TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 

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

FROM: Eastern Research Group, Inc.

DATE: February 9, 2012

SUBJECT: Revised Costs and Emission Reductions for Major Sources in 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 national emissions standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 

(NESHAP) emitted from polyvinyl chloride and copolymer (PVC) production facilities. The 

complete set of regulated hazardous air pollutants (HAP) is listed in CAA section 112(b). The 

CAA requires EPA to determine the maximum achievable control technology (MACT) for each 

category of sources. To do so, EPA must first determine the minimum stringency “floor” 

requirements. Separate memoranda document the MACT floor and Beyond-the-Floor analyses 

for the production facilities1. The purpose of this memorandum is to present the nationwide costs 

and emission reductions for existing major sources to comply with MACT. 

1.1 Selection of Controls Needed to Meet MACT Floor Limits

A significant portion of the total cost for industry compliance comes from the cost of 

installing new pollution control devices or improving existing pollution control devices for 

facilities not currently meeting the MACT limits. Various control technologies were considered 

for each facility depending upon which limits that facility needed to meet and how much 

emissions improvement or HAP reduction would be needed to meet the limits. 

1.2 Compliance Costs

For each emission point, costs were estimated for existing production facilities for (A) the 

emission controls used to comply with the MACT floor limits; and (B) the monitoring, testing, 

recordkeeping, and reporting activities used to demonstrate compliance. All costs were 

calculated as 2010 dollars. 

1.3 Emission Control Costs

The costs for various types of control equipment were estimated depending on the 

emission point. For all cost analyses, an annual operating time of 8,400 hours (assuming 

336 hours or 2 weeks of downtime) was assumed, where applicable. A 20 year life was assumed 

for any installed equipment. Capital recovery factors (CRF) were calculated using a 7 percent 

discount rate. All PVC production facilities were assumed to have adequate space to install 

1
additional emissions control equipment without shutting down the production facility for an 

extended period. It was also assumed that connecting any process piping or ductwork could be 

performed during scheduled downtime for maintenance, thereby minimizing expected downtime. 

1.4 Testing, Monitoring, and Recordkeeping Costs

The initial costs and total annual costs (TAC) for testing, monitoring, recordkeeping and 

reporting were estimated for process vents, stripped resin, wastewater, equipment leaks, storage 

vessels, heat exchange systems, and other emission sources. For total initial costs, the CRF, 

where applicable, was again calculated using a 7 percent discount rate. 

1.5 Emission Reductions

Emission reductions for each emission point were estimated as a result of facilities 

meeting the MACT floor limits. Emission reductions were calculated by subtracting the 

emissions of facilities at the MACT floor from the facility baseline emissions. The calculation of 

baseline emissions is described in a separate memorandum2. If a facility is currently meeting a 

MACT floor, then emissions reductions for that facility, at that emission point were assumed to 

be zero. 

2.0 Process Vents

2.1 Selection of Controls Needed to Meet MACT Floor Limits

One control device to reduce emission concentrations from each subcategory of PVC 

process vents was considered. An existing control device may reduce one of the pollutants to 

below the MACT floor, but additional control may be required to reduce emissions of other 

pollutants from that same process vent. The cost of a refrigerated condenser system installed 

before the thermal oxidizer was estimated to reduce vinyl chloride (VC), hydrogen chloride 

(HCl), chlorinated dibenzodioxins and chlorinated dibenzofurans (CDD/CDF) and total organic 

HAP from facilities in each process vent subcategory. Total organic HAP accounts for VC 

CDD/CDF, but does not include HCl or any other non-organic compounds. For facilities using a 

vent gas absorption system (VGA), the cost of installing a refrigerated condenser on the VGA 

exhaust was estimated since the VGA does not reduce the emission concentrations to the MACT 

floor levels. A refrigerated condenser is expected to reduce VC and total organic HAP emissions 

directly by reducing the amount of HAP being routed to, or exhaust from, the control device. For 

facilities requiring a reduction in HCl or CDD/CDF emissions, it was assumed that condensing 

and removing VC from the control system inlet stream would reduce some of the HCl and/or 

CDD/CDF emissions in the control system exhaust stream as the amount of chloride ions 

available for HCl and/or CDD/CDF formation during combustion would be reduced. 

2.2 Compliance Cost Methodology and Results

The cost of adding a refrigerated condenser for control of VC, HCl, CDD/CDF and total 

organic HAP emissions from process vents was estimated. The cost algorithm for installing a 

refrigerated condenser is presented in Attachment A and is based on algorithms in the OAQPS 

Air Pollution Control Cost Manual 3. The condenser input calculations for VC, HCl, CDD/CDF

and total organic HAP reduction are presented in Attachment B. The refrigerated condenser total 

capital investment (TCI) costs range from approximately $47,000 to $777,000, and TAC range 

2
from approximately $103 thousand per year to $355 thousand per year. Although a refrigerated 

condenser is expected to recover additional VC, no recovery credit has been estimated for 

recovered materials as the extent of additional processing and conditioning is unknown. Sources 

for specific cost data are documented in Attachment A. 

2.3 Testing, Monitoring, and Recordkeeping Costs

The initial cost of emissions tests at process vents for VC, HCl, CDD/CDF and total 

organic HAP were calculated and annualized. The costs of performing emissions tests at process 

vents every 5 years for VC, CDD/CDF, and total organic HAP were calculated. Cost estimates 

for US EPA Method 18, Method 26, Method 23, and Method 25A for VC, HCl, CDD/CDF, and 

THC respectively were performed. 

The cost algorithm used to estimate TAC of testing on a facility basis is presented in 

Attachment C. Testing costs on a facility basis for process vents are presented in Table 1. The 

industry TAC for process vent testing was estimated at approximately $188,000 per year. 

Although facilities will determine traverse points (Method 1), stack velocity (Method 2), 

stack gas oxygen content (Method 3 or ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10-1981), and stack gas moisture 

content (Method 4), it was assumed that the cost of these methods was included in the estimate 

for HCl, CDD/CDF, THC, and VC. Although facilities may potentially use a CEMS to 

demonstrate compliance, any costs to install, maintain, or demonstrate compliance using a 

CEMS have not been estimated. 

Recordkeeping and reporting costs were estimated for process vents. An industry wide 

initial cost of $70,600 and an industry wide total annual cost of $33,100 were calculated based 

on the algorithms presented in Attachment D. Recordkeeping and reporting costs on a facility 

basis for process vents are presented in Table 2. 

3
Table 1. Summary of Control Equipment Costs for Process Vents 

Company/Facility 

Condenser Total Control Costs for Process Vents 

TCI ($) Annualized Capital 

Cost ($/yr) 

Annual Costs 

($/yr) TCI ($) TAC ($/yr) 

Dow - Midland - - - - - 

Formosa - Baton Rouge 584,150 55,140 209,045 584,150 264,185 

Formosa - Point Comfort 435,451 41,104 156,028 435,451 197,131 

Formosa - Delaware 54,595 5,153 101,501 54,595 106,655 

Georgia Gulf - Aberdeen 48,450 4,573 100,026 48,450 104,599 

Georgia Gulf - Plaquemine - - - - - 

OxyVinyls - Pasadena 777,040 73,347 281,841 777,040 355,188 

OxyVinyls - Pedricktown - - - - - 

PolyOne - Henry 59,229 5,591 100,068 59,229 105,659

PolyOne - Pedricktown 47,498 4,483 99,437 47,498 103,921 

Shintech - Freeport - - - - - 

Shintech - Plaquemine - - - - - 

Shintech - Addis - - - - - 

Westlake - Calvert City 584,150 55,140 209,045 584,150 264,185 

Westlake - Geismar - - - - - 

Total* 2,590,563 244,531 1,256,991 2,590,563 1,501,522 

*Totals may not add exactly due to rounding. 

 

4
Table 2. Summary of Testing, Recordkeeping, and Monitoring Costs for Process Vents 

Company/Facility 

Performance Testing Cost Recordkeeping and 

Reporting Cost 

Total Monitoring, 

Reporting, and 

Recordkeeping Costs 

for Process Vents 

Total 

Initial 

Costs 

($) 

Annualized 

Initial Cost 

($/yr) 

Annual 

Cost 

($/yr) 

Total Initial 

Costs 

($)

Annual 

Cost 

($/yr) 

Total 

Initial 

Costs 

($) 

TAC 

($/yr) 

Dow-Midland 51,198 4,833 8,640 4,706 2,204 55,904 15,677 

Formosa-Baton Rouge 51,198 4,833 8,640 4,706 2,204 55,904 15,677 

Formosa-Point Comfort 51,198 4,833 8,640 4,706 2,204 55,904 15,677 

Formosa -Delaware 51,198 4,833 8,640 4,706 2,204 55,904 15,677 

Georgia Gulf-Aberdeen 51,198 4,833 8,640 4,706 2,204 55,904 15,677 

Georgia Gulf -Plaquemine 51,198 4,833 8,640 4,706 2,204 55,904 15,677 

OxyVinyls-Pasadena 51,198 4,833 8,640 4,706 2,204 55,904 15,677 

OxyVinyls -Pedricktown - - - 4,706 2,204 4,706 2,204 

PolyOne-Henry 51,198 4,833 8,640 4,706 2,204 55,904 15,677 

PolyOne-Pedricktown 51,198 4,833 8,640 4,706 2,204 55,904 15,677 

Shintech-Freeport 51,198 4,833 8,640 4,706 2,204 55,904 15,677 

Shintech-Plaquemine 51,198 4,833 8,640 4,706 2,204 55,904 15,677 

Shintech -Addis 51,198 4,833 8,640 4,706 2,204 55,904 15,677 

Westlake -Calvert City 51,198 4,833 8,640 4,706 2,204 55,904 15,677 

Westlake -Geismar 51,198 4,833 8,640 4,706 2,204 55,904 15,677 

Total* 716,772 67,662 120,960 70,591 33,055 787,363 221,677 

*Totals may not add exactly due to rounding. 

2.4 Emission Reduction Methodology and Results

The average HAP concentration values used to calculate baseline annual emissions2 for 

every process vent at each facility were compared with the MACT floor emissions limits. 

Percentages to quantify the amount of improvement needed for the facility to meet the limits 

were calculated. Table 3 and 4 contains the baseline HAP concentration values used for each 

facility and the percentage improvement required to meet the MACT floor emissions limits for 

PVC-only and PVC-combined process vents, respectively. Reductions of VC, HCl, CDD/CDF 

and total organic HAP for process vents were estimated at each facility as a result of all facilities 

complying with the MACT floor standard. Reductions were estimated at 1.02E-01 tons per year 

of VC, 21 tons per year of HCl, 1.87E-08 tons per year of CDD/CDF, and 1.93 tons per year of 

total organic HAP. 

Emission reductions as a result of facilities meeting the MACT floor were estimated by 

multiplying the percent improvement needed by the calculated baseline annual emissions. It was 

assumed that if one of the four pollutant categories required reduction, all pollutants would be 

equally reduced. Reductions by facility for VC, HCl, chlorine (Cl2), CDD/CDF and total organic 

HAP are presented in Table 5. 

5
Table 3. Percent Improvement Needed for PVC-Only Process Vents to Meet MACT Floor Emiss

Company/Facility 

VC 

Limit: 6.0 ppmvd 

HCl 

Limit: 78 ppmvd 

CDD/CDF (TEQ) 

Limit: 3.8E-02 ng/dscm 

Facility 

Baseline 

(ppmvd) 

Percent 

Improvement 

Needed 

Facility 

Baseline 

(ppmvd) 

Percent 

Improvement 

Needed 

Facility 

Baseline 

(ng/dscm) 

Percent 

Improvement 

Needed 

Formosa – Delaware City 2.45E-01 - 121 35.7 2.70E-03 - Georgia Gulf – Aberdeen 2.00 - 157 50.2 4.72E-03 - OxyVinyls – Pasadena 9.71E-01 - 360 78.3 7.76E-03 - PolyOne – Henry 2.18 - 5.30E-01 - - - PolyOne – Pedricktown 2.66 - 1.32 - - - Shintech – Addis 2.43E-01 - 8.47E-02 - 1.73E-02 - Shintech - Freeport 5.00E-03 - 1.2E-01 - 1.16E-02 - VC – Vinyl chloride HCl – Hydrogen chloride CDD/CDF - Chlorinated dibenzodioxin and chlorinated dibenzofuran TEQ - Toxic Equivalency HAP – Hazardous air pollutant ppmvd – Parts per million on a dry volume basis corrected to 3 percent oxygen ng/dscm – Nanograms per dry standard cubic meter corrected to 3 percent oxygen 

6
Table 4. Percent Improvement Needed for PVC-Combined Process Vents to Meet MACT Floor Em

Company/Facility 

VC 

Limit: 1.1 ppmvd 

HCl 

Limit: 380 ppmvd 

CDD/CDF (TEQ) 

Limit: 5.1E-02 ng/dscm 

Facility 

Baseline 

(ppmvd) 

Percent 

Improvement 

Needed 

Facility 

Baseline 

(ppmvd) 

Percent 

Improvement 

Needed 

Facility 

Baseline 

(ng/dscm) 

Percent 

Improvement 

Needed 

Dow – Midland 4.51E-03 - NR - 1.68E-03 - Formosa – Baton Rouge 1.28E-01 - 92.3 - 7.05E-02 27.6 Formosa – Point Comfort 4.40E-01 - 92.3 - 3.10E-01 83.6 Georgia Gulf – Plaquemine 2.35E-03 - 184 - 4.69E-02 - Shintech – Plaquemine 1.28E-01 - 92.3 - 1.95E-02 - Westlake – Calvert City 1.28E-01 - 92.3 - 7.05E-02 27.6 Westlake - Geismar 7.31E-04 - 4.06E-01 - 2.91E-02 - VC – Vinyl chloride HCl – Hydrogen chloride CDD/CDF - Chlorinated dibenzodioxin and chlorinated dibenzofuran TEQ - Toxic Equivalency HAP – Hazardous air pollutant ppmvd – Parts per million on a dry volume basis corrected to 3 percent oxygen ng/dscm – Nanograms per dry standard cubic meter corrected to 3 percent oxygen 

7
Table 5. Process Vent Emission Reductions as a Result of Emissions Limits 

Company/Facility 

Emission Reduction (Tons per Year)

VC HCl Cl2 CDD/CDF 

Total 

Organic 

HAP 

Dow – Midland - - - - - 

Formosa - Delaware City 1.74E-03 5.04E-01 1.04E-03 7.32E-12 1.78E-02 

Formosa - Point Comfort 4.80E-02 5.87E+00 2.76E-01 1.29E-08 1.32E-01 

Formosa - Baton Rouge 1.39E-02 5.84E+00 2.74E-01 2.91E-09 1.31E-01 

Georgia Gulf - Plaquemine - - - - - 

Georgia Gulf - Aberdeen 1.14E-02 5.22E-01 2.51E-01 1.03E-11 3.82E-02 

OxyVinyls – Pasadena 1.29E-02 2.78E+00 9.06E-02 3.92E-11 2.21E-01 

PolyOne – Henry 1.11E-04 1.58E-05 1.96E-05 - 9.09E-01 

PolyOne – Pedricktown 2.05E-05 5.93E-06 3.39E-04 - 3.54E-01 

Shintech – Freeport - - - - - 

Shintech – Addis - - - - - 

Shintech - Plaquemine - - - - - 

Westlake - Calvert City 1.39E-02 5.84E+00 2.74E-01 2.91E-09 1.31E-01 

Westlake – Geismar - - - - - 

TOTAL* 1.02E-01 21.37 1.17 1.87E-08 1.93 

*Totals may not add exactly due to roundingVC – Vinyl Chloride 

HCl – Hydrogen chloride 

Cl2 - Chlorine 

CDD/CDF – Chlorinated dibenzodioxin and chlorinated dibenzofurans 

HAP - Hazardous air pollutant 

3.0 Stripped Resin 

3.1 Selection of Controls Needed to Meet MACT Floor Limits

Average HAP concentration values used to calculate baseline annual emissions2

originating from residual HAP remaining in stripped resin(s) were compared with the MACT 

floor limits for residual HAP in stripped resin(s) for each applicable subcategory. The percent 

improvement needed for a facility to meet the limits was then calculated. Tables 6 through 9 

contain the baseline HAP concentration values used for each facility and the percentage 

improvement required to meet the residual HAP stripped resin limits. 

8
Table 6. Stripped Resin Limits, Baseline Concentrations, and Required Facility 

Improvements – Dispersion Resin 

Company/Facility 

VC 

Limit: 1,300 ppmw 

Total Non-VC Organic HAP 

Limit: 240 ppmw 

Facility 

Baseline 

(ppmw) 

Percent 

Improvement 

Needed 

Facility 

Baseline 

(ppmw) 

Percent 

Improvement 

Needed 

Formosa – Delaware City 534 - 29.0 - 

PolyOne – Henry 381 - 26.3 - 

PolyOne – Pedricktown 144 - 64.7 - 

VC – Vinyl chloride 

HAP – Hazardous air pollutant 

ppmw – parts per million by weight 

Table 7. Stripped Resin Limits, Baseline Concentrations, and Required Facility 

Improvements – Suspension Resin 

Company 

VC 

Limit: 37 ppmw 

Total Non-VC Organic HAP 

Limit: 670 ppmw 

Facility 

Baseline 

(ppmw) 

Percent 

Improvement 

Needed 

Facility 

Baseline 

(ppmw) 

Percent 

Improvement 

Needed 

Formosa - Baton Rouge 5.39E-01 - 39.8 - 

OxyVinyls - Deer Park 8.64E-01 - 12.1 - 

PolyOne - Henry 8.79E-01 - 152 - 

Formosa - Point Comfort 1.68 - 19.1 - 

Shintech - Plaquemine 3.38 - 68.0 - 

Shintech - Freeport 3.64 - 67.8 - 

Georgia Gulf - Plaquemine 3.67 - 235 - 

OxyVinyls - Pasadena 5.51 - 77.2 - 

Shintech - Addis 6.11 - 68.3 - 

OxyVinyls - Pedricktown 6.89 - 39.6 - 

Westlake - Calvert City 13.6 - 248 - 

Georgia Gulf - Aberdeen 18.6 - 226 - 

Westlake - Geismar 68.7 46.3 1.09 - 

VC – Vinyl chloride 

HAP – Hazardous air pollutant 

ppmw – parts per million by weight 

9
Table 8. Stripped Resin Limits, Baseline Concentrations, and Required Facility 

Improvements – Suspension Blending Resin 

Company 

VC 

Limit: 140 ppmw 

Total Non-VC Organic HAP 

Limit: 500 ppmw 

Facility Baseline 

(ppmw) 

Percent Improvement 

Needed 

Facility Baseline 

(ppmw) 

Percent Improvement 

Needed 

PolyOne – Henry 15.7 - 64.2 - 

VC – Vinyl chloride 

HAP – Hazardous air pollutant 

ppmw – parts per million by weight 

Table 9. Stripped Resin Limits, Baseline Concentrations, and Required Facility 

Improvements – Copolymer Resin 

Company 

VC 

Limit: 790 ppmw 

Total Non-VC Organic HAP 

Limit: 1,900 ppmw 

Facility 

Baseline 

(ppmw) 

Percent 

Improvement 

Needed 

Facility 

Baseline 

(ppmw) 

Percent 

Improvement 

Needed 

Dow – Midland 3.67E-01 - 1.86 - 

Formosa – Delaware City 361 - 893 - 

VC – Vinyl chloride 

HAP – Hazardous air pollutant 

ppmw – parts per million by weight 

3.2 Compliance Cost Methodology and Results

The cost installing a new steam stripper was estimated based on industry provided 

information. The algorithm for calculating the TCI and TAC is presented in Attachment E and is 

based on the cost algorithm for wastewater stripper steam requirements used for the development 

of the Hazardous Organic National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (HON)4. It 

was assumed that annual costs for operating the new stripper would not increase in regards to the 

facility’s current operation. The annualized cost consists only of the annualized capital cost. 

Source specific cost data are noted in Attachment E. 

Table 10 presents a summary of the TCI and TAC for resins as a result of complying with 

the MACT floor. 

 

10
Table 10. Annual Cost of New Steam Stripper 

Company/Facility TCI ($) TAC ($/yr) 

Dow – Midland - - 

Formosa - Baton Rouge - - 

Formosa - Delaware City - - 

Formosa - Point Comfort - - 

Georgia Gulf – Aberdeen - - 

Georgia Gulf – Plaquemine - - 

OxyVinyls – Pasadena - - 

OxyVinyls – Pedricktown - - 

PolyOne – Henry - - 

PolyOne – Pedricktown - - 

Shintech – Addis - - 

Shintech – Freeport - - 

Shintech – Plaquemine - - 

Westlake - Calvert City - - 

Westlake – Geismar 10,000,000 943,929 

TOTAL* 10,000,000 943,929 

$/yr – dollars per year 

*Totals may not add exactly due to rounding 

3.3 Testing, Monitoring, and Recordkeeping Costs

Industry wide initial testing costs for stripped resin were estimated at approximately 

$32,000. Industry wide annual testing costs for stripped resin were estimated at approximately 

$130,000 per year. An average test cost of $301 was assumed for US EPA Method 8260B. Since 

VC is currently analyzed “in-house” using Method 107, no additional cost for Method 107 was 

estimated. The cost algorithm is presented in Attachment F and facility specific costs are 

summarized in Table 11. Source specific cost data are noted in Attachment F. 

Recordkeeping and reporting costs were estimated for stripped resins. An industry wide 

initial cost of $42,000 and an industry wide total annual cost of $55,000 were calculated based 

on the algorithms presented in Attachment D. 

11
Table 11. Annual Costs of Stripped Resin Testing, Monitoring, and Recordkeeping 

Company/Facility 

Testing and Monitoring Recordkeeping and Reporting Testing, Monitoring, 

Recordkeeping and Reporting 

Total Initial 

Cost ($) 

Total Annual 

Cost ($/yr) 

Total Initial 

Cost ($) 

Total Annual 

Cost ($/yr) 

Total Initial 

Cost ($) 

Total Annual 

Cost ($/yr) 

Dow - Midland 1,803 7,212 2,799 3,664 4,602 10,876 

Formosa - Baton Rouge 1,803 7,212 2,799 3,664 4,602 10,876 

Formosa - Delaware Citya 3,606 14,424 2,799 3,664 6,405 18,088 

Formosa - Point Comfort 1,803 7,212 2,799 3,664 4,602 10,876 

Georgia Gulf - Aberdeen 1,803 7,212 2,799 3,664 4,602 10,876 

Georgia Gulf - Plaquemine 1,803 7,212 2,799 3,664 4,602 10,876 

OxyVinyls - Pasadena 1,803 7,212 2,799 3,664 4,602 10,876 

OxyVinyls - Pedricktown 1,803 7,212 2,799 3,664 4,602 10,876 

PolyOne – Henrya 5,409 21,636 2,799 3,664 8,208 25,300 

PolyOne - Pedricktown 1,803 7,212 2,799 3,664 4,602 10,876 

Shintech - Addis 1,803 7,212 2,799 3,664 4,602 10,876 

Shintech - Freeport 1,803 7,212 2,799 3,664 4,602 10,876 

Shintech - Plaquemine 1,803 7,212 2,799 3,664 4,602 10,876 

Westlake - Calvert City 1,803 7,212 2,799 3,664 4,602 10,876 

Westlake - Geismar 1,803 7,212 2,799 3,664 4,602 10,876 

TOTAL* 32,454 129,816 41,983 54,962 74,437 184,776 

$/yr – dollars per year 

a

 Facility is required to test multiple types of resin. 

*Totals may not add exactly due to rounding 

3.4 Emission Reduction Methodology and Results

 Annual emissions reductions of VC and total non-VC organic HAP were calculated as a 

result of meeting the MACT floor limit for residual HAP contained in the stripped resin. VC 

reductions were estimated at approximately 8 tons per year. 

VC and total non-VC organic HAP MACT floor emission rates were estimated using the 

procedure described in a separate memorandum2, except that the baseline concentrations for VC 

and total non-VC organic HAP were replaced with the MACT floor limit concentration values. 

Emissions reductions were then calculated by subtracting the MACT floor emission rate from the 

baseline emission rate. Reductions by facility for VC and total non-VC organic HAP are 

presented in Table 12. 

 

12
Table 12. Estimated Emission Reductions for Stripped Resin

Company/Facility 

Emission Reduction

(Tons per Year) 

VC 

Total NonVC 

Organic 

HAP 

Dow – Midland - - 

Formosa - Baton Rouge - - 

Formosa - Delaware City - - 

Formosa - Point Comfort - - 

Georgia Gulf - Aberdeen - - 

Georgia Gulf - Plaquemine - - 

OxyVinyls - Pasadena - - 

OxyVinyls - Pedricktown - - 

PolyOne – Henry - - 

PolyOne - Pedricktown - - 

Shintech – Addis - - 

Shintech – Freeport - - 

Shintech - Plaquemine - - 

Westlake - Calvert City - - 

Westlake – Geismar 8 - 

TOTAL 8 - 

VC – Vinyl chloride 

HAP – Hazardous air pollutant 

*Totals may not add exactly due to rounding 

4.0 Storage Vessels 

4.1 Selection of Controls Needed to Meet MACT Floor Limits, Costs, and Emission 

Reductions

Current industry work practices, as discussed in previous memoranda1, constitute the 

MACT Floor for storage vessels; therefore, costs associated with improvement of emissions 

from storage, unloading, and transfer were not calculated. No additional emissions reductions 

from storage vessels would result from facilities complying with the MACT floor. 

4.2 Testing, Monitoring and Recordkeeping Costs

Recordkeeping and reporting costs were estimated for storage vessels and are presented 

in Table 13. An industry wide initial cost of $16,530 and an industry wide total annual cost of 

$23,309 were calculated based on the algorithms presented in Attachment D. 

 

13
Table 13. Summary of Recordkeeping and Reporting Costs for Storage Vessels 

Company/Facility 

Recordkeeping and 

Reporting 

Total Initial 

Cost ($) 

Total 

Annual 

Cost ($/yr) 

Dow - Midland 1,102 1,554

Formosa - Baton Rouge 1,102 1,554

Formosa - Delaware City 1,102 1,554

Formosa - Point Comfort 1,102 1,554

Georgia Gulf - Aberdeen 1,102 1,554

Georgia Gulf - Plaquemine 1,102 1,554

OxyVinyls - Pasadena 1,102 1,554

OxyVinyls - Pedricktown 1,102 1,554

PolyOne - Henry 1,102 1,554

PolyOne - Pedricktown 1,102 1,554

Shintech - Addis 1,102 1,554

Shintech - Freeport 1,102 1,554

Shintech - Plaquemine 1,102 1,554

Westlake - Calvert City 1,102 1,554

Westlake - Geismar 1,102 1,554

TOTAL* 16,530 23,309 

$/yr – Dollars per year 

*Totals may not add exactly due to rounding 

5.0 Heat Exchange Systems 

5.1 Selection of Controls Needed to Meet MACT Floor Limits

The MACT floor for heat exchange systems is comprised of a leak action level more 

stringent that 40 CFR Part 61, subpart F, and an equipment leak program. It was assumed that a 

more stringent testing and monitoring program would eliminate all baseline emissions. 

 

5.2 Compliance Cost Methodology and Results

It was assumed that no additional control equipment will be necessary to meet the MACT 

floor; therefore, no additional control equipment cost estimation was performed. The cost 

estimation for additional sampling, monitoring, and repair is described in Section 5.3. 

5.3 Testing, Monitoring, and Recordkeeping Costs

The cost of a more stringent testing, monitoring, and repair program for heat exchangers 

using was estimated using the following assumptions; all facilities would elected to perform 

sampling and analysis using method 107; therefore not additional cost for sampling and 

14
monitoring was estimated. It was assumed that each cooling tower would require 1 repair event 

per year at $4,300 per event. Detailed cost information on a per facility basis is presented in 

Table 5-1. Attachment G contains the analysis used to estimate the costs presented in Table 14. 

The total annual cost for heat exchange system sampling and analysis, along with repair events 

was estimated at approximately $99,000 per year. For simplicity, the cost of additional testing 

and monitoring as a result of delay or repair was not estimated. 

Table 14. Summary of Testing, Monitoring, Recordkeeping and Reporting Costs for Heat 

Exchange Systems 

Company/Facility 

Costs to 

Repair Number 

of 

Cooling 

Towers 

Repairs Costs to 

Repair 

Recordkeeping and 

Reporting Total 

Initial 

Costs 

($/yr) 

Total 

Annual 

Costs 

($/yr) 

($/eventtower) (event/yr) ($/yr) Total Initial 

Cost ($) 

Total 

Annual 

Cost ($/yr) 

Dow - Midland 4,300 1 1 4,300 3,103 3,555 3,103 7,855 

Formosa - Baton Rouge 4,300 1 1 4,300 3,103 3,555 3,103 7,855 

Formosa - Delaware City 4,300 2 1 8,600 3,103 3,555 3,103 12,155 

Formosa - Point Comfort 4,300 1 1 4,300 3,103 3,555 3,103 7,855 

Georgia Gulf - Aberdeen 4,300 3 1 12,900 3,103 3,555 3,103 16,455 

Georgia Gulf - Plaquemine 4,300 4 1 17,200 3,103 3,555 3,103 20,755 

OxyVinyls - Pasadena 4,300 2 1 8,600 3,103 3,555 3,103 12,155 

OxyVinyls - Pedricktown 4,300 1 1 4,300 3,103 3,555 3,103 7,855 

PolyOne - Henry 4,300 1 1 4,300 3,103 3,555 3,103 7,855 

PolyOne - Pedricktown 4,300 2 1 8,600 3,103 3,555 3,103 12,155 

Shintech - Addis 4,300 1 1 4,300 3,103 3,555 3,103 7,855 

Shintech - Freeport 4,300 1 1 4,300 3,103 3,555 3,103 7,855 

Shintech - Plaquemine 4,300 1 1 4,300 3,103 3,555 3,103 7,855 

Westlake - Calvert City 4,300 1 1 4,300 3,103 3,555 3,103 7,855 

Westlake - Geismar 4,300 1 1 4,300 3,103 3,555 3,103 7,855 

TOTAL* - 23 - 98,900 46,545 53,325 46,545 152,225 

$/yr – Dollars per year 

$/yr-tower – Dollars per year per cooling tower 

$/event-tower – Dollars per repair event per cooling tower 

event/yr – event per year 

*Totals may not add exactly due to rounding 

5.4 Emission Reduction Methodology and Results

Emission reductions from heat exchangers were estimated by calculating the difference in 

emissions between the facilities’ reported, or estimated, cooling water VC concentration and the 

MACT floor leak action level for facilities complying with Method 107. Emission reductions of 

101 tons per year of vinyl chloride and total organic HAP were estimated for heat exchangers. 

Table 15 presents a summary of heat exchange system emission reductions on a facility basis. 

15
Table 15. Estimated Emission Reductions from Heat Exchange Systems 

Company/Facility 

Emission Reduction 

(Tons per Year) 

VC Total Organic 

HAP 

Dow - Midland 41.1 41.1 

Formosa - Baton Rouge - - 

Formosa - Delaware City 2.20 2.20 

Formosa - Point Comfort 38.8 38.8 

Georgia Gulf - Aberdeen - - 

Georgia Gulf - Plaquemine - - 

OxyVinyls - Pasadena - - 

OxyVinyls - Pedricktown 2.01 2.01 

PolyOne - Henry 9.54 9.54 

PolyOne - Pedricktown 9.18E-01 9.18E-01 

Shintech - Addis 1.10E-01 1.10E-01 

Shintech - Freeport 8.81E-02 8.81E-02 

Shintech - Plaquemine 1.06E-01 1.06E-01 

Westlake - Calvert City 5.63 5.63 

Westlake - Geismar - - 

TOTAL* 101 101 

VC – Vinyl chloride 

*Totals may not add exactly due to rounding 

6.0 Equipment Leaks 

6.1 Selection of Controls Needed to Meet MACT Floor Limits

The MACT floor level of control for equipment leaks consists of 40 CFR part 61 subpart 

V. All facilities currently comply with subpart V or a more stringent equipment leak detection 

and repair (LDAR) program; therefore, no additional costs of complying with a LDAR program 

were calculated. The cost of each facility installing electronic monitoring to detect releases of 

pressure relief devices (PRD) was calculated. Further descriptions of these cost estimations are 

listed in Section 6.2 and 6.3. 

6.2 Compliance Cost Methodology and Results

All facilities currently comply with the MACT floor LDAR program. The cost estimation 

for pressure relief device monitoring systems is described in Section 6.3, Testing, Monitoring, 

and Recordkeeping Costs for Equipment Leaks. 

6.3 Testing, Monitoring, and Recordkeeping Costs

The TCI and TAC of installing a PRD monitoring system at each facility were 

calculated5. The TCI was estimated at approximately $2.8 million and the TAC was estimated at 

approximately $403,000. Source specific cost data are documented in Attachment H. 

16
Recordkeeping and reporting costs were estimated for equipment leaks. An industry wide 

initial cost of $34,500 and an industry wide total annual cost of $65,700 were calculated based 

on the algorithms presented in Attachment D. Table 16 summarizes the TCI and TAC required 

for each facility to install and operating a PRD monitoring in addition to recordkeeping and 

reporting costs. 

Table 16. Summary of Testing and Monitoring Costs for Equipment Leaks 

Company/Facility 

Cost of PRV 

Reduction 

Monitoring System 

Recordkeeping and Reporting 

Total Testing, Monitoring, 

Recordkeeping and 

Reporting Costs 

TCI 

($) 

TAC 

($/yr) 

Total Initial 

Cost ($) 

Total Annual 

Cost ($/yr) 

Total Initial 

Cost ($) TAC ($/yr) 

Dow - Midland 188,913 26,897 2,999 4,382 191,212 31,279 

Formosa - Baton Rouge 188,913 26,897 2,999 4,382 191,212 31,279 

Formosa - Delaware City 188,913 26,897 2,999 4,382 191,212 31,279 

Formosa - Point Comfort 188,913 26,897 2,999 4,382 191,212 31,279 

Georgia Gulf - Aberdeen 188,913 26,897 2,999 4,382 191,212 31,279 

Georgia Gulf - Plaquemine 188,913 26,897 2,999 4,382 191,212 31,279 

OxyVinyls - Pasadena 188,913 26,897 2,999 4,382 191,212 31,279 

OxyVinyls - Pedricktown 188,913 26,897 2,999 4,382 191,212 31,279 

PolyOne - Henry 188,913 26,897 2,999 4,382 191,212 31,279 

PolyOne - Pedricktown 188,913 26,897 2,999 4,382 191,212 31,279 

Shintech - Addis 188,913 26,897 2,999 4,382 191,212 31,279 

Shintech - Freeport 188,913 26,897 2,999 4,382 191,212 31,279 

Shintech - Plaquemine 188,913 26,897 2,999 4,382 191,212 31,279 

Westlake - Calvert City 188,913 26,897 2,999 4,382 191,212 31,279 

Westlake - Geismar 188,913 26,897 2,999 4,382 191,212 31,279 

TOTAL* 2,833,695 403,455 34,478 65,730 2,868,173 469,185 

TCI – Total capital investment 

TAC – Total annualized cost 

$/yr – Dollars per year 

*Totals may not add exactly due to rounding 

6.4 Emission Reduction Methodology and Results

All facilities currently comply with the MACT floor LDAR program for equipment leaks. 

Additionally, installation of an electronic PRD monitoring system is not expected to result in any 

emission reductions. Therefore, no emission reductions were calculated for facilities meeting the 

MACT floor for equipment leaks. 

7.0 Other Emission Sources 

7.1 Selection of Controls Needed to Meet MACT Floor Limits

17
The MACT floor level of control for other emission sources consists of numeric emission 

limits for reactor opening losses and component openings as required by 40 CFR Part 61, subpart 

F. 

7.2 Testing, Monitoring, and Recordkeeping Costs

All facilities currently meet the numeric emission limits required by 40 CFR Part 61, 

subpart F; therefore, no additional compliance or testing and monitoring costs were calculated. 

Recordkeeping and reporting costs were estimated other emission sources and are 

presented in Table 17. An industry wide initial cost of $16,500 and an industry wide total annual 

cost of $23,300 were calculated based on the algorithms presented in Attachment D. 

Table 17. Summary of Recordkeeping and Reporting Costs for Other Emission Sources 

Company/Facility 

Recordkeeping and 

Reporting 

Total Initial 

Cost ($) 

Total 

Annual 

Cost ($/yr) 

Dow - Midland 1,102 1,554

Formosa - Baton Rouge 1,102 1,554

Formosa - Delaware City 1,102 1,554

Formosa - Point Comfort 1,102 1,554

Georgia Gulf - Aberdeen 1,102 1,554

Georgia Gulf - Plaquemine 1,102 1,554

OxyVinyls - Pasadena 1,102 1,554

OxyVinyls - Pedricktown 1,102 1,554

PolyOne - Henry 1,102 1,554

PolyOne - Pedricktown 1,102 1,554

Shintech - Addis 1,102 1,554

Shintech - Freeport 1,102 1,554

Shintech - Plaquemine 1,102 1,554

Westlake - Calvert City 1,102 1,554

Westlake - Geismar 1,102 1,554

TOTAL* 16,530 23,309 

$/yr – Dollars per year 

*Totals may not add exactly due to rounding 

18
7.3 Emission Reduction Methodology and Results

The MACT floor for other emissions sources consists of numeric emission limits for 

reactor opening losses and component openings, as well as work practices to reduce emission 

from other emission sources. It was assumed that emission reductions as a result of the MACT 

floor would be negligible. 

8.0 Wastewater 

8.1 Selection of Controls Needed to Meet MACT Floor Limits

The MACT floor level of control for wastewater consists of numeric concentration limits 

for process wastewater streams before being exposed to the atmosphere and work practices for 

controlling emissions from maintenance wastewater. 

8.2 Compliance Cost Methodology and Results 

All facilities currently meet the numeric concentration limits for process wastewater 

streams before being exposed to the atmosphere. It was assumed that facilities would not incur 

additional costs for perform work practices that constitute the MACT floor for maintenance 

wastewater. Therefore, no additional control equipment costs were calculated for wastewater. 

8.3 Testing, Monitoring, and Recordkeeping Costs

The industry wide wastewater total initial testing cost was estimated at approximately 

$28,000 per year. As previously stated, an average test cost of $301 was assumed for US EPA 

Method 8260B. It was assumed that the cost of Method 107 was included with the cost of 

Method 8260B. The cost algorithm and facility specific costs are presented in Attachment I 

where source specific cost data are also documented. Table 18 presents the wastewater annual 

testing, monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting costs on a facility basis. 

Table 18. Summary of Testing, Monitoring, Recordkeeping and Reporting Costs for 

Wastewater 

Company/Facility 

Testing and 

Monitoring 

Recordkeeping and 

Reporting 

Total Testing, Monitoring 

Recordkeeping and 

Reporting 

Total 

Initial 

Cost ($) 

Total 

Annual 

Cost ($/yr) 

Total Initial 

Cost ($) 

Total 

Annual 

Cost ($/yr) 

Total 

Initial 

Cost ($) 

Total 

Annual 

Cost ($/yr) 

Dow - Midland 1,962 7,358 3,125 3,708 5,087 11,066 

Formosa - Baton Rouge 981 6,377 3,125 3,708 4,106 10,085 

Formosa - Delaware City 1,962 7,358 3,125 3,708 5,087 11,066 

Formosa - Point Comfort 1,962 7,358 3,125 3,708 5,087 11,066 

Georgia Gulf - Aberdeen 981 6,377 3,125 3,708 4,106 10,085 

Georgia Gulf - Plaquemine 1,962 7,358 3,125 3,708 5,087 11,066 

OxyVinyls - Pasadena 3,924 9,320 3,125 3,708 7,049 13,028 

19
Company/Facility 

Testing and 

Monitoring 

Recordkeeping and 

Reporting 

Total Testing, Monitoring 

Recordkeeping and 

Reporting 

Total 

Initial 

Cost ($) 

Total 

Annual 

Cost ($/yr) 

Total Initial 

Cost ($) 

Total 

Annual 

Cost ($/yr) 

Total 

Initial 

Cost ($) 

Total 

Annual 

Cost ($/yr) 

OxyVinyls - Pedricktown 1,962 7,358 3,125 3,708 5,087 11,066 

PolyOne - Henry 3,434 8,829 3,125 3,708 6,559 12,537 

PolyOne - Pedricktown 1,962 7,358 3,125 3,708 5,087 11,066 

Shintech - Addis 1,962 7,358 3,125 3,708 5,087 11,066 

Shintech - Freeport 981 6,377 3,125 3,708 4,106 10,085 

Shintech - Plaquemine 1,472 6,867 3,125 3,708 4,597 10,575 

Westlake - Calvert City 981 6,377 3,125 3,708 4,106 10,085 

Westlake - Geismar 1,472 6,867 3,125 3,708 4,597 10,575 

TOTAL* 27,959 108,891 46,879 55,614 74,835 164,511 

$/yr – Dollars per year 

*Totals may not add exactly due to rounding 

8.4 Generation Reduction Methodology and Results

All facilities currently comply with the MACT floor wastewater concentration limits; 

therefore, no generation reduction was calculated for wastewater. 

9.0 Summary and Results for the Industry 

9.1 Costs

The total initial cost for all existing PVC production facilities to meet the MACT floor 

emission limits is estimated at approximately $16.5 million. The TAC for controls for all units is 

about $2.8 million. The total initial costs for testing, monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting 

was estimated at approximately $1.1 million and the TAC was estimated at approximately 

$737,000. Table 19 summarizes the TCI and TAC of the emission limits for each facility. Table 

20 summarizes the same costs on an emission point basis. Table 21 summarizes the same costs 

on an emission point and facility basis. 

 

20
Table 19. Summary of Control Equipment and Testing and Monitoring Costs by Facility 

Company/Facility 

MACT Floor Costs 

Control Equipment Costs Testing, Monitoring, and 

Recordkeeping 

Total Emission Limits 

Costs 

Total 

Initial 

Costs 

($) 

TAC 

($/yr) 

Total Initial 

Costs 

($) 

TAC 

($/yr) 

Total 

Initial 

Costs 

($) 

TAC 

($/yr) 

Dow – Midland 188,913 26,897 73,199 52,962 262,112 79,859 

Formosa - Baton Rouge 773,063 291,082 72,218 51,981 845,281 343,063 

Formosa - Delaware 

City 243,508 133,552 75,002 64,474 318,510 198,026 

Formosa - Point 

Comfort 624,364 224,028 73,199 52,962 697,563 276,990 

Georgia Gulf –

Aberdeen 237,363 131,496 72,218 60,581 309,581 192,077 

Georgia Gulf –

Plaquemine 188,913 26,897 73,199 65,862 262,112 92,759 

OxyVinyls - Pasadena 965,953 382,085 75,161 59,224 1,041,114 441,309 

OxyVinyls –

Pedricktown 188,913 26,897 22,001 39,490 210,914 66,387 

PolyOne – Henry 248,142 132,556 78,276 68,858 326,418 201,413 

PolyOne - Pedricktown 236,411 130,818 73,199 57,262 309,610 188,080 

Shintech – Addis 188,913 26,897 73,199 52,962 262,112 79,859 

Shintech – Freeport 188,913 26,897 72,218 51,981 261,131 78,878 

Shintech - Plaquemine 188,913 26,897 72,708 52,472 261,621 79,369 

Westlake - Calvert City 773,063 291,082 72,218 51,981 845,281 343,063 

Westlake – Geismar 10,188,913 970,826 72,708 52,472 10,261,621 1,023,298 

TOTAL* 15,424,258 2,848,906 1,050,724 835,527 16,474,982 3,684,433 

TAC – Total annual cost 

$ - Dollars 

$/yr – Dollars per year 

*Totals may not add exactly due to rounding 

21
Table 20. Summary of Emission Limits Control Equipment and Testing and Monitoring 

Costs by Emission Point 

Emission Point 

Costs 

Control Costs 

Testing, Monitoring,

and Recordkeeping 

Costs 

Total Emission Limits 

Costs 

Total 

Initial 

Costs 

($) 

TAC 

($/yr) 

Total 

Initial 

Costs 

($) 

TAC 

($/yr) 

Total 

Initial 

Costs 

($) 

TAC

($/yr) 

Process Vents 2,590,563 1,501,522 787,359 221,666 3,377,922 1,723,188 

Resin 10,000,000 943,929 74,437 184,778 10,074,437 1,128,707 

Wastewater - - 74,837 164,505 74,837 164,505 

Equipment Leaks 2,833,695 403,455 34,478 65,730 2,868,173 469,185 

Storage - 16,530 - 23,309 16,530 23,309 

Heat Exchange 

Systems - - 46,552 152,230a 46,552 152,230 

Other Emission 

Sources - - 16,530 23,309 16,530 23,309 

TOTAL* 15,424,258 2,848,906 1,050,724 835,527 16,474,982 3,684,433 

a

 – Includes cost of leak repair 

TCI – Total capital investment 

TAC – Total annual cost 

$ - Dollars 

$/yr – Dollars per year 

*Totals may not add exactly due to rounding 

22
Table 21. Summary of Control Equipment and Testing and Monitoring Costs by Facility and Em

Company 

Process Vents Resins Storage Vessels Heat Exchange Systems Equipment Leaks Other Emission Sources Wastewat

Total Initial 

Costs ($) 

TAC 

($/yr) 

Total 

Initial 

Costs ($) 

TAC 

($/yr) 

Total 

Initial 

Costs 

($) 

TAC 

($/yr) 

Total 

Initial 

Costs 

($) 

TAC 

($/yr) 

Total 

Initial 

Costs ($) 

TAC 

($/yr) 

Total 

Initial 

Costs 

($) 

TAC 

($/yr) 

Total 

Initial 

Costs 

($) 

T

($

Dow – Midland 55,904 15,677 4,602 10,876 1,102 1,554 3,103 7,855 191,212 31,279 1,102 1,554 5,087 11Formosa - Baton Rouge 640,054 279,862 4,602 10,876 1,102 1,554 3,103 7,855 191,212 31,279 1,102 1,554 4,106 10Formosa - Point Comfort 491,355 212,808 4,602 10,876 1,102 1,554 3,103 7,855 191,212 31,279 1,102 1,554 5,087 11Formosa - Delaware City 110,499 122,332 6,405 18,088 1,102 1,554 3,103 12,155 191,212 31,279 1,102 1,554 5,087 11Georgia Gulf – Aberdeen 104,354 120,276 4,602 10,876 1,102 1,554 3,103 16,455 191,212 31,279 1,102 1,554 4,106 10Georgia Gulf – Plaquemine 55,904 15,677 4,602 10,876 1,102 1,554 3,103 20,755 191,212 31,279 1,102 1,554 5,087 11OxyVinyls - Pasadena 832,944 370,865 4,602 10,876 1,102 1,554 3,103 12,155 191,212 31,279 1,102 1,554 7,049 13OxyVinyls – Pedricktown 4,706 2,204 4,602 10,876 1,102 1,554 3,103 7,855 191,212 31,279 1,102 1,554 5,087 11PolyOne – Henry 115,133 121,336 8,208 25,300 1,102 1,554 3,103 7,855 191,212 31,279 1,102 1,554 6,559 12PolyOne - Pedricktown 103,402 119,598 4,602 10,876 1,102 1,554 3,103 12,155 191,212 31,279 1,102 1,554 5,087 11Shintech – Freeport 55,904 15,677 4,602 10,876 1,102 1,554 3,103 7,855 191,212 31,279 1,102 1,554 4,106 10Shintech - Plaquemine 55,904 15,677 4,602 10,876 1,102 1,554 3,103 7,855 191,212 31,279 1,102 1,554 4,597 10Shintech – Addis 55,904 15,677 4,602 10,876 1,102 1,554 3,103 7,855 191,212 31,279 1,102 1,554 5,087 11Westlake - Calvert City 640,054 279,862 4,602 10,876 1,102 1,554 3,103 7,855 191,212 31,279 1,102 1,554 4,106 10Westlake – Geismar 55,904 15,677 10,004,602 954,805 1,102 1,554 3,103 7,855 191,212 31,279 1,102 1,554 4,597 10

TOTAL* 3,377,922 1,723,188 10,074,437 1,128,707 16,530 23,309 46,552 152,230 2,868,173 469,185 16,530 23,309 74,837 16

TAC – Total annual cost $ - Dollars $/yr – Dollars per year *Totals may not add exactly due to rounding 

23
9.2 Costs

Industry wide VC reductions were estimated at 108 tons per year, HCl at 21.4 tons per 

year, CDD/CDF at 1.87E-08 tons per year, and total HAP at 110 tons per year. Tables 22 and 23 

summarize the reductions by facility and by emission point, respectively. 

Table 22. Summary of Industry Emission Reductions by Facility

Company/Facility 

Emission Reduction (Tons per Year) 

VC HCl Cl2 CDD/CDF 

Total 

Organic 

HAP[1] 

Dow – Midland 41.1 - - - 41.1 

Formosa – Baton Rouge 1.39E-02 5.84 2.74E-01 2.91E-09 1.31E-01 

Formosa – Delaware 2.20 5.04E-01 1.04E-03 7.32E-12 2.22 

Formosa – Point Comfort 38.9 5.87 2.76E-01 1.29E-08 39.0 

Georgia Gulf – Aberdeen 1.14E-02 5.22E-01 2.51E-01 1.03E-11 3.82E-02 

Georgia Gulf – Plaquemine - - - - - 

OxyVinyls – Pasadena 1.29E-02 2.78 9.06E-02 3.92E-11 2.21E-01 

OxyVinyls – Pedricktown 2.01 - - - 2.01 

Poly One – Henry 9.54 1.58E-05 1.96E-05 - 10.5 

Poly One – Pedricktown 9.18E-01 5.93E-06 3.39E-04 - 1.27 

Shintech – Addis 1.10E-01 - - - 1.10E-01 

Shintech – Freeport 8.81E-02 - - - 8.81E-02 

Shintech – Plaquemine 1.06E-01 - - - 1.06E-01 

Westlake – Calvert City 5.64 5.84 2.74E-01 2.91E-09 5.76 

Westlake – Geismar 7.58 - - - 7.58 

TOTAL* 108 21.4 1.17 1.87E-08 110 

[1] – Total Organic HAP includes VC and CDD/CDF but does not include HCl. 

VC – Vinyl Chloride 

HCl – Hydrogen chloride 

Cl2 - Chlorine 

CDD/CDF – Chlorinated dibenzodioxin and chlorinated dibenzofurans 

HAP - Hazardous air pollutant 

*Totals may not add exactly due to rounding 

24
Table 23. Summary of Industry Emission Reductions by Emission Point 

Emission Point 

Emission Reduction (tons per year)

VC HCl Cl2 CDD/CDF 

Total 

Organic 

HAP[1] 

Process Vents 1.02E-01 21.4 1.17 1.87E-08 1.93 

Resin 7.58 - - - 7.58 

Wastewater - - - - - 

Equipment Leaks - - - - - 

Storage - - - - - 

Heat Exchange Systems 101 - - - 101 

Other Emission Sources - - - - - 

TOTAL* 108 21.4 1.17 1.87E-08 110 

[1] – Total Organic HAP includes VC and CDD/CDF but does not include HCl 

VC – Vinyl Chloride 

HCl – Hydrogen chloride 

Cl2 - Chlorine 

CDD/CDF – Chlorinated dibenzodioxin and chlorinated dibenzofurans 

HAP - Hazardous air pollutant 

*Totals may not add exactly due to rounding 

25
10.0 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 Baseline Emission 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. 

3. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. December 1995. OAQPS Control Cost Manual.

Section 3.1: VOC Recapture Controls Chapter 2: Refrigerated Condensers. Publication 

Number EPA/452/B-02-001. 

4. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. November 1992. Hazardous Air Pollutant 

Emissions from Process Units in the Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing 

Industry—Background Information for Proposed Standards. Publication Number EPA453/D-92-016c. 

5. “Proposed Amended Rule 1173 – Control of Volatile Organic Compound Leaks and 

Releases from Components at Petroleum Facilities and Chemical Plants.” South Coast 

Air Quality Management District. May 15th, 2007. 

26
Attachments

Attachment A. Refrigerated Condenser Cost Algorithm 

Attachment B. Refrigerated Condenser Input Calculations 

Attachment C. Process Vent Emissions Testing and Monitoring Cost Algorithm 

Attachment D. Recordkeeping and Reporting Cost Algorithm 

Attachment E. Cost Algorithm for Additional Resin Stripping 

Attachment F. Resin Testing and Monitoring Cost Algorithm 

Attachment G. Heat Exchange System Cost Analysis 

Attachment H. Equipment Leak Testing and Monitoring Cost Algorithm 

Attachment I. Wastewater Testing and Monitoring Cost Algorithm 

27
Attachment A 

Refrigerated Condenser Cost Algorithm 

28
ATTACHMENT A: REFRIGERATED CONDENSER COST ALGORITHM

02/09/2012

Condenser Costing Algorithm

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

-- 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 -- Inlet stream flowrate (scfm): (Qin) =DSCMM/35.31 535 200 19 19 4 4 2 352 321 106 823 50 196 921 -- 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 -- Inlet stream temperature (oF): (Tin) =oC*1.8+32 66 148 60 33 61 21 31 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 Vinyl chloride Vin

-- 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 0.012787174 0.043914959 0.0192627 0.518207166 0.012787174 0.125832627 0-- Required VOC removal (fraction): (n) 0.78 0.00 0.00 0.36 0.50 0.995 0.998 0.00 0.28 0.84 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -- 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 6.497 

B: 783.400 783.400 783.400 783.400 783.400 1257.840 1257.840 783.400 783.400 783.400 783.400 783.400 783.400 783.400 

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

-- VOC heat of condensation (BTU/lb-mole): (Hvoc,r) 10080 10080 10080 10080 13260 13260 10080 10080 10080 10080 10080 10080 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 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 -- VOC boiling point (oF): (Tboil) 7 7 7 7 7 211 211 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 -- VOC critical temperature (oR): (Tc) 773 773 773 773 773 979 979 773 773 773 773 773 773 773 -- VOC molecular weight (lb/lb-mole): (MWvoc) 63 63 63 63 63 114 114 63 63 63 63 63 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 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 DESIGN PARAMETERS:-- Outlet VOC partial pressure (mm Hg): (Pvoc) =760*(Yvoc,in*(1-n)/(1-Yvoc,in*n)) 36.3 72.9 0.2 399.9 242.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.1 5.7 14.6 393.8 9.7 95.6 -- Condensation temperature, Tc (oF): (Tcon) =(B/(A-log10(Pvoc))-C)*1.8+32 -96.4 -77.8 -185.2 -20.0 -39.1 -89.6 -90.1 -246.7 -132.4 -136.4 -117.5 -20.6 -126.1 -69.8 

(oR): =Tcon+460 363.6 382.2 274.8 440.0 420.9 370.4 369.9 213.3 327.6 323.6 342.5 439.4 333.9 390.2 

-- 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 17.73 -- VOC flowrate out (lb-moles/hr): (Mvoc,out) =Mvoc,in*(1-n) 3.336 2.930 0.001 1.157 0.146 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.454 0.117 2.426 3.973 0.383 17.733 -- VOC condensed (lb-moles/hr): (Mvoc,con) =Mvoc,in-Mvoc,out 12.051 0.000 0.000 0.643 0.148 0.006 0.006 0.000 0.173 0.596 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000  (lb/hr): (Lb/hrvoc,con) =Mwvoc*Mvoc,con 753.2 0.0 0.0 40.2 9.2 0.7 0.7 0.0 10.8 37.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -- VOC heat of condensation @ Tc (BTU/lb-mole): (Hvoc) =(Hvoc,r)*[(1-Tcon/Tc)/(1-Tboil/Tc)]^0.38 11251 11054 12122 10403 13978 17175 13060 12670 11617 11657 11468 10410 11554 10968 -- Enthalpy change, condensed VOC (BTU/hr): (Hcon) =Mvoc,con[Hvoc+Cp,voc(Tin-Tcon) 158405 0 0 7088 2235 130 110 0 2414 8352 0 0 0 0 -- Enthalpy change, uncondensed VOC (BTU/hr):(Huncon) =Mvoc,out*Cp,voc*(Tin-Tcon) 6316 7722 2 719 171 0 0 0 1050 277 5191 4011 858 28071 -- Enthalpy change, air (BTU/hr): (Hnoncon) =Cp,air*(Tin-Tcon)*(Qin*60/392-Mvoc,in) 75064 43432 5035 386 218 462 194 117088 66789 21843 157588 2224 39500 116285 -- Condenser heat load (BTU/hr): (Hload) =Hcon+huncon+Hnoncon 239785 51154 5038 8193 2623 592 304 117088 70253 30471 162778 6235 40358 144356 -- 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 

-- Log-mean temperature difference (oF): Tlm =(Tin-Tcon-25)/ln((Tin-Tcon-10)/15) 59.3 75.4 80.0 26.7 42.0 44.9 48.1 95.8 68.5 69.5 64.8 37.8 66.9 52.1 

-- Condenser surface area (ft2): (Acon) =Hload/U*Tlm 202.3 33.9 3.1 15.3 3.1 0.7 0.3 61.1 51.3 21.9 125.7 8.3 30.1 138.5 -- Coolant flowrate (lb/hr): =Hload/(Cp,cool*(Tcon-15+25)-(Tcon-15)) 14756 3148 310 504 161 36 19 7205 4323 1875 10017 384 2484 8883 -- Refrigeration capacity (tons): (R) =Hload/1200 19.98 4.26 0.42 0.68 0.22 0.05 0.03 9.76 5.85 2.54 13.56 0.52 3.36 12.03 

-- Electricity requirement (kW/ton) [6]: (kW) =-9E-06(Tcon)^3 - 0.0004(Tcon)2 - 0.0331(Tcon) + 3.560 11.10 0.00 0.00 4.13 4.78 9.79 9.87 0.00 21.81 23.48 0.00 0.00 0.00 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 21,595 19,165 23,428 18,788 1,274,956 216,206 172,245 0 19,851 163,969 0 -- Refrigeration unit/single-stage (> 10 tons): (Rss>10) =exp(9.26-0.007Tcon+0.627lnR) 134,937 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 122,715 0 0 81,487 -- Multistage refrigeration unit: (Mru) exp(9.73-0.012Tcon+0.584lnR) 99,697 307,363 93,445 - 11,065 8,503 5,790 1,227,936 231,064 148,928 315,895 14,691 155,007 166,085 

 

Total equipment cost ($)--base: (ECp) =1.25*MAX(Rss<10,Rss>10,Mru) 384,204 124,622 231,052 26,994 23,956 29,285 23,485 1,593,694 288,830 215,307 394,869 24,813 204,961 207,606 

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 b. 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  ' ' ' ' --escalated: (ECpe) =(ECp)*(FebFinal/OctFinal) 625,636 202,934 376,245 43,957 39,010 47,688 38,243 2,595,168 470,330 350,605 643,004 40,406 333,758 338,066 Purchased Equipment Cost ($): (PECp) =ECpe*1.08 675,687 219,169 406,344 47,474 42,130 51,503 41,303 2,802,781 507,957 378,653 694,444 43,639 360,459 365,111 Total Capital Investment ($): (TCI) =PECp*1.15 777,040 0 0 54,595 48,450 59,229 47,498 0 584,150 435,451 0 0 0 0 ANNUAL COST INPUTS:Operating factor (hr/yr): (OF) 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 8400 Operating labor rate ($/hr): (LR) 34.60 34.60 34.60 34.60 34.60 34.60 34.60 34.60 34.60 34.60 34.60 34.60 34.60 34.60 Maintenance labor rate ($/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 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 

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 Electricity 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 

Recovered 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 

Annual 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 

Control system life (years): (EL) 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 Capital 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 

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  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) CoOperating 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 Supervisory 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 Maintenance 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 Maintenance 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 Electricity =EP*OF*kW*R/0.85 153,395 0 0 1,953 723 334 173 0 88,315 41,245 0 0 0 0 Overhead =.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 Taxes, insurance, administrative =TaxF*TCI 31,082 0 0 2,184 1,938 2,369 1,900 0 23,366 17,418 0 0 0 0 Capital recovery =CRF*TCI 73,347 0 0 5,153 4,573 5,591 4,483 0 55,140 41,104 0 0 0 0 Total Annual Cost (without credits) (TACwoc) =sum of all annual costs 355,188 0 0 106,655 104,599 105,659 103,921 0 264,185 197,131 0 0 0 0 Recovery credits (RC) =-Rvoc*OF*Lb/hrvoc,con 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Annual Cost (with credits) =TACwoc+RC 355,188 0 0 106,655 104,599 105,659 103,921 0 264,185 197,131 0 0 0 0 

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 Estimates3. 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

29
Attachment B 

Refrigerated Condenser Input Calculations 

 

30
ATTACHMENT B: REFRIGERATED CONDENSER COST ALGORITHM

02/09/2012

PolyOne Isooctane Reduction Requirements for Condenser Cost Algorithm 

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 

POH Ethyl Chloride 6.45E+01 8.09E-01 4.19E+00 56 

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 56 

Isooctane 1.14E+02 2.52E+04Methyl Chloride 5.05E+01 2.64E+00Vinyl Chloride 6.25E+01 2.66E+00

31
Attachment C 

Process Vent Emissions Testing and Monitoring Cost Algorithm

32
ATTACHMENT C: PROCESS VENT EMISSIONS TESTING AND MONITORING COST ALGORITHM

02/09/2012

Process Vent Emissions Testing Cost Algorithm

Process Vents Emission Testing CostsParameters/Costs Equation Values Testing Freq.* Annual Cost of Test Annualized Cost of Initial Test TA. Parameters

1. CE Plant Cost index  a. 2010 (Feb 10 Final CE Index) 539.1

b. 2009 (Annual CE Index) 521.9

 c. 1992 (Annual CE Index) 358.2

B. Testing Costs, $

1. Method 1 or 1A Included as part of M 23 - $ 5 - $ - $ 

$ 

2. Method 26 (HCl) = $5,000 x (539.1/358.2) $8,000 $ 

755 $ 

3. Method 23 (CDD/CDF) = $21,000 x (539.1/358.2) - $5,000 $27,000 5 5,400 $ 2,549 $ 

$ 

4. Method 25A (THC) =$6,000x(539.1/521.9) $6,198 5 1,240 $ 585 $ 

$ 

5. Method 18 (Assumed cost equal to 0031) $10,000 5 2,000 $ 944 $ 

$ 

C. CRF (20 yr, 7%): (0.07*(1+0.07)^20)/((1+0.07)^20-1) 0.09439

D. Facility Totals

1. HCl, TOH, &VC2. CDD/CDF3. Facility Total $ 51,197.74 $ 8,640

* Number of Years Between Tests. Note testing frequency is reduced to once every five years after three consecutive years of compliance demonstration. 

Note:4. Conversation with Ray Merrill, ERG - 11/5/2010.5. Email from Peter Westlin, EPA 4/8/2011 to ERG: Method 18 Costs1. Initial testing costs to be annualized over 20 years at 7% interest.2. Testing costs have been rounded to the nearest $1,000 to be consistent with level of rounding in original costs; costs also adjusted based on additional information from EPA.Sources:1. Memorandum from R. Segall, EPA/EMB, to R. Copland, EPA/SDB. October 14, 1992. Medical Waste Incinerator Study: Emission Measurement and Continuous Monitoring. (II-B-89)2. E-mail from Jason Dewees, EPA, to Peter Westlin, EPA. August 20, 2008. Monitoring Options for SNCR & Test Cost Questions.3. E-mail from Jason Dewees, EPA, to Mary Johnson, EPA. August 20, 2008. Re: Monitoring Options for SNCR & Test Cost Questions.

33
Attachment D 

Recordkeeping and Reporting Cost Algorithm 

34
ATTACHMENT D: RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING COST ALGORITHM

02/09/12

(A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (G) (H)

Respondent Non-Labor Number of Hours Number of Technical Management Clerical Total Total Total 

Hours per Costs Occurrences Per Respondents Hours Hours Hours Labor Costs Non-Labor Responses

Occurrence Per Per Respondent Per Year Per Year Per Year Per Year Per Year Costs Per Year

(Technical Occurrence Respondent Per Year Per Year

Burden Item hours) Per Year (C=A x C (D x E) (F x 0.05) (F x 0.1)

1. Applications N/A

2. Surveys and Studies N/A

3. Reporting Requirements

A. Read and Understand Rule Requirements 25 $100 1 25 15 375 19 38 $40,790 $1,500 0 a,b,c

B. Required Activities

1) Initial performance test, sampling, and report

a) Process Vents 32 $51,198 1 32 14 448 22 45 $48,731 $716,768 0 a,d

b) Resins 2 $1,803 1 2 18 36 2 4 $3,916 $32,454 0 a,e

c) wastewater 2 $491 1 2 57 114 6 11 $12,400 $27,987 0 a,f

d) heat exchangers $0 0 0 23 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 g -

e) equipment leaks 2 $77,798 1 2 13 26 1 3 $2,828 $1,011,368 0 h

2) Periodic performance test, sampling, and report

a) Process Vents 32 $48,030 1 32 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 i

b) Resins 1 $601 11 11 18 198 10 20 $21,537 $118,998 0 e

c) wastewater 1 $491 11 11 15 165 8 17 $17,948 $80,933 0 f

d) uncontrolled wastewater 1 $491 1 1 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 f

e) heat exchangers 1 $0 12 12 23 276 14 28 $30,022 $0 0 g

f) equipment leaks 1 $18,205 1 1 13 13 1 1 $1,414 $236,666 0 h

3) Establish operating parameters and monitoring plan

a) Process Vents 3.5 $0 1 3.5 14 49 2 5 $5,330 $0 0 a,b,c

4) Continuous parameter monitoring

a) Initial capital costs (PRD Electronic Monitor) 0 $188,913 1 0 15 0 0 0 $0 $2,833,695 0 a,b

b) Annualized capital and O&M costs (PRD Electronic Monitor) 11 $26,897 1 11 15 165 8 17 $17,948 $403,455 0 b

C. Create Information Incl. in 3.B

D. Gather Information Incl. in 3.E

E. Report Preparation

1) Initial Notification 5 $0 1 5 15 75 4 8 $8,158 $0 15 a,b

2) Batch precompliance report 5 $0 1 5 15 75 4 8 $8,158 $0 15 a,b

3) Notification of performance test with test plan 10 $0 1 10 15 150 8 15 $16,316 $0 15 a,b

4) Notification of compliance status 20 $0 1 20 15 300 15 30 $32,632 $0 15 a,b

5) Compliance report 25 $0 1 25 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 b,k

6) Notice of inspection 5 $0 1 5 15 75 4 8 $8,158 $0 15 b,k

7) Affirmative defense 18 $0 1 18 0 18 12 0 $0 $0 0 j

ReportingSubtotal 2,540 127 254 $276,285 $2,630,128 75 l

4. Recordkeeping Requirements 

A. Read Instructions Incl. in 3.A 

B. Implement Activities N/A

C. Develop Record System N/A

D. Record Information

1) Records of process vent requirements 10 $0 1 10 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 b,k

2) Records of resin stripper requirements 15 $0 1 15 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 b,k

3) Records wastewater requirements 15 $0 1 15 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 b,k

4) Records of storage vessel requirements 10 $0 1 10 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 b,k

5) Records of equipment leak requirements 25 $0 1 25 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 b,k

6) Records of heat exchanger requirements 10 $0 1 10 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 b,k

7) Records of other emission sources requirements 10 $0 1 10 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 b,k

E. Personnel Training Incl. in 3.B 

F. Time for Audits N/A

Recordkeeping Subtotal 0 0 0 $0 $0 0

TOTAL: 2,540 127 254 $276,285 $2,630,128 75

Total Hours Labor Non-Labor Total

Summary of Respondent Burden 2,921 $276,285 $2,630,128 $2,906,413

Initial Capital and Startup $2,835,195

 $2,630,128

FOOTNOTES

a One-time only costs.

b Cost incurred by a facility regardless of the number of affected units at the plant.

c 15 major sources in affected source category

d 14 major sources are expected to perform testing for process vents. OxyVinyls Pasadena does not operate a process vent control, but rather sends process vent gas streams to PolyOne Pedricktown for control. 

e 18 respondents equivalent to 19 unique combinations of facilities and resin types. 

f An estimated 42 uncontrolled streams and 15 wastewater stripper outlets (across 15 facilities) are expected to require initial wastewater testing. 15 wastewater stripper outlets are expected to require monthly testing. 42 uncontrolled streams will require annual testing

g All heat exchnager testing and monitoring costs assumed to be incurred annually. 23 cooling towers at 15 facilities.

h

i process vent testing is required initially and once every five years, therefore no additional costs are expected in additional to the initial testing requirement. 

j Hours for affirmative defense are shown only for illustration and are not included in the total burden estimate

k Annual cost. Annual costs are not incurred until the second year of operation.

l Reporting subtotal does not include capital costs for PRD monitoring system. 

Annualized Capital/Start-up and O & M

for Existing Major Sources: Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymer Manufacturing Units - Year 1

Table 1 - Annual Respondent Burden and Cost of Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements of the MACT Floor

Footnotes

13 facilities are expected to be required to increase stringency of their LDAR programs to 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart UU. Non-Labor costs technically include labor to perform LDAR testing in addition to monitoring equipment and maintenance materials. Respondent 

hours are an estimation of the additional reporting required by the final rule. 

35
ATTACHMENT D: RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING COST ALGORITHM

02/09/12

(A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (G) (H)

Respondent Non-Labor Number of Hours Number of Technical Management Clerical Total Total Total 

Hours per Costs Occurrences Per Respondents Hours Hours Hours Labor Costs Non-Labor Responses

Occurrence Per Per Respondent Per Year Per Year Per Year Per Year Per Year Costs Per Year

(Technical Occurrence Respondent Per Year Per Year

Burden Item hours) Per Year (C=A x C (D x E) (F x 0.05) (F x 0.1)

1. Applications N/A

2. Surveys and Studies N/A

3. Reporting Requirements

A. Read and Understand Rule Requirements 25 $100 1 25 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 a,b,c

B. Required Activities

1) Initial performance test, sampling, and report

a) Process Vents 32 $51,198 1 32 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 a,d

b) Resins 2 $1,803 1 2 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 a,e

c) wastewater 2 $491 1 2 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 a,f

d) heat exchangers $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 g -

e) equipment leaks 2 $77,798 1 2 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 h

2) Periodic performance test, sampling, and report

a) Process Vents 32 $48,030 1 32 3 90 4 9 $9,746 $134,484 0 i

b) Resins 1 $601 12 12 18 216 11 22 $23,495 $129,816 0 e

c) wastewater 1 $491 12 12 15 180 9 18 $19,579 $88,290 0 f

d) uncontrolled wastewater 1 $491 1 1 42 42 2 4 $4,568 $20,601 0 f

e) heat exchangers 1 $0 12 12 23 276 14 28 $30,022 $0 0 g

f) equipment leaks 1 $18,205 1 1 13 13 1 1 $1,414 $236,666 0 h

3) Establish operating parameters and monitoring plan

a) Process Vents 3.5 $0 1 3.5 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 a,b,c

4) Continuous parameter monitoring

a) Initial capital costs (PRD Electronic Monitor) 0 $188,913 1 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 a,b

b) Annualized capital and O&M costs (PRD Electronic Monitor) 11 $26,897 1 11 15 165 8 17 $17,948 $403,455 0 b

C. Create Information Incl. in 3.B

D. Gather Information Incl. in 3.E

E. Report Preparation

1) Initial Notification 5 $0 1 5 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 a,b

2) Batch precompliance report 5 $0 1 5 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 a,b

3) Notification of performance test with test plan 10 $0 1 10 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 a,b

4) Notification of compliance status 20 $0 1 20 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 a,b

5) Compliance report 25 $0 1 25 15 375 19 38 $40,790 $0 15 b,k

6) Notice of inspection 5 $0 1 5 15 75 4 8 $8,158 $0 15 b,k

7) Affirmative defense 18 $0 1 18 0 18 12 0 $0 $0 0 j

ReportingSubtotal 1,432 72 143 $155,720 $1,013,312 30 l

4. Recordkeeping Requirements 

A. Read Instructions Incl. in 3.A 

B. Implement Activities N/A

C. Develop Record System N/A

D. Record Information

1) Records of process vent requirements 10 $0 1 10 15 150 8 15 $16,316 $0 0 b,k

2) Records of resin stripper requirements 15 $0 1 15 15 225 11 23 $24,474 $0 0 b,k

3) Records wastewater requirements 15 $0 1 15 15 225 11 23 $24,474 $0 0 b,k

4) Records of storage vessel requirements 10 $0 1 10 15 150 8 15 $16,316 $0 0 b,k

5) Records of equipment leak requirements 25 $0 1 25 15 375 19 38 $40,790 $0 0 b,k

6) Records of heat exchanger requirements 10 $0 1 10 15 150 8 15 $16,316 $0 0 b,k

7) Records of other emission sources requirements 10 $0 1 10 15 150 8 15 $16,316 $0 0 b,k

E. Personnel Training Incl. in 3.B 

F. Time for Audits N/A

Recordkeeping Subtotal 1425 71.25 142.5 $155,003 $0 0

TOTAL: 2,857 143 286 $310,723 $1,013,312 30

Total Hours Labor Non-Labor Total

Summary of Respondent Burden 3,285 $310,723 $1,013,312 $1,324,035

Initial Capital and Startup $0

 $1,013,312

FOOTNOTES

a One-time only costs.

b Cost incurred by a facility regardless of the number of affected units at the plant.

c 15 major sources in affected source category

d 14 major sources are expected to perform testing for process vents. OxyVinyls Pasadena does not operate a process vent control, but rather sends process vent gas streams to PolyOne Pedricktown for control. 

e 18 respondents equivalent to 19 unique combinations of facilities and resin types. 

f An estimated 42 uncontrolled streams and 15 wastewater stripper outlets (across 15 facilities) are expected to require initial wastewater testing. 15 wastewater stripper outlets are expected to require monthly testing. 42 uncontrolled streams will require annual testing

g All heat exchnager testing and monitoring costs assumed to be incurred annually. 23 cooling towers at 15 facilities.

h

i process vent testing is required initially and once every five years, therefore no additional costs are expected in additional to the initial testing requirement. 

j Hours for affirmative defense are shown only for illustration and are not included in the total burden estimate

k Annual cost. Annual costs are not incurred until the second year of operation.

l Reporting subtotal does not include capital costs for PRD monitoring system. 

Table 2 - Annual Respondent Burden and Cost of Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements of the MACT Floor

for Existing Major Sources: Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymer Manufacturing Units - Year 2

Footnotes

Annualized Capital/Start-up and O & M

13 facilities are expected to be required to increase stringency of their LDAR programs to 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart UU. Non-Labor costs technically include labor to perform LDAR testing in addition to monitoring equipment and maintenance materials. Respondent 

hours are an estimation of the additional reporting required by the final rule. 

36
ATTACHMENT D: RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING COST ALGORITHM

02/09/12

(A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (G) (H)

Respondent Non-Labor Number of Hours Number of Technical Management Clerical Total Total Total 

Hours per Costs Occurrences Per Respondents Hours Hours Hours Labor Costs Non-Labor Responses

Occurrence Per Per Respondent Per Year Per Year Per Year Per Year Per Year Costs Per Year

(Technical Occurrence Respondent Per Year Per Year

Burden Item hours) Per Year (C=A x C (D x E) (F x 0.05) (F x 0.1)

1. Applications N/A

2. Surveys and Studies N/A

3. Reporting Requirements

A. Read and Understand Rule Requirements 25 $100 1 25 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 a,b,c

B. Required Activities

1) Initial performance test, sampling, and report

a) Process Vents 32 $51,198 1 32 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 a,d

b) Resins 2 $1,803 1 2 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 a,e

c) wastewater 2 $491 1 2 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 a,f

d) heat exchangers $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 g -

e) equipment leaks 2 $77,798 1 2 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 h

2) Periodic performance test, sampling, and report

a) Process Vents 32 $48,030 1 32 3 90 4 9 $9,746 $134,484 0 i

b) Resins 1 $601 12 12 18 216 11 22 $23,495 $129,816 0 e

c) wastewater 1 $491 12 12 15 180 9 18 $19,579 $88,290 0 f

d) uncontrolled wastewater 1 $491 1 1 42 42 2 4 $4,568 $20,601 0 f

e) heat exchangers 1 $0 12 12 23 276 14 28 $30,022 $0 0 g

f) equipment leaks 1 $18,205 1 1 13 13 1 1 $1,414 $236,666 0 h

3) Establish operating parameters and monitoring plan

a) Process Vents 3.5 $0 1 3.5 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 a,b,c

4) Continuous parameter monitoring

a) Initial capital costs (PRD Electronic Monitor) 0 $188,913 1 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 a,b

b) Annualized capital and O&M costs (PRD Electronic Monitor) 11 $26,897 1 11 15 165 8 17 $17,948 $403,455 0 b

C. Create Information Incl. in 3.B

D. Gather Information Incl. in 3.E

E. Report Preparation

1) Initial Notification 5 $0 1 5 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 a,b

2) Batch precompliance report 5 $0 1 5 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 a,b

3) Notification of performance test with test plan 10 $0 1 10 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 a,b

4) Notification of compliance status 20 $0 1 20 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 a,b

5) Compliance report 25 $0 1 25 15 375 19 38 $40,790 $0 15 b,k

6) Notice of inspection 5 $0 1 5 15 75 4 8 $8,158 $0 15 b,k

7) Affirmative defense 18 $0 1 18 0 18 12 0 $0 $0 0 j

ReportingSubtotal 1,432 72 143 $155,720 $1,013,312 30 l

4. Recordkeeping Requirements 

A. Read Instructions Incl. in 3.A 

B. Implement Activities N/A

C. Develop Record System N/A

D. Record Information

1) Records of process vent requirements 10 $0 1 10 15 150 8 15 $16,316 $0 0 b,k

2) Records of resin stripper requirements 15 $0 1 15 15 225 11 23 $24,474 $0 0 b,k

3) Records wastewater requirements 15 $0 1 15 15 225 11 23 $24,474 $0 0 b,k

4) Records of storage vessel requirements 10 $0 1 10 15 150 8 15 $16,316 $0 0 b,k

5) Records of equipment leak requirements 25 $0 1 25 15 375 19 38 $40,790 $0 0 b,k

6) Records of heat exchanger requirements 10 $0 1 10 15 150 8 15 $16,316 $0 0 b,k

7) Records of other emission sources requirements 10 $0 1 10 15 150 8 15 $16,316 $0 0 b,k

E. Personnel Training Incl. in 3.B 

F. Time for Audits N/A

Recordkeeping Subtotal 1425 71.25 142.5 $155,003 $0 0

TOTAL: 2,857 143 286 $310,723 $1,013,312 30

Total Hours Labor Non-Labor Total

Summary of Respondent Burden 3,285 $310,723 $1,013,312 $1,324,035

Initial Capital and Startup $0

 $1,013,312

FOOTNOTES

a One-time only costs.

b Cost incurred by a facility regardless of the number of affected units at the plant.

c 15 major sources in affected source category

d 14 major sources are expected to perform testing for process vents. OxyVinyls Pasadena does not operate a process vent control, but rather sends process vent gas streams to PolyOne Pedricktown for control. 

e 18 respondents equivalent to 19 unique combinations of facilities and resin types. 

f An estimated 42 uncontrolled streams and 15 wastewater stripper outlets (across 15 facilities) are expected to require initial wastewater testing. 15 wastewater stripper outlets are expected to require monthly testing. 42 uncontrolled streams will require annual testing

g All heat exchnager testing and monitoring costs assumed to be incurred annually. 23 cooling towers at 15 facilities.

h

i process vent testing is required initially and once every five years, therefore no additional costs are expected in additional to the initial testing requirement. 

j Hours for affirmative defense are shown only for illustration and are not included in the total burden estimate

k Annual cost. Annual costs are not incurred until the second year of operation.

l Reporting subtotal does not include capital costs for PRD monitoring system. 

Table 3 - Annual Respondent Burden and Cost of Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements of the MACT Floor

for Existing Major Sources: Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymer Manufacturing Units - Year 3

Footnotes

Annualized Capital/Start-up and O & M

13 facilities are expected to be required to increase stringency of their LDAR programs to 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart UU. Non-Labor costs technically include labor to perform LDAR testing in addition to monitoring equipment and maintenance materials. Respondent 

hours are an estimation of the additional reporting required by the final rule. 

37
ATTACHMENT D: RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING COST ALGORITHM

02/09/12

Year Technical Hours

Management 

Hours Clerical Hours Total Hours Labor Costs

Non-Labor 

(Annualized 

Capital/Startup and 

O&M) Costs Tota

1 2,540 127 254 2,921 $276,285 $2,630,128 $2,92 2,857 143 286 3,285 $310,723 $1,013,312 $1,33 2,857 143 286 3,285 $310,723 $1,013,312 $1,3

Total 8,253 413 825 9,491 $897,731 $4,656,752 $5,5

Average 2,751 138 275 3,164 $299,244 $1,552,251 $1,8

Table 4 - Summary of Annual Respondent Burden and Cost of Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirem

the MACT Floor for Existing Sources: Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymer Manufacturing Units

38
Attachment E 

Cost Algorithm for Additional Resin Stripping 

39
ATTACHMENT E. COST ALGORITHM FOR ADDITIONAL RESIN STRIPPING

02/09/2012

Steam Stripper - PVC Resin - Cost Analysis - VC and TOH

Company

Westlake Chemical Corporation

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

A. Parameters (Inputs and Example 

Calculation)

1. Stripper inlet flow rate, pm (Q) 500 19302. Annual operating hours, hr/yr (H) 8400 84003. Steam to Feed Ratio, kg /  (S) 0.096 0.060 assume same from WW stripper4. Electricity use, kWhr/day (EU) 260 2605. Operating labor rate, $/hr (LR) [2] $34.60 $34.606. Electricity cost, $/kWh (EC) [3] $0.07 $0.077. Water cost, $/1,000 gal (WC) [4] $0.20 $0.208. Steam cost, $/1,000 lb (SC) [4] $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

10. Cost index a. 2010 641.1 641.1 b. 1989 356.0 356.011. VCM Concentration, ppm [C] 68.6512. VCM limit, ppm [L] 20.0 36.8413. VCM recovery percentage, % [RP] 99.0 46.314. VOC recovery value, $/lb [RV] [5] $0.313 $0.000

B. Total Capital Investment

1. $ = 0.3731 x Q^0.267 x 10^6 $0 $10,000,000 estimated total capital provided by facility

2. $ / pm = $ / Q $0 $5,182 

C. Direct Annual Operating Costs, $/yr

1. Electricity = EU / (24 hr/day) x H x EC $6,079 $0 

2. Steam = Q x S x (2.2 lb/kg) x (60 min/hr) x H x SC / 1000 $247,484 $0 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 

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

D. Indirect Annual Costs, $/yr

1. Overhead = 0.6 x (labor + maintenance materials) $37,057 $0 

2. Property taxes, insurance, and administration

= 0.04 x TCI $0 $0 

3. Capital recovery = Equipment CRF x TCI $0 $943,929 

E. Recovery Credit, $/yr

a. Recovered vinyl chloride, kg/yr [VCR] = C x 10^-6 x Q x (1 kg/) x (60 min/hr) x H x RP 0.00 30944.10 

b. Value of recovered vinyl chloride, $/yr = VCR x (2.2 lb/kg) x RV $0 $0 

F. Include in Annual Cost? YesF. Total Annual Cost

1. $/yr = Direct Annual Costs + Indirect Annual Costs - Recovery Credit $352,381 $943,929 

2. ($/yr) / pm = ($/yr) / Q $705 $489

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 Estimates3. 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 F 

Resin Testing and Monitoring Cost Algorithm 

41
ATTACHMENT F: RESIN TESTING AND MONITORING COST ALGORITHM

02/09/2012

Resin Sampling and Monitoring

Low High Average

Cost of US EPA Method 8260B [1] $201 $400 $301

Initial Compliance 

3 outlet tests x 2 strippers2

$1,803.00

Total Compliance Cost $1,803.00

Monitoring

1 tests per month for each type of resin x 2 strippers2

$601.00

Company Location Initial Compliance 

Costs

Annualized Initial 

Compliance 

Costs

TAC of Resin 

Testing TAC of Resin Testing

Certain Teed - Lake Charles Bulk $1,803.00 $0.00 $7,212.00 $7,212.00

PolyOne - Pedricktown Dispersion $1,803.00 $0.00 $7,212.00 $7,212.00

PolyOne - Henry Dispersion $1,803.00 $0.00 $7,212.00 $7,212.00

Formosa - Delaware City Dispersion $1,803.00 $0.00 $7,212.00 $7,212.00

Formosa - Baton Rouge Suspension $1,803.00 $0.00 $7,212.00 $7,212.00

OxyVinyls - Deer Park Suspension $1,803.00 $0.00 $7,212.00 $7,212.00

PolyOne - Henry Suspension $1,803.00 $0.00 $7,212.00 $7,212.00

Formosa - Point Comfort Suspension $1,803.00 $0.00 $7,212.00 $7,212.00

Shintech - Plaquemine Suspension $1,803.00 $0.00 $7,212.00 $7,212.00

Shintech - Freeport Suspension $1,803.00 $0.00 $7,212.00 $7,212.00

Georgia Gulf - Plaquemine Suspension $1,803.00 $0.00 $7,212.00 $7,212.00

OxyVinyls - Pasadena Suspension $1,803.00 $0.00 $7,212.00 $7,212.00

Shintech - Addis Suspension $1,803.00 $0.00 $7,212.00 $7,212.00

OxyVinyls - Pedricktown Suspension $1,803.00 $0.00 $7,212.00 $7,212.00

Westlake - Calvert City Suspension $1,803.00 $0.00 $7,212.00 $7,212.00

Georgia Gulf - Aberdeen Suspension $1,803.00 $0.00 $7,212.00 $7,212.00

Westlake - Geismar Suspension $1,803.00 $0.00 $7,212.00 $7,212.00

Dow - Midland Copolymer (VDCO-S) $1,803.00 $0.00 $7,212.00 $7,212.00

Formosa - Delaware City Copolymer (VACO-D) $1,803.00 $0.00 $7,212.00 $7,212.00

PolyOne - Henry Suspension Blending $1,803.00 $0.00 $7,212.00 $7,212.00

2. Average number of strippers calculated from facility submitted survey data

1. National Environmental Methods Index Website 

42
Attachment G 

Heat Exchange System Cost Analysis 

43
	
	





Heat Exchange Systems - Summary of Clarification Data Submitted to EPA Calculated Emissions, Reductions, and Costs

OVP Conc (ppbw) 5.93% of LAL 12%Avg LAL (ppbw) 1363 Based on M107 onlyAvg Conc (ppbw) 162LAL (ppbw) 50 Cost per Repair ($/tower/yr) 4300DOR LAL (ppbw) 800DOR Period (days) 120Repairs per yr 1

REPORTED 

EMISSIONS 

FROM 

VC Conc LAL BASELINE EMISSIONS EMISSION REDUCTIONS REPAIR 

Company Facility CT # Flow Rate (gpm) Pollutant Measured Leak Action Level Units Monitoring Frequency Monitoring Method Note(s) VC (tpy) (ppbw) (ppbw) VC (tpy) VC (tpy) ($/

1 10,000 Vinyl chloride Weekly Water sampling - GC headspace 162 1363 3.54E+00 2.45E+00 

2 5,000 Vinyl chloride Weekly Water sampling - GC headspace 162 1363 1.77E+00 1.22E+00 

Vinyl chloride 10000 ppbw Quarterly Method 415.1 1186 10000 4.29E+01 4.11E+01 

Formosa Baton Rouge 1 48,000 Vinyl chloride 10 ppbw Daily Method 601 1 10 1.25E-01 0.00E+00 

1 6,000 [no data] 162 1363 2.13E+00 1.47E+00 

2 3,000 [no data] 162 1363 1.06E+00 7.34E-01 

Formosa Point Comfort 158700 162 1363 5.62E+01 3.88E+01 

1 13,500 Vinyl chloride 250 ppbw Quarterly Method 107 30 250 8.78E-01 0.00E+00 2 18,000 Vinyl chloride 250 ppbw Quarterly Method 107 30 250 1.17E+00 0.00E+00 3 18,000 Vinyl chloride 250 ppbw Quarterly Method 107 30 250 1.17E+00 0.00E+00 1 40,000 [cw pressure > process pressure] 

2 22,300 [cw pressure > process pressure] 

3 1,181 [no heat exchangers] 

4 11,000 [utility system] 

Vinyl chloride 5000 ppbw Monthly Method 107 593 5000 1.09E+01 1.00E+01 Vinyl chloride 5000 ppbw Monthly Method 107 593 5000 1.56E+00 1.43E+00 Vinyl chloride 50 ppbw Monthly Method 107 9.40E-02 6 50 9.40E-02 0.00E+00 

OxyVinyls Pasadena Vinyl chloride 50 ppbw Monthly Method 107 1.81E-01 6 50 1.81E-01 0.00E+00 

1 9,000

2 11,600

OxyVinyls Deer Park

1 8,4002 1,200

Formosa Delaware CityGeorgia Gulf AberdeenGeorgia Gulf PlaquemineCertainTeed Lake CharlesDow Midland 1 16,500OxyVinyls Pedricktown 1 13,333 Vinyl chloride 1000 ppbv Continuous Similar to M106 and M21 [continuous monitoring of air above cooling tower] 119 1000 3.47E+00 2.01E+00 PolyOne Henry 39000 162 1363 1.38E+01 9.54E+00 

1 1,900 162 1363 6.73E-01 4.65E-01 2 1,850 162 1363 6.55E-01 4.53E-01 

Shintech Addis 449 162 1363 1.59E-01 1.10E-01 Shintech Freeport 360 162 1363 1.28E-01 8.81E-02 Shintech Plaquemine 433 162 1363 1.53E-01 1.06E-01 Westlake Calvert City 1 23,000 [no data] 162 1363 8.15E+00 5.63E+00 Westlake Geismar 1 10,653 Vinyl chloride 50 ppbw Yearly Method 107 6 50 1.39E-01 0.00E+00 

151.1 115.6 

PolyOne Pedricktown

2 11,600

44
	
	





Calculated Emissions, Reductions, and Costs

Total Capital Cost Ttal Annual Cost

Control EquipT&M $ $/yr VCM HCl D/F TOH V

Control Testing and Control Control Testing and Testing and Total Capital Total Baseline - Baseline - Baseline - Baseline - Redu

Certain Teed - Lake Charles Area Source Bulk 8,600 5.31E+00 5.31E+00 PolyOne - Henry PVC - Only Suspension, Dispersion, Suspension Blending 4,300 1.38E+01 1.38E+01 PolyOne - Pedricktown PVC - Only Dispersion 8,600 1.33E+00 1.33E+00 Formosa - Delaware City PVC - Only Dispersion, Copolymer (VACO-D) 8,600 3.19E+00 3.19E+00 Dow - Midland PVC - Combined Copolymer (VDCO-S) 4,300 4.29E+01 4.29E+01 Formosa - Baton Rouge PVC - Combined Suspension 4,300 1.25E-01 1.25E-01 Formosa - Point Comfort PVC - Combined Suspension 4,300 5.62E+01 5.62E+01 Georgia Gulf - Aberdeen PVC - Only Suspension 12,900 3.22E+00 3.22E+00 Georgia Gulf - Plaquemine PVC - Combined Suspension 17,200 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 OxyVinyls - Deer Park PVC - Combined Suspension 8,600 1.25E+01 1.25E+01 

OxyVinyls - Pasadena PVC - Only Suspension 8,600 2.75E-01 2.75E-01 

OxyVinyls - Pedricktown PVC - Only Suspension 4,300 3.47E+00 3.47E+00 

Shintech - Addis PVC - Only Suspension 4,300 1.59E-01 1.59E-01 Shintech - Freeport PVC - Only Suspension 4,300 1.28E-01 1.28E-01 Shintech - Plaquemine PVC - Combined Suspension 4,300 1.53E-01 1.53E-01 Westlake - Calvert City PVC - Combined Suspension 4,300 8.15E+00 8.15E+00 Westlake - Geismar PVC - Combined Suspension 4,300 1.39E-01 1.39E-01 

Control Equip T&M

MACT Floor Costs Baseline Emissions and MACT Floo

MACT Floor Capital Cost ($) MACT Floor - Annual Costs ($/yr) Baseline Emissions (TPY) 

45
Attachment H 

Equipment Leak Testing and Monitoring Cost Algorithm 

46
ATTTACHMENT H: EQUIPMENT LEAK TESTING AND MONITORING COST ALGORITHM

02/09/2012

Equipment Leaks - MACT Floor Cost Analysis

Cost Summary for PRD Monitoring Systems

Capital Costs Annual Costs

Major Sources 26,897 188,913Cost Summary for Equipment Leaks

Company LDAR Program[1] (A) PRV Monitoring System Capital Cost ($) 

 (B) Annualize 

Capital Cost of PRV 

Monitoring System 

($) 

 Baseline 

Emission[2] 

(Tons/yr) 

 Part 61 

Allowable 

Emissions 

(Tons/yr) 

Formosa - Baton Rouge 40CFR61 V 188,913.00 14.64 26,897.00 14.64

Formosa - Delaware City 40CFR63 UU 188,913.00 8.10 26,897.00 14.64

Formosa - Point Comfort 40CFR61 V 188,913.00 14.64 26,897.00 14.64

Georgia Gulf - Aberdeen 40CFR61 V 188,913.00 14.64 26,897.00 14.64

Georgia Gulf - Plaquemine 40CFR63 UU 188,913.00 8.10 26,897.00 14.64

OxyVinyls - Pasadena 40CFR61 V 188,913.00 14.64 26,897.00 14.64

OxyVinyls - Pedricktown 40CFR61 V 188,913.00 14.64 26,897.00 14.64

PolyOne - Henry 40CFR61 V 188,913.00 14.64 26,897.00 14.64

PolyOne - Pedricktown 40CFR61 V 188,913.00 14.64 26,897.00 14.64

Shintech - Addis 40CFR61 V 188,913.00 14.64 26,897.00 14.64

Shintech - Freeport 40CFR61 V 188,913.00 14.64 26,897.00 14.64

Shintech - Plaquemine 40CFR61 V 188,913.00 14.64 26,897.00 14.64

Dow - Midland 40CFR61 V 188,913.00 14.64 26,897.00 14.64

Westlake - Calvert City 40CFR61 V 188,913.00 14.64 26,897.00 14.64

Westlake - Geismar 40CFR61 V 188,913.00 14.64 26,897.00 14.64

Totals 403,455.00 2,833,695.00 207 220 

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

Source Type PRD Monitoring Costs[1]

[1] - From South Coast Air Quality Management District "Proposed Amended Rule 1173 - Control of Volatile Organic Compound Leaks and Releases from Components at Petroleum Facilities and Chemical Plants". May 15, 2007 Includes device parts, installation, maintenance, and data retrieval system. 

47
Attachment I 

Wastewater Testing and Monitoring Cost Algorithm 

48
ATTACHMENT I: WASTEWATER TESTING AND MONITORING COST ALGORITHM

02/09/2012

Wastewater Sampling and Monitoring

Cost of US EPA Method 8260B $201 $400 $301 *National Environmental Methods Index Website https://www.nemi.gov/apex/f?p=237:38:951365369293524::

Cost of US EPA Method 305 $190 http://analyticallaboratories.com/page.cfm?pageid=90 (Cost of Volatile Organics)Cost of US EPA Method 107 $0 Assume no cost since facilities are presumably already testing VC (Based on VI submitted data). 

Number of Initial Test Runs 1.00

Number of Strippers 1.00Number of Continuous Test Runs 1.00Number of Continuous Tests per Year Monthly Testing 12.00Number of Uncontrolled Streams (As reported in survey data)

Number of Uncontrolled Streams with average for missing data Non-VC HAP MeOH VC VC Total Non- VC HAP MeOH VC Total Non- VC HAP MeOH

Certain Teed - Lake Charles 1 1 $300.50 $190.00 $0.00 $0.00 $300.50 $190.00 $0.00 $3,606.00 $2,280.00 PolyOne - Henry 6 6 $1,803.00 $1,140.00 $0.00 $0.00 $300.50 $190.00 $0.00 $3,606.00 $2,280.00 

PolyOne - Pedricktown 3 $901.50 $570.00 $0.00 $0.00 $300.50 $190.00 $0.00 $3,606.00 $2,280.00 

Formosa - Delaware City 3 $901.50 $570.00 $0.00 $0.00 $300.50 $190.00 $0.00 $3,606.00 $2,280.00 Dow - Midland 3 $901.50 $570.00 $0.00 $0.00 $300.50 $190.00 $0.00 $3,606.00 $2,280.00 Formosa - Baton Rouge 1 1 $300.50 $190.00 $0.00 $0.00 $300.50 $190.00 $0.00 $3,606.00 $2,280.00 Formosa - Point Comfort 3 $901.50 $570.00 $0.00 $0.00 $300.50 $190.00 $0.00 $3,606.00 $2,280.00 Georgia Gulf - Aberdeen 1 1 $300.50 $190.00 $0.00 $0.00 $300.50 $190.00 $0.00 $3,606.00 $2,280.00 Georgia Gulf - Plaquemine 3 $901.50 $570.00 $0.00 $0.00 $300.50 $190.00 $0.00 $3,606.00 $2,280.00 OxyVinyls - Deer Park 1 1 $300.50 $190.00 $0.00 $0.00 $300.50 $190.00 $0.00 $3,606.00 $2,280.00 OxyVinyls - Pasadena 7 7 $2,103.50 $1,330.00 $0.00 $0.00 $300.50 $190.00 $0.00 $3,606.00 $2,280.00 

OxyVinyls - Pedricktown 3 $901.50 $570.00 $0.00 $0.00 $300.50 $190.00 $0.00 $3,606.00 $2,280.00 

Shintech - Addis 3 3 $901.50 $570.00 $0.00 $0.00 $300.50 $190.00 $0.00 $3,606.00 $2,280.00 Shintech - Freeport 1 1 $300.50 $190.00 $0.00 $0.00 $300.50 $190.00 $0.00 $3,606.00 $2,280.00 Shintech - Plaquemine 2 2 $601.00 $380.00 $0.00 $0.00 $300.50 $190.00 $0.00 $3,606.00 $2,280.00 Westlake - Calvert City 1 1 $300.50 $190.00 $0.00 $0.00 $300.50 $190.00 $0.00 $3,606.00 $2,280.00 Westlake - Geismar 2 2 $601.00 $380.00 $0.00 $0.00 $300.50 $190.00 $0.00 $3,606.00 $2,280.00 Average 3

Totals 

Count of Wastewater StreamID_STDFacilityName Total

Formosa Plastics Corporation Baton Rouge 1Georgia Gulf Chemicals Aberdeen Facility 1

Lake Charles Polymer Plant 1OxyVinyls Deer Park 1OxyVinyls Pasadena 7PolyOne Henry 6Shintech Addis 3Shintech Freeport 1Shintech Plaquemine 2Union Carbide Texas City 6Westlake Calvert City 1Westlake Geismar 2Grand Total 32

Tota

Initial Continuous Initial Uncontrolled Stream Testing Stripper Outlet Testing

49