MEMORANDUM

Date:
March 12, 2013

Subject:
Costs and Emission Reductions for the Proposed Wool Fiberglass Manufacturing NESHAP - Area Sources
RTI Project No. 0213199.001.007
From:
Dave Reeves, RTI International

To:
Susan Fairchild
OAQPS/SPPD/NRG (D243-02)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, NC  27711

      The purpose of this memorandum is to present the estimated costs for the wool fiberglass manufacturing industry to comply with the proposed area source rule requirements. Major sources are regulated under Part 63 Subpart NNN; area sources will be proposed to be regulated under Part 63, Subpart NN.

      I. BACKGROUND

Based on the information provided by the wool fiberglass manufacturing industry and their primary trade association, North American Insulation Manufacturers Association (NAIMA), there are currently 30 facilities in the U.S. producing wool fiberglass. A letter from NAIMA dated June 8, 2011, stated "non-formaldehyde binder products represent the vast majority of the industry" and "all major sources have already converted or have announced plans to convert to non-phenol formaldehyde binders."  Based on a review of the current permit status of all sources and recent information provided by industry, there are 10 facilities that are major sources (subject to the existing MACT rule, subpart NNN) and 20 area source facilities (with a total of 54 glass-melting furnaces). However, five of the area source facilities with a total of eight furnaces meet the proposed applicability requirements in the proposed area source NESHAP (subpart NN); two of those facilities with a total of three furnaces will need to install control equipment to comply with the proposed standards.

Industry comments on the proposed major source rule amendments (76 FR 72770) stated that some of the major source facilities have already switched some or most of their lines to non-HAP binders and are working towards being redesignated as area sources and no longer subject to subpart NNN.  While industry sources also predicted before proposal of the RTR amendments to NNN that no major sources would exist by the end of 2012, we now find this to be an overstatement. Table 1 provides further information on wool fiberglass furnaces by furnace type and whether furnaces would currently be subject to the proposed area source rule under subpart NN. The following cost impacts are based on the estimated five facilities and eight gas-fired furnaces that would be subject to the proposed area source rule requirements.

      II. GAS-FIRED GLASS-MELTING FURNACES

Based on emissions test data received, we estimate that there are currently eight gas-fired furnaces located at five facilities that do not meet the proposed chromium compounds emission limit. We have estimated the add-on control cost impact for those facilities (three furnaces) based on the installation of a sodium hydroxide (NaOH) scrubber to remove chromium compounds from the furnace exhaust stream(s). The initial capital equipment cost was estimated to be $250,000 for each unit (scrubber) with a calculated annualized capital cost of $27,400 based on a 15-year equipment life and 7% interest rate. The annual operation and maintenance (O&M) costs were estimated to be $72,600 per unit. The combined annualized cost is $100,000 per scrubber. Some of the highest chromium compound emitting furnaces are located at major source facilities and those cost impacts will be attributed to subpart NNN.

The total cost for the five facilities to comply with the proposed area source rule is estimated to be $380,000 per year. Table 1 summarizes the above information and associated cost impacts.

      III.  COMPLIANCE TESTING COSTS
      Mr. Steffan Johnson of EPA's Measurement Policy Group provided the following cost estimates for compliance testing based on the test methods included in the final RTR amendments:

                                Emission Source

                                      HAP
                                     Test
                                    Method
                              Test Costs (2011 $)
                                  Test Freq-
                                     uency
                        Annualized Test Costs (2011 $)
                                    Comment

Glass- Melting Furnace

                         PM (surrogate for HAP metals)

                                       5

                                      and

                                      29
                                  (combined)

                                    $10,000

                                  Every year*

                                    $10,000

         *Reduced test frequency not included in this cost analysis.

                              Chromium Compounds

* The proposed rule allows owners/operators to reduce testing frequency for PM and chromium compounds from every year to once every three years if the initial and second compliance tests are each less than 75% of the proposed PM and chromium compounds emission limits.

      IV. EMISSION REDUCTIONS
Based on the recent test data provided by all of the facilities, the eight gas-fired furnaces emit approximately 65 pounds of chromium compounds annually. We identified three gas-fired furnaces with emission rates above the proposed emission limit and their associated annual emissions of 5, 25, and 35 pounds of chromium compounds, respectively. With the assumption that additional controls on the three furnaces will reduce chromium compound emissions to a level that would meet the proposed emission limit, approximately 53 pounds of chromium compounds would be reduced annually at area sources. These reductions come from the three gas fired furnaces at area sources currently emitting above the proposed emission limit of 6 x 10[-5] pounds chromium per ton glass pulled.  When these meet the proposed limit, we estimate an 80 percent reduction in chromium compounds would be achieved compared to current baseline emissions.

Table 1.  Summary of Costs for Wool Fiberglass Manufacturing Facilities to Comply with Proposed Area Source Rule

                            Glass-Melting Furnaces

                              Total Facility Cost

                             Annual O&M Costs
                                Cr Testing Cost

                     Cost Effectivnss ($ / lb Cr  reduced)

                                    Company
                                   Facility
                                   Location
                                 Source Type*
                                  Steel Shell
                               Electric Cold Top
                                    Air Gas
                                   Oxy Fuel
                                   Total #
                            # subject to area rule
                           Annual-ized Capital Cost*

                            Cr Redu-ctions (lb/yr)
                          Total Annual Facility Cost

                                       1
CertainTeed
Athens, GA
                                     Area

                                       1

                                       1
                                       2
                                       1
                                       0
                                       0
                                    10,000

                                    10,000
                                      NA
                                       2
CertainTeed
Chowchilla, CA
                                     Area

                                       1
                                       1
                                       1
                                       0
                                       0
                                    10,000

                                    10,000
                                      NA
                                       3
Guardian
Kingman, AZ
                                    SynMnr
                                       1

                                       1
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0

                                       0
                                       -
                                       4
Johns Manville
McPherson, KS
                                     Area
                                       5

                                       5
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0

                                       0
                                       -
                                       5
Johns Manville
Penbryn, NJ
                                     Area
                                       3

                                       3
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0

                                       0
                                       -
                                       6
Johns Manville
Richmond, IN
                                     Area

                                       1

                                       1
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0

                                       0
                                       -
                                       7
Johns Manville
Waterville, OH
                                     Area

                                       6

                                       6
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0

                                       0
                                       -
                                       8
Johns Manville
Willows, CA
                                     Area
                                       6

                                       6
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0

                                       0
                                       -
                                       9
Johns Manville
Winder, GA
                                     Area
                                       5

                                       5
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0

                                       0
                                       -
                                      10
Knauf
Lanett, AL
                                     Area

                                       2
                                       2
                                       2
                                    54,800
                                    145,200
                                    20,000
                                      22
                                    220,000
                                    10,000
                                      11
Knauf
Shasta Lake, CA
                                     Area

                                       1

                                       1
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0

                                       0
                                       -
                                      12
Owens-Corning
Delmar, NY
                                     Area

                                       2
                                       2
                                       2
                                    27,400
                                    72,600
                                    20,000
                                      31
                                    120,000
                                     3,800
                                      13
Owens-Corning
Eloy, AZ
                                     Area
                                       2

                                       2
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0

                                       0
                                       -
                                      14
Owens-Corning
Fairburn, GA
                                     Area

                                       3

                                       3
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0

                                       0
                                       -
                                      15
Owens-Corning
Kansas City, KS
                                     Area

                                       1

                                       2
                                       3
                                       2
                                       0
                                       0
                                    20,000

                                    20,000
                                      NA
                                      16
Owens-Corning
Mount Vernon, OH
                                     Area
                                       3

                                       3
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0

                                       0
                                       -
                                      17
Owens-Corning
Salt Lake City, UT
                                    SynMnr
                                       2

                                       2
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0

                                       0
                                       -
                                      18
Owens-Corning
Santa Clara, CA
                                     Area

                                       2

                                       2
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0

                                       0
                                       -
                                      19
Owens-Corning
Nephi, UT
                                    SynMnr
                                       2

                                       2
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0

                                       0
                                       -
                                      20
Owens-Corning
Lakeland, FL
                                     Area
                                       2

                                       2
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0

                                       0
                                       -

                                      21
CertainTeed
Kansas City, KS
                                     Major

                                       2
                                       2
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0

                                       0

                                      22
Guardian
Albion, MI
                                    Major
                                       4

                                       4
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0

                                       0

                                      23
Guardian
Inwood, WV
                                    Major
                                       2

                                       2
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0

                                       0

                                      24
Guardian
Mineral Wells, MS
                                     Major
                                       2

                                       2
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0

                                       0

                                      25
Guardian
Winnsboro, SC
                                     Major

                                       1

                                       1
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0

                                       0

                                      26
Johns Manville
Cleburne, TX
                                     Major
                                       2

                                       1
                                       3
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0

                                       0

                                      27
Johns Manville
Defiance, OH
                                     Major
                                       1
                                       3
                                       2

                                       6
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0

                                       0

                                      28
Knauf
Shelbyville, IN
                                     Major

                                       2

                                       2
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0

                                       0

                                      29
Owens-Corning
Newark, OH
                                     Major

                                       2
                                       2

                                       4
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0

                                       0

                                      30
Owens-Corning
Waxahachie, TX
                                     Major

                                       2

                                       1
                                       3
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0

                                       0

                                    Totals
                                      42
                                      25
                                       4
                                      12
                                      83
                                       8
                                    $82,200
                                   $217,800
                                    $80,000
                                      23
                                   $380,000
                                    $7,200

Table 1 notes: - Major sources will not be subject to the area source rule requirements and any associated control/compliance costs are not included.
      .        - JM Waterville, OH facility also has 40 pot & marble furnaces which are not included in this analysis.
               -  Annualized capital cost is based on interest rate of 7% and 15 year equipment life.
               -  Emissions reductions for Knauf Lanett are estimated to be 1 lb Cr/yr for furnace 1 and 21 lbs Cr/yr for furnace 2.


[Federal Register: December 14, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 240)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 71072-71073]
[DOCID:fr14de07-9]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 50 and 51

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0159; FRL-8506-6]
RIN 2060-AN40

Exceptional Events Rule; Notice of Action Denying Petition for
Reconsideration

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of Action Denying Petition for Reconsideration.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The EPA is providing notice that it has responded to a
petition for reconsideration of the Exceptional Events Rule (EER). On
March 22, 2007, EPA finalized a rule in the Federal Register to govern
the review and handling of air quality monitoring data influenced by
exceptional events. Section 319 of the Clean Air Act (CAA), as amended
by section 6013 of the Safe Accountable Flexible Efficient-
Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFE-TEA-LU) of 2005
required the Administrator to publish a proposed rule in the Federal
Register by March 1, 2006. Further, SAFE-TEA-LU required the EPA
Administrator to publish a final rule within 1 year of the proposal.
The final rule on the ``Treatment of Data Influenced by Exceptional
Events'' became effective on May 21, 2007. Subsequent to the
publication of this action, a petition for reconsideration from the
Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) was received by EPA on May 21,
2007, signed by John D. Walke; Director, Clean Air Program; Natural
Resources Defense Council; 1200 New York Avenue, NW., Suite 400,
Washington, DC 20005-3928. The EPA considered the petition and
supporting information along with information contained in the
rulemaking docket (Docket number EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0159-0163) in reaching
a decision on the petitions. EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson
denied the petition for reconsideration in a letter to the petitioner
dated November 5, 2007. The letter documents EPA's reasons for the
denial.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Padmini Singh, U.S. EPA, Office of
General Counsel, Mail Code 2344A, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20460, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. How Can I Get Copies of This Document and Other Related Information?

    This Federal Register notice, the petition for reconsideration, and
the letter denying the petition for reconsideration are available in
the docket that EPA established for the Exceptional Events Rule (docket
number EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0159). The table below identifies the petition
received by EPA, the date EPA received the petition, the document
identification number for the petition, the date of EPA's response, and
the document identification number for EPA's response. (Note that all
the document numbers listed in the table are in the form of ``EPA-HQ-
OAR-XXXX-XXXX-xxxx.'')

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      Date of        Petition:                     EPA response:
                   Petitioner                       petition to    Document No.     Date of EPA    Document No.
                                                        EPA          in docket       response        in docket
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Natural Resources Defense Council...............       5/21/2007            0163      11/05/2007            0175
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    All documents in the docket are listed on the http://www.regulations.gov
 Web site. Although listed in the index, some

information is not publicly available, e.g., confidential business
information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is
not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard
copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either
electronically through http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at

the EPA Docket Center (Air Docket), EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open
from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202)
566-1744 and the telephone number for the Air Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

II. Judicial Review

    Section 307(b)(1) of the CAA indicates which Federal Courts of
Appeal have venue for petitions for review of final actions by EPA.
This section provides, in part, that petitions for review must be filed
in the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit if: (i)
The agency action consists of ``nationally applicable regulations
promulgated, or final action taken, by the Administrator,'' or (ii)
such actions are locally or regionally applicable, if ``such action is
based on a determination of nationwide scope or effect and if in taking
such action the Administrator finds and publishes that such action is
based on such a determination.''
    The EPA has determined that its action denying the petition for
reconsideration is of nationwide scope and effect for purposes of
section 307(b)(1) because EPA previously found the Exceptional Events
Rule to be of nationwide scope and effect. Thus, any petitions for
review of the letters denying the petitions for reconsideration
described in this Notice must be filed in the Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit within 60 days from the date this Notice
is published in the Federal Register.

    Dated: December 10, 2007.
Robert J. Meyers,
Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Air and Radiation.
[FR Doc. E7-24242 Filed 12-13-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P