ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT
EPA-330/2-77-005-B
IMPACT OF
PARTICULATE MATTER EMISSIONS
ON AMBIENT AIR QUALITY
United States Steel Corporation - Geneva Works
Appendix
Source Identification
(JULY-AUGUST 1976)
NATIONAL ENFORCEMENT INVESTIGATIONS CENTER
DENVER.COLORADO
FEBRUARY 1977
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT
EPA-330/2-77-005-B
IMPACT OF
PARTICULATE MATTER EMISSIONS
ON AMBIENT AIR QUALITY
UNITED STATES STEEL CORPORATION - GENEVA WORKS
APPENDIX II - SOURCE IDENTIFICATION
(JULY-AUGUST 1976)
FEBRUARY 1977
NATIONAL ENFORCEMENT INVESTIGATIONS CENTER
Denver, Colorado
-------
- CONTENTS
I INTRODUCTION 1
Background 2
Site Description 3
Project Description 5
II SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 8
Coke Ovens 8
Coke Byproduct Plant 10
Sintering Plant 11
Blast Furnaces 12
Open Hearth Furnaces 12
Rolling Mills 13
Slag Handling Facilities 13
Power Plant 14
Miscellaneous Sources 14
Emissions Inventory 14
III COKE PLANT 16
Process Description and Inspection Observations 16
Coal Preparation 16
Charging 17
Topside 20
Pushing 21
Quenching 22
Doors 23
Combustion System 25
IV COKE BYPRODUCT RECOVERY FACILITIES 28
Process Description 28
Byproduct Gas Plant 28
Benzene Plant 31
Nitrogen Plant 34
Inspection Observations 37
V SINTERING PLANT 40
Process Description 40
Materials Handing 40
Sintering 41
Particulate Emission Sources 42
Particulate Control System 44
Process Emissions 45
Uindbox Cyclones 45
Windbox Scrubbers 50
Discharge-end Scrubber 55
Inspection Observations 57
VI BLAST FURNACES 59
Process Description 59
Materials Handling 59
Furnaces 60
Particulate Emission Sources 63
Particulate Control System 64
Inspection Observations 67
VII OPEN HEARTH FURNACES 70
Process Description 70
Hot Metal Handling 70
Furnaces 72
Ingot Pouring 77
Particulate Emission Sources and Inspection Observations .... 79
Particulate Control System 81
Process Emissions 81
Electrostatic Precipitators 83
Scrubbers 87
-------
CONTENTS (Cont.)
VIII ROLLING MILLS 93
Process Description 93
Slab Hill 93
Plate and Hot Strip Mill 94
Structural Hill 95
Pipe Mill [ 97
Particulate Emission Sources and Inspection Observations . . '. . 98
IX SLAG HANDLING 99
Process Description 99
Open Hearth Side 99
Blast Furnace Side 101
Particulate Emission Sources and Control System 103
Inspection Observations 104
X POWER PLANT 105
Process Description 105
Small Boiler Units 105
Large Boiler Units 106
Particulate Emission Sources and Control System 106
XI MISCELLANEOUS OPERATIONS 108
Foundry 108
Pig Casting Machine 109
Chemical Coke Plant Ill
XII EMISSIONS INVENTORY 112
ADDENDA
A Addendum 1 to Study Plan for Air Quality
Monitoring at USSC-Geneva Works 118
B EPA June 8 and November 4, 1976 Letters
to USSC-Geneva Works 125
C Particulate Grain Loading Calculations 138
D NEIC Emission Inventory Calculations 140
E USSC Emissions Inventory Calculations (1974) 158
-------
Tables
1 Average Chemical Analyses of Quench Water 24
2 Approximate Chemical Analysis of Coke Oven
Underfire Fuel Gas 27
3 Typical Composition of Sintering Plant Feed Materials 43
4 Characteristics of Exhaust Gas and Participate
Emissions for Sintering Plant 49
5 General, Physical, and Design Parameters for
Sintering Plant Windbox Cyclones 51
6 General and Design Parameters for Sintering Plant
Windbox Emission Scrubbers 53
7 General and Design Parameters for Sintering Plant
Discharge - End Scrubber 56
8 Average Composition of Charge to Blast Furnace 2 -
August 23, 1976 61
9 Typical Composition of Clean Blast Furnace Gas 66
10 Operating Parameters Monitored at Blast Furnaces 69
11 Metallurgical Composition Ranges of Steels Produced 71
12 Operating Parameters Monitored at Open Hearth Furnaces 78
13 Characteristics of Exhaust Gas and Particulate
Emissions for Open Hearth Furnaces 82
14 General, Physical, and Design Parameters for Open Hearth
Furnace Electrostatic Precipitators 84
15 Operating Data Collected from Open Hearth Furnace
Electrostatic Precipitators - August 24, 1976 85
16 General and Design Parameters for Open Haarth
Furnace Scrubbers 90
17 Typical Monthly Production at Foundry - 1975 110
18 Summary of EPA-NEIC Particulate Emissions Estimates 114
19 Comparison of Particulate Emissions Estimates
USSC and EPA-NEIC Emissions Inventories 115
Figures
1 Facility Location - USSC Geneva Works 4
2 Plot Layout - USSC Geneva Works 7
3 By-Product Gas Plant Flow Diagram - USSC Geneva Works 29
4 Benzene Plant Flow Diagram - USSC Geneva Works 32
5 Nitrogen Plant Flow Diagram - USSC Geneva Works 35
6 Sintering Plant Windbox Emission Control System -
USSC Geneva Works 46
7 Sintering Plant Windbox Scrubber - USSC Geneva Works 47
8 Sintering Plant Discharge End Scrubber - USSC Geneva Works ... 48
9 Open Hearth Emission Control System - USSC Geneva Works 73
10 Open Hearth Scrubber - USSC Geneva Works 89
11 Open Hearth Slag Processing Flow Diagram
Heckett Engineering Company 100
12 Blast Furnace Slag Processing Flow Diagram
Heckett Engineering Company 102
-------
I. INTRODUCTION
BACKGROUND
In May 1972, EPA disapproved the control strategy for participate
matter for the Wasatch Front Intrastate Air Quality Control Region
(AQCR) in Utah. On May 14, 1973, EPA promulgated particulate matter
control regulations applicable to, among other things, several of the
process and fugitive sources at United States Steel Corporation (USSC) -
Geneva Works, Orem, Utah. USSC, in turn, filed a "Petition for Recon-
sideration."
Following meetings with USSC and several plant visits, EPA proposed
amendments to those regulations and held a public hearing. On September
5, 1974, EPA promulgated final particulate matter regulations for USSC
in the Utah State Implementation Plan (SIP), including:
a. 45 seconds visible emissions allowed for coke pushing
b. 35 seconds visible emissions allowed for coke charging
c. 5% of the coke oven doors, charging hole covers, and stand-
pipes allowed any visible emissions
d. 10% of the chuckdoors and elbow covers allowed any visible
emissions
e. 0.027 gr/scf allowed from open hearth furnaces (8-hr avg)
f. 0.035 gr/scf allowed from sintering plants (2-hr avg)
-------
On October 4, 1974, USSC filed a second petition challenging certain
aspects of the revised regulations.
The EPA Region VIII office developed and in December 1975 submitted
a revised set of regulations through the EPA concurrence route. These
proposed regulations:
a. acknowledged that the Utah visible emissions regulation is not
applicable to coke pushing operations
b. allowed 10% of the coke oven doors to produce visible emissions
c. required the Geneva Works power plant to meet 0.1 Ib particu-
late/10 Btu. (Other power plants in the AQCR are required to
meet 0.34 lb/10 Btu.) The Region also provided a technical
summary to justify their actions; the justification focuses on
a revised emissions inventory and current air quality data.
On March 12, 1976, the EPA Division of Stationary Source Enforcement
(DSSE) expressed concern with the Region VIII technical justification
underlying their regulation package and asked the National Enforcement
Investigations Center (NEIC) to gather additional data (emissions and
air quality) to evaluate the adequacy of the existing set of regulations
for the control of particulate matter from USSC Geneva Works.
The report evaluating the adequacy of the Utah SIP as it pertains
to USSC Geneva Works is contained in four volumes. Appendix I - Ambient
Air Quality deals with the design, operation, and results of the NEIC
air quality monitoring effort. Appendix II - Source Identification
deals with the evaluation of the process operations and the air pollution
control equipment, as well as the development of a revised emissions
inventory. Appendix III - Source/Receptor Relationships deals with the
methodology employed, analyses performed, and results of the NEIC emissions
-------
characterization effort. The fourth volume, Summary Report, contains an
analysis of all the findings in the three appendices, and the recom-
mendations.
SITE DESCRIPTION
The United States Steel Corporation (USSC) - Geneva Works is a
steel production facility located on the eastern shore of Utah Lake near
Orem, Utah [Figure 1]. The facility, constructed in 1942-43, was owned
and operated by the U. S. Government during World War II. After the War
it was purchased by USSC and has been operated by them ever since.
The Geneva Works is a totally integrated steel production facility.
Three blast furnaces, four coke batteries, a coke byproducts complex
containing three separate plants, a sintering plant, ten open hearth
furnaces, and rolling mills for structural shapes, plate and strip steel
and steel pipe comprise the main production facilities. Support services
include a foundry area, a power plant with turbo blowers and turbo
generators, slag handling facilities and shop areas. Figure 2 is a plot
layout for the facility.
About 4,600 people are employed at the Geneva Works when the plant
is in full operation. Estimated annual production capacities provided
by USSC are based on a three-blast-furnace operation supplying about
1,440,000 m. tons (1,585,000 tons)/yr of hot metal. The open hearth
furnaces produce about 2,200,000 m. tons (2,400,000 tons)/yr of ingot
steel from the hot metal plus scrap. The ingot steel is consumed to
produce about 670,000 m. tons (750,000 tons) of steel plates, 960,000 m.
tons (1,060,000 tons) of coiled strip, 140,000 m. tons (155,000 tons) of
sheets, and 77,000 m. tons (85,000 tons) of structural shapes. Ingots
are also shipped to other USSC plants on the West Coast for further
processing.
-------
- : ••• •• \x , ~
:' \ •'« ;. •-•-.. Mj
• \ • °v^\
\ . t kT7\ «A\.V
1. Foci/ify Locaf/on - USSC Geneva Works
-------
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
In June 1976 the NEIC developed an addendum to the Study Plan for
Air Quality Monitoring at USSC Geneva Works [Addendum A]. In this
addendum the required activities and time scheduling for the second
phase of the study (emissions inventory/characterization) were defined.
On July 1 and during the period August 23-27, 1976, NEIC personnel
conducted a thorough facilities inspection and operations evaluation at
the Geneva Works. The plant visits were announced in advance to USSC
and had been preceded by a letter sent on June 8, 1976 under the authority
of Section 114 of the Clean Air Act, as amended, requesting substantial
quantities of information. A subsequent letter dated November 4, 1976
requested additional process and operating data [copies of both letters
appear in Addendum B]. The information obtained by both letters plus
that obtained during the July 1 and August 23-27 plant visits have been
incorporated into this appendix.
The purposes of the plant visits were threefold: 1) to obtain an
understanding of the routine operations of the various processes at the
facility and the process variability, 2) to inspect air pollution
control equipment and work practices in use at the facility, and 3) to
develop an emissions inventory for particulate matter emitted from the
facility. The utility of the emissions inventory is, of course, greatly
influenced by the success of the first two objectives, as well as the
quality of the information obtained from the Company during the inspection
interviews and from the Section 114 letter responses.
The facility inspection was prescheduled with USSC personnel to
allow approximately one-half day for each of the major processes, with
time allotted for the smaller processes and/or support functions on an
'as available' basis. Pre-inspection conferences were held each morning
between USSC Plant Engineering and NEIC personnel for an overview of the
-------
unit operations and coordination of the day's activities. The following
schedule was observed during the inspection:
Monday, August 23, 1976
a.m. - Pre-inspection briefing
p.m. - Blast furnace operations
Tuesday, August 24, 1976
a.m. - Open hearth furnaces
p.m. - Continuation of same
Foundry area
Open hearth control system
Wednesday, August 25, 1976
a.m. - Raw materials handling
Sintering plant
Sintering plant control systems
p.m. - Coke production
Open hearth control system
Thursday, August 26, 1976
a.m. - Rolling mills
p.m. - Coke byproduct plants
Coke plant
Friday, August 27, 1976
a.m. - Power plant
Pig casting machine
Raw material unloading
Hot metal mixing building
p.m. - Pipe mill
Inspection debriefing
The Heckett Engineering Company's slag handling operations, located
on the northwest corner of the USSC plant site [Figure 2], were inspected
independently on July 1, 1976. NEIC personnel worked directly with
Heckett personnel in arranging and conducting this inspection, since
this operation, although located on USSC property, is independent of
USSC.
-------
,f= —ir— —Tniir CT"" SU»*TA'"O«
c—' llMTOOCEM PLANT j'\J p I—'
IDU _!}[.- ' COAL CHflCAL Pl»
=5tBD--fJE£ d W*™
Figure 2. Plof tayouf - USSC Geneva Works
-------
II. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
In response to a request by the EPA Division of Stationary Source
Enforcement, the NEIC undertook an evaluation of the particulate emissions
from the United States Steel Corporation - Geneva Works at Orem, Utah,
and the effect of these emissions on the ambient air quality of the
Wasatch Front Intrastate AQCR. One portion of the NEIC program was
oriented to investigating the particulate emission potential of USSC
process operations, the evaluation of installed air pollution control
equipment, and the development of a revised emissions inventory for the
facility. Facility inspections were conducted on July 1 and August 23-
27, 1976 to obtain specific process information to evaluate subjectively
the particulate emission potential of the various processes. Two compre-
hensive letters were also written to USSC requesting supplemental infor-
mation on plant operations. This appendix summarizes the results of
these investigations.
The following conclusions were developed based on the information
obtained during those site visits and from the information provided by
USSC in response to EPA letters.
COKE OVENS
1. Charging operations contribute significantly to the particulate
emissions associated with the coke batteries. A form of stage charging
is employed at Geneva; however, the emissions observed during seven
charge sequences were in excess of those at other stagecharged batteries
observed by NEIC personnel. Visible emissions during charging ranging
from 40 to 100% opacity and in excess of 35 seconds duration were observed
during the inspection.
-------
A major problem associated with the stage-charging technique employed
at Geneva appears to be an inadequate number of topside personnel for
the charge schedule. Two persons, a larry car operator and a lid-man,
are responsible for a variety of topside operations including the entire
charge sequence, cleaning of goosenecks, mudding of charge port and
standpipe caps, etc. The charge sequence of one oven every eight minutes
leaves very little time for error in personnel coordination.
The current practice at Geneva of delaying the operation of the
push machine leveling bar until after the charge sequence is completed
is contrary to the practice at other coke batteries observed by NEIC
personnel. USSC personnel stated that the coal used at Geneva Works to
charge the ovens has a naturally flat angle of repose and, hence, the
need for a leveling operation during the charge is minimal. From the
density of charging emissions noted during the inspection, it appeared
that the oven aspiration was not sufficient to evacuate the gas volumes
generated during the charge. Insufficient steam aspiration at the
collector mains and/or peaking of the coal in the ovens could be contrib-
uting to the charging emissions problems.
2. Several topside emissions were noted at the Geneva facility.
Numerous leaks were noted from oven charge port lids and standpipe caps.
The lid luting efforts were only partially successful, possibly due to
the technique employed (i.e., mopping the mud vs. pouring from a ladle),
the consistency and/or amount of luting material us.ed, the lid/casting
interface fit, or the general shortage of topside personnel.
Several significant leaks were noted in the collector mains them-
selves. These leaks appeared to be due to inadequate maintenance.
3. Coke pushing emissions observed during the inspection ranged
in opacity from 20 to 30% and appeared to result from thermal buoyancy
of coke fines. No emissions normally associated with uncoked coal,
i.e., green coke, were noted during the inspection.
-------
4. A brief inspection of leaking pushside doors and chuck doors
on battery 1 indicated that this battery would not have complied with
the SIP regulation.
5. Considerable quantities of fine particulate matter were noted
in the coke quench plume after the steam had dissipated. USSC quenches
the hot coke with contaminated water which contains waste products from
the coke byproducts plant, such as excess flushing liquor.
USSC reportedly uses impregnated pine baffles in the quench tower
chimneys to knock out large particulate in the quench plume. It was
noted that the baffles in the north quench tower were in poor repair
during the inspection.
6. The combustion stacks on batteries 1 and 4 were noted to
periodically discharge dense plumes; battery 1 stack emissions were
periodically in excess of 40% opacity.
COKE BYPRODUCT PLANT
1. The majority of the operations conducted in these facilities
employ closed systems and, hence, do not pose a particulate emission
problem.
2. Waste flushing liquor and other waste byproduct liquid streams
resulting from these operations are currently discharged to the coke
quench water systems. As a result, they indirectly contribute to the
particulate emissions from the complex.
3. The prill tower, and driers/coolers, and the blending opera-
tions at the ammonium nitrate facility are potential sources of particu-
late emissions. Of these sources, the uncontrolled prill tower exhaust
appears to be the most significant with calculated emissions averaging
-------
11
0.13 m. ton (0.14 ton)/day. The other sources discharge to control
systems.
4. There are no sulfur removal systems installed on the coke oven
gas treatment facilities at the Geneva Works. Sulfur dioxide emissions
from the combustion of these gases at the coke ovens and throughout the
facility could substantially contribute to the ambient sulfur dioxide
levels in the AQCR. Further investigation of these contributions is
beyond the scope of the NEIC project.
SINTERING PLANT
1. Fugitive emissions were observed at the iron ore crushing and
screening stations adjacent to the sintering plant. Water spray systems
at these locations were ineffectual or inoperative.
2. It is questionable whether the sintering machine windbox
emissions control system is adequate to meet the SIP requirement of 0.08
o
g/m (0.035 gr/scf). The USSC-quoted removal efficiency for the scrubber
systems appears to be overstated. The potential for particulate addition
due to mist carryover has been neglected in USSC considerations of
particulate removal efficiencies.
Significant particulate plumes ranging from 10 to 40% opacity were
noted from the windbox scrubber exhaust stacks after the steam dissipated.
3. The exhaust hooding and ductwork associated with the discharge-
end of the sintering machines was in very poor repair. Collection
efficiencies were severely reduced and fugitive emissions from these
sources were observed to be significant. Insufficient information was
available to evaluate the performance of the scrubber system which
theoretically controls the emissions from these sources. However, in
light of the collection efficiency problems mentioned above, it is
-------
12
improbable that the scrubber is currently treating a satisfactory propor-
tion of the discharge end emissions.
4. Heavy fugitive emissions were noted at the sinter hot screen-
ing facility. Incomplete sintering of the feed materials and poor
operation of water spray nozzles contributed to this problem.
5. Periodic heavy emissions were noted from the vents serving the
sintering plant pug mills. Company personnel indicated that water
supply problems contribute to this condition.
6. The sintering plant is an antiquated facility. The material
feed systems, pug mills, and sinter cooling facilities were originally
installed in the early 1940's and are not state-of-the-art.
BLAST FURNACES
1. The furnace hot metal casting and slag flushing operations are
significant sources of fugitive particulate emissions. These emissions
are currently uncontrolled.
2. Some particulate leakage was noted from the hopper bells atop
furnaces 2 and 3. Furnace 1 was not in operation during this inspection.
3. No furnace slips were observed during this inspection.
4. No visible emissions were noted from the stove combustion
stacks when the furnaces were in a normal operating mode.
OPEN HEARTH FURNACES
1. It is questionable whether the emission control systems on the
-------
13
open hearth furnace exhausts can comply with the SIP regulation of
0.062 g/m (0.027 gr/scf). The electrostatic precipitator maintenance
and operating procedures appear inadequate. The USSC-derived particulate
removal efficiencies for the scrubber units used on these systems appear
to be overstated. Mist carryover from the scrubbers, adding to the
exhaust gas particulate load, appears to be a significant problem.
2. The open hearth furnace operations are significant sources of
fugitive particulate matter. Fugitive emissions were observed from hot
metal transfer and reladling operations, furnace leaks, furnace charging
and tapping operations, and ingot pouring procedures. All of these
fugitive emissions are uncontrolled.
ROLLING MILLS
1. There are no hot scarfing operations at the Geneva Works.
Handscarfing of slabs and blooms constitutes a minor fugitive emission
problem.
2. The major particulate emissions associated with the rolling
mills are the combustion of fuel oil in the soaking pits and reheat
furnaces of the facilities.
SLAG HANDLING FACILITIES
Particulate emissions associated with this operation include fugi-
tive emissions from storage piles, haul roads, and crushing operations,
These emissions appear to be controllable with judicious use of water
sprays.
-------
14
POWER PLANT
The five power boilers are potential major sources of particulate
emissions when they are fired with coal. Currently none of these boilers
has an emission control system. USSC is in the process of installing
baghouse control systems for the three larger boilers.
MISCELLANEOUS SOURCES
1. The foundry sand reclaim system is a potential source of
particulate emissions. Emissions from this system are reportedly
controlled by wet scrubbers. These scrubbers were not seen in operation
during the inspection.
The foundry casting operations are potential minor sources of
fugitive particulate emissions.
2. The pig casting machine at Geneva is a potential minor source
of fugitive emissions. This unit is only operated intermittently.
3. The drier exhaust stacks on the chemical coke plant emit con-
siderable quantities of particulate emissions. These exhaust stacks are
uncontrolled.
EMISSIONS INVENTORY
Particulate emissions data computed by NEIC for the various sources
at the Geneva Works indicate an average daily particulate emission rate
during the period June-August 1976 of approximately 36 m. tons (38
tons)/day. Fugitive emissions from storage piles, paved and unpaved
roads, and various open areas accounted for approximately 42% of this
-------
15
total. Several significant differences were noted between the NEIC-
calculated figures and those previously submitted by USSC to the EPA.
The majority of these differences can be accounted for by the use of
updated or additional emission factors, more in-depth evaluation of the
sources, or consideration of additional sources.
-------
III. COKE PLANT
PROCESS DESCRIPTION AND INSPECTION OBSERVATIONS
There are four coke batteries at the Geneva facility, numbered 1,
2, 3, and 4 in a south-to-north orientation. Each battery has sixty-
three Becker type underjet ovens. The ovens are tapered from 33 cm (13
in) wide at the pusher side to 39.4 cm (15.5 in) wide at the coke side
and are 4 m (13 ft) high by 12.3 m (40.5 ft) long. The coke ovens
3 3
average 16.3 m (576 ft ) in volume and produce approximately 8 m. tons
(9 tons) of coke per 13.2 m. tons (14.5 tons) of coal charged. The
normal coking cycle for these batteries is 16.25 hours during the summer
months and 15.75 hours in the winter.
Coal Preparation
Coal used in the coking operations is received from three sources.
High volatile content coal is obtained from two USSC mines operated at
Price, Utah and at Sommerset, Colorado. Both of these coals average 37%
volatile material, 0.6 to 0.7% sulfur, and 7.0% ash, all percentages by
weight. The Sommerset coal is washed and dried at the mine site. The
Price coal is washed and dried at Wellington, Utah.
USSC purchases medium volatile coal from the Mid-Continent Coal
Company which operates a mine near Carbondale, Colorado. This coal
averages 25% volatile material, 0.6% sulfur, and 6.5% ash. It is washed
and dried at the Carbondale site before being shipped to the Geneva
Works.
-------
17
Coal from all mines is received at Geneva in gondola railroad cars.
The cars are emptied by a Link Belt rotary railroad car dumper. The
coal is transported via conveyor belts to two storage yards with a total
net capacity of 68,000 m. tons (75,000 tons).
High and medium volatile coals are reclaimed from the storage yards
and transported via conveyor belts to two Pennsylvania center feed
hammer mills operating in parallel. Each of these units has a capacity
of 320 m. tons (350 tons)/hr. The crushed coals are then blended to
obtain the desired volatile content and sent to two Jeffery Manufacturing
Company reversible hammer mills for pulverizing and blending. No. 2
fuel oil (without additives) is mixed with the blended coal at this
time. Approximately 3.1 liters/m. ton coal (0.75 gal/ton coal) of oil
is added. The pulverized coal is screened and then sent to storage
bunkers atop the coke batteries. Oversized material from the screening
operations is recycled to the secondary hammer mills.
The final coal blend sent to the storage bunkers is 70% less than
0.31 cm (1/8 in) and has a moisture content of 5.0 to 5.5% by weight.
Volatile content is about 35%.
There are two storage bunkers at the coke batteries, each with a
capacity of 2,300 m.tons (2,500 tons). Each bunker serves two batteries.
One bunker is located between batteries 1 and 2 and the other between
batteries 3 and 4.
Charging
USSC employs a stage charging technique at Geneva. The ovens each
have three charging ports and dual gas collection mains. There are
three, three-hopper larry cars available at the batteries. Normally one
is kept in reserve status and the other two service the four batteries -•
-------
18
one for batteries 1 and 2 and one for batteries 3 and 4. Two topside
personnel operate as a team servicing each pair of batteries. They
alternate between the larry-car-man and lid-man roles. It is normal
procedure to charge (and push) seven ovens per battery on an "alternating
tens" sequence and then to repeat the sequence on the adjoining battery.
A normal charging sequence lasts approximately 2.5 to 3 minutes
from the time the larry car is positioned above the oven charge ports
until the final port lid is replaced at the end of the charge. The
procedural sequence is as follows.
1. The larry car hoppers are loaded with the coal charge at the
coal storage bunker and the car moves to the oven to be charged,
2. The charging port lids from ports No. 1 and 3 are manually
removed while No. 2 lid remains in place.
3. The larry-car-man lowers the hopper sleeves from hoppers No. 1
and 3 around the charge ports.
4. The steam aspiration jets at both collector mains are turned
on and the oven is connected to the two collector mains by the
lid-man.
5. The larry-car-man discharges hoppers 1 and 3 simultaneously
into the oven.
6. After hoppers No. 1 and 3 have been discharged into the oven,
the drop sleeves are retracted and the larry car is backed off
about 3 m (10 ft).
7. The lids on ports No. 1 and 3 are then replaced, and lid No. 2
is removed.
-------
19
8. The larry car is then repositioned over the oven and hopper
No. 2 is discharged. All three of the larry car hoppers
discharge approximately the same quantity of coal into the
oven.
9. At the conclusion of No. 2 hopper discharge, the larry car is
once again backed off about 3 m (10 ft), and No. 2 lid is
replaced.
10. The two steam aspiration systems are then turned off and the
charge port lids are mudded with a sealing mud.
11. The larry car then returns to the bunker for another coal
charge.
12. After the charging operation is completed, the pusher machine
operator opens the oven chuck door and makes one complete pass
of the oven with the leveling bar. USSC personnel reported
that only one leveling bar pass is required because the coal
has a relatively flat natural angle of repose and assumes a
flat surface without additional leveling.
During the NEIC inspection of the coke batteries, seven oven charges
were observed. Visible emissions ranging from 40% to 100% opacity were
noted from all three charging ports. The emissions did not pass from
the charge ports through the hoppers to the atmosphere; rather they
normally escaped from the ports directly to the atmosphere. Emissions
ranged from black and brown to yellow-white in color and lasted from 30
to 90 seconds.
USSC personnel reported they had modified the steam aspiration
systems for the batteries in an attempt to reduce the charging emissions.
They have experimented with various sized steam nozzles ranging as large
-------
20
as 1.9 cm (3/4 in) diameter units. They found that too many fine particles
were carried over into the collector mains with these larger units and
decided to use 1.3 cm (1/2 in) diameter nozzles. Plant steam is reported
2
to be delivered to the aspiration nozzles at 8.8 kg/cm (125 psi) gauge
pressure. USSC personnel had no records on steam usage per battery nor
did they have any figures as to the amount of gases which could be
2
aspirated from an oven with the 1.3 cm (1/2 in) nozzles at 8.8 kg/cm
(125 psi) steam pressure.
Topside
The general condition of the topside brickwork of the batteries
appeared to be good. There were no noticeable leaks in the paving brick
nor were there leaks at the brickwork/port casting interfaces. USSC
personnel mentioned that several port castings are in poor condition
resulting in a poor seal between the casting and the lid.
Several significant leaks were noted in the collector mains themselves
and the oven standpipes. These leaks were apparently the result of
corrosion, poor joints, etc.
The oven charging port lids and standpipe caps were routinely
sealed with a luting material (refractory mud slurry). The luting
material was swabbed onto the lid or cap with mop-like devices. The
sealing efforts were only partially successful; numerous leaks were
noted on both the charging port lids and standpipe caps.
The goosenecks and standpipes were manually cleaned by topside
personnel working on the first and second turns. The pipes were rodded
out with steel bars while the oven was decarburizing before a charge.
-------
21
A general impression obtained during the topside inspection was
that the two topside personnel have a large number of tasks to perform
and cannot successfully do them all. The charge sequence requires each
topside crew to charge an oven every eight minutes. The charge itself
takes 2-1/2 to 3 minutes and the travel time to and from the bunker plus
filling the larry car hoppers accounts for another 3 to 4 minutes. It
is obvious that little time is available for lid sealing and gooseneck
cleaning, much less attending to operational abnormalities. Also,
considerable coordination is required between the larry car operator and
the lid-man during the charge to insure that the oven is connected to
the collector main and aspirated correctly. It was noted that such
coordination was lacking at times during this inspection.
Pushing
The Geneva coke push cycle is similar to the charge cycle, in that
seven ovens are pushed on one battery in an alternating tens sequence.
After completing the sequence on one battery, the pusher machine moves
to the adjacent battery. One pusher machine services two batteries.
Five coke pushes were observed during this inspection. None of
these pushes were noted to contain green coke; all observed pushes
appeared to be thoroughly coked. No voluminous clouds of smoke and
flame were observed. It was noted, however, that substantial quantities
of fine coke particles were carried aloft by thermal buoyancy, resulting
in plumes of 20 to 30% opacity.
Time did not permit an exhaustive visible emissions evaluation of
pushing operations; however, at times during the remainder of the week,
it was possible to observe additional pushes from a distance. Although
no official records were kept, it appeared that at least two to three
times per day dense push emissions normally associated with green coke
were observed.
-------
22
To assure homogeneous coking in each oven, Geneva personnel routinely
check the flue and oven temperatures to insure that an even heat distribu-
tion is being obtained. On the day turn (No. 2), the two end ovens of
each battery get a complete cross-wall check of flue temperatures.
Also, all ovens are checked for coke and push side flue temperatures.
On No. 3 turn, the coke side flues are checked on all ovens. Three
ovens on each battery, on a rotating basis, are checked during each turn
for oven temperatures. Any temperature irregularities noted during
these inspections are corrected by adjusting the burning patterns of the
underfire jets or by removing the jets for major maintenance and cleaning.
Quenching
There are two coke quench towers at the coke plant. The south
tower services batteries 1 and 2 and the north tower services batteries
3 and 4. Contaminated industrial water from the byproduct plant is used
at both towers.
Both of the quench towers are equipped with impregnated white pine
baffles which are arranged in a single layer just below the stack portion
of the tower. The baffle design is based on the results of a study
conducted at the USSC Clairton, Pennsylvania, coke works.
Geneva personnel reported that it is difficult to keep the quench
tower baffles in place due to the intense heat of the coke. The baffles
must be replaced "every few months." During the NEIC inspection it was
noted that several of the baffle portions in the north quench tower were
missing.
As mentioned above, USSC uses contaminated byproduct recovery
wastewater for quench water. The quench water for the south tower
contains the "devil liquor" which is acquired from blowdown of the
-------
23
ammonia sulfate recovery process and the excess flushing liquor. The
quench water for the north tower contains contaminated caustic material
from both the Benzene Plant and the Nitrogen Plant plus condensed water
from the latter plant. USSC reported that they use approximately
15,000 liters (4,000 gal) of contaminated water per quench. The analyses
of an average quench water sample are summarized in Table 1.
During a quench, both towers exhibited copious quantities of satura-
ted steam. Substantial particulate plumes were observed from both
towers after the steam had dissipitated. The particulate plume from the
south tower appeared to be consistently denser than that from the north
tower. Also, particulate emissions continued to evolve from the quench
car after it had been removed from the quench tower area. The particu-
lates were noted to be white-grey in color.
Doors
Leaks from the push side, coke side, and chuck doors of the four
batteries were observed during this inspection. A brief door survey was
conducted on the pushside doors of battery 1; 12% of the oven doors and
20% of the chuck doors were observed to be leaking during this inspection,
Geneva personnel reported that they have a routine door maintenance
program. Every door and door jamb assembly is cleaned manually with a
spud bar when the door is removed during a push sequence. Daily, twelve
doors per battery, on a rotating schedule, are given a thorough cleaning.
The normal door cleaning complement consists of three persons per pair
of batteries: two on the pusher side, and one on the coke side. On the
day turn, there are two additional men per pair of batteries, one for
the pusher side and the other for the coke side. These individuals are
responsible for cleaning the chuck door (on the pusher side) and the
door jambs down to the first lock bar (on both sides).
-------
24
Table 1
AVERAGE CHEMICAL ANALYSES OF QUENCH WATER
USSC - GENEVA WORKS
Chemical Constituent Concentration (ppm)
Total Dissolved Solids 4,876
Total Suspended Solids 155
Phenol 45
Sulfates 64
Sulfites 352
-------
25
Geneva personnel report that they also routinely remove doors from
the ovens for major repair of the refractory plugs and knife edges.
Through July 24, 200 doors were reported to have been rehabilitated
during 1976 and 90% of these had received both plug change and knife
edge repair.
The oven doors at Geneva are equipped with spring steel knife
edges. These knife edges can be externally adjusted while the doors are
in place. If significant leakage is noted from any door, the battery
maintenance personnel can adjust these knife edges to attempt to seal
the knife edge against the jamb.
Combustion System
By design, the Becker type coke ovens burn fuel gas on an entire
oven wall simultaneously. The products of combustion from the vertical
flues of the walls in which the gas is burning ("on" walls) enter short
bus flues and then are conducted over the top of the oven through
cross-over flues to a companion series of bus flues on the opposite wall
("off" walls). The combustion products are routed from here through the
vertical flues of the "off" wall to checker regeneration systems for
heat recovery. Every thirty minutes the gas flow through the checkers
and flue system is reversed. The stored heat in the checker brickwork
is thus recovered by the incoming combustion air.
The products of combustion leaving the regenerative checkers are
collected in waste heat flues and routed to waste heat stacks. Each
battery has its own waste heat stack which is 76 m (250 ft) high and
tapers from a base diameter of 5.2 m (17.25 ft) to an outlet diameter of
3.3 m (10.75 ft).
The main parameters affecting emissions discharged from the waste
-------
26
heat stacks are the air-to-fuel ratio in the combustion gases, the
"cleanliness" of the fuel gas, and the general condition of the oven
walls. Geneva uses coke oven byproduct gas as fuel to the coke oven
underfire system. This gas, which has been purified in the byproduct
recovery plant, consists mainly of methane and hydrogen and has an
average heat content of 4,000 to 5,200 kg-cal/m3 (560 to 580 Btu/ft3).
Approximately 0.8 x 106 m3 (27 x 106 scf)/day of this fuel is burned in
the four coke batteries. Table 2 is an approximate chemical analysis,
provided by USSC personnel, of this gas.
During the inspection an evaluation of oven wall condition was not
conducted. However, Geneva personnel reported they use a mud gun to
repair brickwork cracks with a fireclay mud slurry. They reportedly
repair three to four ovens per day. They do not routinely mud the roofs
of the ovens since they feel that their roof decarburization program has
helped improve roof brick life.
Visible emissions were observed from the four battery waste heat
stacks periodically throughout the duration of the week-long inspection
period. Batteries 1 and 4 exhibited the densest plumes for the longest
periods of time. At times, battery 1 stack emissions exceeded 40%
opacity.
-------
27
Table 2
APPROXIMATE CHEMICAL ANALYSIS OF COKE OVEN
UNDERFIRE FUEL GAS
USSC - GENEVA WORKS
Gas Constituent % by Volume
Hydrogen 50
Methane 26
Carbon Monoxide 10
Carbon Dioxide 3
Nitrogen 4
Hydrogen Sulfide 0.48
Miscellaneous Hydrocarbon 6.52
-------
IV. COKE BYPRODUCT RECOVERY FACILITIES
PROCESS DESCRIPTION
Coal decomposition products, which are mostly gaseous, are exhausted
from the individual coke ovens through the oven standpipes and goosenecks
into the battery collector mains. There are two collector mains per
battery which are connected by jumper pipes at the north and south ends
of the batteries. These jumper pipes are center tapped to four mains,
one per battery, which route the decomposition products to the Byproduct
Gas Plant. At the Geneva Works, byproduct recovery is accomplished in
three separate plants: the Byproduct Gas Plant, the Benzene Plant, and
the Nitrogen Plant. Each is discussed separately.
Byproduct Gas Plant
Figure 3 shows a simplified process flow for the Byproduct Gas
Plant.
The coal decomposition products collected from the four batteries
are first passed through knock-out pots to remove the main flushing
liquor. This liquor is a combination of the liquor sprayed into the
collector mains to flush out particulate matter and condensed tars from
the coke ovens and the condensed water vapor driven from the charged
coal. The flushing liquor collected in the knock-out pots is sent to
tar decanter units. Here tar-like materials are removed from the liquor
by gravity separation, stored, and ultimately sold to a scavenger opera-
tion. The separated flushing liquor is then chilled in shell and tube
cooling units before advancing to the next stage of the gas treatment.
-------
TO FLARE
GAS
STORAGE
V TANK /
TO COKE OVEN
UNDER FIRE
TO NITROGEN
PLANT
TO FLARE
TO PLANT-WIDE
GAS SYSTEM
1 J FINAL COOLERS
SATURATORs(2
,\
'B-T-X
SCRUBBERS
TAR PRECIPITATORSI
AND REHEATERS,
FINAL
PRECIPITATORS
EXHAUSTERS
1
PRIMARY COOLERS(3; (Z) (l
I
KNOCK-OUT
POTS
I
COKE
BATTERIES
{BATTERIES} |
DQ QD
Figure 3. By-Product Gas Plant Flow Diagram - USSC Geneva Works
ro
vo
-------
30
The coke oven gases are exhausted from the knock-out pots into
three parallel cooler units. Here the gases are cooled by indirect
contact with the chilled, decanted flushing liquor mentioned above. The
coolers are vertical steel towers with wooden baffles. The flushing
liquor discharged from these coolers is recycled through the shell and
tube chiller units in a closed loop. Flushing liquor is continuously
blowndown from this loop and sent to an ammonia stripping still for
ammonia recovery. Effluent from this still is either recycled to the
collector mains or discharged from the system and used as coke quench
water. The wasted flushing liquor is termed "devil liquor."
The cooled coke oven gases are discharged from the primary coolers
through four parallel steam powered, centrifugal pumps termed exhausters.
These units supply 325 mm water vacuum to bring the coke oven gases from
the ovens, through the collector mains, knock-out pots and primary
coolers and supply pressure to force the coke oven gas through the
remainder of the gas cleaning systems.
From the exhausters, the coke oven gases are routed through three
banks of electrostatic precipitator (ESP) units and gas reheaters.
Additional tar materials are removed from the gases in the ESP's and
sold to scavengers.
After passing through the ESP's and reheaters, the gases are bubbled
through two parallel sulfuric acid tanks called saturators. Ammonia in
the coke oven gas reacts with the sulfuric acid to form ammonium sulfate
(NH4)2S04. The (NH4)2S04 crystals precipitate, are collected, centri-
fuged, and air-dried in piles before being sold as fertilizer. Centrate
from this operation is returned to the saturators. The sulfuric acid
concentration is maintained between 3% and 14% by the addition of 96%
acid. Production capacity of this process is about 73 m. tons (80
tons)/day of dried ammonium sulfate.
-------
31
From the saturators, the coke oven gases are sent to two parallel
final coolers. These units are bubble tray towers which provide contact
cooling of the gases with decanted tar materials. The tar also absorbs
naphthalene from the coke oven gases. The naphthalene is reclaimed
along with the tar by the scavenger operation.
From the final coolers, the coke oven gases are passed through two
countercurrent flow scrubbers containing a packing material of curled
steel strips called "curlings." Here the gases are scrubbed with "wash
oil" which has been returned from the Benzene Plant. The wash oil
absorbs benzene, toluene, xylene, and solvent from the gas stream. The
saturated wash oil is then returned to the Benzene Plant.
From the scrubbers, the coke oven gas passes through two parallel
ESP's. Here the remaining tars and other condensed materials are removed
from the gas stream. The resulting purified gas is then separated
essentially into three gas streams. About a third of the total gas
produced is returned to the coke ovens as fuel to the underfire system.
Another third is sent to the Nitrogen Plant. The remaining third is
introduced into a plant-wide fuel gas system. A flare is available to
burn any coke oven gas in excess of the plant requirement and storage
capacity.
Benzene Plant
Figure 4 is a simplified process flow diagram for the Benzene
Plant.
Saturated wash oil is pumped from the Byproduct Gas Plant through
two parallel heat exchangers and two parallel heater units. The heated
wash oil is then introduced into two parallel stills where it is steam
stripped by a countercurrent flow of high pressure steam. Benzene,
-------
32
WASH OIL STILL
SCRUBBERS
CAS FROM ClNAL
' COOLER
OIL —
FINAL HEATER
PCOCN70LIZED WASH OIL
WASH OIL COOLER
VAPOR TO OIL
HEAT EXCHANGER
CAS TO _.
HOLDER
LIGHT OIL VAPOR —
INTfRUFDUTE LIGHT OIL
LtCHT OIL RECTIFIER
SECONDARY LIGHT
OIL CONDENSER
CONDENSER
nris-=-
U U EIV:
C5£ TO COKE -•
OVEN GAS SUPPLY
CS2 STRIPPER
COLUMN
— CRUDE LIGHT OIL
TANK
METERING
TANKS
AGITATOR
— WASHED LIGHT OIL
ACID SLUDGE
TO LADLE
SODA WASH TO
INTERCEPTING SUMP
|—| OCN- TOL
1 4J.N1ERHEOIATES
BENZOL
COLUMN
figure 4. Benzene Plant Flow Diagram - USSC Genora Worki
-------
33
toluene, xylene (B-T-X) and solvent are stripped from the wash oil and
removed from the still as overhead vapors.
The stripped wash oil is then passed through cooler units and
recycled to the Byproduct Gas Plant where it is used to absorb more B-T-
X from the coke oven gas. Make-up wash oil, purchased from the American
Oil Company, is added as needed.
Stripped vapors from the wash oil stills, now termed light oil, are
passed through the wash oil heat exchangers and sent to the light oil
rectifier, which is a fractionation column. About 80 m3 (21,000 gal)/day
of light oil is processed.
The bottoms from the light oil rectifier, termed intermediate light
oil, are routed to a storage tank. From here they can be batch distilled
in a "crude still." The bottoms from this operation are crude residue
which can be burned as a fuel at the open hearth furnaces. Overhead
vapors from the batch still are fractionated and condensed. Naphthalene
and crude aromatic solvents are the products of this distillation stage.
Overhead vapors from the light oil rectifier are condensed to form
a material termed secondary light oil. This material is passed through
a steam stripping column to remove carbon disulfide (CS2). The CS2,
which amounts to about 1.5% by weight of the original light oil, is
mixed with the underfire gas supplied to the coke ovens.
The stripped secondary light oil, now termed crude light oil, is
mixed with 94% to 98% sulfuric acid and 50% sodium hydroxide to remove
impurities such as mercaptans, sulfides, etc. The washed light oil is
then stored for further processing. Acid sludge resulting from the acid
wash is hauled to landfill. Spent caustic from the caustic wash is sent
to a process wastewater sump and is ultimately used in the north quench
tower.
-------
34
Washed light oil from the storage tanks is stripped of benzene in
the benzol column. The resultant pure benzene, termed 1° Benzol, is
condensed and stored in tanks.
Bottoms from the benzol column contain residual amounts of benzene
plus toluene and xylene. These bottoms are fed to a batch still where
they are further separated by fractionation distillation. The products
from this unit operation include pure benzene (1° Benzol), pure xylene
(10° xylol) and pure toluene (1° toluol), plus mixtures of benzene and
toluene, and toluene and xylene.
About 53 m3 (14,000 gal) of 1° Benzol, 11 m3 (3,000 gal) of
1° toluol, 4 m (1,000 gal) of 10° xylol, and 8 m3 (2,000 gal) of crude
solvent are produced each day from the 80 m3 (21,000 gal)/day of light
oil processed. About 4 m3 (1,000 gal)/day is regarded as "lost" material
The B-T-X produced from this facility are extremely pure grades.
The 1° and 10° terms used to describe the materials indicate that all of
the material will volatilize within 1°F and 10°F of the boiling point,
respectively. The B-T-X materials produced at the Geneva facility are
considered to be suitable for nitrification.
Nitrogen Plant
Figure 5 is a simplified process diagram for the Nitrogen Plant.
This facility is actually five separate plants in one unit: an air
separation plant, a coke oven gas purification and separation plant, an
ammonia production plant, a nitric acid production plant, and an ammonia
nitrate production plant.
In the air separation plant, atmospheric air is filtered and then
subjected to cryogenic separation into oxygen and nitrogen. The oxygen
-------
Return Gas
to
Mixed Gas
System
C.O.CA3 O N2
PRECOOLINO
UNIT
COKE OVEN CAS
SEPERATION
C 0. CAS
COMP.
NH, SYNTHESIS
CAS COMP.
B-T-X TO B-T-X PLANT
Al R
SEPARATION
PLANT
COLD
KEROSENE
BAGGED AMMONIUM NITRATE
•
-------
is sent to the open hearth steel furnaces where it is used for lancing
of molten steel to remove impurities.
Coke oven gas is received from the Byproduct Gas Plant after the
gas has been partially purified [Figure 3]. At the Nitrogen Plant the
coke oven gas is compressed and further purified by sequential scrubbing
with an ammonia solution, water, caustic solution, and water again.
Hydrogen sulfide is removed from the coke oven gas by the ammonia scrub-
bing process. Other impurities are removed by the subsequent scrubbing
stages. Liquid blowdown from these scrubbing processes are ultimately
sent to the north quench tower.
The purified coke oven gas is routed to a cryogenic preceding
unit. Nitrogen from the air separation plant is compressed and sent to
the precooling unit also. In the precooling unit, hydrogen is separated
from the higher boiling point constituents (higher boilers) in the coke
oven gas. The higher boilers are mixed with the hydrogen sulfide removed
earlier and returned to the mixed gas system.
The hydrogen from the coke gas is further purified by scrubbing it
with a cold kerosene solution which absorbs trace quantities of B-T-X
from the hydrogen. The recovered B-T-X is recovered in the Benzene
Plant.
In the ammonia plant the purified hydrogen and nitrogen are com-
pressed to about 270 kg/cm (3,800 psi) and passed through a bed of iron
oxide catalyst. The resulting product is liquid, anhydrous ammonia.
About 180 m. tons (200 tons)/day of this material are produced, of which
25% is sold and 75% is used in subsequent processes. The anhydrous
ammonia is stored in pressurized vessels at the site.
In the nitric acid plant, anhydrous ammonia is mixed with air and
passed over a platinum catalyst to form nitrogen dioxide vapor. This
-------
37
vapor is then absorbed in water to produce a 56% solution of nitric
acid. The Geneva nitric acid plant has a nominal production capacity of
350 m3 (90,000 gal)/day of 56% nitric acid. A portion of this produc-
tion is concentrated to 60% and sold. The remainder is used in the
production of ammonium nitrate.
In the ammonium nitrate plant, anhydrous ammonia, water, and 56%
solution of nitric acid are reacted to form an 83% solution of ammonium
nitrate. This solution is concentrated to 96% by evaporation. The
concentrated solution is then pumped to the top of a 49 m (160 ft) high
prill tower. Atop the prill tower, the concentrated solution is passed
through strainer-like discs which form small droplets. These droplets
free-fall the 49 m (160 ft) to the bottom of the tower. During this
fall they cool from 150 to 74°C (300 to 165°F) and crystallize into
spheroids of ammonium nitrate with 4% water of crystallization. About
85% of these spheroids are retained on a No. 14 screen.
The spheroids (prills) are removed from the bottom of the prill
tower by a conveyor belt. This belt transports the prills to a shaker
pan which discharges them into a series of driers and coolers. The
prills are here dried and cooled from 4% moisture and 74°C (165°F) to
0.04% moisture and 29°C (85°F).
From the final cooler, the prills are screened, blended with talc
to form a water resistant talc barrier and sent to final storage or
sales. The ammonia nitrate plant has a nominal capacity of 270 m. tons
(300 tons)/day of prilled product.
INSPECTION OBSERVATIONS
The Byproduct Gas Plant and Benzene Plant are not inherently sources
of particulate emissions since they incorporate closed gas cleaning
systems. The excess coke oven gas flare unit at the Byproduct Gas Plant
-------
33
is the only potential source of continuous particulate emissions. Total
dissolved solids in the liquid blowdowns from the various gas cleaning
processes may be released as particulate matter during coke quenching
operations.
The Nitrogen Plant appears to be the main source of particulate
emissions related to the coke byproduct operations. The prill tower
which is uncontrolled is the primary emission point. USSC personnel
have estimated that approximately 135 kg (300 lb)/day of ammonium nitrate
fines are lost to the atmosphere from the prill tower. A fine, fume-
like plume was observed to be continuously discharged from the top of
the prill tower during the inspection.
The four rotary prill dryer/cooler units are also potential sources
of emissions of ammonium nitrate fines. Exhaust gases from these units
are discharged to three identical C. 0. Bartlett and Snow Co. Model No.
77-21-123 wet cyclone collector systems operating in parallel. The
collector systems, which were installed in 1958, each have a design gas
flow capacity of 270 m3/min (9,400 acfm) and a design collection efficien-
cy of 98% to 99%. USSC has no emission test data for these units. No
visible emissions were observed from the collector exhaust stacks observed
during the inspection.
The prill screening and talc/prill blending operation are vented to
a baghouse which discharges through the side of the building to the
atmosphere. The baghouse is a Wheelabrator No. 8-R Model 126D, Dustube
Dust Collector which employs cotton bags. The air-to-cloth ratio for
the unit is 2.72:1 at an average headloss of 4.6 cm (1.8 in) water. The
design collection efficiency of the unit is 99%. USSC has no emission
test data for this unit.
-------
39
There are no combustion devices (process heaters, furnaces, etc.)
associated with the various byproduct plants. Steam heat exchangers are
used where heat transfer is required. Steam is supplied from the Geneva
central power plant.
-------
V. SINTERING PLANT
The Sintering Plant personnel are responsible for the receipt and
handling of all iron ore materials and limestone at the Geneva facility
as well as the operation and maintenance of the sintering machines
themselves. The materials handling, process operations, and participate
emission control system are discussed in this Section.
PROCESS DESCRIPTION
Materials Handling
Iron ore is received in two forms at the Geneva facility, a magnetic
concentrate from southern Utah and beneficiated ore pellets received
from a USSC facility at Atlantic City, Wyoming. The magnetic concentrate
as received at Geneva contains about 7% to 8% water and has an iron
content of about 57.5%. The beneficiated ore pellets (called agglomerate)
are received at Geneva at an iron content of about 63% to 67%.
All of the iron ore is received at Geneva by rail. The railroad
cars are unloaded by a single Link Belt rotary railroad car dumper. The
ore materials are transported from the dumper to the storage area by
conveyor belt. At the storage area, the ore is stacked into long storage
piles with three Robbins double-wing stacker units. The ores can be
blended with limestone at these stacks by alternating the raw materials
being fed to the stacker units.
There are eight storage beds for the magnetic concentrate and two
storage beds for agglomerate. The total storage capacities are 82,000
m. tons (90,000 tons) and 120,000 m. tons (130,000 tons), respectively.
-------
41
Ore is reclaimed from the storage piles by two Robbins-Messiter reclaim-
ing machines and a Robbins rotary buck wheel reclaimer. The ore is
transferred from the reclaimers to screening facilities by conveyor
belts.
Agglomerate pellets are screened to remove fines before being
transported to storage hoppers. From the storage hoppers they are
transported directly to the blast furnaces. The agglomerate fines
reclaimed at the pellet screening station are transferred by conveyor
belt and stored in two storage silos at the Sintering Plant.
The magnetic concentrate, as received at Geneva, has a wide distri-
bution of particle sizes ranging from fine dust to large rocks. This
material is reclaimed from storage piles and sent by conveyor system to
a crushing and screening facility. Here the ore is passed through
scalping screens to produce size cuts of +5 cm (+2 in), +0.6 cm to -5 cm
(+1/4 in to -2 in) and -0.6 cm (-1/4 in). The +5 cm (+2 in) cut is
routed directly to two parallel Hydrocone crusher units. The resulting
crushed ore is recycled to the scalping screens. The +0.6 cm to -5 cm
(+1/4 in to -2 in) cut from the scalpers is sent directly to the blast
furnace feed storage hoppers. The -0.6 cm (-1/4 in) cut from the scal-
pers is sent to four storage silos at the Sintering Plant.
Sintering
The function of the Sintering Plant is to fuse fine iron ore par-
ticles, iron flue dust from the blast furnace and other iron bearing
fines into clinker-type materials which have the structural strength and
porosity required of blast furnace charge.
There are two Dwight Lloyd sintering machines at this facility each
with a maximum capacity of 1,400 m. tons (1,500 tons)/day, operating
three turns per day. A maximum month's production from the Sintering
Plant during 1975 was 81,000 m. tons (89,000 tons) and the average
-------
42
monthly production was 46,000 m. tons (50,000 tons). Generally, both of
the sintering machines are operated when the Sintering Plant is operated.
In the sintering process, iron bearing materials (e.g., agglomerate
fines, magnetic concentrate, blast furnace flue dust and clarifier
sludge, returns from slag reprocessing) are mixed with coke breeze
(fines), dolomite limestone, recycled sinter fines, and water in two
drum type pug mills. A typical Sintering Plant feed composition is
shown in Table 3. From the pug mills, the mixed materials are transported
via conveyor belts to the sintering machines. Here the materials are
distributed by swinging spouts onto the machines' traveling grates. The
grates carry the bed of feed materials through an ignition furnace where
overhead gas burners ignite the coke breeze. The grate then transports
the ignited bed over a series of windbox sections which are 1.8 m (6 ft)
wide and total 31 m (102 ft) long. As the grate traverses the windbox
sections, air is pulled down through the feed bed into the windboxes
causing the combustion zone to penetrate deeper into the bed. The coke
breeze combustion creates sufficient heat to sinter the fine iron ore
particles together into porous, coherent lumps. Ideally, as the traveling
bed approaches the end of the windbox, the combustion zone should just
be touching the traveling grate.
At the end of the windboxes, the grates discharge the sinter onto
a bar grizzly to break up the large pieces. From here the sinter is
transported by conveyor belts to a hot screening operation. Oversize
material rejected by these screens is sent directly to the blast furnace
feed hoppers. Sinter fines from the screens are returned to the sinter
feed pug mills and blended with the incoming feed materials.
PARTICULATE EMISSION SOURCES
The largest potential sources of particulate emissions at the
Sintering Plant proper are the windbox exhaust systems. Both sintering
-------
43
Table 3
TYPICAL COMPOSITION OF
SINTERING PLANT FEED MATERIALS
USSC - GENEVA UORKS
Material % by Weight, in Feed
-0.6 cm (-1/4 in) magnetic concentrate 40
Blast furnace flue dust 9
Sinter fines recycle 5
-0.3 cm (-1/8 in) dolomite 13
Slag ore fines recycle 5
Coke breeze 5
Blast furnace clarifier sludge 3
Agglomerate (pellet) dust 20
Total 100
-------
44
machines have identical windbox exhaust systems. Air is drawn through
the sinter bed and grates to promote combustion of the coke breeze.
Combustion products and sinter fines are drawn through the sinter bed by
the air stream into the windbox exhaust system. The next largest poten-
tial source of particulate emissions related to the Sintering Plant is
the sinter discharge end. Hot sinter is discharged from the grate
pallets at the end of the windbox section onto bar grizzlies. Consider-
able amounts of dust are generated at this point, especially if the
sinter bed has not been completely fused together before reaching the
discharge location. The unfused materials are easily entrained because
of their fine size distribution. The grizzly bars are enclosed units
which are vented by duct work to a scrubber unit and exhaust fan.
Another potential source of particulate matter at the Sintering
Plant is the sinter screening station. USSC reportedly employs water
sprays at this screening station to minimize particulate emissions.
Again the amount of emissions from this location will depend on the
relative degree of fusing of the sinter achieved on the sinter grates.
If the sintering process is incomplete, more fines will be generated by
the screening process and the fugitive emissions will be higher.
The last significant sources of particulate matter noted at the
Sintering Plant are two vent stacks which serve the two feed material
pug mills. Neither of these emission points is controlled.
PARTICULATE CONTROL SYSTEM
The windbox emission control system consists of two identical
trains, each handling the emissions from an individual Dwight Lloyd
sintering machine. An emissions control train includes a fan, two
parallel banks of three cyclones in series, and a partial orifice
-------
45
scrubber [Figures 6 and 7]. The discharge end emission control system
consists of a single scrubber and fan which handle the emissions from
both sintering machines [Figure 8].
Process Emissions
The Sintering Plant is an intermittent operation with the tempera-
ture and volume of windbox gases maintained at a relatively constant
level when the lines are operating. The emissions consist of some
gaseous combustion products and entrained particulate which is generated
as air is drawn through the sinter bed. The particulate loading, sizing
and characteristics can vary with the feed composition, bed depth, and
bed speed. Windbox emissions are mainly generated early in the sintering
process and at the point where the flame front has reached the bottom of
the bed.
Like the windbox emissions, discharge end emissions will also have
variable particulate characteristics. Discharge end emissions result
when sinter is allowed to drop from the end of the sinter machine pallets,
The quantity and characteristics of particulates released are functions
of some of the same parameters as are the windbox emissions. The particu-
lates are vented from the system at a relatively constant flow rate.
Temperatures may be expected to vary somewhat being especially dependent
upon where on the bed the flame front has ended relative to the sinter
discharge end.
Table 4 shows the expected characteristics of the windbox and
discharge end emissions from the Sintering Plant, as provided by USSC.
Windbox Cyclones
The cyclones in the windbox emission control system are multiple
-------
EXHAUST
NOTE: Schematic shows control system
for one of the sintering machine trains.
SINTERING
PLANT
CYCLONE
DUST COLLECTORS
OL
III
S
0
h
-------
47
EXHAUST
ZT"
SAMPLE PORT
MIST ELIMINATOR
SPRAY NOZZLE HEADER
CONTROL ROOM
GROUND LEVEL
y
Figure 7. Sintering Plant Windbox Scrubber
USSC Geneva Works
-------
EXHAUST
EXHAUST
GAS INLET
8'-O" I D
5'-6" I.D
SPRAY NOZZLE
VATER
/ y5O" ORIFICE PLATE
y v
* j /.SPRAY NOZZLE
£
GAS INLET
D. DUCT
WATER
SLURRY
ELEVATION
Figure 8. Sinfering Plant Discharge End Scrubber
USSC Geneva Works
-------
49
Table 4
CHARACTERISTICS OF EXHAUST CAS
AND PARTICULATE EMISSIONS FOP SINTERING PLANT
USSC - GENEVA WOPKS
Parameter
Windbox Exhaust
Discharge-end Exhaust
Temperature
Pressure (at fan
discharges)
Flow rate
Particulate
Concentration
Particulate
Composition
(% by weight)
93°C (200 °F)
61 cm (24 in) W.G.
5,000 m3/min (180,000 scfm)
7g/nr (3 gr/scf)
Particulate
Size Range
+40ym
20-40ym
10-20ym
5-1 Oum
0-5ym
53%
10%
16%
14.5%
6.4%
SiO,
Particulate
Specific Gravity
13.11
A1203
CaO
MgO
Fe
C
3.49
4.14
3.46
40.60
15.05
82°C (180°F)
18 cm (7 in) W.G.
2,200 m3/min (80,000 scfm)
2g/mJ (1 gr/scf)
not available
not available
3.5
3.5 (estimate)
-------
bO
centrifugal type dust collectors with primary settling chambers. Table
5 presents general, physical, and design data for the cyclones, as
provided by USSC. The cyclones, due to their simplistic design, should
be capable of operating as designed. There are no moving or energized
parts to require constant monitoring. The inlet velocity, which has an
important effect on particulate removal, should remain relatively con-
stant since the windbox fans maintain a relatively constant flow and the
cyclone liners are frequently inspected for wear. Another important
factor affecting particulate removal by the cyclones is the presence of
air inleakage which could interfere with the cyclonic gas flow pattern.
Since the cyclones are routinely inspected for physical integrity this
should not be a problem.
The major variables affecting cyclone operation are the fluctuating
grain loading and particle size resulting from the sintering operation.
Assuming the cyclones were designed for worst case conditions, these
variables should not affect cyclone operation.
USSC has indicated that the cyclone shells are inspected weekly and
repaired as necessary. The brick refractory liners are inspected monthly
and also repaired as necessary. The bottom cones and discharge valves
were reported to be checked daily. These procedures, if adhered to,
should insure that inlet velocity is maintained, inleakage is minimized,
and cone dust buildup with resultant carryover is minimized.
Observations of maintenance were limited during the inspection.
With the exception of one obviously malfunctioning solid discharge
point, the rubber flapper discharge valves appeared to be in good con-
dition.
Windbox Scrubbers
The scrubbers used in the windbox emission control system are USSC-
designed and constructed partial orifice scrubbers [Figure 7]. Initially
-------
51
Table 5
GENERAL, PHYSICAL, AND DESIGN PARAMETERS FOR
SINTERING PLANT WINDBOX CYCLONES
USSC - GENEVA WORKS
Parameter Specification
General Number of cyclones - 6 per train,
2 identical trains
Date Installed - 1953
Manufacturer - American Blower Manuf. Co.
Model - No. 42 type D
Physical Arrangement - 2 parallel sets of
3 cyclones in series
Cyclone diameter - 3.7 m
Cyclone height - 10 m
Cyclone inlet width - 3.1 m
Diameter of cyclone outlet - 2.1 m
Design Particulate removal efficiency - 85%
Inlet velocity - 1,300 m (4,400 ft)/min
-------
52
erected in 1962, the scrubbers were modified in 1975 by relocating
internal sprays. USSC reported that this was done to provide better
mist elimination. Scrubber spray water consists of recycle water from
the neutralization/clarification system diluted with plant makeup water.
The discharge from the scrubber is pumped to the clarification/
neutralization system for treatment.
General and design parameters for the windbox scrubbers, as provided
by USSC, are shown in Table 6. USSC stated that the scrubbers were
originally designed for hydrogen fluoride (HF) removal and were selected
because they would provide adequate HF removal and good access for
maintenance. However, the use of these scrubbers for particulate removal
is questionable for two reasons: particulate removal capability, and
mist carryover.
The most questionable design parameter is the reported particulate
removal efficiency (95%). This efficiency, which is typically a function
of the size of the particulate removed and the energy input into the
scrubber, appears to be higher than would be expected for the size range
of particulate estimated to be discharged from the cyclones. Although
there is a lack of good particle size information, it is questionable
that these low pressure drop (5 to 7 cm W.G.) scrubbers could remove the
95% of the particulates necessary to provide an outlet grain loading of
0.08 g/m3 (0.04 gr/scf).
A second questionable design feature is the use of a packed bed
mist eliminator without a spray wash to clean off solids deposits. The
scrubbing media is saturated with dissolved solids which precipitate in
the packed bed. As the solids accumulate in the packed bed, higher
velocities are created around the plugged areas of the bed. At higher
velocities, more liquid is re-entrained, lowering the efficiency of the
mist eliminator. The mist carried over contains suspended and dissolved
solids which increase the particulate grain loading of the exhaust gas.
-------
53
Table 6
GENERAL AND DESIGN PARAMETERS FOR
SINTERING PLANT WINDBOX EMISSION SCRUBBERS
USSC - GENEVA WORKS
Parameter Specification
General Number of scrubbers - 2
Date installed - 1962
Scrubber type - partial orifice
Manufacturer - USSC
Design Particulate inlet loading - lg/m3 (0.5 gr/scf)
Particle size - 95% <5jjm
Particulate specific gravity - 3.6
Particulate removal efficiency - 95%
Scrubber pressure drop - 5-7 cm (2-3 in) W.G.
Scrubber water rate - 2,600 1(700 gal)/min
Scrubber gas velocity - 2.1 (6.9 ft)/sec
O
Gas volume - 5,000 m /min (180,000 scfm)
Gas temperature - 93°C (200°F)
Gas pressure - 730 mm Hg
-------
54
This carryover could result in an 0.02 to 0.07 g/m3 (0.01 to 0.03
gr/scf) addition to the particulate grain loading [Addendum C].
There are no gas side controls or monitors used for the windbox
scrubbers other than a WP-50 single point sampling train located, at the
time of the inspection, just above the mist eliminator of the north
scrubber. The train withdraws periodic samples of gas which are then
later analyzed by USSC personnel. The data obtained from this train are
highly questionable since the gas sampled may or may not exhibit particu-
late concentrations representative of the entire gas stream. The scrub-
ber liquid pressure is monitored at the pumps and maintained manually.
No other scrubber-operating parameters are monitored. As a result of
the lack of operating indicators, only visible emissions observations
were available as an indicator of collection efficiency. The opacity of
the plume after the steam had detached was typically in the range of 10%
to 40%. It was also observed that there was significant mist fallout
which appeared as large "rain" droplets near the base of the scrubber
stacks.
USSC personnel reported that the scrubbers are cleaned every 3 to
4 weeks. The cleaning program was said to include inspection, replace-
ment of nozzles, flushing of pipes, and the removal of scale from the
mist eliminator and scrubber internals.
The maintenance of the mist eliminator is not adequate because, as
reported by USSC, the buildup of solids occurs immediately. This buildup
would be accompanied by higher droplet carryover and increased particu-
late loads. However, keeping the mist eliminator clean enough to mini-
mize mist carryover problems could require a high frequency of down
time. This problem could be handled by design modification. Such
design modification might include intermittent mist eliminator wash
systems, alternative mibt eliminator designs and orientation, and/or
use of an anti-scaling agent.
-------
55
Discharge-end Scrubber
The Sintering Plant discharge-end emissions are treated by a single
wet scrubber. The scrubber consists of an orifice plate section followed
by a cyclone [Figure 8]. There are sprays located at the orifice opening
and in the entrance to the cyclone. Limited data are available on the
discharge-end particulate emissions and, as a result, the analysis of
this scrubber's particulate emission control capability is limited.
Table 7 shows some of the more relevant general and design param-
eters pertaining to the discharge-end scrubber. Without approximate
particle size information, it is not practical to evaluate design in any
great detail. The orifice/cyclone scrubber should be capable of 97%
particulate removal assuming that a very small portion of the total
particulate is less than 2ym to 3pm in diameter. Mist carryover effects
are also difficult to estimate since the system has a wet fan downstream
from the scrubber, which would collect a large portion of the mist
droplets.
Operation of the discharge-end scrubber is not monitored, other
than the scrubber water pressure. No observations of scrubber operation
or emissions were made during the inspection. The emissions were not
observed because they were not considered to be representative at the
time of the inspection because there were malfunctions in the sintering
process and water system.
Maintenance problems may result from the abrasive nature of the
particulate-laden gas stream and the collection of mist on the wet fan.
The largest abrasive wear would be on the orifice plate but since this
is, by design, a large opening orifice (127 cm opening for a 152 cm
duct) this should not have a major influence on particulate removal
capabilities. The wet fan, however, may have an important effect on
performance; the Company indicated no particular difficulties with the
fan. It is believed, however, that the high potential for deposits on,
-------
Table 7
GENERAL AND DESIGN PARAMETERS FOR
SINTERING PLANT DISCHARGE - END SCRUBBER
USSC - GENEVA WORKS
Parameter Specification
General Number of scrubbers - 1
Date installed - 1962 (estimated)
Scrubber type - orifice/cyclone
Manufacturer - USSC
3
Design Particulate inlet loading - 0.23 m
(0.1 gr/scf)
Particle size - unavailable
Particulate removal efficiency - 97%
Scrubber water rate - 1,100 1(300 gal)/min
Scrubber gas velocity - 7.9 m (26 ft)/sec
Gas volume - 2,200 m3/min (80,000 scfm)
Gas temperature - 80°C
Gas pressure - 822 mm Hg
-------
57
and corrosion and abrasion of, the fan blades could make this a major
problem area.
INSPECTION OBSERVATIONS
The Sintering Plant is an antiquated facility with several design
inadequacies which hinder optimum operating modes and substantially add
to the plant's air pollution potential. Sintering Plant personnel
discussed some of these problem areas with NEIC personnel during the
inspection.
The major problem areas are associated with the feed preparation
systems. The pug mills do not provide adequate mixing of the feed
materials. This, in turn, results in uneven sintering on the traveling
grates. Additionally, there is an inadequate and unreliable v/ater
supply available to the pug mills. During the inspection, intermittent
heavy discharges of particulate matter from the two pug mill stacks were
noted.
Another problem related to the material feed equipment is that the
proportioning controls on the ore, coke, and pellet fines systems are
inadequate. The proportioning systems do not consistently maintain
fixed set ratios of the various feed materials.
A major concern with the feed systems is the lack of surge storage
and proportioning controls on the sinter fines recycle systems. The
fines are currently recycled directly as they are received from the
sinter screening station, with little control on the correct ratios
required. The amount of recycle fines added to the feed materials is
critical in that it affects the sinter bed porosity.
A final problem mentioned by the plant personnel is the lack of
adequate sinter cooling facilities. Having to bundle the sinter in a
-------
hot form increases conveyor belt maintenance and equipment down time.
Not all of the materials handling procedures were in operation at
the time of this inspection. No ore railroad cars were being unloaded,
nor were the ore pile stackers being used. The pile reclaimers and the
ore crushing/screening station were observed in operation.
No fugitive emissions were noted from the ore reclaiming operations,
the primary grizzly screens, or the crushers. However, considerable
fugitive emissions were noted from the secondary screening operations
which receive the pulverized ore from the crushers.
The ore received from Southern Utah contains 7% to 8% moisture. It
appeared that this moisture was sufficient to suppress dusts during the
preliminary material handling stages. However, the ore produced from
the crushing of oversized ore chunks is apparently much drier. When
this material was screened, it liberated significant quantities of dust.
USSC personnel stated that water sprays are usually used to suppress the
dusts at these screens. During this inspection, the water sprays were
not in operation.
It was noted during the inspection that the ductwork serving the
grizzly bar hooding at the sinter line discharge-end was in disrepair.
Several rusted-out holes were noted in the ducts. Suspended particulate
matter was heavy in the atmosphere near the hooding. Since the water
spray system was not in operation, considerable fugitive emissions were
also noted at the sinter screening station during the inspection.
-------
59
VI. BLAST FURNACES
There are three blast furnaces at the Geneva facility which are
used to convert iron ore, agglomerate, and sinter, into pig iron. The
three furnaces are numbered 1, 2, and 3 in a south-to-north plant
orientation. All three of the furnaces are essentially identical; each
is 32.3 m (106 ft) high with a hearth diameter of 8.1 m (26.5 ft). The
nominal production capacity of the three furnaces is 1,680,000 m. tons
(1,850,000 tons)/yr. The daily production capacity varies significantly
with the type of materials fed to the furnaces. The furnaces are each
nominally rated at 1,600 m. tons (1,800 tons)/day capacity with a feed
material based on ore and sinter. However, when the feed is predomi-
nantly agglomerate or pelletized ore the furnace capacity is increased
to 2,000 to 2,200 m. tons (2,200 to 2,400 tons)/day.
PROCESS DESCRIPTION
Materials Handling
Coarse ore, agglomerate pellets, sinter and coke, which have been
screened to remove fines, and dolomite limestone are transported from
their respective storage facilities by railroad transfer cars to the
blast furnace area. The materials are discharged from the transfer cars
to below grade storage bins. From these bins, the materials are dis-
charged into a scale car which transfers predetermined amounts of the
materials to skip hoists which actually feed the furnaces.
Alternating skips of coke, ore, and limestone are fed to the furnace.
The skip hoist lifts the load to the top of the furnace and dumps it
into a receiving hopper. The receiving hopper is isolated from the
-------
60
furnace proper by two sets of inverted cone-shaped cast steel plates
called bells. These bells can be independently depressed providing
access to the furnace proper. The uppermost bell, termed the small
bell, isolates the receiving hopper from the region between the two
bells which is termed the hopper. The lower bell, termed the large
bell, isolates the furnace from the hopper.
After the skip hoist discharges its load of material into the
receiving hopper, it descends the skip bridge to be reloaded. Simulta-
neously, another skip ascends the bridge with another load of material.
The small bell is then depressed, allowing the skip load to enter the
hopper area. The small bell is then closed and another skip load is
dumped into the receiving hopper. The cycle is repeated until three
skip loads are in the hopper area. Then, the small bell is closed and
the large bell is opened allowing the feed material to enter the furnace.
During the inspection, blast furnace 2 was operating in a split
filling mode. The term split filling means that more than one large
bell dump is required to accomplish a single charge. The charge sequence
was small bells of ore (0), stone (S)s and coke (C) followed by a large
bell dump and then small bells of ore (0), coke (C) and coke (C) with a
second large bell dump. This sequence is denoted as OSC/OCC with the
entire sequence constituting a single charge. The average charge
composition during the inspection is presented in Table 8.
Furnaces
Each of the blast furnaces has three regenerative stoves which are
used to preheat the blast air (wind) introduced into the blast furnace
tuyeres. The stoves preheat the wind to about 930 to 980°C (1,700 to
1,800°F). Normally the checkers in two of the three stoves are being
-------
61
Table 8
AVERAGE COMPOSITION OF CHARGE
TO BLAST FURNACE 2 - August 23, 1976
USSC - GENEVA WORKS
Material
Ore"1"
Do! onri te
Roll Scale"1"1"
Coke
Weight
kg
24,000
5,700
1,100
9,500
Total 40,300
by charge
Ib
52,800
12,600
2,500
21 ,000
88,900
t Ore was 80% agglomerate pellets, 10% concentrate;
10% sinter
tt Poll scale is material reclaimed from scarfing
operations3 and other product finishing steps.
-------
62
heated by combustion of blast furnace off-gas. The third stove is used
to preheat the wind by reclaiming heat previously stored in the checker
brickwork. The stoves are on the heat cycle for about 1.5 hours and
then on blast wind for 1 hour. The wind to any given blast furnace
averages about 2,400 m3/min (85,000 acfm). When only two of the three
blast furnaces are in operation, as was the case during the inspection,
additional turbines can be added to increase the wind to the operating
furnaces to about 3,100 m3/min (110,000 acfm).
Steam at a rate of 14 to 18 g/m (6 to 8 gr/scf) is added to the
wind at the tuyeres. Natural gas, during the summer months when it is
readily available, is also added here at a rate of about 28 m3/min
(1,000 acfm). The steam addition reacts with the coke in the furnace
burden to produce hydrogen which aids in the reduction of the iron
oxides in the ore; it also helps to cool the tuyeres and burden ma-
terials, and reportedly reduces the burden slip potential. Natural gas
addition helps reduce the amount of coke required in the furnace burden
and provides a means by which the furnace hearth temperature can be more
effectively controlled.
At Geneva Works, the blast furnace operators reduce the wind supply
to the furnace every half hour. This procedure, termed checking, causes
the furnace burden to slump in a controlled fashion, and reportedly
minimizes the potential for a stuck burden which bridges between the
furnace walls. Such bridging leads to uncontrolled burden collapses
which are called slips. When slips occur, top pressures in the furnace
increase instantaneously, resulting in potential damage to the furnace
structure and off-gas handling systems.
The hot metal tap-to-tap cycle for the Geneva blast furnaces varies
from 4 to 5 hours depending on the type of furnace burden. A normal tap
is about 320 m. tons (350 tons) of hot metal per furnace and lasts about
45 minutes. The hot metal is transferred from the furnaces to ladle
-------
63
cars via runners constructed in the cast house sand floor. The hot
metal ladles are then transferred via railroad tracks to the open hearth
area.
At the midpoint of each tap-to-tap cycle is a slag flushing operation,
The flush lasts about 30 to 45 minutes or as long as required to fill
four slag ladle cars. The slag is flushed from the furnace via the
monkey hole, a tap hole which is about six feet higher on the furnace
than the hot metal tap hole. The slag which floats on the hot metal
surface in the furnace hearth flows from the monkey down runners to the
slag ladle cars. The slag is then taken to a dump area at the northern
end of the facility. The slag is ultimately reclaimed from the dump
area and processed by the Heckett Engineering Company.
PARTICULATE EMISSION SOURCES
The off-gases from the blast furnaces contain a high percentage of
carbon monoxide (CO) formed by the combustion of the burden coke in the
reducing atmosphere of the furnaces. These off-gases have a heat value
of about 760 kg-cal/m (85 Btu/scf) and hence, it is practical to
reclaim them. However, the off-gases also contain high particulate
grain loadings which must first be removed before the gases can be used
for fuel.
The other major potential sources of particulate emissions at the
blast furnace are in the cast houses where the hot metal tapping and
slag flushing operations occur. The emissions from both of these opera-
tions are fugitive, and they emanate from the open building sides and
roof louvers.
-------
64
PARTICULATE CONTROL SYSTEM
At the Geneva Works, the blast furnace gases are subjected to four
stages of particulate removal. Each furnace has its own particulate
removal train and all are identical. Off-gases from each furnace are
collected in four vertical ducts called uptakes. The tops of two adjacent
uptakes are joined together to form two pairs, each pair being connected
to a large descending duct called a downcomer. Each joined pair of
uptakes terminates as a single duct with a counter-weighted flap valve
called a bleeder valve. These valves can be opened to release excessive
pressure from the furnace interior to the atmosphere. At Geneva, the
bleeder valves are set to open at a pressure of 0.4 kg/cm (6 psi) above
the normal furnace topside pressure.
The downcomer carries the off-gases to a cyclone dust collector,
which is original equipment. The unit, designed by Freyn Engineering
Company, has a 10.6 m (35 ft) inside diameter shell by 10.9 m (36 ft)
high chamber. It is a top-entry, top-exit design. There is a bleed-off
valve to the atmosphere located just ahead of this cyclone collector.
The bleeder valve is set to open at 0.3 kg/cm (4 psi) above the normal
furnace topside pressure.
After the gases are partially treated for particulate removal in
the cyclone, they are routed to an orifice scrubber. This unit consists
of an orifice plate with an upstream water spray system. The orifice
scrubber unit was designed by USSC personnel.
The gases from the orifice scrubber are routed to a second stage of
scrubbing in a baffle type counter-current gas washer designed by the
Freyn Engineering Company. The unit is 5.8 m (19 ft) in diameter and
18.2 m (60 ft) long. The gases enter the bottom of the unit and water
enters the top.
-------
65
From the gas washer, the gases are routed to a Western Precipitation
wet electrostatic precipitator. The unit is 8.5 m (28 ft) in diameter
and contains 260 tubes, each 0.3 m (1 ft) in diameter and 4.5 m (15 ft)
long. There is a final gas bleed-off valve located on the gas ductwork
after the ESP unit. This bleeder is set at 0.1 kg/cm (2 psi) above the
normal furnace topside pressure.
The blast furnace gas dust cleaning systems are each designed to
handle variable flow rates from 1,800 to 3,100 m3/min (65,000 to 110,000
scfm) with an overall particulate collection efficiency of 99.5%. USSC
personnel reported that the actual gas flow rates for these systems are
variable, but fall within the design ranges.
Particulate matter collected in the cyclone units is transported in
a dry form to the Sintering Plant where it is ultimately incorporated
into the feed materials. The particulate matter collected in the scrub-
ber and ESP is in a slurry form. This slurry is piped to a Dorr thick-
ener where the particulate materials are concentrated into a sludge.
This sludge is vacuum filtered to form a cake which is ultimately used
as a feed material at the Sintering Plant.
The clean off-gases (blast furnace gas) exit from the ESP and are
fed to a collector main which feeds various combustion sources in the
plant or to a gas storage tank. The blast furnace stoves are fueled
directly from this main. The blast furnace gas is also used to fuel
five power boilers. The blast furnace gas is additionally used to
supplement natural gas to obtain a mixed gas supply. The addition of
blast furnace gas reduces the natural gas heat content and results in a
mixed gas heat content of about 5,100 kg-cal/m3 (575 Btu/scf).
Table 9 shows the typical composition, as supplied by USSC person-
nel, of the clean blast furnace gas.
-------
66
Table 9
TOPICAL COMPOSITION OF CLEAN BLAST FURNACE GAS
USSC - GENEVA WORKS
Gas Constituent
Hydrogen 2.5
Oxygen 0.01
Nitrogen 54.4
Carbon Monoxide 22.5
Carbon Dioxide 20.5
Participate Matter 0.001 to 0.002 g/m3
(0.002 to 0.005 gr/acf)
-------
67
INSPECTION OBSERVATIONS
The hot metal taps and slag flushes are by far the major participate
emission contributors of the blast furnace-related activities. Visible
emissions in excess of 40% opacity were noted from both the cast and
flush operations.
Geneva personnel indicated that the amount of emissions associated
with a given tap depends on the silicon dioxide (SiOp) content of the
hot metal. They try to maintain the Si02 level at about 1.0%. When it
drops to about 0.7%, heavy emissions of red-brown iron oxide evolve
during the tap. This condition was observed during the inspection.
A strong irritating odor was noted in the cast house area during
the slag flushing operation. The odor was characteristic of an oxide of
sulfur or phosphorous and persisted for the duration of the flush. The
particulate emissions observed during the flush were blue-white in
color.
Some leaking of the furnace bells was noted on both blast furnaces
2 and 3. The bell leakage was evident whenever a skip hoist unloaded
into the bell hoppers. Blast furnace 1 was not in operation, but rather
was banked in a stand-by condition due to reportedly unfavorable market
conditions.
The combustion stacks on the furnace stoves had no visible emissions
when the furnaces were in a normal operating mode. Once during the
inspection, blast furnace 2 was placed in a backdrafting mode to repair
a water leak at one of the furnace tuyeres. When the furnace was back-
drafted, a white-blue plume was noted from the stove combustion stack.
This plume appeared to consist mainly of condensed steam.
-------
68
There are several circular or strip chart meters, located in each
blast furnace control room, which are used to monitor pertinent furnace
operating parameters. Table 10 summarizes the parameters monitored.
-------
69
Table 10
OPERATING PARAMETERS MONITORED AT BLAST FURNACES
USSC - GENEVA WORKS
1 Blast Pressure
2 Furnace Topside Pressure
3 Furnace Topside Gas Temperature
4 Blast Temperature
5 Furnace Temperature at Various Locations
6 Stove Stack Temperature
7 Steam Injection Rate at Tuyeres
8 Furnace Burden Height
9 Water Pressure to Furnace Cooling Members
10 Water Flow Rate Through Gas Cleaning Scrubber
11 Gas Pressure Before and After Scrubber
12 Gas Collector Main Pressure
13 Stove Dome Pressure
14 Pressure Between Furnace Bells
15 Blast Rate
16 Natural Gas Injection Rate at Tuyeres
17* Gas Bleeder Pressure (actual and set-point
for release to atmosphere)
Gas bleeder pressures are monitored but not
recorded. All other listed parameters are
recorded on circular or strip charts.
-------
70
VII. OPEN HEARTH FURNACES
There are ten basic hearth construction open hearth furnaces at the
Geneva Works. These units are used to convert pig iron from the blast
furnaces, scrap steel, and some iron ore into finished steel. The total
annual production of ingot steel from these furnaces is about 2,300,000
m. tons (2,500,000 tons)/yr. The majority of this production is tin
plate steel. Table 11 lists the metallurgical range of steels produced
at this facility. The majority of the steel produced has a carbon
content of less than 0.25%. However, some high carbon steel (0.93%
carbon) is produced for grinding rod manufacture.
PROCESS DESCRIPTION
Hot Metal Handling
Molten pig iron (hot metal) is transported by rail to the open
hearth building from the blast furnace cast houses in ladles. The
ladles are received at the mixer building which adjoins the north end of
the open hearth building. At the mixer building, the ladles are hoisted
approximately 23 m (75 ft) by overhead crane from the building floor to
one of two Pennsylvania hot metal mixer vessels. The hot metal is
poured from the ladles into the mixer units.
The two hot metal mixers have a rated capacity of 730 m. tons (800
tons) each. These vessels are not mixers in the true sense of the word,
since external energy is not added to the hot metal via vessel rotation,
•
agitator blades, etc. The mixers serve as a hot metal surge storage to
compensate for differences between the blast furnace supply and the
-------
71
Table 11
METALLURGICAL COMPOSITION RANGES OF STEELS PRODUCED
USSC - GENEVA WORKS
Component % by weight
Carbon 0.04 to 0.93
Manganese 0.03 to 1.75
Phosphorous 0.035 to 0.075
Silica 0.04 to 0.15
Sulfur 0.015 to 0.045
-------
72
open hearth demand. Some hot metal mixing is achieved by combining the
contents of several hot metal ladle cars to one mixer. During the
inspection, only one of the mixers (the north unit) was in operation.
The south mixer was off-line for repair to its refractory brick lining.
Hot metal is supplied from the mixer units to the open-hearth
furnaces by reladling. When hot metal is required at one of the furnaces,
the mixers are rotated about 45° and hot metal is poured into waiting
ladle cars. These cars, generally three per open hearth charge, are
then transported by rail to the furnace being charged.
Furnaces
The ten basic hearth open hearth furnaces are rated at 314 m. tons
(345 tons)/heat and have an average tap-to-tap cycle of 8 to 9 hours.
The primary function of these furnaces is to reduce the carbon content
of pig iron received from the blast furnaces from about 4% to below 1%.
Trace impurities are also removed from the hot metal in the slag formed
in the furnace.
During this inspection period, only five of the furnaces (90, 93,
94, 96, and 99) were in operation [Figure 9]. Under normal production
schedules, seven to eight of the furnaces are operated simultaneously
while two to three of them are undergoing major rebuilding or maintenance.
Due to a general slump in the demand for steel production, the furnace
production had been curtailed at the time of the NEIC inspection.
The open hearth furnaces are both reverberatory and regenerative in
design. They are reverberatory in that the charge to the furnace is
heated both by a flame passing over the charge and from radiation from
the relatively low roof of the furnace. The furnaces are regenerative
in that the hot gases from combustion of the fuel pass out of the
-------
EXHAUST
SCRUBBING
TOWERS
FANS
ELECTROSTATIC _
PRECIPITATORS ^~
NO.I
no. 2
i
NO. 3
! MIXER
* f
NO. 4
; ;
NO. 5
NO. 6
I
MIXER
NO. 7 f
f1
\J
MAIN COLLECTOR
FLUE
WASTE GAS
STACK
OPEN
HEARTH
FURNACES
I.D.FANS
WASTE HEAT
Figure 9. Open Hearth Emission Control System — USSC Geneva V/orfes
CO
-------
74
reverberatory furnace through regenerative chambers which contain fire
brick arranged in checker-work patterns. The hot combustion gases
relinquish heat to the checker bricks. Periodically, the air flow and
combustion pattern directions are reversed, allowing the combustion air
to be pre-heated by the previously heated checker work. This procedure
permits higher flame temperatures than could be obtained with cold
combustion air. At the Geneva Works open hearths, the frequency of
checker reversal is about five to six times per hour. The reversal
frequency is controlled primarily by the checker temperature with a time
clock override.
The open hearth furnaces can be fueled with natural gas and/or No. 6
fuel oil. Pitch and tar obtained from the coke byproduct recovery plant
can be used in place of the fuel oil; however, USSC personnel report
that pitch and tar are no longer used for fuel since the market value of
these materials is higher than their equivalent fuel market value.
Normally the furnaces are operated with 35% of the heat input obtained
from natural gas and the remainder from fuel oil.
The open hearth furnaces are normally run continuously between
major repair periods. The length of run between major repairs, termed
the furnace campaign, is usually five to six months, with minor repairs
being made as required. A major furnace repair takes two weeks to a
month.
A normal open hearth furnace cycle begins just after the furnace
tap has been completed. The first half-hour of the cycle is termed the
fettling period. During this time, minor furnace repairs are made to
the hearth bottom and bench by flinging twice-baked dolomite into the
furnace with a dolomite gun. Pools of molten steel or slag remaining in
the furnace bottom after the tap are blown from the furnace with com-
pressed air.
-------
75
Once the fettling period is concluded, the charge period begins.
The charging machine places a layer of limestone on the hearth bottom
using preweighed charging boxes. These boxes are introduced into the
furnace through charging doors located on the front wall of the furnace.
Iron ore and scrap steel are then placed on top of the limestone layer.
The layered combination of limestone, ore, and scrap steel is termed the
header. The period required for the total cold charging of the furnace
varies from 1 to 1.5 hours. The furnace burners are operating during
this period.
Once the furnace has been cold charged, the charge doors are banked
with twice-burned dolomite lime and the melt period begins. The melt
lasts approximately 45 to 60 minutes.
At the conclusion of the melt period, hot metal which has been
reladled from the hot metal mixers is poured into the furnaces from
ladles handled by an overhead crane. Normally three ladles of hot metal
are added. A typical charge to a furnace is 390,000 kg (850,000 Ib) of
total metal of which 160,000 to 280,000 kg (350,000 to 615,000 Ib) are
hot metal. The hot metal charge period consumes approximately one-half
hour.
Following the hot metal charge, the slag flush period begins. A
small break is made in the dolomite bank at the center charging door.
The slag overflows the bank and flows through a floor grate to the slag
pit beneath the furnace. After the slag is cooled it is broken up and
removed by front-end loader to be ultimately reprocessed at the Heckett
Engineering facility. The slag run-off period lasts approximately one
hour.
The ore boil and lime boil periods follow the flush period. The
ore boil, characterized by a gentle and even aggitation of the molten
steel, is caused by the evolution of carbon monoxide (CO) gas. The
-------
76
CO gas is formed by the oxidation of carbon contained in the molten pig
iron contacting reducible iron oxides in the ore and scrap charge. The
lime boil, which is characterized by a more violent aggitation of the
molten metal, is caused by the evolution of carbon dioxide (CCL) gas
from the calcining of limestone. As the lime boil progresses, chunks of
lime migrate up through the molten metal and react with various impuri-
ties in the slag materials. The ore and lime boil periods require about
2.5 hours.
After the ore and lime boil periods have subsided, the working or
refining periods begin. At this time all charged materials are in a
molten form, and the lime has risen from the header to the slag layer.
The purposes of the refining period are to oxidize the remaining phospho-
rous and neutralize it in the slag, to reduce the carbon to the desired
percentage, to lower the sulfur content, and to raise the temperature of
the molten metal bath to a point suitable for finishing and tapping of
the steel. Additional iron ore and/or limestone are added to the molten
steel during the refining period if chemical analyses of the molten
metal indicate that the carbon, phosphorous, silica, and/or sulfur
content are too high. Likewise, additional hot metal may be charged
during this period if the levels of these components are too low. The
refining period lasts about 2.5 hours.
The majority of the open hearth chemical reactions are based on
oxidation of various impurities in the metal, such as carbon, phosphorous,
sulfur. Oxygen for these reactions comes, in part, from the iron oxides
in the ore and scrap materials. Pure oxygen is also introduced into the
molten bath through oxygen lance tubes suspended through the furnace
roof. There are two such lances per furnace located about mid-furnace
in a front-to-back direction and opposite the number 3 and 5 charge
doors. The oxygen lancing rate is about 1,100 m /hr (38,000 acfh) per
furnace. The oxygen lancing period begins shortly after the hot metal
addition to the furnace and continues up through the refining period,
accounting for about one-half of the entire heat period.
-------
77
At the end of the refining period the furnace is readied for the
tap. A ladle capable of holding the entire furnace contents is po-
sitioned at the rear of the furnace below the tap hole and tapping
spout. The clay-loam plug and most of the dolomite which block the tap
hole are manually removed. The tap hole is then completed by detonating
an explosive charge of nitroglycerine in the hole. When the hole is
completed, the furnace contents are emptied into the ladle via the tap
spout. Steel additives and alloying materials are added to the ladle
from storage hoppers by feeder mechanisms as the molten steel is pouring
into the ladle. Slag materials accumulate on the surface of the molten
metal in the ladle. Toward the end of the tap, the slag overflows the
ladle's slag spout and is discharged into the slag pit.
Each furnace has its own operations booth which contains the various
monitors and recorders required to accurately control the heat cycle.
Table 12 summarizes the parameters which are monitored at each furnace.
Ingot Pouring
At the end of the tap, the ladle of molten steel is transported to
the pouring platforms which are situated along the inside wall of the
open hearth building opposite the rear of the furnaces. Ingot molds
standing on mold rail cars are situated along these platforms ready for
filling. The ladle is equipped with a lever-actuated pouring nozzle
which is situated in the ladle bottom. Operators, standing on the
pouring platforms and working in conjunction with the crane operator,
operate the nozzle lever to direct molten steel from the ladle into the
ingot molds. The actual pouring operation takes about 45 to 60 minutes.
-------
78
Table 12
OPERATING PARAMETERS MONITORED AT
OPEN HEARTH FURNACES
USSC - GENEVA WORKS
1
2
3
4
5
6*
7f
8
Parameters
Oxygen in Furnace Exhaust Gases
Natural Gas Consumption by Furnace Burners
Oxygen Flow to Both Furnace Lances
Combustion Air Flow
Fuel oil Consumption by Furnaces Burners
Carbon Content of Metal Bath
Temperature of Metal Bath
Furnace Pressure
Units
%
scfh
scfh
scfh
9Ph
%
°F
inches of wat<
9 Exhaust Gas Temperature
t The metal bath carbon content and temperatures are
periodically obtained from grab samples of the
bath.
tt Exhaust gas temperatures are obtained from four
locations^ after both sets of regenerative checkers
and in both flues leading to the waste heat boiler.
-------
79
PARTICULATE EMISSION SOURCES AND INSPECTION OBSERVATIONS
The open hearth furnaces discharge their combustion gases through
the regenerative heating systems to collection and control equipment.
After passing through the checker brickwork, the gases are routed to
waste heat boilers and induced draft fans on each furnace. The fans
discharge into a common collector main which serves both to mix the
exhaust gases and to equalize the flow variations associated with furnace
operations. From the manifold, the gases are routed to eight banks of
electrostatic precipitator/scrubbing tower systems operating in parallel.
From the scrubbers, the gases are discharged to the atmosphere.
There are considerable quantities of fugitive emissions associated
with the hot metal mixing and furnace operations. These fugitive emis-
sions are essentially uncontrolled. It was observed during the inspec-
tion that these emissions escape through louvers in the building roof to
the atmosphere.
There are significant fugitive emissions associated with the hot
metal transfer and reladling operations. Kish, a graphite-like material,
is liberated from the hot metal during both the transfer and reladling
operations, and fallout of this material is very noticeable. Copious
quantities of smoke and fume were noted within the mixing building
during these operations. Substantial amounts of these emissions exit
the building through roof louvers as fugitive emissions.
The pouring of hot metal from the ladles to the mixer during
transfer operations takes approximately two minutes per ladle. The
emissions from this operation did not appear to be too dense. A typical
reladling operation from the mixer to the ladle transfer cars takes
about four to five minutes for a three-ladle transfer. Relatively heavy
emissions were observed during these operations. The mixing building
personnel indicated that the heaviest emissions occur when the silicon
dioxide and/or sulfur content of the hot metal is high.
-------
80
The open hearth furnaces themselves are operated under a slight
positive pressure to minimize air infiltration into the combustion and
regenerative zones. Since they are under positive pressure, the furnaces
tend to leak fugitive emissions at various points such as charge door
seals, faulty brickwork, etc. The degree of such leakage appeared to
vary from furnace to furnace, reportedly in proportion to the relative
length of time into the current campaign. The furnace leakage was
continuous throughout the heat cycle. The heaviest leakage appeared to
occur whenever a checker reversal occurred.
Fugitive emissions occurred during the various furnace charging
periods, whenever the charge doors were opened. The emissions during
the scrap and hot metal charges were relatively light, with the heaviest
emissions occurring during the light scrap charges. A relatively heavy
emission of 30 to 60 seconds duration was noted at Furnace 94 when a
charge of iron ore was added to the molten metal bath near the end of
the refining cycle.
The heaviest fugitive emissions occurred during the furnace tapping
operations. These emissions were also of significant duration. The
entire furnace tap operation lasted 8 to 10 minutes. The heaviest
emissions occurred when the molten steel first entered the receiving
ladle. The second heaviest emissions were observed during the 4 to 5
minute period during which alloys and additives were added to the
molten steel in the ladle. The emissions from the latter operation were
very dense and reddish in color.
Relatively heavy fugitive emissions were also noted throughout the
ingot casting period. The emissions from this operation were not as
heavy as from the tapping operation, but lasted considerably longer,
about 45 minutes.
-------
81
PARTICULATE CONTROL SYSTEM
Figure 9 shows a flow diagram of the open hearth furnace emission
control system, which consists of a main collector flue and eight gas
treatment trains. The collector flue receives off-gas from the ten
waste heat boilers through individual induced draft fans. The flue
combines and mixes the off-gases so that their temperature and parti-
culate concentrations are equalized as much as possible prior to entry
into the individual gas treatment trains. Each gas treatment train
consists of an electrostatic precipitator, a fan, and a scrubbing tower
arranged in series.
Process Emissions
The gases emitted from the open hearth process consist principally
of air which has been modified by the oxidation of fuel. As the result-
ant combustion gases sweep across the surface of the furnace charge,
particulate is entrained and carried out with the gases. As the furnace
is cycled throughout a heat, the amount, size range and characteristics
of particulate from the furnace can be expected to vary significantly.
However, since there can be as many as ten furnaces on-line in various
stages of a heat, the ranges in particulate emissions from the open
hearths overall tend to be less varied than those from an individual
furnace. The temperature of the off-gases to the particulate control
system should be fairly uniform, because of the flue gas collector main
and the waste heat boilers. By nature of the operation, the gases
leaving the waste heat boilers are expected to have reasonably constant
temperatures (+ 8°C). The off-gas flowrate, on the other hand, can be
expected to vary significantly. It will change with such variables as
the number of furnaces in operation, air inleakage at the checkers, etc.
The expected characteristics of the emissions from the open hearth
furnace system are shown in Table 13.
-------
82
Table 13
CHARACTERISTICS OF EXHAUST GAS AND PARTICULATE
EMISSIONS FOP OPEN HEARTH FURNACES
USSC - GENEVA WORKS
Parameter
Furnace Exhaust
Temperature
Pressure
Flow Rate
Particulate Concentration
Particulate Size Range
220 to 228°C (425 to 450°F)
-9 to -13 cm (-3.5 to 5.0 in) U.G.
1,900 std m3/min (67,000 scfm) per train
2 to 7 g/m3 (1 to 3 gr/scf)
> 149 vim
7-149ym
44-74ym
20-44]im
10-20ym
5-10ym
<5ym
0.1%
1.2%
8.7%
1.0%
3.0%
5.0%
81.0%
Particulate Composition
(% by weight)
Fe
CaO
A1203
Zn
Si09
2
MgO
S
Pb
K2°
65
1.9
1.4
1.0
0.89
0.81
0.50
0.30
0.30
-------
83
Electrostatic Precipitators
The electrostatic precipitators (ESP's) used in the open hearth
furnace emission control system are Research-Cottrell plate-type precipi-
tators initially installed in 1955. The ESP's were modified in 1972 by
increasing the number of transformer-rectifier sets for each ESP from
two to three. The ESP's have three electrical fields with two sections
per field. Perforated plate distribution devices are located at both
the inlet and outlet of the precipitators. Dust which is collected in
the ESP hoppers located below the collection plates is transferred
through wet eductors to a clarifier. USSC has reported that the ESP
design particulate removal efficiency is currently 95.8% with an inlet
dust loading of 8 g/m (3.4 gr/scf).
General, physical, and design parameters for the precipitators were
supplied by USSC and are presented in Table 14. All parameters appear
typical of literature values for other open hearth applications. The
resistivity value given in Table 14 was determined by USSC consultants
through laboratory measurements. Such laboratory data are typically
more than an order of magnitude higher than for actual operating con-
ditions. Nonetheless, the actual resistivity should still be well
within the accepted range for effective precipitator performance.
The operation and control of the open hearth ESP's are monitored by
various meters located in the ESP control room. There are meters for
primary current and voltage, secondary current and voltage, and spark
rate. During the inspection, one set of readings was taken from the
meters. These data are shown in Table 15.
The usefulness of the data shown in Table 15 is limited. The data
presented are for only one set of operating conditions, but do provide
an indication of the parametric values. It should be noted that each
field in a given precipitator is energized differently -- fields 1 and 3
-------
Table 14
GENERAL, PHYSICAL, AND DESIGN PARAMETERS FOR
OPEN HEARTH FURNACE ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATORS
USSC - GENEVA WORKS
Parameter
Specifications
General
Number of Precipitators - 8
Date Installed - 1955
Precipitator Type - Plate
Manufacturer - Research Cottrell
Physical
Design
Number of mechanical sections - 4
Collection area
Electrical field 1 - 562 m2 (6,043.5 ft2)
Electrical field 2 - 562 m2 (6,043.5 ft2)
Electrical field 3 - 1,124 m2(12,087 ft2)
Number of gas passages - 34
Width of gas passages - 20 cm (8 in)
Flow distribution devices - perforated
plates located at inlet and outlet
Number of HT sections per field - 2
T-R sets
field 1 - 1/2 wave, silicon/saturables
reactor
field 2 - 1/2 wave, silicon/transistor
field 3 - 1/2 wave, silicon/saturable
reactor
DC Voltage - 45 kV design, 35 kV actual
Control mode - automatic voltage control
based on spark rate (200 - 400 sparks/min
setting)
Meters - primary current and voltage, sec-
ondary current and voltage, spark rate
Particulate removal efficiency - 95.8%
Specific collection area - 180 ft2/!,000 acfm
Resistivity - 4 x 10 ohm-cm @ 205°C
Velocity - 1.6 m (5.2 ft)/sec
Precipitation rate parameter - 8.05 cm/sec
-------
Table IS
OPERATING DATA COLLECTED FROM OPEN HEARTH FURNACE
ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOES - AUGUST ?.4, 1976*
USSC - GENEVA WORKS
85
ESP
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
Field
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1 .
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
7
1
2
3
Primary
Voltage
Volts
240
270
240
260
260
230
240
240
220
240
250
230
260
270
220
240
270
230
Not in
210
250
200
Primary
Current
Amps
23
29
33
30
32
32
22
26
43
23
32
35
25
29
25
27
32
38
operation
12
20
6
Power
kVA
5,500
7,800
7,920
7,800
8,300
7,360
5,300
6,500
9,500
5,500
8,000
8,000
6,500
7,800
5,500
6,500
8,600
8,700
2,500
5,000
1,200
Secondary
Current
mi Hi amps
40
160
80
NRft
150
70
NR
160
100
45
170
80
NR
160
50
50
180
90
25
110
10
Power
Secondary Spark Efficient
Voltage Rate Power kW
kV spin kW kVA
30
34
35
35
34
32
32
31
26
30
27
27
35
32
31
30
35
30
32
31
28
380
390
260
350
5
10
260
130
115
310
35
180
290
280
230
135
130
300
380
10
375
1,200
5,400
2,800
5,100
2,200
--
5,000
2,600
1,400
4,600
2,300
—
5,100
1,500
1,500
6,300
2,700
800
3,400
280
21%
69%
35%
61%
30%
--
77%
27%
252
58%
29%
—
65%
27%
23%
73%
31%
32%
58%
23%
:y Current
wA
m2
0.61
2.5
0.61
1.2
0.54
--
2.5
0.77
0.69
2.6
0.62
—
2.5
0.38
0.77
2.8
0.69
0.38
1.7
6.07
v.A
ft2
6.6
26.5
6.6
12.4
5.8
--
26.5
8.3
7.4
28.1
6.7
—
26.5
4.1
8.3
29.8
7.4
4.1
18.2
0.8
t Data obtained between 2:00 and 4:00 p.m. from ESP control room meters.
tt Reading was low or off scale.
-------
85
utilize the older saturable reactor transformer-rectifier (T-R) sets,
while field 2 uses a transistorized set. Field 3 also energizes twice
the collection area of the other two fields.
From Table 15, it appears that fields 1 and 3 in each ESP are
operating at relatively low current densities (
-------
87
1. A large buildup of particulates was observed over the face of
the inlet flow distribution plate, covering up approximately 50% to 60%
of the total plate surface area. This condition can contribute to
significant flow imbalances within the precipitator and cause increased
turbulence and pressure drop.
2. Several relatively large particulate deposits (2 to 5 cm
thickness) were noted on the collector plates. Such deposits can
produce increased turbulence, flow imbalance and pressure drop, as well
as affect voltage-current characteristics. These deposits further
indicate that the rapping system may not be operating properly. In
addition, re-entrainment losses caused by higher gas velocity through
constricted flow passages may also result.
USSC representatives indicated that each ESP is taken off-line for
cleaning and maintenance every 3 to 4 months. The statements as to the
extent of the maintenance provided, however, were not entirely consist-
ent between representatives. Typical maintenance as performed by USSC
probably includes removal of broken or malfunctioning corona wires,
checking and cleaning insulator wires, and removal of particulate
buildup on collection plates as can be accomplished by an air lance.
Any significant particulate buildup would probably include continuous,
prolonged use of the mechanical rappers. Only if major electrical
problems or very severe dust buildup were found would an extensive
cleaning program be initiated. USSC did not appear to conduct routine
inspections of the precipitators by knowledgeable personnel to check for
poor flow distribution, significant dust accumulations, etc.
Scrubbers
The scrubbers used in the open hearth furnace emission control
system are USSC-designed and constructed partial-orifice wet scrubbers
-------
[Figure 10]. Initially erected in 1962, the scrubbers were modified
during 1973 through 1975 by relocating internal sprays and removing the
mist eliminator. USSC reported that this was done to reduce maintenance
requirements and provide better mist elimination. Scrubber spray water
consists of recycle water from the neutralization/clarification system
diluted with plant makeup water. The discharge from the scrubber is
pumped to the clarification/neutralization system for treatment.
General and design parameters for the open hearth scrubbers, as
supplied by USSC, are shown in Table 16. USSC stated that the scrubbers
were originally designed for hydrogen fluoride (HF) removal and were
selected because they would provide adequate HF removal and good access
for maintenance. However, the use of these scrubbers for particulate
removal is questionable for two reasons: particulate removal capa-
bility, and mist carryover.
The most questionable design parameter is the reported particle
removal efficiency (75%). This efficiency is typically a function of
the size of particulate removed and the energy input into the scrubber
(pressure drop). The USSC-reported efficiency for these units appears
to be much higher than would be anticipated for low pressure drop opera-
tions (10 cm W.G.) with the submicron particulates anticipated. The
particle size data provided by USSC is limited and is based on laboratory
measurements rather than in-situ measurements. However, based on other
open hearth operations, the majority of the particulates in the gas
stream is expected to be in the submicron size range. This submicron
particulate typically requires high scrubber energy inputs (i.e., 50+ cm
W.G.) to obtain 75% removal. For example, wet scrubber tests sponsored
by the EPA have indicated that even with an energy input of 50 cm W.G.,
collection of fine particulates would be much less than 50% for <0.5pm
particles. Although factors other than classical impaction dynamics
(i.e. diffusiophoretic and electrophoretic forces) may enhance parti-
culate capture in the treatment system, it is highly questionable that
the USSC scrubbers could remove as much as 75% of the particulates.
-------
EXHAUST
89
SAMPLE PORT
SPRAY BANK
? O
SPRAY NOZZLE HEADER
ORIFICE
•GAS INLET
Figure 10. Open Hearth Scrubber — USSC Geneva Works
-------
90
Table 16
GENERAL AND DESIGN PARAMETERS FOR
OPEN HEARTH FURNACE SCRUBBERS
USSC - GENEVA WORKS
Parameter Specification
General Number of scrubbers - 8
Date installed - 1962
Scrubber type - partial orifice
Manufacturer - USSC
3
Design Particulate inlet loading - 0.23 g/m
(0.1 gr/scf)
Particle size - submicron (estimated)
Particulate removal efficiency - 75%
Scrubber pressure drop - 10 cm (4 in) W.G.
Scrubber water rate - 2,500 1(650 gal)/min
Scrubber gas velocity - 0.85 m (2.8 ft)/sec
Gas volume - 1,900 m7min (67,000 scfm)
Gas temperature - 200°C
Gas pressure - 640 mm Hg
-------
91
A second questionable design feature is the lack of mist elimina-
tors. USSC stated that the bank of sprays located above the orifice
sprays [Figure 10] provide adequate mist elimination. However, with a
gas velocity of 0.85 m (2.8 ft)/sec, a large portion of <250iim diameter
droplets will be carried out with the gas stream. The hollow cone
nozzles used in the USSC open hearth scrubbers when operating at 11 to
12 atmospheres (150 to 170 psig) pressure and under evaporating condi-
tions will produce a significant amount of <250iam diameter droplets.
These droplets would contain dissolved and suspended solids which would
become particulate upon leaving the stack. Based on rough calculations,
this droplet carryover could amount to an 0.02 to 0.07 g/m (0.01 to
0.03 gr/scf) addition to the exit particulate concentrations [Addendum
C].
Operation of the open hearth furnace scrubbers is not monitored,
other than the scrubber water pressure. Two WP-50 single point sampling
trains are located on two of the gas treatment trains. However, the
utility of the resultant data has been discussed previously. As a
result of the lack of operating indicators, the analysis of the open
hearth furnace scrubber operations was limited to observation of the
exhaust plumes from active scrubbers and the internals of the inactive
No. 7 scrubber. The following points were noted during the inspection:
1. The opacity of the plume, after the steam had dissipated, was
highly variable. There were, however, many cases when the
plume opacity was in the range of 40% to 60%.
2. There was a significant buildup of solids in the No. 7 scrub-
ber unit at the wet/dry interface, just as the incoming gas
contacts the orifice spray. The effect of this phenomena on
particulate removal is not readily apparent.
3. There was a significant buildup of solids on the scrubber wall
just opposite the gas entrance. This would indicate that the
-------
92
major portion of the gas was flowing up one side of the
scrubber. Consequently, it can be deduced that the gas stream
is not well distributed as it reaches the top section of
sprays. With the resulting higher velocities and reduced
spray coverage, mist carryover would increase and effective
particulate removal would decrease.
USSC reported that routine maintenance is performed on the open
hearth scrubbers by Company personnel about every 3 to 4 months. The
maintenance program involves removing solids deposits, which are predomi-
nantly calcium sulfate and calcium fluorides. The areas most affected
by these deposits are the inlet orifice wet-dry interface, the scrubber
waste slurry discharge drain and the nozzles, piping, and piping supports.
Since the recycle water supplied from the clarification/neutralization
system is low in total suspended solids and is below saturation with
respect to dissolved solids, degradation in the nozzle spray pattern
resulting from effects of plugging, scaling or erosion should be adequately
minimized with the current 3 to 4 month inspection frequency. Overall,
there did not appear to be major maintenance problems of the open hearth
scrubbers which would affect nominal particulate removal.
-------
VIII. ROLLING MILLS
The final steel products from the Geneva facility include plate and
coiled strip steel, steel pipe, and structural shapes such as I-beams,
angles, and channels. The conversion of the open hearth ingots into
these products occurs in the various rolling mills.
PROCESS DESCRIPTION
Slab Mill
The ingots produced at the open hearth building are cooled and
transported in their molds by railroad car to the slab mill. Here the
molds are stripped from the ingots by overhead cranes and placed in
reheat ovens known as soaking pits. The function of the soaking pits is
to raise the temperature of the steel until it is sufficiently plastic
to allow reduction from ingot size by rolling.
At the slab mill there are twenty soaking pits. Sixteen of these
units are bottom fired and four are top fired. Each of the twenty pits
have a rated capacity of 5 x 106 kg-cal (20 x 106 Btu)/hr heat input.
They were originally designed to be fueled with excess coke oven gas.
However, under current operating modes, the pits are fueled exclusively
with mixed gas, which is natural gas stabilized with blast furnace gas
to a heat value of 4,980 to 5,160 kg-cal/m3 (560 to 580 Btu/scf).
The heated ingots are removed from the soaking pits by overhead
crane and placed on a buggy unit. The buggy is used to transport the
ingot to the head end of the 110 cm (45 in) diameter slab mill.
-------
94
The 110 cm (45 in) mill has, until just recently, served the dual
role of producing slabs and blooms from ingots. Slabs are the starting
point for producing sheet, plate, and strip steel. Blooms are the
starting point for producing structural steel shapes. The 110 cm (45
in) mill can roll either shape. Previously the blooms and slabs were
then segregated after this mill for final rolling in the appropriate
finish mill. USSC has recently completed construction of a new bloom
mill which is an integral part of the structural mill. The new bloom
mill, discussed in detail later in this section, thus removes the dual
rolling duties from the 110 cm (45 in) mill and allows it to be used
exclusively for slab rolling. USSC feels that the new bloom mill will
eliminate a substantial bottleneck in the production facility and permit
optimization of plant production. The following discussion considers
the 110 cm (45 in) mill strictly as a slab mill.
Slabs produced in the 110 cm (45 in) mill are edge-treated and
sheared to length before being removed to a holding yard. At the
holding yard, the slabs are examined and any surface blemishes which are
found are removed by hand scarfing. There are no automatic scarfing
operations at the Geneva facility. The scarfed slabs are then stock-
piled in the holding yard to await finish rolling.
Plate and Hot Strip Mill
The slabs are removed from the storage yard and placed in reheating
furnaces. There are four, three-zone reheating furnaces of the pusher
design which serve the plate and hot strip mill. Each furnace has three
heating zones: the top, bottom, and hearth zones. The hearth zones are
fueled with mixed gas exclusively. The top and bottom zones are fueled
with mixed gas and/or No. 6 fuel oil. The furnaces each have a rated
capacity of 63 x 106 kg-cal (250 x 106 Btu)/hr heat input.
-------
The plate and hot strip mill is a dual purpose mill which can
produce either plate steel or coils of strip steel. Slabs from the
reheat furnaces enter the rolling line. They are first subjected to
edging and scale breaking operations. The slabs are then passed through
a broadside mill which is a Mesta 340 cm (132 in), 4-high mill. This
mill reduces the slab thickness and obtains the finished plate width.
The rough plate then passes to a reversing rougher, which is also a 4-
high mill used to further reduce the rough plate to a thickness suitable
for finish rolling.
The rough plate passes through a pair of pinch rollers to six
finishing strands. This operation also includes a 4-high mill. On the
finishing strands, the plate is reduced to final thickness.
The finished plate passes through a runout area to a leveler which
flattens it, and then to the finishing facility. Here the plate is cut
to finished length and width. The finished plate is then sent to
stockpile. Plate up to 3 m (10 ft) wide and 12 m (40 ft) long can be
produced at this facility.
Essentially the same rolling equipment is used to produce steel
strip. However, after the strip is leveled it can either be cut into
short lengths on a flying shear and stacked by a hot piler or it can be
rolled into coils. At Geneva Works there are two Bliss hot strip
rotating mandrel downcoilers and one Mesta hot strip stationary mandrel
downcoiler which can receive the continuous strip from the mill and
produce coils of strip steel.
Structural Mill
With the completion of the new 100 cm (40 in) bloom mill, the
structural mill is now an autonomous unit. Ingots are received at this
-------
96
mill in molds, stripped, and placed in the soaking pits by overhead
cranes. There are eight soaking pits for the structural mill. Each pit
has a rated heat input of 9 x 10 kg-cal (36
fueled with mixed gas and/or No. 6 fuel oil.
has a rated heat input of 9 x 10 kg-cal (36 x 10 Btu)/hr and can be
Heated ingots are removed from the soaking pits and placed on a
buggy by overhead crane. The buggy conveys the ingot to the bloom mill
where it is reduced in cross-section to form a bloom.
The blooms are sent to a storage yard where they are inspected for
surface defects. If defects are found, the entire bloom is manually
scarfed as there are no automatic scarfing machines at this facility.
There are ten hand scarfing stations, four to ten of which are operated
simultaneously, depending on production rates. The scarfing stations are
operated 24 hr/day.
From the storage yard, the blooms are placed in three, three-zone
pusher-type reheat furnaces. These reheat furnaces are similar to those
used in the plate and hot strip mill in that they have top, hearth, and
bottom heating zones. The top and bottom zones are fueled with mixed
gas and/or No. 6 fuel oil. The hearth zones are fueled with mixed gas
exclusively. The furnaces each have a rated capacity of 50 x 10 kg-
cal (200 x 106 Btu)/hr heat input.
Blooms from the reheat furnaces enter the structural shape rolling
line. They first are passed through an 81 cm (32 in) 2-high Birdsboro
reversing mill to produce a blank. This blank is then passed through a
66 cm (26 in) 3-stand, 3-high Morgan structural mill to produce the
desired structural steel shapes. The structural mill has an annual
production capacity of 77,000 m. tons (85,000 tons) and an average daily
production capacity of 210 m. tons (236 tons).
-------
97
Pipe Mill
The pipe mill is located in a separate building situated at the
northern end of the Geneva Works. There are two steel pipe production
lines in this plant. One line produces pipe ranging in diameter from 10
to 40 cm (4 to 16 in); the second line produces the large diameter pipe
ranging from 50 to 100 cm (20 to 40 in). Neither of these lines incor-
porates furnaces, ovens or other combustion devices since all of the
rolling or forming is accomplished cold.
The small diameter line produces steel pipe by a continuous forming
and electric-resistance welding process. Strip steel is fed into the
head end of the line from coils. The strip is passed through a series
of forming rolls which sequentially convert the flat strip into a circu-
lar shape. The circular shape is then passed through welding electrodes
to form a continuous strand of pipe. The welded pipe is then passed
through sizing mills which insure a round finished product of desired
diameter. Straightening the pipe also occurs here. After sizing, the
pipe is cut to predetermined lengths by traveling saws and transferred
to the finishing floor. The lengths of pipe are again straightened, if
required, and subjected to special cutting and end finishing, when
needed, before being packed for shipment.
The large diameter line produces pipe on a piece-by-piece basis by
electric welding of formed plate steel. Steel plates used in the process
are received from the plate mill. At the pipe mill, plates are edge-
planed to provide square and true edges. The plates are then edge-
crimped in a crimping press and transferred to a "U"-ing machine. This
device forms the crimped plate into a U-shape using hydraulic presses
and a large die. The U-shaped plate is next transferred to the "0"-ing
machine, which uses hydraulic pressure and special dies to form the U-
shape into an almost closed circular shape. From here the 0-shape is
sent to welding machines which place inside and outside welded beads
-------
98
along the gap using submerged-arc techniques. The welded pipe section
is then sent to an expanding station where it is expanded to final size
and roundness by subjecting it to internal hydraulic pressure against a
retaining jacket. After expanding the pipe, the hydraulic pressure is
reduced and the pipe pressure is tested. The expanded pipe is then
routed to the finishing area where it is end-faced and beveled, if being
prepared for field welding.
PARTICULATE EMISSION SOURCES AND INSPECTION OBSERVATIONS
A complete inspection was made of the rolling mill facilities. The
entire plate and hot strip mill, the 110 cm (45 in) slab mill, and the
small diameter pipe mill line were not operating during the inspection.
The former was not operating due to emergency repair of the slab mill.
The small diameter pipe mill was not operating because product inventory
was high. The structural mill and the large diameter pipe mill were
observed in operation.
The rolling mill operations appear to contribute relatively small
amounts of particulate emissions to the overall emissions from the
Geneva Works. The largest potential emission sources are the eight
soaking pits in the new 100 cm (40 in) bloom mill and the seven slab and
bloom reheat furnaces, all of which can burn No. 6 fuel oil. The air-
to-fuel ratio control for these units is accomplished by manual adjust-
ment. There are no stack gas opacity meters on these systems so there
is no reliable method to permit the operators to maintain clean burning
stacks.
The other potential sources of particulate emissions related to the
rolling operations are the hand scarfing stations in both the plate and
hot strip mill and the structural mill. Scarfing was observed at both
of these locations during this inspection. Some scarfing-related fugi-
tive emissions did escape from the louvers in the roofs covering these
areas. The magnitude of these emissions did not appear significant when
compared with other particulate emission sources at the Geneva Works.
-------
IX. SLAG HANDLING
All slag produced at the blast furnaces and open hearth furnaces at
the Geneva Works is processed at a plant adjacent to the northwest end
of the steel production operations. The slag processing facilities are
operated under contract between USSC and the Heckett Engineering Company.
The Geneva plant is one of several similar operations carried out by
Heckett throughout the world. The primary objective is to recover
metallics (iron and steel) from slag. Additionally, at the Geneva plant
non-metal!ics from the slag are processed to produce aggregates for road
building materials and for railroad ballast. At Geneva, Heckett employs
about 70 people, operating 16 hr/day, 5 days/week.
Slag from either the blast or open hearth furnace is transported
to the Heckett plant by USSC vehicles. Although some metallics are
recovered from the blast furnace slag, the bulk of the metallics are
recovered from the open hearth slag. Thus, Heckett operates two process-
ing lines, or "sides," the open hearth and blast furnaces "sides."
PROCESS DESCRIPTION
Open Hearth Side
A flow diagram of the process is shown in Figure 11. Throughput is
about 180 m. tons (200 tons)/hr. Hot open hearth furnace slag is off-
loaded from USSC trucks and cooled for 3 to 4 days prior to processing.
Simple lawn sprinklers are used to cool the slag and assist in reducing
potential dust emissions. A magnet is used to separate large metallic
pieces from the non-metallic or mixed material and these larger pieces
are returned to the open hearth furnaces. The remaining material
-------
Hot SI an to Storane
Area from USSC
Cool inn
•Water Spray
1
t
IHannet
,. Separation
1 Scaloer
Oversize Y
Drum
Non-Metal lies
ij
\ Screen {
Oversize Undersize und
i pi _
1
Undersize
1
Mannets |
y detallics
1
I Screen I Water Soray
ersize Oversize
1
Screen j-<— — 1 Screen 1 I Refined 1
[
Oversize Undersize OvC,si/c
t t {
Waste Rail y yg^p
Undersize \
y
Waste
Figure 7?. Open Hearth Slag Processing Flow Diagram
Heckeff Engineering Company
o
o
-------
101
is moved by front-end loader to one of two feeders which transfer the
material to belt conveyors. The material passes through "scalpers"
which separate all material greater than 30 cm (12 in). Material
smaller than 30 cm (12 in) is conveyed through drum magnets which
separate non-metallic material from metallic material.
The non-metallic material passes through screens which separates
material greater than 10 cm (4 in). Oversize material passes through a
jaw crusher and then rejoins the undersize material to be screened
again. Material greater than 2.5 cm (1 in) is wasted, while undersize
material is sold as railroad ballast.
Metallic material separated by the drum magnets is screened to
segregate all material greater than 12.5 cm (5 in). The oversize
material is "refined" by passing slowly through a "barrel," a rotating
drum where non-metallic material is removed by impact with the drum
sides, as well as the other material in the drum. Retention time in the
drum is about 30 minutes. The refined metallics are then transported to
USSC for melting in the open hearth furnaces. The undersize material is
screened and all material less than 0.9 cm (3/8 in) is wasted. Oversize,
ranging from 0.9 cm (3/8 in) to 12.5 cm (5 in), is transported to USSC
for melting in the blast furnaces.
Blast Furnace Side
A flow diagram of the process is shown in Figure 12. Throughput
was about 180 m. tons (200 tons)/hr. However, plans for major process
changes to be made in October 1976 increased the capacity to about 360
m. tons (400 tons)/hr.
Molten slag from the blast furnaces is transported by rail and
dumped at the Heckett site in one of two "pits." The partially cooled
-------
102
Slan Pit
Ripning
u
-Mater Snray
Scalper
Oversize
Hater.
Spray
Cone Crusher
Undersize
Hannet
Metallic* To USSC
Screen
Oversize
Undersize
Hannet
Water Snray
•letallics
To USSC
Screen
>2.5 cm (1 in)
Cone Crusher
0.9 en (3/8 in) - 2.5 cm (1 in)
Rail
Ballast
0.5 cm (.1/16 in) - 0.9 cm (3/8 in)
Road
Chins
<0.5 cm (3/16 in)
Driveway
Materials
Figure 12. Blast Furnace Slag Processing Flow Diagram
Heckelt Engineering Company
-------
103
material is "ripped," or broken up by USSC-operated bull dozers, and
then sprayed with water to complete the coolinq process and to assist in
reducing fugitive emissions. The cooled wet slag is moved by front end
loader from the pit to a hopper from which it moves over a "scalper"
which removes all material greater than 28 cm (11 in). Undersize
material passes by a magnet which removes the limited amount of metallic
material. The non-metallic material is screened to remove any material
greater than 10 cm (4 in). The oversize passes through a cone crusher
and is returned to the screen. Undersize is conveyed to a crusher
building and passes by a second magnet for further removal of the lim-
ited metal!ics material.
After removal of the metal lies, the material passes through screens
which segregate the material into four size categories (-0.5 cm, +0.5 cm
to -0.9 cm, +0.9 cm to -2.5 cm, and +2.5 cm). The latter material is
processed in a cone crusher and returned to the screens. The +0.9 cm
to -2.5 cm material is sold as railroad ballast; the +0.5 cm to -0.9 cm
material is sold as road chips, the material used as overlay on asphalt
roads and streets. The smaller material (-0.5 cm) is sold for use on
driveways or for "de-icing". The road chips must be cleaned prior to
sale and this is accomplished by "wet screening," or washing.
PARTICULATE EMISSION SOURCES AND CONTROL SYSTEM
Virtually all phases of the operation are potential sources of
particulate emissions. These include the roadways used for hauling
materials, loading and unloading of raw and finished materials, screen-
ing and crushing operations, and conveying materials between process
steps.
The primary method for abatement of emissions is the use of water.
The slag is thoroughly wetted prior to beginning of processing on
-------
104
either side. On the open hearth side, water sprays are utilized on the
final screening of the non-metallic material and on the screen prior to
barrel-refining the metallic material. Water sprays are used on the
blast furnace side prior to final screening. Location of water spray
devices is shown as Figures 11 and 12. To control dust on roadways a
13,000 liter (3,500 gal) water truck is operated virtually continuously.
INSPECTION OBSERVATIONS
At the time of the July 1 inspection, all processes were in opera-
tion. The water spray systems were adequately operating to prevent
fugitive dust emissions from the various crushing and screening opera-
v
tions. Where roadways had been freshly watered, dust emissions were
adequately controlled. Dumping of waste materials was being conducted
at the north end of the USSC property about 300 m (300 yards) south of
an NEIC air monitoring station (No. 3), and no fugitive dust was observed
from the dumping operation. However, the roadway to the dump site had
not been watered, and fugitive dust was observed from movement of the
trucks. Fugitive dust had been observed previously from this area, as
well as from other Heckett roadways.
-------
X. POWER PLANT
USSC operates a power plant at the Geneva Works which produces
steam, electric power, and compressed air for use throughout the complex.
Five boilers supply steam to drive electric generation and compressing
equipment. Electrical power is generated with a single General Electric
50,000 kW turbogenerator. Additional electrical power is purchased from
the Utah Power and Light Company on an as-needed basis. Four Ingersoll-
Rand turbo blowers, each rated at 2,700 m /min (95,000 acfm) up to 2.5
o
kg/cm (35 psig), provide compressed air for use primarily in the blast
furnaces.
PROCESS DESCRIPTION
Small Boiler Units
There are two Babcock and Wilcox Sterling-type water tube boilers,
Units 2 and 3, each rated at 68,000 kg (150,000 Ib) steam/hr at a de-
livery pressure of 32 kg/cm (450 psi) and a temperature of 400 °C (750°F)
at the superheater outlet. Each boiler has a heating surface of 1,170
m2 (12,536 ft2).
These boilers can be fueled with mixed gas, blast furnace gas, or
coal. The boilers have travelling grates and normally operate with a
bed depth of 11.5 to 12.7 cm (4.5 to 5 in) when operating on coal. The
rated heat input for each boiler is 52 x 106 kg-cal (206 x 106 Btu)/hr.
Boilers 2 and 3 share a common exhaust stack. This tapered stack
is 61 m (200 ft) high and 3.3 m (11 ft) in diameter at the top. There
-------
106
are no stack gas opacity meters on this stack or on the ductwork leading
from the boilers to the stack.
Large Boiler Units
Boilers 4, 5, and 6 are Babcock and Wilcox Sterling-type water tube
units which are each rated at 136,000 kg (300,000 lb)/hr of steam at a
delivery pressure of 32 kg/cm (450 psi) and a temperature of 400°C '
(750°F) at the superheater outlet. These boilers each have a heating
surface of 2,070 m2 (22,270 ft2).
These three boilers can be fueled with mixed gas, blast furnace
gas, or pulverized coal. When on the latter fuel, the coal is introduced
into the boilers through direct entry, front wall burners which are
inclined at about 60° downward into the combustion zone. Each boiler
has a rated heat input of 100 kg-cal (412 x 106 Btu)/hr.
Each of the three boilers has its own waste gas stack. The tapered
stacks, which are identical, are 3.3 m (11 ft) in diameter at the outlet
and 61 m (200 ft) high. Each of the boilers is equipped with a Bailey
Bolometer stack gas opacity detector which is located in the breeching
between the boiler and the exhaust stack.
PARTICULATE EMISSION SOURCES AND CONTROL SYSTEM
Each of the five boilers has the potential for emitting significant
quantities of particulate matter, especially when fueled with coal.
There are no emission control devices currently installed on these
stacks.
USSC has reportedly contracted with Wheelabrator, Inc. for the
design and installation of a single baghouse control system to treat the
exhaust gases from boilers 4, 5, and 6. USSC has proposed to operate
-------
107
these boilers with pulverized coal exclusively once the baghouse is
installed. Boilers 2 and 3 would be fueled on blast furnace gas or
mixed gas only after the baghouse is installed. There would be no
control equipment installed on these two boilers.
The new baghouse to be installed on the exhausts from boilers 4, 5
and 6 will be a Wheelabrator-Frye, Inc. Model 264, series 8RS, size
1618D Dustube Dust Collector. The unit will have fiberglass cloth bags,
operate at 290°C (550°F), have an air-to-cloth ratio of 3.2:1 at a
design head loss of 12.7 to 17.8 cm (5 to 7 in) water, and be designed
for a particulate collection efficiency of 99.6%.
-------
XI. MISCELLANEOUS OPERATIONS
There are several operations at the Geneva Works which, due either
to their intermittent operation or size, constitute a relatively small
potential impact on the total particulate emissions from this complex.
These sources are discussed below.
FOUNDRY
USSC operates a foundry which produces ingot molds and stools, slag
and hot metal ladles, and miscellaneous castings for use within the
complex.
The majority of the castings made in the foundry are ingot molds
and stools used in the casting of steel ingots. The foundry schedules
about 360 m. tons (400 tons)/day of hot metal from the blast furnaces
for the production of ingot molds. The average life of an ingot mold is
reported to be 47 casts before cracks occur or some irregularity requires
that it be retired from service. The retired mold is recycled as feed
scrap to the open hearth furnaces. The foundry prepares green sand
cores and flasks for casting of ingot molds. The cores are baked in
core baking ovens, each fueled by natural gas and each rated at 5 x 106
kg-cal (20 x 106 Btu)/hr heat input.
The majority of the castings done at the foundry use green molding
sands. A typical green sand composition is 2.5% bentonite clay, 1.7%
gilsonite (a coal-like material), 2% C-grade coal, 1.3% fireclay, 27%
new sand, and 65.5% recycled sand. Recycled sand is obtained by reclaim-
ing the green sand from the ingot mold flasks after casting.
-------
109
There are three National Hydrofliter wet scrubber systems on the
sand reclaiming system at the foundry. The smaller system has a design
capacity of 600 m /min (21,000 acfm); the larger two units are rated at
960 m3/min (34,000 acfm). USSC has no emission test data on these
scrubbers. They were reportedly designed to reduce the particulate
o
concentration in the exhuast gases to 0.11 g/m (0.05 gr/scf) or better.
The foundry also prepares some molds and cores for steel castings
such as slag ladles. These molds are transported to the pouring floor
of the open hearth building and cast at this location.
There is a small gas-fired reverberatory furnace located at the
foundry building. This furnace is used to melt aluminum and copper for
specialty casts required at the facility.
Table 17 lists a typical month's production at the foundry during
1975. It should be noted that the majority (92%) of the tonnage cast at
the foundry is accounted for by ingot molds and stools used at the
Geneva facility.
During the inspection, ingot mold casts were observed. Some
fugitive particulate emissions were noted during the cast period, but
these emissions were not considered significant when compared with other
sources at the complex. The sand reclaiming operations were not being
conducted during the inspection period. Mold shakeout and sand reclaim
took place during the night turn.
PIG CASTING MACHINE
There is a Pittsburg Coal Washer Company two-strand pig casting
machine at the Geneva Works. It is east of the open hearth building,
just north of the foundry area. This machine casts 18 kg (40 Ib) iron
-------
no
Table 17
TYPICAL MONTHLY PRODUCTION AT FOUNDRY -1975
USSC - GENEVA WORKS
Product
Ingot Molds
Ingot Stools
Ingot Molds for Torrance, Calif, plant
Miscellaneous Iron Castings
Miscellaneous Steel Castings
Miscellaneous Aluminum Castings
Miscellaneous Copper Castings
m. tons
5,000
1,380
71
161
290
-v-1
'bl
tons
5,510
1,522
78
177
318
1
1
-------
Ill
pigs. The pig machine is used whenever hot metal is produced at the
blast furnaces in quantities in excess of that which can be used by the
open hearth furnaces. The excess hot metal is cast into pigs which can
be stockpiled and later charged to the open hearths as solid iron. The
pig machine has a maximum capacity of 18 m. tons (20 tons)/hr and has an
average production of 1,700 m. tons (1,900 tons)/month.
The pig casting machine is a potential source of fugitive particu-
late emissions when the hot metal is transferred from the ladles to the
pig molds. The strands are not enclosed in a building, so any particu-
late emitted is discharged directly to the atmosphere. The pig casting
machine was not in operation at the time of the inspection.
CHEMICAL COKE PLANT
A small portion of the coke produced at the Geneva Works is further
processed to produce a dried and homogeneously sized grade of coke which
is sold as chemical coke. This material is sold to chemical companies
such as Stauffer Chemical.
At the chemical coke plant, coke is crushed in a two-stage roll
crusher (Gunlach Model 70-DA) and screened to produce 1.9 x 0.5 cm (3/4
x 3/16 in) particles. This material is then dried in two gas-fired
Jefferey vibrating conveyors, 1.5 m (5 ft) wide and 12.2 m (40 ft) long.
The driers can be operated in series or parallel. The dried product is
transferred by conveyor belt to storage hoppers and ultimately shipped
by rail.
The production capacity of the chemical coke plant is 127 m. tons
(140 tons)/day.
The chemical coke plant was in operation during the inspection.
Considerable amounts of particulate matter were discharged from the
dryer and crusher exhaust stacks.
-------
XII. EMISSIONS INVENTORY
An emissions inventory for the USSC Geneva Works has been developed
from: a) production and operational data supplied by the Corporation in
letters to the Environmental Protection Agency;1,2 b) data gathered by
EPA and contractor personnel during plant visits the weeks of August 16
and 23, 1976; c) EPA pubication AP-42, Compilation of Air Pollutant
Emission Factors;3 and d) unpublished references including two tables of
emission factors — one compiled by EPA,1*,5 and the other by Midwest
Research Institute6 — and a fugitive dust study conducted by Midwest
Research Institute.7
The emissions inventory for the Geneva Works was compiled according
to the following stipulations: only particulate emissions were inven-
toried; emissions were based on actual production data for the summer
(June, July, and August)1 of 1976; and emissions were calculated on an
average daily rate (tons/day) for each month and for each source.
The following sources were inventoried:
Coke plant Blast furnaces
coal handling material loading
charging material dumping
oven/door leaks leaks
pushing building monitors
quenching off-gas combustion
combustion
coke handling
Open hearth furnaces Boilers
stack gas combustion
fugitive (taps, scrapcharge, coal combustion
hot metal charge, flushing,
bottom repair, leaks, etc.)
-------
113
Sintering Plant Nitrogen plant
stack prilling
fugitive dryer and coolers
Rolling Mills Fugitive Dust
fugitive (scarfing) unpaved roads
combustion paved roads
open areas
storage piles
Table 18 is a summary of the NEIC-calculated participate emissions
itemized by source. A more detailed breakdown of emissions estimates
and the calculations used to obtain them is contained in Addendum D.
Table 19 is a comparison of particulate emissions submitted by USSC to
EPA in a letter dated July 8, 19761 and those calculated by the NEIC and
summarized in Table 18. The calculations submitted with the USSC
emissions data are contained in Addendum E.
The main difference between the NEIC and USSC total daily emissions
estimate totals is due to the NEIC inclusion of fugitive (unpaved roads,
paved roads, open areas and storage piles) sources in its inventory.
However, the differences in emissions from the process sources (coke
plant, blast furnaces, open hearth furnaces, sintering plant, rolling
mills, boilers, and nitrogen plant) are also large. With the exception
of the coke plant where production rates are known to be nearly the same
for both inventories, production rate differences may account for some
of the differences between the two inventories. Most production rates
are not referenced in the USSC inventory.1 However, the more significant
differences are probably due to other reasons and are discussed below on
a source-by-source basis.
For the coke plant emission estimates, the differences can be
attributed to the use by the NEIC of updated emission factors.•» The
updated factors decrease the allowable reduction in quench emissions due
to baffles from 75% to 50% and include new factors for combustion and
-------
114
Table 28
SUMMARY OF EPA-NEIC
PARTICULATE EMISSIONS ESTIMATES
SUMMER 1976
USSC - GENEVA WORKS
Source
Coke Plant
Blast Furnaces
Open Hearth Furnaces
Sintering Plant
Rolling Mills
Boilers
Nitrogen Plant
Unpaved Roads
Paved Roads
Open Areas
Storage Piles
m. tons/day
5.90
6.29
3.88
2.22
0.54
0.38
0.63
2.10
0.41
1.70
10.42
Total 34.47
tons/day
6.50
6.93
4.27
2.45
0.60
0.42
0.69
2.31
0.45
1.87
11.48
37.97
% of Total
17.12
18.25
11.25
6.45
1.58
1.11
1.82
6.08
1.18
4.92
30.23
100
-------
115
Table 19
COMPARISON OF PARTICIPATE EMISSIONS ESTIMATES
USSC AND EPA-NEIC EMISSIONS INVENTORIES
USSC - GENEVA WORKS
Source
Coke Plant
Blast Furnaces
Open Hearth Furnaces
Sintering Plant
Rolling Mills
Boilers
Nitrogen Plant
Unpaved Roads
Paved Roads
Open Areas
Storage Piles
Total
NEIC
m. tons/day
5.90
6.29
3.88
2.22
0.54
0.38
0.63
2.10
0.41
0.70
10.42
34.47
USSC
tons/day
6.50
6.93
4.27
2.45
0.60
0.42
0.69
2.31
0.45
1.87
11.48
37.97
m. tons/day
4.50
0.06
1.09
0.84
0.36
7.97
N.C.1"
N.C.
N.C.
N.C.
N.C.
14.82
tons/day
4.96
0.07
1.20
0.92
0.40
8.78
N.C.
N.C.
N.C.
N.C.
N.C.
16.33
t N.C. - not calculated
-------
116
coke handling. Also the 60% emission reduction factor for oven and door
rehabilitation, which appears in the USSC inventory,1 was not used in
the NEIC inventory. During the NEIC August 1976 inspection of the coke
plant, visibility from one end of the batteries to the other was observed
to be significantly obscured by smoke from oven and door leaks.
For the blast furnace emission estimate differences, the USSC
inventory included only off-gas combustion emissions, while the NEIC
inventory included material loading, material dumping, furnace leaks,
and building monitor emissions, in addition to off-gas combustion
emissions.
The differences in the open hearth furnace and sintering plant
emissions estimates can be attributed to differences in the method of
calculation. The USSC emissions from these sources were calculated from
in-stack monitoring data.1 The NEIC emissions from these sources were
calculated from updated emission factors.** As a result of the inspec-
tion, the accuracy of the data derived from the in-stack monitoring
equipment has been questioned. In addition, the NEIC emissions estimates
include the calculated effect of fugitive emissions from these two
facilities.
The differences in the rolling mill emissions are small and can
probably be attributed to the fact that the NEIC inventory includes
scarfing emissions and the USSC inventory does not.
The large difference between the NEIC and USSC inventories for the
boiler emissions can be attributed to the fuels' use factors that the
calculations are based on. The NEIC boiler emission calculations are
based mainly on the summer use of natural gas to fire the boilers, while
the USSC boiler emission calculations are based on yearly data and
include winter data, during which coal is used to fire the boilers.
-------
ADDENDA
A Addendum 1 to Study Plan for Air Quality
Monitoring at USSC-Geneva Works
B EPA June 8 and November 4, 1976 Letters to
USSC-Geneva Works
C Particulate Grain Loading Calculations
D NEIC Emissions Inventory Calculations
E USSC Emissions Inventory Calculations (1974)
-------
ADDENDUM A
ADDENDUM 1 TO STUDY PLAN FOR
AIR QUALITY MONITORING AT
USSC-GENEVA WORKS
-------
119
AIR QUALITY MONITORING
USSC-GENEVA WORKS, UTAH
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this addendum is to provide a more definitive
description of the required activities, time scheduling, and study
responsibilities for Phase II of the USSC Geneva Works Study. Phase II
will consist of three activities: (1) updating the existing emissions
inventory of all sources within the property boundaries of the USSC
Geneva Works, (2) conducting emission characterization studies, and
(3) evaluating the potential for and conducting emission source tests
and remote sensing activities as required to fulfill .the objectives
of the Study Plan. Phase II will be initiated immediately and will
extend beyond the completion of Phase I activities. The scope of
each activity of Phase II is described below.
EMISSION INVENTORY
This activity will be comprised of three inseparable tasks:
(1) an evaluation of the basis of the existing emissions inventory
and updating of it based on newly acquired data, (2) thorough process
inspections to observe process operations and control systems, and
-------
120
(3) an evaluation of the in-stack monitoring equipment and the data
derived from it. The primary objective of Tasks (2) and (3) is to
aid in the accomplishment of Task (1).
To initiate Task (1), EPA Region VIII will send USSC Geneva
Works a Section 114 letter asking for essential information, as
follows:
(1) background information used to develop the USSC
Geneva Works emission inventory for 1974 particulate
matter;
t
(2) all Company continuous monitoring data for the
open hearth and sintering stacks collected during
the study period;
(3) all particulate matter ambient air quality data for
all USSC Geneva Works sampling sites collected during
the study period;
(4) process block flow diagrams, control equipment design
parameters, and daily operating records for process and
control equipment.
The Company will be requested to periodically report emissions and
air quality data collected during the study period to the EPA.
-------
Process inspections [Task (2)] will be conducted by the EPA-
NEIC during mid to late August. The process inspections will be
conducted in an orderly series. Each inspection will be devoted
to a major process -unit. USSC will be provided a schedule of
inspections and be requested to discuss the process and control
equipment information available at the time of each process
inspection. A tentative listing of process units for the inspec-
tions is as follows:
1) open hearth furnaces
2) sintering and ore preparation operation
3) blast furnaces
4) coke plant
5) coke by-products and benzol plant
6) nitrogen plant
7) rolling mills and boilers
8) Heckett Engineering facility*
Following the completion of the individual inspections, time will be
allocated to discuss with the Company miscellaneous air pollution
sources and to clarify outstanding issues.
*The facility located on USSC property which crushes and grinds USSC
Geneva Works slag into aggregate.
-------
122
Task (3) will include an EPA-NEIC evaluation of the in-stack
monitoring equipment following receipt of pertinent information and
completion of the process inspections. The emission monitoring
equipment will be evaluated for its comparability with the minimum
emission monitoring requirements of 40 CFR Part 51, Appendix P, and
accepted emission monitoring methods, as well as for operational
and maintenance procedures. In addition, during the process inspec-
tions, the CPA-NEIC will evaluate the suitability of the individual
process units to be emission tested. Suitability will be determined
as a function of sampling port size and location, flow disturbance
locations ih the exhaust gas streams, estimated accuracy of a test,
etc.
EMISSION CHARACTERIZATION
The primary objective of this activity is to enable correlation
of particulate catch at the air quality monitoring sites with the
particulate matter emitted by the individual process units at USSC
Geneva Works. Individual tasks will include collection of particulate
samples at or near each individual process unit and a quality assurance
audit of all particulate matter air quality data collected in the
vicinity of USSC Geneva Works during the study period—EPA, State,
-------
123
and Company. The first task will be conducted in early September
for approximately three weeks. The second task will be conducted
as time permits during the study period.
The particulate samples collected at or near each process
unit will be used to identify specific physical and/or chemical
characteristics of that particular emission. An attempt will
be made to gather at least two samples at or near each process
unit during each unique phase of that unit's process cycle. A
list of the process units, process cycle phases, and the minimum
number of particulate samples to be taken will be completed and
distributed following the completion of the process inspections
and prior to the initiation of this activity. During this activity,
visible emission observations will be made during the period
particulate samples are obtained.
Each EPA particulate air quality monitoring site will be
routinely audited. As time permits during the study period a
quality assurance audit will be conducted for State and Company
monitoring and laboratory facilities. A quality assurance audit
will include an equipment calibration check, an evaluation of
the site location, and a check on laboratory procedures.
-------
124
SOURCr TESTING AND REMOTE SENSING
A decision on whether or not to source test will be based on
the findings of the air quality monitoring network and the evaluation
of the in-stack monitoring equipment. However, some testing, such
as at the open hearth furnace roof monitors and at the sinter plant
transfer points, may be conducted prior to the completions of
Activities (1) and (2) [Emission Inventory and Emission Characteri-
zation]. Any other actual source testing will not take place until
after the process inspections.
Remote sensing techniques, including aerial photography and/
or plume tracking/opacity LIDAR, will be employed during the emission
characterization activity to identify source/receptor relationships.
-------
ADDENDUM B
EPA JUNE 8 AND NOVEMBER 4,
1976 LETTERS TO
USSC-GENEVA WORKS
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 126
RCGION VIII
SUITE 9OO. IOCO LINCOLN STREET
DENVER.COLORADO OO203
June 8, 1976
United States Steel Corporation - Geneva Works
P. 0. Box 510
Provo, Utah 84601
ATTENTION: Mr. H. A. Huish, General Superintendent
RE: United States Steel Corporation - Geneva Works
Dear Mr. Huish:
Pursuant to the authority contained in Section 114 of the Clean Air Act,
as amended, (42 U.S.C. 1857 et seq), we are formally requesting that the
following information on the Geneva Works be provided to this office.
The information requested is required in the development of implementation
plans under Section 110 of the Clean Air Act and for a determination or
attainment of ambient air standards.
The data requested in items A through D below should be submitted not later
than 30 days following receipt of this letter. Procpss and monitoring data
requested in items E through G below should be submitted for uie period
June 1 through October 1, 1976, by the 10th of the month following the month
the data was collected.
Please provide:
A) all background information (emission and production data,
calculations, assumptions, etc.) used to develop the
estimated 1974 particulate emissions inventory submitted
by USSC to EPA Region VIII.
B) the description (manufacturer, type, model number), and
location (number of diameters upstream and downstream
from flow disturbances) of the continuous emission moni-
tors on the open hearth scrubber and sintering plant
scrubber stacks.
C) the description (manufacturer, type, model number), and
location on a map of all ambient air monitoring sites
owned and/or operated by USSC, Geneva Works.
D) control equipment and process data listed below:
1) block flow diagrams for:
a) coke by-products plant
b) benzol plant
c) nitrogen plant
-------
127
2) electrostatic precipitators
a) manufacturer, type, model number
b) manufacturer's guarantees, if any (i.e., percent
efficiency at 10 microns, grains/scf,* Ibs/hr)
c) date of installation or last modification and a
detailed description of the nature and extent of
the modification
d) description of cleaning and maintenance practices,
including frequency and method
e) design and actual values for the following variables:
1) current (secondary - amps)
2) voltage (secondary and primary)
3) rapping frequency (times/hr) and intensity (psig)
2
4) collection plate area (ft )
5) number of stages
6) particulate resistivity (ohm-centimeters)
7) conditioning agents added and amount (Ibs/hr)
C
8) effective migration velocity (ft/sec)
9) gas flow rate (scfm)
10) operating temperature (°F) and pressure (psig)
11) inlet particulate concentration and particle
size distribution (Ibs/hr) or grains/scfm)
12) outlet particulate concentration and particle
size distribution (Ibs/hr or grains/scfm)
13) pressure drop (inches of water)
conditions used for temperature and pressure.
-------
128
14) gas velocity (fps)
15) spark rate
f) quantity of fines removed or recycled per day
g) collection plate height, collection plate length,
discharge electrode total length, number of flow
passages, width of flow passages,total number of
bus sections and number in series with gas flow
h) flow distribution devices (location and type)
3) scrubbers
a) manufacturer, type, model number
b) manufacturer's guarantees, if any (i.e., percent
efficiency at 10 microns, grains/scf, Ibs/hr)
c) date of installation or last modification and a
detailed description of the nature and extent of
the modification
d) description of cleaning and maintenance practices,
including frequency and method
e) scrubbing media (composition)
f) design and actual values for the following variables:
1) scrubbing media flow rate (gals/min) vs. gas
flow rate (scfm)
2) pressure of scrubbing media (psig)
3) gas flow rate (scfm)
4) operating temperature (°F) and pressure (psig)
5) inlet particulate concentration and flow rate
(Ibs/hr or grains/scfm)
6) outlet particulate concentration and flow rate
(Ibs/hr or grains/scfm)
-------
129
7) pressure drop (inches of water)
8) gas velocity (ft/sec)
9) pressure drop vs. particle collection efficiency
g) dimensions of scrubber (vertical, horizontal),
location of spray nozzles, flow distribution devices,
details of scrubber internals
h) sketch or plan of scrubber
i) type of pollutants removed
j) mist eliminator (type, superficial gas velocity,
location, spray rate and operation)
4) cyclones
a) manufacturer, type, model number
b) manufacturer's guarantees, if any (i.e., percent
efficiency at 10 microns, grains/scf, Ibs/hr)
c) date of installation or last modification and a
detailed description of the nature and extent of
the modification
d) description of cleaning and maintenance practices,
including frequency and method
e) number of cyclones and physical arrangement (include
a diagram, if available)
f) dimensions of cyclone (diameter, length)
g) inlet temperature, velocity (ft/min), flow rate (cfm)
h) quantity of material removed or recycled per day
i) approximate inlet particle type, specific gravity,
and size distribution
-------
130
E) process data listed below reflecting daily averages:
1) coke plant
a) amount of coal charge by battery (tons)
b) coking time - average for battery
c) number of charges and pushes for each battery
2) blast furnaces
a) amount of ore charged by furnace (tons)
b) amount of agglomerates charged by furnace (tons)
c) number of slag and hot metal taps by furnace
d) furnace pressure recorder data or estimate of total
elapsed time and time of day by-pass valve is open
for each furnace
e) the frequency, total elapsed time and time of day
top gas dust removal equipment is by-passed, if
applicable
3) open hearth furnaces
a) production rate by furnace (tons)
b) number of charges and taps by furnace
c) duration and amount of oxygen lancing by
furnace per heat
d) percent of hot metal and of cold scrap charged,
by furnace
e) frequency, total elapsed time and time of day control
equipment is by-passed or non-operational
f) the number of bottom repairs, length of down time
and time of day repair takes place by furnace
-------
131
4) sintering plant
a) production rate (tons)
b) frequency, total elapsed time and time of day control
equipment is by-passed or non-operational
c) average number of start-ups and time of start-up
d) approximate ratio of charged materials in sintering
operation
5) rolling mills
a) tonnage scarfed
b) frequency, total elapsed time and time of day control
equipment is by-passed or non-operational, if applicable
c) composition and amount of gas used to fire soaking pits
6) coke by-products and benzol plant
a) production rates (tons or set')
7) nitrogen plant
a) production rates (tons)
8) boilers
a) composition and amount of fuel used to fire boilers
F) the data from the continuous emission monitors on the open
hearth and sintering plant scrubber stacks, as well as any
emission test data conducted at any process unit.
G) the particulate matter data from all ambient air monitoring
sites owned and/or operated by USSC, Geneva Works.
Any questions relating to this request should be brought to the attention of
Mr. Robert King (303/234-5306) or Mr. Jonathan Dion (303/234-4658) of the
United States Environmental Protection Agency - National Enforcement Investi-
gations Center, Denver, Colorado.
Sincerely,
John A. Green
Regional Administrator
cc: Dr. Philip X. Masciantonio
Director, Environmental Control
U.S. Steel Corporation
600 Grant St., Pittsburgh, PA 15230
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 132
OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT
NATIONAL ENFORCEMENT INVESTIGATIONS CENTER
BUILDING 53. BOX 25227, DENVER FEDERAL CENTER
DENVER, COLORADO 80225
DAT* November 4, 1976
Mr. H. A. Huish
General Superintendent
United States Steel Corporation
Geneva Works
P. 0. Box 510
Provo, Utah 84601
Dear Mr. Huish:
As a result of the recent on-site inspections conducted by NEIC
personnel at the Geneva Works, we are in need of additional infor-
mation to complete studies of the air pollution control equipment,
process operation, and emissions inventory.
The following information is needed.
A. Blast Furnaces
1) How is material transferred from coke storage,
ore storage, sinter storage to the skip hoists?
2) What was the hot metal production from the blast
furnaces for June, July, August and September of
1976 (tons/month)?
3) What is the design data (type manufacturer, model
number, design and actual flow rates and efficiency)
on cyclones, scrubbers, and ESP's used as blast
furnace gas cleaning devices?
4) Please provide test data on BF gas composition and
particulate content.
B. Sintering Plant
1) Please provide the following information on the
sinter plant cyclones:
-------
133
a) manufacturer and model
b) height of cyclone (ft.)
c) diameter of cyclone (ft.)
d) expected variation in temperature and pressure
of inlet gas (°F, psig)
e) diameter of gas outlet from cyclone (ft.).
2) Please provide the following informaiion on the sinter
plant discharge end (north end) scrubbers:
a) gas flow rate, temperature pressure and fluctua-
tions (scfm, °F, psig)
b) spray configuration and location of nozzles
c) scrubbing media flow rate and pressure (gallons/
min., psig)
d) inlet particulate concentration and particle size
distribution (gr/scf)
e) outlet particulate concentration and particle size
distribution (gr/scf)
f) gas velocity through scrubber (ft./sec.)
g) sketch of scrubber.
3) Please provide the following information on the sinter
plant windbox scrubbers:
a) spray nozzles; type, location and number
b) IDS of discharge from scrubbers (mg/1)
c) TsS of water spray into scrubber (mg/1)
d) gas pressure at inlet (psig).
C. Coke Ovens
1) Please provide the height, base diameter and exit diameter
of the coke battery waste heat stacks (ft.).
-------
134
2) What is the amount of gas burned in the coke ovens and
the gas analysis (MCF/month, % by weight of H2, CH4, etc.,
gr/ft3 of S and particulate)?
3) What is the amount of quench liquor used per quench and
the chemical analysis of the quench liquor (i.e., IDS,
TSS, phenol content, sulfate, sulfide, sulfite content--
mg/D?
4) Briefly describe the chemical coke production process.
Include a process diagram.
5) What is the average production rate of chemical coke
(tons/day)?
D Open Hearth Furnaces
1) Please provide the BTU input to a typical open hearth.
Include the range during the cycle (106 BTU/hr).
2) Please provide the following information on the open
hearth ESP's:
a) pressure of gas at inlet (psig)
b) secondary design current amps
c) particulate composition.
3) Please provide the following information on the open
hearth scrubbers:
a) spray nozzle manufacturer and model number, loca-
tion and number
b) IDS of discharge (mg/1)
c) TSS of water spray into scrubber (mg/1)
d) gas pressure at inlet (psig).
E. Foundry and Pig Machine
1) What are the ratings for the core baking ovens
(106 BTU/hr input)?
2) Please provide the amount and type of fuel used for
the core baking ovens and reverberatory furnaces for
June, July, August, and September of 1976 (MCF/month
or gallons/month).
-------
135
3) Please provide data on the air pollution controls
for the sand handling and reclaim systems at the
foundry (manufacturer and model, design and actual
scfm and efficiency).
4) What is the amount of hot metal and steel poured at
the foundry for June, July, August and September of
1976 (tons/month).
5) What is the production capability and average monthly
production of the pig machine (tons/hr, tons/month)?
F. Rolling Mills
1) What are the base diameters, exit diameters, heights
(ft.), number and location of stacks serving the
soaking pits?
2) What are the ratings of the soaking pits and reheat
furnaces (10^ BTU/hr input)?
3) What is the amount and type of fuel used for the
reheat furnaces and soaking pits at all rolling mill
operations for June, July, August and September of
1976 (MCF/month, gallons/month)?
6. Coke By-Products and Nitrogen Plant
1) Where is the "surplus gas flow" shown near the primary
coolers on Figure 4-1 "By Product Gas System" (provided
by USSC to EPA) sent?
2) Where does centrate from (NH/^SC^ at the by-products
plant centrifuging operation go?
3) Please provide the following information on the four
cyclonic scrubbers serving the prill dryers:
a) manufacturer, type, model
b) height of the cyclones (ft.)
c) diameter of the cyclones (ft.)
d) gas flow rates, temperatures, pressures, and
fluctuations (SCFM, °F, psig)
e) spray configurations and locations
-------
136
f) scrubbing media flow rates and pressures
(gall on/min, psig)
g) diameter of gas outlets from cyclones (ft.).
4) Please provide the following information on the baghouse
serving the prill screening and talc prill blending
operations:
a) manufacturer, type, model
b) filter material and weave
c) air to cloth ratio
d) pressure drop (in, of water)
e) collection efficiency
f) stack test data
H. Boilers
1) What is the heat input for all three boilers (106/BTU/hr)?
2) What are the base diameters, exit diameters, and heights
for the boiler stacks (ft.)?
3) What is the percent ash of the coal used to fire the
boilers?
4) Please provide the following information on the baghouses
that will be used to control boiler emissions:
a) manufacturer, type, model
b) filter material and weave
c) maximum service temperature of filter material (°F)
d) air to cloth ratio
e) pressure drop (in. of water)
f) collection efficiency.
-------
137
I. General
1) What is the porosity of the ceramic alumdum thimbles
used in the participate monitoring equipment?
2) What is mixed gas?
3) Where are blast furnace, natural, mixed and coke oven
gas used and what are their average monthly usage
figures (MCF/month)?
We would appreciate it if you would submit the information requested
above no later than 30 days following the receipt of this letter.
Any questions concerning this request should be brought to the atten-
tion of Mr. David Brooman, Mr. Robert Gosik or Mr. Jonathan Dion
(303/234-4658) of the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, National
Enforcement Investigations Center, Denver, Colorado.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
Thomas P. Gallagher
Director
-------
ADDENDUM C
PARTICULATE GRAIN LOADING
CALCULATIONS
-------
139
ADDENDUM C
APPROXIMATION OF PARTICULATE LOADING DUE TO MIST CARRYOVER
SINTERING PLANT AND OPEN HEARTH SCRUBBERS
USSC - GENEVA WORKS
SINTERING PLANT (one scrubber)
1. Assumptions
a. Scrubber liquid droplets <500um diam. will be entrained in gas
stream.
b. Aproximately 10% of scrubbers liquid is atomized to <500ym diam.
droplets under typical scrubber operating conditions.
c. Mist eliminator efficiency is 50%.
d. There are 2,900 ppm TDS and TSS in scrubber liquid.
2. Calculation
700 gal/8.34 1b/10 Ib of <500um/ 5 Ibs lost /2.900 Ib solids/
min / gal /100 Ib sprayed / 10 Ibs of <500ym/ 100falb lost /
7.000 gr/ 1 / * n no / c
Ib /180.000 scfm / = °'03 9r/scf
OPEN HEARTH (one scrubber)
1. Assumptions
a. Scrubber liquid droplets of <250ym diam. will be entrained
in gas stream
b. Approximately 5% of scrubber liquid is atomized to <250um.
diam. under typical scrubber operating conditions.
c. Spray capture of carryover droplets is 60%, net.
d. There are 2,500 ppm TDS and TSS in scrubber liquid.
2. Calculation
650 gal/8.34 1b/5 Ib of <250um/ 4 Ibs lost /2,500 Ib solids/
min / gal /100 Ib sprayed/10 Ibs of <250ym/ 10b Ibs lost /
7.000 qr/ 1 / •».«„,,
Ib /67,000 scfm/ = °'03 9r/scf
-------
ADDENDUM D
NEIC EMISSIONS INVENTORY
CALCULATIONS
-------
NEIC EMISSION INVENTORY
(JUNE, JULY, AUGUST, 1976)
141
Coke Plant
Coal charged (TONS)
Battery
1
2
3
4
Totals
(Tons/Month)
Average (Tons/Day)
Emissions:
Coal handling
.
June,
40,595
40,450
40,291
40,172
161,508
5,384
July,
41 ,679
41,531
41,321
41 ,340
165,871
5,351
factor: 0.43 Ib/ton of coal charged
June (5384 tons/day) 0.4 Ib/ton) = 2153 Ibs/day =
July (5351 (0.4) = 2140 Ibs/day =
August (5414) (0.4) = 2166 Ibs/day =
AVERAGE
Charging
factor: (1.53 Ib/ton of coal charged) (0.41) =
June (5384 tons/day) (0.6 Ib/ton) = 3230 Ibs/day =
July (5351) (0.6) = 3210 Ibs/day =
August (5414 (0.6) = 3248 Ibs/day =
AVERAGE
August'
41,959
41,906
41,961
42.020
167,846
5,414
1.08 tons/day
1.07 tons/day
1.08 tons/day
1.08 tons/day
0.6 Ib/ton
: 1.6 tons/day
1 1.6 tons/day
: 1.6 tons/day
! 1.6 tons/day
-------
142
Oven/Door Leaks
factor: 0.13 ib/ton of coal charged
June (5384 ton/day) 0.1 Ib/ton = 538 Ibs/day =
July (5351) (0.1) = 535 Ibs/day =
August (5414) (0.1) = 541 Ibs/day =
AVERAGE
Pushing
factor: 0.78^ Ib/ton of coal charged
June (5384)tons/day (0.78 Ib/ton) = 4200 Ibs/day =
July (5351) (0.78) = 4173 Ibs/day =
August (5414) (0.78) = 4223 Ibs/day =
AVERAGE
Quenching
factor: 0.45^ Ib/ton of coal charged
June (5384 ton/day) (0.45 Ib/ton) = 2423 Ibs/day =
= 2402 Ibs/day =
= 2436 Ibs/day =
AVERAGE
0.27 ton/day
0.27 tons/day
0.27 tons/day
0.27 tons/day
2.1ptons/day
2.08 tons/day
2.lQtons/day
2.09 tons/day
July (5351 (0.45)
August (5414) (0.45
1.21 tons/day
1.20 tons/day
1.22 tons/day
1.21 tons/day
Combustion
factor: 0.0694 Ib/ton of coal charged
June (5384 tons/day (0.069 Ib/ton) = 371 Ibs/day
July (5351 (0.69) = 369 Ibs/day
August (5414) (0.069) = 374 Ibs/day
AVERAGE
0.19 tons/day
0.18 tons/day
0.19 tons/day
0.19 tons/day
-------
143
Coke Handling
factor: 0.0234 Ib/ton of coal charged
June (5384 tons/day) (0.023 Ibs/ton) = 124 Ibs/day
July (5351) (0.023) - = 123 Ibs/day
August (5414) (0.023) = 124 Ibs/day
AVERAGE
0.06 tons/day
0.06 tons/day
0.06 tons/day
0.06 tons/day
Coke Plant Total:
Coal Handling
Charging
Oven/Door Leaks
Pushing
Quenching
Combustion
Coke Handling
TOTAL
1.08
1.60
0.27
2.09
1.21
0.19
0.06
6.50 tons/day
-------
144
Blast Furnaces
Production (tons/month) (average tons/day)
June 126,178 4,206
July 130,820 4,220
August 125,342 4,043
Emissions:
Material Loading
Factor: 0.37^ Ib/ton of hot metal produced
June (4,206 tons/day (0.37 Ibs/ton = 1556 Ibs/day = 0.78 tons/day
July (4,220) (0.37 = 1561 Ibs/day = 0.78 tons/day
August (4,043) (0.37) = 1496 Ibs/day = 0.75 tons/day
AVERAGE = 0.77 tons/day
Material Dumping
Factor: 0.734 Ib/ton of hot metal produced
June (4,206 ton/day (0.73 Ib/ton = 3,070 Ibs/day = 1.54 tons/day
July (4,220 (0.73) = 3,081 Ibs/day = 1.54 tons/day
August (4,043) (0.73) = 2,951 Ibs/day = 1.48 tons/day
AVERAGE =1.52 tons/day
Leaks
Factor: 1.1^ Ib/ton of hot metal produced
June (4,206 ton/day (1.1 Ib/ton = 4,627 Ibs/day = 2.31 tons/day
July (4,220) (1.1) = 4,642 Ibs/day = 2.32 tons/day
August (4,043) (1.1) = 4,447 Ibs/day = 2.22 tons/day
AVERAGE =2.28 tons/day
-------
Building Monitor
Factor: 1.1^ Ib/ton of hot metal produced
June (4,206 ton/day) (1.1 Ib/ton = 4,627 Ibs/day = 2.31 tons/day
July (4,220) (1.1) = 4,642 Ibs/day = 2.32 tons/day
August (4,043) (1.1) = 4,447 Ibs/day = 2.22 tons/day
AVERAGE =2.28 tons/day
Off Gas Combustion
Factor: 0.38^ Ib/ton of hot metal produced
June (4,206 tons/day) (0.038 Ib/ton = 160 Ibs/day = 0.08 tons/day
July (4,220) (0.038) = 160 Ibs/day = 0.08 ton/day
August (4,043) (0.038) = 154 Ibs/day = 0.08 ton/day
AVERAGE = 0.08 ton/day
Blast Furnace Total:
Material Loading 0.77
Material Dumping 1.52
Leaks 2.28
Buildup Monitor 2.28
Off Gas Combustion 0.08
TOTAL 6.93 tons/day
-------
146
Open Hearth Furnaces
Production (Tons/Month)
Furnace
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
TOTALS (Tons/Month)
Average Tons/Day
Emissions
Stack
June
678
9,674
24,188
15,768
19,106
11,495
27,575
28,274
26,485
12,284
175,527
5,851
Factor: 0.734 Ib/ton of steel
June (5851 ton/day (0
July (5682 (0.73
August (4565 (0.73)
.73 Ib/ton) =
~
=
July
28,350
20,037
19,933
24,143
23,974
18,005
12,662
22,104
—
6,946
176,154
5,682
produced
4271 Ibs/day = 2.
4147 Ibs/day = 2.
3332 Ibs/day = 1.
August
25,161
18,741
--
26,510
17,236
10,643
—
16,762
—
26,452
141 ,505
4,565
1 tons/day
07 tons/day
67 tons/day
AVERAGE
=1.95 tons/day
-------
147
Fugi ti ve
Factor: 0.87 Ib/ton of steel produced
June (585/ton/day) (0.87 Ib/ton) = 5090 Ibs/day = 2.5 tons/day
July (5682 (0.87) ' = 4943 Ibs/day = 2.47 tons/day
August (4565) (0.87) = 3972 Ibs/day = 1.99 tons/day
AVERAGE =2.32 tons/day
Open Hearth Furnaces Total:
Stack 1.95
Fugi ti ve 2.32
TOTAL 4.27 tons/day
-------
148
Sintering Plant
Production (tons/month)
June July August
52,245 45,693 47,442
(tons/day)
1,742 1,474 1,530
Emissions
Stack
Factor: l.O3 Ib/ton of sinter produced
June (1,742 ton/day) (1.0 Ib/ton) = 1,742 Ibs/day = 0.87 ton/day
July (1,474)(1.0) = 1,474 Ibs/day = 0.74 ton/day
August (1,530) (1.0) = 1,530 Ibs/day = 0.76 ton/day
AVERAGE = 0.79 ton/day
Fugitive
Factor: 2.I3 Ib/ton of sinter produced
June (1,742 ton/day (2.1 Ib/ton) = 3,658 Ibs/day = 1.83 tons/day
July (1,474) (2.1) = 3,095 Ibs/day = 1.55 tons/day
August (1,530) (2.1) = 3,213 Ibs/day = 1.61 tons/day
AVERAGE =1.66 tons/day
Sintering Plant Total:
Stack 0.79
Fugitive 1.66
TOTAL 2.45 tons/day
-------
149
Rolling Mills
Production
June
July
August
(tons/month)
126,486
127,479
112,567
Combustion (mixed gas I? 500 BTU/ft3)
(MCF/month) (Gal/month)
June 1,297,986 26,079
July 1,198,123 78,347
August 1,121,774 113,520
Natural Gas Equivalents
(MCF/month)
June 648,993
July 599,062
August 560,872
Emissions
Scarfing Factor: 0.25 Ib/ton of metal scarfed
June (4,216 ton/day (0.2 Ib/ton) = 843 Ibs/day = 0.42 ton/day
July (4,112) (0.2) = 822 Ibs/day = 0.41 ton/day
August (3,631) (0.2) = 726 Ibs/day = 0.36 ton/day
AVERAGE =0.40 ton/day
(average tons/day)
4,216
4,112
3,631
(Gal/day)
869
2,527
3,662
(MCF/day)
21,633
19,325
18,093
-------
150
Gas Factor: 183 lb/106 ft3 of gas burned
June (21.63 x 106 ft3/gas) (18 lb/106 ft3 of gas = 389 Ibs/day = 0.19 ton/day
July (19.32 x 106) (18 lb/106) = 348 Ibs/day = 0.17 ton/day
August (18.09 x 106) (18 lb/106) = 326 Ibs/day = 0.16 ton/day
AVERAGE =0.17 ton/day
Fuel Factor: 233 lb/103 gallons of fuel = 20 Ibs/day
June (0.869 x 103 gal/fuel) (23 lb/103 gal fuel = 20 Ibs/day = 0.01 ton/day
July (2.527 x 103) (23 lb/103) = 58 Ibs/day = 0.03 ton/day
August (3.662 x 103) (23 lb/103) = 84 Ibs/day = 0.04 ton/day
AVERAGE =0.03 ton/day
Rolling Mill Total:
Scarfing 0.40
Gas Combustion 0.17
Oil Combustion 0.03
TOTAL 0.60 tons/day
-------
151
Boilers
Fuel consumption per month (CF for gas, tons for coal)
NG
MG
BF
Coal
June
180,242,000
894,344,000
3,911,369,000
July
122,282,000
809,570,000
4,530,655,000
206
(NG = natural gas, MG = mixed gas @ 500 BTU/Ft3, BF =
100 FTU/Ft3)
August
65,587,000
884,928,000
4,206,414,000
blast furnace gas @
Natural Gas Equivalents
June
NG 180,242,000
MG 447,172,000
BF 391.137.000
Total 1,018,551,000
(Ft /month)
Avg.
(FtVday)
33,951,700
July
122,282,000
404,785,000
453,065.500
980,132,500
31,617,177
August
65,587,000
442,464,000
420.641 .400
928,692,400
29,957,819
Emissions
Factor: 183 lb/106 ft3 gas burned
June (33.95 x 106 ft3) (18 lb/106 ft3) = 611 Ibs/day
July (31.62 x 106 ) (18) =569 Ibs/day
August (29.96 x 106) (18) = 539 Ibs/day
AVERAGE
0.30 ton/day
0.28 ton/day
0.27 ton/day
0.28 ton/day
-------
152
o 2
Factor: (16)° (8) Ib/ton coal burned
128 Ib/ton coal burned
July (128 Ib/ton (6.65 tons/day) = 0.42 ton/day
Three month average =0.14 ton/day
Boiler Total:
Gas 0.28
Coal 0.14
TOTAL 0.42 ton/day
-------
153
Nitrogen Plant
Production tons/month
June July August
9,395 7,355 11,181
tons/day
313 237 361
Emissions
Prilling
Factor: 0.93 Ib/ton of product
June (313 ton/day) (0.9 Ib/ton) = 282 Ibs/day = 0.14 ton/day
July (237 (0.9) = 213 Ibs/day = 0.11 ton/day
August (361) (0.9) = 324 Ibs/day = 0.16 ton/day
AVERAGE =0.14 ton/day
Dryers and Coolers
Factor: 3.63 Ib/ton of product
June (313 ton/day) (3.6 Ib/ton) = 1127 Ibs/day = 0.56 ton/day
July (237) (3.6) = 8532 Ibs/day = 0.43 ton/day
August (361) (3.6) = 1300 Ibs/day = 0.65 ton/day
AVERAGE =0.55 ton/day
Nitrogen Plant Total:
Prilling 0.14
Dryers and Coolers 0.55
TOTAL 0.69 ton/day
-------
EXPERIMENTALLY DETERMINED FUGITIVE DUST EMISSION FACTORS6'7
Source category
Aggregate storage
(sand and gravel;
crushed stone)
Unpaved roads
Paved roads
Wind erosion
Measure of extent
Tons of aggregate put
through storage cycle
Vehicle-miles traveled
(light duty)
Vehicle-miles traveled
(light duty)
Acre-years of exposed
land
Emission factor—
(Ib/unit of
source extent)
0.33
(PE/100)2
°'49 (Su> o is
9 x 10"5 L
18
esf
(PE/50)2
u
Correction parameters
PE » Thornthwaites Precipitation
Evaporation Index
road surface silt content
S = average vehicle speed (mph)
d = dry days per year
L = surface loading (Ib/mile)
Sp = fractional silt content of
road surface material
e = soil erodibility (tons/acre-yr)
s « silt content of surface soil (%)
f •= fraction of time wind exceeds
12 mph
PE = Thornthwaites Precipitation-
Evaporation Index
a./ Annual average emissions of dust particles smaller than 30 micrometers in diameter based on particle -J
density of 2.5 g/cm3. 2
-------
ROAD EMISSIONS'
Source Extent
Correction Factors Emissions*
Road Length Vehicle Miles Vehicle Class Vehicle Weight Vehicle Speed Road Surface Surface Emission Dally
Roads Traveled Correction Silt Content Loading Factor Emissions
Miles8 Kilc8/Dayb Light Duty A Based on mphb Z or fraction Lbs. Material Lba/VMT Tons/Day
Medium Duty B Observation per Mile
Heavy Duty C
Unpaved
Slag Hauling
Hot Strip
Slag Plane
Coke Pile
Total
Paved
Coal Storage
Coke Plant
Other Paved
Total
1.3
0.9
3.0
0.3
5. 5
0.7
0.8
12.8
14.3
'JO
72
238
28
478
56
120
1.030
1,206
a Determined from plant icap.
b Data obtained from plant personnel.
c Determined by means of dry sieving.
d Assumed value based on observation.
•
C 8.0 25 7C — 4.3e 0.19
A&B 1.3 25 10d — 4.0 0.14
C . 8.0 10 13C — 12.8 1.84
C 8.0 25 4C -- 9.8 0.14
2.31
A&B 1.3 • 25 0.10d >15,000d 4.0f 0.11
B 3.5 25 O.l0d > 15.000d 5.4* 0.32
A&B 1.3 25 0.07d 5.000d 0.04 0.02
0.45
e Factor has been reduced by 757. to account for road surface oiling.
£ Calculated as an unpavcd road due to its high surface loading.
g Same as f , but reduced by 50%.
* All emissions are based on participates leas than 30 microns in diameter.
Yearly
Emissions
Tons /Year
69.4
51. 1
671.6
51.1
843.2
40.2
116.8
7.3
164.3
CJI
Ul
-------
OPEN AREA EMISSIONS'
Source extent
Wind erosion
Plant A Open
Areas
Total
plant
area
acres
1,502
Total
open
area
acres
376
Correction factors
E-nissions
Effective
open area
fraction
Soil
credibility
Surface silt
soil content
(7.)
20£/
PE
0.19^
Emission
factor
Ib/acre year
3,631
Daily
emissions
tons/day
1.87
sj Effective open area fraction: That area which is unsheltered by nearby buildings (effective open area « total ope
0.5).
b_/ Tons of naterial eroded/acre-year.
£/ Assumed value based on known nearby agricultural land silt content.
d/ Fraction of the tine the wind speed is greater than 12 mph.
e_/ Thornthwaites Precipatation-Evaporation Index.
en
CTI
-------
STORAGE PILE EMISSIONS7
Material
in
Storage
Medium
volatil-
ity coal
High
volatil-
ity coal
Iron ore
pellets
Lump
iron ore
Coke
Slag
Total
Source
Amount
in
Storage
(tons)."/
42,500
127,000
125,000
242,333
185,000^
129,000
851,333
extent
Annual
thruput
(million
tons)^/
0.5
1.5
1.5
2.9
1.0
1.5
8.9
Emission
factors'*
Correction factors
Silt
content
tt)
6£/
.
IS.'
13£/
9£/
!«/
1.3S/
Duration
of
storage
(days)li/
30
30
30
30
Surge
basis'
30
Load in
(Ib/ton
stored)
0.16
0.05
0.35
0.24
0.03
0.04
Vehicular
traffic
(Ib/ton
stored)
tl
il
0.43
J/
0.16
&/
Wind
erosion
(Ib/ton
stored)
0.72
0.24
0.31
1.09
0.12
0.18
Load
out
(Ib/ton
stored)
0.79
0.26
f/
f/
0.16
0.25
Total
storage
cycle
(Ib/ton
stored)
1.67
0.55
1.09
1.33
0.47
0.47
Emissions
(tons/day) (tons/yr)
1.15 420
1.14 415
2.25 820
5-30 1,935
0.64 235
1 365
11.48 4.1Qn
£/ Calculated as 1/12 the annual thruput.
j>/ Data obtained through plant personnel.
_£/ Determined by means of dry sieving.
-------
ADDENDUM E
USSC EMISSIONS INVENTORY
CALCULATIONS (1974)
-------
ADDENDUM E
USSC EMISSIONS INVENTORY 159
CALCULATIONS (1974)
Emission Inventory fcr Year of \-7l
Coke Plant - EPA Emission Factors
v
.Discharging -
.6#/T coal charged
.6# x 1.939JOOO tons coal charged
"= ^62 tons part, per year
Unloading
•Wr coal charged
•kf x 1,939,000 tons coal
* 3JJ8 tons part, per year
Charging
1.5#/T coal charged
1.5# X 1,939,000 tons coal
- l.JS'i tons part, per year
\i*y* x .1.0* = 582 tons part, per year
* At 60* reduction due to using stage charging.
Coke Cycle
.1#/T coal charged
.1//JC 1,939,000 tons coal
B 97 tons part . per year
97 x .kO* = 3J? tons part, per year
Quenching
coal charged
•9# x 1,939,000 tons coal
" 873 tons part, per year
873 x .25* = 218 tons part.
e°iSS10ns froni no co"trols due to installation of
Open Hearth
Average volume = 1*50,000 SCFM
Average GR/CF = .026
1.50,000 ^CF x .026 GR/CF 1,1,1,0 Min. 365" D/Y 2 000#
Mm 7,000 CR/# x DaF ' ? = ^3J tons part, per year
ginter Plant^
Wind Box both
Average volume = 35^,000 SCFM
Average GR/CF = .03 GR/CF
-------
160
351* ,000 SCF .03 CR/CF Y 6027 Oner. Hrs. y 60 Min y ]
Min. 7,000 GR/# Yr . Hr. g.OOC/^/T
g7j« tons part . per year .
North End Discharge
Average volume = 80,000 SCFM
Average CR/CF = .03 GR/CF
80,000 SCFY -03 GR/CF y 6027 Oner. Hrs. x 60 Min. x 1
Min 7,000 GR/j? Yr. Hr. 2,000 #/Yr
62 tons part . per 'year.
Total Sinter Plant
Wind Box
_62 Discharge End
336 Tons/Year Total
• -•- '
Blast Furnace Steves
Rated capacity iM M ETU/Hr/Stove
Based on EPA emission factor for natural gas 15# part./MCF
.1M*'0001X 1^557000 CF. KG = 2.1# Part./Hr ./Stove
2.1#/HR x 2U Hrs. x 3 fees, x 365 D/YR = 27.6#/Yr for all 3 fees.
1971* - One furnace down 2 months for a total of 31* fee. months out of a
possible of 36 months.
27.6///YR x 2± = 26.1 tons part, per year.
Power House
Fuels
Coal - 57, 89^ tons
B.P. gas - 75,000,000 MCF @ 100 BTU/CF
Natural Gas - 1,800,000 MCF @ 1,000 BTU/CF
Mixed Gas - 3,200,000 KCF @ 570 BTU/CF
Coal - EPA emission factor 1.6#/ton coal burned
57,891* NJ_Coal 16#/T x 6.7^ Ash x _^_ *A = 3,103 tons part, per year
*r. 2,000 • -
Gaseous Fuels @ 1,000 BTU
Based on EPA emission factor for natural gas - 18# per MCF.
-------
B.F. Gas =
Nat .Gas =
Mixed Gas =
7,500 MMCF
1 ,800 me?
1.82^ MMCF
Total 11, 12^ MMCF
11,121. MMCF x 181/HCF x -
Tons part, per year
Rolling Mill
Coke Oven Gas - 6,500,000 MCF @ 570 BTU
Kat. Gas - 3,700,000 MCF @ 1,000 BTU
Fuel Oil - 7>000 Gals.
Gaseous Fuels
Ba,sed on natural gas @ 1,000 BTU and EPA emission factor of l8#/MMCF
7,li05 MMCF X 18# MMCF = 66.6 tons.
Fuel Oil
EPA emission factor 23#/M Gals.
7,000 M gals. X 23#/M gals. = 80.5 tons.
Total 66.6
80.5
lt>7.1 Tons Part. Per Year
-------
162
REFERENCES
1. USSC letters of July 8, July 19, August 20, and September 17,
1976 to John Green, Regional Administrator, EPA, Region VIII.
2. USSC letter ofDecember 13, 1976 to Thomas Gallagher, Director,
National Enforcement Investigations Center, EPA.
3. Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, OAWM, OAWPS, 2nd Ed., AP-42, March 1976,
pp. 6.8-2, 7.2-2, 7.5-4 and 7.5-5.
4. Emission factors compiled by ESED, OAQPS, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, N.C. (unpublished
tables with references).
5. Personnel communication with Reid Iverson, on October 15, 1976,
OAQPS, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
6. Emission Factors compiled by Midwest Research Institute, Kansas
City, Mo. (unpublished tables with references).
7. Midwest Research Institute letter with fugitive emission tabula-
tions of November 5, 1976 to Jonathan Dion, National Enforcement
Investigations Center, EPA.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Abbott, J. H. and Drehmel, D.C., Dec. 1976. Control of Fine
Particulate Emissions, Chemical Engineering Progress.
Drehmel, D.C. June 27-July 1, 1976. Primary Fine Particle Control
Technology, Paper presented at the 69th Annual Meeting of the Air
Pollution Control Association, Portland, Ore.
The Mcllvain Co., 1976. The Electrostatic Precipitator Manual -
Vol. 2, Northbrook, 111.
Oglesby, S., Jr., and Nichols, G. B. Sept. 1970. A Manual of
Precipitator Technology, Part II: Application Areas, Document
A3 196351, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Va.
Schueneman, J. J., High, M.D. and Bye, W.E., June 1965. Air
Pollution Aspects of the Iron and Steel Industry, U.S. DHEW,
Cincinnati, Ohio.
------- |