p. 1



# OAR Box 

# 1477 Prepped by Ollie Stewart



### Document

Number: 

# 13 ) ll-J- 4
Docket Number: 

# A-94-5 2

Printed 7/31/2008 11:18:29 AM Sheet 13 of 36P. 2 

# XL
From : KEIT H BARNET T p NANA\ I TO : ALDRIDG E -AMAND AGA. S «*** • fc^*** U•*** * * l*¥"*» * |

. Date : 1/4/0 0 3:17p m Subject : Cost s fo r th e Reinforce d Plastic s Composite s MACj T T o th e Smal l Entit yOwners/Operators :
Base d o n th e Decembe r 1 4 smal l entit youtreac h meeting , an d a subsequen t meetin g wit h representative s o f th e Composite s Fabricator s Association , I wante d t o sen d t o yo u som e additiona l informatio n o n th e approac h w e ar e usin g t o calculat e cost s t o mee t th e MAC T floors
. Thi s discussio n focuse s o n th e floo r leve l o f contro l fo r existin g sources . T o mee t thes e floors , ope n moldin g facilitie s woul d b e require d t o us e pollutio n preventio n technique s includin g lo w HA P resin s an d ge l coats , an d flo w coaters
. Severa l time s i n ou r discussions , i t wa s implie d tha t i f facilitie s coul d switc h t o lowe r HA P materials , the ywoul d alread yhav e don e so . I n ou r analysis , w e looke d fo r availabl e resin s an d ge l coat s tha t coul d mee t th e floor
. A s lon g a s a lowe r HA P resin/ge l coa t tha t appeare d t o hav e th e necessar yphysica l propertie s wa s available , w e base d th e floo r o n switchin g t o tha t resin , eve n i f tha t mean t highe r ra w material s costs
. Th e correspondin g ra w material s cos t increase s for m th e basi s o f mos t o f th e cost s o f meetin g th e floo r leve l o f control
. I t i s thes e cost s tha t le d u s t o determin e tha t thei r ma yb e significan t economi c impact s associate d wit h thi s rule , eve n a t th e floo r leve l o f control
. Th e informatio n presente d her e doe s no t dea l wit h issue s o f th e cost s o f ad d o n controls
. Tha t informatio n wil l b e provide d a t a late r time

. I n performin g ou r analysis , w e assume d tha t a facilit ywoul d us e firs t conver t flo w coater s wher e possible

. W e assume d tha t flo w coater s ca n b e use d fo r al l unfille d resi n systems , an d canno t b e use d fo r fille d resin s o r ge l coats
. I f switchin g t o flo w coater s woul d no t allo w th e facilit yt o mee t MACT , the n the y woul d conver t t o lowe r HA P ge l coat s an d resins

. W e di d no t assum e partia l conversion

. W e assume d i f an yresin/ge l coa t conversio n wa s required , the n al l o f th e resi n i n tha t particula r categor ywoul d b e converted
. Attache d i s a portio n o f th e cos t analysi s tha t discusse s cost s o f convertin g t o lo w HA P resin s an d ge l coats
. Yo u ma yfin d th e analysi s a littl e har d t o follow , an d w e ar e plannin g t o revis e th e discussion

. However , I wante d t o g o ahea d an d mak e thi s availabl e t o th e smal l entit yrepresentative s s o yo u coul d se e ou r basi c methodolog yfo r costin g existin g sourc e floors
. I n reviewin g thi s information , b e awar e tha t w e trie d t o determin e "typical " scenario s fo r meetin g th e floor
. W e realiz e tha t th e scenari o show n wil l no t fi t ever yfacility

. Bu t w e d o believ e i t wil l fi t th e majorit yo f th e industry

. Facilitie s tha t believ e the ycan' t mee t existin g sourc e floor s stil l hav e th e optio n o f applyin g som e typ e o f partia l ad d o n control
. Thes e partia l contro l option s ar e no t nearl ya s expensiv e a s th e 9 5 percen t contro l option s w e evaluated
. I t coul d b e a s simpl e a s a ga s burne r i n a n exhaus t stac k i f i tP. 3

ca n b e teste d an

d show n t o reduc e emissions

. Als o attache d i s a tabl e wit h th e existing sourc e floors , an d a n estimat e o f th e resin/ge l coa t HAP conten t require d t o mee t th e floor
.P. 4

6. 2 PROCEDURE S USE D T O ANALYZ E COMPLIANC E OPTION S 6.2. 1 Low HA PResin s fo rCorrosio n Resistan tApplication s Availabl e Cos t

Informatio n CR 1 C R" Th e EP A collecte dcos t

and/o r physica l propertie s informatio n fo r thermose t

resin s designe dspecificall y for

corrosio n resistan t

application s fro mth e followin g majo r resi n manufacturers : Alph aOwen s Cornin g (AOC) , Ashlan dChemica l Company , Do w Chemica l Company , Interplasti c Corporation , an dReichhold

. Th e cos t informatio n submitte db y Dow , Interplastic , an dReichhol di s summarize din Tabl e CR-1

. Th e cos t

informatio n submitte db y Ashlan dChemica l an dAO C wa s submitte da s confidentia l busines s informatio n (CBI ) an di s no t include di n th e table

. In additio n t o th e cos t informatio n submitte db y th e resi n manufacturers , tw o facilitie s submitte dconfidentia l estimate s of th e cos t o f replacin g existin g hig h HA P resin s use db y thei r facilitie s wit

h lo w HA P resins

. Cos t Methodolog y & Assumption s Th e followin g step s (an dassociate dassumptions ) wer e use dt o calculat e th e direc t annua l cos t incurre db y facilitie s du e t o th e replacemen t of hig h HA P corrosio n resistan t resin s wit

h lo w HA P corrosio n resistan t

resins

. Ste p 1 : Selec t

cos t an dphysica l propertie s informatio n fro mresi n manufacturer s fo r th e purpos e of determinin g th e averag e cos t differential associate dwit h replacin g ahig h HA P corrosio n resistan t

resi n wit h alo w HA P corrosio n resistan t resin

. Not e 1 : Do w Chemical , Interplastic , an dReichhol dprovide ddetaile dcos t an dphysica l propertie s informatio n that coul db e use dfo r

determinin g th e averag e cos t of replacin g a hig h HA P corrosio n resistan t resi n wit h alo w HA P corrosio n resistan t resin

. Not e 2 : Th e informatio n provide db y Reichhol dwas selecte dbecaus e (1 ) thi s compan y manufactures hig h HA P isophthali c and/o r bisphenol-A-fumarat e resin s an dlo w HA P viny l este r

resins , an d(2 ) th e replacemen t of ahig h HA P isophthali c o r bisphenol-A

fumarat e resi n wit

h alo w HA P viny l este r

resi n wa s assume dt o b e th e mos t likel y resi n replacemen t

scenario

. Not e 3 : Th e informatio n provide db y Do w Chemica l an dInterplasti c was not use d becaus e i t was assume dtha t

th e resi n replacemen t

scenario s that

coul db e analyze dusin g dat afro mthes e tw o companie s wa s les s representative than th e scenario s that coul db e analyze dusin g th e dat afro mReichhold

. Th e resi n replacemen t scenario s that

coul db e analyze dusin g th e dat aprovide db y thes e tw o companie s wer e replacin g hig h HA P viny l este r o r isophthali c resin s wit

h lo w HA P viny l este r

resins

. Not e 4 : Ashlan dChemica l an dAO C onl y provide dcos t informatio n for

asmal l numbe r o f resin s tha t

wa s inadequat e fo r

th e purpos e of

determinin g th e average cos t differential

. AO C als o di dnot

provid e detaile dinformatio n o n th e physica l propertie s of th e resin s manufacture db y AOC

.P. 5

Table CR-1

. Non-CB I Cost

Information fo

r Corrosion Resistan

t Resins Providedb

y Resi n Manufacturer s

Resi n Manufacture r Do w Chemica l Compan y Do w Chemica l Compan y Do w Chemica l Compan y Do w Chemica l Compan y Do w Chemica l Compan y Do w Chemica l Compan y Do w Chemica l Compan y Do w Chemica l Compan y Do w Chemica l Compan y Do w Chemica l Compan y Interplastic s Corporatio n Interplastic s Corporatio n Interplastic s Corporatio n Interplastic s Corporatio n Interplastic s Corporatio n Interplastic s Corporatio n Interplastic s Corporatio n Interplastic s Corporatio n Interplastic s Corporatio n Interplastic s Corporatio n Interplastic s Corporatio n Interplastic s Corporatio n Interplastic s Corporatio n Reichhol d Reichhol d Reichhol d Reichhol d Reichhol d Reichhol d Reichhol d Reichhol d Reichhol d Resi n Produc t Numbe r DERAKAN E 411-35 0 DERAKAN E 411-4 5 DERAKAN E 411-5 0 DERAKAN E 470-30 0 DERAKAN E 470-3 6 DERAKAN E 441-40 0 DERAKANE510 A DERAKANE510 C DERAKANE 5 IO

N DERAKAN E 808 4 COREZY N CORVE830 0 COREZY N CORVE8360-3 4 COREZY N CORVE843 0 COREZY N CORVE844 0 COREZY N CORVE845 0 COREZY N CORVE8515-3 4 COREZY N CORVE871 0
COREZY N CORVE8730-3 4 COREZY N CORVE8730-4 5 COREZY N MVR804 0 COREZY N MVR806 0 COREZY N COR75-AQ-01 0 COREZY N COR75-AQ-00 1 DIO N 910 0 DIO N 930 0 ATLA C 58 0 DIO N 948 0 DIO N 942 0 DIO N 669 4 ATLA C 38 2 ATLA C 401 0 DIO N 663 1 Resi n Type a b Epox y - Viny l Este r Epox y - Viny l Este r Epox y - Viny l Este r Novala c - Epox y - Viny l Este r Novala c - Epox y - Viny l Este r Epox y - Viny l Este r Epox y - Viny l Este r

(FR ) Epox y - Viny l Este r

(FR ) Novalac - Epox y - Viny l Este r (FR ) Epox y - Viny l Este r

(TF ) Epox y - Viny l Este r Epox y - Viny l Este r Epox y - Viny l Este r

(FR ) Epox y - Viny l Este r

(FR ) Epox y - Viny l Este r

(FR ) Epox y - Viny l Este r

(TF ) Epox y - Viny l Este r

(Hig h Cross

link ) Novalac - Epox y - Viny l Este r Novalac - Epox y - Viny l Este r Viny l Este r

(FR ) Viny l Este r

(FR ) Isophthali c Isophthali c Bispheno l - Epox y - Viny l Este r Bispheno l - Epox y - Viny l Este r Urethan e - Viny l Este r Novalac - Epox y - Viny l Este r Viny l Este r

(Hig h Cross-link ) Bispheno l - A - Fumarat e Bispheno l - A - Fumarat e Bispheno l - A - Fumarat e Isophthali c HA P Conten t ( % b y wt. ) 45. 0 45. 0 50. 0 33. 0 36. 0 33. 0 38. 0 37. 0 35. 0 42. 0 45. 0 35. 0 52. 0 40. 0 40. 0 35. 0 31. 0
35. 0 45. 0 40. 0 40. 0 48. 0 48. 0 43. 5 30. 0 46. 0 39. 0 34. 5 48. 0 50. 0 50. 0 48. 0 Sale c

Pric e ( $ / lb ) $1.5 6 $1.5 7 $1.5 3 $1.7 1 $1.7 4 $1.6 5 $2.0 0 $1.7 1 $2.0 0 $1.9 0 $1.5 8 $1.6 8 $1.8 4 $1.7 6 $1.7 5 $2.0 9 $1.8 0
$2.0 9 $1.8 9 $1.8 1 $2.1 0 $1.0 7 $1.0 7 $1,36 5 $1,43 5 $1,46 5 $2,05 0 $1,76 0 $1,46 0 $1,32 0 $1,32 0 $1,05 0 Sal e Pric e

Shiptnen t Siz e Basi s Truc k Load Truc k Loa d Truc k Loa d Truc k Loa d Truc k Loa d Truc k Loa d Truc k Load Truc k Loa d Truc k Loa d Truc k Load 8 0 Drum s 8 0 Drum s 8 0 Drum s 8 0 Drum s 8 0 Drum s 8 0 Drum s 8 0 Drum s
8 0 Drum s 8 0 Drum s 8 0 Drum s 8 0 Drum s 8 0 Drum s 8 0 Drum s 8 0 Drum s 8 0 Drum s 8 0 Drum s 8 0 Drum s 8 0 Drum s 8 0 Drum s 8 0 Drum s 8 0 Drum s 8 0 Drum s

a F Rindicate s brominate dfire-retardant resi n o r resi n tha t

i s fire-retardan t

wit h th e additio n o f

antimon y trioxid e o r

alumin atrihydrate

. indicate s aresi n wit

h additive s (such a s a

n elastome r

backbone ) designe dt o produc e aresi n with greate r toughnes s an dflexibility

. C A1 1 sal e price s ar e i n 199 8 dollar s an dar e for non-promote dresins

.
Ste p 2 : Usin g th e informatio n selecte di n Ste p 1 , determin e th e cos t differential s associate dwith replacin g hig h HA P corrosio n resistan t resin s wit

h lo w HA P corrosio n resistan t resin s fo r differen t maximu mallowable resi n HA P content s an darepresentativ e se t o f chemica lP. 6



### environment s a

t multipl e continuou s temperatur e limits

. Not e 1 : A chemica

l environmen

t i s define das atyp e o

f chemica l wit h aspecific rang e o

f concentrations

. Th

e maximu mcontinuou s temperatur

e limit fo r aspecific chemica

l environmen

t i s the maximu

mtemperatur

e (basedo n testin g conductedb

y the resin supplier ) tha t aproperly constructe dplasti c composit e storag e tan

k or typ e o f proces s equipmen t ca n continuously handl e (sustain ) withou t experiencing structura

l failure

. Exampl e 1 : Tabl e CR- 2 provide s example s o f specific chemica

l environment s an

d maximu mcontinuou s temperatur

e limits

. Table CR-2 : Examples o

f Specific Chemica

l Environment

s wit h Maximu

m Continuous Temperatur e Limit s

PHEfl-M ! bDMironmentf

c ifflrd-ITOITOtaontifhlTOlT O

Aceti c Aci d Aluminu mSulfat e Calciu mHypochlorit e Ethy l Alcoho l Hydrochlori c Aci d Nicke l Chlorid e Potassiu m Dichromat e Sodiu mOxalat e Tanni c Aci d Zin c Sulfit e 0-2 5

0
- 10 0 0

- 10 0 0-1 0 0
- 1 0 0

- 10 0 0

- 10 0 0
- 10 0 0

- 100 0-10 0 BionlSiliOO

] IBionl93:o:0 ] rA^la-gTS&O l IEi5nl9M0 l lEionPlgQ l IB M 21 0 21 0 18 0 12 0 21 0 21 0 21 0 18 0 21 0 21 0 21 0

21 0 18 0 12 0 21 0 21 0 21 0 18 0 21 0 21 0 21 0

20 0 20 0 14 0 20 0 20 0 20 0 18 0 20 0 20 0 21 0

22 0 18 0 15 0 21 0 21 0 21 0 18 0 21 0 21 0 21 0

22 0 N D 15 0 21 0 21 0 21 0
N D 21 0 21 0 21 0

22 0 21 0 15 0 21 0 22 0 22 0 20 0 22 0 22 0 21 0

21 0 20 0 14 0 21 0 21 0 21 0 20 0 21 0 21 0 20 0

20 0 N R 14 0 20 0 20 0 20 0 18 0 20 0 N D 17 0

17 0 N R N D 16 0 14 0 17 0 N D 17 0 13 0

aExample s represent s 1 0 o f 60 8 chemica l environment s liste di n th e Reichhol dCorrosio n Resi n Selectio n an dDesig n Guide

. N D = Ther e i s n o dat at o establis h acontinuou s temperatur e limi t for this resi n an dchemica l environment

. c N R= Thi s resi n i s no t

recommende dfor

this chemica l environmen t a t an y temperature
. 

### Not e 2 : The cos t

differentia l associate dwit

h replacing ahig

h HA P corrosion resistant resin wit h alo w HA P corrosio n resistant

resin i s primarily dependen t o n th e chemica l environment , the continuou s operating temperature , an dthe HA P conten t o f the lo w HA P resin replacement

. Exampl e 2 : Table CR- 3 provide s actua l cos t differential s fo

r the first fou r chemica l environment s liste di

n Tabl e CR- 2 a

t eigh t differen t continuou s operating temperatures
. A n examination o

f the cos t differential s i

n the tabl e indicate s the following : (1 ) Differen

t chemica l environment s ma

y result i n dissimila

r cos t differential s eve

n i f identica l continuou s operatin g temperature s an dHA P conten t limit s ar e present
. (2 ) Differen

t continuou s operatin g temperature s ma y resul t i n dissimila

r cos t differential s eve n i f identica l chemica l environment s an

dHA P conten t limit s ar e present
.P. 7



### (3 ) Differen

t HA P conten t limit s ma y result i n dissimila

r cos t differential s eve

n i f identica l chemica l environment s an

dcontinuou s operating temperature s ar e present
.Tabl e CR-3 : Example s o f Cos tDifferential s fo rDifferen tChemica l Environments , Continuou s Temperatur e Limits , an d HA PConten tLimit s a, b
Chemical Environment

= Aceti c Aci d[ 0 - 25% ] Pre-MAC T Resi n Cos t

& HA P Conten t Cos t (S/lb ) Leas t Expensiv e Leas t Expensiv e Leas t Expensiv e Leas t ExjDensive_

_ HA P (% b v Wt ) N o Limi t N o Limi t N o Limi t N o Limi t Post-MAC T Resi n Cos t & HA P Conten t Cos t ($/lb ) Leas t Expensiv e Leas t Expensiv e Leas t Expensiv e Leas t Expensiv e HA P (% bv Wt )

< = 35 % < = 40 % < = 45 % N o Limi t Actua l Cos t Differential ($/lb ) = Average(Fina l Cost-Initia l Cost ) a t aSpecifi c Continuou s Temperatur e 10 0 F 0.38 5 0.38 5 0.31 5 0.00 0 120 F

0.38 5 0.38 5 0.31 5 0.00 0 140 F

0.38 5 0.38 5 0.31 5 0.00 0 16 0 F

0.38 5 0.38 5 0.31 5 0.00 0 18 0 F

0.11 5 0.11 5 0.04 5 0.00 0 20 0 F

0.11 5 0.11 5 0.04 5 0.00 0 22 0 F

N/A N/A N/A 0.00 0 24 0 F

N/A N/A N/ A 0.00 0 Chemical Environment

= AluminumSulfat

e [ 0 -100% ] Pre-MAC T Resi n Cos t

& HA P Conten t Cos t ($/lb ) Leas t Expensiv e Leas t Expensiv e Leas t Expensiv e Leas t Expensiv e HA P ( % b v Wt )

N o Limi t N o Limi t N o Limi t N o Limi t Post-MAC T Resi n Cos t & HA P Conten t Cos t ($/lb ) Leas t Expensiv e Leas t Expensiv e Leas t Expensiv e Leas t Expensiv e HA P ( % b v Wt )

< = 35 % < = 40 % < = 45 % N o Limi t Actua l Cos t Differential ($/lb ) = Average(Fina l Cost-Initia l Cost ) a t aSpecifi c Continuou s Temperatur e 10 0 F 0.38 5 0.38 5 0.31 5 0.00 0 120 F

0.38 5 0.38 5 0.31 5 0.00 0 14 0 F

0.38 5 0.38 5 0.31 5 0.00 0 16 0 F

0.38 5 0.38 5 0.31 5 0.00 0 18 0 F

0.11 5 0.11 5 0.04 5 0.00 0 20 0 F

0.11 5 0.11 5 0.04 5 0.00 0 22 0 F

0.30 0 0.30 0 0.30 0 0.00 0 24 0 F

N/A N/A N/A 0.00 0 Chemical Environment

= Calciu mHypochlorite [ 0 -100% ] Pre-MAC T Resi n Cos t

& HA P Conten t Cos t ($/lb ) Leas t Expensiv e Leas t Expensiv e Leas t Expensiv e Leas t Expensiv e HA P ( % bv Wt )

N o Limi t N o Limi t N o Limi t N o Limi t Post-MAC T Resi n Cos t & HA P Conten t Cos t ($/lb ) Leas t Expensiv e Leas t Expensiv e Leas t Expensiv e Leas t Expensiv e HA P ( % b v Wt )

< = 35 % < = 40 % < = 45 % N o Limi t Actua l Cos t Differential ($/lb ) = Average(Fina l Cost-Initia l Cost ) a t aSpecifi c Continuou s Temperatur e 10 0 F 0.11 5 0.11 5 0.04 5 0.00 0 12 0 F

0.11 5 0.11 5 0.04 5 0.00 0 14 0 F

0.11 5 0.11 5 0.04 5 0.00 0 16 0 F

0.11 5 0.11 5 0.04 5 0.00 0 18 0 F

0.11 5 0.11 5 0.04 5 0.00 0 20 0 F

N/A N/A N/A 0.00 0 22 0 F

N/A N/A N/A 0.00 0 24 0 F

N/A N/ A N/A 0.00 0 Chemical Environment

= Ethy l Alcoho l [ 0 -10% ] Pre-MAC T Resi n Cos t

& HA P Conten t Cos t ($/lb ) Leas t Expensiv e Leas t Expensiv e Leas t Expensiv e Leas t Expensiv e HA P ( % bv Wt )

N o Limi t N o Limi t N o Limi t N o Limi t Post-MAC T Resi n Cos t & HA P Conten t Cos t ($/lb } Leas t Expensiv e Leas t Expensiv e Leas t Expensiv e Leas t Expensiv e HAP(%b y Wt )

< = 35 % < = 40 % < = 45 % N o Limi t Actua l Cos t Differential ($/lb ) = Average(Fina l Cost-Initia l Cost ) a t aSpecifi c Continuou s Temperatur e 10 0 F 0.11 5 0.11 5 0.04 5 0.00 0 12 0 F

0.11 5 0.11 5 0.04 5 0.00 0 14 0 F

0.44 0 0.44 0 0.44 0 0.00 0 16 0 F

N/A N/ A N/A 0.00 0 18 0 F

N/A N/A N/A 0.00 0 20 0 F

N/A N/A N/A 0.00 0 22 0 F

N/A N/ A N/A 0.00 0 24 0 F

N/A N/A N/A 0.00 0

1 Th e post-MAC T resi n mus t b e capabl e o f

handlin g th e sam e chemica l environmen t a t th e sam e continuou s temperatur e a s th e pre-MAC T resi n currentl y i n us e whil e no t exceedin g acertai n HA P :ontent
. Th e actua l cos t differentia l associate dwit h replacin g aspecifi c hig h HA P corrosio n resistan t resi n i s calculate db y subtractin g th e pric e ofth e hig h HA P corrosio n resistan t resi n fro mth e nic e o f th e leas t expensiv e lo w HA P corrosio n resistan t resi n replacemen t

tha t meet s th e criteri adiscusse di n th e previou s footnote

.

5P. 9

Not e 3 : Th e lo w HA P resi n replacemen t mus t b e capabl e of

handlin g th e sam e chemica l environmen t

a t th e sam e continuou s temperatur e a s th e Hig h HA P resi n currentl y i n us e whil e not exceedin g acertai n leve l of HA P content
. Not e 4 : Th e actua l cos t

differential associate dwith replacin g aspecifi c hig h HA P corrosio n resistan t

resi n i s calculate db y subtractin g th e pric e of th e hig h HA P corrosio n resistan t resi n fro mth e pric e of

th e leas t expensiv e lo w HA P corrosio n resistan t resi n replacemen t

tha t meet s th e criteri adiscusse di n Not e 3

. Ste p 4 : Usin g th e informatio n calculate di n Ste p 3 , determin e th e averag e cos t differential s associate dwith replacin g hig h HA P corrosio n resistan t resin s wit

h lo w HA P corrosio n resistan t resin s fo r

eac h maximu mallowable HA P conten t rang e an dspecifi c continuou s temperature
. Th e result s of thi s analysi s are summarize di n Tabl e CR-4

. Not e 1 : Th e average cos t differential for

amaximu mallowable HA P conten t rang e an d specifi c continuou s temperatur e i s th e averag e ofth e individua l cos t differential s determine dfo r

eac h chemica l environmen t a t tha t maximu mallowable HA P conten t rang e an dspecifi c continuou s temperature
. Ste p 5 : Selec t

arepresentativ e cos t

differential fo r

replacin g ahig h HA P corrosio n resistan t resi n with alo w HA P corrosio n resistan t resi n fro mth e cos t

differential s calculate din Ste p 4

. Not e 1 : Th e averag e cos t differential selecte dfro mTabl e X i s $0,45 5 pe r pound

. Thi s cos t differential represent s th e highes t averag e cos t

differential fo r

th e resi n replacemen t option s possibl e a

t aspecifi c temperatur e an dgrou p of chemica l environments

. Thi s averag e cos t

differential wa s selecte dbecaus e i t doe s no t substantiall y underestimat e o r overestimat e th e cos t

associate dwit

h replacin g ahig h HA P corrosio n resistan t resi n wit h alo w HA P corrosio n resistan t resin

. Not e 2 : Th e averag e cos t differential wa s use db y th e EP A rathe r than aserie s of

facility specifi c cos t

differentials

. Facility specifi c cos t differential s coul dno t

b e determine d becaus e th e majority of

facilitie s di dno t

provid e th e EP A with informatio n on th e actual corrosio n resistan t

resin s use db y th e facility

. Ste p 6 : Multipl y th e pric e differential selecte di n Ste p 5 b y th e facility' s resi n usag e in th e applicabl e ope n moldin g an dcentrifugal castin g corrosio n resistan t process/produc t groupings

. Not e 1 : Fo r

th e corrosio n resistan t

mechanica l resi n applicatio n process/produc t groupin g withi n th e ope n moldin g subcategory , th e pric e differential selecte di n Ste p 5 was no t multiplie db y th e facility' s resi n usag e if th e adoptio n of

non-atomize dresi n applicatio n equipmen t

wa s th e onl y ste p necessary for th e facility t o attai n compliance

. Not e 2 : With th e exceptio n state di n Not e 1 , th e cos t differential i n Ste p 5 wa s multiplie d b y al l th e resi n i n th e applicabl e process/produc t grouping s rathe r

than apartia l amoun t

of th e resin

. Th e us e of

averagin g betwee n th e applicabl e process/produc t grouping s wa s als o not considere din th e cos t

estimate

.Table CR-4 : Corrosion ResistantResin Properties an d CostAnalysi s Base

d on Resins Supplied by Reichhold

Resi n Nam e Dio n 910 0 Dio n 930 0 Atla c 58 0 Dio n 948 0 Dio n 942 0 Dio n 669 4 Atla c 38 2 Atla c 401 0 Dio n 663 1 Resi n Typ e

Bispheno l - Epox y - Viny l Este r F RBispheno l - Epox y - Viny l Este r Urethan e Viny l Este r Novalac Viny l Este r Hig h Cros s Link

Viny l Este r Bispheno l - A - Fumarat e Bispheno l - A - Fumarat e Bispheno l - A - Fumarat e Isophthali c HDT " (DegF ) 22 0 23 0 24 4 26 0 32 0 27 0 27 0 20 5 22 5 ( % b y Wt )

43. 5 30. 0 46. 0 39. 0 34. 5 48. 0 50. 0 50. 0 48. 0 Pric e b

(S/lb ) 1.36 5 1.43 5 1.46 5 2.05 0 1.76 0 1.460 1.320 1.32 0 1.05 0 All Reichhol dResin s wit h aHA P Conten t

Les s Tha n o r

Equa l T o 35 % HA P b y Weigh t Al l Reichhol dResin s wit h aHA P Conten t

Les s Tha n o r

Equa l T o 40 % HA P b y Weigh t All Reichhol dResin s wit h aHA P Conten t

Les s Tha n o r

Equa l T o 45 % HA P b y Weigh t All Reichhol dResin s Combine dRegardles s o f HA P Conten t Pre-MAC T Resi n Cos t

& HA P Conten t Cos t ($/lb ) Leas t Expensiv e Leas t Expensiv e Leas t Expensiv e Leas t Expensive : HA P ( % b v Wt )

N o Limi t N o Limi t N o Limi t N o Limi t Post-MAC T Resi n Cos t & HA P Conten t Cos t ^$/lb } Leas t Expensiv e Leas t Expensiv e Leas t Expensiv e Leas t Expensiv e HA P ( % b v Wt )

< = 35 % < = 40 % < = 45 % N o Limi t Chemica l Environment s Resi n i s Capabl e o f Handlin g a t

aSpecifi c Continuou s Temperature c 100 F 40 4 40 4 44 4 42 1 28 6 45 4 47 8 43 6 18 8 41 7 45 4 45 4 50 8 80 % 80 % 87 % 83 % 56 % 89 % 94 % 86 % 37 % 82 % 89 % 89 % 100 % 12 0 F 36 2 36 2 38 6 36 6 26 4 40 4 40 6 36 9 17 1 37 8 40 2 40 2 44 4 82 % 82 % 87 % 82 % 59 % 91 % 91 % 83 % 39 % 85 % 91 % 91 % 100 % 14 0 F 32 3 32 3 36 0 32 9 24 9 37 4 37 7 34 1 15 1 34 0 35 9 35 9 40 6 80 % 80 % 89 % 81 % 61 % 92 % 93 % 84 % 37 % 84 % 88 % 88 % 100 % 16 0 F 27 5 27 5 29 4 27 3 21 8 31 4 31 3 27 8 10 0 29 2 30 1 30 1 33 7 82 % 82 % 87 % 81 % 65 % 93 % 93 % 82 % 30 % 87 % 89 % 89 % 100 % 18 0 F 26 0 26 0 27 0 25 8 21 4 29 0 29 2 24 8 0 27 9 28 6 28 6 31 6 82 % 82 % 85 % 82 % 68 % 92 % 92 % 78 % 0 % 81 % 83 % 83 % 100 % 20 0 F 18 2 18 2 19 5 18 3 16 8 23 7 21 3 18 0 0 20 5 21 0 21 0 25 4 72 % 72 % 77 % 72 % 66 % 93 % 84 % 71 % 0 % 81 % 83 % 83 % 100 % 22 0 F 1 1 0 2 8 9 11 0 4 0 0 1 0 3 1 3 1 11 3 1 % 1 % 0 % 25 % 8 % 97 % 4 % 0 % 0 % 9 % 27 % 27 % 100 % 24 0 F 0 0 0 0 0 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 100 % 17 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 100 % Averag e Cos t

Differential ($/lb ) = Average(Fina l Cost-Initia l Cost ) a t aSpecifi c Continuou s Temperatur e d 10 0 F 0.24 0 0.26 7 0.20 5 0.00 0 12 0 F

0.24 1 0.26 2 0.19 9 0.00 0 14 0 F

0.24 2 0.25 8 0.19 5 0.00 0 16 0 F

0.21 9 0.23 4 0.17 0 0.00 0 18 0 F

0.12 5 0.13 9 0.07 6 0.00 0 20 0 F

0.13 6 0.14 6 0.08 5 0.00 0 22 0 F

0.27 5 0.45 5 0.45 3 0.00 0 24 0 F

N/A N/A N/A 0.00 0 Heat Deflectio n Temperatur e (HDT ) Sal e pric e o f

resin s base do n 8 0 dru mshipmen t siz e (199 8 dollars)

. c Th e numbe r

an dpercentag e o f

chemica l environment s aresi n i s capabl e o f handlin g a t

aspecifi c continuou s temperature
. Fo r example , Dio n 930 0 i s capabl e o f handlin g 40 4 (approximatel y 80% ) o f th e chemica l environment s a t 10 0 °Fou t

o f apossibl e 50 8 chemica l environment s tha t ca n b e handle db y al l Reichhol dresin s (liste dabove ) a t 10 0 °F

. Th e averag e cos t

differentia l i s th e averag e o f th e individua l cos t

differential s a t

aspecifi c continuou s temperature
. Fo r example , th e averag e cos t o f replacin g th e leas t

expensiv e resi n (wit h n o HA P limit ) tha t

i s capabl e o f

handlin g achemica l environmen t a t 10 0 ° Fwit

h th e leas t

expensiv e resi n (maximu mHA P = 35% ) tha t i s capabl e o f

handlin g achemica l environmenta l 10 0 °Fi s $0.24 / lb

.p.l l

6.2. 2 Lo w HA P Resin s fo r Non-Corrosio n Resistan t Application s Availabl e Cos t

Informatio n NCR "'- NC R" 2

- NC R" 3

-NCR " «• NCR " 5

- NCR " 6 Th e EP A collecte dcos t

and/o r physica l propertie s infonnatio n for thermose t

resin s use d primaril y fo r

non-corrosio n resistan t

applications fro mth e followin g majo r resi n manufacturers : Alph aOwen s Cornin g (AOC) , Ashlan dChemica l Company , Coo k Composite s & Polymer s (CCP) , Interplasti c Corporation , an dReichhold

. Th e informatio n submitte db y thes e manufacturer s i s summarize di n Tabl e NCR-1

.
Table NC-1

. Non-CB I Cost

Information fo

r Non-Corrosio

n Resistan t Resins Providedb

y Resi n Manufacturer s

Resi n Manufacture r Alph aOwen s Cornin g Alph aOwen s Cornin g Alph aOwen s Cornin g Ashlan dChemica l Ashlan dChemica l Ashlan dChemica l Ashlan dChemica l Ashlan dChemica l Ashlan dChemica l Coo k Composite s & Polymer s Coo k Composite s & Polymer s Coo k Composite s & Polymer s Coo k Composite s & Polymer s Coo k Composite s & Polymer s Interplasti c Corporatio n Interplasti c Corporatio n Interplasti c Corporatio n Interplasti c Corporatio n Reichhol d Reichhol d Reichhol d Resi n Produc t Numbe r 80-610 0 80-06 7 15-65 4 M R1250 6 LB-1127-3 7 AROPO L P-9252 T M R12909C S AM E 500 0 AM E 400 0 Stypo l 40-486 2 Stypo l 40-486 7 Stypo l 40-487 2 Stypo l 40-487 7 Stypo l 40-488 2 COR61-AA-18 9 VEX200-16 7 MVR803 1 CORVE811 7 Polylit e 3323 3 Polylit e 3308 7 Hydre x 3325 0 Resi n Typ e Polyeste r (DCPD ) Polyeste r (DCPD ) Viny l Este r

(Ski n Coat ) Polyeste r Polyeste r (DCPD ) Polyeste r Polyeste r Viny l Este r Viny l Este r Polyeste r Polyeste r Polyeste r Polyeste r Polyeste r Polyeste r (DCPD ) Viny l Este r Viny l Este r Viny l Este r Polyeste r (DCPD-Ortho

. Blend ) Polyeste r (Orthophthalic ) Viny l Este r

- DCP D Blen d HA P Conten t ( % b y wt. ) 35. 0 38. 0 35. 0 42. 0 42. 0 42. 0 44. 0 35. 0 47. 0 39. 0 39. 0 39. 0 39. 0 39. 0 36. 5 34. 9 44. 9 47. 5 38. 0 38. 0 45. 0 Sale "

Pric e ($/lb ) $0.7 5 $0.7 3 $1.3 5 $0.6 5 $0.6 5 $0.7 4 $0.7 3 $1.3 6 $1.2 6 $0.6 3 $0.6 3 $0.6 3 $0.6 3 $0.6 3 $0.8 7 $1.6 0 $1.4 1 $1.5 6 $0.7 5 $0.7 5 $1.5 5 Sal e Pric e

Shipmen t Siz e Basi s Tanke r Truc k Tanke r Truc k Tanke r Truc k Tanke r Truc k Tanke r Truc k Tanke r Truc k Tanke r Truc k Tanke r Truc k Tanke r Truc k Tanke r Truc k Tanke r Truc k Tanke r Truc k Tanke r Truc k Tanke r Truc k Tanke r Truc k Tanke r Truc k Tanke r Truc k Tanke r Truc k Tanke r Truc k Tanke r Truc k Tanke r Truc k

aAl l sal e price s ar e i n 199 8 dollars

. Cos t Methodolog y & Assumption s Th e followin g step s (an dassociate dassumptions ) wer e use dt o calculat e th e direc t annua l cos t incurre db y facilitie s du e t o th e replacemen t of hig h HA P non-corrosio n resistan t resin s with lo w HA P non-corrosio n resistan t resins

. Ste p 1 : Assum e th e averag e cos t differential associate dwit h th e replacemen t

of hig h HA P non corrosio n resistan t

resin s with lo w HA P non-corrosio n resistan t resin s fo r

th e plasti cP.1 2

composite s sourc e category i s th e sam e a s for th e boat manufacturin g sourc e category
. Not e 1 : Thi s assumptio n wa s mad e du e t o ver y limite dinformatio n on th e actual resin s use db y facilitie s in th e non-corrosio n resistan t process/produc t

grouping s of

th e plasti c composite s sourc e category
. Not e 2 : Th e averag e cos t

differential fo r

th e boat manufacturin g sourc e category fo r non corrosio n resistan t

resin s wa s $0,05 5 pe r

poun dfor

facilitie s that

replace dahig h HA P polyeste r resi n (>35 % HA P b y wt. ) wit h alo w HA P polyeste r

resi n (35 % HA P b y wt.)

. Not e 3 : Th e averag e cos t

differential fo r

th e boat manufacturin g sourc e category fo r non corrosio n resistan t

resin s wa s $0,07 7 pe r

poun dfo r

facilitie s that

replace dahig h HA P viny l este r

resi n (>35 % HA P b y wt. ) with alo w HA P viny l este r resi n (35 % HA P b y wt.)

. Not e 4 : Th e averag e cos t

differential selecte dt o represen t th e replacemen t

of hig h HA P non-corrosio n resistan t

resi n with lo w HA P non-corrosio n resistan t resi n wa s $0,05 5 pe r pound

. Thi s averag e cos t differential was selecte dbecaus e th e majorit y of facilitie s usin g non-corrosio n resistan t

resin s i n th e plasti c composite s sourc e category indicate dth e us e of polyeste r resin s rathe r

than viny l este r

resins

. Ste p 2 : Multipl y th e cos t

differential selecte di n Ste p 1 b y th e facility' s resi n usag e in th e applicabl e ope n moldin g an dcentrifugal castin g non-corrosio n resistan t process/produc t groupings

. Not e 1 : Fo r

th e non-corrosio n resistan t (unfilled ) mechanica l resi n applicatio n process / produc t groupin g i n th e ope n moldin g subcategory , th e cos t differential selecte di n ste p 1 wa s no t multiplie db y th e facility' s resi n usag e if th e adoptio n of

non-atomize dresi n applicatio n equipmen t

was th e onl y ste p necessary fo r th e facilit

y t o attai n compliance

. Not e 2 : With th e exceptio n state di n Not e 1 , th e cos t differential selecte din Ste p 1 was multiplie db y al l th e resi n i n th e applicabl e process/produc t grouping s rathe r

than apartia l amoun t of th e resin

. Th e us e of

averagin g betwee n th e applicabl e process/produc t grouping s was als o not

considere di n th e cos t

estimate

. Not e 3 : Th e cos t

differential s use di n th e boat manufacturin g sourc e category are base d o n th e assumptio n that

resin s wit

h 35 % HA P b y weigh t

are adequat e fo r

compliance

. Th e reinforce dplastic s sourc e category ha s non-corrosio n resistan t process/produc t

grouping s that requir e resin s wit

h HA P content s les s than 35 % b y weigh t for compliance

. Th e cos t differential selecte di n Ste p lwa s assume dt o stil l b e applicabl e for thes e process/produc t groupings

.P.1 3

6.2. 3 Lo w HA P Resin s fo r Mol dManufacturin g (Tooling ) Availabl e Cos t

Informatio n Th e EP A collecte dcos t

an dpropertie s infoimatio n o n toolin g resin s fro mfiv e (5 ) majo r resi n manufacturers

. Th e cos t informatio n submitte db y thes e resi n manufacturer s i s summarize d i n Tabl e TR- 1 below

. Table TR-1

. Non-CB I Cos

t Information fo

r Toolin g Resin s fro

mResi n Manufacturer s

G&^KfininflNfiii® ? Alpha-Owen s Cornin g Ashlan dChemica l Compan y Coo k Composite s & Polymer s Interplasti c Corporatio n Interplasti c Corporatio n Reichhol d Bfe8alsi!^StrDii ^ 80-610 0 AM E 500 0 Stypo l 040-423 2 MVR803 1 CORVE-Serie s Viny l Este r Hydre x 33-25 0 DCPD-Viny l Este r Viny l Este r Isophthali c Viny l Este r Viny l Este r DCPD-Viny l Este r 3 5 3 1 4 1 44. 9 47. 5 4 5 M s

Kite s 

## mm $0.8 5 $1.4 6 $1.0 8 $1.5 1 $1.6 6 $1.5 3 M s Kite

s SMpBHiB §to03asf c Dru m Dru m Dru m Dru m Dru m Dru m Cos t Methodolog y & Assumption s Th e followin g step s (an dassociate dassumptions ) wer e use dt o calculat e th e direc t annual cos t incurre db y facilitie s du e t o th e replacemen t o f hig h HA P toolin g resin s wit h lo w HA P toolin g resins

. Ste p 1 : Estimat e th e amoun t of toolin g resi n use db y facilitie s b y assumin g that 2 lb s of toolin g resi n mus t

b e use dfor

every 10 0 lb s of

productio n resin

. Note : Thi s assumptio n i s necessary becaus e anumbe r of facilitie s di dno t

indicat e toolin g resi n o r

gel coat us e i n respondin g t o th e 199 3 Informatio n Collectio n Reques t (ICR ) du e t o th e typicall y smal l amount s of thes e material s that

facility' s us e (relativ e t o productio n materials)

. Ste p 2 : Assum e facilitie s wil l compl y b y usin g alo w HA P toolin g resi n with aHA P conten t o f 40.0 % b y weight

. Note : Thi s assumptio n i s necessary becaus e facilitie s ma y als o compl y b y usin g manua l o r non-atomize dmechanica l resi n applicatio n an daHA P conten t of 50.0%

. It

i s unlikel y facilitie s wil l adop t

th e us e non-atomize dresi n applicatio n solel y t o appl y toolin g resi n give n th e smal l quantitie s of toolin g resi n typicall y use d(relativ e t o productio n resin)

. Further , th e typ e of

non-atomize dmechanica l resi n technolog y mos t likel y t o b e adopte d b y facilitie s (i.e

. flow-coaters ) i s often incompatibl e wit h th e hig h leve l of

fille r presen t in man y toolin g resins

. Ste p 3 : Fro mth e availabl e cos t informatio n i n Tabl e TR-1 , selec t th e cos t associate dwith th e toolin g resi n mos t

likel y t o represen t

th e Hig h HA P toolin g resin s currentl y in use .

1 0P.1 4

Note : Th e toolin g resi n selecte dfor thi s ste p i s th e Reichhol dHydre x 33-25 0 (45 % HAP , $1.53)

. Thi s resi n wa s selecte dbecaus e th e HA P conten t of th e resi n i s near

th e averag e HA P conten t

of th e toolin g resi n process/produc t groupin g (46.4 % b y weight)

. Ste p 4 : Fro mth e availabl e cos t informatio n i n Tabl e X , selec t th e cos t associate dwit

h th e toolin g resi n mos t

likel y t o represen t

th e lo w HA P toolin g resi n facilitie s wil l us e t o compl y wit

h th e standard

. Note : Th e toolin g resi n selecte dfor thi s ste p i s th e Ashlan dAM E 500 0 (31 % HAP , $1.46)

. Thi s resi n wa s selecte dbecaus e i t i s th e mos t

expensiv e resi n in Tabl e X wit h a lo w enoug h HA P conten t sufficient for compliance

. Ste p 5 : Calculat e th e cos t differential betwee n th e selecte dhig h HA P an dlo w HA P toolin g resins

. Not e 1 : Th e cos t

differential betwee n th e toolin g resin s selecte di n step s 3 an d4 i s $0.07/l b ($1.5 3 - $1.46)

. Thi s cos t differential represent s acos t saving s of

$0.07/lb

. Not e 2 : A cos t

saving s i s als o obtaine difth e Interplasti c CoReyz n MV R803 1 (44.9 % HAP , $1.51 ) o r

th e Interplasti c CORVE-serie s viny l este r (47.5 % HAP , $1.66 ) ar e chose n a s th e hig h HA P toolin g resi n i n ste p 3

. Not e 3 : Selectio n ofth e Coo k Composite s Stypo l 040-423 2 (41 % HAP , $1.08 ) a s th e hig h HA P toolin g resi n woul dno t resul t i n acos t savings

. However , th e HA P conten t of thi s resi n i s no t

clos e t o th e averag e HA P conten t of th e toolin g resi n process/produc t grouping

. Ste p 6 : Assig n zer o cos t

t o th e us e of

lo w HA P toolin g resin s rathe r than acos t

savings

. Not e 1 : Th e assignmen t

of zer o cos t t o th e us e of

lo w HA P toolin g resin s rathe r than a cos t saving s ha s th e effec t

of makin g th e cos t

estimat e mor e conservative

. Thi s assumptio n i s necessary give n th e limite damoun t of actua l dat ao n toolin g resi n usag e currentl y availabl e t o th e EPA

.

1 1P.1 5

6.2. 4 Lo w HA PPigmente d Productio n Gel Coat s Availabl e Cos t

Infonnatio n Th e EP A collecte dcos t

an dpropertie s informatio n on pigmente dproductio n ge l coat s fro mtw o majo r

ge l coa t manufacturers

. Th e cos t informatio n submitte db y thes e ge l coa t manufacturer s i s summarize di n Tabl e PGC- 1 below

. Table PGC-1

. Non-CB I Cost Information fo

r Pigmente dProduction Ge

l Coats fro mGe l Coa t Manufacturer s

Ge l Coa t Manufacture r Nest e Polyeste r Nest e Polyeste r Nest e Polyeste r Nest e Polyeste r Nest e Polyeste r Nest e Polyeste r Nest e Polyeste r Nest e Polyeste r Nest e Polyeste r Nest e Polyeste r Nest e Polyeste r Nest e Polyeste r Nest e Polyeste r Nest e Polyeste r Nest e Polyeste r Nest e Polyeste r Nest e Polveste r Coo k Composite s & Polymer s Coo k Composite s & Polymer s Coo k Composite s & Polymer s Coo k Composite s & Polymer s Coo k Composite s & Polymer s Coo k Composite s & Polymer s Coo k Composite s & Polymer s Coo k Composite s & Polymer s Coo k Composite s & Polymer s Coo k Composite s & Polymer s Coo k Composite s & Polymer s Coo k Composite s & Polymer s Coo k Composite s & Polymer s Coo k Composite s & Polymer s Coo k Composite s & Polymer s Coo k Composite s & Polymer s Coo k Composite s & Polymer s Coo k Composite s & Polvmer s Ge l Coa t Produc t Numbe r YG-37120 1 WG-31279 2 AG-0109 1 AG-380 8 RG-29-030 9 GG-29-170 0 LG-29-718 9 TG-2929 7 WG-2X00 0 WG-LSS-000 0 AG-0061 8 AG-LSG-061 3 WG-300 0 BG-355 0 WG-XL-000 0 WG-29-000 0 WG-MP-000 0 944-P0LYC0 R 951-ARMORCOT E 953-BUFFBAC K 961-LO WVO C ARMORCOT E 962-Sanitar y LO WVO C 963-Marin e LO WVO C 944-POLYCO R 95 1 -ARMORCOT E 953-BUFFBAC K 961-LO WVO C ARMORCOT E 962-Sanitar y LO WVO C 963-Marin e LO WVO C 944-POLYCO R 951-ARMORCOT E 953-BUFFBAC K 961-LO WVO C ARMORCOT E 962-Sanitar y LO WVO C 963-Marin e LOWVO C Ge l Coa t Bas e Colo r Whit e Whit e Gray Gray Re d Gree n Blu e Brow n Whit e Whit e Gray Gray Whit e Blac k Whit e Whit e Whit e Whit e Whit e Whit e Whit e Whit e Whit e Blac k Blac k Blac k Blac k Blac k Blac k Re d Re d Re d Re d Re d Re d Styrene* 1

Conten t (% b v wt. 1 27.1 9 27.7 1 32.2 9 36.7 2 24.3 6 17.3 9 20.7 5 21.8 6 3 7 2 8 3 3 2 5 35. 7 37. 4 23. 3 13. 2 27. 9 MMA '

Conten t <% b v wt. 1 4.0 0 4.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 17.5 0 25.0 0 25.0 0 25.0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0. 0 13. 6 20. 4 9. 1 HAP 1

Conten t <% b v wt. 1 31.1 9 31.7 1 32.2 9 36.7 2 41.8 6 42.3 9 45.7 5 46.8 6 3 7 2 8 3 3 2 5 35. 7 37. 4 36. 9 33. 6 37. 0 3 6 4 0 3 5 2 9 2 5 2 5 4 0 4 4 3 9 3 1 3 0 3 0 3 8 4 0 3 5 3 0 3 0 3 0 Sale "

Pric e «/B> 1 $3.3 9 $1.8 0 $1.7 0 $1.7 0 $3.2 9 $2.9 7 $2.9 7 $2.8 8 $1.8 9 $1.9 9 $1.3 9 $1.5 2 $1.5 3 $1.5 4 $2.0 5 $2.9 9 $2.4 3 $1.6 8 $3.0 1 $2.1 8 $1.9 9 $1.9 9 $1.9 9 $1.7 0 $3.0 1 $2.1 8 $1.9 9 $1.9 9 $1.9 9 $2.7 1 $4.8 1 $4.0 9 $3.5 1 $3.5 1 $3.5 1 Sal e Pric e

Shipmen t
Dru m Dru m Dru m Dru m Dru m Dru m Dru m Dru m Dru m Dru m Dru m Dru m Dru m Dru m Dru m Dru m

Dru m Dru m Dru m Dru m Dru m Dru m Dru m Dru m Dru m Dru m Dru m Dru m Dru m Dru m Dru m Dru m Dru m Dru m "Styrene , methy l methacrylate , an dtota l HA P content s ar e show n t o th e numbe r o f decima l place s reporte db y th e ge l coat manufacturer

. Al l sale s price s ar e i n 199 8 dollars

. Blan k space s i n th e tabl e indicat e informatio n wa s no t provide db y th e manufacturer

. 1 2P.1 6

Cos t Methodolog y & Assumption s Th e followin g step s (an dassociate dassumptions ) wer e use dt o calculat e th e direc t annua l cos t incurre db y facilitie s du e t o th e replacemen t of hig h HA P pigmente dproductio n ge l coat s wit h lo w HA P pigmente dproductio n ge l coats
. Ste p 1 : Assum e that

th e colo r distributio n of

pigmente dproductio n gel coats currentl y use db y facilitie s i n th e ope n moldin g subcategory i s 80 % b y volum e whit e ge l coat an d20 % b y volum e redge l coat
. Not e 1 : Thi s assumptio n i s necessary becaus e th e informatio n availabl e t o th e EP A o n th e colo r distributio n of

ge l coat s use db y individua l facilitie s withi n th e ope n moldin g subcategor y i s extremel y limited

. Th e colo r distributio n i s importan t

becaus e differen t colo r pigmente dproductio n ge l coats hav e different price s an dphysical properties

. Ste p 2 : Fro mth e availabl e cos t informatio n in Tabl e PGC-1 , selec t th e cos t associate dwit

h th e pigmente dproductio n ge l coats mos t likel y t o represen t

th e Hig h HA P pigmente d productio n ge l coat s currentl y i n use . Not e 1 : Th e whit e ge l coa t selecte dfor

thi s ste p i s th e Coo k

Composite s & Polymer s 944-POLYCO R(36.0 % HAP , $1.68/lb)

. Thi s ge l coa t wa s selecte dbecaus e i t

can b e matche dwit

h alo w HA P whit e pigmente dproductio n ge l coa t produce db y th e sam e manufacture r

an dcost s mor e than th e lo w HA P whit e pigmente dproductio n ge l coats
. Th e othe r hig h HA P whit e ge l coats produce db y Coo k Composite s are mor e expensiv e tha n th e lo w HA P whit e pigmente dproductio n gel coats
. Not e 2 : Th e re dgel coa t selecte dfo r

thi s ste p i s th e Coo k

Composite s & Polymer s 944

- POLYCO R(38.0 % HAP , $2.71/lb)

. Thi s gel coat wa s selecte dbecaus e i t

can b e matche dwit

h alo w HA P redpigmente dproductio n ge l coa t produce db y th e sam e manufacture r

an dcost s mor e than th e lo w HA P re dpigmente dproductio n ge l coats
. Th e othe r hig h HA P re dge l coat s produce db y Coo k Composite s are mor e expensiv e than th e lo w HA P re dpigmente dproductio n ge l coats
. Ste p 3 : Fro mth e availabl e cos t informatio n i n Tabl e PGC-1 , selec t th e cos t associate dwith th e pigmente dproductio n ge l coat s mos t likel y t o represen t

th e lo w HA P pigmente d productio n gel coats facilitie s wil l selec t t o compl y wit

h th e MAC T standard

. Not e 1 : Th e whit e ge l coa t selecte dfor

thi s ste p i s th e Coo k

Composite s & Polymer s 96 2

- Sanitar y LO WVO C (25.0 % HAP , $1.99/lb)

. Thi s ge l coa t was selecte dbecaus e i t

can b e matche dwit

h ahig h HA P whit e pigmente dproductio n ge l coat produce db y th e sam e manufacture r

an dha s alo w enoug h HA P conten t for complianc e with th e MAC T standard

. Not e 2 : Th e re dge l coa t selecte dfor

thi s ste p i s th e Coo k

Composite s & Polymer s 96 2 - Sanitar y LO WVO C (30.0 % HAP , $3.51/lb)

. Thi s gel coa t wa s selecte dbecaus e i t

can b e matche dwit

h ahig h HA P redpigmente dproductio n gel coa t produce db y th e sam e manufacture r

an dha s alo w enoug h HA P conten t for complianc e wit

h th e MAC T
1 3P.1 7

standard

. Ste p 4 : Determin e th e amoun t of lo w HA P whit e an dre dpigmente dproductio n gel coa t afacility wil l nee dt o us e t o compl y wit h th e existin g sourc e poin t valu e limi t

an dobtai n th e sam e surfac e are acoverag e for eac h colo r

of ge l coat use d(i.e

. whit e an dred)

. Not e 1 : Du e t o difference s in density an dth e amoun t of styren e emitte ddurin g applicatio n an dcuring , th e amoun t of surfac e are athat

ca n b e covere db y equa l amount s o f lo w HA P an dhig h HA P ge l coats i s different

. Lo w HA P gel coats generall y hav e a highe r densit y than hig h HA P ge l coats
. Thi s highe r density equate s t o alowe r volum e of ge l coa t pe r l b of ge l coat purchase

. Thi s lowe r

volum e ca

n resul t in les s tota l gel coa t coverag e pe r

l b of ge l coa t purchased

. Conversely , lo w HA P ge l coat s emit les s styren e an dmethy l methacrylat e with th e resul t tha t les s of th e applie dge l coa t

materia l evaporate s int o th e atmosphere

. Thi s fac t that les s materia l evaporate s can resul t in mor e tota l coverag e pe r

lb of ge l coa t purchased

. Not e 2 : Thes e tw o factor s are simultaneousl y presen t in different

degree s an dth e combine deffec t

of both factor s wil l determin e if th e facilit y mus t increas e o r

decreas e th e amoun t o f ge l coat purchase di n orde r

t o obtai n th e sam e amoun t of surfac e are a coverage . Not e 3 : Du e t o th e cos t

of th e selecte dlo w HA P pigmente dproductio n ge l coat s bein g greate r tha n th e cos t

of th e selecte dhig h HA P pigmente dproductio n ge l coats , i t was assume dtha t

facilitie s woul donl y us e th e amoun t of lo w HA P pigmente dproductio n ge l coa t necessar y t o comply

. Not e 4 : Du e t o th e substantiall y cos t differential betwee n th e lo w HA P whit e an dlo w HA P redpigmente dproductio n ge l coats , i t wa s assume dthat

facilitie s woul dreplac e al l of th e hig h HA P whit e pigmente dproductio n ge l coa t prio r t o replacin g an y of

th e hig h HA P redpigmente dproductio n ge l coat
. Ste p 5 : Calculat e th e annua l tota l cos t incurre db y th e facilit

y prio r t o th e implementatio n of th e MAC T standar db y multiplyin g th e amoun t of pigmente dproductio n ge l coa t use db y th e facility annuall y (usin g th e colo r distributio n assume din ste p 1 ) b y th e cos t of th e hig h HA P pigmente dproductio n ge l coats selecte di n ste p 3

. Ste p 6 : Calculat e th e annua l tota l cos t incurre db y th e facility du e t o th e purchas e o f hig h HA P pigmente dproductio n ge l coats after th e implementatio n of

th e MAC T standar db y multiplyin g th e amoun t

of hig h HA P pigmente dproductio n gel coat s that wil l stil l b e use dafter implementatio n of

th e MAC T standar db y th e pric e of th e pigmente d productio n ge l coat s selecte di n ste p 3

. Ste p 7 : Calculat e th e annua l tota l cos t incurre db y th e facility du e t o th e purchas e o f lo w HA P pigmente dproductio n ge l coat after th e implementatio n of

th e MAC T standar db y multiplyin g th e amoun t

of lo w HA P pigmente dproductio n gel coat s that wil l b e use db y th e pric e of

th e pigmente dproductio n ge l coats selecte din ste p 2

. Ste p 8 : Calculat e th e annua l tota l cos t incurre db y th e facility afte r th e implementatio n o f

th e 1 4P.1 8

6.2. 5 MAC T standar db y summin g th e product s calculate din step s 6 an d7

. Lo w HA PClea rProductio n Gel Coat s Availabl e Cos t

Informatio n Th e EP A collecte dcos t

an dpropertie s informatio n o n clear productio n gel coats fro m tw o majo r

ge l coat manufacturers

. Th e cos t informatio n submitte db y thes e gel coa t manufacturer s i s summarize di n Tabl e CGC- 1 below

. Table CGC-1

. Non-CB I Cos t Information fo

r Clea r Production Ge

l Coats fro mGe l Coa t Manufacturer s

<M Ossf i Sr&ijEifesaDa

F Nest e Polyeste r Nest e Polyeste r Nest e Polyeste r Coo k Composite s & Polymer s @s

0 ©SS C KSSJIBI C Ktanifea

f CG-LE-57 0 CG-0700 9 CG-2100 9 942-XA-22 0 (M©m Hfes s ©ste ? Clea r Clea r Clea r Clea r BStvren'ei B

3 4 47. 2 43. 7 l

0. 0 6. 1 3 5

47. 2 49. 8 45. 0 Kite s

$2.10 c $1.5 3 $1.6 8 $1.9 2 M s Kite s

SMpBSB G

Dru m Dru m Dru m Dru m Styrene , methy l methacrylate , an dtota l HA P content s ar e show n t o th e numbe r of decima l place s reporte db y th e ge l coat manufacturer

. Al l sale s price s ar e i n 199 8 dollars

. Blank space s i n th e tabl e indicat e informatio n wa s no t provide db y th e manufacturer

. C A pric e rang e o f

$ 1.9 5 - $2.2 5 wa s reporte dfor this ge l coat
. Th e pric e valu e show n i s th e midpoin t o f this range . Cos t Methodolog y & Assumption s Th e followin g step s (an dassociate dassumptions ) wer e use dt o calculat e th e direc t annua l cos t incurre db y facilitie s du e t o th e replacemen t of hig h HA P clear

productio n gel coats with lo w HA P clear

productio n ge l coats
. Ste p 1 : Assum e that

facilitie s wil l us e onl y th e amoun t of lo w HA P clear

productio n ge l coa t necessary t o compl y wit

h th e MAC T standard

. Note : Th e MAC T floo r

poin t valu e for th e gel coat

application/clear

productio n gel coat s correspond s t o aHA P conten t of 44.0 % b y weight

. Th e availabl e lo w HA P clear productio n ge l coa t

ha s asubstantiall y lowe r HA P conten t

of 35.0 % b y weight

. I t

i s assume dtha t

thi s larg e differential i n th e HA P conten t (an dth e highe r

pric e of th e lo w HA P clear

productio n ge l coat ) wil l resul t i n facilitie s usin g onl y th e amoun t of lo w HA P clear productio n ge l coa t

necessary t o comply

. Ste p 2 : Determin e th e amoun t of lo w HA P clear

productio n ge l coat

afacility wil l nee dt o us e t o compl y wit

h th e existin g sourc e poin t valu e limi t

an dobtai n th e sam e surfac e are a coverage . Notei : Du e t o difference s i n density an dth e amoun t of styren e emitte ddurin g applicatio n an dcuring , th e amoun t of surfac e are athat

ca n b e covere db y equal amount s of lo w HA P an dhig h HA P ge l coats i s different

. Lo w HA P ge l coat s generall y hav e a highe r densit y tha n hig h HA P ge l coats
. Thi s highe r density equate s t o alowe r volum e o f ge l coat pe r lb of ge l coa t purchase

. Thi s lowe r

volum e can resul t

in les s total ge l coa t coverag e pe r

l b of ge l coa t purchased

. Conversely , lo w HA P ge l coats emit les s styren e
1 5P.1 9

an dmethy l methacrylat e wit h th e resul t

tha t les s of th e applie dge l coa t

materia l evaporate s int o th e atmosphere

. Thi s fac t that les s materia l evaporate s ca n resul t i n more tota l coverage pe r

lb of gel coat purchased

. Not e 2 : Thes e tw o factor s are simultaneousl y presen t in different

degree s an dth e combine deffec t

of bot h factor s wil l determin e if th e facility mus t

increas e o r

decreas e th e amoun t of ge l coat purchase di n orde r

t o obtai n th e sam e amoun t of surfac e are a coverage . Ste p 3 : Fro mth e availabl e cos t informatio n i n Tabl e CGC-1 , selec t th e cos t associate dwit

h th e clea r productio n gel coat

mos t likel y t o represen t

th e Hig h HA P clear

productio n gel coat s currentl y i n use . Note : Th e ge l coat

selecte dfor

thi s ste p i s th e Nest e Polyeste r CG-07009

. Thi s gel coat was selecte dbecaus e th e HA P conten t i s representativ e of

th e HA P conten t

use db y th e majority of

facilitie s currentl y usin g clear productio n ge l coats
. Ste p 4 : Fro mth e availabl e cos t informatio n i n Tabl e CGC-1 , selec t th e cos t associate dwit

h th e clea r productio n gel coat(s ) mos t likel y t o represen t

th e lo w HA P clear

productio n gel coat s selecte db y facilitie s t o comply

. Note : Th e ge l coat

selecte dfo r

thi s ste p i s th e Nest e Polyeste r CG-LE-570

. Thi s gel coa t was selecte dbecaus e i t

i s th e onl y lo w HA P clear ge l coa t for whic h th e EP A ha dcos t information

. Ste p 5 : Calculat e th e annual total cos t incurre db y th e facility prio r t o th e implementatio n of th e MAC T standar db y multiplyin g th e amoun t of clear productio n ge l coat

use db y th e facility annuall y b y th e cos t ofth e hig h HA P clear

productio n ge l coa t

selecte din ste p 3

. Ste p 6 : Calculat e th e annual tota l cos t incurre db y th e facilit

y du e t o th e purchas e of

hig h HA P productio n ge l coat

afte r th e implementatio n of

th e MAC T standar db y multiplyin g th e amoun t of hig h HA P clear

productio n ge l coa t

that wil l stil l b e use dafte

r implementatio n o f th e MAC T standar db y th e pric e o f th e clear productio n ge l coa t

selecte din ste p 3

. Ste p 7 : Calculat e th e annual tota l cos t incurre db y th e facility du e t o th e purchas e of lo w HA P productio n ge l coat

afte r th e implementatio n of

th e MAC T standar db y multiplyin g th e amoun t o f lo w HA P clear

productio n ge l coat

that wil l b e use dafte

r implementatio n of th e MAC T standar db y th e pric e of th e clear productio n ge l coa t

selecte di n ste p 4

. Ste p 8 : Calculat e th e annual total cos t incurre db y th e facility after th e implementatio n of

th e MAC T standar db y summin g th e product s calculate di n step s 6 an d7

.

1 6P.2 0

6.2. 6 Lo w HA P Toolin g Ge l Coat s Availabl e Cos t

Infoimatio n Th e EP A collecte dcos t

an dpropertie s informatio n o n clear productio n gel coats fro m tw o majo r

gel coat manufacturers

. Th e cos t informatio n submitte db y thes e gel coa t manufacturer s i s summarize di n Tabl e TGC- 1 below

. Table TGC-1

. Non-CB I Cost Information fo

r Toolin g Ge l Coats fro mGe l Coa t Manufacturer s

Ge l Coa t Manufacture r Nest e Polyeste r Nest e Polyeste r Nest e Polyeste r Nest e Polyeste r Nest e Polyeste r Nest e Polyeste r Coo k Composite s & Polymer s Coo k Composite s & Polymer s Coo k Composite s & Polymer s Ferr o Corporatio n Ferr o Corporatio n Ferr o Corporatio n Ge l Coa t Produc t Numbe r BG-5500 0 RG-5500 5 YG-5500 0 YG-5700 0 YG-5776 V (Viny l Ester ) CG-5116 V (Viny l Ester ) 945-B-20 1 945-GA-10 4 945-YA-05 8 GV 0389 4 58-601230* * GV 0176 7 Ge l Coa t Bas e Colo r Blac k Re d Orang e Orang e Orang e Clear Blac k Gree n Orang e Re d Tangerin e Blac k Styrene "

Conten t ( % b y wt. ) 40. 8 45. 7 41. 3 41. 7 53. 2 54. 0

36.9 4 29.2 3 36.9 7 MMA "

Conten t ( % b y wt. ) 5. 0 0. 0 0. 0 5. 0 0. 0 0. 0

3.0 0 3.0 0 3.0 0 HAP "

Conten t ( % b y wt. ) 45. 8 45. 7 41. 3 46. 7 53. 2 54. 0 4 8 4 8 4 8 39.6 4 32.2 3 39.9 7 Sale "

Pric e ( $ / lb ) $2.7 2 $2.7 2 $3.3 6 $3.3 6 $4.1 1 $3.4 7 $3.0 6 $3.7 7 $3.7 7 $3.4 8 $4.9 9 $2.9 3 Sal e Pric e

Shipmen t Siz e Basi s 5 Gal

. Pai l 5 Gal

. Pai l 5 Gal

. Pai l 5 Gal

. Pai l 5 Gal

. Pai l 5 Gal

. Pai l 5 Gal

. Pai l 5 Gal

. Pai l 5 Gal

. Pai l 5 0 lb s 5 0 lb s 5 0 lb s "Styrene , methy l methacrylate , an dtota l HA P content s ar e show n t o th e numbe r o f decima l place s reporte db y th e ge l coat manufacturer

. Al l sale s price s ar e i n 199 8 dollars

. Blan k space s i n th e tabl e indicat e informatio n wa s no t provide db y th e manufacturer

. c Accordin g t o th e manufacture r (Ferr o Corporation) , thi s ge l coa t i s aheav y meta l free pigmente dsyste mwit h aver y hig h heat

distortio n temperature
. Th e manufacture r als o indicate dtha t

th e ge l coat

doe s no t hav e man y customers a t

this tim e resultin g i n th e unusuall y hig h cost
. Cos t Methodolog y & Assumption s Th e followin g step s (an dassociate dassumptions ) wer e use dt o calculat e th e direc t annua l cos t incurre db y facilitie s du e t o th e replacemen t o f hig h HA P toolin g ge l coat s wit h lo w HA P toolin g ge l coats
. Ste p 1 : Assum e al l facilitie s know n o r assume dt o us e toolin g resi n us e toolin g gel coat
. Not e 1 : Thi s assumptio n i s necessary becaus e anumbe r of facilitie s di dno t

indicat e toolin g resi n o r

ge l coa t us e i n respondin g t o th e 199 3 Infoimatio n Collectio n Reques t (ICR ) du e t o th e typicall y smal l amount s of thes e material s that

facility' s us e (relativ e t o productio n materials)

. Ste p 2 : Estimat e th e amoun t of toolin g ge l coat

use db y facilitie s b y assumin g that 1 5 lb s of toolin g ge l coat

mus t b e applie dfo r

every 10 0 lb s of

toolin g resin

. Thi s assumptio n may b e expresse da s atoolin g ge l coa t t o toolin g resi n ratio o f

0.15

. Not e 1 : Thi s assumptio n i s necessary becaus e anumbe r of facilitie s di dnot

indicat e toolin g resi n o r

toolin g ge l coat

us e i n respondin g t o th e 199 3 Informatio n Collectio n
1 7P.2 1

Reques t (ICR ) du e t o th e typicall y smal l amount s of thes e material s that

facility' s us e (relativ e t o productio n materials)

. Not e 2 : Th e ratio of

0.1 5 i s a n averag e basedo n tw o applie dgel coat t o applie dresi n ratio s calculate dusin g actual data

. Th e firs t ratio i s th e amoun t

of pigmente dproductio n ge l coa t applie dpe r

productio n resi n applie dusin g manual and/o r mechanica l resi n applicatio n (0.215)

. Th e secon dratio i s th e amoun t of clear productio n ge l coa t

applie d pe r productio n resi n applie ddurin g th e polyme r castin g proces s (0.085)

. Sinc e facilitie s tha t manufactur e product s usin g ope n moldin g processe s and/o r polyme r castin g als o manufactur e molds , th e averag e of thes e ratio s was use dt o obtai n th e 0.1 5 ratio

. Ste p 3 : Estimat e th e averag e HA P conten t of th e toolin g ge l coats use db y facilitie s b y usin g th e averag e HA P conten t

of th e ge l coat

application/toolin g gel coat process/produc t groupin g (wit

h th e exceptio n of

facilitie s wher e th e HA P conten t of th e toolin g ge l coa t

i s known)

. Not e 1 : Thi s assumptio n wa s necessary becaus e th e EP A doe s no t hav e HA P conten t informatio n fo r

th e majority of

facilitie s believe dt o us e toolin g gel coat
. Ste p 4 : Fro mth e availabl e cos t informatio n i n Tabl e TGC-1 , selec t th e toolin g gel coat(s ) mos t likel y t o represen t

th e Hig h HA P toolin g ge l coat s currentl y in use . Not e 1 : Th e ge l coat

selecte dfor

thi s ste p i s Nest e Polyeste r BG-55000

. Thi s ge l coa t wa s selecte dsinc e th e gel coat colo r (black ) i s atypical toolin g gel coa t colo r an dth e HA P conten t

of th e toolin g ge l coa t

(45.8 % b y wt. ) i s clos e t o th e averag e HA P conten t of th e ge l coa t

application/toolin g ge l coat process/produc t

grouping

. Not e 2 : Thi s ge l coa t

was selecte drathe r

than any of

th e orange/tangerin e toolin g ge l coats , du e t o th e lac k

of astandar d(non-specialty ) lo w HA P orange/tangerin e toolin g ge l coat
. Th e Ferr o Corporatio n tangerin e ge l coa t show n i n tabl e X i s no t

astandar d orange/tangerin e toolin g ge l coat
. Ste p 5 : Fro mth e availabl e cos t informatio n i n Tabl e TGC-1 , selec t th e toolin g gel coat(s ) mos t likel y t o represen t

th e lo w HA P toolin g ge l coats selecte db y facilitie s t o comply

. Not e 1 : Th e ge l coat

selecte dfo r

thi s ste p i s Ferr o Corporatio n G V 01767

. Thi s ge l coa t wa s selecte dbecaus e i t

i s alogical matc h fo r

th e hig h HA P Nest e Polyeste r BG-5500 0 du e t o th e identica l colo r

an dpresenc e of

methy l methacrylate

. Not e 2 : Th e existin g sourc e MAC T floo r i s se t b y age l coat

(Polydyn e 15 1 Orange ) with aHA P conten t

of 38.0 % b y weight

. N o cos t infoimatio n i s availabl e for thi s ge l coat
. Th e HA P conten t

of th e ge l coa t

selecte di n ste p 5 i s 39.97%

. Ste p 6 : Calculat e th e cos t differential betwee n th e selecte dhig h HA P an dlo w HA P toolin g ge l coats
.

1 8P.2 2

Not e 1 : Th e cos t

differentia ] betwee n th e gel coats selecte din step s 3 an d4 i s $0.21/l b ($2.7 2 - $2.93)

. Thi s cos t differential wa s use dt o calculat e th e direc t annual cos t incurre db y facilitie s i n replacin g hig h HA P toolin g gel coat s wit h lo w HA P toolin g gel coats
. Ste p 7 : Calculat e th e annual cos t incurre db y th e facility b y multiplyin g th e cos t differential i

n ste p 6 ($0.21/lb ) b y th e tota l amoun t of toolin g ge l coat

use db y th e facility

.
6.2. 7 Testin g o f

Ne w Lo w HA PResin s an d Ge l Coat s Availabl e Cos t

Infoimatio n Th e EP A collecte dinformatio n o n testin g cost s that facilitie s incurre dt o verif y that th e ne w lo w HA P resin s exhibit

acceptabl e physica l properties

. Testin g cos t dat at o switc h fro mhig h t o lo w HA P ge l coats wer e no t available

. Th e cos t

infoimatio n discusse dher e onl y pertain s t o testin g conducte db y th e facility

. Testin g conducte dfor facilitie s b y independen t testin g firm s i s discusse di n Sectio n 6.2. 8 (Recertificatio n of Products)

. Testin g cos t

dat at o switc h fro mhig h t o lo w HA P resin s wer e collecte dfro mnin e facilities

. Thre e o f th e nin e facilitie s tha t

provide dtestin g cos t

dat asubmitte dthei r

dat aa s CBI. REF1,2, 3 Tabl e TS- 1 belo w show s th e non-CB I testin g cos t dat aprovide dt o th e EPA : Tabl e TS-1

. Testin g o

f Ne w Lo w HA P Resin s

IS-isfflt o Bowi e Manufacturing , Inc

. REF4, S Dixie-Pacifi c Manufacturin g Company , Inc. REF 6 Fibe r Pro , Inc. REF7 LASC O Bathwar e (Yelm ) REF8 LaValle y Constructio n Compan y REF 9
Shenandoa h Fiberglas s Product s Compan y REF1 ° Kssns ? ©st o GIM P ©mmm Greate r than 35. 0 39. 8 40. 0 46. 0 43. 0
45. 0 t o 50. 0 

### wmM iRHinll'MSlj^^ B sntgntlS^^^ I 31. 0 an d32. 7 35. 0 35. 3 37. 0 an d30. 0 34. 0
35. 0 ^^^^^^^BFp^i^^nwnsni^^JMni^ro^^^^^^^ll

^^^^HM0§ ! aaSStefeit

e 1 "Minimal "

" A fe w hundre ddollars " Non e $5,00 0 pe r

Tria l N o cos t toth e facility (al l testin g wa s don e b y th e supplier )

$ 3,00 0 pe r

Tria l Cos t Methodolog y & Assumption s Th e followin g step s (an dassociate dassumptions ) wer e use dt o determin e th e annual cos t incurre db y facilitie s du e t o th e testin g of ne w lo w HA P resin s an dge l coats
. Ste p 1 : Base do n th e dat ashow n i n Tabl e TS-1 , assum e that th e averag e testin g cos t

fo r resin s i s $3,00 0 pe r

trial

. A tria l i s considere dt o b e aserie s of test s t o determin e th e suitability of

aparticular

resin

. Thus , if

afacility test s thre e different resins , atotal of thre e trial s i s assume dt o b e conducted

. Not e 1 : A s see n i n Tabl e TS- 1 an dsom e of th e CB I cos t

data , testin g cost s may var y fro mzer o cos t

t o cost s large r

than $3,00 0 pe r

trial

. Whil e both end s of thi s rang e ma

y b e encountere db y facilities , neithe r i s considere dt o b e typical an ds o neithe r th e highes t no r th e lowes t

reporte dcost s wer e use di n determinin g th e $3,00 0 estimate

.

1 9P.2 3

Ste p 2 : Assum e that

th e testin g cost s for

switchin g fro mhig h t o lo w HA P gel coats are th e sam e a s for

switchin g fro mhig h t o lo w HA P resins

. Thus , atestin g cos t of $3,00 0 pe r tria l i s assume dfor

switchin g t o lowe r

HA P gel coats
. Ste p 3 : Assum e that

for estimatin g th e tota l "testing " cost s for afacility , atota l of

thre e trial s woul db e performe dfor

eac h ofth e followin g groupings : corrosio n resistan t resins , non-corrosio n resistan t

resins , toolin g resins , pigmente dgel coats , clear ge l coats , an d toolin g ge l coats
. Thus , atota l "testing " cos t o f $9,00 0 fo r

eac h o f thes e grouping s ha s bee n assumed

. Not e 1 : Th e amoun t

of testin g that

afacility doe s i s highl y variabl e an ddepend s o n th e produc t

bein g manufacture dan dth e exten t of th e testin g don e b y th e resi n o r ge l coa t supplier

. Ste p 4 : Fo r

facilitie s tha t

us e th e resin s o r

ge l coats i n th e grouping s discusse di n Ste p 3 for severa l differen t

process/produc t

groupings , th e testin g cost s are divide damon g thos e process/produc t

groupings

. Tabl e TS- 2 belo w sho w ho w testin g cost s wer e divide d amon g process/produc t

groupings : Tabl e TS-2

. Divisio n o

f Testin g Cost s Amon g Process/Produc t Grouping s

Ra w Materia ] Grouping

Corrosio n Resistan t

Resin s

Non-Corrosio n Resistan t Resin s

Toolin g Resin s Pigmente dGe l Coat s Clear Ge l Coat s Toolin g Ge l Coat s Cos t pe r Tria l ($ )

3,00 0

3,00 0

3,00 0 3,00 0 3,00 0 3,00 0 Estimate d

Numbe r o f Trial s

3

3

3
3 3 3 Tota l Testin g Cos t

($ )

9,00 0

9,00 0

9,00 0 9,00 0 9,00 0 9,00 0 Process/Produc t Groupin g Ove r

whic h Testin g Cost s ar e Divide d(i f

Conducte da t

th e Facility ) Manua l Corrosio n Resistan t Mechanica l Corrosio n Resistan t Filamen t Windin g Corrosio n Resistan t Centrifuga l Castin g Corrosio n Resistan t Manua l Non-Corrosio n Resistan t Mechanica l Non-Corrosio n Resistan t Filamen t Windin g Non-Corrosio n Resistan t Centrifuga l Castin g Non-Corrosio n Resistan t

Manua l Toolin g Mechanica l Toolin g Pigmente dProductio n Ge l Coat s Clear Productio n Ge l Coat s Toolin g Productio n Ge l Coat s
6.2. 8 Trainin g t o Us e Ne w Lo w HA PResin s an d Ge l Coat s Available Cos t

Infoimatio n Th e EP A collecte dinfoimatio n o n trainin g cost s tha t facilitie s incurre dassociate dwit h switchin g t o lowe r

HA P resins

. Trainin g cos t dat at o switc h fro mhig h t o lo w HA P resin s wer e collecte dfro mfiv e facilities

. Trainin g cos t dat at o switc h fro mhig h t o lo w HA P ge l coats wer e not available

. Tabl e TN- 1 belo w show s th e trainin g cos t dat aprovide dt o th e EPA :
2 0P.2 4

Tabl e TN-1

. Trainin g Cost s t o Us e Ne w Low HA P Resin s

Facilit y Dixie-Pacifi c Manufacturin g Company , Inc. REF 6 Fibe r Pro , Inc. REF7 LASC O Bathwar e (Yelm ) REF8 L aValle y Constructio n Compan y REF 9 Shenandoa h Fiberglas s Product s Compan y REF1 ° Forme r Resi n HA P Conicn t (% ) 39. 8 40. 0 46. 0 43. 0 45. 0 t o 50. 0 Ne w Resi n HA P Conten t (% ) 35. 0 35. 3 37. 0 an d30. 0 34. 0 35. 0 Trainin g Cos t fo r Switchin g t o Lower HA P Resi n ($ ) Non e Non e Non e Minima l Non e Cos t Methodolog y & Assumption s Th e followin g step s (an dassociate dassumptions ) wer e use dt o determin e th e annual cos t incurre db y facilitie s du e t o trainin g for switchin g t o ne w lo w HA P resin s an dge l coats
. Ste p 1 : Base do n th e dat ashow n i n Tabl e TN-1 , assum e that ther e are n o trainin g cos t incurre ddu e switchin g t o lowe r HA P resins

. Ste p 2 : Assum e that

th e trainin g cos t

for switchin g fro mhig h t o lo w HA P gel coats are th e sam e a s for

switchin g fro mhig h t o lo w HA P resins

. Thus , n o trainin g cost s ar e assume dfor

switchin g t o lowe r

HA P ge l coats
.
6.2. 9 Recertificatio n o f Product s Availabl e Cos t

Infoimatio n Th e EP A collecte dinformatio n o n produc t recertificatio n cost s for

independen t

testin g that facilitie s incurre ddu e t o switchin g t o lo w HA P resin s o r ge l coats
. Recertificatio n cos t dat awer e collecte dfro mtw o facilitie s bot h o f whic h considere dthei r

dat at o b e confidential. REF1, 3
Cos t Methodolog y & Assumption s Th e followin g step s (an dassociate dassumptions ) wer e use dt o determin e th e annual cos t incurre db y facilitie s du e t o produc t recertification

. Ste p 1 : Assum e that

onl y undergroun dgasolin e storag e tank s incu r produc t recertificatio n costs , sinc e thes e appear

t o b e th e onl y mas s produce dstoc k product s requirin g independen t

certification

. Not e 1 : Custo mmad e tank s o r othe r specialty product s ar e assume dt o nee d individua l produc t

ceitificatio n regardles s of th e typ e an dHA P conten t of th e resin

. Thus , switchin g t o alowe r HA P resi n i s no t

assume dt o affect

produc t certificatio n cost s for custo mproducts

. Ste p 2 : A typical produc t recertificatio n cos t

of $ 50,00 0 wa s assume dfor eac h undergroun d gasolin e storag e tan k

produc t lin e wher e th e resi n i s changed

.

2 1P.2 5



### Ste p 3 : For

facilitie s tha

t us e differen

t process/product

grouping s t

o produc e underground gasoline storag e tanks , the recertification cost s ar e divide damong thos e process/produc t

groupings

.
6.2.1 0 Productio n Proble m Cost s Due t o Switching t

o Ne w Lo w HAPResin s an

d Ge l Coat s Availabl e Cos t

Information The EP A collecte dinformation o

n production proble

mcost s tha

t facilitie s incurre ddue t

o switchin g t o lowe

r HA P resins

. Production proble mcos t dat ato switch fro

mhig h to lo w HAP resin s wer e collecte dfro

mnine facilities

. Tw o o

f the nine facilitie s tha

t provide dthes e cos t

data submitte dtheir

dataas CBI. REF

2 

### Tabl e PP- 1 below show s the no n CB I production problemcos t dataprovide dt o the EPA : Tabl e PP-1 . Production Proble m Cost s Du e t o Use Ne w Lo w HA PResin s

Facilit y Bowi e Manufacturing , Inc

. REF4* 5 Dixie-Pacifi c Manufacturin g Company , Inc. REF 6 Fibe r Pro , Inc. REF7 LASC O Bathwar e (Yelm ) REF 8 LaValle y Constructio n Compan y REF 9 Shakespear e Electronic s & Fiberglas s Divisio n REF " Shenandoa h Fiberglas s Product s Compan y REFI ° Forme r Resi n HA P Conten t (% ) Greate r than 35. 0 39. 8 40. 0 46. 0 43. 0 42. 0 45. 0 t o 50. 0 Ne w Resi n HA P Conten t (% ) 31. 0 an d32. 7 35. 0 35. 3 37. 0 an d30. 0 34. 0 33. 0 35. 0 Production

. Proble mCos t for Switchin g t o Lower HA P Resi n ($ ) Non e Non e Non e "Significant " "Minimal " Non e Non e 

### Cos t Methodology & Assumption s The following step s (an

dassociate dassumptions ) wer e use dto determine the annua

l cos t incurre db y facilitie s due t

o production problem s associatedwit h switching t

o ne w lo w HA P resin s an dge l coats
. Ste p 1 : Basedo

n the datashow

n i n Tabl e PP-1 , assum

e tha t generall y ther e ar e n o productio n problemcost s incurreddue switching t o lowe r HA P resin s an

dge l coats
. 6.2.1 1 Long-Ter

m Increas e i n Labo rCost Availabl e Cos t

Information The EP A collecte dinformation o

n long-ter mincreasedlabo

r cost s associate dwit

h switchin g to lowe r HA P resins

. Change s i

n long-ter mlabo r cost s associatedwit

h switching to lo

w HA P resin s wer e collecte dfro

mtw o facilities

. Tabl e LC- 1 below show s change s i n the long-ter

m labor cost s provide dt o the EPA :

22P.2 6

Table LC-1

. Long-Ter

mIncreas e i

n Labor Cos t
mm® <smm«m> ® » Bowi e Manufacturing , Inc

. REF4*5 L aValle y Constructio n Compan y REF 9 Greate r than 35. 0 43. 0 31. 0 an d32. 7 34. 0 ELsaj^Tftetaju D OrssaB * tai Ikftaar

(Jt o cto s
Non e Non e Cos t Methodolog y & Assumption s Th e followin g step s (an dassociate dassumptions ) wer e use dt o determin e th e annua l increas e i n long-ter mlabo r

cost s incurre db y facilitie s associate dwit h switchin g t o ne w lo w HA P resin s an dge l coats
. Ste p 1 : Base do n th e dat ashow n i n Tabl e LC-1 , assum e that facilitie s generall y d o not incu r a n increas e i n long-termlabo r cost s du e switchin g t o lowe r HA P resins/ge l coats
.
6.2.1 2 Equipmen tChang e Cost s Availabl e Cos t

Informatio n Th e EP A collecte dinformatio n o n equipmen t chang e cost s associate dwit h switchin g t o lowe r HA P resins

. Equipmen t chang e cost s associate dwit h switchin g t o lo w HA P resin s wer e collecte dfro mfiv e facilities

. Thre e of th e fiv e facilitie s that

provide dthes e cos t

dat asubmitte d thei r dat aa s CBI. REF1 * 2 * 3 Tabl e EC- 1 belo w show s th e non-CB I equipmen t chang e cos t

dat a provide dt o th e EPA : Table EC-1

. Equipmen

t Change Costs

Bittne r Industries , Inc. REF1 2 Bowi e Manufacturing , Inc

. REF4*5 Greate r tha n 35. 0 Greate r tha n 35. 0 32. 5

31. 0 an d32. 7 Non e Non e Cos t Methodolog y & Assumption s Th e followin g step s (an dassociate dassumptions ) wer e use dt o determin e th e annual equipmen t

chang e cost s incurre db y facilitie s associate dwith switchin g t o ne w lo w HA P resin s an dge l coats
. Ste p 1 : Base do n th e dat ashow n i n Tabl e EC-1 , assum e that facilitie s generall y d o not incu r an y equipmen t

chang e cost s du e switchin g t o lowe r HA P resins/ge l coats
. Not e 1 : Som e o f

th e CB I cos t

dat adiscusse s significan t anticipate dequipmen t changes

. However , sinc e thes e cost s are onl y anticipate dan dn o actual cost s wer e reporte db y facilitie s that hav e mad e resin/ge l coa t changes , n o cost s wer e assume d fo r equipmen t

changes

. 6.2.1 3 Adoptio n o f

Non-Atomize d Resin Applicatio n Equipmen t Se e ER G Mem o 2 3P.2 7

6.2.1 4 Uncoverin g onl y on e Charg e pe rCompression/Injectio n Moldin g Machin e Available Cos t

Informatio n Cos t dat ao n uncoverin g onl y on e charg e a s oppose dt o severa l charge s pe r compression/injectio n moldin g machin e for eac h mol dcycl e wer e no t available

. Cos t Methodolog y & Assumption s Th e followin g step s (an dassociate dassumptions ) wer e use dt o determin e th e direc t annual cos t incurre db y facilitie s du e t o uncoverin g onl y on e charg e a s oppose dt o several charge s pe r compression/injectio n moldin g machin e for eac h mol dcycle

. Ste p 1 : Assum e tha t

uncovering mor e than on e charg e at atim e pe r

moldin g cycl e ha s a negativ e impac t

o n th e quality of

th e SM C o r

BM C charge

. Thi s i s presume dt o b e tru e becaus e th e uncovere dcharge s loos e monome r mor e quickl y than covere d charges , whic h i s neede dfor aprope r polymerizatio n reaction

. REF1 3
Ste p 2 : Assum e that

fo r th e productio n of

th e sam e amoun t

of tota l product , i t

doe s no t tak e th e operato r

of th e compression/injectio n moldin g machin e an y longe r t o onl y uncove r on e charg e pe r

mol dcycl e than t o uncove r severa l charge s pe r

mol dcycl e a

t once . Ste p 3 : Give n th e assumption s in Step s 1 an d2 above , uncovering onl y on e charg e a s

oppose dt o several charge s pe r compression/injectio n moldin g machin e for eac h mol d cycl e i s not

expecte dt o generat e an y costs
. Ste p 4 : Th e direc t

annual cos t

incurre db y facilitie s du e t o uncoverin g onl y on e charg e a s oppose dt o several charge s pe r compression/injectio n moldin g machin e for eac h mol d cycl e was assume dt o b e zero .

2 4P.2 8

6.2.1 5 We tAre aEnclosure s with Resi n Dri p Collectio n Syste m Availabl e Cos t

InformationPLC 1 Th e EP A collecte dcos t

informatio n o n th e design , installation , an doperatio n of we t are a enclosure s an dresi n dri p collectio n system s installe do n pultrusio n lines

. Thi s informatio n i s summarize di n Tabl e PL-1

. Table PL-1

. Available Cost Information fo

r We t AreaEnclosure s an

d Resi n Dri p Collectio n System s "

^^^^^B^^^^^^^KomRn3n(^Konamon^^^^H^^^^^^^ B Design , Installation , an dOperatio n o f We t Are aEnclosur e Design , Installation , an dOperatio n o f Resi n Dri p Collectio n Syste m Design , Installation , an dOperatio n o f We t Are aEnclosur e Design , Installation , an dOperatio n o f Resi n Dri p Collectio n Syste m 

### Steam s Larg e Larg e Smal l Smal l ^•Iiotai^iiwaiMost^ H

$765.1 5 pe r

year N o Informatio n $396.5 2 pe r

year N o Informatio n /Swmrwf l (S^rstrffto muntil IMMifiaiEnsgCcfef

i $754.8 1 pe r

yea r N o Informatio n $436.5 5 pe r

yea r N o Informatio n "Cos t figure s ar e for

larg e an dsmal l wet

are aenclosure s installe do n pultrusio n line s a t th e Glasforms , Inc

. facility i n Birmingham , Alabama

. Cos t Methodolog y & Assumptions"^ 2 Th e followin g step s (an dassociate dassumptions ) wer e use dt o calculat e th e annua l capita l an doperatin g & maintenanc e cost s incurre db y facilities

. Ste p 1 : Assum e al l facilitie s no t currentl y in complianc e wil l instal l on e we t are aenclosur e an d on e resi n dri p collectio n syste mpe r pultrusio n lin e presen t

a t th e facility

. Not e 1 : Thi s assumptio n i s necessary becaus e ther e i s insufficien t infoimatio n describin g th e typ e of

pultrusio n line s presen t

a t th e facilities

. Th e majority of th e facilitie s di dno t indicat e th e typ e of

pultrusio n lin e presen t

a t th e facility

. Som e facilitie s indicate dmor e tha n on e typ e of

lin e but di dno t provid e specifi c number s (e.g. , som e facilitie s indicate d th e us e of direc t di e injectio n bu t

di dno t indicat e th e numbe r

o f machine s utilizin g thi s technology)

. Not e 2 : Thi s assumptio n wil l probabl y mak e th e cos t estimat e mor e conservativ e sinc e facilitie s that

utiliz e direc t

di e injectio n withou t

resi n pre-we t

wil l no t hav e t o instal l we t are aenclosure s an dhenc e wil l incu r les s cos t than estimated

. Ste p 2 : Fo r

facilitie s tha t

di dno t provid e specifi c informatio n o n th e numbe r o f pultrusio n line s presen t at thei r facility , assum e that

th e numbe r

of line s presen t

a t thes e facilitie s ma

y b e estimate dusin g th e reporte dresi n usag e for th e pultrusio n operation s a t th e facility an d th e pultrusio n lin e t o pultrude dresi n ratio calculate dfro mfacilitie s for whic h dat aare available

. Not e 1 : Thi s assumptio n i s necessary becaus e 7 ou t of 3 1 facilitie s di dnot

provid e th e numbe r o f pultrusio n line s presen t

a t thei r facility

. Ste p 3 : Assum e th e cos t

informatio n availabl e relate dt o th e installatio n o f "large " (a s oppose d t o "small" ) WAE s shoul db e use dt o mak e th e cos t estimat e mor e conservative

. Th e
2 5P.2 9

exac t dimension s of

th e "large " an d"small " WAE s use da t Glasform s are CBI

. However , som e indicatio n of th e relativ e siz e of

th e WAE s ma

y b e inferre dfro mth e sectio n 11 4 screenin g surve y submitte db y Glasform s for thei r Sa n Jose , C A facility . Th e surve y respons e indicate dthat th e larges t

resi n bat h presen t a t th e facility was 8 ' lon g b y 3 ' wid e an dth e smalles t resi n bat h wa s 3 ' 5 " lon g b y 1 ' 7 " wide

. Not e 1 : Thi s assumptio n i s necessary becaus e ther e i s insufficien t infoimatio n availabl e o n th e siz e ofth e pultrusio n line s presen t a t facilitie s tha t

conduc t pultrusio n operations

. A s aresul t

o f thi s lac k of information , i t

i s impossibl e t o judg e whethe r th e pultrusio n lin e at th e facilitie s wil l requir e "small " o r "large " we t

are aenclosures

. Ste p 4 : Assum e tha t

th e cos t overestimatio n tha t

occur s du e t o th e conservativ e assumption s i n Ste p 1 (i.e

. tha t

al l pultrusio n line s wil l requir e awe t are aenclosure ) an dSte p 3 (i.e

. usin g th e greate r

cos t associate dwit

h "large " we t

are aenclosures ) are sufficient t o compensat e fo r

assignin g zer o cos t

for th e design , installation , an doperatio n o f aresi n dri p collectio n system
. Not e 1 : Thi s assumptio n i s necessary becaus e ther e i s insufficien t informatio n availabl e t o cos t th e resi n dri p collectio n system
. Th e resi n dri p collectio n syste mpresen t a t Glasform s consist s of

aplasti c pip e (modifie dwit h acut-out) , afunnel , an dacontaine r (shape dlik e ableac h jug ) for collectin g resin

. Du e t o th e relativel y simpl e material s an d desig n o f thi s resi n dri p collectio n system , th e cos t associate dwit

h implementin g th e resi n dri p collectio n syste mshoul db e minima l compare dt o th e design , installation , an doperatio n of

th e we t are aenclosure

. Finally , resi n collecte di n th e dri p collectio n syste mmay b e recycle db y th e facility , thereb y reducin g th e facility' s raw materia l costs
. Ste p 5:Us e th e sam e capita l cos t annualizatio n perio dfo r

we t are aenclosure s a s indicate db y th e OAQP S cos t

manua l for

permanen t

tota l enclosure s (i.e

. 3 0 years)

. Not e 1 : Thi s assumptio n i s necessary becaus e th e OAQP S cos t manua l doe s not

specif y acapita l cos t

annualizatio n perio dfor

we t are aenclosure s installe do n pultrusio n lines

. Th e annualizatio n perio dfor permanen t

tota l enclosure s wa s assume dt o b e appropriat e du e t o th e similarit y i n constructio n materials

. Ste p 6 : Multipl y th e capita l cos t pe r lin e ($765 ) b y th e numbe r of pultrusio n line s presen t a t th e facility t o obtai n th e facility-specifi c tota l capita l cos t t o b e annualized

. Annualiz e th e tota l capita l cos t

usin g a3 0 yea

r annualizatio n perio dt o obtai n th e annual capita l cost
. Ste p 7 : Multipl y th e annua l operatin g & maintenanc e cos t pe r lin e ($755 ) b y th e numbe r of pultrusio n line s presen t

a t th e facilit y t o obtai n th e facility-specifi c annual operatio n & maintenanc e cost
. Ste p 8 : Su mth e annua l capita l cos t an dannual operatin g & maintenanc e cos t t o estimat e th e tota l cos t tha t wil l b e incurre db y th e facilit y in complyin g with th e existin g sourc e MAC T standar dfo r

pultrusio n operations

.

2 6P.3 0

6.2.1 6 Close d o rCovere d Docto rBoxes , Folde d Edges , an d Lo w Styren e Permeabl e Fil m Available Cos t

Infoimatio n Cos t dat ao n closin g o r

covering docto r

boxes , foldin g edges , an dusin g lo w styren e permeabl e fil m(e.g. , Nylon ) for SM C productio n wer e not available

. Cos t Methodolog y & Assumption s Th e followin g step s (an dassociate dassumptions ) wer e use dt o determin e th e direc t annua l cos t incurre db y facilitie s du e t o closin g o r covering docto r

boxes , foldin g edges , an dusin g lo w styren e permeabl e fil m(e.g. , Nylon ) for SM C production

. Ste p 1 : Assum e that

not closin g o r

covering docto r

boxes , no t

foldin g edges , an dno t

usin g lo w styren e permeabl e fil mha s anegativ e impac t o n th e quality o f

th e SMC

. Thi s i s presume dt o b e tru e becaus e mor e monome r i s los t i f th e abov e mentione daction s are no t taken , whic h i s neede dfor aprope r polymerizatio n reaction

. Ste p 2 : Assum e that

th e benefit s for

closin g o r

covering docto r

boxes , foldin g edges , an d usin g lo w styren e permeabl e fil moutweig h th e cost s of takin g th e above mentione d actions

. Ste p 3 : Give n th e assumption s i n Step s 1 an d2 above , closin g o r covering docto r

boxes , foldin g edges , an dusin g lo w styren e permeabl e fil mi s no t expecte dt o generat e an y ne t costs
. Ste p 4 : Th e direc t

annua l cos t

incurre db y facilitie s du e t o closin g o r covering docto r

boxes , foldin g edges , an dusin g lo w styren e permeabl e fil mwa s assume dt o b e zero . 6.2.1 7 Non-HA PCleanin g Material s Available Cos t

Infoimatio n Base do n 199 3 industry screenin g surveys , th e mos t prevalen t HAP-containin g cleane r use d i n thi s industry i s methylen e chlorid e an dacommonl y use dno n HAP-containin g cleane r i s acetone
. Som e facilitie s als o us e methy l ethy l ketone , whic h i s aHAP-containin g cleaner

. Th e EP A collecte dcos t

dat ao n th e mos t

commonl y use dHAP

- an dno n HAP-containin g cleanin g solvents

. Th e cos t

dat afo r acetone , methylen e chloride , an dmethy l ethy l keton e are show n i n Tabl e CM- 1 below

. Tabl e CM-1

. Cos t

Informatio n fo r

HAP

- an dno n HAP

- Containin g Cleanin g Solvent s

iSSKcrrtlSTippiiei-^^^^^^^^^ B Worth Chemica l Corporatio n REF M Worth Chemica l Corporatio n REF1 4 Fiberglas s Coating s Inc. REF1 5 (gfesaa ? Aceton e Methylen e Chlorid e Methy l Ethy l Keton e 0 10 0 10 0 $2.7 3

$7.2 9 $5.0 0 5 5 Gallo n Dru m

5 5 Gallo n Dru m 5 5 Gallo n Dru m 27P.3 1

Cos t Methodolog y & Assumption s Th e followin g step s (an dassociate dassumptions ) wer e use dt o determin e th e direc t annual cos t incurre db y facilitie s du e t o switchin g fro mHAP

- t o no n HAP-containin g cleaners

. Ste p 1 : Assum e tha t

facilitie s wil l compl y b y switchin g fro musin g methylen e chlorid e o r methy l ethy l keton e t o acetone
. Thi s i s presume dt o b e tru e becaus e th e 199 3 industry screenin g survey s indicate dthat th e mos t prevalen t HAP-containin g cleane r

use din thi s industry i s methylen e chlorid e an dacommonl y use dno n HAP-containin g cleane r i s acetone
. Ste p 2 : Calculat e th e cos t differential betwee n methylen e chlorid e o r methy l ethy l keton e an d aceton e basedo n th e infoimatio n provide di n Tabl e CM-1

. Not e 1 : Th e cos t

differential betwee n methylen e chlorid e an daceton e i s $4.56/gallo n ($7.29/gallon-$2.73/gallon)

. Thi s cos t differential represent s acos t saving s o f

$4.5 6 pe r gallo n of cleaner

. Not e 2 : Th e cos t

differential betwee n methy l ethy l keton e an daceton e i s $2.27/gallo n ($5.00/gallon-$2.73/gallon)

. Thi s cos t differential represent s acos t saving s o f

$2.2 7 pe r gallo n of cleaner

. Ste p 3 : Assum e th e HAP-containin g cleaner s can b e mor e effectiv e than no n HAP-containin g

cleaner s particularl y for

cure do r partiall y cure dresins

. In thi s case , th e us e o f ano n HAP-containin g cleane r

may requir e mor e tim e and/o r physical effor

t than th e us e o f aHAP-containin g cleane r t o remov e th e resin

. Ste p 4 : Assum e that

for th e sam e cleanin g tas k

n o mor e aceton e i s use dthan methylen e chlorid e o r

methy l ethy l ketone

. Ste p 5 : Assum e that

th e cos t saving s i n Step s 2 , outweig h th e cos t of additiona l tim e an d labo r describe di n Ste p 3

. Ste p 6 : Th e direc t

annua l cos t

incurre db y facilitie s du e t o switchin g fro mHAP

- t o no n HAP

containin g cleaner s was assume dt o b e zero .

2 8P.3 2

6.2.1 8 Closed/Covere d Mixin g with N o Visibl e Gap s i n Mixe rCove r Availabl e Cos t

Infoimatio n M1*

M 2 Th e EP A collecte dcos t

infoimatio n associate dwit h th e adoptio n of

closed/covere dmixin g practice s wher e ther e are n o visibl e gap s in th e mixe r cove r an dn o activ e ventilatio n of th e mixer

. Thi s informatio n i s summarize di n Tabl e M-l

. Tabl e M-l . Summar

y o f Availabl e Information fo rClosed/Covered Mixing wit h N o Visible Gaps Components o

f Mixe r Cove r Cos t Material s t

o Construct

Mixe r Cove r Labo r t o Construct

Mixe r Cove r Tota l Mixe r Cove r Cost Componen t Cos t (1998$ ) $5 0 $4 5 $9 5 Frequency o f Replacemen

t Semiannua l Semiannua l Semiannua l Annua

l Cos t (199 8 $/yr ) $10 0 $9 0 $19 0 Th e infoimatio n i s base do n mixin g operation s conducte da t th e Glasforms , Inc

. facility locate di n Birmingham , Alabama

. At th e Glasform s facility , mixin g i s conducte din 5 5 gallo n drums

. Th e 5 5 gallo n dru mi s covere db y aplywoo ddis k larg e enoug h t o cove r

th e entir e dru m top
. Th e front

thir dof th e cove r i s hinge dt o allo w for

th e additio n of

variou s material s durin g o r prio r t o th e mixin g process . Th e mixe r cove r ha s abristle-covere dopenin g that allow s th e cove r t o b e place daroun dth e mixe r shaft

. Th e bristle-covere dopenin g allow s for eas y replacemen t an dremova l of

th e mixe r

cove r durin g mixin g operation s whil e leavin g n o visibl e ga p betwee n th e mixin g shaf

t an dth e mixe r

cover . Th e mixe r

cover s are manufacture d"in-house " b y Glasforms

. Th e labo r cost s an dth e ra w materia l cost s are approximatel y $4 5 pe r mixe r cove r an d$5 0 pe r

mixe r cover , respectively

. Durin g th e mixin g operation , th e mixe r cove r come s i n contac t

wit h th e promote dresi n resultin g i n th e gradua l buildu p of

a n uneven , cure dresi n layer o n th e inside of

th e cover . After approximatel y si x month s thi s layer increase s i n siz e t o th e poin t wher e th e mixe r

cove r mus t b e replace di n orde r

fo r prope r mixin g t o occur . Base do n th e combine dlabo r an dmateria l cos t

of $9 5 pe r mixe r cove r an dth e semi-annua l frequenc y of replacement , th e annual cos t pe r mixe r i s estimate dt o b e $19 0 fo r

a5 5 gallo n mixin g vessel

. Cos t Methodolog y & Assumption s Th e followin g step s (an dassociate dassumptions ) wer e use dt o calculat e th e direc t annua l cos t incurre db y facilitie s du e t o installatio n of mixe r cover s with n o visibl e gap s an dn o activ e ventilatio n of

th e mixer

. Ste p 1 : Determin e th e numbe r of mixer s presen t

a t th e facility

. Not e 1 : Th e annua l cos t

pe r facilit y i s partiall y dependan t

o n th e numbe r

of mixer s presen t a t th e facility

. Th e numbe r of mixer s presen t

a t afacility i s dependen t

o n th e siz e of th e mixin g vessel s used , th e typ e of material s t o b e mixed , th e lengt h of tim e require dt o completel y mi x th e material s use db y th e facility , an dth e capability of th e facility t o us e mixe dmaterial s du e t o productio n capacit y an dproduc t demand

.
2 9P.3 3

Not e 2 : Th e infoimatio n availabl e t o estimat e th e numbe r of mixer s a t eac h facilit

y i s extremel y limited

. Therefore , th e numbe r of mixer s presen t

a t eac h facilit

y wa s estimate d basedo n th e annual usag e o f material s that

are likel y t o requir e mixin g o r agitatio n (i.e

. resins , fillers , an dgel coats)

. Not e 3 : Usin g th e ratio o f mixer s t o th e approximat e usag e o f thes e material s a

t Glasforms ' Birmingha mfacility , on e mixe r wa s assume dfo r

every 40 0 ton s o f

materia l pe r year . Facilitie s usin g les s than 40 0 ton s pe r yea r o f material s wer e assume dt o hav e onl y on e mixe r

an dth e numbe r

o f mixer s pe r

facility was roundedt o th e neares t whol e number

. I t

wa s als o assume dtha t

al l mixin g a

t th e facility occur s in a5 5 gallo n o r large r mixin g vessel

. Exampl e 1 : A

n examinatio n o f

afacility' s annua l materia l usag e indicates 50 0 ton s of resin , 50 0 ton s o f

filler , an d20 0 ton s o f

ge l coat
. Thi s represent s 120 0 ton s pe r yea r of materia l potentiall y requirin g mixin g o r agitation

. Assumin g on e mixe r for every 40 0 ton s o f materia l potentiall y requirin g mixin g o r agitation , thi s facility woul drequir e thre e mixers

. Ste p 2 : O n ape r

mixe r basis , determin e th e facility' s cos t o f complyin g with th e requiremen t for closed/covere dmixin g vessel s with n o visibl e gap s in th e mixe r cove r an dn o activ e ventilation

. Not e 1 : Th e annua l cos t

pe r facility i s partiall y dependen t o n th e existin g degre e o f complianc e wit

h th e standard

. Tabl e M- 2 summarize s th e cos t assigne dpe r mixe r base do n afacility' s existin g leve l o f compliance

. Tabl e M-2

. Pe r

Mixe r Complianc e Cos t

Assigne dto aFacilit

y Base don Existin g Level o f Complianc e
©HBSff i
Open Open Ope n Close d Close d Close d Close d Close d Close d Setof f ©SH® ?
mm N o N o N o Ye s Ye s Ye s Ye s Ye s Ye s ffusaffito

N/ A N/ A N/ A Ye s Ye s Ye s N o N o N o KKsts-ps *

SMf!**-? ^
N/ A N/ A N/ A N o N o N o N o N o Ye s IWixer/A"etJKel\ B WstmospilieTeM N o Ye s N o N o Ye s N o N o Ye s N o B^i'XeniiSgTiSJSi m KflmrSI^ice l N o N o Ye s N o N o Ye s N o N o Ye s £mw_]©m

®mMM_B
100 % 100 % 0 % 50 % 50 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % ^nnrrfi*flca»s G

$19 0 $19 0 $ 0 $9 5 $9 5 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0

Ste p 3 : Estimat e th e tota l annual cos t o f complyin g wit

h th e requiremen t

fo r closed/covere d mixin g vessel s with n o visibl e gap s i n th e mixe r cove r an dn o activ e ventilatio n b y multiplyin g th e pe r

mixe r complianc e cos t

b y th e estimate do r

actua l numbe r

of mixer s presen t at th e facility

.
3 0P.3 4

6.2.1 9 Add-o n Contro l Device s (Therma l Oxidizers ) T o b e adde da

t alate r date

. 6.2.2 0 Monitoring , Recordkeeping , an d Reportin g Availabl e Cos t

Infoimatio n At thi s tim e n o specifi c facility cos t dat aare availabl e t o determin e th e monitoring , recordkeepin g an dreportin g (MRR ) requirement s for th e Reinforce dPlasti c Composite s MAC T standard , sinc e n o facility ha s conducte dthes e activitie s yet
. However , th e EP A ha s dat aon th e estimate dhour s an dcost s for MR Rtask s of

othe r standard s that

the y developed

. Hou r

estimate s fo r som e commo n MR Rtask s wer e availabl e fro mth e Emissio n Standard s Divisio n (ESD ) Procedure s Manual. REF1 6 Fo r thos e MR Rtask s for

whic h n o hou r

estimate s wer e available , assumption s wer e mad e t o estimat e th e MR Rhours

. Fo r th e cos t estimatio n of

th e MR Rhours , wag e rate s that

wer e use dfor

th e Architectura l Coating s Infoimatio n Collectio n Reques t (ICR ) wer e available

. Tabl e MRR- 1 belo w show s th e wag e rate s use dfor th e Architectura l Coating s ICR :
Tabl e MRR-1 . Wag e Rate s fo rArchitectura l Coating s IC R REF1 7

GfcS B MSss GJsfi

s fens Eteusi

B •jffikfea?S*iaaa®p[L^

) iMipiMB^Ii/wffiii g
Clerica l Technica l Managemen t 11.9 5 18.8 6 28.5 4 1.4 1 1.43 1.4 0 1.6 7 1.6 7 1.6 7 28.1 4 45.0 4 66.7 3

Cos t Methodolog y & Assumption s Th e followin g step s (an dassociate dassumptions ) wer e use dt o determin e th e MR Rhour s an d direc t annua l cos t

incurre db y facilitie s du e t o MR Rrequirements

. Ste p 1 : Assum e tha t

MR Rrequirement s ma

y occu r i n an y of th e followin g si x categories : (1 ) readin g rule , (2 ) performanc e test s an dothe r requirement s fo r

facilitie s complyin g b y usin g a n add-o n contro l device , (3 ) employe e training , (4 ) subpart A notifications , (5 ) percen t HA P monome r

record s for

ope n moldin g an dcentrifugal castin g operation s an drecord s fo r

othe r pollutio n preventio n technique s use din ope n molding , an d(6 ) developin g arecor dsystem
. Ste p 2 : Identif

y al l activitie s tha t

fall withi n th e si x categorie s describe din Ste p 1

. Ste p 3 : Compil e th e followin g infoimatio n for eac h expecte dactivity identifie di n Ste p 2 : (1 ) Applicabilit y (e.g. , existin g facilities , ne w facilities , facilitie s wit h contro l devices , etc.) , (2 ) firs t

yea r hours , (3 ) annual hours , an d(4 ) assumptions

. Not e 1 : Tabl e MRR- 2 list s th e informatio n tha t wa s compile dfor

eac h activit y b y
3 1

_ JP.3 5

MR Rcategory describe di n Ste p 1 : Ste p 4 : Determin e th e tota l firs t year MR Rhour s an dth e tota l annua l MR Rhour s o n afacility basi s (base don applicability ) for al l activitie s liste di n Ste p 2

. Ste p 5 : Determin e th e firs t yea r MR Rhour s an dth e annual MR Rhour s o n asubcategory basi s (base do n applicability ) for al l activitie s liste din Ste p 2

. Ste p 6 : Assum e tha t

al l of th e MR Rwor

k i s performe db y manageria l staf f wit h on e hou r

of clerica l support

for every eigh t

hour s of manageria l work

. Fo r

example , i

f 28 0 hour s ar e estimate dfo r

agive n activity , 28 0 hour s are assume dt o b e spen t a s manageria l hour s an d3 5 hour s (280/ 8 = 35 ) are assume dt o b e spen t a s clerica l hours

. Not e 1 : Assumin g tha t

al l wor k i s performe db y managemen t probabl y over-estimate s th e cos t impac t o f th e rule' s MR Rrequirement s for som e facilities

. Ste p 7 : Fo r

eac h subcategory , determin e th e firs t yea r MR Rcost s b y multiplyin g th e firs t yea r managemen t

an dclerica l hour s b y th e associate dlabo r rat e for that category , $66.7 3 an d$ 28.1 4 pe r

hour , respectively

. Ste p 8 : Fo r

eac h subcategory , determin e th e annual MR Rcost s b y multiplyin g th e annua l managemen t

an dclerica l hour s b y th e associate dlabo r rat e for tha t category , $66.7 3 an d$ 28.1 4 pe r

hour , respectively

. Ste p 9 : Annualiz e th e firs t yea r MR Rcost s ove r

ate n yea r perio dfo r

eac h subcategory usin g aseve n percen t

interes t rate
. Ste p 10 : Ad dth e annualize dfirs t year MR Rcost s an dannual MR Rcost s fo r eac h subcategory t o obtai n th e tota l annua l costs
. Ste p 11 : Fo r

subcategorie s wit

h process/produc t

groupings , divid e th e tota l annual subcategor y cos t fo r afacility evenly amon g th e process/produc t grouping s (conducte da

t th e facility ) fo r

eac h particular

subcategory

.

3 2Tabl e MRR-2 . MR RInformatio n b y Activit y

MR RCategor y Readrul e Performanc e test s an d othe r requirement s for facilitie s wit

h add-o n control s

Employe e trainin g

Tabl e MRR-2 . M Activit y

Rea dpromulgate drul e an d Subpar t A , Genera l Provision s Initia l performanc e tes t

- Contro l devic e efficienc y Initial performanc e tes t

- Captur e efficienc y Notificatio n o f

initial performanc e tes t Repor t o f initia l performanc e tes t Developmen t

o f operatio n an d maintenanc e plan Developmen t

o f startup , shutdown , an dmalfunctio n (SSM ) pla n Record s an dreport s o f

SS M an dcorrectiv e measure s take n Developmen t

o f operato r trainin g cours e Tim e t o trai n personne l

Record s o f

operator s completin g operato r

trainin g cours e R RInformatio n b y Activit y Applicabilit y Al l existin g an dne w facilitie s Facilitie s complyin g b y usin g contro l device s tha t

hav e not don e testin g Facilitie s complyin g b y usin g contro l device s tha t

hav e no t don e testin g Facilitie s complyin g b y usin g contro l device s Facilitie s complyin g b y usin g contro l device s Facilitie s complyin g b y usin g contro l device s Facilitie s complyin g b y usin g contro l device s Facilitie s complyin g b y usin g contro l device s Facilitie s wit

h wor k practic e requirement s All facilitie s

All facilitie s Firs tYea rHour s 8 Hour s pe r

facility plu s 1 additiona l hou r

pe r subcategor y 28 0 Hour s pe r

facility REF ' 4

4 0 Hour s pe r

facility

2 Hour s pe r

facility

Include di n performanc e tes t hour s 4 0 Hour s pe r

facility 2 0 Hour s pe r

facility

2 Hour s pe r

facility 8 Hour s for

wor k practice s an d 2 4 hour s fo r

spray trainin g Smal l Facilities : 2 Hour s for

Work practice s an d4 fo r spra y trainin g Mediu mFacilities : 4 Hour s for

Wor k practice s an d8 fo r spray trainin g Larg e Facilities : 8 Hour s for

Wor k practice s an d 1 6 fo r spray trainin g 2 Hour s pe r

facility

3 3 Annua l Hour s 1 Hou r pe r facility
Non e

Non e

Non e

Non e

Non e Non e

2 Hour s pe r

facility
Non e

Non e

2 Hour s Assumption s

Readin g rul e an dSubpar t A wil l b e necessar y fo r complianc e Facilitie s tha t

alread y conducte ddestructio n efficienc y testin g accordin g t o EP A requirement s d o no t

hav e t o retes t Facilitie s tha t

alread y conducte dcaptur e efficienc y testin g accordin g t o EP A requirement s d o no t

hav e t o retes t Doe s not appl y t o facilitie s tha t

alread y demonstrate ddestructio n an dcaptur e efficienc y Doe s no t appl y t o facilitie s tha t

alread y demonstrate ddestructio n an dcaptur e efficienc y Non e Non e

SS M repor t

hour s ar e covere dunde r report s o f accedence s an dperiod s o f noncomplianc e Trainin g hour s ar e incrementa l hour s betwee n curren t leve l trainin g an dMAC T leve l trainin g Trainin g ne w employee s base do n requirement s i n th e standar ddoe s not tak e mor e tim e tha n trainin g ne w employee s withou t MAC T standar di n plac e Smal l <. 10 0 Employee s Mediu m> 10 0 <. 25 0 Employee s Larg e > 25 0 Employee s Non e ' -MR

RCategor v Subpart A notification s

Percen t HA P monome r an d pollutio n preventio n record s Develo p recor d syste m Activit y

Notificatio n o f

constructio n an d reconstructio n Notificatio n o f

anticipate d startu p Notificatio n o f

actua l startu p Notificatio n o f

complianc e statu s Semiannua l repor t

- Complianc e certificatio n Semiannua l repor t

- Period s o f

noncomplianc e an d method s use dt o attai n complianc e Record s o f

HA P percen t

an d weighte daverag e HA P concentratio n calculation s an d record s o f

othe r pollutio n preventio n technique s Develo p recor dsyste m Applicabilit y Ne w facilitie s Ne w facilitie s Ne w facilitie s Al l facilitie s Al l facilitie s

Al l facilitie s wit

h period s o f noncomplianc e
Ope n Moldin g an dCentrifugal Castin g facilitie s

All facilitie s Firs t Yea r Hour s 2 Hour s pe r

facilit y REF1 4
2 Hour s pe r

facilit y REF1 4
2 Hour s pe r

facilit y REFI 4
4 Hour s pe r

facilit y REFI 4
8 Hour s pe r

facilit y REF ' 4

1 6 Hour s pe r

facilit y REFI 4

1 2 Hour s pe r

facility

Wor k practices : 1 Hou r HA P conten t

an dothe r

pollutio n preventio n measures : 5 Hour s Contro l devices : 2 Hour s Annua l Hour s Non e Non e Non e Non e 1 6 Hour s pe r facilit y ( 8 hour s X 2) REFI 4 3 2 Hour s pe r facilit y (1 6 hour s X2) REF " *
1 2 Hour s pe r facilit y

Non e Assumption s

N o reconstructio n wil l occu r a t existin g facilitie s N o reconstructio n wil l occu r a t existin g facilitie s N o reconstructio n wil l occu r a t existin g facilitie s Non e Onl y on e semiannua l repor t i s submitte din th e first year plu s th e Notificatio n o f complianc e statu s 2 0 Percen t

o f facilitie s wil l hav e som e period s o f

noncomplianc e an d8 0 percen t wil l no t hav e an y period s o f

noncomplianc e Non e

Non e

3 4

### Tabl e 1

. Existin g Sourc e MAC T Floor s Fo r Ope n Moldin g an dCentrifuga l Castin g
Sourc e Open Moldin g

Centrifuga l Castin g Process/Produc t Grouping s Corrosio n Resistant

(CR) Mechanical Resi n Applicatio n No n CRMechanical Resin Application

Unfille d No n CRMechanical Resi n Application-Fille d Manual Resi n Application-Toolin g Mechanical Resi n Application-Toolin g C RManual Resi n Applicatio n No n CRManua

l Resi n Applicatio n C RFilament

Windin g No n CRFilamen t

Windin g Toolin g Ge l Coatin g Pigmente dGel Coatin g Clea r Productio n Gel Coatin g NonC R C R Existin g Source s MAC T Floo r 19 0
10 4

144 9 7
25 6 124 7 6 16 3 17 8 39 4 26 5 50 4 39 6 53 6 Require dHA P

Content a 48. 3 an d100 % F C 37. 1 an d100 % F C 33. 9 3 6
4 3 4 0 32. 3 4 2 4 5 3 8 3 0 4 4 35. 5 4 8 Facility whic h set s floor b A n Co r Industrial Plastic s Inc

. (4 2 an d 50 % FC ) Custo mFiberglas s Molding , Inc

. Hydr o Systems , Inc

. (42. 6 an dCF ) Norto n Performanc e Plastics(4 7 an d VB ) Prestigiou s Accessorie s Inc

. Hartzel l Fan , Inc

. CD RSystem s Cor

p (3 5 an dVB ) Industrial Fiberglas s Specialties , Inc

. Wate r Heate r Innovations , Inc.

. Marbl e Creation s TJ

. S

. Fiberglas s Product s Inc

. Laminate dProduct s In c Henderson. , Blac k

& Gree n Inc

. Averag e o

f Rave n an dFibercas t

aRepresent s th e HA P conten t require dt o meet

th e point value

. Where F C i s show n i t i s assume d100 flo w coater s are als o used

. b Where th e facilit

y representin g th e floor

meet s the point

valu e usin g aresin/ge l coa t wit h adifferent

HA P content

tha n i s show n i

n th e previou s column , th e resin HA P content

andother control s use da

t the facilit y ar e show n i n parenthesis

. FC = Flo w Coater , V B = Vacuu mBagging , C F= Carbo n Filter s

1 4