Date:
May
6,
2003
Subject:
Cost
Impacts
for
Wastewater
at
Chemical
Manufacturing
Facilities
for
Promulgation
Package
Miscellaneous
Organic
NESHAP
From:
Melissa
Icenhour
To:
MON
Project
File
I.
Introduction
Due
to
comments
received
during
the
comment
period,
the
MACT
floor
for
wastewater
has
been
revised
since
the
proposal
package.
As
a
result,
the
regulatory
alternative
and
cost
impacts
also
have
changed.
This
memorandum
summarizes
the
revised
regulatory
analysis
and
presents
the
results
of
the
revised
cost
analysis.

II.
MACT
Floor
The
previous
analysis
evaluated
all
of
the
HAP
that
are
listed
in
Table
9
of
the
HON
(
i.
e.,
"
Table
9
HAP")
in
one
group.
1
This
revised
analysis
evaluates
wastewater
streams
that
contain
soluble
HAP
separately
from
streams
that
contain
partially
soluble
HAP
or
a
mixture
of
soluble
and
partially
soluble
HAP.
Partially
soluble
and
soluble
HAP
are
listed
in
Tables
2
and
3,
respectively,
of
40
CFR
Part
63
Subpart
GGG
(
Pharmaceuticals
MACT).

The
revised
MACT
floor
consists
of
HON­
equivalent
management
and
treatment
for
wastewater
streams
with
the
following
characteristics:
2,3
1.
The
total
annual
average
concentration
of
partially
soluble
HAP
compounds
is
>
50
ppmw,
and
the
combined
total
annual
average
concentration
of
all
Table
9
HAP
compounds
is

10,000
ppmw
at
any
flow
rate.

2.
The
total
annual
average
concentration
of
partially
soluble
HAP
compounds
is
>
50
ppmw,
the
combined
total
annual
average
concentration
of
all
Table
9
HAP
is

1,000
ppmw,
and
the
annual
average
flow
rate
is

1
liter
per
minute.

3.
The
total
annual
average
concentration
of
partially
soluble
HAP
compounds
is

50
ppmw,
the
total
annual
average
concentration
of
soluble
HAP
compounds
is

30,000
ppmw,
and
the
total
annual
load
of
soluble
HAP
compounds
is

1
ton
per
year.
2
Table
1.
Summary
of
Current
Wastewater
Database
for
Chemical
Manufacturing
Facilities
Number
of
streams
Total
Controlled
as
required
All
accepted
dataa
364
All
streams
meeting
any
of
the
cutoffs
157
30
1.
Streams
with
total
annual
avg
conc
of
partially
soluble
HAP
>
50
ppmw
and
all
Table
9
HAP
conc

10,000
ppmw
60
13
2.
Streams
with
total
annual
avg
conc
of
partially
soluble
HAP
>
50
ppmw
and
all
Table
9
HAP
conc

1,000
ppmw
and
flow

1
L/
min
53
9
3.
Streams
with
total
annual
avg
conc
of
partially
soluble
HAP

50
ppmw
and
total
annual
avg
conc
of
soluble
HAP

30,000
ppmw
and
load
of
soluble
HAP

1
ton/
yr
44
8
a
Includes
only
streams
that
contain
Table
9
HAP
at
concentrations
greater
than
or
equal
to
1,000
ppm.

III.
Impacts
The
number
of
affected
streams
is
summarized
in
Table
1.
Compared
to
the
May
2000
analysis,
the
number
of
affected
streams
decreased
from
186
to
157.
A
total
of
59
streams
were
excluded
because
they
contain
soluble
HAP
at
concentrations
less
than
30,000
ppmw
or
loads
less
than
1
tpy.
In
comparison,
only
30
streams
were
added
because
they
contain
partially
soluble
HAP
with
flows
between
1
liter
per
minute
and
10
liters
per
minute.

Emissions
and
cost
impacts
were
estimated
for
both
the
MACT
floor
and
a
regulatory
alternative
using
the
same
procedures
as
in
the
previous
analysis,
but
the
threshold
cutoffs
for
the
regulatory
alternative
have
been
changed
to
coincide
with
the
revised
MACT
floor.
The
regulatory
alternative
consists
of
the
same
management
and
treatment
requirements
as
the
floor,
but
the
flowrate
cutoff
for
streams
containing
partially
soluble
HAP
and
the
concentration
cutoff
for
streams
containing
soluble
HAP
were
reduced
by
50
percent.
The
regulatory
alternative
criteria
are
as
follows.

1.
The
total
annual
average
concentration
of
partially
soluble
HAP
compounds
is
>
50
ppmw,
and
the
combined
total
annual
average
concentration
of
all
Table
9
HAP
compounds
is

10,000
ppmw
at
any
flow
rate.

2.
The
total
annual
average
concentration
of
partially
soluble
HAP
compounds
is
>
50
ppmw,
the
combined
total
annual
average
concentration
of
all
Table
9
HAP
compounds
is

1,000
ppmw,
and
the
annual
average
flow
rate
is

0.5
liter
per
minute.
3
3.
The
total
annual
average
concentration
of
partially
soluble
HAP
compounds
is

50
ppmw,
the
total
annual
average
concentration
of
soluble
HAP
compounds
is

15,000
ppmw,
and
the
total
annual
load
of
soluble
HAP
compounds
is

1
ton
per
year.

The
method
and
equations
used
to
calculate
the
cost
impacts
are
identical
to
the
previous
analysis.
The
flow
rate
of
the
stream,
the
HAP
load
of
the
stream,
and
the
HAP
emission
reduction
were
used
to
calculate
the
cost
impacts.

The
HAP
load
was
calculated
for
each
wastewater
stream
from
the
reported
flow
rates
and
HAP
concentrations
as
follows:

Eq.
1
HAP
load
Flow
HAP
concentration
ppm
lb
yr
gal
yr
lb
gal
,
,
.
,

,
,
=
×
×
833
1
000
000
Uncontrolled
emissions
from
each
stream
were
then
calculated
by
multiplying
the
HAP
load
by
the
Fe
value
for
each
HAP.
The
Fe
values
for
each
HAP
are
from
Table
34
of
the
HON.

Baseline
emissions
were
then
assumed
to
be
equal
to
the
uncontrolled
emissions
for
the
streams
that
were
not
treated.
For
wastewater
streams
currently
treated
in
a
unit
that
meets
the
requirements
of
the
HON,
the
HAP
removed
was
estimated
by
multiplying
the
HAP
load
by
the
Fr
value
(
from
Table
9
in
subpart
G
of
the
HON).
Emission
reductions
were
estimated
by
multiplying
the
load
reduction
by
the
Fe
as
follows:

Eq.
2
HAP
reduction
lb
yr
HAP
Load
Fr
Fe
,
(
)
(
)
(
)
=
×
×
Baseline
emissions
for
these
controlled
streams
were
then
estimated
as
the
difference
between
the
uncontrolled
emissions
and
the
reductions.

Emission
reductions
achieved
by
the
MACT
floor
and
regulatory
alternative
were
also
estimated
using
Equation
2.
Wastewater
stream
characteristics
and
the
estimated
uncontrolled
and
baseline
emissions
for
each
wastewater
stream
are
presented
in
Attachment
2.

Treatment
costs
for
all
streams
from
batch
processes
that
would
require
additional
control
under
the
MACT
floor
or
regulatory
alternative
were
estimated
for
a
steam
stripper.
The
total
annual
cost
(
TAC)
and
total
capital
investment
(
TCI)
were
estimated
using
the
equations
developed
in
the
analysis
for
the
HON.
4
These
equations
express
the
costs
as
a
function
of
the
wastewater
flow
rate
(
in
liters
per
minute)
treated
by
the
steam
stripper.
The
original
equation
estimated
costs
in
July
1989
dollars.
The
TCI
equation
was
escalated
to
February
1999
dollars
using
the
Chemical
Engineering
Plant
Cost
Index
ratio
of
387.9/
356.
We
also
added
costs
to
purchase
and
install
steam
flow,
liquid
flow,
and
outlet
gas
temperature
monitors
and
a
data
acquisition
system
($
20,100),
resulting
in
the
following
equation:
4
Eq.
3
TCI
Flowrate
yr
(
)
,
,
$
=
×
+
1189
432
475
In
the
original
analysis,
separate
equations
were
developed
for
the
total
direct
annual
costs
(
TDAC)
and
the
total
indirect
annual
costs
(
TIAC).
We
used
the
TDAC
equation
without
change
because
the
original
unit
costs
for
utilities
and
labor
are
acceptable.
We
escalated
the
TIAC
equation
using
the
Chemical
Engineering
Plant
Cost
Index
ratio
of
387.9/
356
because
most
of
the
elements
in
the
TIAC
are
calculated
as
a
percentage
of
the
TCI.
We
also
added
monitoring
labor
costs
($
12,300/
yr);
monitoring
maintenance
materials
costs
($
500/
yr);
and
associated
indirect
costs
for
overhead
($
7,690/
yr);
administrative
charges,
property
taxes,
and
insurance
($
800/
yr);
and
capital
recovery
($
2,200/
yr).
Combining
the
original
TDAC
equation
with
the
escalated
TIAC
equation
and
the
monitoring
costs
produced
equation
4.

Eq.
4
(
)
TAC
yr
Flowrate
(
$)
.
,
=
×
+
418
6
156
343
The
electricity
and
steam
costs
for
the
steam
stripper
are
based
on
the
amount
of
flow
that
will
be
treated
by
the
steam
stripper.
In
equations
5
and
6,
the
flowrate
is
in
liters
per
minute.

Eq.
5
(
)(
)
Electricity
yr
Flowrate
kwh
(
$)
$
0./
=
×
×
249
059
Eq.
6
(
)(
)
Steam
yr
Flowrate
lb
(
$)
,
.
$
6/,
=
×
×
44
067
4
1
000
Emissions
and
treatment
costs
for
wastewater
from
continuous
processes
were
estimated
to
be
equal
to
1.7
times
greater
than
the
emissions
and
costs
for
the
wastewater
from
batch
processes.
5
Thus
the
nationwide
impacts
are
estimated
to
be
2.7
times
the
impacts
for
the
wastewater
from
batch
processes.
The
results
of
the
cost
analyses
are
summarized
in
Table
2.
The
impacts
for
each
facility
with
wastewater
subject
to
the
applicability
cutoffs
of
the
floor
and
regulatory
alternative
are
presented
in
Attachments
1
and
2,
respectively.
Data
for
the
individual
streams
that
meet
the
thresholds
for
control
are
presented
in
Attachment
3.
Five
of
the
48
facilities
with
streams
that
meet
the
cutoffs
have
HAP
loads
less
than
1
Mg/
yr;
these
facilities
were
excluded
from
the
analyses
in
Attachments
1
and
2
because
a
standard
based
on
HONequivalent
requirements
would
exempt
these
facilities.

As
shown
in
Table
2,
the
emission
reductions
and
cost
impacts
are
lower
than
the
previous
analysis.
Two
changes
account
for
the
bulk
of
the
difference.
Part
of
the
reduction
is
due
to
the
smaller
number
of
streams
that
are
affected
by
this
analysis.
Also,
the
calculation
of
load
has
changed
slightly
since
the
previous
analysis.
As
shown
in
equation
1,
the
HAP
load
depends
on
the
flow
rate
in
gallons
per
year.
Originally,
the
flow
rate
was
calculated
assuming
each
process
operated
24
hours
per
day
and
365
days
per
year.
This
revised
analysis
uses
the
actual
process
operating
time
to
calculate
the
yearly
flow
rate
if
the
wastewater
flow
rate
data
were
given
on
a
daily
or
per
minute
basis.
Since
estimated
costs
and
emission
reductions
both
have
been
reduced,
the
cost
per
Mg
of
HAP
removed
has
changed
only
slightly
relative
to
the
previous
analysis.
The
5
cost
effectiveness
values
of
both
the
MACT
floor
and
the
regulatory
alternative
relative
to
baseline
are
similar.
However,
the
because
few
additional
streams
are
subject
to
control
under
the
regulatory
alternative,
the
incremental
cost
effectiveness
of
the
regulatory
alternative
is
unreasonable.
Thus,
we
recommend
setting
the
revised
standard
for
wastewater
at
the
MACT
floor.

Table
2.
Impacts
of
Regulatory
Alternatives
for
Existing
Sources
Parameter
Previous
analysis
Current
analysis
MACT
floor
Regulatory
alternative
MACT
floor
Regulatory
alternative
TCI,
$
47,000,000
63,400,000
40,400,000
44,200,000
TAC,
$/
yr
16,900,000
22,730,000
14,600,000
15,900,000
Emission
reduction,
Mg/
yra
4,380
4,780
2,840
3,000
Cost
effectiveness,
$/
Mg
Relative
to
baseline
3,860
4,760
5,130
5,310
Incremental
N/
A
14,600
N/
A
8,450
a
Nationwide
uncontrolled
and
baseline
emissions
from
affected
streams
at
the
MACT
floor
are
estimated
to
be
15,000
Mg/
yr
and
5,900
Mg/
yr,
respectively.

IV.
References
2.
Memorandum
from
D.
Randall
and
J.
Fields,
Midwest
Research
Institute,
to
MON
Project
File.
MACT
Floor,
Regulatory
Alternative,
and
Impacts
for
Wastewater
at
Chemical
Manufacturing
Facilities.
December
10,
1999
(
revised
May
17,
2000).

3.
Memorandum
from
B.
Shine,
North
State
Engineering,
Inc.,
to
MON
Project
File.
MACT
floor
for
Partially
Soluble­
Mixed
Streams.
December
18,
2002.

4.
Memorandum
from
D.
Randall,
RTI
International,
to
MON
Project
File.
MACT
Floor
for
Soluble
HAP
in
Wastewater
Streams.
March
20,
2003.

5.
Memorandum
from
C.
Zukor
and
K.
Pelt,
Radian
Corporation,
to
Mary
Tom
Kissell,
EPA:
SDB.
Total
Capital
Investment
and
Total
Annual
Cost
Equations
Used
in
the
Framework
for
Steam
Stripping
Wastewater.
February
1,
1994
6.
Memorandum
from
C.
Zukor,
Alpha­
Gamma
Technologies,
Inc.,
to
Miscellaneous
Organic
NESHAP
Project
File.
July
27,
1999.
National
Impacts
Associated
with
Regulatory
Options
for
MON
Chemical
Manufacturing
Processes.
6
This
page
intentionally
left
blank.
A­
1
ATTACHMENT
1
Costing
Analysis
for
MACT
Floor
A­
2
This
page
intentionally
left
blank.
A­
3
Facilities
that
Meet
the
Floor
Criteria
for
Analysis
of
Group
I
Wastewater
Streams
Count
Facility
#
Flow
rate
(
1/
min)
Uncontrolled
load
(
tpy)
Uncontrolled
HAP
emissions
(
tpy)
Control
Device
Baseline
HAP
emissions
(
tpy)
HAP
reduction
(
tpy)
TCI
($)
TAC
($/
yr)
CE
($/
ton)

1
1
71
4,119
975
SS/
DP
435
0
$
0
$
0
NA
2
10
95
559
248
248
228
$
545,788
$
196,227
$
862
3
11
14
31
26
26
25
$
449,606
$
162,374
$
6,411
4
19
2
6
5
O
(
Onsite
destruction)
0
0
$
0
$
0
NA
5
20
3
8
7
7
7
$
435,901
$
157,550
$
23,296
6
21
2
7
6
6
6
$
435,447
$
157,390
$
26,828
7
22
1
4
3
3
3
$
434,126
$
156,925
$
48,147
8
23
1
4
3
3
3
$
434,126
$
156,925
$
48,147
9
24
2
5
4
O(
onsite
destruc)
0
0
$
0
$
0
NA
10
27
1
19
3
3
1
$
433,237
$
156,613
$
160,323
11
29
2
73
12
12
4
$
434,444
$
157,037
$
40,870
12
31
2
23
18
18
18
$
435,070
$
157,258
$
8,702
13
34
15
836
564
O­
Onsite
incineration
25
0
$
0
$
0
NA
14
35
1
7
2
2
1
$
434,188
$
156,947
$
153,388
15
36
10
20
16
SS
0
0
$
0
$
0
NA
16
43
0
17
5
OF
(
incin)
2
0
$
0
$
0
NA
17
45
136
382
72
72
29
$
594,607
$
213,410
$
7,454
18
53
2
111
45
45
38
$
434,301
$
156,987
$
4,098
19
54
151
633
195
195
137
$
612,459
$
219,693
$
1,600
20
57
189
73
31
31
31
$
657,576
$
235,573
$
7,685
21
58
144
171
137
SS,
DP
1
0
$
0
$
0
NA
22
63
1,155
4,233
768
768
286
$
1,806,266
$
639,877
$
2,238
23
74
1
22
4
O­
Onsite
Distruct
3
0
$
0
$
0
NA
24
81
0
2
1
1
1
$
432,481
$
156,346
$
125,912
Count
Facility
#
Flow
rate
(
1/
min)
Uncontrolled
load
(
tpy)
Uncontrolled
HAP
emissions
(
tpy)
Control
Device
Baseline
HAP
emissions
(
tpy)
HAP
reduction
(
tpy)
TCI
($)
TAC
($/
yr)
CE
($/
ton)
A­
4
25
86
3
102
17
17
5
$
435,962
$
157,572
$
29,222
26
88
1
33
6
6
2
$
433,332
$
156,646
$
89,198
27
89
0
5
1
1
0
$
432,821
$
156,466
$
588,674
28
91
2
46
9
9
3
$
435,019
$
157,240
$
47,383
29
92
12
58
30
30
27
$
446,180
$
161,168
$
5,956
30
105
166
281
135
135
128
$
629,438
$
225,669
$
1,760
31
106
29
284
163
TT,
AS
(
incin),

DP
4
0
$
0
$
0
NA
32
108
17
144
50
50
46
$
453,184
$
163,633
$
3,577
33
109
7
12
10
10
10
$
440,424
$
159,142
$
16,464
34
128
95
438
280
SS,
DP
13
0
$
0
$
0
NA
35
130
11
2,332
1,866
AS,
TT,
HT,
O
(
Off­
site
treat
at
WW
TSDF)
19
0
$
0
$
0
NA
36
130
0
19
15
15
15
$
432,604
$
156,389
$
10,277
37
133
48
230
99
0
(
after
burner)
4
0
$
0
$
0
NA
38
136
0.4
60
41
41
40
$
432,962
$
156,516
$
3,927
39
138
2
159
29
SS
18
0
$
0
$
0
NA
40
143
23
133
107
TT,
OF
(
off­
site
trash­
to­
steam)
1
0
$
0
$
0
NA
41
153
70
152
45
45
36
$
516,213
$
185,817
$
5,132
42
155
0
2
1
1
1
$
432,526
$
156,362
$
191,999
43
158
14
500
85
85
26
$
449,606
$
162,374
$
6,164
Batch
processes
16,354
6,141
2,412
1,158
$
14,979,894
$
5,392,126
$
4,656
Continuous
processes
27,802
10,440
4,100
1,969
$
25,465,820
$
9,166,614
$
4,656
Total
44,156
16,581
6.511
3,127
$
40,445,714
$
14,558,740
$
4,656
A­
5
ATTACHMENT
2
Costing
Analysis
for
Regulatory
Alternative
A­
6
This
page
intentionally
left
blank.
A­
7
Facilities
that
Meet
the
Criteria
for
Analysis
of
Group
I
Wastewater
Streams
Regulatory
Alternative
Count
Facility
#
Flow
rate
(
1/
min)
Uncontrolled
load
(
tpy)
Uncontrolled
HAP
emissions
(
tpy)
Control
Device
Baseline
HAP
emissions
(
tpy)
HAP
reduction
(
tpy)
TCI
($)
TAC
($/
yr)
CE
($/
ton)

1
1
71
4,119
975
SS/
DP
435
0
$
0
$
0
NA
2
10
100
586
260
260
237
$
551,878
$
198,370
$
835
3
11
14
31
26
26
25
$
449,606
$
162,374
$
6,411
4
19
2
6
5
O
(
Onsite
destruction)
0
0
$
0
$
0
NA
5
20
3
8
7
7
7
$
435,901
$
157,550
$
23,296
6
21
2
7
6
6
6
$
435,447
$
157,390
$
26,828
7
22
1
4
3
3
3
$
434,126
$
156,925
$
48,147
8
23
1
4
3
3
3
$
434,126
$
156,925
$
48,147
9
24
2
5
4
O(
onsite
destruc)
0
0
$
0
$
0
NA
10
27
2
34
6
6
2
$
434,865
$
157,185
$
86,793
11
29
2
84
14
14
4
$
435,260
$
157,324
$
35,330
12
31
2
23
18
18
18
$
435,070
$
157,258
$
8,702
13
34
15
836
564
O­
Onsite
incineration
25
0
$
0
$
0
NA
14
34
42
698
119
119
37
$
481,997
$
173,775
$
4,721
15
35
1
7
2
2
1
$
434,188
$
156,947
$
153,388
16
36
10
20
16
SS
0
0
$
0
$
0
NA
17
43
0
17
5
OF
(
incin)
2
0
$
0
$
0
NA
18
45
136
382
72
72
29
$
594,607
$
213,410
$
7,454
19
53
2
111
45
45
38
$
434,301
$
156,987
$
4,098
20
54
152
636
198
198
139
$
613,353
$
220,008
$
1,578
21
57
189
73
31
31
31
$
657,576
$
235,573
$
7,685
22
58
144
171
137
SS,
DP
1
0
$
0
$
0
NA
23
63
1,157
4,246
772
772
288
$
1,807,994
$
640,486
$
2,224
24
74
1
22
4
O­
Onsite
Distruct
3
0
$
0
$
0
NA
25
75
10
136
23
23
7
$
444,467
$
160,565
$
22,327
Count
Facility
#
Flow
rate
(
1/
min)
Uncontrolled
load
(
tpy)
Uncontrolled
HAP
emissions
(
tpy)
Control
Device
Baseline
HAP
emissions
(
tpy)
HAP
reduction
(
tpy)
TCI
($)
TAC
($/
yr)
CE
($/
ton)
A­
8
26
81
0
2
1
1
1
$
432,481
$
156,346
$
125,912
27
86
3
102
17
17
5
$
435,962
$
157,572
$
29,222
28
88
1
35
6
6
2
$
433,460
$
156,691
$
85,999
29
89
0
5
1
1
0
$
432,821
$
156,466
$
588,674
30
91
2
46
9
9
3
$
435,019
$
157,240
$
47,383
31
92
14
85
35
35
28
$
449,606
$
162,374
$
5,704
32
105
166
281
135
135
128
$
629,438
$
225,669
$
1,760
33
106
29
284
163
TT,
AS
(
incin),

DP
4
0
$
0
$
0
NA
34
108
17
144
50
50
46
$
453,184
$
163,633
$
3,577
35
109
7
14
11
11
11
$
441,135
$
159,392
$
14,011
36
119
1
2
2
2
2
$
433,160
$
156,585
$
98,883
37
128
95
438
280
SS,
DP
13
0
$
0
$
0
NA
38
130
11
2,332
1,866
AS,
TT,
HT,
O
(
Off­
site
treat
at
WW
TSDF)
19
0
$
0
$
0
NA
39
130
0
19
15
15
15
$
432,604
$
156,389
$
10,277
40
133
48
230
99
0
(
after
burner)
4
0
$
0
$
0
NA
41
136
0.4
60
41
41
40
$
432,962
$
156,516
$
3,927
42
138
2
159
29
SS
18
0
$
0
$
0
NA
43
143
23
133
107
TT,
OF
(
off­
site
trash­
to­
steam)
1
0
$
0
$
0
NA
44
153
70
152
45
45
36
$
516,213
$
185,817
$
5,132
45
155
0
2
1
1
1
$
432,526
$
156,362
$
191,999
46
158
15
515
88
88
27
$
450,891
$
162,826
$
5,999
Batch
17,308
6,316
2,586
1,223
$
16,356,224
$
5,888,930
$
4,816
Continuous
29,424
10,736
4,396
2,079
$
27,805,581
$
10,011,181
$
4,816
Nationwide
Totals
46,732
17,052
6,982
3,302
$
44,161,805
$
15,900,111
$
4,816
A­
9
ATTACHMENT
3
Data
for
the
Individual
Streams
that
Meet
the
Thresholds
for
Control
A­
10
This
page
intentionally
left
blank.
A­
11
Wastewater
Streams
that
Contain
Soluble
HAP
and
Meet
the
Thresholds
for
Control
Facility
#
Flow
rate
Units
Flow
rate
(
l/
min)
HAP
name
HAPconc
(
ppmw)
Load,
lb/
yr
Already
controlled?
1
17,000
gal/
day
44.68
Methanol
200,000
7,363,502
True
10
4,000
gal/
yr
0.0288
Methanol
65,800
2,192
False
10
3,000
gal/
yr
0.0216
Methanol
90,900
2,272
False
10
9,000
gal/
yr
0.0648
Methanol
136,800
10,256
False
10
83,000
gal/
yr
0.597
Methanol
30,600
21,156
False
10
90,000
gal/
yr
0.648
Methanol
172,200
129,095
False
27
89,000
gal/
yr
0.641
Methanol
50,000
37,067
False
29
12,009
gal/
yr
0.0864
Methanol
102,300
10,233
False
29
217,872
gal/
yr
1.569
Methanol
74,700
135,567
False
45
7,000
gal/
yr
0.0504
Methanol
80,000
4,665
False
54
12,000
gal/
yr
0.0864
Methanol
100,000
9,996
False
54
22,300
gal/
yr
0.161
Methanol
75,000
13,932
False
54
55,200
gal/
yr
0.398
Methanol
39,000
17,932
False
54
69,900
gal/
yr
0.503
Methanol
41,000
23,872
False
54
27,650
gal/
yr
0.199
Methanol
107,000
24,644
False
54
72,000
gal/
yr
0.519
Acetonitrile,
Triethylamine
44,500
26,689
False
54
69,500
gal/
yr
0.501
Methanol
75,000
43,419
False
54
227,950
gal/
yr
1.64
Methanol
55,000
104,432
False
54
143,360
gal/
yr
1.03
Methanol
240,000
286,597
False
54
245,946
gal/
yr
1.77
Methanol
210,000
430,221
False
63
21,841
gal/
yr
0.157
Methanol
35,000
6,368
False
63
310,544
gal/
yr
2.24
Methanol
48,344
125,054
False
63
543,494
gal/
yr
3.91
Methanol
38,940
176,288
False
63
685,118
gal/
yr
4.93
Methanol
35,000
199,740
False
63
16.3
gal/
min
61.7
Methanol
41,781
490,131
False
63
16.3
gal/
min
61.7
Methanol
41,781
1,388,705
False
63
15
gal/
min
56.8
Methanol
37,023
2,198,221
False
63
16.3
gal/
min
61.7
Methanol
41,781
2,695,721
False
74
175,000
gal/
yr
1.26
Methanol
30,000
43,731
True
86
169,500
gal/
yr
1.22
Methanol
49,600
70,030
False
86
237,600
gal/
yr
1.71
Methanol
68,000
134,582
False
88
100,000
gal/
yr
0.720
Methanol
80,000
66,638
False
89
40,360
gal/
yr
0.291
Methanol
30,000
10,086
False
92
200,000
gal/
yr
1.44
Methanol
31,000
51,644
False
106
17,824
gal/
yr
0.128
Methanol
102,000
15,144
True
106
23,868
gal/
yr
0.172
Methanol
102,000
20,279
True
136
2,945
gal/
yr
0.0212
Methanol
811,262
19,901
False
138
1,766
gal/
yr
0.0127
Methanol
150,000
2,207
True
138
7,167
gal/
yr
0.0516
Methanol
150,000
8,955
True
138
30,498
gal/
yr
0.220
Methanol
150,000
38,106
True
138
153,164
gal/
yr
1.103
Methanol
200,000
255,164
True
153
0.5
gal/
min
1.89
Methanol
153,637
57,128
False
153
0.6
gal/
min
2.27
Methanol
162,420
91,176
False
158
2,000,000
gal/
yr
14.4
Methanol
60,000
999,570
False
A­
12
Wastewater
Streams
that
Contain
Partially
Soluble
HAP
and
Meet
the
Thresholds
for
Control
Facility
#
Flow
rate
Units
Flow
(
L/
min)
HAP
name
HAP
Conc
(
ppmw)
Load
(
lb/
yr)
Already
controlled?
HAP
concentration
greater
than
or
equal
to
10,000
ppmw
1
7
gal/
min
26.50
Toluene
40,000
873,346
True
8
320
gal/
yr
0.00230
Methyl
Isobutyl
Ketone
18,000
48
False
8
400
gal/
yr
0.00288
Methyl
Isobutyl
Ketone
18,000
60
False
10
300
gal/
yr
0.00216
Tetrachloroethylene
27,300
68
False
10
1,000
gal/
yr
0.00720
Toluene
48,800
407
False
10
2,096,000
gal/
yr
15.096
2,4­
Dinitrophenol
15,200
265,416
False
10
7,000
gal/
yr
0.0504
Xylenes
12,600
735
False
10
287,000
gal/
yr
2.0670
Toluene
10,100
24,149
False
10
40
gal/
yr
0.00029
methanol,
xylenes,
methylene
chloride,
toluene
35,000
12
False
10
1,340,000
gal/
yr
9.650
methanol,
toluene
20,100
224,385
False
10
52,000
gal/
yr
0.3745
Toluene
39,000
16,895
False
10
26,000
gal/
yr
0.1873
Methyl
isobutyl
ketone
15,200
3,292
False
10
4,000
gal/
yr
0.0288
Methyl
isobutyl
ketone
41,100
1,370
False
29
433
gal/
yr
0.00312
Chlorobenzene
450,000
1,623
False
31
175,824
gal/
yr
1.266
Toluene
20,972
30,719
False
31
70,542
gal/
yr
0.5080
benzene
12,751
7,493
False
31
56,600
gal/
yr
0.4076
benzene
15,745
7,424
False
34
819,000
gal/
yr
5.90
toluene,
methanol
30,000
204,690
True
34
136,000
gal/
yr
0.979
toluene,
methanol
600,000
679,802
True
34
329,000
gal/
yr
2.37
toluene,
methanol
150,000
411,130
True
34
94,000
gal/
yr
0.677
toluene
440,000
344,566
True
43
5,610
gal/
yr
0.040
methanol,
xylenes
740,000
34,585
True
53
213,208
gal/
yr
1.54
Methanol,
xylenes,
MEK,
toluene
124,800
221,672
False
54
330
gal/
yr
0.00238
Methylene
chloride
15,000
41
False
54
32,400
gal/
yr
0.233
Methylene
chloride
19,000
5,129
False
54
162,000
gal/
yr
1.17
acetonitrile,
carbon
disulfide,
triethyleamine
19,800
26,722
False
60
1
gal/
yr
0.00001
Vinyl
Acetate
49,000
0
False
63
11,505
gal/
yr
0.0829
Xylenes
11,561
1,108
False
81
711
gal/
yr
0.00512
Methylene
chloride
550,000
3,258
False
90
1,600
gal/
yr
0.0115
Xylenes
10,000
133
False
91
297,000
gal/
yr
2.14
methanol,
methylene
chloride
37,030
91,623
False
92
10,000
gal/
yr
0.0720
toluene
10,000
833
False
92
60,000
gal/
yr
0.4321
toluene
10,000
4,999
False
92
40,000
gal/
yr
0.2881
toluene
19,000
6,331
False
92
90,000
gal/
yr
0.6482
toluene
19,000
14,246
False
92
70,000
gal/
yr
0.5041
toluene
10,000
5,832
False
A­
13
Facility
#
Flow
rate
Units
Flow
(
L/
min)
HAP
name
HAP
Conc
(
ppmw)
Load
(
lb/
yr)
Already
controlled?
92
40,000
gal/
yr
0.2881
toluene
10,000
3,332
False
96
14
gal/
yr
0.0001
Vinyl
Acetate
10,000
1
False
96
1
gal/
yr
0.000004
Vinyl
Acetate
10,000
1
False
96
14
gal/
yr
0.0001
ethyl
acrylate,
methyl
methacrylate
10,000
0
False
106
1,219,075
gal/
yr
8.780
Dimethyl
Aniline
15,900
161,480
True
106
135,936
gal/
yr
0.9790
Dimethyl
Aniline
39,000
44,166
True
106
1,077,468
gal/
yr
7.75
dimethyl
aniline,
xylenes
16,400
147,211
True
106
1,077,468
gal/
yr
7.75
xylenes,
dimethyl
aniline
16,400
147,211
True
108
5
gal/
min
17.41
Epichlorohydrin
15,000
287,232
False
130
15,000
gal/
yr
0.1080
xylenes
300,000
37,489
False
130
3
gal/
min
11.36
benzene
360,000
4,664,241
True
136
21,256
gal/
yr
0.1531
toluene
224,404
39,738
False
136
3,334
gal/
yr
0.024
methyl
chloride,
methanol
136,698
3,797
False
136
83
gal/
yr
0.000598
methylene
chloride,
MIBK
30,580
21
False
136
390
gal/
yr
0.00281
MIBK
242,331
787
False
136
368
gal/
yr
0.00265
toluene
27,876
85
False
136
29,308
gal/
yr
0.2111
toluene
228,416
55,771
False
138
24,000
gal/
yr
0.1728
acrylonitrile
63,063
12,609
True
143
3,200,000
gal/
yr
23.05
toluene
10,000
266,589
True
147
20,000
gal/
yr
0.1440
benzyle
chloride
10,000
1,666
False
153
1
gal/
min
1.893
methyl
methacrylate
103,650
38,547
False
153
1
gal/
min
2.271
methyl
methacrylate
59,120
33,192
False
153
8
gal/
min
28.77
methyl
methacrylate
19,000
48,504
False
155
6,000
gal/
yr
0.0432
acetaldehyde
70,000
3,499
False
HAP
concentration
greater
than
or
equal
to
1,000
ppmw
and
less
than
10,000
ppmw
10
484,000
gal/
yr
3.486
toluene
2,700
10,887
False
10
167,000
gal/
yr
1.203
toluene,
xylenes
9,900
13,773
False
10
388,000
gal/
yr
2.794
toluene
3,300
10,667
False
10
2,362,000
gal/
yr
17.01
toluene
1,300
25,581
False
10
2,826,000
gal/
yr
20.35
toluene,
xylenes
6,400
150,676
False
10
1,540,000
gal/
yr
11.09
toluene,
methanol
8,700
111,617
False
10
166,000
gal/
yr
1.20
methanol,
toluene
4,700
6,500
False
10
265,000
gal/
yr
1.91
xylenes
7,900
17,441
False
10
649,000
gal/
yr
4.67
toluene,
methanol
8,500
45,957
False
10
216,000
gal/
yr
1.56
methanol,
MIBK,
xylenes
9,800
17,635
False
10
180,000
gal/
yr
1.30
chlorobenzene
6,800
10,197
False
11
2,000,000
gal/
yr
14.4
naphthalene,
toluene,
xylenes
3,752
62,507
False
19
300,000
gal/
yr
2.16
xylenes
5,000
12,496
True
20
400,000
gal/
yr
2.88
xylenes
5,000
16,662
False
21
346,988
gal/
yr
2.50
xylenes
5,000
14,454
False
22
192,771
gal/
yr
1.39
xylenes
5,000
8,030
False
A­
14
Facility
#
Flow
rate
Units
Flow
(
L/
min)
HAP
name
HAP
Conc
(
ppmw)
Load
(
lb/
yr)
Already
controlled?
23
192,771
gal/
yr
1.39
xylenes
5,000
8,030
False
24
260,000
gal/
yr
1.87
xylenes
5,000
10,830
True
34
744,000
gal/
yr
5.36
toluene
5,000
30,991
True
35
200,000
gal/
yr
1.44
methanol,
MEK
8,000
13,329
False
36
1,400,000
gal/
yr
10.1
xylenes
3,400
39,655
True
45
36
gal/
min
136.3
methyl
methacrylate,
methyl
chloride,
methanol,
toluene
4,821
759,954
False
54
2,556,000
gal/
yr
18.4
toluene
1,700
36,199
False
54
454,400
gal/
yr
3.27
toluene
1,000
3,786
False
54
10,800,000
gal/
yr
77.8
toluene
1,700
152,955
False
54
1,164,240
gal/
yr
8.38
toluene
1,700
16,489
False
54
4,614,400
gal/
yr
33.2
styrene
1,000
38,442
False
54
283,500
gal/
yr
2.04
toluene
1,700
4,015
False
57
25
gal/
min
94.6
ethyl
acrylate
1,000
73,179
False
57
25
gal/
min
94.6
methyl
methacrylate
1,000
73,179
False
58
20,000,000
gal/
yr
144.0
naphthalene,
o­
toluidine,
xylenes
2,051
341,734
True
63
40
gal/
min
151.4
nitrobenzene,
ethylbenzene,
methanol,
xylenes
5,200
249,527
False
63
35
gal/
min
132.5
methanol,
ethylbenzene,
xylenes
1,100
46,187
False
63
40
gal/
min
151.4
ethylbenzene,
methanol,
nitrobenzene,
xylenes
5,200
197,127
False
63
35
gal/
min
132.5
methanol,
ethylbenzene,
xylenes
1,100
36,482
False
63
40
gal/
min
151.4
methanol,
ethylbenzene,
nitrobenzene,
xylenes
5,200
366,805
False
63
35
gal/
min
132.5
methanol,
ethylbenzene,
xylenes
1,100
67,894
False
63
175,748
gal/
yr
1.27
MEK
1,000
1,464
False
63
577,180
gal/
yr
4.16
MEK
2,000
9,617
False
63
380,451
gal/
yr
2.74
MEK
2,000
6,339
False
63
1,340,643
gal/
yr
9.66
MEK
2,000
22,338
False
63
396,531
gal/
yr
2.86
MEK
1,500
4,955
False
63
4,285,400
gal/
yr
30.9
MIBK
5,000
178,506
False
92
400,000
gal/
yr
2.88
toluene
3,800
12,663
False
92
700,000
gal/
yr
5.04
toluene
3,000
17,495
False
105
44
gal/
min
165.6
MEK
4,074
562,354
False
106
144,321
gal/
yr
1.04
dimethyl
aniline,
xylenes
9,800
11,783
True
106
274,536
gal/
yr
1.98
xylenes,
methanol
8,900
20,355
True
109
140,000
gal/
yr
1.01
xylenes
5,800
6,765
False
109
788,000
gal/
yr
5.68
xylenes
2,597
17,049
False
128
25
gal/
min
94.6
ethylene
dichloride
8,000
875,745
True
133
6,700,000
gal/
yr
48.3
methanol,
acrylonitrile
8,240
459,933
True
A­
15
Facility
#
Flow
rate
Units
Flow
(
L/
min)
HAP
name
HAP
Conc
(
ppmw)
Load
(
lb/
yr)
Already
controlled?
153
9
gal/
min
33.3
methyl
methacrylate
3,856
36,230
False
