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 ------- |