SAI
Human Exposure
To Atmospheric Concentrations
Of Selected Chemicals
Volume IS
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711

-------
ATTACHMENT A
HUMAN EXPOSURE TO ATMOSPHERIC
CONCENTRATIONS OF SELECTED CHEMICALS
EPA Contract No. 68-02-3066
SAI No. 58-EF81-156R2
10 February 1982
Prepared for
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
by
Systems Applications, Incorporated
Amended by EPA
to reflect public comments

-------
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A-l 	 Acetaldehyde
APPENDIX A-2 	 Acrolein
APPENDIX A-3 	 Allyl Chloride
APPENDIX A-4 	 Benzyl Chloride
APPENDIX A-5 	 Beryllium
APPENDIX A-6 	 Carbon Tetrachloride
APPENDIX A-7 	 Chlorobenzene (p-Dichlorobenzene
and o-Dichlorobenzene)
APPENDIX A-8 	 Chloroform
APPENDIX A-9 	 Chloroprene
APPENDIX A-l0 	 Cresol
APPENDIX A-11 	 Dimethylnitrosamine
APPENDIX A-l2 	 Dioxin
APPENDIX A-13 	 Epichlorohydrin
APPENDIX A-14 	 Ethylene Oxide
APPENDIX A-l5 	 Formaldehyde
APPENDIX A-16 	 Hexachlorocylopentadiene
APPENDIX A-l7 	 Manganese
APPENDIX A-l8 	 1,1,1-Trichloroethane (Methyl Chloroform)
APPENDIX A-19 	 Methylene Chloride
APPENDIX A-20 	 Nitrosomorpholine
APPENDIX A-21 	 Nickel
APPENDIX A-22 	 Nitrobenzene
A-I

-------
APPENDIX
A-23 —
--- PCB
APPENDIX
A-24 - -
— Phenol
APPENDIX
A- 25 —
— Phosgene
APPENDIX
A-26 —
--- Propylene Oxide
APPENDIX
A-27 —
--- Toluene
APPENDIX
A-28 —
--- Trichloroethylene
APPENDIX
A-29
--- Xylene
The following three pages were located at the beginning of each
appendix. In order to reduce the reproduction cost, all duplications
of these pages have been removed. Thus, each appendix will begin on
page four.
A-II

-------
Each chemical was studied as one of a set of 35 chemicals. A corv-
plete description of the program is given in the parent document to this
attachment. The table of contents of the parent report 1s presented as
Figure 1 here. Specific questions that the reader may have about pre-
sentations 1n this attachment are most probably addressed in the relevant
section or sections as described in Figure 1.
This attachment consists of the following elements:
>	A table of physical and chemical properties of the chemi-
cal .
>. A sutnnary of emission sources, modes, and rates.
>	A map showing major, specific point sources.
>	Input parameters for dispersion calculations.
>	Exposure/dosage tables for each type of source analyzed
and a summary for all sources.
>	A reference list for the emissions study.
A few definitions—described more completely in the main text—are
presented here as an aid to the reader.
>	EXPOSURE - The number of people in the United States esti-
mated to experience annual average atmospheric concentra-
tions equal to or greater than the stated level.
>	DOSAGE - The sum over the population of the product of con-
centration (jigm/m^), times number of people exposed at that
concentration. This is a potential concentration, and
does not represent material actually ingested or absorbed
into body tissues.
>	EMISSIONS ANALYSIS - A review by one or more of various
methods including surveys of literature or state and
federal data, conmunication with, or visits to, staff of
the operator of the sources to determine sources and
source locations, and to estimate
- emission rates-adjusted to 1978
A-III

-------
-	type of source (e.g. chimney, vent, open surface, etc).
>	DISPERSION ANALYSIS - Use of a computer program to compute
annual average concentration patterns given wind, turbu-
lence and emissions data.
>	POPULATION ANALYSIS - Use of a computer program to extract
site-specific population patterns at the finest resolution
available from U.S. Census Bureau 1970 census files.
Populations are scaled to 1978 levels.
>	SOURCE TYPE - Three source types are defined:
-	Major, specific point sources, each emitting a signifi-
cant fraction of the total emissions of a studied
chemical. These sources are treated using parameters
appropriate to each specific source.
-	General point sources - other point sources warranting
a detailed dispersion analysis but which are members of
a group of sources too numerous to treat
individually. For such sources, a prototype analysis
is done, and results are multiplied by the estimated
number of sources.
-	Area Sources - sources which are so small and numerous
that their concentration patterns are inseparable. Such
sources are treated as emissions per unit area over
identified areas.
A-IV

-------
CONTENTS
PREFACE			i
FIGURES		iii
TABLES		iv
1.	EXECUTIVE SUMMARY		1
2.	DATA BASES		26
Emissions Data		26
Meteorological Data		35
Population Distribution Data Bases		44
Atmospheric Transformations of Toxic Compounds		54
3.	EXPOSURE-DOSAGE APPROACH		84
Major (Specific) Point Sources		84
Prototype Point Source Exposure and Dosage
Estimations		110
Area Source Modeling Approach		144
4.	UNCERTAINTIES		193
Uncertainties Involved in Emissions Estimations		193
Uncertainties in Exposure/Dosage Estimations		194
REFERENCES		216
ATTACHMENTS
A Summary of Human Exposure Estimations for
35 Selected Chemicals		A-l
B Supplementary Document for Human Exposure
Estimations				B-l
A-V

-------
APPENDIX A-l 	 Acetaldehyde
ACETALDEHYDE CHEMICAL DATA
Nomencl ature
Chemical Abstract Service Registry Number: 75-07-0
Synonyms: Acetic Aldehyde; Ethyl Aldehyde; Ethanal
Chemical Formula
Molecular Weight: 44.05
Molecular Formula: CjH^O,
Molecular Structure:
0
CH -C*
H
Chemical anc' Physical Properties
Physical State at STP: Liquid - flanriable, pungent odor
Boiling Point: 20.S°C at 760mm
Melting Point: -121°C
Density: 0.7834 at 18SC/4°C
Vapor Pressure: 923 Torrs at 25°C
Vapor Density: 1.52
Solubility: Infinite (hot
Log Partition Coefficient (Octanol/H^O): 0.43
Atmospheric Reactivity
Transformation Products: Peroxyacetyl Nitrate; Formaldehyde
Reactivity Toward 0H-: 4 x Butane
Reactivity Toward 0^: No reaction
Reactivity Toward Photolysis: s: 0.5 x Formaldehyde
Major Atmospheric Precursors: Hydrocarbons (C3 +)
Formation Reactivity: Equilibrium concentration ~ 5* NMHC

-------
1-5
I. SOURCES
A.	PRODUCTION
Acetaldehyde (C2H^0) is produced by ethylene oxidation processes, such as the
Wacker process, or by vapor phase oxidation and dehydrogenation of ethanol.
The latter method has declined rapidly since the ethylene oxidation facilities
have come on-stream. Publicker is the only company that uses the ethanol process.1
In the ethanol process, ethanol vapors and preheated air are mixed. The exit
gases, containing ethanol and acetaldehyde, are scrubbed and the solution is
rectified in a column to produce acetaldehyde. In the direct oxidation of ethylene,
air or oxygen can be used. A water solution of cupric chloride and a small
amount of palladium chloride is generally used as a catalyst. The gaseous reaction
mixture containing steam and unreacted ethylene in addition to reaction product
gases goes to a water scrubber, where acetaldehyde is removed in solution.1
There are currently four companies at five locations that produce acetaldehyde
in the United States. The locations of the plants and the 1978 estimated capacity
1 ' 2
and production levels for each site are shown in Table 1-1.' An estimated
1000 million lb of acetaldehyde was produced in 1978.1,2
B.	USES
Acetaldehyde is used exclusively as a chemical intermediate to produce other
chemicals. The largest end-use is in acetic acid manufacture, which accounts
for an estimated 690 million lb of production. The second largest end-use is
for peracetic acid production, which consumed an estimated 100 million lb in
1978. Other uses of acetaldehyde include pentaerythritol (80 million lb),
pyridines (40 million lb), glyoxal (40 million lb), 1,3-butylene glycol (20 million
lb), and miscellaneous uses (remaining 30 million lb). There were no reported
exports of acetaldehyde in 1978. Acetaldehyde end-uses are summarized in
Table 1-2.1,2
Acetic acid is produced by two companies at three locations by the catalytic
oxidation of acetaldehyde. Source locations are shown in Table 1-3.3'4

-------
Table 1-1. Acetaldehyde Producers3
1970	1978
k Capacity Production0 Geographical Location
Company	Location	Ib/yr)	(10^ lh/yr)	Latitude/Longitude
Celanese
Bay City, TX
300
204
28
51
45/96
01
00

Clear Lake, TX
600
100
29
37
17/95
03
51
Texas Eastman
Longview, TX
500
340
32
25
55/94
41
06
Publicker Industries
Philadelphia, PA
65
44
39
53
30/75
12
18
Shell Chemical
Norco, LA
	5
4
30
00
11/90
23
42
Total

1 47n
1000





aSee ref3. 1 and 2.
^Union Carbide shut down 200 million lb of capacity at Institute and S. Charleston, WV, in the
first quarter of 1978.
Q
Total production distributed over individual sites based on site capacity compared to total
industry capacity.

-------
7-7
Table 1-2. 1978 Acetaldehyde End-Use Distribution*
End-Use
Usage
(*}
Acetaldehyde Use
(million lb/yr)
Acetic acid
69
690
Peracetic acid
10
100
Pentaeryrhritol
8
80
Pyridenes
4
40
Glyoxal
4
40
1,3-Butylene glycol
2
20
Miscellaneous
3
30
Total
100
1000
*See refs. 1 and 2.

-------
Table 1-3. Acetic Acid Producers3
Company
1970
Acetic Acid
Capacity
Location
1978
Acetalde^hydo
Usage
(10G Ib/yr)
Geographical Location
Celanese
Bay City, TX
110
6U
20
51
45/96
01
00

Clear Lake, TX
600
373
29
37
17/95
03
51
Tennessee Eastman
Kingsport, TN
400
249
36
31
27/08
32
29
Total

1110
GOO





See refs. 3 and 4.
Total acetaldehyde usage distributed over all three sites based on acetic acid capacity.

-------
1-9
Peracetic acid is manufactured by the liquid-phase catalytic oxidation of
acetaldehyde at three sites in the United States. Source locations are
shown in Table 1-4.3
Pentaerythritol is produced by the aldol condensation of acetaldehyde and for-
maldehyde in the presence of lime or caustic at ambient temperature and pressure.
The four manufacturing sites are shown in Table 1-5.3'5
Synthetic pyridenes are produced as a co-product with beta-picoline by the vapor
phase reaction of acetaldehyde, ammonia, and formaldehyde by two companies in
the United States. Source locations are shown in Table 1-6.3,6
Glyoxal is produced by two companies by the nitric acid oxidation of acetaldehyde
in an autoclave at two locations as shown in Table 1-7.3
1,3-Butylene glycol is produced by the catalytic hydrogenation of acetaldol which
is made by the liquid-phase condensation of acetaldehyde. The three companies
at three sites which produce 1,3-butylene glycol are shown in Table 1-8.
II. EMISSION ESTIMATES
A. PRODUCTION
Acetaldehyde emissions from production sites are presented in Table 1-9.7'8'9'10'11
Total estimated emissions from these sites for 1978 were 271,730 lb. Emission
factors, derived from state files, used to develop process, storage, and fugitive
emission estimates are shown in Table 1-9. Process vent emissions originate pri-
marily from the off-air absorber vents. Other associated emissions would include
ethylene and ethane. Storage emissions represent the losses from both working
and final product storage tanks. Fugitive emissions are those which result
from plant equipment leaks. For the purpose of this report, the emissions of
acetaldehyde from the ethanol process used by Publicker were assumed to be the
same (emission factor) since no data were available from that site.
Vent parameter data for the production sites11 as well as the end-users are
shown in Table 1-10.

-------
Table 1-4. Peracetic Acid Producers3
Company
Location
1978
Peracetic
Acid Capacity
(million lb)
1970
Acetaldehyde
Used
(million lb)
Geographic Coordinates
FMC
Buffalo, NY
NAC
33. 33
42
59
10/78
50
30
High Point Chemical
High Point, NC
NA
33. 33
35
59
10/80
00
30
Union Carbide
Taft, LA
NA
33.33
29
58
00/90
27
00
Total

NA
100.00





See ref. 3.
Total acetaldehyde used distributed evenly over all three sites in the absence of capacity data.
'Not available.

-------
a
Table 1-5. Pontaerythritol Producers
Company
Location
1970
Pent aery tliri tol
Capacity
(106 Ib/yr)
1978
Acetaldchyde
Used'*
(106 lb/yr)
Geographical Location
Latitude/Longitude
Celanese
Bishop, TX
75
J 3
27
34
06/97
49
27
Hercules
Louisiana, MO
17
21
39
26
24/91
03
37
IMC (CSC)
Sciple, PA
25
11
40
30
12/75
31
50
Perstorp AD
Toledo, OH
^35
15
41
43
10/03
31
28
Total

102
00





See refs. 3 and 5.
^Total acetaldehyde usage distributed over all four sites based on pentaerythritol capacity.

-------
Table 1-6. Pyridines Producers'3
Company
Nepara Chemical
Reilly Tar f»
Chemica L
Total
Location
llarriman, NY
Indianapolis, IN
197(1 Pyridene
Capacity''
<10f' .lb/yr)
>25
Yj
>G0
1970
Q
Production
(.1.0G lb/yr)
17
10
Geographical Location
I.a tit lido /Long i t ude
41 16 45/7 4 08 24
39 42 00/B6 14 00
See refs. 3 and 6.
Capacity includes pyr.idenes, picolines, and pyridene derivatives.
'Total acetaldehyde usage distributed over both sites based on pyridenes' capacity.

-------
Table 1-7. Clyoxnl Producers0
Company
Location
197 0 Glyoxal
Capacity
(m i 1 1 Lori .1 b)
1970
Estima ted
Aceta Iclehyde
Used1'
(million lb)
Geographic Coordinates
1 .a t.i. t:ud<; /I,on gi. tude
American Cyanamide
Charlotte, NC
NAC
20
35 12 ir,/H0 50 32
Union Carbide
Taft, T.A
NA
20
29 58 00/97 27 00
Total

NA
40

°See ref. 3.
^Total acetaldehyde used distributed equally over both sites in the. absence of capacity data.
Q
Not available.

-------
1-14
Table 1-8. l,3-3utylene Glycol Producers3
Co-oar.v
Location
1978
1,3-Butylene
Glycol Capacity
(million lb)
1978
Acetaldehyde
Used
(million lb)
Geographic Coordinates
Latitude/Lonaitude
Celar.ese
Bishop, T.X
NAC
6. 67
27 34 06/97 49 27
East.-an
Rochester, NY
NA
6. 67
43 12 01/77 37 53
Mallinckrodt
Lodi, NJ
NA
6. 67
40 52 56/74 05 46
Total

NA
20.00

a
See ref. 3.
^Total actaldehyce used distributed evenly over all three sites in the absence of
capacity data.
Q
Not available.

-------
Table 1-9. Acetaldehyde Emissions from Production Sites


Emiss ions (lb/yr)

Total Emissions3
Company
location
Process
Storage
Fug.i. t.i.ve
(lb/yr)
(g/sec)b
Cclanese
Ray City, TX
'If*, 510
5,91 5
2,650
55,000
0.79

Clear Lake, TX
106-585
0
5,305
110,890
1. 59
Tennessee Eastman
Longview, TX
77,5:;o
9,or>o
1,120
91,000
1. 32
Publicker Industries
Philadelphia, PA
.1.0,030
1,275
570
11,080
0. 17
Shell Chemical
Norco, LA
010
115
50
1,080
0.02
Total

241 ,560
17,170
13,000
271,730

a
Based on the following
9, 10, and 11.
emission factors (lb
acetaldehyde emitted per
lb produced)
See refs.
1, 8,
Process 0.000228
B - (derived from
state air
emission fi.les)



Storage 0.000029
B - (derived from
state air
emission files)



Fugitive 0.000013
B - (derived from
state air
emission files)



Total	0.000270
^Uased on 0760 hr/yr operation.

-------
Table 1-10.
Number	Vent
of	Height
Source	Stacks	(ft)
Production
Process	4	36
Storage	3	24
Fugitive
Acetic acid
Process	4	30
Storage	4	24
Fugitive
Peracetic acid
Process	1	30
Storage	2	24
Fugitive
Pentaerythirtol
Process	3	140
Storage	2	20
Fugitive
Pyridenes
Process	1	30
Storage	2	16
Fugitive
Acetnldehyde Vent Parameters
Vent	Discharge	Distribution
Diameter	Temperature	Velocity	Area
(It)	(°F)	(ft/sec)	(ft X ft)
1.0
0.17
1.2
0. 17
1.0
0. 17
1.5
0. 33
70
00
75
00
80
00
140
70
190
110
175
400 X 000
300 X 300
300 X 300
100 X 200
0.5
0.17
100
80
10
100 X 200

-------
Table 1-10. (Continued)
Source
Number
of
Stacks
Vent
Height
(ft)
Vent
niamcter
(It)
Discharge
Temperature
CF)
Velocity
(ft/sec)
Distribution
Area
(ft X ft)
Glyoxal
Process
Storage
Fugitive
1,3-Butylene glycol
Process
20
16
20
0.00
0. 17
0.00
70
70
65
100 X 100
44
Fugitive
100 X 100
2
Note: building cross-section for production and end-uses - 50 m .

-------
1-18
B. USES
Emission estimates for the end-users of acetaldehyde in 1978 are summarized in
Table 1-11. They are based on the emission factors tabulated in Table 12.
Acetaldehyde emissions from acetic acid production were estimated to have been
1,86.7,130 lb. Other associated emissions would include acetic acid and ethyl
acetate.
Acetaldehyde emissions from peracetic acid production were estimated to have
been 450,000 lb. Other associated emissions would include ethyl acetate and
peracetic acid.
Pentaerythritol production contributed an estimated 688,000 lb of acetaldehyde.
Other associated emissions would include formaldehyde, ammonia, and pentaerythritol.
Pyridenes manufacture release an estimated 300,000 lb of acetaldehyde. Other
emission components include picoline, formaldehyde, and pyridene.
Glyoxal production contributed an estimated 180,000 lb of acetaldehyde. Other
associated emissions besides blyoxal are unknown.
1,3-Butylene glycol manufacture contributed 27,000 lb of acetaldehyde emissions.
Other associated emissions include ethanol, dioxane, and 1,3-butylene glycol.
Miscellaneous uses of acetaldehyde were estimated to have contributed 153,900 lb.
These uses are too diverse and numerous to specify or location. Emissions were
estimated by taking a weighted average of all the other acetaldehyde end-uses
and multiplying by the 30 million lb used.
The total nationwide emissions of acetaldehyde in 1978 were estimated to have
been 3,921,350 lb. A tabulation of the losses is shown in Table 1-13.

-------
Table 1-11. Acetaldehyde Emissions from End-Users



Emissions (lb/yr)
Total Emissions3
Company
Location
End-Use
Process
Storage
Fugitive
(lb/yr)
(g/sec)b
Celanese
Bay City, TX
Acetic acid
loo,eno
22,440
10,200
213,520
3.07

Clear Lake, TX
Acetic acid
1 ,133,660
0
55,950
1.189.610
17.13
Eastman
Kingsport, TN
Acetic acid
392 .239
49.743
22.018
464.000
6.68
FMC
Buffalo, NY
Peracetic acid
135,000
7,330
7,670
150 ,000
2. 16
High Point
High Point, NC
Peracetic acid
135,000
7,330
7,670
150,000
2.16
Union Carbide
Taft, LA
Peracetic acid
135,000
7,330
7,670
150,000
2. 16
Celanese
Bishop, TX
Pentaerythritol
241,2 30
29,040
13,530
283,800
4.09
Hercules
Louisiana, MO
Pentaerythritol
153,510
18,480
8,610
100,600
2.60
IMC
Seiple, PA
Pentaerythritol
80,110
9,680
4,510
94,600
1. 36
Perstorp
Toledo, OH
Pentaerythritol
109,050
13,200
6,150
129,000
1. 86
Ncpara
Harriman, NY
Pyridenes
108, '1G0
10,880
0,160
127,500
1.84
Reilly
Indianapolis, IN
Pyridenes
146,740
14,720
11,040
172,500
2.48
American Cyanamide
Charlotte, NC
Glyoxal
81,000
4,400
4,600
90,000
1. 30
Union Carbide
Taft, LA
Glyoxal
81,000
4,400
4,600
90,000
1. 30
Celanese
Bishop, TX
1,3-Butylene glycol
8,135
0
865
9,000
0.13
Eastman
Rochester, NY
1,3-Butylene glycol
0,135
0
865
9,000
0.13
Mallinckrodt
Lodi, NJ
1,3-Butylene glycol
8,135
0
865
9,000
0. 13
Total


3 .138 ,184
198.973
174,973
3,512,130

°Derived from the emission factors shown in Table 12.
Dased on 8760 hr/yr operation.

-------
Table 1-12. Acetaldeliyde End-Use Emission Factors
End-Use
Process
Derivation3
Storage
Derivation
Fugitive
.Derivation
Total
Acetic acid - Celanese
0.00266
n
0.00033
U
0.00061
B
0.00314b
Acetic acid - Eastman
0.00401
B
0.00015
n
0.00027
B
0.00569°
Peracetic acid
0.00405
B
0.00022
B
0.00023
B
0.00450d
Pentaerythritol
0.00731
C
0.00000
C
0.00041
C
0.00860e
Pyridenes
0.00638
C
0.00004
C
0.00048
C
0.007506
Glyoxal
0.00405
D
0.00022
D
0.00023
D
0.00450f
1,3-Butylene glycol
0.00122
B
0
B
0.00013
B
0.000139
aA - Basis:	site visit data
B - Basis:	state emission files
C - Basis:	published literature
D - Basis:	Hydroscience estimate
^See refs. 7 and 8.
CSee ref. 10.
^See ref. 12.
GSee ref. 13.
^Hydroscience estimate.
gSee ref. 14.

-------
1-21
Table 1-13. 1978 Acetaldehyde
Nationwide Emissions
Source
Nationwide
Emissions
(lb/yr)
Production
27-1/730
Acetic acid
11867»130
Peracetic acid
450,000
Pentaerythritol
688,000
Pyridenes
300,000
Glyoxal
180,000
1,3-Butylene glycol
27,000
Miscellaneous*
137,400
Total
3'921'260
*Based on a weighted average of emission
factors for other user categories.
Factor: 0.0045S lb lost/lb used.

-------
FIGURE 1-1. SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF ACETALDEHYDE EMISSIONS

-------
NO.
1
2
3
4
5.
6.
7.
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
lb
16
17
18
1: A
Table 1-14. EMISSIONS AND METEOROLOGICAL STATIONS OF SPECIFIC PUINT SOURCES UF ACETALUEHYUE
STAR PLANT* SOURCE+	EMISSIONS (GM/SEC)
COMPANY	SITE	LATITUDE LONGITUDE STATION TYPE TYPE PROCESS STORAGE FUGITIVE
CELANESE
BAY CITY, TX
28
51
45
96
01
00
12923
1
1
2
.669711
2.604642
.085141
.32318b
.038177
.146880
CELANESE
CLEAR LAKE, TX
29
37
17
95
03
51
12906
1
1
2
1.533042
16.305808
0.
0.
.076294
.804731
EASTMAN KODAK
LONGVIEW, TX
32
25
55
94
41
06
13972
2
1
1.116311
.142028
.063642
PUBLICKER
PHILADELPHIA, PA
39
53
30
75
12
18
13739
2
1
.144470
.018360
.U08213
SHELL
NORCO, LA
30
00
11
90
23
42
12958
2
1
.013064
.001617
.000719
EASTMAN KODAK
KINGSPORT, TN
36
31
41
82
12
22
13877
3
2
1.410451
.178875
.31668b
FMC
BUFFALO, NY
42
59
10
78
50
30
14747
4
3
1.944000
.105530
.110445
HIGHPOINT
HIGH POINT, NC
35
59
10
80
00
37
93807
4
3
1.9440U0
. 105530
.110445 _
UNION CARBIDE
TAFT, LA
27
58
00
97
27
00
13970
5
3
6
1.944000
1.166413
.105530
.063356
.110445 ™
CO
.066242
CELANESE
BISHOP, TX
27
34
06
97
49
27
12925
6
4
7
2.089992
.070523
.377473
0.
.117199
.007357
HERCULES
LOUISIANA, MO
39
26
24
91
03
37
93989
7
4
2.210521
.266109
.123985
IMC
SEIPLE, PA
40
38
21
75
31
38
14737
7
4
1.157915
.13939b
.064942
PERSTORP
TOLEDO, OH
41
43
10
83
31
28
94830
7
4
1.578957
.190068
.088565
NEPARA
HARRIMAN, NY
41
16
40
74
08
24
14757
8
5
1.561834
.155505
.117516
REILLY TAR
INDIANAPOLIS, IN
39
42
00
86
14
00
93819
8
5
2.113045
.211948
. 1589bl
AMER CYANAMID
CHARLOTTE, NC
35
12
16
80
50
32
13881
9
6
1.165049
.Ob32y3
.066178
EASTMAN KODAK
ROCHESTER, NY
43
12
01
77
37
58
14717
10
7
.117136
0.
.012462
MALLINCKRODT
LODI, NJ
40
52
56
74
05
46
94741
10
7
.117136
0.
.012462

-------
TABLE 1-14 (Concluded)
* Plant Types:
Type 1: Plant produces acetaldehyde and
acetic acid
Type 2: Plant produces acetaldehyde
Type 3: Plant produces acetic acid
Type 4: Plant procudes peracetic acid
Type 5: Plant produces peracetic acid
and glyoxal
Type 6: Plant produces pentaerythirtol
and 1, 3-butylene glycol
Type 7:	Plant produces pentaerythirtol
Type 8:	Plant produces pyridenes
Type 9:	Plant produces glyoxal
Type 10:	Plant produces 1, 3-butylene glycol
t Source Types:
Type 1:	Acetaldehyde production
Type 2:	Acetic acid production
Type 3:	Peracetic acid production
Type 4:	Pentaerythirtol production
Type 5:	Pyrldenes production
Type 6:	Glyoxal production
Type 7:	1, 3-butylene glycol

-------
TABLE 1-15. EMISSIONS PARAMETERS FOR SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF ACETALDEHYDE
Vent Building Cross Vent Vent	Vent
Source Type
Emissions Cateqory
Height
(m)
Section
(m?)
Diameter
(m)
Velocity
(m/sec)
Temperature
(°k)
Acetaldehyde production
Process
10.8
50
0.3
—


Storage
7.2
50
0.05
--


Fugitive
0
50
--
--
--
Acetic acid production
Process
9.0
50
0.36
57
--

Storage
7.2
50
0.05
--
--

Fugi tive
0
50
--
--
--
Peracetic acid production
Process
9.0
50
0.3
33
--

Storage
7.2
50
0.05
--
--

Fugi tive
0
50
--
—
--
Pentaerythlrtol production
Process
42
50
0.45
52
333

Storage
4.8
50
0.10

--

Fugi tive
0
50
—
--
--
Pyridenes production
Process
9
50
0.15
3
311

Storage
4.8
50
0.05
--
--

Fugi tive
0
50
--
--
--
Glyoxal production
Process
6
50
0.02
1.5
--

Storage
4.8
50
0.05
--
--

Fugitive
0
50
--

--

-------
TABLE 1-15
Vent
Height
	Source Type	 Emission Category (m)	
1,3-Butylene glycol	Process	6
Production	Fugitive	0
Concluded)
Building Cross	Vent	Vent	Vent
Section	Diameter	Velocity	Temperature
	(ni'L)		("')		(°k)
50	0.02	13

-------
1-27
TABLE 1-16. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE OF ACETALDEHYDE FROM
SPECIFIC POINT SOURCE EMISSIONS
Concentration	Population
Level	Exposed	Dosage
3	3
(ug/m )	(persons)	[(ug/m ) . persons]
250
2
499
100
14
2,310
50
58
5,040
25
459
18,300
10
2,517
48,500
5
5,653
71,200
2.5
14,670
103,000
1
64,410
177,000
0.5
167,890
247,000
0.25
441,702
342,000
0.1
933,239
419,000
0.05
1,627,955
469,000
0.025
2,773,705
509,000
0.01
4,493,446
538,000
0.005
5,478,435
545,000
0.0025
7,119,999 .
551,000
0.001
11,549,762
558,000
, -5*


3.2 x 10 3
12,323,453
559,000
*
The lowest annual average concentration occurring within
20 km of the specific point source.
1:A-17

-------
1-28
TABLE 1-17. MAJOR PARAMETERS FOR ESTIMATING EXPOSURE/DOSAGE RESULTING
FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS OF ACETALDEHYDE
	Parameter	 	Value	
Daytime decay rate (Kd)	7.3 x 10"^ sec"*
Nighttime decay rate (Kp)	0
Hanna-Gifford coefficient (C)	225
Nationwide heating source emissions (E^)	0
Nationwide nonheating stationary source emissions
(E^)	1.98 gm/sec
Nationwide mobile source emissions (EM)	0
58/4

-------
TARLE 1-10. ACETALOEHYDE EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULTING FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS
Dosage
Expo Level Populalion	(pg/mV	Percentage of Contribution	Percentage of Diatribution	
(pq/m^)	(persona)	person) Heating Stationary Hohile City Type 1 City Type 2 City type 3
.010000
446,952
4,759.0
0.
100,0
0.
100.0
0.
0.
.005000
505,140
5,363.7
0.
100.0
0.
100.0
0.
0.
.002500
9,149,730
37,317.9
0.
100.0
0.
100.0
0.
0.
.001000
35,088,457
75,128.7
0.
100.0
0.
100.0
0.
0.
.000500
89,470,782
110,094.3
0.
100.0
0.
97.2
1.2
1.6
.000250
135,836,014
127,401.4
0.
100.0
0.
94.0
2.6
3.4

150,679,135
131,504.0
0.
100.0
0.
92.4
2.8
4.8

-------
TABLE 1-19. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE SUMMARY OF ACETALDEHYDE


Population Exposed



Dosage



(persons)


Lluq/m3)
- persons]

Concentrati on
Specific
General


Specific
General


Level
Poi nt
Point


Poi nt
Poi nt


(uq/m3)
Source
Source
Area Source
U.S. Total
Source
Source
Area Source
U.S. Total
250
2
0
0
2
49y
0
0
499
100
14
0
0
14
2,310
0
0
2,310
50
58
0
0
58
5,040
0
0
5,04u
25
459
0
0
459
18,300
0
0
18,300
10
2,517
0
0
2,517
48,500
0
0
48,5UO
5.
5,663
0
0
5,663
71,200
0
0
71,200
2.5
14,670
0
0
14,670
103,000
0
0
103,000
1
64,410
0
0
64,410
177,000
0
0
177,000
0.5
167,890
0
0
167,890
247,000
0
0
247,000
0.25
441,702
0
0
441,702
342,000
0
0
342,000
0.1
933,239
0
0
933,239
419,000
0
0
419,000
0.05
1,627,955
0
0
1,627,955
469,000
0
0
4b9,000
0.025
2,773,705
0
0
2,773,705
509,000
0
0
509,000
0.01
4,493,446
0
446,952
4,940,398
538,000
0
4,760
542,7bO
0.005
5,478,435
0
505,140
5,983,575
545,000
0
5,260
550,2bU
0.0025
7,119,999
0
9,149,730
16,269,729
551,000
0
37,30u
588,300
0.001
11,549,762
0
35,008,457
46,558,219
558,000
0
75,100
633,100
0.0005
--
0
89,470,782
--
--
0
110,000
--
0.00025
--
0
135,836,014
--
--
0
127,000
--
0
12,323,453
U
158,679,135
158,679,135
559,000
0
132,000
6yl.ooo
NOTE: The use of -- as an entry indicates that the incremental E/U is not significant (relative to last entry or
relative to entry in another column at the same row) or that the exposure of the same population may be
counted in another column.
1:A-1B

-------
1-31
REFERENCES
1.	A. K. Rafie and S. L. Soder, "Acetaldehyde," Chemical Economics Handbook,
p. 601.5020F, Stanford Research Institute^ Menlo Park, CA (March
1979.
2.	"Chemical Products Synopsis on Acetaldehyde," Mannsville Chemical Products,
October 1976.
3.	1978 Directory of Chemical Producers, United States, p. 415, Stanford
Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA.
4.	A. K. Rafie, S. L. Soder, "Acetic Acid," p. 602.502UE, Chemical Economics
Handbook, Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA (April 1977).
5.	"Chemical Products Synopsis on Pentaerythritol," Mannsville Chemical Pro-
ducts. (December 1977).
6.	"Chemical Products Synopsis on Pyridines Synthetic," Mannsville Chemical
Products, (December 1977).
7.	Texas Air Control Board 1975 Emissions Inventory Questionnaire, Celanese
Chemical Co., Bay City, Texas.
8.	Texas Air Control Board 1975 Emissions Inventory Questionnaire, Celanese
Chemical Co., Clear Lake, Texas.
9.	Texas Air Control Board 1975 Emissions Inventory Questionnaire, Texas
Eastment Co., Longview, Texas.
10.	Survey Reports on Atmospheric Emissions from the Petrochemical Industry,
Volume I~ prepared for Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air
and Water Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC, by J. W. Pervier, et
al., Houdry Division, Air Products and Chemicals, Inc., Marcus Hook,
PA, January 1974 EPA-450/3-73-005a.
11.	Emission Control Options for the Synthetic Organic Chemicals Manufacturing
Industry, Acetaldehyde Abbreviated Product Report, prepared for Office
of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, by R. J. Lovell,
Hydroscience, Inc., January 1979.
12.	Lousiana Air Board, 1975 Emission Inventory Questionnaire, Union Carbide,
Taft, LA.
13.	Special Project Report "Petrochemical Plant Sites" prepared for Industrial
Pollution Control Division, Industrial Environmental Research Labo-
ratory, Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio, by Monsanto
Research Corporation, Dayton, Ohio, April 1976.
1:A-19 & 20

-------
1-32
REFERENCES
14.	Texas Air Control Board 1975 Emissions Inventory Questionnaire, Celanese
Chemical Co., Bishop, Texas.
15.	Celanese Chemical Company, Inc. (R. H. Maurer), Personal communication
in response to publication of the first draft of this report (July
1981).
16.	Tennessee Eastman Company (J. L. Edwards) Personal communication in res-
ponse to publication of the first draft of this report (October 1980).
1:A-20

-------
APPENDIX A-2
Acrolein
ACROLEIN CHEMICAL DATA
nomenclature
Chemical Abstract Service Registry Number: 107-02-8
Synonyms: ?-Propenal; Acrylic Aldehyde; Allyl Aldehyde;
Acryla 1oehyde; Acraldehyde
Cherr.ical Formula
Molecular Weight: 56.06
Molecular Formula:
Molecular Structure:
Chemical and Physical Properties
Physical State at STP: Liquid - flamr,2ble, pungent odor
Boiling Point: 52.5°C
Melting Point: -86.95°C
Density: 0.8410 at 20°C/4°C
Vapor Pressure: 288.2 nn at 25°C
Vapor Density: 1.94
Solubility: very soluble, (400 g/1 of h^O)
Log Partition Coefficient (Octanol/H^O):
Atmospheric Reactivity
Transformation Products: Formaldehyde
Reactivity Toward OH*: 1/2 Propylene
Reactivity Toward Q^: 1/2 Propylene
Reactivity Toward Photolysis: * Formaldehyde
Major Atmospheric Precursors: N/A
Formation Reactivity: N/A

-------
2-5
A. ACROLEIN
All acrolein is currently produced in the United States by the direct oxidation
of propylene.1 The specific processes vary significantly, depending primarily
on the by-product distribution desired and on the end-use requirements.3'4
Acrolein is currently produced by four companies at four locations in the United
States.1 The plant locations and the 1978 capacity and estimated production
level for each plant are shown in Table 2-1. An estimated 350 million lb of arcrolein
was produced in 1978.5
The largest end-use of acrolein is as an unisolated intermediate in the produc-
tion of acrylic acid and its derivatives.1 This end-use consumed an estimated
87% of production in 1978 amounting to 308 million lb.5
The end-uses of refined, or isolated, acrolein are small compared to its use as
an unisolated intermediate in acrylic acid production. Synthetic glycerin con-
sumed an estimated 24 million lb (7% of total acrolein production) in 1978.5
Refined acrolein is also used in the manufacture of methionine and methionine
hydroxy analogue (poultry feed supplements) which consumes 20 million lb. Mis-
cellaneous applications consume the remaining 2 M lb and include 1,2,6-hexanetriol
(a humectant used in flexible polyurethane foam manufacture), glutaraldehyde
(used in leather tanning), and others.1 Total consumption of acrolein in chemical
intermediate applications is estimated to have been 22 million lb (6%) in 1978.
End-uses are summarized in Table 2-2.5

-------
Table 2-1. Production of Allyl Chloride, F.pichlorohydrin, and Acrolein^
Source
l.ocat ion
1970
Estimated rrotluct ion*'
(N lb)
1070 F.:
;limnt.cd Capacity
(m lb)
Geographic Coordinates
l.«itl tiKlo/LnncjittMc
M lyl
Chlor idc•
Epi chloro-
hydr in
Acrole i n
Allyl
Ch1or i de
Gqi chloro-
hydr i n
Acrolein
Dow Chcmic.il Co.
Frec|-ort, TX
116
166

260
230

20
59
30/95
23
35
Shell Chemical Co.
Deer Park, TX
77
73

117
110

29
42
55/95
07
34
Shell Chemical Co.
Norco, LA
77
73
24°
117
110
55C
30
00
11 /90
23
42
Union Carbide Corp.
Taft. La


2 2C


60C
29
50
00/90
27
00
Cclancse Corp.
Clear Lake, TX


091


167d
29
37
17/95
03
51
Rohm and Haas Co.
Deer Park, TX


14G1'


27 3d
29
43
30/95
06
15.
Union Carbide Corp.
Ta ft f LA


71'1


137d
29
58
00/90
27
00
Total

330
31 2
354
499
470
692





aScc refs 1 and 2.
^Thc distribution of production for each producer is determined by the ratio of total U.S. production to total U.S. capacity as compared to indivi-
dual plant capacity.
CIsolated acrolein*
dAcrolein produced as an uriisolatcd intermediate in the propylene oxidation process for acrylic acid and derivitives.

-------
2-7
Table 2-2. !1978 Acrolein Consumption by End-Use3
End-Use
Usage
(%)
End-Use
Consumption
(M lb)
b
Acrylic acid and esters
87
308
Glycerin
7
24
Methionine and methionine
hydroxy analogue
6
20
Q
Miscellaneous
>1
__2
Total
100
354
a
See refs. 1 and 2.
^Acrolein produced as an unisolated intermediate in
the propylene oxidation process used to produce
acrylic acid and esters.
Includes glutaraldehyde, 1,2,6-hexane triol and
others.

-------
2-8
Estimated production losses are shown in Table 2-3 for each of the four producing
locations. Total emissions of acrolein from production faclities are estimated
to have been 70,835" lb.	In the production of acrylic acid and derivatives
(three locations) acrolein occurs only as an unisolated intermediate. Refined
acrolein is produced at two locations. (One plant produces both acrylic acid
and refined acrolein.) The emission sources and resulting emissions are signifi-
cantly different for the two types of processes.
The predominant source of acrolein emissions from plants producing acrylic acid
is the off-gas from the quench-absorber.4 Other associated emission components
include propane, propylene, acrylic acid, ethyl acrylate, acetone, and acetic
acid. Emissions from this source are normally controlled by thermal oxidation.4
With acrolein occurring only as an unisolated intermediate, storage emissions
are negligible.6'7 Fugitive emissions are those which result from plant equip-
ment leaks.
The predominant sources of acrolein emissions from plants producing refined
acrolein are the acrolein absorber vent (Union Carbide Process) and the condenser
vents from the distillation columns. Other associated emission components include
propane, propylene, and acetaldehyde.3 With the use of pressurized tanks for
storage the emissions of acrolein from storage sources are negligible.
Vent stack data for acrolein are shown in Table 2-4. Data for plants producing
refined acrolein are also given in Table 2-4. Both types of production facilities
are usually "open-air" structures without walls and solid floors (i.e., steel
grating). Only the control room area is enclosed.
Uses
The acrolein produced by acrylic acid manufacturers (308 million lb in 1978),
which accounts for 87% of acrolein production, occurs as an unisolated inter-
mediate. End-use emissions are included in production emissions. Similarly,
the emissions of acrolein from the production of glycerin (7% of total acrolein
consumption) are included in the production emissions since the glycerin is
produced in the same plant.

-------
2-9
Table 2-3. 1978 Acrolein Production Emissions


Process
Emissions
(lb/yr) •
Storage
Emissions
(lb/yr)
Fugitive
Emissions
(lb/yr)
Total Emissions
Ccnoa.iv
Location
(lb/yr)
(a/sec)3
Shell
Norco, LA
26,400
0
2,640
29,040b
0. 418
Union Carbide
Ta f t, LA
24,200
0
2,420
26,62Qb
0. 3S3
Celanese
Clear Lake, T.v.
463
0
37
500d
0.007
Rohm and Haas
Deer Park, TX
9,050
0
730
9,780C
0.141
Union Carbide
Taft, LA
4,530
0
365
4,B95C
0.071
Total

64,643-
0
6-192
70-335

^ased on S760 hr/yr operation.
Isolated acrolein emission factor (lb lost per lb produced)
A - Derived from site visit data
A - Derived from site visit data
A - Derived from site visit data
See ref. 3.
Process 0.00110
Storage 0
Fugitive 0.00011
Total 0.00121
Unisolated acrolein emission factor (lb lost per lb acrolein produced). See ref. 4.
Process 0.000052 A - Derived from site visit data
Storage 0	A - Derived from site visit data
Fugitive 0.000005 A - Derived from site visit data
Total 0.000067
See ref. 11

-------
2-10
Table 2-4. Acrolein Vent Parameters
Source
Number
of
Stacks
Vent
Height
(ft)
Vent
Diameter
(ft)
Discharge
Temperature
*( °F)
Velocity
(ft/sec)
~ j	a,b,c
Production
{acrylic acid mfgs)
Process
b,c
Production
(refined acrolein)
Process
End-use
(Methionine)
Process
b,d
50
120
40
2.7
0.3
0.6
70
70
70
50
72
Individual process vents are collected and fed to a single thermal oxidizer.
Storage emissions are negligible.
c	2
Building cross-section 10 m .
d	2
Building cross-section 100 m .

-------
2-n
Emissions resulting from the use of acrolein in the production of methionine
and its derivatives, and in miscellaneous uses, were estimated by using the refined
(isolated) acrolein production emission factor. Specific source locations for
methionine manufacturers are shown in Table 2-5. Acrolein usage was distributed
evenly over all four sites since capacities were not known. Specific locations
for miscellaneous uses could not be identified.
Total nationwide emissions of acrolein in 1978 from all sources are estimated
to have been 91,405 lb. A tabulation of the losses is shown in Table ^~6\

-------
Table 2-5. 1978 Emissions of Acrolein from Methionine Production3


1978 Estimnte
Acrolein Used
(M lbs)
Process
Emissions
(lb/yr)
Fugitive
Total
^ • • h»c
Emissions
Geographic Coordinates
Latitude/Longitude
Company
Location
Emissions
(lb/yr)
(lb/yr)
(g/sec)d
Degussa
Theodore, AL
5.0
5,500
550
6,050
0.087
30
33
06/88 10
35
NAPP
Lodi, NJ
5.0
5,500
550
6,050
0.087
40
52
30/74 06
14
Dupont
Beaumont, TX
5.0
5,500
550
6,050
of
0.087
30
00
51/94 01
40
Monsanto
Nitro, WV
5.0
0
0
0.0
38
24
26/81 51
26
Total

20.0
16,500
1,650e
18,150





a	_
See ref. 1.
^Based on isolated acrolein production emission factor.
Q
Storage emissions negilible.	^
^Based on 8760 hr/yr operation.	^
Fugitive losses are distributed over a 100 ft X 100 ft area.
Monsanto claims no emissions losses due to incineration of acrolein wastes.

-------
2-13
Table 2-6. 1978 Estimated Acrolein Nationwide
Emission Losses
Estimated National
Emissions
	Source	(lb/vr)	
Production
Acrylic acid intermediate	15,175
Refined acrolein and glycerin	55,660
Chemical intermediate*
Methionine	18,150
Miscellaneous	2,420
Total	91,405
*Sased on emission factor of 0.00121 determined for
isolated acrolein production.

-------
V
I
ro
i
FIGURE 2-1. SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF ACROLEIN EMISSIONS

-------
Table 2-7.
EMISSIONS AND METEOROLOGICAL STATIONS OF SPECIFIC POINT SOUKCES OF ACROLEIN
NO.
COMPANY
SITE
LATITUOE LONGITUDE
STAR PLANT*
STATION TYPE
SOURCE+	EMISSIONS (GM/SEC)
TYPE PROCESS STORAGE FUGITIVE
1
SHELL
NORCO, LA
30
00
11
o
o
23
42
12958
1
1
.380169
0.
.038020
2
UNION CARBIDE
TAFT, LA
29
58
00
090
27
00
13970
2
1
.348491
0.
.034849











2
.U65227
0.
.0052b4
3
CELANESE
CLEAR LAKE, TX
29
37
17
095
03
51
12906
3
2
.006659
0.
.000539
4
ROHMAND HASS
DEER PARK, TX
29
43
30
095
06
30
12906
3
2
.130327
0.
.010528
5
DEGUSSA
THEODOR. AL
30
33
06
088
10
35
03855
4
3
.079211
0.
.007927
6
NAPP
LODI, NJ
40
52
30
074
06
14
94741
4
3
.050387
0.
.007927
7
UUPONT
BEAUMONT, TX
30
00
51
094
01
40
12917
4
3
.079211
0.
.007927
ro
i
* Plant Types:
Type 1
Type 2
Type 3
Type 4
Plant	produces	refined acrolein
Plant	produces	refined acrolein and acrylic acid
Plant	produces	acrylic acid and acrolein is the intermediate
Plant	produces	methionine
+ Source Types:
Type 1: Refined acrolein production
Type 2: Acrylic acid production
Type 3: Methionine production
1: A-21

-------
2-16
Table 2-8. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE OF ACROLEIN RESULTING
FROM SPECIFIC POINT SOURCE EMISSIONS
Concentration	Population
Level	Exposed	Dosage
3	3
(ug/m )	(persons)	[(uq/m ) . persons]
1
169
207
0.5
1,590
1,150
0.25
4,064
2,040
0.1
18,180
4,140
0.05
39,655
5,540
0.025
78,077
6,810
0.01
232,250
9,200
0.005
488,918
10,900
0.0025
1,022,985
12,800
0.001
4,047,571
17,100
0.0005
5,872,726
18,600
1. 52 x 10~5*
6,497,934
18,800
*The lowest annual average concentration occurring within 20 km of the specific
point source.
2:B-09

-------
2-17
TABLE 2-9. MAJOR PARAMETERS FOR ESTIMATING EXPOSURE/DOSAGE RESULTING
FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS OF ACROLEIN
	Parameter	 	Value
, .	.4-1
Daytime decay rate (Kd)	1.6 x 10 sec
Nighttime decay rate (K )	5.0 x 10"® sec"^
Hanna-Gifford coefficient (C)	225
Nationwide heating source emissions (E^)	0
Nationwide nonheating stationary source emissions (E^)	0.0348 gm/sec
Nationwide mobile source emissions (Eu)	0
n

-------
TABLE 2-10. ACROLEIN EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULTING FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS
PERCENTAGE OP COUTHIBUTIOH
PERCENTAGE OF DISTRIBUTION
EXPO LEVEL
( UC/( H) 3)
MlM
M
20
000010
000000
POPULATION
(PERSON)
(MO 14#
914473*
2*449737
03204340
127309709
180679130
DOSAGE
(UG/
-------


TABLE
2-11. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE
SUMMARY OF
ACROLEIN




Population Exposed



Dosage



(persons)


[(uq/m3)
- persons]

Concentration
Speci fic
General


Specific
General


Level
Point
Point


Poi nt
Point


(ug/m3)
Source
Source
Area Source
U.S. Total
Source
Source
Area Source U.
.S. Total
1
169
0
0
169
207
0
0
207
0.5
1,590
0
0
1 ,590
1,150
0
0
1 i 150
0.25
4,064
0
0
4,064
2,040
0
0
2,040
0.1
18,180
0
0
18,180
4,140
0
0
4,140
0.05
39,655
0
0
39,655
5,540
0
0
5,540
0.025
78,077
0
0
78,077
6,810
0
0
6,810
0.01
232,250
0
0
232,250
9,200
0
0
9,200
0.005
488,918
0
0
488,918
10,900
0
0
10,900
0.0025
1,022,985
0
0
1,022,985
12,800
0
0
12,800
0.001
4,047,571
0
0
4,047,571
17,100
0
0
17,100
0.0005
5,872,726
0
0
5,872,726
18,600
0
0
18,600
0.0001
	
0
505,140

	
0
91
—
0.00005
	
0
9,149,730

	
0
590
—
0.000025
	
0
20,443,737

	
0
925
	
0.00001
	
0
55,204,345

	
0
1,443
	
0.000005
	
0
127,350,709

	
0
1,987
	
0
6,497,934
0
158,679,135
If,8,679,135
18,800
0
2,094
20,894
Note: The use
of -- as an entry indicates that the incremental E/D is
not significant relative
to last entry or

relative to entry
in another column at the same
row) or that the exposure
of the same population may be

counted
in another
column.






2:B-10
-------
2-20
REFERENCES
1.	S. L. Soder and K. Ring, "Propylene," pp. 300.5405E-300.5405L in Chemical
Economics Handbook, Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA (August
1978).
2.	J. L. Blackford, "Epichlorohydrin," pp. 642.3021A-642.3022M in Chemical
Economics Handbook, Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, "CA (May
1978)	.
3.	C. A. Peterson, Jr., Hydroscience, Inc., Emission Control Options for the
Synthetic Organic Chemicals Manufcturinq Industry—Product Report on
Glycerin and Its Intermediates (Allyl Chloride, EpichlorohydrinT
Acrolein, and Ally! Alcohol (on fi 1 e at EPA, ESED, Research Triangle
Park, NC) (March 1979).
4.	J. W. Blackburn, Hydroscience, Inc., Emission Control Options for the
Synthetic Organic Chemicals Manufacturing Industry—Acrylic Acid and
Esters Product Report (on fi 1 e at EPA, ESED, Research Triangle Park,
NC) (July 1978).
5.	CEH Manual of Current Indicators—Supplementary Data, p. 84 in Chemical
Economics Handbook, Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA (April
1979).
6.	D. B. Dimick, Dow Chemical, Freeport, TX, Texas Air Control Board Emissions
Inventory Questionnaire for 1975, Epichlorohydrin, Glycerin No. 1.
7.	Dow Chemical Co., Freeport, TX, Texas Air Control Board Emission Inventory
Questionaire for 1975, Allyl Chloride, Glycerin II.
8.	Shell Chemical Co., Deer Park, TX, Texas Air Control Board Emission Inven-
tory Questionnaire for 1975, Glycerin and Associated Products.
9.	Shell Chemical Co., Norco, LA, Louisiana Air Control Commission Emission
Inventory Questionnaire (January 31, 1977).
10.	Shell Chemical Co., Deer Park, TX, Texas Air Control Board Emission Inven-
tory Questionnaire for 1975, Resins Process.
11.	Celanese Chemical Company, Inc. (R. H. Maurer) Personal communication in
response to first draft of this document (July 1981).
1:A-22
-------
APPENDIX A-3 	 Ally! Chloride
ALLYL CHLORIDE CHEMICAL DATA
Homencl ature
Chemical Abstract Service Registry Number: 107-05-1
Synonyms: 3-Chloroprene; AC; Chlorallylene; 3-Chloro-l-propene;
1-Chioro-2-propene; 3-Chloropropylene
Cher.ical Formula
Molecular Weight: 76.53
Molecular Formula: C^Cl
Molecular Structure: = CH - CH^Cl
Chemical and Physical Properties
Physical State at STP: Liquid, pungent odor
Boiling Point: 44,6°C
Melting Point: -134.5°C
Density: 0.938 at 20°C/4°C
Vapor Pressure: 359 mm at 25°C
Vapor Density: 2.64
Solubility: Soluble (33 g/1 of HjO) at 20°
Log Partition Coefficient (Octanol/H^O):
Atmospheric Reactivity
Transformation Products: 2-Chloroacetaldehyde; Formaldehyde
Reactivity Toward 0H-: 2 x Butane
Reactivity Toward 03 = 15? of propylene
Reactivity Toward Photolysis: NAPP
Major Atmospheric Precursors: N/A
Formation Reactivity:
-------
3-5
A. ALLYL CHLORIDE
All allyl chloride currently produced in the United States by the chlorination
of propylene is consumed in the production of epichlorohydrin2 Allyl
chloride is first reacted with hypochlorous acid to form dichlorohydrin;
dichlorohydrin is then reacted with sodium hydroxide or calcium hydroxide
to form crude epichlorohydrin.2
Crude epichlorohydrin can be used directly for the production of synthetic
glycerin.2 For other end-uses (primarily expoxy resins) the crude product is
further refined by distillation.2
Allyl chloride and epichlorohydrin are both produced by two companies at three
locations.2 The plant locations and the 1978 capacities and estimated production
levels for each plant are shown in Table 3-1.1,2 The estimated quantities of
allyl chloride and epichlorohydrin produced in 1978 were 330 million lb and 312
million lb respectively.2
The primary end-uses of epichlorohydrin are for the manufacture of epoxy resins
and synthetic glycerin. An estimated 53% of epichlorohydrin production amounting
to 165 million lb was consumed to produce epoxy resins and 25%, or 78 million
lb, was consumed in the manufacture of synthetic glycerin.1'2
Most of the other applications of epichlorohydrin are relatively minor. Epichloro-
hydrin elastomers consumed an estimated 6 million lb (2%) in 1978. An esti-
mated 47 million lb (15%) was used to produce a variety of products in relatively
small volume including glycidol ethers, some types of modified epoxy resins,
wet strength resins for the paper industry, water treatment resins, surfactants,
and ion-exchange resins. Exports of epichlorohydrin are estimated to have been
16 million lb (5%) in 1978. End-uses are summarized in Table 15-2.1,2 Specific
source locations of the epoxy resin producers are shown in Table 15-3.1,J
EMISSIONS ESTIMATES
1. Production
Estimated production losses are shown in Table 3-2 for each of the three producing
locations. Total emissions of allyl chloride and epichlorohydrin from production
facilities are estimated to have been 1,112,100 lb and 146,640 lb respectively
in 1978.3 Process emissions originate primarily through the condenser vents
-------
Table 3-1. Production of Allyl Chloride, Epichlorohydrin, and Acrolein
1978 Estimated Production** 1978 Estimated Capacity
	(H lb)	 	(H lb)	
Allyl Epichloro- Allyl Eqtchloro-	Geographic Coordinates
Source	Location	Chloride •	hydrln	Acrolein	Chloride	hydrln	Acrolein Latitude/Longitude
Dow Chemical Co.
Freeport, TX
176
166

265
250

23
59
30/95
23
35
Shell ChcHlcal Co.
Deer Park, TX
77
73

117
110

29
42
55/95
07
34
Shell Chemical Co.
Norco, LA
77
73
24°
117
110
55C
30
00
11/90
23
42
Union Carbldo Corp.
Taft, La


22C


60°
29
58
00/90
27
00
Colancse Corp.
Clear Lake, TX


B9d


167d
29
37
17/95
03
51
ftohm and Haas Co.
Deer Park, TX


I46d


27 3d
29
43
30/95
06
15
Union Carbide Corp.
Taft, LA


7 3d


137d
29
56
00/90
27
00
Total

330
312
354
499
470
692





a
See reft 1 and 2.
bThe distribution of production for each producer la determined by the ratio of total U.S. production to total U.S. capacity as compared to indivi
dual plant capacity.
g
Isolated acrolein.
^Acrolein produced as an uniaolated Intermediate in the propylene oxidation process for acrylic acid and dcrivitives.
-------
Table 3-2. 19*78 Allyl Chloride and Epichlorohydrin Production Emissions
Company
Location
Process
Allyl
Chloride
db/yr)
Eroi sslona
Eplchloro-
hydrln
iIb/yr)
Storaqe
Allyl
ChlorIrie
1lb/vr)
fjnlsslons
Cpichloro-
hyd» i n
(] li /y r)
fuqi tlvc
Allyl
Chloride
Ub/yr)
Emissions
Eplchloro-
hydr i ri
Ub/yr)
Allyl Chi
(lb/yr)
Total
ortde*
(q/scc)
Dn| es tons
Cjilchlo
c (IWyr)
rohydr1
lq/scc)c
Dow
Treeport, TX
515.660
69,720
24,640
1 , 6fi0
52,000
6,640
593,120
0. 54
78,020
1. 12
Shell
Deer Park, TX
725,610
30,600
10,7B0
730
2 3,100
2,920
259,490
3.74
3A . 310
0. 49

Norco, LA
225,610
30,660
10,780
7 30
23,100
2^920
259,490
3.74
Is
Is
0. 49
Total
966,900
131,040
46,200
3, 120
99,000
12,400
1,112,100

140,640

6
Based on allyl chloride emission factor (lb lost/lb produced). Sec refs. 7—9.
Proceai 0.00291 B - From state files
Storage 0.00014 B - From state files
Fugitive 0.00030 D - Engineering estimate
Total 0.00337
Based on eplchlorohydrln emission factor (lb lost/lb produced). See refs. 6, 6, and 9.
Proceis 0.00042 B - Fron state files
Storage 0.00001 B - From state flies
Fugitive 0.00004 D - Engineering estimate
Total 0.00047
CBased on 8760 hr/yr operation.
-------
3-8
from the distillation columns.3 Other associated emissions include C3 hydro-
carbons and other C3 chlorinated hydrocarbons.3 storage emissions, which repre-
sent total losses from storage tanks and loading and handling, are generally
controlled by the use of pressurized tanks and/or refrigerated vent condensers
and account for less than 5% of allyl chloride losses and less than 3% of epi-
chlorohydrin losses.4'7 Fugitive emissions are those which result from plant
equipment leaks.
Vent stack data are shown in Table 3-3. Typically, there are four process vents
that emit allyl chloride and three process vents that emit epichlorohydrin.
Emissions from banks of storage tanks are normally collected and discharged
from common vent stacks. Usually allyl chloride/epichlorohydrin production
facilities are "open-air" structures without walls and solid floors (i.e., steel
grating). Only the control room area :'s enclosed.
2. Uses
For the purpose of this report, emissions resulting from the export of epichloro-
hydrin are assumed to be negligible.
Since the only significant end-use for allyl chloride is in the production of
epichlorohydrin, allyl chloride end-use emissions are included in the allyl
chloride/epichlorohydrin production emissions.
More than half (53%) of the epichlorohydrin produced is used in the production
of epoxy resins. The current domestic producers of epoxy resins, plant locations,
and estimated emissions of epichlorohydrin are given in Table 15-6. Vent parameter
data relative to epichlorohydrin emissions from epoxy resin production are shown
in Table 3-3.
Emissions of epichlorohydrin resulting from the production of glycerin, the
next largest end-use of epichlorohydrin (25%), are included in the listed epi-
chlorohydrin production emissions. (Glycerin and the required epichlorohydrin
are produced at the same location.) Emissions resulting from the use of epi-
chlorohydrin in the production of miscellaneous products were estimated by using
the epoxy resin (epichlorohydrin use) emission factor. Specific source locations
for miscellaneous chemical intermediate use could not be identified.
Total nationwide emissions of allyl chloride and epichlorohydrin in 1978 from
all sources are estimated to have been 1.11 million lb and 0.479 million lb
respectively. A tabulation of the losses is shown in Table 3-4.
-------
3-9
Table 3-3. Allyl chloride and Epichlorohydrin Vent Parameters
Source
Number
of
Stacks
Vent
Height
(ft)
Vent
Diameter
(ft)
Discharge
Temperature
CF)
Velocity
(fps)
T,	J	a'b
Production
Process- vents
Allyl chloride
Epichlorohydrin
Storage vents
Allyl chloride
Use
Epichlorohydrin
c,d
2
2
3
2
2
Epoxy resins, elas-
tomers and raise.
products
Process
Column vent
Recovery vents
Storage
1
3
7
85
40
50
15 t 20
15 - 20
0:6
0.167
0. 34
0.6
0. 6
50
135
20
0.3 3
0.83
0.17
80
22B
90
86
80
115
110
00
Intermittent
5.5
13.8
5.3
10.0
building cross-section 5 m .
b
Fugitive emissions distributed over a 300 ft X 300 ft area.
c	2
Building cross-section 100 m .
Fugitive emissions distributed over a 100 ft X 200 ft area.
-------
3-10
Table 3-4. 1978 Estimated Allyl Chloride and Epichlorohydrin
Nationwide Emission Losses

Estimated National Bnissions
Source
Allyl Chloride
(M lb/yr)
Epichlorohydrin
(M lb/yr)
Production (allyl chloride,
epichlorohydrin, and glycerin)
1.11
0.147
Unmodified epoxy resins - use

0.251
Chemical intermediate - use

0.081
Export
J)	=
0
Total
1.11
0.479
•Based on emission factor of 0.00152 lb lost per 1b used derived
for epoxy resin manufacture.
-------
./—•

FIGURE 3-1. SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF ALLYL CHLORIDE EMISSIONS
-------
TABLE 3-5. EMISSIONS AND METEOROLOGICAL STATIONS OF SPECIFIC
POINT SOURCES OF ALLYL CHLORIDE
RO.
COHPARY
RITE
*	«	EMISSIONS (CTH»PC»
STAR PLANT SOURCE 	
LATITUDE LOUR I TOPE STATIOR TYPE TYPE PROCESS STORAGE fUClTIVE
1	now
2	SHELL
3	SHELL
FREEPOflT. TX
OEF.n PARK. TX
RORCO. LA
2(t r»9 34» «93 23 an 12923
29 42 93 093 »7 34 129*6
TIO 0« I I 090 23 42 I299B
7.423792
3.240704
3.240704
.394016
.199232
. 199232
. 76*329
.33264*
.33264*
* All allyl chloride currently produced In the United States Is consumed 1n the production of
epichlorohydrin. Therefore, the only emissions sources are the allyl chloride production facilities.
-------
3-13
TABLE 3-6. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE OF AlLYl CHLORIDE RESULTING FROM
SPECIFIC POINT SOURCE EMISSIONS
Concentration Population
Level	Exposed	Dosage
(uq/m3)	(persons)	[(ug/m3) 'persons]
25	19	576
10	127	2,210
5	376	3,960
2.5	1,812	8,610
1	10,178	20,900
0.5	26,109	31,800
0.25	63,281	45,300
0.1	170,957	62,600
0.05	300,767	71,500
0.025	549,875	80,000
0.01	913,265	86,500
0.0047*	940,280	86,700
* The lowest annual average concentration occurring within
20 km of the specific point source.
58/k
-------
3-14
REFERENCES
1.	S. L. Soder and K. Ring, "Propylene," pp. 300.5405E—300.5405L in Chemical Economics
Handbook, Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA (August 1978).
2.	J. L. Blackford, "Epichlorohydrin," pp. 642.3021A—642.3022M in Chemical Economics
Handbook, Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA (May 1978).
3.	C. A. Peterson, Jr., Hydroscience, Inc., Emission Control Options for the Synthetic
Organic Chemicals Manufacturing Industry	Product Report on Glycerin and Its
Intermediates (Allyl Chloride, Epichlorohydrin, Acrolein, and Allyl Alcohol (on
file at EPA, ESED, Research Triangle Park, NC)(March 1979).
4.	J. W. Blackburn, Hydroscience, Inc., Emisson Control Options for the Synthetic
Organic Chemicals Manufacturing Industry	Acrylic Acid and Esters Product Report
(on file at EPA, ESED, Research Triangle Park, NC) (July 1978).
5.	CEH Manual of Current Indicators	Supplementary Data, p. 84 in Chemical Economics
Handbook, Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA (April 1979).
6.	D. B. Dimick, Dow Chemical, Freeport, TX, Texas Air Control Board Emissions
Inventory Questionnaire for 1975, Epichlorohydrin, Glycerin No. 1.
7.	Dow Chemical Co., Freeport, TX, Texas Air Control Board Emission Inventory
Questionnaire for 1975, Allyl Chloride, Glycerin II.
8.	Shell Chemical Co., Deer Park, TX, Texas Air Control Board Emission Inventory
Questionnaire for 1975, Glycerin and Associated Products.
9.	Shell Chemical Co., Norco, LA, Louisiana Air Control Commission Emission Inventory
Questionnaire (January 31, 1977).
10.	Shell Chemical Co., Deer Park, TX, Texas Air Control Board Emission Inventory
Questionnaire for 1975, Resins Process.
-------
APPENDIX A-4
Benzyl Chloride
BENZYL CHLORIDE CHEMICAL DATA
Homeric! ature
Chemical Abstract Service Registry Number: 100-44-7
Synonyms: n-Tolylchloride; Chioromethylbenzene; o-Chlorotoluene
Chemical Formula
Molecular Weight: 126.5
Molecular Formula: C^H^Cl
Molecular Structure:
Cnemical and Physical Properties
Physical State at STP: Liquid - very refractive, irritating odor
Boiling Point: 179°C at 760 mm
Melting Point: -39°C
Density: 1.1026 at 18°C/4°C
Vapor Pressure: 1.4 mm at 25°C
Vapor Density: 4.36
Solubility: Insoluble (H?0)
Log Partition Coefficient (Octanol/HjO):
Atmospheric Reactivity
Transformation Products:
Reactivity Toward 0H«: 2 x Butane
Reactivity Toward 0^: No reaction
Reactivity Toward Photolysis: No photochemical degradation
Major Atmospheric Precursors: n/A
Formation Reactivity:
-------
4-5
I. SOURCES
A.	PRODUCTION
Benzyl chloride (C6H5CH2C1) is currently produced in the United States by the
direct chlorination of boiling toluene. In this process, boiling toluene is
chlorinated in the absence of light until the proper weight increase is achieved.
The reaction mixture is then agitated with mild alkali and distilled. Benzyl
chloride and benzotrichloride are formed as by-products. Other processes for
producing benzyl chloride which are not in use in the U.S. today include chlori-
nation of toluene using sulfuryl chloride and the chloromethylation of benzene
using formaldehyde and hydrogen chloride.
There are currently three producers of benzyl chloride at three locations in the
United States. The site locations of the plants and the 1978 capacity and esti-
mated production levels for each plant are shown in Table 4-1.1 In 1978 an esti-
mated 115 million lb of benzyl chloride was produced.
B.	USES
The major use of benzyl chloride is for the production of butyl benzyl phthalate,
a plasticizer used in the manufacture of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) for floor
coverings. An estimated 75% (86.25 million lb) of benzyl chloride production
was consumed for this end-use. Butyl benzyl phthalate is produced by reacting
butyl alcohol, benzyl chloride, and phthalic anhydride in the presence of an
acid catalyst. The site locations of the butyl benzyl phthalate producers are
shown in Table 4-2.2
Quaternary ammonium compounds are the second largest outlet for benzyl chloride.
They are formed by reacting benzyl chloride with dimethyl alkyl amines and are
used primarily as germicides. Approximately 10% (11.5 million lb) was consumed
for this end-use. Source locations of the major quaternary ammonium compound
manufactures are shown in Table 4-3.2
Benzyl alcohol production consumed 7% of benzyl chloride production (8.0 million
lb). Benzyl alcohol is made by the hydrolysis of benzyl chloride with an alkali.
Benzyl alcohol is used primarily as a textile dye assistant. Source locations
of benzyl alcohol producers are shown in Table 4-4.3
-------
Table 4-1. Benzyl Chloride Producers3
Company
Loca tion
19 70
Capaci ty
no6 Jb/yr)
1970'
Production
(106 Ib/yr)
Geographic Coordinates
La t i. tude/Long i tude
Monsanto
Bridgeport, NJ
00
52.5
39 47 33/75 23 45

C
Sauget, IL
00
52.5
38 35 31/90 10 11
Stauf fer
Edison, NJ
12
8.0
40 29 23/74 23 03
UOP, Inc.
East Rutherford, NJ
3
2.0
40 49 46/74 05 30
Total

175
115 .0

aSee ref. 1.
^Basod on ratio of production to capacity of 66% (see ref. 1).
cMonsanto reports that the Sauget, ILunit was shutdown in July 1982. Emissions
calculations have been revised to omit this source.
-------
Table 4-2. Butyl Benzyl Phthalate Producers3
Company
Location
Monsanto
Bridgeport, NJ
d
Sauget, IL
1970
Butyl Benzyl.
Phathala to
Capaci. ty
(106 lb/yr)
NA1'
NA
197G
Benzyl Chloride*
Used
(ID6 Ih/yr)
13.125
13.125
Geographic Coordinates
f.a t i tude/Lonc) i tude
39 47 33/75 23 45
38 35 31/90 10 11
Total
86.25
aSee ref. 2.
bTotal benzyl chloride use oF 86.25 million lb was distributed evenly over both sites since capacity
data were not available.
Q
Not available.
^Monsanto reports that the Sauget, IL. unit was shutdown in July 1982. Emissions
calculations have been revised to omit this source.
-------
Table 4-3. Quaternary Ammonium Compounds Producers9
Company
Location
Ammon i. um
Capacity
	 V
Compound
(1b/yr)
, , b
Henzyl Chloride
Used (Jb/yr)
Geographic Coordinates
La ti tude/Longi tude
Ak zona
McCook , I L,
c
NA

02,500
41
40
17/87
49
41

Morris, 1b
NA

92,500
41
24
24/80
18
10
Lonza
Mapleton, 1L
NA

92,500
40
34
00/89
43
01
lloxcel
Lodi, NJ
NA

92,500
40
52
00/74
06
50
Wit co
Houston, TX
NA

92,500
29
34
45/95
26
00
Ashland
Janesvilie, WI
NA

92,500
42
41
56/09
00
10
Gulf Oil
Jersey City, NJ
NA

92,500
40
43
02/74
06
14
Rohm & Haas
Philadelphia, PA
NA

92,500
39
54
50/75
11
30
Sterling
Cincinnati, OH
NA

92,500
39
05
15/(34
33
09
National Starch
Salisbury, NC
NA

92,500
35
43
36/00
20
19
Total
9,250,000
aSee ref. 2.
^Total benzyl chloride usage distributed evenly over all 10 sites,
c
Not available.
-------
Table 4-4. Benzyl Alcohol Producers3
Company
Stauffer Chemical
UOP, Inc.
Velsicol
Orbis
Nor da
Location
Edison, NJ
E. Rutherford, NJ
Chattanooga, TN
Newark, NJ
Boon ton, NJ
1978
Capnc ity
Benzyl Alcohol
(106 Ib/yr)
5
2
5
1.5
1.5
1978
Benzyl Chloride
Use
(106 Ib/yr)
2 . 7
1.0
2.7
0.0
0.8
Geographic Coordinates
Latitude/L.ongi tudo
40 29 23/74	23	07
40 49 46/74	05	30
30 36 31/85 16	36
40 41 16/74	12	17
40 54 13/74 24	44
Total
15
8.0
a
See ref. 3.
^Based on 7% of benzyl chloride that is used to make benzyl alcohol (sse ref. 1).
UA capacity
Benzyl alcohol used = ~ jf§	X 0.07 (115 X 10° lb/yr benzyl chloride produced).
-------
4-10
The remaining benzyl chloride production (8%) representing 9.25 million lb was
used in a variety of small diverse chemical intermediate end-uses. Benzyl
chloride end-uses are summarized in Table 4-5.'
II. EMISSION ESTIMATES
A.	PRODUCTION
Benzyl chloride emissions from production sites are presented in Table 4-6.
Total estimated emissions from these sites are 24,260 lb. Emission factors
a c
derived from state files ' included both benzyl chloride production
emissions and benzyl alcohol consumption emissions. They apply only to
Stauffer at Edison, NJ and UOP at E. Rutherford, NJ. These factors are
shown in Table 4-7. Emissions from the Monsanto facility were provided by
Monsanto.7 Process emissions originate primarily from scrubber vents and
vacuum jets. Other associated emission components would include toluene,
hydrochloric acid, and chlorine.
Storage emissions represent the losses from both working and final product
storage as well as loading and handling losses. Fugitive emissions are those
that are result from plant equipment leaks.
Vent parameter data are reported in Table 4rS for both producers and end-users.
B.	USES
Emission estimates for end-users of benzyl chloride are summarized along with
production emissions in Table 4-6. They are based on the emission factors
tabulated in Table 4-7, except where noted.
Benzyl chloride emissions from butyl benzene phthalate production are estimated
to be 6,300 lb. Other associated emissions would include phthalic anhydride
and butanol.
Benzyl chloride emissions from benzyl alcohol production are estimated to have
been 2150 lb. However the emissions from benzyl alcohol manufactured at Stuaffer
and UOP are already included in the benzyl chloride production emission losses.
-------
4-n
Table 4-5. Benzyl Chloride End-Uses 1978*
Use
Usage
(106 lb/yr)
Usage
(%)
Butyl benzyl
phthalate
86.25
75
Benzyl alcohol
8.0
7
Quaternary armionium
compounds
11.5
10
Miscellaneous
9.25
8
Total
115'
100
*See ref. 1.
-------
Table 4-6. Benzyl Chloride Emissions from Producers and Users
	Emissions (lb/yr)		Total Emissions0 ^
Company	location	Source	p roc-ess	S Loragc	Fug! t i ve	(lb/yr)	(g/sec)
Monsanto	Bridgeport, NJ	Production	14,070	1,217	2,614	17,900	0.257
Stauffer
Edison, NJ
Production
1,000
344
744
5,088
0.073
UOP
E. Rutherford, NJ
Production
1 ,000
86
186
1 ,272
0.018
Monsanto
Bridgeport, NJ
BBP
4,720
500
1,080
6,300
0.091
Velsicol
Chattanooga, TN
Benzyl alcohol
945
loa
297
1 ,350
0.019
Orbis
Newark, NJ
Benzyl alcohol
200
32
08
400
0.006
Norda
Boonton, NJ
Benzyl alcohol
200
32
88
400
0.006
Akzona
McCook, IL
QAC
322
46
92
460
0 .007

Mo r r i s , 1L
QAC
322
46
92
460
0.007
Lonza
Mapel ton, IL
QAC
322
46
92
460
0.007
llexcel
Lodi, NJ
QAC
322
46
92
460
0.007
Wi tco
Houston, TX
QAC
322
46
92
460
0.007
Ashland
Janesville, WI
QAC
322
46
92
460
0.007
Gulf Oil
Jersey City, NJ
QAC
322
46
92
460
0.007
Rohm 6 Haas
Philadelphia, PA
QAC
322
46
92
460
0.007
Sterling
Cincinnati, OH
QAC
322
46
92
460
0.007
National Starch
Salisbury, NC
QAC
322
46
92
460
0.007
Total


28,515
2,779
6,017
37,310

aBased on emission factors shown in Table 7.
^Based on 8760 hr/yr operation.
C	7
Based on Monsanto estimate.
-------
Table 4-7. BenzyL Chloride Emission Factors
Emission Factor (lb lost/lb produced) (used)
Source
Process
Deri.vat ion
S toro'io
Derivation
Fugitive
Derivation
To ta 1
Benzyl chloride production	0.000500
(Stauffer/UOP)
Benzyl alcohol	0.000350
Quaternary ammonium compounds	0.000280
B
0.000043
0.000093
B
C	0.000040
D	0.000040
C
D
0.000110	C
0.000000	0
0.000636
0.000500
0.000400
3A - basis site visit data
D - basis state emission files	-L.
C - basis published data
D - basis Hydroscience estimate
Emission factor represents benzyl chloride production and benzyl alcohol use loss.
c
See ref. 6.
dSee refs. 4 and 5.
e
Hydroscience estimate.
-------
Table 4-8. Benzyl Chloride Vent Parameters
Niimbe r
of
Stacks
Vent
lleiyht
(ft)
Vent
D i a me te r
(ft)
Discha rge
Temp.
(°r)
Veloci ty
(f t/sec)
Distribution
Area
Production
Process
Storage
Fugi tive
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Process
Storage
Fugitive
Quaternary NH^ compounds
Process
Storage
Fugitive
Benzyl alcohol
Process
Storage
F ug i t i ve
2
6
3G
24
36
24
20
B
36
20
1.0
0.17
0.6
0. 33
0.33
0.17
0. 33
0.17
78
70
90
80
75
70
00
70
0.02
0.02
14
10
300 X 300
200 X 300
100 X 100
300 X 300
Building cross-section for all sources - 50 m
-------
4-15
Quaternary ammonium compounds manufacture contributed an estimated 4600 lb
of benzyl chloride emissions. Other emission components would likely be
amines. Miscellaneous uses of benzyl chloride were estimated to have contrib-
uted 7493 lb of emissions. These uses are extremely•small and too diverse and
numerous to locate and specify individual emission quantities. Emissions were
estimated by taking a weighted average of the other benzyl chloride end-uses and
multiplying by the 9.25 million lb used.
The total nationwide emissions of benzyl chloride are estimated to be
44,803 lb. A tabulation of the losses is shown in Table 4-9.
-------
4-16
Table 4-9. Benzyl Chloride Nationwide Emissions
Nationwide
Emissions
	Source	(lb/vr)
Production
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Quaternary ammonium compounds
Benzyl alcohol
Miscellaneous^
Total
a
Emissions from the use of 3.7 million lb of benzyl
chloride to produce benzyl alcohol are included in
production.
b
Based on a weighted average emission factor for all
benzyl chloride uses of 0.000405 lb lost/lb used.
24,260
6,300
4 ,600
2,150a
7,493
44,803
-------
FIGURE 4-1. SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF BENZYL CHLORIDE EMISSIONS
-------
TABLE 4-10. EMISSIONS AND METEOROLOGICAL STATIONS OF SPECIFIC
POINT SOURCES OF BENZYL CHLORIDE
EMISSIONS (GM/SEC)
STAR PLANT* SOURCE1" 	
NO.
a COMPANY
SITE
LATITUDE
LONGITUDE
STATION
TYPE
TYPE
PROCESS
STORAGE
FUGITIVE
1
MONSANTO
BRIDGEPORT, NJ
39
47
33
075
23
45
13739
1
1
2
.202373
.067889
.017505
.007191
.037598
.015534
3
STAUFFER
EDISON, NJ
40
29
23
074
23
03
94741
2
1
.057600
.004954
.01714
4
UOP
E. RUTHERFORD, NJ
40
49
46
074
05
30
94741
2
1
.014400
.001238
.002678
5
VELSICOL
CHATTANOOGA, TN
35
02
31
85
16
36
13882
3
3
.013608
.001555
.004277
6
ORBIS
NEWARK, NJ
40
41
16
074
12
17
94741
3
3
.004032
.000461
.001267
7
NOR DA
BOOTEN, NJ
40
54
13
074
24
44
94741
3
3
.004032
.000461
.001267
8
AKZONA
MCCOOK, IL
41
48
17
087
49
41
94846
4
4
.004637
.000662
.001325
9
AKZONA
MORRIS, IL
41
24
24
088
18
10
14855
4
4
.004367
.000662
.001325
10
LONZA
MAPELTON, IL
40
34
00
089
43
01
14842
4
4
.004637
.000662
.001325
11
HEXCEL
LODI, NJ
40
52
00
074
06
50
94741
4
4
.004637
.000662
.001325
12
WITCO
HOUSTON, TX
29
34
45
095
26
00
12906
4
4
.004637
.000662
.001325
13
ASHLAND
JANESEVILLE, WI
42
41
56
089
00
10
14839
4
4
.004637
.000662
.001325
14
GULF OIL
JERSEY CITY, NJ
40
43
02
074
06
14
94741
4
4
.004637
.000662
.001325
15
ROHM & HAAS
PHILADELPHIA, PA
39
54
50
075
11
30
13739
4
4
.004637
.000662
.001325
16
STERLING
CINCINNATI, OH
39
05
15
084
33
09
13840
4
4
.004637
.000662
.001325
17
NATIONAL STARCH
SALISBURY, NC
35
43
34
080
28
19
13728
4
4
.004637
.000662
.001325
aOne emission point has been eliminated due to comments to early drafts of this document.
-------
TABLE 4-10. (Concluded)
~ Plant Types:
Type 1: Plant produces benzyl chloride and butylenzyl phthalate
Type 2: Plant produces benzyl chloride
Type 3: Plant procudes benzyl alcohol
Type 4: Plant produces quaternary anwnonlum compounds
+ Source Types:
Type 1: Benzyl chloride production
Type 2: Butyl benzyl phthalate production
Type 3: Benzyl alcohol production
Type 4: Quaternary ammonium compounds production
-------
4-20
TABLE 4-11. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE OF BENZYL CHLORIDE RESULTING FROM
SPECIFIC POINT SOURCE EMISSIONS
Concentration Population
Level	Exposed	Dosage
(ug/m^)	(persons)	[(ug/m^) * persons]
2.5	1	5
1	10	17
0.5	64	51
0.25	255	114
0.1	2,780	458
0.05	8,691	849
0.025	32,157	1,610
0.01	196,874	3,980
0.005	529,823	6,220
0.0025	1,255,730	8,840
0.001	2,532,018	10,800
9.58 x 10"5*	31,498,400	16,300
* The lowest annual average concentration occurring within
20 km of the specific point source.
58/4
-------
4-21
TABLE 4-12. HAJOR PARAMETERS FOR ESTIMATING EXPOSURE/DOSAGE RESULTING
FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS OF BENZYL CHLORIDE
_	Parameter	 	Value
Daytime decay rate (Kd)	2.8 x 10~5 sec"1
Nighttime decay rate (K^)	0
Hanna-Gifford coefficient (C)	225
Nationwide heating source emissions (E^)	0
Nationwide nonheating stationary source emissions	(E^) 0.108 gm/sec
Nationwide mobile source emissions (E^)	0
-------
TABLE 4-13.
BENZYL CHLORIDE EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULTING FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS
EXPO LEVEL POrULATIOH
(UC/(MK1)	(I'KllNOrO
.000500
.000250
.000100
.000050
.000025
.000010
0.
440032
503140
17551646
no99606B
9»o:ir>25r>
1406070 I I
15007') 105
DOSARE
(l)C/< N>3-
I'K.nSON)
261.0
209.4
3070.7
4551.0
66 17.n
75 I I. :i
75V7.7
PERCENTARE OF CONTIt I IlimON	PERCENTACE OF DISTTUnUTION
IIKATINC STATIONARY MOOII.E CITY TYPE I CITY TYPE 2 CITY TYPE 3
O.
0.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
IOO. (I
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100. o
o.
0.
0.
o.
o.
o.
o.
100. 0
100.0
100.0
99.2
97. O
93.4
92.7
O.
0.
o.
. I
I . 4
2.6
2.7
0.
0.
0.
.7
I .G
4.0
4.6
r»
i
r\>
fsj
-------
LP
CO
-T
TABLE 4-14. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE SUMMARY OF OENZYL CHLORIDE
Concentration
Level
Specific
Point
5ource
Population Exposed
(persona)	
General
Point
Source
Area Source
U.S. Total
Dosage
[(uq/m^) * persons]
Specific
Point
Source
General
Point
Source
Area Source
U.S. Total
2.5
1
0
0
1
5
0
0
5
1
10
0
~
10
17
0
0
17
0.5
64
0
0
64
51
0
0
51
0.25
255
0
0
255
114
0
0
114
0.1
2,780
0
0
2,780
458
0
0
458
0.05
8,691
0
0
8,691
849
0
0
849
0.025
32,157
0
0
32,157
1,610
0
0
1,610
0.01
196,874
0
0
196,874
3,980
0
0
3,980
0.005
529,823
0
G
529,823
6,220
0
0
6,220
0.0025
1,255,730
0
0
1,255,730
8,840
0
0
8,840
0.001
2,532,018
0
0
2,532,018
10,800
0
0
10,800
0.0005
	
0
446,952

	
0
261
	
0.00025
	
0
505,140

	
0
209
		
0.0001
_ _ _
0
17,551,646

	
0
3,080
_____
0.00005
—
0
30,996,868

---
0
4,550
...
0.000025

u
98,0)5,255

...
0
6,620

0.00001

0
140,607,011

		
0
7,510

0
31,498,400
0
158,679,135

16,300
0
7,580
23,880
NOTE: Ihe U3e of — as nn entry indicates that the incremental E/D is not significant (relative to last entry
or relative to entry in another column at the same row) or that the exposure oT l.he same population may be
counted in another column.
-------
4-24
REFERENCES
1.	"Chemical Product Synopsis on Benzyl Chloride," Mannsville Chemical Products,
Mannsville, NY (July 1978).
2.	1979 Directory of Chemical Producers, United States, Stanford Research Institute,
Menlo Park, CA.
3.	"Chemical Product Synopsis on Benzyl Alcohol," Mannsville Chemical Products,
Mannsville, NY (July 1978).
4.	State of New Jersey, Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Air Pollution
Control, files on Universal Oil Products, E. Rutherford, New Jersey.
5.	State of New Jersey, Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Air
Pollution Control, files on Stauffer Chemical Company, Edison, New Jersey.
6.	Special Project Report, "Petrochemical Plant Sites," prepared for Industrial
Pollution Control Division, Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory,
Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH, by Monsanto Research Corporation,
Dayton, OH (April 1976).
7.	Monsanto Company (C.D. Mallock) personal communication in response to publication
of the second draft of this report (February 1982).
-------
APPENDIX A-5
Beryl Hum
BERYLLIUM CHEMICAL DATA
Nomgncl ature
Chemical Abstract Service Registry Number: 744.04-17
Synonyms: Glucinium
Chemical Formula
Molecular Weight: 9.012 (atomic)
Molecular Formula: Be - atomic number: 4
Molecular Structure: Gray metal, close-packed hexagonal structure,
anisotropic
Chemical and Physical Properties
Physical State at STP: hard, non-corrosible gray metal
Boiling Point: 2970°C at 5 mm,
Pelting Point: 1278°C
Density: 1.848 at 20°C/4°C
Vapor Pressure: N/A
Vapor Density: N/A
Solubility: Insoluble
Log Partition Coefficient (Octanol/^O): N/A
Atmospheric Reactivity
Transformation Products: (depend upon aerosol size range and growth char-
acteristics) Metal resistant to attack by acid due to the formation of a thin
Reactivity Toward DH-:	\	oxide film.
Reactivity Toward 0^:	> unreactive
Reactivity Toward Photolysis: )
Major Atmospheric Precursors: n/a
Formation Reactivity:
-------
5-5
I. SOURCES
A.	PRODUCTION
Bertrandite ore is the major source for beryllium mineral produced in the United
States. Production data for beryllium have not been reported in recent years
in order to avoid disclosing individual company confidential data.1
Only one site, Brush Wellman, Inc., in Millard County, Utah, processes bertrandite
ore and converts it to beryllium hydroxide. Brush Wellman processes both domestic
bertrandite ore, mined at its delta facility, and imported beryl ore for
Kawecki-Berylco. The beryllium hydroxide resulting from the processing of the
imported beryl ore is then upgraded by Kawecki-Berylco at its plants in Hazelton
and Reading, Pennsylvania.1'2 Small quantities of beryl ore have reportedly been
mined in South Dakota and Arizona.
In 1976, the last year for which data are available, 7.5 million lb of beryllium
was used in the United States. Of this quantity, approximately 2.1 million lb
was imported from other countries, and the remaining 5.4 million lb was obtained
from stockpiles and production.2
B.	USES
The primary end-use of beryllium is in the manufacture of beryllium-copper alloys.
An estimated 75% (5.6 million lb) is consumed for this end-use. Beryllium metal
production consumed an estimated 18% (1.35 million lb}, and beryllium oxide con-
sumed the remaining 7% (0.55 million lb). Uses are summarized in Table 5-1.'2 There
have been no reported exports of beryllium since 1964. Source locations for the
major beryllium metal and alloy sites are shown in Table 5-2.3,4 Total beryllium
use in metal and alloy manufacture was allocated based on the number of employees
at each site.
C.	INCIDENTAL SOURCES
Incidental sources of beryllium emissions include coal- and oil-fired boilers,
coke ovens, and the gray iron foundry industry. The boilers include industrial,
power plant, commercial, and residential types. Beryllium emissions originate
as impurities from oil and coal when they are burned in the boilers or in coke
ovens or as diesel fuel. Table 5-3 shows the estimated consumption of oil and coal
in 1978 by category. Table 5-4 indicates, by region, the percent of coal and oil
used by power plants.
-------
5-6
Table 5-1. Beryllium End-Use 1978a
Use
Usage
(106 lb/yr)¦
Usage
(%)
Beryllium-copper alloys
5-6
75
Beryllium metal
1. 35
18
Beryllium-oxide ceramics
0.55
7
Total
7.5
100
See ref. 2.
-------
a
Table 5-2. Beryllium Metal and Alloy Producers
Company
Brush Wellman
Kawecki Derylco Industries
Total
liOcn tion
Elmore, Oil
Reading, PA
Hampton, NJ
llazelton, PA
Reading, PA
DuryIlium Metal/
A] Joy C.iput: i t:y
	( Ib/yr)	
MA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Bcry L.lium
Unod
(1 Ij/yr)
2 . 39
0.57
0.28
2.16
1.55
6.95
Geographical Location
Latitude/Long i tude
11 28 06/0 3	16	37
40 46 4 5/73	11	10
40 42 32/74	57	41
40 21 28/75	57	10
40 47 32/73	11	50
See refs. 3 and 4.
3Total beryllium usage distributed over the sites based on the number of people employed.
en
i
-------
5-8
Table 5-3. 1978 United States Oil and Coal Consumption*
User
Coal Consumption
(million tons)
Oil Consumption
(million bbls)
Electrical utilities
480
646
Industry
55
671
Coke ovens
75
-
Residential commercial
8
707
Diesel fuel
-
32 7
Total
618
2351
*See refs 5 and 6.
-------
Table 5-4. Electrical Utility Power Plant Locations and
Usage of Coal and Oil by Geographic Region*
Region
Number of
Sites
Percentage of
Total U.S. Coal
Consumption
Number of
Sites
Percentage of
Total U.S. Oil
Consumption
New England
9
0.7
35
9.4
Middle Atlantic
51
11.3
70
27.9
East North Central
156
33.9
110
5.9
West North Central
111
9.4
85
0.7
South Atlantic
61
19.6
97
31.4
East South Central
44
16.3
26
2.0
.West South Central
3
1.3
100
4.8
Mountain
38
6.8
44
2.2
Pacific
1
0.7
33
15.7
Total
474
100.0
600
100.0
*See ref. 7.
-------
5-10
II. EMISSION ESTIMATES
A.	PRODUCTION
The primary source of emission data for this summary das the Survey of Emissions
and Controls for Hazardous and Other Pollutants prepared for the Environmental
Protection Agency by the Mitre Corp.8 In this report, it is estimated that
emissions resulting from ore mining and processing, use as beryllium oxide, and
use in beryllium metal fabrication are negligible due to control techniques.
The only significant sources of beryllium emissions are in beryllium alloy and
compound manufacture and from the incidental sources noted in Section I.
B.	USES
Beryllium emissions from beryllium metal and alloy manufacture are shown in
Tabl£ 5-5.3' ** '8 Total emissions were derived by multiplying the emission factor
of 0.0U0785 lb beryllium lost per lb used from the Mitre report8 times the beryllium
used. Total beryllium emissions from this end-use are estimated to have been
5455 lb.
C.	INCIDENTAL
Beryllium emissions resulting from gray iron foundry operations are shown in
Table 5-6 by geographic region. They totaled 8,000 lb. Emissions were estimated
by multiplying the emission factor 0.000444 lb/ton8 times the estimated pro-
duction of 18,000,000 tons of metal. The total emissions were then distributed
by region based on the total number of employees in gray iron foundry operations
in each region.9
Beryllium emissions resulting from electrical utility power plants are shown
for coal-firec operations ir. Table 5-7 and for oil-fired operations in Table 5-8.
Coal-fired plants had emissions of 240,000 lb, and oil-fired plants had emissions
of 9500 lb.
These emissions were calculated by multiplying the emission factors shown in
Tables 5-7 and 5-8 by the coal and oil used shown in Table 5-3. The emissions were
distributed by region according to the usage percentages shown in Table 5-4.
-------
Table 5-5. Beryllium Emissions from Beryllium Metal and Allyol Production
Company
r,oca tion
IV; ry Ilium Used
(lb/yr)b
Beryl 1 iiun
(lb/yr)
Emissions0
(q/sec)d
Brush Wellman
Elmore, Oil
2. 39
1875
0.027

Reading, PA
0. 57
450
0.006

Hampton, NJ
0.2B
2 20
0.00 3
Kawecki-Berylco
Hazel ton, PA
2. 16
1695
0.024

Reading, PA
1.55
1215
0.017
Total

6.05
5455

aSee refs. 3 and 4.
^Total beryllium usaye allocated per site based on the number of employees at each site.
Q
Based on emission factor of 0.000785 lb beryllium lost per lb used. C - derived from published source.
See ref. 8.
Assumes 8760 hr/yr operation.
-------
5-12
Table 5-6. Beryllium Emissions from Gray Iron Foundry Operations*

Number of
Sites
Beryllium Emissions
(lb/yr)
Average
Emissions/Site
Recion
(lb/yr)
/ / Nb
(q/sec)
New England
13
200
15.4
0.0002
Middle Atlantic
42
735
17.5
0.000 3
East North Central
129
4170
32. 3
0.0005
West North Central
29
455
15.7
0.0002
South Atlantic
22
590
26.8
0.0004
East South Central
37
944
25.5
0.0004
West South Central
19
400
21.0
0.0003
Mountain
5
95
23.8
0.0003
Pacific
28
408
14.5
0.0002
Total
324
8000C


a
See ref. 9.
b
Based on 8760 nr/yr operation.
Q
Based on an emission factor of 0.000444 lb beryllium lost per ton of metal produced.
C - derived from published data. See ref. 8.
-------
5-13
Table 5-7. Beryllium Emissions from Electrical Utilities
Power Plants Coal-fireda
Region
Number of
Sites
Beryllium Emissions
(lb/vr)
Averaoe
(lb/yr)
Emissions/Site
(q/sec)b
New England
9
1,680
190
0.003
Middie Atlantic
51
27,120
5 30
0.008
East North Central
156
81,360
520
0.007
West North Central
111
22,560
200
¦0.003
South Atlantic
61
47,040
770
0.011
East South Central
44
39,120
890
0.013
West South Central
3
3,120
1040
0.015
Mountain
38
16,320
4 30
0.006
Pacific
1
1,680
1680
0.024
.Total
474
240,000°
506

aSee ref. 7.
^Based on 8760 hr/yr operation.
Q
Based on 0.00000025 lb beryllium emitted per lb coal burned. C - derived from
published data. See ref. 8.
-------
5-14
Table 5-8. Beryllium Emissions from Electrical Utility
Power Plants Oil-fired3
Recion
Number of
Sites
Beryllium Emissions
(lb/yr)
Averaae
(lb/yr)
Emissions/Site
(g/sec)b
New Englar.d
35
893
25.5
0.0004
Kiddle Atlantic
70
2650
37.9
0.0005
East North Central
110
560
5.1
nil
West North Central
85
67
0.8
nil
South Atlantic
97
2983
30. 8
0.0004
East South Central
26
190
7.3
0.0001
West South Central
100
456
4.6
nil
Mountain
44
209
4.8
nil
Pacific
33
1492
45.2
0.0007
Total
600
9500°
15.8

a„	_
See rer. 7.
^Based on 8760 hr/yr operation.
CBased on 0.00000035 lb beryllium emitted per gallon oil burned. C - derived from
published data. See ref. 8.
-------
5-15
Beryllium emissions from coke oven operations were estimated to be 37,500 lb as
shown in Table 5-9. This estimate is based on the coal emission factor derived
for power plants.8 Total emissions were distributed by the number of sites in
each region.10
The remaining incidental sources of beryllium emissions are from other sources
that burn oil or coal. The emission factors used were the same as for power
plant emission estimates. Emissions from oil- and coal-fired industrial boilers
were estimated to have been 27,500 lb and 9870 lb respectively. Emissions from
residential and commercial oil and coal heating were estimated to be 4,000 lb
and 10,400 lb respectively. Diesel fuel consumption generated an estimated
4810 lb of beryllium emissions. Source locations for all these incidental cate-
gories are considered too numerous and too diverse to pinpoint regional distribu-
tions .
Vent parameter data for all beryllium emission sources are shown in Table 5-10.
Table 5-11 presents a summary of beryllium emissions. Total nationwide beryllium
emissions are estimated to have been 357,035 lb in 1978.
-------
5-16
Table 5-9. Beryllium Emissions from Coke Oven Operations3

Number of
Beryllium Emissions
Region
Sites
(lb/yr)
New England
0
0
Middle Atlantic
15
9,220
East North Central
25
15,370
West North Central
3
1,845
South Atlantic
4
2,460
East South Central
9
5,530
West South Central
2
1,2 30
Mountain
2
1,2 30
Pacific
1
615
Total
61
37,500b'C
aSee ref. 10.


Based or. an emission
factor of 0.00000025
lb lost/lb coal
burned. See ref. 8.


CAverage emission per
site 615 lb/yr (0.009
g/sec).
-------
5-17
*
Table 5-10. Beryllium Vent Parameters
Source
Number of
Stacks
Vent Height
(ft)
Vent
Diameter
(ft)
Discharge
Temperature
(°F)
Velocity
(ft/sec)
Power plants
1
400
16
200
90
Gray iron foundry
1
150
2
200
40
Alloy manufacture
2
40
1
140
10
Coke oven
2
30
1
300
15
2
•Building cross-section for all sources - 200 m .
-------
5-18
Table 5-11. 1970 Beryllium Nationwide Emissions
Source
Estimated
Nationwide Emissions
(lb/vr)
Producers
3eryllia-n metal, alloys, and compounds
SerylliUiTi fabrication
Beryllium oxide-ceramics
Gray iron foundries
Electrical utility
Power plant boilers
Coal
Oil
Industrial boilers
Coal
Oil
Sesidenticl/cormercial boilers
Coal
Oil
Coke ovens (coal)
Diesel fuel (oil)
Negligible
5,455
Negligible
Negligible
8,000
240,000
9,500
27,500
9,870
4,000
10,400
37,500
4, 810
Total
357,035
-------
FIGURE 5-1. SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF BERYLLIUM EMISSIONS
-------
Ln
oo
-r
TABLE 5-12. EMISSIONS AMD ME TEOROLOGICAL STATIONS OF SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF UERYU.IUM
No.
Company
Site
1 Brush Wellman Elinor, OH
2 Brush Wellman Reading, PA
3 Brush Wellman Hampton, NJ
4 Kawecki-Berylco Reading, PA
5 Kawecki-Berylco Hazelton, PA
Star	Plant Source
TVPe
Emissions (qm/Bec)
Lat itude Lonqi turie Station Type
20 06	08) 16 37 94030
40 46 45	076 11 10 14712
40 42 32	074 57 41 94741
40 47 32	076 11 50 14712
40 21 2B 075 57 10 14737
Process Storage Fugitive
.027000	0.1075	0.
.006480
.003168
.024408
.017496
0.450
0.220
0.695
0.1215
0.
0.
in
i
IVJ
O
All the emissions of beryllium are from metal and alloy production sites with the Following emissions parameters:
Vent height = 12 m
2
Building croas-gection = 200 m
Vent diameter = 0.3 m
Vent velocity - 3 m/aec
Vent temperature = 333 *K
-------
5-21
TABLE 5-13. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE OF BERYLLIUM RESULTING FROM
SPECIFIC POINT SOURCE EMISSIONS
Concentration Population
Level	Exposed	Dosage
(ug/tn^)	(persons)	[(ng/rc^) • persons]
0.25	102	32
0.1	562	108
0.05	1,298	160
0.025	3,042	225
0.01	8,937	314
0.005	32,669	472
0.0025	74,596	618
0.001	176,030	770
5.0 x 10"6*	720,266	923
*The lowest annual average concentration occurring within 20 km of the
specific point source.
58/4
-------
CD
-r

TABLE
5-10. EMISSIONS RATES AND NUMIICR OF GENERAL
POINf SOURCES OF
BERYLLIUM



Cray Iron
Foundry
Power Plant
(Coal)
Power Plant
(Oil)
Coke Oven


Emissions/Site
Number
Emi saions/Si te
Number
Emissions/Site
Number
Emissions/Site
Number
Reqion
(qm/aec)
of Sites
(qm/aec)
of Sites
(qm/sec)
of Sites
(qm/sec)
of Sitea
New England
0.00022
13
0.00274
9
0.00037
35
O
0
Hiddle Atlantic
0.00025
42
0.00763
51
0.00055
70
0.00885
15
Eaat North Central
0.00047
129
0.00749
156
0.000073
110
0.008B5
25
Weat North Central
0.00023
29
0.00208
111
0.000012
85
0.00885
3
South Atlantic
0.00039
22
0.0111
61
0.00044
97
0.00005
4
Cast South Central
0.00037
37
0.012B
44
0.00011
26
0.00805
9
West South Central
0.00030
19
0.0150
3
0.000066
100
0.00805
2
Mountain
0.00034
5
0.0062
38
0.000069
44
0.00885
2
Paci fic
0.00021
28
0.00242
1
0.00065
33
0.00885
1
cn
i
ro
r>o
-------
TABLE 5-15. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULTING FROM EMISSIONS FROM GENERAL POINT SOURCES OF BERYLLJUM
Population Exposed	Dosage
(1Q3 persons)	 	[ 10^(uq/m3) * persons]
Concent ration
Gray
Power
Power


Gray
Power
Power


Level
I ron
Plant
Plant

U.S.
I ron
Plant
Plant
Coke
U.S.
(pq/m')
F oundry
(Coal)
(Oil)
Coke Oven
Total
F oundry
(Coal)
(Oil)
Oven
Tota
0.1
0
0
0
1.3
I.J
0
0
0
0.15
0.15
0.05
0
0
0
14
14
0
0
0
0.9
0.9
0.025
0
0
0
GO
00
0
0
0
3
3
0.01
0
40
0
464
504
0
0.5
0
9
9
0.005
0
410
0
1,200
1,610
0
3
0
14
17
0.0025
—
~
—
--
—
0
10
0
20
30
0.001
—
—
--
--
--
0.02
19
0
2(1
47
0.0005
—
—
—
--
—
0.3
29
0.05
36
65
0.00025
—
—
—
--
--
0.7
37
0.12
44
02
0
—
—
—
—
—
6.4
01
3.2
55
145
NOTE: The use of — as an entry indicates that the incremental E/D is not significant (relative to last entry
or relative to entry in another column at the same row) or that the exposure of the same population may
be counted in another column.
-------
5-24
TABLE 5-16. MAJOR PARAMETERS FOR ESTIMATING EXPOSURE/DOSAGE RESULTING
FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS OF BERYLLIUM
Parameter	Value
Daytime decay rate (lO	0
Nighttime decay rate (Kn)	0
Hanna-Gifford coefficient (C)	225
Nationwide heating source emissions (EH)	0.203 gm/sec
Residential/commercial coal-burning	0.058 gm/sec
Residential/commerical oil-burning	0.145 gm/sec
Nationwide nonheating stationary source emissions (EN)	0.538 gm/sec
Coal-burning	0.396 gm/sec
Oil-burning	0.142 gm/sec
Nationwide mobile source emissions (EM)	0.0693 gm/sec
Ratio of truck emissions to auto emissions	(RM) 3.0
58/4
-------
1/1
CD
*r
TABLE 5-17. F1ERYLI.1UM EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULTING FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS
Exposure
Level
Dosage
Percentage of Contribution
Percentage of Distribution
(pq/m3)
(person)
person)
Heatinq
Stationary
Mobile
Citv Type 1
Citv Type 2
City Type 3
0.002500
505,140
1,758.9
13.8
82.4
3.0
100.0
0.
0.
0.001000
9,149,730
16,754.3
30.8
66.6
2.6
100.0
0.
0.
0.000500
20,601,329
30,552.2
28.9
66.7
4.4
100.0
0.
0.
0.000250
73,351,092
45,256.6
27.7
67.2
5.1
97.8
0.8
1.3
0.000100
139,664,753
56,842.5
26.9
67.4
5.8
94.2
2.5
3.3
0.
158,679,135
53,136.8
26.8
67.4
5.8
92.8
2.6
4.6
in
i
f\s
in
-------
I ABLE 5-10. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE SUMMARY OE UEHYLl. 1IIM
Population Exposed	Dosage
(persons)			[(uq/m*) • peraona)
Concentration
Level
(pq/m*)
Speci f ic
Point
Source
General
Point
Source
Area Source
U.S. Total
Specific
Point
Source
General
Point
Source
Area Source
U.S. Total
0.25
102
0
0
102
32
0
0
32
0.1
562
1 ,300
0
1,862
108
150
0
258
0.05
1,290
14,000
0
15,290
160
900
0
1,060
0.025
3,042
00,000
0
83,042
225
3,000
0
3,225
0.01
8 937
504,000
0
512,937
314
9,000
0
9,314
0.005
32,669
1,610,000
0
1,642,669
472
17,000
0
17,472
0.0025
74,596
--
505,140
74,596
618
30,000
1,759
32,377
0.001
176,030
--
9,149,730
176,030
770
47,000
16,754
64,524
0.0005
—
—
2B, 601,329
--
—
65,000
30,552
—
0.00025
--
—
73,351,092
—
—
82,000
45,257
—
0.0001
--
--
139,664,750
--
--
--
56,843
—
0
720,266
~
158,679,135
—
923
145,000
5B,100
204,023
NOTE: The use of — as an entry indicates that the incremental E/D is not significant (relative to last entry or
relative to entry in another column at the game row) or that the exposure of the same population may be
counted in another column.
-------
5-27
REFERENCES
1.	Benjamin Petkof, "Beryllium," Bureau of Mines Minerals Yearbook, 1976.
2.	"Beryllium Minerals—Salient Characteristics," Chemical Economics Handbook,
p. 716.1000A, Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA (July 1978).
3.	1978 Directory of Chemical Producers, United States, p. 474, Stanford Research
Institute, Menlo Park, CA.
4.	1979 Thomas Register, Thomas Publishing Co., New York, NY.
5.	"Bituminous Coal," Chemical Economics Handbook, p. 211.3026, Stanford Research
Institute, Menlo Park, CA (October 1978).
6.	"Fuel Oils," Chemical Economics Handbook, p. 229.4350B, Stanford Research
Institute, Menlo Park, CA (February 1979).
7.	"Existing Power Plants as of 1974," supplied by Systems Applications, Inc.,
San Rafael, CA, to Hydroscience, Inc., Knoxville, TN.
8.	Survey of Emissions and Controls for Hazardous and Other Pollutants, the Mitre
Corp., EPA Contract No. 68-01-0438, p. 103.
9.	Marketing Economics Key Plants 1975-1976, Marketing Economics Institute,
New York, New York.
10.	"Coke Oven Plants in the United States," p. 212.2000A—D, Chemical Economics
Handbook, Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA (October 1978).
-------
APPENDIX A-6 	 Carbon Tetrachloride
CARBON TETRACHLORIDE CHEMICAL DATA
Homencl ature
Cher.ical Abstract Service Registry Number: 56-23-5
Synonyms: Tetrachloromethane; Perchloromethane; Methane Tetrachloride;
Necatorina; Benzinoforrn
Chemical Formula
Molecular Weight: 153.82
Molecular Formula: CCl^
Molecular Structure:
CI
i
CI - C-CI
I
CI
Chemical end- Physical Properties
Physical State at STP: Liquid - colorless, nonflammable
Boiling Point: 76.54°C at 760 mm
Melting Point: -22.99°C
Density: 1.5940 at 20°C/4°C
Vapor Pressure: 115.2 mm at 25°C
Vapor Density: 5.32
Solubility: Soluble (0.77 g/7 of H20)
Log Partition Coefficient (Octanol/H^O): 2.64
Atmospheric Reactivity
Transformation Products: None - NAPP
Reactivity Toward OH.; Extremely slow
Reactivity Toward 0^: Extremely slow
Reactivity Toward Photolysis: NAPP
Major Atmospheric Precursors: Chlorinated hydrocarbons
Formation Reactivity:
-------
6-5
I. SOURCES
Four volatile organic compounds	methyl chloride, methylene chloride, chloro
form, and carbon tetrachloride	comprise the group of chemicals commonly referred
to as the chlorooethanes.
Carbon tetrachloride (CC14) can be produced by a variety of processes including
the chlorination of carbon disulfide, methane, and methyl chloride, or the chlori-
nolysis of mixed hydrocarbons.
In 197S six companies at ten locations in the U.S. produced an estimated 750 million
lb of carbon tetrachloride. The locations of the plants, the type of production
process used, and the 1978 capacity and estimated production level for each
plant are shown in Table 6-1.4'a'9
The major end-use for carbon tetrachloride is in the production of the fluoro-
carbon gases trichlorofluoromethane (F-ll) and dichlorodifluoromethane (F-12).
An estimated 55% (412.5 million lb) of carbon tetrachloride was used to make
F-12 and an estimated 255.0 million lb was used to make F-ll in 1978. .
The remaining carbon tetrachloride production (60.0 million lb) was used in
solvent applications as an oil, wax, and fat extractant; in rubber cement; in
shoe and furniture polishes; in paints and lacquers,- in printing ink; in floor
waxes; in stains; and in pesticide manufacture.
An estimated 3% of the total production amounting to 22.5 million lb of carbon
tetrachloride was exported. End-uses for carbon tetrachloride are summarized
in Table 6-2.6
II. EMISSION ESTIMATES
PRODUCTION
Estimated emission losses from the production of carbon tetrachloride for each
location is shown in Table 6-3.''2 Total emissions of methylene chloride,
chloroform, and carbon tetrachloride from production facilities are estimated
to have been 645,914 lb.",~ 351,280 lb, and 4,141,360 lb respectively in 1978.
These estimates are based on the emission factors generated for each of the
four processes used in the industry2,10 Other associated emission components
include methyl chloride and hydrogen chloride from the methyl chloride and
methane chlorination processes and perchloroethylene, ethylene source locations
-------
TABLE 6-1. Production of Carbon Tetrachloride3
b
Source
Locat ion
1978
Estimated
c
Production
(10fi ]b/yr)
d
Process
1970
Estimated
Capacity
(10r> Lb/yr)
Geographic Coordinates
Lati tude/Longitude
Allied Chemical Corp.
Moundsville, wv
4
c
A, 13
0
39
54
24/80
47
51
Dow Chemical
Freeport, TX
70
B
135
28
59
15/95
24
45

Pittsburg, CA
42
C
80
37
59
34/121
. 54 56

Plaquemine, LA
65
C
125
30
19
00/91
15
00
Du Pont
Corpus Christi, TX
213
C
410
27
53
00/97
15
00
FMC Corp.
S. Charleston, WV
156
D
300
30
22
10/81
40
03
Stauffer Chemical
LeMoyne, AL
104
D
200
30
53
50/87
58
50

Louisville, KV
10
C
35
30
12
09/85
51
49
Vulcan Materials Co.
Geismar, T f\
47
C
90
30
10
00/90
59
00

Wichita, KS
31
C
60
37
36
55/97
18
30
Total

750

1443





aSee refs. 4, 0,and 9.
bFMC Corp. has announced that It is shutting down its 300 million pound per year plant in S. Charleston, WV, in
September 1979.
distribution of the 750 million pounds per year for each producing location has been made as a direct ratio of
total production/total capacity X plant capacity.
^(A)	- Methyl chloride chlorinqtion.
(B)	- Methane chlorination•
(C)	- Chlorinolysis of mixed HC feed with perchlor co-product.
(D)	- Carbon disulfide chlorination.
e5% methane chlorination, 95% methyl chloride chlorination.
-------
6-7
TABLE 6-2. 1978 Carbon Tetrachloride Consumption by End Use*
End Use
Percent of Consumption
End Use	Total Consumption	(H lb)
Dichlorodifluoromethane (F-12)
55
412.5
Trichlorofluoromethane (F-ll)
34
255.0
Solvents and miscellaneous
8
60.0
Export
	3
22.5
Total
100
750.0
*See ref. 6.
-------
TAOLE 6-3. 1970 Carbon Tetrachloride Production Emissions
Company
l/yt)
(q/nrc)''
(ll./yi »
(q/src)*1
(lh/yr)
(q/noc)'1
(lb/yr)
Iq/sec)
Allied Chemical
Houndsv 111 et WV
20
HI 1
510
0.007
290
0.004
020
0.01 2
Dow Chemical
Freeport, TK
370
0.005
n,nno
0.120
5,030
0.072
14,260
0. 206

Pittsburg, CA
350
0.005
70.140
1.010
20,500
0. 296
91,070
1. 311

plaqucmlne, LA
550
0.000
inn.550
1.563
31,050
0. 459
140,950
2.029
Dupont
Corpus Christ 1, TX
1,790
0.026
3r.5,710
5.121
104,370
1.503
461,870
6.649
rue
South Charleston, WV
1,560,000
22.4511
510,400
7.636
93,600
1. 347
2,184,000
31.441
Stauffer
Lemoyne, AL
713.000
10.694
252,600
3.636
44,600
0.641
1,040,000.
14.971

Louisville. K*
150
0.002
30,000
0.433
0,020
0.127
39,030
0.562
Vulcan
Ctlsmnr, Ul
400
0.006
7B, 490
1.130
23,030
0. 332
101,920
1.467

Hlchlta. KA
260
0.004
51,770
0.745
15,190
0. 219
67,220
0. 968
Total

2.306,890

1,407,110

347,360

•4,141,360

°Dorlved from the emission factors sltown In Table 10.
**Ba3ed on 8760 hr/yr operation.
-------
6-9
source locations for fluorocarbons 11 and 12 manufacture are shown in Table fr-4.13
Also shown in that table are the production quantities for fluorocarbons 11 and
12 and the corresponding carbon tetrachloride manufacturing requirement.
Emission estimates of carbon tetrachloride from these sites are shown in Table 6-5.14
Total estimated emissions of carbon tetrachloride from fluorocarbon 11 and 12
production sites are estimated to be 333,360 lb.	Other associated
emissions from these sites would incude other halocarbons used as feed materials
and the various fluorocarbons produced. Vent parameter data relative to carbon
tetrachloride emissions from fluorocarbons 11 and 12 production are shown in
Table 8-7. Carbon tetrachloride emissions originate from two process distillation
vents and four storage tanks.
The remaining carbon tetrachloride (60.0 million lb) consumed for solvent appli-
cations is eventually released to the atmosphere. Specific source locations
could not be identified. Emissions from exports were assumed to be negligible.
Total annual nationwide emissions of carbon tetrachloride are estimated to be
64,500,000 lb. A tabulation of the losses is shown in Table 6-6.
-------
Table 6-4. Users of Carbon Tetrachloride and Chloroform to Produce Fluorocarbons
Allied Chemical
\
Baton Rouge, LA
Danville, XL
Elizabeth, NJ
El Sequndo, CA ^
Dd Pont
Ant loch, CA
Deepwater, NJ
Montague, Ml	\
Louisville, KY
Corpua Christl, TX
/
Pcnnvalt Corp.
Calvert City, IC*
Thorofare, HJ
Union Carbide
Institute and S. Charleston, WV
Essex Chemical Corp. (Racon)
Wichita, KS
Kaiser Alumlnuri i Chemical Corp.
Gramercy, LA
Total
Flurorocarbon
Annual
Capaci ty
(106 lbl
Estimated 1978 Production
F6n
(10° lb)
F- 1 2
CIO6 lb)
r-22
<106 lb)
Estimated
Product Ion
Tota 19
iio*> ib)
Carbon
Tetra-
chloride
Used
(106 lb)
Chloro-
form
Used
DO6 lb)
Geographic Coordinates
Latitude/Longitude
310
Assured shut down
28.5	40.6
20.5	40.6
28.5	40.6
282.9
87. 3
87. 3
87. 3
55.7
55.7
40 08 30/87 33 45
40 40 45/74 13 51
33 56 30/118 26 35
400
36.8
36.8
36.8
52. 3
52. 3
52. 3
48. 8
48.8
364.9
112.6
112.6
112.6
71.9
71. 9
37 59 37/121 52 00
39 41 25/75 30 35
43 24 10/66 23 40
30 11 51/05 54 13
27 53 00/97 15 00
B0
35
22.1	31.4
Assuned shutdown
19.5
73.0
67.6
28. f
37 03 18/00 19 40
Hot listed
Assuned shutdown
00
925
21B
310. 1
192.7
720.8
667.5
283.8
•See ref. 13.
-------
6-n
Table 6-5. Emissions from Carbon Tetrachloride and
Chloroform Users for Flurocarbon Production3
F-ll/F-12 Carbon
Tetrachloride	F-22 Chloroform
Emissions	Emissions
Source
Location
(lb/vr)b
(q/sec)d
(lb/yr)c
(q/sec)d
Allied ®
Danville, IL
58,460
0.84
0


Elizabeth, NJ
0
0
16,350
0.24

El Segundo, CA
3,400
0.05
100
0.001
Du Pont
Antioch, CA
75,420
1.09
0
0

Deepwater, NJ
75,420
1.09
148,800
2.14

Montague, MI
75,420
1.09
0
0

Louisville, KY
0

148,800
2.14
Pennwalt
Calvert City, K¥
45,240
0. 65
59,410
0. 86
Total

333,360

373,460

a
See ref. 14.
bBased cn the following emission factor, except where noted:
Process 0.000449 A - (derived from site visit)
Storage 0.000442 A - (derived from site visit)
Fugitive C.000178 A - (derived from site visit)
0.001069
CBased on the following emission factor, except where noted:
Process 0	A - (derived from site visit)
Storage 0.00374 A - (derived from site visit)
Fugitive 0.00075	A - (derived from site visit)
0.00449
d
Assumes 8760 hours/year operation.
p	• 15
Allied Company has supplied their own emissions estimates.
-------
6-12
Table 6-6.	Estimated Carbon Tetrachloride Nationwide Emission Losses
Estimated National
	Source	Emission (M lb/yr)
Production
Dichlorodifluoromethane (F-12
Trichlorofluoromethane
Solvents, miscellaneous
Export
Total
)
4.14
0.36
60.0
_0	
64.5
-------
-n\
13
••—» >
CT\
I
CO
FIGURE 6-1. SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF CARBON TETRACHLORIDE EMISSIONS
-------
TABLE 6-7. EMISSIONS AND METEOROLOGICAL STATIONS OF SPECIFIC
POINT SOURCES OF CARBON TETRACHLORIDE
no.c
COMPANY
SITE
*	1
STAIl PLANT SOOHCF.
LATITUDE LONG ITUI1K STATION TYPE TYPE
emissions ( cm/sec )
PHOCESS STOIIAGE FUGITIVE
1
ALLIED CHEMICAL
MOUWDSV ILI.E. WV
:»<»
54
39
ono
44
49
13736
1
2
DOW CHEMICAL
FREEPOHT, TX
211
59
32
095
23
:ir»
1292:1
2
3
DOW CHEMICAL
pirrsnuno, ca
(17
59
34
121
54
r>6
2:1202
3
4
DOW CHEMICAL
Pl.AQUEM 1NE. LA
ao
19
00
09 1
15
00
1:1970
:i
3
DUPONT
conrus cnisTi. tx
27
53
00
097
15
00
12925
3
6
STAUIFF.H
LOUISVILLE, KY
:iii
12
09
our;
r> i
49
9111120
3
7
VULCAN
CE1SMAI1. LA
30
10
00
090
59
00
129511
:t
n
VULCAN
WICHITA. KA
07
ao
lis
097
III
ao
03920
a
9
FMC
SO CHARLESTON, WV
an
'»<»
10
0(lt
40
oa
i:wu><>
4
te
STAUITEll
LEMOYNE. AL
:io
r.:i
50
0117
511
50
9:11141
4
11
ALLIED
DANVILLE. II.
40
Oil
;io
on7
a:»
45
1 4006
r>
1
. 0002Hfl
.007344
.004176
0
.005320
.127872
.072402
a
.005040
1 .010016
.296332
:i
.007920
1 .563120
. 451)640
a
.025770
5.122224
I .50292U
a
.002 ICO
.4321164
. 1270011
a
.005700
1 . I3W256
.331632
a
. 00:1744
. 74540H
.210736
4
22.404000
7.637760
1 . 3471140
4
14.976000
5.09IU40
. 119113 60
5
.35a520
. 34U040
. 139680
o%
I
13
ALLIED
EL SECUNDO. CA
33
36
30
1 in
26
35
23129
5
3
0.0
.048903
0.0
14
DtlPONT
DEF.PWATEH. M J
39
41
23
073
30
35
13739
3
3
.456192
.440992
.100864
13
UIH'tlNT
IIONTACU... Ml
43
¦21
10
ftliC
23
¦;o
(4«l-;o

:¦
. '>K'.>04»
. 4
16
DUPONT
ANTIOCII, CA
:i7
59
a/
121
52
IK,
232«>2
5
5
. 451.192
. '14U992
. lHOl',64
17
I'ENNWALT
CALVEIIT CITY. ICY
37
Oil
111
Ollll
19
<>0
o;;ait>
5
5
. 27:>ooo
. 2»>92;i0
.100432
a0ne emission point has been eliminated due to comments to early drafts of this document.
-------
TABLE 6-7 (Concluded)
* Plant Types:
Type 1: Plant produces carbon tetrachloride by using the methyl chloride
chlorination process
Type 2: Plant produces carbon tetrachloride by using the methane chlorlnatlon
process
Type 3: Plant produces carbon tetrachloride by using the chlorlnolysls process
Type 4: Plant produces carbon tetrachloride by using the carbon disulfide
chlorlnation process
Type 5: Plant produces flurocarbons
+ Source Types:
Type 1: Methyl chloride chlorlnatlon process
Type 2: Methane chlorlnatlon process
Type 3: Chlorlnolysls process
Type 4: Carbon disulfide chlorlnatlon processes
Type 5: Flurocarbons production process
-------
6-16
TABLE 6-8. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE OF CARBON TETRACHLORIDE RESULTING
FROM SPECIFIC POINT SOURCE EMISSIONS
Concentration	Population
Level	Exposed	Dosage
(ug/m^)	(persons)	[(ug/m^) • persons]
500	66	36,900
250	403	154,000
100	1,615	332,000
50	3,762	474,000
25	8,048	622,000
10	23,396	863,000
5	35,821	949,000
2-5	60,945	1,040,000
3.8 x	10-iJ 5,195,587	1 ,280,000
~
The lowest annual average concentration occurring within
20 km of the specific point source.
58/4
-------
6-17
TABLE 6-9. MAJOR PARAMETERS FOR ESTIMATING EXPOSURE/DOSAGE RESULTING
FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS OF CARBON TETRACHLORIDE
		Parameter	 	Value
Daytime decay rate (K^)	0
Nighttime decay rate (K^)	0
Hanna-Gifford coefficient (C)	225
Nationwide heating source emissions (EH)	0
Nationwide nonheating stationary source emissions	(EN) 864 gm/sec
Nationwide mobile source emissions	0
-------
TABLE 6-10. CARBON TETRACHLORIDE EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULTING FflOM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS
EXPO LEVEL
( VGSi PI) 31
2.3*4m»
1.
. OMim
.2Sooee
.100900
e.
POPULATION
(I'EIISONI
008140
914973*
33972205
03219704
142920333
130679133
PEIICENTACE OF CONTIlinUTION
PERCENTAGE OF 0ISTOIDUTION
ROSACE
< UC./i Ml 3-
PEnSOlO	IlKiVI'INC STATIUNAIIY Mill:I I.E CITY TVPE I CITy TYPE 2 CITY TYI'E 3
2327308.7
I79137O4.0
33194B09.0
BI52A2H4.4
6IO790U3.9
6292f.2U9.ft
• .
0.
e.
0.
o.
0.
I9«.e
199.9
199. e
100.9
190.0
IOO. O
9.
9.
9.
0.
0.
0.
199.0
199.0
109.0
90. I
9
-------
TARLE 6-12. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE SUMMARY OF CAfWON TETRACHLORIDE
Population Exposed
Dosage
Concentration
Speci Fic
General


Specific
General


Level
Point
Point


Point
Point


(yq/m3)
Source
Source
Area Source
U.S. Total
Source
Source
Area Source
U.S. Total
620
15
0
0
15
9,420
0
0
9,420
500
66
0
0
66
36,900
0
0
36,900
250
403
0
0
403
154,000
0
0
154,000
100
1,615
0
0
1,615
332,000
0
0
332,000
50
3,762
0
0
3.762
474,000
0
0
474,000
25
8,048
0
0
8,048
622,000
0
0
622,000
10
23,396
0
0
23,396
863,000
0
0
863,000
5
35,821
0
0
35,821
949,000
0
0
949,000
2.5
60,945
0
505,140
566,085
1,040,000
0
2,327,400
3,367,400
1
112,556
0
9,119,730
9,262,286
1,120,000
0
17,913,784
19,033,784
0.5
187,202
0
33,072,205
33,259,407
1,180,000
0
35,194,859
36,374,859
0.25
--
0
83.219,704
--
—
0
51,520,284

0.1
--
0
142,92B,535
—
—
0
61,879,003
	
3.8x10-5
5,195,587
0
150,679,135
—
1,280,000
0
62,926,300
54,456,300
a*
i
NOTE: The use of -- as an entry Indicates that the Incremental E/D Is not significant
{relative to last entry or relative to entry 1n another column at the same row)
or that the exposure of the same population may be counted 1n "another column.
-------
6-20
REFERENCES
1.	F. D. Hobbs and C. W. Stueue, Hydroscience, Inc., Emission Control Options for
the Synthetic Organic Chemicals Manufacturing Industry	Product Report on Chloro-
methanes. Methane Chlorination Process (on file at EPA, ESED, Research Triangle
Park, NC (January 1979).
2.	F. D. Hobbs and C. W. Stueve, Hydroscience, Inc., Emission Control Options for
the Synthetic Organic Chemicals Manufacturing Industry	Product Report on Chloro-
methanes. Methanol Hydrochlorination and Methyl Chloride Chlorination Processes
(on file at EPA, ESED, Research Triangle Park, NC (January 1979).
3.	"Chemical Product Synopsis on Methylene Chloride," Mannsville Chemical Products
(March 1978).
4.	T. E. Killilea, "Chlorinated Methanes," Chemical Economics Handbook, Stanford
Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA (April 1979).
5.	"Chemical Profile on Methylene Chloride," Chemical Marketing Reporter
(September 20, 1976).
6.	"Chemical Product Synopsis on Chloroform," Mannsville Chemical Products
(June 1978).
7.	"Chemical Profile on Chloroform," Chemical Marketing Reporter (September 27, 1976).
8.	"Chemical Product Synopsis on Carbon Tetrachloride," Mannsville Chemical Products
(June 1978).
9.	"Chemical Profile on Carbon Tetrachloride," Chemical Harketing Reporter
(April 10, 1978).
10.	F. D. Hobbs and C. W. Stuewe, Hydroscience, Inc., Emission Control Options for
the Synthetic Organic Chemicals Manufacturing Industry	Product Report on Carbon
Tetrachloride and Perchloroethylene, Hydrocarbon Chlorinolysis Process (on file
at EPA, ESED, Research Triangle Park, NC (March 1979).
-------
6-21
11.	Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Solvent Metal Cleaning, EPA-450/2-77-022
(OAQPS No. 1.2-079), Research Triangle Park, NC (November 1977).
12.	Solvent Metal Cleaning, Background Information: Proposed Standards (draft)
EPA,-, NSPS, ESED, Research Triangle Park, NC (November 1978).
13.	Chemical Research Services, 1979 Directory of Chemical Producers, United States
of America, Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA.
14.	D. M. Pitts, Hydroscience, Inc., Emission Control Options for the Synthetic Organic
Chemicals Manufacturing Industry	Product Report on Fluorocarbons, on file at EPA,
ESED, Research Triangle Park, NC (February 1979).
15.	Allied Company (W.S. Turetsky) personal communication in response to publication of
the second draft of this report (February 1982).
-------
APPENDIX A-7 	 Chlorobenzene (p-Dichlorobenzene
and o-Dichlorobenzene)
CHLOROBENZENE (MONO) CHEMICAL DATA
Women:!ature
Chemical Abstract Service Registry Number: 10B-90-7
Synonyms: Phenyl Chloride; MonochTorobenzene; Chorobenzo!; Benzene
Chloride
Cher.ical Formula
Molecular Weight: 112.56
Molecular Formula: CgHjCl
Molecular Structure:
Chemical and Physical Properties
Physical State at ST?: Liquid-colorless, very refractive
Boiling Point: 131.7CC at 760 mm
Melting Point: -45.6°C
Density: 1.1053 at 20°C/4°C
Vapor Pressure: 12.14 rim at 25°C
Vapor Density: 3.88
Solubility: Insoluble (J^O)
Log Partition Coefficient (OctanoT/H2O): 2.84
Atmospheric Reactivity
Transformation Products:
Reactivity Toward OH-: V3 Butane
Reactivity Toward O^: No reaction
Reactivity Toward Photolysis: No photochemical degradation
Major Atmospheric Precursors: N/A
Formation Reactivity:
-------
7-5
o-DICHLOROBENZENE CHEMICAL DATA
Nomencl ature
Chemical Abstract Service Registry Number: 95-50-1
Synonyms': DCB; Dichlorobenzol; 1,2-Dichlorobenzene; o-Dichlorobenzol;
ODB; ODCB; Chloroben; Cloroben; Dizene; Oowthern E
Chemical Formula
Molecular Weight: 147.0
Molecular Formula: CgH^C^
Molecular Structure: n
Che~ica1 and Physical Properties
Physical State at STP: Liquid - colorless
Boiling Point: 180.5°C at 760 mm
Melting Point: -17°C
Density: 1.305 at 20°C/4°C
Vapor Pressure: 1.45 at 25CC
Vapor Density: 5.05
Solubility: Slightly soluble (0.145 g/1 of H^O)
Log Partition Coefficient (Octanol/H^O): 3.38
Atmospheric Reactivity
Transformation Products:
Reactivity Toward 0H-: 1/2 Butane
Reactivity Toward Oy 5* Propylene
Reactivity Toward Photolysis: NAPP
Major Atmospheric Precursors: N/A
Formation Reactivity:
-------
7-6
p-DICHLOROBENZENE CHEMICAL DATA
Nomenclature
Chemical Abstract Service Registry Number: 95-50-1
Synonyms: DCB; Dichlorobenzol; Paradichlorobenzene; Parazene; Paramoth;
Di-chloricide; Paracide; Paradi; Paradow; Santochlor
Chemical Formula
Molecular Weight: 147.0
Molecular Formula: Cg^C^
Molecular Structure: ~
Chemical and Physical Properties
Physical State at STP: Monoclinic crystals - volatile
Boiling Point: 174.12°C
Melting Point: 53.5°C
Density: 1.288 at 20°C/4°C
Vapor Pressure: 2.28 at 25°C
Vapor Density:
Solubility: Nearly insoluble (0.079 g/1 of H^O)
Log Partition Coefficient (Octanol/^O): 3.39
Atmospheric Reactivity
Transformation Products:
Reactivity Toward 0H»: 1/2 Butane
Reactivity Toward 0^: 5% Propylene
Reactivity Toward Photolysis: NAPP
Major Atmospheric Precursors: N/A
Formation Rpartivitv:
CI
-------
7-7
I. SOURCES
A.	PRODUCTION
This report summarizes emissions of chlorobenzenes including monochlorobenzene
and the two dichlorobenzene isomers (o-dichlorobenzene and p-dichlorobenzene).
Monochlorobenzene is produced by the direct chlorination of benzene using iron
as a catalyst. When only monochlorobenzene is desired, the temperature is
kept near the lower end of a 40 to 60°C range, and only 60% of the theoretical
amount of chlorine is added to lessen the formation of dichlorobenzenes. When
dichlorobenzenes are desired, higher chlorine quantities and temperatures are
used. The chlorinated benzene is neutralized with aqueous caustic soda, allowed
to separate, and the dichlorobenzene-rich sludge that forms is removed. The
chlorobenzene layer is then distilled to obtain a fraction containing unreacted
benzene and some monochlorobenzene, which is recycled, and chlorobenzene. The
higher chlorinated fractions and residues from a number of batches are combined
and then distilled to recover para-dichlorobenzene in the distillate and ortho-
dichlorobenzene residues which are then purified.
There are currently 6 monochlorobenzene producers in the United States. The
locations of the plants and the 1978 capacity and estimated production for each
plant are shown in Table 7-1.1 23 In 1978, an estimated 355 million lb of mono-
chlorobenzene was produced.
Table 7-2 345 presents the producers of o-dichlorobenzene in the United States.
There are currently 7 sites which produced an estimated 59 million lb of
o-dichlorobenzene in 1978.
Table 7-3 3 * 6 presents the producers of p-dichlorobenzene in the United States.
There are currently 7 sites which produced an estimated 55 million lb of
p-dichlorobenzene in 1978.
B.	USES
Table 7-4 summaries the chlorobenzene end-use distribution. The various uses,
quantities, and percent usage of monochlorobenzene, o-dichlorobenzene, and
p-dichlorobenzene are shown. Approximately 49% of the monochloobenzene pro-
duced is used in solvents and 30% is used in nitrochlorobenzenes. Other uses
-------
Table 7-1. Monochlorobcnzene Producers3
Source
Location
1978
Estj mated
. b
Product ion
(10° Ib/yr)
1978
Estimated
Capacity
(30° lb/yr)
Geographic Coordinates
Latitude/longitude
Dow
Midland, MI
101
220
43
35
28/04 13 00
ICC
Niagra Falls, NY
5
10
43
03
33/79 00 55
Monsanto
Sauget, IL
69
150
38
35
31/90 10 11
Montrose
Henderson, NV
32
70
36
03
32/114 58 34
b
PPG
New Martinsville, WV
79
172
39
47
22/00 51 27
Standard Chlorine
Delaware City, DE
69
150
39
33
54/75 30 47
Total

355
772



aSee refs. 1, 2, and 3.
Total production was distributed per site based on site capacity.
-------
Table 7-2. o-Dichlorobenzene Producers3
Source
Location
1970
Estimated
Product ior/5
<1.0rj Ib/yr)
197B
Estimated
Ctipaci ty
UO6 Ib/yr)
Geographic Coordinates
Latitude/Longitude
Dow
Midland, MI
12
30
13
35
28/04 13 08
Monsanto
Sauget, IL
r>
16
3B
35
31/90 10 11
PPG
New Martinsville, WV
15
38
39
47
22/80 51 27
Standard Chlorine
Delaware City, DE
19
50
39
33
54/75 38 47
Specialty Organicsc
Irwindale, CA
1
2
34
06
30/117 55 48
Montrose
Henderson, NV
3
7
36
03
32/114 58 34
ICC
Niagara Falls, NY
3
8
43
03
33/79 00 55
Total

59
151



aSee refs. 3, 4, and 5.
^Total production was distributed per site based on capacity.
Processes dichlorobenzenes from Montrose.
-------
Table 7-3. p-Dichlorobenzene Producers3
1 97 8	1970
Estimated	Estimated
Source
Location
Product ion'3
(10° Ib/yr)
Capaci ty
(].0() Ib/yr)
Geographic Coordinates
f.ati tude/Longitude
Dow
Midland, MI
9
30
13
35
28/04 13 08
Monsanto
Sauget, IL
4
12
30
35
31/90 10 11
PPG
New Martinsville, WV
13
10
39
47
22/80 51 27
Standard Chlorine
Delaware City, DE
21
75
39
33
54/75 38 47
Q
Specialty Organics
Irwindale, CA
1
2
31
06
30/117 55 48
Montrose
Henderson, NV
2
7
36
03
32/114 58 34
ICC
Niagara Falls, NY
2
8
43
03
33/79 00 55
Total

55
174



aSee refs. 3, 4, and 6.
^Total production was distributed per site based on capacity.
Q
Processes dichlorobenzenes from Montrose.
-------
7-1 I
Table 7-4. Chlorobenzenes End-Use Distribution 19783
Source
Usage
(million Lb/yr)
Usage
(%)
Monochlorobenze.ne
355
100
Pesticide/degreasing solvents
174
49
Nitrochlorobenzene
10 7
30
DDT
25
7
Miscellaneous, others
49
14
o-Dichlorobenze.ne
59
100
3,4 dichloroar.iline
3S
65
Toluene diisocyanate solvent
9
15
Miscellaneous solvents (paint
6
10
removers, engine cleaners, etc.)


Dye manufacturing
3
5
Pesticide intermediate
3
5
p-Dichlorobenzene
55
100
Space deodorant
27.5
50
Moth control
22
40
Pesticide intermediate
5.5
10
a
See ref. 3.
-------
7-12
of monochlorobenzene include DDT production. Approximately 65% of the
o-dichlorobenzene produced is used for dichloroaniline manufacture, which is
then used as an intermediate in pesticide manufacture. Other uses include solvents,
dyes, and as a pesticide intermediate. Approximately. 50% of the p-dichlorobenzene
is used in the manufacture of space odorants and 40% is used in moth control.
Pesticide manufacture, as a chemical intermediate, accounts for 10% of the
p*dichlorobenzene usage.
Specific identified source locations of monochlorobenzene users are shown in
Table 7-5.7 They include nitrochlorobenzene , and DDT producers. Monchlorobenzene
usage was distributed based on the individual plant's production capacity.
Specific identified source locations of o-dichlorobenzene users are shown in
Tables 7-6 and 7-7. They include TDI production sites where o-dichlorobenzene is
used as a solvent (Table 7-67) and dichloroaniline sites where it is used as an
intermediate (Table 7-77). Total o-dichlorobenzene usage was distributed over the
TDI sites based on TDI site capacity.
o-Dichlorobenzene usage for dichloroaniline manufacture was divided evenly over
the four sites in the absence of capacity figures.
All other uses of chlorobenzenes are presented by a geographic region distribution
in the emissions Section II of this report.
II. EMISSION ESTIMATES
A. PRODUCTION
Table 7-8 shows the monochlorobenzene emissions from production sites. Total
estimated emissions from the 6 sites were 1,136,000 lb in 1978. Emission factors
used to develop process, storage, and fugitive emission estimates are shown in
Table 7-8. Process vent emissions originate primarily from distillation processes.
Storage emissions represent losses from both working and final product storage
tanks as well as loading and unloading losses. The number of tanks at a facility
-------
Table 7-5. Monoch.lorobenzenc End-Users3
Company
Location
End-Use Capacity
(mil]ion lb/yr)
Monocli] oro-
benzene Used
(million .lb/yr)
Geographic Coordinates
Latitude/Longitude
Nitroclilorobenzene Producers
Du Pont
Monsanto
Total
Deepwater, NJ
Sauget, IL
45
90
140
34
73
107
39 41 25/75 30 35
38 35 31/90 10 11
DDT Producer
Montrose
Torrance, CA
60
25
33 46 58/110 22 06
aSee ref. 7.
-------
Table 7-6. o-Dichlorobenzene Solvent Users3
[Manufacturers of Toluene Diisocyanate (TDI)J
Company
Location
1970
TDI
Capaci ty
(30& lb/yr)
1978 o-Dichloro-
benzene Use*0
(lb/yr)
Geographic Location
Latitude/Longitude
Allied Chemical
Moundsville, WV
00
094,410
39
54
39/80
44
49
BASF Wyandotte
Geismar. LA
100
1,118,010
30
11
34/91
00
42
Dow Chemical
Freeport, TX
100
1,118,010
28
59
12/95
24
05
Du Pont
Deepwater, NJ
70
702,610
39
41
25/75
30
35
Mobay Chem. Corp.
Daytown, TX
130
1,453,416
29
45
30/94
54
25

New Martinsville, WV
100
1,110,010
39
44
50/80
50
50
Olin Corp.
Ashtabula, Oil
30
335,405
41
53
07/80
45
50

Lake Charles, LA
100
1,118,010
30
13
55/93
15
57
Rubicon Chems. Inc.
Ge.ismar, LA
40
447,205
30
12
00/91
11
30
Union Carbide
S. Charleston, WV
55
614,905
38
19
35/81
40
29
Total

005
9,000,000





aSee ref. 7.
^Total o-dichlorobenzene use is distributed per site based on TDI capacity.
-------
7-15
Table 7-7. o-Dichlorobenzene Chemical Intermediate User Locations*
Geographic Coordinates
Source	Location	(latitude/longitude)
2,4-Dichloroaniline
Eastman Kodak Company
Rochester, NY
43
12
01/77
37
58
2 ,4-Dichloroaniline
31ue Spruce Company
Bound Brook, NJ
40
32
10/74
29
18
Du Pont
Deepwater, NY
39
41
25/75
30
35
Monsanto
Luling, LA
29
55
10/90
22
30
*
See ref. 7.
-------
Table 7-8. Monochlorobenzene Emissions from Production Sites



Emissions (lb/y
r)
Tot a 1
„ . a
Emissions
Company

I.ocat ion
Process
Storage
F ug i. t i ve
(lb/yr)
(g/sec)
Dow

Midi and , MI
20(1,060
45,4 50
69,690
32 3,200
4 .65
ICC

Niagara Falls, NY
10,300
2, 250
3,4 50
16,000
0.23
Monsanto

Sauget, IL
112 , .1.40
31,050
4 7,610
2 20 ,000
3. 10
Montrose

Henderson, NV
65,920
14,400
22,ono
102,400
1.47
PPG

New Martinsville, WV
162 , 740
35,550
54 ,510
252,000
3.64
Standard Chlorine
Delaware City, DE
142 , 140
31 ,050
4 7,610
2 20,000
3. 18
Total


7 31 , 300
159,750
244,950
1,136,000

a
Based on the
following
emission factors (lb
emitted per lb produced).
See ref. 8.


Process
0.00 206
A - (derived from
site visit
data)



Storage
0.00045
A - (derived from
site visit
data)



Fugitive
0.00069
A - (derived from
site vi sit
data)



Total 0.00320
I
Based on 8760 hr/yr operation.
-------
7-17
are a function of the production and tank sizes. Fugitive emissions are those
that result from plant equipment leaks. Emission estimates are based on a plant
operation schedule of 24 hr/day, 7 days/week, 52 weeks/yr.
Table 7-9 shows the o-dichlorobenzene emissions from production sites. Total
estimated emissions from the 7 sites were 209,450 lb in 1978. Emission factors
used to develop the process, storage, and fugitive emissions are shown in Table 9.
Table 7-10 shows the p-dichlorobenzene emissions from production sites. Total
estimated emissions from the 8 sites were 398,200 lb in 1978. Emission factors
used to develop the process, storage, and fugitive emissions are shown in Table 7-10.
B. USES
1. Monochlorobenzene
It was estimated that 75% of the chlorobenzene used as solvent was consumed in
cold cleaning operations. Total emissions of 130,500,000 lb were derived by
assuming that all chlorobenzene consumed was lost. The total number of cleaners
in service and the average emission rate per unit are shown in Table 7-11. Distri-
bution of the cold cleaners by geographic region is shown in Table 7-12.
The remaining chlorobenzene was used as a solvent in pesticide manufacture.
The entire amount used (43,500,000 lb) was assumed to be lost. The total emis-
sions that are shown in Table 7-13 by geographic region were distributed by the
number of sites in each region.
Emissions from chlorobenzenes used as chemical intermediates are summarized in
Table 7-14. They were derived from the emission factors shown in Table 7-15, except
where rioted. Emissions from nitrochlorobenzene and DDT production were estimated to
be 171,200 lb and 12,500 lb, respectively.
Miscellaneous uses of chlorobenzene were estimated by using an average emission
factor derived for all other chlorobenzene uses of 0.00133 lb lost/lb used times
the usage. Emissions from miscellaneous uses were estimated to have been 65,170
Source locations could not be identified for regional distribution.
-------
Tabic 7-9. o-Dichlorobenzene Emissions from Production Sites



Emissions (l.b/y
r)
Total
„ • a
Emissions
Company

Location
Process
.Storage
Fugi ti ve
(Ib/yr)
(q/sec)"
Dow

Midland, MI
27,(140
5,640
9,120
4 2,600
0.61
Monsanto

Saugct, IL.
13,920
2,820
4, 560
21,300
0. 31
PPG

New Martinsville, WV
34,000
7,050
11,400
53,250
0.77
Standard Chlorine
Delaware City, DE
44,000
0,9 30
14 ,440
67,450
0.97
Specialty Organics
Irwindale, CA
2 , 320
470
760
3,550
0.05
Montrose

Henderson, NV
6,960
1,410
2 ,280
10,650
0.15
ICC

Niagara Falls, NY
6,960
1 ,410
2,200
10,650
0.15
Total


i36,nno
2 7 , 7 30
44,040
209,450

a
Based on the
following
emission factors (lb
emitted per lb
produced).
See ref. 0.


Process
0.00232
A - (derived from
site visit data)




Storage
0.00047
A - (derived from
site visit data)




Fugit ive
0.00076
A - (derived from
site visit data)




Total 0.00355
^Based on 8760 hr/yr operation.
-------
Table 7-10. p-Dichlorobenzeno Emissions from Production Sites



Kmissioris (lb/y
r)
Total
„ . a
Emissions
Company

Locat ion
Process Storage
Fugi t ive
(lb/y r)
(g/sec)"
Dow

Midland, MI
52,290 3,690
9,180
65,160
0.94
Monsanto

Sauget, IL
23.240 1,640
4,000
20,960
0.42
PPG

New Martinsville, WV
75,5 30 5,3 30
13,260
94,120
1. 35
Standard Chlorine
Delaware City, DE
139,4 40 9,840
24,400
173,760
2.50
Specialty Organics
Irwindale, CA
5,810 410
1,020
7, 240
0.10
Montrose

Henderson, NV
11,620 820
2,040
14 , 4 80
0. 21
ICC

Niagara Falls, NY
11,620 820
2,040
14,480
0.21
Total


319,550 22,550
56,100
398,200

3Based on the
following
emission factors (lb
emitted per lb produced).
See ref. 8.


Process
0.00581
A - (derived from
site visit data)



Storage
0.00041
A - (derived from
site visit data)



Fugitive
0.00102
A - (derived from
site visit data)



Total 0.00724
^Based on 8760 hr/yr operation.
-------
7-20
Table 7-11. Chlorcbenzene Emissions from Solvent Degreasers3
Estimated	Estimated
. . .	,, , j.	Average Emission
National	Number of	.	....
Emission^	Units in
Rate per Unit	
c
Type Degreaser	(M lb/yr)	Service	(Ib/yr)	(q/sec)
Cold cleaners	130.5	197,423	661	0.04
a
See refs. 3 and 9.
b
Assumes all chlorober.zene used in cold cleaners is lost.
Q
Based on 2250 hr/yr operation.
-------
Table 7-12. Estimated Number of Degreasers Using Chlorobcnzene in 1978 by Geographic Location*



East
West

East
West




North
Mid
North
North
South
South
South



Degreaser Type
East
Atlantic
Central
Central
Atlantic
Central
Central
Mountain
Pacific
Total
Cold cleaners
11,869
30,780
52,272
17,309
23,817
11,678
19,166
7,164
23,374
197,428
*See ref. 10.
-------
Table 7-13. Ig78 Chlorobenzene Emission Estimates from Pesticide Manufacturers3
Nuinbor of	Henoch lorobenzene	o-Dichlorobenzene	p-Dichlorobenzene
Region
Sites per
Reg ion
Emissions as Solvent
( lb/yr) 'J
limi ss ions
(lb/yr)c
Emiss ions
(lb/yr)
New England
4
1,251,000
43
80
Middle Atlantic
37
11,579,135
400
7 30
East North Central
19
5,946,045
205
375
West North Central
15
4 , 694 ,24 5
160
295
South Atlantic
17
5,320,145
185
335
East South Central
14
4,301 ,295
150
275
West South Central
15
4 ,P>94 ,245
160
29 5
Mountain
5
1,564,750
55
100
Paci fic
13
4 ,060,345
140
255
Total
139
4 3,500,000
1500
2 750
aSee ref. 10.
^Average per site 312,950 lb/yr (4.51 g/sec)
°Average per site 10.8 lb/yr (0.0002 g/sec).
^Average per site 19.0 lb/yr (0.0003 g/sec).
-------
Table 7-14. Emissions from Chlorobenzene End-Users (Chemical Intermediate)
„ • • a
Emissions


Process
Storage
Fugi tive
Total


Company
Location
( Jb/y r)
(lb/yr)
(lb/yr)
lb/yr
q/se
c
Monochlorobenzene







Du Pont
Deepwater, N.J
37,400
6,000
10,200
54,400
0.
78
Monsanto
Sauget, IL
00,300
14,600
21,900
116,800
1 .
68
Montrose
Torrance, CA
10,000
1,250
1,250
12 ,500
0.
18
o-Dichlorobenzene







Eastman
Rochester, NY
9,975
1,425
2,850
14,250
0 .
21
Blue Spruce
Bound Brook, NJ
9,975
1,425
2,850
14,250
0.
21
Du Pont
Deepwater, NY
9,9 75
1,425
2,850
14,250
0.
21
Monsanto
Luling, LA
1,400
200
400
2,000C
0.
03
aBased on emission factors shown in table.
^Based on 8760 hr/yr operation.
Q
Based on Monsanto estimate using material balance
calculations and sampling.
-------
7-24
Table 7-15. Chlorobenzenes End-User Emission Factors
End-User
Emi
ssion Factor
(lb lost/lb used)

¦ a
Derivation
Process
Storage
Fuaitive
Total
Monochlorobenzene





DDT
0.0004
0.00005
0.00005
0.00050
cb
Nitrochlorobenzer.e
0.0011
0.00020
0.00030
0.00160
cb
o-Dichlorobenzene





4-DichIoroar.i line
0.00105
0.00015
0.00030
0.00150
cb
Dye manufacturing
0.0004
0.00005
0.00005
0.0005
D
Pesticide interred.
0.0004
0.00005
0.00005
0.0005
D
p-Dichlorobenzene





Pesticide interntec.
0.0004
0.00005
0.00005
0.0005
D
aA - Basis:	site visit data
B -	Basis:	published data
C -	Basis:	Hydroscience estimate
^See ref. 11
-------
7-25
2. o-Dichlorobenzene
Emissions resulting from the use of o-dichlorobenzene as a solvent in TDI manu-
facture were estimated to be 5,259,164 lb by assuming that all usage is lost,
except as noted. Table 7-16 summarizes TDI o-dichlorobenzene emissions which were
distributed based on TDI capacity.
Emissions from chemical intermediate use of o-dichlorobenzene are shown in Table 7-14
for dichloroaniline manufacture (44,750 lb)- Total emissions were distributed
evenly per site, except where noted, since capacity data were not available. Emission
factors used to derive o-dichlorobenzene emissions(except for the Monsanto source)
are shown in Table 7-15.
Pesticide intermediate uses of o-dichlorobenzene were estimated to have been
1500 lb and were distributed by region in Table 7-13. Dye manufacturing losses
were also estimated to be 1500 lb, but locations by region could not be identi-
fied.
Miscellaneous solvents primarily consumer types, (i.e., paint cleaners, engine
cleaners, etc.) contributed 6,000,000 lb of o-dichlorobenzene emissions. Losses
were considered too widespread to model.
p-Dichlorobenzene emissions from its use as a space deodorant were estimated as
27,500,000 lb and as 22,000,000 lb for moth control by assuming that total
usage is lost. Losses were considered too widespread to model.
Emissions from p-dichlorobenzene used as a chemical intermediate in pesticide
manufacture (2,750 lb) are shown in Table 13 by geographic region. Emissions
were derived from the emission factors shown in Table 7-15 and distributed by the
number of sites in each region.
Vent parameter data for producers and users of chlorobenzenes are shown in Table 7-17.
Total emissions of all three chlorobenzenes are summarized in Table 7-18. Total
nationwide emissions of chlorobenzene, o-dichlorobenzene, and p-dichlorobenzene
were 175,384,870 lb, 11,516,364 lb, and 49,900,950 lb respectively in 1978.
Total emissions of all chlorobenzenes were established to have been 236,802,180 lb.
-------
7-26
Table 7-16. o-Dichlorobenzene Emissions from Solvent Use in TDI Production
Company
Location
Total Emissions
(lb/yr)
(q/sec)
Allied Chemical
Moundsville, WV
4,508
0.06
Dow
DuPont
Mo bay
01 in
Rubicon
Total'
Freeport, TX
Deepwater, NJ
Baytown, TX
New Martinsvi11e, WV
Ashtabula, OH
Geismar, LA
1,118,010
782,610
1,453,416
1,118,010
335,405
447,205
5,259,164
16.10
11.27
20.92
16.10
4.83
6.44
^Based on total o-dichlorobenzene used as solvent lost as process emission.
Based on 8760 hr/yr operation.
See ref 13.
"Certain facilities in Table 7-6, claim zero emissions of o-Dichlorobenzene
(ref 14, 15, 16
.1:A-23
-------
Table 7-17. Chlorobenzenos Vent Parameters3
Number
o f
Stacks
Vent
Heigh t
( ft)
Vent
Diameter
( ft)
Discharge
Temp.
(°F)
Velocity Distribution Area
(Et/sec)	 (ft x ft)
Production
Process
Storage
Fugitive
Degreasing
End-Uses^
Process
Storage
Fugitive
Pesticide/DDT
Process
Storage
Fugitive
TDI
Process
m,o,p
P
m
o
P
3
5
5
8
5
60
30
36
12
16
15
20
20
30
20
90
0.125
0.80
0. 33
0. 33
0. 33
0.5
0.17
0.17
0.17
0. 17
0.9
101
120
80
170
80
70
110
80
100
80
110
20
12
0.6
12
15
40
300 x 600
100 x 100
300 x 300
Building cross-section Production - 50m
Degreasing - 501^
End-uses - 100m'
Pesticide - 100m2
TDI
- 200m
Includes dichloroaniline, nitro chlorobenzene
-------
7-28
Table 7-18. 1978 Nationwide Emissions of Chlorobenzenes
Nationwide
Emissions
	Source	(lb/yr)
Monochlorobenzene
Production	1,136,000
Pesticide/decreasing solvents	174,000,000
Nitrochlorobenzene	171,200
DDT	12,500
Miscellaneous, other3	65,170
Sub-total	175,384,870
o-Dichlorobenzene
Production	209,450
3,4-Dichloroaniline	44,750
Toluene diisocynnate solvent	5,259,164
Miscellaneous solvents	6,000,000
Dye manufacturing	1,500
Pesticide intermediate		1, 500
Sub-total	11,516,364
p-Dichlorober.zene
Production	398,200
Space deodorant	27,500,000
Moth control	22,000,000
Pesticide intermediate		2,750
Sub-total	49,900,950
236,802,180
Total - all chlorobenzenes
3Based on an emission factor of 0.00133	lb lost/lb used derived
from weighted average of all other monochlorobenzene uses.
-------
i -
w
-¦T"'


Nj
I
ro
UD
FIGURE 7-1. SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF CHLOROBENZENE(MONO) EMISSIONS
-------
TABLE 7-19. EMISSIONS AND METEOROLOGICAL STATIONS OF SPECIFIC
POINT SOURCES OF CHLOROBENZENE(MONO)
RO.
COMPANY
SITE

LATITUDE
LONGITUDE
STAR
STATION
*
PLANT
TYl'E
SOURCE+
TYPE
EMISSIONS (CM/SBC)
PROCESS STORAGE FOCITIV*
1
DOW
MIDLAND, MI

43
30
28
084
13
08
14843
1
1
2.996064
.604489
1.9*3034
2
MONSANTO
8AUCET. IL

GO
39
31
090
10
1 1
13994
2
1
2.046816
.447120
.680084













1. 136320
.210240
.3IB369
3
ICC
NIAGARA FALLS,
NY
43
03
33
079
00
05
14747
3
1
.148320
.032400
.949689
4
HDNTROSC
HENDERSON, ftV

36
ea
32
1 14
ftfl
34
231 m
3
1
.949240
.267369
.nmn
0
pre
NEW MARTINSVILLE.WV
39
47
22
080
01
27
13736
3
1
2.343406
.011920
.784944
6
STAND CHLORINE
DELAWARE CITY.
DE
39
33
04
070
38
47
94741
3
1
2.046816
.447120
.*80184
7
DUPONT
DEEPWATER, NJ

39
41
20
070
30
33
13739
4
2
.338360
.097920
.146889
8
MONTROSE
TORRANC, CA

33
46
08
1 IO
22
06
23129
0
3
.144000
.018000
.918999
-------
TABLE 7-19 (Concluded)
* Plant Types:
Type 1: Plant produces chlorobenzene(mono)
Type 2: Plant produces chlorobenzene(mono) and nitro
chlorobenzene
Type 3: Plant produces chlorobenzene(mono)
Type 4: Plant produces nitro chlorobenzene
Type 5: Plant produces DDT
t Source Types:
Type 1: Chiorobenzene(mono) production
Type 2: Nitro chlorobenzene production
Type 3: DDT production
-------
7-32
TABLE 7-20. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE OF CHLOROBENZENE(MONO) RESULTING
FROM SPECIFIC POINT SOURCE EMISSIONS
Concentration Population
Level	Exposed	Dosage
(ug/rc^)	(persons)	[(ug/m^) . persons]
25
13
412
10
179
2,750
5
992
7,910
2.5
2,797
14,600
1
12,582
30,400
0.5
51,586
56,000
0.25
178,741
98,500
0.1
600,173
163,000
0.05
1,203,923
205,000
4.7 x 10"4*
4,034,456
241,000
~
The lowest annual average concentration occurring within 20 km
of the specific point source.
58/4
-------
In
GO
-T
TABLE 7-21. EXP05URE AND OOSAGE RESULT INC. FROM EMISSIONS FROM GENERAL POINT SOURCES OF
CHLOROBENZENE (MONO)
Concentration
Level
(yiq/m^)
Population Exposed
(10 persona)
Degreasing
Operation
Pest icide
Production
U.S. Total
Dosage
[ 10^(tiq/ni^ ) « persona]
Degreasing
Operation
Pesticide
Production
U.S. Total
100
50
25
10
5
2.5
1
0.5
0.25
0.1
0.05
0.025
0.01
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2.2
1 4
56
215
405
1,490
4,250
9,030
2.2
14
56
215
405
1,490
4,250
9,030
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.94
5.23
9.40
14.0
21.5
104
0.30
1.10
2.54
4.84
6.70
10.1
14.2
17.7
21. B
27.3
31.9
35.3
36.4
36.4
0.30
1.10
2.54
4.04
6.70
10.1
14.2
17.7
22.7
32.5
41.3
49.3
57.0
141
i
OJ
GJ
NOTE: The use of — as an entry indicates that the incremental E/D i9 not significant (relative
to last entry or relative to entry in another column at the same row) or that the exposure
of the same population may be counted in another column.
-------
7-34
TABLE 7-22. MAJOR PARAMETERS FOR ESTIMATING EXPOSURE/DOSAGE RESULTING
FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS OF CHLOROBENZENE (MONO)
Parameter	Value
Daytime decay rate (Kj)	4.67 x 10"^ sec"*
Nighttime decay rate (Kn)	0
Harma-Gifford coefficient (C)	225
Nationwide heating source emissions (EH)	0
Nationwide nonheating stationary source emissions	(EN) 0.402 gm/'sec
Nationwide mobile source emissions (EM)	0
58/u
-------
LT»
CD
N
XT
TABLE 7-23. CHLOROBENZENE (MONO) EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULTING EROM AREA SOURCE EMI5SI0NS
Exposure
Level
Population
(person)
Dosage
(pg/mV
person)
Percentage of Contribution
Percentage of Distribution
Heating Stationary Hobile City Type 1 City Type 2 City Type 3
0.001000
505,140
1,081.9
0.
100.0
0.
100.0
0.
0.
0.000500
9,149,730
8,281.1
0.
100.0
(I.
100.0
0.
0.
0.000250
27,819,254
14,972.1
0.
100.0
0.
100.0
0.
0.
0.000100
95,892,357
25,160.8
0.
100.0
0.
97.3
1.2
1.5
0.000050
140,093,202
20,469.2
0.
100.0
0.
94.2
2.5
3.3
0
158,679,135
29,091.4
0.
100.0
n.
92.9
2.6
4.5
i
OJ
<_n
-------


1ADLE 7-24.
EXPOSURE AND
D0SACE SUMMARY
or Clll.OnOBENZENE (MONO)




Population
Exposed


Dosage




(persons
)


[(uq/ni ) • persons]

Concentration
Specific
General


Specific
General


Level
Point
Point


Point
Point


(pq/m'')
Source
Source
Area Source
U.S. Total
Source
Source Area
Source
U.S. Total
100
0
2,200
0
2,200
0
300,000
0
300,000
50
0
14,000
0
14,008
0
1,100,000
0
1,100,000
25
13
56,000
0
56,013
412
2,540,000
0
2,540,412
10
179
215,000
0
215,179
2,750
4,040,000
0
4,842,750
5
992
405,000
0
485,992
7,910
6,700,000
0
6,707,910
2.5
2,797
1,490,000
0
1,492,797
14,600
10,100,000
0
10,114,600
1
12,582
	
0
—
30,400
14,200,000
0
14,230,400
0.5
51,586
—
0
—
56,000
17,700,000
0
17,756,000
0.25
178,741
—
0
—
98,500
22,700,000
0
22,798,000
0.1
600,173
—
0
—
163,000
.32,500,000
0
32,663,000
0.05
1,203,932
~
0
—
205,000
41,300,000
0
41,505,000
0.025
--
—
0
—
--
49,300,000
0
—
0.01
--
—
0
--
—
57,800,000
0
--
0.001
—
—
505,140
—
—
—
1,082
--
0.0005
—
--
9,149,730
--
—
--
8,281
--
0.00025
—
~
27,819,254
—
--
--
14,972
—
0.0001
—
--
95,892,057
—
—
--
25,169
—
0.00005

—
140,098,202
	
--
--
20,469 '

0
4,034,456
—
158,679,135
	
241,000
141,000,000
29,100
141,270,100
NOTE: The use of — aa an entry indicates that the incremental E/0 iB not significant (relative to last entry or
relative to entry in another column nt the same row) or that the exposure of the same population may be
counted in another column.
-------
• , } ^ Yl>.
V\ L-l^rw'
r '

\ jT~
u
CO
^i
FIGURE 7-2. SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF o-DICHLOROBENZENE EMISSIONS
-------
NO.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
11
12
13
14
16
18
19
20
1: A-
Table 7-25. EMISSIONS AND METEOROLOGICAL STATIONS OF SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF o-DICHLOROBENZENE
ALLIED
MOUNDSVILLE, WV
39 54 39 080 44 49
COMPANY
SITE
LATITUDE
LONGITUDE
STAR
STATION
DOW
MIDLAND, MI
43
35
28
084
13
08
14845
MONSANTO
SAUGET, IL
38
35
31
090
10
11
13994
PPG
NEW HARTINSVILLE, WV
39
47
22
080
51
27
13736
STAND CHLORINE
DELAWARE, CITY, DE
39
33
54
075
38
47
94741
SPECIALTY ORGAN
IRWINDALE, CA
34
06
30
117
55
48
23152
MONTROSE
HENDERSON, NV
36
03
32
114
58
34
23112
ICC
NIAGARA, NY
43
03
33
079
00
55
14747
DUPONT
DEEPWATER, NJ
39
41
25
075
15
50
13739
13736
PLANT*
TYPE
SOURCE+
EMISSIONS (GM/SEC)
YPE
PROCESS
STORAGE
FUGITIVE
1
.400875
.081176
.131342
1
.200439
.040592
.065671
1
.501141
.101472
.164162
1
.634704
.128616
.207921
1
.033390
.006848
.010940
1
.100266
.020296
.032820
1
.100266
.020296
.032820
2
11.269596
0.
0.
3
.143645
.020548
.041032
2
.064847
0.
0.
I
CO
00
DOW
FREEPORT, TX
28
59
30
095
23
35
12923
3
2
16.099346
0.
0.
MOBAY
BAYTOWN, TX
29
45
30
094
54
25
12906
3
2
20.099346
0.
0.
MOBAY
NEW MARTINSVILLE, WV
39
44
50
cr>
CO
o
50
50
13736
3
2
16.099346
0.
0.
OLIN
ASHTABULA, OH
41
53
07
080
45
50
14843
3
2
4.829813
0.
0.
RUBICON
GEISMAR, LA
30
12
00
091
11
30
12958
3
2
6.437975
0.
0.
EASTMAN
ROCHESTER, NY
43
12
01
077
37
58
14771
4
3
.143645
.020548
.041032
BLUE SPRUCE
BOUND BROOK, NJ
40
32
10
074
29
18
14737
4
3
.143645
.020548
.041032
MONSANTO
LULING, LA
29
55
10
090
22
30
13958
4
3
,020161
.002884
.005759
Some emission points have been eliminated due to comments to early drafts of this document.
-------
TABLE 7-25 (Concluded)
* Plant Types:
Type 1: Plant produces o-Dlchlorobenzene
Type 2: Plant produces Toluene d11socyanate and 3,4-D1ch1oroan1Hne
Type 3: Plant produces Toluene dllsocyanate
Type 4: Plant produces 3,4-Dlchloroanl1Ine
t Source Types:
Type 1: o-Dlchlorobenzene production
Type 2: Toluene dllsocyanate production
Type 3: 3,4-Dlchloroanil 1ne production
-------
7-40
TA8LE 7-26. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE OF o-DICHLOROBENZENE FROM
SPECIFIC POINT SOURCE EMISSIONS
Concentration	Population
Level	Exposed Dosage
3	3
(ug/m )	(persons) l_(uq/m ) . persons]
50	6	373
25	36	1,380
10	350	5,330
5	1,294	10,120
2.5	5,569	25,500
1	39,571	76,000
0.5	95,918	116,000
0.25	154,256	137,000
0.1	385,422	175,000
0.05	578,509	189,000
0.025	757,868	195,000
0.01	1,444,164	206,000
7.17 x 10"5*	6,052,014	219,000
~
The lowest annual average concentration occurring within
20 km of the specific point source.
1:A-25
-------
7-41
TABLE 7-27. EXPOSURE AND OOSAGE RESULTING FROM EMISSIONS FROM GENERAL
POINT SOURCES OF o-DICHIOROBENZENE (PESTICIDE PRODUCTION)
Concentration
Level	Population	Exposed Dosage
(uq/m^)	(lO^ persons)	[lO^ug/m^) . persons]
0.01	0.8	0.009
0.005	7	0.05
0.0025	30	0.13
0.001	--	0.27
0.0005	--	0.40
0.00025	~	0.57
0	-	2.46
Note: The use of -- as an entry indicates that the incremental E/D is
not significant (relative to last entry or relative to entry in
another column at the same row) or that the exposure of the same
population may be counted in another column.
58/4
-------
7-42
TABLE 7-28. MAJOR PARAMETERS FOR ESTIMATING EXPOSURE/DOSAGE RESULTING
FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS OF o-DICHLOROBEN2ENE
	Parameter	 	Va 1 ue
Daytime decay rate (Krf)	7,5 x io~6 sec'1
Nighttime decay rate (K^)	5.0 x icf7 sec"1
Hanna-Gifford coefficient (C)	225
Nationwide heating source emissions (E^)	0
Nationwide nonheating stationary source emissions	(E^) 86.42 gm/sec
Dye production	0.02 gm/sec
Miscellaneous solvents	86.4 gm/sec
Nationwide mobile source emissions (Eu)	0
n
-------
TABLE 7-29.
o-DICHLOROBENZENE EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULTING FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS
DOSACE
PliRCEriTACF. OF CONTOIMJTION
PEIICENTACE OF DISTRIBUTION
EXPO LEVEL
(0G/"(H)3>
POPULATION
(PERSON*
(UC^< M>3-
PEnSOH)
UKATINC
STATIONARY
M01HI.E
CITY TYPE 1
CITY TYPE 2
CITY TYPE
.88MM
MS 14#
232431.4
• .
IM.8
0.
106.•
• .
• .
. 1— M
914979#
1772982.3
e.
lee.e
8.
lee.e

e.
.(MM*
83*722*0
8479770.2
e.
iee.6
e.
leo.e
0.
9.
.02SA0*
8irs<)048
603G4UI.0
0.
100.0
e.
98. 0
.7
1 o
. • IMM
143920335
6121 131.0
0.
too.o
o.
94.0
U.G
3.C

1GQ679130
6225504.7
0.
IOO.O
0.
92.9
ti.O
4.G
to
-------
TABLE 7-30. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE SUMMARY OF o-DICHLOROBENZEt{E


Population Exposed



Dosage



(persons)


[(uq/i
ti3) - personsl

Concentration
Specific
General

Spec ific
General


Level
Poi nt
Poi nt

Poi nt
Poi nt


(ug/m3)
Source
Source Area Source
U.S. Total
Source
Source
Area Source
U.S. Total
50
6
0 0
6
373
0
0
373
2b
36
0 0
36
1,380
0
0
1,380
10
350
0 0
350
5,330
0
0
5,330
5
1,294
0 0
1,294
11,200
0
0
11,200
2.5
5,569
0 0
5,569
25,600
0
0
25,600
1
39,571
0 0
39,571
76,000
0
0
76,000 "
0.5
95,918
0 0
95,918
116,000
0
0
116,000
0.25
154,256
0 505,140
659,396
137,000
0
232,451
369,451
0.1
385,422
O 9,149,730
9,535,152
175,000
0
1,772,052
1,947,052
0.05
578,509
0 33,072,205
33,650,714
189,000
0
3,479,775
3,668,775
0.025
757,868
0 81,759,648
82,517,516
195,000
0
5,056,481
5,251,481
0.01
1,444,164
800 142,928,535
144,373,490
206,000
9
6,121,131
6,327,131
0
6,052,014
158,679,135
--
219,000
2.460
6,225,594
6,447,054
NOTE: The use
of -- as an
entry indicates that the incremental E/D
is not significant (relative to last entry
or
relative
1 to entry in
another column at the same row) or that
the exposure
of the same
population may be

counted in another column.
1:A-26
-------

\
I
• x ! to
i

FIGURE 7-3. SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF p-DICHLOROBENZENE EMISSIONS
-------
TABLE 7-31. EMISSIONS AND METEOROLOGICAL STATIONS OF SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF p-OlCHLOROBENZENE
F.HIRS10NS LAHn, HI
40
nr>
211
004
in
on
I404S 1
1 .75297ft
.033136
. 132192
2
nonsAriTO
HAUcrr. il
nn
nn
31
090
10
H
(3994 1
1 . 334636
.1123616
.•110702
a
PPC
HEV MARTIWSVILLE, WV
n»
47
22
eo«
B1
27
in7o* i
1 1.#07602
.0767B2
. I9A944
4
PTANO cm.onmp;
nRLKVAnr CITY, OF.
n<>
m
114
073
nn
47
94741 1
1 2.A0793A
.141696
. nt(2!t 12
0
SPEC 1ALTV onnAlt
lUWUIOALF.. CA
36
Of.
no
1 17
nr»
40
23215 1
i . «n:if,f.4
.OO3904
.014600
•
nowmofJF.
tTEiwEnson, nv
3ft
03
32
1 14
no
n4
23 112 1
1 . 1670211
.oiinon
.029376
7
ICC
H 1 ACAftA FALLS. NY
-------
7-47
TABLE 7-32. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE OF p-DICHLOROBENZENE RESULTING
FROM SPECIFIC POINT SOURCE EMISSIONS
Concentration Population
Level	Exposed	Dosage
(ug/m-*)	(persons)	[(wg/m^) . persons]
50	2	118
25	8	328
10	42	815
5	127	1,420
2.5	389	2,350
1	1,691	4,330
0.5	3,879	5,930
0.25	10,792	8,400
0.1	36,631	12,200
0.05	126,422	18,400
0.025	384,501	27,400
0.01	888,210	35,200
0.00035	2,341,084	41,400
5 e / h
-------
7-48
TABLE 7-33. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULTING FROM EMISSIONS FROM
GENERAL POINT SOURCES OF p-0ICHLOROBENZENE
(PESTICIDE PRODUCTION)
Concentration Population
Level	Exposed	Dosage
(ug/m^)	(i03 persons) [lO^ug/m^) « persons]
0.01	3.4	0.05
0.005	19.6	0.16
0.0025	59.6	0.30
0.001	—	0.55
0.00025	—	0.76
0	-	3.73
it
The use of -- as an entry indicates that the incremental
E/D is not significant (relative to last entry	or relative
to entry in another column at the same row) or	that the
exposure of the same population may be counted	in another
column.
5 8/i+
-------
7-49
TABLE 7-34. MAJOR PARAMETERS FOR ESTIMATING EXPOSURE/DOSAGE RESULTING
FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS OF p-DICHLOROBENZENE
	Parameter	 	Value
Daytime decay rate (Kd)	7.5 x to"6 sec"1
Nighttime decay rate (K^)	5.0 x 10"^ sec"1
Hanna-Gifford coefficient (C)	225
Nationwide heating source emissions (E^)	0
Nationwide nonheating stationary source emissions	(E^) 713 gm/sec
Space deodorant	396 gm/sec
Moth control	317 gm/sec
Nationwide mobile source emissions (Eu)	0
n
-------
TABLE 7-35.
p-DICHLOROBENZENE EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULTING FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS
CXrO IXVXL POPm.ATJON
( DCS( N)3)	3-
I'EltSMN)
1917017.8
14620149.2
26*29910.4
3?I
-------
TABLE 7-36. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE SUMMARY Of p-DICHLOROBENZENE
Population Exposed	Dosage
(persona)	 	[(uq/m^) * persons]
Concent ration
Speci fic
General


Specific
General


Leve 1
Point
Point


Poi nt
Point


(pq/m'')
Source
Source
Area Source
U.S. Total
Source
Source
Area Source
U.S. Total
50
2
0
0
2
110
0
0
110
25
0
0
0
0
320
0
0
320
10
42
0
0
42
815
0
0
015
5
127
0
0
127
1,420
0
0
1,420
2.5
389
0
505,140
505,529
2,350
0
1,917,010
1,920,160
1
1,691
0
9,149,730
9,151,421
4,330
0
14,620,149
14,624,479
0.5
3,879
0
26,976,292
26,900,171
5,930
0
26,029,918
26,035,840
0.25
10,792
0
61,583,693
61,594,485
8,400
0
37,167,980
37,176,388
0.1
36,631
0
--
--
12,200
0
49,590,016
49,603,016
0.05
126/122
0
--
--
18,400
0
--
—
0.025
384,501
0
—
--
27,400
0
—
—
0.01
000,210
3,400
--
—
35,200
50
—
—
0.005
—
19,600
—
—
--
160
--
—
0
2,341,004
—
150,679,135
—
41,400
3,360
51,363,670
51,400,438
NOTE: The use of — as an entry indicates that the incremental E/D is not significant (relative to last entry or
relative to entry in another column at the same row) or that the exposure of the same population may be
counted in another column.
-------
7-52
REFERENCES
1.	"Chemical Product Synopsis on Monochlorobenzene, "Mannsvi11e Chemical
Products, July 1977.
2.	"Chemical Profile on Monochlorobenzene," October 31, 1977, Chemical Market-
ing Reporter.
3.	E. M. Klapproth, "Chlorobenzenes," p. 633.5030A--I, Chemical Economics
Handbook, Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA (July 1977).
4.	"Chemical Product Synopsis on Dichlorobenzene, "Mannsville Chemical Pro-
ducts, June 1978.
5.	"Chemical Profile on o-Dichlorbenzene," September 6, 1976, Chemical Market-
ing Reporter.
6.	"Chemical Profile on p-Dichlorobenzene.," March 15, 1976, Chemical Marketing
Reporter.
7.	1978 Directory of Chemical Producers, United States, Stanfora Research
Institute, Menlo Park, CA.
8.	S. W. Dylewsi, Emissions Control Options for the Synthetic Organic Chemicals
Manufacturing Industry, Chlorobenzenes Product Report, Hydroscience,
Inc., Knoxville, TN, August 1978.
9.	Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Solvent Metal Cleaning, EPA-450/
2-77-022 (OAQPS No. 1.2-079), Research Triangle Park, NC (November
1977).
10.	Solvent Metal Cleaning, Background Information: Proposed Standards (draft),
EPA, NSPS, ESED, Research Triangle Park, NC (November 1978).
11.	Special Project Report, "Petrochemical Plant Sites," prepared for Industrial
Pollution Control Division, Industrial Environmental Research Lab-
oratory, Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH, by Monsanto
Research Corp., Dayton, OH (April 1976).
12.	Monsanto Corp., Chocolate Bayou, TX, Diphenyl Oxide Process, Texas Air
Control Board emission inventory questionnaire for 1975.
13.	Allied Chemical, (W. S. Turetsky), personal communication in response to
publication of the first draft of this report. (June 1981).
14.	Union Carbide Corporation (R. L. Foster), personal communication in response
to publication of the first draft of this report. (June 1981).
15.	01 in Chemicals Group (V. M. Norwood), personal communication in response to
publication of the first draft of this report. (November 1980).
16.	BASF Wyandotte Corporation (L.J. Story), personal communication in response
to publication of the second draft of this report (February 1982).
2:B-29 & 30
-------
APPENDIX A-8 	 Chloroform
CHLOROFORM" CHEMICAL DATA
Noren:! ature
Chemical Abstract Service Registry Number: 67-66-3
Synonyms: Trichloromethane; Mether.yl Chloride; Trichloroform; Methenyl
Trichloride; Formyl Trichloride; Methyl Tricnlorioe
Chemical Formula
Molecular Weight: 119.39
Molecular Formula: CHCl^
Molecular Structure:
CI
i
CI - C - H
i
CI
Cher.ical arc Physical P-ooerties
Physical St2te at ST?: Liquid - highly refractive, nonflammable, heavy,
very volatile
Boiling Point: 61.25°C
Melting Point: -63.5°C
Density: 1.4934 5 at IS°C
Vapor Pressure: 200 rm at 25.9°C
Vapor Density: 4.12
Solubility: Soluble (3.15 g/1 of H^O)
Log Partition Coefficient (Octanol/H^O): 1.17
Atmospheric Reactivity
Transformation Products: Easily hydroly2ed by aqueous alkali to formic acid.
When exposed to air and light, breaks down to phosgene, HC1 , and chlorine.
Reactivity Toward OH-: same as methane, 1/4^ Butane
Reactivity Toward 0,: No reaction
Reactivity Toward Photolysis: No photochemical degradation
Major Atmospheric Precursors: n/A
Formation Reactivity:
-------
8-5
I. SOURCES
Four volatile organic compounds	methyl chloride, methylene chloride, chloro-
form, and carbon tetrachloride	comprise the group of chemicals commonly referred
to as the chloromethanes. Emission losses for all except methyl chloride are
assessed in this summary.
CHLOROFORM
Chloroform (CHC13) is a clear, water-white, heavy, volatile, nonflammable liquid
at ambient conditions and is manufactured by the chlorination of either methyl
chloride or methane. The chlorination of methane is the predominant route for
the manufacture of chloroform.
In 1573 five companies were operating plants at seven locations in the U.S.
The locations of the plants, the type of production process used, and the 1973
capacity and estimated production level for each plant are shown in Table 8-1.4'6'7
An estimated 330 million lb of chloroform was produced in 1978.
The largest end-use for chloroform is in the manufacture of chlorodifluoromethane,
commonly referred to as fluorocarbon 22 or F-22. Fluorocarbon 22 is used primarily
as a refrigerant with an estimated 61% of the chloroform production (201.3 million
lb) consumed for this application. In addition an estimated 82.5 million lb of
chloroform was consumed to produce fluorocarbon 22 that was subsequently used
as a chemical intermediate to produce fluorocarbon resins.
The remaining 1978 chloroform production was either exported (23.1 million lb)
or used as an industrial solvent to produce pharmaceuticals or pesticides
(23.1 million lb). End-uses of chloroform are summarized in Table 8-2.
For the purpose of this report emissions resulting from the export of chloroform
are assumed to be negligible. The remaining chloroform produced (23.1 million
lb) is used as a solvent in a variety of end-use applications and is eventually
released to the atmosphere. Individual source locations could not be identified
for this broad category. Estimated emissions losses for each producing location
are shown in Table 8-3.
Total nationwide emissions of chloroform from all. sources are estimated to
be 23,820,000 lb. A tabulation of the losses is .shown in Table
-------
8-6
The most significant end-use for chloroform is as a chemical intermediate in
the production of fluorocarbon 22. Identified source locations for fluorocarbon 22
manufacture are shown in Table 8-5.13 Also shown in that table are the 1973
fluorocarbon 22 production and the corresponding chloroforn requirement for its
manufacture.
Emission estimates of chlorofrora from these sites are shown in Table 8-6.14
Total estimated emissions of chloroform from fluorocarbon' 22 production sites
are estimated to be 373,460 lb. Additional associated emissions
from these sites would include other halocarbons used and the various fluoro-
carbons produced. Vent parameter data relative to chloroform emissions from
fluorocarbon production are shown in Table	estimated that an average
of five tanks per sits contribute chloroform storage emissions. Process emissions
were reported as negligible.14
-------
Table C-l. Production of Chloroform3
Source
Location
1978
Estimated
Production
<106 lb/yr)
„ c
Process
197B
Estimated
Capacity
{lev Ib/yr)
Geographic Coordinates
Latitude/Longitude
Allied Chemical Corp.
Moundsville, WV
19
d
A,13
30
39
54
24/B0
47
51
Diamond Shamrock
Belle, WV
26
A
10
3Q
14
09/01
32
38
Dow Chemical
Freeport, TX
61
U
100
28
59
15/45
24
45

Plaquemine, LA
61
A
100
30
19
00/91
15
00
Stauffer Chemical Co.
Louisville, KV
49
A
75
36
12
09/65
51
49
Vulcan Materials Co.
Geismar, LA
30
A
fiO
30
10
00/90
59
00

Wichita, KS
70
A,Qe
110
37
36
55/97
18
30
Total

330

515





3See refs. 4, 6, and 7.
^Distribution of the 330 million pounds per year for each producing location has been made as a direct ratio of
total production/total capacity X individual plant capacity.
Q
(A)	- Methanol hydrochlorination process or methyl chloride chlorination process.
(B)	- Methane chlorination process.
**5% methane chlorination 95% methyl chloride chlorination.
10% methane chlorination 90 % methyl chloride chlorination.
-------
8-8
Table 8-2. 1978 Chloroform Consumption by End Use*
End Use
Percent of-
Total ConsumDtion
End Use
Consumption
(M li)
Chlorodifluororaethane (F-22)
refrigerants
61
201.3
Chlorodifluoromethane (F-22)
resin intermediates
25
82.5
Export
7
23.1
Solvent/miscellaneous
7
23.1
Total
100
330.0
*See rets. S and /.
-------
Table 8-3. 1970 Chloroform Production Emissions


Process Vent
Llini ssi.ons
SLoracje Vc-nt
1:1)11 i Mb i OIlS
Fugi tive
tini scions
a
Total Emissions
. Company
Locat ion
(lb/yr)
(cj/sec)k
(lb/yr)
b
(f) /sec)
(lb/yr)
(q/sec)b
(lb/yr)
(cj/sec) k
Allied
Chemical
Moundsville, WV
140
0.002
17 , U70
0. 257
4,630
0.067
22,640
0. 326
Diamond
Shamrock
Belle, WV
200
0.003
25,150
0. 365
6,420
0.092
31,970
0. 460
Dow
Chemical
Freeport, TX
260
0.004
10,470
0. 266
11,500
0. 166
30,2 30
0.435

Plaquemine, LA
480
0.007
62,400
0. 890
15,810
0.228
78,690
1.133
Stauffer
Louisville, KY
370
0.005
47,7U0
0.688
12,100
0.174
60,250
0. 867
Vulcan
Geismar, LA
290
0.004
37,050
0.533
9,390
0.135
46,730
0.673

Wichita, KA
500
0.007
63,450
0.913
16,820
0.242
00,770
1.163
Total

2,240

27 2,370

76,670

351,200

a
Derived from the emission factors shown in Table 10.
^Based on 8760 hr/yr operation.
-------
8-10
Table 8-4. Estimated Chloroform Nationwide Emission Losses
Estimated National
	Source	Emission (ii Lb/vr)
Production	0.35
Chlorodiiluoromethane (F-22)
(refrigerants)	I
Chlorodifluoromethane (F-22)|	0.37
resin intermediates	J
Solvent, miscellaneous	23.1
Export	0
Total	23.82
-------
Table 8-5. Users of Carbon Tetrachloride and Chloroform to Produce Fluorocarbons
Allied Cheaical
Baton Rouge, LA
Danville, IL
Elisabeth, NJ
El Se	(106 lb)	Uit 1 tude/lonqItudo
Assumed sliut down
20. 5
40.6


07. 3

40
08
30/07 33 45
20. 5
40.6
37.0 )
202.9
07. 3
55.7
40
40
45/74 13 51
26. 5
40.6
37.0 I

07. 3
55.7
33
56
30/110 26 35
36.6
52.3
1

112.6

37
59
37/121 52 00
36.6
52. 3
40.8

112.6
71.9
39
41
25/75 30 35
36. 6
52. 3

~ 364.9
112.6

43
24
10/06 2 3 40


48.0


71.9
30
1L
51/05 54 13


s



27
53
00/97 15 00
22.1
31.4
19.5
73.0
67.6
20.6
37
03
10/08 19 40
Assumed
shutdown







Not listed	Assmed shutdown
20
80												
92S	218 310.1 192.7 120.0 667.5 283.8
•See re(. 13.
-------
8-12
Table 8-6. Qaissions from Carbon Tetrachloride and
Chloroform Caers for Flurocarbon Production3
F-ll/T-12 Carbon
Tetrachloride
E&issions
F-22 Chloroform
Emissions
Source
Location
(lb/Vr)*3
(c/sec)'2
(lb/Vr)c
(q/sec)^
Alliede
Danville, I!
58,460
0.84
0


Elizabeth, NJ
0
0
16,350
0.24

El Segundo, CA
3,400
0.05
100
0.001
Du Pont
Antioch, CA
75,420
1.09
0
0

Deepvater, NJ
75,420
1.09
148,300
2.14

Montague, MI
75,420
1.09
0
0

Louisville, KY
0

148,300
2.14
Pennwalt
Calvert City, :
-------
3-13
Table 8-7. Chloromethane Vent Parameters3
Source
Number
of
Vents
Vent
Height
(ft)
Vent
Diameter-
(ft)
Discharge
Temperature
CD
Velocity
(fps)
^ b
>.iion
j-.-i chloride chlo-
rjjzi on





Process
3
35
0.08
95
5.0
Storage
10
20
0.17
80

r^r.e chlorination





frocsss
2
35
0.08
100
270
Storage
10
20
0.17
80

¦¦« disulfide and
"n chlorination
rxtsses





?ncess
2
45
0.17
100
9.0
Storage
7
20
0.17
80

Q
.me chloride end-use





Colli cleaner
1
15
0.5
70
0.6
7apor degreaser
1
15
0.5
150

-arbons ll/12d





Process
2
30
0.33
90

Storage
4
20
0.17
80

¦ :irbon 22d





Process6
0
0
0
0
0
Storage
2
20
0.17
80

' 1, 2, 10, and 14.
¦-^9 cross-section -5 m2
2
-r? cross-section - 50 m
•;""9 cross-section - 20 m2
: *re no process vent losses of chloroform from f-22 manufacture.
-------
00
1
FIGURE 8-1 . SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF CHLOROFORM EMISSIONS
-------
TABLE 8-0. EMISSIONS AND METEOROLOGICAL STATIONS OF SPECIFIC
POINT SOURCES OF CHLOROFORM
*	+	EMISSIONS 
931120
1
1
.0033211
. 6(111032
. 174240
a
vulcan
CEIFHAtl. LA
30
IO
00
090
09
OO
129311
1
1
.004176
.333320
. 133216
6
VUI.CAN
HICIIITA. ICA
37
36
33
097
lit
30
03920
1
1
.007200
.9136110
.242208
7
DOM
FrtEEPonr, tx
211
39
30
090
23
3d
12923
2
2
.6*1744
.260960
. Us&AS
8
ALLIED
ELIZABETH, NT
40
40
43
074
13
81
04739
3
3
•
.228695
.006473
9
ALLIED
EL 8ECUND0. CA
33
06
SO
1 in
26
33
23129
3
3
0.
0.
.001438
ie
DUI'ONT
UEEPWATEn, NJ
39
41
23
073
30
33
13739
3
3
0.
1.704736
.387984
ii
DUI'ONT
LOUISVILLE. KY
311
1 1
HI
ons
54
13
131107
3
3
0.
1.704736
.387984
12
fknuwalt
CALVEHT CITY. KY
37
03
10
Ollll
19
40
031) 16
3
3
0.
.7i2noo
.142360
-------
TABLE 8-9. (Concluded)
* Plant Type:
Type 1: Plant produces chloroform by using the methylchlorlde chlorination
process
Type 2: Plant produces chloroform by using the mcthan chlorlnatlon process
Type 3: Plant produces flurocarbon 22
t Source Type:
Type 1: Methyl chloride chlorination process
Type 2: Methane chlorination process
Type 3: Flurocarbon 22 production
-------
8-17
TABLE 8-10. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE OF CHLOROFORM RESULTING FROM
SPECIFIC POINT SOURCE EMISSIONS
Concentration	Population
Level	Exposed	Dosage
(ug/m^)	(persons)	[(ug/m^) ~ persons]
25	9	281
10	BT	1,330
5	301	2,830
2.5	921	4,960
1	8,387	19,800
0.5	28,456	34,500
0.25	52,915	42,900
0.1	220,934	68,600
0.05	728,929	104,000
0.025	1,619,506	136,000
0.01	2,762,466	154,000
0.005 ,*	3,922,379	162,000
4.21x10	7,619,827	168,000
* The lowest annual average concentration occurring within
20 km of the specific point source.
58/4
-------
8-10
TABLE 8-11. HAJOR PARAMETERS FOR ESTIMATING EXPOSURE/DOSAGE RESULTING
FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS OF CHLOROFORM
	Parameter			Value
Daytime decay rate (K^)	0
Nighttime decay rate (K^)	0
Hanna-Gifford coefficient (C)	225
Nationwide heating source emissions (E^)	0
Nationwide nonheating stationary source emissions (EN)	332.6 gm/sec
Nationwide mobile source emissions (EM)	0
-------
TABLE 8-12. CHLOROFORM EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULTING FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS
EXPO LEVEL

I.
.MMM
.100000
.000000
POPULATION
(PERSON)
8*8
4I497S4
21839303
70609337
129499039
100679130
PERCENTAGE OF DISTRIBUTION
ROSACE	PERCENTAGE OF CONTRIBUTION
(ur./( mi a- 	 	
PERSON)	IIKATINU STATIONARY UODILE CITY TYPE I CITY TYPE 2 CITY TYPE 3
098928.3
6098977.8
11010193.3
l9084fl6V4
23221690.1
24223700.2
e.
6.
0.
o.
0.
0.
IM.S
100.0
100. e
100.e
loo. e
too.e
e.
e.
e.
e.
0.
e.
100.0
109.0
100.6
90. I
9G.2
92.9
• .
0.
0.
.7
2.3
2.6
~ .
0.
0.
1.2
2.0
4.0
-------
1 Afll.E B-13. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE SUMMARY Of CHLOROFORM
Population Exposed Dosage
	(persona)	 	[(nq/m ) * persons]
Concentration
Speci fic
General


Speci fic
General


Level
Point
Point


Point
Point


(pq/m*)
Source
Source
Area Source
U.S. Total
Source
Source
Area Source
U.S. lotal
25
9
0
0
9
281


218
10
81
0
0
81
1,330
0
0
1,330
5
301
0
0
301
2,830
0
0
2,830
2.5
921
0
0
921
4,960
0
0
4,960
1
8,387
0
505,140
513,527
19,800
0
895,925
915,725
0.5
28,456
0
9,149,730
—
34,500
0
6,895,977
6,930,477
0.25
52,915
0
21,039,303
~
42,900
0
11,010,193
11,053,093
0.1
220,934
0
78,609,557
—
68,600
0
19,384,869
19,453,469
0.03
728,929
0
129,499,035
~
104,000
0
23,221,696
23,325,695
0.025
1,619,506
0
—
~
136,000
0
--
—
0.01

0
—
—
154,000
0
—
--
0.005
	
0
—
—
—
0
--
--
0
7,619,027
0
158,679,135
—
168,000
0
24,223,708
24,391,708
NOTE: The use of — aa an entry indicates that the incremental E/D is not significant (relative to last entry or
relative to entry in another column at the same row) or that the exposure of the same population may be
counted in another culuim.
-------
8-21
REFERENCES
1.	F. D. Hobbs and C. W. Stueve, Hydroscience, Inc., Emission Control Options for
the Synthetic Organic Chemicals Manufacturing Industry	Product Report on Chloro-
methanes, Methane Chlorination Process (on file at EPA, ESED, Research Triangle
Park, NC (January 1979).
2.	F. D. Hobbs and C. W. Stuewe, Hydroscience, Inc., Emission Control Options for
the Synthetic Organic Chemicals Manufacturing Industry	Product Report on Chloro-
methanes. Methanol Hydrochlorination and Methyl Chloride Chlorination Processes
(on file at EPA, ESED, Research Triangle Park, NC (January 1979).
3.	"Chemical Product Synopsis on Methylene Chloride," Mannsville Chemical Products
(March 1978).
4.	T. E. Killilea, "Chlorinated Methanes," Chemical Economics Handbook, Stanford
Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA (April 1979).
v. "Chemical Profile on Methylene Chloride," Chemical Marketing Reporter
(September 20, 1976).
6.	"Chemical Product Synopsis on Chloroform," Mannsville Chemical Products
(June 1973).
7.	"Chemical Profile on Chloroform," Chemical Marketing Reporter (September 27, 1976).
8.	"Chemical Product Synopsis on Carbon Tetrachloride," Mannsville Chemical Products
(June 1978).
9.	"Chemical Profile on Carbon Tetrachloride," Chemical Marketing Reporter
(April 10, 1978).
10.	F. D. Hobbs and C. W. Stuewe, Hydroscience, Inc., Emission Control Options for
the Synthetic Organic Chemicals Manufacturing Industry	Product Report on Carbon
Tetrachloride and Perchloroethvlene, Hydrocarbon Chlorinolysis Process (on file
at EPA, ESED, Research Triangle Park, NC (March 1979).
-------
8-22
11.. Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Solvent Metal Cleaning, EPA-450/2-77-022
(OAQPS Ho. 1.2-079), Research Triangle Park, NC (November 1977).
12.	Solvent Metal Cleaning, Background Information: Proposed Standards (draft)
EPA, NSPS, ESED, Research Triangle Park, NC (November 1973).
13.	Chemical Research Services, 1979 Directory of Chemical Producers, United States
of America, Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA.
14.	D. M. Pitts, Hydroscience, Inc., Emission Control Options for the Synthetic Organic
Chemicals Manufacturing Industry	Product Resort on Fluorocarbons. on file at EPA,
ESZ3, Research Triangle Park, NC (February 1979).
15. Allied Company (W.S. Turetsky) personal communication in response to publication
of the second draft of this report. (February 1982).
-------
APPENDIX A-9 	 Ctloroprene
CHLOROPRENE CHEMICAL DATA
Homeric 1 at ure
Chemical Abstract Service Registry Number: 126-99-8
Synonyms: 2-ChlorDbutadiene-1,3; 6-Chioroprene; Chloroprene;
2-Chloro-l,3-Butadiene
Chemical Formula
Molecular Weight: 88.54
Molecular Formula: C.HrCl,
4 5
Molecular Structure:
CI
I
CH2-C-CH~CH2
Cherries! and Physical Properties
Physical State at STP: Liquid-colorless, -flammable, pungent ethereal odor
Boiling Point: 59.4°C at 760 mm
Melting Point:
Density: 0.95E3 at 2D°C/4°C
Vapor Pressure: 215.4 mm at 25°C
Vapor Density: 3.0
Solubility: Slightly soluble (<10.0 g/1 of )
Log Partition Coefficient (Octanol/^O):
Atmospheric Reactivity
Transformation Products: 2-Chloroacrolein, Chloroacrolein
Reactivity Toward 0H-: 4 x Butane
Reactivity Toward 0^: 2 x Propylene
Reactivity Toward Photolysis: NAPP
Major Atrospheric Precursors:
Formation Reactivity:
-------
9-5
I. SOURCES
Chloroprene is currently produced in the United States by chlorination, isomeri-
zation, and caustic dehydrochlorination from butadiene. Until the late 1960s,
chloroprene was also produced from acetylene, but that process has been discon-
tinued because the cost of acetylene is much higher than that of butadiene.
Only two companies at three locations currently produce chloroprene in the United
States. Dupont shut down its Louisville, KY, chloroprene facility and expanded
its Laplace, LA, facility. Dupont's Victoria, TX, facility has also begun produc-
tion of chloroprene. The locations of the plants and the 1978 capacity and
estimated production for each site are shown in Table 9-1. An estimated 277.2 million
lb of chloroprene was produced in 1978.1,2
All chloroprene produced is captivelv consumed to manufacture polychloroprene
(neoprene) synthetic rubber by polymerization of the chloroprene. Neoprene is
used in wire and cable covers, gaskets, automobile parts, caulks, and other
applications requiring chemical, oil, and weather resistance.
II. EMISSION ESTIMATES
Emission estimates for the three sites listed in Table 9-1 include the total emis-
sions of chloroprene, and toluene from the Dupont sites, for both the production
of chloroprene and its captive use to make neoprene.
Emission factors used to calculate the emissions of chloroprene and toluene are
shown in Table 9-2, along with vtnt parameter data.
Total emissions of chloroprene from its production and use are estimated to
have been 3,523,090 lb, and those of toluene are estimated to have been
895,433 lb. There were no identified toluene emissions associated with chloro-
prene or neoprene manufacture at the Denka facility. Total emissions are shown
in Table 9-3 by site location.
-------
9-6

Table 9-1.
Chloroprene
Producers and
Captive Users3
Co-oar.v
Location
1978
Capacity
(M lb)
1978
Production
(M lb)b
Geographic Coordinates
Latitude/Lonqi tude
Du Pont
Laplace, LA
190
169. 4
30 04 00/90 32 00

Victoria, TXC
60
53. 9
28 40 29/96 57 21
Denka
Houston, TX
60
53.9
29 41 31/95 15 12
Total

310
277. 2

3See refs. 1 and 2.
Total production distributed over all sites based on capacity.
c
Total capacity and estimated production have been determined by the difference
in overall U.S. capacity and overall U.S. demand for neoprer.e.
-------
9-7
Table 9-2. Chloroprene/Toluene Emission Factors and Vent Parameter Data
Source
Chemical
Emission Factor lb Lost per lb Produced/Used
Process	Storage	Fugi tive	Total
Emission Factors
Du Pont sites
Denka site
Chloroprene
Toluene
Chlorocrene
0.014000
0.003473
0.002200t
0.000004
0.00004®
0.000004*
0.001000
0.00050°
0.001000C
0.015004
0.00401
0.0C3204
Vent Parameter Data
Source
Q
All sites
Process
Storage
Fugi tive
Number
of
Vents
6
4
Vent
Height
(ft)
56
16
Vent
Diameter
(ft)
1.25
0.33
Vent
Discharge
Temperature
( °F)
100
75
Vent
Velocity
(ft/sec)
85
Discharge
Area
(ft X ft!
400 X 600
See ref. 3.
3See ref. 4.
"Hydroscience estimate.
Building cross section all sites - 100 m
-------
9-8
Table
Chloroprene
and Toluene Emissions from Chloroprene
Production and Use
C0r.02.nv
Location
Emissions (lb/yr)3
a
Total Emissions
Process Storace Fucitive
(lb/yr 1 (g/sec)b


ChloroDrene Emissions

Du Pont
Laplace, LA
2,371,600 678 169,400
2,541,678 36.59

Victoria, TX
754,600 216 53,900
808,716 11.64
DenXa
Houston, TX
118,580 216 53,900
172,696 2.49
Total

3,244,780 1,110 277,200
3,523,090


Toluene Emissions

Du Pont
Laplace, LA
587,818 6,776 84,700
679,294 9.78

Victoria, TX
187,033 2,156 26,950
216,139 3.11
Total

774,851 8,932 111,650
895, 433
aBased on emission factors shown in Table 2.
b
Based on 8760 hr/yr operation.
-------
9-9
Process emissions originate from the chloroprene reactor vent scrubber, the
neoprene strippers, and the neoprene dryer exhausts. Storage emissions repre-
sent the losses from both working and final product storage as well as loading
and handling losses. Fugitive emissions as those that result from plant equip-
ment leaks.
-------
W

-y
\y
'—A
I
o
FIGURE 9-T. SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF CHLOROPAENE EMISSIONS
-------
TABLE 9-4. EMISSIONS AND METEOROLOGICAL STATIONS OF SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF CHLOROPRENE
missions ccH/prc>
STAH ri.AHT SOIinr.F. 	
wo. cowanv	sitk	mtithor i.ohcituhf. station tvm-: ivri: riiocKss stohacf. fhcitivf.
1	nriPONT	LArLrtcr.. i.a	rio 04 n<» oon 2«» «i 2t»r.n 1	1 34.1:11040 .novTon 2.wnf>*
2	DIU'OHT	VICTOIUA. TX	211 -vr» rt<)f> r»7 21 I2'»2:i I	I in.ll 41 :m 005 ir» 12 iivmr. 1 1 i.7»7r»r>2 .o«mi» ,77f.if.»
-------
TABLE 9-5. EMISSIONS PARAMETERS FOR SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF CHIOROPRENE
Vent	Building Cross	Vent	Vent	Vent
Height Section	Diameter	Velocity	Temperature
Source Type '	 Emissions Category (m)		(m?J	 	(mj		(m/sec)	(°k)
Process 17 100	0.38	26	311
Storage 5 100
Fugitive 0 100
NOTE: The use of -- as an entry Indicates that the incremental E/D 1s not significant
(relative to last entry or relative to entry 1n another column at the same row)
or that the exposure of the same population may be counted 1n another column.
KO
I
-------
9-13
TABLE 9-6. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE OF CHLOROPRENE RESULTING FROM
SPECIFIC POINT SOURCE EMISSIONS
Concentration Population
Level	Exposed	Dosage
(ug/m^)	(persons)	[(ug/m^) • persons]
100	27	3,560
50	126	10,300
25	443	22,000
10	2,762	57,700
5	7,322	91,000
2.5	14,083	114,000
1	34,121	150,000
0.5	65,675	171,000
0.25	129,903	192,000
0.1	332,934	224,000
0.05	695,229	249,000
0.0047*	1,414,679	272,000
* The lowest annual average concentration occurring within
20 km of the specific point source.
58/4
-------
9-14
REFERENCES
Sara L. Soder, "Butadiene Marketing Research Report," Chemical Economics Handbook,
Stanford Research Institute, June 1977.
Chemical Marketing Reporter, Chemical Profiles Neoprene, August 16, 1976.
D. D. Wild, Louisiana Air Control Commission, Emission Inventory Questionnaire
for Dupont Chemical, March 3, 1977.
M. 2. Woskow, Texas Air Control Board Emissions Inventory Questionnaire for
Petrotex Chemical, Aug. 26, 1976.
-------
APPENDIX A-10 	 Cresol
ro-CRESOL CHEMICAL DATA
Nomencl ature
Chemical Abstract Service Registry Number: 108-39-4
Synonyms: 3-Methylphenol; m- Hydroxyltoluene
Chercical Formula
Molecular Weight: 108.1
Molecular Formula: C^HgO
Molecular Structure:	OH
<3
\
CH3
Chemical and Physical Properties
Physical State at STP: Liquid - colorless or yellowish, phenolic odor
Boiling Point: 202.8°C
Melting Point: 12°C
Density: 1.034 at 20°C/4°C
Vapor Pressure: 1 mm at 52.0°C
Vapor Density: 3.72
Solubility: Slightly soluble (HjO)
Log Partition Coefficient (Octanol/H^O): 2.37
Atmospheric Reactivity
Transformation Products:
Reactivity Toward OH--' 12 x Butane
Reactivity Toward 0^: 10» Propylene
Reactivity Toward Photolysis: NAPP
Major Atrospheric Precursors: Toluene
Formation Reactivity: Small formation pathway (<1 OS from all cresols)
from toluene decay
-------
10-5
o-CRESOL CHEMICAL DATA
Nomenclature
Chemical Abstract Service Registry Number: 95-48-7
Synonyms: o-Cresylic Acid; o-Hydroxyltoluene; 2-Methylphenol
Chemical Formula
Molecular Weight: 108.1
Molecular Formula: C^HgO
Molecular Structure: ru
Chemical and Physical Properties
Physical State at STP: Solid crystals - non volatile phenolic odor
Boiling Point: 190.8CC
Melting Point: 30.9°C
Density: 1.047 at 20°C/4°C
Vapor Pressure: 1 nm at 38.2°C
Vapor Density: 3.72
Solubility: Soluble (31 g/1 of H^O)
Log Partition Coefficient (Octanol/H^O): 3.40
Atmospheric Reactivity
Transformation Products: Reacts with oxidizing materials to yield quinones and
benzenes (<1 day in air, <10 days in water). Methyl quinone, methyldihydroxy!
Reactivity Toward OH -: 10 x Butane	benzenes
Reactivity Toward 0^: 10% Propylene
Reactivity Toward Photolysis: N/A
Major Atmospheric Precursors: Toluene
Formation Reactivity: See m-Cresol
3
-------
10-6
p-CRESOL CHEMICAL DATA
Nomenclature
Chemical Abstract Service Registry Number: 106-44-5
Synonyms: 4-Cresol; 4-Methylphenol; p-Hydroxyltoluene
Chemical Formula
Molecular Weight: 108.1
Molecular Formula: C^HgO
Molecular Structure:
Chemical and Physical Properties
Physical State at STP: Solid crystals - phenolic odor
Boiling Point: 201.8°C
Melting Point: 35.26°C
Density: 1.0341 at 20°C/4°C
Vapor Pressure: 1 mm at 53.0°C
Vapor Density: 3.72
Solubility: Slightly soluble (H20)
Log Partition Coefficient (Octanol/^O): 2.35
Atmospheric Reactivity
Transformation Products:
Reactivity Toward OH*: 10 x Butane
Reactivity Toward 0^: 10» Propylene
Reactivity Toward Photolysis:
Major Atmospheric Precursors: Toluene
Formation Reactivity: See m-Cresol
-------
10-7
I. SOURCES
A. PRODUCTION
The cresol isomers include para-cresol, ortho-cresol, and meta-cresol. Produc-
tion and capacity information is normally expressed in terms of total cresols
and cresylic acid rather than the individual cresol isomers. Cresols typically
occur as mixture of the cresol isomers and are defined as the compounds in the
mixture with boiling points below 204°C. Cresylic acids are the compounds with
boiling points above 204°C. Cresols and cresylic acid are produced as by-products
of either coal tar distillation or petroleum naphtha cracking.
As a by-product of coal tar distillation, cresols and cresylic acids are obtained
from the middle light oil cut of the distillation and from- the filtrate remaining
after crystallization of the naphthalene, which is also present in the middle
light oil. Extraction of the filtrate with sodium hydroxide removes phenols,
cresols, and xylenols. After separation in an aqueous layer, the phenols are
acidifed to yield an organic layer which is then distilled to yield natural
phenol, cresols, and xylenols. The crude cresol cut is further purified by
fractional distillation to yield ortho-cresol and a mixture consisting of meta-
and para-cresol. In the thermal cracking of naphtha and gas oil fractions,
petroleum acids are obtained which can be processed by methods similar to the
cresol recovery processes used by the coal tar distillation.1
p-Cresol is also produced synthetically by methylation of phenol.
There are currently six producers of mixed cresols. The locations of the plants
and the 1978 capacity and estimated production level for each plant are shown
in Table 10-1 .* In 1978 an estimated 32 million lb of mixed cresols was produced.
The average composition of the three isomers in the mixed cresols produced is
estimated to have been 26% p-cresol, 31% o-cresol, and 43% m-cresol.2'3
There are also currently seven producers of cresylic acid. The locations of the
plants and the 1978 capacity and estimated production of each are shown in Table 10-1.
In 1978 an estimated 47 million lb of cresylic acid was produced. The average
composition of the three isomers in the cresylic acid produced is estimated to
-------
Table 10-1. Mixed Cresols and Crcsylic Acid Producers3
Crcsols or
Tar Acids Crcsylic Acid
Capacity Produced Geographic Coordinates
Company	Locat ion	(mill i on 11 i/y r)	(mi 1J ion lb/y r)	(Latl tude/Longi tudc)
Mixed Cresols Producers
Continental Oil
Newark, NJ
50
6
<10 43 31/7-1 07 26
Fallek
Tuscaloosa, AL
20
2
33 11 00/B7 34 50
Ferro
Sante Po Springs, CA
30
4
33 56 30/1IB 04 1G
Koppers
Oil City, PA
35
4
41 29 30/79 4 3 20
Merichem
Houston, TX
100
12
29 45 36/95 10 48
Stimson
Anacart.es , WA
30
4
48 28 31/122 32 48
Total	265	32
Cresylic ftcid Producers
Continental Oil
Newark, NJ
50
9
40 43 34/74 07 26
Fallek
Tuscaloosa, A.L
20
3
33 11 00/87 34 50
Ferro
Sante Fe Springs, CA
30
5
33 56 30/110 04 10
Koppe rs
Follansbee, WV
35
6
40 23 10/80 35 07
Merichem
Houston, TX
100
17
29 45 36/95 10 48
Mobil Oil
Beaumont, TX
10
2
34 04 14/94 03 40
Stimson
Anacortes, V/A
30
_5
40 28 31/122 32 48
Total	275	47
aSec rcf. 1.
-------
10-9
have been 35% p-cresol, 3% o-cresol, and 34% m-cresol. The remaining 28% of
cresylic acid is made up primarily of xylenols.1
Some of the cresols/cresylic acid manufacturers also produce individual isomers,
with o- and m-cresols removed by extraction and distillation of the coal tars
and petroleum fractions. p-Cresol isomer is produced synthetically.
There are currently six producers of o-cresol isomer in the United States. The
locations of the plants and the 1978 capacity and production levels are shown
in Table iO-2.1 An estimated 30 million lb of o-cresol was produced in 1978.
Sherwin Williams at its Chicago, Illinois, plant produced an estimated 21 million
lb of p-cresol synthetically in 1978. The plant location is shown in Table 10-2.
There were two m-cresol isomer producers in 1978 that manufactured an estimated
1.5 million lb. Source locations are shown in Tab]" 10-2.1
A summary of the estimated cresol isomer composition of mixed cresoJs, cresylic
acids, and a mixture of the two as used in 197S is given in Table 10-3.1'2'3
B. USES
Table 10-41'4 shows the end-use distribution of the individual cresol isomers, the
mixed cresols, and cresylic acid.
The manufactaure of 2,6-ditert butyl-p-cresol (BHT), which is used as a food
preservative, consumed half of the o-cresol isomer production (15 million lb).
Antioxidant manufacture consumed an estimated 10 million lb with the remainder
being exported (5 million lb).
The majority of the p-cresol isomer produced was exported. Estimated exports
in 1978 were 10.5 million lb, representing 50% of production. An estimated
5.5 million lb was consumed in phenolic resin manufacture, and 5.0 million lb
was used to produce pesticides.
m-Cresol isomer production was used exclusively in the manufacture of pyrethroid
pesticides (1.5 million lb).
-------
Table 10-2. Cresol Isomer Producers0
Company
Locat ion
Cresol Isomer
Capacity
(mi 1.1.ion lb/y r)
Cresol Isomer
Produced
(million lh/yr)
Geographic Coordinates
(l.at i t ude/Longi tudr:)


o-Crnsol Producers


Continental Oil
Newark, NJ
7.7
5.0
40 43 34/74 07 26
Fallek Chemical
Tuscaloosa, AL
9.6
6.0
33 11 00/07 34 50
Ferro Corp.
Sante Fe Springs,
CA 4.5
3.0
33 56 30/110 04 18
Koppe rs
Oil City, PA
5.4
3.0
41 29 30/79 4 3 20
Merichem
Houston, TX
15.1
10.0
.29 45 36/95 10 48
Stimson
Anacortes, WA
	4 . 5
3.0
48 28 31/122 32 48
Total

46. 8
p-Cresol Producer
30 .0

Sherwin Williams
Chicago, IL
b
NA
m-Cresol Producers
21.0
41 4 3 04/87 36 30
Koppe rs
Oil City, PA
b
NA
0. 75
41 29 30/79 4 3 20
Merichem
Houston, TX
b
NA
0. 75
29 45 36/95 10 48
Total


1.50

See ref. 1.
Not available.
-------
10-11
Table 10-3. Cresol Isomer Compositions*
In mixed crescl 3 (both product and emissions)
26% p-cresol
31% o-cresol
43% m-cresol
100%
In cresylic acid (both product and emissions)
35% p-cresol
3% o-cresol
34% m-crescl
2S% others, mainly xylenols
In mixed cresol/cresylic acid end-use (corbinea) anc emissions
31.6% p-cresol
12.7% o-crescl
37.4% n-cresol
17.3% o-hers (.7ic.ir.lv xyier.ois)
•See refs. 1, 2 and 3.
-------
10-12
Table 10-4. 1978 End Use Distribution of Cresol Isomers, Cresols
and Cresylic Acid*
Isomer, Cresols, or Cresylic Acid Used
End-Use
(million lb/yr)
(%)
•o-Cresol Isomer
2,6-ditert butyl-p-cresol (BHT)
Antioxidants
Export
Total
p-Cresol Isomer
Phenolic resins
Pesticides
Export
Total
m-Cresol Isomer
Pyrsthroid pesticides
Total
Mixed Cresols/Cresylic Acids
(combined)
Tricresyl phosphate (TCP)
N
Cresyl diphenol phosphate (CDP) J
Phenolic resins
Wire enamel solvent
Pesticides
Disinfectants/cleaning compound
Ore flotation
Miscellaneous other
Export
Total
15.0
10.0
5.0
30 .0
5.5
5.0
10.5
21.0
1.5
1.5
31.0
20.0
20.0
8.0
3.0
3.0
7.0
5.0
97.0
50
33
17
100
26
24
50
100
100
100
32
21
21
8
3
3
7
	5
100
'See refs. 1 and 4.
-------
10-13
The only available data on the end-uses of mixed cresols and cresylic acid are
in combined form. Total consumption of both mixed cresols and cresylic acid
was 97 million lb with the difference between production (79 million lb) and
use resulting from imports (18 million lb).
The largest end-use5 of mixed cresols/cresylic acid was in tricresyl phosphate
(plasticizer) manufacture (31 million lb), phenolic resins (20 million lb), and
wire enamel solvent (20 million lb). Pesticide manufacture consumed 8 million
lb; use in cleaning compounds and disinfectants for consumer use consumed 3 million
lb; and use as an ore flotation agent consumed 3 million lb.
Other miscellaneous uses consumed 7 million lb, and exports accounted for 5 million
lb.
Specific user locations for BHT producers, pyrethroid pesticide producers, and
tricresyl phosphate producers are shown in Table 10-5.5
C. INCIDENTAL SOURCES
The major incidental source of cresol isomer emissions is coke ovens. Coal
tars from coke ovens contain tar acids of 1.04% cresols.
Table 10-66 presents a list of coke oven plants in the U.S. Data to assign capacity
and production to each site were not available. The total estimated coke pro-
duction from these plants in 1978 was 107 billion lb.
II. EMISSION ESTIMATES
A. PRODUCTION
Emission factors used to develop production and end-use emission estimates for
the isomers, mixed cresols, and cresylic acid are shown in Table 10-7.
Emissions from the production of mixed cresols and cresylic acid are shown in
Table 10-8. Total cresol emissions from mixed cresol production were estimated to
have been 80,000 lb in 1978. Of this total 24,800 lb were o-cresol, 20,800 lb
were p-cresol, and 34,400 lb were m-cresol.
-------
Table 10-5. Identified Source I.ocntionn of Crcsols End-Users3
Company
Location
Product i t)ii
C.ip.ici t.y
	(Jlb/yr)
2.6 di-tert-buty-p-crcsol (HUT) Produccrs
Ashland	Fords, MJ
Koppcrs	Oil City, PA
Shell	Martinez, CA
UniroyaL	Geismar, LA
Total
o-Crcr.ol Isomcr
12
9
10
_5_
36
C If! sol
US.KJO
( lb/yr)
¦j
4
4
_2
15
Geographic Coordinates
	(I, at i tiidc/Long i tudc;)	
40	31 20/7'1 2n 50
41	29 39/79 4 3 20
38 00 05/122 06 40
30 13 30/91 00 15
m-Crcsol Isomer
Pyrctbroid Pesticide Producers
CPC International Lyndhurst, N.7
FMC	Baltimore, MD
Vertac	West Helena, AR
Total
ma
NA
NA
0.5
0.5
0.5
1.5
40 47 30/74 04 34
39 14 50/76 35 30
34 36 10/90 33 4 5
Mixed Cresols/Cresy1ic Acid
Tricresyl Phosphate/Cresy1 Diphenyphosphate	Producers
FMC Nitro, WV	60
Stauffer Gallipolis Ferry, WV	35
Total	95
20
31
38 25 33/81 50 05
38 46 40/82 )0 54
See ref. 5.
Mot available.
-------
10-15
Table 10-6. Coke-Oven Plants in the United States*
Comoanv
Location
Alabama By-Products Corporation
Alan Wood Steel Company
Allied Chemical Corporation
Senet-Solvay Division
Ar^co Steel Corporation
Bethlehem Steel Corporation
Chattanooga Coke & Chemical Co. Inc.
Citizens Gas & Coke Utility
Colorado Fuel L Iron Steel Corporation
Colt Industries Inc.
Crucible Stainless Steel and Alloy
Division
Cyclops Corporation
Empire-Detroit Steel Division
Donner-Hanna Coke Corporation
(jointly owned by Republic Steel
Corporation and Hanna Furnace Corpo-
ration, a subsidiary of National
Steel Corporation)
Eastern Gas and Fuel Associates
Eastern Associated Coal Corp., subsidiary
Empire Coke Company
Ford Motor Company
Steel Division
Great Lakes Carbon Corporation
Missouri Coke and Chemical Division
Indiana Gas & Chemical Corporation
Inland Steel Company
Interlake, Inc.
Tarrant, Alabama
Swedeland, Pennsylvania
Ashland, Kentucky
Detroit, Michigan
Hamilton, Ohio
Houston, Texas
Middletown, Ohio
Bethlehem, Pennsylvania
Burns Harbor, Indiana
Johnstown, Pennsylvania
Lackawana, New York
Sparrows Point, Maryland
Alton Fark, Tennessee
Indianapolis, Indiana
Pueblo, Colorado
Midland, Pennsylvania
Portsmouth, Ohio
Buffalo, New York
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Holt, Alabama
Rouge, Michigan
St. Louis, Missouri
Terre Haute, Indiana
Indiana Harbor, Indiana
South Chicago, Illinois
Toledo, Ohio
-------
10-16
Table 10-6 (Continued)
Comoanv
Location
International Harvester Company
Wisconsin Steel Division
Jones & Laughlin Industries, Inc.
(ovned by the LTV Corporation)
Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp., subsidiary
Kaiser Steel Corporation
Koppers Company, Inc.
Organic Material Division
Lykes Corporation
Youngstovn Sheet and Tube Company
subsidiarv
McClouth Steel Corporation'--
Milwaukee Solvay Coke Company
(affiliated vrith Pickands Mather S
Co., subsidiary of Moore and McCormick
Co., Inc.)
National Steel Corporation
Granite City Steel Division
Great Lakes Steel Division
B. F. Division
Weirton Steel Division
Northwest Industries, Inc.
Lone Star Steel Company, subsidiary
NVF Conpany
Sharon Steel Corporation, subsidiary
Republic Steel Corporation
Iron and Chemical Division
South Chicago, Illinois
Aliquippa, Pennsylvania
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Fontana, California
Erie, Pennsylvania
St. Paul, Minnesota
Woodvard, Alabama
Campbell, Ohio
Indiana Harbor, Indiana
Ironton, Ohio
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Granite City, Illinois
Zug Island, Michigan
Weirton, West Virginia
Daingerfield, Texas
Fairmont, West Virginia
Chicago, Illinois
Cleveland, Ohio
Gadsden, Alabama
Massillon, Ohio
Thomas, Alabama
Warren, Ohio
Youngstovn, Ohio
*McClouth Steel Corporation purchased only the coking operations of Allied
Chemical Corporation's Ironton, Ohio, facility in 1977. By-products are
still manufactured by Allied.
-------
10-17
Table 10-6 (Continued)
Comoanv
Location
Shenango Incorporated
(owned by The Shenango Furnace Company)
Tonawanda Coke Corporation
United States Steel Corporation
USS Agri-Chemicals Division and
USS Chemicals Division
Jim Walter Corporation
Jin: Walter Resources, Inc., subsidiary
Chemical Division
Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel Corporation
Neville Island, Pennsylvania
Buffalo, New York
Clairton, Pennsylvania
Duluth, Minnesota
Fairfield, Alabama
Fairless Hills, Pennsylvania
Gary, Indiana
Geneva, Utah
Lorain, Ohio
Birmingham, Alabama
East Steubenville, West
Virginia
Monessen, Pennsylvania
*See ref. 6.
-------
10-18
Table 10-7. Cresols Production and End-Use Emission Factors

lb
Lost per lb
Produced
(Used)

Source
Process
Storaqe
Fuqitive Total
a
Derivation
Mixed cresol production
0.00190
0.00020
0.00040
0.00250
Bb
Cresylic acid production
0.00190
0.00020
0.00040
0.00250
Bb
p-Cresol production
0.0039
0.00030
0.00080
0.00500
D
BHT/antioxidants
0.0008
0.0001
0.0001
0.001
D
Phenolic resins
0.00400
0.0005
0.0005
0.00500
D
Pesticides
0.00040
0.00005
0.00005
0.00050
cc
Pyrethroid pesticides
0.00040
0.00005
0.00005
0.00050
D
TCP production
0.00035
0.00005
0.00010
0.0005
cb
Miscellaneous, other



o.ooid

^asis: A - site visit data
E - state files
C - published data
D - Hydroscience estimate
See ref. 7.
CSee ref. £.
d
Based on a weighted average of all of crescl uses.
-------
Table 10-8. Cresol Emissions from Mixed Cresol, Cresylic Acid Producer's
Total Cresol
Emissions (lb/yr)	 	Emissions
Company
Location
Process
Storage
Fugitive
(lb/yr)
*
(g/sec)

Mixed
Cresols
Producers



Continental Oil
Newark, NJ
11,400
6,400
2,400
15,000
0. 22
Fallek
Tuscaloosa, AL
3,800
400
800
5,000
0.07
Ferro
Santa Fe Springs, CA
• 7,600
800
1,600
10,000
0.14
Koppers
Oil City, PA
7,600
800
1,600
10,000
0.14
Merichem
Houston, TX
22,800
2,400
4,800
30,000
0. 43
Stimson
Anacortes, WA
7 ,600
800
1,600
10,000
0.14
Total

60,800
6,400
12,800
80,000

Continental 011
Newark, NJ
17,100
1,800
3,600
22,500
0.32
Fallek
Tuscaloosa, AL
5,700
600
1,200
7,500
0.11
Ferro
Santa Fe Springs, CA
9,500
1,000
2,000
12,500
0. 18
Koppers
Follarisbee, WV
11,400
1,200
2,400
15,000
0. 22
Merichem
Houston, TX
32,300
3,400
6,800
42,500
0.61
Mobil Oil
Beaumont, TX
3,800
400
800
5,000
0.07
Stimson Lumber
Anacortes, WA
9,500
1,000
2,000
12,500
0.18
Total

89,300
9,400
18,800
117,500

*Based on 8760 hr/yr operation.
-------
10-20
Total cresylic acid production emissions were estimated to have been 117,500 lb.
Of this total 3,525 lb were o-cresol, 41,125 lb were p-cresol, and 39,950 lb were
m-cresol.
Since both mixed cresols and cresylic acid share common producing sites, and in
the absence of other emission data, the same emission factor of 0.00250 was
used to estimate emissions for both. It was assumed that the cresol isomer
composition in the emissions was the same as in the product mixtures shown in
Table 1U-3.
Process vent emissions originate primarily from distillation and neutralizaton
processes. Storage emissions represent the losses from both working and final
product storage as well as loading and handling. Fugitive emissions are those
which result from plant equipment leaks.
Emissions from the individual isomer production are shown in Table 10-9. The emis-
sion factor used for m- and o-cresol production losses is the same that was
used for mixed cresols. The p-cresol emission factor used was 0.005 lb/lb since
it is synthetically manufactured.
Emissions from o-cresol, p-cresol, and m-cresol individual isomer production
were estimated to have been 75,000 lb, 105,000 lb, and 3,750 lb respectively.
B. USES
The emissions from specific end-user locations are shown in Table 10-10 for p-cresol
isomer used in BHT production, m-cresol isomer used in pyrethroid pesticide
production, and mixed cresols/cresylic acid used in TCP production Emission
estimates were developed using the emission factors shown in Table 10-7.
o-Cresol emissions from BHT production were 15,000 lb. Emissions resulting
from its use in antioxidant manufacture were estimated to be 10,000 lb. Specific
manufactures and locations for regional distribution of antioxidant emissions
were not available.
Emissions from m-cresol use were estimated to have been 750 lb. Emissions were
distributed evenly over all three sites in the absence of capacity data.
-------
Table 10-9. Cresol Isomer Emissions from Cresol Isomer Producers
Company
Location

Emissions Ub/yr)

Total
Emissions
Process
Storage
Fugitive
(lb/yr)
(g/sec)*


o-Cresol Producers



Continental Oil
Newark, NJ
9,500
1,000
2,000
12,500
0.18
Fallek
Tuscaloosa, AL
11,100
1,200
2,400
15,000
0.22
Ferro
Santa Fe Springs, CA
5,700
600
1,200
7,500
0.11
Koppers
Oil City, PA
5,700
600
1,200
7, 500
0.11
Merichem
Houston, TX
19,000
2,000
4,000
25,000
0. 36
Stimson
Anacortes, WA
5,700
600
1,200
7,500
0.11
Total

57,000
6,000
12,000
75,000



p-Cresol
Producer



Sherwin-Williams
Chicago, IL
81,900
6, 300
16,800
105,000
1.51
Total

81,900
6,300
16,800
105,000



m-Cresol Producers



Koppers
Oil City, PA
1,425
150
300
1,875
0.03
Merichem
Houston, TX
1,425
150
300
1,875
0.03
Total

2,850
300
600
3,750

~Based on 8760 hr/yr operation.
-------
Table 10-]0. Cresol Emissions Crom Cresol Users


Emissions (lb/yr)

Total
Emissions
Company
Location
Process
Storage
Fugitive
(lb/yr)
(g/sec)*


o-Cresol Isomer




2,6-Di-tert-buty-p-cresol
(BUT) producers






Ashland
Fords, NJ
4,000
500
500
5,000
0.07
Koppers
Oil City, PA
3,200
400
400
4,000
0.06
Shell
Martinez, CA
3, 200
400
400
4,000
0.06
Uniroyal
Geismar, LA
1,600
200
200
2,000
0.03
Total

12,000
m-Cresol Isomer
1,500
1,500
15,000

Pyrethroid pesticide
producers






CPC International
Lyndhurst, NJ
200
25
25
250
0.004
FMC
Baltimore, MD
200
25
25
250
0.004
Vertac
West Helena, AR
^00
25
25
250
0.004
Total
Mixed
600
Cresols/Cresylic
75
Acid
75
750

Tricresyl phosphate/cresyl
diphenylphosphate producers






FMC
Nitro, WV
7,000
1,000
2,000
10,000
0.14
Stauffer
Gallipolis Ferry, WV 5,500
550
1,100
5,500
0.08
Total

12,500
1,550
3,100
15,500

•Based on 8760 hr/yr operation.
-------
10-23
Emissions from the use of cresols/cresylic acid to manufacture TCP were estimated
to have been 15,500 lb. Of that total 2120 lb were o-cresol, 4900 lb were p-cresol,
and 5800 lb were m-cresol.
Other sources of cresol emissions had to be handled on a regional basis because
of their widespread use.
Emissions of p-cresol isomer and cresol/cresylic acid used to produce phenolic
resins are summarized in Table .10-11 by geographic region. Emissions from.this
end-use were estimated to have been 13,700 lb o-cresol, 37,400 lb m-cresol, and
31,600 lb p-cresol. In addition, 27,500 lb of p-cresol was lost when used as
an individual isomer for phenolic resins production. Total emissions of all
isomers were distributed based on the number of sites in each region.
The emissions of p-cresol isomer and cresol/cresylic acid used to produce pesti-.
cides are shown in Tabi; 10-12 by geographic region. Emissions from this end-use
were estimated to have been 1265 lb p-cresol, 550 lb o-cresol, and 2185 lb m-cresol
from cresol/cresylic acid use. In addition, 2500 lb p-cresol was lost from its
use as an individual isomer in pesticide production. Total emissions were distri-
buted by the number of sites in each region.
The emissions of cresols in wire enamel solvents are shown in Table 10-13. Emissions
were developed by assuming that all cresols used in this solvent application
are lost and that the emission composition of cresol isomers is the same as the
end-use production shown in Table 10-3. Emissions were estimated to have been
2,740,000 lb o-cresol, 6,320,000 pcresol, and 7,480,000 m-cresol. Emissions
were distributed over the number of paint and lacquer sites in the U.S. in the
absence on any other distributable data.
Emissions from cresols/cresylic acid used in ore flotation were estimated to
have been 411,000 lb o-cresol, 1,122,000 lb m-cresol, and 948,000 p-cresol in
1978. Emissions are summarized and distributed in Table 10-14 by the number of
mining sites in the U.S.
Emissions from coke ovens were estimated to have been 796,080 lb o-cresol,
1,104,240 lb m-cresol, and 667,680 lb p-cresol in 1978. Emissions were
-------
10-24
Table 10-11.
Cresol Isomer
Emissions from
Phenolic Resin Producers by
Region3



p-Cresol
Emissions


Number
o-Cresol
From
From Cresols/
m-Cresol

of
Emissions
Isomer
Cresylic Acid
Emissions
Region
Sites
(lb/yr)
(lb/yr)
(lb/yr)
(lb/yr)
New England
6
660
1,320
1,500
1,800
Middle Atlantic
26
2,860
5,720
6,500
7,800
East North Central
31
3,410
6,820
7,750
9,300
West North Central
5
550
1,100
1,250
1,500
South Atlantic
15
1,650
3,300
3,750
4,500
East South Central
6
660
1,320
1,500
1,800
West South Central
11
1,210
2,420
2,750
3,300
Mountain
1
110
220
250
300
Pacific
24
2,640
5,280
6,000
7 ,200
Total
125
13,70Qb
27,500C
31,600d
37,400e
a
See ref. 9.
^Average 110 lb/yr per site,
c
Average 220 lb/yr per site.
d
Average 250 lb/yr per site.
e
Average 300 lb/yr per site.
-------
10-25
Table 10-12. 1978 Cresol Isomer Emission Estimates from Pesticide Manufacturers
a
Reqion
Number
of
Sites
As Isomer
(lb/yr)
p-Cresol
In Mixed Cresols/
Cresylic Acid
(lb/yr)
o-Cresol
in Mixed
Cresols/
Cresylic
Acid
(lb/yr)
m-Cresol
in Mixed
Cresols/
Cresylic
Acid
(lb/yr)
New England
4
72
36
16
63
Middle Atlantic
37
666
337
148
581
East North Central
19
342
173
76
298
West North Central
15
270
137
60
236
South Atlantic
17
306
155
68
267
East South Central
14
250
127
56
220
West South Central
15
270
137
60
236
Mountain
5
90
46
20
79
Pacific
13
2 34
118
52
204
Total
139
2500b
1265°
S50d
2185e
aSee ref. 10.
"^Average 18 Ib/yr per site.
""Average 9.1 lb/yr per site.
dAverage 4.0 lb/yr per site.
€
Average 15.7 lb/yr per site
-------
10-26
Table 10-13. Cresol Isomer Emissions from Mixed Cresols/Cresylic Acid
Used as Wire Enamel Solvent3
Number o-Cresol	p-Cresol	m-Cresol
of	Emissions ESaissions Emissions
Region
Sites
(lb/yr)
(lb/yr)
(lb/yr)
New England
46
79,975
184,465
218,325
Middle Atlantic
339
589,380
1,359,440
1,60 8,960
East North Central
370
643,275
1,483,755
1,756,090
West North Central
84
146,040
336,855
398,680
South Atlantic
174
302,510
697,765
825,835
East South Central
44
76,500
176,445
208,830
West South Central
87
151,255
348,885
412,920
Mountain
258
448,555
1,034,620
1,224,520
Pacific
174
302 ,510
697,765
825,840
Total
1,576
2,740,000
6,320,000
7,480,000
2See ref. 11.
b
Average 17 3S.6 lb/yr per site.
CAverage 4010.2 lb/yr per site.
^Average 4746.2 lb/yr per site.
-------
10-27
Table 10-14. Cresol Isomer Emissions from Mixed Cresol/Cresvlic Acid
Used as an Ore Flotation Agent3
Number
Region
of
(Mining)
Sites
o-Cresol
Emissions
(lb/vr)
m-Cresol
Emissions
(lb/vr)
p-Cresol
Emissions
(lb/yr)
"New England
6
4,382
11,957
10,103
Middle Atlantic
38
27,750
75,729
63,987
East North Central
85
62,075
169,392
143,128
West North Central
145
105,890
288,964
244,159
South Atlantic
62
45,275
123,557
104,399
East South Central
40
29,211
79,714
67,354
West South Central
21
15,336
41,850
35,361
Mountain
144
105,161
286,971
242,475
Pacific
22
16,066
43,843
37,045
Total
563
411,000b
1,122,000C
984,000d
3See ref. 12.
^Average 7 30 lb/yr per site
c
Average 1993 lb/yr per site.
^Average 1684 lb/yr per site.
-------
10-28
estimated by assuming that for 107 billion lb coke produced, 0.000024 lb of
cresols would be lost per pound of coke produced. Composition of the cresols
is the same as the mixed cresols product composition shown in Table 10-3. Emissions
are summarized and distributed in Table 10-15 by the number of coke oven sites iri
each region.
Emissions from the solvent use of cresols/cresylic acid as a disinfectant/cleaning
compound were estimated to have been 411,000 lb o-cresol, 948,000 lb p-cresol,
and 1,122,000 m-cresol. Emissions are considered widespread in proportion
with population.
Miscellaneous uses as a chemical intermediate are too widespread to allow for
regional distribution. Emission estimates were made by using a weighted average
emission factor of 0.001 lb lost/Lb use derived from all other isomers, mixed
cresols, and cresylic acid end-users. Emissions from miscellaneous uses were
estimated to have been 1000 lb o-cresol, 2200 lb p-cresol, and 2600 lb m-cresol.
Vent parameter data for both production and end-uses of cresols are summarized
in Table 10-16.
The total nationwide emissions of o-cresol, p-cresol, and m-cresol are estimated
to have been 4,503,775 lb, 9,120,570 lb, and 10,955,0751b respectively. Total
emissions are summarized in Tables 10-17, 10-18, and 10-19 for o-cresol, p-cresol and
m-cresol, respectively.
-------
10-29
Table 10-15.
Cresol
Isomer Emissions
from Coke Oven
a ,b
Operations

Heaion
Number
of
Sites
o-Cresol
Emissions
(lb/yr)
m-Cresol
Emissions
(lb/yr)
p-Cresol
Emissions
(lb/yr)
Total
Cresol
Emissions
(Lb/yr.)
New England
0
0
0
0
0
Middle Atlantic
15
195,750
271,500
164,175
631,500
East North Central
25
326,250
452 ,500
273,625
1,052,500
West North Central
3
39,150
54,300
32,835
126,300
South Atlantic
4
52,200
72,400
43,780
168,400
East South Central
9
117,450
162,900
96,505
378,900
West South Central
2
26,100
36,200
21,890
84,200
Mountain
2
26,100
36,200
21,890
84,200
Pacific
_1
13,050
18,100
10,945
42,100
Total
61
796,080C
l,104,240d
667,680®
2,568,000
a
See ref. 6.
b
Basis: 107 billion lb coke produced; 0.000024 lb cresols emitted/lb coke produced;
cresol composition - 26% p-cresol, 31% o-cresol, and 43% m-cresol in nixed cresols
emitted.
CAverage 13,050 Ib/yr per site,
d
Average 18,100 Ib/yr per site.
£
Average 10,945 lb/yr per site.
-------
Table 10-16. Cresol Vent Parameters
Source
Number
of
Stacks
Vent
Height
(ft)
Vent
Diameter
(ft)
Discharge
Temperature
(°F)
Velocity
(ft/sec)
Discharge
Area
(ft X ft)
Production (all types)
Process
Storage
Fugitive
BUT/TCP production
Process
Storage
Fugitive
Phenolic resins
Process
Storage
Fugitive
Pesticides/pyrethroids
Process
Storage
Fugitive
Wire enamel solvent
Process
Ore flotation
Process
2
8
1
1
30
24
60
16
60
16
30
20
40
20
1
0. 17
0. 5
0.17
0. 33
0.17
0.17
0.17
0.25
0. 25
208
80
150
80
150
80
100
80
120
120
75
35
20
15
10
10
300 X 600
100 X 100
100 X 100
100 X 100
Building cross-section: Production - 200 m2; BMT/TCP - 100 m2; Phenolic Resins - 50 m2;
Pesticides - 100 m2; Wire Enamel Solvent 0 200 m2; Ore Flotation - 50 m2
-------
10-31
Table 10-17. 1978 Nationwide o-Cresol Emissions

Nationwide

Emissions
Source
(lb/yr)
o-Cresol production
75,000
Mixed cresol production
24,800
Cresylic acid production
3,525
BHT production
15,000
Antioxidants production
10,000
Tricresyl phosphate production
2,120
Phenolic resins
13,700
Wire enamel solvent
2,740,000
Pesticides
550
Disinfectants/cleaning compounds
411,000
Ore flotation agent
411,000
Miscellaneous, other
1,000
Coke ovens
796,080
Total
4,503,775
-------
10-32
Table 10-18. 1978 Nationwide p-Cresol Emissions

Nationwide

Emissions
Source
(lb/yr)
p-Cresol production
105,000
Mixed cresol production
20,800
Cresylic acid production
41,125
Phenolic resins production (isomer)
27,500
Pesticides production
2,500
Tricresyl phosphate
4,900
Phenolic resins
31,600
Wire enamel solvent
6,320,000
Pesticides
1,265
Disinfectants/cleaning compounds
948,000
Ore flotation agent
948,000
Miscellaneous, other
- .2,200
Coke ovens
¦667,680
Total
9,120,570
-------
10-33
Table 10-19. 1978 Nationwide Emissions m-Cresol
Nationwide
Emissions
Source	
-------
"1
/•w>iv
0
1
OJ
FIGURE 10-1. SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF m-CRESOL EMISSIONS
-------
TABLE 10-20. EMISSIONS AND METEOROLOGICAL STATIONS OF SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF m-CRESOL
EMISSIONS 
NO. COMPANY
S I TP.
*	i
STAIl PLANT sounr.E 	
LATITIIOP. I.ONCITUIH". STATION TYIT. TYPE PIIOCESS STOIIACE PIICITIVE
1
KOPI'EIW
OIL CITY, PA
41
29
:io
07<»
411
20
141160
1
1
. 020520
. 04701111
. 002160
.004096
. 004:120
.009936
o
MEKICIIEM
HOUSTON. TX
29
4r»
:w,
09 r>
IO
411
120 or.
'~
1
:i
.020520
. i n 120
. ir.oi 12
.002 160
. (1 1 4IUI2
. 41 1 <>704
.004:120
. 0^'>«in4
. 033264
:i
CONTI »ENTAL OIL
NEWAIIK. H.I
<>«
4:1
:i>
t>74
07
2(.
'>47-; 1
;i
i i
. 070500
. oo:k><>4
. 0.19600
. 000704
.OI4!i:i2
.0 175611
4
p ai.i.p.k
TUSCALOOSA. AL
n:i
1 1
00
(ti>7
;i4
50

:i
-.1
. 02:1-: V2
. 027906
. 002440
. 0O2I1OO
. 00-MJ96
.005904
3
feiiho
SANTA PP. S. CA
:i:i
r>(>
:io
1 III
04
11;
9:1 mii>
;i

. or.oJiu
. 0279:10
. 0041196
.002000
. 0(i<)<>:i6
. OO.l 904
6
STiriSON
AN ACOIITES, WA
4:1
20
:ii
i l;i:
:t2
411
24217
a
:i
. o-;7oi;ii
. 04(.5 12
. 004096
. 0041196
. (HJV9:I6
.009792
8
noun, oil
IIEA1IMONT. IX
:io
04
14
0')4
0:1
40
12") 17
4
:i
. ir.ai 12
.016704
. o: P.I26 4
9
kopfEhs
pollaNshee, wv
4e
23
10
000
35
07
14762
4
a
.055072
.005904
.01100a
10
CPC
LYNDIIUHST, NJ
40
47
:io
074
04
:i4
9474 1
5
4
.002000
. 000:160
.000360
11
fmc
HALTIMOIIE, Ml>
39
14
so
076
:tr»
30
91172 1
r»
4
.002000
.000360
.000360
12
vi.iuac
WEST IIL1.IIM, All
;I4
o<»
10
viVO
*>!»
45
1 :i9:.9
if
•>
. 0(i:l;;i>o
. ooo:;<»o
. 04
.0U2966

One emission point has been eliminated due to comments to early drafts of this document.
-------
TABLE 10-20. (Concluded)
* Plant Types:
Type 1: Plant produces	isolated m-cresol and mixed cresols
Type 2: Plant produces	isolated m-cresol, mixed cresols. and cresyllc acid
Type 3: Plant produces	mixed cresols and cresyllc acid
Type 4: Plant produces	cresylic acid
Type 5: Plant produces	pyrethroid pesticide
Type 6: Plant produces	tricresyl phosphate (TCP) and cresyl diphenyl
phosphate (CDP)
t Source Types:
Type 1: Isolated m-cresol production
Type 2: Mixed cresols production
Type 3: Cresyllc acid production
Type 1: Pyrethroid pesticide production
Type 5: Tricresyl phosphate (TCP) and cresyl diphenyl phosphate (CDP) production
-------
10-37
TABLE 10-21. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE OF tn-CRESOL RESULTING FROM
SPECIFIC POINT SOURCE EMISSIONS
Concentration Population
Level	Exposed	Dosage
(vq/m^)	(persons)	[(yg/m^) » persons]
2.5
41
107
1
246
425
0.5
1,171
1,120
0.25
5,010
2,390
0.1
27,102
5,850
0.05
63,501
8,380
0.025
272,402
15,200
0.01
1,003,356
26,500
0.005
2,747,945
38,300
0.0025
6,360,348
51,000
3.5 x 10"6*
19,505,952
57,800
The lowest annual average concentration occurring within
20 km of the specific point source.
sa/k
-------
TABLE 10-22. EMISSIONS RATES AND NUMBER OF GENERAL POINT SOURCES OF m-CRESOL
Resins Production Mire Enamel Solvent Pesticide Production	Ore Flotation	Coke Oven
EmHslons75l te Rumber CmHifonv/SI te Number CnTTTTonVSTTe dumber CnTTTlon5TTTe Nunber FmlnlonVSI te Number
Region	 (gm/sec) of Sites (gm/sec) of Sites (gm/tec) of Sites (gm/sec) of Sites (gm/iec) of Sites
Hew England
0.00411
6
0.0683
46
0.000155
4
0.0287
(
0
0
Middle Atlantic
0.00431
26
0.0683
339
0.000155
37
0.0787
38
0.761
15
Cast North Central
0.00431
31
0.0683
370
0.000155
19
0.0287
65
0.261
75
West North Central
0.00431
S
0.0683
84
0.000155
15
0.0287
145
0.261

South Atlantic
0.00431
IS
0.06B3
174
0.000155
17
0.0287
62
0.761

East South Central
0.00431
6
0.0683
44
0.000155
14
0.0287
40
0.761

Uest South Central
0.00431
11
0.0683
B7
0.000155
15
0.0287
21
0.761

Mountain
0.00431
1
0.0683
758
0.000155
5
0.0287
144
0.761

Pacific
0.00431
?4
0.0683
174
0.000155
13
0.0287
77
0.761

-------
cn
CD
N
r
TABLE 10-23. EXPOSURE! AND DOSAGE HE SUET INC FnflM EMISSIONS FROM GENERAL POINT SOURCES Of ro-CRESOL
Concentration
Level
(pq/m^)
Regina
Production
Population Exposed
(10^ persons)
Wi re
Ename1
Solvent
Pesticide
Production
Ore
Floatation
Coke
Oven
U.S.
Total
Reaina
Production
Dosage
« persons]
Hire
Enamel
Solvent
Pesticide
Production
Ore
F loatation
Coke
Oven
U.S.
Total
5
0
0.7
0
0
11
11.7
0
0
0
0
0.00
0.0B
2.5
0
41
0
0
J2
73
a
0.14
0
0
0.16
0.29
1
0
363
0
3
107
474
0
0.6
0
0.004
0.27
0.87
0.5
0
1,040
0
32
261
1,340
0
1.1
0
o.az
0.3B
1.5
0.25
0
2,510
0
132
767
3,410
0
1.6
0
0.06
0.55
2.2
O.t
—
—
—
—
—
--
0
2.6
0
0.10
0.75
3.4
0.05
--
--
--
--
—
—
0
3.4
0
0.14
0.91
4.5
0.025
—
—
—
—
—
—
0
4.4
0
0.19
1.1
5.7
0.01
--
--
--
--
--
—
0
5.6
0
0.27
1.4
7.2
0
	
	
	
	
—
—
0.04
10.4
o.ooz
0.35
1.0
13
0
1
OJ
in
NOTE: The uae of — as an entry indicates that the incremental E/D is not significant (relative to last entry or relative to entry in another column
at the same row) or that the exposure of the same population may be counted in another column.
-------
10-40
TABLE 10-24. ^jqr PARAMETERS FOR ESTIMATING EXPOSURE/DOSAGE RESULTING
FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS OF m-CRESOL
Parameter	Value
Daytime decay rate (K^)	1.63 x 10~^ sec ^
Nighttime decay rate (K^)	1.0 x 10~® sec"^
Hanna-Gifford coefficient (C)	225
Nationwide heating source emissions (E^) 0
Nationwide nonheating stationary source emissions (E^)	16.20 gm/sec
Cleaning solvent	16.16 gm/sec
Miscellaneous	0.04 gm/sec
Nationwide mobile source emissions (E^) 0
-------
TABLE 10-25. m-CRESOL EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULTING FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS
Expo Level
Population
Jp®«p?.L
Oosaqe
	person)	
Percentage of Contribution
Percentage of Distribution
Healing
Stationary
fob Me
C I t/ Jype.J.
City Type 2
City Type
.050000
SOS 140
42338.5
0.
100.0
0.
100.0
0.
0.
.025000
9149730
274137.2
0.
100.0
0.
100.0
0.
0.
.010000
23637505
464245.9
0.
100.0
0.
100.0
0.
0.
.005000
51757583
654161.0
0.
100.0
0.
97.8
.7
1.5
.002500
123305988
914669.0
0.
100.0
0.
94.5
2.5
2.9
0.
158679135
973892.7
0.
100.0
0.
91 .8
3.0
5.3
-------
LP
CD
-s.
¦C*
TAOLE 10-26. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE SUMMARY OF m-CRESOL
Population Exposed
Dosage
[(gq/m*) • pergonal
Concentration
Specific
General


Specific
General


Level
Point
Point


Point
Point


(pn/mJ)
Source
Source
Area Source
U.S. Total
Source
Source
Area Source
U.S. Total
5
0
12,000
0
12,000
0
00,000
0
80,000
2.5
41
73,0130
0
73,000
107
290,000
0
290,107
1
216
474,000
0
474,250
425
070,000
0
870,425
n.5
1,171
1,340,000
0
1,341,000
1,120
1,500,000
0
1,501,120
0.25
5,010
3,410,000
0
3,415,000
2,390
2,200,000
0
2,202,000
0.1
27,102
—
0
...
5,850
3,400,000
0
3,406,000
0.05
63,501
--
505,140
...
8,380
4,500,000
42,339
4,551,000
0.025
272,402
~
9,149,730
	
15,200
5,700,000
274,137
5,989,000
0.01
1,003,356
—
23,637,505
	
26,500
7,200,000
464,246
7,691,000
0.005
2,747,915

51,757,503
	
38,300
—
654,161
	
0,0025
6,360,340
—
123,305,900
	
51,000
—
914,669
—
0.001
	
--
--
	
—
--
—
—
0.0005
	
--
--
	
—
--
--
—
0
19,505,952
—
150,679,135
158,679,135
57,800
>3,000,000
973,900
14,032,000
0
1
-p»
ro
N01E: The use of — as an entry indicates that the incremental E/D is not significant (relative to last entry or
relative to entry in another column at the same row) or that the exposure of the same population nay be
counted in another column.
-------
c
0
1
GJ
FIGURE 10-2. SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF o-CRESOl EMISSIONS
-------
TABLE 10-27. EMISSIONS AND METEOROLOGICAL STATIONS OF SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF o-CRESOL
+	+	missions te pnn<:F.ss rtokace fucitive
1
COHTINF.HTAL OIL
krwaiuc. nj
40
40
34
074
07
26
94741
i
2
3
. i36n»»
.9301132
. ««17:i44
.014400
.02113 12
. ntt»720
.9200*9
. o i«(.ri6
.«nir>ii4
2
FALLEK
TUSCALOOSA. AL
:m
1 1
00
0117
34
nn
93nOA
i
1
•»
3
.164160
.O16992
. 0024411
. O 172110
. OO 17211
.m«A2iin
.034569
. »Ml6
.HOI 440
.037609
.921609
. 002IIH0
B
PTinson
ANACOIITES, WA
40
211
31
122
32
4n
24217
I
1
2
3
.onsooo
.033904
.004032
.A0064A
. «w:i4r.f>
.909432
.917209
.0O72H0
. «(04
6
KOPPEIW
OIL CITY, PA
41
29
no
079
43
20
I4n60
a
'i
4
.on2ono
. o:ui9n4
.046000
.000640
.nn:i456
.005769
.917209
.o»72n9
.003769
8
koppeiis
FOLLAPSOEE, W
40
23
10
ono
35
07
14762
3
3
.994096
.000376
.OOIOOS
9
rtoniL oil
UEArtONT, TX
30
04
14
094
03
40
12917
3
3
.001504
.000144
.eoo2nn
10
ASIILAIW
Fonns, nj
40
31
22
074
29
00
04739
4
4
.937699
.007200
.007209
11
SHELL
riAIXTI T1EZ, CA
nn
00
OS
122
96
40
23202
4
4
.046000
.00576®
.90376®
12
UMinOVAL
CEIFftrtn, LA
30
13
no
091
99
13
I295H
4
4
.023040
.002000
. 9A2HII9
13
FMG
IHTOO. HV
nn
23
33
oni
SO
03
I3n66
a
3
.913024
.002016
,993nno
L4
BTAUFFEIt
CALL1POLIO FY. WV
nn
46
40
0112
10
54
131141
5
3
.olonoo
.ooiono
.00216®
'One emission point
has been eliminated
due
to
comments to
early drafts of
thi s
document.


-------
TABLE 10-27 (Concluded)
* Plant Types:
Type 1: Plant produces	Isolated o-cresol, mixed cresols, and cresyllc acid
Type 2: Plant produces Isolated o-cresol, mixed cresols, and 2,6-dl(t-butyl)-p-
cresol (BHT)
Type 3: Plant produces cresylic acid
Type 4: Plant produces	2,6-dl(t-butyl)-p-cresol (BHT)
Type 5: Plant produces	trlcresyl phosphate (TCP) and cresyl dlphenyl phosphate (COP)
t Source Types:
Type 1
Type 2
Type 3
Type 4
Type 5
o-Cresol production
Mixed cresols production
Cresyllc acid production
2,6-D1(t-butyl)-p-cresol (BHT) production
Trlcresyl phosphate (TCP) and cresyl dlphonyl phosphate (COP) production
-------
10-46
TABLE 10-28. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE OF o-CRESOL RESULTING FROM
SPECIFIC POINT SOURCE EMISSIONS
Concentration Population
Level	Exposed	Dosage
(ug/m^)	(persons)	[(ug/m^) • persons]
2.5	2,712	13,100
1	13,213	28,500
0.5	25,326	37,000
0.25	49,636	45,100
0.1	198,570	68,000
0.05	532,426	90,300
0.025	1,315,167	IIS,000
0.01	2,136,688	131,000
0.005	4,039,816	144,000
0.0025	7,787,072	157,000
0.001	10,068,552	161,000
4 6 x 10"6*	12,928,239	163,000
The lowest annual average concentration occurring within
20 km of the specific point source.
S8/U
-------
TABLE 10-29. EMISSIONS RATES AND NUMBER OF GENERAL POINT SOURCES OF o-CRESOL
Resins Production	 Wtrg Enamel Solvent Pesticide Production	Ore Flotation	Cofce thren
fiSTsi ions/5' te Run'ther Emlss lons/SITe Number Imi sifonVSTte Numbrr FmlssTcmy SI te Number"" Cmlss 1onV5lte Number
Region	 	(qm/secl of Sites (gin/sec) of Sites 	(gm/sec) of Sites (gm/sec) of Sites (gw/sec) of Sites
New England
0.001 SB
6
0.0250
46
0.000057
4
0.0t05
6
0. IBB
0
Middle Atlantic
0.00158
26
0.0250
339
0.000057
37
0.010S
38
0.188
15
Cast North Central
0.00158
31
0.0250
370
0.000057
19
0.0105
85
0.168
25
West North Central
0.00158
S
0.0250
84
0.000057
15
0.0105
145
0.188
3 ?
South Atlantic
0.00158
15
0.0250
174
0.000057
17
0.0105
6?
0.188
4 ij
Cast South Central
0.001S8
6
0.0250
44
0.000057
14
0.0105
40
0.188
9
West South Central
0.00158
11
0.0250
87
0.000057
15
0.0105
21
0.188
2
Mountain
0.00158
1
0.0250
258
0.000057
S
0.0105
144
0.188
2
Pacific
0.00158
24
0.0250
174
0.000057
13
0.0105
22
0.18B
1
-------
TABLE 10-30. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULT INK FROM EMISSIONS FROM GENERAL POINT SOURCES OF o-CRESOL
ConcenLration
Level
(pq/m3)
Resins
Product ion
Papulation Exposed
(103 persons)
Wi re
Enamel
Solvent
Pesticide
Production
Ore
floatation
Coke
Oven
U.S.
1 otnl
Res ins
Production
Dosage
[103(pq/m3) ~ persons]
Wi re
Enamel
Solvent
Pest icide
Production
Ore
F testation
Coke
Oven
U.S.
Total
5
0
0
0
0
5
5
0
0
0
0
36
36
2.5
0
0
0
0
20
20
0
0
0
0
88
80
1
0
24
0
0
65
09
0
33
0
0
157
191
0.5
0
176
0
1.5
104
361
0
139
0
0.9
240
380
0.25
0
666
0
16
497
1,180
0
310
0
5.4
342
657 c
|
0.1
0
2,340
0
125
1,500
3,960
0
557
0
21
491
1,070 £
0.05
0
5,360
0
3Q4
3,200
0,070
0
765
0
34
610
1,410
0.025
—
—
~
—
--
—
0.1
1,110
0
47
710
1,070
0.01
--
—
—
—
--
—
0.6
1,550
0
72
910
2,540
0.005
—
—
—
—
—
~
1.6
1,900
0
92
1,060
3,060
0
—
—
—
--
--
—
16
3,000
0.9
290
1,270
5,300
NOTE: The use of — as an entry indicates that the incremental E/D ia not significant (relative to last entry or relative to entry in another column
at the same row) or that the exposure of the ssme population may be counted in another column.
-------
10-49
TABLE 10-31. MAJOR PARAMETERS FOR ESTIMATING EXPOSURE/DOSAGE RESULTING
FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS OF o-CRESOL
		Parameter	
Daytime decay rate (K^)
Nighttime decay rate (Kn)
Hanna-Gifford coefficient (C)
Nationwide heating source emissions (E^)
Nationwide nonheating stationary source emissions (E^)
Cleaning solvent
Antioxidants production
Miscellaneous
National mobile source emissions
	Value
1.41 x 10"4 sec"1
1.0 x TO"6 sec"1
225
6.076 gm/sec
5.918 gm/sec
0.144 gm/sec
0.014 gm/sec
0
-------
TABLE 10-32. o-CRESOL EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULTING FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS
EXTO LEVEL
< uc/< ri) a>
.020000
.410444
.MtBM
.001000
.000000
POPULATIOH
( PERSON)*
OAS 140
91M7M
17BB1644
4«ai*ffra
I 19306114
131204048
150679133
PERCENTAGE OF DISTRIBUTION
DOSAGE	PERCENTAGE OF CONTTUfllTHOU
< UG/< ri> 3- 	 -
PERSON)	OKATINC STATI0MA11Y HORILE CITY TYPE I CITY TYPE 2 CITY TYPE 3
15955.3
140706.2
102043.0
22BS22.I
340504. •>
37230(1.0
3747S9.I1
O.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
leo.e
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
100.0
100.4
100.0
99.0
94.7
92.4
91.9
0.
0.
0.
.2
2.4
2.9
2.9
0.
0.
0.
.a
2.9
4.7
0.2
-------
TABLE 10-33. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE SUMMARY OF o-CHESOL
Population Exposed	Dosage
(persona)	 	[(pq/m3) ~ persona]
centrat ion
Specific
General


Speci fic
General


Level
Point
Point


Point
Point


(pq/m3)
5ource
Source
Area Source
U.S. Total
Source
Source
Area Source
U.S. Total
5
0
5,000
0
5,000
5,000
0
0
36,000
2.5
2,712
20,000
0
20,146
22,712
13,100
0
101,100
1
13,213
89,000
0
90,381
102,213
28,500
0
219,500
0.5
25,326
361,000
0
365,400
386,300
37,000
0
417,000
0.25
49,636
1,180,000
0
1,193,000
1,230,000
45,100
0
702,100
0.1
198,570
3,960,000
0
4,000,600
4,158,600
68,000
0
1,138,000
0.05
532,426
0,870,000
0
8,930,000
9,402,400
90,300
0
1 ,500,300
0.025
1,315,167
—
505,140
—
	
118,000
15,955
2,004,000
0.01
2,136,688
—
9,149,7 30
--
	
131,000
105,758
2,816,800
0.005
4,039,816
—
17,551,646
--
	
144,000
152,043
3,356,000
0
12,928,239
--
158,679,135
--
—
163,000
374,759
5,917,800
NOTE: The use of — as an entry indicates that the incremental E/D is not significant (relative to last entry or
relative to entry in another column nt the saine row) or that the exposure of the same population may be
counted in another column.
-------
w
Y
0
1
en
no
FIGURE 10-3. SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF p-CRESOL EMISSIONS
-------
TABLE 10-34. EMISSIONS AND METEOROLOGICAL STATIONS OF SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF p-CRESOL
NO.3 COMPANY
S I 'IT.
EMISSIONS (CM/SEC)
* +
ptai: n.ANT source 	
latitiiw. i.oncrnini: station tvit. tyi-i. phockss stoiuci: euoitive
1	S1IF.IIW I N-WI LL I ATI CIIICACO, II.
2	CONTINENTAL OIL NEWAIIK. N.J
3	EAI.I.KK
4	KEIIIIO
3	rir.it ii:ii[-:ri
6	STIMSOH
7	KOPPEIIS
TUSCALOOSA, AL
SANTA I E S. <;a
HOUSTON. IX
ANACORIEX, WA
OIL CITY. PA
41	43	ID (1117	36	30	't'Hlll.
40	-HI	34 074	07	26	'>474 1
33	• i	oo oii7	:i4	no
;i:i	fy(,	30 nil	04	lit	'cui.i,
2'»	»r>	a». <)'»5	io	4ii	iii'xx.
40	2U	HI 122	32	41 i	242 17
41	29	HO 079	4!l	20	I4H60
I . 179300
. 04:.«.24
. on<>2:>o
. o i4:;r.».
. 021(1100
. o2Jtr» 12
. 04<,:i<,m
. OH!i3<>2
. 162720
. 02l«i 12
. 04(>:i(iii
.02115 12
.090720 . 24 I '>20
. o j:i'»M4
. 009072
.00144(1
. 00;t024
. 003024
.005040
. oor.9211
. O 17 136
. oo:t<>24
.003024
. t» 1.1144
. o»/:;«24
. OO604H
. 004*0411
.oloono
.oinooo
. 034272
. 003040
.006040
en
CO
9	KOPPERS
10	11111111. oil
11	EMC
12	STAUEEEIl
POLLANSBEF., WV
llfc'.AUNOIINT. IX
N I TltO, WV
40 23 10 OHO 35 07
so 04 14 o*)4 o:; 40
:iii 25 33 oil 1 no or.
CALLI I'OI.IS EY. WV 3(1 40 40 0U2 IO Ti4
I 4762
I 2'> 17
I3iu.6
. or>74r>f»
. O 19 Hi2
. 03 11124
. 02005*)
. 006O4II
.002016
. 0046011
.002440
.O12006
.604032
. <100072
. uor>o4o
aOne emission point has been eliminated due to comments to early drafts of this document.
-------
TABLE: 10-34. (Concluded)
* Plant Types:
Type 1: Plant produces	Isolated p-cresol
Type 2: Plant produces	mixed cresols and cresyllc acid
Type 3: Plant produces	mixed cresols
Type 4: Plant produces	cresyllc acid
Type 5: Plant produces	trlcresyl phosphate (TCP) and cresyl dlphenyl
phosphate (CDP)
+ Source Types:
Type 1: p-cresol production
Type 2: Mixed cresols production
Type 3: Cresyllc acid production
Type 4: Trlcresyl phosphate (TCP) and cresyl dlphenyl phosphate
(CDP) production
-------
10-55
TABLE 10-35. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE OF p-CRESOL RESULTING FROM
SPECIFIC POINT .SOURCE EMISSIONS
Concentration Population
Level	Exposed	Dosage
(yg/m^)	(persons)	[(yg/m^) • persons]
10
57
682
5
631
4,780
2.5
2,847
12,300
1
10,133
22,300
0.5
32,841
37,600
0.25
78,175
52,800
0.1
299,683
86,100
0.05
801,086
120,000
0.025
1,627,372
150,000
0.01
3,066,093
174,000
5.6 x 10" 5*
10,438,324
187,000
* The lowest annual average concentration occurring within
20 km of the specific point source.
58/4
-------
TABLE 10-36. EMISSIONS RATES AND NUMBER OF GENERAL POINT SOURCES OF p-CRESOL
Ruins Production Ut re Enamel Solvent Pesticide Production	Ore Flotitton 	Cote Oven	
tmlss lons/SI te Number [missions/Site Number Emissions/Site Number Emissions/Site Number Cmistlont/Slte Number
Beg I on	 (qm/sec) of Sltei (gin/sec> of Situ (qm/sec > Of Sites (gm/s*C) Of Sites (qm/sec) Of-SItes
New England
0.00661
6
0.0577
46
0.00039
4
0.024?
6
0.158
0
Middle Atlantic
0.00681
26
0.0577
339
0.00039
37
0.0?42
36
0.156
IS
[
-------
is*
OD
"s.
TABLE 10-37. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULTING FROM EMISSIONS FROM GENERAL POINT SOURCES OF p-CRESOL
Population Exposed
Dosage
Concentration
Level
(pq/n.3)
Resins
Production
Wire
Enamel
Solvent
Pesticide
Production
Ore
F loatation
Coke
Oven
U.S.
Total
Resins
Production
Mi rc
Enamel
Solvent
Pesticide
Production
Ore
Floatation
Coke
Oven
U.S.
Total
5
0
0
0
0
3.5
3.5
0
0
0
0
23
23
2.5
0
19
0
0
15
33
0
65
0
0
61
125
1
0
25 4
0
3
54
310
0
404
0
3
122
529
0.5
0
B22
0
26
142
991
0
790
0
18
182
999
0.25
0
2,170
0
110
335
2,610
0
1,240
0
46
250
1,540
0.1
3.7
6,560
0
351 1
,150
8,060
0.5
1,900
0
83
381
2,360
0.05
--
--
—
--
--
—
2.1
2,660
0
116
490
3,270
0.025
--
—
--
—
—
~
5.0
3,530
0
156
501
4,280
0.01
—
—
--
—
--
—
11.5
4,570
0.2
229
732
5,550
0
—
--
--
—
--
~
70.3
8, 7HU
6
668
1,060
10,600
0
1
QJl
--¦J
NOTE: The use of — as an entry indicates that the incremental E/D is not significant (relative to last entry or relative to entry in another column
at the same row) or that the exposure of the same population may be counted in another column.
-------
10-58
TABLE 10-38. MAJOR PARAMETERS FOR ESTIMATING EXPOSURE/DOSAGE RESULTING
FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS OF p-CRESOL
Parameter	Value
Daytime decay rate (K^)	1.41 x 10~4 sec"1
Nighttime decay rate (
-------
TABLE 10-39.
p-CRESOL EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULTING FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS
EXPO LEVEL
( UQ/( M) 3)
.e&oeeo
.M8IM
.919994
.MBMt
.062309
.991999
POPULATION
(PERSON)
005140
0*014*
I979«7M
44443179
1 I 1531366
10 1902934
1S0679I33
PERCENTAGE OF D1STRI BUTION
ROSACE	PERCENTAGE OF CONTMRUTION
(UC/( M)3- 	 	
I'KIISUN)	1IKAT I Nli STATIONARY NOIULk: CITY TYPE I CITY TYPE 2 CITY TYPE 3
35930.9
30939.9
366437. I
B33S43.4
76<>«90.9
039614.3
U43949.7
0.
9.
9.
e.
0.
o.
o.
100.0
199.9
199.9
199.9
100.0
100.0
100.0
0.
9.
9.
9.
9.
0.
O.
100.0
199.9
199.9
9B.0
•>5.3
92.3
91.9
0.
9.
9.
2.9
2.9
O.
9.
9.
1.6
2.5
4.0
G.2
O
i
t_n
ix)
-------
TADLE 10-60. EXPOSUHE AND DOSAGE SIJKMARY Of p-CHESOL
Concentration
Level
(yiq/m^)
10
5
2.5
1
0.5
0.25
0.1
0.05
0.025
0.U1
0.005
0.0025
0.001
0
Population Exposed	Dosage
	(persons )			[(pq/m^) * persona]	
Specific General	Specific General
Point	Point	Point	Point
Source	Source Area Source U.S. Total	Source Source Area Source U.S. lotal
57
0
0
57
682
0
0
682
631
3,500
0
4,131
4,780
23,000
0
27,780
2,847
33,000
0
35,847
12,300
125,000
U
137,300
10,133
310,000
0
320,133
22,300
529,000
0
531,300
32,841
991,000
0
1,024,000
37,600
999,000
0
1,036,600
78,175
2,610,000
0
2,688,000
52,800
1,540,000
0
1,592,800
299,683
8,060,000
0
8,359,683
86,100
2,360,000
0
2,446,100
801,086
—
505,140
	
120,000
3,270,000
35,931
...
1,627,372
—
505,140
	
150,000
4,200,000
35,931
...
3,066,093
—
19,790,740
	
174,000
5,550,000
366,437
...
—
--
44,443,179
	
	
--
533,543
	

—
111,931,566
	
	
--
766,691
—

—
151,902,934
	
	
--
039,614
—
10,438,324
—
150,679,135
158,679,135
197,000
10,600,000
043,950
10,797,000
N01E: The use of — as an entry indicates that the incremental E/D ia not significant (relative to last entry or
relative to entry in another column at the same row) or that the exposure of the same population may be
counted in another column.
-------
10-61
REFERENCES
1.	"Cresols and Cresylic Acid," p. 637.5030A—K, Chemical Economics Handbook,
Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA (May 1979).
2.	Kirk-Othmer, Volume 6, 2d ed., pp. 440—442.
3.	J. Gosdar, "Air Pollution Assessment of Cresols," Mitre Corp., Report No. MTR-7227,
June 1976.
4.	"Chemical Products Synopsis on Cresols and Cresylic Acids," Mannsville Chemical
Products, Mannsville, New York, August 1977.
5.	The 1978 Directory of Chemical Producers, United States, Stanford Research
Institute, Menlo Park, CA.
6.	"Coke-Oven Plants in the United States," Coal and Coke Products, Chemical Economics
Handbook, p. 212.2000A, Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA (October 1978).
7.	New Jersey State Air Files, Continental Oil Co., Newark, NJ, March 31, 1977.
8.	Special Project Report "Petrochemical Plant Sites" prepared for Industrial
Pollution Control Division, Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory,
Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio, by Monsanto Research
Corporation, Dayton, Ohio, April 1976.
9.	"Phenolic Resins," p. 580.0933, Chemical Economics Handbook, Stanford Research
Institute, Menlo Park, CA (May 1978).
10.	Source Assessment, Pesticide Manufacturing Air Emissions	Overview and Priori-
tization , Environmental Protection Agency Technology Series, EPA 600/2-78-0049,
March 1978.
11.	U.S. Bureau of Census, Standard Industrial Code 2851, Paints and Allied Products,
1972.
12.	"Industrial Explosives," p. 530.2000B, Chemical Economics Handbook. Stanford
Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA (Hay 1976).
-------
APPENDIX A-ll 	 Dimethylnitrosamine
For an explanation of the assumptions used to make these exposure estimates,
please refer to the discussion beginning on page 57 of the report.
DIMETHYLAMINE CHEMICAL DATA
Nomenclature
Chemical Abstract Service Registry Number: 124-40-3
Synonyms: N-Methyl methanamine, DMA
Chemical Formula
Molecular Weight: 45.08
Molecular Formula: C2H7N
Molecular Structure:
H —N
\
ch3
Cher-leal and Physical Properties
Physical State at STP: Gas
Boiling Point: 7.4eC
Melting Point: -93°C
Density: 0.68 at 06C/4°C
Vapor Pressure: 1290 mm at 25°C
Vapor Density: 1.55
Solubility: Infinitely soluble (1^0)
Log Partition Coefficient (Octanol/H^O): -0.38
Atmospheric Reactivity
Transformation Products:
Reactivity Toward OH-:
Reactivity Toward 0^:
Reactivity Toward Photolysis: NAPP
Major Atmospheric Precursors: N/A
Formation Reactivity:
-------
n-5
I. SOURCES
A.	PRODUCTION
Methylamines are produced by the vapor phase ammonolysis of methanol. Monomethyl-
amine, with smaller quantities of both dimethylamine and trimethylamine, is
produced by passing methanol and ammonia over a dehydrating catalyst such as
alumina and aluminum silicate. Separation of the methylamines into mono-, di-,
and trimethylamine can be accomplished by a series of stage distillations or by
extractive distillation. Dimethylamine is separated from a mixture of methyl-
amines by subjecting the mixture to extractive distillation using aniline, morpho-
line, dimethylformamide or diethanolamine, in which dimethylamine is the most
soluble. The dimethylamine is recovered by flashing from the solvent.
There are currently five producers of dimethylamine in the United States. The
plant locations and the 1978 estimated capacity and production levels for each
site are shown in Table 11-1. Production levels for each site were estimated from
the total methylamine capacities of each site and the overall industry ratio of
dimethvlamines to total methylamines. An estimated 71.8 million lb of dimethylamine
was produced in 1973.
B.	USES
The end-use distribution of dimethylamine is shown in Table 1l-2. An estimated
50% (35.9 million lb) of the dimethylamine produced is used to make the industrial
solvents dimethyl formamide and dimethy acetamide. Approximately 15% (10.8 million
lb) is used to make lauryl dimethylamine oxide, and 15% is used to make chemical
accelerators for the rubber industry. Other uses of dimethylamine, accounting
for the remaining 20% of production, are in pesticides manufacture and the dimethyl
hydrazine used in rocket fuel.
Source locations of the manufacturers of dimethyl formamide, dimethyl acetamide,
lauryl dimethylamine oxide, and dimethyl hydrazine are shown in Tables 11-3, 11-4
and 11-5.
-------
Table 11-1. Dimethylamine Producers3
19713 ,	1970
L)	c
Capaci ty	Production	Geographic Location
Company	Location	(10 ' Ib/yr)	(TO6 Ib/yr)	Lati tude/Longitude
Air Products and Chemicals
Pensacola, FL
.1.00
22.2
30
36
29/81
08
12
Du Pont
Belle, WV
165
36.7
38
] 3
06/81
34
12

LaPorte, TX
20
4.5
29
42
04/95
02
05
GAF Corporation
Calvert City, KY
10
2.2
37
02
50/88
21
12
International Minerals &
Chemical Corporation
Terre Haute, IN
20
6.2
39
27
07/87
25
02
Total

323
71.8





3See refs. 1 and 2.
^Includes capacity for mono-, di-, and trimethylomines. Capacities are reduced significantly by recycling for
a desired amine.
c	,
Based on the ratio of total industry dimethylamine production to the total industry methylamines capacity X
individual site methylamines capacity.
-------
11-7
Table 11-2. Dimethylamine End-Use Distribution 1978*
Use
Usage
(106 lb/yr)
Usage
(%)
Dimethyl foraamide and acetamide
35.9
50
Lauryl dimethylamine oxide
CO
o
r~\
15
Rubber chemical accelerators
10.8
15
Pesticides and dimethyl hydrazine
14. 3
20
Total
71.8
100
*See ref. 1.
-------
n-8
Table 11-3. Dimethylamine Users for Dimethyl Formanude and Acetamide3
Company
Location
1978
Dimethylamine
Usage
(106 lb/yr)
Geographic Location
Latitude/Longitude
c
Air Products and Chemicals
Pensacola, FL
12.0
30 36 29/81 08 12
•d
Du Pont
Belle, WV
12.0
38 13 06/81 34 12
c
Lachat Chemical, Inc.
Mequon, WI
11.9
43 13 56/88 02 30
Total

35.9

a
See ref. 1.
Total usage distributed evenly over all three sites.
c
Dimethyl formamide.
d
Dimethyl formamide and dimethyl acetamide.
-------
11-9
a
Table 11-4. Dimethylamine Users for Lauryl Dimethylamine Oxide
1978
Dimethylamine
Usageb Geographic Location
Company	Location	(106 lb/yr)	Latitude /Longitude
Akzona Inc.
McCook, IL
1.8
41
48
17/87 49
41

Morris, IL
1.8
41
24
28/88 18
10
Continental Chemical
Clifton, NJ
1.8
40
43
34/74 07
26
Gulf Oil
Jersey City, NJ
1.8
40
43
02/74 06
10
Lonza, Inc.
Mapleton, IL
1.8
40
34
00/89 43
01
Scher 3rothers, Inc.
Clifton, NJ
1. 8
40
42
14/74 10
17
Total

10. 8




a
See ref. 1.
^Total usage distributed evenly over all six sites.
-------
li-iq
Table 11-5. Dimethylamine User for Dimethyl Hydrazine3


1978 b



Dimethylamine



Usage
Geographic Location
Convoanv
Location
(Million lb)
Latitude/Lonqitude
Teledyne McCormick Selph
Hollister, CA
7.15
36 50 06/121 25 00
aSee refs. 1 and 3.
^Usage assumed to be } of 14.3 million lb.
-------
11-11
II. EMISSION ESTIMATES
A.	PRODUCTION
Estimated production losses are shown in Table 11-6 for each of the five producing
locations. Total emissions of dimethylamine from production facilities are
estimated to have been 143,600 lb in 1978. Process emissions originate primarily
through condenser vents from the distillation columns. Other associated emission
components include methanol, monomethylamine, trimethylamine, and ammonia.
Storage emissions represent the total losses from crude and final product storage
tanks and from loading and handling. Fugitive emissions are those which result
from plant equipment leaks.
Vent stack data are shown in Tabls 11-7 for both production and enduse sources.
B.	USES
Total emissions of dimethylamine resulting from its use as a chemical inter-
mediate are estimated to have been 71,800 lb in 1978 using an emission factor
of 0.001 lb lost/lb produced. This factor was determined from dimethylamine
use in 2-4-D manufacturing and is considered representative of its use as a
chemical intermediate. Vent parameter data for chemical intermediate end-use
are shown in Table 11-7.
Source locations of end-use emissions are shown in Table 11-8. Emissions for pesti-
cide manufacturing and rubber accelerators are shown by region in Tables 11-9 and
10. The total nationwide emissions of dimethylamine in 1978 from all sources
is shown in Table 11-11 and is estimated to have been 215,400 lb.
-------
Table 11-6. Dimethylaminc Production Emissions
Company
IxDcnti on
Process
Emissions
(lb/yr)
Storage
Emissions
(lb/yr)
Fugitive
Emissions
(lb/yr)
Total
(lb/yr)
a
Emissions
(g/sec)b
Air Products and
Pensacola, FL
28,860
4, 440
11,100
44,400
0.64
Chemicals






Du Pont
Belle, wv
47,710
7, 340
18,350
7 3,400
1.06

Laporte, TX
5,850
900
2, 250
9,000
1.30
GAF Corporation
Calvert City, KY
2,860
440
1,100
4,400
0.06
International
Terre Haute, IN
8,060
1, 240
3,100
12,400
0.18
Minerals






Total

93,340
14,360
35,900
143,600

aBased on the following emission factor (lb dimethylamine lost per lb produced). See ref. 4.
Process 0.0013	C-Published source
Storage 0.0002	C-Published source
Fugitive 0.0005 C-Published source
Total	0.0020
^Assuming 8760 hr/yr operation.
-------
11-13
Table 11-7. Dimethylamine Vent Parameters

Nun\ber
of
Vents
Vent
Height
(ft)
Vent
Diameter
(ft)
Discharge
Temperature
(°F)
Velocity
(fps)
a,b
Production





Process
2
40
0.17
130
22
Storage
8
20
0.17
80

_ , a,b
Enc-uses





Process
1
30
0.17
100
15
Storage
2
20
0.17
80

a
Fugitive eraissions dist
^Euildir.g cross-section
ributed over
100 m2.
a 300 ft X
300 ft area.

-------
Table 11-8. Emissions from Dimethylam.ine Users
Company
Location
Process
Emissions
(lb/yr)
Storage
Emissions
(lb/yr)
Fugitive
Emissions
(lb/yr)
Total
(lb/yr)
__. . a
Emissions
(g/secf*
Air Products
Pensacola, Fr»
7
000
1, 200
3,000
]2,000
0.173
Du Pont
Belle, WV
7
800
1, 200
3,000
12,000
0. 173
Lachat
Mequon, WI
7
735
1,190
2,975
11,900
0.171
Akzona
McCook, 11.j
1
170
180
450
1,800
0.026

Morris, IL.
1
170
180
450
1,800
0.026
Continental
Clifton, NJ
1
170
180
450
1,800
0.026
Gulf Oil
Jersey City, NJ
1
170
] 80
450
CD
O
O
0.026
Lonza
Mapleton, IL
1
170
] 80
450
1,800
0.026
Scher Brothers
Clifton, NJ
1
170
180
450
1,800
0.026
Teldyne McCormick
Hollister, CA
4
648
715
1,787
7,150
0.103
Se Iph







Total

35
003
5,385
13,462
53,850

3Emission factor dimethylamine (lb lost per lb used). See ref. 4.
Process	0.00065 C-Published source
Storage	0.00010 C-Published source
Fugitive	0.00025 C-Published source
Total	0.00100
'Assumes 8760	hr/yr operation.
-------
11-15
Table 11-9. 1978 Dimethylamine
Emission Estimate from
Pesticide Manufacturers3


Number of
Sites per
Dimethvlamine
Emissions13



Region
Region
(lb/yr)
(g/sec)c
New England
4
206
0.003
Middle Atlantic
37
1903
0.027
East North Central
19
977
0.014
West North Central
15
772
0.011
South Atlantic
17
874
0.013
East South Central
14
720
0.010
West South Central
15
772
0.011
Mountain
5
257
0.004
Pacific
13
669
0.010
Total
139
7150

a
From refs. 1 and 3.



^Based on an average
emission rate
of 51.4 lb/yr
per site
Q
Based on 8760 hr/yr
operation.


-------
11-16
Table 11-10. 1978 Dimethylamine Qnission Estimates from
Rubber Chemical Accelerator Manufacturers3
, .	Dimethylamine
Number of	. . b
Emissions
Region	Region	(lb/yr)	(g/sec) C
New England
15
1,688
0.024
Middle Atlantic
24
2,700
0.039
East North Central
25
2,813
0.041
South Atlantic
9
1,012
0.015
East South Central
18
2,025
0.029
West South Central
_5
562
0.008
Total
96
10,800

a
See refs. 1 and 3.
^Basea on an average emission rate of 112.5 lb/yr per site.
Based on 8760 hr/yr operation.
-------
11-17
Table 11-11. 1978 Dimethylamine Nationwide Emissions

Production/

Total

Usage
Usage
Emissions
Source
(106 lb/yr)
(%)
(lb/yr)
Producers
71.8

143,600
Users



DMF and DMA3
35.9
50
35,900
b
Lauryl DMA oxide
10.8
15
10,800
Rubber chemical accelerators
€0
O
rH
15
10,800
Dimethyl hydrazine/pesticides
14. 3
20
14,300
Total


215,400
SDimethyl formamide and dimethyl acetamide (industrial solvents).
^Lauryl dimethylamine oxide.
-------
^ A i—p-C l	,
f U 4t 1 L-r-W
V 6 I A
i 7 ,/ n i /
>t-^r
~7 .4—>. /
1—v \ r
•, j^9,10.
M
4
5:
V
y^v
FIGURE 11-1. SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF DIMETHYLAMINE EMISSIONS
-------
TABLE 11-12. EMISSIONS AND METEOROLOGICAL STATIONS OF SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF DIMETHYLAMINE
*	+	EMISSIONS (CM/BEC)
STAR PLANT souncE 		
NO. COMPANY	SITE	LATITUDE LONGITUDE STATION TYl'E TYI'E PROCESS STORACE FUGITIVE
1
AIR PRODUCTS
PENSACOLA, FL
30
36
29
007
on
12
03855
1
•>
.415504
. 1 12320
.063936
.0I7280
. 109840
.O43200
2
DUPONT
BELLE, WY
38
13
06
OOI
34
12
13066
1
1
2
.607024
.112320
.103696
.0I72O0
.264240
.043200
3
DUPONT
LAPORTE. TX
39
42
04
095
02
05
12906
2
1
.004240
.012960
.032400
4
CAF CORPORATION
CALVERT CITY, KY
37
02
50
000
M |
12
030 16
2
1
.041184
.006336
.015O40
S
INTER MINERAL
TERRE IIAUTE. IN
39
27
07
007
25
02
13806
2
1
.1 16064
.017856
.044640
6
LACIIAT
MEQUOII, Wl
43
13
56
000
02
30
14839
3
2
.111384
.017136
.042840
7
AKZONA
MCCOOK, IL
41
40
17
oni
on
12
03855
3
2
.0I6B4B
.002392
.006480
a
AKZONA
MORRIS. 1L
41
24
24
000
in
IO
14855
3
2
.016840
.002592
.006480
9
CONTINENTAL
CLIFTON. NJ
40
43
34
074
07
26
94741
3
'»
.O16040
.002592
.006480
IO
CULF OIL
JERSEY CITY. NJ
40
43
02
074
06
14
94741
3
O
.016040
.002592
.006480
1 1
LONZA
MAPLETON. IL
40
34
00
009
43
0 1
I4U42
3
O
.016040
.002592
.006480
1 o
SCIIER BROTHERS
CLIFTON, NJ
40
42
14
074
IO
17
94741
0
2
.016840
.002592
.006480
13
TELDYNE MCCORMI
HOLLISTER. CA
06
50
06
121
25
00
23199
3
'1
.066931
.010296
.025733
-------
TABLE 11-12. (Concluded)
* Plant Types:
Type 1: Plant produces dlmethylamine and uses It to produce dimethyl formamlde
(DMF)/dimethyl acetamide (DMA)
Type 2: Plant produces dimethylamlne
Type 3: Plant produces dimethyl formaldehyde (DMF), dimethyl acetamide (DMA),
lauryl dlmethylamlne oxide, or dimethyl hydrazine
t Source Types:
Type 1: Dlmethylamlne
Type 2: Dlmethylamlne consumption
-------
11-21
TABLE 11-13 EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE OF DIMETHYLNITROSAMINE RESULTING
* FROM SPECIFIC POINT SOURCE EMISSIONS
Concentration	Population
Level	Exposed Dosage
(ug/m3)	(persons) [(ug/m3) . persons]
0.01	4	.0418
0.005	112	.704
0.0025	1,437	4.78
0.001	14,843	22
0.0005	65,125	56.9
0.00025	261,935	127
0.0001	395,19S	149
0.00005	974,464	185
0.000025	3,569,282	266
0.00001	15,127,027	450
1.34x10-5*	18,661,392	470
~The lowest annual average concentration occurring within 20 km of the
specific point source.
-------
TABLE 11-14. EMISSIONS RATES AND NUMBER OF GENERAL POINT
SOURCES OF DIMETIIYLAMINE
Pesticide Production Chemical Accelerator_
Emi ssions/Si to Number Emissions/Si te Number
Region	 (gm/sec) of_Sjtes 	(qm/sec) of Sites
New England
0.00074
4
0.00162
15
Middle Atlantic
0.00074
37
0.00162
24
East North Central
0.00074
19
0.00162
25
West North Central
0.00074
15
0
0
South Atlantic
0.00074
17
0.00162
9
East South Central
0.00074
14
0.00162
18
West South Central
0.00074
15
0.00162
5
Mountain
0.00074
5
0
0
Paci fic
0.00074
13
0
0
-------
TABLE 11-15. DIMETHYLNITROSAMINE EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULTING FROM EMISSIONS FROM
GENERAL POINT SOURCES OF DIMETHYLAMINE
Concentration
Level
(nq/m3)
0.025
0.010
0.0050
0.0025
0.0010
0.0005
0.00025
0
Population Exposed
(IP3 persons)
Pesticide Chemical
Production Accelerator U.S. Total
0
0.6
12
0.16
13.1
136
0.16
13.8
148
Dosage
[10J(ng/m3)-persons)
Pesticide Chemical
Production Accelerator U.S. Total
0
0.008
0.078
0.45
3.18
14.3
30.5
57.2
0.005
0.183
0.987
4.53
30.8
56.9
76.9
90.3
0.005
0.191
1.06
4.98
34.0
71.2
107
148
I
ro
CO
NOTE: The use of -- as an entry Indicates that the Incremental E/D 1s not significant
(relative to last entry or relative to entry in another column at the same row)
or that the exposure of the same population may be counted In another column.
-------
TABLE 11-16. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE SUMMARY OF DIMET1IYLNITROSAM1NE
Population Exposed
(persons)
mcentratlon
Speci fic
General


Level
Point
Point


(pq/m3)
Source
Source
Area Source
U.S. Total
0.01
4
0
0
4
0.005
112
0
0
112
0.0025
1,437
O
0
1 ,437
0.001
14,843
0
0
14,843
0.0005
65.125
0
0
65,125
0.00025
261,935
0
0
261,935
0.0001
395,198
O
O
395,198
0.00005
974,464
O
0
974,464
0.000025
3,569,282
O
0
3,569,202
0.00001
15,127,027
13,800
0
15,140,827
0.000005
- -
148,000
0
--
0.0000025

--
0
--
0.000001

--
0
--
0
18.66T.592

0
--
Dosage
,		[(uq/m3)-persons]	
Specific General
Point Point
Source 	Source Area Source U.S. Total
.0418
0
0

1
0
0
1
5
0
0
5
22
0
0
22
57
0
0
57
127
0
0
127
149
0
0
149
185
0
0
185
266
0
0
266
450
0
0
450
--
1
0
--
--
5
0
--
--
34
0
--
4 70
148
0
618
NOTE: The use of — as an entry Indicates that the Incremental E/D 1s not significant
(relative, to last entry or relative to entry in another column at the same row)
or that the exposure of the same population may be counted in another column.
-------
11-25
REFERENCES
1.	T. F. Killilea, "Miscellaneous Aliphatic Amines," p. 611.5030B, Chemical Economics
Handbook, Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA- (July 1978).
2.	"Miscellaneous Aliphatic Amines	Salient Statistics," Chemical Economics Handbook,
Manual of Current Indicators	Supplemental, Stanford Research Institute, Menlo
Park, CA (April 1979).
3.	Directory of Chemical Producers in the United States, 1978, pp. 564, 567 and 931,
Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA.
4.	Special Project Report, "Petrochemical Plant Sites," prepared for Industrial
Pollution Control Division, Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory,
Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH, by Monsanto Research Corporation,
Dayton, OH (April 1976).
-------
SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR DIOXIN
Attachment A-12-1
As a result of information received subsequent to the original distribution
of this document, the following are noted:
-	Dioxin emission estimates in this document are theoretical. Testing of
at least one plant (Vulcan Chemical, Wichita, Kansas) has shown no evidence of
either emissions of dioxin or dioxin in the product. Additional assessment of
all sources is planned by EPA.
-	The Monsanto plant identified in Table 12-3 no longer produces
pentachlorophenol.
-------
APPENDIX A-12-2 		 Qioxin
DIOXIN CHEMICAL DATA
Nomenclature
Chemical Abstract Service Registry Number^ T746-01-6
Synonyms: 2.3.7.8 - Tetracnlorodibenzo-p-dioxin; 2.3.7.8-TCDD
Chemical Formula
Molecular Weight: 251
Molecular Formula: C-^H^Cl^
Molecular Structure:
Chemical and Physical Properties
Physical State at STP: Solid - Colorless needles
Boiling Point:
Melting Point: 306°C
Density:
Vapor Pressure:
Vapor Density:
Solubility: Insoluble (2 x 10"^ g/1 of ^0
Log Partition Coefficient (Octanol/t^O).'
Atmospheric Reactivity
Transformation Products:
Reactivity Toward 0H-:
Reactivity Toward O^:
Reactivity Toward Photolysis:
Major Atmospheric Precursors: N/A
Formation Reactivity:
-------
12-5
I. SOURCES
2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (2,3,7,8-TCDD) is only one of a total of
75 compounds that make up a group of chemicals referred to as polychlorinated
dioxin. It is an impurity that results from the manufacture of trichlorophenol
which is used to make 2,4,5-trichlorophenoxy acetic acid, commonly referred to
as 2,4,5-T, a herbicide. The primary end-use for 2,4,5-T is for weed and grass
control.1
2,3,7,8-TCDD has also been reported in pentachlorophenol which is produced by
chlorinating phenol or poiychlorophenols.2 The primary end-use for pentachloro-
phenol is as a wood preservative.
An estimated 6.5 million lb of 2,4,5-T was produced and consumed as weed killer
in the United States in 1973.3 Tabxe I 2-14 lists the five companies at seven loca
tions that produced 2,4,5-T.
An estimated 10 million lb of trichlorophenol was produced by two companies at
two locations as shown in Table 12-L'.4
Pentachlorophenol production was estimated to have been 47 million lb in 197S.
Producers and site locations are identified in Table 12-3.2
In addition to its formation in the chlorinated chemical reactions noted above,
Dow Chemical announced, in late 1978, findings that indicate 2,3,7,8-TCDD is a
product of fire chemistry.5 Dow claims that 2,3,7,8-TCDD is created during the
burning of organic material and can be found in the resulting particulate matter
emitted. Dow tests found traces of 2,3,7,8-TCDD in the emissions of gasoline
and diesel engines, incinerators, powerhouse boiler stacks, fireplaces, and
cigarettes ranging from 0.001 to 1100 ppb.5
II. EMISSION ESTIMATES
Prior to 1965 2,3,7,8-TCDD was present in concentrations of up to 50 ppm in
2,4,5-T. Since then, sufficient technology became available to allow the manu-
facture of 2,4,5-T containing no more than 1 ppm 2,3,7,8-TCDD.1
-------
Table 12-1. 2,4,5-T (Trichlorophenoxy1 Acetic Acid) Producers3
2,4,5-T Capacity 2,4,5-T Productign Geographic Coordinates
Company	Location	(million lb/yr)	(million lb/yr)	Latitude/Longitude
Dow
Midland, MI
NAC
0.93
43
25
28/84 13 08
PBI-Gordon
Kansas City, KA
NA
0.93
39
00
53/94 40 59
Riverdale
Chicago Heights, IL
NA
0.93
41
30
30/87 38 11
Union Carbide
Ambler, PA
NA
0.93
40
01
48/75 13 41

Fremont, CA
NA
0.93
37
28
38/122 00 40

St. Joseph, MO
NA
0.93
39
45
36/94 50 46
Vertac
Jacksonville, AR
NA
0.93
34
55
36/92 04 56
Total

NA
6.5



3See ref. 4.
^Production evenly distributed over all sites in the absence of capacity data,
c
Not available.
-------
Table 12-2. Trichlorophenol Producers3
Trichlorophenol	Trichlorophenol
Capacity Production Geographic Coordinates
Company	Location	(million lb/yr)	(million lb/yr)	Latitude/Longitude
Dow	Midland, HI	NAC	5	43 25 28/84 13 08
Vertac	Jacksonville, AR	NA	_5	34 55 36/92 04 46
Total	NA	10d
aSee ref. 4.
^Production split between both sites.
CNot available.
ro
'^Hydroscience estimate.	^
-------
Table 1.2-3. Pentaclilorophenol Producers3
Company
Location
Pentaclilorophenol
Capaci ty
(million lb/yr)
Pentaclilorophenol
Production
(million lb/yr)
Geographic Coordinates
Lati tude/Longitude
Dow
Monsanto
Reichhold
Vulcan
Total
Midland, MI
Sauget, IL
Tacoma, WA
Wichita, KA
15
26
12
16
69
10
18
8
U
47
43 25 28/84 13 08
38 35 31/90 10 11
47 16 11/122 22 57
37 36 55/97 18 30
aSee ref. 2.
^Total pentachlorophenol distributed by site capacity.
-------
12-9
Emissions for chemical producers were estimated by assuming that 0.005 lb of
product was lost per lb of product produced and the 2,3,7,8-TCDD concentrat^a
in the production emission was 50 ppm, i.e., the maximum level reported in
2,4,5-T prior to 1965.1
Total emissions of 2,3,7,8-TCDD from the processes producing 2,4,5-T, trichloro-
phenol and pentachlorophenol were 1,6, 2.5, and 11.8 lb respectively. An addi-
tional 6.5 lb of 2,3,7,8-TCDD is lost each year when 2,4,5-T is applied to land
for weed control, and pentachlorophenol emissions from its use as a wood preserva-
tive (90% of production) have the potential of releasing 42.3 lb/yr assuming
2,3,7,8-TCDD concentrations of 1 ppm in both cases.1
Using an average concentration from Dow data of 2 ppb 2,3,7,8-TCDD in burned
particulate matter and the particulate emission estimates made by Mitre6 as shown
in Table 12-4,2,3,7,8-TCDD emissions from burning were estimated at 18.8 lb/yr.
Total emissions of 2,3,7,8-TCDD from all sources were estimated to have been
83.5 lb in 1978. Table i2-5 summarizes 2,3,7,8-TCDD emissions.
-------
12-10
Table 12-4. Potential Sources of 2,3,7,8-TCDD (Emissions of
Particulates) from Burning
Particulate Total
Emissionsa Emissiogs
	Source	(ton's/yr)	(lb/vr)
Open burning
Agriculture
2,161,142
8.6
Forest fires
1,433,712
5.7
Refuse open burning
526,843
2.1
Conical burners
212,211
0.8

193,500
0.8
Coal burning	all sources
108,952
0.4
Oil burning	all sources
72,389
0.3
Incineration, municipal
30,123
0.1
domestic
Total	18.8
aSee ref. 6.
^Based on an emission concentration of the particulate of
2 ppb (see ref. 5) .
-------
12-11
Table 12-5. 1978 Total Nationwide Emission Estimates of 2,3,7,8-TCDD
Nationwide Emissions
	Source	(lb/yr)
Trichlorophenol production	2.5
2,4,5-T production	1.6
Pentachlorophenol production	11.8
Burning (fire sources)	18.8
2,4,5-T application (use)	6.5
Pentachlorophenol as wood preservative	(use) 42.3
Total	83.5
-------
H2

ro
i
FIGURE 12-1 . SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF 2,3,7,8-TCDD EMISSIONS
-------
TABLE 12-6. EMISSIONS AND METEOROLOGICAL STATIONS OF SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF 2,3,7,8-TCDO
*	t	EMISSIONS iMfVPEC)
NO.
corn* any
SITE
LATITlinE
i.oncminr.
STAT1
STATION
PLANT
TVIT.
soimcE
TYI'K
PMICF.SS
STOOACE
runiTivt
1
now
Mini,Ann, ni
43
33
20
004
13
on
14(143
1
1
a
A.
0.
0.
0.
e.
o.
.•03290
.einoftH
.6424116
2
pnt-coruKW
KAUNAS CITV, KA
30
Otl
33
094
40
59
13900

i
B.
0.
.663298
G
IM VEnOALE
cnicAco irr.icirrs,
IL 41
30
39
0B7
till
11
94fl46
r»
i
0.
e.
.003298
4
UNION CAnn IDE
ArmLEn. pa
40
01
40
073
13
41
13739
2
i
0.
o.
.O0329B
0
union CAfiniDR
KHEno«T, CA
07
20
30
122
©0
40
23244
2
i
0.
©.
.603298
«
unton CAnntne
8T. JOSEPH, HO
39
43
36
694
36
46
13921
2
i
e.
e.
.663298
7
VEIITAC
JACKSONVILLE, AI\
34
53
36
092
04
36
13963
3
1
2
e.
o.
«.
«*.
.603298
.oinono
a
HOTISANTO
SAUCET. IL
30
35
31
09#
IO
1 1
13994
4
3
0.
0.
.642406
9
nr.lCIItlOLD
TACOtlA, WA
47
16
1 1
122
22
57
24207
4
3
0.
e.
. 642406
10
VULCAN
VICIIITA. KA
37
36
33
097
in
30
0392fl
4
3
0.
e.
.042406
-------
TABLE 12-6. (Concluded)
* Plant Types:
Type 1: Plant produces 2,4,5-T, trlchlorophenol, and pentachlorophenol
Type 2: Plant produces 2,4,5-T
Type 3: Plant produces 2,4,5-T and trlchlorophenol
Type 4: Plant produces pentachlorophenol
t Source Types:
Type 1: 2,4,5-T production
Type 2: Trlchlorophenol production
'Type 3: Pentachlorophenol production
-------
12-15
TABLE 12-7. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE OF 2, 3, 7, 8-TCDD RESULTING
FROM SPECIFIC POINT SOURCE EMISSIONS
Concentration Population
Level	Exposed	Dosage
(ug/m^)	(persons)	[(ug/m^) » persons]
2.5
1
3
1
12
18
0.5
57
48
0.25
151
80
0.1
550
139
0.05
3,249
326
0.025
11,006
578
0.01
33,516
925
0.005
106,892
1,430
0.0025
306,516
2,110
0.001
1,048,267
3,250
0.0005
1,938,136
3,890
5.5 x 10"6*
7,765,165
4,470
* The lowest annual average concentration occurring within
20 km of the specific point source.
58/4
-------
12-16
TABLE 12-8. HAJOR PARAMETERS FOR ESTIMATING EXPOSURE/DOSAGE RESULTING
FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS OF 2,3,7,8-TCDD (DIOXIN)
Parameter	Value
Daytime decay rate (Krf)	0
Nighttime decay rate (K )	0
Hanna-Gifford coefficient (C)	225
Nationwide heating source emissions (Eu)	0
Nationwide nonheating stationary source emissions	(E^) 9.734 x 10 mq/sec
2,4,5-T application	9.36 x 10~^ mq/$ec
Wood preservative	6.091 x 10 mq/sec
-&
Burning	2.707 x 10 mq/sec
Nationwide mobile source emissions (EM)	0
-------
TABLE 12-9. 2,3,7,8-TCDD EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULTING FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS
Capo level
Population
Dosage
(«
Percentage^ of Contribution
Percentage of Distribution
li-9/"3)
(person)
	person)
HeatIng
Stat lonarjf
Mobile
CUjfJjfE* i
CUy Type 2
City Irpe
.005000
446952
2373.2
0.
100.0
0.
100.0
0.
0.
.002500
505140
2622.0
0.
100.0
0.
100.0
0.
0.
.001000
14890505
26247.1
0.
100.0
0.
100.0
0.
0.
.000500
357 ?9915
41054.4
0.
100.0
0.
100.0
0.
0.
.000250
92471736
60521.2
0.
100.0
0.
97.5
1.1
1.4
.000100
145894105
70028.4
0.
100.0
0.
93.8
2.5
3.7
1.
156679135
70894.0
0.
100.0
0.
92.9
2.6
4.5
ro
-------
TAfll.E 12-10. EXPOSMItE AND DOSAf.E SIIWARY Of 2, 3, 7, fl-ICDO (DIOXIN)
Population Exposed
Dosage
Concentration
Specific
General


Specific
General

Level
Point
Point


Point
Point

(pq/m3)
Source
Source
Area Source
U.S. Total
Source
Source
Area Source
2.5
1
0
0
1
3
0
0
1
12
0
0
12
18
0
0
0.5
57
0
0
57
48
0
D
0.25
151
0
0
151
80
0
0
0.1
550
0
0
550
139
0
0
0.05
3,249
0
0
3,249
329
0
0
0.25
11,006
0
0
11,006
570
0
0
0.01
33,516
0
0
33,516
925
0
0
0.005
106,892
0
446,952
--
1,430
0
2,373
0.0025
306,516
0
505,140
~
2,110
0
2,622
0.001
1,048,267
0
14,090,505
--
3,250
0
26,247
0.0005
1,938,136
0
35,729,915
~
3,090
0
41,054
0.00025
—
0
92,471,736
—
--
0
60,521
0.0001
—
0
145,094,105
--
—
0
70,028
0
7,765,165
0
158,679,135
--
4,470
0
70,894
U.S. Total
3
18
48
00
139
329
578
925
3,803
A,730
29,497
45,9 44
74, 574
NOTE: The use of — as an entry indicates that the incremental E/D i9 not significant (relative to lost entry or
relative to entry in another column nt the same row) or that the exposure of the same population may be
counted in another column.
-------
12-19
REFERENCES
1.	Report on 2,4,5-T, A report of the panel on herbicides of the President's
Science Advisory Committee, Executive Office of the President, Office of
Science and Technology (March 1971).
2.	"Chemical Product Synopsis on Pentachlorophenol," Mannsville Chemical Products,
Mannsville, NY (September 1977).
3.	"Herbicides," Chemical Economics Handbook, p. 573.7000A—70060, Stanford Research
Institute, Menlo Park, CA (December 1976).
4.	1979 Directory of Chemical Producers, United States, Stanford Research Institute,
Menlo Park, CA.
5.	The Trace Chemistries of Fire	A Source of and Routes for the Entry of Chlorinated
Dioxins into the Environment, the Chlorinated Dioxin Task Force, The Michigan
Division, Dow Chemical U.S.A (November 1978).
6.	A Survey of Emissions and Controls for Hazardous and Other Pollutants by Mitre
for EPA (February 1973).
-------
APPENDIX A-13	Epichlorohydrin
EPICHLOROHYDRIN CHEMICAL DATA
Nomencleture
Chemical Abstract Service Registry Number: 106-89-8
Synonyms: 3-CMoro-l ,2-Propylene; 3-Chloro-l-Ozacyclobutane; 3-
Chlorooxetane; Chloromethyloxirane; dl-a-Epichlorohydrin;
l-Chloro-2,3-£poxypropane; y-Chloropropylene Oxide
Cherr.ical Formula
Molecular Weight: 92.53
Molecular Formula: C^H^CIO
Molecular Structure:
0
/ \
CH„ - CH - CH-C1
therical and Physical Properties
Physical State at STP: Liquid - colorless
Boiling Point: 117-9°C
Melting Point: -25.6°C
Density: 1.1801 at 20°C/4°C
Vapor Pressure: 16.B im at 25°C
Vapor Density: 3.29
Solubility: Insoluble (HjO)
Log Partition Coefficient (Octanol/f^O):
Atmospheric Reactivity
Transformation Products:
Reactivity Toward OH-:
Reactivity Toward O^:
Reactivity Toward Photolysis:
Major Atmospheric Precursors: N/A
Formation Reactivity:
-------
n-5
I. SOURCES
All allyl chloride currently produced in the United States by the chlorination
jf propylene is consumed in the production of epichlorohydrin.1'2 Allyl chloride
is first reacted with hypochlorous acid to form dichlorohydrin; dichlorohydrin
is then reacted with sodiuin hydroxide or calcium hydroxide to form crude epichloro-
hydrin .2
Crude epichlorohydrin can be used directly for the production of synthetic glycerin.
For other end-uses (primarily epoxy resins) the crude product is further refined
by distillation.2
Allyl chloride and epichlorohydrin are both produced by two companies at three
locations.2 The plant locations and the 1978 capacities and estimated production
levels for each plant are shown in Table 13-1 2 The estimated quantities of
allyl chloride and epichlorohydrin produced in 1978 were 330 million lb and
312 million lb respectively.2
The primary end-uses of epichlorohydrin are for the manufacture of epoxy resins
and synthetic glycerin. An estimated 53% of epichlorohydrin production amounting
to 165 million lb was consumed to produce epoxy resins and 25%, or 78 million
lb, was consumed in the manufacture of synthetic glycerin.1'2
Most of the other applications of epichlorohydrin are relatively minor. Epichloro-
hydrin elastomers consumed an estimated 6 million lb (2%) in 1978. An esti-
mated 47 million lb (15%) was used to produce a variety of products in relatively
small volume including glycidol ethers, some types of modified epoxy resins,
wet strength resins for the paper industry, water treatment resins, surfactants,
and ion-exchange resins. Exports of epichlorohydrin are estimated to have been
16 million lb (5%)in 1978. End-uses are summarized in Table 13-2.1 2 Specific
source locations of the epoxy resin producers are shown in Table 13-3.1,2
EMISSIONS ESTIMATES
Production
Estimated production losses are shown in Table 13-4 for each of the three producing
locations. Total emissions of allyl chloride and epichlorohydrin from production
facilities are estimated to have been 1,112,100 lb and 146,640 lb respectively
in 1978.3 Process emissions originate primarily through the condenser vents
from the distillation columns.3 Other associated emissions include C3 hydro-
-------
Table 13-1. Production of Mlyl Chloride, Epichlorohydrin, and Acrolein3
1978 Estimated Production^ 1978 Estimated Capacity
	(M lb)			(M lb)	
Allyl Eplchloro- Mlyl	Eqlchloro-	Geographic Coordinates
Source	Location	Chloride-	hy
-------
13-7
Table 13-2. 1978 Epichlorohydrin Consvsnption by End-Use*

Percent
End-Use

of Total
Consumption
End-Use
Consumption
(M lb)
Glycerin
25
76
Unmodified epoxy resins
53
165
Miscellaneous products
15
47
Epichlorohydrin elastomers
2
6
Export
5
16
Total
100.0
312
•See refs 1 and 2.
-------
Table 13-3. Users of Epichlorohydrin to Produce Epoxy Resins3
Company
Location
1978 Estimated
Epoxy Resin
Capacity
(M lb)
1978 Estimated
Epichlorohydrin^
Used
(M lb)
Geographic Coordinates
Latitude/Longitude
Celanese
Linden, NJ
10
14
4035 10/74 13 40

Louisville, KY
25
9
3812 23/85 52 09
Ciba-Geigy
Toms River, NJ
60
22
3959 20/74 22 33
Dow
Freeport, TX
170
61
28 59 15/95 24 45
Reichhold
Andover, MA
8C
3
42 08 30/71 08 28

flzusa, CA
8C
3
34 07 52/117 53 51

Detroit, MI
8C
3
4228 17/83 07 52

Houston, TX
8C
3
29 45 10/95 10 15
Shell
Deer Park, TX
100
36
29 42 55/95 07 34
Union Carbide
Bound Brook, NJ
10
4
4033 32/74 31 ID

Taft, LA
20
7
29 58 00/90 27 00
Total

457
165

aSee refs. 1 and 2.
^Epichlorohydrin usage allocated to each site based on resin capacity.
CReichhold*s total epoxy resin capacity at 32 M lb allocated evenly over all four producing sites.
-------
Table 13-4. 1978 Allyl Chloride and Epi.chlorohydrin Production Emissions

Process
ftnissions
Storage (missions
FuqitJ ve
FrolssIons

Tot a 1
Km 1s s ions











Allyl
Chloride
(lb/yr)
Epichloro-
hydr in
(lb/yr)
Allyl
Chloride
(lb/yr)
Epi chloro-
liydt i n
(lb/yr)
Allyl
Cli 1 or ide
(lb/yi)
Epichloro-
hydri n
(lb/yr)
Allyl Chlor id«ja
Epi chlorohydr 1 n^
Company Location
(lb/yr)
('|/'JOC)
c (lb/yr*
(g/sec)c
Dow Frecport, TX
515,680
69,720
24,640
1 , fcf.O
52,000
6,640
593,120
0.54
7 0,020
1.12
Shell Deer Park, TX
225,610
30,660
10 ,7 00
7 30
2 3,100
2,920
259,490
3.74
34,310
0.49
Norco, LA
225.610
30,660
io,7no
7 30
23,100
2 ,920
259,490
3.74
34,310
0. 49
Total
966,000
131.040
46,200
3. 1 20
'J 9,000
12,400
1 ,1 12,100

146,640

a
Ujscd on allyl chloride
emission factor (lb lost/lb produced)
Sou r»?fc.
7—-9.





Process 0.00293 B - From state files
Storage 0.00014 B - From state files
Fugitive 0.00030 D - Engineering estimate
Total	0.00337
^Dased on epichlorohydrin emission factor (lb lost/lb produced). See refs. 6, 0, and 9.
Process 0.00042 B - Fron ytate files
Storage 0.00001 B - From state files
Fugitive 0.00004 D - Engineering estimate
Total	0.00047
CDased on 0760 hr/yr operation.
U>
l
KO
-------
13-10
carbons and other C3 chlorinated hydrocarbons.3 Storage emissions, which repre-
sent total losses from storage tanks and loading and handling, are generally
controlled by the use of pressurized tanks and/or refrigerated vent condensers
and account for less than 5% of allyl chloride losses and less than 3% of epi-
chlorohydrin losses.6'7 Fugitive emissions are those which result from plant
equipment leaks.
Vent stack data are shown in Table 13-5. Typically, there are four process vents
that emit allyl chloride and three process vents that emit epichlorohydrin.
Emissions from banks of storage tanks are normally collected and discharged
from common vent stacks. Usually allyl chloride/epichlorohydrin production
facilities are "open-air" structures without walls and solid floors (i.e., steel
grating). Only the control room area is enclosed.
2. Uses
For the purpose of this report, emissions resulting from the export of epichloro-
hydrin are assumed to be negligible.
Since the only significant end-use for allyl chloride is in the production of
epichlorohydrin, allyl chloride end-use emissions are included in the allyl
chloride/epichlorohydrin production emissions.
More than half (53%) of the epichlorohydrin produced is used in the production
of epoxy resins. The current domestic producers of epoxy resins, plant locations,
and estimated emissions of epichlorohydrin are given in Table 13-b. Vent parameter
data relative to epichlorohydrin emissions from epoxy resin production are shown
in Table-13-5.
Emissions of epichlorohydrin resulting from the production of glycerin, the
next largest end-use of epichlorohydrin (25%), are included in the listed epi-
chlorohydrin production emissions. (Glycerin and the required epichlorohydrin
are produced at the same location.) Emissions resulting from the use of epi-
chlorohydrin in the production of miscellaneous products were estimated by using
the epoxy resin (epichlorohydrin use) emission factor. Specific source locations
for miscellaneous chemical intermediate use could not be identified.
Total nationwide emissions of allyl chloride and epichlorohydrin in 1978 from
all sources are estimated to have been 1.11 million lb and 0.479 million lb
respectively. A tabulation of the losses is shown in Table 13-7.
-------
13-11
Table 13-5. Allyl Chloride and Epichlorohydrin Vent Parameters
Source
Number
of
Stacks
Vent
Height
(ft)
Vent
Diameter
(ft)
Discharge
Temperature
	CD	
Velocity
(fps)
Production3'
Process vents
Allyl chloride
Epichlorohydrin
Storage vents
Allyl chloride
Use
Epichlorohydrin
c,d
Epoxy resins, elas-
tomers and misc.
products
Process
Column vent
Recovery vents
Storage
85
40
50
15 - 20
15 - 20
50
135
20
0.6
0.167
0.34
0.6
0.6
0.33
0.83
0.17
80
228
90
86
80
115
110
80
Intermittent
5.5
13.8
5.3
10.0
^Building cross-section 5 m .
^Fugitive emissions distributed over a 300 ft X 300 ft area.
c	2
Building cross-section 100 m .
^Fugitive emissions distributed over a 100 ft X 200 ft area.
-------
Tahle 13-6. 1978 Epichlorohydrjn Emissions from Epoxy Resin Production
Process Emissions
Storage Emissions
Fugitive Emissions
Total Emissions
Company
Location
(lb/yr) (g/sec)	(Ib/yr) (g/sec)b	(lb/yr) (g/sec)	(lb/yr)	(g/sec)b
Celanese
Linden, NJ
15,960
0.
,2 30
1,
,100
0.
020
3,920
0.
056
21
,280
0.
306

Louisville, KY
10,260
0.
. 148

900
0.
013
2,520
0.
036
13
,680
0.
197
Ciba-Geigy
Toms River, NJ
25,080
0.
. 361
2,
, 200
0.
.032
6,160
0.
089
33
,440
0.
481
Dow
Freeport, TX
69,540
1
.001
6,
,100
0.
,008
17,080
0.
, 246
92
,720
1.
335
Reichhold
Andover, MA
3,420
0.
.049

300
0.
,00 3
840
0.
,012
4
,560
0.
066

Azusa, CA
3,420
0.
.049

300
0.
.003
840
0.
,012
4
,560
0.
066

Detroit, MI
3,420
0
.049

300
0.
,003
840
0.
,012
4
,560
0.
066

Houston, TX
3,420
0
.049

300
0,
.003
840
0.
.012
4
,560
0.
066
Shell
Deer Park, TX
41,040
0
. 591
3
,600
0.
.052
10,080
0,
.145
54
,720
0.
788
Union Carbide
Bound Brook, NJ
4,560
0
.066

400
0,
.004
1,120
0.
.016
6
,080
0.
088

Taft, LA
7,980
0
.115

700
0,
.010
1,960
0,
.028
10
,640
0.
153
Total

188,100


16
,500


46,200


250
,800


Emission factor for epichlorohydrin emissions
Process 0.00114 B - From state files
Storage 0.00010 B - From state files
Fugitive 0.00028 B - From state files
Total	0.00152
(lb lost per lb used). See ref. 10.
Assumes 8760 hr/yr operation.
-------
13-13
Table 13-7. 1978 Estimated Allyl Chloride and Epichlorohvdrin
Nationwide Emission Losses

Estimated National Emissions
Source
All^l Chloride
(M lb/yr)
Epichlorohydrin
(M lb/yr)
Production (allyl chloride,
epichlorohydrin, and glycerin)
1.11
0.147
Unmodified epoxy resins - use

0.251
Chemical intermediate - use

0.081
Export
0
0
Total
1.11
0. 479
~Based on emission factor of 0.00152 lb lost per lb used derived
for epoxy resin manufacture.
-------
A->

U>
I
FIGURE 13-1 SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF EPICHLOROHYORIN EMISSIONS
-------
TABLE 13-8. EMISSIONS AND METEOROLOGICAL STATIONS OF SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF EPICHLOROHYDRIN
*	t	emissions (cn/SEC)
no.
COMPANY
SITE
LATITUDE
LONCITUDE
STAR
STATION
PLANT
TYPE
SOURCE
TYPE
PROCESS
STORAGE
FUCITIVE
i
DOW
FREEPORT, TX
28
89
30
093
23
33
12923
1
1
2
1 .003968
1 .001376
.023904
.007040
.093616
.243932
2
SHELL
DEER PARK, TX
29
42
33
093
07
34
12906
I
1
2
.441504
.590976
.010312
.065664
.042048
.114912
3
SHELL
HORCO, LA
30
00
1 1
090
23
42
12923
2
1
.441304
.010312
.042048
4
CELANESE
LINDEN, NJ
40
37
10
074
IS
53
94741
3
2
.229824
.020160
.036448
0
CELANESE
LOUISVILLE. KY
30
1 1
00
003
30
00
93B21
3
2
.147744
.012960
.036208
6
CIBA-CEICY
TOMS RIVER, NJ
39
59
20
074
22
33
14706
3
2
.361152
.031680
.088704
7
tetcHnoLb
ANDOVER, HA
42
©iJ
30
071
oti
2ti
147(1$
3
i
.64924a
.664320
.612696
a
REICHHOLD
AZUSA, CA
34
07
82
1 17
S3
SI
23174
3
2
.049248
.004320
.012096
9
REICnnOLD
DETROIT. Ml
42
28
17
003
07
82
14822
3
2
.049248
.004320
.012096
10
REICHHOLD
HOUSTON, TX
29
43
10
095
10
IS
12906
3
O
.0492411
.004320
.012096
11
UNION CARBIDE
DOUND BROOK, NJ
40
33
32
074
31
10
94741
3
*>
.065664
.005760
.016128
12
UNION CARD IDE
TATT. LA
29
08
00
090
27
00
13970
3
2
.1 14912
.010000
.028224
* Plant Types:
Type 1: Plant produces eplchlrohydrln, glycerins and epoxy reslons
Type 2: Plant produces	eplchlorohydrln and glycerins
Type 3: Plant produces	epoxy resins
t Source Types:
Type 1: Eplchlorohydrln and glycerin production
Type 2: Epoxy resins production
-------
13-16
TABLE 13-9. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE OF EPICHLOROHYDRIN RESULTING
FROM SPECIFIC POINT SOURCE EMISSIONS
Concentration Population
Level	Exposed	Dosage
(ug/m^)	(persons)	[(ug/m^) • persons]
10	2	28
5	25	172
2.5	158	591
1	822	1,550
0.5	4,806	4,270
0.25	20,499	9,380
0.1	86,056	19,200
0.05	232,925	29,500
0.025	480,983	37,900
0.01	1,291,751	50,700
0.005	2,365,630	58,000
0.00012*	10,565,428	70,400
* The lowest annual average concentration occurring within
20 km of the specific point source.
58/4
-------
13-17
TABLE 13-10. MAJOR PARAMETERS FOR ESTIMATING EXPOSURE/DOSAGE RESULTING
FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS OF EPICHLOROHYDRIN
		Parameter	 	Value
Daytime decay rate (K^)	0
Nighttime decay rate (K )	0
Hanna-Gifford coefficient (C)	225
Nationwide he2ting source emissions (EH)	0
Nationwide nonheating stationary source emissions	(E^) 1.165 gm/sec
Nation mobile source emissions (Eu)	0
n
-------
TABLE 13-11. EPICHLORHYDRIN EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULTING FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS
Cipo level
Ua/"3)
PopulatIon
_( person)
Dosage
(„g/«3/
	pe_rion)_
Percentage of Contr
Heating Statlonary
(but Ion
Hob He
.uosooo
505140
3140.9
0.
100.0
0.
.002500
505140
3140.9
0
100.0
0.
.001000
19111174
36094.9
0.
100.0
0.
.00500
43072401
53239.5
0.
100.0
0.
.000250
106150721
76295.7
0.
100.0
0.
.000100
150983815
84448.2
0.
100.0
0.
0.
158679135
84921.4
0.
lon.o
0.
Percentage of Distribution
Clly 'yp* 1
100.0
100.0
100.0
99.3
96.7
93.4
92.9
City Type 2
0.
0.
0.
. 1
1.6
2.6
2.6
CIty type 3
0.
0.
0.
.6
1.7
4.1
4.5
CO
I
00
-------
cn
CO
¦tr
TABLE 13-12. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE SUMMARY OF EPICHL OROHYDR1N
Concentration
Level
(iiq/m*)
Specific
Point
Source
Population Exposed
	(persona)	
General
Point
Source
Area Source U.S. Total
Dosage
[(liq/m^) • perBona]
Specific
Point
Source
General
Point
Source
Area Source U.S. Total
10
2
0
0
2
20
0
0
28
5
25
0
0
25
172
0
0
172
2.5
158
0
0
158
591
0
0
591
1
822
0
0
822
1,550
0
0
1,550
0.5
4,806
0
0
4,806
4,270
0
0
4,270
0.25
20,499
0
0
20,499
9,380
0
0
9,380
0.1
86,056
0
0
86,056
19,200
0
0
19,200
0.05
232,925
0
0
232,925
29,500
0
0
29,500
0.025
400,983
0
0
480,983
37,900
0
0
37,900
0.01
1,291,751
0
0
1,291,751
50,700
0
0
50,700
0.005
2,365,630
0
505,140
2,070,770
50,000
0
3,141
61,141
0.0025
—
0
505,140
~
—
0
3,141
--
0.001
—
0
19,111,174
—
—
0
36,095
—
0.0005
~
0
43,072,401
—
—
0
53,240
—
0.00025
~
0
106,150,721
—
—
0
76,296
—
0.0001
~
0
150,983,015
—
--
0
04,448
—
0
10,565,429
0
158,679,135
—
70,400
0
84,921
155,321
NOTE: The use of — as an entry indicates that the incremental E/D ia not significant (relative to last entry or
relative to entry in another column at the 9ante row) or that the exposure of the same population may be
counted in another column.
5H/i<
-------
13-20
REFERENCES
J. S. L. Soder and K. Ring, "Propylene," pp. 300.5405E—300.5405L in Chemical Economics
Handbook, Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA- (August 1978).
2.	J. L. Blackford, "Epichlorohydrin," pp. 642.3021A—642.3022M in Chemical Economics
Handbook, Stanford Research Institute, Henlo Park, CA (May 1978).
3.	C. A. Peterson, Jr., Hydroscience, Inc., Emission Control Options for the Synthetic
Organic Chemicals Manufacturing Industry	Product Report on Glycerin and Its
Intermediates (Allyl Chloride, Epichlorohydrin, Acrolein, and Allyl Alcohol (on
file at EPA, ESED, Research Triangle Park, NC)(March 1979).
4.	J. W. Blackburn, Hydroscience, Inc., Emisson Control Options for the Synthetic
Organic Chemicals Manufacturing Industry	Acrylic Acid and Esters Product Report
(on file at EPA, ESED, Research Triangle Park, NC) (July 1978).
5.	CEH Manual of Current Indicators	Supplementary Data, p. 84 in Chemical Economics
Handbook, Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA (April 1979).
6.	D. B. Dimick, Dow Chemical, Freeport, TX, Texas Air Control Board Emissions
Inventory Questionnaire for 1975, Epichlorohydrin, Glycerin No. 1.
7.	Dow Chemical Co., Freeport, TX, Texas Air Control Board Emission Inventory
Questionnaire for 1975, Allyl Chloride, Glycerin II.
8.	Shell Chemical Co., Deer Park, TX, Texas Air Control Board Emission Inventory
Questionnaire for 1975, Glycerin and Associated Products.
9.	Shell Chemical Co., Norco, LA, Louisiana Air Control Commission Emission Inventory
Questionnaire (January 31, 1977).
10.	Shell Chemical Co., Deer Park, TX, Texas Air Control Board Emission Inventory
Questionnaire for 1975, Resins Process.
-------
APPENDIX A-14 	 Ethylene Oxide
tTHYLENE OXIDE CHEMICAL DATA
Nomenclature
Chemical Abstract Service Registry Number: 75-21-8
Synonyms: 1,2-Epoxyethane; Oxirane; Anprolene; Dihydrooxirene; Dimethylene
oxide; Ethyleneoxide; ETO; Oxacyclopropane; Oxane; Oxidoethane.;
a.B-Oxidoethane
Chemical Formula
Molecular Weight: 44.05
Molecular Formula: C^H^O
Molecular Structure:
\ / \ /"
/ C\
H	H
Chemical and Physical Properties
Physical State at STP: Gas - colorless, flatimable
Boiling Point: 13.5°C at 746 nm
Melting Point: -111.3CC
Density: 0.8711 at 20°C/20°C
Vapor Pressure: 1475 irm at 25®C
Vapor Density: 1.52
Solubility: Infinitely soluble (H^O)
Log Partition Coefficient (Octanol/HjO): -0.3
Atmospheric Reactivity
Transformation Products:
Reactivity Toward OH*- Same as butane
Reactivity Toward 0^: No reaction
Reactivity Toward Photolysis: NAPP
Major Atmospheric Precursors: N/A
-------
14-5
I. PRODUCTION
A.	PRODUCTION SITES
Ethylene oxide (CH2OCH2) can be produced by either the chlorohydrin process or
the direct catalytic oxidation of ethylene using air or oxygen. Catalytic oxi-
dation is now the preferred production method because of improved technology
and the rising cost of chlorine. In the direct oxidation process, ethylene
from a steam cracker is purified to remove catalyst poisons such as sulfur com-
pounds. The oxidation of ethylene with air or oxygen is carried out in the
presence of a silver catalyst. The present trend is to use oxygen in place of
air to increase yields.1'2
There are 13 ethylene oxide producing locations in the United States. The loca-
tions of the plants and t*n 1978 capacity and estimated production level for
each site are shown in Table ±4-1. In 1978, an estimated 3640 million lb of ethylene
oxide was produced.1'2'3'4
B.	END-USE DISTRIBUTION
Table 14-2 shows the end-use distribution for ethylene oxide. Approximately 25%
of the ethylene oxide produced is used to make ethylene glycol polyester and
23% is used to make ethylene glycol antifreeze. Ethylene glycol miscellaneous
uses and surface active agents account for 10 and 15% of the use, respectively.
Ethylene oxide is also used to produce diethylene glycol, triethylene glycol,
glycol ethers, ethanolamines, and other miscellaneous products.
C.	EMISSION ESTIMATES
Ethylene oxide emissions from production sites are presented in Taxsles 14-3 and 14-4.
Emission estimates represent total ethylene oxide emissions for both production
and usage at a particular site. Most of the production sites captively use the
ethylene oxide produced for ethylene glycol and other uses. Table 3 shows the
ethylene oxide emissions from producers using the air oxidation process. Total
estimated emissions for 1978 were 1.28 million lb. Emission factors used to
develop process vent, storage, and fugitive emission estimates are also shown
in Table 14-3.5 Process vent emissions originate primarily from the reactor vent
and the stripper vent. Storage emissions represent the losses from both working
and final product storage tanks as well as loading and unloading areas. The
number of tanks at a facility is a function of production and tank sizes. Fugi-
-------
Table 14-1. Ethylene Oxide Producers3
1978 1978
Estimated Estimated
Type Production0 Capacity
Source	Location	Process	(10^ lb/yr)	(10 lb/yr)	Geographic Coordinates
BASF Wyandotte
Geismar, LA
B
222
310
30
11
34/91
00
42
Celanese
Clear Lake, TX
B
340
475
29
37
17/95
03
51
Dow
Freeport, TX
A
322
450
28
59
15/95
24
45

Plaquemine, LA
A
351
490
30
19
00/91
15
32
Jefferson Chemical
Port Neches, TX
A
340
475
29
57
45/93
56
00
Northern Petrochemical
East Morris, IL
B
165
230
41
24
08/88
17
18
Olin
Brandenburg, KY
B
75
105
38
00
27/86
06
50
PPG
Beaumont, TX
B
107
150
30
03
40/94
02
30
Shell Chemical
Geismar, LA
B
193
270
30
11
00/90
59
00
Sunolin Chemical
Claymont, DE
B
72
100
39
48
20/75
25
40
Texas Eastman
Longview, TX
B
136
190
32
25
55/94
41
06
Union Carbide
Seadrift, TX
A
594
830
28
30
31/96
46
18

Taft, LA
A
723
1010
29
58
00/97
27
00
Total


3640
5085





See refs 1—4.
= air oxidation process
B «= oxygen oxidation process
c
The distribution of production for each producer is determined by the ratio of total U.S. production/total
capacity times individual site capacity.
-------
14-7
Table 14-2. Ethylene Oxide End-Use Distribution 1978*
Use
Usage
(106 lb/yr)-
Usage
(%)
Ethylene glycol polyester
910
25
Ethylene glycol antifreeze
837
23
Ethylene glycol (other uses)
364
10
Surface active agents
546
15
Ethanolamines
255
7
Glycol ethers
255
7
Other
473
13
Total
3640
100
*See refs 2 and 4.
-------
Table 14-3. Ethylene Oxtde Emissions from Producers3
(Air Oxidation Process)
Company
Location
Process
Emission
(lb)
Storage
Emission
(lb)
Fugitive
Emission
(lb)
Total Emissions'5
(lb) (g/sec)
Dow
Freeport, TX
169,000
6,880
529
176,000
2.5

Plaquemine, LA
104,000
7,500
577
192,000
2.8
Jefferson
Port Neches, TX
179,000
7,270
559
186,000
2.7
Union Carbide
Seadrift, TX
312,000
12,700
977
326,000
4.7

Taft, LA
380,000
15,500
1,190
396,000
5.7
Total

1,224,000
49,850
3,832
1,277,000
*r
CD
»—i
a
Based on the following emission factors {lbs EO emitted per lb produced) :
Process 0.000525 A - (derived from site visit data)
Storage 0.000021 A - (derived from site visit data)
Fugitive 0.000002 A - (derived from site visit data)
0.00054B
b
See ref. 5.
-------
Table 14-4. Ethylene Oxide Emissions from Producers3
(Oxygen Oxidation Process)



Process
Emission
(lb)
Storage
Emission
(lb)
Fugitive
Emission
(lb)
b
Total Emissions
Company

Location
(lb)
(g/sec)
BASF

Geismar, LA
1 ,032
156
12
1,200
0.02
Celanese

Clear Lake, TX
135
TZ-
1,853
2,000
0.03
Northern Petrochemical
East Morris, IL
77,340
ll, 690
899
89,930
1.3
Olin

Brandenburg, KY
35,150
5,314
409
40,880
0.6
PPG

Beaumont, TX
50,150
7,581
583
58,320
0.8
Shell Chemical

Geismar, LA
90,460
13,670
1,052
105,200
1.5
Sunolin Chemical
Claymont, DE
33,750
5,101
392
39,240
0.6
Texas Eastman

Longview, TX
63,740
9,636
741
74,120
1.1
Total


351.667'
53/158'
9/942'
416,900
'5. 9
aBased on the
following
emission factors (lb
EO emitted
per lb produced):



Process
0.000470
A - (derived from
site visit
data)



Storage
0.000071
A - (derived from
site visit
data)



Fugitive
0.000005
A - (derived from
site visit
data)



0.000546
b	. .
See ref. 5.
cSee ref. 6.
^See ref. 7.
-------
14-10
tive emissions are those that result from plant equipment. Emission estimates
are based on a plant operating schedule of 24 hr/day, 7 days/week, 52 weeks/yr.
Taoxe 14-4 shows the ethylene oxide emissions from producers using the oxygen oxi-
dation process.
Total estimated emissions for 1978 were 0.41 million lb. Emission factors used
to develop emission estimates also are shown in Table 14-4.
Ethylene oxide production and end-use vent stack data by each of the two processes
used to manufacture are shown in Table 14-5..
II. USER SITES
A.	USER SITES
The user sites for ethylene oxide are the same as the production sites shown
previously in Tabj.e 14-1. Taiue 14-6 shows the ethylene oxide producing locations,
the use or uses of ethylene oxide at each site, and the 1978 capacities for
each of the products at each site.
B.	EMISSION ESTIMATES
Ethylene oxide emissions from users of ethylene oxide are included in total emis-
sions shown previously in Tables 14-3 and 14-4. Although the end-uses of ethylene
oxide vary at different plants (as shown in Table 14-6) , only one set of emission
factors for the two basic production processes was used to estimate emissions
from captive ethylene oxide production and use at the various manufacturing sites.
There are two sites, Oxirane in Channelview, TX, and ICI in Hopewell, VA, which
produce ethylene glycol directly without actually producing ethylene oxide.
Oxirane utilizes a new process called acetozylation to produce ethylene glycol.
There should be no ethylene oxide emissions from these two sites since ethylene
oxide is not one of the products or intermediates in the acetozylation process.
Mono and diacetates are formed in this process when ethylene is reacted with
acetic acid in the presence of catalysts such as tellurium and bromine.
-------
14-11
Table 14-5. Ethylene Oxide Vent Parameters3
Source
Number
of
Vents
Vert
Height
(ft)
Vent
Diameter
(ft)
Discharge
Temperature
	(°F>
Velocity
(ft/sec)
Air oxidation process
Process-
Storage
c
Fugitive
Oxygen oxidation process1
Process
Storage
. . d
Fugitive
55
32
66
32
2.00
0.17
1.00
0.17
110
50
140
50
345
100
See ref. 5.
b	2
Building cross-section - 200 m .
"Fugitive emissions are distributed over a rectangular area 350 ft X 1350 ft.
^Fugitive emissions are distributed over a rectangular area 350 ft X 1000 ft.
-------
Table 14-6. Ethylene Oxide Producers and Users




1978 Capacity
(lb X 106)


Company
Location
Ethylene
Oxide
Ethylene
Glycol
Diethylene
Glycol
Triethylene
Glycol
Glycol
Ethers
Ethanol-
amines
BASF
Geismar, LA
310

20

230

Celanese
Clear Lake, TX
475

50
10


Dow
Freeport, TX
450
330

50

40

Plaquemine, LA
490
550
50 J

100
Jefferson
Port Neches, TX
475
360
35
20
40
80
Northern Petrochemical
East Morris, IL
2 30
350
35



Olin
Brandenburg, KY
105
50
5
2
70
25
PPG
Beaumont, TX
150
200
20

20

Shell
Geismar, LA
270
200
20
5
50

Sunolin
Claymont, DE
100





Texas Eastman
Longview, TX
190
180
20

25

Union Carbide
Seadrift, TX
Taft, LA
830
1010
870
1200
80
100 J
75*
490*
2 30
ICI
Hopewell, VA

33




•Includes a plant in Penuelas, Puerto Rico.
Oxirane's Channelview, TX facility has shut down (ref. 8)
-------
14-13
III. TOTAL EMISSIONS
Table 14-7 summarizes the total ethylene oxide emissions from producers and users.
Since ethylene oxide emissions were reported for both combined production and
usage, the total emissions from producers also include the various user cate-
gories for ethylene oxide. Total nationwide emissions of ethylene oxide were
estimated to have been 1,687 ,900" lb in 1978.
-------
14-14
Table 14-7. Estimated 1978 Ethylene Oxide Nationwide Emissions
Source
Production/
Usage
(106 lb/yr)
Usage
(%)
Total Bnissions
(lb/yr)
(g/sec)
Producers
Air oxidation	2330
Oxygen oxidation	1310
Users
EGb polyester	910
EG antifreeze	837
EG (other uses)	364
Surface active agents	546
Ethanolamines	255
Glycol ethers	255
Other	47 3
Total
25
23
10
15
7
7
13
1,277,000	18.4
4;ia,90ff 5-9
1,637,900
24.3
Total emissions from producers also include total emissions from users,
since ethylene oxide is produced and used at the same site.
EG = ethylene glycol.
-------
5J**
2,5,6.11
-C»
i
FIGURE 14-1. SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF ETHYLENE OXIDE EMISSIONS
-------
Table 14-8. EMISSIONS AND METEOROLOGICAL STATIONS OF SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF ETHYLENE OXIDE
STAR PLANT* SOURCE+	EMISSIONS (GM/SEC)
NO. COMPANY	SITE	LATITUDE LONGITUDE STATION TYPE TYPE PROCESS STORAGE FUGITIVE
1
DOW
FREEPORT, TX
28
59
30
095
23
35
12923
1
1
2.433600
.099061
.007610
2
DOW
PLAQUEMINE, LA
30
19
00
091
15
00
23202
1
1
2.649607
.108004
.008308
3
JEFFERSON
PORT NECHES, TX
29
57
45
093
56
00
12917
1
1
2.577625
.104674
.008054
4
UNION CARBIDE
SEARIFT, TX
28
30
31
096
46
10
12923
1
1
4.492643
.182870
.014079
5
UNION CARBIDE
TAFT, LA
27
58
00
097
27
00
13958
1
1
5.471841
.223205
.017123
6
BASF
GEISMAR, LA
30
11
34
091
00
42
13970
2
2
.022260
.002251
.000159
7
CELANESE
CLEAR LAKE, TX
29
37
17
095
03
51
12906
2
2
.001934
.000159
.026668
8
N PETROCHEMICAL
EAST MORRIS, IL
41
24
08
088
17
18
94846
2
2
1.11241
.168347
.012938
9
OLIN
BRANDENBURG, KY
38
00
27
086
06
50
13807
2
2
.506152
.076516
.005898
10
PPG
BEAUMONT, TX
30
03
40
094
02
30
12917
2
2
.722159
.109177
.008403
11
SHELL
GEISMAR, LA
30
11
00
090
59
00
12958
2
2
1.302606
.196854
.015157
12
SUNOLIN CHEMICAL CLAYMONT, DE
39
48
20
075
25
40
94741
2
2
.485984
.073440
.005644
13
TEXAS EASTMAN
LONGVIEW, TX
32
25
55
094
41
06
13972
2
2
.917840
.138762
.010654
* Plant Types:
Type 1: Plant produces ethylene oxide by using the air oxidation process
Type 2: Plant produces ethylene oxide by using the oxygen oxidation process
+ Source Types:
Type 1: Ethylene oxide production (Air oxidation process)
Type 2: Ethylene oxide production (Oxygen oxidation process)
1:A-27
-------
14-17
TABLE 14-9. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE OF ETHYLENE OXIDE RESULTING
FROM SPECIFIC POINT SOURCE EMISSIONS
Concentration
Level
(uq/m3)
Population
Exposed
(persons)
Dosage
3
[(uq/m ) . persons]
5
37
238
2.5
133
577
1
3,744
5,920
0.5
12,131
11,700
0.25
20,968
14,700
0.1
127,410
30,500
0.05
329,480
44,300
0.025
627,370
55,000
0.01
1,026,800
61,600
0.005
1,361,211
63,900
-5*
5x10 5
2,144,290
65,800
* The lowest annual average concentration occurring within
20 km of the specific point source.
2:B-26
-------
14-18
REFERENCES
1.	J. L. Blackford, "Ethylene Oxide," pp. 654.5031B--G, Chemical Economics
Handbook, Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, C/T (Sept. 1976).
2.	"Chemical Products Synopsis on Ethylene Oxide," Mannsville Chemical Products
(May 1978).
3.	"Chemical Profile on Ethylene Oxide," p. 7 in Chemical Marketing Reporter
(July 31, 1978).
4.	R. F. Bradley, "Surfactants and Detergent Raw Materials," p. 583.8002Y,
Chemical Economics Handbook, Menlo Park, CA (Sept. 1978).
5.	J. F. Lawson and V. Kalcevic, Hydroscience, Inc., Emission Control Options
for the Synthetic Organic Chemicals Manufacturing Industry—Ethylene
Oxide Product Report, Knoxville, TN (November 1978).
6.	BASF Wyandotte Corporation (Keith Fry) personal communication in response to
publication of the first draft of this report (October 1980).
7.	Celanese Chemical Company, Inc. (R. H. Maurer) personal communication in
response to publication of the first draft of this report (July 1981).
8.	Arco Chemical Company (J.J. Zimmerman) personal communication in response to
publication of the first draft of this report (June 1981).
2:B-27
-------
APPENDIX A-15
Formaldehyde
FORMALDEHYDE CHEMICAL DATA
Nomenclature
Chemical Abstract Service Registry Number: 50-00-0
Synonyms: Methanal; Methyl Aldehyde; Formalin; Oxomethane;
Qxymethylene; Methylene Oxide; Formic Aldehyde
Chem'cal Formula
Molecular Weight: 30.03
Molecular Formula: CH^O
Molecular Structure:
0
II
H - C - H
Chemical and Physical Properties
Physical State at STP: Gas - Flammable, colorless
Boiling Point: -21°C at 760 urn
Melting Point: -92°C
Density: 0.B15 at 20°C/4eC
Vapor Pressure: 1946.67 rm at 25°C
Vapor Density: 1.075
Solubility: Soluble (370 g/1 of H^O)
Log Partition Coefficient (Octanol/H^O): -0.96
Atmospheric Reactivity
Transformation Products: Carbon monoxide; water
Reactivity Toward OH.: 2-4 x butane
Reactivity Toward 0,:
Reactivity Toward Photolysis: 9« per hour at full sunlioht
Major Atmospheric Precursors: Hydrocarbons (photooxidation)
Formation Reactivity: Equilibrium ~ 5X NMHC. Formed by incomplete
combustion of many organic substances. Present in coal and
-------
15-5
I. SOURCES
Formaldehyde is currently produced in the United States by two different processes,
both of which use methanol as a raw material.1'2 The-predominant process, by
which 75% of the formaldehyde is manufactured, involves the use of a metallic
silver catalyst (silver process). Formaldehyde is formed from methanol by a
combination of oxidation and dehydrogenation reactions.1'2
The alternate process, by which 25% of the formaldehyde is produced, involves
the use of a metal oxide catalyst (metal oxide process). In this process, formal-
dehyde is formed exclusively by oxidation.
Formaldehyde is produced by 16 companies at 53 locations in the United States.1'2
Because most of the formaldehyde is manufactured and shipped as a solution con-
taining 50% or more water, the distance from the producing point to the consuming
point must be minimized to reduce shipping costs,- therefore, the industry is
characterized by a large number of relatively small plants. Since more than
half the formaldehyde used is in the manufacture of adhesives for wood products,
the producing plants are located predominantly in the south and west. The plant
locations and the 1978 capacity and estimated production level for each plant
are shown in Table 15-1. An estimated 6400 million lb of 37% formaldehyde solution
was produced in 1978.1,2,3
Formaldehyde has many diverse end-uses. The largest end-use is in the production
of urea-formaldehyde, phenol-formaldehyde, and melamine-formaldehyde resins which
are, in turn, primarily consumed by the wood products industry. This end-use
consumed an estimated 54% of production in 1978 amounting to 3,460 million lb.
Of this total, 1,630 million lb was used to produce urea-formaldehyde resins,
1,560 million lb to produce phenol-formaldehyde resins, and 270 million lb to
produce melamine-formaldehyde resins.1'2'4 The balance of the formaldehyde pro-
duced is consumed as a chemical intermediate in a variety of products.
Other applications of formaldehyde include its use in the production of elastomers,
explosives, plastics, fibers, fertilizer, chelating agents, alkyd resins (protective
coatings), textiles, and dyes.1 Total consumption for this broad category is
estimated to have been 2,940 million lb in 1978. Because of the undesirability
-------
£}
Table 15-1. Production of Formaldehyde
Source
Location
1978
Estimated
Production
(M lb)b
1978
Estimated
Capacity
(M lb)
Geographic Coordinates
Allied Chemical
South Point, OU
222
310
38
25 43/82 36 00
Borden, Inc.
Demopolis, AL
72
100
32
30 48/27 50 06

Diboll, TX
57
80
31
11 52/94 46 50

Fayetteville, NC
168
235
35
01 43/78 51 41

Geismar, LA
179
250
30
13 00/91 01 00

Louisville, KY
57
80
38
12 09/85 51 49

Sheboygan, WI
93
130
43
45 26/87 46 17

Fremont, CA
161
225
37
32 06/121 57 24

Kent, WA
57
80
47
23 12/122 13 15

LaGrande, OK
46
65
45
20 33/100 02 02

Missoula, MT
64
90
46
54 10/114 40 00

Springfield, OR
172
240
44
02 60/122 59 06
Celanese Chemical
Bishop, TX
1075
1500
27
34 06/97 49 27

Newark, NJ
84
117
40
43 30/74 07 25

Rock Hill, SC
84
117
34
57 25/80 57 32
Chembond Corp.
Springfield, OR
107
150
44
02 60/122 59 06

Winnifield, LA
50
70
31
54 49/92 40 35
Du Pont
Belle, WV
358
500
38
12 13/81 28 34

LaPorte, TX
229
320
29
42 04/95 02 05

Healing Springs, NC
158
220
35
01 56/80 10 30

Linden, NJ
115
160
40
36 02/74 12 08

Toledo, OH
193
270
41
39 22/83 33 20
GAF Corp.
Calvert City, KY
72
100
37
02 50/88 21 12
-------
Table 15-1 (Continued)
Source
Location
1978
Estimated
Production
(M lb)b
1978
Estimated
Capacity
(M lb)
Geographic Coordinates
Georgia-Pacific Corp.
Albany, OR
06
120
44
37
07/123 05 13

Columbus, OH
72
100
39
53
07/82 56 45

Coosbay, OR
65
90
42
27
26/124 10 47

Crossett, AR
115
160
33
08
36/93 02 11

Russelville, SC
143
200
33
20
52/79 58 00

Taylorsville, MS
86
120
39
51
00/89 25 00

Vienna, GA
72
100
37
07
30/83 49 00

Lufkin, TX
72
100
31
21
00/94 47 00
Gulf Oil Corp.
Vicksburg, MS
43
60
32
17
00/90 54 00
Hercules Inc.
Louisiana, MO
122
170
39
26
24/91 03 37

Wilmington, NC
72
100
34
19
09/77 59 23
Hooker Chemicals
& Plastics
Tonawanda, NY
97
135
43
02
47/78 51 44
IMC Chemical Group
Seiple, PA
47
65
40
38
12/75 31 58

Sterlington, LA
22
30
32
43
25/92 08 56
Monsanto Corp.
Addyston, OH
72
100
39
07
30/84 42 58

Chocolate Bayou, TX
140
195
29
14
55/95 12 45

Eugene, OR
72
100
44
02
59/123 08 19

Springfield, MA
211
295
42
09
33/72 29 09
Pacific Resins and
Chemicals
Eugene, OR
68
95
44
01
00/123 05 05
-------
Table 15-1 (concluded)
Source
Location
1978
Estimated
Production
(M lb)b
1978
Estimated
Capacity
(M lb)
Geographic Coordinates
Reichhold Chemicals,
Inc.
Hampton, SC
36
50
32
53
33/81 06 10

Houston, TX
86
120
29
44
50/95 10 00

Kansas City, KA
36
50
39
09
28/94 37 41

Malvern, AR
79
110
34
24
09/92 48 45
Reichhold
Chemicals, Inc.
Moncure, NC
86
120
35
31
18/79 04 52

Tacoma, WA
36
50
47
16
11/122 22 57

Tuscaloosa, AL
50
70
33
12
03/87 34 00

White City, OR
179
250
42
26
18/122 07 07
Tenneco, Inc.
Fords, NJ
133
185
40
30
50/74 19 17

Garfield, NJ
72
100
40
52
28/74 06 49
Wright Chemical
Corp.
Riegelwood, NC
57
80
34
19
22/78 12 09
Total

6400
8929



BSee refs. 1—3.
^The distribution of production for each producer is determined by the ratio of total U.S. production
to total U.S. capacity as compared to individual plant capacity.
-------
15-9
of transporting formaldehyde exports accounted for only 30 million lb (0.5%) of
domestic production in 1978.2 Formaldehyde end-uses are summarized in Table 15-2.
II. EMISSION ESTIMATES
2. PRODUCTION
Estimated production losses are shown in Table 15-3 for each of the 53 producing
locations. Total emissions of formaldehyde from production facilities are esti-
mated to be 1,939,700 lb. Process emissions from both types of
processes originate primarily from the product absorber vent. Other emission
components include methanol, methyl formate, methylal from the metallic-silver-
catalyst process, and methanol and dimethyl ether from the metal-oxide-catlayst
process. Storage emissions, which account for about 8-0% of estimated production
losses, represent the total losses from both working and final product storage
tanks and from loading and handling. Fugitive emissions (15-7% of total formal-
dehyde emissions) are those which result from plant equipment leaks.
Vent stack data are shown in Table 15-4. Normally two process and six storage
tank vents are involved in the production and storage emissions from the metallic-
silver-catalyst process, and one process vent and six storage tank vents are
involved in emissions from the metal-oxide-catalyst process. Usually formaldehyde
production facilities are "open-air" structures without walls or solid floors
(i.e., steel grating). Only the control room area is enclosed.
B. USES
Emissions resulting from the production of urea-formaldehyde, phenol-formaldehyde,
and melamine-formaldehyde resins were estimated to have been 8.15, 7.8 and
1.35 million lb respectively in 1978. The average emission rates per site, the
total number of sites, and the total emissions per region are shown in Table 15-5.
Table 15-6 lists the producers of each type of resin and the plant locations.
Emissions were estimated from the resin emission factor shown in Table 15-7.3,6
Table 15-81 lists the site locations and Table 15-9 the emission estimates for the
other major chemical intermediate uses of formaldehyde. They are based on the
emission factors shown in Table 15-7.
-------
15-10
Table 15-2. Formaldehyde Consumption by End Use3
Percent	End-Use ^
of Total	Consumption
	End-Use	Consumption	(M lb)
Urea resins 25.4	1630
Phenolic resins 24.3	1560
Butanediol 7.7	490
Acetal resins 7.0	450
Pentaerythritol 6.0	380
Hexamethylenetetramine 4.5	290
Melamine resins 4.2	270
Urea formaldehyde concentrates 3.6	230
Chelating agents 3.6	230
Trimethylolpropane 1.3	80
Other chemical intermediate uses 11.9	760
Export 0.5	30
Total 100	6400
aSee refs 1—4.
k&s 37% solution.
-------
Table 15-3. FORMALDEHYDE PRODUCTION EMISSIONS3




Process
Storage
Fug1tive




Production
Type6
Emi ssions
Emissions
Emissions
Total
Emissions
Company
Location
(lb x 106)
Process
(lb x 104)
cr
X
O
(lb x 104)
(lb x 104)
c / /
(q/sec)
Allied Chemical
South Point, OH
222
A
5.81
0.46
0.91
7.19
1.04
Borden
Demopolls, AL
72
A
1.89
0.15
0.30
2.33
0.34

Dlboll, TX
57
A
1.49
0.12
0.23
1.85
0.27

Fayettevilie, NC
168
A
4.40
0.35
0.69
5.44
0.78

Geismar, LA
179
A
4.69
0.37
0.74
5.79
0.83

Louisville, KY
57
A
1.49
0.12
0.23
1.8b
0.27

Sheboygan, UI
93
A
2.44
0.19
0.38
3.01
0.43

Freemont, CA
161
A
4.22
0.33
0.b6
5.21
0.75

Kent, WA
57
A
1.49
0.12
. 0.23
1.8b
0.27

LaGrande, OR
46
A
1.21
0.09
o.ly
1.49
0-21

Missoula, MT
64
A
1.68
0.13
0.26
2.07
0.3U

Springfield, OR
172
A
4.51
0.35
0.71
5.57
0.80
Celanese Chem1cale
Bishop, TX
1,075
A
8.64
U. 70
1.36
10.98
l.bB

Newark, NJ
84
B
3.30
0.43
0.68
4.41
0.63

Rock Hill, SC
84
B
3.30
0.43
0.68
4.41
0.b3
Chembond
Springfield, OR
107
B
4.20
0.5b
0.86
5.62
0.81

Winnifleld, LA
50
B
1.96
0.26
0.40
2.62
0.38
DuPont
Belle, UV
358
A
9.38
0.74
1.47
11.59
1.67

LaPorte, TX
229
A
6.00
0.47
0.94
7.41
1.07

Healing Springs, NC
158
A
4.14
0.33
0.65
5.11
0.74

Linden, NJ
115
A
3.01
0.24
0.47
3.72
0.54

Toledo, OH
193
A
5.06
0.40
0.79
6.25
U.90
1:A-28
-------
Table 15-3.
Production
Company	Location	(lb x 10^)
GAF Calvert City, KY	72
Georgia-Pacific^ Albany, OR	86
Columbus, OH	72
Coos Bay, OR	65
Crossett, AR	72
43
Russelvllle, SC	143
Taylorsvllle, MS	86
Vienna, GA	72
Lufkin, TX	72
Gulf 011 Vicksburg, MS	43
Hercules Louisiana, MO	122
Wilmington, NC	72
Hooker Chamicals &
Plastics Tonawanda, NY	97
IMC Chemical Group Seiple,' PA	47
Sterlington, LA	22
Monsanto Addyston, OH	72
Cholocate Bayou, TX	140
Eugene, OR	72
Springfield, MA	211
1.-A-29
FORMALDEHYDE PRODUCTION EMISSIONS3 (continued)
Process	Storage	Fugitive
Type*3 Emissions Emissions	Emissions 	Total Emissions
Process (lb x 10^)	(lb x 10^)	(lb x 1U*S	(lb x 10 )C	(q/sec)^
B	2.83	0.37	0.58	3.78	U.54
B	3.38	0.44	0.69	4.51	0.65
B	2.83	0.37	0.5b	3.78	0.54
B	2.55	0.34	0.52	3.41	0.49
A	0.00	0.15	0.30	0.45	0.06
B	0.00	0.22	0.35	0.57	0.08 f
B	5.61	0.74	1.15	7.51	1.08 ro
B	3.38	0.44	0.6y	4.51	O.bb
A	0.00	0.15	0.30	0.45	0.06
B	0.00	0.37	0.58	0.95	0.14
B	1.69	0.22	0.35	2.26	0.33
A	3.20	0.25	0.50	3.95	0.57
A	1.89	0.15	0.30	2.33	0.34
A	2.54	0.20	0.40	3.14	0.45
A	1.23	0.10	0.19	1.52	0.22
A	0.58	0.05	O.Uy	0.71	0.10
A	0.34	0.03	0.05	0.42	0.06
A	0.66	0.05	0.11	0.82	0.12
A	o.34	0.03	0.05	0.42	0.06
A	] go	0.08	0.16	1.23	0.10
-------
Table 15-3.
FORMALDEHYDE PRODUCTION EMISSIONS3 (concluded)
Company
Location
Production
(lb x 106)
Type
Process
Process
Emi sslons
(lb x 104)
Storage
Emissions
(lb x 104)
Fugitive
Emi sslons
(lb x 104)
Total Emissions
(lb x 10
4 ,c
tg/sec)
Pacific Resins &
Chemicals
Retchhold Chemicals
Tenneco
Wright Chemical
Total
Eugene, OR
68
A
1.78
0.14
0.28
2.20
0.32
Hampton, SC
36
A
0.94
0.07
0.15
1.17
0.17
Houston, TX
86
B
3.38
0.44
0.69
4.51
0.65
Kansas City, KA
36
A
0.94
0.07
0.15
1.17
0.17
Melverri, AR
79
B
3.10
0.41
0.64
4.15
O.bO
Moncure, NC
86
B
3.38
0.44
0.69
4.51
0.65
Tacoma, WA
36
B
1.41
0.19
0.29
1.89
0.27
Tuscaloosa, AL
50
A
1.31
0.10
0.21
1.62
0.23
White City, OR
179
B
7.03
0.93
1.44
9.40
1.35
Fords, NJ
71
A
1.86
0.15
0.29
2.30


62
B
2.43
0.32
0.5U
3.25

Garfield, NJ
72
A
1.89
0.15
0.30
2.33

Kiegelwood, NC
57
B
2.24
0.29
0.46
2.yy


6.400

150.24
15.76
30.86
193.97

bSee ref. 2.
A - si lver process
B - metal oxide process
Emission factors for formaldehyde production
Process
Storage
Fugitive
Silver Process
S
A
A
0.0002620
0.0000206
0.0000411
d	0.0003237
8760 operating hours per year; i.e., 24/day,
fSee ref. 7.
See ref. 8.
"See ref. 10.
(lb formaldehyde lost/lb formaldehyde produced):
Metal Oxide Process
0.0003930 A - Derived from site visit data
0.0000517 A - Oerived from site visit data
0.0000806 A - Derived from site visit data
0.0005253
7 day/wk, 52 wk/yr.
l:A-30
-------
a
Table ]5-4. Formaldehyde Vent Parameters
Source
Number
o f
Stacks
Vent
Height
(ft)
Vent
Diameter
(ft)
Discharge
Temperature
CD
Velocity
(ft/sec)
Discharge
Area
(ft X ft)
Production
Process
Storage
Fugitive
b
Resins
Process
Storage
Fugitive
Butanediol
Process
Storage
Fugitive
Pentaerythritol
Process
Storage
Fugitive
1
6
1
2
3
2
100
24
60
24
40
24
140
20
2
0.66
0. 33
0.17
0. 50
0. 33
1.5
0. 33
500
80
150
80
190
80
140
70
30
20
40
175
160 X 500
100 X 100
100 X 200
100 X 200
-------
fable 15-4 (concluded)
Source
Number
of
Stacks
Vent
Height
(ft)
Vent
Dj.iimoter
(ft)
Discharge
Temperature
CD
Velocity
(ft/sec)
Discharge
Area
(ft X ft)
Hexamethylene tetramine
Process
Storage
Fugitive
Trimethylolpropane
Process
Storage
Fugitive
60
24
15
20
0. 33
0.17
0.13
0.17
160
80
150
80
45
68
200 X 200
100 X 200
£1	2
Building cross-section for production and uses - 50 m .
''includes urea, phenolic, melamine and acetal resins.
-------
Table 15-5. Formaldehyde Emissions from Resin Producers by Region
Region
Phenolic
Resins
Urea
Resins
Melamine
Resins
Number
of
Sites
Formaldehyde
Emissions'1
(lb/yr)
Number
of
Sites
Formaldehyde
Emissions^
(lb/yr)
Number
of
Sites
Formaldehyde
Emissions'-'
(lb/yr)
New England
6
374,400
12
674 ,460
11
148,500
Middle Atlantic
26
1,622,400
21
1,180,305
15
202,500
East North Central
31
1,934,400
24
1,348,920
15
202,500
West North Central
5
312,000
4
224,820
3
40,500
South Atlantic
15
936,000
27
1,517,535
20
270,000
East South Central
6
374,400
17
955,485
12
162,000
West South Central
11
686,400
15
843,075
8
108,000
Mountain
1
62 ,400
1
56,205
0
0
Pacific
24
1,497,600
24
1,348,920
16
216,000
Total
125
7,800,000
145
8,150,000b
100
1,350,000°
aAverage emissions per site:	62,400	lb/yr	(0.90 g/sec).
^Average emissions per site:	56,205	lb/yr	(0.81 g/sec).
c
Average emissions per site:	13,500	lb/yr	(0.19 g/sec).
-------
15-17
Table 15-6. Producers of Formaldehyde-Based Resins3
Type of Resin Produced
Producer
Location
Phenolic
Urea
Me lam:
Allied Chemical
South Point, OH

X


Toledo, OH
X
X
X
American Cyanamid
Columbia, SC


X

Evendale, OH
X

X

Azusa, CA

X
X

Longview, WA

X
X

Wollingford, CN

X
X
Ashland Oil
Clevelend, OH
X



Hammond, IN
X



Calumet City, IL
X



Fords, NJ
X



Pensacola, FL
X


Auralux Chemical
Hope Valley, RI

X
X
Bendix
Green Island, NY
X


Borden
Bainbridge, NY
X
X
X

Demopolis, AL
X
X
X

Diboll, TX

X
X

Fayetteville, NC
X
X
X

Louisville, KY

X
X

Sheboygan, WI
X
X
X

Freemont, CA
X
X


Kent, WA
X
X
X

LaGrande, OR
X
X


flissoula, MT
X
X


Springfield, OR
X
X
X
Brand-S
Eugene, OR
X


Carborundum
Wheatfield, NY
X


Cargill
Carpentersville, IL

X
X

Philadelphia, PA

X
X
Celanese
Charlotte, NC

X


Louisville, KY

X
X
Champion International
Redding CA
X
X
X
-------
15-18
Table 15-6 (Continued)
Type of Resin Produced
Producer
Location
Phenolic
Urea
Me 1amine
Clark Chemical
CMC Chemical
Combustion Engineering
Commercial Products
Conchemco
Consolidated Papers
Conwed
Cook Paint & Varnish
Core-Lube
CPC International
Dan River
De Soto
The Dexter Corp.
Dock Resins
The Duplan Corp
Eastern Color &
Chemical
Emkay Chemical
Exxon
The Fiberite Corp.
Ford Motor
GAP
General Electric
The P-D. George Co.
Blue Island, IL
Providence, RI
Muse, PA
Hawthorne, NJ
Baltimore MD
Kansas City, MO
Wisconsin Rapids, WI
Cloquet, MN
Detroit, MI
North Kansas, MO
Danville, IL
Forest Park, IL
Danville, VA
Berkeley, CA
Garland, TX
Waukegan, IL
Linden, NJ
Brodhead, WI
Providence, RI
Elizabeth, NJ
Odenton, MD
Winona, MN
Mt. Clemens, MI
Chattanooga, TN
Coshocton, OH
Schenectady, NY
Pittsfield, MA
St. Louis, MO
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
-------
15-19
Table 15-6 (Continued)
Type of Resin Produced
Producer
Location
Phenolic
Urea
Melamine
Georgia-Pacific
Getty Oil
Gilman Paint & Varnish
W. R. Grace
Guardsman Chemicals
Albany, OR
Columbus, OH
Conway, NC
Coos Bay, OR
Crossett, AR
Louisville, MS
Lufkin, TX
Russellville, SC
Savannah, GA
Taylorsville, MS
Tewkesbury, MA
Ukiah, CA
Vienna, GA
Andalusia, AL
Spokane, WA
Springfield, OR
Winnfield, LA
Chattanooga, TN
Alliance, OH
Charleston, SC
Columbus, OH
Finley, OH
Fort Pierce, FL
Henrietta, IL
Lansing, MI
Memphis, TN
San Juan, PR
Statesville, NC
Tampa, FL
Tulsa, OK
Wilmington, NC
Grand Rapids, MI
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
-------
15-20
Table 15-6 (Continued)
Type of Resin Produced
Producer
Location
Phenolic
Urea
Melamine
Gulf Oil
Hanna Chemical Coatings
Hart Products
Hercules
Hersite and Chemical
H a N Chemical
E. F. Houghton
Inland Steel
Inmont
International Minerals
& Chemicals
The Ironsides Co.
Knoedler Chemical
Xoppers
Kordell Industries
Lawter Chemicals
Magna
The Marblette Corpora-
tion
Masonite
Millmaster Onyx
Alexandria, LA
High Point, NC
Lansdale, PA
Shawano, WI
Valleyfield, Quebec
West Memphis, AR
Birmingham, AL
Jersey City, NJ
Chicopee, MA
Hattiesburg, MS
Milwaukee^ WI
Marshalton, DE
Manitowoc, WI
Totowa, NJ
Philadelphia, PA
Alsip, IL
Anaheim, CA
Cincinnati, OH
Detroit, MI
Greenville, OH
Detroit, MI
Columbus, OH
Lancaster, PA
Bridgeville, PA
Mishawaka, IN
S. Kearney, NJ
Houston, TX
Long Island City, NY
Gulfport, MS
Lyndhurst, NJ
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
-------
15-21
Table 15-6 (Continued)
Type of Resin Produced
Producer
Location
Phenolic
Urea
Melamine
Minnesota Mining and
Manufacturing
Mobil Oil
Wongauto
Napko
National Casein
National Casein of
California
National Casein of
New Jersey
National Starch and
Chemical
Occidental Petroleum
Onyx Oils & Resins
Owens-Coming Fiber-
glas
Pat Chemical
Patent Plastics
Perstorp U.S.
Pioneer Plastics
Plastics Engineering
Plastics Manufacturing
Polymer Applications
Polyrez
Cordova, IL
Cottage Grove, MN
Kankakee, IL
Addyston, OH
Alvin, TX
Eugene, OR
La Salle, Quebec
Santa Clara, CA
Springfield, MA
Houston, TX
Chicago, IL
Tyler, TX
Santa Ana, CA
Riverton, NJ
Salisbury, NC
Kenton, OH
N. Tonawanda, NY
Newark, NJ
Barrington, NJ
Kansas City, XA
Newark, OH
Waxahachie, TX
Greenville, SC
Knoxville, TN
Florence, MA
Auburn, ME
Sheboygan, WI
Dallas, TX
Tonawanda, NY
Woodbury, NJ
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
x15
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
-------
15-22
Table 15-6 (Continued)
Type of Resin Produced
Producer
Location
Phenolic
Urea
.Melamine
PPG Industries
Raybestos-Manhattan
Reichhold Chenicals
Riegel Textile
Rogers
Schenectady Chemicals
Scher Brothers
Scott Paper
Sharico Plastics &
Chemicals
The Sherwin-Williams
Company
Circleville, OH
Oak Creek, WI
Stratford, CT
Andover, MA
Azusa, CA
Carteret, NJ
Detroit, MI
Houston, TX
Kansas City, XS
Malvern, AR
Moncure, NC
Niagara Falls, NY
S. San Francisco, CA
Tacoma, WA
Tuscaloosa, AL
White City, OR
Ware Shoals, SC
Manchester, CT
Oyster Creek, TX
Rotterdam Junction, NY
Schenectady, NY
Clifton, NJ
Chester, PA
Everett, WA
Fort Edward, NY
Marinette, WI
iMobile, AL
Tonawanda, NY
Chicago, IL
Cleveland, OH
Morrow, GA
Newark, NJ
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
-------
15-23
Table 15-6 (Continued)
Type of Resin Produced
Producer
Location
Phenolic
Urea
Melamine
Simpson Timber
Southeastern Adhesives
Spaulding Fibre
Sun Chemical
Sybror.
Synthron
Thomason Industries
TRW
Union Camp
Union Carbide
United-Erie
United Merchants &
Manufacturers
U.S. Oil
Univar
USM
Valentine Sugars
West Coast Adhesives
Areata, CA
Portland, OR
Lenoir, NC
De Kalb, IL
Tonawanda, NY
Chester, SC
Haledon, NJ
Ashton, RI
Morganton, NC
Fayetteville, NC
Thomasville, NC
Dowington, PA
Valdosta, GA
Bound Brook, NJ
Elk Grove, CA
Marietta, OH
Sacramento, CA
Texas City, TX
Erie, PA
Langley, SC
East Providence, RI
Rock Hill, SC
Eugene, OR
Newark, OH
Portland, OR
Richmond, CA
Greenville, SC
Lockport, LA
Portland, OR
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
-------
15-24
Table 15-6 (concluded)
See ref. 1.
Plant to be owned by Libby Owens Ford.
Type of Resin Produced
Producer
Location
Phenolic Urea Melamine
Westinghouse Electric Manor, PA
Hampton, SC
West-Point-Pepperell Opelika, AL
Weyerhaeuser	Longview, WA
Marshfield, WI
X
X
X
X
-------
Table 15-7. Formaldehyde End-Use Emission Factors
lb Formaldehyde Lost per lb Used
End-Use
Process
I.evela
Storaqe
Level
Fuqitive
Level
Total
Resins'5
0.00400
D
0.0005
D
0.0005
D
0.00500
Butanediol
0.00200
D
0.0005
D
0.0005
D
0.00300
Pentaerythritol
0.00731
C
0.00088
C
0.00041
C
0.00860°
llexamethylene tetramine
0.00105
C
0.00015
C
0.00030
C
o.ooisoc
Trimethylolpropane
0.00020
B
0.00003
B
0.00003
B
0.00026d
aA - Basis:	site visit data.
B - Basis:	state air files.
C - Basis:	published literature.
D - Basis:	Hydroscience estimate.
^Urea, melamine, phenolic and acetal.
CSee ref. 5.
d
See ref. 6.
-------
Table 15-8. Formaldehyde Chemical Intermediate Users
1978
Estimated
Formaldehyde
Consumption Geographic Coordinates
Source	Location	(lb X IP6)	Latitude/I.onqi tude
Butanediol Production
Du Pont Company
Houston, TX
240
29
42
04/95
02
05
GAF Corporation
Calvert City, KY
80
37
02
50/88
21
12

Texas City, TX
80
29
25
29/94
58
07
Total

400






Acetal Resins
Production





Celanese Corporation
Bishop, TX
310
27
34
06/97
49
27
Du Pont Company
Parkersburg, WV
140
39
15
27/81
32
52
Total

450






Pentaerythritol
Production





Celanese Corporation
Bishop, TX
160
27
34
06/97
49
27
Hercules, Inc.
Louisiana, MO
100
39
26
24/91
03
37
IMC (CSC)
Seiple, PA
50
40
38
12/75
31
58
Perstorp AB
Toledo, OH
70
41
42
33/83
30
00
Total	380
-------
Table 15-8 (concluded)
1978
Estimated
Formaldehyde
Consumption Geographic Coordinates
Source	Location	(lb X 10^)	Latitude/Longitude
Hexamethylenetetramine Production
Borden, Inc.
Fayettevi1le, NC
60
35
01
4 3/78
51
41
W. R. Grace & Co.
Nashua, Nlf
60
42
46
00/71
27
52
Occidental Petroleum Co.
North Tonawanda, NY
50
43
02
47/70
51
44
Plastics Engineering Co.
Sheboygan, WI
20
43
45
00/87
47
00
Tenneco, Inc.
Fords, NJ
40
40
30
50/74
19
17
Wright Chemical Corp.
Acme, NC
60
34
19
22/78
12
09
Total

290





Trimethylolpropane Production
Celancse Corp.
Total
Bishop, TX
80
80
27 34 06/97 49 27
-------
Table 15-9. Formaldehyde Emissions from Chemical Intermediate Users
Source
Location
Process
Emissions
(lb/yr)
Storage
Emissions
(lb/yr)
Fugitive
Emissions
(lb/yr)
Total Emissions
(lb/yr)
(g/sec)
Butanediol producers
Du Pont Company
GAF Corporation
Total
Acetal resin producers
Celanese Corporation
Du Pont Company
Total
Pentaerythritol producers
Celanese Corporation
Hercules, Incorporated
IMC (CSC)
Perstorp AB
Total
Houston, TX
Calvert City, KY
Texas City, TX
Bishop, TX
Parkersburg, WV
Bishop, TX
Louisiana, MO
Seiple, PA
Toledo, Oil
480,000
160,000
160,000
800,000
391 ,409
560,000
953 ,409
369,208
731,000
365,500
511,700
1, 977/408
120,000
40,000
40,000
200,000
48,927'
70,000
118,927
44', 44 5
88,000
44,000
61,600
235,045
120,000
40,000
40,000
200,000
4S,927
70,000
118,927
20,708
41,000
20,500
28,700
110.908
720,000
240,000
240,000
1,200,000
489,263
700,000
1,189,263
434,361
860,000
4 30,000
602,000
2.326.361
10. 37
3.46
3.46
7.04
10.08
6.25
12. 38
6. 19
8.67
-------
Table 15-9 (concluded)
Source
Location
Process
Emissions
(lb/yr)
Storage
Emissions
(lb/yr)
Fugitive
Emissions
(lb/yr)
Fayetteville, NC
6 3,000
9,000
10,000
Nashua, Nil
63,000
9,000
18,000
North Tonawanda, NY
52,500
7,500
15,000
Sheboygan, WI
21,000
3,000
6,000
Fords, NJ
42,000
6,000
12,000
Acme, NC
63,000
9,000
18,000

304,500
43,500
87,000
Bishop, TX
5,050
. 757-
757''

5,050
757-
757
Total Emissions
(lb/yr)
(g/scc)
Hexamcthylenetetramine producers
Borden, Incorporated
W. R. Grace & Company
Occidental Petroleum Company
Plastics Engineering Company
Tenneco, Incorporated
Wright Chemical Corporation
Total
Trimethylolpropane producers
Celanese Corporation
Total
90,000
90,000
75,000
30,000
60,000
90,000
435,000
6,565
6,56fr
1. 30
1. 30
1.08
0.43
0.86
1.	30
0. 09
Based on emission factors shown in Table 7.
^Based on 8760 hr/yr operation.
'See ref. 9.
See ref. 7.
-------
15-30
Formaldehyde emissions from butanediol production are estimated to be
1.20 million lb, from acetal resins T.19 million lb, from pentaerythritol
2-33 million lb from hexamethylene tetramine 0.44 million lb, and from trimethylol
propane 6.5^thousand lb»
Emissions from all other uses of formaldehyde are estimated to be
5,86 million lb. This was estimated by using a weighted average emission factor
derived from all other formaldehyde uses.
Specific source locations could not be identified for UF concentrates and chelating
agents. Other uses of formaldehyde are so numerous and widespread that a regional
breakdown is not possible.
Emissions from exports are assumed to be negligible.
Total nationwide emissions of formaldehyde from all sources are estimated
to be 30.27 million lb. A tabulation of the losses is shown in Table 15-10.
-------
15-31
Table 15-10. 1978 Formaldehyde Nationwide Emissions
Nationwide
Formaldehyde
Emissions
Source	(mill ion-Ib/vr)
1.94
8.15
7.80
1.35
1.20
1 .n
2.33
0.44
0.006
5.86
_0	
30.27
*Based on weighted average of all other formalde-
hyde uses. (0.00481 lb lost/lb used)
Production
Urea resins
Phenolic resins
Melanine resins
Butanediol
Acetal resins
Pentaerythritol
Hexamethylenetetramine
Trimethylolpropane
Other miscellaneous*
Export
Total
-------
39,57
42,51 I,
<*•¦¦&* /-rAZ
i l ¥ r» \	1 \l&
	1 61, .	1		-VJ • ••
J
oil I
		-\ I 10
v	C	ri^
1.24
)
U,
^7^2,9,19,30
3?. ,.r ^vj

i ^ /
¦	23" ;¦--< 34
	—'	a"'
\ "\ ,»V' 11,11
>—•-
\ 19
D34 } «
	\
I..-- \
J'" 11 .V'1-
v5
K
V
v/
FIGURE 15-1. SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF FORMALDEHYDE EMISSIONS
-------
NO
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
21
22
23
1:1
Table 15-11. EMISSIONS AND METEOROLOGICAL STATIONS OF SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF FORMALDEHYDE
COMPANY
SITE

LATITUDE
LONGITUDE
STAR
STATION
PLANT* SOURCE+
TYPE TYPE
EMISSIONS (GM/SEC)
PROCESS STORAGE FUGITIVE

BORDEN
GEISMAR, LA

30
13
00
091
01
00
13970
1 1
.675355
.053279
.106561

CELANESE
NEWARK, NJ

40
43
30
074
07
25
94741
1 1
.475203
.061y20
.097920

CELANESE
ROCK HILL, SC

34
57
25
080
57
32
93804
1 1
.475203
.061920
.097920

CHEMBOND
SPRINGFIELD, OR

44
02
60
122
59
06
24221
1 1
.604801
.079202
.123839

CHEMBOND
WINNIFIELD, LA

31
54
49
092
40
35
13942
1 1
.282239
.037440
.057601

DUPONT
BELLE, WV

38
13
06
081
34
12
12866
1 1
1.350710
.106561
.211679

DUPONT
LAPORTE, TX

29
42
04
095
02
05
12906
1 1
.863997
.067681
.135360

DUPONT
HEALING SPRINGS,
NC
35
01
56
080
10
30
13714
1 1
.596144
.047520
.093601

DUPONT
LINDEN, NJ

40
36
02
074
12
08
94741
1 1
.433441
.034560
.067681

DUPONT
TOLEDO, OH

41
39
22
083
33
20
94830
1 1
.728628
.057601
.113759

GEORGIA-PACIFIC
LUFKIN, TX

31
21
00
094
47
00
93987
1 1
0.
.053279
.083520

GULF OIL
VICKSBURG, MS

32
17
00
090
54
00
13956
1 1
.243360
.031680
.050400
cn
i
u>
HERCULES
WILMINGTON, NC

34
19
09
077
59
23
13713
1 1
.272159
.021600
.043201

HOOKER
TONAWANDA, NY

43
02
47
078
51
44
14747
1 1
.365772
.028800
.057601

IMC
STERLINGTON, LA

32
43
35
092
08
56
13942
1 1
.083520
.007200
.012960

MONSANTO
CHOCOLATE BAYOU,
TX
29
14
55
095
12
45
12906
1 1
.096585
.007317
.016098

PACIFIC RESINS
EUGENE, OR

44
01
00
123
05
05
24221
1 1
.256320
.020160
.040319

REICHHOLD
HAMPTON, SC

32
53
33
081
06
10
03820
1 1
.135360
.010080
.021600

TENNECO
GARFIELD, NJ

40
52
28
074
06
47
94741
1 1
.272159
.021600
.043201

DUPONT
HOUSTON, TX

29
42
04
095
02
05
12906
2 2
6.912100
1.727993
1.727993

GAF
TEXAS CITY, TX

29
25
29
094
58
07
12923
2 2
2.304002
.576008
.576008

DUPONT
PARKERSBURG, WV

39
15
27
081
32
52
13866
3 3
8.064117
1.007991
1.007991

-------
Table 15-11. EMISSIONS AND METEOROLOGICAL STATIONS OF SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF FORMALDEHYDE (continued)
NO.
COMPANY
SITE
LATITUDE
LONGITUDE
STAR
STATION
PLANT*
TYPE
SOURCE*
TYPE
EMISSIONS (GM/SEC)
PROCESS STORAGE FUGITIVE
24
PERSTORP
TOLEDO, OH
41 43 10
083 31 28
94830
4
4
7.368404
.887050
413274
25
W.R. GRACE
NASHUA, NH
42 46 00
071 27 52
14745
5
5
.907185
.129601
259199
26
GAF
CALVERT CITY, KY
37 02 50
088 21 12
03816
6
1
.407534
.053279
083520







2
2.304002
.0576008 .
576008
27
CELANESE
BISHOP, TX
27 34 06
097 49 27
12925
7
1
1.271563
.100913
200675







3
5.629756
.703735
703735







4
5.310439
.639269
,297844







6
.072641
.010896
,010896
28
HERCULES
LOUISIANA, MO
39 26 24
091 03 37
93989
8
1
.460807
.036000
,072000







4
10.526382
1.267187
,590405
29
IMC
SEIPLE, PA
40 38 12
075 31 38
14737
8
1
.177118
.014400
,027360







4
5.263191
.633593
,295199
30
TENNECO
FORDS, NJ
40 30 50
074 19 17
94741
9
1
.617770
.067678
113759







5
.604801
.086400
,172799
31
WRIGHT
RIEGELWOOD, NC
34 19 22
078 12 09
13717
9
1
.322552
.041759
066239







5
.907185
.129601
,259199
32
BORDEN
FAYETTEVILLE, NC
35 01 43
078 51 41
13714
10
1
.633593
.050400
,099359







3
1.522355
.190081
,190081







5
.907185
.129601
,259199
33
ALLIED
SOUTH POINT, OH
38 25 43
082 36 00
93824
11
1
.836631
.066239
131041







3
.647990
.080927
,080927
34
BORDEN
DEMOPOLIS, AL
32 30 48
087 50 06
13850
11
1
.272159
.021600
043201







3
1.522355
.190081
190081
1:B-05
-------
NO.
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
1 :B
Table 15-11. EMISSIONS AND METEOROLOGICAL STATIONS OF SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF FORMALDEHYDE (continued)
COMPANY
BORDEN
SITE
DIBOLL, TX
BORDEN	LOUISVILLE, KY
BORDEN	SHERBOYGAN, WI
BORDEN	FREEMONT, CA
BORDEN	KENT, WA
BORDEN	LARGRANDE, OR
BORDEN	MISSOULA, MT
BORDEN	SPRINGFIELD, OR
GEORGIA-PACIFIC	ALBANY, OR
GEORGIA-PACIFIC	COLUMBUS, OH
GOERGIA-PACIFIC	COOS BAY, OR
STAR
LATITUDE	LONGITUDE	STATION
31 11 52	094	46	50	93987
38	12 09	085	51	49	93820
43	45 26	087	46	17	14898
37 32 06	121	57	24	23244
47 23 12	122	13	15	24238
45	20 33	118	02	02	24130
46	54 10	114	40	00	24146
44	02 60	122	59	06	24221
44 37 07	123	05	13	24232
39	53 07	082	56	45	14821
42 27 26	124	10	47	24283
ANT* SOURCE+
PE
EMISSIONS (GM/SEC)
TYPE
PROCESS
STORAGE
FUGITIVE

1
.214561
.017280
.033121

3
.803494
.100799
.100799

1
.214561
.017280
.033121

3
.803494
.100799
.100799

1
.351344
.027360
.054718

3
1.522355
.190081
.190081

1
.607686
.047520
.095041

3
1.366565
.171360
.171360

1
.214561
.017280
.038121

3
1.522355
.190081
.190081

1
.174239
.012960
.027360
<_n
i
CO
3
1.366565
.171360
.171360
(_n
1
.241920
.018720
.037440

3
1.366565
.171360
.171360

1
.649448
.050400
.102239

3
1.522355
. 190081
.190081

1
.486714
.063359
.099359

3
1.522355
.171360
.171360

1
.407534
.053279
.083520

3
1.522355
.171360
.171360

1
.367199
.048960
.074879

3
1.522355
.171360
.171360

-------
Table 15-11. EMISSIONS AND METEOROLOGICAL STATIONS
NO.	COMPANY	SITE	LATITUDE	LONGITUDE
46	GEORGIA-PACIFIC	CROSSET, AR	33 08 36	093 02 11
47	GEORGIA-PACIFIC	RUSSELVILLE, SC	33 20 52	079 58 00
48	GEORGIA-PACIFIC	TAYLORSVILLE, MS	31 51 00	089 25 00
49	GEORGIA-PACIFIC	VIENNA, GA	32 07 30	083 49 00
50	MONSANTO	ADDYSTON, OH	39 07 30	084 42 58
51	MONSANTO	EUGENE, OR	44 09 59	123 08 19
52	MONSANTO	SPRINGFIELD, MA	42 09 33	072 29 09
53	REICHHOLO	HOUSTON, TX	29 45 10	095 10 15
54	REICHHOLD	KANSAS CITY, KA	39 09 28	094 37 41
55	REICHHOLD	MALVERN, AR	34 24 09	092 48 45
56	REICHHOLD	MONCURE.NC	35 31 18	079 04 52
1:B-06
OF SPECIFIC POINT
SOURCES
OF FORMALDEHYDE (conti
nued)
STAR PLANT*
SOURCE+
EMISSIONS (GM/SEC)
STATION TYPE
TYPE
PROCESS
STORAGE FUGITIVE
93992 11
1
0.
.053279
.093601

3
1.522355
.171360
.171360
13717 11
1
.807839
.106561
.165601

3
1.522355
.171360
.171360
13865 11
1
.486714
.063359
.099359

3
1.522355
.171360
.171360
13815 11
1
0.
.021600
.043201

3
1.522355
.171360
.171360
93815 11
1
.048571
.004286
.007143

3
.718861
.089856
.089856
24221 11
1
.048571
.004286
.007143

3
1.522355
.190081
.190081
14763 11
1
.146342
.011707
.023415

3
1.522355
.190081
.190081
12906 11
1
.486714
.063359
.099359

3
.647990
.080927
.080927
13988 11
1
.135360
.010080
.021600

3
.718861
.089856
.089856
13963 11
1
.446410
.059040
.092161

3
1.522355
.190081
.190081
13714 11
1
.486714
.063359
.099359

3
1.366565
.171360
.171360
-------
Table 15-11. EMISSIONS AND METEOROLOGICAL STATIONS OF SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF FORMALDEHYDE (concluded)
STAR PLANT* SOURCE+	EMISSIONS (GM/SEC)
NO.
COMPANY
SITE
LATITUDE
LONGITUDE
STATION
TYPE
TYPE
PROCESS
STORAGE
FUGITIVE
57
REICHHOLD
TACOMA, WA
47 16 11
122 22 57
24207
11
1
.203041
.027359
.041759







3
1.522355
.190081
. 19U081
58
REICHHOLD
TUSCALOOSA, AL
33 12 03
087 34 00
13825
11
1
.188638
.014400
.030240







3
1.522355
.190081
.190081
59
REICHHOLD
WHITE CITY, OR
42 26 18
122 07 07
24225
11
1
1.012335
.133920
.207360







3
1.522355
.190081
.190081
60
OCCIDENTAL
NORTH TOWAWANDA, NY
43 02 47
078 51 44
14747
12
3
.718829
.089856
.U89856







5
.755993
.108000
.216001
61
PLASTICS
SHEBOYGAN, WI
43 45 00
087 47 00
14898
12
3
.874366
.109440
.109440







5
.802400
.043201
.086400
'One emission point has been eliminated due to comments to early drafts of this document.
on
i
(a>
-sj
1:B-07
-------
TABLE 15-11 (Concluded)
* Plant Types:
Type 1:	Plant produces formaldehyde
Type 2:	Plant produces butanedlol
Type 3:	Plant produces acetal resins
Type 4:	Plant produces pentaerythrltol
Type 5:	Plant produces hexamethyl tetramlne
Type 6:	Plant produces formaldehyde and butanedlol
Type 7:	Plant produces formaldehyde, acetal resins, pentaerythrltol and trlmethylol propane
Type 8:	Plant produces formaldehyde and pentaerythrltol
Type 9:	Plant produces formaldehyde and hexamethyl tetramlne
Type 10: Plant produces formaldehyde, hexamethyl tetramlne, and resins
Type 11:	Plant produces formaldehyde and resins
Type 12:	Plant produces hexamethyl tetramlne and resins
+ Source Types:
Type 1
Type 2
Type 3
Type 4
Type 5
Type 6
Formaldehyde production
Butanedlol production
Resins production
Pentaerythrltol production
Hexamethylene tetramlne production
Trlmethylol propane production
-------
15-39
Table 15-12. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE OF FORMALDEHYDE RESULTING
FROM SPECIFIC POINT SOURCE EMISSIONS
Concentration	Population
Level	Exposed	Dosage
3	3
(ug/m )	(persons)	[(uq/m ) . persons]
100
11
1,110
50
330
21,800
25
1,556
63,600
10
7,437
152,000
5
19,909
238,000
2.5
51,751
351,000
1
165,115
513,000
0.5
392,328
667,000
0.25
887,638
836,000
0.1
2,335,139
1,060,000
0.05
4,242,104
1,190,000
0.025
7,398,887
1,300,000
0.01
14,018,225
1,410,000
2.45 x
10"4* 27,458,135
1,480,000
*The lowest annual average concentration occurring within
20 km of the specific point source
1:B-08
-------
TABLE 15-13. EMISSIONS RATES AND NUMBER OF GENERIC POINT SOURCES
OF FORMALDEHYDE (RESINS PRODUCTION)*
Region
Emissions/Site
(qm/sec)
Number
of Sites
New England
1.233
14
Middle Atlantic
1.233
39
East North Central
1.233
47
West North Central
1.233
7
South Atlantic
1.233
28
East South Central
1.233
12
West South Central
1.233
15
Mountain
1.233
0
Pacific
1.233
23
* Those resin production units located within plants that are also
equipped with other forma 1dehyde-emitting facilities were
treated as specific point sources. Plants that only emit for-
maldehyde from phenolic/urea/melamine resin oroduction units are
treated here with average emissions rate of 1.233 gm/sec per unit.
Average emissions parameters for process vent, storage vent, and
fugitive emissions weighted by their emissions rates are:
Vent height: 50 m
Building cross section: 50 m?
Vent diameter: 0.10 m
Vent velocity: 4.8 m/sec
Vent temperature: 325°K
-------
15-41
TABLE 15-14. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULTING FROM EMISSIONS
FROM GENERAL POINT SOURCES OF FORMALDEHYDE
(RESINS PRODUCTION)
Concentration Population
Level	Exposed	Dosage
(ug/m^)	(persons)	[(pg/m^) • persons]
2.5	85	264
1	755	1,180
0.5	2,730	2,520
0.25	—	3,760
0.1	—	5,440
0.05	—	7,300
0.025	—	9,200
0	—	11,400
NOTE: The use of — as an entry indicates that the incremental
E/D is not significant (relative to last entry or relative
to entry in another column at the same row) or that the
exposure of the same population may be counted in another
column.
50/U
-------
•15-42
TABLE 15-15. ^JOR PARAMETERS FOR ESTIMATING EXPOSURE/DOSAGE RESULTING
FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS OF FORMALDEHYDE
		Parameter		 	Val ue
Daytime decay rate (K^)	4.2 x 10 ^ sec
Nighttime decay rate (K^)	0
Hanna-Gifford coefficient (C)	225
Nationwide heating source emissions (E^)	0
Nationwide nonheating stationary source emissions	(E^) 84.4 gm/sec
Nationwide mobile source emissions (EM)	0
-------
TABLE 15-16. FORMALDEHYDE EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULTING FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS
Eipo level
Population
Doitqe
(ug/mJ/
_ Percentage of Contr
IbutIon
Percentage of Distribution

(person)
pcnon)
Heat tng
Stat lonarjf
Mobile
City Type 1
City Type 2
City Type 3
.250000
505140
225625.1
0.
100.0
0.
100.0
0.
0.
.100000
9149730
1653960.0
0.
100.0
0.
100.0
0.
0.
.050000
27019254
2990265.2
0.
100.0
0.
100.0
0.
0.
.025000
73211145
4503453.5
0.
100.0
0.
97.9
.7
1.3
.010000
141027899
5698572.7
0.
100.0
0.
93.9
2.6
3.6
0.
156679135
58I77B3.3
0.
100.0
0.
92.6
2.7
4.7
CO
-------
TABLE 15-17 EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE SUMMARY OF FORMALDEHYDE
Population Exposed
Dosage
[(ug/mJ) - persons]
Concentration
Speci fic
General


Specific
General


Level
Point
Point


Point
Point


(uq/m3)
Source
Source
Area Source
U.S. Total
Source
Source
Area Source
U.S. Total
100
11
0
0
11
1,110
0
0
1,110
50
330
0
0
330
21,800
0
0
21,800
25
1,556
0
0
1,556
63,600
0
0
63,600
10
7,437
0
0
7,437
152,000
0
0
152,000
5
19,909
0
0
19,909
238,000
0
0
238,000
2.5
51,751
85,000
0
136,751
351,000
264,000
0
615,000
1
165,115
755,000
0
920,115
513,000
1,180,000
0
1,693,000
0.5
392,328
2,730,000
0
31,122,328
667,000
2,520,000
0
3,187,000
0.25
887,638
—
505,140
--
836,000
3,760,000
225,625
4,821,625 ^
0.1
2,335,139

9,149,730
—
1,060,000
5,440,000
1,653,960
8,153,960 .U
0.05
—

27,819,254
--
—
7,300,000
2,998,265

0.01
—
--
73,231,345
—
—
9,200,000
4,503,455

0
—
--
141,027,899
—

--
3,698,573
--

27,458,135
--
158,679,135
--
1,480,000
11,400,000
5,817,783
18,697,793
Note: The use of — as an entry indicates that the incremental E/D is not significant (relative to last entry
or relative to entry in another column at the same row) or that the exposure of the same population may
be counted in another column.
1:B-09
-------
15-45
REFERENCES
1.	J. L. Blackford, "Formaldehyde," pp. 658.503A-658.5034M in Chemical Economics
Handbook, Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, ~CA (Apri1 1977).
2.	R. J. Lovell, Hydroscience, Inc., Emission Control Options for the Synthetic
Organic Chemicals Manufacturing Industry—Formaldehyde Product Report
(on file at EPA, ESED, Research Triangle Park, NC) October 1978.
3.-	"Manual of Current Indicators Supplemental Data," p. 252 in Chemical Economics
Handbook, Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, ~CA (Apri 1 1979).
4.	"Chemical Products Synopsis on Formaldehyde," Mansville Chemical Products
(March 1978).
5.	Special Project Report, "Petrochemical Plant Sites," prepared for Industrial
Pollution Control Division, Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory,
Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH, by Monsanto Research
Corporation, Dayton, OH (April 1976).
6.	Celanese Chemical Co., Bishop, TX, Texas Air Control Board Emission Inventory
Questionnaire for 1975, Trimethylolpropane Process.
7.	Celanese Chemical Co., (R.H. Maurer) personal communication in response to
publication of the first draft of this report (July 1981).
8.	Formaldehyde Institute (Donald L. Morgan) personal communication in response
to publication of the first draft of this report (May 1981).
9.	BASF Wyandate Corporation (Keith Fry) personal communication in response to
publication of the first draft of this report (October 1980).
10. Monsanto Company (C.D. Malloch) personal communication in.response to publication
publication of the second draft of this report (July 1982).
1: B-10
-------
APPENDIX A-16 	 Hexachlorocylopentadiene
HEXACHLORuCYLLOPENiADIENE chemical data
Nomencl ature
Chemical Abstract Service Registry Number:
Synonyms: Perch!orocyclooentadiene
Chemical Formula
Molecular Weight: 272.77
Molecular Formula: C^Clg
Molecular Structure: CI - C	C - CI
Chemical and Physical Properties
Physical State at STP: Liquid
.Boiling Point: 2396C
Melting Point: 9°C
Density: 1.702 at 25°C/4°C
Vapor Pressure:
Vapor Density:
Solubility:
Log Partition Coefficient (Octanol/I^O}:
Atmospheric Reactivity
Transformation Products:
Reactivity Toward OH-:
Reactivity Toward O^:
Reactivity Toward Photolysis:
Major Atmospheric Precursors:
Formation Reactivity:
II
II
C - CI
CI - C
or
-------
16-5
I. SOURCES
A.	PRODUCTION
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene has been produced commercially by three different
processes. It is believed that currently in the United States, the predominant
method involves the use of mixed pentanes as a raw material. The mixed pentanes
are chlorinated to polychlorinated pentanes in the liquid phase followed by
vapor phase chlorinolysis and ring closure over a surface-active catalyst to
produce hexachlorocyclopentadiene.1'2
Two companies at three locations currently produce hexachlorocyclopentadiene in
the United States.3 The locations of individual plants are shown in Table 16-1.
An estimated 7 million lb of hexachlorocyclopentadiene was produced in 1978.
B.	USES
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene is used as a chemical intermediate in the manufacture
of flame retardants, in the manufacture of pesticides, and in the production of
flame-retardant resins.
A list of the major hexachlorocyclopentadiene derivatives is shown in Table 16-2/
Current production estimates of hexachlorocyclopentadiene derivatives are not
available The known locations of hexachlorocyclopentadiene users are shown
in Table 16-3."
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene has a very questionable future because many of its
former end-uses have been banned by EPA and OSHA regulations.
II. EMISSION ESTIMATES
A. PRODUCTION
Estimated emission losses from the production of hexachlorocyclopentadiene
are shown in Table 16-4 for each of the three producing locations. Total emissions
of hexachlorocyclopentadiene resulting from its production are estimated to have
been 56,000 lb in 1978. Emissions were determined using the emission factor
shown in Table 16-4 which represents Hydroscience's estimate of the average emis-
-------
16-6
Table 16-1. Production of Hexchlorocyclopentadiene3
Source
Location
1978
Estimated
Production
(M lb)
1978
Estimated
Capacity
(M lb)
Geographic Coordinates
Latitude/Longitude
Hooker Chemical £.
Plastics Corp.
Montague, MI
1.75
NAC
43 24 45/86 22 30

Niagara Falls, NY
3.50
NA
43 04 52/79 00 34
Velsicol Chemical
Corp.
Memphis, TN
1.75
,d
NA
35 09 50/90 57 45
Total

7
NA

3See ref. 3.
b
Individual site production allocated by the ratio of the total number of employees at
each site compared to the total number of employees at all three sites.
c
Not available.
d
Hydroscience estimate.
-------
Table 16-2. Hexachlorocyclopentadiene Derivatives*
Compound
End-Use
Category
1974
Production
(million lb)
1978 Status
Known
Producer
Location

Aldrin
Pesticide
6.5
No
longer made



Chloradane
Pesticide
21.2

?
Velsicol
Marshall, IL

Dieldrin
Pesticide
1.0
No
longer made



Endosulfan
Pesticide
1.5

?
FMG & Hooker
New York sites

Endrin
Pesticide
1.2
No
longer made



Heptachlor
(r)
Pentac ^
Pesticide
2.0

?
Velsicol
Memphis, TN

Pesticide
?
No
longer made



Het-acid
Flame retardant
?

?
Hooker
Niagara Falls,
NY
Mive*
Pesticide
?
No
longer made



Het-anhydride
Flame retardant
7.0

?
Hooker
Niagara Falls,
NY
Dichlorane plus
Flame retardant
?

1
i
Hooker
Niagara Falls,
NY
Chlorendic diesters
Resins
?

?
Velsicol
Memphis, TN

*See ref. 1 and 4.
-------
16-8
Table 16-3. Consumers of Hexachlorocyclopentadiene3
Company
Geographic Coordinates
Location
End-Use
Hooker
Montague, MI
A
43
24
45/B6
22
30

Niagara Falls, NY
A,3
43
04
52/79
00
34
Velsicol
Memphis, TN
B,C
35
09
50/90
57
45

Marshall, IL
A
39
23
00/87
42
30
FMC
Middleport, NY
A
43
12
21/78
29
23
See ref. 4.
End-use code:
A = pesticide
B = flame retardent
C = resin
-------
Table 16-4. 1978 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene Production Emissions
Company
Location
Process
Emissions
Storage
Emissions
Fugitive
Emissions
Total 1
^ . a
Emissions
(lb/yr)
(g/sec)b
(lb/yr)
(g/sec)b
(lb/yr)
(g/sec)b
(lb/yr)
(g/sec)b
Hooker
Montague, MI
9,100
0.131
1,400
0.020
3,500
0.050
14,000
0.202

Niagara Falls, NY
18,200
0. 262
2,800
0.040
7,000
0.101
28,000
0. 404
Velsicol
Memphi s, TN
9,100
0.131
1,400
0.020
3,500
0.050
14,000
0.202
Total

36,400

5,600

14,000

56,000

aEmission factor hexachlorocyclopentadiene (lb lost/lb produced)
Process	0.0052	D - Hydroscience	estimate
Storage	0.0008	D -	Hydroscience	estimate
Fugitive	0.0020	D - Hydroscience estimate
Total	0.0080
^Based on 8760 hr/yr operation.
-------
16-10
sion loss for the synthetic organic chemical industry. Other associated com-
ponents include pentanes, polychlorinated pentanes, and hydrogen chloride.
Process emissions originate primarily from the chlorination reactor vent. Storage
emissions represent the losses from both in-process and final product storage
tanks as well as loading and handling. Fugitive emissions are those emissions
resulting from plant equipment leaks. Vent parameter data are shown in Table 16-5.
B. USE
Total emissions of hexachlorocyclopentadiene resulting from its use as a chemical
intermediate are estimated to have been 3500 lb in 1978 using an emission factor
of 0.0005 lb lost/lb produced.5 This factor was determined from hexachlorocyclo-
pentadiene use in pesticide manufacturing and is considered representative
of its use as a chemical intermediate. Vent parameter data for end-uses are
shown in Tabli 16-5.
Source locations of end-use emissions are shown in Table 16-6. Total emissions
were distributed by ratioing the total number of plant employees employed at
each site to the total number employees at all five sites.
The total nationwide emissions of hexachlorocyclopentadiene in 1978 from all
sources are shown in Table 16-7 and are estimated to have been 59,500 lb.
-------
16-11
Table 16-5. Hexachlorocyclopentadiene Vent Parameters3
Source
Number
of
Vents
Vent
Height
(ft)
Vent
Diameter
(ft)
Discharge
Temperature
(°F)
Velocity
(fps)
Production13'C





Pjrocess
2
40
0.17
140
20
Storage
_ . b,c
End-use
6
20
0.17
80

Process
1
40
0.17
100
20
Storage
2
20
0.17
80

a
Hydroscience estimate.
^Fugitive emissions are dispersed over a 200 ft X 200 ft area.
c	2
Building cross-section - 100 m .
-------
16-12
Table 16-6. 1978 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene End-Use Emissions
Source
Location
Process
Emissions
(lb/yr)
Storage
Emissions
(lb/yr)
Fugitive
Emissions
(lb/yr)
Total
(lb/yr)
^ ¦ a
Emissions
(q/sec)b
Hooker
Montague, MI
570
90
215
675
0.013

Niagara Falls, NY
810
125
315
1250
0.018
Velsicol
Memphis, TN
390
60
150
600
0.009

Marshall, IL
180
25
70
275
0. 004
TMC
Middleport, NY
325
50
125
500
0.007
Total

2275
350
875
3500

aitoission factor for hexachlorocyclopentadiene end-use (lb lost/lb used). See ref. 5.
Process	0.000325	C - Derived from published source
Storage	0.000050	C - Derived from published source
Fugitive	0.000125	C - Derived from published source
Total	0.000500
^Based on 8760 hr/yr operation.
-------
16-13
Table 16-7. 1978 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Nationwide Emissions
Estimated
National
Emission
	Source	(lb/yr)
Production	56,000
Chemical intermediates	3,500
Pesticides
Flame retardents
Resins		
Total	59,500
-------
FIGURE 16-1. SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF HEXACHLOROCYCLOPENTADIENE EMISSIONS
-------
TABLE 16-8. EMISSIONS AND METEOROLOGICAL STATIONS OF SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF HEXACHLOROPENTADIENE
EMISSIONS (ClfSEC)
*0.
COMPANY
SITE
LATITUDE
LONGITUOE
STAn
STATION
PLANT
TVPE
SOURCE
1TPE
PROCESS
STORACE
FUCITIVE
1
HOOKER
MOHTACUE, Ml
4G
24
45
Ofl6 22
30
14040
1
1
2
.131040
.000200
.020160
.001296
.050400
.003096
3
HOOKER
NIACIU PALLS, NY
43
03
02
079 00
27
14747
1
1
2
.262000
.011664
.040320
.001000
.100000
.004506
3
VELSICOL
MEMPHIS, TN
33
09
30
009 07
45
13963
1
2
.131040
.005616
.020160
.000064
.050400
.002160
4
VELSICOL
MARSHALL, 1L
39
23
00
007 42
30
93019
2
o
.002392
.000360
.001000
8
FMC
MIDDLEPOHT, NY
43
12
21
070 29
23
14747
O
1
.004600
.00072©
.001800
* Plant Types:
Type 1: Plant produces and consumes hexachlorocyclopentadlene
Type 2: Plant consumes hexachlorocyclopentadlene
t Source Types:
Type 1: Hexachlorocyclopentadlene production
Type 2: Hexachlorocyclopentadlene consumption
-------
16-16
TABLE 16-9. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE OF HEXACHlOROCYCLOPENTADIENE
RESULTING FROM SPECIFIC POINT SOURCE EMISSIONS
Concentration Population
Level	Exposed	Dosage
(uq/m^)	(persons)	[(ug/m^) . persons]
10	1	12
5	6	53
2.5	149	494
1	685	1,290
0.5	1,584	1,870
0.25	4,291	2,790
0.1	17,399	4,710
0.05	51,677	7,080
0.025	128,051	9,730
0.01	319,577	12,700
0.005	623,040	14,800
1.6	x 10"5*	1,376,988	16,700
* The lowest annual average concentration occurring within
20 km of the specific point source.
58/4
-------
16-17
REFERENCES
1.	J. E. Stevens, "Chlorinated Derivatives of Cyclopentadiene,11 p. 791 in Kirk-Othmer
Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology, 3d ed., Vol. 5, edited by M. Grayson £t al.,
Wiley, New York, 1979.
2.	R. R. Whetstone, "Chlorinated Derivatives of Cyclopentadiene," p. 240 in
Kirk-Othmer Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology, 2d ed., Vol. 5, edited by
A. Standed et al., Wiley, New York, 1967.
3.	1979 Directory of Chemical Producers, United States of America, Stanford
Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA.
4.	J. Hayers and 0. H. Johnson, "Insecticides," pp. 573.3007E,F, Chemical Economics
Handbook, Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA (July 1976).
5.	Source Assessment: Pesticide Manufacturing Air Emissions	Overview and
Prioritization, EPA, IERL, ORD, EPA-600/2-78-004d, Research Triangle Park,
NC (March 1978).
-------
APPENDIX A-l? 	 Manganese
MANGANESE CHEMICAL DATA
Nomenclature
Chemical Abstract Service Registry Number:
Synonyms: None
Chemical Formula
Molecular Height: 54.94 (atomic wt.)
folecular Formula: ^n - atomic number 25
Molecular Structure: (atomic structure)
{Jo - Form: Body centered cubic
g - Form: Cubic
8 - Form or electrolytic MN: Face centered cubic
Chemical and Physical Properties
Physical State at STP: Sol id-metal-steel gray, lustrous, hard, brittle
Boiling Point: 1962°C
Melting Point: 1244CC
Density: 7.21 to 7.44 (depending on alotropic form)
Vapor Pressure: N/A
Vapor Density: N/A
Solubility: Insoluble
Log Partition Coefficient (Octanol/HjO): N/A
Atmospheric Reactivity
Transformation Products: No atmosoheric transformation (aerosol and
particle deposition). Reacts with all mineral acids with evolution
of hydrogen and formation of divalent manganous salts.
Reactivity Toward OH-: N/A
Reactivity Toward 0^: N/A
Reactivity Toward Photolysis: N/A
Major Atmospheric Precursors: N/A
Formation Reactivity:
-------
17-5
I. SOURCES
A.	PRODUCTION
There was neither production nor shipments of manganese ore containing 35% or
more manganese by weight in the United States in 1976, the last year for which
complete data are available.1
U.S. production from domestic low grade (less the 35% manganese) ores mined in
Minnesota and New Mexico is estimated to have been 81,607 tons.1 Imports
supplied the major portion of manganese ore used in the United States amounting
to a total of 1,519,266 tons. Total consumption of manganese ore is estimated
to have been 1,600,873 tons.1
B.	USES
Manganese ore consumption is shown in Table 17-1.1 The largest end-use of manganese
ore is for the direct manufacture of manganese alloys and metal, which consumed
(1,263,531 tons). Pig iron and steel production consumed an estimated 143,761 ton,
or 9%. The remainder (12%) was consumed for battery chemical and miscellaneous
alloy manufacture (193,581 tons).
C.	INCIDENTAL SOURCES
Incidental sources of manganese emissions include coal- and oil-fired boilers,
and coke ovens. The boilers include industrial, electrical utility power
plant, commercial, and residential types. Manganese emissions originate as
impurities from oil and coal when they are burned in the boilers or in coke
ovens Table 17-21'2 shows the estimated consumption of oil and coal by use category.
Table 17-34 indicates the percentage breakdown by region of the coal and oil used
by electric utility power plants.
II. EMISSION ESTIMATES
A. PRODUCTION
The primary source of emission data for this summary was the Survey of Emissions
and Controls for Hazardous and Other Pollutants, prepared for the Environmental
Protection Agency by the Mitre Corp.5 Based on the emissions data presented in
-------
17-6
Table 17-1. united States Manganese Ore Consunption
Use
Usage
(%)
Manganese Ore Consumed
(ton/yr)
Manganese alloys/metals
79
1,263,581
Pig iron and steel
9
143,761
Dry cells, chemicals, misc.
12
193,581
Total
100
1,600,923
*
See ref. 1.
-------
17-7
Table 17-2. 1978 United States Oil and Coal Consumption
User
Coal Consumption
(million tons]
Oil Consumption
(million bbls)
Electrical utilities
480
646
Industry
55
671
Coke ovens
75
	
Residential/commercial
8
707
Diesel fuel
	
327
Total
618
2351
~
See refs. 2 and 3.
-------
17-8
Table 17-3. Electrical Utility Power Plant Locations and
Usage of Coal and Oil by Geographic Region*
Region
Number of
Coal Con-
suming sites
Percentage
of Total U.S.
Coal Consumption
.Number of
Oil Con-
suming sites
Percentage
of Total U.S.
Oil Consurotion
New England
9

0.7
35
9.4
Middle Atlantic
51

11.3
70
27.9
East North Central
156

33.9
110
5.9
West North Central
111

9.4
85
0.7
South Atlantic
61

19.6
97
31.4
East South Central
44

16.3
26
2.0
West South Central
3

1.3
100
4.8
Mountain
38

5.8
44
2.2
Pacific
	1

0.7
33
15.7
Total
474

100.0
600
100.0
*
See ref. 4.
-------
17-9
this report and the fact that high grade ore is no longer mined in the United
States, manganese emissions from mining are assumed to be negligible.
B. USES
Emissions of manganese from its use as an ore also include incidental emissions
inherent in the metals processed. The emissions from its use to produce ferro-
alloys which include ferromanganese, silicomanganese, and manganese metals are
shown in Table 17-4 by geographic region.6 Emission estimates of 12,632,000 lb
were based on an emission factor of 0.003307 lb manganese lost per pound
ferroalloy produced.5 The emission factor is large because it includes ferro-
and silicomanganese production which are subsequently consumed to produce
ferroalloys. Total ferroalloy production was estimated to be 1,910,000 tons in
1978.
Emissions of manganese from its ore to produce iron and steel are shown in
Table 17-5 by geographic region. Estimated emissions of 9,212,000 lb are based on
an emission factor of 0.00002 lb manganese lost per pound iron and steel
produced and assuming total iron and steel production was 230,300,000 tons in
1978.5 Total emissions were distributed by the number of people employed in the
industry in each region.7
Emissions from gray iron foundry operations were estimated to have been
5,540,000 lb based on an emission factor of 0.000154 lb manganese lost per
pound of metal produced5 and production was 18,000,000 ton of hot metal in
1978. The emissions are shown in Table 17-67 and were distributed using the same
method as for iron and steel.
Manganese emissions from chemical applications were estimated to have been
644,000 lb based on an emission factor of 0.004 lb lost/lb used and assuming
80,500 ton manganese used. Manganese emissions from its use in battery
manufacture were estimated to have been 276,000 lb based on an emission factor
of 0.004 lb lost/lb used5 and assuming 34,500 ton manganese used. Emissions
from welding rod manufacture of 48,000 lb were taken directly from the report.5
Actual production quantities of manganese used for this application could not
be estimated. Emissions were assumed to be the same as those reported in the
Mitre report. Specific source locations for all three of these sources could
not be identified to allow for a regional distribution.
-------
17-10
Table 17-4. Manganese Emissions from Ferroalloy,
Ferro Manganese, and Silica Manganese Production

Number
Emissions
Reqion
of Sites
(lb/vr)b
New England
0
0
Middle Atlantic
12
2,972,220
East North Central
8
1,981,480
West North Central
1
247,685
South Atlantic
8
1,981,480
East South Central
13
3,219,905
West South Central
1
247,685
Mountain
4
990,740
Pacific
4
990,740
Total
51
12,632,000C
aSee ref. 6.
b
Based on an emission factor of 0.003307 1b manganese lost per lb ferro
alloy produced. "C" derived from published data (see ref. 5).
c
Average emission rate per site: 247,685 lb/yr (3.57 g/sec).
-------
17-11
Table 17-5. Manganese Emissions from Iron and Steel Production3
„ . „ _ . Average Emissions per Site
Number Manganese Emissions 	2	c	
Region	of Sites	(lb/yr)^	(lb/vr)	(g/sec) C
New England
10
55,045
5,505
0.079
Middle Atlantic
65
2,846,685
43,795
0.630
East-North Central
84
3,859,795
45,950
0.661
West North Central
5
101,260
20,250
0.292
South Atlantic
22
819,940
37,270
0.537
East South Central
25
626,250
25,050
0.361
West South Central
12
211,865
17,655
0. 254
Mountain
2
221,210
110,605
1.592
Pacific
32
469,950
14,685
0. 211
Total
257
9,212,000
35,844

a„ . _
See ref. 7.
Based on emission factor of 0.00002 lb manganese lost per lb iron and steel
produced. "C" derived from published data (see ref. 5).
""Based on 8760 hr/yr operation.
-------


17-12


Table 17-6.
Manganese
Emissions from Gray Iron
Foundry Operations3


Number
Manganese Emissions
Averacje Emissions
oer Site
Region
of Sites
(lb/yr)
' '(lb/yr)
(q/sec)
New England
13
138,500
10,655
0.15
Middle Atlantic
42
508,985
12,120
0.17
East North Central
129
2,887,725
22,385
0.32
West North Central
29
315,085
10,865
0.16
South Atlantic
22
408,575
18,570
0.27
East South Central
37
654,410
17,685
0.25
West South Central
19
277,000
14,580
0.21
Mountain
5
65,785
13,157
0.19
Pacific
28
283,925
10,140
0.15
Total
324
5,540,Q00C
17,100

aSee ref. 7.
^Based on 8760 hr/yr operation.
J
Based on an emission factor of 0.000154 lb manganese lost per lb metal produced.
"C" derived from published data (see ref. S).
-------
17-13
C. INCIDENTAL SOURCES
Manganese emissions resulting from electrical utility power plants are shown
for coal-fired power plants in Table 17-7, and for oil-fired power plants in
Table 17-8. Coal-fired plants had manganese emissions of 5,280,000 lbs and oil-
fired plants 13,566 lb.5
These emissions were calculated by multiplying the emission factors shown in
Tables 17-7 and 17-8 by the coal and oil used shown in Table 17-2. The emissions were
distributed by region according to the usage percentages shown in Table 17-3.
Manganese emissions from coke ovens were estimated to have been 1,950,000 lb as
shown in Table 17-98 using the emission factor of 0.000013 lb manganese lost per
lb of coal used and the amount of coal used is shown in Table 17-2. Total emissions
were distributed by the number of sites in each region.
The remaining incidental sources of manganese emissions are from other sources
which burn oil or coal. Emissions from coal and oil-fired industrial boilers
were estimated to have been 352,000 lb and 14,091 lb respectively derived from
an emission factor of 0.0000032 lb manganese lost per lb of coal burned and
0.00000050 lb manganese lost per gal of oil burned.5 Emissions from
residential/ commercial coal and oil for heating were estimated to be 16,000 lb
and 4,454 lb respectively derived from an emission factor of 0.0000010 lb
manganese lost per lb of coal burned and 0.00000015 lb manganese lost per gal
of oil burned.5. Source locations for all these incidental sources are
considered too numerous and too diverse to pinpoint regional distributions.
Vent parameter data for all manganese sources are shown in Table 17-10.
Table 17-11 presents a summary of manganese emissions. Total nationwide emissions
are estimated to have been 35,982,111 lb in 1978.
-------
17-14
Table 17-7. Manganese E.-aissions from Electrical Utility Power Plants (coal-fired)a

Number
of Sites
Manganese Emissions
(lb/yr)
Averaqe
Emissions/Site
Recion
(lb/yr)
(q/sec)b
New England
9
36,960
4,105
0.06
Middle Atlantic
51
596,640
11,700
0.17
East North Central
156
1,789,920
11,475
0.17
West North Central
111
496,320
4,470
0.07
South Atlantic
61
1,034,880
16,965
0.25
East South Central
44
860,640
19,560
0.29
West South Central
3
68,640
22,880
0. 33
Mountain
38
359,040
9,450
0.14
Paci fic
	1
36,960
36,960
0. 54
Total
474
3,280,000C
11,140

a
See ref. 3.
bBased on 8760 hr/yr operation.
CBased on an emission factor of 0.0000055 lb manganese lost per lb coal burned.
"C" derived from published data (see ref. 5).
-------
17-15
Table 17-8. Manganese Emissions from Electrical Utility Power Plants (oil-fired)a
Region
Number
of Sites
Manganese Emissions
(lb/vr)
Average
(lb'/yr)
Emissions per Site
(g/sec)
New England
35
1,275
36. 4
0.0005
Middle Atlantic
70
3,788
54.1
0.0008
East North Central
110
800
7.3
0.0001
West North Central
85
100
1.2
Nil
South Atlantic
97
4,250
43. 6
0.0006¦
East South Central
26
275
10.6
0.0002
West South Central
100
650
6.5
0.0001
Mountain
44
300
6.8
0.0001
Pacific
33
2,125
64.4
0.0009
Total
600
13,566C
22.6

a_	,
See ref. 3.
^Based on 8760 hr/yr operation.
Based on an emission factor of 0.0000005 lb manganese lost per gal oil burned.
"C" derived from published data (see ref. 5).
-------
17-16
Table 17-9. Manganese Emissions from Coke Oven Operations3
Number Manganese Emissions
	Region	of Sites	(lb/yr)	
New England	0	0
Kiddle Atlantic	15	479,505
East North Central	25	799,185
West North Central	3	95,900
South Atlantic	4	127,870
East South Central	9	287,705
West South Central	2	63,935
Mountain	2	63,935
Pacific	_1	31,965
Total	61	1,950,OOOb'C
SSee ref. 8.
^Basea on an emission factor of 0.000013 lb manganese lost per Ur
coal burned. "C" derived from published data {see ref. 5).
c
Average emission per site: 31,967 lb/yr (0.46 g/sec).
-------
17-17
Table 17-10. Manganese Vent Parameters
Source
Number
of Stacks
Vent
Height
(ft)
Vent
Diameter
(ft)
Discharge
Temperature
(°F)
Velocity
(fps)
Power plant
1
400
16
200
90
Iron and steel
2
80
1
200
40
Ferro alloy
1
80
1
200
40
Gray iron foundry
1
150
2
200
40
Coke oven
2
30
1
300
15
Building cross-section all sources - 200 ® •
-------
17-18
Table 17-11. 1978 Manganese Nationwide Emissions
Source
Nationwide Emissions
(lb/vr)
Mining
Iron and steel
Gray iron foundry
Ferro alloy, ferro manganese, silico manganese
Chemical applications
Battery production
Welding rod manufacture
Power Plants
Coal
Oil
Industrial Boilers
Coal
Oil
Residential/commercial
Coal
Oil
Coke ovens
Total
Negligible
9,212,000
5,540,000
12,632,000
644,000
276,000
48,000
5,280,000
13,566
352,000
14,091
16,000
4,454
1,950,000
35,982,111
-------
TABLE 17-12. EMISSIONS RATES AND NUMBER OF GENERAL POINT SOURCES OF MANGANESE

ferroalloys Production
Iron/Steel Production
Gray Iron Foundry
Power Plant (Coal)
Power Plant
(011)
Coke Oven


CmlsiIons/Site
Number
Cfllssfons/Slte
Number
(mlsslons/Slte
Nuniter
Ortsslons/Slte
Number
Enlsslont/Slte
Number
tmli»lo«u/5lte
(further

Reolon
(qm/jec)
of Sites
(gm/sec)
of Sites
(qm/tec)
or sites
(
-------
cn
cu
s
-T
TABLE 17-13. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULTING FROM EMISSIONS FROM GENERAL POINT SOURCES OF MANGANESE
Concentration
Level
(gq/m*)
Population Cxposed
Dosaqe
(10J
per
»>
[ 1Q3( Ul/tn*)
persons]
Iron/
Steel
Production
Ferro-
alloys
Production
Gray
I roil
Foundry
Power
Plant
(Coal)
Power
Plant
(Oil)
Coke
Oven
U.S.
Total
Iron/
Steel
Production
Ferro-
alloys
Product ion
Gray
Iron
Foundry
Power
PI ant
(Coal)
Power
Plant
(Oil)
Oven
Coke
U.S.
Total
10
11
0
0
0
0
2
13
146
0
0
0
0
28
174
5
105
0
0
0
0
14
119
796
0
0
0
0
102
898
2.5
527
9
0
0
0
50
5B7
2,180
27
0
0
0
229
2,430
1
1,660
258
0
0
0
219
2,140
3,870
377
0
0
0
483
4,730
0.5
3,960
1,420
137
0.2
0
628
6,150
5,540
1,150
86
0.1
0
754
7,520
0.25
—
—
--
~
—
—
~
7,220
2,000
364
10
0
1,030
10,600
0.1
—
—
--
—
—
—
--
10,200
3,430
1,030
76
0
1,450
16,100
0.05
—
--
~
~
—
—
—
12,200
4,710
1,470
236
0
1,810
20,400
0
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
13,800
5,920
2,050
1,790
4
3,140
32,900
NOTE: The use of — as an entry indicates that the incremental E/D is not significant (relative to last entry or relative to entry in another column
at the same row) or that the exposure of the same population may be counted in another column.
-------
17-21
TABLE 17-14. MAJOR PARAMETERS FOR ESTIMATING EXPOSURE/DOSAGE RESULTING
FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS OF MANGANESE
Parameter
Daytime decay rate (K^)
Nighttime decay rate (K^)
Hanna-Gifford coefficient (C)
Nationwide heating source emissions (E^)
Residential coal burning
Residential oil burning
Nationwide nonheating stationary emissions (EN)
Chemical applications
Battery production
Welding rod manufacturing
Industrial boiler coal combustion
Industrial boiler oil combustion
Nationwide mobile source emissions (E^)
	Value
0
0
225
0.294 gm/sec
0.230 gm/sec
0.064 gm/sec
19.211 gm/sec
9.274 gm/sec
3.974 gm/sec
0.691 gm/sec
5.069 gm/sec
0.203 gm/sec
0
-------
TABLE 17-15. MANGANESE EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULTING FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS
tipo level
Jj-a/"1)
Population
(person)
Ooiigt
(1.9/raV
	person]	
Percentage of Contr
1button
Percentage of Distribution

Hut log
Stlllomrir
Mobile
City Type 1
CI tv Type 2
Cltr Type I

.100000
446952
*709).2
.6
99.4
0.
100.0
0.
0.
1
.050000
505140
52100.1
.7
99.3
0.
100.0
0.
0.
no
ro
.025000
9149730
405765.5
IB
98.2
0.
100.0
0.
0.

.010000
17272291
639199.2
1.6
9B.4
0.
100.0
0.
0.

.005000
92073726
1211620.7
1.6
98.4
0.
97.5
1.1
1.4

.002500
138413291
1367299.2
1.6
98.4
0.
94.5
2.4
3.1

0.
158679135
1421708.9
1.6
98.4
0.
92.9
2.6
4.5

-------
TABLE 17-16. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE SUMMARY OF MANGANESE


Populati
on Exposed



Dosage



(persons)


[(Uq/m
') • persons]

icentration
Specific
General


Specific
General


Level
Point
Point


Point
Point


(pq/m'')
Source
Source
Area Source
U.S. Total
Source
Source
Area Source
U.S. Total
10
0
1>,000
0
13,000
0
174,000
0
174,000
5
0
119,000
0
119,000
0
890,000
0
898,000
2.5
0
587,000
0
587,000
0
2,430,000
0
2,430,000
1
0
2,140,000
0
2,140,000
0
4,730,000
0
4,730,000
0.5
0
6,150,000
0
6,150,000
0
7,520,000
0
7,520,000
0.25
0
—
0
0
0
10,600,000
0
10,600,000
0.1
0
--
446,952
0
0
16,100,000
47,097
16,147,097
0.05
0
--
505,140
0
0
20,400,000
52,100
20,452,100
0.025
0
—
9,149,730
0
0
—
405,705
—
0.01
0
~
37,272,291
0
0
—
839,199
—
0.005
0
--
92,073,729
0
0
—
1,211,820
—
0.0025
0
~
130,413,291
0
0
~
1,387,299
—
0
0
—
150,679,135
0
0
32,900,000
1,421,708
34,321,700
NOTE: The use of — as an entry indicates that the incremental E/D is not significant (relative to last entry or
relative to entry in another column at the same row) or that the exposure of the same population may be
counted in another column.
-------
17- 29-
REFERENCES
1.	G. L. DeHuff, Manganese-1977, Mineral Commodity Profiles, Bureau of Mines,
U.S. Dept. of the Interior (October 1977).
2.	"Bituminous Coal," p. 211.3026C, Chemical Economics Handbook, Stanford Research
Institute, Menlo Park, CA (October 1978).
3.	"Fuel Oil," p. 229.4350B, Chemical Economics Handbook, Stanford Research
Institute, Menlo Park, CA (February 1979).
4.	"Existing Power Plants as of 1974," supplied by Systems Applications, Inc.,
San Rafael, CA, to Hydroscience, Inc., Knoxville, TN.
5.	Survey of Emissions and Controls for Hazardous and Other Pollutants, the
Mitre Corp., EPA Contract No. 68-01-0438, p. 115.
6.	"Ferroalloys," p. 738.4000C, D, E, Chemical Economics Handbook, Stanford
Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA.
7.	Marketing Economics Key Plants 1975-1976, Marketing Economics Institute,
New York, NY.
8.	"Coke Oven Plants in the U.S.," p. 212.2000A—D, Chemical Economics Handbook,
Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA (October 1978).
-------
APPENDIX A-18
1,1,1-Trichloroethane (Methyl Chloroform)
METHYL- CHLOROFORM (1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE) CHEMICAL DATA
Nomenclature
Chemical Abstract Service Registry Number: 71-55-6
Synonyms: Alpha-Trichloroethane; Methyl Chloroform; Chlorothene;
Aerothene TT, Dowclene WR; Chlorten; Trithane
Chemical Formula
Molecular Weight: 133.4
Molecular Formula: CH^ CCl^
Molecular Structure:
H CI
I I
H - C - C - CI
I I
H CI
Chemical and Physical Properties
Physical State at STP: Liquid-clear, nonflammable
Boiling Point: 74.1°C
Melting Point: 30.41°C
Density: 1.34 at 20eC/4°C
Vapor Pressure: 130 mm at 25°C
Vapor Density: 4.55
Solubility: soluble (1.3 g/1 of H^O)
Log Partition Coefficient (Octanol/^O): 3.32
Atmospheric Reactivity
Transformation Products: CO, HC1, HCOH, C0C12» CH3COCL, CH2C1C0C1
Reactivity Toward 0H-: ,1nert t0 stnospheric
Reactivity Toward ty Wdation, t 1/2 > 5 yr.
Reactivity Toward Photolysis: none
Major Atmospheric Precursors: n/A
Formation Reactivity: N/A
-------
18-5
I. SOURCES
1,1,1 trichloroethane (methyl chloroform) is currently produced in the United
States by two different processes.^The predominant method involves the use
of vinyl chloride as a raw material. Vinyl chloride, produced from ethylene
dichloride, is hydrochlorinated with hydrogen chloride to form 1,1-dichloroethane,
which is then thermally chlorinated to produce 1,1,1 trichloroethane.
The alternate process, used only by Vulcan, uses ethane and chlorine as raw
materials. 1,1,1 trichloroethane is produced by the continuous noncatalytic
chlorination of ethane. Other chlorinated hydrocarbon co-products, such as
ethyl chloride, vinyl chloride, etc., which are formed in this reaction in sig-
nificant quantities, are recycled unless individual separation is required.
Only three companies at four locations currently produce 1,1,1 trichloroethane
in the United States. The plant locations and the 1978 capacity and estimated
production level for each plant are shown in Tabie 18-1.1,7'3 An estimated 620
million lb of 1,1,1-trichloroethane was produced in 1978.
1,1,1 trichloroethane has many diverse end-uses. The largest end-use of 1,1,1 tri-
chloroethane is in metal degreasing and cleaning operations. This end-use consumed
an estimated 63% of production in 1978 amounting to 390 million lb. Of this
total, 193 million lb was used in degreasers and 197 million lb was used in
cold cleaners.
Most of the other applications of 1,1,1 trichloroethane are small and minor in
importance when compared to degreasing use. Aerosol formulations consumed an
estimated 30 million lb (5%) in 1978. An undisclosed use of 1,1,1 trichloro-
ethane as a chemical intermediate has been reported to consume an estimated
15 million lb. Other applications of 1,1,1-trichloroethane include its use as
a formulation and vehicle solvent in a wide variety of consumer products such
as adhesives, nonflammable paints, urethane coatings, and other types of sealants.
It is also used as an extraction solvent in nonfood and drug formulations, as a
fabric and drain cleaner, and as a lubricant and coolant in cutting oils. Total
consumption for this broad category is estimated to have been 135 million lb (22%)
in 1978. Exports of 1,1,1-trichloroethane are estimated to have been 50 million lb
(8%) in 1978. End-uses are summarized in Table 18-2.1'2
-------
Table 18-1. Production of 1,1,l-Trlchloroethane8
Source
Location
197B Estimated
Production
(M lb)
1978 Estimated
Capacity
(M lb)
Geographic
Coordinates
Dow Chemical
Freeport, TX
266
500
20 59 15
N. latitude
95 24 45
w. longitude
Dow Chemical
Plaquemine, LA
160
300
30 19 00
N. latitude
91 15 32
W. longitude
PPG Industries
Lake Charles, LA
160
300
30 13 14
N. latitude
93 16 54
W. longitude
Vulcan Chemical Co.
Geismar, LA
34
65
30 10 00
N. latitude
90 59 00
W. longitude
Total

620
1165

8See refs. 1—3.
^The distribution of production for each producer is determined by the ratio of total U.S. production to total U.S.
capacity as compared to individual plant capacity.
-------
78-7
Table 18-2. 1978 1,1,1-Trichloroethane Consumption by End-Use*


End-Use

% of Total
Consumption
End-Use
Consumption
(M lb]
Metal cleaning, degreasing
63
390
Chemical intermediate
2
15
Aerosols
5
30
Vehicle solvent, cleaner, misc.
22
135
Export
_8
50
Total
100
620
*See refs. 1,2.
-------
18-8
II. EMISSION ESTIMATES
A.	PRODUCTION
Estimated production losses are shown in Table 18-3 for each of the four producing
locations.4'5'6 Total emissions of 1,1,1 trichloroethane from production facili-
ties are estimated to have been ,1,318,200 lb in 1978. Process emissions origi-
nate primarily through the condenser vents from the distillation columns. Other
associated emission components include ethyl chloride, vinyl chloride, vinyl-
idene chloride, hydrogen chloride, and 1,1-dichloroethane. Storage emissions,
which account for over half of the estimated production losses, represent the
total losses from both working and final product storage tanks and from loading
and handling. Fugitive emissions are those emissions which result from plant
equipment leaks.
Vent stack data are shown in Table 1.8-4. Normally three process and seven storage
tank vents are involved in the production and storage emissions. Usually 1,1,1 tri-
chloroethane production facilities are "open air" structures without walls and
solid floors (i.e., steel grating). Only the control room area is enclosed.
B.	USES
For the purpose of this report, emissions resulting from the export of 1,1,1 tri-
chloroethane are assumed to be negligible. The total amount of 1,1,1-trichloro-
ethane used in aerosol formulations (30 million lb) and miscellaneous solvent
and cleaning applications (135 million lb) is eventually released to the atmos-
phere. Statistical data on individual solvent use by specific classification
or category are not available and are usually estimated as a group by difference.
Therefore, no point sources or model sources other than the use in aerosols and
chemical intermediates were identified. The losses from aerosol and miscellaneous
solvent applications are probably distributed geographically in proportion to
the population of the United States. Emissions resulting from use as a chemical
intermediate (60,000 lb) were estimated by using the 1,1(l-trichloroethane pro-
duction emission factor. A specific location for chemical intermediate use of
1,1,1-trichloroethane could not be identified.
1,1,1-trichloroethane vapor degreasing emissions are estimated to have been
371.2 million lb in 1978 or 95.2% of the total quantity of 1,1,1-trichloroethane
consumed for that end-use.7'8 An estimated 9.5% of the 1,1,1-trichloroethane
-------
Table 18-3 1978 1,1,1-Trichloroethane Production Emissions 3
1978	Process	Storage	Fugitive	Total	Total
Production Emissions	Emissions Emissions Emissions	Emissions
Company Location	(lb X 10®) (lb X 10^) (lb X 10^) (lb X 10^) (lb X 10^)b	(g/sec)C
Dowd Freeport, TX	266 9.36	29.53	13.02	51.91	7.47
Dow ^ Plaquemine, LA	160 0.0	1.74	.76	2.50	.36
PPG Lake Charles, LA	160	11.50	36.32	16.00	63.84	9.19
Vulcan Geismar, LA	_34 2.46	7.72	3.4	13.57	1.95
Total	620	23.32	75.31	33.18	131.82	18.97
See refs. 4--6.
Emission factor for 1,1,1-trichloroethane (lb trichloroethane lost/lb trichloroethane produced)
Process 0.00072 B - (derived from state air emission files)
Storage 0.00227 B - (derived from state air emission files)
Fugitive 0.00100 D - (derived from engineering estimate)
Total 0.00399
Fugitive emissions are released over a 300 x 300 ft area.
8760 operating hours per year, i.e., 24 hr/day, 7 days/ wk, 52 wk/yr.
See ref. 9
1:B-12
-------
18-10
Table 18-4. 1,l,1-Trichloroethane Vent Parameters
Source
Nuinber
of
Stacks
Vent
Height
(ft)
Vent
Diameter
	(ft)
Discharge
Temperature
CD
Velocity
(fps)
a
Production
Process vents
Storage vents
b
Use
Cold cleaner
Open top degreaser
50
15—20
.15
IS
0.17
0.66
0.5
0.5
100
70
70
130
5.0
0.6
building cross-section
5 m2.
Building cross-section - 50 m
-------
18-11
used in cold cleaners is encapsulated or burned and is not released to the atmos-
phere.8 The estimated emissions from degreasing operations are 178.5 million lb
from cold cleaners and 192.7 million lb from degreasers. The average emission
rates per unit and the total number of units in operation nationally are shown
in Table 18-5. The estimated number of degreasers using 1,1,1-trichloroethane in
1978 by geographic region is shown in Table
Total nationwide emissions of 1,1,1-trichloroethane in 1978 from all sources
are estimated to have been 537,580,000 lb. A tabulation of the losses is
shown in Table 18-7.
-------
18-12
Table 18-5. 1,1,1-Trichloroethane Emissions from Solvent Degreasers

Estimated
National
Estimated
Number of
Average
Rate
Emission
. a
per Unit
b

Emission
Units in
Type Degreaser
(M lb/vr)
Service
(Ib/yr)
(q/sec)
Cold Cleaners
178.5
270,045
661
0.04
Open top vapor degreasers
128.5
6,425
20,000
1.13
Conveyorized degreasers
64.2
1,080
59,500
3.35
Total
371.2
277,550


Weighted Average


1,337
0.07
aSee ref. 7.
b
The number of annual operating hours was assumed to be 2250.
-------
Table 18-6. Estimated Number of Degreasers Using 1,1,1-Trichloroethane in 1978 by Geographic Location*
East	West	East	West
North	Mid	North-	North-	South South-	South-
Degreaser Type	East	Atlantic	Central	Central	Atlantic Central	Central Mountain Pacific	TOTAL
Cold cleaners 16,234	42,101	71,498	23,675	32,577 15,974	26,216 9,799 31,971	270,045
Open top vapor 589	1,217	1,832	475	490 279	418 183 942	6,425
degreasers
Closed con- 99	214	355	70	74 46	60 18 145	1,080
veyorized
degreasers
•See ref. 8.
-------
18-14
Table 18-7. 1978 Estimated 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
Nationwide Emission Losses
Estimated National
Emission
	Source	(M lb/yr)
Production	J-32
Metal cleaning (degreasing) - use	371.2
Solvent, cleaner, misc - use	135.0
Aerosols - use	30.0
Chemical intermediate - use	0.06
Export	0
Total	537. 58
-------
S''
^>w
-^r
y
4 Si'M
FIGURE 18-1. SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF 1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE EMISSIONS
-------
Table 18-8. EMISSIONS AND METEOROLOGICAL STATIONS OF SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF 1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE
No. Company Site
Star Plant Source	EMISSIONS (GM/SEC)
Latitude Longitude Station Type Type Process Storage Fugitive
1 Dow
2. Dow
PPG
Freeport, TX
28 59 30 095 23 35 12923
PIaquemine, LA. 30 19 00 091 15 00 13970
Lake Charles, LA 30 13 14 093 16 54 03937
4 Vulcan Geismar, LA
30 10 00 090 59 00 12958
1 1.346082 4.248699 1.873129
1 0.	0.249718 2.304002
1.656012 5.230022 2.304002
.354243 1.117431 .489599
CO
I
cr>
1: B -13
-------
18-17
TABLE 18-9. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE OF 1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE RESULTING
FROM SPECIFIC POINT SOURCE EMISSIONS
Concentration	Population
Level	Exposed*	Dosage
3	3
(ug/m )	(persons)	[(ug/m ) . persons]
50
2
137
25
10
387
10
85
1,380
5
427
3,420
2.5
1,982
8,430
1
9,036
18,700
0.5
32,600
34,600
0.25
73,844
48,800
0.1
189,148
65,700
0.00105*
461,832
71,300
~
The lowest annual average concentration occurring within
20 km of the specific point source.
1:B-14
-------
TABLE 18-10. EMISSIONS RATES AND NUMBER OF GENERAL POINT SOURCES OF 1,1,1 -TRICHLOROETHANE
Open Top Vapor	ConveyoHzed Vapor
	Cold Cleaning Degreaslng (OTVD)	Degreaslng (CVD)
Emissions/Site Number Emissions/Site Number	Emissions/Site Number
Region	 (gm/sec) of Sites (gm/sec) of Sites	(gm/sec) of Sites
New England
0.00952
16,234
0.288
589
0.857
99
Middle Atlantic
0.00952
42,101
0.288
1,217
0.857
214
East North Central
0.00952
71,498
0.288
1,832
0.857
355
West North Central
0.00952
23,675
0.288
475
0.857
70
South Atlantic
0.00952
32,577
0.288
490
0.857
74
East South Central
0.00952
15,974
0.288
279
0.857
46
West South Central
0.00952
26,216
0.288
418
0.857
60
Mountain
0.00952
9,799
0.288
183
0.857
18
Pacific
0.00952
31,971
0.2B8
942
0.857
145
-------
TABLE 18-11. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULTING FROM EMISSIONS FROM GENERAL POINT SOURCES OF 1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE
Concentration
Level
(Uq/m3)
Cold
Deqreaalnq
Population Exposed
(1Q3 per9ona)
Open
Top Vapor
Deqreaainq
Conveyorized
Vapor
Peqrea3inq
U.S.
Total
Cold
Deqreaainq
Do9age
[106(pq/m3) • peraona]
Open
Top Vapor
Deqreaainq
Conveyorized
Vapor
Deqreaainq
U.S.
Total
25
10
5
2.5
1
0.5
0.25
0.1
0.05
0.025
0.01
0.005
0.0025
0.001
0
0
60
37 9
1,550
12
155
472
1,030
12
215
051
2,580
0
0
0
0
0
0
1.3
7.2
12.9
19.2
29.4
42.2
54.9
71.3
146
0
0.7
2.7
6.6
11.0
244
24.4
36
47
55
71
84
97
105
105
0.4
2.4
4.6
6.5
10.5
15
19
26
32
37
47
52
53
53
53
0.4
3
7
13
22
32
45
69
92
111
147
178
204
229
304
NOTE: The use of — as an entry indicates that the incremental E/D is not significant (relative to last entry or relative
to entry in another column at the same row) or that the exposure of the same population may be counted in another co
-------
18-20
TABLE 18-12. HAJOR PARAMETERS FOR ESTIMATING EXPOSURE/DOSAGE RESULTING
FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS OF 1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE
	Parameter	 	Value
Daytime decay rate (K^)	0
Nighttime decay rate (K^)	0
Hanna-Gifford coefficient (C)	225
Nationwide heating source emissions (EH)	0
Nationwide nonheating stationary source emissions	(E^) 2376 gm/sec
Aerosol formation	432 gm/sec
Miscellaneous	1944 gm/sec
Nationwide mobile source emissions (E^)	0
-------
TABLE 18-13. 1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULTING FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS
Eipo level
(fQ/"3)
10.000000
5.000000
2.500000
1.000000
.500000
.250000
0.
Population
(person)
505140
505140
11147543
43314528
10892B270
145742124
158679135
Dosage
(iig/niJ/
	person)
6400236.4
6400236.4
54715139.6
108733700.5
156869401.7
170896866.9
173 047296.4
Percentage of Contribution
Heating St£Mpnarji Hoblje
100.0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
City Type I
100.0
100.0
100.0
99.2
96.6
93.8
92.9
Percentage of 01strlbutJon_
City Type 2
0.
0.
0.
.2
1.6
2.5
2.6
City Type 1
0.
0.
0.
.6
1.8
3.7
4.5
OO
I
ro
-------
TABLE 18-14. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE SUMMARY OF 1,1, l-TRICHLOROETHANE


Population Exposed



Dosage



(persons)


[(ug/m3)
. persons]

Concentration
Specific
General


Specific
General


Level
Poi nt
Point


Poi nt
Point


(uq/m3)
Source
Source
Area Source
U.S. Total
Source
Source
Area Source
U.S. Tote
50
2
0
0
2
137
0
0
137
25
10
12,000
0
12,010
387
400,000
6,400,236
6,800,623
10
85
215,000
505,140
720,225
1,380
3,000,000
6,400,236
9,401,616
5
427
851,000
505,140
1,356,567
3,420
7,000,000
54,715,139
61,718,559
2.5
1,982
2,580,000
11,147,543
13,729,525
8,430
13,000,000
108,733,700
121,742,130
1
9,036
—
43,314,528
--
18,700
22,000,000
156,869,401
178,888,101
0.5
32,600
—
108,928,270
—
34,600
32,000,000
170,896,866
202,931,466
0.25
73,844
—
145,742,124
--
48,800
45,000,000
--
--
0.1
189,148
—
—
--
65,700
69,000,000
--
--
0.05
--
—
—
--
--
92,000,000


0.025
—
--
--

--
111,000,000

--
0.01
--
—
—

--
147,000,000
--

0.005
—
--
—
--
--
178,000,000


0.0025
—
—
—
--
--
204,000,000
--
--
0.001
--
—

--
--
229,000,000

__
0
461,832
—
158,679,135
—
71,300
304,000,000
173,047,000
477,118,300
NOTE: The use of -- as an entry indicates that the incremental E/D is not significant (relative to last entry or
relative to entry in another column at the same row) or that the exposure of the same population may be
counted in another column.
1:B-15
-------
18-23
REFERENCES
1.	S.A. Cogswell, "C? Chlorinate Solvents," Chemical Economics Handbook,
Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA, (December 1978).
2.	"Chemical Products Synopsis on 1,1,1 Trichloroethane," Mannsville Chemical
Products, (July 1978).
3.	"Chemical Profile on Trichloroethylene," Chemical Marketing Reporter,
(January 17, 1977).
4.	G.A. Vlacos, Louisiana Air Control Commission, Emission Inventory Question-
naire for Vulcan Materials Co. at Geismar, LA, (August 16, 1976).
5.	A.T. Raetzsch, Louisiana Air Control Comission, Emission Inventory Question-
naire for PPG at Lake Charles, LA, (March 3, 1976).
6.	B. Dellamea, Texas Air Control Board Emission Inventory Questionnaire for
Dow Chemical at Freeport, TX, (February 24, 1976).
7.	Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Solvent Metal Cleaning, EPA-450/
2-77-022 (OAQPS No. 1.2-079), Research Tri angle Park, NC (November
1977).
8.	Solvent Metal Cleaning, Background Information: Proposed Standards (draft),
EPS, NSPS, ESED Research Triangle Park, NC, (November 1978).
9.	DOW Chemical U.S.A., (Paul J. Sienknecht) personal communication' in response
to publication of the first draft of this report (June 1981).
2: B-30
-------
APPENDIX A-19
Methylene Chloride
METHYLENE CHLORIDE CHEMICAL DATA
Nomenclature
Chemical Abstract Service Registry Number: 75-09-2
Synonyms: Methylene Chloride; Methylene Dichloride;
Dichloromethane; Methylene Bichloride
Chemical Formula
Molecular Weight: 84.93
Molecular Formula: CH^Cl^
Molecular Structure: CI
I
H - C - CI
1
H
Chemical and Physical Properties
Physical State at STP: liouid -colorless, pleasant odor
Boiling-Point: 40°C at 760 mm
Melting Point: 95.1°C
Density: 1.3266 at 20°C/4°C
Vapor Pressure: 435.8 mm at 25°C
Vapor Density: 2.93
Solubility: slightly soluble (13 g/1 of H^O)
Log Partition Coefficient (Octanol/^O): i 25
Atmospheric Reactivity
Transformation Products: C02, HC1, CO, C0C12
Reactivity Toward 0H-: t 1/2 ~1 yr., < methane
Reactivity Toward 0^: No Reaction
Reactivity Toward Photolysis: NAPP
Major Atmospheric Precursors: N/A
Formation Reactivity: N/A
-------
19-5
I. SOURCES
Four volatile organic compounds	methyl chloride, methylene chloride, chloro-
form, and carbon tetrachloride	comprise the group of chemicals commonly referred
to as the chloromethanes. Emission losses for all except methyl chloride are
assessed in this summary.
A. METHYLENE CHLORIDE
Methylene chloride (CH2C12) is a heavy volatile liquid at ambient conditions
and is produced by the chlorination of either methyl chloride or methane.
The methane chlorination process yields methylene chloride as well as methyl
chloride, chloroform, and carbon tetrachloride. The methyl chloride process
involves the reaction of methanol and hydrogen chloride to yield methyl chloride
which is subsequently reacted with chlorine to form methylene chloride and other
chlorinated methanes.1'2
The latter process is used extensively by those producers who have large captive
uses for methyl chloride such as in silicone or tetramethyl lead manufacture.
Variations in the methane chlorination process conditions and in the amount of
methyl chloride recycled can significantly change the various product yield
ratios. This minimizes inventory problems that might be created by changing
market demand. Capacities for each of the chloromethanes at any producing site
are very flexible.1'2
In 1978 five domestic producers of methylene chloride were operating seven plants.
The locations of the plants, the type of production process used, and the 197p
capacity and estimated production level for each plant are shown in Table 19-1.3,415
An estimated 525 million lb of methylene chloride was produced in 1978.3
Hethylene chloride has many diverse end-uses, the largest being in the formulation
of industrial and household paint and varnish removers. An estimated 157.5 million
lb representing 30% of the total methylene chloride production was consumed for
this end-use in 1978.
-------
Table 19-1. Production of Methylene Chloride3
Source
Location
1978
Estimated^
Production
(106 lb/yr)
c
Process
1978
Estimated
Capacity
(10f> lb/yr)
Geographic Coordinates
Latitude/Longitude
Allied Chemical Corp.
Moundsville, WV
31
A, Bd
50
39
54
24/80
47
51
Diamond Shamrock
Belle, WV
63
A
100
38
14
09/81
32
38
Dow Chemical
Freeport, TX
125
B
200
28
59
15/95
24
45

Plaquemine, LA
112
A
180
30
19
00/91
15
00
Stauffer
Louisville, KY
38
A
60
38
12
09/85
51
49
Vulcan Materials Co.
Geismar, LA
50
A
80
30
10
00/90
59
00

Wichita, KS
106
A,B8
170
37
36
55/97
18
30
Total

525

840





°See refs. 3—5.
^Distribution of the 525 million pounds per year for each producing location has been made as a direct ratio of
total production/total capacity X individual plant capacity.
C(A) - Methanol hydrochlorination process or methyl chloride chlorination process.
(B) - Methane chlorination process.
d5% methane chlorination 95% methyl chloride chlorination.
ei0% methane chlorination 90% methyl chloride chlorination.
-------
19-7
The second largest end-use of methylene chloride is as a metal degreasing solvent.
An estimated 115.5 million lb was consumed for this purpose with 88.5 million
lb' used in cold cleaners and 27.0 million lb used in degreasers. Exports consumed
110.25 million lb (21%) in 1978 representing the third largest end-use category.
The use of methylene chloride as a vapor depressant in aerosols is estimated to
have consumed 89.25 million lb in 1978.
Methylene chloride is also used as a chemical intermediate in the manufacture
of various drugs, dyes, and perfumes and in the dewaxing of oils, as a decaf-
feinating agent for coffee, and as a foaming agent for flexible polyurethane
foams. Total end-use for all of these applications is estimated to have been
26.25 million lb in 1978. An equivalent amount of methylene chloride (26.25
million lb) was consumed as a solvent in plastics processing. End uses are
summarized in Table 19-2.3'1*
II. EMISSION ESTIMATES
Estimated emission losses from the production of methylene chloride for each
producing location are shown in Table 19-3. Total emissions of methylene chloride,
chloroform, and carbon tetrachloride from production facilities are estimated
to have been 645,914 lb' 351,280 lb, and 4,141,360 lb respectively in 1978.
These estimates are based on the emission factors generated for each of the four
processes used in the industry as shown in Table 19-4.1'2'10 Other associated
emission components include methyl chloride and hydrogen chloride from the methyl
chloride and methane chlorination processes and perchloroethylene, ethylene
dichloride, and tetrachloroethane from the carbon disulfide/hydrocarbon chlori-
nolysis processes.
Process emissions originate primarily from the inert gas purge vent from the
methyl chloride or primary product recovery condenser. They also originate
from the methylene chloride, chloroform, and carbon tetrachloride distillation
columns. Storage emissions represent the total losses from crude and final
product storage tanks as well as loading and handling losses. Fugitive emissions
are those emissions which occur when leaks develop in valves, pumps, seals, or
other equipment. Corrosion caused by the hydrogen chloride or chlorine used in
the process can result in more frequent leakage, which increases the amount
of fugitive emissions compared to other processes.
-------
19-8
Table 19-2. 1978 Methylene Chloride Consumption by End Use*
End Use
Percent of.
Total Consumption
End Use
Consumption
(M lb)
Paint and varnish remover
30
157.5
Metal degreasing
22
115 5
Aerosols
17
89.25
Plastics processing
5
26.25
Export
21
110.25
Miscellaneous
5
26.25
Total
100
525
*See refs. 3 and 4.
-------
Table 19-3. 1970 Methylene Chloride Production Emissions



Process
Vent
Storage
Vent
Fugitive





Enii ss ions
Emissions
Emis
si ons
Total emissions
Company
Location

(lb/yr)
(g/sec)b
(lb/yr)
(g/sec)b
(lb/yr)
(g/sec)
(lb/yr)
(g/sec)
A1lied
Moundsville,
WV
980
0.014
74,030
1.066
14 , 4 30
0. 20B
89,440
1. 288
Chemical
Diamond
Belle, WV

164
0.002
15,498
0.223
2,980
0.043
18,642
0.268
Shamrock










Dow
Freeport, TX

16,353,
0.235
1 19,566.
1.720
37,780
0.543
1 7 3-, 699-
2,49a
Chemicalc











Plaquemine,
LA
234
0.003
22,178
0. 3.19
4,268.
0.061
26,680
0,383
Stauf fer
Louisvilie,
KV
990
0.014
93,480
1. 346
17,970
0. 259
112,440
1.619
Vulcan^
Geismar, LA

1,300
0.019
123,000
1.771
23,650
0. 340
147,950
2. 130
Total
Wichita, KA

3,960
23,901
0.057
24,553"
472,305
0 . 353-
48,550
149,628
0. 699
77,063
Mb,914
1 .109
flDerived From the emission factors shown in Table 10.
^Based on 8760 hr/yr operation.
cSee ref. 15
dSee ref. 16
-------
19-10
Table 19-4. Chloromethane Production Emission Factors
Process Desicnation
Emission Factors
(lb of product lost/lb of product produced)
Methylene	Carbon
Chloride	Chloroform Tetrachloride
(A) Methyl chloride
chlorination
Total
rProcess
( Storage
v Fugitive
0.000026
0.002460
0.000473
0.002959
0.000008
0.000975
0.000247
0.001230
0.000076
0.000020
0.000096
(B) Methane ^
chlorination
EProcess
( Storage
V. Fugitive
Total
0.00014
0.00102
0.00032
0.00148
0.000004
0.000289
0.000180
0.000473
0.000005
0.000127
0.000072
0.000204
(C) Chlorinolysis
Total
(Process
Storage
Fugitive
0.000008
0.001670
0.000490
0.002168
(D) Carbon disulfide
Total
f Process
Storage
Fugitive
0.0100
0.0034
0.0006
0.0140
A—derived from site visit. See ref. 2.
A—derived from site visit. See ref. 1.
A—derived from site visit. See ref. 10.
-------
19-11
Chloromethane production end-use vent stack data are shown in Table I 9—5.^12»10
Typically there are three process vents and ten storage tanks which emit chloro-
methanes in the methyl chloride chlorination process. The methane chlorination
process generally has just two process vents and ten storage tanks. The carbon
disulfide and other chlorination processes used to produce carbon tetrachloride
normally have two process vents and seven storage tanks. All chloromethane
production facilities are open air structures without walls and solid floors
(i.e., steel grating) and with only the control room area enclosed.
USES
The total quantity of methylene chloride used in paint and varnish removers
(157.5 million lb), aerosol formulations (89.25 million lb), plastics processing
(26.25 million lb), and miscellaneous applications (26.25 million lb) is even-
tually released to the atmosphere. These losses are distributed geographically
approximately in proportion to the industrialized population in the United States.
Methylene chloride emissions from degreasing operations are estimated to have
been 107.1 million lb in 1978. An estimated 8.4 million lb of methylene chloride
from cold cleaners was encapsulated (landfilled) or burned.11 The emissions
jfrom degreasing operations are split between cold cleaners (75%) and degreasers
(25%). The emissions from degreasing operations, the average emission rates
per unit, and the total number of units in operation nationally are shown in
Table 19-6.** The estimated number of degreasers using methylene chloride in
1978 by geographic region is shown in Table 19-7.12
Total nationwide emissions of methylene chloride in 1978 from all sources are
estimated to have been 407,000,000 lb. A tabulation of the losses is shown in
Table 19-8.
-------
19-12
Table 19-5. Chloromethane Vent Parameters3
Source
Number
of
Vents
Vent
Height
(ft)
Vent
Diameter-
(ft)
Discharge
Temperature
(°F)
Velocity
(fps)
Production
Methyl chloride chlo-
rination
Process
Storage
Methane chlorination
Process
Storage
Carbon disulfide and
other chlorination
processes
Process
Storage
Methylene chloride end-useC
Cold cleaner
Vapor degreaser
Fluorocaxbons ll/12d
Process
Storage
.Fluorocarbon 22^
Process6
Storage
3
10
2
10
2
7
1
1
2
4
0
2
35
20
35
20
45
20
15
15
30
20
0
20
0.08
0.17
0.08
0.17
0.17
0.17
0.5
0.5
0.33
0.17
0
0.17
95
80
100
80
100
80
70
150
90
80
0
80
5.0
270
9.0
0.6
See refs. 1, 2, 10, and 14.
b	2
Building cross-section -5m
CBuilding cross-section - 50
d	2
Building cross-section - 20 m
"There are no process vent losses of chloroform from f-22 manufacture.
-------
19-13
Table 19-6. Methylene Chloride Emissions from Solvent Degreasers3

Estimated
National
Emission
(M lb/yr)
Estimated
Number of
Units in
Service
Average Emission
Rate per Unit
Type
(lb/yr)
(g/sec)b
Cold cleaners
00
o
121,180
661
0.04
Open-top vapor degreasers
18.0
900
20,000
1.13
Conveyorized degreasers
9.0
151
59,500
3.35
Total
107.1
122,231


Weighted average


876
0.05
aSee ref. 11.
^The number of annual operating hours was assumed to be 2250.
-------
Table 19-7. Estimated Number of Degreasers Using Methylene Chloride in 1978 by Geographic Location*
Degreaser Type
North
East
Mid
Atlantic
East
North-
Central
West
North-
Central
South
Atlantic
East
South-
Central
West
South-
Central
Mountain
Pacific
Total
Cold cleaners
7,284
18,092
32,084
10,624
14,620
7,168
11,764
4,397
14,347
121,180
Open top vapor
degreasers
82
170
257
66
69
39
59
26
132
900
Closed con-
veyorized
degreasers
14
30
50
10
10
6
0
3
20
151
*See ref. 12.
-------
19-15
Table 19-8. 1978 Methylene Chloride Nationwide Emission Losses
Estimated National
	Source	Emission (M lb/yr)
Production	0.65
Paint and varnish remover	157.5
Metal degreasing	107.1
Aerosols	89.25
Plastics processing	26.25
Miscellaneous	26.25
Export	0
Total	407.00
-------
FIGURE 19-1. SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF METHYLENE CHLORIDE EMISSIONS
-------
Table 19-10. EMISSIONS AND METEOROLOGICAL STATIONS OF SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF METHYLENE CHLORIDE
STAR PLANT* SUURCE+	EMISSIONS (GM/SEC)
NO. COMPANY	SITE	LATITUDE LONGITUDE STATION TYPE TYPE PROCESS STORAGE FUGITIVE
1
ALLIED CHEMICAL
MOUNDSVILLE, WV
39
54
39
o
Cc
o
44
49
13736
1
1
.014112
1.022831
.207791
2
DIAMOND SHAMROC
BELLE, WV
38
14
09
081
32
38
13866
1
1
.002347
.222920
.042872
3
DOW CHEMICAL
PLAQUEMINE, LA
30
19
00
091
15
00
13970
1
1
.003372
. 319286
.061393
4
STAUFFER
LOUISVILLE, KY
38
12
09
085
51
49
93820
1
1
.014256
1.346112
.258768
5
VULCAN
GEISMAR, LA
30
10
00
093
59
00
12958
1
1
.018720
1.771214
.340563
6
VULCAN
WICHITA, KA
37
36
55
097
18
30
13968
1
1
.056957
.353152
.698313
7
DOW CHEMICAL
FREEPORT, TX
28
59
30
095
23
35
12923
2
2
.235214
1.71978U
.543411
* Plant Types:
Type 1: Plant produces methylene chloride by using methyl chloride chlorination process
Type 2: Plant produces methylene chloride by using methane chlorination process
+ Source Types:
Type 1: Methyl chloride chlorination process
Type 2: Methane chlorination process
1:B-17
-------
19-18
TABLE 19-11. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE OF METHYLENE CHLORIDE RESULTING
FROM SPECIFIC POINT SOURCE EMISSIONS
Concentration Population
Level	Exposed	Dosage
(ug/m^)	(persons)	[(yg/m^) • persons]
50	12	781
25	52	2,090
10	189	4,110
5	448	5,900
2.5	5,768	23,300
1	16,046	35,600
0.5	30,805	47,200
0.25	63,272	58,000
0.1	165,543	73,500
0.05	387,750	88,400
0.004	1,694,524	116,000
* The lowest annual average concentration occurring within
20 km of the specific point source.
SB/b
-------
TABLE 19-12. EMISSIONS RATES AND NUMBER OF GENERAL POINT SOURCES
OF METHYLENE CHLORIDE
Open Top Vapor	Conveyorlzed Vapor
Cold Cleaning Degreaslng (OTVD)	Degreaslng (CVD)
Emissions/Site Number Emissions/Site Number	Emissions/Site Number
Region	 (gm/sec) of Sites (gm/sec) of Sites	(gm/sec) of Sites
New England
0.00952
7,284
0.288
82
0.857
14
Middle Atlantic
0.00952
18,892
0.288
170
0.857
30
East North Central
0.00952
32,084
0.288
257
0.857
50
West North Central
0.00952
10,624
0.288
66
0.857
10
South Atlantic
0.00952
14,620
0.288
69
0.857
10
East South Central
0.00952
7,168
0.288
39
0.857
6
West South Central
0.00952
11,764
0.288
59
0.857
8
Mountain
0.00952
4,397
0.288
26
0.857
3
Pac1flc
0.00952
14,347
0.288
132
0.857
20
-------
TABLE 19-13. EXPOSURE A NO DOSAGE RESULTING FRON EMISSIONS FROM GENERAL POINT SOURCES OF MEIHYLENE CHLflRIOE
Population Exposed	Dosage
(10^ persona)	 	[10^(m/m^) « persona]
icentration

Open
Conveyorized


Open
Conveyori zed

Level
Cold
Top Vapor
Vapor
U.S.
Cold
Top Vapor
Vapor
U.S.
Win3)
Cleaninq
Deqreasinq
Deqreasinq
Total
Cleaninq
Deqreasinq
Deqreasinq
Total
25
0
0
1.7
1.7
0
0
0.056
0.056
10
0
B.J
21.6
30
0
0.10
0.34
0.44
5
0
53
65. B
119
0
0.38
0.64
1.02
2.5
0
217
143
360
0
0.93
0.91
1.84
1
0
682
503
1,180
0
1.65
1.46
3.12
0.5
0
1,790
1,420
3,210
0
2.42
2.09
4.5
0.25
—
—
—
~
0.58
3.41
2.60
6.7
0.1
—
—
—
—
3.22
5.00
3.61
11.8
0.05
—
~
—
~
5.78
6.59
4.42
16.8
0.025
—
--
—
—
8.60
7.65
5.21
21.5
0.01
—
—
—
—
13.2
9.93
6.48
29.6
0.005
—
—
—
—
19.0
11.8
7.18
37.9
0.0025
~
—
—
--
26.6
13.5
7.38
45.5
0.001
--
--
~
~
32.0
14.6
7.40
54.0
0
—
—
—
—
65.5
14.7
7.40
87.6
NOTEi The use of — as an entry indicates that the incremental E/D is not significant (relative to last entry or relative
to entry in another column at the same row) or that the exposure of the same papulation may be counted in another
column.
-------
19-21
TABLE 19-14. MAJOR PARAMETERS FOR ESTIMATING EXPOSURE/DOSAGE RESULTING
FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS OF METHYLENE CHLORIDE
	Parameter	 	Value
Daytime decay rate (K^)	0
Nighttime decay rate ()	0
Hanna-Gifford coefficient (C)	225
Nationwide heating source emissions (E^)	0
Nationwide nonheating stationary source emissions	(E^) 4309 gm/sec
Paint and varnish removing	2268 gm/sec
Aerosol formulation	1285 gm/sec
Plastic processing	378 gm/sec
Miscellaneous	378 gm/sec
Nationwide mobile source emissions	0
-------
TABLE 19-15. METHYLENE CHLORIDE EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULTING FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS
Enpo Level
Populitlwi
JfiH15.lL
Doitge
(119/mJ/
	person)	
PerctnUoe of Contribution
Percent*
ge of distribution
He HI fig
SKI lonirjr
Mobile
City Type 1
City Type 2
City Type
10.000000
S0SI40
11607162.7
0.
100.0
0.
100.0
0.
0.
5.000000
9149730
89340851.2
0.
100.0
0.
100.0
0.
0.
t.500000
33072205
175526212.2
0.
100.0
0.
100.0
0.
0.
1.000000
101310744
277269308.4
0.
100.0
0.
97.1
1.4
1.5
. S00000
142626781
308556733.5
0.
100.0
0.
94.1
2.5
3.4
0.
158679135
313830303.2
0.
100.0
0.
92.9
2.6
4.5
-------
v»
CD
TABLE 19-16. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE SUMMARY OF METHYLENE CHLORIDE
Population Exposed	Dosage
3
(persons)	 	[(ug/m ) - persons]
Concentration
Specific
General


Speci fic
General


Level
Point
Point


Point
Point


(ug/m3)
Source
Source
Area Source
U.S. Total
Source
Source
Area Source
U.S. Total
50
12
0
0
12
781
0
0
781
25
52
1,700
0
1 ,752
2,090
56,000
0
58,090
10
189
30,000
505,140
535,329
4,110
440,000
11,607,163
12,051,273
5
448
119,000
9,149,730
9,269,178
5,900
1,020,000
89,340,851
90,366,751
2.5
5,768
360,000
33,072,205
33,437,973
23,300
1,040,000
175,526,212
--
1
16,046
1,180,000
101,318,744
—
35,600
3,120,000
277,269,308
--
0.5
30,885
3,210,000
142,826,781
—
47,200
4,500,000
308,556,733
--
0.25
63,272
--
__
--
58,000
6,700,000


0.1
165,543
--
--
--
73,500
11,800,000
- _

0.05
387,750
—
	
--
88,400
16,800,000
- -

0.025
--

	
--
108,000
21,500,000
--
--
0.01
—
—
	
--
—
29,600,000
--

0.005
--
—
	
—
—
37,900,000
--
	
0.0025
—
—
	
—
—
45,500,000
	

0.001
—
—
	
—
—
54,000,000
--
--
0
1,694,524
—
158,679,135
—
116,000
87,600,000
313,830,000
401 ,546,000
NOTE: The use of - as an entry indicates that the incremental E/D is not significant (relative to last entry or
relative to entry in another column at the same row) or that the exposure of the same population may be
counted in another column.
-------
19-24
REFERENCES
1.	F. D. Hobbs and C. W. Stuewe, Hydroscience, Inc., Emission Control Options
for the Synthetic Organic Chemicals Manufacturing Industry---Product Report
on Chloromethanes, Methane Chlorination Process [on file at EPA, ESED,
Research Triangle Park, NC (January 1979).
2.	F. D. Hobbs and C. W. Stuewe, Hydroscience, Inc. Emission Control Options
for the Synthetic Organic Chemicals Manufacturing Industry—Product Report
on Chloromethanes, Methanol H.ydrochlorination and Methyl Chloride Chlori-
nation Processes (on file at EPA, ESED, Research Trianqle Park, NC (January
1979).
3.	"Chemical Product Synopsis on Methylene Chloride," Mannsville Chemical
Products (March 1978).
4.	T. E. Killilea, "Chlorinated Methanes, "Chemical Economics Handbook, Stan-
ford Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA (April 1979).
5.	"Chemical Profile on Methylene Chloride, "Chemical Marketing Reporter
(September 20, 1976).
6.	"Chemical Product Synopsis on Chloroform, "Mannsville Chemical Products
(June 1978).
7.	"Chemical Profile on Chloroform, "Chemical Marketing Reporter, (Sep-
tember 27, 1976).
8.	"Chemical Product Synopsis on Carbon Tetrachloride, "Mannsvilie Chemical
Products (June 1978).
9.	"Chemical Profile on Carbon Tetrachloride, "Chemical Marketing Reporter
(April 10, 1978).
10.	F. D. Hobbs and C. W. Stuewe, Hydroscience, Inc. Emission Control Options
for the Synthetic Organic Chemicals Manufacturing Industry—Product Report
on Carbon Tetrachloride and Perchloroethylene, Hydrocarbon ChlorinolysiT
Process (on file at EPA, ESED, Research Triangle Park, NC (March 1979).
11.	Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Solvent Metal Cleaning, EPA-405/2-
77-022 (OAQPS No. 1.2-079), Research Triangle Park, NC (November 1977).
12.	Solvent Metal Cleaning, Background Information: Proposed Standards (draft)
EPA, NSPS, ESED, Research Triangle Park, NC (November 1978).
13.	Chemical Research Services, 1979 Directory of Chemical Producers, United
States of America, Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA.
1: B-20
-------
19-25
14.	D. M. Pitts, Hydroscience, Inc., Emission Control Options for the Synthetic
Organic Chemicals Manufacturing Industry—Product Report on Fluorocarbons,
on file at EPA, ESED, Research Triangle Park, NC (February 1979).
15.	Dow Chemical U.S.A., (Paul S. Sienknecht) Personal Communication in response
to publication of the first draft of this report (June 1981).
16.	Vulcan Materials Company, (Thomas A. Robinson) Personal Communication in
response to publication of the first draft of this report (October 1980).
1:8-21
-------
APPENDIX A-20 	 Nitrosomorpholine
For an explanation of the assumptions used
to make these exposure estimates, please refer to
MORPHOL'INE CHEMICAL DATA	the discussion beginning on Page 57 of this report
Nomencl ature
Chemical Abstract Service Registry Number: 110-91-8
Synonyms: Diethylenimide Oxide; Tetrahydro-1,4-Isoxazine;
Tetrahydro-2H,4 Oxaiine; Diethylene Oximide;
Diethylene Imidoxide
Chemical Formula
Molecular Weight: 87.12
Molecular Formula: C.H-NO
4 9
Molecular Structure:	0
Ci-L ' NCH,
r r
CH-, CH,
I
U
Cherr-ica! an^ Physical Properties
Physical State at STP: Linuid-mobi1e, hygroscopic, amine odor
Boiling Point: 128.3°C
Melting Point: -4.75°C
Density: 1.00 at 20eC/4°C
Vapor Pressure: 10 mm at 23°C
Vapor Density: 3.00
Solubility: Infinite (H^O)
Log Partition Coefficient (Octanol/^O): -1.08
Atmospheric Reactivity
Transformation Products:
Reactivity Toward OH.:
Reactivity Toward 0^:
Reactivity Toward Photolysis:
Major Atmospheric Precursors: r/a
Formation Reactivity.
-------
20-5
I. SOURCES
A.	PRODUCTION
Morpholine is produced by the dehydration of diethanolamine. The diethanolamine
is produced by reacting ethylene oxide with ammonia. Morpholine processes are
integrated into the ethanolamine facility.
Currently, Jefferson Chemical is the only company in the United States that
produces morpholine (two locations as shown in Table 20-1).^ In 1978, an estimated
25 million lb of morpholine was produced.
B.	USES
Morpholine has many diverse end-uses. The largest end-use of morpholine is as
an intermediate in the production of rubber processing chemicals, particularly
accelerators. An estimated 35% of morpholine production (8.8 million lb) was
consumed for this end-use. The second largest application for morpholine is as
a corrosion inhibitor in steam condensate systems. An estimated 7.5 million lb
(30%) was consumed for this end-use.
Most of the other applications of morpholine are small in quantity. Approximately
2.5 million lb of morpholine is used as an intermediate to produce optical
brighteners for the soap and detergent industry. An equivalent amount (2.5 million
lb) was used in formulating polishes and waxes. Miscellaneous applications
consuming 2 million lb include the pharmaceutical industry, deodorants, shampoos,
cosmetics, and disinfectants. An estimated 1.7 million lb was exported. End-uses
of morpholine are summarized in Table 20-2.1 2
II. EMISSION ESTIMATES
A. PRODUCTION
Morpholine emissions from production sites are presented in Table 20-3. Total
estimated emissions from these sites were 13,700 lb for 1978. The emission
factors used to develop process vent, storage, and fugitive emission estimates
(shown in Table 20-3) were assumed to be similar to ethylene oxide in the absence
-------
20-6
Table 20-1. Morpholine Producers
Company
Location
1978 b
Capacity
(10° lb/yr)
1978 b
Production
(106 lb/yr)
Geographical Location
Latitude/Longitude
Jefferson
Port Neches, tx
14
12.5
29 57 45/93 56 00

Conroe, TX
li
12.5
30 18 50/95 23 06
Total

28
25.0

aSee refs. 1 and 2.
^Capacity and production were distributed evenly over both sites since individual
capacities were not available.
-------
20-7
Table 20-2. Morpholine End-Use Distribution 1978*
Use
Usage
(106 lb/yr)
Usage
(%)
Rubber chemicals
8.8
35
Corrosion inhibitors
7.5
30
Optical brightners
2.5
10
Polishes and waxes
2.5
10
Miscellaneous
2.0
8
Exports
1.7
	7
Total
25.0
100
*See refs. 1 and 2.
-------
20-8
Table 20-3. 1978 Morpholine Production Emissions
Process Storage	Fugitive	a
^	^ . .	_ . .	Total Emissions
Emissions Emissions	Emissions 	—
Company	Location	(lb/yr)	(lb/yr)	(lb/yr)	(lb/yr) (q/sec)
Jefferson Port Neches, TX 6,560	260	25	6,850 0.099
Conroe, TX	6,560	260	25	6,850 0.099
Total	13,125	525	50	13,700
a
Based on the following emission factor (lb lost per lb produced)
Process 0.000525 A - Derived from site visit	data
Storage 0.000021 A - Derived from site visit	data
Fugitive 0.000002 A - Derived from site visit	data
Total 0.000548
^Based on 8760 hr/yr operation.
-------
20-9
of data on morpholine emissions. Process vent emissions would originate from
the stripping, evaporating, drying, and fractionating operations,3 while storage
emissions represent losses from both working and final product storage loading
and unloading. Fugitive emissons are those resulting- from leaks from plant
equipment. Emission estimates are based on a plant operating schedule of 24 hr/day,
7 days/week, 52 weeks/yr.
Other associated emission components would include diethanolamine and ammonia.
Vent parameter data are shown in Table 20-4.
B. USES
For the purpose of this report, emissions resulting from the export of morpholine
are assumed to be negligible.
The total amount of morpholine used as a corrosion inhibitor in boiler systems
(7.5 million Ub) and in polish and wax formulating (2.5 million lb) is eventually
released to the atmosphere. The losses from these two applications and from
morpholine's use as a chemical intermediate in miscellaneous applications (2000 lb)
are probably distributed geographically in proportion to the population of the
United States.
Emissions resulting from its use as a chemical intermediate were estimated by
using the dimethylamine end-use emission factor of 0.001 lb lost/lb used. Emis-
sions from rubber accelerator (8,800 lb) and optical brightener manufacturers
(2500 lb) are shown in Tables 20-5 and 20-6 by region.
Total nationwide emissions of morpholine in 1978 from all sources are estimated
to have been 10.028 million lb. A tabulation of the losses is shown in Table 20-7
-------
20-10
Table 20-4. Morpholine Vent Parameter Data
Number	Vent	Vent	Discharge
of	Height Diameter Temperature Velocity
	Stacks	[ft)	(ft)	(°F)	(ft/sec)
a
Production
Process	3
Storage	8
~ • ¦ b
Fugitive
End-useC (chemical
intermediate)
Process	1
Storage	2
Fugitive
a • t j •	2
Building cross-section 5 m .
b
Distributed over a 200 ft X 200 ft area.
CBuilding cross-section 50 m^.
"^Distributed over a 100 ft X 100 ft area.
40
20
0. 33
0.17
40
20
0.17
0.17
150
80
10
100
80
-------
20-11
Table 20-5. Morpholine Elnission Estimates from
Rubber Accelerator Producers3

Number
of
Sites
Morpholine
Emissions^3
Region
(lb/yr)
(g/sec)c
New England
15
1380
0.020
Middle Atlantic
24
2210
0.032
East North Central
25
2300
0.033
South Atlantic
9
830
0.012
East South Central
18
1650
0.024
West South Central
_5
460
0.007
Total
96
8800

3See ref. 4.
bBased on morpholine emissions lost per site of 92 lb/yr
using 0.001 lb morpholine lost/lb used.
Based on 8760 hr/yr operation.
-------
20-12
Table 20-6. Morpholine Emission Estimates from
Optical Brightener Producersa

Number
of
Sites
Morpholine
Emissions13
Average
Emissions
per Sitec
(lb/yr)
Region
(lb/yr)
(g/sec)d
New England
8
175
0.003
22
Middle Atlantic
29
454
0.007
16
East North Central
31
833
0.012
27
West North Central
10
310
0.004
31
South Atlantic
13
286
0.004
22
East South Central
4
32
nil
8
Pacific
33
31"
0.005
10
Total
128
2500


a
See ref. 5.
^Based on 0.001 lb morpholine lost/lb used.
Q
Emissions allocated by total number of employees per region.
^Assumes 6760 hr/yr operation.
-------
20-13
Table 20-7. 1978 Morpholine Nationwide Emissions
Source
Estimated
National'Emission
(M lb/yr)
Production
0.014
Rubber chemicals
0.009
Corrosion inhibitor
7.500
Optical brightener
0.003
Polishes and waxes
2.500
Miscellaneous
0.002
Exports
0
Total
10.028
-------
ro
0
1
4^
FIGURE 20-1. SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF MORPHOLINE EMISSIONS
-------
TABLE 20-8. EMISSIONS AND METEOROLOGICAL STATIONS OF SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF MORPHOLINE
*	*	EMISSIONS (CN/SEC)
STAR PLANT SOURCE 	
HO. COHPAKY	SITE	LATITUDE LONGITUDE STATION TVI'E TYPE PROCESS 8T0RACE FUCITIVE
1	JEPPERSOK	PORT HECHES, TX 29 07 43 093 B6 00 12917 I	I	.094464 .003744 .000360
2	JEFFERSON	CONROE, TM	36 10 00 090 23 06 12960 I	I	.094464 .003744 .000360
* The chemical plants producing morphollne are the only type of specific point sources for
its emissions.
-------
20-16
TABLE 20-9. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE OF MORPHOLINE RESULTING
FROM SPECIFIC POINT SOURCE EMISSIONS
Honcentration
Level
(ug/m3)
0.0005
0.00025
0.0001
0.00005
0.000025
0.0000125*
Population
Exposed
(persons)
0
1,380
26,481
106,662
200,117
239,277
Dosage
[(ug/m3) • persons]
.0000219
.372
3.4
8.8
12.5
13.4
•The lowest annual average concentration occurring within 20 km of the
specific point source.
-------
TABLE 20-10. EMISSIONS RATES AND NUMBER OF GENERAL POINT SOURCES OF MORPHOLINE
Resins Production Wire Enamel Solvent
Emissions/Site Number Emissions/Site Number
Region	 (qm/sec) of Sites (qm/sec) of Sites
New England
0.00132
15
0.000315
8
Middle Atlantic
0.00132
21
0.000225
29
East North Central
0.00132
25
0.000387
31
West North Central
0.00132
0
0.000416
10
South Atlantic
0.00132
9
0.000317
13
East South Central
0.00132
18
0.000115
4
West South Central
0.00132
5
0
0
Mountain
0.00132
0
0
0
Paclflc
0.00132
0
0.000138
33
-------
TABLE 20-11. NITROSOMORPHOLINE EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULTING FROM EMISSIONS
FROM GFNFRAL POINT SOURCES OF MORPHOLINE
Population Exposed
Dosage
[lO-^ng/m-1)-persons]
Level
(nq/m3)
Accelerator
Production
Brightener
Production
U.S. Total
Accelerator
Production
Brightener
Production
U.S. Total
0.025
0.16
0
0.16
0.004
0
0.004
0.010
7.87
0
7.87
0.102
0
0.102
0.0050
91.5
0.54
92.0
0.602
0.003
0.605
0.0025
—
—
—
2.65
0.035
'2.69
0.0010
—
—
—
16.8
0.33
17.1
0.00050
—
—
—
40.8
1.27
42.1
0.00025
—
—
—
58.0
6.57
64.5
0
--

--
736
23.7
97.3
ro
0
1
CO
NOTE: The use of — as an entry Indicates that the Incremental E/D Is not significant
(relative to last entry or relative to entry in another column at the same row)
or that the exposure of the same population may be counted in another column.
-------
20-19
TABLE 20-12. MAJOR PARAMETERS FOR ESTIMATING EXPOSURE/DOSAGE RESULTING
FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS OF MORPHOLINE
	Parameter	 	Value
Daytime decay rate (Krf)	0
Nighttime decay rate (Kr)	4.67 x 10~® sec"1
Hanna-Gifford coefficient (C)	225
Nationwide heating source emissions (EH)	0
Nationwide nonheating stationary source emissions	(EN) 144.03 gm/sec
Corrosion inhibitor emissions	108 gm/sec
Wax application emissions	36 gm/sec
Miscellaneous	0.03 gm/sec
Nationwide mobile source emissions	0
-------
TABLE 20-13. M0RPH0LINE EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULTING FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS
EXPO LEVEL
POPULATION
< I'KnsON)
nnsAcrc
( VC./i M>3-
ricnsoii)
PF.nCF.HTACE OF COUTninUTIOH	rEnCEITTACE OF DISTniDOTION
IIEATINU 8TATIONAHY HOI)ILK CITY TYPE I CITY TYPE 2 CITY TYPE 3
.000100
21609620
3442.1
0.
100.9
s.
109.0
».
«.
.000030
44606070
5073.2
9.
100.9
0.
100.0
9.
9.
.000023
72202642
0917.5
0.
100.9
0.
ieo.0
0.
9.
.000010
104003590
0572.1
0.
100.0
0.
100.0
.0
0.
.000000
123409379
6709.4
0.
100.0
0.
99.7
.3
0.
e.
100679133
6790.6
0.
100.9
0.
90.0
.6
.6
0
1
ro
o
-------
TABLE 20-14. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE SUMMARY OF NITROSOMORPHOLINE
Population Exposed	Dosage
(persons)			[(nq/ni3) 'persons]
Concentration
Level
(wq/m3)
Speci fie
Point
Source
General
Point
Source
Area Source
U.S. Total
Specif1c
Point
Source
General
Point
Source
Area Source
U.S. Total
0.00025
1,380
0
0
1,300
0.4
0
0
0.4
0.0001
26,481
0
21 ,659,620
--
3
0
3,442
3,445
0.00005
106,662
0
44,606,075
--
9
0
5,073
5,080
0.000025
200,117
160
72,282,642
--
13
0
6.017
6,030
0.00001
239,277
7,870
104,863,590
--
--
0.1
6,572

0.000005

92,000
123,499,379


0.6
6,709

0


158,679,135

13
97.3
6,791
6,900
ro
0
1
ro
NOTE: The use of — as an entry Indicates that the Incremental E/D 1s not significant
(relative to last entry or relative to entry 1n another column at the same row)
or that the exposure of the same population may be counted 1n another column.
-------
20-22
REFERENCES
1.	"Chemical Products Synopsis on Morpholine," Mannsville Chemical Products
(December 1977).
2.	"Chemical Profile on Morpholine," Third Revision, Chemical Marketing Reporter
(October 1, 1974).
3.	Special Project Report, "Petrochemical Plant Sites," prepared for Industrial Pollution
Control Division, Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory, Environmental
Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio, by Monsanto Research Corporation, Dayton,
OH (April 1976).
4.	1979 Directory of Chemical Producers, United States of America, Stanford Research
Institute, Menlo Park, CA.
5.	"Soaps and Other Detergents," 1972 U.S. Census of Manufacturers, SIC Code 2841.
-------
APPENDIX A-21
Nickel
NICKEL CHEMICAL DATA
Nomenclature
Chemical Abstract Service Registry Number: 7440-02-0
Synonyms: Carbonyl nickle powder
Chenical Formula
Molecular Weight: 58.71 (atomic weight)
Molecular Formula: Ni - atomic number: 28
Molucular Structure: (atomic structure): face-centered
cubic crystal
Chemical and Physical Properties
Physical State at STP: Solid-lustrous white, hard, ferromagnetic
Boiling Point: 2732°C to 2837°C
Melting Point: 1453°C to 1555°C
Density: 8.902 at 25°C/4°C
Vapor Pressure: N/A
Vapor Density: N/A
Solubility: Insoluble (H^O)
Log Partition Coefficient (Octanol/H^O): N/A
Atmospheric Reactivity
Transformation Products: Stable in air at ordinary temperatures. Burns
in oxygen forming N.O. Slowly attacked by oil hydrochloric or sulfuric
acid, readily attached by nitric acid.
Reactivity Toward OH: Unreactive
Reactivity Toward 0^: Unreactive
Reactivity Toward Photolysis: N/A
Major Atmospheric Precursors: N/A
Formation Reactivity: 0.018% abundance in earth's crust. Occurs free
in meteorites. Found in many ores (e.g. pentlandite (FeN»)gSo).
-------
21-5
I. SOURCES
PRODUCTION
There were only two domestic nickel mineral production sites in the United
States in 1976 the last year for which data are available.1
H.-.nn/t Mining Company at Riddle, Oregon, produced an estimated 10,300 tens of
nickel primarily from latcrite ore, although part of the production -ss from
scrap. The second producer, AV-AX, Inc., at Pert Nickel, Louisiana, produced an
estimated 13,300 tons of nickel derived frcrr. nicJrei-copper matte ir.pc-rted frci:i
Botswana.2
The remainder of the nickel consumed in the United States was ir.~-cr ted. This
c.~,ounted to 188,100 tons in 1978. Table 21-1 snows the estimated salient scat-
: y t i c s.
1 2
The two producing site locations are shev/n in Table 21-2.
USES
The primary end-use cf nickel is in the manufacture of steel and other ferrous
alloys. An estimated 43,600 tons of nickel was ccnsirned i'or steel manufacture.
A total of 19,100 tons was consumed in the manufacture of other ferroalloys.
Konferroalloys consumed 54,800 tons of nickel; electroplating used an estimated
23,700 tons of nickel. Other smaller uses of the mineral were in cast irons,
chemicals, batteries, and ceramics.
An estimated 1£2,900 tons of primary nickel was consumed as shown ir. Tible 21-3.
INCIDENTAL SOURCES
Incidental sources of nickel emissions include coal- and oil-fired be Liars,
coke ovens, diesel fuel burning, and the gray iron foundry industry. The
boilers include industrial, electric utility power plant, corner cial, end
residential types. Nickel emissions originate as impurities frcm oil and coa]
when they are burned in the boilers, in coke ovens, or as diesel fuel. Table 2J-
shevs the estimated consumption of oil and coal in 1973 by use category.
Table 21-5^indicates the percent breakdown of the coal and oil used by the electr
utilities by region.
-------
21-6
Table 21-1. Nickel Salient Statistics*

1000 ton/yr
U.S. Plant production
Primary
13.9
Secondary
13.3
Imports
188.1
Exports

Primary stock
31.6
Net consumption
172.6
*
See ref. 1.
-------
21-7
Table 21-2. Domestic Nickel Producers*
Production Geographic Coordinates
Corpany	Location	(ton/vr)	.(latitude/longitude)
Primary
Hannah Mining Ridcle, OR	13,900	42 55 02/123 24 60
Secondary
AKAX, Inc.	Port Nickel, LA 13,300	29 52 35 /89 57 26
*
See rsfs. 1 and 2.
-------
21-8
Table 21-3. Nickel End-Use Consumption3
_ , b
End-use
Usage
1000 ton/yr
Percent
Usaae
Steel
Stainless and heat resistant
48.6
29.8
Alloys (excludes stainless)
19.1
11.7
Super alloys
9.1
5.6
Nickel-oopper/copper-nickel alloys
7.4
4.5
Permanent magnet alloys
5.8
3.6
Other nickel and nickel alloys
32.5
20.0
Cast irons
4.0
2.5
Electroplating
28.7
17.7
Chemicals and chemical uses
2.6
1.6
c
Others
4.1
3.1
Total
162.9
100.0
a. - ,
bee rei. 1.
£
Exclusive of scrap; primary nickel only.
c
Includes batteries, ceramics, and other alloys containing nickel.
-------
21-9
Table 21-4. 1978 United States Oil and Coal Consurotion*
Users
Coal Consunption
(million tons)
Oil Consumption
(million bbls)
Electrical utilities
480
646
Industry
55
671
Coke ovens
75
	
Res i den ti al/Comre r ci al
8
707
Diesl fuel
~ ~
327
Total
618
2351
*
See refs. 3 and 4.
-------
21-10
Table 21-5. Electrical Utility Power Plant Locations and
Usage of Coal and Oil by Geographic Region*
Number of
Coal Con-
Region suminq Sites
Percentage of
Total U.S. Coal
Consumption
Number of
Oil Con-
sumino Sites
Percentage of
Total U.S. Oil
Consumption
New England
9
0.7
35
9.4
Middle Atlantic
51
11.3
70
27.9
East North Central
156
33.9
110
5.9
West North Central
111
9.4
85
0.7
South Atlantic
51
19.6
97
31.4
East South Central
44
16.3
26
2.0
West South Central
3
1.3
100
4.8
Mountain
38
6.8
44
2.2
Pacific
	1
0.7
33
15.7
Total
474
100.0
600
100.0
*
See ref. 5.
-------
21-11
II. EMISSION ESTIMATES
A. FRODUCTION
The primary source of emission data for this summary vas the Sur:-y of Emissions
and Controls for Hazardous and Other Pollutants, prepared for the Environmental
Protection Agency by the Mitre Corp.6 In this report, it is estimated that
emissions resulting from electroplating, chemical use, and miscellaneous uses
are negligible due to control techniques.
Production emissions as shown in Table 21-6 are estimated to have been 236,060 lb.
S. USES
Emissions from nickel use also include incidental emissions of nickel inherent
in the metals processed. The emissions from its use to produce iron.and steel
are shown in Table 21-7 by geographic region. They totaled 231.000 lb. Emi: ions
are based on an emisson factor of 0.0000011 lb nickel lost/ib iron steel produced
assuming pigiron production of 105,000,000 tons in 1978.
Emissions from ferroalloy manufacture'totaled 823,000 lb and are shown in
Table 21-8 by geographic region. Emission estimates were based on an emission
factor of 0.000217 lb nickel lost per lb ferro alloy produced.6 Ferro alloy
production was estimated to be 1,910,000 tons in 1978. Emissions are distributed
by geographic region, in Table 8.
Nickel emissions from gray iron foundries totaled 185,800 lbs based cn an
emission factor of 0.00000516 lb nickel lost per lb of hot metal produced
assuming 18,000,000 ton hot metal was preduced in 1978. Emissions are dis-
tributed by region in Table 21-9.
Emissions from iron and steel and gray iron foundry sources were distributed by
region based on the number of people employed in the basic industries.7 Ferro-
alloys were distributed simply by the number of sites in each region.8
-------
21-12
Table 21-6. Nickel Production Emissions
Total Emissions
Company	Location	(lb/yr)	(g/sec)
Hannah Mining a Riddle, OR	2U,600	.30
AMAX, Inc.D	Port Nickel, LA	215,460	3.10
236,060
See ref. 9
Based on 0.0081 lb nickel emitted/lb nickel produced. "C" derived
from published data (see ref. 6).
1: B-23
-------
21-13
Table 21-7. Nickel Emission Estimates from-Iron and Steel Manufacturing Sites9

Number
Nickel Emissions
Averaae
Emissions Per Site



Recion o
f Sites
(lb/vr)
(Ib/yr)
{g/sec)1^
New England
10
1, 380
13S
0.003
Middle Atlantic
65
71,333
1098
0.016
East North Central
84
96,789
1152
0.017
West North Central
5
2,539
508
0.008.
South Atlantic
22
20,561
935
0.013
East South Central
25
15,704
628
0.009
West South Central
12
5, 313
443
0.007
Mountain
2
5, 547
2774
0.040
Pacific
32
11,784
363
0.005
Total
257
231,000
099
0.013
a
See ref. 7.




b
Eased on 8760 nr/yr
operation.



c_
3asea on an emission
factor of
0.0000011 lb nickel
lost per
lb iron/steel
produced "C" (see ref. 6).



-------
21-14
Table 21-8. Nickel Emission Estimates from
Ferro-Alloy Production Sites3


Nickle
Emissions
Reqion
Number of Sites
(lb/yr)b
(g/sec)C
New England
0
0
0
Middle Atlantic
12
194,820
2.80
East North Central
8
129,880
1.87
West North Central
1
16,235
0.23
South Atlantic
8
129,880
1.87
East South Central
13
211,055
3.04
West South Central
1
16,235
0.23
Mountain
4
64,940
0.93
Pacific
_4
64,940
0.93
Total
51
828,000

3See ref. 8.
^Based on an average emission rate of 16,235 lb/yr per site. (0.23 g/sec)
Q
Based on 8760 hours per year operation.
^Based on an emission factor of 0.000217 lb nickel lost/lb ferro-alloy
produced "C" (see ref. 6).
-------
21-15
Table 21-9. Nickel Emission' Estimates from Gray Iron Foundry Sites3
Region
Number
of Sites
Nickel Emissions
(Ib/yr)
Average
(lb/vr)
Emissions/Site
it ^b
(g/sec)
New England
13
4 ,645
35 7
0.005
Middle Atlantic
42
17,095
407
0.006
East North Central
129
96,800
750
0.011
West North Central
29
10,590
365
0.005
South Atlantic
22
13,750
625
0.009
East South Central
37
21,925
593
0.009
West South Central
19
9,290
489
0.007
Mountain
5
2,230
4.45
0.006
Pacific
28
9,475
338
0.005
Total
324
1S5,80CC
573
0.008
a
See ref. 7 .
Based on 3760 "nr/yr operation.
c
Based on an emission factor of 0.00000516 lb nickel lost per lb of hot metal
,:C" (see ref. 6).
-------
21-16
Emissions from nonferrous alloy manufacture were estimated to be 142,600 lb
based on an emission factor of 0.000012 lb nickel lost/lb produced and 5,942,000
tons of nonferrous alloy produced in 1978. Specific source locations could not
be identified to allow for a regional distribution.
Nickel emissions resulting from electrical utility power plants are shown for
coal-firei operations in Table 21-10 and for oil-fired operations in Table 21-11.
Coal-firec plants had emissions of 316,800 lb6 and oil fired plants 8,139,600 Lb.6
These emissions were calculated by multiplying the emission factors shown in
Tables 21-10 and 21-11 by the coal and oil used shown in Table 21-4. The emissions
were distributed by region according to the usage percentages shown in Table 21-5
Nickel emissions from coke ovens were estimated to have been 123,000 lb as
shown in Table 21-12. This estimate is based on an emission factor of
0.00000082 lb nickel lost per lb of coal used to manufacture coke.6. Total
emissions were distributed by the number of sites in each region.
The remaining incidental sources of nickel emissions are from other sources
which burn oil or coal. Emissions from coal- and oil-fired industrial boilers
were estimated to have been 36,300 lb and 6,481,860 lb respectively derived
from an emission factor of 0.00000033 lb nickel lost per lb of coal burned6 and
0.00023 lb of nickel lost per gal of oil burned.6 Emissions from residential
and commercial coal and oil heating were estimated to be 2,400 lb and
3,860,220 lb respectively derived from an emission factor of 0.00000015 lb
nickel lost per lb of coal burned5 and 0.00013 lb of nickel lost per gal of oil
burned.6 Diesel fuel consumption generated an estimated 1,785,420 lb of nickel
emissions based on emission factor of 0.00013 lb nickel lost per gal of diesel
fuel consumed.6 Source locations for all of these incidental categories are
considered too numerous and too diverse to pinpoint regional distributions.
Vent parameter data for all nickel emission sources are shown in Table 21-13.
Table 21-14 presents a summary of nickel emissions. Total nationwide nickel
emissions are estimated to have been 22,369,.060 lb in 1978.
-------
21-17
Table 21-10. Nickel Emissions from Electrical Utility Power Plants (coal-fired)a
Region
Number
of Sites
Nickel Emissions
(Lb/yr)
Average
(lb/yr)
Emissions/Site
(g/sec)b
New England
9
2 ,220
245
0.004
Middle Atlantic
51
35,E00
700
0.010
East North Central
156
107,395
690
0.010
West North Central
111
29,775
270
0.004
South Atlantic
61
62,095
1020
0.015
East South Central
44
51,640
1175
0.017
West South Central
3
4,115
1370
0.020
Mountain
38
21,540
565
0.008
Pacific
	1
2,220
2220
0.032
Total
474
316,800
670

aSee ref. 5.
^3ased on 8760 hr/yr operation,
c
Based on an emission factor of 0.00000C33 lb nickel emitted per lb coal burned
"C" from published source (see ref. 6).
-------
21-18
Table 21-11. Nickel Emissions from Electrical Utility Power Plants (oil-fired)3
. „ • , , „ • • Average Emissions/Si te
Number	Nickel Emissions 	2	—
Region	of Sites	(lb/yr)	(lb/yr)	(g/sec)
New England
35
765,125
21,860
0. 31
Middle Atlantic
70
2,270,945
32,44C
0. 47
East North Central
110
4B0.235
4,365
0. 06
West North Central
85
56,960
670
0.01
South Atlantic
97
2,555,830
26,350
0. 38
East South Central
26
162,790
6,260
0.09
West South Central
100
390,700
3,905
0.06
Mountain
44
179,075
4,070
0.06
Pacific
33
1,277,920
38,725
0.56
Total
600
8,139,600C
13,566

aSee ref. 5.
^Based on 8760 hr/yr operation.
CBased on an emission factor of 0.000300 lb nickel emitted per gal oil burned.
"C" Published data {see ref. 6).
-------
21-19
Table 21-12. Nickel Emissions from Coke Oven Operations (coal burning)3

Number
Total Emissions
Region
of Sites
(lb/vr)
New England
0
0
Middle Atlantic
15
30,245
East' North Central
25
50,410
West North Central
3
6,050
South Atlantic
4
S, 065
East South Central
9
18,145
West South Central
2
4,035
Mountain
2
4,035
Pacific
1
2,015
Total
61
123,000b,c
See ref. 9.
^Basea on an emission factor of 0-00000082 lb nickel emitted/lb coal burned
(see ref. 6).
Q
Average emission rate per site 2016 lb/vr (0.029 g/sec).
-------
21-20
Table 21-13. Nickel Vent Parameters
Vent Vent Discharge
Number of Height Diameter Temperature Velocity
Source	Stacks	(ft)	(ft)	( °F)	(fps)
Power plant	1	400	16	200	90
Iron and steel	2	80	1	200	40
Ferro-alloy	1	80	1	200	40
Gray iron foundry	1	150	2	200	40
Coke oven	2	30	1	300	15
2
Building cross-section all sources-2M .
-------
21-21
Table 21-14. 1978 Nickel Nationwide Emissions
Nationwide
Emissions
	Source	(lb/y r)
Nickel mining/smelting	236,060
Iron and steel manufacturing	231,000
Ferroalloys	828,000
Non-ferroalloys	142,600
Gray Iron Foundry	185,800
Electroplating	Negligible
Chemicals	Negligible
Others	Negligible
Power Plants
Coal	316,800
Oil	8,139,600
Industrial 3oilers
Coal	36,300
Oil	6,4C1,860
Residential/Commercial
Coal	2,400
Oil	3,560,220
Coke ovens (coal)	123,000
Diesel fuel (oil)	1,785,420
Total	22,369,060
-------
f\3
I
ro
r>o
FIGURE 21-1. SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF NICKEL EMISSIONS
-------
Table 21-15. EMISSIONS AND METEOROLOGICAL STATIONS OF SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF NICKEL
NO.
COMPANY
1	HANNAH MINING
2.	AMAX
SITE
RIDDLE, OR
PORT NICKEL, LA
LATITUDE LONGITUDE
42 55 02 123 25 00
29 52 35 089 57 26
STAR	PLANT*
STATION	TYPE
24221	1
12958	1
SOURCE*
TYPE PROCESS
1 .296296
1 3.099029
EMISSIONS (GM/SEC)
STORAGE FUGITIVE
0.
0.
0.
0.
The only specific point sources of nickel emissions are the two smelters producing nickel.
Parameter
vent height
effective building
cross section
vent diameter
vent velocity
vent temperature
Hannah Mining
18.6 m
200 m2
4.5m
2.8 m/s
356° K.
Vent: Parameters
AMAX
I
ro
CO
30 m
200 m2
0.6 m
14 m/s
477° K.
See ref. 9.
1:8-24
-------
21-24
TABLE 21-16 EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE OF NICKEL RESULTING FROM
SPECIFIC POINT SOURCE EMISSIONS
Concentration
Level
(ug/m3)
Population
Exposed
(persons)
Dosage
3
[(ug/m ) . persons]
5.53
2
10
5
6
30
2.5
132
441
1
773
1,290
0.5
1,496
1,810
0.25
2,586
2,160
0.1
99,664
16,200
0.05
448,132
38,600
0.025
706,032
49,700
0.01
708,128
49,700
0.00111*
720,524
49,700
~
The lowest annual average concentration occurring within
20 km of the specific point source.
1:8-25
-------
TABLE 21-17. EMISSIONS RATES AND NUMBER OF GENERAL POINT SOURCES OF NICKEL

Iron/Steel Production
Ferroalloys Production
Gray Foundry
Power Plant (Coal)
Power Plant (011)
Coke Oven
Realon
Emissions/Site
(dm/sec)
Number
of Site!
Emissions/Site
(qtn/jec)
Number
of Sites
Emissions/Site
(qm/sec)
Number
Of Sites
Emissions/Site
(qm/iec)
Number
of Sites
Emissions/Site
(qm/sec)
Number
of-Sltei
Einlss Ions/Site Nuntwr
(qm/sec) of-Sites
New England
0.00199
10
0.234
0
0.00514
13
0.00353
9
0.315
35
0.029 0
Middle Atlantic
0.0156
65
0.234
12
0.00586
42
0.0101
51
0.467
70
0.029 15
Eitt North Central
0.0166
84
0.234
e
0.010S
129
0.00994
156
0.0679
110
0.029 25
West North Central
0.00732
5
0.234
i
0.00526
29
0.003B9
111
0.00965
85
0.029 3
South Atlantic
0.0135
22
0.234
B
0.0090
22
0.0147
61
0.0379
97
0.029 4
Eitt South Central
0.00904
25
0.234
13
0.00854
37
0.0169
44
0.0901
26
0.029 9
West South Central
0.00638
12
0.234
1
0.00704
19
0.0197
3
0.0567
100
0.029 2
fountain
0.0399
2
0.234
4
0.00642
5
0.00814
38
0.0586
44
0.079 2
Pacific
0.00573
32
0.234
4
0.00487
78
0.0370
1
0.0558
33
0.079 1
-------
TABLE 21-18. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULTING FROM EMISSIONS FROM GENERAL POINT SOURCES OF NICKEL
Concentration
Level
(pq/m*)
Population Exposed
(10* persona)
Dosage
[10*( m/m*) ^personal
Iron/
Steel
Production
Ferro-
al loys
Production
Gray
Iron
Foundry
Power
Plant
(Coal)
Power
Plant
(Oil)
Coke
Oven
U.S.
Total
Iron/
Steel
Production
Ferro-
alloya
Production
Gray
Iron
Foundry
Power
Plant
(Coal)
Power
Plant Oven
(Oil) Coke
U.S.
Total
1
0
3.4
0
0
0
0
3.4
0
3.9
0
0
0
0
3.9
0.5
0
44
0
0
44
0.5
B8
0
31
0
0
27.3
0.25
59
0.25
0
230
0
0
233
7.3
470
0
94
0
0
92
2.4
189
0.1
0
1,030
0
0
2,040
71
3,140
0
224
0
0
355
11
590
0.05
~
~
—
--
—
--
—
2.3
344
0
0
587
23
956
0.025
—
--
~
—
—
—
~
12
435
0.6
0.02
932
39
1,420
0.01
—
--
—
—
~
--
—
42
639
10
2
1,330
63
2,090
0.005
—
—
--
—
--
—
—
70
805
25
7
1,760
80
2,730
0.0025
—
—
—
—
—
~
~
98
934
43
16
2,130
103
3,330
0.001
--
--
—
—
—
—
~
141
982
65
32
2,610
135
3,960
0.0005
~
—
—
—
—
--
—
183
986
86
43
2,740
161
4,200
0
~
—
—
—
--
—
—
261
986
159
108
2,840
177
4,350
NOTE: The uae oF — as an entry indicates that the incremental E/D is not aigniFicant (relative to last entry or relative to entry in another column
at the same row) or that the exposure oF the aame population may be counted in another column.
-------
21-27
TABLE 21-19. MAJOR PARAMETERS FOR ESTIMATING EXPOSURE/DOSAGE RESULTING
FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS OF NICKEL
	Parameter	 	Value
Daytime decay rate (K^)	0
Nighttime decay rate (K^)	0
Hanna-Gifford coefficient (C)	225
Nationwide heating source emissions (E^)	55.62 gm/sec
Nationwide nonheating stationary source emissions	(EN) 95.91 gm/sec
Nonferroalloys production	2.05 gm/sec
Industrial boiler combustion	93.86 gm/sec
Nationwide mobile source emissions (EM)	25.71 gm/sec
Raito of truck emissions to auto emissions (R„)	3
-------
TABLE 21-20. NICKEL EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULTING FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS
Eipo level
(fa/"1)
.500000
.350000
.100000
.050000
.025000
Population
505140
9149730
30136880
81697926
131790074
158679135
Dotage
(ug/»'/
	person)
349680.9
3565444.6
6710390.7
10154411.8
12041708.9
12506833.2
Percentage of Contribution
Healing	Mat ionarjf	Mobile
19.0	73.9	7.1
39.7	55.8	4.6
37.0	55.3	7.7
35.2	55.7	9.1
34.4	55.0	9.8
34.1	55.9	10.0
Percentage of Distribution
City Type I
100.0
100.0
100.0
97.6
94.6
92.7
City type 2
0.
0.
0.
1.0
2.4
2.7
City Type 3
0.
0.
0.
1.4
3.0
4.7
I
ro
oo
-------
TABLE 21-21. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE SUMMARY OF NICKEL


Population Exposed



Dosage



(persons)


[(ug/m3)
- persons]

Concentration
Specific
General

Specific
General


Level
Point
Point

Poi nt
Poi nt


(ug/m3)
Source
Source Area Source
U.S. Total
Source
Source
Area Source U
.S. Total
5
6
0 0
6
30
0
0
30
2.5
132
0 0
132
441
0
0
441
1
773
3,400 0
4,173
1,290
3,900
0
5,190
0.5
1,496
88,000 505,140
594,636
1,810
59,000
349,681
410,491
0.25
2,586
470,000 9,149,730
9,622,316
2,160
189,000
3,565,444
3,756,604
0.1
99,664
3,140,000 30,126,880
33,366,544
16,200
590,000
6,710,390
7,316,590
0.05
448,132
81,697,926
--
38,600
956,000
10,154,411
11,149,011
0.025
706,032
131,790,074
--
49,700
1,420,000
12,041,708
13,511,408
0.01
--
--
--
--
2,090,000
--
--
0
720,524
158,679,135
	
49,700
4,350,000
12,506,833
16,906,533
NOTE: The use
of -- as an
entry indicates that the incremental E/D
is not significant (relative to last entry
or
relative to entry
in another column at the same
row) or that
the exposure
of the same population may be

counted
in another
column.





1:B-26
-------
21-30
REFERENCES
1.	J.O. Corrick, Nickel-1977 Mineral Commodity Profiles, Bureau of Mines, U.S.
Dept. of Interior (July 1977).
2.	"Nickel--Salient Statistics," p. 754.1000B, Chemical Economics Handbook,
Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA (February 1977).
3.	"Bituminous Coal," p. 211.3026C, Chemical Economics Handbook, Stanford
Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA (October 1978).
4.	"Fuel Oil," p. 229.4350B, Chemical Economics Handbook, Stanford Research
Institute, Menlo Park, CA (February 1979).
5.	"Existing Power Plants of 1974," supplied by Systems Applications, Inc., San
Rafael, CA, to Hydroscience, Inc., Knoxville, TN.
6.	Survey of Emissions and Controls for Hazardous and Other Pollutants, The
Mitre Corporation, EPA Contract No. 68-01-0438, p. 115.
7.	Marketing Economics Key Plants 1975-1976, Marketing Economics Institute, New
York, NY.
8.	"Ferroal1oys," p 738.4000C,D,E . Chemical Economics Handbook, Stanford
Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA.
9.	"Coke Oven Plants in the U.S.," p 212.2000A--D, Chemical Economics Handbook,
Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA (October 1978).
10.	The Hannah Mining Company, (Samuel E. Malourh), Personal Communication in
response to publication of the first draft of this report (June 1981).
11.	AMAX Nickel, Inc. (0. H. Wilkinson), Personal communication in response to
publication of the first draft of this report (June 1981).
1:B-27
-------
APPENDIX A-22 	 Nitrobenzene
NITROBENZENE CHEMICAL DATA
Nomencl ature
Chemical Abstract Service Registry Number: 98-95-3
Synonyms: Nitrobenzol; Mononitrobenzene
Chemical Formula
Molecular Weight: 123.11
Molecular Formula: C^H^ NOj
Chemical and Physical Properties
Physical State at STP: Solid/oily 1iquid, colorless; volatile oil; almond odor
Boiling Point: 210.8°C at 760 mm
Melting Point: 5.7°C
Density: 1.2037 at 20°C/4°C
Vapor Pressure: 0.284 mm at 25°C
Vapor Density: 4.25
Solubility: Slightly soluble (10 g/1 at 20°C; 2.04 g/1 in H20 at 30°C).
Log Partition Coefficient (Octanol/HjO): 1.88
Atmospheric Reactivity
Transformation Products:
Reactivity Toward 0H-: 1/2 butane
Reactivity Toward 0^: Relatively unreactive, t 1/2 «= 11 yr.
Reactivity Toward Photolysis: NAPP
Major Atmospheric Precursors: N/A
Formation Reactivity:
Molecular Structure:
-------
22-5
I. SOURCES
A.	PRODUCTION
Nitrobenzene (C6H5N02) is currently produced in the United States by the direct
nitration of benzene with a mixture of nitric acid, sulfuric acid, and water.1'2
The quantity of organic by-products formed, primarily nitrated phenols, is only
about 0.02 wt % of the nitrobenzene produced.
There are currently five companies producing nitrobenzene at six locations in
the United States. The locations of the plants and the 1978 capacity and estimated
production level for each plant are shown in Table 22-1.2,3 An estimated 795 million
lb of nitrobenzene was produced in 1978.
B.	USES
Approximately 98% (784 million lb) of the nitrobenene produced in 1978 was con-
sumed captively for the manufacture of aniline. An estimated 6 million lb.
(0.5%) of the nitrobenzene production was used as a solvent in cellulose ether
manufacture and as a selective solvent in the petroleum industry. A very small
portion, 4 million lb, was used as a chemical intermediate to produce dichloro-
anilines and dinitrobenzenes. Uses are summarized in Table 22—2.1 -2 Specific
chemical intermediate, nitrobenzene user site locations are shown in
Table 22-35.
II. EMISSION ESTIMATES
A. PRODUCTION AND USE TO MAKE ANILINE
Estimated production losses are shown in Table 22-5 for each of the six producing
locations. Total emissions of nitrobenzene resulting from its production and
subsequent use to produce aniline are estimated to have been 257,000 lb in 1978.^
Process emissions of nitrobenzene originate from the reactor and separator vents,
from the wash and neutralization vents, and from the nitrobenzene stripper.
Other associated emission components include nitrated phenols which leave via
the wastewater effluent and benzene. It is estimated that nitrobenzene consti-
tutes roughly 20% of the total volatile organic compounds emitted from nitro-
5
benzene production and aniline manufacturing facilities. Storage emissions
-------
Table 22-1. Production of Nitrobenzene3
Source
Location
1978 Estimated
Production
(million lb)
1978 Estimated
Capacity
(million lb)
Geographic
Coordinates
N. Latitude/W. Longitude
American Cyanamid Willow Island, wv
Du Pont
First Chemicals
Hobay Corp.
Rubicon
Total
Beaumont, TX
Gibbstown, NJ
Pascagoula, MS
New Martinsville, WV
Geismar, LA
55.2
243.3
129.8
227.1
87.6
51.9
794,8
85
375
200
350
135
	80
1225
39
21
50/
81
18
50
30
00
51/
94
01
40
39
49
50/
75
15
50
30
21
20/
88
32
55
39
44
50/
80
50
50
30
12
00/
91
00
30
See refs 1—3.
3The distribution of production for each producer is determined by the ratio of total U.S. production/total
capacity as compared to individual capacity.
-------
22-7
Table 22-2. 1978 Nitrobenzene Consumption by End Use*
End Use
Percent
of Total
ConsumDtion
End Use
Consumption
(M lb)
Aniline
Solvent
petroleum industry)
Chemical intermediate
(dichloroanilines,
dinitrobenzenes)
Total
99
0.5
0.5
100.0
784
6
794
*See refs 1 and 2.
-------
22-8
Table 22-3. Nitrobenzene Chemical Intermediate User Locations*
Geographic Coordinates
	Source	Location	Latitude /Longitude
2,4-Dichloroaniline
Eastman Kodak Company	Rochester, NY	43 12 01/77 37 58
3 ,'4-Dichloroaniline
Blue Spruce Co.	Bound Brook, NJ	40 32 10/76 29 IB
Du Pont	Deepwater, NJ	39 41 25/75 30 35
Dinitrobenzene sulfonic acid
Toms River Chem.	Toms River, NJ	39 58 14/74 12 30
*See ref 4.
-------
fable 22-4», 1978 Nitrobenzene Emissions from Both Nitrobenzene and Aniline Production3
1978	Process	Storage	Fugitive	Total ^ Total
Production Emissions Emissions Emissions Emissions Emissions
Company	Location	(l"l lb)	(lb X 104) (]b X 104) (lb X 104) (lb X 104) (g/sec)C
American Cyanamid
Willow Island, WV
55.2
0.04
0.03
1.71
1.79
0.26
Du Pont
Beaumont, TX
243.3
0.20
0.15
7.54
7.88
1.13

Gibbstown, NJ
129.8
0.10
0.08
4.02
4.21
0.61
First Chemical
Pascagoula, MS
227.1
0.18
0.14
7.04
7.36
1.06
Mobay
New Martinsville, WV
87.6
0.07
0.05
2.73
2.84
0.41
Rubicon
Geismar, LA
51.9
0.04
0.03
1.61
1.68.
0.24
Total

794.8
0.64
0.48
24.64
25.75
3.70
aFrom refs 1, 2, and 5 .
Emission factor:
Process	0.000008 "A" from site visit data
Storage	0.000006	"A" from site visit data
Fugitive	0.000310	"A" from site visit data
Total	0.000324
Q
Based on 8760 hr/yr operation.
-------
22-10
represent the total losses from surge, final product, and feed storage tanks as
well as loading and handling losses. Fugitive emissions are those that result
from plant equipment leaks.
Vent stack data are shown in Table 22-5. Normally five process vents and five
storage tank vents are sources oi production and storage emissions. Usually
nitrobenzene production facilities are "open-air" structures without walls and
solid floors (i.e., steel grating). Only the control room area is enclosed.
5
Fugitive losses are estimated to occur over a 130 ft X 260 ft area.
B. USES
The emissions of nitrobenzene resulting from its use to make aniline were included
in the nitrobenzene production losses.
The total quantity of nitrobenzene used in solvent applications, is eventually
released to the atmosphere.
The 6,375,000 lb lost in refinery operations was distributed by geographic region.
Allocation of emissions shown in Table 22-6 were made based on region refinery
g
capacity.
Nitrobenzene emissions resulting from its use as a chemical intermediate to
produce dichloroanilines and dinitrobenzenes amounted to 6375 lb in 1978 based
on an emission factor of 0.0015 lb lost/lb used. Emissions are shown in Table 22-7.
Total emissions were distributed evenly over all five sites in the absence of
capacity data.
Total nationwide emissions of nitrobenzene in 1978 from all sources are estimated
to have been 6.67 million lb. A tabulation of the losses is shown in Table 22-8 .
-------
22 -n
Table 22-5. Nitrobenzene Vent Parameters
Source
Number
of Stacks
Vent
Height
(ft)
Vent
Diameter
(ft)
Discharge
Temperature
(°F)
Velocity
(ft/sec)
Production3





Process





Reactors and separator
3
66
o
M
K)
131
11.5
Wash and neutralization
1
36
0.10
113
12.5
Nitrobenzene stripper
1
66
0.08
89
6.6
Storage





Nitrobenzene storage tank
5
40
0.12
104
-
Fugitive*"





Refinery6





Process
1
30
0.33
120
7
Nitrobenzene chemical





intermediate^





Process
1
20
0.17
140
12
Storage
2
20
0.17
80
-
Fugitive^
-
-
-
-
•
aSee ref 5 -
^Building cross-section 50 m2.
distributed over a 130 ft X 260 ft area.
^Building cross-section 200 m2.
^Distributed over 100 ft X 100 ft area.
-------
22-12
Table 22-£. Nitrobenzene Solvent Emissions from Petroleum Refineries by Region3

Number
of Sites
Refinery
Capacity
(bbl/dav)
Nitrobenzene
Emissions'3 .
(lb/yr)
Average Nitrobenzene
Emissions Der Site
P.ecion
(lb/yr)
(q/sec)c
New England
1
13,000
5,100
5,100
0.073
Midal-e Atlantic
16
1,552,620
595,425
37,215
0.536
East North Central
33
2,535,350
972,190
29,460
0.424
West North Central
19
844,75 3
323,850
17,045
0.245
South Atlantic
11
279,600
107,100
9,735
0.140
East South Central
16
645,686
247,350
15,460
0.223
West South Central
92
7,305,616
2,800,540
30,440
0.438
Mountain
42
683,076
262,010
6,240
0.090
Paci fic
49
2,769,883
1,062,075
21,675
0.312

279
16,629,584
6, 375,000


aSee ref. 6 ¦
Assumes 50% of nitrobenzene solvent use is in refinery operations. Individual
total emissions allocated per region by ratio of region refinery capacity compared
to total U.S.A. refinery capacity.
c
Assumes S760 hr/yr operation.
-------
22-13
Table 22-7. Nitrobenzene Emissions from Chemical Intermediate Users3


Process
Emissions
(Ib/vr)
Storage
Emissions
(lb/yr)
Fugitive
•Emissions
(lb/yr)
Total
¦ b
Emissions
Comoanv
Location
(lb/yr
) (g/sec)C
Eastman Kodak
Rochester, NY
893
128
255
1275
0.01E
Blue,. Spruce
Bound Brook, NJ
893
128
255
1275
0.013
Du Pont
Deepwater, NJ
893
128
255
1275
0.018
Toms River
Toms River, NJ
89 3
128
255
1275
0.018
Toral

3567
512
1020
5100

3See ref. 4.
^Based on nitrobenzene	factor (Lb lost/lb used). See ref. 7 -
Process 0.00105	C Derived from published source.
Storage 0.00015	C Derived from published source.
Fugitive 0.00030	C Derived from published source.
0.00150
Q
Based on 8760 hr/yr operation.
-------
22-14
Table 22-8 . Estimated 1978 Nitrobenzene
Nationwide Emission Losses
Estimated National
Emission
	Source	(million lb/yr)
Production and consumption to	0.26
make aniline
Solvent	6.4
(petroleum industry)
Chemical intermediates (dichloro-	0.01
anilines and dinitrobenzenes)
Total	6.67
-------
21
22
V
rv>
ro
i
FIGURE 22-1. SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF NITROBENZENE EMISSIONS
-------
TABLE 22-9 . EMISSIONS AND METEOROLOGICAL STATIONS OF SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF NITROBENZENE
*	+	EMISSIONS (CH/SEC)
STAR PLANT SOURCE 	
NO. COMPANY	8ITE	LATITUDE LONCITUDE STATION TYPE TYPE PROCESS STORACE FUCITIVE
1
AMERICAN CYANAfl
WILLOW ISLAND. WV
39
21
30
001
10
SO
13736
1
I
.000760
.004320
.246240
2
DUPONT
BEAUMONT, TX
39
ee
SI
094
01
40
12917
1
I
.028800
.021600
1.083760
3
DUPONT
CIBB8T0WN, NJ
39
49
se
073
15
SO
13739
1
i
.014400
.011020
.078880
4
FIRST CHEMICAL
PASCACOLA, K9
30
21
20
000
32
3D
13020
1
1
.023920
.02(1160
1.0)3740
5
MOBAY
NEW MAIITINSVILLE.WV
39
44
00
080
00
00
13736
1
1
.010080
.007200
.393120
6
RUBICON
CEISMAR, LA
30
12
00
091
1 1
30
12938
1
1
•003760
.004320
.231840
7
EASTMAN KODAK
ROCHESTER. NY
43
12
01
077
37
00
14771
2
2
.012059
.001843

-------
TABLE 22- 9 (Concluded)
NO.
COMPANY
SITE
EMISSIONS (CM/SEC)
* +
STAR PLANT SOURCE 	
LATITUDE LONCITUDE STATION TYPE TYPE PROCESS STORACE FUCITIVE
21	BLUE SPRUCE
22	IJUPONT
ROUND BROOK NJ
DEKPWATEH. NJ
40 32 10 074 29 10 14737 2	2
39 41 25 073 30 JJf. 13739 2	2
.012039
. 0 121159
.001043
.001043
.003672
.003672
24 TOMS RIVER
TOMS RIVER, NJ
39 30 14 074 12 30 14706
.012059 .001043 .003672
* Plant Types:
Type 1: Plant produces nitrobenzene and aniline
Type 2: Plant produces nitrobenzene derivatives
t Source Types:
Type 1: Nitrobenzene and aniline production
Type 2: Derivative productions
-------
22-18
TABLE 22-10. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE OF NITROBENZENE RESULTING FROM
SPECIFIC POINT SOURCE EMISSIONS
Concentration Population
Level	Exposed	Dosage
(uq/m^)	(persons)	[(ug/m^) ~ persons]
5
4
23
2.5
106
370
1.0
1,359
2,200
0.5
5,825
5,150
0.25
14,435
8,000
0.10
47,471
13,500
0.05
86,600
16,200
0.025
175,991
19,200
3.6 x
10"5* 4,510,613
39,000
* The lowest annual average concentration occurring within
20 km of the specific point source.
58/4
-------
TABLE 22-11. EMISSIONS RATES AND NUMBER OF GENERIC POINT SOURCES
OF NITROBENZENE (REFINERY SOLVENT USE)*
Emissions/Site Number
Region	 (gm/sec) of Sites
New England
0.073
1
Middle Atlantic
0.536
16
East North Central
0.424
33
West North Central
0.245
19
South Atlantic
0.140
11
East South Central
0.223
16
West South Central
0.438
92
Mountain
0.090
42
Pac1f1c
0.312
49
* Emissions parameters:
Vent height: 9 m
Building cross section: 200 m?
Vent diameter: 0.10 m
Vent velocity: 2.1 m/sec
Vent temperature: 322°K
-------
22-20
TABLE 22-12. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULTING FROM EMISSIONS FROM
GENERAL POINT SOURCES OF NITROBENZENE (REFINERY
SOLVENT USE)
Concentration Population
Level	Exposed	Dosage
(uq/m-3)	(10-3 persons) [10^ (ug/m^) • persons]
10
0.71
0.01
5
8.1
0.06
2.5
43.4
0.18
1
192
0.41
0.5
482
0.61
0.25
—
0.91
0.1
—
1.41
0.05
—
1.75
0.025
—
2.17
0.01
—
3.26
0.005
—
3.75
0.0025
—
4.01
0.001
—
4.04
0.0005
—
4.05
0
--
4.05
NOTE: The use of -- as an entry indicates that the incremental
E/D is not significant (relative to last entry or relative
to entry in another column at the same row) or that the
exposure of the same population may be counted in another
column.
S8/t+
-------
cn
CD
N
¦T
TABLE 22-13. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE SUMMARY OF NITROBENZENE
Concentration
Level
(pq/ro^)
Speci Fic
Point
Source
Population Exposed
(peraona)	
General
Point
Source
Area Source
U.S. Total
Specific
Point
Source
Dosage
[(pq/m ) » persona]
Genera 1
Point
5ource
Area Source
U.S. Total
10
5
2.5
1
0.5
0.25
0.1
0.05
0.025
0.01
0.005
0.0025
0.001
0.0005
0
4
106
1,359
5,829
14,435
47,471
86,600
179,991
710
0,100
43,400
192,000
482.000
4,510,613
8,104
43,506
193,359
487,829
23
370
3,200
5,150
8,000
13,500
16,200
19,200
39,000
10,000
60,000
180,000
410,000
610,000
910,000
1,410,000
1,750,000
2,170,000
3,260,000
3,750,000
4,010,000
4,040,000
4,050,000
4,050,000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10,000
60,000
180,000
412,000
615,000
918,000
1,423,000
1,766,000
2,189,000
rsj
ro
i
4,089,000
N0IE: Ihe usr; nF -- nn 311 entry indicates thnt the incremental E/D is not niqnificnnt (relative to ln.it entry or
relative to entry in another column ot the same row) or that the exposure oF the name population may he
counted in another column.
-------
22-22
REFERENCES
1.	E. M. Klapproth, "Aniline and Nitrobenzene," Chemical Economics Handbook,
Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA (January 1979).
2.	"Chemical Product Synopsis on Nitrobenzene," Mannsville Chemical Products
(March 1978).
3.	"Chemical Profile on Nitrobenzene," Chemical Marketing Reporter (December 20, 1976).
4.	Chemical Research Services, 1979 Directory of Chemical Producers, United States
of America, Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA.
5.	F. D. Hobbs and C. W. Stuewe, Hydroscience, Inc., Emission Control Options for
the Synthetic Organic Chemicals Manufacturing Industry	Product Report on
Nitrobenzene (on file at EPA, ESED, Research Triangle Park, NC (January 1979).
6- T. F. Killilea, "Petroleum Refinery Capacity by State," Chemical Economics
Handbook, p. 229.3510B, Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA (January 1, 1978).
7. Special Project Report, "Petrochemical Plant Sites," prepared for Industrial
Pollution Control Division, Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory,
Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio, by Monsanto Research
Corporation, Dayton, Ohio (April 1976).
-------
APPENDIX A-23	PCB
PCB'S (POLYCHLORINATED BIPHENYLS) CHEMICAL DATA
Nomencl ature
Chemical Abstract Service Registry Number:
Synonyms: (a) Aroclor 1254
Chlorinated biphenyls
Polychlorinated biphenyls
(a) 11097-69-1
L(b) 11096-82-5
(b) Aroclor 1260
PCB 1260
Kanechlor
Chemical Formula
Molecular Weight:
Molecular Fonnula: (exact comDosition unknown or underternined)
Molecular Structure:
Xj, x = CI or H
Chemical and Physical Properties
Physical State at STP: Variable—mobile oily liquids; white crystalline
solids; and hard noncrvstaline resins
Boiling Point: 365° to 390°C
Melting Point:
Density: 1.495 to 1.505 at 65°C/15.5°C
Vapor Pressure: 1 mm at 25°£
Vapor Density:
Solubility: Slightly soluble (5.6 x 10"^ g/1 of ^0)
Log Partition Coefficient (Octanol/H^O):
Atmospheric Reactivity
Transformation Products:
Reactivity Toward 0H-: 5« butane
Reactivity Toward 0^: No Reaction
Reactivity Toward Photolysis: NAPP
Major Atmospheric Precursors: N/A
Formation Reactivity;
-------
23-5
I. SOURCES
Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) is a generic term used to describe the mixture
of chlorinated biphenyl isomers (209 possible isomers) formed by the direct
chlorination of biphenyl. PCBs were produced in the United States by the Monsanto
Corporation at its Sauget, Illinois, plant, but PCB manufacture is currently
banned in the United States.1
PCBs are no longer used or consumed for any kind of end-use in this country.
Originally, PCBs had application as plasticizers, hydraulic fluids, pump oils,
in carbonless carbon paper, and as a dielectric fluid in electrical equipment.
In September of 1970, all end-uses of PCBs were restricted to only closed elec-
trical systems such as transformers and capacitors.2'3
Currently, the only potential source of PCB emissions to the atmosphere is from
the disposal of transformers and capacitors containing PCBs. Chemical landfills
will be used to dispose of medium- and small-sized capacitors with negligible
resulting emissions. Liquid PCBs, drained from transformers and large capacitors
containing PCBs, will have to be incinerated per EPA regulations. Incineration
will have some PCB emission potential.
The specific areas from which transformers and capacitors will have to be dis-
posed *he quantity of PCBs generated by such incineration disposal are shown
in Table 23-1.2 Quantities of PCBs in excess of 30.02 million lb/yr requiring
disposal would be landfilled. A list of proposed PCB incinerator site locations
is shown in Table 23-2.
II. EMISSION ESTIMATES
Using the EPA's Versar Report2 as a basis, an emission estimate was completed
for incinerating a total of 30.02 million lb of PCBs at 12 locations within the
United States (see Table 23-3). The total was. apportioned over each site per the
Versar Report assuming that all twelve sites would be in operation and that all
PCBs incinerated would be done only at these 12 locations.
-------
23-6
Table 23-1. Sources of PCBs for Incineration*
(million lb/yr)
Source
PCBs from
Transformer Disposal
PCBs from
Capacitor Disposal
Total PCBs from Closed
Electrical Systems
Utilities
4.7
9.79
14.49
Large residential
and commercial
1.6
6.78
8.38
Industrial
1.6
5.04
6.64
Private residential
0.5
0.01
0.51
Total
8.4
21.62
30.02
*See ref 2.
-------
23-7
Table 23-2. Proposed PCB's Incinerator Site Locations
a
Incinerator	Geographic Coordinates
Location	Latitude/Longitude
Bridgeport, NJ
39
46
00/75
22 00b
Deer Park, TX
29
45
50/95
09 00b
Baton Rouge, LA
30
33
35/91
15 30b
San Francisco, CA
38
00
00/122
00 ooc
Los Angeles, CA
34
00
00/118
; 00 00C
Denver, CO
39
43
12/105
00 ooc
Chicago, IL
41
52
00/87
43 38C
Sandusky, OH
40
26
15/82
41 21°
Atlanta, GA
33
45
17/84
22 51°
Richmond, VA
37
28
53/77
25 06C
Waterforc, NY
42
49
03/73
45 13b
El Dorado, AR
33
14
38/92
18 45C
aSee ref. 1.
b	....
Represents existing incinerator sites.
c
Represents geographic center of city or approximate
center of chemical industry in proximity to that
city.
-------
23-8
Table 23-3. Incidental Sources of PCBs from
Incinerator Sites after July 1, 19793

PCS Solids
Burned
(million lb/yr)

PCB Emissions^

Incinerator
Location
Case
I
Case
II
(lb/yr)
(q/sec)
(lb/yr)
(q/sec)C
Bridgeport, NJ^
5.91
5,910
0.106
591
0.011
Deer Park, TXd
2.12
2,120
0.038
212
0.004
d
Baton Rouge, LA
0.99
990
0.018
99
0.002
San Francisco, CAe
1.60
1,600
0.029
160
0.003
£
Los Angeles, CA
3.01
3,010
0.054
301
0.005
Denver, C0e
1.19
1,190
0.021
119
0.002
£
Chicago, IL
2.75
2,750
0.049
275
0.005
£
Sandusky, OH
3.83
3,830
0.069
383
0.007
Atlanta, GAe
5.21
5,210
0.094
521
0.009
Richmond, VA6
1.82
1,820
0.033
182
0.003
Waterford, NY^
0.10
100
0.002
10
-
El Dorado, AKC
1.49
1,490
0.027
149
0.003
Total
30.02
30,020

3,002

aSee ref 1.
^Case I = 99.90% removal efficiency; 0.001% of PCBs charged to the incinerator
are released to the atmosphere.
Case II = 99.99% removal efficiency; 0.0001% of PCBs charged to the incinerator
are released to the atmosphere.
Q
Assumes incinerator in operation 80% of the time, i.e., 7008 hr/yr.
All three existing incinerators are owned by Rollins Environmental Services.
£
Planned new incinerator installations.
^General Electric's Waterford, New York, incinerator to be used only for GE
waste generated onsite.
-------
23-9
The first three locations shown in Tables 23-2 and 23-3 are currently existing and are
owned by Rollins Environmental Services. A fourth location, General Electrical,
Waterford, NY, is also existing but will incinerate only PCB wastes generated
onsite. All other sites shown in Tables 2.*-2 and 23-3 are proposed or planned.
Individual site emission estimates are based on two cases. Case I assumes a
removal efficiency of 99.9% as specified in the initial EPA rules and regulations
for PCB disposal,4 and Case II assumes 99.99% removal efficiency, the level
currently being recommended by RECRA.5 Case II efficiencies have been demonstrated
when burning liquid PCBs. Case I efficiencies have been achieved for incineration
of solid PCB waste.
Emission rates are based on an average rate of 80% of total annual time'. The
other 20% downtime is caused by maintenance, refractory repair, and inventory
interruptions.
Vent parameter data, representative of a typical incinerator system, are shown
in Table 23-4 .
Total estimated annual emissions of PCBs with all twelve incineration sites
operating are estimated to be between 3000 and 30,020 lb/yr.
-------
23-10
Table 23-4. PCB Incinerator Vent Parameters
Number of stacks	1
Vent height	175 ft
Vent diameter	2 ft
Discharge temperature (after	180°F
water scrubber)
Velocity	60 ft/sec
Building cross-section	100 k?
-------
FIGURE 23-1. SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF EMISSIONS OF PCBs
-------
TABLE 23-5. EMISSIONS AND METEOROLOGICAL STATIONS OF SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF PCBs
EHIPSIOltS 
00
073
22
00
13739
. er.oi 12
0.
o.
n
OEF.n PARK, Tt
29
43
30
093
09
00
12906
.024400
0.
o.
'J
BATOR nOUCE. I.A
30
33
33
091
13
30
13970
.011376
0.
0.
4
sam prune inco. ca
33
00
oo
122
00
00
23234
.010432
0.
0.
0
LOS AIICELr^, CA
34
00
00
i in
00
00
23174
.034704
0.
0.
6
DEUVKn, co
39
43
12
103
00
00
23062
. inocoo
0.
0.
7
CHICAGO. IL
41
32
oo
007
43
3B
94046
.031600
0.
e.
0
8AHDUSKY, Oil
49
26
13
002
41
21
14091
.044064
0.
9.
9
ATLANTA, CA
33
43
17
004
22
Bl
13074
.060040
f>.
tt.
10
oicnr;miD, va
37
211
33
077
23
06
13740
.021024
o.
0.
1 1
VATERFOPJ>, RY
42
49
03
073
43
13
14733
.OOI102
0.
o.
12
EL DOnADO, AIC
33
14
30
092
10
43
93992
. 0 17 1 tIC
0.
0.
-------
23-13
TABLE 23-6. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE OF PCBs RESULTING FROM
SPECIFIC POINT SOURCE EMISSIONS
Concentration	Population
Level	Exposed	Dosage
(yq/m^)	(persons)	[(pg/m^) » persons]
0.25
231
65
0.10
2,749
435
0.05
6,936
708
0.025
33,510
1,650
0.010
165,571
3,570
0.005
443,520
5,490
0.0025
959,598
7,240
0.0010
2,349,660
9,400
0.0005
4,203,743
10,700
0.00025
7,286,678
11,800
0.00010
10,592,456
12,300
7.7 x 10"7*
12,024,404
12,400
The lowest annual average concentration occurring within
20 km of the specific point source.
58/4
-------
23-14
REFERENCES
1.	A. K. Ahmed, "PCB in the Environment," Environment 18 (2), p. 7, March 1976.
2.	"Microeconomic Impacts of the Proposed Marketing and Disposal Regulations for
PCBs," EPA 560/6-77-013, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Toxic
Substances, Washington, D.C. (April 1977).
3.	"Microeconomic Impacts of the Proposed PCB Ban Regulations," EPA 560/6-77-035,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Planning and Management,
Washington, D.C. (May 1978).
4.	Environmental Protection Agency, Part VI, "Polychlorinated Biphenyls; Criteria
Modification: Hearings," Federal Register, p. 31519 (May 31, 1979).
5. "EPA Seeks Comments on Decision to Test Proposed PCB Disposal Method," Environment
Reporter, p. 666 (July 13, 1979).
-------
APPENDIX A-24 	 Phenol
PHENOL (MONOHYDROXYBENZENE) CHEMICAL DATA
fjpmen:1 eture
Chemical Abstract Service Registry Number: 108-95-2
Synonyms: Carbolic acid; phenic acid; phenylic acid; oxybenzene;
phenyl hydroxide; hydroxybenzene
Cherr.ical Formula
Molecular Weight: 94.11
Molecular Formula: CgH^O
Molecular Structure:
\ y-°H
Chemical and Physical Properties
Physical State at STP: Solid colorless, acicular crystals or white
cryst mass
Boiling Point: 181.9°C at 760 mm
Melting Point: 42.5 to 436C
Density: 1.0576 at 20°C/4eC
Vapor Pressure: 0.530 mm at 25°C, 1 rrn at 40°C
Vapor Density: 3.24
Solubility: Soluble (86.6 gm/1 of H^O}, infinitely soluble in hot H^Q
Log Partition Coefficient (Octanol/HjO): 1.48
Atmospheric Reactivity
Transformation Products: Reacts with oxidizing materials (forming a variety
of products including benzenediols, benzenetriols, and diphenyls).
Rapidly biodegraded to catechol, CH2> CH3 and-keto-adipate, cis,
cis-muconate
Reactivity Toward	OK•: 2 x butane
Reactivity Toward	O^: t 1/2 * 9.6 hr. 152 propylene
Reactivity Toward	Photolysis: NAPP
Major Atmospheric	Precursors: N/A
-------
24-5
I. SOURCES
A.	PRODUCTION
Phenol (C6H50H) is currently produced in the United States synthetically by the
cumene process and by the oxidation of toluene. The cumene process represents
over 90% of the capacity for synthetic phenol. In the cumene process, cumene
is oxidized with air to cumene hydroperoxide which .is then decomposed by sulfuric
acid hydrolysis to yield phenol and acetone. Toluene oxidation consists of
oxidation of toluene to benzoic acid with subsequent oxidation of the benzoic
acid to phenol. Kalama Chemical at its plant in Kalama, Washington, is the
only synthetic producer that uses the toluene oxidation process. All others
use the cumene process.
There are currently 11 producers of synthetic phenol in the United States. The
locations of the plants and the 1978 capacity and estimated production levels
for each plant are shown in Table 24-1.1,2 In 1978 an estimated 2375 million lb
of phenol was produced.
Phenol is also produced "naturally" from coal tar and petroleum fractions at
the five locations shown in Table 24-2.1 Natural phenol production for 1978 was
estimated to have been 27 million lb.
B.	USES
Phenol is a major chemical intermediate used to produce a variety of other chemi-
cals and products. The largest end-use of phenol is for the manufacture of
phenol-formaldehyde (phenolic) resins which are used primarily in plywood adhesives,
insulation binders, and molding compounds. An estimated 1045 million lb of phenol
was consumed for this end use. An estimated 405 million lb of phenol was used to manu-
facture Bisphenol-A which is used to make epoxy resins. Caprolactam production,
which is a starting material for nylon manufacture, consumed .15% (355 million
lb) of phenol production. Other uses of phenol include the manufacture of nonyl-
phenol (2%), salicylic acid (2%), dodecypl.'-nol (1%), and aaipic acid (1%).
Other miscellaneous uses consume an estimated 15% of phenol production. Exports
in 1978 were estimated to consume 3% (71 million lb) of production. End-uses
are summarized in Table 24-3.1 Identifiable source locations of phenol end-users,
excluding phenol resins, are shown in Table 24-4. Phenolic resin plant are so
-------
Table 2^-1. Phenol Producers (Synthetic Phenol)3
Company
Location
197G
Capacity
(.10& lb/yr)
197G b
Product i.cm
(106 lb/yr)
Coo'n-'P'iicai Location
L,"! 11 tude /Lone; i tudo
Allied Chemical*3
Philadelphia, PA
GOO
453
40 00 24 75 04 07
Clark
Blue Island, IL
80
66
41 39 21/87 41 56
Dow
Freeport, TX
465
351
20 59 12/95 24 05
Georgia Pacific
Plaquemine, LA
265
200
30 15 00/91 11 00
Getty
El Dorado, KS
95
72
37 47 10/96 52 00
Kalama
Kalama, WA
75
57
46 00 54/122 51 05
Monsanto
Chocolate Bayou, TX
500
377
20 14 55/95 12 45
Shell
Deer Park, TX
500
377
29 42 57/95 07 28
Standard Oil of California
Richmond, CA
55
42
37 56 12/122 20 48
Union Carbide
Bound Brook, NJ
180
135
40 33 32/74 31 18
U.S. Steel
Haverhill, OH
325
245
38 34 52/82 49 36
Total

3148C
2375

aSce rets. 1 and 2.
^Total production distributed based on individual site capacity.
CKeichhold put a 150 M Ib/yr plant on stand-by in the first quarter of 1978 at Tuscaloosa, AL.
^See ref. 8
-------
Table 24-2. Phenol Producers (Natural Phenol)3
Company
Location
1970 ,
b
Capacity
(10fi lb/yr)
1978
o
Production
(106 lb/yr)
Geographical Location
Latitude/Longitude
Ferro Corporation
Sante Fe Springs, CA
12
5.4
33
56
30/118 04 18
Koppers
Follansbee, WV
12
5.4
40
23
10/80 35 07
Merichem
Houston, TX
12
5.4
29
45
36/95 10 48
Stimson Lumber
Anacortes, WA
12
5.4
48
20
31/122 32 48
U.S. Steel Corporation
Clairton, PA
12
5.4
40
18
15/79 52 43
Total

60
27



aSee ref. 1.
Total capacity and production distributed evenly over all five sites in the absence of capacity figures.
-------
24-8
Table 24-3. Phenol End-Use 1978
(Synthetic and Natural Phenol)*
Source
Usage
(106 lb/yr)
% Usage
Phenolic resins
1045
44
Bisphenol-A
405
17
Caprolactam
355
15
Nonylphenol
48
2
Salicylic acid
48
2
Dodecylphenol
24
1
Adipic acid
24
1
Miscellaneous
382
15
Exports
71
	3
Total
2402
100
*See ref. 1.
-------
24-9
Table 24-4. Phenol User Locations
1978 1978
Production Phenol
Capacity Usage Geographic Coordinates
Company	Location	(lb/yr)	(lb/yr)	Latitude/Longitude
Bisphenol-A Producers3
Dow
Freeport, TX
150
95
28
59
12/95
24
05
General Electric
Mount Vernon, IN
220
140
37
56
42/87
34
25
Shell
Deer Park, TX
150
95
29
42
55/95
07
34
U.S. Steel
Haverhill, OH
120
75
38
34
52/82
49
36

Total
640
405






Caprolactam Producer'3






Allied
Hopewell, VA
400
355
37
22
13/77
18
08

Total
400
355






Nonylphenol
Producers'5






Borg Warner
Morgantown, WV
60
10
39
40
39/80
58
34
Exxon
Bayvay, NJ
20
3
40
38
46/74
11
48
GAF
Calvert City, KY
5
1
37
02
50/88
21
12

Linden, NJ
20
3
40
38
19/74
15
26
Jefferson
Port Neches, TX
35
6
29
57
45/93
56
00
Kalama
Kalama, WA
20
3
46
00
54/122 51 OS
Monsanto
Kearney, NJ
40
6
40
46
12/74
0.9
08
Rohm and Haas
Deer Park, TX
10
2
29
43
30/95
06
15

Philadelphia, PA
20
3
39
54
50/75
11
30
Schenectady
Rotterdam Junction, NY
20
3
42
47
22/73
43
12

Oyster Creek, TX
50
_8
29
58
21/95
20
38

Total
300
48






Salicylic Acid ProducersC





Dow
Midland, MI
15
14
43
35
28/84
13
08
Monsanto
St. Louis, MO
20
18
38
34
37/90
11
42
Sterling Drug
Cincinnati, OH
8
7
39
05
15/84
33
09
Tenneco
Garfield, NJ
10
9
40
52
28/74
06
49

Total
53
48






Dodecylphenol Producers*5





Borg Warner
Morgantown, WV
60
4
39
40
39/80
58
34
gaf"
Calvert City, KY
5
1
37
02
05/88
21
12
Monsanto
Kearney, NJ
40
9
40
46
12/74
09
08

Total
105
24






Adipic Acid Producer*3






Allied
Hopewell, VA
30
24
37
22
13/77
18
08

Total
30
24





3See ref. 3.
^See ref. 1.
CSee ref. 4
-------
24-10
numerous (total 125)1 that they had to be tabulated by geographic region. They
are shown in the emissions section of this report.
II. EMISSION ESTIMATES
PRODUCTION
Phenol emission estimates from both synthetic and natural phenol producers are
tabulated in Table 24-5. Total phenol emissions from these sites are estimated
to be 3,708,080 lb. Emission factors used to develop process, storage, ana
fugitive emission estimates (except where noted) are shown in Taole 24-b. Emission
factors derived for the cumene process were usea for all producers in the absence of
any site visit, state file, or other published data on toluene oxidation or natural
phenol production. Process emissions originate primarily from catalytic columns and
steaming column vents. Storage emissions represent the losses from both working and
final storage tanks as well as loaaing ana unloading losses. Fugitive emissions are
those caused by leaks from plant equipment. Other associated emission components would
include acetone, benzene, a-methyl styrereand cumene from the process, ana toluene ana
benzene from the toluene oxidation process.
USES
Phenol emissions resulting from the production of phenol-formaldehyde resins
(phenolic) were estimated to have been 522 ,200 lb in 1978. The total estimated
emissions, the total number of phenolic resin plants, and the average emission
rate per site are shown in Table 24-7.7 Total emissions were estimated from the
usage shown in Table 24-3 and the emission factors in Table 24-6. They were distri-
buted by the total number of sites in each region.
Table 24-8 shows the emission estimates for all other identifiable phenol
end-users.
Phenol emissions from the four Bisphenol-A plants were estimated to have been
202,500 lb in 1978.
-------
Table 24-5. Phenol Emissions from P"hcnol Producers
Company
Location

Process
remiss ions
(lh/y r)
5 toracje
Emissions
(lh/yr)
Fugitive
Emissions
(lb/yr)
Total Emissions^
(lb/yr) (q/sec)b
Alliedc
Philadelphia, PA

23,000
172,000
12,740
207,740
2.99
Clark
Blue Island, IL

117 ,<100
1 ,900
2 7,060
1 4i"., S20
2.11
Dow
Frceport, TX.

621,700
10,530
143,910
779 ,220
11.22
Georgia Pacific
Plaquemine, LA

356,000
6,000
82,000
444 ,000
6. 39
Getty
El Dorado, KS

128,160
2 ,160
29,520
159,840
2. 30
Kalama
Kalama, WA

10.1,460
1,710
23,370
126,540
1.82
Monsanto ^
Chocolate Bayou,
TX
8,419
142
19,390
10,500
0.15
Shell
Deer Park, TX

671,060
11,310
154 ,570
836,940
12.05
Standard Oil of







California
Richmond, CA

74,760
1,260
17,220
93 ,240
1. 34
Union Carbide
Bound Brook, NJ

240,300
4 ,050
55,350
299,700
4.31
U.S. Steel
Haverhill, OH

436,100
7 , 350
100,450
54 3,900
7.83
Fe rro
Sante Fe Springs,
, CA
9,612
162
2, 214
11,988
1.73
Koppers
Follansbee, WV

9,612
162
2,214
11,988
1.73
Merichem
Houston, TX

9,612
162
2, 214
11,988
1.73
Stimson
Anacortes, WA

9,612
162
2, 214
11,988
1.7 3
U.S. Steel
Clairton, PA

9,612
162
2, 214
11 ,988
1.73
Total


2,829,579
219,302
659,199
3,708,080

UDascd on the emission factors for phenol production shown in Table 6.
^Iioscd on 0760 lir/yr operation.
cSee ref. 8
^See ref. 10
-------
Table 24-6. Phenol Production and End-Use Emission Factors
Source
Emission Factor
Process Storage
_lb_Pheno1 Lost per
Fugi tive
lb Used
Tota 1
(Produced).
Derivation
Phenol production e
0.00170
0.0000 3
0.00011
0.00222
b
C
Caprolactam
0.00130
0.00001
0.00013
0.00144
c
A
Bisphenol A
0.000 35
0.00003
0.00012
0.00050
b
C
Nonylphenolf
0.00000
0.00001
0.00019
0.00100
b
C
Salicylic Acid
0.00035
0.00001
0.00014
0.00050
b
C
Dodecylphenol
0.00080
0.00001
0.00019
0.00100
D
Phenolic resins
0.00035
0.0000 2
0.00013
0 .00050
D
Adipic acid
Phenol emi
ssions are
included with caprolactam production losses
Miscellaneous



0.00068

a	. . . .
A - site visit data
D - state files
C - published data
D - Hydroscience estimate
^See ref. 5.
c
See ref. 6.
dBased on a weighted average of all other phenol end-use emission factors.
0
Does not apply to Allied Chemical, Philadelphia PA (ref. 8)
^The total emission factor for Exxon, Bayway, NJ is 0.0003 lbs of Phenol lost per lb used (ref. 9)
-------
24-13
Table 24-7. Phenol Emissions from Phenolic Resin
Producers by Region

Number
Phenol

of
Emissions
Reqion
Sites
(lb/yr)
New England
6
25,080
Middle Atlantic
26
108,680
East North Central
31
129,580
West North Central
5
20,900
South Atlantic
15
62,700
East South Central
6
25,080
West South Central
11
45,980
Mountain
1
4,180
Pacific
24
100,320
Total
125
522,500C
3See ref. 7.


b* • ¦
Average emissions
per site ; lb/yr
q/sec

2926
Process 0.042

167
Storage 0.002

1087
Fuqitive 0.016

4180
Total 0.060
CBased on emission
factors shown in
Table 6.
-------
24-14
Allied at Hopewell, Virginia, is the only producer of caprolactam derived from
phenol. Adipic acid is considered a by-product of the caprolactam manufacture.
Emissions of 511,200 lb phenol shown in Table 8 actually represent the total
losses from Allied's facility in the production of both products.
Phenol emissions from nonylphenol and dodecylphenol are estimated to have been
41,700 and 24,000 lb respectively. The same emission factor was used for both
products since they are made by the same producers in the same equipment.
Salicylic acid, the main ingredient in aspirin production, had estimated phenol
emissions of 24,000 lb in 1978 at the four producing locations listed.
The other miscellaneous uses of phenol are very small but numerous. Specific
industry and site identification was not possible, so point source or regional
locations could not be determined.
Total estimated emissions of 259,760 lb for miscellaneous uses of phenol were
made by using a weighted average emission factor of 0.00068 derived from all
other phenol end-uses. Emissions from exports were assumed to be negligible.
Vent parameter data for phenol production and end-uses are tablulated in Table 24-9.
Total nationwide emissions of phenol in 1978 from all sources are estimated to
have been &^124,4801b. A tabulation of the losses is shown in Table 24-10.
-------
Table 24-8. PHenol Emissions from End-Users
Company
Location
Phenol Emissions
Process
Storage
Total
Fugitive
(lb/yr)
(q/sec)
Dow
General Electric
Shell
U.S. Steel
Freeport, TX
Mount Vernon, IN
Deer Park. TX
Haverhill, OH
Total
Bisphenol-A Producers
33.2BO 2,850	11,400	47,500	0.68
49,000 4,200	16,800	70,000	1.01
33,250 2,850	11,400	47,500	0.68
26.250 2,250	9,000	37,500	0.54
141,750 12,150	48,600	202,500
Allied
Hopewell, VA
Total
Caprolactam Producer
461.500 3,550
461,500
3,550
46,150
46,150
511,200
511.200
7.36
Borg Warner
Exxon
GAF
Jefferson
Kalama
Monsanto
Horgantown, NY
Bayway, NJ
Calvert City, KY
Linden, NJ
Port Neches, TX
Kalama, WA
Kearney, NJ
Nonylphenol Producers
8,000	100
450	28
800	10
2,400	30
4,800	60
2,400	30
1,360	17
1.900
522
190
570
1,140
570
323
10,000
1,000
1,000
3,000
6.000
3,000
1,700
0.144
J-0 .-014
0.014
0.043
0.086
0.043
0.024
-------
Table 24-8 (continued)
Company
Phenol Emissions
Total
Location
Process
Storage
Fugitive

(q/sec)
Nonylphenol Producers (Continued)
Rohm and Haas
Schenectady
Dow
Honsanto
Sterling Drug
Tenneco
Borg Warner
GAF
Honsanto
Allied
Deer Park, TX
Philadephia, PA
Rotterdam Junction,
Oyster Creek, TX
Total
Hidland, HI
St. Louis, MO
Cincinnati, OH
Garfield. NJ
Total
Morgantown, WV
Calvert City, KY
Kearney, NJ
Total
Hopewell, VA
NY
1,600
2,400
2,400
6,400
33,010
20
30
30
60
435
Salicylic Acid Producers
4,900
6.300
2,450
3.150
16,800
140
180
70
90
480
Dodecylphenol Producers
11.200	140
800	10
7,200	90
19,200	240
380
570
570
1,520
8,255
1,960
2,520
980
1,260
6.720
2,660
190
1.710
4.560
2,000
3,000
3,000
8,000
41,700
7,000
9,000
3,500
4,500
24,000
14,000
1 ,000
9,000
24,000
0.029
0.043
0.043
0.115
0.101
0.130
0.050
0.065
0.202
0.014
0.130
Adipic Acid Producer
Emissions are included in caprolactam production losses
aBased on emission factors shown in Table 6.
^Based on 8760 hr/yr operation.
-------
24-17
Table 24-9. Phenol Vent Parameters for Production and End-use Facilities
Source
Number Vent
of Height
Stacks(ft)
Vent Discharge Discharge
Diameter Temp. Velocity Area
(ft)	(^F)	(ft/sec) (ft X ft)
Production
Process
Storage
Fugitive
Phenolic resins
Process
Storage
Fugitive
Bisphenol A
Process
Storage
Fugitive
Caprolactam/adipic acid
Process
Storage
Fugitive
Nonyl/dodecylphenol
Process
Storage
Fugitive
Salicylic acid
Process
Storage
Fugitive
3
10
2
8
2
3
75
25
60
24
40
24
60
24
60
20
55
20
0.4
0.33
0.33
0.17
0.5
0.25
1.0
0.17
0.5
0.17
0.5
0.17
125
150
150
150
100
150
90
ISO
160
150
120
150
20
24
500
60
300 X 1000
100 X 100
300 X 300
100 X 200
100 X 200
100 X 200
Building cross-section Producers	100 m2
Resins	50 m2
Bisphenol A	50 m2
Caprolactam	200 m2
Nonyl/dodecybenzenes	25 m2
Salicylic acid	50 m2
-------
24-18
Table 24-10. Phenol Nationwide Emissions
Nationwide
Emissions
Source
(lb/vr)
Production
3,708,080
Phenolic resins
522,500
Bisphenol-A
202,500
Caprolactam3
511,200
Nonylphenol
41,700
Salicylic acid
24,000
Dodecylphenol
24,000
Miscellaneous
259,760
Export
0
Total
5,293,740
alncludes emissions from adipic acid manufacture.
^Based on an emission factor of 0.00068 lb phenol lost per
lb used. Derived from a weighted average of all other
phenol uses.
-------

¦
-------
Table 24-11. EMISSIONS AND METEOROLOGICAL STATIONS
NO.
COMPANY
SITE
LATITUDE
LONGITUDE
1
ALLIED
PHILADELPHIA, PA
40
00
24
075
04
07
2
CLARK
BLUE ISLAND, IL
41
39
21
087
41
56
3
GEORGIA PACIFIC
PLAQUEMINE, LA
30
15
00
091
11
00
4
GETTY
EL DORADO, KS
37
47
10
096
52
00
5
MONSANTO
CHOCOLATE BAYOU, TX
29
14
55
095
12
45
6
STANDARD
RICHMOND, CA
37
56
12
122
20
48
7.
UNION CARBIDE
BOUND BROOK, NJ
40
33
32
074
31
18
8.
FEKRO
SANTE FE SPGS., CA
33
56
30
118
04
18
9.
KOPPERS
FOLLANSBEE, WV
40
23
10
080
35
07
10.
MERICHEM
HOUSTON, TX
29
45
36
095
10
48
11.
STIMSON
ANACORTES, WA
48
28
31
122
32
48
12.
US STEEL
CLAIRTON, PA
40
18
15
079
52
43
13
DOW
FREEPORT, TX
28
59
30
095
23
35
14
SHELL
DEER PARK, TX
29
43
30
095
06
15
15
US STEEL
HAVERHILL, OH
38
34
52
082
49
3b
16
KALAMA
KALAMA, WA
4b
00
54
122
51
05
17
GEN ELECTRIC
MOUNT VERNON, IN
37
56
42
087
34
25
18
ALLIED
HOPEWELL, VA
37
22
13
077
18
08
2:A-03
OF SPECIFIC POINT
SOURCES
OF PHENOL


STAR
PLANT*
SOURCE+
EMISSIONS (GM/SEC)
STATION
TYPE
TYPE
PROCESS
STORAGE
FUGITIVE
13739
1
1
.033105
2.479071
.183631
14855
1
1
1.691686
.028539.
.389650
13970
1
1
5.126427
. 086251
1.18U809
13969
1
1
1.845510
.031076
.425101
12906
1
1
.121093
.002042
.027889
12906
1
1
1.076579
.018075
.247971
94741
1
1
3.460331
.058346
. 7y7057
93106
1
1
.138413
.002315
.031868
14762
1
1
.138413
.UU2315
.0318b8
12906
1
1
.138413
.002315
.031868
24217
1
1
.138413
.002315
.03l8b8
14762
1
1
.138413
.002315
.031868
12923
2
1
8.996860
.151573
2.072298


2
.478818'
.041096
. 1641b2
12906
2
1
9.663241
.162986
2.225805


2
.478818
.041096
. Ib4l62
13866
2
1
6.272577
.105720
1.444793


2
.377568
.032516
.129439
24229
3
1
1.460997
.024734
.336536


4
.034564
.000476
.0U8213
93817
4
2
.705606
.06U502
.241914
13740
5
3
6.b45611
.051243
. 664574
-------
NO.
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
2: A-
Table 24-11. EMISSIONS AND METEOROLOGICAL STATIONS OF SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF PHENOL (Concluded)
STAR PLANT* S0URCE+	EMISSIONS (GM/SEC)
COMPANY	SITE	LATITUDE LONGITUDE STATION TYPE TYPE PROCESS STORAGE FUGITIVE
EXXON
BAYWAY, NJ
40
38
46
074
11
48
94741
6
4
.006469
.000412
.007515
GAF
LINDEN, NJ
40
38
19
074
15
26
94741
6
4
.034564
.000412
.008213
JEFFERSON
PORT NECHES, TX
29
57
45
093
56
00
12917
6
4
.069127
.000856
.016426
ROHMAND HAAS
DEER PARK.TX
29
43
30
095
06
15
12906
6
4
.023085
.000285
.005486
ROHMAND HAAS
PHILADELPHIA, PA
39
54
50
075
11
30
13739
6
4
.034564
.000412
.008213
SCHENECTADY
R JUNCTION, NY
42
47
22
073
43
12
14735
6
4
.034564
.000412
.008213
SCHENECTADY
OYSTER CREEK, TX
29
58
21
095
20
38
12960
6
4
.092149
.001142
.021880
BORG WARNER
MORGANTOWN, PA
39
40
39
080
58
34
13736
7
4
.115170
.001427
.027366










6
.161276
.001998
.038305
GAF
CALVERT CITY, KY
37
02
50
088
21
12
03816
7
4
.011542
.000190
.002727










6
.011542
.000190
.002727
MONSANTO
KEARNEY, NJ
40
46
12
074
09
08
94741
7
4
.019451
.000245
.004646










6
.103691
.001332
.024639
DOW
MIDLAND, MI
43
35
28
084
13
08
14845
8
5
.070654
.001998
.028223
MONSANTO
ST. LOUIS, MO
38
34
37
090
11
42
13994
8
5
.090722
.002568
.000349
STERLING DRUG
CINCINNATI, OH
39
05
15
084
33
09
13840
8
5
.035293
.001046
.014111
TENNECO
GARFIELD, NJ
40
52
28
074
06
47
94741
8
5
. 045345
.001332
.018138
-------
TABLE 24-11 (Concluded)
* Plant Types:
Type 1:
Plant
produces
Type 2:
Plant
produces
Type 3:
Plant
produces
Type 4:
Plant
produces
Type 5:
Plant
produces
Type 6:
Plant
produces
Type 7:
Plant
produces
Type 8:
Plant
produces
phenol
phenol and B1sphenol-A
phenol and nonylphenol
Blsphenol-A
caprolactam and adlplc acid
nonylphenol
nonylphenol and dodecylphenol
salicylic acid
t Source Types:
Type 1:	Phenol production
Type 2:	Blsphenol-A production
Type 3:	Caprolactam/adlplc acid production
Type 4:	Nonylphenol production
Type 5:	Salicylic acid production
Type 6:	Dodecylphenol production
ro
i
ro
M
-------
24-23
TABLE 24-12. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE OF PHENOL RESULTING FROM
SPECIFIC POINT SOURCE EMISSIONS
Concentration	Population
Level	Exposed	Dosage
3	3
(ug/m )	(persons)	[(ug/m ) . persons]
100	0	0
50	0	3
25	75.	2,150
10	607	10,400
5	3,733	31,200
2.5	14,895	686,000
1	79,518	167,000
0.5	247,865	282,000
0.25	612,488	407,000
0.1	1,847,851	592,000
0.05	3,751,128	725,000
0.025	6,318,109	817,000
0.01	8,859,612	860,000
0.005	10,780,296	874,000
0.0025	14,385,766	886,000
0.001	23,119,700	900,000
4.58 x 10~5*	35,736,282	907,000
~
The lowest annual average concentration occurring within
20 km of the specific point source.
2:A-05
-------
TABLE 24-13. EMISSIONS RATES AND NUMBER OF
GENERAL POINT SOURCES OF PHENOL
(PHENOIC RESINS PRODUCTION)*
Emissions/Site Number
Region	 	(gm/sec) of Sites
New England
0.0602
6
Middle Atlantic
0.0602
26
East North Central
0.0602
31
West North Central
0.0602
5
South Atlantic
0.0602
15
East South Central
0.0602
6
West South Central
0.0602
11
Mountain
0.0602
1
Pacific
0.0602
24
* Emissions parameters:
Vent height: 13 m
Building cross section: 50 m2
Vent diameter: 0.085 m
Vent velocity: 4.2 m/sec
Vent temperature: 339°K
ro
i
ro
-------
24-25
TABLE 24-14. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULTING FROM GENERAL POINT
SOURCES OF PHENOL (PHENOLIC RESINS PRODUCTION)
Concentration
Population

Level
Exposed
Dosage
(ug/m3)
(103 persons)
[103 (ug/m3) • pf
2.5
2.1
6.7
1
19
31
0.5
63
62
0.25
173
99
0.1
539
153
0.05
—
218
0.025
—
370
0.01
—
447
0

725
NOTE: The use of -- as an entry indicates that the incremental
E/D is not significant (relative to last entry or relative
to entry in another column at the same row) or that the
exposure of the same population may be counted in another
column.
58/1
-------
24-26
TABLE 24-15. MAJOR PARAMETERS FOR ESTIMATING EXPOSURE/DOSAGE RESULTING
FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS OF PHENOL
	Parameter	 	Value
-5 -1
Daytime decay rate (Krf)	2.95 x 10 sec
Nighttime decay rate (K^)	1.5 x 10~^ sec"^
Hanna-Gifford coefficient (C)	225
Nationwide heating source emissions (E^)	0
Nationwide nonheating stationary source emissions (E^)	3.74 gm/sec
Nationwide mobile source emissions (E^)	0
-------
TABLE 24-16. PHENOL EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULTING FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS
Cipo level
-jb-3/Bll	
Population
(person)
Dotage
(ug/mJ/
person)
Percentaqe of Contribution
Heating Stationary hob11e
. 01 oooo
505140
10017.9
0.
100.0
0.
.005000
9149730
74330.2
0.
100.0
0.
.002500
27656703
134272.7
0.
100.0
0.
.001000
87809142
217937.4
0.
100.0
0.
.000500
135741991
253535.3
0.
100.0
0.
0.
158679135
261345.4
0.
100.0
0.
	Percentage of Distribution	
City Type 1 tlty Type 2 City Type 1
100.0	0.	0.
100.0	0.	0.
100.0	0.	0.
97.6	1.0	1.4
rv>
94.4	2.5	3.2
92.7	2.7	4.6	fsj
-------
TABLE 24-17. EXPOSURE AND DUSAGE SUMMARY OF PHENOL


Population Exposed



Dosage



(persons)


[(uq/nv )
- persons]

Concentrati on
Spec i fic
General


Speclf i c
General


Level
Point
Point


Poi nt
Poi nt


(ug/m3)
Source
Source
Area Source
U.S. Total
Source
Source
Area Source
U.S. Total
100
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
50
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
3
25
75
0
0
75
2,150
0
0
2,150
10
607
0
0
607
10,400
0
0
10,400
5
3,733
0
0
3,733
31,200
0
0
31,200
2.5
14,895
2,100
0
16,996
68,600
4,030
0
72,630
1.
79,518
19,000
0
98,518
167,000
28,000
0
195,600
0.5
247,866
63,000
0
310,866
282,000
55,300
0
337,300
0.25
612,488
173,000
0
785,488
407,000
82,100
0
489,100
0.1
1,847,851
539,000
0
2,386,851
592,000
129,000
0
721,000
0.05
3,751,128
--
0
--
725,000
177,000
0
902,000
0.025
6,318,109
--
0
--
817,000
225,000
0
1,042,000
0.01
8,859,612
--
505,140
--
860,000
294,U00
10,017
1,164,017
0.005
10,780,296
--
9,149,730
--
874,000
--
74,338
--
0.0025
14,385,766
—
27,656,703
--
886,000
--
134,272
--
0.001
23,119,700
--
87,809,142
--
900,000
--
217,y37
--
0.0005
29,934,481

135,741,991
--
905,000
--
253,535
--
0
35,736,282

158,679,135

907,000
555,000
261,343
1,723,343
NOTE: The use of -- as an entry indicates that the incremental E/U is not significant (relative to last entry or
relative to entry in another column at the same row) or that the exposure of the same population may be
counted in another column.
2:A-06
-------
24-29
REFERENCES
1.	S. A. Cogswell, "Phenol," p. 868.5021S--5023J, Chemical Economics Handbook,
Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA, (October 1978).
2.	"Chemical Products Synopsis on Phenol," Mannsville Chemical Products,
Mannsville, NY, July 1977.
3.	"Chemical Products Synopsis on Bisphenol-A," Mannsville Chemical Products,
Mannsville, NY (February 1978).
4.	"Chemical Products Synopsis on Salicylic Acid," Mannsville Chemical Products,
Mannsville, NY (December 1977).
5.	Special Project Report "Petrochemical Plant Site," Monsanto Research
Corporation, April 15, 1976.
6.	Trip Report, Emission Control Options for the Synthetic Organic Chemicals
Manufacturing Industry, Allied Chemical Corporation, Hopewell, VA,
plant visit by Hydroscience, Inc., February 21, 1978.
7.	"Phenolic Resins," p. 580.0933B--0, Chemical Economics Handbook, Stanford
Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA (May 1978).
8.	Allied Chemical, (J. D. Alcorta), Personal communication in response to the
first draft of this report (June 1981).
9.	Exxon Chemical Americas (J. P. Thorn), Personal communication in response
to the first draft of this report (August 1981).
10. Monsanto Company (C.D. Malloch) personal communication in response to
publication of the second draft of this report (July 1982).
2:A-07
-------
APPENDIX A-25 	 Phosgene
PHOSGENE CHEMICAL DATA
Nomenclature
Chemical Abstract Service Registry Number: 75-44-5
Synonyms: Carbonoxychloride; Carbonylchloride; CG; Carbonic Dichloride;
Chloroformyl Chloride
Chemical Formula
Molecular Weight: 98.92
Molecular Formula: COCl^
Molecular Structure:
0
II
C
/ \
CI CI
Chemical and Physical Properties
Physical State at STP: Gas (or volatile liquid) - colorless; highly toxic,
suffocating odor
Boiling Point: 7.56°C at 760 mm
Melting Point: -118°C
Density: 19°C/4°C
Vapor Pressure: 1428 nn at 25°C
Vapor Density: 3.4
Solubility: Decomposes in H^O
Log Partition Coefficient (Octanol/^O):
Atmospheric Reactivity
Transformation Products: Decomposes in to form HC1
Reactivity Toward 0H-:
Reactivity Toward O^:
Reactivity Toward Photolysis:
Major Atmospheric Precursors:
Formation Reactivity:
-------
25-5
I. PRODUCTION
A.	PRODUCTION SITES
Phosgene (C0C12) is made by reacting carbon monoxide and chlorine in the presence
of a catalyst, usually activated carbon. The hot product gases are put through a
condenser where liquid phosgene is removed. Additional phosgene is scrubbed
from the system with a hydrocarbon solvent. In most cases the phosgene is used
as it is made, and the solvent in the scrubber may be the same solvent in which
subsequent processing takes place.
There are curreni.j.y 17 phosgene producers in the United States. The locations of
the plants and the 1978 capacity and estimated production levels for each plant
are shown in Table 25-1- In 1978, an estimated T243.4- million lb of phosgene was
produced.
Virtually all phosgene produced is used captively. The Chemetron site at Laporte,
Texas, and the VanDeMark site at Lockport, New York are believed to be the only
producers of phosgene for the merchant market.
B.	END-USE DISTRIBUTION
Table 25-2 shows the end-use distribution for phosgene. Approximately 60% of the
phosgene produced is used to make toluene diisocyanate (TDI), and 25% is used
to make polymeric isocyanates. Phosgene is also used in the manufacture of
polycarbonates and other miscellaneous products.
C.	EMISSION ESTIMATES
Phosgene emissions from phosgene producers are shown in Table 25-3. Total estimated
phosgene emissions from the 18 sites that produce phosgene were 1.90,960 Lb/yr
in 1978. Emission factors used to develop process vent storage and fugitive
emission estimates are also shown in Table 25-3. There were no proven vent or
storage emissions. Fugitive emissions from plant equipment accounted for the
total phosgene emissions. Emissions estimates are based on a plant operation
schedule of 24 hr/day, 7 days/week, 52 weeks/yr. Vent stack data, where avail-
able, were reported in Table 25-3. In this case limited data were available, and
data from one site were used for all the sites.
-------
igitudi
47	51
00	42
02	18
24	05
30	35
54	25
2 3 06
34	41
54	25
49	43
43	22
15 57
36 29
00 30
01	16
04	29
42 40
Table 25-1. Phosgene Producers*
1978 1978
Capacity Production
Location	(10^' lb/yr)	(10^ lb/yr)
Moundsville, WV
100
76
Geismar, LA
55
CO
LaPorte, TX
80
60. 8
Freeport, TX
130
CD
CD
C\
Deepwater, NJ
135
102.6
Mt. Vernon, IN
60
45.6
Port Neches, TX
30
22. 8
Baltimore, MD
8
6.1
Baytown, TX
250
190
New Martinsville, WV
250
190
Ashtabula, OH
50
38
Lake Charles, LA
120
91. 2
Barberton, OH
5
3.8
Geismar, LA
J. 30
CD
CD
0%
Cold Creek, AL
25
19
LaPorte, TX
200
152
Lockport, NY
8
6.1
1,636	1,243.4
-------
25-7
Table 25-2.
Phosgene
End-Use Distribution*

Source

Usage
(106 lbs/vr)
% Usaee
Toluene diisocyar.aces
(TDI)
758.9
60
Polymeric isocyanates
(>3I)
339.5
25
Polycarbonates

67.8
5
Miscellaneous

58.4
10

Tocal
1243.4
100
*
See Referep.ce 1.
-------
25-6
Table 25-3. Phosgene Emissions from Phosgene Producers3
b
Total Emissions
Comoanv
Location
(lb/yr)
(g/sec)
Allied Chemical
Moundsville, WV
4,341
0.063
BAST Wyandotte
Geismar, LA
276
0.004
Chenetron
LaPorte, TX
10,944
0.158
Dov
Freeport, TX
17,784
0. 256
Du Pont
Deepwater, NJ
18,468
0.266
Qonc>-21
Mt. Vernon, IN
8,208
0. 11c
Jefferson
Port Neches, TX
4,104
0.059

Baltimore, MD
1,098
0.016
Mo bay
Baytovrn, TX
34,200
0. 492

New Martinsville, WV
34,200
0.492
dir.
Ashtabula, Or.
6,840
0.09S

Lake Charles/ Lr1.
154
0.394
??G
Barbertor., OH
684
0.010
Rubi cor.
Geismar, LA
17,784
0. 256
Staurf-r
Cold Creak, AL
3, 420
C.049
Upjohn
Laporte, TX
27,360
0.394
Van De Mark
Lockport, NY
1 ,098
0.016
Total	190,960 2.749
aSee ref 4.
^Enission factor phosgene (lb phosgene lost/lb phosgene produced)
Process 0
Storage 0
Fugitive 0.0001S
0.0001S
fugitive emissions are distributed over a 300 X 300 ft area
Building cross-section - 200 m'-
8760 operating hours per year i.e. 24 hr/day, 7 days/wk, 52 wk/yr.
-------
25-9
Process and storage emissions are negligible. The only emissions noted from
production facilities are from fugitive sources; therefore, no process or storage
vent parameter data are given.'
II. USERS
A.	USER SITES
laule 25-4 presents the phosgene users who manufacture toluene diisocyanate (TDI).
There are 9 sites which used an estimated total of 758.9 million lb
of phosgene in 1973.
Table 25-5 oresents the phosgene users who nanuiacturs polymeric isocyana'-es
(MDI). There are 4 sites which used an estimated total of 339.5 million
lb of phosgene in 197S.
B.	EMISSIOM ESTIMATES
Table 25-6 presents the phosgene emissions i rom phosgene
TDI. Estimated total emissions from these sites in 1978
presents the phosgene emissions from phosgene users that
total emissions from these sites in 1978 were 2140 lb.
III. TOTAL EMISSIONS
Table 25-8 presents a summary of the total phosgene emissions for ail the produc-
tion and user sites. A number of the plants produce phosgene for captive use
in producing TDI and MDI.
Table 25-9 presents a summary of the phosgene usage and sources of phosgene emissions
for production and various uses. Total nationwide emissions from producers and
users for 1978 are estimated to have been 199,438 Lb.
users that produce
were 4998 Lb. Table 25-7
produce MDI. Estimated
-------
Table 25-4. Phosgene Users3
(Manufacturers or Toluene Diisocyanate (TDI)|
1970
TDI 1978 Geographical
Capacity Phosgene Use Location
Company	Location	(IP1' lb/yr)	(10*' lb/yr)	Latitude/Longitude
Allied Chemical
Moundsville, WV
BO
O
CO
39
54
39/00
44
49
BASF Wyandotte
Geismar, LA
100
101.?c
30
11
34/91
00
42
Dow Chemical
Freeport, TX
100
101,2c
28
59
12/95
24
05
DuPont
Deepwater, NJ
70
70 .8
39
41
25/7*5
30
3':>
Mobay Chem. Corp.
Baytown, TX
130
131.5
29
45
30/94
54
25
Mobay Chem. Corp.
New Martinsville,
WV
100
101.2
39
44
50/00
50
50
Olin Corp.
Ashtabula, Oil
30
30.4
41
53
07/00
45
50
Olin Corp.
Lake Charles, LA
100
101.2C
30
13
55/93
15
57
Rubicon Chems. Inc.
Geismar, LA
40
40.5
30
12
00/91
11
30
Total	750	758.9
aSee References 2, 3, and 4.
^Based on 60% of phosgene produced that is used to make TDI (see Reference 1).
Phosgene used =	r « -60 (1357.4 X 10r> lb/yr phosgene produced).
c
" Phosgene use exceeds phosgene produced at same plant.
-------
Table 2 3-5. Phosgene Users3
(Manufacturers oi Polymeric Isocynnates)
Company
Location
1970
Capacity
(10^ .lbs/yr)
MDI
1978
Phosgene
Use
(106 .lb/yr)
Geographi cal
L.oca tion
La ti t ude/l.oncj L t.urle
Mobay Chem. Corp.
Baytown, TX
110
81 .25
29 45 30/94 54 25
Mobay Chem. Corp.
New Martinsville,
WV 50
36.9
39 44 50/00 50 50
Rubicon Chemicals
Geismar, I.A
50
36.9
30 12 00/91 00 30
Upjohn
LaPoite, TX
250
184.4
29 42 26/95 04 29

Total
460
339. 5

aSee Reference 4.
^Based on 25% of phosgene produced that is used to make MDI (see Reference 1).
Phosgene used =	r K • ^5 (1357.4 X 10° Ib/yr phosgene produced).
-------
T.-ill Is	Phosgene; I^miss.ions froM Phosgene Users for TUT Production0


Prcc
ess Vents
issions
FU'-jj.t VVQ
Ji^nissions
Total
Emissions
Cor-.-oariy
Iiocation
(l.b/yr)
(q/sr.-c)
(Ib/yr)
(y/sec:)
! :!!-./v/-)
(q/sec)
Al l ied Chemical,:>
lioundsville , WV
169
0.002
Mil
ti i L
169
0.002
DASF Wyandotte '5
Geismo.r , LA
24
-
Nil
Mil
24
-
De<-
Freeport, TX
666
0.01
nil
Nil
666
0.01
Du Pont
Deepvmter, MJ
466
0.007
Mil
Mil
466
0.007
f-vr: >ay
Bay tov;n, TX
GG9
0.012
Mil
Mil
060
0.012

Mew Martinsville, WV
666
0.01
Mil
Mil
666
0.01
Olin b
Ashtabula, Oil
200
0.003
Mil
Nil
200
0.003

Lake Charles, LA
6
-
Nil
Mil
6
-
Rubicon
Geisraar, LA
266
0.004
Nil
Nil
2GG
0.004
Total





4,990
0.074
*"r:• sed on the following emission factors (lb phosgene emitted per lb produced) :
Process 0.000006 fi - (derived from state air emission files)
Storage Ni.l	B - (derived from state air emission files)
Fugitive ilil	 D - (derived from state air emission files)
0.000006
Average process vent stack parameters for all locations are: 27.1 m
0.27 m
11.0 rn/sGC
'i-3. 5°C
-	stack height
-	stack diajneter
-	stack velocity
-	stack temperature
'^Basijd on assumed distribution, see ref 1 I
-------
I ;'l> I e 25-7. Phosgene Emissions from J'liosgenr: Users for MOT Producti on



l'roccsa Vents
fclm.i. a si oils
Fugitive
Rnissions
Total
Emissions
Company

Location
(Ib/yr) (g/scc)
(lb/yi:)
(g/sec)
(Ib/yr)
(y/sec)
Mcbay

Daytown, TX
400 0.007
Nil
Nil
<100
0.007


New Martinsville, WV
220 0.003
Nil
Nil
220
0.003
Rubicon

Geismar, I.A
220 0.003
Nil
Nil
220
0.003
Upjohn

I.aforte, TX
.1.220 0.0 10
Ni.1
Nil
1220
0.01.0
Total





2140
0.031
a
Based on the
following emission factors
(lb phosgene emitted per
lb produced)
:


Process
0.0000066 B - (derived
from state air emission
files)



Storage
0
0 - (derived
from state air emission
files)



Fugitive
Nil
B - (derived
from state air emission
files)



0.0000066
Average process vent stack parameters for all locations are: 27.1 m
0.27 m
11.0 m/sec
13. 13 °C
2
IHulding cross-sect ion - 200 m .
-	stack height
-	stack diameter
-	stack velocity
-	stack temperature
-------

25-14


Table 25-5. Total
Phosgene E~.iss5.on3 from
Producer and
Ur-:-srsc


Phosqsne
Emic2ions
Corroanv
Location
(ib/vr)
(cr.o/se: )
" ^ ^ r%pi *3.
Koimdsville, WV
4,510
0.065
EAS? '-•-•and.-: :ja
Gsismar, LA
300
0. 004
Chems trt?n
LaForte, IX
10,944
0.153
Dow
Prceport, TX
18,450
0.256
D'Jpont
Daepw-:itsr, NJ
IB,934
0.273
General Elc-ctn-
!!t. Vernon, IA
8,203
0.11S
Jcf.cerson
Port fiechss, TX
4,104
0.059
iliner.--
3itltiiriore, !2)
1,093
0.016
IIol-
B?.y town, TX
35,543
0.511
Hobay
Mew Mar'-lir:sv.ills, WV
35,036
0.505
01 in
Ashtabvila, OH
7,040
0.101
0lina
La.-i^ Cnar.*-ss,
160
0.002
P?~-
Barbsrton, OH
6S4
0.01
P. Lib I COT:
G2i£:n=r, L.-.
10,270
C.263
Stauffer
Cold Crc-LL
3,420
0.049
Upjohn
LaPnrto, TX
2C,520
0.412
Van D-mark
Lockport, in
1,058
0.016

Total
196,434
2.828
cSee ref. 9
2See ref. 10
c3ee ref. 11
d
Union Carbide at S. Charleston, wv No longer emitts phosaene ref. 12.
-------
25-15
Table 25-9. Sources of Phosgene Emissions

Production/
Usage

Total
Emissions
Source
(10s lb/hr)
% Usaae
(Lb/vr!
) (am/sec)
Producers
Users
1243.4
-
190,960
2.749
Toluene diisocyanate
758.9
60
4.998
0.074
Polymeric isocyanates
339.5
25
2,140
0.031
Polycarbonates
67.3
5
447*
0.006
Miscellaneous
58.4
10
893*
0.012
Total
1243.4
100
199.438
2.874
*Easea on emission factor for toluene diisocyanate (TDI).
-------
ro
cn
cr»
FIGURE 25-1. SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF PHOSGENE EMISSIONS
-------
NO.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
2:A
Table 25-10. EMISSIONS AND METEOROLOGICAL STATIONS OF SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF PHOSGENE








STAR
PLANT*
SOURCE+
EMISSIONS (GM/SEC)

COMPANY
SITE
LATITUDE
LONGITUDE
STATION
TYPE
TYPE
PROCESS
STORAGE
FUGITIVE

ALLIED CHEMICAL
MOUNDSVILLE, WV
39
54
39
080
44
49
13736
1
1
.002442
0.
.062437

BASF WYANDOTTE
GEISMAR, LA
30
11
34
091
00
42
13970
1
1
.000349
0.
.003964

DOW
FREEPORT, TX
28
59
30
095
23
35
12923
1
1
.256089
0.
.009576

DUPONT
DEEPWATER, NJ
39
41
25
075
30
35
13739
1
1
.006722
0.
.265950

MOBAY
BAYTOWN, TX
29
45
30
094
54
25
12906
1
1
.019502
0.
.492485

MOBAY
NEW MARTINSVILLE,WV
39
44
50
080
50
50
13736
1
1
.492485
0.
.012747

OL IN
ASHTABULA, OH
41
53
07
080
45
50
14843
1
1
.002886
0.
.098491

OLIN
LAKE CHARLES, LA
30
13
55
093
15
57
03937
1
1
.000095
0.
.002220

RUBICON
GEISMAR, LA
30
12
00
091
11
30
12958
1
1
.007008
0.
.256088

UPJOHN
LAPORTE, TX
29
42
26
095
04
29
12906
1
1
.017567
0.
.393994
ro
CJl
i
CHEMETRON
LAPORTE, TX
29
39
20
095
02
18
12906
2
1
0.
0.
.151890
GEN ELECTRIC
MT VERMON, IN
37
56
42
087
34
25
93817
2
1
0.
0.
.118182

JEFFERSON
PORT NECHES, TX
29
57
45
093
56
00
12917
2
1
0.
0.
.059107

MINEREC
BALTIMORE, MD
39
14
11
076
34
41
13701
2
1
0.
0.
.015823

PPG
BARBERTON, OH
41
00
37
081
36
29
14895
2
1
0.
0.
.009323

STAUFFER
COLD CREEK, AL
30
58
30
088
01
16
93841
2
1
0.
0.
.049245

VANDEMARK
LOCKPORT, NY
43
11
08
078
42
40
14747
2
1
0.
0.
.015823

-------
TABLE 25-10 (Concluded)
* Plant Types:
Type 1: Plant produces and consumes phosgene
Type 2: Plant produces phosgene
+ Source Types:
Type 1: Phosgene production/consumption processes
fS>
cn
«
CO
-------
25-19
TABLE 25-11. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE OF PHOSGENE RESULTING FROM
SPECIFIC POINT SOURCE EMISSIONS
Concentration
Level
(ug/m3)
Population
Exposed
(persons)
Dosage
3
[(ug/m ) . persons]
10
1
10
5
8
57
2.5
42
167
1
185
379
0.5
454
564
0.25
1,580
962
0.1
12,568
2,600
0.05
42,880
4,470
0.025
122,705
7,230
0.01
435,912
11,800
0.005
981,804
15,600
0.0025
1,625,886
17,900
7.54 x 10"6*
4,454,739
19,500
*
The lowest annual average concentration occurring within
20 km of the specific point source.
2:A-10
-------
25-20
REFERENCES
1.	Phosgene, Chemical Product Synopsis, March 1978, A Reporting Service of
Mansville Chemical Products, Mannsville, New York.
2.	1978 Directory of Chemical Producers in United States.
3.	Toluene Diisocyanate, Chemical Product Synopsis, July 1977, A Reporting
Service of Mansville Chemical Products, Mannsville, New York.
4.	Chemical Economics Handbook, Stanford Research Institute, Diisocyanates and
Polyisocyanates, September 1978.
5.	Texas Air Control Board Emissions Inventory Questionnaire for Chemetron
Corp., LaPorte, Texas, June 2, 1976.
6.	Texas Air Control Board Emission Inventory Questionnaire for Mobay Chemical
Co., Baytown, Texas, April 11, 1974.
7.	Gray, D. K., Texas Air Control Board Emissions Inventory Questionnaire for
Upjohn Chemical Co., LaPorte, Texas, July 28, 1976.
8.	Keene, M. L, Louisiana Air Control Commission, Emission Inventory Question-
naire for Rubicon Chemicals, Inc., Geismar, Louisiana, April 14, 1975.
9.	Allied Chemical, (W.S.Turstsky) Personal Communication in response to
publication of the first draft of this report (June 1981).
10.	BASF Wyandotte Corporation, (Keith Fry), Personal communication in response
to publication of the first draft of this report (October 1980).
11.	01in Chemicals Group, (V. M. Norwood), Personal communication in response to
publication of the first draft of this report (November 1980).
12.	Union Carbide Corporation, (R. L. Foster), Personal communcation in response
to publication of the first draft of this report (September 1980).
1:A-11
-------
APPENDIX A-26 	 Propylene Oxide
PROPYLENE OXIDE CHEMICAL DATA
Nomenclature
Chemical Abstract Service Registry Number: 75-56-9
Synonyms: Propene Oxide; Methyl Oxirane; 1, 2 Epoxy Propane; Epoxypropane;
Methy Ethylene Oxide; Propene. Oxide; Propyleneoxide; 1, 2-Propylene
Oxide
Chemical Formula
Molecular Weight: 58.08
Molecular Formula: C^H^O
Molecular Structure:
0
/ \
CH2- CH-CH3
Chemical and Physical Properties
Physical State at STP: Liquid-colorless, ethereal, extremely flanmble
Boiling Point: 33.96C at 760 rrn
Melting Point: -104.4°C
Density: 0.8394 at 20°C/4°C
Vapor Pressure: 596 urn at 25°C
Vapor Density: 20
Solubility: Soluble (650 gm/1. of F^O)
Log Partition Coefficient (Octanol/^O):
Atmospheric Reactivity
Transformation Products:
Reactivity Toward OH-:
Reactivity Toward O^:
Reactivity Toward Photolysis:
Major Atmospheric Precursors:
Formation Reactivity:
-------
26-5
I. SOURCES
A.	PRODUCTION
Propylene oxide (C3H60) is currently produced in the United States by chloro-
hydration or peroxidation of propylene. (Peroxidation is the direct oxidation
of propylene.1) The chlorohydration of propylene oxide is similar to ethylene
oxide manufacture via chlorohydrin. Many ethylene oxide plants have been converted
to chlorohydrin PO plants. The basic raw materials for the chlorohydrin process
are propylene, chlorine, and caustic. In the process propylene and hypochlorous
acid are reacted to yield propylene chlorohydrin. The chlorohydrin is then
treated with slaked lime or caustic to yield propylene oxide. Propylene dichloride
is the major by-product.
There are currently seven producers of propylene oxide in the United States.
The locations of the plants and the 1978 capacity and estimated production levels
for each plant are shown in Table 26-1.*'2 The two Oxirane Plants use the peroxida-
tion process. All other sites produce propylene oxide by the chlorohydrin process.
In 1978 an estimated 2000 million lb of propylene oxide was produced.
B.	USES
Table 26-21*2 shows the distribution of end-uses of propylene oxide. The largest
end-use of propylene oxide, which consumes an estimated 56% of production
(1120 million lb), is polyether polyol manufacture for urethane applications.
An additional 6% of production was used to produce polyether polyols for surfactant
applications. In each of these processes, water or propylene glycol is reacted
with propylene oxide to form the polyols.3
Specific source locations of the urethane polyol producers are shown in Table 26-3,^
and the surfactant polyol producers are shown in Table 26-5.4 An estimated 24%
(40 million lb) of propylene oxide was captively consumed to produce propylene
glycol. Propylene glycol is made by reacting propylene oxide with water (hydration).
Specific source locations of propylene glycol manufacturers are shown in Table 26-4.6
Minor uses of propylene oxide include di- and tripropylene glycol manufacture
(source locations shown in Table 26-6)5 consume 100 million lb and glycol ethers
manufacture (source locations shown in Table 26-7)1 which consume an estimated
-------
Table 26-1. Propylene Oxide Producers3
1978 1978C	Geographical
Capacity Process Production	Location
Company	Location	(10° lb/yr)	Usea 	(10s lb/yr) Latitude/Longitude
BASF Wyandotte
Wyandotte, Michigan
175
A
109
42
12
55/83
08
35
Dow
Freeport, Texas
1100
A
684
2B
59
35/95
23
36
Dow
Plaquemine, LA
340
A
212
30
19
00/91
15
32
Jefferson
Port Neches, Texas
150
A
93
29
57
50/93
56
0
Olin
Brandenburg, Kentucky
130
A
81
38
00
27/66
06
50
Oxirane
Bayport, Texas
920
B
572
29
37
26/95
03
07
Oxirane
Channelview, Texas
400
B
249
29
48
50/95
07
30

Total
3215

2000





aSee References 1 and 2.
= chlorohydrin
B = peroxidation
£
Based on 62.2% production to capacity ratio.
-------
26-7
Table 26-2. Propylene Oxide End-Uses 1978*
Source .
Usage
(106 lb/vr)
% Usage
Urethane poiyols
1120
56
Propylene glycol
430
24
Surfactant polvols
120
6
Diprcpylene glycol
100

Glycol ethers
40
2
Miscellaneous
40
2
Exports
100
	5
Total
2000
100
*See ref. 1 and 2.
-------
£1
Table 26-3. Propylene Oxide Users for Urethane Polyols Production


1978
19783





Urethane Polyols
Propylene Oxide





Capacity
Used
Geographic Coordinates
Company
Location
(million Ib/yr)
(million lb/yr)
Latitude/Lonqitude
BASF Wyandotte
Geismar, LA
100
45
30
11
34/91 00 42

Washington, NJ
40
18
40
45
20/74 58 22

Wyandotte, HI
225
101
42
12
55/83 08 35
E. R. Carpenter Co.
Bayport, TX
150
68
29
43
20/94 54 00
Dow Chemical Co.
Freeport, TX
400
180
28
59
35/95 23 36

Midland, MI
20
9
43
34
08/84 16 26
Emery Industries
Mauldin, SC
10
4.5
34
48
16/82 16 09

Sante Fe Springs, CA
10
4.5
33
55
30/118 05 40
Hodag Chemical Co.
Skokie, IL
10
4.5
42
01
50/87 43 39
Magna Corporation
Houston, TX
12
5
29
40
10/95 23 30
Milliken
Inman, SC
3
1.5
34
56
10/82 06 29
3M
Decatur, AL
15
7
34
38
39/87 02 25
Mobay Chemical Corp.
Baytown, TX
100
45
29
45
30/94 54 25

New Martinsville, WV
80
36
39
44
50/80 50 55
Nalco Chemical Co.
Sugar Land, TX
40
18
29
37
10/95 38 32
Olin Corporation
Brandenburg, KY
220
100
38
00
26/86 00 50
Owens-Corning
Newark, OH
10
4.5
40
05
30/82 26 00
Pelron Corporation
Lyons, Illinois
22
10
41
44.
56/87 49 04
-------
Table 26-3 (concluded)
Company
Location
1978
Urethane Polyols
Capacity
(million lb/yr)
1978
Propylene Oxide
Used
(million lb/yr)
Geographic Coordinates
Latitude/Longitude
Petrolite Corp.

Brea, CA
15
7
33
53
30/117 58 45


St. Louis, MO
15
7
38
41
50/90 12 00
PPG Industries,
Inc.
Circleview, OH
30
14
39
36
05/82 57 34
The Quaker Oats
Co.
Memphis, TN
10
4.5
35
10
30/90 56 56
Reichhold

Carteret, NJ
20
9
40
35
56/74 13 13
Jefferson Chem.
Co.
Austin, TX
33
15
30
20
00/97 14 15


Conroe, TX
33
15
30
18
50/95 23 06


Port Neches, TX
34
15
29
57
50/93 56 0
Union Carbide

Institute, WV
245
110
38
23
02/81 47 24


Seadrift, TX
245
110
28
30
31/96 46 18


South Charleston, WV
250
113
38
22
13/81 40 44
Upjohn

LaPorte, TX
14
6
29
42
44/95 04 45
Witco

Clearing, IL
25
11
41
48
02/87 46 39


Houston, TX
18
8
29
34
45/95 26 00


Total
2484
1120



See refs. 3 and 4.
'Based on 56% of propylene oxide produced. Used to make urethane polyols (see refs. 2 and 5)
propylene oxide used = ure^^*ane	caPac^tY ^ _ 55 (2000 X 10® lb/yr propylene oxide produced).
2484
-------
Table 26-4. Propylene Oxide Users for Propylene Glycol Production3


1978
1978b



Propylene Glycol
Propylene Oxide



Capacity
Used
Geographic Coordinates
Company
Location
(million lb/yr)
(million lb/yr)
Latitude/Lonqitude
Dow
Freeport, TX
250
140
28 59 35/95 23 36

Plaquemine, LA
160
91
30 19 00/91 15 32
Jefferson
Port Neches, TX
50
28
29 57 50/93 56 0
Olin
Brandenburg, KY
45
25
38 00 27/86 06 50
Oxirane
Bayport, TX
250
140
29 37 26/95 03 07
Union Carbide
Institute, WV
50
28
38 23 02/81 47 24
S. Charleston, WV	50	28	38 22 13/81 40 44
Total	855	480
aSee ref. 5.
^Based on 24% of propylene oxide produced used to make propylene glycol (see ref. 2).
propylene oxide used = ProPYlene g^Yco1 capacity x Q 24 (2000 X 106 lb/yr polylene oxide produced).
-------
Table 26-5. Propylene Oxide Users for Surfactant Polyols Production3
Polyether Polyols Propylene^Oxide
Capacity Used Geographic Coordinates
Company	Location	(million lb/yr)	(million lb/yr)	Latitude/Longitude
Emery Industries
Sante Fe Springs, CA
10
2
33 55 30/118 05 40
Olin
Brandenburg, KY
270
51
38 00 26/86 00 50
Petrolite
Brea, CA
15°
3
33 53 30/117 58 45

St. Louis, HO
15C
3
38 41 50/90 12 00
Sherex
Janesville, WI

I
42 40 47/89 00 30
Union Carbide
Institute, WV
100
19
38 23 02/81 47 24

Seadrift, TX
100
19
28 30 31/96 46 18

S. Charleston, WV
100
19
38 22 13/81 40 44
Witco
Houston, TX
18
	3
29 34 45/95 26 00

Total
633
120

3See ref. 4.
''Total propylene oxide used distributed over each site based on polyether polyols capacity.
CTotal capacity of 30 million lb equally distributed between both sites.
'S'otal capacity of 300 million lb equally distributed over all three sites.
-------
Table 26-6. Propylene Oxide Users for Di- and Tripropylene Glycol Production3


Dipropylene Glycol/




Tripropylene Glycol




Production
Propylene Oxide



Capacity
Used
Geographic Coordinates
Company
Location
(million lb/yr)
(million lb/yr)
Latitude/Lonqitude
Dow
Freeport, TX
27.5
32.3
28 59 35/95 23 36

Plaquemine, LA
17.6
20.7
30 19 00/91 15 32
Olin
Brandenburg, KY
5
5.9
30 08 27/86 06 50
Oxirane
Bayport, TX
18
21.1
29 37 26/95 03 07
Jefferson
Port Neches, TX
7
8.2
29 57 50/93 56 00
Union Carbide
Institute, WV
5C
5.9
38 23 02/81 47 24

S. Charleston, WV
5C
5.9
38 22 13/81 40 44

Total
85.1
100.0

aSee ref. 5.
^Total propylene oxide used allocated per site based on the rati of di/tripropylene glycol individual site produc-
tion capacity to total industry production capacity.
Capacity of 10 million lb/yr equally distributed between the two sites.
-------
26-13
Table 26-7. Propylene Oxide Users for Glycol Ethers Production'
Company
Location
Propylene Oxide Used*5
(million lb/vr)
Geographic Coordinates
Latitude/Longitude
Dow
Olin
Freeport, TX
Plaquemine, LA
Brandenburg, KY
Total
19.5
13.0
7.5
40.0
28 59 35/95 23 36
30 19 00/91 15 32
30 08 27/86 06 50
aSee ref. 1.
^Propylene oxide use allocated over the three sites based on ethylene glycol
ethers capacity in the absence of propylene glycol ether figures.
-------
26-14
40 million lb. Miscellaneous end-uses of propylene oxide as a chemical inter-
mediate consumed 40 million lb, and exports are estimated to have been 100 million
lb.
II. EMISSION ESTIMATES
A. PRODUCTION
Emission estimates from the production of propylene oxide are tabulated in Table 26-8.
Total emissions of propylene oxide from production facilities are estimated to
have been 1,059,600 lb in 1978. Emission factors used to develop process storage
and fugitive emission estimates are shown in Table '.6-8. 6 '7' 8'9 Process emissions
originate primarily from the reaction and scrubber vents. Other associated
emission components would include propylene, chlorine, and propane from the
chlorohydrin process and n-butyl alcohol and octane from the peroxidation process.
Storag? emissions represent the total losses from working and final product
storage tanks as well as loading and handling losses. Fugitive emissions are
those caused by leaks from plant equipment. Emission estimates are based on a
plant operation schedule of 24 hr per day, 7 days per week, 52 weeks per year.
Vent stack data are reported in Table 26-8. Normally 2 process vents and 2 storage
tank vents are involved. Usually propylene oxide production facilities are
"open-air" structures without walls and solid floors (steel grating). Only the
control room area is enclosed.
3. USES
For the purpose of this report, emissions resulting from the export of propylene
oxide are assumed to be negligible.
Table 26-S shows the emissions of propylene oxide that result froa its use in the
manufacture of polyether polyols for urethane applications. Total emissions of
propylene oxide from this end-use are estimated to have been 245,239 lb in 1978.
Emission factors used to develop this estimate are shown in Table 26—9^0 along
with vent parameter data. Other associated emissions would include propylene
glycols and propylene. Normally one process vent and one storage tank vent are
involved.
-------
Table 26-8. EMISSIONS FROM PROPYLENE OXIDE PRODUCERS3
Process Vents	 Storage
Stack Stack Stack Stack Vent Fugitiveb
Emissions Height Diameter Velocity Tenp. Emissions Emissions	Total Emissions
Company
Location
(lb/yr)
(m)
(m)
(m/sec)
(° C)
(lbs/yr)
(lb/yr)
(lb/yr)
(q/sec)
BASF Wyandotte
Wyandotte, MI
81,750
10.4
0.26
2.0
25
3,380
2,290
87,420
1.26
Dow
Freeport.TX
513,000
10.4
0.26
2.0
25
21,200
14,360
548,570
7.90

Plaquemine, LA
159,000
10.4
0.26
2.0
25
6,570
4,450
170,020
2.45
Jefferson
Port Neches, TX
69,750
7.25
0.19
2.0
46
2,880
1,950
74,590
1.07
01 in
Brandenburg, KY
60,750
10.4
0.26
2.0
25
2,510
1,700
64,960
0.94
Oxirane
Bayport, TX
21,320
9.1
0.05
2.0
21
10,000
17,600
48,920
0.71

Channelview, TX
52,290
14.6
0.76
2.0
26
7,720
5,230
65,240
0.94

TOTAL
957,860




54,270
47,590
1,059,720

3 Based on the following emission factors (lb PO lost per lb produced)
Process A -- Chlorohydrination (refs. 6, 9)	Process B -- Peroxidation (refs. 7, 8)
State air files
State air files
Hydroscience estimate
Building cross section 200 m*" distributed over a 350 ft x 1350 ft area.
C See ref. 14
2:A-16
Process 0.000750	"B"	State air files	Process 0.000210 "B"
Storage 0.000031	"B"	State air files	Storage 0.000031 "B"
Fugitive 0.000021	"D"	Hydroscience estimate	Fugitive 0.000021 "D"
Total 0.000802	Total 0.000262
-------
Table 26-9. EMISSIONS FROM PROPYLENE OXIDE USERS FOR ERETHANE POLYOLS PRODUCTION*
Company
Location
Process Vents
Emissions
Storage Vents
Emi ssions
Fugitive Emissions
Total
Emi ssi ons
(lbs/yr)
(g/sec)
(lb/yr)
(g/sec)
(lb/yr)
(g/sec)
(lb/yr)
(g/sec)
BASF Wyandotte
Geismar, LAa
103,703
1.49
708
0.010
708
0.010
105,119
0.192

Washington, NJ
2,400
0.03
20

20

2,440
0.03

Wyandotte,MI
13,200
0.19
100
0.002
80
0.001
13,380
0.193
E. R. Carpenter
Bayport, TX
8,800
0.13
80
0.001
60
0.001
8,940
0.132
Dow
Freeport, TX
23,400
0.34
100
0.003
140
0.002
23,640
0.345

Midland, MI
1,200
0.02




1,200
0.02
Emery Industry
Maudlin, SC
600
0.01




600
0.01

Santa Fe Springs,
CA 600
0.01




600
0.01
Hodag Chemical
Skokie, IL
600
0.01




600
0.01
Magna
Houston, TX
600
0.01




600
0.01
Mi 11 iken
Inman, SC
200





20U

Minnesota Mining &
Decatur, AL
1,000
0.01




1,000
0.01 £
Manufacturing








1
Mo bay
Baytown, TX
5,800
0.08
40
0.001
40
0.001
5,880
0.082 01

New Martinsville,
WV 4,600
0.07
40
0.001
20

4,660
0.071
Nalco
Sugarland, TX
2,400
0.03
20

20

2,440
0.03
01 in
Brandenburg, KY
12,800
0.19
100
0.002
80
0.001
12,980
0.193
Owens-Corni ng
Newark, OH
600
0.01




600
0.01
Pelron
Lyons, IL
1,400
0.02
20



1,420
0.02
Petroli te
Brea, CA
1,000
0.01




1,000
0.01

St. Louis, MO
1,000
0.01




1,000
0.01
PPG Industries
Circleview, OH
1,800
0.03
20

20

1,840
0.03
Quaker Oats
Memphis, TN
600
0.01




600
0.01
Reichhold
Cateret, NJ
1,200
0.02




1,200
0.02
Jefferson
Austin, TX
2,000
0.03
20

20

2,040
0.03

Conroe, TX
2,000
0.03
20

20

2,040
0.03

Port Neches, TX
2,000
0.03
20

20

2,040
0.03
2:A-14
-------
Table 26-9. EMISSIONS FROM PROPYLENE OXIDE USERS FOR ERETHANE POLYOLS PRODUCTION* (concluded)
Company
Location
Process Vents
Emissions
Storage Vents Emissions
Fugitive Emissions
Total
Emi ssions
(lbs/yr)
(g/sec)
lb/yr
(g/sec)
lb/yr
(g/sec)
(lb/yr)
(g/sec)
Union Carbide
Institute, WV
14,300
0.21
120
0.002
80
0.001
14,500
0.213

Seadrift, TX
14,300
0.21
120
0.002
80
0.001
14,500
0.213

S. Charleston, WV
14,600
0.21
120
0.002
80
0.001
14,800
0.213
Upjohn
LaPorte, TX
800
0.01




800
0.01
Witco
Clearing, IL
1,400
0.02
20



1,420
0.02

Houston, TX
1,000
0.01




1,000
0.01

Total
241,703

1,768

1,768

245,239

* Based on the following emission factors (lb PO
emmitted per lb PO used):
(ref. 10)
Process 0.000130 B - (derived from state air emission files)
Storage 0.000001 B - (derived from state air emission files)
Fugitive 0.000001 B - (derived from state air emission files)
IN>
cn
i
Average process vent stack parameters for all locations are: 13.1 m
0.03 m
-	stack height
-	stack diameter
1.1 m/sec - stack velocity
27°C m - stack temperature
Average storage vent parameters: 6m - stack height
0.03 m - stack diameter
27°C - stack temperature
2
Building cross section - 100 m
Fugitive emissions distributed over a 100 ft x 100 ft area
a See ref. 15
The Olin Company's Lake Charles, LA plant no longer emits propylene oxide (ref. 16).
2:A-l5
-------
26-13
Table 26-10 shows the emissions of propylene oxide that result from its use in the
manufacture of propylene glycols. Total emissions of propylene oxide from this
end-use are estimated to have been 9.,860 lb in 1978. Emission factors used to
develop this estimate are shown in Table 26-1011'12 along with vent parameter data.
Other associated emission components would include propylene glycols and propylene.
Normally one process vent distillation column and one storage tank vent are
involved.
Emissions from storage are reported to be negligible.11'12 Both di- and tri-
propylene glycol are co-products of propylene glycol manufacture.
Table 26-11 shows the propylene oxide emissions resulting from its use in the manu-
facture of polyether polyols used in surfactant applications. Since most surfactant
polyols are produced by the same companies that produce urethane polyols, usually
in the same equipment, the emission factors and vent parameter data are assumed
to be the same for both end-uses. Total emissions of propylene oxide resulting
from this end-use are estimated to have been 15,840 lb in 1978.
Table 26-12 shows the estimated emissions of propylene oxide form the manufacture
of dipropylene glycol, tripropylene glycol, and propylene-based glycol ethers.
Because these chemicals are all manufactured by the same companies that produce
propylene glycol and are integrated units, the emission factors and vent parameter
data determined for propylene glycol manufactures are applicable here.13 Total
estimated emissions of propylene oxide from these end-uses are estimated to
have been 345Q lb in 1978.
Total nationwide emissions of propylene oxide in 1978 from all sources are esti-
mated to have been 1^337,9.49 lfc. A tabulation of the losses is shown in Table 13.
-------
26-19
Table 26-10. Emissions from Propylene Oxide Users for
Propylene Glycol Production*


Process
Emissions
Fugitive
Emissions
Total
Emissions
Comoanv
Location
(lb/vr)
(lb/yr)
(lb/yr)
(q/sec)
Dow
Freeport, TX
3,920
140
4,060
0.058

Plaquemine, LA
2,550
90
2,640
0.038
Jefferson
Port Neches, TX
785
30
810
0.012
Oliii
Brandenburg, KY
700
25
725
0.010
Union Carbide
Institute, WV
785
30
810
0.012

S. Charleston, WV
785
30
810
0.012

Total
9,520
340
9,860

*Based on the following emission factors (lb PO emitted per lb PO used); see
refs. 21, 12.
Process 0.000028 B - (derived from state air emission files)
Storage 0.0	B - (derived from state air emission files)
Fugitive 0.000001 B - (derived from state air emission files)
0.000029
Average process vent stack parameters for all locations are:
27.4 m - stack height
0.05 m - stack diameter
3.3 m/sec - stack velocity
5°C	- stack temperature
Average storage vent stack parameters:
6.0 m	- stack height
0.03 m - stack diameter
27°C	- stack temperature
Building cross-section, 200 m2
Fugitive emissions distributed over a 350 ft X 1350 ft area.
-------
Tnhlo 26-1j. Emissions from Surfactant Polyol Producers
Process
Em i ss i om
Storage
Tin i ss ions
Kugitive
Emi ss ions
Total Emissions
Company
Location
(Ib/yr)
(.Ib/yr)
(lb/yr)
(lb/yr)
(q/sec)
Emery
Santa Fe Springs, CA
2 GO
nil
nil
265
0.004
Olin
Brandenburg, KY
6630
50
50
6730
0.097
Petrolite
Brea, CA
390
ni 1
nil
395
0.006

St. Louis, MO
390
nil
nil
395
0.006
Sherex
Janesville. WI
130
nil
n i 1
130
0.002
Union Carbide
Institute, WV
2170
20
20
2510
0.036

Seadrift, TX
2470
20
20
2510
0.036

S. Charleston, V/V
2-170
20
20
2510
0.036
Witco
Houston, TX
390
nil
ni 1
395
0.006

Total
15,600
120
120
15,810

aBased on urethane polyols emission factor since both are produced in the same equipment.
^Dased on 8760 hr/yr operation.
-------
26-21
Table 26-12. Emissions from Dipropvler.e Glycol, Tripropylene Glycol,
ana Glycol Ether Producers
Comoar.v
Location
Process
Emissions
(Lb/vr)
Fugitive
Emissions
(lb/vr)
Total Em
(lb/vr)
a
issions
(c/sec)
Dow
Freeport, TX
1450
50
1500
0.022

Plaquemme, LA
945
35
980
0.014
Olin
Brandenburg, KY
375
15
390
0.006
Jefferson
Port Neches, TX
230
10
240
0.00 3
Union Carbide
Institute, WW
165
5
170
0.002

5. Charleston, WV
165
5
170
0.002

Total
3,330
120
3,450

2
Based on propylene glycol emission factor; see ref. 13.
^Based on £760 hr/yr operation.
-------
26-22
Table 26-13. 1973 Propylene Oxide Nationwide Emissions
Estimated 1973
	Source	i	'Emissions (Ib/vr)
Production
Urethar.e polyols
Propylene glycol
Surfactant polyols
Di/tri-propylene glycols
Glycol ethers
Miscellaneous
Exports
To-cal
^Derived based on weighted average of other users except
es-ports .
1 ,059 ,720
245,239
9,360
15,S40
2,290
1,160
3,340*
	0
1 ,337,949
-------
3
_) —-yy' \	¦I
} X
vi
M.N
U^" 6,7,12,17,
~ z 21,24,26,35
rvj
CT»
I
ro
CJ
FIGURE 26-1. SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF PROPYLENE OXIDE EMISSIONS
-------
Table 26-14. EMISSIONS AND METEOROLOGICAL	STATIONS OF
NO.	COMPANY	SITE	LATITUDE	LONGITUDE
1	BASF WYANDOTTE	WYANDOTTE, MI	42 12 55	083	08	35
2	DOW	FREEPORT, TX	28 59 30	095	23	35
3	JEFFERSON	PORT NECHES, TX	29 57 45	093	56	00
4	OLIN	BRANDENBURG, KY	38 00 27	086	06	50
5	DOW	PLAQUEMINE, LA	30 19 00	091	15	00
6	OXIRANE	BAYPORT, TX	29 37 26	095	03	07
7	OXIRANE	CHANNELVIEW, TX	29 48 50	095	07	30
8	EMERY	SANTA FE SPGS, CA	33 55 30	118	05	40
9	PETROLITE	BREA, CA	33 53 30	117	58	45
10	PETROLITE	ST. LOUIS, MO	38 41 50	090 12	00
11	UNION CARBIDE	SEADRIFT, TX	28 30 31	096 46 18
12	WITCO	HOUSTON, TX	29 34 45	095	26	00
1 • A _1 7
SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF PROPYLENE OXIDE
STAR PLANT* SOURCE+	EMISSIONS (GM/SEC)
STATION
TYPE
TYPE
PROCESS
STORAGE
FUGITIVE

14822
1
1
1.177194
.049060
.029775



2
.190068
.001427
.001142

12923
2
1
7.387240
.305302
.206780



2
.336948
.001427
.002029



4
.077340
0.
.002727

12917
2
1
1.004440
.041476
.028095



2
.028792
.000285
.00U285



4
.014618
0.
.000571

13807
3
1
.874810
.036150
.024480



2
.184329
.001427
.001142



3
.095478
.000729
.000729
ro
cn
i


4
.015474
0.
.000571
ro
13970
4
1
2.289574
.094625
.064085



4
.050387
0.
.001870

12906
4
1
.306665
.143836
.253139

12906
5
1
.752980
.111174
.075311

23174
6
2
.008625
0.
0.



3
.095478
0.
0.

23174
6
2
.014396
0.
0.



3
.005613
0.
0.

13994
6
2
.014396
0.
0.



3
.005613
0.
0.

12923
6
2
.205923
.001712
.001142



3
.035578
.000285
.000285

12906
6
2
.014396
0.
0.



3
.005613
0.
0.

-------
Table 26-14. EMISSIONS AND METEOROLOGICAL STATIONS OF SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF PROPYLENE OXIDE (Continued)
STAR
PLANT* SOURCE+
EMISSIONS (GM/SEC)
NO.
COMPANY
SITE
LATITUDE
LONGITUDE
STATION
TYPE
TYPE
PROCESS
STORAGE
FUGITIVE
13
UNION CARBIDE
INSTITUTE, WV
38
23
02
081
47
24
13866
7
2
.205923
.001712
.001142











3
.035578
.000285
.000285











4
.013667
0.
.000507
14
UNION CARBIDE
SO CHARLESTON, WV
38
19
35
081
40
29
13866
7
2
.210236
.001712
.001142











3
.035578
.000285
.000285











4
.013667
0.
.000507
15
BASF WYANDOTTE
GEISMAR, LA
30
11
34
091
00
42
13970
8
2
1.491597
.010179
.010179
16
BASF WYANDOTTE
WASHINGTON,NJ
40
45
20
074
58
22
04789
8
2
.083524
.000571
.000571
17
ER CARPENTER
BAYPORT, TX
29
43
20
094
54
00
12906
8
2
.126712
.001142
.000856
18
DOW
MIDLAND, MI
43
35
28
084
13
08
14845
8
2
.017282
0.
0.
19
EMERY
MAUDLIN, SC
34
48
16
082
16
09
93804
8
2
.008625
0.
0.
20
HODAG
SKOKIE, IL
42
01
50
087
43
39
14855
8
2
.008625
0.
0.
21
MAGNA
HOUSTON, TX
29
40
10
095
23
30
12906
8
2
.008625
0.
0.
22
MILLIKEN
INMAN, SC
34
56
10
082
06
29
93804
8
2
.002886
0.
0.
23
3M
DECATUR, AL
34
38
39
087
02
25
13882
8
2
.014396
0.
0.
24
MOBAY
BAYTOWN, TX
29
45
30
094
54
25
12906
8
2
.083524
.000571
.000571
25
MOBAY
NEW MARTINSVILLE,WV
39
44
50
080
50
50
13736
8
2
.066242
.000571
.000285
26
NALCO
SUGARLAND, TX
29
37
10
095
38
32
12906
8
2
.034564
.000285
.000285
27
OWENS CORNING
NEWARK, OH
40
05
30
082
26
00
93824
8
2
.008625
0.
0.
28
PELRON
LYONS, IL
41
44
56
087
49
04
94846
8
2
.020167
.000285
0.
29
PPG
CIRCLEVIEW, OH
39
36
05
082
57
34
93824
8
2
.025907
.000285
.000285
30
QUAKER OATS
MEMPHIS, TN
35
10
30
089
56
56
13963
8
2
.008625
0.
0.
ro
cr»
ro
en
2:A-18
-------
Table 26-14 (Concluded)





STAR
PLANT*
S0URCE+
EMISSIONS (GM/SEC)
NO.
COMPANY
SITE
LATITUDE
LONGITUDE
STATION
TYPE
TYPE
PROCESS
STORAGE
FUGITIVE
32
REICHOLD
CATTERET, NJ
49 35 56
074 13 13
94741
8
2
.017285
0.
0.
33
JEFFERSON
AUSTIN, TX
30 20 00
097 14 15
13958
8
2
.028792
.000285
.000285
34
JEFFERSON
CONROE, TX
30 18 50
095 23 06
12960
8
2
.028792
.000285
.000285
35
UPJOHN
LAPORTE, TX
29 42 26
095 04 29
12906
8
2
.011511
0.
0.
36
WITCO
CLEARING, IL
41 48 02
087 46 39
94846
8
2
.020167
.000285
0.
37
SHEREX
JAMESVILLE, WI
42 40 47
089 00 30
14837
9
3
.001871
0.
0.
*Plant types:
Type 1
Pi ant
Type 2
PI ant
Type 3
PI ant
Type 4
PI ant
Type 5
PI ant
Type 6
PI ant
Type 7
PI ant
Type 8
PI ant
Type 9
PI ant
produces propylene oxide and urethane polyols
produces propylene oxide, urethane polyols, and glycols
produces propylene oxide surfactant polyols and glycols
produces propylene oxide and glycols
produces propylene oxide
produces urethane polyols and surfactant polyols
produces urethane polyols, surfactant polyols and glycols
produces urethane polyols
produces surfactant polyols
ro
cn
i
no
cr>
+ Source types:
Type 1:	Propylene oxide production
Type 2:	Urethane polyols production
Type 3:	Surfactant polyols productin
Type 4:	Propylene glycol production/Di/tripropylene glycol/glycol ether production
2:A-19
-------
26-27
Table 26-15. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE OF PROPYLENE OXIDE RESULTING FROM
SPECIFIC POINT SOURCE EMISSIONS
Concentration	Population
Level	Exposed	Dosage
3	3
(ug/m )	(persons)	[(ug/m ) . persons]
250	2	499
100	14	2,310
50	58	5,040
25	459	18,300
10	2,515	48,600
5	5,658	71,400
2.5	14,670	103,000
1	64,361	177,000
0.5	167,900	247,000
0.25	441,716	342,000
0.1	936,879	420,000
0.05	1,636,769	470,000
0.025	2,778,117	510,000
0.01	4,497,702	539,000
0.005	5,480,715	546,000
0,0025	7,121,386	552,100
0.001	11,549,809	559,000
4.36 x 10"5*	12,323,453	560,000
*The lowest annual average concentration occuring within
20 km of the specific point source.
2:A-20
-------
26-28
TABLE 26-16. MAJOR PARAMETERS FOR ESTIMATING EXPOSURE/DOSAGE RESULTING
FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS OF PROPYLENE OXIDE
	Parameter	 	Value
Daytime decay rate (Kd)	1.4 x 10"5 sec"1
Nighttime decay rate (Kn)	0
Hanna-Gifford coefficient (C)	225
Nationwide heating source emissions (E^)	0
Nationwide nonheating stationary source emissions	(EN) 0.055 gm/sec
Nationwide mobile source emissions (E^)	0
-------
TABLE 25-17. PROPYLENE OXIDE EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULTING FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS
t«po level
(uq/nl)
Population
(person)
Dosage
person)
Percentaqe of Contribution
Heating Stationary Mobile
Percentaqe of Distribution
Clt* Type 1 Clt» T»oe 2 Clt

.000250
446952
133.7
0.
100.0
0.
100.0
0.
0.
.000100
9)49730
1118.6
0.
100.0
0.
100.0
0.
0.
.000050
17551646
1596.0
0.
100.0
0.
100.0
0.
0.
.000025
40970419
2412.9
0.
100.0
0.
99.3
.1
.7
.000010
120132422
3680.4
0.
100.0
0.
95.7
2.0
2.3
0.
158679135
3930.4
0.
100.0
0.
92.8
2.6
4.6
-------
TABLE 26-18. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE SUMMARY OF PROPYLENE OXIDE
Population Exposed	^ Dosage
(Persons)	 		[(uq/m ) . persons")
Concentration
Specific
General


Specific
General


Level
(ug/m )
Poi nt
Po i n t


Point
Point


Source
Source
Area Source
U. S. Total
Source
Source
Area Source
U.S. Tot,
250
2
0
0
2
499
0
0
499
100
14
0
0
14
2,310
0
0
2,310
50
58
0
0
58
5,040
0
0
5,040
25
459
0
0
459
18,300
0
0
18,300
10
2,515
0
0
2,515
48,600
0
0
48,600
5
5,558
0
0
5,658
71,400
0
0
71,400
2.5
14,670
0
0
14,670
103,000
0
0
103,000
1
64,361
0
0
64,361
177,000
0
0
177,000
0.5
167,900
0
0
167,900
247,000
0
0
247,000
0.25
441,716
0
0
441,716
342,000
0
0
342,000
0.1
936,879
0
0
936,879
420,000
0
0
420,000
0.05
1,636,769
0
0
1,636,769
470,000
0
0
470,000
0.025
2,778,117
0
0
2,778,117
510,000
0
0
510,000
0.01
4,497,702
0
0
4,497,702
539,000
0
0
539,000
0.005
5,480,715
0
0
5,480,715
546,000
0
0
546,000
0.0025
7,121,386
0
0
7,121,380
552,000
0
0
552,000
0.001
11,549,809
0
0
11,549,809
559,000
0
0
559,000
0.00025
--
0
446,952
--
--
0
134

0.0001

0
9,149,730
	
	
0
1,118
	
0
12,323,453
0
158,679,135
171,002,588
560,000
0
3,930
563,930
Note: The use of -- as an entry indicates that the incremental E/D is not significant (relative to last entry or
relative to entry in another column at the same row) or that the exposure of the same population may be
counted in another column.
2:A-21
-------
26-31
REFERENCES
1.	J. L. Blackford, "Propylene Oxide," Chemical Economics Handbook, pp.
690.8022C--690.8022E, Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA
(November 1976).
2.	"Chemical Products Synopsis on Propylene Oxide," Mannsville Chemical Pro-
ducts, (January 1977).
3.	J. L. Blackford, "Polyether Polyols," Chemical Economics Handbook, pp.
688.3031E--688.3032K,	Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA
(September 1977).
4.	1978 Directory of Chemical	Producers, United States, "Polyether Polyols for
Urethane Application,	Polyether Polyols for Non-urethane Applications,"
pp. 857-858, Stanford	Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA.
5.	E. M. Klapproth, "Propylene Glycols," Chemical Economics Handbook, p. 690.
6050E, Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA (March 1978).
6.	Texas Air Control Board 1975 Emissions Inventory Questionnaire, Jefferson
Chemical Co., Inc., July 1, 1976.
7.	Texas Air Control Board, Construction Permit for Oxirane Chemical Co.,
Channelview, TX, April 3, 1975.
8.	Texas Air Control Board Construction Permit for Oxirane Chemical Co.,
LaPorte, TX, April 24, 1973.
9.	Texas Air Control Board Emissions Inventory Questionnaire, Dow Chemical Co.,
Freeport, TX, Propylene Oxide Finishing Facility, February 6, 1976.
10.	Texas Air Control Board Emission Inventory Questionnaire, Dow Chemical Co.,
Freeport, TX, Voranol Polyol. Plant, Februry 6, 1976.
11.	Texas Air Control. Board Emission Inventory Questionnaire Dow Chemical Co.,
Freeport, TX, Glycols Plant, February 6, 1976.
12.	Trip Report, Emission Control Options for the Synthetic Organic Chemicals
Manufacturing Industry, Dow Chemical Co., Plaquemine, LA, plant visit
by Hydroscience, Inc., November 16-17, 1977.
13.	T. L. Schomer, Emission Control Options for the Synthetic Organic Chemicals
Manufacturing Industry, Glycol Ethers Abbreviated Product Report,
Hydroscience, Inc., Knoxville, TN (February 1979).
14.	Arco Chemical Company (J. J. Zimmerman) Personal communication in response
to publication of the first draft of this report (June 1981).
15.	BASF Wyandotte Corporation (Keith Fry) Personal communication in response
to publication of the first draft of this report (October 1980).
16.	Olin Chemicals Group (V. M. Norwood) Personal conmunication in response to
publication of the first draft of this report (November 1980).
2:A-22 & 23
-------
APPENDIX A-27
Toluene
TOLUENE CHEMICAL DATA
Nomen:! ature
Chemical Abstract Service Registry Number: 108-38-3
Synonyms: Methyl Benzene; Phenyl Methane; Toluol; Methacide
Cherical Formula
MoT ecu 1 ar Weight: - ¦ ^ ^
Molecular Formula:
Molecular Structure
U
"8
Cng-.ical and Physical P-
Physical State at
6oi1i nc Point: 1
Melting Point:
Density: 0.8669
Vapor Pressure:
Vapor Density: ;
Solubility: sii:
Log Partition Co
V\ /Ach3
rfl es
Liquid-flammable, refractive, clear, noncorrcsive, sweet
odor
5C at 760 mr.
)°C/4°C
mm at 25°C
soluble (4.7 g/1 of ^0)
ient (Octanol/K^O): 2.80
Atmospheric Reactivit
Transformation F
(5-10«), Formalc
Reactivity Towa-
Reactivity Towa-
Reactivity Towa
Major Atjnospher
Formation React
ts: reacts with oxidizing materials. Forms organic aerosols
, and Cresols (10%), Benzaloehyde, benzoic acid
2 x Butane
Nc Reaction
tolysis: none - NAPP
cursors: N/A
-------
27-5
I. SOURCES
A. PRODUCTION
Toluene is produced as an aromatic mixture (BTX) with-benzene and mixed xylenes
primarily from catalytic reformate from refineries. It is also produced as BTX
from petroleum-derived pyrolysis gasoline as a by-product of olefin manufacture
during the cracking of hydrocarbons. Small amounts of toluene as BTX are also
obtained from coal-derived coke oven light oil and as a by-product from the
manufacture of styrene.1'2
Approximately 9,195 million lb of toluene was isolated from a total of 66,930 mil-
lion lb of toluene produced as BTX. The isolated toluene is used primarily for
chemical manufacturing and as a solvent.1'2
The largest source of toluene is from catalytic reformate. Total estimated
toluene produced from this source is estimated to have been 64,875 million lb
with 7,943 million lb isolated for chemical use. Catalytic reforming involves
the dehydrogenation of selected petroleum fractions rich in naphthalenes in the
presence of hydrogen to yield a mixture of aromatics consisting of toluene,
benzene, and mixed xylenes. Toluene is isolated by distillation followed by
washing with sulfuric acid and redistillation.1'2
The second largest source of toluene is from pyrolysis gasoline. An estimated
1274 million lb of toluene was produced from this source with an estimated
586 million lb isolated for chemical use.
An estimated 320 million lb of toluene was produced as a by-product of styrene
manufacture with 220 million lb isolated for chemical use.1'2
Approximately 175 million lb of toluene was produced from coal-derived BTX with
an estimated 145 million lb isolated for chemical use.1'2
There are currently 200 locations that produce toluene as BTX from catalytic
reformate. They are shown in Table 27-1 by geographic region.3 Of this total,
only 32 plants isolate toluene from catalytic reformate. Three of these sites
are located outside the continental United States and were not considered in
-------
zi-s
Table 2 7-1.
Nonisolated
Toluene Production
from Catalytic
a
Reformate
Region
Number
of
Sites
Reformate
Capacity
(M bbl/day)
Nonisolated
Toluene
Produced
(M lb/yr)
Average
Nonisolated
Toluene Produced
Per Site
(M lb/yr)
New England
0
0
0
0
Middle Atlantic
17
369,952
5,564
327
East North Central
28
624,178
9,388
335
West North Central
16
165,250
2,485
155
South Atlantic
5
57,660
868
174
East South Central
8
144,700
2,176
272
West South Central
71
1,649,303
24,805
249
Mountain
23
123,094
1,851
80
Pacific
33
647,461
9,738
295
Total
201
3,781,598
56,875
283
a_ .
See ref. 3.
Total production distributed based on total capacity.
-------
27-7
the project scope. The locations of the plants, the isolated toluene capacity,
and the isolated toluene production are shown in Table 27—2.112
There are currently eight producers at eight locations that produce toluene as
BTX from pyrolysis gasoline manufacture. One of the sites is in Puerto Rico
and was considered outside the project scope. The locations of the plants, the
ethylene capacity, the estimated toluene production as BTX and as isolated
toluene, and the total toluene produced are shown in Table 27-3.112
The six locations that produce coal-derived toluene and the seven sites that
produce toluene as a styrene by-product are also listed in Table 27-3.
A production summary of the sources of isolated toluene and toluene as BTX are
shown in Table 27-41'2 along with toluene's 1978 end-use distribution.
B. USES
As noted above, the end-use distribution of toluene is shown in Table 27-4. All
toluene produced as BTX and not isolated (57,693)million lb) is blended into
gasoline. The remaining isolated toluene (8,894)million lb) has a large
variety of end-uses.
The single largest end-use of toluene is in the manufacture of benzene through
dealkylation which consumes an estimated 3693 million lb and represents 40.2%
of isolated toluene production. Specific source locations of benzene producers
are shown in Table 27-5, The second largest use of isolated toluene is backblending
into gasoline. This end-use consumed an estimated 3230 million lb of isolated
toluene, representing 35.1% of 1978 production.
Toluene is the most important of the three major aromatics in solvent appli-
cations, and this end-use accounts for an estimated 9.5% of isolated toluene
production. The major use of toluene as solvent is in paints and coatings
formulations which consumed an estimated 579 million lb. A significant amount,
291 million lb, was used in adhesives, inks, pharmaceuticals, and other formu-
lated products requiring a solvent carrier.
-------
Table 27-2. Isolated Toluene Production from Catalytic Reformate3
Company
Location
Toluene
Capaci ty
(metric ton/yr)
Isolated
Toluene
Produced
(M lb/yr)b
Geographic Coordinates
Latitude/Longitude
Amerada Hess
St. Croix, VI
460
798
Not
in
project
scope
American Petrofina
Big Spring, TX
164
285
32
17
10/101
25
17

Beaumont, TX
125
217
29
57
30/93
53
20
Ashland Oil
Catlettsburg, KY
99
171
38
22
39/82
35
5B

N. Tonawanda, NY
39
68
42
59
45/78
55
27
ARCO
Houston, TX
118
217
29
42
17/95
16
01

Wilmington, CA
46
85
33
48
15/118
17
' 22
Charter Oil
Houston, TX
53
68
29
42
50/95
15
12
Coastal States
Corpus Christi, TX
56
97
27
48
43/97
26
28
Commonwealth
Penuelas, PR
395
684
Not
in
i project
scope
Crown
Pasadena, TX
46
80
29
44
40/95
10
30
Exxon
Baytown, TX
411
713
29
44
50/95
01
04
Getty
El Dorado, KA
13
34
37
47
10/96
52
00
Gulf
Alliance, LA
207
336
29
50
00/90
00
10

Philadelphia, PA
92
160
39
54
00/75
12
30

Port Arthur, TX
49
86
29
51
30/93
58
30
Kerr McGee
Corpus Christi, TX
148
257
27
48
16/97
25
24
Marathon
Texas City, TX
72
125
29
22
22/94
54
58
Mobile
Beaumont, TX
280
485
30
04
00/94
03
30
-------
Table 27-2 (concluded)
Isolated
Toluene	Toluene
Capacity Produced Geographic Coordinates
Company	Location	(metric ton/yr)	(M lb/yr)*3	Latitude/Longitude
Phillips
Sweeny, TX

33
57
29
04
48/95
44
46

Guayama, PR

335
582
Not
. in
i project
scope
Quintana-Howe11
Corpus Christi,
TX
56
97
27
48
35/97
27
30
Shell
Deer Park, TX

197
342
29
42
55/95
07
33
Sun
Corpus Christi,
TX
138
239
27
49
53/97
31
30

Marcus Hook, PA

151
262
39
48
45/75
24
51

Toledo, OH

247
428
41
36
52/83
31
40

Tulsa, OK

66
114
36
08
18/96
01
18
Tenneco
Chalmette, LA

99
200
30
03
30/89
58
30
Texaco
Port Arthur, TX

92
160
29
52
00/93
54
43

Westville, NJ

132
228
39
52
05/75
08
42
Union Oil
Chicago, IL

56
97
41
38
33/88
03
02
Union Pacific
Corpus Christi,
TX
99
171
27
48
10/97
35
•29
Total


4,574
7,943





aSee refs. 1 and 2.
^Total isolated toluene production distributed per toluene extraction capacity.
-------
inai
tudi
i 43
00
i 20
. 10
I 30
1 33
00
55
27
17
24
43
14 2
Table 27-3. Other Toluene Producers3
Location
1978
Production
Capacity
(M lb)
1978
Toluene
Produced
as nrx
(M lb)b
1978
Toluene
Isolated
-------
Table 27-3 (concluded)
Company
Locat ion
1978
Production
Capacity
-------
27-12
Table 27-4. Toluene Production and Consumption*
Total
Isolated Toluen6 Toluene
Toluene in BTX Produced
Source	(M lb)	(M lb)	(A lb)
Production
Catalytic reformate
7,943
.56,875
64,818
Pyrolysis gasoline
586
688
1,274
Coal derived
145
30
175
Styrene by-product
220
100
320
Total
8,894
57,693
66,587
End-Use Consumption
Isolated
Toluene	Toluene
Used	Used
End Use	(%)	(M lb/yr)
Gasoline as BTX	57,693
Gasoline isolated (back blended)	35.1	3,230
Benzene dealkylation	40.2	3,693
Paints and coating solvent	6.3	579
Adhesives, inks, pharmaceuticals solvent	3.2	291
Toluene diisocyanate	4.8	440
Xylenes (disproportionation)	2.3	216
Benzoic acid	1.6	144
Benzyl chloride	0.S	79
Vinyl toluene	0.6	55
Benzaldehyde	0.2	18
p-Cresol	0.1	14
Miscellaneous others	0.6	53
Net export	4.2	383
Total	100.0	66,888
•See refs. 1 and 2.
-------
27-13
Table 27-5. Benzene Producers3
Benzene
Production	Toluene
Capacity	Used Geographic Coordinates
Company	Location	(M gal/yr) (M lb/yr)	Latitude/Longitude
American Petrofina
Port Arthur, TX
23
131
29 57
30/93
53 20

Big Spring, TX
40
228
32 17
10/101
. 25 17
Ashland Oil
Catlettsburg, KY
35
200
38 22
39/82
35 58
Coastal States
Corpus Christi, TX
60
343
27 48
43/97
26 28
Commonwealth
Penuelas, PR
115
657
NIPSC


Crown
Pasadena, TX
23
131
29 44
40/95
10 30
Dow
Freeport, TX
25
143
28 59
15/95
24 25
Gulf
Alliance, LA
47
268
29 50
00/90
00 19

Philadelphia, PA
20
114
39 54
00/75
12 30
Monsanto
Alvin, TX
40
228
29 14
55/95
12 45
Phillips
Guayama, PR
40
228
NIPSC


Quintana-Howe11
Corpus Christi, TX
74
422
27 48
35/97
27 30
Shell
Odessa, TX
7
40
31 49
14/102
19 53
Sun
Corpus Christi, TX
20
114
27 50
00/97
31 25

Toledo, OH
63
360
41 36
52/83
31 40

Tulsa, OK
15
86
36 08
18/96
01 18
Total

647
3693



aSee refs. 1 and 2.
^Total usage distributed per benzene capacity,
c
Not in project scope.
-------
27-14
Other major uses of isolated toluene include toluene diisocyanate production
(440 million lb), xylenes via disproportionation (216 million lb), benzoic acid
manufacture (139 million lb), benzyl chloride production (43 million lb), vinyl
toluene manufacture (55 million lb), benzaldehyde manufacture (18 million lb),
and p-cresol production (14 million lb). Net exports consumed 383 million lb
of production, and 53 million lb of toluene was consumed in other miscellaneous,
unidentifiable uses.
Locations producing toluene diisocyanate are listed in Table 27—6.112 All other
chemical intermediate users of toluene are listed in Table 27—7.1'2'^
C. INCIDENTAL USES
For the purpose of this report, the use of toluene in gasoline and the emissions
resulting from gasoline evaporation and exhaust are considered incidental. The
only other source of toluene assessed for emissions was coke ovens.
Gasoline consumption in 1978 is estimated to have been 104,568 million gal.2
Coal tars from coke oven plants contain toluene. The total estimated coke pro-
duction from 61 plants in 1978 was 107 billion lb.5
II. EMISSIONS
A. PRODUCTION
Emission factors used to develop production and end-use emission estimates for
toluene are shown in Tables 27-8,27-6	27-13.
Emissions from the production of nonisolated toluene from catalytic reformate
are tabulated by geographic region in Table 27-9. Emissions from the production
of isolated toluene from catalytic reformate are tabulated in Table 27-10.
Emissions from the production of toluene from pyrolysis gasoline and coal-
derived and styrene by-product are tabulated in Table 27-11.
Emission factors used to develop process, storage, and fugitive emission
estimates are shown in Table i/-8. Process emissions are those that originate
-------
Table 27-6. Toluene Diisocyanate Producers3
1978	1970
TDI	Toluene
Company
Location
Capaci ty
(106 lb/yr)
Useb
(10& lb/yr)
Geographic Coordinates
Latitude/Longitude
Allied Chemical
Moundsville, WV
00
44
39
54
39/80
44
49
BASF Wyandotte
Geismar, LA
100
55
30
11
34/90
00
42
Dow Chemical
Freeport, TX
100
55
28
59
12/95
24
05
Du Pont
Deepwater, NJ
70
38
39
41
25/75
30
35
Mobay Chem. Corp
Baytown, TX
130
71
29
45
30/94
54
25

New Martinsville, WV
100
55
39
44
50/80
50
50
Olin Corp.
Ashtabula, OH
30
16
41
53
07/80
45
50

Lake Chrales, LA
100
55
30
13
55/93
15
57
Rubicon Chems. Inc.
Geismar, LA
40
22
30
12
00/91
11
30
Union Carbide
S. Charleston, WV
55
29
38
19
35/81
40
29
Total

805
440





aSee refs. 1 and 2.
^Total usage distributed per TDI capacity.
-------
27-16
Table 27-7. Other Toluene Chemical Intermediate Users3
Company
Location
Production Toluene
Capacity Used Geographic Coordinates
(10° ih/yr)	(106 lb/yr) Latitude/Longitude
Monsanto
Benzyl Chloride Producers
Bridgeport, NJ	80	36
39 47 33/75. 23 45
Stauffer
UOP, Inc.
Total
Edison, NJ
E. Rutherford, NJ
12
3
95
6
1
43
40 29 23/74 23 03
40 49 46/74 05 30
Kalama
Kalama, WA
Benzoic Acid Producers
140
72
46 00 54/122 51 05
Velsicol
Beaumont, TX

50
26
29
GO
in
16/94
03
17

Chattanooga,
TN
60
31
30
36
31/85
16
36
Pfizer
Terre Haute,
IN
6
3
39
26
01/87
24
22
Tenneco
Garfield, NJ

15
7
40
52
28/74
06
49
Total
271
139
AECO
Sun
Total
Xylene Disproportionation Producers
Houston, TX
Marcus Hook, PA
196
202
398
106
110
216
29 42 17/95 16 01
39 48 45/75 24 51
Dow
Vinyl Toluene Producer
Midland, MI	60	55
43 35 28/84 13 08
Sherwin Williams Chicago, IL
p-Cresol Producer
NAC
14
41 43 04/87 36 30
-------
27-17
Table 27-7 (concluded)
1978	1978b
Production	Toluene
Capacity Used	Geographic Coordinates
Company	Location	(106 lb/yr)	(106 lb/vr)	Latitude/Longitude
Benzaldehyde Producers
Kalama
Kalama, WA
NA
3.6
46
00
54/122 51 05

Eddystone, PA
NA
3.6
39
50
58/75 20 00
Stauffer
Edison, NJ
NA
3.6
40
29
23/74 23 07
Tenneco
Garfield, NJ
NA
3.6
40
52
28/74 06 49
UOP
E. Rutherford, NJ
NA
3.6
40
49
46/74 05 30
Total

NA
18d



SSee refs. 1, 2, and 4.
bTotal usage distributed per production capacity.
Q
Not available
^Total usage distributed evenly over all sites.
-------
Table 27-8. Toluene Emission Factors
Emission Factor lb Lost/lb Produced (Used)

Source
Process
Storage
Fugitive
Total
a
Derivation
Toluene
production - catalytic reformate
0.00002
0.00006
0.00002
0.00010
Bb
Toluene
production - pyrolysis gasoline
0.00015
0.00060
0.00015
0.00090
AC
Toluene
production - coal derived
0.00050
0.00060
0.00015
0.00125
D
Toluene
production - styrene by-product
0.00001
0.00060
0.00015
0.00076
d
A
Benzoic
acid production
0.00100
0.00040
0.00010
0.00150
ce
Benzyl <
chloride production
0.00055
0.00030
0.00015
0.00100
ce
Vinyl toluene production
0.00055
0.00030
0.00015
0.00100
D
Benzene
production
0.00005
0.00010
0.00005
0.00020
f
B
Xylene <
disproportiona tion
0.00005
0.00010
0.00005
0.00020
D
Toluene
diisocyanate production
0.00077
0.00032
0.00019
0.00128
ce
p-Cresol production
0.00120
0.00050
0.00030
0.00200
D
Benzaldehyde production
0.00090
0.00040
0.00020
0.00150
D
aA - Site visit data
B - State Eiles
C - Published data
D - Hydroscience estimate
^See refs. 6—10.
Q
See	ref. 11.
d
See	ref. 12.
CSee	ref. 13.
^See	refs. 6, 7, and 9.
-------
27-19
Table 27-9. Toluene Emissions from Nonisolated Toluene Produced as
BTX from Catalytic Reformate
Region
Number
of
Sites3
Toluene
Emissions
(lb/yr)b
Average
Emissions
(lb/yr)
Toluene
per Site
(a/sec) C
New England
0
0
0
0
Middle Atlantic
17
556,400
32,730
0.47
East North Central
28
938,800
33,530
0.48
West North Central
16
248,500
15,530
0,22
South Atlantic
5
86,800
17,360
0.25
East South Central
8
217,600
27,200
0. 39
West South Central
71
2,480,500
34,940
0.50
Mountain
23
185,100
8,050
0.12
Pacific
33
973,800
29,510
0,42
Total
201
5,687,500


aSee ref. 3.
^Based on the following emission factor:
lb toluene lost per lb produced
0.00002 Process
0.00006 Storage
0.00002 Fugitive
0.00010 Total
c
Based on 8760 hr/yr operation.
-------
Table 27-10. Toluene Emissions from Catalytic Reformate Isolated Toluene Production
Company
Location
Emissions (lb/yr)
Total Emissions
Process
S torage
Fug itive
(lb/yr)
(g/sec)
Amerada Hess
American Petrofina
Ashland Oil
ARCO
Charter Oil
Coastal States
Commonwe a 1th
Crown
Exxon
Getty
Gulf
Kerr McGee
Marathon
Mobil
St. Croix, VI
Big Spring, TX
Beaumont, TX
Catlettsburg, KY
N. Tonawanda, NY
Houston, TX
Wilmington, CA
Houston, TX
Corpus Christi, TX
Penuelas, PR
Pasadena, TX
Baytown, TX
El Dorado, KS
Alliance, LA
Philadelphia, PA
Port Arthur, TX
Corpus Christi, TX
Texas City, TX
Beaumont, TX
15,960
5,700
4,340
3,420
1, 360
4, 340
1,700
1, 360
1,940
13,680
1,600
14,260
680
6,720
3,200
1,7 20
5,140
2,500
9,700
47,880
17,100
13,020
10,260
4,080
13,020
5,100
4,080
5,820
41,040
4,800
42,780
2,040
20,160
9,600
5,160
15,420
7,500
29,100
15,960
5,700
4 , 340
3,420
1,360
4,340
1,700
1,360
1,940
13,680
1,600
14,260
680
6,720
3,200
1,720
5,140
2,500
9,700
79,800
28,500
21,700
17,100
6,800
21,700
8,500
6,800
9,700
68,400
8,000
71,300
3,400
33,600
16,000
8,600
25,700
12,500
48,500
1. 15
0. 41
0. 31
0. 25
0.10
0. 31
0.12
0.10
0.14
0. 98
0.12
1.03
0.05
0.48
0. 23
0.12
0. 37
0.18
0.70
Phillips
Quintana-Howe11
Sweeny, TX
Guayama, PR
Corpus Christi, TX
1,140
11,640
1,940
3,420
34,920
5,820
1,140
11,640
1,940
5,700
58,200
9,700
0.08
0.84
0. 14
-------
Table 27-10 ( com-I lulml )



Mini tin ions (lb/yr)

Tot a 1
it; ions
Company
Loca tion
Prom .-nr.
tora<|i:
FiKjiti.ve
(lb/yr)
(<:j/sec)
She 1 1
Deer Park, TX
6, IMO
20, '3 20
C) ,010
31,200
0. 19
Sun
Corpus Christi, TX
'1, 7 Ho
14,:hu
1 , 7 U0
23,900
0. 31

Marcus Hook, PA
r>, :mo
1 5, 7 20
5 , 210
26,200
0 . 30

Toledo, Oil
M, 560
2 5,600
0,560
12,U00
0. 62

Tulsa, OK
2, 200
6,010
2 , 200
Il,100
0 . 16
Tcnneco
Chalmette, I.,A
1,000
.1 2 ,000
1 ,000
20,000
0. 29
'l'exaco
Port Arthur, TX
3, 200
9,600
3, 200
16,OOO
0. 23

Westvil.le, NJ
1, 560
I 3,GOO
1, 560
22, tiOO
0. 33
Union. Oi ]
Chicago, I. L
1 , 9'10
5, 020
I ,910
9, 700
0. L1
Union Pacific
Corpus Christi., TX
J, 120
10,260
3,120
17,J 00
0. 25
Total

158,860
476,580
158,860
794,300

*Based on 87C0 hr/yr operation.
-------
Table 27-11. Toluene Emissions from Pyrolysis Gasoline, Coal-Derived and Styrene By-Product Production
Company
Location

Emissions (lb/yr)

Total Emissions

Process
Storaqe
Fugitive
(JWyr)
(q/sec)


Pyrolysis Gasoline




ARCOa
Channelview, TX

0
10,940
860
11,800
0. 17
Commonwealth
Penuelas, PR

22,200
88,800
22,200
133,200
1.92
Dow
Freeport, TX

24,600
98,400
24,600
147,600
2.12
Exxon
Baton Rouge, LA

15,150
60,600
15,150
90,900
1 .31
Gulf
Cedar Bayou, TX

28.350
113,400
28,350
170,100
2.45
Mobil
Beaumont, TX

12,150
48,600
12,150
72,900
1.05
Shell
Deer Park, TX

11,550
46,200
11,550
69,300
1.00
Union Carbide
Taft, LA

26,100
104.400
26,100
156,600
2.25
Total










140,100
571,340
140,960
852,400



Coal
Derived




Ashland
Catlettsburg, KY

35,000
42,000
10,500
87,500
1.26

N. Tonawanda, NY

10,500
12,600
3,150
26,250
3.78
Bethlehem Steel
Sparrows Point,
MD
3,500
4,200
1,050
8,750
0.13
Jones & Laughlin
Aliquippa, PA

7,500
9,000
2,250
18,750
0.27
U.S. Steel
Clairton, PA

27,500
33,000
8,250
68,750
0.99

Geneva, UT

3,500
4,200
1,050
8,750
0.13
Total


87,500
105,000
26,250
218,750



Styrene By-Product




American Hoechst
Baton Rouge, LA

470
28,200
7,050
35,720
0.51
Cos-Mar
Carville, LA

610
36,600
9,150
46,360
0.67
Dow
Freeport, TX

710
42,600
10,650
53,960
0.70

Midland, HI

160
9,600
2,400
12,160
0.10
Gill f
Donaldsonville,
LA
280
16,800
4,200
21,280
0.31
Monsanto
Texas City, TX

197
11,842
2,961
15,000
0.22
Amoco *-
Texas City, TX

42
2.526
632
3.200
0.05
Total

2,469
140,168
37,043
187,680

*Based on 8760 hr/yr operation.
aSee -<;f. 18
bSeL if. 22
-------
27-23
from the reactor and distillation vents. Storage emissions represent the loss
from both working and final product storage as well as loading and handling
losses. Fugitive emissions are those that result from plant equipment leaks.
Toluene emissions from catalytic reformate, pyrolysis gasoline, and
coal-derived and styrene by-product were 794,300 lb, 852,400 lb,
218,750 lb, and 187,6801b respectively in 1978.
Other associated emissions would primarily include benzene and the three xylene
isomers.
Process emissions of toluene from refineries are apparently quite low because
of the use of flares as hydrocarbon control devices.
B. USES
Toluene emissions from its use to produce benzene estimated to be
693,000 lb. The emissions are tabulated in Table 27-12 using the emission
factors listed in Table 27-8.
Toluene emissions resulting from its use in toluene diisocyanate manufacture
were estimated to have been 544,226 lb in 1978.. Emissions are tabulated in
Table 27-13.
Toluene emissions from all other chemical intermediate end-uses are tabulated
in Table 27-14. Toluene emissions were 43,000 lb from benzyl chloride, 208,500 lb
from benzoic acid, 43,200 lb from xylene disproportionation, 55,000 lb from
vinyl toluene, 28,000 lb from p-cresol, and 27,000 lb from benzaldehyde. Emis-
sion factors used to estimate toluene emissions are listed in Table 27-8.
Other miscellaneous uses of toluene caused an estimated 20,140 lb of toluene
emissions. This estimate was made by using an emission factor of 0.00038 lb
toluene lost per lb used and was derived from a weighted average of all other
toluene chemical intermediate end-uses.
For the purpose of this report all toluene used in paints and coatings,
578,000,000 lb, is assumed released to the atmosphere. Specific end-user
locations are considered too widespread to identify regionally.
-------
Table 27-12. Toluene Emissions from Benzene Producers
Company
Location

Emissions (lb/yr)

Total Emissions
Process
Storaqe
Fuqitive
(lb/yr)
(q/sec)*
American Petrofina
Port Arthur, TX
6,550
13.100
6,550
26,200
0.38

Big Spring, TX
11,400
22,800
11,400
45,600
0.66
Ashland Oil
Catlettsburg, KY
10,000
20,000
10,000
40,000
0.58
Costal States
Corpus Christi, TX
17,150
34,300
17,150
68,600
0.99
Commonwealth
Penuelas, PR
32,850
65,700
32,850
131,400
1.89
Crown
Pasadena, TX
6,550
13,100
6,550
26,200
0.38
Dow
Freeport, TX
7,150
14,300
7,150
28,600
0.41
Gulf
Alliance, LA
13,400
26.800
13,400
53,600
0.77

Philadelphia, PA
5,700
11,400
5,700
22,800
0.33
Phillips
Guayama, PR
11,400
22,800
11,400
45,600
0.66
Quintana-Howell
Corpus Christi, TX
21,100
42,200
21,100
84,400
1.22
Shell
Odessa, TX
2,000
4,000
2,000
8,000
0.12
Sun
Corpus Christi, TX
5,700
11,400
5,700
22,800
0.33

Toledo, OH
18,000
36,000
18,000
72,000
1.04

Tulsa, OK
4,300
8,600
4,300
17,200
0.25
Total

173,250
346,500
173,250
693,000

*Based on 8760 hr/yr operation.
-------
Table 27-13. Toluene Emissions from Toluene Uiisocyiinatc Producers
Company
¦ ocat ion
Process
Emissions (1!
S t.oraqc
Vyr)
Fugitive
Total Eni
(lb/yr)
g si. oris
{ cj/nec ) '•
EASF Wyandotte a
Goisinar, LA
107,244
44,536
26,36 6
170,146
2 .56
Dew Chemical
Freeport, TX
42,350
17,600
10,4 50
o
o
O
1 .01
fluPont
DeepwaLer, NJ
29,260
12,160
7 , 220
40,640
0.70
Mobay Cherri. Corp.
Baytown, TX
54,670
22,720
13 ,490
90,800
1 .31

Mew Martinsville, WV
43.250
17,600
10,450
70,400
1.01
Olin Corp.'J
Ashtabula, OH
12,320
5, 120
3,040
20,400
0.29
Rubicon Chems. Inc.
Geisnnar, LA
IE,.940
7 , 040
4,1 B0
28,160
0.41
Union Carbide
S. Charleston, WV
22 .330
0 , 2
5,510
37,120
0.53
Total

327,464
136,056
80,706
544 ,226

ABased on B760 hr/yr operation.
aSee ref. 19
bSee ref. 20
Allied Chemical, Moundsvi.lle, WV does not emit toluene (ref. 21) . Ol i.n Corn, Lake Charles, 1.A facilities are
no ionyoc operatiny (ref. 20).
-------
Table 27-14. Toluene Emissions from Other Chemical Intermediate Users


Emissions (lb/yr
)
Total Emissions
Company
Location
Process
Storage
Fugitive
(lb/yr)
(g/sec)*

Benzyl Chloride Producers



Monsanto
Bridgeport, NJ
19,800
10,800
5,400
36,000
0.518
Stauffer
Edison, NJ
3,300
1,800
900
6,000
0.086
UOP, Inc.
East Rutherford, NJ
550
300
150
1,000
0.014
Total
Benzoic
23,650
Acid Producers
12,900
6,450
43,000

Kalama
Kalama, HA
72,000
28,800
7,200
108,000
1 .55
Velsicol
Beaumont, TX
26,000
10,400
2,600
39,000
0.56

Chattanooga, TN
31,000
12,400
3,100
46,500
0.67
Pfizer
Terre Haute, IN
3,000
1,200
300
4,500
0.06
Tenneco
Garfield, NJ
7,000
2,800
700
10,500
0.15
Total

139,000
55,600
13,900
208,500


Xylene Disproportionation Producers



ARC0
Houston, TX
5,300
10,600
5,300
21,200
0.31
Sun
Marcus Hook, PA
5,500
11,000
5,500
22,000
0.32
Total
10,500
21,600
10,800
43,200
-------
Table 27-14 (concluded)
Emissions (lb/yr)		Total Emissions
Company
Location
Process
Storaqe
Fugitive
(lb/yr)
(q/sec)*


Vinyl Toluene Producer




Dow
Midland, MI
30.250
16,500
8,250
55,000
0.79


p-Cresol Producer




Sherwin Williams
Chicago, IL
16.800
7,000
4,200
28,000
0.40


Benzaldehyde Producers




Kalama
Kalama, WA
3,240
1,440
720
5,400
0.078

Eddystone, PA
3,240
1,440
720
5,400
0.078
Stauffer
Edison, NJ
3,240
1,440
720
5,400
0.078
Tenneco
Garfield, NJ
3,240
1,440
720
5,400
0.078
UOP
E. Rutherford,
NJ 3,240
1,440
720
5,400
0.078
Total

16,200
7,200
3,600
27,000

*Based on 8760 hr/yr operation.
-------
27-28
Hydroscience estimates that 15% of the toluene used in other solvent applica-
tions is consumed as a fuel. The remaining 247,000,000 lb of toluene is
released to the atmosphere. Again, specific source/industry locations could
not be identified because use is considered too widespread.
C. INCIDENTAL SOURCES
Since gasoline consumes 91% of all toluene produced, it is the largest source
of toluene emissions.
There are three distinct toluene emission sources from gasoline use. They
include evaporation from its use in automobiles, evaporation from gasoline
marketing activities (bulk and service stations), and emissions from the
exhaust of automobiles.
Toluene emissions are estimated to have been 38,492,000 lb from gasoline marketing
activities using an emission factor of 0.004735 lb hydrocarbon lost per lb gasoline
consumed14 and assuming toluene is 1.26 wt%15 of the hydrocarbon emission. In
Table 27-15 the total emissions from gasoline marketing are distributed by the
total number of service stations in each geographic region.14
Toluene emissions are estimated to have been 35,400,000 lb from automobile
gasoline evaporation using an emission factor of 0.83 g/mile hydrocarbon
evaporative loss.16 Average mileage was assumed to be 14.7 mile/gal,14 and
toluene was assumed to be 1.26 vt% of the total hydrocarbon emission.
Toluene emissions in automobile exhaust were estimated to have been
1,300,147,000 lb using an emission factor of 3.2 g/mile16 of hydrocarbons in
the exhaust, 14.7 mile/gal mileage,14 and assuming toluene constituted 12%17 by
weight of the exhaust emission.
Toluene emissions from coke ovens were estimated to have been 25,680,000 lb
using an emission factor of 0.48 lb toluene lost per ton of coke produced and
estimating coke production at 107 billion lb in 1978. Emissions are sussnarized
and distributed in Table 27-16 by the number of coke oven sites in each region.5
-------
27-29
a
Table 27-15. Toluene Emissions from Gasoline Marketing

Number
Toluene

of
Emissions
Region
Sites
(lb/yr)
New England
11,105
1,887,850
Middle Atlantic
28,383
4,825,110
East North Central
42,270
7,185,900
West North Central
23,304
3,961,680
South Atlantic
37,286
6,338,620
East South Central
16,313
2,773,210
West South Central
28,336
4,817,120
Mountain
12,815
2,178,550
Pacific
26,647
4,529,900
Total
226,459
38,492,000b
aSee ref. 13.
^Average toluene emission per site:170 lb/yr (0.002 g/sec).
-------
27-30
Table 27-16. Toluene Emissions from Coke Oven Operations3
Region
Number
of
Sites
Toluene
Emissions
(lb/yr)
New England
0
0
Middle Atlantic
15
6,314,775
East North Central
25
10,524,625
West North Central
3
1,262,955
South Atlantic
4
1,683,940
East South Central
9
3,788,865
West South Central
2
841,970
Mountain
2
841,970
Pacific
_1
420,985
Total
61
25 ,680,000'
a
See ref. 4.
^Average emissions: 420,985 lb/yr per site (6.06 g/sec).
-------
27-31
••'•-r.t uararcoter d*ta for both production and epd-uses of toluene are su-rasariaed
in T^ible 2 7 — 17.
7!:e total nationwide emissions of toluene are estimated to be
2,229,434,200 lb. Total emissions are summarised in Table 2 7—1-3.
-------
27-32
Table 27-17. Toluene Vent Parameter Data*
Source
Number
of
Stacks
Vent
Height
(ft)
Vent
Diameter
(ft)
Discharge
Temperature
(°F)
Velocity
(ft/sec)
Discharge
Area
(ft X ft)
catalytic reformate
- 11	54
12	30
Production
Process
Storage
Fugitive
Production - pyrolysis gasoline
Process	4	250
Storage	10	30
Fugitive
Production - coal derived
Process	2	60
Storage	8	24
Fugitive
Production - styrene by-product
Process	3	200
Storage	4	30
Fugitive
Benzene production
Process	4	50
Storage	8	55
Fugitive
TDI production
Process	2	90
Storage	6	24
Fugitive
Benzoic acid production
Process	2	50
Storage	5	24
Fugitive
Benzyl chloride production
Process	2	38
Storage	4	24
Fugitive
3.0
0.33
2.50
0.17
1.5
0.25
0.25
0.17
0.25
4.0
0.90
0.17
1.25
0.25
1.0
0.17
300
80
100
80
120
80
115
80
95
115
110
80
110
80
78
70
12
210
40
16
40
15
0.02
800 X 1400
600 X 1200
400 X 400
200 X 700
300 X 600
300 X 500
300 X 300
300 X 300
-------
27-33
Table 27-17 (concluded)
Source
Number
of
Stacks
Vent
Height
(ft)
Vent
Diameter
(ft)
Discharge
Temperature
(°F)
Velocity
(ft/sec)
Discharge
Area
(ft X ft)
Vinyl toluene production
Process	2 ~
Storage	4
Fugitive
Benzaldehyde production
Process	1
Storage	3
Fugitive
p-Cresol production
Process	2
Storage	4
Fugitive
Xylene production
Process	3
Storage	4
Fugitive
Coke ovens
Process	2
50
24
40
20
30
24
60
30
30
1.0
0.17
0.75
0.17
1
0.17
1.5
0. 25
120
80
125
80
208
80
150
80
300
15
10
75
60
15
100 X 100
100 X 100
200 X 200
300 X 600
~Building cross-section: Benzoic acid - 50 m
Benzyl chloride - 50 m2
2
Vinyl toluene - 20 m
Benzaldehyde - 50
2
All others - 200 m
-------
27-34
Table 27-18. Total Nationwide 1978 Toluene Emissions

Toluene Emissions
Source
(lb/yr)
Toluene production - catalytic reformate
794,300
Toluene production - pyrolysis gasoline
852,400
Toluene production - coal-derived
218,750
Toluene production - styrene by-product
187,680
Paint and coatings solvent
579,000,000
Adhesives, inks, pharmaceutical solvent
247,000,000
Benzene production
693,000
Toluene diisocyanate production
-544,226
Benzoic acid production
208,500
Benzyl chloride production
43,000
Vinyl toluene production
55,000
Benzaldehyde production
27,000
p-Cresol production
28,000
Xylene disproportionation production
43,200
Other/miscellaneous uses
20,140
Gasoline - marketing evaporative loss
38,492,000
Gasoline - automobile evaporative loss
35,400,000
Gasoline - automobile exhaust emissions
1,300,147,000
Coke ovens
25,680,000
Total
2,229,434,200
-------
25,52,54
4,20,48
¦hJTi..
^7^3,5,0,10, 17,24,33
HGURE 27-1. SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF TOLUENE EMISSIONS
-------
NO
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
2:1
Table 27-19. EMISSIONS AND METEOROLOGICAL STATIONS OF SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF TOLUENE
STAR PLANT* SOURCE*	EMISSIONS (6M/SEC)
COMPANY	SITE	LATITUDE LONGITUDE STATION TYPE TYPE PROCESS STORAGE FUGITIVE
ARCO
CHANNELVIEW, TX
29
50
04
095
06
43
12906
1
1
0
0.015728
0.012399
EXXON
BATON ROUGE, LA
30
09
10
090
54
20
13970
1
1
0.218164
0.872650
0.218163
GULF
CEDAR BAYOU, TX
29
49
29
094
55
10
12923
1
1
0.408168
1.633050
0.408232
MOBILE
BEAUMONT, TX
30
04
14
094
03
40
12917
1
1
0.174912
0.699840
0.174943
SHELL
DEER PARK, TX
29
42
55
095
07
34
12906
1
1
0.166288
0.665270
0.166318
UNION CARBIDE
TAFT, LA
29
58
00
090
27
00
13970
1
1
0.375824
1.503360
0.375824
DOW
FREEPORT, TX
28
59
30
095
23
35
12923
2
1
0.354260
1.416790
0.354230










3
0.010179
0.613440
0.153349










4
0.102992
0.205984
0.102962










5
0.609842
0.253422
0.150495
MONSANTO
TEXAS CITY, TX
29
22
45
094
33
30
12923
6
3
0.002834
0.170327
0.042589
ASHLAND
CATLETTSBURG, KY
38
22
39
082
55
58
13866
4
2
0.503996
0.604008
0.151192










4
0.143964
0.287928
0.143994
ASHLAND
N. TONAWANDA, NY
42
59
45
078
55
27
14747
5
2
0.151192
0.181376
0.453577
BETHLEHEM STEEL
SPARROW POINT, MD
39
18
30
076
34
30
13701
5
2
0.050356
0.060376
0.015126
JONES LAUGIDLI
ALIQUIPPA, PA
40
35
54
080
14
24
14762
5
2
0.108004
0.129632
0.032407
U. S. STEEL
CLAIRTON, PA
40
18
15
079
52
43
14762
5
2
0.395992
0.475136
0.118785
U. S. STEEL
GENEVA, UT
40
19
01
111
44
29
24101
5
2
0.050356
0.060376
0.015126
AMER HOECHST
BATON ROUGE, LA
30
33
02
091
15
50
13970
6
3
0.006753
0.406012
0.101503
COS-MAR
CARVILLE, LA
30
13
30
091
04
00
13970
6
3
0.008751
0.527016
0.131754
GULF
DONALDSONVILLE, LA
30
13
30
091
04
00
13970
6
3
0.003996
0.241884
0.060471
AMOCO
TEXAS CITY, TX
29
21
40
094
55
50
12906
6
3
0.000604
0.036332
0.009090
-------
NO
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
2:
Table 27-19. EMISSIONS AND METEOROLOGICAL STATIONS OF SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF TOLUENE (continued)
COMPANY
DOW
SITE
MIDLAND, MI
LATITUDE LONGITUDE
43 35 28 084 13 08
STAR PLANT* SOURCE+
STATION TYPE TYPE PROCESS
EMISSIONS (GM/SEC)
14845
AMER PETROFINA
PORT ARTHUR, TX
29
57
30
093
53
20
12917
8
AMER PETROFINA
BIG SPRING, TX
32
17
10
101
25
17
13962
8
COASTAL STATES
CORPUS CRISTI, TX
27
48
43
097
26
28
12925
8
CROWN OIL
PASADENA, TX
29
44
40
095
10
30
12906
8
GULF
ALLIANCE,LA
29
50
00
090
00
19
12958
8
GULF
PHILADELPHIA, PA
39
54
00
075
12
30
13739
8
3
8
4
4
4
4
4
4
0.002283
0.435566
0.094368
0.164128
0.246956
0.094240
0.192924
0.082064
STORAGE
0.138256
0.237568
0.188736
0.328256
0.493912
0.188480
0.385848
0.164128
FUGITIVE
0.034532
0.118880
0.094305
0.164162
0.246956
0.094305
0.192954
0.082065
QUINTANT-HOWELL
CORPUS CRISTI,
TX
27
48
35
097
27
30
12925
8
4
0.303780
0.607560
0.303843
SHELL
ODESSA, TX

31
49
14
102
19
53
23023
8
4
0.028792
0.057584
0.028792
SUN OIL
CORPUS CRISTI,
TX
27
50
00
097
31
25
12925
8
4
0.082064
0.164128
0.082064
SUN OIL
TOLEDO, OH

41
36
52
083
31
40
94830
8
4
0.259260
0.518520
0.259196
SUN OIL
TULSA, OK

36
08
18
096
01
18
13968
8
4
0.061896
0.123792
0.061929
BASF WYANDOTTE
GEISMAR, LA

30
11
34
091
00
42
13970
9
5
1.541412
0.640602
0.380391
DUPONT
DEEPWATER, NJ

39
41
25
075
30
35
13739
9
5
0.421360
0.175038
0.103976
MOBAY CHEM CORP
BAYTOWN, TX

29
45
30
094
54
25
12906
9
5
0.787290
0.327054
0.194254
MOBAY CHEM CORP
NEW MARTINSVILLE, WV
39
44
50
080
50
50
13736
9
5
0.622780
0.253422
0.150495
OLIN CORP
ASHTABULA, OH

41
53
07
080
45
50
14843
9
5
0.177384
0.073818
0.043760
RUBICON CHEMS
GEISMAR, LA

30
12
00
091
11
30
12958
9
5
0.243912
0.101406
0.060185
UNION CARBIDE
SO CHARLESTON,
WV
38
19
35
081
40
29
13866
9
5
0.321538
0.133560
0.079338
-------
Table 27-19. EMISSIONS AND METEOROLOGICAL STATIONS OF SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF TOLUENE (concluded)
NO.
COMPANY
SITE
LATITUDE
LONGITUDE
STAR
STATION
PLANT*
TYPE
SOURCE+
TYPE
EMISSIONS (GM/SEC)
PROCESS STORAGE FUGITIVE
39
MONSANTO
BRIDGEPORT,NJ
39
47
33
075
23
45
13739
10
7
0.285134
0.155504
0.077752
41
STAUFFER
EDISON, NJ
40
29
23
074
23
03
94741
11
7
0.047502
0.025876
0.012969











9
0.046645
0.020739
0.010369
42
UOP INC
RUTHERFORD, NJ
40
49
46
074
05
30
94741
11
7
0.007928
0.004312
0.002156











9
0.046645
0.020739
0.010369
43
KALAMA
KALAMA, WA
46
00
54
122
51
05
24229
12
6
1.036784
0.414765
0.103691











9
0.046645
0.020739
0.010369
44
TENNECO
GARFIELD, NJ
40
52
28
074
06
47
94741
12
6
0.100838
0.040270
0.010084











9
0.046645
0.020739
0.010369
46
VELSICOL
BEAUMONT, TX
29
58
16
094
03
17
12917
13
6
0.037443
0.149830
0.037418
47
VELSICOL
CHATTANOOGA, TN
35
02
31
085
16
86
13882
13
6
0.446348
0.178525
0.044647
48
PFIZER
TERRA HAUTE, IN
39
26
01
087
24
22
93819
13
6
0.043188
0.017280
0.004313
49
ARCO
HOUSTON, TX
29
42
17
095
16
01
12960
14
11
0.076293
0.152716
0.076325
50
SUN
MARCUS HOOK, PA
39
48
45
075
24
51
13739
14
11
0.079149
0.158424
0.079179
51
SHERWIN WILLIAM
CHICAGO, IL
41
43
04
087
36
30
94846
15
10
0.241882
0.100836
0.060407
52
KALAMA
EDDYSTONE, PA
39
50
58
075
20
00
13739
16
9
0.046645
0.020739
0.010369
53
DUPONT
LAPLACE,LA
30
04
00
090
32
00
12958
17
12
8.464614
0.097540
1.219685
54
DUPONT
VICTORIA, TX
28
40
29
096
57
21
12923
17
12
2.693304
0.031076
0.388064

aSome emission
plants have been
eliminated due '
to comments
to early
drafts of
this document.


2:B-19
-------
TABLE 27-19 (Continued)
* Plant types:
Type 1:	Plant produces toluene (gasoline pyrolysls)
Type 2:	Plant produces toluene (gasoline pyrolysls and from styrene production, benzene, and
toluene dilsocyanate
Type 3:	Plant produces toluene (gasoline pyrolysls and from styrene production)
Type 4:	Plant produces toluene (coal derived) and benzene
Type 5:	Plant produces toluene (coal derived)
Type 6:	Plant produces toluene (from styrene production)
Type 7:	Plant produces toluene (from styrene production) and vinyl toluene
Type 8:	Plant produces benzene
Type 9:	Plant produces toluene dilsocyanate
Type 10:	Plant produces benzyl chloride
Type 11:	Plant produces benzyl chloride and benzaldehyde
Type 12:	Plant produces benzolcacld and benzaldehyde
Type 13:	Plant produces benzoic acid
Type 14:	Plant produces oxylene
Type 15:	Plant produces p-cresol
Type 16:	Plant produces benzaldehyde
Type 17:	Plant produces chloroprene
t Source types:
Type 1:	Toluene production (gasoline pyrolysls)
Type 2:	Toluene production (coal derived)
Type 3:	Toluene production (styrene production)
Type 4:	Benzene production
Type 5:	Toluene dilsocyanate production
-------
TABLE 27-19 (Concluded)
Type 6:	Benzoic acid production
Type 7:	Benzyl chloride production
Type 8:	Vinyl toluene production
Type 9:	Dertzaldehyde production
Type 10: p-cresol production
Type 11: Xylene disproportionate
Type 12: Chloroprene production
r\j
i
-t*
o
-------
27-41
Table 27-20. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE OF TOLUENE RESULTING
FROM SPECIFIC POINT SOURCE EMISSIONS
Concentration	Population
Level	Exposed	Dosage
3	3
(ug/m )	(persons)	[(uq/m ) . persons]
25
7
178
10
345
4,590
5
1,296
10,800
2.5
5,809
27,200
1
23,516
54,700
0.5
59,628
79,700
0.25
159,488
114,000
0.1
496,875
165,000
0.05
1,305,009
219,000
0.025
3,176,495
284,000
0.01
8,480,952
367,000
0.005
14,708,444
410,000
0.0025
23,466,299
441,000
6.59 x 10 5
30,919,980
454,000
*The lowest annual average concentration occurring within 20 km
of the specific point source.
2:B-20
-------
TABLE 27-21. EMISSIONS RATES AND NUMBER OF GENERAL POINT SOURCES OF TOLUENE
Toluene Production
(Catalytic Reforming)*	Gasoline Marketing		Coke Oven	
Emissions/Site Number	Emissions/Site Number	Emissions/Site Number
Region	 (qm/sec) of Sites	(gin/sec) of Sites (gm/sec) of Sites
New England
0
0
0.00245
11,105
6.062
0
Middle Atlantic
0.535
17
0.00245
28,383
6.062
15
East North Central
0.510
28
0.00245
42,270
6.062
25
West North Central
0.227
16
0.00245
23,304
6.062
3
South Atlantic
0.250
5
0.00245
37,286
6.062
4
East South Central
0.422
8
0.00245
16,313
6.062
9
West South Central
0.634
71
0.00245
28,336
6.062
2
Mountain
0.116
23
0.00245
12,815
6.062
2
Pacific
0.429
33
0.00245
26,647
6.062
1
* This Includes both the nonisolated toluene (as BTX) producers and the
Isolated toluene producers.
-------
TAtti.r 27-22. cxposiiuf anii nnsftix nr. sum nr. rhom tmisnniNr. tiiOM r.r.NHiiw. point smmnrr. or ioujcnf.
Population flxpoaed	Dotmqe
(10 * persona)		[.10**( m/m~*) » personal
Coocentrat ion
Level	loluene Coaolino	U.S.	foluene	Onstiline	U.S.
(tn/m*)	Proline! ion Market inr|	Tnke Oven	Total Product ion Markut inq	Coke Oven	lota!
inn	0	11	2.1	2-'	0	0	0.29	0.29
50	o	0	12	12	0	n	0.98	0.9fl
•25	0	I)	JO	38	0	o	l.fM	1.0
10	1.3	0	1i0	131	0.02	n	1.2	i.2
5	15	O	310	325	0.11	0	4.4	4.5
2 .5	55	O	874	920	0.22	0	6.4	6.6
1	207	0	2,56(1	2,770	0.47	0	fl.9	9.4
0.5	--	--	--	—	0.67	0	10.3	II
0.25	--	--	--	--	0.99	0	12	M
0.1	--	--	--	—	1.5	0.1	14	16
0.05	—	--	--	--	1.8	0.7	16	19
0.025	--	--	--	--	2.1	1.7	10	21
0.01	--	--	--	--	2.6	3.4	IS	24
0	--	--	-	--	2.9	4.7	1B	40
N0IF: Ihe use of — as an entry indicates LliaL tlie inoremiMita I E/l) is not. 3iqni f iennt. (relative to last entry or relative
to entry in another column nt the anrne rnw) or thai tin? exposure oT the smne population may he counted in another
column.
-------
27-44
TABLE 27-23. MAJOR PARAMETERS FOR ESTIMATING EXPOSURE/DOSAGE RESULTING
FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS OF TOLUENE
Parameter
Daytime decay rate (Kd)
Nighttime decay rate (K^)
Hanna-Gifford coefficient (C)
Nationwide heating source emissions (E^)
Nationwide nonheating stationary source emissions (Eu)
N
Paint/coating solvent emissions
Adhesive/links solvent emissions
Miscellaneous
Nationwide mobile source emissions (E^)
Motor vehicle evaporation loss
Motor vehicle exhaust loss
Ratio of truck emissions to auto emissions
Value
2.8 x 10~5 sec"1
225
0
11,895 gm/sec
8,337.6 gm/sec
3,556.8 gm/sec
0.3 gm/sec
19,232 gm/sec
509.8 gm/sec
18,722.2 gm/sec
0
-------
TABLE 27-24. TOLUENE EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULTING FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS
tips level
(u9/m])
100.000000
50.000000
25.000000
10.000000
5.000000
0.
PopulatIon
(pen on)
58188
505140
12853644
55332557
123701326
158679135
Dosage
(u9/m*/
	person)
71854 3 3.1
50335701.2
460475519.4
1141494655.0
1623319075.5
1742401236.9
_ Percentage of Contribution
Heating	S\a t lonjiry	Mobile
0.	42.3	57.7
0.	63.3	36.7
0.	61.5	38.5
0.	50.4	49.6
0.	48.5	51.5
0.	47.9	52.1
Percentage of Dlitrlbutlon
City Type I
100.0
100.0
100.0
98.1
94.2
91.1
City Type 2
0.
0.
0.
.9
3.0
3.4
City Type 1
0.
0.
0.
1.0
2.7
5.5
ro
i
-E*
cn
-------
TABLE 27-25. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE SUMMARY OF TOLUENE
Population Exposed
Dosage
[(ug/mJ) . persons!
Concentration
Specific
General


Specific
General


Level
Point
Point


Point
Point


(uq/m3)
Source
Source
Area Source
U.S. Total
Source
Source
Area Source
U.S. Total
100
0
2,100
58,347
60,447
0
290,000
7,185,433
7,475,
50
0
12,000
505,140
517,140
0
980,000
50,335,701
51,315,
25
7
38,000
12,853,644
12,891,644
178
1,800,000
460,475,519
462,275,
10
345
131,000
55,332,557
55,463,902
4,590
3,200,000
1,141,494,655
1,144,699,
5
1,296
325,000
123,701,326

10,800
4,500,000
1,623,319,075

2.5
5,809
928,000
—

27,200
6,600,000
--
--
1
23,516
2,770,000
—
--
54,700
9,400,000
—
--
0.5
59,628
—
—
--
79,700
11,000,000
--

0.25
159,488
—
—
--
114,000
13,000,000
—

°-10
496,875
—
—
—
165,000
16,000,000
--
--
0.59 x 10~b 30
,919,980
"
158,679,135
158,679,135
454,000
48,000,000
1,742,401,000
1,790,855,1
Note: The use
of — as an
entry indicates that the
incremental E/D is
not significant (relative
: to last entry

or relative to entry
in another
column at the
same row) or that
the exposure of the same
population may

ro
i
4=-
crv
be counted in another column,

-------
27-47
REFERENCES
1.	K. Ring, "Toluene," p. 300.7200A—300.7202L, Chemical Economics Handbook,
Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA (July 1979).
2.	K. Ring, T.C. Gunn, "BTX Aromatics Supply," p. 300.6500A--300.6502F, Chemi-
cal Economics Handbook, Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA
(February 1979).
3.	Oi1 and Gas Journel, "Annual Refinery Survey," p. 63, March 20, 1978.
4.	1979 Director of Chemical Producers, United States, Stanford Research
Institute, Menlo Park, CA.
5.	"Coke-Oven Plants in the United States," Coal and Coke Products, Chemical
Economics Handbook, p. 212.2000A, Stanford Research Institute^ Menlo
Park, CA (October 1978).
6.	Texas Air Control Board 1975 Emissions Inventory Questionnaire, Cosden Oil
and Chemical Co., subsidiary of American Petrofina, Inc., Big Spring,
TX, May 19, 1977.
7.	Texas Air Control Board 1975 Emissions Inventory Questionnaire, Coastal
States Petrochemical Co., subsidiary of Coastal States Gas, Corpus
Christi, TX, July 6, 1976,
8.	Texas Air Control Board 1975 Emissions Inventory Questionnaire, Charter
International Oil Co., Houston, TX, April 4, 1977.
9.	Texas Air Control Board 1975 Emissions Inventory Questionnaire, Sun Oil
Company of Pennsylvania, Corpus Christi Refinery, Corpus Christi, TX,
July 1, 1976.
10.	Texas Air Control Board 1975 Emissions Inventory Questionnaire, Marathon Oil
Co., Texas Refining Division, Texas City, TX, March 25, 1976.
11.	R. L. Standifer, Hydroscience, Inc., Emission Control Options for the
Synthetic Organic Chemicals Manufacturing Industry—Product Report on
Ethylene (on file at EPA, ESED, Research Triangle Park, NC) (June
1978).
12.	J. A. Key, Hydroscience, Inc., Emission Control Options for the Synthetic
Ogranic Chemicals Manufacturing Industry—Product Report on Styrene
(on file at EPA, ESED, Research Triangle Park, NC) (May 1978).
2: B-22
-------
27-48
13.	Special Project Report "Petrochemical Plant Sites" prepared for Industrial
Pollution Control Division, Industrial Environmental Research Labor-
atory, Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio, by Monsanto
Research Corporation, Dayton, Ohio, April 1976.
14.	A Study of Vapor Control Methods for Gasoline Marketing Operations: Volume
I -- Industry Survey and Control Techniques, EPA, OAWM, OAQPS, Research
Triangle Park, NC, EPA 450/3-75-046a (April 1975).
15.	Source Reconciliation of Atmospheric Hydrocarbons, State of California Air
Resources Board, El Monte, CA (March 1975).
16.	Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, AP-42, 2d ed., EPA, Research
Triangle Park, NC (March 1975).
17.	F. Black and L. High, Automotive Hydrocarbon Emission Patterns and the Measure
ment of Nonmethane Hydrocarbon Emission Rates, EPA, Mobile Source Emis-
sions Research Branch, Research Triangle Park, NC (February 1977).
18.	ARCO Chemical Company, (J.J. Zimmerman), personal communication in response
to publication of the first draft of this report (June 1981).
19.	BASF Wyandotte Corporation, (Keith Fry), personal communication in response
to publication of the first draft of ths report (October 1980).
20.	Olin Chemicals Group (V.M. Norwood), personal communication in response to
publication of the first draft of this report (November 1980).
21.	Allied Chemical (W.S. Tusetsky) personal communication in response to
publication of the first draft of this report (June 1981).
22.	Monsanto Company (C.D. Malloch) personal communication in response to
publication of the second draft of this report (July 1982).
23.	Standard Oil Company (R.A. Simuleski) personal communication in response
to publication of the first draft of this report (January, 1982).
2:B-23
-------
APPENDIX A-28 	 Trichloroethylene
TRICHLORUtTHYLENE CHEMICAL DATA
Nomencl ature
Chemical Abstract Service Registry Number: 79-01-6
Synonyms: Ethylene Trichloride; Trichloroethene; Ethinyl Trichloride; Acetylene
Trichloride; Tri-Clene; Trielene; Trilene; Trichloran; Trichloren;
Chlorylen; Gemalgene; Algylen Trimar; Triline; Tri; Trethylene;
Sestrosol; Germalgene
Chemical Formula
Molecular Weight: 131.39
Molecular Formula: CgHCl^
Molecular Structure:
Chemical and Physical Properties
Physical State at STP: Liquid-nonflammable, mobile, chloroform-like odor
Boiling Point: 87°C at 760 mm
Melting Point: -73°C
Density; 1.4642 at 20°C/4°C
Vapor Pressure: 77.5 mm at 25°C
Vapor Density: 4.53
Solubility: Slightly soluble (1.1 g/1 of H^O)
Log Partition Coefficient (Octanol/^O): 2.29
Atmospheric Reactivity
Transformation Products: Phosgene, HC1, CO, Trichloroethylene oxide, and
Dichloroacetylchloride from oxidation by O3 4 RO2. Formyl Chloride
Reactivity Toward 0H-: quite reactive, 1/3 x vinyl chloride, 0.2 x propene
Reactivity Toward 0^: slow oxidation
Reactivity Toward Photolysis: 0
Major Atmospheric Precursors: N/A
Formation Reactivity: Not Applicable
-------
26-5
I. SOURCES
Trichloroethylene, CHC1=CC12, is currently produced in the United States by
processes involving either chlorination or oxychlorination of ethylene dichloride
or other C2 chlorinated hydrocarbons. Perchloroethylene is a coproduct of the
reaction. Feed adjustments can vary product ratios from all perchloroethylene
to nearly all trichloroethylene. Until early 1978 trichloroethylene was also
produced by acetylene chlorination, but that process was abandoned in early
197S due to its high manufacturing cost.1
Only three companies currently produce trichloroethylene in the United States.
The locations of the plants and the 1978 capacity and estimated production level
for each plant are shown in Table 28-1.^'2'3 An estimated 290 million pounds of
trichloroethylene was produced in 1978.2
The largest end-use of trichloroethylene is in the industrial metal fabricating
industry for vapor degreasing and cleaning operations. This end-use consumed
an estimated 80% of production in 1978 amounting to 232 million pounds. Of
this total, 195.6 million pounds was used in degreasers and 36.4 million pounds
was used in cold cleaners.
Most other applications of trichloroethylene are small and minor in importance
when compared to degreasing use. Other applications include its use as a solvent
or solvent base for adhesives, sealants, lubricants, and dip-painting processes.
Total consumption for this broad category is estimated to have been 11.6 million
pounds (4%) in 1978. Exports of trichloroethylene are estimated to have been
46.4 million pounds (16%) in 1978. End-uses are summarized in Tablr ?8-2.2
II. EMISSION ESTIMATES
A. PRODUCTION
Estimated production losses are shown in Table 28-3 for each of the three producing
locations.4'5'6 Total emissions of trichloroethylene resulting from its produc-
tion are estimated to have been ^f.35,-200 pounds in 1978. Process emissions origi-
nate primarily from the condenser vent off the oxychlorination reactor and the
-------
28-6
Table 28-1. Production of Trichloroethylene a
b
Source
Location -
1978 Estimated0
Production
(million pounds)
1978 Estimated
Capacity
(million pounds)
Geographic
Coordinates
Dov chemical
^Freeport, TX
89.0
120
28°, 59', IS"
N. Latitude
95°, 24', 45"
W. Longitude
.Ethyl Corpora-
tion
./Baton Rouge, LA
37.0'
50
30°, 18', 00"
N. Latitude
91°, 08', 00"
W. Longitude
PPG Industries
*Lake Charles, LA
164.0
220
30°, 13', 14"
N. Latitude
93°, 16', 54"
H. Longitude
Total

290
390

A
See refs. 1—3.
Diamond Shamrock Corporation placed a 50 million pound per year unit at Deer Park, Texas,
J/n standby in early 1978. Hooker Chemical Company no longer produces trichloroethylene
-at its Taft, LA, facility.
The distribution of production for each producer is determined by the ratio of total U.S.
production/total capacity as compared to individual capacity.
-------
28-7
Table 28-2. Trichloroethylene End-Uses 1978*
End Use
% of Total
Consumotion
End-Use_
Consumption (M lb)
Vapor degreasing
80
232
Solvent
4
11.6
Export
16
46.4
Total
100
290
•See refs. 1 and 2.
-------
28-8
condenser vent off the light-ends column. Storage emissions represent the losses
from both working and final product storage tanks as veil as loading and handling
losses. Fugitive emissions are those emissions caused by leaks from plant equip-
ment. Vent stack data are shown in Table 28-4. normally four process and nine storage
tank vents are involved.
B. USES
For the purpose of this report, emissions resulting from the export of trichloro-
ethylene are assumed to be negligible. The total amount, 11,600,000 pounds, of
trichloroethylene used in solvent and solvent-based applications is eventually
released to the atmosphere. Statistical data on individual solvent use by spe-
cific category are not available and are usually estimated as a group by difference.
Therefore, no point sources or model sources were identified. Trichloroethylene
vapor degreasing emissions are estimated to have been 228.5 million pounds in
1978, or 98.5% of the total amount of trichloroethylene consumed for this end-
use! An estimated 9.5% of the trichloroethylene used in cold cleaners is encap-
sulated or burned and is not released to the atmosphere.7 An estimated 15% of
the trichloroethylene used in degreasing applications was used in cold cleaning
equipment. The remaining 85% was used in open top or conveyorized degreasers.
The average emission rates per unit and the total number of units in operation
nationally are shown in Table 28-5. The estimated number of degreasers using tri-
chloroethylene in 1978 by geographic area is shown in Table 23-6. .
Total nationwide emissions of trichloroethylene in 1978 are estimated to have
been £4C..;8 million pounds. A tabulation of the losses is shown in Table 28-7.
-------
Table 28-3. 1978 Trichloroethylene Production Emissions3
1978	Process	Storage	Fugitive	Total	Total
Production Emissions Emissions Emissions Emissions	Emissions
Company Location	(lb X 106) (lb X 104) (lb X 104) (lb X 104) (lb X 104)b	(gr/sec)C
Dowd Freeport, TX	89	7.88	12.45	11.54	31.87	4.59
PPG Lake Charles, LA	164	8.40	13.28	12.30	33.98	4.89
Ethyl Baton Rouge, LA	Ji7	1.89	3.00	2.78	7.67	1.103
Total	290	18.17	28.73	26.62	73.52	10.58
See refs. 4--6.
Emission factor trichloroethylene (lb trichloroethylene lost/lb trichloroethylene produced)
Process .000512 B - (derived from state air emission files)
Storage .000810 B - (derived from state air emission files)
Fugitive .000750 D - (derived from engineering estimate)
Total .002072
Fugitive emissions are released over a 300 x 300 ft area.
8760 operating hours per year, i.e., 24 hr/day, 7 days/ wk, 52 wk/yr.
See ref. 9
2:A-26
-------
28-10
Table 28-4. Trichloroethylene Vent Parameters
Source
Number
of
Stacks
Vent
Height
(ft)
Vent
Diameter
(ft)
Discharge
Temperature
(°F)
Velocity
(ft/sec)
Production
Process vent	4
Storage	9
Use1*
Cold cleaner	1
Vapor degreaser	1
45
20
15
15
0.17
0.17
0.5
0-.5
-10—150
.70
70
150
5.5
a	2
Building cross-section - 5M .
b ., ,.	2
Building cross-section - 50M .
-------
28-11
Table 28-5. Trichloroethylene Emissions from Solvent Degreasers
Type
Degreaser
Estimated
National
Emission
(M lb/yr)
Estimated
Number of
Units in
Service
Average Emission Rate
Per Unita
b
(lb/yr) (gm/sec)
Cold cleaners
32.9
49,773
661
0.04
Open top vapor
122.25
6,110
20,000
1.12
degreasers




Conveyorized
73.35
1,232
59,500
3.33
degreasers




Total
228.5
57,115


Weighted
Average

4,000
0.22
SSee ref. 7.
b
The number of annual operating hr was assumed to be 2,250 hr.
-------
Table 28-6. Estimated Number of Degreasers U9ing Trlchloroethylene in 197B by Geographic Location*
Degreaser Type
North
East
Mid
Atlantic
East
North-
Central
West
North-
Central
South
Atlantic
East
South-
Central
West
South-
Central
Mountain
Pacific
TOTAL
Cold cleaners
2,991
7,760
13,179
4,362
6,005
2,944
4,8 32
1,806
5,893
49,773
Open top vapor
degreasers
560
1,150
1,742
452
465
265
390
174
896
6,110
Closed con-
veyorized
degreasers
113
244
405
eo
84
52
68
21
165
1,232
•See ref. 8.
-------
28-13
Table 28-7. Estimated 1978 Trichloroethylene Nationwide
Emission Losses
Source
Estimated National Emission
(million lb/yr)
Production
0.7
Cold cleaners
32.9
Vapor degreasers
195.6
Solvent
11.6
Export
0
Total
•240; 8
-------
FIGURE 28-1. SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF TRICHLOROETHYLENE EMISSIONS
-------
Table 28-8. EMISSIONS AND METEOROLOGICAL STATIONS OF SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF TRICHLOROETHYLENE





Star
Plant
Source
EMISSIONS (GM/SEC)
No.
Company
Site
Latitude
Longitude
Station
Type
Type
Process
Storage
Fuqi tive
1
Dow
Freeport, TX
28 59 30
095 23 35
12923
1
1
1.132959
1.791349
1.659659
2
PPG
Lake Charles, LA
30 13 14
093 16 54
03937
1
1
1.209602
1.912322
1.771214
3
Ethyl
Baton Rouge, LA
30 18 00
091 08 00
13970
1
1
.272159
.432014
.40U304
ro
CO
cn
2:A-27
-------
28.16
TABLE 28-9. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE OF TRICHLOROETHYLENE RESULTING
FROM SPECIFIC POINT SOURCE EMISSIONS
Concentration
Level
(ug/m3)
Population
Exposed*
(persons)
Dosage
[(uq/m3) . persons]
25
2
72
10
20
318
5
112
899
2.5
425
1,880
1
3,341
6,440
0.5
9,169
10,600
0.25
37,129
20,400
0.1
87,317
28,300
0.05
171,976
34,100
0.025
232,333
36,500
0.002641"
451,451
38,900
People exposed to annual average concentrations equal to, or
greater than, noted level.
The lowest annual average concentration occurring within
20 km of the specific point source.
2: A-28
-------
TABLE 28-10. EMISSIONS RATES AND NUMBER OF GENERAL POINT SOURCES OF TRICHLOROETHYLENE
Open Top	Vapor	Conveyorlzed Vapor
Cold Cleaning Degreaslng	(OTVD)	Degreasing (fcVD)
Emissions/Site Number Emissions/Site	Number	Emissions/Site Number
Region	 (qm/sec) of Sites (gm/sec)	of Sites	(gm/sec) of Sites
New England
0.00952
2,991
0.288
560
0.857
113
Middle Atlantic
0.00952
7,760
0.288
1,158
0.857
244
East North Central
0.00952
13,179
0.288
1,742
0.857
405
West North Central
0.00952
4,362
0.288
452
0.857
80
South Atlantic
0.00952
6,005
0.288
465
0.857
84
East South Central
0.00952
2,944
0.288
265
0.857
52
West South Central
0.00952
4,832
0.288
398
0.857
68
Mountain
0.00952
1,806
0.288
174
0.857
21
Pad fic
0.00952
5,893
0.288
896
0.857
165
-------
TABLE 20-11. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULT INK FROM EMISSIONS FROM GENERAL POINT SOURCES OF FRICHLOROETHVLENE
Population Exposed
(IP3 peraoo3)
Dosage
Concentration

Open
Conveyorized


Open
Conveyorized

Level
Cold
Top Vapor
Vapor
U.S.
Cold
Top Vapor
Vapor
I
(m/m5)
Cleaninq
Deqreasinq
Deqreasinq
Total
Cleaninq
Deqreasinq
Deqreasinq

5
0
361
510
079
0
2.6
5.1
7
2.5
0
1,430
1,140
2,570
0
6.1
7.3
13
1
0
4,570
4,020
6,590
0
11
11.7
23
0.5
0
11,900
10,000
21,900
0
16
15.0
32
0.25
—
~
~
—
0.02
22
20.4
42
O.t
—
—
—
~
1.20
32
27.1
60
0.05

~
—
--
2.34
41
31
74
0.025
—
—
--
—
3.45
47
37
87
0.01
—
~
~
—
5.25
50
43
106
0
—
—
—
—
22.2
02
50
154
U.S.
Total
NOIE: The use of — as an entry indicates that tho incremental E/D ie not significant (relative to last entry or relative
to entry in another column at the same row) or that the exposure of the same population may be counted in another
column.
-------
28-19
TABLE 28-12. MAJOR PARAMETERS FOR ESTIMATING EXPOSURE/DOSAGE RESULTING
FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS OF TRICHLOROETHYLENE
		Parameter	 	Value
Daytime decay rate (K^)	2.8 x 10 * sec ^
Nighttime decay rate (K^)	0
Hanna-Gifford coefficient (C)	225
Nationwide heating source emissions (E^)	0
Nationwide nonheating stationary source emissions	(E^) 167.04 gm/sec
Nationwide mobile source emissions (E^)	0
-------
TABLE 28-13. TRICHLOROETHYLENE EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULTING
FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS
FXPO LEVEL
I 110/( M>3>
POPULATION
C PERSON)
DOSACE
< UC.'< M>3-
PEnSONt
PF.RCKNTACE OF CONTninUTION	PERCENTAGE OF DISTRIBUTIOW
HEAT INC STATIONARY MOD 11.E C ITY TYPE I CITY TYPE 2 CITY TYPE 3
. (lA660d
.23096*
.100000
.030000
.023000
e.
#0514$
9 149730
27819234
73300'.*71
1211273330
100*79 133
447676.A
3334607.3
6037914.6
90119292.7
I I 194270.7
11720159.7
0.
0.
0.
O.
0.
0.
I0A.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
0.
0.
0.
o.
o.
o.
<00.0
100.0
100.0
98.0
93. I
92.7
0.
0.
0.
.7
2.3
2.7
0.
0.
0.
1.3
2.6
4.0
no
00
1
ro
o
-------
TABLE 28-14. EXPOSURE AND UOSAGE SUMMARY OF TRICHLOROETHYLENE


Population Exposed



Dosage




(persons)


L(uq/m3)
- persons]

Concentration
Speci fic
General


Specific
General


Level
Point
Point


Poi nt
Point


(uq/m3)
Source
Source
Area Source
U.S. Total
Source
Source
Area Source
U.S. Total
25
2
0
0
2
72
0
0
72
10
20
0
0
20
318
0
0
318
5
112
879,000
0
879,112
899
7,700,000
0
7,700 ,ti99
2.5
425
2,570,000
0
2,570,425
1,880
13,000,000
0
13,001,880
1
3,341
8,590,000
0
8,593,341
6,440
23,000,000
0
23,006,440
0.5
9,169 ;
21,900,000
505,140
22,414,309
10,600
32,000,000
447,676
32,458,276
0.25
37,129
--
9,149,730
--
20,400
42,000,000
3,334,007
45,354,407
0.1
87,317
--
27,819,254
--
28,300
61,000,000
6,037,914
67,06b,214
0.05
171,976
--
73,308,971
--
34,100
74,000,000
9,08y,292
75,123,392
0.025
232,333
--
128,273,558
--
36,500
87,000,000
11,194,278
98,230,778
0.01
—
--
--
--
--
--
—

0
451,451
- —
158,679,135
	
38,500
154,000,000
11,720,159
165,759,059
NOTE: The use
i of -- as
an entry indicates that the
incremental E/D
is not significant (relative to last entry
or
relative to entry
in another
column at the same row) or that
the exposure
of the same
population may be

counted in another column.
2:A-29
-------
28-22
REFERENCES
1.	S. A. Cogswell, "C Chlorinate Solvents," in Chemical Economics Handbook,
Stanford Researoi Institute, Menlo Park, CA (December 1978).
2.	"Chemical Products Synopsis on Trichloroethylene, "Mannsville Chemical
Products, May 1978.
3.	"Chemical Profile on Trichloroethylene, "p. 9 in Chemical Marketing Reporter
June 26, 1978.
4.	W. C. Hutton, Texas Air Control Board Emission Inventory Questionnaire for
Diamond Shamrock at Deer Park, TX, April 7, 1977.
5.	A. T. Raetzsch, Louisiana Air Control Commission, Emission Inventory Ques-
tionnaire for PPG at Lake Charles, LA, March 3, 1976.
6.	R. S. McKneely, Texas Air Control Board Emission Inventory Questionnaire for
Dow Chemical at Freeport, TX, Feb. 6, 1976.
7.	Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Solvent Metal Cleaning, EPA-450/2-
77/022 (OAQPS No. 1.2-079), Research Triangle Park, NC (November 1977).
8.	Solvent Metal Cleaning, Background Information: Proposed Standards (draft),
EPA, NSPS, ESED Research Triangle Park, NC (November 1978).
9.	Dow Chemical U.S.A., (Paul J. Sienknecht), Personal Communication in response
to publication of the first draft of this report (June 1981).
2: B-02
-------
APPENDIX A-29 	 Xylene
m-XYLENE (PREDOMINANT OF 3 ISOMERS) CHEMICAL DATA
Nomgnclature
Chemical Abstract Service Registry Number: 108-33-3
Synonyms: m-Xylol; Dimetnyhenzene
Chemical Formula
Molecular Weight: 106.2
Molecular Formula: CgH-|g
Molecular Structure:
CH,
i3
'CH.
V/
Chemical and Physical Properties
Physical State at SIP: Liquid - mobile, flammable, colorless
Boiling Point: 139®C at 760 mm
Melting Point: -47.4°C
Density: 0.864 at 20°C/4°C
Vapor Pressure: 8.56 mm at 25°C
Vapor Density: 3.66
Solubility: Nearly insoluble (0.13 gm/1 of H2O)
Log Partition Coefficient (Octanol/HjO): 3.20
Atmospheric Reactivity
Transformation Products: Organic aerosol, formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, PAN,
benzaldehyde. Xylene can be easily chlorinated, sulfonated, or nitrated.
Reactivity Toward OH*: t 1/2 e 8 x Butane
Reactivity Toward 0^: No Reaction
Reactivity Toward Photolysis: NAPP
Major Atmospheric Precursors: N/A
Formation Reactivity:
-------
29-5
p-XYLENE CHEMICAL DATA
Nomenclature
Chemical Abstract Service Registry Number: 106-42-3
Synonyms: p-Xylol; Dimethybenzene
Chemical Formula
Molecular Weight: 106.2
Molecular Formula: CgH}g
Molecular Structure:	C^
O
C^3
Chemical and Physical Properties
Physical State at STP: Liquid - colorless (plates or prisms at low temperatures)
Boiling Point: 138.5°C at 160 mm
Melting Point: 13.2°C
Density: 0.8611 at 20°C/4°C
Vapor Pressure: 10 mm at 27.3°C
Vapor Density: 3.66
Solubility: Insoluble (H^O)
Log Partition Coefficient (Octanol/H^O): 3.15
Atmospheric Reactivity
Transformation Products: Reacts with oxidizing materials (see m-Xylene for
products)
Reactivity Toward OH*: t 1/2 = 3 days, 8 x Butane
Reactivity Toward 0^: t V2 B TOO yr
Reactivity Toward Photolysis: NAPP
Major Atmospheric Precursors: N/A
Formation Reactivity:
same as
toluene
-------
29-6
O-XYLENt ChtrilCAL DATA
Nomenclature
Chemical Abstract Service Registry Number: 95-47-6
Synonyms: o-Xylol; Dimethybenzene
Chemical Formula
Molecular Weight: 106.2
Molecular Formula: CgH-|Q
Molecular Structure:	ru
Chem'cal and Physical Properties
Physical State at STP: Liquid - colorless
Boiling Point: 144.4°C at 760 mm
Melting Point: -25°C
Density: 0.880 at 20°C/4°C
Vapor Pressure: 10 mm at 32.1°C
Vapor Density:
Solubility: Insoluble (H,,0)
Log Partition Coefficient (Octanol/H2O): 2.77
Atmospheric Reactivity
Transformation Products: Reacts with oxidizing materials (see m-Xylene
monograph for products)
Reactivity Toward OH*: 1/2 x m-Xylene
Reactivity Toward 0^: 1/2 x m-Xylene
Reactivity Toward Photolysis: NAPP
Major Atmospheric Precursors: N/A
Formation Reactivity:
CH

-------
29-7
I. SOURCES
A. PRODUCTION
The xylene isomers include para-xylene (p-xylene), ortho-xylene (o-xylene), and
meta-xylene (m-xylene). Most of the xylene isomers produced occur together as
mixed xylenes in an aromatic mixture (BTX) along with benzene and toluene. The
majority of mixed xylenes currently are produced in the United States by catalytic
reforming of petroleum. They are also obtained from pyrolysis gasoline as a
by-product of olefin manufacture during the cracking of hydrocarbons. Small
amounts of mixed xylenes as BTX are also obtained from coal-derived coke oven
light oil and from the disproportionation of toluene.1'2
Approximately 8,555 million lb of mixed xylenes was isolated in 1978 from a
total of 77,973 million lb of mixed xylenes produced as BTX. The isolated mixed
xylenes are used primarily•for the production of the individal isomers and for
solvent applications. The nonisolated mixed xylenes as BTX are blended into
gasoline.1'2
The largest source of mixed xylenes is from catalytic reformate. Catalytic
reforming involves the hydrogenation of naphtha fractions that are unsatisfac-
tory for use as gasolines. The aromatic fractions, consisting primarily of
benzene, toluene, and mixed xylenes, are isolated from the reformate by a com-
bination of extraction and distillation. Total mixed xylene produced from this
source is estimated to have been 76,916 million lb with 7,991 million lb isolated
for chemical use.1'2
The second largest source of mixed xylenes is from pyrolysis gasoline. An esti-
mated 826 million lb of mixed xylene as BTX was produced from this source with
an estimated 429 million lb isolated for chemical use.
The disproportionation of toluene produced an estimated 198 million lb of mixed
xylenes of which 106 million lb was separated for chemical use.
Approximately 33 million lb of mixed xylene was produced from coal-derived BTX
with an estimated 29 million lb separated for chemical use.
-------
29-8
A summary of both isolated and nonisolated mixed xylenes production by source
for 1978 is shown in Table 29-1.
There are currently 201 locations that produce mixed xylenes from catalytic refor-
mate. They are shown in Table 29-2 by geographic region.3 Of this total, only
29 plants isolate mixed xylenes from catalytic reformate. Three of the sites
are located outside the continental United States and were not considered in this
project scope. The locations of the plants, the mixed xylenes capacity, and the
isolated mixed xylenes produced are shown in Table 29-3.
There are currently nine producers at nine locations that produce mixed xylene
as BTX from pyrolysis gasoline manufacture. One of these sites is located in
Puerto Rico and was considered outside the project scope. The locations of the
plants, the ethylene capacity, the estimated mixed xylene production as BTX and
as isolated mixed xylene, and the total mixed xylene produced are shown in Table 29-4.
The three locations that produce coal-derived mixed xylenes and the two sites
that produce mixed xylenes from toluene disproportionation are also listed in
Table 29-4.
Since the individual isomers are actually end-uses of mixed xylene production,
they will be discussed in the uses section of this report.
B. USES
The end-use distribution of mixed xylenes is shown in Table 29-5. All mixed xylenes
produced as BTX and not isolated (69,418 million lb) are blended into gasoline.
The remaining isolated mixed xylenes (8,555 million lb) are used to produce the
individual xylene isomers and are also used in a variety of solvent applications.
The single largest end-use of mixed xylene is in the production of the p-xylene
isomer, which consumed an estimated 4,107 million lb in 1978. o-Xylene isomer
production consumed 1,046 million lb, m-xylene isomer production 88 million lb,
and ethylbenzene, a natural constituent of mixed xylenes, 220 million lb. Sepa-
ration of the various xylene isomers from mixed xylene is accomplished through
distillation and crystallization.
-------
29-9
Table 29-1. Mixed Xylene Production Source Summary*
Source
Isolated Mixed
Xylene Product
(M lb/yr)
Nonisolated
Mixed Xylene
Production
(M lb/yr)
Total Mixed
Xylene
Production
(M lb/yr)
Catalytic reformate
7,991
68,925
76 ,916
Pyrolysis gasoline
429
397
826
Toluene disproportionation
106
92
198
Coal-derived
29
4
33
Total
8,555
69,418
77,97 3
*See refs. 1 and 2.
-------
29-10
Table 29-2. Nonisolated Mixed Xylene (as BTX) Production from
Catalytic Re formate3
Reqion
Number
of
Sites
Reformate
Capacity
(M bbl/day)
Nonisolated
Mixed
Xylenes
Produced
(M lb/yr)
Average
Nonisolated
Mixed Xylenes
Produced
Per Site
(M lb/yr}
New England
0
0
0
0
Middle Atlantic
17
369,952
6,743
397
East North Central
2B
624,178
11,377
406
West North Central
16
165,250
3,012
186
South Atlantic
5
57,660
1,051
210
East South Central
8
14-1,700
2,637
330
West South Central
71
1,649,303
30,061
423
Mountain
23
123,094
2,243
98
Pacific
33
647,461
11,801
356
Total
201
3,781,598
68,925
343
3See ref. 3.
_b
Total production is
distributed
based on capacity


-------
Table 29-3. Isolated Mixed Xylene Production from Catalytic Reformate3
Isolated
Mixed
Mixed Xylene	Xylene
Capacity Produced Geographic Coordinates
Company	Location	(metric ton/yr)	(M lb/yrp	Latitude/Longitude
Amerada Hess
St. Croix, VI
457
699
Not
in
project
scope
American Petrofina
Big Spring, TX
209
306
32
17
10/101
25
i 17

Beaumont, TX
49
72
29
57
30/93
53
20
Ashland Oil
Catlettsburg, KY
9B
143
38
22
39/82
35
58

N. Tonawanda, NY
46
67
42
59
45/78
55
27
ARCO
Houston, TX
258
378
29
42
17/95
16
01
Charter Oil
Houston, TX
36
53
29
42
50/95
15
12
Cities Service
Lake Charles, LA
163
239
30
10
58/93
19
01
Coastal States
Corpus Christi, TX
55
80
27
48
43/97
26
28
Commonwea1th
Penuelas, PR
343
502
Not
. in
i project
scope
Crown
Pasadena, TX
46
67
29
44
40/95
10
30
Exxon
Baytown, TX
408
597
29
44
50/95
01
04
Gulf
Alliance, LA
196
287
29
50
00/90
00
10
Kerr McGee
Corpus Christi, TX
140
205
27
48
16/97
25
24
Marathon
Texas City, TX
36
53
29
22
22/94
54
58
Monsanto^
Texas City, TX
32
47
29
22
45/94
33
30
Phillips
Guayama, PR
326
477
Not
: in project
scope
Quitana-Howell
Corpus Christi, TX
42
61
27
48
35/97
27
30
Shell
Deer Park, TX
245
359
29
42
55/95
07
33
-------
Table 29-3 (concluded)
Isola ted
Mixed
Mixed Xylene	Xylene
Capacity Produced Geographic Coordinates
Company	Location	(metric ton/yr)	(M lb/yr)^	l.atitude/Longitude
Chevron
Pascagoula, MS

212
310
30
19
04/88
28 37

Richmond, CA

196
287
37
56
12/122
20 48
Amoco
Texas City, TX

800
1,171
29
21
40/94
55 50

Whiting, IN

588
860
41
41
07/87
29 02
Sun
Corpus Christi,
TX
78
114
27
49
53/97
31 30

Marcus Hook, PA

65
95
39
48
45/75
24 51

Toledo, OH

163
239
41
36
52/83
31 40
Tenneco
Chalmette, LA

130
190
30
03
30/89
58 30
Union Oil
Chicago, IL

33
48
41
38
33/88
03 02
Union Pacific
Corpus Christi,
TX
10
15
27
48
10/97
35 29
Total


5,460
7,991




3See refs. 1 and 2.
bTotal isolated mixed xylene production distributed per mixed xylene extraction capacity.
cMonsanto (ref. 19) claims the above process no longer exist at this plant.
-------
nat
ude
43
SCO
00
20
10
30
40
33
00
58
27
43
Table 29-4. Other Mixed Xylene Producers3
Location
Production
Capacity
(M lb/yr)
Nonisolated
Mixed
Xylene
Produced
(M lb/yr)
Isolated
Mixed
Xylene
Produced
(M lb/yr)
Total
Mixed
Xylene
Produced
(M lb/yr)*3
Channelview, TX
Penuelas, PR
Freeport, TX
Baton Rouge, LA
Cedar Bayou, TX
Beaumont, TX
Texas City, TX
Deer Park, TX
Taft, LA
Pyrolysis Gasoline
1179	79
454	30
1134	76
816	55
544	37
408	27
340	23
624	42
417	28
5916
168
91
397
61
109
429
247
121
76
55
37
27
84
42
137
826
Catlettsburg, KY
N. Tonawanda, NY
Clairton, PA
13
7
11
33
Coal-Derived
1.6
0.8
1.6
4.0
11.4
6. 2
11. 4
29.0
13
7
JL3
33
-------
Table 29-4 (concluded)
Company
Location
Production
Capacity
(M lb/yr)
Nonisolated
Mixed
Xylene
Produced
(M lb/yr)
Isolated
Mixed
Xylene
Produced
(M lb/yr)
Total
Mixed
Xylene
Produced
(M lb/yr)b
Geographic Coordinates
Latitude/Longitude


Toluene
Disproportionation


ARCO
Houston, TX
196
45
52
97
29 42 17/95 16 01
Sun
Marcus Hook, PA
202
47
54
101
39 48 45/75 24 51
Total

398
92
106
198

aSee refa. 1 and 2.
^Total production distributed based on production capacity.
cMonsanto (ref. 19) claims the above process no longer exist at this plant.
-------
29 15
Table 29-5. End-Use Distribution—19783
Mixed Xylene and Xylene Isomers
_Usage Usage
(M lb/yr)	(%)
Mixed xylene as BTX (not isolated)
69,418

Gasoline
69,418
100.0
Isolated mixed xylene
8,555

p-Xylene isomer
4,107
48.0
o-Xylene isomer
1,046
12.2
m-Xylene isomer
88
1.0
Ethyl benzene
220
2.6
Gasoline backhlending
2,158
25.2
Paint and coating solvent
496
5.8
Adhesives solvent
77
0.9
Chemical manufacturing solvent
77
0.9
Agricultural solvent
66
0.8
Other miscellaneous solvents
55
0.7
Net export
165
1.9
o-Xylene
1,046

Phthalic anhydride
670
64.1
Gasoline backblending
21
2.0
Exports
355
33.9
p-Xylene
4,107

Terephthalic acid
1,430
34.8
Dimethyl terephthalate
2,040
49.7
Net exports
620
15.1
Gasoline backblending
17
0.4
m-Xylene
88

Isophthalic acid
98b
100.0
a
See refs. 1, 2, and 4.
b
Difference between production and use supplied by imports.
-------
29-16
Individual locations producing xylene isomer are shown in Table 29-6.** Total isomer
production was distributed based on the individual site's capacity. In this
report ethyl benzene production has been grouped with the individual xylene
isomers because it is a component of mixed xylenes.
The second largest use of isolated mixed xylenes is backblending into gasoline.
This end-use consumed an estimated 2,158 million lb of isolated mixed xylenes
representing 25.2% of 1978 isolated production.
The only other area of domestic use for mixed xylenes is in solvent applications
which consumed an estimated 771 million lb in 1978. Use as a solvent in paints
and coatings was the single largest solvent application. An estimated 496 mil-
lion lb was consumed for this end-use. Other solvent applications include
77 million lb for adhesives and rubber solvent, 77 million lb for chemical and
manufacturing solvent, 66 million lb for agricultural solvent (solvent carrier
for pesticides), and 55 million lb for household proprietary product and print-
ing ink solvent. Net exports consumed 165 million lb, representing 1.9% of
production.
Each of the individual isomers has one primary outlet for end-use. o-Xylene is
used almost exclusively as a chemical intermediate to produce phthalic anhydride
which is used chiefly in phthalate plasticizers. An estimated 670 million lb
of o-xylene was consumed for this use. Exports of o-xylene totaled 355 million
lb, and the remaining 21 million lb was backblended into gasoline.
p-Xylene is used primarily to produce terephthalic acid and dimethyl terephthalate
which are used as intermediates in the manufacture of polyester fiber. Consump-
tion of p-xylene was estimated to have been 1430 million lb for terephthalate
acid production and 2040 million lb for dimethyl terephthalate manufacture.
Net exports consumed 620 million lb of p-xylene, and the remaining 17 million
lb was backblended into gasoline.
m-Xylene is used exclusively to produce isophthalic acid, which is primarily
used in the manufacture of polyester resins. A total of 98 million lb of
m-xylene was consumed for this end-use, of which 10 million lb was imported.
Xylene isomer end-user locations are summarized in Table 29-7.**'5
-------
2&-17
Table 29-6. Xylene Isomer Producers3
Company
Location

Isomer
Capacity
(M lb/yr)
Isomer
Production
(M lb/yr)13
Geographic Coordinates
Lati tude/Longitude



o-Xylene Producers


ARCO
Houston, TX

210
183
29 42 17/95 16
01
Corco
Ponce, PR

175
153
Not in project
scope
Exxon
Baytown, TX

200
174
29 44 50/95 01
00
d
Monsanto
Chocolate Bayou
, TX
30
26
29 14 55/95 12
45
Phillips
Guayama, PR

130
113
Not in project
scope
Shell
Deer Park, TX

165
144
29 42 55/95 07
34
Sun
Corpus Christi,
TX
160
140
27 49 53/97 31
30
Tenneco
Chalmette, LA

130
113
30 03 30/89 58
30
Total


1200
m-Xylene
1046
Producer


mo co
Texas City, TX

175
88
29 21 40/94 55
50



p-Xylene Producers


Amoco
Decatur, AL

1300
952
34 36 12/86 58
42

Texas City, TX

900
659
29 21 40/94 55
50
ARCO
Houston, TX

360
264
29 42 17/95 16
01
Chevron
Pascagoula, MS

330
242
30 19 04/88 28
37
St. Croix
St. Croix, VI

600
440
Not in project
scope
Exxon
Baytown, TX

420
308
29 44 50/95 01
00
Hercor
Penuelas, PR

600
440
Not in project
scope
Phillips
Guayama, PR

470
344
Not in project
scope
Shell
Deer Park, TX

110
80
29 42 55/95 07
34
Sun
Corpus Christi,
TX
390
286
27 49 53/97 31
30
Tenneco
Chalmette, LA

125
92
30 03 30/89 58
30
Total


5605
4107


-------
29-18
Table 29-6 (concluded)
Isomer Isomer
Capacity Production Geographic Coordinates
Company	Location	(M lb/yr)	(M lb/yr)°	Latitude /Longitude


Ethylbenzene
c
Producers





KRCO
Houston, TX
136
99
29
42
17/95
16
01
Charter
A
Houston, TX
35
25
29
42
50/95
15
12
0
Monsanto
Chocolate Bayou, TX
59
43
29
14
55/95
12
45
Sun
Corpus Christi, TX
73
53
27
49
53/97
31
30
Total

303
220





aSee ref. 4.
^Total production distributed based on capacity.
CEthylbenzene is considered to be a mixed xylene isomer.
dMonsanto (ref. 19) claims the above process has been sold.
-------
29-19
Table 29-7, Xylene Isomer End-Users3
Company
Location
Production
Capacity
(M lb/vr)
o-Xylene
Used
(M lb/yr)
Geographic Coordinates
Latitude/Longitude

Phthalic
Anhydride Producers (o-Xylene)

Allied
El Segundo, CA
36
26
33 56 30/118 26 35
BASF Wyandotte
Kearny, NJ
150
107
40 45 53/74 09 03
Exxon
Baton Rouge, LA
130
93
30 09 10/90 54 20
Koppers
Cicero, IL
235
168
41 48 44/87 45 04
Monsanto
Texas City, TX
150
107
29 22 45/94 33 30
Hooker
Arecibo, PR
87
62
Not in project scope
Chevron
Richmond, CA
50
36
37 56 12/122 20 48
Stepan
Millsdale,. IL
100
71
41 26 03/88 09 48
Total

938
670


Isophthalic Acid Producer (m-Xylene)

Amoco
Joliet, IL
240
98
41 26 48/88 10 41

Dimethylterephthalic Acid
Producers (p-Xylene)
Du Pont
Old Hickory, TO
550
273
36 16 24/B6 34 12

Wilmington, NC
1250
622
34 10 00/77 56 06
Eastman Kodak
Columbia, SC
500
249
33 59 50/81 04 17

Kingsport, TN
500
249
36 31 41/82 12 22
Hercofina
Wilmington, NC
1300
647
34 19 27/77 46 56
Total

4100
2040


Terephthalic Acid Producers (p-Xylene)

Amoco
Cooper River, SC
1000
441
32 45 57/79 58 28

Decatur, AL
2000
883
34 36 12/86 58 42
Hercofina
Wilmington, NC
240
106
34 19 27/77 46 56
Total

3240
1430

3See refs. * and 5.
b
Total use distributed based on production.
-------
23-20
C. INCIDENTAL SOURCES
For the purpose of this report, the use of mixed xylenes in gasoline and the
emissions resulting from gasoline evaporation and exhaust are considered to be
incidental. Gasoline consumption in 1978 is estimated to have been 104,568 million
gal.
II. EMISSIONS
A. PRODUCTION
Emission factors used to develop production and end-use emission estimates for
mixed xylenes are shown in Table 29-8.e—Process emissions originate from the
reactor, distillation, and crystallization vents. Storage emissions represent
the loss from both working and final product storage as well as loading and
handling losses. Fugitive emissions are those which result from plant equip-
ment leaks.
Xylene isomer emissions can occur from both mixed xylenes and individual isomer
producers and end-users.
Total enissions of mixed xylenes and xylene isomers from the production of nonisolated
mixed xylene via catalytic reformate are tabulated by geographic region in Table 29-9.
Average emissions of each of the xylene isomers per each catalytic reformate
producing site in the nine geographic regions are tabulated in Table 10. Total
emissions of mixed xylenes from isolated mixed xylenes production are tabulated
in Table 29-11. Emissions of individual isomers from this source are tabulated in
Table 29-12. Total emissions of mixed xylenes from this catalytic reformate production
were estimated to have been 9,858,760 lb. Individual isomer emissions were
estimated by assuming that the weight composition of the individual isomers in
the mixed xylene were 16.7% p-xylene, 20.5% o-xylene, 35.7% m-xylene, 2.9% toluene,
23.7% ethyl benzene, and 0.5% others.13 Individual emission estimates from
catalytic reformating production of p-xylene, o-xylene, and m-xylene are
1,540,455 lb, 1,890,978 lb, and 3,293,068 lb respectively.
Emissions of mixed xylenes from the other mixed xylene production sources are
tabulated in Table 29-13. The mixed xylene emissions from pyrolysis gasoline,
-------
29-21
Table 29-8. Xylene Emission Factors
lb Xylene Lost per lb Produced (Used)
Source
Process
Storage
Fugitive
Total
Derivation
Mixed xylene - catalytic reformate
0.00003
0.00006
0.00003
0.00012
b
B
Mixed xylene - pyrolysis gasoline
0.00007
0.00030
0.00003
0.00040
AC
Mixed xylene - toluene
0.00005
0.00010
0.00005
0.00020
D
Mixed xylene - coal-derived
0.00050
0.00060
0.00015
0.00125
D
o-Xylene - production
0.00209
0.00008
0.00038
0.00255
d
B
m-Xylene - production
0.00158
0.00012
0.00030
0.00200
D
p-Xylene - production
0.00114
0.00019
0.00024
0.00157
B6
Ethylbenzene - production
0.00010
0.00005
0.00005
0.00020
D
Phthalic anhydride - production
0.00014
0.00002
0.00004
0.00020
cf
Isophthalic acid - production
0.00085
0.00005
0.00010
0.00100
cf
Dimethylterephthalate - production
0.00013
0.00003
0.00007
0.00023
A9
Terephthalic acid - production
0.00254
0.00011
0.00007
0.00272
A9
a
A - Site visit data
B - State files
C - Published data
D - Hydroscience estimate
b
See refs. 6—9.
CSee ref.	1C.
d
See refs. 7 and 8.
e
See ref.	7.
^See ref.	11.
gSee ref.	12.
-------
29-22
Table 29-9. Total Mixed Xylenes and Xylene Isomer Emissions from
Catalytic Reformate (Nonisolated) Production*
Region
Number
of
Sites
Mixed
Xylene
Qnissions
(lb/yr)
Total
p-Xylene
Emissions
o-Xylene
(lb/yr)
m-Xylene
New England
0
0
0
0
0
Middle Atlantic
17
809,160
135,130
165,878
288,870
East North Central
28
1,365,240
227,995
279,874
487,391
West North Central
16
361,440
60,360
74,095
129,034
South Atlantic
5
126,120
21,062
25,855
45,025
East South Central
8
316,440
52,845
64,870
112,969
West South Central
71
3,607,320
602,422
739,501
1,287,813
Mountain
23
269,160
44,950
55,178
96,090
Pacific
33
1,416,120
236,492
290,305
505,555
Total
201
8,271,000
1,381,257
1,695,555
2,952,747
*See ref. 3.
-------
29-23
Table 29-10. Average Xylene Isomer Emissions per Site from
Catalytic Reformate (Nonisolated Mixed Xylene Production)
Average Emissions per Site

Number
of
Sites
p-Xyl
ene
o-
Xylene
m-Xylene
Region
(lb/yr)
(g/sec)*
(lb/yr)
(g/sec)*
(lb/yr)
(g/sec)*
New England
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.24
Middle Atlantic
17
7949
0.11
9,758
0.14
16,992
0.25
East North Central
28
8143
0.12
9,996
0.14
17,407
0.12
West North Central
16
3773
0.05
4,631
0.07
8,065
0.13
South Atlantic
5
4212
0.06
5,171
0.07
9,005
0. 20
East South Central
8
6606
0.10
8,109
0.11
14,121
0. 26
West South Central
71
8485
0.12
10,416
0.15
18,138
0.06
Mountain
23
1954
0.03
2,399
0.03
4,178
0. 22
Pacific
33
' 7166
0.10
8,797
0.13
15,320

Total
201






Weighted average

6872

8,436

14,690

Based on 8760 hr/yr operation.
-------
Table 29-11. Mixed Xylene Emissions from Catalytic Reforrnate (Isolated Mixed Xylenes) Production
Company
Location
Emissions (lb/yr)
Total Emissions
Process
S toracje
Fugitive
(lb/yr)
(g/sec)*
Amerada Hess
American Petrofina
Ashland Oil
Arco
Charter Oil
Cities Service
Coastal States
Commonwealth
Crown
Exxon
Gulf
Kerr-McGee
Marathon
St. Croix, VI
Big Spring, TX
Beaumont, TX
Catlettsburg, KY
N. Tonawanda, NY
Houston, TX
Houston, TX
Lake Charles, LA
Corpus Christi, TX
Penuelas, PR
Pasadena, TX
Baytown, TX
Alliance, LA
Corpus Christi, TX
Texas City, TX
20 ,070
9,180
2,160
4,290
2,010
11,340
1,590
7,170
2, 400
15,060
2,010
17,910
8,610
6,150
1,590
40,140
18,360
4,320
B, 580
4,020
22,680
3,180
14,340
4,800
30,120
4,020
35,820
17,220
12,300
3,180
20,070
9,180
2,160
4, 290
2,010
11,340
1,590
7,170
2,400
15,060
2,010
17,910
8,610
6,150
1,590
80,280
36,720
8,640
17,160
8,040
45,360
6, 360
28,680
9,600
60,240
8,040
71,164
34,440
24,600
6,360
1.16
0.53
0.12
0.25
0.12
0.65
0.09
0.41
0.14
0.87
0.12
1.02
0.50
0. 35
0.09
Phillips
Quintana-Howe11
Shell
Chevron
Guayama, PR
Corpus Christi, TX
Deer Park, TX
Pascagoula, MS
Richmond, CA
14,310
1,830
10,770
9,300
8,610
28,620
3,660
21,540
18,600
17,220
14, 310
1,830
10,770
9, 300
8,610
57,240
7,320
43,080
37,200
34,440
0.82
0.11
0.62
0.54
0.50
-------
Table 29-11 (concluded)
Company
Location

Emissions (lb/yr)

Total
Emiss ions
Process
Storage
Fugitive
(lb/y r)
(g/sec)
Amoco
Texas City, TX
193,750
387,500
193,750
775,000
2.02

Whiting, IN
25,000
51,600
25,800
103,200
1.49
Sun
Corpus Christi, TX
3,420
6,840
3,420
13,680
0. 20

Marcus Hook, PA
2,850
5,700
2,850
11,400
0.16

Toledo, OH
7,170
14,340
7,170
28,680
0.41
Tenneco
Chalmette, LA
5 ,700
11,400
5,700
22,800
0. 33
Union Oil
Chicago, IL
1,440
2 ,880
1,440
5,760
0.08
Union Pacific
Corpus Christi, TX
450
900
450
1,800
0.03
Total

396,940
793,880
396,940
1,587,760

*Based on 8760 hr/yr operation.
-------
Table 29-12. Xylene Isomer Emissions
	Company	
Amerada (less
American Petrofina
Ashland Oil
Arco
Charter Oil
Cities Service
Coastal States
Commonwealth
Crown
Exxon
Gulf
Kerr-McGee
Marathon
Phillips
Quintana-Howe11
Shell
Chevron
	Location	
St. Croix, VI
Big Springs, TX
Beaumont, TX
Catlettsburg, KY
N. Tonawanda, NY
Houston, TX
Houston, TX
Lake Charles, LA
Corpus Christi, TX
Penuelas, PR
Pasadena, TX
Baytown, TX
Alliance, LA
Corpus Christi, TX
Texas City, TX
Guayama, PR
Corpus Christi, TX
Deer Park, TX
Pascagoula, MS
Richmond, CA
Isolated Mixed Xylene Catalytic Reformate Producers
p-Xylene
Total Emissions
o-Xylene
Total Emissions
m-Xylene
Total Emissions
(lh/yr)	(cj/sec) *	(lb/yr)	(cj/sec) *	(lb/y r)	(g/sec)
13,407	0.19
6,132	0.09
1,443	0.02
2,866	0.04
1,343	0.02
7,575	0.11
1,062	0.02
4,790	0.07
1,603	0.02
10,060	0.14
1,343	0.02
11,804	0.17
5,751	0.08
4,100	0.06
1,062	0.02
16,457	0.24
7,528	0.11
1,771	0.0 3
3,510	0.05
1,648	0.02
9,299	0.13
1,304	0.02
5,879	0.08
1,968	0.03
12,349	0.18
1,648	0.02
14,589	0.21
7,060	0.10
5,043	0.07
1,304	0.02
28,660	0.41
13,109	0.19
3,084	0.04
6,126	0.09
2,870	0.04
16,194	0.23
2,271	0.03
10,239	0.15
3,427	0.05
21,506	0.31
2,870	0.04
25,406	0.37
12,295	0.18
8,7B2	0.13
2,271	0.03
9,559	0.14
1,222	0.02
7,194	0.10
6,212	0.09
5,751	0.08
11,734	0.17
1,501	0.02
8,831	0.13
7,626	0.11
7,060	0.10
20,435	0.29
2,613	0.04
15,380	0.22
13,280	0.19
12,295	0.18
-------
Table 29-12 (concluded)


p-Xylene
Total Emissions
o-Xylene
Total Emissions
in-
Total
Xylene
Emissions
Company
Location
(lb/yr)
(g/sec)*
(lb/yr)
(g/sec)*
(lb/yr)
(g/sec)*
Amoco
Texas City, TX
23,167
0. 34
28,807
0. 41
50,166
0.72

Whiting, IN
17,234
0. 25
21,156
0. 30
36,842
0.53
Sun
Corpus Christi, TX
2,285
0..03
2,804
0.04
4,884
0.07

Marcus Hook, PA
1, 904
0.03
2,337
0.03
4,070
0.06

Toledo, OH
4,790
0.07
5,879
0.08
10,239
0.15
Tenneco
Chalmette, LA
3,808
0.05
4,674
0.07
8,140
0.12
Union Oil
Chicago, IL
962
0.01
1,181
0.02
2,056
0.03
Union Pacific
Corpus Christi, TX
301
Nil
369
0.01
643
0.01
Total

159,198

195,423

340,321

rv>
~Based on 8760 hr/yr operation.	^
-------
29-28
Table 29-13. Mixed Xylene Emissions from Other Mixed Xylene Producers
	Emissions (lb/vr)		Total Emissions
Company	Location	Process Storage Fugitive	(lb/yr)	(g/sec) *
Pyrolysis-Gasoline
'ARCO
Channelview, TX
17,290
74,100
7,410
98,800
1.42
Commonwealth
Penuelas, PR
8,470
36,300
3,630
48,400
0. 70
Dow
Freeport, TX
5,320
22,800
2,280
30,400
0.44
lExxon
Baton Rouge, LA
3,850
16,500
1,650
22,000
0.32
Gulf
Cedar Bayou, TX
2,590
11,100
1,110
14,800
0.21
.Mobile
Beaumont, TX
1,890
8,100
810
10,800
0.16
Shell
Deer Park, TX
2,940
12,600
1,260
16,800
0.24
Union Carbide
Taft, LA
9,590
41,100
4,110
54,800
0.79
Total

51,940
222,600
22,260
296,800



o
o
h-»
-Derived



Ashland
Catlettsburg, KY
6,500
7,800
1,950
16,250
0. 23

N. Tonawanda, NY
3,500
4,200
1,050
8,750
0.13
U.S. Steel
Clairton, PA
6,500
7,800
1,950
16,250
0.23
Total

16,500
19,800
4,950
41,250


Toluene Disproportionation



•ARCO
Houston, TX
4,850
9,700
4,850
19,400
0.28
-Sun
Marcus Hook, PA
5,050
10,100
5,050
20,200
0.29
Total

9,900
19,800
9,900
39,600

*"3ased on 8760 hr/yr operation.
-------
29-22
toluene disproportionation and coal-derived production sources were 296,800 lb
39,600 lb, and 41,250 lb respectively.
Emissions of the individual isomers from other mixed xylene producers are shown
in Table 29-14, where the same compositions employed in catalytic reformate computa-
tions are used.
Individual isomer emissions from pyrolysis gasoline production were 49,566 ^
p-xylene, 60,844 lb o-xylene, 105,958 ^ m-xylene; from toluene disproportiona-
tion emissions were 6,613 lb p-xylene, 8,118 lb o-xylene, 14,137 lb m-xylene;
and from coal-derived production emissions were 6,889 lb p-xylene, 8,456 lb
o-xylene, and 14,726 lb m-xylene.
Other associated emissions would primarily include benzene and toluene from all
four production sources.
B. USES
Individual isomer emissions from each of the individual isomer production sites
are tabulated in Table 29-15.
o-Xylene emissions from its production were estimated to have been 2,601,000
p-Xylene production emissions totaled 4,870,299 lb, and m-xylene production
emissions were 15,800 lb.
The emissions from the production of ethylbenzene from mixed xylene are shown
in Table 29-16. Total mixed xylene emissions are estimated to have been 15,600 lb.
Individual isomer emission totals based on the reported composition mentioned
earlier in this report are 2,605 lb p-xylene, 3,198 lb o-xylene, and 5,569 lb
m-xylene.
For the purpose of this report all mixed xylenes used in solvent applications
for adhesives and rubber, agricultural pesticides, and household products were
assumed to be released to the atmosphere. Specific end-user locations are con-
sidered too widespread (individual consumer-type uses) to identify regionally.
-------
Table 29-14. Xylene Isomer Emissions from Other Mixed Xylene Producers


p-Xylene
Total Emissions
o-
Total
Xylene
Emissions
m-
Total
Xylene
Emissions
Company
Location
(lb/yr)
(g/sec)*
(lb/yr)
(g/sec)*
(lb/yr)
(g/sec)*



Pyrolysis Gasoline



ARCO
Channelview, TX
16,500
0. 24
20,254
0. 29
35,272
0. 51
Commonwealth
Penuelas, F**
8,083
0.12
9,922
0.14
17,279
0. 25
Dow
Freeport, TX
5,077
0.07
6,232
0.09
10,853
0.16
Exxon
Baton Rouge, LA
3,674
0.05
4,510
0.07
7,854
0.11
Gulf
Cedar Bayou, TX
2,472
0.04
3,034
0.04
5,284
0.07
Mobile
Beaumont, TX
1,804
0.03
2,214
0.03
3,856
0.06
Shell
Deer Park, TX
2,806
0.04
3,444
0.05
5,998
0.09
Union Carbide
Taft, LA
9,152
0. 13
11,234
0.16
19,564
0. 28
Total

49,566
Coal-Derived
60,844

105,958

Ashland
Catlettsburg, KY
2,714
0.04
3,331
0.05
5,801
0.08

N. Tonawanda, NY
1,461
0.02
1,794
0.03
3, 124
0.05
U.S. Steel
Clairton, PA
2,714
0.04
3,331
0.05
5,801
0.08
Total

6,889

8,456

14,726



Toluene Disproportionation



ARCO
Houston, TX
3,240
0.05
3,977
0.06
6,926
0.10
Sun
Marcus Hook, PA
3,373
0.05
4,141
0.06
7, 211
0.10
Total

6,613

8,118

14,137

*Based on 8760 hr/yr operation.
-------
29-31
Table 29-15. Xylene Isomer Emissions from Xylene Isomer Producers
Company
Location
Emissions (lb/yr)
Total Emissions
Process
Storage
Fugitive
(lb/yr)
(g/sec)*


o-Xvlene
Producers



ARCO
Houston, TX
382,470
14,640
69,540
466,650
6. 72
Corco
Ponce, PR
319,770
12,240
58,140
390,150
5.62
Exxon
Baytown, TX
363,660
13,920
66,120
443,700
6.39
Phillips
Guayama, PR
237,170
9,040
42,940
288,150
4.15
Shell
Deer Park, TX
300,960
11,520
54,720
367,200
5.29
Sun
Corpus Christi, TX
292,600
11,200
5 3,200
357,000
5-14
Tenneco
Chalmette, LA
236,170
9,040
42,940
288,150
4.15
Total

2,131,800
81,600
387,600
2,501,000



m-Xylene
: Producer



\moco
Texas City, TX
12,482
948
2,370
15,800
0.23


p-Xylene
Producers



Amoco
Decatur, AL
509,717
84,953
'107,309
701,979
10r.l0

Texas City TX
181,238
30,206
38,155
249,600
3.59
ARCO
Houston, TX
300,960
50,160
63,360
414,480
5.97
Chevron
Pascagoula, MS
275,880
45,980
58,080
379,940
5.47
St. Croix
St. Croix, VI
501,600
83,600
105,600
690,800
9. 94
Exxon
Baytown, TX
351,120
58,520
73,920
483,560
6. 96
Hercor
Penuelas, PR
501,600
83,600
105,600
690,800
9. 94
Phillips
Guayama, PR
392,160
65,360
82,560
540,080
7.78
Shell
Deer Park, TX
91,200
15,200
19,200
125,600
H
00
H
Sun
Corpus Christi, TX
326,040
54,340
68,640
449,020
6.46
Tenneco
Chalmette, LA
104,880
17,480
22,080
144,440
2. 08
Total

3,536,395
589,399
744,504
4,870,299

•Based on 8760 hr/yr operation.
-------
Table 29-16- Mixed Xylene and Xylene Isomer Emissions from Ethylbenzene Production
p-Xylene	o-Xylene	m-Xylene
Mixed Xylene Emissions (lb/yr)	Total Emissions	Total Emissions	Total Emissions
* *
Company	Location	I'rocess Storage Fugitive Total tlb/yr) (g/scc)	CD.'/y rj	(g/soc*)	(lb/yr) (g/sec )
Charter Houston, TX	2,500	1,250	1,250 5,000 035 0.01	1,025 0.01	1,785	0.03
Sun	Corpus Christi, TX 5,300 2,650 2,650 10,000 1,770 0.03 2,173 0.03 3,784 0.05
7,800 3,900 3,900 15,600 2,605	3,198	5,569
*
Based on 8760 hr/yr operation.
ARCO Houston, TX No longer has an ethylbenze production facility (ref. 18)
PO
i
u>
r\j
-------
29-33
Hydroscience estimates that 15% of the mixed xylene used as solvent, in paints
and coatings, and in chemical and manufacturing applications is consumed as
fuel. The remaining mixed xylene is released to the atmosphere. Again, spe-
cific source/locations could not be identified nor could a further breakdown of
use quantities be obtained for regional distribution. Emission estimates for
the individual isomers from solvent applications are shown in Table 29-17. Emis-
sions were 114,395,000 lb p-xylene, 140,425,000 lb o-xylene( and 244,545,000 lb
m-xylene.
Emissions of the individual isomers from their chemical end-users are tabulated
in Table 29-18. Phthalic anhydride manufacture contributed 132,600 lb of o-xylene,
isophthalic acid production released 98,000 lb of m-xylene, and terephthalic
acid and dimethyl terephthalate yielded emissions of p-xylene of 469,200 lb and
2,152,641 lb, respectively.
C. INCIDENTAL SOURCES
Since gasoline consumes 92% of all mixed xylenes produced, it is one of the
largest sources of mixed xylenes emissions.
There are three distinct sources of mixed xylenes emissions from gasoline use.
They include evaporation from its use in automobiles, evaporation from gasoline
marketing activities such as bulk and service stations, and emissions from the
exhaust of automobiles. Individual xylene isomer emissions are estimated to
have been 2,138,500 lb p-xylene, 2,138,500 lb o-xylene, and 5,193,450 lb m-xylene.
These estimates were made by using an emission factor of 0.004735 lb hydrocarbon
lost per lb gasoline consumed,14 assuming the weight composition of p-, o-( and
m- isomers in the gasoline vapor were 0.07%, 0.07%, and 0.17%, respectively.15
The total emissions of each isomer from gasoline marketing are distributed in
Table 29-19 by the total number of service stations in each geographic region.
Xylene isomer emissions are estimated to have been 1,967,100 lb p-xylene,
1,967,100 o-xylene, and 4,777,400 lb m-xylene from automobile gasoline evapora-
tion using an emission factor of 0.83 g/mile hydrocarbon evaporative loss.16
Average mileage was assumed to be 14.7 mile/gal14 and the xylene isomer composi-
tion in the vapor was assumed to be the same as reported above.
-------
Table 29-17. Xylene Isomer Emissions from Mixed Xylene Solvent Uses*
Total

Mixed Xylene
p-Xylene
o-Xylene
ra-Xylene

Emissions
Emissions
Emissions
Emissions

(M lb/yr)
(M lb/yr)
(M lb/yr)
(M lb/yr)
Paints and coatings
422
70.4 74
86.510
150.654
Adhesive, rubber
77
12.859
15.785
27.489
Chemical, automotive
65
10.855
13.325
23.205
Agricultural pesticides
66
11.022
13. 530
23.562
Household products, printing inks
55
9.185
11.275
19.635
Total
685
114.395
140.425
244.545
*See ref. 2.
-------
29-35
Table 29-18. Xylene Isomer Emissions from Users
Emissions (Ib/yr)		Total Emissions
Company
Location
Process
Storage
Fugitive
(lb/yr)
(g/sec

Phthalic
Anhydride
Producers
(o-Xylene)


Allied
El Segundo, CA
3,640
520
1,040
5,200
0.07
BASF Wyandotte
Kearny, NJ
14,980
2,140
4,280
21,400
0. 31
Exxon
Baton Rouge, LA
13,020
1,860
3,720
18,600
' 0.27
Koppers
Cicero, IL
23,520
3,360
6,720
33,600
0.48
Monsanto
Texas City, TX
14,000
2,000
4,000
20,000
0.29
Hooker
Arecibo, PR
8,680
1,240
2,480
12,400
0.18
Chevron
Richmond, CA
5,040
720
1,440
7,200
0.10
Stepan
Millsdale, IL
9,940
1,420
2,840
14,200
0. 20
Total

92,820
13,260
26,520
132,600


Isophthalic Acid Producer (m-
-Xylene)


^moco
Joliet, IL
83,300
4,900
9,800
98,000
1. 41

Dimethylter
¦ephthalate
Producers
(p-Xylene)


Du Pont
Old Hickory, TN
35,490
8,190
19,110
62,790
0.90

Wilmington, NC
87,360
18,660
43,540
143,060
2.06
Eastman Kodak
Columbia, SC
32,370
7,470
17,430
57,270
0.82

Kingsport, TN
32,370
7,470
17,430
57,270
0. 82
Hercofina
Wilmington, NC
84,110
19,410
45,290
148,810
2.14
Total

265,200
61,200
142,800
469,200


Terephthalic Acid Producers {p-Xylene)


Amoco
Cooper River, SC
687,574
29,777
18,949
736,300
10.59

Decatur, AL
1,053,373
45,618
29,030
1,128,021
16,22
Hercofina
Wilmington, NC
269,240
11,660
7,420
288,320
4.15
Total

2,010,187
87,055
55,399
2,152,641

~Based on 8760 hr/yr operation.
-------
Table 29-19. Xylene Isomer Emissions from Gasoline Marketing3

Number
o-Xylene
m-Xylene
p-Xylene

of
Emissions
Emissions
Emissions
Region
Sites
(lb/yr)
(lb/yr)
(lb/yr)
New England
11,105
104,831
254,638
104 ,831
Middle Atlantic
28,38 3
267,935
650,822
267,935
East North Central
42,270
399,029
969,251
399,029
West North Central
23,304
219,990
534,361
219,990
South Atlantic
37,286
351,980
854,968
351,980
East South Central
16, 313
153,995
374,057
153,995
West South Central
28,336
267,492
649,744
267,492
Mountain
12,815
120,974
293,848
120,974
Paci fic
26,64 7
251,548
611,016
251,548
Total
226,459
2,138,500b
5,193,400°
2,138,500b
flSee ref. 14.
bAverage 9.44 lb/yr per site (0.00014 g/sec).
°Average 22.93 lb/yr per site (0.00033 g/sec).
-------
29-37
Xylene isomer emissions from automobile exhaust were estimated to have been
103,345,600 lb p-xyle.ne, 119,180,000 lb o-xylene, and 195,022,100 lb m-xylene
using an emission factor of 3.2 g/mile16 of hydrocarbons in the exhaust. Average
mileage was assumed to be 14.7 mile/gal14 and xylene isomer weight composition
of the hydrocarbons in the exhaust were 1.0% p-xylene, 1.1%. o-xylene, and 1.3%
m-xylene.17
Vent parameter data for both production and end-uses of mixed xylene and xylene
isomers are summarized in Table 29-20.
The total nationwide emissions of p-xylene, o-xylene, and m-xylene are estimated
to have been 235,944,470 lb, 268,415, 790 lb. and 453,085,160 1b, respectively.
Total emissions are summarized in Table 29-21 for all three isoners.
-------
Table 29-20. Xylene Vent Parameter Data*
Source
Number
of
Stacks
Vent
lleicjht
(ft)
Vent
Diameter
(ft)
Discharge
Temperature
(° F)
Velocity
(ft/sec)
Discharge
Area
(ft x £t)
Production - Catalytic Reformate
Process
Storage
Fugitive
Production - Pyrolysis Gasoline
Process
Storage
Fugitive
Production - Coal Derived
Process
Storage
Fugitive
Production - Toluene Disproportionation
Process
Storage
Fugitive
o-Xylene Production
Process
Storage
Fugitive
11
10
4
9
3
4
54
30
250
30
60
24
60
30
100
30
3.0
0. 33
2.50
0.17
1.5
0.25
1.5
0.25
2.5
0.25
300
80
100
80
120
80
150
80
300
80
12
210
40
60
13
800 x 1400
600 x 1200
400 x 400
300 x 600
30t) x 300
-------
Table 29-"20 (Continued)
Source
Number
o f
Stacks
Vent
Height
(ft)
Vent
Diameter
(ft)
Discharge
Temperature
(°F)
Velocity
(ft/sec)
Discharge
Area
(ft x ft)
p-Xylene Production
Process
Storage
Fugitive
m-Xylene Production
Process
Storage
Fugitive
Ethyl Benzene Production
Process
Storage
Fugitive
Phthalic Anhydride
Process
Storage
Fugitive
Isophthalic Acid
Process
Storage
Fugitive
5
8
2
6
125
30
60
24
100
30
60
24
60
24
3.5
0.25
1.0
0.17
1.0
0.17
0.5
0.17
1.0
0.25
700
75
150
80
115
80
150
80
180
80
10
10
20
300 x 300
300 x 300
200 x 500
200 x 200
200 x 200
-------
Table 29-20 (concluded)
Source
Number
of
Stacks
Vent
Height
(ft)
Vent
Diameter
( ft)
Discharge
Temperature
(°F)
Velocity
(ft/sec)
Discharge
Area
ft x ft
Terephthalic Acid
Process
Storage
Fugitive
Dime thylterephthalate
Process
Storage
Fugitive
6
4
3
4
100
30
100
24
1.5
0.33
2.0
0.25
120
80
175
80
15
25
300 x 500
300 x 600
•Building cross-section
2
Phthalic Anhydride - 100 m
2
Isophthalic Acid - 40 m
2
All Others	- 200 m
-------
29-41
Table 29-21. 1978 Nationwide Emissions of Xylene Isomers
Nationwide Emissions
	(lb/yr)	
p-Xylene
Mixed xylene production	1,603,523
Mixed xylene solvent use	114,395,000
Ethyl benzene production	2,605
p-Xylene production	4,870,299
Terephthalic acid production	2,152,541
Dimethylterephthalate production	469,200
Gasoline marketing - evaporation	2,138,500
Gasoline automobile - evaporation	1,967,100
Gasoline automobile - exhaust	108,345,600
Total	235,944,470
o-Xylene
Mixed xylene production	1,968,396
Mixed xylene solvent use	140,425,000
Ethyl benzene production	3,198
u-Xylene production	2,601,000
Phthalic anhydride	132,600
Gasoline marketing - evaporation	2,138,500
Gasoline automobile - evaporation	1,967,100
Gasoline automobile - exhaust	119,180,000
Total	268,415,790
m-Xylene
Mixed xylene production	3,427,889
Mixed xylene solvent use	244,545,000
Ethyl benzene production	5,569
,r
m-Xylene production	15,800
Isophthalic acid	98,000
Gasoline marketing - evaporation	5,19 3,400
Gasoline automobile - evaporation	4,777,400
Gasoline automobile - exhaust	195,022,100
Total	453,085,160
-------
16
ro
i
•U
ro
FIGURE 29-1. SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF m-XYLENE EMISSIONS
-------
NO
1
2
3
4
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
16
17
2:
Table 29-22. EMISSIONS AND METEOROLOGICAL STATIONS OF SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES
OF m-XYLENE
COMPANY
SITE
LATITUDE
LONGITUDE
STAR
STATION
PLANT*
TYPE
SOURCE+
TYPE
EMISSIONS (GM/SEC)
PROCESS STORAGE FUGITIVE

ARCO
CHANNELVIEW, TX
29
50
04
095
06
43
12906
1
1
.088848
.380866
.038087

DOW
FREEPORT, TX
28
59
30
095
23
35
12923
1
1
.027360
.117215
.011722

EXXON
BATON ROUGE, LA
30
09
10
090
54
20
13970
1
1
.021240
.084814
.008482

GULF
CEDAR BAYOU, TX
29
49
29
094
55
10
12923
1
1
.013320
.057024
.005702

MOBILE
BEAUMONT, TX
30
04
14
094
03
40
12917
1
1
.009720
.041616
.004162

SHELL
DEER PARK, TX
29
42
55
095
07
34
12906
1
1
.015120
.064799
.006480

UNION CARBIDE
TAFT, LA
29
58
00
090
27
00
13970
1
1
.049318
.211247
.021125
ro
ASHLAND
CATLETTSBURG, KY
38
22
39
082
35
58
13866
2
2
.033406
.040103
.010080
vo
r->
ASHLAND
N. TOWAWANDA, NY
42
59
45
078
55
27
14747
2
2
.018U00
.021600
.005400
CO
U.S. STEEL
CLAIRTON, PA
40
18
15
079
52
43
14762
2
2
.033406
.040103
.010080

SUN
MARCUS HOOK, PA
39
48
45
075
24
51
13739
4
3
.025920
.051839
.025920

AMOCO
TEXAS CITY, TX
29
21
40
094
55
50
12906
5
4
.179533
.013635
.034089

CHARTER
HOUSTON, TX
29
42
50
095
15
12
12906
6
5
.012816
.006422
.006422

SUN
AMOCO
CORPUS CRISTI, TX
JOLIET, IL
27 50 00 097 31 25
41 26 48 088 10 41
12925 6
14855 7
5
6
.027216
1.199518
.013680
.070561
.013680
.141121
-------
TABLE 29-22.(Concluded)
* Plant types:
Type 1:	Plant produces mixed xylene (gasoline pyrolysls)
Type 2:	Plant produces mixed xylene (coal-derived)
Type 3:	Plant produces mixed xylene (toluene disproportionate), and 0-ethylbenzene
Type 4:	Plant produced mixed xylene (toluene disproportionate)
Type 5:	Plant produces Isolated m-xylene
Type 6:	Plant produces ethylbenzene
Type 7:	Plant produces Isophthallc acid.
t Source types:
Type 1:	Mixed xylene production (gasoline pyrolysls)
Type 2:	Mixed xylene production (coal derived)
Type 3:	Mixed xylene production (toluene disproportionate)
Type 4:	m-Xylene Isolation
Type 5:	Ethylbenzene Isolation
Type 6:	Isophthallc acid production
-EE "KJ®A-4-
-------
29-45
TABLE 29-23. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE OF m-XYLENE RESULTING FROM
SPECIFIC POINT SOURCE EMISSIONS
Concentration	Population
Level^	Exposed	^osage
(ug/ m )	(persons)	[(ug/m ) . persons]
25	0
10	0
5	2	14.4
2.5	8	35.3
1	87	145
0.5	422	371
0.25	1,230	672
0.1	6,788	1,480
.05	56,643	4,690
.025	239,788	11,200
.01	447,807	14,500
.005	908,322	17,500
.0025	1,533,264	19,800
3.74 x 10~5	6,630,088	24,100
*The lowest annual average concentration occuring within 20 km of the
specific point source.
2:B-05
-------
TABLE 29-24. EMISSIONS RATES AND NUMBER OF GENERIC POINT SOURCES OF m-XYtENE
Mixed Xylene Production
(Catalytic Reforming)	Gasollng Marketing
Emissions/Site Number	Emissions/Site Number
Region	 (gm/sec) of Sites	(gm/sec) of Sites
New England
0
0
0.00033
11,105
Middle Atlantic
0.251
17
0.00033
28,383
East North Central
0.276
28
0.00033
42,270
West North Central
0.116
16
0.00033
23,304
South Atlantic
0.130
5
0.00033
37,286
East South Central
0.233
8
0.00033
16,313
West South Central
0.313
71
0.00033
20,336
Mountain
0.0602
23
0.00033
12,815
Pacific
0.226
33
0.00033
26,647
-------
TABLE 29-25. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULTING FROM EMISSIONS FROM GENERAL POINT SOURCES OF m-XYLENE
Concentration
Level
(pq/tn^)
Population Exposed
(10^ persons)
Mixed Xylene
Production
Gasoline
Marketing
U.S Total
Dosage
[lO^(Uq/in^) » persons]
Mixed Xylene
Production
Gasoline
Marketing
U.S. Total
5
2.5
1
0.5
0.25
O.t
0.05
0.025
0.01
0.005
0.0025
0.001
0.0005
0.00025
0
0.5
9.5
87
311
1,450
3,350
7,830
0
0
0
0
O
0
0
0.5
9.5
87
311
1,450
3,350
7,830
2.7
30.5
144
300
540
077
1,200
1,470
1,910
2,310
2,650
2,840
2,860
2,060
2,060
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
58
334
673
983
1,490
2,010
2,670
7,690
2.7
30.5
144
300
540
077
1,200
1,530
2,250
2,980
3,640
4,320
4,870
5,530
10,600
NOTE: The use of — as an entry indicates that the
entry or relative to entry in another column
population may be counted in another column.
incremental E/D is not significant (relative to last
at the same row) or that the exposure of the same
-------
29-48
TABLE 29-26. MAJOR PARAMETERS FOR ESTIMATING EXPOSURE/DOSAGE RESULTING
FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS OF m-XYLENE
	Parameter	 	Value
Daytime decay rate (K^)	1.12 x 10~^ sec ^
Nighttime decay rate (
-------
TABLE 29-27. m-XYLENE EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULTING FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS
EXPO LEVEL
( UC/(n>3>
38.
ll.MMWt
S. 000000
2.800000
I.000000
0.
POPULATION
(PERSON)
Baifia
808140
12046 I 13
39492498
121689730
188679135
DOSAGE
( UG/t UN-
PERSON)
1801077.1
11484086.4
98797171.8
191324441.7
318706727.3
341146820.1
PERCENTAGE OF CONTRIBUTION	PERCENTAGE OF DISTRIBUTION
HEAT INC STATIONARY MOBILE CITY TYPE 1 CITY TYPE 2 CITY TYPE 3
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
54.8
73.8
71.8
63.6
60. I
89.4
46.0
26.8
28.2
36.4
39.9
40.6
100.0
100.0
100.0
98.8
93.8
90.8
0.
0.
0.
.4
3. I
3.8
6.
0.
0.
.9
3. 1
8.7
ro
10
i
•Ct
to
-------
TABLE 29-28. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE SUMMARY OF m-XYLENE
Populate Exposure	Dosage
3
	(persons)	 	[(ug/m ) . persons]	
Concentration Specific General	Specific General
Level	Point	Point	Area	Point Point	Area
3
(ug/m )	Source	Source	Source U. S. Total	Source	Source	Source	U.S. Total
25
0
0
58,188
58,200
-
0
1,501,077
1,501,077
10
0
0
505,140
505,140
-
0
11,454,086
11,455,566
5
2
0
12,846,113
--
14.4
91,100
95,797,171
96,000,000
2.5
8
500
39,492,498
--
35.3
176,000
191,324,441
191,500,000
1
87
9,500
121,659,730
--
145
338,000
315,706,727
316,000,000
0.5
422
87,000
--
--
371
491,000
--
--
0.25
1,230
311,000
--
—
672
607,000
—
--
0.1
6,788
1,450,000
--
--
1,480
905,000
--
--
0
6,630,088
3,350,000
158,679,135
—
24,100
7,650,000
341,146,000
348,800,000
NOTE: The use of — as an entry indicates that the incremental E/D is not significant (relative to last entry or relative to
entry in another column at the same row) or that the exposure of the same population may be counted in another column.
-------
23
ie
ro
UD
I
CJ1
FIGURE 29-2. SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF o-XYLENE EMISSIONS
-------
TABLE 29-29. EMISSIONS AND METEOROLOGICAL STATIONS
No.
Company
Site
Latitude
Longitude
1
ARCO
CHANNELVIEW, TX
29
50
04
095
06
43
2
DOW
FREEPORT, TX
28
59
30
095
23
35
3
GULF
CEDAR BAYOU, TX
29
49
29
094
55
10
4
MOBILE
BEAUMONT, TX
30
04
14
094
03
40
5
UNION CARBIDE
TAFT, LA
29
58
00
090
27
00
6
EXXON
BATON ROUGE, LA
30
09
10
090
54
20
8
SHELL
DEER PARK, TX
29
42
55
095
07
34
9
ASHLAND
CATLETTSBURG, KY
38
22
39
082
35
58
10
ASHLAND
N, TONAWANDA, NY
42
59
45
078
55
27
11
U. S. STEEL
CLAIRTON, PA
40
18
15
079
52
43
12
ARCO
HOUSTON, TX
29
42
17
095
16
01
13
SUN
MARCUS HOOK, PA
39
48
50
075
24
51
14
EXXON
8AYT0WN, TX
29
44
50
095
01
00
15
TENNECO
CHALMETTE, LA
30
03
30
089
58
30
17
SUN
CORPUS CHRISTI, TX
27
50
00
097
31
25
2:B-24
OF SPECIFIC POINT
SOURCES
OF o-XYLENE


Star
Plant*
Source+
Emissions (GM/SEC)
Station
Type
Type
Process
Storage
Fugitiv«
12906
1
1
.050973
.021888
.002189
12923
1
1
.015696
.067320
.006739
12923
1
1
.007632
.032759
.003283
12917
1
1
.005616
.023904
.002399
13970
1
1
.028368
.121391
.012139
13970
2
1
.015696
.067320
.006739


6
.187487
.026784
.053567



.201367
.028767
.057533
12906
3
1
.008640
.037152
.003715


4
4.333777
.165887
.787957
13866
4
2
.019152
.023040
.005760
14747
4
2
.010368
.012384
.003096
14762
4
2
.019152
.023040
.005760
12960
5
3
.012557
.028666
.014269


4
5.507568
.210816
1.001376
13739
6
3
.014904
.029808
.014904
12906
7
4
5.236704
.200448
.952128
12958
7
4
3.400875
.130175
.618309
12925
8
4
4.213280
.161279
.766077


5
.012744
.0065336
.006336
-------
TABLE 29-29. (Concluded)
Star Plant* Source*	Emissions (GM/SEC)
No. Company	Site		Latitude Longitude Station Type Type Process Storage Fugitive
18
CHARTER
HOUSTON, TEXAS
29
42
50
095
15
12
12906
9
5
.006048
.003024
.003024
19
ALLIED
EL SEGUNDO, CA
33
56
30
118
26
35
23129
10
6
.052416
.007488
.014976
20
BASF
KEARNY, NJ
40
45
53
074
09
03
04739
10
6
.215712
.030816
.061632
21
KOPPERS
CCICERO IL
41
48
44
087
45
04
14855
10
6
.338692
.048383
.096766
22
CHEVRON
RICHMOND, CA
37
56
12
122
20
48
23239
10
6
.072574
.010368
.020736
23
STEPAN
MILLSDALE, IL
41
26
03
088
09
48
94846
10
6
.143135
.020448
.040896
no
vo
i
en
CO
2:B-25
-------
TABLE 29-29 (Concluded)
* PI ant types :
Type 1: Plant produces mixed xylene	(gasoline pyrolysls)
Type 2: Plant rpoduces mixed xylene	(gasoline pyrolysls) and phthalic anhydride
Type 3: Plant produces mixed xylene	(gasoline pyrolysls) and o-xylene
Type 4: Plant produces mixed	xylene	(coal-derived)
Type 5: Plant produces mixed xylene	(toluene disproportionation),o-xylene
and ethylb-enzene
Type 6:	Plant produces mixed xylene (toluene disproportionation)
Type 7:	Plant produces o-xylene
Type 8:	Plant produces o-xylene and ethyl benzene
Type 9:	Plant produces ethyl benzene
Type 10:	Plant produces phthalic anyydride
+ Source types:
Type 1:	Mixed xylene production (gasoline pyrolysis)
Type 2:	Mixed xylene production (coal-derived)
Type 3:	Mixed xylene production (toluene disproportionation)
Type 4:	o-xylene Isolation
Type 5:	Ethylbenzene Isolation
Type 6:	Phthalic anhydride production
-------
29-55
TABLE 29-30. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE OF o-XYLENE RESULTING FROM
SPECIFIC POINT SOURCE EMISSIONS
Concentration	Population
Level	Exposed*	Dosage
3	3
(ug/m )	(persons)	[(uq/m ) . persons]
25	0	0
10	0	0
5	4,572	29,000
2-5	13,188	60,300
1	65,322	141,000
0.5	172,562	13,000
0.25	439,744	303,000
0.1	1,270,307	432,000
0.05	2,776,807	538,000
0.025	4,047,056	586,000
0.01	6,501,317	624,000
0.005	9,625,488	646,000
0.0025	12,691,212	657,000
2.74 x 10'5	21,041,612	664,000
*The lowest annual average concentration occurring within 20 km of the
specific point source.
2:B-l1
-------
TABLE 29-31. EMISSIONS RATES AND NUMBER OF GENERAL POINT SOURCES OF O-XYLENE
Mixed Xylene Production
(Catalytic Reforming)	Gasoline Marketing
Emissions/Site Number	Emissions/Site Number
Region	 (gm/sec) of Sites	(gm/sec) of Sites
New England
0
0
0.00014
11,105
Middle Atlantic
0.144
17
0.00014
28,383
East North Central
0.158
28
0.00014
42,270
West North Central
0.0667
16
0.00014
23,304
South Atlantic
0.0745
5
0.00014
37,286
East South Central
0.137
8
0.00014
16,313
West South Central
0.180
71
0.00014
28,336
Mountain
0.0345
23
0.00014
12,815
Pacific
0.130
33
0.00014
26,647
-------
TABLE 29-32. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULTING FROM EMISSIONS FROM GENERAL POINT SOURCES OF o-XYLENE

Population Exposed


Dosage



(10 persons)

[10 (UQ/m • persons]

Concent ration






Level
Mixed Xylene
Gasoline

Mixed Xylene
Gasoline

(pq/m3)
Production
Marketlnq
U.S Total
Production
Marketinq
U.S. Total
2.5
0.84
0
0.84
2.5
0
2.5
1
22
0
22
33
0
33
0.5
125
0
125
103
0
103
0.25
300
0
308
194
0
194
O.t
1,690
0
1,690
387
0
387
0.05
4,110
0
4,110
545
0
545
0.025
—
--
—
716
0
716
0.01
~
~
—
954
29
983
0.005
—
--
—
1,150
109
1,260
0.0025
~
—
—
1,380
251
1,630
0.001
~
—
—
1,590
625
2,010
0.0005
—
—
--
1,640
590
2,230
0.00025
~
—
~
1,640
786
2,430
0.0001
~
~
—
1,650
1,150
2,790
0
—
--
--
1,650
3,260
4,910
NOTE: The use of — as an entry indicates that the
entry or relative to entry in another column
population may be counted in another column.
incremental E/D is not significant (relative to last
at the same row) or that the exposure of the same
-------
29-58
TABLE 29-33. MAJOR PARAMETERS FOR ESTIMATING EXPOSURE/DOSAGE RESULTING
FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS OF o-XYLENE
	Parameter	 	Value
Daytime decay rate (K^)	5.6 x 10 ^ sec ^
Nighttime decay rate (K^)	0
Hanna-Gifford coefficient (C)	225
Nationwide heating source emissions (E^)	0
Nationwide nonheating stationary source emissions (E^)	1830 gm/sec
Paint/coating solvent emissions	1245 gm/sec
Adhesive emissions	277 gm/sec
Agricultural pesticide emissions	195 gm/sec
Miscellaneous	162 gm/sec
Nationwide mobile source emissions (EM)	1935 gm/sec
Chemical (automobile) emissions	192 gm/sec
Motor vehicle gasoline evaporation	28 gm/sec
Motor vehicle exhaust emissions	1716 gm/sec
Ratio of truck emissions to auto emissions	(R^) 3
-------
TABLE 29-34. o-XYLENE EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULTING FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS
EXPO LEVEL
< UG/3)
POPULATION
(PERSON)
DOSAGE
( UC/< IDS-
PERSON)
PERCENTAGE OF CONTIllRUTION	PERCENTAGE OF DISTRIBUTION
IlKATINC STATIONAI1Y MOBILE CITY TYPE 1 CITY TYPE 2 CITY TYPE 3
16.000090
8.000000
2.900000
I .000000
.300000
0.
303(44
303140
19771703
6H4L!6033
1333133 14
i50679i:;3
fc744dti2.4
6729302.4
79734063.4
I546li90ll9.4
204701332.0
212473034.1
0.
0.
0.
0.
O.
O.
72.5
72.3
67.4
39 .9
511.7
3(1.4
27.3
27.3
32.6
40. I
41.3
41.6
100. 6
100.0
100.0
97. I
93. 1
91.2
0.
0.
0.
1.3
3.2
3.4
0.
0.
0.
1.4
3.7
3.5
r\>
10
I
cn
10
-------
TABLE 20-35.
EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE SUMMARY OF o-XYLENE
Concentration
Level
(ug/m3)
Population Exposed
(persons)	
Specific	General
Point	Point
Source	Source Area Source
Dosage
|"(ug/mJ) - persons]
U.S. Total
Specific
General

Poi nt
Poi nt

Source
Source
Area Source
0
0
0
0
0
6,729,382
29,000
—
6,729,382
60,300
2,500
79,754,865
141,000
33,000
154,689,889
213,000
103,000
204,701,332
303,000
194,000
--
432,000
387,000
--
664,000
4,910,000
212,475,000
U.S. Total
25
10
5
2.5
1
0.5
0.25
0.1
0
0
0
4,572
13,188
66,322
172,562
439,744
1,270,307
21,041,612
0
0
840
22,000
125,000
388,000
1,690,000
0
0
0
19,771,703
68,426,035
135,515,319
0
0
4,572
19,785,731
68,514,357
13,739,093
0
6,729,382
79,817,665
154,863,889
205,017,332
218,049,000
Note: The use of — as an entry indicates that the incremental E/D is not significant (relative to last entry or
relative to entry in another column at the same row) or that the exposure of the same population may be
counted in another column.
2:8-12
-------

(
12,15,17,20
FIGURE 29-3. SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF p-XYLENE EMISSIONS
-------
Table 29-36. EMISSIONS AND METEOROLOGICAL STATIONS OF SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF p-XYLENE
NO.
COMPANY
SITE
LATITUDE
LONGITUDE
STAR
STATION
PLANT*
TYPE
SOURCES-
TYPE
EMISSIONS (GM/SEC)
PROCESS STORAGE FUGITIVE
1
ARCO
CHANNELVIEW, TX
29
50
04
095
06
43
12906
1
1
.041616
.178127
.017813
2
DOW
FREEPORT, TX
28
59
30
095
23
35
12923
1
1
.012816
.054864
.005486
3
EXXON
BATON ROUGE,LA
30
09
10
090
54
20
13970
1
1
.009259
.039745
.003974
4
GULF
CEDAR BAYOU, TX
29
49
29
094
55
10
12923
1
1
.006221
.026640
.002664
5
MOBILE
BEAUMONT, TX
30
04
14
094
03
40
12917
1
1
.004550
.019440
.001944
7
UNION CARBIDE
TAFT, LA
29
58
00
090
27
00
12970
1
1
.023040
.098782
.009878
8
SHELL
DEER PARK, TX
29
42
55
095
07
34
12906
2
1
.007056
.030240
.003024











4
1.313293
.218880
.276481
9
ASHLAND
CATLETTSBURG, KY
38
22
39
082
35
58
13866
3
2
.015696
.018720
.004608
10
ASHLAND
N. TONAWANDA, NY
42
59
45
078
55
27
14747
3
2
.008424
.010080
.002520
11
U.S. STEEL
CLAIRTON, PA
40
18
15
079
52
43
14762
3
2
.015696
.018720
.004608
12
ARCO
HOUSTON, TX
29
42
17
095
16
01
12960
4
3
.011669
.023338
.011669











4
4.333824
.722304
.912884
13
SUN
MARCUS HOOK, PA
39
48
45
075
24
51
13789
5
3
.012096
.024336
.012096
14
AMOCO
DECATUR, AL
34
36
12
086
58
42
13882
6
4
7.331423
1.221906
1.543460












15.151001
.656138
.417548
15
AMOCO
TEXAS CITY, TX
29
21
40
094
55
50
12906
7
4
2.606804
0.434463
0.548796
16
CHEVRON
PASCAGOULA, MS
30
19
04
088
28
37
13820
7
4
3.972602
.662100
.836346
17
EXXON
BAYTOWN, TX
29
44
50
095
01
00
12906
7
4
5.056128
.842688
1.064448
18
TENNECO
CHALMETTE, LA
30
03
30
089
58
30
12958
7
4
1.510274
.251709
.317954
2:B-07
-------
29-63
Table 29-36. EMISSIONS AND METEOROLOGICAL STATIONS OF SPECIFIC POINT SOURCES OF p-XYLENE (concluded)
NO.
COMPANY
SITE
LATITUDE
LONGITUDE
STAR
STATION
PLANT*
TYPE
SOURCE+
TYPE
EMISSIONS (GM/SEC)
PROCESS STORAGE FUGITIVE
19
SUN
CORPUS CHRISTI, TX
29
50 00
097
31
25
12925
8
4
4.694951
.782502
.988426










5
.012816
.006336
.006336
20
CHARTER
HOUSTON, TX
29
42 50
095
15
12
12906
9
5
.006048
.003024
.003024
22
DUPONT
OLD HICKORY, TN
36
16 24
086
34
12
13897
10
6
.511067
.117935
.275184
23
DUPONT
WILMINGTON, NC
34
10 00
077
56
06
13717
10
6
1.257959
.268702
.626966
24
EASTMAN KODAK
COLUMBIA, SC
33
59 50
081
04
17
13883
10
6
.466102
.107569
.250992
25
EASTMAN KODAK
KINSPORT, TN
36
31 41
082
12
22
13877
10
6
.466102
.107569
.250992
26
HERCOFINA
WILMINGTON, NC
34
19 27
077
46
56
13717
11
6
1.211187
.279503
.652175










7
3.877156
.167903
.106849
27
AMOCO
COPPER RIVER, SC
32
45 57
079
56
28
13717
12
7
9.889597
.428292
.272550
2:B-08
-------
TABLE 29-36 (Concluded)
* Plant Types:
Type 1:	Plant produces mixed xylene (gasoline pyrolysls)
Type 2:	Plant produces mixed xylene (gasoline pyrolysls) and p-xylene
Type 3:	Plant produces mixed xylene (coal-derived)
Type	Plant produces mixed xylene (toluene disproportionation), p-xylene and ethylbenzene
Type 5:	Plant produces mixed xylene (toluene disproportionation)
Type 6:	Plant produces p-xylene and terephthalic acid
Type 7:	Plant produces p-xylene
Type 8:	Plant produces p-xylene and ethylbenzene
Type 9:	Plant produces ethyl benzene
Type 10:	Plant produces dimethyl terephthalate
Type 11:	Plant produces dimethyl terephthalate and terephthalic acid
Type 12:	Plant produces terephthalic acid
Source types:
Type 1:	Mixed xylene production (gasoline pyrolysls)
Type 2:	Mixed xylene production (coal-derived)
Type 3:	Mixed xylene production (toluene disproportionation)
Type 4:	p-Xylene isolation
Type 5:	Ethylbenzene Isolation
Type 6:	Terephthalic acid production
-------
29-65
TABLE 29-37. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE OF p-XYLENE RESULTING FROM
SPECIFIC POINT SOURCE EMISSIONS
Concentration	Population
Level Exposed	Dosage
3	3
(ug/m )	(persons)	[(ug/m ) . persons]
250
100
59
6,480
50
240
18,300
25
1,523
62,600
10
5,871
125,000
5
22,126
232,000
2.5
49,090
325,000
1
138,977
460,000
0.5
280,119
561,000
0.25
540,985
649,000
0.1
1,386,718
778,000
0.05
2,532,162
860,000
63 x 10"5
10,150,367
920,000
*The lowest annual average concentration occurring within
20 km of the specific point source.
2:B-13
-------
TABLE 29-38. EMISSIONS RATES AND NUMBER OF 'GENERAL POINT SOURCES OF p-XYLENE
Region	
New England
Middle Atlantic
East North Central
West North Central
South Atlantic
East South Central
West South Central
Mountain
Pacific
Mixed Xylene Production
(Catalytic Reforming)
Emissions/Site Number
(gm/sec) of sites
Gasoline Marketing
Emissions/Site Number
(gm/sec) of Sites
0.0
0
0.00014
11,105
0.117
17
0.00014
28,383
0.129
28
0.00014
42,270
0.0543
16
0.00014
23,304
0.0607
5
0.00014
37,286
0.111
8
0.00014
16,313
0.146
71
0.00014
28,336
0.0281
23
0.00014
12,815
0.106
33
0.00014
26,647
-------
TABLE 29-39. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULTING FROM EMISSIONS FROM GENERAL POINT SOURCES OF p-XYLENE
Concentration
Level
(uq/m3)
Population Exposed
(10* peraon9)	
Mixed Xylene
Production
Gasoline
Marketing
U.S Total
Dosage
[10^(m/m3) » personal
Mixed Xylene
Production
Gasoline
Marketing
U.S. Total
1
15
0
15
21
0
21
0.5
91
0
91
72
0
72
0.25
339
0
339
158
0
158
0.1
1,650
0
1,650
341
0
341
0.05
3,410
0
3,410
464
0
464
0.025
—
—
—
663
0
663
0.01
—
—
—
854
38
892
0.005
—
--
--
1,060
124
1,100
0.0025
—
--
--
1,270
271
1,540
0.0001
—
--
—
1,470
458
1,930
0.0005
—
~
—
1,530
645
2,100
0.00025
—
--
—
1,550
843
2,390
0.0001
--
—
--
1,550
1,240
2,790
0.00005
~
—
—
1,550
1,550
3,100
0
--
—
—
1,550
3,410
4,960
NOTE: The use of — as an entry indicates that the
entry or relative to entry in another column
population may be counted in another column.
incremental E/D is not significant (relative to last
at the same row) or that the exposure of the 9ame
-------
29-68
TABLE 29-40. HAJOR PARAMETERS FOR ESTIMATING EXPOSURE/DOSAGE RESULTING
FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS OF p-XYLENE
		Parameter	 	Value	
Daytime decay rate (K^)	1.12 x 10~4 sec"1
Nighttime decay rate (K^)	0
Hanna-Gifford coefficient (C)	225
Nationwide heating source emissions (E^)	0
Nationwide nonheating stationary source emissions (E^)	1488 gm/sec
Paint/coating solvent emissions	1015 gm/sec
Adhesive emissions	185 gm/sec
Agricultural pesticide emissions	156 gm/sec
Miscellaneous	132 gm/sec
Nationwide mobile source emissions (E^)	1745 gm/sec
Chemical (automobile) emissions	156 gm/sec
Motor vehicle gasoline evaporation	28 gm/sec
Motor vehicle exhaust emissions	1561 gm/sec
Ratio of truck emissions to auto emissions	(R^) 3
-------
TABLE 29-41. p-XYLENE EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE RESULTING FROM AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS
EXPO LEVEL
( UC/-( M>3)
POPULATION
(PERSON)
DOSAGE
(UG/< M)3-
PEIISON)
PERCENTAGE OF CONTRIBUTION	PERCENTAGE OF DISTRIBUTION
[IF.ATINO STATIONARY M0I1ILE CITY TYPE 1 CITY TYPE 2 CITY TYPE 3
10.000000
0.000000
2.B00000
I.000000
.500000
0.
003140
503140
12833644
52630636
121944630
150670133
53006(6.4
5380616.9
4681316 I.7
109234!) 12.0
137103626.7
169072766.6
0.
0.
0.
O.
0.
0.
70.4
70.4
60.6
30.6
36.4
35.7
29.6
29.6
31.4
41.4
43.6
44.3
100.6
100.0
100.0
97.3
93.7
90.6
0.
0.
0.
.9
3.2
3.3
0.
0.
0.
1.6
3. I
5.8
ro
a>
10
-------
TABLE 29-42. EXPOSURE AND DOSAGE SUMMARY OF p-XYLENE


Population Exposed



Dosage



(persons)


[(ug/m3)
persons]

Concentration
Specific
General


Specific
General


Level
Point
Poi nt


Point
Point


(uq/m3)
Source
Source
Area Source
U.S. Total
Source
Source
Area Source
U.S. Total
250

0
0


0
0

100
59
0
0
59
.6,480
0
0
6,480
50
240
0
0
240
18,300
0
0
18,300
25
1,523
0
0
1,523
62,600
0
0
62,600
10
5,871
0
505,140
511,011
125,000
0
5,580,616
5,705,616
5
22,126
0
505,140
527,266
232,000
0
5,580,616
--
2.5
49,090
0
12,853,644
—
325,000
0
46,813,161

1
138,977
15,000
52,650,656
--
--
21,000
109,234,512
—
0.5
280,119
91,000
121,944,638
--
--
72,000
157,185,626
--
0.25
540,985
339,000

--
--
158,000
--

0.25

1,650,000

--

158,000

--
0.1
--
3,410,000
--
--
--
341,000

--
0.05
--

--
—
--
464,000
--

0.025

—

—
--
663.000
--

0
10,150,367
--
158,679,135
--
920,000
4,960,000
169,872,766
175,752,766
Note: The use of — as an entry indicates that the incremental E/D is not significant (relative to last entry or relative
to entry in another column at the same row) or that the exposure of the same population may be counted in another
column.
2:8-14
-------
29-71
REFERENCES
1.	K. Ring and T. C. Gunn, "BTX Aromatics Supply," p. 300.6500A--300.6501U,
Chemical Economics Handbook, Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park,
CA (February 1979).
2.	K. Ring, "Mixed Xylenes," p. 300.7300A—300.7301D, Chemical Economics
Handbook, Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA (February 1979).
3.	Oi1 and Gas Journal, "Annual Refinery Survey," p. 63, March 20, 1978.
4.	E. M. Klapproth, "Xylene Isomers," p. 300.7400A--300.7404M, Chemical Econo-
mics Handbook, Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park"! CA (December
1978).
5.	K. Ring and S. Al-Sayyari, "Ethyl benzene," p. 645.3000D	F, Chemical
Economics Handbook, Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA (March
1979).
6.	Texas Air Control Board, 1975 Emissions Inventory Questionnaire, Marathon
Oil Co., Texas Refining Division, Texas City, Texas, March 25, 1976.
7.	Texas Air Control Board, 1975 Emissions Inventory Questionnaire, Sun Oil
Company of Pennsylvania, Corpus Christi Refinery, Corpus Christi,
Texas, July 1, 1976.
8.	Texas Air Control Board, 1975 Emissions Inventory Questionnaire, Cosden Oil
and Chemical Co., subsidiary of American Petrofina, Inc., Big Spring,
Texas May 19, 1977.
9.	Texas Air Control Board, 1975 Emissions Inventory Questionnaire, Charter
International Oil Co., Houston, Texas, April 4, 1977,
10.	R. L. Standifer, Hydroscience, Inc., Emission Control Options for the
Synthetic Organic Chemicals Manufacturing Industry—Product Report on
Ethylene (on file at EPA, ESED, Research Trianqle Park, NC) (June
1978).
11.	Special Project Report "Petrochemical Plant Sites" prepared for Industrial
Pollution Control Division, Industrial Environmental Research Lab-
oratory, Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio, by Monsanto
Research Corporation, Dayton, Ohio, April 1976.
12.	S. W. Dylewski, Hydroscience, Inc., Emission Control Options for the Syn-
thetic Organic Chemicals Manufacturing Industry—Dimethyl Terephtha-
late Terephthalic Acid Report, on file at ESED, EPA, Research Trianqle
Park, NC (June 1979).
2:B-15
-------
29-72
13.	Assessment of Ortho-xylene as a Potential Air Pollution Problem, January
1976, GCA/Technology Divison..
14.	A Study of Vapor Control Methods for Gasoline Marketing Operations: Volume
I—Industry Survey and Control Techniques, EPA, OAWM, OAQPS, Research
Triangle Park, NC, EPA 450/3-75-046a (April 1975).
15.	Source Reconciliation of Atmospheric Hydrocarbons, State of California Air
Resources Board, El Monte, CA (March 1975).
16.	Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, AP-42, 2d ed., EPA, Research
Triangle Park, NC (March 1975).
17.	F. Black and L. High, Automotive Hydrocarbon Emission Patterns and the
Measurement of Nonmethane Hydrocarbon Emission Rates, EPA, Mobile
Source Emissions Research Branch, Research Triangle Park, NC (February
1977).
18.	ARCO Chemical Company, (J.J. Zimmerman), personal communication in response
to publication of the first draft of this report (June 1981).
19.	Monanto, (C.D. Malloch), personal communication in response to publication of
the second draft fo this report (July 1982).
2 : B-16
-------