p. 1 

# OAR Box 

# 1415 Prepped byOllie Stewart



## Document

Number: 

# 28 ) IV-H- 9 Docket Number: 

# A-94-5 2

Printed 7/15/2008 9:38:26

AM Sheet 28 of 130P. 2

Keit h Barnet t j _Tq ^ Bry_on_P._Allen@omb.eop.go v i 02/04/200 3 01:0 6 PMEP AAi k,.n C r^.-^777 o ^ rcc: r JB.\\ Wehrum/DC/USEPA/US@EPA , Cecili a Kim/DC/USEPA/US@EPA , Penn yLassiter/RTP/USEPA/US@EP A Subject : RE : Reinforce d Plasti cComposite s NESHA P - Definitio n o fLarg e Parts U Dea rBryon : I wante d t o follo wu p wit h yo u concernin g Kevi n Bromberg' s las tmessage . Th e followin g i s th e basi s fo r EPA' s definitio n o flarg e parts . I believ e w e too k a reasonabl e approac h t o thi s definitio n base d o n facilitie s currentl yoperating . I als o discus s wh yw e canno tus e th e ACM Adefinitio n fo rlarg e parts . Th e basi s fo rth e 40 0 cubi cfoo t volum e i s A.R.E . i n Mt . Eaton , Ohio , whic h meet s th e 9 5 percen tcaptur e an d contro l requirements . Th e larges t partbuil ta tA.R.E . i s a custo m ca rbody . Aful l siz e automobil e i s approximatel y6x15x 5 feet . Thi s i s a volum e o f45 0 cubi cfeet . I originallyplanne d t o us e a maximu m part volum e o f50 0 cubi cfeet , bu tlate rdecide d i twoul d b e mor e appropriat e t o roun d dow n t o 40 0 cubi cfeet , t o giv e facilitie s som e leewa yan d accoun t fo rth e mol d volume . Thi s eliminate d th e majorit yo fth e part s o n th e ACM Apart s lis tfro m captur e an d contro l requirements . I t wa s the n suggeste d (b yOffic e o fGenera l Counsel ) tha ti tmigh tb e mor e appropriat e t o hav e tw o criteria . One o n volum e an d on e o n length . Th e proble m wa s howt o selecta length . Th e larges tsingl e part dimensio n wher e permanen t tota l enclosure s hav e bee n applie d wer e a tNobl e Composites . Th e longes t part the yproduc e i s 5 0 feet . S o w e selecte d an ydimensio n tha texceed s 5 0 feet . Thi s eliminate d severa l mor e part s o n th e ACM Alist , bu tdi d no teliminat e fla tpane l typ e product s (whic h wa s ou rintention) . I rea d th e teleco n betwee n Nobl e Composite s an d Kevi n Bromberg . M yunderstandin g i s tha tNobl e bag s th e part s i n th e enclosur e an d pull s a vacuu m afte rth e parti s ou tofth e enclosure . I d o no tbeliev e tha t th e part wil l emi t HA P afte rbagging . Therefore , th e laminatio n operatio n wil l mee tth e requirement s o fEP AMetho d 204 , whic h i s th e requiremen ti n th e rule . Eve n i fther e ar e emission s a s th e partleave s th e boot h tha t woul d violat e th e EP AMetho d 20 4 criteria , th e reaso n i s tha tthe ychos e t o vacuu m ba g rathe rthe n cur e th e part i n th e booth . Ane wfacilit ycoul d op tt o exten d th e boot h an d completel ycur e th e part prio rt o remova l fro m th e booth , whic h i s exactl ywha tNobl e Composite s doe s i n thei rge l coa t booth . O rthe ycoul d sea l th e ba g prio rt o takin g th e partou to fth e boot h t o insur e ther e ar e n o emissions . Th e poin t i s tha t th e issue s raise d byACM Afo rlarg e part s ar e no tapplicabl e t o part s suc h a s recreatio n vehicl e sidewalls . Th e ACM Aha s state d tha tth e reaso n tha tth e facilitie s makin g larg e part s ar e not "similar " t o th e facilitie s tha t se t th e ne wsourc e floor s i s tha tthe yhav e t o ope n larg e door s t o ge tpart s an d materia l i n an d out , an d mus t hav e muc h large rpermanen ttota l enclosure s wit h highe rairflow s tha n th e facilitie s tha t hav e captur e an d control . Thi s i s no tth e cas e wit h larg e fla tpart s suc h a s recreationa l vehicl e sidewalls . The yrequir e opening s i n th e permanen ttota l enclosure s n o large rtha n thos e at facilitie s tha t currentl ymee t 9 5 percen t captur e an d control . Fla tpanel s ca n b e cure d i n enclosure s a s smal l a s 4 fee t high . Therefore , w e hav e n o basi s t o hav e a larg e part s definitio n tha tresult s i n larg e fla t panel s bein g exclude d fro m captur e an d contro l requirements . Further , w e se e n o justificatio n fo rth e ACMA' s suggeste d definitio n (part s wit h an ydimensio n ove r1 2 fee t ar e "larg e parts") . Th e basi s o ftha t definition , accordin g t o ACMA , wa s tha tthei ranalysi s showe d tha t facilitie s makin g custo m molde d part s o f1 2 fee to rmor e ar e les s cos teffectiv e t o contro l tha n facilitie s makin g smalle rparts . First , tha tstatemen ti s insufficien tjustification . W e ca n no tconside r cost s whe n developin g floors . Second , A.R.E . Mt . Eaton i s a custo m moldin g facility . The yhav e 9 5 percen t captur e an d control . The yhav e buil tpart s u p t o th e siz e o fca rbodies . Th e larg e partspray-u p are a a t thi s facilit yi s approximatel y42. 5 fee tx37. 5 fee tx2 5 fee thigh . Therefore , the yhav e roo m fo r part s muc h large rtha n 40 0 cubi cfeet , an d certainl yca n buil d part s tha texcee d 1 2 fee tlong . Third , reviewin g th e comment s submitte d b yth e ACM Ao n th e propose d rule , thei row n cos tanalysi s show s tha t captur e an d contro l wher e th e facilit ymanufacture s fla tparts , an d part s wit h volume s u p t o 40 0P. 3

cubi cfeet , was cost-effective , wit h a n estimate d cos t effectivenes s o

fless tha n $400 0 pe rto n ofHA P emissio n reduction . Thi s i s lowe rthat al l bu t on e ofth e cos t example s i n th e ACM Acomments . I t i s als o belo wsom e facilitie s that produce bathware , whic h wil l be subjec t t o captur

e an d control . Th e ACM A lin e o freasonin g was that contro l oflarg e parts was mor e expensive tha n smal l parts , and , therefore , there mus

t be technica l difference s that mak e larg e par

t productio n "not similar " t o smal l par t productio n whe n considerin g add-o n controls . Base d o n th e ACMAlin e o freasoning , i fth e cost ofcontro l fo rsmal l parts an d larg e fla t parts ar e similar , the n th e facilitie s mus t be technicall ysimilar . S o I fai l t o se e ho wa facilityproducin g lon g fla t parts ca n no t be "similar " th e facilitie s that se t th e ne wsource floors . Keit h W . Barnet

t US/EP AOAQPS , ESD/MIC G C504-0 5 Researc hTriangl e Park , N C 2771 1 919-541-560 5 bamett.keith@epa.gov "Bromberg , Kevi nL. " <kevin.bromberg@sba.gov >

"Bromberg , Kevin L. " To : '"Bryon_P._Allen@omb.eop.gov" ' <Bryon_P._Allen@omb.eop.gov> , <kevin.bromberg@sb

a Keit

hBarnett/RTP/USEPA/US@EP A .gov > cc : 02/03/200 3 0Q-4

Q A M Subject : RE : Reinforce d Plasti c Composite s NESHA P - Propose d Suggestio

n • 1 2 Fee t Dimension I'v e sen t bot ho f yo u faxe s fro mNobl e Composite s tha t contradic t th e on e plant tha t EP Asay s ca n mak e 100 % captur e an d contro l fo r larg e parts . Th e ge l coa t spra yboot hca n d o so , but no t th e laminat e booth . Ever ymoto r vehicl e sidewal l raust g o throug hbot hbooths , an d therefor e thi s plan t canno t d o 100 % capture . Man yo f th e part s i n th e industr ylist , fo r whic h ACM Asay s 100 % captur e i s not feasible , woul d b e capture d b yEPA' s lates t approach . Keith , fo r wha t plant , i f any , ca n EP Ademonstrat e 100 % captur e an d control ? Wha t i s th e EPA' s basi s fo r th e suggeste d dimension s below ? I f ther e i s n o furthe r evidence , I suspec t tha t th e onl ynumbe r supporte d by th e recor d i s ACMA' s proposa l t o defin e "smal l ope n molde d parts " wit hn o dimensio n greate r tha n 1 2 feet . I f EP Aha s n o recor d suppor t fo r anothe r dimension , o r definition , th e 1 2 foo t dimensio n reasonabl ywel l capture s bi g facilitie s tha t specializ e i n smal l parts , an d ar e reasonabl yexpecte d t o b e abl e t o desig n i n a 100 % captur e system , becaus e i t doe s not hav e th e diversit yo f part s tha t man yfacilitie s have , wh o canno t desig n i n suc ha system . Let' s se e i f w e ca n wra p thi s up quickl y Kevi n Origina l Messag e From : Bryon_P._Allen@omb.eop.go v[mailto:Bryon_P._Allen@omb.eop.gov ] Sent : Thursday , Januar y30 , 200 3 5:0 6 P M To : kevin.bromberg@sba.go v Subject : Reinforce d Plasti c Composite s NESHA P Kevin -