United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Water
(4303) ;
EPA821-R-97-005
November 1997
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis for
Proposed Pretreatment Standards
for Existing and New Sources for
the Industrial Laundries Point
Source Category
-------
-------
COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS FOR
PROPOSED PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR
EXISTING AND NEW SOURCES FOR THE
INDUSTRIAL LAUNDRIES POINT SOURCE CATEGORY
FINAL REPORT
Prepared for
Ms. Susan Bums
Engineering and Analysis Division
Office of Water
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW
Washington, D.C. 20460
Prepared by
Eastern Research Group, Inc.
110 Hartwell Avenue
Lexington, MA 02173
November 1997
-------
-------
CONTENTS
SECTION ONE
INTRODUCTION
Page
1-1
SECTION TWO
BACKGROUND AND METHODOLOGY 2-1
2.1
Pollutants of Concern 2-3
2.2 Toxic Weighting Factors 2-3
2.3
Pollution Control Options 2-4
2.4 Pollutant Removals 2-4
2.5
Annualized Costs of Compliance 2-7
2.6 Calculation of the Cost-Effectiveness Values 2-9
2.7 Comparisons of Cost-Effectiveness Values . . 2-11
SECTION THREE COST-EFFECTIVENESS RESULTS 3-1
SECTION FOUR COMPARISON OF COST-EFFECTIVENESS VALUES WITH
PROMULGATED RULES 4-1
SECTION FIVE REFERENCES 5-1
APPENDIX A SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION FOR COST-EFFECTIVENESS
ANALYSIS: POLLUTANT LOADING ANALYSIS A-l
APPENDIX B SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION FOR COST-EFFECTIVENESS
ANALYSIS: COST ANALYSIS . B-l
APPENDIX C COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS RESULTS USING THE
ALTERNATIVE PWF APPROACH C-l
APPENDIX D COST-EFFECTTVENESS ANALYSIS RESULTS ASSUMING A
TOXIC WEIGHTING FACTOR FOR TPH OF ZERO D-l
-------
APPENDIX E
Eage
COMPARISON OF AVERAGE COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF
PROPOSED AND ALTERNATIVE EXCLUSION CUTOFFS
UNDER THE CP OPTION B-l
11
-------
SECTION ONE
INTRODUCTION
This report supports the proposed Pretreatment Standards for the Industrial Laundries Point
Source Category (IL Standards). In this document, EPA compares the total annualized cost of each of
four regulatory options to the corresponding effectiveness of that option in reducing the discharge of
pollutants. EPA evaluates the effectiveness in terms of costs per pound of pollutant removed, weighted by
the relative toxicity of die pollutant (toxic weighting factor). The rationale for this measure, referred to as
"pounds-equivalent removed," is described later in this document.
Section Two discusses EPA's cost-effectiveness methodology and identifies me pollutants included
in ihe analysis. This section also presents EPA's toxic weighting factors for each pollutant and considers
the removal efficiency of each option. Section Three presents the results of ihe cost-effectiveness analysis.
In Section Four, ihe cost-effectiveness value for the proposed regulatory option is compared to cost-
effectiveness values for other proposed and promulgated rules. Appendix A presents data on pollutants
and pollutant removals, and Appendix B presents data on annualized costs for each of the regulatory
options.
1-1
-------
-------
SECTION TWO
BACKGROUND AND METHODOLOGY
Cost-effectiveness (CE) is evaluated as the incremental and average annualized cost of a pollution
control option in an industry or industry subcategory per incremental and total pound equivalent of
pollutant (i.e., pound of pollutant adjusted for toxicity) removed by mat control option. The cost-
effectiveness analysis primarily enables EPA to compare the removal efficiencies of regulatory options
under consideration for a rule. A secondary use is to compare the cost effectiveness of the proposed
option for the IL Standards to that of pretreatment standards for olher industries.
EPA ranks options hi order of increasing pound equivalents removed to identify the point at which
increased removal of pollutants is no longer cost-effective. Generally, EPA determines this to be where
costs (per pound equivalent removed) increase sharply, mat is, where relatively few incremental pounds
are removed for steady increases in cost. The accompanying figure (Figure 2-1) shows this point as Point
A, where the cost-effectiveness curve becomes nearly vertical. Increases hi removals beyond this point
come only at relatively high unit costs, which, hi many cases, EPA will determine exceed the benefit of the
increased removals to society.
A number of steps must be undertaken before a cost-effectiveness analysis can be performed.
There are five steps that define the analysis or generate data for use hi the cost-effectiveness calculation:
• Determine Ihe wastewater pollutants of concern (priority and other pollutants).
• Estimate the relative toxic weights (Ihe adjustments to pounds of pollutants to reflect
toxicity) of the pollutants of concern.
• 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
-------
CD
1
§•
-------
All of these factors are used in the calculation of the cost-effectiveness values, which can then be
compared for each regulatory option under consideration. The following sections discuss the five
preliminary steps and the cost-effectiveness calculation and comparison methodologies.
2.1 POLLUTANTS OF CONCERN
Under the IL Standards, a number of priority and other nonconventional pollutants are regulated.
Some of the factors considered in selecting pollutants for regulation include toxicity, frequency of
occurrence in wastestream effluent, and amount of pollutant in the wastestream. The list of regulated
pollutants for each regulatory option is presented in Appendix A.
2.2 TOXIC WEIGHTING FACTORS
Cost-effectiveness analyses account for differences hi toxicity among the pollutants using toxic
weighting factors. These factors are necessary because different pollutants have different potential effects
on human and aquatic life. For example, a pound of zinc in an effluent stream has a significantly different
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 derived from chronic
freshwater aquatic criteria. In cases where a human health criterion has also been established for the
consumption of fish, the sum of both the human and aquatic criteria are used to derive toxic weighting
factors. The factors are standardized by relating mem to a "benchmark" toxicity value that was based on
the toxicity of copper when the methodology was developed.1 Appendix A presents the toxic weighting
factors used for the regulated pollutants in the cost-effectiveness analysis of the industrial laundries
industry.
1 Although the water quality criterion has been revised (to 12.0 ng/1), all cost-effectiveness analyses for
effluent guideline regulations continue to use the "old" 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 hi the effluent, the revised higher criterion for copper results hi a toxic weighting factor for copper
of 0.467 rather than 1.0.
2-3
-------
Examples of the effects of different aquatic and human health criteria on freshwater toxic
weighting factors are presented in Table 2-1. As shown hi this table, the toxic weighting factor is the sum
of two criteria-weighted ratios: the "benchmark/old" copper criterion divided by the human health
criterion for the particular pollutant and the "benchmark/old" copper criterion divided by the aquatic
chronic criterion. For example, using the values reported in Table 2-1, 11 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 11 times as large as the toxic weight of copper (5.16/0.467=11.05).
2.3 POLLUTION CONTROL OPTIONS
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources (PSES) and Pretreatment Standards for New Sources
(PSNS) options are proposed. Because there are no direct discharges hi the Industrial Laundry Industry,
Best Available Technology (BAT), New Source Performance Standards (NSPS), and Best Practicable
Control Technology (BPT) are not considered. This cost-effectiveness analysis was performed for four
pollution control options for indirect dischargers: OC, organics control using a steam-tumbling process;
CP, chemical precipitation treatment of wastewater from industrial laundry items; DAF, dissolved air
flotation treatment of wastewater from industrial laundry items; and COMBO, either chemical precipitation
or dissolved air flotation of wastewater from industrial laundry items (as defined in Table 2-2). A zero-
discharge option is not considered within the analysis.
2.4 POLLUTANT REMOVALS
The pollutant loadings have been calculated for each facility under each regulatory option for
comparison with baseline loadings. The postregulatory removals under each regulatory option are
presented in Appendix A.
Pollutant removals are calculated directly as the difference between current and post-treatment
discharges. Removals are then weighted using the toxic weighting factors and are reported hi pound
equivalents (see Appendix A for pound-equivalent removals for all pollutants by pollutant and option).
2-4
-------
TABLE 2-1
EXAMPLES OF TOXIC WEIGHTING FACTORS
BASED ON COPPER FRESHWATER CHRONIC CRITERIA
Pollutant
Copper3
Cadmium
Naphthalene
Human Health
Criteria
Gig/1)
—
84
41,026
Aquatic
Chronic
Criteria Ois/1)
12.0
1.1
370
Weighting Calculation
5.6/12.0
5.6/84 + 5.6/1.1
5.6/41,026 + 5.6/370
Toxic
Weighting
Factor
0.467
5.16
0.015
"Although Ihe water quality criterion for copper has been revised (to 12.0 ftg/1), the cost effectiveness analysis
used the previous criterion (5.6 pgfl) to facilitate comparisons with cost-effectiveness values for other effluent
limitations guidelines. The revised higher criteria for copper results in a toxic weighting factor for copper
equal to 0.467 instead of 1.0, which was the result of the previous criterion.
Notes: Human health and aquatic chronic criteria are maximum contamination thresholds. Units for
criteria are micrograms of pollutant per liter of water.
Sources: EPA, 1997c.
2-5
-------
TABLE 2-2
REGULATORY OPTIONS CONSIDERED IN THE COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS
Option
OC
CP
COMBO
DAF
Description
Organics control using a steam-tumbling process.
Chemical precipitation treatment of wastewater from
industrial laundry items; linen supply wastewater does
not require treatment. If untreated, the treated and
untreated streams are combined prior to discharge.
Either chemical precipitation or dissolved air flotation
of wastewater from industrial laundry items; linen
supply wastewater does not require treatment. If
untreated, streams are combined prior to discharge.
Uses the higher long-term average of the two
technologies.
Dissolved air flotation treatment of wastewater from
industrial laundry items; linen supply wastewater does
not require treatment. If untreated, streams are
combined prior to discharge.
Note: The CP, COMBO, and DAF options correspond to CP-IL, COMBO-IL, and DAF-IL in EPA's
Development Document for Proposed Pretreatment Standards for the Industrial Laundries Point
Source Category, September, 1997. (EPA, 1997a).
2-6
-------
Total removals for each option are then calculated by summing the removals for all pollutants under each
option.
One additional step is undertaken to calculate final reductions hi pollutant loadings for indirect
dischargers because of the ability of POTWs to remove pollutants, measured as POTW removal
efficiencies. Appendix A presents the POTW removal efficiencies for 47 pollutants.
POTW removal efficiencies are used as follows. If a facility is discharging 100 pounds of
cadmium hi its effluent stream to a POTW and the POTW has a removal efficiency for cadmium of
38 percent, then the cadmium discharged to surface waters is only 62 pounds. If the regulation results hi a
reduction of cadmium hi the effluent stream such that total cadmium discharged to the POTW is
50 pounds, men the amount discharged to surface waters is calculated as SO pounds multiplied by the
POTW removal efficiency factor (1 - 0.38 or 0.62 times 50 pounds equals 31 pounds). The cost-
effectiveness calculations then reflect the fact that die actual reduction of pollutant discharged to surface
water is not 50 pounds (the change hi the amount discharged to the POTW), but 31 pounds (the change hi
the amount actually discharged to surface water). Pollutant removals calculated hi this way are presented
hi Table 2-3.
2.5 ANNUALIZED COSTS OF COMPLIANCE
Under each regulatory option, annualized costs of compliance have been developed (see EPA,
1997a and 1997b). The derivation of these costs is summarized briefly below.
EPA derived the pretax costs (including the state and federal governments' share of compliance
costs)2 of purchasing, installing, and operating pollution control equipment. EPA annualized any capital
costs at 7 percent3 over 16 years and added these costs to the annual costs of operating the pollution control
2 Every dollar spent on compliance can be applied against a firm's taxable income. Due to various tax
mechanisms such as accelerated depreciation, this reduction means mat firms face only about 70 percent of
compliance costs after taxes.
i
3 Source of real cost of capital: Office of Management and Budget (OMB), undated.
2-7
-------
TABLE 2-3
TOTAL POLLUTANT REMOVALS BY REGULATORY OPTION
Option
Pounds
Removed
Pound Equivalents
Removed
OC
570.205
5,278
CP
27,308,247
407,358
COMBO
27,028,386
402,253
DAF
28,552,783
402,921
Source: see Tables A-l through A-4.
2-8
-------
equipment. The aggregate annual pretax costs by option are presented in Table 2-4. Appendix B presents
the calculations used to arrive at the aggregate annual costs figures presented hi Table 2-4.
2.6 CALCULATION OF THE COST-EFFECTIVENESS VALUES
Cost-effectiveness values are calculated separately for each regulatory option. Options first are
ranked in ascending order of pounds equivalent of pollutants removed. The incremental cost-effectiveness
value for a particular control option is calculated as the ratio of the incremental annual cost to the
incremental pounds equivalent removed. Average cost-effectiveness values for each option are calculated
as total dollars for the option divided by total pounds equivalent removed by the option. The incremental
effectiveness values are viewed incrementally in comparison to the baseline (zero costs/zero removals) for
OC and to the preceding regulatory option (for all subsequent options). Cost-effectiveness values are
reported in units of dollars per pound equivalent of pollutant removed.
For ihe purpose of comparing cost-effectiveness values of options under review to those of other
promulgated rules, compliance costs used in the cost-effectiveness analysis (which are hi 1993 dollars) are
adjusted to 1981 dollars using Engineering News Record's Construction Cost Index (CCI) (see Table 2-4
for compliance costs in 1981 dollars). This adjustment factor is calculated as follows:
Adjustment factor = 1981 CCI/1993 CCI = 3,535/5,210 = 0.6785
The equation used to calculate incremental cost effectiveness is:
CE
where:
CEk=
ATCk=
Cost-effectiveness of Option k
Total annualized treatment cost under Option k
Pound equivalents removed by Option k
2-9
-------
TABLE 2-4
AGGREGATE ANNUAL COST BY REGULATORY OPTION
Option
OC
CP
COMBO
DAF
Cost
$1993
$59,431,680
$123,384,085
$131,269,784
$159,931,631
Cost
$1981
$40,324,395
$83,716,102
$89,066,549
$108,513,611
Source: see Table B-l
2-10
-------
The numerator of the equation, ATCk minus ATC^, is simply the incremental annualized
treatment cost in going from Option k-1 (an option that removes fewer pound equivalent pollutants) to
Option k (an option that removes more pound equivalent pollutants). The denominator is similarly the
incremental removals achieved in going from Option k-1 to k. Thus, cost-effectiveness measures the
incremental unit cost of pollutant removal of Option k (hi pound equivalents) in comparison to
Option k-1.
Average cost-effectiveness values can also be derived by setting ATC^ to zero and by setting the
pollutant loadings (PEtO to the current loading. These values can be used, with caution, to compare an
option to previously promulgated effluent limitations guidelines.
2.7 COMPARISONS OF COST-EFFECTIVENESS VALpES
Because the options are ranked in ascending order of pound equivalents of pollutants removed,
any option that has higher costs but lower removals than another option immediately can be identified (the
cost-effectiveness value for the next option becomes negative). When negative values are computed for
Option k, Option k-1 will be noted as "dominated" (having a higher cost and lower removals than Option
k). Option k-1 is then removed from the 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 in terms of their
incremental cost-effectiveness values and are considered viable options for regulatory consideration.
2-11
-------
-------
SECTION THREE
COST-EFFECTIVENESS RESULTS
In this cost-effectiveness analysis, EPA evaluates four PSES options. The CP, DAF, and
COMBO options assume only that wastewater from industrial laundry items will be treated (linen supply
wastewater would not require treatment). If untreated, the treated and untreated streams are combined
prior to discharge. The remaining option, OC, requires the entire wastestream to be treated using a steam
tumbling process (see Table 2-2). Table 3-1 presents the cost-effectiveness data and results.
A brief glance at Table 3-1 will reveal that COMBO and DAF are both dominated options, that is,
CP removes more pound equivalents at a lower cost than COMBO and DAF. Thus, the only
nondominated (and thus potentially cost-effective) options are OC and CP. Table 3-2 shows the
incremental cost-effectiveness of these two options to be $7,640 and $108, with average cost effectiveness
of $7,640 and $206.
3-1
-------
I
to
3
CA /••»«,
a.S»|
^ co ^ 00 O4
fcj O -S O\ SJ
w ^
•a £ "?
ra s\ ^
« a '"•» m
§ « £ 00 §•
g o •£ o\ «
o C_) "S *^ •
*• 8 52- iS
>S W S-
—
1
2
1
•a
3
1
^H
Cfl ^
e ON
tS
l|It
W*
jy
M 00
g ON
O AA.
iflt
v'3a>^—'
ff*
a
e
I
O
:
:
o
%o
o
VO
r-"
ON
CO
^r
cs
CO
o"
60
oo
>0
CO
§"
o"
so
oo
8
cs
f»
s
60
>n
T— <
fsj*
^"
l"*^
00
V*
r-
s
CO
fp
VO"
vo
oo
co
1
O
s
ON
VO
OO
co
oT
cs
CO
VO
o^
t~^
•*
^1^
ON
60
VO
VO
t— 1
VO,
co
oo"
o
•— 1
6O
*— i
1
O
VO
o
g
00
oo
"I
§
^
o\
C*"^
Tf
ts
&2
co
CS
o
VO
en
oc
£O
oo
-------
vc
§
W
8 oo a"
.c o\ «
W
a
E
s
CO
eT
oo
r-
I
s
a •!•(
oo
!*>
VO
CO
oo
00
>O
s
o
-
I
a
3-3
-------
-------
SECTION FOUR
COMPARISON OF COST-EFFECTIVENESS VALUES WITH
PROMULGATED RULES
As discussed in Section Two, incremental cost-effectiveness is the appropriate measure for
comparing one regulatory option to an alternative, less stringent regulatory option for the same rule. Some
believe mat it may also be used to compare cost-effectiveness across rules when considering how the last
increment of stringency in one rule compares to the last increment of stringency hi another. For
comparing the overall cost-effectiveness of one rule to another, average cost-effectiveness may be a more
appropriate measure, but must be considered in context with caution. (Average cost-effectiveness can be
thought of as the "increment" between no regulation and the selected option, for any given rule.
Table 4-1 presents the incremental cost-effectiveness values for the IL Standards and pretreatment
standards issued for other industries. The numbers presented here for this rulemaking are pretax costs,
whereas many of the numbers presented for other effluent guidelines are after-tax costs—that is, the costs
actually faced by the firms, not the total cost of the equipment (which is subsidized by reductions hi taxable
income). Thus direct comparisons between this rulemaking and others cannot be made easily. The
equivalent after-tax cost, however, is approximately 70 percent of pretax costs. The number reported for
the industrial laundry industries is for the preferred option, CP.', As the table shows, the $108 per
incremental pound equivalent removed associated with the traditional cost-effectiveness calculations is hi
the range of cost-effectiveness values seen for other rules. .
4-1
-------
TABLE 4-1
INDUSTRY COMPARISON OF PSES COST-EFFECTIVENESS
FOR INDIRECT DISCHARGERS
(Toxic and Nonconventional Pollutants Only; Copper-Based Weights'; $ 1981)
Industry
Aluminum Penning
Battery Manufacturing
Canmaking
Coal Mining1"
Coastal Oil and Gas*
Coil Coating
Copper Forming
Electronics I
Electronics n
Foundries
Industrial Laundries
Inorganic Chemicals I
Inorganic Chemicals II
Iron and Steel
Leather Tanning
Metal Finishing
Nonferrous Metals Forming
Nonfcrrous Metals
Manufacturing I
Nonfcrrous Metals
Manufacturing n
Offshore Oil and Gasb
OCSPSF
Pharmaceuticals^ A/C
B/D
Plastics Molding and Forming
PE Currently
Discharged
(thousands)
1,602
1,152
252
NA
NA
2,503
34
75
260
2,136
2,002
3,971
4,760
5,599
16,830
11,680
189
3,187
38
NA
5,210
897
90
NA
PE Remaining at
Selected Option
(thousands)
18
5
5
NA
NA
10
4
35
24
18
1,594
3,004
6
1,404
1,899
755
5
19
0.41
NA
72
47
0.5
NA
Cost-Effectiveness of
Selected Optkm(s)
($/PE removed)
155
15
38
NA
NA
10
10
14
14
116
108
9
<1
6
111
10
90
15
12
NA
34
47
96
NA
4-2
-------
TABLE 4-1 (continued)
Industry
Porcelain Enameling
Pulp and Paper*
PE Currently
Discharged
(thousands)
1,565
9,539
PE Remaining at
Selected Option
(thousands)
96
103
Cost-Effectiveness of
Selected Optkm(s)
($/PE removed)
14
65
'Although toxic weighing factors for priority pollutants varied across these rules, this table reflects the cost-effectiveness at the
time of regulation.
"Industry has no known or expected indirect discharges.
"Reflects costs and removals of both air and water pollutants. '
••Proposed.
4-3
-------
-------
SECTION FIVE
REFERENCES
U.S. EPA, 1997a. Technical Development Document for Proposed Pretreatment Standards for Existing
and New Sources for the Industrial Laundries Point Source Category. November.
U.S. EPA, 1997b. Economic Analysis for Proposed Pretreatment Standards for Existing and New Sources
for the Industrial Laundries Point Source Category. November.
U.S. EPA, 1997c. Toxic and Pollutant Weighting Factors for Proposed Pretreatment Standards for
Existing and New Sources for the Industrial Laundries Point Source Category. November.
OMB, undated. "Memorandum to the regulatory working group on economic analysis of federal
regulations under Executive Order 12866." Sally Katzen.
5-1
-------
-------
APPENDIX A
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION FOR
COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS:
POLLUTANT LOADINGS ANALYSIS
-------
-------
Table A-l
Industry Loads and Removals by Pollutant
OC Option
Industry Baseline Industry Treated
Pollutant Code Analvte Loadflb/vrt Load flb/vrt
B7
N34
N38
N42
122
N54
N58
AL
SB
AS
BA
N64
N66
BE
F66
BOD
B
167
CD
COD
17
T23
CR
CO
CU
F68
T69
P38
N90
FE
T54
PB
N9S
MN
HG
144
MO
Ml 02
N103
N104
N105
N106
N107
N114
N115
N116
N117
N118
T55
MI
N119
HEM
N125
N126
N130
res
SB
AG
T85
FL
SN
n
T86
roc
SHEM
rs
T30
T87
ZN
1,2-DIPHENYLHYDRAZrNE
2-BUTANONE
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
2-PROPANONE
4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL
4-METHYL-2-PENTANONE
ALPHA-TERPINEOL
ALUMINUM
ANTIMONY
ARSENIC
BARIUM
BENZOIC ACID
BENZYL ALCOHOL
BERYLLIUM
BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE
BOD S-DAY (CARBONACEOUS)
BORON
BUTYL BENZYL PHTHALATE
CADMIUM
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND (COD)
CHLOROBENZENE
CHLOROFORM
CHROMIUM
COBALT
COPPER
DI-N-BUTYL PHTHALATE
DI-N-OCTYL PHTHALATE
ETHYLBENZENE
HEXANOIC ACID
IRON
ISOPHORONE
LEAD
M-XYLENE
MANGANESE
MERCURY
METHYLENE CHLORIDE
MOLYBDENUM
N-DECANE
N-DOCOSANE
N-DODECANE
N-EICOSANE
N-HEXACOSANE
N-HEXADECANE
N-OCTACOSANE
N-OCTADECANE
N-TETRACOSANE
N-TETRADECANE
N-TRIACONTANE
NAPHTHALENE
NICKEL
O+PXYLENE
OIL AND GREASE (AS HEM)
P-CRESOL
P-CYMENE
PENTAMETHYLBENZENE
PHENOL
SELENIUM
SILVER
TETRACHLOROETHENE
THALLIUM
TIN
TITANIUM
TOLUENE
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBON (AS SO
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
TRANS-I,2-DICHLOROETHENE
TRICHLOROETHENE
VANADIUM
YTTRIUM
ZINC
Totals
0
28,645
9,280
160,369
12,774
19,278
12,512
673,267
32,101
13,013
71,391
78,273
32,522
31
133,020
113,260,559
34,470
30,064
5,561
265,197,924
2,714
125,352
14,533
5,264
122,556
10,143
11,339
44,621
8,389
1,111,476
4,504
73,452
21,366
23,929
174
35,480
9,810
686,923
12,325
172,443
163,512
17,892
78,453
11,308
66,428
15,405
112,217
14,897
38,713
14,777
10,774
35,873,692
0
57,874
0
13,649
99
4,560
42,026
0
5,760
13,986
72,921
80,496,673
13,242,028
62,793,110
3,909
3,334
1,658
648
194,171
575.722,778
45,282
0
16,645
3,049
80,343'
12,774
13,376
6,820'
673,267
32,101
13,013
71,391
78,273
32,522
31
133,020
113,260,559
34,470
17,432
5,561
265,197,924
897.
129,011
14,533
5,264
122,556 i
10,143
11,339
14,363
8,389
1,111,476
4,504
73,452 '
14,595
23,929
174
16,778
9,810
417,706
12,325
82,141 .
163,512
10,905
78,453
8,100
66,428
15,405
112,217
10,494
18,592
14,777 '
7,906
35,873,692
0
19,102
0
13,649
99
4,560
3,817
0
5,760 '
13,986 '
42,062 '
80,496,673
13,242,028
62,793,110
933
892
1,658
648
194,171
POTW Removals
Removals Removal After POTW
11,176
0
12,000
6,230
80,026
0
5,902
5,691
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
12,632
0
0
1,816
(3,659)
0
0
0
0
0
30,258
0
0
0
0
6,770
0
0
18,701
0
269,217
0
90,302
0
6,987
0
3,209
0
0
0
4,403
20,121
0
2,868
0
0
38,772
0
0
0
0
38,209
0
0
0
30,858
0
0
0
2,976
2,443
0
0
0
0%
62%
0%
28%
84%
63%
0%
0%
88%
72%
40%
35%
81%
0%
61%
60%
91%
14%
86%
91%
82%
0%
0%
91%
4%
84% ,
75%
0%
0%
0%
83%
62%
92%
0%
41%
0%
0%
52%
0%
65%
0%
0%
65%
0%
65%
0%
65%
0%
65%
0%
52%
0%
87%
72%
99%
91%
95%
34%
80%
0%
28%
65%
69%
0%
71%
65%
91%
0%
0%
42%
58%
77%
11,176
0
12,000
4,486
12,804
0
5,902
5,691
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,768
0
0
1,816
(3,659)
0
0
0
0
0
30,258
0
0
0
0
6,770
0
0
18,701
0
269,217
0
90,302
0
2,445
0
1,123
0
0
0
1,541
20,121
0
2,868
0
0
388
0
0
0
0
38,209
0
0
0
30,858
0
0
0
2,976
2,443
0
0
0
Toxic
Weighting
4.30E-03
1.20E+00
2.20E-05
1.80E-02
7.60E-06
4.30E-03
1.20E-04
l.OOE-03
6.40E-02
1.90E-01
4.00E+00
2.00E-03
3.30E-04
5.60E-03
5.30E+00
1.10E-01
O.OOE+00
1.80E-01
2.30E-02
5.20E-MK)
O.OOE+00
2.90E-03
2.10E-03
2.70E-02
1.10E-01
4.70E-01
1.20E-02
2.20E-01
1.40E-03
3.40E-04
5.60E-03
7.30E-04
1.80E+00
1.50E-03
1.40E-02
5.00E+02
4.20E-04
2.00E-01
4.30E-03
8.20E-05
4.30E-03
4.30E-03
8.20E-05
4.30E-03
8.20E-05
4.30E-03
8.20E-05
4.30E-03
8.20E-05
1.50E-02
3.60E-02
8.50E-03
O.OOE+00
2.40E-03
4.30E-02
2.90E-01
2.80E-02
1.10E+00
4.70E+01
7.40E-02
1.40E-01
3.00E-01
2.90E-02
5.60E-03
O.OOE+00
I.OOE-01
O.OOE+00
9.30E-05
6.30E-02
6.20E-01
O.OOE+00
5.10E-02
PE
48
8
,
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
41
0
0
t
(8)
0
0
0
0
0
42
0
0
0
0
10
0
0
8
0
1,158
0
388
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
302
0
24
0
0
17
0
0
0
0
2,827
0
0
0
173
0
0
0
0
154
0
0
0
Source: Development Document (EPA, 1997a).
A-l
-------
Table A-2
Industry Loads and Removals by Pollutant
CP Option
Industry Baseline Industry Treated
n?
N34
M38
N42
m
N54
S'58
(\L
SB
AS
BA
N64
N66
3B
T6S
BOD
B
r«?
CD
COD
n
ro
CR
CO
cu
f«
K9
T38
N90
FB
rM
PB
1495
MN
[10
r-W
MO
N102
N103
HIM
M105
MI06
N107
M114
mis
NU6
NU7
NI18
rss
M
N1I9
HEM
N125
N126
N130
res
SB
AO
res
n.
SN
n
res
roc
S1IEM
rs
no
m
V
Y
ZN
-jXraKEajBROHHrai
1,2-DIPHENYLHYDRAZINE
2-BUTANONE
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
2-PROPANONE
4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL
4-METHYL-2-PENTANONE
ALPHA-TERPINEOL
ALUMINUM
ANTIMONY
ARSENIC
BARIUM
BENZOICACID
BENZYL ALCOHOL
BERYLLIUM
BlSp-ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE
BOD 5-DAY (CARBONACEOUS)
BORON
BUTYL BENZYL PHTHALATE
CADMIUM
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND (COD)
CHLOROBENZENE
CHLOROFORM
CHROMIUM
COBALT
COPPER
DI-N-BUTYL PHTHALATE
DI-N-OCTYL PHTHALATE
ETHYLBENZENE
HEXANOICACTO
IRON
ISOPHORONE
LEAD
M-XYLENE
MANGANESE
MERCURY
METHYLENE CHLORIDE
MOLYBDENUM
N-DECANE
N-DOCOSANE
N-DODECANE
N-EICOSANE
N-HEXACOSANE
N-HEXADECANE
N-OCTACOSANE
N-OCTADECANE
N-TETRACOSANE
N-TETRADECANB
N-TRIACONTANE
NAPHTHALENE
NICKEL
O+PXYLENE
OIL AND GREASE (AS HEM)
P-CRESOL
P-CYMENE
PENTAMETHYLBENZENE
PHENOL
SELENIUM
SILVER
TETRACHLOROETHENE
THALLIUM
TIN
TITANIUM
TOLUENE
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBON (AS SG
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
TRANS-1.2-DICHLOROETHENE
TRICHLOROETHENE
VANADIUM
YTTRIUM
ZINC
Totali
0
28,645
9,280
160,369
12,774
19,278
12,512
673,267
32,101
13,013
71,391
78,273
32,522
31
133,020
113,260,559
34,470
30,064
5,561
265,197,924
2,714
125,352
14,533
5,264
122,556
10,143
11,339
44,621
8,389
1,111,476
4,504
73,452
21,366
23,929
174
35,480
9,810
686,923
12,325
172,443
163,512
17,892
78,453
11,308
66,428
15,405
112,217
14,897
38,713
14,777
10,774
35,873,692
0
57,874
0
13,649
99
4,560
42,026
0
5,760
13,986
72,921
80,496,673
13,242,028
62,793,110
3,909
3,334
1,658
648
194,171
575,722,778
0
28,645
3,080
160,369
3,513
19,278
12,512
413,096
16,110
13,01 1
57,034
78,273
32,522
30
82,027
106,929,464
29,154
14,524
2,977
184,207,948
1,863
125,351
8,989
3,539
60,664
5,676
9,949
20,292
8,389
712,723
4,504
27,159
19,692
10,719
174
11,824
9,810
346,103
5,804
156,037
12,358
4,347
26,293
3,816
11,822
8,707
23,201
7,541
18,835
10,266
9,979
15,180,786
0
57,874
0
13,649
99
4,087
20,782
0
900
9,326
59,128
74,086,442
2,414,527
32,114,458
3,909
3,334
1,644
648
58,577
417,851,812
POTW Removals
Removals Removal After POTW
flbs/vrt Efficiency (%) flbs/vrt
0
0
6,199
0
9,261
0
0
260,172
15,991
2
14,356
0
0
0
50,993
6,331,095
5,316
15,540
2,584
80,989,976
851
1
5,544
1,725
61,892
4,467
1,389
24,329
0
398,753
0
46,293
1,674
13,210
0
23,656
0
340,821
6,521
16,406
151,154
13,545
52,160
7,493
54,606
6,698
89,016
7,356
19,878
4,511
795
20,692,906
0
0
0
0
0
473
21,244
0
4,861
4,660
13,792
6,410,230
10,827,501
30,678,652
0
0
14
0
135,593
157,870,966
62%
0%
28%
84%
63%
0%
0%
88%
72%
40%
35%
81%
0%
61%
60%
91%
14%
86%
91%
82%
0%
0%
91%
4%
84%
75%
0%
0%
0%
83%
62%
92%
0%
41%
0%
0%
52%
0%
65%
0%
0%
65%
0%
65%
0%
65%
0%
65%
0%
52%
0%
87%
72%
99%
91%
95%
34%
80%
0%
28%
65%
69%
0%
71%
65%
91%
0%
0%
42%
58%
77%
0
0
4,463
0
3,427
0
0
31,221
4,477
1
9,332
0
0
0
20,397
569,799
4,571
2,176
233
14,578,196
851
1
499
1,656
9,903
1,117
1,389
24,329
0
67,788
0
3,703
1,674
7,794
0
23,656
0
340,821
2,282
16,406
151,154
4,741
52,160
2,623
54,606
2,344
89,016
2,574
19,878
2,165
795
2,690,078
0
0
0
0
0
95
21,244
0
1,701
1,445
13,792
1,858,967
3,789,625
2,761,079
0
0
8
0
31,186
27,308,247
Toxic
Weighting
Factor
1.20E+00
2.20E-05
1.80E-02
7.60E-06
4.30E-03
1.20E-04
l.OOE-03
6.40E-02
1.90E-01
4.00E+00
2.00E-03
3.30E-04
5.60E-03
5.30E+00
1.10E-01
O.OOE+00
1.80E-01
2.30E-02
5.20E+00
O.OOE+00
2.90E-03
2.10E-03
2.70E-02
1.10E-01
4.70E-01
1.20E-02
2.20E-01
1.40E-03
3.40E-04
5.60E-03
7.30E-04
1.80EfOO
1.50E-03
1.40E-02
5.00E+02
4.20E-04
2.00E-01
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
1.50E-02
3.60E-02
8.50E-03
O.OOE+00
2.40E-03
4.30E-02
2.90E-01
2.80E-02
1.10E+00
4.70E+01
7.40E-02
1.40E-01
3.00E-01
2.90E-02
5.60E-03
O.OOE+00
l.OOE-01
O.OOE+00
9.30E-05
6.30E-02
6.20E-01
O.OOE+00
5.10E-02
PE
Removal
0
0
80
0
15
0
0
1,998
851
4
19
0
0
1
2,244
0
823
50
1,209
0
2
0
13
182
4,654
13
306
34
0
380
0
6,666
3
109
0
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
298
78
7
0
0
0
0
0
0
4,443
1,572
0
510
42
77
0
378,963
0
0
0
5
0
1,591
407,358
Source: Development Document (EPA, 1997a).
A-2
-------
Table A-3
Industry Loads and Removals by Pollutant
COMBO Option
Industry Baseline Industry Treated
rs?
N34
N38
N42
F22
NS4
N58
AL
SB
AS
BA
N64
N66
BE
T66
BOD
B
F67
CD
COD
T7
T23
CR
CO
cu
res
F69
T38
N90
FE
T54
PB
N95
MN
HG
F44
MO
N102
N103
N104
N105
N106
N107
Ml 14
N11S
Ml 16
N117
Ml 18
rss
NI
Ml 19
HEM
N125
N126
N130
T6S
SE
AG
T85
TL
SN
n
rs6
roc
SHEM
rs
no
re?
ZN
1,2-DIPHENYLHYDRAZINE
2-BUTANONE
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
2-PROPANONE
4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL
4-METHYL-2-PENTANONE
ALPHA-TERPINEOL
ALUMINUM
ANTIMONY
ARSENIC
BARIUM
BENZOICACID
BENZYL ALCOHOL
BERYLLIUM
BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE
BOD 5-DAY (CARBONACEOUS)
BORON
BUTYL BENZYL PHTHALATE
CADMIUM
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND (COD)
CHLOROBENZENE
CHLOROFORM
CHROMIUM
COBALT
COPPER
DI-N-BUTYL PHTHALATE
DI-N-OCTYL PHTHALATE
ETHYLBENZENE
HEXANOICACID
IRON
ISOPHORONE
LEAD
M-XYLENE
MANGANESE
MERCURY
METHYLENE CHLORIDE
MOLYBDENUM
N-DECANE
N-DOCOSANE
N-DODECANE
N-EICOSANE
N-HEXACOSANE
N-HEXADECANE
N-OCTACOSANE
N-OCTADECANE
N-TETRACOSANE
N-TETRADECANE
N-TRIACONTANE
NAPHTHALENE
NICKEL
0+PXYLENE
OIL AND GREASE (AS HEM)
P-CRESOL
P-CYMENE
PENTAMETHYLBENZENE
PHENOL
SELENIUM
SILVER
TETRACHLOROETHENE
THALLIUM
TIN
TITANIUM
TOLUENE
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBON (AS SG
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
TRANS-1,2-DICHLOROETHENE
TRICHLOROETHENE
VANADIUM
YTTRIUM
ZINC
Total!
0
28,645
9,280
160,369
12,774
19,278
12,512
673,267
32,101
13,013
71,391
78,273
32,522
31
133,020
113,260,559
34,470
30,064
5,561
265,197,924
2,714
125,352
14,533
5,264
122,556
10,143
11,339
44,621
8,389
1,111,476
4,504
73,452
21,366
23,929
174
35,480
9,810
686,923
12,325
172,443
163,512
17,892
78,453
11,308
66,428
15,405
112,217
14,897
38,713
14,777
10,774
35,873,692
0
57,874
0
13,649
99
4,560
42,026
0
5,760
13,986
72,921
80,496,673
13,242,028
62,793,110
3,909
3,334
1,658
648
194,171
575,722.778
0
28,645
8,274
160,369
10,714
19,278
12,485
478,212
19,230
13,012
57,034
76,861
32,522
31
84,742
106,935,931
33,931
20,325
3,565
184,256,521
1,874
125,352
10,906
3,850
86,855
8,140
9,949
20,293
8,389
712,723
4,504
33,242
19,868
12,683
156
31,665
9,810
372,763
6,740
156,037
14,750
4,720
27,414
3,816
14,778
9,537
24,343
7,541
20,132
10,629
10,379
15,880,079
0
23,954
0
13,637
99
4,087
21,005
0
4,779
9,326
59,200
74,088,883
2,646,314
32,114,458
3,909
3,334
1,644
648
109,873
419,052398
Removals Removal
0
0
1,006
0
2,061
0
26
195,056
12,871
1
14,356
1,412
0
0
48,278
6,324,628
539
9,739
1,997
80,941,404
839
0
3,627
1,414
35,701
2,003
1,389
24,327
0
398,753
0
40,210
1,498
11,245
18
3,815
0
314,161
5,585
16,406
148,762
13,172
51,039
7,493
51,649
5,869
87,873
7,356
18,580
4,148
395
19,993,613
0
33,920
0
12
0
472
21,021
0
981
4,660
13,721
6,407,789
10,595,713
30,678,652
0
0
14
0
84,297
156,670380
0%
62%
0%
28%
84%
63%
0%
0%
88%
72%
40%
35%
81%
0%
61%
60%
91%
14%
86%
91%
82%
0%
0%
91%
4%
84%
75%
0%
0%
0%
83%
62%
92%
0%
41%
0%
0%
52%
0%
65%
0%
0%
65%
0%
65%
0%
65%
0%
65%
0%
52%
0%
87%
72%
99%
91%
95%
34%
80%
0%
28%
65%
69%
0%
71%
65%
91%
0%
0%
42%
58%
77%
Removals
After POTW
24,811
0
0
724
0
762
0
26
23,407
3,604
0
9,332
268
0
0
19,311
569,217
463
1,363
180
14,569,453
839
0
326
1,358
5,712
501
1,389
24,327
0
67,788
0
3,217
1,498
6,635
18
3,815
0
314,161
1,955
16,406
148,762
4,610
51,039
2,623
51,649
2,054
87,873
2,574
18,580
1,991
395
2,599,170
0
339
0
1
0
94
21,021
0
343
1,445
13,721
1,858,259
3,708,500
2,761,079
0
0
8
0
19,388
Toxic
Weighting
4.30E-03
1.20E+00
2.20E-05
1.80E-02
7.60E-06
4.30E-03
1.20E-04
l.OOE-03
6.40E-02
1.90E-01
4.00E+00
2.00E-03
3.30E-04
5.60E-03
5.30E+00
1.10E-01
O.OOE+00
1.80E-01
2.30E-02
5.20E+00
O.OOE+00
2.90E-03
2.10E-03
2.70E-02
1.10E-01
4.70E-01
1.20E-02
2.20E-01
1.40E-03
3.40E-04
5.60E-03
7.30E-04
1.80E+00
1.50E-03
1.40E-02
5.00E+02
4.20E-04
2.00E-01
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
1.50E-02
3.60E-02
8.50E-03
O.OOE+00
2.40E-03
4.30E-02
2.90E-01
2.80E-02
1.10E+00
4.70E+01
7.40E-02
1.40E-01
3.00E-01
2.90E-02
5.60E-03
O.OOE+00
l.OOE-01
O.OOE+00
9.30E-05
6.30E-02
6.20E-01
O.OOE+00
S.10E-02
PE
107
13
1,498
685
19
(
2,12'
i
83
31
93'
0
0
i
149
2,685
6
306
34
0
380
0
5,790
93
8,866
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
279
72
3
0
0
15
0
0
0
4,441
1,556
0
103
42
77
0
370,850
0
0
0
5
0
989
Source: Development Document (EPA, 1997a).
A-3
-------
Table A-4
Industry Loads and Removals by Pollutant
DAF Option
Industry Baseline Industry Treated
ffi" J.i.l^rMCHCOROHHAfffi
n?
N34
N38
N42
122
NS4
S5S
\L
SB
AS
DA
N«
N66
BE
res
BOD
B
F67
CD
COD
n
123
CR
co
cu
rsa
r«9
na
two
FE
rs4
PB
S«S
VfN
HO
«4
MO
N102
M103
N104
N10S
NI06
NI07
NU4
NUS
NI16
MU7
N1U
rss
N!
Mil?
HEM
N12S
M126
MI30
r6S
SB.
\a
rss
n.
SN
n
rs6
roc
SHEM
rs
no
n?
V
Y
ZN
J.2-DIPHENYLHYDRAZINE
2-BUTANONE
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
2-PROPANONE
4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL
4-METHYL-2-PENTANONE
ALPHA-TERPINEOL
ALUMINUM
ANTIMONY
ARSENIC
BARIUM
BENZOICACID
BENZYL ALCOHOL
BERYLLIUM
BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE
BOD 5-DAY (CARBONACEOUS)
BORON
BUTYL BENZYL PHTHALATE
CADMIUM
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND (COD)
CHLOROBENZENE
CHLOROFORM
CHROMIUM
COBALT
COPPER
DI-N-BUTYL PHTHALATE
DI-N-OCTYL PHTHALATE
ETHYLBENZENE
HEXANOICACID
IRON
ISOPHORONE
LEAD
M-XYLENE
MANGANESE
MERCURY
METHYLENE CHLORIDE
MOLYBDENUM
N-DECANE
N-DOCOSANE
N-DODECANE
N-EICOSANE
N-HEXACOSANE
N-HEXADECANE
N-OCTACOSANE
N-OCTADECANE
N-TETRACOSANE
N-TETRADECANE
N-TRIACONTANE
NAPHTHALENE
NICKEL
O+PXYLENE
OIL AND GREASE (AS HEM)
P-CRESOL
P-CYMENE
PENTAMETHYLBENZENE
PHENOL
SELENIUM
SILVER
TETRACHLOROETHENE
THALLIUM
TIN
TITANIUM
TOLUENE
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBON (AS SG
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
TRANS-1.2-DICHLOROETHENE
TRICHLOROETHENE
VANADIUM
YTTRIUM
ZINC
56,458
0
28,645
9,280
160,369
12,774
19,278
12,512
673,267
32,101
13,013
71,391
78,273
32,522
31
133,020
113,260,559
34,470
30,064
5,561
265,197,924
2,714
125,352
14,533
5,264
122,556
10,143
11,339
44,621
8,389
1,111,476
4,504
73,452
21,366
23,929
174
35,480
9,810
686,923
12,325
172,443
163,512
17,892
78,453
11,308
66,428
15,405
112,217
14,897
38,713
14,777
10,774
35,873,692
0
57,874
0
13,649
99
4,560
42,026
0
5,760
13,986
72,921
80,496,673
13,242,028
62,793,110
3,909
3,334
1,658
648
194,171
575.722,778
0
28,645
8,274
160,369
10,714
19,076
12,485
478,212
19,230
13,012
43,646
76,861
32,522
31
84,742
106,879,999
33,931
20,325
3,565
178,964,957
1,740
125,352
10,906
3,850
86,855
8,140
9,591
6,559
8,389
621,491
4,504
33,242
19,497
12,683
156
31,665
8,997
372,763
6,740
59,948
14,750
4,720
27,414
3,366
14,778
9,537
24,343
7,273
20,132
10,629
10,379
15,880,079
0
23,954
0
13,637
99
4,069
20,463
0
4,779
8,858
51,663
73,470,522
2,646,314
29,721,017
3,909
3,334
1,619
643
109,873
410,439304
POTW Removals Toxic
Removals Removal After POTW Weighting PE
Obs/vrt Efficiency f%) flbs/vrt Factor Removal
0
0
1,006
0
2,061
202
26
195,056
12,871
1
27,745
1,412
0
0
48,278
6,380,560
539
9,739
1,997
86,232,967
974
0
3,627
1,414
35,701
2,003
1,748
38,062
0
489,985
0
40,210
1,869
11,245
18
3,815
813
314,161
5,585
112,495
148,762
13,172
51,039
7,943
51,649
5,869
87,873
7,625
18,580
4,148
395
19,993,613
0
33,920
0
12
0
490
21,563
0
981
5,128
21,258
7,026,150
10,595,713
33,072,094
0
0
40
5
84,297
165,283,474
62%
0%
28%
84%
63%
0%
0%
88%
72%
40%
35%
81%
0%
61%
60%
91%
14%
86%
91%
82%
0%
0%
91%
4%
84%
75%
0%
0%
0%
83%
62%
92%
0%
41%
0%
0%
52%
0%
65%
0%
0%
65%
0%
65%
0%
65%
0%
65%
0%
52%
0%
87%
72%
99%
91%
95%
34%
80%
0%
28%
65%
69%
0%
71%
65%
91%
0%
0%
42%
58%
77%
0
0
724
0
762
202
26
23,407
3,604
0
18,034
268
0
0
19,311
574,250
463
1,363
180
15,521,934
974
0
326
1,358
5,712
501
1,748
38,062
0
83,297
0
3,217
1,869
6,635
18
3,815
390
314,161
1,955
112,495
148,762
4,610
51,039
2,780
51,649
2,054
87,873
2,669
18,580
1,991
395
2,599,170
0
339
0
1
0
98
21,563
0
343
1,590
21,258
2,037,584
3,708,500
2,976,488
0
0
23
2
19,388
28.552,783
1E+00
2E-05
2E-02
8E-06
4E-03
1E-04
1E-03
6E-02
2E-01
4E+00
2E-03
3E-04
6E-03
5E+00
1E-01
OE+00
2E-01
2E-02
5E+00
OE+00
3E-03
2E-03
3E-02
1E-01
5E-01
1E-02
2E-01
1E-03
3E-04
6E-03
7E-04
2E+00
2E-03
1E-02
5E+02
4E-04
2E-01
OEH-00
OE+00
OE+00
OE+00
OE+00
OE+00
OE+00
OE+00
OE+00
OE+00
OE+00
2E-02
4E-02
9E-03
OE+00
2E-03
4E-02
3E-01
3E-02
1E+00
5E+01
7E-02
1E-01
3E-01
3E-02
6E-03
OE+00
1E-01
OE+00
9E-05
6E-02
6E-01
OE+00
5E-02
0
0
13
0
3
0
0
1,498
685
1
36
0
0
0
2,124
0
83
31
934
0
3
0
9
149
2,685
6
385
53
0
466
0
5,790
3
93
8,866
2
78
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
279
72
3
0
0
15
0
0
0
4,610
1,596
0
103
46
119
0
370,850
0
0
0
14
0
989
402.921
Source: Development Document (EPA, 1997a).
A-4
-------
APPENDIX B
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION FOR
COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS:
COST ANALYSIS
-------
-------
TABLE B-l !
Computation of Annualized Costs in 1993 and 1981 Dollars
Costs
Capital Cost ($1993)
Annual O&M Cost ($1993)
Total Annualized Capital
Cost ($1993)
Total Annual Cost ($1993)
Deflator (c)
Total Cost ($1981)
OC
$262,564,089
$31,637,263
$27,794,417
$59,431,680
0.6785
$40,324,395
CP
$425,080,134
$78,386,102
i
$44,997,983
i
$123,3841085
0.6785
$83,716,102
COMBO
$398,489,118
$89,086,664
$42,183,121
$131,269,784
0.6785
$89,066,549
DAF
$329.375,031
$125,064,764
$34,866,866
$159,931,631
0.6785
$108,513,611
Source: Capital and O&M Costs: Development Document (EPA,' 1997a); Deflator: Engineering News
Record Construction Cost Index, March 31,1997.
B-l
-------
-------
APPENDIX C
COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS RESULTS
USING THE ALTERNATIVE PWF APPROACH
-------
-------
APPENDIX C
COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS RESULTS
USING THE ALTERNATIVE PWF APPROACH
The pollutant weighting factor (PWF) method is an alternative to the TWF method for assessing
water-based effects. PWFs are derived from the more protective of either the chronic aquatic life criteria (or
toxic effect levels) or the human health criteria (or toxic effect levels) established for the consumption of
water and fish. For carcinogenic substances, the human health risk level is 10"6 (i.e., protective to a level
allowing 1 in 1,000,000 excess lifetime cancer cases over background). In contrast to TWFs, PWFs are not
related to a benchmark pollutant. PWFs are derived by taking the reciprocal of the more stringent (smallest
value) of the aquatic life or human health criterion or toxic effect level, both expressed in concentration units
of micrograms per liter (ug/L): !
PWF = _L, if AQ x HHWO or PWF = .j if HHWO < AQ
AQ HHWO
where:
PWF = pollutant weighting factor
AQ = chronic aquatic life value (ug/L)
HHWO = human health (ingesting water and organisms value (ug/L)
The results of using PWFs rather than TWFs in the cost-effectiveness analysis are shown in
Tables C-l and C-2. As Table C-2 shows, the proposed option, CP, has an incremental cost-effectiveness
value of $512/lb. eq. and an average cost-effectiveness value of $868/lb. eq. using this approach. Tables C-3
through C-6 provide the detailed supporting data.
C-l
-------
, 3
0 g
a
|ts
t
CO
CO
en
6%
00
•o
oo
— s ^
•2 *• ^ .-
S •" S S S<
3
VO
•N
o
oo
.
g
u
•3
3
cr»
n
5=
rf
oo
00
S |
w*
o\
oo
S
co
s
cs
vS
a
o
C-2
-------
c£ O
„ SB >•
MI S3 ^* "S
yy jj S ^^ 3
2 » ? oo o<
w ^
1 « 1^*1
2 « S oe a>
B o £ o\ «
3
a
g
i
1
a
I
I i
s
llfl
GA ®®
o ON
(^ g^
^
Pound
Equivalents
Removed
(Ibs.)
a
e
a,
O
;
CO
tr
rr
•3
O
rr
^
CS
n
^-
69
|
8
oo
vo
oo
0
<«•
69
ve
S
VC
ro
oo
»9
VC
&
C-3
-------
Table C-3
Industry Loads and Removals by Pollutant
OC Option
Industry Baseline Industry Treated Removals Removal After POTW Weighting PE
*H
n?
34
N'33
N42
172
s«4
N58
AL
SB
AS
JA
N64
N'66
OE
r66
BOD
67
CO
COD
n
F23
CR
CO
cu
163
T69
ns
N90
IH
rs4
'B
W5
SIN
10
•44
MO
M102
MI03
N104
NIOJ
N105
N107
S114
M115
M116
NU7
NUS
res
Jl
NU9
HEM
N12S
•J126
N130
rds
!B
VO
ns
H-
SN
n
its
roc
SHEM
rs
no
r«7
v
y
ZN
1 ,2-DIPHENYLHYDRAZINE
2-BUTANONE
2.METHYLNAPHTHALENE
2-PROPANONE
4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL
4-METHYL-2-PENTANONE
ALPHA-TERPINEOL
ALUMINUM
ANTIMONY
ARSENIC
BARIUM
BENZOICACID
BENZYL ALCOHOL
BERYLLIUM
BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE
BOD S-DAY (CARBONACEOUS)
BORON
BUTYL BENZYL PHTHALATE
CADMIUM
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND (COD)
CHLOROBENZENE
CHLOROFORM
CHROMIUM
COBALT
COPPER
DI-N-BUTYL PHTHALATE
DI-N-OCTYL PHTHALATE
ETHYLBENZENE
HEXANOICACID
IRON
ISOPHORONE
LEAD
M-XYLENE
MANGANESE
MERCURY
METHYLENE CHLORIDE
MOLYBDENUM
N-DECANE
N-DOCOSANE
N-DODECANE
N-EICOSANE
N-HEXACOSANE
N-HEXADECANE
N-OCTACOSANE
N-OCTADECANE
N-TETRACOSANE
N-TETRADECANE
N-TRIACONTANE
NAPHTHALENE
NICKEL
O+PXYLENE
OIL AND GREASE (AS HEM)
P-CRESOL
P-CYMENE
PENTAMETHYLBENZENE
PHENOL
SELENIUM
SILVER
TETRACHLOROETHENE
THALLIUM
TIN
TITANIUM
TOLUENE
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBON (AS SG
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
TRANS-l^-DICHLOROETHENE
TRICHLOROETHENE
VANADIUM
YTTRIUM
ZINC
To""
0
28,645
9,280
160,369
12,774
19,278
12,512
673,267
32,101
13,013
71,391
78,273
32,522
31
133,020
113,260,559
34,470
30,064
5,561
265,197,924
2,714
125,352
14,533
5,264
122,556
10,143
11,339
44,621
8,389
1,111,476
4,504
73,452
21,366
23,929
174
35,480
9,810
686,923
12,325
172,443
163,512
17,892
78,453
11,308
66,428
15,405
112,217
14,897
38,713
14,777
10,774
35,873,692
0
57,874
0
13,649
99
4,560
42,026
0
5,760
13,986
72,921
80,496,673
13,242,028
62,793,110
3,909
3,334
1,658
648
194,171
0
16,645
3,049
80,343
12,774
13,376
6,820
673,267
32,101
13,013
71,391
78,273
32,522
31
133,020
113,260,559
34,470
17,432
5,561
265,197,924
897
129,011
14,533
5,264
122,556
10,143
11,339
14,363
8,389
1,111,476
4,504
73,452
14,595
23,929
174
16,778
9,810
417,706
12,325
82,141
163,512
10,905
78,453
8,100
66,428
15,405
112,217
10,494
18,592
14,777
7,906
35,873,692
0
19,102
0
13,649
99
4,560
3,817
0
5,760
13,986
42,062
80,496,673
13,242,028
62,793,110
933
892
1,658
648
194,171
0
12,000
6,230
80,026
0
5,902
5,691
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
12,632
0
0
1,816
(3,659)
0
0
0
0
0
30,258
0
0
0
0
6,770
0
0
18,701
0
269,217
0
90,302
0
6,987
0
3,209
0
0
0
4,403
20,121
0
2,868
0
0
38,772
0
0
0
0
38,209
0
0
0
30,858
0
0
0
2,976
2,443
0
0
0
697,908
62%
0%
28%
84%
63%
0%
0%
88%
72%
40%
35%
81%
0%
61%
60%
91%
14%
86%
91%
82%
0%
0%
91%
4%
84%
75%
0%
0%
0%
83%
62%
92%
0%
41%
0%
0%
52%
0%
65%
0%
0%
65%
0%
65%
0%
65%
0%
65%
0%
52%
0%
87%
72%
99%
91%
95%
34%
80%
0%
28%
65%
69%
0%
71%
65%
91%
0%
0%
42%
58%
77%
0
12,000
4,486
12,804
0
5,902
5,691
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,768
0
0
1,816
(3,659)
0
0
0
0
0
30,258
0
0
0
0
6,770
0
0
18,701
0
269,217
0
90,302
0
2,445
0
1,123
0
0
0
1,541
20,121
0
2,868
0
0
388
0
0
0
0
38,209
0
0
0
30,858
0
0
0
2,976
2,443
0
0
0
570,205
2.50E+01
4.80E-05
3.20E-03
2.90E-04
7.70E-04
5.80E-04
1.80E-04
1.10E-02
7.20E-02
5.70E+01
l.OOE-03
5.80E-05
l.OOE-03
1.30E+02
5.70E-01
O.OOE+00
3.20E-02
3.80E-03
9.10E-01
O.OOE+00
1.50E-03
1.80E-01
4.80E-03
2.00E-02
8.30E-02
2.00E-03
2.70E-02
3.20E-04
6.10E-05
l.OOE-03
2.80E-02
3.10E-01
2.60E-04
l.OOE-02
8.30E+01
3.70E-01
3.60E-02
7.70E-04
1.50E-05
7.70E-04
7.70E-04
1.50E-05
7.70E-04
1.50E-05
7.70E-04
1.50E-05
7.70E-04
1.50E-05
2.70E-03
6.30E-03
1.50E-03
O.OOE+00
6.00E-04
7.70E-03
5.30E-02
5.00E-03
2.00E-01
8.30E+00
1.30E-01
2.50E-02
5.40E-02
5.20E-03
l.OOE-03
O.OOE+00
1.80E-02
O.OOE+00
1.40E-03
3.70E-02
1.10E-01
O.OOE+00
9.10E-03
0
1
14
4
0
3
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
0
0
(659)
0
0
0
0
0
10
c
0
0
c
2
C
C
6,920
•
207
C
70
(
0
(
(
(
(
(
0
54
(
*
(
0
-
(
{
0
0
4,967
(
(
I
31
i
9(
11,744
Source: Development Document (EPA, 1997a).
C-4
-------
Table C-4
Industry Loads and Removals by Pollutant
CP Option ,
Industry Baseline Industry Treated
Pollutant Code Analvte Loadflb/vri Loadflb/vr)
rn
T37
N34
N38
N42
F22
N54
N58
AL
SB
AS
BA
N64
N66
BE
T66
BOD
B
F67
CD
COD
17
123
CR
CO
cu
res
T69
F38
N90
FE
TS4
PB
N95
MN
HG
T44
MO
N102
N103
N104
N10S
N106
N107
N114
N115
N116
N117
N118
T55
NI
N119
HEM
N12S
N126
N130
res
SE
AG
185
FL
SN
n
T86
roc
SHEM
TS
F30
187
f
'
ZN .
1 , 1 ,1-TRICHLOROETHANM
1,2-DIPHENYLHYDRAZINE
2-BUTANONE
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
2-PROPANONE
4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL
4-METHYL-2-PENTANONE
ALPHA-TERPINEOL
ALUMINUM
ANTlMONy
ARSENIC
BARIUM
BENZOIC ACID
BENZYL ALCOHOL
BERYLLIUM
BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE
BOD 5-DAY (CARBONACEOUS)
BORON
BUTYL BENZYL PHTHALATE
CADMIUM
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND (COD)
CHLOROBENZENE
CHLOROFORM
CHROMIUM
COBALT
COPPER
DI-N-BUTYL PHTHALATE
DI-N-OCTYL PHTHALATE
ETHYLBENZENE
HEXANOIC ACID
IRON
ISOPHORONE
LEAD
M-XYLENE
MANGANESE
MERCURY
METHYLENE CHLORIDE
MOLYBDENUM
N-DECANE
N-DOCOSANE
N-DODECANE
N-EICOSANE
N-HEXACOSANE
N-HEXADECANE
N-OCTACOSANE
N-OCTADECANE
N-TETRACOSANE
N-TETRADECANE
N-TRIACONTANE
NAPHTHALENE
NICKEL
O+PXYLENE
OIL AND GREASE (AS HEM)
P-CRESOL
P-CYMENE
PENTAMETHYLBENZENE
PHENOL
SELENIUM
SILVER
TETRACHLOROETHENE
THALLIUM
TIN
TITANIUM
TOLUENE
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBON (AS SG
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
TRANS-1,2-DICHLOROETHENE
TRICHLOROETHENE
VANADIUM
YTTRIUM
ZINC
Totals
56,458
0
28,645
9,280
160,369
12,774
19,278
12,512
673,267
32,101
13,013
71,391
78,273
32,522
31
133,020
113,260,559
34,470
30,064
5,561
265,197,924
2,714
125,352
14,533
5,264
122,556
10,143
11,339
44,621
8,389
1,111,476
4,504
73,452
21,366
23,929
174
35,480
9,810
686,923
12,325
172,443
163,512
17,892
78,453
11,308
66,428
15,405
112,217
14,897
38,713
14,777
10,774
35,873,692
0
57,874
0
13,649
99
4,560
42,026
0
5,760
13,986
72,921
80,496,673
13,242,028
62,793,110
3,909
3,334
1,658
648
194,171
575.722,778
31,647
0
28,645
3,080
160,369
3,513
19,278
12,512
413,096
16,110
13,011
57,034
78,273
32,522
30
82,027
106,929,464
29,154
14,524
2,977
184,207,948
1,863
125,351
8,989
3,539
60,664
5,676
9,949
20,292
8,389
712,723
4,504
27,159
19,692
10,719
174
11,824
9,810
346,103
5,804
156,037
12,358
4,347
26,293
3,816
11,822
8,707
23,201
7,541
18,835
10,266
9,979
15,180,786
0
57,874
0
13,649
99
4,087
20,782
0
900
9,326
59,128
74,086,442
2,414,527
32,114,458
3,909
3,334
1,644
648
58,577
417,851,812
I POTW
Removals Removal
: flbs/yr) Efficiency (%)
24,811
i 0
0
6,199
; o
9,261
': 0
i 0
. 260,172
15,991
'. 2
14,356
: °
', 0
'. 0
50,993
6,331,095
! 5,316
15,540
2,584
:80,989,976
851
1
5,544
1,725
; 61,892
4,467
, 1,389
. 24,329
0
398,753
0
46,293
1,674
13,210
0
23,656
0
340,821
6,521
16,406
1 151,154
, 13,545
: 52,160
7,493
54,606
i 6,698
, 89,016
7,356
19,878
4,511
795
20,692,906
0
0
0
0
0
473
21,244
0
: 4,861
4,660
13,792
i 6,410,230
10,827,501
30,678,652
0
' 0
i 14
0
135,593
157,870,966
0%
62%
0%
28%
84%
63%
0%
0%
88%
72%
40%
35%
81%
0%
61%
60%
91%
14%
86%
91%
82%
0%
0%
91%
4%
84%
75%
0%
0%
0%
83%
62%
92%
0%
41%
0%
0%
52%
0%
65%
0%
0%
65%
0%
65%
0%
65%
0%
65%
0%
52%
0%
87%
72%
99%
91%
95%
34%
80%
0%
28%
65%
69%
0%
71%
65%
91%
0%
0%
42%
58%
77%
Removals
After POTW
flbs/yr)
24,811
0
0
4,463
0
3,427
0
0
31,221
4,477
1
9,332
0
0
0
20,397
569,799
4,571
2,176
233
14,578,196
851
1
499
1,656
9,903
1,117
1,389
24,329
0
67,788
0
3,703
1,674
7,794
0
23,656
0
340,821
2,282
16,406
151,154
4,741
52,160
2,623
54,606
2,344
89,016
2,574
19,878
2,165
795
2,690,078
0
0
0
0
0
95
21,244
0
1,701
1,445
13,792
1,858,967
3,789,625
2,761,079
0
0
8
0
31,186
27308,247
Pollutant
Weighting
Factor
7.70E-04
2.50E+01
4.80E-05
3.20E-03
2.90E-04
7.70E-04
5.80E-04
1.80E-04
1.10E-02
7.20E-02
5.70E+01
l.OOE-03
5.80E-05
l.OOE-03
1.30E+02
5.70E-01
O.OOE+00
3.20E-02
3.80E-03
9.10E-01
O.OOE+00
1.50E-03
1.80E-01
4.80E-03
2.00E-02
8.30E-02
2.00E-03
2.70E-02
3.20E-04
6.10E-05
l.OOE-03
2.80E-02
3.10E-01
2.60E-04
l.OOE-02
8.30E+01
3.70E-01
3.60E-02
7.70E-04
l.SOE-05
7.70E-04
7.70E-04
1.50E-05
7.70E-04
1.50E-05
7.70E-04
1.50E-05
7.70E-04
1.50E-05
2.70E-03
6.30E-03
1.50E-03
O.OOE+00
6.00E-04
7.70E-03
S.30E-02
5.00E-03
2.00E-01
8.30E+00
1.30E-01
2.50E-02
5.40E-02
5.20E-03
l'.OOE-03
O.OOE+00
1.80E-02
O.OOE+00
1.40E-03
3.70E-02
1.10E-01
O.OOE+00
9.10E-03
PE
Removal
19
0
0
14
0
3
0
0
343
322
57
9
0
0
19
11,626
0
146
8
212
0
1
0
2
33
822
2
38
8
0
68
0
1,148
0
78
0
8,753
0
262
0
13
116
0
40
0
42
0
69
0
54
14
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
785
2,762
0
92
8
14
0
68,213
0
0
0
1
0
284
96,501
Source: Development Document (EPA, 1997a).
C-5
-------
Table C-5
Industry Loads and Removals by Pollutant
COMBO Option
-Juh
F37
N34
(438
1442
m
NS4
53
/VL
SB
AS
A
M64
N66
g
r«
BOD
167
ID
COD
n
23
JR
X)
su
res
139
T33
N90
FB
'S4
'B
(95
iSN
K5
M4
MO
1102
003
4104
4105
MtOS
NI07
M114
MilS
41 16
Ml 17
S11S
T5S
41
4119
HEM
N125
4126
N1JO
[65
5E
AG
rss
it
SN
n
res
roc
SHEM
rs
no
r»7
v
y
ZN
Industry Baseline Industry Treated
1,2-DIPHENYLHYDRAZINE
2-BUTANONE
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
2-PROPANONE
4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL
4-METHYL-2-PENTANONE
ALPHA-TERPINEOL
ALUMINUM
ANTIMONY
ARSENIC
BARIUM
BENZOICACID
BENZYL ALCOHOL
BERYLLIUM
BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE
BOD S-DAY (CARBONACEOUS)
BORON
BUTYL BENZYL PHTHALATE
CADMIUM
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND (COD)
CHLOROBENZENE
CHLOROFORM
CHROMIUM
COBALT
COPPER
DI-N-BUTYL PHTHALATE
DI-N-OCTYL PHTHALATE
ETHYLBENZENE
HEXANOICACID
IRON
ISOPHORONE
LEAD
M'-XYLENE
MANGANESE
MERCURY
METHYLENE CHLORIDE
MOLYBDENUM
N-DECANE
N-DOCOSANE
N-DODECANE
N-HCOSANE
N-HEXACOSANE
N-HEXADECANE
N-OCTACOSANE
N-OCTADECANE
N-TETRACOSANE
N-TETRADECANE
N-TRIACONTANE
NAPHTHALENE
NICKEL
O+PXYLENE
OIL AND GREASE (AS HEM)
P-CRESOL
P-CYMENE
PENTAMETHYLBENZENE
PHENOL
SELENIUM
SILVER
TETRACHLOROETHENE
THALLIUM
TIN
TITANIUM
TOLUENE
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBON (AS SG
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
TRANS-1,2-DICHLOROETHENE
TRICHLOROETHENE
VANADIUM
YTTRIUM
ZINC
Totals
0
28,645
9,280
160,369
12,774
19,278
12,512
673,267
32,101
13,013
71,391
78,273
32,522
31
133,020
113,260,559
34,470
30,064
5,561
265,197,924
2,714
125,352
14,533
5,264
122,556
10,143
11,339
44,621
8,389
1,111,476
4,504
73,452
21,366
23,929
174
35,480
9,810
686,923
12,325
172,443
163,512
17,892
78,453
11,308
66,428
15,405
112,217
14,897
38,713
14,777
10,774
35,873,692
0
57,874
0
13,649
99
4,560
42,026
0
5,760
13,986
72,921
80,496,673
13,242,028
62,793,110
3,909
3,334
1,658
648
194,171
575,722,778
0
28,645
8,274
160,369
10,714
19,278
12,485
478,212
19,230
13,012
57,034
76,861
32,522
31
84,742
106,935,931
33,931
20,325
3,565
184,256,521
1,874
125,352
10,906
3,850
86,855
8,140
9,949
20,293
8,389
712,723
4,504
33,242
19,868
12,683
156
31,665
9,810
372,763
6,740
156,037
14,750
4,720
27,414
3,816
14,778
9,537
24,343
7,541
20,132
10,629
10,379
15,880,079
0
23,954
0
13,637
99
4,087
21,005
0
4,779
9,326
59,200
74,088,883
2,646,314
32,114,458
3,909
3,334
1,644
648
109,873
419,052398
Removals Removal After POTW Weighting PE
flbs/vrt Efficiency (%>
-------
Table C-6
Industry Loads and Removals by Pollutant
DAF Option
Industry Baseline Industry Treated Removals Removal
Pollutant Code Analyte Loadflb/vrt Loadrtb/vrt ', flbs/vrt Efficient/.!
F37
N34
N38
N42
T22
NS4
N58
AL
SB
AS
BA
•164
N66
BE
F66
BOD
}
T67
CD
COD
T7
T23
CR
CO
CU
T68
T69
T38
•190
Ti
154
'B
[95
MN
HG
F44
MO
N102
103
N104
N105
N106
N107
N114
N115
N116
N117
N118
rss
MI
N119
HEM
125
126
N130
T65
SE
3
rss
'
SN
86
roc
SHEM
J
T30
'87
I
1,2-DIPHENYLHYDRAZINE
2-BUTANONE
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
2-PROPANONE
4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL
4-METHYL-2-PENTANONE
ALPHA-TERPINEOL
ALUMINUM
ANTIMONY
ARSENIC
BARIUM
BENZOIC ACID
BENZYL ALCOHOL
BERYLLIUM
BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE
BOD 5-DAY (CARBONACEOUS)
BORON
BUTYL BENZYL PHTHALATE
CADMIUM
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND (COD)
CHLOROBENZENE
CHLOROFORM
CHROMIUM
COBALT
COPPER
DI-N-BUTYL PHTHALATE
DI-N-OCTYL PHTHALATE
ETHYLBENZENE
HEXANOICACID
IRON
ISOPHORONE
LEAD
M-XYLENE
MANGANESE
MERCURY
METHYLENE CHLORIDE
MOLYBDENUM
N-DECANE
N-DOCOSANE
N-DODECANE
N-EICOSANE
N-HEXACOSANE
N-HEXADECANE
N-OCTACOSANE
N-OCTADECANE
N-TETRACOSANE
N-TETRADECANE
N-TRIACONTANE
NAPHTHALENE
NICKEL
O+PXYLENE
OIL AND GREASE (AS HEM)
P-CRESOL
P-CYMENE
PENTAMETHYLBENZENE
PHENOL
SELENIUM
SILVER
TETRACHLOROETHENE
THALLIUM
TIN
TITANIUM
TOLUENE
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBON (AS SG
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
TRANS-1.2-DICHLOROETHENE
TRICHLOROETHENE
VANADIUM
YTTRIUM
ZINC
Totals
0
28,645
9,280
160,369
12,774
19,278
12,512
673,267
32,101
13,013
71,391
78,273
32,522
31
133,020
113,260,559
34,470
30,064
5,561
265,197,924
2,714
125,352
14,533
5,264
122,556
10,143
11,339
44,621
8,389
1,111,476
4,504
73,452
21,366
23,929
174
35,480
9,810
686,923
12,325
172,443
163,512
17,892
78,453
11,308
66,428
15,405
112,217
14,897
38,713
14,777
10,774
35,873,692
0
57,874
0
13,649
99
4,560
42,026
0
5,760
13,986
72,921
80,496,673
13,242,028
62,793,110
3,909
3,334
1,658
648
194,171
0
28,645
8,274
160,369
10,714
19,076
12,485
478,212
19,230
13,012
43,646
76,861
32,522
31
84,742
106,879,999
33,931
20,325
3,565
178,964,957
1,740
125,352
10,906
3,850
86,855
8,140
9,591
6,559
8,389
621,491
4,504
33,242
19,497
12,683
156
31,665
8,997
372,763
6,740
59,948
14,750
4,720
27,414
3,366
14,778
9,537
24,343
7,273
20,132
10,629
10,379
15,880,079
0
23,954
0
13,637
99
4,069
20,463
0
4,779
8,858
51,663
73,470,522
2,646,314
29,721,017
3,909
3,334
1,619
643
109,873
0
0
1,006
0
! 2,061
202
26
. 195,056
! 12,871
1
: 27,745
1,412
0
0
48,278
6,380,560
1 539
9,739
: 1,997
86,232,967
974
0
3,627
' 1,414
35,701
2,003
1,748
: 38,062
0
489,985
0
40,210
! 1,869
: 11,245
: 18
3,815
813
314,161
5,585
112,495
. 148,762
13,172
1 51,039
• 7,943
51,649
5,869
1 87,873
I 7,625
: 18,580
I 4,148
395
19,993,613
0
33,920
0
12
0
490
21,563
0
981
5,128
21,258
7,026,150
10,595,713
33,072,094
0
0
40
5
i 84,297
62%
0%
28%
84%
63%
0%
0%
88%
72%
40%
35%
81%
0%
61%
60%
91%
14%
86%
91%
82%
0%
0%
91%
4%
84%
75%
0%
0%
0%
83%
62%
92%
0%
41%
0%
0%
52%
0%
65%
0%
0%
65%
0%
65%
0%
65%
0%
65%
0%
52%
0%
87%
72%
99%
91%
95%
34%
80%
0%
28%
65%
69%
0%
71%
65%
91%
0%
0%
42%
58%
77%
Removals
After POTW
52,970
o
o
724
0
762
202
26
23,407
3,604
0
18,034
268
0
0
19,311
574,250
463
1,363
180
15,521,934
974
0
326
1,358
5,712
501
1,748
38,062
0
83,297
0
3,217
1,869
6,635
18
3,815
390
314,161
1,955
112,495
148,762
4,610
51,039
2,780
51,649
2,054
87,873
2,669
18,580
1,991
395
2,599,170
0
339
0
1
0
98
21,563
0
343
1,590
21,258
2,037,584
3,708,500
2,976,488
0
0
23
2
19,388
Pollutant
Weighting
7.70E-04
2.SOE+01
4.80E-05
3.20E-03
2.90E-04
7.70E-04
5.80E-04
1.80E-04
1.10E-02
7.20E-02
5.70E-H)!
l.OOE-03
5.80E-05
l.OOE-03
1.30E+02
5.70E-01
O.OOE+00
3.20E-02
3.80E-03
9.10E-01
O.OOE+00
1.50E-03
1.80E-01
4.80E-03
2.00E-02
8.30E-02
2.00E-03
2.70E-02
3.20E-04
6.10E-OS
l.OOE-03
2.80E-02
3.10E-01
2.60E-04
l.OOE-02
8.30E+01
3.70E-01
3.60E-02
7.70E-04
1.50E-05
7.70E-04
7.70E-04
1.50E-05
7.70E-04
1.50E-05
7.70E-04
1.50E-05
7.70E-04
1.50E-05
2.70E-03
6.30E-03
1.50E-03
O.OOE+00
6.00E-04
7.70E-03
5.30E-02
5.00E-03
2.00E-01
8.30E+00
1.30E-01
2.50E-02
5.40E-02
S.20E-03
l.OOE-03
O.OOE+00
1.80E-02
O.OOE+00
1.40E-03
3.70E-02
1.10E-01
O.OOE+00
9.10E-03
PE
257
259
20
18
11,007
IS
Ifr
27
474
47
12
0
83
0
997
0
66
1,47;
1,412
It
242
(
87
115
0
39
o
4C
0
68
0
50
13
1
0
o
3
0
o
0
814
2,803
0
19
8
21
0
66,753
0
o
0
3
0
176
Source: Development Document (EPA, 1997a).
C-7
-------
-------
APPENDIX D
COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS RESULTS
ASSUMING A TOXIC WEIGHTING FACTOR FOR TPH OF ZERO
-------
-------
APPENDIX D
COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS RESULTS
ASSUMING A TOXIC WEIGHTING FACTOR FOR TPH OF ZERO
Table D-l presents the results of the cost-effectiveness analysis had EPA not developed a TWF for
TPH. As the table shows, the incremental cost-effectiveness of the CP option is $1,660, and the average
is $2,664. Tables D-2 through D-5 provide the detailed supporting data.
D-l
-------
A
" I
« 3 >*
So fl £7* 'd
W aa ^. GO o4
w ^
"S M "?
O3 ^ ^
lljll
— 1
•a
s
B
"«
£
O *j
Pound
Equivalents
Removed
(Ibs.)
^^*
-j,f J3
o «•
^^ &z
NW'
"2 1 1 "*
S w o 2
B ^ g J
O *£3 •• C
a
O
;
•
1
^-
1
t~T
6ft
ON
CO
3'
oo
10
en
^jT
CN
O
^
oo
r-
B
VO
vq_
of
o
vo
(— <
6ft
C--
O
r— t
ON
"*
S"
s
vo
r^
co
oo
ff.
cs
(T
PM
oo
ON
of
6ft
S
6ft
1
O
CO
in
o
vo
oi
ON
S
vo
V£
c^
ON
oo
ff.
ex
CO
c
s
8
oo
o
CO
6ft
vo
ON
6ft
co
vo
o
^
ON
^
6ft
VO
VO
V
co
Pj
P
D-2
-------
Table D-2
Industry Loads and Removals by Pollutant
OC Option
Pollutant Code Analvte
F37
N34
N38
N42
122
N54
N58
AL
SB
AS
BA
N64
N66
BE
T66
BOD
B
T67
CD
COD
n
T23
CR
CO
CU
res
T69
F38
N90
FE
T54
PB
N95
MN
HG
T44
MO
N102
N103
N104
N105
N106
N107
N114
N115
N116
N117
N118
T55
NI
N119
HEM
N125
N126
N130
T65
SE
AG
res
-
SN
rse
TOC
SHEM
>
T30
T87
ZN
1,2-DIPHENYLHYDRAZINE
2-BUTANONE
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
2-PROPANONE
4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL
4-METHYL-2-PENTANONE
ALPHA-TERPINEOL
ALUMINUM
ANTIMONY
ARSENIC
BARIUM
BENZOIC ACID
BENZYL ALCOHOL
BERYLLIUM
BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE
BOD 5-DAY (CARBONACEOUS)
BORON
BUTYL BENZYL PHTHALATE
CADMIUM
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND (COD)
CHLOROBENZENE
CHLOROFORM
CHROMIUM
COBALT
COPPER
DI-N-BUTYL PHTHALATE
DI-N-OCTYL PHTHALATE
ETHYLBENZENE
HEXANOIC ACID
IRON
ISOPHORONE
LEAD
M-XYLENE
MANGANESE
MERCURY
METHYLENE CHLORIDE
MOLYBDENUM
N-DECANE
N-DOCOSANE
N-DODECANE
N-EICOSANE
N-HEXACOSANE
N-HEXADECANE
N-OCTACOSANE
N-OCTADECANE
N-TETRACOSANE
N-TETRADECANE
N-TRIACONTANE
NAPHTHALENE
NICKEL
O+PXYLENE
OIL AND GREASE (AS HEM)
P-CRESOL
P-CYMENE
PENTAMETHYLBENZENE
PHENOL
SELENIUM
SILVER
TETRACHLOROETHENE
THALLIUM
TIN
TITANIUM
TOLUENE
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBON (AS SG
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
TRANS-1.2-DICHLOROETHENE
TRICHLOROETHENE
VANADIUM
YTTRIUM
ZINC
Totals
Industry Baseline Industry Treated
0
28,645
9,280
160,369
12,774
19,278
12,512
673,267
32,101
13,013
71,391
78,273
32,522
31
133,020
113,260,559
34,470
30,064
5,561
265,197,924
2,714
125,352
14,533
5,264
122,556
10,143
11,339
44,621
8,389
1,111,476
4,504
73,452
21,366
23,929
174
35,480
9,810
686,923
12,325
172,443
163,512
17,892
78,453
11,308
66,428
15,405
112,217
14,897
38,713
14,777
10,774
35,873,692
0
57,874
0
13,649
99
4,560
42,026
0
5,760
13,986
72,921
80,496,673
13,242,028
62,793,110
3,909
3,334
1,658
648
194,171
575,722,778
45,282
0
16,645
3,049
80,343
12,774
13,376
6,820
673,267
32,101
13,013
71,391
78,273
32,522
31
133,020
113,260,559
34,470
17,432
5,561
265,197,924
897
129,011
14,533
5,264
122,556
10,143
11,339
14,363
8,389
1,111,476
4,504
73,452
14,595
23,929
174
16,778
9,810
417,706
12,325
82,141
163,512
10,905
78,453
8,100
66,428
15,405
112,217
10,494
18,592
14,777
7,906
35,873,692
0
19..102
0
13,649
99
4,560
3,817
0
5,760
13,986
42,062
80,496,673
13,242,028
62,793,110
933
892
1,658
648
194,171
POTW Removals
Removals Removal After POTW
: 11,176
0
: 12,000
6,230
, 80,026
0
! 5,902
; 5,691
0
: 0
0
0
0
• 0
0
! 0
! o
: 0
i 12,632
0
0
i 1,816
(3,659)
0
0
0
0
0
30,258
: 0
0
0
0
; 6,770
0
0
, 18,701
0
1 269,217
! 0
90,302
0
6,987
0
3,209
0
0
0
; 4,403
; 20,121
0
2,868
0
: o
. 38,772
0
0
0
: o
: 38,209
0
I o
0
: 30,858
0
0
0
i 2,976
2,443
0
0
0
0%
62%
0%
28%
84%
63%
0%
0%
88%
72%
40%
35%
81%
0%
61%
60%
91%
14%
86%
91%
82%
0%
0%
91%
4%
84%
75%
0%
0%
0%
83%
62%
92%
0%
41%
0%
0%
52%
0%
65%
0%
0%
65%
0%
65%
0%
65%
0%
65%
0%
52%
0%
87%
72%
99%
91%
95%
34%
80%
0%
28%
65%
69%
0%
71%
65%
91%
0%
0%
42%
58%
77%
11,176
0
12,000
4,486
12,804
0
5,902
5,691
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,768
0
0
1,816
(3,659)
0
0
0
0
0
30,258
0
0
0
0
6,770
0
0
18,701
0
269,217
0
90,302
0
2,445
0
1,123
0
0
0
1,541
20,121
0
2,868
0
0
388
0
0
0
0
38,209
0
0
0
30,858
0
0
0
2,976
2,443
0
0
0
Toxic
Weighting
4.30E-03
1.20E+00
2.20E-05
I.80E-02
7.60E-06
4.30E-03
1.20E-04
l.OOE-03
6.40E-02
1.90E-01
4.00E+00
2.00E-03
3.30E-04
5.60E-03
5.30E+00
1.10E-01
O.OOE+00
1.80E-01
2.30E-02
5.20E+00
O.OOE+00
2.90E-03
2.10E-03
2.70E-02
1.10E-01
4.70E-01
1.20E-02
2.20E-01
1.40E-03
3.40E-04
5.60E-03
7.30E-04
1.80E+00
1.50E-03
1.40E-02
5.00E+02
4.20E-04
2.00E-OI
4.30E-03
8.20E-05
4.30E-03
4.30E-03
8.20E-05
4.30E-03
8.20E-05
4.30E-03
8.20E-05
4.30E-03
8.20E-05
1.50E-02
3.60E-02
8.50E-03
O.OOE+00
2.40E-03
4.30E-02
2.90E-01
2.80E-02
1.10E+00
4.70E+01
7.40E-02
1.40E-01
3.00E-01
2.90E-02
5.60E-03
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
9.30E-05
6.30E-02
6.20E-01
O.OOE+00
5.10E-02
PE
48
0
0
81
0
I
0
!
6 I
0
°S
o j
0?
!'
0
0
0
0
0
0
41
0
0
5
(8)
0
0
0
0
0
42
0
0
0
0
10
0
0
8
0
1,158
0
388
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
302
0
24
0
0
17
0
0
0
0
2,827
0
0
0 !
173
0
0
0
0
154
0
0
0
Source: Development Document
D-3
-------
Table D-3
Industry Loads and Removals by Pollutant
CP Option
Industry Baseline Industry Treated
rn
n?
M34
M38
172
NS4
NSS
SB
AS
BA
S'64
Mfifi
BE
T66
BOD
g
T67
CD
COD
n
T23
CR
CO
cu
res
ns
N90
FE
TS4
PQ
«S
MN
10
V10
NI02
N103
•JICH
•)I05
MIOfi
M107
Ml 14
N11S
NI16
Ml 17
M1IS
rss
MI
Ml 19
HEM
N12S
M126
M130
res
5E
AG
rss
rL
n
res
roc
SHEM
rs
no
v
ZN
l,i,l-TRiCHTOROETHANE
1,2-DIPHENYLHYDRAZINE
2-BUTANONE
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
2-PROPANONE
4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL
4-METHYL-2-PENTANONE
ALPHA-TERPINEOL
ALUMINUM
ANTIMONY
ARSENIC
BARIUM
BENZOICACID
BENZYL ALCOHOL
BERYLLIUM
BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE
BOD S-DAY (CARBONACEOUS)
BORON
BUTYL BENZYL PHTHALATE
CADMIUM
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND (COD)
CHLOROBENZENE
CHLOROFORM
CHROMIUM
COBALT
COPPER
DI-N-BUTYL PHTHALATE
DI-N-OCTYL PHTHALATE
ETHYLBENZENE
HEXANOICAC1D
IRON
ISOPHORONE
LEAD
M-XYLENE
MANGANESE
MERCURY
METHYLENE CHLORIDE
MOLYBDENUM
N-DECANE
N-DOCOSANE
N-DODECANE
N-EICOSANE
N-HEXACOSANE
N-HEXADECANE
N-OCTACOSANE
N-OCTADECANE
N-TETRACOSANE
N-TETRADECANE
N-TRIACONTANE
NAPHTHALENE
NICKEL
O+PXYLENE
OIL AND GREASE (AS HEM)
P-CRESOL
P-CYMENE
PENTAMETHYLBENZENE
PHENOL
SELENIUM
SILVER
TETRACHLOROETHENE
THALLIUM
TIN
TITANIUM
TOLUENE
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBON (AS SG
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
TRANS-1 ,2-DICHLOROETHENE
TRICHLOROETHENE
VANADIUM
YTTRIUM
ZINC
0
28,645
9,280
160,369
12,774
19,278
12,512
673,267
32,101
13,013
71,391
78,273
32,522
31
133,020
113,260,559
34,470
30,064
5,561
265,197,924
2,714
125,352
14,533
5,264
122,556
10,143
11,339
44,621
8,389
1,111,476
4,504
73,452
21,366
23,929
174
35,480
9,810
686,923
12,325
172,443
163,512
17,892
78,453
11,308
66,428
15,405
112,217
14,897
38,713
14,777
10,774
35,873,692
0
57,874
0
13,649
99
4,560
42,026
0
5,760
13,986
72,921
80,496,673
13,242,028
62,793,110
3,909
3,334
1,658
648
194,171
0
28,645
3,080
160,369
3,513
19,278
12,512
413,096
16,110
13,011
57,034
78,273
32,522
30
82,027
106,929,464
29,154
14,524
2,977
184,207,948
1,863
125,351
8,989
3,539
60,664
5,676
9,949
20,292
8,389
712,723
4,504
27,159
19,692
10,719
174
11,824
9,810
346,103
5,804
156,037
12,358
4,347
26,293
3,816
11,822
8,707
23,201
7,541
18,835
10,266
9,979
15,180,786
0
57,874
0
13,649
99
4,087
20,782
0
900
9,326
59,128
74,086,442
2,414,527
32,114,458
3,909
3,334
1,644
648
58,577
Removals Removal After POTW Weighting PE |
flbs/vr) Efficiencv (%1 (Ibs/vr) Factor Removal I]
0
0
6,199
0
9,261
0
0
260,172
15,991
2
14,356
0
0
0
50,993
6,331,095
5,316
15,540
2,584
80,989,976
851
1
5,544
1,725
61,892
4,467
1,389
24,329
0
398,753
0
46,293
1,674
13,210
0
23,656
0
340,821
6,521
16,406
151,154
13,545
52,160
7,493
54,606
6,698
89,016
7,356
19,878
4,511
795
20,692,906
0
0
0
0
0
473
21,244
0
4,861
4,660
13,792
6,410,230
10,827,501
30,678,652
0
0
14
0
135,593
157,870,966
62%
0%
28%
84%
63%
0%
0%
88%
72%
40%
35%
81%
0%
61%
60%
91%
14%
86%
91%
82%
0%
0%
91%
4%
84%
75%
0%
0%
0%
83%
62%
92%
0%
41%
0%
0%
52%
0%
65%
0%
0%
65%
0%
65%
0%
65%
0%
65%
0%
52%
0%
87%
72%
99%
91%
95%
34%
80%
0%
28%
65%
69%
0%
71%
65%
91%
0%
0%
42%
58%
77%
0
0
4,463
0
3,427
0
0
31,221
4,477
1
9,332
0
0
0
20,397
569,799
4,571
2,176
233
14,578,196
851
1
499
1,656
9,903
1,117
1,389
24,329
0
67,788
0
3,703
1,674
7,794
0
23,656
0
340,821
2,282
16,406
151,154
4,741
52,160
2,623
54,606
2,344
89,016
2,574
19,878
2,165
795
2,690,078
0
0
0
0
0
95
21,244
0
1,701
1,445
13,792
1,858,967
3,789,625
2,761,079
0
0
8
0
31,186
27,308,247
1.20E+00
2.20E-05
1 .80E-02
7.60E-06
4.30E-03
1 .20E-04
l.OOE-03
6.40E-02
1.90E-01
4.00E+00
2.00E-03
3.30E-04
5.60E-03
5.30E+00
I.10E-01
O.OOE+00
1.80E-01
2.30E-02
5.20E+00
O.OOE+00
2.90E-03
2.10E-03
2.70E-02
1.10E-01
4.70E-01
1.20E-02
2.20E-01
1.40E-03
3.40E-04
5.60E-03
7.30E-04
1.80E+00
1 .50E-03
1.40E-02
5.00E+02
4.20E-04
2.00E-01
4.30E-03
8.20E-05
4.30E-03
4.30E-03
8.20E-05
4.30E-03
8.20E-05
4.30E-03
8.20E-05
4.30E-03
8.20E-05
1.50E-02
3.60E-02
8.50E-03
O.OOE+00
2.40E-03
4.30E-02
2.90E-01
2.80E-02
1.10E+00
4.70E+01
7.40E-02
1.40E-01
3.00E-01
2.90E-02
5.60E-03
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
9.30E-05
6.30E-02
6.20E-01
O.OOE+00
5.10E-02
Or
0 >
80)
0
15
0
1,998
851
4
19
0 jj
01
1 1
2,244 !
OJi
8238
50 |l
1,209,
0
' 2j
0 |
13 i
182
4,654
13
306
34
380
0
6,666
3 1
109 II
o
10
0 |,
1,466
0
71
650
0
224
0
235
0
383
0
298
78
7
0
0'
0
0
0
4,443
1,572
0
510
42
77
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
1,591 |
31,425
Source: Development Document
D-4
-------
Table D-4
Industry Loads and Removals by Pollutant
COMBO Option
POTW
Industry Baseline Industry Treated Removals Removal
Pollutant Code Analvte Loadflb/vrt Loaddb/vrt : Obs/vrt Efficiency f%l
T37
N34
N38
N42
122
N54
N58
AL
SB
AS
BA
N64
N66
BE
T66
BOD
B
F67
CD
COD
n
T23
CR
CO
cu
T68
F69
T38
N90
FE
T54
PB
N95
MN
HG
F44
MO
N102
N103
N104
N105
N106
N107
N114
N115
N116
N117
N118
F55
NI
N119
HEM
N12S
N126
N130
T65
7
AG
T85
L
SN
'
T86
roc
SHEM
>
T30
T87
ZN
1 ,2-DIPHENYLHYDRAZINE
2-BUTANONE
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
2-PROPANONE
4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL
4-METHYL-2-PENTANONE
ALPHA-TERPINEOL
ALUMINUM
ANTIMONY
ARSENIC
BARIUM
BENZOIC ACID
BENZYL ALCOHOL
BERYLLIUM
BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE
BOD 5-DAY (CARBONACEOUS)
BORON
BUTYL BENZYL PHTHALATE
CADMIUM
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND (COD)
CHLOROBENZENE
CHLOROFORM
CHROMIUM
COBALT
COPPER
DI-N-BUTYL PHTHALATE
DI-N-OCTYL PHTHALATE
ETHYLBENZENE
HEXANOICACID
IRON
ISOPHORONE
LEAD
M-XYLENE
MANGANESE
MERCURY
METHYLENE CHLORIDE
MOLYBDENUM
N-DECANE
N-DOCOSANE
N-DODECANE
N-EICOSANE
N-HEXACOSANE
N-HEXADECANE
N-OCTACOSANE
N-OCTADECANE
N-TETRACOSANE
N-TETRADECANE
N-TRIACONTANE
NAPHTHALENE
NICKEL
O+PXYLENE
OIL AND GREASE (AS HEM)
P-CRESOL
P-CYMENE
• PENTAMETHYLBENZENE
PHENOL
SELENIUM
SILVER
TETRACHLOROETHENE
THALLIUM
TIN
TITANIUM
TOLUENE
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBON (AS SG
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
TRANS-1,2-DICHLOROETHENE
TRICHLOROETHENE
VANADIUM
YTTRIUM
ZINC
Totals
0
28,645
9,280
160,369
12,774
19,278
12,512
673,267
32,101
13,013
71,391
78,273
32,522
31
133,020
113,260,559
34,470
30,064
5,561
265,197,924
2,714
125,352
14,533
5,264
122,556
10,143
11,339
44,621
8,389
1,111,476
4,504
73,452
21,366
23,929
174
35,480
9,810
686,923
12,325
172,443
163,512
17,892
78,453
11,308
66,428
15,405
112,217
14,897
38,713
14,777
10,774
35,873,692
0
57,874
0
13,649
99
4,560
42,026
0
5,760
13,986
72,921
80,496,673
13,242,028
62,793,110
3,909
3,334
1,658
648
194,171
575,722,778
0
28,645
8,274
160,369
10,714
19,278
12,485
478,212
19,230
13,012
57,034
76,861
32,522
31
84,742
106,935,931
33,931
20,325
3,565
184,256,521
1,874
125,352
10,906
3,850
86,855
8,140
9,949
20,293
8,389
712,723
4,504
33,242
19,868
12,683
156
31,665
9,810
372,763
6,740
156,037
14,750
4,720
27,414
3,816
14,778
9,537
24,343
7,541
20,132
10,629
10,379
15,880,079
0
23,954
0
13,637
99
4,087
21,005
0
4,779
9,326
59,200
74,088,883
2,646,314
32,114,458
3,909
3,334
1,644
648
109,873
419,052,398
0
i °
1,006
0
2,061
0
: 26
195,056
12,871
1
14,356
1,412
0
0
48,278
6,324,628
539
9,739
: 1,997
80,941,404
839
0
3,627
1,414
'• 35,701
', 2,003
'• 1,389
24,327
0
398,753
; o
40,210
1 1,498
11,245
18
3,815
0
314,161
5,585
16,406
148,762
13,172
51,039
7,493
51,649
5,869
87,873
7,356
18,580
4,148
395
19,993,613
0
33,920
0
: 12
i 0
472
21,021
0
981
i 4,660
13,721
: 6,407,789
,10,595,713
30,678,652
! o
0
; 14
0
84,297
0%
62%
0%
28%
84%
63%
0%
0%
88%
.72%
40%
35%
81%
0%
61%
60%
91%
14%
86%
91%
82%
0%
0%
91%
4%
84%
75%
0%
0%
0%
83%
62%
92%
0%
41%
0%
0%
52%
0%
65%
0%
0%
65%
0%
65%
0%
65%
0%
65%
0%
52%
0%
87%
72%
99%
91%
95%
34%
80%
0%
28%
65%
69%
0%
71%
65%
91%
0%
0%
42%
58%
77%
Removals
After POTW
24,811
0
0
724
0
762
0
26
23,407
3,604
0
9,332
268
0
0
19,311
569,217
463
1,363
180
14,569,453
839
0
326
1,358
5,712
501
1,389
24,327
0
67,788
0
3,217
1,498
6,635
18
3,815
0
314,161
1,955
16,406
148,762
4,610
51,039
2,623
51,649
2,054
87,873
2,574
18,580
1,991
395
2,599,170
0
339
0
1
0
94
21,021
0
343
1,445
13,721
1,858,259
3,708,500
2,761,079
0
0
8
0
19,388
Toxic
Weighting
4.30E-03
1.20E+00
2.20E-05
1.80E-02
7.60E-06
4.30E-03
1.20E-04
l.OOE-03
6.40E-02
1.90E-01
4.00E+00
2.00E-03
3.30E-04
5.60E-03
5.30E+00
1..10E-01
O.OOE+00
1.80E-01
2.30E-02
5.20E+00
O.OOE+00
2.90E-03
2.10E-03
2.70E-02
1.10E-01
4.70E-01
1.20E-02
2.20E-01
1 .40E-03
3.40E-04
5.60E-03
7.30E-04
1.80E+00
1.50E-03
1.40E-02
5.00E+02
4.20E-04
2.00E-01
4.30E-03
8.20E-05
4.30E-03
4.30E-03
8.20E-05
4.30E-03
8.20E-05
4.30E-03
8.20E-05
4.30E-03
8.20E-05
1 .50E-02
3.60E-02
8.50E-03
O.OOE+00
2.40E-03
4.30E-02
2.90E-01
2.80E-02
1.10E+00
4.70E+01
7.40E-02
1.40E-01
3.00E-01
2.90E-02
5.60E-03
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
9.30E-05
6.30E-02
6.20E-01
O.OOE+00
5.10E-02
PE
107
0
0
13
0
3
0
0
1,498
685
]
19 !|
0
0
o
2,124
0
83
31
934
0
2
0
9
149
2,685
6
306
34(
0
380
0
5,790
2
93
8,866
2
0
1,351
0
71
640
0
219
0
222
0
378
0
279
72
3
0
0
15 .
0
0
0
4,441
1,556
0
103
42
77
0
0
0
Oj|
0
5
0
989
Source: Development Document
D-5
-------
Table D-5
Industry Loads and Removals by Pollutant
DAF Option
fr
D7
N34
N3S
22
N'54
N58
AL
SO
AS
iA
461
M66
IE
T66
BOD
[
Tffl
CD
COD
n
73
CR
CO
JO
K8
T69
ras
IP
I*
"B
4N
Industry Baseline Industry Treated
U-DIPHENYLHYDRAZINE
2-BUTANONE
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
2-PROPANONE
4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL
4-METHYL-2-PENTANONE
ALPHA-TERPINEOL
ALUMINUM
ANTIMONY
ARSENIC
BARIUM
BENZOICACID
BENZYL ALCOHOL
BERYLLIUM
BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE
BOD S-DAY (CARBONACEOUS)
BORON
BUTYL BENZYL PHTHALATE
CADMIUM
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND (COD)
CHLOROBENZENE
CHLOROFORM
CHROMIUM
COBALT
COPPER
Dt-N-BUTYL PHTHALATE
Dl-N-OCTYL PHTHALATE
ETHYLBENZENE
HEXANOICACID
IRON
IlSwi1*
ISOPHORONE
LEAD
M-XYLENE
MANGANESE
wtrpmmv
r44 METHYLENE CHLORIDE
MO MOLYBDENUM
N10Z N-DECANE
N103 N-DOCOSANE
4104 N-DODECANE
MIOS N-EICOSANE
NI06 N-HEXACOSANE
N107 N-HEXADECANE
M114 N-OCTACOSANE
MUS N-OCTADECANE
Ml 16 N-TETRACOSANE
Nil? N-TETRADECANE
NI18 N-TRIACONTANE
fSS NAPHTHALENE
NHIltm.
•1119 O+PXYLENE
HEM OIL AND GREASE (AS HEM)
4125 P-CRESOL
N126 P-CYMENE
N130 PENTAMETHYLBENZENE
rss
SB
AG
rss
n.
SN
rso
PHENOL
SELENIUM
SILVER
TETRACHLOROETHENE
THALLIUM
TIN
TITANIUM
TOIJIFNE
rOC TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOG)
SHEM TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBON (AS SG
TS TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
no
re?
v
Y
ZH
TRANS-1,2-DICHLOROETHENE
TRICHLOROETHENE
VANADIUM
YTTRIUM
ZINC
Total?
0
28,645
9,280
160,369
12,774
19,278
12,512
673,267
32,101
13,013
71,391
78,273
32,522
31
133,020
113,260,559
34,470
30,064
5,561
265,197,924
2,714
125,352
14,533
5,264
122,556
10,143
11,339
44,621
8,389
1,111,476
4,504
73,452
21,366
23,929
174
35,480
9,810
686,923
12,325
172,443
163,512
17,892
78,453
11,308
66,428
15,405
112,217
14,897
38,713
14,777
10,774
35,873,692
0
57,874
0
13,649
99
4,560
42,026
0
5,760
13,986
72,921
80,496,673
13,242,028
62,793,110
3,909
3,334
1,658
648
194,171
0
28,645
8,274
160,369
10,714
19,076
12,485
478,212
19,230
13,012
43,646
76,861
32,522
31
84,742
106,879,999
33,931
20,325
3,565
178,964,957
1,740
125,352
10,906
3,850
86,855
8,140
9,591
6,559
8,389
621,491
4,504
33,242
19,497
12,683
156
31,665
8,997
372,763
6,740
59,948
14,750
4,720
27,414
3,366
14,778
9,537
24,343
7,273
20,132
10,629
10,379
15,880,079
0
23,954
0
13,637
99
4,069
20,463
0
4,779
8,858
51,663
73,470,522
2,646,314
29,721,017
3,909
3,334
1,619
643
109,873
410,439,304
Removals Removal After POTW Weighting PE
(lhs/yr) Efficiency f%1 flbs/vrt Factor Removal
0
0
1,006
0
2,061
202
26
195,056
12,871
1
27,745
1,412
0
0
48,278
6,380,560
539
9,739
1,997
86,232,967
974
0
3,627
1,414
35,701
2,003
1,748
38,062
0
489,985
0
40,210
1,869
11,245
18
3,815
813
314,161
5,585
112,495
148,762
13,172
51,039
7,943
51,649
5,869
87,873
7,625
18,580
4,148
395
19,993,613
0
33,920
0
12
0
490
21,563
0
981
5,128
21,258
7,026,150
10,595,713
33,072,094
0
0
40
5
84,297
165,283,474
62%
0%
28%
84%
63%
0%
0%
88%
72%
40%
35%
81%
0%
61%
60%
91%
14%
86%
91%
82%
0%
0%
91%
4%
84%
75%
0%
0%
0%
83%
62%
92%
0%
41%
0%
0%
52%
0%
65%
0%
0%
65%
0%
65%
0%
65%
0%
65%
0%
52%
0%
87%
72%
99%
91%
95%
34%
80%
0%
28%
65%
69%
0%
71%
65%
91%
0%
0%
42%
58%
77%
0
0
724
0
762
202
26
23,407
3,604
0
18,034
268
0
0
19,311
574,250
463
1,363
180
15,521,934
974
0
326
1,358
5,712
501
1,748
38,062
0
83,297
0
3,217
1,869
6,635
18
3,815
390
314,161
1,955
112,495
148,762
4,610
51,039
2,780
51,649
2,054
87,873
2,669
18,580
1,991
395
2,599,170
0
339
0
1
0
98
21,563
0
343
1,590
21,258
2,037,584
3,708,500
2,976,488
0
0
23
2
19,388
28,552,783
1.20E+00
2.20E-05
1.80E-02
7.60E-06
4.30E-03
1.20E-04
1 .OOE-03
6.40E-02
1.90E-01
4.00E+00
2.00E-03
3.30E-04
5.60E-03
5.30E+00
1.10E-01
O.OOE+00
1.80E-01
2.30E-02
5.20E+00
O.OOE+00
2.90E-03
2.10E-03
2.70E-02
1.10E-01
4.70E-01
1.20E-02
2.20E-01
1.40E-03
3.40E-04
5.60E-03
7.30E-04
1.80E+00
1.50E-03
1.40E-02
5.00E+02
4.20E-04
2.00E-01
4.30E-03
8.20E-05
4.30E-03
4.30E-03
8.20E-05
4.30E-03
8.20E-05
4.30E-03
8.20E-05
4.30E-03
8.20E-05
1.50E-02
3.60E-02
8.50E-03
O.OOE+00
2.40E-03
4.30E-02
2.90E-01
2.80E-02
1.10E+00
4.70E+01
7.40E-02
1.40E-01
3.00E-01
2.90E-02
5.60E-03
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
9.30E-05
6.30E-02
6.20E-01
O.OOE+00
5.10E-02
0
0
13
0
3
0
0
1,498
685
1
36
0
0
0
2,124
0
83
31
934
0
3
0
9
149
2,685
6
385
53
0
,,466
0
5,790
3
93
8,866
2
78
1,351
0
484
640
0
219
0
222
0
378
0
279
72
3
0
0
15
0
0
0
4,610
1,596
0
103
46
119
0
0
0
0
0
14
0
989
35,366
Source; Development Document
D-6
-------
APPENDIX E
COMPARISON OF AVERAGE COST-EFFECTIVENESS
OF PROPOSED AND ALTERNATIVE EXCLUSION CUTOFFS
UNDER THE CP OPTION
-------
-------
APPENDIX E
COMPARISON OF AVERAGE COST-EFFECTIVENESS
OF PROPOSED AND ALTERNATIVE EXCLUSION CUTOFFS
UNDER THE CP OPTION
As discussed in the Economic Assessment report (U.S. EPA, 1997b), EPA is proposing to exclude
from coverage by the EL Standards small facilities that launder less man 1 million pounds of incoming
laundry per calendar year and less than 255,000 pounds of shop towels and/or printer towels/rags per
calendar year. EPA also looked at a number of additional alternative exclusion cutoffs (see Appendix E of
the Economic Assessment report). This Appendix compares the average cost-effectiveness of the proposed
cutoff, as described hi Section Three of this report, to two of the alternative exclusion cutoffs: a cutoff at 3
million pounds of laundry per year and a cutoff at 5 million pounds of laundry per year (with neither
alternative considering any cutoff of shop towels or printer towels/rags). The results of this comparison of
average cost-effectiveness results can be seen hi Table E-l. As the table shows, the average cost-
effectiveness of the option with the cutoff as proposed is $206 per pound equivalent. In comparison, the 3
million pound cutoff would have an average cost-effectiveness of $164 per pound equivalent, and the 5
million pound cutoff would have an average cost-effectiveness of $128 per pound equivalent.
E-l
-------
Table E-l
Comparison of Average Cost-Effectiveness of Proposed and Alternative
Exclusion Cutoffs under the CP Option
Cutoff
Total Annual
Cost
($1981)
Pound Equivalent
Removed
(Ibs.)
'-' " ' ':'";T ' l> :"''!'' ''!•' ;^1^
Proposed
3 million pounds
5 million pounds
$83,716,102
$58,061,963
$33,579,859
407,358
353,286
262,943
Average Cost
Effectiveness
($1981)
($/lb.eq.)
|fft«%ft^^*T"Mrl^^l!
$206
$164
$128
E-2
-------
-------
------- |