Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Controlling Hydrocarbon Emissions from Tank Vessel ·oacling Committee on Control and Recovery of Hydrocarbon Vapors from Ships and Barges Marine Board Commission on Engineering and Technical Systems National Research Council NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS Washington, D.C. 1987
the Governing NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by ~ Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the Nation- al Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the panel responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance. This report has been reviewed by a group other than the authors according to procedures approved by a Report Review Committee consisting of members of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self- perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and techno- logy and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a man- date that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Frank Press is president of the National Academy of Sciences. '''The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organiza- tion of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recog- nises the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Robert M. White is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appro- priate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Samuel O. Thier is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1°16 to associate the broad community of science and tech- nology with the Academy's purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operat- ing agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council i administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Frank Press and Dr. Robert M. White are chairman and vice-chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council. The program described in this report is supported by Cooperative Agreement No. 14-12-0001-30301 between the Minerals Management of the U.S. Department of Interior and the National Academv of s Service Sciences. Limited copies are available from: Marine Board Commission on Engineering and Technical Systems National Research Council 2101 Constitution Avenue Washington, DC 20418 Printed in the United States of America
COMMITTEE ON CONTROL AND RECOVERY OF HYDROCARBON VAPORS FROM SHIPS AND BARGES WILLIAM M. BENKERT, Chairman, U. S. Coast Guard (-retired), McLean, Virginia SARI ATALLAH, Risk and Industrial Safety Consultants, Illinois Inc ., ALLEN ELI BELL, Texas Air Control Board, Austin, Texas ROBERT M. FREEMAN, Exxon Shipping Company, Houston, Texas ROBERT J. KLETT, Chevron Research Company, Richmond, California HENRY S MARCUS, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge ARTHUR McKENZIE, Tanker Advisory Center, Inc., New York New York CONSTANTINO J. SANTAVICCA, The Ohio River Company, Cincinnati RICHARD C. SCHWING, General Motors Research Laboratories Michigan Staff CHARLES A . BOOKMAN, Director AURORE BLECK, Senior Secretary DUNCAN M. BROWN, Editorial Consultant iii Des Plaines, , Warren
MARINE BOARD WILLIAM C. WEBSTER, Chairman, University of California, Berkeley SIDNEY WALLACE, Vice-Chairman, U. S . Coast Guard (retired), Reston, Virginia ROGER D. ANDERSON, Cox's Wholesale Seafood, Inc., Tampa, Florida KENNETH A. BLENKARN, NAE, Amoco Oil Co. (retired), Tulsa, Oklahoma DONALD F. BOESCH, Louisiana Universities Marine Consortium, Chauvin, Louisiana C. RUSSELL BRYAN, U.S. Navy (retired), St. Leonard, Maryland F. PAT DUNN, Shell Oil Company, Houston, Texas JOHN HALKYARD, Offshore Technology Corporation, Escondido, California EUGENE H. HARLOW, Soros Associates Consulting Engineers, New York, New York KENNETH S. KAMLET, A.T. Kearney, Inc., Alexandria, Virginia DON E. KASH, University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma DANA R. KESTER, University of Rhode Island, Kingston, Rhode Island WARREN LEBACK, Puerto Rico Marine Management, Inc., Elizabeth, New Jersey EUGENE K. PENTIMONTI, American President Lines, Ltd., Oakland, California ERNEST L. PERRY, Port of Los Angeles (retired), Sun City, Arizona RICHARD J. SEYMOUR, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, La Jolla, California RICHARD T. SOPER, American Bureau of Shipping, Paramus, New Jersey BRIAN J. WATT, Consulting Engineer, Kingston, Texas Staff CHARLES A. BOOKMAN, Director DONALD W. PERKINS, Associate Director RICHARD W. RUMKE, Senior Staff Officer (retired, 1987) CELIA Y. CHEN, Staff Officer C. LINCOLN CRANE, Staff Officer DORIS C. HOLMES, Administrative Associate JOYCE B. SOMERVILLE, Administrative Secretary AURORE BLECK, Senior Secretary iv
PREFACE Several states are considering placing controls on vapor emissions from the loading and ballasting of tankships and barges carrying vola- tile organic compounds, mainly hydrocarbons. The object is to attain federal standards for ambient air concentrations of ozone under the National Ambient Air Quality Standards administered by the U.S. Environ- mental Protection Agency (EPA). Hydrocarbon vapors contribute to ozone formation in the lower atmosphere, which triggers atmospheric phenomena (smog) that exacerbate lung conditions and related health problems in the general populace. Controls would require loading of cargo and ballasting in such a manner that vapors could be piped ashore, for disposal or recovery, or retained aboard. The U.S. Coast Guard and industry have identified a number of safety and operational concerns. Safety concerns include the risk of fire and explosion associated with handling vapors and the dangers and accompanying risks associated with overloading and spills. Operational concerns include the need for perhaps costly modifications to vessels and loading terminals; better qualification, training, and management of personnel; and improved operational controls to ensure safety. Another potential problem is the possibility that regulations in different locations could require equipment and procedures that are incompatible with one another. The Coast Guard, responsible for the safety of waterborne commerce, requested that the National Research Council (NRC) conduct an assessment to provide a sound technical basis for any contemplated state, federal, and industry action. Accordingly, the NRC's Commission on Engineering and Technical Systems (CETS) convened the Committee on Control and Recovery of Hydrocarbon Vapors from Ships and Barges. Committee members were selected with regard for the expertise necessary for the assess- ment, and to achieve a balance of experience and viewpoints. (Biographi- cal information is presented in Appendix A.) The principle guiding the constitution of the committee and its work, consistent with NRC policy, was not to exclude the bias that might accompany expertise vital to the study, but to seek balance and fair treatment. The committee operated under the auspices of the Marine Board, a unit of GETS. The committee was asked to assess the technical, safety, and eco- nomic aspects of maritime hydrocarbon vapor control and recovery systems. It agreed to review the available and prospective technology for vapor control; to identify engineering, operational, and cost con v
cerns for vessels associated with control systems; to examine safety concerns and potential safety-related technical developments; and to develop alternative procedures for achieving adequate national standards and practices. The committee also agreed to recommend government and industry initiatives for ensuring safe operation of maritime hydrocarbon vapor control and recovery systems. Two topics were j udged to be outs ide the scope of the study: ( 1 ) emission controls on vessel engine exhausts, and (2) the justification for, or the environmental impacts of, air quality requirements. The committee began its study by surveying 62 state and local envi- ronmental or air pollution agencies to assemble an inventory of current and contemplated regulations affecting the control of hydrocarbon vapors from loading and ballasting vessels. A summary of its findings is pre- sented in Appendix B. The committee estimated the extent of these emissions nationally and their distribution by state and air quality region. Using detailed cargo data, the committee applied emission estimating models used by the EPA. The estimates showed that gasoline and crude oil account for the overwhelming majority of hydrocarbon vapor emissions from cargo loading; the committee therefore restricted its further investigations to these two cargoes. The committee visited several large gasoline and crude oil loading terminals to obtain a clear picture of operating procedures and tech- nology. The site visits included several to terminals using vapor recovery systems designed and installed for special cargoes. The committee developed hypothetical but realistic technical systems suitable for vapor control in situations typifying a variety of the affected industries' operations. To put the costs of compliance in perspective, the committee obtained independent estimates of the capital and operating costs of these vapor control systems. It also conducted a case study of two actual gasoline terminals in Texas to estimate the costs of vapor control on the basis of throughput. Committee meetings included site visits and briefings by government and industry representatives and others with an interest in the study topic. The committee also reviewed working papers prepared by its members and consultants. The conclusions and recommendations represent the committee's consensus. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The committee benefited from the interest and contributions of a number of individuals and organizations. Frits Wybenga and Kathy Barylski of the U. S. Coast Guard worked closely with the committee in all areas of its study, and provided much useful information on tank vessel operations and safety. David Markwordt of the EPA also parti- cipated actively in committee deliberations and contributed to the cost-effectiveness analysis. Early discussions with the American Institute of Merchant Shipping, American Petroleum Institute, American Waterways Operators (AWO), and Independent Liquid Terminals Association (ILTA) assisted the committee vi
in understanding the issues. John Prokop and Clement Mesavage of the ILTA helped the committee identify marine terminals that load gasoline or crude oil and the operators of the terminals. Joseph Farrell and Thomas Allegretti of the AWO organized a task force of their organiza- tion to assist the committee. This task force, chaired by Joseph H. Pyne of Hollywood Marine Company, provided supplemental analyses of the costs and operational implications of regulatory controls. These analyses were performed under contract to the AWO by Booz-Allen & Hamilton; John Wing and David St. Amand of the Transportation Division of Booz-Allen & Hamilton met with the committee to convey the results. Austin P. Olney and Laurie Frost of LeBoeuf, Lamb, Leiby & MacRae provided an analysis of statutory and case law (Appendix C). Cordell Haymon and other members of the Petroleum Services Corporation met with the committee to discuss the training and responsibilities of inland barge tanker personnel. Robert Conn of Shell Oil Company assisted in the understanding of closed loading operations. Philip Wolfe and David Noble of United Technical Design estimated the costs of sample vapor control systems at the direction of the committee. Several companies generously showed the committee their operations and discussed marine loading and vapor recovery operations. These included Exxon Baytown refinery and terminal, Houston, Texas; Bay Tank Terminal , Houston ; Chotin Marine Transportation, Baton Rouge, Louisiana; Hall - Buck Marine Services Company, Baton Rouge; Exxon Terminal, Baton Rouge; and Shell Terminal, Norco, Louisiana. While committee members serve as individuals, several experts from their organizations provided invaluable assistance. Thomas Grimmett of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology assisted with the analysis of tank vessel emissions. Harald Lyche of Chevron contributed to the description of vapor control technologies and assisted in other ways. Alex Opiela, Beverly Fowler, John Turney, and Freylon Coffey of the Texas Air Control Board also undertook substantial assignments at the direction of the committee. Jim Montenieri and Gary Wesiowski of IMO-Delaval, Inc., briefed the committee on closed-tank gauging systems. vii
