P. 1


# OAR Box 1338 Prepped by Ollie Stewart



## Document

Number: 

# 14 ) ll-E-2 5 Docket Number: 

# A-89-1 0

Printed 6/17/2008 1:48:06

PM Sheet 14 of 105P. 2

LA W OFFICE S PHILI PJ . HARTE R

SUIT E 40 4 230 1 M STREET . N.W . WASHINGTON . D.C . 2003 7 (202 ) 887-103 3 FAX : (202 ) 887-103 6 

# A-89-1 0 II-E-2 5



# ift^' ' Augus t 30 , 1990 

# MEMORANDU M To : EPA Negotiate dRulemaking Committe e o n Fugitiv e Emission s fro

mEquipment

Leak s an dIntereste d Partie s Fr : Phili

p J . Harte r Facilitator Re : Minute s o

f "Ga p Filling andDrafting Workgroup " Meetin g o f Augus t 2 3 Th e Ga p Filling andDrafting Workgrou p me t here i n m y office on Augus t

23 . Th e minute s o

f tha t meeting , whic

h were prepare db y Radia n Corporation , ar e attached . EP A i s bus y wrappin g word s aroun dall th e concept s andwil

l distribute adraf

t rul e i n acoupl e o

f weeks . A s th e minute s indicate , mos t o f thos e attendin g las t

week' s meetin g were o

f th e vie w tha t a n interi m agreement i n principl e shouldb e signedonc e w e hav e a n agreement

on apropose drule . Tha t agreement wouldb e preliminar

y pending development

o f critica l portion s o

f th e preambl e tha

t explain th e rule . Th e feelin g wa s tha t th e preliminar

y agreement

wouldput

th e issue s to rest , s o w e wouldall know wha t we ar e dealin g with ; thos e who neede dt o star t preparin g t o implemen

t i t coul dd o so , andi

t wouldprotec t

other s fro mhaving t o worr

y abou t reopenin g issue s later

on . Everyon e agree dtha t th e preambl e i s ver

y important an dtha t afina l agreement

mus t awai t th e preparatio n o

f at leas t portion s o

f it . Som e at th e meetin g fel

t tha t an y agreement

shouldawait

th e preambl e sinc e i

t necessarily ha s acritica

l bearin g on th e practica

l effect s o f th e rul e itself

. There seeme dt o b e a

n agreement

t o execute a

n agreement

i n principle , bu t

thos e who fel

t strongl y tha t any agreement

shoul dfollow th e preambl e wouldno t hav e t o sign at

thi s time . I revise dth e draf

t agreement

tha t wa s previously circulate dt o conver t i t int o a n agreement

i n principl e andt o take into accoun

t severa l comment s tha

t I receive do

n th e earlie r

one . Pleas e review i

t carefull y and sendm e any comment s you ma

y hav e on it

fairl y soon s o I ca

n incorporate theminto th e agreement tha t i s sen t wit h th e rule .P. 3

Draf t 

# t>* H

^ - #Augus t 31 , 1990 J ^ ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTIO N AGENC Y 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 dRulemakin g Committe e considere dth e technica l an dpolicy issue s involve di n controllin g fugitive emission s o

f toxi c chemical s fro

mequipment

leak s pursuant

t o th e Clea

n Air Ac t andha s reache da consensu s o n arecommende dpropose drule .

_ , apart y t o th e negotiations , agree s that : 1 . Th e perso n signing thi s agreement i s authorize dt o commit

th e party t o it s terms . Whe n considere da s awhole , th e party concur s i n th e recommende dpropose drul e that i s date d an dentitle d"Nationa

l Emissio n Standardfo

r Equipment

Leak s (Fugitiv e Emissio n Sources). " 3 . Th e part

y recognizes , however , tha t th e preambl e t o th e rul e ma y hav e a n important

bearin g on it s scope , application , an dpractica

l effect . Therefore , th e part y an dth e Committe e a s awhol e wil l no t b e i n a positio n t o ente r

int o afina

l agreement

o n th e recommende dpropose drul e unti l it-i s accompanie db y th e critica l portion s o

f it s preamble . Th e part

y wil l agre e t o th e recommende dpropose drul e andit s preambl e a t such time a s th e preambl e i s consistent wit h an dexplain s th e rul e satisfactorily . A fina l agreemen t

will b e execute da

t tha t time . EP A agree s t o draf

t apreambl e consistent

wit h th e recommende dpropose drul e an dexplai n it s basi s and purpos e consistent

wit h th e understandin g o

f th e Committee . EP A wil l submit th e preambl e t o th e Committe e fo

r it s concurrence . 5 . Th e party agree s t o th e explanatio n o f th e "Relationship betwee n thi s Regulatio n an dFutur e Regulation s fo r Refiner y Equipment

Leaks " that

date dAugus t

23 , 1990 an dattache dt o thi s Agreemen t in Principle . 6 . Th e fina

l agreement

wil l provid e that

- a . EP A wil

l publis h th e recommende dpropose drul e an dit s preambl e a s aNotic e o f Propose dRule

making fo r Controllin g Fugitiv e Emission s o f Toxi c Chemical s fro

mEquipment

Leaks . b . Eac h other

part y agree s that

it will no t fil e negativ e comment s o n th e propose drul e o f th e preambl e t o th e exten t

the y ar e consistent

wit h th e recommende dpropose drul e an dpreambkkthat ar e th e subjec t o f th e fina l agreement . Eac h party i s fre e t o comment on thos e portion s o

f th e pnonnble that d o no t explain th e basi s an dpurpos e o f th e agree dupo n rul e bu t rathe r explain EPA' s positio n o n issue s that were no t th e subjec t

o f negotiations .P. 4

c . EP A wil

l conside r all relevant

comment s submitte din respons e t o th e Notic e o f Propose dRulemakin g an dwil l mak e suc h modification s in th e propose drul e andth e preambl e a s i s necessar y when issuing arule . d . Eac h other

party agree s no t

take any actio n t o inhibit

th e adoptio n o

f th e recommende dpropose drul e a s arule . e . Eac h part

y other tha n EP A agree s no t

t o challeng e th e rul e i

n cour t i f th e fina l rul e andit s preambl e ar e consistent

wit h th e recommende dpropose drule . f . Eac h part

y other tha n EP A agree s t o file amemorandu minforming th e agenc y or th e cour t tha t i t participate di

n th e negotiation s an dtha t it concurre di

n th e recommende dpropose drul e when considere da s awhol e - (1 ) i f advers e comment s ar e file dwit h th e agency o r

i f th e rul e i s challenge di

n court , an d (2 ) th e preambl e andrul e ar e consistent wit h th e recommende dpropose drule .

Individua l Committe e Member Organizatio n Dat e

### Augus t 23 , 199 0

Relationshi p between thi s Regulation an 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 froma 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 yrefiner y 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 refiner y equipmen t leak s utilizin g th e framewor k o f th e currently-negotiate d regulation . I f EP Adevelop s MAC T refiner yequipmen t lea k regulations , i t wil l conduc t a separat e rulemaking . Technica l difference s betwee n SOCM I an

d refiner yprocesse s tha t mayaffec t th e achievabilit yo f th e standard s wil l b e considere d b yEPAi n th e refiner yequipmen t lea k rulemaking .

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



### De l iverabl e Dat e Draf t revise dregulatio nreflectin g agreement s 8/30/9 0 reache d a 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 d onth e 8/29/9 0 draf t Fina l revise ddraf t regulatio n10/10/9 0 Sig nagreemen 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 . We di d th e same thin g i

nwoodstoves , 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 NFUGITIV

E EQUIPMEN

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

G MINUTE S Asummaryo f th e genera l agreement s reache d ar e presented . Th e following presentatio n material 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 AProposa l fo r Staggere d Implementatio n o f the Regulatio n Conceptua l Approac h fo r Pump s Timelin e fo r Implementatio n o f Pump s Standar d AP I Suggeste d Languag e Addressin g Applicabilit yo f Negotiate d Regulatio n t o RefineryBTX Unit s Agreemen t o n th e Negotiate d Rul e

• Th e meetin g attendee s (se e Attachmen t 2 ) agree d t o sig n a tentativ e agreemen t o n the rul e a s soo n a s the rul e i s finalize d (wit h the exceptio n o f the America n Petroleu mInstitute ) an

d t o sign a fina l agreemen t afte r Committe e revie w o f the preamble . Mr . LarryGoodhear t an d Ms . Elle n Siegler , representing th e America n Petroleu

mInstitut e (API) , expresse d thei r desir e t o se e th e preambl e sectio n documenting the rational e fo r the negotiate d standar d befor e signing the agreement .

• Mr . Davi d Donige r o f the Natura l Resource s Defens e Counci l (NRDC ) aske d abou t the fat e o f the negotiate d standar d i f the propose d Clea n Ai r Ac t i s no t passe d thi s year . Th e meetin g attendee s agree d tha t the result s o f the negotiate d regulatio n shoul d b e publishe d i n some form , perhap s a s a revisio n t o a n existing rul e o r a Contro l Technique s Guidelin e (CTG ) document . Staggere d Implementatio n o f the Regulatio n

• Mr . TomKittleman , representing the Chemica l Manufacturer s Associatio n (CMA) , propose d a methodolog yfo r staggering the implementatio n o f the equipmen t leak s negotiate d regulatio n (se e Attachmen t 3) . Th e hazardou s ai r pollutant s (HAPs ) liste d i n the propose d Clea n Ai r Ac t (CAA ) amendment s wer e divide d int o five group s base d o n carcinogenicit yrankings , an d al l produc t processe s tha t produc e o r us e a s intermediate s an yo f thes e HAP s woul d b e similarl yseparated . 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 yquarter s int o th e regulatio n (withi n on e yea r plu s on e day) . I n addition , the eigh t non-SOCM I categorie s tha t wil l b e subjec t t o the equipmen t leak s regulatio n wil l b e include d i n the firs t phase-i n group . HAP s i n a late r phase-i n grou p tha t ar e use d t o produc e a HA P i n a n earlie r phase-i n grou p woul d b e regulate d a t the earlie r date .

• Mr . Goodhear t state d tha t AP I woul d agre e t o includ e benzene/toluene/xylen e (BTX ) unit s i n the aforementione d staggere d implementatio n i f theycoul d b e phase d i n wit h a late r group , sinc e benzen e equipmen t leak s ar e alread ycontrolle d an

d toluen e an d xylen e hav e low carcinogenicit yrankings . Mr . Bo b Aja x o f the U.S . Environmenta l Protectio n Agenc y(EPA ) sai d tha t BT X d o no t nee d th e extr a tim

e t o compl ywit h the regulatio n tha t theywoul d enjoyb ybein g place d int o a late r phase-i n group , becaus e existin g benzen e lea k detectio n an d repai r (LDAR ) program s hav e prepare d thes e unit s fo r the negotiate d regulation . I n addition , Mr . Aja x fel t tha t th e hig h carcinogenicit yrankin g o f benzen e warrant s inclusio n o f BTX unit s i n the firs t phase-i n group .P. 8

Pump s

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

whethe r EP

Awil l promulgat e five separat e equipmen t lea k rule s o r on e rul e wit h five applicabilit ydate s o f complianc e fo r the fiv e phase-i n groups . Th e meetin g attendee s agree d tha t on e rul e wit h five applicabilit ydate s o f complianc e seeme d mor e logical , a s long a s a n appropriat e Federa l Registe r notic e wa s issue d befor e the applicabilit ydat e o f eac h phase-i n group . Th e 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 th e timelin e fo r implementing the standard . Th e lea k definitio n o f 1,00 0 ppm v i n Phas e 3 fo r genera l dut ypump s wa s introduce d a t previou s meetings , along wit h a trigge r concentratio n fo r repai r a t 2,00 0 ppmv . Th e concep t o f a six-mont h rollin g averag e fo r determining allowabl e leaker s wa s propose d b yAP I t o accoun t fo r randomnes s o f screening value s fo r a smal l populatio n o f pumps . Th e lea k definition s o f 2,00 0 ppm v fo r pump s i n foo d an d medica l servic e an d 5,00 0 ppm

v fo r pump s i n polymerizing monome r servic e wer e selecte d t o accoun t fo r the limite d applicabilit yo 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 n the six-mont h rolling averag e u p t o on e mont h afte r a proces s uni t start-up . Leakin g pump s woul d no t b e counte d I n the percen t leaker s calculatio n u p t o on e mont h afte r start-up .

• Th e meetin g attendee s agree d tha t proces s unit s coul d ente r the valv e qualit yimprovemen t progra m(QIP ) onl ywithi n on e yea r afte r the beginnin g o f Phas e 3 , bu t tha t theycoul d sta yi n the QI P indefinitel yan

d monito r quarterl y(o r les s frequently , i f otherwis e qualifie d t o d o so ) whil e implementing a QI P program . Enterin g a QI P progra mafte r the firs t yea r o f Phas e 3 o r re enterin g the QI P progra mwoul d no t b e allowed .
• Th e EP

Aagree d t o includ e i n the preambl e a rational e fo r exemptin g smal l corporation s fro mperformanc e trial s aime d a t identifying low-lea k valv e technologie s an d effectiv e maintenanc e practices .
• Th e meetin g attendee s discusse d th e provisio n i n the draf t rul e fo r inter

- an

d intra-compan

ysharing o f dat a i n the 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 n thi s issue . Alternativ e Mean s o f Emissio n Limitatio n

• Concern s wer e expresse d wit h the existing equivalenc yprovision s i n the regulation , whil e the EP Aexpresse d it s concern s wit h som 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 n the EPA' s revision s t o the equivalenc y sectio n o f th e negotiate d rule . Credi t fo r Removin g Component s fro mServic 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

mservice . Tha t is , fo r ever y thre e valve s o r flange s remove d fro mservice , two o f th e component s coul d stil l b e include d i n calculating percentag e o f leaking components .P. 9

Criterio n fo r Exempting Plant s fro mMonthl yMonitorin g an d QI P Provision s

• Th e meetin g attendee s agree d tha t plant s wit h les s tha n 25 0 valve s woul d b e exemp t fro mmonthl ymonitorin g o f valve s an d th e QI P provisions . Repaire d Valve s Follow-u p

• Th e meetin g attendee s agree d tha t valve s mus t b e monitore d fo r tw o successiv e month s following repai r i f a proces s uni t i s i n the QI P progra mfo r valve s an

d ha s mor e tha n 2 % leaking valves . Th e meetin g attendee s agree d tha t valve s mus t b e monitore d onc e withi n th e firs t quarte r afte r repai r i f the 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 n a QI P progra mfo r valve s an

d ha s les s tha n 2 % leaking valves . Applicabilit yt o BTX Unit s

• I n additio n t o it s discussio n fo r phasin g BTX unit s int o the negotiate d regulation , AP I submitte d suggeste d languag e addressing the applicabilit yo f the negotiate d standar d t o BTX unit s (se e Attachmen t 6) . N o Detectabl e Emission s

• Th e EPAagree d tha t i t ha d insufficien t dat a t o revis e the "no detectabl e emissions " limit , currentl y50 0 ppmv . Th e meetin g attendee s agree d tha t a definitio n o f "no detectabl e emissions " wa s unnecessaryfo r the negotiate d regulatio n an d tha t the ter

m coul d b e delete d fro mthe regulation . Batc h Processe s

• Fo r clarificatio n purposes , the meetin g attendee s wer e informe d tha t batc h proces s unit s hav e tw o option s fo r complying wit h the negotiate d regulation : (1 ) pressur e testing ; an d (2 ) complianc e wit h the basi c standar d fo r continuou s processes .

• Fo r clarificatio n purposes , the meetin g attendee s agree d tha t al l reconfiguration s o f equipmen t hav e t o b e monitore d eve n i f anothe r reconfiguratio n occurre d withi n the previou s 3 0 days . Flange s

Draf t Rul e Th e concep t o f "extremel yinaccessibl e flanges " wa s introduced .

A s a n example , CM

Acite d flange s tha t ar e locate d i n pipin g tha t straddle s two distillatio n column s tha t mayb e ove r 10 0 fee t tall . Th e meetin g attendee s agree d tha t flange s mor e tha n tw o meter s abov e a suppor t surfac e an d tha t canno t b e reache d b ya 25-fee t portabl e platformar e exemp t fro mthe standard . Th e EP Aagree d t o submi t a revise d cop yo f the draf t rul e t o al l Committe e member s during 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 onth 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 % of 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 nof 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

or outsid e th e agreemen t Credit s fo r valve s remove dfro m 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 No 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 m

numbe 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 T 2

ENVIRONMENTA

L PROTECTIO

NAGENC Y WORKGROU P ATTENDEE S CONTRO L O F FUGITIV

E EMISSION S O F VOC s FROM EQUIPMEN T LEAK S ATTENDEE S LIS T FOR MEETIN G O F AUGUS T 23 , 199 0

NAM E AFFILIATION Phili p Harte r Facilitato r Elle n Siegle r AP I LarryGoodhear t Chevron/AP I Ja n Meye r s SDB/EPA E d Morett i Radia n Corp Bo b Aja x EP A Chery l Sutterfiel d PM A Bo b Rowland PM A Harve l M . Rogers , Jr . Jefferso n Co . De b Dalto n EP A TomKittlema n DuPon t (CMA ) Kare n Fidle r CM A Kath yBaile yCM A A l Bicku

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



# ATTACHMEN T 3 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 b e divide d int o subgroup s s o tha t the applicabl e (fugitiv e emissions , ai r toxics , etc. ) regulation s ar e graduall yphase d in . Thu s al l chemical s in Grou p I shoul d b e regulate d firs t followe d b yth e othe r groups . Instea d o f arbitraril yclassifying chemical s int o th e subgroups , the ymus t b e sorte d accordin g t o a logica l methodology . Oblective : T o develo p a methodolog yfo r subgroups ; an

d propos e a CM

Alis t Methodology : sorting SOCM I chemical s int o

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 . chemicals-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 the 14 9 organi c

chemicals ) onl y9 9 Fift y(50 ) other s ar e HAP s (ou t o f 19 1 tota l appea r o n the IAR

C Lis t 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 ; 2A- 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

Clas s 2 A Clas s 2 B Clas s 3 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 . 7 no t include d

list . 1 2 no t include d list , including Xylen e 1 4 chemical s on the SOCM I 3 9 chemical s o n the SOCM I 7 chemical s an d isomers , 1,2-Epoxybutane , Toluene , an d Phenol . 1,2
- Epoxybutan e i s no t include d o n th e SOCM I list .P. M



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

o n th e SOCM I list ^ Ste p 3 : Formth e firs t grou p (Grou p I ) startin

g wit h th e Clas s 1 an d Clas s 2 Achemical s (i.e . 1 0 chemicals ; excludin g thos e tha t ar e no t o n th e SOCM I list) . Ad d othe r chemical s (upt o 100 ) i n Grou p I base d o n th e us e patter n (or 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 o n Industria l Organi c Chemica l Us e Trees 1 

### tha t show 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 o n the SOCM I list . Result : Wit h th e inclusio n o f chemical s derive d fro m Benzen e (55) , Formaldehyd e (9) , Ethylen e Oxid e (30) , Propylen e Oxid e (8 ) an d other s (8) , th e tota l consist s o f 11 0 productio n categories . Anilini c an d Phenoli c derivative s ar e excluded . Bi s (Chloromethy l ) Ethe r i s a confirme d carcinoge n accordin g t o EPAan d i s adde d t o th e list . Thus , Grou p I consist s o f 11 1 chemicals . Ste p 4 : For

mGrou p I I starting wit h th 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 n the SOCM I list) . Add othe r chemical s accordin g t o th e us e pattern s (a s outline d i n Ste p 3 ) o f th e 2 7 chemicals . Result : Seve n o f the initia l 2 7 chemical s wer e

include d in Grou

p I through Ste p 3 . Wit h the inclusio n o 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 starting wit h the 6 chemical s i n Clas s 3 , excludin g 1,2-Epoxybutan e whic h i s no t o n th e SOCM I list . Add othe r chemical s accordin g t o th e us e pattern s (a s outline d in Ste p 3 ) o f th e 6 chemicals . Add othe r chemical s fro mClas s 4 t o increas e th e siz e t o approximatel y100 . Result : Wit h th e inclusio n o f othe r chemical s derive d

fro mPheno l (26) , Toluen e (46) , an d Xylen e (19) , th e tota l add s up t o 91 . Althoug h Anilin e i s i n Clas s 4 o n th e IAR C list , i t i s Radia n Corporation , Industria l Organi c Chemica l Us e Trees . DC

N83-211-030-09-08 , Prepare d fo r USEP A (Contrac t No . 68-03-3038-SBR0 9 ) , Octobe r 1983 .P.1 5



### a suspecte d carcinoge n accordin g t o EPA . Wit hth e additio n o 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 n th e IARC lis t an d their-derivatives . Result : O f th e 2 6 chemical s in Clas s 4 , 1 6 o f the m hav e bee n include d in Group 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 and 2 4 hav e bee n include d i n previou s Group s I , II , and III . Wit hthe inclusio n o 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 n categories . Ste p 7 : For

m Grou p V

ou t o f the remainin g productio n categorie s o n th 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 five group s ha s bee n presented . B y followin g thi s methodology , the fiv e group s consis t o f 111 , 100 , 112 , 62 , and 6 8 productio n categories , respectively . Th e propose d regulation s mus t be phased-in firs t fo r the productio n categorie s in Grou p I , followe d by Group s II , III , IV , an

d V in sequence .P.1 6 

# Attachmen t 4
PUMP S

Phase .

Phas e I I 10,00 0 pp m LDAR

5,00 0 pp m LDAR

Phas e II I

Genera l Pumps Monthl y LDAR

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

Ful l QI P 20 % Replacemen t pe ryea r Food/Medica l Monthly . LDAR

>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 Monthly . LDAR

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

# Attachmen t 5 PUMP S

Phase ! Phas e l l Phas e II I

10,00 0 pp m LDAR Monthl y 5,00 0 pp m

LDAR Monthl y Promulgatio n + 3 month s EOY- 1 EOY-2

EOY = EndofYea r EOY-3 EOY-4 EOY-5 EOY-6

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

) i Q l Analyz

e Dat a •larg e plants perfor m trial s o n 10 % o r 3 (whicheve r I s less ) pumps

•<10 % o r < 3 pumps , o r •Qualit y Improvemen t (Ql ) •collec t dat aP.1 8

• 1



# ATTACHMEN T 6 America n Petroleu m Institute 1220 L Street , Northwest Washington , D.C
. 2000 5 202-682-800 0 

# 9

HAN D DELIVERE D MEMORANDU

M DATE : Augus t 22 , 199 0 TO : HVO C Fugitive s Regulator yNegotiation s Committe e FROM : Larr yGoodhear t SUBJECT : Scop e o f Regulation : Refiner yBTXUnit s An 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 EP Aha 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 regulator ylanguag 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