UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
SUBJECT: Review of Assessment Guidelines for DATE:
Selected New Source Industries
FROM: Sheldon Meyers, Director O/• ft fl '"~yiSL{U UP\,&
nff-ir-n nf PoHoyal A^'f-i Tr-i-t-i* oe j^A^^-l^^^- / ^^-^ q
Office of Federal Activities
TO: See Distribution List
Attached for your review is a copy of the final
report for "Environmental Impact Assessment Guidelines
for Selected New Source Industries" prepared under
contract by Roy F. Weston. When they are finalized
the guidelines will be handed out to industries that are
applying for new source discharge permits.
The final report contains a general guideline that
applies to all industries and an appendix for each of the
four following industries:
0 rubber processing
0 petroleum refining
0 organic chemicals
0 steam supply and non-contact
cooling water
After these appendices are finalized, OFA will have
appendices prepared for all other significant categories
as well.
Please review the attached final report by May 30
and forward your coirarents to Peter Cook of my office.
The guidelines will be revised based on your comnents
and will then be provided to all appropriate offices
so that you can distribute them to prospective applicants,
Attachment
EPA Form 1320-6 (Rov. 6-72)
-------
DRAFT
Environmental Impact Assessment
Guidelines for
Selected New Source Industries
-------
Distribution List
EIS Preparers for New Source
Regional Permit Directors
J. Whitescarver (EG 336)
J. Souzon (EG 336)
E. Francis (EG 338)
G. Werdig (WH 449)
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter Rage
AUTHORITY AND RESPONSIBILITIES
(to be supplled)
INTRODUCTION TO THE MANUAL
I DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED NEW SOURCE 1-1
A. Overview 1-1
B. Summary of Major New Source Features 1-1
C. Detailed Descriptions of New Source 1-1
1. Description Resource Requirements 1-1
2. Description of the Process or Production
Facility 1-2
3. Description of Economic Benefits, and
Product Markets
II ENVIRONMENT WITHOUT THE PROPOSED ACTION
A. Purpose
B. Special Considerations
C. Description of the Baseline
1. Meteorology and Climatology
2. Air Quality
3. Topography
*t. Geology
5. Soils
6. Hydrology
7. Biology
8. 'Land Uses
9. Identification of Significant Environmentally
Sensitive Areas
10. Population Projections and Economic Forecasts
11. Other Programs in the Area
III ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED NEW SOURCE
A. Genera]
B. Impact 'Identification
1. Systematic Identification System
2. Process Impacts
3. Raw Material Utilization Impacts
If. Transportation Requirements
5. Site Requirements
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(continued)
Chapter Page
C. Impact Evaluation Methods 111-5
1. Evaluation vs. Identification
2. Universal Assessment Methodology
3. Methodology Success
if. Significance vs. Magnitude
5. Inevitable vs. Possible Impacts
6. Cumulative Impacts
7. Primary and Secondary Induced Impacts
8. Long-Term vs. Short-Term Impacts
9. Reversibility
10. Secondary Impacts
11. Identification of Significant Environmentally-
Sensitive Areas
12. Population Projections and Economic Forecasts
13. Other Programs in the Area
14. Land Media
D. Summary of Adverse Impacts
E. Irretrievable Commitments of Resources
F. Short-Term Use of the Environment vs.
Long-Term Productivity
G. Summarization
-5
-6
-6
-7
-7
-8
-8
-9
-9
-9
-9
-10
-10
-10
-10
-10
11-11
11-11
IV ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED NEW SOURCE IV-1
A. General IV-1
B. Special Considerations IV-1
C. Criteria IV-2
D. Detail of Alternative Description IV-6
APPENDIX A - Miscellaneous Documentation
APPENDIX 8-1 - Rubber Processing Industry
APPENDIX 8-2 - Petroleum Refining
APPENDIX B-3 - Organic Chemicals Industry
APPENDIX B-4 - Steam Supply and Non-Contact Cooling
Water Industries
-------
AUTHORITY AND RESPONSIBILITIES
(To be supplied by EPA)
-------
INTRODUCTION TO THE MANUAL
Guidance for preparing Environmental Impact Assessments (ElA's)
for new source actions is provided in this manual in two major
ways:
• A General Assessment Guideline which discusses the general
format to be incorporated in the EIA, and the basic assess-
ment considerations common to all industries.
• A set of Appendices to the General Assessment Guideline
which describe, on an industry-by-industry basis, the
environmental problems representative of that industry,
environmental controls employed by that industry, and other
relevant information.
The Appendices are written to assist new source permit appli-
cants in achieving otherwise difficult perspectives of
environmental impact problems.
The General Assessment Guideline has been broken down into
four major chapters. Each chapter describes a corresponding
chapter which will be included in the EIA. These chapters
are:
I Description of the Proposed New Source
II Environment Without the Proposed New Source
III Environmental Effects of the Proposed New Source
IV Alternatives to the Proposed New Source
Diagramatically, the interrelationship of these chapters and
appendices is shown in Figure 1 .
-------
FIGURE 1
INTERRELATIONSHIP OF
CHAPTERS AND APPENDICES
IN THIS MANUAL
CHAPTER I
DESCRIPTION
OF
THE
PROPOSED NEW
SOURCE
APPENDIX
APPLICABLE TO
NEW SOURCE
IN QUESTION
CHAPTER II
ENVIRONMENT
WITHOUT
THE
PROPOSED ACTION
CHAPTER III
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
OF THE
PROPOSED
NEW SOURCE
CHAPTER IV
ALTERNATIVES TO
THE PROPOSED
NEW SOURCE
-------
CHAPTER I
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED NEW SOURCE
-------
CHAPTER I
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED NEW SOURCE
A. Overview
This Chapter of the EIA must provide a detailed explanation and
description of the proposed new source and present all information
regarding discharges, emissions, and economic and other factors
which will either directly or indirectly have an environmental
impact.
The guidance which follows explains in more detail the specific
content requirements for this Chapter, and is organized in a
format which should be closely followed by the applicant in pre-
paring the EIA.
B. Summary of Major New Source Features
The applicant should summarize in a short section the proposed
new source in terms of its major operations such as unloading,
loading, raw material preparation, processing, storage, shipment,
waste control measures, resource recovery measures, and others.
Such a summary should be supplemented diagramatically by way of
a flow chart or equivalent process operation diagram. Closely
related operations, such as docking, transhipment and storage,
must be shown as well.
C. Detailed Description of New Source
1. Description Resource Requirements
Detail regarding requirements for raw materials, land, and
energy should be provided. As an example of the types of
resource utilization data which are required, the following
list is provided:
a. Feed stock raw materials must be described in terms of:
• Source.
•Availability.
• Depletion rate.
•Substitutes or replacements.
•Competing uses.
1-1
-------
b. Energy requirements should be described by:
• Source.
•Pollutants (discharges and emissions) which may be
attributed to utilization of this source.
•Substitutes or backups.
•Competing public or private uses for such primary
sources.
c. Land uses (agriculture, industry, residential, etc.).
An aerial photograph or similar map showing the site and
surroundings should be provided to aid such description.
2. Description of the Process or Production Facility
a. Description of the major unit operations which comprise the
process together with a process flow diagram must be given.
b. Approximate material balances of raw material, product, by-
product, and wastes should be given.
c. Description of the normal process operation in relation to
this diagram should be made. Special attention to air,
water and solid waste sources should be given in this dis-
cussion.
d. Description of intermittent process operations and their
wastes should be made in relation to this process diagram.
Examples of waste generating intermittent operations are:
•Start-up and shut-down.
•Testing.
•Oecoking, etc.
Other intermittent sources specifically applicable to the
proposed New Source must also be described.
e. Accidents, spills.
Description of potential accidents and spiUs potentially
impacting the environment should be given. An estimate of
likelihood or occurrence should also be given, and should
be based upon historical records for similar existing fa-
cilities whenever possible or upon the judgement of the
applicant and his consultants. Assumptions should be
clearly stated and defended.
1-2
-------
De-emphasis or oversight of potential spills and accidents
by the applicant on the basis of planned safety or manage-
ment programs is not acceptable. While such programs may
well reduce or eliminate the occurrence of accidents and
spills and should therefore be described, it is important
that all such impacting events be identified.
The significance of spills or accidents as environmental
impacts is determined by many factors, some of which are
Iisted as follows:
• Acute toxicity.
• Volatility, odor, and flammabi 1 ity.
•Treatability by conventional waste treatment methods.
•Damage/upset of biological waste treatment systems.
•Shock or stress upon biotic communities.
•Persistence in food chains.
•Collectibility.
f. Control measures
Description of all pollution control measures to be incor-
porated in the new source should be discussed, recognizing
that a major permit consideration reflected by the New Source
Performance Standards is the use of in-process pollution
control measures in lieu of or supplementation to end of
process control.
Waste reduction, waste recovery, and recycle should also be
discussed. Differentiation should be made between tradi-
tional water and waste recycling measures and any new or
unusual methods. While EPA does not require that untested
techniques be employed for such recycle/reuse, it is realized
that many new recycle/reuse options will be available to the
process designer who is not constrained by existing buildings,
process configurations, and operating procedures. Such op-
tions should be considered carefully and described in the
EIA.
For purposes of showing the interdependence of air, water,
solid waste generation, and pollution control operations,
the applicant should supply a pollutant material balance
diagram showing all emissions and discharges with the pro-
posed treatment systems being applied to each. Quantification
and balance of material flows through this control network
should be shown so that specified levels of discharge and
emission may be interrelated and evaluated. The applicant
should describe pollution control measure operations for the
proposed facility, recognizing such control measures are
1-3
-------
categorized into normal, intermittent, and emergency (spills,
accidents) controls.
Description of the facilities, equipment and manpower re-
quired for such controls shall be given.
Changes in process raw material inputs, to the extent they
will necessitate changes in pollution controls operation or
design, should be discussed.
Monitoring systems which support normal control systems and/or
provide emergency warning or control for accidents and spills,
or which provide periodic check for ambient^ enviornmental
degradation, should be described. Flow.diagrams, schematics,
or similar means for display where or how control measures
will be utilized in the actual process and its auxiliary
operations should be provided.
3. Description of Economic Benefits, and Product Markets
A description should be given of economic, social, environmental,
or other benefits which will result from the proposed new source.
Special attention should be given to define who or what will be
benefited, and by how much. Assumptions or judgements inherent
in such assessments should likewise be given.
-------
CHAPTER II
ENVIRONMENT WITHOUT THE PROPOSED ACTION
-------
CHAPTER II
ENVIRONMENT WITHOUT THE PROPOSED ACTION
A. Purpose
Description of the environment must be developed in this chapter
with sufficient detail and breadth so that all environmental impacts
attributable to the proposed alternative may be explored.
It is not intended, except in cases where the proposed industry is
very large and/or possesses potentially very large impacts, that
original investigations be conducted to clarify poorly-understood
environmental relationships. Instead, the applicant should rely
upon existing data and currently accepted scientific principles,
supplementing these with field verification and descriptive surveys.
B. Special Considerations
In preparing the description of the environment, it is important to
keep several considerations in mind:
1. The need for a description which is broad enough to provide a
meaningful basis for evaluating both direct and induced impacts
(which may be social and economic, as well as environmental).
2. The need to incorporate a basic understanding of the inter-
relationships between social, economic, and environmental elements.
3. The need to incorporate a basic understanding of the chemical,
physical, biological and other properties of all process dis-
charges that determine behavior and impact.
4. The need to describe the baseline environment as it exists at
present, and as it would exist in the near term future (10 to 15
years) if the proposed alternative were not implemented.
5. The importance of considering the effects of cumulative impacts.
The proposed project must be weighed against not only its own
set of impacts, but those additional impacts which will arise
because of interaction with other environmental stresses which
cumulatively cause much greater impact. For example, a stream
of a given flow and gradient has a certain ability to assimilate
degradable materials discharged to it by virtue of its capacity
to reaerate itself. If the stream course is altered by dams,
channels, diversions, etc., this capacity is greatly altered with
a likely outcome of severe damage to stream ecosystems and man's
abi1ity to use it.
11-1
-------
6. The need to provide detail which is complete enough to allow
independent impact assessments by public reviewers, and mini-
mize delays in EIA review.
C. Description of the Baseline
A description of major environmental, economic and social elements
which correctly characterize the project setting is necessary. While
greatest emphasis should be placed upon environmental factors, ade-
quate understanding and prediction of impact is not achievable without
consideration of non-environmental features.
The following outline of Important baseline elements should be
followed by the applicant. It may be regarded as one recommended
method of accounting all baseline elements and organizing them
in the EIA. The baseline elements encompassed in this outline should
be regarded as a minimum requirement for all ElA's. The outline
however, may be reorganized or supplemented as necessary.
1. Meteorology and Climatology
Description should be made in terms of features such as:
• Temperature extremes and monthly averages.
• Average annual rainfall.
• Peak storm precipitation and frequency of occurence.
• Hail, snow, hurricanes, and other unusual storms, along with
their frequency and magnitude.
• Wind rose (wind directions and wind speeds).
These data may be obtained in'most cases from the U.S. Weather
Service.
2. Air Qua! ity
The ambient air quality must be established in terms of particu-
lates, sulfur oxides, nitrogen oxides, hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide,
and photochemical oxidants.
Trends in air quality, in terms of specific pollutant concentra-
tions, should be evaluated where data permits. Data insufficiencies
should be described. (Anticipated air quality both with and with-
out the proposed new source must be assessed in subsequent chapters.
This assessment may require air diffusion modeling).
I 1-2
-------
Those pollutants which will be emitted from the proposed new
source must be given special attention when describing ambient
,air quality. For large projects, data gaps for such pollutants
will have to be supplemented by original air quality surveys.
Applicable State Air duality Implementation Plans and any pending
revisions should be identified and reviewed.
Federal standards relating to indirect sources and significant air
quality deterioration are now being considered, however, pro-
cedures for implementing these standards have not yet been
determined.
3. Topography
Description may be made with the aid of a U.S. Geological Survey
Topographical map supplemented by aerial photographs. Major
drainage basins, developments, transportation systems, and
natural areas may be shown by overlay, outline, or verbal des-
cription. Description of slope, erosion, and outcroppings are
also required.
if. Geology
Description must be made of the geology of the affected area.
Geologic structures that have a direct influence on either ground-
water or surface water resources should be specifically described.
Areas which are susceptible to earthquakes, landslides, subsidence,
or other earth movement should be located on an area map and de-
scribed. Particular care should be taken to discuss geologic
conditions in relation to proposed land disposal practices.
5. Soils
Identification of soil types in terms of depth to bedrock,
permeability, erodibility, expansion, and compaction, etc.
should be made.
6. Hydrology
a. General
The applicant should describe the relevant surface water
bodies and groundwater aquifers in the area.
b. Water duality
The applicant should describe the existing surface and ground-
water quality using physical, chemical, and biological
parameters. If land disposal practices are proposed, special
explanations of subsurface pollutant migration potentials
shal1 be made.
M-3
-------
c. Water Quantity
The applicant should describe the existing surface and ground-
water quantity and relate to water uses in Subsection "6.e"
below. Include a discussion of surface water volume, stream
flow rates, and the frequency and duration of seasonal varia-
tions. Specify the 7-day, 10-year low flow, groundwater storage
volume, or extent and depth of the major aquifers, and their
rate of recharge and/or depletion. Regulating (dams or locks)
or diversion (dams, tunnels, or canals) structures which are
in place, or proposed, should be identified. Structures in-
fluencing stream-flow should be identified on an area map; the
recharge areas for replenishing ground water should also be
identified on this map.
d. Water duality and Quantity Problems
The applicant should identify existing and potential water
quality and quantity problems in the area, and address
specifically the relevant point and non-point sources of
pollution such as those arising from industry, municipalities,
combined sewers, stormwater run-off, agriculture, silviculture,
mines or mine drainage, salt water intrusion, and subsurface
pollution migration.
e. Water Uses
Tye type and extent of existing and future surface and ground-
water uses should be described. Reuse and/or reclamation of
water should be considered. Regulatory and administrative
procedures in force to reduce water consumption (thereby re-
ducing waste volume) should be noted.
f. Water duality Management
All pertinent areawide or basin water quality management plans,
court-ordered allotments, or interstate compacts involving
water quality/quantity in the project area should be summarized
and related to the proposed new source. If State or local
water pollution control agencies have issued permits or orders
on specific water resources, these should also be identified
and related.
g. Flood Hazards
The applicant should indicate the 25-, 50-, and 100-year flood
levels for the area where possible. Any Corps of Engineers
flood-plain plan or proposed project should be indicated.
-------
7. Biology
The applicant's description should include:
•Major ecological systems of the area (as determined by gross
climatic, soil, and topographic features).
•The location of unique natural communities
(cranberry bogs, woodlands, tundra, etc.).
•Migratory wildlife and habitat.
•Wildlife benefits to man (recreation, food, aesthetics,
and relative importance of each).
•Rare or endangered plants and animals.
Species checklists are not a substitute for the above information
and are generally discouraged. Information is generally available
from State fish and game agencies, local schools and universities,
and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
8. Land Uses
In cases where land use plans or other growth plans exist for
the region being affected by the proposed new source, the EIA
should carefully describe how the proposed new source conforms
(or does not conform) with the plan. Maps showing planned land
uses, such as residential, commercial, industrial, extractive,
strip development, transportation, utilities, open space, conser-
vation, agricultural, and historical uses should be provided.
These plans provide an important means for portraying the environ-
mental baseline, not only in the present, but also in the fore-
seeable future. Such portrayal is necessary if the proposed new
source impact upon the environment is to be assessed fairly,
inasmuch as:
•The new source action may already conform to plans which were
derived with full environmental consideration.
•The new source action may not conform to land use plans, and
by virtue of its precedence, may greatly alter future environ-
ments through induced growth in ancillary industries.
The environmental adequacy of any land use plans should be
described and critiqued.
Even where no land use planning has been done, the EIA must still
reflect environmental baselines of the foreseeable future. "Fore-
seeable" should generally encompass a period of 15 to 20 years.
11-5
-------
The applicant should describe long term plans to either scrap,
refurbish, or otherwise modify the proposed facility beyond its
designed lifetime.
Reliance upon local zoning ordinances, local, and regional
government agencies will be necessary to derive approximate land
development alternatives.
Description of development trends (as opposed to plans) for
industry and other land uses should also be given with special
recognition of the ways in which these might threaten air or
water quality, or other environmental problems.
9. Identification of Environmentally-
Sensitive Areas
Describe and show on a map any of the following sensitive eco-
systems which may be significantly impacted by the proposed action,
and which are not described elsewhere in this chapter:
a. Surface waters.
b. Marshland, wetlands, and estuaries.
c. Flood plains or flood-retention areas.
d. Groundwater recharge areas.
e. Steeply sloping lands.
f. Forests and woodlands.
g. Prime agricultural lands.
h. Habitats of rare and endangered species.
i. Public outdoor recreation areas.
j. Sensitive geologic areas.
k. Archaeological and historic sites.
10. Population Projections and Economic Forecasts
Designate the current and projected population levels. In dis-
cussing these population trends, the rates of growth for the
region contained in reports for the Water Resources Council by
the Bureau of Economic Analysis, Department of Commerce and the
Economic Research Service, Department'of Agriculture (the OBERS
projections) should be considered. The reasons for using a
particular projection or forecast should be stated briefly.
11. Other Programs in the Area
Describe local, State, and Federal projects (planned or underway)
which have or will have an impact (social, economic, or environ-
mental) on the area. If there will be a major interaction between
these projects and the proposed water quality action, discuss the
interaction.
11-6
-------
CHAPTER 111
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED NEW SOURCE
-------
CHAPTER III
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED NEW SOURCE
A. General
All beneficial and detrimental effects on impacts of the proposed
new source must be presented by the applicant in this Chapter and
discussed in detai1.
The applicant must make conclusions upon the basis of this detailed
analysis regarding the adverse impacts and the irretrievable commit-
ments of resources which will be necessitated.
Finally, the applicant must also state the lorvj-term effects that
the proposed new source will have upon the environment's productivity
and compare it to the short-term benefits which will result from
implementing the proposed new source.
B. Impact Identification
1. Systematic Identification System
Diagramatically, the impact identification process may be illus-
trated as shown in Figure 111-1.
This identification system analyzes each project requirement and
operation and weighs it against control technologies (such as
waste treatment plants) and against environmental sensitivity.
Impact identification is thus predicted by a good understanding
of the environmental baseline, the proposed project, impact control
technology, and the natural laws and principles governing their
interaction.
As reflected in Figure 111-1, impacts may be ameliorated or
prevented by certain techniques or measures. The applicant is
expected to state what controls will be employed and justify
their reasonableness in terms of cost, reliability, and imple-
mentabi1ity.
Not shown in Figure 111-1 is the need to consider different project
alternatives as a means for limiting environmental impacts. Alter-
natives which must be analyzed by the applicant are discussed in
Chapter IV of these guidelines.
111-1
-------
FIGURE 111-1
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT IDENTIFICATION
PROCESS
PROCESS
OPERATIONS
• Wastes
• Labor Demand
• Payroll
• etc
RAW MATERIAL
REC'TS
• Minerals
• Imports
• Land
• Disposal Sites
• etc
TRANSPORATION
REQUIREMENTS
Loading
Unloading
Right of Way
Railway Spurs
etc.
i
i
SITE
REQUIREMENTS
• ClUcll Illl)
• Grading
• Water Resource
Development
• etc
. .
Analysis of control, reduction,
recovery, ameboration, treatment
technologies
Analysis of Environmental Interactions
I
Impact Identification
Final
Impact
Identification
Yes
Reasonableness
Test
111-2
-------
This procedure is intended to assist the applicant in examining
and identifying impacts and is not intended to require original
environmental research except in extreme cases. Special require-
ments of this nature are discussed in the Appendices and are
modifiable at the discretion of the EPA Regional Administrator.
2. Process Impacts
Process impacts are identified by examination of all wastes dis-
charged to air, water, and land media. Such waste discharges
must conform to applicable Federal, State and local discharge
standards. In the case of solid waste discharges, no Federal
discharge regulations have been published.
The applicant must describe as part of the impact identification
step, the regulations and other standards of performance govern-
ing each source of process waste. Such information should be
presented in tabular form, following the general format shown in
Figure 111-2.
Identification of impact sources, and demonstration of compliance
with applicable regulations and standards of performance accom-
plish the first step in impact evaluation. Additional evaluation
and impact following the guidance and requirements of Section C
of this Chapter must be provided in the El A.
All uncertainties in waste source strength, rate of flow, uni-
formity, etc., must be stated explicitly. Appropriateness of
waste recovery, control, or treatment systems should be also
discussed for each waste source.
Examples of other important process-related requirements which
will have impact upon the environment and must be considered in
the EIA are:
•Labor force requirements.
•Uti1ity demands.
•Payroll.
•No i se.
These requirements will induce change in local economic and social
structures, which will themselves become sources of environmental
impacts (power plant expansion, growth in supportive industries,
etc.). See Section C for discussions of indirect impacts.
11 1-3
-------
FIGI 111-2
TABULAR SUMMARY OF STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS
SOURCE
IDENTIFICATION
CONCENTRATION
QUANTITY
(FLOW RATE)
METHOD OF
DISPOSAL
STANDARD OR
REGULATION
REQUIRE-
MENT
PROPOSED|
RESPONSIBLE
REGULATORY
AGENCY
OTHER
-------
3. Ran Material Utilization Impacts
The EIA must consider and identify impacts resulting from raw
material operations directly associated with the proposed new
source. Such operations shall include off-loading, conveying,
pretreatment, storage and similar operations performed on or
adjacent to the proposed new source site. Detailed guidance is
presented in the Appendices.
k. Transportation Requirements
The EIA must consider and identify impacts resulting from the
transportation requirements of proposed new source. Examples of
such transportation considerations are new rights-of-way which
must be cleared and constructed, increased ro-... usage, con-
struction of spurs, and access roads. Additional details are pre-
sented in the Appendices.
5. Site Requirements
The EIA must consider and identify impacts resulting from the
development and utilization of the proposed facility site.
Following are examples of impacts resulting from site develop-
ment and utilization:
•Loss of prime agricultural land (if applicable).
•Erosion during and after construction.
•Wildlife habitat loss.
•Aesthetic degradation and property value diminution.
C. . Impact Evaluation Methods
1. Evaluation vs. Identification
Impact evaluation or assessment should be distinguished from
impact identification. "Identification" entails only the state-
ment that a certain Impact will occur or result. "Assessment"
or evaluation, on the other hand, entails the comparison, and
prioritization of impacts according to their importance to
environmental quality.
Impact evaluation requires that the multi-dimensional nature of
all impacts be recognized. The following characteristics are
most important and should be followed by the applicant. Discus-
sions of each are presented in this section (in Item 3, "Method-
ology Success").
•Significance.
•Magnitude.
•Cumulative effects.
111-5
-------
•Directness.
•Long-term effects.
•Short-term effects.
•ReversibiIity.
2. Universal Assessment Methodology
No universal methodology for estimating and comparing environ-
mental impacts exists.
Because impacts have highly-variable characteristics, they are not
generally quantifiable in units which allow easy comparison. For exam-
ple, loss of open space is an impact measurable in terms of acreage,
standing biomass (quantity of living matter), numbers of picnic
benches, miles of nature trails, or, on the other hand, construc-
tion revenue, employment, tax base, etc. None of these parameters
are readily different!able or meaningful without verbal description.
It is the responsibility of the new source applicant in preparing
the EIA to ensure that careful consideration be given not only to
identifying impacts, but also to describing their implications by
concise descriptions and stating any judgment criteria and assump-
tions made in assessing their importance.
3. Methodology Success
In general, the successful ness of any assessment methodology is
measurable on the basis of its:
•Accuracy - Ability to portray comprehensively and
fairly all impacts.
• Rep 1icabMity - Ability to be used by different investi-
gators of the same subject with equal results.
•Economy - Reasonableness of demands upon the analyzer
for time and sophisticated computational techniques.
•Understandabi1ity - Ability to be understood by persons
of different backgrounds.
These criteria are the most important measures of the methodol-
ogies1 success for the specific analysis being done by the EIA
preparer.
(For further discussion of Impact Assessment Methodologies, the
applicant should refer to: "A Review of Environmental Impact
Assessment Methodologies," EPA 600-5-7^-002, April 197^. This
document is available from the U.S. Government Printing Office.)
111-6
-------
k. Significance vs. Magnitude
Each action impacting the environment should be described in a
way which differentiates the significance of the action and the
magnitude of such action.
Magnitude is measurable by some physical property of the impact,
and significance is measurable by using some weighting factor or
other relative measure which describes how important, in terms of
benefit or detriment, that impact is.
For example, organic wastes can be described in terms of magni-
tude by such units as "pounds of total organic carbon", but the
significance of the organic waste will be a fur-tion of such
characteristics as "toxicity" (sugar is less toxic than phenol).
Magnitude factors may be described through normal parameters of
quantification.
Significance factors on the other hand will require:
•Consideration of all chemical, physical, and biological ef-
fects of the potentially impact substance or action to deter-
mine which properties have special importance upon impact
estimation.
•Description of what impacts such properties will likely or
potentially produce.
•Judgmental evaluation of whether the described effects are
significant, and prioritization of that significance in rela-
tion to the significance of other potential impacts.
5. Inevitable vs. Possible Impacts
The EIA preparer should also be cognizant of another important
dimension of impact - that is, the probability of occurrence.
For convenience, probability may be described in terms of:
•Possible impacts - impacts which are not certain to occur but
which may be important since they may have very high significance.
•Inevitable impacts - impacts which are more certain and directly
treatable by graphs or ratios in that they are normally related
proportionately to some parameter of size, such as size of pro-
duction, acreage of land, flow of a river, etc.
111-7
-------
6. Cumulative Impacts
The applicant should consider the cumulative effects of all pro-
posed actions, in addition to the effects of each action alone.
This distinction is important in that individually such actions
may be small but cumulatively large.
For example, a new refinery sited in the Carribbean typically
involves destruction of coral communities at a level which, for
the individual new source under review, appears small. The
impact, however, is much greater because the destruction of one
area will lead to future industrial siting in that area because
of the lowered environmental quality of the area, hence leading
to more reef destruction and so on.
7. Primary and Secondary Induced Impacts
The most important distinction which the applicant must address
in analyzing impacts is that between primary (also called "direct")
impacts and secondary (also called "induced") impacts.
•Primary impacts are defined as those attributable to the
action of process wastes, demands upon resources, accidents
or abnormal conditions of operation, and initial project
construction.
•Secondary impacts are those attributable to some direct
demand or impact of the project upon the environment, society,
or economy which occur or become important at some different
point in time or space, or in some other sector of the environ-
ment, society, or economy.
For example, the alteration of air quality by stack emissions or
fugitive losses from the manufacturing process is a primary impact
of the project.
The alteration of housing values because of degraded air quality
(odors, corrosive properties) is a secondary impact. Secondary
impacts are of great importance to the overall evaluation of any
new source proposal because they may be:
a. Less obvious and, hence, are commonly overlooked in weighing
project costs and benefits.
b. Less easily controlled or ameliorated.
c. Often, more important than the direct impacts' importance
because of their inducement of growth in other impacting
industries.
See Item 7 following for examples of secondary impacts.
II1-8
-------
8. Long-Term vs. Short-Term Impacts
Unlike the description of primary versus secondary impacts which
accounts for the cause-effect or chain-react ion nature of impacts,
the description of long- and short-term aspect? of impacts must
account for the impact's persistence. For example, a primary
impact of land disposal of certain effluents is the removal of
that land from other uses such as agriculture. If certain metals
or toxic substances are contained in it, this impact wi11 be
persistent or long-term. In some cases primary impacts, if highly
persistent, may be the most important consideration.
9. Reversibi1ity
The reversibility of an impact accounts for the degree to which
the impact may be nullified and the base environmental condition
restored. Reversal may be enabled or assisted by natural forces
(biodegradation, revegetation) or by direct clean-up effort.
10. Secondary Impacts
Secondary impacts may be exemplified as follows:
•Increased water supply treatment costs to users.downstream
of wastewater discharge.
•Increased pressure upon remaining recreational lands, parks,
as a result of development of existing recreational lands.
•Increased water use resulting from labor influx.
•Increased investment of industries supporting the new source
industry.
•Increased costs of cleaning windows, cars, streets made dirty
by air pollution, increased traffic and congestion.
•Increased electrical utility growth to meet new housing
industry and residential demands.
11. Identification of Significant Environmentally-Sensitive Areas
The El A should state explicitly any impacts affecting environ-
mentally-sensitive areas such as:
a. Surface waters.
b. Marshland, wetlands, and estuaries.
c. Flood plains or flood-retention areas.
d. Groundwater recharge areas.
111-9
-------
e. Steeply sloping lands.
f. Forests and woodlands.
g. Prime agricultural lands.
h. Habitats of rare and endangered species.
i. Public outdoor recreation areas.
j. Sensitive geologic areas.
k. Archaeological and historic sites.
12. Population Projections and Economic Forecasts
The current and projected population levels should be designated.
In discussing these population trends, the rates of growth for
the region contained in reports for the Water Resources Council
by the Bureau of Economic Analysis, Department of Commerce and
the Economic Research Service, Department of Agriculture (the
OBERS projections) should be considered. The reasons for using
a particular projection or forecast should be stated briefly.
13. Other Programs in the Area
Local, State, and Federal projects (planned or underway) which
have or will have an impact (social, economic, or environmental)
on the area, should be described. If there will be a major inter-
action between these projects and the proposed water quality action,
discuss the interaction.
Ik. Land Media
Loss of wetlands and sloughs (used frequently for new source
siting where land and sanitation controls are absent or unenforced).
D. Summary of Adverse Impacts
The applicant should summarize in a short section, all adverse impacts
of the proposed new source.
E. Irretrievable Commitments of Resources
The applicant should summarize in a short section the irretrievable
commitments of raw materials, natural values, such as scenery, wild-
life habitat, etc., which will be made if the proposed new source is
undertaken. Irretrievabi1ity judgements may be based upon the con-
siderations of umpail reversibility discussed in Chapter III, Section
C of the Guidelines.
111-10
-------
F. Short-Term Use of the Environment vs.
Long-Term Productivity
The applicant shall assess the benefits associated with the proposed
new source and weigh them against the long-term productivity impacts
of the environment which would result. Long-term productivity should
be assessed in terms of agricultural yield, water, animal and other
natural resource reserves, diversity and abundance of game and non-
game biota, basic needs for aesthetic quality, etc.
Such assessment of short-term vs. long-term considerations need not
involve lengthy statements or justifications, but should state in
simple and direct terms, the applicants own appraisal.
G. Summarization
For purposes of summarizing impacts and impact considerations developed
under Sections A through F of this Chapter, the applicant should pro-
vide a summary of all impacts using the same environmental element
categories utilized in Chapter II for describing the environmental
baseline of the proposed new source. This summarization should be to
the extent feasible, made in tabular form.
This recategorization process is shown diagramatically in Figure 111-3.
111-11
-------
FIGURE 111-3
RECATEGORIZATION PROCESS
DESCRIPTION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE
BY CATEGORIES
BASELINE.
1 Meteorology and Climatology
2 Air Quality
3 Topography
4 Geology
5 Soils
6 Hydrology
7 Biology, etc
etc
(CHAPTER II)
SUMMARY/COMPARISON
OF PROJECT IMPACTS
TO BASELINE CATEGORIES
IMPACTS
1 Meteorology and Climatology
2 Air Quality
3 Topography
4 Geology
5 Soils
6 Hydrology
7 Biology
etc
(CHAPTER III)
DESCRIPTION OF
PROJECT IMPACTS
Process Impacts
Raw Material Impacts
Transportation Impacts
etc
{CHAPTER llf)
111-12
-------
CHAPTER IV
ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED NEW SOURCE
-------
CHAPTER IV
ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED
NEW SOURCE
A. General
This chapter in the EIA must present the alternatives considered by
the applicant during the new source development process.
The scope of alternatives which the applicant must consider is set
forth in the sections which follow.
B. Special Considerations
1. It is the policy of the EPA that environmental factors be recog-
nized and accounted earJy in the project planning effort for all
alternatives under consideration.
The alternative optimization process may be accomplished by evalu-
ating all reasonable alternatives against a set of pre-established
economic, environmental and related factors which measure the
success or conformance of each alternative.
In all cases, the applicant should consider environmental factors
in addition to economic and other factors in the selection
decision.
2. It is the policy of the EPA that the scope of alternatives which
must be presented by the applicant in the EIA be related to the
level of impact which is associated with the proposed new source
(as described in Chapter III).
This policy recognizes that not all alternatives considered during
the project planning effort can be reasonably covered in the EIA.
Thus, in cases where minimal impact can be demonstrated for the
proposed new source, fewer alternatives need be presented in the
EIA.
Criteria which define the scope of alternatives which must be
discussed in the EIA are presented in Section C of this chapter.
3. The applicant should also consider the extent of public interest
in the proposed new source in determining the scope and detail
of alternatives which must be considered. Public concern is
considered an Important input in the impact assessment process
since it provides a measure of otherwise unquantifiable elements
IV-1
-------
such as aesthetic impact, land use preferences, etc. Public
and industrial concerns are rationally interrelated by the
EIA and EIS process.
*t. Applicants must be candid and fully descriptive in discussing
new source impacts and alternatives since EIA review will
encompass several levels of technical review by governmental
and public groups. In all cases, high priority is given to
ascertaining whether or not reasonable alternatives have been
overlooked which would entail less environmental impact.
Oversight by the applicant of impact-reducing options, or
downplay of impacts associated with the proposed new source
will jeopardize EIA review and acceptance.
C. Criteria
1. Criteria for determining what alternatives must be described
and compared in the EIA are presented in Table IV-1.
2. In all cases, the alternative of taking "no action" must be
considered.
3. The criteria presented in Table IV-1 each requires that additional
alternatives be described in the EIA if a certain key environ-
mental consideration or objective is not met by the new source
proposal.
It is expected that the applicant will have selected the pro-
posed new source action on the basis of documentable trade-offs
between environmental, economic, and other factors. Consequently,
compliance with the requirements invoked by the criteria of
Table IV-1 should present little problem. In effect, the criteria
may be regarded as a verification process which tests the assertion
that the proposed new source action is the best alternative.
k. The criteria do not specify all details of the additional alter-
natives which must be considered. Rather, they specify the:
•Number of alternatives which must be considered in addition
to the proposed action.
•Specific aspect of the proposed action which is intolerable
or unacceptable environmentally.
5. In all cases, the judgement of the applicant should be guided by
the need for presentation of detai1 to show why the proposed
action is the best alternative.
IV-2
-------
Table IV-1
No. Criteria - Process Related
1 Process technology for industry in question
is rapidly developing or expanding.
2 Pollution control technology is rapidly
expanding for some critical or costly facet
of the industry.
3 Renovation/expansion of existing facilities
would eliminate need to develop natural areas.
k The proposed project will rely upon relatively
unproven technology.
5 The proposed project utilizes scarce or rapidly
diminishing resources (e.g., natural gas).
6 The proposed project has several raw materials
options.
7 Others, as defined by EPA Regional Administrator
Requi rement
Consider postponement
of the project.
Consider postponement
of the project.
Consider renovation/
expansion.
Consider at least one
otherprocess option.
Consider at least one
other process using
other resources.
Consider al 1 raw
material options and
determine one causing
lowest pollution load.
IV-3
-------
Table IV-1
(continued)
No.
Criteria - Site Related
Requi rement
The proposed new source is likely to be
controversial.
Consider at least one
additional site.
The proposed new source and/or associated
facilities would infringe upon scientifically
valuable areas, as determined by site
uniqueness, primitiveness, amenability to
study or observation. Such sites may be
defined by local universities, colleges,
research organizations, etc.
Consider at least one
additional site.
The proposed new source and related facilities
would directly or indirectly infringe upon
recreational lands, park lands, wildlife
refuge lands.
Consider at least one
additional site.
The proposed new source and related facilities
would either directly or indirectly, accelerate
change in rural, pristine, or agricultural land
areas.
Consider at least one
additional site.
The proposed new source and related facilities
would induce secondary residential, industrial,
commercial growth in the community which cannot
be supported by existing community services and
financial capabilities.
Consider at least one
additional site.
The proposed new source and related facilities
would cause traffic congestion in nearby
vicinities.
Consider at least one
additional site.
The proposed site is prone to flooding,
hurricane, earthquake, or other natural
disasters.
Consider at least one
additional site.
8 The proposed new source and related facilities
would infringe directly or indirectly upon
endangered species or their habitat, or
wetlands, including fresh water wetlands, or
wild and scenic rivers; or sensitive or unique
ecosystems.
Consider at least one
additional site.
-------
Table IV-1
(continued)
No.
B. Criteria - Site Related
9
10
The proposed new source and related facilities
would infringe directly or indirectly upon
historical sites currently included, or
proposed for inclusion within the National
Registery of Historical Landmarks. Archae-
ological ly important sites are likewise
covered by this criterion.
Others to be specified by EPA Regional
Administrator.
Requi rement
Consider at least one
additional site.
IV-5
-------
D. Detail of Alternative Description
1. In general, alternatives specified for consideration in Table IV-1
should be describable with less detailed discussions than those
for the proposed new source. This rule will apply only if the
applicant has considered environmental factors in deriving the
new source proposals inasmuch as all tradeoffs and considerations
which disqualified other alternatives will be already known and
read!ly stated.
Thus, even cases where environmentally more acceptable alterna-
tives were found but disqualified, the applicant will be able,
and is expected, to state what overriding economic, technological,
or related considerations were involved.
The applicant is required to explore alternatives to the extent
necessary to:
a. Provide a general description of the alternative's environ-
mental characteristics (baseline, sensitive ecosystems,
natural features).
b. Provide a discussion of what is environmentally more or less
acceptable about the alternative than the proposed new source
and what factors have influenced the final decision not to
adopt this alternative.
2. Moreover, the applicant is responsible for discussing alternatives
in a manner wherein:
a. Narrative style does not require extensive scientific or
technical expertise.
b. Full consideration is given (sometimes qualitatively) to
each impact's significance, magnitude, likelihood of accu-
rance, cumulative effects, short-term and long-term effects,
reversibility, and secondary or induced effects.
c. All tradeoffs, assumptions, and judgments utilized in weighing
environmental costs with social and economic costs are de-
scribed.
3. The applicant shall provide a tabular summary of the alternatives
finally considered and the major considerations which have been
analyzed and compared for each.
For this purpose, the format provided in Table IV-2 should be
followed.
IV-6
-------
The recommended format may not permit direct summarization of
considerations within the table for reasons of space and economy
of size. Instead, the applicant should specify within the table
what considerations have been analyzed for the respective alter-
natives by way of page and paragraph number citation. Where
feasible, a relative estimate of impact significance should be
included in the table.
IV-7
-------
FIGURE IV-2
GENERAL FORMAT FOR SUMMARIZING ALTERNATIVES
NEW SOURCE
TITLE
Impact Description
(Examples):
1. Process Impacts
Solid Waste Disposal
Effects
Water Quality Effects
Aesthetic Effects
2. Site Impacts
Loss of Agricultural
Land
Erosion
Loss of Habitat
Traffic Congestion
3. Etc
ALTERNATIVE A
(BRIEF
DESCRIPTION)
Significance
Page
ALTERNATIVE B
Significance
Page
ALTERNATIVE C
Significance
Page
ALTERNATIVE D
Significance
Page
ALTERNATIVE E
Significance
Page
<
oo
-------
APPENDIX A
MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTATION
-------
Appendix
TABLE OF
MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTATION
A.I
A. 2
A. 3
Forecasting Economic Changes and
Induced Inputs
a. Location Quotients
b. Multiplier Effects
c. Industries Which Will Be Stimulated
Computer Models
a. Water Resources
1. Storm Water Management Models
2. Storm Sewer Design Models
3. Sanitary Sewer Design Models
k. Plume Models
5. Stream Assimilative Capacity Models
6. DOSAG 1 and OJJAL 1
7. Water Surface Profiles
8. System Desing Optimization
9. Thermal Plume Prediction Model
10. Dispersion of Barged Wastes in
Ocean Waters
b. Air Resources
1. AOJ>M
2. APRAC
3. COM
k. PTMAX
5. PTDIS
References
a. Air Qjjal ity
b. Water Qual ity
c. Biological
d. Solid Waste and Hazardous Materials
e. Computer Modeling
f. General
CONTENTS
Page
A-1
A-1
A-1
A-2
A-U
A-5
A-5
A-5
A-5
A-6
A-6
A-6
A-6
A-6
A-7
A- 7
A-7
A-8
A-8
A-8
A-8
A-8
A-8
A- 9
A-9
A-11
A-11
A-11
A-1 2
A- 12
-------
APPENDIX A
MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTATION
A.1 Forecasting Economic Changes and Induced Inputs
The need for a straightforward method of predicting changes in the
economic base of the affected region is recognized in order to
reasonably forecast important secondary impacts. Specifically,
the following fundamental economic impact can be approximated:
The proposed industry's role as exporter or importer within
Its region of influence.
The multiplier effect of the proposed industry, approximating
the amount of secondary investment which will be stimulated in
other supportive industries.
An insight of what other industries may be stimulated to do
and the approximate levels of stimulation.
a. Location Quotients
Location quotient analysis is a technique which uses commonly
available data on industrial employment levels and permits
differentiation between exporting industries (also called basic
industries! and importing industries (also known as non-basic).
The terms importing and exporting are used here to describe
the industry's economic role within its region.
A generally used definition of region is the Standard Metro-
politan Statistical Area (SMSA) in as much as data is readily
available within the SMSA and the unit approximates, to some
degree, commonality between the industry, its sources of
supplies, and its markets.
Location quotient analysis relies upon the relationship that
the basic or exporting industries generally support the nonbasic
or importing industries. Basic industries will generally have
the greatest environmental (and economic) impact.
The level of support which basic industry provides for nonbasic
industry is determined in the following manner:
1. A comparison is made between local employment level for
the industry which includes the proposed new industry,
and total employment level within the affected region.
A-1
-------
2. Likewise, a comparison is made between the national employ-
ment level for that industry to total national employment.
3. If the ratios expressed in step T and step Z are compared
(by dividing RsTEP 1 bV RSTEP 2)> a measure .M= the proposed
industry's status as basic or non-basic will be made. For
example, if the resultant ratio is less than one, the
industry is termed non-basic to the local economy, reflecting
the fact that locally, the proposed industry is not producing
a "fair share" relative to the rest of the nation and hence
is a net importing or non-basic industry within its region.
Conversely, if the ratio is greater than one, the industry
is producing locally more than its share and may be termed
a net exporter or basic industry.
*t. A more realistic ratio may be obtained if RSJEP 1 is compared
to the RSTEP 2 which is based on state employment data or a
region which reflects more appropriately the industries
economic community.
b. Multiplier Effects
An estimate induced investment in non-basic industries which will
occur as consequence of the direct investment in basic industries
is made on the basis of the multiplier concept.
'The familiar multiplier concept states, in brief, that an increase
in the exports of a region will lead to an increase in regional
employment and, therefore, to an increase in regional income. This
increased income will, in turn, be spent and induce a second round
of increased regional employment and income which will also be
spent to induce more income, and so on, to a finite limit. The
calculated regional multiplier is an estimate of that finite limit.
It is an estimate of the total amount of income generated by an
injection of one dollar of new income into the region." (Schenker,
1970).
A measure of the multiplier effect is the ratio of total employment
in the affected region to the total employment for all basic
industries.
A sample calculation for a hypothetical location and industry is
provided In Table A.1-1.
Care must be exercised in indiscriminately applying the multiplier
so calculated because it assumes that the proposed industry will
behave Identically to those basic industries already there. This
A-2
-------
Table A.1-1
Sample Calculation of Employment,
Employment Coefficient, and Location
Quotient for Hypothetical Community
Agriculture
Chemical & Allied
Construction
Utilities and Sanitary Serv.
Food and Kindred
Textile Mills and Fabricated
Text! les
Trucking & Warehousing
Communication
Railraod
Printing & Publishing
Machinery, except Electrical
Furniture, Lumber and
Wood Prod.
Eating Establishments
Education
Non-profit
Professional
Governmental
Total
Total Basic Industries
(1)
Employment
Hypothetical
Commun i ty
*6,106
11
59
95
2,603
5
do
*16
23
42
98
*169
304
97
42
151
5*6
10,467
8,894
(2)
Coefficient
U.S.
.03710
.01290
.05972
.01677
.01316
.02853
.01414
.01402
.00831
.01556
.02600
.01278
.03003
.08030
.01519
.02552
.05488
(3)
Coefficient
Local
.58335
.00105
.00564
.24868
.24868
.00047
.00764
.00153
.00219
.0040!
.00930
.01614
.02904
.00926
.00401
.01443
.05407
(4)
Location
Quotient
(3) 4 (2)
*15.73720
.08140
.09444
.54085
* 13. 69380
.01647
.54031
*1.09130
.26353
.25777
.36000
*1. 26291
.96703
.11530
.263Sd
.56543
.98524
Multiplier:
1.18
---indicates a "Basic" Industry.
A-3
-------
assumption is not valid for industries where the project being
manufactured will be rapidly exported out of the region . . .
that is, not permitted to stimulate growth in "finishing"
industries, transportation, warehousing, etc.
By examination of the way in which the proposed industry will
be linked with the proposed economic setting in comparison to
the linkages between existing basic industries and the economic
setting, a qualitative judgment can be made as to whether the
calculated multiplier may be high or low, by what approximate
amount; adjustments can then be made accordingly.
Moreover, rapid technological changes in industry manufacturing
process will alter traditional industry interdependencies and
affect the validity of the results. The impact assessor should
consider such variables before applying the technique.
c. Industries Which Will Be Stimulated
An estimation of the kinds of industries which will be stimulated
by the proposed industry may be derived using Bureau of Economic
Analysis data for the "Input-Output" ("1-0") structure of the
U.S. economy, which relates the effect that investment in one
industry will have on other industries.
The BEA data applies nationally and, to that extent, is a measure
on an industry-specific basis of the induced economic impact
that the proposed industry will have. For example, a dollar of
investment in petroleum refining will induce economic growth in
other industries (per dollar) as shown below:
1. (New) Petroleum Refining 1.086
2. Chemicals and Selected Chemical Products 0.114
3. Plastics and Synthetic Materials 0.062
k. Paints and Allied Products 0.05^
5. Other Agricultural Products 0.052
6. Transportation and Warehousing 0.050
7. Stone and Clay Mining 0.0^3
8. Maintenance and Repair Construction 0.037
9. Livestock 0.032
10. Business Travel and Entertainment 0.032
11. New Construction 0.030
12. Forestry 0.028
13. Broad and Narrow Fabrics and Yarns 0.026
1^4. Stone and Clay Products 0.026
15-82. All Others 0.68
-------
It is noted that the BEA "1-0" statistics have been developed
four times over a twenty year period, the most recent estimate
being for the base year of 19&7. This recent I -0 data was
published in February,
This data will be useful as a gross estimate of induced change.
Rapid technological changes occurring today again affect the
accuracy of this measure. (This limitation is naturally most
applicable to industries where greatest technological develop-
ment is occurring. However, for the purpose of a simple means
for economic impact analysis in preparation of ElA's, this
analytical technique will be of some value.)
A. 2 Computer Models
Forecasting methodologies based upon computerized modeling approaches
have been developed for solving a wide variety of environmental
problems, with varying success. While a discussion of each available
model and explanation of the application to which it is suited is
outside the scope of this manual, a reference list of the most common
models is provided below.
Use of modeling approaches should generally be required for only large
new source projects or projects known to have a very significant
environmental impact. In as much as such successful modeling requires
high degree of skill in inter-relating natural environmental parameters
with projected process parameters in a manner consistent with the basic
assumptions inherent in the model, expert assistance may be required
in employing modeling techniques.
a. Water Resources
1. Storm Water Management Models
Such models are able to provide simulation of storm and
combined sewer systems, including the computation of both
flow and quality of storm and sanitary runoff.
2. Storm Sewer Design Models
Storm sewer design models are used to calculate the runoff
hydrograph at inlets of sewer lines of a sewer system network
and to find the sizes of the individual sewer lines from
known invert elevations.
*For a summary, refer to "Survey of Current Business", Volume
$k, No. 2, February, 197^, U.S. Department of Commerce, Social
and Economic Statistics Administration, Bureau of Economic
Analysis.
A-5
-------
3. Sanitary Sewer Design Models
Such models assist in the design of sanitary sewer systems.
The input data typically include geometry of the system,
minimum and maximum permissible velocity, minimum depth of
cover, wastewater flow rate, infiltration rate, and minimum
sewer slope. Output will include a table giving, all design
information (e.g., size of pipes, invert elevations, slopes,
capacities, velocity of flow, etc.).
k. Plume Models
Plume models are used for analysis of the effect of pipeline
discharges of pollutants (municipal, industrifl or thermal)
in stagnant density stratified water bodies such as lakes,
reservoirs, estuaries, and oceans.
5. Stream Assimilative Capacity Models
Such models simulate dissolved oxygen (DO) levels in a stream
resulting from a sequence of point and/or distributed BOD
loadings. Models can also allocate point source load reduc-
tions as required to maintain a specified DO standard and
calculate the corresponding treatment efficiencies required.
6. DOSAG 1 and QUAI 1
DOSAG 1 and Q.UAL 1 are used to predict water quality of streams
due to pollution loads. Q.UAL 1 simulates the spatial and
temporal variations of parameters such as BOD, DO, temperature,
and conservative minerals in streams. It allows for multiple
waste discharges, withdrawals, tributary flows, and incremental
runoff. OJJAL 1 is used to study a stream system in great
detail; the DOSAG 1 Model is used to analyze the same system
in lesser detail, but under a larger range of conditions.
7. Water Surface Profiles
This model computes and plots the water surface profile for
river channels of any cross-section under various conditions
of flows. The effects of hydraulic structures such as bridges,
culverts, weirs, embankments and dams may also be computed.
The program can be used for determining water profiles and
flooding areas of a watershed under various frequency floods.
A-6
-------
8. System Design Optimization
This is a simulation tool which assists the engineer in
evaluating treatment plant process designs from the stand-
point of the variability of effluent characteristics. More
specifically, SDO predicts the variability of certain effluent
characteristics so that alternative designs or alternative
operating modes may be compared with respect to their effec-
tiveness in producing the required effluent. Hence, by using
SDO to look at various design alternatives, the engineer can
establish the cost of providing additional reliability into
designs and, therefore, use this program to determine the
most cost-effective design.
9. Thermal Plume Prediction Model
This mode) describes the behavior of heated surface jets for
a wide range of ambient and initial discharge conditions
encountered in practice. The surface discharge of heated
water is often chosen over the submerged discharge because
it affects a greater rate of heat transfer to the atmosphere
due to normally higher surface temperatures. The solutions
obtained using this model are limited to a uniform and steady
surface discharge of heated water from a rectangular channel
into a large and deep body of water that is either at rest or
moving at a uniform and constant velocity. The output provides
results describing the surface plume trajectory, width, temp-
erature, depth, surface area, and time of travel along the
plume centerline.
10. Dispersion of Barged Wastes in Ocean Waters
A simple one-dimensional dispersion equation has been modeled
to predict the dispersion of liquid wastes in ocean waters.
The model predicts the concentration of the waste on the
surface along the centerline of the wake of the barge at
various times after discharge. This provides a means of
estimating the rate of discharge of pollutant necessary to
meet specific concentration limits. This model gives conser-
vative values of pollutant concentration. The input data
includes the capacity and the speed of the barge, time of
disposal, and horizontal dispersion coefficient.
A-7
-------
b. Air Resources
1. AQDM; The Air Quality Display Model calculates the disberse-
ment of pollutants by mathematical simulation of the study
area. This is accomplished through application of meteoro-
logical data to measure source output. The source output
disbursement is mathematically applied to observe sampling
station data and source contributors for specific geographic
areas. The Briggs or Holland plume rise equation may be
used. The AQDM program has been extensively used for regional
air quality and industrial impact studies. (AQDM has been
developed by the Environmental Protection Agency.)
2. APRAC: This computes the hourly average? of carbon monoxide
as a function of extra-urban diffusion from automotive sources
in upwind cities, intra-urban diffusion from roadway sources,
and local diffusion within a street canyon. The model re-
quires an extensive emission or traffic inventory for the city
of interest. Requirements and technical details are documented
in "User's Manual for the APRAC-1A Urban Diffusion Model Com-
puter Program" which is available from NTIS (access number
PB-213-091).
3. COM: The Climatological Dispersion Model (CDM) determines
long-term (seasonal or annual) quasi-stable pollutant con-
centrations at any ground level receptor using average emis-
sion rates from point and area sources and a joint frequency
distribution of wind direction, wind speed, and stability
for the same period. This Environmental Protection Agency
model differs from the Air Quality Display Model (AQDM) pri-
marily in the way in which concentrations are determined from
area sources, and the use of an increase in wind speed with
height dependent upon stability. CDM uses a separate data
set for the area of interest.
4. PTMAX: Is an interactive program which performs an analysis
of the maximum, short-term concentration from a point source
as a function of stability and wind speed.
5. PTDIS: Is an interactive program which computes short-term
concentration downwind from a point source at distances speci-
fied by the user.
A-8
-------
A.3 References
AIR QUALITY
1. Nationwide Air Pollutant Emission Trends 1S40-1970,
N73-27537 BB
2. Effects of Sulfur Oxides in the Atmosphere on Vegetation;
Revised Chapter 5 for "Air Quality Criteria for Sulfur Oxides"
(NTIS No. PB-226 314/3 BB)
3. A Time and Space Study of Pollutants (NTIS No. PB-226 1*21/6)
4. The Uses of Meteorologic Data in Large Scale Air Pollution
Surveys (NTIS No. PB-226 423/2)
5. The National Air Monitoring Program: Air Quality and Emissions
Trends Vol. I (NTIS No. PB-226 490/1 BB)
6. Program for Reduction of NOx from Tangential Cool Fired
Boilers, Phase I (NTIS No. PB-226 547/8)
7. National Air Quality Levels and Trends in Total Suspended
Particulates and Sulfur Dioxide Determined by Data in the
National Air Surveillance Network (NTIS No. PB-227 059/3)
8. A Cost Effectiveness Study of Air Pollution Abatement in the
National Capital Area (NTIS No. PB-227 110/4)
9. A Cost Effectiveness Study of Air Pollution Abatement in the
Greater Kansas City Area (NTIS No. PB-227 116/1)
10. A Cost Effectiveness Study of Particulate and SOx Emission
Control in the New York Metropolitan Area (NTIS No. PB-227 121/1)
11. The National Air Monitoring Program: Air Quality and Emission
Trends, Annual Report Volume II (NTIS No. PB-227 272/2)
12. Air Pollution Survey, Report 1 & 2, Air Pollution Emissions
in the Delaware Valley (NTIS No. PB-228 043/6 & PB-228 162/4
respectively)
13. Problems of the Recognition and Evaluation of Effects of Gaseous
Air Impurities on Vegetation (NTIS No. PB-229 740)
14. Regional Air Pollution Analysis (NTIS No. PB-230 872)
15. Emission Factors for Trace Substances (NTIS No. PB-230 894)
A-9
-------
16. An Urban Atmospheric Dispersion Model ANL/ES-CC-5.
17. Comprehensive Study of Specified Air Pollution Sources to
assess the Economic Impact of Air duality Standards
(NTIS No. PB-222 857/5)
18. Cost of Air Pollution Damage: A Status Report
(NTIS No. PB-222 040/8)
19. A Survey of Emissions and Controls for Hazardous Wastes and
Other Pollutants (NTIS No. PB-223 996/0)
20. A Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors (2nd Edition)
(NTIS No. PB-223 996/0)
21. Development of Methodology to Permit Projection of Air
Pollution Emissions for Geographic Areas (NTIS No. PB-220 433/7)
22. Air Quality Display Model (NTIS No. PB-189 19*0
23. Intermedia Aspects of Air and Water Pollution Control
(NTIS No. PB-224 812/8)
2k. Costs and Economic Impacts of Air Pollution Control: Fiscal
Years 1970-1975 (NTIS No. PB-227 022/1)
25. Biological Aspects of Air Pollution: An Annotated Bibliography
(NTIS No. PB-227 10^/7)
26. Cost of Monitoring Air Quality in the United States
(NTIS No. PB-231 169)
27. Federal Air Quality Control Regions (NTIS No. PB-229 701/8)
28. Directory of Air Quality Modeling Sites, 1912 (NTIS No. PB-231 003)
29. Supplement No. 1 for Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission
Factors, Second Edition (NTIS No. PB-228 708A)
30. Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, Second Edition
(NTIS No. PB-223 996/0)
31. Economic Damages of Air Pollution EPA-600/5-7^0/2
A-10
-------
WATER QUALITY
1. Economic Benefits from an Improvement in Water Quality
EPA-R5-73-008 (NTIS No. PB-219 474)
2. "Physical and Economic Factors Associated with the Establishment
of Stream Water Quality Standards." Volume I, Iowa State
Water Resources Research Institute, March 1970
3. "Benefits of Water Quality Enhancement," Washington, D.C.,
Environmental Protection Agency, Water Quality Office,
December 1970
BIOLOGICAL
1. Biological Aspects of Air Pollution: An Annotated Biobliography
(NTIS NO. PB-227 104/7)
2. Bio-environmental Impact of Air Pollution from Fossil Fuel
Power Plants (EPA 660/3-74-011)
3. Biological Effects of Air Pollution - Biobliography
(EPA 15080 FHU 10/69) Selected Bibliography (NTIS No. PB-213 483)
SOLID WASTE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
1. Problems and Opportunities in Management of Combustible Solid
Wastes (NTIS No. PB-222 467/3)
2. Studies on Modifications on Solid Industrial Wastes
(NTIS No. PB-222 419/4)
3 A Study of Hazardous Waste Materials, Hazardous Effects and
Disposal Methods, Vols. I-111 (NTIS No. PB-221 465/8, PB-221 466/6,
PB-221 467/4 respectively)
4. Recommended Methods of Reduction, Neutralization, Recovery,
or Disposal of Hazardous Waste.
1. Vol I - Summary Report (NTIS No. PB-224 580/1)
2. Vol II - Toxicological Summary (NTIS No. PB-224 581/9)
3. Vol III - Disposal Process Descriptions. Ultimate Disposal,
Incineration, and Pyrolysis Processes
(NTIS No. PB-224 582/7)
4. Vol IV - Disposal Processes Descriptions, Biological, and
Miscellaneous Waste Treatment Processes
(NTIS No. PB-224 583/5)
A-11
-------
5. Vol V - National Disposal Site Candidate Waste Stream
Constituent Profile Reports. Pesticides and
Cyanide Compounds (NTIS No. PB-224 584/3)
6. Vol VI - National Disposal Site Candidate Waste Stream
Constituent Profile Reports. Mercury, Arsenic,
Chromium, and Cadmium Compounds (NTIS No. PB-224
585/0)
7. Vol VII - National Disposal Site Candidate Waste Stream
Constituent Profile Reports. Propellants,
Explosives and Warfare Material (NTIS No. PB-224
586/8)
8. Vol VIII - Radioactive Materials (NTIS No. PB-22*f 586/8)
9. Vol IX - Organic Compounds
10. Vol X - Organic Compounds, continued
11. Vot XI - Inorganic Compounds
12. Vol XII - Inorganic Compounds, continued
13. Vol XIII - Summary of Waste Origins, Forms and Quantities
14. Vol XIV - Research and Development Plans (NTIS No. PB-224
59V2)
15. Vol XV - References (NTIS No. PB-22^ 595/9)
5. Alternatives to the Management of Hazardous Wastes at National
Disposal Sites (NTIS No. PB-225 164/3)
COMPUTER MODELING
1. Mathematical Urban Air Pollution Models (ANL/ES-RPY-001 13B)
2. User's Guide for the Climatological Dispersion Model
(NTIS No. PB-11? 3**6A)
3. Air Quality Display Model (NTIS No. PB-189 194)
GENERAL
1. The Economic Impact of Noise (NTIS No. PB-206-726)
2. Laws and Regulatory Schemes for Noise Abatement
(NTIS No. PB-206 719)
3. Noise from Industrial Plants (NTIS No. PB-206 718)
4. National Survey of the Odor Problem. Phase I Study of the
Social and Economic Impact of Odors (NTIS No. PB-194 376)
5. Economics of Air and Water Pollution (Blacksburg, Water
Resources Research Center, Bulletin 26)
A-12
-------
6. Environmental Quality in a Growing Economy. Resources for the
Future, Inc., Johns Hopkins Press
7. Economics of Outdoor Recreation, Resources for the Future, Inc.,
Johns Hopkins Press, 1966.
8. "Water Quality and the Value of Homesites on the Rockaway
River, N.J." New Brunswick, Water Resources Research Institute,
Rutgers - The State University, 1969.
A-13
-------
APPENDIX B-1
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Appendix
B-1 RUBBER PROCESSING INDUSTRY 1
Introduction 1
Overview of the Industry 1
I. Tire and Inner Tube Industry 3
I. A Impact Identification 3
I.A.I Process Impacts 3
1 .A. 2 Other Impacts 7
I.B Process Impact Control 8
I.C Alternatives 1°
II. Synthetic Rubber Industry 12
1 1. A Impacts Identification 12
M.A.I Process Impacts 12
1 1. A. 2 Other Impact Sources 18
M .B Process Impact ^
11 .C Alternatives '9
III. Molded, Extruded, and Fabricated Rubber 21
Products Industry
1 1 1. A Impact Identification 21
1 1 1. A.I Process Impacts 21
1 1 1. A. 2 Other Impacts 23
1 1 1 .B Process Impact Control 24
I I I.C Alternatives 2^
IV. Reclaimed Rubber Industry 2&
IV. A Impact Identification 26
IV. A. 1 Process Impacts 26
IV.B Process Impact Control 28
IV. C Alternatives 28
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(continued)
Append i x
B-1 V. Latex-Based Goods 30
(con't)
V.A Impact Identification 30
V.A.1 Process Impacts 30
V.A.2 Other Impacts 30
V.B Process Impact Control 30
V.C Alternatives 30
References 31
-------
APPENDIX B-1
RUBBER PROCESSING INDUSTRY
Introduct ion
This Appendix supplements the instructions provided in the General Assess-
ment Guideline. The information which is presented has been developed on
the basis of its suitability for clarifying the general guidance provided
to the permit applicant in order to specify and describe more fully the
scope of the requirement which the El A must meet.
Overview of the Industry
The Rubber Processing Industry may be regarded as the following five
distinctly different industry components:
I. Tire and Inner Tube industry.
II. Synthetic Rubber Industry.
III. Molded, Extruded, and Fabricated Rubber Products Industry.
IV. Reclaimed Rubber Industry.
V. Latex-Based Products Industry.
This industry categorization coincides with the U.S. Department of
Commerce Standard Industrial Classification, and has already been adopted
by EPA in a nation-wide survey of the Industry for purpose of effluent
source analysis and development of EPA Effluent Guideline Limitations.
The Appendix which follows has been divided, according to this categori-
zation, into individual subappendices.
-1-
-------
APPENDIX B-1
I. TIRE AND INNER TUBE INDUSTRY
-2-
-------
I. TIRE AND INNER TUBE INDUSTRY
I.A Impact Identification
Impacts which must be described as a minimum by the applicant are des-
cribed herein.
I.A.1 Process Impacts
Using process flow diagrams such as those provided in Figures 1 and 2,
the applicant should describe all sources of process waste. The diagrams
presented have been developed for water pollution survey studies, and
thus, are not complete regarding air and solid waste sources. Minimum
requirements which the applicant should address in the EIA are presented
in the following sections (see Reference No. 1).
I.A.1.a Effluents
(1) Cooling Water
Specific attention should be given to maximizing water recycle
or reuse by means of recirculating cooling water systems.
(See General Assessment Guideline.)
(2) Utility Services Wastes
Aqueous wastewaters associated with cooling water and steam
supply systems should be defined and described. Such wastes
include boiler blowdowns, cooling system blowdowns, raw water
treatment system wastes.
(3) Spills Washdowns
Intermittent sources of wastes, such as those generated by
spills, leaks, and routine plant housekeeping should also
be described. Particular attention should be drawn to soap-
stone and latex dip areas.
-3-
-------
Figure 1
FLOW DIAGRAM FOR TYPICAL TIRE AND CAMELBACK PRODUCTION FACILITY
RUS8EI OKI
FIBIIC IND imc
-4
RUB1
IND
COUP
ORSON
STORIGE
f ITENDER
Oil — •
STORICE
1
ER
ORT
BUNDS
1
CON POUND mo
BIIBURT _
KILLS
Mt-CDOUNG
' I— IMUER
LEIMGES.
T
K1STEIIIER
SOIPSTONE
SOIU I ION
1 1
• 1
RUV OFF
i WASHnQlN
+ v
1
4
»
«
FIBRIC COMING
• III
CILENDE
COO LI KG
SUCH?
SPLICIN
1
1
1
LEUinES
•ISHD01
IStEIMI
BEID FO
HILL
EITRU
RRIPP
FLIPP
1
1
1
1
LEUIGt
lASHDOil
• ISTE1M
TREAD
MILL
EXTRU
COOL!
CENEN
SLICI
« CORDS INO BEITS
r,
j >
1 COflim':
i
R
RKITIOK I '
BE«fl I IRE
BER ' • BUIIO'H
ER
CB
1— COOl IMG
S
ER
ronimmr '"E1D o
DER
KG TIKI
TING
KG
1 t
| I—COOLING
— — ** 1
^ u COOLING | ,
1 ' IdEITIIENT |"
BLUlilINN REGENEVlTIOK
| IISTE
t i
ilSIEtrms IISTEIITER
'-i G'REEK TIR'E IIRf »OLIIING llrtt HIISHING
CREEK ^ INSPECTION HI [IIV'" — »
STEII4-I 1 1
| LCOOIIKG
| L^IUER
1ISHODWH
«SFE»m8
CIICLBICIt IS PRODUCT
JCONEBNSIIE
RETURN
i " N ,,,rr TDFAiirnr 4
Sttrr\.i+^ei 1 BOuSE ' v
STEIN ' 1 ' 1
1 <
i •
BLOW001N REGEUERITIO
III INTIIE I1TER
IRE PRODUCI
NSPECTION STORIGE
ND * IND
EPIIR SHIPPING
fill IITIKE (IFER
II
IISTEIIUR
IIS1EIITE8
IEIMGES
DISHDOIII
HISUIITEB
IISTE
I
IISTEdTER
IISTEIIUR
-------
Figure 2
FLOW DIAGRAM FOR A TYPICAL INNER TUBE PRODUCTION FACILITY
vn
i
COOLINC WATER
CARBON
BLACK
STORAGE
RUBBER
AND DRY
COMPOUND
STORAGE
EXTENDER
OIL
STORAGE
SPI'LLS
RUNOFF
+
WASTEWATER
i
1
*
RETURN
" COOLING V
SUPPLY
COMPOUNDING
RAW
MILLS STO"
L»COOLII
4 LEAKAGE _^v..,f
SCIP AND
SCAPSTONE
SCLUTIONS
SPILLS
LEAKAGE
WASHDOWN
••STEWATER
" 'I
COOLINR COOLING WATER
(ATER '" TOWER * TREATMENT
i I
1 !
SLOWDOWN REGENERATION
1 T
WASTEWATER WASTEWATER
TUBE FORMATION
y 1 1 « TUBE _—
M LLo i lint —
* EXTRUDER UNCUREO ^ SLICING ^ ..
TANKS TUBES »NO "
nip iif, —
ir ' ' ! _^.^»____
] COOLING TPIsTEAM
1 WATER ^ {
niirrn 1 IHA QTT ^— — ^ — ^^»*
RAW INTAKE
WATER
PRODUCT
SPECTION ' » STORAGE
CKAGING AND
WATER • waaii-^ ICIKIPF
LEAKAGE WATER JJ KJ"
V WASHnOWN WASHOOWN
COOLING 1 CONDENSATE
WATER ' RETURN
WA.TEWATER BQ1LER ±
* SUT HOU-C 1 I
STEAM .. -
BLOWOOWN
I
4
WASTEWATER
WATER RAW
TREATMENT INTAKE
REGENERATION W*TER
WASTE|
WASTEWATER
-------
I.A.I.b Solid Wastes
The solid waste generation within the tire and tire products industry
has been summarized as follows (Reference No. 2):
Pounds of Waste Per Million
Type of Sol id Waste Pounds of Product Shipped
Paper, cardboard, and wood 13,^00
Rubber compound 11,900
Textile material 5,900
Metal 9,700
Other 14,000
Paper type solid waste is largely attributable to the shipping packaging
for carbon black, mineral segments, and other chemicals used in the
process.
Rubber waste occurs at virtually all stages of the process with the ex-
ception of fabric coating.
Textile and tire cord scrap (ends, clippings and defects) which have
not been rubberized may be sold to scrap dealers for reuse in the
mechanical rubber goods industry.
Metal waste is comprised largely of the high carbon steel wire from the
tire head. This waste is generated by defective material in process
waste trimmings. Scrap head wire once was sold as scrap steel. Changes
in the steel industry have eliminated this market.
The applicant should make an estimate of solid wastes for the proposed
new source using a similar or more detailed method of categorization.
I.A.I.c Air Emissions
Primary air emissions attributable to the Tire and Inner Tube industry are
those resulting from open burning, drying operations, and on-site utilities
associated with the process.
The applicant should describe all air pollutant sources using a process
flow diagram and any supplementary diagrams.
-6-
-------
Specific attention, as a minimum, should be given to:
(1) Compounding of raw materials: Activated carbon used in this
process becomes easily dispersed and creates a significant
cleanliness problem. Bag house control is common practice.
(2) Odor: Particularly from burning rubber scraps which also pro-
duces very acid and sulfurous gases in addition to obnoxious,
sooty flame.
(3) Drying operations: Various organic solvents.
Storage of organic chemicals: Vent valves, spillage, leaks.
(5) On-s?te utilities (Steam generation, healing): SOX, NOX
particulates depending upon fuel source.
I. A. 2 Other Impacts
I. A. 2. a Raw Materials
Raw materials for tire and inner tube manufacture include rubber, carbon
black, oils, chemicals, and segments which are transportable via existing
rail heads, trucking, or barge systems.
For large new source facilities (those greater than about 20,000 units/day),
careful analysis within the EIA should be given showing themethod of raw
material delivery and its associated environmental impacts, such as barge
spillage or ballast discharge tank-car cleaning.
I.A.2.b Transportation
The EIA should show exactly what loading, unloading, transhipment and
other handling operations will be required for moving raw materials and
products. For large plants, this analysis should include movement of
material from point of origin to product distribution center. Raw
materials and products in this industry segment are more readily dispersed
than product materials, inasmuch as they are either liquids or dispersable
sol ids.
I.A.2.C Site Preparation and Destruction
This segment of the rubber processing industry has no unique site prep-
aration or construction impacts. The general assessment guideline should
be appl ied.
-7-
-------
I.B Process Impact Control
I.B.I Effluents
The applicant must discuss all in-process controls being incorporated in
the proposed new source. Such discussion should cover as a minimum:
a. Soapstone discharge control systems: Recircu1 ation systems have
been imployed to eliminate continuous discharges of large soap-
stone quantities.
If recirculation systems are to be incorporated, the applicant
must state what cleaning operations will be entailed and what
discharges are likely to result.
b. Spills and leakages: Drip pans, curbs collection sumps, etc.,
have been used to collect and segregate such wastes from process
sewers.
The applicant should, in addition, state how such leaks and
spillages will be avoided or reduced, in addition to how they
will be disposed once collected.
c. Washdowns and machine cleaning: Special areas are commonly set
aside for machinery cleaning and maintenance where solvents and
steam are required.
The applicant must describe the facilities and procedures which
will be incorporated in the new source in order to control the
source of waste, including method of disposal.
d. Stormwater runoff-: The applicant must describe how stormwater
will affect the proposed facility and operations giving special
attention to loading and unloading operations, washdown areas,
oi1 storage areas.
Description of the methods by which stormwater runoff will be
minimized, or controlled should be specifically described, in-
cluding as a minimum, consideration of diking, collection sumps,
oil and water separation systems, roofing.
e. Protective measures incorporated in design and maintenance
programs which further reduce or control waste loads should be
specifically described. For example, cooling water can be con-
taminated with process materials if heat exchangers are not
periodically inspected for leaks and repaired.
-8-
-------
b. End-of-process treatment: The applicant should describe the end-
of-pipe treatment system that will be employed.
I.B.2 Solid Waste Control Measures
The applicant must describe all measures which will be employed to reduce
solid waste, being sure to include consideration of recycle and reuse
options.
Of the various waste types, rubber compound and metal wastes are the most
significant solid waste problems.
The applicant should specifically discuss how destructively tested tires
(a fraction of 1 percent al all produced) will be disposed of.
Open incineration is generally considered an unacceptable practice. Land-
filling is currently practiced. Decreasing landfill capacity and
increasing recognition of landfill impact upon the environment (ground
water in particular) will limit the long-range suitability of the landfill
solution.
Currently, small-scale reuse of old tires to artificial marine reef con-
struction is being tested with promising results.
I.B.3 Air Emissions
The applicant must describe all measures which will be incorporated in
the facility design which will reduce air emissions.
Particular attention should be given to discussing how open burning of
solid wastes will be eliminated, for example, by solid waste reuse or
recycle, landfill disposal, or incineration by approved multichamber
incinerators.
In addition, the applicant should give specific consideration to the use
of:
a. Baghouses to control particulates generated in the compounding
areas.
b. Wet or dry collection systems to control particulates generated
in sidewall grinding areas, balancing machine areas, and tire
repair areas.
c. Systems used to control particulate and solvent emissions
generated in painting areas. Substitution of water-based paints
has been attempted, but with limited success.
d. Oil/water separator enclosures.
-9-
-------
I.C Alternatives
I.C.I Site Alternatives
The tire and Inner Tube segment of the Rubber industry has no unique
environmental requirements affecting the site selection decisions.
The General Assessment Guideline should be followed.
I.C.2 Process Alternatives
Manufacturing process alternatives will be largely constrained by
marketing considerations. Environmental impact considerations are
not likely to affect process choice if in-process -nd reliable end-of-
process techniques are'employed.
I.C.3 Control Alternatives
In-process controls discussed previously should be incorporated in the
project design, and, where determined unfeasible, reasons documenting
other systems should be clearly stated. End-of-process control systems
are important and must be well designed if new source standards are to
be met and met continuously. No single control system is recommendable
in as much as there is tremendous variability in new source size, inte-
gration with other industrial activities, and product mix. The applicant
should provide description and documentation of the proposed control
scheme to demonstrate such system adequacy and reliability.
-10-
-------
APPENDIX B-1
SYNTHETIC RUBBER INDUSTRY
-11-
-------
II. SYNTHETIC RUBBER INDUSTRY
11.A. Impacts Identification
11.A.I. Process Impacts
Using process flow diagrams, such as those provided in Figures 3, ^, or
5, the applicant should describe all sources of process waste. The
diagrams, which have been adapted from a water pollution survey report
of this industry, show only wastewater sources (Reference No. 1). The
diagram presented by the applicant should be comprehensive of all wastes.
Requirements for nonwater wastes which the applicant should address in
the EIA, as a minimum are set forth in subsequent sections of the Ap-
pendix.
II.A.La. Process Effluents
(1) Effluents from Emulsion Processes (Crumb Production)
The applicant should discuss as a minimum the following waste-
water sources:
(a) Caustic Soda Scrubber Unit - spent caustic streams.
(b) Monomer Recovery Unit - decant water.
(c) Coagulation - coagulation liquor overflow.
(d) Crumb Dewatering - crumb reuse overflow.
(e) Monomer Strippers - stripper clean out rinse water.
(f) Tanks and reactors - clean out rinse water.
(g) Area washdowns.
-12-
-------
Figure 3
General Water Flow Diagram For An Emulsion Polymerized Crumb Rubber Production Facility
/
1REI
•ME
1
1
THEM
I1JER
1—
•tin
SPtll
CUISIIC
IlTlEIME
ltd PROttSS
i I
SOIP
solution
LD PROCESS
1,1
ICTIHIIQR
ciunsr
HDIFKR
SOl.UTIO«S
1
.
r**
ED
Cl
JtPKKI
[IRUP
<
MSfEH
*
1
1
»
IER
t
t
EOUiPW.T1 "« ""T | IEIKJIHKNI
CIEIWP 1 • 'CIEIIIUP
^ EouincRi ^CIC»UP ^
IISIEHttt UStEfllER MSIEIIHI
EI1EIDER OH r
CIRIOI BllCI SURRT »
^
SUPPIT .
EOUIPIEIl'ciCIIUP
4
HSIEHIfS
L=
m» Lh'«"
COIOCRSI1E
IETURR
IRE I TED
PROCESS
I1TER
UKU?
MTEI
C>RION BLIO
SLURRT
BOILER
HOUSE
DIIEI FEED HIED
4
SHLIS
I
S.OIOOIH
IISTtflTCR
IIIER
[REinERt
URITS
RII imm
TME«
REcmuTin
IISH
•
IISlCltlER
-------
Figure k
General Water Flow Diagram For An Emulsion Latex Rubber Production Facility
Rlf IITIK HIE* _.
COOLINC
101(1
TiEHIERI
*
COOUIIG
10IER
COOUIC
IIIER
REIURI
>COOUNr
IIIER
SUP PL I
II CHI IOIOIER
10 IIIOSPHERE
BLOIOOM
I
•ISTEIIIER
tICUUI SOURCE
(SIEII IEI OR
IICUUI PUIPl
IIIHOUI
CODOEIISER
EIECIOR
(STEM IEI OR
fICUUI PMPI
HIM COIDEISER
• DIOIER MO STEII
comnsiu
UNIKHIMIEO ICtOIER
IIHIBIICO
lOROIER
SPtm ClUSriC
tISTEIITER
SHIP
I
1REIIEO (li£8 PROCESS
• ItEUP IITER
TREtlEO m>:-'JP IIIER
EQUIPHE*TCIEINUP
*
ItSIEIIIER
EQUIPIENT | CUM UP
I
i
IISIEIIIER
S1EII
CaKOENClIE
REIUR*
TREITED
PROCESS
IIIER
sum»
*JI»!-ii_
BOILER
HOUSE
j
* 1
T,
IIIER
UEHItl-
UIIIS
^ Rll HIKE
IIIER
BlOIDOlH
IISItfHEB
•ISIEIi'-t
-------
Figure 5
General Water Flow Diagram For A Solution Polymerized
Crumb Rubber Production Facility
SOLIEKt
SrORICE
DtmxiairEO i
T
•DIOIt t
ilt>S*Sl
limilED
•moitR
o*n«£R
• OIOIIER
iNHiei mi
mo IISH
10 IOHOIEII
BECOVIRT
HIM
r. KMBIER
! SEPIM1IOII
! . ri
i d
• ISU 1
HEM!
SIOPS
, FlEl
URTKC
IT*'
f
•
EU-
i
SOL«E>I
SF PI Bill OK
p*
IISItlltlR
PDLUE1
lltMW
•EICIOR
|H
CODimc
HIED
REIDflK
{
EtlEKOER Dlt
;-«:f> on no cutni
i:i II! KOI IDDEO 14
i-EITEiDCO IIUOBEt
coo^mr
IOIER
BLOIOOK
•
•ISTEIirE'
IHEUP
8Lic« SIUIPI
OUT INC
r^l
Ji. •:
noguci
stoticr
IID
SKIPPIIC
USH001K
-l> tISICIIIEI
-------
(2) Effluents from Emulsion Latex Rubber Processes
The applicant should discuss as a minimum the following waste-
water sources:
(a) Caustic Soda Scrubbers - spent caustic streams.
(b) Excess Monomer Stripping - decant water layer.
(c) Tanks, Reactors, and Strippers - clean out rinse water.
(d) Tank Cars and Tank Trucks - clean out rinse water.
(e) Area washdowns.
(3) Effluents from Solution Polymerization Processes
The applicant should discuss as a minimum the following waste-
water sources:
(a) Caustic Soda Scrubbers - spent caustic stream.
(b) Solvent Purification - fractionator bottoms.
(c) Monomer Recovery - decant water layer.
(d) Crumb Dewatering - crumb rinse water overflow.
(e) Area washdowns.
II.A.I.b. Solid Wastes
Solid waste generation within the Synthetic Rubber segment of the Rubber
Processing Industry has not been wel1-documented. Qualitatively, soap-
stone sludges and low-quality rubber products are probably the most
important solid wastes.
The applicant should describe in detail all expected operations from
which solid wastes will result. Explanation of how solid waste gener-
ation levels are optimized and what recovery or reuse options exist
for minimizing waste disposal impacts must be made.
-16-
-------
II.A.L.C. Air Emissions
Emissions from the Synthetic Rubber Manufacturing Industry have been
categorized as:
(1) Organic compounds emitted from reactor and blowdown tanks.
(2) Particulate matter and odors emitted from drying operations.
A more detailed breakdown of emission factors for this industry is
presented in the following tableJ
Compound Emissions
Ib/ton kg/MT
Alkenes
Butadiene kO 20
Methylpropene 15 7.5
Butyne 3 1.5
Pentadiene 1 0.5
Alkanes
Dimethylheptane 1 0.5
Pentane 2 1
Ethanonitrile 1 0.5
Carbonyls
Acrylonitrile 17 8.5
Acrolein 3 1.5
-17-
-------
11.A.2 Other Impact Sources
II .A.2.a Raw Materials
Raw materials for synthetic rubber manufacture are generally procured
as output of other chemical manufacturing operations, and impacts
associated with natural resource development are generally not a
problem. Materials include: carbon black, solvent, soap, monomer,
antioxidant, and extender oil. Consideration of induced impacts upon
raw material supplying industries, however, will be required if the
proposed synthetics plant:
(1) Is very large (larger than several 100,000 metric tons/year).
(2) Would require significant expansion of capacity in the supplying
plant (expansion greater than about 25 percent).
II.A.2.b Transportation Impacts
The EIA should show exactly what loading, unloading, transhipment, and
other handling operations will be required for moving raw materials and
products. For large plants, this analysis should include movement of
material from point of origin to product distribution center. Raw
materials in this industry segment are more readily disbursed than
product materials since they are liquids or solids and will have greater
impact when spilled.
Possible spillage impacts include:
(1) Massive paniculate (soot) pollution by carbon black.
(2) Toxicity to living organisms (land and water and environments).
(3) Fire and severe property damage.
II.A.2.C Site Preparation and Construction
This segment of the Rubber Processing industry has no unique site
preparation or construction impacts. The guidance of "General"
(Chapter III) should be applied.
II.B Process Impact Control
II.B.I Effluent Controls
The applicant should discuss all in-process waste controls which will
be incorporated in the proposed new source. These discussions should
cover (as a minimum) in-process controls for:
a. Crumb rinse overflow elimination systems.
b. Coagulation liquor overflow controls.
-18-
-------
c. Elimination of steam-driven vacuum systems.
d. Equalization of spent scrubber solutions.
e. Carbon black slurrying systems.
f. Latex spi11 control.
End-of-process treatment systems should also be discussed, giving
particular attention to the following:
a. Primary clarification of fine rubber solids.
b. Latex coagulation and use of clay or limestone settling aids.
c. Collection, dewatering, and disposal of surface (floating) solids.
d. Nutrient addition to achieve biodegradation.
e. Secondary clarification.
f. Tertiary treatment units, such as activated carbon.
11.C Alternatives
II .C.I Site Alternatives
The Synthetic Rubber segment of the rubber processing industry has no
unique environmental requirements affecting the site selection decision.
The General Assessment Guideline should be followed in analyzing alter-
native sites.
II.C.2 Process Alternatives
Overall process choice will be controlled by the product market being
pursued. Economically stimulated trends towards radial tires which
require more natural rubber in tire manufacture may reduce the
pollution levels,
II.C.3 Control Alternatives
In-process control techniques discussed in paragraph "B" of this appendix
should all be as minimum levels of in-process control with specific
explanation of justification of why any particular method is unsuitable
(excessive cost, better control system availability, lack of reliability,
etc.).
End-of-process control systems are important and must be well designed
if new source standards are to be met and met continuously. No single
control system however is recommendable in as much as tremendous vari-
ability in new source size, product mix, and raw materials will control
the ultimate control system chosen. The applicant should provide descrip-
tion and documentation of the proposed control scheme to demonstrate
such system's adequacy and reliability.
-19-
-------
APPENDIX B-1
III. MOLDED, EXTRUDED, AND FABRICATED
RUBBER PRODUCTS INDUSTRY
-20-
-------
III. MOLDED. EXTRUDED. AND FABRICATED
RUBBER PRODUCTS INDUSTRY
111.A Impact Identification
Impacts which must be described by the applicant are described herein.
111.A.I Process Impacts
Using a process flow diagram such as that provided in Figure 6, the
applicant should describe all sources of process waste. The diagram
presented in this figure has been developed from a water pollution survey
of the industry and thus is not complete regarding air and solid waste
sources.
111.A.I.a Effluents
All effluents must be identified and evaluated. In particular, the
applicant should give special attention to spills and leaks, washdowns,
discharges from air pollution equipment, rinse waters.
III.A.I.b Solid Wastes
Data relating solid waste generation levels for this industry segment is
provided as follows. For further detail see reference
Millions of Pounds Per
Rubber Footwear Million Pounds of Product
Paper, cardboard, wood 17,000
Rubber compound 90,000
Textile 66,000
Metal 1,000
Other 35,000
Belts
Paper, cardboard, wood 27,300
Rubber compound 41,000
Textile 25,200
Metal 2,300
Other 30,200
Hose
Paper, cardboard, wood 33,000
Rubber compound 5^,700
Textile 18,300
Metal 10,200
Other 49,300
-21-
-------
Figure 6
Flow Diagram for the Production of a Typical Molded I tern
ro
N>
i
RUBBER STOCK ^ PHF-FDRM
SQAPSTONE
SOLUTION
DR IFF AGE
LEAKAGE
1ASTEHATER
RUBBER
PIGMENTS
AND MIX •
COMPOUNDS
STORAGE
COOLING • •
PREPARATION
1
1
COOLING AND
RINSE MATER
i
•RMPI'iiNiiiNi. —
MIKING - RUBBER STOCK . BUNX
KILL!
AND S
WEIGH
HATER *"
N& P PREPARATION
TOCK I i
ING J
„;..- COOLING AND
LEAKAGE R.MSE(.ATER
HASHIIATER »ASTE*ATER
RUBBER STOCK
BOLD PRE-FORM _ CDHPRESSIONl •
TRANSFER BLA
[ I
1 i
HULUl t.^
1
O.L1
LEAKAGE
1
*
MASTEWATER
UK ^ TRANSFER «
* HOLDS
I 1
OIL EXCESS
LEAKAGE BLANK
| SOLID
i »ASTE
HASTEKATER
1
^ INIECTIQN i
i r
1 C
OLDED PRUUUU
OED PRODUCT OEFL»
SYSTE
F
FLASH
SOLID
IHASTE
MOLDED PRODUCT
SH1NG _»
H
_
30LING
METAL
PARIS
STORAGE
DECREASING
1
SURFACE
PREPARATION
PERIODIC
SOLVENT
DISPOSAL
MOLDED
PRODUCT
FINISHING
MOLDED
PRODUCT
INSPECTION
PACKAGING J.
SHIPMENT
COOLING
WATER
PERIODIC
MOLD
CLEANING
OIL
LEAKAGE
I
*
HASTEtATER
'WATER
-------
III.A.I.c Air Emissions
Air Emission for this industry segment are those resulting from compounding,
drying, and on-site utilities associated with the process (to steam
generation, cooling water evaporation.
The applicant should describe all such air emission sources using the
process diagram and any supplementary diagrams.
Specific attention, as a minimum, should be given to:
(1) Compounding of raw materials: Activated carbon used in this
process may become easily dispersed.
(2) Odor.
(3) Drying and curing operations which drive off organic solvents.
Storage of organic solvents.
(5) On-site utilities (Steam generation and heating - SOX, NOX,
particulates).
1 1 1. A. 2 Other Impacts
II I .A. 2. a Raw Materials
Raw materials are generally procured as output of other chemical manu-
facturing operations, and impacts associated with resource development
will not be a problem. Consideration of induced impacts upon raw
material in supplying industries is also not required.
1 1 1. A. 2. b Transportation Impacts
The EIA should show exactly what loading, unloading, transhipment and
other handling operations will be required for moving materials and
products.
1 1 1. A. 2. c Site Preparation and Construction
This segment of the Rubber Processing industry has no unique site prepara-
tion or construction impacts. The General Assessment Guideline should
be app 1 i ed .
-23-
-------
MI.B Process Impact Control
The following in-process controls must be addressed as a minimum:
(1) General spills and leaks - segregated collection and treatment
systems for oily and greasy waste wastewaters, soapstone, and
anti-tach dip solutions.
(2) Spills at storage and loading facilities - collection and treat-
ment systems.
(3) Storage drum cleaning and rinsing areas.
(4) Solvent and cement mixing areas - preventative measures for
keeping these materials from entering plant process sewers.
(5) Closed system degreasing units employed in metal preparation.
(6) Pretreatment of acid pickling solutions to remove metallic
components and adjust pH.
(7) Dry and wet scrubbing devices used in rubber compounding and
bluffing areas.
End-of-pipe treatment should also be described. Special attention should
be given to oil, grease, and suspended solids.
III.C Alternatives
111.C.I Site Alternatives
The molded, extruded, and fabricated products segment of the rubber pro-
cessing industry has no unique environmental requirements or consideration--
affecting the site selection decision. The General Assessment Guideline
should be followed in analyzing alternative sites.
111.C.2 Process Alternatives
Process alternatives are not a great determinant of waste load or impact
in this segment of the industry and need not be, as long as full control
of waste generation by means of identified in-process controls (Sub-
section MI.B.2.a) is implemented.
III.C.3 Control Alternatives
Full evaluation should be given to incorporating all in-process controls
identified in Subsection 111.b.2.a with special emphasis on the feasibility
of dry-type pollution devices to collect metal fines from sand blasting
and other grinding operations.
-------
APPENDIX B-1
IV. RECLAIMED RUBBER INDUSTRY
-25-
-------
IV. RECLAIMED RUBBER INDUSTRY
IV.A Impact Identification
Impacts which must be described by the applicant are described herein.
IV.A.1 Process Impacts
All process wastes should be described and identified by a suitable
process flow diagram.
I V.A.I.a Effluents
Effluents which the applicant should address are summarized by Table IV-1.
IV.A.1.b Solid Wastes
Since this segment of the Rubber Processing industry normally utilizes
waste as raw material, any solid wastes resulting from this industry
segment cannot be converted into a reuseable product (by existing technology).
The following solid waste generation characteristics are noted for the three
basic reclaiming processes:
Wet Digester Process 0.6 Ibs rubber waste/100 Ibs
25.3 Ibs other waste/100 Ibs
Pan (or Dry Process) 1.9 Ibs rubber waste/100 Ibs
2.k Ibs other waste/100 Ibs
Mechanical 1.0 Ibs rubber waste/100 Ibs
O.'t Ibs other waste/100 Ibs
"Other" wastes are comprised of waste paper, wire shopping, broken pallets,
and testing scrap.
The applicant should identify and estimate the solid wastes to be generated
by the proposed new source.
IV.A.1.c Air Emissions
Air emission sources should be identified and described by the applicant
with particular attention being given to the following:
(1) Vapor vents on devulcanizers and blowdown tanks.
(2) Compounding mixers.
(3) Devulcanized rubber dryers.
(k) Line grinding operations.
(5) Process-associated utilities (cooling water, steam).
(6) Depolymerization and defibering agent storage areas.
-26-
-------
Table IV-1
Process-Associated Waste Water Sources from Rubber Reclaiming
Plant Uni t or Area
Wet Digester Reclaim Process
Grinding
De polymer! zation, Defibering
and OiI Storage
Slowdown Tank
Oewatering
Dryers
Compounding
Pan (Heater) Reclaim Process
Grinding
Oepolymerization Agent and
Oi I Storage
Oevulcanizer
Compounding
Source
Washdown, spills, leaks
Spills, runoff
Air pollution equipment
Digester liquor
Air pollution equipment
Washdown, spills, leaks,
air pollution equipment
Washdown, spills, leaks
SpiI Is, runoff
Air pollution equipment
Washdown, spills, leaks,
air pollution equipment
Nature and Origin of Waste Water Contaminants
Bearing oil from machine drives Oil from seals
on milling equipment.
Oil, solids, caustic and organics.
Oi Is and organics.
Oil, solids, caustic and organics from spent
depolymerizatIon and defibering agents and excess
oil. High concentrations of fibrous material
removed from tires
Oils and organics.
Bearing oil from machine drives Oils from seals
on milling equipment. Solids from soapstone dip
tanks Solids from air pollution equipment
Bearing oil from machine drives. Oil from seals
on milling equipment.
Oil, solids, caustic and organics.
Oi I and organics.
Bearing oil from machine drives Oils from seals
on milling equipment Solids from soapstone dip
tanks. Solids from air pollution equipment.
-------
IV.B Process Impact Control
IV.B.I Effluents
All recycle and reuse measures which will be employed should be described.
Leak and spillage containment procedures and devices should also be
described.
Vacuum systems not utilizing steam should be evaluated and discussed.
Surface condensers (heat exchangers) should be considered for use in lieu
of barometric condensers.
Specific discussion of scrap rubber defibering metnods should be given
with consideration given to pollution caused by use of defibering chemicals,
End-of-pipe treatment systems should also be fully described. If process
sewers will be sent to municipal treatment plants, the applicant should
discuss the capability of the municipal treatment system to adequately
handle the process wastewaters.
IV.C Alternatives
IV.C.I Site Alternatives
No special environmental requirements or considerations affecting site
selection within this segment are noted.
IV.C.2 Process Alternatives
The conversion of a wet digestion reclaiming plant to any of the three dry
reclaiming processes (pan, mechanical, or dry digestion), in order to
improve the quality of the plant's effluent would effect considerable
reduction of waste load.
IV.C.3 Control Alternatives
As an alternative to chemical defibering, defibering by mechanical or
physical techniques can be used. In brief, the waste water benefits of
this method are: fiberfree dewatering liquor, no chemical defibering
agents in the liquor, and reduced dewatering liquor discharge due to
liquor recycle. In cases where liquor recycle can be utilized, the usage
of process oils and digestion chemicals is also significantly reduced.
-28-
-------
APPENDIX B-1
V. LATEX-BASED GOODS
-29-
-------
V. LATEX-BASED GOODS
V.A Impact Identification
V.A.1 Process Impacts
All impacts should be described by means of a suitable process flow
diagram.
V.A.2 Other Impacts
Impacts associated with closely associated process facilities, such as
loading, storage, preparation, and shipping facilities should be fully
developed per the General Assessment Guideline.
V.B Process Impact Control
All process waste, and other impact controls should be described per the
General Assessment Guideline.
V.C Alternatives
No special alternatives analyses procedure are noted. The General
Assessment Guideline should be followed.
-30-
-------
REFERENCES
1. Development Document for Effluent Limitations Guidelines and New
Source Performance Standards for the Rubber Processing Industry.
U.S. EPA, 1973.
2. Rubber Reuse and Solid Waste Management, Part I, Solid Waste Series
(SW-22c), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
3. An Economic Analysis of the Control of Sulphur Oxides Air Pollution,
NT IS No. PB-227-099/9.
14. Air Pollution from Fuel Combustion in Stationa-/ Sources. NTIS No.
PB-22-3*»1/0.
5. Fluidized Bed Incineration of Selected Carbonaceous Industrial
Wastes. NTIS No. PB 211-161.
6. Flue Gases - Exhaust Gases from Combustion and Industrial Processes,
NTIS No. PB 20*1-861.
7. Control Techniques for Hydrocarbon and Organic Solvent Emissions
from Stationary Sources. NTIS No. PB 190-266.
8. Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors (2nd Ed.) U.S. EPA,
April 1973, NTIS No. 223 996.
-31-
-------
APPENDIX B-2
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(continued)
Appendix Page
B-2 PETROLEUM REFINING INDUSTRY 1
Introduction 1
I. Impact Identification 2
I.A Process Waste Impacts 2
I.B Other Impacts 12
I.C Summary of Impact Sources 15
II. Pollution Control 17
11.A In-Process Controls on Effluents 17
II.B End-of-Process Controls for Effluents 19
II.C Solid Waste Control Measures 20
II.D Control of Air Emissions 21
III. Other Design Factors Which Control Refinery 23
Impacts
111.A Aesthetic Impact Control 23
11I.B Dockside Terminal Impact Control 23
III.C Pipeline Impact Control 23
IV. Evaluation of Available Alternatives 2U
IV.A Site Alternatives 24
IV.B Process Alternatives 2k
References 25
-------
APPENDIX B-2
PETROLEUM REFINING INDUSTRY
Introduction
This Appendix supplements the instructions provided in the General Assess-
ment Guideline. The information which is presented has been developed on
the basis of its suitability for clarifying the general guidance provided
to the permit applicant in order to specify and describe more fully the
scope of the requirement which the EIA must meet.
-1-
-------
I. IMPACT IDENTIFICATION
I.A Process Waste Impacts
All process wastes shall be identified by means of a suitable flow diagram
which designates each waste source.
I.A.I Effluents
Effluents which require special consideration are listed herein:
a. Storage and Transportation:
(1) Oil, water, and sludges from storage tank oottoms.
(2) Tank cleaning operations.
(3) Leakage, spi1lage.
(k) Salt filters.
(5) Intermediate product storage - wastewater from tank bottoms.
(6) Finished product storage.
(7) Ballast waters from tankers.
b. Crude Desalting: Desalter wastewaters.
c. Crude Oil Fractional ion:
(1) Wastewater from overhead accumulators.
(2) Oil sampling lines.
(3) Barometric condenser.
d. Cracking:
(1) Overhead accumulator wastewater (thermal cracking).
(2) Steam strippers and overhead accumulators on fractionators waste-
waters (catalytic).
e. Hydrocarbon RebuiId ing:
(1) Polymerization wastewater.
(2) Alkylation wastewater streams resulting from the neutralization
of hydrocarbon streams leaving the suIfuric acid alkylation
reactor.
(3) Overhead accumulators wastewater.
(4) Hydrofluoric acid alkylation rerun unit wastewaters.
-2-
-------
f. Hydrocarbon Rearrangements. Wastewater resulting from the overhead
accumulator.
g. Solvent Refininq. Fractionation towers bottoms.
h. Hydrotreating. Hydrotreating unit wastewaters.
i. Grease Manufacturing. Grease manufacturing unit wastewaters process.
j. Asphalt Production. Wastewaters from asphalt blowing operations.
k. Product Finishing.
(1) Drying and sweetening operations.
(2) Lubricating oil finishing wastes (acid-bearing wastes, rinse
waters, sludges and discharges resulting from acid treatment
of lubricating oils).
(3) Blending and finishing operations.
(*t) Washing of railroad tank cars or tankers prior to loading.
(5) Tetraethyl lead additives appearing as pollutants in sludges
from storage tanks (see Reference No. 1).
1. Auxiliary Activities
(1) Hydrogen manufacture process wastes.
(2) Utilities functions (steam and cooling water systems).
(3) Slowdowns from closed-loop recirculating systems.
I.A.2 Sol id Wastes
Solid wastes generated at a refinery include a variety of process sludges,
spent catalysts, scrap materials, and sediments. The applicant must show
all sources of solid waste by means of suitable flow diagram, and verbally
describe all waste characteristics. Quantitative estimates shall be made.
One proposed 250,000-bpd topping refinery had a predicted solid waste
production at roughly 50 tons per week. Of this amount, 35 tons per week
were to be disposed of at the local municipal landfill, and 15 tons per
week were spent catalyst which were to be returned to the manufacturer for
reprocessing.
-3-
-------
Refinery solid waste can be categorized into three general types:
1) process solids from refinery operations; 2) solids generated from
effluent treatment processes; and 3) wastes associated with general
plant activities. Tables 1-1, 1-2, and 1-3 summarize sources and
characteristics of each general type of waste (see Reference No. 1).
Comprehensive surveys of solid waste generation rates for petroleum
refineries are currently being conducted by the EPA office of Solid WasU
Management Programs. Results are scheduled for publication in late 1975.
I.A.3 Air Emissions
The applicant is required to present a thorough identification, description
and estimation of all air emissions generated by the new source. Particu-
lar attention must be paid to fugitive emissions and their sources.
Ancillary facilities, such as docks, transhipment facilities, storage
areas, and distribution facilities shall be considered part of the new
source.
I.A.3.a Emission Source Summary
A summary of important air emission sources is presented below:
(1) Storage tanks.
(2) Catalyst regeneration units.
(3) Pipeline valves and flanges.
(4) Pressure relief valves.
(5) Pumps and compressors.
(6) Compressor engines.
(7) Cool ing towers.
(8) Loading facilities.
(9) Wastewater separators and process drains.
(10) Blowdown systems.
(11) Pipeline blind flange changing.
(12) Boilers and process heaters.
(13) Vacuum gets.
(1*0 Sampling.
(15) Air blowing.
(16) Acid treating.
Supplementary data which the applicant should consider in preparing the
EIA are presented herein.
-------
Table 1-1
Sources and Characteristics of Refinery Solid Waste
Type of Waste
Process Sol ias
Effluent Treatment
Solids
Sources
Crude oil storage,
desalter
Catalytic cracking
Coker
Alkylation
Lube 011 treatment
Storage tanks
Slop oil treatment
API separator
Chemical treatment
Air flotation
Description
Basic sediment and water
Catalyst fines
Coker fines
Spent sludges
Spent clay sludges,
press dumps
Drying and sweetening Copper sweetening residues
Tank bottoms
Precoat vacuum filter
sludges
Separator sludge
Flocculant aided precipi-
tates
Scums or froth
Chaiacieristies
Iron rust, iron sulfidev, ilay
sand, water, otI
Inert solids, catalybt part.clej,
carbon
Carbon particles hydrocarbons
Calcium flouride, bauxiLe
aluminum chloride
Clay, acid sludges, 01t
Copper compounds, sulfides,
hydrocarbons
Oil, watei, sol ids
Oil, diatomaceous earth, solids
Oil, sand, and various
process sol ids
Aluminum or ferric hydroxides.
calcium carbonate
Oil, sohds, flocculants (it used)
General Waste
Biological treatment
Water treatment plant
Office
Cafeteria
Shipping and receiving
Boiler plant
Laboratory
Plant expansion
Maintenance
Waste sludges
Water treatment sludges
Waste paper
Food wastes (garbage)
Packaging materials,
strapping pallets, canons,
returned products, cans,
drums
Ashes, dust
Used samples, bottles,
cans
Construction and demoli-
tion
General refuse
Water, biological solids, inerts
Calcium carbonate, alumina,
ferric oxide, si I tea
Paper, cardboard
Putrescible matter, paper
t'aper, wood, some- metal, wire
Inert solids
Glass, metals, waste products
Dirt, building materials,
insulation, scrap metal
Insulation, dirt, scrapped
materials - valves, hoses, pipe
-5-
-------
Table 1-2
Characteristics of Refinery Solid Wastes
(All values are percentages)
Waste
Type
API Separator Sludge
Tank Bottoms
Chemical Treatment Sludge
Air Flotation Froth
Precoat Vaccum Fi Iter Sludges
Biological Treatment Sludges
Raw
Mechanically Thickened
Centnfuged
Vacuum filtered
Screw pressed
Water Treatment Sludge
Oil or
Hydrocarbon
15
U
5
22
22
0
0
0
0
0
0
Water
66
40
90
75
29
98
*
85
75
HO
95
Volatile
Solids
6
1
-
-
-
1.5
k
10
15
1)0
-
Inert
Solid!
13
8
5
3
-9
0.5
2
5
10
zo
5
Characteristics
Fluid slurry of oil. water, and
sand
Oil-water mixture
Slightly viscous fluid
Thick, oily fluid
Stiff material, semi-solid at
ambient temperatures
Water consistency
Thick, but pumpable
Viscous - peanut butter consistency
Wet, crumbly solid
Intact, sol id cake
Pumpable fluid, sometimes gel a", nous
-------
Table 1-3
Refinery Solid Waste Quantities
Waste
Types
API Separator Sludges
Chemical Treatment
(API Separator Effluent)
Biological Sludges
Water Treatment Sludge
a. Lime Soda Ash
b. Ion exchange
Office wastes
Cafeteria
Unit
Loads
Factors
200 mg/L Suspended Solids c. 0 mgd
50 mg/L Suspended Solids
removed only
0.7 Ibs. dry solids per
Ib. BOD removed
2 parts dry sludge per
1 part hardness removed
!
O.k Ibs. salt per
1,000 grains hardness
1.0 cu. yd. per
employee/month
0.6 Ibs per meal
5.0 mgd
4,500 lbs/BOD5/day
200 ppm hardness
removed
200 ppm hardness
removed
120 employees
100 meals/day
Quanti ties
Ibs/day
8,320
2,080
(dry sol ids)
3,150
16,700
(dry sol ids)
560
(dry salt)
1,200
60
-7-
-------
I.A.3.b Petroleum Storage Emissions
A major source of air emissions has been the fixed roof storage and the
"working losses" associated with changes in liquid level within the tank.
Floating roof tanks are considered more desirable for new source projects.
A comparison of emission factors for these two tank varieties is presented
in Table \-k.
I.A.3.C Crude Oil Separation Emissions
A compilation of emission factors for crude oil separation units is pre-
sented in Table 1-5.
I.A.3-d Catalyst Regenerator Unit Emissions
Emission factors for catalyst regeneration units are presented in
Table 1-6.
I.A.B.e Claus Sulfur Recovery Unit Emissions
The applicant should describe the Claus sulfur recovery unit associated
with the proposed new source petroleum refinery, and should pay particular
attention to tail gas air emissions. If Beavon or similar units are used
to improve sulfur removal efficiencies, these should also be described.
Further data regarding Claus Plant Emissions are presented (see References).
I.A.3.f Economic Factors Associated with Air Pollution Control
Data regarding the economic impact of air quality standards upon the
petroleum refining industry has been reported (see References).
-8-
-------
Table \-k
Hydrocarbon Emission Factors For Evaporation Losses
From The Storage Of Petroleum Products
Type of Material Stored
Type of Tank
Fixed roof
Breathing loss
Working loss
Floating roof
Breathing loss
Working loss
Units
lb/day-1,000 gal
storage capacity
kg/day-1,000 liters
storage capacity
lb/1,000 gal
throughput
kg/1,000 liters
throughput
Ib/day-tank
kg/day-tank
lb/1,000 gal
throughput
kg/1,000 liters
throughput
Gasoline or Finished
Petroleum Product
0.1*
0.05
11
1.32
Crude Oi 1
0.3
0.0*1
8
0.36
I40(
-------
Table h5
Pollutants From Crude-Oil Separation units
Emission Factor
Source
Combustion
Process heaters
Boilers
Barometric
condensers
Mi seellaneous:
Sampling,
spillage, leaks,
drains, and
blowdown
Pollutant
Sulfur Oxides
Hydrocarbons
Particulates
Carbon monoxide
Nitrogen oxides
Hydrocarbons
Odors
Hydrocarbons
1b/1.000 cu ft
Negative
0.03
0.02
0.02
lb/1,000 bbl oil
8400 x %S
\ko
800
2
2900
130 lb/1,000 bbl
charge to vacuum
distillation tower
Odors caused by
noncondensables and
light hydrocarbons
150 lb/1,000 bbl crude
-10-
-------
Pollutant
Sulfur dioxide
Participates
Hydrocarbons
Carbon monoxide
Nitrogen oxides
Table 1-6
Emission Factors for Pollutants
From Catalyst Regenerator
Regenerator
(with precipitator)
Regenerator
Regenerator
Regenerator
Emission Factor
(lb/1.000 bbl charge)
500
61
220
13,700
63
-11-
-------
I.B Other Impacts
I.B.1 Raw Materials Extraction and Transportation
The Environmental Impact Assessment must include examination of the
extraction, transportation and handling of crude oil raw materials as
part of the refining impact assessment.
The proposed refinery may be variously comprised of such important
facilities as deepwater ports, submerged pipelines, marine terminals,
overland pipelines, bulk storage areas, loading areas, etc.
Such facilities must be fully encompassed and analyzed in the EIA
whenever:
a. Facilities are (or will be) substantially owned by the proposed
refinery or its affiliated companies.
b. Facilities will be constructed or expanded largely through the
revenues paid by the proposed refinery.
Degree of detail which must be given to impact investigations for these
facilities shall be directly proportional to the degree to which such
facilities are directly owned, operated, or supported by the proposed
refinery. In cases where the proposed refinery will construct its own
marine facility, or deepwater port, for example, such facility shall be
investigated with the same level of detail as that for the refinery
itself. This requirement will apply in cases where a substantial portion
of the deepwater port or marine facility would be leased to other industry.
If, however, the port facilities are being expanded to meet the new re-
finery demands by some independent or non-affiliated party, the degree
of detail can be cursory and qualitative in nature.
The discretion of the EPA Regional Administrator shall govern the final
detail requirements.
I.B.2 Marine Terminal and Deepwater Port Facilities
In cases where new or expanded marine terminal and deepwater facilities
are involved in the new source proposal, the applicant shall ensure that
the following considerations are covered as a minimum:
a. Location in relation to railways, major access roads, towns, and
major commercial and residential areas.
b. Visual character.
c. Land Ownership.
-12-
-------
d. Easements, encumbrances.
e. Local and regional land use.
f. Sewer, electrical, water supply, and other services.
g. Description of the pier structure.
h. Piping and its design basis pipelines for crude, product, fire water.
i. Storage tanks (slop, foam, etc.).
j. Cathodic protection systems.
k. Lighting.
If dredging will be required, the applicant must discuss as a minimum:
a. Psysiography.
b. Dredging methods.
c. Estimated volume to be dredged.
d. Disposal options (inshore emboyments, deepwater disposal).
e. Biota which will be affected.
f. Sediment consolidation.
g. Recolonization of biota.
h. Disposal site hydrography.
Tanker casualties must also be discussed. Data showing the frequency of
tanker casualties worldwide are provided in Table 1-7.
-13-
-------
Table 1-7
Types and Magnitude of Tanker Casualties Worldwide^
Type of Casualty
Structural Failures
Groundings
Col Iisions
Explosions
Rammings
Fires
Breakdowns and Other
Range-Barrels
1 to 1,000
1,001 to 3,500
3,501 to 20,000
20,001 to 100,000
100,000
Percent of
Polluting Incidents
Percent of
Pollution Resulting
19
26
31
6
8
7
2
49
29
8
8
1
1
4
Percent of Incidents
Percent of Total
OiI Released
63.^7
22.37
10.05
3.65
0.46
5.75
11.29
16.07
37.74
29.15
References describing the Impacts of oil upon marine life are presented
in the reference section.
I.B.3 Overland Pipelines
In cases where overland pipelines are involved, the applicant shall ensure
that the following considerations are covered as a minimum:
a. Location, in relation to major transportation networks, residential
and commercial areas, water crossings, lowlands, wildlife habitat,,
parks.
b. Land ownership.
c. Easements, encumbrances.
d. Leak detection systems.
-14-
-------
e. Emergency shut-down procedures.
f. OH spill contingency plans.
g. Disruptions to traffic, property caused by construction.
h. Erosion and sedimentation controls.
i. Pi peline design 1ife.
I.C Summary of Impact Sources
Table I.C-1 summarizes impact sources for the Refining industry. Data
presented in Table I.C-1 are approximate and reprp^ant best estimates
based upon current knowledge. The applicant should in all cases esti-
mate corresponding values for the proposed new source and clearly explain
rationale behind such estimates.
-15-
-------
Table l.C-1
Major Impact Sources and/Quantities1
00
00
o
o
o
a
o .0
00 —
TRANSPORT:
(CRUDE & PRODUCT)
Pi pel ine
Tankers
Supertankers
Barges
Tank Trucks
Tank Cars
Processing
Crude Desalting '
Crude Fractionation .2
Cracking 15
Hydrocarbon
rebuilding 12
Hydrocarbon
rearrangement
Solvent Refining
Hydrotreating 95
Crease Mfg.
Asphalt Production
Storage
Crude 1
-J in _J
CD U 00
00 4J 00
ID
O — O
0 30
O O O
a in L. in
o xi ID xi
o — a. —
1.9
0.4
0.42
34
7
- *
0
5 2.3
18 17
142 7
40 5
-
100 5
-
32 6
0
CO
CO
o
o
0
x —
4.0
5.8
5.8
26
15
37
0
.1
300
.1
.05
-
-
-
0.2
0
•ocarbons
'1000 BBL
•o in
5.5
0.2
0.2
16
21
29
0
34
kk
77
34
90
120
23
35
62
CO
OQ
O
O
in o
•0 —
— in
O X)
in —
-
-
-
-
-
-
0
-
48
-
-
-
-
-
-
_
Product - - - - 21
Environmental Impacts, Effeciency and Cost of Energy Supply and
End Use. Vol. I Final Report. Hittman Associates. Prepared
for the Council on Environmental Quality, the National Science
Foundation RANN Program, and the Environmental Protection Agency.
Not Yet Published.
-16-
-------
II. POLLUTION CONTROL
11.A In-Process Controls on Effluents
11.A.1 Reuse of Water
The applicant should discuss all water reuse measures, including the
following as a minimum:
a. Reuse of sour waters from catalytic cracker accumulators for makeup
to crude desalters.
b. Reuse of high-pressure boiler cbndensate blowdown as makeup to
low-pressure boilers.
c. Reuse of treated effluent water wherever possible (routine washing'
operations, fire mains, cooling systems).
d. Reuse of contaminated condensate for regeneration of steam which
will be used for process contact operations.
e. Use of stormwater retention ponds for fire water, or other low-quality
uses.
f. Use of cooling tower blowdowns as seal water on high-temperature pump
service where mechanical seals are impractical.
11.A.2 Recycle Water (reuse of water more than once for same purpose)
The applicant should discuss all water recycle measures, including the
following as a minimum:
a. Recirculation of steam condensate as boiler feedwater (commonly
practiced for medium- and high-pressure systems, not always for
low-pressure steam).
b. Recirculation of cooling water (in lieu of once-through water).
11.A.3 Housekeeping
The applicant should discuss what good housekeeping measures have been
incorporated in the proposed new source, including consideration of the
following:
a. Minimizing waste from sampling stations.
b. Use of vacuum trucks (or other non-aqueous methods) for cleaning
up oil spills (thereby permitting recovery of hydrocarbons).
-17-
-------
c. Preventive maintenance program to reduce leaks (pump seals, valve
stems, etc.).
d. Segregation of process wastes and other specialized wastes which
are better treated individually as low-flow, highly concentrated
streams.
e. Curbing process units so that spills, washes, and oily stormwater
runoff can be collected separately and recycled and/or treated
specially.
f. Process sewer flushing on a regular basis to prevent buildup of
materials which can cause sudden pollution loading on the treatment
plant, thereby causing treatment process upsets.
g. Collection vessels provided near units with frequent checking,
cleaning, or maintenance.
h. Specialized handling systems for process turnaround wastes (sludges,
washwaters, cleanup, and startup).
II.A.Jf Changes in Process Technology
The applicant must consider and describe technological changes which may
occur subsequent to design and construction of new source.
Substitution of catlysts which have high activity and longer life, and
hence require less regeneration (e.g., decoking with sparge steam) and
involve lower wastewater production should be specifically assessed for
retrofStability/suitability.
Also, the following technological changes should be assessed:
a. Replacement of barometric condensers (direct-contact condensers)
with surface condensers (indirect-contact condensers) or air-fin
coolers.
b. Substitution of air-fin coolers to relieve various cooling water
requirements with the process.
c. Installation of hydrocracking and hydrotreating processes to reduce
sulfide and spent caustic loadings in the wastewaters.
d. Installation of automatic monitoring instrumentation (e.g., TOC
monitors for early detection of various upset conditions).
e. Increased use of drying, sweetening and finishing procedures that
will minimize spent caustics and acids, water washes, and filter
solids requiring disposal.
-18-
-------
11.A.5 Cooling Towers
Cooling systems should be described; the applicant should specifically
discuss the suitability of non-evaporative cooling devices in the
discussion. In general, such discussions should cover the following:
a. Evaoorative Cooling Systems:
(1) Spray ponds.
(2) Mechanical-draft cooling towers.
(3) Atmospheric cooling towers.
(4) Natural-draft cooling towers.
b. Dry Cooling Systems: These units use heat-dissipating air-fins
to reject unwanted heat directly to the air.
c. Wet-drv Systems:
11.A.6 In-process Pretreatment
Discussion of the following important pretreatment steps should be
included in the EIA:
a. Neutralization of spent caustic wastewaters.
b. Separation of oil from ballast waters, slop oil recovery systems.
c. Clarifiers to separate sediments using chemical coagulants as
necessary.
II.B End-of-Process Controls for Effluents
The applicant should provide a full description of the end-of-process
treatment plant to be employed in the proposed new source. A treatment
process flow diagram should be utilized to explain various treatment
steps and to show quantitatively the mutual balance through the process.
(See Chapter I, Section 2f of the General Assessment Guideline.)
Specific attention should be given to the following treatment plant-related
considerations:
1. Reliability.
2. Susceptibility to upset by natural storms, floods, etc.
3. Margin for process expansion.
k. Effluent monitoring systems.
-19-
-------
5. Allowance for treatment plant expansion to meet increased discharge
standards which may be Instituted.
6. Capability of the treatment plant to process different kinds of
wastewaters, whose composition will vary according to varying raw
material, product mix parameters.
7. Capability of the treatment plant to remove or be upgraded to remove
trace substances which may be defined subsequently as toxic substances.
8. Complexity of operation and maintenance operations.
II.C Solid Waste Control Measure
11 .C.1 Process Wastes
Methods by which all solid wastes will be recycled, reused, or disposed
must be identified for all solid wastes.
Using the waste identification and quantification developed in Section
of the appendix, the applicant should relate and evaluate the adequacy
of planned disposal sites and state what long-term disposal measures be
implemented if disposal system capacity is insufficient.
Particular attention should be paid to oily sludges and spent caustic
wastes.
Open-pit disposal and volume reduction of oily sludge by open burning
will generally be considered inadequate because of obvious atmospheric
pollution effects.
Open-pit disposal of spent caustic streams has also been shown to cause
leaching problems with potential impact upon ground water.
The applicant should specifically analyze and assess the suitability of
fluidized bed incineration of these wastes as one disposal option.
Heavy metal or trace metal leaching problems should also be assessed.
II.C.2 Treatment Plant Sludges
The applicant should describe what sludge handling and disposal methods
wi11 be employed.
-20-
-------
If landfilling is planned without any predigestion step, the applicant
should describe how odor problems will be controlled. Leaching problems
shall be assessed and also described in the EIA.
II.D Control of Air Emissions
The applicant must describe how hydrocarbons, participates, and carbon
monoxide, sulfur dioxide, smoke, and odors will be controlled.
Following are the specific measures which should be assessed as a minimum.
1. Hydrocarbons
a. Floating roof tanks.
b. Manifolding purge lines to recovery system or flare.
c. Use of vapor recovery systems on loading facilities.
d. Good housekeeping.
e. Covered waste treatment plant.
f. Operation of a carbon monoxide boiler.
g. Use of mechanical seals on pumps and compressors.
h. Training of personnel.
2. Particulars
a. High-efficiency mechanical separators.
b. Electrostatic precipitators on catalyst regenerators, and/or
power plant stacks.
c. Controlled combustion(smoke 1ess).
d. Maintenance of correct stack temperature.
e. Use of smokeless flames for burning gases.
f. Use of improved incinerators.
3. Carbon monoxide
a. Proper furnace and burner design.
b. Carbon monoxide boiler on catalytic cracking and fluid coking units
4. Odors
a. Good housekeeping.
b. Regulation of hydrocarbons on sulfur emissions.
c. Treatment of sour water streams (produced in catalytic crackers,
gas processing units, and vacuum towers).
Atmospheric Emissions from the Petroleum Refining Industry, U.S. EPA,
EPA-650/2-73-017. NTIS Mo. PB 225-040.
-21-
-------
5. Sulfur dioxide
a. Desulfurization of fuels used in heaters and boilers,
b. Flue gas desulfurization.
c. Low-sulfur fuels.
6. Nitrogen oxides
a. Combustion control unproven units.
b. Stack dispersal.
-22-
-------
Ill. OTHER DESIGN FACTORS WHICH CONTROL
REFINERY IMPACTS
111.A Aesthetic Impact Control
The applicant should describe the following as a minimum:
1. Site arrangement to obscure tall towers.
2. Directional lighting.
3. Greenbelts (which also attenuate noise).
III.B Dockside Terminal Impact Control
Description of the following control/prevention measures should be
included, as applicable:
1. Studies to optimize dredging/dredge spoil disposal programs:
a. Currents at the dredge site.
b. Dredge spoil contaminants.
c. Means for controlling spoil exposure to oxidants (thereby
limiting contaminant release).
d. Disposal site selection (migration susceptibility, unique
fauna, fishing).
e. Plan for dredge material disposal.
f. Monitoring plan.
2. Oi1-containment procedures:
a. Booms around docked ships.
b. Weather effect upon containment systems.
3. Pierside slop tanks.
4. System for collecting drainage from transfer pipelines.
lll.C Pipeline Impact Control
The applicant should describe, as a minimum, the following control systems:
1. Remote maintenance valve operation.
2. Utility corridors around line.
3. Use of existing utility rights-of-way.
k. Leak-detection systems.
5. Cathodic protection.
6. Land control and stabilization.
-23-
-------
IV. EVALUATION OF AVAILABLE ALTERNATIVES
IV.A Site Alternatives
Site alternatives for refineries include alternatives which should be
recogni zed:
1. Refinery Processing Site Alternatives.
2. Tank Farm Alternatives.
3. Docksite Alternatives.
k. Pipeline/Transportation Alternatives.
Each of these categories will have a distinct environment of its own and,
consequently, a distinct set of impacts.
Since refinery projects involve major investment and major environmental
risks and impacts, an analysis of each of the foregoing refinery components
is necessary. The extent of detail with which each is examined should be
determined by the same criteria as for the processing site (see Chapter IV
of the General Assessment Guidance). (These criteria are based essentially
on the presence of sensitive areas, the size of the proposed facility in
relation to current facilities elsewhere in the U.S., and the reliability
of the proposed operations.)
IV.B Process Alternatives
Manufacturing alternatives will be determined by economic and marketing
conditions. It is anticipated that new-source refineries to be proposed
in the near future will be residual fuels (e.g., No. 6 fuel oil) refineries,
i.e., essentially topping refineries with hydro-desulfurization to produce
high-quality (low-pollution) fuels. Residual fuels have in recent years
have been the primary petroleum imports, and are the petroleum products
hardest hit by recent worldwide petroleum-producing policy changes. Also,
the kind of crude oil available to the refiner will greatly affect the
final process options. Production of any given petroleum product will
entail significantly different processing technology if different crudes
are used.
The new-source applicant should discuss concisely such process constraints
in the EIA.
-2k-
-------
References
1. Recommended Methods of Reduction, Neutralization, Recovery or Disposal
of Hazardous Waste, Volume XI, Organic Compounds, U.S. EPA, EPA 6/0/2-
73-053K. NT IS No. PB 224 590/45.
2. Lawson, J.R., Disposal of Oily Wastes. Pollution Engineering, January/
February 1976.
3. Atmospheric Emissions from Petroleum Refineries a Guide for Measure-
ment and Control U.DHEW I960 NTIS No. PB-198-096.
I*. Compilation of Air Pollution Emission Factors (Second Edition)
U.S. EPA. AP-42, 1973. NTIS Number PB-223-996.
5. Characterization of Claus Plant Emission. U.S. EPA R2-73-188, 1973.
NTIS No. PB-220-376.
6. Comprehensive Study of Specified Air Pollution Sources to Assess the
Economic Impact of Air Quality Standards. U.S. EPA NTIS No. 222-857.8.
7. Fluid Bed Incineration of Petroleum Refinery Wastes, U.S. EPA Water
Pollution Control Research Series 12050EKT03/71, NTIS No. PB202-570.
8. Recommended Methods of Reduction, Neutralization, Recovery of
Disposal of Hazardous Waste, Vol. Ill, Incineration, Pyrolysis.
U.S. EPA, EPA 670 2-73-053C. TIS No. PB 224-582/AS.
9. Blumer, M., G. Souza and J. Sass. 1970. Hydrocarbon Pollution of
Edible Shell-fish by an Oil Spill. Marine Biology 5(3): 195-202.
10. Blumer, M., and H. L. Sanders, J. F. Grassle and G. R. Hampon, 1971.
A Small Oil Spill. Environment, 13{2):2-13.
11. Blumer, M., et al., 1972. Petroleum, In: A Guide to Marine Pollution.
Goldberg (ed.) Gordon and Breach Sci. Pub., New York, Longon, Paris.
12. Clark, R. C., Jr. and J. S. Finley, 1971 "Puget Sound Fisheries and
Oil Pollution - A Status Report", pp. 139-145. In: Proceedings of
Joint Conference on Prevention and Control of Oil Spills, June 15-17,
1971. Washington, O.C., sponsored by American Petroleum Institute
Environmental Protection Agency, and U.S. Coast Guard. 554 pp.
13. Crowell, E. B., J. M. Baker and G. B. Crapp, 1970. The Biological
Effects of Oil Pollution and Oil Cleaning Materials on Littoral
Communities, Including Salt Marshes. In: Mar. Poll, and Sea Life,
pp. 359-364. Fishing News Ltd.
-25-
-------
]k. Deshimaru, 0., 1971. Studies on the Pollution of Fish Meat by
Mineral Oils.
1. Deposition of Crude Oil in Fish Meat and Its Detection.
2. Injury and Pollution Brought Forth on Fish by Oil Dispersers.
Japanese Soc. of Sci. Fish. Bull. 37 (**) : 297- 306.
15. Foster, M., M. Newshul, and R. Zingmark, 1971. The Santa Barbara
Oil Spill. Part 2: Initial Effects on Intertidal and Kelp Bed
Organisms. Environ. Pollut. 2:115-13^.
16. Margrave, B. T., andC . P. Newcombe 1973- Crawling and Respiration
as Indices of Sublethal Effects of Oil and a Uispersant on an Inter-
tidal Snail Littorina littorea. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. 30: 1 789-1 792 ,
17. Lee, R. F., R. Saverheber, and A. A. Benson, 1972. Petroleum Hydro-
cargons: Uptake and discharge by the Marine Mussel, Myti lus edul is.
Science
18. Moore, S., Dwyer, R. L. and A. M. Katz, 1973. A Preliminary Assess
ment of the Environmental Vulnerability of Machias Bay, Maine, to
Oil Supertankers. M. I . T. Report No. MITSG73-6.
19. Nicholson, N. L., and R. L. Gimberg, 1970. The Santa Barbara Oil
Spills of 1969: Post-spill Survey of the Rocky Intertidal. A
Hancock Found., Univ. of So. California, Los Angeles.
20. Offshore Oil Task Group, Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
1973. The Georges Bank Petroleum Study, Volume II, Impact on
New England Environmental Quality of Hypothetical Regional
Petroleum Developments, Report No. MITSG73-5, Mass. Inst. of
Technology, Cambridge, Mass., 02139,311 pp.
21. Schramm, W. 1971. The Effects of Oil Pollution in Gas Exchange in
Porphyra umbi 1 ical is When Exposed to Air. Proc. of the 7th
International Seaweed Symposium. Kazutosi Nisizawa (ed.), Sapporo,
Japan. August 1971. Halstead Press Book.
22. Smith, J. E. (Ed), 1970. "Torrey Canyon" Pollution and Marine Life.
A report by the Plymouth Laboratory of the Marine Biological
Association of the United Kingdom. Cambridge Univ. Press 1970,
PP. 199.
23- Straughan, D., (compiler), 1971. Biological and Oceanograph ic
Survey of the Santa Barbara Channel Oil Spill, 1969-1970. Vol. 1
Biology and Bacteriology. Allan Hancock Foundation, Univ. of
Southern California, Los Angeles.
-26-
-------
2k. Teeson, D., F. M. While and H. Schench, Jr., 1970. Studies of the
Simulation of Drifting Oil by Polyethylene Sheets. Ocean Engineering,
Vol. 2., pp. 1-11.
25. Thomas, M. L. H., 1973 Effects of "Bunker C" Oil on Intertidal and
Lagoonal Biota in Chedabucto Bay, Nova Scotia. J. Fish. Res. Bd.
Canada 70:83-90.
26. Trask, T., 1971. A Study of Three Sandy Beaches in the Santa
Barbara, Calif. Area. Bioloqrcal and Oceanographic Survey of the
Santa Barbara Channel Oil Spill. 1969-1970. Vol. 1 Biology and
Bacteriology. Stroughan, D. (compiler) 1971- Allan Hancock
Foundation, Univ. of Southern California, Los Angeles.
27. Vast Inc., 1974. Environmental Effects of P..< Oil Spill in Casco Bay,
Maine, 22 July 1972, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office
of Water Programs.
28. Donovan, E.J.; Nebolsine, R. "Fit Wastewater Treatment Processes
to Industrial Process", Plant Engineering, June, 1966.
29. Dotson, G.K., et al, "Land Spreading: A Conserving and Non-Polluting
Method of Disposing of Oily Wastes", presented at Fifth International
Water Pollution Research Conference and Exhibition, San Francisco,
California, July 26, 1970.
30. Lawson, J.R., "Disposal of Oily Wastes", Pollution Engineering,
January/February, 1970, p. 25.
31. Rabb, A. "Sludge Disposal: A Growing Problem", Hydrocarbon Process-
ing, April, 1965, p. U9.
32. Mallat, R.C.; Grutsch, J.F.; and Simons, H.E.; "Incinerate Sludge
and Caustic", Hydrocarbon Processing, May, 1970, p. 121.
33. Manual on Disposal of Rifinery Wastes, Vol. VI, Solid Wastes, API,
1963.
34. Lewis, W.L.; "Solid Wastes Industrial Profiles - Petroleum Refining",
Presented at National Industrial Solid Wastes Management Conference,
University of Houston, March 25, 1970.
35_ Lawson, J.R., "Management of Industrial Solid Waste in Municipal
Operations", Waste Age, March/April, 1971, p. 5.
36. "'967 Domestic Refinery Effluent Profile", CAWC, American Petroleum
Institute, September, 1968.
37. "The Cost of Clean Water", Vol. Ill, Mo. 5 - Petroleum Refining,
U.S. Department of the Interior, November, 1967.
-27-
-------
38. Water Treatment Plant Design, ASCE, AWWA, CSSE, 1969, p. 213.
39. "How Refiners Abate Pollution", NPRA Panel Discussion, Oil and Gas
Journal, May 24, 1971, p. 77.
40. Benger, Michael, "The Disposal of Liquid and Solid Effluents from
Oil Refineries".
4l. Robertson, J.H., "Handling and Disposal of Special Chemical Wastes",
New York State Department of Health Special Solid Wastes Synposium,
Albany, New York, January, 19&9-
42. Evaporation Loss from Fixed Roof Tanks. API New York, N.Y. API
Bulletin Number 2518. 1962
43. Evaporative Loss in the Petroleum Industry: Causes and Control.
API New York, N.Y. API Bulletin Number 2513. 1959
44. Evaporative Losses from Floating Roof Tanks. API New York, N.Y.
API Bulletin Number 2517. 1962
45. Tentative Methods of Measuring Evaporative Loss from Petroleum Tanks
and Transportation Equipment. API New York, N.Y. API Bulletin Number
2512. 1957
46. A survey of Emissions and Controls for Hazardous Wastes and other
Pollutants NT IS PB 223 568/7
47. Hydrocarbon Pollutant Systems Study. Volume I. Stationary Sources,
Effects, Controls NTIS PB 219 073/4. Appendices: PB 219 074/2
48. Atmospheric Emissions from the Petroleum Refining Industry
PB-225 040/5
49. Air Pollution Aspects of Emission Sources: Petroleum Refineries.
EP 4.9:110
50. Background Information for Proposed New Source Performance Standards:
Asphalt Concrete Plants, Petroleum Refineries, Storage Vessels,
Secondary Lead Smelters and Refineries, Brass or Bronze Ingot Pro-
duction Plants, Iron and Steel Plants, Sewage Treatment Plants.
Volume 2, Appendix: Summaries of Test Data PB-229-660/6
51. Screening Report, Crude Oil and National Gas Production Processes
PB-22-718/9
52. Comprehensive Study of Specified Air Pollution Sources to Assess the
Economic Impact of Air Quality Standards. Volume I. PB-222-857/5
-28-
-------
53. Characterization of Claus Plant Emissions MTIS PB 220 376/8
54. An economic Analysis of the Control of Sulfur Oxides Air Pollution
NT IS PB 227 099/9
55. Air Pollution from Fuel Combustion in Stationary Sources NTIS PB
222 3^*1/0
56. Atmospheric Emissions from Catalytic Cracking Unit Regenerator Stacks
NTIS PB 216
57. Emissions to the atmosphere from Eight Miscellaneous Sources in Oil
Refineries NTIS PB 216 668
58. Hydrocarbon Losses from Valves and Flanges N1IS PB 216 682
59. Hydrocarbon Leakage from Pressure Relief Valves NTIS PB 216 715
60. Fluidized Bed Incineration of Selected Carbonaceous Industrial
Wastes NTIS PB 211 161
6l. Control Techniques for Hydrocarbon and Organic Solvent Emissions
from Stationary Sources NTIS PB 190 266
62. Petroleum Systems Rel iabil ity Analysis Volumes I and II EPA-R2-73
280 a, b; NTIS PB 226 571 /AS, PB 232 3^3/AS
63. Petroleum Weathering: Some Pathways, Fate and Disposition on
Marine Waters EPA 660/3-73-0/3
6k, Petrochemical Effluents Treatment Practices EPA 12020-02/70
-29-
-------
APPENDIX B-3
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(continued)
Appendix
B-3 ORGANIC CHEMICALS INDUSTRY 1
Introduction 1
I. Impact Description and Control 2
I.A Process Waste Impacts 2
I.B Other Impact Sources 6
11. Impact Control 8
11.A Effluent Controls 8
11.8 Solid Waste Controls 9
II.C Air Emission Controls 13
III. Alternatives ]k
I 11.A Site Alternatives 14
III.B Process Alternatives 14
References 15
-------
APPENDIX B-3
ORGANIC CHEMICALS INDUSTRY
Introduction
This Appendix supplements and instructions provided in the General Assess-
ment Guideline. The information which is presented has been developed on
the basis of its suitability for clarifying the general guidance provided
to the permit applicant in order to specify and describe more fully the
scope of the requirement which the EIA must meet.
-1-
-------
I. IMPACT DESCRIPTION AND CONTROL
I.A Process Waste Impacts
All process wastes shall be identified by means of a suitable process
flow diagram, and described both verbally and quantitatively.
The process flow diagrams should be sufficiently detailed to show the
f ol 1 owi ng:
1. Closely related process elements, such as raw water treatment, raw
material and feedstock pretreatment, storage and handling, product
storage and distribution.
2. All process water inputs and outputs.
3. AH sources of leakage, spillage.
The applicant, using the provided process diagram(s) must moreover discuss
how product mix will vary and explain the causes for such variation. The
effects of product mix upon waste loads quantities shall be explained in
detail with special emphasis given to describing process configurations
associated with maximum and minimum waste generation .levels.
The applicant shall, in all cases, assume worse-case conditions when
evaluating process waste impacts.
A major requirement which the process flow diagram must fulfill is the
illustration of individual processes which are integrated within the
proposed organic chemical manufacturing facility. Interconnections which
tie together various process inputs and outputs should be described
explicitJy.
1. All components requiring cleaning and washout,
2. All liquid, solid, and vapor recovery and/or recycle steps.
Organic chemical manufacturing complexes which are comprised of several
or many individual chemical processes whall be described by both process
specific diagrams and general flow diagrams for the complex.
Where production mix varies according to market demand, raw material
availability, etc., and causes a significant change in waste loads, the
applicant must discuss.
Feedstock and other raw material requirements must also be given special
consideration in the EIA. Effects of feedstock variation or substitution
upon process waste characteristics shall be specifically described.
-2-
-------
Where more than one process option exists for manufacturing the same
product, the applicant shall compare process waste loads and give
justification for the process chosen.
As aid to explanation of complex integration of raw materials, precursor
intermediate feedstocks and end-products, the applicant should supply
"end-use" diagrams illustrating the many complex interactions typical to
the proposed facility.
I.A.I Effluents
Effluents should be described with particular attention to the following:
a. Periodic washes or steaming use to treat non-aqueous catalysts,
working solvents, etc.
b. External washes, maintenance operations, area washdowns.
c. Method and degree of process wastewater segregation from non-process
contact wastewaters, such as cooling water, recirculating steam.
d. Intermittent discharges associated with startup, shutdown, or process
upset situations.
e. Stormwater runoff.
f. Steam and cooling water blowdown.
All effluents should be described in terms of expected flow rates and
waste loadings.
I.A.2 Solid Wastes
Solid wastes should be identified in terms of source, content, and
generation rate.
In particular, the applicant's presentation shall include as a minimum
consideration of the following solid waste sources.
1. Off-quality product.
2. Sludges from water, and wastewater treatment systems (sediment,
biological sludges, spent filter media, oil water separators).
3. Spent catalysts (normally recycleable).
J*. Ash from incinerators and boiler houses.
-3-
-------
5. Miscellaneous scrap from packaging, including metal strapping,
and board, wood, etc.
6. Tar and other heavy residues.
7. Furnace coke.
8. Desiccants.
I.A.3 Air Emissions
Air emissions should be identified in terms of source, composition, and
emission rate.
Air emissions for approximately thirty different crganic chemical manu-
facturing processes have been surveyed and published by the EPA. (See
Reference No. 1).
These surveys provide information regarding both source identification
and control practices.
Processes which have been surveyed are summarized in Table 1-1.
Among the sources which are found in organic chemical processes, generalized
kinds of air emission sources appear frequently and are here listed to
exempl-ify the scope of sources which must be considered.
a. Catalyst regenerator unit off gases or off gas vents.
b. Light ends scrubber vents.
c. Storage tank vents.
d. Absorber vents.
e. Combustion of fuel for reactor startup.
f. Organic waste boilers - flue gas and boiler off gas.
g. Furnace decoking, regeneration.
h. Steam exhaust of organics.
i. Drying, conveying, melting.
j. Emergency or startup vents.
k. Neutralization of spent caustic streams.
Fugitive emissions should also be identified and estimated. Design or
control features should also be discussed.
The following emissions were identified for an ethylene manufacturing
operation. These kinds of sources should be specifically discussed in
the EIA.
-k-
-------
Table 1-1
Organic Chemical Manufacturing Processes
Covered by Atmospheric Emissions Surveys
(See Reference No. 1)
Acetaldehyde via Ethylene
Acetaldehyde via Ethanol
Acetic Acid via Methane1
Acetic Acid via Butane
Acetic Acid via Acetaldehyde
Acetic Anhydride
Adipic Acid
Adiponitrile via Butadiene
Adiponitrile via Adipic Acid
Carbon Oisulfide
Cydohexanone
Dimethyl Terephthalate (and TPA)
Ethylene
Ethylene Dichloride (Direct)
Formaldehyde (Silver Catalyst)
Glycerol (Allyl Chloride)
Hydrogen Cyanide (Andrussow)
Isocyanates via Amine Phosgenation
Maleic Anhydride
Nylon 6
Nylon 6, 6
Oxo-Process
Phenol
High-Density Polyethylene
Low-Density Polyethylene
Polypropylene
Polystyrene
Polyvinyl Chloride
Styrene
Styrene - Butadiene Rubber
Vinyl acetate via Acetylene
Vinyl Acetate via Ethylene
Vinyl Chloride via EDC Pyrolysis
-5-
-------
The following flue gas ventings result from furnace shutdowns:
a. Vapors from oil water separators.
b. Vapors from decant water.
c. Tight oil storage drums.
d. Heavy oil vapors from processing, storage, loading.
e. Control gas vent from flue stack (pneumatic instruments operated by
flue gas).
f. Pump seal and packaging leakage.
g. Vapors from engine crank cases and compressor oil reservoirs.
h. Container surging and filling.
i. Vents from moisture analyzers and vents.
j. Vapors from oil drainage for maintenance.
k. Valve stem packing leaks.
I. Flange leaks.
m. Compressor seal leaks.
I.B Other Impact Sources
I.B.1 Raw Materials Development-Related Impacts
New Organic Chemicals Processing complexes will place increased demands
upon raw material supplies.
Such demand will incrementally influence crude oil and natural gas
exploration and importation, which will in themselves ultimately affect
the environment. Such induced impacts should be examined by the applicant
in a cursory fashion; detailed impact analysis of such resource development
policy will ultimately be addressed by other Federal agencies.
I.B.2 Transportation and Handling
An integral part of any Organics complex will be the handling and trans-
portation of feedstock and finished products, which cause significant
impacts, examples of which are the following:
a. Tanker spills and accidents (dockside spills associated with transfer
operations).
b. Pipeline construction between loading, unloading areas, and the
process unit, resulting in land clearing, interference with traffic
and other transportation potential pipeline fractures or leaks.
The applicant must examine such impact sources in the EIA.
I.B.3 Site Preparation and Facility Construction
The applicant should discuss in the EIA all site preparation and facility
construction operations which involve direct environmental impacts. Odor,
-6-
-------
noise and aesthetic impact reduction will require the following special
site development considerations which should also be considered in the EIA:
a. Location of high noise-producing units as nearly as possi-ble in the
site interior (high-noise units are generally those using steam jets
for vacuum production).
b. Use of greenbelt to alternate noise, and aesthetic impacts.
Another specialized site development problem is the location and arrange-
ment of storage tank forms, which require special dike systems to collect
spills and control fire hydrants. Such tank farms require large tracts
of land which must be cleared and graded. Care should be taken to minimize
the amount of prime land which is developed for this purpose.
-7-
-------
II. IMPACT CONTROL
11.A Effluent Controls
M.A.I In-process Effluent Controls
The applicant should discuss all in-process controls which will be
incorporated in the new source.
Such discussion should cover, but not be limited to the following:
a. Substitution of barometric condensers with surface heat exchangers.
b. Maximization of recirculating steam and cooling water systems.
c. Substitution of vacuum pumps for steam jet ejectors.
d. Recycle of scrubber water.
e. Separation and recovery of insoluble hydrocarbons.
f. Phenol removal through solvent extraction, steam stripping,
chlorination.
g. Ammonia and sulfide shipping.
h. Cyanide removal via chlorination.
i. Ozonation.
j. Incineration of chlorinated hydrocarbons.
k. Incineration of spent caustic wastewaters and oily sludges.
11.A.2 End-of-process Effluent Controls
The applicant should describe all end-of-process effluent controls. Using
a treatment plant flow diagram as basis for explanation, all plant design
criteria shall be stated, and removal efficiencies for each treatment plant
section defined.
Particular attention should be paid to describing process reliability,
flexibility to handle highly variable waste streams resulting from changes
in feedstock or product mix, redundancy, and the ability to meet process
expansions and increased effluent removal requirements.
-8-
-------
II.B Solid Waste Controls
11.6.1 Hazardous Waste Control
a wide variety of organic wastes produced by the oiganic chemical manu-
facturing industry have been described as hazardous wastes by the EPA
Office of Solid Waste Management. Resource conducted by EPA has been
directed at the following:
a. Information base development.
b. Waste management practice analysis
c. Determination of hazardous waste forms and quantities.
d. Research and development planning.
Table 11-1 presents a listing of hazardous organ'c compounds which
have been investigated.
Waste management practices, both current and recommended, have been
specified for each of these organic compounds, relating particularly to
the applicability of recovery and recycle, incineration biodegradation,
avid landfill disposal. Landfill disposal options have been categorized
in the following three major groups:
a. Municipal landfills.
b. Industrial landfills.
c. National hazardous materials disposal sites.
All compounds which will be manufactured, stored, handled, processed, or
wasted as part of the proposed new source facility, and which are included
in the hazardous substance listing (Table ll-l), should be specifically
described by the applicant in the EIA. Handling and disposal practices
which reflect EPA findings and recommendations shall also be described.
II.B.2 Other Solid Waste Disposal
Hazardous materials classification and differentiation from orginary solid
waste materials has been based upon the following criteria:
a. Quantity produced.
b. Material distribution.
c. Toxic hazard to man and environment.
d. Explosiveness, flammabiIity, and other hazards.
Solid wastes which comprise part of the preceding hazardous materials
classification should be treated as hazardous substances by the applicant.
Furthermore, the applicant shall be responsible for interpreting and ex-
tending the hazardous materials designation criteria for the set of
wastes which will be encountered in the proposed new source facility.
-9-
-------
Table 11-1
Hazardous Organic Compounds
1. Acetaldehyde
2. Acetone
3. Butyraldehyde
4. Camphor
5. Crotonaldehyde
6. Cyclohexanone
7. Diisobutyl Ketone
8. Ethyl Methyl Ketone
9. Furfural
10. Isophorone
11. Mesityl Oxide
12. Methyl Isobutyl Ketone
13. Paraformaldehyde
14. Propionaldehyde
15. Acetic Acid
16. Acetic Anhydride
17- Acetyl Chloride
18. Formaldehyde
19. Oleic Acid
20. Phthaiic Anhydride
21. Sodium Formate
22. Sodium Oxalate
23. Acetone Cyanohydrin
2k. Acetonitrile
25- Acrylonitrile
26. Cyanoacetic Acid
27. Ethylene Cyanohydrin
28. Toluene Diisocyanate
29- Acetylene
30. Butadiene
31. Butane
32. 1-Butene
33. Butylene
34. Cyclohexane
35. Dicyclopen tadiene
36. Diisobutylene
37- Ethane
38. Ethylene
39- n-Heptane
40. 1-Heptene
41. Hexane
42. Isopentane
43. Isoprene
44. Naphtha (crude)
45. n-Pentane
46. Propane
47. PropyIene
48. Tetrapropylene
49. Triprof»ne (Norene)
50. Turpentine
51. Anthracene
52. Benzene
53* Creosote (coal tar)
54. Cumene
55• Dodecy1 benzene
56. Ethyl benzene
57- Naphthalene
58. Styrene
59. Styrene
60. Toluene
61. Xylene
62. Acrylic Acid
63. Adipic Acid
64. Benzoic Acid
65. Fatty Acids
66. Formic Acid
67. Propionic Acid
68. Salicylic Acid
69. Allyl Alcohol
70. Amyl Alcohol
71. Butanols
72. Cyclohexanol
73. Decyl Alcohol
74. Diethylene Glycol
75- Furfural Alcohol
76. Glycerine
77* Isopropanol
78. Methanol
79. Methyl Amyl Alcohol
80. Octyl Alcohol
-10-
-------
Table 11-1
(continued)
81. n-Propyl Alcohol 121.
82. Propylene Glycol 122.
83- Sorbitol 123.
84. Triethylene Glycol 124.
85- Allyl Chloride 125-
86. Aminoethylethanol Amine 126.
87. n-Butylamine 127.
88. Cyclohexylamine 128.
89. Diethanolamine 129.
90. Diethylamine 130.
91. Diethylene Trimine 131.
92. Diisopropanolamine 132.
93- Oimethyl amine 133-
94. Ethanolamine (MonoetHanoi amine) 134.
95- Ethylamine (Monoethylamine) 135-
96. Ethlyene Diamine 136.
97- Hexamethylene Diamine 137.
98. I sopropy 1 Amine 138.
99. Methylamine 139.
100. Morpholine 140.
101. Propylamine 141.
102. Triethanolamine 142.
103. Triethyl amine 143.
104. Triethylene Tetramine 144.
105. Trimethlamine 145.
106. Urea 146.
107. Amyl Acetate 147.
108. Butyl Acetate 148.
109. Butyl Acrylate 149.
110. Di-n-butyl Phthalate 150.
111. Ethyl Acetate 151.
112. Ethyl Acrylate 152.
113- Ethyl Phthalate 153-
114. Isobutyl Acetate 154.
115- Methyl Acetate 155-
116. Methyl Acrylate 156.
117. Methyl Formate 157.
118. Methyl Methacrylate 158.
119. n-Propyl Acetate 159.
120. Vinyl Acetate 160.
Acridine
Ani1ine
2,4-Dinitroani1ine
n-Methylani1ine
B-Naphthylamine
Phenylhydrazine Hydrochloride
Pyridine
o-Toluidine
Benzene Sulfonic Acid
Benzyl Chloride
Buty1 Phenol
Butyl Phenol
Carbolic Acids (Phenol)
Cresol (Cresylic Acid)
Diethylstibestrol
Ethyl Phenol
Nonyl Phenol
Xylenol
Butyl Mercaptan
Carbon Disulfide
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chloral Hydrate
Chloroform
Dichloroethyl Ether
Dichlorofluoromethane
Dichloromethane
1,2-Dichloropropane
1-3-Dichloropropene
Dich1orotetrafluoroethane
Epichlorohydrin
Ethyl Chloride
Ethylene Dichloride
Methyl Chloroformate
Perchloroethylene
Polyvinyl Chloride
Tetrachloroethane
Trichloroethane
Trichlorof1uoromethane
Vinyl Chloride
Chlorobenzene (Chlorobenzol)
-11-
-------
Table 11-1
(continued)
161. o-Dichlorobenzene 201. Polyvinyl Nitrate (PVN)
162. p-Dichlorobenzene 202. Quinone
163. Hexachlorophene 203. Tetraethyl- and Tetramethyllead
164. Trichlorobenzene 204. Tetranitromethane
165. Benzoyl Peroxide 205. Tricresyl Phosphate
166. 1,2,4-Butanetriol Trinitreate (BTTN) 206. Acrolein
167. Chloropicrin 207. Diemthyl Sulfate
168. Cyanuric Triazide 208. Pentachlorophenol
169. Diethylether
170. Dioxane
171. Ethers
172. Ethylene Glycol Monethyl Ether
173. Ethylene Glycol Monoethyl Ether
Acetate
174. Isopropyl Ether
175- Polypropylene Glycol Methyl Ether
176. Propylene Oxide
177. Tetrahydrofuran
178. Oinitrobenzene
179- Dinitrophenol
180. Diphenylamine
181. Ethylene Bromide
182. Methyl Bromide
183. Methyl Chloride
184. Ethylenimine
185. Glycerol Monolactate Trinitrate
(GLNT)
186. Hydrazine Azide/Hydrazine
187. Hydroquinone
188. Maleic Anhydride
189. Manganese MethylcyclopentadJ-
eny1 tricarbony1
190. Nitroaniline
191> Nitrobenzene
192. meta- and para-Nitrochlorobenzene
193. Nitroethane
194. Nitromethane
195- 1-Nitropropane
196. 4-Nitrophenol
197. 4-Nitrotoluene
198. Oxalic Acid
199. Phosgene (Carbonyl Chloride)
200. Polychlorinated Biphenyls
-12-
-------
Consequently, solid waste management practices recommended by the applicant
should strongly parallel those recommended for hazardous materials. Ex-
ceptions should be specifically stated and described in detail.
11.C Air Emission Controls
Using a process flow diagram, the applicant must designate all emission
control and recovery devices which will be incorporated.
Each stack or vent should be designated and described with regard to
function, emission factors, and controls.
Although emission control and recovery systems will varry for each process,
the applicant should specifically evaluate the following control systems
as part of the El A:
(1) Off air scrubbers (for reactor surges).
(2) Light-end scrubbers (for crude stills, product storage tanks)
(3) Absorbers.
(k) Incinerators.
(5) Flares.
(6) Venturi scrubbers.
(7) Cyclones.
(8) Bag filters.
(9) Condensers.
(10) Knock-out drums, degassers, demisters.
(11) Process feedstock substitution.
(12) Process technology change.
-13-
-------
III. Alternatives
I 11 .A Site Alternatives
The applicant should state and discuss the site selection criteria for
new organic chemicals complex. Trends towards integration of organic
chemicals processing with basic petroleum refining because of economic
advantages would exemplify one such criterion.
Alternative site locations for dock facilities, pipelines, storage
facilities, and waste treatment facilities are however more variable
and should be examined with a level of detail which is commensurate
with the magnitude of the new complex.
III.B Process Alternatives
Sometimes different processes may be used to produce the same end
product in the Organic Chemicals industry. The applicant should state
what constraints have affected choice of process.
It is recognized that in new organic chemicals complexes, a potentially
greater flexibility exists to use inherently clean processes. The
applicant should describe what steps have been taken to optimize process
selection and overall process integration to minimize pollution loads,
accounting specifically for flexibility required to meet changing market
demands.
-------
REFERENCES
1. Survey Reports on Atmospheric Emissions from the Petrochemical
Industry. Vols. I-IV. U.S. EPA. EPA-l»50/3-73-005a,b,c,d.
2. A Survey of Emissions and Controls for Hazardous Wastes and other
Pollutants. NTIS PB-223-568/7-
3. Hydrocarbon Pollutant Systems Study. Volume I. Stationary Sources,
Effects, Controls. NTIS PB-219-073/4.
J». Air Pollution from Nitration Processes. PB-217-106/4.
5. Air Quality Data for Organics 1969 and 1970 f.om the National Air
Surveillance Networks. PB-224-822/7.
6. An Economic Analysis of the Control of Sulfur Oxides Air Pollution.
NTIS PB-227-099/9.
7. Air Pollution from Fuel Combustion in Stationary Sources.
NTIS PB-222-341/0.
8. Air Pollution from Chlorination Processes. PB-218 048/7-
9. Hydrocarbon Losses from Valves and Flanges. NTIS PB-216-682.
10. Hydrocarbon Leakage from Pressure Relief Valves. NTIS PB-216-715-
11. Fluidized Bed Incineration of selected Carbonaceous Industrial
Wastes. NTIS PB-211-161.
12. Control Techniques for Hydrocarbon and Organic Solvent Emissions
from Stationary Sources. PB-190-266.
-15-
-------
APPENDIX B-4
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(continued)
Appendix Pafle
Q-k STEAM SUPPLY AND NON-CONTACT COOLING
WATER INDUSTRIES 1
Introduction 1
I. Impact Identification 2
I.A Process Waste Impacts 2
I.B Other Impacts ^
II. Alternatives 5
References 6
-------
APPENDIX B-*f
STEAM SUPPLY AND NON-CONTACT
COOLING WATER INDUSTRIES
Introduction
This Appendix supplements the instructions provided in the General
Assessment Guideline. The information which is presented has been
developed to assist the permit applicant in defining and comprehending
the scope of the EIA requirement.
The Steam Supply and Now-Contact Cooling Water industries include all
enterprises engaged in the production or distribution of steam, heated
or cooled air, and non-cooling water. "Non-control" refers to
the inherent segregation of process streams and coolant streams which
typifies certain cooling water systems.
This Appendix is limited only to these industries and should not be
confused with Steam and Electric Generation industries (Power Utilities)
-1-
-------
B4 I
-------
I. IMPACT IDENTIFICATION
I.A Process Waste Impacts
All process wastes shall be identified by means of a suitable process
flow diagram which designates each waste source. Waste sources should
be described verbally and quantitatively according to the guidance con-
tained in the following sections.
I.A.I Effluents
Effluents should be described for both continuous and intermittent sources,
and fully characterized in terms of important pollutant parameters.'
Special attention shall be paid to the use of che.,i cal additives for pre-
vention of scale, corrosion, carryover, slime growth, rotting, etc. Use
of such chemicals shall be related to other process requirements with
explanation being given of how such variables were interrelated to reduce
final wastewater pollutant loads or impacts. Chromium bearing chemicals,
for example, are of special concern since chromium in the hexavalent state
is toxic to aquatic organisms.
Estimates of special cleaning and flushing operations, and description of
how resultant wastewaters will be handled, should likewise be made.
Effluents from flue gas scribbers, raw water treatment plants, fly ashponds,
system blowdowns, coal storage areas, must also be covered in the El A.
Typical pollutant values for these effluents are provided in Reference.
Special attention must be paid to metal contaminants which may appear in
wastewaters, as a result of ash handling operations, flue gas scrubbing.
Mercury and other trace metals may be present depending upon coal being
used. The applicant must explain and justify fuel source, handling and
treatment methods which will be incorporated in the new source if heavy
metals are likely to be present.
Thermal characteristics of effluents must also be fully described, for
significant effluents such as once through cooling water, boiler blowdowns,
etc.
Development Document for Proposed Effluent Limitations Guidelines and
New Source Performance Standards for the Steam Supply and Non-Contact
Cooling Water Industry. U.S. EPA 1975.
-2-
-------
I.A.2 Solid Waste Impacts
Solid wastes should be identified, estimated and described.
Of particular concern will be the following:
a. Solid wastes associated with bottom and fly ash handling
systems.
b. Solid wastes associated with water treatment systems.
c. Solid wastes generated during maintenance operations.
Particular attention should be given to discussing the affect of air
pollution controls upon solid waste characterist'cs and quantities.
Evaluation should be made for example, of low sulfur fuel availability
and use where S02 controls would otherwise necessitate wet scrubbing
systems.
Ash handling, reuse or recovery for cement manufacturing, etc. should
also be discussed. Where aqueous slicing systems are employed for
handling bottom or fly ash, consideration must be made of potential
leaching problems potentially resulting at the ash pond site. Such
assessment of leaching should include full consideration of site geology
and hydrogeology and possible leachate control measures (e.g. lining,
PH control, etc.).
I.A.3 Air Emissions
All air emissions must be identified and quantified.
I.A.3.a Fuel Combustion
The applicant's description should cover as a minimum the type of fuel
and fuel grades available, standby fuel combustion equipment, soot
blowing and related operating practices and schedules.
Sulfur oxides, nitrogen oxides, particulates, hydrocarbons, and carbon
monoxide levels must be estimated.
I.A.3.b Cooling Tower Plumes
Cooling towers should be described and evaluated with respect to fogging
and potential impacts upon roads and air traffic.
In addition, the applicant should describe any impacts resulting from
carryover of cooling water (spray and drift) upon the local environment.
This potential impact will be especially important where the coolant
contains high levels of dissolved solids.
-3-
-------
I.B Other Impacts
The applicant should identify and review with the EPA Regional Adminis-
trator all process, manufacturing operations, or other activities
associated with the proposed new source steam or run-contact cooling
water facilities. This review should clarify the degree to which
impacts resulting from these dependent activities must be considered in
the applicant's El A. Where major manufacturing or processing activities
will be serviced, the applicant will be required to examine comprehensively
all associated impacts. If specific appendices have not been developed
which cover the serviced operations, the applicant should use the General
Assessment Guideline in conjunction with the Regional Administrator to
determine the El A requirements.
-if-
-------
R4 II
-------
II. ALTERNATIVES
I I.A Site Alternatives
Site selection for proposed new source steam supply or non-contact
cooling water actions may generally be performed on the basis of
economic impacts, since both industries are largely captive; that is,
only usable where industry already exists.
Some care in siting cooling towers should be taken in order that
fogging or icing of roadways, airways, etc., is avoided.
11.B Process Alternatives
Major process alternatives exist for non-contact cycling systems with
respect to the kind of cooling devices used. Generally, recirculating
closed loop systems are the most environmentally acceptable since they
dissipate their heat to air media which are relatively insensitive
biologically; and they are more conservative in water use. Slowdowns
necessitated by such cooling systems have generally low impact. Many
kinds of closed loop (recirculating) systems exist; the EIA need not
explore all such design options in detail, but rather, indicate the
basic assumptions and design requirements affecting final system design.
-5-
-------
REFERENCES
1. Development Document for Proposed Effluent Limitations Guidelines
and New Source Performance Standards for the Steam Supply and Non
Contact Cooling Water Industry. U.S. EPA 197b-
2. An Economic Analysis of the Control of Sulfur Oxides Air Pollution.
NT IS PB-227-099/9
3. Air Pollution from Fuel Combustion in Stationary Sources. NT IS
k. Flue Gases - Exhaust Gases from Combustion and Industrial Processes.
NT IS 204-861 .
5. Cooling Tower Study. NTIS PB-201-216.
6. Potential Environmental Modifications Produced by Large Evaporative
Cooling Towers. NTIS PB-21 0-702.
7. Industrial Waste Guide on Thermal Pollution. NTIS PB-197-262
8. Experimental Study of Warm Water Flow Into Impoundments -
Part I; NTIS PB-188-512
Part II; NTIS PB-188-513
Part III; NTIS PB-1 88-51 ^
by St. Anthony Falls Hydraulic Lab., University of Minnesota,
Minneapol is, MN.
9. Working Paper No. 67: Economic Aspects of Thermal Pollution Control
in theElectric Power Industry. NTIS PB-208-43^.
10. Guidelines: Biological Surveys at Proposed Heat Discharge Sites.
NTIS PB-206-815.
11. Thermoelectric Generators Powered by Thermal Waste From Electric
Power Plants; by M. A. Shirazi, Pacific Northwest Water Lab., FWQA.
Corvallis, OR. NTIS PB-207-870.
12. An Engineering-Economic Study of Cooling Pond Performanc. NTIS
PB-206-817.
13. A Predictive Model for Thermal Stratification and Water Quality in
Reservoirs; by Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge,
MA. NTIS PB-21 1-621.
1*4. Temperature Prediction in Stratified Water: Mathematical Model -
User's Manual; by Ralph M. Parsons Lab., Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, Cambridge, MA. NTIS PB-210-701.
-6-
-------
14. An Analytical and Experimental Investigation of Surface Discharge
of Heated Water; by Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge,
MA. NTIS No. PB-210-13*.
15. Advanced Nonthermally Polluting Gas Turbines ,'n Utility Application.
NTIS No. PB-211-283.
16. Potential Environmental Modifications Produced by Large Evaporative
Cooling Towers. NTIS No. PB-210-702.
17. Research on the Physical Aspects of Thermal Pollution. NTIS No.
PB-210-124.
18. Mathematical Models for the Prediction of Temperature Distributions
Resulting from the Discharge of Heated Water ,nto Large Bodies of
Water. NTIS No. PB-208-034.
19. Research on Dry-Type Cooling Towers for Thermal Electric Generation,
Part I: NTIS No. PB-206-951*
Part II: NTIS No. PB-210-778
20. Thermal Pollution: Status of the Art; by Vanderbilt University,
Nashville, TN. (Vanderbilt)
21. Mathematical Models for the Prediction of Thermal Energy Change in
Impoundments. NTIS No. PB-210-126.
22. Effect of Geographical Location on Cooling Pond Requirements and
Performance; by Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN. NTIS NO.
PB-208-031.
23. Heated Surface Jet Discharged into a Flowing Ambient Streat; by
L. H. Motz and B. A. Benedict, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN.
NTIS No. PB-211-281*.
Ik. Beneficial Uses of Waste Heat - An Evaluation. NTIS No. PB-201-724.
25. Surface Discharge of Heated Water. NTIS No. PB-211-285.
26. A Method for Predicting the Performance of Natural Draft Cooling
Towers. NTIS No. PB-210-125.
27. Development and Demonstration of Low-Level Drift Instrumentation.
NTIS No. PB-210-759.
-7-
------- |