PRELIMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF CONTROLLING LEAD
EMISSIONS FROM STATIONARY SOURCES
DRAFT REPORT
July 6, 1976
EPA Contract No. 68-02-1399, Task No. 5
MRI Project No. 3925-C(5)
For
Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park
North Carolina 27711
Gary McCutchen
-------
PREFACE
This study was conducted under Task No. 5 of EPA Contract No.
68-02-1399, which is Midwest Research Institute's Project No. 3925-C(5).
This report covers all the principal activities that were under-
taken. These are summarized in Figure 1 (p» 4) which gives an overall view,
in block diagram form, of the approach used in performing the task work.
A survey was performed to acquire pertinent information on fugi-
tive lead emissions. The results of this survey showed that there was
no information available with which to perform dispersion modeling and
provide significant results. As a consequence, pertinent data had to be
assumed in order to carry out dispersion calculations of assumed represen-
tative plants of 16 different stationary-source operations.
A major effort as well as a significant accomplishment was the
development of specific dispersion modeling techniques that were used in
calculating lead concentrations for the 16 stationary-source operations:
primary lead smelter, secondary lead smelter, mining and milling of lead
ore, primary copper smelter, grey iron foundry, ferroalloy plant, gasoline
additive (TEL) plant, lead oxide plant, lead pigment manufacture, lead
acid battery plant, can manufacture, cable covering plant, type metal
operation, combustion of fossil fuel, waste oil combustion, and waste
crankcase oil combustion.
The results of the dispersion calculations are given in Section
IV. These expected ambient air concentrations of lead in the vicinity of
assumed typical plants (in most cases) are given in graphic and tabular
form.
ii
-------
The results of the review of available state implementation
plans show that there were no regulations on the control of fugitive lead
emissions. Also, there was very little information in these plans on lead
emissions from any type source. Also, federal ambient air quality standards
are not adequate on this subject.
Because of the lack of regulatory bases and the subjective nature
of the results of the dispersion calculations, it is recommended that the
Environmental Protection Agency should initiate a major program to control
new and existing sources under Section 111 of "The Glean Air Act."
The work on this program was led by Mr. Paul C. Constant, Jr.
Messrs. Emile Baladi and William Maxwell participated in acquisition of
information. Dr. Chatten Cowherd undertook the modeling and dispersion
calculations. He was assisted by Mrs. Christine Maxwell, Dr. Robert Hegarty,
and Mr. Dan Nelson.
Approved for:
MIDWEST RESEARCH INSTITUTE
L. J. Shannon, Assistant Director
Physical Sciences Division
July 6, 1976
iii
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PaR.e
List of Figures • vi
List of Tables viii
I. Introduction. . ... ........ 1
A. Background. 1
B. Putpose of Task 2
C. Overall Task Approach ....... 3
II. Acquisition of Information • 5
A* Type of Information .............. 5
1. Lead Processes of Concern ...... . 6
2. Sources of Emissions. ........ 6
3. Emission Source Data 6
4. Physical Aspects of a Plant 7
5. Climatology 7
6. Topography. 7
B. Sources 7
C. Results 8
1. EPA 8
2. EPA Contractors ...... 9
3. State Agencies. • • 9
4. Technical Groups and Associations 10
5. Universities 10
6. Industry 10
7. Open Literature 11
III. Data Processing Techniques • 11
A. Source Characterization and Dispersion Phenomena 11
1. "Tall" Stacks ..... 11
2. "Short" Stacks 11
3. Roof and Side Openings 11
4. Ground-Level Area Sources 12
B. Modeling Approaches • 13
1. Annual Average Concentrations ..... . 13
2. 24-Hr Maximum Concentrations 13
3. 30-Day and 90-Day Maximum Concentrations 15
iv
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Concluded)
IV* Results of Dispersion Calculations 18
V. Conclusions • 70
VI* Recommendations 72
VII. References 73
Appendix A - Summary Listing of Contacts ••• 74
Appendix B - Summary of Fugitive Lead Results of Studies Previously
Conducted • 78
Appendix C - Information From State Agencies ..... 81
Appendix D - Bibliography 91
Appendix E - Source Emission Data: Acquired and Assumed • 99
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
No. ' Title Page
1 Overall Task Approach 4
2 GDM Output - Primary Lead Smelter (Bunker Hill Company;
Kellogg, Idaho) 37
3 CDM Output - Primary Lead Smelter (ASARCO; Glover,
Missouri) 38
4 GDM Output - Secondary Lead Smelter 39
5 CDM Output - Mining and Milling of Lead Ore 40
6 CDM Output - Primary Copper Smelter 41
7 CDM Output - Grey Iron Foundry 42
8 CDM Output - Ferroalloy Plant 43
9 CDM Output - Gasoline Additive (TEL) Plant. ... 44
10 CDM Output - Lead Oxide Plant 45
11 CDM Output - Lead Pigment Manufacture 46
12 CDM Output - Lead Acid Battery Plant. 47
13 CDM Output - Can Manufacture. 48
14 CDM Output - Type Metal Operation 49
15 CDM Output - Waste Oil Combustion 50
16 CDM Output - Waste Crankcase Oil Combustion 51
17 PTMTP Output - Primary Lead Smelter (Bunker Hill Company;
Kellogg, Idaho) 52
18 PTMTP Output - Primary Lead Smelter (ASARCO; Glover,
Missouri) 53
19 PTMTP Output - Secondary Lead Smelter 54
20 PTMTP Output - Mining and Milling of Lead Ore 55
vi
-------
LIST OF FIGURES (Concluded)
No. Title Page
21 PTMTP Output - Primary Copper Smelter 56
22 PTMTP Output - Grey Iron Foundry. • . 57
23 PTMTP Output - Ferroalloy Plant 58
24 PTMTP Output - Gasoline Additive (TEL) Plant 59
25 PTMTP Output - Lead Oxide Plant 60
26 PTMTP Output - Lead Pigment Manufacture 61
27 PTMTP Output - Lead Acid Battery Plant 62
28 PTMTP Output - Can Manufacture. 63
29 PTMTP Output - Cable Covering Plant ............. 64
30 PTMTP Output - Type Metal Operation 65
31 PTMTP Output - Combustion of Fossil Fuel •• 66
32 PTMTP Output - Waste Oil Combustion 67
33 PTMTP Output - Waste Crankcase Oil Combustion 68
vii
-------
LIST OF TABLES (Concluded)
No. Title Page
22 Contributions to Maximum 24-Hr Ground-Level Concentrations. . 69
23 Concentrations for Selected Averaging Times .*.. 71
B-l Fugitive Emission of Lead From Bunker Hill Primary Smelter. . 80
IX
-------
I. INTRODUCTION
A. Background
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has been concerned
with the magnitude and the effect of emissions from stationary lead sources.
An investigation was undertaken by EPA on this subject. This investigation
was completed in September 1974, and it resulted in the recommendation
that the control of lead emissions from stationary sources rely upon exist-
ing State Implementation Plans (SIPs) for the control of particulate matter,
with the possible selected use of performance standards for new and exist-
ing sources under Section 111 of "The Clean Air Act." This recommendation
(Alternative II below) is one of three basic alternatives available for
the control of lead emissions from stationary sources:
I - Implement control through national, ambient air quality
standards, supplemented by standards of performance for new sources under
Section 111 of the Act.
II - Rely upon existing SIPs for the control of particulate
matter, with the possible selected use of performance standards for new
and existing sources under Section 111 of the Act.
Ill - Initiate a major program to control new and existing sources
under Section 111 of the Act.
The investigation undertaken by EPA did not sufficiently explore
the importance of specific lead standards from an enforcement point of
view and the magnitude and effect of fugitive lead emissions. As a conse-
quence, EPA recognized that further work should be done in the attempt
to obtain sufficient information upon which to base policy decisions.
1
-------
In June 1975, EPA gave Midwest Research Institute (MRI) a task
under Contract No. 68-02-1399 to undertake an investigation for pertinent
information that may be available.
B. Purpose of Task
MRI was to make a preliminary determination as to the relative
adverse and beneficial environmental impacts that could result from the
three alternative regulatory approaches to the control of lead emissions
from stationary sources. The principal objectives that define the scope
of MRI's task are as follows:
1. Estimate total fugitive particulate and lead emissions from
the stationary source operations listed in Table 1.
2. Determine, by means of dispersion modeling and the results
that are available from the trace-element analyses of particulate samples,
expected ambient air concentrations of lead in the vicinity of typical
plants for emissions under SIP control and under performance standard
control.
3. Delineate those source categories for which performance
standards and/or SIP regulations can be expected to reduce or maintain
ambient lead levels at or below 1, 2, and 4 ug/nr averaged over 90 days.
4. Assess the effectiveness or total effectiveness of existing
SIP regulations for total fugitive particulates in reducing lead emissions.
5. Estimate the potential for standards developed under Section
111 of the Act to further reduce lead emissions and the extent of such
reduction.
-------
6. Analyze the alternatives to show adverse or beneficial en-
vironmental impact.
TABLE 1
STATIONARY SOURCE OPERATIONS OF INTEREST
Primary Lead Smelter
Secondary Lead Smelter
Mining and Milling of Lead Ore
Primary Copper Smelter
Grey Iron Foundry
Ferroalloy Plant
Gasoline Additive (TEL) Plant
Lead Oxide Plant
Lead Pigment Manufacture
Lead Acid Battery Plant
Can Manufacture
Cable Covering Plant
Type Metal Operation
Combustion of Fossil Fuel
Waste Oil Combustion
Waste Crankcase Oil Combustion
C. Overall Task Approach
The overall approach that was taken in the performance of MRI's
task is shown in block diagram form in Figure 1. This approach comprised
four major phases of activity: (a) data acquisition (Blocks 1 to 10);
(b) data processing techniques (Blocks 11 to 16); (c) analysis of results
(Blocks 17 to 21); and (d) reporting (Blocks 22 to 26).
The acquisition of pertinent information is discussed in Section
II. The sources of information are identified; the means by which these
sources were investigated are given; the results of this phase of the
task are summarized.
-------
Ooto Set
• '5
r
itimoH of th«
OltmiQl for
rgnderdi Under
tction III of Act
o Further R»duc«
•ad Emiuiom. &
Kf«nt of Deduction
Source Col*goriM
•of ^KicP
-|
16
Eitimet** gf
Total Porttculafm
& Uad Emiuieni ,
fugirl** & tout*
AnficipatM Air
Conetfrtrotion of
Uod in Vicinity
of Typical Planti
fo* Eminiont
Under SIF Conrrol
or Ptrfbrfranct
Standard Control :
for tot* Fuoiilv*
& rVoctn Eminiofn
Ptrformonci
ifondordi and/or
SIP **aulot!om
Can deduce or
Maintain l«v»li
at or a«lo* 1.2
4 4 ttfl/m3
Avvrogcd O*«t
90 Doyi
AiM»m»nt of
E'feetivvntu of
lilting SIP
Regulation* for
To>al Part!culofM
'>n Reducing
Ltod Eminiom
Figure 1 - Overall Task Approach
4
-------
Source characterization and dispersion phenomena as well as
the modeling approaches that were used are discussed in Section III. The
results that were obtained from applying the models to the data collected
and assumptions that were made are given in Section IV. Sections V and VI
present conclusions and recommendations, respectively.
ii. AComsmoN OF INFORMATION
The initial steps taken in the acquisition of information were
to: (a) determine the type of information that would be required; (b)
determine the probable sources of this information; and (c) seek the in-
formation from these sources in an effective manner. Each of these steps
is discussed in Sections II-A through II-C, respectively. Section II-D
summarizes the results from the data acquisition phase (Blocks 1 to 10
of Figure 1) of the program.
A. Type of Information
The information sought was that which is needed to meet the
six major objectives of the program (see Section I-B). The information
needed can be categorized into the following six major areas.
1. Lead processes of concern,
2. Sources of emissions,
3. Emission source data,
4. Physical aspects of a plant,
5. Climatology, and
6. Topography.
Each of these areas are discussed below.
5
-------
1* Lead processes of concern; The processes for which pertinent
information was sought are the 16 processes identified in Table 1 (see
page 3).
2. Sources of emissions; The specific type of emissions of
concern was fugitive, lead* The primary sources of interest were stationary
sources of the processes* For example, in a lead acid battery plant, the
casting furnace is a fugitive source, whereas burning and paste mixer are
ducted sources. In a primary lead smelter, fugitive emission sources
could include ore stock piles, conveyor areas, and material transfer points
such as from a blast furnace to dross kettles.
Mobile sources were not a part of this study. Emissions from
automobiles, trucks, etc., definitely were not to be included. However,
fugitive emissions from process-related, nonstationary sources were of
interest if they were considered to have significant emissions. An example
of a nonstationary source of potential interest is the transport of mate-
rial such as ore in rail cars or trucks from a mine to a primary lead
smelter.
Since there were expected to be very few fugitive lead emis-
sion data, total particulate was sought from fugitive and ducted sources.
With this information, proportionality factors could be assumed to provide
fugitive lead emission information.
3. Emission source data; The principal information needed
included height of the source, emission rate, geometry of emissions,
exit area, and exit velocity and temperature.
6
-------
4. Physical aspects of a plant; Plant geometric aspects in-
cluded number of stacks, location of ducted fugitive sources, building
dimensions, plant layout, and location and area of stockpiles.
5. Climatology; The principal climatological data sought were
joint frequency function (stability wind rose), morning and afternoon
mixing heights, and mean atmospheric temperature.
6. Topography; The topographical aspect of the immediate plant
area and that contiguous to it is important in dispersion modeling. Other
interests about the area are the type of ground cover that exists, as
well as the physical location of the plant with respect to principal ground
cover and topological aspects.
B. Sources
Sources from which information was sought covered EPA, state
agencies, industry, technical groups or associations, and open litera-
ture. The general approach to EPA and state agencies was to send a letter
explaining our mission and the type of information that was being sought.
This was followed in many cases by subsequent telephone conversations.
The general approach to industry and technical groups or associations
was to call and explain our purpose. In some cases, these calls were fol-
lowed by correspondence, especially in cases where a plant visit might
be arranged.
The principal sources within EPA were the task project officer,
regional offices, and the Air Pollution Technical Information Center (APTIC).
The principal state sources were state air pollution agencies. All states
7
-------
were contacted by letter for a copy of their implementation plans for the
control of particulate matter and for information on current and past
fugitive and process sampling from lead sources, as well as sources of
fugitive lead emissions* In the case of California, it was necessary to
contact the different districts in seeking this information.
There were a total of 37 different industrial, technical groups
and associations and universities contacted* In four cases, visits to
plants were made: Ethyl Corporation, Pasadena, Texas - gasoline additive
(TEL) plant; Amax Lead and Zinc, Inc., Boss, Missouri - primary lead
smelter; General Battery Corporation, Reading, Pennsylvania - battery
plant and secondary lead smelter; and Delco Company, Olathe, Kansas -
battery plant* A summary listing of contacts made is given in Appendix A.
C. Results
In summary, the extensive survey undertaken revealed that there
was not available the technical information that is needed to meet the
objectives of the program. The specific primary information or lack of
information is indicated in the following subsections. Specific technical
data used in dispersion modeling are given in Section IV.
1. EPA; There were two major findings:
a. Letters were sent to all the regional offices, which
resulted in one source of fugitive lead emission data. This was the Bunker
Hill Company study that was done under EPA Contract No. 68-02-1343. This
information was obtained from Region X. Appendix B contains a summary of
measured and calculated results of these studies.
8
-------
b. A search was requested of APTIG. Searches were made
but no information was found. The key words for the search were fugitive,
lead, emissions, and processes. APTIC reported to MRI that fugitive and
lead were not terms for the computer. An auxiliary method was tried by
APTIC, which also resulted in no information.
2. EPA contractors; - There were three principal organizations.
The PEDCo Company has a contract with EPA on emissions from the industrial
processes of type printer, gasoline additives, and lead emissions. Contact
made with PEDCo provided no information on fugitive lead emissions from
these three sources. However, PEDCo did provide MRI with a copy of a re-
port on the Bunker Hill study.
The Research Corporation of New England is a company working
under contract with EPA on the development of procedures for the measure-
ment of fugitive emissions. No information on fugitive lead emissions
was obtained.
MRI has a program under Contract No. 68-02-2120 to look into
fugitive emissions from metallurgical processes. No fugitive lead emis-
sion information other than the Bunker Hill study was found.
3. State agencies; A letter was sent to each state in search
of current and past fugitive lead emission tests or studies, as well as
a copy of the state's implementation plan for the control of particulate
matter. Answers were obtained from 38 states. The information gained was
implementation plans from the majority of those that responded, and some
peripheral data. There was nothing specifically on fugitive lead emissions.
-------
The results of a critical review of the information received
from the states are given in Appendix C.
4. Technical groups and associations; No pertinent technical
information on fugitive lead emissions was obtained from the seven organi-
zations contacted. Leads for other contacts as well as information on the
names and locations of industrial processes were obtained.
5. Universities: The University of Missouri at Rolla has been
investigating lead emission of the Southeast Missouri Lead Belt region
where three of the six U.S. operating lead smelters are located. This
work is being done for the National Science Foundation under the RANN
project. Dr. Bobby 6. Wixson and Dr. Ivan H. Lowsley, Jr., were contacted
for fugitive lead emission information. This work did not include direct
investigations of fugitive lead emissions. Another technical report on
this work is due to be published during the summer of 1976.
6. Industry: Contacts with industry were principally by tele-
phone. In some cases there was correspondence. Some of the industrial
leads came from our contacts with EPA Regional Offices, state agencies,
and the EPA project offices. However, most of the contacts were from sources
obtained from technical groups and associations, the open literature, and
MRI. The key findings are as follows:
a. There was no information on fugitive lead emissions.
b. There was no knowledge of fugitive emission tests for
lead emissions.
c. The production of type metal has been declining steadily
for the past several years. During 1972, domestic consumption of lead for
-------
B. Modeling Approaches
1. Annual average concentrations; EPA's Climatological Dis-
persion Model (CDM)^' was used to determine ground-level distributions of
annual average lead concentrations. Except for the Bunker Hill lead smelter,
meteorological conditions for the Kansas City area were input into CDM
(see Table 2).
Emissions from roof openings and short stacks were modeled as
area sources with emission heights as follows:
* Buoyant emissions (> 25°C above ambient temperature) at build-
ing height; and
* Nonbuoyant emissions (^ 25 C above ambient temperature) at
one-half the building height.
Since overlapping area sources cannot be used with CDM, a weighted average
emission height was used when more than one area source existed.
The validity of this modeling technique was demonstrated in the
case of the Bunker Hill lead smelter, for which ambient data were avail-
ui 4/
able.
2. 24-Hr maximum concentrations; To determine the worst case,
24-hr meteorological conditions giving rise to the highest ground-level
lead concentrations, a series of modeling experiments were performed with
EPA point-source models. The results indicated that highest concentrations
would occur under the following conditions:
* Tall stacks - unstable atmosphere, low winds; and
* Building-affected sources - stable atmosphere, high winds.
13
-------
TABLE 2
Mean Ambient Temperature ( C)
Avg. Morning Mixing Height (m)
Avg. Afternoon Mixing Height (m)
Joint Frequency Function
METEOROLOGICAL PARAMETERS (ANNUAL)
2/
Bunker Hill""
8.9
400
1,700
October 24 - December 31, 1974-
Bunker Hill
Other
3/
Source Operations"
13
436
1,299
1967 - 1971
Kansas City
k/
a/ Assumed C stability and eight wind directions were converted to 16 directions.
b/ Day/night stability classes broken down on the basis of 1964 data.
-------
Having made these determinations, worst case meteorological
conditions were constructed as follows.
1. Wind direction was distributed normally with spread of 70
degrees.
2. Stability classes were chosen for extreme cases documented
by weather records.
3. Wind speeds were selected from a realistic range for each
stability class.
4. Mixing heights were interpolated from average annual morning
and afternoon values for the Kansas City area.""
Table 3 gives the resulting distributions of meteorological data in 3-hr
time increments.
EPA's PTMPT model" was used to compute distributions of maximum
24-hr concentrations. Building-affected sources and ground level sources
were modeled as virtual point sources. Other details on modeled source
configurations are given in Table 4.
3. 30-Day and 90-day maximum concentrations; The technique
used in this task to estimate 30- and 90-day maximum concentrations from
the annual mean concentration and the 24-hr maximum concentration follows
g /
the analysis developed by Larsen.— The following assumptions are made
in this analysis:
a. Concentrations are lognormally distributed for all
averaging times.
b. The median concentration is proportional to averaging
time raised to an exponent.
15
-------
TABLE 3
DISTRIBUTION OF METEOROLOGICAL DATA IN 3-HR TIME INCREMENTS
UNSTABLE LOW WINDS
STABLE HIGH WINDS
Wind Time
Direction Interval
(deg.)
305 •
287.5
279.5
273
267
260.5
252.5
235
6pm - 9pm
Noon - 3pm
3am - 6am
Mid — 3om
9am - Noon
3pm - 6pm
9pm - Mid
6am - 9om
Wind Stability
Speed Class
(m/sec)
2.5 4
2.5 2
2.5 5
2.5 5
1.5 1
4.0 3
2.5 5
4.0 3
Mixing
Height
(m)
400
1500
400
400
1500
1000
400
1000
Wind Time
Direction Interval
(deg.)
305
287.5
279.5
273
267
260.5
252.5
235
6am - °om
3am - 6am
9am - Noon
Mid - 3arn
6pm - 9pm
Noon - 3pm
9pm - Mid
3pm - 6pm
Wind Stability
Speed Clots
(m/sec)
5.0 4
5.0 5
5.0 4
5.0 6
5.0 5
5.0 4
5.0 6
5.0 4
Mixing
Height
(m)
1500
1000
1500
400
1000
1500
400
1500
-------
TABLE 4
MODELED SOURCE CONFIGURATIONS FOR DETERMINATION OF 24-HR MAXIMUM CONCENTRATIONS
Actual
Modeled
Stable/High Winds
Unstable/Low Winds
Tall Stack
a/
"Short" Stack-
• Buoyant (> 25°C above
ambient temperature)
• Nonbuoyant (£ 25°C above
ambient temperature)
Building (roof) Emissions"
Open Storage
Tall Stack
Virtual point source at an
emission height of one-
half the building height
Virtual point source at 1 m
emission height
Virtual point source at 1 m
emission height
Virtual point source at 1 m
emission height
Tall Stack
Virtual point source at an
emission height equal to the
building height
Virtual point source at 1 m
emission height
a7 "Short" stacks were classified for emission heights in the range of 0.5 to 1.5 times the building
height.
b_/ All building (roof) emissions were determined to be nonbuoyant.
-------
c* The arithmetic mean concentration is the same for all
averaging times.
The first assumption means that if the geometric mean Mg and
standard geometric deviation Sg are known for a particular averaging time*
the maximum concentration can be determined according to the following
equation:
, (i)
where z = 1.04 for a 90-day maximum (four samples), and
z = 1.64 for a 30-day maximum (12 samples).
The problem is to find Mg and Sg for 30- and 90-day averaging
times when only the arithmetic mean and 24-hr maximum are known. Since,
from. assumption c, the arithmetic mean is the same for all averaging times,
the 24-hr maximum and the arithmetic mean can be used to find Mg and Sg
for a 24-hr averaging time by using assumption a. Since the EPA report
shows how, from assumption b, one can calculate Mg and Sg for one averag-
ing time from information about another averaging time, one can calculate
Mg and Sg for 30- and 90-day averaging times from the corresponding values
for 24-hr averaging time. Once these values are found, Eq. (1) with the
appropriate value of z, can be used to find the maximum 30- and 90-day
concentrations.
IV. RESULTS OF DISPERSION CALCULATIONS
The source emission parameters for each modeled source opera-
tion (see Table 1) are given in Tables 5 through 21. This information
was input into either CDM or PTMPT as described above.
18
-------
TABLE 5
SOURCE EMISSION PARAMETERS
Process
Main Lead Stack
Building Ventila-
tion - Buoyant
Building Ventila-
tion - Nonbuoyant
Open Stroage
Source Operation: Primary Lead Smelter (Bunker Hill
Building Dimensions: Height = 20 m; Width =
Open Storage Area: 8,800 m2
Lead
Emission
Rate
(g/sec)
8.97
6.0
18.5
0.088
Discharge Configuration
Actual
Stack
Roof
Opening
Roof
Opening
Area
Annual
Point
Area
Area
Area
Modeled
24-hr Max.
Point
VP(75)
VP(75)
VP(240)
Emis.
Temp.
(°C)
61
39
21
21
Company, Kellogg, Idaho)
50 m
Emission
Actual
61
20
20
0
Height (m)
Modeled
Annual 24 -hr Max.
61
20
10
1
61
10
1
1
Exit
Vel.
(m/sec)
12
1
1
1
Source
Diam.
(m)
4.57
1.0
1.0
1.0
-------
TABLE 6
SOURCE EMISSION PARAMETERS
Source Operation: Primary Lead Smelter (ASARCO, Glover, Missouri)
Building Dimensions: Height = 20 m; Width = 50 m
Open Storage Area: 8,800 m2
ro
o
Process
Blast Furnace
Sintering Opera-
tion
Building Ventila-
tion - Buoyant
Building Ventila-
tion - Nonbuoyant
Open Storage
Lead
Emission
Rate
(g/sec)
6.01
0.624
2.044
6.363
0.03
Discharge Configuration
Modeled
Actual
Stack
Stack
Roof
Opening
Roof
Opening
Area
Annual
Point
Point
Area
Area
Area
24-hr Max.
Point
Point
VP(75)
VP(75)
VP(75)
Emis.
Temp.
(°C)
142
140
53
14
14
Emission Height (m)
Modeled
Actual
109
186
20
20
0
Annual
109
186
20
10
1
24-hr Max.
109
186
10
1
1
Exit
Vel.
(m/sec)
6.3
19.3
1.0
1.0
1.0
Source
Diam.
(m)
2.38
3.19
1.0
1.0
1.0
-------
TABLE 7
SOURCE EMISSION PARAMETERS
Process
Blast Furnace
Reverberatory
Furnace
Open Storage
Source Operation: Secondary Lead Smelter
Lead
Emission
Rate
(g/sec)
0.02
0.033
Building Dimensions: Height =
Open Storage Ar^a: 465 m^
Discharge Configuration
Modeled
Actual Annual 24-hr Max.
Stack Point Point
Stack Point Point
15 m; Width = 45 m
Etnis. Emission Height (m) Exit Source
Temp. Modeled Vel. Diam.
(°C) Actual Annual 24-hr Max. (m/sec) (m)
90 30.5 40.0 30.5 4.2 1.2
65 21.3 40.0 21.3 7.6 1.2
0.00465
Area
Area
VP(75)
14
1.0
1.0
-------
TABLE 8
SOURCE EMISSION PARAMETERS
Source Operation: Mining and Milling
Building Dimensions: Height =
Open Storage Area: 0 m^
Lead
Process
Secondary
£ Crusher (3)
Tertiary
Crusher (3)
Rod-Ball Mill (3)
Emission
Rate
(fc/sec)
0.2
0.2
0.02
Discharge Configuration
Actual
Stack
Stack
Stack
Annual
Area
Area
Area
Modeled
24-hr Max.
VP(90)
VP(90)
VP(90)
of Lead Ore
15 m; Width =
Emis.
Temp.
(°c)
14
14
14
50 m
Emission Height (m)
Modeled
Actual
12.2
13.7
13.7
Annual
7.5
7.5
7.5
24 -hr Max.
1
1
1
Exit
Vel.
(m/sec)
1.0
1.0
1.0
Source
Diam.
(m)
1.2
1.2
1.2
-------
TABLE 9
SOURCE EMISSION PARAMETERS
Source Operation: Primary Copper Smelter
Building Dimensions: Height = 18 m; Width - 60 m
Open Storage Area: 9,300 m
Process
Roaster
Furnace
Converter
Building Ventila-
tion
Open Storage
Lead
Emission
Rate
(g /sec^
0.174
0.160
0.092
0.0002
0.093
Discharge Configuration
Actual
Stack
Stack
Stack
Roof
Opening
Area
Modeled
Annual
Point
Point
Point
Area
Area
24-hr Max.
Point
Point
Point
VP(90)
VP(250)
Emis.
Temp.
(°C)
81
130
120
38
14
Emission Height (m)
Modeled
Actual
170
155
170
18
0
Annual
170
155
170
18
1
24 -hr Max.
170
155
170
18
1
Exit
Vel.
^m/secl
5.7
7.6
5.3
2.59
1.0
Source
Diam.
(m)
7.3
7.3
7.3
1.5
1.0
-------
TABLE 10
SOURCE EMISSION PARAMETERS
Process
Furnace
Building Ventila-
tion
Open Storage
Source Operation: Grey Iron Foundry
Building Dimensions: Height = 15 m; Width =45 m
Open Storage Area: 465 m2
Lead
Emission
Rate
(g/sec)
0.0018
0.0088
0.00465
Discharge
Configuration Emis. Emission Height (m)
Modeled Temp. Modeled
Actual Annual 24-hr Max. (°C) Actual Annual 24-hr Max.
Stack
Roof
Opening
Area
Area VP(70) 46 18.3 15 15
Area VP(70) 35 18.3 7.5 1
Area VP(75) 14 0 1 1
Exit
Vel.
(m/secj
17.7
10.0
1.0
Source
Diam.
(m)
0.72
0.76
1.0
-------
TABLE 11
SOURCE EMISSION PARAMETERS
Source Operation: Ferroalloy Plant
Building Dimensions: Height = 15 m; Width
Open Storage Area: 930 m2
45
Process
tering Op-
i Storage
Lead
Emission Discharge Configuration Emis. Emission Height (m)
Rate Modeled Temp. Modeled
(g/sec) Actual Annual 24-hr Max. (°C) Actual Annual 24-hr Max.
2.79 Point Point Point 107 27.5 40.0 27.5
0.0093 Area Area VP(80) 14 0 1 1
Exit Source
Vel. Diara.
(m/sec) (m)
32.5 3.7
1.0 1.0
-------
TABLE 12
SOURCE EMISSION PARAMETERS
Source Operation: Gasoline Additive (TEL) Plant
Building Dimensions: Height
Open Storage Area: 0
15 m; Width
45 m
N3
Process
Flaker Vent
Furnace-Venturi
Vents (3)
Process Vent
Sludge Pit Vent
Area Vent (3)
Lead
Emission
Rate
(g/sec)
0.013
0.189
0.00033
(2) 0.0038
0.00094
Discharge Configuration
Modeled
Actual
Stack
Stack
Stack
Stack
Stack
Annual
Point
Point
Point
Point
Point
24-hr Max.
Point
Point
Point
Point
Point
Emis.
Temp.
(°C)
14
60
14
14
14
Emission Height (m)
Modeled
Actual
24.4
30.5
45.7
45.7
22.9
Annual
24.4
30.5
45.7
45.7
22.9
24-hr Max.
24.4
30.5
45.7
45.7
22.9
Exit
Vel.
(m/sec)
6.7
3.6
0.91
16.2
4.0
Source
Diam.
(m)
0.91
0.91
1.5
1.2
1.2
-------
TABLE 13
SOURCE EMISSION PARAMETERS
Source Operation: Lead Oxide Plant
Building Dimensions: Height = 15 m; Width = 45 m
Open Storage Area: 0 m^
to
Process
Barton Pots (3)
Furnace Baghouse
Furnace Vent
Building Ventila-
tion
Lead
Emission
Rate
(g/sec)
0.0076
0.0003
0.0002
0.020
Discharge Configuration
Modeled
Actual
Stack
Stack
Stack
Roof
Opening
Annual
Area
Area
Area
Area
24-hr Max.
VP(70)
VP(70)
VP(70)
VP(70)
Emis.
Temp.
(°c)
50
50
50
50
Emission Height (m)
Modeled
Actual
16.8
16.8
18.3
16.8
Annua 1
15
15
15
15
24 -hr Max.
7.5
7.5
7.5
7.5
Exit
Vel.
(m/sec)
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
Source
Diam.
(m)
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
-------
TABLE 14
SOURCE EMISSION PARAMETERS
ro
oo
Process
Controlled
Building Ventila-
tion
Source Operation:
Lead Pigment Manufacture
Building Dimensions: Height =
Open Storage Area: 0 m^
Lead
Emission
Rate
(g/sec)
0.041
0.010
Discharge Configuration
Actual
Stack
Roof
Modeled
Annual 24-hr Max.
Point Point
Area VP(45 )
15 m; Width = 45 m
Emis. Emission Height (m)
Temp. Modeled
(°C) Actual Annual 24-hr Max.
14 30.5 40.0 30.5
14 15.2 7.5 15
'
Exit Source
Vel. Diam.
im/sec) (m)
5.0 1.5
4.0 1.5
Opening
-------
TABLE 15
SOURCE EMISSION PARAMETERS
Source Operation: Lead Acid Battery
Building Dimensions: Height =
Open Storage Area: 0 m2
Lead
Emission Discharge Configuration
Process
Burning
Paste Mixer
Casting Fu ranee
Rate
(g/sec)
0.0008
0.005
0.0025
Modeled
Actual
Stack
Stack
Stack
Annual
Area
Area
Area
24-hr Max.
VPS(90)
VPS (90)
VPS(90)
Plant
10 m;
Emis.
Temp.
38
38
38
Width = 60
Emission
Actual
12.2
9.1
7.6
m
Height (m)
Modeled
Annual 24-hr Max.
10.0
10.0
10.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
Exit
Vel.
(m/sec)
2.0
2.0
2.0
Source
Diam.
(m)
1.2
1.2
1.2
-------
TABLE 16
SOURCE EMISSION PARAMETERS
10
o
Process
Solder Bath
Wiping Station
Source Operation:
Can Manufacture
Building Dimensions: Height - 15 m; Width = 60 m
Open Storage Area: 0 m2
Lead
Emission
Rate
(g/sec)
0.0023
0.011
Discharge Configuration Emis. Emission Height (m)
Actual
Stack
Stack
Modeled Temp. Modeled
Annual 24-hr Max. (°C) Actual Annual 24-hr Max.
Area VP(90) 14 15.2 7.5 1
Area VP(90) 14 15.2 7.5 1
Exit Source
Vel. Diam.
(m/sec) (m)
0.28 1.5
0.28 1.5
-------
TABLE 17
SOURCE EMISSION PARAMETERS
Process
Dross Kettle,
Robertson Pot,
Robertson Press
Lead Pit
Perrille Pot
Source Operation: Cable Covering Plant
Building Dimensions: Height =
Open Storage Area: 0 m^
Lead
Emission
Rate
(g/sec)
0.0024
0.0031
0.000025
Discharge Configuration
Modeled
Actual Annual 24-hr Max.
Area Area VP(45 )
Area Area VP(45)
Area Area VP(45)
12 m; Width 30 m
Emis. Emission Height (m)
Temp. Modeled
(°C) Actual Annual 24-hr Max.
41 15.2 12 12
39 15.2 12 12
25 15.2 6 1
Exit Source
Vel. Diam.
(m/sec) (m)
12.4 0.51
10.4 0.30
2.7 0.36
-------
TABLE 18
SOURCE EMISSION PARAMETERS
Source Operation: Type Metal Operation
Building Dimension
Open Storage Area:
Building Dimensions: Height = 15 m; Width =45 m
0 m2
Process
Lead
Emission
Rate
(g/sec)
Discharge Configuration
Modeled
Actual Annual 24-hr Max.
Emis. Emission Height (m)
Temp.
(°C) Actual
Modeled
Annual 24 -hr Max.
Exit
Vel.
(m/sec)
Source
Diam.
(m)
Building Ventila-
tion
1.0
OJ
ro
Roof Area VP(70)
Opening
14 15.2 7.5 1.0
5.0
1.2
-------
TABLE 19
SOURCE EMISSION PARAMETERS
Source Operation: Combustion of Fossil Fuel
Building Dimensions: Height = 45 m; Width 45 m
Open Storage Area: 0 m^
Lead
Emission Discharge Configuration Emis. Emission Height (m) Exit Source
Rate Modeled Temp. Modeled Vel. Diam.
Process (g/sec) Actual Annual 24-hr Max. (°C) Actual Annual 24-hr Max. (m/sec) (m)
Boiler 0.022 Stack Point Point 149 91.5 91.5 91.5 8.2 4.3
-------
TABLE 20
SOURCE EMISSION PARAMETERS
Source Operation: Waste Oil Combustion
Building Dimensions: Height =? 15 m; Width = 30 m
Open Storage Area: 0 m*
Lead
Emission Discharge Configuration Emis. Emission Height (m) Exit Source
Rate Modeled Temp. Modeled Vel. Diam.
Process (g/sec) Actua1 Annual 24-hr Max. (°C) Actual Annual 24-hr Max, (tn/sec) (m)
Boiler 0.150 Stack Point Point 149 41.8 41.8 41.8 7.6 1.5
-------
TABLE 21
SOURCE EMISSION PARAMETERS
Source Operation: Waste Crankcase Oil Combustion
Building Dimensions: Height = 18 m; Width =45 n>
Open Storage Area: 0 m^
Lead
Emission Discharge Configuration Emis. Emission Height (m) Exit Source
Rate Modeled Temp. Modeled Vel. Diam.
Process (g/sec) Actual Annual 24-hr Max. (°C) Actual Annual 24-hr Max. (m/sec) (m)
Boiler 3.1 Stack Point Point 149 61 61 61 0.647 3.1
-------
Since there was very little information available, most of the information
that is given in Tables 5 through 21 was assumed. VP indicates a virtual
point source at an upwind distance, in meters specified in parentheses.
These basic data assumptions are given in Appendix E.
The results of the modeling of annual average conditions are
presented in Figures 2 through 16. The values shown are total lead con-
centrations (in micrograms per cubic meter) resulting from all emissions
considered for each source operation (industry): tall stacks (indicated
by a dot), short stacks and building roof and side openings (indicated
by an open square), and ground-level sources (indicated by shading). Source
operations of a cable covering plant and combustion of fossil fuel are
not presented because the 24-hr maximum lead concentrations are less than
3
0.01 ng/m .
In the case of the Bunker Hill lead smelter (Figure 2), measured
concentrations are indicated by x's. It appears that predicted and measured
lead concentrations agree to within a factor of 2.
Figures 17 through 33 give the profiles of maximum 24-hr lead
concentration under worst case meteorological conditions for a typical
year. The contribution of fugitive emissions is denoted by the shaded areas;
this includes emissions from building roof and side openings and ground-
level open storage activities.
Table 22 gives the percentage breakdown of the contribution
of each source (tall stacks, short stacks, building roof and side openings
and ground-level sources) at the point of maximum ground-level lead con-
centrations.
36
-------
ANNUAL AVERAGE CONCENTRATIONS (/ig/m3)
Source Operation: Primary Lead Smelter
(Bunker Hill Co.; Kellogg, Idaho)
5x
Figure 2 - CDM Output - Primary Lead Smelter (Bunker Hill Company; Kellogg, Idaho)
37
-------
ANNUAL AVERAGE CONCENTRATIONS ( g/m3)
Source Operation: Primary Lead Smelter
(ASARCO; Glover, Missouri)
N
Figure 3 - CDM Output - Primary Lead Smelter (ASARCO; Glover, Missouri)
38
-------
ANNUAL AVERAGE CONCENTRATIONS (/ig/m3)
Source Operation: Secondary Lead Smelter
N
Figure 4 - CDM Output - Secondary Lead Smelter
39
-------
ANNUAL AVERAGE CONCENTRATIONS (/zg/m3)
Source Operation: Mining and Milling of Lead Ore
N
1.1
Figure 5 - CDM Output - Mining and Milling of Lead Ore
40
-------
ANNUAL AVERAGE CONCENTRATIONS
Source Operation: Primary Copper Smelter
N
.12
.12
Figure 6 - COM Output - Primary Copper Smelter
41
-------
ANNUAL AVERAGE CONCENTRATIONS
Source Operation: Grey Iron Foundry
N
Figure 7 - CDM Output - Grey Iron Foundry
42
-------
ANNUAL AVERAGE CONCENTRATIONS (jig/™3)
Source Operation: Ferroalloy Plant
N
Figure 8 - CDM Output - Ferroalloy Plant
43
-------
ANNUAL AVERAGE CONCENTRATIONS
Source Operation: Gasoline Additive
(TEL) Plant
N
Figure 9 - COM Output - Gasoline Additive (TEL) Plant
44
-------
ANNUAL AVERAGE CONCENTRATIONS
Source Operation; Lead Oxide Plant
N
Figure 10 - CDM Output - Lead Oxide Plant
45
-------
ANNUAL AVERAGE CONCENTRATIONS
Source Operation: Lead Pigment Manufacture
N
Figure 11 - CDM Output - Lead Pigment Manufacture
46
-------
ANNUAL AVERAGE CONCENTRATIONS (M9/™3)
Source Operation: Lead Acid Battery Plant
N
Figure 12 - COM Output - Lead Acid Battery Plant
47
-------
ANNUAL AVERAGE CONCENTRATIONS
Source Operation: Can Manufacture
N
Figure 13 - CDM Output - Can Manufacture
48
-------
ANNUAL AVERAGE CONCENTRATIONS ( g/m3)
Source Operation: Type Metal Operation
N
1.4
Figure 14 - CDM Output - Type Metal Operation
49
-------
ANNUAL AVERAGE CONCENTRATIONS (/ig/m3)
Source Operation : Waste Oil Combustion
N
Figure 15 - CDM Output - Waste Oil Combustion
50
-------
ANNUAL AVERAGE CONCENTRATIONS (/ig/m3)
Source Operation: Waste Crankcase Oil Combustion
N
.24
Figure 16 - CDM Output - Waste Crankcase Oil Combustion
51
-------
ro
i
z"
g
I
UJ
U
O
U
MAXIMUM 24-HR CONCENTRATIONS
Source Operation: Primary Lead Smelter
(Bunker Hill Co.; Kellogg, Idaho)
Fugitive Sources
(Roof openings and ground level storage)
Ducted Sources
(Tall and short stacks)
456
DOWNWIND DISTANCE. Km
Figure 17 - PTMTP Output - Primary Lead Smelter (Bunker Hill Company, Kellogg, Idaho)
-------
to
MAXIMUM 24-HR CONCENTRATIONS
Source Operation: Primary Lead Smeller
(ASARCO; Glover, Missouri)
j:ji:j::::::3Fugitive Sources
"'''''''"'*'* (Roof openings and ground level storage)
I I Ducted Sources
' ' (Tall and short stacks)
456
DOWNWIND DISTANCE, Km
10
Figure 18 - PTMTP Output - Primary Lead Smelter (ASARCO; Glover, Missouri)
-------
Cn
-P-
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
<1 1.2
^ ...
Z
O >-°
^-
j| 0.9
Z
u 0.8
Z
U 0.7
Q
uJ 0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
AAAXIMUM 24-HR CONCENTRATIONS
Source Operation: Secondary Lead Smelter
|?:$S-:v:} Fugi I ive Sources
t;-:-.-:::v.v< (R00f openings and ground level storage)
I (Ducted Sources
' ' (Toll and short slacks)
456
DOWNWIND DISTANCE. Km
10
Figure 19 - PTMTP Output - Secondary Lead Smelter
-------
Ln
Ui
li
60
64
60
56
52
"E 48
=t 44
Z
2 40
|
LU
u
O
u
36
32
28
24
20
16
12
8
4
0
MAXIMUM 24-HR CONCENTRATIONS
Source Operation: Mining and Milling
of Lead Ore
Fufilive Sources
(Roof openings and ground level storage)
456
DOWNWIND DISTANCE. Km
10
Figure 20 - PTMTP Output - Mining and Milling of Lead Ore
-------
27
21
1 18
O 15
u
z
O
u
12
MAXIMUM 24-HR CONCENTRATIONS
Source Operation! Primary Copper Smelter
(Fugitive Sources
• (Roof openings and ground level storage)
4 56
DOWNWIND DISTANCE. Km
10
Figure 21 - PTMTP Output - Primary Copper Smelter
-------
Oi
—I
MAXIMUM 24-HR CONCENTRATIONS
Source Operation: Grey Iron Foundry
IFufilive Sources
• (Roof openings and ground level storage)
456
DOWNWIND DISTANCE. Km
10
Figure 22 - PTMTP Output - Grey Iron Foundry
-------
oo
MAXIMUM 24-HR CONCENTRATIONS
Source Operation: Ferroalloy Plant
I (
' - '
Source*
(Roof openings and ground level storage)
Dueled Sources
(Tall and short stacks)
456
DOWNWIND DISTANCE. Km
10
Figure 23 - PTMTP Output - Ferroalloy Plant
-------
vO
•4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
§ 2.0
Z
o
u
a
^ 1.5
1.0
0.5
I
^AAXIMUM 24-HR CONCENTRATIONS
Source Operation: Gasoline Additive
(TEL) Plant
I (Ducted Sources
(Tall and snort stacks)
I
2 3 4 5 6 7 B
DOWNWIND DISTANCE. Km
Figure 24 - PTMTP Output - Gasoline Additive (TEL) Plant
10
-------
0.18
0.17
0.16
0.15
0.14
0. »3
«E 0.12
^
=t 0.11
g o.io
P
| 0.09
2
UJ
u 0.08
O
u 0.07
o
<
^ 0.06
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0
I
MAXIMUM 24-HR CONCENTRATIONS
Source Operations Lead Oxide Plant
Dueled Sources
(Toll and short slocks)
456
DOWNWIND DISTANCE. Km
10
Figure 25 - PTMTP Output - Lead Oxide Plant
-------
O
u
z
O
u
o
25
MAXIMUM 24-HR CONCENTRATIONS
Source Operation! Lead Pigment Manufacture
I I
' - '
r*°9'''ve Sources
(Roof openings and ground level storage)
Dueled Sources
(Tall and ihort stacks)
456
DOWNWIND DISTANCE. Km
Figure 26 - PTMTP Output - Lead Pigment Manufacture
-------
MAXIMUM 24-HR CONCENTRATIONS
Source Operation: Lead Acid Battery Plant
Ducted Sourcet
(Tall and short stacks)
456
DOWNWIND DISTANCE. Km
Figure 27 - PTMTP Output - Lead Acid Battery Plant
-------
MAXIMUM 24-HR CONCENTRATIONS
Source Operation: Con Manufacture
Ducted Sources
(Tall and short stacks)
456
DOWNWIND DISTANCE. Km
10
Figure 28 - PTMTP Output - Can Manufacture
-------
0.024
0.021
"^ 0.018
dS
1 0.0.5
u
z
o
u
Q
0.012
0.009
0.006
0.003
MAXIMUM 24-HR CONCENTRATIONS
Source Operation: Cable Covering Plant
Fugitive Sources
(Roof openings and ground level storage)
I
456
DOWNWIND DISTANCE. Km
10
Figure 29 - PTMTP Output - Cable Covering Plant
-------
01
MAXIMUM 2+HE roNCENTRATfn
Source Qperotion: Type Metal Operation
PJ.'.V.'/.M c •»• «-
[ij|||S:]Fu9'hve Sources
(Roof openings and ground level storage)
4 5 6
DOWNWIND DISTANCE. Km
6
10
Figure 30 - PTMTP Output - Type fetal Operation
-------
.003r
MAXIMUM 24-HR CONCENTRATIONS
Source Operation: Combustion of Fossil Fuel
Ducted Sources
(Tall and short stacks)
. 002
a>
i
Z
O
u
Z
O
u
a
.001
1
I
456
DOWNWIND DISTANCE. Km
10
Figure 31 - PTMTP Output - Combustion of Fossil Fuel
-------
.18
.17
.16
.15
.14
.13
°|- .12
\
O) , .
i • '1
O •'»
»—
2> .09
S .08
8 .07
Q
^ .06
.05
.04
.03
.02
.01
0
MAXIMUM 24-HR CONCENTRATIONS
Source Operation: Waste Oil Combustion
Ducted Sources
(Tall and short stacks)
I
I
456
DOWNWIND DISTANCE. Km
10
Figure 32 - PTMTP Output - Waste Oil Combustion
-------
00
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
o>
i
Z
O
Z
IIJ o n
u *-u
Z
O
u
Q
< i 5
UJ * • *•*
1.0
0.5
MAXIMUM 24-HR CONCENTRATIONS
Source Operation: Waste Crankcase Oil Combustion
I I Ducted Sources
(Tall and short stacks)
I
I
456
DOWNWIND DISTANCE. Km
10
Figure 33 - PTMTP Output - Waste Crankcase Oil Combustion
-------
TABLE 22
CONTRIBUTIONS TO MAXIMUM 24-HR GROUND-LEVEL CONCENTRATIONS
Source Operations
Primary Lead Smelter
(Bunker Hill Company, Kellogg, Idaho)
Primary Lead Smelter
(ASARCO, Glover, Missouri)
Secondary Lead Smelter
Mining and Milling of Lead Ore
Primary Copper Smelter
Grey Iron Foundry
Ferroalloy Plant
Gasoline Additive (TEL) Plant
Lead Oxide Plant
Lead Pigment Manufacture
Lead Acid Battery Plant
Can Manufacture
Cable Covering Plant
Type Metal Operation
Combustion of Fossil Fuel
Waste Oil Combustion
Waste Crankcase Oil Combustion
Percent Contributions to Maximum Concentration
Tall Short Building Open
Stacks Stacks Openings Storage
0
0
< 1
0
100
75.8
100
100
100
< 1
22.2
0
100
24.2
100
100
100
99.7
99.5
100
< 1
100
< 1
< 1
100
100
77.8
100
-------
Table 23 presents the annual average and highest expected 90-
and 30-day and 24-hr ground-level concentrations of lead. The 90- and
30-day maxima (which are expected to occur once per year) were determined
by the statistical approach described earlier. It is assumed that both of
these maxima will occur at the same distance from the source(s) as the
point of maximum 24-hr ground-level lead concentration (see Figures 17
through 33).
V. CONCLUSIONS
The results of the dispersion calculations were based, in most
cases, on assumed data that was needed for calculated expected ambient
air lead concentrations in the vicinity of stationary-source operations.
Also, it was assumed that the operation considered was typical of that
industry.
These assumptions were made because the data needed to determine
expected ambient air concentrations in the vicinity of the 16 stationary-
source operations that were considered in this study were not available.
As a consequence, all results from this study are subjective.
Based upon the concentrations determined, the following four
*5
stationary-source operations could exceed 1, 2, or 4 y,g/m ground-level
lead concentrations at their boundaries on a 90-day basis: primary lead
smelter, mining and milling of lead ore, type metal .operation, and primary
copper smelter. The following four are questionable: ferroalloy plant,
grey iron foundry, secondary lead smelter, and gasoline additive plant.
70
-------
VII. REFERENCES
1» Busse, A. D., and J. R. Zimmerman, User's Guide for the Climatolog-
ical Dispersion Model, EPA Report No. EPA-R4-73-024, December 1973.
2. "Aerometric Data Summary, Bunker Hill Lead Smelter," prepared by PEDCo
Environmental Specialists, October 26 through December 31, 1974.
3. "Annual Wind Distribution by Pasquill Stability Glasses (STAR Program),"
January 1967 to December 1971 and 1964, Kansas City, Missouri, from
the National Climatic Center, Asheville, North Carolina.
4. Silver Valley/Bunker Hill Smelter Environmental Investigation. Interim
Report , PEDCo Environmental Specialists, EPA Contract No. 68-02-
1343, Task No. 8, February 1975.
5. Guidelines for Air Quality Maintenance Planning and Analysis » Vol. 10:
Reviewing New Stationary Sources, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Report No. EPA-450/ 4-74-011 (OAQPS No. 1.2-029), September'
1974.
6. Holzworth, G. C., Mixing Heights, Wind Speeds, and Potential for Urban
Air Pollution Throughout the Contiguous United States. U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency, Report No. AP-101, January 1972.
7. Turner, D. B., and A. D. Busse, User's Guide to the Interactive Ver-
sions of Three Paint Source Dispersion Programs: PTMAX, PTDIS.
and PTMTP. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, January 1973.
8. Larsen, R., A Mathematical Model for Relating Air Quality Measurements
to Air Quality Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Report No. AP-89, November 1971.
73
-------
APPENDIX A
SUMMARY LISTING OF CONTACTS
74
-------
THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Project Officer
All Regional Offices
Air Pollution Technical Information Center
EPA CONTRACTORS
PEDCo
The Research Corporation of New England
Midwest Research Institute
STATES
All 50 states
Districts in the State of California
TECHNICAL GROUPS AND ASSOCIATIONS
National Association of Recycling Industries, Inc.
Grey and Ductile Iron Founders Society
International Typesetting Organization
Battery Council International
National Association of Recycling Industries
International Lead-Zinc Research Organization
Independent Battery Manufacturers Association
UNIVERSITIES
University of Missouri at Rolla
Dr. Bobby G. Wixson
Dr. Ivan H. Lowsley, Jr.
75
-------
INDUSTRY
Ethyl Corporation
Pasadena, Texas
Delco Company
Anderson, Indiana
Olathe, Missouri
Source Type
Gasoline additives
(TEL)
Battery plant
Battery plant
AMAX Lead and Zinc, Inc.
Boss, Missouri Primary lead smelter
Letter Telephone Visit
X
X
X
RSR Corporation
Dallas, Texas
Secondary lead smelter
Hammond Lead Products, Inc.
Hammond, Indiana Lead pigment
Certified Metals and
Manufacturing Company
Cincinnati, Ohio
Schreylkill Metals Corp.
Baton Rouge, Louisiana
ASARCO
El Paso, Texas
National Lead Industries/
Metals Division
McCook, Illinois
General Battery Corp.
Reading, Pennsylvania and
Dallas, Texas
Globe-Union Incorporated
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Battery System, Inc.
Santa Ana, California
Gould, Inc., Industrial
Battery Division
Trenton, New Jersey
Secondary lead smelter
Lead alloy
Metal products
Primary lead smelter
Battery plant and
Secondary lead smelter
Battery plant
Secondary lead smelter
Battery plant
Battery plant
Battery plant
76
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
-------
INDUSTRY (Concluded)
Source Type Letter Telephone Visit
Prestolite Battery Division,
Eltra Company
Toledo, Ohio Battery plant X
East Penn Manufacturing Co. Battery plant and
Lyon Station, Pennsylvania Secondary lead smelter X
Standard Electric Company,
Inc. Battery plant and
San Antonio, Texas Secondary lead smelter X
Chloride Incorporated
Columbus, Georgia and Battery plant and
Tampa, Florida Secondary lead smelter X
Gould, Inc.
Omaha, Nebraska Secondary lead smelter X
ESB Automotive Division
Cleveland, Ohio Battery plant X
K & W Batteries Battery plant and
Skokie, Illinois Secondary lead smelter X
Batteries Manufacturing Co. Battery plant and
Detroit, Michigan Secondary lead smelter X
Metal Industries Battery plant and
Detroit, Michigan Secondary lead smelter X
St. Joe
Herculaneum, Missouri Primary lead smelter X X
ASARCO
Glover, Missouri Primary lead smelter X X
Missouri Lead
Boss, Missouri Primary lead smelter X
Bunker Hill
Kellog, Idaho Primary lead smelter X
77
-------
APPENDIX B
SUMMARY OF FUGITIVE LEAD RESULTS
OF STUDIES PREVIOUSLY CONDUCTED
78
-------
A. Bunker Hill Primary Smelters, Idaho
A summary of fugitive lead emission, measured and estimated, is
presented. The data are taken from previous studies.
Table B-l contains a summary of fugitive lead emission, by process,
from the Bunker Hill primary lead smelter in the state of Idaho. This study
was conducted by PEDCo Environmental Specialists of Cincinnati, Ohio.
Based on the fugitive lead emission from Table B-l, and on the ore
analysis data below, the following calculation can be made for the fugitive
lead emission from the Bunker Hill primary copper smelter.
1. The lead content of copper concentrate is 0.29%;
2. The average lead content of lead concentrate is 62.5%; and
3. The smelter input is 1,200 tons/day copper concentrate.
Therefore, fugitive emission from primary copper smelter is:
147 (Ib/hr) x 1,200 (tons/day) x 0.0029 _
576 (tons/day) x 0.625 '
B. Silver Valley, Idaho
Silver Valley is a cluster of mines, storage, tailings, towns and
smelters about 15 miles long. Using the wind erosion equation, a methodology
based on extensive data collected by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and
PEDCo Environmental Specialists of Cincinnati, Ohio, had estimated lead
fugitive emission in the Silver Valley region. The total fugitive lead
emission in the valley is 8.99 tons/year or:
8.99 (tons/year) x 2,000 (Ib/ton) - 2 05 Ib Pb/hr
365 (days/year) x 24 (hr/day)
79
-------
TABLE B-l
FUGITIVE EMISSION OF LEAD FROM BUNKER HILL PRIMARY SMELTER
Fugitive Lead Concentration
Process lb/ft3 x 10'6
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
CO
0 7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
Sinter conveyor belt and rotoclone
discharge to ore preparation plant
Return sinter transfer belt on roof
of blending building
Exhaust vent from ore concentrate
building
Exhaust vent from ore preparation
building
Sinter product line from slzer to
storage area
Sinter product dump area
Sinter tunnel feed to blast furnace
Inlet area to blast furnace
Upset condition of blast furnace
Blast furnace roof vents
Lead refinery vents
Lead casting ducts
Zinc fuming furnace vents
Silver refinery and retort building
Electric arc furnace vents
0.2/1
85
1.3
121
0.47
4.4
4.3
21
0.03
43
0.05
230
0.26
0.15
0.35
0.17
0.24
0.11
0.04
Ib/hr
0.29
50
3.2
39
9.2
5.2
5.5
6.4
0.17
8.9
0.09
7.1
0.9
2.5
5
1.2
1.8
0.43
0.05
Ratio of Pb
g/sec to Partlculate
2.2
378
24.2
295
69.6
39.3
41.6
48.4
1.3
67.3
0.7
53.7
6.8
18.9
37.8
9.1
13.6
3.3
0.3
0.35
0.14
0.51
0.29
0.37
0.37
0.27
0.58
0.31
0.39
0.32
0.03
0.47
0.37
0.38
0.03
0.07
0.01
0.04
Area of Emission to
Emission the Atmosphere
Point (ft2) (ft3/mln)
175,000
61 400
270
36
23 161,792
19,733
21,323
25
225
31
100 100
." 625
2,657,160
35,443,574
34,211,944
500
18,259,178
9,408,284
120 21,000
% Operation
in 24 hr
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
33
100
100
100
Total
147
0.28
Notes: (a) These measurements represent about 807. of the total fugitive emission. The accuracy of the measurements is ± 50% of the"jja'ctual values.
(b) The production rate is 15 tons Ph/hr. •'•3&-v •
(c) The Input lead concentrate contains 62.57. lead. Therefore, plant input lead concentrate is 576 tons/day.
-------
APPENDIX C
INFORMATION FROM STATE AGENCIES
81
-------
Lead Standard
Unknown
None
Arkansas
California
None
Unknown
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
None
Unknown
None
District of
Columbia
Florida
Unknown
None
Remarks
State has no stationary sources that emit
lead as a primary constituent. Several
copper smelters are located in the state.
Some lead may be emitted- from them. The
state performs extensive monitoring in the
vicinity of these smelters. From particulate
samples collected by hi-volume drivers, lead
has been found to range from 0 to 0.6 ug/m^
(avg. for 24 hr) at different locations.
1972 SIP out of print. Working on a second
edition. Local districts have the primary
responsibility for controlling emissions of
air pollutants from stationary sources.
SIP is being revised. Air Pollution Control
Division has not identified lead as a signif-
icant pollution of concern to it.
Section 7 - Control of Potentially Hazardous
Particulate Matter - of Delaware's 1974
Regulations Governing the Control of Air
Pollution states: "7.1 Persons responsible
for a source operation from which potentially
hazardous particulate matter may be emitted
such as, but not limited to, lead, arsenic,
beryllium, silica, asbestos, and other such
materials shall list such contaminants and
their exit concentrations in a written report
to the Department. The Department shall as-
sign emission limits on an individual basis.
Ambient air quality standards - suspended par-
ticulates: 50 Ug/m3 annual geometric mean;
180 ug/m^ max. 24-hr concentration.
82
-------
Lead Standard
Unknown
None
Idaho
None
Illinois
None
Remarks
One stationary source of lead emissions:
Waiau plant of the Hawaiian Electric Company
on Oahu. Summary results of testing for
lead content in the stack emissions from
waste-oil burning are: (1) waste-oil burning
results in increased lead emissions from the
boiler stack; (2) for the conditions covered
by the test, the predicted contribution to
ground-level concentrations, based on emission
data obtained from the study, would be well
below 5 ug/m3, which is the level recommended
by the states of Montana and Pennsylvania as
a maximum limit.
One major source of lead in state, which is
iron smelter located in Kellogg, Idaho. Minor
sources are lead-producing mines in this area.
Fugitive and stack emissions have been measured
in Kellogg Valley under EPA Contracts Nos. 68-
02-0236 and 68-02-1343. Percent lead in par-
ticulate ambient-air samples ranged from 2 to
18, averaged by quarter during 1971 to 1974.
Monthly average lead in 24-hr ambient-air sam-
ples was as much as 35 ug/m3 at a distance of
~ 1.6 miles from the stack, and ~ 2 ug/m3 at
~ 2.5 miles.
Fugitive Particulate Matter; Any particulate
matter emitted into the atmosphere other than
through a stack, provided that nothing in this
definition or in Rule 203(f) shall exempt any
source from compliance with other provisions
of Rule 203 otherwise applicable merely because
of the absence of a stack.
203(f) Fugitive Particulate Matter.
(1) No person shall cause or allow the emission
of fugitive particulate matter from any
process, including any material handling
or storage activity, that is visible by
an observer looking generally toward the
zenith at a point beyond the property line
of the emission source.
83
-------
State
Lead Standard
Remarks
Illinois (concluded)
Iowa
Kansas
Unknown
None
(2) No person shall cause or allow the
emission of fugitive particulate matter
from any process, including any material
handling or storage activity, in such a
manner that the presence of such particu-
late matter shown to be larger than forty
(40) microns (mean diameter) in size exists
beyond the property line of the emission
source.
(3) Rules 203(f) (1) and 203(f) (2) shall not
apply to emissions of fugitive particulate
matter from stock-piles of materials when
the wind speed is greater than 25 miles per
hour. Determination of wind speed for the
purposes of this rule shall be by a 1-hr
average at the nearest official station of
the U.S. Weather Bureau, by interpretation
of surface weather maps by a meteorologist,
or by wind speed instruments installed on
the stock-pile site.
(4) No person shall cause or allow the opera-
tion of a vehicle of the second division
as defined by 111. Rev. Stat., Ch. 95 1/2,
pp. 1-217, as revised, or a Semitrailer as
defined by 111. Rev. Stat.. Ch. 95 1/2,
pp. 1-187, as revised, without a covering
sufficient to prevent the release of par-
ticulate matter into the atmosphere, pro-
vided that this paragraph (f)(4) of this
Rule 203 shall not apply to automotive ex-
haust emissions.
(5) Except for the stockpiling of materials,
Rule 203(f) shall not apply to emissions
resulting from the manufacture of coke.
(6) Rule 203(f) shall not apply to emissions
of water and water vapor from cooling
towers.
28-19-51 Ground Level Particulate Limitations:
The provisions of other emission control regu-
lations, notwithstanding, no person shall cause
or permit the handling, transport or storage of
84
-------
State
Lead Standard
Remarks
Kansas (concluded)
Kentucky
Louisiana
Unknown
None
Maine
Maryland
None
Unknown
any materials or any other use of a premise
in a manner which has been demonstrated to
allow sufficient quantities of particulate
matter to become airborne to cause a ground
level particulate concentration at the prop-
erty line equal to or exceeding 2.0 milligrams
per cubic meter above background concentra-
tions for any time period aggregating more
than 10 min during any hour.
Compliance with this section shall be deter-
mined by the Department by means of collecting
air samples from one or more locations both up-
wind and downwind from the source of emissions
at any point on, or beyond, the premise prop-
erty line. Such sampling may be carried out
by means of a portable high volume sampler
equipped with a 4-in. diameter filter, a
portable electrostatic precipitator, or any
other sampling procedure established by the
Department commensurate with good engineering
practice. (Authorized by K. S. 1970 Supp.
65-3005, 65-3006, 65-3010: Effective January 1,
1971.) Plants handling lead are: Gould, Inc.,
Leavenworth; Delco-Remy Div, of General Motors
Corp., Olathe; Chicago Battery Corp., Kansas
City; Sherwin-Williams Chemicals, Coffeyville;
Cherryvale Zinc Division, National Zinc Company,
Cherryvale.
Ambient air-quality standards-Max. permissible
concentration of suspended air particulate:
75 ug/tn3 (annual geometric mean); 260 ug/m3
(max. 24-hr concentration not to be exceeded
more than once a year).
Ambient air-quality standards: 100 ug/m3
(24-hr cone.) and 50 ug/m^ (annual geometric
mean).
Proposed ambient-air quality standards for
suspended particulate matter: SERIOUS -
75 Vg/m3 is annual arithmetic average;
85
-------
State
Lead Standard
Remarks
Maryland (concluded)
Massachusetts
None
160 ug/m3 is 24-hr max., and is not to be
exceeded more than one time a year. More
adverse - 65 ug/m3 for annual arithmetic
average; and 140 ug/ra3 for 24-hr max., which
is not to be exceeded more than once a year.
There are some 200 nonferrous foundries in
Massachusetts and 100 or so metal reclaiming
plants. Most of the foundries melt, pour and
grind lead bearing bronze (85-5-5-5) 570 lead.
The reclaiming operations are involved in
melting 100% lead. The melting takes place
at a rather low temperature (600-800°C).
However, the dressing operation involves lead
oxide dust which can be liberated to the
ambient air.
The foundry operations are carried out at
higher temperatures (2000°C or higher) and
liberate lead fume as well as lead oxide
dust from the dressing operation. Uncon-
trolled grinding operations are also a source
of lead dust.
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
None
Unknown
None
None
Air quality standards for suspended partic-
ulates (sampling with hi-volume samplers):
K.C. metropolitan area - 60 ug/m3 max. annual
geometric mean at any sampling site and 150 ug/
m3 24-hr average not to exceed more than one
24-hr period in any three consecutive months
at any sampling site; St. Louis metropolitan
area - 75 ug/m3 annual geometric mean at any
sampling site and 200 jig/m3 not to be exceeded
over one day in any 3-month period at any sam-
pling site; Springfield-Green County area -
60 ug/m3 max. annual geometric mean at any
sampling site and 150 pg/m3 24-hr average
not to be exceeded on more than one 24-hr
period in any three consecutive calendar
months at any sampling site.
86
-------
Lead Standard
None
Unknown
None
Nevada
None
Remarks
One lead plant - East Helena, Montana.
Ambient air-quality standards for suspended
particulate matter: primary standards -
during any 12 consecutive months, the geo-
metric mean value of all 24-hr averages of
suspended particulate matter concentrations
in ambient air shall not exceed 75 ug/m3
and during any 12 consecutive months, 24-hr-
average concentrations may not exceed 260 ug/
m3 no more than once; secondary standards
60 ug/m3 for the annual average, and 150 ug/
n>3 for the 24-hr average concentration.
Ambient air quality standards for particu-
late matter concentration are: 60 ug/m3
annual geometric mean, and 150 ug/m3 max.
24-hr concentration.
New Hampshire
None
New Mexico
Yes
No person shall operate a new or modified
secondary lead smelter or a new or modified
secondary brass or bronze ingot production
plant in such a manner as to discharge or
cause to discharge into the atmosphere -of
any gasps from blast (cupola) furnaces which
contain particulate matter in excess of
50 mg/dscm. Primary ambient air quality
standards for suspended particulate matter
of air (shall be determined by hi-volume sam-
plers) are: (1) the annual geometric mean
for all particulates shall not exceed 60 ug/
m3; (2) the annual geometric mean will con-
sist of the geometric mean for the 12-month
period beginning on July 1 and ending on
June 30; and (3) the 24-hr max. cone, of
particulates shall not exceed 150 ug/m3
over one day per year.
Ambient air quality standards for total sus-
pended particulate - max. allowable concentra-
tions: (1) average daily 150 ug/m3 for any
24-hr period; (2) average weekly 110 ug/m3;
(3) average monthly 90 ug/m3; and (4) annual
geometric mean 60 ug/tn3.
87
-------
State
Lead Standard
New Mexico (concluded)
Remarks
When one or more of the following elements
are present in the total suspended partic-
ulate, the max. cone, of the element in-
volved is: lead - 10 ug/m3 30-day average;
beryllium - 0.01 ug/m3 30-day average;
arsenic, copper and zinc - 10 ug/m3 30-day
average in any combination.
After April 30, 1974, no person owning or
operating a nonferrous smelter shall permit,
cause, suffer or allow particulate matter
emissions to the atmosphere in excess of
0.03 grains per average sampled cubic foot
of discharge gas at standard temperature and
pressure.
Only one stationary source within New Mexico
is thought to have significant emissions. It
is Sandia Battery Company, Bernallillo,
New Mexico.
New York
North Carolina
Unknown
None
North Dakota
None
Ambient air quality standards for suspended
particulate matter are: 60 ug/m^ annual
geometric mean, and 150 ug/tn^ max. 24-hr
cone, not to be exceeded more than once a
year.
Ambient air quality standards for suspended
particulate matter are: 60 ug/m3 annual
geometric mean, and 150 ug/m3 max. 24-hr
cone.
Ohio
Unknown
No known sources of particulate lead in state.
Oklahoma
Unknown
Oregon
None
When fugitive emissions escape from a building
or equipment in such a manner and amount as to
create nuisance conditions or to violate any
regulation, the Department may, in addition to
other means of obtaining compliance, order that
88
-------
State
Lead Standard
Remarks
Oregon (concluded)
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
Yes
Unknown
the building or equipment in which processing, "
handling and storage are done be tightly closed
and ventilated in such a way that air contami-
nants are controlled or removed before discharge
to the open air.
Ambient air quality standards for suspended
particulate matter at a primary mass station
shall not exceed: (1) 60 ug/m3 of air, as an
annual geometric mean for any calendar year;
(2) 100 ug/m3 of air, 24-hr cone, for more than
15% of the samples collected in any calendar
month; and (3) 150 ug/m3 of air, 24-hr cone.,
more than once a year.
There are 11 known emission sources of lead -
one smelter, one sporting goods, and nine
battery manufacturers.
Ambient air quality standards - the maximum
value of lead concentration averaged over
30 days shall not exceed 5 ug/m3.
South Carolina
Unknown
South Dakota
Tennessee
None
Unknown
Ambient air quality standards for particu-
lates are 60 ug/m3 as an annual geometric
mean and 150 ug/m3 as the max. 24-hr cone.
Texas
Utah
None
None
All toxic elements (lead included) above
10 ug/m3 (arbitrarily selected) are on the
prime priority element surveillance list.
National air quality standards of perfor-
mance for secondary lead smelters and sec-
ondary brass and bronze ingot production
plants—no emission of particulate matter
from a blast (cupola) or reverberatory fur-
nace shall exceed 50 mg/dscm; for iron and
steel mills, emissions shall not exceed
50 mg/dscm.
89
-------
Lead Standard
Unknown
None
Washington
None
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Unknown
Unknown
None
Remarks
Ambient air quality standards for particu-
late matter: primary standards, 75 ug/m3
annual geometric mean and 260 ug/m^ max.
24-hr cone, not to be exceeded more than
once a year; secondary standards, 60 ug/m3
annual geometric mean as a guide to be used
in assessing achievement, the 24-hr standard,
and 150 ug/m3 max. 24-hr cone, not to be
exceeded more than once a year.
Ambient air quality standards. The suspended
particulate concentrations in the ambient air,
averaged over any 24-hr period, shall not
exceed: (1) 60 ug/m3 annual geometric mean;
(2) 100 ug/m3 for more than 15% of the sam-
ples collected in any calendar month; and
(3) 150 ug/m3 not to be exceeded more than
once a year.
The ambient air standards for total sus-
pended particulates are: (1) 60 ug/m3
annual geometric mean; and (2) 150 -ug/m3
max. 24-hr cone, not to be exceeded more
than once per year.
90
-------
APPENDIX D
BIBLIOGRAPHY
91
-------
1. "The Clean Air Act," Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, B.C., December 1970.
2. "Standards Support and Environmental Impact Statement,"
Outline, Volume I.
3. "Preferred Standards Path Analysis on Lead Emissions From
Stationary Sources," Emission Standards and Engineering Division, Environ-
mental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, August 9,
1974.
4. "Preferred Standards Path Analysis on Lead Emissions From
Stationary Sources," Volume II.
5. "Preferred Standards Path Analysis on Lead Emissions From
Stationary Sources," Volume III.
6. "Scientific and Technical Assessment Report on Lead From
Stationary Sources," Office of Research and Development, Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., EPA Report No. EPA-600/6-75-OOX,
February 1975.
7. "EPA's Position on the Health Implications of Airborne
Lead," Environmental Protection Agency,'Washington. D.C., November 28, 1973.
8. "Final Report on Economics of Lead Removal in Selected
Industries," Environmental Protection Agency/Battelle Columbus Laboratories,
August 31, 1973. Project No. 68-02-0611
9. "Emission Study of Industrial Sources of Lead Air Pollutants,
1970," Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, APTD-1543.
10. "Background Information for New Source Performance Standards:
Primary Copper, Zinc, and Lead Smelters, Volume I: Proposed Standards,"
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, EPA Report No. EPA-450/2-74-002a,
October 1974.
11. "Emissions from Lead Smelter at American Smelting and Refining
Company, Glover, Missouri," by E. P. Shea, Midwest Research Institute,
Kansas City, Missouri, EMB Project Report No. 73-PLD-l. Proj. No. 68-02-0228.
MRI 3585-C27.
12. Workbook of Atmospheric Dispersion Estimates, by D. Bruce Turner,
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Programs, Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina, Publication No. AP-26, Sixth Printing, January 1973.
92
-------
13. "Primary Lead Production Areas in the United States,"
Lead Industries Association, May 1972.
14. "Facts about Lead and the Atmosphere," Lead Industries
Association, March 1968.
15. Lead, Lead Industries Association, Vol. 38, No. 1-2 (1975).
16. "Facts about Lead and Industrial Hygiene," Lead Industries
Association, April 1967.
17. "Lead Welding," American Welding Society, reprinted and
distributed by Lead Industries Association, July 1972.
18. "Lead-Covered Underground Cable Use Increasing," by C. N. Peters,
Wisconsin Electric Power Company, distributed by Lead Industries Association,
reprinted from Transmission and Distribution.
19. "Emissions from Coal-Fired Power Plants: A Comprehensive
Summary," by Stanley T. Cuffe and Richard W. Gerstle, National Air Pollution
Control Association, U.S. Public Health Service, Durham, North Carolina
(1967).
20. Lagerwerff, J. V., W. H. Arminger, and A. W. Specht, "Uptake
of Lead by Alfalfa and Corn from Soil and Air," Soil Science, Spring 1973.
21. Hankin, Lester, "Lead Poisoning - A Disease of Our Time,"
reprinted from Journal of Milk and Food Technology, Vol. 35, No. 2, pp. 86-97,
February 1972.
22. McKee, Arthur G., and Company, Systems Study for Control of
Emissions Primary Nonferrous Smelting Industry, Vol. I of III, for National
Air Pollution Control Administration, PH 86-65-85, June 1969.
23. McKee, Arthur G., and Company, Copper, Zinc and Lead Smelting
Practice, Vol. II of III, for National Air Pollution Control Administration,
PH 86-69-85, June 1969.
24. McKee, Arthur G., and Company, Systems Study for Control of
Emissions Primary Nonferrous Smelting Industry, Vol. Ill of III, Appendices C
through G, for National Air Pollution Control Administration, PH 86-65-85,
June 1969.
25. Wixson, Bobby G., Ernst Bolter, Nord L. Gale, J. Charles Jennett,
and Krishnier Purushothaman, "The Lead Industry as a Source of Trace Metals in
the Environment," presented to Environmental Resources Conference on Cycling
and Control of Metals, Batelle Memorial Institute, October 31 to November 2,
1972.
93
-------
26. Wixson, Bobby G., and William H. Tranter, "An Investigation
of Environmental Pollution by Lead and Other Heavy Metals from Industrial
Development in Southeastern Missouri," presented to National Telecommuni-
cations Conference, Houston, Texas, December 4-6, 1972.
27. Wixson, Bobby G., Ernst Bolter, J. Charles Jennett, and
Krishnier Purushothaman, "Environmental Impact of Trace Metals on the New
Lead Belt of Southeast Missouri," presented to American Geophysical Union,
San Francisco, California, December 6-9, 1971.
28. Purushothaman, Krishnier, "Air Quality Studies of a Developing
Lead Smelting Industry," presented to Society of Engineering Science, First
International Meeting on Pollution, Tel Aviv, Israel, June 12-17, 1972.
29. Jennett, J. Charles, Bobby G. Wixson, Ernst Bolter, and
James 0. Pierce, "Environmental Problems and Solutions Associated with the
Development of the World's Largest Lead Mining District," presented to
Society of Engineering Science, First International Meeting on Pollution,
Tel Aviv, Israel, June 12-17, 1972.
30. Sandstead, H. H., W. H. Allaway, R. G. Burau, W. Fulkerson,
H. A. Laitinen, P. M. Newberne, J. 0. Pierce, and B. G. Wixson, "Cadmium,
Zinc and Lead in Geochemistry and the Environment," Vol. I, The Relation
of Selected Trace Elements to Health and Disease, National Academy of
Sciences, Washington, D.C. , pp. 29-35 (1974).
31. Committee on Biologic Effects of Atmospheric Pollutants,
Lead; Airborne Lead in Perspective, National Academy of Sciences, Washington,
D.C. (1972).
32. Foster, Ronald L., Peter F. Lott, John N. Goulias, and James
H. Long, "The X-Ray Identification of Trace Amounts of Toxic Lead Compounds
Emitted into Air by Smelting Operations in Missouri," undated.
33. National Association of Recycling Industries, NARI Membership
Directory 1975-76, National Association of Recycling Industries Incorporated,
July 1975.
34. Gray and Ductile Iron Founders Society, Sources for Gray and
Ductile Iron Castings; a Buyers Guide and Directory of Members, 1975-76.
35. Battery Council International, The Storage Battery Manufacturing
Industry, 1973-74 Yearbook.
36. Nonferrous Metal works of the World, 1967-USA.
94
-------
37. Davis, W. E., and Associates, National Inventory of Sources
and Emissions; Barium, Boron, Copper, Selenium, and Zinc. Section III:
Copper. EPA Office of Air Programs, Contract No. 68-02-0100, April 1972.
38. Anonymous, Potential Pollutants in Fossil Fuels, EPA-R2-73-
249, June 1973. Office of Research & Monitoring.
39. "Low Level Lead Toxicity and the Environmental Impact of
Cadmium," Environmental Health Perspectives, Experimental Issue No. 7,
May 1974.
40. Karvonen, M. J., "Air Pollution and its Effects on Health:
Heavy Metals and Hydrocarbons," in Comparative Studies of Food and Environ-
mental Contamination, proceedings of a Symposium, Otaniemi, August 27-31,
1973, International Atomic Energy Association, Vienna (1974).
41. Golberg, A. J., A Survey of Emissions and Controls for
Hazardous and Other Pollutants, Office of Research and Monitoring, Environ-
mental Protection Agency, November 1972.
42. Novick, Robert E., "Man, His Environment, and Lead," Journal
of Environmental Health, Vol. 35, No. 4, January-February 1973.
43. Berg, Byron A., and Carl Zenz, "Environmental and Clinical
Control of Lead Exposure in a Nonferrous Foundry," American Industrial
Hygiene Association Journal, pp. 175-178, March-April 1967.
44. Everett, J. L., C. L. Day, and D. Reynolds, "Comparative
Survey of Lead at Selected Sites in the British Isles in Relation to
Air Pollution," Food and Cosmetic Toxicology, Vol. 5, Permagon Press,
pp. 29-35 (1967).
45. Elkins, H. B., Chemistry of Industrial Toxicology, Chapter 4,
pp. 49-58, Wiley.
46. Wixson, Bobby G. et al. An Interdisciplinary Investigation of
Lead and Other Heavy Metals in the New Lead Belt of Southeastern Missouri,
Interim Report to the National Science Foundation Research Applied to National
Needs (RANN), Vol. I, June 1, 1971 to June 1, 1972.
47. ibid. Vol. II
48. Tsuchyia, Kenzaburo, and Susumu Harashima, "Lead Exposure
and the Derivation of Maximum Allowable Concentrations and Threshold Limit
Values," British Journal of Industrial Medicine, Vol. 22, p. 181 (1965).
95
-------
49. National Oil Recovery Corporation Conversion of Crankcase
Waste Oil into Useful Products, for the Water Quality Office, EPA Water
Pollution Control Series 15080D30, EPIC L-8, pp. 37-53, March 1971.
50. Roberts, T. M., T. C. Hutchinson, and W. Ginz, "Effects of
Secondary Lead Smelters on Air, Soil and Vegetation Quality and on Local
Residents in Toronto," Department of Botany and Institute for Environmental
Studies, University of Toronto.
51. Williams, M. K., E. King, and Joan Walford, "An Investigation
of Lead Absorption in an Electric Accumulator Factory with the Use of Personal
Samplers," British Journal of Industrial Medicine, Vol. 26, pp. 202-216 (1969).
52. Davis, W. E. of W. E. Davis and Assoc., Leawood, Kansas,
APTD 1543, Contract No. 68-02-0271, Office of Air and Water Programs, Office
of Air Quality Planning and Standards, EPA, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
(1973).
53. Aust, Steven P., "Aerosol Lead, Its Present and Future in
Maryland," Division of Program Planning and Evaluation, Bureau of Air
Quality Control, Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Environmental
Health Administration, State of Maryland, October 1974.
54. Lagerwerft, J. V., D. L. Brower, G. T. Biersdorf, "Contamination
of Soil and Vegetation with Cadmium, Copper, Lead, and Zinc (in the Proximity
of a Smelter)" USDA Agricultural Research Service, Agricultural Environmental
Quality Institute, Ag. Chemicals Management Lab (1971).
55. "Profile: Amax Homestate Lead Mine-Mill-Smelter," AMAX.
56. Cramer, K., and S. Selander, "Studies in Lead Poisoning:
Comparison Between Different Laboratory Tests," British Journal of Industrial
Medicine, 22:311 (1965.).
57. , "Lead Arsenate."
58. "Waste Oil Roundup No. 1," American Petroleum Institute.
59. Vanderkerk, G., and Lead Industry Association, "New Develop-
ments in Organo Lead Chemistry," Ind. & Eng. Chem., pp. 29-35 (1966).
60. "Helena Valley, Montana, Area Environmental Pollution Study,"
EPA, Publication AP 91 (1972).
61. "Background Information for Standards of Performance Phosphate
Fertilizer Industry," Vols. 1 and 2, EPA, Proposed Standards (1974).
96
-------
62. Valentine, Fisher, and Tomlinson, Engineers, "Bunker Hill
Atmospheric Emission Evaluation: Particulates" (1975).
63. Singmaster and Breyer, "Air Pollution Control in the Primary
Aluminum Industry: Technical Appendices" (1973).
64. Shea, E. P., "Emissions from Cable Covering Facility," EPA
Contract No. 68-02-0228, MRI Project No. 3585-C32 (1973).
65. "Development of Procedures for the Measurement of Fugitive
Emissions," TRC and EPA, Vol. 1, July 1975.
66. "Emissions from a Primary Lead Smelter Sintering Machine
Acid Plant, Boss, Missouri," EPA Contract No. 68-02-0228, Task 10, ETB Test
No. 72MM13, MRI Project No. 3585-Cll (1973).
67. Goldberg, A. J., and EPA, "A Survey of Emissions and Controls
for Hazardous and Other Pollutants" (1972).
68. "Criteria for a Recommended Standard: Occupational Exposure
to Inorganic Lead," U.S. Department Public Health Service HEW (1972).
69. (Map) Location of Major Lead Operations.
70. "Elemental X-Ray Analysis of Hi-Volume Filters from Public
Health Service Office Building, Ft. Bragg, California," State of California -
Resources Agency, Air Resources Board, Mendocino County Air Pollution Control
District, September 1973.
71. "Final Report on Suspended Particulate Sources in Mendocino
County, California (S, Cl, K, Ca, Ti, Cr, Mn, Fe, CO, Br, Pb, Cu, Zn)" State
of California - Resources Agency, Air Resources Board, Mendocino County Air
Pollution Control District (1974).
72. Roberts, T. M., T. C. Hutchinsbn, W. Gizyn of Department of
Botany and Institute for Environmental Studies, University of Toronto,
"Effects of Secondary Lead Smelters on Air, Soil and Vegetation Quality and
on Local Residents in Toronto."
73. Yankel, A. J., and I. von Lindern, Idaho Department of Health
and Welfare, "Procedures Employed for a Study of Lead in Dust, Soil and the
Ambient Air," paper presented 74-AP-19 PWINS meeting, Boise, Idaho, pp. 17-
19, November 1974.
74. "Report on Source Testing of a Grid Casting Pot Stack and a
Lead Oxide Mill Stack for Prestolite (Battery Division) Toronto," Enviroclean,
LTD, Willowdale, Ontario (Engineers).
97
-------
75. "Lead Concentrations in the San Francisco Bay Area,"
Technical Services Division, Bay Air Pollution Control District, 1970-1973.
76. Culkowski, Walter M., and Malcolm R. Patterson, "A Compre-
hensive Atmospheric Transport and Diffusion Model," Oak Ridge National
Laboratory, ORNL NSF EATC-17, April 1976.
77. Wixson, B. G., and J. C. Emmett, "An Interdisciplinary
Investigation of Environmental Pollution, Lead and Other Heavy Metals,"
from Industrial Development in the New Lead Belt of Southeast Missouri,
Interim Progress Report, May 1972-June 1974, Interdisciplinary Lead Belt
Team, University of Missouri-Rolla, Vols. 1 and 2.
78. Same as above. June 1971, May 1972, Vol. 1-11.
79. Fulkerson, W., W. D. Shults, and R. I. Van Hook, editors,
"Ecology and Analysis of Trace Contaminants - Progress Report, October 1973
- September 1974," Oak Ridge National Laboratory, ORNL NSF EATC-11, December
1974.
80. Van Hook, R. I., and W. D. Shults, editors, "Ecology and
Analysis of Trace Contaminants - Progress Report, October 1974 - December
1975," Oak Ridge National Laboratory, ORNL NSF EATC-22, February 1976.
81. Patterson, M. R., J. K. Munro, and R. J. Luxmoore, "Simulation
of Lead Transport on the Crooked Creek Watershed," Annual Conference on Trace
Substances in Environmental Health, University of Missouri, 1975.
82. Tussey, Robert C., Jr., "Emissions from a Primary Lead Smelter
Sintering Machine Acid Plant at Missouri Lead Operating Company, Boss, Missouri,"
for Office of Air Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, No. 68-02-0228,
MRI 3585-C(ll), ETB Test No. 72-MM-13, March 1973.
83. Jutze, George A., and Lawrence A. Elfers, "Testimony Support
Document: In-Plant Fugitive Dust Emission Measurements, Bunker Hill Lead
Smelter," for State of Idaho, DHW, Division of Legal Counsel, Boise, Idaho,
PEDCo Environmental Specialists - Cincinnati, September 30, 1975.
84. Elfers, Lawrence A., and George A. Jutze, PEDCo, "Silver
Valley/Bunker Hill In-Plant Fugitive Dust Emission Tests," for EPA Region
X, No. 68-02-1343, Task 3.
85. "Ambient Air Data for Monitoring Locations at Silver Valley,
Idaho," DHW, State of Idaho, June 1974-June 1975, May 1976.
86. Fisher, Valentine, and Tomlinson, "Atmospheric Emission Formu-
lation: Particulates," Bunker Hill Company, Kellogg, Idaho, EPA Region X,
Air Surveillance and Investigation Branch, Seattle, No. 68-02-0236, October
17-19, 1974 and November 4-22, 1974.
98
-------
APPENDIX E
SOURCE EMISSION DATA; ACQUIRED AND ASSUMED
99
-------
Source Operation: Primary Lead Smelter (Bunker Hill Company; Kellogg, Idaho)
Value
Process/Pat;
11-74
10-74
Remarks
o
o
Main Lead Stack
Height (m) 61.0
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec) 3.91
Diameter (m) 4.57
Exit Velocity (m/sec) 12.0
Temperature (°C) 61.2
Sinter Sizing (W Rotoclone)
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec) 0.476
Diameter (m) 0.69
Exit Velocity (m/sec) 10.8
Temperature (°C) 51.6
Sinter Sizing (N Rotoclone)
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec) 0.403
Diameter (m) 0.60
Exit Velocity (m/sec) 10.7
Temperature ( C) 54.6
Reverb Furnace (Norblow Baghouse)
Height (in)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec) 0.798
Diameter (m) 0.97
Exit Velocity (m/sec) 15.5
Temperature ( C) 86.3
61.0
14.0
4.57
9.1
52.3
PEDGo Report
PEDCo Report, p. 23+ (19+)
PEDGo Report
PEDGo Report, p. 67+
PEDGo Report
PEDGo Report, p. 23+
PEDCo Report
PEDCo Report, p. 67+
PEDGo Report
PEDCo Report, p. 23+
PEDCo Report
PEDGo Report, p. 67+
PEDGo Report
PEDGo Report, p. 23+
PEDCo Report
PEDGo Report, p. 67+
PEDCo Report
-------
Source Operation: Primary Lead Smelter (Bunker Hill Company; Kellogg, Idaho) (Continued)
Value
Process/Data
11-74
Remarks
OPP Norblow Baghouse
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec)
Diameter (m)
Exit Veloctiy (m/sec)
Temperature (°G)
Reverb Furnace (J-M Baghouse)
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec)
Diameter (m)
Exit Velocity (m/sec)
Temperature ( C)
a =
0.013
0.90
5.8
18.0
0.014 b
0.76
11.6
19.4
= 0.09
0.51
PEDCo Report, p. 23+
PEDGo Report
PEDCo Report, p. 67+
PEDCo Report
PEDCo Report, a = 0.15b
PEDCo Report, p. 108 (41)
PEDCo Report, p. 67+
PEDCo Report
Zinc Fuming Furnace
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec) 0.358
Diameter (m) 2.82
Exit Velocity (m/sec) 13.6
Temperature (°C) 65.2
Zinc Fuming Furnace Charging Hood
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec) 0.454
Diameter (m) 1.55
Exit Velocity (m/sec) 11.7
Temperature (°C) 14.1
0.063
1.55
9.9
13.0
PEDCo Report, p. 23+
PEDCo Report
PEDCo Report, p. 67+
PEDCo Report
PEDCo Report, p. 17 (p. 19 - Hi Vol.)
PEDCo Report
PEDCo Report, p. 67+
PEDCo Report
-------
Source Operation: Primary Lead Smelter (Bunker Hill Company; Kellogg, Idaho) (Continued)
Value
Process/Data
11-74
10-74
Remarks
o
N>
Reverb Granulator (Slag)
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec)
Diameter (m)
Exit Velocity (m/sec)
Temperature ( C)
Reverb Granulator (Copper)
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec)
Diameter (m)
Exit Velocity (m/sec)
Temperature ( C)
Pelletizing Dryer
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec)
Diameter (m)
Exit Velocity
Temperature (°C)
Electric Furnace Granulator
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec)
Diameter (m)
Exit Velocity (m/sec)
Temperature ( C)
cl ~~"
cl """*
1.437 b
0.91
9.6
33.0
0.693 b
0.91
11.0
38.3
0.287
1.06
11.2
37.2
0.075
0.30
18.2
50.2
= 0.225
= 0.103
PEDCo Report, b = 0.15a (p. 17, 24)
PEDGp Report
PEDCo Report, p. 67+
PEDCo Report
PEDCo Report, b
PEDCo Report
PEDCo Report
PEDCo Report
PEDCo Report, p. 23+
PEDCo Report
PEDCo Report, p. 67+
PEDCo Report
PEDCo Report, p. 23+
PEDCo Report
PEDCo Report, p. 67+
PEDCo Report
= 0.15a (p. 17, 24)
-------
Source Operation: Primary Lead Smelter (Bunker Hill Company; Kellogg, Idaho) (Continued)
Value
Process/Dati
11-74
10-74
Remarks
o
LO
OPP Rodmill
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec)
Diameter (m)
Exit Velocity (m/sec)
Temperature ( C)
Sinter Bin Discharge
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec)
Diameter (m)
Exit Velocity (m/sec)
Temperature ( C)
Sinter Tank Return
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec)
Diameter (m)
Exit Velocity (m/sec)
Temperature ( C)
Main Lead Baghouse (3)
Roof Vent
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec)
Diameter (m)
Exit Velocity (m/sec)
Temperature ( C)
0.193
0.60
23.3
17.0
0.035
0.36
16.8
24.1
0.108
0.51
7.5
48.8
0.013 b
1.47
5.8
53.9
= 0.038
PEDCo Report, p. 23+
PEDCo Report
PEDCo Report, p. 67+
PEDCo Report
PEDCo Report, p. 23+
PEDCo Report
PEDCo Report, p. 67+
PEDCo Report
PEDCo Report, p. 23+
PEDCo Report
PEDCo Report, p. 67+
PEDCo Report
PEDCo Report, a = 0.15b (p. 25, 19)
PEDCo Report
PEDCo Report
PEDCo Report
-------
Source Operation: Primary Lead Smelter (Bunker Hill Company; Kellogg, Idaho) (Continued)
Value
Process/Data
11-74
10-74
Remarks
Silver Retort Roof Outlet
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec) a = 0.035 b = 0.252
Diameter (m) 1.57
Exit Velocity (m/sec) 10.8
Temperature (°C) 17.2
Reverb Granulator Charging-Roof Outlet
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec) 0.017
Diameter (m) 1.46
Exit Velocity (m/sec) 13.1
Temperature (°C) 29.6
Dross Roof Outlet
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec) a = 0.362 b = 2.369
Diameter (m) 1.42
Exit Velocity (m/sec) 11.0
Temperature (°C) 21.3
Zinc Fuming Furnace Granulator
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec) 0.085
Diameter (m) 2.29
Exit Velocity (m/sec) 13.2
Temperature (°C) 81.0
0.113
PEDCo Report, a = 0.15b (p. 25, 20)
PEDCo Report
PEDCo Report
PEDCo Report
PEDCo Report, p. 25, 20
PEDCo Report
PEDCo Report
PEDCo Report
PEDCo Report, a == 0.15b (p. 25, 20)
PEDCo Report
PEDCo Report
PEDCo Report
PEDCo Report, p.
PEDCo Report
PEDCo Report
PEDCo Report
25
-------
Source Operation: Primary Lead Smelter (Bunker Hill Company; Kellogg, Idaho) (Concluded)
Value
Process/Data
11-74
10-74
Remarks
Open Storage
Area (m^ )
Emission Rate (g/sec/m^)
Building Dimensions
Length (m)
Width (m)
Height (m)
50
50
20
8,800 Assumed .
1.0 x 10~5 1.10 tons/acre/montha
Assumed
aj "Development of Emission Factors for Fugitive Dust Sources," EPA Report No. EPA-450/3-74-037,
June 1974.
-------
Source Operation: Primary Lead Smelter (ASARCO; Glover, Missouri)
Process/Data Value
Blast Furnace and Baghouse
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec)
Diameter (m)
Exit Velocity (m/sec)
Temperature ( C)
Sintering
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec)
Diameter (m)
Exit Velocity (m/sec)
Temperature ( C)
Building Ventilation (Buoyant)
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec)
Temperature ( C)
Building Ventilation (Nonbuoyant)
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec)
Temperature ( C)
Open Storage
Area (m^)
Emission Rate (g/sec/m^)
109
6.01
2.38
6.3
142
186
0.624
3.19
19.3
140
20
2.04
53
20
6.36
13
8,800
1.0 x 10-5
Remarks
a/
MRI Report-
a/
MRI Report-
Assume d~~
Assumed"
Ambient
Assumed .
1.19 tons/acre/month—
-------
Source Operation: Primary Lead Smelter (ASARCO; Glover, Missouri) (Concluded)
Process/Data Value Remarks
d/
Building Dimensions Assumed"
Length (m) 50
Width (m) 50
Height (m) 20
a/ "Emission from Lead Smelter at American Smelting and Refining Company (ASARCO), Glover, Missouri,"
EPA Contract No. 68-02-0228 (1973).
b/ "In-Plant Fugitive Dust Emission Measurements, Bunker Hill Lead Smelter, PEDCo Envrionmental
Report (1975).
c/ "Development of Emission Factors for Fugitive Dust Sources," EPA Report No. EPA-450/3-74-037,
June 1974.
d/ Raw Assumption.
-------
Source Operation: Secondary Lead Smelter
Process/Data Value
Remarks
Blast Furnace
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec)
Diameter (m)
Exit Velocity (m/sec)
Temperature (°C)
Reverberatory Furnace
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec)
Diameter (m)
Exit Velocity (m/sec)
Temperature (°C)
Open Storage
Area (m^)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec/
30.5
0.02
1.2
4.2
90
21.3
0.033
1.5
7.6
65
465
m4'
- 1.0 x 10-5
Building Dimensions
Length (m)
Width (m)
Height (m)
45
45
10
EPA Communication
a/
Avg. Table VII-3, Assume 50% Pb~
Assumed 5 ftk/
Avg. Table VII-33/
Avg. Table VII-3-7
EPA Communication
Avg. Table VII-5, 6, Assumed
50% Pb£/
Assumed 5 ft^/
Avg. Table VII-5, 6&
Avg. Table VII-5, 6JL/
Assumedk/
1.10 tons/acre/monthS/
Assumed^/
a/ "Background Information for New Source Performance Standards: Primary
Copper, Zinc, and Lead Smelters," EPA Report No. EPA-450/2-74-002a,
October 1974.
b/ Raw Assumption.
£/ "Development of Emission Factors for Fugitive Dust Sources," EPA Report
No. EPA-450/3-74-037, June 1974.
108
-------
Source Operation: Mining and MILling »f Lead Ore
Process/Pat*
Stack 1
Value
Stack 2
Stack 3
Remarks
Secondary Crusher
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec)
Diameter (m)
Exit Velocity (m/sec)
Temperature (°C)
Tertiary Crusher
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec)
Diameter (m)
Exit Velocity (m/sec)
Temperature (°C)
Rod-Ball Mill
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec)
Diameter (m)
Exit Velocity (m/sec)
Temperature ( C)
Open Storage
Building Dimensions
Length (m)
Width (m)
Height (m)
12.2
0.2
1.2
1.0
25
13.7
0.02
1.2
1.0
25
None
60
60
15
12.2
0.2
1.2
1.0
25
13.7
0.2
1.2
1.0
25
13.7
0.2
1.2
1.0
25
13.7
0.02
1.2
1.0
25
12.2
0.2
1.2
1.0
25
13.7
0.02
1.2
1.0
25
AMAX Brochure Picture
Assumed
Assumed
Assumed
Assumed
AMAX Picture
Assumed
Assumed
Assumed
Assumed
AMAX Picture
Assumed
Assumed
Assumed
Assumed
Assumed
Assumed
-------
Source Operation: Primary Copper Smelter
Process/Data Value
Remarks
Roaster
Height (m) 170
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec) 0.174
Diameter (m) 7.3
Exit Velocity (m/sec) 5.7
Temperature (°C) 81
Furnace
Height (m) 155
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec) 0.160
Diameter (m) 7.3
Exit Velocity (m/sec) 7.6
Temperature (°C) 130
Converter
Height (m) 170
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec) 0.092
Diameter (m) 7.3
Exit Velocity (m/sec) 5.3
Temperature (°O 120
Fugitive Source (Uncontrolled)
Height (m) 18.3
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec) 0.0002
Diameter (m) 1.5
Exit Velocity (m/sec) 2.59
Temperature (°C) 37.8
Avg. of stacks, p. 5-3, EPA 450/2-74-002a~
Avg. of stacks, p. 5-3; Assumed 0.3% Pb2/
EPA Communication
Avg. of stacks, p. 5-3; Assumed 24-ft diameter—'
EPA Communication (avg.)
Avg. of stacks, p. 5-3, EPA 450/2-74-0023^
Avg. of stacks, p. 5-3; Assumed 0.3% Pb£/
EPA Communication
Avg» of stacks, p. 5-3; Assumed 24-ft diameter3-'
EPA Communication
Avg. of stacks, p. 5-3, EPA 450/2-74-002a^/
Avg. of stacks, p. 5-3; Assumed 0.3% Pb3./
EPA Communication
Avg. of stacks, p. 5-3; Assumed 24-ft diameter—/
EPA Communication (avg.)
Assumed 60-ft higb£
EPA Communication
Assumed 5-ft diameter£/
Assumed 10,000 cfmk/
Assumed 100°F^./
-------
Source Operation: Primary Copper Smelter (Concluded)
Process/Data Value Remarks
Open Storage
Area (m^) 465 Assumed0-/
Emission Rate (g/sec/m^) 1 x 10~^ 1.10 tons/acre/month£/
Building Dimensions Assumed
Lenght (m) 60
Width (m) 60
Height (m) 18.3
a/ "Background Information for New Source Performance Standards: Primary Copper, Zinc, and Lead
Smelters," EPA Report No. EPA-450/2-74-002a, October 1974.
b/ Raw assumption that all building sources ducted to atmosphere (except storage).
c/ "Development of Emission Factors for Fugitive Dust Sources," EPA Report No. EPA-450/3-74-037,
June 1974.
-------
Source Operation: Grey Iron Foundry
Process/Data Value
Remarks
Furnace
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec)
Diameter (m)
Exit Velocity (m/sec)
Temperature (°C)
18.3
0.0018
0.72
17.2
46
Assume 60 ft—'
EPA Report 75-GFE-3;
Assumed 1%
EPA Reportk/
EPA Report^/
EPA Report^/
Area Vents (fan)
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec)
Diameter (m)
Exit Velocity (m/sec)
Temperature ( C)
Open Storage
Area (m^)
Emission Rate (g/sec/m^)
Building Dimensions
Length (m)
Width (m)
Height (m)
18.3
0.0088
0.76
10.0
35
465
1 x 10-5
45
45
15
Assumed3.'
Assumed 10% inlet; 1% Pb3/
Assumed 2-1/2 ft3/
Assumed3/
Assumed3./
Assumed3-'
1.19 tons/acre/month0-'
Assumed3.'
aj Raw assumption, all sources ducted to atmosphere.
b/ "Stationary Source Testing of a Grey Iron Foundry," EPA Project Report
No. 75-GFE-3, February 7, 1975, EPA Contract No. 68-02-1403, Task 4,
MRI Project No. 3927-C(4).
c/ "Development of Emission Factors for Fugitive Dust Sources," EPA
Report No. EPA-450/3-74-037, June 1974.
112
-------
Source Operation: Ferroalloy Production
Process/Data
Value
Remarks
Sintering Operation
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rage (g/sec)
Diameter (m)
Exit Velocity (m/sec)
Temperature (°C)
Open Storage
Area (nr)
Emission Rate (g/sec/m )
Building Dimensions
Length (m)
Width (m)
Height (m)
27.5
2.79
3.7
32.5
106.7
930
1 x 10
45
45
45
-5
Source test by Pennsylvania Department
of Health, Air Pollution Control, on
New Jersey Zinc Company, 1970
Assumed—
1.19 tons/acre/monthJ^'
Assumed3.'
jj/ Raw assumption.
b/ "Development of Emission Factors for Fugitive Dust Sources," EPA Report No. EPA-450/3-74-037,
June 1974.
-------
Source Operation: Gasoline Additive (TEL) Plant
Process/Data
Value
Stack 1 Stack 2 Stack 3
Remarks
Flaker Vent - Source A
Height (ra)
Pb Emission Rage (g/sec)
Diameter (m)
Exit Velocity (m/sec)
Temperature (°C)
24.4
0.013
0.91
6.7
26.7
Filter
£/
Assumed 1 Ib/hr, 9070 removal
efficiency^/
fi /
Assumed 3-ft diameter-
Assumed 10,000 cfm£/
Assumed 80°F (near ambient)—'
Furnace-Venturi Vent - Source E
Height (m) 30.5
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec) 0.189
Diameter (m) 0.91
Exit Velocity (m/sec) 3.6
Temperature (°C) 60
Wet Venturi Scrubber
30.5
0.189
0.91
3.6
60
30.5
0.189
0.91
3.6
60
Assumed 3 Ib/hr particulate, 50% Pb£/
Assumed—'
Assumed 5,000 cfm, 3-ft diameter3.?*:'
c/
Process Vent - Source U
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec)
Diameter (m)
Exit Velocity (m/sec)
Temperature (°C)
45.7
0.00033
1.5
0.91
26.7
~ , •*>!
Assumed 0.2 mg/mj—
Assumed—'
Assumed 3,500 cfm, 5-ft
Assumed (near ambient)—'
-------
Source Operation: Gasoline Additive (TEL) Plant (Continued)
Process/Data
Value
Stack 1 Stack 2 Stack 3
Remarks
Sludge Pit Vent - Source C
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec)
Diameter (m)
Exit Velocity
Temperature (°C)
Area Vent - Source D
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec)
Diameter (m)
Exit Velocity (m/sec)
Temperature (°C)
Open Storage
Building Dimensions (see attached)
Length (m)
Width (m)
Height (m)
45.7
0.0038
1.2
16.2
26.7
22.9
0.00094
1.2
4.0
26.7
45.7
0.0038
1.2
16.2
26.7
22.9
0.00094
1.2
4.0
26.7
22.9
0.00094
1.2
4.0
26.7
None
-
Assumed 0.2 mg/n
—
Assumed 40,000 cfm, 4-ft diamete
c/
Assumed 0.2 mg/m—'
Assumed 10,000
£/
Assumed
a.c/
Based on site visit—'
a/
a/ Rased on site observation or plant drawings; site visit April 30, 1976.
b/ Raw assumption.
£/ Based on discussion with plant personnel.
-------
TOP VIEW
N-
3 Story 34' x 193'
4 Story ~40'x260'
1 High Story 47'x 234'
~30'
35'
Gasoline Additive (TEL) Plant (Concluded)
116
-------
Source Operation: Lead Oxide Plant
Process/Data
Value
Stack 1 Stack 2 Stack 3
Remarks
Barton Pots
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec)
Diameter (m)
Exit Velocity (m/sec)
Temperature (°C)
16.8
0.0076
1.2
5.0
50
16.8
0.0076
1.2
5.0
50
16.8
0.0076
1.2
5.0
50
Baghouse
Assumed 50-ft building, 5-ft stack-
Assumed 1.5 lb/hrk/
Assumed9.'
Assumed—'
Assumed—'
Furnace Baghouse
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec)
Diameter (ra)
Exit Velocity (m/sec)
Temperature (°C)
16.8
0.0003
1.2
5.0
50
Assumed 50-ft building, 5-ft stack-
Assumed 0.06 Ib/hr-/
Assumed—'
a/
Assumed—'
Assumed?/
a/
Furnace Vent
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec)
Diameter (m)
Exit Velocity (m/sec)
Temperature (°C)
18.3
0.0002
1.2
5.0
50
Assumed 50-ft building, 10-ft stack8-'
Assumed 0.04
Assumed—'
Q /
Assumed-
Assumed3-'
-------
Source Operation: Lead Oxide Plant (Continued)
Process/Data
Value
Stack 1 Stack 2 Stack 3
Remarks
oo
Fugitive
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec)
Diameter (m)
Exit Velocity (m/sec)
Temperature (°C)
Open Storage
Building Dimensions
Length (m)
Width (m)
Height (m)
16.8
0.020
1.2
5.0
50
None
45
45
15
Assumed 50-ft building, 5-ft stacks.
Assumed 3.84
Assumed^'
Assumed-?.'
Assumed—'
Assumed-
Assumed8-'
a/
a/ Raw assumption, all sources ducted to atmosphere,
b/ EPA communication.
-------
Source Operation: Lead Pigment Manufacture
Process/Data
Value
Remarks
Point Source
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec)
Diameter (m)
Exit Velocity (m/sec)
Temperature (°C)
30.5
0.041
1.5
5.0
25
Assumed 100 ft-/
Battelle Economics of Recovery Report—'
Assumed 5 ft3.'
Assumed3-'
Assumed3-'
Fugitive Source
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec)
Diameter (m)
Exit Velocity (m/sec)
Temperature (°C)
15.2
0.010
1.5
4.0
25
Assumed—'
Assumed3/
Assumed-
Assumed—'
Assumed—'
Open Storage
None
Building Dimensions
Length (m)
Width (m)
Height (m)
45
45
15
Assumed
£/ Raw assumption, all sources ducted to atmosphere.
_b/ "Economics of Lead Removal in Selected Industries,1
August 31, 1973, by Battelle.
EPA Contract No. 68-02-0611, Task 3,
-------
Source Operation: Lead Acid Battery Plant
Process/Dat£
K)
O
Burning
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec)
Diameter (m)
Exit Velocity (m/sec)
Temperature (°C)
Paste Mixer
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec)
Diameter (m)
Exit Velocity (m/sec)
Temperature (°C)
Casting Furnace
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec)
Diameter (m)
Exit Velocity (m/sec)
Temperature (°C)
Value
Remarks
12.2
0.0008
1.2
2.0
37.8
EPA communication
EPA communication
2 /
Assumed 4 ft—
Assumed 5,000 cfmi/
Assumed 100°F£/
9.1
0.005
1.2
2.0
37.8
EPA communication
EPA communication
Assumed 4 ft—'
Assumed 5,000 cfm -
Assumed
a/
7.6
0.0025
1.2
2.0
37.8
EPA communication
EPA communication
Assumed 4 ftS./
Assumed 5,000 cfm§/
Assumed
-------
Source Operation: Lead Acid Mattery Plant (Continued)
Process/Data Value Remarks
Open Storage • None
Building Dimensions Assumed
Length (m) 60
Width (m) 60
Height (m) 15
£/ Raw assumption, all sources ducted to atmosphere.
-------
Source Operation: Can Manufacture
Process/Data
Value
Remarks
Solder Bath
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rage (g/sec)
Diameter (m)
Exit Velocity (m/sec)
Temperature (°C)
15.2
0.0023
1.5
0.28
25
Assumed 50 ft3-/
Battelle Economics of Recovery Report^'
Assumed 5 ft3-/
Assumed 1,100 cfm3/
Assumed3-'
t-o
N3
Wiping Station
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec)
Diameter (m)
Exit Velocity (m/sec)
Temperature (°C)
15.2
0.011
1.5
0.28
25
a/
Assumed—
Battelle Economics of Recovery Report^'
Assumed—
Assumed!!/
Assumed—'
Open Storage
Building Dimensions
Length (m)
Width (m)
Height (m)
None
60
60
15
Assumed
Assumed
ci/ Haw assumption, all sources ducted to atmosphere.
b/ "Economics of Lead Removal in Selected Industries,"
August 31, 1973, by Battelle.
EPA Contract No. 68-02-0611, Task 3,
-------
Source Operation: Gable Covering Plant
Process/Data
Value
Remarks
Dross Kettle, Robertson Pot,
Robertson Press
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec)
Diameter (m)
Exit Velocity (m/sec)
Temperature (°C)
15.2
0.0024
0.51
12.4
41.1
Assumed 50
MRI Report No.
MRI Report-'
MRI Report^/
MRK Report^/
3585-C(32)-/
to
OJ
Lead Pit
Height (m)
?b Emission Rate (g/sec)
Diameter (m)
Exit Velocity (m/sec)
Temperature. (°C)
15.2
0.0031
0.30
10.4
39.4
Assumed—'
MRI Report^/
MRI Report^
MRI ReportV
MRI Report^/
-------
Source Operation: Cable Covering Plant (Continued)
Process/Data
Value
Remarks
K)
Peri-ille Pot
Height (m)
IM> Emission Kate
lUainetev (m)
lixit Velocity (m/scc)
Tempera ture (°C)
Open Storage
Building Dimensions
Length (m)
Width (m)
Height (m)
15.2
0.000025
0.36
2.7
25.4
None
30
30
12
a/
Assumed—
MRI Report^'
Mill Report^/
MRI Report^/
MRI Report^/
a/
Assumed"
a/ Raw assumption.
b/ "Kmission from Cable Covering Facility," EPA Contract No. 68-02-0228, Task No. 31,
MRI Project No. 3585-C(32), (EMB Project Report No. 73-CCC-l).
-------
Source Operation: Type Metal Operation
Process/Data
Value
Remarks
Fugitive Source
Height (m)
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec)
Diameter (m)
Exit Velocity (m/sec)
Temperature ( C)
Open Stox-age
Building Dimensions
Length (m)
Width (m)
Height (in)
15.2
1.0
1.2
5.0
25
None
45
45
15
Assumed roof vents, 50 ft—'
Assumed^/
Assumed 4 itSJ
Assumed^.'
Assumed ambient—'
Assumed^.'
a/ Raw assumption.
b/ Raw assumption that all plant air ducted to atmosphere.
-------
Source Operation: Combustion of Fossil Fuel
Process/Data Value
Remarks
Boiler
Height (m) 91.5
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec) 0.022
Diameter (m) 4.3
Exit Velocity (m/sec) 8.2
Temperature (°C) 149
Open Storage None
Building Dimensions
Length (m) 45
Width (m) 45
Height (m) 45
MRI Project No. 3821-0(27 &
MRI Report^/
MRI Report^/
MRI Report*/
AssumedlL'
Assumed"
a/ "Hazardous Emission Characterization'of Utility Boilers," EPA Report
No. EPA-650/2-75-006, July 1975.
b_/ Raw assumption.
126
-------
Source Operation: Waste Oil Combustion
Process/Data Value
Remarks
Boiler
Height (m)
Temperature ( C)
Open Storage
Building Dimensions
Length (m)
Width (m)
Height (m)
41.8
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec) 0.150
Diameter (m) 1.5
Exit Velocity (m/sec) 7.6
149
None
30
30
15
Letter, Hawaii Electric Company,
December 21, 1972
Letter, Hawaii Electric Company
Assumed 5 ft*./
Assumed 1,500 ppm£/
Assumed3.'
Assumed3/
Assumed3/
a/ Raw assumption.
127
-------
Source Operation: Waste Grankcase Oil Combustion
Process/Pata Value
Remarks
Boiler Stack
Height (m) 61
Pb Emission Rate (g/sec) 3.1
Diameter (m) 3.1
Exit Velocity (m/sec) 0.647
Temperature (°C) 149
Open Storage None
Building Dimensions
Length (m) 45
Width (m) 45
Height (m) 18
Assumed 200 ftS
Table I, Waste Oil Roundup No. 1,
Assumed 10 ftJ/
Assumed 10,000 cfm§/
Assumed 300° F£/
Assumed^/
Assumed^
a/ Raw assumption.
b/ "Waste Oil Roundup—No. 1," Committee on Disposal of Waste Products,
Division of Marketing, American Petroleum Institute, 1801 K Street,
N.W,, Washington, D.C. 20006.
128
------- |