p. 1



# OAR Box 1168 Prepped by Ollie Stewart



### Document

Number: 

# 89 ) ll-C-1 8

Docket Number: 

# A-89-1 0

Printed 4/29/2008 11:23:19 AM Sheet 89 of 131P. 2



# A-89-1 0

II-C-1 8



## m r* 2 ; 

## 1930

-



## EP AA mD ; 

## *._ * Mr . W . F . Buchholt z Exxo nChemica l America s Baytow nChemica l Plan t Pos t Offic e Bo x400 4 Baytown , Texa s 77522-400 4

Dea r Mr . Buchholtz : Thi s i s inrespons e t o you r lette r o f Marc h6 , 1990 , t o Dr . Hershkowit z an dme . I appreciat e you r comments . However , I believ e I di d understan d correctl y

th e lea kdetectio nan d repai r program

a t th e Baytow

nChemica l Plant . Th e poin t tha t came u p a t th e recen t negotiatio nmeetin g di d no t pertai nt o th e program

yo u ar e now

running , bu t rather , pertaine dt o you r comment s whe nI aske dwha t yo u woul do r coul dd o i f yo u neede dt o reduc e emission s further . M y note s from

th e plan t tou r describ e th e monthly/quarterl y program

yo u ar e now runnin g a s yo u describe di t i nyou r letter . Base donm y notes , yo u us e on e standar dapproac hwhic hi s th e leas t commo ndenominato r neede dt o mee t EPA , Texa s and , I believe , Harri s Count y rules . Th e program

applie s t o 2 0 operatin g units , whic har e i nphysicall y

define dareas . Ever y uni t i s i

nth e program , excep t th e wate r plant . JtejM^K||U_U« c -^-rl ^ ou * ty 7 people , a t a .^Sj^^W'^^'Pfl^-BS^JSliF^ ' A totS^fj^OoOcompbnent s ar e involve d(whic h tl|n|%j £ $2V0*df^Sponenf/yr). * I d o no t recal l whethe r th e wor ko f th e 7 ma n stVf f i s sprea devenl y ove r th e quarte r o r whethe r i t i s concentrate di na singl e month . Th e valv e result s fo r individua l unit s range dfro m 1. 5 percen t t o 0. 2 percen t leaker s wit ha 10,00 0 pp m lea kdefinition . Th e resul t fo r flange s wa s 2 leaker s ou t o f 50,00 0 flanges . I nvie w o f thes e lo

w results , I aske di f yo u too kadvantag e o f th e ski pprogram o r th e 2 percen t performance/annua l monitorin g standar di nth e EPA

rule . Yo u responded , i n part , tha t yo u di d no t becaus e o f th e desir e t o kee pth e cre w traine dan

d available . Th e potentia l fo r fallin g bac kt o quarterl y fro m semi-annua l woul d mak e i t mor e difficul t t o planwor kan d t o hav e a stabl e grou po f traine d staff . Anothe r questio nI aske dwas , wha t yo u woul dd o i f yo u ha d t o reduc e emission s further . Accordin g t o m y notes , yo u sai dtha t monthl y monitoring woul db e "no problem" . ( I hav e checke dwit h3 other s wh o wer e presen t an d the y hav e th e same recollection. ) Yo u als o mad e clea r tha t thi s woul db e costl y an d tha t yo u though t tha t thi s woul db e a wast e o f money , a s th e facilit y wa s already

wel l controlled , an d th e emission s wer e ver y low relativ e t o moto r vehicl e emission s i nth e area . Thi s seem s t o diffe r fro m you r letter , wher e yo u state dtha t "pur e monthl y monitoring fo r al l component s i s no t practica l a t Baytow no r a t othe r larg e plants. " I a m no t sur e wha t yo uP. 3

mea nb y no t practical , bu t i f yo umea ntha t i t woul dno t be possibl e fo r some reason , tha t conflict s wit hwha t I understoo dyo ut o say durin g th e tour . Furthermore , I d o no t understan dwha t factor s woul dmak e thi s o r an y othe r monitorin g program

impractica l a t a larg e plant . I t seem s t o m e tha t th e proximit y

o f operatin g units , o na commo nsite , wit ha centra l environmenta l an dengineerin g staf f woul dleadt o economie s o f scal e an dothe r efficiencies . I t i s no t m

y inten t her e t o ge t int o a wh o sai dwha t argument . Th e mor e importan t poin t i s tha t th e committe e i s workin g har dt o develo pa goo drul e tha t reflect s th e bes t performanc e an dtha t i s practical . On e o f th e principa l reason s tha t EPA chos e t o pursu e thi s throug h"re g neg " wa s tha t thi s proces s provide s a nopportunit y

t o produc e a bette r rul e tha nmigh t resul t from

traditiona l in-hous e rulemaking . However , i norde r t o accomplis h thi s goal , th e committe e need s t o obtai na s muc hfactua l informatio na s possible . Th e committe e ha s neve r considere drequirin g monthl y monitorin g a s a bas e program

(i.e. , pur e monthl y

monitoring) . Rather , th e approac hw e ar e pursuin g i s designe dt o encourag e effective , industr y designe dqualit y assurance/qualit y

contro l programs , suc ha s th e on e Ro nBerglan dsuggested , b y offerin g reduce dmonitorin g frequencie s a s a rewar dfo r effectiv e control . Genera l statements , suc ha s yours , tha t pur e monthl y monitorin g i s impractical , ar e o f littl e use . I f yo uhav e cos t o r technica l dat a tha t show tha t ther e ar e problem s wit hwha t we ar e considering , o r tha t ther e ar e bette r approaches , thi s woul db e helpful . However , a t thi s point , I believ e tha t m y understanding , whic hi s th e basi s fo r th e comment s I mad e t o Bruc e Davi s a t th e meeting , i s correct . Sincerely ,

Rober t L . Aja x Chie f Standard s Developmen t Branc h

cc : Phi l Harte r (fo r distributio n t o th e committee ) 0AQPS:ESD:SDB:RLAjax:eaeleanor:629-5578(MD-13):3/13/9 0