United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Water
(4303)
EPA-8ei-R-OQ-014
June 2000
Cost - Effectiveness Analysis Of
Final Effluent Limitations
Guidelines And Standards For
The Transportation Equipment
Cleaning Category
-------
-------
COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS OF
FINAL EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS FOR
THE TRANSPORTATION EQUIPMENT
CLEANING INDUSTRY
POINT SOURCE CATEGORY
FINAL REPORT
Carol M. Browner
Administrator
J. Charles Fox
Assistant Administrator, Office of Water
Sheila Frace
Director, Engineering and Analysis Division
Ronald Jordan
Acting Chief, Chemicals Branch
George Denning
Work Assignment Manager
Engineering and Analysis Division
Office of Science and Technology
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D.C. 20460
-------
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This report has been reviewed and approved for publication by the Engineering and Analysis
Division, Office of Science and Technology. This report was prepared with the support of Eastern
Research Group, Inc. (Contract No. 68-C6-0022) under the direction and review of the Office of Science
and Technology.
-------
-------
CONTENTS
Pjags
SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION 1-1
SECTION2 METHODOLOGY 2-1
2.1 Selection of Pollutants Effectively Removed 2-3
2.2 Toxic Weighting Factors 2-3
2.3 POTW Removal Factors 2-8
2.4 Pollutant Removals and Pound-Equivalent Calculations 2-8
2.5 Annualized Costs of Compliance 2-10
2.6 Calculation of the Cost-Effectiveness Values 2-10
2.7 Comparison of Cost-Effectiveness Values 2-11
SECTION 3 POLLUTION CONTROL AND MONITORING OPTIONS 3-1
SECTION 4 RESULTS OF COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS 4-1
4.1 Truck Chemical & Petroleum Indirect 4-2
4.2 Rail Chemical & Petroleum Direct 4-2
4.3 Rail Chemical & Petroleum Indirect 4-5
SECTION 5 COMPARISON OF COST-EFFECTIVENESS VALUES WITH
PROMULGATED RULES 5-1
SECTION 6 COST-REASONABLENESS OF CONVENTIONAL
POLLUTANTS REMOVED 6-1
6.1 BCT Cost-Reasonableness Test 6-1
6.1.1 POTWTest 6-1
6.1.2 Industry Ratio Test 6-2
-------
CONTENTS
6.2 SubcategoryBCT Tests
SECTION? REFERENCES
6-2
7-1
APPENDIX A SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION FOR COST-
EFFECTTVENESS ANALYSIS: POLLUTANT LOADINGS
AND POUND EQUIVALENTS REMOVED
APPENDIX B SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION FOR COST-
EFFECTTVENESS ANALYSIS: BASELINE POLLUTANT
DISCHARGES IN POUNDS AND POUND EQUIVALENT'S
11
-------
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
This cost-effectiveness (CE) analysis presents an evaluation of the technical efficiency of
pollutant control options for the Final Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards (Final Rule) for the
Transportation Equipment Cleaning Industry based on Best Available Technology Economically
Achievable (BAT) and Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources (PSES). BAT standards set effluent
limitations on toxic and nonconventional pollutants for direct dischargers prior to wastewater discharge
directly into a water body such as a stream, river, lake, estuary, or ocean. Indirect dischargers send
wastewater to publicly owned treatment works (POTW) for further treatment prior to discharge to U.S.
surface waters; PSES set limitations for indirect dischargers on toxic and nonconventional pollutants
which pass through a POTW.
For the proposed regulation, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) divided the
Transportation Equipment Cleaning (TEC) industry into 11 subcategories on the basis of the commodity
transported and the mode of transportation:
» Truck Chemical (TT/CHEM)
» Rail Chemical (RT/CHEM)
Barge Chemical and Petroleum (TB/CHEM)
Truck Petroleum (TT/PETR)
Rail Petroleum (RT/PETR)
" Truck Food (TT/FOOD)
Rail Food (RT/FOOD)
Barge Food (TB/FOOD)
Truck Hopper (TH/HOPPER)
" Rail Hopper (RH/HOPPER)
Barge Hopper (BH/HOPPER)
1-1
-------
During and following proposal, EPA determined that a number of the subcategories listed above
either did not require regulation or could be combined into one subcategory. All hopper subcategories
were found to have insignificant pollutant loadings and, as proposed, will not be regulated by the Final
Rule. EPA also determined that the chemical and petroleum subcategories for both truck and rail
subcategories could be combined. Additionally, EPA combined all food subcategories into one
subcategory. These changes mean that only the following subcategories will be regulated under the Final
Rule:
Truck Chemical and Petroleum (TT/CHEM&PETR), both direct and indirect
dischargers.
» Rail Chemical and Petroleum (RT/CHEM&PETR),both direct and indirect dischargers.
Barge Chemical and Petroleum (BT/CHEM&PETR), both direct and indirect
dischargers.
m Truck, Rail, and Barge Food (FOOD), direct dischargers only.
The remainder of this analysis will focus on the costs and pollutant loadings for regulated facilities. No
costs and pollutant loadings for facilities in the HOPPER subcategory will be included in the discussions
that follow. Furthermore, the selected options for the FOOD subcategory are unchanged, and no
comments were received on those options. Therefore no revisions have been made to the analysis of the
FOOD subcategory since proposal, and the CE analysis of the FOOD subcategory will not be discussed
further in this document Readers interested in this analysis can refer to the Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
of Proposed Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Transportation Equipment Cleaning
Industry Point Source Category (U.S. EPA, 1998).
In this CE analysis, EPA compares the total pretax annualized cost of each regulatory option to
the corresponding effectiveness of that option in reducing the discharge of pollutants. EPA evaluates the
effectiveness of each option in terms of costs per pound of pollutant removed, weighted by the relative
toxicily of the pollutant. EPA also provides the rationale for using this measure, which is referred to as
pound equivalents removed.
The CE analysis is based on two surveys conducted by EPA. The first, called the screener
survey, listed 16 questions and was sent to 3,267 industry participants that might be affected by the rule
(U.S. EPA, 1993). From the results of the screener survey, EPA identified 734 facilities with TEC
1-2
-------
operations that might be affected by the rule. These facilities formed the universe from which a stratified
sample was drawn for the second survey, a detailed questionnaire (U.S. EPA, 1995).
In general, EPA estimated cost-effectiveness and economic impacts for subcategories and
discharge status using data from the detailed questionnaire. Cost-effectiveness is also estimated for
subcategories where certain types of dischargers are represented only by screener data. Unless otherwise
specified in the text, however, cost-effectiveness is estimated on the results of the detailed questionnaire.
Section 2 discusses EPA's cost-effectiveness methodology and identifies the pollutants included
in titie analysis. This section also presents EPA's toxic weighting factors for each pollutant and discusses
POTW removal factors for indirect dischargers. Section 3 describes the options evaluated for each
subcategory. Section 4 presents the results of the cost-effectiveness analysis. In Section 5, cost-
effectiveness values for final TEC industry options are compared to cost-effectiveness values for other
promulgated rules. Section 6 discusses the two-part cost-reasonableness test for BCT options. Appendix
A presents data on pollutants, pollutant removals, and pound equivalents removed. Appendix B presents
data on pollutants discharged at baseline.
1-3
-------
1-4
-------
SECTION 2
METHODOLOGY
The cost-effectiveness of the TEC Industry Guidelines and Standards is evaluated as the
incremental annualized cost of a pollution control option in an industry or industry subcategory per
incremental pound equivalent of pollutant (i.e., pound of pollutant adjusted for toxicity) removed by that
control option. EPA uses the cost-effectiveness analysis primarily to compare the removal efficiencies
of regulatory options under consideration for a rule. A secondary and less effective use is to compare the
cost-effectiveness of the options for the TEC Industry Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards to
that of effluent limitation guidelines and standards for other industries.
EPA ranks pollution control options in order of increasing pound equivalents removed in order to
identify the point at which increased removal of pollutants is no longer cost-effective. Generally, EPA
determines this to be where the marginal cost per pound equivalent removed increases sharply; that is,
where relatively few incremental pounds are removed for steady increases in cost. Figure 2-1 shows this
point as Point A, where the cost-effectiveness curve becomes nearly vertical. Increases in removals
beyond Point A come only at relatively high unit costs, which, in. many cases, EPA may determine
exceeds the relative benefit to society.
To develop a cost-effectiveness study, the following number of steps must be taken to define the
analysis or generate data used for calculating values:
« Determine the pollutants effectively removed from the wastewater
Estimate the relative toxic weights - the adjustments to pounds of pollutants to reflect
toxicity of the pollutants effectively removed
» Estimate the POTW removal factors - the adjustments to pounds of pollutants to reflect
the ability of a POTW to remove specified pollutants
Define the regulatory pollution control options
Calculate pollutant removals for each pollution control option
Determine the annualized cost of each pollution control option
2-1
-------
1
£0
I
a
a
Range of
noncost-
effective
removals
Range of
cost-effective
removals
1.00
Percentage of pound equivalents, removed.
Figure 2-1. Cost effectiveness
2-2
-------
Once cost-effectiveness values are calculated, various regulatory options under consideration can
be compared. The following seven sections discuss each of the six preliminary steps and the cost-
effectiveness calculation and comparison methodologies.
2.1 SELECTION OF POLLUTANTS EFFECTIVELY KEMOVED
EPA considers several factors in selecting pollutants for regulation, including toxicity, frequency
of occurrence in wastestream effluent, and amount of pollutant in the wastestream. The list of pollutants
considered, therefore, differs by subcategory. Table 2-1 is the list of the pollutants effectively removed
in the TT/CHEM&PETR and RT/CHEM&PETR subcategories; no priority or nonconventional
pollutants are removed in the TB/CHEM&PETR subcategory, and the' analysis of FOOD and HOPPER
subcategories was not revised.
2.2 TOXIC WEIGHTING FACTORS
Cost-effectiveness analyses account for differences in toxicity among the pollutants using toxic
weighting factors. Accounting for these differences is necessary because the potentially harmful effects
on human and aquatic life are specific to the pollutant. For example, a pound of zinc in an effluent
stream has a significantly different, less harmful effect than a pound of PCBs. Toxic weighting factors
for pollutants are derived using ambient water quality criteria and toxicity values. For most industries,
toxic weighting factors are developed from chronic freshwater aquatic criteria. In cases where a human
health criterion has also been established for the consumption offish, the sum of both the human and
aquatic criteria are used to derive toxic weighting factors. The factors are standardized by relating them
to a "benchmark" toxicity value, which was based on the toxicity of copper when the methodology was
developed.1 Table 2-1 presents the toxic weighting factors used for the regulated pollutants in this cost-
effectiveness analysis.
1 Although the water quality criterion has been revised (to 9.0 ug/1), all cost-effectiveness analyses for
effluent guideline regulations continue to use the former criterion of 5.6 ug/1 as a benchmark so that cost-
effectiveness values can continue to be compared to those for other effluent guidelines. Where copper is
present in the effluent, the revised higher criterion for copper results in a toxic weighting factor for copper
of 0.63 rather than 1.0.
2-3
-------
TABLE 2-1
POLLUTANTS, TOXIC WEIGHTING FACTORS, AND POTW REMOVAL FACTORS
CAS
Number
CONVENTIONALS
C002
C036
C009
Pollutant Name
5-Day Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Oil and Grease
Total Suspended Solids
Toxic
Weighting
Factor
UNK
UNK
UNK
POTW
Removal
Factor
UNK
UNK
UNK
Subcateeorv
TT/CHEM
&PETR
X
X
X
RT/CHEM
&PETR
X
X
X
NONCONVENTIONALS
59473040
7664417
C004
16887006
16984488
COOS
U014
C010
C012
C037
C020
14265442
VOLATILES
67641
71432
67663
107062
100414
78933
108101
75092
127184
108883
71556
79016
108383
136777612
SEMIVOLATILES
120127
65850
100516
117817
Adsorbable Organic Halides (AOX)
Ammonia as Nitrogen
Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD)
Chloride
Fluoride
Nitrate/Nitrite
Surfactants (MBAS)
Total Dissolved Solids
Total Organic Carbon (TOC)
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH)
Total Phenols
Total Phosphorus
Acetone
Benzene
Chloroform
Dichloroethane, 1,2-
Ethylbenzene
Methyl ethyl ketone
Methyl isobutyl ketone
Methylene Chloride
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
Trichloroethane, 1,1,1-
Trichloroethylene
Xylene, m-
Xylene, o+p-
Anthracene
Benzoic acid
Benzyl alcohol
Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
UNK
1.8E-03
UNK
2.4E-05
3.5E-02
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
5.0E-06
1.8E-02
2.1E-03
6.2E-03
1.4E-03
2.5E-05
1.3E-04
4.2E-04
1.3E-02
5.6E-03
4.5E-03
6.4E-03
1.5E-03
4.7E-03
2.5E+00
3.3E-04
5.6E-03
9.5E-02
UNK
61%
UNK
UNK
39%
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
16%
5%
27%
11%
6%
8%
12%
46%
15%
4%
10%
13%
35%
5%
4%
19%
22%
40%
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
2-4
-------
TABLE 2-1 (continued)
POLLUTANTS, TOXIC WEIGHTING FACTORS, AND POTW REMOVAL FACTORS
CAS
Number
SEMIVOLATILES
86748
95578
95487
106445
99876
124185
95807
95501
67710
117840
629970
112403
112958
206440
630013
544763
142621
2027170
91576
832699
91203
630024
593453
85018
108952
129000
100425
98555
646311
629594
638686
88062
PESTICIDES
30560191
86500
1861401
319846
319857
319868
58899
Pollutant Name
(continued)
Carbazole
Chlorophenol, 2-
Cresol, o-
Cresol, p-
Cymene, p-
Decane, n-
Diaminotoluene, 2,4-
Dichlorobenzene, 1,2-
Dimethyl sulfone
Di-n-octyl phfhalate
Docosane, n-
Dodecane, n-
Eicosane, n-
Fluoranthene
Hexacosane, n-
Hexadecane, n-
Hexanoic Acid
Isopropylnaphthalene, 2-
Methylnaphthalene, 2-
Methylphenanthrene, 1-
Naphthalene
Octacosane, n-
Octadecane, n-
Phenanthrene
Phenol
Pyrene
Styrene
Terpineol, alpha-
Tetracosane, n-
Tetradecane, n-
Triacontane, n-
Trichlorophenol, 2,4,6-
Acephate
Aainphos methyl
Benefluralin
BHC, alpha-
BHC,beta-
BHC, delta-
BHC, gamma-
Toxic
Weighting
Factor
2.7E-01
3.3E-02
2.7E-03
4.0E-03
2.4E-02
4.3E-03
1.8E-01
1.1E-02
UNK
2.2E-01
8.2E-05
4.3E-03
4.3E-03
8.0E-01
8.2E-05
4.3E-03
3.7E-04
7.2E-02
8.0E-02
l.OE-01
1.5E-02
8.2E-05
4.3E-03
2.9E-01
2.8E-02
1.1E-01
1.4E-02
1.1E-03
8.2E-05
4.3E-03
8.2E-05
4.4E-01
4.6E-02
2.8E+01
1.9E-01
4.3E+01
1.2E+01
3.5E-02
4.7E+01
POTW
Removal
Factor
100%
38%
47%
28%
1%
91%
100%
11%
UNK
32%
12%
5%
8%
58%
29%
29%
16%
72%
72%
5%
5%
29%
29%
.5%
5%
5%
6%
'5%
29%
29%
29%
UNK
100%
26%
100%
15%
11%
53%
25%
Subcateaory
TT/CHEM
&PETR
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
RT/CHEM
&PETR
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
2-5
-------
TABLE 2-1 (continued)
POLLUTANTS, TOXIC WEIGHTING FACTORS, AND POTW REMOVAL FACTORS
CAS
Number
Pollutant Name
Toxic
Weighting
Factor
POTW
Removal
Factor
Subcateeorv
TT/CHEM
&PETR
RT/CHEM
&PETR
PESTICIDES (continued)
5103742
1861321
2303164
60571
1031078
7421934
21609905
82688
1918167
139402
5902512
5915413
HERBICIDES
94757
75990
94826
1918009
120365
88857
94746
7085190
93765
93721
Chlordane, gamma-
Dacthal (DCPA)
Diallate
Dieldrin
Endosulfan sulfate
Endrin Aldehyde
Leptophos
Pentachloronitrobenzene
Propachlor
Propazine
Terbacil
Terbuthylazine
2,4-D
Dalapon
2,4-DB (Butoxon)
Dicamba
Dichloroprop
Dinoseb
MCPA
MCPP
2,4,5-T
2,4,5-TP
1.6E+03
3.4E-02
4.5E-01
5.7E+04
l.OE+02
1.6E+02
1.1E+01
7.4E-01
3.3E-01
3.5E-03
l.OE-03
3.5E-02
3.0E-03
5.1E-03
3.6E-02
1.5E-02
9.3E-02
9.0E-01
1.6E-02
1.8E-03
2.8E-01
1.8E-01
50%
16%
100%
14%
42%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
51%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
44%
56%
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
DIOXINS and FURANS
35822469
67562394
3268879
39001020
METALS
7429905
7440382
7440393
7440428
7440439
7440702
7440473
1234678-HPCDD
1234678-HPCDF
OCDD
OCDF
Aluminum
Arsenic
Barium
Boron
Cadmium
Calcium
Chromium
4.2E+06
6.7E+05
4.2E+05
6.7E+04
6.4E-02
3.5E+00
2.0E-03
1.8E-01
2.6E-f-00
2.8E-05
7.6E-02
17%
17%
21%
17%
9%
57%
25%
80%
10%
91%
20%
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
2-6
-------
TABLE 2-1 (continued)
POLLUTANTS, TOXIC WEIGHTING FACTORS, AND POTW REMOVAL FACTORS
CAS
Number
Pollutant Name
Toxic
Weighting
Factor
POTW
Removal
Factor
Subcategory
TT/CHEM
&PETR
RT/CHEM
&PETR
METALS (continued)
7440508
7439896
7439954
7439965
7439976
7439987
7440020
7723140
7440097
7440213
7440235
7440246
7704349
7440315
7440326
7440666
Copper
Iron
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Molybdenum
Nickel
Phosphorus
Potassium
Silicon
Sodium
Strontium
Sulfur
Tin
Titanium
Zinc
6.3E-01
5.6E-03
8.7E-04
7.0E-02
1.2E+02
2.0E-01 .
1.1E-01
UNK
1.1E-03
UNK
5.5E-06
UNK
5.6E-06
3.0E-01
2.9E-02
4.7E-02
16%
18%
86%
67%
10%
81%
49%
31%
80%
73%
45%
88%
88%
55%
|8%
20%
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
References: Toxic Weighting Factors: Versar, Inc., 2000.
Final POTW Removal Factors: Memorandum in the Rulemaking Record.
2-7
-------
Examples of the effects of different aquatic and human health criteria on freshwater toxic
weighting factors are presented in Table 2-2. As shown in this table, the toxic weighting factor is the
sum of two criteria-weighted ratios: the former benchmark copper criterion divided by the human health
criterion for the particular pollutant and the former benchmark copper criterion .divided by the aquatic
chronic criterion. For example, using the values reported in Table 2-2,4 pounds of the benchmark
chemical (copper) pose the same relative hazard in freshwater as one pound of cadmium because
cadmium has a freshwater toxic weight 4 times greater than the toxic weight of copper (2.6 divided by
0.63 equals 4.13).
23 POTW REMOVAL FACTORS
Calculating pound equivalents for direct dischargers differs from calculating for indirect
dischargers because of the ability of POTWs to remove certain pollutants. The POTW removal factors
are used as follows: If a facility is discharging 100 pounds of chromium in its effluent stream to a POTW
and the POTW has a 80 percent removal efficiency for chromium, then the chromium discharged to
surface waters is only 20 pounds (1 minus 0.8 equals 0.2). If the regulation reduces chromium
discharged in the effluent stream to the POTW by 50 pounds, then the amount discharged to surface
waters is calculated as 50 pounds multiplied by the POTW removal factor (50 pounds times 0.2 equals
10 pounds). The cost-effectiveness calculations tiien reflect the fact that the actual reduction of pollutant
discharged to surface water is not 50 pounds (the change in the amount discharged to the POTW), but 10
pounds (the change in the amount actually discharged to surface water). A pollutant discharge that is
unaffected by the POTW has a removal factor of 1. Table 2-1 presents the POW removal factors for
pollutants included in this analysis.
2.4 POLLUTANT REMOVALS AND POUND-EQUIVALENT CALCULATIONS
The pollutant loadings have been calculated for each facility under each regulatory pollution
control option for comparison with baseline (i.e., current practice) loadings. Pollutant removals are
calculated simply as the difference between current and post-treatment discharges. These pollutant
removals are converted into pound equivalents for the cost-effectiveness analysis. For direct dischargers,
removals in pound equivalents are calculated as:
2-8
-------
TABLE 2-2
EXAMPLES OF TOXIC WEIGHTING FACTORS
BASED ON COPPER FRESHWATER CHRONIC CRITERIA
Pollutant
Copper*
Cadmium
Naphthalene
Human Health
Criteria
1,200
84
21,000
Aquatic
Chronic
Criteria (ug/1)
9.0
2.2
370
Weighting
Calculation
5.6/1,200 + 5.6/9.0
5.6/84 + 5.6/2.2
5.6/21,000 + 5.6/370
Toxic
Weighting
Factor
0.63
2.6
0.015
* The water quality criterion has been revised (to 9.0 ug/1). Formerly, the weighting factor calculation led
to a result of 0.47 as a toxic weighting factor for copper.
Notes: Human health and aquatic chronic criteria are maximum contamination thresholds. Units for criteria
are micrograms of pollutant per liter of water.
Source: Versar, Inc., 2000.
2-9
-------
Removals e = Removalspomdl x Toxic weighting fector
For indirect dischargers, removals in pound equivalents are calculated as:
Removalspe = RemovalspomdJ x Toxic weighting factor x POTW removal factor
Total removals for each option are then calculated by adding up the removals of all pollutants included in
the cost-effectiveness analysis for a given subcategory. Total pollutant and pound-equivalent removals
estimated for each option that has both costs and loads associated with it are presented by subcategory in
Appendix A.
2.5 ANNUALIZED COSTS OF COMPLIANCE
Annualized costs of compliance have been developed for each regulatory pollution control
option (see the Economic Analysis (U.S. EPA, 2000b). In brief, the annualized cost considers the capital
investment needed to purchase and install new equipment, the annual cost of operating and maintaining
the equipment, and the cost of money needed to finance the investment. The annualized costs presented
in Section 4 represent the pretax costs to the TEC industry.2
2.6 CALCULATION OF THE COST-EFFECTIVENESS VALUES
Cost-effectiveness ratios are calculated separately for direct and indirect dischargers and by
subcategory. Within each of these many groupings, the pollution control options are ranked in ascending
order of pound equivalents removed. The incremental cost-effectiveness value for a particular control
option is calculated as the ratio of the incremental annual cost to the incremental pound equivalents
removed. The incremental effectiveness may be viewed primarily in comparison to the baseline scenario
2 This report discusses only three of the regulated subcategories in detail. See Section Four for more
information.
2-10
-------
and to other regulatory pollution control options. Cost-effectiveness values are reported in units of
dollars per pound equivalent of pollutant removed.
For the purpose of comparing cost-effectiveness values of options under review to those of other
promulgated rules, compliance costs used in the cost-effectiveness analysis are adjusted to 1981 dollars
using Engineering News Record's Construction Cost Index (CCI). This adjustment factor is calculated as
follows:
Adjustment factor = 1981 CCI/1994 CCI = 3,535/5,408 = 0.654
The equation used to calculate incremental cost-effectiveness is:
ATCk-
where:
CEf= Cost-effectiveness of Option k
ATCk= Total annualized treatment cost under Option k
PEj^ Pound equivalents removed by Option!: !
Cost-effectiveness measures the incremental unit cost of pollutant removal of Option k (in pound
equivalents) in comparison to Option k-1. The numerator of the equation, ATCk minus ATC,^, is simply
the incremental annualized treatment cost in moving from Option k-1 (an option that removes fewer
pound equivalents of pollutants) to Option k (an option that removes more pound equivalents of
pollutants). Similarly, the denominator is the incremental removals achieved in going from Option k-1
tok.
2.7 COMPARISON OF COST-EFFECTIVENESS VALUES
Because the options are ranked in ascending order of pound equivalents of pollutants removed,
any pollution control option that has higher costs but lower removals than another option can be
2-11
-------
immediately identified (the cost-effectiveness value for the next option becomes negative). When
negative values are computed for Option k, Option k-1 is considered "dominated" (having a higher cost
and lower removals than Option k). Option k-1 is then removed from cost-effectiveness calculations,
and all cost-effectiveness values within a regulatory grouping are then recalculated without the
dominated option. This process continues until all dominated options are eliminated. The remaining
options can then be presented as viable in terms of their incremental cost-effectiveness values for
regulatory consideration.
2-12
-------
SECTION 3
POLLUTION CONTROL OPTIONS
EPA may subcategorize an industry to establish effluent limitations guidelines and standards
based on untreated wastewater characteristics, commodity transported, mode of transportation, or other
factors. Section 3.1 summarizes the technology options for the six TEC subcategories for which EPA
revised the options presented at proposal.3 In addition to commodity transported and mode of
transportation, facilities are also identified by discharge status: direct or indirect. BAT applies to direct
dischargers; PSES applies to indirect dischargers. Additional pollutants may be controlled or reduced by
BAT and PSES, but are not part of the cost-effectiveness analysis because (1) a toxic weighting factor is
not available for the pollutant, or (2) reliable estimates of pollutant removals are not available.
The Development Document (U.S. EPA, 2000a) presents a detailed description of the TEC
industry subcategories and pollution control options for each subcategory. Table 3-1 outlines the
technology options for each of the six subcategories analyzed in this report. EPA developed between one
and three technology options for each subcategory based on incremental technology additions to a
wastewater treatment train. Each succeeding option builds on the previous option. The incremental or
differentiating technology for a succeeding option is in italics.
3 Because no revisions were made to the analysis for the FOOD subcategory after proposal, technology
options for FOOD are not presented in this document. Readers interested in options for mis subcategory can
refer to the Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Proposed Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the
Transportation Equipment Cleaning Industry Point Source Category (U.S. EPA, 1998).
3-1
-------
TABLE 3-1
TECHNOLOGY OPTIONS FOR TEC INDUSTRY SUBCATEGOREES
Option
Description
TT/CHEM&PETR Direct
1
2
Equalization, oil/water separation, chemical oxidation, neutralization, coagulation,
clarification, biological treatment, and sludge dewatering
Equalization, oil/water separation, chemical oxidation, neutralization, coagulation,
clarification, biological treatment, activated carbon adsorption, and sludge
dewatering
TT/CHEM&PETR Indirect
A
1
2
Equalization, and oil/water separation
Equalization, oil/water separation, chemical oxidation, neutralization, coagulation,
clarification, and sludge dewatering
Equalization, oil/water separation, chemical oxidation, neutralization, coagulation,
clarification, activated carbon adsorption, and sludge dewatering
RT/CHEM&PETR Direct
1
2
3
Oil/water separation, equalization, biological treatment, and sludge dewatering
Oil/water separation, equalization, dissolved air flotation (withflocculation andpH
adjustment), biological treatment, and sludge dewatering
Oil/water separation, equalization, dissolved air flotation (with flocculation andpH
adjustment), biological treatment, organo-day/activated carbon adsorption, and
sludge dewatering
RT/CHEM&PETR Indirect
1
2
3
Oil/water separation
Oil/water separation, equalization, dissolved air flotation (withflocculation andpH
adjustment), and sludge dewatering
Oil/water separation, equalization, dissolved air flotation (with flocculation and pH
adjustment), organo-day/activated carbon adsorption, and sludge dewatering
3-2
-------
TABLE 3-1 (continued)
Option
Description
TB/CHEM&PETR Direct ;
1
2
Oil/water separation, dissolved air flotation, filter press, biological treatment, and
sludge dewatering
Oil/water separation, dissolved air flotation, filter press, biological treatment, reverse
osmosis, and sludge dewatering
TB/CHEM&PETR Indirect
1
2
3
Oil/water separation, dissolved air flotation, and in-line filter press
Oil/water separation, dissolved air flotation, in-line filter press, biological treatment
(with chemically assisted clarification), and sludge dewatering
Oil/water separation, dissolved air flotation, in-line filter press, biological treatment
(with chemically assisted clarification), reverse osmosis, and sludge dewatering
Note: EPA developed options based on incremental technology additions to a treatment train. Each
option builds upon the previous option. Technologies incremental to the previous option are
shown in italics to help the reader identify the distinguishing characteristics of an option.
3-3
-------
3-4
-------
SECTION 4
RESULTS OF COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS
For the Final Rule, EPA revised its estimated cost-effectiveness (CE) ratios for dischargers in six
TEC industry subcategories:
TT/CHEM&PETR Direct '.
TT/CHEM&PETR Indirect
RT/CHEM&PETR Direct
RT/CHEM&PETR Indirect;
TB/CHEM&PETR Direct
TB/CHEM&PETR Indirect
This section presents the revised ratios for these six subcategories. (Section 3 outlines technology
options for each subcategory.) Revised CE ratios were not calculated for either the FOOD or HOPPER
subcategories because neither BAT nor PSES limitations are set for those subcategories. For further
information on FOOD and HOPPER CE, please see the Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Proposed Effluent
Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Transportation Equipment Cleaning Industry Point Source
Category (U.S. EPA, 1998).
Costs are presented on a pretax basis in 1981 dollars; costs are estimated in 1994 dollars and
deflated to 1981 dollars to facilitate comparison with effluent guidelines of other industries. Compliance
costs include monthly monitoring costs for indirect dischargers and a combination of monthly/weekly
monitoring costs for direct dischargers. The CE ratios are expressed on an incremental and average
basis. Average CE is equal to total option costs divided by total option removals. Although me decision
on the relative cost-effectiveness of an option is based on the incremental CE ratio, average CE also
provides useful information about removal efficiencies.
4-1
-------
If EPA estimates that a subcategoiy incurs zero compliance costs for an option, CE is zero
regardless of removals. If EPA estimates that zero priority or nonconventional pollutants are removed,
then the CE for the option is undefined. The following subcategories had CE ratios that were either
undefined or zero:
TT/CHEM&PETR, direct dischargers; EPA estimated zero compliance costs, so all CE
ratios are zero.
TB/CHEM&PETR, direct dischargers; EPA estimated zero removals of priority and
nonconventional pollutants, so all CE ratios are undefined.
TB/CHEM&PETR, indirect dischargers; EPA estimated zero removals of priority and
nonconventional pollutants, so all CE ratios are undefined.
These subcategories will not be discussed further in this section.
4.1 TRUCK CHEMICAL & PETROLEUM INDIRECT
Table 4-1 presents the results of the CE analysis for indirect dischargers;. There are three
technology options for Til CHEM&PETR indirect dischargers (see Table 3-1). The incremental CE
ratio ranges from $3,179/pe under Option A, to $372/pe under Option 1, to $l,199/pe under Option 2.
Option 1 is the selected option for indirect dischargers in the TT/ CHEM&PETR subcategory.
4.2 RAIL CHEMICAL & PETROLEUM DIRECT
All RT/CHEM&PETR facilities in the detailed questionnaire database are indirect dischargers;
however, one direct discharger was identified in the screener questionnaire data.. Table 4-2 presents the
results of the CE analysis for direct dischargers, based on the unweighted data, from this one facility.
Because data are available for only one facility, cost and load data are not disclosed. There are three
technology options for RT/CHEM&PETR direct dischargers (see Table 3-1). The incremental CE ratio
for Option 1 is undefined; the incremental CE ratio for Option 2 is $323/pe and $l,381/pe for Option 3.
Option 2 is the selected option for direct dischargers in the RT/CHEM&PETR subcategory.
4-2
-------
u
!> -5 fi;
§3 jO oo
> 53 os
42
§
8 B3
£ "*"*
oo
o\
Pound
uivalents (PE)
Removed
Eq
s
a
g S I
I -3
I I
II
cr
W
13 ~
w oo
.S o\
"« Z&
s ^>
Os vo 0
t-
-------
3
U X
CO
|||
1
«
C *i
T3
43 S
J 1
« 5
q ^.
O C
£3 c
SB
r
to *
MSI
§
< Q
~ f
1 c
CO
C c
1 SI. a.
« O O O
O
5
5
O
O
2
4-4
-------
4.3 RAIL CHEMICAL & PETROLEUM INDIRECT
Table 4-3 presents the results of the CE analysis for indirect dischargers in the
RT/CHEM&PETR subcategory. There are three technology options for RT/CHEM&PETR indirect
dischargers (see Table 3-1). The incremental CE ratio ranges from $82/pe under Option 1, to $492/pe
under Option 2, to $l,138/pe under Option 3. Option 2 is the selected;option for indirect dischargers in
the RT/CHEM&PETR subcategory.
4-5
-------
3
f-s
2 o
5 s
~ e
CA
ill
g S S
1 « a
§ «
< -°
"S i >
i s s
I
C3
I?
.8
CO O\
O 00
^r O
p- >o
vo1
t>- CS CM
00 0^ C^
*
VO
6%
O vi
vd" i>
o
OO
n vo t~
r- o\ '-i
oo oo^ t-^
in" oC 06"
m o\ t~-
vi oo *
o »-i co co
| | | |
e§ O, O. O<
« O O O
4-6
-------
SECTIONS
COMPARISON OF COST-EFFECTIVENESS VALUES WITH
PROMULGATED RULES
In addition to subcategory-specific cost-effectiveness ratios, this analysis also includes cost-
effectiveness ratios for BAT and PSES for the TEC industry as a whole. EPA calculates the cost-
effectiveness ratio for the entire industry usiing two factors: the incremental annualized cost and
incremental removals for the proposed options for each subcategory. The incremental values are totaled
to provide the cost-effectiveness ratio for the industry. The selected options are:
TT/CHEM&PETR Direct: Option 2
TT/CHEM&PETR Indirect: Option 1 .
RT/CHEM&PETR Direct: Option 2
RT/CHEM&PETR Indirect: Option 2
» TB/CHEM&PETR Direct: Option 1
TB/CHEM&PETR Indirect: Option 2
Tables 5-1 and 5-2 illustrate the process for calculating the industry cost-effectiveness for BAT and
PSES, respectively.
Table 5-1 presents the incremental cost-effectiveness of proposed pollution control options for
direct dischargers in the TEC industry. Incremental CE for direct dischargers in both the Truck
Chemical & Petroleum and Barge Chemical & Petroleum subcategories is undefined due to zero
incremental pollutant removals under the selected option. Direct discharging facilities in the Barge
Chemical & Petroleum subcategory incur incremental costs under the selected option, but only to control
conventional pollutants (i.e., BPT not BAT). EPA selected BPT for the subcategory then set BAT equal
to BPT. Therefore these costs are not included in the incremental CE calculation of Table 5-1. The
incremental CE resulting from the selected options for direct dischargers in the Truck Chemical &
Petroleum and Rail Chemical & Petroleum subcategories is $323/pe.
5-1
-------
TABLE 5-1
INCREMENTAL COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF POLLUTANT CONTROL OPTIONS
TRANSPORTATION EQUIPMENT CLEANING INDUSTRY
DIRECT DISCHARGERS
Subcategory
Incremental
Pre-tax
Annualized Cost
($1981)
TT/CHEM&PETR ND
RT/CHEM&PETR ND
TB/CHEM&PETR NA
PE
Removed
ND
ND
NA
Cost-Effectiveness
($/PE)
UNDEFINED
$323
NA
Industry Total
ND
ND
$323
ND: Not disclosed due to business confidentiality.
NA: Not Applicable; BAT = BPT.
Note: Incremental costs and removals are calculated from the selected option and preceding
option in the subcategory cost-effectiveness analysis.
TABLE 5-2
INCREMENTAL COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF POLLUTANT CONTROL OPTIONS
TRANSPORTATION EQUIPMENT CLEANING INDUSTRY
INDIRECT DISCHARGERS
Subcategory
Incremental
Pre-tax
Annualized Cost
($1981)
TT/CHEM&PETR $3,785,568
RT/CHEM&PETR $364,023
TB/CHEM&PETR* $0
PE
Removed
10,176
740
0
Cost-Effectiveness
($/PE)
$372
$492
UNDEFINED
Industry Total
$4,149,591
10,916
$380
"Incremental monitoring costs are zero.
Note: Incremental costs and removals are calculated from the selected option and preceding
option in the subcategory cost-effectiveness analysis.
5-2
-------
Table 5-2 presents the incremental cost-effectiveness of selected pollution control options for
indirect dischargers in the TEC industry. Incremental CE for indirect ;dischargers in Barge Chemical &
Petroleum is undefined because the subcategory has zero incremental pollutant removals and incurs zero
incremental monitoring costs under the selected option. The incremental industry cost-effectiveness
resulting from the selected options for indirect dischargers in the Truck Chemical & Petroleum, Rail
Chemical & Petroleum, and Barge Chemical & Petroleum subcategories is $380/pe.
Tables 5-3 and 5-4 present the cost-effectiveness values for effluent limitations guidelines and
standards in other industries for direct dischargers under BAT and indirect dischargers under PSES. The
numbers presented for this rulemaking are pretax costs, whereas many of the numbers presented for other
effluent guidelines are posttax coststhat is, the actual costs faced by the firms, not just the total cost of
the equipment (which is subsidized by reductions in taxable income). Thus, direct comparisons between
this rulemaking and others cannot be made easily. An equivalent posttax cost-effectiveness, however, is
approximately 60 to 70 percent of pretax cost-effectiveness. Appendix B contains the supporting
information for baseline discharges.
5-3
-------
TABLE 5-3
INDUSTRY COMPARISON OF BAT COST-EFFECTTVENESS
FOR DIRECT DISCHARGERS
Industry
Battery Manufacturing
Centralized Waste Treatment?
Coal Mining
Conner Forming
Electronics n
Iron & Steel
Nonferrous Metals Forming
Nonferrous Metals Mfg n
Oil and Gas: Offshore11
Coastal Produced Water/TWC
Prilling Waste
Pharmaceuticals0 A/C
B/D
Pulo & Paper*
Textile Mills
TEC: TB/CHEM&PETR
TT & RT/CHEM &PETR
PE Currently Discharged
(thousands)
1,340
4,126
12
3,372
BAT=BPT
2,289
70
9
NA
2,308
32,503
605
40,746
259
3,305
140
34
6,653
1,004
3,809
951
BAT = Current Practice
54,225
2,461
897
90
44
1,086
BAT=BPT
61,713
BAT=BPT
BAT=BPT
1
PE Remaining at Selected
Option
(thousands)
90
5
0.2
1,261-1,267
BAT=BPT
9
8
3
NA
39
1,290
27
1,040
112
3,268
70
2
313
12
2,328
239
BAT = Current Practice
9,735
371
47
0.5
41
63
BAT=BPT
2,628
BAT=BPT
BAT=BPT
ND
Cost-Effectiveness of
Selected Option(s)
(S/PE removed)
121
2
10
5-7
BAT=BPT
49
27
404
NA
84
<1
6
2
BAT=BPT
12
50
69
4
6
33
35
BAT = Current Practice
5
14
47
96
BAT=BPT
6
BAT=BPT !
39
BAT=BPT
BAT=BPT
323 1
"Although toxic weighting factors for priority pollutants varied across these rules, this table reflects the cost-effectiveness at the time of
regulation,
*Produced water only; for produced sand and drilling fluids and drill cuttings, BAT=NSPS.
ND: Nondisclosed due to business confidentiality.
5-4
-------
TABLE 5-4
INDUSTRY COMPARISON OF PSES COST-EFFECTIVENESS
FOR INDIRECT DISCHARGERS
(Toxic and Nonconventional Pollutants Only; Copper-Based Weights'; $ 1981)
Industry11
Aluminum Forming
Battery Manufacturing
Canmaking
Centralized Waste Treatment'
Coal Mining
Coil Coating
Copper Forming
Electronics I
Electronics n
Foundries
Inorganic Chemicals I
Inorganic Chemicals II
Iron & Steel
Leather Tanning
Metal Finishing
Metal Products and Machinery0
Nonferrous Metals Forming
Nonferrous Metals Mfg I
Nonferrous Metals Mfg II
Organic Chemicals
Pesticide Manufacturing
Pesticide Formulating
Pharmaceuticals'1
Plastics Molding & Forming
Porcelain Enameling
Pulp & Paper0
Transportation Equipment Cleaning
PE Currently Discharged
(To Surface Waters)
(thousands)
1,602
1,152
252
689
NA
2,503
934
75
260
2,136
3,971
4,760
5,599
16,830
11,680
1,115
189
3,187
38
5,210
257
7,746
340
NA
1,565
9,539
38
PE Discharged at Selected
Option (To Surface
Waters)
(thousands)
18
: 5
' 5
328-330
NA
' 10
4
35
24
18
3,004
6
1,404
1,899
'755
234
5
19
0.41
72
19
'112
63
NA
96
103
19
Cost-Effectiveness of
Selected Option(s)
Beyond BPT
(S/PE removed)
155
15
38
70-110
NA°
10
10
14
14
116
9
<1
6
111
10
127
90
15
12
34
18
<3
1
NA
14
65
380
"Although toxic weighting factors for priority pollutants varied across these rules, this table reflects the cost-effectiveness at the time of
regulation.
°No known indirect dischargers at this time for offshore oil and gas and coastal oil and gas.
°Proposed. :
5-5
-------
5-6
-------
SECTION 6
COST-REASONABLENESS OF
CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS REMOVED
6.1 BCT COST-REASONABLENESS TEST
EPA evaluates the cost-reasonableness of control technologies for conventional pollutants for
direct dischargers using the Best Conventional Pollutant Control Technology (BCT) cost test. After
setting Best Practicable Control Technology (BPT), EPA uses the BCT cost test to evaluate whether it
can set BCT at a more stringent level. The test evaluates the cost-reasonableness of BCT options
compared to BPT options. Like BPT, BCT applies only to direct dischargers.
The test is composed of two parts, the POTW test and the industry cost-effectiveness test. A
pollution control technology must pass both parts in order to pass the test. If it does not pass, then BCT
limitations are serai a level equal to BPT limitations. This is also done if there are no candidate
technologies for BCT at a more stringent level than BPT. In the latter case, the BCT cost test is not
performed.
6.1.1 POTW Test
The POTW test compares the incremental cost of removals incurred by switching from BPT to
BCT against the cost of upgrading POTWs from secondary to advanced secondary treatment. In order to
pass this test, the incremental cost for the TEC industry to comply with BCT (measured hi dollars per
pound of conventional pollutants removed) must be less than the cost of upgrading POTWs to achieve
similar removals. This benchmark cost for POTWs is set at $0.56 in 1994 dollars. Cost per pound of
conventional pollutant removals is calculated as:
Cost per Pound = Pretax Annualized Cost / Pounds Removed
To pass this part of the test, the TEC industry cost per pound removed must be less than $0.56.
6-1
-------
6.1.2 Industry Ratio Test
The industry cost-effectiveness test compares the rate of cost increase for an industry to move
from BPT to BCT to the rate of cost increase for POTWs to upgrade from secondary to advanced
secondary treatment. To pass this test, the rate of cost increase for the industry must be less than the rate
of cost increase associated with upgrading POTWs. This rate is benchmarked at 1.29. In effect, this part
of the test requires that the cost of removals must increase by less than 29% in moving from BPT to
BCT. The industry cost-effectiveness is calculated as the ratio of the incremental cost of BCT to the
incremental cost of BPT (which is incremental from the baseline level of treatment):
Industry Cost-Effectiveness = BCT Incremental Cost per Pound / BPT Incremental Cost per Pound
6.2 SUBCATEGORY BCT TESTS
i
Table 6-1 presents the cost-reasonableness of BCT options for direct dischargers in the
RT/CHEM&PETR subcategory. All costs are presented in 1994 dollars. The table presents figures
based on a combination of monthly and weekly monitoring. EPA selected Option 2 as the basis for BPT;
Option 3 failed the BCT cost test because the incremental cost per pound of conventional pollutant
removals exceeds $0.56.
The BCT cost test is not applicable to direct dischargers in the TT/CHEM&PETR and
TB/CHEM&PETR subcategories:
" TT/CHEM&PETR direct dischargers: estimated compliance costs are zero under both
options; zero incremental conventional pollutant removals expected under Option 2.
I
TB/CHEM&PETR direct dischargers: Option 1 is selected for BPT; zero incremental
conventional pollutant removals expected under Option 2, thus the BCT cost test is
undefined for Option 2.
6-2
-------
T 1
1
2
H
^
g
O
i
0
CONVEN1
55
COST TEST Ft
U
Ed
jj
a
^^-
1
fe
fcl
W
i
&
o
u
g
0
S
p so
S C5
& PETROLEU
ECTDISCHAR<
CHEMICAL
DIR1
j
JT|
2
£ 1
s S i
g u g
a
B
n
Incremental
«
g
1
H
S3 -a
o- c
P
CO
1
Pretax
Annualized
b -0
o. £
21
w
*o
1
"8
X .^
i P
a. g
i
i
S
t-i
£
g>
1
Removed
Cost ($1994)
1
V
g
(2
1
a
§
s.
o
§ § §
't '. U
O O O
c:
=!
O
a.
Incremental Cost per
per Pour.d/BPT !
«
c>
6
^S
^* §!
^BJ C«
p| S cj
ii *S ^'
^ 8 ffl
O to M
§ s I
o -S S3
° S3 f-<
0 ^ 03
8 o «! 1
° § =; f-
O TJ *^
"1 1 Is a
11 3 S
si 1 1
< Q | 1
Z Z £ £
vb
«->
g
V
*2
1
n.
^
,9
1
,e
S
o\
s
ffl
S
V*
ea
CO
52
Effectiver
I
1
6-3
-------
6-4
-------
SECTION 7
ElEFERENCES
Engineering News Record. 1996. Construction cost index history, 1907-1996. Engineering News
Record. March 25.
U.S. EPA. 1993. Tank and container interior cleaning screener questionnaire. OMB No. 2040-0166.
Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water.
U.S. EPA. 1995. 1994 Detailed questionnaire for the transportation equipment cleaning industry. OMB
No. 2040-0179. Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water. April.
U.S. EPA. 1998. Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Proposed Effluent Limitations Guidelines and
Standards for the Transportation Equipment Cleaning Industry Point Source Category. EPA 821/B-98-
013. Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water. May.
U.S. EPA. 2000a. Development Document for Proposed Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards
for the Transportation Equipment Cleaning Industry. EPA-821-R-00-012. Washington, DC: U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water. June.
U.S. EPA. 2000b. Economic Analysis of Final Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the
Transportation Equipment Cleaning Industry. EPA-821-R-00-013. Washington, DC: U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water. June.
Versar, Inc. 2000. TWF and categorization information for TEC analyses. Prepared for U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water. March.
7-1
-------
7-2
-------
APPENDIX A
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION FOR
COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS:
POUND EQUIVALENTS REMOVED
FOR TT/CHEM&PETR INDIRECT
AND RT/CHEM&PETR INDIRECT
A-l
-------
A-2
-------
1/3
z
o
1
Q
1
i^
ce
a
|3
(/2
°t»
HO -
5 H
POLLUTE
IDUSTRY
^~
O
g
0
u
H
3
o
S
A
I
cu
g
I
CT
c
S
o
CO
a
i£
o
H
*-»
53
"o
a
S
1
t5
.g
s
S
&
o
b
j
V.
Q Q 0
| § °
» H
Q Q 0
g§°
O CS O
ts \o
<* o
is
Q Q O
* *
2 P P
td u w
^ S S
m W U
^ S 1
P erf H
oo
o\
06"
g
oo
<*
I
I
.5
_>.
s
o
A-3
-------
TABLE A-2
POLLUTANT REMOVALS
TRUCK CHEMICAL & PETROLEUM SUBCATEGORY
INDIRECT DISCHARGERS
Conversion Factors
Grams Removed
Chemical Name
Adsorbsble Organic Halides (AOX)
Ammonia as Nitrogen
5-Day Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD)
Chloride
Fluoride
Nitrate/Nitrite
Surfacants (MBAS)
Total Dissolved Solids
Tool Organic Carbon (TOC)
Tool Petroleum Hydrocarboos (TPH)
Total Phenols
Tool Phosphorus
Ofl and Grease
Total Suspended Solids
Acetone
Benzene
Chloroform
1,2-DicMoroethane
Emylbenzene
Methyl c thy! ke tone
Methyl isobutyl ketone
Me&ylenc chloride
Tetrachloroctbylene
Toluene
1,1,1-Tricnloroetnane
Trichloroethylcne
m-Xylese
o+p-Xylene
alpba-Tcrpineol
Bcnxoicadd
Benzyl alcohol
bis (2-Ethylhexyl) pbmalate
2-ChIoropbenol
o-Cresol
p-Cresol
p-Cymene
n-Deeane
1,2-DichIorobenzene
Dimethyl sulfooe
Di-n-octyl phlhalate
n-Dooosane
n-Dodecane
n-EScosane
n-Hexacosine
n-Hexadecane
2-IsopropyloiphthjIcne
2-Methylnapathalene
Napalnalene
n-Octadecane
Phenol
Styrene
n-Tc«acosane
Option A
590,889
45,576,217
798,806,651
710,352,964
4,975,059
6,418,517
15304
4,685,574
33,165,752
112,897,181
253,896,096
24,159
2^31,810
2,827,102,168
604,681,625
266,675
430
10,941
6,429
34,998
47,295
17,218
3,105,244
2,287,404
20,859
8,143
263
21,771
11,206
15,094
213,956
103,660
71,922
13,013
854
631
4,037
3,952
1,138
5,212,788
1,921
70,632
12,504
179,652
75,522
748,069
110,401
76,776
122,207
274,602
364,675
740,916
126,987
Option 1
6,648,073
45,576,217
4,147,813,790
7,822,858,835
4,975,059
19,158,437
257,013
20,578,755
33,165,752
693,817,730
255,014,443
1,834,157
35,808,147
2,835,993,028
2,252,660,214
15,196,032
50,403
82,445
830,748
763,713
2,283,902
1,691,800
11,451,813
2,321,144
2,491,659
1,134,976
25327
3,326,599
1,699,774
275,823
7,248,087
481,210
913,900
97,608
117,944
17,853
85,440
607,836
163,291
13,946,741
287,088
188,612
1,958,352
525,198
258,085
1,364,254
331,881
125,869
541,358
719,686
633,653
4,852,728
328,728
Option 2
8,267,784
128,679,236
4,147,813,790
10,919,736,348
682,248,837
35,384,557
4,248,053
37,962,044
4,547,781,156
3,615,893,382
255,014,443
2,715,989
45,804,897
2,835,993,028
2,351,508,030
67,549,900
51,929
122,061
1,080,235
832,892
14,242,357
4,294,472
26,433,612
2,321,144
3,681,059
1338,835
26,241
3,627,088
1,877,457
598,999
47,536,659
491,296
927,252
101,402
118,716
206,774
97,546
607,836
163,291
13,946,741
287,088
188,612
1,958,352
565,870
258,085
1,364,254
331,881
125,869
564,741
719,686
1,535,315
6,773,134
328,728
Toxic POTW
Grams/ Weighting Removal
Pounds Factor Factor
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.2IE-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2^1E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2^1E-03
2^21E-03
2^1E-03
2^1E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2^1E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2^1E-03
2^1E-03
2.2IE-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2^1E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2^1E-03
2^1E-03
2.21E-03
2^1E-03
2.21E-03
UNK
1.8E-03
UNK
UNK
2.4E-05
3.5E-02
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
5.0E-06
l.SE-02
2.1E-03
6.2E-03
1.4E-03
2.5E-05
UE-04
4^E-04
UE-02
5.6E-03
4.5E-03
6.4E-03
1.5E-03
4.7E-03
1.1E-03
3.3E-04
S.6E-03
9JE-02
3JE-02
2.7E-03
4.0E-03
2.4E-02
4.3E-03
1.1E-02
UNK
2.2E-01
8^E-05
4.3E-03
43E-03
S.2E-05
4.3E-03
7JE-02
8.0E-02
1.5E-02
4.3E-03
2.8E-02
1.4E-02
8.2E-05
UNK
61%
UNK
UNK
UNK
39%
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
16%
5%
27%
11%
6%
8%
12%
46%
15%
4%
10%
13%
35%
5%
5%
19%
22%
40%
38%
47%
28%
1%
91%
11%
UNK
32%
12%
5%
8%
29%
29%
72%
72%
5%
29%
s%;
6%
29%
Pound Equivalents (PE)
Removed
Option A
0.0
110.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
193.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.3
9.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.3
6.0
0.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
03
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
2.1
12.6
9.8
0.2
0.8
1.1
1.4
0.0
Option 1
0.0
110.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
577.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
1.3
0.1
0.0
0.1
4.9
10.0
1.2
I.I
0.0
3.9
0.9
0.0
1.0
1.3
76.7
2.7
0.3
0.0
0.0
53
0.4
0.0
44.7
0.0
03
0.4
0.0
3.8
38.0
16.0
0.9
2.0
2.0
9.0
0.0
Option 2
0.0
312.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
1,067.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.2
1.6
0.2
0.1
0.1
11.3
10.0
1.8
1.3
0.0
4.2
1.0
0.1
6.6
13
77.9
2.8
0.3
0.5
0.1
5.3
0.4
0.0
44.7
0.0
0.9
0.4
0.0
3.8
38.0
16.0
0.9
2.0
4.8
12.6
0.0
A-4
-------
TABLE A-2 (continued)
POLLUTANT REMOVALS
TRUCK CHEMICAL & PETROLEUM SUBCATEGORY
INDmECT DISCHARGERS
Conversion Factors
Grams Removed
Toxic
Grams/ Weighting
Chemical Name
n-Tetradecane
n-Triacontane
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
Azinphos methyl
Leptophos
Beta-BHC
Gamma-BHC
Diallate
Endosulfan Sulfate
Endrin Aldehyde
Pentachloronitrobenzene
2,4-D
Dalapon
2,4-DB (Butoxon)
Dinoseb
MCPA
2,4,5-T
2,4,5-TP
1234678-HPCDD
1234678-HPCDF
OCDD
Aluminum
Boron
Cadmium
Calcium
Chromium
Copper
Iron
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Molybdenum
Nickel
Phosphorus
Potassium
Silicon
Sodium
Strontium
Sulfur
Tin
Titanium
Zinc
Total
Option A
529,638
77,731
73,677
SO
71
5
2
193
3
39
86
25
8
57
19
906,241
10
6
0
0
0
5,565,643
29,835
2,503
10,178,954
465,753
191,301
18,102,171
41,651,066
440,028
18
11,028
49,394
23,692,682
213,116
4,790,600
7,309,475
307,422
3,311,298
2,110,273
183,944
419,991
5,540,419,106
Option 1
929,432
384,985
164,094
6,123
8,027
621
2
26,082
58
39
13,498
1,499
8
4,228
858
978,853
1,241
628
1
0
13
11,172,310
1,596,428
19,770
108,258,088
3,497,303
361,345
34,287,118
96,335,172
597,886
2,477
36,954
170,523
83,142,295
7,936,420
19,127,561
94,547,651
860,253
3,311,298
11,730,482
338,815
1,072,485
18,736,504,135
Option 2
929,432
384,985
331,162
6,123
8,027
621
328
33,225
58
39
13,498
1,499
2,098
11,140
858
1,080,472
1,423
628
1
0
13
12,086,152
9,089,771
20,238
237,901,413
3,511,771
414,463
36,143,109
96,835,531
597,886
2,482
36,954
282,502
94,374,663
7,936,420
21,013,882
' 985,893,681
860,253
385,216,498
28,283,190
356,488
1,072,485
31,751,064,446
Pounds
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
Factor
4.3E-03
8.2E-05
4.4E-01
2.8E+01
I.IE+OJ
1.2E+01
4.7E+01
4.5E-01
l.OE+02
1.6E+02
7.4E-01
3.0E-03
5.1E-03
3.6E-02
9.0E-01
1.6E-02
2.8E-01
1.8E-01
4.2E+06
6.7E+05
4.2E+05
6.4E-02
1.8E-01
2.6E+00
2.8E-05
7.6E-02
6.3E-01
5.6E-03
8.7E-04
7.0E-02
1.2E402
2.0E-01
1.1E-01
UNK
1.1E-03
UNK
5.5E-06
UNK
5.6E-06
3.0E-01
2.9E-02
4.7E-02
POTW
Removal
Factor
29%
29%
UNK
26%
100%
11%
25%
100%
42%
100%
100%
51%
100%
100%
100%
100%
44%
56%
17%
17%
21%
9%
80%
10%
91%
20%
16%
18%
86%
67%
10%
81%
49%
31%
80%
73%
45%
88%
88%
55%
8%
20%
Pound Equivalents (PE)
Removed
Option A
1.5
0.0
0.0
0.8
1.7
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
13.6
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
32.0
0.0
0.0
15.8
0.0
11.7
70.8
9.5
1.4
0.6
15.6
42.6
40.3
68.9
45.6
0.5
3.9
5.9
0.0
0.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
769.5
0.9
8.7
1,514
Option 1
2.6
0.0
0.0
98.5
195.1
1.8
0.1
25.9
5.4
13.6
22.1
0.0
0.0
0.3
1.7
34.6
0.3
0.1
2,224.9
60.4
2,504.7
142.2
508.0
11.4
6.1
117.5
80.5
76.4
159.3
62.0
65.7
13.2
20.3
0.0
15.4
0.0
0.5
0.0
0.0
4,277.5
1.7
22.3
11,690
Option 2
2.6
0.0
0.0
98.5
195.1 '
1.8
8.5
33.0
5.4
13.6
22.1
0.0
0.0
0.9
1.7
38.2
0.4
0.1
2,224.9
60.4
2,504.7
153.9
2,892.7
11.6
13.4
118.0
92.3
80.5
160.1
62.0
65.8
13.2
33.7
0.0
15.4
0.0
5.4
0.0
4.2
10,313.5
1.8
22.3
20,903
Note 1: Pound equivalent removals are rounded to the nearest 0.1 pounds.
Note 2: Chemicals for which no TWF or POTW removal fector is available (designated by "UNK") are entered as having zero pound equivalents removed.
A-5
-------
TABLE A-3
POLLUTANT REMOVALS
RAIL CHEMICAL & PETROLEUM SUBCATEGORY
INDIRECT DISCHARGERS
Conversion Factors
Grams Removed
Chemical Kame
Adsotbible Organic Halides (AOX)
Ammonia as Nitrogen
5-Day Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD)
Chloride
Fluoride
NiBate/Nitrite
SurfacUats(MBAS)
Total Dissolved Solids
Total Organic Caibon (IOC)
Total Petroleum Hydrocaibons (IPH;
Total Phenols
Total Phosphorus
OH and Crease
Total Suspended Solids
Acetone
Efhylbenzenc
Methyl ethyl ketooe
m-Xykoe
o*p-Xylene
Anthracene
Benzoicactd
Cubazole
p-Crcjol
2,4-Diaminotoluene
Dimethyl sulfone
n-Docoiane
n-Dodecane
n-ESconne
Fluoranlhene
n-Hexacosane
n-Hexadeeane
HexanofcAcid
1-Methylphenanthrcne
Naphthalene
n-Octacosane
n-Octadecane
Phenanthrene
Phenol
Pyreoe
Styrenc
n-Tetracosinc
n-Tetradecane
n-Triacontane
Acephate
Beneflunlin
Option 1
62,921
51,605
10,326,486
581,631,968
83,674,966
19,999
341,560
48,438
586,739,367
77,122,891
43,197,025
63,028
1,999,055
191,514,645
103,984,354
164,950
777
10,487
2,512
1,172
24,150
228,543
15,669
80
3,649
9,504
58,236
92,790
243344
23,046
30,789
471,065
13,142
19,356
13,624
18,535
285,183
51,473
34,491
17,867
45,512
50,851
326,289
20,017
24,176
344
Option 2
70,487
51,605
86,921,420
665,398,106
118,277,995
115,806
341,560
303,149
804,720,987
108,149,955
45,151,123
85,130
2,686,503
196,220,906
152,231,066
164,950
5,549
10,487
15,104
7,212
26,005
228,543
16,060
80
13,795
9,862
59,160
97,431
246,560
23,404
31,086
472,123
127,436
19,449
17,627
18,948
287,724
53,143
51,512
18,153
45,572
51,998
328,953
20,607
34,395
509
Option 3
156,451
1,250,046
130,344,246
676,180,211
118,277,995
482,877
973,656
463,344
1,099,039,915
120,714,991
45,151,123
162,508
2,934,450
196,964,299
161,483,517
207,013
19,340
94,957
46,099
31,925
26,005
742,910
20,379
11,608
463,699
9,862
59,160
97,431
246,560
23,404
31,086
472,123
127,436
19,449
20,393
18,948
287,724
53,360
137,642
18,153
45,572
51,998
328,953
20,607
196,352
588
Toxic POTW
Grams/ Weighting Removal
Pounds Factor Factor
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
' 2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
UNK
1.8E-03
UNK
UNK.
2.4E-05
3.5E-02
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
5.0E-06
1.4E-03
2.SE-05
1.5E-03
4.7E-03
2.5E+00
3.3E-04
2.7E-01
4.0E-03
1.8E-01
UNK
8.2E-05
4.3E-03
4.3E-03
8.0E-01
8.2E-05
4.3E-03
3.7E-04
l.OE-01
1.5E-02
8.2E-OS
4.3E-03
2.9E-01
2.8E-02
1.1E-01
1.4E-02
8.2E-OS
43E-03
8.2E-05
4.6E-02
1.9E-01
UNK
61%
UNK
UNK
UNK
39%
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
16%
6%
8%
35%
5%
4%
19%
100%
28%
100%
UNK. '
12%
5%
8%
58%,
29%
29%
16%
5%
5%
29%
29%
5%
5%
5%
6%
29%
29%
29%
100%
100%
Pound Equivalents (PE)
Removed
Option 1 Option 2
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
53
0.0
9.3
0.0
1.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
23.6
0.0
1.3
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.8
1.6
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.9
0.0
2.5
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
5.7
0.0
9.6
0.0
5.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
24.0
0.0
1.3
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.8
1.7
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.9
0.0
3.5
0.2
Options
0.0
3.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
14.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
q.o
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
5.7
0.1
12.2
o.o
184.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
24.0
0.0
1.3
6.0
6.2
6.0
0.0
6.8
1.7
6.4
6.2
0.1
0.0
0.9
0.0
20.0
0.2
A-6
-------
TABLE A-3 (continued)
POLLUTANT REMOVALS
RAIL CHEMICAL & PETROLEUM SUBCATEGORY
INDIRECT DISCHARGERS
Conversion Factors
Grams Removed
Toxic
Grams/ Weighting
Chemical Name
Alpha-BHC
Beta-BHC
Delta-BHC
Gamma-Chlordane
Dacthal(DCPA)
DiaUate
Dieldrin
Endosulfan Sultate
Pentachloronitrobenzene
Propachlor
Fropazine
Terbacil
Terbuthylazine
2,4-DB (Batoxon)
Dicamba
Dichloroprop
Dinoseb
MCPP
2,4,5-T
2,4,5-TP
OCDD
OCDF
Aluminum
Arsenic
Barium
Boron
Calcium
Chromium
Copper
Iron
Magnesium
Manganese
Phosphorus
Potassium
Silicon
Sodium
Sulfur
Titanium
Zinc
Total
Option!
2
5,857
82
2
75
53,958
351
45
7
2,722
2,262
4,291
8,334
869
4,394
9,772
4,779
633,994
1,860
147
0
0
2,081,699
4,708
34,395
120,726
2,217,701
20,781
4,690
177,799
818,905
70,292
2,006,366
53,241,248
61,318
134,558,681
31,765,756
22,707
99,693
1,911,126,197
Option 2
IS
5,858
85
10
78
69,977
370
50
33
2,722
2,262
4,291
68,864
10,179
49,423
13,131
7,158
3,495,117
2,754
1,149
1
0
2,260,659
5,784
101,911
155,412
2,297,864
35,349
15,193
1,779,707
865,359
90,959
2,856,511
73,884,295
492,416
180,259,266
42,659,059
29,332
135,604
2,494,887,438
Option 3
16
5,859
85
11
80
69,977
380
54
89
2,722
2,569
4,291
528,518
12,723
49,457
15,201
7,158
4,025,548
2,839
1,149
I
0
2,994,441
8,431
101,911
210,571
' 2,297,864
35,349
15,193
1,803,425
865,359
90,959
3,010,107
87,675,244
492,416
190,612,109
54,375,109
29,332
135,604
2,907,992,512
Pounds
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
231E-03
2.21E-03
Factor
4.3E+01
1.2E+01
3.5E-02
1.6E+03
3.4E-02
4.5E-01
5.7E+04
l.OE+02
7.4E-01
3.3E-01
3.5E-03
l.OE-03
3.5E-02
3.6E-02
1.5E-02
9.3E-02
9.0E-01
1.8E-03
2.8E-01
1.8E-01
4.2E+05
6.7E+04
6.4E-02
3.SE+00
2.0E-03
1.8E-01
2.8E-05
7.6E-02
6.3E-01
5.6E-03
8.7E-04
7.0E-02
UNK
1.1E-03
UNK
5.5E-06
5.6E-06
2.9E-02
4.7E-02
POTW
Removal
Factor
15%
11%
53%
50%
16%
100%
14%
42%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
44%
56%
21%
17%
9%
57%
25%
80%
91%
20%
16%
18%
86%
67%
31%
80%
73%
45%
88%
8%
20%
Pound Equivalents (PE)
Removed
Option 1
0.0
17.1
0.0
3.0
0.0
53.7
6,181.7
4.1
0.0
2.0
0.0
0.0
0.6
0.1
0.1
2.0
9.5
2.5
0.5
0.0
25.3
0.5
26.5
20.8
0.0
38.4
0.1
0.7
1.0
0.4
1.4
7.3
0.0
103.5
0.0
0.7
0.3
0.1
2.1
6,555
Option 2
0.2
17.1
0.0
17.8
0.0
69.6
6,518.7
4.7
0.1
2.0
0.0
0.0
5.3
0.8
1.6
2.7
14.2
13.9
0.7
03
290.4
5.8
28.8
25.5
0.1
49.5
0.1
1.2
3.4
4.0
1.4
9.4
0.0
143.7
0.0
1.0
0.5
0.2
2.8
7,295
Options
0.2
17.1
0.0
19.7
0.0'
69.6
6,707.2
5.1
0.1
2.0
0.0
0.0
40.9
1.0
1.6
3.1
14.2
16.0
0.8
0.3
290.4
5.8
38.1
37.2
0.1
67.0
0.1
1.2
3.4
4.0
1.4
9.4
0.0
170.5
0.0
1.0
0.6
0.2
2.8
7,803
Note 1: Pound equivalent removals are rounded to the nearest 0.1 pounds.
Note 2: Chemicals for which no TWF or POTW removal factor is available (designated by "UNK") are entered as having zero pound equivalents removed.
A-7
-------
A-8
-------
APPENDIX B
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION FOR
COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS:
BASELINE POLLUTANT DISCHARGES IN
POUNDS AND POUND EQUIVALENTS
B-l
-------
B-2
-------
TABLE B-l
BASELINE POLLUTANT DISCHARGES
TRUCK CHEMICAL & PETROLEUM SUBCATEGORY
INDIRECT DISCHARGERS
Chemical Name
Adsorbable Organic Halides (AOX)
Ammonia as Nitrogen
5-Day Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD)
Chloride
Fluoride
Nitrate/Nitrite
Surfactants (MBAS)
Total Dissolved Solids
Total Organic Carbon (TOC)
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH)
Total Phenols
Total Phosphorus
Oil and Grease
Total Suspended Solids
Acetone
Benzene
Chloroform
1,2-Dichloroethane
Ethylbenzene
Methyl ethyl ketone
Methyl isobutyl ketone
Methylene chloride
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
Trichloroethylene
m-Xylene
o+p-Xylene
alpha-Terpineol
Benzoic acid
Benzyl alcohol
bis (2-Ethylhexyl) phthalate
2-Chlorophenol
o-Cresol
p-Cresol
p-Cymene
n-Decane
1,2-Dichlorobenzene
Dimethyl sulfone
Di-n-ocryl phthalate
n-Docosane
n-Dodecane
n-Eicosane
n-Hexacosane
n-Hexadecane
2-Isopropyhiaphthalene
2-Methylnaphmalene
Naphthalene
n-Octadecane
Phenol
Styrene
n-Tetracosane
Pollutants
Discharged
at Baseline
(grams)
9,619,158
332,138353
4,505,323,981
13,197,262,918
2,057,319,842
54,761,604
5,945,789
40,397,710
13,713,818,491
4,137,729,951
282,261,808
5,842,482
56,634,709
2,913,400,314
2,409,561,509
85,714,689
76,699
160,680
1,110,356
857,662
15,867,56!
5,043,559
29,287,288
2,345,915
3,705,829
1,363,779
51,014
3,651,858
1,902,227
623,769
76,783,616
529,240
952,022
126,172
143,486
232,422
122,319
632,606
188,061
13,971,511
311,859
213,382
1,983,123
590,640
282,855
1,389,024
356,651
150,639
589,511
744,456
4,827,430
6,839,669
353,499
Conversion Factors
Pound
Toxic POTW Equivalent
Grams/ Weighting Removal Discharge
Pounds Factor Factor at Baseline
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.2IE-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.2LE-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.2IE-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
231E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
UNK
1.8E-03
UNK
UNK
2.4E-05
3.5E-02
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
5.0E-06
l.SE-02
2.1E-03
&2E-03
1.4E-03
2.5E-05
1.3E-04
4.2E-04
1.3E-02
S.6E-03
4.5E-03
6.4E-03
1.5E-03
4.7E-03
LIE-OS
33E-04
5.6E-03
9.5E-02
33E-02
2.7E-03
4.0E-03
2.4E-02
4JE-03
1.1E-02
UNK
2.2E-01
8.2E-05
4JE-03
4JE-03
S^E-05
4.3E-03
7.2E-02
8.0E-02
1.5E-02
43E-03
2.8E-02
1.4E-02
8.2E-05
UNK
61%
UNK
UNK
UNK
39%
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
16%
5%
27%
11%
6%
8%
12%
46%
15%
4%
10%
13%
35%
5%
5%
19%
22%
40%
38%
47%
28%
1%
91%
11%
UNK
32%
12%
5%
8%
29%
29%
72%
72%
5%
29%
5%
6%
29%
0.0
806.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1,652.0
0.0
0.0-
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.2
0.2
1.7
0.2
0.1
0.2
12.5
10.1
1.8
1.4
0.1
4.2
1.0
0.1
10.6
1.4
80.0
3.5
0.4
0.6
0.1
5.5
0.5
0.0
48.5
0.0
0.9
0.4
0.0
3.8
40.9
19.2
1.0
2.1
14.9
12.7
0.0
B-3
-------
TABLE B-l (continued)
BASELINE POLLUTANT DISCHARGES
TRUCK CHEMICAL & PETROLEUM SUBCATEGORY
INDIRECT DISCHARGERS
Chemical Name
n-Tetradccane
n-Triacontane
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
Azinphos methyl
Leptophos
Beta-BHC
"Gamma-BHC
Diallate
Endosulfan Sulfate
Endrin Aldehyde
Pentachloronitrobenzene
2,4-D
Dalapon
2,4-DB (Butoxon)
Dinoseb
MCPA
2,4,5-T
2,4,5-TP
1234678-HPCDD
1234678-HPCDF
OCDD
Aluminum
Boron
Cadmium
Calcium
Chromium
Copper
Iron
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Molybdenum
Nickel
Phosphorus
Potassium
Silicon
Sodium
Strontium
Sulfur
Tin
Titanium
Zinc
Total
Pollutants
Discharged
at Baseline
(grams)
954,202
409,755
519,558
8,782
12,981
859
798
39,318
1,194
15,888
13,513
8,261
3,223
17,640
6,699
1,337,352
1,734
1,432
2
0
13
12,334,667
9,764,762
44,286
773,095,652
3,545^530
551,233
36,607,107
122,454,716
855,402
2,977
240,523
679,519
118,800,604
79,811,321
28,110,043
2,880,003,995
5,959,067
1,367,258,441
31,204,256
380,057
1,122,025
49,462,275,088
Conversion Factors
Toxic
Grams/ Weighting
Pounds
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
Factor
4.3E-03
8.2E-05
4.4E-01
2.8E+01
1.1E+01
1.2E+01
4.7E+01
4.5E-01
l.OE+02
1.6E+02
7.4E-01
3.0E-03
5.1E-03
3.6E-02
9.0E-01
1.6E-02
2.8E-01
1.8E-01
4.2E+06
6.7E+05
4.2E+05
6.4E-02
1.8E-01
2.6E+00
2.8E-05
7.6E4J2
6.3Er01
5.6E-03
8.7E-04
7.0E-02
1.2E+02
2.0E-01
1.1E-01
UNK
1.1E-03
UNK
5.5E-06
UNK
5.6E-06
3.0E-01
2.9E-02
4.7E-02
POTW
Removal
Factor
29%
29%
UNK
26%
100%
11%
25%
100%
42% '
100%
100%
51%
100%
100%
100%
100%
44%
56%
17%
17%
21%
9%
80%
10%
91%
20% ;
16%
18%
86%
67%
10%
81%
49%
31%
80%
73%
45%
88%
88%
55%
8%
20%
Pound
Equivalent
Discharge
at Baseline
2.6
0.0
0.0
141.3
315.6
2.5
20.7
39.1
110.8
5,617.8
22.1
0.0
0.0
1.4
13.3
47.3
0.5
0.3
2,416.1
105.5
2,549.3
157.0
3,107.5
25.4
43.5
119.1
122.8
81.5
202.S
88.7
79.0
86.1
80.9
0.0
155.2
0.0
15.8
0.0
14.9
11,378.6
1.9
23.3
29,929
Note 1: Pound equivalent baseline discharges are rounded to the nearest 0.1 pounds.
Note 2: Chemicals for which no TWF or POTW removal factor is available (designated by "UNK")
are entered as having zero pound equivalent baseline discharges.
For excluded facilities baseline loads approximate 0.0 pe and were therefore not included in the analysis.
B-4
-------
TABLE B-2
BASELINE POLLUTANT DISCHARGES
RAIL CHEMICAL & PETROLEUM SUBCATEGORY
INDIBJECT DISCHARGERS
Chemical Name
Adsorbable Organic Halides (AOX)
Ammonia as Nitrogen
5-Day Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD)
Chloride
Fluoride
Nitrate/Nitrite
Surfactants (MBAS)
Total Dissolved Solids
Total Organic Carbon (TOC)
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH
Total Phenols
Total Phosphorus
Oil and Grease
Total Suspended Solids
Acetone
Ethylbenzene
Methyl ethyl ketone
m-Xylene
o+p-Xylene
Anthracene
Benzoic acid
Carbazole
p-Cresol
2,4-Diaminotoluene
Dimethyl sulfone
n-Docosane
n-Dodecane
n-Eicosane
Fluoranthene
n-Hexacosane
n-Hexadecane
Hexanoic Acid
1-Methylphenanthrene
Naphthalene
n-Octacosane
n-Octadecane
Phenanthrene
Phenol
Pyrene
Styrene
n-Tetracosane
n-Tetradecane
n-Triacontane
Acephate
Benefluralin
Pollutants
Discharged
at Baseline
(grams)
401,120
8,611,896
448,778305
1,204,503,320
393,062,048
636,565
1,715,683
611,216
2,536,008,797
317,567,223
46,268,551
1.8 1,737
3,092,974
199,937,870
163,555,222
465,397
21,426
106,800
48,185
34,011
28,136
759,635
25,250
13,694
484,353
14,987
61,328
99,517
248,647
25,642
33,392
474,233
540,796
21,535
22,655
21,040
289,810
55,558
139,728
20,375
47,658
54,160
331,040
22,774
205,827
602
Conversion Factors
Toxic
POTW
Grams/ Weighting Removal
Pounds
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.2IE-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
Factor
UNK
1.8E-03
UNK .
UNK
2.4E-05
3.5E-02
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
'UNK
'LINK
UNK
UNK
5.0E-06
1.4E-03
2.5E-05
1.5E-03
4.7E-03
2.5E400
3.3E-04
2.7E-01
4.0E-03
1.8E-01
UNK
8.2E-05
43E-03
4.3E-03
8.0E-01
8.2E-05
4.:SE-03
3.7E-04
l.OE-01
I.5E-02
8.2E-05
4.3E-03
2.9E-01
2.8E-02
1.1E-01
1.4E-02
8.2E-05
4.3E-03
8.2E-05
4.6E-02
1.9E-01
Factor
UNK
61%
UNK
UNK
UNK
39%
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
16%
6%
8%
35%
5%
4%
19%
100%
28%
100%
UNK
12%
5%
8%
58%
29%
29%
16%
5%
5%
29%
29%
5%
5%
5%
6%
29%
29%
29%
100%
100%
Pound
Equivalent
Discharge
at Baseline
0.0
20.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
19.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
6.2
0.1
15.1
0.0
192.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
26.3
0.0
1.3
0.1
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.8
1.8
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.9
0.0
20.9
0.3
B-5
-------
TABLE B-2 (continued)
BASELINE POLLUTANT DISCHARGES
RAIL CHEMICAL & PETROLEUM SUBCATEGORY
INDIRECT DISCHARGERS
Chemical Name
Alpha-BHC
Beta-BHC
Delta-BHC
Gamma-Chlordane
Dacthal (DCPA)
Diallatc
Dieldrin
Endosulfan Sulfate
Fentachloronitrobenzene
Propachlor
Propazine
Teibacil
Terbuthylazine
2,4-DB (Butoxon)
Dicamba
Dichloroprop
Dinoseb
MCPP
2,4,5-T
2,4,5-TP
OCDD
OCDF
Aluminum
Arsenic
Barium
Boron
Calcium
Chromium
Copper
Iron
Magnesium
Manganese
Phosphorus
Potassium
Silicon
Sodium
Sulfur
Titanium
Zinc
Total
Pollutants
Discharged
at Baseline
(grams)
24
5,862
108
13
85
80,259
383
63
94
2,901
3,286
4,709
529,562
14,079
49,669
15,930
7,513
4,053,465
3,027
1,284
2
, 0
3,015,304
14,322
143,637
615,072
13,089,008
37,435
20,409
1,824,288
5,330,338
221,143
3,271,635
303,733,452
3,287,851
525,354,036
149,168,609
30,375
139,777
6,343,719,726
Conversion Factors
Pound
Toxic POTW Equivalent
Grams/ Weighting Removal Discharge
Pounds
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
Factor Factor at Baseline
4.3E+01
1.2E+01
3.5E-02
1.6E+03
3.4E-02
4.5E-01
5.7E-H>4
l.OE+02
7.4E-01
3.3E-01
3.5E-03
l.OE-03
3.5E-02
3.6E-02
1.5E-02
9.3E-02
9.0E-01
1.8E-03
2.8E-01
1.8E-01
4.2E+05
6.7E+04
6.4E-02
3.5E+00
2.0E-03
1.8E-01
2.8E-05
7.6E-02
6.3E-01
5.6E-03
8.7E-04
7.0E-02
UNK
1.1E-03
UNK
5.5E-06
5.6E-06
2.9E-62
4.7E-02
15%
11%
53%
50%
16%
100%
14%
42%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
44%
56%
21%
17%
9%
57%
25%
80%
91%
20%
16%
18%
86%
67%
31%
80%
73%
45%
88%
8%
20%
,
0.3
17.1
0.0
23.2
0.0
79.8
6,751.7
5.8
0.2
2.1
0.0
0.0
41.0
1.1
1.6
3.3
14.9
16.1
0.8
0.3
296.9
6.5
38.4
63.1
0.2
195.7
0.7
1.3
4.5
4.1
8.8
22.9
0.0
590.7
0.0
2.9
1.6
0.2
2.9
8,509
Note 1: Pound equivalent baseline discharges are rounded to the nearest 0.1 pounds.
Note 2: Chemicals for which no TWF or POTW removal factor is available (designated by "UNK")
are entered as having zero pound equivalent baseline discharges.
For excluded facilities baseline loads approximate 6.0 pe and were therefore not included in the analysis.
B-6
-------
TABLE B-3
BASELINE POLLUTANT DISCHARGES
TRUCK CHEMICAL, & PETROLEUM SUBCATEGORY
DIRECT DISCHARGERS
Chemical
Adsorbable Organic Halides (AOX)
5-Day Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD)
Fluoride
Nitrate/Nitrite
Surfactants (MBAS)
Total Organic Carbon (TOC)
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH)
Total Phenols
Total Phosphorus
Oil and Grease
Total Suspended Solids
Acetone
Benzene
Chloroform
1,2-Dichloroethane
Ethylfaenzene
Methyl ethyl ketone
Methyl isobutyl ketone
Methylene Chloride
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
Trichloroethylene
m-Xylene
o+p-Xylene
Alpha-Terpineol
Benzoic acid
Benzyl alcohol
Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
2-Chlorophenol
o-Cresol
p-Cresol
p-Cymene
n-Decane
1 ,2-Dichlorobenzene
Dimethyl sulfone
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Pollutants
Discharged
at Baseline
(grams)
35,942
420,162
16,146,256
1,067,412
40,756
57,250
12,265,728
291,112
105,965
566,505.
318,404
1,547,553
137,516
582
582
708
582
8,242
9,391
98,411
582
582
586
799
582
582
582
123,932
1,129
582
774
776
786
582
582
582
582
582
Conversion Factors
Grams/
Pounds
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21B-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21B-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
Toxic
Weighting
Factor
UNK
UNK
UNK
3.5E-02
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
5.0E-06
1.8E-02
2.1E-03
6.2E-03
1.4E-03
2.5E-05
1.3E-04
4.2E-04
1.3E-02
5.6E-03
4.5E-03
6.4E-03
1.5E-03
4.7E-03
1.1E-03
3.3E-04
5.6E-03
9.5E-02
3.3E-02
2.7E-03
4.0E-03
2.4E-02
4.3E-03
1.1E-02
UNK
2.2E-01
Pound
Equivalent
Dischargee
at Baseline
0.0
0.0
0.0
82.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.3
B-7
-------
TABLE B-3 (continued)
BASELINE POLLUTANT DISCHARGES
TRUCK CHEMICAL & PETROLEUM SUBCATEGORY
DIRECT DISCHARGERS
Chemical
n-Docosane
n-Dodecane
n-Eicosane
n-Hexacosane
n-Hexadecane
2-Isopropylnaphthalene
2-MethylnaphthaIene
Naphthalene
n-Octadecane
Styrene
n-Tetracosane
n-Tetradecane
n-Triaoontane
Azinphos methyl
Leptophos
beta-BHC
Diallate
Pentachloionitrobenzene
Dalapon
2,4-DB (Butoxon)
MCPA
2,4,5-T
2,4,5-TP
1234678-HPCDD
1234678-HPCDF
OCDD
Aluminum
Boron
Chromium
Copper
Iron
Manganese
Mercury
Phosphorus
Silicon
Tin
Titanium
Zinc
Total
Pollutants
Discharged
at Baseline
(grams)
582
582
582
582
582
582
582
582
582
777
582
582
582
291
116
6
242
3
6
542
15,429
12
46
0
0
' 0 '
11,353
15,866
1,134
5,040
54,531
12,130
12
1,249,843
301,379
377,088
1,110
1,164
35,309,353
Conversion Factors
Grams/
Pounds
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
i
Toxic
Weightuig
Factor
8.2E-05
4.3E-03
4.3E-03
8.2E-05
4.3E-03
7.2E-02
8.0E-02
1.5E-02
4.3E-03
1.4E-02
8.2E-05
4.3E-03
8.2E-05
2.8E+01
1.1E+01
1.2E+01
4.5E-01
7.4E-01
5.1E-03
3.6E-02
1.6E-02
2.8E-01
1.8E-01
4.2E+06
6.7E+05
4.2E+05
6.4E-02
1.8E-01
7.6E-01
6.3E-01
5.6E-03
7.0E-02
1.2E+02
UNIC
UN1C
3.0E-()l
2.9E-02
4.7E-02
Pound
Equivalent
Dischargee
at Baseline
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
18.0
2.8
0.2
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
0.0
0.0
27.0
10.6
5.4
1.6
6.3
0.2
7.0
0.7
1.9
3.2
0.0
0.0
250.0
0.1
0.1
420
Note 1: Pound equivalent baseline discharges are rounded to the nearest 0.1 pounds.
Note 2: Chemicals for which no TWF or POTW removal fector is available (designated by "UNK")
are entered as having zero pound equivalent baseline discharges.
B-8
-------
TABLE B-4
BASELINE POLLUTANT DISCHARGES
RAIL CHEMICAL & PETROLEUM SUBCATEGORY
DIRECT DISCHARGERS
Chemical Name
Adsorbable Organic Halides (AOX)
Ammonia as Nitrogen
5-Day Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD)
Chloride
Fluoride
Nitrate/Nitrite
Surfactants (MBAS)
Total Dissolved Solids
Total Organic Carbon (TOC)
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH
Total Phenols
Total Phosphorus
Oil and Grease
Total Suspended Solids
Acetone
Ethylbenzene
Methyl ethyl ketone
m-Xylene
o+p-Xylene
Anthracene
Benzoic acid
Carbazole
p-Cresol
2,4-Diaminotoluene
Dimethyl sulfone
n-Docosane
n-Dodecane
n-Eicosane
Fluoranthene
n-Hexacosane
n-Hexadecane
Hexanoic Acid
1-Methylphenanthrene
Naphthalene
n-Octacosane
n-Octadecane
Phenanthrene
Phenol
Pyrene
Styrene
n-Tetracosane
n-Tetradecane
n-Triacontane
Acephate
Benefluralin
Pollutants
Discharged
at Baseline
(grams)
759
14,925
28,204
351,265
2,445,766
4,645
4,409
4,956
15,433,477
348,076
39,507
826
18,605
22,869
38,460
128
26
281
26
26
67
150
79
84
3^04
44
26
26
26
29
33
26
4,956
26
26
28
26
62
94
26
26
50
26
48
1,331
4
Conversion Factors
Pound
Toxic Equivalent
Grams/ Weighting Discharge
Pounds Factor at Baseline
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03;
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
UNK
1.8E-03
UNK
UNK
2.4E-05
3.5E-02
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
UNK
5.0E-06
1.4E-03
2.5E-05
1.5E-03
4.7E-03
2.5E+00
3.3E-04
2.7E-01
4.0E-03
1.8E-01
UNK
8.2E-05
4.3E-03
4.3E-03
8.0E-01
8.2E-05
4.3E-03
3.7E-04
l.OE-01
1.5E-02
S.2E-05
4.3E-03
2.9E-01
2.8E-02
1.1E-01
1.4E-02
8.2E-05
43E-03
8.2E-05
4.6E-02
I.9E-01
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
B-9
-------
TABLE B-4 (continued)
BASELINE POLLUTANT DISCHARGES
RAIL CHEMICAL & PETROLEUM SUBCATEGORY
DIRECT DISCHARGERS
Chemical Name
Alpha-BHC
Beta-BHC
Deita-BHC
Gamma-Chlordane
Dacthal (DCPA)
Diallate
Dieldrin
Endosulfan Sulfate
Pentachloronitrobenzene
Propaohlor
Propazine
Terbacil
Terbuthylazine
2,4-DB (Butoxon)
Dicamba
Dichloroprop
Dinoseb
MCPP
2,4,5-T
2,4,5-TP
OCDD
OCDF
Aluminum
Arsenic
Barium
Boron
Calcium
Chromium
Copper
Iron
Magnesium
Manganese
Phosphorus
Potassium
Silicon
Sodium
Sulfur
Titanium
Zinc
Total
Pollutants
Discharged
at Baseline
(grams)
0
0
0
0
0
364
1
0
0
1
10
5
4,221
202
881
80
48
58,732
19
20
0
0
10,217
75
1,513
3,458
60,879
96
210
31,611
25,687
1,295
20,233
1,918,732
25,768
3,107,077
888,609
140
686
24,928,725
Conversion Factors
Toxic
Grams/ Weighting
Pounds
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21 E-03
2.21E-03
2.21 E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21 E-03
2.21E-03
2.21 E-03
2.21 E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21 E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21 E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21E-03
2.21 E-03
2.21E-03
2.21 E-03
2.21 E-03
2.21E-03
2.21 E-03
2.21 E-03
2.21E-03
Factor
4.3E+01
1.2E+01
3.5E-02
1.6E+03
3.4E-02
4.5E-01
5.7E+04
l.OE+02
7.4E-01
3.3E-01
3.5E-03
l.OE-03
3.5E-02
3.6E-02
1.5E-02
9.3E-02
9.0E-U1
1.8E-03
2.8E-01
1.8E-01
4.2E+05
6.7E+04
6.4E-02
3.5E+00
2.0E-03
1.8E-01
2.8E-05
7.6E-02
6.3E-01
5.6E-03
8.7E-04
7.0E-02
UNK
1.1 E-03
UNK
5.5E-06
5.6E-06
2.9E-02
4.7E-02
Pound
Equivalent
Discharge
at Baseline
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.6
0.0
0.4
74.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.0
0.0
23.9
0.6
1.4
0.6
0.0
1.4
0.0
0.0
0.3
0.4
0.0
0.2
0.0
4.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
113
Note 1: Pound equivalent baseline discharges are rounded to the nearest 0.1 pounds.
Note 2: Chemicals for which no TWF or POTW removal factor is available (designated by "UNK"
are entered as having zero pound equivalent baseline discharges.
B-10
------- |