ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT
MAGMA
SAN MANUEL
NATIONAL ENFORCEMENT INVESTIGATIONS CENTER
DENVER, COLORADO
-------
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
INSPECTION OF
SAN MANUEL DIVISION SMELTER
MAGMA COPPER COMPANY
SAN MANUEL/ ARIZONA
JUNE 1976
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL ENFORCEMENT INVESTIGATIONS CENTER
Denver
OFFICE OF AIR QUALITY PLANNING AND STANDARDS
Durham
REGION IX
San Francisco
-------
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION 1
PROCESS DESCRIPTION 2
EMISSION SOURCES AND RELATED
CONTROL EQUIPMENT 6
EMISSIONS DATA 10
TABLES
1 Smelter Process Equipment and
Operating Data 4
2 Smelter Air Pollution Control
Equipment and Operating Data .... 8
3 Particulate Matter Emissions Test
Results 12
FIGURES
1 Magma, San Manuel Process Flow
Diagram 3
2 Magma, San Manuel Plant Layout,
Process Exhaust Flow and Air
Pollution Control Systems 7
APPENDICES
A NEIC Information Request
Letter to Magma 15
B Magma Response to
NEIC Information Request .... 26
C SIP Regulation Applicable to
Magma 45
D Example Calculations of Gas Flow
Rates, Moisture Content, Actual
Emission and Allowable Emission . 47
Bibliography 54
-------
Magma Copper Company
San Manuel Smelter
San Manuel, Arizona
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Magma Copper Company operates an underground mine, concentrator,
smelter, electrolytic refinery, and continuous casting rod plant in the
vicinity of San Manuel, Arizona. An inspection to acquire data with
which to evaluate the operation of existing process and particulate
matter air pollution control equipment at the smelter was conducted by
EPA personnel on January 30, 1976. Substantial amounts of process and
control equipment information were requested of, and received from,
Magma.
The following conclusions are based on the inspection and a review
of the information obtained:
1. The two reverberatory furnace ESPs do not have sufficient
capacity to handle the gas volumes coming to them if there is any
infiltration air. The Company reports the gas volume generated by
the reverberatory furnaces is identical to the ESP design rate -
8,200 m3/min (289,000 scfm).
2. The removal of the perforation plates preceding the ESP units
could result in improper flow balance to the two ESP units and in
non-uniform gas distribution within the units, thereby impairing
their efficiency.
3. The actual gas flow rate to the converter ESP reported by the
Company [5,220 m /min (184,500 scfm)] would be exceeded if the
-------
larger three converters, or any combination of four converters,
were on their blow cycle simultaneously, assuming that the Company
estimate of 100% excess air infiltrating around the primary hooding
system is correct.
4. The June 1975 source test of the acid plant stacks, although
not a valid test, shows the converter process is in compliance with
the process weight regulation.
5. The October 1975 source test results for the reverberatory
stack, although indicating the source is substantially in violation,
cannot be considered a valid compliance test because of the apparent
discrepancy of time spent at the individual traverse points and
because the isokinetic percentages were not within the permissible
range.
-------
INSPECTION OF
MAGMA COPPER COMPANY
SAN MANUEL DIVISION
San Manuel, Arizona
January 30, 1976
602/385-2201
INTRODUCTION
The Magma Copper Company, a subsidiary of Newmont Mining Corporation,
operates an underground mine, concentrator, smelter, electrolytic refinery,
and a continuous casting rod plant in the vicinity of San Manuel,
Arizona. Products include electrolytically refined copper, copper rod,
sulfuric acid, and molybdenum. Average anode copper production averages
613 to 635 m. tons (675 to 700 tons)/day.
On December 17, 1975, the general manager of Magma was requested by
letter to provide process and air pollution control information on the
San Manuel Smelter and informed of a planned plant inspection [Appendix
A]. On January 30, 1976, the following EPA personnel conducted a process
inspection: Mr. Larry Bowerman, USEPA, Region IX; Mr. Reid Iversen,
USEPA, OAQPS; Mr. Gary D. Young, USEPA, NEIC; Mr. Jim V. Rouse, USEPA,
NEIC. The data requested were furnished at the completion of the
inspection [Appendix B].
The purpose of the inspection was to acquire data with which to
evaluate the design and operation of existing particulate matter air
pollution control equipment. The inspection focused primarily on the
smelter, although the concentrator was inspected. Also examined were
the process equipment, the particulate matter emission sources, and the
air pollution control equipment.
-------
Company personnel were cooperative throughout the inspection. All
the information requested was supplied at the completion of the in-
spection or by subsequent letter or telephone call. Company personnel
participating included: Mr. E. K. Staley, General Manager; Mr. T. E.
Hearon, Manager, Engineering and Technical Services; Mr. Art Verdugo,
Construction Engineer; Mr. R. L. Sloan, Smelter Superintendent.
The applicable regulation contained in the Arizona State Implemen-
tation Plan (SIP) of specific interest for this inspection was the
process weight regulation [Appendix C]. This regulation was promulgated
as 40 CFR § 52.126 on May 14, 1973, to replace the State's process
weight regulation, which was determined by EPA to be not sufficiently
stringent. The regulation provides for an allowable emission rate for
each process unit based on the production feed rate to the unit.
PROCESS DESCRIPTION
Figure 1 is a simplified process flow diagram for the smelter.
Table 1 is a list of the smelter process equipment and operating data.
Concentrate is delivered from the concentrator to the smelter by a
belt conveyor to storage bins above the three reverberatory furnaces.
Limerock is added to the concentrate in the storage bins; silica rock is
stored in adjacent bins. A belt conveyor system is used to move con-
centrate and flux (limerock or silica rock) from the storage bins to
hoppers above and adjacent to the sidewalls of the three reverberatory
furnaces. Charging doors are opened and the reverberatory furnaces are
fed by gravity flow.
The three reverberatory furnaces are each 31 m (102 ft) long and
3.5 m (11 ft) high, inside dimensions. The widths are 10, 10.5 and 11
m (32, 34, and 36 ft) for the No. 1, 2 and 3 furnaces, respectively.
-------
CONCENTRATES
LIMEROCK
REVERTS
CASTINGWHEELS (2)
01
o
I-
<
01
LU
CO
01
UJ
>
LJ
Qi
o
v^
W
UJ
u
<
z
01
D
1L
ANODES TO REFINERY
ANODE
URNACEE
(4)
BLISTER Cu
(98.5%)
SLAG
O
<
_l
(0
CONVERTERS
(6)
SILICA FLUX
AIR
REFORMED GAS
Figure I. /Magma, San Manuel Process F/ow Diagram
-------
Table 1
SMELTER PROCESS EQUIPMENT AND OPERATING DATA
MAGMA COPPER COMPANY
San Manuel, Arizona
Parameter
Reverberatory
Furnaces
Converters
No. of Units
Feed Constituents
Feed Rate
3 6
C, F, CS M, F
(m.tons/day)(tons/day) (m.tons/day)(tons/day)
C
F
CS
2,004
202
1,089
2,208
222
1,200
M
F
1,253
251
1,380
276
Size of Unit
3,295 3,630
(meters) (feet)
width
1,504 1,656
(meters) (feet)
3 (
9.8, 10.4, 32, 34, diameter 3 @ 4,
11.0
length
height
Hours of Operation/month
Gas Volume Generated
Exit Gas Temperature
31
3.4
36
102
11
720-744
3 @ 4.6
length 10.7
432
13,
15
35
tt
(m /min) (scfm)*
8,200 289,500
(m /min) (scfm)
3 @ 690 24,500
3 @ 1,070 37,700
260
500
704
1,300**
t Concentrates (C)3 Flux (F)3 Converter Slag (CS)3 Matte (M); Company
did not report any feed of flue dust, scrap copper, or cold dope.
tt Estimate per converter (720 x 60%)
* Standard conditions are 29.92 in Eg (14.7 psia) and 21°C (70°F)
** Maximum temperature reached during final copper blow
-------
The furnaces are normally fired with natural gas, but if natural gas
delivery is interrupted, fuel oil is used. Work is underway to convert
to coal for firing the reverberatory furnaces.
The reverberatory furnace walls are made of basic brick. At the
slag line, seventy-six copper water jackets 0.6 m (2 ft) high and 1.5 m
(5 ft) long surround nearly three sides of the furnaces. The roof is a
suspended arch constructed also of basic brick. The walls and arch are
maintained by replacing brick; no hot patching is used.
The normal molten material depth actually varies among the three
furnaces. However, the normal slag depth is approximately 102 cm (40
in) and the'normal matte depth is approximately 38 cm (15 in). Slag is
tapped near one end of the furnaces and flows through a launder into
slag pots which are rail-hauled to the slag dump. Matte is tapped
nearer the center of the furnaces as required by converter or reverberatory
furnace conditions and carried in a launder one floor below the furnaces.
The matte by gravity drops off the launder into ladles resting on a
pallet which is moved into the converter aisle by an electric winch and
cable unit.
The matte ladles are picked up by overhead crane and charged to one
of six Fierce-Smith converters. Converters No. 1, 2 and 3 are 4 by 11 m
(13 by 35 ft), while converters No. 4, 5 and 6 are 4.5 by 11 m (15 by
35 ft). An initial charge to a converter normally consists of two to
four ladles of matte. Air is blown through tuyeres into the charge,
flux is added and slag produced is skimmed into a ladle. The converter
slag is then returned to one of the reverberatory furnaces by an overhead
crane. Additional matte is added to the converter to produce a total of
approximately 65 m. tons (70 tons) of blister copper.
-------
The blister copper is poured into ladles and carried by overhead
crane to one of four anode furnaces. Two of the anode furnaces are 4 by
9 m (13 by 30 ft), and two are 4 by 11 m (13 x 35 ft). Additional air
is blown through tuyeres into the charge to assure complete oxidation.
Hydrogen (produced by reforming natural gas) or propane is then introduced
through the tuyeres for final copper reduction. The anode-grade molten
copper is cast into approximately 360 kg (800 Ib) anodes on either of
two casting wheels. The anodes are cooled, inspected, and transferred
to the electrolytic refinery.
EMISSION SOURCES AND RELATED CONTROL EQUIPMENT
The primary particulate matter sources at the Magma smelter are the
reverberatory furnaces and the converters. The majority of the exhaust
gas volumes produced by these sources is treated by control systems
which are discussed below. However, fugitive emissions from feeding
concentrates, skimming converter slag, or returning converter slag are
neither collected, nor treated, but are exhausted directly to the
atmosphere. The reverberatory furnace matte and slag tap areas are
hooded, and collected gases containing particulate matter are exhausted
untreated directly to individual stacks above the building. Similarly,
converter "smoke" not collected by the primary hood system is exhausted
untreated. The anode furnaces also emit some ugtreated particulate
matter directly to the atmosphere above the converter aisle; however,
the concentrations are indeterminate.
Figure 2 is a diagram of the Magma smelter layout, the air pollution
control systems, and the exhaust gas flow. Table 2 summarizes certain
design and operating data for the individual air pollution control
systems. Appendix B contains more specific information on each control
system.
-------
WASTE HEAT BOILERS
EXHAUST
CASTINO WHEELS (9)
EXHAUST
REVERB STACK
CONVERTERS
(6)
HEAT EXCHANGERS
ABSORBING TOWERS
ESP (1)
CONVERTER STACK
.^.EXHAUST
HUMIDIFYINQ
TOWER
O-o-
v^/.
MIST ESP (6)
CATALYST CHAMBERS
ORVINQ TOWERS
figure 2. Magma, San Manuel Plant Layout, Procoit fxhouif Flow, and Air Poilvfion Control Syil«m«
-------
Table 2
SMELTER AIR POLLUTION CONTROL EQUIPMENT AND OPERATING DATA
MACm COPPER CO.'4PAtlY
San Manual, Arizona
Date of
Control Manufacturer Installation/ No. of Gas Flow Operating Pressure Drop Collection Velocity Retention
Device Modification Units Rate Temperature Area Time
ESP Research-Cottrell 1975
ESP Research-Cottrell 1971
Acid Plant Monsanto 1974
m /min scfm °C
Reverberatory Furnaces
1-4 stages 8,200 289,500 260-
1-6 stages 354
Converters
1-4 stages 5,220 184,500 316-
2 trains 5,480 193,700 427-
454
°F cm H2° in m2 ft* m/sec ft/sec
500- 0.8 0.35 20,320 1.1 3.57
670 218,700
600- 2.5 1.0 NRf NR
800- NR NAft NA
850
sec
7.56
NR
NA
t UR = Not reported
tt NA = Not applicable
CO
-------
Reverberatory Furnace Control System
The principal reverberatory furnace exhaust gases pass through a
pair of waste heat boilers following each furnace. The partially cooled
gases are then combined into a common duct before entering the plenum
chamber for the two independent electrostatic precipitators (ESPs). The
east ESP was designed to handle about two-thirds of the gas volume,
while the west ESP was designed to handle one-third. However, shortly
after installation, the perforation plates between the plenum and the
ESP's were removed because of excessive plugging. Assuming the gas flow
distribution is actually as designed, the east ESP handles 5,470 m /min
(193,000 scfm), while the west ESP handles 2,730 m3/min (96,500 scfm).
[See Appendix D for calculations of gas flow rates.] The east ESP
o
consists of six stages with a total collection are of 13,540 m (145,800
ft2), while the west ESP consists of four stages with a total collection
area of 6,780 m2 (72,900 ft ). Gas retention time is less than 8 seconds
with an average gas velocity of 1.1 m (3.6 ft)/sec. The pressure drop
across the ESP's is 0.8 cm (0.35 in) of water maximum. The exit gas
stream is exhausted to and discharged from the 157 m (515 ft) stack.
Converter Control System
The converter exhaust gases become laden with particulate matter
when air is blown into a converter through tuyeres to oxidize the iron
and copper sulfides. An estimated 100% additional air infiltrates
around the primary hoods collecting the off gases. This additional air
becomes part of the converter exhaust gas stream ducted through a high
velocity flue system into the main balloon flue. The gases then pass
through three inlet ducts into the ESP. The ESP is rated at 21,240
m3/min (750,000 acfm) at 454 °C (850°F) [8,630 m3/min (304,800) scfm)].
-------
10
The Company indicates that it actually operates at approximately 5,220
m3/min (184,500 scfm). However, as a hypothetical example, during the
blow cycle of the three larger converters and assuming the Company
estimate of 100% excess air for each converter, the estimated resultant
gas volume could be as high as 5,900 m3/min (208,200 scfm) [2 x 3 x
34,700 = 208,200 scfm]. The ESP consists of four stages with an unreported
total collection area, gas retention time, and average gas velocity.
The maximum pressure drop across the unit is 2.5 cm (1.0 in) of water.
Following the ESP's, the gas stream first enters a humidifying
tower where the gas is cooled by evaporation of a weak acid solution and
most of the remaining particulate matter is scrubbed from the gas. The
gases then enter a cooling tower in which further cooling is accomplished
by running cool weak acid down through packing as the gases ascend. The
process gas then flows through three parallel banks of two mist precipi-
tators in series where any acid mist or remaining dust particles are
removed. The clean gas stream is then split and enters either of the
two acid plant trains where it is dried, the S02 converted into S03, and
the S03 absorbed in acid to form the final strength acid. Although
designed to produce 2,250 m. tons (2,480 tons)/day, approximately 1,340
m. tons (1,480 tons)/day of 94% strength acid are produced. The exit
gases from the two absorption towers pass through mist eliminators
before exhausting to the atmosphere through respective 76 m (250 ft)
stacks.
EMISSIONS DATA
Two separate source tests were conducted at the Magma smelter
during 1975; both tests were performed by the Company at the request of
the EPA Region IX Enforcement Division. The first test was conducted at
the acid plant stacks as a compliance test for the converter process.
The second test was conducted at the reverberatory furnace stack as a
compliance test for the reverberatory furnace process.
-------
11
Each test was attempted following the prescribed methods (Methods
1-5) in the regulation [Appendix C], with certain modifications. Method
3 was modified by taking a gas bomb grab sample and analyzing it with a
gas chromatograph, instead of taking an integrated sample and using an
Orsat analyzer. In addition, for the acid plant test, only 33 points on
three radii were sampled, instead of the required 44 points on four
radii.
Individual hourly process weights for each process were determined
by dividing the daily tonnage fed to each process unit by 24. The
allowable emissions were calculated for both the reverberatory furnace
process and the converter process. The sampling results were then com-
pared with the allowable emissions.
Following is a summary of each test containing comments regarding
the methods, procedures, and results of each test.
June 4-6, 1975
All of the test runs were conducted at the 74 m (244 ft) elevation
of the two identical acid plant stacks, where the inside stack diameter
is 2.9 m (9 ft 6 in). Sample points were calculated for 11 points on
only three radii because only three pprts were available due to an
incomplete platform. Two runs were conducted on each stack; the minimum
sampling time of 2 hours and the minimum sampling volume of 1.70 m (60
ft ) were both met [Appendix C]. Each run was within isokinetic tolerances.
The results of the four runs are presented in Table 3. The process
weight at each stack was determined to be equal to half of the converter
process weight, i.e. half the total matte and flux fed to the converters
during the test period.
-------
12
Table 3
PARTICULATE MATTER EMISSIONS TEST RESULTS
MAG14A COPPER COf>lPANY
San Manuel, Arizona
Test
Run
T 1-1*
T 1-2
T 2-1
T 2-2
R-l**
R-2
R-3
R-4
Date
(1975)
6-4
6-5
6-6
6-6
10-30
10-30
10-30
10-31
Stack
Temperature
op oc
161
152
169
158
579
576
579
557
72
67
76
70
304
302
304
292
Gas
Vol ume
scfm
100,509
98,770
81 ,068
89,972
332,020
335,290
339,070
318,430
3y •
m /mm
2,846
2,797
2,296
2,548
9,402
9,494
9,601
9,017
Moisture
Content
%tt
0
0
0.2
0.2
11.1
9.6
11.2
10.4
Actual
Emissions
Ib/hr1"1"
5.3
4.7
10.2
8.3
930
633
349
1,071
kg/hr
2.4
2.1
4.6
3.8
422
287
158
486
Allowable
Emissions
lb/hrtf
31.4
31.3
31.9
31.9
36
36
36
36
kg/hr
14.2
14.2
14.5
14.5
16
16
16
16
t Standard conditions are 29.92 in Hg (14.7 psia) and 21°C (70°F)
tt Calculated from Company figures [.Appendix Z?]; allowable emissions are
based on the process weight regulation [Appendix C~\
* T 1-1 means Acid Plant Train No. 1 stack, Run No. 1
** R-l means Reverberator^ Furnace Stack, Run No. 1
-------
13
October 30-31. 1975
The four test runs were conducted at the 79 m (258 ft) elevation of
the reverberatory furnace stack, where the inside stack diameter is
approximately 6 m (20 ft). Six points on each diameter were sampled
during each run. However, each point was not sampled an equal period of
time. The sample time and volume requirements were met, but isokinetic
sampling rates ranged from 114% to 125%. The results of the four runs
are presented in Table 3.
-------
APPENDICES
A NEIC Information Request
Letter to Magma
B Magma Response to NEIC Information
Request
C SIP Regulation Applicable to Magma
D Example Calculations of Gas Flow
Rates, Moisture Content, Actual
Emissions, and Allowable Emissions
-------
Appendix A
NEIC Information Request
Letter to Magma
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 16
OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT
NATIONAL FIELD INVESTIGATIONS CENTER-DENVER
BUILDING 53, BOX 25227. DENVER FEDERAL CENTER
DENVER, COLORADO £0225
December 17, 1975
E. K. Staley
General Manager
San Manuel Division
Magma Copper Company
P.O. Box M
San Manuel, Arizona 85631
Dear Mr. Staley:
The Environmental Protection Agency has undertaken a program to
evaluate the performance characteristics of particulate control facilities
at the copper smelters in Arizona and Nevada. Representatives of EPA
will observe each smelter's process operations and air pollution control
facilities, review source test data, examine appropriate records, etc.,
during a site inspection of each smelter.
In anticipation of such a site inspection of your smelter, we have
prepared the attached list of detailed information needs which we intend
to use as a discussion outline during our inspection. We would appreciate
it if you could inform the appropriate company personnel about the
attached list and the forthcoming inspection of your facility so that
the necessary information will be readily available and the inspections
can be expedited.
We are conducting these inspections under the authority of Section
114(a)(ii) of the Clean Air Act, which authorizes representatives of EPA
to enter facilities for the purpose of determining whether the facility
is in violation of any requirement of a state implementation plan. At
your facility, we anticipate that EPA or a contractor hired by EPA will
be conducting an emissions source test for particulate matter within the
next few months. Therefore, EPA will make a source test pre-survey,
either separately or in conjunction with our site inspections, prior to
performing such a source test.
If you have any questions concerning the purpose of these site
inspections, please feel free to contact Mr. Gary D. Young of my staff
(303/234-4658) or Mr. Larry Bowerman, EPA Region IX (415/556-6150). Mr.
Young will be in contact with you within the next few weeks concerning a
site inspecton of your smelter during January or early February.
Sincerely,
Thomas P. Gallagher
Director
Attachment
cc: Richard O'Connell
Bruce Scott
-------
17
COPPER SMELTER INFORMATION NEEDS
A. GENERAL
1. Plant location
2. Person to contact regarding plant survey information needs, his
telephone number and address
3. Simple block flow diagram showing smelter process equipment, air
pollution control devices, and stack configuration
B. PROCESS
1. General
a. Detailed description of the process, including flow diagrams,
unique features, and how the process operates
•
b. Definition of normal operation
c. Actual production rate (Ibs blister copper/hr and percent Cu)
d. Type and quantity of fuel consumed
Oil - i. Heating value (BTU's/gal)
ii. Percent sulfur (by weight)
iii. Percent ash (by weight)
iv. Specific gravity
v. Consumption (gals or bbls/yr)
Gas - i. Type of gas (constituents in percent by weight)
ii. Density (Ibs/SCF)
iii. Heating value (BTU's/SCF)
iv. Percent sulfur (by volume and grains/SCF)
v. Consumption (SCF/yr)
Coal - i. Heating value (BTU's/T)
ii. Percent sulfur (by weight)
iii. Percent ash (by weight)
iv. Consumption (Ibs/unit/hr)
e. Ore composition, including a typical percent and range of
percentages for each chemical constituent
f. Flux composition, including a typical percent and range of
percentages for each chemical constituent
g. Standard conditions - pressure (psi) and temperature (°F) -
used to calculate SCFM
-------
18
2. Concentrators
a. Design process feed rate (Ibs raw ore/hr)
b. Actual process feed rate (Ibs raw ore/hr), including method
and estimated accuracy of measurement
c. Average number of hours of operation per month
d. Process instrumentation used, including data for a typical
reading and range of readings
e. Description of where and how samples of process material can
be collected
f. Description of typical types of process fluctuations and/or
malfunctions, including frequency of occurrence and anticipated
emission results
g. Expected life of process equipment (years)
h. Plans to modify or expand process production rate
3. Roasters
a. Design process feed rate (Ibs concentrate/hr)
b. Actual process feed rate (Ibs concentrate/hr), including
method and estimated accuracy of measurement
c. Design process gas volumes (SCFM)
d. Actual process gas volumes (SCFM), including method of
determination, calculation, or measurement
e. Actual process temperature (°F)
f. Average number of hours of operation per month
g. Process instrumentation used, including data for a typical
reading and range of readings
h. Description of where and how samples of process material
can be collected
i. Description of typical types of process fluctuations and/or
malfunctions, including frequency of occurrence and anticipated
emission results
-------
19
j. Expected life of process equipment (years)
k. Plans to modify or expand process production rate
4. Reverberatory furnaces
a. Design process feed rate (Ibs calcine/hr + Ibs flux/hr +
Ibs converter slag/hr)
b. Actual process feed rate (Ibs calcine/hr + Ibs flux/hr +
Ibs converter slag/hr), including method aud estimated
accuracy of measurement
c. Design process gas volumes (SCFM)
d. Actual process gas volumes (SCFM), including method of
determination, calculation, or measurement
e. Actual process temperature (°F)
f. Average number of hours of operation per month
g. Process instrumentation used, including data for a typical
reading and range of readings
h. Description of where and how samples of process material can
be collected
i. Description of typical types of process fluctuations and/or
malfunctions, including frequency of occurrence and anticipated
emission results
j. Expected life of process equipment (years)
k. Plans to modify or expand process production rate
5. Converters
a. Design process feed rate (Ibs matte/hr + Ibs slag/hr +
Ibs flux/hr)
b. Actual process feed rate (Ibs matte/hr + Ibs slag/hr +
Ibs flux/hr), including method and estimated accuracy of
measurement
c. Design process gas volumes (SCFM)
d. Actual process gas volumes (SCFM), including method of
determination, calculation, or measurement
e. Actual process temperature (°F)
-------
20
f. Average number of hours of operation per month
g. Process instrumentation used, including data for a typical
reading and range of readings
h. Description of where and how samples of process material can
be collected
i. Description of typical types of process fluctuations and/or
malfunctions, including frequency of occurrence and anticipated
emission results
j. Expected life of process equipment (years)
k. Plans to modify or expand process production rate
6. Refining Furnaces
a. Design process feed rate (Ibs blister copper/hr)
b. Actual process feed rate (Ibs blister copper/hr), including
method and estimated accuracy of measurement
c. Design process gas volumes (SCFM)
d. Actual process gas volumes (SCFM), including method of
determination, calculation, or measurement
e. Actual process temperature (°F)
f. Average number of hours of operation per month
g. Process instrumentation used, including data for a typical
reading and range of readings
h. Description of where and how samples of process material can
be collected
i. Description of typical types of process fluctuations and/or
malfunctions, including frequency of occurrence and anticipated
emission results
j. Expected life of process equipment (years)
k. Plans to modify or expand process production rate
-------
21
C. EMISSIONS
1. List of sources of particulate emissions in the plant (including
fugitive emissions)
2. Level of uncontrolled particulate emissions by source (Ibs/hr or
T/yr)
3. Existing source test data employed for particulates by stack,
process unit, or control device, including:
a. Test method
b. Data acquired
c. Operating process weight rate
d. Calculations
e. Test results
4. Particle size and chemical composition of uncontrolled particulate
emissions, including method of determination
5. Level of uncontrolled visible emissions by source (percent opacity)
and method of determination
6. Extent of and reason for variance of particulate emissions with:
a. Process design parameters
b. Process operating parameters
c. Raw material composition or type
d. Product specifications or composition
e. Production rate
f. Season or climate
g. Sulfur dioxide control
D. CONTROL SYSTEMS
1. Detailed description of the particulate and sulfur dioxide emissions
control systems, including:
a. Process treated
-------
22
b. Type of fuel consumed per unit
c. Quantity of fuel consumed per unit
d. Method of determination of design parameters
e. Engineering drawings or block flow diagrams
f. Expected life of control system
g. Plans to upgrade existing system
2. Electrostatic precipitators
a. Manufacturer, type, model number
b. Manufacturer's guarantees, if any
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:
i. Current (amperes)
ii. Voltage
iii. Rapping frequency (times/hr)
iv. Number of banks
v. Number of stages
vi. Particulate resistivity (ohm-centimeters)
vii. Quantity of ammonia injected (Ibs/hr)
viii. Water injection flow fate (gals/min)
ix. Gas flow rate (SCFM)
x. Operating temperature (°F)
xi. Inlet particulate concentration (Ibs/hr or grains/SCFM)
xii. Outlet particulate concentration (Ibs/hr or grains/SCFM)
xiii. Pressure drop (inches of water)
3. Fabric filters
a. Manufacturer, type, model number
b. Manufacturer's guarantees, if any
i
Date of installation or last modii
description of the nature and extent of the modification
i
c. Date of installation or last modification and a detailed
-------
23
d. Description of cleaning and maintenance practices, including
frequency and method
e. Filter material
f. Filter weave
g. Bag replacement frequency
h. Forced or induced draft
i. Design and actual values for the following variables:
i. Bag area (ft2)
ii. Bag spacing (inches)
iii. Number of bags
iv. Gas flow rate (SCFM)
v. Operating temperature (°F)
vi. Inlet particulate concentration (Ibs/hr or grains/SCF).
vii. Outlet particulate concentration (Ibs/hr or grains/SCF)
viii. Pressure drop (inches of water)
4. Scrubbers
a. Manufacturer, type, model number
b. Manufacturer's guarantees, if any
c. Date of installation of 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
f. Design and actual values for the following variables:
i. Scrubbing media flow rate (gals/min)
ii. Pressure of scrubbing media (psi)
iii. Gas flow rate (SCFM)
iv. Operating temperature (°F)
v. Inlet particulate concentration (Ibs/hr or grains/SCF)
vi. Outlet particulate concentration (Ibs/hr or grains/SCF)
vii. Pressure drop (inches of water)
5. Sulfuric acid plants
a. Manufacturer, type, model number
-------
24
b. Manufacturer's guarantees, if any
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. Frequency of catalyst screening
f. Type of demister
g. Design and actual values for the following variables:
i. Production (T of acid/day)
ii. Conversion rate (percent)
iii. Acid strength (percent H2SO^)
iv. Number of catalyst beds
v. Gas flow rate (SCFM)
' vi. Operating temperature (°'F)
vii. Inlet S02 concentration (ppm)
viii. Outlet S02 concentration (ppm)
ix. Acid mist (Ibs H2S04/T of acid)
x. Blower pressure (psi)
6. Liquid S02 plants
a. Manufacturer, type, model number
b. Manufacturer's guarantees, if any
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. Absorbing media
f. Design and actual values for the following variables
i. Production (T of S02/day)
ii. Conversion rate (percent)
iii. Gas flow rate (SCFM)
iv. Operating temperature (°F)
v. Inlet S02 concentration (ppm)
vi. Outlet S0~ concentration (ppm)
vii. Acid mist (Ibs H2S04/T of S02)
-------
25
7. Detailed description of how the particulate and sulfur dioxide
emission control systems operate
8. Description of instrumentation (flow meters, continuous monitors,
opacity meters, etc.) used, including manufacturer and model
number, data for typical and range of readings, and identification
of location by process unit, control system unit, or by stack
9. Description of typical types of control system malfunctions,
including frequency of occurrence and anticipated emission results
E. STACKS
1. Detailed description of stack configuration, including process
and/or control system units exhausted
2. Identification by stack of:
a. Heights (ft above terrain)
b. Elevation of discharge points (ft above sea level)
c. Inside diameters (ft)
d. Exit gas temperatures (°F)
e. Exit gas velocities (ft/sec)
-------
Appendix 6
Magma Response to NEIC
Information Request
-------
27
COPPER SMELTER INFORMATION NEEDS
GENERAL
1. Plant location
San Manuel, Pdnal County, Arizona
2. Person to contact regarding survey information needs
W. L. Parks Telephone - (602) 385-2201 Ext. 330
Magma Copper Company
P.O. Box M
San Manuel, Arizona 85631
3. Simple block diagram showing smclter'process
Sec attached diagrams.
B. PROCESS
1. General
a. Description of plant process (smelter)
Concentrates from the mill and outside sources are transported
by conveyor belt into storage bins located above the three reverberator/
furnaces.
From these bins, the concentrate, containing about 13% by weight
of limerock flux and 2% by weight of silicious flux, is drawn out
onto a belt system that deposits the concentrate onto the sidcwalls
of the furnaces by gravity through a hopper system.
The concentrate is smelted down by means of fuel burned through
one end of the furnace. The slag is removed from the furnace nearly
continuously and discarded. The matte, containing about 34% copper,
is tapped off into 300 cu. ft. ladles and transferred to the converters
by means of 60-ton, overhead cranes.
Air, at 15 psi, is blown into the converters through submerged tuyere
pipes located along the back of the converter. The matte is converted
to blister copper and then transferred to the refinery furnaces
via transfer ladles and overhead cranes.
In the refining vessels, the blister copper is blown again with air
until1 the copper has become saturated with oxygen; at this point,
the copper contains about 0.80% oxygen. The remaining impurities which
could not be removed in the converters then float to the surface as
a viscous slag and arc removed.
-------
28
COPPER SMELTER INFORMATION NEEDS
B. PROCESS
1. General
a. Description of plant process (smelter) - con't
The contained oxygen is then removed by blowing hydrogen through the
copper in the same manner that the air was introduced. The hydrogen
removes the oxygen by combining with it to form water vapor. When
the oxygen content, as determined by samples, has been lowered to about
0.16%, the copper is ready for casting.
Casting is accomplished by means of one of two casting wheels.
The finished product is cast into 800 Ibs. cakes called anodes which
are then ready for shipment to the refinery.
Fuel must be supplied to the reverb furnaces to accomplish the
initial smelting; it must also be supplied to the anode refining vessels
to keep the copper hot during the fire-refining steps.
b. Definition of normal operation
Operation of the smelter is dependent on the copper market. Smelter
design capacity is 3,150 tons of concentrate per day (maximum average
based on one year period). Present throughput is 2,200 tons of concen-
trate per day which produces 28-30 taps total per shift from the reverb-
erator/ furnaces, 28-SO taps per shift from the converters, 225 to
235 tons of copper per shift for transfer to anode department, and 675
to 700 tons per day of anode copper.
c. Actual production rate of blister copper in pounds per hour and
• percent Cu of blister copper
28 to 30 tons of blister copper per hour @ 98.5% Cu.
d. Type and quantity of fuel consumed
Oil:
i. Heating value - 139,500 Btu's/gal
ii. Percent sulfur - .35% by weight
iii. Percent ash - nil
iv. Specify gravity - .92 Ibs/cu. ft.
v. Consumption - 39,000,000 gallons/year*
Note: 3,000,000 SCF of natural gas will be required for equipment
which cannot be converted to oil.
*If used exclusively
-------
29
COPPER SMLLTER INFORMATION NLEDS
PROCESS
1. General
d. Type and quantity of fuel consumed - con't
Gas:
i. Type of gas - natural gas (City - 88.3%, Ethane - 7.2%,
Propane 1.5%)
ii. Density - .630 Ibs/cu. ft.
iji. Heating value - 1,000 Btu's/SCF (1,070 Btu/ACF)
iv. Percent sulfur - Nil (0.06 grains/100 cu. ft.)
v. Consumption - 5,500,000,000 SCF/year *
Coal:
i. Not used
e. Ore composition
0.75% Cu
65.0-68.0% Si02
11.0-16.0% A1203
3.5-4.0% Fe
2.0-3.0% S
2.0-3.0% CaO
f. Flux composition
Silica Limestone Mine Run
• 0.01% Cu -- 0.75% Cu
92.0% Si02 6.0% Si02 65.0-68.0% Si02
2.0% Al203 2.0% A1203 11.0-16.0%
1.0% Fe 2.0% FeO 3.4-4.0% Fe
1.0% MgO -- 2.0-3.0% S
1.5% CaO 51.0% CaO 2.0-3.0% CaO
g. Standard conditions
14.7 psia and 60°F
i
I
2. Concentrators
a. Design process feed rate
5,208,333 Ibs/hour (62,500 TPD)
*If used exclusively
-------
30
COPPER SMELTLR INFORMATION NEEDS
3. PROCESS
2. Concentrators - con't
b. Actual process feed rate
3,750,000 Ibs/hour (45,000 TPD)
Ore is weighed by weightomcters
Estimated accuracy = 95%
c. Average number of hours of operation per month
720 to 744 hours/month
d. Process instrumentation used, including data for a typical reading
and range of reading
Ph meters - used on flotation cells, sumps, etc.
Flow meters - used on piping
Weightometers - used on conveyor belt bins
Gamma meters - used on piping
Reading range varies considerably depending on location of instrument
and instrument type.
e. Description of where and how samples of process material can be
collected
Samples are made on all process streams on a hourly basis at all
critical points. A sample can be cut at almost any point in the process.
f. Description of typical types of process fluctuations and/or malfunctions,
including frequency of occurrence and anticipated emission results
Concentrator operation is very stable and minor fluctuations and rare
malfunctions have little or no effect on emissions.
g. Expected life of process equipment
40 years
h. Plans to modify or expand process, production rate
No plans to expand beyond current capacity.
3. Roasters
This section is not applicable. Roasters are not used in Magma's process.
-------
31
COPPER SMELTER INFORMATION NEEDS
B. PROCESS - con't
4. Reverberator/ Furnaces
a. Design process feed rate
282,000 Ibs. concentrate/hour
29,000 Ibs. flux/hour
128,000 Ibs. converter slag/hour
This is approximate high for a one-hour period.
Note: The smelter design feed rate daily average is approximately 3,150 tons
(262,500 Ibs/hour) of concentrate. Based on 318 reverberatory furnace
operating days per year yields a design feed rate of 1,001,700 toils
of concentrate per year.
b. Actual process feed rate
184,000 Ibs. concentrate/hour
18,500 Ibs. flux/hour
100,000 Ibs. converter slag/hour
This is current hourly average.
Concentrate is weighed by weightometers
Flux is weighed by weightometers
Converter slag weighed by ladle count times average weight
Estimated accuracy = 95%
c. Design process gas volume
. 284,000 SCFM
d. Actual process gas volume
284,000 SCFM
Process gas flows are determined by flowmeters
e. Actual process temperature
Process gas temperatures vary from 2,700°F inside the furnace to
500°F where gas exists from the stack.
f. Average number of hours of operation per month
720 to 744 hours/month
-------
COPPER SMELTER IN!:ORMATION NC12DS 32
J. PROCESS
4. Rcvcrbcratory Furanccs - con't
g. Process instrumentation used
Process gas flow is determined by fuel gas into process instrumentation
by Bailey, Foxboro, Taylor, and Honeywell. Fuel gas flowmetcrs
read directly in ACFH and are calibrated to read 0 to 300,000 ACFH.
h. Description of where and how samples of process material can be collected
Samples may be taken by hand from §19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 37, or
39A belts.
i. Description of typical process fluctuations and/or malfunctions
and frequency and anticipated emission results
Breakdown of conveyor feed belts yields zero production in 3-4 hours;
frequency = once/month; emission minimal. Bridgewall repair to one
reverb reduces production 1/3; frequency = twice/month; emissions
reduced.
Matte and/or slag spills; frequency = once/week; reverb operation
curtailed as are emissions.
j. Expected life of equipment
40 years
k. Plans to modify or expand process production rate
No plans at present time to expand over our present design capacity.
5. Converters
a. Design process feed rate
165,000 pounds matte/hour
128,000 pounds converter slag/hour
32,000 pounds converter flux/hour
b. Actual process feed rate
115,000 pounds matte/hour
100,000 pounds converter slag/hour
23,000 pounds converter flux/hour
Converter flux weighed by weightometcrs
Matte and slag estimate by number of ladles time average weight
Estimated accuracy = 95%
-------
33
COPP1-R SMELTER INFORMATION NEEDS
B. PROCESS
5. Converters - con't
c. Design process gas volumes
Three 13 ft. converters @ 30,000 SCFM each
Three 15 ft. converters @ 45,000 SCFM each
d. Actual process gas volume
Three 13 ft. converters @ 24,000 SCFM each
Three 15 ft. converters @ 34,000 SCFM each
e. Actual process temperature
Temperature varies - the blast air is 300°F while the converter
temperature is 2,200°F.
f. Average number of hours of operation per month
720 hours x 60% = 432 hours/month per converter
g. Process instrumentation used
Instrumentation by Bailey, Foxboro, Taylor, and Honeywell.
Tuyere air pressure (12-15 psi), tuyere header pressure (12-15 psi),
SCFM blast air (25,000-45,000), % blast gate open (70-100%),
% 02 in blast air (26 %), temperature indicator (2,000-2,400°F),
hood water level, high and low alarms.
Typical blast air readings = 1 to 30,000 ACFM
*
h. Description of where and how samples of process material can be
collected
Matte samples taken manually during tapping. Converter slag samples
taken manually during skimming. Blister Cu samples taken manually
from converter.
i. Description of typical process fluctuations and/or malfunctions
and frequency and anticipated emission results
Waiting on overhead cranes-frequency = 6 times per day per converter-
reduced acid production. Turn around-frequency = 1^ times/day per
converter. Waiting on matte-frequency = 3 times a day per converter-
reduced acid production. Collar pulling-frequency = 2 times a day
per converter-reduced acid production.
-------
34
COPPER SICLTER INI:ORMATION NEl-US
B. PROCESS
5. Converters (con't)
j. Expected life of process equipment
40 years
k. Plans to modify or expand process production rate
No plans at present time to expand over our present design capacity.
6. Refining Furnaces
a. Design process feed rate
80,000 Ibs./hour blister copper
b. Actual process feed rate
60,000 Ibs./hour blister copper
Anode copper output weighed on scales.
Accuracy = 100%
c. Design process gas volumes
Fuel for holding: 200 SCFM/vesscl (4 vessels)
Poling gas: 350 SCFM/vessel (4 vessels)
d. Actual process gas volume
Fuel for holding: 200 SCFM/vessel
Gas volume determined by burner rating
Poling gas: 350 SCFM/vessel
Gas volume by flowmeter
e. Actual process temperature
2,100°F
I
I
f. Average number of hours of operation per month
720 x 75" = 540 hours/month total per vessel.
g. Process instrumentation used
Poling gas flow and pressure, air pressure, temperature indicators,
low flow alarm, high pressure alarm. Typical poling gas flow = 1-500 ACFM.
-------
35
COPPER SMELTER INI-OHMATION NEEDS
B. PROCESS
6. Refining Furnaces - con't
h. Description of where and how samples of process material can be
collected
All samples must be taken manually from vessel mouth.
i. Description of typical process fluctuations and/or malfunctions
and frequency and anticipated emission results
Malfunctions in refining furnaces cause no effect on emissions.
Propane gas for poling emits black smoke.
j. Expected life of process equipment
40 years •
k. Plans to modify or expand process production rate
No plans to expand refining vessel capacity.
C. EMISSIONS
1. List of sources of particulate emissions in the plant
Reverb stack
2. Level of uncontrolled particulate emissions by source
See attached test data on reverb stack.
3. Existing source test data employed for particulates by stack, process
unit or control device, including:
a. Test method
b. Data acquired
c. Operating process weight
d. Calculations
e. Test results
i
Sec attached test data on particulate emissions from reverbcrutory stack
and the acid plant stacks.
4. Partical size and chemical composition of uncontrolled particulate emission!
including method of determination
Data not available.
-------
36
COPPER SMIiLTER INI:ORMATION NEEDS
C. EMISSIONS - con't
5. Level of uncontrolled visable emission by source (percent opacity) and
method of determination
*Reverb stack - two to five on Ringclmann scale
Converter stack - 0 on Ringelmann scale
Acid plant stacks - 0 on Ringelmann scale
*Reverb stack emissions composition .7% S02, 15% water vapor, § 84.3% inert
air components.
6. Extent of and reason for variance of particulate emissions with:
a. Process design parameters
Flows and temperatures of gas affect precipitator capacity.
b. Process operating parameters
Combustion would have an effect in that uncombusted fuel would be
considered a particulate. Draft control affects gas flow, temperature,
and oxygen content. Particulate emissions peak during charging periods.
Arch blowing is cyclic.
c. Raw material compositions or type
Fine flue dust recycle increases particulate emissions.
d. Product specifications or composition
No variance of emissions.
e. Production rate
Higher rate means increased charging time, increased flue dust recycle,
etc.
f. Season or climate
No significant effect.
i
g. Sulfur dioxide control
Upset conditions of acid plant increase particulate emissions.
-------
37
COPPER SMELTER INFORMATION NEGUS
D. CONTROL SYSTEMS
1. Detailed description of the particulatc and sulfur dioxide emissions^
control system, including:
a. Process treated
Contact H2S04 plant to treat converter gases. Acid plant consists
of two trains.
b. Type of fuel consumed per unit
Fuel oil and natural gas.
c. Quantity of fuel consumed per unit
Variable (0-90,000,000 Btu/hour)
d. Method of determining of design parameters
Flows and S02 content.
e. Engineering drawings block diagrams
See attached prints.
f. Expected life of control system
15 years
g. Plans to upgrade existing system
• None at present
2. Electrostatic precipitators
See attached sheet.
3. Fabric filters
Not applicable.
4. Scrubbers
Not applicable.
5. Su]furic acid plants
a. Manufacturer, type, model number
Monsanto, contact sulfuric acid plant.
No model number available.
-------
38
COPPER SMELTER INFORMATION NEEDS
D. CONTROL SYSTEMS
5. SulfurJc acid plants - con't
b. Manufacturer's guarantees
98% conversion S02 to H2S04 at 220,000 SCFM and 6.2% S02 by volume.
c. Date of installation and modification
Installed August 1974 - no modifications
d. Description of cleaning and maintenance practices, including frequency
and method
Detailed daily, weekly, monthly by PM program on all components -
weak acid pumps - weekly
Lewis a.cid pumps - check every shift, lube every four months.
Product pumps - check daily '
Loading pumps - check weekly
Elliott compressors - PM each shift, oil sampled weekly, one on
standby, continuous vibration monitoring.
e. Frequency of catalyst screening
Once per year per 1st and 2nd pass.
f. Type of dcmistcr
Absorbing towers - Brinks Candle mist eliminator
Drying towers - York mist eliminator
g. Design and actual values for the following:
Design Actual
i. Production 2,480 TPD 1,480 TPD
ii. Conversion rate 98% 98%
iii. Acid strength 93.6% 93.6%
iv. Number of Four per train Four per train
catalyst beds
v. G:is flow rate 220,000 SCFM 190,000 SCFM
vi. Operating 800-850°F 800-850°F
j temperature 1st pass inlet 1st pass inlet
vii. InJct S02 55,000 ppm 48,000 ppm
concentration
viii. Outlet S02 2,600 ppm maximum 2,600 ppm maximum
concentration
ix. Acid mist 0.10 pounds I^SO^ 0.10 pounds ll2S04
mist/ton of mist/ton of
acid produced acid produced
x. Blower pressure 5.59 psi (155"II20) 4.83 psi (133"II20)
-------
39
COPPER SMELTER INFORMATION NEEDS
D. CONTROL SYSTEMS - con't
6. Liquid S0? plants
Not applicable.
D. STACKS
1. Detailed description of stack configuration, including process and/or
control system units exhausted
Reverb stack - reverb waste heat gases
Converter stack - no emissions except for emergency situations
(when acid plant is inoperable)
Acid plant stacks (2) - acid plant tail gases
Sec attached drawings.
2. Identification by stack of: ' Acid Plant
Reverb Stack Converter Stack Stacks
a. Height 515' 550' 250'
b. Elevation discharge points 3,738.0" 3,751.0" 3,452.5
c. Inside diameter Top 2Q'-9'5/8" 2Q'-0" 9'-6"
Base 35'-6" 38'-0" 16'-0"
d. Exist gas temperature 500-550 * 120°-130°F
e. Exit gas velocities 24-28 ft/sec 0 33-35 ft/sec
*No gas exit under normal operating conditions
-------
SECTION D-2
Electrostatic Precipitators
A. Manufacture
Type
Model Number
B. Manufacture Guarantee
Installation Date
Modifications Made
Description of Clean-
ing 5 Maintenance
Practices Along With
Frequency and Method
Values for Following
Current
Voltage
Rapping Frequency
Number of Banks
Number of Stages
Particulate Resistivity
Qty Ammonia Inj ected
Water Injected
Gas Flow Rate
Operating Temperature
Inlet Particulate Cone.
Outlet Particulate Cone.
Pressure Drop
Reverb Off-Gases
Research-Cottrell
High Voltage - Plate
N/A
Removal of 98% of
Particulates
1975
None
Voltage and Amps continu-
ously monitored. PM check
daily. Penthouse inspec-
tion and cleaning weekly.
Cell inspection and
cleaning monthly. Cell
cleaning done by hand
rapping and scraping.
Design
1,500 ma
45 KV
30/hr
5
1
7
none
none
284,OOOSCFM
500°-670°F
.41 gr/ACF
.00615gr/ACF
.35
Actual
1,500 ma
45 KV
30/hr
5
1
7
none
none
284,OOOSCFM
500°-570°F
.41 gr/ACF
?
.35
Converter Off-Gases
Research-Cottrel 1
High Voltage - Plate
N/A
Removal of 95% of
Particulates
1971
None
Same as reverb.
Design
1.500 ma
70 KV
50/hr
4
1
7
none
none
299,OOOSCFM
600°-850°F
1 gr/ACF
.05 gr/ACF
1.0
Actual
1,500 ma
70 KV
30/hr
4
1
7
none
none
181,OOOSCFM
600°-850°F
1 gr/ACF
?
1.0
Acid Plant Gases
Western Precipitator
High Voltage - Pipe
N/A
Removal of 98% of
Particulates
1974
None
De-energize and flush once
per shift.
Daily PM checks. Inter-
vals of cells every four
months.
Design
600 ma
1,100 ma
60 KV
none
6
1
7
none
1,416 gpm
220,OOOSCFM
93°F
1-2 gr/ACF
.005 gr/SCF
3
Actual
600 ma
1,100 ma
60 KV
none
6
1
7
none
1,416 gpm
181,OOOSCFM
90°-95°F
1-2 gr/ACF
?
3
•p.
o
SCFM (60°F @ 14.7 psia)
-------
IA&33TIA
a^-^f \i X^-Zj**-* Ll tl H. J' *J
41
San Manuel Division
Smelter Flow Sheet
SOLID FLOW
JEL CONCENTRATE .
CONCENTRATE
MOLTEN CLOW
LIQUID FLOW
BINS
6 SAN MANUEL CONCENTRATE a 500 TONS
6 OUTSIDE CONCENTRATE 3 500 TONS
6 FLUX a 375 TONS
CONCENTRATES
AND LIMEROCK
SILICA ROCK
AND SULFIDE ORE
RECYCLED DUST
UED AIR
GAS
REVERBERATORY FURNACES
NO. 1: 32 FT. X 102 FT. INSIDE
NO. 2: 31 FT. x 102 FT. INSIDE
NO. 3: 36 FT. x 102 FT. INSIDE \
ELECTROSTATIC
515 FT. STACK
MATTE LADLE
300 CUBIC FEET
SLAG POT
380 CUBIC FEET
REVERBERATORY
SLAG TO DUMP
MATTE
ELECTROSTATIC
PRECIPITATOR
CONVERTERS
3-13 FT, x 35 FT.
3 - 15 FT. x 35 FT,
550 FT. STACK
•
AIR
H—v
,\ > ..
DUST TO REVERBERATORIES
NEUTRALIZATION
PLANT FOR
EXCESS ACID
.-M
2 STACKS
200 FEET
TAIL GAS
ACID PLANT
REFINING VESSELS
2 - 13 FT. x 35 FT.
2-13 FT. x 30 FT.
CASTING WHEELS
1-15 FT. DIAMETER, 28-MOLDS
1 - 3^ FT. DIAMETER, 22 MOLDS
SULFUR 1C ACID
TO MARKET
e— AIR
REFORMED
GAS
TO SAN MANUEL REFINERY
TO OUTSIDE REFINERY
-------
42
PllMIOVA^
\ &
I7u I dia^j
-------
-------
44
MAGMA COPPEK COMPANY
A SUBSIDIARY ot NEWMONT MINING CORPORATION
P.O box M.San Manuel. An/ona 85631 (602)385-2201
W.L. Parks March 10, 1976
Executive Vice President
Mr. Gary D. Young
Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Enforcement
National Field Investigations Center - Denver
Building 53, Box 25227, Denver Federal Center
Denver, Colorado 80225
Dear Mr. Young:
The following information was furnished to Mr. Reed
Iverson by telephone:
1. Collection area of reverberatory precipitator in
square feet.
218,700 sq. ft.
2. Gas velocity through reverberatory precipitator in
feet/second.
3.57 feet/second
3. Gas retention time in reverberatory precipitator.
7.56 seconds
This is design data and questions No. 2 and No. 3 will
vary slightly with actual gas flows.
This information was in addition to the information
requested in Mr. T. P. Gallagher's letter of December 17, 1975,
addressed to Mr. E. K. Staley.
Yours very
W. L. Parks
WLP/gla
cc: T. P. Gallagher
T. E. Hearon
H. A. Twitty
-------
Appendix C
SIP Regulation Applicable
to Magma
-------
RULES AND REGULATIONS
Subpart D—Arizona
§52.124 [Revoked]
1. Section 52 124 is revoked.
2. Section 52.126 is amended by add-
ing paragraph (b) as follows:
§ 52.126 Control strategy anil regula-
tions: 1'articulate matter.
• • • • •
(b) Replacement regulation for Regu-
lation 7-1-3 G of the Arizona Rules and
Regulation's for Air Pollution Control.
Rule 3KE) of Regulation 111 of the Man-
copa County Air Pollution Control Rules
and Regulations, and Rule 230tons/h
Where: E= Emissions In pounds per hour
F=Proccsa weight In tons per hour
46
(ID Process weight is the total weight
of all materials and solid fuels introduced
into tiny specific process. Liquid and
caseous fuels and combustion air will
not be considered as part of the process
weight. For a cyclical or batch operation,
the process weight per hour will be de-
rived by dividing the total pioccss weight
by the number of houis in one complete
operation from the beginning of the
given process to the completion thcicof.
excludmg any time during which the
equipment is idle For a continuous op-
eration, the process weight per hour will
be derived by dividing the pioccss weight
for a given period of time by the num-
ber of hours in that pci lod
(111) For purposes of this regulation.
the total process weight from all similar
units employing a similar type piocess
shall be used in determining the maxi-
mum allowable emission of participate
matter.
(2) Paiagraph (bHl) of this section
shall not apply to incinerators, fuel
burning installations, 01 Portland cement
plants having a piocess weight rate in
excess of 250,000 Ib/h.
(3) No owner or operator of a Port-
land cement plant in the Phoenix-Tucson
Intrastate Region (§81.36 of this chap-
ter) with a process weight rate in excess
of 250,000 Ib/h shall dischaige or cause
the discharge of participate matter into
the atmosphere m excess of the amount
specified in § CO 62 of this chapter.
(4) Compliance with this paragraph
shall be m occordance with the provi-
sions of ij 52 134(a).
(5) The test methods and procedures
used to determine compliance with this
paragraph are set forth below The meth-
ods refeienced arc contained m the ap-
pendix to pai t GO of this chapter. Equiv-
alent methods and procedures may be
used if approved by the Administrator
(i) For each sampling repetition, the
average concentration of participate
matter shall be determined by using
method 5. Traversing during sampling
by method 5 shall be according to meth-
od 1. The minimum sampling time shall
be 2 hours and the minimum sampling
volume shall be GO ft1 (1 70 m>. cor-
rected to standard conditions on a dry
basis.
(11) The volumetric flow rate of the
total effluent shall be determined by us-
ing method 2 and traversing according to
method 1. Gas analysis shall be per-
formed using the integrated sample
technique of method 3, and moisture
content shall be determined by the con-
denser technique of method 4.
(in) All tests shall be conducted while
the source is operating at the maximum
production or combustion late at which
such souice will be operated During the
tests, the source shall bum fuels or com-
binations of fuels, use raw materials, and
maintain process conditions representa-
tive of normal operation, and shall op-
erate under such other relevant condi-
tions as the Administrator shall specify.
FEDERAL RCGISTER, VOL. 38, NO. 92—MONDAY, MAY 14, 1973
-------
Appendix D
Example Calculations of Gas Flow Rates,
Moisture Content, Actual Emissions, and Allowable Emissions
-------
48
Flowrate at Standard Conditions
V = Vs or
T1 Ts
vs
t *
T
X
vi
where: P^ = given pressure
Vj = given gas volume
T.. = given temperature in ° R
PS = pressure @ std condns (14.7 psi or 760 mm Hg)
Vg = gas volume @ std condns (in same units as V.)
TS = temperature @ std condns (530 °R)
Reverberatory Furnace
P. = Ps = 14.7 psia
Vs = 284.000 (530)
520
2/3 = 193,000 scfm
Vs = 289,500 scfm 1/3 = 96,500 scfm
Converter Air
#1, #2, #3
#4, #5, #6
Vs =
Vs =
Vs =
vc =
24,000 (5301
520
24,500 scfm
34,000 (530)
520
34,700 scfm
Converter ESP
Design- V = 299,000 (530)
uesign. vg 52Q
V. = 304,800 scfm
Actual- V - 181.000 (530)
Hctuai. vs g2Q
Vc = 184,500 scfm
d
-------
49
Acid Plant
220.000
Desiqn.
uesign.
V = 224,200 scfm
Actual. VS = 190,000 (530)
Actual. vs 52Q
V = 193,700 scfm
MC . °-0474sr (VLC>
Moisture Content
°-°474sf (VLc>
x 100
VGs+ °'0474 ST
MC = moisture content
where: V, = Volume of liquid collected in impingers and silica gel (ml)
VG = Volume of gas sampled through the dry gas meter @ std condns
0.0474 = Constant converting VLc to the volume of water vapor in
the gas sample @ std condns
T 1-1*
MC = VLc =0
T 1-2*
MC = VLc 0
T 2-1*
MC = 0.0474 (3.3) Y inn = n 9*
63.06 + 0.0474 (3.3)
* Reference 4
-------
50
T 2-2*
MC " °-0474 <2-5? x 100 = 0.2*
70.48 + 0.0474(2.5)
R-1**
MC = 0.0474(173.0) inn _ ,, ,,
65.62 + 0.0474(173.0) x IUU ~ "•'*
R-2**
MC = 0.0474(151.1) x 100 g 6%
67.25 + 0.0474(151.1)
R-3**
MC = 0.0474 (175.5)
66.19 + 0.0474(175.5)
R-4**
MC = 0.0474(162 5) _
66.35 + 0.0474(162.5)
Actual Emissions
EflrT = grains 1 Ib SCF 60 min
HU SCF x 7,000 grains x min x hr
where: E^CT = actual emissions (Ib/hr)
T 1-1*
Eflrr = 0.0061(100.509)(60) _ 5.26 Ib/hr
MU 7,000
T 1-2*
= 0.0056 (98.770H60) _ . 7.
7,000
T 2-1*
EACT - . . 10_21 lb/hp
* Reference 4
** Reference 5
-------
51
T 2-2*
= 0. 0108(89, 972)(60) = 8.33 Ib/hr
7,000
R-1**
E.rT = 0. 3268(332. 020)(60)
MLI 7
R-2**
= 0.2202^335, 290) (60)
R-3**
= 349 lb/hr
7,000
R-4**
E.PT ^ 0. 3924(318. 430)(60) = 1,071 lb/hr
MU 7,000
Allowable Emissions
EALL = 3>59 P°*62 P " 30
or EALL = 17.31 P°'16 P > 30
where: E^LL = allowable emissions (lb/hr)
P = process weight (T/hr)
p = !L
E2
where: E, = actual emissions (lb/hr)
E = actual emissions (Ib/process T)
* Reference 4
** Reference 5
-------
T 1-1*
"ALL
T 1-2*
P = 5.26 = 41.4 T/hr
0.127
Eflll = 17.31(41.4)°'16 = 31.4 Ib/hr
-ALL
T 2-1*
P =_±74_ = 4Q>
0.117
Eflll = 17.31(40.5)°'16 = 31.3 Ib/hr
P = 10.21 = 45.2 T/hr
0.226
EALL = 17-31(45.2)°'16 - 31.9 Ib/hr
T 2-2*
-ALL
R-l**
P = 8.33 = 45.3 T/hr
0.184
Eflll = 17.31(45.3)°'16 = 31.9 Ib/hr
LA11
R-2**
P = 930 = 96.3 T/hr
9.653
Eflll = 17.31(46.3)°'16 = 35.9 Ib/hr
P = 633 = 97.5 T/hr
67490
EALL = 17.31(97.5)°'16 = 36.0 Ib/hr
* Reference 4
** Reference 5
52
-------
53
R-4*
P = 1071 = 98.5 T/hr
TO?
EALL = 17-31(98.5)°'16 = 36.1 Ib/hr
Reference 5
-------
54
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Copper Smelter Information Needs, Magma Copper Company, San Manuel,
Arizona. Undated.
2. San Manuel Smelter Gas Treatment Plant and Equipment. E. J.
Caldwell, Smelter Engineer and R. L. Sloan, Smelter Superintendent,
Nov. 24, 1974.
3. Compilation and Analysis of Design and Operating Parameters of the
San Manuel Division Smelter, Magma Copper Company, San Manuel,
Arizona for Emission Control Studies. Pacific Environmental
Services, Inc., Santa Monica, Nov. 1975.
4. Particulate Emission Compliance Testing on the Exhaust Gas Streams
from Trains 1 and 2 of the Sulfuric Acid Plant of Magma Copper
Company at San Manuel, Arizona. Magma Copper Company Metallurgical
Department, Michael V. Coffey, June 11, 1975.
5. Particulate Emission Compliance Testing on the Exhaust Gas Stream
from the Reverberatory Furnace Stack of the San Manuel Smelter.
Magma Copper Company Metallurgical Department, Michael V. Coffey,
Nov. 4, 1975.
6. Letter from W. L. Parks, Executive Vice President, Magma Copper
Company to Gary D. Young, EPA-NEIC, Denver, Mar. 10, 1976.
------- |