p. 1 

# OAR Box 1384 Prepped by Charmelle Mathews



### Document

Number: 

# 83 ) ll-E-4 3 Docket Number: 

# A-94-5 2

Printed 7/2/2008 8:42:05 AM

Sheet 83 of 264P. 2

G_7 £ O 

### A-94-52

MEMORANDU M TO : Madelein e Stru m U.S . EPA/ESD/CCPG FROM : Gre g LaFla

m Pacifi c Environmenta

l Services , Inc . (PES ) DATE : Augus t

13,199 6 P:/N504 • •**.' •

" ' % «V^:v*?V,.:,,.,,,. . 

## 6ECi5l99f i ,° , EP A AI R DOCKE T •* # * ,

SUBJECT : Minute s of

July 29,199 6 Meetin g Betwee n EP A andRepresentative s o f

th e Plasti c Composite s Industr

y LOCATION : EPA/Mutua l Building , Durham , NC , 11t h floor conferenc e room , 1:0 0 pm-3:0 0 p m ATTENDEES :

Mr . Jame s Gauchel Mr . Ro b Haberlein Ms . Lind aHerrin g Mr . Bruc e Jorda

n Mr . Nor mKapla n Ms . Rosemari e Kelley Mr . Gre g LaFla

m Ms . Karen Levy * Mr . Stev e McNall

y Mr . WaltMcSherr

y Mr . And y Mille r Ms . Nancy Pate Mr . Isidro P

e Mr . Ro n Rya

n Mr . Joh n Schweitze

r Ms . Madeleine Stru

m Owens-Corning Engineerin g Environmenta l EPA/ES D EPA/ES D EPA/OR D Kelle r & Heckma

n PE S EPA/OPA R Compos . Fabricator s Assoc . Omeg aPultrusion s EPA/OR D EPA/ITPI D LASC O EPA/EFI G SPI/Composite s Institute EPA/ES D * Ms . Lev y participate db y telephone . (614)321-772 4 (410)268-736 7 (919 ) 541-535 8 (919 ) 541-557 2 (919 ) 541-255 6 (202)434-420 8 (919)941-033 3 (202)260-895 2 (703)610-902 5 (216 ) 562-520 1 (919 ) 541-292 0 (919 ) 541-534 7 (714)993-122 0 (919)541-433 0 (313)668-470 3 (919)541-238 3

PURPOS E Th e purpos e o f

th e meetin g wa s t o discus s anumbe r o f topic s a s reflecte di n material provide d t o EP

A b y th e composite s industr y prior to th e meeting , whic h included : 1 ) Agenda , 2 ) Summary , 3 ) Issue s fo

r Discussion , an

d4 ) Talkin g Point s o n SBREF A (se e Attachment) .P. 3

Madeleine Stru m Augus t 13,199 6 Pag e 2 DISCUSSIO N Non-economi c Impact s o f

Incineratio n T o begi n th e meeting , th e participant s introduce dthemselves . Th e first speaker wa s Mr . Haberlein , acontractor t o SP I wh o sai dh e ha

dperformedanumbe

r o f RAC T andMAC T analyse s i n several States . H e gav e apresentatio n tha t describe dnon-economi c impact s o f incineratio n controls . (The presentatio n wa s base do n arepor t authore db y th e speaker , whic h ha s bee n place d i n EPA' s rulemakin g docket no . A-94-5 2 a s a

n attachmen

t t o aJ . Schweitzer

to-M . Stru mletter

dated Jun e 26,1996. ) Mr . Haberlei n said that

th e us e o f supplementa

l fue l (usuall y natura

l ga s o r propane ) i n incineratio n system s lead s t o th e creatio n an demissio n of non-VO C pollutants , includin g No x , SO x , CO , soot , an d radionuclides . H e presente dcalculation s indicatin g that , i n order fo r an incinerato r

t o b e self-firing (n o supplementa l fue l required) , astyren e concentratio n o f approximatel y 35 0 pp mi s neede dfo r regenerativ e unit s an

d1,40 0 to 2,00 0 pp mi s neede d fo r catalyti c units . Mr . Haberlein' s calculation s o f utilitie s requirement s assume dan inpu t strea m of 30,00 0 cf m(whic h he sai d i s reasonabl e fo r spra y booths ) and2 0 pp mstyren e (ne w propose d TLV) . H e said tha t alternat e inpu t value s coul db e selected , but hi s ai mwa s t o demonstrate th e calculatio n method . EP A staf f member s a

t th e meetin g expresse da

n interes t in examinin g an d evaluatin g Mr . Haberlein' s calculatio n methods , andhe referre dthe mt o th e repor t fo r details . Mr . Haberlei n stated that

th e desirabilit

y of high concentration s fo

r th e contro l devic e ar e i n direc t conflic t wit h th e issu e o f

employe e protectio n fromhig h exposure s (OSH A requirements) . Mr . Jorda

n aske d whethe

r th e us e o f respirator s andful

l "spacesuit " protectio n ha d bee n looke d a

t a s amean s o f

addressin g th e problem s o f employe e exposur

e t o hig h styren e concentration s in th e productio n area . Mr . Schweitze r pointe dou

t tha t OSH A rule s prohibi t th e us e o f

suc h protectio n i n case s where ventilatio n o f th e area , andsubsequent lowerin g o f

concentration s t o saf

e levels , i s feasible . He als o state dma t they consider incinerator s t o b e aproblembecaus e they set difficul t floors fo r ne w andexistin g sources . Ms . Stru mrequeste d afutur e meetin g wit

h Mr . Haberlein andth e Composite s Institute t o explor e issue s relate d t

o add-o n controls , an dMr . Schweitze r indicate dtha

t funding wa s availabl e t o allo w Mr . Haberlei n t o atten dsuc h ameeting . Dat aBas e an d MAC T Floor Issue s Mr . McNall y bega

n b y statin g tha

t th e plasti c composite s industr y i s divers e an d complex , an d man

y facilitie s hav e co-mingle dprocesses . H e sai dtha t part s o f EPA' s data bas e fo r ope n molder s i s inadequat e an dinaccurate . Dat

awer e submitte dt o EP

A b y companie s base d o n styrene content averages , andofte

n d o no t represen t th e "maximumdoP. 4

Madelein e Stru

m Augus t 13,199 6 Pag e 3 no t exceed " value s specified , fo r example , i n th e Californi aregulations . H e pointe dou t that , althoug h on e o f

EPA' s floo

r value s i s 3 2 percent , n o resin s wit h les s tha n 3 5 percent

styren e ar e i n use . Also , Materia

l Safet y DataSheet s (MSDS ) indicat e th e 3 5 percent

figure. Mr . McNally extende d a

n offe r t o reorganiz e EPA' s databas e fo r ope n moldin g an d correc t wha t h e fel t wer e error s i n som

e o f th e styrene content

determinations . H e aske d ho w EP A woul d trea

t th e "new " data . The EP

A responde db y requestin g facility-specifi c styren e data , a s wel l a s th e MSDS' s fo r th e resin s in use . Ms . Stru msai dtha t EP A woul dupdate th e databas e a s appropriat

e afte r th e CF A provided , an

dEP A reviewed , th e ne w information . Industr y member s mentione dth e A.R.E . facilit y i n Ohio , whic h manufacture s truc k cap s usin g resi n sprayup , gel coating , andpaintin g processes . The y fel t tha t th e incinerato r

i n us e there wa s installe d primaril y to contro l emission s fro mspra y painting , an dtha

t control s woul d no t hav e been applie d onl

y fo r aresi n sprayu

p operation . Ohi o VO C rul e 3745-21-0 7 limit s emission s t o n o more than 8 lb/h r and4 0 lb/da

y fro meac h emission s unit . Facilitie s ofte n compl y b y dividin g meir operation s int

o severa l emission s units , eac h o f

whic h i s abl e t o sta y belo w thes e limits . Th e EP A agreedtha

t facilitie s wit

h co-controlle dprocesse s ma y no t b e usefu l model s i n establishin g MACT floors , i f th e contro l wa s installe dprimaril y fo r th e "other " processes) . Ms . Stru mexpresse dth e main issu e surroundin g suc h co-controlle d processes : ho w do yo u decid e whethe r add-o n control s are intende dprimaril y fo r on e proces s versu s another , o r

equall y fo r al l of th e controlle dprocesses ? Basedo n it s revie w o f thi s facility , EPA' s conclusio n o n A.R.E . i s tha t thi s facilit y wit h it s incineratio n control s can b e factore d int o th e MAC T floo r determinatio n fo

r ope n moldin g (sprayup ) processes . Another Ohi o facilit

y discusse dwa s America

n Standard , whic h ha s arecentl y installe d incinerator . Du e t o it s recent installation , thes e control s ma y no t b e use di n settin g th e floo r fo r existin g ope n moldin g sources , but ma y b e usedin settin g new sourc e MACT . (Th e EP A clarifie d tha t

th e facilit y ca n be . usedfo

r existin g sourc e MACT i f

th e standard s ar

e delaye d such that th e facilit y ha s ha d it s contro l operating fo

r mor e tha n 1 8 month s befor

e proposal o r 3 0 month s befor

e promulgatio n of

th e standards. ) Mr . Schweitze

r suggeste dtha

t aconferenc e cal l b e hel dconcernin g th e incorporatio n o f wor k practice s into th e NESHAP . Ms . Stru mexpresse dme belie f

tha t wor k practice s involvin g sprayup technique s useda s a n alternativ e mean s o f

complianc e wit

h othe r MAC T requirement s are to o difficul t t o enforce suc

h tha t continuou s complianc e ca

n b e verified . Th e industr y nonetheles s agree d t o develo p aproposa

l of it s ideas . Thi s ma

y includ e amateria

l specificatio n (suc h a s specifying a n allowabl e materia

l weigh t usag e pe r part ) a s amean s o f ensurin g controlle d resi n application . 

## 3P. 5

Madelein e Stru m Augus t 13,199 6 Pag e 4 Emissio n Factor s Th e industr

y aske d EPA t o addres s wha t industr y feel s t o b e th e mis-us e o f informatio n fro

mth e CF A and ORD/RT

I emissio n studie s a s ne

w emissio n factors . Mr . Schweitzer

asserte d tha

t i t i s premature t o us e th e curren t datat o modif

y th e AP-4 2 factors . Mr . Jorda n state d tha

t th e EPA staf

f responsibl e fo

r AP-4 2 wil l revie w th e availabl e information , an d mak

e adeterminatio n o n th e bes t wa y t o estimat

e emission s fromcomposite s manufacturing . Followin g thi s review , EP A wil l issu e appropriat

e guidanc e o n th e us e o f current o r revise d factors . Thi s wil l occur i n th e nea r future . ^ " Smal l Busines s Regulator

y Enforcemen

t Fairnes s Ac

t Ms . Kelle y describe d th e primar y goa l o f SBREF A a s attemptin g t o prevent companie s fro

mbein g drive n ou t

o f busines s du e to th e burde

n o f excessiv e regulations . She pointe d ou t

that smal l businesse s ar

e defineda s 50 0 employee s o r less , andthes e constitut

e abou t 9 5 percent

o f thi s industry . Unde

r SBREFA , th e cost s of

achievin g aMAC T floor shoul d b e considere d initially , andthe n th e floor shoul db e adjusteda s neede ds o tha t th e cost s o f th e standar

d ar e reasonable . Th e EPA disagree dwit h industry' s clai mtha

t SBREF A shoul d take precedenc e ove r requirement s o f

th e Clea n Ai r Act ; i n particular , thos e provision s o f th e Ac t that pertai n t o settin g MAC T floors . Mr . Jorda n responde d that

th e Agenc y i s keenly awar e o f th e nee dt o consider

smal l busines s impacts , an

d ha s incorporate dthes e concern s int o it s rulemakings . H e sai dtha t a Counci l wil l b e appointe d t o revie w th e draf t rule , andth e Small Busines s Administratio n wil l als o participate i n th e review . Summar y Mr . Schweitze

r bega n hi s summarizatid

n b y stating tha

t th e "A " i n MAC T stand s fo r "achievable; " jus t

becaus e acontro l i s i n use , thi s doesn' t mea n tha t it' s goo dfo

r th e environment . H e asserted tiiat Congres s di dno t

mea n fo r asingl e contro l t o dictat

e th e standard fo

r an entir e broadly definedsubcategory . Mr . McNall y adde dtha

t th e industry' s incentiv e t o implemen

t pollutio n preventio n measure s will b e stifledb y arequirement fo r incineration . Mr . Schweitze r emphasize dtha

t EP A shouldloo

k a t th e economi c and environmenta

l impact s befor

e th e final floo

r determination s ar

e made . Mr . Jorda

n aske d how , i f incinerator s hav e negativ e economi c andother impacts , th e facilitie s wit

h incinerator s ar

e continuin g i n operation . Mr . Schweitze r responde dtha

t such facilitie s are fundedb y th e corporatio n or

b y th e State ; o r

they installe dth e control s t o satisf y aVO C regulation , and the n regrette d th e decision . 

# H-P. 6

Madelein e Strum Augus t 13,199 6 Pag e 5 ACTIO N ITEM S Follow-up activitie s agreedt o by meetin g participants : Part y 1 . U.S . EPA (M . Strum) 2 . U.S . EP

A (AP-4 2 group ) 3 . CF A (S . McNally )

4 . SPI/C I (J . Schweitzer) Actio n Agreedt o Se t u p meetin g wit

h SPI o n th e us e o f

add-o n control s Review emission s informatio n andissu e emissio n factor

guidanc e Provide facility-specifi c styren e data/MSD S o n ope n moldin g facilitie s fo

r EPA' s us e i n updatin g th e dat abas e Se t u p conferenc e cal l t o discus s industr y proposal o n wor k practice s Attachmen t



# s>T6nvww_:n«_w1«~S«o«e ^ """ ' D-t:70U M flmcBaMS PJ _

Composite

s Industr y Meetin g wh h LP

A EP A Offices , Durham , N C Jur y 29,199 6 AGENDA 1:00-1.0 5 Self-introduction s 1:05-1:1 5 Openin g comment s J . Schweitze r 1 ;15-1:4 5 Non-economi c impact o f incineratio n o f emission s fro m oomposil e

manufacturin g operation s R . Haberlei n 1:45-2:0 5 Database an d MAC T Floo r issue s S . McNall y 2:05-2:2 0 Smal l Busines s Regulator

y Enforcement Fairnes

s AC L Implication s lo r EP A promulgatio n o f MAC T for composite s R . Kelle y 230-2:3 5 Summar

y J . Schweitze r 2:35-3:0 0 Discussio n

EP A PARTICIPANT

S Madelein e Strum , Emission s Standard

s Division , 919.541.238 3 Lind a Herring , Emission s Standard s Divisio n Bruce Jordan , (.missio

n Standards Divisio n Kare n Levy , Offic e o f Polic y Analysis an d Revie

w Lcsly c Fraser , Office of Genera l Counse l INDUSTR Y PARTICIPANT S Stev e McNally , Composite

s I abricator

s Association , 703.610.900 5 Ro b Haberlein , Engineerin g Environmenta l Consultin g Services , 410.268.736 7

Joh n Schweitzer , SP I Composite s Institute , 313.668.470 3 Rosemari e Kelley , Kelle r an d Heckma n (counse l t o SPI )

Wal t McSheny , Omeg a Pultrusion s Si d Pe , LASC

O Bathwar

e



# CP. 8

.^TAu^_^^^^na^M-RMw)>inm wD_«7/ZM 6 Tin r 2-233 2 &&f l

Composite

s Industr y Meetin g wit h H»

A Jul y 29,199 6 SUMMAR

Y Congres s di d no t inten d that infeasibl e o r environmentally , harmfu l control s b e required , o r b e use d t o se t MAC T floors .

• The"A'inMACTisforAcn/eva6fe . Yes , indnerator s ar c use d a t som e fadlitics . However.. . • Feasibility i s determine d b y fad%-$ped/f c factors.

n Fo r example , th e presenc

e o f a high-VO

C sourc e suc h a s a paint lin e ma

y mak e incineratio n feasibl

e an d environmentall

y sound . ° Eac h facilit y i s essentiall

y it s ow n subcategory

. Indncratio n o f emission s fro m th e vas t majority o f likel y ne wo r existin g source s wil l b e a net-negative fo r th e environmen t

• Significan t releases o f greenhous e gasscs.

" Possibly-significan t releases o f radon , SOx , an d NOx , and , t o a lesse r extent , PM, o an d CO . • I n mos t cases , indneratio n consume s larg e quantitie s o f natura l gas . MAC T base d o n indnerator s ma y discourag e industr y effort s t o develo p additiona l pollutio n preventio n Ledinologies . MAC T base d o n indnerator s wil l b e espedali y harmfu l t o smal l businesses . Therefore.. . • EP A shoul d agre e no t L

o us e incinerator

s l o se t MAC T Floors . • Industr

y wil l wor k

wit h EP A t o achiev

e th e greates

t possibl e reductio n i n emission s throug h th e us e o f pollutio n preventio n technology , an d t o evaluat e emergin g contro l technologies .



# ?P. 9 rrgm:«ibi>r««.i»«nu*i~iu . miwtiiiWWUi'i ; '"" ' Date:7/24/9 6 rrrrie:2^:l7i2 9 |J '3< , ^B2of 2

Issue s Fo r Discussio n I . Surve y Dat a Accuracy : 1 . Th e validity o f

th e information . 2. Th e interpretation o f dat a b y th e EP A (specificall y LASCO) . 3 . Exclusio n o f

facility informatio

n fro m Floo r detennination s (Specificall y A.R.E.) . 4 . Wha tformatshoul d w e pursu e t o obtai n infonnatio n from source s whic h submitte d questionabl e information . 5 . Wha tassurance s d o w e hav e tha tth e correcte d informatiou wil l b e regarde d b y th e EP

A a s having "standing 1 ' . 6 . Wha tmechanis m wil l the EP A emplo y to eithe r rectif y th e infonnatio n submitte d b y thes e sources , o r remov e i tfrom consideration . 7 . Wha tassurance s do w e have tha tih e EP A wil l abid e b y mis . II . Utilizatio n o f

Data Whic h I s Excluded Unde r 112(d) : 1 . A.R.E . 2 . America n Standar d ill . - Us e o f

CF A Tes tDat a i n th e MAC T Standard : 1 . Ho w wil l th e EP A regar d thi s data . 2 . Ho w wil l th e EP A incorporat e i tint o th e MAC T Standard . IV . OAQPS * Responsibility t o th e AP-4 2 Emissio n Factors : 1 . Congressionall y mandate d updat e o f AP-42 . 2 . Fragmentar

y releas e o f

selectiv e informatio n regardin g AP-42 . 3 Resultin g interference b y OAQP S i n ih e Titl e V process .



# VP.1 0

07-25-9 6 04:2 0 P

M FRO M KELLE Ri HECE11A

N PO Z

Talkin g Point s o n SBREF A for meetin g wit h EP A o n Jul y 2 9 regardin g Composite s MAC T Representative

s o f smal l businesse

s ar e t o b e consulte

d b y agencies fo r advic e an d recommendations regardin g the potentia

l impac to f a propose d rule . I n addition . EP

A mus tnotif y 5B A befor e proposal ; SB A ihe

n form s a smal l busines s advocac

y revie w pane l to revie w ih trule . This pane

l consider s comment s an d recommendation

s fro m th e selecte d smal l businesses . {24 4 Prio r t o publishin

g a n initia l regulatory flexibilit

y analysis , th

e Agency mustconsider th e inpu to f smal l businesse

s an d "wher e appropriate

, th e agenc y (must] modif

y th e propose d mle , th e initia l regulator y flexMby analysi

s o r th e decisio n o n whethe

r a n initia l regulator y flexibility analysis I

s required. ' 1244(b)(6) . SBREF A provide s for a Smal

l Busines s an

d Ajuicullur

e Eufuxwuieu

tOmbudsman

. The Ombudsman' s role i s to ensur e cooperatio

n an d communicatio

n between regulating agencie

s an d th e smal l business community

, f 222 . SBREF A require s eac h regulator

y flexibility analysi

s t o describ e "th

e step s th e agenc

y ha s take n t o wi<wfrwi»

_th e significan

teconomi c impac to n sma U entities. " SBREF

A §24 1 SBREF A provide s tha ta regulator

y flexibility analysi

s i s pa n o f

th e recor d for di e purpose s o f judida l revie w o f a rulemaking

, f 742 . 

### .Vnhrtri e Kset s ou ta serie s o f

procedure s b y whic h Congres s may . a tIt s discretion , revie w al l agenc y rule s an d enac t"Join tresolution

s of disapproval " whic

h mus tb e signe d or vetoe

d by th e Presiden tan d whic h hav e (h e effec to f laws nullifyin g ihe rule s atIssue. 9 251 . SBREF A direct s th e federa l governmen

tt o issu e fai r rule s whil e safeguardin

g di e interest s of smal l businesses . Th

e Actsecie s t o ensur e tha tregulator

s d o no tdriv

e a viabl e smal

l business * ou to f business . EPA* s p_s

tleadin g o f section 112(d) o f

th e Clea n AirAc tconclude d tha tth e Agenc

y ma y onl y conside r cost s an d non-ai r qualit y healt h an d environmenta

l impact s an d energ y requirement

s whe n goin g abov e th e MAC f floor. $HRt_r

A require s th e Agency to conside

r cost s a s a n initia l matter . 

# 1