VOLUME II: CHAPTER 15
Preferred and Alternative
Methods for Estimating
Air Emissions from the
Printing, Packaging, and
Graphic Arts Industry
May 2002
Prepared by:
Eastern Research Group, Inc.
Prepared for:
Point Sources Committee
Emission Inventory Improvement Program
-------
DISCLAIMER
As the Environmental Protection Agency has indicated in Emission Inventory Improvement
Program (EIIP) documents, the choice of methods to be used to estimate emissions depends on
how the estimates will be used and the degree of accuracy required. Methods using site-specific
data are preferred over other methods. These documents are non-binding guidance and not rules.
EPA, the States, and others retain the discretion to employ or to require other approaches that
meet the requirements of the applicable statutory or regulatory requirements in individual
circumstances.
-------
ACKOWLEDGEMENT
This document was prepared by Eastern Research Group, Inc., for the Point Sources Committee
of the Emission Inventory Improvement Program and for Roy Huntley of the Emission Factor
and Inventory Group, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Members of the Point Sources
Committee contributing to the preparation of this document are:
Lynn Barnes, South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control
Bob Betterton, Co-Chair, South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control
Paul Brochi, Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission
Richard Forbes, Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
Alice Fredlund, Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality
Frank Gao, Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control
Marty Hochhauser, Allegheny County Health Department
Roy Huntley, Co-Chair, Emission Factor and Inventory Group, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Sonya Lewis-Cheatham, Virginia Department of Environmental Quality
Toch Mangat, Bay Area Air Quality Management District
Ralph Patterson, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
Anne Pope, Emission Factor and Inventory Group, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Jim Southerland, North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Bob Wooten, North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
EllP Volume II
-------
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
5/08/02
This page is intentionally left blank.
IV
El IP Volume
-------
Contents
Section Page
1 Introduction 15.1-1
2 Source Category Descriptions 15.2-1
2.1 Process Descriptions 15.2-3
2.1.1 Lithography 15.2-4
2.1.2 Flexography 15.2-6
2.1.3 Gravure 15.2-6
2.1.4 Screen Printing 15.2-8
2.1.5 Letterpress 15.2-8
2.2 Emission Points 15.2-12
2.3 Control Equipment and Pollution Prevention Techniques 15.2-14
3 Overview of Available Methods 15.3-1
3.1 Emission Estimation Methods 15.3-1
3.1.1 Material Balance 15.3-1
3.1.2 Source Testing 15.3-2
3.1.3 Emission Factors 15.3-2
3.2 Comparison of Available Emission Estimation Methodologies 15.3-3
4 Preferred Methods for Estimating Emissions 15.4-1
4.1 Material Balance Approach 15.4-1
4.1.1 Calculation of Emissions from each Emissions Source 15.4-1
4.1.2 Combustion Sources 15.4-2
4.1.3 Facility Totals 15.4-2
4.1.4 Emissions Calculations When Using EPA Methods 204 and 204a-f 15.4-4
4.1.5 Example Calculations 15.4-5
El IP Volume II
V
-------
Contents (Continued)
Section Page
5 Alternative Methods for Estimating Emissions 15.5-1
5.1 Emissions Calculations Using Emission Factors 15.5-1
6 Quality Assurance/Quality Control 15.6-1
6.1 QA/QC for Using Material Balance 15.6-1
6.2 QA/QC for Using Emission Factors 15.6-2
6.3 QA/QC for Using Source Test Data 15.6-2
7 Data Coding Procedures 15.7-1
7.1 Source Classification Codes 15.7-1
7.2 AIRS Control Device Codes 15.7-1
8 References 15.8-1
vi El IP Volume II
-------
Tables and Figures
Table Page
15.2-1 HAPs Associated with Printing and Graphic Arts Industries 15.2-15
15.2-2 Typical Graphic Arts Industry Emission Control Techniques 15.2-15
15.3-1 Summary of Preferred and Alternative Emission Estimation Methods for the
Printing and Graphic Arts Industry 15.3-3
15.4-1 References for Retention Factors and Capture Efficiencies Available on the
Internet 15.4-3
15.4-2 EPA Test Methods for Determining Capture Efficiency 15.4-5
15.7-1 Source Classification Codes for Printing Processes 15.7-2
15.7-2 AIRS Control Device Codes for Graphic Arts Processes 15.7-5
Figure
15.2-1 The Lithographic Printing Process 15.2-5
15.2-2 The Flexographic Printing Process 15.2-7
15.2-3 The Gravure Printing Process 15.2-9
15.2-4 The Screen Printing Process 15.2-10
15.2-5 The Letterpress Printing Process 15.2-11
15.2-6 Typical Image Carriers Used in the Printing Graphic Arts Industry 15.2-13
El IP Volume II vii
-------
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
5/08/02
This page is intentionally left blank.
Vlll El IP Volume
-------
1
Introduction
The purposes of the preferred methods guidelines are to describe emission estimation
techniques for point sources in a clear and unambiguous manner and to provide concise
example calculations to aid in the preparation of emission inventories. While emissions factors
are not provided, the information presented in this document can be used to select the emission
estimation technique best suited to a particular application. This chapter describes the process
and recommends the approaches for estimating volatile organic compound (VOC) and
hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions from printing and graphic arts operations. This
chapter is intended to be a useful guide for industry, federal, state, and local agencies.
Section 2 of this chapter contains a general description of the printing and graphic arts source
category; the various printing processes used by the printing and graphic arts industry; and the
common emission sources. Section 3 of this chapter provides an overview of available
emission estimation methods.
Section 4 presents the preferred methods for estimating emissions from printing and graphic
arts operations. Although preferred methods are identified, this document does not mandate
any method. Preferred methods are desirable when data are readily available, when expected
emissions are high, or when their use is cost-effective. Alternative methods may be used when
preferred methods are not cost-effective. Section 5 presents the alternative emission estimation
techniques. Quality Assurance and Quality Control are described in Section 6. Section 7 of
this chapter contains coding procedures used for data input and storage. Some states use their
own unique identification codes, so individual state agencies should be contacted to determine
the appropriate coding scheme to use. Complete citations for all references are provided in
Section 8.
El IP Volume II
15.1-1
-------
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
5/08/02
This page is intentionally left blank.
15.1-2 El IP Volume
-------
2
Source Category
Descriptions
This section presents a brief overview of the printing and graphic arts industry and a description
of the various printing processes involved in the graphic arts industry. For a more detailed
discussion of printing processes, refer to EPA Office of Compliance Sector Notebook Project:
Profile of the Printing and Publishing Industry (EPA, 1995a), and the Sector Notebook Data
Refresh (EPA, 1998a).
The printing and graphic arts industry, defined most broadly, includes:
• Firms whose business is dominated by printing operations;
• Firms performing operations commonly associated with printing, such as
platemaking or bookbinding; and
• Publishers, whether or not they actually print their own material (EPA, 1995a).
This document will focus on the first group, firms whose business is dominated by printing
operations. Products printed include newspapers, books, greeting cards, checks, annual reports,
magazines, flexible packaging, corrugated cartons, and vinyl and urethane products, such as
resilient flooring, wallpaper, upholstery, and shower curtains. The United States Bureau of
Census' Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code 27 corresponds to this category. Some
58,000 firms and 62,000 facilities were identified within SIC code 27 by the Census (Census
Bureau, 1997). This figure does not include the large number of "in-plant" printing operations
located throughout the manufacturing sectors, which could bring the total number of operations
well in excess of 100,000 (EPA, 1995a).
The markets for printing can be international, national, regional, or local in scope. Some
facilities, such as those printing books, periodicals, and newspapers, serve national and
international markets; while other printers may serve regional and local customers. As a result,
the geographic distribution of printing facilities parallels U.S. population distribution. The
printing and graphic arts industry is dominated by small firms. Almost one-half of all printing
facilities have fewer then five employees; while approximately 84 percent employ fewer
than 20 (EPA, 1995a).
El IP Volume II
15.2-1
-------
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
5/08/02
From the printing industry's perspective, the industry is organized according to the type of
printing process used. Types of printing processes include:
• Lithography;
• Flexography;
• Gravure;
• Screen printing;
• Letterpress; and
• Digital.
Historically, facilities tended to exclusively use one of these processes, with some larger
facilities in operation that operated using some combination of these processes. Recently, it is
becoming more common to have more than one process located at a facility. Based on 1997
estimated shipment values, the industry breaks down as 68.5 percent lithography, 6.4 percent
flexography, 5.4 percent gravure, 0.6 percent digital, 4.5 percent letterpress, 9.0 percent screen
printing, and 5.7 percent quick printing.1 (Census Bureau, 1997).
The equipment, applications, and chemicals vary for each of these six printing processes.
However, they all print an image on a substrate following the same basic sequence. The
fundamental steps in printing are:
• Pre-press operations - The entire goal of the prepress operation is to
produce an image carrier. The image carrier is used on a press to transfer an
inked image from the image area to substrate. There are a variety of image
carriers used and the specific one depends upon the particular printing process
that will be utilized. The most common image carriers are planographic plates
(lithography), relief plates (flexography and letterpress), screens (screen
printing), and engraved cylinders (rotogravure).
In order to create the image carrier, often times a film negative or positive is
created. The film negative or positive can be produced in a conventional
manner, where the type is set with a computer and original photographs and
'Quick printers are engaged in traditional printing activities, such as short-run offset
printing or prepress services, in combination with providing document photocopying service.
91% of all quick printers utilize offset lithographic printing presses.
15.2-2
El IP Volume II
-------
05/08/02
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
artwork are separated into the four primary colors and a film flat is assembled.
Over the past decade, these conventional steps have been computerized and
films can be imaged directly from the computer. The film negative or positive is
used to transfer the image to the image carrier. More recently, image carriers
are now imaged directly from the computer.
The other important step very common in the prepress operations is that of
proofing. Prior to the final imaging setup, a proof of the job is made for
customer approval. Not all printing jobs are proofed prior to image carrier
preparation.
• Printing operations - Ink is applied to the image carrier, and the image is
transferred to a substrate.
• Post-press step - The printed material may receive any one of numerous
finishing operations, depending on the desired form of the finished product. The
post-press step includes such processes as cutting, folding, collating, binding,
perforating, drilling, coating, gluing, and laminating.
2.1 Process Descriptions
The printing and graphic arts industry as well as trade associations, technical foundations, and
suppliers can be divided into six main categories by the printing process used:
Lithography;
Flexography;
Gravure;
Screen printing;
Letterpress; and
• Digital or electronic printing.
Digital printing is any printing completed via digital files, not restricted to short runs and is
able to provide variable printing such as incorporating data directly for a compact database and
printing not using traditional methods of film or printing plates. Calculating emissions from
digital printing is not discussed in this document. Such plateless printing processes include
electronic (e.g., laser printers), electrostatic (e.g., xerographic copiers), magnetic, thermal (e.g.,
El IP Volume II
15.2-3
-------
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
5/08/02
facsimile machines), and ink jet printing. Electrostatic toners and ink jet printers may contain
HAPs; however, the quantities emitted at any location are small (EIIP, 1996a).
2.1.1 Lithography
Lithography is a planographic printing technique, that is, the printing and non-printing surfaces
are essentially in the same plane. The image area of that plane is hydrophobic and oleophilic,
while the non-image area is hydrophilic and chemically repellant to oil-based inks. The
"offset" in offset lithography refers to the use of a rubber blanket to transfer the image from the
plate to the substrate. Figure 15.2-1 presents a process flow diagram of the sheetfed offset
lithographic printing process.
Fountain solution, a mixture of water and other volatile and non-volatile chemicals and
additives that maintain the quality of the printing plate and reduces the surface tension of the
water so that is spreads easily across the printing plate surface, is applied to the plate. The
fountain solution wets the nonimage area so that the ink is maintained within the image areas.
Non-volatile additives include mineral salts and hydrophilic gums. Alcohol and alcohol
substitutes, including isopropyl alcohol, glycol ethers, and ethylene glycol, are the most
common VOC additives used to reduce the surface tension of the fountain solution. There is
also a type of lithography called waterless, in which no fountain solution is used. The non-
image areas have a silicon coating which repels ink.
Lithography can be divided into two broad subdivisions based upon ink drying and substrate
feed mechanisms:
• Sheetfed press - The substrate is fed into the press one sheet at a time.
Sheetfed printing is typically used for printing books, posters, brochures, and
artwork. Sheetfed inks dry by a combination of penetration and oxidation.
• Web-press - Prints on a continuous roll of substrate, known as a web. Web-
fed lithography can be divided into heatset and non-heatset, the difference being
that heatset web lithography dries the ink by evaporating the ink oils with indirect
hot air dryers, and non-heatset web inks dry principally by absorption. Web-fed
printing is commonly used for high speed production of magazines, catalogs,
newspapers, and other periodicals.
15.2-4
EIIP Volume II
-------
05/08/02
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
dajnpening-
solution
fountain^
plate
cylinder
blanket
cylinder
I
feed
pile
impression
cylinder
ink fountain
paper
sheets
additional units
for multicolor
printing
delivery
pile
Figure 15.2-1. The Sheetfed Offset Lithographic Printing Process
Source: EPA, 1994b.
El IP Volume II
15.2-5
-------
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
5/08/02
2.1.2 FLEXOGRAPHY
Flexographic printing uses flexible plates with raised images to transfer fluid inks to a substrate.
The plates are typically rubber or photopolymer and are attached to a roller cylinder.
Traditionally, four rollers are used to transfer an ink to a substrate. The first roller transfers an
ink from an ink fountain to an engraved roller, known as an anilox roller. The anilox roller
meters the ink to a uniform thickness for transfer to the third roller, the plate cylinder. The fourth
roller is the impression cylinder. The impression cylinder applies pressure to the substrate as it
passes between the plate cylinder and impression cylinder during printing. The substrate will
pass through a dryer before another ink is printed. Flexography presses with a common
impression cylinder are also frequently used. Doctor blade systems can be used in place of the
first ink transfer roller. In a single doctor-blade system, the anilox roller is in direct contact with
the ink fountain, and a single, reverse-angle doctor blade in employed to scrape off excess ink.
In a double-blade system, the anilox roller rotates in an enclosed ink chamber with two doctor
blades. Figure 15.2-2 shows a process flow diagram of the flexographic printing process.
Flexographic printing presses can be either sheetfed or webfed. Flexographic inks can be used
on both absorbent (paper, corrugated cardboard) and non-absorbent substrates (film and foil).
Flexographic inks need to be fast-drying, low-viscosity inks. These inks lie on the surface of
substrates and solidify when solvents are removed, making flexography ideal for printing on
impervious materials, such as plastics or metallized surfaces. The soft plates allow quality
printing on compressible surfaces, such as cardboard packaging, as well.
2.1.3 Gravure
Almost all gravure is webfed (GATF, 1993). The image area of a gravure cylinder consists of
small, recessed cells, which are typically electro-mechanically engraved. The engraved surface
of a gravure cylinder consists of millions of minute cells engraved into a copper cylinder and is
protected with a very thin electroplated layer of chromium. Chemical etching, formerly the most
common method of gravure cylinder engraving, accounts for only a small fraction of the etching
done today.
During gravure printing, a low viscosity ink floods the lower portion of the gravure cylinder.
The ink is then wiped from the surface of the cylinder with a doctor blade, leaving ink only in the
image area. The ink left in the recessed cells is then pressed onto the substrate as the substrate is
pressed against the gravure cylinder with a rubber-covered impression roll. The substrate is then
passed through a high volume, recirculated air dryer before the next ink or coating is applied.
Low-boiling point organic solvents are commonly used to achieve the low viscosity, fast drying
properties required of inks used in a rotogravure process. Inks in the press fountain can contain
15.2-6
El IP Volume II
-------
05/08/02
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
Inleedi Tension Control Printing & Drying OutfMd & Rewind
INK "OUT
RETURN
Enclosed Doctor Blade System Diagram
Figure 15.2-2. The Flexographic Printing Process
El IP Volume II
15.2-7
-------
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
5/08/02
as much as 75 percent solvent by weight (GATF, 1993). Figure 15.2-3 shows a process flow
diagram of the gravure printing process.
2.1.4 Screen Printing
Screen printing differs from the other printing processes in that ink is transferred to a
substrate through a porous mesh rather than on an impervious surface. Mesh is stretched
across a frame and a stencil applied to the mesh defines the print image. Mesh thread
count and diameter control the volume of ink applied to the substrate. A rubber or
synthetic blade known as a squeegee applies pressure to the ink, causing the ink to flow
through the imaged mesh and onto the substrate. Once the substrate has been printed, it is
placed either on drying racks or on a conveyor into a dryer. Due to the flexibility in the
screen printing process, a wide variety of substrates are possible, including, but not
limited to, textiles, plastics, metals, and paper. Figure 15.2-4 shows a process flow
diagram of the screen printing process.
2.1.5 Letterpress
Similar to flexography, letterpress printing uses metal or plastic plates with a raised printing
image to transfer ink to a substrate. There are three types of letterpresses:
• Platen;
• Flatbed; and
• Rotary.
In a platen press, the raised plate is locked on a flat surface, while the substrate is pressed
between the raised plate and another flat surface. In both flatbed presses and rotary presses, the
substrate passes between the plate cylinder and an impression cylinder during printing. With a
flatbed press, only one side of the substrate is printed at a time, whereas rotary presses are
designed to print both sides simultaneously. The web-fed rotary letterpress is the most common
letterpress used today. Figure 15.2-5 shows a process flow diagram of the letterpress printing
process.
Letterpress, once the predominant used printing process, is being replaced by lithography,
flexography, and gravure. Lithography and flexography have been replacing letterpress in the
printing of newspapers. Flexography has also been replacing letterpress in the printing of
paperbacks, labels, business forms, and corrugated cartons. Gravure has largely replaced
15.2-8
El IP Volume II
-------
05/08/02
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
additional stations for
multicolor printing
sheets
I folder
doctor
blade
rewind
¦ ink fountain
Figure 15.2-3. The Gravure Printing Process
Source: EPA, 1994b.
El IP Volume II
15.2-9
-------
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
5/08/02
squeegee
Jk idr"'bk=j
screen
^ H .
paper sheets
squeegee screen
t
o 0 0 0
paper roll
magnet force
Figure 15.2-4. The Screen Printing Process
Source: EPA, 1994b.
15.2-10
El IP Volume II
-------
05/08/02
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
impression
cylinder
folder
plate
cylinder
inking roller
plate
^ cylinder
inking
roller
ink fountain
paper roll
plate cylinder
inking
roller
ink
fountain'
impression
cylinder
paper roll
folder
Figure 15.2-5. The Letterpress Printing Process
Source: EPA, 1994b.
El IP Volume II
15.2-11
-------
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
5/08/02
letterpress for long-run magazine and catalog print jobs. Today, letterpress is used primarily for
the printing of books, business cards, and advertising brochures.
2.2 Emission Points
Each of the printing processes follows the same basic sequence of imaging, pre-press, printing,
and post-press.
Pre-Press
Pre-press operations include those operations used to create a positive or negative image which is
then in turn used to create a plate, cylinder, or screen. The input materials used in the creation of
the image are very similar to the input materials used in other fields of photography. Emissions
may be the result of the use of developers, fixers, photographic processing solutions, or cleaning
solutions. Emissions from the imaging step are minimal and are usually considered insignificant.
The plate, cylinder, or screen produced will be used in the printing stage to transfer ink in the
form of the image to the substrate. Emissions from the lithographic platemaking operation are
minimal and typically considered insignificant. In flexographic platemaking, emissions may
result from platemaking using perchloroethylene (PERC) or VOC-containing perchloroethylene
alternative solvents (PAS) to wash photopolymer plates. PERC is being phased out as a solvent
for flexographic platemaking. Most prepress operations now use PASs or water washable plates.
Figure 15.2-6 presents examples of the various image carriers used in the printing and graphic arts
industry.
Printing
The majority of releases in the printing and graphic arts industry occur during the printing step,
during the process of transferring the ink and coating to a substrate. For the purpose of emission
estimation, the printing step includes cleanup operations, which may occur during or between
print runs. Emissions result from the evaporation of VOC contained in the inks and cleaning
solutions. Lithography will also produce emissions from the evaporation of VOC contained in
fountain solutions. In lithography, a portion of the VOC in inks can be retained on the substrate,
thus reducing the amount available to volatilize into the atmosphere. The use of retention factor
to account for this substrate retention is discussed in Section 4.1.1 of this document, along with a
list of references on this subject.
Combustion of fuel, such as natural gas or oil, to provide heat for dyers also produces some
emissions. In some cases, recovered solvent may be used as a supplemental fuel (EIIP, 1996a). A
detailed discussion of the methodology used to calculate emissions associated with fuel
15.2-12
EIIP Volume II
-------
05/08/02
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
Relief (flexography/letterpress)
—¦—Impression surface
~ Substrate
Ink
^Raised printing surface
/-I ill —k
fife' lU-gstit •'! Mr
Plate
Intaglio (gravure)
1 1
i
1
if
¦ j
'!¦
\
rSff
"1
Plate
Impression surface
Substrate
Recessed ink cups
Planography (lithography)
¦B*r[nk
Ink-
Impression surface
SuDstrate
Plate Water-receptive surface
//
receptive plate coating
Stencil
(screen)
1 I till"
Squeegee blade
, Screen
-Substrate
-Impression surface
Figure 15.2-6. Typical Image Carriers Used in the Printing and
Graphic Arts Industry
Source: EPA, 1994b.
El IP Volume II
15.2-13
-------
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
5/08/02
combustion is presented in EIIP Volume 2, Chapter 2, Preferred and Alternative Methods for
Estimating Air Emissions from Boilers (EIIP, 1996a).
Post-Press
The post-press step includes such processes as cutting, folding, collating, binding, perforating,
and drilling. From an emissions perspective, binding is the most significant of the various post-
press operations. Emissions may result from the volatilization of VOC contained in the adhesives
used in the binding operation and solvents found in some types of ink jets inks, coatings, and
some laminates used in the finishing process.
2.3 Control Equipment and Pollution Prevention
Techniques
There are several methods by which VOC/HAP emissions at a facility can be reduced. These
include material substitution, and control devices.
Material Substitution
Switching to cleaning solutions with lower hazardous air pollutant (HAP) and VOC contents or
low volatility cleaners (those with VOC composite vapor pressure of less than 10mm Hg at 20°C)
have been shown to reduce emissions. In lithography, the use of isopropyl alcohol has been
replaced in many operations with alcohol substitutes. Some printers have also had success in
reducing their emissions by switching from solvent-based inks to water-based inks and ultra violet
(UV) curable inks. Some lithographic operations use vegetable oil-based inks. HAPs associated
with printing and publishing industries are listed in Table 15.2-1.
Control Devices
Another strategy to control emissions is the installation of control devices. Control techniques
commonly used in the printing and graphics arts industry and their typical control efficiency
ranges are presented in Table 15.2-2. Control devices used by the printing and graphics arts
industry can be described as either destructive or nondestructive. Destructive control devices are
combustion devices, such as thermal oxidizers and catalytic oxidizers, designed to destroy volatile
organic compounds in the vent stream prior to release into the atmosphere. Nondestructive
control devices are recovery devices, such as carbon adsorbers or cooler/condenser filtration units.
Recovery devices control emissions by recovering VOC for other uses, rather than destroying
them.
15.2-14
EIIP Volume II
-------
05/08/02
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
Table 15.2-1
HAPs Associated with Printing and Graphic Arts Industries
1,4-Dioxane
Glycol Ethers
2-Nitropropane
Hydrochloric Acid (Hydrogen Chloride gas only)
4-4'-Methylenediphenyl Diisocyanate
Lead & Compounds
Acrylic Acid
Maleic Anhydride
Benzene
Methanol
Bis 2-ethylhexyl phthalate
Methyl Ethyl Ketone
Cadmium & Compounds
Methyl Isobutyl Ketone
Chromium & Compounds
Methylene Chloride
Cobalt Compounds
Nickel & Compounds
Cumene
Phthalic Anhydride
Cyanide Compounds
T etrachloroethy 1 ene
Dibutylphthalate
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
T ri chloroethy 1 ene
Ethylene Glycol
Vinyl Acetate
Formaldehyde
Xylenes (includes o, m, and p)
Source: EPA, 1998a.
Table 15.2-2
Typical Graphic Arts Industry Emission Control Techniques
Pollutant
Control Device Type
Average Control Device Efficiency (%)
voc
Recuperative Thermal Oxidizer®
95 - 99.8
Regenerative Thermal Oxidizer11
90-99
Catalytic oxidizer0
95 - 99
Regenerative Catalytic Oxidizerb
90-99
Carbon Adsorber^6
95 - 98
a EIIP, 2000
b EPA, 1999c
c EPA, 1999d
d EPA, 1999e
e For concentrations between 500 and 2000 ppm
EIIP Volume II
15.2-15
-------
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
5/08/02
Other Process Changes
In lithography, refrigerated circulators are used to control emissions of isopropyl alcohol from
fountain solutions by cooling the solution to between 55 and 60°F. Using refrigerated circulators
reduces the evaporation of isopropyl alcohol, thereby reducing emissions of isopropyl alcohol and
stabilizing the ink/water balance, as well as providing operators with better control of ink
emulsification and hot weather scumming. There is no such equivalent reduction when alcohol
substitutes are used. Refrigeration of fountain solutions with alcohol substitutes is not appropriate
as a control technology.
In flexography, enclosed doctor blade systems have been used to reduce emissions from the
printing process. While enclosed doctor blade systems are not control devices or material
substitution, they can reduce VOC emissions due to reduced evaporation and more efficient
cleaning.
15.2-16
El IP Volume II
-------
3
Overview of Available
Methods
3.1 Emission Estimation Methods
Several methods are available for calculating emissions from printing and graphic arts operations.
The "best" method to use depends upon available data, available resources, and the degree of
accuracy required in the estimate. In general, site-specific data that are representative of normal
operating conditions are preferred over industry-average data, such as the emission factors presented
in Compilation of Air Pollution Emission Factors (AP-42) (EPA, 1995c).
This section discusses and compares the methods available for calculating emissions from printing
and graphic arts operations and identifies the preferred method of calculation on a pollutant basis.
Although preferred methods are identified, this document does not mandate any emission estimation
method. Industry personnel using this manual should contact the appropriate state or local air
pollution control agency regarding suggested methods prior to calculating emissions estimates.
3.1.1 Material Balance
Material balance utilizes the raw material usage rates, fraction of the pollutant in the raw material,
and portion (if any) of the pollutant in the raw material that is retained in the substrate to estimate the
amount of pollutant emitted. Material balance is used most often where a relatively consistent
amount of material is emitted during use. The material balance emission rate is calculated by
multiplying the raw material usage by the amount of pollutant in the raw material, and subtracting
the amount of the pollutant retained in the substrate. For VOC/HAP-containing materials, the
amount of pollutant emitted is assumed to be 100 percent of the amount of pollutant contained in the
material, unless a control device is used to remove or destroy VOC/HAP in the exhaust stream or a
known portion of ink, for example, is retained in the substrate. To estimate VOC/HAP emissions
where a control device is being used, it is necessary to establish the efficiency of the capture system
and the control device. Regardless of whether a control device is being used, it is necessary to utilize
all accepted retention factors and emission factors to accurately perform the mass balance equations.
Guidance on retention factor utilization can also be found at the EPA's Technology Transfer
Network (TTN) web site (EPA, 1998b).
El IP Volume II
15.3-1
-------
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
5/08/02
3.1.2 Source Testing
Source sampling provides a "snapshot" of emissions during the period of the test. EPA has
promulgated several test methods for performing source testing at printing and graphic arts facilities.
These methods are outlined in Section 5.1 of this document. Because there are many steps in the
source sampling procedures were errors can occur, only experienced source testers should perform
such tests. Source sampling methods are available to measure VOC and HAP emissions. For further
guidance on when source testing may be appropriate/required, contact your federal, state, or local
agencies.
3.1.3 Emission Factors
An emission factor is a representative value that attempts to relate the quantity of a pollutant released
to the atmosphere with an activity associated with the release of that pollutant (e.g., pound of VOC
emitted per gallon of ink applied). Emission factors are available for some printing operations and
are based on the results of source tests or material balances performed for one or more facilities
within an industry. Chapter 1, Introduction to Point Source Emission Inventory Development,
contains a detailed discussion of the reliability and quality of available emission factors. The EPA
provides compiled emission factors for criteria and hazardous air pollutants in AP-42 (EPA, 1995c)
and the Factor Information Retrieval (FIRE) System (EPA, 1999a). Refer to Chapter 1, Introduction
to Point Source Emission Inventory Development, of this series for a complete discussion of
available information sources for locating, developing, and using emission factors as an estimation
technique.
Due to their availability and acceptance, emission factors are commonly used to prepare emission
inventories. However, the emissions estimate obtained from using emission factors is likely to be
based upon emission testing performed at similar but not identical facilities and may not accurately
reflect emissions at a single source. Thus, the user should recognize that, in most cases, emission
factors are averages of available industry-wide data with varying degrees of quality and uncertainty,
and may not be representative for an individual facility within that industry.
Source-specific emission factors can be developed from multiple source test data, predictive
emissions monitoring data, or from single source tests. These factors, when used for the specific
operations for which they are intended, are generally more representative than the average emission
factors found in AP-42 (EPA, 1995c) or FIRE (EPA, 1999a).
15.3-2
El IP Volume II
-------
05/08/02
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
3.2 Comparison of Available Emission Estimation
Methodologies
Table 15.3-1 identifies the preferred and alternative emission estimation approaches for selected
pollutants for the printing and graphic arts industry. For many of the pollutants emitted from the
printing and graphic arts industry, several of the previously defined emission estimation
methodologies can be used.
Table 1 5.3-1
Summary of Preferred and Alternative Emission Estimation
Methods for the Printing and Graphic Arts Industry
Parameter
Preferred Emission
Estimation Approach
Alternative Emission
Estimation Approach
VOC
Material Balance
Source Testing
Emission Factor
HAP
Material Balance
Source Testing
Emission Factor
The preferred method for estimating VOC and HAP emissions is material balance. Source testing
may provide accurate emission estimates, but the quality of the data will depend on a variety of
factors, including the number of data points generated, the representativeness of those data points,
and the proper operation and maintenance of the equipment being used to record the measurements
El IP Volume II
15.3-3
-------
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
5/08/02
This page is intentionally left blank.
15.3-4 El IP Volume
-------
4
Preferred Methods for
Estimating Emissions
4.1 Material Balance Approach
Emissions from the materials used in the four fundamental process operations (imaging, pre-press,
printing, and post-press processes) can be calculated using the mass balance approach described
below. The equations presented below apply to more than one process operation (i.e., emission
point). For example, cleaning solutions may be used in both the pre-press step and the printing
step.
4.1.1 Calculation of Emissions from Each Emissions Source
If control devices are in place, the emissions from each VOC/HAP-containing material (i.e., inks,
fountain solutions, cleaning solvents, and coatings) can be calculated as follows:
Ematerial = V * (1 - R/100) * (1 - [K/100 * J/100]) (15.4-1)
Where: V = U * (W/100) or G * C
Where:
F
material
Emissions, of VOC/HAP material, lb
u
Material Usage, lb
w
VOC/HAP Content, % by weight
R
% VOC/HAP Retained on Substrate
K
Control Efficiency, %
J
Capture Efficiency, %
V
VOC/HAP Content, lb
G
Material Usage, gal
C
VOC/HAP Content, lb/gal
VOCs/HAPs that are captured and re-introduced to the process do not count as being controlled.
If no control device is in place, the equation simplifies to:
Ematerial= V*(l- R/100). (15.4-2)
El IP Volume II
15.4-1
-------
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
5/08/02
A detailed discussion of the factors assumed for the amount of each material retained on the
substrate can be found in Control Of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions From Offset
Lithographic Printing, Guideline Series {Draft} (EPA, 1995b) and Alternative Control
Techniques Document: Offset Lithographic Printing (ACT) (EPA, 1994a). The documents
addressing retention factors address lithography only. Similar materials are often used in
letterpress operations, so it is reasonable to assume the same retention factors in letterpress
emission estimates, depending on the specific material and process configuration. The specific
retention factors in these documents are not applicable for flexography, gravure, or screen
printing, though the concept of retention may apply.
A detailed discussion of capture efficiency determination can be found in the Guidelines for
Determining Capture Efficiency (EPA, 1995d). The ACT (EPA, 1994a) also provides a detailed
discussion on capture efficiencies, particularly in distinguishing between indirect and direct
capture efficiencies. Indirect capture efficiency refers to VOC that is first dispersed in the press
room air and is subsequently drawn into the dryer (and into a control device). Direct capture
efficiency refers to the fraction of VOC (such as that contained in blanket wash) that is carried
into the dryer on the substrate. Table 15.4-1 lists the web addresses where electronic versions of
these useful documents are available. Federal, state, or local agencies should be able to provide
guidance on the specific requirements for estimating and reporting capture efficiency.
VOC content can be determined using EPA Test Method 24. Method 24A is appropriate when
determining VOC-content of publication gravure inks and coatings. HAP-content can be
determined using EPA Method 311, or in situations where all the HAPs are also VOC, then
Method 24 or 24A is appropriate. Copies of these documents are available at
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/emc/promgate.html. Material safety data sheets (MSDS) may also be
useful in determining VOC- and HAP-content.
EPA Test Methods 25 and 25A can be used to determine control device efficiency. They are also
available at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/emc/promgate.html. The ACT (EPA, 1994a) provides
guidance regarding when to use Method 25 and when to use Method 25 A.
4.1.2 Combustion Sources
Refer to EIIP Volume II, Chapter 2 on calculating emissions from combustion sources.
4.1.3 Facility Totals
The following approaches can be used to calculate total emissions from a facility, based on
the printing process used.
15.4-2
EIIP Volume II
-------
05/08/02
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
Table 1 5.4-1
References for Retention Factors and Capture
Efficiencies Available on the Internet
Document
Internet Address
Alternative Control Techniques
Document: Offset Lithographic
Printing (EPA, 1994a)
http://www.epa.gov/ttnuatwl/print/printpg.html
Guidelines for Determining Capture
Efficiency (EPA, 1995d)
http://www.epa.gov/ttncaaal/tl/meta/m28508.html
Printer's Plain Language Workbook
(EPA, 1999f)
http://www.epa.gov/ooaujeag/sectors/pdf/lngwkbk.pdf
Background Information Document
(BID) for Final NESHAP for Printing
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/uatw/print/prbid2.pdf
EPA Test Methods 204, 204 a-f
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/emc/promgate.html
Potential to Emit (PTE) Guidance for
Specific Source Categories (EPA,
1998b)
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t3/meta/m29616.html
Lithography
Total emissions for a facility can then be calculated by summing the emissions from usage of the
various materials as follows:
"F — "F _l~ "F H~F H~F H~F H~F (1S 4-^^
Total ink fountain solutions "Miand cleaning solutions automatic blanket wash coatings/adhesives other V J J
Where:
Etotal = Emissions, total, lb
Eink = Emissions, ink, lb
^fountain solutions = Emissions, fountain solutions, lb
Ecleaning solutions = Emission, cleaning solutions, lb
Eautomatic blanket wash = Emissions, automatic blanket wash, lb
Ecoating/adhesives = Emissions, coatings/adhesives, lb
Eother = Emissions, other VOC - or HAP containing materials, lb
El IP Volume II 15.4-3
-------
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
5/08/02
Flexography, Gravure, and Screen Printing
Total emissions for a facility can then be calculated by summing the emissions from usage of the
various materials as follows:
P — p _|_ p + p +p +p
Total ink dilution solvent cleaning solutions coatings/adhesives other
(15.4-4)
Where:
-'total
Jink
dilution solvent
-^cleaning solutions
-'coating/adhesives
-'other
Emissions, total, lb
Emissions, ink, lb
Emissions, dilution solvent, lb
Emission, hand cleaning solutions, lb
Emissions, coatings/adhesives, lb
Emissions, other VOC - or HAP containing materials, lb
Letterpress
Total emissions for a facility can then be calculated by summing the emissions from usage of the
various materials as follows:
p — p _|_ p +P H~ "F (\ S 4-S^
Total ink cleaning solutions coatings/adhesives other
Where:
p
-^total
= Emissions, total, lb
Eink
= Emissions, ink, lb
P
cleaning solutions
= Emission, cleaning solutions, lb
P
coating
= Emissions, coatings/adhesives, lb
P
-^other
= Emissions, other VOC - or HAP containing materials, lb
4.1.4 Emissions Calculations When Using EPA
Methods 204and204a-f
EPA has promulgated Methods 204 and 204a-f to determine site-specific capture efficiencies. A
detailed description of each of these test methods is not presented in this document. Instead,
readers are referred to the EPA website for a complete methodology for each of these test
procedures. Table 15.5-1 lists each of these test methods and its internet address. A complete list
15.4-4 El IP Volume
-------
05/08/02
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
Table 1 5.4-2
EPA Test Methods for Determining Capture Efficiency
Promulgated Test Method
Internet Address
Method 204-204f Preamble
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/emc/promgate/pre204.pdf
Method 204 - Permanent or Temporary
Total Enclosure (TTE) for Determining
Capture Efficiency
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/emc/promgate/m-204.pdf
Method 204a - VOCs in Liquid Input
Stream
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/emc/promgate/m-204a.pdf
Method 204b - VOCs in Captured Stream
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/emc/promgate/m-204b.pdf
Method 204c - VOCs in Captured Stream
(Dilution Technique)
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/emc/promgate/m-204c.pdf
Method 204d - Fugitive VOCs from
Temporary Total Enclosure
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/emc/promgate/m-204d.pdf
Method 204e - Fugitive VOCs from
Building Enclosure
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/emc/promgate/m-204e.pdf
Method 204f - VOCs in Liquid Input
Stream (Distillation)
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/emc/promgate/m-204f.pdf
of all EPA Emissions Measurement Center (EMC) promulgated test methods is available at
www.epa.gov/ttn/emc/promgate.html.
4.1.5 Example Calculations
The following pages provide example calculations for each of the printing processes described in
this document. Example 15.4-1 provides sample calculations for lithography, 15.4-2 for
flexography, 15.4-3 for gravure, 15.4-4 for screen printing, and 15.4-5 for letterpress. These
sample calculations can be used for estimating HAP emissions
El IP Volume II
15.4-5
-------
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
5/08/02
Example 15.4-1
Part A:
A print shop using a sheetfed lithography process reports the following material usage:
Annual
Use
VOC Content
HAP Content
Material
Unit
(Percent by
weight or lb/gal)
(% by VOC weight
or lb/gal)
Ink
19,000
lb
35%
0%
Fountain Solution:
Concentrate
300
gal
1.85 lb/gal
Ethylene Glycol, 100%
Fountain Solution:
Additive
100
gal
4.5 lb/gal
2-Butoxyethanol, 82%
Ethylene Glycol, 18%
Automatic Blanket
Wash
7,750
gal
0.8 lb/gal
Naphthalene,
0.296 lb/gal
2-Butoxyethanol,
0.144 lb/gal
Cleaning Solution
2,212.5
gal
0.8 lb/gal
Naphthalene, 0.16
lb/gal
Coating: UV
1,530
lb
2%
0%
Coating: Conventional
6,003
lb
35%
0%
No control devices are in place for this particular facility. According to the ACT (EPA,
1994a), it can be assumed that 95 percent of the ink and conventional coating (i.e., varnish)
VOC is retained in the substrate. A 50% retention factor is assumed for cleaning solutions,
since soiled towels are kept in a closed container and have a vapor pressure of less than 10
mmHg at 20°C. Therefore, the emissions can be calculated as described below.
Ink Emissions
With no control device in place, VOC emissions are calculated using equation 15.4-2.
Evoc (ink) = U * (W/100) * (1 - R/100)
= (19,000 lb/year) * (35/100) * (1-95/100)
= 332.5 lb VOC/year from ink usage
Note: In this example, the ink is 0% HAP by weight, therefore, no HAPs are emitted from the
ink.
15.4-6
El IP Volume II
-------
05/08/02
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
Example 15.4-1 (Continued")
Fountain Solution Emissions
With no control device in place, VOC and HAP emissions are calculated using
equation 15.4-2.
Eyoc (Concentrate)
= U* (W/100) * (1 -R/100)
= (300 gal/year) * (1.85 lb/gal)*(l-0/100)
= 555 lb VOC/year from fountain solution concentrate
usage
Eyoc (Additive)
= U* (W/100) * (1 - R/100)
= (100 gal/year) * (4.5 lb/gal) * (1-0/100)
= 450 lb VOC/year from fountain solution additive
usage
Evoc (Total, Fountain Solution)
= EvOC (Concentrate) + E voc (Additive)
= 555 lb VOC/year + 450 lb VOC/year
= 1055 lb VOC/year
Ehap (Concentrate)
= U* (W/100) * (1 - R/100)
= (300 gal/year) * (1.85 lb/gal) * (1 - 0/100)
= 555 lb HAP
Ehap (Additive)
= U* (W/100) * (1 - R/100)
= (100 gal/year) * 4.50 * ((82+18)/100) * (1-0/100)
= 450 lb HAP
Ehap (Total, Fountain Solution)
= E„Ap (Concentrate) + E HAP (Additive)
= 555 lb + 450 lb HAP/year
= 1050 lb HAP/year
Cleaning Solution Emissions
With no control device in place, VOC and HAP emissions are calculated using
equation 15.4-2.
EVoc (Automatic Blanket Wash)
= G * C * (1 - R/100)
= (7,750 lb/year) * (0.8) * (1 - 0/100)
= 6,200 lb VOC/year
El IP Volume II
15.4-7
-------
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY 5/08/02
Example 15.4-1 (Continued^)
EvOC (Cleaning Solutions) =
EvOC (Total, Cleaning Solutions) =
(Automatic Blanket Wash) =
(Cleaning Solutions) =
(Total, Cleaning Solution) =
Coating Emissions
With no control device in place, VOC emissions are calculated using equation 15.4-2.
Evqc (UV Coating) = U * (W/100) * (1 - R/100)
= (1,530 lb/year) * (2/100) * (1-0/100)
= 31 lb VOC/year
EvOC (Conventional Coating) = U * (W/100) * (1 - R/100)
= (6,003 lb/year) * (35/100) * (1-95/100)
= 105 lb VOC/year
EvOC (Total, Coating) = EyOC (UV Coating) + Evoc (Conventional Coating)
= 31 lb VOC/year + 105 lb VOC/year
= 136 lb VOC/year
G* C * (1 - R/100)
(2,212.5) * (0.8) * (1-50/100)
885 lb VOC/year
EvOC (Automatic Blanket Wash) + Evoc (Hand Cleaning
Solutions)
6,200 lb VOC/year + 885 lb VOC/year
7,085 lb VOC/year
G* C * (1 - R/100)
(7,750) * (0.296 + 0.144) * (1 - 0/100)
3,410 lb HAP/year
G* C * (1 - R/100)
(2,212.5) * (0.16) * (1-50/100)
177 lb HAP/year
E^ (Automatic Blanket Wash) + EnAI, (Hand Cleaning
Solutions)
3,410 (lb HAP/year) + 177 (lb HAP/year)
3,587 lb HAP/year
15.4-8
El IP Volume II
-------
05/08/02 CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
Example 15.4-1 (Continued^)
Note: In this example, the coatings are 0 percent HAP by weight, therefore, no HAPs are
emitted.
Facility Totals
Total HAP and VOC emissions for this facility are then calculated using equation 15.4-3.
p =p_i_p _|_p _i_p
total ink fountain solutions cleaning solutions coating
Evqc = 332.5 lb VOC/year + 1050 lb VOC/year + 7,085 lb VOC/year +
136 lb VOC/year
= 8,603.5 1b VOC/year
Ejjap = 0 lb HAP/year + 1050 lb HAP/year + 3,587 lb HAP/year +
0 lb HAP/year
= 4,637 lb HAP/year
El IP Volume II
15.4-9
-------
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
5/08/02
Example 15.4-1 (Continued^)
PartB:
A print shop using a heatset web offset lithographic process reports the following material
usage:
Material
Annual
Use
Unit
VOC Content
(Percent by
weight or lb/gal)
HAP Content
(% by VOC weight or
lb/gal)
Ink
100,000
lbs
45%
0%
Fountain Solution:
Concentrate
300
gal
1.85 lb/gal
Ethylene Glycol, 1.85 lb/gal
Fountain Solution: Additive
100
gal
4.5 lb/gal
2-Butoxyethanol, 4.5 lb/gal
Automatic Blanket Wash
500
gal
6.48 lb/gal
Xylene, 0.10 lb/gal
Cumene, 0.08 lb/gal
Hand Cleaning Solution
1,000
gal
6.73 lb/gal
Naphthalene, 0.16 lb/gal
2-Butoxyethanol, 0.14 lb/gal
Coating: UV
1,500
lb
1%
0%
Coating: Conventional
10,000
lb
40%
0%
An oxidizer with a destruction efficiency of 95% is in place for this particular facility.
According to the ACT for Offset Lithography (EPA, 1994a), it can be assumed that 20 percent
of the ink and conventional coating (i.e., varnish) VOC is retained in the substrate and the
remaining 80% if completely captured in the dryer. A 70% capture efficiency can be used for
fountain solutions utilizing alcohol substitutes. In this example, a 40% capture efficiency can
be used for automatic blanket washes with composite VOC vapor pressures of less than
10 mmHg at 20°C. A 50% retention factor can be assumed for hand cleaning solutions, since
soiled towels are kept in a closed container and have a composite VOC vapor pressure of less
than 10 mmHg at 20°C. Therefore, the emissions can be calculated as described below.
Ink Emissions
With a 95% efficient oxidizer in place, VOC emissions are calculated using equation 15.4-1.
Evqc (Ink) = V * (1 - R/100) * (1 - [K/100 * J/100])
V = (100,000 lb/year * (45/100) = 45,000 Evoc (Ink) = 45,000 * (1 - 80/100) *
(1 - [95/100 * 100/100])
= 1,800 lb VOC/year from ink usage
Note: In this example, the ink is 0% HAP by weight, therefore, no HAPs are emitted from the
ink.
15.4-10
El IP Volume II
-------
05/08/02
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
Example 15.4-1 (Continued")
Fountain Solution Emissions
With a 95% efficient oxidizer in place, VOC emissions are calculated using equation 15.4-1.
EvOC (Concentrate)
EvOC (Concentrate)
= V * (1 - R/100) * (1 - [K/100 * J/100])
V = (300 * 1.85) = 555 lb
= 555 * (1 - 0/100) * (1 - [95/100 * 70/100])
= 186 lb VOC/year from fountain solution concentrate
usage
EvOC (Additive)
EvOC (Additive)
= V * (1 - R/100) * (1 - [K/100 * J/100])
V = (100 * 4.5) = 450 lb
= 450 * (1 - 0/100) * (1 - [95/100 * 70/100])
= 151 lb VOC/year from fountain solution concentrate
usage
EvOC (Total, Fountain Solution)
= EvOC (Concentrate) + EyOC (Additive)
= 186 lb/year VOC +151 lb/year VOC
= 337 lb HAP/year
(Concentrate)
(Concentrate)
= V * (1 - R/100) * (1 - [K/100 * J/100])
V = (300 * 1.85) = 555 lb
= 555 * (1 - 0/100) * (1 - [95/100 * 70/100])
= 186 lb HAP/year from fountain solution concentrate
usage
(Additive)
(Additive)
= V * (1 - R/100) * (1 - [K/100 * J/100])
V = (100 * 4.5) = 450 lb
= 450 * (1 - 0/100) * (1 - 95/100 * 70/100])
= 151 lb HAP/year from fountain solution concentrate
usage
(Total Fountain Solution)
= EnAI, (Concentrate) + EnAI, (Additive)
= 186 lb/year HAP +151 lb/year HAP
= 337 lb HAP/year
El IP Volume II
15.4-11
-------
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
5/08/02
Example 15.4-1 (Continued^)
Cleaning Solution Emissions
With a 95% efficient oxidizer in place, VOC emissions from the automatic blanket wash are
calculated using equation 15.4-1.
Evqc (Automatic Blanket Wash) = V * (1 - R/100) * (1 - [K/100 * J/100])
V = (500 * 6.48) = 3,240 lb
Evqc (Automatic Blanket Wash) = 3,240 * (1 - 0/100) * (1 - 95/100 * 40/100])
= 2,009 lb VOC/year from auto blanket wash usage
Since hand washing does not occur while the dryer is running, VOC emissions from the hand
wash cleaning solution are calculated using equation 15.4-2.
Evqc (Hand Wash) = V * (1 - R/100)
EvOC (Total, Cleaning Solution) = EyOC (Auto Blanket Wash) + EyOC (Hand Wash)
2,009 lb/year VOC + 3,365 lb/year VOC
5,374 lb VOC/year
Ejjap (Automatic Blanket Wash) = V * (1 - R/100) * (1 - [K/100 * J/100])
= (500 * 0.18) = 90 lb
Ejjap (Automatic Blanket Wash) = 90 * (1 - 0/100) * (1 - [95/100 * 40/100])
EvOC (Hand Wash)
V = (1,000 * 6.73) = 6,730 lb
6,730 * (1 - 50/100)
3,365 lb VOC/year from hand wash usage
56 lb HAP/year from automatic blanket wash
usage
EnAI, (Hand Wash)
V* (1 - R/100)
V = (1,000 * 0.3) = 300
300 * (1 - 50/100)
150 lb HAP/year from hand wash usage
EnAI, (Handwash)
EnAI, (Total, Cleaning Solution)
EnAI, (Auto Blanket Wash) + EnAI, (Hand)
56 lb/year HAP +150 lb/year HAP
206 lb HAP/year
15.4-12
El IP Volume II
-------
05/08/02
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
Example 15.4-1 (Continued^)
Coating Emissions
Since the conventional coating in this example is applied before the dryer ducted to a 95%
efficient oxidizer, VOC emissions from the coating are calculated using equation 15.4-1.
EvOC (Conventional Coating) = V * (1 - R/100) * (1 - [K/100 * J/100])
V = (10,000 * 45/100) = 4,500 lb
Evqc (Conventional Coating) = 4,500 * (1 - 80/100) * (1 - [95/100 * 100/100])
= 180 lb VOC/year from conventional coating
usage
Since the UV coating in this example is applied after the dryer, VOC emissions from the
coating are calculated using equation 15.4-2.
Evqc (UV Coating) = V * (1 - R/100)
V = (1,500 * 1/100) = 15 lb
Evqc (UV Coating) = 15 * (1 - 0/100)
= 15 lb VOC/year from hand wash usage
EvOC (Total, Coating) = EyOC (Conventional Coating) + Evoc (UV
Coating)
= 180 lb/year VOC +15 lb/year VOC
= 195 lb VOC/year
Note: In this example, the coating is 0% HAP by weight, therefore, no HAPs are emitted from
the coating.
Facility Totals
Total HAP an d VOC emissions for this facility are then calculated using equation 15.4-3.
F — F H~ F H~F + p
total ink fountain solutions cleaning solutions coating
Evoc = 1,800 lb VOC/year + 337 lb VOC /year + 5,374 lb VOC/year + 195 lb
VOC/year
7,706 lb VOC/year
EttAP = 0 lb HAP/year + 337 lb HAP/year + 206 lb HAP year + 0 lb HAP/year
543 lb HAP/year
El IP Volume II
15.4-13
-------
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
5/08/02
Example 15.4-2
A flexography printing operation reported using a thermal incinerator with a 95% control
device efficiency. The press is in an enclosure that has 70% capture efficiency, based on EPA
Method 204 test results. The facility reported following annual material usage, and associated
VOC content, based on EPA Method 24 test results:
Material
Annual Use (lb)
VOC Content (by weight)
Ink
30,000
18%
Dilution Solvent
15,000
25%
Cleaning Solution
9,000
40%
The plant engineer calculated this facility's emissions as follows, using equations 15.4-1
through 15.4-3:
E-voc (Ink)
U * (M/100) * (l-R/100) * [1 - (K/100 * J/100)]
(30,000 lb/year) * (18/100) * (1-0/100) * [1 - (95/100 *
70/100)]
1,809 lb VOC/year
EvOC (Dilution Solvent)
G * C * (l-R/100) * [1 - (K/100 * J/100)]
(15,000 lb/year) * (25/100) * (1-0/100) * [1 - (95/100 *
70/100)]
1,256 lb VOC/year
EvOC (Cleaning Solution)
= G * C * (l-R/100) * [1 - (K/100 * J/100)]
= (9,000 lb/year) * (40/100) * (1-50/100) * [1 - (95/100 *
70/100)]
= 603 lb VOC/year
Ey
oc
= F + F + F
ink dilution solvents cleaning solutions
= 1,809 lb/year + 1,256 lb/year + 603 lb/year
= 3,668 lb/year
Note: Calculation of emissions involving numerous inks, coatings, solvents, and other
materials will require separate calculations such as presented here for each of the numerous
inks being used with the different formulas at a given facility.
15.4-14
El IP Volume II
-------
05/08/02
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
Example 15.4-3
A gravure printing operation reported using a carbon adsorber on its ink press with a 75%
overall control efficiency, based on test results from a liquid-liquid mass balance (i.e., K/100 *
J/100 * 0.75). The facility reported following annual material usage, and associated VOC
content, based on EPA Method 24a test results:
Material
Annual Use
Unit
VOC Content (% by weight or lb/gal)
Ink
75,000
lb
12%
Dilution Solvent
37,500
gal
0.256 lb/gal
Cleaning Solution
22,500
gal
0.44 lb/gal
Coating
45,000
lb
10%
The plant engineer calculated this facility's emissions as follows, using equations 15.4-1
through 15.4-3:
¦"VOC
(Ink)
Evoc (Dilution Solvent) =
Eyoc (Cleaning Solution) =
U * (M/100) * (l-R/100) * [1 - (K/100 * J/100)]
(75,000 lb/year) * (12/100) * (1 - 0/100) * [1 - (0.75])
2,250 lb VOC/year
G * C * (l-R/100) * [1 - (K/100 * J/100)]
(37,500) * (0.256) * (1-0/100) * [1 - (0.75)]
2,400 lb VOC/year
G* C * (1 -R/100)
(22,500) * (0.44) * (1 - 0/100)
9,900 lb VOC/year
U * (M/100) * (1 - R/100)
(45,000 lb/year) * (10/100) * (1-0/100)
4,500 lb VOC/year
F + F + F + F
ink dilution solvents cleaning solutions coating
= 2,250 lb/year + 2,400 lb/year + 9,900 lb/year
4,500 lb/year
= 19,050 lb/year
Note: Calculation of emissions involving numerous inks, coatings, solvents, and other
materials will require separate calculations such as presented here for each of the numerous
inks being used with the different formulas at a given facility.
Evoc (Coating)
¦"VOC
El IP Volume II
15.4-15
-------
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
5/08/02
Example 15.4-4
A screen printing shop reported the following annual material usage:
Annual Use
VOC Content
HAP Content
iviateriai
(gal)
(lb/gal)
(lb/gal)
Ink
2,000
1.5
0
Cleaning Solution
9,375
0.32
Toluene, 0.16
Haze Remover
667
0.48
0
Adhesive
312.5
3
1,1,1-Trichloroethylene, 0.2
The plant engineer calculated this facility's emissions as follows, using equations 15.4-2 and
15.4-3:
E-voc (Ink)
G* (1 -R/100)
(2,000) * (1.5) * (1 -0/100)
3,000 lb VOC/year
Eyoc (Cleaning Solution)
G* C * (1 - R/100)
(9,375) * (0.32) * (1-0/100)
3,000 lb VOC/year
Ehap (Cleaning Solution)
G* C * (1 - R/100)
(9,375) * (0.16) * (1-0/100)
1,500 lb HAP/year
Evoc (Haze Remover)
G* C * (1 - R/100)
(667) * (0.48) * (1 - 0/100)
320 lb VOC/year
Evoc (Adhesive)
G* C * (1 - R/100)
(312.5) * (3) * (1 -0/100)
937.5 lb VOC/year
Ehap (Adhesive)
G* C * (1 - R/100)
(312.5) * (0.2) * (1 -0/100)
62.5 lb HAP/year
15.4-16
El IP Volume II
-------
05/08/02
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
Example 15.4-4 (Continued^)
p =p_i_p _|_p _i_p
total ink cleaning solutions coating/adhesive Other
Evqc = 3,000 lb VOC/year + 3,000 lb VOC/year + 320 lb VOC/year
+ 937.5 lb VOC/year
= 7257.5 lb VOC/year
Ejjap = 1,500 lb HAP/year + 62.5 lb HAP/year
= 1,562.5 lb HAP/year
Note: Calculation of emissions involving numerous inks, coatings, solvents, and other
materials will require separate calculations such as presented here for each of the numerous
inks being used with the different formulas at a given facility.
El IP Volume II
15.4-17
-------
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
5/08/02
Example 15.4-5
A print shop using a letterpress process reports the following material usage:
Material
Annual
Use (lb)
VOC Content
(by weight)
HAP Content
(by weight)
Ink
92,500
15%
0%
Cleaning Solution:
Concentrate
32,500
100%
Toluene 60%
Coating: Conventional
8,500
30%
0%
This facility uses no add-on control devices. It's cleaning solution has a vapor pressure of
less than 10 mm Hg at 20°C and rags are kept in a closed container. Therefore, a 50%
retention factor can be assumed for cleaning solutions. Letterpress inks and conventional
coatings are virtually identical to lithographic inks. Therefore, a 95% retention factor is
assumed for this non-heat set press. Emissions are calculated as follows:
Ink Emissions
VOC emissions are calculated using equations 15.4-1.
Evoc (Ink) = U * (M/100) * (1 - R/100)
= (92,500 lb/year) * (15/100) * (1-95/100)
= 694 lb/year VOC
Cleaning Solution Emissions
VOC/HAP emissions are calculated using equations 15.4-2.
EVoc (Cleaning Solution) = U * (M/100) * (1 - R/100)
= (32,000 lb/year) * (100/100) * (1-50/100)
= 16,0001b VOC/year
Ehap (Cleaning Solution) = U * (M/100) * (1 - R/100)
= (32,000 lb/year) * (60/100) * (1-50/100)
= 9,600 lb HAP/year
15.4-18
El IP Volume II
-------
05/08/02 CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
Example 15.4-5 (Continued^)
Coating Emissions
VOC emissions are calculated using equations 15.4-2.
Evoc (Coating) = U * (M/100) * (1 - R/100)
= (8,500 lb/year) * (30/100) * (1- 95/100)
= 128 lb VOC/year
Facility Totals
Total HAP and VOC emissions for this facility are then calculated using equation 15.4-5.
p = p _i_ p _|_ p
total ink cleaning solutions coating adhesives
Evoc = 694 lb VOC/year + 16,000 lb VOC/year + 128 lb VOC/year
= 16,8221b VOC/year
E^ = 0 lb HAP/year + 9,600 lb HAP/year + 0 lb HAP/year
= 9,600 lb HAP/year
Note: Calculation of emissions involving numerous inks, coatings, solvents, and other
materials will require separate calculations such as presented here for each of the numerous
inks being used with the different formulas at a given facility.
El IP Volume II
15.4-19
-------
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
5/08/02
This page is intentionally left blank.
15.4-20 El IP Volume
-------
5
Alternative Methods for
Estimating Emissions
Where there is a choice of methods, material balance is generally preferred over an emission
factor unless the assumptions needed to perform a material balance have a high degree of
uncertainty and/or the emission factor is site-specific.
For the printing and graphic arts industry, source testing and emission factors are the alternative
methods for estimating VOC and HAP emissions.
5.1 Emissions Calculations Using Emission Factors
Emission factors can be used when site-specific monitoring data are unavailable. The EPA
maintains AP-42 (EPA, 1995c), a compilation of approved emission factors for criteria pollutants
and HAP. Another comprehensive source of available air pollutant emission factors from
numerous sources is the FIRE system (EPA, 1999a). Refer to Chapter 1, Introduction to Point
Source Emission Inventory Development, of this series for a complete discussion of available
information sources for locating, developing, and using emission factors as an estimation
technique.
The basic equation used to calculate emissions using an emission factor is shown in
Equation 15.5-1.
Ex = EFX * AF (15.5-1)
El IP Volume II
15.5-1
-------
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
5/08/02
Where:
Ex = Emissions of pollutant x
EFX = Emission factor of pollutant x
AF = Activity factor
Example 15.5-1 shows how VOC emissions may be calculated for a printing operation.
Example 15.5-1
A publication gravure printing press uses 45,000 gallons of ink annually. A carbon adsorber
with an overall control efficiency of 85 percent is currently in place at the facility.
Table 4.9.2-1 from AP-42 gives us an emission factor of 1.86 lb total VOC/gallon of ink
used, including the 85% control efficiency (12.40 lb VOC/gallon was the uncontrolled
emission factor presented in this table). The VOC emissions were calculated as follows:
Evoc — EFvoc * AF
= 1.86 lb/gal * 45,000 gallons of ink used/year
= 83,700 lb VOC/year
15.5-2
El IP Volume II
-------
6
Quality Assurance/Quality
Control
The consistent use of standardized methods and procedures is essential in the compilation of
reliable emission inventories. Quality assurance (QA) and quality control (QC) of an
inventory is accomplished through a set of procedures that ensure the quality and reliability
of data collection and analysis. These procedures include the use of appropriate emission
estimation techniques, applicable and reasonable assumptions, accuracy/logic checks of
computer models, checks of calculations, and data reliability checks. Volume VI of this
series, Quality Assurance Procedures, describes additional QA/QC methods and tools for
performing these procedures.
Volume II, Chapter 1, Introduction to Point Source Emission Inventory Development, presents
recommended standard procedures to follow to ensure that the reported inventory data are
complete and accurate. Chapter 1 discusses preparation of a QA plan, development and use
of QC checklists, and QA/QC procedures for specific emission estimation methods (e.g.,
emission factors). If further guidance is needed, federal, state, and local agencies should be
able to provide guidance regarding specific reporting requirements.
Another useful document, "Guidelines for Determining Capture Efficiency," can be found at
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/emc/guidlnd.html (EPA, 1995d). This document presents details of
the EPA approved test methods for determining capture efficiency, which is critical to
determining the effectiveness of VOC emission control systems. The document also
provides the data quality objective (DQO) and lower confidence limit (LCL) approaches for
validating alternative test methods. The DQO and LCL methods are sets of approval criteria
which, when met by the data obtained with any given protocol of process parameter
measurement procedures, may be used to determine capture efficiency (CE). EPA Method
204 and 204a-f (EPA, 1997) also document procedures using Permanent Total Enclosures
and Temporary Total Enclosures to determine capture efficiency.
6.1 QA/QC for Using Material Balance
The material balance method for estimating emissions may use various approaches; the
QA/QC considerations will also vary and may be specific to an approach. Generally, the
fates of all materials of interest are identified, and then the quantity of material allocated to
each fate determined. Identifying these fates, such as material contained in a product or
material leaving the process in the wastewater, is usually straightforward. However,
El IP Volume II
15.6-1
-------
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
5/08/02
estimating the amount of material allocated to each fate may be complicated and is the prime
QA/QC consideration in using the material balance approach. Amounts obtained by direct
measurement are more accurate and produce emission estimates of higher quality than those
obtained by engineering or theoretical calculations. QA/QC of an emissions estimate
developed from a material balance approach should include a thorough check of all
assumptions and calculations. Also, a reality check of the estimate in the context of the
overall process is recommended.
6.2 QA/QC for Using Emission Factors
The use of emission factors is straightforward when the relationship between process data and
emissions is direct and relatively uncomplicated. When using emission factors, the user should
be aware of the quality indicator associated with the value. Emission factors published within
EPA documents and electronic tools have a quality rating applied to them. The lower the
quality rating, the more likely that a given emission factor may not be representative of the
source type. The reliability and uncertainty of using emission factors as an emission estimation
technique are discussed in detail in the QA/QC section of Chapter 1 of this volume.
6.3 QA/QC for Using Source Test Data
Data collected via source testing must meet quality objectives. Source test data must be reviewed
to ensure that the test was conducted under normal operating conditions, or under maximum
operating conditions in some states, and that the results were generated according to an acceptable
method for each pollutant of interest. Calculation and interpretation of accuracy for source testing
methods are described in detail in the Quality Assurance Handbook for Air Pollution
Measurements Systems: Volume III. Stationary Source Specific Methods (Interim Edition).
The acceptance criteria, limits, and values for each control parameter associated with manual
sampling methods, such as dry gas meter calibration, are summarized in Chapter 1 of this volume.
The magnitudes of concentration and emission rate errors caused by a +10 percent error in various
types of measurements (e.g., temperature) are also presented in Chapter 1 of this volume.
15.6-2
El IP Volume II
-------
7
Data Coding Procedures
This section describes the methods and codes available for characterizing emission sources at
graphic arts facilities. Consistent categorization and coding will result in greater uniformity
among inventories. In addition, the procedures described here will assist the reader who is
preparing data for input to the Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS) or a similar
database management system. The use of Source Classification Codes (SCCs) provided in
Table 15.7-1 is recommended for describing various printing operations. Refer to the
Clearinghouse for Inventories and Emission Factors (CHIEF) website for a complete listing of
SCCs for printing and graphic arts facilities.
7.1 Source Classification Codes
SCCs for various components of a printing and graphic art operation are presented in
Table 15.7-1. These include the following:
• Lithography;
• Flexography;
• Gravure;
• Letterpress; and
• Screen Printing.
7.2 AIRS Control Device Codes
Control device codes applicable to printing and graphic art operations are presented in
Table 15.7-2. These should be used to enter the type of applicable emission control device into
the AIRS Facility Subsystem (AFS). The "099" control code may be used for miscellaneous
control devices that do not have a unique identification code.
Note: At the time of publication, these control device codes were under review by the EPA. The
reader should consult the EPA for the most current list of codes.
El IP Volume II
15.7-1
-------
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
5/08/02
Table 1 5.7-1
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES FOR PRINTING PROCESSES
Printing Process
Process Description
see
Units
Lithographic: SIC
2752
Lithographic: 2752
4-05-004-01
Tons Ink
Lithographic: 2752
4-05-004-11
Tons Solvent in Ink
Lithographic: 2752
4-05-004-12
Gallons Ink
Lithographic: Isopropyl Alcohol Cleanup
4-05-004-13
Tons Solvent Used
Flexographic: Propyl Alcohol Cleanup
4-05-004-14
Tons Solvent Consumed
Offset Lithography: Dampening Solution
with Alcohol Substitute
4-05-004-15
Tons of Substitute
Offset Lithography: Dampening Solution
with High Solvent Content
4-05-004-16
Tons of Pure Solvent
Offset Lithography: Cleaning Solution:
Water-based
4-05-004-17
Tons Used
Offset Lithography: Dampening Solution
with Isopropyl Alcohol
4-05-004-18
Tons Alcohol Used
Offset Lithography: Heatset Ink Mixing
4-05-004-21
Tons Solvent in Ink
Offset Lithography: Heatset Solvent
Storage
4-05-004-22
Tons Solvent Stored
Offset Lithography: Nonheated
Lithographic Inks
4-05-004-31
Tons Ink
Offset Lithography: Nonheated
Lithographic Inks
4-05-004-32
Tons Solvent in Ink
Offset Lithography: Nonheated
Lithographic Inks
4-05-004-33
Gallons Ink
Flexographic: SIC
2759
Printing: Flexographic
4-05-003-01
Tons Ink
Ink Thinning Solvent (Carbitol)
4-05-003-02
Tons Solvent Added
Ink Thinning Solvent (Cellosolve)
4-05-003-03
Tons Solvent Added
15.7-2
El IP Volume II
-------
05/08/02
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
Table 1 5.7-1
(Continued)
Printing Process
Process Description
see
Units
Flexographic: SIC
Ink Thinning Solvent (Ethyl Alcohol)
4-05-003-04
Tons Solvent Added
2759 (Cont'd)
Ink Thinning Solvent (Isopropyl Alcohol)
4-05-003-05
Tons Solvent Added
Ink Thinning Solvent (n-Propyl Alcohol)
4-05-003-06
Tons Solvent Added
Ink Thinning Solvent (Naphtha)
4-05-003-07
Tons Solvent Added
Printing: Flexographic
4-05-003-11
Tons Solvent in Ink
Printing: Flexographic
4-05-003-12
Gallons Ink
Printing: Flexographic: Propyl Alcohol
Cleanup
4-05-003-14
Tons Solvent Consumed
Flexographic: Steam: Water-based
4-05-003-15
Tons Ink
Flexographic: Steam: Water-based
4-05-003-16
Tons Solvent in Ink
Flexographic: Steam: Water-based
4-05-003-17
Tons Solvent Stored
Flexographic: Steam: Water-based in Ink
4-05-003-18
Tons Solvent in Ink
Flexographic: Steam: Water-based Ink
Storage
4-05-003-19
Tons Solvent Stored
Gravure: SIC 2754
Gravure: 2754
4-05-005-01
Tons Ink
Ink Thinning Solvent: Dimethylformamide
4-05-005-02
Tons Solvent Added
Ink Thinning Solvent: Ethyl Acetate
4-05-005-03
Tons Solvent Added
Ink Thinning Solvent: Methyl Ethyl Ketone
4-05-005-06
Tons Solvent Added
Ink Thinning Solvent: Methyl Isobutyl
Ketone
4-05-005-07
Tons Solvent Added
Ink Thinning Solvent: Toluene
4-05-005-10
Tons Solvent Added
Gravure: 2754
4-05-005-11
Tons Solvent in Ink
Gravure: 2754
4-05-005-12
Gallons Ink
Gravure: 2754
4-05-005-13
Gallons Ink
Gravure: Cleanup Solvent
4-05-005-14
Tons Solvent Consumed
El IP Volume II
15.7-3
-------
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
5/08/02
Table 1 5.7-1
(Continued)
Printing Process
Process Description
see
Units
Gravure: SIC 2754
(Cont'd)
Other Not Classified
4-05-005-97
Pounds Liquid Ink
Consumed
Ink Thinning Solvent: Other Not Specified
4-05-005-98
1000 Gallons Solvent
Ink Thinning Solvent: Other Not Specified
4-05-005-99
Tons Solvent Added
Screen Printing: SIC
2759
Screen Printing
4-05-008-01
Tons Ink
Cleaning Rags
4-05-008-02
Tons Solvent Used
Screen Printing
4-05-008-11
Tons Solvent in Ink
Screen Printing
4-05-008-12
Gallons Ink
Letterpress:
SIC 2751
Letter Press
4-05-002-01
Tons Ink
Ink Thinning Solvent (Kerosene)
4-05-002-02
Tons Solvent Added
Ink Thinning Solvents (Mineral Solvents)
4-05-002-03
Tons Solvent Added
Letter Press
4-05-002-11
Tons Solvent in Ink
Printing: Letter Press
4-05-002-12
Gallons Ink
Letterpress: Cleaning Solution
4-05-002-15
Tons Solvent Consumed
General Processes
Dryer
4-05-001-01
Tons Solvent in Ink
Dryer
4-05-001-99
Gallons Ink
Ink Mixing
4-05-006-01
Tons Solvent in Ink
Solvent Storage
4-05-007-01
Tons Solvent Stored
Specify in Comments Field
4-05-888-01
Process Unit-Year
Specify in Comments Field
4-05-888-02
Process Unit-Year
Specify in Comments Field
4-05-888-03
Process Unit-Year
Specify in Comments Field
4-05-888-04
Process Unit-Year
Specify in Comments Field
4-05-888-05
Process Unit-Year
15.7-4
El IP Volume II
-------
05/08/02
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
Table 1 5.7-2
AIRS CONTROL DEVICE CODES FOR GRAPHIC ARTS
PROCESSES3
Control Device
Code
Catalytic Afterburner
019
Catalytic Afterburner with Heat Exchanger
020
Direct Flame Afterburner
021
Direct Flame Afterburner with Heat Exchanger
022
Vapor Recovery Systems (Including Condensers,Hooding,Other Enclosures)
047
Activated Carbon Adsorption
048
Process Enclosed
054
Miscellaneous Control Device
099
"At the time of publication, these control device codes were under review by the EPA. The reader should consult the
EPA for the most current list of codes.
El IP Volume II
15.7-5
-------
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
5/08/02
This page is intentionally left blank.
15.7-6 El IP Volume
-------
8
References
EIIP. 2000. How to Incorporate The Effects of Air Pollution Control Device Efficiencies and
Malfunctions Into Emission Inventory Estimates. Chapter 12 in EIIP Volume II. Point Sources
Preferred and Alternative Methods. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards. Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. (EIIP Internet address:
http://www.epa.gov.ttnchiel/eiip).
EIIP. 1996a. Volume III, Chapter 7, Graphic Arts. United States Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, EPA-454/R-97-004, Research Triangle
Park, North Carolina.
EIIP. 1996b. Volume II, Chapter 2, ['referred and Alternative Methods/or Estimating Air
Emissions from Boilers. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, EPA-454/R-97-004, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
EPA. 2000. US EPA Emissions Measurement Center - CFR Promulgated Test Methods. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality and Planning Standards, Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina, http://www.epa.gov/ttn/emc/promgate.html.
EPA. 1999a. Factor Information Retrieval (FIRE 6.22) Data System. United States
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina.
EPA. 1999b. Air Pollution Technology Fact Sheet, Thermal Incinerator. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality and Planning Standards, Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina. http://www.epa.gOv/ttn/catc/products.html#aptecfacts.
EPA. 1999c. Air Pollution Technology Fact Sheet, Incinerator - Regenerative Type. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality and Planning Standards, Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina. http://www.epa.gOv/ttn/catc/products.html#aptecfacts.
EPA. 1999d. Air Pollution Technology Fact Sheet, Catalytic Incinerator. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality and Planning Standards, Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina. http://www.epa.gOv/ttn/catc/products.html#aptecfacts.
EPA. 1999e. Technical Bulletin, Choosing an Adsorption System for VOC: Carbon, Zeolite, or
Polymers? EPA-456/F-99-004. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality
EIIP Volume II
15.8-1
-------
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
5/08/02
and Planning Standards, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina,
http: //www. epa.gov/ttncatc 1 /ci ca/ other6_e. html.
EPA. 1999f. Printers'Plain Language Workbook. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Reinvention, Washington, D.C. http://www.epa.gov/ooaujeag/sectors/pdf/lngwkbk.pdf.
EPA. 1998a. EPA Office of Compliance Sector Notebook Data Refresh - 1998: Printing. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Compliance, EPA/310-R-97-010, Washington, D.C.
EPA. 1998b. Potential to Emit (PTE) Guidance for Specific Source Categories. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality and Planning Standards, Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina, http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t5pgm.html
EPA. 1996a. Background Information Document (BID) for Final NESHAP for Printing and
Publishing. EPA-453/R-96-005b. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality
and Planning Standards, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/uatw/print/prbid2.pdf.
EPA. 1996b. National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants; Final Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutant Emissions from the Printing and Publishing Industry. 40 CFR Parts 9
and 63. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality and Planning Standards,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, http://www.epa.gov/ttn/uatw/print/fr30my96.pdf.
EPA. 1995a. EPA Office of Compliance Sector Notebook Project: Profile of the Printing and
Publishing Industry. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Compliance,
EPA/310-R-95-014, Washington, D.C.
EPA. 1995b. Control Of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions From Offset Lithographic
Printing, Guideline Series {Draft}. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, EPA/453-D-95-001, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
EPA. 1995c. Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors. Volume I: Stationary Point and
Area Sources, Fifth Edition, AP-42. Section 9.1, General Graphic Printing. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards. Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina.
EPA. 1995d. Guidelines for Determining Capture Efficiency. United States Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, EMC G-D-035, Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina.
EPA. 1995e. Background Information Document (BID) for Proposed NESHAP for Printing and
Publishing. EPA-453/R-95-002a. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality
15.8-2
El IP Volume II
-------
05/08/02
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
and Planning Standards, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/uatw/print/prpbbid.pdf.
EPA. 1994a. Alternative Control Techniques Document: Offset Lithographic Printing. United
States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards,
EPA-453/R-94-054, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
EPA. 1994b. Printing Industry and Use Cluster Profile. United States Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, EPA-744/R-94-003, Washington, D.C.
El IP Volume II
15.8-3
-------
CHAPTER 1 5 - PRINTING AND GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY
5/08/02
This page is intentionally left blank.
15.8-4 El IP Volume
------- |