p. 1 I I


# OAR Box 1384 Prepped by Charmelle Mathews



### Document

Number: 

# 60 ) ll-E-20 Docket Number: 

# A-94-5 2

Printed 7/2/20088:42:05AM

Sheet 60of 264 i i I



## i i ;P. 2

* " ^ * \

UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTIO N AGENC Y 3 RESEARC H TRIANGL E PARK

. N C 2771 1 

# 1532/ Februar y 23 , 199 5 OFFIC E O F AI R QUALITY PLANNIN G AN D STANDARD S TRANSMITTA L T O REINFORCE D COMPOSIT E PLASTIC S NESHA P PRE-MAC T TEAM , WOR K GROU P AN D INFORMATIONA L WOR K GROU P MEMBER S Dea r Tea mand/o r Wor k Group Member : Thank s t o al l o f yo u wh o wer e abl e t o atten d th e firs t pre-MAC T informatio n meetin g hel d Februar y7 , 1995 . Thi s i s t o transmi t th e minute s o f th e meetin g (Enclosur e l ) an d formall y reques t you r feedbac k o n issue s liste d i n th e briefin g packag e an d discusse d durin g th e meeting
. Fo r purpose s o f plannin g subsequen t dat a analyse s an d informatio n fo r th e pre-MAC T decisio n meeting , pleas e sen d you r comments/idea s byMarc h 15 , 1995 . Yo u ma ysend the mbyfa x (919-541-568 9 o r 919-541-0072) , throug h th e TechnologyTransfe r Networ k (m yuse r nam e i s Madelein e Strum)'' , o r b ymail
. I f yo u wer e unabl e t o atten d th e meeting , pleas e rea d throug h th e minute s an d briefin g packag e and provid e inpu t wher e yo u can . I woul d lik e t o hol d a secon d meetin g i n Ma yo r Jun e i n whic h vendor s o f specifi c contro l technologie s wil l presen t informatio n o n thei r system s t o th e pre-MAC T team . Thi s schedulin g o f th e meetin g wil l b e contingen t o n whe n w e ar e abl e t o ge t a n environmenta l representativ e o n th e group , an d ou r abilit yt o kee p thi s projec t o n schedul e i n ligh t o f myupcomin g te n week s o f maternit yleav e (fro mapproximatel yMarc h 3 1 throug h Jun e 12) . I n th e mea n time , I hop e tha t yo u wil l kee p you r thinkin g cap s o n wit h regar d t o thi s prdject
. I f yo u com e acros s pertinen t data , applicabl e contro l technologie s o r an yothe r informatio n tha t ca n ai d i n th e project , pleas e giv e m e a cal l a t (919 ) 541-2383 . Yo u ma yals o shar e thi s informatio n wit h ou r contracto r lea d projec t manager , Mr . Gre g LaFlamo f Pacifi c Environmenta l Services , a t (919 ) 941-033 3 o r anyothe r perso n o n th e team . Fo r you r convenience , a listin g o f reinforce d composit e plastic s NESHA P pre-MAC T team , wor k grou p and informationa l wor k group member s an d EPAcontractor s workin g wit h thi s industryi s containe d i n Enclosur e 2 . *•** * DlX O 1JLH , ^ Sincerely , f ! 

## i^ r 

## i i i

• ' •• r,, .**' / r T ...-. ' - * V: , * * '-"^c I 2 Enclosure s 

### V I:: Madelein e Stru

m Coating s and Consume r Product s Grou p Emissio n Standard s Division , MD-1 3P. 3

ADDRESSEES : Mar k Bahner/Emor yKong , Researc h Triangl e Institut e Moha n Balagopalan , SCAQMD Bo b Burmark , Washingto n Stat e Leonard o Cero n Regio n I V Lis a Conner , OAQPS/AQSS D MD-1 5 Laure l Driver , OAQPS/AQSS D MD-1 5 Patrici a Embre yOG C (mai l 2344 ) Bo b Fegle yORD , D C (mai l 8105 ) Chuc k French , OAQPS/AQSS D MD-1 5 Rober t Goulish , Ohi o EP A Nor mKaplan , EPA/OR D (MD-61 ) Kare n Lev

yOPA R (mai l 6103 ) Mari a Malave , OECA ; (mai l 2223A ) Hail e Mariam , OS W (Mai l 5302W ) Crai g Matthiessen , OSWE R (mai l 5101 ) Ke n Meardon/Gre g LaFlam , Pacifi c Environmenta l Service s Richar d Nielson, / Clar k Count yHealt h Distric t Carlo s Nune z ORD , RT P (MD-61 ) Solomo n Ricks , OAQPS/EMAD (MD-19 ) Bo b Rose , OSDB U 1230- C Ro n Ryan , OAQPS/EMAD MD-1 4 Jorda n Spoone r OPPT/PP D (mai l 7409 ) Jer i Weiss , Regio n I , AP O
cc : Lyn n Hutchinson , OAQPS/ES D MD-1 3 Ja n Meyer/Lind a Herring , EPA/ESD/CCP G Jan e Caldwel l (MD-15 )



## VP. 4



# EflltLOSurlE

I

UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTIO N AGENCY

RESEARC H TRIANGL E PARK . N C 2771 1
OFFICE O F AI R QUALIT

Y PLANNING AN O STANOARO

S Februar y 23 , 199 5

MEMORANDU

M SUBJECT : Summar

y o f Februar

y 7 , 199 5 Meeting o f th e Pre-MAC T Tea m •if FROM : Madelein e Stru m "T^feiu . Coating s an

d Consume r Product s Group , ES D (MD-13 ) TO : Reinforce d Composit e Plastic s NESHAP Projec t Fil e

(SA R 3326 ) Thi s memorandu

m summarize s th e firs t meeting o f th e pre-MAC T projec t tea

m fo r th e developmen t o f a presumptive maximu m achievabl e contro l technolog y (pre-MACT ) fo r th e reinforce d composit e plastic s industry . Th e meeting wa s hel d b y teleconferenc e a t 2:0 0 p m easter n standar d time . Som e tea m member s cam

e t o th e EP

A offic e (Durham , Nort hCarolina. ) Attendee s o f th e meetin g consiste d o f EP

A an d State/loca l environmenta l agency pre-MAC T tea

m member s an

d contractor s t o EPA . ATTENDEES : Mar k Bahner , Researc hTriangl e Institut e (Contractor t o EPA/ORD ) BobBurmark , WashingtonStat e Departmen t o f Ecology , Ai r Qualit y Progra m . ^ Leonardo Ceron , U S EPA , RegionIV Patrici a Embrey , U S EPA , OG C Chuc k French , U S EPA , OAQPS , Ai r Qualit y Strategie s & Standard s Division Nor m Kaplan , U S EPA , ORD , Ai r an d Energ y Engineerin

g Researc h Laborator

y Gre g LaFlam , Pacifi c Environmenta l Service s (Contractor t o EPA/OAQPS ) Mari a Malave , U S EPA , OECA , Offic e o f Complianc e Ke n Meardon , Pacifi c Environmenta l Service s (Contractor t o EPA/OAQPS ) Ja n Meyer , U S EPA , OAQPS , Emissio n Standard s Divisio n Richar d Nielson , Clar k Count yHealt h District , Ai r Pollutio n Contro l Division , (La s Vegas , Nevada ) Solomo n Ricks , U S EPA , OAQPS , Emission s Monitorin g & Analysi s Divisio n Jorda n Spooner , U S EPA , OPPT , Pollutio n Preventio n Divisio n Madelein e Strum , U S EPA , OAQP S Emissio n Standard s Divisio n


# 3P. 5

PURPOS E O F MEETING : Th e purpos e o f th

e meetin

g wa s t o presen t introductor y informationpertainin g t o the MAC T an

d pre-MAC T proces s fo r th e reinforced composite s plasti c industr y an d reques t feedbac k fro m tea m member s o

nvariou s issue s pertainin g t o pre-MAC T development . Attachmen t 1 contain s a cop y o f the briefing packag e (wit h correction s incorporate d pe r th

e meeting discussion) . DISCUSSIONS : 1 . Tea

m Feedback onIssue s (briefin g packag e pag e 2 ) Madeldin e explained tha t tea m members ' feedbac k o n th e firs t thre e item

s liste d on pag e 2 wer e no t expecte d a t th e meeting , bu t rathe r afte r tea m member s hav

e a chanc e t o take the - tim e t o analyz e the issue s an d informatio

npresented . A s for th e fourt h issue , Madeleine explained th e larg e rol e tha t th e majo r industr y trade associations , th e Composit e Fabricator s Association(CFA ) an d Societ y

o f Plastic s industr y (SPI ) playe d i n the informatio

ngatherin

g par t o f thi s work . I nparticular , thes e trade association s helpe d develop exampl e screenin g surve y response s an

d participated i nth e plan t tour s EP

A took t o learn mor e abou t th

e specifi c manufacturin g processes . Ther e wa s a n overal l agreemen t tha t industr y shoul d b e participatin g i n subsequen t tea

m meetings , however , the tea m als o fel t tha t representative s of environmenta l organization s shoul d als o participate . Madeleine note d tha t findin g a nenvironmenta l organization wh

o woul d b e willin

g t o devot e effort s t o thi s proces s ma

y no t be easy , an

d requested hel p fro m tea m member s in tryin

g t o recrui t an environmenta l grou p representative . Madelein e als o explore d th e ide a o f recruitin g vendor s o f contro l technologie s fo

r th e pre-MAC T team , an d th e feelin

g wa s tha t the

y shoul d no t be par t o f th e decision process , bu t rathe r b e invite d t o som e meeting s for th

e purpos e o f presentin g informatio

n on thei r technologies . I t wa s explored whethe r thi s be don e earl y o r lat e i n th

e pre-MAC T process . Becaus e th e contro l technolog y informationwoul d b e helpfu l upfront , i t wa s thought tha t thi s shoul d occu r earlie r rathe r tha n later . 2 . Emission s fro

mAre a versu s Majo r source s (pag e 5 ) I t wa s explaine

d tha t becaus e th

e reinforced composit e plastic s categor

yi s liste d a s a majo r sourc e category(majo r source s ar e thos e source s tha t emi t o r hav e th e potentia l t o emi t 1 0 ton s o r mor e pe r yea r o f a singl e HAP , o r 2 5 ton s o r mor e pe r yea r o f an

ycombinatio n o f HAP ) th e MAC T standar d fo r th e currentl yliste d sourc e categorywoul d onl ycove r majo r sources . However , i n the developmen t o f th e standar d i t woul d b e necessary t o analyz e whethe r are a source s (source s tha t hav e th e potentia l t o emi t les s tha

n th e majo r sourc e levels ) shoul d als o b e regulate d b

ya MAC T o r generall yachievabl e contro l technology (GACT ) standar d (thi s i s calle d a n "are a sourc e finding")
. Thi s decisio n woul d b e base d o n healt h hazar d an d ris k consideration s pursuan t t o Sectio n 112(c)(3 ) o f th e 199 0 Clea n Ai r Amendments . /P. 6

Chuc k French , fro

m EPA' s Ris k an

d Exposur e Assessmen t Grou p (REAG ) explained tha t h e woul d b e workin g wit hthi s issue b y lookin g a t potentia l healt heffect s du e t o emission s o f styrene fro m source s tha t emi t les s than 1 0 ton s pe r yea r o f styrene (th e mai n HAP emitted fro m th e industry) . I t wa s questioned whethe r EPA classified styrene a s a carcinogen . Chuc k explained tha t whethe r o r no t styrene shoul d b e considere d a carcinogenan d the carcinogenclassificatio n wa s ver y controversia l an

d i s currentl y

bein g debate d an

d reviewed . A decisio n o nth

e EP A cance r classification fo r styrene woul d likel y b e mad e soon . I nan y case ; a numerica l estimat e o f th e dose-respons e or cance r potenc y (i.e . cance r uni t ris k estimate ) woul d no t b e likel y an d the healt hanalysi s h e woul d b e doin g woul d b e semi-qualitative . However , for healt heffect s othe r than cancer , a n inhalatio nreferenc e concentration(RfC ) i s availabl e t o us e i n the healt hris k assessment . H e woul d need t o look a t factor s sucha s ho w fa r a facility

coul d b e fro

m it s neares t residentia l neighbors , stac k heights , dispersion characteristics , etc . t o estimat e potentia l exposur e t o styrene . BobBurmar k fro

m th e Stat e o f Washingtonnoted tha t hi s agency wa s conductin

g & healt hstud

y o na reinforced composit e plan t i n hi s are a an

d tha t h e coul d coordinat e gettin g the informatio

nt o Chuc k fo r th

e are a sourc e finding . 3 . Geographi c locatio no f plant s (pag

e 5 ) Becaus e Ohi o ha s th e larges t numbe r o f facilities , i t wa s suggested tha t w

e recrui t a tea

m membe r fro

m th e Stat e o f Ohi o t o participat e o n th

e MAC T team . I t wa s noted tha t a membe r o f th e Sout hCoas t Ai r Quality Managemen t Distric t ( a loca l agency i n Southern California ) wa s planning t o participate , bu t wa s unfortunatel y

no t presen t a t th e teleconferenc e due t o administrativ

e difficulties . 4 . Type s o f HA

P emitted Madelein e emphasize d that , whil e styrene i s th e mos t abundan t HA P emitted fro

m a reinforced Composite s plastic s facility , no t al l th e styrene presen t i na resi ni s emitted . A s a monomer , styrene polymerize s an d remain s i n th

e product . Th e styren e tha t i s emitte d from

a proces s i s a resul t o f evaporatio n loss . Som e o f th e othe r chemical s liste d i n th e briefin g packag e (methanol , toluene , 1,1,1 , trichloroethan e and xylene ) ar e likel ypain t solvent s use d in spra y paintin g th e finished product . The yma y als o b e solvent s i n mol d releas e chemical s (thos e chemical s wipe d o r spraye d ont o a mol d t o eas e remova l o f th e molde d product) . Whil e w e migh t nee d t o conside r emission s frommol d releas e fo r th e reinforce d plastic s composite s category , th e spra ypaintin g operatio n woul d b e covere d unde r a separat e sourc e category , an d woul d therefor e no t b e addresse d i n th e developmen t o f th e reinforce d plasti c composite s MAC T standard . Thes e emission s woul d b e important , however , i n determinin g whethe r a relativel y smal l reinforce d composit e plastic s plan t i s a majo r source . Fo r example , a facilit ywhic h emit s 2 5 ton s annuall yfro m paintin g bu t onl y1 to n annuall yfrom reinforce d composit e plastic s operation s woul d b e a majo r sourc e an d subjec t t o the reinforce d 

# yP. 7

composit e plastic s MAC T standard . 5 . Principa l fabricatio n processe s (pag

e 7 ) I n describin

g th e variou s processe s used i n th e industr

y t o manufactur e composites , i t wa s noted tha t ther e wa s a significan t differenc e i n th

e variou s type s o f processe s an d thei r emission characteristic s used i n th e industry . Th e makin g o f intermediat e molding compound s suc ha s shee t moldin g compoun

d an d bul k moldin

g compoun d wer e included a s a fabricatio n process . 6 . Emission reductio n technique s (pag

e 9 ) I t wa s noted tha t th e SCAQM D regulatio

nfor polyeste r resi n operation s included mor e reductio n technique s than indicated i n the origina l briefin g package . Attachmen t 1 contain s corrections . A s a reference , th e mos t updated versio no f th e rule , a s wel l a s additiona l informatio nfro m th e SCAQM D regardin

g bes t availabl e contro l technolog y determination s i s included a s Attachmen t 2 . 7 . Emission facto r estimate s (pag e 10 ) A grea t dea l o f discussion focuse d aroun d th e 9 7 percen t numbe r obtained fro m th e EPA/Radian testin g a t Genera l Marble , i n tha t i t seemed impossibl e t o be tha t high . Mar k Bahne r explained tha t on e facto r tha t coul d lea d t o relativel y

hig hemission s woul d b e larg e amount s o f overspray . Th e secon d poin t Mar k mad e wa s tha t the numbe r coul d b e of f b y 2 0 percent , an

d the way

i t shoul d b e takeni s tha t th e emissio

n facto r fro

m thi s tes t was , a s wer e al l th

e othe r dat a point s inth e table , highe r thanth e factor s publishe d i nAP-42 . H e ha s provided th e dat a an

d the calculation an

d a brie f analysi s o f ho w differen t assumption s affec t th

e calculatio

n results , whichi s include d a s Attachmen t 3 . BobBurmark asked i f an y o f th e dat a point s wer e obtained b

y materia l balanc e (o r correlated wit hmateria l balanc e results) . I t wa s explained tha t th e dat a wer e al l base d o nai r emissionmeasurements , however , th e CF A testin g (th e bo x entitled "Preliminar y (Ja n1995^ ) tes t b

y trade association i n lab-type se t up" ) wil l b e comparin g thei r dat a wit hmateria l balanc e results . ResearchTriangl e Institut e (RTI ) wil l als o b e conductin g test s t o compar e emissio n tes t result s wit hmateria l balanc e results . 8 . Ongoin g wor k o n factor s (page 11 ) Th e CF Atestin g program wa s explained
. Mar k Bahner , wh o unde r a cooperativ e agreemen t wit h EPA' s ORD , ha s bee n workin g closel ywit h th e CF Ates t programexplaine d tha t th e CF A originall yplanne d t o complet e testing ove r a yea r ag o bu t du e t o postponement s wa s onl yno w gettin g underway . H e explaine d tha t RT I wil l embar k o n a n independen t testing progra mthi s summer . Th e detail s hav e no t ye t bee n worke d out , bu t th e mai n goal s woul d b e t o quantif yemissio n reduction s fro m pollutio n preventio n measure s suc h a s styren e suppressants , HVL P spray guns , an

d environmenta l modificatio n suc h a s lo w linea r ai r velocitie s and/o r lo w temperatur e i n th e applicatio n area .


### bP. 8

9 . Preliminar

y Surve y Analyses : Ad

d o nControl s (page s 13-14 ) I t wa s pointed out tha t dollar s pe r to nanalysi s i s no t good wa y t o examine th

e cos t o f add-on controls . Rathe r the cos t shoul d b e looke

d a t i n compariso

n wit hth

e cos t o f the manufacture d product . Fo r example , ho w muc hwil l the cos t o f installin

g an d operatin

g a nadd-on contro l devic e ad d t o th e cos t o f the product . Madelein e noted tha t thi s typ e analysi s doe s no t ten d t o ge t done unti l a n optioni s alread y selected a s par t o f th e economi c impac t analysis . The economi c impac t analysi s tend s t o b e very

resourc e intensive , an d i t wil l b e especiall y difficul t fo r thi s sourc e category , a s product s rang e fro m smal l relativel y

inexpensiv

e item s t o massive infrastructur e item s such a s bridges . Richard Nielson 1 ''note d tha t thi s typ

e o f cos t analysi s wa s done fo r th e ne w tub/showe r plan t tha t opened i n Clar k County , an

d h e woul d b e abl e t o shar e th e results . I n term s o f researchin

g th e feasibility

o f add-on controls , i t wa s suggested tha t w e examine equipmen t bein g use d b

y othe r industr y categories . A

nexampl e wa s give ni nwhic ha catalyti c incinerato r wit h6 0 percen t hea t recover y i s bein

g use d t o abat e th e remainin

g 5 percen t o f emission s o f a pollutan t a t a chemica l plant . Informationonth e operationan

d cost s o f thi s proces s ma y b e helpfu l po the reinforced composit e plastic s project . Anothe r suggestio

n wa s t o examine add-oncontrol s i nterm s o f th e siz e o f th

e particula r proces s tha t wa s bein g controlled . Fo r example , in som e standards , th

e emission s fro

m storag e tank s unde r a particula r siz e ar e subjec t t o a differen t limit
. Analogously , w

e migh t loo

k a t size s o f pultrusionbath s t o determine whethe r som e size s shoul d be exempt . I t wa s als o suggeste d tha t w e us e bubblin g fromth e variou s emission s source s o f th e plan t an d requir e a certai n percentag e o f contro l whic h ma yb e achievabl e b y th e us e o f a n add-o n contro l fo r som e emissio n points , and pollutio n preventio n technique s fo r others . Ther e wa s additiona l discussio n o n th e fac t tha t som e foreig n (European ) facilitie s i n thi s sourc e categoryus e add-o n controls , and tha t thei r cost s and emissio n reduction s woul d b e usefu l t o develo p an d analyz e option s whic h ar e mor e stringen t tha n th e existin g sourc e floor . Th e add-o n contro l optio n ma y ver ywel l b e th e ne w sourc e floor , an d w e ca n us e dat a from foreig n facilitie s i f add-on s ar e operate d mor e cost-effectivel y and wit h les s negativ e environmenta l impact s tha n the yar e i n thi s country . I t wa s note d tha t SCAQMD recommend s including th e analysi s o f add-o n control s i n a BAC T analysi s (se e Attachmen t 2) . Finally , i t wa s pointe d ou t tha t th e trad e association s hav e pose d seriou s objection s t o add-o n control s (se e Attachmen t 4) .



## 7P. 9

10 . Conclusio n Madelein e requeste d tha t teammember s rea d th e bi g pictur e idea s (pag e 15) , th e variou s alternative s fo r a forma t o f th e standar d (page s 16-17 ) and summar yo f question s fo r th e team (pag e 18 ) and provid e inpu t o n thes e a t som e poin t afte r th e meeting
. Th e meetin g adjourne d a t approximatel y4pmeaster n standar d time
.

/



### ti %P.1 0



# ATTACH/ilE M i
Pre-MAC T fo r Reinforce d Plasti c Composite s CORRECTE D BRIEFIN

G PACKAG E (Februar y 23 ) Pre-Meetin g #1 : Informatio n Februar y 7 , 199 5 2p m ES T teleconferenc e PURPOSE : Provid e Informatio n t o Pre-MAC T TEA M on :

- CA A requirements : MACT , MAC T "floor "

- Pre-MAC T Proces s

i f

- Sourc e Category

Profil e

- Productio n Processe s Encompasse d i nSourc e Categor y

- Preliminar yScreenin g Surve yResult s Ge t You r Feedbac k on : t

- Possibl e forma t o f th e standar d

- Furthe r Screenin g Surve yanalyse s

- Furthe r dat a require d (an d offer s t o hel p gathe r data ) fo r Pre
- MAC T decisio n meetin g

- * Industr yParticipatio n i n Subsequen t TeamMeetings ?

/P.1 1

MAC T and the MAC T "floor " A s Prescribed i n Clea n Ai r Ac t (Sectio n 112(d) ) MACT : ".. . maximu mdegre e o f reductio n i n emission s o f th e hazardou s ai r pollutant s subjec t t o thi s section [Sectio n11 2 o f th e Act ] (includin

g a prohibition o nsuc hemissions , wher e achievable ) tha t the Aministrator , takin g int o considerationth e cos t o f achievin

g suc hemission reductions , and an y non 1 ai r qualit y healt han

d environmenta l impact s an d energ

y requirements , determine s i s achievabl e fo r new o r existin

g sourc s i n th e categor y o r subcategory

t o whic hsuc hemissionstandard applie s " MAC T coul d resul t from : '-'

- proces s change s o r materia l substitution ,

- enclosing system s o r processe s t o eliminat e emissions ,

- collection , capture , treatmen t

- design , equipment , wor k practic e or operationa l standard s

- combinatio n o f above . MAC T FLOO R - - minimu mstringenc ya s prescribe d byClea n Ai r Ac t NE W SOURCE S "shal l no t b e les s stringen t tha n th e bes t controlle d simila r sourc e withi n the category " EXISTING SOURCE S fo r sourc e categorie s o r subcategorie s wit h mor e tha n 3 0 sources , MACT : "shal l no t b e les s stringen t tha n th e averag e leve l o f contro l achieve d b ythe bes t performin g 12 % o f source s withi n th e category. "

/P.1 2

Presumptive-MAC T Presumptiv

e MAC T is : ou r "best'guess ' a t MACT , base d o n dat a whic h ca n b e obtaine d i n a shor t timefram e (1- 4 months) . I t i s don e a t th e beginnin g o f a projec t i n 3- 6 month s ("If MAC T ha d t o b e determine d today , wha t woul d i t be?" ) Presumptive MAC T i s use d fort Assis t Stat e an d loca l agencie s i n making case-by-cas e determination s fo r Section s 112(g ) an d (j) . I t i s offere d onl y

fo r guidance , caveate d by the dept ho f availabl e informationo n whic hi t i s based . Ho w i s i t developed? : I t i s develope d a s a conservativ e estimat e o f wha t MAC T woul d b e afte r a brie f revie w o f availabl e information . Conservative , mean s mor e stringen t (th e goa l i s no t t o g o belo w the floor) , an d coul d b e don e usin g a "top-down " analysi s wher e the most - stringen t option s ar e looked a t first . I t i s anticipate d tha t i n mos t case s i t woul d no t b e possibl e t o conduc t a forma l 'floor ' analysis
. Informatio n whic h migh t b e availabl e includes : Stat e an d loca l regulations , previou s regulator yefforts , MAC T fo r a simila r sourc e category , tes t reports , permit s an d perhap s othe r information
. Who Play s a rol e i n Pre-MACT? : EP Aan d State/loca l agencie s an d Outsid e Parties
.
Wha t i s th e resul t o f the fina l Pre-MAC T decision meeting : 1 ) Th e presumptiv e MAC T and a lis t o f question s t o b e addresse d i n developin g a MAC T standar d 2 ) Arecommendatio n o f th e propose d regulator ypat h whic h shoul d b e take n t o develo p MAC TP.1 3

SOURC E CATEGOR

YPROFIL E A . Numbe r o f Source s Base d o n TR I (1992) , ther e ar e approximatel y 75 0 facilitie s i nth e sourc e category . (Facilitie s usin g mor e than 10,00 0 pound s o f styren e annuall y

mus t repor t t o TRI )

- - Som e industr

y member s believe actua l numbe r o f facilitie s coul d b e a s hig

ha s 5,00 0 t o 10,00 0 — • . Ou t o f th

e 75 0 fro

m TRI , approximatel y 29 7 ar e majo r sources . (Thi s wa s base d on reported-TR I emission s time s a fudg e factor ) NOTE : W E HAV

E SURVE YDAT A FRO M ABOUT 50 0 SOURCE S (i t i s no t know n ho w man y o f the 29 7 ar e covered-fro m a quic k review , i t appear s tha t abou t 9 0 o r s o o f thes e ar e no t covered b y surve y responses.) . B . Styren e Emission s Tota l fro

m Majo r an

d no nmajo r sources : styren e i n 1992 . abou t 15,00 0 ton s o f Emission s from

No n majo r source s contribut e abou t 10 % o f thi s total . / ' C . Type s o f Industria l Group s Include d Th e Source s SPA

Nmor e tha n 5 0 SI C Codes , fo r example : 308 : Miscellaneou s Plasti c Product s 308 8 Plastic s Plumbin g Fixture s 308 3 Laminate d Plastic s Plate , Shee t an d Profil e Shape s 308 9 Plastic s Products , No t Elsewher e Classifie d 371 : Moto r Vehicles/Equipmen t 371 3 Truc k and Bu s Bodie s 379 2 Trave l Trailer s an d Camper s 372 : Aircraf t and Part s 372 8 Aircraf t Part s & Equipmen t 394 : Toy s and Sportin g Good s 394 9 Sportin g and Athleti c Goods , No t Elsewher e Classifie d D . Geographi c Locatio n TE NSTATE S WIT H LARGES T NUMBE R O F FACILITIE S ARE : Ohi o (7 0 facilities ] Indian a (65 ) Californi a (51 ) Texa s (45 ) Pennsylvani a (37 ) Nort h Carolin a (34 ) Michiga n (33 ) Florid a (32 ) Illinoi s (31 ) Wisconsi n (31 ) Not e Washingto n Stat e ha s 2 1 facilities ; Nevad a ha s 1 facilit y (based o n 1992 ) / 

# aP.1 4

BASI C PRODUCTIO

N PROCES S Combine ra

w material s i n a fixed shap e

- unsaturate d polyeste r resi n wit hcross-linking monome r (usually

styrene ) o r corrosionresistan t polyeste r resin s (typicall y

thes e hav e highe r concentration s o f styrene )

- additiona l styrene fo r thinnin g (sometimes )

- filler s and additive s (sometimes )

- fibe r reinforcemen t (glass , carbon , kevlar , etc ) - excep t fo r syntheti c marbl e castin g

Cur e Produc t a t ambien t temperature , o r unde r hea t and/o r pressur e Perfor m finishin

g operation s (cutting , drilling , sanding )

TYPE S O F HAP' s EMITTED (fro m highes t t o lowes t emitted ) Styren e - monome r use d i n fabricatio n proces s methylen e chlorid e - cleanin g
methano l toluen e * x ME K 1,1, 1 trichloroethan e xylen e methy l methacrylat e - sometime s use d a s a monome r i n fabricatio n processes , als o use d i n cleanin g



## 1 3P.1 5

Principa l Fabricatio nProcesse s

OPE N MOLDIN G TYP E gelcoatin g - sprayin g a laye r o f pigmente d polyeste r resi no n surfac e o f mol d o r a s a thi n sheet . Usuall y don e i n conjunction wit ha hand o r spra y layu p proces s o r marbl e casting . resi n spray

u p - sprayin

g a resi n ont o a n ope n mol d t o buil d a laye r (laminate ) o r multipl e layer s o f plastic . Afte r th e spraying step , th e we t laminat e i s typicall y

rolle d wit ha rolle r fo r remova l o f ai r gaps , and the n lef t t o cure .

/ ' hand lay-u

p o r pre-pregging - pouring , brushin g resi n ont o glas s —ReMorcemen t Spray-U p Gu n

"Continuou s Rovin g Reinforcemen t

filamen t windin g - saturating * a glas s ma t wit h resi n b ydippin g i t int o a resi n bath , an d windin g i t aroun d a rotatin g mold . O r windin g th e glas s ma t aroun d th e mol d an d the n sprayin g i t wit h resi n t o saturat e it
.

marbl e castin g an d curin g it
. pourin g a highl yfille d resi n int o a hollo w mol d



# XhP.1 6

CONTINUOU S PROCESSE S (lit e printing ) pultrusio n - Glas s mattin g and fiber s ar e pulle d through a bat ho f resi nan d throug ha close d heate d di e fo r curing . continuou s laminatio n CONTINUOU S LAMINATING : Hea l Source Continuou s Stran d Rovin g
_ MatorOot h f j

Resi n AppScato r FMNCO*MA T

CAMME RSHEET S MEA T SOURC E

FMSHC O STOC K SQUEEZE ROU S RES * SA W COKnWUOU8tAMW«*TIH O 

### productio n o f

shee tmoldin g compoun d
Continuou s Continuou s stran d rovin g stran d rovin g 

# V

Chopped ? roving— ^ ^

iT'*» - ^ Resin/fille r

past e Carrie r fil m

Chai n lin k compactio n bel t

Resin/fille r past e Take-u p rol l Carrie r fil m \ \ Pufin g Device

MIXIN G TYP E OPERATION S productio n o f bul k moldin g compoun d

CLOSE D MOLDING TYP E close d moldin g processe s (compressio n molding , resi n injectio n molding )P.1 7

EMISSIO N REDUCTIO

N TECHNIQUE S STORAGE/TRANSFER OPERATIONS : Ad d o n controls , refrigerate d storag e CLEANIN G OPERATIONS : Us e o f nonHA P cleanin g material , Limi t Quantit yo f HA P use d i n cleanin g (* ) MIXIN G OPERATIONS : Ad d o n controls , close d piping , puimpin g (versu s pouring) , cover s o n mixer s (* ) FABRICATIO

N PROCESSES : AD D O N(treatmen t and recovery ) thermal/ca£alyti c incineratio n (used i n U.S. ) concentration-incineratio n (POLYA D syste muse d i n Europe ) concentration-recover y(PURU S syste mteste d i n U.S. ) Europea n fluidize d be d system ) biofiltratio n (AM

T syste muse d i n Swedis h plan t fo r 5 years ) SOURC E REDUCTION Materia l Changes' : lo w styren e gelcoats , lo w styren e resin s (*) , non-styren e base d resin s (eg . epoxy) , faste r curin g resins , vapo r suppresse d resins , othe r formulation s (U V cured , W.E.T. ) Usin g les s permeabl e fil mmaterial s fo r shee t moldin g compound Proces s Changes : Switchin g fromOpe n t o Close d Mol d Example : SCRIM P proces s (vacuu massiste d resi n infusio n molding ) Equipmen t Changes : usin g flo w coater s instea d o f spray , usin g mor e efficien t spray equipmen t (*) , covere d pultrusio n bath s (* ) Environmenta l Changes : x lo w linea r ai r velocitie s t o decreas e styren e evaporatio n rat e lo w temperatur e i n applicatio n are a Housekeeping : Operato r training , solven t tracking , lea k detectio n an d repair , keepin g container s close d (* )

* thos e item s tha t for mbasi s o f Sout h Coas t rul e fo r reducin g VO C fromPolyeste r Resi n Operation s

/ 

## H,RESULT S O F ORD' s INVESTIGATIO N O F EMISSIO

N ESTIMATE S FRO M VARIOU S PROCESSE S ••Recen t tes t dat a show s AP-4 2 may

under-estimat e percen t o f availabl e styrene whic hi s emitted ^ EMISSIO N FACTOR S EXPRESSE D A S PERCENT AVAILABL E STYRENE 100 * (gram

s styren e emitte d pe r gra m styren e i n resin ) Emission Facto r Sourc e j Proces s j type -- > V

•

r AP-4 2 (base

d o n198 2 data ) EPA/Southern Researc h Insitut e a t Elje r Plummingwar e (1993 ) EPA/Radian testin

g a t Venetia n Marbl e i n V A EPA/Radian testin

g a t Genera l Marbl e i nN C Radian Testing a t CORTE C plan t i n Ohi o (1993 ) (fla t line spra

y operation ) - - continuou s process ) Preliminar

y (Ja n1995 ) tes t b y trade association i n lab type se t u p Bison Engineerin

g testin g a t GE A dynami c I fabricators , I D GE L COAT (spray )

26-3 5 

### 6 6
6 8 9 7 42/29 '



### 4 1 RESI N

SPRA YU P

9-1 3



### 2 4 RESI N

SPRA Y U P vapo r suppr e ssed 

### 3- 9 1 6 HAN

D LA Y U P

5-1 0



### 1 7

Discrepancie s mayb e du e to : Metho d o f testin g (1 8 versu s 25A ) , Difference s i n environmenta l factor s (ai r velocit yacros s surface ) prope r enclosure , Prope r trackin g o f th e quantit yo f resi n use d i n test s

1 Emissio n facto r o f 42 % fo r conventiona l gelcoat , 29 % i s f o a "hig h performance " ge l coa t wit h a fas t ge l time 

## x 5 

# nEMISSIO N FACTOR S . continued Som e industr

y member s have use d factor s tha t ar e les s tha n AP-4 2 emission factor s for som e processe s 

# 1
A P - 4 2 Pultrusion Industr

y Counci l Testing on pultrusionmachine ^ Plant - tes t i n Ohi o Facilit y

, f (throug

h verba l communication ) Pultrusion 

### 4- 7 1.1 5 Mixing 1 (pain t mixing )

0. 5 (resi n mixing )

•stud y note s tha t the experimenta l condition s d o no t necessaril y represen t condition s presen t o r attainabl e i n al l pulltrusion operations . I n particular , th e mor e complexpart s typicall y pultrude d may

hav e large r resi nbaths , we t ou t areas , an d ma y consequentl y

hajf e highe r emissions .

ONGOIN G WOR KO N FACTOR S Testin g being done b

y CF A fo r Ope n Moldin

g t o calculat e "baseline " emission s fro

m resin/gelcoa t spra y up . Purpos e i s t o stud y als o th e effectivenes s o f Pollutio n Preventio n contro l option s Additiona l Dat a fro mNe w LASC O plan t (Clar k County ) mayb e availabl e withi n nex t 6 month s
CF Aals o explorin g a mode l t o predic t emissio n factor s dependin g o n variou s factor s
EPAOR D Contractor s ar e workin g o n a mode l t o predic t emissio n factor s dependin g o n variou s factor s
W e wil l us e result s o f mode l (hopefull ya n industry-EP Aconsensus ) fo r calculatio n o f potential-to-emi t i n th e MAC T standar d
AP-4 2 updatin g wil l b e base d o n result s obtaine d fro m thi s projec tP.2 0

PRELIMINAR

YSURVEYRESULT S - - EMISSION S B YPROCESS * Tota l emission s o f styren e fro m the sourc e categor y i s o nth e orde r o f 15,00 0 ton s pe r yea r (include s bot hmajo r and are a sources ) We estimat e tha t abou t 10 % o f th e tota l emission s ar e fro m are a sources . EMISSION S (NOTE TR I DAT A

MULTIPLIE D B YA

FUDG E FACTO

Rfo r gelcoating , hand lay-up , resi n spray up )

Proces s
ge l coatin

g resi n spra

y up han d la y u p and ; pre-pregging filamen t winding pultrusion continuou s laminatio n close d mol d unknown TOTA L 199 2 Styren e Emission s (Tons ) 400 6 511 5 110 8 

### 22 6 16 1 18 9 58 3 425 6 15,64 4

• Tabl e need s t o b e update d (t o reduc e th e tonnag e o f "unknown") . W e nee d als o t o figur e ou t th e riumber o f majo r source s tha t perfor m eac h process .P.2 1

Preliminar

y Surve y Result s U.S . Plant s wit hADD-O N Control s
Process / proces s type gel coating (continuous flat-line spray process) * ge l coating , resi nspra y up , mixing
H . » Ge l coa t an

d resi n sprayin

g pultrusion** pultrusion, continuous lamination, acrylic spraying pultrusion i continuous lamination sheet mold compounding sheet mold compounding Mixing , close

d molding , possibl y pultrusion an

d han d la y u p unknow n unknow n Confidentia l busines s information (CBI ) Processe s liste

d ar e CB I x R+D facility - - prepregging prepregging phenolic resins
epoxy resin casting, painting not using styrene based resins Locatio n Washington Court House, Ohio
Lancaster , Texa s Elizabethtown , P

A Sout hBoston , V

A Hazleton, PA Fort Worth, TX Sand Springs, OK Jonesboro, Arizona Dekalb, Illinois Columbus, Ohio SouthEuclid , Ohi o Witchita , Kansa s Magna , Uta h
• CB I *

* CB I * Tempe, Arizona Hoosick Falls, NY Springboro Ohio

* CBI * Instal l

Dat e 1992

198 5 198 5 198 6 1990 1991

1990
1993

199 3 Planned 199 4
1993 1993

* overal l contro l efficienc ywa s determine d t o b e betwee n 88-95 % * * on e o f possibl ymor e whos e add-o n devic e control s pain t emission s a s wel l a s emission s fro mthi s category On e additiona l plan t ha s conducte d testing a n add-o n fro m mixing/genera l plan t an d foun d tes t ver

ysuccessful . 

## M 

## I tPRELIMINAR YSURVEYRESULT S AD D O N CONTROL S
PROCES S #FACILITIE S

Gelcoating PERCENT O F CATEGOR YWHIC H HA S ADD-O

N CONTROL S (INCLUDE S BOT H MAJOR AND NO N MAJO R SOURCES ) 4. 0 (ma

y b e les s i f tak e ou t continuou s process )
Resi n Spra

y up 

### 2. 2
Han d La y u p

Pultrusion AND 4 Continuou s Lamination 0. 0 (did no t coun t facilitie s no t using styrene ) 1 1 (industr

y interpretatio

n o f ou r dat a shows i t i s close r t o 0 , an

d they woul d no t grou

p continuou s lamination wit h pultrusion )
We don' t kno

w ho w muc h o f th e emission s ar e vente d t o th e contro l device , an d w e don' t kno w overal l contro l efficiencie s o f th e majority
.

Othe r emissio n reductio n technique s reporte d i n surve y hav e no t ye t bee n tabulated ._P^2 3

Possibilitie s fo r MAC T (BI G PICTURE )
1 . Adop t Sout hCoas t Ai r Qualit y Managemen t Distric t Rul e 116 2 for existing sourc e MAC T Advantage s - - Othe r State s ar e adoptin g the rule , thu s i t probabl y

wil l affec t 12 % o f facilitie s (eas y MAC T floor ) Disadvantage s - - rul e exempts'the majorit y o f th e processe s and require s status-quo for ge l coating , an d an y proces s whic huse s filler s (larg

e par t o f resi nspra y u p an d han d la y up ) Consequently , thi s approachmay no t ge t an

y emissionreduction . 2 . Us e 116 2 an

d negotiat e additiona l work practic e standard s on othe r processe s wit hth e industr

y (eg . cove r o npultrusionbath ) Advantage s - - may

ge t industr

y support , ma y

encourag e industr

y t o institut e tes t program(s ) an d "design " equipmen t standard for pultrusion . Disadvantage s - - We d o no t no w hav e dat a onwor k practic e standard s no r thei r emissionreduction impacts . Thi s approach woul d ignor e th

e emissio

n reduction potentia l fro m add-on devices . / ' i / / 3 . Pu t effort s i n th e explorationof add-oncontrol s fo r ne w sourc e MAC T Advantage s - - wil l encourag e innovatio ni npollution preventio n suc h a s resin s wit h n o styrene , styren e recover ydevice s Disadvantage s - - coul d b e a difficul t sel l (eve n thoug h thes e device s ar e ou t there ) 4 . D o a "process-by-process " MAC T rathe r tha n subcategorizaton
. Exemp t certai n processes/resin s fro mMAC T a s di d th e SCAQM D rul e - e.g. : compressio n molding , corrosio n resistan t resins , pultrusion , continuou s lamination , SM C production
. Perhap s develo p housekeeping-typ e requirements.fo r these .

% QPOSSIBL E FORMAT S O F A STYRENE EMISSIO

N STANDAR

D Importan t i n figurin g ou t HO

W T O ANALYZ E DATA 1 ) PLANT-WID E STYRENE EMISSIO N LIMIT : gram s styrene emitte d pe r mete r squared surfac e coated ADVANTAGE S

- Unit s ar e familia r t o industr y (use d i nSout hCoas t rule )

- Giv e credit s t o thi n application o f gelcoating (les s tota l resi n used )

- Credit s minimizatio n o f usag e o f resi n (i. e bette r spra y methods ) DISADVANTAGE S

- Depending o n ho

w yo u tak e surfac e are a int o account , yo u ma y penaliz e thic k layer s o f resi n

- W e don' t have ver y good dat a t o com

e u p wit ha numbe r withou t having t o us e significan t estimatin g procedure s t o determin e emission s

- Plant s wil l nee d t o measure/calculat e surfac e are a fo r every piec e coated an

d Measur e o r /calculat e emission s

- Difficul t t o demonstrat e compliance/enforc e

- Woul d penalize y :thos e product s that , fo r qualit y reasons , may

nee d mor e resi n thicknes s (mor e grams emitted , sam e surfac e area ) 2 ) Emissionlimi t o nstyrene fro m resin s use d (either the resi nas supplie d b

y the supplier , o r th e resi nas-applied , tha t is , afte r mixing wit hadditives , fillers , etc . b y th e manufacturer ) i nterms o f gram s pe r mete r square d ADVANTAGE S

- I t i s ver yfamilia r t o th e industry : Sout h Coas t Rul e utilize s thi s already , and resi n supplier s kee p dat a o n thi s quantit y

- Wit h a tes t method , i t shoul d b e relativel yeas yt o demonstrat e complianc e DISADVANTAGE S

- Won' t addres s emission s fro mapplication , onl ycuring ; therefor e w e woul d nee d t o addres s method s t o minimiz e resi n usage/resi n evaporatio n durin g sprayin g (i.e
. bette r sprayguns , operato r training , close d containers ) i n a differen t forma t suc h a s a wor k practic e standar d - - thi s coul d actuall yb e a n advantage , however .

- Analysi s o f Sout h Coas t tes t metho d showe d proble m- - EP Awoul d hav e t o adop t a ne w metho d

- W e wil l likel ynee d t o giv e exemption s fo r man ytype s o f resins/application s "A s - applied " disadvantag e : thos e companie s wit h highl yfille d resin s wil l no t ge t an yemissio n reductio n i f thei r dat a ar e average d i n wit h companie s tha t don' t fil l th e resin s (however , w e coul d trea t themseparatel yand deriv e a separat e limi t fo r fille d resins )

- "A s - Supplied " disadvantage : companie s coul d thi n resin s wit h additiona l styren e and tha t woul d no t coun t a s emission s 

## -* £ 2 1P.2 5

POSSIBL E FORMAT S O F A STYREN E EMISSIO N STANDARD.. . continue d 3 ) PLAN T WID E LIMI T gram s emitte d pe r k g resin use d ADVANTAGE S

- Shoul d b e relativel y eas y t o kee p record s o f k g resin use d

- Ma y b e abl e t o d o a mas s balanc e (weig hresi ngoin g int o process , weig hresi n goin g ou t o f process ) t o calculat e emission s DISADVANTAGE S

- W e don' t hav e ver y goo d dat a t o com e u p wit ha numbe r withou t havin g to us e significan t estimatin g procedure s t o determin e emission s

- Problems.rwit htesting / complianc e / enforcement : Mas s balanc e technique s ca n b e ver y innaccurate , w e woul d hav e t o com e u p wit h a protoco l an d qualit y assuranc e procedure s 4 ) Emissio n limi t o n resin s use d (eithe r th e resin as-supplie d by th e supplier , o r th e resi nas-applied , tha t is , afte r mixin g wit h additives , fillers , etc . b y th e manufacturer ) i nterm s o f gram s pe r k g resi n use d ADVANTAGE S f

- W e coul d possibl y utiliz e EP A

Metho d 2 4 fo r measuremen t o f nonvolatile s conten t (the y hav e recentl y

adde d i nprocedure s fo r multicomponen t coating s - - whic hencompasse s catalyze d coatings ) DISADVANTAGE S

- Won' t addres s emission s fro mapplication , onl y curing ; therefor e w e woul d nee d t o addres s method s t o minimiz e resi n usage/resi n evaporatio n durin g sprayin g (i.e
. bette r spra yguns , operato r training , close d containers ) i n a differen t forma t suc h a s a wor k practic e standar d - - thi s coul d actuall yb e a n advantage , however . 5 ) Emplo ya semi-quantitativ e POIN T syste man d writ e re g base d o n facilit ygettin g a certai n cumulativ e point s base d o n th e emissio n reductio n technique s the yuse. xW e assig n point s t o th e variou s emissio n reductio n technique s ADVANTAGE S

- Provide s Flexibilit yan d choice s

- Onc e w e hav e a poin t scheme , w e woul d b e abl e t o calculat e a MAC T floo r fro m

surve yver yeasil y

- Ide a originate d fro ma membe r o f industry
. DISADVANTAGE S

- ma yb e complicate d t o wor k ou t a poin t schem e

- eve n mor e complicate d t o com e u p wit h a limi t

- woul d no t necessaril yencourag e P 2 technique s tha t w e migh t hav e lef t ou t

- woul d nee d t o wor k ou t complianc e procedure s fo r eac h techniqu e w e appl ypoint s t oP.2 6

SUMMAR Y O F QUESTION S FO R TEAM 1 . D o w e ope n al l o f ou r meeting s t o industr ytrad e associatio n groups ? I f so , shoul d w e tr yt o identif yintereste d environmenta l group s fo r participation ? 2 . Wha t additiona l dat a analyse s ar e necessary ? Wha t dat a d o yo u thin k industr ycoul d provide ? 3 . An ybi g pictur e MAC T ideas ? 4 . Wha t woul d b e a goo d forma t o f th e standard ? 5 . I s i t reasonabl e t o us e performanc e data/cos t data/environmenta l impac t dat a o n add-o n control s fo r thi s industr y base d fro m

facilitie s tha t ar e usin g thes e device s i n Europe ? eg : i f a U.S . plan t ha s installe d carbo n filter s i n whic h cost s an d environmenta l impact s ar e poor , bu t w e find Europea n technologie s tha t ge t th e sam e o r bette r reductio n an d ar e favorabl e i n thes e impacts , ca n w e us e th e Europea n dat a fo r evaluatin g feasibility , an d U.S . dat a fo r justificatio n tha t thi s shoul d b e th e floo r fo r ne w sources ? / ' 6 . Ho w woul d 'yo

u group "similar " processe s togethe r (eg , fo r purpose s o f ne w sourc e MAC T floor) . Fo r example : shoul d continuou s lamination , pultrusion , th e continuou s ge l coa t spra y lin e b e considere d "similar " wit h respec t t o th e feasibilit yo f add-o n controls ?



## 1-bP.2 7 FE B 0 6 '9 5 09 = ISA

M SCHUTU

J HUtxn =>"x

* 

# *mctiM£HT'3~-

\ 

### (Adopted Marc

h 6,19$7)(Amended Apri

l 3,1987}(Amenoea^u^ * - , ~~ . (Ajncnde d December7,1990 ) (Amende d Augus t2,l#l){Ainende d Jul

y 10,199 2 (Amende d Ma y 13,1994 ] RUL E 1162 , POLYESTE

RRES1 KOPERATION

S (a ) Applicabilit

y Thi s role sha

U appl y t o all polyesterresin operation s tha tfabricate , rework

, repair, ortouch-u

p product s forcommercial, military

, o riaduttria

l us e including, butnotlimite d to , boats , tubs , pools , shewe renclosures , tp ^ bathroo m fixtures, jigs , tools , molds , ai

rpollution contro

l equipment

, sewag e treatmen

tequipment

, storag e tanks , transportatio

n parts , an d othe rindustria l an d consume

rproducts. . (b ) Definitions Fo rthe purpose o

f thi s rule , th e followin

g definition

s Shal l apply : (1 ) AIRLES S SPRA

Y \s acoatin

g applicatio

n syste m i n whic h th e coating fluid i^ supplie

d t o th e gu

n unde rfluid pressur

e an d ai ri s notadded t o th e gun . AIR-ASSISTE

D AIRLES S SPRA

Y i s acoating applicatio

n syste m i n whic h th e coatin

g fluid i s supplie

d to th e gu

n unde rflui d pressur e an d air i s combine

d a tth e spra y cap . CORROSION-RESISTAN T MATERIAL

S ar e polyesterresi n materials used t o mak

e product s fo rcorrosio n resistan tapplication

s suc h as tooling , fue l orchemica

l tank s an d boathulls . EXEMP T COMPOUND

S ar e an y o f the followin

g compounds : 

### (2 ) (3 )

(A ) Group I

dichlorotrifluoToethane (HCrOixj j tetrafluoroethan e (HFC-134a ) dichlorofluoroethane (HCFC-141b ) chlorodifluoroethane (HCFC-142b ) trifluoromethan e (HFC-23 ) 2-chloro-l,l,l,2-tetrafluoroethan e (HCFG124 ) pentafluoroethan e (HFC-125 ) 1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethane (HFG134 ) 1,1,1-trifluoroethane (HFC-143a ) 1,1-difluoroethan

e (HFC-152a

) cycli c branched , o

r linear , completel

y fluorinatedalkane s



## ^ 4FE B 0 6 '9 5 89:18 m SCRQMD RDMI N SER V 90 9 39633S0 ~ " JL2 8
Rul e 116 2 (Cont ) (Amende d Ma y 13,1994 ) cycli c branched , o rlinear , completely fluorinated ether s wit h n o unsaturations cycli c branched , o rlinear , completel y fluorinated tertiary amine s with n o unsaturations sulfur-containing perflaorocarbon s wit h n o unsaturation s an d with sulfurbond s onl y t o carbo n an d fluorine (B ) Grou p I I

methylen e chlorid e
, carbo n tetrachlorid e l,Ll^chloroethan e (methyl chloroform ) tricMorotrifluoroethane (CFC-113 ) eacNorodifluoroniethane (CFC-12 ) trichlorofluoromethane (CFC-11 ) dichlorotetrafluoroethane (CFC-114 ) chloropentafluoroethan e (CFC-115 ) Us e o f Grou p II compound s ma y b e restricted i n th e future becaus e they ar e eithe rtoxic , potentiall y toxic , orupper-atmosphere ozon e depleters , o rcaus e othe renvironmenta l impacts . Specifically , th e Distric tBoar d ha s establishe d apolicy t o phas e ou tchlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) , methy l chloroform (LLl-trichloroethan e orTCA) , an d carbon tetrachlorid e by Decembe r31,1995 . (5 ) FIR E RETARDAN T MATERIAL S ar e polyeste rresi n material s use d t o mak e product

s thai ar e resistantt o flame o rfire. (6 ) GE L COA T i s apolyeste rresi n surface coating , eithe rpigmente d o r dear , tha tprovides acosmeti c enhancementan d improve s resistanc e t o degradatio n fro

m exposure t o th e elements . GENERA L PURPOS E POLYESTE RRESIN S are material s tha tar e no t corrosio n resistant , fire retardant, hig hstrength, vapo rsuppressed , o r ge l coats
. HIGH-STRENGT H MATERIAL S ar e polyeste r resin s whic hhav e castin g tensil e strengt ho f 10,00 0 ps i o r

mor e an dwhic har e use dfo r manufacturin g o

f hig hperformanc e boat s an dskis
. • HIGH-VOLUME , LOW-PRESSURE
. (HVLP ) SPRA Y i s acoatin g applicatio n syste

mwhic hi s operate dat

air pressur e o

f betwee n 0. 1 an d 1 0 pound s pe r

squar e inc hgaug e (psig ) at th e air ca p .o f th e spray gun . 

### (7 ) (8)

116 2 - 2' FE B 8 6 '9 5 89:i6A M SCflQM D ADMI N SER V * » ^ ^



### Rul e 116 2 (Cont ) (Amende d Ma y 13,1994 )

• N (10 ) MONOME Ri s arelativel

y low-molecular-weigh

torgani c compoun

d suc h

. a s styren

e thatcombine

s wit h itself , o rothe rsimila rconrpounds, b y a cross-Unkin

g reaction t o becom

e acure d thermosettin

g resin . (11 ) POLYESTE

RRESI N MATERIAL

S ar e unsaturate

d polyesterresins , suc h a s isophthalic, orthophthalic , halogenated , bisphenol A , viny l ester , o rfura n resins ; cross-linkin

g agents ; catalysts ; ge l coats ; inhibitors ; accelerators ; promoters ; an d an y othe rmateria

l containin

g VO C used i n

r

### polyesterresm operations . (12 ) POLYESTE

RRESI N OPERATION

S fabricate, rework

, repair, o r touch-u p product

s fo rcommercial, muhaty, o rindustria l us e b y nuxing, pouring, hand laying-up, .impregnating , mjectmg

, forming, winding, spraying , and/o rcurin

g by usin g unsaturate

d polyesterresi n materials . (13 ) PULTRUSIO

N i s aprocess wher

e continuou

s rovin g strand s are moved throug h astrand-tensionin

g devic e into aresin bat

h forimpregnatio

n and the n passed throug

h aheated di e fo rcuring

. (14 ) REPAIRi s tha

tportio n of

th e fabricatio

n proces s thatrequire

s th e addition of

polyesterresin material

s t o portion

s o f apreviousl

y fabricate

d produc ti n ordert o men

d damage. (15 ) TOUCH-U

Pi s tha tportion o f

th e process tha

ti s necessar

y t o cover minorimperfections . (16 ) VAPO RSUPPRESSE D RESI N i s apolyesterresin materia l whic h contain s additive s t o reduc e VO C evaporatio

n los s t o les s tha

n sixt y (60 ) gram s persquar

e metero f surfac e are aa s determine

d and certified b y resin manufacturers

. (17 ) VOLATIL

E ORGANI C COMPOUN D (VOC ) means an

y volatil e chemica l compoun

d tha tcontain s th e elementcarbon, exduding methane, carbo

n monoxide, carbo

n dioxide, carboni

c add , metallic carbide s an d carbonates , ammoniu

m carbonate, an

d exemp tcompounds . (c ) Requirement

s (1 ) Fo r eac h process , aperso n operatin g apolyester resi n operatio n shal l compl y wit h eithe r th e materia

l requirement s o r

on e o f th e applicabl e proces s requirement s set

fort h below :

116 2 - 3P.3 0 FE B 0 6 '9 5 09:17W 1 SGSQM D ADMI N SER V 90 9 39 6 335 0 P. 5



### Rol e ll62<Cont ^ (Amende d Ma y 13,1»4 )
(A ) MaterialReouirements^^ ^ resin niateria l i n apolyester
Unit s specifie

d i n the Tabl e below .

Geoert l Purpos e Polyeste rReof l MooomerOooWttia Fobette rRed n KliierWs«AppGe d ^n..«u>xMi f Percen t 1



### (ii )
(m )

(2 )

(3)
(4 ) 

### (B ) Process Requirement s (i ) Th e weigh tlos s o f polyeste rmaterial s shall b e les s tha

n fou r(4 ) percen

twhe n adosed-mold syste

m i s used . Whe n avapo rsuppresse

d resi n i s used , the weigh tlos s fro m VO C emission

s shal l notexceed sixt

y (60 ) gram

s persquar

e mete ro f expose d surfac e are adurin g resin polymerization . A pultrusio

n operation shal

l hav e covere d wet-outbaths . Fromth e exi

t n f th e bat h t o th e di e »& bu t

1 8 inche s o

f th e prefor m distanc e shall b e endose d t o minimiz e ai rflow. Th e weigh tlos s o f polyeste rmaterial s shall b e les s tha

n thre e (3 ) percen

ti n apultrusio

n operation . Fo rsprayin g operations, i

n additio n to complyin

g wit h th e requirement

s specifie d i n paragrap

h (c)(1) , aperso

n shal l us e high-volume-lowpressur e (HVLP) , airless , air-assiste d airless , o

relectrostati c spra

y equipment
. Fo r

iouch-u p an drepair , ahand-held , air-atomize dspra y gu n whic h ha s acontaine

r fo r resi n a s part

o f th e gu n ma y b e used
. An y perso n operating apolyeste r resi n operatio n shal l kee p th e resi n material s i

n close dcontainer s excep

t when fillin

g o r emptying th e container
. Solvent cleanin g operation s shal l comply wit hRul e 117 1 - Solven t Cleanin g Operations
. 1162- 4



## 1/ 1FE B 0 6 '9 5 09:17M 1 SCfiQM D ADMI NSER

V 90 9 a * p ^



### Rule 1162 (Cont. ) (Amende d Ma y 13,1994 )
(d ) Control Equipmen

t I n lie u o f complyin g wit h th e requirement

s o f paragrap h (c)(1 ) an d(c)(2) , a perso n ma

y install an

d operat e a n emission control syste m vmichudeslgrie d an

d operate d i n accordanc

e wit h guideline

s published i n th e 20t

h Editio n o f

th e Industria l Ventilation Manua

l b y th e America

n Conferenc

e o f Governmenta

l Industria l Hygjenist

s fo rth e collectio n o f

fugitive emissions fro

m polyesterresi n materials , an

d whic h syste m i s approve

d b y th e Executive Officer' s designee , and

• ha s a n overal

l captor e an dcontro

l effidenc y o f 9 0 percento rmor

e o n amas s basis
. (e ) Recordkeepin g Requirement s (1 ) A perso n subjec

tt o th e provision s o f

thi s rul e shal l maintai n dail y records
. Suc

h record s shal l b e mad e availabl e t o th e Executiv e Officer' s designe e upo n reques t

an dsha U b e kep t for no tles s tha n tw o years . Th e record s shal l contain : (A ) Th e manufacturer' s name , th e typ e an damoun t o f eac h o f th e polyeste r resi n material s used ; an d (B ) Th e weigh

t (i n percent ) of

monomer

for al l polyester

resi n materials , and , i f

adding VOC-containin g material s t o th e polyeste r resin , th e amount

o f VOC-containing materials , i n grams , an dth e VO C content i n gram s pe r

liter , o f VOC-containin g materials ; an d (C ) Fo r vapor suppresse dresins , acertificat e fro maresi n manufacturer

fo r eac h resi n type ; an d (D ) Fo r closed-mol dan dpultrusio n systems , th e weight los s (i n percent ) of

polyester resi n material s fo

r eac h appUcation
. (2 ) Record s fo

r cleanin g solvent s subje at o Rul e 117 1 • Solvent Cleanin g Operation s shall b e maintaine dpursuant t o Rul e 109
. (3 ) An y perso n using a n emission s contro l syste ma s amean s of

complying wit h thi s rul e shal l maintai n dail y record s of

al l ke y syste mparameters,
- including hour s o

f operation , temperatures , pressure s an dflo w rates , tha t are necessar

y t o ensure contro l efficienc y requirements
.

1162- 5 1%FE B 0 6 '9 5 09:17 m SCfiQM D (mm SER

V 93 9 39 6 335 0 P. 7 

### Rule 1162 (Cont. ) (Amende d Ma y 13,1994 )

Oi ) .complianc

e wit h subdivisio

n (e ) a tsuc

h time manufacturer

s specif y whic h individua l compound

s ar e used i n th e coatin

g formulation

s and . identif y th e tes tmethods, which, priort o suc h analysis , have bee n approve d b y th e USEP A an d th e SCAQMD, matca

n b e use d t o quantif

y th e amount

s o f each exemp

tcompound

. Exemption

s (1 ) „ Until Jul

y 1,1994 , th e provision

s o f paragraph

s (c)(1 ) and (c)(2 ) and subdivisio n (d ) shall no tappl

y to : corrosion resistant

, fire retardant

, and hig h strengt h materials . (2 ) Until Jul

y 1,1994,- Th e provision

s o f (c)(1 ) shall notappl

y t o ge l coats .

116 2 - 7FE

B 0 6 '9 5 09:i8flM SCRQri D Hunm ac* v


### Rul e 116 2 (Cont. ) (Amende d Ma y 13,1994 ) (4 ) Th e record

s shall als o contai

n th e rnanufacturer' s name , typ e an d amoun t o f corrosio n resistant , fire retardant

, hig h strer ^ materials an

d g d coat s used , whic

h ar e temporaril

y exemp tfro

m proces s requirement

s until

. Jur y L1994 . (f ) ' Method s o f

Analysi s Th e VO C conten

to f eac h o f th e polyesterresi n materials shall b e determine d by usin g USpP A Reference Method 2 4 (Determination o f Volatil e Matte

rContent , WaterContent

, Densit y Volume Solids , and Weigh tSolids o f Surfac e Coating, Cod e o f Federa l Regulations Titl e 40 , Appendi x A , utilizing Procedur

e B o f ASTM Method D2369) , o rth e SCAQM D Metho d 304 . Th e monome

rconten t shal l b e determine

d b y Metho

d 312 , an d weightlos s o f

polyeste rresin materials shal l b e determine

d by Method 309 ; and th e exemp tcompound' s conten

tshal l b e determme

d by Method

s 30 2 an d 30 3 i n th e Sout

h Coas tAirQualit

y Managemen

tDistrict' s (SCAQMD) Laborator y Methods o f

Analysi s for Enforcemen

tSamples . (g ) Tes tMethod

s (1 ) Th e effidenc

y of th e contro

l device an

d the VO C contentmeasure d an d calculate d a s carbo

n i n th e control devic

e exhaus tgase s shall b e determine dby USEPA' s Tes t Metho d18 , or

Air Resource s Boar d(ARB ) Metho d 42 2 fo rth e determinatio

n o f emission s of ExemptCompound

s an d USEPA' s Tes tMethod s 25 , 25A , o rSCAQMD' s Method 2S. 1 (Determination of

Total Gaseous Non-Methan e Organi c Emissions a s Carbon ) forth e determinatio

n o f tota l organi c compoun

d emissions
. Emission s determine dt o excee dan y limit s establishe db y thi s rul e throug h th e us e of

an y o f th e above-reference dtes t method s shal l constitut e aviolatio n of

th e rule
. (2 ) Th e followin

g classe s o

f compounds : cyclic , branched , o r linear , completel y fluorinate dalkanes ; cyclic , branched , o r linear , completely fluorinatedether s wit

h n o unsaturations ; cydic , branched , o r linear , completel y fluorinate dtertiar

y amine s wit

h n o unsaturations ; an

dsulfur

containe dperfluorocarbon s wit h n o unsaturation s andwit h sulfu r bond s onl y t o carbo n an dfluorine ; will b e analyzeda s exemp t compound s fo

r
116 2 - 6
^ 0^


### SOUT H COAS T AI R QUALIT Y MAKAGEMEN

T DISTRIC T Bes t Availabl e Contro l Technolog y(BACT ) Guidelin e Equipmen t o r Process : Fiberglas s Fabricatio n - Hand an d Spra yLayu p Equipmen t Rating : Al l KO G NO X 3Q2L 

# m Revision : Date : 10/07/8 8

JEASR i BAC I 1cchnolo<)icaU y Feasibl e 1. 3 1 . Afterburne r l > 0. 3 | SecondRetentio nT?me | a t > 1400 ° F > | 2 . Carbon Adsorbe r| Afterburne r(> , 0. 3 Secon d Retentio n Tt m • t> 1*00 ° f

>
BAC T Achieve di n Practic e o r Containe di n EP

A Approve dSIP Complianc e wit h SCAOMO, a Rul e 116 2 and De e o f Aqueous Eftulalon Cleane r Instea d o f

Aceton e fo r Clean-U p t o Mexlnu

m Exten tPossibl e Afrlea aSpra y Equipment| an d Spra y toot h irii h iRee h Typ e f

titer s
1

^ BAC

T Fo r Sraal l Busines s 1. 3 1 . Afterburne r« £ 0. 3 \ Secon d Retentio n Tin e a t> U00 ° f> 2 . Carbo n Adsorbe r 3 . Complfenc

e Mlt h SCAM), * Rul e 116 2 an d Us e of Aojueou a Emulsio n Cleane r Instea d o f

Aceton e fo rClean-u

p t o Maximu m Exten t Posatbl e Afterburne r< > 0 3 Secon d Retentio n Tta

a a t> 1400 ° n 2 . Airles s Spra

y Equip men tmi Spra

y loat h tilt h Hesh Typ

e F tIter *

Alternat e Basi c Equipmen t o r Proces s Close d Holdin g Proces s

\. Require s Economi c Analysi s 2
. H o Economi c Analysi s 3
. Contro l technologie s ar e i n descendin g orde ro f efficiency . analysis
. Th e mos tefficien tcontro l technolog y ma tb e considere d firs tirhen conductin g e n economi c



### Bes t Availabl e Contro l Technolog yGuidelin e 6 9 Fiberglas s Fabricatio n - Han d an d Spra y Layu p T J)

SOUT H COAS T AI RQUALIT YMANAGEMEN T DISTRIC T Bes t Availabl e Contro l Technolog y (BACT ) Guidelin e Equipmen t o r Process : Fiberglas s Fabricatio n - Pane l Manufacturin g Equipmen t Rating : Al l RO G NO X -SPJC . 

### £QBAc r Technologicall y

Feasibl e 1

BAC T Achieved i n Practic e or Contained I

n EP A Approve d SIP ' |Curin g Oven, In^reana Itlo o Tables , Mixing \Tanks , Storag e Tank

s an d JHotdtn g tank s Vente

d t o \e n Afterburne rCj.0. 3 |Sec . Retentio n Tim

e a t*} 11400 ° f > o raCarbo

n (Adsorberwit h Vo

w |Styren e Resi n an

d Wate r \&a*e d o rAqueous , Hon

- | Vo l a tH e Organi c Co

w |poun d Cleanin g Solven t 

### J Natura l Ga s Fire d Curin g Ove n tilt h Radian t Burne r, Electricall y Heate d Cellophan e Ove

n an d Laminating Tabl e

|Curin g Oven , Inpregna - \tfo h Table s an

d Mixin g (Tank s Vente d t o an |Afterburne r(£0. 3 See . (Retentio n Tim

e a t> . Storag e an

d \Kold1ng Tank

s Vente d t o | aCarbo n Adsorbe

r Natura

l Co s f tre d Curin g Oven , Electri call y Heated Cellophan e Ove n an d laminatin g Table Natura l Ga s Natural Oa s 

### Revision : Date : 10/07/8 8 

# -i
" R & 

## 8 ' PAKE s Natural Ba

aFire d Curin

g Ovens , Cellophane Oven s |Vente d t o a

n Afterburne r < > 1. 3 Sec . Retentio n Ttaaa t> 1400 ° n an d •ane l Cuttin g Sa

w Vented t o tagjheu

M

natura l C M Fire d Curin g ene . Cellophan e Oven

s iVsated t o a

n Etcctre statl e Precipitato rand Pena l Cuttin g Se aVente d toBaghouc e

70-J . Fiberglas s Fabricatio n - Pane l Manufacturin g^ > ) J


### SOUTH COAS T AI RQUALIT YMANAGEMEN

T DISTRICT Bes t Availabl e Contro l Technolog y (BACT ) Guideline Equipmen t Equipmen t o r Process* .

Rating : Al l Fiberglas s Fabricatio n- Pane l Manufacturin g Revision : 1

Date : 04/05/9 0
SKCTT V fo r Sraoll Business 1 '- "

^ V P 'Alternat e Beii c tquvproen t o rProcess 1 • *

BAC I - 5CAOK

> Fuel Policy ' Board' s Clea n 

### RO G i . impregnatio ntables . Curin g Oven , Mixin g Tanks , Storag e Tanks and Holdin g Tanks Vente d t o tn After burne r l » 0. 3 See . Retentio nrim

e a t > 14G0 6 F ) o r a Carbo n Adsorbe r wit hLo

w styren e Resi nand Wate r Base d o r Aqueous , Non-Volatil e Organi c Compound Cleanin g Solven t 2 . Impregnatio nTables , Curin g Owe nand nix in g Tank s Vente d t o a nAfterburne r ( > 0. 3 Sec . Retentio nTin e at > HCO * M . Stor age**an d Holding Tank s Vente d t o a Carbo n Adsorbe r NO X SO X

Electri c Kea

t 

### SSL

Electri c Beat Electri c Hea t Electri c Wee *

Hat
. Ga s o r Othe r Equt

valen tClea

n Fuel s a s Standb y fue l o rEquival en tControl Technology Hat . Ge e o rOthe rEeui valen tClea

n Fuel s a s Standby Fue

l o requival en tContro l Technology \. Require s Economi

c Analysi s Z
. H o Economi c Analysi s 5
. Contro l technologie s ar e i n descendin g orde r o f efficiency . analysis
. 

## rffffft M T . fairs' Curing ©vena . Cello phan e Oven s Vente d to a n Afterburne r( > 0. 3 See . Retentio n TI M a t• WOO

* F ) an d •am i Cuttin g ta n Vente d t e Safhous * I . Natural fiae Fire d Ourlngjjbrena

, Cello phan e Oven aVente d t o a n eiectroetatl e Precipitato ren d Panel Cuttin g So u Vente d t o • iegKous e

1 . electri c Hea

tand Uae

1 • I •jon-flasticln d Cellophan e 2 . electri c tea t 3 . flee « f

Non-Plaetl clze d Cellophan e Hai . Ca ao rOAhe

rEou\ - valen tClean Fua U a s Standby fue l e rEquival en tContro l fethnolog y
Th e isos tefficien tcontro l technolog y ous tb e considere d firs tatte n conductin g a

n economi c



### Bes t Availabl e Contro l Technolog y Guidelin

e 70- 2 Fiberglas s Fabricatio n - Pane l Manufacturin

g (cont'd ))



### SOUT H COAS T AI R QUALITYMANAGEMEN T DISTRICT Bes t Availabl e Contro l Technolog y (BACT ) Guideline Equipmen t o r Process : Fiberglas s Fabricatio n - Pultrusio

n Equipmen t Rating : Al l Revision : Date : 10/07/& 8 RO G NO X SO x C O PART . BAC T \\. Afterburne r<> . 0. 3 \ \ | \ | Technologicall yFeasibl e ' | Secon d Retentio n 1 1 I 1 I I Tim e a t » , 1400 ° F > \ \ j \ | |2

. Carbo n Adsorbe r| | \ 1 1 BAC T |Stryen e Suprease d Besl n | | \ \ \ Achieve d i n Practic e o r| | \ \ \ | Containe d i n EP

A Approve d SI P \

| | [ | \ BAC T (l

. Afterburne r<> . 0. 3 | | I I 1 Fo rSmal l Busines s ' | Secon d Retention ' 1 1 1 1 1 j Tin e a t > 1400 ° F > \ | j | \ | 2

. Carbo n Adsorbe r| 1 1 1 1 |3

. Stryen e Supresae d \ \ | \ | \ Resi n | ' | | 1 1 Alternat e 8a*i c Equipmen t \ II I 1 1 o rProcet i | II I 1 1 

## 8

1 . Require s Economi c Analysi s 2 . N o Economi c Analysi s 3 . Contro l technologie s ar e i n descendin g orde r o f efficiency . Th e mos t efficien t contro l technology ous t b e considere dfirs t whe nconductin g a n economi c analysis .



### Bes tAvailabl e Contro l Technolog y Guidelin e I J . 

### Flberalas s Fabricatio n - Pultrusio

nP.3 8



# MfacV \(wen t 3

Memorandu m To: ft4D£LEttoe

5TG.UM. Date : 

### V?/* 5 

### " From : /**£(&

BAHtOE.fl.



## 3^-* - 

## > ^ ^ ct-'*ow > o-y^ n 

### <4 ) >$? / <mi ^ | z 

### .«c t ^

. ^

c^±

Researc h Triangl e Institut e RTI3 1 (r> 

### " c 

### ' 11



### - 83 

### 'P.3 9



### RESEARC H TRIANGL E INSTITUT E 

# /RT I

Cente rfo r Environmenta l Analysi s

FA X TRANSMITTA L COVE R SHEET

TO : Pag e 1 of 8 Dat e Ilfii»h4 TF-.ftft Y COVJL&Y I BOB L/\CO\/A(Kr\ D o wgHgfriiC/iLs / £»F . A.

FAX : PHONE : (4o4 ) 73 8 -O-Z/2. 1



### (*0<j) 2/3, 8 -5Z7.- 7
FROM :

PHONE : MAR K6dHAJ£^

.

POLLUTIO N PREVENTIO N PROGRA M HOBB S BUILDIN G (919)541 - CAtk

FAX : (919)541-715 5
SUBJECT :

PROJECT NO : SELELCTeib ?&&&£>

OF TUB.

FA CTO 

### rZ

, NOTE

PiSSOfiApTfotJ

OF \G H&/p/? yo f $P&tV(\(0& AMD AODiTio/0

COrt T <9V/^r O EMtSSiO^S

.

304 0 Comwaili s Roa d • Pos t Ollic e Bo x12;9- i Telephon e 91 9 i Researc h Ttiangl e Park , Nou n Carolin a 27709-219 4 US A

•56'i 6 • Fax\)l 9 5-S1-715 5 

### ~b^oP.4 0

DC N No. : 92-275-026-54-1 1 Radia n No. : 275-026-5 4 EP A No. : 68-D9-005 4



### DETERMINATIO N O F STYREN E EMISSION S FRO M TH E CULTURE D MARBL E AN D SIN K MANUFACTURIN G INDUSTRY
FINA L REPORT

Genera l Marble jjncolnton , N C

Work Assignmen

tZ5 4 EP A Contrac

t68D90O5

4
prepared for : Rober tMcCracka

n Emissio n Measuremen

tBranch Researc h Triangl e Park

, Nort h Carolin a

Prepared by : Radia n Corporatio n Researc hTriangl e Park , N. C 2220 9

June , 199 2 

# 3 72. 0 

### DESCRIPTIO N O F FACILIT

Y AN D SAMPLIN

G LOCATION

S
2. 1 

### Descriptio n o f

Facility Genera l Marble , locate d i n Uncolnton , N.G , manufacture s product s consistin g almostentirely o f

bathroo m sinks . Thi s facilit

y ca n b e characterize

d a s alarg e productio n operation i n contras

tt o smalle rcusto m manufacturin

g operations . The norma l plan toperatin g schedule i s fro

m 6:0 0 A M t o 12:0

0 midnight

, Monda y throug h Friday.- ?
Includin

g tw o 1 0 minut

e wor k break s an d 3 0 minute

s forlunch , th

e operatin g schedule s fo rspecific task

s ar e a s follows : Spra y Boot h 6:3 0 A M t o 11:1 5 P M Castin g - 7:0 0 A M to 11-3 0 P M Ge l Coa tOve n 6-3

0 A M to 11:1 5 P M PostCurin

g Ove n 7:30 A

M t o 113 0 P M Grinding/Sandin

g 7:0

0 A M t o 3:3 0 P M
The resi n \s purchase

d in bul k liqui d for m an d transporte

d t o th e facilit y b y tanke rtruck . Th e resin h stored o n site in fou r400 0 gallo n tank s whic h ar e house d in aseparat

e roo m attache d t o th e mai

n manufacturin

g area . Th e ge l coat, amor

e highl y refine d version of

th e resin , i s purchase

d i n bul k liqui d for m i n 5 5 gallon drums

. The dail y mixin g of the resi n wit h crushe d marbl e filleri s performe

d i n three larg

e ope n to p mixin g vats . Eac

h va twill contai

n 120 0 lbs
. o f mi x o f whic h 23 % b y weigh ti s resin . Smalle r 12 0 lb . "working

f batche s ar e removedfromth e vats a s needed . Catalys

t\s the n adde dt o th e "working " batc h befor e pourin g ont o th e molds
. Th e castin g proces s use s closedmold s which hav e bee n "ge l coated"
. (Approximatel

y 16,00 0 lbs
. o f mi x i s used pe r da y t o produc e 500 - 600 units. )
Th e emission point s fo

r styrene within th e buildin

g ar e th e mixin

g vats , the ge l coa t spra y areaandth e poin t

i n th e proces s wher

e th e resin i s applie dt o the molds
.

dkd.19 6 StyTCtK-Po l 

### 2- 1 

# nfi

### The entir e manufacturin

g operation i s house

di n alarg e singl

e roo mexcept fo r th e resin storag

e tank s whic h are i n aseparat

e roo mattachedt o th e large

r room . Individua l units ar e produce di n acloc k wis e flo w throug hth e facility
. Mold

s are cleane dandwaxe

da s the first ste p i n th e process . Th e molds then proceedt o th e spra y boot h wher e athin laye

r o f resin , "ge l coat' , i s applied
. Th e molds mov e dow n a conveye r passin g throug h age l coa t dryin g oven . A premixedcompositio n o f resin , fille r an dcatalyst

are applie dt o th e mold s manuall

y usin g han dhel dtrowels
. Th e back o f th e moldi s clampe

dint o plac e an dth e assembl

y i s mechanicall

y vibratedt o remov

e bubble s an dallo w th e resi n to settle
. Th e mold s continue t o travel alon g th e conveye

r passin g through acurin

g ove n ando n t o th e sanding an

dgrindin g area . Th e finishe

dproduct s the n go t o the warehouse are afo r packagin g andshipment Exhaus t fan s ar e usedt o ven

t th e wor k plac e air t o th e outsid

e o f th e building
. Th

e ge l coa t dryin g ove n an 3 th e curin

g oven , have tw

o ducts eac

htha t extend through the roof

. The spra y boot h ha s asingl

e duct tha t als o extends throug

h th e roof
. Th e tan k roo mhas afloo

r leve l intak e vent tha t exhaust s throug halouveredfa

n mountedon a

n outsid e wal L Each o f th e fou r storag e tank s has atwo inc

hstati c vent pip e that extend s throug h a n outsid e wal L Particulat

e fro mth e grindin

g an dsanding operatio n an

dfro mth e mixin

g vat s i s controlledb

y ahig hefficienc y filtration system
. Th e filteredai

r i s returnedt o th e wor

k plac e an dno t ventedt o th e outsid

e o f th e building
. Fiv

e louvere dexhaus t fan s are mounte

dnea r th e ceilin g on th e bac

k outside wal L Thes e fan

s ar e fo r genera l building exhaus

t (not associate dwit haspecifi c operation ) an

dar e operatedonl

y i n th e wanne

r month s o f th e year . N

o emissio n control s ar e i n place excep

t fo r th e filtration system
. Figur e 2- 1 i s adiagra

mo f th e plan t product area . 22 Samplin

g Locations Th e samplin g location s ar

e describe din th e followin

g sections
. Sketche s o

f th e locations ar

e containe di n th e appendices
.

dkd.19 6 StyrcncJ-'n l 2- 2 

## 3^ j

### Exhaust Fan s

Grindin g ...75^5^^..^.. . Sandin g L.Q..Q..Q......J S Are a—— .
Polishing Are a Curin

g Ove n
Packag e Shippin g Are a Shake

r
Pourin g Are a 

# O G

Batch ^ Mi x ( J 

# Mi y o o Mol

d Pre p I J) . Fa

n 

# Q

8 o 

# • a

Ge l Coa t Ove n / / 

### Door s Mbdn g Tank s 

# O O O L Exhaus t Fa n —Ep l 

# o s

•a



### Tank Roo m Garag e Door s 

# Figure 2-1
. Genera

l Marbl e Plan t

Productio n Are a

2- 3 

## koP.4 4

/ 

## W W . Serene^-^oaaadEo^oaRaleSununar y Genera l Marbl e (Marc h 1992 )

Dat e . Sampling

Time - : Styren

e {^jjgeeotratio

o Ru n Aveng e Styren e Cooceotratlo

o Aveng e SUc k Flo w Rat e (dscftn ) Emissio

n Rate. (Ib/hr )

Curin g Ove n Inle t 3/05/9 2

Curin g Ove n Outle t Avcr

a 1620-172 0 1725-1825 1830-193 0 13. 6

13. 6 10. 2 b 14. 4 14. 9 13, 6

10. 2 2484

2484

3/05/9 2 Aveng e

1005-1105 Duplicat e 1230-133 0 Duplicat e 1515-161 5 5. 4

4. 9 5. 3 5. 1 a8. 8 a8. 8 a8. 4 a7. 9 11. 8 11. 7 

## 1

H
5. 2 5. 2 8. 8 8. 2 11. 8 342 3

342 3
342 3
342 3
342 3

aCalculatedStyrene concentratio n usin g pea k heights
. b Lo w sample volume
. catio n 3 2 5
. N/ A = Not applicabl e 3-7



## 4-1 0.50 7P.4 5

aCalculate

d Styren e concentratio

n usin g pea k heights . lculated . Se e Sectio n 3.2.5 . b Lo w sampl e volume . c Sampl e wa s agra b sample , n

o emis«o n rat

e ca N/ A = Notapplicabl

e

3- 8 

# k\

### 32JS Styrene Emissio n Summary Monthl y inventor y dat arelativ e t o th e consumptio n of resin , ge l coa

t an d filler wa s availabl e fromGenera l Marble
. Th e inventor y dat afor th e mont h o f February ; 1992*show

s that 114,805 lbs
. of

resin ; 628 9 lbs ; of

ge l coat an d499,00

0 lbs
. o f filler wa s use di n th e manufacturin g process . Fo r thi s time period , th e number o f productio n Jay s wa s 19
. Th e averag e daily us e o f resin , ge l coat

an dfiller i s calculated t o b e 604 2 lbs.,-33 1 lbs
. an d26,26 3 lbs
. respectively
. Th e averag e dail y consumpu'o n o f resi n wa s calculate dt o be
. 6,37 3 lbs
. (resi n plu s gel coat ) whic h wa s use dt o produc e a daily averag e of

60 8 units
. Thi s show s tha t o n th e averag e fo

r ever y poun do f resin^i f unit s ca n b e produced
. Thi s agree s ver y closel y wit h th e daily productio n logs
. Fromthe dat agiven i n Tabl e 3-3 , th e styren e emissio n rate s fro mth e spra

y booth , ge l coa

t ove n inle t an doutle t

th e curin g ove n inle t

an doutle t

an dth e tank

roo mexhaus t

ca n b e summe dt o give an.averag e plant-wid e emission rat e of 12,4 lbs./hour
. Fo r

a16'hou r productio n day , th e daily styrencemissio n rat e wouldb e 198Tbs7dayr Therefor e th e daily emissio n rat e of

styren e woul db e 19 8 lbs
. pe r 637 3 lb s of

resin , used
.

dkd.19 6 Styrcoe-Fr d 

## 3- n 

# ¥b

•»'ajT^nH.'(imfewvnLifju».i,' i tx*i «.u.immiu..« xw *&_ CL*.«UJ . J U » i

# REGULATORYNEW S "7T~TTTTC7T 7VT CTO — » —T ~ P.4 7 

### CoMffia't^ Uf$4i> Hades 

# LOOKIN G INT O TH E FUTUR E

I n thi s column , I' d lik e t o offe ra fe w prediction s fo rth e futur e o f th e com posite s industry

. N o doub t m yprog nosti c abilit yi s no t infallible

. Ye t th e trend s see m bot h clea renoug h an d dangerou s enoug h t o warran t a fe w educate d guesse s abou t th e future

. I f I' m prove n wrong , s o muc h th e bette r fo rth e industry

. An d i f I' m right , the n I ca n g o o n Oprah

. Smalle r facilitie s wil l escap e regulatio n unde r th e CAA , an d wil l therefor e enfo y a signifi can t advantag e ove r thei r larger , highly-regulate d com petitors . Unde rth e 199 0 amend
ment s t o th e Clea n Ai rAct , EP A an d th e state s ar e t o requir e majo rsource s i n th e composite s industr yt o adop t Maximu m Achievabl e Contro l Tech
nolog yt o reduc e emission s o f sty rene . Majo rsource s ar e facilitie s wit h th e potentia l t o emi t 1 0 ton s pe ryea r o rmor e o f styrene , assumin g continu
ou s operations

. An yfacilit ytha t i s no t a majo rsourc e i s considere d a n "are a source. " I expec t EP

A t o eithe rexemp t are a source s fro m regulatio n unde rth e MAC T standar d altogether , o rse t a readily-achieve d .leve l of contro l simi
la rt o California' s Rul e 1162

. Fo rmajo r sources , th e MAC T requiremen t fo r ne w productio n capacit ywil l b e a t leas t a s stringen t a s th e bes t con trolle d simila rsource . EP A full yex pect s tha t thi s leve l of contro l wil l b e expensiv e —i n effect , majo rsource s wil l hav e t o adop t th e highes t leve l o f contro l tha t the yca n afford

. Are a source s ar e als o exemp t fro m man yof th e permittin g requirement s unde rTitl e V

. Th e permittin g proces s fo rmajo rsource s wil l b e time-con
suming , costly , an d wil l plac e signifi
can t operationa l restriction s o n facili
ties

. Whil e are a source s ma ystil l b e require d t o hav e som e sor t o f permit , particularl ythos e source s qualifyin g unde rstat e "syntheti c minor " pro grams , thes e permits wil l b e obtaine d throug h a streamline d process . Are a source s wil l no t b e require d t o per for m al l o f th e monitorin g an d report in g activitie s require d o

f majo rsources . Requirement s fo r "cose-by case " MAC T ma y mak e EP A irrelevant . B yth e tim e EP A pub
lishe s th e composite s MACT standard , mos t majo rsource s i n th e industrywil l hav e alread ynegotiate d MACT s wit h thei rstates
. Thes e case-by-cas e MACT s ar e require d unde rsection s 112(g ) an d 112(j ) o f th e 199 0 Amend
ment s t o th e CAA

. 112(g ) require s case-by-cas e MAC T fo rne w construc tio n an d modifications , an d takes ef
fec t a s earl ya s 1995.112(j ) applie s t o existin g sources , an d take s effec t i n Novembe ro f 1997

. I n submittin g application s fo rthes e case-by-cas e MACTs , facilitie s ar e t o follo w th e sam e procedure s EP A wil l follo w fo rMACT : surve yindustr yfacili
tie s an d determin e th e leve l o f contro l achieved ; identif ysimila rsource s i n othe rindustrie s an d loo k a t thei rcon trols ; ran k

al l control s identifie d b y contro l efficiency , cos t effectiveness , energ yan d cross-medi a impacts ; an d finall yselec t th e mos t effectiv e afford
abl e control

. (Incidentally , n o on e know s wha t "affordable " means . EP A ma yeventuall yse t som e cos t figure , i n dollar s pe rpoun d o f styren e col
lecte d o rdestroyed
- I n th e meantime , determinin g wha t i s a n affordabl e leve l of contro l wil l b e a matte rfo rnegotia
tio n wit h you rstate. ) I n additio n t o placin g th e MACT
developmen t burde n o n individua l facilities , thes e cose-by-cos e re quirement s mak e th e MAC T developmen t proces s a free for-all . It' s verypossibl e tha t th e industr ywil l se e dozen s o

f differen t facilitie s al l makin g independen t MAC T determinations

. Onc e a permi t i s grante d base d o n a certai n MACT , th e technolog ybe
come s a matte ro f publi c record , an d state s wil l rel yo n thi s recor d whe n reviewin g MAC T application s fro m othe rfacilities

. Thi s mean s tha t th e firs t compan yt o ge t a MACT approve d b yit s stat e has , i n effect , pai d fo ra MAC T determinatio n fo rit s entir e in
dustry

. O n th e othe rhand , a large , wel l capitalize d compan yca n us e thi s proces s t o se t a n expensiv e leve l o f contro l fo rth e entir e industry

. Tak e anothe r loo k a t abate ment . Jus t th e mentio n of thedreade d wor d "incinerator " i s enoug h t o sen d shiver s throug h th e mos t hardene d composite s industrymanager . Cer
tainly , incineratio n technology , wit h it s hig h capita l an d operatin g costs , an d NO xan d C0 2 emissions , i s a poo r choic e fo rman ycomposite s facilities

. Yet , fo ra numbe rof reasons , th e in
dustryshoul d b e lookin g fo rworkabl e an d affordabl e abatemen t controls

. ("Abatement " mean s end-of-stac k contro l technology , suc h a s absorp
tion , condensation , incineration , etc. ) Th e firs t reaso n i s th e preferenc e o f EP A fo r abatemen t con trols . Thi s preferenc e i s base d o n bot h a lon g traditio n o

f usin g abate
men t technolog yt o contro l ai rpollut
ants , an d a realizatio n tha t suc h con trol s ar e easie rt o enforc e tha n wor k practice s an d operationa l standards

. EP A ha s agree d t o us e pollutio nP.4 8

preventio n technolog yfo rMACT , bu t onl ywhe n affordabl e abatemen t con trol s ar e no t available

. Further , th e pollutio n preventio n technolog ymus t resul t i n significan t reduction s i n emis
sion s (minimu m of 60%)

. th e reduc
tion s mus t b e supporte d b yhar d data , an d th e technolog ymus t b e enforce
able a s a practica l matter
. Fo rex ample

. low-VO C coating s hav e bee n accepte d b yEP

A a s MACT

. becaus e i t i s eas yt o verif ythei reffectivenes s (sinc e al l o f th e VO C evaporates , put tin g les s i n th e formul a necessaril y mean s tha t les s wil l evaporate) , an d enforcemen t i s simpl ya matte ro f checkin g th e labe l o n th e drum

. A secon d reaso n t o hav e a loo k at abatemen t control s i s th e requirement s fo rcase-by-cas e MACT describe d above

. Th e importan t questio n is : wha t wil l you r stat e accep t a s MACT ? MACT application s base d o n abatemen t ar e likel yt o gai n rapi d approva l b ystates
. O n th e othe rhand , application s base d o n pollutio n pre ventio n options , suc h a s suppresse d resi n technology , wil l b e a proble m fo r state s unles s th e applican t ca n clearl y demonstrat e bot h significan t level s of reductio n an d enforceability

. Th e composite s industr

yha s alread y see n a numbe rof case s wher e a facil
it yha s installe d abatement , no t be
caus e i t wa s specificall yrequired , o r eve n becaus e i t wa s beneficia l fo rth e environment , bu t onl yi n orde rt o ob
tai n a n operatin g permit

. Further , onc e eve n on e facilit yi n you rindustr yob
tain s a permi t base d o n abatement , yo u wil l fin d i t ver

ydifficul t t o convinc e you rstat e tha t th e sam e leve l of con tro l shouldn' t appl yt o you rfacility

. Th e fina l facto rfavorin g abatemen t i s th e possibilit ytha t you rstat e wil l decide t o regulat e styren e a s a car cinoge n (se e th e discussio n o n sty ren e classification , below)

. Abatemen t wil l b e th e onl ywa yt o mee t th e stric t fence-lin e limit s tha t wil l b e se t fo r styren e i f i t i s regulate d a s a carcino
gen . Th e battl e wit h EP A ove r sty ren e classificatio n wil l neve r end . Sinc e i t i s impossibl e t o prov e absolutel ytha t styren e (o ran ysub
stance , fo rtha t matter ) i s no t a car cinogen , ther e wil l alway s b e som e uncertainty

. EP

Awil l prefe rt o dea l wit h thi s uncertaint yb ysimpl yassum in g th e worst , an d procee d t o regulat e styren e a s a carcinogen

. SIR C deserve s much credi t fo rpre ventin g a n outrigh t classificatio n o f styren e a s a carcinogen

. Som e staff
er s a t EPA , however , hav e decide d tha t the yca n simply.regulat e styren e a s i f i t ha d a carcinoge n classification ? A n exampl e i s th e EP

A proposa l un de r112(g)

. whic h regulate s styren e mor e stringentl ytha n benzene , a know n huma n carcinogen

. SIR C an d th e othe rindustrygroup s wil l continu e th e fight , an d s o fa rth e scienc e sup port s ou rposition

. However , th e othe r sid e ha s a powerfu l weapon t righteousness . I n additio n t o th e 112(g ) regulation , ther e ar e othe rarea s wher e EP Aca n practic e stealt h classification

. Fo rex ample , i n decidin g wha t i s a n "afford
able " leve l o f control , EPA wil l deter
min e th e healt h effect s o f exposur e t o styrene , i n effec t makin g a classifica
tion

. B yth e en d of th e decade , I als o expec t EP

A t o ad d styren e t o th e lis t o f substances ' fo rwhic h TCL P testin g i s required

. I f styren e i s regulate d a s a carcinogen , th e TCL P leve l wil l b e se t lo w enoug h s o tha t overspray , par tially-cure d edg e trims , an d othe rin
dustrysoli d wast e wil l hav e t o b e dispose d o f a s hazardou s waste , a t a n industry-wid e cos t of som e $10 0 millio n pe ryear . We'r e payin g fo r ou r success . Industr yha s effectivel ychallenge d EP A ove rever

yregulation , an d afte r decade s o f effor

t onl ya handfu l o f industrie s wer e regulate d unde rth e CAA

. I n 1990 , Congres s sai d "Enough!, " an d wit h th e hel p of Georg e Bus h (let' s giv e credi t wher e it' s due) , amende d th e CAA

. No w we'r e face d wit h requirement s lik e thos e unde r 112(g ) an d 112(j)

. whic h prett ymuch mak e i t irrelevan t whethe rEP A write s regulation s o rnot
. Now , w e ar e no t entirel yhelples s here

. Fo rone . neithe rCongres s no r EP A intend s t o pu t significan t num ber s o f companie s ou t of busines s b y requirin g expensiv e controls , an d it' s u p t o u s t o mak e sur e thi s doesn' t happen

. Second , companie s hav e muc h t o gai n b y takin g a s muc h contro l o f th e proces s a s the y can . Buil d relationship s wit h you rstat e regulator s an d legislators

. Star t wor k o n you rpermi t applicatio n a s soo n a s yo u can , thin k

strategicall yabou t th e term s o f you rpermit , an d atten d CI' s Permi t Worksho p i n January

. Star t thinkin g abou t abatemen t ( I know , i t hurt s —tr

yi t fo rjus t a fe w minute s a da yi n th e beginning)

. Finally , Cl

. CFA , SIRC , an d th e othe r industr ygroup s ar e workin g har d t o chang e th e future

. Ge t involve d i n thes e efforts

. Fo rmore information , contac t m e a

t 313-668-4703

. John Schweitzer Cl Technical

Director

# Ewcio50£ &

WOO D FURNITUR

E NESHA

PWOR KGROU PMEMBE

RTABL E iijQS 9fa.fi fi'sf COR E WOR KGROU PMEMBER

S AR E I N BOL D TYPE . NAM E Madelein e Stru m MUTUA L DURHA M

Lind aHerrin g MUTUA L DURHA M
Jorda n Spoone r (WATERSID E MALL , DC ) Mari aMalav e (DC )
Hail e Maria m (WATERSID E MALL , DC )
Patrici aEmbre y (WATERSID E MALL , DC ) Kare n Lev y
Da n Axelra d (WATERSID E MALL , DC ) Bo b Fegle y (WATERSID E MALL , DC ) OFFIC E OAQPS/ESD / Coating s and Consume rProducts Grou p (CCPG ) OAQPS/ESD/CCP G

OPP T Pollutio n Preventio n Divisio n OEC A

OS W Wast e Min . Branc

h

OG C

OPA R
OPP E

OR D PHONE # 91 9 541-238 3

91 9 54 1 535 8

20 2 26 0 441 8

20 2 56 4 702 7

70 3 30 8 843 9

20 2 26 0 762 5

20 2 26 0 895 2
20 2 26 0 936 3

20 2 26 0 048 4 FAX #

91 9 54 1 007 2

91 9 54 1 007 2

20 2 26 0 018 7

20 2 56 4 005 0

70 3 30 8 843 3

20 2 26 0 058 6

20 2 26 0 976 6
20 2 26 0 051 2

20 2 26 0 693 2 ADDRES S

MD-1 3 U S EP A RTP , N C 2771 1
MD-1 3 USEP A RTP , NC2771 1 MAilcod e 740 9 40 1 M . St . S W Washingto n D C 2046 0 OEC A/222 3 A 40 1 M . St . S W Washingto n D C 2046 0 5302 W 40 1 M St . S W Washingto n D C 2046 0
234 4 40 1 M S tS W Washingto n D C 2046 0 Mailcode610 3 40 1 M . S t Mailcod e 212 6 40 1 M St . S W
mai l 810 5 40 1 M St . S W Comment s ProjectLea

d t o who m al l correspondenc e shoul d b e directed ; WORKGROU PCHAI R Grou p Leade rfo rCoating s an d Consume rProduct s Grou p
Sourc e Reductio n Revie w Program (SRRP ) Projec t Coordinato rfro m OPP T OEC A W

G membe r

*

dismisse d himsel f

an d OPP E fromW G 1/9 5 

# o A :NAM E

Bob Burmar k

Moha n Balagopala n

Bo b Ros e (Crysta l City , VA )

Ro n Rya n (EPA;RTP )
Leonard o Cero n

Jer i Weis s

Chuc k Frenc h

Laure l Drive r

Crai g Matthiesse n (WATERSID E MALL , DC ) Carlo s Nune z OFFIC E Stat e o f Washingto n

Sout h Coas t

Ai r Qualit y Managemen t Distric t Deput y Smal l Busines s Ombudsma n OAQPS/EMA D /Emissio n Inventor y & Factor s Grou p Regio n 4
Regio n 1

AQSSD/Ris k

& Exposur e Assessmen t

Grou p AQSSD/Visibilit y an dEcosyste m Protectio n Grou p OSWE R

ORD/AEER L PHONE # 20 6 40 7 681 2

90 9 39 6 270 4

70 3 30 5 551 1

91 9 54 1 433 0
phon e 40 4 34 7 355 5 ex t 419 6 61 7 56 5 917 7

91 9 54 1 046 7

91 9 54 1 285 9

20 2 26 0 978 1 20 2 26 0 978 1 533 8 (sec. ) 91 9 54 1 115 6 FAX #

20 6 40 7 680 2

90 9 39 6 334 2

70 3 30 5 646 2

91 9 54 1 068 4

40 4 34 7 213 0

61 7 56 5 493 9

20 2 26 0 092 7

91 9 54 1 215 7 ADDRES S

Dep t Ecology ; Ai r program ; P O Bo x 47600 ; Olympia , Washingto n 98504

- 760 0 SCAQMD;2186 5 E
. Cople y Drive , Diamon dBar , C A 91765-418 2 OSDB U 1230- C 40 1 M S t

, S W
MD-1 4

34 5 Courtlan dStreet , N E Atlanta , G A 3036 6 AP O JF K Federa l Buildin g Boston , Mas s 02203

- 221 1 MD-1 5

MD-1 5

5101 ; U S EP A 40 1 M St
. S W Washingto n D C 2046 0 MD-61 ; RTP , N C 2771 1 Comment s

no t sur e i f the y ar e o n W G ye t

informatio n onl y

lea dRegiona l W Gmembe r

informatio n onl y

informatio n onl y

no t sur e i f h e i s W Gye t

OR D pollutio n preventio n projec t coordinato rNAM E

Nor mKapla n Lis aConne

r (MUTUA L DURHAM , NC ) Solomon Rick s (GRAN D SLAM , RTP )
Jan e Caldwell (MUTUAL DURHAM , NC ) Richar dNielso n OFFIC E

ORD/AEERL OAQPS/AQSSD/ Innovativ e Strategie s & Economic s Group OAQPS/EMAD/So u rc e Characterizatio n Grou p A OAQPS/AQSSD/H e alth Effects an d Standard s Grou p Clar k Count y Healt h Distric t (La s Vegas ) PHON E ft

91 9 54 1 255 6 91 9 54 1 056 0

91 9 54 1 524 2

91 9 54 1 032 8

70 2 38 3 127 6 FAX #

91 9 54 1 522 7

91 9 54 1 103 9

fa x 70 2 38 3 144 3 ADDRES S

MD-61 ; RTP , N C 2771 1 MD-1 5 USEP A RTP , N C 2771 1 MD-1 9 USEP A RTP , NC 2771 1
MD-1 5 USEP A RTP , NC 2771 1 PO Bo x 4426 , 62 5 Shadow Lane , La s Vegas 8912 7 Comment s

cost , economi c an

dimpact analysi s lea

d

measurement

lea d

informatio n only

Acronyms : AQSS D = Ai

r Qualit y Strategie s an dStandard s Divisio n (whic h i s withi n OAQPS ) EMAD = Emissions , Monitorin g & Analysi s Divisio n (whic h i s withi n OAQPS ) ESD = Emission s Standard s Divisio n (which i s withi n OAQPS ) OECA = Office of

Enforcement

andcomplianc e assuranc e OGC = Office o f

General Counse l OPA R= Office of

Polic y Analysi s andReview OPP T = Office o f

Pollutio n Preventio n andToxic s OSDB U = Office o f

Small an dDisadvantage dBusinesse s OSW = Office o

f Soli dWaste ORD = Office of

Researc han dDevelopment AEERL = Ai

r an dEnerg y Engineerin g Research Laborator y
EP A CONTRACTOR S O

N PROJECT : FOROAQPS/ES D Project : Ke n Meardon/Gre g LaFlam ; Pacific Environmenta l Service s (919 ) 94 1 033 3 (ph) 94 1 023 4 i n perso n FORORD/AEER

L Project : Mar k Bahner/Emor

y Kong ; Researc h Triangl e Institut e (919 ) 54 1 601 6 by fa x 715 5