p. 1 

# OAR Box 1669 Prepped by Charmelle Mathews



### Document

Number: 

# $-£6 ) II-E-1 8 Docket Number: 

# A-98-1 3

Printed 9/23/20089:36:49AM

Sheet 86 of 110C^DLTTJx^-J

D 

# A-^6-/ 3 P. 2

Teleconferenc e Repor t Organi c Liquid s Distributio n NESHA P

From : Date : Contact : Bern d Haneke , Pacifi c Environmenta l Services , Inc . (PES)^^ f

Augus t 25,199 9 Mr . Do n Wang , E P Staf

f Enginee r Company : Unio n Carbid e Corporation , Charleston , Wes t Virgini a Telephon e Number : 304/747-492 4

I . Participant s Bern d Haneke , Pacifi c Environmenta l Services , Inc . Gre g LaFlam , Pacifi c Environmenta l Services , Inc . Marth aSmith , U.S . EPA , OAQPS/ESD/WCP G Do n Wang , Unio n Carbid e Corporatio n II . Teleconferenc e Summar y Do n Wan g ha d aske d PE S t o cal l hi mt o clarif y question s relate d t o th e Organi c Liquid s Distributio n (O.L.D. ) NESHAP' s Mode l Plant s memo . PE S an d th e EP A projec t lead , Marth a Smith , calle d Mr . Wan g o n Augus t 5,199 9 t o discus s an d answe r Mr . Wang' s questions . Question/Comment

1: How were model

plants developed? Mr . Wan g wa s informe d b y th e EP A projec t tea mtha t mode l plant s wer e develope d o n th e basi s o f informatio n obtaine d fro mth e O.L.D . dat abase . Th e mode l plant s wer e develope d o n th e basi s of: 1 . Numbe r

o f storag e tanks , 2 . Storag e tan k

throughput , 3 . Numbe r

o f transfe r rack s an d loadin g positions , 4 . Transfe r

rac k throughput , 5 . Equipmen t

numbers . A n attemp t

wa s mad e t o develo p mode l plant s fo r small , medium , an d larg e facilities . Usin g thi s methodology , facilitie s wer e assigne d t o thes e categorie s for further analysi s i n support

ofth e rul e development .P. 3



### Teleco n Report Union Carbid e Corporation Pag e 2 Question/Comment

2: Cost effectiveness

forsmall plants may not

be very large. The EPA/PE S project

tea macknowledged thi s statemen t an d informed Mr . Wang tha

t a n economi c analysi s wa s being performed b y a n EP A contractor . Th

e economi c analysi s ha s no t been completed , therefor

e information i s no t

obtainabl e a

t thi s time . Question/Comment

3: Average HAP

Percentages in O.L.D. Liquids Mr . Wang inquire d ho w th e averag e HA P percentage s presente d in Tabl e 3 ofth e Model Plant s mem o wer e developed . Th

e EPA/PE S project

tea minforme d hi mtha t th e surve y ha d requeste d HA P weight percent s in bot

h liquid s an

d their vapors . I n mos t case s th e respondent s di d no t provid e th e averag e vapo

r weigh t percents , s o th e averag e liqui d weigh t percent s wer

e used i n th e emission s calculations . Mr . Wan g suggeste d tha

t th e EPA/PE S project

tea mdevelop a simpl e spreadsheet , based upon Raoult' s law , in which th e vapo r weigh t percent s fo

r variou s liquid s ar e calculated . Th

e EP A project tea macknowledged thi s approach , an d agree d t o investigat e it further . Question/Comment

4: Compressors I n apreviou s telephon e conversation , th e EPA/PE S project tea mha d asked Unio n Carbide about th e us e o f compressor s i

n th e O.L.D . industry . A

t tha t time , Unio n Carbid

e ha d responde d tha

t they d o no t us e compressor s to transfe

r liquids . Mr . Wan

g was asked agai n about

hi s understandin g ofth e us e of compressor s i

n th e O.L.D . business , t

o which he answere d tha

t h e wa s not awar e tha t compressor s wer

e being used to transfe

r an d distribut e liquids . Questions/Comment

s submitted b

y John Soice of

Unio n Carbid e Corporatio n John Soice , Unio n Carbid

e Corporation , submitte d to Mr . Wan g variou s question s and observation s pertainin g to the Mode l Plant s memo . Mr . Soic e wa s not presen t a t thi s teleconference , s o hi s comments an d question s wer

e delivered by Mr . Wang . Question/Observation 1: Mr . Soic e observe d tha

t th e equipmen

t count s fo r flanges i n SI C cod e 2 8 appea r to b e lowe

r tha n woul d b e expecte d fo

r thi s industry . The EPA/PE S project tea mdiscusse d thi s a

t lengt h wit h Mr . Wan g and i t was decided tha

t Union Carbid

e Corporation would re-evaluat e it s equipmen

t coun t numbers . I

t was als o suggested tha

t som e facilitie s ma

y hav e erroneously reporte d their equipmen t count s (se e Attachmen

t 1) . The EPA/PE S project

tea minformed Mr . Wan g tha

t th e equipmen t count s fo r man y facilitie s appeared to b e eithe r ver y larg e o r ver y small . 

# 2P. 4

Teleco n Repor t Unio n Carbid e Corporatio n Pag e 3 Question/Observation 2: Mr . Soic e observe d tha t

th e O.L.D . surve y di d no t as k for storag e tan k

dimensions , an d tha t

th e Mode l Plant s mem o provide s storag e tan k dimension s i n Tabl e 4 . Mr . Wan g state d tha t storag e tan k height s an d diameter s wer e importan t i n determinin g emissions , an d tha t Mr . Soic e ha d commente d tha t

i t woul d hav e bee n usefu l for th e EP A t o reques t

thi s information . Th e EPA/PE S projec t

tea mresponde d b y statin g tha t i t ha d develope d mode l storag e tank s whic h wer e programme d int o Tanks3. 1 softwar e t o quantif y emissions . Furthermore , the y acknowledge d Unio n Carbid e Corporation' s opinio n tha t requestin g storag e tan k

dimension s woul d hav e bee n useful . Question/Observation 3: O n behal f o f Mr . Soice , Mr . Wan g requeste d t o kno w i f transfe r rac k an d storag e tan k throughput s ha d bee n combined . Th e EPA/PE S projec t tea mresponde d tha t

i n mos t surveys , th e transfe r rac k an d storag e tan k

volume s di d not

appear equa l t o eac h other . Therefore , thes e wer e analyze d separately . Question/Observation 4: Mr . Wan g observe d tha t

pressur e vessel s wer e no t bein g addresse d i n th e Mode l Plant s memo , an d h e requeste d t o kno w ifth e EP A wa s goin g t o regulat e thes e i n th e O.L.D . NESHAP . Th e EPA/PE S projec t tea mresponde d tha t

t o th e bes t

o f it s knowledge , th e populatio n o f pressur e vessel s i s quit e lo w an d the y woul d no t

hav e significan t

emission s tha t

woul d warran t

control . Mr . Wan g offere d t o sen d th e EPA/PE S projec t tea mamemorandu maddressin g pressur e vessel s whic h h e ha d sen t

t o Stev e She d earlie r

i n th e project . Th e EPA/PE S projec t tea magree d tha t thi s woul d b e usefu l informatio n (se e Attachmen t 2) . Question/Comment

5: Mr . Wan g pointe d out

an anomal y i n Tabl e 2 ofth e Mode l Plant s memo . H e state d tha t external/interna l floatin g roo f tank s wer e usuall y use d t o stor e highe r vapo r pressur e liquid s tha n fixed roo f tanks . H e observe d tha t

for SI C cod e 2 8 th e averag e vapo r pressur e for

liquid s i n interna l floating roo f

tank s wer e lowe r

tha n for fixed roo f

tanks . Th e EPA/PE S projec t

tea macknowledge d thi s anomal y an d pointe d out tha t vapo r pressure s b y tan k typ e wer e develope d fromth e tan k an d liqui d informatio n reporte d i n th e surve y responses . 

# 3P. 5



### Teleco n Repor

t Union Carbid e Corporation Pag e 4 III . Actio n Item s Mr . Wan g offere

d t o chec k th e facilit y equipmen

t count s submitted b y Unio n Carbide Corporation . Furthermore , Mr.Wang offere d t o sen d th e EPA/PE S projec t

tea mamem o which ) he ha d sen t t o Steve Shed

d a t a n earlie r date . Thes e wer

e received following th e telephon e conversatio n an d ar

e include d a s Attachment s 1 an d 2 .



# 4P. 6



### ATTACHMEN T 1



# oP. 7

From : "Wan g D L (Don) " <wangdl@ucarb.com > To : '"Haneke , Bernd" , <bhaneke@rtp.pes.com> , 'I'LaFlam , Greg' " <glaflam@rtp.pes.com > Copie s to : "Soic e J R(John) " <soicejr@ucarb.com> , "Williams J B (Jim) " <williajb@ucarb.com> , "Yalcinkay aA

P (Peri) " <yalcinap@ucarb.com> , "Pedraz aJ L (Luis) " <pedraz j l@ucarb.com

> Subject : B-9-9 9 Connecto r Coun t Correction i

n Texa s Cit

y OL D MAC T IC R Dat e sent : Mon , 9 Au g 199 9 10:51:18-040 0 Bernd/Greg : I checke d Tabl e 7 i

n th e UCC OL

D MAC T ICR' s submitted to EP

A fo r Connecto r Counts an d foun d tha t afe w of ou r Texa s Cit y Unit s ha d no t included connectors o

r th e connecto

r coun t did not appea r correct . T o correc t thi s apparen

t anomal y i n connecto r count , abes t

estimat e ha s bee n provide d base d o

n th e following assumptions : 1 . 4 connectors/valve , to accoun t fo r th e 2 connectors/valv e plu s 2 pipe connector s 2 . 2 connectors/pum

p 3 . 1 connector/PRV . 4 . 1 connector/samplin g connection Base d o n th e abov e assumption , pleas e ad d th e connecto r coun t below , tha t ma y b e subject

to OL D MACT , to the followin

g Units : Texa s Cit y Marine Termina

l Valves-11 2 ; Pump s - 2 ; PRV' s - 2 Connector s - 45 4 Texas Cit y Mai n Plan t Olefin s Uni

t Valve s - 49 ; Pump s - 1 ; Sampling Conection s - 1 Connectors

- 19

9 Texas Cit y Mai n Plan t IP D Unit Valves-137 ; Pumps-3 ; Sampling Connections-4 ; PRV- 1 Connector s - 55 9 Texas Cit y Mai n Plan t SV RUnit Valves-474 ; Pumps- 3 ;PRV's-2 0 Connector s - 192

2 Le t m e kno w i f furthe r information i s required . Do n Wan g - Unio n Carbid e Corporation E-Mail : wangdl@ucarb.com Bld g 2000/R m342 9 Phone : 304-747-4924 

# iffP. 8



### ATTACHMEN T 2



# 1P. 9

From : "Wan g D L (Don) " <wangdl@ucarb.com > To : "Haneke , Bernd' " <bhaneke@rtp.pes.com> , GLaFlam . Greg" ' <glaflam@rtp.pes.com > Subject : Compresse d Gas Storag e i

n OL D MAC T Dat e sent : Fri , 6 Au g 1999 07:04:0 3 -0500 Bernd/Greg : Se

e below fo r DLW/UC C opinion (i

n red) o n compressed ga s storage . Thi s wa s lifte d fromm y respons e to OL

D MACT ICRWorksho

p questions . Le

t m e kno w if furthe r inf o i s required . Do n 3 . Compressed Gases . Doe s th e surve y cove r materia l tha t ar e gase s a t standar d conditions , bu

t ar e compressed/cooled to b e loaded as aliquid ? Response : Gase s containin g HA P tha t ar e compressed to aliquid fo

r storage/shipping/transfe

r purpose s ma

y hav e the potentia

l fo r HA P emission s fromequipmen t leaks . Ifth e liquid i s aHA P o r contain s HAP , an

d the applicabilit

y criteri aar e satisfied (plant

i s alarg e emitter , i

t i s asurveyed liquid , an

d the activit

y i s not covere d b y anothe r MAC T rule) , th e operatio n shoul d b e reported o n th e survey . (Not e t o roundtable : Th

e EP A want s to mak e a n informe d decisio n o n thi s issue . I

t i s no t clea r fro mth e questio n wha

t th e issue s an d ramification s ar

e an d wha t th e rational e would b e fo

r not obtaining thi s information. ) DLW-NSP

S subpar t K an d HO N state s tha

t pressurized vessel s designed t o operat e i n exces s o f 1 5 psi g wit

h no releas e to atmospher

e (excep t fo r emergencies ) ar

e excluded fro

mthe rule . AP-42 Sectio

n 7.1.1. 6 (2/96 ) state s tha

t hig h pressur e storag e tank s (highe

r tha n 1 5 psig ) ca

n operat e s o tha t virtuall y n o evaporativ e o

r workin g losse s occur . I t appear s tha

t storag e vessel s designed i

n thi s manne

r emi t ver y littl e t o th e atmospher

e a s confirmed b

y th e consisten t inclusion ofth e exclusion fo r thi s design i

n the previou s ai

r rules . Rathe

r tha n covering ol

d ground , i

t i s suggested tha

t pressurize d vessel s designe d i n thi s manne

r als o b e excluded fromthe ICR .



# g >