P. 1



# OAR Box 

# 1338 Prepped by Ollie Stewart



## Document

Number: 

# 15 ) ll-E-2 6
Docket Number: 

# A-89-1 0

Printed 6/17/20081:48:06

PM Sheet 15of 105P. 2

LA W OFFICE S PHILI PJ . HARTE R

SUIT E 40 4 230 1 M STREET , N.W . WASHINGTON . O.C . 2003 7 (202 ) 887.103 3 FAX : (202 ) 887.103 6

Octobe r9 , 199 0 

# A-89-1 0

II-E-2 6

i iH

e 

### L 

# ' : 

# -' * Jiil ! 

# *»*•* , m
\ •"' '' 1 -'V-v O 

# MEMORANDU M

To : EP A Negotiate d Rulemakin g Committe e o n Fugitiv e Emission s from Equipmen tLeak s and Intereste d

Fr : Partie s Phili p J . Harte r FaciUtator 

# •tti

Re : Minute s of

"Ga p Fillin g and Draftin g Workgroup " Meetin g of Augus t2 3

Th e Ga p Fillin g and Draftin g Workgroup me tin my offic e o n Augus t23 . Th e minute s of tha tmeeting , whic h wer e prepare d b y Radian Corporation , are attached . W e are i n th e proces s o

f workin g ou tth e fina

l detail s o n adraf

tstandard , o n portion s o f th e preamble , an d o n th e agreemen tth e committe e wil l sign . We anticipate thatal l thatwil l b e wrappe d u p i n th e next coupl e o f weeks . We wil l distribute th e Committee' s recommende d propose d rul e shortl y thereafter .

b ) 

# m "i

\ ,- • *[•-"•?P. 3



# • * Draf t Augus t31 , 199 0

m j W*" ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTIO N AGENC Y ^9 NEGOTIATE D RULEMAKIN G '- *

CONCERNIN G CONTRO L O F FUGITIV E EMISSION S FRO M EQUIPMEN T LEAK S 

## AGREEMEN T I N PRINCIPL E Th e Negotiate d Rulemakin g Committe e considere d th e technical an d polic y issue s involve d in controllin g fugitiv e emission s of

toxi c chemical s from equipmen tleak s pursuantt o th e Clea n Ai rAc tand ha s reache d a consensu s o n arecommende d propose d rule .

, apart y t o th e negotiations , agree s that :
1 . Th e perso n signin g thi s agreemen ti s authorize d t o commi tth e part y t o it s terms .
Whe n considere d a s awhole , th e part y concur s i n th e recommende d propose d rul e thati s date d an d entitle d "Nationa

l Emissio n Standard fo rEquipmen tLeak s (Fugitiv e Emissio n Sources). "

Th e part y recognizes , however , thatth e preambl e t o th e rul e ma y hav e a n importantbearin g o n it s scope , application , an d practical effect . Therefore , th e part y an d th e Committe e a s awhol e wil l no tb e i n a positio n t o ente rint o afina l agreemen to n th e recommende d propose d rul e until it-i s accompanie d b y th e critical portion s of

it s preamble . Th e part

y wil l agre e t o th e recommende d propose d rul e and it s preambl e a tsuch tim e a s th e preambl e i s consisten twith an d explain s th e rul e satisfactorily . A fina l agreemen twil l b e execute d attha

ttime .
EP A agree s t o draf

tapreambl e consisten twith th e recommende d propose d rul e an d explai n it s basi s and purpos e consisten twith th e understandin g of th e Committee . EP A wil l submi tth e preambl e t o th e Committe e fo rit s concurrence .
5 . Th e part

y agree s t o th e explanatio n o f th e "Relationshi p betwee n thi s Regulatio n an d Future Regulation s fo rRefiner y Equipmen tLeaks " tha tdate d Augus t23 , 199 0 and attache d t o thi s Agreemen ti n Principle .
6 . Th e final agreemen twil l provid e that-
a . EP A wil l publis h th e recommende d propose d rul e an d it s preambl e a s aNotic e o f Propose d Rule makin g fo rControllin g Fugitiv e Emission s of Toxi c Chemical s fro m Equipmen tLeaks . b . Eac h othe rpart

y agree s tha

ti twil l no tfil e negativ e comment s o n th e propose d rul e o rth e preambl e t o th e exten tthe y ar e consisten twith th e recommende d propose d rul e an d preambl e thatar e th e subjec tof

th e fina l agreement . Eac h part

y i s fre e t o commen to n thos e portion s of th e pnonfibl e that d o no texplai n th e basi s an d purpos e of th e agree d upo n rul e bu trathe rexplai n EPA' s positio n o n issue s thatwer e no tth e subjec tof negotiations .P. 4

c . EP A wil l conside ral l relevan tcomments submitte d i n respons e t o th e Notic e o f Propose d Rulemakin g an d wil l mak e such modification s i n th e propose d rul e an d th e preambl e a s i s necessar y whe n issuin g arule . d . Eac h othe rpart

y agree s no ttak e an y actio n t o inhibi tth e adoptio n o f th e recommende d propose d rul e a s arule .
e . Eac h part

y othe rthan EP A agree s no tt o challeng e th e rul e i n courti f th e fina l rul e an d its preambl e ar e consisten twith th e recommende d propose d rule . f . Eac h part

y othe rthan EP A agree s t o fil e amemorandu m informin g th e agenc y o rth e cour ttha ti t participate d i n th e negotiation s an d thati tconcurre d i n th e recommende d propose d rul e whe n considere d a s awhol e - (1 ) i f advers e comment s ar e file d with th e agenc y o ri f th e rul e i s challenge d i n court , an d (2 ) th e preambl e and rul e are consisten twith th e recommende d propose d rule .

Individual Committe e Membe r

Organizatio n
Dat eP. 5



### Augus t 23 , 199 0 Relationshi p betweenthi s Regulationan d Futur e Regulation s for Refiner

y Equipmen t Leak s Th e standard s incorporate d i n thi s agreemen t wer e establishe d b yth e Negotiatin g Committe e base d primaril yo n dat a from well-controlle d ethylen e oxid e plant s an d dat a from

a numbe r o f SOCM I plants
. Th e Committe e di d no t revie w dat a frompetroleu m refinin g processe s becaus e the ywer e outsid e th e scop e o f th e negotiations , an

d th e Committe e di d no t conside r whethe r th e numerica l standard s i n thi s agreemen t ar e achievabl e b yrefinery processes . Th e Committe e recognize s tha t ther e ar e technica l difference s betwee n SOCM I categorie s an d petroleu

mprocesse s tha t ma yaffec t th e achievabilit yo f th e numerica l standard s (including percen t leakers)
. Potentia l difference s includ e th e availabilit yan

d effectivenes s o f emissio n contro l technologies , plan t shutdow

n practices , lin e sizes , proces s temperature s an d proces s pressures , an d cost . Thes e difference s coul d wor k i n th e directio n o f makin g th e numerica l standard s adopte d b yth e Committe e mor e easil yachievable , o r les s easil yachievable , fo r refiner yprocesses . Th e Committe e agree s tha t th e framewor k use d fo r th e regulatio n develope d durin g th e curren t negotiatio n shoul d b e adopte d i n th e MAC T regulatio n fo r petroleu mrefiner yequipmen t leak s unles s ther e ar e soun d technica l reason s wh ya differen t framewor k woul d b e mor e effective
. AP I understand s tha t th e numerica l standard s include d i n thi s negotiate d rul e ar e mor e stringen t tha n thos e tha t woul d hav e bee n selecte d i f th e rul e ha d provide d tha t exceedence s o f numerica l standards , b ythemselves , constitute d violation s o f th e Act . AP I recognize s tha t thi s wil l als o b e tru e o f th e numerica l standard s tha t wil l b e include d i n a MAC T regulatio n fo r refinery equipmen t leak s utilizin g th e framewor k o f th e currently-negotiate d regulation
. I f EPAdevelop s MAC T refineryequipmen t lea k regulations , i t wil l conduc t a separat e rulemaking
. Technica l difference s betwee n SOCM I an

d refineryprocesse s tha t ma yaffec t th e achievabilit yo f th e standard s wil l b e considere d b yEP Ai n th e refiner yequipmen t lea k rulemaking
.

### RE GNE G"DELIVERABLES " P. 6



### Deliverabl e Qa£ £ Draf t revise dregulatio nreflectin g agreement s 8/30/9 0 reache da t th e 8/2 3 meetin g Draf t meetin g minute s fro m th e 8/2 3 meetin g 9/4/9 0 Comment s du e o n8/29/9 0 draf t regulatio n9/11/9 0 Draf t preambl e languag e o nus e o f dat a i

n9/19/9 0 settin g standard s Draf t revise dregulatio nincorporatin g comment s 9/19/9 0 receive donth e 8/29/9 0 draf t Fina l revise ddraf t regulatio n10/10/9 0 Signagreemen t (i nprinciple , o r fina l i f 10/17/9 0 precedin g preambl e languag e acceptable ) Draf t F Rnotic e describin g result s o f Re g Neg . 11/9 0 Thi s woul dno t b e th e actua l preabl e t o th e reg , whic hwil l b e par t o f th e HON , bu t wil l describ e i ndetai l al l th e element s an ddecision s tha t wen t int o developin g th e regulation . W e di dth e sam e thin g i

nwpodstoves , bu t I envisio na mor e elaborat e notic e here , thi s i s th e "preamble " tha t peopl e wil l wan t t o see .P. 7

WORKGROU

P MEETIN

G O N FUGITIV

E EQUIPMEN

T LEAK S AUGUS T 23 , 199 0 WASHINGTON , D.C .
DRAFT MEETIN

G MINUTE S
A summar y o f th e genera l agreement s reache d ar e presented . Th

e followin

g presentatio

nmaterial s ar

e attached . Attachmen t 1 Attachmen t 2 Attachmen t 3 Attachmen t 4 Attachmen t 5 Attachmen t 6 Meetin g Agend a Attendanc e Lis t CM A Proposa l fo

r Staggere

d Implementatio

no f th e Regulatio

n Conceptua l Approac

hfo r Pumps Timelin e fo r Implementatio

no f Pumps Standar

d AP I Suggeste

d Language Addressin g Applicability

o f Negotiate

d Regulatio

nt o Refiner

y BT XUnit s Agreemen t o

nth e Negotiate

d Rul e
• Th

e meetin

g attendee s (se

e Attachmen t 2 ) agree d t o sig na tentativ

e agreement o

nth e rul e a s soo

na s th e rul e i s finalize

d (wit hth e exceptio

no f th e America

nPetroleu

m Institute ) an

d t o sig na fina l agreement after Committee revie w o f th e preamble . Mr . Larr

y Goodhear t an

d Ms . Elle

nSiegler , representin g th e America nPetroleu

m Institut e (API) , expresse d thei r desire t

o see th e preambl e sectio

ndocumentin

g th e rational e fo

r th e negotiate

d standar d befor e signin

g th e agreement .
• Mr . Davi d Doniger o f th e Natura l Resource s Defens e Counci l (NRDC ) aske d about th

e fat e o f th

e negotiate

d standar

d i f th e propose

d Clea nAi r Ac t i s no t passe d thi s year . Th

e meetin

g attendee s agree d that th

e result s o f th

e negotiate

d regulatio

nshoul d b

e published i nsom

e form , perhap s a s a revisio nt o a nexistin

g rul e o r a Contro l Technique s Guidelin e (CTG ) document . Staggere

d Implementatio

no f th e Regulatio

n
• Mr . To

m Kittleman , representin g th e Chemica l Manufacturer s Associatio

n(CMA) , propose

d a methodolog

y fo r staggerin

g th e implementatio

no f th e equipment leak s negotiate d regulatio

n(se e Attachmen t 3) . Th

e hazardou s ai r pollutant s (HAPs ) liste d i nth e propose d Clea nAi r Ac t (CAA ) amendment s wer e divide d into fiv

e group s based o

ncarcinogenicit

y rankings , an

d al l produc t processe s tha t produc e o r us e a s intermediate s an y o f thes e HAP s woul d b e similarl y

separated . Th

e meetin

g member s agree

d tha t al l fiv e group s o f produc t processe s wil l b e phase d b y quarter s into th e regulatio

n(withi non

e year plu s on

e day) . Inaddition , th e eigh t non-SOCM I categorie s that wil l b e subjec t t

o th e equipment leak s regulatio

nwil l b

e include

d inth e firs t phase-i n group . HAP s i na later phase-i n grou p tha t are used t

o produc e a HA

P i n anearlie r phase-i ngrou p woul d be regulate d a t th e earlie r date .

• Mr . Goodhear t state d that AP I woul d agre e t o includ

e benzene/toluene/xylen e (BTX ) unit s inth e aforementione

d staggere

d implementatio

ni f the

y coul d b

e phase d inwit ha later group , sinc e benzene equipment leak s are alread y controlle

d an d toluen

e an d xylen e hav e lo w carcinogenicit

y rankings . Mr . Bo

bAja xo f th e U.S . Environmenta l Protectio nAgenc y (EPA ) sai d that BT Xd o no t need th e extra tim

e t o comply

withth

e regulatio

nthat the

y woul d enjo y b y bein g place d into a late

r phase-i n group , becaus e existin g benzene lea

k detectio

nan d repai r (LDAR ) program s hav e prepared thes e unit s fo r th e negotiate

d regulation . I naddition , Mr . Ajaxfel t that th e hig hcarcinogenicit

y rankin g o f benzene warrant s inclusio

no f BT Xunit s inth

e firs t phase-i n group .P. 8

Pump s

Valve s A s a resul t o f th e phase-i n concept , th e questio naros e a s t o

whethe r EP A

wil l promulgat e fiv e separat e equipmen t lea k rule s o r 'on e rul e wit hfive applicabilit y date s o f complianc e fo r th e five phase-i n groups . The meetin g attendee s agree d tha t one rul e wit h fiv e applicabilit y date s o f complianc e seeme d more logical , a s lon g a s a nappropriat e Federa l Registe r notice wa s issue d before th e applicabilit y dat e o f eac hphase-i n group .

The meetin g attendee s agree d t o a standar d fo r pump s (se e Attachmen t 4) . Attachmen t 5 present s the timelin e fo r implementin g the standard . Th e lea k definitio no f 1,00 0 ppm v i n Phas e 3 fo r genera l dut y pump s wa s introduce d a t previou s meetings , alon g wit ha trigge r concentratio nfo r repai r a t 2,00 0 ppmv . Th e concep t o f a six-mont hrollin g averag e fo r determinin g allowabl e leaker s wa s propose d by AP I t o accoun t fo r randomnes s o f screenin g value s fo r a smal l populatio no f pumps . The lea k definition s o f 2,00 0 ppm v fo r pump s i nfoo d an d medica l servic e an d 5,00 0 ppm

v fo r pump s i npolymerizin g monome r servic e were selecte d t o accoun t fo r th e limite d applicabilit y o f dua l mechanica l seal s t o thes e pumps . Th e meetin g attendee s agree d tha t a proces s uni t coul d begi nthe six-mont hrollin g averag e up t o on e mont hafte r a proces s uni t start-up . Leakin g pump s woul d no t b e counte d i nthe percen t leaker s calculatio nup t o on e mont hafte r start-up .

• The meetin g attendee s agree d tha t proces s unit s coul d ente r the valv e qualit y

improvemen t program (QIP ) onl y

withi non e yea r afte r the beginnin g o f Phas e 3 , bu t tha t the y coul d sta y

i nthe QI P indefinitel y

and monito r quarterl y (or les s frequently , i f otherwis e qualifie d t o d o so ) while implementin g a QI P program . Enterin g a QI P program afte r the firs t yea r o f Phas e 3 o r re enterin g the QI P program woul d no t be allowed .
• Th e EP A

agree d t o includ e i nthe preambl e a rational e fo r exemptin g smal l corporation s fro m performanc e trial s aime d a t identifyin g low-lea k valve technologie s an d effectiv e maintenanc e practices .
• Th e meetin g attendee s discusse d the provisio ni nthe draf t rul e fo r inter - an d intra-company sharin g o f dat a i nth e QI P program . Th e draf t rul e wa s revise d t o reflec t the consensu s o f the meetin g attendee s o nthi s issue . Alternativ e Mean s o f Emissio nLimitatio n

• Concern s were expresse d wit hthe existin g equivalenc y provision s i nth e regulation , while the EP A expresse d it s concern s wit hsom e o f CMA' s propose d example s o f equivalency . Th e meetin g attendee s agree d t o commen t o nth e EPA' s revision s t o the equivalenc y sectio no f th e negotiate d rule . Credi t fo r Removin g Component s fro m Servic e

» Th e meetin g attendee s agree d t o a "thre e fo r two " credi t fo r removin g valve s an d flange s fro m service . Tha t is , fo r ever y thre e valve s o r flange s remove d fro m service , tw

o o f th e component s coul d stil l b e include d i ncalculatin g percentag e o f leakin g components .P. 9

Criterio nfo r Exemptin g Plant s fro m Monthl y

Monitorin g an d QI P Provision s

• The meetin g attendee s agree d tha t plant s wit hles s tha n25 0 valve s woul d be exemp t fro m monthl y

monitorin g o f valve s an d the QI P provisions . Repaire d Valve s Follow-u p

• The meetin g attendee s agree d tha t valve s mus t b e monitore d fo r tw o successiv e month s followin g repai r i f a proces s uni t i s i nthe QI P program

fo r valve s an d ha s more tha n2 % leakin g valves . Th e meetin g attendee s agree d tha t valve s mus t be monitore d onc e withi n th e firs t quarte r afte r repai r i f th e proces s uni t i s monitorin g valve s quarterly , semi-annually , o r annually , o r i f the proces s uni t i s i na QI P program fo r valve s an d ha s les s tha n2 % leakin g valves . Applicabilit y

t o BT XUnit s

• I nadditio nt o it s discussio nfo r phasin g BT Xunit s int o the

- ' negotiate d regulation , AP I submitte d suggeste d languag e addressin g the applicabilit y o f the negotiate d standar d t o BT Xunit s (se e Attachmen t 6) . N o Detectabl e Emission s

• Th e EP A

agree d tha t i t ha d insufficien t dat a t o revis e the "no detectabl e emissions " limit , currentl y 50 0 ppmv . Th e meetin g attendee s agree d tha t a definitio no f "no detectabl e emissions " wa s unnecessar y

fo r th e negotiate d regulatio nan d tha t the ter m coul d b e delete d fro m the regulation . Batc hProcesse s

• Fo r clarificatio npurposes , the meetin g attendee s were informe d tha t batc hproces s unit s hav e tw o option s fo r complyin g wit hthe negotiate d regulation : (1 ) pressur e testing ; and (2 ) complianc e wit hthe basi c standar d fo r continuou s processes .
• Fo r clarificatio npurposes , the meetin g attendee s agree d tha t al l reconfiguration s o f equipmen t have t o be monitore d eve ni f anothe r reconfiguratio n occurre d withi nthe previou s 3 0 days . Flange s

Draf t Rul e Th e concep t o f "extremel y inaccessibl e flanges " wa s introduced . A s a nexample , CM A cite d flange s tha t ar e locate d i npipin g tha t straddle s tw

o distillatio ncolumn s tha t ma y be ove r 10 0 fee t tall . The meetin g attendee s agree d tha t flange s more tha ntw o meter s abov e a suppor t surfac e and tha t canno t b e reache d by a 25-fee t portable platform ar e exemp t fro

m the standard .

Th e EP A

agree d t o submi t a revise d copy o f th e draf t rul e t o al l Committe e member s durin g the wee k o f Augus t 27 , 1990 .P.1 0



# ATTACHMEN T 1

Augus t 2 3 Meetin g Discussio nPoin t Checklis t
Wha t d o th e partie s nee dt o se e befor e signin g th e Agreement ? -Shoul dther e b e a

ninitial , tentativ e Agreemen t o nth e rul e an

da fina l Agreemen t afte r th e preambl e i s available ? Methodolog y

fo r staggere dimplementatio no f HON CM A respons e t o alternativ e proposal s Pump s Separat e Phas e II I actio nlevel s fo r food/medica l an dmonome r servic e pump s Phas e II I lea k definitio nfo r genera l dut y pump s QIP : requir e replacemen t o f 20 % o f pump s eac hyea r wit h prove neffectiv e technolog y Valv e QI P Perio dfo r optin g int o QI P Demonstratio no f furthe r progres s Schedul e fo r performanc e trial s an dvalv e replacemen t Exemptio no f smal l corporation s from performanc e trial s Alternativ e mean s o f emissio nlimitatio n Handl e no w

o r outsid e th e agreemen t Credit s fo r valve s remove dfrom servic e Criterio nfo r source s onl y subjec t t o valv e LDA Rprogram Valve s o r component s Repaire dvalve s followu p Applicabilit y

t o BT Xunit s N o detectabl e emission s Batc hProcesse sP.1 1



### Augus t 2 3 Meetin g Additiona l Discussio n Point s

Valve s

• QI P - Availabilit yo f finding s Sunse t o n performanc e trial s

Pump s

• Basi s fo r calculatio n o f th e performanc e level : averag e o f 2 , 3 , o r ? months
.

• Dela yo f repai r provision s

• QI P

- Schedul e fo r performanc e trial s and pum p replacement s

- Minimu mnumbe r o f pump s i n th e performanc e trial s Criteri a fo r exitin g QI P Flange s

• Extremel yinaccessibl eP.1 2



# ATTACHMEN T2

ENVIRONMENTA

L PROTECTIO

N AGENC Y WORKGROU

P ATTENDEE S CONTROL OF FUGITIV

E EMISSIONS O

F VOC s FRO

M EQUIPMEN

T LEAK S ATTENDEE S LIS T FO

RMEETIN

G OF AUGUS T 23 , 199 0

NAM E AFFILIATIO N Phili p Harte r Facilitator EllenSiegler AP I Larr y Goodhear t Chevron/AP I JanMeye r SDB/EP A E d Morett i Radia nCor p Bo bAjaxEP A Chery l Sutterfiel d PM A Bo bRowlan

d PM A Harve l M . Rogers , Jr . Jefferso nCo . De bDalto n EP A To m Kittlema

nDuPont (CMA ) KarenFidler . CM A Kath y Baile y CM A A l Bicku

m IISR P Ric k Colye r EP A Davi d Donige r NRD CP.1 3



# ATTACHMEN T3
METHODOLOG Y FO R SORTING SOCM I PRODUCTIO N

CATEGORIE S INT O SUBGROUP S Purpose : Th e SOCM I Lis t o f productio n categorie s consist s o f 45 3 chemicals
. CM

Adeeme d i t necessarytha t th e lis t be divide d int o subgroup s s o tha t th e applicabl e (fugitiv e emissions , ai r toxics , etc. ) regulation s ar e graduall yphase d in
. Thu s al l chemical s i n Grou p I shoul d b e regulate d firs t followe d b yth e othe r groups . Instead o f arbitraril yclassifying chemical s int o th e subgroups , the ymus t b e sorte d according t o a logica l methodology
. Objective : T o develo p a methodolog yfo r sorting SOCM I chemical s int o subgroups ; an

d propos e a CM

Alist
. Methodology : Astep-wis e methodolog yuse d t o arriv e a t subgroup s o f SOCM I productio n categorie s i s presente d below
. Ste p 1 : Star t wit h th e lis t o f Hazardou s Ai r Pollutant s (Clean

Ai r Act , propose d ammendments ) an d compar e themt o the IAR C Lis t o f Chemical s (i.e
. chemical s evaluate d for thei r carcinogenicity)
. Mar k al l the
. organi c HAP s o n th e IAR C list
. Result : O f th e 14 9 organi c HAP s (ou t o f 19 1 tota l

chemicals ) onl y9 9 appea r o n the IAR C List
. Fift y(50 ) other s ar e unlisted
. Ste p 2 : Sor t th e 9 9 commo n chemical s int o IAR C "Weigh t o f Evidence " classes : 1 - Huma n Carcinogens ; 2 A- Probabl e Huma n Carcinogens ; 2 B - Possibl e Huma n Carcinogens ; 3 - Insufficien t Dat a t o Determin e Carcinogenicity ; an d 4 - Unclassifie d o r Probabl yNo t Huma n Carcinogens
. Result : Clas s 1 - Fou r chemical s (Benzene , Benzidine , Viny l Chloride , an d 4-Aminobiphenyl)
. 4-Amino

bipheny l i n no t o n the SOCM I List
. Clas s 2 A- 1 4 chemicals
. 7 no t include d

on th e SOCM I list
. Clas s 2 B - 3 9 chemicals
. 1 2 no t include d

o n th e SOCM I list
. Clas s 3 7 chemical s including Xylen e

and isomers , 1,2-Epoxybutane , Toluene , and Phenol
. 1,2

- Epoxybutan e i s no t include d on th e SOCM I list
.P.1 4



### Clas s 4 3 5 chemicals . 9 no t include d

onth e SOCM I list, , Ste p 3 : For

m th e firs t grou p (Group I ) startin g wit hth e Clas s 1 and Clas s 2A

chemical s (i.e . 1 0 chemicals ; excludin g thos e tha t ar e no t onth e SOCM I list) . Ad d othe r chemical s (upt o 100 ) i nGrou p I base d onth e us e patter n(o

r progression ) o f th e 1 0 chemicals . Selec t derivative s o f Benzen e (Clas s 1) , Ethylen e Oxid e (Clas s 2A) , etc. , base d onIndustria l Organi c Chemica l Us e Trees 1 

### tha t sho

w th e us e pattern s o f chemicals . Thes e Tree s als o includ e al l 45 3 chemical s tha t ar e onthe SOCM I list . Result : Wit hth e inclusio no f chemical s derive d fro m Benzen e (55) , Formaldehyd e (9) , Ethylen e Oxid e (30) , Propylen e Oxid e (8 ) and other s (8) , th e tota l consist s o f 11 0 productio n categories. Anilini c and Phenoli c derivative s ar e excluded . Bi s (Chloromethyl ) Ethe r i s a confirme d carcinoge naccordin g t o EP A and i s adde d t o th e list . Thus , Grou p I consist s o f 11 1 chemicals . Ste p 4 : For

m Grou p I I startin g wit hth e Clas s 2 B chemical s (i.e. ' 2 7 chemicals ; excludin g thos e tha t ar e no t include d o

nthe SOCM I list) . Ad d othe r chemical s accordin g t o th e us e pattern s (a s outline d inSte p 3 ) o f the 2 7 chemicals . Result : Seve no f the initia l 2 7 chemical s wer e

include d inGrou p I throug hSte p 3 . Wit hthe inclusio no f othe r chemical s derive d fro m 1,3-Butadien e (11) , Acetaldehyd e (52) , Ethylen e Dichlorid e (21) , an d other s (16) , Grou p I I consist s o f 10 0 productio n categories. Ste p 5 : For

m Grou p II I startin g wit hthe 6 chemical s i nClas s 3 , excludin g 1,2-Epoxybutan e whic hi s no t o nth e SOCM I list . Ad d othe r chemical s accordin g t o th e us e pattern s (a s outline d inSte p 3 ) o f th e 6 chemicals . Ad d othe r chemical s fro m Clas s 4 t o increas e th e siz e t o approximatel y

100 . Result ; Wit hth e inclusio no f othe r chemical s derive d

fro m Pheno l (26) , Toluen e (46) , and Xylen e (19) , th e tota l add s u p t o 91 . Althoug h Anilin e i s i nClas s 4 o nth e IAR

C list , it i s
Radia nCorporation , Industria l Organi c Chemica l Us e Trees . DC

N 83-211-030-09-08 , Prepare d fo r USEP A (Contrac t No . 68-03-3038-SBR09) , Octobe r 1983 .P.1 5



### a suspecte d carcinoge naccordin g t o EPA . Wit hth e additio no f Anilini c derivative s (21) , Grou p II I consist s o f 11 2 productio n categories . Ste p 6 : For

m Grou p I

V ou t o f th e remainin g Clas s 4 chemical s an d th e remainin g chemical s ou t o f th e 5 0 organi c HAP s unliste d i nth e IARC lis t an d their-deriva t Ives , Result ; O f th e 2 6 chemical s inClas s 4 , 1 6 o f the m hav e bee ninclude d inGroup s I , II , an d III . O f th e 5 0 unliste d chemicals , 1 1 ar e no t on th e SOCM I lis t an d 2 4 hav e bee ninclude d in previou s Group s I , II , and III . Wit hthe inclusio no f th e remainin g chemical s in Clas s 4 and thei r derivative s (10) , and the remainin g unliste d chemical s an d thei r derivative s (52) , Grou p I V consist s o f 6 2 productio ncategories . Ste p 7 : For

m Grou p V

ou t o f th e remainin g productio ncategorie s o nth e SOCM I list . Result : Grou p V consist s o f 6 8 remainin g productio n categories.
Summary : A methodolog y

tha t sort s th e SOCM I lis t int o fiv e group s ha s bee npresented . B y followin g thi s methodology , the fiv e group s consis t o f 111 , 100 , 112 , 62 , and 6 8 productio ncategories , respectively . Th e propose d regulation s mus t be phased-i nfirs t fo r the productio ncategorie s inGrou p I , followe d by Group s II , III , IV , an

d V i nsequence .P.1 6



# Attachmen t 4

PUMPS

Phas e I

Phas e I I 10,00 0 pp m LDA R

5,00 0 pp m LDAf T

Phas e II I

Genera l Pump s

Monthl yLDA R

>10%or 3 ( 6 mont h rollin g avg . a t 1,00 0 ppm ) (repai ra t 2,00 0 ppm )

Ful l QI P 20 % Replacemen t pe ryea r Food/Medica l Monthl yLDA R

>10%or 3 ( 6 mont h rollin g avg . a t 2,00 0 ppm )

QI P N o Replacemen t Polymerizin g Monomer s Monthl yLDA R

>10%or 3 ( 6 mont h rollin g avg . a t 5,00 0 ppm )P.1 7


# Attachmen t 5
PUMPS

Phas e

10,00 0 pp m
Monthl y Phas e I I

5,00 0 pp m 

# ss r
Monthly Promulgatio n + 3 month s EOY- 1 EOY-2

EOY = EndofYea r EOY-3 Phas e II I

EOY-4 EOY-5 EOY-6

•Q I Larg e plants Instal l superio r equipmen t I n general-dut y pumps (20 % pe r year

) i Q I Analyz

e Dat a •larg e plants perfor m trial s o n 10 % o r 3 (whicheve r I s less ) pumps i <10%or<3pump8 , o r i Qualit y Improvemen t(QI

) • collec tdat aP.1 8



# ATTACHMEN T6 .America n Petroleu m Institute 1220 L Street , Northwest ' Washington , D.C

. 2000 5 202-682-800 0 

# 4 >

HAN D DELIVERE D MEMORANDU

M DATE : Augus t 22 , 199 0 TO : HVO C Fugitive s RegulatoryNegotiation s Committe e FROM : Larr yGoodhear t JXr ? SUBJECT : Scop e o f Regulation : Refiner yBTXUnit s
A n issu e relatin g t o th e scop e o f th e negotiate d regulatio n i s whethe r processe s a t refinerie s tha t produc e chemical s suc h a s benzene , toluene , an d xylen e wil l b e subjec t t o th e regulation
. AP I ha s oppose d th e inclusio n o f thes e processes , bu t EPAha s insiste d tha t the yb e include d an d ha s take n th e positio n tha t thi s issu e i s non-negotiable
. I f EP Amake s a fina l unilatera l decisio n t o includ e thes e processe s withi n th e scop e o f th e regulation , AP I suggest s tha t thi s b e expresse d i n th e regulatorylanguag e a s follows : (1 ) th e "Applicability " sectio n o f th e regulatio n shoul d provid e tha t n o processe s a t refinerie s wil l b e covere d b yth e regulatio n wit h th e exceptio n o f "syntheti c organi c chemica l processes" ; an d (2 ) "syntheti c organi c chemica l processes " shoul d b e define d a s "proces s unit s whos e sol e purpos e i s t o produc e pur e chemicals , suc h a s benzene , toluene , o r xylen e a s fina l chemica l products , a s i s don e i n operation s conducte d b ymember s o f th e Syntheti c Organi c Chemica l Manufacturer s Associatio n ( / 

### SOCMA / 

### ). "

A n equa l opportunit y employe r