## Date: May 8 , 2012

Subject: Recommendations Concerning Residual Risk Remodeling for the Pulp and

Paper Industry EPA Contract No. EP - D - 11 - 0 84 ; Work Assignment No. 0 - 03 From: Thomas Holloway To: John Bradfield , Bill Schrock , Kelley Spence, and Nick Swans on U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 **I. Background**  Under section 112(f)(2) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is directed to conduct risk assessments on each source category subject to maximum achievable control technology (MACT) standards and determine if additional or more stringent standards beyond those originall y promulgated are needed to reduce any residual risk remaining after promulgation. The EPA is directed to conduct the se ction 112(f)(2) residual risk review 8 ye ars after promulgation of the original standards. The national emissions standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) for the pulp and paper industry (40 CFR part 63, subpart S) were originally

promulgated on Ap ril 15, 1998 . S ubpart S amendments that addressed the residual risk assessment required for the pulp and paper industry were proposed in the Federal Register on December 27, 2011. Final amendments to subpart S are required to be signed b y the EPA Adminis trator by

July 31, 2012. Data from a CAA section 114 information collection request (ICR) sent to the pulp and paper industry were used for th e residual risk assessment. The second part of the ICR (Part II), which concluded in June 2011, was targeted tow ards facilities that are major sources of hazardous air pollutant ( HAP ) emissions, and involved an update of pre -populated National Emissions Inventory

(NEI) data spreadsheets (or creation of new NEI data sets). The response rate for Part II of EPA’s ICR was 100 percent, with respondents submitting NEI spreadsheets for 171 major sources. S ubstantial quality

assurance (QA) efforts were conducted on the Part II data in order to create the modeling files needed for the residual risk assessment. Modeling files were needed for both the subpart S category (MACT code 1626 - 1) and the whole facility , so QA efforts focused on data for all emission sources at pulp and paper facilities. The QA of the inputs to the residual risk modeling file was documented in a Novemb er 11, 2011 memorandum entitled, Inputs to the Pulp and Paper Industry October 2011 Residual Risk Modeling . 1 

## Using these modeling files, EPA conducted risk assessments that provided estimates of the following:

## 2

 The maximum individual risk (MIR) posed by the HAP emissions from the 171 pulp and paper mills in the source category , where MIR is defined as the risk associated with a lifetime of exposure at the highest concentration ;  The distribution of cancer and noncancer risks within the exposed populations;  The total cancer incidence;  Estimates of the maximum target organ - specific hazard index (TOSHI) for chronic exposures to HAP with the potential to cause chronic noncancer health effects ;  W orst - case screening estimates of hazard quotient (HQ ) for acute exp osures to HAP with the potential to cause noncancer health effects ; and  An evaluation of the potential for adverse environmental effects. The results of these risk assessments were presented in a December 2011 EPA document entitled, Draft Residual Risk Assessment for the Pulp &Paper Source Category . 2 

## II. **Objective** In the preamble to the December 27, 2011 subpart S proposal , EPA proposed that the risks from the pulp and paper source category are acceptable and concluded that the current subpart S rule protects public health with an ample margin of safety . 3 

## The EPA also solicited comment on the proposal, asking for any additional data that may help to reduce the uncertainties inherent in the risk assessments and other analyses . 4 

## The EPA was specifically intere sted in receiving corrections to the mill - specific HAP emissions data used in the risk modeling , but also accepted revisions to mill - specific non - HAP emissions data, including revised data for criteria air pollutants (CAP) and total reduced sulfur (TRS) . The mill - specific NE I emissions data were available for download on EPA’s Risk and Technology

Review (RTR) web page at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/rrisk/rtrpg.html ; the NEI data files include d detailed information for each HAP emissions release point for each facility included in the subpart S source category . 4 

## Commenters on the subpart S proposal (e.g., industry , states) were asked to determine whether any of the NE I data were unrepresentative or inaccurate and to submit their comments on the data downloade d from the RTR web page . 4 

## Specificall y , commenters were asked to enter suggested revisions to the NEI data fields appropriate for that information , gather documentation for any suggested emissions revisions (e.g., performance test reports, material balanc e calculations), and send the downloaded file with suggested revisions and all accompanying documentation to the docket for the subpart S amendments (Docket ID N o. EPA

–HQ

–OAR

– 2007

–0544). 4 

## The NEI data fields that could be revised included those listed in Table 1 at the end of this memorandum . 4 

## The objective of this memorandum is to document the review of the NEI data revision s received from the pulp and paper industry, evaluate which revisions could increase or decrease the risk associated with a particular facility , and recommend whether risk remodeling for the subpart S category should be conducted for any of the facilities based on these findings. **III. Review of**  **NEI Data R** **evision s**  An estimated 81 facilities provided NEI data revision s , out of 171 major source facilities in the source category , for a response rate of nearly 50 percent , and 5 3 of 67 facilities with

## 3

cancer risk greater than 1 in a million provided NEI revisions, for a response rate of nearly 80 percent. Most NEIdata revisions were received after proposal , but there were some late NEI data revisions received prior to proposal that were not incorporated into the pre -proposal risk modeling file, which we have now included with the post -proposal revisions . The f acilities made a variety

of revisions to their NEI data, including, but not limited to:
 Deleting emission units (e.g., shutdown units, units with emissions collected and emitted elsewhere, causticizing systems using fresh water/no pulping condensates, units consolidated elsewhere in the inventory , fugitive sources changed to stack sources , paper machines reconfigured from a single emission point to wet/dry end emission points or multiple vents );  Replacing emission units (e.g., consolidated units , stack sources changed from fugitive sources , rec onfigured paper machines);  Adding emission units omitted from previous inventory (e.g., wastewater treatment plant);  Deleting individual records (e.g., duplicates, zero emissions);  Correcting source classification codes ( SCC s) ;  Changing release point IDs;  Correcting release point ty pe from fugitive to stack;  Deleting pollutants (e.g., hexachloroethane [ HCE ] from washers/bleach plants, chlorinated compounds at unbleached mills, biphenyl from recycle paper machines, o xylene double - counted with total xylenes, o - cresol double - counted with total cresols);  Adding pollutants omitted from previous inventory ;  Revising routine annual emissions data (e.g., based on updated emission factors/test data, corrected emission s calculations);  Deleting/replacing routine annual emissions data with updated/corrected data;  Revising maximum hourly emissions data;  Revising MACT code;  Providing stack parameters for newl y designated stack sources;  Correcting stack parameters;  Replacing incorrect fugitive parameters; and  Correcting latitudes/longitudes. **A. QA of**  **NEI D** **ata R**  **evision Spreadsheets**  The first step in our review was to QA the aforementioned changes in the individual NEI data revision spreadsheets received from the pulp and paper industry . Table 2 at the end of this memorandum lis ts the NEI data fields we reviewed in each spreadsheet and provides some examples of the ty

pe of review we conducted. The risk inputs memo 1 

## was used as a guide to ensure that the changes commenters made were consistent with prior modeling inputs. We added an “RTI Notes” column at the end of each facility’s NEI data revision s spreadsheet that (1) noted our recommendations regarding the facility ’s suggested NEI data revision s and rationale (e.g., OK to add/delete/revise record to correct error, update data, replace data); and (2 ) noted our own revision s (e.g., adding default stack parameters, calculating flow rates, correcting errors , filling data gaps , adding data from facilities’ previous inventory updates ) .

## 4

Where we made revisions, we highlighted those sp readsheet cells in yellow to distinguish them from the revisions made by the facilities. **B. Completion of Review Checklist**  **s** After we had completed our QA of each facility ’s NEI data revision s spreadsheet, we filled out a review checklist for each facility that documented whether the NEI data revision s could be expected to increase or decrease the risk for that facility, to assist in developing our recommendations whether to remodel for risk for the subpart S category . See Appendix A for a blank cop y of the NE I data revisions review checklist that was used . The review checklist includes the following items:
 Risk results from EPA’s December 2011 risk report for each facility for the subpart S c ategory and facility- wide, including chronic cancer MIR , chronic non - cancer maximum hazard index (HI), and acute non - cancer HQ reference exposure level (REL) ; 2 

## for each facility, we included onl y those HQ(REL) values above 0.1, unless the highest HQ(REL) for the facility was below 0.1, in which case we included the highest HQ(REL) value for that facility ;  Facility information , including mill name, city, state, NEI ID, RTI facility ID ;  Format of the NEI data revision provided by the facility, including whether the revision was provided as a spreadsheet or written comment, wh ether the revision was submitted before proposal, and whether the revision was a resubmittal of a prior inventory ;  Table of changes that may increase risk for subpart S pulp and paper production sources (MACT code 1626-1 ), subpart MM chemical recovery sources (MACT code 1626 - 2), and facility- wide sources, including: o Reductions in stack/fugitive release height, fugitive area (length x width) , stack temperature, exit gas velocity, and/or exit gas flow rate ; o A dditions or increases in emissions of key risk driv er pollutants and other HAP ; o A ddition of emission units ; and o C hange in release point type from stack to fugitive or from vertical to horizontal/gooseneck/etc . ;  Table of changes likel y t o reduce risk for the same aforementioned sources, including (conversely) : o Increases in stack/fugitive release height, fugitive area (length x width) , stack temperature, exit gas velocity, and/or exit gas flow rate ; o D eletions or reductions in emissions of key risk driver pollutants and other HAP ; o D eletion of emission units ; and o C hange in release point type from fugitive to stack or from horizontal/gooseneck/ etc. to vertical ;  Table of changes with an unknown effect on risk on the aforementioned sources, including: o C hanges in latitude and longitude ; o Changes in fugitive angle ; and

## 5 o Other change s listed on a site - specific basis (e.g., change in stack diameter , receptor location) ;  List of other ty

pes of changes , including mill names , IDs, codes, descriptions; and
 Any other notes from RTI pertinent to the review. We checked off each box in the review checklist that applied and also provided some additional information to assist in our later recommendations concerning risk remodeling for the subpart S category . Specifically, we listed on the checklist any of the key HAP risk driver po llutants whose emissions were increased, reduced, or deleted in the NEI data revision spreadsheets . Based on our review of the risk results, we considered the key HAP risk driver pollutants to be acetaldehyde, formaldehyd e, HCE , naphthalene, chloroform, m ethanol, and metals. We also listed on the checklist the emission units from which the relevant pollutants were emitted. In addition, w e listed on the checklist any emission units that were added or deleted from the spreadsheets and their associated risk driver pollutants. W e also calculated the HAP emission s reductions/increases associated with the aforementioned changes and then calculated the net change in facility HAP emissions for subp art S sources, subpart MM sources, and facility- wide , as applicabl e. **C. Risk Remodeling Recommendations**  To facilitate our development of recommendations concerning residual risk remodeling for the subpart S processes at each facility, w e consolidated the information from the review checklists for the 81 facilities that submitted NEIdata revisions into a single summary spreadsheet , provided as Appendix B at the end of this memorandum . We added the following additional columns to the spreadsheet to help us in our recommendations :  Two c olumns including information summarized by the pulp and paper industry ’s consultant AECOM , listing the risk drivers for facilities with chronic cancer risk over 2 in a million, specifically

the pollutants considered risk drivers (e.g., acetaldehyde, formaldehyde) and the sources from which the p ollutants are emitted (e.g., wastewater, papermaking, pulping); 5 

##  One column noting whether facilities submitted comments about incorrect receptor location s at their facilities;  One c olumn providing our recommendations about whether to remodel risk for subp art S processes at each facility (Yes, No, May be) and one column listing the reasons why or why not ;  One column providing the baseline HAP emissions in tons per year (tpy) for subpart S processes for each facility from the NEI data files on the RTR web pag e;  One column providing the estimated net change in HAP emissions in tpy relative to baseline for subpart S processes for each facility that can be used to support our recommendations concerning remodeling of risk for subpart S processes ; and  One column providing the estimated percent change in HAP emissions relative to baseline for subpart S processes for each facility that can also be used to support our recommendations concerning remodeling of risk for subpart S processes .

## 6

Where facilities made the ty pes of NEI data revisions that could reduce risk, we attempted to link those changes to the chronic cancer risk driver information from AECOM 5 

## and the acute non - cancer risk information from EPA’s December 2011 risk report2 

## by highlighting the relevant cells in yellow, to directly show where the NEI data revisions are expected to reduce risk. After populating the summary spreadsheet with the aforementioned information from the review checklists, AECOM, and EPA risk report , w e sorted the spreadsheet by chronic cancer risk, from highest to lowest. Then, for each facility that submitted NEI data revision s, we made recommendations whether to remodel risk for subpart S processes based on (1) the level of chronic cancer and acute non - cancer risk from subpart S proce sses at the facility, reported in the EPA risk report2 

## ; (2) the NEI data revision s that were made ; and (3) the net change in HAP emissions for subpart S processes . The development of our recommendations did not include chronic non - cancer risk, since it wa s low

— below a HI of 1

— for all facilities . Table 3 at the end of this memorandum presents our facility- specific recommendations whether to remodel risk for subpart S processes . Our recommendations were premised on EPA’s finding in the December 27, 2011 subpart S propo sed amendments that the risks from the pulp and paper source category, as modeled prior to proposal, are acceptable. 3 

## Therefore, as long as the risk for subpart S processes at an individual facility is not expected to be substantially increas ed as a result of the facility ’s NEI data revision s , we do not recommend remodeling risk for the subpart S processes at that facility . Specificall y, f

or facilities with chronic cancer MIR values above 1 in a million and acute non - cancer HQ(RE L) values abo ve 1, we recommend no risk remodeling of subpart S processes if the facilities provided NEI data revision s that would be expected to either reduce risk or result in no significant change to risk for subpart S processes . Itfollows that any facilities with lower MIR or HQ(REL) values is also not re commended for risk remodeling. Only three facilities’ NEI data revision s increased the overall HAP emissions from their subpart S processes . The net HAP emissions increase for subpart S processes at two of the facilities was minimal (approximately 3 tpy at each facility), so any increase in risk w as expected to be minor. While the net HAP emissions increase for subpart S processes at the third facility was substantial ( a twofold increase of 308 t py), 98 percent o f the added HAP emissions can be attributed to methanol; less than 6 tons of HAP emissions can be attributed to the other risk driver pollutants (e.g., acetaldehyde, formaldehyd e). The chronic cancer MIR values fo r subpart S processes at all three facilities were at or below 1 in a million, and the highest acute non - cancer HQ(REL) values for subpart S processes at all three facilities were below 1, so any increase in risk for these three facilities is not expected to result in a high risk result. Therefore, we do not recommend risk remodeling for subpart S processes at these three facilities. A fourth facility , which consists of three plants

—a pulp mill, paper mill, and water quality center , each with its own NEIID

— had a minimal HAP emissions increase for its pulp mill, but the HAP emissions reductions at the water quality center at the facility far exceeded this small emissions increase; there were no NE I data revision s for the paper mill. Based on these findings , we do not recommend risk remodeling for the subpart S processes at this facility . Note: For facilities that did not provide NEI data revision s, we also do not recommend risk remodeling

## 7

for subpart S processes because there are no new data that would alter the risks modeled prior to proposal . Nine facilities provided stack or fugitive parameter revisions that could potentially increase risk for the subpart S category . However , the se changes were (1) countered by other changes that c ould potentially reduce risk (e.g., additional stack/fugitive parameter changes, HAP emissions reductions, changes to release point ty pe or equipment configuration) or (2) were not expected to have a significant effect because the risk estimates for th e facilities were very low ( i.e., chronic cancer MIR below 1 in a mi llion and highest acute non - cancer HQ(REL) below 1 ) and because there was no increase in HAP risk driver emissions for the subpart S processes at these facilities . Therefore, we also do not recommend risk remodeling for the subpart S processes at these fa cilities . In summary , b ased on EPA’s current cancer and non - cancer risk estimates for the pulp and paper industry

and our review of the NE I data revision s received from the industry , we do not recommend risk remodeling for the subpart S category for any o f the major source facilities in this industry . **IV. References**  1. Memorandum from Thomas Holloway , Katie Hanks, C orey Gooden, and M att Hakos, RTI , to J. Bradfield and B. Schrock, EPA. Inputs to the Pulp and Paper Industry October 2011 Residual Risk Modeling. November 11, 2011. 2. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency . Draft R esidual Risk Assessment for the Pulp & Paper Source Category. December 2011. 3. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency . National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants f

rom the Pulp and Paper Industry, Proposed Rule. 76 FR 81344. December 27, 2011. 4. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency . National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants f

rom the Pulp and Paper Industry, Proposed Rule. 76 FR 81349 - 51. December 27, 201 1. 5 . Comment submitted by Paul Noe, Vice President for Public Policy, American Forest and Paper Association (AF&PA) . RE: Docket ID No. EPA

– HQ

– OAR

–2007
- 0544, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants from the Pulp and Paper Industry (76 Fed eral Register 81328, December 27, 2011). Attachment 1: Review of the HEM3 Modeling Conducted b y EPA for the Pulp & Paper Industry RTR by David Heinold, AECOM (February

2012) , Table 2 . February 27, 2012.

## 8 **Table 1. NEI**  **Data Fields for Revision Data elem**  **en t**  **Definition** Control Measure Are control measures in place? (yes or no). Control Measure Comment Select control measure from list provided, and briefly describe the control measure. Delete Indicate here if the facility or record should be deleted. Dele te Comment Describes the reason for deletion. Emissions Calculation Method Code For Revised Emissions Code description of the method used to derive emissions. For example, CEMS, material balance, stack test, etc. Emissions Process Group Enter the general type of emissions process associated with the specified emissions point. Fugitive Angle Enter release angle (clockwise from true North); orientation of the y dimension relative to true North, measured positive for clockwise starting at 0 degrees (maximum 89 degrees). Fugitive Length Enter dimension of the source in the east - west (x - ) direction, commonly referred to as length (ft). Fugitive Width Enter dimension of the source in the north - south (y - ) direction, commonly referred to as width (ft). Malfunc tion Emissions Enter total annual emissions due to malfunctions (tpy). North American Datum Enter datum for latitude/longitude coordinates (NAD27 or NAD83); if left blank, NAD83 is assumed. Process Comment Enter general comments about process sources of emissions. REVISED Address Enter revised physical street address for MACT facility here. REVISED City Enter revised city name here. REVISED County Name Enter revised county name here. REVISED Emissions Release Point Ty pe Enter revised Emissions Release Point Type here. REVISED End Date Enter revised End Date here. REVISED Exit Gas Flow Rate Enter revised Exit Gas Flowrate here (ft3/sec). REVISED Exit Gas Temperature Enter revised Exit Gas Temperature here (°F). REVISED Exit Gas Velocity Enter revise d Exit Gas Velocity here (ft/sec). REVISED Facility Category Code Enter revised Facility Category Code here, which indicates whether facility is a major or area source. REVISED Facility Name Enter revised Facility Name here. REVISED Facility Registry Id entifier Enter revised Facility Registry Identifier here, which is an ID assigned by the EPA Facility Registry System. REVISED HAP Emissions Performance Level Code Enter revised HAP Emissions Performance Level here. REVISED Latitude Enter revised Latitud e here (decimal degrees). REVISED Longitude Enter revised Longitude here (decimal degrees). REVISED MACT Code Enter revised MACT Code here. REVISED Pollutant Code Enter revised Pollutant Code here. REVISED Routine Emissions Enter revised routine emissi ons value here (tpy). REVISED SCC Code Enter revised SCC Code here. REVISED Stack Diameter Enter revised Stack Diameter here (ft). REVISED Stack Height Enter revised Stack Height here (ft). REVISED Start Date Enter revised Start Date here. REVISED State Enter revised State here. REVISED Tribal Code Enter revised Tribal Code here. REVISED Zip Code Enter revised Zip Code here. Shutdown Emissions Enter total annual emissions due to shutdown events (tpy). Stack Comment Enter general comments about emis sions release points. Startup Emissions Enter total annual emissions due to startup events (tpy). Year Closed Enter date facility stopped operations.

## 9 **Table 2. NEI**  **Data Fields Reviewed a**  

### Data field **Example review** SCC Code Determined whether SCC code change was valid, based on type of pulping process and emission unit description in risk modeling file. Emission Release Point ID Determined whether revisions of release point ID could result in duplicate records. Emission Release Point Ty pe Determined whether revision of release point type was valid, based on stack parameters provided by facility (e.g., release point changed from fugitive to stack, but the stack diameter was greater than the stack height). Pollutant Code Generally accepted facilities’ pollutant codes, pending review of a compilation of NEI data revisions for all 81 facilities reporting. b 

### Checked for any data gaps. Determined whether the deletion of a pollutant was valid (e.g., facility wanted to delete pollutant that is not emitted, but the original pollutant code was incorrect, resulting in the incorrect pollutant being assigned; so, a change in pollutant code and pollutant fixed the problem). Routine Emissions Generally accepted facilities’ rationale and revisions of emissions data, pending review of a compilation of NEI data revisions for all 81 facilities reporting. b 

### When facilities assigned a value of zero to emissions but did not mark the record for deletion, we made a note in the spreadsheet that the record should be deleted. Also, for one facility, we include d emissions data from their pre -proposal inventory revisions that were not included in any post -proposal revisions. Max Hourly Emissions Generally accepted the few facilities’ rationale and revisions of maximum hourly emission s data. MACT Code Determined whether the revised MACT code corresponded to the type of emission unit identified by SCC code (e.g., lime kiln should be assigned to 1626 - 2). Stack Height Revie wed revised stack height values provided by industry to ensure that stack height wa s always greater than stack diameter for stack emission points. Added SCC/MACT code default stack heights when facilities changed release point type from fugitive to stack but did not revise nationwide default stack height of 10 feet. Exit Gas Temperature Added SCC/MACT code default exit gas temperature values when facilities changed release point type from fugitive to stack but did not revise nationwide default exit gas tem perature of 72°F. Stack Diameter Added SCC/MACT code default s tack diameter values when facilities changed release point type from fugitive to stack but did not revise nationwide default stack diameter of 0.003 feet. Exit Gas Velocity Added SCC/MACT code default stack diameter values when facilities changed release point type from fugitive to stack but did not revise nationwide default exit gas velocity of 0.0003 feet per second. Where there were revised values for stack diameter and flow rate (e.g., from facility and/or SCC/MACT code defaults), calculated velocity as “flow rate/(π × (diameter/2) 2 

### ].” Exit Gas Flow

Rate Added SCC/MACT code default exit gas flow rate values when facilities changed

release point type from fugitive to stack but did not revise nationwide default stack diameter, exit gas velocity, and exit gas flow rate from their respective national default values. Where there were revised values for stack diameter and exit gas velocity (e.g., from facility and/or SCC/MACT code defaults), calculated exit gas flow rate as “velocity × π × (diameter/2) 2 

### .” Fugitive Length Revie wed fugitive length values to determine whether any revisions were made relative to the risk modeling file (e.g., to correct error). Deleted fugitive length values when facility changed release point type from fugitive to stack. Fugitive Width Revie wed fugitive width values to determine whether any revisions were made relative to the risk modeling file (e.g., to correct error). Deleted fugitive width values when facility changed release point type from fugitive to stack. Fugitive Angle Revie wed fugitive angle values to determine whether any revisions were made relative to the risk modeling file (e.g., to correct error). Deleted fugitive angle values when facility changed release point type from fugitive to stack. Latitude Generally accepted facilities’ revision of latitude (e.g., to correct error), pending a

## 10

**Data field Example review**  mo re in - depth review similar to the QA conducted pre -proposal. Longitude Generally accepted facilities’ revision of longitude (e.g., to correct error), pending a mo re in - depth review similar to the QA conducted pre -proposal. a 

### For new /replacement records added by facilities, we checked the accuracy of all fields in the table. b 

### Pollutant codes and emission rates will be rechecked for consistency across all facilities upon compi lation of the revised nationwide NEI file.

## 11 **Table 3. Recommendations Concerning Risk Remodeling Survey NEI**  **Company**

**na me**  **Mi ll city**  **Mi ll**  **state Cancer MIR**  **Chronic non**   ** cancer** **max HI**  **a Acute non**  ****

**cancer max**  **HQ(REL) b**  **Re**  

** model?** **Reasons** NEI32869A Domtar Paper

Company LLC Hawesville KY 1.21E - 05 0.17 <1 No Emissions reduction/removal of risk driver pollutants from multiple sources expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI18334 GeorgiaPacific Corp. Pennington AL 1.04E - 05 0.20 5.67 (formaldehyde) 4.91 (methan ol) 4.66 (acetaldehyde) 2.91 (chloroform) No Changes in release point type and stack parameters, removal of some emission units, and net emissions reduction/removal of risk driver/other pollutants expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI40648 SP Newsprint

Co. Newberg OR 9.01E - 06 0.44 3.17 (chloroform) No No NEI revisions received NEI40282 Blue Ridge

Paper Products Inc. Canton NC 8.98E - 06 0.29 <1 No Net emissions reduction/removal of risk driver/other pollutants expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEIWI7720116, NEI46739, & NEI42963 NewPage

Corporation Wisconsin

Rapids WI NEIWI7720116: 8.51E - 06 NEI46739: 4.00E - 07 NEI42963: 1. 56E - 07 NEIWI7720116:

0.41 NEI46739: 0.05 NEI42963: 0.00 NEIWI7720116:

4.29 (acetaldehyde) 3.43 (methanol) 3.12 (chloroform) 1.38 (formaldehyde) No Net emissions reduction/removal of risk driver/other pollutants for entire facility expected to reduce risk f or subpart S category ; large emissions reduction for higher- risk NEIWI7720116; minimal net emissions increase in emissions for low- risk NEI46739 NEIME0250002 Madison Paper

Co. Madison ME 7.58E - 06 0.31 1.57 (acetaldehyde) 1.32 (formaldehyde) No Changes in release point type and stack parameters and net emissions reduction of risk driver/other pollutants expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI42695 Domtar

Corporation Nekoosa WI 7.42E - 06 0.29 <1 No Removal of some risk driver pollutants expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI41552 Packaging

Corp. of America Counce TN 7.14E - 06 0.36 2.12 (acetaldehyde) No Changes in release point type and stack parameters, removal of risk driver pollutant from one source, and net emissions reduction of risk driver

## 12

**Survey NEI Company** 

**na me**  **Mi ll city**  **Mi ll**  **state Cancer MIR**  **Chronic non**   ** cancer** **max HI**  **a Acute non**  ****

**cancer max**  **HQ(REL) b**  **Re**  

** model?** **Reasons**

pollutant expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI6057 Graphic

Packaging International, Inc. West Monroe LA 5.27E - 06 0.22 <1 No No NEI revisions received

NEI47091 Buckeye

Technologies Inc. Perry FL 5.22E - 06 0.16 1.68 (chloroform) No Removal of risk driver pollutant from multiple sources expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI40600 GeorgiaPacific Corp. Toledo OR 4.94E - 06 0.15 <1 No Replacement of fugitive records with stack records and emissio ns reduction of risk driver/other pollutants expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI46835 Woodland

Pulp LLC Baileyville ME 4.86E - 06 0.20 15.2 (acetaldehyde) 1.40 (chloroform) No No NEI revisions received
NEI43207 Appleton

Coated L.L.C. Combine d

Locks WI 4.32E - 06 0.22 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI13363 Simpson

Tacoma Kraft Co Tacoma WA 4.30E - 06 0.07 4.62 (formaldehyde) No Emissions reduction of risk driver pollutants expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI41314 International

Paper Co. Georgetown SC 4.25E - 06 0.16 <1 No Removal of some emission units and risk driver/other pollutants from multiple sources expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI42211 GeorgiaPacific Corp. Big Island VA 4.25E - 06 0.20 1.29 (acetaldehyde) No No revisions except minor changes to lat/longs and fugitive angles, so risk for subpart S category expe cted to be unchanged NEI7104 Appleton Roaring Spring PA 4.09E - 06 0.07 <1 No Changes to stack heights expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI40686 Domtar

Corporation Johnsonburg PA 3.85E - 06 0.07 <1 No Removal of some risk driver/other pollutant s from multiple sources expected to reduce risk for subpart S

## 13

**Survey NEI Company** 

**na me**  **Mi ll city**  **Mi ll**  **state Cancer MIR**  **Chronic non**   ** cancer** **max HI**  **a Acute non**  ****

**cancer max**  **HQ(REL) b**  **Re**  

** model?** **Reasons**

category NEI33135 & NEI706 NewPage

Corporation Luke MD NEI33135: 3.77E - 06 NEI706: 4.65E - 07 NEI33135:

0.14 NEI706: 0.01 <1 No Changes in release point type and stack parameters, removal of emiss ion unit, and emissions reduction of risk driver pollutant expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI41599 Domtar Paper

Company LLC Kingsport TN 3.62E - 06 0.14 1.09 (acetaldehyde) No Net emissions reduction/removal of risk driver/other pollutants f rom multiple sources expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI8178 GeorgiaPacific Corp. Rincon GA 3.34E - 06 0.06 <1 No Net emissions reduction/removal of risk driver/other pollutants from multiple sources expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI8196 GeorgiaPacific Corp. Brunswick GA 3.27E - 06 0.14 1.98 (acetaldehyde) No Change in release point type and stack parameters and emissions reduction of risk driver/other pollutants expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI6450 MeadWes t vaco Evadale TX 3.25E - 06 0.09 1.20 (acetaldehyde) 1.03 (chloroform) No Change in fugitive parameters and net emissions reduction of risk driver pollutants expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI26495 TIN Inc., dba

Temple - Inland Rome GA 3.18E - 06 0.09 <1 No No revisions except suggested change in receptor location, so risk for subpart S category expected to be unchanged NEI42357 Port Townsend

Paper Corp. Port

Townsend WA 3.10E - 06 0.18 <1 No Change in release temperature and emissions reduction of risk driver pollutant expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI18660 Domtar

Industries Ashdown AR 3.04E - 06 0.08 <1 No Emissions reduction/removal of risk driver pollutants from multiple sources expected to reduce risk for

## 14

**Survey NEI Company** 

**na me**  **Mi ll city**  **Mi ll**  **state Cancer MIR**  **Chronic non**   ** cancer** **max HI**  **a Acute non**  ****

**cancer max**  **HQ(REL) b**  **Re**  

** model?** **Reasons**

subpart S category NEIIL0215971 Ahlstrom

Filtration LLC Taylorville IL 3.00E - 06 0.15 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI45182 Internati onal

Paper Co. Springfield OR 2.80E - 06 0.05 <1 No Emissions reduction of risk driver/other pollutants expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI47104 KapStone Roanoke Rapids NC 2.73E - 06 0.12 9.32 (acetaldehyde) 1.48 (formaldehyde) No Changes in re lease point type and stack parameters expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI12407 Verso Paper

Corp. Sartell MN 2.72E - 06 0.09 <1 No Removal of emission unit expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI40247 International

Paper Co. Riegel wood NC 2.69E - 06 0.09 <1 No Removal of some emission units and emissions reduction/removal of risk driver/other pollutants expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI759 MeadWestvaco Covington VA 2.62E - 06 0.08 <1 No Removal of risk driver pollutant expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI8560 International

Paper Co. Prattville AL 2.58E - 06 0.10 <1 No Removal of some emission units expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI42482 GeorgiaPacific Corp. Green Bay WI 2.46E - 06 0.03 <1 N o Net emissions reduction of risk driver pollutant expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEIVA00022 Greif Inc. Amherst VA 2.32E - 06 0.10 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI34030 UPM, Blandin

Paper Co. Grand Rapids MN 2.30E - 06 0.04 <1 No Change in paper machine configuration (to include wet/dry end) and change in stack parameter expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI8278 Rock- Tenn Co. Panama City FL 2.28E - 06 0.07 <1 No Changes in release point type and stack parameters and removal of risk driver/other pollutants from multiple

## 15

**Survey NEI Company** 

**na me**  **Mi ll city**  **Mi ll**  **state Cancer MIR**  **Chronic non**   ** cancer** **max HI**  **a Acute non**  ****

**cancer max**  **HQ(REL) b**  **Re**  

** model?** **Reasons**

sources expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI11610 Rock- Tenn Co. Cincinnati OH 2.27E - 06 0.05 <1 No Changes to release point type and parameters expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI6261 Verso Paper

Corp. Jay ME 2.22E - 06 0.12 <1 No Emissions reduction of HAP driver/other pollutants expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI43472 Sonoco

Products Co. Hartsville SC 2.19E - 06 0.11 1.32 (acetaldehyde) No No NEI revisions received NEI33 883 NewPage

Corporation Escanaba MI 2.04E - 06 0.12 <1 No Emissions reduction of HAP driver pollutants expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI8186 International

Paper Co. Savannah GA 2.00E - 06 0.03 1.57 (formaldehyde)) No Removal of some emission units and dmissions reduction of HAP driver pollutants expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI26476 Weyerhaeuser

Co. Port

Wentworth GA 1.91E - 06 0.10 1.09 (acetaldehyde) No No NEI revisions received NEI41565 AbitibiBowater

Inc. Calhoun TN 1.89E - 06 0.13 1.27 (chloroform) No No NEI revisions received NEI40738 Proctor &

Gamble Paper Products Co. Mehoopany PA 1.86E - 06 0.06 <1 No Removal of some risk driver pollutants expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI11251 International

Paper Co. V alliant OK 1.84E - 06 0.06 <1 No Changes in stack /fugitive parameters and removal of some emission units expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI11172 GeorgiaPacific Corp. Monticello MS 1.71E - 06 0.06 <1 No Emissions reduction of risk driver pollutant expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI54342 GeorgiaPacific Corp. Crossett AR 1.68E - 06 0.06 <1 No Changes in release point type and stack parameters expected to reduce risk for subpart S category

## 16

**Survey NEI Company** 

**na me**  **Mi ll city**  **Mi ll**  **state Cancer MIR**  **Chronic non**   ** cancer** **max HI**  **a Acute non**  ****

**cancer max**  **HQ(REL) b**  **Re**  

** model?** **Reasons** NEI26581 Clearwater

Paper Corp. Lewiston ID 1.49E - 06 0.03 <1 No Removal of risk driver pollutant expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI34066 GeorgiaPacific Corp. New Augusta MS 1.44E - 06 0.04 <1 No Change in fugitive parameters and removal of risk driver pollutant expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI11367 Ahlstrom

Filtration LLC Madisonville KY 1.42E - 06 0.16 2.07 (formaldehyde) 1.18 (methanol) No No NEI revisions received
NEI18658 Evergreen

Packaging Pine Bluff AR 1.39E - 06 0.22 2.9 (chloroform) No Emissions reduction/removal of risk driver/other pollutants expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI7181 Glatfelter Spring Grove PA 1.35E - 06 0.05 <1 No Removal of risk driver pollutant from multiple sources expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI34070 International

Paper Co. Redwood MS 1.32E - 06 0.04 <1 No Change in paper machine configuration (to include wet/dry end) and stack parameters, removal of some emission units, and net emissions reduction expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI13340 P ope & Talbot

Inc. Halsey OR 1.29E - 06 0.14 4.67 (formaldehyde) 2.57 (acetaldehyde) 1.58 (methanol) No No NEI revisions received

NEI26526 Rayonier Inc. Jesup GA 1.28E - 06 0.13 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI54400 Domtar Paper

Company LLC Rothschild WI 1 .18E - 06 0.04 <1 No Emissions reduction of risk driver pollutants expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI8265 GeorgiaPacific Corp. Palatka FL 1.16E - 06 0.03 <1 No Removal of risk driver /other pollutants expected to reduce risk for subpart S cate gory

## 17

**Survey NEI Company** 

**na me**  **Mi ll city**  **Mi ll**  **state Cancer MIR**  **Chronic non**   ** cancer** **max HI**  **a Acute non**  ****

**cancer max**  **HQ(REL) b**  **Re**  

** model?** **Reasons** NEI42341B North Pacific

Paper Corp. (Norpac) Longview WA 1.15E - 06 0.03 <1 No No NEI revisions received
NEI33025 or NEW71411 International

Paper Co. Campti LA 1.10E - 06 0.04 <1 No Removal of some emission units expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI33023 Rock- Tenn Co. Hodge LA 1.10E - 06 0.03 <1 No Change in release point type and stack parameters and net emissions reductions/removal of biphenyl, o cresol, chloroform, and other chlorinated HAPs expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI46814 TIN Inc., dba

Temple - Inland Bogalusa LA 1.10E - 06 0.03 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI6273 NewPage

Corporation Rumford ME 1.09E - 06 0.04 <1 No Minimal net emissions increase for subpart S category , so any increase in risk for subpart S category expected to be minor; also, cancer MIR for subpart S category is ~1E - 6, and noncancer HI and HQ(REL)<<1, so any increase in risk is not expected to result in a high risk result NEI46599 GeorgiaPacific Corp. Camas WA 1.05E - 06 0.03 <1 No Changes in rele ase point type and stack parameters and emissions reductions of risk driver/other pollutants expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI8619 International

Paper Co. Pine Hill AL 1.04E - 06 0.04 <1 No Removal of some emission units expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI42254 Rock- Tenn Co. West Point VA 1.02E - 06 0.05 <1 No Changes in release point type and stack parameters and removal of biphenyl, o - cresol, and o - xylene from multiple sources expected to reduce risk for subpart S category

## 18

**Survey NEI Company** 

**na me**  **Mi ll city**  **Mi ll**  **state Cancer MIR**  **Chronic non**   ** cancer** **max HI**  **a Acute non**  ****

**cancer max**  **HQ(REL) b**  **Re**  

** model?** **Reasons** NEI47074 Domtar Paper

Company LLC Bennettsville SC 1.02E - 06 0.03 <1 No Changes in release point type and stack parameters and replacement of fugitive records with lower- emitting stack records expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI26491 GeorgiaPacific Corp. Cedar Springs GA 9.95E - 07 0.04 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI8261 Rock- Tenn Co. Fernandina Beach FL 9.31E - 07 0.03 <1 No Removal of biphenyl, o - cresol, and chlorinated HAPs from multiple sources expected to reduce risk for subpart S cate gory NEI26309 International

Paper Co. Cantonment FL 9.23E - 07 0.04 <1 No Change in fugitive parameters and removal of risk driver pollutant expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI45206 Weyerhaeuser

Co. Vanceboro NC 8.85E - 07 0.01 <1 No Removal o f risk driver pollutant from multiple sources expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI41252 KapStone North Charleston SC 8.85E - 07 0.02 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI7559 Boise Inc. DeRidder LA 8.80E - 07 0.04 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI33013 International

Paper Co. Mansfield LA 8.44E - 07 0.03 <1 No Removal of some emission units expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI11461 Rock- Tenn Co. Coshocton OH 8.18E - 07 0.04 <1 No Removal of biphenyl from multiple sources expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI33945 Packaging

Corp. of America Filer City MI 8.16E - 07 0.04 <1 No Emissions reductions of risk driver/other pollutants expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI40554 GeorgiaPacific Corp. Clatskanie OR 8.00 E - 07 0.01 <1 No Changes to release point type and stack parameters expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI26504 Packaging Clyattville GA 7.94E - 07 0.03 <1 No No revisions to subpart S sources, so

## 19

**Survey NEI Company** 

**na me**  **Mi ll city**  **Mi ll**  **state Cancer MIR**  **Chronic non**   ** cancer** **max HI**  **a Acute non**  ****

**cancer max**  **HQ(REL) b**  **Re**  

** model?** **Reasons** Corp. of America risk for subpart S category expe cted to be unchanged NEI18335 International

Paper Co. Selma AL 7.69E - 07 0.05 <1 No Removal of some emission units and risk driver pollutant expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI11338 NewPage

Corporation Wickliffe KY 7.44E - 07 0.03 <1 No No revisions to subpart S sources, so risk for subpart S category expected to be unchanged NEI46852 Green Bay

Packaging Inc. Morrilton AR 7.35E - 07 0.04 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI18390 AbitibiBowater

Inc. Coosa Pines AL 6.85E - 07 0.02 <1 No No NEI revi sions received NEI23 Halltown

Paperboard Co. Halltown WV 6.53E - 07 0.03 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI42341A Weyerhaeuser

Co. Longview WA 6.47E - 07 0.07 4.03 (chloroform) No Net emissions reduction of risk driver pollutant expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI46817 GeorgiaPacific Corp. Zachary LA 6.43E - 07 0.02 1.03 (acetaldehyde) No Removal of risk driver pollutant expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI47077 AbitibiBowater

Inc. Catawba SC 6.42E - 07 0.04 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI26471 Graphic

Packaging International, Inc. Macon GA 6.28E - 07 0.01 <1 No No NEI revisions received

NEI33103 Red Shield

Environmental Old Town ME 5.54E - 07 0.03 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI42689 Wausau Paper Mosinee WI 5.50E - 07 0.10 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI46866 TIN Inc., dba

Temple - Inland Waverly TN 5.40E - 07 0.03 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI42486 Green Bay

Packaging Inc. Green Bay WI 5.12E - 07 0.01 <1 No No NEI revisions received

## 20

**Survey NEI Company** 

**na me**  **Mi ll city**  **Mi ll**  **state Cancer MIR**  **Chronic non**   ** cancer** **max HI**  **a Acute non**  ****

**cancer max**  **HQ(REL) b**  **Re**  

** model?** **Reasons** NEI6175 Hollingsworth

& Vose Co. Wes t Groton MA 5.08E - 07 0.00 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI26382 Rayonier Inc. Fernandina Beach FL 5.05E - 07 0.02 1.10 (chloroform) No No NEI revisions received NEI42329 Nippon Paper

Industries USA Co., Ltd. Port Angeles WA 5.05E - 07 0.01 <1 No No NEI revisions received
NEI42338 Longview

Fibre Co. Longview WA 5.02E - 07 0.03 1.46 (formaldehyde) No Emissions reductions of risk driver/other pollutants expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI46931 MeadWestvaco Cottonton AL 4.77E - 07 0.02 <1 No No NE I revisions received NEI9201 Domtar Paper

Company LLC Ply

mouth NC 4.73E - 07 0.02 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI41628 International

Paper Co. Queen City TX 4.52E - 07 0.03 <1 No Removal of some emission units and risk driver pollutant expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI12411 Boise Inc. International Falls MN 4.44E - 07 0.02 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI18338 GeorgiaPacific Corp. Brewton AL 4.31E - 07 0.01 <1 No Large net emissions increase for subpart S category ; however, 98% of the added emissions is methanol (only 5.7 tons attributed to other risk driver pollutants); also cancer MIR for subpart S category is <<1E - 6, and non- cancer HI and HQ(REL)<1, so any increase in risk is not expected to result in a high risk result NEI18357 International

Paper Co. Courtland AL 4.29E - 07 0.01 <1 No Removal of risk driver pollutant expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI26514 International

Paper Co. Augusta GA 4.17E - 07 0.02 <1 No Changes in fugitive parameters and removal of some emissio n units and risk driver pollutant expected to reduce risk for subpart S category

## 21

**Survey NEI Company** 

**na me**  **Mi ll city**  **Mi ll**  **state Cancer MIR**  **Chronic non**   ** cancer** **max HI**  **a Acute non**  ****

**cancer max**  **HQ(REL) b**  **Re**  

** model?** **Reasons** NEI34064 Weyerhaeuser

Co. Columbus MS 3.90E - 07 0.04 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI12492 TIN Inc., dba

Temple - Inland Orange TX 3.83E - 07 0.01 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI33118 Sappi Fine

Paper North America Skowhegan ME 3.83E - 07 0.01 <1 No No NEI revisions received
NEI18657 Delta Natural

Kraft Pine Bluff AR 3.70E - 07 0.01 8.54 (1,2 - dimethoxyethane) 2.75 (formaldehyde) No No NEI revisions received

NEIMA10626 Onyx Specialty

Papers South Lee MA 3.62E - 07 0.00 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI18347 Rock- Tenn Co. Stevenson AL 3.57E - 07 0.02 1.00 (acetaldehyde) No Changes in fugitive parameters and removal of biphenyl and chlorinated HAPs from multiple sources expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI208 Bear Island

Paper Co., LLC Ashland VA 3.54E - 07 0.02 4.16 (chloroform) No No NEI revisions received
NEI46760 International

Paper Co. Eastover SC 3.49E - 07 0.07 <1 No Removal of some emission units and risk driv er pollutant expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI43202 Wausau Paper Rhinelander WI 3.35E - 07 0.01 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI8601 Boise Inc. Jackson AL 2.93E - 07 0.01 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI18373 Alabama River

Cellulose P erdue Hill AL 2.92E - 07 0.01 1.53 (acetaldehyde) No Emissions reduction of risk driver pollutant expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI33887 Verso Paper

Corp. Quinnesec MI 2.88E - 07 0.01 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI42317 Rock- Tenn Co. Ho pewell VA 2.83E - 07 0.01 <1 No Changes in release point type and stack parameters and removal of o -

## 22

**Survey NEI Company** 

**na me**  **Mi ll city**  **Mi ll**  **state Cancer MIR**  **Chronic non**   ** cancer** **max HI**  **a Acute non**  ****

**cancer max**  **HQ(REL) b**  **Re**  

** model?** **Reasons**

xylene and chlorinated HAPs from multiple sources expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI26487 Proctor &

Gamble Paper Products Co. Albany GA 2.79E - 07 0.01 <1 No No NEI revisions received
NEI45474 Rock- Tenn Co. Demopolis AL 2.77E - 07 0.11 1.93 (chlorine) No Removal of emission unit and risk driver/other pollutants from multiple sources expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI42710 Thilmany

Papers, LLC Kaukauna WI 2.73E - 07 0.01 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI8122 Augusta

Newsprint Co. Augusta GA 2.62E - 07 0.01 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI42730 Fraser Papers

Inc. Park Falls WI 2.40E - 07 0.01 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEIWI40 50324 GeorgiaPacific Corp. Green Bay WI 2.18E - 07 0.14 <1 No Small net emissions increase for subpart S category ; however, the added pollutant (4.8 tons) is vinyl acetate (not risk driver), while the reduced pollutant (1.8 tons) is acetaldehyde (risk driver); also cancer MIR for subpart S category is <<1E - 6, and non - cancer HI and HQ(REL)<<1, so any increase in risk is not expected to result in a high risk result NEI33981 Domtar Paper

Company LLC Port Huron MI 2.13E - 07 0.01 <1 No No revisions to subpart S s ources, so risk for subpart S category expected to be unchanged NEI42410 Boise Inc. Wallula WA 1.93E - 07 0.01 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEIMN14904 NewPage

Corporation Duluth MN 1.89E - 07 0.01 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI39968 Finch Paper

LLC Glens Falls NY 1.86E - 07 0.14 <1 No No NEI revisions received

## 23

**Survey NEI Company** 

**na me**  **Mi ll city**  **Mi ll**  **state Cancer MIR**  **Chronic non**   ** cancer** **max HI**  **a Acute non**  ****

**cancer max**  **HQ(REL) b**  **Re**  

** model?** **Reasons** NEI13216 Catalyst Paper Snowflake AZ 1.76E - 07 0.00 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI12368 Sappi Fine

Paper North America Cloquet MN 1.73E - 07 0.00 <1 No No NEI revisions received
NEI26506 Weyerhaeuser

Co. Oglethorpe GA 1.59E - 07 0.01 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI11108 AbitibiBowater

Inc. Grenada MS 1.57E - 07 0.01 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI42495 Thilmany

Papers, LLC De Pere WI 1.51E - 07 0.01 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI129 80 GeorgiaPacific Corp. Muskogee OK 1.49E - 07 0.01 <1 No Minor changes in stack parameters for two release points expected to have minimal impact on risk for subpart S category NEI33104 Lincoln Paper

and Tissue Lincoln ME 1.48E - 07 0.00 <1 No No NEI revisi ons received NEI42800 Shawano

Specialty Papers Shawano WI 1.47E - 07 0.01 <1 No No NEI revisions received
NEI42690 Wausau Paper Brokaw WI 1.45E - 07 0.01 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI18652 Clearwater

Paper Corp. McGehee AR 1.29E - 07 0.05 <1 No No revis ions to subpart S sources, so risk for subpart S category expected to be unchanged NEI35908 International

Paper Co. Ticonderoga NY 1.17E - 07 0.01 <1 No Removal of some emission units and risk driver pollutant expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEIWI7500086 & NEIWIT$8597 NewPage

Corporation Stevens Point WI NEIWI7500086: 1.13E - 07 NEIWIT$8597: 0.00E+00 NEIWI7500086:

0.01 NEIWIT$8597: 0.00 <1 No No NEI revisions received

NEIWI0793640 Wisconsin

Paperboard Corp. Milwaukee WI 1.12E - 07 0.00 <1 No No NEI revisions received

## 24

**Survey NEI Company** 

**na me**  **Mi ll city**  **Mi ll**  **state Cancer MIR**  **Chronic non**   ** cancer** **max HI**  **a Acute non**  ****

**cancer max**  **HQ(REL) b**  **Re**  

** model?** **Reasons** NEI7933 Rock- Tenn Co. Florence SC 1.08E - 07 0.00 <1 No Changes in release point type and stack parameters and removal of o cresol, o - xylene, chloroform, and other chlorinated HAPs from multiple sources expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEI8177 Interstate

Paper L.L.C. Riceboro GA 1.07E - 07 0.00 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI6284 Verso Paper

Corp. Bucksport ME 1.05E - 07 0.00 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI46750 Packaging

Corp. of America To mahawk WI 9.83E - 0 8 0.00 <1 No No NEI revisions received
NEI34020 Wausau Paper Brainerd MN 9.79E - 08 0.00 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI11602 Graphic

Packaging International, Inc. Middletown OH 7.40E - 08 0.00 <1 No No NEI revisions received

NEIPA1013489 Newman &

Co., Inc. Philadelphia PA 7.36E - 08 0.00 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI2INT16350 Temple - Inland Cayuga IN 6.75E - 08 0.00 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEITN1050093 KimberlyClark Worldwide, Inc. Loudon TN 6.34E - 08 0.01 5.24 (chloroform) No No NEI revision s received

NEI11645 Appleton West Carrollton OH 6.13E - 08 0.07 1.90 (chloroform) No No NEI revisions received NEI11600 Smart Papers

L.L.C. Hamilton OH 5.51E - 08 0.00 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI36019 Knowlton

Technologies, LLC Watertown NY 5.18E - 08 0.00 <1 No No NEI revisions received
NEICT3102 Cascades Versailles CT 5.01E - 08 0.00 <1 No No NEI revisions received

## 25

**Survey NEI Company** 

**na me**  **Mi ll city**  **Mi ll**  **state Cancer MIR**  **Chronic non**   ** cancer** **max HI**  **a Acute non**  ****

**cancer max**  **HQ(REL) b**  **Re**  

** model?** **Reasons** Boxboard NEIWI4710355 SCA Tissue

North America, L.L.C. Menasha WI 4.43E - 08 0.00 <1 No No NEI revisions received

NEI42961 NewPage

Corporation Wisconsin

Rapids WI 4.32E - 08 0.00 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEW73505 Republic

Paperboard Co. Lawton OK 4.22E - 08 0.00 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI40488 Glatfelter Chillicothe OH 3.76E - 08 0.00 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEIGAT$3911 SP Newsprint

Co. East Dublin GA 3.39E - 08 0.02 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI33866 Neenah Paper,

Inc. Munising MI 2.45E - 08 0.00 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI7106 American

Eagle Paper Mills Inc. Tyrone PA 1.40E - 08 0.00 <1 No No NEI revisions rec eived
NEI33950 Menominee

Paper Co. /Cellu Tissue Menominee MI 8.45E - 09 0.00 <1 No No NEI revisions received
NEI40720 PaperWorks

Industries, Inc. Philadelphia PA 7.58E - 09 0.00 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI26304 Rock- Tenn Co. Jacksonville FL 4.13E - 0 9 0.00 <1 No Removal of biphenyl, o - xylene, methylene chloride, and other chlorinated HAP from multiple sources expected to reduce risk for subpart S category NEINY5532600 Hollingsworth

& Vose Co. Greenwich NY 1.44E - 09 0.00 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI40553 Boise Inc. St Helens OR 4.20E - 10 0.00 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEINY5533400 Hollingsworth

& Vose Co. Easton NY 3.12E - 10 0.00 <1 No No NEI revisions received

## 26

**Survey NEI Company** 

**na me**  **Mi ll city**  **Mi ll**  **state Cancer MIR**  **Chronic non**   ** cancer** **max HI**  **a Acute non**  ****

**cancer max**  **HQ(REL) b**  **Re**  

** model?** **Reasons** NEI2WAT18798 Ponderay

Newsprint Co. Usk WA 0.00E+00 0.00 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI42385 KimberlyClark Worldwide, Inc. Everett WA 0.00E+00 0.00 <1 No No NEI revisions received
NEIGAT$3909 Hollingsworth

& Vose Co. Hawkinsville GA 0.00E+00 0.00 <1 No No NEI revisions received NEI33072 Sappi Fine

Paper North America Westbro ok ME -- -- -- No No HAP data for subpart S category to model NEI33986 Manistique

Papers Inc. Manistique MI -- -- -- No No HAP data for subpart S category to model NEIMA131179 Hollingsworth

& Vose Co. East Walpole MA -- -- -- No No HAP data for subpart S category to model NEIWA0270002 Grays Harbor

Paper, LLC Hoquiam WA -- -- -- No Not modeled

a Chronic non - cancer max HI results are low (<1) for all mills, so HI values were not considered in the risk remodeling evaluation. Note: HI values of 0.00 simply mean that HI is less than 0.005 (i.e., cannot be rounded to 0.01). b Acute non - cancer HQ(REL) results are available for multiple pollutants. Note: Table only includes specific HQ(REL) values above 1.

## Appendix A. NEIData Revisions Review Sheet

A - 1 Source category Facility - Wide Chroni c cancer MIR

_______ _______ Chronic non - cancer max HI

_______ _______ Acute non - cancer max HQ REL

_______ _______ NEI code: ____________ RTI code:

______ Mill name (city and state):

___________________________________________________ Format of NEI revision (check one): __Spreadsheet __Resubmittal of prior inventory in its entirety __Written comment __Other (specify) _______________ __Submitted before proposal **Changes That May Increase Risk (check all that apply) Type of change in inve**  **ntory revision Subpart S**  **(1626 -**  **1 Sources) Subpart MM** 

**(1626 -**  **2 Sources) Facility**  ****

**wide sources**  Reduced stack/fugitive release height Reduced fugitive area (l x w) Increased emissions of key risk driver pollutants (> 1 tpy increase)* Increased em issions of other HAP less likely to be risk drivers (> 10 tpy increase) Reduced stack gas temperature Reduced stack gas velocity or flow Added rows with add’l HAP emission unit(s) Added rows with add’l HAPs (particularly risk drivers) for p reviously reported emission units* Changed emission release point type from stack to fugitive, vertical to horizontal, gooseneck, etc *acetaldehyde, formaldehyde, hexachloroethane, naphthalene, chloroform, methanol, metals **Changes Likely to Reduc e Risk (check all that apply)**  **Type of change in inventory revision Subpart S**  **(1626 -**  **1 Sources) Subpart MM** 

**(1626 -**  **2 Sources) Facility**  ****

**wide sources**  Increased stack/fugitive release height Increased fugitive area (l x w) Reduced emissions of key risk driver pollutants (> 1 tpy decrease)* Reduced emissions of other HAP less likely to be risk drivers (> 10 tpy decrease) Increased stack gas temperature Increased stack gas velocity or flow Deleted rows of HAP emission unit(s) Deleted ro ws of HAPs (particularly risk drivers) for previously reported emission units*

## Appendix A. NEIData Revisions Review Sheet

A - 2 **Type of change in inventory revision Subpart S**  **(1626 -**  **1 Sources) Subpart MM** 

**(1626 -**  **2 Sources) Facility**  ****

**wide sources**  Changed emission release point type from fugitive to stack, horizontal/gooseneck/etc. to vertical *acetaldehyde, formaldehyde, hexachloroethane, naphthalene, chloroform, methanol, metals **Changes with Unknown Affect on Risk Type of change in inventory revision**  **Subpart S (1626**  **- 1 Sources)**  **Subpart MM**

**(1626 -**  **2 Sources) Facility**  ****

**wide sources**  Changes in lat/long coordinates Change in fugitive angle

**Other types of changes (list):** __Mill name __NEI ID __SIC code __SCCs __Emission unit description __Emission unit ID __Process ID __Emission release point ID __MACT code __Control measure code/description **Notes:**