Regulatory Impact Analysis Of The Plywood And Composite Wood Products NESHAP, Draft Report.
EPA is proposing a rule to reduce hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions from existing and new plywood and composite wood products facilities that are major sources. The major HAPs whose emissions will be reduced are formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acrolein, methanol, phenol, and propionaldehyde. The proposed rule will also lead to emission reductions of other pollutants such as VOCs, PM10, CO, and emission increases in NOx and SO2 to the application of incineration-based controls.
Compliance costs, which include the cost of control and monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting requirements are estimated at $142 million (1998). Economic impacts associated with these costs include price increases nationally of 0.9 to 2.5 percent for products affected by this rule, and a reduction in output of only 0.1 to 0.7 percent nationally for the affected industries. An analysis of small business impacts shows that there are 17 small firms affected, with 10 of them having annual compliance costs of 1 percent or greater than their sales, and 3 of these having annual compliance costs of 3 percent or greater than their sales. The Agency that there is no significant impact on a substantial number of small entities associated with this rule.
The EPA is able to monetize only a part of the benefits, positive and negative, of the proposed rule. The EPA's primary estimate of benefits associated with the rule is $8.5 million (1998 dollars), and the estimate of benefits associated with the value of life-years approach instead of the Agency's preferred value of statistical life approach is $5.3 million (1998 dollars). The primary estimate reflects the PM and NOx emissions increases and decreases. The Agency is unable to monetize the benefits from the HAP and CO emissions reductions due to lack of credible data for assigning benefits values to those reductions. In addition, the Agency is unable to monetize the disbenefits from the SO2 emission reduction due to limitations in available transfer values, concentration-response functions, and air quality and exposure models.
This document has been revised (see A.2002.14). The newer document contains an estimate of total social cost and removes all of the benefits analysis.
|Office of Air and Radiation|
|Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards|
|Emission Standards Division|
|Sorrels, Larry; Kissell, Mary Tom|
|Economic Impact Assessment|