TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 

TO: Jodi Howard, US EPA/OAQPS/SPPD/RCG 

FROM: Eastern Research Group, Inc.

DATE: February 8, 2012

SUBJECT: Revised Beyond-the-Floor Analysis for the Polyvinyl Chloride and 

Copolymers (PVC) Production Source Category 

1.0 Introduction 

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), under section 112 of the Clean Air 

Act (CAA), is required to establish emissions standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) 

emitted from polyvinyl chloride and copolymers (PVC) production facilities. The complete set of 

HAP is listed under CAA section 112(b). To do so, EPA must first determine the minimum 

stringency “floor” requirements. A separate memorandum documents the revised maximum 

achievable control technology (MACT) floor analysis for existing and new PVC units.1 

EPA must also examine more stringent “beyond-the-floor” (BTF) regulatory options to 

determine MACT. Unlike the minimum stringency requirements of the floor, EPA must consider 

various impacts of the more stringent regulatory options such as costs and emissions reductions 

in determining whether MACT standards are to reflect BTF requirements. This memorandum 

describes the revised cost and emissions reductions for PVC units achieved by applying BTF 

regulatory options. 

Sections 2.0 and 3.0 discuss the selection of more stringent controls or emissions levels 

than the floor level reviewed for this analysis for existing and new sources, respectively. Section 

4.0 discusses the methodology used to estimate costs and emissions reductions of the more 

stringent controls and Section 5.0 summarizes the results of the BTF analysis. 

2.0 Identification of More Stringent Controls for Existing Sources 

The MACT floor analysis for existing sources results in emissions levels that each 

existing PVC unit is required to meet. As documented in a separate memorandum2, the emissions 

reductions and costs of the MACT floor level of control were estimated using the following 

assumptions: 

1. For each process vent subcategory, units that needed to meet the MACT floors for 

emissions of vinyl chloride (VC), hydrogen chloride (HCl), total organic HAP, and 

chlorinated dibenzodioxins and chlorinate dibenzofurans (CDD/CDF) from process 

vents would add a (an additional) refrigerated condenser; 

1
2. For each resin subcategory, units that needed to meet the MACT floors for residual 

VC and total non-vinyl chloride organic HAP (total non-VC organic HAP) in resin 

would install a new resin stripper; 

3. All units currently meet the MACT floor for equipment leaks; 

4. Units that need to meet the MACT floor for heat exchange systems would implement 

a leak detection and repair (LDAR) program with a leak action level of 50 parts per 

billion (ppb) of VC; 

5. All units currently meet the MACT floor for storage vessels; 

6. All units currently meet the MACT floor for wastewater; and 

7. All units currently meet the MACT floor for other emission sources. 

BTF options were evaluated and analyzed for each of the emission sources listed above 

from existing sources. 

2.1 Process Vents

The control technologies that would be needed to achieve the MACT floor levels for 

process vents (i.e., enhanced VC recovery) are generally the most effective controls available for 

reducing VC, HCl, total organic HAP, and CDD/CDF. The incremental costs and emission 

reductions of all facilities meeting the new source MACT floors were determined. 

2.2 Resins

For stripped resins, it was determined that additional emission reductions could be 

achieved by routing vent streams from process components downstream of the stripper (e.g., the 

PVC dryer vent(s)) to a thermal oxidizer (TO). The TO would theoretically achieve at least a 

98 percent reduction of the residual HAP left in the resin (after the MACT floor levels have been 

met by stripping the resin) that is emitted in the dryer vent stream(s). The incremental emissions 

reductions and costs for installing a TO to control emissions from the PVC dryer vent(s) were 

determined. 

2.3 Equipment Leaks

For equipment leaks, the MACT floor level of control is the LDAR program in 40 CFR 

part 61 subpart V. A BTF option equivalent to the hazardous organic national emission standards 

for hazardous air pollutants (HON), which is considered the most effective control of emissions 

from equipment leaks, was analyzed. 

2.4 Heat Exchange Systems

As described in a separate memorandum1, the MACT floor analysis for heat exchange 

systems was revised since proposal. Based on those revisions, the existing source MACT floor 

level of control is an LDAR program with two different leak action levels for VOC and for vinyl 

chloride, depending on which monitoring option a facility elects to use. The MACT floor leak 

action levels for existing sources and new sources were evaluated independently, but the 

resulting action levels are the same. Furthermore, the monitoring frequencies are the same. A 

heat exchange system LDAR program is the most effective control available for reducing leaks 

2
from heat exchange systems. A BTF option of having existing sources meet a more stringent leak 

action level, such as a new source action level that may have been more stringent than the 

existing source action level, could not be analyzed as the leak action levels are the same (50 

ppbw in the cooling water). EPA did not receive any comments on, or identify, any other control 

options more stringent than the MACT floor to reduce HAP from heat exchange systems at PVC 

production facilities. Furthermore, we assumed that all facilities would monitor for vinyl chloride 

using Method 107, as they already do it in-house for resin and wastewater. We reviewed the 

resin and wastewater data for Method 107 and it looks like the lowest that method can detect is 

50 ppb. On that basis, it is not technically feasible to perform vinyl chloride monitoring with 

Method 107 at anything lower than 50 ppb. 

2.5 Storage Vessels

As described in the MACT floor analysis1, 2 types of storage vessels were identified; 

storage vessels storing material that are gasses at ambient conditions (vapor pressures greater 

than 14.7 pounds per square inch, absolute (psia)) and storage vessels storing all other materials. 

Information provided in the August 21, 2009 section 114 showed that materials with vapor 

pressures greater than 14.7 psia are stored in pressure vessels. All other materials at all facilities 

are stored in fixed roof tanks ranging in size from less than 5,000 gallons up to 30,000 gallons. 

The following is a description of the BTF options analyzed for each type of storage vessel: 

• Pressure vessels: The results of the MACT floor analysis1 showed that materials 

with vapor pressures greater than 14.7 pounds per square inch absolute (psia) are 

stored under pressure (i.e., pressure vessels); a closed vent system that is routed to 

a control device is used when filling or emptying the vessels. Based information 

provided in the August 21, 2009 section 114, no additional work practices or 

control measures were identified that would be more effective at reducing HAP 

emissions from pressure vessels than those in the MACT floor; therefore no BTF 

options for pressure vessels were analyzed. 

• Fixed roof storage vessels: Several storage tanks with capacities greater than 

20,000 gallons (gal) were identified that have the potential to emit several tons of 

HAP per year depending on the vapor pressure of the material stored and the 

number of turnovers. A BTF option of requiring floating roof tanks meeting the 

requirements of 40 CFR part 63 subpart WW for storage vessels meeting the 

specific vapor pressure and storage capacity parameters of 40 CFR part 60, 

subpart Kb was analyzed. Based information provided in the August 21, 2009 

section 114, no additional work practices or control measures were identified that 

would be more effective at reducing HAP emissions from fixed roof storage 

vessels less than 20,000 gal in size than those in the MACT floor; therefore no 

BTF options were analyzed for fixed roof storage vessels less than 20,000 gal in 

size. 

2.6 Wastewater

For wastewater, a BTF option of routing all process wastewater, regardless of HAP 

concentration, to a wastewater stripper was analyzed. 

3
As discussed in a separate memorandum, facilities indicated a variety of work practices 

to minimize emissions from maintenance wastewater including collection on concrete secondary 

containment pads, collection in trenches and pits, and routing maintenance wastewater through 

the facility clarification system. However, maintenance wastewater activities result in generation 

of wastewater in such a manner that it cannot be collected, enclosed, and routed to a wastewater 

treatment system or otherwise managed in a controlled or enclosed system as process wastewater 

can. 

Maintenance wastewater streams can vary considerably in HAP concentration. 

Additionally, sufficient information was not available from industry regarding work practices to 

manage and control fugitive emissions from maintenance wastewater streams to prescribe or 

enforce an emissions standard for maintenance wastewater. The maintenance wastewater work 

practices described by industry are generally equivalent to the compliance requirements of 40 

CFR 63.105 of subpart F; therefore, the MACT floor for maintenance wastewater at PVC 

production facilities consists of the requirements of 40 CFR 63.105 of subpart F. Based on 

available information, no additional work practices or control measures beyond-the-floor were 

identified. 

2.7 Other Emissions Sources 

For other emission sources, an additional work practice used to minimize emissions from 

PVC facilities was identified. The work practice consists of installing floating objects in the 

gasholder water seal to limit fugitive emissions. 

3.0 Selection of More Stringent Controls for New Sources 

Except for emissions from storage vessels, equipment leaks and other emission sources, 

no technologies or methods were identified to achieve emission limits that would be more 

stringent than the MACT floor limits or work practices for new units based on the best 

performing PVC facilities. The control technologies and work practices necessary to achieve the 

MACT floor levels are generally the most effective controls available. 

Requiring floating roof tanks or fixed roof tanks routed to a closed vent system and 

control device for storage vessels that (1) have a storage capacity equal to or greater than 

40,000 gal and store material with maximum true vapor pressures greater or equal to 0.75 pounds 

per square inch absolute (psia) or (2) have a storage capacity equal to or greater than 20,000 gal 

and less than 40,000 gal and store material with maximum true vapor pressures greater or equal 

to 4 psia appears to be cost-effective ($2,000 to $12,000 per ton of HAP). 

Requiring the LDAR program specified in 40 CFR part 63, subpart UU appears to be 

cost-effective ($2,800 per ton of HAP). 

Requiring floating objects covering the gasholder water seal appears to be cost-effective 

($1,000 per ton of HAP). 

4
4.0 Methodology Used to Estimate Costs and Emission Reductions

The methodology used to calculate costs and emissions reductions from applying the 

more stringent controls followed the same procedures as those discussed in the memorandum 

titled “Revised Cost and Emissions Reductions for Major Sources in the Polyvinyl Chloride and 

Copolymers (PVC) Production Source Category2.” 

4.1 Process Vents

The procedure used to asses MACT floor costs and emission reductions (described in a 

separate memorandum2) was used to asses BTF costs and emission reductions for process vents 

in each subcategory, except that instead of meeting the existing source MACT floor, refrigerated 

condensers were sized such that all facilities could meet the new source MACT floor for the 

appropriate process vent subcategory. This analysis can be found in Attachment A. 

4.2 Resins

Emissions reductions from application of the BTF controls relative to the MACT floor 

limits were calculated for facilities in each resin subcategory using the following procedure. 

First, the reduction efficiency of the BTF control for VC was applied to the uncontrolled 

concentration of VC estimated in the stripped resin exiting the resin stripping operation to 

determine the total reduction the control would achieve for facilities in each resin subcategory. It 

was assumed that all VC remaining in the resin after being stripped would be removed by the 

drying operation and exit the process through the dryer vent(s). The reduction in VC 

concentration from current actual concentration levels to the MACT floor limits was previously 

calculated for the MACT floor cost and emissions reduction analysis2 for each resin subcategory. 

For VC and total organic HAP, the incremental reduction between the more stringent BTF 

control and the MACT floor was calculated by subtracting the MACT floor emissions reductions 

from the reductions achieved by the more stringent control for all facilities in each resin 

subcategory. 

The EPA Air Compliance Advisor (ACA)3 program was used to estimate the cost of a 

regenerative thermal oxidizer (RTO) for each facility. The main inputs to the program are: 

• Dryer exhaust total organic HAP flow rate (mass); 

• Dryer exhaust volumetric flow rate; and 

• Dryer exhaust temperature and moisture content. 

The above inputs were calculated as follows: 

• Pounds per hour of total organic HAP at MACT floor emission levels were 

used as the initial pollutant input to the program. To yield a conservative 

fuel cost estimate, it was assumed that all total organic HAP was comprised 

of VC; therefore combustion properties of VC were assigned to total organic 

HAP. 

5
• Dryer exhaust flow rates were calculated first by determining a flow rate 

factor calculated from an average value of dryer flow rate divided by annual 

resin production. Dryer exhaust flow rates and non-confidential resin 

production rates were extracted from facility submitted survey information4. 

This average was then multiplied by 2006 facility capacity information to 

obtain a theoretical maximum flow rate for each facility. In instances where 

facilities 2008 production was greater than the 2006 capacity, the 2008 nonconfidential production information was used. 

• Waste stream temperature and moisture content was calculated as an 

average of the data provided by OxyVinyls - Pedricktown. OxyVinyls – 

Pedricktown was the only facility for which industry provided supplemental 

dryer exhaust testing information. 

An RTO cost scenario was completed for each facility. Costs were calculated in 2008 and 

2010 dollars (based on Chemical Engineering general cost index). This analysis can be found in 

Attachment B. 

4.3 Equipment Leaks

The BTF option for equipment leaks consists of a more stringent LDAR program. The 

cost of all facilities complying with the National Emissions Standards for Equipment Leaks – 

Control Level 2, subpart UU of 40 CFR part 63 was estimated using costs previously developed 

and documented in the memorandum “Analysis of Emissions Reduction Techniques for 

Equipment Leaks5.” In the memorandum, RTI International developed model chemical facilities 

and costs for complying with various equipment leak options. A medium complexity chemical 

facility was used to model major source PVC facilities. Option 1 for valves, pumps, and 

connectors were determined to be equivalent with subpart UU of 40 CFR part 63. Equipment 

leak emissions of VOC, which for this analysis were considered analogous to total organic HAP, 

were estimated using previously developed emissions factors, equipment counts, and the control 

effectiveness of LDAR programs used by each facility. A description of emission factors and 

equipment counts can be found in a separate memorandum5. Emission factors were developed 

using facility data from the Miscellaneous Organic NESHAP MACT floor development and the 

EPA Office of Air Quality and Planning Standards Protocol for Equipment Leak Emission 

Estimates6. This analysis can be found in Attachment C. 

4.4 Storage Vessels

The vapor pressure and storage capacity parameters for the BTF option are those from 40 

CFR part 60 subpart Kb: (1) the material stored has a maximum true vapor pressure greater or 

equal to 0.75 psia (5.2 kilopascal (kPa)) and the storage vessel has a capacity equal to or greater 

than 40,000 gal (151 cubic meters), or (2) the material stored has a maximum true vapor pressure 

greater or equal to 4 psia (27.7 kPa) and the storage vessel has a capacity equal to or greater than 

20,000 gal (75.5 cubic meters) but less than 40,000 gal (151 cubic meters). Data supplied by 

industry via EPA’s section 114 survey were analyzed to identify storage vessels meeting the 

aforementioned criteria. However; no storage vessels meeting the subpart Kb criteria were 

6
identified. Although a test method such as ASTM D2879-10 or API Publication 2517 would be 

used to determine vapor pressure, it was assumed that facilities currently incur a cost to 

determine vapor pressure, therefore, no additional cost was estimated. As a theoretical case, the 

emission reduction and cost of retrofitting a fixed roof tank with an internal floating roof was 

calculated for a 40,000 gal tank storing methanol using EPA cost estimation equations7. This 

analysis can be found in Attachment D. 

4.5 Wastewater

To asses BTF costs for wastewater, data supplied by industry via EPA’s section 114 

survey were analyzed to identify wastewater streams that are currently not controlled by a 

stripping operation. The cost of installing hard piping and pumping equipment to collect and 

convey the water to the wastewater stripper was estimated using “Plant Design and Economics 

for Chemical Engineers8.” The cost of installing and operating a sufficiently sized wastewater 

stripper was also estimated for each facility using capital cost estimates supplied by industry 

regarding resin strippers. Only the incremental annual costs such as capital recovery, increased 

steam, and electrical usage were included in the annual cost estimate. The wastewater analysis 

can be found in Attachment E. 

4.6 Other Emission Sources

The assessment for BTF costs for other emission sources was based on data submitted by 

industry regarding gasholders and appropriate work practices. Industry supplied estimates for 

emissions from gasholder water seals and the capital cost of installing floating objects on the 

water seal. Annual costs of maintaining the floating objects were estimated using factors from 

“Plant Design and Economics for Chemical Engineers8.” This analysis can be found in 

Attachment F. 

5.0 Results 

5.1 Process Vents

 Applying BTF control to further reduce emissions from PVC-only process vents would 

result in a total capital investment (TCI) of approximately $6.9 million (2010$), an additional 

total annualized cost (TAC) of $3.1 million (2010$), and would achieve additional VC, HCl, 

CDD/CDF and total organic HAP reductions of 2.0E-02, 2.2, 8.9E-011 and 2.8E-01 tons per 

year respectively beyond the MACT floor level of control. The incremental cost-effectiveness 

was estimated to be $11.2 million per ton of total organic HAP reduced. 

 Applying BTF control to further reduce emissions from PVC-combined process vents 

would result in a total capital investment (TCI) of approximately $3.6 million (2010$), an 

additional total annualized cost (TAC) of $1.5 million (2010$), and would achieve additional 

VC, HCl, CDD/CDF and total organic HAP reductions of 1.2E-01, 76, 2.4E-8 and 1.3 tons per 

year respectively beyond the MACT floor level of control. The incremental cost-effectiveness 

was estimated to be $1.2 million per ton of total organic HAP reduced. 

7
5.2 Resins

 Applying BTF control to further reduce emissions from resins would result in a TCI 

(2010$) of approximately $332 million, $6.4 million, $803,000 and $2.6 million for suspension, 

dispersion, suspension blending and copolymer resins respectively. Applying BTF control to 

further reduce emissions from resins would result in an additional total annualized cost (TAC) 

(2010$) of $128 million, $2.5 million, $388,000 and $1.0 million for suspension, dispersion, 

suspension blending and copolymer resins respectively. BTF control would achieve additional 

VC reductions of 47, 20, 1.6 and 16 tons per year for suspension, dispersion, suspension 

blending and copolymer resins respectively. BTF control would achieve additional total organic 

HAP (including VC) reductions of 674, 19, 1.4 and 16 tons per year for suspension, dispersion, 

suspension blending and copolymer resins respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness was 

estimated to be $190,000, $132,000, 283,000 and $64,800 per ton of total organic HAP reduced 

(including VC) for suspension, dispersion, suspension blending and copolymer resins 

respectively. Bulk resin was not analyzed since there are currently no major sources that produce 

bulk resin. 

5.3 Equipment Leaks

Applying a BTF LDAR program for equipment leaks using the previously mentioned 

options results in an industry wide TCI of $1.0 million and a TAC of $238,000 per year for 

facilities currently complying with 40 CFR part 61, subpart V to comply with 40 CFR part 63, 

subpart UU. The BTF LDAR program would achieve an additional 85 tons per year of total 

organic HAP reduction for a cost effectiveness of $2,800 dollars per ton of total organic HAP. 

5.3 Storage Vessels

The results of the BTF analysis for storage vessels show that cost effectiveness ranged 

from $2,000 to $12,000 per ton of HAP reduced by this option, depending on the number of 

turnovers assumed. Based on information submitted by PVC and copolymer production 

facilities, no storage vessels from affected sources that meet the capacity levels (20,000 gallons 

or 40,000 gallons) and store material that meet the vapor pressure levels of subpart Kb were 

identified. Therefore, no additional costs and emission reductions were estimated for this option. 

5.4 Wastewater

Based on the analysis, applying BTF control to further reduce emissions from wastewater 

would result in a TCI $98.2 million and a TAC of $616 million and would achieve additional VC 

and total organic HAP (including VC) reductions of 1.4 tons per year and 1.4 tons per year 

respectively beyond the MACT floor level of control. The incremental cost effectiveness was 

estimated to be $440 million per ton of total organic HAP reduced (including VC). 

5.4 Other Emission Sources

8
Based on the analysis, applying BTF control to reduce emissions from other emission 

sources would result in a TCI $75,000 million and a TAC of $22,200 and would achieve 

additional VC and total organic HAP1 reductions of 22 tons per year and 22 tons per year 

respectively beyond the MACT floor level of control. The incremental cost effectiveness was 

estimated to be $1,000 per ton of total organic HAP reduced (including VC). 

6.0 Results 

Table 6-1 summarizes the results of the BTF analysis for all emission points for existing 

PVC units. All emission reductions, costs, and cost effectiveness values are incremental above 

the MACT floor level of control. 

 

1Available emission estimates only included VC, therefore, all total organic HAP was assumed to be VC. 

9
Table 6-1. Summary of Beyond-the-Floor Analysis Results for Existing PVCPUs 

Emission Point BTF Option TCI (2010 $) TAC[1] (2010 $)

Incremental Emissions Reduction (tons/year) 

VC HCl CDD/CDF 

Total 

Organic 

HAP 

Process Vents 

PVC-Only New Source Limits 6,917,351 3,099,295 2.00E-02 2.19 8.90E-011 2.77E-01 PVCCombined New Source Limits 3,640,439 1,452,660 1.17E-01 75.9 2.42E-08 1.26 

Resins 

Suspension 

Thermal Oxidizer for Dryer Vent[2](s) 

331,837,508 128,233,707 46.9 - - 674 

Dispersion 6,382,912 2,474,580 20.2 - - 18.8 Suspension Blending 803,206 387,830 1.64 - - 1.37 Copolymer 2,635,073 1,049,505 15.7 - - 16.2 

Equipment Leaks 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart UU 1,015,610 238,080 - - - 85.0 Heat Exchange Systems None - - - - - - Storage Tanks HON capacity and VP cutoffs - - - - - - Wastewater 

Treatment of uncontrolled streams 

98,237,246 615,889,097 1.4 - - 1.4 

Other Emission Sources Floating objects for gasholders 75,000 22,170 22.0 - - 22.0 

[1] – Calculated using a 7 percent discount factor.[2] – For facilities that produce more than 1 type of resin, dryer exhaust flow rates were not able to be allocated to the specific type of resin prodapportion costs for facilities producing more than 1 type or resin, the total cost for the facility was divided by the number of resins types produceBTF – Beyond-the-floor TCI – Total capital investment for the BTF option TAC – Total annual cost for the BTF option HON – Hazardous organic national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants VP – Vapor pressure ppmw – parts per million by weight ppb – parts per billion $/ton – Dollars per ton VC – Vinyl Chloride HCl – Hydrogen Chloride CDD/CDF – Chlorinated dibenzodioxins and chlorinated dibenzofurans HAP – Hazardous air pollutant 

10
7.0 References 

1. “Revised Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) Floor Analysis for the 

Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers (PVC) Production Source Category.” Memorandum 

from Eastern Research Group, Inc. to Jodi Howard, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency. February 2012. 

2. “Revised Costs and Emissions Reductions for Major Sources in the Polyvinyl Chloride 

and Copolymers (PVC) Production Source Category.” Memorandum from Eastern 

Research Group, Inc. to Jodi Howard, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. February 

2012. 

3. “Air Compliance Advisor.” U.S. EPA. 22 June, 2007. 24 Sept., 2010. 

http://www.epa.gov/ttnecas1/ACA.htm

4. “Revised Baseline Emissions Estimates for Major Sources in the Polyvinyl Chloride and 

Copolymers (PVC) Production Source Category.” Memorandum from Eastern Research 

Group, Inc. to Jodi Howard, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. February 2012. 

5. “Analysis of Emissions Reductions Techniques for Equipment Leaks.” Memorandum 

from Cindy Hancy, RTI International to Jodi Howard, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency. December 21, 2011. 

6. 1995 Protocol for Equipment Leak Emission Estimates. U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency. November 1995. EPA-435/R-95-017. 

7. US EPA Hazardous Air Pollutant Emissions from Process Units in the Synthetic Organic 

Chemical Manufacturing Industry -- Background Information for Proposed Standards 

Volume 1B: Control Technologies EPA-453/D-92-016b 

8. Peters, Timmerhaus, and West. 2003. Plant Design and Economics for Chemical 

Engineers. Fifth Edition. McGraw Hill, New York, NY. 

11
Attachments 

Attachment A. Beyond-the-Floor Analysis for Process Vents 

Attachment B. Beyond-the-Floor Analysis for Resins 

Attachment C. Beyond-the-Floor Analysis Equipment Leaks

Attachment D. Beyond-the-Floor Analysis for Storage Vessels 

Attachment E. Beyond-the-Floor Analysis for Wastewater 

Attachment F. Beyond-the-Floor Analysis for Other Emission Sources 

12
Attachment A 

Beyond-the-Floor Analysis for Process Vents 

13
ATTACHMENT A: BEYOND THE FLOOR ANALYSIS FOR PROCESS VENTS

02/08/2012

BTF Reductions, Costs

Facility Classification Outlet Max Flow Rate (DSCMM) Average O2 (%) Avg. Temp (C) Vinyl Chloride (ppmvd @ 3%O2) HCl (ppmvd @ 3%O2) CDD/CDF (ng/dscm @ 3%O2) TotalHAP (ppmvd @ 3%O2)

OVPA PVC - Only 1.55E+01 7.46E+00 2.48E+01 9.71E-01 3.60E+02 7.8E-03 1.8E+01CTLC Area Source 3.43E+01 1.69E+01 5.71E+01 5.24E+00 1.04E+02 3.1E-02 73.70

SHTFP PVC - Only 1.10E+01 2.43E+00 2.29E+01 5.00E-03 1.20E-01 1.2E-02 2.2E-01FPC DE PVC - Only 1.57E+01 5.37E+00 6.17E+00 2.45E-01 1.21E+02 2.7E-03 2.8E+00GGA PVC - Only 1.07E+01 7.83E+00 2.09E+01 2.00E+00 1.57E+02 4.7E-03 6.9E+00POH PVC - Only 1.13E-01 1.53E+01 -6.37E+00 2.18E+00 5.30E-01 Not Reported 9.7E+03POP PVC - Only 4.36E-02 1.87E+01 -3.63E-01 2.66E+00 1.32E+00 Not Reported 2.5E+04SHTA PVC - Only 1.43E+01 7.59E+00 3.13E+01 2.43E-01 8.47E-02 1.7E-02 1.2E+01FPC BR PVC - Combined 4.10E+02 9.15E+00 4.87E+01 1.28E-01 9.23E+01 7.05E-02 2.02E+00FPC TX PVC - Combined 1.36E+02 9.10E+00 6.42E+01 4.40E-01 9.23E+01 3.10E-01 2.02E+00OVLADP PVC - Combined 1.05E+03 4.07E+00 5.50E+01 1.93E-01 9.23E+01 1.53E-02 2.02E+00GGP PVC - Combined 3.36E+02 1.08E+01 2.01E+01 2.35E-03 1.84E+02 4.69E-02 1.71E+00SHTP PVC - Combined 2.50E+02 6.72E+00 1.23E+02 1.28E-01 9.23E+01 1.95E-02 2.02E+00WLG PVC - Combined 6.50E+02 1.13E+01 2.50E+01 7.31E-04 4.06E-01 2.91E-02 4.02E+00WLCC PVC - Combined 4.10E+02 9.15E+00 4.87E+01 1.28E-01 9.23E+01 7.05E-02 2.02E+00DOWMI PVC - Combined 3.44E+01 1.29E+01 4.16E+00 4.51E-03 Not Reported 1.68E-03 3.36E-01

Color Code KeyAverage of PVC Combined FacilitiesBased on Average Factor (Inlet Flow Rate/Outlet Flow Rate) of PVC Combined FacilitiesEstimated by calculating average Reduction Effy for VC for All PVC facilties and applying to outlet concentrationAverage of All FacilitiesCalculated using Inlet flow, O2, and VC Concentration estimatesEstimated by calculating average factor of TOHAP (TPY)/Outlet Flow RateNew Source LimitsVC PVC - Only 0.56 ppmvd @ 3% O2VC PVC - Combined 0.56 ppmvd @ 3% O2HCl PVC - Only 0.17 ppmvd @ 3% O2HCl PVC - Combined 1.40 ppmvd @ 3% O2CDD/CDF PVC - Only 0.038 ng/dscm @ 3% O2CDD/CDF PVC - Combined 0.034 ng/dscm @ 3% O2TOHAP PVC - Only 5.500 ppmvd @ 3% O2TOHAP PVC - Combined 5.50 ppmvd @ 3% O2

Outlet Conditions

14
ATTACHMENT A: BEYOND THE FLOOR ANALYSIS FOR PROCESS VENTS

02/08/2012

Inlet Max Flow 

Rate (DSCMM)

Average O2

(%)

Avg. Temp

(C)

Vinyl Chloride

(ppmvd @ 3%O2) CE Redux Effy Vinyl Chloride (lbs/hr) VC Baseline (lbs/hr) HCl Baseline (lbs/hr) CDD/CDF Baseline (lbs/hr) TOHAP Baseline (lbs/hr) VC Baseline (Tons/Yr) HCl Baseline (Tons/Yr) CDD/CDF (

Baseline (To

1.51E+01 4.94E+00 1.89E+01 1.88E+05 9.999948E+01 8.82E+02 3.92E-03 8.46E-01 1.19E-11 6.72E-02 1.64E-02 3.55E+00 

5.65E+00 3.33E-02 6.47E+01 9.59E+04 9.999453E+01 2.20E+02 1.39E-02 1.61E-01 3.14E-11 2.55E-01 5.84E-02 6.77E-01 

5.47E-01 6.67E-01 1.56E+01 2.84E+02 9.999824E+01 6.09E-02 1.98E-05 2.77E-04 1.75E-11 8.96E-04 8.32E-05 1.16E-03 

5.26E-01 8.15E+00 7.40E-01 6.33E+05 9.999996E+01 8.25E+01 1.16E-03 3.36E-01 4.88E-12 1.19E-02 4.88E-03 1.41E+00 

1.12E-01 2.13E+00 1.63E+01 4.85E+05 9.999959E+01 1.98E+01 5.41E-03 2.47E-01 4.86E-12 1.81E-02 2.27E-02 1.04E+00 

1.13E-01 6.03E+00 1.65E+01 7.39E+05 9.999971E+01 2.40E+01 2.66E-05 3.79E-06 No Data 2.18E-01 1.12E-04 1.59E-05 

9.01E-02 2.64E+00 -3.63E-01 5.08E+05 9.999948E+01 1.62E+01 4.89E-06 1.41E-06 No Data 8.45E-02 2.05E-05 5.94E-06 

9.97E+00 2.10E-01 1.89E+01 1.57E-01 -5.510638E+01 6.27E-04 8.98E-04 1.83E-04 2.43E-11 6.23E-02 3.77E-03 7.67E-04 

9.08E+00 2.43E+00 1.89E+01 1.28E+04 9.999900E+01 4.16E+01 1.20E-02 5.04E+00 2.51E-09 1.13E-01 5.03E-02 2.11E+01 

3.00E+00 2.43E+00 1.89E+01 4.39E+04 9.999900E+01 4.73E+01 1.37E-02 1.67E+00 3.67E-09 3.75E-02 5.74E-02 7.03E+00 2.33E+01 2.43E+00 1.89E+01 1.93E+04 9.999900E+01 1.61E+02 6.64E-02 1.85E+01 2.01E-09 2.91E-01 2.79E-01 7.78E+01 1.42E+00 1.90E+00 1.89E+01 5.18E+05 1.000000E+02 2.71E+02 1.55E-04 7.09E+00 1.18E-09 6.54E-02 6.52E-04 2.98E+01 5.54E+00 2.43E+00 1.89E+01 1.28E+04 9.999900E+01 2.54E+01 8.83E-03 3.71E+00 5.12E-10 6.92E-02 3.71E-02 1.56E+01 2.61E+01 2.97E+00 1.89E+01 1.26E+05 1.000000E+02 1.14E+03 8.82E-05 2.86E-02 1.34E-09 3.86E-01 3.71E-04 1.20E-01 9.08E+00 2.43E+00 1.89E+01 1.28E+04 9.999900E+01 4.16E+01 1.20E-02 5.04E+00 2.51E-09 1.13E-01 5.03E-02 2.11E+01 

7.62E-01 2.43E+00 1.89E+01 4.51E+02 9.999900E+01 1.23E-01 2.41E-05 No Data 3.42E-12 1.42E-03 1.01E-04 No Data 

Inlet Conditions Baseline Emissions Estimates

15
ATTACHMENT A: BEYOND THE FLOOR ANALYSIS FOR PROCESS VENTS

02/08/2012

VC - % Redux to 

Meet Conc. Limit

 HCl - % Redux to 

Meet Conc. Limit

CDD/CDF - % 

Redux to Meet 

TOHAP - % Redux to 

Meet Conc. Limit VC HCl CDD/CDF TOHAP

42.3478 99.9527 0.0000 69.1029 78.3177 0.0129

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 99.8599 0.0000 0.0000 35.7143 0.0017

72.0305 99.8916 0.0000 19.9351 50.2479 0.011474.2645 67.9527 0.0000 99.9434 99.4241 0.000178.9700 87.1285 0.0000 99.9782 99.7775 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 53.7556 0.00000.0000 98.4837 51.7481 0.0000 27.6222 0.01390.0000 98.4837 89.0393 0.0000 83.5590 0.04800.0000 98.4837 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 99.2402 27.5045 0.0000 0.00000.0000 98.4837 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 98.4837 51.7481 0.0000 27.6222 0.01390.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Percent Reductions Needed to Meet New Source Floors MACT Floor Reductions (Tons/yr)

16
ATTACHMENT A: BEYOND THE FLOOR ANALYSIS FOR PROCESS VENTS

02/08/2012

Incremental Total 

Reductions

VC HCl CDD/CDF TOHAP Tons/yr Condenser TCI ($) Condenser Annualized Capital Cost ($/yr) Condenser Annual Costs ($/yr) Condenser Total Annualized Costs ($/yr)

-7.83E+01 #VALUE! #VALUE! 2.69E-01 #VALUE! 2,454,057 $ 231,646 $ 1,224,928 $ 1,456,573 $ 

#VALUE! #VALUE! #VALUE! 0.00E+00 #VALUE! - $ - $ - $ - $ 

-3.57E+01 #VALUE! #VALUE! 4.81E-02 #VALUE! 491,037 $ 46,350 $ 68,420 $ 114,771 $ 

-5.02E+01 #VALUE! #VALUE! 6.45E-02 #VALUE! 342,660 $ 32,345 $ 26,902 $ 59,247 $ 

#VALUE! #VALUE! 9.94E+01 9.13E-01 #VALUE! 119,705 $ 11,299 $ 6,250 $ 17,549 $ #VALUE! #VALUE! 9.98E+01 3.55E-01 #VALUE! 75,249 $ 7,103 $ 3,560 $ 10,663 $ #VALUE! #VALUE! #VALUE! 1.41E-01 #VALUE! 3,434,645 $ 324,206 $ 1,116,285 $ 1,440,492 $ #VALUE! -6.79E+00 #VALUE! 4.54E-01 -6.34E+00 801,567 $ 75,662 $ 255,462 $ 331,125 $ #VALUE! -7.66E+01 #VALUE! 1.07E-01 -7.65E+01 345,080 $ 32,573 $ 65,734 $ 98,307 $ #VALUE! #VALUE! #VALUE! 2.73E-01 #VALUE! 551,480 $ 52,056 $ 198,985 $ 251,041 $ #VALUE! #VALUE! #VALUE! 2.86E-01 #VALUE! 1,140,745 $ 107,678 $ 333,385 $ 441,063 $ #VALUE! #VALUE! #VALUE! 0.00E+00 #VALUE! - $ - $ - $ - $ #VALUE! -6.79E+00 #VALUE! 4.54E-01 -6.34E+00 801,567 $ 75,662 $ 255,462 $ 331,125 $ #VALUE! #VALUE! 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 - $ - $ - $ - $ 

Incremental BTF Reductions (Tons/yr) Incremental Equipment Costing

17
ATTACHMENT A: BEYOND THE FLOOR ANALYSIS FOR PROCESS VENTS

02/08/2012

Condenser Costing Algorithm, BTF

OVPA CTLC SHTFP FPC DE GGA POH POP SHTA FPC BR FPC TX OVLADP GGP SHTP WLG WLCC DOWMI TotalsPVC - Only Area Source PVC - Only PVC - Only PVC - Only PVC - Only PVC - Only PVC - Only PVC - CombinedPVC - CombinedArea Source PVC - CombinedPVC - CombinedPVC - CombinedPVC - CombinedPVC - Combined

-- Inlet stream flowrate (DSCMM): 1.51E+01 5.65E+00 5.47E-01 5.26E-01 1.12E-01 1.13E-01 4.36E-02 9.97E+00 9.08E+00 3.00E+00 2.33E+01 1.42E+00 5.54E+00 2.61E+01 9.08E+00 7.62E-01-- Inlet stream flowrate (scfm): (Qin) =DSCMM/35.31 535 200 19 19 4 4 2 352 321 106 823 50 196 921 321 27-- Inlet stream temperature (oC): 1.89E+01 6.47E+01 1.56E+01 7.40E-01 1.63E+01 -6.37E+00 -3.63E-01 1.89E+01 1.89E+01 1.89E+01 1.89E+01 1.89E+01 1.89E+01 1.89E+01 1.89E+01 1.89E+01-- Inlet stream temperature (oF): (Tin) =oC*1.8+32 66 148 60 33 61 21 31 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66

-- VOC to be condensed: Vinyl chloride Vinyl chloride Vinyl chloride Vinyl chloride Vinyl chloride IsoOctance IsoOctance Vinyl chloride Vinyl chloride Vinyl chloride Vinyl chloride Vinyl chloride Vinyl chloride Acetaldehyde Vinyl chloride Vinyl chloride

-- VOC inlet volume fraction:(Yvoc,in) =ppm/1E6 0.18791389 0.095862393 0.000283667 0.633376328 0.484980983 9.72E-03 2.52E-02 1.56667E-07 0.01278717 0.043914959 0.0192627 0.518207166 0.012787174 3.35E-06 0.012787174 0.00045057-- Required VOC removal (fraction): (n) 0.9995 0.0000 0.0000 0.9986 0.9989 0.999990 0.999990 0.5376 0.9848 0.9848 0.9848 0.9924 0.9848 0.0000 0.9848 0.0000-- Antoine equation constants for VOC: [4]

A: 6.497 6.497 6.497 6.497 6.497 6.812 6.812 6.497 6.497 6.497 6.497 6.497 6.497 8.006 6.497 6.497B: 783.400 783.400 783.400 783.400 783.400 1257.840 1257.840 783.400 783.400 783.400 783.400 783.400 783.400 1600.017 783.400 783.400

C: 230.010 230.010 230.010 230.010 230.010 220.735 220.735 230.010 230.010 230.010 230.010 230.010 230.010 291.809 230.010 230.010

-- VOC heat of condensation (BTU/lb-mole): (Hvoc,r) 10080 10080 10080 10080 13260 13260 10080 10080 10080 10080 10080 10080 10080 11094 10080 10080-- VOC heat capacity (BTU/lb-mole-oF): (Cp,voc) 11.655 11.655 11.655 11.655 11.655 45.080 45.080 11.655 11.655 11.655 11.655 11.655 11.655 13.100 11.655 11.655-- Coolant specific heat (BTU/lb-oF): Cp,cool 0.650 0.650 0.650 0.650 0.650 0.650 0.650 0.650 0.650 0.650 0.650 0.650 0.650 0.650 0.650 0.650-- VOC boiling point (oF): (Tboil) 7 7 7 7 7 211 211 7 7 7 7 7 7 68 7 7-- VOC critical temperature (oR): (Tc) 773 773 773 773 773 979 979 773 773 773 773 773 773 830 773 773-- VOC molecular weight (lb/lb-mole): (MWvoc) 63 63 63 63 63 114 114 63 63 63 63 63 63 44 63 63-- VOC condensate density (lb/gal): 8.15 8.15 8.15 8.15 8.15 5.77 5.77 8.15 8.15 8.15 8.15 8.15 8.15 6.53 8.15 8.15-- Air heat capacity (BTU/lb-mole-oF): (Cp,air) 6.95 6.95 6.95 6.95 6.95 6.95 6.95 6.95 6.95 6.95 6.95 6.95 6.95 6.95 6.95 6.95DESIGN PARAMETERS:-- Outlet VOC partial pressure (mm Hg): (Pvoc) =760*(Yvoc,in*(1-n)/(1-Yvoc,in*n)) 0.1 72.9 0.2 1.8 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.5 0.2 6.2 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.3-- Condensation temperature, Tc (oF): (Tcon) =(B/(A-log10(Pvoc))-C)*1.8+32 -195.9 -77.8 -185.2 -155.8 -168.6 -158.4 -150.1 -250.9 -189.5 -173.8 -184.6 -135.0 -189.5 -221.5 -189.5 -179.5

(oR): =Tcon+460 264.1 382.2 274.8 304.2 291.4 301.6 309.9 209.1 270.5 286.2 275.4 325.0 270.5 238.5 270.5 280.5

-- VOC flowrate in (lb-moles/hr): (Mvoc,in) =Qin*Yvoc,in*60/392 15.39 2.93 0.00 1.80 0.29 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.63 0.71 2.43 3.97 0.38 0.00 0.63 0.00-- VOC flowrate out (lb-moles/hr): (Mvoc,out) =Mvoc,in*(1-n) 0.007 2.930 0.001 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.010 0.011 0.037 0.030 0.006 0.000 0.010 0.002-- VOC condensed (lb-moles/hr): (Mvoc,con) =Mvoc,in-Mvoc,out 15.381 0.000 0.000 1.798 0.293 0.006 0.006 0.000 0.618 0.702 2.390 3.943 0.377 0.000 0.618 0.000 (lb/hr): (Lb/hrvoc,con) =Mwvoc*Mvoc,con 961.3 0.0 0.0 112.4 18.3 0.7 0.7 0.0 38.6 43.9 149.3 246.4 23.6 0.0 38.6 0.0-- VOC heat of condensation @ Tc (BTU/lb-mole): (Hvoc) =(Hvoc,r)*[(1-Tcon/Tc)/(1-Tboil/Tc)]^0.38 12220 11054 12122 11845 15742 17888 13535 12706 12161 12016 12116 11642 12161 14331 12161 12069-- Enthalpy change, condensed VOC (BTU/hr): (Hcon) =Mvoc,con[Hvoc+Cp,voc(Tin-Tcon) 234910 0 0 25257 5403 154 129 0 9355 10402 35932 55136 5714 0 9355 0-- Enthalpy change, uncondensed VOC (BTU/hr):(Huncon) =Mvoc,out*Cp,voc*(Tin-Tcon) 22 7722 2 6 1 0 0 0 28 30 107 71 17 2 28 5-- Enthalpy change, air (BTU/hr): (Hnoncon) =Cp,air*(Tin-Tcon)*(Qin*60/392-Mvoc,in) 121062 43432 5035 1370 498 749 290 118666 86012 25881 215161 5159 52535 281642 86012 7021-- Condenser heat load (BTU/hr): (Hload) =Hcon+huncon+Hnoncon 355994 51154 5038 26632 5902 903 419 118666 95395 36313 251200 60366 58266 281644 95395 7027-- Heat transfer coefficient, U (BTU/hr-ft2-oF): Estimate from OAQPS Manual 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20

-- Log-mean temperature difference (oF): Tlm =(Tin-Tcon-25)/ln((Tin-Tcon-10)/15) 84.0 75.4 80.0 66.2 76.3 63.6 64.2 96.7 82.5 78.7 81.3 69.2 82.5 90.0 82.5 80.1

-- Condenser surface area (ft2): (Acon) =Hload/U*Tlm 211.9 33.9 3.1 20.1 3.9 0.7 0.3 61.3 57.8 23.1 154.5 43.6 35.3 156.5 57.8 4.4-- Coolant flowrate (lb/hr): =Hload/(Cp,cool*(Tcon-15+25)-(Tcon-15)) 21907 3148 310 1639 363 56 26 7303 5870 2235 15458 3715 3586 17332 5870 432-- Refrigeration capacity (tons): (R) =Hload/1200 29.67 4.26 0.42 2.22 0.49 0.08 0.03 9.89 7.95 3.03 20.93 5.03 4.86 23.47 7.95 0.59

-- Electricity requirement (kW/ton) [6]: (kW) =-9E-06(Tcon)^3 - 0.0004(Tcon)2 - 0.0331(Tcon) + 3.560 62.38 0.00 0.00 33.04 40.91 34.51 29.95 128.87 56.68 44.51 52.65 22.86 56.68 0.00 56.68 0.00

CAPITAL COSTSEquipment Costs ($):-- Refrigeration unit/single-stage (< 10 tons): (Rss<10) =exp(9.83-0.014Tcon+0.340lnR) 0 90,367 184,842 215,828 154,706 70,778 48,553 1,358,594 533,574 308,744 0 212,908 451,229 0 533,574 191,161-- Refrigeration unit/single-stage (> 10 tons): (Rss>10) =exp(9.26-0.007Tcon+0.627lnR) 346,977 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 257,573 0 0 358,416 0 0-- Multistage refrigeration unit: (Mru) exp(9.73-0.012Tcon+0.584lnR) 99,697 1,278,080 93,445 173,713 84,028 24,819 14,351 1,301,754 548,129 258,528 910,031 218,141 411,000 1,515,824 548,129 106,012

Total equipment cost ($)--base: (ECp) =1.25*MAX(Rss<10,Rss>10,Mru) 1,597,600 124,622 231,052 269,785 193,382 88,473 60,691 1,698,243 685,161 385,930 1,137,538 272,676 564,036 1,894,780 685,161 238,951

Cost Indexa. 2010 CE Equip (Feb Final) CE Equipment index (Feb 2010 Final) 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1b. 1990 CE Equip (Oct Final) CE Equipment index (Oct 1990 Final) 394 394 394 394 394 394 394 394 394 394 394 394 394 394 394 394 ' ' ' ' --escalated: (ECpe) =(ECp)*(FebFinal/OctFinal) 2,601,527 202,934 376,245 439,317 314,903 144,069 98,830 2,765,414 1,115,714 628,448 1,852,364 444,025 918,474 3,085,455 1,115,714 389,107Purchased Equipment Cost ($): (PECp) =ECpe*1.08 2,809,650 219,169 406,344 474,462 340,095 155,594 106,736 2,986,647 1,204,972 678,723 2,000,554 479,548 991,952 3,332,291 1,204,972 420,235Total Capital Investment ($): (TCI) =PECp*1.15 3,231,097 0 0 545,631 391,110 178,934 122,747 3,434,645 1,385,717 780,532 2,300,637 551,480 1,140,745 0 1,385,717 0 15,448,990ANNUAL COST INPUTS:Operating factor (hr/yr): (OF) 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400Operating labor rate ($/hr): (LR) 34.60 34.60 34.60 34.60 34.60 34.60 34.60 34.60 34.60 34.60 34.60 34.60 34.60 34.60 34.60 34.60

Maintenance labor rate ($/hr): (MR) 38.06 38.06 38.06 38.06 38.06 38.06 38.06 38.06 38.06 38.06 38.06 38.06 38.06 38.06 38.06 38.06

Operating labor factor (hr/sh): (OLF) 1/2 hour per 8 hour shift 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50

Maintenance labor factor (hr/sh): (MLF) 1/2 hour per 8 hour shift 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50Electricity price ($/kWhr): (EP) 0.0700 0.0700 0.0700 0.0700 0.0700 0.0700 0.0700 0.0700 0.0700 0.0700 0.0700 0.0700 0.0700 0.0700 0.0700 0.0700Recovered VOC value ($/lb)[5]: (Rvoc) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00Annual interest rate (fraction): (Int) 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07Control system life (years): (EL) 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20Capital recovery factor: (CRF) =Int*(1+Int)^EL/((1+Int)^EL-1) 0.0944 0.0944 0.0944 0.0944 0.0944 0.0944 0.0944 0.0944 0.0944 0.0944 0.0944 0.0944 0.0944 0.0944 0.0944 0.0944

Taxes, insurance, admin. factor: (TaxF) 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 ANNUAL COSTS: Item Cost ($/yr) Cost ($/yr) Cost ($/yr) Cost ($/yr) Cost ($/yr) Cost ($/yr) Cost ($/yr) Cost ($/yr) Cost ($/yr) Cost ($/yr) Cost ($/yr) Cost ($/yr) Cost ($/yr) Cost ($/yr) Cost ($/yr) Cost ($/yr)Operating labor =OF/8*OLF*LR 18,165 18,165 18,165 18,165 18,165 18,165 18,165 18,165 18,165 18,165 18,165 18,165 18,165 18,165 18,165 18,165Supervisory labor =.15*Operating Labor 2,725 2,725 2,725 2,725 2,725 2,725 2,725 2,725 2,725 2,725 2,725 2,725 2,725 2,725 2,725 2,725Maintenance labor =OF/8*MLF*MR 19,982 19,982 19,982 19,982 19,982 19,982 19,982 19,982 19,982 19,982 19,982 19,982 19,982 19,982 19,982 19,982Maintenance materials 100% of maintenance labor 19,982 19,982 19,982 19,982 19,982 19,982 19,982 19,982 19,982 19,982 19,982 19,982 19,982 19,982 19,982 19,982Electricity =EP*OF*kW*R/0.85 1,280,160 0 0 50,732 13,919 1,796 723 881,535 311,715 93,176 762,402 79,562 190,391 0 311,715 0Overhead =.60*(Operating Labor+Supervisory Labor+Maint Labor+Maint Materials) 36,512 36,512 36,512 36,512 36,512 36,512 36,512 36,512 36,512 36,512 36,512 36,512 36,512 36,512 36,512 36,512Taxes, insurance, administrative =TaxF*TCI 129,244 0 0 21,825 15,644 7,157 4,910 137,386 55,429 31,221 92,025 22,059 45,630 0 55,429 0Capital recovery =CRF*TCI 304,993 0 0 51,504 36,918 16,890 11,586 324,206 130,802 73,677 217,164 52,056 107,678 0 130,802 0Total Annual Cost (without credits) (TACwoc) =sum of all annual costs 1,811,761 0 0 221,425 163,846 123,208 114,584 1,440,492 595,310 295,438 1,168,956 251,041 441,063 0 595,310 0 7,222,433Recovery credits (RC) =-Rvoc*OF*Lb/hrvoc,con 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Total Annual Cost (with credits) =TACwoc+RC 1,811,761 0 0 221,425 163,846 123,208 114,584 1,440,492 595,310 295,438 1,168,956 251,041 441,063 0 595,310 0 7,222,433

NOTES: ---------- 1. Base equipment costs reflect Third Quart 19902. Operating labor rate: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment Statistics, May 2008 National Industry-Specific Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates

3. Electricity cost: Energy Information Administration. Average Industrial Retail Price of Electricity: October 2009.4. Antoine constants listed in OAQPS Manual5. ICIS, http://www.icis.com/v2/chemicals/9076567/vinyl-chloride/pricing.html, October 20, 2010. (Avg. $690/tonne = $0.313/lb)6. Polynomial of best fit based on Table 2.5 OAQPS Control Cost Manual Section 3.1 Chapter 2. 

 INPUT PARAMETERS: Equation

18
ATTACHMENT A: BEYOND THE FLOOR ANALYSIS FOR PROCESS VENTS

02/08/2012

PolyOne Isooctane Reduction Requirements for Condenser Cost Algorithm, BTF

HAP HAPHAP_Cat_Name (All)Inlet_Outlet OutletControl Device (All)Colocated with with EDC/VCM (0=No,1=Yes) (All)Compounds via Multiple Test Methods (0= Multiple Results Excluded) 0Test Representative of Normal Op. Conditions (Yes=1, 0=No) (All)Test Included Streams Other Than PVC (0=No, 1=Yes) (All)Test Included Streams Other Than PVC/VCM/EDC (0=No, 1=Yes) (All)Exclude Previous Test Data (1=data excluded) 1

Data

Std Facility Compound_Std Average of MW Sum of Avg_Conc_ERG_Units Total of Non-Iso Octane Compounds TOH Limit Maximum ISO Conc (ppmvd @ 3%O2) % Redux 

POH Ethyl Chloride 6.45E+01 8.09E-01 4.19E+00 5.50 1.31E+00 

Isooctane 1.14E+02 9.72E+03Methyl Chloride 5.05E+01 1.21E+00Vinyl Chloride 6.25E+01 2.18E+00

POP Ethyl Chloride 6.45E+01 1.19E+00 6.49E+00 5.50 -9.88E-01 

Isooctane 1.14E+02 2.52E+04Methyl Chloride 5.05E+01 2.64E+00

Vinyl Chloride 6.25E+01 2.66E+00

19
Attachment B 

Beyond-the-Floor Analysis for Resins 

20
ATTACHMENT B. BEYOND THE FLOOR ANALYSIS FOR RESINS

02/08/2012

BEYOND THE FLOOR CALCULATIONS AND SUMMARY

Moisture Temperature 

Vinyl Chloride Total Non-VC HAP (fraction) Vinyl Chloride Total Organic HAP DSCFM Vinyl Chloride Total Non-VC HAP % oF 2010 2010 

Formosa - Delaware City Dispersion, Copolymer 32.1 33.0 0.98 31.4 32.4 101,882 7.634 7.863 8.9 130.6 $3,917,879 $36

PolyOne - Henry Suspension, Dispersion, Suspension Blending 5.0 4.2 0.98 4.9 4.1 89,343 1.198 0.997 8.9 130.6 $2,409,618 $22

PolyOne - Pedricktown Dispersion 2.9 1.3 0.98 2.8 1.3 92,477 0.684 0.307 8.9 130.6 $3,620,766 $34

Dow - Midland Copolymer 0.0 0.0 0.98 0.004 0.02 15,357 0.001 0.005 8.9 130.6 $676,134 $6

Formosa - Baton Rouge Suspension 0.2 18.2 0.98 0.242 17.88 652,045 0.059 4.345 8.9 130.6 $21,998,070 $2,07Formosa - Point Comfort Suspension 1.3 14.9 0.98 1.286 14.64 1,112,865 0.312 3.556 8.9 130.6 $37,255,660 $3,51Georgia Gulf - Aberdeen Suspension 9.3 113.1 0.98 9.108 110.81 711,606 2.213 26.921 8.9 130.6 $23,879,753 $2,25

Georgia Gulf - Plaquemine Suspension 2.2 141.2 0.98 2.154 138.39 852,674 0.523 33.622 8.9 130.6 $28,336,452 $2,67

OxyVinyls - Pasadena Suspension 5.8 81.1 0.98 5.672 79.50 1,493,747 1.378 19.314 8.9 130.6 $49,987,856 $4,71OxyVinyls - Pedricktown Suspension 1.2 6.9 0.98 1.183 6.80 249,219 0.287 1.652 8.9 130.6 $8,572,627 $80

Shintech - Addis Suspension 1.9 21.3 0.98 1.869 20.89 443,578 0.454 5.074 8.9 130.6 $14,712,950 $1,38Shintech - Freeport Suspension 5.8 108.3 0.98 5.701 106.13 2,272,752 1.385 25.784 8.9 130.6 $75,297,743 $7,10Shintech - Plaquemine Suspension 2.2 44.2 0.98 2.152 43.32 924,775 0.523 10.525 8.9 130.6 $31,313,481 $2,95

Westlake - Calvert City Suspension 7.5 136.3 0.98 7.305 133.54 782,065 1.775 32.444 8.9 130.6 $26,105,744 $2,46

Westlake - Geismar Suspension 8.8 0.3 0.98 8.6 0.26 407,528 2.089 0.063 8.9 130.6 $13,573,966 $1,28Totals 84.44 709.89 $341,658,699 $32,25

Facility

Estimated Dryer Flow Stream Parameters

Rate

Pollutant Mass Flow Rate - ACA Input

lb/hr

TO Total Annualiz

Capital Cost ($/y

Part 63

Floor Emissions, tons/yr 

BTF Reductions, tons/yr TO TCI ($) TO Redux Part 63

21
ATTACHMENT B. BEYOND THE FLOOR ANALYSIS FOR RESINS

02/08/2012

RTO Cost Summary 

TCI (2008 Dollars) $413,923,096 In-Cell Calculation

Total Ann. Costs (2008 Dollars) $143,507,188

Note: use "x" in include in summation line to select which facilities are included in the industry total cost estimate

TCI (2010 Dollars) $348,707,092

Total Ann. Costs (2010 Dollars) $134,742,473

Include in Summation (x=yes) x x x x x x x x x x x x x x

Dow

Baton Rouge Delaware Point Comfort Aberdeen Plaquemine Deer Park Pasadena Pedricktown Henry Pedricktown Addis Freeport Plaquemine Midland Calvert City Geismar

Formosa - Baton Rouge Formosa - Delaware City Formosa - Point ComfortGeorgia Gulf - AberdeenGeorgia Gulf - Plaquemine OxyVinyls - Deer Park OxyVinyls - Pasadena OxyVinyls - Pedricktown PolyOne - Henry PolyOne - PedricktownShintech - Addis Shintech - Freeport Shintech - PlaquemineDow - Midland Westlake - Calvert City Westlake - Geismar 1

Program Inputs 2

Hours of Operation (per year) 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 3

Total Dryer Exhaust Flow Rate (SCFM) 111,835.33 715,746.09 1,221,585.88 781,126.75 935,975.66 #REF! 1,639,677.95 273,566.42 98,070.98 101,512.07 486,913.81 2,494,788.06 1,015,120.66 16,857.21 858,468.96 447,341.31 4

Total Dryer Exhaust Flow Rate (DSCFM) 652,045 101,882 1,112,865 711,606 852,674 #REF! 1,493,747 249,219 89,343 92,477 443,578 2,272,752 924,775 15,357 782,065 407,528 5

Stream Temperature (F) 130.6 130.6 130.6 130.6 130.6 130.6 130.6 130.6 130.6 130.6 130.6 130.6 130.6 130.6 130.6 130.6 6

VC Flow Rate (lb/hr) (Assumed ALL TOH) 4 8 4 27 34 #REF! 19 2 1 0 5 26 11 0 32 0 7

Op. Labor Cost 34.6 34.6 34.6 34.6 34.6 34.6 34.6 34.6 34.6 34.6 34.6 34.6 34.6 34.6 34.6 34.6 8

Electricity Cost ($/kWh) 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 9

Interest Rate 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 10

Equipment Life 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 11

Program Outputs 12

Min % O2 Required 19.8 13

Op. Temp (R) 2660 14

Auxiliary Air Req (CFM) 0 15

Min Fuel Req (CFM) 1534 16

Auxiliary Fuel Req (CFM) 1561 243 2668 1705 2037 939 3575 597 214 221 1060 5449 2216 36 1874 977 17

Auxiliary Fule Req (Ft^3 per year) 786867987 122680858 1344871287 859376238 1026528053 473485149 1801709571 300841584 107847525 111536304 534287129 2746501650 1116996700 18210000 944408581 492574257 18

Electricity Requirments (kWh/yr) 43328714 6770114 73950429 47286571 56660571 26038857 99260286 16560714 5936871 6145171 29476000 151025714 61451714 1020481 51968571 27080429 19

Auxiliary Fuel Cost ($/yr) $2,384,210 20

Equipment Cost* 1.37E+07 21

Auxilary Equipment Cost 0 22

Total Equipment Cost 1.37E+07 23

Instrumentation Cost 1.37E+06 24

Sales Tax $412,341 25

Freight Cost $687,235 26

Purchased Equipment Cost 1.62E+07 27

Foundation Cost 1.30E+06 28

Equipment Erection Cost 2.27E+06 29

Electrical Cost $648,750 30

Piping Cost $324,375 31

Insulation Cost $162,188 32

Painting Cost $162,188 33

Direct Installation Cost 4.87E+06 34

Total Direct Capital Cost 2.11E+07 35

Engineering Cost 1.62E+06 36

Field Cost $810,938 37

Contractor Cost 1.62E+06 38

Start Up Cost $324,375 39

Performance Test Cost $162,188 40

Contingencies Cost $486,562 41

Total Indirect Capital Cost 5.03E+06 42

Total Capital Investment (2008 Dollars) 2.61E+07 4.65E+06 4.42E+07 2.83E+07 3.36E+07 1.55E+07 5.93E+07 1.02E+07 2.86E+06 4.30E+06 1.75E+07 8.94E+07 3.72E+07 $802,586 3.10E+07 1.61E+07 43

Total Capital Investment (2010 Dollars) $21,998,070.20 $3,917,879.20 $37,255,660.49 $23,879,753.46 $28,336,451.51 $13,078,776.98 $49,987,855.94 $8,572,627.45 $2,409,617.74 $3,620,766.00 $14,712,950.14 $75,297,742.59 $31,313,480.66 $676,133.88 $26,105,743.64 $13,573,965.65 44

Operating Labor $18,152 $18,152 $18,152 $18,152 $18,152 $18,152 $18,152 $18,152 $18,152 $18,152 $18,152 $18,152 $18,152 $18,152 $18,152 $18,152 45

Supervisory Labor $2,723 $2,723 $2,723 $2,723 $2,723 $2,723 $2,723 $2,723 $2,723 $2,723 $2,723 $2,723 $2,723 $2,723 $2,723 $2,723 46

Maintenance Labor $19,968 $19,968 $19,968 $19,968 $19,968 $19,968 $19,968 $19,968 $19,968 $19,968 $19,968 $19,968 $19,968 $19,968 $19,968 $19,968 47

Maintenance Materials $19,968 $19,968 $19,968 $19,968 $19,968 $19,968 $19,968 $19,968 $19,968 $19,968 $19,968 $19,968 $19,968 $19,968 $19,968 $19,968 48

Replacement Parts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 49

Utilities 5.42E+06 $845,631 9.25E+06 5.91E+06 7.08E+06 3.26E+06 1.24E+07 2.07E+06 $742,359 $768,117 3.68E+06 1.89E+07 7.69E+06 $126,610 6.50E+06 3.39E+06 50

Electricity** 3.03E+06 $473,908 5.18E+06 3.31E+06 3.97E+06 1.82E+06 6.95E+06 1.16E+06 $415,581 $430,162 2.06E+06 1.06E+07 4.30E+06 $71,434 3.64E+06 1.90E+06 51

Total Direct Annual Cost 5.48E+06 $906,441 9.31E+06 5.97E+06 7.14E+06 3.32E+06 1.25E+07 2.13E+06 $803,169 $828,927 3.74E+06 1.90E+07 7.75E+06 $187,420 6.56E+06 3.45E+06 52

Overhead $36,486 $36,486 $36,486 $36,486 $36,486 $36,486 $36,486 $36,486 $36,486 $36,486 $36,486 $36,486 $36,486 $36,486 $36,486 $36,486 53

Administrative Charges $522,244 $93,012 $884,466 $566,916 $672,719 $310,497 1.19E+06 $203,518 $57,206 $85,959 $349,291 1.79E+06 $743,395 $16,052 $619,761 $322,252 54

Property Taxes $261,122 $46,506 $442,233 $283,458 $336,360 $155,248 $593,367 $101,759 $28,603 $42,979 $174,646 $893,801 $371,698 $8,026 $309,881 $161,126 55

Insurance $261,122 $46,506 $442,233 $283,458 $336,360 $155,248 $593,367 $101,759 $28,603 $42,979 $174,646 $893,801 $371,698 $8,026 $309,881 $161,126 56

Capital Recovery Factor 0.0943929 0.0943929 0.0943929 0.0943929 0.0943929 0.0943929 0.0943929 0.0943929 0.0943929 0.0943929 0.0943929 0.0943929 0.0943929 0.0943929 0.0943929 0.0943929 57

Capital Recovery 2.46E+06 $438,984 4.17E+06 2.68E+06 3.18E+06 1.47E+06 5.60E+06 $960,532 $269,990 $405,694 1.65E+06 8.44E+06 3.51E+06 $75,758 2.93E+06 1.52E+06 58

Total Indirect Annual Cost 3.55E+06 $661,495 5.98E+06 3.85E+06 4.56E+06 2.12E+06 8.01E+06 1.40E+06 $420,887 $614,098 2.38E+06 1.20E+07 5.03E+06 $144,348 4.20E+06 2.20E+06 59

Recovery Credit $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 60

Total Annualized Cost (2008 Dollars) 9.02E+06 1.57E+06 1.53E+07 9.82E+06 1.17E+07 5.44E+06 2.05E+07 3.54E+06 1.22E+06 1.44E+06 6.13E+06 3.10E+07 1.28E+07 $331,768 1.08E+07 5.65E+06 61

62

2010 Cost Calculations 63

Overhead (2010 Dollars) $36,486.1 $36,486.1 $36,486.1 $36,486.1 $36,486.1 $36,486.1 $36,486.1 $36,486.1 $36,486.1 $36,486.1 $36,486.1 $36,486.1 $36,486.1 $36,486.1 $36,486.1 $36,486.1 64

Administrative Charges (2010 Dollars) $439,961.40 $78,357.58 $745,113.21 $477,595.07 $566,729.03 $261,575.54 $999,757.12 $171,452.55 $48,192.35 $72,415.32 $294,259.00 $1,505,954.85 $626,269.61 $13,522.68 $522,114.87 $271,479.31 65

Property Taxes (2010 Dollars) $219,980.70 $39,178.79 $372,556.60 $238,797.53 $283,364.52 $130,787.77 $499,878.56 $85,726.27 $24,096.18 $36,207.66 $147,129.50 $752,977.43 $313,134.81 $6,761.34 $261,057.44 $135,739.66 66

Insurance (2010 Dollars) $219,980.70 $39,178.79 $372,556.60 $238,797.53 $283,364.52 $130,787.77 $499,878.56 $85,726.27 $24,096.18 $36,207.66 $147,129.50 $752,977.43 $313,134.81 $6,761.34 $261,057.44 $135,739.66 67

Capital Recovery Factor 0.0943929 0.0943929 0.0943929 0.0943929 0.0943929 0.0943929 0.0943929 0.0943929 0.0943929 0.0943929 0.0943929 0.0943929 0.0943929 0.0943929 0.0943929 0.0943929 68

Capital Recovery (2010 Dollars) $2,076,461.64 $369,819.98 $3,516,669.83 $2,254,079.18 $2,674,759.83 $1,234,543.69 $4,718,498.69 $809,195.17 $227,450.81 $341,774.60 $1,388,798.03 $7,107,572.29 $2,955,770.25 $63,822.24 $2,464,196.85 $1,281,285.98 69

Total Indirect Annual Cost (2010 Dollars) $2,992,871 $563,021 $5,043,382 $3,245,755 $3,844,704 $1,794,181 $6,754,499 $1,188,586 $360,322 $523,091 $2,013,802 $10,155,968 $4,244,796 $127,354 $3,544,913 $1,860,731 70

Recovery Credit 71

Total Annualized Cost (2010 Dollars) $8,470,901 $1,469,462 $14,355,682 $9,220,535 $10,982,134 $5,112,361 $19,222,699 $3,320,196 $1,163,491 $1,352,018 $5,756,822 $29,110,468 $11,991,696 $314,774 $10,105,073 $5,309,671 72

* - Does not include auxialiary equipment

** - Represented as subpart of Utilities

Formosa Georgia Gulf OxyVinyls PolyOne Shintech Westlake

22
ATTACHMENT B. BEYOND THE FLOOR ANALYSIS FOR RESINS

02/08/2012

DRYER DATA SUMMARY

Min Max Avg

Formosa - Baton Rouge 9 323,496 240,226 917,121,920 Formosa - Delaware City 2 143,300,300 Formosa - Point Comfort 1 1,565,280,200 Georgia Gulf - Aberdeen 7 1,000,897,480 Georgia Gulf - Plaquemine16 1,199,313,280 OxyVinyls - Deer Park 2 551,155,000 OxyVinyls - Pasadena 7 325,468 2,101,002,860 OxyVinyls - Pedricktown 3 81,055 350,534,580 

PolyOne - Henry 7 154,826 96,576 76,007,292 145 668 125,663,340 

PolyOne - Pedricktown 2 39,809,584 130,072,580 

Shintech - Addis 1 623,907,460 

Shintech - Freeport 1 3,196,699,000 Shintech - Plaquemine 1 1,300,725,800 

Dow - Midland 1 21,600,000 41 

Westlake - Calvert City 5 1,100,000,000 2,093 800,277,060 Westlake - Geismar 1 33,000 76,000 44,250 476,390,000 906 49 573,201,200 

*Estimate from Survey Submission 358 DSCF/Lb of Dry Resin Produced

1 No Capacity Info - Based on Non-CBI Survey Response2 Survey Response > Capacity Info - Based on Non-CBI Survey Response 

Average of Avg Dry Flow Rate per Lb Production

Sum of Dryer Flow Rates (DSCFM) Company Number of Dryers* 

2006 Production Capacity (lbs) Dryer Flow 

Avg Flow 

Annual Production (Lbs) Annual Production (lbs/min) Avg Dryer Flow Rate per Production (DSCF/LB)

23
Attachment C 

Beyond-the-Floor Analysis for Equipment Leaks 

24
ATTACHMENT C: BEYOND THE FLOOR ANALYSIS FOR EQUIPMENT LEAKS

02/08/2012

BTF Equipment Leaks Options Cost Summary

Pumps - Option 1 972 5,948 209 1,181

Valves - Option 1 883 6,216 416 1,299

Connectors - Option 1 9,320 65,633 6,405 15,725

Total 11,175 77,798 7,030 18,205

Cost Summary for Equipment Leaks

Company LDAR Program[1] (A) Capital Cost Increase of LDAR ($) (B) Annualized Capital Cost Increase of LDAR (C) Annual Increase in LDAR Cost (D) TAC ($) D=B+C Baseline Emiss

(Tons/yr) 

Formosa - Baton Rouge 40CFR61 V 77,798 11,175 7,030 18,205 Formosa - Delaware City 40CFR63 UU 

- Formosa - Point Comfort 40CFR61 V 77,798 11,175 7,030 18,205 

Georgia Gulf - Aberdeen 40CFR61 V 77,798 11,175 7,030 18,205 Georgia Gulf - Plaquemine 40CFR63 UU 

- OxyVinyls - Pasadena 40CFR61 V 77,798 11,175 7,030 18,205 

OxyVinyls - Pedricktown 40CFR61 V 77,798 11,175 7,030 18,205 PolyOne - Henry 40CFR61 V 77,798 11,175 7,030 18,205 PolyOne - Pedricktown 40CFR61 V 77,798 11,175 7,030 18,205 Shintech - Addis 40CFR61 V 77,798 11,175 7,030 18,205 Shintech - Freeport 40CFR61 V 77,798 11,175 7,030 18,205 Shintech - Plaquemine 40CFR61 V 77,798 11,175 7,030 18,205 Dow - Midland 40CFR61 V 77,798 11,175 7,030 18,205 Westlake - Calvert City 40CFR61 V 77,798 11,175 7,030 18,205 Westlake - Geismar 40CFR61 V 77,798 11,175 7,030 18,205 Totals 145,273 1,011,368 91,392 236,666 

 

[1] - LDAR program type reported by facility in August 12, 2009 information collection request. [2] - VOC assumed to equal total HAP. 

Component Capital Costs Annualized Capital Costs Annual Costs Total Annualized Costs 

25
ATTACHMENT C: BEYOND THE FLOOR ANALYSIS FOR EQUIPMENT LEAKS

02/08/2012

Major Source Equipment Leaks Baseline and Emission Reduction Analysis[1] 

Type of Component Number of Components

1

SubpartV Emission 

Factor 

(kg/hr/equipment)

Subpart UU Emission 

Factor 

(kr/hr/equipment)

Subpart V 

Emissions 

(Tons/yr)

Subpart UU 

Emissions 

(Tons/yr)

Model 2 Pump Seals

 * Light-liquid service 40 2.51E-03 6.95E-04 0.93 0.26  * Heavy-liquid service 5Valves * Gas/vapor service 414 3.52E-04 2.03E-04 1.35 0.78  * Light-liquid service 1,179 3.90E-04 2.32E-04 4.26 2.53  * Heavy-liquid service 71Connectors * Flanges - gas/vapor 0 3.07E-04 3.07E-04 0.00 0.00  * Flanges - light liquid 2,662 3.07E-04 1.62E-04 7.57 3.99  * Flanges -heavy liquid 0Agitators * Light-liquid service 3 2.51E-03 2.51E-03 0.07 0.07  * Heavy-liquid service 3Pressure Relief Devices * Disks 45 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00 0.00  * Disk holders, valves,etc. 45 NA NAOpen-ended Valves 141 3.33E-05 3.33E-05 0.04 0.04 Sampling Connections 35 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00 0.00 Compressor Vent 2 2.28E-02 2.28E-02 0.42 0.42 

Totals 14.64 8.10 

[1] - Emissions estimated based on 8,400 operating hours per year

26
ATTACHMENT C: BEYOND THE FLOOR ANALYSIS FOR EQUIPMENT LEAKS

02/08/2012

Major Source Equipment Leaks - Subpart V Cost

Type of Component Number of Components

Initial 

Monitoring 

Fee or Unit 

Cost 

($/comp)

Initial LDAR 

Costs ($/yr) 

(Capital)

Initial 

LDAR 

Admin. 

Costs

Frequency 

of 

Monitoring 

(times/yr)

Subsequent 

Monitoring Fee 

($/comp) or 

Charge (%)

Annual 

Monitoring 

Costs ($/yr)

Annual 

Maintenance 

Costs ($/yr)

Initial Leak 

Frequency 

(%)

Initial 

Number of 

Leaks

Subsequent 

Leak 

Frequency (%)

Annual 

Number 

of Leaks

Percent 

Repaired 

OnLine

Repair 

Time 

(hours)

Labor 

Charge 

($/hr)

Annual OnLine 

Leak Repair 

Cost ($/yr)

Percent 

Requiring 

Further 

Repair

Repair 

Time 

(hours)

Labor 

Charge 

($/hr)

Annu

Offline 

Repair 

($/y

Model 2 Pump Seals

 * Light-liquid service 40 23.80  12 1.50 1547.01 310.2 2.42 0.97 0.23 1.097 100 16.00 66.24 1162.87 0 80.00 66.24  * Heavy-liquid service 5 1.10 5.52Valves * Gas/vapor service 414 23.80 	 2 1.50 1242.00 0.33 1.38 0.33 2.77 75 0.17 66.24 22.95 25 4.00 66.24 1 * Light-liquid service 1,179 23.80 

 2 1.50 3537.00 0.33 3.94 0.33 7.88 75 0.17 66.24 65.35 25 4.00 66.24 5 * Heavy-liquid service 71 1.10 78.38Connectors * Flanges - gas/vapor 0 1.10 0.00 * Flanges - light liquid 2,662 1.10 2938.85 * Flanges -heavy liquid 0 1.10 0.00Agitators * Light-liquid service 3 23.80 71.41 12 1.50 140.11 0.00 2.42 0.07 0.23 0.08 100.00 16.00 66.24 87.22 0 80.00 66.24  * Heavy-liquid service 3 1.10 3.31Pressure Relief Devices * Disks 45 122.11 5494.78 0 2.00 0.00 109.90  * Disk holders, valves,etc. 45 6,374.29 286842.95 5.00 14342.15 Open-ended Valves 141 140.92 19870.03 5.00 993.50 Sampling Connections 35 687.86 24075.01 5.00 1203.75 Compressor Vent 2 10526.21 21052.42 5.00 1052.62 Replacement Pump Seals 40 282.71 273.72Monitoring Instrument 1 10,800 10,800Data Collection System 1 14,500 14,500

hr/activity $/hr

Administrative and Reports 250 92.72 

Planning and Training 320 92.72 29670.40TOTALS 426311.44 29670.40 6466.12 18012.11 1338.39 7

Capital Costs 455,982

Capital Rec. Fac for Pump Seals and Rupture Disks 0.244

Capital Rec. Fac for All other Equipment 0.142

Annualized Capital Costs 65,338

Annual Expenses 64,261

Annual Fixed Costs ($/yr) 103,049 129,599

Annual Variable Costs ($/yr) 26,861

27
ATTACHMENT C: BEYOND THE FLOOR ANALYSIS FOR EQUIPMENT LEAKS

02/08/2012

Equipment Leaks - Pumps Option 1 Incremental Cost

Type of Component Number of Components

Initial 

Monitoring 

Fee or Unit 

Cost 

($/comp)

Initial LDAR 

Costs ($/yr) 

(Capital)

Initial 

LDAR 

Admin. 

Costs

Frequency 

of 

Monitoring 

(times/yr)

Subsequent 

Monitoring 

Fee ($/comp) 

or Charge 

(%)

Annual 

Monitoring 

Costs ($/yr)

Annual 

Maintenance 

Costs ($/yr)

Initial Leak 

Frequency 

(%)

Initial 

Number 

of Leaks

Subsequent 

Leak 

Frequency 

(%)

Annual 

Number 

of Leaks

Percent 

Repaired 

OnLine

Repair 

Time 

(hours)

Labor 

Charge 

($/hr)

Annual 

OnLine Leak 

Repair Cost 

($/yr)

Percent 

Requiring 

Further 

Repair

Repair 

Time 

(hours)

Labor 

Charge 

($/hr)

O

R

Model 2 Pump Seals

 * Light-liquid service 40 0.00  12 1.50 1547.01 347.9 13.48 5.39 0.26 1.231 100 16.00 66.24 1304.21 0 80.00 66.24  * Heavy-liquid service 5 0.00 0.00Replacement Pump Seals 40 282.71 1524.88

hr/activity $/hr

Administrative and Reports 0 92.72 Planning and Training 0 92.72 0.00TOTALS 7249.53 0.00 1547.01 347.90 1304.21 

Capital Costs 7,250

Capital Rec. Fac for Pump Seals and Rupture Disks 0.244

Capital Rec. Fac for All other Equipment 0.142

Annualized Capital Costs 1,185

Annual Expenses 3,479

Baseline Monitoring

Type of Component Number of Components

Initial 

Monitoring 

Fee or Unit 

Cost 

($/comp)

Initial LDAR 

Costs ($/yr) 

(Capital)

Initial 

LDAR 

Admin. 

Costs

Frequency 

of 

Monitoring 

(times/yr)

Subsequent 

Monitoring 

Fee ($/comp) 

or Charge 

(%)

Annual 

Monitoring 

Costs ($/yr)

Annual 

Maintenance 

Costs ($/yr)

Initial Leak 

Frequency 

(%)

Initial 

Number 

of Leaks

Subsequent 

Leak 

Frequency 

(%)

Annual 

Number 

of Leaks

Percent 

Repaired 

OnLine

Repair 

Time 

(hours)

Labor 

Charge 

($/hr)

Annual 

OnLine Leak 

Repair Cost 

($/yr)

Percent 

Requiring 

Further 

Repair

Repair 

Time 

(hours)

Labor 

Charge 

($/hr)

O

R

Model 2 Pump Seals

 * Light-liquid service 40 0.00  12 1.50 1547.01 310.2 2.42 0.97 0.23 1.097 100 16.00 66.24 1162.87 0 80.00 66.24  * Heavy-liquid service 5 0.00 0.00Replacement Pump Seals 40 282.71 273.72

hr/activity $/hr

Administrative and Reports 0 92.72 Planning and Training 0 92.72 0.00TOTALS 1301.32 0.00 1547.01 310.19 1162.87 

Monitoring Repair

Capital Costs 1,301 1,301.32

Capital Rec. Fac for Pump Seals and Rupture Disks 0.244

Capital Rec. Fac for All other Equipment 0.142

Annualized Capital Costs 213 212.71

Annual Expenses 3,270 1,548.86 1,473.07

Incremental Capital Costs 5948.21

Incremental Annual Costs 1181.47

28
ATTACHMENT C: BEYOND THE FLOOR ANALYSIS FOR EQUIPMENT LEAKS

02/08/2012

Equipment Leaks - Valves Option 1 Cost Analysis

Type of Component Number of Components

Initial 

Monitoring 

Fee or Unit 

Cost 

($/comp)

Initial LDAR 

Costs ($/yr) 

(Capital)

Initial 

LDAR 

Admin. 

Costs

Frequency 

of 

Monitoring 

(times/yr)

Subsequent 

Monitoring 

Fee ($/comp) 

or Charge 

(%)

Annual 

Monitoring 

Costs ($/yr)

Annual 

Maintenance 

Costs ($/yr)

Initial Leak 

Frequency 

(%)

Initial 

Number 

of Leaks

Subsequent 

Leak 

Frequency 

(%)

Annual 

Number 

of Leaks

Percent 

Repaired 

OnLine

Repair 

Time 

(hours)

Labor 

Charge 

($/hr)

Annual 

OnLine Leak 

Repair Cost 

($/yr)

Percent 

Requiring 

Further 

Repair

Repair 

Time 

(hours)

Labo

Charg

($/hr

Model 2 Valves

 * Gas/vapor service 414 0.00  2 1.50 1242.00 7.24 29.98 0.51 4.19 75 0.17 66.24 34.75 25 4.00 66. * Light-liquid service 1,179 0.00 	 2 1.50 3537.00 4.84 57.09 0.51 11.93 75 0.17 66.24 98.95 25 4.00 66. * Heavy-liquid service 71 0.00 0.00

hr/activity $/hr

Administrative and Reports 0 92.72 Planning and Training 0 92.72 0.00TOTALS 6620.56 0.00 4779.00 0.00 133.69 

Capital Costs 6,620.56

Capital Rec. Fac for Pump Seals and Rupture Disks 0.244

Capital Rec. Fac for All other Equipment 0.142

Annualized Capital Costs 940

Annual Expenses 6,004

Baseline Monitoring

Type of Component Number of Components

Initial 

Monitoring 

Fee or Unit 

Cost 

($/comp)

Initial LDAR 

Costs ($/yr) 

(Capital)

Initial 

LDAR 

Admin. 

Costs

Frequency 

of 

Monitoring 

(times/yr)

Subsequent 

Monitoring 

Fee ($/comp) 

or Charge 

(%)

Annual 

Monitoring 

Costs ($/yr)

Annual 

Maintenance 

Costs ($/yr)

Initial Leak 

Frequency 

(%)

Initial 

Number 

of Leaks

Subsequent 

Leak 

Frequency 

(%)

Annual 

Number 

of Leaks

Percent 

Repaired 

OnLine

Repair 

Time 

(hours)

Labor 

Charge 

($/hr)

Annual 

OnLine Leak 

Repair Cost 

($/yr)

Percent 

Requiring 

Further 

Repair

Repair 

Time 

(hours)

Labo

Charg

($/hr

Model 2 Valves

 * Gas/vapor service 414 0.00 
	 2 1.50 1242.00 0.33 1.38 0.33 2.77 75 0.17 66.24 22.95 25 4.00 66. * Light-liquid service 1,179 0.00  2 1.50 3537.00 0.33 3.94 0.33 7.88 75 0.17 66.24 65.35 25 4.00 66. * Heavy-liquid service 71 0.00 0.00

hr/activity $/hr

Administrative and Reports 0 92.72 Planning and Training 0 92.72 0.00TOTALS 404.63 0.00 4779.00 0.00 88.30 

Capital Costs 405

Capital Rec. Fac for Pump Seals and Rupture Disks 0.244

Capital Rec. Fac for All other Equipment 0.142

Annualized Capital Costs 57

Annual Expenses 5,588

Incremental Capital Costs 6215.93

Incremental Annual Costs 1298.68

V Option 1 - MC 

29
ATTACHMENT C: BEYOND THE FLOOR ANALYSIS FOR EQUIPMENT LEAKS

02/08/2012

Equipment Leaks - Connectors Option 1 Cost Analysis

Type of Component Number of Components

Initial 

Monitoring Fee or Unit 

Cost ($/comp)

Initial LDAR 

Costs ($/yr) 

(Capital)

Initial 

LDAR 

Admin. 

Costs

Frequency of 

Monitoring 

(times/yr)

Subsequent 

Monitoring Fee 

($/comp) or 

Charge (%)

Annual 

Monitoring 

Costs ($/yr)

Annual 

Maintenance 

Costs ($/yr)

Initial Leak 

Frequency 

(%)

Initial 

Number 

of Leaks

Subsequent 

Leak 

Frequency (%)

Annual 

Number 

of Leaks

Percent 

Repaired 

OnLine

Repair 

Time 

(hours)

Labor 

Charge 

($/hr)

Annual 

OnLine Leak 

Repair Cost 

($/yr)

Percent 

Requiring 

Further 

Repair

Repair 

Time 

(hours)

Labor 

Charge 

($/hr)

Annual 

Offline Lea

Repair Cos

($/yr)

Model 2 Connectors

 * Flanges - gas/vapor 0 23.80 0.00 0.20 2.50 0.00 0.36 0.00 0.36 0.00 75 0.17 66.24 0.00 25 2.00 66.24 0.0 * Flanges - light liquid 2,662 23.80 63778.96 0.25 2.50 1663.75 0.36 9.58 0.36 2.40 75 0.17 66.24 19.88 25 2.00 66.24 79.3

 * Flanges -heavy liquid 0 0.00 0.00

hr/activity $/hr

Administrative and Reports 50 92.72 Planning and Training 20 92.72 1854.40

1663.75 0.00 19.88 79.3

TOTALS 63778.96 1854.40 1663.75 0.00 19.88 79.3

Capital Costs 65,633

Capital Rec. Fac for Pump Seals and Rupture Disks 0.244

Capital Rec. Fac for All other Equipment 0.142

Annualized Capital Costs 9,320

Annual Expenses 6,405

C Option 1 - MC 

30
Attachment D 

Beyond-the-Floor Analysis for Storage Vessels 

 

31
ATTACHMENT D: BEYOND THE FLOOR ANALYSIS FOR STORAGE VESSELS

02/08/2012

Emissions, lb/yr*

20,000 gal 40,000 gal

MTVP, 1 TO 5 TO 1 TO 5 TO VP, mm Hg Lowest

HAP psi S_Loss W_Loss Total W_Loss Total S_Loss W_Loss Total W_Loss Total 25 C emissions 

Methanol 1.85 557 49 606 243 800 20 C Trend

Methylene chloride 6.78 3,693 246 3,939 1,229 4,922 6,006 491 6,498 2,457 8,464 79 1,176 972Hexane 2.35 1,763 171 1,933 853 2,616 92 571 1,113 Acetaldehyde** 14.5 115 1,482 1,361Propylene oxide 8.48 3,724 211 3,935 1,054 4,778 6,015 422 6,437 2,109 8,124 125 606 1,469Vinylidene chloride 9.64 8,028 400 8,428 1,998 10,026 12,922 799 13,721 3,995 16,917 151 1,933 1,749Vinyl acetate 1.74 1,357 125 1,482 627 1,983 194 3,484 2,213Ethyl benzene 0.14 250 3,366 2,818Phenol 0.004 429 3,939 4,749Methyl isobutyl ketone 0.28 533 3,935 5,871Acetonitrile 1.41 523 48 571 241 764 601 8,428 6,605Chloroform 3.00 3,183 301 3,484 1,507 4,690Methyl tert-butyl ether 2.13 3,071 294 3,366 1,472 4,543Ethylene dichloride 1.20 1,079 98 1,176 488 1,567

> 4 psi -----> > 0.75 psi ----->

* Emissions = breathing losses (S_Loss) + working losses (W_Loss). Default values for Atlanta, Georgia.** Unable to model acetaldehyde tank emissions due to vapor pressure.

Estimated S and W

mmHg psia emissions, lb/yr

triethylamine 57 1.1 735trichloroethylene 69 1.3 745benzene 95 1.8 1,025acrylonitrile 109 2.1 1,176carbon tetrachloride 115 2.2 1,241methyl chloroform 124 2.4 1,338MTBE 250 4.8 2,697acrolein 274 5.3 2,956carbon disulfide 359 6.9 3,874allyl chloride 368 7.1 3,971

Vapor pressure (25C) y = 10.79x + 120.07

R2 = 1

0

1,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

Emissions, lb/yr

Vapor pressure, mm Hg

Emissions vs Vapor Pressure

32
ATTACHMENT D: BEYOND THE FLOOR ANALYSIS FOR STORAGE VESSELS

02/08/2012

Emissions Needed to Achieve Cost Effectiveness of $3,500/ton

Volume

Degas (1989)

FlRoof 

(1989)

Cost 

Escal* TCI (2010) O&M

Emissions

, lb/yr

Emiss Red, 

lb/yr TAC** Rec. Cr.*** $/ton

Volume 20,000 $1,227 $8,817 1.80 $18,087 $1,809 1,997 1,897 $3,795 $949 $3,500

Volume 20,000 gal 75.7 m3 30,000 $1,510 $9,925 1.80 $20,593 $2,059 2,599 2,469 $4,320 $3,500Tank diameter 15.0 ft 4.6 m 40,000 $1,750 $10,807 1.80 $22,614 $2,261 2,497 2,372 $4,744 $1,186 $3,500Height 15.0 ft 4.6 m 50,000 $1,963 $11,552 1.80 $24,338 $2,434 3,071 2,918 $5,106 $3,500

60,000 $2,155 $12,203 1.80 $25,858 $2,586 3,263 3,100 $5,425 $3,500

Volume 30,000 gal 113.6 m3 * Cost escalation conducted from 7/89 to 6/06.Tank diameter 17.2 ft 5.2 m ** TAC (annualized capital cost plus O&M, w/o recovery credit).Height 17.2 ft 5.2 m ***Based on $500/ton (approx average of methylene chloride and ethylene dichloride from Platts)

Equation: Emissions = 0.0191 x volume + 1442.7 (R

2=0.99)

Volume 40,000 gal 151.4 m3Tank diameter 18.953 ft 5.777 mHeight 18.953 ft 5.777 mVolume 50,000 gal 189.3 m3Tank diameter 20.4 ft 6.2 mHeight 20.4 ft 6.2 mVolume 60,000 gal 227.1 m3Tank diameter 21.7 ft 6.6 mHeight 21.7 ft 6.6 m

bEmissions estimated for model tank in Atlanta, Georgia using TANKS4.

33
ATTACHMENT D: BEYOND THE FLOOR ANALYSIS FOR STORAGE VESSELS

02/08/2012

Turnovers: 1

mm Hg mm Hg mm Hg mm Hg mm Hg mm Hg mm Hg mm Hg mm Hg mm Hg mm Hg mm Hg

39 52 78 103 129 155 39 52 78 103 129 155

psia psia psia psia psia psia psia psia psia psia psia psia

Volume TAC** 0.75 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 0.75 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

20,000 $3,795 539 678 957 1236 1515 1794 13616 10717 7455 5665 4534 375530,000 $4,32040,000 $4,744 606 1518850,000 $5,10660,000 $5,425

Turnovers: 5

mm Hg mm Hg mm Hg mm Hg mm Hg mm Hg mm Hg mm Hg mm Hg mm Hg mm Hg mm Hg

39 52 78 103 129 155 39 52 78 103 129 155

psia psia psia psia psia psia psia psia psia psia psia psia

Volume TAC** 0.75 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 0.75 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

20,000 $3,795 2213 2910 4305 5700 7095 8490 2955 2133 1288 856 595 41930,000 $4,32040,000 $4,744 800 1137950,000 $5,10660,000 $5,425

Turnovers: 10 # of TO's $/Ton

mm Hg mm Hg mm Hg mm Hg mm Hg mm Hg mm Hg mm Hg mm Hg mm Hg mm Hg mm Hg 1 15,188 $ 

39 52 78 103 129 155 39 52 78 103 129 155 5 11,379 $ 

psia psia psia psia psia psia psia psia psia psia psia psia 10 8,616 $ 

Volume TAC** 0.75 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 0.75 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 20 $ 5,725 

20,000 $3,795 4305 5700 8490 11280 14070 16860 1288 856 419 198 64 -25 40 3,315 $ 30,000 $4,320 80 1,657 $ 40,000 $4,744 1044 8616 160 662 $ 50,000 $5,10660,000 $5,425

Using methanol TANKS value in CMAS table, VP = 1.85

lb/yr Emissions $/ton including recovery creditslb/yr Emissions $/ton including recovery creditslb/yr Emissions $/ton including recovery credits

34
Attachment E 

Beyond the Floor Analysis for Wastewater 

35
ATTACHMENT E: BEYOND THE FLOOR ANLYSIS FOR WASTEWATER

02/08/2012

Baseline Emissions Analysis for Maintenance and Process Wastewater

Pollutant Existing Source (ppmw) New Source (ppmw)VC 6.80 0.28Total Non_VC HAP 110.00 0.018

CONTROLLED WW STREAMS - Stripper Outlet Data - VC concentrations replaced with VI data where supplied

Company & Facility Originating Equipment Total WW (GAL) Acetaldehyde EDC MeOH MIBK VC Total Non-VC HAP VI Data Name Lookup

Certain Teed Lake Charles Waste Water Stripper 3,600 0.4000Dow MidlandFormosa Baton Rouge Wastewater Stripping Columns 13,703,040 0.3 0.1400 0.3

Formosa DelawareFormosa Point Comfort 1.6212 FPCTXOxyVinyls Deer Park Waste Water Stripper 0.018 0.3761 0.018 OXYDPOxyVinyls Pasadena Waste Water Preheater E-422 64,000,000 0.0245 OXYPAOxyVinyls PedricktownPolyOne Henry Waste Water Stripper Column 4,953,600 1.4832 POHPolyOne Pedricktown Waste Water Stripping Column 247,101 1.8752 POPShintech Addis Waste Water Stripper 14,839,200 40 0.26 0.0060 40.26

Shintech Freeport HEAT EXCHANGER 27,000,000 39 0.259 0.1186 39.259 SHTF

Shintech Plaquemine Waste Water Stripper 3,801,600 40 0.3 0.0100 40.3

Westlake Calvert City Water Stripper Col Feed Heat Exch 28,908,000 2.26 1.0146 2.26 WLCC

Westlake Geismar PVC Plant Waste Water Stripper13,225,138 1.1870 WLGGeorgia Gulf Aberdeen Waste Water strippers 10,584,000 0.8678 GGAGeorgia Gulf Plaquemine Waste Water Stripper 1.0000

Avg Conc (PPMW) 0.72 20.40VI Supplied Data

Stripper Outlet Wastewater Baseline Estimation 

Company & Facility Resin Type 2008 lbs of Resin 2008 lb of Resin CBI? 2006 Capacity 2008 Stripper WW (Gal) 2008 Stripper Outlet (Gals)/Lb of Resin 2008 Stripper Outlet (Gals/YR) VC Conc W/ Avg for Non-Report (PPMW) % Reduction of VC Conc Needed to meet MACT floor limit Total Non-VC HAP Conc W/ Avg for Non- Report (PMW) % Reduction of Total Non-VC HAP Conc Needed to meet MACT floor limit Baseline VC (Tons/YR) Baseline Total Non- VCHAP (Tons/YR) 

Certain Teed Lake Charles Bulk 447,348,640 No 480,607,160 3600.00 8.05E-06 3,600 0.40 - 20.40 - 6.01E-06 3.06E-04 

Dow Midland Other 21,600,000 No 0.72 677,273 - 20.40 - 2.04E-03 5.77E-02 Formosa Baton Rouge Other Yes 917,121,920 13703040.00 13,703,040 0.14 - 0.30 - 8.01E-03 1.72E-02 Formosa Delaware Dispersion Yes 143,300,300 0.72 4,493,214 - 20.40 - 1.36E-02 3.82E-01 Formosa Point Comfort Other Yes 1,565,280,200 1.62 49,079,723 - 20.40 - 3.32E-01 4.18E+00 OxyVinyls Deer Park Other Yes 551,155,000 0.38 17,281,593 - 0.02 - 2.71E-02 1.30E-03 OxyVinyls Pasadena Other Yes 2,101,002,860 64000000.00 64,000,000 0.02 - 20.40 - 6.53E-03 5.45E+00 OxyVinyls Pedricktown Other 350,534,580 0.72 10,991,093 - 20.40 - 3.32E-02 9.36E-01 PolyOne Henry Other/Dispersion 76,007,292 No 125,663,340 4953600.00 6.52E-02 4,953,600 1.48 - 20.40 - 3.07E-02 4.22E-01 PolyOne Pedricktown Dispersion 39,809,584 No 130,072,580 247101.00 6.21E-03 247,101 1.88 - 20.40 - 1.93E-03 2.10E-02 Shintech Addis Other Yes 623,907,460 14839200.00 14,839,200 0.01 - 40.26 - 3.72E-04 2.49E+00 Shintech Freeport Other Yes 3,196,699,000 27000000.00 27,000,000 0.12 - 39.26 - 1.34E-02 4.42E+00 Shintech Plaquemine Other Yes 1,300,725,800 3801600.00 3,801,600 0.01 - 40.30 - 1.59E-04 6.39E-01 Westlake Calvert City Other 1,100,000,000 No 800,277,060 28908000.00 2.63E-02 28,908,000 1.01 - 2.26 - 1.22E-01 2.73E-01 Westlake Geismar Other 476,390,000 No 573,201,200 13225138.43 2.78E-02 13,225,138 1.19 - 20.40 - 6.55E-02 1.13E+00 Georgia Gulf Aberdeen Other 1,000,897,480 10584000.00 10,584,000 0.87 - 20.40 - 3.83E-02 9.01E-01 Georgia Gulf Plaquemine Other 1,199,313,280 1.00 37,604,746 - 20.40 - 1.57E-01 3.20E+00 

Average* 3.14E-02 Totals 8.52E-01 2.45E+01 *Average does not include CTLC due to absence of H20 

UNCONTROLLED WASTEWATER STREAMS in Bulk process

Average of Avg Conc (ppmw)

Wastewater Stripper Outlet Concentration Limits (Monthly Basis)

36
ATTACHMENT E: BEYOND THE FLOOR ANLYSIS FOR WASTEWATER

02/08/2012

Pollutant Existing Source (ppmw) New Source (ppmw)VC 6.80 0.28

Wastewater Stripper Outlet Concentration Limits (Monthly Basis)

UnControlled Data

Data

FacilityName Sum of Total WW (GAL) Sum of VC2 Sum of Total Non-VC HAP2Formosa Plastics Corporation Baton Rouge 342048960 0.14273188Georgia Gulf Chemicals Aberdeen Facility 27720000 0Lake Charles Polymer Plant 59616000 0.000621921OxyVinyls Deer Park 0OxyVinyls Pasadena 462061144.2 0 1.439935448PolyOne Henry 41253800 0.34429179Shintech Addis 51112800 0.007939744 2.492969532Shintech Freeport 27000000 0.000676002 4.423191163Shintech Plaquemine 10022400 0.002797745 0.61992652Westlake Calvert City 64648800 0 0.609679537Westlake Geismar 110527230.7 0.006666394

Company & Facility Total WW (GAL) Tons VC Tons Total Non-VC HAP VC Conc (PPMW) Total Non-VC HAP Conc (PPMW)

Formosa Baton Rouge 342048960 0.14273188 0.1Georgia Gulf Aberdeen 27720000 0 0

Certain Teed Lake Charles 59616000 0.000621921 0.0025OxyVinyls Deer Park 0OxyVinyls Pasadena 462061144.2 0 1.439935448 0 0.746811268PolyOne Henry 41253800 0.34429179 2Shintech Addis 51112800 0.007939744 2.492969532 0.037225806 11.6883871Shintech Freeport 27000000 0.000676002 4.423191163 0.006 39.259Shintech Plaquemine 10022400 0.002797745 0.61992652 0.066896552 14.82298851Westlake Calvert City 64648800 0 0.609679537 0 2.26Westlake Geismar 110527230.7 0.006666394 0.01445403

Average 0.22 13.76

Company & Facility Resin Type 2008 lbs of Resin 2008 lb of Resin CBI? 2006 Capacity 2008 Uncontrolled WW (Gal) 2008 Uncontrolled Flow (Gals/Lb of Resin 2008 Uncontrolled Flow (Gals/YR) VC Conc W/ Avg for Non-Report (PPMW) Total Non-VC HAP Conc W/ Avg for Non- Report (PMW) Baseline VC (Tons/YR) Baseline Total Non-VC HAP (Tons/YR)  	
 	
 

Certain Teed Lake Charles Bulk 447,348,640 No 480,607,160 59616000.00 1.33E-01 59,616,000 0.0025 13.75543737 6.22E-04 3.42E+00 4 $ 195,687.80 ,312,495.51 $ 407,063.77 $ Dow Midland Other 21,600,000 No 0.222707639 13.75543737 5.58E-03 3. 6,001,507 44E-01 1,170,206.76 $ 263,169.23 $ 110,458.54 $ Formosa Baton Rouge Other Yes 917,121,920 342048960.00 342,048,960 0.1 13.75543737 1.43E-01 1.96E+01 12,497 $ 27,555,245.71 ,714.15 $ 1,179,678.11 $ Formosa Delaware Dispersion Yes 143,300,300 0.222707639 13.75543737 3.70E-02 2.29 39,815,639 E+00 3,607,537.41 $ 4,760,376.15 $ 340,522.10 $ Formosa Point Comfort Other Yes 1,565,280,200 0.222707639 13.75543737 4.04E-01 2.50E+ 434,909,290 01 15,004,502.40 $ 68,716,040.93 $ 1,416,298.20 $ OxyVinyls Deer Park Other Yes 551,155,000 0.222707639 13.75543737 1.42E-01 8.79E+ 153,137,074 00 8,050,612.18 $ 30,134,452.20 $ 759,910.49 $ OxyVinyls Pasadena Other Yes 2,101,002,860 462061144.24 462,061,144 0 0.746811268 0.00E+00 1.44E+00 15,765,4 $ 108,791,861.15 47.36 $ 1,488,125.20 $ OxyVinyls Pedricktown Other 350,534,580 0.222707639 13.75543737 9.05E-02 5.59 97,395,179 E+00 6,147,011.88 $ 26,713,314.84 $ 580,226.88 $ PolyOne Henry Other/Dispersion 76,007,292 No 125,663,340 41253800.00 5.43E-01 41,253,800 2 13.75543737 3.44E-01 2.37E+00 3,698, $ 12,919,660.71 428.98 $ 349,101.51 $ PolyOne Pedricktown Dispersion 39,809,584 No 130,072,580 0.222707639 13.75543737 1.03E-02 6.35 11,060,996 E-01 1,603,065.92 $ 3,901,367.75 $ 151,316.76 $ Shintech Addis Other Yes 623,907,460 51112800.00 51,112,800 0.037225806 11.6883871 7.94E-03 2.49E+00 4,561,891.33 $ 19,963,003.73 $ 430,605.54 $ Shintech Freeport Other Yes 3,196,699,000 27000000.00 27,000,000 0.006 39.259 6.76E-04 4.42E+00 4,025,7 $ 11,596,709.31 28.22 $ 379,997.39 $ Shintech Plaquemine Other Yes 1,300,725,800 10022400.00 10,022,400 0.066896552 14.82298851 2.80E-03 6.20E-01 1,796,626.93 $ 4,700,549.55 $ 169,587.67 $ Westlake Calvert City Other 1,100,000,000 No 800,277,060 64648800.00 5.88E-02 64,648,800 0 2.26 0.00E+00 6.10E-01 5,610,422.62 $ 32,757,050.10 $ 529,578.58 $ Westlake Geismar Other 476,390,000 No 573,201,200 110527230.71 2.32E-01 110,527,231 0.01445403 13.75543737 6.67E-03 6.34E+00 6,651,912.71 $ 60,274,694.99 $ 627,885.24 $ Georgia Gulf Aberdeen Other 1,000,897,480 27720000.00 27,720,000 0 13.75543737 0.00E+00 1.59E+00 3,296, $ 16,199,462.93 630.76 $ 311,175.68 $ Georgia Gulf Plaquemine Other 1,199,313,280 0.222707639 13.75543737 3.10E-01 1.91E+ 333,226,273 01 12,800,118.20 $ 207,503,809.01 $ 1,208,223.21 $ 

Average* 2.78E-01 1.51 104.68 $ 636,946,456.09 110,600,353.33 $ 10,439,754.89 $ 

*Average does not include CTLC due to absence of H20 

in Bulk process Totals W/O CTLC or OVDP 98,237,245.63 $ 606,616,316.10 $ 9,272,780.63 $ 

(see "BTF Costing" sheet) 

37
ATTACHMENT E: BEYOND THE FLOOR ANLYSIS FOR WASTEWATER

02/08/2012

Pollutant Existing Source (ppmw) New Source (ppmw)VC 6.80 0.28

Wastewater Stripper Outlet Concentration Limits (Monthly Basis)

MAINTENANCE WW STREAMS

Company & Facility Total WW (GAL) VC Conc (PPMW) Total Non-VC HAP Conc (PPMW)

PolyOne Henry 22,243,957.00 2

Shintech Freeport 430,000.00 0.077Westlake Calvert City 1,206,000.00Westlake Geismar 852,000.00 2.25

2.1250 0.077

Company & Facility Resin Type 2008 lbs of Resin 2008 lb of Resin CBI? 2006 Capacity 2008 Main WW (Gal) 2008 Maint Flow (Gals/Lb of Resin 2008 Maint Flow (Gals/YR) VC Conc W/ Avg for Non-Report (PPMW) TOHAP Conc W/ Avg for Non-Report (PMW) Baseline VC (Tons/YR) Baseline TOHAP (Tons/YR)

Certain Teed Lake Charles Bulk 447,348,640 No 480,607,160 2.13 0.077 3.91E-01 1.42E-02 44,069,862Dow Midland Other 21,600,000 No 2.13 0.077 1.89E-02 6.84E-04 2,127,891Formosa Baton Rouge Other Yes 917,121,920 2.13 0.077 8.01E-01 2.90E-02 90,348,854Formosa Delaware Dispersion Yes 143,300,300 2.13 0.077 1.25E-01 4.54E-03 14,117,008Formosa Point Comfort Other Yes 1,565,280,200 2.13 0.077 1.37E+00 4.95E-02 154,201,168OxyVinyls Deer Park Other Yes 551,155,000 2.13 0.077 4.81E-01 1.74E-02 54,296,186OxyVinyls Pasadena Other Yes 2,101,002,860 2.13 0.077 1.84E+00 6.65E-02 206,977,061OxyVinyls Pedricktown Other 350,534,580 2.13 0.077 3.06E-01 1.11E-02 34,532,374PolyOne Henry Other/Dispersion 76,007,292 No 125,663,340 22,243,957.00 2.93E-01 22,243,957 2.00 0.077 1.86E-01 7.15E-03

PolyOne Pedricktown Dispersion 39,809,584 No 130,072,580 2.13 0.077 3.48E-02 1.26E-03 3,921,780

Shintech Addis Other Yes 623,907,460 2.13 0.077 5.45E-01 1.97E-02 61,463,283Shintech Freeport Other Yes 3,196,699,000 430,000.00 2.13 0.077 3.81E-03 1.38E-04 430,000Shintech Plaquemine Other Yes 1,300,725,800 2.13 0.077 1.14E+00 4.12E-02 128,138,999Westlake Calvert City Other 1,100,000,000 No 800,277,060 1,206,000.00 1.10E-03 1,206,000 2.13 0.077 1.07E-02 3.87E-04Westlake Geismar Other 476,390,000 No 573,201,200 852,000.00 1.79E-03 852,000 2.25 0.077 8.00E-03 2.74E-04Georgia Gulf Aberdeen Other 1,000,897,480 2.13 0.077 8.74E-01 3.17E-02 98,601,874Georgia Gulf Plaquemine Other 1,199,313,280 2.13 0.077 1.05E+00 3.80E-02 118,148,501

Average* 9.85E-02 9.17E+00 3.33E-01*Average does not include CTLC due to absence of H20 

in Bulk process

Stripper Outlet, Uncontrolled, and Maint. Wastewater Combined

Company & Facility Resin Type Baseline VC (Tons/YR) Baseline Total Non-VC HAP (Tons/YR) VC Reduction (Tons Per Year) Total Non-VC HAP Reduction (Tons Per Year)

Certain Teed - Lake Charles Bulk 3.91E-01 3.44 0.00E+00 0.00E+00Dow - Midland Other 2.65E-02 4.03E-01 0.00E+00 0.00E+00Formosa - Baton Rouge Other 9.52E-01 19.7 0.00E+00 0.00E+00Formosa - Delaware City Dispersion 1.76E-01 2.67 0.00E+00 0.00E+00Formosa - Point Comfort Other 2.10 29.2 0.00E+00 0.00E+00OxyVinyls - Deer Park Other 6.51E-01 8.81 0.00E+00 0.00E+00OxyVinyls - Pasadena Other 1.84 6.95 0.00E+00 0.00E+00OxyVinyls - Pedricktown Other 4.30E-01 6.54 0.00E+00 0.00E+00PolyOne - Henry Other/Dispersion 5.61E-01 2.80 0.00E+00 0.00E+00PolyOne - Pedricktown Dispersion 4.70E-02 6.57E-01 0.00E+00 0.00E+00Shintech - Addis Other 5.53E-01 5.01 0.00E+00 0.00E+00Shintech - Freeport Other 1.79E-02 8.85 0.00E+00 0.00E+00Shintech - Plaquemine Other 1.14 1.30 0.00E+00 0.00E+00Westlake - Calvert City Other 1.33E-01 8.83E-01 0.00E+00 0.00E+00Westlake - Geismar Other 8.02E-02 7.47 0.00E+00 0.00E+00Georgia Gulf - Aberdeen Other 9.13E-01 2.52 0.00E+00 0.00E+00Georgia Gulf - Plaquemine Other 1.51 22.4 0.00E+00 0.00E+00Total 11.5 130 0.00 0.00

Totals w/o area sources 10.49 117.29

38
ATTACHMENT E: BEYOND THE FLOOR ANALYSIS FOR WASTEWATER

02/08/2012

Cost of Piping Additional Streams to Wastewater Stripper Feed Tank

Assumptions

Wastewater Flow (GPM) 50 Assume Hard pipe wastewater flow to Stripper Feed TankWastewater Flow (m^3/sec) 0.003154534 Assume all piped flow is turbulent

Fluid Density (kg/m^3) 983.24 Assume water temperature of 140FOptimum Pipe Diameter (m) 0.066599847

Optimum Pipe Diameter Calculation Eq. (12-15) Peters, Timmerhaus, & 

West pg. 501

Optimum Pipe Diameter (inches) 2.622035973Caluclated (Rounded) Pipe Diameter (inches) 3Estimated Pipe Cost (304 Stainless)* (Jan. 2002 Dollars) $/linear foot 50 <-----Estimated Pipe Cost (Carbon Steel)* (Jan. 2002 Dollars) $/linear foot 3.3 Where:

Pump and Pumping Cost Di,opt=optimum pipe diameter in meters

Pump cost (w/o motor)† $3,000 1000 gpm, 20 ft, general purpose centrifugal mv=volumetric flow rate (m^3/sec)

Power Output (kW) (brake power) 11.25 p=fluid density kg/m^3

Pump motor cost§ $ Alternating Current, Explosion proof (~13 kW) 2,000Motor Efficiency‡ 87% ~11.25 bkW Assumed 20 ft of headPower requirement † (kW) 12.9Operating hours per year (Hrs) 8400Electricity Cost ($/kWh) 0.07Electricity Cost per year ($/yr) 7603

Total Capital Investment 

Assumed length of pipe run (ft) 500 GPM TCI TAC CRPurchased cost of pipe (Stainless Steel) $ 25,000 10 47300 13960 4465 18425Purchased cost of pump $ 3,000 50 105111 11808 9922 21730Purchased cost of motor $ 2,000 100 140148 13209 13229 26438Equipment Cost $ 30,000 500 297813 19516 28111 47627Installation Factor** (Ratio of total cost for fittings and installation to the purchase cost for the new pipe) 1.4 1000 420443 24421 39687 64108Installation Cost (includes pump and moto) $ 42,000Tax and Freight Factor†† 0.08Tax and Freight Cost $ 2,400Total Capital Investment (Jan. 2002) $ 74,400CE - July 02 (Pipes, Valves, and Fittings) $ 563.5CE - Feb 2010 (Pipes, Valves, and Fittings) $ 796.1

Total Capital Investment (Feb. 2010) $ 105,111Annual Cost

Annual interest rate (fraction): 0.07System life (years): 20Capital recovery factor: 0.0944Taxes, Insurance, Admin Factor 0.04Electricity $ 7,603Taxes Insurance, Administrative $ 4,204Capital Recovery $ 9,922

Total Annual Cost ($/yr) $ 11,808 does not incl. capital recovery* From Figure 12-4 Peters, Timmerhaus, & West. Plant Design and Economics for Chemical Engineers** pg. 404 Peters, Timmerhaus, & West. Plant Design and Economics for Chemical Engineers† Estimated from Figure 12-19 Peters, Timmerhaus, & West. Plant Design and Economics for Chemical Engineers§ Estimated from Figure 12-24 Peters, Timmerhaus, & West. Plant Design and Economics for Chemical Engineers‡ Estimated from Figure 12-18 Peters, Timmerhaus, & West. Plant Design and Economics for Chemical Engineers†† - Eqn. 10.39 pg. 10-49 OAQPS Control Cost Manual Fifth Edition Feb. 1996pg. 10-51 OAQPS Cost Control Manual (Ductwork)Pipe Cost $/Linear FootDiameter 304/L. Stainless (Sch 40) Carbon Steel (Sch 40)

1 17 0.92 31 2.13 50 3.34 70 5.85 90 7.56 120 107 160 138 190 179 210 19

10 230 20

* From Figure 12-4 Peters, Timmerhaus, & West. Plant Design and Economics for Chemical Engineers







    

* From Figure 12-4 Peters, Timmerhaus, & West. Plant Design and Economics for Chemical Engineers

39
ATTACHMENT E: BEYOND THE FLOOR ANALYSIS FOR WASTEWATER

02/08/2012

Wastewater - Steam Stripper Costing

Wastewater Strippe - Current Operation Cost Estimate

Company

Westlake Chemical Corporation - MODEL

Certain Teed Lake Charles Dow Midland

Formosa Baton Rouge

Formosa Delaware

Formosa Point Comfort

OxyVinyls Deer Park

OxyVinyls Pasadena

OxyVinyls Pedricktown PolyOne Henry

PolyOne Pedricktown Shintech Addis

Shintech Freeport

Shintech Plaquemine

Westlake Calvert City

Westlake Geismar

Georgia Gulf Aberdeen

Georgia Gulf Plaquemine

Facility Westlake Geismar Process Type SuspensionProcess Type Std Suspension

Process Unit ID P-1Stripped Resin Stream ID S-1Stripping Type Continuous ContinuousInlet Stream Flow, liters/min 1930 0.02704 5.08686 102.92076 33.74762 368.62788 129.79855 480.69107 82.55188 37.20549 1.85593 111.45423 202.79154 28.55305 217.12215 99.33134 79.49429 282.44165

A. Parameters (Inputs and Example 

Calculation)

1. Stripper inlet flow rate, pm (Q) 500 1930 0 5 103 34 369 130 481 83 37 2 111 203 29 217 99 79 282

2. Annual operating hours, hr/yr (H) 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400

3. Steam to Feed Ratio, kg /  (S) 0.096 0.060 0.060 1.060 2.060 3.060 4.060 5.060 6.060 7.060 8.060 9.060 10.060 11.060 12.060 13.060 14.060 15.060 16.060

4. Electricity use, kWhr/day (EU) 260 260 260 260 260 260 260 260 260 260 260 260 260 260 260 260 260 260 2605. Operating labor rate, $/hr (LR) [2] $34.60 $34.60 $34.60 $34.60 $34.60 $34.60 $34.60 $34.60 $34.60 $34.60 $34.60 $34.60 $34.60 $34.60 $34.60 $34.60 $34.60 $34.60 $34.60

6. Electricity cost, $/kWh (EC) [3] $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07

7. Water cost, $/1,000 gal (WC) [4] $0.20 $0.20 $0.20 $0.20 $0.20 $0.20 $0.20 $0.20 $0.20 $0.20 $0.20 $0.20 $0.20 $0.20 $0.20 $0.20 $0.20 $0.20 $0.208. Steam cost, $/1,000 lb (SC) [4] $4.65 $4.65 $4.65 $4.65 $4.65 $4.65 $4.65 $4.65 $4.65 $4.65 $4.65 $4.65 $4.65 $4.65 $4.65 $4.65 $4.65 $4.65 $4.659. Capital recovery factor = [i x (1 + i)a] / [(1 + i)a - 1], where i = interest rate, a = equipment life

 a. Equipment CRF, 20-yr life, 7% interest

0.09439 0.09439 0.09439 0.09439 0.09439 0.09439 0.09439 0.09439 0.09439 0.09439 0.09439 0.09439 0.09439 0.09439 0.09439 0.09439 0.09439 0.09439 0.09439

10. Cost index a. 2010 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1

 b. 1989 356.0 356.0 356.0 356.0 356.0 356.0 356.0 356.0 356.0 356.0 356.0 356.0 356.0 356.0 356.0 356.0 356.0 356.0 356.0

B. Total Capital Investment

1. $ = 0.3731 x Q^0.267 x 10^6 $0 

2. $ / pm = $ / Q $0 

C. Direct Annual Operating Costs, $/yr

1. Electricity = EU / (24 hr/day) x H x EC $6,079 $6,079 $6,079 $6,079 $6,079 $6,079 $6,079 $6,079 $6,079 $6,079 $6,079 $6,079 $6,079 $6,079 $6,079 $6,079 $6,079 $6,079 $6,079 2. Steam = Q x S x (2.2 lb/kg) x (60 min/hr) x H x SC / 1000 $247,484 $596,994 $8 $27,801 $1,093,142 $532,440 $7,716,500 $3,386,309 $15,019,132 $3,004,954 $1,546,138 $86,695 $5,780,970 $11,564,081 $1,775,440 $14,620,205 $7,200,751 $6,172,585 $23,387,319 3. Water = Q x (5220 liters water-min / liters feed-day) x (1 day / 24 hr) x H x (0.264 gal/liter) x 

WC / 1000

$0 $186,159 $3 $491 $9,928 $3,255 $35,560 $12,521 $46,370 $7,963 $3,589 $179 $10,751 $19,562 $2,754 $20,945 $9,582 $7,668 $27,246 

4. Operating labor = (1 hr/shift) x (1 shift/8 hr) x H x LR $36,330 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 5. Supervisory labor = 0.15 x (operating labor) $5,450 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 6. Maintenance labor = (0.5 hr/shift) x (1 shift/8 hr) x H x (LR x 1.1) $19,982 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 7. Maintenance materials = 0.02 x TCI $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

D. Indirect Annual Costs, $/yr

1. Overhead = 0.6 x (labor + maintenance materials) $37,057 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 2. Property taxes, insurance, and administration

= 0.04 x TCI $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

3. Capital recovery = Equipment CRF x TCI $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

F. Include in Annual Cost? yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes

F. Total Annual Cost

1. $/yr = Direct Annual Costs + Indirect Annual Costs - Recovery Credit $352,381 $789,232 $6,090 $34,371 $1,109,149 $541,774 $7,758,139 $3,404,908 $15,071,581 $3,018,996 $1,555,806 $92,953 $5,797,800 $11,589,723 $1,784,273 $14,647,229 $7,216,412 $6,186,332 $23,420,644 

Sources:1. Cost equations: HON BID, Vol 1-b and 1-c, Nov 1992 (EPA-453/D-92-016c)2. Operating labor rate: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment Statistics, May 2008 National Industry-Specific Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates

3. Electricity cost: Energy Information Administration. Average Industrial Retail Price of Electricity: October 2009.4. Water cost and steam cost: Air Compliance Advisor, version 7.5.

5. ICIS, http://www.icis.com/v2/chemicals/9076567/vinyl-chloride/pricing.html, October 20, 2010. (Avg. $690/tonne = $0.313/lb)

Parameters/Costs Equation

40
ATTACHMENT E: BEYOND THE FLOOR ANALYSIS FOR WASTEWATER

02/08/2012

Wastewater - Steam Stripper Costing

Wastewater stripper - incremental cost of controlling previously uncontrolled streams

Company

Westlake Chemical Corporation - MODEL

Certain Teed Lake Charles Dow Midland

Formosa Baton Rouge Formosa Delaware

Formosa Point Comfort OxyVinyls Deer Park OxyVinyls Pasadena

OxyVinyls Pedricktown PolyOne Henry

PolyOne Pedricktown Shintech Addis Shintech Freeport Shintech Plaquemine

Westlake Calvert City Westlake Geismar

Georgia Gulf Aberdeen

Georgia Gulf Plaquemine

Facility Westlake Geismar Process Type SuspensionProcess Type Std SuspensionProcess Unit ID P-1Stripped Resin Stream ID S-1Stripping Type ContinuousInlet Stream Flow, liters/min 1930 448 50 2672 333 3635 1280 3951 814 347 85 495 406 104 703 929 288 2785

A. Parameters (Inputs and Example 

Calculation)

1. Stripper inlet flow rate, pm (Q) 500 1930 448 50 2672 333 3635 1280 3951 814 347 85 495 406 104 703 929 288 2785

2. Annual operating hours, hr/yr (H) 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400

3. Steam to Feed Ratio, kg /  (S) 0.096 0.060 0.060 1.060 2.060 3.060 4.060 5.060 6.060 7.060 8.060 9.060 10.060 11.060 12.060 13.060 14.060 15.060 16.060

4. Electricity use, kWhr/day (EU) 260 260 260 260 260 260 260 260 260 260 260 260 260 260 260 260 260 260 260

5. Operating labor rate, $/hr (LR) [2] $34.60 $34.60 $34.60 $34.60 $34.60 $34.60 $34.60 $34.60 $34.60 $34.60 $34.60 $34.60 $34.60 $34.60 $34.60 $34.60 $34.60 $34.60 $34.606. Electricity cost, $/kWh (EC) [3] $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07

7. Water cost, $/1,000 gal (WC) [4] $0.20 $0.20 $0.20 $0.20 $0.20 $0.20 $0.20 $0.20 $0.20 $0.20 $0.20 $0.20 $0.20 $0.20 $0.20 $0.20 $0.20 $0.20 $0.208. Steam cost, $/1,000 lb (SC) [4] $4.65 $4.65 $4.65 $4.65 $4.65 $4.65 $4.65 $4.65 $4.65 $4.65 $4.65 $4.65 $4.65 $4.65 $4.65 $4.65 $4.65 $4.65 $4.659. Capital recovery factor = [i x (1 + i)a] / [(1 + i)a - 1], where i = interest rate, a = equipment life

 a. Equipment CRF, 20-yr life, 7% interest

0.09439 0.09439 0.09439 0.09439 0.09439 0.09439 0.09439 0.09439 0.09439 0.09439 0.09439 0.09439 0.09439 0.09439 0.09439 0.09439 0.09439 0.09439 0.09439

10. Cost index a. 2010 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1 641.1

 b. 1989 356.0 356.0 356.0 356.0 356.0 356.0 356.0 356.0 356.0 356.0 356.0 356.0 356.0 356.0 356.0 356.0 356.0 356.0 356.0

B. Total Capital Investment

1. $ = 0.3731 x Q^0.267 x 10^6 $0 $10,000,000 $4,162,340 $1,119,238 $12,156,052 $3,483,361 $14,621,955 $7,816,538 $15,371,841 $5,957,838 $3,572,161 $1,535,104 $4,422,226 $3,922,296 $1,731,747 $5,454,430 $6,451,137 $3,191,910 $12,462,632 

2. $ / pm = $ / Q $0 $5,182 $9,295 $22,312 $4,549 $10,467 $4,022 $6,107 $3,890 $7,319 $10,293 $18,074 $8,927 $9,671 $16,679 $7,762 $6,941 $11,095 $4,475 

C. Direct Annual Operating Costs, $/yr

1. Electricity = EU / (24 hr/day) x H x EC $6,079 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 2. Steam = Q x S x (2.2 lb/kg) x (60 min/hr) x H x SC / 1000 $247,484 $0 $138,518 $246,353 $27,286,494 $4,718,102 $68,378,090 $30,007,037 $108,433,711 $26,627,746 $12,876,305 $3,880,741 $19,912,230 $11,564,081 $4,680,705 $32,696,095 $60,179,262 $16,166,293 $207,241,642 3. Water = Q x (5220 liters water-min / liters feed-day) x (1 day / 24 hr) x H x (0.264 gal/liter) x 

WC / 1000

$0 $0 $43,194 $4,348 $247,826 $28,848 $315,106 $110,953 $334,779 $70,566 $29,890 $8,014 $37,033 $19,562 $7,262 $46,840 $80,081 $20,084 $241,434 

4. Operating labor = (1 hr/shift) x (1 shift/8 hr) x H x LR $36,330 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 5. Supervisory labor = 0.15 x (operating labor) $5,450 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 6. Maintenance labor = (0.5 hr/shift) x (1 shift/8 hr) x H x (LR x 1.1) $19,982 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 7. Maintenance materials = 0.02 x TCI $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

D. Indirect Annual Costs, $/yr

1. Overhead = 0.6 x (labor + maintenance materials) $37,057 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 2. Property taxes, insurance, and administration

= 0.04 x TCI $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

3. Capital recovery = Equipment CRF x TCI $0 $943,929 $392,895 $105,648 $1,147,445 $328,805 $1,380,209 $737,826 $1,450,993 $562,378 $337,187 $144,903 $417,427 $370,237 $163,465 $514,860 $608,942 $301,294 $1,176,384 

F. Include in Annual Cost? yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yesF. Total Annual Cost

1. $/yr = Direct Annual Costs + Indirect Annual Costs - Recovery Credit $352,381 $943,929 $574,607 $356,350 $28,681,766 $5,075,755 $70,073,406 $30,855,815 $110,219,483 $27,260,690 $13,243,381 $4,033,658 $20,366,690 $11,953,881 $4,851,431 $33,257,795 $60,868,284 $16,487,671 $208,659,460 

Sources:1. Cost equations: HON BID, Vol 1-b and 1-c, Nov 1992 (EPA-453/D-92-016c)2. Operating labor rate: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment Statistics, May 2008 National Industry-Specific Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates

3. Electricity cost: Energy Information Administration. Average Industrial Retail Price of Electricity: October 2009.4. Water cost and steam cost: Air Compliance Advisor, version 7.5.

5. ICIS, http://www.icis.com/v2/chemicals/9076567/vinyl-chloride/pricing.html, October 20, 2010. (Avg. $690/tonne = $0.313/lb)

Parameters/Costs Equation

41
Attachment F 

Beyond the Floor Analysis for Other Emission Sources 

42
	

	

	





	










 !"#$%#&'



#''()(&#&*!!+&&'

 + !",!#&+#! )(&#&*!!+&&'"!--".&+#!/0#'-!"/!"123&!"!" !"%( !+鷕*!"!6

	#&'
:;!%#&'#! #

 <2 -!" !"

#&+#! !+&&'"! (%#&')"+)#&':;!%#

 $=

>!#?!!&+"%#)+#5 !'#&'%( !&'##&'9

 <42

Table B.2 Total Capital Investment and Total Annualized Cost Estimate: Flow Indicator - Gas Phase

Component Equation Cost ($)

Capital and Other Initial CostsTotal Capital Investment ($2011) TCI 5,000Annualized CostsMaintenance and repairs

3 O&M=.07*TCI 350

Taxes, Insurance

3 TI=0.04*TCI 200

Interest Rate

3

i 0.07

Equipment Life

3 (years) n 7

Capital Recovery Factor

4 CRF=(i*(1+i)

n)/((1+i)

n-1) 0.19

Capital Recovery

4 CR=CFR*TCI 928

Total Annualized Costs ($/yr) ($2011) TAC=O&M+TI+CR 1,478

LOW HIGH Averaeg

Total VCM Emission (ton/yr) (tons per gas holder)*(gas holders) 13.20 49.50 31.35

Total VCM Removed (ton/yr) (ton per gas holder) * (gas holders) * (% reduction ) 9.24 34.7 21.9

Removal Effectiveness ($/ton VCM) (Total VCM Removed) / ((Total Costs)* (gas holders)) 2,399 640 1,010

References1 - Comments Of The Vinyl Institute, Inc., PVC Mact Working Group. Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-00372 - Krock, Richard P. Memorandum to Ms. Jodi Howard. "Vinyl Institute Response to EPA Request for Additional Information on Work Practices for Gasholders at PVC Resin Manufacturing Facilities." Septemb

3 - Peters, Timmerhaus, and West. "Plant Design and Economics for Chemical Engineers." Fifth Edition. McGraw Hill. New York, NY. 2003. pg. 2684 - U.S. EPA. "Air Pollution Control Cost Manual." Sixth Edition (EPA/452/B-02-001). January 2002 pg 2-21

Assumed emission Redux Component Equation

43