Se e Attachmen t 8) . Lea k definitio nan

dallowabl e leakers : MAC T Th e committe e discusse dsevera l combination s o f lea k definitio n andallowabl e lea k frequencie s fo r us e inPhas e II I o f th e standard . Al l committe e member s agree dtha t th e lea k definitio n shoul db e hig henoug ht o minimiz e th e effect s o f operato r and instrumen t variabilit y whil e simultaneousl y providin g a

n environmenta l benefi t a t a reasonabl e cost . Discussio nfocuse do n a lea k definitio nrangin g from 25 0 t o 1,00 0 pp

m andanallowabl e limi t rangin g from

abou t on e t o thre e percent . Severa l committe e member s expresse dconcer ntha t a lea k definitio n belo w 1,00 0 ppm

v wa s no t appropriat e fo r severa l reasons . First , screenin g dat a ma y

b e les s accurat e a t lowe r screenin g value s du e t o increase dinstrumen t variability . Second , repai r o r replacemen t o f equipmen t tha t emit s a t yery low concentration s ma y actuall y increas e emission s mor e tha ni f th e equipmen t had remaine dinservic e wit hcontinua l monitoring .

. Severa l committe e member s expresse dconcer ntha t B D plant s woul d no t b e abl e t o achiev e th e lowes t lea k definition s andallowabl e lea k frequencie s propose db y some committe e members . The y pointe d ou t tha t man y

B D plant s d o no t achiev e thes e levels , andtha t individua l plan t motivatio nma y no t provid e sufficien t impetu s fo r achievin g MACT . The y expresse dconcer ntha t E 0 plant s ma y mee t lowe r allowabl e lea k frequencie s mor e easil y becaus e the y

shu t downmor e frequently . The y asserte dtha t man y

B D facilitie s (an

d possibl e othe r facilitie s producin g som e o f th e 19 1 CA A chemicals ) coul dsuffe r economi c hardshi pb y havin g t o shu t dow

na s frequentl y

a s E O plant s i norde r t o repai r leaks . Mr . Aja xstate d tha t n o informatio ncurrentl y exist s tha t suggest s B D plant s coul d no t mee t an

y o f th e propose dperformanc e level s i f th e plant s institute dimprove dqualit y assuranc e procedures . H e note dtha t low lea k frequencie s hav e bee nachieve dwit ha 50 0 pp m LDA R program , a s show

nb y th e TAC B screenin g survey s tha t Mr . Montgomer y

provided .

cao.027 aP.1 0

A discussio naros e a s t o whic hplant s shoul dconstitut e th e basi s fo r MACT . On e suggestio nwa s tha t al l o f th e E O plant s reflec t MACT , sinc e the y

appea r t o b e wel l controlle drelativ e t o th e 19 1 CA A chemicals . Severa l committe e member s disagreed , sayin g tha t onl y th e best-controlle dplant s shoul dreflec t MACT , an da few o f th e EO plant s coul dno t b e considere dbest-controlled . Conceptua l Approac ht o th e Standar d

Severa l draf t framework s fo r th e equipmen t leak s standar dwer e propose d(Se e Attachment s 9 , 10 , an d11) . I ngeneral , th e basi s i s a quarterl y

LDA Rprogram

fo r valves , wit ha 25 0 t o 1,00 0 ppm v lea k definition . Th e maximum allowabl e lea k frequenc y inth e proposal s range dfrom les s tha non e (fo r annua l sampling ) t o thre e percent . Mor e frequen t monitorin g woul db e require di f a plan t exceed s th e allowabl e lea k frequenc y (o r some multipl e o f th e allowabl e lea k frequency ) an dles s frequen t monitorin g woul db e permitte di f a plan t perform s bette r tha nth e allowabl e lea k frequenc y

(o r some fractio no f th e allowabl e lea k frequency) . 1 Thi s concep t i s based , i npart , onth e statistical , qualit y

assuranc e typ e samplin g pla nsuggeste dpreviousl y b y CMA . EPA

an d some othe r committe e member s fel t that , inorde r t o us e les s frequen t monitoring , plant s shoul ddemonstrat e performanc e belo w th e allowabl e lea k frequency . Othe r committe e member s fel t tha t th e cos t benefit s associate dwit hles s frequen t monitorin g provid e sufficien t incentiv e fo r plant s t o perfor m belo w th e allowabl e lea k frequency , s o a performanc e leve l belo w th e allowabl e lea k frequenc y

shoul dno t b e specified . Committe e member s discusse dth e issu e o f a "deat hpenalty " fo r plant s tha t continuall y demonstrat e noncomplianc e wit hth e standard . Severa l committe e member s suggeste da "clos e an d repair " penalt y

rathe r tha ncreatin g a "non-compliance " approach . Severa l committe e member s expresse dconcer ntha t n o on e onth e negotiatin g committe e ca npredic t whethe r al l o f th e plant s producin g th e 19 1 CA

A chemical s wil l b e abl e t o compl y wit hth e propose dstandard , an dtha t ther e shoul db e a "safet y valve " allowin g non-complyin g plant s t o remai ninoperatio ni f the y ar e demonstratin g ^improvement . Mr . Aja xindicate dtha t EPA' s interes t wa s i nachievin g low emission s - no t penaltie s o r closures . Consisten t wit hthat , h e suggeste dtha t th e committe e migh t buil d ina requiremen t fo r continua l progres s a t plant s tha t di dno t initiall y

mee t th e limi t wit hmonthl y LDAR . Industr y member s discusse daward s fo r plant s demonstratin g exemplar y

performance , includin g ta xcredits , emissio ncredits , i n tot o emissio nreduction , an dles s frequen t inspectio naudits . Mr . Aja xagree dt o loo k int o th e possibilit y o f "awards " bu t though t tha t th e othe r suggestion s wer e probabl y beyon dth e negotiatio n scope .

cao.027 aP.1 1

Committe e member s agree dtha t th e issu e o f random samplin g shoul d b e abandone dfo r th e purpose s o f thi s negotiate dregulation . Mr . Phi l Harte r reminde dth e committe e member s tha t severa l miscellaneou s issue s raise db y CM A a t previou s meeting s wil l nee d resolutio na t futur e negotiatio nmeetings . Committe e member s discusse dprocedure s fo r determinin g equivalen t approache s t o th e propose dstandard . Whil e specifi c procedure s wer e no t agree dupon , th e committe e member s committe dt o definin g equivalenc e clearly . Emissio nFactor s

Mr . Rober t Pahel-Shor t o f EPA presente da serie s o f figure s illustratin g th e relationshi pbetwee nemissio nfactor s an dlea k frequenc y

fo r variou s equipmen t type s an dlea k definition s (Se e Attachmen t 12) . Th e committe e member s agree dtha t thes e type s o f figure s wil l b e usefu l fo r estimatin g emissio nfactors . Mr . Kittlema nreporte dtha t no furthe r wor k ha s bee nperforme do n th e conceptua l emissio nfactor s model . Batc hProcessin g

Mr . Bo bRowland , representin g PMA , reporte donth e Februar y 21 , 199 0 wor k grou pmeetin g o nbatc hprocesse s (Se e Attachmen t 13) . Th e wor k grou pmember s ar e workin g o na nalternat e standar dfo r batc hprocesse s tha t the y fee l wil l be base dupo nth e standar d bein g develope dfo r continuou s processes . The y drafte da definitio no f batc hprocesse s t o identif y th e processe s tha t woul d b e subjec t t o th e alternat e standard . Th e fiv e tes t procedure s presente dinth e Januar y meetin g b

y PM A ar e neede dt o provid e industr y flexibility , s o th e standar dshoul dpermi t thei r use . A n alternat e standar dshoul dno t requir e dua l mechanica l seal s fo r pumps , sinc e thei r us e i s limite di npharmaceutica l an dothe r batc hprocesses . Th e followin g issue s stil l nee dt o b e resolve db y th e batc hwor k group : 1 ) determinin g how time i nus e fo r batc hcomponent s wil l influenc e th e alternat e standard ; 2 ) determinin g how respons e factor s wil l be use dfo r batc hequipment , whic hma y be i nmany differen t chemica l service s an di s ofte nmove dthroughou t th e plant ; 3 ) determinin g a definitio nfo r pilo t plant s an ddecidin g whethe r the y

shoul db e include dinth e standard ; an d4 ) determinin g ho w

batc hplant s wil l b e require dt o maintai nrecord s o f compliance .

cao.027 aP.1 2

Actio nItem s

A t th e nex t meetin g o f th e ful l committee , standard s fo r pump s an d flange s wil l be examine dingreate r detail . Mr . Goodhear t expresse dconcer nwit hth e possibilit y o f awardin g credi t fo r takin g equipmen t ou t o f service . The y wil l addres s thi s issu e a t th e nex t committe e meeting . CM A indicate dthe y

wer e preparin g materia l onth e cos t impact s o f a standar dan

dwil l distribut e thi s soon . Committe e member s wil l continu e t o refin e th e conceptua l approac h an dth e scop e o f th e standard , includin g lea k definition , allowabl e lea k frequency , d e minimi s concentratio ncutoff , us e o f respons e factors , a "deat hpenalty " fo r non-complyin g plants , an d procedure s fo r determinin g equivalency . Futur e Meeting s

Batc hProcesse s Workgroup : Marc h26 , 199 0 a t 11:0 0 a.m. , Gues t Quarter s Hotel , Researc hTriangl e Park , NC Th e nex t meetin g o f th e ful l Negotiatio nCommitte e i s schedule dt o b e hel di nResearc hTriangl e Park , NC o nMarc h27-28 , 199 0 a t th e Gues t Quarter s Hotel , 251 5 Meridia nParkway . Apri l 2 5 an

d26 : Washington , D.C . a t th e Conservatio nFoundation , Suit e 500 , 125 0 24t hStree t NW .

cao.027 aP.1 3



# ATTACHMEN T1 ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTIO N AGENC Y NEGOTIATIN G COMMITTE E FO R CONTRO L O F FUGITIV E EMISSION S O F VOC s FRO M EQUIPMEN T LEAK S

AGEND A FO RMEETIN G O F FEBRUAR Y 23-2 3 Administrativ e

• Introduction s
• Revie w o

f th e Agenda : additions , subtractions , orde r
• Minute s o

f January meeting : Any major heartburn s Scop e of th e Standar d

• Source s include din th e negotiation s
• Source s exclude dfromthi s standar d

• O e minimi s cutof

f Dat a

• Report o f th e Dat aWorkgroup
• Discussio n o

f dat a
• Additional data : availabilit y an drequirement s Leakdefinitio n an d allowabl e leakers : MAC T i- Conceptua l Approac h t o th e Standar d

• Phasin g
• Incentive s (botto mlin e o f boxes )

• Exi t criteri a(right

colum n o f boxes )

• Miscellaneou s point s raise da t prio r meeting s
• Samplin g strategie s
• Procedure s for

determinin g equivalen t

approache s Repor tof

th e Batc h Processin g Workgrou p Emissio n Factor s

• Statu s o

f modellin g approac h

• Matri x approac h Approache s t o assessin g th e cos tof th e standar dP. M



# ATTACHMEN T2

ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTIO N AGENC Y NEGOTIATIN GCOMMITTE E FOR CONTRO L O F FUGITIV E EMISSION S O F VOC s FROM EQUIPMEN T LEAK S ATTENDEE S LIS T FORMEETIN GO F FEBRUAR Y2 2 - 23 , 199 0
NAM E Rober t Majewsk i A l Bicku m Gu s VonBodunge n Harve l Roger s Debora hDa l to n Phili pHarte r Bo bAja x Davi dDun n To m Kittlema n Alle nHershkowit z Larr y Goodhear t Meredit hMille r Bruc e Grumstru p Ric k Colye r Wal t Brenne r Kare nFidle r E dMorett i Mar y An nGork o Davi dMarkword t Ro nBerglun d Bo bHinkso n Bo bRowlan d Elle nSiegle r Scot t Throw e Kathy Kaufma n Rober t Pahel-Shor t Le s Montgomer y Bruc e Bower s Bo bFegle y Kari nRitte r Doroth y Bower s Chery l Sutterfiel d Leig hMark s Richar dMoenc h Davi dGustafso n Nanc y Cookso n Kennet hMulho i land Geral dR . Hil l Bets y Lyon s Bruc e C . Davi s Davi dBerengu t Stev e Smit h AFFILIATIO N NESCAUM IISR P Louisian a DEQ-Ai r Qualit y JCAPC D EP A - Re g Ne g Projec t Facilitatio n U . S . EP A Sterlin g Chemicals , Inc . CM A (DuPont ) NRD C AP I (Chevron ) Fishe r Control s Fishe r Control s EPA/OAQP S Su nCo . CM A Radia nCorp . - RT P DuPon t EPA/OAQP S Unio nCarbid e Moba y Synthetic s Pfize r Inc . AP I EPA/OAQPS/SSC D EPA/OAR/OPAR EPA/OAQP S TAC B Standar dChlorin e EPA/OPP E AP I Merc k Compan y PM A El i Lill y El i Lill y Do w CM A DuPon t Phillip s Petroleum GAO Exxo nChemica l DuPon t Amoc oP.1 5



# ATTACHMEN T3

REVISION S T O JANUAR YMINUTE S
Secon dbulle t unde r Dat a (Pag e 3 )

Som e committe e member s expresse dconcer nove r th e appropriatenes s o f th e dat a fo r selectin g a lea k definitio nan dpercen t allowabl e leaker s notin g evidenc e tha t some dat a appea r t o hav e bee nrounde d or truncated . Committe e member s wer e requeste dt o revie w th e dat a indetai l prio r t o decidin g onth e dat a subse t t o us e in establishin g th e leve l o f th e standard . Frequenc y plot s of th e dat a wil l b e distribute ddurin g th e wee k of Januar y 2 2 wit hth e inten t o f discussin g th e dat a i ndetai l ina

ninteri m

workgrou p meeting . Furthe r discussion s of th e dat a b y th e ful l committe e wa s postpone dunti l th e Februar y meeting . Th e workgrou pmeetin g onth e dat a bas e i s schedule dfo r Wednesday , Januar y 3 1 a t 10:0 0 a t th e EPA' s Durham , Nort hCarolin a offic e (Mutua l Building) , i n th e 9t hfloo r conferenc e room . Thir dbulle t unde r Dat a (Pag e 3 )

. Severa l committe e member s sai dther e wa s a sufficien t quantit y o f dat a tha t wer e no t questionabl e t o allo w position s onth e leve l of th e standar dt o b e formulated . A suggestio nwa s mad e tha t a lea k definitio nof 5 0 pp

m an d4 t o 5 percen t lea k frequenc y wa s supporte dfo r valve s an dflange s takin g int o accoun t tha t some of th e dat a i s suspect . On e proposa l wa s tha t th e committe e begi nb y considerin g a lea k definitio na t th e lowest practica l concentration , whic hshoul dlogicall y begi na t instrumen t detectio nlevels . Firs t bulle t unde r Conceptua l Approac h(Pag e 4 )

A nanalysi s of th e conceptua l LDA Rapproac hdiscusse di nth e Decembe r meetin g wa s presente dtha t compare da monthl y bas e t o a quarterl y

bas e program

(Attachmen t 9) . Specifically , th e analysi s evaluate dtw

o element s fo r monthl y an dquarterl y

bas e programs :P.1 6

1 ) th e probabilit y

o f failin g a

ninspection , an

d2 ) th e numbe r o f inspection s require dpe r year . Durin g th e presentatio nther e wa s discussio nabou t th e numbe r o f program level s a plan t woul dhav e t o fal l bac k i f the y

sample dannuall y

an dfounda

nunacceptabl e lea k level . Ther e wa s a consensu s tha t a plan t shoul dno t b e require dt o g o al l th e wa y bac k t o th e bas e monitorin g frequenc y i nthos e circumstances .P.1 7



# ATTACHMEN T4

COMPARISO N O F EMISSION S asasaaiaaeaaasasssassBasasaasEssssssssaaasasassssssssssBasaaasasBsasssassBsssaeasasaaaflaaaBBeaaaaaDaBaas a Equipmen t Componen t Numbe r o f

Component s (SOCM I Av

g Mode l Uncon t Plan t B ) Re f Emission s (kg/hr )
Av g Avg Re f Av

g SOCM I Sterling 50 0 pp m 5 0 pp m Uncon t (Monthl y

(Monthl y

Benzen e an

d and SOCM I LDAR ) LDAR ) . Oat a 5 % SX

Ga s Valve s Ligh t Liqui d Valve s Pump s Flange s Compressor s Open-ende d1ine s Pressure-relie f device s Samplin g connectio nsys . Tota l o,i37 402 10.773 6 2.251 2 2.9088 7 0.6078 2 0.1230 1 1.3708 2 0.11135 4 52 4 5.711 6 3.720 4 2.3417 6 1.5253 6 0.1603 4 0.44697 2 0.38566 4
29 3.30 6 1.432 6 1.2959 5 0.5615 8 0.0249 4 0.00301 6 0.00113 1 240 0 0. 6 1.99 2 0. 6 1.99 2 0.04 8 0.907 2 0.799 2 2 1.27 2 0.45 6 0 0 0 0 0 22 6 0.519 8 0.384 2 0 0 0 0 0 4 2 6.7 2 4.36 8 0 0 0 0 0

10 4 0 1.5 6 0 0 0 0 0

28.90 3 16.164 4 7.1465 8 4.6867 7 0.356 3 2-r72S00 8 1.29734 9

COMPARISON

O F EMISSION

FACTOR S :s333sa=33sss==sssssssasa3Bssascncasa=33DOS3 3 Emissio nFacto r (kg/hr/source ) Equipmen t Componen t

Ga s Valve s Ligh t Liqui d Valve s Pump s Flanges ' Compressor s Open-ende d1 Pressure-re l ine s

ie f device s (gas ) Av

g Uncon t Re f

0.026 8 0.010 9

0.11 4 0.0002 5 0.63 6 0.002 3 0.1 6 Av

g Avg Re f Avg SOCM I Sterlin g 50 0 pp m 5 0 pp m Uncon t (Monthl y

(Monthl y

Benzen e an

d an

d SOCM I LDAR ) LDAR ) Dat a 5 % 5 X o.oooill 0.005 6 0.0072 4 0.0015 1 0.0003 1 4*4034 1 0.00027 7 0.007 1 0.0044 7 0.0029 1 0.0003 1 0.0008 5 0.00073 6
0.049 4 0.0446 9 0.0193 6 0.0008 6 0.000 1 3.9E-0 5 0.0008 3 0.00025 0.0008 3 2E-0 5 0.0003 8 0.00033 3 0.22 8 0 0 0 0 0.001 7 0 0 0 0 0.10 4 0 0 0 0
0.01 5 0 0 0 0 Samplin g N/

A connectio n sys .P.1 8



# ATTACHMEN T5

RECOMMENDATION S O F TH E "DATA " SUBCOMMITTE E Th e followin g recommendation s wer e reache d b yth e subcommitte e examinin g th e ethylen e oxid e (EO ) and butadien e (BD ) dat a fo r acceptability . Th e basi s fo r rejectio n o f anydat a i s tha t th e dat a (o r lac k of ) differe d markedl yfro m th e dat a pattern s o f th e othe r plants . W e canno t conclud e th e dat a ar e "wrong" , base d o n wha t wa s reported , bu t hav e identifie d thos e w e believ e t o b e highl ysuspect , and ar e recommendin g tha t th e Re g Ne g Committe e giv e thes e dat a lo wweighting , i f any , i n selectin g th e basi s fo r th e standards . Th e number s discusse d belo war e i n term s o f th e value s no t adjuste d fo r respons e factor , excep t fo r E07 . 1 . Drop : BD 2 Examinatio n o f th e ra wdat a sheet s fo r thi s plan t

reveale d sever e calibratio n problem s tha t canno t b e correcte d o r adjusted . BD 9 N o dat a point s recorde d belo w100 0 ppm . Dat a belo w100 0

appea r t o hav e bee n treate d a s "0" . E01 0 N o dat a point s recorde d belo w800 0 ppm . 2 . Th e subcommitte e coul d fin d n o problem s wit h dat a i n severa l othe r plants , bu t note s tha t ther e ar e gap s betwee n certai n ranges . Severa l subcommitte e representative s wer e concerne d tha t thes e gap s indicate d roundin g problems , and coul d affec t th e leve l o f th e standards , shoul d th e basi s fo r thes e level s li e withi n th e range s o f concern . Th e subcommitte e recommend s tha t thes e plant s b e give n onl yver yligh t consideratio n i n thes e ranges . Thes e were :

BD 3 betwee n 50 0 and 100 0 ppm , BD 7 betwee n 10 0 an d 100 0 ppm , and E0 7 betwee n 25 0 and 250 0 ppm . 3 . Th e subcommitte e agree s tha t th e dat a fro mth e res t o f th e plant s ar e acceptable .CONTRO L O F EMISSION S FRO M EQUIPMEN T LEAK S DAT A QUALIT Y WORKGROU P MEETINGATTENDEE S LIS T FO RMEETINGO F JANUARY31 , 199 0 P.1 9

NAME Ric k Colye r Ja nMeyer Ji m Sampl e Kari nRitte r Kare nFidle r Davi dGustafso n Harve l Roger s Davi dMarkword t Davi dBerengu t Mar y An nGork o Rober t Pahel-Shor t A l Weh e E dMorett i ORGANIZATIO N EPA/OAQP S EPA/SDB/OAQP S AP I (consultant) AP I CM A DOW/CM A Jefferso nCo./APC D EPA/OAQPS/CP B DuPon t DuPon t . EPA/OAQP S EPA/OAQP S Radia nCorporatio n TELEPHON E (919)541-526 2 (919)541-525 4 (703)255-215 9 (202)682-847 2 (202)887-117 6 (517)636-295 3 (502)625-600 0 (919)541-083 7 (302)366-394 3 (302)366-301 1 (919)541-531 0 (919)541-562 3 (919)541-910 0P.2 0

© oovf^eooeoinmwr*p*oiino^orMoa . «- t • | 0©rt©©©rt©rtr->m©*00»<9'©fn© 0 <NOfMr>ir**oo M O © © © ©

O O i • H o m *• i i ©

I N ©

© < H ©

©oo>r , rt©m<N(N^'r*rsiTr^-i(N©r > '©i o ©©r , r*©or»tnmrtrtr*rtrt^ , ©inoo . 'tforMr^iNoor-ootnatfloroovocTt m f>i©rMrNir»o©vor->ocOrt©ieoo*«v«* , fM* 0 ©Ort©rtoiN©rtr»in©r*rtin©r*© o OOOOOOOCIHOVirtVNtOOHN H

©©mnr*-fN\o»nM(Nfvinfn©eo(y.min i fM« i *0s6maor , «oinrMr h fMaoN0rteortr' , > ' O O ONNW O NNVhHO9>C0O«N V ooooHoomNOhh««voiN<i , i o
0 tn c o a m * o ooir.«iNinv«in9ifnir.«into(ntocoe n

© © C M n wo i irM^r-woo,o.©o\(Nir t *efnvovo©rt*0irtrt«o©r*^ , « , fn©©v o rNv««nTPhoh<Ninwvr«HHNo o ooooHHomNo«or«r'Mf,HN« h 

## C D oor-oaNtfuohNnotn^oomopif M o o

. * rt H N H t N io««vo»»inr»voino«NhfMOOir " Nr»voio(tnois\ooifBiin«<o(oriH«i n OHOOrtrtOinNOWeOr^Ol^HM^ O
< 

## L U ©©omtooin<Nirt0.t£<-<fNcoor < *«'co< N OOM(DOOl/>HrOM(OrvnOima)N(<1 « ©©romfMrt^^ i vonMiaOnHMN W

_ 4 r ^ rt f M <- t f M (NV00>«)O«iinNH*0r*O«0rth»ON H inrtcotfpo<No.^o^'« , rtm©»n^ , o»rt© m ONOrtHNOVCTOHOfflTTrtHINH V rt rt f M f M rt rt 

# X 

# o
< IS 0 ©r-cr.infMvin©«o<ftvowmr , *iftr v n(^<5 ' owNeooifviniTir*NrhNinr»vohMc n
rtrt rt f M rt r M rt rt

or'«innvin(*i^o\vofNmmr , , r , -o.r t owv«mMnffiHiN(nrtinfnr*vwN( n

iniNN^ininviAifiift i rt «- t . rt I m * H rt (M«m(Ninr*cft«y3v-(inoo(NinooMi n mrtinr'«poo(N(Nmp*rto>«ovinmrtVr t ONrtrtlNNNMnOnrtOWl/. ! rt rt rt f M f N

inHh»VC9Nl*IM(OOO0hOlVHinr 1 ONHHN(NNr*fiOU1MH*OhTfNtrir> , rt rt rt f N f M rt f O

OMvrviovmffO'OiMwo'niflHirir r OVOV*ONNVHhNO«N(n«)^OIO N mrtr*eocortcoc»Of»0"w^ , r-'rtr*rtoor M

ivmninvinwvornNttWic o rtrt fNfnrs i <*> . r^ w~i O«NrtHMmiNhr«H»fl*J , VV0rt(NrMHi n rt rt rt f M f > rt N 9

9 or*«rM«3^'oo©eoo,r*^r^Mrto.©vot n

ovoeoyj^rMrtr-r-fMOffaVommwooor t HHrtNmrriHVVI N fM©rt(y»«ir , , *«'fftf^»/>»'>r-voooo\f v io)«>i n tfHCNrnv«NrtNOONin»oo«7iM< , e o ONNNnrtrthoommwocowifinooi n rtrtCMfMm^rtfM^ <* > o or-tnfMino.ooeo«j)c.wo>r>)nfMrnfOM © rt ovD(?noHOirtfNffNmhioroffiff>trn o I .*c oon^>m»nooo^rt^'r , *©infneoMfMM © ( 0 HHHfNINrtMVI/ICO O 0> rt rt
0 HHHHH^HHrtrtrtHH^HHHH H W < 0 a tnviiDtnioionioviviiiiuivliAiiiiaioia u •r t >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > ^ rtrtrtrtrtrtrtrtrtrtrtrtrtrtrtrtrtrtrt • >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > rt f M © f^infnrMfn»rt\&oovrtrt'X»Wrtrt^e[jr*i n V OOTJOOOOO'O'OTJ'OO'O'dOTJ'O' O rMor'inowwo^r-fMcy.mr'vot/irtfnv o m\or"«o , voortfnCT,mfNrMr*©rNrtv*nr *

inm^rvr*ooo^infnr»mrtfMseoo « HINNfMtnyjvOOltT l
NN<NMNfNrN(NNNNNr«((NfNWMfMr N

u i t n n i n t n cnntfltnntntnmtnoicnunc o >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OOOOOOOIJ'OO'O'B'O'O'OOtl'O' O© o opin^«in<N(*)o>9trtrMin0ot«ooo< o ^or»»nmoo©r-ir><oooininr-rteortw©r nNinvfN«ntnortNiniNrtftiiio*Ort « O©fMrtrt©rtfMrtVV0rtrtr*r*r*or»fs | OOOOOHOinNO«IT)«)NMrtOMf l

o
oomvHinnciNainoifli'Mnoo e ©onmmfMfnr-MfMVVinromoorof O lfiOIT)(<l<OOM'llflOHOr > NhrMt£Of y l ©OfNrtfM©rtfMfM'V»fMrt©00a,©r , * f N ooooOHotnNo«mwrtinMO(Ni n

a ) * o 1 0 3 0 • w > « L i a s o a a <a a II ) C <

g o ^ a e¥ > o o IT ) J C « m * w <* > o m f M J C « V

- a a¥ > ooM(N«»n«'j | N(Titneoiri« , MnM«> M o©p*r»©fMm\£>*nfM^roo\omno««o , n •oo>ornrNOtf(Mri«HOwr , >moo o (M^vov^nr^^VO^OflOrtr^^COrtrtO O © O f M rt W ©

rt < >fN^«OOfMrt©COO>©0ir M ooooorto m owinhnininrtrv h

OOOOlOOOWlflffiOlVMMIOinNMOe O ooiNWOOMinorjnwrtirnoiNoio n OOP1rtMHNVrt^OVNrt<TiNOO< N rtrt rt f M f M ^owvor^rtovofMr-voctoomr^eoinvof O O'OOHHHO«r1OO«)»VOC0HN O rt f M rt rt

©r-o»fOfM«»'in»nco<*r»fo , o , fMo©« , tfio . ovoNiNiflNMnnrNor*en»mvr*rt N N^owMino.vwvrtnoNinhfOv o

0 a rtrt rt rt f M f M rt ©©rtfMrtfMfM*0<T©rtr»©«0©mfNfM © rt rt f M f M f M
or^woNVP.iftooi^ioiooiwhr'Mef t ©to^ , , « , vor'fM»nwfMvovcr*fMr-invor*f M
> ^**P*& V

CO ^*^f*t

V0^F 0\ *T t~t 1~4 r~i

rM f M f M rt rv^rMtooino.inicMrtvma>aooMOi n inVfNrtVV(N(nN«H«IOB(JINOinrtr M OHMNNN(NhWOfl<DOainmmN M rt rt f M f M f M oh«p*fM^ , rtinin(Ti<'Oo»\ohvh r OWfiniONhVHNfnHHNINininffH O fMvonooco^omfoo.u^MiAfMvovirtor m*»n«vflOtDniflM'nH»oooi/io\H H 4 J « 0 1 L t a

. * a a j 4 J c 0 u k t X

K « » H » » m f N j f a a r* a * O oocifNcmminmvuiOicwfflwN v rtrtrt rt rt f N f l rt
©r*KovofM^rr*coTro.r'Oow©mnineov o O^OJfUONWrtVNOftiONWIO.Wc O rtrtrt fMrtflrtm^ " or*iny)oomiNWi/ii^o l mw(^rtMrt(?ir n ow>ciVPim»rtf>iNinNr»»inninH n

rtrtrtfMiNmmmvoo OHHNN(NNr*<OHrtOlHH\DMnNr t ^ rt rt f M f M C >
fMfMr*©fMvovo>©in»nr*>rtrtf , , "r , 'r*<D v inrr*«coTNmoDoocofnoH(rno(n N O rt rt f M f M i p'p-minomuP'HCfiir. o
N«e*MUlOO.fflfMNWhP'N©(rirtM * incovort«rt«oinNrtnH««<Dv» N rtHHININfiniOCN
(NfMfMfMfMfMfMrMfMfMfMfMfMfMfMf M

3 XT O (ntnincow««mwwtntnuJwwwww w tntninntntninMtonmtntotnmtnoiuiu i >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aitttxtnsusatmiaaittmmmmtemiG** >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > rtrs j o r-ir.mp.NHviccortrti/.iooiHrtvcor ' 0 0T 3 0 0 0* 0 0 OTJTJ'OtJO'O'OO'O' O 0 OJ D 9 0 Oj Q 9 0 > J 3 J 3 J3 ^ * J3 X » « •X ) - Q in^mfMcor-vo^rtrtrt^rtinrtoo^rr-y j

0 0 O O O 0 0"Ot J O T 3 * D " O " O " U " O O'd' O 0 0 0 9 0 0 9

J> A •D D ^ A J

O ^ 0 . A £ 1P.2 2



# ATTACHMEN T7 jj^X -Qp\.^Tf

y 

### <s*t{ 

## DO W CHEMICA L U.S.A
. OC-70 8 Februar y15 , 199 0 TEXA S OOERATICH-. S FREEPOR TTEXA S 7?54 1 

# m

?•-<• Le s Montgomery , P.E. , Directo r Technica l Suppor t an d Regulatio n Developmen t Progra m Texa s Ai r Contro l Boar d 633 0 Highwa y29 0 Eas t Austin , T

X 7872 3
Dea r Mr . Montgomery : 28MI D INFORMATION

REQUES T Th e informatio n reques t ha s bee n complete d fo r al l complete d quarter s o f monitorin g data . Monitorin g wa s initiate d earlie r tha n require d bypermi t s o tha t th e dat a i s fro mFebruar y198 9 throug h Decembe r 1989 . I n interpretin g th e dat a i t ma yb e usefu l t o kno wtha t th e valve s i n th e plan t ar e primaril yquarter-tur n rotatin g valve s rathe r tha n gat e valves . Eaua l performanc e ma yno t b e achievabl e wit h slidin g ste m valves . Th e dat a wa s collecte d wit h a n OVA-10 8 analyze r whic h wa s calibrate d accordin g t o Metho d 21 . A s I amsur e tha t yo u realize , tha t metho d require s calibratio n wit h a standar d nea r 10,00 0 ppm . Therefor e althoug h i t i s a reliabl e indicato r o f concentration s betwee n 10,00 0 pp man d 50 0 pp mi t i s no t a n accurat e metho d t o gathe r dat a fo r reading s belo w50 0 ppm . I f yo u hav e an yquestion s concernin g thi s dat a pleas e cal l Jame s Davenpor t a t (409 ) 238-7877 . Sincerel yyours ,

Jame s Davenpor t Environmenta l Specialis t JWD.33/t o Enclosur e



### =Qualitv= , Pcffonnanct A N OPERATIN G UNI TO F TH E DO W CHEMICA L COMPAN YMean s Mor e A t POv
.P.2 3

**Pleas e Complet e On e For mFo r Eac h Quarte r o f Monitorin g Data* * 28MI D FUGITIV E MONITORIN G LEAK S DETECTE D FOR M
Dat e o f Monitorin g Data : FEB-MARC H 1989 , FIRS T QUARTE R 198 9 Concentratio n o f Lea k Definition : 50 0 ppm v Record s o f Actua l Lea k Concentratio n Available : X Ye s N o I f Yes , Pleas e Provid e Typ e o f Processe s Monitored : PHENO L / ACETON E PRODUCTIO N Lis t Mai n Toxi c Chemical s bein g Detected : 1 ) PHENO L 4 ) ACETON E 2 ) CUMEN E 5 ) 3 ) CUMEN E HYDROPEROXID E 6 ) Componen t Leaks : NO . NO . EQUIPMENT / COMPONENT S COMPONENT S SERVIC E TESTE D LEAKIN G VALVE S Ga s / Vapo r 7 0 Ligh t Liqui d 117 2 4 2 Heav yLiqui d 0 0 RELIE F VALVE S Ga s / Vapo r 4 6 0 COMPRESSO R SEAL S Ga s / Vapo r 0 0 PUM P SEAL S Ligh t Liqui d 12 5 2 1 Heav yLiqui d 0 0 FLANGE S Ga s / Vapo r 0 0 Ligh t Liqui d 0 0 Heav yLiqui d 0 0P.2 4

••Pleas e Complet e On e For mFo r Eac h Quarte r o f Monitorin g Data* * 28MI D FUGITIV E MONITORIN G LEAK S DETECTE D FOR M
Dat e o f Monitorin g Data : SECON D QUARTE R 198 9 Concentratio n o f Lea k Definition : 50 0 ppm v Record s o f Actua l Lea k Concentratio n Available : X I f Yes , Pleas e Provid e Typ e o f Processe s Monitore d PHENO L / ACETON E PRODUCTIO N Ye s N o
Lis t Mai n Toxi c Chemical s bein g Detecte d 1 ) PHENO L 2 ) CUMEN E 3 ) CUMEN E HYDROPEROXID E Componen t Leaks : 4 ) ACETON E 5 ) 6 ) EQUIPMENT / SERVIC E NO . COMPONENT S TESTE D NO . COMPONENT S LEAKIN G VALVE S Ga s / Vapo r Ligh t Liqui d Heav yLiqui d RELIE F VALVE S Ga s / Vapo r COMPRESSO R SEAL S Ga s / Vapo r • 7 117 1 0 0 4 0

PUM P SEAL S Ligh t Liqui d Heav yLiqui d 12 5 0 0 0 FLANGE S Ga s / Vapo r Ligh t Liqui d Heav yLiqui d 0 0 0 0 0 0P.2 5

**Pleas e Complet e On e For mFo r Eac h Quarte r o f Monitorin g Data* * 2SMI D FUGITIV E MONITORIN G LEAK S DETECTE D FOR M
Dat e o f Monitorin g Data : THIR D QUARTE R 198. 9 Concentratio n o f Lea k Definition : 50 0 ppm v Record s o f Actua l Lea k Concentratio n Available : X Ye s N o I f Yes , Pleas e Provid e Typ e o f Processe s Monitored : PHENO L / ACETON E PRODUCTIO N Lis t Mai n Toxi c Chemical s bein g Detected : 1 ) PHENO L 2 ) CUMEN E 4 ) 5 ) 3 ) CUMEN E HYDROPEROXID E 6 ) Componen t Leaks : EQUIPMENT / SERVIC E VALVE S Ga s / Vapo r Ligh t Liqui d Heav yLiqui d NO . COMPONENT S TESTE D
7 117 1 0 ACETON E
' NO . COMPONENT S LEAKIN G
0 2 0 0 RELIE F VALVE S Ga s / Vapo r 0 0 COMPRESSO R SEAL S Ga s / Vapo r 0 0 PUM P SEAL S Ligh t Liqui d 12 5 6 Heav yLiqui d 0 0 FLANGE S Ga s / Vapo r 0 0 Ligh t Liqui d 0 0 Heav yLiqui d 0 0P.2 6

**Pleas e Complet e On e For mFo r Eac h Quarte r o f Monitorin g Data* * 28MI D FUGITIV E MONITORIN G LEAK S DETECTE D FOR M
Dat e o f Monitorin g Data : FOURT H QUARTE R 198 9 Concentratio n o f Lea k Definition : 50 0 ppm v Record s o f Actua l Lea k Concentratio n Available : X Ye s N o I f Yes , Pleas e Provid e Typ e o f Processe s Monitored : PHENO L / ACETON E PRODUCTIO N Lis t Mai n Toxi c Chemical s bein g Detected : 1 ) PHENO L 4 ) 2) CUMEN E 5 ) 3 ) CUMEN E HYDROPEROXID E b) Componen t Leaks : NO . EQUIPMENT / COMPONENT S SERVIC E TESTE D VALVE S Ga s / Vapo r 7 Ligh t Liqui d 117 1 Heav yLiqui d 0 ACETON E

NO . COMPONENT S LEAKIN G
0 0 0 RELIE F VALVE S Ga s / Vapo r 0 0 COMPRESSO R SEAL S Ga s / Vapo r 0 0 PUM P SEAL S Ligh t Liqui d 12 5 5 Heav yLiqui d 0 0 FLANGE S Ga s / Vapo r 0 0 Ligh t Liqui d 0 0 Heav yLiqui d 0 0P.2 7

U C 149 - i UNIO N CARBID E INTERNA L CORRESPONDENC E

r>. O . OO X Ol , TCKA C ClTV , TKKA C JJiO O



### To : Februar y 20 , 199 0 Mr . Le s Montgomer y Progra m Directo r Technica l Suppor t an

dRegulator y

Developmen t Texa s Ai r Contro l Boar d Austi nTexa s Dea r Mr . Montgomery : Pleas e fin

dattache dth e performanc e dat a yo urequeste dfo r th e 2 8 MI D lea k detectio nprogram

at . ou r 0X 0 facilit y

her e a t 7$X« S City . I woul dlik e t o poin t ou t tha t ther e ar e 3 7 pump s 1 nth e Buildin g 45/7 9 and8 3 0X 0 unit s program . Th e 2 8 MI D proqram starte d1nMa y

n f 198 9 at . th e 0X 0 facility . Thu s th e 3 7 pump s wer e monitore donl y twic e (7 4 samplings ) durin g the secon dquarter o f 198 9 a s compare dt o thre e time s (11 1 samplings ] durin g th e followin g quarter s Ther e ar e come practica l limitation s t o th e progeam beyon dwha t th e dat a can 

### ninrtmt n I mniild,hn.hinnvT n rmnnui wllmltatlnn ^ wit h vnii r nff1r.f i nf

i yuu r cuiivei'iiftnce
. I f

ther e ar

e an y jjuoetlsno-cp

- it- 1 can-to
- ot. unji.tiuij.'.
. pleas e cal l m

e a t('409') ' 9¥8'-3i'86 . Ver y Trul y Your

s 

### tyji-^ H . G . Dorbl n 

### Environmenta l A1 r Coordinato rP.2 8 0£/ifi/9 3 1 5 ; <3< t S **<> ' ' i' t wH * o . w

* c tf_

BUILniNG S 4 5 . 7 9 , AN D 8 3 2N D QUARTERO F 198 9

NUMBERO F COMPONENT S NUMBB ROPCOMPONKNT S MONITORED PE

RQUARTE RLEAKIN G VALV E SERVIC E LIGH T LIQUI D &$ 8 JL 4 OA S Ai
_ 0 HBAV Y LIQUI D
_ £
__ > SAFETY VALV E LIOHT LIQUI D .J . _f l OA S _1 4
_ 2 HBAVY LIQUI D _<

__J
_ PUMP S SERVIC E LIOHT LIQUI D J. 4 -1 5 OA S _f i _$ > HBAVY LIQUI D
_ 0 _f i FLANGE S LIOHT LIQUI D li.Q0.E_ST,. „ ] OA S _9QEST , _P
_ HBAVY LIQUI D
_ 0 _J
_ 3R D QUARTE RO F 198 9 - VALV E SERVIC E LIOHT LIQUI D fill _?
_ OA S J J _f i HEAVY LIQUI D
__ Q _f i SAFET Y VALV E LIOHT LIQUI D
_ J
__ Q OA S J 4
_ 1 HEAV Y LIQUI D _f t_f i PUMP S SERVIC E LIOHT LIQUI D H I J J OA S _f i _j
_ HEAVY LIQUI D
_ 0 _fl FLANGE S —- LIGHT LIQUI D 1500EST . _J
_ OA S 90BST . _f i HEAVY LIQUI D _fi
__ 0 4TI I QUARTE RO F 198 9 VALVE SERVIC E LIOHT LIQUI D feifi
__1 OA S J U
_ i HEAVY LIQUI D _f t_..Q . SAFETY VALV E LIOHT LIQUI D
_ 1 _f i OA S JL 4 _f l HEAVY LIQUI D Jf c , 0 PUMP S SERVIC E LIOHT LIQUI D L U - 1 OA S _J 0
_Q HEAVY LIQUI D
_ 0
_ 0 FLANOE S LIOHT LIQUI D L559M T ._ Q OA S ._.5»QEST , _.. Q HEAV Y LIQUI D 1_ > __ QP.2 9

, . ' . .•• • ,.,t . .-... ' .'•••• , /'..>. • r.-a'.-'/f . /;,., • /.'/.v. ' Iil.->:>!i-l-ll. 7. V .*•"•''.' /



### Februar y19 , 199 0

Le a Montgomery , P.E. , Directo r Technica l Suppor t an d Regulatio n Developmen t Progra m Texa s Ai r Contro l Boar d 633 0 Hwy . 29 0 Eas t Austin , T X 7872 3 Re
- Reques t fo r Informatio n o n Lea k Frequenc yo f Equipmen t Regulate d b

yGenera l Permi t Provisio n 2AMI D Dea r M r Mongomery : Pleas? * find attache d th o 2 8 MI D lea k reports:-yo u requeste d fro mou r facility . W e appreciat e th e extensio n yo u allowe d t o compil e thi s d«\a . I n orde r no t t o dela yyo u an yfurther , w e ar e faxin g th e requeste d informal'io n t o you . Colo r copie s o f th e graph s w.i.1. 1 follow . W e hav e include d frequenc ydistributio n graph? ; tha t shoul d prov e usefu l t o you . Som e note s ar e i n order : l ) Liqui d drip s ar e counte d a e 10,00 0 pp m.leaks o n th e graph s 2; Th e count s o f equipmen t monitore d ar e approximate . Exac t count s ar e imbedde d i n ou r database , bu t owin g t o th e shor t tim e available , w e provid e estimates . I f yo u hav e questions , pleas a fee l fre e t o c&l l m e a t (713)-920

- 4316 .

Charle s Barfielr t Sr . Proces s Enginee r Pasaden a Cumen e Plan t CEB: 2 2C:p a D . E . Hamilto n K. A . Konderl a K . K . Robinso n b . V . GhoJso nP.3 0

• -•»•• »


### ••Pleas e Complat e On a For m Fo r Eac hQuarta r o f Monitorin g Dat t **. • 

### 28KX D FUGITIV E 

### NONITOtXtr o UUX 8 DBTBCTB

) FOA M Dat aO f Monitorin g Data i 3rdQuarte r - 198 8 •**" ^m—1 1 n-r t '•rr^a.'S n 

### Concentratio n o f Laa k Definition * 50 0 ppm v 

### Record s o f Actua l Laa k Concentratio nAvailable i Jf
_ If . Yet , Pleas e Provid e Typ e o f Proceeee e Monitored i

Syntheti c Organi c Chemica l MF C Proces s (Cimen e Plant ) 

### Lif t Main Toxi c Chemioal s bein g Detected * Ye s M o

lienzen e Lumen e 2 ) 

### Componen t

LeeOcs t

«*M««« ~ >*ia

aac y CtntUtvao^ a 

### 4 )

S ) 6 )

EQUIPMENT / Servic e VALVE S Ga e / V&po r Ligh t Liqui d Heav y Liqui d 

### X&hTW VALVB S Qa a / Vapo r COMPRESSOR8SAL< £ ' Ga e / Vapo r 

### :•>::« ? SEALS * Ligh t Liqui d Heav yLiqui d '.'.ANC^S' ' c;a a / Vcpo : 1* 3 he . Liqui d '••jo«v v;,.v.n:i d 

### NO .

COMPONENT S TESTE D 26 S 1,24 8

0 -12 - 

### JL

o »+*MMm**,mmmmi t * iw a •'•1i.lLilfc.wn. ,
-i*'.*v. ( r... ,


## no . COMPONENT

S LBAXtN O

0 3 •»*a W 0 Flang * loak s sra thor- e discover*;. 1 , duirin y vh n qu e <•".'.?. / j yft* v pr.toi * -:.o th * T^r
. i t <.•*. • in ? bein g rojiorted
.P.3 1

» » • . • ».. •



### **Piea» o Complet e On e Form Fo r Eac hQuarte r o f Monitorin g Data * 28MI D FUGITIV E MOHIVOBXN Q LKAK 8 DBTIOTB ) FOR M Oat a o f Monitorin g Data ? 4t h Quarte r - 198 S

u**w*-*.T,\'vp'Mjaj* « 

### Concentratio no f Lea) c Definition t 50 0 ppm v 

### Record s o f Actua l Lea k Concentratio nAvailable ! xye a __ . N o Tf Yes , Pleas e Provid e Typ e o f Processe s Monitore d% «_ -fc 

### ____^ . Syntheti c Organi c Chemica l MF C Proces s (Cumen e Plant ) 

### List - Mai nToxi c Chemical s bein g Detected t I) Benzer.e 4 ) 2 } Curifcn

e 5 ) * - r•• - • - - - • - ' ~-> - • - • ^ ' <»M>WMP»*M»i'Wi'iiw

—» • raw • • .cut.'^.-^ • ;•• ) 6 ) 

### Componen t Leaks t NO . 

## no . EQUIPMENT / COMPONENT S C0KPOM8KT S Servic e TESTE D LEAKIN G VALVE S Ga t / Vapo r 23 6 2 Ligh t Liqui d1,18 1 < £ Heavy Liqui d0 _.. . 0 «I* M 

### Mr-UXT VALVS S 

### Ga s / Vapo r COMPRESSO

RSEAL S 

### Ga s / Vapo r
'"*• Ligh tLiqui d 1 9 < 2M 

### Heav y Liqui d Q. , J

J « . ;:..ANGEy-

L 

### •'Jas / Vapo rj ) _,_? . « Ligh t Liqui d ?_ „ .'.••;r.v v Liqui d
_„J L



### - -Flang e leak s av

& thos e dia-.jwere d du/fin* / th aquarr.di ' •:^ > y^fii

- prio rt o th e r.or. i tarin g bsin qreport^ .P.3 2

IT. 1 • •

**Pleaa e Complet e On e For m Fo rEach Quarta ro f Monitorin g Data* * 28KX D FUGITIV

E MOHITO&XH

O L.tAK 8 DHTICTI

U FOR M Dat e O f Monitorin g Data t1s t Quarte r - 198 9 '
. concentratio no f Lea k Definition ! 50 0 ppm v Record s o f Actua l Lea k Concentratio nAvailable- ? _> L Ve t _ , No I f Yes , Pleaa e Provid e Typ e o f Processe s Monitored t —,-^i^lhoti c Or^nic.Chenica l M r Proces s (Cumen

e Plant ) Lis t Mai nToxi c Chemical s being Detected ; -*J~e- rrtv «.-.•*- \ ) _Benzen

e 2 ) Cumen e m-.~..-.-aJX*c.-. 4 ) 3 ) 6 ) Componen t Leaks t EQUIPMENT / Servic e VALVE 3 Ga s / Vapo r Ligh t Liqui d Heav y Liqui d RELIE F VALVS S Ga e / Vapo r COMPRESSO R8SAL£ i " Ga s / Vapo r NO . COMPONENT S TESTE D 25 0 1,18 1

^M P SEAL S Ligh t Heav y
GA 3 / ' LL^l'.t

• ""; i t V' V Liqui d Liqui d

rr^.-.- . .-. — Liqui d Liqu.i- 3 19 , 0 0
0 0 Kri» ^ . «.. -

'timmm IJ-IIIT" I - -" 1 • u*.. i

NO . COMPONENT

S LEAKIN G

4 0



### J L L 0 Flang e loaV s ar e r. K .cs e discovere ddurin g th« s cjo*..vv,ft r ; *

. v prio r t o tb« * •••o

n Ite r in* / beir. o r«port.ftd
.P.3 3



### "Pleas e Complet e On e For m Po r Eac hQuarte r o f Monitorin g Data* * 2 SKI D FUGITIV E MOBXTQftXV Q LBAX 8 DBTBCTg ) FORM Dat e o f Monitorin g Data i 2n d Quarte r - 198 9 

### Concentratio no f Laa k Definition t 50 0 ppm v 

### Record * o f Actua l Lea k Concentratio nAvailable * _£
_ I f Yes , Pleaa e Provid e Typ e o f Processe s Monitored t

Syntheti c Organi c Chemica l MF C Proces s (Cumene Plant ) 

### Ye s N c

•*'«^we^»*'»M . -r>WWfc» M 

### Lis t Mai nToxi c Chemical s bein g Detected * 1 ) _Ben.zen

e 2 ) Cioene •i) 

### Componen t Leaks t EQUIPMENT / Servic e V?.LVES Ga s / Vapo r Ligh t Liqui d Heavy Liqui d RELIE F VALVS S Ga s / Vapo r COMPRESSO RSEAL S Ga a / Vapo r 4 ) 5 ) 6 )
NO . COMPONENT S TESTE D 25 6 1,18 1 0 0

PL'M P SEAL S Ligh t Liqui d Heav y LiqvJ. 6 Ga s / Vapo r 1 9 0 0



### _L
_ 0 < tlM0^ *, .jfc

—f>*«. 1 f —CO* ^ 'Tja SUTrnffi

» I N I * —ni* nI ' I tf .•»

••'—***rf« ihilMJ - •
ia»iM«^»> . i auv . rr.- :


### NO . COMPONENT S LSAXIV Q

3 5

MnM.-A l

0
_


### o Flang e loaXf t ar« ? thoa t discyvor« d durin g Ur n qneirtu; ; .. • tr. « yea r prio r t 2 tl\» monitorin g be.lnc j rtperted <P.3 4



### ••Pleas * Complet e On e form Fo r Eac hQuarte r o f Monitorin g Data* * 28XX D FDGITIV 1 MONITOR!* ! LSAX 8 DBT1CTE D FOR M Pat e o f Monitorin g Data ! 3 rc i Quarte r 198 9 

### Concentratio no f Lea k Definition ! 50 0 pp» v 

### Record s o f Actua l Lea k Concentratio nAvallabia i jc

_Ye s i f Yes. - Pleaa e Provid e Typ e o f Processe s Monitored i
_

Syntheti c Organi c Chemica l MF G Proces s (Cunen e Plant ) No

Lis t Mai n Toxi cChemical s 1 } Benzen e 2 ) Cumen

e 3 ) Componen t

Leaks i EQUIPMENT

/ i Servic e VALVE S Ga s / Vapo r Ligh t Liqui d Heav y Liqui d RELIE FVALVE

S Ga s / Vapo r COMPRESSO

RSEALS " Ga s / Vapo r ?UMI > SEAL S Ligh t Liqui d fieav y Liqui d
-' : AKSSS 1 • '•^is > v^pcs. " L..ch t Liqui d H:**'r y liqui d 1 bein g Detected t 4 )

, 5 )
. 6 )
NO
. COMPONENT

S TESTE D 26 8 1,24 8 0

M 0 0 JL9
_ 0 _
_ 0

_Jj4 0 ^

..... 0 NO .

COMPONENT

S LEAKIN G 2 3 9 0

i 0 0 ] ().,

__ _ 0 0 IWJUHI W itr ' < L
..... .



### - Flang o leak ? ar * thctj p disjcsvure d durin g th * qc^rtc/ r :. v v , ! 

### ' s r 

### prio r t o th e rc.?.'.ti:rin$bein g reported .P.3 5

«*v * < • w %



### "Pleas e Complet e On e Por n Fo rEac h Quarte ro f Monitorin g Data** * 28M2 D FDOITIV

B MDHITOIHW

O LEAK S DETECTE

D FOR M Dat e O f Monitorin g Data i 4t.hQuarte r - 1989 ^ Concentratio no f Lea k Definition t 50 0 ppm v 

### Record s o f Actua l Lea k Concentratio nAvailable i xye s _ _N o I f Yes , Pleaa e Provid e Typ e o f Processe s Monitored t

Syntheti c Organi c Chemica l MF G Proces s (Cumen e Plant ) j zs%**±^.<f» n i 

### Lis tMai n Toxi c Chemiaal abein g Detected t 1) Benzen

e 4 ) £ 1 Cuncn

e f} ) i i • r r --i— i 1 •

> t mm. 1 1'i'T t i —T ~ v r

«»*»i^i^^ " :>.)
__6 ) 

### Componen t Leaks J EQUIPMENT / Servic e VALVE S Ga a / Vapo r Ligh t Liqui d Heav y Liqui d RELIE F VALVE S Ga s / Vapo r NO . COMPONENT S TESTE D 25 6 • 

### 1J8 1 0 

### 0 NO .

COMPONENT S LEAKIN G

7 

### 8 0 0 COMPRESSO RSEAL S Ga a / Vapo r PUM P SEAL 8 Ligh t Liqui d 'Heav yLiqui d -V.AKCSS

1 '
- Gr.. s / Vapc- r Liyh t Liqui d :-'MV V L i CM ! i-

3 

### 12^



## _f l 0_
_ 

## o _ 0 Q , .

. w 0
_ 0
_



### '

- Flang e leak s ar e thea e discovere ddurin g th e cjua>:<;y.r wh u J»UV 

### prio r t. o th e r.or.itcrin c toeing' r«s>erteci
./

—. 

## 0 0 

# mmmmmmmwmm® C \t\


# o n
0 0 OT) 

# o :D
^•— > (/ )
'.L i

_. J •..L i -• ^ ,^ " . " N < i C O 

### c e < * ^
. —r» 

### o 

# ? . 8 i a : o o 

## iii i
^ 3 ; 

## o ! < - : 

### o a : • o • hi . O ! <ff S

it j 

# 3

Jl .



## I ) 

# a iMii o -4 - 

# S • ^ w 

### o I

i n

a.l.L03.L3 Q SMV3" ! IC S .4 0 i l

## SiKl3£§^ ^ 

# immm0 0 

# q L i j

C O 

# o o 2 < N O Q

• * ft.'. 

# o : D
^ . '— s 

### C O •> . / » - X . 

## < l U J 1 LL J 

### o 

# £ ? a : o o 

## Ii i D O < 

### o ft. 

# a o *«** $ Cifl / L 

## i
. *$SfcftflBS2f l



### &P& & o

b o o o o
i O
o o I O t o 

### o 1 0 

## h

o O •J l 'i' 

## h
* 0 

### o . J

a . n.

__ i 

## 0 0

V 

## ,.9 1 " L
. 

# ii 

### o C. ) o < s 

### a >. o < s

sC c s « * I N N C M O CN ; 0 0

» • • U 3 r ~ • + » " C S »• - 

## o

T" * K*3ff i ( 0 ( 0 I 

### c

s o a C 3



### c:i:.o::U3 G sw.-r . 9
. .•J O :. 'P.3 8



### C O



# n o £ co g 

# : ? g 

# -S I 

# 9§ '

i ' - J 1..V J 1 3 

### • o a • . Q U . J & : 

# o s

a . L
. . 

# ::o 

# q

t 

### o o O C i I » • 1
... » 1 lllll l O O ' O © O O c o N «

o i? ) ^ t o
C3J.0M13 C SNV'Ji" ! 9 .aO s : ! o C i CwfliKu!ri^>i U



### ro

.. . o

, 0 1 i 

### ro 

# rn i. 8
rO 

### f - « Lo f I N
1
. 1 

### ro 

# \" ° I 1 0 i
. to 

### l
. : n 1 

### L
. 6 r o000275035004250500'2502

O O V " ^

ft! 0
.

#P.3 9



# c n CO 

# O U . J 

## C\
• 

## 0 0 

# oo * 

# o I D

*•• * ^ - ^ 

# c n < < 

### L u 1 ] 'A. 1 0 C S t o • * 

## a : o 

# £ o C L C t O O ^ 0 3 O 

## a : o U i 

## o 

## n 0 L .. . 

### ^39&^^25®£M£^ ^

i I 

### a o
r * n V 

## i . r 

## f - } • L
. • > ! 1 }
_ f 1 » • I i
.
i r V j i 

## r i.. . [ \- \. 

## i i 

## ii 

## 1 - r 

# t
1 i l !- ^ F 

## F a ^ * b o 

## ?, o W o la' )
O O »f ) t o o r . _ i m i u • > u i o .- : w

## > ft

. J 

### o -. * if i • * N *' - vj - a . a o \x\ i o o M l c s o 

## £ L J c s o m c s •*• • O 

### o OOOOOOOOOO O o o to

o r - i o m 3 - r o C M »- •
C3J.03i.7i C S>iV3 i 0 1 J O UP.4 0

^

> . O o 

# 1 ^ 

# Ml^ l V N 

# 1 l 

# £ 

# 1
II1

1 

# \ 

# I
'ec r 1 

## Q £ 

# ' ^ I
^ ^

^



# w 5 

# J S J S - 4 M 

# v S I 

# h 4 ) 

# 1 •F . "3 " 

# HV

r o 

# | ^ i ^ )

* •



# ^D < * 

# w 

# 1Z - T 

# - 3 ^ -N: 

# 4 / 

### vf l 

# '•3


# 3

s O r - 

# r > u -PUM P SEA L INFORMATIO NFO R BUTADIEN E FACILITIE S S M = Singl e mechanica l Sea l D M = Dua l Mechanica l Sea l P = Packe d Sea l Plan t I D Numbe r Pum p Sea l Typ eBD1 Di d no t identif ytyp e o f pum p sea l B D - 3 Al l S M BD- 4 A l 1 D MBD5 Screenin g value s provide d i n on e package ;

Pum p sea l inf o provide d i n secon d package ; Compan yprovide d differen t I D number s i n th e packages , s o ther e i s n o wa yt o associat e S V an d sea l type . BD- 6 BD- 7 BD- B A l 1

A l l A l l S M followe d b y P D M S M BD-1 0 >

> 

# o Onl yinf o provide d indicate s tha t th e seal s are

NO T DM . BD- U BD-1 2 A l 1 S M

Pum p 3002 1 Pum p 3002 2 Pum p 3025 5 Pum p 3048 0 Pum p 3054 8 Pum p 3065 9 Pum p 3066 5 Pum p 3072 0 Pum p 3072 1 Pum p 3079 1 Pum p 3081 8 Pum p 3085 1 Pum p 3091 4 Pum p 3091 5 Pum p 3092 3 Pum p 3092 4 Pum p 3092 5 Pum p 3094 4 Pum p 3094 5 Pum p 3094 6 0 ppm v - D M

0 ppm v - D M O ppm v - D M 423.1 5 ppm v - S M 14476. 2 ppm v - S M 0 ppm v - D M 0 ppm v - D M

- 0 ppm v - D M

- 0 ppm v - D M

- 13693.1 5 ppm v

- 265.0 5 ppm v -

- 0 ppm v - S M

- 0 ppm v - D M

- 0 ppm v - D M

- O ppm v - D M

- O ppm v - D M

- 0 ppm v - D M

- - 0 ppm v - D M

- 0 ppm v - D M

- 0 ppm v - D M 

# m o o

S M S MPUM P SEA L INFORMATIO NFO R ETHYLEN E OXID E FACILITIE S

S M = Singl e mechanica l Sea l D M = Dua l Mechanica l Sea l P = Packe d Sea l Plan t I D Numbe r Pum p Sea l Typ e EO- 1 Pum

p 1167 1 - 68 5 pp m- Sealles s Pum p 1181 1 - 7 3 pp m- Sealles s 23 other s S M EO- 2 EO- 3
EO- 4 EO- 5
EO- 6

EO- 7 EO- 8 EO- 9 Al l S M

Onl yinf o th e seal s Al l S M Al l D M
Pum p 111 2 Pum p 113 1 Pum p 118 6 Pum p 120 3 Pum p 160 7 Pum p 3220 9 Pum p 3223 0 Pum p 3229 9 1 6 other s Al l D M Al l D M Al l D M provide d indi e

ar&

- 0

- 0

- 0

- 0

- 0 NO T DM .

ppm v - D M ppm v - D M ppm v - D M ppm v - D M ppm v - D M

- 0 ppm v - D M

- 0 ppm v - D M

- 0 ppm v - D M S MP.4 3



# ATTACHMEN T9

Monthl y LDA R Al l Component s



### 2 < A L 1 > A L

L.. . Quarterl y

LDA R Al l Component s



### 2 < A L 1 > A L
Semiannua l LDA

R Rando m Sampl e Al l Component s


### 2 < 0.5A L 

### 1 > 2 < 0.5A L

Annua l LDA R Rando m Sampl e 

### A

L >xyrs .



### 1 > A L
Alternativ e Approac h Annua l LDA R Al l Component s 

### 3

< A L 1 > A L
Alternativ e Approac h Annua l LDA R Al l Component sP.4 4 FEB 1 7 '9 0 13=0 0 CHEVROlRESEflCHC O P. l 

# ATTACHMEN T1 0
Transmittin

g letter LTG-Membera , Equipment Leak s Regulator y Negotiatio

nCommittee , "Draf t Framework, " date d i 

### BVBowers- 1 DWDunn- 1 KFidler- 1 TAKittleman- 1 DDoniger- 1 AHershkowitz- 1 RAjax- 1 DDalton- 1 KKaufman- 1 PJHarter- 1 NGaraia- 1 JKaca- 1 AWBickum- 1 GVBodungen- 1 AGanguli- 1 RVMajewski- 1 LMontgomery- 1 HRogera- l CBennett- 1 MLev-On- 1 LCurran- 1 ESiegler- 1 DGealy- 1 KRitter- 1 DRuaaell- l JHill- 1 WJMulligan- 1 DGDale- 1 RDEdwards- 1 JJMojcher- 1 RJKlett- 1 DFVanDerZanden- 1 LTGoodheart- 1 File- 1

WOtmAHtMfTTA t Chtyro nP.4 5
FE B 1 7 '9 0 13:0 1 CHEVRONREbEACHC O P
. 2 Chivro r ctiivro n 

### ^ 0 Chevro n Researc h an d Technolog y Compan

y

Draf t Framewor

k Members , Equipment Leak s Regulator

y Negotiatio

nCommittee : A t th e las t Reg/Neg meeting , ther e wa s a goo d dea l o f discussio n concernin

g th e framewor

k fo r th e fina l rule . As show no n Attachmen t No . 1 , Chevro nwoul d lik

e t o propos e a draf t framewor k tha t i s ver

y similar t o th

e skip-perio

d approac

hbu t als o attempt s t o addres s other issue s o f concer nt o th e committee . Th e basi c pla

ncall s fo

r quarterl y

inspectio

nan d maintenanc e (I4M ) o f al l components , wheneve r monitorin g result s indicat e tha t th e performanc e leve l o f th e facilit

y i s not meetin

g th e performanc e standard , monthl y monitoring , instea d o f quarterly , o f al l component s i s triggered . Chevro nbelieve s tha t monthl y monitorin

g wil l b

e suc ha sig nificant burde

nfo r plant s tha t ther e wil l be ampl e economi c justificatio

nfo r facilitie s t o improv e performance . For example , a monthl y

inspectio

nan d maintenanc e progra m for a smal l -refiner y with50,00 0 component s woul d cos t i nexces s o f $1. 5 millio nannually . Increasin g th e expens e o f I&

M program

s wil l provide a

neconomi c incentiv e fo r facilitie s t o improv e per formance-b

y emphasizin

g tota l quality

contro l program

s an d capita l investment o f ne w leakles s technolog y wher e appropriate . I na nearlier Reg/Neg meeting , a draf t framewor k wa s discussed whichinclude

d a provisio

no f annua l monitorin g i f plant s achieved a performanc e leve l greate r tha none-hal f th

e standard . It i s ou

r opinio

nthat th

e fina l rul e shoul d not includ e a separat e provisio

nfo r performanc e beyon d Maximu

m Achievabl e Contro l Technolog

y (MACT) , but ther e shoul d b e incentive s buil t int o th e framewor

k fo r improvin

g performance . I

nth e draf t framework , w

e hav e include

d a performance-based incentiv e fo r plant s t o reduc e inspectio nan d maintenanc e operatin g expenses . For plant s wh

o ca nimprov

e performanc e leve l belo w th e standar

dP.4 6

r E B 1 7 '9 0 13:0 2 CHEVRONREbEPCHC O p

- 3


### Members , Equipment Leak s Regulator

y Negotiatio

nComm . -2- fo r thre e consecutiv

e semi-annua l monitorin g period s (1. 5 years) , only annua l inspectio

nan d monitorin

g woul d b

e required . A

plant wil l hav

e t o demonstrat e excellent performanc e t o achiev e annua l monitoring . A

statistica l analysi s o f th e monitorin

g pla n indicate s tha t fo

r a facilit

y t o be confident tha t it coul d achiev e a performanc e leve l bette r tha nth e standar

d fo r thre e consecutiv

e periods , th

e performanc e o f th e plant woul d hav

e t o be significantl y

belo w th e standard . Agai nth e drivin

g forc e for improvin

g performanc e i s economics . Usin g th e sam e exampl e a s described above , a smal l refiner y witha nannua l inspectio

nan d monitorin

g progra

m woul d hav

e it s inspectio

nan d maintenanc e operatin

g expense s reduce

d t o approximatel y

$100,00 0 per year ; a saving s o f $1. 4 million . Thi s typ e o f approac

hsatisfie s th

e intent o f th

e rul e fo

r providin

g incentive s fo

r improvin

g plant performanc e beyon

d th e standard . Lea k Definitio

n Chevro nfeel s strongly

tha t th

e Reg/Neg Committee shoul d develo p a lea k definitio

nfo r MAC T baaed o

na stron

g technica l justifica tion . A

t th e las t meeting , a lea k definitio

nof 5 0 pp

m wa s proposed t o th

e committee . W

e fee l strongly

tha t a 50-pp

m lea k definitio

ni s not appropriat e based o nth e followin

g technica l rationale : 1 . Dat a Adequacy . I ndevelopin

g a performanc e standar d fo r MAC T tha t include s bot hth e lea k definitio

nan d th e percent leakin

g equipment , th

e Reg/Neg Committe e mus t hav e confidenc e i

nth e dat a bein g uaad"t o establis hthe standard . Attachment No . 2 repre sent s a grap

hof constant emission s a s a functio no f lea

k defini tio nan d percen t leaking . A MAC T standar

d ca nb e develope

d based o neither a lo

w lea k definition , suc

has 5 0 ppm , an

d a highe r percent leakin

g o r a highe r lea

k definition , suc

ha s 100 0 ppm , witha lowe

r percent leaking . Fro m a standpoint o f havin g statistica l confidenc e i nth e data , there i s mor e variabilit y in th e dat a a

t th e lo w lea k definition s tha

na t highe r lea

k defini tions , (Se

e Figure 1 , coefficient o f variatio nversu s concentra tion. ) Therefore , w e woul d recommen

d that a highe r lea k definition , suc

ha s 100 0 ppm , be adopte d t o ensur e confidenc e i n the data . 2 , Measuremen t Variability . Measurin g fugitiv

e emission s i s not a precis e science . I ndevelopin

g a lea k definitio

nfo r MACT , th

e concept o f statistica l confidenc e inth e dat a mus t be considered . Th e OVA-10 8 i s a

nanalyze r specificall y designe

d fo r fugitiv

e emission

1 

### monitorin

g o f organi c leaks . It ha s beenknow nsinc eP.4 7

FE B 1 7 '9 0 13=0 3 CHEVRONRESEftCHC O P . 4


### Members , Equipmen t Leak s Regulatory

Negotiatio nComm . -3 - th e star t o f variou s fugitiv e emission s monitorin g program s usin g a lea k definitio no f 10,00 0 ppm , tha t thes e result s ar e no t reproducibl e i nth e field . Variabilit y woul db e eve nmor e pronounce dfo r a significantl y lowe r lea k definition , suc ha s 5 0 ppm . I nan y analytica l process , ther e i s variabilit y buil t int o th e equipment , calibratio nprocedures , etc. , whic hfor m th e basi s fo r th e Metho dDetectio nLimi t (MDL ) -o f th e process . Ther e ar e a numbe r o f factor s tha t affec t th e MD L fo r screenin g fugitiv e emission s fro

m equipment . Thes e ar e describe dbelow . a . Th e OVA-108' s maximu m accurac y

i s onl y

+/-20% . Thi s i s state di nth e operatin g manual fo r th e OVA-108 . b . Temperatur e change s introduc e additiona l Inaccuracies . Th e accurac y

i s +/-20 % withi nth e temperatur e rang e o f 50' F t o 104*F . Th e OVA-10 8 i s require dt o b e use dunde r th e variou s regulator y

program

schedule s a s frequentl y a s monthly . Plan t an d seasona l condition s ar e frequentl y greate r tha n104' pandcer tainl y durin g winter , temperature s dro pbelo w 50* F i nmos t facilities . c . Change s i nrelativ e humidit y introduc e additiona l vari ability . Th e operatin g manua l fo r th e OV A state s tha t th e accurac y

fo r a relativ e humidit y rang e o f 5 % t o 95 % i s 20% . Thi s i s i nadditio nt o othe r inaccuracie s o f th e instrument .
i 

### d . -I nth e proces s o f screenin g equipment , ther e i s erro r in . th e procedur e use db y th e technicia ni nanalyzin g th e equipment . Fo r example , i f th e same technicia nmeasure dth e sam e piec e o f equipmen t severa l time s i na row , differen t value s woul db e obtained . Thi s i s a measur e o f th e reproducibilit y o f th e data . e . Th e respons e factor s ar e nonlinear . Th e respons e factor s tha t ar e publishe db y EP A ar e thos e fo r screenin g value s nea r th e lea k definitio no f 10,00 0 ppm . Th e respons e factor s fo r sig nificantl y

lowe r screenin g value s ar e different . Fo r a give n compoun dwitha respons e facto r greate r tha n100 % a t a lea k definitio no f 10,00 0 ppm , th e respons e facto r a t lowe r screenin g valu e ma y

b e les s tha n100% . Respons e factor s hav e bee n establishe donl y

.fo r pur e streams . Ther e i s n o recor dtha t an y respons e factor s hav e bee nestablishe dfo r multicomponen t streams . Du e t o th e nonlinea r natur e o f th e respons e factor s o f th e pur e streams , i t canno t b e assume dtha t respons e factor s fo rP.4 8

FE B 1 7 '9 0 13:0 4 CHEVRONRESEACHC O P . 5


### Members , Equipment Leak s Regulator

y Negotiatio

nComm . -4 - mixture s woul d b

e additive . EP

A Metho d 2 1 shoul d b

e updated to reflec t problem

s associate

d withth

e measurement of multicom ponen t streams . Th e MD L applie s only

t o a specifi c analytica l process . Whe non e consider s a mor e globa l assessment of th e variabilit

y involve

d whe nman y plant s acros s th

e countr

y ar e conductin

g monitorin

g program s withman

y technicians , al l wit hdifferent level s o f training , usin

g different analyzer s an d procedures , etc. , th e variability

i s further compounded , Takin g globa l variability int o account leads t o a concept know na s th e Practica l Quantificatio

nLeve l (PQL) . (Se e Figure 2. ) Th

e PQL i s typicall y

3-1 0 time s th

e MD L an d represent s th

e leve l o f a

n analytica l procedur e whichensure s statistica l confidenc e i nth e dat a bein

g obtained . I t shoul d b e th e goa l o f th

e Reg/Neg t o develo p a lea k definitio

ntha t i s abov

e th e PQ L of th e screenin

g proces s t o ensure confidenc e o f th e dat a bein

g collected . A

t th e current lea

k definitio

no f 10,00 0 ppm , variabilit y du e to analyt ica l an d procedure s i s a smal l percentage o f th e overal l screen in g value . However , whenth e lea k definitio

ni s reduce

d t o lowe r values , suc

ha s 5 0 ppm , thi s measurement error i s ver y sig nificant . W

e woul d anticipat e that a lea k definitio

no f 5 0 pp

m woul d not b

e greate r tha

nth e PQL fo

r th e screenin

g process . 3 . Repairabllitv . A nimportant facto

r t o consider i

nsettin

g th e lea k definitio

ni s th e repairabilit

y of th e equipment , with a lo w lea k definitio

no f 5 0 ppm , certai nplant equipment , suc ha s contro l valve s i ndynami c service , wil l not b e abl e t o compl y withthe-standard . Othe r equipment will " not b e abl e t o b

e repaire d a t th e lo w lea k definitio

nbut wil l b

e replace

d which wil l increas e th

e cos t o f th

e standard . I

nman y case s whe

n repairin

g valve s leakin

g a t the 5 0 pp

m level , there woul d be mor e emission s resultin

g fro m th e maintenanc e procedur e tha nha d th e valv e remaine

d i nservic e withcontinua l monitoring . W e loo k forwar

d t o discussin

g thes e issue s withyo u a t th e nex t meetin g of th e Reg/Neg Committee . I f yo u hav e an y question s o

r comments , pleas e cal l L . T . Goodheart , a t (415 ) 620-4145 . Thanks . Sincerely

yours , L . T . Goodhear t LTG:oom/cif/1160 8 Encl . - Figure s 1 an d 2 Attachment s 1 an

d 2P.4 9

"E B 1 7 '9 0 13:0 5 CHEVPONRESEACHC O



### Recommendatio n fo rPhas e III o f Equipmen tLeakRegulations fo rValve s ye s I


### LeakDefinitio n •

« 100 0 pp m

I f > Allowabl e Leaker s i n on e quarte r

If > allowabl e leaks , i h on e perio d Monthl y monitorin g o f al l component s I f < Allowabl e Leaker s i n 2 consecutiv e month s 

# i Startin g poin to f th e regulatio n i s quarterly monitorin g o f al l component s Quarterly monitorin g o f al l component s I f £ Allowabl e Leaker s i n 2 consecutiv e quarters 

# 1
Semi-annua l monitorin g o f al l component s

If < .Allowabl e Leaker s i n 3 consecutiv e semi-annua l period s 

# 1
Annual monitorin g o f al l component s I f > allowabl e leaker s i n on e perio d

Note : Alternativ e approache s t o th e monitorin g requirement s show n i n thi s figure shoul d als o b e permitte d wher e demonstrate d t o b e equivalen t Thes e ma y includ e rando m partia l sampling , are aan d buildin g ven t monitoring , an d othe rapproaches .
Attachmen tNo . 1n

ATTACHMBN

T 2 a i
% Leakin g Ga s Valve s a t 5 0 & 100 0 pp m Lea k Defnitioi i ( 3 I n

8 9 1 0 1 1

Plan t 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0 i n m m X' n iP.5 1
"E B 1 7 '^ 0 13:0 7 CHEVROfNRESEftCHC O P. 3 Figur e 1 TYPICA L DETECTIO N & QUANTITATIO N LEVEL S O F CONSTITUENT S

Concentration Practica l Quantitatio

n Limit(PQL )

Metho d Detectio n Umi t(MDL )

Instrumen

tDetectio n limit(IDL )

Tim e

### S* !?',t:l' »

D



## + + +

(% ) uoucuc A

j o luopijj* ^

S' d ; 0jH3y3S3aN0dA3H 3 80:E T 06 . Ll 83 3P.5 3



# ATTACHMEN T1 1

Date : 2 2 Februar y199 0 To : Fugitiv e Emission s Regulator yNegotiation s Committe e From : Gu s vo n Bodunge n (La.) , Alle n Hershkowit z (NRDC) , Bo b

Majewsk i (NY) , Le s Montgomer y(Tx) , Harve l Roger s (JCAPCD) . Re : Propose d lea k definition , lea k frequenc yallowanc e and

monitorin g protocol . Durin g th e las t seve n month s w e hav e togethe r o r individuall y assesse d th e dat a brough t fort h durin g thes e committe e meetings , toure d a variet yo f th e SOCM I facilities , interviewe d manager s responsibl e fo r LDA R a t thes e facilities , discusse d issue s relate d t o thi s re g ne g wit h member s o f th e committe e an d other s i n ^attendanc e durin g committe e meeting s an d consulte d wit h ou r variou s and divers e constituencie s t o hel p u s determin e the followin g regulator yproposa l fo r existin g facilities . I n ligh t o f th e fac t tha t comparativel yfe wne w"grassroots " facilitie s wil l b e buil t i n th e foreseeabl e futur e relativ e t o the amoun t o f processin g capacit ytha t no w exists, w e vie wthi s sectio n o f th e forthcomin g propose d rul e a s particularl yimportant . Existin g facilities : Standard s fo r pumps , valves , flange s an d agitato r seals : Th e provision s o f thi s sectio n appl yt o facilitie s tha t commence d constructio n befor e (dat e o f proposal)... . (a ) Phas e 1 : LDAR . O n an d afte r (9 0 day s fromthe dat e o f promulgation ) pump s and valve s mus t mee t curren t lea k -detectio n and repai r (LDAR ) requirement s a s describe d i n 4 0 CF R 61.242- 2 (pumps ) and 61.242- 7 (valves) . I n addition , flange s and agitato r seal s mus t mee t paralle l requirement s t o valve s [regulator ylanguag e t o b e worke d on] . Othe r applicabl e provision s woul d includ e 61.242-1 0 (Dela yo f repair) , 61.243- 1 and - 2 (Alternativ e standard s fo r valves ) an d 61.24 4 (Alternativ e mean s o f emissio n limitation) . [Thes e othe r provision s woul d als o appl yt o flanges. ] (b ) Phas e 2 : LDAR . O n and afte r 1 2 month s fro mthe star t o f Phas e 1 pumps , valves , flange s and agitato r seal s mus t mee t th e sam e requirement s a s (a ) abov e excep t tha t a lea k i s define d a s a n instrumen t readin g o f 25 0 ppm v a s measure d accordin g t o Metho d 21 , an d a lea k repai r i s no t require d fo r leak s les s tha n 100 0 ppmv . "N o detectabl e emissions " i s redefine d a s (0. 5 x 25 0 ppmv) . [Standard s fo r othe r equipment , e.g . compressors , pressur e relie f devices , etc. , describe d i n 4 0 CF R Subpar t V , woul d als o b e revise d t o b e consisten t wit h th e redefinition s here. ]P.5 4

(c ) Phas e 3 : O n an d afte r 1 2 month s fromth e star t o f Phas e 2 th e followin g number s o f allowabl e leaker s wil l appl yfo r th e specifie d equipmen t (Phas e 2 LDA R requiremen t wil l no t appl yi n Phas e 3) : (1 ) Fo r valves : a t a lea k definitio s o f 25 0 ppmv , n o mor e tha n 2 percen t valv e leak s o r 1 valv e leaking , whicheve r i s greater ; (2 ) Fo r pumps : a t a lea k definitio n o f 25 0 ppmv , n o mor e tha n 2 percen t pum p leak s o r 1 pum

p leaking , whicheve r i s greater ; (3 ) Fo r flanges : a t a lea k definitio n o f 25 0 ppmv , n o mor e tha n 2 percen t flang e leak s o r 1 flang e leaking , whicheve r i s greater ; (4 ) Fo r agitato r seals : a t a lea k definitio n o f 25 0 ppmv , n o mor e tha n 2 percen t agitato r sea l leak s o r 1 agitato r sea l leaking , whicheve r i s greater ;Monitorin g Protoco l P.5 5



### 1 inspectio n @ 2 % leaker s v I Monthl y Inspectio n J



# r clos e and repai r afte r fou r month s 9 >25 0 ppm

v < < 2 % leaker s 

# f* - >25 0 ppm

v 2 consecutiv e inspection s 9 <25 0 ppm

v @ 2 % leaker s =? . / J Quarterl yInspectio n 1 £.



# - > b 1 inspectio n >25 0 ppm v 9 1 % leaker s 2 consecutiv e inspection s 9 <25 0 ppm

v 9 1 % leaker s -(— J Semiannua l Inspectio n

1 inspectio n leaker s 

# f

>25 0 ppm

v 9 0.5 % 2 consecutiv e inspection s 9 <25 0 ppm

v 9 0.5 % leaker s
Annua l Inspectio n m " f j

# Respons e Facto rAdjustmen t an d Emissio n Calculation s

ADJ_S V = SCREENJ/A L *
>



## (PCTCHE M * CHEM_RE F + PCT.SOL 1 * SOL1_RE F + PCT_SOL 2 * SOL2_REF ) ^

(PCT_CHE M + PCTSOL 1 + PCT_SOL2 )



# FO R GA S VALVES : 0.69 3 EF_KG_8PP M = (1/2.2 ) * 0.000016 8 * (ADJ_SV ) i fADJ_S V < = 8 pp m the n EF_KG_8PP M = 0.00003 3 i fADJ_SV> = 10,00 0 pp m the n EF_KG_8PP M = 0.045 2

EF_KG_8PPM , EF_KG_6PPM , EF_KG_4PPM , EF_KG_2PP M an d EF_KG_0PP M ar e i n unil s o fkg/hr/sourc e >



# o m
r o

# Correlatio n o

f Emissio n Factors v s %Leaker s Ga s Valve s i n E O & B D Unit s 0.00 5 C D O • 5 0.00 4 

# o C O 

### _§ > 0.00 3 C O 

# o o 0 3 L L 

# c o "C O C O 

# "E L U 0.00 2



### 0.00 1 - 

# a
n a
a !

. ^rnea n + 2 s = 0.00052 0



## . 

## J /

D

- —-jm - -g ——<—mea n + I s = 0.00043 0 

### '-Q 

# odan
. n \ mean=0.00034 1 

# n D



# a

1 0 1 5 

# Percen t Leaker s a t 500 pp m 2 0 2 5

# Correlatio n o

f Emissio n Factor s v s %Leaker s Ga s Valve s i n E O & B D Unit s 0.00 5 

# o o C O

C O k
_ 

# o

••— » 

# o 0 3 Li
_ 

### c o "c o C O 

# E U J 0.00 2


## 0.00 1

0 -

-

-

• ^

_ /mea n + 2 s = 0.00052 9

• i / n / mea n + I s = 0.00040 3 !^-Lfliea n = 0.00027

7 

### [£] . ...•— : D_ J D 

### D



# •

•

•1 

# • •

•

1 

### 1 0 2 0 3 0 

# Percen t Leakers a t 5 0 pp m 4 0

# Estimated EO/B D Emissio n Factor s fo rvariou s defaul t zer o values (kg/hr/source ) 

# 8 pp m 4 pp m 0 pp m # ofunit s 5 %leaker s & 50 0 ga s valve s liqui d valve s pump s flange s 

# pp m

5 %leaker s & 5 0 pp m ga s valve s liqui d valve s pumps flange s 0.00034 1 0.00085 3 0.00010 4 0.00037 8

0.00027 7 0.00073 6 0.00003 9 0.00033 3 0.00033 1 0.00076 1 0.00009 2 0.00034 8

0.00026 5 0.00063 9 0.00002 1 0.00029 6 0.00031 9 0.00055 6 0.00007 9 0.00031 3

0.00024 8 0.00042 2 0.00000 0 0.00025 2 1 2 1 1 5 1 4

6 9 1 9

T l U l C O

# Correlatio n o

f Emissio n Factors v s %Leakers Ga s Valve s i n E O & B D Unit s 0.00 5 C D O 

## 3 0.00 4 o C O 

## S P0.00 3 - c o o g 0.002 Li . 

## </ ) 0.00 1 

# " E L U 

## 0 -

- .

-

-



## a i D D



## a ^>

i 

# •

i 

# •^s



# •

i 

## 1 0 1 5 

# Percen t Leakers at 50 0 pp m 2 0 2 5

# Correlatio n o

f Emissio n Factor s v s %Leaker s Ga s Valve s i n E O & B D Unit s 0.00 5
< D o 3 0.00 4 

# o C O 

## _§> 0.00 3 C O 

## o g 0.00 2
$ 0.00 1 

# E L U 1 0 2 0 3 0 

# Percen t Leakers at 5 0 pp m 4 0

T J C7 )

# Correlatio n o

f Emissio n Factors vs %Leaker s Ga s Valve s i n E O Unit s 0.003 5
O 0.00 3 3 

### O C O 

### 0.002 5 -

C O 

# o o 0 3 L L 

# c o C O C O 

# E L U 0.00 2 - 

## 0.001 5 - 0.00 1 - 0.000 5 

# ot o 4 6 8 1 0



# Percen t Leakers at 50 0 pp m 1 2 1 4

# Correlatio n o

f Emissio n Factor s v s %Leaker s Ga s Valve s i n E O Unit s 0.003 5 O 0.00 3 O { 2 0.002 5

^ 0.00 2 c o 

# o " 5 0.001 5 03



### 0

# ma 5 1 0 1 5 2 0 

# Percen t Leakers at 5 0 pp m 2 5

# Correlatio n o

f Emissio n Factors vs %Leakers Ga s Valve s i n E O & BD(10,11,1 2 only ) Unit s 0.005
C D O 

# o C O 

## 0.00 4 - _§ > 0.00 3 c o o g 0.002 c 

# g < 8 0.00 1 

# E L U -

-

-

-

- „



# 9^n i 

# "/n

i 

# D y^

i / ^

I 

## 0 1 0 1 5



# Percen t Leakers at 50 0 pp m 2 0 2 5

O )

# Correlatio n o

f Emissio n Factors v s %Leakers Ga s Valve s i n E O & B D (10,11,1 2 only ) Unit s 0.00 5 C D 

### O 

### 3 0.00 4 

# o C O 

### 3 0.00 3 - C O 

### o g 0.00 2 LL

< 0 0.00 1 

# * E L U 

### Offi B 1 0 1 5 2 0 2 5 

# Percen t Leakers at 5 0 pp m 3 0 3 5

# Correlatio n o

f Emissio n Factor

s vs %Leakers Liqui d Valvn s i n E O & B D Unit s

C D O 1 3 O CO 

### 0.01 2
0.0 1
0.00 8 - D ) C O O 

# " o 0 3 L L 

### C 

# g "co



### ~ 0.00 2 L U 0.00 6
0.00 4

5 1 0 1 5 2 0



# Percen t Leaker

s at 50 0 pp m 2 5

# Correlatio n o

f Emissio n Factor s v s %Leaker s Liqui d Valve s i n E O Unit s 0.001 2
< Drsour<(kg/hr/Factors



# cissio 

# b L U 0.001 1 0.00 1 0.000 9 0.000 8 0.000 7 0.000 6 0.000 5 0.000 4 

# • -D- 

# •
•

0. 5 1 

## 1. 5 

# Percen t Leakers a t 50 0 pp m • •

L

# Correlatio n o

f Emissio n Factor

s vs %Leakers Liqui d Valve s i n E O & B D (10,11,1 2 only ) Unit s 0.01 2



## 1 0 1 5



# Percen t Leakers at 50 0 pp m 2 0 2 5

o o

# Correlatio n o

f Emissio n Factors vs %Leakers Liqui d Valves i n E O & B D (10,11,1 2 only ) Unit s

< D O O C O 

## 0.01 2
0.0 1
0.00 8 - O ) 

### £ 2 0.00 6 h o •4— • 

## o 0 3 

### " - 0.00 4 - C O 

## j = 0.002 L U 1 0 1 5 2 0 

# Percent Leaker

s a t 5 0 ppm 2 5 3 0

# Correlatio n o

f Emissio n Factors vs %Leakers Flange s i n E O & B D Unit s 0.002 5 CD 

### O 

### 3 0.00 2 

# o C O 

### 9 > 0.001 5 - C O 

# o g 

## 0.001 

# c o < 0 0.000 5 

# E L U 2 4 6 8 

# Percen t Leakers at 50 0 pp m 10

T 3

# Correlatio n o

f Emissio n Factor

s v s %Leakers Flange s i n E O & B D Unit s 0.002 5 0 O • 3 0.00 2 O C O 

### ^0.001 5 - c o o g 0.00 1 LL </ > 0.000 5 

# E L U 4 6 8 1 0 1 2 

# Percen t Leaker

s at 5 0 pp m 1 4 1 6

T l

# Correlatio n o

f Emissio n Factors vs %Leaker s Flange s i n E O & BD(10,11,1 2 only ) Unit s 0.002 5 C D O O C O 0.00 2 -



## 0.00 1 - 9 > 0.001 5 - c o o " o 0 3 L L C 

# o w0.000 5 

# E L U 2 3 4 5 

# Percen t Leakers a t 50 0 pp m

r o

# Correlatio n o

f Emissio n Factors vs %Leakers Flange s i n E O & BD(10,11,1 2 only ) Unit s 0.001 6 g 0.001 4 g 0.001 2 SZ 

## "o ) 0.00 1 2 0.0008 o o

** 0.0006 .9 0.000 4 C O C O 

## E 0.000 2 U J -

-

-

-

-

-


## [ 3 • 

# ... • D I irx —tJ - 

# •

-^" Q

I jj-^-jr*^-"'



## D

I I D



# •"

I I i 

## 0 4 6 8 1 0 1 2



# Percen t Leakers a t 5 0 pp m 1 4 1 6

# Correlatio n o

f Emissio n Factors v s %Leakers Pump s i n E O & B D Unit s g 

# 0.1 4

2 0 3 0 4 0 5 0



# Percen t Leakers at 50 0 pp m 6 0 7 0

^ i

# Correlatio n o

f Emissio n Factors v s %Leakers Pump s i n E O & B D Unit s 0.1 6 

## g 0.1 4 

## -

E 0.02 

## L U 2 0 4 0 6 0 

# Percen t Leakers a t 5 0 pp m 8 0P.7 6



# ATTACHMEN T1 3

-any process oobtfti rv i a+enal s c\<*. mie.r/riiH-^^y Or d\sc*s<\ hnucus / * ckdrtLtd + © a . -aroctss unrt-. ^zolaied
proces s m^fke/\ occurs , uot.tct 7 f/i e protest unit- is 

### trn pti'eo / prio r

+* o -t-lie
. bc^'mnihc, o£ the. ne.x+ cycle..

£ samples o

v B^+c U Optro/hoV l

£ > e.. 5 C Y > p-h-*••<
. (<i.v\aoca<a«..

-P.7 7

'

/&#// * 

# I/O £62 

# S/)// 64/z® 6D1 £oi 

# tot® Zol® 

# £a& 

# Sac



# a £ 

# (3 * " —• • • m w 

### ^MrfAAi of £rhl>Jibj£0)UC£

*

%desjcsjc*, 

# <? /OO/>/>,* 

# o ^/6.&7 So. .25".- 3 7 ify.fr ^ lO. #3 

# 4c, c 

# /i 6C.C7 38.99

3 *s<*?/e Vsc ) '/I off./^fS % £t?,$JC, tu3



# Q 1 

### £oo f&4 O /CC '7 */C.G 

### Z3.9d 3C.3C £?*3 3 7 2.7 3 

# 42. & 32.22 7a Ce^*•.'*>a *rf> f&jcJc,



# < ? SOCG /?/>,*, 

### O /£~C7 40.0 /3.</3 ?,o< ? O Q,69 

# V/./ y / / . /

i i 

# 1 i 

# i

' / $es?t £<?.-itf

-T#£<rsJ

/test f?-r.-1,0 

# e

/C<XJO />/>.* 

# a /d.67 -/CO /3,«2 9
. 6-1 O 

# 4.4 53A 

### 73 

# Co

s<. J 

### .;c ^a-r - f./!2.

4 x „UC/*;fej './v */o U,-e<s° /)/</. $<?;*/$-",77/ ZtrSO i's<'JS.'0^i 

### S£so£s '*0<..?r4#

/?$•vor

£ rf - /?*&'*£& $M.PUM P SEA L INFORMATIO N FO RETHYLEN E OXID E FACILITIE S S M = Singl e mechanica l Sea l DM = Dua l Mechanica l Sea l P = Packe d Sea l Plan t Pum p I D Sea l Numbe r Typ e EO- 1 Pum p 1167 1 - 68 5 pp m — Sealles s Pum p 1181 1 - 7 3 pp m - Sealles s 2 3 other s S M EO- 2 EO- 3
EO- 4 EO-S
EO- 6

EO- 7 EO- 8 EO- 9 Al l S M

Onl y inf o th e seal s AI L S M Al l D M
Pum p 111 2 Pum p 113 1 Pum p 118 6 Pum p 120 3 Pum p 160 7 Pum p 3220 9 Pum p 3223 0 Pum p 3229 9 1 6 other s Al l D M Al l D M Al l DM provide d indi e

ar e

- 0

- 0

- 0

- 0

- 0 NO T DM .

•

ppm v - DM ppm v - D M ppm v - D M ppm v - D M ppm v - D M

- 0 ppm

v - D M

- O ppm

v - D M

- O ppm

v — D M S M "n m t u r o C D U ) < 3 U l -\ ] ?0 D o a- a o o

- H T J

C J

# f

Typica l Product Natura l Ga s Condensat e 155 0 F(68°C )

Propylen e 90° F (32°C )

Ethan e 30° F (-1'C ) 

### .6 5
_

.6 0
_ £ * .5 5
_ > a . 

## a o .5 0
_ " o C D w " .4 5
_ .4 0 -. GRAP H 1 

### Dur a Sea l Guideline s Base d O n Specifi cGravit

y An d Targeted Maximu m Emissio n Level s

Doubl e (a.c

) AP I Plan s 53,5

4 Tandem(a.b) AP I Plan s 11,13,5 2 Singl e (b ) AP I Plan s 11.13,23,3 2



## 1 1 1 1 100 0 10,000 Leakag e t o Atmosphere , ppm , 1 cm . fro m source Notes : (a ) Minimur r (b) Floatin g (c ) Buffe rf l wit h pr o i sea l flus h 3 gpm . throttl e bushin g ui d mus t b e compat i cess flui d bl e P.7 9P.8 0

THRE E SINGL E MECHANICA L SEA L PUMP S I

N VO S SERVIC E HER

E SCREENED & BAG6ED T O DETERMIN E FUGITIV E EMISSIO

N RATE S & COST S FO

RCONTROLLIN

GTO < 50 0 PPM .

PUM P DESIGNATIO N 

### OV

A SCREENIN G VALU E 1 PP M 

## ; vo s

i LB/HR 1 BAGGING 1 VALU E TYPICA L

HRS/Y R 

## vo s

EMISSION S TONS/Y R APROX .

COS T T O CONVERT T O DOUBL E MECH . SEA

L COS T $ / TO NVO C REDUCTION
1500 . ,00 8 600 . .002 4 2000 . S 800,000. / TO N
755 . .0007 6 1280 . .0004 9 2000 . 4,000,000. / TO N
38000 . 

### 0 2 700 . .00 7 2000 . 300,000. / TO NDraft : 2/13/9 0

"STRAWMAN " EQUIPMEN T LEAKREGULATIO N (Followin g i s aroug

h draf tfo rdiscussio n purposes o f the Reg Ne g Committe e o f apossibl e regulation forequipmen

tleaks . I

tinclude s provision s an

d concepts tha

thav e been identifie d b y various committee members , l l i s notintende d l o represen

tEPA' s o ran

y othersingl e Committe e member' s position , bu

ti s intende

d t o reflec tameldin g o f

idea s presented s o far

. Ther e ar e numerou s references t

o existin g Subpar

tV o f 4 0 CF RPar t6 1 (NESHA Pequipmentleaks) . The followin g language i s quasi-regulator y an d i s presented l o sho w di e sor to f detail expecte d i

n the substantive provisions , nota s th e fina l regulator

y language , especiall y reference s l o Subpar tV , wher

e wordin g changes would stil l b e necessary . Any value s in blank s ar e example s only , an d d o no t represen tconsensus . Comment s an d explanation ar

ccontained in "[]". ] SCOP E O F STANDARD S Sectio n 1 . Applicatio n and designatio n o f sources . (a ) Th e provision s o f

thi s subpar tappl y t o al l sourc e categorie s liste d i n Appendi x . > 

# O |W e envisio n thes e standard s to appl y l o SOCM

I proces s source categorie s (an d notthe typical , ^
_ large-scal e continuou s processing al petroleu m refineries) , dia

l us e orproduce an

y o f the lis to f

^ t chemical s contained in the Clea n Ai rAc tAmendment

s (i.e. , di e lis to f

191). ] ^3* SUBJECT TYPE S O

F (b ) Th e provision

s o f this subpar

tappl y t o eac h of th e following items o

f equipmen

ttha tare TT\ EQUIPMEN

T intende d t o operat e i n hazardou

s organi cNESHA P(HON ) service : pumps , valves , flange s an d other^ H connectors , agitatorseals , compressors , pressur e relie f devices , sampling connection systems , an d open - ^ M ende d valve s orlines . m-X (The equipmen

tlea kstandard

s fo rth e HON , whe

n established , wil l cove rthe sam e «"a V equipmen tas foun d in Par t6 1 Subpar

tV . Thi s negotiatio n focuse s on ihos e source s t o whic h lea k£ ^ detectio n an

d repai rha s bee n applied , namel

y pump s an

d valves ; w e wil l als o includ e flange s an d otherconnectors , fro

m whic h emission s becom e proportionall y mor e significan ta s emission s fro m othercontrolled equipmen tdecrease , an

d agitato rseals . Standards forcompressors , pressur e relief devices , sampling connectio n systems , an d open-ende d valve s o rline s wil l remain unchange d an d wil l appl y l o HO N source s as ihe

y have applied l o Subpar tV source s becaus e thes e ar e zero emissio n standards . Fo

rsimplicit

y th e res to f thi s draf tregulation will dea

l onl y wit

h pumps , valves , flanges , an d agitatorseals . Fo

rlac ko f abelterdescripto rcurrently , w e wil l referto "i n HO N service " a s thos e piece s o f

equipmen

tassociated wilh di e HO N source categories. ]

T J 0 0Draft : 2/13/9 0

ORGANI C PERCEN T (c ) Th e provision s o f thi s subpar tappl y t o eac h piec e o f equipmen ti n HO N servic e containin g CUTOF F greate rthan (e.g. . 1 ) percen tb y weigh to f th e tota l o f

HO N chemical s in th e proces s stream . [Although i

n the past

, standard s have applied t

o streams containin g 1 0 percentorgreatero f the pollutan

tcovered , i ti s no

tclearwhy thi s leve l would b e appropriat e fordies e standards , in ligh t o f die muc h lowe rlea

kdefinitions . I

n addition , as we achiev e muc h lowe remission s fo

rthos e higherconcentration source s (1 0 percen torgreater) , equipmen

thandling thos e streams less tha n 1 0 percen tbecom e proportionall

y greate remitters , i

f th e standard

s d o no textend t

o diem . O

n die other han d ther e ma y b e aneed t

o identif y som e lo w level o

f organies in the equipment, e.g. , 1 percen t tota l hazardou

s organies , dia

l avoid s regulation o f

stream s wit h relativel y small contaminan tlevels. ] STANDARD S FO REXISTIN G Sectio n 2 . Existin g facilities : Standard s fo rpumps , valves , flanges, an d agitato rseals . UNIT S Th e provision s o f thi s sectio n appl y to facilitie s tha tcommence d constructio n befor e (dat e o f proposal ) . Th e owne ro roperato ro f afacility may elec tt o mee tth e requirement s o f alate rphas e durin g th e perio d in whic h an earlie rphas e i s effective , provide d h e notifie s th e Administrato ra s require d i n Sectio n 7 . PHAS E I : LDAR ; (a ) Phas e I : LDAR . O n and afte r(e.g. , 9 0 day s fro m th e dat e o f

promulgation ) pump s an d CURREN T LEA Kvalve s mus tmeetcurren tleakdetectio n an d repai r(LDAR ) requirement s a s describe d in 4 0 CF R DEFINITIO N (10,00 0 61.242- 2 (pumps ) an d 61.242- 7 (valves) . In addition , flange s an d agitato rseal s mus tmee tparalle l PPM ) requirement s t o valve s |regulator y languag e t o b e worke d onj . Othe rapplicabl e provision s woul d includ e 61.242-1 0 (Dela y o f repair) , 61.243- 1 an d - 2 (Alternativ e standard s fo rvalves) , an d 61.24 4 (Alternativ e mean s o f

emissio n limitation) . (Thes e othe rprovision s woul d als o appl y t o flanges] . (Thi s provisio n i s designed to achiev e di e degre e o f control tha

tLDARprovide s as soo n as possible , t

o heighten awarenes s o f

leaks an d lea kcontrol , t

o assis tplant

s i n identifyin g die sor

to f step s dia l wil l need t

o b e take n t o meetdi e Phase II

I standards , an

d to provid e time t

o meetdios e standards . LDA Rwil l als o b e applied t

o flange s an

d agitatorseal s di e same way itcurrentl y applie s t o valves . Th e definitio n o f alea kan d n o detectabl e emission s wil l remai n unchange

d durin g thi s transition . Method X , similarto Metho d 21 , i s being develope d fo rthes e regulations an d wil l belter address suc

h thing s a s calibration gas an d respons e factorcorrection . Forsimplicity , w e wil l continu e l o referto Method 2 1 here , keepin g in min d dia l asimilar , bu

tnew medio d wil l ultimately apply. ]Draft : 2/13/9 0 PHAS E II : LDAR ; TIGHTE RLEA K DEFINITIO N

PHAS E III : PERFORMANC E STANDARDS ; ALLOWABL E LEAKER S VALVE S PUMP S FLANGE S (b ) Phase II : LDAR . O n an d afte r (e.g. . 1 8 month s fro m Hi e star t o f Phase I ) pumps , valves , flange s an d agitato r seal s must mee t th e sam e requirement s a s (a ) above , excep t tha t a lea k i s define d as a n instrumen t readin g o f (e.g. . SO ) ppm va

s measure d accordin g t o Metho d 21 , an d a lea k repai r i s no t require d fo r leak

s les s tha n (e.g. , 50-500 ) ppmv . "N o detectabl e emissions " i s redefine d as (0. 5 x lea k definition ) ppmv . (Standard s fo r othe r equipment , e.g . compressors , pressur e relie f devices , etc. , describe d i n 4 0 CF R Subpar t V , woul d als o be revise d t o be consisten t wit h th e redefinition s here. ]

(Thi s provisio n represent s a lowerin g o f di e standar d i n di e for m o f a lowe r lea k definition . Whereas Phas

e I wa s designe

d t o assur

e tha t a basi c lea k

detectio n an d repai r progra m i s started earl y an d to focu s o n di e larges t leakers , Phas

e I I i s designed t o expan d th e progra m t o includ e smalle r leaks . T o assur e dia l tota l emission s ar c reduced , i l i s necessar y t o addres

s thes e source s that lea k a t rates muc h lowe r tha n indicate d b y a 10,00 0 ppmvmonito r reading . Phas e I I i s als o intende d t o provid e to plan t operator s di e data needed l o determin e wha t combinatio n o f practices an d equipmen t wil l b

e neede d t o mee

t specifi c lea k

rat e targets . Thi s phase als o recognizes that di e "leak " definitio n nee

d no t b e th e sam e a

t whic h lea k

repai r i s required . (c ) Phas e III : O n an d afte r (e.g. , 1 8 month s fro m th e star t o f Phas e II ) th e followin g number s o f allowabl e leaker s wil l appl y fo r th e specifie d equipmen t (Phas e I I LDA R requiremen t wil l no t appl y i n Phase HI) : (1 ) Fo r valves : a t a lea k definitio n o f (e.g. , 50 ) ppmv , n o mor e tha n (e.g. , 5 ) percen t leaks o r (e.g. , 1 ) valv e leaking , whicheve r i s greater . (2 ) Fo r pumps : a t a lea k definitio n o f (e.g. , 50 ) ppmv , n o mor e tha n (e.g. , .5 ) percen t leaks o r (e.g. , 1 ) pum p leaking , whicheve r i s greater . (3 ) Fo r flanges : a t a lea k definitio n o f (e.g. , 50 ) ppmv , n o mor e tha n (e.g. . 5 ) percen t leaks o r (e.g. . 1 ) flang e leaking , whicheve r i s greater .

(Th e performanc

e standard s are expressed i n term s o f percen t o r numbe r o f allowabl e leakers an d no t emissions , becaus

e leak s ar e a paramete r dia l ca n be directl y an d easil y measured whereas mas s fugitiv e emission s ar e no L Althoug h di e relationshi p betwee n percen t leak s an d emission s i s not precise , percen t leak s ar e th e bes

t indirec t indicato r of mas s emissions . Therefor e i l makes sens e t o specif y a performanc

e standar

d i n term s o f leaks . Th e abov e structur

e als o allow s fo r differen t lea k definition s fo r differen t components . Th e standard s als o allo wfo r smal l componen t counts . Fo r example , i f th e standar d fo r pump

s were 5 percen t leakers , an d a facilit y ha d onl y 8 pumps , di e standar d woul d b

e th e minimu m allowabl e numbe r o f leaker s instea d o f a percent .Draft : 2/13/9 0

INITIA L SCREENIN G INITIA L FREQUENC Y REPAI RA COMPONEN T

PERCEN T LEAKE R CALCULATIO N Othe r provision s currcnd y i n Subpar t V wil l stil l appl y suc h a s thos e fo r difficul t an d unsaf e t o monito r equipment ; dela y o f repair ; an d alternative means o f emissio n limitation. ] (5 ) Al l component s i n subparagraph s (l)-(4 ) shal l be screene d withi n 9 0 day s afte r (th e onset o f Phas e III ) usin g th e tes t method s an d procedure s i n Sectio n 5 . (6 ) Th e result s i n subparagrap h (5 ) o f thi s paragrap h shal l b e use d t o determin e th e initia l screenin g frequenc y fo r eac h typ e o f component , a s specifie d i n Sectio n 4 .

(7 ) I f a screenin g valu e greate r tha n (e.g. . 50-500 ) ppm vi s found , i t mus t be repaire d withi n 1 5 days , wit h a firs t attemp t a t repai r withi n 5 days .

[I tmakes sens e t

o repai racomponenttha

tca n b e repaire d wil h reasonable assurance dia l greaterleakage woul d notresult. Thus th e repairtrigge rscreenin g valu e i s highertha n the lea

k definition. ] (8 ) Percen t leakin g component s shal l b e calculate d accordin g t o th e followin g formula : L % = (( # o f leakers)/(baseline) ) * 10 0 wher e # o f leaker s = numbe r o f component s wit h screenin g valu e greate r tha n th e specifie d lea k definitio n

STANDARD S FO ROTHE R EQUIPMEN T STANDARD S FO RNE W UNIT S baselin e =(numbe r o f component s screened ) + ( 0. 5 x numbe r o f component s take n ou t o f servic e i n a n activ e uni t subsequen t t o th e initia l screenin g performe d a s require d i n (c)(5 ) o f thi s section ) (d ) Standard s fo r othe r equipmen t covere d b y thi s subpar t remai n unchanged .
Sectio n 3 . Ne wfacilities : standard s fo r pumps , valves , flanges an d agitato r seals . Th e provision s o f thi s sectio n appl y t o facilitie s tha t commence d constructio n afte r (dat e o f proposal ) .Draft : 2/13/9 0 PUMP S AN D AGITATO RSEAL S (a ) Fo r pump s an d agitato r seals : a t a lea k definitio n o f (e.g. , 50 ) ppmv , n o mor e tha n (e.g. , 3 ) percen t leaks o r (e.g. , 1 ) componen t leaking , whicheve r i s greater . VALVE S AN D FLANGE S

INITIA L SCREENIN G INITIA L FREQUENC Y REPAI RA COMPONEN T SCREENIN G FREQUENC Y

VALVE S MONTHL Y (b ) Fo r valve s an d flanges : a t a lea k definitio n o f (e.g. . 50 ) ppmv , n o mor e tha n (e.g. , 3 ) percen t leaks o r (e.g. . 1 ) componen t leaking , whicheve r i s greater . (3 ) Percen t leakin g component s shal l be calculate d accordin g t o th e followin g formula :

L % = (( # o f leakers)/(TC) ) * 10 0 wher e # o f leaker s = numbe r o f component s wit h screenin g valu e greate r tha n th e specifie d lea k definitio n T C =numbe r o f component s screene d (c ) Al l component s i n paragraph s (a ) an d (b ) shal l be screene d withi n 9 0 day s afte r th e dat e o f startu p usin g th e tes t method s an d procedure s i n Sectio n 5 . (d ) Th e result s i n paragrap h (c ) o f thi s paragrap h shal l b e used t o determin e th e initia l screenin g frequenc y fo r eac h typ e o f component , as specifie d i n Sectio n 4 .

(e ) I f a screenin g valu e greate r tha n (e.g. . 50-500 ) ppm vi s found , i t mus t be repaire d withi n 1 5 days , wit h a firs t attemp t a t repai r withi n 5 days . Sectio n 4 . Screenin g frequency .

Based o n th e result s o f screenin g require d i n Sectio n 2(5) , Sectio n 3(c) , an d thi s section , th e followin g screenin g frequencie s apply : (a ) Valves . (1 ) Greate r tha n th e number o f allowabl e leakers , except as provide d i n paragraph s (3 ) an d (4 ) below : monthl y screenin g o f al l component s fo r a t least 2 consecutive months . I f 2 consecutive screening s ar e eac h les s tha n o r equa l t o th e numbe r o f allowabl e leakers , th e frequenc y i n paragrap h (2 ) belo wwil l apply .Draft : 2/13/9 0 QUARTERL Y SEMIANNUA L

ANNUA L

FLANGE S QUARTERL Y
ANNUA L BIENNIA L PUMP S AN D AGITATO RSEAL S MONTHL Y QUARTERL Y (2 ) Equa l t o o r les s tha n th e number o f allowabl e leakers : quarterl y screenin g o f al l components , excep t a s provide d i n paragraph s (3 ) an d (4 ) below . (3 ) Equa l t o o r les

s tha n th e number o f allowabl e leaker s fo r 2 consecutive quarterl y o r annua l screenings : semiannua l screenin g o f al l components , except a s provided i n paragrap h (4 ) below . I f a sourc e exceed s th e numbe r o f allowabl e leaker s durin g a semiannua l screening , th e frequenc y specifie d i n paragrap h (2 ) applies . (4 ) Les s tha n 0. 5 time s th e numbe r o f allowabl e leaker s fo r 2 consecutive quarterl y o r semiannua l screenings : annua l screenin g o f al l components . I f a sourc e exceed s th e numbe r o f allowabl e leaker s durin g a n annua l screening , th e frequenc y specifie d i n paragrap h (2 ) applies .

(b ) Flanges . (1 ) Greate r tha n th e numbe r o f allowabl e leakers : quarterl y screenin g o f al l component s fo r a t leas t 2 consecutiv e quarters . I f 2 consecutiv e screening s ar e eac h les s tha n o r equa l t o th e numbe r o f allowabl e leakers , th e frequenc y i n paragrap h (2 ) belo wwil l apply .

(2 ) Equa l t o o r les

s tha n th e number o f allowabl e leakers : annua l screenin g o f al l components , excep t a s provide d i n paragrap h (3 ) below .

(3 ) Les s tha n 0. 5 time s th e numbe r o f allowabl e leaker s fo r 2 consecutive annua l screenings : biennia l screenin g o f al l components . (c ) Pump s an d agitato r seals . (1 ) Greate r tha n th e numbe r o f allowabl e leakers : monthl y monitorin g o f al l component s fo r a t least 2 consecutiv e months . (2 ) Equa l t o o r les

s tha n th e numbe r o f allowabl e leakers : quarterl y monitorin g o f al l components .Draft : 2/13/9 0

ALTERNATIV E STANDARDS : RANDO M SAMPLIN G

REPAI RA COMPONEN T ALTERNATIV E STANDARDS : BATC H PROCESSE S Sectio n 4a . Alternativ e standard s fo rvalve s an d flanges : rando m sampling . (a ) Th e owne ro roperato rof afacility may choos e t o scree n arando m sampl e o f component s instea d o f

screenin g al l component s a s require d in paragraph s 4(a)(3 ) an d (4) , an d 4(b)(2 ) an d (3) . (b ) [Thi s paragrap

h will describ e th

e rando m sampl e selectio n scheme . We envisio n arando m sampl e schem e ver

y similart

o dia l use d i n the woodstove s standards , copie s o f whic h have bee

n distributed to the negotiatin g committee . Basically , (hi s schem e identifie s aminimu m numbe ro f item s to sampl e an

d establishe s the number

s tha tindicat e bot h a"pass " ora"fail" . Component s ar e sampled sequentiall y fro m a startin g pointunti

l the numbe

ro f leaker s foun d eidie rindicates a"pass " o ra"fail" . Th e minimu m an d maximu m number

s l o b e screened , an

d die number

s indicating "pass " an

d "fail " wil l be published in die rule . Once afacilit

y reaches a

n indicatoro f

"pass " o r"fail" , i l cannotcontinue unles s all components i n di e facilit

y ar e sampled . I

n addition , the alternativ e standar d cannotb e use

d t o advance t

o les s frequen

tmonitoring ; i . e. , I f on e i s sampling randoml y fo rasemiannua

l frequency , h

e canno tus e the results t

o advanc e t

o annua l sampling . Severa l star tpoint s woul d b e pre-identified prio rt o die rando

m selectio n process . Conceptually , a sampling rout

e throug h th e entir e plan twould b e identified whic h would b e divide d into roughly equidistant startin g points , notl o excee d 10 . A star tpoin twould die

n b e randoml

y selecte d usin g awell-know n an d widel y availabl e "generator" , suc h a s di e lastnumbe

ri n die Do w Jones Industria l Averag e clos e forth

e secon d Wednesda

y o f di e mondi . Screenings woul d the n be performe

d within X day s aftertha tdate . Finally , thi s sectio n would specif y tha tai rcomponent

s previously foun

d leakin g an

d repaire d woul d b e included in di e sample , irrespective o f il s location. ] (c ) I f ascreenin g valu e greate rtha n (e.g. . 50-500 ) ppm v i s found , i tmus tb e repaire d withi n 1 5 days , wit h afirs tattemp ta trepai rwithi n 5 days . Sectio n 4b . Alternativ e standards : batch processes . [Thi s sectio n would describ e alternativ e standard

s develope d forbatc

h processes , i f

any . Thes e standard s coul d replace all o rpar to f aphase. ]

o oDraft : 2/13/9 0

EQUIVALEN

T STANDARD

S

ENFORCEMEN

T SCREENING

S

TES T METHOD

S Sectio n 4c . Equivalen

tstandards . [Thi s section woul

ddescrib e criteri afo

r determining equivalence
. I t i s generall

y agree ddia l an y approac hfo r determining equivalenc e woul db e base do n emissions , i.e. , th

e equivalen

t standar d woul d have l o demonstrat

e tha t equa l o r greate r emissio n reduction woul

dbe achieve

dcompare dwit h di e publishedstandard. ] Sectio n 4d . Enforcemen

tscreenings . (a ) A tan y time , the Administratorma y requir e th e owne roroperato ro

f aplan tt o perfor m a screening o

f all o rarando

m sample o

f component

s a s describe

d i n section 4a(b) . (b ) The result

s o f an y screening require

d b y paragrap

h (a ) abov e will be use

d to determin

e the subsequen tscreening frequenc

y a s describe

d i n Section 4 . Sectio n 5 . Tes tmethods an

d procedures . (a ) The testmethods an

d procedure

s containe d i n 61.24 5 appl y (substituting th

e applicable lea

k an d organicconcentration definitions a s specified above) . (b) Screening result

s shall be adjuste

d fo rresponse facto

ro f the instrumen

tb y either : (1 ) Applyin

g the highestresponse factortha twoul d b e foun d i n an y o f th e process streams o

f th e process uni

tt o all screening values fo

rtha tuni tregardless o

f th e chemica l componen

tmix, o r (2) Applyin

g individua

l response factor

s t o eac h screening valu

e fo rthe specific chemica

l mi x foun d i n th e piec e o f equipmen

tscreened . (3) Adjuste

d screening values shal

l be calculate

d accordin

g t o the followin

g formula : SV A = |(HO % x H

O RF) + Z (SOLn % x SOL n RF) ( x fSV

» • SV. I (HO % + I (SOLn % + SOLn%) ) wher e SV

A = the adjusted screening value HO % = percentage o

f the hazardous organici

n the equipmen

tbein g screene dCURREN T REQUIREMENT S APPL Y RANDO M SAMPL E REQUIREMENT S

REPORTIN G Draft : 2/14/9 0 H O R F = th e instrumen trespons e facto r fo r th e hazardou s organi c i n th e equipmen t bein g screene d SOLn % = percentage s o f eac h o f th e n solvent s in th e equipmen tscreene d SOL n RF = respons e facto rforeac ho f n solvent s in th e equipmen tscreene d SV 0 = observe d screenin g valu e SV „ = backgroun d screenin g valu e (4 ) Individua l compoun d respons e factor s shal l b e determine d directl y fo rth e specifi c instrumen t use d i n th e screenin g accordin g t o th e procedur e in Metho d X . Publishe d respons e factor s ma y no tb e use d i n determinin e adjuste d screenin g values . (Respons e factor s ar e no t onl y afunctio n o f

th e typ e o r

mode l o f

instrumen t

use dbu t ar e als o instrumen t

specific , eve n amon g instrument s o f di e sam e model
. I

t i s importan t

t o calculat e di e instrument-specifi c respons e factor s fo r thi s reason. Accordin g to th e curren t Metho d21 , a n averag e o f dire e calculate dresponse factor s woul db e use d(Sectio n 4.4.1) J 6 . Recordkeeping . (a ) Th e curren trecordkeepin g requirement s o f 61.24 6 shal l apply . [Thi s wil l b e revise dt o includ e flange s an dagitato r seals , whic hwil l hav e requirement s similar t o valves. ] (b ) A n owne ro roperato rchoosin g t o emplo y rando m sequentia l screenin g a s describe d i n Sectio n 4 amus tmaintai n record s that (1 ) Identif

y th e entir e samplin g route , includin g locatio n o f al l startin g points , an d location an d typ e o f eac h component , prio rt o th e initia l rando m screening , an d (2 ) Identif

y th e star tpoin to

f eac h screening , th e numbe ro f component s screened , th e numbe r o f leakin g components , an d identity o f eac h componen tfoun d leaking . Sectio n 7 . Reporting .Draft : 2/13/9 0 CURREN T REQUIREMENT S AN D LEAKE R INFORMATIO N NOTIFICATIO N O F ADVANCE D PHAS E IMPLEMENTATIO N (a ) Th e sam e reportin g requirement s containe d in 61.24 7 apply . I n additio n t o th e informatio n requeste d i n 61.247(b) , thi s repor tshall identif y thos e source s (e.g. , valve s in liqui d service , valve s in ga s service , etc. ) foun d leaking , th e percen tleaker s o f eac h typ e o f

source , an d th e tota l numbe ro f eac h typ e o f sourc e tested . (b ) A n owne ro roperato rwh o wishe s t o implemen talate rphas e tha n require d a tth e curren t tim e mus tnotif

y Ih e Administrato ra tleas t3 0 day s prio rt o th e initia l screenin g require d in Sectio n 2(c)(5) . NOTIFICATIO N O F LES S FREQUEN T MONITORIN G NOTIFICATIO N O F ALTERNATIV E STANDAR D (c ) A n owne ro roperato rwh o wishe s t o us e th e result s o f ascreenin g performe d i n Sectio n 4 t o g o t o les s frequen tmonitoring , mus tnotif y th e Administrato rin writin g a tleas t3 0 day s prio rt o screening . (d ) A n owne ro roperato rwishin g t o us e an alternativ e standar d mus tnotif y th e Administrato r in writin g a tleas t3 0 prio rt o implementin g th e alternativ e standard . FOR M O F SUBMITTA L O F SCREENIN G INFORMATIO N (e ) Al l report s shall b e submitte d t o EP A o n electroni c medi a(e.g hard copy . flopp y diskettes ) a s wel l a s

[Emission s dat

aar e neede d b

y di e sourc e an

d b y several EP

A program

s foranumbe

ro f purposes . Computer-generated information woul d be muc h mor e easil y accessibl e an

d analyzed . I

t makes sense , therefore , t o pursue di e developmen to f a n electroni c dat

aforma ttha tcoul d meetth e various needs. ]

1 0

T l CO o