p. 1


# OAR Box 

# 1875 Prepped byOllie Stewart



### Document

Number: 

# 56 ) ll-F- 3 Docket Number: 

# A-90-1 9

Printed 12/1/200811:12:47

AM Sheet 56 of 86P. 2

1 

## A-90-1 9 ll-F- 3

Attache d ar e material s distribute d b yth e EP

Aa t a meeting wit hOMB o n Ma

y19 , 1992 . Belo wi s a lis t o f attendees . EPA OMB Bruc e Jorda n Ja n Meye r Andre wOti s Tom Walto n Mik e Wine r Ric k Belze r TroyHillie r Ti m Hun tP. 3

y1



## Hazardou s Organi c NESHA P (HON )

Ma y199 2P. 4



## Agend a
Backgroun d Approac h SOCM I Characteristic s Th e Analyse s Regulator yOption s Approac h Floo r& Standar d Contro l Option s fo rProces s Vent s Option s Selectio n KeyConsideration s Contro l Decision s Impact s Summar y Potentia l Ne t Benefit sP. 5 

## Approac h

Generi c rulemakin g fo ral l o fSOCM I Th e fiv e emissio n point s commo n throughou t SOCM I Sam e emissio n control s appl y
Selecte d Consisten t wit h previou s rulemaking s fo rSOCM I Mor e efficien t fo rbot h industr yan d governmen tP. 6


## Wha t i s SOCM I ?

Subse t ofth e chemica l industr y produc e chemical s derive d fro m 1 1 basi c chemicals ; o r produc e chemical s fro m othe rindustria l organi c chemical s
SOCM I consist s o f66 0 industria l organi c chemical s
Uni t i s subjec t t o HO N if : produce s on e (o rmore ) of~39 9 organi c compound s liste d i n rul e o List consist s oforgani c HAP' s an d SOCM I chemical s tha t ar e produce d usin g organi c HAP' s Proces s i s exemp t i fn o HAP' s i n proces sP. 7


## SOCM I Characteristic s

Plan t site s includ e On e t o severa l proces s unit s Non-SOCM I processe s suc h a s plastic s an d resin s manufactur e units , refiner yoperations , etc .
Wid e range s i n size s an d physica l characteristic s withi n th e sam e kin d o femissio n poin t (an d betwee n points )P. 8


## Th e Analyse s

SOCM I characterizatio n (1 ) Industr ycharacterizatio n (2 ) Mode l emissio n strea m developmen t (3 ) Mode l assignmen t t o produc t processe s
Baselin e contro l requirement s Applicabl e contro l requirement s i n Stat e an d Federa l rule s Specifi c applicabilit y
Calcuilt o emissions , emissio n reductions , an d contro l cost s emission s i n absenc e ofHO N assig n contro l technolog y calculat e cost s an d emissio n reductio nP. 9


## Th e Analyse s
Approac h fo reconomi c analysi s (1 ) cumulativ e cos t

- 49 0 chemical s i n th e chemica l tree s

- averag e an d highe rcos t analysi s (2 ) detaile d analysi s fo rsubse t o f2 0 chemical s

- pric e an d outpu t adjustment s Impact s presente d ar e fo rtota l industr ycontro l

contro l ofal l emissio n point s overstate s economi c impact s Analysi s o fth e selecte d optio n i s underwa y

wil l provid e whe n availabl eP.1 0 

## RegulatoryOption s Mos t efficien t universall yapplicabl e contro l technique s base d o n pas t an d curren t rulemaking s widel yuse d withi n SOCM I Regulator yissu e i s whic h stream s ar e t o b e controlled ; no t wha t i s th e contro l sam e contro l efficienc yrequire d i n al l option s option s var yi n numbe rofstream s affecte d Option s wer e define d considerin g leas t cos t curv e luYnpiness ofth e dat a criteri a i n othe rrule s floo ranalysi s

## Summar yo fReference Control s p. n



### Poin t Specifi c Contro l Technique s Emissio n Poin t Equipmen t Leaks Proces s Vent s
Storag e Vessel s
Wastewate r
Transfe r Operation s RC T
•Lea k Detectio n & Repai r •Improve d Maintenanc e
•Combustio n

- Flar e

- Incinerato r

- Boile r
•Interna l Floatin g Roof •Externa l Floatin g Roo f •Close d ven t syste m w / Controls
•Close d transpor t an d storag e •Desig n stea m stripper , an d •Control s fo rstrippe rvent s
•Combustio n

- Flar e

- Incinerato r

- Boile r •Recovery RC E 85-8 8 9 8

9 5
95-9 8
9 8P.1 2



# Floo rDeterminatio n Proces s

fo r Proces s Vent s TR E Cos t Effectivenes s Estimate s $184Bil/M g

$4/M g > * • 

## 56 5 vent s

47 7 vent s 1 0 % wMAC T

$1,500/M g 44 % wMAC TP.1 3

V 

## Summar yo fFloo rAnalyse s

•Proces s Vent s

Ranke d b yC/ E fro m hig h t o low ; range d fro m $18 4 billion/M g t o $4/M g 12 % controlle d a t C/ E <$1,500/M g

•44 % ofvent s wit h C/ E <$1,500/M g controlle d by98 % devic e

•10 % ofvent s wit h C/ E >$1,500/M g controlle d b y98 % devic e

•Storag e Vessel s

Examine d mode l tank s i n 3 group s Fo reac h group , ranke d b yvapo rpressur e fro m lo w t o hig h (i.e. , hig h C/ E t o lo wC/E ) 12 % found :

•10,00 0 t o 20,00 0 gallons : n o vapo rpressur e

•20,00 0 t o 40,00 0 gallons : 1. 9 psi a

•40,00 0 gallon s & up : 1. 9 psi a

nP.1 4



## Summar yo fFloo rAnalyses , cont' d Transfe rOperation s Examine d mode l racks i n 2 group s Fo reac h group , ranke d b ythroughpu t fro m lo wt o hig h (i.e. , hig h C/ E t o lo wC/E ) 12 % foun d

•racks wit h v p < 1. 5 psia : n o throughpu t controlle d

•racks wit h v p > 1. 5 psia : 0.1 7 MMGal/y r Wastewate r Differen t approac h used : examine d percentag e of al l processe s an d stream s controlle d Foun d onl y2.5 % ofth e stream s an d onl y5.1 % o f processe s controlle d fo rai remission s

•Contro l du e t o Viny l Chlorid e NESHA P an d Benzen e Wast e NESHA P

1 2P.1 5 

## Exampl e Optio n Tabl e Fina l Contro l Option s fo rHO N Process Vent s

Existin g Source s Optio n

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Emissio n

Reducti o n Mg/y r HA P 228,19 0 233,55 6 236,17 7 236,79 0 237,04 7 237,40 1 237,60 1 Percen t

HA P Reducti o n 9 1 9 3 9 4 9 4 9 5 9 5 9 5 Annua l

Cost , $1000/y r 57,11 4 65,93 9 73,88 0 77,46 3 79,65 9 85,25 6 106,33 0 Averag e

$/M g 25 0 28 2 31 3 32 7 33 6 35 9 44 8 Incre .

$/M g HA P 1,64 0 3,03 0 5,84 6 8,55 0 15,80 0 105,46 4 Baselin e emission s ar

e 250,66 4 Mg/y ro

fHAP . Floo relemen t i s Optio n 1 . Optio n 1 - Optio n 2 - Optio n 3 - Optio n 4 - Optio n 5 - Optio n 6 - Optio n 7 - contro l vent s wit h c/ e o f<$1500/Mg . contro l v«nt s wit h c/

e o f<$2000/Mg . <$5000/Mg . <$7500/Mg . <$10000/Mg . <$28,000/Mg . contro l al l vent s wit h HAP's .

1 3P.1 6


## Ke yConsideration s

Decisio n criteri a fo rselectin g leve l beyon d th e floo rfo r MAC Tstandards : technica l feasibilit y nonai rqualit yhealt h an d environmenta l impact s cos t energ yimpact s

•Cos t effectivenes s (C/E ) i s on e metho d o fconsiderin g cos t usefu l wher e hav e wid e rang e i n size s o femissio n pDint s

•Rang e ofC/ E value s considered : $11 7 t o $28,000/M g

reflect s VO C C/ E decision s a s wel l a s ai rtoxic s C/ E value s

1 4P.1 7


## KeyConsiderations , cont' d

crud e estimate s ofcance rbenefit s pe rM g
Incrementa l VO C C/ E value s (198 9 $ ) SOCM I vents : Incr . $3,090/M g [$1900/M g 1978$ ] Polymer s an d Resins : Incr . $1,400/M g [$930/M g 1980$ ]
Incrementa l ai rtoxic s C/ E value s (198 9 $ ) Benzen e NESHAP : $65 0 - $7,000/M g Bfcnzen e Wast e Operations : $28,000/M g Viny l Chlorid e NESHAP : $1,500/M g

1 5P.1 8


## Ke yConsiderations , cont' d

Qualitativ e consideration s HO N emission s are VOC' s

- Majorit yofsource s i n nonattainmen t area s

- Contro l wil l make othe rVO C control s unnecessary Publi c perceptio n i s toxic s ar e mor e dangerou s tha n VOC' s Cost s ar e consisten t wit h benefit s base d o n Benzen e NESHA P an d earlie rHO N ris k assessmen t Thes e benefi t estimate s d o no t includ e noncance rhealt h effect s N o model s exis t fo rdeterminin g noncance rhealt h benefit s Consistenc ywit h pas t NSP S fo rsame emissio n point s i n th e categor yi s administrativel ydesirabl e

1 6

## Contro l Requirement s HO N Existin g Source s
Emissio n Poin t Proces s Vent s Wastewate r Transfe r Storag e Smal l Storag e Mediu m Storag e Larg e Tota l Emissio n

Reductio n Mg/y r 236,20 0 127,00 0 36 0 0 32 7 8,60 0 372,50 0 %



### fo rth e Typ e 9 4 8 7 6 5 0 7 0 8 7 9 1 Cos t $ 1000/y r 73,90 0 80,40 0 3,10 0 0 2,10 0 * 

### 17,10 0 176,60 0 Avg .

$/M g 31 3 63 5 8,70 0 0 6,50 0 2,00 0 47 5 Inc . $/Mg . 3,00 0 3,50 0 8,700 * 0 * 6,500 * 2,50 0

* denote s floo rleve l o fcontro l

C O

## Contro l Requirement s HO N Ne wSource s
Emissio n Poin t Proces s Vent s Wastewate r Transfe r Storag e Smal l Storag e Mediu m Storag e Larg e Tota l Emissio n

Reductio n Mg/y r 45,00 0 24,20 0 7 0 6 0 6 0 1,60 0 71,05 0 %



### fo rth e Typ e 9 5 8 7 6 5 8 5 7 0 8 7 9 2 Cos t $1000/y r 15,20 0 16,50 0 60 0 1,50 0 39 5 * 

### 2,60 0 37,00 0 Avg .

$/M g 34 0 69 0 8,70 0 24,00 0 6,40 0 1,60 0 52 0 Inc . $/Mg . 340 * 1,60 0 8,700 * 24,000 * 6,400 * 73 0

* denote s floo rleve l o fcontro lP.2 1


## Sensitivit y Analysis (Thousands o

f Dollars )
VOC* * an dHA PValue s
Existin g P

V Floo r Op t 2 Op t 3 * Op t 4 Existin g W

W Opt l Op t 2 * Op t 3 Ne w W W Floo r Op t 2 * Op t 3 Existin g LS V Floo r Op t 2 Op t 3 * Op t 4 Ne w LS V Floo r Op t 2 * Op t 3 VO C = $25 0

HA P= $ 0

16000 27000 20000 1700 0
72000 35000 32000
9800 5500 4900
-3600 -6100 -15000 -16000
-1600 -2100 -2400 VO C = $500

HA P= $25 0

150000 180000 170000 170000
200000 180000 180000
30000 34000 33000
-2800 -3700 -11000 -12000
-1300 -1300 -1600 VO C = $1000

HA P= $1000

470000 540000 540000 540000
490000 510000 510000
76000 96000 95000
-660 2300 190 -1200
-640 73 0 49 0 LS V = Larg e Storag e Vesse l **Averag e VO C valu e for bothattainmen t

an dnon-attainmen t area s
1 7P.2 2



## Sensitivit yAnalysis forExistingPoint s
Potential Net

Benefit s
CompositeOptio n

Floo r + 1 o nW

W Floo r o r Floo r + 1 Decision s VO C Value s

VO C = $25 0 HA P= $ 0
79000 87000 35000 VO C = $500

HA P= $25 0
340000 370000 340000 VO C =

$1000 HA P= $1000 950000 1000000 1000000 VO C =

$2000 HA P= $2000 2000000 2200000 2300000

1 8P.2 3



### Appendi xA :
Detaile d Contro l Optio n TablesFina l Contro l Option s fo r HO NProces s Vent s P.2 4

Existin g Source s Optio n
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Emissio n

Reductio n Mg/y r HA P 228,19 0 233,55 6 236,17 7 236,79 0 237,04 7 237,40 1 237,60 1 Percen t

HA P Reductio n 9 1 9 3 9 4 9 4 9 5 9 5 9 5 Annua l

Cost , $1000/y r 57,11 4 65,93 9 73,88 0 77,46 3 79,65 9 85,25 6 106,33 0 Averag e

$/Mg 25 0 28 2 31 3 32 7 33 6 35 9 44 8 Incre .

$/M g HA P

1 , 64 0 3,03 0 5,84 6 8,55 0 15,80 0 105,46 4 Baselin e emission s ar e 250,66 4 Mg/y r o f HAP . Floo r elemen t i s Optio n 1 . Optio n 1 - contro l vent s wit hc/ e o f <$1500/Mg . Optio n 2 - contro l vent s wit hc/ e o f <$2000/Mg . Optio n 3 - <$5000/Mg . Optio n 4 - " * <$7500/Mg . Optio n 5 - " <$10000/Mg . Optio n 6 - <$28,000/Mg , Optio n 7 - contro l al l vent s wit hHAP's .P.2 5

Fina l Contro l Option s fo r HON Proces s Vent s New Source s Optio n
1 2 3 4 Emissio n

Reductio n Mg/y r HA P 45,04 6 45,10 6 45,13 2 45,14 4 Percen t

HA P Reductio n 9 5 9 5 9 5 9 5 Annua l

Cost , $1000/y r 15,20 6 16,19 9 17,74 5 20,20 3 Averag e

$/M g 33 8 35 9 39 3 44 8 Incre .

$/M g
16,55 0 59,45 2 205,52 8 Baselin e emission s ar e 47,62 6 Mg/y r HA P Optio n 1 - Optio n 2 - Optio n 3 - Optio n 4 - c/ e <$11,000/M g <$28,000/M g <$100,000/M g al l vent s wit hHAP' sP.2 6

Fina l Contro l Option s fo r HO N Wastewate r Existin g Source s Optio n
1 2 3 4 5 Emissio n

Reductio n M g HAP/y r 112,81 0 127,00 0 127,65 0 129,08 5 129,45 0 Percen t

HA P Reductio n 7 7 8 7 8 3 8 9 8 9 Annua l

Cost , $1000/y r 30,80 0 80,40 0 84,60 0 112,30 0 177,20 0 Averag e

$/M g HA P 27 5 63 5 66 0 87 0 1,37 0 Incre .

$/M g HAP
3,50 0 6,44 0 19,39 0 178,30 0 Baselin e emission s ar e 145,58 5 Mg/y r o f HA P an d 529/92 0 Mg/y

r o f VOC . Floo r elemen t i s no control . Optio n 1 - Optio n 2 - Optio n 3 - Optio n 4 - Optio n 5 - contro l stream s >1 0 1p man d >100 0 ppm

wVHA P contro l stream s > 1 1p man d >50 0 ppm

wVHAP . contro l stream s > 1 1p man d >20 0 ppm

wVHAP . contro l stream s > 1 1p man d >10 0 ppm

wVHAP . contro l al l stream s wit han yHAP .P.2 7

Fina l Contro l Option s fo r HO N Wastewate r Ne w Source s Optio n
1
- 2 3 4 Emissio n

Reductio n M g HAP/y r 17,79 0 24,17 0 24,27 0 24,59 5 Percen t

HA P Reductio n 6 4 8 7 8 8 8 9 Annua l

Cost , $1000/y r 6,40 0 16,50 0 17,20 0 33,70 0 Averag e

$/M g 36 0 68 5 71 0 1,37 0 Incre .

$/M g
1,59 5 6,99 0 49 , 98 0 Baselin e emission s ar e 27,66 0 Mg/yr o f HA P an d 100,68 5 Mg/y

r o f VOC . Floo r elemen t i s Optio n 1 , whic hreflect s contro l requirement s o f Viny l Chlorid e NESHAP an d th e Benzen e Wast e NESHAP . Optio n 1 - Optio n 2 - Optio n 3 - Optio n 4 - contro l stream s >1 0 ppm wver yvolatil e HAP . contro l stream s >1 0 ppm wver yvolatil e HA

P an d stream s >50 0 ppm

wvolatil e HAP . contro l stream s >1 0 ppm wver yvolatil e HA

P an d stream s >20 0 ppm

wvolatil e HAP . contro l al l stream s wit han yHAP .Fina l Contro l Option s fo r HO N Transfe r Existin g Source s
Optio n 1 2 Emissio n

Reductio n Mg HAP/y

r 36 0 42 4 Percen t

HA P Reductio n 6 5 7 7 Annua l

Cost , $1000/y r 3,12 8 6,52 1 Averag e

$/M g 8,69 0 15,41 6 • Incre .

$/M g
53,86 0 Baselin e emission s ar e 55 1 Mg HAP/yr . Floo r elemen t i s Optio n 1 . Optio n 1 - Optio n 2 - contro l rack s loading liqui d HAP' s wit hv p > 1. 5 psi a an d throughpu t >0.1 7 millio n gallon s pe r year . contro l al l rack s loading liqui d HAP's .P.2 9

Fina l Contro l Option s fo r HO N Transfe r Ne w Source s Optio n 1 2 Emissio n

Reductio n Mg/yr 6 8 8 1 Percen t

HA P Reductio n 6 5 7 7 Annua l

Cost , $1000/yr 59 4 1,23 9 Averag e

$/M g 8,69 0 15,42 0 Incre .

$/M g
53,86 0 Baselin e emission s ar e 10 5 M g HAP/yr , Floo r elemen t i s Optio n 1 . Optio n 1 - contro l rack s loading liqui d HAP' s wit hv p > 1. 5 psi a an d throughpu t >0.1 7 millio n gallon s pe r year . Optio n 2 - contro l al l rack s loading liquid s HAP' sP.3 0

Fina l Contro l Option s fo r HO N Storage Vessel s Existin g Sources : 10,00 0 t o 20,00 0 gallo ncapacit

y Optio n
1 2 3 Emissio n

Reductio n M g HAP/y r 53. 3 32 2 35 9 Percen t

HA P Reductio n 1 4 8 5 9 5 Annua l

Cost , $1000/y r 31 8 7,73 6 18,94 9 Averag e

$/M g 6,00 0 23,95 0 52,78 0 Incre .

$/M g
27,47 4 311,50 0 Baselin e emission s ar e 37 9 Mg/y r o f HAP . .Floo r elemen t i s no control . Optio n 1 - contro l tank s storing HAP' s wit hv p >ll.l-psia . Optio n 2 - contro l tank s storing HAP' s wit hv p >1. 9 psia . Optio n 3 - contro l al l tank s storing HAP's .

Existin g Sources : 20,00 0 t o 40,00 0 gallo ncapacit

y Optio n
1 2 3 Emissio n

Redactio n M g HAP/y r 32 7 40 9 41 0 Percen t

HA P Reductio n 7 0 8 8 88. 4 Annua l

Cost , $1000/y r 2,11 3 4 , 11 0 5,67 0 Averag e

$/M g HA P 6,50 0 10,05 0 13,87 0 Incre .

$/M g HAP
24,40 0 7,800 , 00 0 Baselin e emission s ar e 46 4 Mg/yr o f HAP . Floo r elemen t i s optio n 1 . Optio n 1 - Optio n 2 - Optio n 3 - contro l tank s storing HAP' s wit hv p >1. 9 psia . contro l tank s storing HAP' s wit hv p >0. 1 psia . contro l al l tank s storing HAP's .P.3 1

Fina l Contro l Option s fo r HO N Storage Vessel s Existin g Sources : 40,00 0 gallo ncapacit

y an dgreate r Optio n
1 2 3 4

" Cos t dee r Emissio n

Reductio n M g HAP/y r 1,70 0 4,77 6 8,62 9 8 , 64 4 eas e du e t o Percen t

HA P Reductio n 1 7 4 8 86. 6 86. 8 Annua l

Cos t $1000/y r 4,05 7 7,290 a 17,06 8 18,52 5 credit s fro mcontrol l Averag e $/M g HA P 2,39 0 1,52 6 1,97 8 2 , 14 3 in g severa J Incre .

$/M g HA P 

### 1,05 1 

### 1 2,53 8 97,13 3

. larg e tank s Baselin e emission s ar e 996 4 Mg/yr o f HAP . Floo r elemen t i s Optio n 1 . Optio n 1 - contro l tank s storing HAP' s wit hv p >1. 9 psia . Optio n 2 - contro l tank s storing HAP' s wit hv p >0.7 5 psi a Optio n 3 - contro l tank s storing HAP' s wit hv p >0. 1 psia . Optio n 4 - contro l al l tank s storin g HAP's .P.3 2

Fina l Contro l Option s fo r HO N Storage Vessel s
Ne w Sources : 40,00 0 gallo ncapacit

y an dgreate r 'Optio n
1 . 2 3 Emissio n

Reductio n M g HAP/y r 55 8 1 , 64 0 1,64 2 Percen t

HA P Reductio n 2 9 8 7 8 7 Annua l

Cos t $1000/y r 1,76 0 2,55 5 2,79 0 Averag e

$/M g HA P 3 , 15 5 l,558 a 1 , 69 8 Incre .

$/M g HAP

73 4 116,50 0
a Cos t decreas e du e t o credit s fro mcontrolling larg e tank s wit h v p betwee n 0.7 5 an

d 0. 1 psia . Baselin e emission s ar e 189 3 Mg/yr o f HAP . Floo r elemen t i s Optio n 1 . Optio n 1 - contro l tank s storing HAP' s wit hv p >0.7 5 psia . Optio n 2 - contro l tank s storing HAP' s wit hv p >0. 1 psia . Optio n 3 - contro l al l tank s storing HAP's. "P.3 3 i

Fina l Contro l Option s fo r HON Storag e Vessel s Ne w Sources : 10,00 0 t o 20,00 0 gallo ncapacit y Optio n
1 2 Emissio n

Reductio n M g HAP/y r 6 1 6 8 Percen t

HA P Reductio n 8 5 9 4 Annua l

Cost , $1000/y r 1,47 0 3,60 0 Averag e

$/M g 24,09 8 52,94 1 Incre .

$/M g
304,28 6 Baselin e emission s ar e 7 2 Mg/y r o f HAP . Floo r elemen t i s optio n 1 . Optio n 1 - contro l tank s storin g HAP' s wit hv p >1. 9 psia . Optio n 2 - contro l al l tank s storin g HAP's .

Ne w Sources : 20,00 0 t o 40,00 0 gallo ncapacit y Optio n
1 2 3 Emissio n

Reductio n M g HAP/y r 6 2 - 77. 6 77. 7 Percen t

HA P Reductio n 7 0 -3 8 88. 4 Annua l

Cost , $1000/y r 39 5 76 6 1,06 0 Averag e

$/M g HA P 6,37 0 9,87 0 13,64 0 Incre .

$/M g HA P
23,78 0 2,940 , 00 0 Baselin e emission s ar e 8 8 Mg/y r o f HAP . Floo r elemen t i s optio n 1 . Optio n 1 - contro l tank s storin g HAP' s wit hv p >1. 9 psia . Optio n 2 - contro l tank s storin g HAP' s wit hvp >0. 1 psia . Optio n 3 - contro l al l tank s storin g HAP's .