DRAFT: 9/10/98 REINFORCED PLASTICS MACT STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT FOR EXISTING OPEN MOLDING SOURCES Briefing Package for Outreach Meeting with Small Businesses.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
September 17, 2003 Workshop WEBCAST Hank Naour ILLINOIS EPA MACT Standards and Section 112f Residual Risk.
Advertisements

METAL COIL SURFACE COATING MACT OVERVIEW 40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART SSSS May CFR PART 63, SUBPART SSSS May 2006.
METAL CAN SURFACE COATING MACT OVERVIEW 40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART KKKK June CFR PART 63, SUBPART KKKK June 2006.
DRAFT IRON & STEEL FOUNDRY MACT FACILITY INSPECTIONS 40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART EEEEE.
METAL CAN SURFACE COATING MACT COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE 40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART KKKK June 2006 June CFR PART 63, SUBPART KKKK June 2006 June 2006.
METAL FURNITURE SURFACE COATING MACT FACILITY INSPECTIONS 40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART RRRR July, 2006.
METAL FURNITURE SURFACE COATING MACT COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE
METAL COIL SURFACE COATING MACT FACILITY INSPECTIONS 40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART SSSS May, CFR PART 63, SUBPART SSSS May, 2006.
METAL COIL SURFACE MACT COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE 40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART SSSS May 2006 May 2006.
METAL CAN SURFACE COATING MACT FACILITY INSPECTIONS 40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART KKKK June, CFR PART 63, SUBPART KKKK June, 2006.
METAL FURNITURE SURFACE COATING MACT QUESTION & ANSWERS 40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART RRRR July 2006.
Clean Air Act By: Sophie Netter. Clean Air Act Drafted in 1970 Amended in 1977 and 1990 in order to set new dates for the goals because many areas had.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency April 13, 2011 Final Rules to Reduce Air Toxics from Boilers.
MON MACT Storage Tank & Transfer Racks Presenter: James Leonard November 5, 2003 ACC/SOCMA Conference New Orleans, LA.
MSW LANDFILL MACT STANDARD DEVELOPMENT SWANA’s 22nd Annual Landfill Gas Symposium March 22-25, 1999 Michele Laur Emission Standards Division US Environmental.
EPA Air Toxics Programs Ruben R. Casso Toxics Coordinator EPA Region 6 Phone
Plastic Parts and Products (Surface Coating) NESHAP Subpart PPPP Kim Teal Coatings and Consumer Products Group (919)
Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products (Surface Coating) NESHAP Subpart MMMM Kim Teal Coatings and Consumer Products Group (919)
Overview of the Clean Air Act and the Proposed Petroleum Refinery Sector Risk and Technology Review and New Source Performance Standards Public Outreach.
MCIC Workshop 2012 Complying with NC Air Quality Regulations Boiler MACT/GACT and 112j Steve Schliesser Division of Air Quality Environmental Engineer.
April 15, 2015 Betty Gatano, P.E. Permitting Section North Carolina Division of Air Quality, Raleigh, NC (919)
Materials Lifecycle Solutions MACT DEVELOPMENT DEFINITIONS HAP - HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS: FEDERAL LIST OF 188 COMPOUNDS AND COMPOUND CATAGORIES. COMMON.
Revisiting the Impact of Judicial Review on Agency Rulemakings: An Empirical Investigation Wendy Wagner University of Texas School of Law.
Dr. Sophia Hassiotis.  Laboratory set up  Personal Protective equipment  Directions for mixing  Slump test  Cylinder casting  Cleaning up your station.
NCMA Workshop March 24, 2015 Booker Pullen Supervisor, Permitting Section North Carolina Division of Air Quality, Raleigh, NC (919) Permitting.
REINFORCED PLASTICS AND BOAT MANUFACTURING MACT STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT For the Composites Fabricators Association Annual Meeting October 23, 1998 Madeleine.
December 4, Utility MACT Air & Waste Management Association/EPA Information Exchange December 4, 2002 William H. Maxwell Combustion Group/ESD.
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) Measurement Issues Reporting VOC Mass Emissions.
1 Control Techniques Guidelines Joel Leon September 16, 2011.
Air Pollution Control Board October 1, 2008 Thomas W. Easterly, P.E., DEE, QEP Commissioner, Indiana Department of Environmental Management We Protect.
1 RECENT CHANGES TO THE EPA MACT RULE FOR COMPOSITES MANUFACTURING For Composites 2005 September 29, 2005 Keith Barnett, Environmental Engineer Office.
EPA Rule 40 CFR Part 63 Subpart HHHHHH “The Refinisher Rule”
Where to find Information About Facilities. Overview of Title V Permits.
Air Quality 101 Kansas Air Quality Program overview.
BART Control Analysis WESTAR August 31, 2005 EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Todd Hawes
MS4 Remand Rule Intergovernmental Associations Briefing September 15, 2015.
1 Potential Impacts of a National SO 2 Program WRAP Forum June 3, 2004.
Blue Skies Delaware; Clean Air for Life NESHAPs Jim Snead October 8, 2008.
Title V Operating Permit Program 1 Section 1: Intro to Title V Laura McKelvey U.S. EPA.
Title V: The Big Picture
URBAN AIR TOXICS – AREA SOURCE PROGRAM SALLY SHAVER, DIRECTOR EMISSION STANDARDS DIVISION October 5, 2004.
Composite Materials Bill Pedersen. Components of Polymer Composites Polymer Resin Usually a thermoset Usually a thermosetEpoxyPolyesterVinylester Thermoplastics.
NTEC -- April 24, Utility Air Toxics Regulatory Finding National Tribal Environmental Council April 24, 2001 William H. Maxwell U.S. EPA OAQPS/ESD/CG.
Stationary and Area Source Committee Update OTC Committee Meeting September 13, 2012 Washington, D.C. Hall of the States 1.
HAP Rule 372 Guidance Permitting Division Maricopa County Air Quality Department.
1 REINFORCED PLASTIC COMPOSITES NESHAP Applicability and Requirements of the Final Rule For Composites 2004 October 6, 2004 Keith Barnett, Environmental.
Best Available Retrofit Technology Rule - Colorado David R. Ouimette Colorado Air Pollution Control Division.
Rigid Plastic Packaging Container (RPPC) Informational Update Permitting and Compliance Committee Meeting February 17, 2009.
Presumptive MACT For Municipal Solid Waste Landfills July 1999 Emission Standards Division US Environmental Protection Agency.
Georgia’s 112(g) Experiences Eric Cornwell Acting Manager Permitting Program.
LEGAL ASPECT OF WASTE MANAGEMENT (INTERNATIONAL) NURUL MAISYARAH BINTI SAMSUDIN NORAINI BINTI ABD RAHMAN NOR AINI OTHMAN NUR NAZNIN BINTI ISHAK.
Public Workshop Airborne Toxic Control Measure (ATCM) for Motor Vehicle and Mobile Equipment Coatings Public Workshop Airborne Toxic Control Measure (ATCM)
The Paper and Other Web Coating (POWC) MACT – Executive Summary The executive summary is a power point presentation designed to be used for basic education.
1 Conducting Reasonable Progress Determinations under the Regional Haze Rule Kathy Kaufman EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards January 11,
Processes Used to Form Composite Materials
Best Available Control Technology/Lowest Achievable Emission Rate Evaluation Sarah Fuchs Air Permits Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality.
Non-Hg HAPs: A Utility View Larry S. Monroe, Ph.D. EPA MACT Working Group July 9, 2002.
1 Special Information Session on USEPA’s Carbon Rules & Clean Air Act Section 111 North Carolina Division of Air Quality Special Information Session on.
Proposed Carbon Pollution Standard For New Power Plants Presented by Kevin Culligan Office of Air Quality Planning And Standards Office of Air and Radiation.
Nonattainment New Source Review (NA NSR) Program Raj Rao US Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards ,
1 Proposed Amendments to the Verification Procedure for In-Use Diesel Emission Control Strategies August 23, 2012 California Environmental Protection Agency.
Start Do you own or operate a facility that engages in the coating of paper, plastic film, metallic foil or any other web surfaces? Your facility is not.
Climate: ANPR, SIPs and Section 821 WESTAR October 2, 2008.
EPA Options for the Federal Regulation of Coal Combustion Waste Lisa Evans Earthjustice October 22, 2010.
Clean Air Act Glossary.
EPA’S New Source Performance Standard (NSPS)
CAIR Replacement Rule and Regional Haze
Boiler Sheltered Initiative
Kansas Air Quality Seminar March 5, 2008
NEW JERSEY 1-HR SULFUR DIOXIDE (SO2) ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION
Presentation transcript:

DRAFT: 9/10/98 REINFORCED PLASTICS MACT STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT FOR EXISTING OPEN MOLDING SOURCES Briefing Package for Outreach Meeting with Small Businesses September 11, 1998 Madeleine Strum, Project Lead Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Emission Standards Division Coatings and Consumer Products Group

DRAFT: 9/10/98 Outline Legal requirements and background Status of reinforced plastics MACT development EPA’s approach for developing MACT for existing open molding sources MACT standards being considered for existing open molding sources

DRAFT: 9/10/98 Legal Requirements and Background Legal Requirements MACT = “maximum achievable control technology.” This term is commonly used to describe the standards mandated by section 112 of the Clean Air Act Law contains a list of hazardous air pollutants (HAP) that the EPA is mandated to regulate (e.g., styrene, methyl methacrylate, others) Law requires EPA to list industry categories of major sources of HAP (major: potential to emit 10 tons per year of a single HAP or 25 of a combination of HAP) and develop MACT standards for them EPA listed more than 200 major source categories -- Reinforced Plastics Composites Production is one of them

DRAFT: 9/10/98 Standards Development Law prescribes the minimum level of stringency of the standard, denoted as the “MACT floor” Stringency can be different for new versus existing sources For existing sources: –the MACT floor is the average of the best performing 12 percent of the existing sources if there are 30 or more sources in the category or subcategory –the MACT floor is the average of the best performing 5 sources if there are less than 30 sources in the category or subcategory –the average of the best performing sources can be the mean or the median Subcategories can be based on classes, types, and sizes of sources

DRAFT: 9/10/98 Different subcategories can have different floors -- cannot allow sources to average across subcategories MACT floor for new sources is the level of emission control that is achieved in practice by the best controlled similar source Timing This MACT standard is due in the year 2000 (proposal is usually a year before rule is final) Compliance date established by rule, but generally can be no more than 3 years after rule is final

DRAFT: 9/10/98 Status of MACT Standard Development Still in pre-proposal rule development phase. Subcategories currently being considered are: –open molding –closed molding –polymer casting –pultrusion –continuous lamination/casting –SMC manufacturing –equipment cleaning –mixing of HAP-containing materials –storage of HAP-containing materials MACT floors have been calculated Cost data to determine economic impacts have been collected and costs are being computed

DRAFT: 9/10/98 EPA’s Approach for Developing MACT for Existing Open Molding Sources Currently, the open molding subcategory has been broken out into process/product groupings, for which individual MACT floors have been established Latest approach to determine MACT floors is the use of a “point value” system involving averaging This type of an approach was suggested by industry representatives in September 1997

DRAFT: 9/10/98 The Open Molding Product/Process Grouping Currently Being Considered Are : Mechanical resin operations (e.g., spray guns that atomize, flow coaters, pressure- fed rollers) –corrosion –non corrosion filled –non corrosion unfilled Manual resin operations (e.g., bucket-and- brush, bucket-and-tool) –corrosion –non corrosion Filament winding/centrifugal casting –corrosion –non corrosion Gel coat operations –tooling –clear –pigmented

DRAFT: 9/10/98 What is a Point Value System? It is a method to combine specific emission reduction techniques into a numerical standard The point value determines the extent to which emission reduction techniques are employed & their combined effectiveness A point value limit is not an emission limit A MACT point value limit is determined for each product/process grouping within the open molding subcategory Facilities that have more than one product/process grouping can average

DRAFT: 9/10/98 Question: How do I know if I am meeting the point value limit(s) in the MACT standard? Answer: Plug in your HAP content, application method and other emission reduction techniques into the MACT Model Model consists of equations for: atomized resin (mechanical) non-atomized resin (mechanical or manual) filament winding/centrifugal casting gel coat Model will contain methods to incorporate: –vapor suppressed resins (VSR) –vacuum bagging –add-on control

DRAFT: 9/10/98 The emission reduction techniques being considered in the model are: –lower HAP resins and gel coats –non atomized resin application technology –vapor suppressed resins (VSR) –vacuum bagging (immediately after resin application) –add-on control device You may need to do more than one of the above to meet the limits We are planning to incorporate a procedure into the rule which will allow you to use other enforceable emission reduction techniques which are not addressed by the point value system

DRAFT: 9/10/98 Point Value System Summary Each product/process grouping will have a MACT point value “limit” Use MACT model to determine if your emission reduction techniques meet the point value limits Facility has the option to meet a weighted average limit for all of its product/process groupings on a time-averaged basis (12 months rolling average)

DRAFT: 9/10/98 MACT Standards Being Considered for Existing Open Molding Sources What are the MACT point value limits and some corresponding potential compliance options for the open molding process/product groupings?

DRAFT: 9/10/98 The following notes apply to the compliance options listed: All % HAP limits are in terms of % by weight and are based on the HAP content of the neat resin and any added HAP (filler not included) VSR effectiveness is assumed to be 35% except for filled resins where it is assumed to be 0. For MACT compliance purposes a VSR effectiveness test needs to be conducted. Therefore, HAP contents presented in compliance options with VSR are approximate. The actual HAP content allowed will be based on the results of the effectiveness test. Vacuum bagging effectiveness is assumed to be 45%. This will be further investigated. Therefore, HAP contents presented in compliance options with vacuum bagging could change.

DRAFT: 9/10/98 Mechanical Resin Operations –non corrosion unfilled point value = 90 pounds of HAP/ton of resin used Some compliance options that will meet the above point value: 28.1% HAP and atomized or 36.0% HAP and non-atomized or 33.1% HAP and atomized with VSR or 43.6% HAP and non-atomized with VSR or 35.3% HAP and atomized with vacuum bagging or 46.9% HAP and non-atomized with vacuum bagging

DRAFT: 9/10/98 Mechanical Resin Operations (continued) –non corrosion filled point value = 160 pounds of HAP/ton of resin used Some compliance options that will meet the above point value: 35.0% HAP and atomized or 44.0% HAP and atomized with vacuum bagging or depending on VSR effectiveness for filled resins, there may also be a higher HAP resin option with the use of VSR

DRAFT: 9/10/98 Mechanical Resin Operations (concluded) –Corrosion point value = 160 pounds of HAP/ton of resin used Some compliance options that will meet the above point value: 35.0% HAP and atomized or 46.4% HAP and non-atomized or 41.3% HAP and atomized with VSR or 56.3% HAP and non-atomized with VSR or 44.0% HAP and atomized with vacuum bagging or 60.5% HAP and non-atomized with vacuum bagging

DRAFT: 9/10/98 Manual Resin Operations –non corrosion point value = 71 pounds of HAP/ton of resin used Some compliance options that will meet the above point value: 32.3% HAP or 39.1% HAP with VSR or 42.1% HAP with vacuum bagging –corrosion point value = 85 pounds of HAP/ton of resin used Some compliance options that will meet the above point value: 35.0% HAP or 42.4% HAP with VSR or 45.6% HAP with vacuum bagging

DRAFT: 9/10/98 Filament Winding/Centrifugal Casting –non corrosion point value = 130 pounds of HAP/ton of resin used Some compliance options that will meet the above point value: 35.0% HAP or 48.8% HAP with VSR –corrosion point value = 148 pounds of HAP/ton of resin used Some compliance options that will meet the above point value: 38.7% HAP or 54.0% HAP with VSR

DRAFT: 9/10/98 Gel Coating –clear production point value = 518 pounds of HAP/ton of gel coat used A compliance option that will meet the above point value: 44.0% HAP –pigmented production point value = 274 pounds of HAP/ton of gel coat used A compliance option that will meet the above point value: 31.2% HAP

DRAFT: 9/10/98 Gel Coating (concluded) –Tooling point value = 431 pounds of HAP/ton of gel coat used A compliance option that will meet the above point value: 39.8% HAP

DRAFT: 9/10/98 Reinforced plastics MACT standard will also address ancillary emission points Cleaning: potential requirement will be that cleaning materials contain no HAP Mixing of HAP-containing materials: potential requirement will be that mixers are to be closed or covered during mixing (except when materials are added or removed from the vessel) such that there are no visible gaps and there is no active venting Storage of HAP-containing materials: potential requirement will be that containers are to be covered (except when materials are added or removed from the vessel)