EPA ACTIVITIES CONCERNING
   PETROLEUM DISTILLATE PRODUCTS


            Volume I


          Final Report
GCA
GCA CORPORATION
Technology Division

213 Burlington Road
Bedford, Mass. 01730

-------
                                     GCA-TR-CH-84-06(1)
              Prepared  for

  U.S.  ENVIRONMENTAL  PROTECTION AGENCY
       Chemical  Coordination Staff
       Office  of Toxic  Substances
            Washington, B.C.
       Contract No.  68-01-6775
         Task Nos.  3  arid  8


        EPA Project Officer
         Robert E.  Janney
         EPA Task Manager
        Arnold M. Edelman
      EPA ACTIVITIES CONCERNING
    PETROLEUM DISTILLATE PRODUCTS

              Volume I

            Final Report
            Prepared by
         Timothy L. Curtin
            February 1985
          GCA CORPORATION
      GCA/TECHNOLOGY DIVISION
Chapel Hill, North Carolina  27514

-------
                                   DISCLAIMER
     This report was furnished to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency by
GCA Corporation, GCA/Technology Division, 213 Burlington Road, Bedford,
Massachusetts, 01730, in fulfillment of Contract No. 68-01-6775, Task Nos. 3
and 8.  The opinions, findings and conclusions expressed are those of the authors
and not necessarily those of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  Mention
of company or product names is not to be considered as an endorsement by the
Environmental Protection Agency.
                                     ii

-------
                                TABLE OF CONTENTS
                                    Volume 1
                                                                      Page
Section 1      Executive Summary	      1
Section 2      Introduction	      5
Section 3      Petroleum Product Industry	      9
Section 4      Current and Completed Agency Projects	     18


                                    Volume 2
Appendices
     A.   Federal Register Citations	
     B.   Report Abstracts	    247
     C.   Document Contents	    276
     D.   Agency Responses to Information Requests	    327
                                       iii

-------
                                 LIST OF FIGURES




Number                                                               Page




  1       Integrated Refinery Process Flow Chart	     13
                                     iv

-------
                                 LIST OF TABLES

Number                                                                    Page

 1        Summary of EPA Projects Concerning Petroleum Distillates	      2

 2        Telephone Survey Questions	      8

 3        Number and Capacity of Refineries  Owned  and  Operated by
            Maj or Companies	     10

 4        Percent Volume Yields of Petroleum Products  by Year,
            United States Refineries	     15

 5        Production of Petroleum Products by Year	     16

 6        Derivation and Use of Major Petroleum  Products	     17

 7        Current EPA Projects Concerning Petroleum Distillates	     19

 8        Tasks Required for NSPS/NESHAP Development	     34

-------
                                    SECTION 1

                                EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
     This report presents the results of a study for the Chemical Coordination
Staff of EPA's Office of Toxic Substances to determine EPA activities
concerning petroleum distillate products.  The majority of information contained
in this report was gathered during the summer of 1984.!  Initial Agency activities
were identified through the Federal Register .Search System which is a computerized
data base of Federal Register notices.  The EPA Regulatory Agenda was also
reviewed to determine relevant projects and their associated EPA contacts.

     The personnel identified in the Federal Register notices and the Regulatory
Agenda were contacted by telephone or in writing to gather more material on the
particular projects.  Written questionnaires were sent to most of the individuals
identified in the previous efforts.

     The major agency projects concerning petroleum distillate products as of
June, 1984 are summarized in Table 1.  This table presents information on Agency
contacts and phone numbers, regulatory authority, regulatory status, and exposure.
The second part of the table presents the status of various Agency information
gathering activities including chemical composition; exposed population;      :
exposure levels; health, economic, and engineering data; and exposure and risk
models. In some cases, more than one Agency contact within an EPA Division or
Office is appropriate.  For the sake of simplification, only one contact is
listed in Table 1.

-------
                    TABLE 1.  SUMMARY OF EPA PROJECTS CONCERNING PETROLEUM DISTILLATE PRODUCTS AS OF JULY  1984
N>
EPA
Project Substance Contact
G to
o e c
•HO *ri
O4Jl« *rl ill V4
3 u a M u u dim 2 n jz a  «n o*> to*j o.'o «-u
Hlllnhav Altt-lln«-4 hw ' Ct-nt-lia 'K*H- H1' ^3O HO KU WQ Url Ctd XO -HO
.Huinoer nuciioncy . acams MIW fit ta uo w(^ idrJ M^p wp wca WZ W2»
OFFICE OF AIR
Xylene Exposure Xylene

Ozone NAAQ.S Ozone

Refinery Fugitive VOC
NSPS
Benzene Storage NESHAP Benzene

Benzene Fugitive NESHAP Benzene
Bulk Gaaollne Terminala VOC
NSPS
On-Shore Production NSPS VOC
SOX
Diatillatlon Operation* VOC
NSPS
Refinery Waatewater NSPS VOC

Petroleum Solvent Dry VOC
Cleaning NSPS
FCCU Regenerator NSPS SOX

Organic Solvent Cleanera VOC
NSl'S
Caaoline Marketing NESHAP Benzene

Asphalt Concrete NSPS VOC

POM Dec la ion POM

VOL Storage VOC
Nancy
Pate
Dave
McKee
Gil
Wood
Gil
Wood
m'
Wood
Gil
Wood
Gil
Wood
Doug
Bell
Gil
Wood
Dale
Pohl
Gill
Wood
Bob
Roaenthal
Rick •
Colyer
Ken
Durkee
Kent
Berry

629-5645

629-5655

629-5655

629-5655
£ AQ e£ e c
D/T- JOJJ
629-5655

629-5655

629-5624

629-5655

629-5624

629-5655

629-5671

629-5578

629-5596

629-5504


CAA

CAA

CAA

CAA

CAA

CAA

CAA

CAA

CAA

CAA

CAA

. CAA

CAA

CAA


QUALITY PLANNING AND STANDARDS
Not currently Under Active Assessment

Review u3 uuuuuun

Red Border c c

Dropped 1 2 c c c c c cc c

Promulgated c c

Propoaed c c

Propoaed c c

Phaae 2 c c

Propoaed c c

Propoaed c c

Proposed

Phaae 1 1 2 c c c c c

Review 12 c c c c c

Completed 1 2

Proposed

-------
                                                               TABLE  1.      (CONTINUED)
ProJ ect
EPA
Substance Contact.
FTS Rcf.ulntory
Number Authority
RogiilAtory
Status
Exposur
Effects
OFFICE OF EMERGENCY AND REMEDIAL
Gasoline Listing
Oil Pollution
Prevention
Gasoline Richard
llorner
Various Barbara
Hostage
382-2668 CWA
CKRCLA
382-2186 CWA
Phase 1

Exposur
Scenari
Chesicz
Cosposi
0» VI
W f 1
o :)
.ST.?
y « .rt (i «t
w »-i »* o n
o oi . i rt t' rt ;t a
p. > nl w o t* Ml *J
!-: «u w « o rj i: «
i*j »j u; o uj o MI n
M
P « W
W *-4 •-<
O : « >:
RESPONSE
6
8

n
n n n

            Hazardous Substances
            Pollution Prevention

            Discharge of Oil
Various      L.  M.     382-2196   CWA
             Flaherty

Oil          Jack      382-2814   CWA
             Kooyoomjlan
                                                                        OFFICE OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES
            Synthetic Fuel PUN          Various


            Catalytically Cracked
            Clarified Oil Listing

U)          Used Motor Oil Listing


            Proualent 4A Listing         Various


            C9 Test Rules               Various
            Larry     382-7971   TSCA     Prenanufacturlng Notices are done on a case-by-case basis
            Longnecker
            Albert    382-3842   TSCA
            Colll

            Albert    382-3842   TSCA
            Colll

            Albert    382-3842   TSCA
            Colll

            Kevin     475-8129   TSCA     Proposed
            HcCormlck
                                                                   OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
Cancer Assessment
Review of Criteria for
Vapor-Phase Uydroearbona
Health Assessment
for Toluene
1 - Hunan
2 - Aabient
3 - Hunan Ecologlc
4 - All but Spills
5 - Water
Gasoline Robert
McGaughy
William
Various Ewald
Toluene William
Ewald
6 - All
7 - Disposal
8 - Disposal Spills
9 - Spills
10 - Air
382-7341 CAA Planned 1 10 n n
629-4164 CAA Review 3 10 c c
629-4164 CAA Complete 1 6 c c
c - completed
n - need
u - underway

-------
TABLE 1.  (CONTINUED)
Project

Review of Policy on
Petroleum Products In
Pesticide!

Effluent Guidelines for
Off-shore Oil and Gas
Effluent Guideline! for
Petroleum Refineries
Health Advisory for No. 2
Fuel Oil and Kerosene
Ambient Water Quality
Criteria Document!



Dsed Oil Listing

Used Oil as Fuel

Waste Oil Storage

Waste Oil aa Dust
Suppressant
Management Standards
Waste Oil
Leaking Underground
Storage Tanks
Refinery Wastes
Listing
g s?
•** O si
* « O rH «<> il« U !< «l
14 tt H -H tf -rl tl < > ) i -H V "
ss ss ss s.g 3,3 •£ i g 33 a
EPA FTS Regulatory Regulatory g.,2 g. g 8 & S.S. £5 «2 §S 1.2 8.41 3 -S
Substance Contact .Number Authority Status ^B ,3£S3 flS fij wouS 55 ££ 3^

Various Gary
Burin


Oil t, Gas Dennis
Ruddy
Oil Dennis
Ruddy
Fuel Oil Joseph

Toluene Tom
Benzene Puree 11
Napthalene
Ethylbenzene

Used Mike
Oil Petruaka
Dsed Oil Mike
Petruala
Waste Oil Mike
Petruska
Waste Oil Mike
Petruaka
Waste Oil Mike
Petruska
Gasoline Penny
llanaon
Refinery Ben
Smith
OFFICE OF PESTICIDE PROGRAMS
557-7695 FIFRA Conteaplated 3 A n n n n


OFFICE OF WATER
382-7165 CWA Phase 1 5 Environmental Impact Statements

382-7165 CWA Promulgated 5

382-7575 CWA Draft 5 n n n

245-3042 CWA Ambient W. Q. n n n
Criteria
Available

OFFICE OF SOLID WASTE




382-7917 RCRA Phase 1 39cccccc

382-7917 RCRA Phase 1 37cccecc

382-7917 RCRA Phase 1

382-2814 RCRA Phase 1 6

382-4791 RCRA Phase 1 1 7 n u u


-------
                                    SECTION 2

                                  INTRODUCTION

BACKGROUND

     Crude petroleum consists of hundreds of different chemicals,  or chemical
groups from methane to asphalt.  Refineries process crude oil through a
series of physical and chemical processes into myriad products.  Petroleum
products are divided into salable cuts by the operations within the refinery.

     Because of the diversity of petroleum products, analysis and regulation
of potentially toxic products of petroleum processes have been undertaken by
various program offices within the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA).  Eight offices within EPA have responsibility for assessing or regulating
potentially toxic products of the petroleum refining industry.  They are the
Office of Pesticide Programs and the Office of Toxic Substances which are
located within the Office of Pesticides and Toxic Substances; the Office of
Water Regulation and Standards and the Office of Drinking Water, located
within the Office of Water; the Office of Emergency and Remedial Response and
the Office of Solid Waste located within the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response; and the Offices of Air Quality Planning and Standards, and Mobile
Sources, which are part of the Office of Air and Radiation.  The Office of
Research and Development has also performed studies aimed at various segments
of the petroleum products industry.

     The Office of Pesticides and Toxic Substances advises the Administrator
of EPA on all matters regarding the assessment, regulation, and control of
pesticides and toxic substances and manages the Agency's pesticides and toxic
substances program under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide
Act (FIFRA) and the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).  The Office of Toxic
Substances (OTS), is responsible for developing and operating Agency programs
and policies for new and existing chemicals.  In each of these areas, the
Office Director is responsible for information collection, data development,
health, environmental, economic assessment, and negotiated or regulatory
control actions.  The Office Director also is responsible for coordinating
communication with the industrial community, environmental groups, and other
parties on matters relating to the implementation of TSCA; providing technical
support to international activities coordinated by the Office of International
Activities; and managing the joint planning of toxics research under the
auspices of the Chemical Testing and Assessment Research Committee.  As a
part of this Office, the Chemical Coordination Staff establishes policies and
procedures for the coordination and integration of Agency and Federal activities
concerning toxic substances, and creates and analyzes chemical and industry data
bases for integration of Agency chemical activities.

-------
     The Existing Chemical Assessment Division of OTS is charged with the
following responsibilities:

     •    Provides program management for TSCA testing and existing chemicals
          program.  Identifies and manages the evaluation and implemention of
          non-regulatory remedial control actions for risk posed by existing
          chemicals to human health and the environment.

     •    Identifies specific sources of exposure and potential effects on
          human health or the environment for which testing or control
          regulations may be warranted and evaluates the types of hazards and
          degrees of risk reflected in the data and petitions submitted to
          the Agency under TSCA Sections 4, 8, and 21.

     •    Develops and implements recordkeeping and reporting rules under
          Section 8 of TSCA to obtain industry data needed to identify and
          evaluate possible unreasonable risks posed by commercial chemicals.

     •    Develops and implements procedures for systematically screening
          available information on existing chemicals and uses of chemicals
          to identify priority chemicals or categories of chemicals for
          further evaluation.

     •    Develops and implements procedures for the selection of specific
          chemicals or chemical categories for testing under Section 4.
          Procedures include conducting or coordinating the review of relevant
          data on candidate substances, negotiating industry testing without
          rulemaking, preparing test rules and conducting public hearing,
          responding to priority designations of the TSCA Interagency Testing
          Committee (ITC), and evaluating requests for exemptions from testing.

PROJECT PURPOSE

     The Office of Toxic Substances currently is attempting to define an
appropriate role in the assessment and control of petroleum products.
Recent decisions of the Office of Pesticide Programs and numerous on-going
and recently completed projects within the Agency indicate a possible need
for a more broadly-based Agency strategy to address the potential risks
associated with all petroleum products.  In order to obtain a proper perspective
for future strategy development, the Chemical Coordination Staff, in conjunction
with the Existing Chemicals Assessment Division, has conducted a scoping
exercise to identify what the Agency has done, is doing, or will be doing
concerning the broad category of materials called petroleum products.

PROJECT APPROACH AND REPORT ORGANIZATION

     Because regulatory procedures used by EPA generally focus on each environmental
medium, an overall strategy to address the potential risks associated with
petroleum products does not exist.  This report presents a summary of recent
and ongoing EPA projects involving petroleum distillates, excluding petrochemical
feedstocks, gasoline additives, and products of combustion.  Where applicable,
areas of overlap or areas with the potential for integrated information
exchange are presented.
                                        6

-------
     Systematic data gathering activities, including literature searches and
telephone inquiries, were used to summarize relevant EPA activities and
technical reports concerning petroleum distillates.  Basic information on
petroleum products was examined to identify chemicals or groups of chemicals
that are output products from the refinery.  The manufacture, use, or disposal
of these petroleum products was investigated.

     For chemicals or groups of chemicals identified as petroleum products,
a search of the Federal Register Search System was conducted permiting
retrieval of all Federal Register citations that concern a chemical substance.
Literature searches to obtain citations and abstracts of EPA-sponsored
program reports also were performed.

     Concurrently with the literature search activities, telephone surveys
were made of EPA personnel who had been identified as responsible for analysis
or regulatory development for petroleum distillates.  Table 2 lists types
of information obtained from these surveys.

     The information gathered through literature searches and EPA contacts is
presented in this report.  Section 3 provides a brief discussion of major
products of the petroleum refining industry.  Section 4 is a summary of
current Agency projects, and Section 5 presents summaries of recently completed
Agency projects.  Federal Register citations and report abstracts are contained
as appendices to the report.

-------
    TABLE 2. TELEPHONE SURVEY QUESTIONS
•  Substance identification
•  EPA contact
•  Exposure scenarios of concern
   - Products
   - Commercial and industrial processes/uses
   - Consumer uses
   - Disposal
   - Environmental media
•  Effects of concern
   - Human health
   - Ecologic
   - Abiotic
•  Status of any risk assessment
•  Regulatory control actions planned or completed
•  Authority used
•  Status of technical analysis
•  Information needs/information available
   - Chemical composition
   - Exposed population
   - Exposure levels
   - Toxicological data
   - Economic data
   - Engineering data
   - Exposure models
   - Risk assessment models
•  Technical/regulatory reports available

-------
                                    SECTION 3

                           PETROLEUM PRODUCT INDUSTRY
GENERAL INDUSTRY PROFILE

     On January 1, 1980, there were 311 petroleum refineries operating in the
continental United States with a total crude capacity of 3,005,000 m  per
stream day.  Refining capacity is concentrated in Texas, Louisiana, and Cali-
fornia.  Table 3 summarizes the U.S. refining capacity as of January 1, 1980.

     Although refining capacity grew steadily through the 1970's, a similar
trend in capacity growth is not anticipated during the 1980's.  The decrease
in the rate of capacity expansion can be traced to demand reductions resulting
from rising gasoline prices, the slowdown of economic growth, the availability
of substitutes in some applications, environmental opposition to new refineries,
and the increasing fuel efficiency of newer automobiles.  Those additions to
capacity that are most likely to occur at existing refineries are changes to
allow processing of lower quality high-sulfur crudes and to increase the
output of unleaded gasoline.

PETROLEUM COMPOSITION

     Crude petroleum is made up of hundreds of different individual chemicals,
from methane to asphalt.  Although most of the constituents are hydrocarbons,
ultimate analyses indicate the presence in small quantities of nitrogen (0 to
0.5 percent), sulfur (0 to 6 percent), and oxygen (0 to 3.5 percent).
Refineries process crude oil through a series of physical and chemical processes
into myriad products.  The hydrocarbon products can be divided into two major
chemical classes—open-chain or aliphatic compounds, and ring compounds.

     The open chain compound class consists of the n-paraffin series (C H-  + 2^»
the isoparaffin series (C H™    „), and the olefin series (C EL ).  Paraffins
comprise a larger fraction o? most petroleums than any of the other individual
classes.  Important members are n-hexane and n-heptane.  Paraffins predominate
in most straight-run gasoline.  Branched-chain compounds, isoparaffins, are
very desirable and frequently are manufactured by catalytic reforming, alkylation,
and isomerization.  Naturally occurring members of this class are 2- and
3-methylpentanes, 2,3-dimethylpentane, and 2-methylhexane.  Olefins are
either not present in crude oil or exist in very small quantities.  Cracking
processes produce large amounts of olefins.  Olefins possess better antiknock
properties than normal paraffins but have poorer properties than highly
branched paraffins and aromatics.  Their usefulness in mixtures is reduced
somewhat by their chemical reactivity, since they can polymerize or oxidize
easily when stored.  Olefins are the most important class of compounds
chemically derived from petroleum in the making of other products.

-------
TABLE 3.  NUMBER AND CAPACITY OF REFINERIES
          OWNED AND OPERATED BY MAJOR COMPANIES
Company
Exxon
Chevron
Amoco
Shell
Texaco
Gulf
Mobil
ARCO
Marathon
Union Oil
Sun
Sohio/BP
Ashland
Phillips
Conoco
Coastal States
Cities Service
Champ 1 in
Tosco
Getty
Number of
refineries
5
12
10
8
12
7
7
4
4
4
5
3
7
5
7
3
1
3
3
2
Crude capacity
(1,000 m3/cd)
251
233
197
183
168
145
142
133
93
78
77
72
73
68
58
47
46
38
35
35
                    10

-------
     Ring compounds, consisting of naphthenes (C H? ) and aromatics (C H9  ,),
comprise the other major class of compounds presentnin crude petroleum?  The
naphthene series, which has the same empirical formula as the olefin series,
differs in that its members are completely saturated.  It is the second most
abundantly occurring series of compounds in most crudes.  Members are methyl-
cyclopentane, cyclohexane, dimethylcyclopentane and methyl-cylohexane.  These
napthenes predominate in most gas oils and lubricating oils from all types of
crudes.  They also are present in residual products.  Members of the aromatic
series of compounds are benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes.  These
compounds are present in crudes only in very small quantities but are produced
by chemical processing for their use as chemical feedstocks and as antiknock
agents.

     Petroleum crudes are characterized by variability in composition and
must be evaluated before they can be refined.  Paraffin-based crudes consist
primarily of open-chain compounds and furnish low-octane number straight-run
gasoline and excellent but waxy lubricating oil stocks.  Intermediate-based
crudes contain large quantities of both paraffinic and naphthenic compounds
and furnish medium-grade straight-run gasolines and lubricating oils.  Both
wax and asphalt are found in these oils.  Naphthene crudes contain a high
percentage of cyclic compounds and furnish relatively high-octane-number
straight-run gasoline.  The lubricating-oil fractions must be solvent refined.
Asphalt is present.

REFINING PROCESSES

     The initial step in refining crude oil is to separate physically the oil
into distinct components or fractions through distillation at atmospheric
pressure.  There are several possible combinations of fractions and quantities
available from crude distillation depending upon the type of crude being
processed and the products desired,  High boiling components often are separated
further by vacuum flashing or vacuum distillation.  The crude oil still
provides feedstock for downstream processing and some final products.

     Thermal cracking operations include coking and visbreaking.  In each of
these operations, heavy oil fractions are broken down into lighter fractions
by the action of heat and pressure; heavy fuels and coke are produced from
the uncracked residue.  Visbreaking is a mild form of thermal cracking that
causes very little reduction in boiling point but significantly lowers the
viscosity of the feed.  The furnace effluent is quenched with light gas oil
and flashed in the bottom of a fractionator, while gas, gasoline, and heavier
fractions are recycled.

     Coking is a severe form of thermal cracking in which the feed is held at
a high cracking temperature long enough for coke to form and settle.  The
cracked products are separated and drawn off, and heavier materials are
recycled to the coking operations.

     Catalytic cracking is used to increase the yield and quality of gasoline
blending stocks and to produce furnace oils and other useful middle distillates.
By this process the large hydrocarbon molecules of the heavy distillate
feedstocks are fractured into smaller olefinic molecules.  The use of a
                                      11

-------
catalyst permits operation at lower temperatures and pressures than those
required in thermal cracking.  In the fluidized catalytic cracking process,  a
finely powdered catalyst is handled as a fluid as opposed to the beaded or
pelletized catalysts employed in fixed and moving bed processes.

     Reforming is a molecular rearrangement process to convert low-octane
feedstocks to high octane gasoline blending stocks or to produce aromatics
for petrochemical uses.  Hydrogen is a significant co-product of reforming.

     Isomerization, like reforming, is a molecular rearrangement process used
to obtain higher octane blending stocks.  In this process, light gasoline
materials (butane, pentane, and hexane) are converted to their higher octane
isomers.

     Alkylation involves the reaction of an isoparaffin (usually isobutane)
and an olefin (propylene or butylenes) in the presence of a catalyst to
produce a high octane alkylate, an important gasoline blending stock.

     Hydrotreating is used to saturate olefins and improve hydrocarbon streams
by removing unwanted materials such as nitrogen, sulfur, and metals.  In
addition to or in place of drying and sweetening in hydrotreating units,
petroleum fractions in the lubricating oil range are processed further through
solvent, acid, or clay treatment in the production of motor oils and other
lubricants.

     The manufacture of hydrogen has become increasingly necessary to maintain
hydrotreating operations.  Natural gas and by-products from reforming and
other processes may serve as charge stocks.  The gases are purified of sulfur
and processed to yield a high purity hydrogen.

     Solvent extraction processes separate petroleum fractions or remove
impurities through the use of differential solubilities in particular solvents.
Asphalt is a residual product of crude distillation.  It also is generated
from deasphalting and solvent decarbonizing—two specialized steps that
increase the quantity of cracking feedstocks.

     Figure 1 shows the integration of the refinery.

PETROLUM PRODUCTS

     Petroleum products are divided into salable cuts by the operations
within the refinery.  These refinery fractions may be classified as follows:

     •    Light distillates—motor gasolines, solvent naphthas, jet fuel,
          kerosene, and light heating oilsj

     •    Intermediate distillates—heavy fuel oils, diesel oils, and gas
          oils ;

     •    Heavy distillates—heavy mineral oils, heavy floatation oils,
          waxes, and lubricating oil; and

     •    Residues—lubricating oils, fuel oils, road oils, asphalts, and
          coke.

                                       12

-------
                                                                                                DRY CAS
                                                                                                                             *-FUEL GAS
                                                                                                                             *-LP CAS
                                                                                                                                MOTOR
                                                                                                                               GASOLINE
U>
                                                                                             LIGHT HYDROCRACKED GASOLINE
                                                                   HEAVY
                                                                HYDROCRACKED
                                                                  GASOLINE
                                                                                                                               HEAVY FUEL
                                                                                                                                 OIL
                                                                                                                               ASF11ALT
                                                                                                                               COKE
                     Figure.!.    Integrated refinery  process  flow chart,

-------
In terms of total national output, the percentage yields of most refined
petroleum products have remained constant over recent years.  The percentage
yields of the major refined petroleum products from crude oil for the years
1971 through 1978 are summarized in Table 4.  Table 5 shows the yearly
output of the major products.

     The diversity of refinery output varies with refinery capacity.   Large
integrated refineries operate a wide variety of processing units, enabling
the production of many or all of the products shown in Table .4.  On the
other hand, many refineries are relatively small, have only a few processing
units, and produce only selected products, such as distillate oil and asphalt.

     Through the 1970's residual fuel oil and petrochemical feedstocks have
accounted for an increasing share of total refinery output.  These increases
can be traced to the use of residual fuel in industrial applications  and  the
growth in petrochemical markets due to the increased production of synthetic
rubber, fibers, plastics, and other materials manufactured from petrochemicals.
The increased output of residual fuel oil and petrochemicals is balanced  by
the declining output of gasoline and kerosene.  Table 6 summarizes the
derivation and use of each major petroleum product.
                                       14

-------
        TABLE 4. PERCENT VOLUME YIELDS OF PETROLEUM PRODUCTS BY YEAR
                          United States Refineries
                                  1971-1978
                                  (Percent)
Product
Motor gasoline
Jet fuel
Ethane
Liquefied gases
Kerosene
Distillate fuel oil
Residual fuel oil
Petrochem. feedstocks
Special naphthas
Lubricants
Wax
Coke
Asphalt
Road oil
Still gas
Miscellaneous
Processing gaina
Total
1971
46.
7.
0.
2.
2.
22.
6.
2.
0.
1.
0.
2.
3.
0.
3.
0.
- 3.
100.
2
4
2
9
1
0
6
7
7
6
2
6
8
2
8
4
4
0
1972
46
7
0
2
1
22
6
2
0
1
0
2
3
0
3
0
- 3
100
.2
.2
.2
.8
.8
.2
.8
.9
.7
.5
.1
.8
.6
.2
.9
.4
.3
.0
1973
45.6
6.8
0.2
2.8
1.7
22.5
7.7
2.9
0.7
1.5
0.2
2.9
3.6
0.2
3.9
0.4
- 3.6
100.0
1974
45
6
0
2
1
21
8
3
0
1
0
2
3
0
3
0
- 3
100
.9
.8
.1
.6
.3
.8
.7
.0
.8
.6
.2
.8
.7
.2
.9
.5
.9
.0
1975
46.5
7.0
0.1
2.4
1.2
21.3
9.9
2.7
0.6
1.2
0.1
2.8
3.2
0.1
3.9
0.7
- 3.7
100.0
1976
45.5
6.8
0.1
2.4
1.1
21.8
10.3
3.3
0.7
1.3
0.1
2.6
2.8
0.0
3.7
1.0
- 3.5
100.0
1977
43.4
6.6
0.1
2.3
1.2
22.4
12.0
3.6
0.6
1.2
0.1
2.5
2.9
0.1
3.6
1.0
- 3.6
100.0
1978
44.1
6.6
0.1
2.3
1.2
22.4
12.0
3.6
0.6
1.2
0.1
2.5
2.9
0.1
3.6
1.0
- 3.6
100.0
 Hydrogen, etc.
SOURCE:  American Petroleum Institute.•  Basic Petroleum Data Book.   Section
         VIII.  Table 4-4a.
                                   15

-------
              TABLS 5. PRODUCTION OF PETROLEUM PRODUCTS BY YEAR
                          United States Refineries
                                  1969-1978
                               (I,000,m3/Cd)a
Year
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
Motor
gasoline
872
909
951
1,000
1,039
1,011
1,037
1,088
1,118
1,140
Distillate
fuel oil
370
391
297
419
449
424
422
465
521
501
Residual
fuel oil
116
112
120
127
154
170
197
219
279
266
Jet fuel
140
131
133
135
137
133
138
146
155
155
Kerosene
45
42
38
35
35
25
24
24
27
24
NGL
and LRGb
54
55
57
57
60
54
49
54
56
—
 Total and product output reports may vary by data source.
t>NGL = Natural gas liquids; LRG = Liquified refinery gases.

SOURCE:  American Petroleum Institute.  Basic Petroleum Dai:a Book.
         Tables 5, 6, 6a, 7, 7a, 14, 15, 16, 16a, 17, and 17a.
Section VII.
                                      16

-------
                           TABLE 6.  DERIVATION AND USE OF MAJOR PETROLEUM PRODUCTS
  Product
           Refining processes employed
               Typical uses
Light gases


Gasoline
Kerosine
Gas oils
Lubricating
 oils
Residua
Distillation of crude petroleum
Distillation of crude petroleum
Cracking of heavy fractions (thermal, catalytic,
 hydrocracking, coking of pitch, residues, etc.)
Reforming (catalytic and thermal)
Polymerization of light olefins
Isomerization of C^ and Cg paraffins
Alkylation of olefins with isoparaffins

Distillation of crude petroleum
Cracking of heavier fractions (thermal, catalytic,
 etc.)

Distillation of crude petroleum (atmospheric and
 vacuum)
Cracking of heavier fractions (thermal and
 catalytic, etc.)
Hydrocracking of residual oils
Vacuum distillation

Distillation of crude petroleum (atmospheric
 and vacuum)
Hydrocracking special residual oils
Solvent refining of residual oils

Vacuum distillation of petroleum
Distillation of synthetic petroleum made by
 cracking
Chemical manufacturing, gasoline
 manufacturing, fuels  (LPG)

Automotive and aircraft fuels, solvent,
 chemical manufacturing, illuminant,
 cooking fuel
Jet-aircraft fuel, illuminant, cooking and
 space-heating fuel, solvent
Domestic and light industrial fuels, diesel
 fuels, chemical manufacturing, gasoline
 manufacture, solvents, road oils
Various lubricating oils, pharmaceutical
 white oils, sources of waxes and petro-
 latums, petroleum jelly, asphalt, lubri-
 cating greases

Manufacturing of fuel oils and gasoline,
 chemical manufacturing, source of coke,
 asphalt
Coke
Thermal cracking of residuums and pitches
Fuel, metallurgy, industrial electrodes

-------
                                                                 July 1984
                                    SECTION 4


                      CURRENT AND COMPLETED AGENCY PROJECTS
INTRODUCTION
     Because of the diversity of products of a petroleum refinery,  the  potential
for EPA technical or regulatory analysis is great.  This section describes  current
and completed EPA projects concerning members of the group of petroleum products.
Since this report serves as a directory for information exchange regarding
petroleum products, descriptions of EPA projects focus on types of  data
potentially available from the respective program offices.  Table 7 lists
EPA projects currently underway; the following sections describe those  major
projects and the responsible Offices.

THE OFFICE OF AIR QUALITY PLANNING AND STANDARDS

     The Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS) is responsible
for the air quality planning and standards functions of the Agency.  This
Office develops national standards for ambient air quality, emissions standards
for new stationary sources, and emission standards for hazardous pollutants.
In addition, the Office develops national programs, technical policies,
regulations, guidelines, and criteria for air pollution control; assesses  the
national air pollution control program; provides assistance to States and  the
Regional Offices; develops emission factors and monitoring strategies for
toxic air pollutants; and monitors compliance with stationary source emission
limitations under the Clean Air Act.

     Within OAQPS, two divisions are responsible for technical and regulatory
analysis of air pollutants resulting from the production and use of potentially
toxic petroleum products.

Strategies and Air Standards Division

     As a part of OAQPS, the Strategies and Air Standards Division is
involved in analysis programs for petroleum products.  Specifically, the
Strategies and Air Standards Division is charged with the following responsibilities:

     •    Identify and evaluate the need to regulate potential pollutants  and
          recommend appropriate control strategies;

     •    Develop, review, and revise national ambient air quality standards;  and

     •    Prepare cost, economic, and benefit analysis in support of regulatory
          actions.
                                      18

-------
          TABLE  7.  CURRENT EPA PROJECTS CONCERNING PETROLEUM DISTILLATES
TITLE:
   Hazardous Substances Pollution Prevention  for Facilities
   Subject to Permitting Requirements of Section 402


RIN: 2040-AA34

CFR CITATION:
   40 CFR 151

ABSTRACT:
   This regulation's purpose  is  to  prevent  spills  of  hazardous
   substances into navigable  waters.  It  sets  forth requirements  for
   the Spills Prevention Control and  Countermeasure Plans  for
   facilities which  (a) are not  related  to  transportation,  (b) which
   store, manufacture or otherwise  handle hazardous substances at
   their facilities, and (c)  are subject to NPDES  permits.  The
   Agency will  likely exempt  any small  facilities  which store  less
   than ten  times the reportable quantities of  spilled, hazardous
   substances.

ADDITIONAL  INFORMATION:
   SAR No.  1451.
   FTS:8-382-3000.
   FTS-.8-382-2196.
TIMETABLE:
                          Final
 ACTION
   NPRM
   RPRM
Action
  DATE'
09/01/78
00/00/00
00/00/00
  FR CITE
43 FR 39276
LEGAL  AUTHORITY:
    33  USC  1321  "/ CWA 311"
 EFFECTS  ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: Yes

 AGENCY CONTACT:
    L.  M.  Flaherty
    (WH-548B)
    Washington,  DC 20460
    202 382-2196
                                     19

-------
     TABLE 7. (CONTINUED).  CURRENT EPA PROJECTS CONCERNING PETROLEUM DISTILLATES
TITLE:
   Discharge of Oil  (Revision)


RIN: 2040-AA48

CFR CITATION:
   40 CFR 110

ABSTRACT *
   This revision will extend applicability  to  deep water  ports  and
   extend reporting  requirements  for  oil  to 200  miles  offshore.  It
   will provide for  U.S. obligations  under  international  MARPOL
   agreements. It will also provid  for  exemptions  from reporting
   requirements for  permitted dischargers and  for  special use
   applications of oil.

ADDITIONAL  INFORMATION:
   SAR No.  1579.
   FTS:8-382-3000.

TIMETABLE:                      ACTION    DATE               FR  CITE
                                  NPRM  07/00/85
                         Final  Action  04/00/86

LEGAL AUTHORITY:
   33 USC 1321 "/ CWA  311"

EFFECTS ON  SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:  Undetermined

AGENCY CONTACT:
   Jack Kooyoomjian
    (WH-548b)
   Washington, DC 20460
   202 382-2814

ANALYSIS:                       ACTION    DATE              FR CITE
                              RIA,  RFA
                                    20

-------
      TABLE 7.  (CONTINUED).   CURRENT EPA PROJECTS CONCERNING PETROLEUM DISTILLATES,
TITLE:
   Oil Pollution Prevention Regulation
RIN: 2040-AA49

CFR CITATION:
   40 CFR 112
                                                    offshore.  This
                                                    for facilities
ABSTRACT:
   This revision to  40 CFR  112  will  include exemptions from
   reporting requirements and will extend EPA's oil pollution
   authority from  three miles to  two hundred miles ~**-'-'»—
   revision does not affect  the existing exemption
   that store 1,320  gallons  or  less.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
   SAR No. 1584.
   FTS.-8-382-2196.
TIMETABLE:
                                 ACTION
                                   NPRM
                          Final  Action
  DATE
05/20/80
01/00/85
  FR CITE
45 FR 33814
LEGAL AUTHORITY:
   33 USC 1321  "/ CWA  311"

EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: Undetermined

AGENCY CONTACT:
   L. M. Flaherty
   (WH-548)
   Washington,  DC 20460
   202 382-2196
                                      21

-------
      TABLE 7.  (CONTINUED).  CURRENT EPA PROJECTS CONCERNING PETROLEUM DISTILLATES
TITLE:
   Standards
   Waste Oil
for the Management of Specific Hazardous Wastes:
RIN: 2050-AAOO

PRIORITY: Yes  CRITERIA:  Major

CFR CITATION:
   40 CFR 266

ABSTRACT:
   Pursuant to the  requirements  of  the  Used Oil Recycling  Act
   (incorporated  into  RCRA  by amendment in 1980),  the  Agency  is
   evaluating what  types  of  regulatory  controls should apply  to  the
   re-use and re-cycling  of  used oil. EPA will propose regulations
   based on these evaluations. In addition the Agency  is considering
   proposal of near  term  interim controls including notification
   requirements for  facilities that blend, distribute,  and burn  used
   oil fuel sold  to  non-industrial  boiler owners.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
   SAR No. 1713.
   Docket No. 3012.
   FTS:8-382-4788.
TIMETABLE:
                     Interim
                   ACTION
                     RPRM
                     NPRM
               Final Rule
  DATE
06/00/84
01/00/85
01/00/86
  FR CITE

43 FR 58946
LEGAL AUTHORITY:
   42 USC 6921 "/ RCRA  3001";  42  USC  6932  "  / RCRA 3002"

EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND  OTHER ENTITIES: Yes

AGENCY CONTACT:
   Michael Petruska
   (WH-565)
   Washington, DC 20460
   202 382-7917
ANALYSIS:
                   ACTION   DATE
                 RIA, RFA
                    FR CITE
                                     22

-------
 TITLE:
    NSPS: Refinery Fugitive Emissions


 RIN:  2060-AA28

 CFR CITATION:
    40 CFR 60,  Subpart GGG

 ABSTRACT:
    This regulation will control  fugitive emissions  of  volatile
    organic compounds from new,  reconstructed,  or  modified  processing
    units in petroleum refineries.  Jt will  allow no  detectable
    emissions from pressure relief  devices  during  normal  operations;
    require a leak detection and  repair  program for  valves  and pumps;
    and the use of certain equipment  for compressors, sampling
    connections,  and open-ended  lines to reduce emissions.

 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
    SAR No.  1696.
    FTS.-8-629-5578.

 TIMETABLE:                       ACTION   DATE              FR CITE
                                   NPRM  01/04/83          48 FR 279
                          Final Action   03/00/84

 LEGAL  AUTHORITY:
    42  USC  7411  "/ CAA  111"

 EFFECTS ON  SMALL  BUSINESS AND OTHER  ENTITIES:  No

AGENCY CONTACT:
   Gilbert Wood
    (MD-13)
   Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
   919 541-5578
                                   23

-------
     TABLE 7. (CONTINUED).  CURRENT EPA PROJECTS CONCERNING PETROLEUM DISTILLATES
TITLE:
   NSPS:
Petroleum Solvent Dry Cleaning
RIN: 2060-AA32

CFR CITATION:
   40 CFR 60

ABSTRACT:                                       '
   This regulation  will  control  emissions of  volatile organic
   compounds from dry  cleaning  equipment in which petroleum solvent
   is used. EPA  is  considering  exempting facilities that clean  less
   than an as yet undetermined  amount  of material a year.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
   SAR No. 1690.
   FTS:8-629-5624.
TIMETABLE:
                          Final
                       ACTION
                         NPRM
                      Action
  DATE
12/14/82
03/00/84
  FR CITE
47 FR 56118
LEGAL AUTHORITY:
   42 USC 7411  "/ CAA  111"

EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND  OTHER ENTITIES: Yes

AGENCY CONTACT:
   Dale- A. Pohl
   (MD-13)
   Research Triangle Park,  NC  27711
   919 541-5624
                                    24

-------
      TABLE 7.  (CONTINUED).  CURRENT EPA PROJECTS CONCERNING PETROLEUM DISTILLATES
TITLE:
   NSPS: Distillation Operations


RIN: 2060-AA35

CFR CITATION:
   40 CFR 60

ABSTRACT:
   This regulation will  control  emissions of volatile organic
   compounds  from modified  and  reconstructed facilities at petroleum
   refineries and synthetic organic  chemical plants.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
   SAR No. 1733.
   FTS:8-629-5578.

TIMETABLE-                       ACTION   DATE              FR  CITE
11METABLE.                                                      57538
                          Final  Action   03/00/85

LEGAL AUTHORITY:
   42 USC 7411  "/ CAA  111"

EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:  Undetermined

AGENCY CONTACT:
   Doug Bell
   (MD-13)
   Research Triangle Park
   NC 27711
   919 541-5578
                                    25

-------
     TABLE 7. (CONTINUED).  CURRENT EPA PROJECTS CONCERNING PETROLEUM DISTILLATES
TITLE:
   NSPS: Petroleum Refinery,  FCC  Regenerators (Revision)


RIN: 2060-AA36

CFR CITATION:
   40 CFR 60

ABSTRACT"
   This standard will  require control of sulfur dioxide from
   fluidized catalytic  cracking  units.

ADDITIONAL  INFORMATION:
   SAR NO.  1736.
   FTS:8-629-5624.

TIMETABLE:                       ACTION   DATE            Vn
                                   NPRM 01/00/84          49 FR 2058
                          Final Action  03/00/85

LEGAL AUTHORITY:
   42 USC 7411  "/ CAA  111"

EFFECTS ON  SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No

AGENCY CONTACT:
   Gilbert  Wood
    (MD-13)
   Research Triangle  Park
   NC 27711
   919 541-5624
                                     26

-------
_.     TABLE 7. (CONTINUED).   CURRENT EPA PROJECTS CONCERNING PETROLEUM DISTILLATES

TITLE:
   NSPS: Asphalt  Concrete Plants


RIN: 2060-AB41

REVIEW: Yes

CFR CITATION:
   40 CFR 60

ABSTRACT:
   EPA is reviewing  this  standard to determine whether revisions are
   warranted. The review  will  assess performance and costs of
   control systems and economic  and technological developments in
   the industry of particular  interest are asphalt recycling plants
   which in  some  cases have  experienced "blue haze" emissions. The
   review will seek  information  to identify and quatify the "blue
   haze" constituents and assess  control techniques.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
   FTS: 80629-5596.

TIMETABLE:                       ACTION   DATE              FR CITE
                           Begin  Review 00/00/00
                           End Review  00/00/00

LEGAL AUTHORITY:
   42 USC 7411 "/ CAA 111"

EFFECTS ON SMALL  BUSINESS AND  OTHER ENTITIES: No

AGENCY CONTACT:
   Kenneth Durkes
   MD-13
   Research Triangle Park, NC  27711
   919 541-5596
                                     27

-------
     TABLE 7. (CONTINUED).  CURRENT EPA PROJECTS CONCERNING PETROLEUM DISTILLATES
TITLE:
   NESHAPS:
Benzene Fugitive Emissions
RIN: 2060-AA45

CFR CITATION:
   40 CFR 61 J

ABSTRACT:
   This  regulation  would  limit  benzene
   emission  sources in  new  and  existing
   organic chemical manufacturing plant
   no detectable  emissions  due  to leaks
   and product  accumulator  vessels.  The
   require a leak detection and repair
   and pumps, and would require certain
   sampling  connections,  and open-ended

ADDITIONAL  INFORMATION:
   SAR No.  1126.
   Docket No. A-79-27.
   FTS:8-629-5578.
                            emissions  from  fugitive
                             petroleum refineries  and
                            s.  The  standards  would allow
                             from safety/relief  valves
                             standards would  also
                            program for pipeline valves
                             equipment for  compressors,
                             valves.
 TIMETABLE:
                          Final
                     ACTION
                       NPRM
                    Action
  DATE
01/05/81
05/00/84
  FR CITE
46 FR 1165
 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
    42 USC 7412 "/ CAA 112"
 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: Yes

 AGENCY CONTACT:
    Gilbert Wood
    (MD-13)
    Research Triangle Park
    NC 27711
    919 541-5578
                                    28

-------
     TABLE 7. (CONTINUED).   CURRENT EPA PROJECTS CONCERNING PETROLEUM DISTILLATES
TITLE:
   Decision
on Regulation on Polycyclic Organic Matter
RIN: 2060-AB48

ABSTRACT:
   EPA is currently reviewing available  information  on  polycyclic
   organic matter  (POM) to determine  whether  emmissions of  POM into
   the ambient air endangers public health.  If  EPA concludes  that
   POM does endanger public health, then EPA  must  set  a national
   ambient air quality standard  standard under  Section  109  of the
   Clean Air Act,  list POM as a  hazardous air pollutant under
   section 112, or test significant POM  source  categories for
   regulation under section 111  (or pursue a  combination of such
   actions).

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
   SAR NO. 2067.
   FTS: 8-629-5504.
TIMETABLE:
                         Final
                    ACTION
                      NPRM
                   Action
  DATE
02/13/84
00/00/00
                                                            FR CITE
LEGAL AUTHORITY:
   42 USC 7422  "/ CAA 122"

EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND  OTHER ENTITIES:  No

AGENCY CONTACT:
   Kent Berry
   MD-13
   Research Triangle Park, NC  27711
   919 541-5504
                                    29

-------
      TABLE 7.  (CONTINUED).  CURRENT EPA PROJECTS CONCERNING PETROLEUM DISTILLATES
TITLE:
   Fuels and Fuel Additives


RIN: 2060-AA59

PRIORITY: Yes  CRITERIA: Major

CFR CITATION:
 •  40 CFR 79

ABSTRACT:
   These protocols will help determine  effects of fuel and fuel
   additives on public health and  emission control devices.  They
   will  ensure that motor  vehicle  fuels and additives will not harm
   the public health. They will  also ensure that they do not damage
   emission control devices in motor vehicles.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
   SAR No. 1328.
   FTS:8-374-8339.

TIMETABLE-                       ACTION    DATE              FR CITE
                                   NPRM  01/00/85

LEGAL AUTHORITY:
   42 USC 7545 "/ CAA 211"

EFFECTS  ON SMALL BUSINESS  AND OTHER ENTITIES: Undetermined

AGENCY CONTACT:
   Richard A. Rykowski
   2565  Plymouth Road
   Ann Arbor, MI 48105
   313 668-4339
                                     30

-------
The Strategies and Air Standards Division currently is performing  analysis
for two programs associated with the petroleum products industry.

Xylenes

     The Strategies and Air Standards Division is performing a preliminary
exposure assessment for xylenes.  Xylenes have been listed as a group  of
chemicals to investigate for human health and ecological effects as  soon  as
funds become available.  It is anticipated that a health assessment  and a
more detailed exposure assessment be started in 1986 or 1987.  Exposure to
xylenes from commercial and industrial production processes and commercial
and industrial uses will be assessed.

Xylenes—

     As part of the Regulatory Impact Analysis for the National Ambient Air
Quality Standard for ozone, available information on emissions, controls  and
control costs for petroleum refineries is being reviewed and summarized.
Plant-specific emissions data in the National Emissions Data Systems are
being examined, and existing EPA New Source Performance Standards, Control
Techniques Guidelines, and other studies are used to develop control cost
equations for varying control levels.  Control costs are categorized by
Source Classification Codes for use in a computerized least-cost model, which
generates overall national control costs for alternative ozone standards.

Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards—

     The Emission Standards and Engineering Division has the following
responsibilities:                                                             i

     •    Develop, review, and revise national emission standards for hazardous
          pollutants and new source performance standards.  Provide guidance  i
          for delegation of standards;

     •    Study stationary source categories and analyze control methods and
          economic information;

     •    Provide technical expertise in emission control technologies; and

     •    Evaluate development alternatives  for their  technical soundness and
          for their compatibility to emissions regulations.

     The Emission Standards and Engineering  Division of OAQPS  currently is
developing new source performance standards  (NSPS)  and national emission
standards for hazardous air pollutants  (NESHAP) for several  source categories
of  the petroleum products  industry.

     A NSPS  is designed to reduce emissions  of criteria pollutants from new
or  modified  sources as defined by Section  111 of the Clean Air Act.   Criteria
pollutants are those  for which an ambient  air quality  standard has been  set—
lead, particulate matter,  sulfur dioxide,  nitrogen  dioxide,  carbon monoxide,
                                      31

-------
and ozone and its volatile organic compound precursors.  The petroleum products
industry is regulated by NSPS's, primarily because of their contribution to
volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions.  These compounds have been identified
as having the potential to endanger public health or welfare.  Many of these
individual compounds may be toxic to human health in varying degrees.

     In 1970, Congress directed that NSPS for these sources require the
application of the best adequately demonstrated system of emission reduction
considering costs, energy requirements, and other environmental impacts.  The
1977 Amendments to the Act specify that emissions must be controlled continuously
and specify a time schedule for adopting standards.

     A NESHAP is designed to reduce air emissions, which, in the judgment of
the Administrator, cause or contribute to air pollution which may reasonably
be anticipated to result in an increase in mortality or an increase in serious,
irreversible, or incapacitating illness.  In the NESHAP process, emissions of
a particular hazardous pollutant from some or all sources, both new and
existing, are considered rather than emissions of all criteria pollutants
from a particular source category.  The intent of a NESHAP is to protect the
public health with an ample margin of safety.

     In addition, the Clean Air Act, as amended, requires that the Agency
review promulgated NSPS's every four years.  The review should determine how
the source category has changed over the last four years, and specifically,
whether the emergence of new processes, control technology, or new information
would warrant a revision of the standard.  If a revision were performed, it
would proceed in a manner similar to the development of a new standard.  The
Clean Air Act, as amended, also requires that the Agency publish (and shall
from time to time thereafter revise) a list which includes each hazardous air
pollutant for which it intends to establish a NESHAP.

     Background information for standards development is basically the same,
regardless of the particular industry source or pollutant being considered.
The basic information necessary to characterize the industry can be divided
into the following groups:

     •    Pollutants considered;

     •    Definition of source category processes;

     •    Emissions of pollutants;

     •    Financial assessment of the industry;

     •    Potential control techniques;

     •    Cost of control;

     •    Economic impact of source control;

     •    Effectiveness of control; and

     •    Exposure/risk assessment (NESHAP's only).

                                     32

-------
     Table 8 shows specific tasks applicable to the development of any NSPS
or NESHAP.  The following subsections describe specific NSPS or NESHAP develop-
ment activities currently underway or recently completed by the Emission
Standards and Engineering Division for source categories within the petroleum
products industry.  These descriptions focus primarily on the petroleum
products covered and the information available.

Organic Solvent Cleaners —

     Information supporting standards of performance for new and modified
organic solvent cleaners (degreasers) was gathered under the authority of
Section 111 of the Clean Air Act.  Emissions from these sources that were
studied are VOC's.  The Administrator determined that emissions from organic
solvent cleaners contribute to the endangerment of public health or welfare.

     The proposed standards would reduce volatile organic compound emissions
from cold cleaning degreasers, open top vapor degreasers, and conveyorized
degreasers.  The owner or operator of the affected facility would be required
to follow proper operating procedures and equipment specifications by degreaser
type and size.  The discussion that follows summarizes the control equipment
and operating requirements for each affected facility proposed in 1979.

     The control equipment for cold cleaners includes a cover, drainage racks
or baskets, specified freeboard ratio, visible fill line, and a permanent
label with operating requirements.  Also if a sprayer is used, a solid spray
is required.  If an electric agitation pump is used, rolling motions are
required.

     The operating requirements proposed for cold cleaners include closing of ,
the cover when the degreaser is not in use, spraying parts inside of tank,    '<
restriction of drafts of air over tank, time limit on drainage of parts,
restriction of air agitation, and waste solvent disposal requirements.

     The control equipment for open top vapor degreasers includes a cover,
safety switches and labels.  The owner or operator would have the option of
using a refrigerated freeboard chiller or a carbon adsorber with lip exhaust
on large degreasers.  On small degreasers with a vapor-air interface area of
less than one square meter, the owner or operator would have these same
options and an additional option of a specified freeboard.

     The operating requirements for open top degreasers would include all of
the requirements for cold cleaners as well as specified work load moving
rates, restricted work loads, vapor level restrictions, a properly operating
water separator, and repairing of leaks.

     The control equipment proposed for conveyorized degreasers includes
refrigerated chillers, carbon adsorption systems, drying tunnel, and safety
switches.
                                      33

-------
 TABLE 8.   TASKS REQUIRED FOR NSPS/NESHAP  DEVELOPMENT






Task 1 - Data Base Development and Review




Task 2 - Industry Assessment and Control Analysis




Task 3 - Emission Testing




Task 4 - Background Document Preparation




Task 5 - Model Plant and Regulatory Analysis




Task 6 - Cost Analysis




Task 7 - Economic and Environmental Impact Assessment




Task 8 - Review and Proposal




Task 9 - Public Hearing and Promulgation
                           34

-------
      The operating requirements for conveyorized degreasers would  include all
 of the requirements for open top degreasers plus minimized  openings, down-
 time covers, and specified condenser water operating procedures.

      The beneficial and adverse environmental impacts associated with the
 various control system alternatives that were considered  are presented.

      The beneficial impacts on air quality are moderate for the proposed
 standards.   There would be a small adverse water quality  impact from the
 wastewater  from carbon adsorbtion control systems.   A small adverse energy
 impact would be associated with the proposed standards.   There would be no
 noise or radiation impacts associated with the proposed standard.

      The costs associated with the proposed standards for new and modified
 organic solvent cleaning facilities have been judged not  to be of such magnitude
 to require  an analysis of the inflationary impact.   Many  facilities would
 realize a net cost reduction due to implementation  of the proposed standards.

      Implementation of proper operating  procedures  and control devices would
 reduce solvent loss and minimize solvent expenditures.  Control of open top
 and conveyorized vapor degreasers as well as manufacturing  and maintenance
 cold cleaners would have a positive economic impact.   Waste solvent disposal
 for all degreasing operations would have a small negative economic impact.

      Appendix C of this report contains  a summary of the  information presented
 in "Organic  Solvent Cleaning-Background  Information for Proposed Standards",
 EPA-450/2-78-045.

 VOC Fugitive Emissions in Petroleum Refining—

      Standards of  performance for stationary source: VOC's from fugitive
 emission  sources in the petroleum refining industry are being developed under
 the authority of Section 111  of  the Clean Air Act.   These standards would
 affect  new and modified/reconstructed existing stationary sources of VOC in
 the petroleum refining industry.

      Six  regulatory alternatives  were considered  in standard development.
 Regulatory Alternative I represents the  level of  control  within the industry in
 the  absence  of new regulations.   It provides  the  basis for  comparison of the
 impacts of the other regulatory alternatives.   The  requirements for Regulatory
Alternative  II are based upon the recommendations of  the  refinery VOC control
 techniques guideline (CTG) document (EPA-450/2-78-036).   The requirements
would be  as  follows:

     •    Quarterly  monitoring for  leaks  from valves  in gas service,
          pressure/relief devices  in  gas  service, and compressor seals (also
          monitoring relief valves  after  overpressure relief to detect improper
          reseating);

     •    Annual monitoring for leaks  from pump seals and valves in light
          liquid service;
                                       35

-------
      •    Weekly visual  inspections of  pump  seals and immediate instrument
           monitoring  of  visually  leaking  pumps; and

      •    Installation of caps, blind flanges, plugs, or other valves to seal
           all open-ended lines.

      Regulatory Alternative III would provide more effective control than
 Regulatory Alternative II by increasing the  frequency of equipment inspections
 and by specifying additional equipment requirement:

      •    Quarterly monitoring for leaks  from valves in gas and light liquid
           service;

      •    Monthly monitoring for leaks from pump seals in light liquid service;
           and

      •    Installation of rupture disks on safety/relief valves,  mechanical seals
           with controlled degassing reservoirs on compressors,  and closed purge
           sampling systems.

      Regulatory Alternative IV would reduce emissions further by  specifying
 equipment for pumps rather than monthly monitoring.  Dual mechanical seals
 with a barrier fluid and degassing reservoir vents would be required on pumps
 in light liquid service.   Other controls would be required as specified for
 Regulatory Alternative III.

      Regulatory Alternative V provides emission control by requiring more
 frequent inspections on valves in gas and light liquid service.   Valves would
 be monitored monthly.   The control requirements for other sources would be
• identical to those required in Regulatory Alternative IV.

      Regulatory Alternative VI would provide the greatest level of emission
 reduction by controlling  fugitive VOC emissions through additional equipment
 specifications.   In addition to the equipment specifications as required
 under Regulatory Alternative V,  Regulatory Alternative VI would require the
 installation of  sealed bellows valves  in gas and  light liquid service.

      Total fugitive  emissions  of  VOC from new units  in the  petroleum refining
 industry  in  1986 would be 19.8  gigagrams under Regulatory Alternative I,
 compared  to  6.2, 4.5,  4.1,  3.6  and 1.4 gigagrams under Regulatory  Alternatives II
 through VI.   The average  percent  emissions reductions from  the Regulatory
 Alternative  I level  effected by Regulatory Alternatives  II  through VI would
 be  69, 77, 79, 82, and 93 percent,  respectively.

     For  the  maximum number of modified  and reconstructed units, total VOC
 fugitive  emissions in  1986 are expected  to be 43.5 gigagrams  under Regulatory
Alterantive I, compared to 13.6,  9.9, 9.0,  8.0  and 3.1 gigagrams under Regulatory
Alternatives  II through VI.
                                       36

-------
      In addition to reducing emissions to the atmosphere, implementation of
 Regulatory Alternatives II through VI would reduce the waste load on wastewater
 treatment systems by preventing leakage from process equipment from entering
 the wastewater system.  The impact of solid wastes generated by the replacing
 mechanical seals, rupture disks, plugs, and other metal parts would be insignificant,
 since these wastes could be recycled.

      Energy savings would result under Regulatory Alternatives II through VI.
 Only a minimal increase in energy consumption would result from operation of
 combustion devices and installation of dual mechanical seals.  Assuming
 recovery of all emission reduction achieved by the regulatory alternatives,
 the energy savings over a 5-year period from new units would have an energy
 content ranging from 1,090 terajoules (Regulatory Alternative II) to 1,770 terajoules
 (Regulatory Alternative VI).   An additional 2,450 to 3,970 terajoules could
 be recovered from modified and reconstructed units for the same period.

      A more detailed analysis of environmental and energy impacts is presented
 in Chapter 7 of the background information document.

      Cumulative capital and annualized costs,  including recovery credits, for
 the entire petroleum refining industry were estimated for the first five
 years of implementing'each of the regulatory alternatives (1982 - 1986).  The
 estimates for new and modified/reconstructed units are based on May 1980 dollars.

      During the first five years of implementation of Regulatory Alternative II,
 the cumulative capital costs  for the petroleum refining industry would be
 $1.8 million for new units and an additional $3.7 million for modified/reconstructed
 units.   In the fifth year, the industry would  incur net annualized  credits of
 $!«3 million and $3.3 million for new and  modified/reconstructed units,
 respectively,  due to the value of the recovered product.


      Under Regulatory Alternative III,  cumulative capital costs would be
 $8.2 million for new units and $19.0 million for modified/reconstructed
 units.   Net  annualized costs  of $31 thousand for new units and $900  thousand
 for  modified/reconstructed units would  be  incurred by the industry  in 1986.

      Under Regulatory Alternative IV, cumulative capital  costs for  the period
 from 1981  to 1986 would be $20.0 million and $47.0 million for new units and
modified/reconstructed  units,  respectively.  The net  annualized  costs in the
 fifth year would  be  $3.2 million for new units  and $7.7 million  for modified/
 reconstructed  units.

      The 5-year  cumulative capital  costs as  a result  of implementing Regulatory
Alternative V would  be  $20.0 million for new units  and  $47.0 million for
Codified/reconstructed  units.   The  net annualized  costs in the  fifth year
would be $3.6 million and  $9.2 million for new  and modified/reconstructed
units, respectively.

     Regulatory Alternative VI would  incur the  greatest capital cost and net
annualized cost of all  the regulatory alternatives.   Cumulative capital
costs for  the industry would be $274.0 million  for new units and $610.0 million


                                        37

-------
  for modified/reconstructed units.   The net annualized costs  in 1986 would
  be $64.1  million for new units and $146.3 million for modified/reconstructed
  units.

       Industry-wide price increases are not expected  to result from implementation
  of any  of these  regulatory alternatives because the  net annualized costs to the
  industry  are  an  insignificant  fraction of the net annual revenues.

       Appendix C  of this  report contains a summary of the information presented
  in "VOC Fugitive Emissions in  Petroleum Refining  Industry -  Background Information
  for  Proposed  Standards",  EPA-450/3-81-015a.

  Petroleum Dry Cleaning—

       The  dry  cleaning industry is  a service industry involved in the cleaning
  and/or  renting of  apparel.  Petroleum  solvent dry cleaning is offered
  by the  commercial  and industrial sectors  of the industry  and represents about
  30 percent of  the  total quantity of apparel cleaned  by  the aggregate dry
  cleaning  industry.

      In order to evaluate  the  environmental, economic, and energy impacts
 associated with implementation of a standard for  the petroleum solvent dry
 cleaning industry, the Administrator has  examined  several regulatory alternatives
 for petroleum solvent dry cleaning.  The  three regulatory alternatives
 developed for controlling VOC are summarized below.

      •    Regulatory Alternative I - No new source performance standard
           (NSPS)  would be promulaged for the petroleum solvent dry cleaning
           industry.  For the purpose of determining impacts,  this alternative
           uses baseline emission control levels to project VOC emission
           growth.

      •    Regulatory Alternative II - All affected petroleum  dry  cleaning
           facilities would be  required to reduce the  petroleum solvent  content
           in  the  vacuum still  waste and to implement  an effective maintenance
           program to eliminate any perceptible fugitive VOC liquid and  vapor
           leaks.

      •    Regulatory Alternative III - In addition to the provisions of
           Alternative II,  all  affected petroleum dry  cleaning facilities
           would be required to  reduce  VOC emissions from dryers by requiring
           the  use of  a recovery dryer.

      The environmental and energy impacts  of the regulatory alternatives are
summarized in  the background information document.  Regulatory Alternative  I
would  have the greatest adverse environmental  impact  while Alternative  III
would  have the greatest benefical impact.   The maximum nationwide VOC emission
reduction would occur under Regulatory  Alternative III, with negligible water
Pollution  impacts and actual reductions in solid waste emissions.  Regulatory
Alternative HI also would  produce  the  most favorable energy  impacts, with
savings  in nationwide energy consumption resulting  from  solvent recovery.
                                       38

-------
      The  estimated  economic  impacts  are  also  summarized  in  the background
 document.  While  both  Regulatory Alternatives II  and  III would have potential
 benefical  economic  impacts,  Regulatory Alternative  III would have the greatest
 potential  economic  impact  for  petroleum  solvent dry cleaning facilities
 having  large  throughput  capacities.

      Appendix C of  this  report contains  a  summary of  the information presented
 in  "Petroleum Dry Cleaners - Background  Information for  Proposed Standards."

 Distillation  Operations —

      The proposed NSPS for distillation  operations  within the synthetic
 organic chemicals industry does not  explicitly include refinery operations.
 The project,  however,  initially did  include petroleum refineries.  Thus, some
 information valuable to  studies of distillation of  refinery products may be
 contained  in  the  regulatory  docket.  This  subsection  presents a summary of
 the basic  analysis  results described in  the background information document.
 Appendix C contains a  summary  of the types of  information contained in "Distillation
 Operations in Synthetic  Organic Chemical Manufacturing - Background Information
 for Proposed  Standards."

      The proposed distillation standard  examines  the  use of a single control
 technique, combustion, as  applied to varying  percentages of new distillation
 facilities.   Combustion  devices are the  most  effective controls and are
 demonstrated  for  application at all distillation  facilities.  This procedure
 is  in contrast to most NSPS's,  where alternative  control technologies applied to
 all affected  facilities  are  examined.  A maximum  or cutoff value of total resource
 effectiveness (TRE) is associated with controlling any given percentage of    i  '
 affected facilities by combustion.  The  TRE value of  a facility is proportional
 to  the  cost of combustion  per megagram of  VOC  destroyed  for that facility.  A
 facility with a TRE below  the  cutoff TRE value would  be  required to reduce
 VOC emissions by  combustion  (using a boiler,  thermal  incinerator, or flare).

      The environmental impacts  of requiring VOC control  for varying percentages
 of  new  distillation facilities  have been analyzed.  If no standard were
 promulgated,  projected 1987 VOC emissions  from new,  modified,  or reconstructed
 distillation  facilities would be 84,000  Mg/yr.  The regulatory possibilities
 under consideration reduce these emissions up  to  78,000 Mg/yr.   This represents
 up  to a 90 percent  reduction beyond the'level  that would be experienced due to
 SIP regulations or  economic reasons, if  no standard were promulgated.

     Any increase in emissions  of other  air pollutants as a result of
 controlling VOC emissions would be negligible.  There would be no direct solid
waste impacts under any of the  regulatory alternatives,  and impacts on noise,
 space requirements, and availability of  resources would be negligible.

     No increase  in total plant wastewater is  projected.   There is no  organic
wastewater effluent associated with combustion devices.   Therefore,  the only
possible instances of water pollution impact would be those where additional product
recovery is employed to reduce  emissions.  Carbon adsorption and absorption
with water are the only product recovery techniques currently in use in the

                                         39

-------
 industry which have an associated organic wastewater effluent.  Based on past
 industry experience, very few new distillation facilities are expected to employ
 carbon adsorption or water absorption.  Therefore, the wastewater generated
 is expected to be minimal.

      The projected fifth year energy usage under the proposed standard would
 depend on the number of units that use boilers and flares and could range
 from a fuel savings of 2.70 billion megajoules/year (1320 bbl oil/day) to a
 fuel usage of 0.57 billion megajoules/year (270 bbl oil/day).

      The projected fifth year capital cost to the organic chemical industry
 under the proposed standard would be; approximately $16.5 million.   The projected
 annualized costs would range from a net savings of $8.3 million to a net cost
 of $10.4 million, depending on the number of units that used boilers and
 flares.  The maximum projected capital and annualized  costs were projected to
 be reasonable.

 Petroleum Wastewater —

      The Emission Standards and Engineering Division of OAQPS has  recently
 begun a project  to develop a NSPS for VOC emissions from refinery  wastewater
 drains,  wastewater/oil separators and air floatation units.   Currently,  no
 information  is available  concerning  the potential coverage of this standard.
 The Agency's internal  schedule indicates that a draft  regulatory package will
 be available for  internal  Agency review in mid-summer  1984.

 Volatile  Organic  Liquid Storage —

    •  Proposed  standards for volatile  organic  liquids would control  emissions .
 of VOCs from vessels that  store volatile organic  liquids  (VOLs).  VOL  storage
 vessels are  located primarily at  chemical manufacturing facilities  and bulk
 storage terminals.  These vessels are used  for  storing a variety of materials,
 including raw materials, final products, and/or usable byproducts, waste
 tars, residues, and nonusable byproducts.

      In order to  evaluate the environmental,  economic, and energy impacts
associated with implementation of a standard  for VOL storage vessels, the
Administrator has examined several regulatory alternatives for VOL storage
vessels.  The VOL regulatory alternatives, in order of increasing emission
control potential, are summarized below.

     •    Regulatory Alternative I would require that  each storage vessel
          storing a VOL with a true vapor pressure less than 76.6 kilopascals
          (kPa) (11.1 psia) be equipped with a noncontact internal floating
          roof with primary and secondary seals.  A vapor control system would
          be required for all storage vessels storing  a VOL with a true vapor
          pressure greater than or equal to 76.6 kPa.
                                      40

-------
       •     Regulatory  Alternative  II  would  require  that  each storage vessel
            storing  a VOL with  a  true  vapor  pressure less than 76.6 kPa be
            equipped with an  external  floating  roof  with  a mechanical shoe
            primary  seal and  a  continuous  secondary  seal.  A vapor control system
            would be required for all  storage vessels storing a VOL with a true
            vapor pressure greater  than or equal  to  76.6  kPa.

       •     Regulatory  Alternative  III would require that each storage vessel
            storing  a VOL with  a  true vapor pressure less than 76.6 kPa be
            equipped with a contact internal floating roof with a liquid-mounted
            primary  seal.  A  vapor  control system would be required for all
            storage  vessels storing a VOL with a true vapor pressure greater than
           or equal to 76.6  kPa.

      •    Regulatory Alternative IV would require  that each storage vessel storing
           a VOL with a true vapor pressure less than 76.6 kPa be equipped with
           a contact internal  floating roof with a  liquid-mounted primary seal
           and a continuous  secondary seal.  A vapor control system would be
           required for all  storage vessels storing a VOL with a true vapor
           pressure greater  than or equal to 76.6 kPa.

      •    Regulatory Alternative V would require that  each storage vessel be
           equipped with a vapor control system such as thermal oxidation
           [Alternative V(a)] or carbon adsorption  [Alternative V(b)].

      The environmental regulatory alternatives are summarized  in the background
 information document  for  this  standard.   The only alternative  having any
 adverse  environmental  impacts  would be Regulatory Alternative  V,  which would
 require  that each  vessel  be  fitted to a  vapor control  system.

      The economic  impacts also are summarized in the background  document.
 Regulatory Alternatives II and V have potential  adverse  economic  impacts.

 .gasoline Marketing —

      The purpose of the study  was  to  evaluate the air  pollution  regulatory
 strategies available to reduce emissions  of volatile organic compounds (VOC),
 including benzene  (Bz), ethylene dibromide  (EDB),  and  ethylene dichloride
 (EDC), and gasoline vapors (GV)  from  the  gasoline marketing industry.  VOC
 emissions contribute to ambient  ozone/oxidant  concentrations and, thus, in
 some  areas contribute  to a failure to attain  the  ambient standard.  Benzene
 is known carcinogen, which has been listed as a hazardous air pollutant under
 Section  112  of the  Clean Air Act and  is present in  varying amounts in gasoline.
 EDB,  EDC and gasoline vapors each  have been shown to cause cancers in laboratory
 animals.   EDB and EDC are generally added to leaded gasoline, but are not
 present  in  unleaded gasoline.  The following segments of the gasoline marketing
 industry were considered:   bulk  terminals (including storage tanks and tank
 trucks), bulk plants (including  storage tanks and tank trucks) and service
 stations  (both inloading of  underground storage tanks and refueling of vehicles).
The regulatory strategies examined controls on all  segments of the industry,
both with and without selected size cutoffs for small facilities, as well as
controls onboard vehicles to reduce refueling emissions.

                                      41

-------
      There  are  still  areas  of  the  country which  have not yet attained the
 national ambient  air  quality standard  (NAAQS)  for  Ozone.  The Clean Air Act
 requires that all areas achieve  the  NAAQS by December  31, 1987.  Some States,
 as part of  their  State implementation  plans to meet the statutory requirement,
 are considering control of  gasoline  marketing  sources, especially the refueling
 of motor vehicles.  Thus, an analysis  of  gasoline marketing regulatory strategies
 must address the  need to attain  the  ozone NAAQS  in selected areas.  However,
 the emissions from gasoline marketing  sources  may induce public health risks
 which require control on a  national  basis.  The  analysis evaluated regulatory
 strategies which  address both  the more limited nonattainment issue in part of
 the country and the broader question of the need for a national control
 program to limit  potential  hazardous exposure.

      A contractor is updating  the data base relevant to possible regulation under
 Section 112 of benzene emissions from gasoline marketing,  including bulk terminals,
 bulk plants, service stations, and automobiles.  The contractor is using available
 information (EPA files)  to update numbers and  locations of sources (by latitude
 and longtitude for the large sources, where information is available,  otherwise
 by state and region),  plant throughputs and emission factors,  automobile fleet
 Projections, effect of regulations in place, and efficiencies,  costs,  and
 frequency of use of the latest control technologies based  on actual practice.
 In addition, the contractor is analyzing the data base and projecting  potential
 emission reductions achieveable through application of Stage I,  Stage  II and
 on-board controls.

 New Source  Performance Standard for Bulk Gasoline Terminals —

     Standards of  performance "for bulk gasoline terminals  were proposed  in  the
 Federal  Register on  December 17,  1980 (45  FR 83126).   This action  promulgates
 standards of performance  for bulk gasoline terminals.   These standards implement
 Section  111  of the Clean Air Act  and  are based  on the Administrator's
 determination that petroleum transportation and marketing  cause, or contribute
 significantly to,  air  pollution which may  reasonably be anticipated to endanger
 public health or welfare.  The  intended effect  of these standards is to require
 all new, modified, and reconstructed  facilities at  bulk gasoline terminals  to
 control emissions  to the level  achievable  through use of the best demonstrated
 system and environmental and energy impacts.

     The promulgated standards  of performance limit volatile organic compound
 (VOC) emissions from each affected facility on  which construction, modification,
 °r reconstruction  commenced  after December  17,  1980 (after August 18, 1983,
 for reconstruction necessitated by State or local regulations).  The affected
 facilities is the  total of all  the loading  racks  at a bulk gasoline terminal
which deliver either gasoline into any delivery tank truck or some other'liquid
product into trucks which have loaded gasoline  on the immediately previous load.

-------
       The promulgated standards require the installation  of vapor collection
  equipment at the terminal to collect total organic  compound vapors displaced
  from gasoline tank trucks during product  loading.   The standards limit emissions
  from the collection system to 35 milligrams of  total  organic compounds per
  liter of gasoline loaded,  unless the facility has an  existing vapor processing
  system (construction or  refurbishment commenced before December 17, 1980).  In
  this latter  case,  the standards limit emissions from  the vapor collection system
  to  80 mg/liter.

       The Agency  has  concluded that  it is  quite  costly in light of the resulting
  emission reduction for an  owner whose existing  facility becomes subject to
  NSPS  (e.g.,  through  modification or  reconstruction) to meet 35 mg/liter when
  the  facility already has a system capable of meeting  80 mg/liter.

       To  control  tank truck leakage emissions during loading,  the promulgated
  standards require  that loadings  be made only into gasoline tank trucks tested
  for vapor tightness.  The  terminal owner  or operator  is required to obtain the
  identification number and  test documentation for each gasoline tank truck
  loading  at the facility.   In  accordance with Section lll(h)(3) of the Clean
 Air Act,  the Administrator may approve alternative procedures that  assure that
  loading will be limited to vapor-tight trucks.

      The standards are based  on  the use of carbon adsorption  and thermal
 oxidation type vapor processors  for the 35 mg/liter limit,  which represent
 the best demonstrated technology.  Test data show the ability of these systems
 °f continuous emission reduction to achieve the 35 mg/liter emission limit
 of the standards of performance.  Although only some of the refrigeration systems
 tested met 35 mg/liter (all the systems tested were designed  to  meet the  State
 implementation plan (SIP) limit of 80 mg/liter), test data  and engineering
 calculations  also support the ability of refrigeration systems to achieve the
 35 mg/liter emission limit of the standards.  In addition,  the major manufacturer
 has stated that all currently manufactured refrigeration  systems cati be
 specified to  operate at 35 mg/liter.   In selecting  those  standards,  the Agency
 considered costs, nonair quality health and environmental impacts, and energy
 requirements.

 OFFICE OF MOBILE  SOURCES

      The  Office of Mobile Sources has the  responsiblity to characterize
 emissions from mobile sources and develop  control programs, to recommend
 emission  standards  and any related test procedures for mobile sources, and to
 conduct regulatory compliance programs to  ensure that  mobile sources adhere
 to  the standards  developed.

     Within the Office of Mobile Sources,  the Emission Control Technology
 Division  is responsible for assessing  emissions  from all mobile sources and
 developing new emission standards in  cases where the new standards are effective
 to implement.   To  support the  goal of  standards  development, the Division
must consider  test  procedure development,  technology assessments, characterization
of regulated  and unregulated pollutants from currently regulated and unregulated
 sources,  cost  effectiveness analyses,  fuel  economy test procedures and the
relationship between  fuel economy and  emissions,  in-use vehicle performance
assessments, and the  feasibility  of implementing  in-use vehicle control strategies.

                                      43

-------
      The Engineering Operations Division is responsible for the complete
 range of tasks required to provide the necessary facilities and equipment  in
 support of all emission and fuel economy testing programs.

      Since both these divisions deal primarily with emissions of fuel  combustion
 products, they do not fall within the scope of this project.   Some relevant
 data on fuel characteristics, however, may be available from this Office.

 OFFICE OF SOLID WASTE

      The Office of Solid Waste is responsible for implementing the Resource
 Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)  of 1976.  As such,  the Office has lead
 responsibility for the development of all regulations  and guidelines under
 RCRA as well as the establishment of  basic policies for technical and  financial
 assistance,  public participation, and a number of other programs.   The following
 divisions operate within the Office of Solid Waste:

      •    State Programs and Resource Recovery Division;

      •    Land Disposal Division; and

      •    Waste Management and Economics Divison.

 The  following subsections describe some of the major projects  being performed
 by the Office of Solid Waste.

 Used  Oil  as  Fuel

      The  regulations  promulgated  under the Resource  Conservation  and Recovery
 Act  (RCRA) in 1980  (and the  additions/revisions of  1981 and 1982)  covered
 hazardous wastes, but left used oil largely unregulated.  In line with sections
 that  allow exemptions for  materials that  are reused, recycled  or  reclaimed,
 used  (waste)  oils have been  used  as fuels and dust  suppressants without being
manifested or tested.   Also, waste oils  sometimes serve.as  carriers for
 other hazardous wastes,  such as chlorinated and nonchlorinated organic solvents.
As a  result of  this lack of  regulation, waste oils containing heavy metals,
organic solvents, and other  contaminants  (e.g.,  polychlorinated biphenyls)
are dispersed  into  the environment with.little knowledge of the potential
health impacts and resulting risks to  exposed  populations.  The prupose
of this study  is to analyze  the risks  associated with the use of waste oil as
a fuel.
                                       44

-------
      Risk assessment  is  an estimate of  the probability and severity of harm to
 human health or  to  the environment  as a result  of  some occurrence.  This section
 is  a  quantitative assessment  of  the risks associated with waste oil burning.
 The sources  are  characterized by examining waste oil burning practices and
 estimating emissions  from oil space heaters,  small waste oil boilers (defined
 as  those  with capacities of less than 15 million Btu/h) , and medium-size oil
 boilers  (defined as those capacities of 15 to 150  million Btu/h).  This effort
 was followed by  air dispersion modeling to estimate the ground-level
 concentrations of waste  oil contaminants in the emission.  The resulting
 concentrations in air were then  used to estimate doses to exposed populations
 and to determine the  response to the population in the form of threshold toxic
 effects or excess cancers.

      The  numbers used to estimate risk  to exposed  populations were derived from
 Threshold Limit  Values (TLV's) or from  carcinogenic potency factors developed
 by  the EPA's Cancer Assessment Group. For those waste oil contaminants that
 have  a threshold response (i.e.,  a  threshold  level below which no adverse
 effects are  observed), the TLV's were modified  in  two ways:  1) a factor was
 added to  account for  lifetime vs. workweek exposure, and 2) another factor
 was added to account  for exposure to the most susceptible portion of the
 population vs. the  typical adult male worker.   Risk was estimated by comparing
 the modified TLV's—referred  to  as  Environment  Exposure Limits (EEL's)—with
 the concentrations  calculated by the disperson  models.  For those waste oil
 contaminants classed  as  carcinogens,  the current theory is that no safe
 threshold exists.   For these  contaminants,  the  carcinogenic potency factors
modified  for airborne exposure (referred to as  reference concentrations) were
used  to calculate excess cancers.   The  ambient  air concentration estimated
 from  the  disperson  modeling is compared with  the reference concentrations to
 calculate the number  of  cancers  that  would  occur from exposure to the ambient :
 air concentration.  Risk is determined  by stating  the number of cancers per
 10iOOO, 100,000,  or 1,000,000 people, referred  to  as a risk levels of 10 4,
 10~5,   or  10~6, respectively.   Risk  was  also stated as the risk of cancer to
an  individual (one  chance in  300,000, etc.)-  Appendix B explains the method
 for assessing health  effects  in more  detail.

     Waste oil varies widely  in  its composition, depending on the type of oil
 (e.g., industrial oils such as hydraulic oil vs. crankcase oil from automobiles
and diesel engines),  the extent  of  its  previous use, and the addition of other
wastes (such as  degreasing solvents)  to  the oil.   Because its composition
varies, waste oil cannot  be easily  characterized.   The approach taken in this
study was  to  compile  available waste oil composition data and look at the
distribution  of  concentrations of contaminants.  The median, 75th percentile, and
90th percentile  concentrations were calculated for  each contaminant.  The
waste oil composition used  for the  modeling represented the 90th percentile
concentrations so that risk estimation would err on the side of overestimating
rather than underestimating the risk.

     Two  air  dispersion models were used  to estimate ground-level concentrations
of contaminants  from  sources  burning waste  oil:  the Industrial Source
Complex (ISC) model,  and  the Hanna-Gifford model.   The ISC model,  a point-source
                                      45

-------
 model used to estimate maximum concentrations around a single point  source or
 several point sources, was used to estimate ground-level concentrations of
 threshold contaminants.  The Hanna-Gifford model, an area-source model used
 to estimate ground-level concentrations from many sources throughout an
 entire area (such as a city and its suburbs), was used as the "urban model"
 to determine concentrations of both threshold and nonthreshold contaminants from
 the widespread burning of waste oil.  Air dispersion modeling results are
 presented.

      For proper interpretation of the results, it is important to know several
 of the assumptions used in the modeling.  Emissions of metals from waste oil burning
 can vary from 20 percent (or less) to 100 percent, depending on boiler operation
 and condition.  This range is very wide, but a review of data in the literature
 indicated that the emission of about 50 percent of the metals in the waste oil
 is common.  In the dispersion modeling, it was assumed that 75 percent of the
 metals are emitted.  Although this assumption is realistic, it could result
 in overestimating risk in some cases.  A limited amount of modeling  was also
 done based on an assumed emission of 50 percent of the metals in the oil.

      Destruction removal efficiencies (DRE's)  of organics in waste oil boilers
 were assumed to be 97 percent.  Some additional modeling was done based on a
 99 percent DRE.  Some recently completed waste oil test burns done as part of
 a  current study for the EPA confirm that the usual DRE exceeds 99 percent
 (occasionally,  slightly less).  Again,  the DRE assumption used in the modeling
 is realistic,  but may err slightly on the side of overestimating risk.

      The concentrations calculated from the air dispersion modeling  were compared
 with the EEL's  and the reference concentrations for threshold and nonthreshold
 contaminants (see Section 5 for detailed results).  The threshold contaminants
 that appear to  present a potentially significant risk are barium,  hydrogen
 chloride,  and  lead.   Concentrations of  each of these substances  from sources
 burning  waste  oil could have a significant impact on air quality.  The other
 threshold pollutants (cadmium, chromium, zinc,  naphthalene,  toluene,  and
 ijl.l-trichloroethane)  do not appear to have a serious impact on air  quality or
 pose a significant health risk.

      Potential  cancer risk estimates are also  summarized.   At a  risk  level of
 approximately one cancer in 10,000 or lO"4,  chromium is  a contaminant of conern.
 At  a risk level of 10~5,  arsenic,  and in some  cases  dioxins,  become additional
 contaminants of concern.   At  a risk level  of 10~6,  or one excess  cancer in a
 million  people,  cadmium also  becomes a  contaminant of concern.

      Other  waste oil nonthreshold  contaminants  pose  lesser  cancer risk levels
 of  10~7  (carbon tetrachloride, PCB's, tetrachloroethylene,  and
 1.1,1-trichloroethane)  or  10~^  (benzene and  trichloroethylene).

Waste Oil Storage

     The purpose of  this  study was  to evaluate  the potential  for environmental
contamination from waste oil  storage  systems.
                                       46

-------
     Generally, stored waste oil falls into one of two categories:   automotive/diesel
or industrial.  Automotive/diesel waste oils consist primarily of crankcase
oils generated by cars, trucks, and other vehicles.  Because these oils are
usually consistent in composition and levels of contamination, increased
contamination as a result of mixing the oils from different sources is not
likely.  The contaminants that are common in these oils are the metals
barium, chromium, and lead.  Lead is still the contaminant of greatest concern,
despite the fact that the decrease in the use of leaded gasoline has lessened
its significance.  These waste oils also contain some potentially hazardous
polynuclear aromatic compounds (PNA's).

     Industrial waste oils are generated by industry.  They include metal
working, hydraulic process, electrical, refrigeration, and turbine oils.
These waste oils can contain a wide range of potentially hazardous constituents,
including halogenated solvents, aromatic solvents, polychlorinated biphenyls
(PCB's), and heavy metals  (cadmium, chromium, and zinc).  The levels of these
contaminants range from very high to essentially zero.

     Waste oil is stored in below-ground tanks and 55-gallon drums.  Most of
the tanks now  in use are made of unprotected steel, but this practice is
changing, particularly for below-ground tanks.  For example, to avoid corrosion
problems, the major oil companies are replacing most of their below-ground
steel  tanks that fail with fiberglass units.

     Tank sizes vary widely, but the vast majority of them  (both below-
ground and above-ground) hold  500 gallons or less.  Some facilities, however,
have 5,000- to 10,000-gallon  tanks, and collector-processors of waste oil
occasionally have tanks that hold a few hundred thousand gallons.

     Waste oil that is lost as a result of  spills or leaks may contaminate
the land, groundwaters, surface waters, and even the air.  The current study
focuses on an  evaluation of soil contamination.  Evaluation w«?.s limited to
the rate or depth of penetration of waste oil  into the  soil.

     A worst-case scenario approach was selected for determination of the
environmental  impact of losses from waste oil  storage systems.  This scenario
describes the  worst conditions for environmental contamination that reasonably
can be expected  to occur.  If  environmental contamination  is  low under these
conditions, more  typical situations are likely to  result in little or no
contamination.

     Environmental  contamination  from waste oil loss  from  above-ground tanks
can  result  in seepage  of  spilled  oil  from  the  impounded area  around the
storage tank  or  from  leaks in the  tank bottom.  The  time required  for  spilled
oil  to contaminate  a  depth of 30.5 centimeters (12 inches)  of  soil depends  on
 the  type  of  soil present within the  secondary  containment  (impoundment) area.
It is  predicted  that  a spill  with an  average depth of 30.5 centimeters within
 the  secondary containment  area will  penetrate  a typical sandy soil to  a depth
of 30.5 centimeters  in only  a few minutes.  The amount  of  oil lost depends  on soil
porosity, but it will  certainly be more  than 25 percent.   Because  cleanup times
                                       47

-------
 range  from an hour  to  several days, much of the oil will be lost before it
 can be cleaned up;  thus, a  secondary containment system with a sandy soil
 bottom is virtually useless.  The rate of oil seepage is much slower if the
 soils  in the secondary containment area are silt or clay, and expeditious
 cleanup of spilled  oil lessens the loss considerably.

      Leaks from the bottom  of above-ground tanks also pose severe problems if
 the soil under and  around the tank is sandy.  In the event of a major rupture,
 oil may reach a shallow (100 centimeters or 39 inches deep) water table in a
 matter of minutes.  It would take several days for an oil to reach the groundwater
 table  if the tank were placed on a silty soil.  Regular monitoring of oil
 levels within the tank is necessary to assure that a failure does not go
 undetected.

      Failure of an underground tank will result in seepage of oil into the
 surrounding soils.  Because leaks are not visible from the surface,  they are
 likely to go undetected for a much longer period than those from above-ground
 tanks.  Failure of a tank placed in an average sandy soil may result in
 oil migration to a water table 100 centimeters (39 inches)  deep in less than
 an hour.   An average silty soil may lengthen migration times to 1 or
 2  months.   Because of the long periods of time that may elapse before
 detection of oil loss from a below-ground tank,  the potential for environmental
 contamination from a below-ground tank in a silty soil is still significant.
 Clay is the only type of soil that is believed to be safe for burying
 below-ground tanks,  and this belief  may be overly optimistic.   Recent
 research  indicates that interaction  of  some organics with clay can greatly
 increase  its  permeability.

      Spills from containers  and  drums will  result  in some seepage of oil  into
 soils.  Depth of  oil penetration was  evaluated for  both  catastrophic spills
 and sequential  small spills.  Catastrophic  spills  tend to spread  over a large
 surface area.   Soil  penetration  varies  with  soil  type and the  type of oil
 spilled.  A light  oil  spilled on a gravel surface results in  the  deepest oil
 migration.  Sequential  small spills do  not  spread over such a  large  area, but
 the repeated  spillage usually occurs  in the  same location.  The result is a deeper
 localized penetration of oil,  even though the  total  volume of  oil may be small.

     In general, groundwater contamination due to spills  from  containers and
 drums should be minimal.  Because  cleanup of these spills is typically minimized,
 however, some soil contamination can be expected, and leaching of some oil
 components from oil-contaminated soil may occur.

Waste Oil as a Dust  Suppressant

     The objective of this study was to evaluate the potential for harm to human
health  or to the environment presented by the use of waste oil as a dust
suppressant.  This study is  one of three funded by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste, to assess the environmental impact
of common waste oil  practices.  The practices covered in the other two studies
are waste oil storage and use of waste oil as a fuel.
                                      48

-------
      This study is divided into three main parts:   1)  the  characterization of
 the use of oil as a dust suppressant, 2)  the environmental fate of waste oil
 contaminants,  and 3)  a risk assessment.   The results indicate  that the use of
 waste oil as  a dust suppressant is potentially harmful to  human health and the
 environment.

      The waste oil management system consists of generators, collectors,
 processors, and reusers.  Most road oiling is done by collectors, many of whom
 also participate in other segments of the industry.   For example, these collectors
 may also reprocess or blend used oils into boiler fuels.   Some road oiling is
 done by local  government agencies and private industries,  which may also be
 generators.   Because  of the large number  of participants and the undocumented
 nature of the  collection/processing segments of the industry,  tracing the movement
 of  waste oil  is difficult and it is often necessary to make estimates based on
 numerous interviews.

      In addition to the projects already  listed in this section, the Office of
 Solid Wastes  is considering listing all non-product refinery wastes under
 RCRA.

 Leaking Underground Storage Tanks

      The Agency has authorized a national survey of leaking underground storage
 tanks  not containing  hazardous wastes to  determine how many tanks there are,
 how many are leaking,  and what geophysical factors are associated with leaking
 tanks.   Initially,  this study focuses on  motor fuel storage.   Subsequent studies
 may deal with  other kinds of underground  tanks and above-ground tanks and
 pipelines.  A  pilot exposure study for leaking underground motor fuel storage
 tanks  will be  undertaken by the Exposure  Evaluation Division of this office.

      It  has been recommended,  therefore,  that the  Office of Toxic Substance
 survey be extended  in the initial data gathering phase to  include additional
 types  of  underground  storage tanks.   The  Office of Solid Waste is in the
 process  of developing regulations for the control  of used  oil  under Section 3012
 of  the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.   These  regulations will address
 all  aspects of  used oil recycling from generation  to final usage, including
 storage.   Since storage of used  oil  in underground tanks is common,
particularly by generators such  as  service stations, there is an important
 interface  of this project with the  leaking underground storage tanks project.

     It has been recommended,  therefore,  that  the  Office of Toxic Substances
 include used oil tanks  in its  survey  of underground  gasoline storage tanks.  The
regulation of certain underground storage tanks  under  the  Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act may be  deferred  until an overall  control  scheme for leaking
underground storage tanks  is resolved.  OSW has  regulations to cover tanks
used to store hazardous wastes and is  in  the process of revising them.
                                        49

-------
      It has been recommended that the following facilities be included in the
 initial survey of tanks.

      •    Service stations - There are approximately 113,000 service stations;
           each typically has a single 500 gallon underground tank for used oil
           storage.

      •    Automotive repair shops - There are approximately 123,800 repair shops;
           approximately 93,000 of these store used oil in a single 500 gallon
           underground tank, and 30,800 store in a single"500 gallon above ground  tank.

      •    Automobile dealerships - There are approximately 63,000 dealers, each
           typically storing in a 500 gallon underground tank.

      •    Fleet maintenance garages - There are approximately 44,600 garages.
           Approximately 42,000 store in a single 600 gallon underground tank,
           and 2,600 store in a single 600 gallon above ground tank.

      •    Airplane service facilities - There are approximately 1500 airplane
           service facilities each storing used oil in a single 250 gallon above
           ground tank.

 At these facilities, most used oil is stored in underground tanks,  and many of
 them will be addressed  under the Office of Toxic Substances'  leaking underground
 storage tank program.  The Office of Solid Waste does not  have significant
 data on these facilities on which to base a Resource Conservation and Recovery
 Act regulatory strategy.

      Additional studies are being conducted within the Office of Toxic Substances
 in support of various sections of the Toxic Substances Control Act.   More
 complete descriptions of these projects  are not available.

 OFFICE OF EMERGENCY  AND REMEDIAL RESPONSE

      The Office of Emergency and Remedial Response (OERR)  is  responsible  for
 implementing the Comprehensive Environmental Response,  Compensation,  and
 Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA or Superfund)  and Section 311 of the Clean
 Water Act (CWA).

      CERCLA  provides for liability,  compensation,  cleanup,  and emergency
 response for hazardous  substances  released into the  environment (land,  air,
 water)  and the cleanup  of  inactive hazardous waste sites.   The Emergency
 Response Division  (ERD)  is  currently engaged in rulemaking  to  amend  Subpart H
 of  the  National  Contingency Plan (NCP) pursuant to Section  311(c)(2)(G) of
 the CWA and  Section  105  of  CERCLA.   Subpart  H specifies  testing and  data
 requirements  for inclusion  of a  dispersant,  surface  collecting agent,  or
 biological additive  on  the  NCP Product Schedule, and  establishes  the  procedures
 by which an  On-Scene Coordination  (OSC) may  authorize the use  of  products
 listed  on  the  Schedule  in responding  to an oil  discharge in navigable
waters.
                                        50

-------
      In  addition,  OERR has  the responsibility for  several  CWA regulations,
 including:   the  Hazardous Substances  Pollution Prevention  for Facilities
 Subject  to  Permitting Requirements  of Section 402  (40  CFR  112); the Hazardous
 Substances  Pollution Prevention for Facilities Subject to  Permitting Requirements
 of  Section  402  (40 CFR 151);  and,  the Discharge of Oil regulation  (40 CFR 110).

      The Emergency Response Division  currently is  examining  the possibility
 of  revising the  promulgated oil pollution prevention regulation.   In 1974, in
 accordance  with  oil pollution prevention regulations (40 CFR 112), EPA initiated
 the Oil  Spill Prevention, Control,  and Countermeasure  Program.  The primary
 objectives  of the  program are to reduce the  number and volume of nontransportation-
 related  oil spills and to prevent any such spills  that did occur from reaching
 navigable waters of the United States.  This is accomplished by requiring
 each facility that stores oil in quantities  as set forth in  40 CFR 112 to
 develop  and implement an oil  spill  prevention control  and  countermeasure
 compliance  plan, to have it certified by a registered  professional engineer,
 and to have it available for  review by the EPA Regional Office during all
 facility inspections.   Inspected facilities  that are in violation  of the
 regulations are  subject to  EPA enforcement proceedings and possible civil
 penalties.   The  Emergency Response  Division  is in  the  process of amending the
 oil discharge regulation (40  CFR 110).  This regulation was  promulgated in
 1970.  Despite significant  changes  in the Clean Water  Act, only minor changes
 have been made to  the regulation.   In addition, the U.S. Coast Guard needs a
 determination by the EPA Administratior of the quantity of oil determined to
 be  harmful  in the  marine environment  of a deepwater port in  order  to be able
 to  implement the Deepwater  Port Act.   Finally,  EPA has received a  number of
 requests concerning possible  changes  in the  regulation.  The amendments of
 40  CFR are  scheduled to be  promulgated in June 1985.   The  Emergency Response
 Division is also studying the feasibility of listing gasoline as a hazardous
 substance under  the designation authority of Section 102 of  CERCLA.

 OFFICE OF WATER

      This office is responsible for EPA activities pertaining to the management
 of  water programs.   These responsibilities include program policy  development
 and evaluation,  standards development,  overview, and technical support.

     There  are four major offices within the Office of Water.  Three of these
 offices  have responsibilities  relevant to the petroleum products industry.
 Thay  include the Office of  Water Regulations and Standards, which has major
 responsibilities under  the  Clean Water Act;  the Office of Drinking Water,
which is  responsible for Agency activities under the Safe Drinking Water Act;
 and  the  Office of Water Enforcement and Permits, which develops policies for
 compliance  monitoring and enforcement  actions  and  for  management of the
 National  Pollutant  Discharge  Elimination System under  the Clean Water Act.
                                       51

-------
 OFFICE OF WATER REGULATIONS AND STANDARDS

      The  Office of Water Regulations and Standards is responsible  for developing
 an overall program strategy for the achievement of water  pollution abatement
 and control.   As  such,  it assures  the coordination of all national water-
 related activities within this water program strategy and monitors national
 progress  toward the achievement of water quality goals.   The  Office  is responsible
 for development of effluent standards for industrial  sources, water  quality
 monitoring,  and ocean dumping  regulations.

      Within the Office  of Water Regulations  and Standards,  three divisions
 have responsibilities that could involve petroleum products —  the Effluent
 Guidelines  Division,  the Criteria  and Standards Division,  and the  Monitoring
 and Data  Support Division.  Currently,  the major effort concerning petroleum
 products  within the Office of  Water Regulations and Standards is being
 conducted by  the Effluent Guidelines Division.

      The  Effluent  Guidelines Division is charged with the following
 responsibilities:

      •    Develop  industrial point source effluent limitations  and pretreatment
          standards for controlling the discharge of  toxic, nonconventional,
          and conventional pollutants into the  Nation's waterways.

      •    Provide  engineering  and  analytical technical expertise in  defining the
          most appropriate technologies for  pollution control.

      •    . Conduct  in-depth technical studies relating to  alternative treatment
          technologies  and recycling and reuse  of wastewater to minimize
          the overall discharge of all  toxics into the environment.

      •    Conduct  engineering  analyses  and data acquisition to evaluate the
          occurrence  and  impact of toxic pollutants in the raw waste, treated
          wastewaters,  and sludge  streams discharged  by industry.

      •    Provide  assistance to State and Regional Permit Writers  in resolving
          engineering,  economic, and scientific  problems  arising from permitting
          activities  based upon effluent guidelines.

      Relevant to the  study of  petroleum distillates,  the  Effluent Guidelines
Division  recently  has completed a  technical  background document and a 50,000-page
rulemaking record  concerning wastewater  discharge  from the disposal and
industrial production processes involving petroleum distillates.   Industry
source identification,  environmental  release to water and land data,  economic
data, engineering  data, control technology assessments, and control cost
evaluations have been compiled.

     The Criteria  and Standards Division, which  is responsible for developing water
quality standards,  is investigating effluents containing  toluene, benzene, and
napthalene discharged from commerical or  industrial production processes,  disposal,
and spills within  the petroleum products  industry.  Ambient water quality criteria
documents are available.

                                       52

-------
     The Monitoring and Data Support Division prepares industrial environmental
assessments which address impacts  from  industrial discharges to waters and sewage
treatment plants.  Environmental assessments have been prepared for the Petroleum
Refining and Offshore Oil and Gas  Effluent Regulations.

OFFICES OF DRINKING WATER

     The Office of Drinking Water  is responsible for the implementation and
coordination of the programs established by the Safe Drinking Water Act.  It
establishes standards, develops regulations, policies, and guidelines for
drinking water quality and treatment requisite to protect the public health
and welfare.  It also develops regulations specifying minimum requirements for
the State programs designed to protect  underground sources of drinking water from
endangerment by subsurface emplacement  of fluid through wells.  Where State
programs are insufficient or nonexistent, it develops State-Specific Federal
Regulations and implements the program.

     This Office is currently developing drinking water standards or guidelines
for several petroleum based products including benzene, toluene, xylenes, and
ethyl benzene.  A draft Health Advisory on November 2 Fuel Oil/Kerosine has also
been prepared.  The Office also has an  interest in the use of petroleum asphalts
or coatings in drinking water piping systems and tanks.

OFFICE OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES

     The Office of Toxic Substances, as mandated by the Toxic Substances
Control Act, is responsible for developing and operating Agency programs and
policies for new and existing chemicals.  In each of these areas, the Office
Director is responsible for information collection, data development, health,
environmental, and economic assessments, and negotiated regulatory control   .
actions.  The Office Director also is responsible for coordinating communication
with the industrial community, environmental groups, and other parties
on matters relating to the implementation of the Toxic Substances Control Act
and managing the joint planning of toxics research under the auspices of the
Chemical Testing and Assessment Research Committee.  In fulfilling these
responsibilities, the Office of Toxic Substances is investigating several
facets of the petroleum products industry; the major projects are described
in the following subsection.

Used Motor Oil Chemical Advisory

     In February of 1984, EPA's Office  of Pesticides and Toxic Substances issued
a chemical advisory to service station  workers, engine mechanics, and any other
workers who handle used motor oil.  They are advised to minimize skin contact
with used oil and promptly remove any used oil from their skin.  In a laboratory
study, mice developed skin cancer after their skin was exposed to used motor oil
twice a week without being washed off for most of their life span.  While this
one study is not conclusive, substances found to cause cancer in laboratory animals
may also cause cancer in humans.  The advisory presents recommendations for the
proper handling of used motor oil.
                                      53

-------
     Chemical Advisories discuss toxic effects of chemicals of concern, routes
of exposure and alternative methods of reducing risks.  They are written by
EPA's Office of Toxic Substances after consultation with interested parties
which could include companies, public interest groups, and other agencies.
They are designed to be used where an increased awareness of potential risk is
likely to lead to meaningful precautions, and are addressed and distributed to
individuals or organizations for whom the information is most useful.  Chemical
Advisories are intended to encourage voluntary risk reduction actions by
individuals or organizations in instances where regulatory control is not
appropriate or as interim measures while regulatory action is pursued.

Synthetic Fuel Premanufacturing Notice

     Synthetic fuels may be submitted to OTS under Premanufacture Notice (PMN)
Regulations.  The Chemical Engineering Branch reviews such notices to identify
and estimate environmental releases or worker exposure throughout the industrial-
commercial cycle.  Currently there are no PMN reviews underway.  PMN's are
often received for petroleum additives.  For both petroleum additives and
synthetic fuels, much of the work has to be based on analogy to what happens in
the petroleum industry.

Catalytically Cracked Clarified Oil

     Regulatory activities are being considered by the Office of Toxic Substances
under TSCA for Catalytically Cracked Clarified Oil (CCCO).  The Risk Management
Branch is reviewing data submitted from the American Petroleum Institute (API)
during 1982.  The API study of lifetime mouse skin painting indicated the positive
control and the test material both caused significant response, but the onset
of neoplasia development was much more rapid for the test material than for
the established oncogen.  It is general knowledge that petroleum oils which
contain polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) are likely to be carcinogenic.

     According to the public TSCA Inventory, approximately 18.5 billion pounds of
Catalytically cracked clarified oil were reported as produced or imported in
1977.  Because the data base on Catalytically cracked clarified oil is incomplete,
it is recommended that the Risk Management Branch review the advisability of
OTS-initiated contacts with industry to obtain additional information on a
voluntary basis from manufacturers and processors.  This information should
specifically include known and probable uses of Catalytically cracked clarified
oil, the extent of current monitoring for PAH during the manufacture and
processing of this product, and the availability/feasibility of alternative
processes to obtain comparable products.

Provalent 4-A

     The Chemical Hazard Identification Branch of OTS has reviewed preliminary
results of a skin painting study reporting that each of two tested materials
(ARCO LB-7979 and Provalent 4A (catalytically and/or thermally cracked petroleum
distillates)) had produced skin tumors when applied to the shaven skin of mice.
The submitter stated that all tumors observed thus far had been characterized as
benign by the performing laboratory.  The submitter also stated that the
incidence of apparently benign skin tumors observed at this stage of this study
does not indicate a substantial health risk to humans.

                                     54

-------
     It was  recommended  that  the  Atlantic  Richfield  company and Mobil Oil
Corporation  should be  requested to  provide the  CAS numbers of the components
in their products.   It was  also recommended that  EPA transmit a copy of a
status report  to  the Mobil  Oil Corporation,  the Standard Oil Company (Indiana),
NIOSH, OSHA, DOE, DOT  and OWWM.

ETHYLTOLUENES, TRIMETHYLBENZENES, AND  Cg AROMATIC HYDROCARBON FRACTION:
PROPOSED TEST  RULE

     In its  Tenth Report, the Interagency  Testing Committee (ITC) designated
mixed ethyltoluenes  (ET) and  1,2,4-trimethylbenzene  (1,2,4-TMB) for priority
consideration  for environmental and health effects testing.  In its Eleventh
Report, the  ITC recommended that  the other trimethylbenzenes be considered
for testing.   Under  section 4(a)  of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA),
EPA is proposing  that  manufacturers and processors of  the Cg aromatic hydrocarbon
fraction, which contains ethyltoluene  (ortho-,  meta- and para- isomers)
and the 1,2,3-, 1,3,5-and 1,2,4-isomers of trimethylbenzene as primary components,
test the Cg  aromatic fraction for health effects, including neurotoxicity,
mutagenicity,  teratogenicity, reproductive effects and carcinogenicity (in
the event the  results  of mutagenicity  studies are positive).  Health effects
testing would  be performed  according to test standards prescribed in a subsequent
rulemaking.  Environmental  effects  testing is not being proposed at this time.
This notice,  constitutes EPA's response to  the ITC's  designation of ET (mixed
isomers) and 1,2,4-TMB as priority  candidates for testing, and to the ITC's
recommendation that  the other trimethylbenzenes (1,2,3- and 1,3,5-isomers) be
considered for testing.

OFFICE OF PESTICIDE  PROGRAMS

     The Office of Pesticide Programs  is responsible for implementing the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act  and certain provisions of
the Federal Food, Drug and  Cosmetic Act.   The Office coordinates all Agency:
programs concerning  pesticide management and regulation, including the establishment
of tolerance levels  for pesticide residues which  occur in or on food; the
registration and re-registration  of pesticides; the  monitoring of pesticide
levels in food, humans, and nontarget  fish and  wildlife; and the preparation
of guidelines  and standards for products in the development of more effective
pesticide control programs.  In addition,  the Office provides policy direction
to technical and manpower training  activities in  the pesticide area; develops
research needs and monitoring requirements for  the pesticide program; reviews
impact statements dealing with pesticides; and  carries out assigned
international  activities.
                                      55

-------
      The  Hazard Evaluation Division of  the  Office  of  Pesticide Programs, which
 is  responsible  for  performing  risk assessments  on  proposed  and existing
 pesticide uses, currently  is investigating  human and  environmental exposure
 to  petroleum distillates used  as  carrying agents for  pesticides.  Areas
 of  concern include  food residues,  applicator  exposure,  and  general environmental
 exposure  from pesticidal uses.  No additional information is available.

 OFFICE  OF RESEARCH  AND DEVELOPMENT

      The  Office of  Research and Development is  responsible  for performing all
 inter and intra Agency research activities.   The identified projects relating to
 petroleum distillate  products  are listed below.

 Review  of Vapor Phase Hydrocarbons

      Information on vapor-phase hydrocarbons  presented  in this document covers
 basic atmospheric chemistry relative to secondary  products, especially ozone;
 sources and emissions; ambient air concentrations;  relationship of precursor
 hydrocarbons  to resultant  ozone levels in ambient  air;  health effects; and
 welfare effects.  The principal conclusions from this document are as follows.
 Hydrocarbons  are a  principal contributor to the  formation of ozone and other
 photochemical oxidants; however,  no fixed single quantitative relationship
 between precursor hydrocarbons and resulting  ozone  concentrations can be defined.
 This  relationship varies from  site to site  depending  on local precursor mixes,
 transport  considerations,  and meteorological  factors.   Consequently no single
 quantitative  relationship  can be  defined nationwide.  While specific hydrocarbon
 compounds  can be of concern to public health  and welfare, as a class, this group
 of materials  cannot be considered  a hazard  to human health  or welfare at or
 even  well,- above those concentrations observed in the ambient air.

 Health Assessment Document  for Toluene

      Considerable information is available on the effects of toluene on
 humans and  experimental animals after inhalation exposures.  The data on oral
 exposure are  much less satisfactory, although one acceptable subchronic oral
 study using rats  is available.  No  information on dermal exposures suitable for
 use in human  risk assessment was encountered.

      The subchronic and chronic inhalation data  lend themselves less to the
 definition  of dose-response relationships.  Most of the reports of human
 exposures  failed  to define  precisely levels or durations of exposure, involved
 relatively small  numbers of exposed  individuals, and did not adequately control
 exposure to other toxic agents.  The animal data are of little use in supporting
 the human data  because humans appear to be more  sensitive to toluene than the
experimental  animals on which data  are available.

     Qualitatively,  dermal  exposure  to toluene can  cause skin damage, as is the
case with many  solvents,  but systemic signs of intoxication are likely to occur
only  in cases of  gross overexposure.
                                        56

-------