APPENDICES
SCREENING STUDY ON FEASIBILITY OF
STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE FOR SECONDARY
ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
THE RESEARCH CORPORATION
OF NEW ENGLAND
125 Silas Dearie Highway
Wethersfield.
Connecticut 06109
tel. (203) 563 -1431
e^Pr^imental consultants
-------
APPENDICES
TO
SCREENING STUDY ON FEASIBILITY OF
STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE FOR SECONDARY
ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
THE RESEARCH CORPORATION
OF NEW ENGLAND
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS
Final Report by
Edward T. Brookman
EPA Task Manager
Mr. William 0. Herring
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Emission Standards and Engineering Division
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
Contract No. 68-02-2615
Task Order No. 7
September 1978
125 Silas Deane Highway
Wtethersfield
Connecticut OB1Q9
C2Q3) 5B3 -1431
-------
APPENDIX A
RESULTS OF VISITS TO AND CONTACT WITH PLANTS, REGULATORY AGENCIES AND
CONSULTANTS.
This appendix contains the following information in order as follows:
o Trip reports from the two plants visited
o Trip reports from the two regulatory agencies visited
o Correspondence and information received by mail from
other industries and agencies
o Reports on meetings with outside consultant
o Results of a search through the Compliance Data System
(CDS) file for information on secondary aluminum smelters
(SIC 3341)
o Location of additional information not obtained during
this study.
A-l
-------
Trip Reports
The following section contains the trip reports from the visits to
the two secondary aluminum plants (Vulcan and Allied). These reports
were written by William Herring of EPA who accompanied IRC on the plant
visits. Also included is data taken from a report on an emission test at
Vulcan.
A-2
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
DATE: ^
subject: jrip Report - Visit to Vulcan Materials Company
Si//4.7.
from: William 0. Herring -/i't'P*
Stationary Source Analysis Section
T0: George B. Crane, Chief
Stationary Source Analysis Section
I. Purpose
To obtain information on secondary aluminum processes, emissions,
and emission control systems for a screening study on feasibility of
standards of performance for that industry.
II. Place and Date
Vulcan Materials Company, Sandusky, Ohio, June 27, 1978.
III. Attendees
A. Mr. Jack Eagan, Manager of Environmental Control, Metals Division,
Vulcan Materials Company
B. Mr. John Hrovatich, Plant Manager, Vulcan Materials Company
C. Mr. Edward Brookman, TRC
E. Mr. William Herring, EPA
IV. Discussion
At this plant, scrap aluminum is consumed to produce specification
aluminum alloys, virtually all containing 85 to 95% elemental aluminum.
The alloys are produced as ingots or as molten aluminum, delivered to
customers in containers called "ladles."
Scrap such as sidings, turnings, cans, old sheet and castings with
removable iron attachments are first fragmentized to fist size or less
in a hammermill. Iron is then magnetically removed. Dust, consisting
of paint and plastic chips and dirt, is generated. Particle size is
thought to be greater than 100 microns. The dust is collected in a
baghouse. The company representatives commented that is is easily
removed by means of the baghouse; that it can be moved with shovels, and
is disposed of as landfill. About 30% of production at this plant is
EPfc FORM 1320-6 (REV. 3-76)
A-3
-------
2
derived from fragmentized scrap. No emission tests have been conducted
for the fragmentizing operation.
Oil coated scrap, such as borings, and painted or plastic coated
items such as sidings are treated after fragmentizing in a rotary-drum
"chip dryer." Pyrolysis effected by natural gas (or alternatively oil)
combustion removes the coatings at 500 to 1000°F. Emissions include
solid carbon particles and compounds of carbon and hydrogen. They are
controlled by a natural gas (or alternatively oil) fired afterburner.
We observed the dryer and afterburner during operation. Some steam and
a small amount of smoke appeared to escape, within the plant building,
from the dryer. A vibrating device after the dryer removed some impurities
that might include dirt and coating pigments such as titanium dioxide
(TiOp). These go to the same baghouse that control the fragmentizing
operation. I noted zero opacity of emissions from the afterburner stack.
Dryer-treated scrap accounts for about 40% of production at this plant.
Emission tests at a similar Vulcan plant in California show the afterburner
gas flow rate of 3,640 scfm dry. The emission data were transcribed by
Mr. Brookman and will be made available to the EPA file on this study.
Scrap with iron inserts or attachments, not easily removed, and
sometimes associated with organic materials, such as pistons and lawn
chairs, are sweat processed in a reverberatory furnace burning natural
gas (or alternatively oil). Furnace temperature is around 2000°F. The
aluminum melts and flows from the furnace while the iron remains in the
furnace for removal after the aluminum extraction. At this plant, scrap
fed to the sweat furnace contains less organic matter than that fed to
the dryer. Consequently, carbonaceous emissions are less. An afterburner
is, however, built into the furnace to control any carbonaceous emissions.
We observed the sweat processing operation. The furnace was not being
charged, but aluminum was being melted and flowed from its hearths.
Only a trace of smoke (5% opacity or less) was visually indicated at the
afterburner stack. About 10% of production at this plant is accounted
for by aluminum from this sweat furnace. No emission tests have been
conducted at this furnace.
This plant processes, basically, only its own residual scrap.
Skimmings, with residual flux, and dross are removed together from the
process baths and washed with water in a rotary-drum ball mill to concentrate
the metallic aluminum to 60% (dry basis). The only possible air pollutant
emissions would be from drying the concentrate. These are not considered
significant. Residual scrap accounts for less than 5% of plant production.
There is no dry mechanical separation of metal from skimmings at
this plant. Sweat processing of residual scrap is not practiced at this
or other other modern plants. The company representatives commented
that sweat processing residual scrap would be wasteful.
A-4
-------
3
There is no recovery of waste heat from afterburners at this plant.
Mr. Eagan commented, however, that such a heat recovery system has been
installed at one Vulcan plant and that Alcoa has one that is used in can
processing. The recovered heat is used in the dryers. These systems are,
however, very costly.
Melting and alloying (M&A), including demagging, at this plant is
done in reverberatory furnaces. Each furnace consists of one combustion
chamber and one charging well. Fuel is natural gas or oil. A batch
(or "heat") of metal is commonly processed in periods up to 24 hours.
Charging takes up to 2/3 of this time. Chlorination, if required, takes
3 to 4 hours.
At one of the M & A furnaces, gases from the well and the combustion
chamber go to the same hood which is vented to the atmosphere. We observed
operation of this furnace being charged with scrap radiators. Flaming
occurred as they were charged, and there was some smoke at the well,
apparently caused by some organic material or coatings associated with the
scrap. This smoke was burned further by mixing with air and the hot com-
bustion chamber exhaust gas.
I noted operations at two other melting and alloying furnaces. At
these, the wells and combustion chambers were vented separately.
Dryer-treated scrap was charged to one furnace resulting in little
visible smoke or steam at the well.
At the other furnace, the bath was being demagged by "bell system"
chlorination. Chlorine (Cl9) was bubbled into the bath in the charging
well. The resulting emissions, probably consisting mostly of aluminum
chloride vapor (AlpClg) with small amounts of unreacted CUt enter the
bell system and are removed by scrubbing. There appeared to be no gas
stream discharged from this system. A hose removed the spent scrubbing
fluid. There were no chlorinating emissions that I could detect either
visually or by odor in the region of the furnace. Mr. Eagan indicated
that the bell system removes chlorinating emissions nearly 100% since
there is very little leakage around the bell system.
Mr. Eagan described the bell system scrubbing operation as follows.
Raw river water is used as the scrubbing fluid. Hydrochloric acid
(HC1), formed by hydrolysis of dissolved aluminum chloride (A1C13), is
neutralized by an alkali in the scrubbing liquid. Heavy particles are
allowed to settle out. Aluminum hydroxide, the other A1CI3 hydrolysis
product, cannot be settled out. After settling of the heavy particles,
the fluid goes to the municipal treating system. It is accepted by the
local authority and has been considered beneficial because the A1 (OH).,
substitutes for alum required for treating the total sewage stream.
A-5
-------
4
Fluxing salts used to remove metal oxides and otherwise cleanse the
metal were not being applied during our plant observations. Me were
told, however, that a mixture of about one-half ?!aCl and one-half KC1
with 2 to 5% fluorspar is used which does not fume except for steam if
the flux is moist.
Inspection of the MSA furnace stacks after the aforementioned in-
plant observations indicated only traces of emissions (5% opacity or
less).
Pertaining further to emissions, the stacks at this plant were low
and could not be observed from the ground except from certain locations.
During the several instances when we were outside of the plant buildings,
but not within view of the stacks, only once could a distinct trace of
visible smoke be seen, apparently caused by charging some scrap with a
small content of organic matter to a MSA furnace. During all other
observations, there were no visible plumes.
Emission tests at a MSA furnace had been conducted by a contractor.
Test results were transcribed by Mr. Brookman and will be made available
to the file on this study.
Pertaining to the total secondary aluminum industry, Mr. Eagan
commented that yearly production is about 1600 million pounds, and that
its products are sold in competititon with the primary producers, usually
at prices a cent or two less per pound. There may be some increase in
secondary aluminum processing because of more aluminum being used in
automobiles. This automotive scrap will, however, have more than the
usual organic content, entailing higher cost to burn it off. There are also
increasing amounts of scrap containing the higher percentages of magnesium,
such as beverage cans, which increases the demagging that must be done.
Pertaining to information claimed proprietary and obtained at this
visit, Mr. Eagan asked that no production rate or process weight rate
be released. Accordingly, all plant production and process weight rate
data have been transcribed as an entry in the ESED Confidential File,
then cut out of my plant notes.
V. Conclusions and Recommendations
A. If uncontrolled, air pollutant emissions at this plant would
consist of:
1. Carbonaceous emissions derived from organic constituents in
scrap such as oils, grease, paint, and plastics.
2. Chlorine-demagging emissions comprised of hydrolysis products
of A1C1^ including HC1 and AlCOH)^.
A-6
-------
5
B. Carbonaceous emissions are effectively controlled at this plant
by one or a combination of the following techniques:
1. Pyrolysis of organic constituents in a dryer with afterburner.
2. Pyrolysis of organics in a sweat furnace with afterburner.
3. Providing a good air draft at the MSA furnace charging
well, to accomplish nearly complete combustion when scrap with minor
organic content is charged, then burning off any remaining carbonaceous
smoke by allowing it to mix with air then enter the hot combustion
chamber exhaust gas stream.
C. Chlorine-demagging emissions at this plant are effectively
controlled by scrubbing, using the bell system, with an alkaline solution
to remove aluminum chloride and neutralize its acidic hydrolysis product.
D. The techniques just listed for controlling carbonaceous emissions
(essentially by afterburning scrap-derived pyrolysis products) and
chlorine-demagging emissions (by bell-system scrubbing) are "candidate
best systems of emission control."
E. the energy and cost impact of afterburners for controlling
carbonaceous emissions might be critical to their evaluation as a control
alternative in Standards Support and Environmental Impact Statement
(SSEIS) development, because of natural gas and oil prices and supply
limitations. Applicability of waste heat recovery as practiced, to a
limited extent, by Vulcan and Alcoa, would therefore be of special
interest if SSEIS development is initiated. Inquiries and a plant visit
to Alcoa to ascertain their experience regarding heat recovery and the
effectiveness of their systems are suggested for SSEIS development.
F. Water pollution impact of the bell system and other scrubbing
systems for controlling chlorine-demagging emissions, under new Federal
water pollution legislation, might be critical to its evaluation as a
control alternative in SSEIS development. This will require further
study in SSEIS development.
Mote: A copy of the first draft of this report, dated July 5, 1978, was
sent to Mr. Eagan. Comments of Mr. Eagan in phone discussions
with Mr. Herring were considered in rewriting this report.
-------
VULCAN TEST DATA
A-8
-------
Emission Test on Reverbatory Furnace - 3/18/74
Conducted by Crobaugh Labs - observed by state
Overall results:
From material balance: 28 lb/hr for 20 hr processing period
from uncontrolled furnace air emissions
From AP-42: 65.4 lb/hr uncontrolled emissions
According to Ohio EPA regulation EPA-11-11, the uncontrolled
particulates must be reduced to 5.27 lb/hr for the 28
lb/hr estimate and to 10.6 lb/hr for the 65.4 lb/hr
estimate
Test results: 2.25 lb/hr - well within limits
Test I
Material Charged
Weight
10:12-11:05
Test II
Misc. clip and sow chunks
(fluxed, but not skimmed)
clip - 7,000 lb
sow - 7,035 lb
14,035 lb
2:28-3:40
Test III
Painted siding
Misc. clip
Borings
(fluxed & skimmed)
750 lb
3,500 lb
5,500 lb
9,750 lb
4:00-5:21
Test IV
Borings
Silicon
50-50 Cu
(fluxed & skimmed)
8,150 lb
400 lb
200 lb
8,750 lb
7:15
A1C1» - Bell scrubber in service
CI2 - input rate of 600 lb/hr
Test V
4:30
Combustion Chamber
A-9
-------
Emission rates as follows:
Test I - Open hearth, charging
Test II - Open hearth, charging
Test III - Open hearth, charging
Test IV - Open hearth, demagging
Test V - Combustion chamber
1.65 lb/hr
2.01 lb/hr
4.33 lb/hr
1.08 lb/hr
1.08 lb/hr
Results:
Emissions from runs I, II, III = 3.14 + 3.82 + 8.23 = 15.19 lb
Weight of material charged = 32,535 lb or 65.1% of typical
50,000 lb charge
So, typical emissions during 16 hr charge period =
= 23.33 lb per charge =» 1.45 lb/hr
(J • Oj 1
Emissions from run IV = 1.08 lb/hr x 16 hr - 17.28 lb
Total emissions = 23.33 + 4.32 + 17.28 = 44.93 lb
The rate is thus 44.93/20 hr = 2.25 lb/hr
Note - the charging rates for tests I, II & III were nearly twice those
usually used during daily operations. This was to depict peak
emission periods.
Method 5 was used. Further test conditions and data are available.
A-10
-------
Materials Balance Calculations of Uncontrolled Part. Emissions
Uncontrolled Part. Uncontrolled Part. Emission
Source Output (lb/heat) Rate (lb/hr) - 20 hrs.
Total part, from furnace
discharge flues 44.9
Total AlCl^ released from
process during demagging
collected & measured in
"Bell" system 515.0
Total 559.9 28.0
Calculation of Uncontrolled Part. Emissions using AP-42
Uncontrolled Part. Uncontrolled Part. Emission
Source Output (lb/heat) Rate (lb/hr) - 20 hrs.
Reverb, furnace
(4.3 lb/ton x 25 tons/heat) 107.5
Chlorination
(1000 lb/ton CI2 x 1.2 tons C^/heat) 1200.0
Total 1307.5 65.4
A-ll
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
date: July 20, 1978
subject: Trip Report - Visit at Allied Metals Company
from-. V\(. 0. Herring
Stationary Source Analys/s Section
T0: G. B. Crane, Chief
Stationary Source Analysis Section
I. Purpose
To obtain information on secondary aluminum processes, emissions,
and emission control systems for a screening study on feasibility of
standards of performance.
II. Place and Date
Allied Metals Company, Chicago, Illinois, June 28, 1978
III. Attendees
A. Mr. Marvin Fink, Vice-President, Allied Metals Co.
B. Mr. Edward Brookman, The Research Corporation of New England (TRC)
C. Mr. John Notar, EPA Region V
D. Mr. William Herring, EPA
IV. Discussion
At this plant, scrap aluminum is consumed to produce specification
aluminum alloy ingots, typically containing 85% aluminum.
This plant does not have a crusher for fragmentizing scrap. Raw
scrap is initially processed by sorting, using a conveyor and a magnet
for removing iron.
Scrap, such as borings, turnings, and spatters, is treated in a
natural-gas-fired, rotary-drum dryer to remove organic contaminants.
Iron inclusions are then magnetically removed. The dryer exhaust gas
goes to an afterburner. The plant building has very high ceilings (70
feet), and the dryer-afterburner stack exhausts within the building.
During our plant observations, this system being in use, I could not see
any emissions from that stack or detect any odor indicating such emissions.
The building was too dark, however, for an opacity reading. About 10%
of scrap at this plant is dryer-treated. Emission tests on the dryer-
afterburner system have not been conducted.
Scrap with iron attachments, which might also be associated with
grease and other carbon compounds, such as aluminum castings containing
steel parts, is sweat processed in a natural gas or oil fired open-
hearth furnace. This furnace was not in use during our visit. About
20% of scrap at this plant is sweat processed.
EPA FORM 1320-6 IREV. 3-76)
A-12
-------
2
Residual scrap is not processed at this plant. Skimmings and dross
produced there are sold.
Melting- and alloying (M & A), including demagging, is done in
natural gas or oil fired reverberatory furnaces, each consisting of one
hooded charging well and one combustion chamber with a separate flue.
About 70% of the scrap processed at this plant goes to the M & A furnace
without drying or sweating pretreatment. This untreated scrap includes
organic coated items such as beer cans, sidings, and printing sheets. A
production batch, or "heat", is processed in 24 hours.
We observed a pile of cans being charged to one furnace. Some
visible smoke filtered through the pile, in the charging well, and
entered the hood. A luminous flame, however, indicated considerable
combustion of the pyrolysis products.
Fluxing salts for cleansing and covering the bath at the well were
not being charged during our inspection. Mr. Fink said that a cryolite-
KCl-NaCl mixture is used, and that not much of this is emitted.
Demagging was not done during our inspection. Mr. Fink said that
aluminum fluoride (A1F-) is used at the well for demagging, and that
visible fumes result. About 3 1/2 pounds of A1F, are used per pound of
magnesium removed. It is applied for about 1 1/2 hours during each 24-
hour heat. All aluminum processed at this plant is demagged.
Emissions from the sweat furnace, and the M & A furnace charging
well and combustion chamber go through separate ducts to a manifold,
then to a Teller, internally coated baghouse.
To demonstrate the effectiveness of the baghouse, a large quantity
of oily turnings were charged to one furnace. This caused a large
amount of smoke at the well, entering the hood , but no visible emissions
at the baghouse stack.
In the baghouse system, the emissions are first cooled in a quench
tank. The cooling water entering the gas stream is entirely evaporated,
prior to baghouse entry.
The baghouse coating material is applied once a week. The spent
coating is disposed of commercially. Mr. Fink did not know of its
ultimate disposal method.
The city of Chicago tested this plant during September, 1977, using
EPA Method 5. Mr. Fink loaned us his copy of the Chicago report. Copies
were made at the EPA Region V office and sent to the EPA and TRC parti-
cipants in this visit.
A-13
-------
3
The Chicago test report showed the following data on the baghouse:
A. 4 modules
B. 4,914 square feet cloth area per module.
C. 260 bags per module.
D. Bags coated with "Tesisorb."
E. Shaker type cleaning system.
F. 21" designed pressure drop.
The test data showed operation of the baghouse at gas flow rates
and outlet temperature approximating 41,000 SCFM and 110°F, respectively.
During the tests, the two M & A furnaces at the plant, but not the
sweat furnace, were in use. Mr. Fink mentioned that the baghouse system
was planned to include one more M & A furnace and one more sweat furnace,
in the event of a plant expansion, without changing the baghouse flow
rate.
The city of Chicago test data were obtained during charging of
scrap and demagging and included particulate, hydrocarbons (total,
condensible, and gaseous), carbon monoxide, and fluorides.
Test ports are located in the middle of a verticle section of
baghouse exhaust duct with about 5 feet of straight duct above and
below.
Mr. Fink said that the baghouse capital cost was about 1/2 million
dollars.
Pertaining to the secondary aluminum industry, Mr. Fink commented
that growth and plant expansion are not expected because of increasing
consumption of scrap by the primary producers, owing to the energy
advantage of processing scrap as compared to ore, and more competition
from the primaries. Production of the secondary aluminum industry is
currently at 60% of capacity.
Mr. Fink asked that no production data be released. Accordingly,
all data that he furnished on production rates and from which production
rates could be calculated has been entered into the ESED confidential file.
V.• Conclusions and Recommendations
A. The significant, actual or controlled, air pollutant emissions
at this plant are:
1. Carbonaceous emission derived from organic constituents
in scrap such as oils, grease, paint, and plastics.
2. Particulate matter containing fluorides and probably
chlorides and oxides formed during demagging with AlFg.
A-14
-------
4
B. Carbonaceous emissions are effectively controlled at this plant
by the following techniques:
1. Organic contaminants on small scrap fragments such as
borings are removed in a dryer with afterburner.
2. Organic contaminants associated with scrap other than
small fragments are burned off in sweating or in charging to a M & A
furnace. Oxidation to C(L at these furnaces removes part of the resulting
pyrolisis products. The remaining particulate is removed in a coated
baghouse sufficiently to obtain zero opacity.
C. Fluoride-demagging emissions at this plant are effectively
controlled by removal in a coated baghouse system.
D. The techniques just listed for controlling carbonaceous emissions
(burning scrap-derived pyrolysis products and collecting the remaining
particulate in a coated baghouse) and fluoride-demagging emissions (by
coated baghouse) are "candidate best systems of emission control."
E. Solid waste impact might impose the most significant limitation
on use of the coated baghouse for removal of both carbonaceous and
fluoride emissions. If standards Support and Environmental Impact
Statement (SSEIS) development is undertaken, spent coating samples
should be tested to determine whether significant leaching of toxic
matter would be likely if the spent coating is landfilled.
F. The sources of most emissions at this plant, if uncontrolled,
would be the M & A furnaces because (1) all scrap aluminum processed
goes through M & A furnaces, (2) a large amount of the scrap charged to
M & A furnaces (up to 70%) has some degree of organic coating, and
(3) fluoridation is done at the M & A furnaces. The borings dryer and
sweat furnace, if uncontrolled, would be sources of smaller amounts of
emissions because (1) they account for only 10% and 20%, respectively,
of the scrap processed, and (2) emissions would be generally limited
to the carbonaceous pyrolysis products, which would be partially oxi-
dized by air in the dryer and sweat furnace.
G. The City of Chicago test report provides data on emissions
during the most usual operating conditions at this plant; that is,
with two M & A furnaces in use. Emissions to the baghouse would be
increased to only a small extent if the sweat furnace were also in use.
There would also be times when the emissions would be less because of
one furnace being inoperative for maintenance. Thus the City of Chicago
data appears representative of effective and economically acceptable
emission control at this plant during normal production conditions. Those
data should therefore be useful to the data base for SSEIS development.
H. The pollutants reported in the City of Chicago Report and
listed below should be included in tests at similar plants for SSEIS
A-15
-------
development.
1. Particujate (EPA Method 5)
2. Total Hydrocarbons
a. Condensible
b. Gaseous
3. Carbon monoxide
4. Fluorides
Note: A copy of the first draft of this report, dated July 14, 1978,
was sent to Mr. Fink. Comments by Mr. Fink in phone discussion
on July 17 and 18 with Mr. Herring were considered in rewriting
this report.
A-16
-------
Regulatory Agency Trip Reports
The following section contains the trip reports from the visits
made to two regulatory agencies (Region IX, EPA and Indiana State Board
of Health). The data is given in English units since these were the
units obtained from their files.
A-17
-------
Trip Report
Place: Region IX EPA
Surveillance & Analysis Division
215 Fremont St.
San Francisco, Cal.
Contacts: Mr. Arnold Den
Ms. Linda Wunder-Freet (Chem. eng. - air investigator)
Date: June 21, 1978
I visited EPA in order to obtain information on the secondary aluminum
plants located in Region IX. According to the literature, there are eleven
plants in Region IX - all in California. These are listed in Table I. I
examined EPA's Compliance Data System (CDS) file, emission inventory report,
and inspection files in an effort to obtain information on these plants. Un-
fortunately, information was only available on some of the larger plants.
According to Ms. Wunder-Freet, this was probably due to the size of some of
the operations. If the sources are estimated to emit less than 25 tons/year
(T/Y), then they would not be included in CDS or the Emission Inventory (EI).
And if no complaints or problems were encountered, then they would not be in
the files. Table I also lists the sources of information that were available
for each plant. The remainder of this report summarizes the information obtained.
One additional plant was added to the list. This plant, the Liston
Brick Co., was not included in our literature, but is a secondary aluminum
plant. This plant is also listed in Table I.
Further information regarding the plants in the Los Angeles area will
hopefully be forthcoming since a questionnaire was forwarded to the Air
Pollution Control District of that region (South Coast Air Quality Management
District.
A-18
-------
Table I
Region IX Secondary Aluminum Plants
Plant Name
City
County (code)
EI
CDS File
Aetna Metals Co.
Vulcan Materials Co.
Chersky (Jon) & Sons
Vista Metals Corp.
General Metals Ref. Co.
Goldberg Metal
Ref. Corp.
Progressive Metals Co.
Kirk (Morris P.) & Son
McGowan Co., Inc.
Globe Metals Co.
U.S. Reduction Co.
Liston Brick Co.
Industry
Corona
E. Los Angeles
Fontena
Gardena
Gardena
Gardena
Los Angeles
Los Angeles
Oakland
Ontario
Corona
Los Angeles (4200)
Riverside (6420)
Los Angeles (4200)
San Bernardino (6700)
Los Angeles (4200)
Los Angeles (4200)
Los Angeles (4200)
Los Angeles (4200)
Los Angeles (4200)
Alameda (0060)
San Bernardino (6700)
Riverside (6420)
X
X
X
X
X
X
A-19
-------
CDS Information
Globe Metals:
Source no. - 00042
SIC - 3361
Compliance Status (CMST): 3
Emission Category (ECAT): 2
Inspected - 6/16/77
Vulcan Materials Co.
Source no. - 00014
SIC - 3341
CMST: 2
ECAT: 2
Inspected:
Action No.
6
-
VE
Evaluation
2/18/75
7
-
VE
Evaluation
5/29/75
8
-
VE
Evaluation
9/25/75
9
-
VE
Evaluation
12/23/75
10
-
VE
Evaluation
3/25/76
11
-
VE
Evaluation
6/24/76
12
-
Source Test
8/26/76
13
-
Source Test
12/2/76
14
-
Source Test
1/26/77
15
-
VE
Evaluation
6/29/77
16
-
VE
Evaluation
9/30/77
17
—
VE
Evaluation
11/30/77
Where VE = Visible Emissions
A-20
-------
Emission Inventory Information
1) Vulcan Materials
Parkridge & Sampson Sts.
SIC 3361
Process
Point
see
Description
Weight
01
3-04-001-03
Alum.
reverb.
furnace
0002125
3-90-006-05
Metal
melting
- nat. gas
0000016
3-90-005-05
Metal
melting
- dist. oil
0000000
02
3-04-001-03
Alum.
reverb.
furnace
0002800
3-90-006-05
Metal
melting
- nat. gas
0000021
3-90-005-05
Metal
melting
- dist. oil
0000000
08
3-04-001-99
Alum.
scrap -
drum dryer
0002029
3-90-006-99
Alum.
scrap -
drum dryer
0000016
2) Aetna
Metals Co.
13329
E. Ector St.
Pollutants(t/y)
NCU
SIC 3341
Pollutants (t/y)
Process
Particulate
N0o
Point
sec
Description
Weight
2
01
3-04-001-03
Alum, reverb, furnace
0006240
4
1
02
3-04-001-03
Alum, reverb, furnace
0003744
2
1
03
3-04-001-03
Alum, reverb, furnace
0004680
8
2
04
3-04-008-04
Sec. zinc
0000650
05
3-04-008-08
Sec. zinc
0002903
1
2
06
3-04-008-99
Zinc alloying furnace
0002903
2
07
3-04-008-03
Sec. zinc
0002903
08
3-04-008-02
Sec. zinc
0002903
1
9
A-21
-------
3) Vista Metals 13425 Wittram
SIC 3341
Point
01
02
03
04
SCC Description
3-04-001-03 Alum, reverb, furnace
3-90-006-05 Metal melting - nat. gas
3-90-005-05 Metal melting - dist. oil
3-04-001-04 Alum, chlorination station
3-04-001-03 Alum, reverb, furnace
3-90-006-05 Metal melting - nat. gas
3-90-005-05 Metal melting - dist. oil
3-04-001-01 Sweating furnace
3-90-006-05 Metal melting - nat. gas
3-90-005-05 Metal melting - dist. oil
3-04-001-03 Alum, reverb, furnace
3-90-006-05 Metal melting - nat. gas
3-90-005-05 Metal melting - dist. oil
Process
Weight
0005000
0000003
0000000
0005000
0008000
0000010
0000013
0001200
0000002
0000000
0008000
0000010
0000013
Pollutants (t/y)
Particulate N0„
4) U.S,
Point
01
02
03
04
07
Reduction Co.
SIC 3341
SCC
Box 507
Description
3-04-001-03 Alum, reverb, furnace
3-90-006-05 Metal melting - nat. gas
3-90-005-05 Metal melting - dist. oil
3-04-001-99 Alum, borings dryer
3-90-006-99 Borings dryer - nat. gas
3-90-005-99 Borings dryer - dist. oil
3-04-001-03 Alum, reverb, furnace
3-90-006-05 Metal melting - nat. gas
3-90-005-05 Metal melting - dist. oil
3-04-001-99 Rotary borings dryer
3-90-006-99 Borings dryer - nat. gas
4-03-001-07 Fixed roof tank -
breathing - dist. fuel
4-03-001-52 Fixed roof tank -
working - dist. fuel
Process
Weight
0010000
0000113
0000070
0010000
0000011
0000013
0010000
0000147
0000072
0003500
0000032
0000060
0000060
Pollutants (t/y)
Part. S0o N02 HC
14
2 20 18
A-2 2
-------
Site Information
I. Vulcan Materials Co.
Chlorine demagging:
Performance day
A. Avg. chlorine input
B. Chlorine consumption
1. into MgCl.7
2. into AlCl^
C. Air pollution from C^
1. MgCl2
2. AlCl^ (reported as C^)
1,015 lbs. CI,
935 lbs. CI,
80 lbs. CI,
solid - none to atmosphere
(a) Captured in scrubbers
(b) Bypass scrubbers to atm. (measured)*
*(1) a typical high particulate
concentration in furnace hood
gas during demagging
Equivalent AlCl^ rate
Equivalent Cl^ rate
(2) opacity in atmosphere
79.8 lbs. CI,
0.2 lbs. CI,
0.004 gr/scf
0.26 lbs/day
0.17 lbs/day
none
EI data:
1)
Alum, reverb, furnace (#2503)
3
gas usage - 16.5 mm eft
oil usage - 0
afterburner gas usage (to both 2503 & 2334) - 19.5 mm eft
3
CO: 19.8 lbs/hr x 24 h/d x 5 d/w x 17 w/y = 20.196 T/Y
NO : 1.71 lbs/hr x 24 h/d x 5 d/w x 17 w/y = 1.75 T/Y
Part: 4.45 lbs/hr x 24 h/d x 5 d/w x 17 w/y = 4.5 T/Y
A-23
-------
2) Alum, reverb, furnace (#2334)
3
gas usage - 21.1 mm eft
oil usage - 0
CO: 19.8 lbs/hr x 24 h/d x 5 d/w x 23 w/y = 27 T/Y
N0x: 1.71 lbs/hr x 24 h/d x 5 d/w x 23 w/y = 2 T/Y
Part: 4.45 lbs/hr x 24 h/d x 5 d/w x 23 w/y = 6 T/Y
3) Chip dryer (#2400)
3
gas usage (dryer) - 15.8 mm eft
3
gas usage (afterburner) - 31.5 mm eft
CO: 23 lbs/hr x 20 h/d x 5 d/w x 40 w/y =4.6 T/Y
Part: 6.53 lbs/hr x 20 h/d x 5 d/w x 40 w/y = 13 T/Y
3
NO : estimate based on 213.33 lb/mm eft
x
3
47.3 mm eft (gas burned in dryer & afterburner)
x 213.33 lb/mm eft3 = 5.0 T/Y
Sampling Test - reverb, furnace:
Plant has 4 reverb, furnaces whose charging wells are vented
to one afterburner to control smoke emissions. Compliance
test on afterburner on 8/26/76. Only one furnace running at
the time:
flowrate: 12,041 scfm
process wt.: 5,134 lbs/hr
avg. exhaust temp.: 1230 F.
max. capacity of furnace: 110,000 lbs. with a 24 hr.
cycle between tapping
normal pour is 40,000 lbs/day
During the test, 3285 lbs. of fairly clean sheet alum, clippings
were charged along with 1849 lbs. of dried "borings". Testing
was conducted about 2 hrs. after a pour.
*Note: calc. in error - this was as copied from file.
A-24
-------
Sampling procedure: a velocity traverse of 12 points was taken using an
"S" type pitot tube, magnehelic gauge and digital thermometer at a
point 5' before the stack discharge. The sampling was conducted
one hour at one reference point using a quartz probe and wet im-
pingement train. CO was measured with an Infrared Industries NDIR
instrument. NO and SO. were measured on an Environmetrics
x 2
instrument.
Results:
Emissions
Part. - .0431 gr/scf
4.45 lb/hr
CO - 380 ppm
NO - 20 ppm
x
SO^ - nil
Allowed
0.0738 gr/scf (rule 404)*
6.11 lb/hr (rule 405)
2,000 ppm (rule 407)
no limits
.05% (rule 53)
Sampling test - chip dryer afterburner - test #1:
The chip dryer is a direct fixed rotary drum unit. It has one
4 x 10® Btu/hr nat. gas burner. Alum, borings and shavings are
normally fed by hand onto a feed conveyor. A 150 HP ring crusher
breaks up big pieces or bundles. The afterburner is of vertical,
natural draft design. It has 3 Eclipse 2412 burners rated at
2.55 x 106 Btu/hr each. The max. charge rate is from 4000 to 5000
lb/hr.
Flow rate: 3293 scfm
Process wt.: 2420 lb/hr
Sample procedure: a velocity traverse was run at the stack discharge
using an "S" type pitot tube and magnehelic gauge. The sample
was drawn for one hour from the center of the stack through a
quartz probe into a wet impingement train. The velocity and
temperature were monitored. CO measured on Infrared Industries
NDIR instrument.
*an explanation of these rules follows the file information
A-25
-------
Results:
Emissions
Part. - 0.2313 gr/scf
6.53 lb/hr
CO - 160 ppm
2.3 lb/hr
Allowed
0.1204 gr/scf (rule 404)
4.12 lb/hr (rule 405)
2,000 ppm (rule 407)
Aluminum oxide was collected.
Sampling test - chip dryer afterburner - test #2:
The exceedence of emissions over the allowable was thought to be
caused by the heavy tumbling action of the rotary dryer (chips
falling out at 12:00). It appeared that the small chips were
picked up in the exhaust and vented to the afterburner where
they were either oxidized or melted and emitted to atmosphere.
Changes were made to decrease tumbling action so chips fell out
at 9:00. Source retested on 1/26/77.
Flow rate: 3640 scfm
Process wt.: 2214 lb/hr
Results:
Emissions Allowed
Part. - .0979 gr/scf 0.116 gr/scf
3.06 lb/hr 3.93 lb/hr
CO - 400 ppm 2000 ppm
6.4 lb/hr
NO - 24 ppm, 0.6 lb/hr
x
Additional information:
Flux is added at the furnace charging well about 2,500 lbs.
of KC1 and NaCl (60% & 40%).
About 40,000 lbs. alum, drained from furnace/day.
A-26
-------
An inverted bell is used to contain the chlorine fumes from
the demagging process. These fumes go to a scrubber.
Crushing, screening, handling of alum, dross lots generates
airborne dust. This dust is conveyed by a dust system
to a REES Baghouse.
II. U.S. Reduction Co.
Source test - smelting furnace afterburner - 4/30/71:
Load of 3,000 lbs. of alum, scrap billets (composed of crushed
and packaged alum, beer and pop cans) added to kiln throughout
one hour sampling period.
Particulate matter test conducted using a glass packed thimble
with an impinger train set-up. HC emissions sampled using a
Beckman model 109A HC analyzer.
!_ I T
Results:
Emissions
Allowable
Part. - .0086 gr/scf
Dust & fumes - .49 lb/hr
HC - 12-24 ppm
NO^ - 17, 40, 65 ppm (3 samples)
0.3 gr/scf (rule 52)
1.77 lb/hr (rule 54)
Inspection report of 2/10/76:
Material
Process
Alum, shavings, borings Dryer (large) 2700 lb/hr (dry out)
Alum, shavings, borings Dryer (small) 500-600 lb/hr (dry out)
A-27
-------
(cont.)
Material
Process
Alum, scrap, dryer scrap,
sows
Chlorine
Alum, ingots
2 double well
furnaces
Chlorinating
Smelting
80-85,000 lb/24 hrs. (each)
3,500
1974 -
1975 -
1/76 -
2/76 -
3/76 -
4/76 -
5/76 -
lb/day, 55,000 lb/month
42 x 106 lbs.
25 x 106 lbs.
1.75 x 105 lbs. (down
10 days)
2.5 x 106 lbs. (pro-
jected)
1.8 x 105 lbs. (pro-
jected)
1.8 x 105 lbs. (pro-
jected)
1.8 x 10s lbs. (pro-
jected)
Process Rule
Small rotary dryer 52A
(700 lb/hr
processed) 54A
Emissions - due to test
Pollutant
Cl^ scrubber line
from settling
pond
Reverb, furnace #51
(north)
(3,000 lb/hr scrap
charged)
53A
52
54
66
Part.
Part.
C0„
x
NO
J
HC
CO
C12
Part.
Part.
Emissions
.032 gr/scf
.648 lb/hr
3.7 % by wt.
97 ppm by vol.
5 ppm by vol.
neg.
.00036 ppm by vol.
.0086 gr/scf
.49 lb/hr
HC(as methane) 12-24 ppm
CO,
NO
Allowable
.145 gr/scf
1.9 lb/hr
450 ppm
0.3 gr/scf
1.77 lb/hr
2.5% by vol.
17,40,65 ppm by vol.
Large rotary dryer
Reverb, furnace //52
(south)
Emissions - due to emission factors
54A Part. 2.5 lb/hr
54A
Part.
0.58 lb/hr
4.4 lb/hr
5.2 lb/hr
A-28
-------
Process description:
Alum, scrap such as can cuts, aircraft scraps, remelt
sows, and two dryer end products are charged into the
wells of furnaces. A movable door is opened during
charging. The furnace is natural gas fired and melts
scraps at 2300 F. A worker hand skims the dross from
either well. Alloys such as silica, copper and zinc
are added to the melt in proportions up to 10% by
weight of the total product. During a 24 hour period:
15 hrs. to charging, 4 to refining, 4 to pouring, and
1 to cleaning and heating. Heated pipes are placed
into the wells for injecting chlorine gas in order to
remove Mg in the melt. A "bell" over the pipes contains
emissions and forces air to a waste water pond via 30-40
water sprays (scrubber). Gases pass through a pond
before entering the atmosphere. Molten alum, flows into
an ingot mold machine. Water is sprayed on for cooling.
Ingots are used in foundries, die casters, magwheel
production and other related industries.
Diagrams:
1) Shavings/borings dryers
(Lh'X
LO \j vs (r
V_
M oP PEK
yL
L
rtfet) t r<
ST
fa
i f:
GutWlK
(\4 OU - f)
C" A iC'l ~~~
T>? 7 1
i>Co "F
1
SMALL bi/
1r
1
rttwcii j—
J uidic a "< " sx-
y ci<
i\rTkt'i
, ' > J- - i ^C'O :Y; j
R OT ^ /
'• ' ' t'c.
"1\—
->Sc -
c ' ir
rAj-^ir-c ct
r <-1"- •'' f.
A-29
-------
Large dryer can efficiently burn alum.
20% oil and moisture.
scrap containing
Small dryer can efficiently burn alum, scrap containing
6% oil and moisture.
2) Double well furnace
> I20QY
[ti»crK -
» n fc O \A C>
tWPMeft S
CI
X
-------
Equipment list:
Unit
1) Alum, borings dryer (large) 1)
2) Alum, borings dryer (small) 2)
3) South double well furnace (//52) 3)
4) North double well furnace (//51) 4)
5) Fuel oil storage tanks (diesel) 5)
6) a. Fuel oil consumption 6)
b. Nat. gas consumption
Specs
4x10 Btu/hr, nat. gas, fuel
oil standby, 8000 cmm, 2700
lb/hr (dry out), 1200-1500° F
1x10^ Btu/hr, nat. gas, 500-
600 lb/hr (dry out), 1400° F
24x10^ Btu/hr, nat. gas, diesel
oil standby, 3541.7 lb/hr (max)
30-85,000 lb/24 hr
32x10^ Btu/hr, nat. gas, diesel
oil standby, 3541.7 lb/hr (max)
80-85,000 lb/24 hr
2 (? 12,000 gals, 2 @ 15,000 gals,
1 @ 63,000 gals - all<.05% sulfur
a. On standby during inspection -
7,800 gals in last 24 hr
Avg. 8,000 gals/24 hr for
both furnaces & large dryer
Fuel oil #2 used about 7-14
days/winter
b. 200-250,000 therms/24 hr
Control Equipment list:
Unit
1) Small dryer afterburner
2) Large dryer afterburner
3) North furnace (51)
af terburner
4) South furnace (52)
afterburner
5) Chlorination bells
Specs
3xl06 Btu/hr, 2329 scfm
8x10^ Btu/hr
2x10^ Btu/hr, 6668 scfm
2x10 Btu/hr
30-40 water sprays in
enclosed system
Efficiency
87.23% for part.
92.4% for part.
A-31
-------
Chlorination Source Test (4/19/75):
Used 10' stainless steel probe of 3/8" tubing, polyethylene
line, impingers, pump & gas meter.
Meter rate of 1 cfm.
Probe end placed 4-5" above water surface and about 10'
downwind of scrubber and fall line.
Only trace amounts of present at outfall.
Vjfv'--; t -
Source Test: CO, HC from rotary borings dryer afterburner:
(June 6 & 21, 1974)
Flow rate: 700 lb/hr
Instruments:
- gas absorption-type Hays Orsat Analyzer (C02, 02» CO)
- flame ionization-type Beckman HC Analyzer - Model 109A
and a fuel cell-type Envirometrics Analyzer with
recorder (CO, NO )
x
Sample of gas also collected in an aluminum coated mylar bag
(grab sample) and analyzed with Hewlett-Packard gas
chromatograph.
C ~.A 'Cr
Mofpf: K.
3
f"* G. fc V. \'\
~ 7
row T
-J
G-ps? Pcfc-r; (V)
&Gti=*r. / l i_,V ~~j
-i-
A-32
-------
Estimated emissions - using factors from AP-42 (7.8-1 sec. alum.)
Actual emissions - from source tests:
1) Sweating furnaces (dryers)
a. Uncontrolled particulates
Small dryer (700 lb/hr max.):
14.5 lb/1 x .35 T/hr = 5.075 lb/hr
Large dryer (2700 lb/hr):
14.5 lb/T x 1.35 T/hr = 19.575 lb/hr
Yearly: 24 h/d x 5 d/w x 52 w/y - 6240 h/y
Small dryer - 5.075 lb/hr x 6240 h/y = 15.834 T/Y
Large dryer - 19.575 lb/hr x 6240 h/y = 61.074 T/Y
b. Controlled
Small dryer:
Source test - .648 lb/hr
this yields 1-.648/5.075 = 87.23% efficiency
Allowable is 1.9 lb/hr for 700 lb/hr process wt.
Large dryer:
No source test - assume same efficiency
19.575 lb/hr x .1277 - 2.50 lb/hr
Allowable is 4.4 lb/hr for 2700 lb/hr process wt.
Efficiency could be as low as 78% and still be
within allowable.
2) Double well furnaces
a. Uncontrolled
Reverb. (3541.7 lb/hr max. or 1.77 T/hr)
4.3 lb/T x 1.77 T/hr = 7.62 lb/hr
Yearly: 24 h/d x 5 d/w x 52 w/y = 6240 h/y
7.62 lb/hr x 6240 h/y = 23.77 T/Y
b. Controlled
Process wt. = 3,000 lb/hr or 1.5 T/hr average
Source test - 0.49 lb/hr
At 3,000 lb/hr -> emissions = 1.5 T/h x 4.3 lb/T = 6.45 lb/hr
(uncontrolled - above was for 3541.7 lb/hr)
So, efficiency = 1-0.49/6.45 = 92.4%
For max. rate: 7.62 lb/hr x .076% = 0.58 lb/hr
Allowable is 5.2 lb/hr for 3541 lb/hr process wt.
3) Chlorination
a. Uncontrolled
1,000 lb of part./ton of CI2 gas used
3,500 lb (1.75 T) of Cl2 used per 24 hr
1.75 T/D x 1,000 lb/T = 1750 lb/day (max.) = 72.92 lb/hr
Yearly: 24 h/d x 5 d/w x 52 w/y = 6240 h/y
6240 h/y x 72.92 = 227.5 T/Y
Average of 55,000 lb Cl2/month (27.5 T) or 480 h/month
55,000 lb/m v 480 h/m * 114.58 lb/hr of Cl2
114.58 lb/hr x 1000 lb/ton * 2000 lb/ton = 57.29 lb
of part./hr (avg.)
A-33
-------
So, uncontrolled emissions range from 57.29
to 12.^2 lb/hr
b. Controlled
Source test: .000362 ppm by vol. emissions of
Summary of uncontrolled emissions - yearly (part.)
Small dryer = 15.834 T/Y
Large dryer = 61.074 T/Y
North furnace = 23.770 T/Y
South furnace = 23.770 T/Y
Chlorination = 227.510 T/Y
351.960 T/Y
A-34
-------
III. Liston Brick Co.
20401 Temescal Canyon Rd.
Corona, Cal. 91720
Operations:
Alum, scrap melting 6000 h/y
Alum, scrap charging 4858 h/y
Scrap decontamination (chip dryer) 4500 h/y
24 h/d
24 h/d
18 h/d
Raw material:
Material
Usage rate:
Alum, scrap
Flux (Na, Cryolite)
Turnings, greasy scrap
Avg-
1755 lb/hr
88 lb/hr
Max.
3800 lb/hr
(2000 lb/day)
3000 lb/hr
Production: 20 T/day of alum, ingots
Fuel Combustion:
Reverb. & afterburner - 96 x 10^ Cfy nat. gas (1050 Btu/cf)
16 x 10 Cfh
standby: 85 gal/hr fuel oil
Chip dryer afterburner - 48 x 10^ Cfy nat. gas (1050 Btu/cf)
6.7 x 10 Cfh
Emissions
Part. - 0.35 lb/hr
CO - 80 ppm
4.3 lb/hr
NO 0.4 lb/hr
x
Allowable
Tons/year (actual)
3.4 lb/hr (
2000 ppm
Rule 405
for 1755 lb/hr)
1.1
12.9
1.2
Equipment List:
Unit
Reverb, furnace
Af terburner
Chip dryer
Af terburner
Specs
6.4 x 10^ Btu/h burners (2), capacity: 74,000 lb, nat.gas
Hirt model, 6000 scfm, t = 1200 F, exhaust t = 600 F,
residence time =0.3 sec., vel. = 26 fps
Standby melting furnace
A-35
-------
Several violations have occurred over the years.
Process description:
Scrap is composed of turnings, airplane clippings, beer cans,
sows (50% of scrap produced in sweating operations that melt
alum, off of iron). The scrap goes to a rotary chip dryer,
with an afterburner. After the dryer, the decontaminated
scrap is conveyed over a magnet to remove bits of iron. It
then goes to a reverb, furnace with an afterburner. The
clippings are charged every 10 min., the turnings at 5 min.
intervals. Flux material (NaCl, KC1, Cryolite) is used about
3 times per day. Chlorine gas is used for demagging on about
3 melts per month. Silicon, copper, and other alloying metals
are added to the melt which is cast into ingot molds. The
finished product contains about 85% alum., 9% silicon, and
small amounts of Cu, Fe, Zn and others.
A-36
-------
Rules
The rule numbers referred to previously deal with the allowable
emissions. These rules are peculiar to each air control district.
The rule numbers change over the years as the district boundaries
change.
Riverside Air Pollution Control District:
Rule 52 - particulate matter concentration
Volume discharged (cu.ft./min.) Max. concentration allowed
calculated as DSCF in discharged gas gr/DSCF
<1000 0.200
1200 0.187
>250,000 0.010
Rule 50 - deals with Ringelmann chart
Rule 54 - solid particulate matter - weight - not in excess
of 0.5 lb/ton of process wt. fed per hr
South Coast Air Quality Management District:
Rule 404 - particulate matter concentration
Rule 405 - solid particulate matter - weight
Rule 407 - liquid and gaseous air contaminants
CO not greater than 2000 ppm
SIC's
3361 - alum foundries (castings)
3341 - sec. nonferrous metals
A-37
-------
Trip Report
Place: Indiana State Board of Health
Air Pollution Control Division
1330 W. Michigan St.
Indianapolis, Ind. 46206
Person Contacted: Ed Stresino
Chief, Enforcement Branch
Date: June 29, 1978
I visited the State Board of Health in order to obtain emission inven-
tory and file information. According to the literature, there are five
secondary aluminum plants in Indiana. I was able to get EI information on
two of these plus one additional plant: Barmet of Indiana, Inc. which is an
aluminum dross recycling plant. I was able to get file information on one
of the five plus the Barmet plant. I discovered that the R. J. Fitzpatrick
Co., one of the five listed, is really a zinc plant. The following table
shows the information obtained:
Company
Town
EI
File
1.
Apex International Alloys Inc.
Bicknell
No
No
2.
U. S. Reduction Co.
E. Chicago
Yes
No
3.
R. J. Fitzpatrick
Seymour
-Zinc
Plant
4.
South Bend Smelting and Re-
fining Co.
South Bend
No
No
5.
Wabash Alloys
Wabash
Yes
Yes
6. Barmet of Indiana, Inc. Rockport Yes Yes
A-38
-------
Emission Inventory Information
Notes:
Control equipment codes:
1 - wet scrubber - high efficiency (95+)
2 - wet scrubber - medium efficiency (80-95)
5 - gravity collector - medium efficiency
16 - fabric filter - high temperature
18 - fabric filter - low temperature
21 - direct flame afterburner
47 - vapor recovery system
Emissions in tons/year.
Measured emissions are the potential emissions with no control.
Fuel process/operating rate is the annual amount - the units depend
on the SCC no.
Maximum design rate is the maximum hourly rate - the units depend on
the SCC no.
1) Barmet of Indiana, Inc.
Co. Rd. 200 N. and Co. Rd. 50 W
Rockport, Ind. 47635
Spencer County AQCR: 77 Plant ID: 0013
Contact: John Voges Phone: (812) 649-2294
UTM: X - 494.7 Y - 4196.0
SIC: 3341
SCC: 30400102 - Aluminum dross recycling
7 locations to one stack
Operates 24 h/d, 7 d/w, 52 w/y
Control equipment: primary: 2 Efficiency = 99%
secondary: 16
TSP emissions: estimate: 3 Emission Factor: 1.9
measured: 1092
allowed: 31
2) U.S. Reduction Co.
4610 Kennedy Ave.
E. Chicago, Ind. 46312
Lake County AQCR: 67 Plant ID: 0084
Phone: (219) 397-9000 UTM: Y - 461.5 Y - 4608.6
Point 01 - Space heating SCC: 10200603 SIC:3341
Operates 24 h/d, 7 d/w, 21 w/y
A-39
-------
Emission
Pollutant Control Measured Allowed Factor
TSP 11 10
CO - 1 26 17
S02 - 1 1 0.6
NO - 1 1 120
h£ - 11 3
Fuel: 3 Max.: 0.001
Point 02: Preheat Hmt Pot Exhaust SCC:
Operates 24 h/d, 7 d/w, 21 w/y
10200602 SIC: 3344
Pollutant
Control
Estimated Measured
Allowed
Emission
Factor
TSP
CO
S02
NO
1
2
0
24
0
1
2
1
24
1
55
2
610
24
1
10
17
0.6
230
3
Fuel:
210
Max.: 028
Point 03: Chlorination Stand No. 1 SCC: 30400103 SIC: 3341
30400104
Operates 24 h/d, 6 d/w, 52 w/y
Pollutant Control Efficiency Estimated Measured
TSP 21
CO 21
S02 21
NO 21
h£ 21
95
95
95
95
99.9
16
5
1
1
9
312
96
1
1
180
Fuel: 655200
Max.: 87.5
Points 04 and 05: Chlorination Stands No. 2 and No. 5
Same conditions and results as No. 1
Allowed
187
96
1
1
180
Point 06: Chlorination Stand No. 4
Operates 24 h/d, 6 d/w, 52 w/y
SCC: 30400103
30400104
SIC: 3341
Emission
Factor
4.3-nat. gas
12.5-oil
A-40
-------
Emission
Pollutant Control Efficiency Estimated Measured Allowed Factor
TSP 21
CO 21
S02 21
N°x 21
HC 21
Fuel: 374400 Max.
95
95
95
95
99.9
0
0
0
0
178
1
1
1
1
167
1
1
1
1
4.3-nat. gas
12.5-oil
50
Point 07: No. 8 Rotary Flux Furnace SCC: 30400199
Operates 24 h/d, 5 d/w, 57 w/y
Pollutant
TSP
CO
S02
NO
X
HC
Fuel: 78000
Control
16
Efficiency
99.9
Estimated
9
1
1
1
Measured
3000
1
1
1
1
SIC: 3341
Allowed
69
1
1
1
1
Emission
Factor
0.496
.010
.003
.002
Max.
12.5
Point 08: Chlorination Stand No. 9 SCC: 30400103 SCC: 3341
30400104
Operates 24 h/d, 6 d/w, 52 w/y
Pollutant
TSP
CO
S02
N0x
HC
Control
21
21
21
21
21
Fuel: 561600 Max.
Point 09:
Efficiency
95
95
95
95
99.9
75
Estimated
14
3
1
0
2
Milling System SCC: 30400199
Operates 24 h/d, 5 d/w, 52 w/y
Pollutant
Control
TSP 18
Fuel: 78000 Max.
Efficiency Estimated
99.9 11
216.667
Measured
269
50
5
1
43
Allowed
181
50
5
1
1
SCC: 3341
Measured
11040
Allowed
222
Emission
Factor
4.3-nat. gas
12.5-oil
Emission
Factor
283.077
A-41
-------
Point 10: Borings Dryer SCC: 30400199 SIC: 3341
Operates 24 h/d, 5 d/w, 52 w/y
Emission
Pollutant Control Efficiency Estimated Measured Allowed Factor
TSP 21 98.0 10 500 25 23.809
CO 21 98 - - .010
S02 21 98 - 11 .452
NO 21 98 - - .001
HC 21 98 1 20 20 9.524
Fuel: 13104 Max.: 2.1
Point 11: Salt Recovery Plant Boiler SCC: 10200502
Operates 24 h/d, 5 d/w, 52 w/y
SIC:3341
Pollutant Control Efficiency Estimated Measured Allowed
Emission
Factor
TSP
CO
S02
NO
HS
12
3
409
48
2
13
388
24
48
3
59
609
24
48
3
15
4
142
60
3
Fuel: 1605 Max.: 0.27
Point 12: Castings Crusher SCC: 30400199 SIC: 3341 AIF3
Operates 16 h/d, 5 d/w, 52 w/y
Emission
Pollutant Control Efficiency Estimated Measured Allowed Factor
TSP 18 99.9 1 4 16 0.769
Fuel: 10400 Max.: 2.5
3) Wabash Alloys
State Hwy. 24 West
Wabash, Indiana 46992
Contact: K. Habayeb
UTM: X - 596.1 Y - 4516.6
A-42
-------
Point 01: 13 Aluminum Reverb. Stacks
Operates 24 h/d, 7 d/w, 52 w/y
Pollutant Control Efficiency Estimated
TSP 5 80 33
Fuel: 75000 Max.: 8.0
TSP 1 99 26
Fuel: 40425 Max.: 1.0
SCC: 30400103
30400104
SIC: 3341
Measured Allowed
162
253
72
49
Emission
Factor
4.3-nat. gas
12.5-oil
Point 02: Three Chip Dryers SCC: 30400199 SIC: 3341
Operates 24 h/d, 7 d/w, 52 w/y
Pollutant Control
TSP
HC
Fuel: 14000
47
Max. :
Efficiency
98
5.25
Estimated Measured Allowed
0
0
180
59
59
9
Emission
Factor
Point 03: Dross Mill SCC: 30400199 SIC: 3341
Operates 12 h/d, 5 d/w, 52 w/y
Pollutant Control Efficiency Estimated Measured Allowed
TSP
Fuel: 16305
18 99.5
Max.: 11.9
0
8228
85
A-43
-------
Permit Information
1) Wabash Alloys
1974 data:
Total production
Flux received
Total chlorine received
Total caustic received
Total dross received
Total scrap received
Total shredder production
Total chip dryers production
140,600,000 lbs.
15,000,000 lbs.
823 tons
693 tons
87,000,000 lbs.
162,000,000 lbs.
8,242,079 lbs.
32,180,000 lbs.
Shredder:
capacity - 15 tons/yr
production - 6,00-10,000 lb/yr, 12 hr/day
no control
Chip dryers (3): capacity - 10,000 lb/hr (each)
production - 5,000 lb/hr (each)
control - afterburner 1300-1500° F 20 hr/day
Distribution of scrap:
20-30% direct to furnace
20-25% to dryers
10-15% to shredders
15-20% from dross
15% radiators, etc. - direct to furnace
Reverb, furnaces - avg. values:
nat. gas fuel - 16,000 cu.ft./hr.
charge 18 hr/day, 5 d/w, 50 w/y
50 tons batch (2.5 tons/hr in, 2.0 tons/hr out)
hoods recirculate gases thru burner
Demagging by chlorination:
3.5-4.0 lb chlorine/bl. Mg removed
lh hours per batch
scrubber used - 99% eff.
approx 200 lbs. Mg removed per batch
Dross process:
20% metal recovered
80% chlorides, A1 oxides, Na, F goes to
2 Wheelabrator-Frye baghouses
A-44
-------
2) Barmet of Indiana, Inc.
Dross recycling plant - not scrap
Currently installing 3 baghouses (1.5 million dollars)
design gas vol. 80,000 cu.ft./min.
380° F
AP = 4" H20
eff. = 99.5% (design)
Nomex bags - 44,160 sq.ft. filter area
A/C = 1.81:1
Collects NaCl and AI2O3
Raw materials:
NaCl - 3,420 lb/hr
Alum, dross - 4,050 lb/hr
Process wt. through baghouse: 7,470 lb/hr (32,719 tons/yr)
1976 melting operations - rotary furnace
nat. gas fired - 146,000 MCF/yr (16.7 MCF/hr)
metal cast - .875 ton/hr, 21 ton/day, 7,665 ton/yr
charge composition - A1 furnace skim: 67%
NaCl: 33%
An emission sampling test is attached.
A-45
-------
I 11 wt
EMISSION' SAMPLING TEST
BAfljMET
itOCKPOivT, INDIANA
February 24» 1976
Conducted By:
Indiana State Board of Healtn
Air Pollution Control Division
Emissions Sampling Section
A-46
-------
INTRODUCTION
7
t
On February 24, 1976, tot^l particulate and particulate fluoride and chloride
testa were conducted at the Barmqt Plant ITumber two in Rockport, Indiana. The
tests were conducted in conjunction with ambient suspended particulate sampling
to determine the compliance status of the plant with Indiana APC-5 and APC-20.
The particulate sampled collected from tlie stack were analytically compacted
to the ambient samples. The^ testing was conducted in acoordance with the
State ol' Indiana, Air Pollution Control Board's Source Sampling Policy and
EPA Method 5.
Test Personnel:
Indiana State Board of Health
Air Pollution Control Division
Emissions Sampling Section
Paul Dubenetzky, Chief
Daniel F. Hancock
Philip A. Peterson
Richard T. Sekula
A—4,7
-------
Process Information
Barmet is an aluminum dross reclamation plant. Plant 2 consists of three
rotary furnaces whose emissions are controlled by baghouses. A water spray is
introduced to the gas stream to cool it to approximately 250°F prior to entering
the baghouse. The gases exit from individual stacks sixty feet above ground.
The furnaces are charged with lump and dust dross and sodium chloride. The
average charge i'or the testing period was 33»l390 pounds. This can be broken down
as 11,130 pounds lump dross, 9120 dust dross, and 13,140 pounds sodium chloride.
The dross is processed l'or four hours. The furnace is then tapped and depending
on the aluminum content of the dross, between 4»50<"1 and 12,000 pounds of aluminum
axe recovered.
The torn bags were replaced on February 23, but not changed on ~the baghouse
tested on the 24th at the request of Paul Dubenetzky of the Indiana State Board
of Health. Daily replacement of torn bags is said to be normal operating pro-
cedure and four bags were replaced on the other operating baghouse on February 24.
Sampling and Analytical Procedures < ¦' o v •'
0
The particulate test was conducted 'vising the sampling train shown in Appendix
17. The particulate matter was collected by the filter located in the heated portion
of the sample box. Moisture content was determined by condensing the water vapor
in the impinger train located in the ice bath portion of the sample box. Carbon
Dioxide and oxygen content of the exhaust gas was measured using Bacharach Fyxite
analyzers.
Three $6 minute sampling runs comprised the test. The temperature and velocity
pressure of the flue gas was measured ,at each sampling point while collecting
the sample at that point. The ^low ratd in the sampling line was adjusted accord-
ing to the Isokinetic Sampling Formula (Appendix II).
The middle furnace in the trow of three furnaces was sampled for this test.
Samples were oollected only during the charging operation to obtain worfes case
emissions. Sinoe this furnace's operation oannot be considered to be identical
A-48
-------
to the other, both furnaces cannot be assumed to have equal emission rates.
The western most furnace was not operating during the test. Visible emissions
evaluation was not possible due to not being able to distinguish the steam in
the plume from the particulate emissions.
Only total particulate was originally planned to be sampled with a ohloride
analysis to be conducted to connect thd i>lant emissions to the ambieiit particulate
samples. During the test U. S. EPA representative James Adams requested a fluoride
analysis. Since laboratory distilled water is necessary to oollect gaseous fluo-
rides and this was not available to the Emission Sampling Section, only particulate
fluorides could be collected. Other chemical species were analyzed on both the
stacks, emission and ambient samples. A separate report will be prepared on these
analyses, but a summary of the species and the analytic method can be found below:
CHEMICAL SPECIES ANALYTICAL METHOD
Total Particulate Gravimetric
Fluorides Specific and ion Electrode
Chlorides Fotentiometrio Silver Nitrata Titration.
Aluminum Fluorometric Determination
Manganese, Magnesium, Atomic Absorption
Calcium, Sodium
A-49
-------
RESULTS SUMMARY
The particulate emission rate was calculated by determining the particulate
concentration and multiplying by the gas 1*1 ow rate in the stack. These calcu-
lations can be foupd in Appendix VII. The results ol' the emissions test are
tabulated below:
(lbs/hr)
Total for both Furnaces
. Run Iro.l
, Run No.2
. Run No.3 •
Average
Maximum Allowable Total
Particulate ESniss.Rate |
17.0
17.0
17.0
T
17.0
Total Part.Rate
8.04
•9.98
16.6
11.5
....
Part .fluoride Rate
(lbs/hr) _ , _l_
0.20
0.36
0.22
10.26
Isokinetic Sampling
JirtiM.-. .u
_ 1,06
100
104
10?
MAXIMUM ALLQWABLE5 EMISSION RATE
Particulate emissions from process operation are regulated by Indiana APC-5
(Appendix ). Process weight! for the middle fuxnacd was monitored and tike aver-
age charge was determined to bp 33>390 poimds. Since the operating cycle is four
hours this represents a procei? weight rate of 8348 pounds per hour. Even though
the second furnace's emissions oazmot be assumed to be equal to the ode. which
was tested* its process weight rate can be considered a? roughly equal. There-
fore the total prooess weight ,rate for plant two was 16695 pounds per hour or
8.35 tons per hour. Calculation of the maximum allowable emission rate for pro-1
cess weight rates less ihan 60,000 pounds per hour is accomplished using the
following equation:.
E = 4.10 P°*67
where: E a rate of emission in pounds per hour
P - Process weight rate in tons per hour
E - 4-10 P 0,67
E - 4.10 (8.35) 0,67
E ¦ 17*0 pounds per hour
A-50
-------
Industry and Agency Correspondence and Information
The following section contains the correspondence sent to various
industries and regulatory agencies and the responses and information (if
any) received from them. Two emission test reports are not included due
to their large size. One is from The Allied Metal Company in Chicago,
Illinois, and the other is from IERL in Cincinnati, Ohio, concerning
The Rochester Smelting and Refining Co. Both reports deal with the
coated baghouse. These reports are available from either TRC or EPA
upon request.
A-51
-------
,\bl^
ny/ealth or PennSVlv
«. & ^
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES
Post Office Box 2063
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17120
June 15, 1978
TRC
125 Silas Deane Highway
Wethersfield, Connecticut 06109
Attention: Mr. Ed Brookman
Gentlemen:
As requested in our telephone conversation of June 7, 1978
I am sending a copy of the emission inventory form for the Gettysburg
Foundry Specialities Company for the calendar year 1976.
If you have further questions regarding this matter please
do not hesitate to contact me.
Very truly yours
James R. Benson
Chief, Case Section
Division of Abatement and Compliance
Bureau of Air Quality Control
Enclosure
A-52
-------
PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES
BUREAU OF AIR QUALITY AND NOISE CONTROL
FORMATS VERSION Q1
|fmMC006.2g,|^2gyj3 KANT:
ADOS ONLY-TRANSACTION
FIRM NAME
0011
PLANT
MAMC
S»C
COO€
vm
LOCATION
COOC
POLITICAL SUBDIVISION
ANO COUNTY NAME
AP-FlLE
NUMBER
(10S>
NEDS—IO
NUMBER
ON-SITE
DISPOSAL?
006)
OPEN
BURN?
CW>
. .'WXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX - %^
31*1 4L1LL xxxxxxxxxxxxxx xx-$Ofcfe xxxx t/o. wo_
STREET——PLANT ADDRESS CITY
d | »0t) (1101
ZIP
-» r—V« -«
*""*J
-------
FOMMUVIRSiONOl
PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES
BUREAU OF AIR QUALITY AND NOISE CONTROL
I F»**M COO€: 21.111^1
PLANT: Qi
PROCESS-IO: i9i.
AOOS ONLY-TRANSACTION
NAME OR TYPE OP PROCfSt OA OPERATION
a pa*
PROCESS COOS
W)
MATERIAL PROCESSS> OR PBOPUCED-NAMaCOOE
(SO«l ($09)
NCOS SCC OOOC
(601)
PERMIT-NUM
007)
OftOER-NUM
GEl(Sot)
AJUOONT ANNUAL THRUPUT UNITS/COOE
(*9) (51*
.1*^18-0 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Ql
process exhaust actual
ACTUAL-VOLUME STANOAftO-VOLUME MOIST
Bl isti)* (Mi* (tin
ML DATA
YEAR
Otl)
*2 xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
ixxxxxKxxx
&«**. %T i4J.
EM* 5»i_
S99a §2i_
.„sa
i*
. j.;
—
(MS*
MZ 7--' - -«-o
4 1
7 L*
(597) 099)
xxxxxxxxxxx S
REL
IAS
(599)
ALLOWABLE EMISSIONS
LBS/HR* CALC-COOE
(57Q) (971)
XXXXXXXXXXX •
_1.3 XXXXXXXXXXX i"
..f.i XXXXXXXXXXX &
5.1 xxxxxxxxxxx (i
XXXXXXXXXXX _
.... XXXXXXXXXXX _
_L_._ XXXXXXXXXXX
I:
XXXXXXXXXXX -
jJ,,. _ , XXXXXXXXXXX„. __
__1
vm
REGULATION
(»«l
Lli.ii 1
7" "*1
-------
FORMATS VERSION Ot
PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES
BUREAU OF AIR QUALITY AND NOISE CONTROL
FWM COO€ V!-
flANT: Pi
PROCESS-iO:
NAME OR TYPE Of PROCESS OR OPERATION
IB <»«>
PROCESS COOS
(sou
MATERIAL PROCESSEO OR fROOOCCO-MAME/COOE
(S04) (90S)
NCOS SCC COOE
(MS)
AOOS ONLY-TRANSACTION
PERMIT-NUM
t»n
AMOUNT ANNUAL THRUPU1 UNITS/COOE YEAR
nm <»«i
33JSI ' "
AVERAGE TMRUPUT/HR
MAX/1 IR OPER CAP LIMIT-UNlTSSCOOE
(Sit) (S13)
(XXX
Ik
Z>ZZX.X xxxxxxxx
-i-Sta-a,
Ol
INSTALLATION-CMTE
<*")
01 -M-i&
.j
moccssnMAusT actual actual
ACTUAL-VOLUME STANDARD-VOLUME VMOtST TEUP-f
m (!¦»• (tit)
HOUHMKMTB
AVBD DAY/yn TOTAL/m
KM) (iM| (Uty
« TMHUPUT Ptfl QUAHTEA
111 2nd 3rd
1*11) WW (323)
-• _•
FU£L OATA _
...ll-li'S'
•hiQ
Vi*:zm * TTwT"-*?"" 1m
(S24)
"U7
UNK COOES
ABC
(US) (52*) C$27)
S2* fcf ...
.nr.o
FUEL — TYPE
RATED INPUT
ANNUAC
SULF
ASH
BTU/LB*
HOURS OPERATEO
%
% THRUPUT/OUARTER
COOE
BTU
AMOUNT
UNIT -- COOE
%
%
OAL-FTS
AVE/O
OAY/YR
TOTAL/YR
IN 8n* 3rd 4lh
UM
(SSI)
(632)
(S33)
(SS4)
(SSS)
(SM)
(SW)
(S43)
. (S30)
(539) ($40) (S41) (S42)
P^YjXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
• 3*oa&*dsa
Lfe*lQft
XXXXXXXKXXXXXXXXX 06.
lfi.fi.
— £«*S6
^•9
-1Q -iS .ifi .I7j
^.JUXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
EMISSION OATA-BASB) ON FIELDS SOS ANO ft» .
XXXXXXXKXXXXXXXXX
POLLUTANT
iza
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
FUFL STACK
COOE X) 10
(SSI) (902) (S73)
Cma. Sfii_
Sai-
ls*! __ 5«i.
B«oq jj" §o<
POTENTIAL EMISSIONS REL
LISM« BASIS COOE IA8
(M3) (S04) (SOS)
xxxxxxxxxxx ST H
i-i xxxxxxxxxxx 2 %
1.2 xxxxxxxxxxx *3
9*7 xxxxxxxxxxx 5" \
«_•_ xxxxxxxxxxx . . ' _
XXXXXXXXXXX _
xxxxxxxxxxx _ .
.... xxxxxxxxxxx
ACTUAL EMISSIONS
LBS/HR* TONS/YEAR* BASIS COOE
(Mi) (SOT) (6M)
-Q
. 1-Q
xxxxxxxxxxx _
d.9 xxxxxxxxxxx 9
xxxxxxxxxxx 3
.1.7 xxxxxxxxxxx &
_1.2 xxxxxxxxxxx V
xxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxx -
xxxxxxxxxxx _
XXXXXXXXXXX -
^.-.•^. XXXXXXXXXXX.
REL
MB
3
7
a
ALLOWABLE EMISSIONS
LBS/HR* CALC-COOE
(S70) (S71)
REGULATION
(S72)
Mi
Ill
11
-------
FOIIUATC VERSION Oi
PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES
BUREAU OF AIR QUALITY AND NOISE CONTROL
T
Ui
CT>
Ifirmcooe
plant: QL
PftOCESS-ID: 11* _
NAME OR m>t or moccss OH OHMTION
SI ism
AMOUNT ANNUM. TMRUPUT UN4TVCOOC
PROCESS COOE
K03)
MATERIAL PROCESSED OR WKWUCEfrHAMMOW
(MM) (S06)
NCOS SCC COOC
AOOS ONLY-TRANSACTION
PEAMIT-NUM
<»n
YEAR
<*")
211*1 Q^Ltfial 1
AVERAGE THftUPUTSHH
3aXaa.La3
MJUUHH-OTEH CAP UMT-UNITS/COOC
<»U>
(SI3)
IN8TAUATION-OATE
|*I4)
Ji'lil-S XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
at
PHOCCSS EXHAUST ACTUAL
ACTUAL-VOLUME STAMOAJKMFOLUMC VMOIST
IT1 (51I)« • ¦ (Sl«f (SIT)
Q&
ACTUAL
TEMP#
ZtZZX.X XXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX OA .
QZ-dft-SZ-
-T1
HOURS-OPERATED
AVE/O DAY/m TOTAl/YR
(9UI I62«| (*20)
% TMRUPUT PER QUARTER
M 2nd 9r4
(Ul) («22) (&23)
{••
FUEL DATA
.11.air
Ji
.21- .1?
-71
(524)
_LZr*
A
(S2S)
LINK COOES
8 C
(5») («n
FUEL — TYPE
COOE
DAWR
TOTAL/YR
tat
2nd
3rd
411%
(M3|
(M4) (S3S)
(US)
(83T»
<&*>
.(«•)
(SMI
(S40|
(S41)
(342)
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX £6
Vi-v
i2£
.LI
-3^
-1^
-tr.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 23
_2-S"_ L1* 3
> xxxxxxxxxxx i~ 3
xxxxxxxxxxx S" J
• 2.1- xxxxxxxxxxx S~ 3
¦ 1.1 XXXXXXXXXXX T "" J
• xxxxxxxxxxx _
. ._ xxxxxxxxxxx _ ' _
_.i.r nv
ill.13 .
Lll.Ll
-------
FOftUATS VfRSKM O! .
PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES
BUREAU OF AIR QUALITY AND NOISE CONTROL
[FIRM COOC is i VJ32
PLANT: * (it?) (fit) pu) octt*oAO iL*3^id .xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 9£. _Q*Q^ tt-S 1SD ...'Vltifa
» _• XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX —• — •- - _•
% TBRUPUT/QUARTER
1»1 2nd 3rd 4tft
(430) (940) (441) (942)
.tfo _M „ 10
(491) (942) (973)
Pass 3al
&3_
_____ 5;3_
POTENTIAL EMISSIONS REL
LBS/HA* BASIS COOE IAS
(443) (444) (444)
..1*1 xxxxxxxxxxx S"
1-fc xxxxxxxxxxx 6 *L
0.1 xxxxxxxxxxx S" 3
----- xxxxxxxxxxx -
xxxxxxxxxxx _ ^
xxxxxxxxxxx _
XXXXXXXXXXX
.... xxxxxxxxxxx _
xxxxxxxxxxx ..
ACTUAL EMISSIONS
LBS/HR* TONS/YEAR*
(444) (547)
COOE
(444)
5? - • 9-9 xxxxxxxxxxx
*
® • /.? xxxxxxxxxxx &
3 1.3 xxxxxxxxxxx S*
•_ XXXXXXXXXXX
• xxxxxxxxxxx »
- • xxxxxxxxxxx _
- ---xxxxxxxxxxx _
t. xxxxxxxxxxx _
. xxxxxxxxxxx _
REL
IAS
(449)
3
1
V
ALLOWABLE EMISSIONS
LBS/HR* CALC-COOE
(470) (471)
~i.* m
REGULATION
(572)
ill
13
— I
-------
FORMATS VERSION Gt
PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES
BUREAU OF AIR QUALITY AND NOISE CONTROL
IFIRM coot Ti-
name oa rm of process on operation
a tm
PLANT: O£
PAOCESS-IO: iof.
PROCESS COOE
MATERIAL PROCESSED OR PRODUCEO-NAME/COOE
*04) (*»}
NEDS SCO CODE
<«•>
AOOS ONLY-TRANSACTION
PEAMIT-NUM
(907)
OROEA-NUM
iftJaiYrf
AMOUNT ANNUAL THMjmi UMTS/CODC
(MM »'«•
(EM
0tt)
yrvni., AyxxSTuivLMS.
AVERAGE TMRUPUT/HR
• lSl-O XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX $3- Qfe
-—yo.*
z.zzx.x xxxxxxxx
4
I*«S|
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ?2-g?-48
MAXMR-OPER CAP LthUT—UNITS/COOE
P12»
MSTAUATION-OATE
PROCESS EXHAUST
ACTUAL-VOLUME STANDARD-VOLUME
m (stst« (Sit»«
_• • 1 _ • - • «3oa
FUEL DATA
ACTUAL ACTUAL HOURS-OPERATEO
«-MOtST TEMP# AVE/0 OAY/YR TOTAi/VR
|S17) (SW
ASH
«
(535)
•TU/LA+
oal-fts
(SM)
HOURS OPERATED
AVE/0 OAY/YR TOTAL/YR
(437) (U3) . (&3I)
FUEL -- TYPE
CODE
(530.^
[?£S^
-------
'FORMATS VERSION 02
PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES
BUREAU OF AIR DUALITY AND NOISE CONTROL
I HUM coot Tt. - 37
PONT: Pi
PROCESS-JO:
ADDS ONLY-TRANSACTION
NAVE OR TYPE OF PROCESS OR OPERATION
UM IMH
AMOUNT ANNUA! THRUPUT UNITS/COOE
(M*l (t1H
«!• 3s®
process cooe
(903)
MATERIAL PROCESSED Oft PROOUCCO-NAME/COOE
(904) (SOS)
ncdsscccooe
(SOD
PERMIT-NUM
(507)
OROER-NUM
IZl(SOt)
atyei.ceaii
iilault
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
mOCESSEXHAUST
ACTUAL-VOLUME STANOARO-VOLUME
CO (Sli)* <9*)*
YEAR
2*2ZX.X XXXXXXXX
MAX/IIH OPER CAP LMMT-UNIT8/COOE
(912) (913)
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx o/
IMSTALLATION-OATE
(514)
ei-«-68
ACTUAL HOURS-OPERATED
TEMP-f AVE/D OAYVYR TOTAL/YR 1*
(916) (929) (Saoi (921)
% THRUPUT PER QUARTER
2nd 3rd
(522) (523)
4th
(524)
LINK COOES
(825) (929) (927)
r
Ul
vo
-• -.Attfl -• •
j3 «
£•320
.ir
-i*
.Lr
UNIT
FUEL DATA
fUEL -- TYPE
CODE
| juxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx • . »_ . xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I Ixxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx • ...... xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
RATE0 INPUT
BTU
("II
ANNUAL
AMOUNT
(532)
SULF
COOE %
(533) (934)
ASH
%
(535)
BTU/LB* HOURS OPERATED
OAL-m AVE/D DAY/YR T0TA1AR
(S3*) (W7) (543) (539)
% THRUPUT/OUARTER
Ut 2nd 3rd 4tft
(539) (540) (541) ($42)
EMISSION DATA-BASED ON FIELDS MB AND HO .
POLLUTANT
na
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
FUfL STACK
COOE 10 ib
(Ml) (562) (973)
Baas 5a(>_
POTENTIAL EMISSIONS
LBS/HR* BASIS COOE
(963) (M4)
.U-Q xxxxxxxxxxx 4
. XXXXXXXXXXX -
_ xxxxxxxxxxx _
_ xxxxxxxxxxx _
_ xxxxxxxxxxx _
_ XXXXXXXXXXX -
_ xxxxxxxxxxx ....
_ xxxxxxxxxxx _
XXXXXXXXXXX
ACL ACTUAL EMISSIONS
IAB LBS/HR* TONS/YEAR* BASIS COOE
(919) (969) (967) (599)
I ft../. Q.l xxxxxxxxxxx S
xxxxxxxxxxx ^
, XXXXXXXXXXX _
xxxxxxxxxxx «.
, ... xxxxxxxxxxx «
. »_ • xxxxxxxxxxx _
, , ... xxxxxxxxxxx .
. . xxxxxxxxxxx «
xxxxxxxxxxx «.
(960)
ALLOWABLE EMISSIONS
LBS/HR* CALC-CODE
(970) (571)
REGULATION
(572)
.a
3 m
m
L3
— i
-------
™EJ
THE RESEARCH CORPORATION of New England
UAS DEANS HIGHWAY, WETHERSFIELD, CONNECTICUT 0«109 203 563-1431
Environmental Consultants To Management
June 12, 1978
Mr. Tom Hendon
U.S. Reduction Co.
P.O. Box 30
4610 Kennedy Avenue
E. Chicago, Indiana 46312
Dear Mr. Hendon:
TRC - THE RESEARCH CORPORATION of New England is currently performing
a screening study of the secondary aluminum manufacturing industry for the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This study is being performed under
EPA Contract Number 68-02-2615 between TRC and the Emission Standards and
Engineering Division of EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.
Background data on the industry is being gathered to help determine the
need for development of standards of performance pursuant to Section III
of the Clean Air Act. We would appreciate your cooperation in providing
us with the information requested in Table 1 for each plant in your region.
As noted in the enclosed letter from Mr. Walter Barber of EPA, TRC has
been designated by EPA as an authorized representative of the Agency.
Therefore, TRC is subject to the provision of 42 U.S.C. 1857c9 (c) respect-
ing confidentiality of methods or processed entitled to protection as trade
secrets. If you believe that disclosure of any information requested would
reveal trade secrets or other confidential information, you should clearly
identify such information. If you wish, you may also set forth reasons for
your claim and include supportive data or legal authority at the time the
information is submitted (in most cases, there will be an opportunity to
do so later if a question concerning public availability of information
arises). If no such claim is made, the Information may be released to the
public without further notice to you.
Due to the relatively short time frame of this screening study, your
prompt reply would be very much appreciated. Please let us know if you can
meet a June 30, 1978 deadline. Thank you for your voluntary cooperation
In this study.
Sincerely,
TRC - THE RESEARCH CORPORATION
of New England
~7.
Edward T. Brookman
Associate Project Engineer
ETB/daa
Attachments
A-60
Service tailored to the ctiem's need - backed by research
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
DESIGNATION OF AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE
The Research Corporation of New England (TRC), is hereby designated
an Authorized Representative of the Administrator of the U. S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency for purposes of (i) assisting in the development
of any implementation, plan under 42 USC 1857c-5, or 42 USC 1856-c(d), any
standard of performance under 42 USC 1856c-6, or any emission standard
under 42 USC 1857c-7, (ii) determining whether any person is in violation
of any such standard or any requirement of such a plan, or (iii) carrying
out 42 USC 1857h-l.
This designation is made pursuant to the Clean Air Act, 42 USC
1857c-9. The United States Code provides that, upon presentation of
this credential, the Authorized Representative named herein: (A) shall
have a right of entry to, upon, or through any premises in which an
emission source is located or in which records required to be maintained
under 42 USC 1857c-9(a)(1) are located, and (B) may at reasonable times
have access to and copy any records, inspect any monitoring equipment or
method required under 42 USC 1857c-9(a)(1), and sample any emissions
which the owner or operator of such source is required to sample.
Authorized Representatives of the Administrator are subject to
the provisions of 42 USC 1857c-9(c) respecting confidentiality of
methods or processes entitled to protection as trade secrets.
Date: sS""~ C9 78
Designation Expires: September 30, 1978
Deputy Ass Air Quality
Planning and Standards
A-61
-------
L- pil p |rpd THE RESEARCH CORPORATION of New England
LI UL)l!=D 125 SILAS OEANE HIGHWAY, WETH6RSFIELD, CONNECTICUT 08109
~Environmental Consultants To Management
203 563-1431
June 12, 1978
Mr. Matt Lydon
Apex International Alloys, Inc.
Suite 215
2340 Des Plaines Avenue
Des Plaines, Illinois 60018
Dear Mr. Lydon:
TRC - THE RESEARCH CORPORATION of New England is currently performing
a screening study of the secondary aluminum manufacturing industry for the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This study i3 being performed under
EPA Contract Number 68-02-2615 between TRC and the Emission Standards and
Engineering Division of EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.
Background data on the industry i3 being gathered to help determine the
need for development of standards of performance pursuant to Section III
of the Clean Air Act. We would appreciate your cooperation in providing
us with the information requested in Table 1 for each plant in your region.
Aa noted in the enclosed letter from Mr. Walter Barber of EPA, TRC has
been designated by EPA as an authorized representative of the Agency.
Therefore, TRC is subject to the provision of 42 U.S.C. 1857c9 (c) respect-
ing confidentiality of methods or processed entitled to protection as trade
secrets. If you believe that disclosure of any information requested would
reveal trade secrets or other confidential information, you should clearly
identify such information. If you wish, you may also sat forth reasons for
your claim and include supportive data or legal authority at the time the
information is submitted (in most cases, there will be an opportunity to
do so later if a question concerning public availability of information
arises). If no such claim is made, the information may be released to the
public without further notice to you.
Dae to the relatively short time frame of this screening study, your
prompt reply would be very much appreciated. Please let us know if you can
meet a June 30, 1978 deadline. Thank you for your voluntary cooperation
in this study.
Sincerely,
TRC - THE RESEARCH CORPORATION
of New England
Edward T. Brookman
Associate Project Engineer
ET3/daa
Attachments A-62
Service tailored to the client's need - backed by research
-------
t> /-V
PRO*4,
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
DESIGNATION OF AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE
The Research Corporation of New England (TRC), is hereby designated
an Authorized Representative of the Administrator of the U. S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency for purposes of (i) assisting in the development
of any implementation, pi an under 42 USC 1857c-5, or 42 USC 1856-c(d), any
standard of performance under 42 USC 1856c-6, or any emission standard
under 42 USC 1857c-7, (ii) determining whether any person is in violation
of any such standard or any requirement of such a plan, or (iii) carrying
out 42 USC 1857h-1.
This designation is made pursuant to the Clean Air Act, 42 USC
1857c-9. The United States Code provides that, upon presentation of
this credential, the Authorized Representative named herein: (A) shall
have a right of entry to, upon, or through any premises in which an
emission source is located or in which records required to be maintained
under 42 USC 1857c-9(a)(1) are located, and (B) may at reasonable times
have access to and copy any records, inspect any monitoring equipment or
method required under 42 USC 1857c-9(a)(1), and sample any emissions
which the owner or operator of such source is required to sample.
Authorized Representatives of the Administrator are subject to
the provisions of 42 USC 1857c-9(c) respecting confidentiality of
methods or processes entitled to protection as trade secrets.
Date: J3 O 78
Designation Expires: September 30, 1978
Deputy Ass Air Quality
Planning and Standards
A-63
-------
l- -iip|r=a THE RESEARCH CORPORATION of New England
U Lr~LlL=3 12S SILAS OEANE HIGHWAY, WETHEHSFIELD, CONNECTICUT 0610S
Environmental Consultants To Management
.203 563-1431
June 12, 1978
Mr. Jack Eagan
Manager of Environmental Control
Metals Division
Vulcan Materials Company
P.O. Box 720
Sandusky, Ohio 44870
Dear Mr. Eagan:
TRC - THE RESEARCH CORPORATION of New England is currently performing
a screening study of the secondary aluminum manufacturing industry for the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This study is being performed under
EPA Contract Number 63-02-2615 betveen TRC and the Emission Standards and
Engineering Division of EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.
Background data on the industry is being gathered to help determine the
need for development of standards of performance pursuant to Section III
of the Clean Air Act. We would appreciate your cooperation in providing
us with the information requested in Table 1 for each plant in your region.
As noted in the enclosed letter from Mr. Walter Barber of EPA, TRC has
been designated by EPA as an authorized representative of the Agency.
Therefore, TRC is subject to the provision of 42 U.S.C. 1857c9 (c) respect-
ing confidentiality of methods or processed entitled to protection as trade
secrets. If you believe that disclosure of any information requested would
reveal trade secrets or other confidential information, you should clearly
identify such information. If you wish, you may also set forth reasons for
your claim and include supportive data or legal authority at the time the
information is submitted (in most cases, there will be an opportunity to
do so later if a question concerning public availability of information
arises). If no such claim is made, the information may be released to the
public without further notice to you.
Due to the relatively short time frame of this screening study, your
prompt reply would be very much appreciated. Please let us know if you can
meet a June 30, 1978 deadline. Thank you for your voluntary cooperation
in this study.
Sincerely,
TRC - THE RESEARCH CORPORATION
of New England
Edward T. Brookman
Associate Project Engineer
ETB/daa
Attachments
A-64
Service tailored fo the client's need - backed by research
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
DESIGNATION OF AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE
The Research Corporation of New England (TRC), is hereby designated
an Authorized Representative of the Administrator of the U. S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency for purposes of (i) assisting in the development
of any implementation, plan under 42 USC 1857c-5, or 42 USC 1856-c(d), any
standard of performance under 42 USC 1856c-6, or any emission standard
under 42 USC 1857c-7, (ii) determining whether any person is in violation
of any such standard or any requirement of such a plan, or (iii) carrying
out 42 USC 1857h-1.
This designation is made pursuant to the Clean Air Act, 42 USC
1857c-9. The United States Code provides that, upon presentation of
this credential, the Authorized Representative named herein: (A) shall
have a right of entry to, upon, or through any premises in which an
emission source is located or in which records required to be maintained
under 42 USC 1857c-9(a)(1) are located, and (B) may at reasonable times
have access to and copy any records, inspect any monitoring equipment or
method required under 42 USC 1857c-9(a)(l), and sample any emissions
which the owner or operator of such source is required to sample.
Authorized Representatives of the Administrator are subject to
the provisions of 42 USC 1857c-9(c) respecting confidentiality of
methods or processes entitled to protection as trade secrets.
Date: >S**- J3 <2 — "78
Designation Expires: September 30, 1978
Deputy Ass Air Quality
Planning and Standards
Walter C. varber
A-65
-------
*—| f ~ |ff~^ THE RESEARCH CORPORATION of New England
U Lrulir^ 12s silas dean6 highway, wethersfielo, connec
CONNECTICUT 06109 203 563-1431
Environmental Consultants To Management
June 8, 1978
Mr. Andrew Sunderland
State Board of Health
Air Pollution Control Division
1330 W. Michigan Avenue
Indianapolis, Indiana 46206
Dear Mr. Sunderland:
TRC - THE RESEARCH CORPORATION of New England is currently performing
a screening study of the secondary aluminum manufacturing industry for the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This study is being performed under
EPA Contract Number 68-02-2615 between TRC and the Emission Standards and
Engineering Division of EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.
Background data on the industry is being gathered to help determine the
need for development of standards of performance pursuant to Section III
of the Clean Air Act. We would appreciate your cooperation in providing
us with the information requested in Table 1 for each plant in your region.
Additionally, information on the best controlled plants in your region
would be appreciated.
As noted in the enclosed letter from Mr. Walter Barber of EPA, TRC has
been designated by EPA as an authorized representative of the Agency.
Therefore, TRC is subject to the provision of 42 U.S.C. 1857c9 (c) respect-
ing confidentiality of methods or processed entitled to protection as trade
secrets. If you believe that disclosure of any information requested would
reveal trade secrets or other confidential information, you should clearly
identify such information. If you wish, you may also set forth reasons
for your claim and include supportive data or legal authority at the time
the information is submitted (in most cases, there will be an opportunity
to do so later if a question concerning public availability of information
arises). If no such claim is made, the information may be released to the
public without further notice to you.
Due to the relatively short time frame of this screening study, your
prompt reply would be very much appreciated. Please let us know if you can
meet a June 30, 1978 deadline. Thank you for your voluntary cooperation
in this study.
Sincerely,
TRC - THE RESEARCH CORPORATION
of New England
Edward T. Brookman
Associate Project Engineer
ETB/daa
Attachments
A-66
Service tailored to the client's need - backed by research
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
DESIGNATION OF AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE
The Research Corporation of New England (TRC), is hereby designated
an Authorized Representative of the Administrator of the U. S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency for purposes of (i) assisting in the development
of any implementation.plan under 42 USC 1857c-5, or 42 USC 1856-c(d), any
standard of performance under 42 USC 1856c-6, or any emission standard
under 42 USC 1857c-7, (ii) determining whether any person is in violation
of any such standard or any requirement of such a plan, or (i 1 i) carrying
out 42 USC 1857h-l.
This designation is made pursuant to the Clean Air Act, 42 USC
1857c-9. The United States Code provides that, upon presentation of
this credential, the Authorized Representative named herein: (A) shall
have a right of entry to, upon, or through any premises in which an
emission source is located or in which records required to be maintained
under 42 USC 1857c-9(a)(1) are located, and (B) may at reasonable times
have access to and copy any records, inspect any monitoring equipment or
method required under 42 USC 1857c-9(a)(1), and sample any emissions
which the owner or operator of such source is required to sample.
Authorized Representatives of the Administrator are subject to
the provisions of 42 USC 1857c-9(c) respecting confidentiality of
methods or processes entitled to protection as trade secrets.
Date: S~~ 78
Designation Expires: September 30, 1978
Deputy Ass _ Air Quality
Planning and Standards
A-67
-------
TABLE I
INFORMATION NEEDED FOR THE EPA SCREENING STUDY OF THE
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING INDUSTRY
1. What is the secondary aluminum production capacity of the plant?
2. What is the number of plant employees involved in the secondary
aluminum manufacturing operations?
3. What is the age of the manufacturing facility?
4. Provide a quantitative estimate of past, current and projected
production at the plant projected for five years.
5. Indicate any plans for expansion or modification of the production
facilities.
6. Provide a brief description of the process employed for secondary
aluminum manufacture at the plant, together with flow sheets and a
material balance. Pollutant emission locations should be clearly shown.
7. Provide a description and discussion of the emission control systems
used in the manufacturing operation. Design and actual removal
efficiencies should be specified.
8. Provide a current emissions inventory for the secondary aluminum
manufacturing operation at the plant. Separate emissions data should
be supplied for each basic step in the manufacturing process and for
each emission point. If emissions factors have been developed for
the operation, such information should be supplied.
Specifically, the following format should be used for supplying the
emissions data:
Process
Volumetric Flow
Rate (temp)
Pollutants
Quantities
Generated
Quantities
Emitted
Z
Control
9. Provide any available emission test data from the secondary aluminum
manufacturing operations and indicate the availability of such data which
is not in your possession. Test methods should be specific and uncon-
trolled emission data should, if possible, be reduced to the form of
emission factors.
A-68
-------
crprTHE RESEARCH CORPO
LI L125 SILAS OEANE HIGHWAY
Environmental Consultants To Management
THE RESEARCH CORPORATION of New England
125 SILAS OEANE HIGHWAY, WETHEBSFIELD, CONNECTICUT 061 09
203 563-1431
June 8, 1978
Ms. Barbara Sidler
Division of Air Pollution Control
Environmental Protection Agency
2200 Churchill Road
Springfield, Illinois 62706
Dear Ms. Sidler:
TRC - THE RESEARCH CORPORATION of New England is currently performing
a screening study of the secondary aluminum manufacturing industry for the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This study is being performed under
EPA Contract Number 68-02-2615 between TRC and the Emission Standards and
Engineering Division of EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.
Background data on the industry is being gathered to help determine the
need for development of standards of performance pursuant to Section III
of the Clean Air Act. We would appreciate your cooperation in providing
us with the information requested in Table 1 for each plant in your region.
Table II lists the plants in your region according to our sources of in-
formation. If you know of other plants, please include those also. Addi-
tionally, information on the best controlled plants in your region would
be appreciated.
As noted in the enclosed letter from Mr. Walter Barber of EPA, TRC has
been designated by EPA as an authorized representative of the Agency.
Therefore, TRC is subject to the provision of 42 U.S.C. 1857c9 (c) respecting
confidentiality of methods or processed entitled to protection as trade
secrets. If you believe that disclosure of any information requested would
reveal trade secrets or other confidential information, you should clearly
identify such information. If you wish, you may also set forth reasons for
your claim and include supportive data or legal authority at the time the
information is submitted (in most cases, there will be an opportunity to
do so later if a question concerning public availability of information
arises). If no such claim is made, the information may be released to the
public without further notice to you.
Due to the relatively short time frame of this screening study, your
prompt reply would be very much appreciated. Please let us know if you can
meet a June 30, 1978 deadline. Thank you for your voluntary cooperation
in this study.
Sincerely
TRC - THE RESEARCH CORPORATION
of New England
Edward T. Brookman
Associate Project Engineer
ETB/daa
Attachments
A-69
Service tailored to the client's need • barked by research
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
DESIGNATION OF AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE
The Research Corporation of New England (TRC), is hereby designated
an Authorized Representative of the Administrator of the U. S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency for purposes of (i) assisting in the development
of any implementation.plan under 42 USC 1857c-5, or 42 USC 1856-c(d), any
standard of performance under 42 USC 1856c-6, or any emission standard
under 42 USC 1857c-7, (ii) determining whether any person is in violation
of any such standard or any requirement of such a plan, or (iii) carrying
out 42 USC 1857h-l.
This designation is made pursuant to the Clean Air Act, 42 USC
1857c-9. The United States Code provides that, upon presentation of
this credential, the Authorized Representative named herein: (A) shall
have a right of entry to, upon, or through any premises in which an
emission source is located or in which records required to be maintained
under 42 USC 1857c-9(a)(1) are located, and (B) may at reasonable times
have access to and copy any records, inspect any monitoring equipment or
method required under 42 USC 1857c-9(a)(1), and sample any emissions
which the owner or operator of such source is required to sample.
Authorized Representatives of the Administrator are subject to
the provisions of 42 USC 1857c-9(c) respecting confidentiality of
methods or processes entitled to protection as trade secrets.
Date: S~~ J3 — 78
Designation Expires: September 30, 1978
Deputy Ass Air Quality
Planning and Standards
A-70
-------
TABLE I
INFORMATION NEEDED FOR THE EPA SCREENING STUDY OF THE
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING INDUSTRY
1. What is the secondary aluminum production capacity of the plant?
2. What is the number of plant employees involved in the secondary
aluminum manufacturing operations?
3. What is the age of the manufacturing facility?
4. Provide a quantitative estimate of past, current and projected
production at the plant projected for five years.
5. Indicate any plans for expansion or modification of the production
facilities.
6. Provide a brief description of the process employed for secondary
aluminum manufacture at the plant, together with flow sheets and a
material balance. Pollutant emission locations should be clearly shown.
7. Provide a description and discussion of the emission control systems
used in the manufacturing operation. Design and actual removal
efficiencies should be specified.
3. Provide a current emissions inventory for the secondary aluminum
manufacturing operation at the plant. Separate emissions data should
be supplied for each basic step in the manufacturing process and for
each emission point. If emissions factors have been developed for
the operation, such information should be supplied.
Specifically, the following format should be used for supplying the
emissions data:
Process
Volumetric Flow
Rate (temp)
Pollutants
Quantities
Generated
Quantities
Emitted
7.
Control
9. Provide any available emission test data from the secondary aluminum
manufacturing operations and indicate the availability of such data which
is not in your possession. Test methods should be specific and uncon-
trolled emission data 3hould, if possible, be reduced to the form of
emission factors.
A-71
-------
TABLE II
SECONDARY ALUMINUM PLANTS IN ILLINOIS
Town.
Company
Alton
Aurora
Bensenville
Chicago
Chicago
Chicago
Chicago
Chicago
Chicago Heights
Lockport
Rockport
U.S. Reduction Company-American Can Company - P.O. Box 30
4610 Melville Avenue, E. Chicago, Indiana 46312
Tower Metals and Ore Corporation
332 S. Michigan Avenue, Chicago, Illinois 60604
Carroll (Donald) Metals, Incorporated
201 N. Division Street, Besenville, Illinois 60106
Allied Metal Company
2059 S. Canal Street, Chicago, Illinois 60616
Apex International Alloys, Incorporated, Division of
Alumax, Incorporated - Suite 215, 2340 Des Plaines
Avenue, Des Plaines, Illinois 60018
Harco Aluminum, Incorporated
4528 W. Division Street, Chicago, Illinois 60651
Lavin (R) and Sons, Incorporated
3426 Kedzie Avenue, Chicago, Illinois 60623
Lissner Corporation
1000 N. Branch Street, Chicago, Illinois 60622
Hall Aluminum Company - P.O. Box 223
17th & State Street, Chicago Heights, Illinois 60411
Intercontinental Alloys
P.O. Box 920 N. Broadway, Joliet, Illinois 60434
Behr (Joseph) and Sons, Incorporated
1100 Seminary Street, Rockford, Illinois 61108
A-72
-------
Illinois Environmental
Protection Agency 2200 Churchill Road,Springfield, Illinois 62706
217/782-5544
June 27, 1978
Ur, & m .
v'j
JHN 3,| |S7P
Mr. Edward T. Brookman
Associate Project Engineer ' jf"\
The Research Corporation of New England
125 Silas.Deane Highway
Weathersfield, Connecticut 06109
Dear Mr. Brookman:
Having reviewed your request for information concerning the secondary
aluminum plants located in Illinois and the statement of authority given
to you by Walter Barber of USEPA pursuant to 42 USC 1857c9(c), it appears
to us that you have adequate authority to request the information
directly from the sources.
In light of your authority to request the information'directly, we
request that you do so. If you are unsuccessful, we will then search our
files to determine what we have and what we can release to you in light
of the confidential nature of some of the information submitted to us.
Very truly yours,
ir*a Sidler
r Technical Advisor
'^Sepw Techni
^Enforcement P
BS:dw/3921-23
Senior Technical Advisor
Enforcement Programs
A-73
-------
r JI D |r=z THE RESEARCH CORPORATION of New England
LI 125 SILAS OEANE HIGHWAY. WETHERSFIELD. CONNECTICUT 06109
203 563-1431
Environmental Consultants To Management
June 8, 1978
Mr. Frank Giaccone
Chief - Air Facilities Branch
EPA - Region II
Federal Office Building
26 Federal Plaza
New York, New York 10007
Dear Mr. Giaccone:
TRC - THE RESEARCH CORPORATION of New England is currently performing
a screening study of the secondary aluminum manufacturing industry for the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This study is being performed under
EPA Contract Number 68-02-2615 between TRC and the Emission Standards and
Engineering Division of EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.
Background data on the industry is being gathered to help determine the
need for development of standards of performance pursuant to Section III
of the Clean Air Act. We would appreciate your cooperation in providing
us with the information requested in Table 1 for each plant in your region.
Table II lists the plants in your region according to our sources of in-
formation. If you know of other plants, please include those also. Addi-
tionally, information on the best controlled plants in your region would
be appreciated.
As noted in the enclosed letter from Mr. Walter Barber of EPA, TRC has
been designated by EPA as an authorized representative of the Agency.
Therefore, TRC is subject to the provision of 42 U.S.C. 1857c9 (c) respecting
confidentiality of methods or processed entitled to protection as trade
secrets. If you believe that disclosure of any information requested would
reveal trade secrets or other confidential information, you should clearly
identify such information. If you wish, you may also set forth reasons for
your claim and include supportive data or legal authority at the time the
information is submitted (in most cases, there will be an opportunity to
do so later if a question concerning public availability of information
arises). If no such claim is made, the information may be released to the
public without further notice to you.
Due to the relatively short time frame of this screening study, your
prompt reply would be very much appreciated. Please let us know if you can
meet a June 30, 1978 deadline. Thank you for your voluntary cooperation
in this study.
Sincerely
TRC - THE RESEARCH CORPORATION
of New England
Edward T. Brookman
Associate Project Engineer
ETB/daa
Attachments
Service tailored to the client's • backed
-------
$s&)
i>. ,<-y
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
DESIGNATION OF AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE
The Research Corporation of New England (TRC), is hereby designated
an Authorized Representative of the Administrator of the U. S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency for purposes of (i) assisting in the development
of any implementation, plan under 42 USC 1857c-5, or 42 USC 1856-c(d), any
standard of performance under 42 USC 1856c-6, or any emission standard
under 42 USC 1857c-7, (ii) determining whether any person is in violation
of any such standard or any requirement of such a plan, or (iii) carrying
out 42 USC 1857h-l.
This designation is made pursuant to the Clean Air Act, 42 USC
1857C-9. The United States Code provides that, upon presentation of
this credential, the Authorized Representative named herein: (A) shall
have a right of entry to, upon, or through any premises in which an
emission source is located or in which records required to be maintained
under 42 USC 1857c-9(a)(1) are located, and (B) may at reasonable times
have access to and copy any records, inspect any monitoring equipment or
method required under 42 USC 1857c-9(a)(1), and sample any emissions
which the owner or operator of such source is required to sample.
Authorized Representatives of the Administrator are subject to
the provisions of 42 USC 1857c-9(c) respecting confidentiality of
methods or processes entitled to protection as trade secrets.
Date: >5""- JO" 78
Designation Expires: September 30, 1978
Deputy Ass Air Quality
Planning and Standards
A-75
-------
TABLE I
INFORMATION NEEDED FOR THE EPA SCREENING STUDY OF THE
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING INDUSTRY
1. What is Che secondary aluminum production capacity of the plant?
2. What is the number of plant employees involved in the secondary
aluminum manufacturing operations?
3. What is the age of the manufacturing facility?
4. Provide a quantitative estimate of past, current and projected
production at the plant projected for five years.
5. Indicate any plans for expansion or modification of the production
facilities.
6. Provide a brief description of the process employed for secondary
aluminum manufacture at the plant, together with flow sheets and a
material balance. Pollutant emission locations should be clearly shown.
7. Provide a description and discussion of the emission control systems
used in the manufacturing operation. Design and actual removal
efficiencies should be specified.
8. Provide a current emissions inventory for the secondary aluminum
manufacturing operation at the plant. Separate emissions data should
be supplied for each basic step in the manufacturing process and for
each emission point. If emissions factors have been developed for
the operation, such information should be supplied.
Specifically, the following format should be used for supplying the
emissions data:
Process
Volumetric Flow
Rate (temp)
Pollutants
Quantities
Generated
Quantities
Emitted
%
Control
9. Provide any available emission test data from the secondary aluminum
manufacturing operations and indicate the availability of such data which
is not in your possession. Test methods should be specific and uncon-
trolled emission data should, if possible, be reduced to the form of
emission factors.
A-76
-------
TABLE II
SECONDARY ALUMINUM PLANTS IN REGION II
State
NJ
NJ
NY
NY
NY
NY
NY
NY
Town
Perth Amboy
South Amboy
Brooklyn
Brooklyn
Brooklyn
E. Syracuse
Long Island City
Rochester
Company
American Smelting and Refining Company -
Federated Metals Division - 120 Broadway,
New York, New York 10005
EASCO Corporation - Aluminum Billets Incorporated
2100 Arlington Federal Building, Baltimore,
Maryland 21201
Belmont Smelting and Refining Works Incorporated
330 Belmont Avenue, Brooklyn, New York 11207
Elkins (J.R.), Incorporated
518 Gardner Avenue, Brooklyn, New York 11222
Henning Brothers and Smith, Incorporated
91-115 Scott Avenue, Brooklyn, New York 11237
Roth Brothers Smelting Corporation - P.O. Box 158
Thompson Road, E. Syracuse, New York 13200
Paragon Smelting Corporation
36-08 Review Avenue, Long Island City, New York
11101
Rochester Smelting and Refining Company,
Incorporated - P.O. Box-547 26 Sherer Street,
Rochester, New York 14602
A-77
-------
United Status
Environmental Protection
Agency
Region 2
26 Federal Plaza
New York NY 10007
New Jersey, New York,
Puerto Rico,
Virgin Islands
' I
June 28, 1978
JIJti 3 n 1978
Mr. Edward T. Brookman
^-ThT :.
TRC - The Research Corporation '—
of New England
125 Silas Deane Highway
Wethersfield, Connecticut 06109
Dear Mr. Brookmanr
Enclosed are copies of the process information available in EPA Region II
or NYSDEC files for the following secondary aluminum smelting plants:
Roth Brothers Smelting Corporation - E. Syracuse, New York
Rochester Smslting & Refining - Rochester, New York
Alcan Aluminum - Oswego, New York
J. R. Elkins, Inc. - Brooklyn, New York
The following firms are no longer in operation:
Paragon Smelting Corporation - Long Island City, New York
Henning Brothers & Smith - Brooklyn, New York
American Smelting & Refining - South Amboy, New Jersey
Neither EPA nor NJDEP have any information concerning an EASCO Corporation
plant in South Amboy. To the best of our knowledge no such plant exists.
NYSDEC reviewed their Belmont file and it contains no information on A1
smelting. We will check further and forward any data we can obtain.
You may wish to contact the sources directly if you require additional de-
tailed information.
*s,
», Chief
Air Facilities Branch
Enclosure
A-78
-------
/ i 4 c £ J 4/j C? <> «-¦ • •• •' 1111
function 06
PCM-CNVASMLE
AIR POLLUTION SOURCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
PACT
0001
FACILITY / EP DATA LIST
SPECIAL REPORT FOR DENNIS SANTELLA USEPA
REGION 0
MONROE
COUNTY
REPORT DATE 06/16/78
LOCATION FACILITY -
2614000760 NAME - ROCHESTER SMELTING & REFINING
ADDRESS - 26 SHF.RER ST
C-T-V - ROCHESTER
FACILITY CLASSIFICATION - B
SIC - 334 1
EMISSION POINT
00008
P.C. DATES TEST C.O. DATES CONDITIONS CERT. NO CONFID COMPLIANCE UTM E UTM N
3/ 5/ 711 3/ 5/81 I 5 5 1 3027 0 C 284 .5 78 1 .1
CROUKD ELEV STK HT IIT ABOVE STRUC
525 35 8
DIAMETER DIMENSIONS TEMP
34 1200
VELOCITY FLOW RATE
2 1.0 8123.0
DRAFT TYPE RECEPTOR HULT-S
F 2 00 0
~PROCESS PROCESS SCC
UNIT ID CODE CODE
99
CLASS
ACTIVITY
>
I
-J L NUMBER OF UNITS PROCESS DISCRIPTION SUMMARY
NO. OF
UNITS BUILDING NAME
FLOOR NAME / NUMBER
FIRST FLOOR
k£>
1 ALUMINUM CRUSHER ROTARY FURNACE FOR REMOVAL
OF COMBINED OIL/WATER FROM CRUSHED ALUMINUM TURNINCS
PROCESS FUEL SUMMARY SOLID - TYPE QUANTITY SULFUR OIL - TYPE QUANTITY SULFUR CAS
L CONTROL ID TYPE MFG AMD MODEL NUMBER
1 10 IND FURNACE CO AFTERBURNER SYSTEM
2 1
L CONTAMINANT NAME CODE INPUT UNITS ERP
A OIL MIST 90 2000.00 I 200.00
ACTUAL F.FF HOW DET COHTAM CODE
98.15 2 90
TYPE QUANTITY BTU / HR
1 4801 1100
COST OP COST DATE INST LIF
15000 40000 6 68 3
HRS/DAY DAYS/YR ACTUAL E UNITS ALLOWABLE E UNITS RATING LBS/HR
8.00
150
3.70 1
.30
3.70
EMISSION POINT
0001A
P.C. DATES TEST C.O. DATES CONDITIONS CERT. NO CONFII) COMPLIANCE
3/ 5/78 3/ 5/81 1
E E
13767
UTM E
284.5
UTM N
781 .
GROUND ELEV
525
STK IIT
47
HT ABOVE STRUC
7
DIAMETER
36
DIMENSIONS
TFHP
250
VELOCITY
38.0
FLOU RATE
16000.0
DRAFT TYPE
I
RECEPTOR
10
MULT-
3
•PROCESS
UNIT ID
99
PROCESS SCC
CODE CODE
CLASS
ACTIVITY
NO. OF
UNITS
BUILDING NAME
FOUNDRY
FLOOR NAME / NUMBER
i
L NUMBER OF UNITS PROCESS DISCRIPTION SUMMARY
1 3 SECONDARY ALUMINUM REVFRRATORY FUP.NACES
-------
L CONTROL in TYPE HFC AND HOD EL NUMBER
I 98 TELLER ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEM
ACTUAL EFF IIOU DF.T CONTAM CODE
95.00
i i >¦ r
2
1' i\i i i i
1 5
•¦ii. i
COST OP COST DATE INST LIF
260000 3500 5 73
PGM-CNVASMLE
REGION 8
AIR POLLUTION SOURCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
FACILITY / EP DATA LIST
SPECIAL REPORT FOR DENNIS SANTELLA USEPA
MONROE
COUNTY
L
CONTROL ID TYPE
MFC AND MODEL NUMBER
ACTUAL EFF
11OW DET
2
1 ABSORPTION CHROMATOGRAPHIC
SYSTEM
L
CONTAMINANT NAME
CODE INPUT UNITS
/^ERT3
i 11RS/DAY
DAYS/YR
ACTUAL E
A
PARTICULATES
75
09.10
\ 24.00
260
.03
B
PARTICULATES
75
/ 2.10
I 24.00
260
.03
C
MISC. ORGANICS
990
/ .50
/ 24.00
260
.02
D
HYDROGEN FLUORIDE
175
V .65
/ 24.00
260
.18
E
CHLORINE
160
24.00
260
PAGE - 0002
REPORT DATE 06/16/78
COST OP COST DATE INST LIF
/—-v
fNlTS ALLOWABLE F. UNITS RATINC
LBS/HR
30
5
A
2 . 10
30
5
B
2 . 10
02
1
D
.02
18
1
B
.18
11
A
EMISSION POINT
0001B
p.C. DATES TEST C.O. DATES CONDITIORS CERT. NO
3/ 5/78 3/ 5/81 I 13768
CONFID COMPLIANCE UTM E VTH N
0 C 284.5 781.1
>
I
oo
o
GROUND ELEV
525
•PROCESS
UNIT ID
99
STK IIT
47
PROCESS SCC
CODE CODE
HT ABOVE STRUC
7
CLASS
DIAMETER
36
DIMENSIONS
ACTIVITY
L NUMBER OF UNITS
1
PROCESS FUEL SUHHARY
PROCESS DISCRIPTION SUMMARY
3 SECONDARY ALUMINUM REVERBATOKY FURNACES
SOLID -
TYPE
QUANTITY
SULFUR
TEMP
250
VELOCITY
38.0
NO. OF
UNITS
1
FLOW RATE
16000.0
DRAFT TYPE
I
BUILDING NAME
FOUNDRY
OIL - TYPE QUANTITY SULFUR GAS -
TYPE
2
RECEPTOR
10
MULT-S
3
FLOOR NAME / NUMBER
1
OUANTITY
15
BTU / HR
L CONTROL ID TYPE
98
1
MFC AND MODEL NUMBER
TELLER ENVIRONMENTAL
ABSORPTION CHROMATOGRAPHIC SYSTEM
ACTUAL EFF
95.00
HOW DET CONTAM CODE
COST
260000
OP COST DATE INST LIF
3500
5 73
L CONTAMINANT NAME
CODE
INPUT
UNITS ERP HRS/DAY
DAYS/YR
ACTUAL E
UNITS
ALLOWABLE E
UNITS
RATING
LBS/HR
A PARTICULATES
75
29.10 24.00
260
.03
5
.30
5
A
2.10
B PARTICULATES
75
2.10 24.00
260
.03
5
.30
5
B
2.10
C MISC. ORGANICS
990
.50 24.00
260
.02
1
.02
1
1)
.02
D HYDROGEN FLUORIDE
1 75
.65 24.00
260
.18
1
.18
1
B
.18
E CHLORINE
160
24 .00
260
1 1
1 1
A
EMISSION POINT
P.C
. nATFS
TEST C.O. DATES
CONDITIONS CERT. NO
COt) FID COMPLIANCE
UTM E
UTM
0001C
3/ 5/78 3/
5/81 1
5 5
1 3769
0
C
284 .5
7 P 1
GROUND ELEV STK HT
525 A 7
HT ABOVE STRUC DIAMETER DIMENSIONS TEMP VELOCITY FLOW RATE DRAFT TYPE RECEPTOR
7 36 250 38.0 16000.0 1 10
MHLT-!
-------
UNIT in
99
ClJUt
1:001.
units
i
RIIII.DI.MC NAME
FOUNDRY
FLOOR NAML / NIIHFER
PCM-CNVASMLE
REGION 8
L NUMBER OF UNITS
1
AIR POLLUTION SOURCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
FACILITY / EP DATA LIST
SPECIAL REPORT FOR DENNIS SANTELLA USEPA
MONROE
COUNTY
PACE - 000 3
REPORT DATE 06/16/78
PROCESS DISCRIPTION SUMMARY
3 SECONDARY ALUMINUM REVERBATORY FURNACES
PROCESS FUEL SUMMARY SOLID - TYPE QUANTITY SULFUR OIL - TYPE
L CONTROL ID TYPE MFC AND MODEL NUMBER
QUANTITY SULFUR CAS
ACTUAL EFF HOW DET CONTAM CODE
TYPE
2
QUANTITY
15
FTU / HR
COST OP COST DATE INST LIF
1 98 TELLER ENVIRONMENTAL
95
.00
260000
3500
5 73
2 1 ABSORPTION
CHROMATOGRAPHIC SYSTEM
L CONTAMINANT NAME CODE
INPUT UNITS ERP
IIRS/DAY
DAYS/YR
ACTUAL E
UNITS
ALLOWABLE E
UNITS
RATING
LBS /IIR
A PARTICULATES 75
29.10
24.00
260
.03
5
.30
5
A
2 . 10
B PARTICULATES 75
2.10
24.00
260
.03
5
.30
5
B
2.10
C MISC. ORGAN ICS 990
.50
24.00
260
.02
1
.02
1
D
.02
D HYDROGEN FLUORIDE 175
.65
24.00
260
.17
1
. 18
1
B
. 1 7
E CHLORINE 160
24.00
260
1 1
1 1
A
PGM-CNVASMLE
AIR POLLUTION SOURCE
MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
PAGE -
0001
>
'00
FACILITY / EP DATA LIST
SPECIAL REPORT FOR DENNIS SANTELLA USEPA
REGION 7
ONONDAGA
COUNTY
REPORT DATE 06/16/78
LOCATION FACILITY -
3126010420 NAME
ADDRESS
ROTH BROS SMELTINC CORP
6223 THOMPSON RD
C-T-V - DEWITT
FACILITY CLASSIFICATION - B
SIC - 3339
EMISSION POINT
00001
P.C. DATES TEST C.O. DATES CONDITIONS CERT. NO
11/ 1/77
11/ 1/78 1
9212
COHFID COMPLIANCE
UTM E
41 1 .0
UTM N
769. 1
CROUND ELEV
404
STK IIT
22
IIT ABOVE STRUC
22
DIAHETER
DIMENSIONS
TEMP
1 10
VELOCITY
78.0
FLOW RATE
19500.0
DRAFT TYPE
I
RECEPTOR
320
MULT— S
0
•PROCESS
UNIT ID
99
PROCESS SCC
CODE CODE
CLASS
ACTIVITY
NO. OF
UNITS
BUILDING NAME
BLDG 4 PLANT 2
FLOOR NAME / NUMBER
1
L NUMBER OF UNITS
1
PROCESS DISCRIPTION SUMMARY
COPPER ROTARY FURNACE
FOR BURNING OF INSULATION FROM WIRE
PROCESS FUEL SUMMARY SOLID - TYPE QUANTITY
SULFUR
OIL - TYPE
OUANTITY
SULFUR
C.AS -
TYPE
QUANTITY
BTU / HR
L CONTROL ID TYPE MFC AND MODEL NUMBER ACTUAL EFF HOI? DET CONTAM CODE
COST OP COST DATE INST LIF
-------
J li *.r l uii r. r r r /n. i w :
11 J P ELLIOT ASSOC QIIF.NCII STATION
PEABODY VEN-KINE DC 200-3
L CONTAMINANT SAME CODE
A CHLORINE 160
B PARTICULATES 7S
INPUT
UNITS
ERP
232 .00
90.00
HRS/DAY
8 .00
8 .00
DAYS/YR
250
250
« n
2 1h
ACTUAL E UNITS
ALLOWABLE E
1 1 .00
.05
UNITS
1
6
RATING
B
B
LBS/HR
4.40
2 .64
EMISSION POINT
00002
P.C.
DATES TEST
C.O. DATES CONDITIONS CERT. NO
4/ 1/78 4/ 1/80 J 8522
CONFIO COMPLIANCE UTM E UTM N
0 C 411.0 769.1
GROUND ELEV
409
~PROCESS
UNIT ID
99
STIC HT
30
PROCESS SCC
CODE CODE
HT ABOVe STRUC
10
CLASS
DIAMETER
24
DIMENSIONS
TEMP
400
ACTIVITY
L NUMBER OF UNITS
1
PROCESS DISCRIPTION SUMMARY
CLEANED CRUSHED ALUMINUH SCRAP IS MELTED DOVN IK
SMALL AMOUNTS TO OBTAIN LAB SAMPLES
VELOCITY
97.0
NO. OF
UNITS
1
FLOW RATE
2870.0
DRAFT TYPE RF.CEPTOR
N
300
MULT-S
0
BUILDING NAME FLOOR NAME / NUMBER
PLANT 12 CRUSHER BLD1
PROCESS FUEL SUMMARY SOLID - TYPE QUANTITY
SULFUR
OIL - TYPE QUANTITY SULFUR GAS -
TYPE
I
QUANTITY
2000
BTU / HR
1000
PGM-CNVASMLE
>
I
P°
is)
AIR POLLUTION SOURCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
FACILITY / EP DATA LIST
SPECIAL REPORT FOR DENNIS SANTELLA USEPA
REGION 7
L CONTROL ID TYPE
1 99
L CONTAMINANT NAME
A ALUMINUM
HFG AND MODEL NUMBER
CODE
5
INPUT
UNITS
ONONDAGA COUNTY
ACTUAL EFF HOW DET CONTAM CODE
PAGE - 0002
REPORT DATE 06/16/78
COST OP COST RATE INST LIF
ERP HRS/DAY DAYS/YR
.30 5.00 150
ACTUAL E UNITS ALLOWABLE E UNITS
212.00 5 .30 1
RATING
D
LRS/HF
.30
EMISSION POINT
00003
P.C .
DATES TEST C.O. DATES CONDITIONS CERT. NO
11/ 1/77
11/ 1/78 I
9213
CONFID COMPLIANCE UTM F. UTM N
0 C 411.0 769.1
GROUND ELEV
409
'PROCESS
UNIT ID
99
STK HT
30
PROCESS SCC
CODE CODE
I1T ABOVE STRUC
6
CLASS
DIAMETER DIMENSIONS TEMP
27 140
ACTIVITY
NUMBER OF UNITS
PROCESS DISCRIPTION SUMMARY
SCRAP ALUMINUP IS CRUSHED
& PUT THRU A ROTARY FURNACE
TO BURN OFF COHTAMINENTS
SIICII AS OIL GREASE PAINT ETC
SMOKE GENERATED AT BURNING PROCESS
PASSES TI1RII AN AFTERBURNER
& THEN T/IRI) SCRUBBER
VELOCITY
100.0
NO. OF
UNITS
1
FLOW RATE
9300.0
DRAFT TYPE
I
RECEPTOR
412
MULT-S
0
BUILDING NAME FLOOR NAME / NUMBER
PLANT 2 ALUMINUM CKII1
-------
I CONTROL ID TYPE MFC AND MODEL NUMBER
t 13 SHOP FABRICATED
INPUT UNITS
L CONTAMINANT NAME
A ALUMINUM
CODE
5
ERP
62.00
ACTUAL EPF
95.00
HRS/DAY DAYS/YR
10.00 220
HOW PET CONTAM COPE
5
COST OP COST DATE INST I.IK
16000 14000 7 74
ACTUAL E UNITS ALLOWABLE E UNITS RATINC
.05 6 B
LBS/HR
3.10
EMISSION POINT
00005
P.C. DATES TEST C.O.
8/20/75
8/20/76 N
DATES COHDITIOUS CERT. NO CONFID COMPLIANCE
4/ 1/78
4/ 1/80 1
E E
8528
UTM E
4 11.0
UTH N
769.1
CROUND ELEV
409
•PROCESS
UNIT ID
99
STK HT
24
PROCESS SCC
CODE CODE
HT ABOVE STRUC
8
CLASS
DIAMETER
38
DIMENSIONS
TEMP
100
ACTIVITY
L NUMBER OF UNITS
I
PROCESS DISCRIPTION SUMMARY
SCRAP ZINC WITH SOME METAL ATTACHMENTS IS PUT INTO A
ROTARY FURNACE i HEATED TO THE POINT
VELOCITY
42.0
NO. OF
UNITS
1
FLOW RATE
18548.0
DRAFT TYPE
F
RECEPTOR
7 30
MULT — S
0
BUILDINC NAME
PLANT 2 BLDC 6
FLOOR NAME / NUMBER
1ST
PGM—CNVASMLE
AIR POLLUTION SOURCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
PAGE - 0003
00 REGION 7
L NUMBER OF UNITS
3
FACILITY / EP DATA LIST
SPECIAL REPORT FOR DENNIS SANTELLA IISEPA
ONONDAGA
PROCESS DISCRIPTION SUMMARY
WHERE ONLY THE ZINC FLOWS
THIS METAL IS CAST INTO PIGS OR INGOTS
NON MELTED METALS ARE REMOVED FROM THE FURNACE
FOR FURTHER PROCESSING AT OTHER DEPARTMENTS
PROCESS FUEL SUMMARY
SOLID -
TYPE QUANTITY SULFUR OIL
COUNTY
L CONTROL ID TYPE MFC AND MODEL NUMBER
1 8 DUSTY DUSTLESS S228
TYPE QUANTITY SULFUR CAS -
ACTUAL EFF HOW DET CONTAM CODE
99.00 2 70
REPORT DATE 06/16/7B
TYPE
I
QUANTITY
4600
BT1I / HR
1000
COST OP COST DATE INST LIF
85000 7500 12 75 2
L CONTAMINANT NAME
A ZINC
CODE INPUT UNITS ERP HRS/DAY DAYS/YR
70 60.00 8.00 200
ACTUAL F. UNITS
ALLOWABLE E
.05
UNITS
6
RATING
LBS/HR
.60
EMISSION POINT
00006
—P.C. DATES TEST C.O. DATES CONDITIONS CERT. NO CONFID COMPLIANCE UTM E
4/ 1/76 4/ 1/78
E E
8523
4 11.0
UTM N
769. 1
GROUND ELEV STK HT HT ABOVE STRUC
404 30 8
~PROCESS PROCESS SCC
UNIT ID CODE CODE
99
CLASS
DIAMETER DIMENSIONS
1 2
ACTIVITY
TEl'P
150
VELOCITY
71.0
NO. OF
UNITS
2
FLOW RATE
3000.0
DRAFT TYPE RECEPTOR
F 4 00
MULT-S
0
BUILDING NAME
PLANT #1
FLOOR MAMF. / NUMBER
L NUMBER OF UMTS
PROCESS DISCRIPTION SUMMARY
-------
| UL I'.iM I.I' Al.li 1/III V. 1 » .• V, J II 1 . I « • I II * . r
SHALL AMOUNTS OF FLUX POTASH SODIUM CHLORIDE AJ>nfl>
] CHLORINE USFD FOR HAG EN SI UM REMOVAL CYCLE 2 HOURS
SHALL AMOUNTS OF ALLOYING INGREDIENTS HAY BE ADDED AS
5 REQUIRED THE METAL IS THEN CAST ISTO INGOTS OR SOfc'S
PROCESS FUEL SUMMARY SOLID - TYPE QUANTITY SULFUR OIL - TYPE QUANTITY SIILFUK GAS - TYPE OllANTITY BTU / HR
I 414 00 1000
L CONTROL ID TYPE HFC AND MODEL NUMBER ACTUAL EFF HOW DET CONTAM CODE COST OP COST DATE INST LIF
I 15 H A KNIGHT CUSTOM MADE 95.00 2 190 35000 4000 1 67 1
L CONTAMINANT NAME CODE INPUT UNITS ERP HRS/DAY DAYS/YR ACTUAL E UNITS ALLOWABLE E UNITS RATING LBS/'IR
A OTHER HALOGEN GAS 190 96.00 4.00 200 212.00 5 4.80 1 B 4.80
EHISSION POINT P.C. DATES TEST C.O. DATES CONDITIONS CERT. NO CONFID COHPLIAHCE UTM E UTM N
00008 4/ 1/78 4/ 1/80 1 8524 0 C 411.0 769.1
GROUND ELEV STK HT HT ABOVE STRUC DIAMETER DIMENSIONS TEMP VELOCITY FLOW RATE DRAFT TYPE RECEPTOR MIILT-S
404 30 10 13 850 142.0 3350.0 N 260 0
PGM-CNVASMLE AIR POLLUTION SOURCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM PAGE - 0004
FACILITY / EP DATA LIST
SPECIAL REPORT FOR DENNIS SANTELLA USEPA
jj, REGION 7 ONONDAGA COUNTY REPORT DATE 06/16/78
|°*PROCESS PROCESS SCC CLASS ACTIVITY NO. OF
UNIT ID CODE CODE UNITS BUILDING NAME FLOOR NAME / NUMBER
99 1 PLANT #1 ZAMAK RLDO 1
L NUMBER OF UNITS PROCESS DISCRIPTION SUMMARY
I NEK ZINC IN SLAB FORM IS CHARGED INTO THE REVERBATORY
FURNACE MELTED DOWN ALUMINUM ADDED AS ALLOY
3 INGREDIENT THEN THE METAL IS CAST INTO INGOTS
PROCESS FUEL SUMMARY SOLID - TYPE QUANTITY SULFUR OIL - TYPE QUANTITY SULFUR GAS - TYPE QUANTITY BTU / HR
1 4090 1000
L CONTROL ID TYPE HFG AND HODEL NUMBER ACTUAL EFF HOW DET CONTAH CODE COST OP COST DATE INST LIF
1 99
L CONTAMINANT NAME CODE INPUT UNITS ERP IIRS/DAY DAYS/YR ACTUAL E UNITS ALLOWABLE F. UNITS RATING L BS /1!R
A ZINC 70 2.50 20.00 200 212.00 5 .30 5 B 2.50
EHISSION POINT P.C. DATES TEST C.O. DATES CONDITIONS CERT. NO CONFID COMPLIANCE UTM F. UTM N
00009 4/ 1/76 4/ 1/78 F. E 8525 0 X 411 .0 769.1
GROUND ELEV STK HT HT ABOVE STRUC DIAMETER DIMENSIONS TEMP VELOCITY FLOW RATE DRAFT TYPF. RECEPTOR MULT-S
404 32 12 24 500 42.0 4270.0 K 250 0
•PROCESS PROCESS SCC CLASS ACTIVITY NO. OF
UNIT ID CODE CODE UNITS RRILDIKG NAME FLOOR NAMF. / NIIMRER
99 2 PLANT II ZAMAK BLDG 1
-------
3
MELTED ANALYZED SHALL A'OUHiS ALLOY II.H'I. AI.UI
6 MAr.NESXUtl ARE ADDED AS REQUIRED
METAL IS THEN CAST INTO INGOTS
PROCESS FUEL SUMMARY SOLID - TYPE QUANTITY SULFUR OIL - TYPE QUANTITY SULFUR GAS - TYPE QUANTITY ETII / 11R
214 0
1000
L CONTROL in TYPE MFC AND MODEL NUMBER
1 99
I. CONTAMINANT NAME CODE INPUT UHITS
A ZINC 70
ACTUAL EFF HOW DET C0t!TAM CODE
COST OP COST I1ATF. INST 1.1 F
ERP
1 .70
HRS/DAY DAYS/YK ACTUAL E KNITS A 1,1,0 l.'A R1. F. E UNITS RATING LRS/HR
6.00
SO
212.00
.30
B
1 .70
PGM-CNVASMLE
REG ION 7
AIR POLLUTION SOURCF. MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
FACILITY / EP DATA LIST
SPECIAL REPORT FOR DENNIS SANTELI.A USEPA
ONONDAGA
COUNT*
PAGE - 0005
REPORT DATE 06/16/7S
EMISSION POINT
00011
P.C. DATES TEST C.O. DATES CONDITIONS CERT. NO CONFID COMPLIANCE UTM F.
11/ 1/77 11/ 1/78 I
9214
411.0
UTM N
769 .1
CROUND ELEV STIC 1IT IIT ABOVE STKUC
404 25 25
CLASS
ID CODE CODE
99
>
I
® *PROCESS PROCESS SCC
UNIT ID CODE CODE
DIAMETER DIMENSIONS
2D
ACTIVITY
TEMP VELOCITY FLOW RATE
100 32.0 3900.0
NO. OF
UHITS BUILDINC NAME
PLANT 2
L NUMBER OF UNITS PROCESS DISCK1PTION SUMHARY
1 OUTSIDE INCINERATOR FOR BURNING OF INSULATION
FROM HIRE
DRAFT TYPE RECEPTOR HULT-S
I 370 0
FLOOR NAME / NUMBER
1
PROCESS FUFL SUMMARY SOLID - TYPE QUANTITY SULFUP OIL - TYPE QUANTITY SULFUR GAS - TYPE QUANTITY BTU / IIR
L CONTROL ID TYPE
MFC AND MODEL NUMBER
ACTUAL EFF
MOW DET CONTAM CODE
COST OP COST DATE INST LIF
10
7
HOME MADE
CENTRI SPRAY MODIFIED
L CONTAMINANT NAME CODE
A CHLORINE 160
B PARTI CULATF.S 7 5
INPUT
UNITS
ERP
116.00
45.00
75
160
IIRS/DAY
9.00
9.00
DAYS/YR
250
250
ACTUAL E UNITS
ALLOWABLE E
6 .80
.05
UNITS
1
6
RATING
B
B
LRS/HR
2 .20
1 .32
EMISSION POINT
00012
P.C. DATES TEST C.O. DATES
1 2 / 1S / 7 5
CONDITIONS CERT. NO
CONFID COMPLIANCE
11/ 1/79 I 4
9215
UTM E
4 11.0
UTM N
769 .1
GROUND F.LF.V
409
STK IIT
42
IIT ABOVE STRUC
12
DIAMETER
DIMENSIONS
TEFP
300
VELOCITY
70.0
FLOW RATE
19000.0
DRAFT TYPE
I
RECEPTOR
3 50
MULT-S
0
•PROCESS
UNIT ID
99
PROCESS SCC
CODE CODE
CLASS
ACTIVITY
NO. OF
UNITS
1
BUILDING NAME
PLDC I PL 2
FLOOR NAMH / Nilf'BER
1
-------
L M. i i t.>: a i
I
3
i 11> > .hm, 11/11 i
ROTARY FURNACE 6 POTS FOR SECONDARY LEAD SMELTING
ADDITION TO AN EXISTING INSTALLATION IS TO ALLOW
REPAIR & MAINTENANCE WHILE OPERATING
PERMIT INTRODUCTION OF TEMPERING AIR
L CONTROL ID TYPE HFG AND IfODEL NUMBER
1 8
ACTUAL EFF
99.90
HOW DET CONTAM CODE
I SO
COST OP COST DATE INST LIF
65000 1 75 2
L CONTAMINANT NAME CODE
A PARTICULATES 75
INPUT UNITS
10880.00
ERP IIRS/DAY DAYS/YR ACTUAL E UNITS ALLOWABLE E UNITS RATING
388.00 8.00 240 3.30 20 388.00 20 A
LBS/HR
PGM-CNVASMLE
REGION 7
AIR POLLUTION SOURCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
FACILITY / EP DATA LIST
SPECIAL REPORT FOR DENNIS SANTELLA USEPA
ONONDAGA
COUNTY
PACE - 0006
REPORT DATE 06/16/78
EMISSION POINT
00014
p.C. DATES TEST C.O. DATES CONDITIONS CERT. NO
4/ 1/78 4/ 1/80 1 8526
CONFID COMPLIANCE UTM E UTM N
0 C 411.0 769.1
00
O*
GROUND ELEV STK IIT HT ABOVE STRUC
404 38 12
'PROCESS PROCESS SCC
UNIT ID CODE CODE
99
CLASS
DIAMETER DIMENSIONS TEMP
36 400
ACTIVITY
L NUMBER OF UNITS
1
3
5
VELOCITY FLOU RATE
42.0 10620.0
DRAFT TYPE RECEPTOR HULT-S
N 420 0
NO. OF
UNITS BUILDING NAME FLOOR NAME / NUMBER
1 PLANT fl ALUMINUM SMI
PROCESS DISCRIPTIOt) SUMMARY
CLEAN ALUM SCRAP CHARGED INTO REVERRAT FURNACE
MELTED ANALYZED SMALL AMOUNTS OF ALLOYINC INGREDIENTS
SUCH AS COPPER TITANIUM MACNESIUM ARE ADDED AS REQUIRED
THE METAL IS THEN CAST INTO INGOTS
NO FLUXING CLEANING OR CHLORINATION IN THIS FURNACE
PROCESS FUEL SUMMARY SOLID - TYPE QUANTITY SULFUR OIL - TYPE QUANTITY SULFUR GAS - TYPE QUANTITY BTU / HR
1 6786 1000
L CONTROL ID TYPE MFC AND MODEL NUMBER
1 99
ACTUAL EFF HOW DET CONTAM CODE
COST OP COST DATE INST LIF
L CONTAMINANT NAME CODE
A ALUMINUM 5
INPUT UNITS
ERP
1 .50
MRS /DAY DAYS/YR ACTUAL F, UNITS ALLOWABLE F. UNITS RATING LBS/HR
15 .00
100
212.00
.30
1 .50
EMISSION POINT
00015
P.C .
DATES TEST
C.O. DATES CONDITIONS CF.RT • NO
4/ 1/78 4/ 1/80 1 8527
COKFID COMPLIANCE
UTM F.
411.0
UTM N
769.1
GROUND ELEV
4 04
STK HT
26
HT ABOVE STRUC
6
DIAHETER
24
DIMENSIONS
TEMP
300
VELOCITY
23.0
FLOW RATE
30 14.0
DRAFT TYPE
K
RECEPTOR
260
MULT — S
O
•PROCESS
UKIT IB
99
PROCESS SCC
CODE CODE
CLASS
ACTIVITY
NO. OF
UNITS
BUILDING NAME
FLOOR NAKE / NUMBER
PLANT fl ZAHAK RLfiC 1
-------
L
I CLEAN ALUMINUM IS MELTED IN THIS FURNACE
THEN TRANSFERRED VIA A CHUTE INTO TilF. 7.AMAK RF.VERBATORY
3 FURNACE WHERE IT BECOMES AN ALLOYING INGREDIENT
PROCESS FUEL SUMMARY SOLID - TYPE QUANTITY SULFUR OIL - TYPE QUANTITY SULFUR GAS - TYPE QUANTITY BTU / HR
1 1156 1000
L CONTROL ID TYPE HFC AND MODEL NUMBER ACTUAL EFF HOW DET CONTAM CODE COST OP COST DATE INST LIF
1 99
PGM-CNVASMLE
AIR POLLUTION SOURCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
PACE
0007
REGION 7
L CONTAMINANT NAME
A ALUMINUM
FACILITY / EP DATA LIST
SPECIAL REPORT FOR DENNIS SANTELLA IISEPA
ONONDAGA
COUNTY
REPORT DATE 06/16/78
CODE
5
INPUT
UNITS
ERP
.67
HRS/DAY DAYS/YR
6 .00
200
ACTUAL E UNITS ALLOWABLE E UNITS RATING
212.00 5 .67 1 D
LBS/ilH
.67
EMISSION POINT
00016
GROUND ELEV STK HT
404 30
P.C .
DATES TEST C.O. DATES CONDITIONS CERT. NO
>
I
00
•PROCESS
UNIT ID
Ot
PROCESS SCC
CODE CODE
4/ 6/77 4/ 6/78 N
HT ABOVE STRUC
4
CLASS
11/ 1/77 4/ 1/BO 1 4
DIMENSIONS TEMP
DIAMETER
60
ACTIVITY
170
L NUMBER OF UNITS
1
PROCESS DISCRIPTION SUMMARY
ALUMINUM TURNINGS ARE CRUSHED THEN PUT THROUGH
A ROTARY FURNACE TO RURN OFF CUTTIKG OIL
MOISTURE - KNOWN AS ALUMINUM CHIP DRYER
KNOWN AS ALUMINUM CHIP DRYER
8871
CONFID COMPLIANCE UTM E
0 C 411.0
VELOCITY
37.6
NO. OF
UNITS
1
FLOW RATE
27312.0
BUILDING NAME
DRAFT TYPE RECEPTOR
PROCESS FUEL SUMMARY
SOLID -
TYPE
OUAHTITY
SULFUR
OIL - TYPE QUANTITY
SULFUR
GAS -
TYPE
1
70
UTM N
769 .1
MULT—S
0
FLOOR NAME / NUMBER
QUANTITY
BTU / HR
1000
L CONTROL ID TYPE MFG AND MODEL NUMBER
1 10 DENTON REFRACTORY
ACTUAL EFF
99.80
HOW DET CONTAM CODE
90
COST OP COST DATE INST LIF
35000 120 6 70 2
L CONTAMINANT NAME
A PARTICULATES
B PARTICULATES
•PROCESS
UNIT ID
02
PROCESS
CODE
L NUMBER OF UNITS
1
L CONTROL ID TYPE
I P
CODE
75
75
SCC
CODE
INPUT
CLASS
UNITS
ERP
200.R0
200.80
HRS/DAY DAYS/YR ACTUAL E UNITS ALLOWABLE E UNITS RATING
9.00
9.00
220
220
ACTIVITY
PROCESS DISCRIPTION SUMMARY
ZINC SKIMMI ffCS CONTAINING OIL fc DIRT ARE
MELTED IN AN IRON POT SKIflf.ED & RECAST INTO INGOTS
IROD POT SKIMMED & RECAST INTO INGOTS
MFG AND MODEL NUMBER
ENVIROTt'CII 5-1 20-J122 • 5
ACTUAL EFF
99.00
NO. OF
UNITS
1
BUILDING NAME
HOP DET CONTAM
CODE
5
LBS/HR
2 .01
2.01
FLOOR NAME / NUMBER
COST
300000
OP COST DATE IHST LIF
4 7 7 2
-------
2 1 CHAMPION FAN 4 7 7 2
L CONTAMINANT NAME
A PARTICULATES
CODE INPUT UNITS ERP 1IRS/DAY DAYS/YR ACTUAL E UNITS
75 20.00 8.00 150 .02 1
ALLOWABLE E UNITS RATING
LBS/HR
.02
~PROCESS
UNIT ID
03
PROCESS SCC
CODE CODE
CLASS
ACTIVITY
NO • OF
UKITS
2
BUILDING NAME
FLOOR NAME / NUMBER
>
I
oa
00
PGM—CNVASHL E
REGION 7
L NUMBER OF UNITS
1
AIR POLLUTION SOURCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
FACILITY / EP DATA LIST
SPECIAL REPORT FOR DENNIS SANTELLA USEPA
ONONDAGA COUNTY
PROCESS DI SCR IPTIOti SUMMARY
CLEANED ALUMINUM SCRAP IS CHARGED INTO FURNACES
MELTED SMALL AMOUNTS OF FLUX (POTASHSODIUM CHLORIDE)
ADDED DURING CHARCE PERIOD CHLORINE USED FOR MAGNESIUM
REMOVAL CYCLE - 2 HOURS SMALL AMOUNTS OF ALLOYING
INGREDIENTS MAY BE ADDED AS REQUIRED THE METAL IS
THEN CAST INTO INGOTS OR SOWS (REVERATERY FURNACE)
PAGE
0008
REPORT DATE 06/16/78
L CONTROL ID TYPE MFG AND MODEL NUMBER
1 8 ENVIROTECH 5-120-8-22.5 NORBLO
2 t CHAMPION FAN
L CONTAMINANT NAME CODE
A OTHER HALOGEN GAS 190
•PROCESS
UNIT ID
99
PROCESS SCC
CODE CODE
INPUT
CLASS
UNITS
ERP
96.00
ACTUAL EFF
99.00
HRS/DAY DAYS/YR
4.00 200
HOW DET CONTAM CODE
5
COST OP COST DATE INST LIF
300000
4 77
4 77
ACTUAL E UNITS ALLOWABLE E UNITS RATING
LBS/HR
.19
PROCESS FUEL SUMMARY
SOLID
TYPE QUANTITY
ACTIVITY
SULFUR
NO. OF
UNITS
BUILDING NAME
1
FLOOR NAME / NUMBER
ROOF PL 1
OIL
TYPE QUANTITY SULFUR GAS
TYPE
Oil ANT I TY
BTU / 11R
L CONTROL ID TYPE MFG AND MODEL NUMBER
1 8 ENV IROTECII 5-120-8-22.5 NORBLO
2 1 CHAMPION FAN (2)
ACTUAL EFF
99.00
HOW DET CONTAM CODE
5
COST OP COST DATE INST LIF
300000 4 77 2
A 77 2
L CONTAMINANT NAME
A PARTICULATES
CODE INPUT UNITS ERP HRS/DAY DAYS/YR
75 220.80 8.00 220
ACTUAL E UNITS ALLOWABLE E UNITS RATING
.01 6 .05 6 B
LBS/HR
2.2 1
EMISSION POINT
00017
r,C. DATES TEST C.O. DATES
*/ 8/77
A/ 8/78 Y
11/ 1/77
CONDITIONS CERT. NO C0HFII1 COMPLIANCE
A/ 1/RO I 4
B543
UTM E
4 11.0
UTM N
769.1
GROUND ELF.V
404
~PROCESS
IItil 7 IP
STK HT
32
PROCESS SCC
CODE CODE
HT ABOVE STRUC
4
CLASS
DIAMETER
45
DIMENSIONS
TF.HP
350
ACT Iv rTV
VELOCITY
41.5
NO. OF
UNITS
FLOW RATE
15500.0
DRAFT TYPE
I
RFCEPTOR
265
M1ILT-S
0
BUILDING NAME
FLOOR NAME / NUMBER
-------
L NUMBER OF UNITS PROCESS DISCRIPTION SUMMARY
i ROTARY FURNACE FOR REMOVAL OF VARIOUS TYPES OF
INSULATION FROM COPPER UIRF.S BY INCINERATION
PROCESS FUEL SUMMARY SOLID - TYPE QUANTITY SULFUR OIL - TYPE QUANTITY SULFUR CAS -
L CONTROL ID TYPE MFC AND MODEL NUMBER
1 10 DENTON REFRACTORY
ACTUAL EFF HOW DET CONTAM CODE
75
TYPE
QUANTITY
2200
BTU / HR
1 000
COST OP COST DATE INST LIF
ROOOO 30000 I 74 2
PCH-CNVASMLE
AIR POLLUTION SOURCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
FACILITY / EP DATA LIST
SPECIAL REPORT FOR DENNIS SANTELLA USEPA
REGION 7
L CONTROL ID TYPE MFC AND MODEL NUMBER
2 8 ENVIROTECH 3 120 8
ONONDAGA COUNTY
ACTUAL EFF HOW DET CONTAM CODE
PACE - 0009
REPORT DATE 06/16/78
COST OP COST DATE INST LIF
260000
3 77
L CONTAMINANT NAME CODE
A CHLORINE 160
B PARTICULATES 75
INPUT UNITS
ERP
1 17.50
90.00
HRS/DAY
8.00
8.00
DAYS/YR
220
220
ACTUAL E UNITS
ALLOUABLE E
7.00
.05
UNITS
RATINC
B
B
LBS/HR
.90
PCH-CNVASMLE
AIR POLLUTION SOURCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
FACILITY / EP DATA LIST
SPECIAL REPORT FOR DENNIS SANTELLA USEPA
PAGE - 0010
REGION 7
OSWEGO
COUNTY
REPORT DATE 06/16/78
LOCATION FACILITY
3556000004 NAME - ALCAN ALUMINUM CORP
ADDRESS - PO BX 28
C-T-V - OSWEGO
FACILITY CLASSIFICATION - B
SIC - 3553
EKISSION POINT
0000A
P.C. DATES TEST C.O. DATES CONDITIONS CERT. NO CONFID
10/26/76 9/ 1/79 1 E E 6360 0
GROUND ELEV
346
^PROCESS
UNIT ID
99
STK 11T
76
PROCESS SCC
CODE CODE
HT ABOVE STRUC
6
CLASS
DIAMETER
36
DIMENSIONS
ACTIVITY
L NUMBER OF UNITS
1
3
5
PROCESS DI SCR IPT10N SUMMARY
EXHAUST SYSTEM FOR 72" ALUMINUM
COLD ROLLINC HILL VMIICH USES
OIL BASED COOLANG-LUBRICANT•
FUMES FROIt MILL DRAWS OFF BY F.XIIAHST SYSTEJ'.
PASSED THROUGH SCRUBBER AND VENTED TO
ATMOSPHERE AFTER OIL HIST HAS CEF.K REMOVED.
TEMP
88
VELOCITY
29 .0
NO. OF
UHITS
FLOW RATE
41496.0
COMPLIANCE
C
DRAFT TYPE
I
BUILDIMG NAME
COLD MILL
UTH E
382.4
RECEPTOR
1900
IITM H
8 16.0
MULT-S
0
FLOOR NAME / NUMBER
L CONTROL ID TYPE
nrr. and model number
ACTUAL r,FF
HOC DET COPTAH CODE
COST OP COST DATE INST LIF
-------
Rev. 11-72
1T2W YOniC CITY DEPART]EUT OP AIR RESOURCES^
rUREM' OF INDUSTRIAL AIR POLLUTION CONTROL
F.', 7VI RONI'IENTAL RATI17G REPORT - ..o, IS?' J i V /? W' -
Individual Point of Emlcnlon -m:s-pl- ^°- . ' '' ^ y ¦
(Please follow printed Guidelinoo to complete this form) 2. "2-~
1. Company name F.lKins, Inc..
2. Emission Point No.
Premises Address 470 Scott Ave
1
Borough £Jro»«lilytij K,Y, 11«^«.«:
3. Raport Date
Telephone No. v.;. ft/an
1-3-/-75
O
4. Officii use (leave blanlc)
5.Name of Person
Preparing Report rii.-rrjr G. Sawan. P.k.
TitlO rill Hr.r "
Address 186 Jo«l»swn. Scroti t>E»1ayn,N.Y.Zin H«:01
Tel. ITo. 358 2332
6. Manufacturing Process
Fccvcll nc fcrao Alumina's
7. Operation Producing Emission
No air-bourne emission#
8. Procesi Weight. #/HR
• 4
not sp.il ioi.bl
-------
rarcd tcrt r £ultf c-f i*,^. iJ-'.-'t- /..J • t- : - X1 -*JJ <-
Cj.lt.Iji iiO. 1j~»01v A ;>• 1>
12. Air Contaminant emissions to outer air.
Air Contaminant-
State
Emission
Solids/Liquids
gases & vapo
(chemical name)
S,L,G
Rate-#/HR
mg/cu.m.
ppm by voluns
nci
¦i'
U
"nci2
t.
W.
;-'0
Concentration at point
of discharge to atmosph
13. Air or gas flow rate at operating conditions.
Fan: make model HP RPM
Constant flow rate: CFM
_;HRS/day_
p»in. of H2O
jdays/yr. ; °F
If variable flow rate; describe variation in CFM with respect to
time and cycles/hr, /day, /year, as applicable, (as attachment)
14. Physical characteristics at emission point
a. Gatfi temperature at point, of discharge:__
b. Dimensiq^is of outlet:
in. diam.;
c. Height at point of discharge:
in. x
,ft. above ground
15. Fuel used as process constituent and/or in control device.
a.' Coal: type ;#/HR ;% sulfur by Wt.
b. Oil:grade ;GPH ; 7% sulfur by Wt.
c. Gas:CFH ;BTU/Cu.Ft.
d..Combustion air: CFM
1 'J
16. a. Emission source is existing. x
New* modified Anticipated completion date
date installed ^^75
b. Does emission source have: PA L79/'V'j 71
Certificate of Environmental Rating; No. p *39/u&te ^¦"^'Rgting
Application for Certificate of Operation; No.PA __date
Notice of Approval (work permit); date issued
Certificate of Operation; date issued.
17.
Hum if
Signature of pciroon preparing report
* rtT
-------
11-72
TOW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OP AIR RESOURCES-
BUREAU OF INDUSTRIAL AIR POLLUTION CONTROL
F.
-------
L ¦"* J • J
— r>
— > I
0 • J *. /.2. > y 2. 3*;.
(J.665)
12. Air Contaminant emissions
to outer air.
Concentration at point
of discharge to atmosph
Air Contaminant-
(chemical name)
State
S,L, G
Emission
Rate-#/HR
Solids/Liquids
mg/cu.m.
gases & vapo
ppm by volum
Hydrocarbons
13. Air or gas flow rate at operating conditions.
Fan: makeN .Y.TUo? tniodel HrfbP-30 HP 30 RPM 2,600 p. in.
of H?0
Constant flow rate: CFM •
;HRS/day
* dsvs/yr•
;°F
If variable flow rate; describe variation in CFM with respect to
time and cycles/hr,/day,/year, as applicable, (as attachment) ¦
14. Physical characteristics at emission point,
a. Gad' temperature at point of discharge: ^
25 oF
*b. Dimensions of outlet:
A.2 ft
in. diam.; in
X
c. Height at point of discharge:
70?$
ft. above ground
15. Fuel used as process- constituent and/or in control device,
a. Coal:type_ i ;#/HR '.% sulfur by Wt.
b. Oil:qrade **- A• ;GPH
c. GastCFH X-rr »¦ • • BTU/Cu. Ft.
d. . Combus tion 'alV':' *CFM " »QOd
j% sulfur by Wt.
C : va
16. a. Emission source is existing.
date installed
New
modified
Anticipated completion date
b. Does emission source have:
Certificate of Environmental Rating; No. *_
date
Application for Certificate of Operation; No.PA
Notice of Approval (work permit); date issued
Certificate of Operation; date issued
Ra ting_
date
17.
UjjA^w I c
lignature of nproqn preparing report
f/S1.
A-93
-------
STATE OF NEW YORK : DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION
X
In the Matter of compliance with Part 212 of Title 6
of the Codes, Rules and Regulations of the State of New York
by:
MODIFIED
ORDER ON
CONSENT
J.R. Elkins Inc.
(Facility in Kings County)
File No.
Respondent
X
On October 1, 1974, the Department issued an Order on Consent to J.R.
Elkins Inc. requiring that certain steps be taken by Respondent to bring his
facility into compliance with 6 NYCRR Part 212.
Subsequent to the issuance of the aforementioned Order, J.R. Elkins Inc.
has requested that Schedule A of the Consent Order be modified. Copies of
these requests are attached hereto and made a part hereof.
The modification to Schedule A is acceptable to the Department since it
merely adjusts the schedule in light of delays not caused by the action of the
Respondent.
Respondent has affirmatively waived its right to a hearing in the matter
£n the manner provided by law and has consented to the issuing and entering of
this Order, with Revised Schedule A attached, pursuant to the provisions of
Article 19 of the Environmental Conservation Law of the State of New York and
agrees to be bound by the terms, provisions and conditions contained herein.
NOW, having considered this matter and being duly advised, I Order the
following:
I. That the Schedule A, Revised Compliance Schedule for J.R. Elkins Inc.
attached hereto be, and the same hereby is, substituted for the Compliance
Schedule appended to the Department's Ocotber 1, 1974 Order on Consent.
II. All other terms nnd conditions of my October 1, 197A Order on Consent
not rescinded or modified by the within Revised Ordier on Consent, shall remain
in full force and effect.
-------
Page Two
DATED:
Albany, New York
OGDEN REID, Commissioner
New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation
TO: Mr. J.R. Elkins, President
J.R. Elkins Inc.
518 Gardner Avenue
Brooklyn, N.Y. 11222
A-95
-------
SCHEDULE A
(Revised 12/24/75)
ORDER ON CONSENT
J.R. ELKINS INC.
1. Respondent owns.or operates facilities for secondary processing of
aluminum scrap at the following locations.:
518 Gardner Ave.
Brooklyn, N.Y. 11222
and
470 Scott Ave.
Brooklyn, N.Y. 11222
2. Respondent shall accomplish the following steps on or before the stated
dates:
STEP ONE: Submit plans and applications to the New York City Department of
Air Resources, 120 Wall Street, New York, N.Y. 10005, and submit
evidence that equipment required to satisfy step two has been ordered,
-------
STEP THREE: Complete construction in accordance witb approved plans, as follows:
A - "Bell" System for controlling emissions
during chlorination -
March 31, 1976
B - Charging Well Hood System, Furnace If3,
and existing air pollution control system
t? he used during ncn CuxOiiiidciou
operation - Aug. 31, 1976
C - Additional Chip Dryer System - April 30
, 197(1
STEP FOUR: Procure New York City Department of Air Resources Certificate to
Operate, after having made timely and proper application therefore,
and done all things requisite for the issuance thereof,.as follows:
A - "ESell" System for controlling emissions
during chlorination - May 31, 1976
B - Charging Well Hood System, Furnace #3,
and existing air pollution control system
to be used during non chlorination
operation - Oct. 31, 1976
C - Additional Chip Dryer System - May 31, 1976
A-97
-------
"CONSENT BY RESPONDENT
Respondent acknowledges the authority .and jurisdiction of the Commissioner
of Environmental Conservation of the State of New York to issue the foregoing
Order, waives publio hearing or other proceedings in this matter, accepts the
terms and conditions set lorth in the Order, and consents to the issuance
thereof.
J.R. ELKINS INC.-
By.
State of New York)_
County of )*
On cnis day of , 197 , before me came
to me known who being duly sworn deposed and said
that he is the of the
corporation described in and on whose behalf he executed the foregoing Consent
and that he was fully authorized by said corporation so to do.
-------
,: / / « '
¦A A-*
, » f
«iff V
JJuij.oxj}v
uim.aij or :' nr.ii;ii!:irJG
Application No. PA- _ 112.6/74
Date Isr.uod 7/11/77
E>: pi rut ion D.ite
7/.11/80
P.E.or R.A.
I
Harry G. 5avran, P.E.
186 Jorale;non Street
Brooklyn, Now York 11201
L_
>ar Prnpi-c Address "518 Gardner Avenue
1
J
J.
.J,—L_i _J.
..Lu_
1_J L l_
u
Premises Identification No.
OWNER
)
J. R. Klkins, Inc.
518 Gardner Avenue
Brooklyn, New York 11222
L -I
Floor Ko.
_JBoro_ Bklyn
J.
J.
EMISSION SOURCE "1-CH*
Source Emis. Pt. No.
CERTIFICATE OF OPERATION
DESCRIPTION OF INSTALLATION: Aluminum smelting. Operating 4 0 hr/wk.
DESCRIPTION OF EQUIPMENT: One (1) charging well, 16 1/2 ft. wide
x 6 1/2 ft.- deep x 4TI77 ft. high, attached to No. 3 Reverberatory
Furnace, 16 1/2 ft. x 17 1/2 ft. x 13 ft. high.
EXHAUST SYSTEM: One (1) Champion Blower & Forge Co. HPR blower,
Si'ze 38~5, 125 HP motor, 2500 RPM, exhausting 14000 CFM @ 150 F.
and 30" S.P. (max.).
CONTROL APPARATUS: One (1) Purification Industries Series V
Verituri Jpcrubber, with adjustable throat, with cyclonic separator,
5'6" diam x 13' 6" high, handling 26000 CFM of carbon and aluminum-
laden gases @ 800 F, and discharging 14000 @ 150 F.
Any purported or attempted transfer of ... an operating certificate ...
from one location to another or from one piece of equipment to another
automatically revokes ... the certificate Sec. 5-31 New York City Air Pol-
lution Control Code.
H.E. Anderson
7/11/77
DATE INSPECTED BY APC ENGINEER
INSTALLER
r J.R. Elkins, Inc.
518 Gardner Avenue
Brooklyn, New York 11222
¦ ilU
I
(VyjOytv— Pj
HEAD, INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES DIVISION
FOR THE COMMISSIONER
~~l
KEEP CERTIFICATE ON PREMISE NEAR EQUIP
MEIfT. NOT VALID WITHOUT OFFICIAL SEAL.
a n a
ii if J
-------
i. i
Nev/xon^.
120 wail s'fr.ctr, kf.w vcrk, n. v. juojs
. , 3'op trv'Girv'tF.niNG
i'A I i.-iliU-J)
0"
AUG ] 1 1977 v-
P.E.or R.A.
i..
Dtf-T. Or As!-,' Ki-.awwi\wLS
PLAN DESK
;ViH>l5.cr;t1.on )»*0. FA-/3/'5
D:ite Issued 7/15/77
r'/.pl ratvi on p tte 7/15/30
I
L.
JTnrry G. Snvran, P.F..
13 6 Joraleiron Street
Brooklyn/ New York .11201
1
.J
r
L
OWNER
J . R. F.Ik ins, Tnc.
518 r.ai'dner Avcmie
Brooklyn, New York 112 22
\a Premie A.Mre« •*'518 Gardner Avenue Floor i'o. 1 J3oro_ Bklvn^
_L_J L
I I I I I
Premises Identification No.
J_J
Source Emts. Pt. No.!
j j EMISSION SOURCE "1-C:j
CERTIFICATE OP OPERATION
DESCRIPTION OF INSTALLATION: Scrap aluminum smelting.
Operated 40 hr/v.'k.
DESCRIPTION OF EQCJIP.MEf^T:Three (3) chlorination stations, each consistir
of one (1) chlorinating lance and one (1) 3' x 5' x 3' high chlorination
bell/ each station located at the puddling wells on the ends of three (3
reverberatory furnaces, each 18' 6" x 23'6" x 9' 6" high.
EXHAUST SYSTEM: One (1) Natural Draft system induced by condensation of
chlorine in gas-and-water injection mixer, gaseous chlorine removed from
chlqjfination bell through 6" diam. cast iron pipe.
CONTROL DBVICE; One (1) gas-and-water injection mixer, 6" diam. x
3" diam. x I'll" long, supplied by 6 GFM ex 40 psi cold water, sprayed
into gas stream through eight (8) 1/8" diam. holes, discharging into
3" diam. rubber hose discharging into ground disposal.
Any purported or attempted transfer of ... an operating certificate ...
from one location to another or from one piece of equipment to another
automatically revokes ... the certificate Sec. 5.31 New York City Air Pol-
lution Control Code.
7/15/77 H.E. Anderson ^
DATE INSPECTED BY A PC ENGINEER
HEAD, INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES DIVISION
FOR THE CONCESSIONER
INSTALLER
r~
J.R. Elkins, Inc.
518 Gardner Avenue
Brooklyn, N.Y. 11222
~1
I.
I
KEEP CERTIFICATE ON PREMISE NEAR EQUIP-
MENT. NOT VALID WITHOUT OFFICIAL SEAL.
A-100-
-------
' N..< t }.ng, supplied by 6 GPM of 40 psi cold water, sprayed into gas
stream through eight (8) 1/8" diam. holes, discharging into 3" diam.
rubber hose discharging into ground disposal.
Any purported or attempted transfer of ... an operating certificate ...
from one location to another or from one piece of equipment to another
automatically revokes ... the certificate Sec. 5*31 Ne'.-i York City Air Pol-
lution Control Code.
7/15/77 H.E. Anderson •
DATE INSPECTED BY A PC ENGINE®
INSTALLER
r. J.R. Elkins, Inc.
518 Gardner Avenue
Brooklyn, N.Y. 11222
11 : '
HEAD, INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES DIVISION .
FOR THE COMMISSIONER
I
KEEP CERTIFICATE ON PREMISE NEAR EQUI£
MENT. NOT VALID WITHOUT OFFICIAL SEAL„
_ A-J,Q1,
-------
J. LIMIIi, IIH-
518 GARDNElt AVENUE
BROOKLYN, U.Y. 11222
May 1, 1978
N.Y. State Dept. of Environmental Conservation
Region 2 Office
2 World Trade Center - 6lst Floor
New York, N.Y. lOO^
Att: Regional Air-Pollution Control Engineer
Reference: (a) fT.Y.St Dept. of Environmental Conservation
Order on Consent File No. 20&5 dated Oct. 1, 197^
Gentlemen:
This letter is forwarded in accordance with the progress
reporting requirements of the Reference (a) Consent Order
and covers the period of January 15, 1978 through March 15, 1978.
CHIP DRYER SYSTEM: Operational testing of the system is in
progress. At present we are developing operating and safety
procedures. During testing, we encountered a problem con-
veying material through the dryer drum. An excessive build-
up of product occurs at the feed end causing material to
spill back into the stationary feed end housing. The dryer
feed conveyor and the flights in the feed end of the drum
are being modified. This work will be completed during the
week of May 21, 1978. A request for inspection will be
filed with the N. Y. City Dept. of Air Resources as soon as
the modification is completed.
Joseph] R. Elkins , President
Very truly yours,
J;,K. ELK.IMG , IKC
JR£:cb
cc: Albert Klauss, P.E
SPECIFICATION ALUMINUM INGOTS
±£02-
¦¦ y*1* i. 1 m ¦ 1 •»
-------
S ri ~ |fr^ THE RESEARCH CORPORATION of New England
L-» 125 SILAS OEANE HIGHWAY WETHEnspiELQ er>Nwer
125 SILAS OEANE HIGHWAY. WETHERSFIELO, CONNECTICUT 06109 203 563-1431
Environmental Consultants To Management
June 8, 1978
Mr. Alex Bailey
South Coat Air Quality
Management District
9150 Flare Drive
El Monte, California 91731
Dear Mr. Bailey:
TRC - THE RESEARCH CORPORATION of New England is currently performing
a screening study of the secondary aluminum manufacturing industry for the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This study is being performed under
EPA Contract Number 68-02-2615 between TRC and the Emission Standards and
Engineering Division of EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.
Background data on the industry is being gathered to help determine the
need for development of standards of performance pursuant to Section III
of the Clean Air Act. We would appreciate your cooperation in providing
us with the information requested in Table 1 for each plant in your region.
Additionally, information on the best controlled plants in your region
would be appreciated.
As noted in the enclosed letter from Mr. Walter Barber of EPA, TRC has
been designated by EPA as an authorized representative of the Agency.
Therefore, TRC is subject to the provision of 42 U.S.C. 1857c9 (c) respect-
ing confidentiality of methods or processed entitled to protection as trade
secret3. If you believe that disclosure of any information requested would
reveal trade secrets or other confidential information, you should clearly
identify such information-—If you wish, you may also set forth reasons
for your claim and include supportive data or legal authority at the time
the information is submitted (in most cases, there will be an opportunity
to do so later if a question concerning public availability of information
arises). If no such claim is made, the information may be released to the
public without further notice to you.
Due to the relatively short time frame of this screening study, your
prompt reply would be very much appreciated. Please let us know if you can
meet a June 30, 1978 deadline. Thank you for your voluntary cooperation
in this study.
Sincerely,
TRC - THE RESEARCH CORPORATION
of New England
Edward T. Brookman
Associate Project Engineer
ET3/daa
Attachments A-103
Service tailored to the client's need - backed by research
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
DESIGNATION OF AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE
The Research Corporation of New England (TRC), is hereby designated
an Authorized Representative of the Administrator of the U. S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency for purposes of (i) assisting in the development
of any implementation plan under 42 USC 1857c-5, or 42 USC 1856-c(d), any
standard of performance under 42 USC 1856c-6, or any emission standard
under 42 USC 1857c-7, (1i) determining whether any person is in violation
of any such standard or any requirement of such a plan, or (iii) carrying
out 42 USC 1857h-l.
This designation is made pursuant to the Clean Air Act, 42 USC
1857c-9. The United States Code provides that, upon presentation of
this credential, the Authorized Representative named herein: (A) shall
have a right of entry to, upon, or through any premises in which an
emission source is located or in which records required to be maintained
under 42 USC 1857c-9(a)(1) are located, and (B) may at reasonable times
have access to and copy any records, inspect any monitoring equipment or
method required under 42 USC 1857c-9(a)(l), and sample any emissions
which the owner or operator of such source is required to sample.
Authorized Representatives of the Administrator are subject to
the provisions of 42 USC 1857c-9(c) respecting confidentiality of
methods or processes entitled to protection as trade secrets.
Date: ~ >3 O — 78
Designation Expires: September 30, 1978
Deputy Ass . Air Quality
Planning and Standards
A-104
-------
TABLE I
INFORMATION NEEDED FOR THE EPA SCREENING STUDY OF THE
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING INDUSTRY
1. What is the secondary aluminum production capacity of the plant?
2. What is the number of plant employees involved in the secondary
aluminum manufacturing operations?
3. What is the age of the manufacturing facility?
4. Provide a quantitative estimate of past, current and projected
production at the plant projected for five years.
5. Indicate any plans for expansion or modification of the production
facilities.
6. Provide a brief description of the process employed for secondary
aluminum manufacture at the plant, together with flow sheets and a
material balance. Pollutant emission locations should be clearly shown.
7. Provide a description and discussion of the emission control systems
used in the manufacturing operation. Design and actual removal
efficiencies should be specified.
8. Provide a current emissions inventory for the secondary aluminum
manufacturing operation at the plant. Separate emissions data should
be supplied for each basic step in the manufacturing process and for
each emission point. If emissions factors have been developed for
the operation, such information should be supplied.
Specifically, the following format should be used for supplying the
emissions data:
Process
Volumetric Flow
Rate (temp)
Pollutants
Quantities
Generated
Quantities
Emitted
Z
Control
9. Provide any available emission test data from the secondary aluminum
manufacturing operations and indicate the availability of such data which
is not in your possession. Test methods should be specific and uncon-
trolled emission data should, if possible, be reduced to the form of
emission factors.
A-105
-------
South Coast
AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
METROPOLITAN ZONE
9150 FLAIR DRIVE, EL MONTE, CALIFORNIA 91731 • (213)572-6258
June 27, 1978
The Research Corporation of New England
125 Silas Deane Highway
Wethersfield, Connecticut 06109
Attention: Mr. Edward T. Brookman
Associate Project Engineer
Gentlemen:
We would like to provide you with the information you requested in your
letter of June 8, 1978, but due to a shortage of manpower, we are unable
to assign engineering time to compile the data requested by you. However,
if you wish to send someone from your office to research our files and
extract the data you need, we would be happy to provide limited assistance.
Very truly yours,
Robert J. MacKnight
Director of Engineering
Alex L/Bailey
Supervising A. Rr-iESgineer II
Engineering Division
ALB:sh
A-106
-------
THE RESEARCH CORPORATION of New England
U U uv ) 125 SILAS DEANE HIGHWA'
Environmental Consultants To Management
125 SILAS DEANE HIGHWAY, WETHERSFIELD, CONNECTICUT 06109
203 563-1431
July 12, 1978
Mr. R. M. Cooperman
Suite 504
900 17th Street NW
Washington, D.C. 20006
Dear Mr. Cooperman:
I am sending this letter in response to the request you made during
our telephone conversation yesterday. TRC - THE RESEARCH CORPORATION
of New England is currently performing a screening study of the secondary
aluminum manufacturing Industry for the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA). This study is being performed under EPA Contract Number 68-02-
2615 between TRC and the Emission Standards and Engineering Division of
EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards. Background data on
the industry is being gathered to help determine the need for development
of standards of performance pursuant to Section III of the Clean Air Act.
Any help you can give to us on this project would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely
TRC - THE RESEARCH CORPORATION
of New England
7.
Edward T. Brookman
Associate Project Engineer
ETB/daa
Service tailored to the cliffitfoifeed - backed by research
-------
ALL IliD MliTALS
System Operational
April 19 7 7
AUG 19 7 3 TEST
Front Half
Particulate Flourides(Gaseous)
Test No.
Flow SCI'M
GU/nSCF
LB/IIR
PPMV
LB/HR
1
South
Vent
31400
0.050
12.86
180
17.0
North
Vent
26600
0.045
9.77
86
7.3
Total
58000
22.63
25.2
2
South
Vent
31900
0.126
33.02
595
60.3
North
Vent
26400
0.0 79
17.20
180
15.1
Total
58300
50.22
75.4
3
South
Vent
32400
0.020
5.28
44
4.5
North
Vent
26500
0.026
5.64
35
2.9
Total
58900
10.92
7.4
Slil'T
19 77 Tl-ST
Teller System
Florides
Charge Rate
Lb/Hr
PPMV
Charging 1
¦b/Ur
Total
Gas
Gas
1.
4150
41600
0.00008
0.03
2
9 S00
41900
0.0002
0.07
4
2000
41800
0.0003
0.10
7
3400
40800
0.0004
0.14
10
41200
0.0003
0.11
Deraag
3
41800
0.0001
0.04
0.28
0.15
1.1
5
41600
0.0013
0.46
0.16
0.0.9
0.7
6
42500
0.0015
0.56
0.12
0.04
0.3
8
41500
0.0005
0.17
0.12
0.05
0.4
9
41600
0.0007
0.24
0.12
0.17
0.5
A-108
-------
TESI DRY SYSTEMS
A. DATA SUMMARY - COMMERCIAL INSTALLATIONS
GLASS
APPLICATION:
CONTAINER
System capacity - SCTTV°F
17-19,000 SCFM @ 600°F
Inlet Conditions:
HF
B
SO
x
Particulate (size)
Opacity
N/A
N/A
50-200 PPM
.2-.4 gr/sdcf (.l-1.0y)
20%
Outlet Performance:
HF
B
Particulate
Opacity
N/A
N/A
5-10 PPM
.001-.01 gr/sdcf
Zero
Shake Cycle
24-36 hrs.
System Pressure Drop
8-10 in. w.g.
3/16/75
TESISORB ADDITIVES
FIBERGLASS SECONDARY ALUMINUM
3,500 SCFM @ 800°F 40-90,000 SCEM @ 300°1
70-200 2-20
.03 gr/scf N/A
50-300 PPM (0-100 PPM CI )
.1-.2 sdcf (.05-1.0y) .01-.25 gr/sdcf
(.2-1.5U)
20% 20-80%
<1 PPM <1 PPM
.001-.0016 gr/scf
25 PPM (<5 PPM Cl")
.001-.007 gr/sdcf .001-.003 gr/sdcf
Zero <5%
24 hrs. 72-120 hrs.
8-12 in. w.g. 3-15 in. w.g.
Teller Environmental Systems, Inc.
10 Faraday Street
Worcester, Massachusetts 01605
Tel. No. 617 755-8613
-------
TESI DRY SYSTEMS - SECONDARY ALUMINUM
E. DATA SUMMARY - COMMERCIAL INSTALLATION - ROCHESTER SMELTING & REFINING
DATA OBTAINED BY EPA
PARTICULATE
FLUORIDE
OPERATION
SCFM
AP
gr/scf
PPM
DATE
MODE
IN
OUT
in. w.q.
IN
OUT
IN
OUT
10/22/74
P-H
44600
52200
10.0
0.014
0.43
10/23/74
C-C-P
49900
56800
13.0
0.0128
0.0038
2.42
0.43
10/23/74
P-C-F
46800
61000
13.8
0.0234
0.0084
3.1
0.86
10/24/74
C-C-C
40900
50100
4.8
0.0254
0.0032
4.04
1.35
10/24/74
P-C-H
36700
47700
5.6
0.0086
0.0023
0.54
0.27
10/25/74
C-C-P
33900
45400
10.4
0.0196
0.0036
4.32
0.81
3/18/75
C-C-P
32600
36100
0.0616
0.0021
0.97
0.43
3/18/75
P-C-P
29400
34100
7.7
0.0369
0.0006
1.19
0.27
3/19/75
C-P-C
24400
28400
12.2
0.0540
0.0016
1.16
1.17
3/20/75
C-P-F
33900
38700
2.6
0.0661
0.0010
10.2
0.98
3/20/75
C-C
37400
41600
3.9
0.0256
0.0010
0.91
0.38
3/25/75
C-C
43600
40500
4.3
.0.0162
0.0019
2.24
0.07
3/25/75
P-P
37300
41800
4.8
0.0018
0.0012
0.25
0.05
3/26/75
C-C
45900
45500
11.9
0.0938
0.0023
1.24
0.21
3/27/75
C-C
33800
37400
12.1
0.0494
0.0034
1.21
0.07
3/27/75
C-C
32400
36200
12.5
0.0357
0.0014
I
0.49
0.05
H=Hold
C*=Charge
Average:
0.0341 0.0025
-------
Meeting Reports
The following section contains the results of the meetings with
the outside consultant on this project: Mr. William Balgord, President,
Environmental & Resources Technology, Inc.
A-lll
-------
Report on Meeting with Bill Balgord
May 19, 1978
Date: May 19, 1978
Place: TRC - Wethersfield, CT
Attendees: Bill Balgord and Ed Brookman
Summary of Discussion:
During the meeting with Bill, several topics were discussed regarding
the secondary aluminum industry. These topics included possible best
controlled plants, possible trade association contacts, possible future
industrial trends, process descriptions, and demagging operations.
I provided him with a copy of the Project Plan and Task Order.
A-112
-------
Report on Meeting with Bill Balgord
May 30, 1978
Date: May 30, 1978
Place: TRC - Wethersfield, CT
Attendees: Bill Balgord and Ed Brookman
Summary of Discussion:
Bill provided several documents for use in this project. These
documents were discussed as regards their relevance and content.
Bill also provided information on industry and trade association
personnel who might be contacted for further discussion on the secondary
aluminum industry.
A-113
-------
CDS Results
The following section of Appendix A contains the result of a search
conducted through the Compliance Data System (CDS) file on SIC 3341 which
is the nonferrous secondary metals industry. As can be seen, very few of
the secondary aluminum plants are listed in CDS. This is primarily due
to either their predicted emissions being less than the inclusion limit
of CDS (90,720 kg/year (100 tons/year)) or there were no complaints and
subsequent plant inspections. Those that are listed include very little
emission information.
A-114
-------
SOURCE DATA REPORT
06/02/76 COMPLIANCE OAT* SYSTEM PAGE J
HERMAN BROS JRONlHET SECONDARY ALUMINUM SCREENING STUDY PEOF NON-FED ROE!
STATE AL COUNTY JEFFERSON APCD 0 SIR SOURCE R0E2 S
COUNTY 1*80 SOURCE 08020 AOCR 004 CITY OSSO APST OPERATING ROES H
'SOURCE *NAME* * 'rERMAn'bROs'IrONIHET STATE *REBIST ••••••• • • ""roeS
ADDRESS 270016TH STREET N NEOS XHEF >020 RDE4 STAFF MEMBER
CITY, STATE BIRMINGHAM AL 99207 PRIORITY ROES LAST-UPDATE 2/21/78
'*'pOINt'nUMBER*'ooO"*'*iuLT "'SOURCE*CMPL*r'IN*COMPL"CERTIPIca{n""8TATE/L0C*RE0UL " CMS2
POLLUTANT SOURCI-tIP 0 NO SCHEDULE SOURCE EMU CAT 2 100 TO 1000 TPY RUE7
DESCRIPTION ENTIRE SOURCE CAPACITY SCCS CODE
t
t-1
t—'
(V1
-------
SOURCE DATA REPORT
06/02/7B
US REUUCTIOK CO
STATE At COUNTY FRANKLIN
COUNTY i«60 SOURCE 0000! ABCR 007
COMPLIANCE DATA RV8TEM
SECONDARY ALUMINUM 8CREENIN6 8TU0Y
CITY 2940
PACE IB
FEDF NOk-PED RDE1
APCD 0 81F SOURCE RDE2 V
AP8T CPENATIK6 ROEJ M
SUURCE NAME
AOORESS
CITY, STATE
US REDUCTION CO
PO BX 1149
RUSSELLVILLE AL 35653
STATE RESIST
NEOS XREF
PRIORITY
0001
SIC 3341
R0E4
ROES
RDE6
STAFF MEMBER
LAST-UPDATE
AM OUBOSE
l/lJ/76
COMMENT tSECCNOARV SMELT INS ANO
2REFININ0 • ALUMINUM
000
MULT
POINT NUMBER
PULLUTANT
DESCRIPTION ENTIRE SOURCE
SOURCE CMPL « IN COHPL-CERTIFICATN
SOURCE-SIP 2 APPROVED STATE 8CHED
CAPACITY
STATE/LOC RE6LL
SOURCE EMIS CAT
SCC8 CODE
2 100 TO 1000 TPV
CM82
RUE 7
POINT NUMBER 001 MULT POINT CMPL « IN C0MPL-CERT1FICATN STATE/LOC REOUL CH 4.4 C*S2
PULLUTANT PT POINT-SIP 2 APPROVED STATE SCHED PT IM1S CAT 2 100 TO 1000 TPV RUE7
DESCRIPTION CRUSHIN6/SCRECN1N6 CAPACITY SCCB CODE S0400I
COMMENT 1 PERMIT *001# ZOO*
POINT 'number'*002 MULT " ' """ "pOINt'cmPl"* 'In'cOMPL-CERTIF ICATN* '"sImE/LOc'rECUl'ch'aIS" CM82
POLLUTANT PT POINT-SIP 2 APPROVED STATE 8CHED PT |MI8 CAT 3 OVER 1000 TPV R0E7
DESCRIPTION TANDEM REVER8 FURNACE CAPACITY SCC8 CODE 304001
COMMENT 1 PERMIT *002
PUINT NUMBER
POLLUTANT
DESCRIPTION
003 MULT
PT
INDUCTION FURN »»
COMMENT 1 PERMIT
M003
POINT CMPL
POINT-SIP
CAPACITY
4
7
IN COMPL-CERTIFICATN
SCHEO FEND/NOT APPRV
STATE/LOC RE6UL
PT EMIS CAT
acce cooe
CM 4.4
2 100 TO
304001
1000
TPV
CM82
RDE7
PUINT NUMBER
POLLUTANT
DESCRIPTION
005 MULT
PT
induction furn *3
COMMENT 1 PERMIT
MOOS
POINT CMPL
POINT-SIP
CAPACITY
4
7
IN COMPL-CERTIFICATN
SCHED PEND/NOI APPRV
STATE/LOC RE6UL
PT EMIS CAT
SCCB CODE
2 100 TO
304001
1000
TPV
CM82
RDE7
PUINT NUMBER
pollutant
DESCRIPTION
006 MULT
PT
INDUCTION FURN 42
COMMENT 1 PERMIT
M004
POINT CMPL
POINT-SIP
capacity
4
0
IN COMPL-CERTIFICATN
NO SCHEDULE
STATE/LOC RE8UL
PT EMIS CAT
SCCB CODE
2 100 TO
304001
1000
TPV
crai
RDE7
POINT NUMBER
pollutant
DESCRIPTION
007 MULT
PT
DRV1N0/CLASS - FLU8S0L
COMMENT 1 PERMIT Z007
POINT CMPL
POINT-SIP
capacity
a
0
IN COMPL-CERTIFICATN
NO SCHEDULE
STATE/LOC REOUL
PT EMIS CAT
8CC8 COOE
2 100 TO
304001
1000
TPV
CMS2
RDE7
POINT NUMBER 00* MULT POINT CMPL 4 IN COMPL-CERTIFICATN STATE/LUC RE6UL CP82
PULLUTANT PT POINT-SIP 0 NO SCHEDULE PT EMIS CAT 2 100 TO 1000 TPY R0E7
DESCRIPTION ROTARY FURNACE CAPACITY SCC0 CODE 304001
COMMENT 1 PERMIT Z008
PUINT NUMBER *009 MULT POINT CMPL 4 In'cOMPL-CERTIFKATN* '* 'sf ATE/LOc'rEGUL " ' " ' * " * " '*""c?S2
POLLUTANT PT POINT-SIP 0 NO SCHEDULE PT EMIS CAT 2 100 TO 1000 TPV RUE7
DESCRIPTION REVERB FURNACE CAPACITY SCCB CODE 304001
COMMENT 1 PERMIT Z0O9
-------
SOURCE DAT* REPORT
Ofc/O2/ie
h J BULLOCK
STATE *L
countv mo
INC
COUNTY JEFFERSON
SOURCE 000*8 AOCR 004
COMPLIANCE OAT* SYSTEM
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SCREENING STUDY
CITY 0360
PACE 20
FEDP NOK.PEO ADC 1
APCO 0 SIP SOURCE RDE2 0
APST OPERATING ROES M
SOURCE NAME
ADDRESS
CITY* STATE
N J BULLOCK INC
1901 ERIE ST
BIRMINGHAM AL 19220
STATE RESIST
NEDS XREF
PRIORITY
4-07-006B-21
SIC 3341
ROE*
ROES
ROE*
STAFF MEMBER
LAST-UPDATE
*e
-------
SOURCE OATA REPURT
06/03/1$
W J BULLOCK IMC SECONDARY *
STATE *L COUNTY JEFFERSON
CUUNTV l«eo SOURCE OOOfcB AQCR 004 CI1V 0360
OHPLIANCE DATA SYSTEM
UH1NUM SCREENING STUDY
PA6E 21
FEDF NOK-FED
APCD 0 SIP SOURCE
APST 0PERATIK6
R0E1
RDEZ 0
ROES M
POINT NUMBER
POLLUTANT
DESCRIPTION
010
PT
ZINC
MULT
DISTILLATION
ruRNJ
POINT
POINT
CAPAC
CMPL
SIP
TY
4
7
IN C0MPL»CENT1FICATN
SCHED PENO/NOT APPRV
STATI/LOC RECUL
PT EMIS CAT
SCCB CODE
CH 4,4
0 UNKkONK
304000
CK82
R0E7
POINT NUMBER
POLLUTANT
DESCRIPTION
Olt
PT
ZINC
MULT
DISTILLATION
FURN4
POINT
POINT
CAPAC
CMPL
SIP
TY
4
7
IN compl*certificatn
SCHED PEN0/N0T APPRV
STATE/LOC RECUL
PT EMIS CAT
SCCS CODE
CM a.4
0 UNKKONK
304008
CMS2
RDE7
POINT NUMBED
POLLUTANT
DESCRIPTION
on
PT
ZINC
MULT
DISTILLATION
FURNf
POINT
POINT
CAPAC
CMPL
SIP
TY
•
7
IN C0MPL-CEHT1F1CATN
SCHED PEND/NOT APPRV
STATE/LOC REOUL
PT EMIS CAT
SCCS CODE
CH 4,4
0 UNKfcON*
304000
CMSI
B0I7
POINT NUMBER
POLLUTANT
DESCRIPTION
Oil
PT
ZINC
MULT
DISTILLATION
FURNk
POINT
POINT
CAPAC
CMPL
SIP
TY
4
7
IN C0HPL-CERT1F1CATN
SCHED PENO/NOT APPRV
STATE/LOC RECUL
PT EMIS CAT
SCCS CODE
CH 4,4
0 UNKKONK
S0400B
CPS2
HVC7
PUINT NUMBER
POLLUTANT
DESCRIPTION
0|«
PT
ZINC
MULT
OISTILLATION
FURNT
POINT
POINT
CAPAC
CMPL
• IP
TY
4
7
IN C0MPL»CERT1F!CATN
SCHED PEND/NOT APPRV
STATE/LOC RECUL
PT EMIS CAT
SCCS CODE
CH 4,4
0 UNKInQHK
304008
CM82
H0E7
POINT NUMBER
POLLUTANT
DESCRIPTION
01S
PT
ZINC
MULT
OISTILLATIUN
FURNB
POINT
POINT
CAPAC
CMPL
BIP
TY
4
7
IN C0MPL-CERT1P1CATN
SCHED PENO/NOT APPRV
STATE/LOC RESUL
PT EMIS CAT
SCCS CODE
CH 4,4
0 UNKNOWN
30400S
CM82
RDE7
POINT NUMBER
POLLUTANT
DESCRIPTION
Olfc
PT
ZINC
MULT
D1BTILLATIUN
FURNf
POINT
POINT
CAPAC
CMPL
BIP
TY
4
7
IN COMPL"CE*)TIFICATN
SCHED PEND/NOT APPRV
STATE/LOC RECUL
PT EMIS CAT
SCCS COOE
CH 4,4
0 UNKhONfc
304000
CMSS
RDE7
POINT NUMBER
POLLUTANT
DESCRIPTION
0|7
PT
ZINC
MULT
D1ST, PURN4|0
POINT
POINT
CAPAC
CMPL
BIP
TY
4
7
IN COMPL"CERTipicatn
SCHED PENO/NOT APPRV
STATE/LOC RECUL
PT ENIS CAT
SCCS CODE
CH 4,4
0 UNKKONK
304008
C*82
RDE7
-------
SOURCE DAIA REPORT
06/02/76
COM
LlANCE OATA SYSTEM
PACE
16
VULCAN PATERlALS
CO,
SECONOARV ALUM
nuh screening study
FEDF
NCN-FEO
R0E1
1
STATE CA COUNTY RIVERSIDE
APCD
0 SIP SOURCE RDE2
COUNTY *«20 SOURCE 00014 AQCR 024
CITV 1600
APST
OPERATING DDES
SOURCE NAME
VULCAN
MAURI
L» CO,
OTATC
RE
1ST
SIC 3341
ROE 6
ADDRESS
QUARRY
ROAO
NEDS
XRE
0043
RDE4
STAFF PEMBER
C04 GREEN
CI?t, STATE
CORONA
CA 917
0
PRIORITY
R0E5
LAST-UPOATE
¦5/17/78
POINT NUMBER
000
MULT
SOURCE CHPL 2
IN
COMPL-SOURCE TEST 8TATE/L0C RE6UL
CMsa
POLLUTANT
SOURCE>8
P 0
NO
SCHEDULE
SOURCE EHIS CAT 2 100 TO 1000
TP*
RCE7
DESCRIPTION
ENTIRE
SOURCE
CAPACITY
scce
CODE
ACTICN
0*
SCHD
2/10/7
ACHV
2/16/75
ACT
TYPE
TO
STATE
VISIBLE EMISSION#
EVALUATION
STAFF
C04 6REEN
RESLLTS
01 ACTION
ACHIEVED
RUEB
0
ACTION
07
SCHO
5/29/7
ACHV
5/29/75
ACT
TYPE
7S
STATE
VISIBLE EMISSIONS
EVALUATION
STAFF
C04 GREEN
RESULTS
01 ACTION
ACHIEVED
RUE6
0
ACTION
OS
SCND
12/12/7
ACHV
0/25/75
ACT
TYPE
76
STATE
VISIBLE EMISSIONS
EVALUATION
STAFF
C04 SREEN
RESLLTS
00
RUEO
0
ACTION
09
SCHD
12/21/7
ACHV
12/21/75
ACT
TYPE
76
6TATE
VISIBLE EMISSIONS
EVALUATION
STAFF
Com sheen
RESULTS
00
RDE8
0
ACTION
10
SCHO
1/25/7
ACHV
1/25/76
ACT
TYPE
7S
STATE
VISIBLE EMISSIONS
EVALUATION
STAFF
RESULTS
RDE6
ACTION
It
SCHD
6/2«/7
ACHV
6/24/76
ACT
TYPE
76
STATE
VISIBLE EMISSIONS
evaluation
STAFF
RESLLTS
RDES
ACTtON
12
SCHD
8/20/7
ACHV
0/26/76
ACT
TYPE
77
STATE
SOURCE TEST
STAFF
RESULTS
01 ACTION
ACHIEVED
RDEO
ACTION
IS
SCHD
12/ 2/7
ACHV
11/ 2/76
ACT
TYPE
77
STATE
SOURCE TEST
STAFF
RESULTS
01 ACTION
ACHIEveo
RDES
ACTION
14
SCHD
1/26/7
ACHV
t/26/77
ACT
TYPE
77
STATE
SOURCE TEST
STAFF
RESLLTS
01 ACTION
ACHIEVED
RUES
ACTION
15
SCHD
6/29/7
ACHV
6/29/77
ACT
TYPE
76
STATE
VISIBLE EMISSIONS
EVALUATION
STAFF
RESULTS
01 ACTION
achieved
RDEB
ACTION
1*
SCHD
9/30/7
ACHV
0/10/77
ACT
TYPE
7B
STATE
VISIBLE EMISSIONS
EVALUATION
STAFF
RESULTS
RUEO
ACTION
17
SCHD
11/J0/7
ACHV
11/10/77
ACT
TYPE
76
STATE
VISIBLE EMISSIONS
EVALUATION
STAFF
RESLLTS
RUEO
ACTION
IS
SCHD
2/20/7
ACHV
2/20/70
ACT
TYPE
78
STATE
VISIBLE EMISSIONS
EVALUATION
STAFF
RESULTS
RUES
25
POINT NUHBER
001
MULT
POINT
CM
L 3
IN
C0MPL«1NBPECT10N STATE/LOC REGUL
CM82
POLLUTANT
POINT
"SI
0
NO
SCHEDULE
PT CMIS CAT 2 100 TO 1000
TPY
RDE7
UESCR1PIION
ALUMINUM l)RUS
HILL
CAPACITY
scca
CODE
-------
SOURCE 0*1* REPORT
06/02/71 COMPLIANCE DAT* SYSTEM PAOE 1
N, AMERICAN 8KELTIN6 SECONDARY ALUMINUM BCREEN1N6 STUDY FEDF KO*-FED RDtl t
STATE DE COUNTY NEW CAITLE APCD 0 SIP SOURCE R0E2
COUNTY OtSO SOURCE 0006* *OCR 0«S CITY 0260 *PST OPERATINE ROES 2
" SOURCE'NAME " *n" AMERICAN*SMELTING* BUTE *NE6IST ' "rDeJ"' * "
ADDRESS NEDS HREF 006* ROCS STAFF PEMBER
CITY* STATE WILMINGTON DE 1*899 PRIORITY RDES LAST-UPDATE 12/22/77
"*"uiNT'number**00#' *""uLT** SOURCE *CMPL'i*iN*c6MPLlcERUpicATN''*'8TATE/L6c*RE«CL * """*82
POLLUTANT SOURCE-SIP 0 NU SCHEDULE SOURCE EMIS CAT 3 OVER 1000 TPV R0E7
DESCRIPTION SECONDARY SMELTING CAPACITY BCCS CODE
ACTION 01 8CH0 6/10/79 *CMV 9/ 9/79 ACT-TYPE 90 EPA INSPECTION
STAFF RESULTS 01 ACTION ACHIEVED RDES 0
ACTION 02 SCHO 6/10/76 ACHV / / ACT-TYPE OS STATE INSPECTION
STAFF RESULTS 00 RDES 0
ACTION OS 8CHD 4/30/77 ACHV 2/10/77 ACT-TYPE OS STATE INSPECTION
STAFF RESLLTS 30 IN COMPLIANCE RDES
ACTION 04 SCHO 4/10/77 ACHV 2/10/77 ACT-TYPE SO EPA INSPECTION
STAFF E02 FERDAS RESULTS 01 ACTION ACHIEVED RDES 72
ACTION 06 SCHO 12/31/76 ACHV 12/11/76 ACT-TYPE 10 STATE CIVIL ACTION
STAFF RESULTS 01 ACTION ACHIEVED RUES
ACTION 01 8CH0 12/31/76 ACHV 12/31/76 ACT-TYPE 09 STATE VE EVALUATION
STAFF RESLLTS 10 OUT OF CCHPLJAN RUE6
ACTION OS SCHO 3/31/77 ACHV / / ACT-TYPE 93 PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REVIEM
STAFF E04 NATHAN RESULTS 02 NOT ACHIEVED ROES
ACTION 09 BCHD 9/30/78 ACHV / / ACT-TYPE OS STATE INSPECTION
if STAFF RESLLTS RDE8
H I I I I I I I I 11 It I I I
g POINT NUMBER 010 MULT POINT CMPL • IN C0MPL-CERT1F1CATN STATE/LOC RECbL V CHS2
PULLUTANT PT POINT-SIP 0 NU SCHEDULE PT EMIS CAT 3 OVER 1000 TPY RUE7
DESCRIPTION SCRAP ALUM TO INGOT CAPACITY 8CC8 CODE 304001
COMMENT 1 met SCRUBBER-HIGH EPPtCIENTCY
ACTION 09 8CHD 1/ 1/72 ACHV 1/ 1/72 ACT-TYPE OS FINAL COMPLIANCE
STAFF RESLLTS 0| ACTION ACHIEVED ROES 0
***'pOINT*NUMBER*'o 15**'*'SuLT*oio" """'poINt'cmp"'* IN COMPL-CERTIF!c*TN ' sfATE/LOC*RE«UL"v' ........
POLLUTANT VE POINT-SIP 0 NO SCHEDULE PT EMIS CAT 3 OVER 1000 TPV RL'E7
DESCRIPTION SCRAP ALUM TO INGOT CAPACITY SCCS CODE 304001
COMMENT 1 MET SCRUBBEH-HI6H EFFICItNTCY
ACTION OS SCHO 1/ 7/72 ACHV 1/ 7/72 ACT-TYPE 09 FINAL COMPLIANCE
STAFF RESULTS 0| ACTION ACHIEVED RDE8 0
""puiNT*NUMBER"o2o"""uL"" * 'point'cmpl* S in compl-centificatn' * state/loc'resul'v "ch«""
POLLUTANT PT POINT-SIP 0 NU SCHEDULE PT EMIS CAT 3 OVER 1000 TP> RUE7
DESCRIPTION ROTARY FNC CAPACITY SCCS CODE 304001
COMMENT I FABRIC FILTER-MEDIUM TEMPERATURE
ACTION OS 8CHD 1/ 1/72 ACHV 1/ 1/72 ACT-TYPE 09 FINAL COMPLIANCE
STAFF RESLLTS 01 ACTION ACHIEVED RUES 0
' "pd|nT,nUMBEr"o25*""muLT*020* * POINT CMPL 4 IN CO*PL-CERT IF 1CATN STATE/L0C*RE6Ll" V * * ' " " " * *' * ' "cHS2 *"
-------
SOURCE 0*1* HEPURI
06/02/76 COMPLIANCE DATA SYSTEM PAGE 3
ft. AMERICAN SMELT 1*16 SECONDARY ALUMINUM SCKEENING STUDY FEDF KON-FED HOit 1
STATE OE COUNTY NfN CASTLE APCD 0 SIP SOURCE RDE2
COUNTY QISO SOURCE 0006A A8CR 0«S CITY 92*0 *PST 0PERATIK6 ROES 2
"'pollutant •••••••••• • •• • JoiSTliiJ-TSu'ScSeOULr " * "" PT ISisCM roJES'ISSS^r * ROE 7
DESCRIPTION RUTARV MC CAPACITY SCCB CODE JO«OOJ
COMMENT I FABRIC FILTER-MEDIUM TEMPERATURE
ACTION OS SCHO 1/ ?/72 ACMV 1/ 7/72 ACT-TYPE 05 FINAL COMPLIANCE
STAFF RESLLTS Of ACTION ACHIEVED RUES 0
-------
SUUHCE IUTA REPORT
KEYSTONE BA METAL CO
STATE BA COUNTY GREENE
COUNTY IMO SOURCE 00008
COMPLIANCE OATA SYSTEM
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SCREENING STUDY
AQCR 057 CITY 2*40
PACE 1
FEDF NON-FED ROE 1
APCD 0 SIP SOURCE ROES
APST OPERATING ROES
SOURCE NAM{
ADDRESS
CITY. STATE
KEYSTONE 0* METAL CO
SOX 100
GREENSBORO 64 30642
STATE RESIST
NEOS HREF
PRIORITY
OOOS
SIC 3341
R0E4
RDE9
RDE6
STAFF MEMBER
LAST-UPDATE 4/ 6/76
POINT NUMBER SOS RULT
POLLUTANT PT
DESCRIPTION ENTIRE SOURCI
SOURCE CHPL « IN COHPL-CCRUFICATN
SOURCE-SIP 2 APPROVEO STATE SCHEO
CAPACITY
STATE/LOC REOIL
SOURCE EMJS CAT
SCCS COOE
I LESS THAN 100 TPY
CHS2
RDE7
-------
SUUHCfc 0*1* REPORI
06/U2/TS
COMPLIANCE DATA SYSTEM
PAGE 12
R LAVIN a SONS
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SCREENING STUDY
FEOF NOk'FED
ROEt 1
STA1E IL COUNTY COOK
APCD 0 SIP SOURCE
NDE2
COUNTY 1540 SOURCE 00510 AQCR Ok?
CITV <1220
APST CPEHAmC
ROES
BOUNCE NAPE
R LAV1N t SON#
81 ATE RESIST OSltOOAOX SIC
))«!
RDE6
A00HE8S
3426 8 KE0Z1E
NEDS XREF 9999 RDE4
STAFF PEM8ER
CITY. STATE
CHlCASO IL *0*21
PRIORITY roes
LAST'UPOATE 10/ll/U
POINT NUMBER
000 HULT
SOURCE CMPL 4 IN COHPLHERT IFICATN
STATE/LOC
RECUl
CM!
POLLUTANT
80UPCE-SIP NUT SPECIFIED
SOURCE EP18 CAT 2 100 TO 1000 TPY
PUE7
description
ENTIRE SOURCE
CAPACITY
SCC8 CODE
-------
SUUHCfc DATA REPORT
06/02/70
WABASH SMELTING
•TATE IN COUNTY MABA8H
COUNTY 4320 SOURCE 00010
COMPLIANCE DATA SYSTEM
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SCREENING STUDY
AQCR 004 CITY 4500
PAGE 4
fedf ho*-fed roei
APCD 1 8JP - ACTIVE R0E2
APST OPERATING RDE3
SOURCE NAPt
ADDRESS
CITY* STAJE
WABASH SMELTING
US 20M
WABASH IK 46«92
STATE RESIST
NEDS *REF
PRIORITY
OOltt
0010
SIC 3341
ROE 4
RDE5
R0E6
STAFF MEMBER
LAST-UPDATE
4/27/78
COMMENT jrOLLOWINB REBUJRED OF SOURCE IN GENERAL
36/30/73-SUBM1T LIST OF POSITIONS AS FOLLONS
4/ PCSITION/SHIFT RESPONSIBLE FOR OPEATION UP REVEHBERA-
STORY PROCESS CNTRL E8UIP AMD SCRUBBER
0/ POSITION/SHIFT RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTENANCE OF ABOVE
TEHUIPMKNT 7/1/TJ-SUBMIT MONTHLY PRO*
S0RC88 REPORTS BEGINNING ON THIS DATE*
POINT NUMBER
000
MULT
SOURCE CMPL «
IN
compl-certificatn STATE/LOC
RECIL
CK82
pollutant
SOURCE-SIP S
Sill OROER-EPA E*FOR SOURCE EPIS CAT 2
too
TO 1000
TPY
RDE7
DESCRIPTION
ENTIRE
SOURCE
CAPACITY
SCCS CODE
ACTION
01
SCHD
6/27/74
ACMV
/ /
ACT-TYPE
99
NOTICE OF VIOLATION
STAFF
RESULTS
00
RDEB
10
ACTtON
03
SCMO
9/3I/7J
ACHV
9/31/73
ACT-TYPE
64
EPA ORDER ISSUED
STAFF
RESILT8
01
ACTION
ACHIEVEO
ROES
0
ACTION
04
SCHD
3/28/73
ACHY
3/28/73
ACT-TYPE
63
NOTICE OF VIOLATION ISSUED
STAFF
RESULTS
01
ACTION
ACHIEVED
ROES
0
ACTION
OS
SCHD
6/27/74
ACHV
6/27/7*
ACT-TYPE
63
NOTICE OF VIOLATION ISSUEO
STAFF
RE8LLT8
01
ACTION
ACHIEVED
RDE8
0
ACTION
Ob
SCHD
7/16/79
ACHV
6/16/7S
ACT-TYPE
72
CONSENT DECREE ISSUED
STAFF
RESULTS
00
RCES
0
ACTION
07
SCHO
10/17/74
ACHV
10/17/74
ACT-TYPE
77
REFERRAL TO US ATTORNEY
STAFF
RE8LLTS
RDEB
ACTION
OS
SCHO
/ /
ACHV
10/25/72
ACT-TYPE
«7
COURT ORDER
STAFF KOI
RESULTS
RUES
ACTION
0«
8CH0
6/10/77
ACHV
/ /
ACT-TYPE
61
COMPLIANCE MONITORING EVALUATION
STAFF
REStLTS
ROES
POINT NUMBER 001 PULT POINT CMPL I NOT IN COMPL-NO SCHD MaTE/LOC REGUL APC-3,APC-5 CM82
POLLUTANT PT POINT-SIP 9 Sit] (JROER-EPA ENFOR PT EMI8 CAT 2 100 TO 1000 TPY RDE7
DESCRIPTION REV FURN AREA-NUT D(NAG CAPACITY SCCS CODE 304001
COMMENT I CUNTHL EM1S FROM CHRGNG"ELL MOOUNG SYS-FURK 5,14
2 REPORT ON OPERATION OF FURNACES 14 ANO 5 BY 7/19/73. IF
3 COMPLIANCE NOT MET HOOIFV IN ACCORDANCE HITH SCHEOULE FOR
4 EMISSION PT 002.
PUINT NUMBER 002 MULT 001 POINT CMPL I NOT IN COMPL-NO SCHD 8TA1E/LCC REGUL APC-3«APC-5 CM82
POLLUTANT PT POINT-SIP 5 8113 ORDER-EPA ENFOR PT EM18 CAT 2 100 TO 1000 TPY R0E7
DESCRIPTION REV FURN AREA-NUT DEMAG CAPACITY SCCS CODE 304001
COMMENT 1 CNTRL IMIS FR CHGNG NELL HDN8 SYS-FR 1*2,6*12
POINT NUMBER 003 MULT POINT CMPL 1 NOT IN COMPL-NO SCHD 8TATE/L0C REGUL APC-3,APC-5 C»82
POLLUTANT PT POINT-SIP S 8113 ORDER-EPA ENFUR PT EMI8 CAT 2 100 TC 1000 TPY RDE7
DESCRIPTION DEMAGGING-RV FUHN.SCRB ST CAPACITY SCCS CODE 304001
COMMENT I MODIFY OPERATING PROCEDURE FOR COMPLIANCE
-------
SOURCE CUT A REPORT
06/02/78
WABASH SMELTlH.fi
STATE IN COUNTY
COUNTY 4320 SOURCE
WABASH
00010
COMPLIANCE DATA SYSTEM
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SCREENING STUDY
AflCR 084 CITY <500
FEDF
APCO
AP8T
PA6E 9
NOK-FED
1 SIP • ACTIVE
OPERATING
RDE1
RDE2
DDES
2
I
4
9
IF UNABLE TO COMPLY BY 6/30/73 FOLLONINB SCHEDULE IN EFFECT
PINAL PLAN-07/31/73 AhARO CONTRACTS* 08/15/73
START CONSTRUCT10N«|0/19/73 COMPLETE C0N8TR-09/31/74
FINAL COMPLIANCE 06/01/74
POINT NUMBER 900 MULT POINT CHPL 9 JN COMPL N SCHEDULE 8TATE/L0C RESUL APC-9 CH8S
POLLUTANT PT POINT-SIP NOT SPECIFIED PT EMIS CAT 0 UNKfcOHK ROE?
DESCRIPTION CHIP ORVERl «1*2,3 CAPACITY SCCS CODE
ACTION 01 3CH0 8/11/75 ACHV 8/31/79 ACT-TYPE 09 PINAL COMPLIANCE
STAFF RESULTS 00 ROES 0
POINT NUMBER 901 MULT POINT CHPL 9 IN COMPL N SCHEDULE 8TA1E/L0C RE6UL APC-9 CMS8
POLLUTANT PT POJNT-81P NUT SPECIFIED PT EMIS CAT 0 UNKNOT R0£7
DESCRIPTION PNC1,2,9,6,7,8,9,10,11,14 CAPACITY SCCS CODE
ACTION
01 SCHO
7/30/79
ACHV
7/30/79
ACT'TYPE
02
BIND1N6 COMMITMENT TO PURCHASE CGMROL
EQUIPMENT
staff
RESULTS
00
ROES
0
ACTION
02 SCHO
11/ 1/79
ACHV
11/ 1/79
ACT-TYPE
03
INITIATION OP ON SITE CONSTRUCTION/PROCESS CHANGE
STAFF
RESULTS
00
ROES
0
ACTION
03 8CHD
3/1S/76
ACHV
4/29/76
ACT-TYPt
09
FINAL COMPLIANCE
STAFF
RESULTS
00
ROES
0
POINT NUMBER
90 2
MULT
POINT
CMPL S
IN
COMPL n schedule state/loc
REOLL APC
-9
C»8i
POLLUTANT
PT
POINT
-SIP
NOT
SPECIFIED PT EMIS CAT 0 UNKfcOfck
flOET
DESCRIPTION
0R088
MILL
CAPACITY
SCCS CODE
ACTION
01 SCHO
8/31/79
ACHV
S/31/79
ACT-TYPE
02
B1NDIN0 COMMITMENT TO PURCHASE CCMROL
E0U1PMENT
STAFF
RESULTS
00
ROES
0
ACTION
02 SCHO
4/30/76
ACHV
4/29/76
ACT-TYPE
03
INITIATION OF ON SITE CONSTRUCTICfc/PROCESS CHANCE
STAFF
RESLLTS
00
ROEB
0
ACTION
03 8CHD
10/19/76
ACHV
9/17/76
ACT-TYPE
09
FINAL COMPLIANCE
STAFF
t »¦
RESULTS
00
ROES
0
POINT NUMBER
903
MULT
POINT
CHPL 9
IN
COMPL m SCHEDULE 8TATE/L0C
REGUL APC
-9
CPS2
pollutant
PT
POINT
•SIP
NOT
8PECIF1E0 PT EMIS CAT 0 UNKNOT
ROE?
DESCRIPTION
RClPOINTS 900,91(1,902
CAPACITY
SCCS CODE
ACTION
01 SCHD
12/31/79
ACHV
12/31/79
ACT-TYPE
01
SUBMISSION OF FINAL CONTROL
PLAN
STAFF
RESULTS
00
ROES
0
ACTION
02 SCHO
7/ 1/79
ACHV
7/ 1/79
ACT-TYPE
08
PP06RE8S REPORT TO EPA
STAFF
RESULTS
00
RDE8
0
ACTION
03 SCHD
10/ 1/79
ACHV
10/ 1/79
ACT-TYPE
08
PROGRESS REPORT TO EPA
STAFF
RESULTS
00
ROES
0
ACTION
OS SCHO
«/ 1/76
ACHV
4/29/76
ACT-TYPE
08
PROGRESS REPORT TO EPA
STAFF
RESLLTS
00
ROES
0
ACTION
06 SCHD
7/ 1/76
ACHV
6/16/76
ACT-TYPi
08
PROGRESS REPORT TO EPA
STAFF
RESULTS
00
R0E8
0
ACTION
07 SCHD
1U/1S/76
ACHV
9/17/76
ACT-TYPE
08
PROGRESS REPORT TO EPA
STAFF
RESULTS
00
Rote
0
-------
SOURCE DATA REPORT
04/42/70
WABASH SMEL11N0
SIA1E IN COUNTY "ABASH
COUNTV 4320 SOURCE 00010
COMPLIANCE OATA SYSTEM
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SCRtENINQ STUDY
BCD OS* CITY 4SOO
PAGE 6
FEDF NOK-FED ROIl
APCB i SIP - ACTIVE R0E2
APST OPERATIC RDIS
T
O
POINT NUMBER
400
MULT
POINT CMPL 0
CQMPL STATUS
UNKNOWN
STATE/LUC
RE6UL
CMSt
pollutant
POINT-SIP
NUT
SPECIFIED
PT EHIS CAT 0 UNKKO**
RDE7
DESCRIPTION
SCRUBBER
HON
ORS
CAPACITY
SCCS CODE
ACTION
«I
8CHD
1/
1/
ACHV
12/22/70
ACT-TYPE
OS
PROWESS
REPORT
TO
EP*
STAFF
RESLLTS
RDEO
ACTION
02
SCHD
«/
1/
ACHV
l/U/77
ACT-TYPE
OS
PROORESS
REPORT
TO
EPA
STAFF
*01
RESULTS
RUES
ACTION
01
SCNO
?/
1/
ACMV
0/21/77
ACT-TYPE
00
PROGRESS
REPORT
TO
EPA
STAFF
RESULTS
RDES
ACTION
00
SCMO
10/
1/
ACMV
t/20/77
ACT-TYPE
00
PROORESS
REPORT
TO
EPA
STAFF
RESULTS
RDCB
ACTION
09
SCHD
1/
1/
ACMV
12/10/77
ACT-TYPE
00
PROORESS
REPORT
TO
EPA
STAFF
RESLLTS
ROEO
ACTION
0*
SCMO
0/
1/
ACMV
S/10/7S
ACT-TYPE
00
PROORESS
REPORT
TO
EPA
STAFF
RESULTS
ROEO
ACTION
or
SCMO
7/
1/
ACHV
/ /
ACT-TYPE
00
PROORESS
REPORT
TO
EPA
STAFF
RESLLTS
RDES
ACTION
OS
SCMO
10/
1/
ACHV
/ /
ACT-TYPE
00
PROORESS
REPORT
TO
EPA
STAFF
RESLLTS
ROEO
ACTION
00
SCMO
I /
1/
ACHV
/ /
ACT-TYPE
00
PROORESS
REPORT
TO
EPA
STAFF
RESULTS
RDEB
ACTION
10
SCMO
0/
1/
ACHV
/ /
ACT-TYPE
00
PROORESS
REPORT
TO
EPA
STAFF
RESLLTS
ROEO
ACTION
it
SCHD
7/
1/
ACHV
/ /
ACT-TYPE
00
PROORESS
REPORT
TO
EPA
STAFF
RESULTS
ROES
ACTION
12
SCMO
10/
1/
ACHV
/ /
ACT-TYPE
00
PROORESS
REPORT
TO
EPA
STAFF
RESULTS
ROEO
ACTION
15
SCMO
1/
1/
ACMV
/ /
ACT-TYPE
00
PROORESS
REPORT
TO
EPA
STAFF
RESLLTS
HUES
-------
SOURCE DAT* REPORT
0*/02/78 COMPLIANCE DATA SYSTEM PACE 3
8-0 METALS SECONDARY ALUMINUM SCREENING 8TU0Y FEDF NGK-FED ROE I I
STATE K8 COUNTY WYANDOTTE APCO 0 SIP SOURCE RDE2
COUNTY 1840 SOURCE OOOOJ AQCR 094 CITY 1800 APST OPERATES ROES
'**8UURCE*naJe*"*8-S*HETALs""** '"'sTATe'rEGIST***** SIC* *1141'***"* ROE** * •
ADDRESS RIVERV1ER AT 2ND ST NEDS *REF 0015 RDE4 STAFF FEHBER 012
CITY# STATE KANSAS CITY K8 6*118 PRIORITY ROES LAST-UPDATE 1/20/78
"*,poiirNUMBER'*000***"*MULT"*'*''"***"**,|6uRCE*CHPl*j'iN*c6MPLilRSPECT!QN""***8TSTE/L6c*REcCL"** * '""""cKSI
POLLUTANT SOURCE-SIP 0 NO SCHEDULE SOURCE ENJS CAT 2 100 TO 1000 TPY ROM
DESCRIPTION ENTIRE SOURCE CAPACITY SCCS CODE
COMMENT 1 IN COMPLIANCE AS PER BDT
I
ACTION Of SCHO 1/21/75 ACNV 1/11/75 ACT-TYPE 07 STATE INSPECTION
STAFF KOI SALE MRIOHT RESULTS 01 ACTION ACM1EVE0 ROES
COMMENT 1 NOT IN COMP
ACTION 02 SCMD */20/7S ACNV t/20/75 ACT-TYPE 92 EPA INSPECTION
STAFF KOI SALE NRIGHT RESULTS 01 ACTION ACHIEVED RPEO
COMMENT 1 NUT IN COMP • CLCSE SURVEILLANCE RECOMMENOEO
ACTION OS SCHD 9/ «/79 ACMV f/ 4/75 ACT-TYPE 07 STATE INSPECTION
STAFF KOI 6ALE NRIGHT RESLLTS 01 ACTION ACHIEVED RDH
ACTION 04 SCHD 12/|*/7S ACNV tt/U/75 ACT-TYPE 52 EPA INSPECTION
STAFF KOI SALE "RIGHT RESULTS 01 ACTION ACHIEVED ROES
COMMENT 1 IN COMP
ACTION 05 SCHD 1/ 1/7* ACHV 1/ 1/78 ACT-TYPE 07 STATE INSPECTION
STAFF KOl SALE WRIGHT RESULTS 01 ACTION ACHIEVEO RUES
COMMENT 1 IN COMP
ACTION OA SCHO 10/ 8/7* ACHV 10/ 8/7* ACT-TYPE 07 STATE INSPECTION
STAFF KOI SALE KRI6NT RESULTS 01 ACTION ACHIEVED RCE8
ACTION 07 SCHO 10/ S/7* ACHV 10/ 8/7* ACT-TYPE 21 IN STATE OPACITY OBSERVATIONS
STAFF KOI SALE hRICHT RESLLTS 0| ACTION ACHIEVED RDEO
ACTION 08 SCHD 2/ 1/77 ACHV 2/ 1/77 ACT-TYPE 52 EPA INSPECTION
STAFF KOI GALE WRIGHT RESULTS 01 ACTION ACHIEVED R0E6
ACTION 0« SCHO 1/ 1/77 ACHV 3/ 1/77 ACT-TYPE II SOURCE MALFUNCTION
STAFF KOl SALE WRIGHT RESULTS 01 ACTION ACHIEVEO ROES
ACTION tO SCHO 1/23/77 ACHV 3/23/77 ACT-TYPE 11 SOURCE MALFUNCTION
STAFF KOl SALE hRICHT RESLLTS 01 ACTION ACHIEVEO KDEB
ACTION 11 SCHO 10/27/77 ACHV 10/27/77 ACT-TYPE 27 INSPECTION AND OPACITY OBSERVATION
STAFF KOI SALE WRIGHT RESULTS 01 ACTION ACHIEVED R0E8
ACTION 12 8CH0 11/21/77 ACHV 11/23/77 ACT-TYPE tl SOURCE MALFUNCTION
STAFF KOl VALE BRIGHT RESLLTS 01 ACTION ACHIEVEO RUES
COMMENT 1 MALFUNCTIONS FRCH 3/11/77 THROUGH 11/15/77
ACTION 11 8CHD 12/20/77 ACHV 12/20/77 ACT-TYPE 58 FORMAL INQUIRY
STAFF KOl GALE MIGHT RESULTS 01 ACTION ACHIEVEO RUES
COMMENT 1 RUSTO INFO RE MALFUNCTIONS AND BREAKDOWNS
ACTION 14 SCHO 12/21/77 ACMV 12/21/77 ACT-TYPE 11 SOURCE MALFUNCTION
STAFF KOI GALE MRIGHT RESLLTS 01 ACTION ACHIEVED ROES
ACTION 15 SCHD 12/22/77 ACHV 12/22/77 ACT-TYPE 11 SOURCE MALFUNCTION
STAFF KOl GALE "RIGHT RESLLTS 01 ACTION ACHIEVED RUES
ACTION 1* SCHD 12/28/77 ACHV 12/28/77 ACT-TYPE 13 SOURCE MALFUNCTION
STAFF KOl GALE KNIGHT RESLLTS 01 ACTION ACHIEVEO ROE«
ACTION 17 SCHO 1/18/78 ACHV 1/18/78 ACT-TYPE 11 SOURCE MALFUNCTION
STAFF KOl GALE *H1GHT HE8LLT8 01 ACTION ACHIEVED ROES
ACTION 18 SCHO 1/21/78 ACHV 1/21/78 ACT-TYPE 13 SOURCE MALFUNCTION
-------
SOURCE DATA REPORT
06/02/70 compliance data system page «
s-s metal*
SECONOARV
ALUMINUM
SCREENING STUOY
FEOF
NOK-FED RDE1
1
•TATE KS
COUNTY WYANDOTTE
APCO
0 SIP SOURCE RDE8
COUNTV 1S40
•OURCE 00001 AOCR
094
CITY iSOO
APST
OPERATING R0E3
STAFF KOI SALE WRIGHT
REILLTS
01 ACTION ACHIEVED
HDEI
ACTION
19 SCUD
2/14/70
ACHV
2/14/7S
ACT-TYPE
11
SOURCE malfunction
STAFF KOI SALE MRJQHT
REStLTS
01 ACTION ACHIEVED
RDEO
ACTION
10 SCHO
2/22/78
ACHV
2/22/70
ACT-TYPE
tl
SOURCE malfunction
STAFF HOI 6ALC WRIGHT
RESULTS
01 ACTION ACHIEVEO
ROES
ACTION
It SCHO
)/ 0/70
ACHV
1/ 0/70
ACT-TYPE
IS
SOURCE MALFUNCTION
STAFF KOI GALE NRJQHT
RESULTS
01 ACTION ACHIEVED
ROES
ACTION
22 SCHO
1/20/70
ACHV
1/20/78
ACT-TYPE
27
INSPECTION ANO OPACITY I
STAFF HOI GALE WRIGHT
OBSERVATION
RESULTS
01 ACTION ACHIEVED
RDEC
ACTION
91 SCHO
0/17/70
ACHV
4/I7/7S
ACT-TYPE
92
EPA INSPECTION
STAFF EOS JOE ARELIO
RESULTS
01 ACTION ACHIEVED
RUES
-------
SOURCE DATA RWURT
06/02/76
TO*ER METALS PROD
STATE KS COUNTY BOURBON
COUNTY 0)00 SOURCE 00600 A OCR 09S
COMPLIANCE DATA SYSTEM
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SCREENING STUOY
CITY 1100
PAGE S
FEOF KQK-FED RDE1
APCD 7 NE» SOURCE REVR0E2
APST CPERATIKC ROES
SOURCE NAPE
ADDRESS
CITY# STATE
TONER METALS PRUO
PO BOX 791
FUHT SCUTT MS 6*701
STATE RE0IS1
NEOS KREF
PRIORITY
SIC 3341
RDE4
RDE9 1
RDE*
STAFF MEMBER
LAST-UPOATE
11/16/77
COMMENT 1MR KADI COBERLY
2P0LLUTIQN CNTRL DEVICE FOR EXISTING ALUMINUM FURNACES
POINI NUMBER
pollutant
DESCRIPTION
000
MULT
ENTIRE SOURCE
COMMENT I
SOUNCE CMPL S NO APPL1C STATE RES
SOURCE-SIP 0 nq SCHEDULE
CAPACITY
(NEW) 0g FURNACE
STATE/LOC REGliL 28-19-20 > SO C>82 C
SOURCE EMIS CAT 2 100 TO 1000 1PY RDE7
SCCS CODE
ACTION 01 SCHO 3/11/75 ACHV 1/11/71 ACT-TYPE 40
FINAL APPROVAL OF NEH/HOO SOURCE
STAFF KOI SALE BRIGHT REILLTS
COMMENT I *2 FURNACE* TO BE CUNTROLLED BY USING INTEC CHLORINATCR
ACTION 02 SCHO 11/29/T5 ACHY" 11/29/79 ACT-TYPE 40 FINAL APPROVAL OF NEN/POO SOURCE
STAFF KOI GALE KRIGHT RESULTS
COMMENT I »i FURNACE* TO BE CONTROLLED THRU USE OF THE "DERHAM" PHCSS
2 (DEMAGG1NG OPERATIONS)
ACTION 03 SCHD fc/ Itlb ACHV «/ 7/7* ACT-TYPE SO FINAL APPROVAL OF NEn/MOD SOURCE
STAFF KOI GALE NRIGMT REILLTS
COMMENT 1 POLLUTION CNTRL EQPHNT FOR "T« I "M" FURNACES
ACTION 04 SCHO ll/lt/7* ACHV ll/lt/7* ACT-TYPE 40 FINAL APPROVAL OF NEN/MOD SOURCE
STAFF KOI GALE MIGHT REILLTS
COMMENT 1 "M" FURNACE TO BE TURNEO t EGPO KITH •WABASH" CNTRL SYSTEM
2 "M(»l-C)» FURNACE TO BE ALTERED TO ACCOMMODATE THE "DERHAM"
3 PNOCESSl THE FLORIOATION SYSTEM TO BE ELIMINATED
01 ACTION ACHIEVEO ROES
01 ACTION ACHIEVED RDE6
01 ACTION ACHIEVED ROES
01 ACTION ACHIEVED RUES
POINT NUMBER 001 HULT POINT CMPL S NO APPLIC STATE REG STATE/LOC REGUL 26-19.20 I 50 CMS! t
POLLUTANT POINT-SIP NOT SPECIFIED PT EMIS CAT 0 UNKfcOMK RDE7
DESCRIPTION FURNACE CNTRL ESP CAPACITY SCCS CODE
COMMENT 1 CHARGE RATE 3«S TUNS/MR m "T" FURNACE CNTRLSI "ABASH SYSTEM
2 CHARGE RATE 2,5 TONS/HR • "M* FURNACE CNTRLSI MBASH SYSTEM
puint number**oo2*"* mult point cmpl ¦ nu applic'state'reg "*"state/loc'regul'isiiilso"'cnsS'c
POLLUTANT PUInT-SIP not SPECIFIEO PT EMIS CAT 0 UNKKOMK Rl)E7
DESCRIPTION *2 FURNACE CAPACITY SCCS C00E
-------
SOURCE DATA REPORT
06/02/1S COMPLIANCE data systeh
MICH standard alloy secondary aluminum screenino stuoy
STATE MI COUNTY BERRIEN
COUNTY 0S40 SOURCE 00010 A9CR 002 CITY 04*0
PAGE 1
FfOF NO*-FED
APCD 0 SIP SOURCE
APST €PERATI*fi
RDEl
RDE2
ROE)
SOURCE NAME MICH STANDARD ALLOY
APORESS 01250HILTON
CITY, STATE BENTON HARBOR Ml 4*022
STATE RESIST S1642
NEDS XREF 0010
PRIORITY
SIC 3141
R0E4
ROES
HOES
STAFF MEMBER
LAST-UPDATE 1/10/77
POINT NUMBER 000 MULT SOURCE CHPL • IN COHPL-CERTIFICATN STA1E/LOC RE6UL CMS2
POLLUTANT SUURCE-SIP NOT SPECIFIED SOURCE E*IS CAT I LESS THAN 100 TPV RDE7 1
DESCRIPTION ENTIRE SOURCE CAPACITY SCCS CODE
ACTION 01 SCHO 1/ t/Tk ACHV / / ACT-TYPE St TEAH COMPLIANCE SPECIALIST TO CHECK
STAFF RESULTS 00 ROES 0
PUINT NUMBER MULT POINT CHPL 4 IN COHPL-CERTIFICATN 8TA1C/LOC RECLl RULE 44 CMS2
POLLUTANT PT POINT-SIP 0 NU SCHEDULE PT E*!S CAT 2 100 TO 1000 TPV RUE?
DESCRIPTION ALUM CHLORINE STATION CAPACITY SCCS CODE 304001
POINT NUMBER 020 MULT POINT CMPL 1 NOT IN COMPL-NO SCHO SIATE/LOC RECLl RULE 44 CMS!
POLLUTANT PT POINT-SIP NUT SPECIFIED PT ENIS CAT 1 LESS THAN 100 TPV RDE7
DESCRIPTION ALUM REVERB FURNACK CAPACITY SCCS CODE 304001
-------
SOURCE DATA REPORT
06S0$/7S
compliance data system
PAGE 11
NURTHMCSTERN
NETAL
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SCREENING STUOV
FCOF NOK-FED
ROE 1
STATE NE
COUNTY LANCASTER
APCD 0 SIP SOURCE
RDE2
COUNTY 1520
SOURCE 00010 AOCR t«S
CITY 15*0
APST CPERATIKC
RDE3
source name
NORTHWESTERN METAL
STATE RESIST
SIC 3341
R0E6
AuORESS
NORTH I7TH INDUS PK
NEDS XREF O0S7
HDl«
STAFF PEMRER
CITY, STATE
LINCOLN fc£ *8501
PRIORITY
RDE5
LAST-UPDATE S/11/7S
POINT NUMBER 000 MULT SOURCE CMPL « IN COMPL-CEHTIFICATN STATE/LOC RE6UI CPS?
PULLUTANT SOURCE-SIP 0 NO SCHEDULE SOURCE EMIS CAT » LESS THAN 100 TPV RDET
DESCRIPTION ENTIRE SCURCE CAPACITY SCCS COOl
ACTION 01 SCHO */SO/75 ACHV */S0/75 ACT-TYPE 07 STATE INSPECTION
STAFF N0| PETE CULVER RESULTS 01 ACTION ACHIEVED RDE6
POInI,NUHBtR**0oi MULT *POINt"cmPl" ""A'cOMfL-CERUFicATN*" "StATE/LOc'rEOUI 'SECTION* ! ! * " " " *'" * *'' *' 'CMS2
POLLUTANT PT POINT-SIP 0 NO SCHEDULE PT ENtS CAT 1 LESS THAN 100 TPV RDET
DESCRIPTION OPEN BURNIN# CAPACITY SCCS COOl 50)002
COMMENT 1 INSTALL INCINERATOR
-------
SOURCE DATA report
08/02/78
J.R, KUINS
STATE NY
COUNTY 3440
COUNTY KJN68
SOURCE 008)4
COMPLIANCE OAT* SYSTEM
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SCREENING STUOV
A8CR 04 J CITY
PACE 6
FE0 F KON-FED ROC 1
APCD 0 SIP SOURCE R0E2
APST QPERATIN6 ROES
SOURCE NAME
ADDRESS
CITY, STATE
J,R, CUIUS
6AR0NER88COTT AVE8*
BROOKLYN NY
STATE RESIST
NEOS XREF
PRIORITY
8100000222 2085
SIC
R0E4
ROES
5341
R0E6
STAFF PEP8ER
CAST-UPDATE
9/27/78
COMMENT lAOORESS-518,571 SARONEN AND 470 SCOTT AVENUE,
FACILITY CAPACITY
ROE 9 0008214
ROE 10
ROE It
ROE 12
POLLUTANT
compliance
EMISSION CATE60RV
AQCR INDICATOR
AOKA INDICATOR
LOADING
PI PART, HATTER
5 IN COMPL h SCHEDULE
0 UNKNOWN
NO
82 SULFUR OXIDES
8 IN COMPL-CERTIFICATN
8 UNKNOWN
NO
HC HYDROCARBONS
4 IN COHPL-CERTIF1CATN
0 UNKNOWN
NO
CO CARBON MONOXIDE
4 IN COMPL-CERTIFICATN
o unknown
to
N2 NITRQIiEN DIOXIDE
4 IN COMPL-CERTIFICATN
o unknown
NO
POINT NUMBER 000 MULT SOURCE CMPL 5 IN COMPL W SCHEOULE 8TATE/LOC REGCt
POLLUTANT SOURCE-SIP 4 COUNT ORD/CON8NT DEC SOURCE E*IS CAT 2 100 TO 1000 1PV
DESCRIPTION ENTIRE SOURCE CAPACITY 8CC8 CUD!
COMMENT I ALMOST ALL WORK COMPLETECUNLV CHIP DRYER IN PR06RESS).
CM92
RUE7
ACTION Ot 8CH0 2/ 1/77 ACHV 2/ 1/77 ACT-TYPE 50
ACTION 02 8CHD 9/ 2/77 ACHV 9/ 2/77 ACT-TYPE 52
COMMENT I NO PROBLEMS NOTED,
EPA SOURCE INSPECTION
STAFF 90S D SANTELLA
EPA SURVEILLANCE ACTION
STAFF 908 S FREY
RESULTS 01 ACTION ACHIEVED RDEO
RESULTS 01 ACTION ACHIEVED RUES
-------
SOURCE DATA REPORT
06/02/7® COMPLIANCE OAT* SYSTEM PACE 12
ROCHESTER SMELUREF SECONOARV ALUMINUM SCREENING STUDY FEDF NOK-FED RDEt
STATE NY COUNTY MONROE APCO 0 SIP SOURCE ROE?
COUNTY 4300 SOURCE 0OOSO AflCR 1*0 CITY 17*0 APST OPERATIKG ROES
SOURCE NAME ROCHESTER SMELUREF STATE RESIST 2*140007*0 SIC 334} ROES
ADORESS 2* SHERER ST NEOS *REF 07*0 RDE4 STAFF *eM«R 102 P KAHA
CITY, STATE ROCHESTER NY t«411 PRIORITY ROES LAST-UPDATE 5/25/71
FACILITY CAPACITY
113
ROE «
ROE 10
ROE 11
ROE 12
POLLUTANT
compliance
EMISSION CATEGORY
ASCR INDICATOR
ASPA INC1CATQR
LOADING
PT PART. RATTER
• IN COMPL-CERT1PICATN
1 LESS THAN 100 TPY
KO
«2
HC HYORQCAR0ON8
« IN COMPL-CERUFICATN
4 LESS THAN ?S TPY
N KON-ATTAINPENT
*0
1
POINT NUMBER 000
PULT
SOURCE CMPL
4 IN COMPL-CERTIFICATN
STATE/LOC RE6UL
C»S2
POLLUTANT
SOURCE-SIP
0 NO SCHEDULE
SOURCE EPIS CAT 2
100 TO 1000 TPY
R0I7
DESCRIPTION ENTIRE
SOURCE
CAPACITY
SCCS CODE
>
I
G
u>
-------
SOURCE 0*1 * REPORT
Qfe/02/TS COMPLIANCE OAT* SYSTEM P*«E 13
RUTH BROS, METAL CO SECONDARY ALUMINUM SCREENING STUOY FEDF NON-FED R0E1
STATE NY COUNTY ONONOA6A APCD 0 SIP SOURCE R0E2 T
COUNTY S100 SOURCE 00002 AOCR I5« CITY 0 APST OPEHAT1N6 RDEJ
SOURCE NAME ROTH BROS, METAL CO STATE RESIST 1126010419*420 SIC 3341 R0E6
ADDRESS THOMPSON RD NEDS XREF 0419 RDE4 STAFF KEMBER SOS D SAMELLA
CITY. STATE EAST SYRACUSE NT PRIORITY ROES LAST-UPDATE »/ 1/7S
FACILITY CAPACITY
RDE 9
RDE 10
ROE 11 ROE 12
pollutant
COMPLIANCE
EMISSION CATE60RY
A8CR IND1CATCR ASF A INDICATOR
LCADINB
PI PARI, MATTER
4 IN compl-certificatn
0 UNKNOWN
KO
02 SULFUR OXIDES
4 IN COMPL'CERTIFICATN
0 UNKNOWN
NO
HC HYDROCARBONS
• (N C0MPL-CERT1F1CATN
0 UNKNOWN
KO
CO CARBON MGK0X10E
S COMF1 STATUS UMNOfcN
0 unknown
KO
*2 NITROOEN DIOXIDE
0 CUMPL STATUS UNKNOWN
0 UNKNOWN
NO
POINT NUMBER 000
MULT
SOURCE CMPL
3
IN COMPL-1NSPECTION
STATE/LOC RE6UL
CMS2
POLLUTANT
SOURCE-SIP
0
NO SCHEDULE
SOURCE EMIS CAT 2 100 TO 1000 TPY
RUE7
DESCRIPTION ENTIRE
SOURCE
CAPACITY
SCC8 CODE
ACTION 01 SCHD 1/13/7* ACHV 1/13/76 ACT-TYPE 92 EPA INSPECTION
STAFF 905 D SANTELLA RESULTS 01 ACTION ACHIEVED
ROES 0
-------
SOURCE DAT* REPORT
06/02/7#
COMPLIANCE DATA SYSTEH
PACE
2
LEE I NO* A METAL
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SCREENING STUDY
FEOF NO*-FEO
ROE t
STATE NC
COUNTY LEE
APCD 0 SIP SOURCE
R0E2
COUNTY 2260
SOURCE OOOBJ
ABCR 1*6
CITY 3SS0
APST OPERATING
RDE 3 P
SOURCE NAVE
LEE IRON 1
METAL
STATE RESIST
SIC 3341
HOE*
AUORESS
BOX T7S
NEOS »REF
RDE«
STAFF MEMBER Ml
CITY, STATE
SANFORO NC
27130
PRIORITY
ROES
LAST-UPDATE «/
6/76
POINT NUMBED 000 CULT
POLLUTANT
DESCRIPTION ENTIRE. SOURCE
SOURCE chpl
SOURCE-SIP
CAPACITY
4 IN C0MPL«CERT1F1CAT*
NUT SPECIFIED
STATE/IOC REBliL
SOURCE EMS CAT 2
SCCS CGUE
100 TO 1000 TPV
CPS!
R0E7
-------
SOURCE dam REPORT
06/02/18 COMPLIANCE OAT* SYSTEM PAGE 2
ALUMINUM SMELTtftEF SECONDARY ALUMINUM SCREENING STUOV FEDF KO&-FEO ROE I
STATE QH COUNTY CUYAHOGA APCD 0 SIP SOURCE RDf2
COUNTY 1600 SOURCE 00260 AQCR IT* CITY 3680 APST OPERATING RDE3
SOURCE NAME
AUDKESS
city, state
ALUMINUM SMELTSKEF
SOb3 DUNHAM RD
MAPLE NTS OH 44137
state resist
NEDS KRtF
PRIORITY
13183721*3
A
SIC
RDE4
R0E5
J3«t
R0E6
STAFF MEMBER
LAST-UPDATE
¦! /
4/78
POINT NUMBER
POLLUTANT
description
000 MULT
ENTIRE SOURCE
SOURCE CHPL
SUURCt-SIP
CAPACITY
1
NOT
NOT
IN COMPL-NO
SPECIFIED
SCHD
STATE/LOC REGUL
SOURCE EMIS CAT
SCCS CODE
3 OVER 1000
TFY
CPS2
RDE7
ACTION
90 SCHD 3/17/77 ACHV
1/17/77 ACT-TYPE
91
114 letter
STAFF KOI
SENT
RESULTS
RDE8
POINT NUMBER
POLLUTANT
DESCRIPTION
010 MULT
PT
P001-ALUM FURNACE
ti
POINT CMPL
POINT-SIP
CAPACITY
1
NOT
NOT
IN COMPL-NO
SPECIFIED
SCHO
STATE/LCC REGUL
PT EMIS CAT
SCCS CODE
AP-3-11
1 LESS THAN
100
IPY
CM82
RUE7
POINT NUMBER
POLLUTANT
DESCRIPTION
920 MULT
PT
P002-ALUF FURNACE
#4
POINT CMPL
POINT-SIP
CAPACITY
1
NO!
NOT
IN COMPL-NO
SPECIFIED
SCHD
STATE/LOC RE6U
PT EMIS CAT
sees COOI
AP-3-12
1 LESS THAN
IOC
TPY
C"82
R0E7
POINT NUMBER
POLLUTANT
DESCRIPTION
030 MULT
PT
P003-ALUM FURNACE
PUINT CMPL
POINT-SIP
CAPACITY
1
NOT
NOl
IN COMPL-NO
SPECIFIED
SCHO
STATE/LOC REGUL
PT EMIS CAT
SCCS CODE
AP-3-12
1 LESS THAN
100
TPY
CM82
RDE7
POINT NUMBER
pollutant
DESCRIPTION
040 MULT
PT
P005-AIU* FURNACE
IT
PUINT CMPL
POINT-SIP
CAPACITY
1
NOT
NOT
IN COMPL-NO
SPECIFIED
SCHD
STATE/LOC REGUL
PT EMIS CAT
SCCS CODE
AP-3-12
2 100 TO 1000 TPY
CK32
RDE7
POINT NUMBER
POLLUTANT
DESCRIPTION
OSO MULT
PT
POOt-ALUM FURNACE
»8
POINT CMPL
POINT-SIP
capacity
I
NOT
NOT
IN compl-no
SPECIFIED
SCHO
STATE/LCC REGUL
PT EMIS CAT
SCCS CODE
AP-3-12
1 LESS THAN
too
TPY
CM82
RDE7
POINT NUMBER
pollutant
DESCRIPTION
0*0 fULT
PT
P007-ALUM FURNACE
09
POINT CMPL
POINT-SIP
CAPACITY
I
NOT
NOT
IN COMPL-NO
SPECIFIEO
SCHO
STATE/LOC REGl/L
PT EMIS CAT
ices CODE
AP-3-12
1 LESS THAN
100
TPY
CMS*
RDE7
POINT NUMBER 070 MULT POINT CMPL • IN COMPL-CERT1FICATN STATE/LOC REGUL AP-3-12 CPS2
POLLUTANT PT POINT-SIP NOT SPECIFIED PT 6*18 CAT 2 100 TO 1000 TPY RUET
DESCRIPTION POOS-ALUM FURNACE *10 CAPACITY SCCS CODE
POINT NUMBER OSO MULT POINT CMPL I NUT IN COMPL-NO SCHD STATE/LOC 4EGUL AP-3-12 CMSJ
POLLUTANT PT POINT-SIP NOT SPECIFIED PI EMIS CAT 1 LESS THAN 100 IPY R0E7
DESCRIPTION P009-ALUM FURNACE «I3 CAPACITY SCCS CODE
POINT NUMBER 090 MULT PUlNT CMPL t NOT IN COMPL-NO SCHO 81ATE/L0C REQUL AP-3-12 CMSI
POLLUTANT PT POINT-SIP NOT SPECtFIEO PT EMIS CAT 1 LESS THAN 100 TPY ROE7
DESCRIPTION POlO-ALUM FURNACE *i CAPACITY SCCS CODE
POINT NUMBER 100 MULT POINT CMPL 4 IN COMPl-CERIIFlCATN STATE/LOC REGU AP-3-12 C*82
POLLUTANT PT POINT-SIP NOT SPECIFIED PT EMIS CAT I LESS THAN IOC TPY RUE 7
DESCRIPTION Pol I -DRY ING OVEN CAPACITY SCCS CODF.
-------
SOURCE DAT* REPORT
06/02/78 COMPLIANCE DATA SYSTEH PAGE 1
ALUH1NUK SHELTIREF SECONDARY ALUMINUM SCREENING 8TOO If FEOF KOK-FED RDE1
STATE OH COUNTY CUYAHOGA APCO 0 SIP SOURCE R0E2
COUNTY 1609 SOURCE 00260 AOCR 174 CITY 3M0 APST CPERAf1KG RDEJ
PUJNT NUMBER
110 *ULT
POINT CHPL
6
NOT
IN COHPL * 8CH0
SUTE/LCC REGUl
AP-3-12
Cf82
POLLUTANT
PT
POINT-SIP
NOT
SPECIFIED
PT tHIS CAT
2 100 TO 1000 TPY
NDE7
DESCRIPTION
POti-ALUtt CHIP DRYKR
CAPACITY
SCCB CODE
POINT NUMBER
120 MULT
POINT CMPL
4
IN
COHPL-CERTlFICAt*
STATE/LOC RECU
AP-5-12
CHS2
pollutant
PT
P0INT-91P
NOT
SPECIFIED
PT EM1S CAT
3 OVER 1000 TPY
RUE7
DESCRIPTION
P013»ALU* DROSS RECL
CAPACITY
9CCS CODE
POINT NUMBER
130 HULT
POINT CNPL
1
NOT
IN COMPL-NO SCHO
STATE/LOC RE6UL
AP.j-ja
CHSS
POLLUTANT
PT
POINT-SIP
NOT
SPECIFIED
PT E*IS CAT
1 LESS THAN 100 TPY
RtE 7
DESCRIPTION
POi«-
CAPACITY
SCCS COOE
POINT NUMBER
131 PULT
POINT CHPL
1
NUT
IN COHPL-NO SCHO
STATE/LOC RECUL
AP-S-OT
CfBi
POLLUTANT
HC
POINT-SIP
NUT
SPECIFIED
PT E«IS CAT
2 100 TO 1000 TPY
Hl)E7
DESCRIPTION
POIO*
CAPACITY
SCCS CODE
-------
SOURCE DATA REPORT
06/A2/T8 COMPLIANCE DATA SYSTEM
BARNET INDUSTRIES SECONDARY ALUMINUM SCREENING STUDY
STAT! OH COUNTY TUSCARAWAS
COUNTY 6720 SOURCE 00005 ABCR 183 CITY 0
PACE
FEDF KOK-FEO
APCD 0 SIP SOURCE
APST OPERATING
4
ROE 1
RDt2
ROES f
SOURCE NAME
barmet industries
STATE RESIST 0679010151
SIC 3341
ROEfc
AOOHfSa
NE«PORT RO
NEDS XHEP OOJS
ROE 4
STAFF MEMBER
CIIV, state
UMRICMSVILLE OH 44*8]
PRIORITY
RDE5
LAST*UPOATE
oo
-------
SOURCE OAT* REPORT
0fe/02/7B COMPLIANCE 0A?A SYSTEM PACE 9
US REDUCTION SECONDARY ALUMINUM SCREENING STUDY FEDF NOk-PED ROEl I
STATE QH COUNT* LUCAS APCD 0 IIP SOURCE ROE?
CUUNTY 3T20 SOURCE 000*8 ABCR 124 CITY *600 APST CPERATIM ROEJ
SOURCE NAMf
US ReOUCTtON
STATE RESIST
04*00100*2 SIC
3341
RDE6
AUORESS
SSSS CECELIA ST
NCOS HREF
ROE 4
STAFF MEMSER
CITY* STATE
TOLEDO ON 41*00
PRIORITY
ROE*
.
LAST-UPDATE A/18/7T
POINT NUMBER
000 MULT
SOURCE CMPL
4
IN cohpl-certipicatn
STATF/LOC REOUL
CMS2
POLLUTANT
SOURCE-SIP
NOT SPECIFIED
SOURCE EMIS CAT
2 100 TO 1000 TPV
ROE 7
DESCRIPTION
ENTIRE SOURCE
CAPACITY
SCCO CODE
POINT number
0|0 MULT
point chpl
4
IN cohpl-cehtipicatn
ST AIE/LOC REOUL
AP-3-12
CM82
POLLUTANT
PT
POINT-SIP
NOT SPECIFIED
PT EMIS CAT
1 LESS THAN 100 TPY
RUE 7
DESCRIPTION
P006-B0R1N6S DRYER
CAPACITY
SCCS CODE
303001
POINT NUMBER
OIJ MULT 010
POINT CHPL
4
IN COMPLACENT IF1CATN
STA1E/L0C RE61L
AP-5-0?
CMS2
POLLUTANT
HC
POINT-SIP
NOT SPECIFIED
PT EMIS CAT
1 LESS THAN 100 TPV
R0I7
DESCRIPTION
PQ06>BORIN6S DRYER
CAPACITY
SCCB CODE
303001
POINT NUMBCS
0)0 MULT
POINT CMPL
•
IN COMPLACENT IFICATN
STAIE/LOC REOUL
AP-3-1*
Cf-82
POLLUTANT
PT
POINT-SIP
NOT SPECIFIED
PT EMIS CAT
2 100 TO 1000 TPV
ROE 7
DESCRIPTION
POOWURNACE *25
capacity
SCCS CODE
303001
-------
SOURCE DAT* REPORT
00/02/78
ALAN-BARR ALUMINUM
STATE PA COUNTV LEBANON
COUNTY 4000 SOURCE 00019 A (ICR 106
COMPLIANCE DATA SYSTEM
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SCREENING STUDY
CITY 0
PACE 1
FEOF KOk-FED
APCD 0 SIP SOURCE
AP8T CPERATUG
RDEt 1
RDE2 3
ROES
SOURCE NAME ALAN-BARS ALUMINUM
STATE RESIST 23-1330002 01
SIC 33«1
RDE6
AOONE88
NEDS HREF
RDEO
STAFF MEMBER
CITY, STATE PALMYRA PA
PRIORITY
RDES
LAST-UPOATE 12/22/77
POINT NUMBER 000 MOLT
POLLUTANT
DESCRIPTION SECONDARY SMELUNB
SOURCE CHPL S IN COMPL-INSPECTION
SOURCE-SIP 0 NO SCHEDULE
CAPACITY
8TATI/L0C RE6UL CMSJ
SOURCE EMIS CAT 2 100 TO 1000 TPY RDE7
SCCB CODE
ACTION
01
8CM0
8/30/70
ACMV
3/18/7*
ACT-TYPE
08
STATE
STAFF
INSPECTION
RESULTS
01
ACTION ACM1EVED
me
ACTION
02
SCHD
9/30/77
ACMV
e/iom
ACT-TYPE
08
8TATE
STAFF
INSPECTION
RESULTS
30
IN COMPLIANCE
RUE#
ACTION
03
8CHD
0/30/70
ACHV
/ /
ACT-TYPE
00
STATE
STAFF
INSPECTION
RESULTS
me
t
js
P
-------
SOURCE DATA REPORT
06/02/70
COMPLIANCE data system
PA6E 1
BAICHELOER BLA81U8
SECONDARY ALUMINUM SCREENING STUDY
FEDF NOK-FED
POt 1
STATE SC
COUNTY SPARTANBURS
APCD 0 SIP SOURCE
R0E2
COUNTY 2060
SOURCE 00020 A OCR 202
CITY 2040
APST OPERATING
ROES »
source name
SATCHELOER 8LASIUS
STATE RESIST
SIC 3341
HDE6
address
BC* 5501
NEDS XREF 0020
ROE4
STAFF MEMBER
CITY# STATE
SPARTANBURS SC 2930|
priority
ROES
LAST-UPOATE 4/19/76
POINT NUMBER 000 NULT
POLLUTANT
SOURCE CMPL S IN COMPL W SCHEDULE
SOURCE-SIP 0 NO SCHEDULE
STATE/LOC RESUL CKS8
SOURCE EH1S CAT 2 100 TO 1000 TPV RDE7 5
DESCRIPTION
ENTIRE
SOURCE
CAPACITY
8CCS CODE
ACTION
01
SCHO
6/1S/7S
ACHV
6/16/75
ACT-TYPE
AS
HE-INSPECTION
STAFF
RESLLTS
01 ACTION ACHIEVE0 RDEE
ACTION
02
SCHD
/ /
ACHV
12/13/7*
ACT-TYPE
29
STATE PROCESS INSPECTION
STAFF
RESULTS
RUES
ACTION
03
SCHO
/ t
ACHV
12/ 0/76
ACT-TYPE
27
STATE COMPLIANCE INSPECTION
STAFF
RESLLTS
RDEC
ACTION
04
SCHO
4/ 8/17
ACHV
4/ 6/77
ACT-TYPE
64
EPA OEFERRAL TO STATE
STAFF
RESULTS
RUES
ACTION
OS
SCHD
/ /
ACHV
4/1S/77
ACT-TYPE
29
STATE PROCESS INSPECTION
STAFF
RESULTS
RUES
ACTION
00
SCHD
9/19/78
ACHV
/ /
ACT-TYPE
ES
FINAL COMPLIANCE
STAFF A66 COLE
RESULTS
SDEB
ACTION
07
SCHO
6/1S/7S
ACHV
/ /
ACT-TYPE
E«
COMPLETE CONSTRUCTION
STAFF A66 COLE
RESULTS
RDE8
ACTION
OS
SCHD
5/27/77
ACHV
5/27/77
ACT-JYPE
B2
STATE ORDER RECEIVED
STAFF A66 COLE
RESULTS
HOES
ACTION
09
SCHD
I/IS/7S
ACHV
1/15/78
ACT-TYPE
E3
BEGIN CONDUCTION
STAFF A66 COLE
RESLLTS
ROEG
ACTION
10
SCHD
4/30/77
ACHV
4/30/77
ACT-TYPE
El
PLAN SUBMITTAL
STAFF A67 YEAST
RESULTS
RDES
ACTION
11
SCHD
6/19/77
ACHV
6/19/77
ACT-TYPE
E2
AnARO CONTRACTS
STAFF A66 COLE
RESLLTS
note
ACTION
12
SCHO
6/15/76
ACHV
/ /
ACT-TYPE
00
CONSENT ORDER
STAFF
RESLLTS
RDE8
ACTION
13
8CHD
9/ 1/7B
ACHV
/ /
ACT-TYPE
00
CONSENT ORDER
STAFF
RESULTS
RDEI
COMMENT
1
FULL COMPLIANCE
ACTION 14 SCHD 9/ 1/7B
COMMENT i
ACHV
/ /
ACT-TYPE 00 CONSENT ORDER
STAFF
COMPLETE CONSTRUCTION/INSTALLATION OF EQUIPMENT
RESLLTS
me
POINT NUMBER
pollutant
DESCRIPTION
010
PT
MULT
POINT CMPL
POINT-SIP
CAPACITY
4
IN COMPL-CERT1F1CATN
NOT SPECIFIED
STATE/LOC REGIL
PT ENIS CAT
8CC8 COOE
4 LESS
304001
THAN
23
TPV
C»S2
RDE7
POINT NUMBER
030
HULT
POINT CMPL
4
IN COMPL-CERT1FICATN
STATE/LOC REGIL
CPSS
POLLUTANT
PT
POINT-SIP
NOT SPECIFIE0
PT EMIS CAT
4 LESS
THAN
25
TPY
RUE7
DESCRIPTION
CAPACITY
SCCS CODE
304001
POINT NUHBER
POLLUTANT
DESCRIPTION
040
PT
MULT
POINT CMPL
POINT-SIP
CAPACITY
4
IN COMPL-CERTIF1CATN
NOT SPECIFIED
STATE/LOC RE6UL
PT EMIS CAT
SCCB COOE
1 LESS
304001
THAN
too
TPV
CMS2
RUE7
-------
SOURCE OAT4 REPORT
00/02/78 COMPLIANCE DATA SYSTEM PACE 1
AMERICAN RECYCLE CO SECONDARY ALUMINUM SCREENING STUDY FEDF NCK-FED RDE1 1
8TA1E IN COUNTY MAURY APCO 0 SIP SOURCE R0E2
COUNTY 2)00 SOURCE 00001 A9CR 200 CITY 2500 APST OPERATING ROES *
1 SUURCe'nAME* 'AMERICAN RECYCLe'cO " *STATE*REO!IT**6O»OO0B|*** •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••#•••••••••••••••»•••<
ADPRESS PO BOX 929 NEDS XREF 0001 ROE* STAFF MEMBER US
CITY, STATE NT PLEASANT ?N 38474 PRIORITY 0 ROES LAST-UPDATE .9/17/78
COMMENT 1TN kO, IS *0-0008!
POINT NUMBER**000"""muLT** " * SOURCE*CMPL** NOt'in'cOMPL i*SCHO,""sTATE/L6c'REeUL'****"**"",,,","****C^8r
POLLUTANT SOURCE-SIP NOT SPECIFIED SOURCE EMIS CAT 2 100 TO 1000 TPY RDET
DESCRIPTION ENTIRE SOURCE CAPACITY SCC8 CODE
ACTION 01 8CH0 */ 7/77 ACHV 0/ 7/77 ACT-TYPE A7 VISIBLE EMISSION EVALUATION
8TAFP RESULTS ROES
ACTION 02 SCHP 6/ 7/77 ACHV */ 7/77 ACT-TYPE A« INSPECTION
STAFF RESLLTS RDEfl
ACTION 03 3CHD 1/ 9/78 ACHV 1/ i/78 ACT-TYPE A4 INSPECTION
STAFF At} NELLMIS RESULTS RUE*
ACTION 0« 8CHI) 4/ 1/78 ACHV / / ACT-TYPE CI CIVIL/CRIMINAL ACTION
STAFF AOJ HELLM10 RESULTS RDE8
POINT*NUMBER*'ooi*"* *MULT**" " * " 'POINT CMPL* **'NUriN'cOMPL*"'sCHo'*"''amE/L6c'RE6UL*CH*W
-------
8UURCE DA IA REPORT
06/02/78 COMPLIANCE OATA SYSTEM PAGE 2
HVMAN VIEWER t SONS SECONDARY ALUMINUM SCREENING STUOY FEOP NOfc-FED RDE1 1
STATE VA COUNT* RICHMOND CITY APCO 0 SIP SOURCE RDE2 5
COUNTY 2*60 SOURCE 00017 AOCR 229 CITY 26*0 APST 'OPERATING ROES
* s6uRCE,HAfiE,#*HrMAN,VllitR*»,s6N8#*','**STATe*REflJ5T,'5oi»j"#"* "slc"jsi! """'ROE* ***'
ADDRESS PO BOX 573 NEDS KREP ROE* STAFF MEMBER
CITVi STATE RICHMOND VA 23205 PRIORITY ROES LAST-UPDATE >3/30/78
POINT NUMBER 000 MULT ** *SOURCfi*CMPL 4 {n c6MPL*CERTIp!cATN*',,8TATE/LOC,REGtC"'"
POLLUTANT SOURCE-SIP I STATE ENF/ADM ORDERS SOURCE EM18 CAT 2 100 TO tOOO TPY RDE7
DESCRIPTION SECONDARY SMELT1NB CAPACITY 8CCB CODE
ACTION 02 SCHD «/30/77 ACHV 0/20/77 ACT-TYPE 08 STATE INSPECTION
STAFF RESULTS 01 ACTION ACHIEVED RDE8
ACTION 03 SCHD 0/30/78 ACHV / / ACT-TYPE OS STATE INSPECTION
STAFF RESLLTS RDE8
ACTION 16 SCHD 4/30/78 ACHV / / ACT-TYPE *2 NOV ISSUED
STAFF EIO GROSS RESULTS RDE8
POINf NUMBER**010*' * MULT ** * ** POINT CHPL*ViN*COMPLJcERTIFlCATN****STATE/L6c"REcCL"«I3SIoJ«s5c^03"""***"*"cKaa*"#,
POLLUTANT PT POINT-SIP 3 STATE ENF/ADM ORDERS PT EMIS CAT 2 100 TO 1000 TPY RDE7
DESCRIPTION CUPOLA t REVERB FURNACE CAPACITY SCC8 CODE 300004
COMMENT 1 INSTALL BAG COLLECTOR
ACTION 00 SCHD 9/ 1/74 ACHV 9/ 1/74 ACT-TYPE 04 COMPLETION CF ON SITE CONSTRUCTI'O/PR0CE88 CHANGE
STAFF RESLLTS 01 ACTION ACHIEVED R0E8 0
ACTION OS SCHD 9/ 1/74 ACHV 9/ 1/74 ACT-TYPE 09 FINAL COMPLIANCE
STAFF RESULTS 01 ACTION ACHIEVED RUE8 0
* *PUInT *NUMBER* *019* * * * *MULT*Ot0* * **"* *POIN^CMPL*"4*iN*c6MPLicERUFlCATN'**,STATE/LOC,5tGiL,4Io2*"*,,*, * CMSa""
POLLUTANT VE POINT-SIP 3 STATE ENF/ADM ORDER! PT EMIS CAT 2 100 TO |000 TPY RDE7
DESCRIPTION CUPOLA * REVERB FURNACE CAPACITY SCC8 CODE 304004
ACTION 04 SCHD 9/ 1/74 ACHV 9/ 1/74 ACT-TYPE 04 COMPLETION CF ON SITE CONSTRUCTICK/PROCESS CHANGE
STAFF RESULTS 01 ACTION ACHIEVEO ROES 0
ACTION 09 8CH0 9/ 1/74 ACHV 9/ 1/74 ACT-TYPE 09 FINAL COMPLIANCE
STAFF RESLLTS 01 ACTION ACHIEVED ROES 0
-------
SOURCE DATA REPORT
06/02/78
MATERIALS REC. CO.
STATE "A COUNTY KINS
COUNTY 0900 SOURCE 10015 AQCR 22*
COMPLIANCE DATA SYSTEM
SECONOARY ALUMINUM SCREENING STUDY
CITY !M0
PABE 5
FEDF NOK-FED RDE1
apcd o sip auusce roe;
APST CPERATIKC RDE3
SOURCE NAME
ADDRESS
CITY. STATE
MATERIAL! REC* CO,
*760 * MARGINAL MAY
SEATTLE M 9810b
STATE RESIST COS »321 SIC
NEDS XREF 00*0 RQE4
PRIORITY RDE5
3341
ROE*
STAFF MEMBER k04 P8APCA
LAST-UPDATE 5/21/75
POINT NUMBER
POLLUTANT
DESCRIPTION
000 NULT
ENTIRE SOURCE
SOURCE CMPL 4 IN C0MPL-CERTIP1CATN
SOURCE-SIP 3 STATE ENF/ADM ORDERS
CAPACITY
STAIE/LOC REGLL CPS2
SOURCE EMIS CAT t LESS THAN 100 TPY RDET
SCCS CODE
POINT NUMBER tOt MULT POINT CMPL • IN COMPL-CERTIFICATN STAIE/LOC REGUL REG t 8 3,tt CH82
PULLU1ANT PT POINT-SIP J STATE ENF/ADH ORDERS PT |H18 CAT t LESS THAN 100 TPY RDE7
DESCRIPTION BA6HOU8E EQUIPMENT CAPACITY SCC8 CODE 10«00l
COMMENT t NOTICE OP CONSTRUCTION 9/15/72
ACTION
01
SCHD
9/15/72
ACHY
S/tl/73
ACT-TYPE
01
SUBMISSION OF FINAL CONTROL PLAN
STAFF
RESLLTS 01 ACTION
ACHIEVEO
note
0
ACTION
02
8CHD
11/15/72
ACHV
1/13/73
ACT-TYPE
02
BINOING COMMITMENT TO
STAFF
purchase ccktrol equipment
RESULTS 01 ACTIO*
ACHIEVED
RDES
0
ACTION
01
SCMO
11/10/72
ACHV
S/tl/71
ACT-TY^E
03
INITIATION OF ON SITE
STAFF
CONSTRUCTICMPROCE88 CHANGE
RESULTS 01 ACTION
ACHIEVED
RDES
0
ACTION
04
SCHD
t/15/71
ACHV
0/1 J/71
ACT-TYPE
04
completion of ON SITE
STAFF
CONSTRUCTICK/PROCESS CHANGE
RESULTS 01 ACTION
ACHIEVED
RDES
0
ACTION
OS
SCHD
2/15/71
ACHV
8/13/71
ACT-TtPE
OS
FINAL COMPLIANCE
STAFF
RESLLTS 01 ACTION
ACHIEVED
RDES
0
-------
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
This section contains known possible sources of additional information
such as emission test reports, file information and emission inventories that
were not obtained during this study. The information was not obtained for one
or more of the following reasons:
• Data requested but no reply from agency/industry
• Data has to be obtained through a visit to agency/industry
• Local, regional office not contacted.
A-145
-------
Source
Contact
Connecticut DEP
165 Capital Avenue
Hartford, CT 06115
(203) 566-4030
Mr. A1 Conklin
Ohio EPA
Cleveland District
2735 Broadway Avenue
Cleveland, OH 44115
(216) 694-3500
Mr. Ang
Ohio EPA
Akron District
177 South Broadway
Mr. Norm Keckler
Akron, OH 44705
(216) 375-2480
Ohio EPA
Mr. Tom Kavachick
Toledo District
26 Main Street
Toledo, OH 43605
(419) 247-6524
Ohio EPA
Mahoning - Trumbull District
Room 404
1 Federal Plaza
Youngstown, OH 44503
(216) 744-1928
Penn. Dept. of Env. Resources Mr. Terry Black
York Office
(717) 771-4481
Penn. Dept. of Env. Resources
Lancaster Office
(717) 299-7601
Illinois EPA Ms Barbara Sidler
2200 Churchill Road Mr. Miles Zanco
Springfield, IL 62706 Mr. Paul Shmearbok
(217) 782-5544
South Coast Air Quality Management Mr. Alex Bailey
District
9150 Flair Drive
El Monte, CA 91731
(213) 572-6258
A-146
-------
Source
Contact
U.S. Reduction Co.
P.O. Box 30
4610 Kennedy Avenue
East Chicago, IN 46312
(312) 731-1000
Apex International Alloys, Inc.
Suite 215
2340 Des Plaines Avenue
Des Plaines, IL 60018
(317) 297-1360
Mr. Tom Hendon
Mr. Matt Lydon
A-147
-------
APPENDIX B
CALCULATIONS
This Appendix contains the calculations for the un-
controlled emission factors and efficiencies noted
in Section 6.4 as being derived from test data.
B-l
-------
CONTROL EFFICIENCIES
Afterburner-Particulate
a. Liston Brick Co. test data:
Controlled particulate emissions on reverbatory furnace
0.0441 g/sec.
Process weight rate = 221.1 g/sec.
2214!1) (1000) = 0,199 ks/1000 kS A1
Assume 2.15 kg/1000 kg A1 uncontrolled.
2 15 - O 199
Thus: Efficiency - —:—^ ^5* = 90.7 percent
b. U. S. Reduction test data:
Controlled particulate emissions on reverbatory furnace
0.0617 g/sec.
Process weight rate ¦ 378 g/sec
(0,^g7 ) (1000) - 0.163 kg/1000 kg A1
Assume 2.15 kg/1000 kg A1 uncontrolled.
. 2.15 - 0.163 ,
Thus: Efficiency ¦ ^ 92.4 percent
c. U. S. Reduction test data:
Controlled particulate emissions on chip dryer ¦
0.0816 g/sec.
Process weight rate =88.2 g/sec.
Q,2!1o (1000) - 0.925 kg/1000 kg A1
DO • L
They assume uncontrolled rate ¦ 7 kg/1000 kg A1
7-0 925
Thus: Efficiency - — «86.8 percent
B-2
-------
Therefore, average afterburner efficiency =
90.7 + 92.4 + 86.8 „
^ = 90.0 percent
Scrubber with Bell System - Particulate
Vulcan test data:
Particulate released during demagging = 237 kg
Particulate caught by bell system « 233 kg
233
Efficiency = = 98.3 percent
Scrubber with Bell System - CI?
Vulcan test data:
CI2 released during demagging = 36.3 kg
CI2 caught be scrubber ¦ 36.2 kg
36 2
Efficiency « .v*- ¦ 99.7 percent
jO • J
Coated Baghouse - Particulate
a. Allied Metals test data and AP-42:
Particulates released during charging - 0.0353 kg/1000 kg A1
Uncontrolled rate « 2.15 kg/1000 kg A1
. 2.15 - 0.0353 ,
Efficiency 0 2~15 * percent
b. Allied Metals test data:
Particulates released during charging and demagging ¦
0.0558 g/sec.
Uncontrolled test data ¦ 3.518 g/sec.
Efficiency - 3,51|? I,?'0558 - 98.4 percent
J • jXo
B-3
-------
5. Coated Baghouse - Gaseous Fluorides
a. Allied Metals test data - g/sec
Fluorides released during demagging = 0.0135 g/sec
Uncontrolled test data = 4.498 g/sec
Efficiency = 4'4984"4°qQ135 - 99.7 percent
b. Allied Metals test data - ppm
Fluorides released during demagging = 0.48 ppm
Uncontrolled test data = 373.3 ppm
. 373.3 - 0.48 _ „
Efficiency = —^ = 99.9 percent
Average ¦ 99.8 percent
B-4
-------
UNCONTROLLED EMISSION FACTORS
Particulate Emissions From Chip Dryers
a. From test at U. S. Reduction in California:
Controlled (afterburner) emission rate = 0.0816 g/sec
Process weight rate =88.2 g/sec
(°gg8^6 )(1000) - 0.925 kg part./1000 kg A1
They assumed 87 percent efficiency on afterburner.
b. From test at Vulcan Materials in California:
Controlled (afterburner) emission rate = 0.3856 g/sec
Process weight rate = 279.0 g/sec
Assuming 90 percent efficiency on afterburner yields:
EF = ^3g2 = 13.8 kg/1000 kg A1
The range is therefore 7-14 kg/1000 kg Al.
Particulate Emissions From Reverbatory Furnace (Charging)
a. AP-42 states 2.15 kg/1000 kg Al
b. Allied Metal test data:
Since efficiencies were calculated to be 98.4 percent
using test data or AP-42, assume 2.15 kg/1000 kg Al
Is accurate.
0 925
Thus: EF - =7.1 kg/1000 kg Al
°2795Q ) (1000) = 1,382 k§ part./1000 kg Al
B-5
-------
Hydrocarbon and Carbon Monoxide Emissions From Reverbatory
Furnace (Charging)
Allied Metal test data:
HC: controlled emission rate = 0.0545 kg/1000 kg A1
CO: controlled emission rate ¦ 38.3 ppm
Assume 95 percent efficiency, then:
Uncontrolled HC rate ™ j^gg" = 1*1 kg/1000 kg A1
38.3
Uncontrolled CO rate = -i—jr- ¦ 760 ppm
1*" i7J
Particulate Emissions From Reverbatory Furnace (Demagging)
Fluoride demagging:
Allied Metal test data:
Controlled emission rate - 0.195 kg/1000 kg AIF3
Control efficiency ¦ 98.4 percent
EF » XT^ff" 12.2 kg/1000 AIF3
Chlorine demagging:
AP-42 states 500 kg/1000 kg CI2
Carbon Monoxide Emissions From Reverbatory Furnace (Demagging)
Allied Metal test data:
Controlled emission rate * 28 ppm
Assume 95 percent efficiency, then:
28
Uncontrolled CO rate - -j—^ = 560 ppm
B-6
-------
6. Fluoride Emissions From Reverbatory Furnaces (Demagging)
Allied Metal test data:
Controlled emission rate for particulate fluorides =
0.062 kg/1000 kg A1F3
Controlled emission rate for gaseous fluorides =
0.058 kg/1000 kg A1F3
For 99.8 percent efficiency for gaseous fluorides:
For 98.4 percent efficiency for particulate fluorides:
Uncontrolled particulate fluorides emission rate ¦
7. Chlorine Emissions From Reverbatory Furnace (Demagging)
a. Vulcan test data - California:
Uncontrolled emissions =* 36.29 kg
Process input = 460.4 kg
Uncontrolled gaseous fluorides emissions rate =
£§§ - 29 kg/1000 kg A1F3
1r7§ff - 4 kg/iooo kg aif3
EF = (1000) * 80 kg/1000 kg Cl2
b. Vulcan test data - Ohio:
Uncontrolled emissions ¦ 237 kg
Process input m 1089 kg
(1000) - 218 kg
B-7
-------
APPENDIX C
LIST OF CONTACTS AND INDIVIDUALS WITH EXPERTISE IN THE INDUSTRY
C-l
-------
FEDERAL AGENCY CONTACTS
Mr. William 0. Herring
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Industrial Studies Branch
Emission Standards and Engineering Division
U. S. EPA
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
(919) 541-5295
Mr. Robert Ogg
Region II EPA
26 Federal Plaza
New York, NY 10007
(212) 264-2517
Mr. Benson Hellwig
Region IV EPA
345 Courtland NE
Atlanta, GA 30308
(404) 881-4298
Mr. Kesari
Region V EPA
230 S. Dearborn Street
Chicago, IL
(312) 353-2086
Mr. Steve Rothblatt
Region V EPA
230 S. Dearborn Street
Chicago, IL
(312) 353-2086
Mr. Arnold Den
Region IX EPA
Surveillance and Analysis Division
215 Fremont Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
(415) 556-8752
Mr. Bill Thurston
Region IX EPA
215 Fremont Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
(415) 556-6150
Ms. Linda Wunder-Freet
Air Investigator
Region IX EPA
215 Fremont Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
(415) 556-8047
C-2
-------
Federal Agency Contacts (Continued)
Mr. John Burckle
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
Cincinnati, OH
(513) 684-4491
STATE AGENCY CONTACTS
Mr. A1 Conklin
Enforcement Division
Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection
Hartford, CT
(203) 566-4030
Ms. Barbara Sidler
Senior Technical Advisor
Enforcement Programs
Illinois EPA
2200 Churchill Road
Springfield, IL 62706
(217) 782-5544
Mr. Ed Stresino
Chief, Enforcement Branch
Indiana State Board of Health
1330 W. Michigan Street
Indianapolis, IN 46206
(317) 633-0665
Mr. Andrew Sunderland
Indiana State Board of Health
Air Pollution Control Division
1330 W. Michigan Street
Indianapolis, IN 46206
(317) 633-0665
Mr. Ang
Ohio EPA
Cleveland District
Cleveland, OH
(216) 664-3500
C-3
-------
State Agency Contacts (Continued
Mr. Alan Franks
Ohio EPA
Public Information Center
Columbus, OH
(614) 466-8508
Mr. Howard Johnson
Ohio EPA
Public Information Center
Columbus, OH
(614) 466-7390
Mr. Bill Juris
Ohio EPA
Columbus, OH
(614) 466-7390
Mr. James Benson
Chief, Case Section
Division of Abatement and Compliance
Bureau of Air Quality Control
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources
P. 0. Box 2063
Harrisburg, PA 17120
(717) 787-4324
Mr. Alex Bailey
South Coast Air Quality Management District
9150 Flare Drive
El Monte, CA 91731
-------
INDUSTRIAL CONTACTS
Mr. George Herman
Manager of Can Reclamation
ALCOA
Pittsburgh, PA
(412) 553-4645
Mr. Jim Smith
ALCOA
Pittsburgh, PA
(412) 553-2504
Mr. Marvin Fink
Vice President
Allied Metal Company
2059 S. Canal Street
Chicago, IL
(312) 225-2800
Mr. Matt Lydon
Apex International Alloys, Inc.
Suite 215
2340 Des Plaines Avenue
Des Plaines, IL 60018
(312) 297-1360
Mr. Skip Brown
Engineering Department
Ogden Metals
20521 Chargrin Street
Cleveland, OH
(216) 752-4000
Mr. Jack Eagan
Manager of Environmental Control
Metals Division
Vulcan Materials Company
P. 0. Box 720
1 Huron Street
Sandusky, OH 44870
(419) 626-4610
Mr. Tom Hendon
U. S. Reduction Company
P. 0. Box 30
4610 Kennedy Avenue
E. Chicago, IN 46312
(312) 731-1000
C-5
-------
ASSOCIATION CONTACTS
Mr. R. Cooperman
Executive Director
Aluminum Recycling Association
Suite 504
900 17th Street, NW
Washington, D. C. 20006
(202) 785-0550
Mr. Sy Epstein
The Aluminum Association
818 Connecticut Avenue, NW
Washington, D. C. 20006
(202) 862-5100
Mr. Howard Ness
National Association of Recycling Industries, Inc.
330 Madison Avenue
New York, NY 10017
(212) 867-7330
CONSULTANTS
Mr. William D. Balgord
President
Environmental Resources Technology, Inc.
P. 0. Box 300
Brookfield, CT 06804
(203) 775-1523
Dr. Teller
Teller Environmental Systems, Inc.
10 Faraday Street
Worcester, MA.
(617) 755-8613
C-6
-------
APPENDIX D
TELEPHONE CALLS
This appendix contains copies of all pertinent telephone conversations
(calls such as those placed to a receptionist or secretary with the contact
being out of the office are not recorded).
D-l
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE: May 12, 1978
PERSON CALLED:
ORGANIZATION:
ADDRESS:
William Herring
EPA
Raleigh-Durham, N.C.
TEL. NO.
TRC PERSONNEL:
(919) 541-5295
E.T. Brookman
SUBJECT MATTER:
I called Bill to inform him that the Work Plan was in the mail
and that once he has received it and read it over he should contact
me. At that time we'll decide whether to revise it, or whether I
should come down to discuss it.
D-2
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE: May 17, 1978
PERSON CALLED:
ORGANIZATION:
ADDRESS:
Bill Balgord
Consultant - ER & T
Brookfield, CT.
TEL. NO.
TRC PERSONNEL:
(203) 775-1523
E.T. Brookman
SUBJECT MATTER:
I called Bill to see If he could assist us with the secondary
aluminum project. He said he would come to TRC on May 19 to discuss it.
D-3
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE: May 18, 1978
PERSON CALLED: William Herring
ORGANIZATION: EPA
ADDRESS: Raleigh-Durham, N.C.
TEL. NO. (919) 541-5295
TRC PERSONNEL: E.T. Brookman
SUBJECT MATTER:
Bill called me in order to comment on the Work Plan which I sent to
him last week. He approved of the Plan, but had a few comments as follows:
1. He stressed that one of the important results of this project
will be the compiling of a list of the best controlled plants.
These will be the plants that EPA might choose for testing
later on. He said other parts of the project could be weaker
in order to obtain this information.
2. The contacts with agencies and associations should result in
information on these best controlled plants - such as processes,
raw materials, products, available data, etc.
3. He felt that the EPA Region V office might be a good place to
start for information since there are many plants in that
region. Likewise, Region II could be helpful.
4. He questioned the visit to a "typical" plant - he thought
that meant that I would bypass one with best control technology
as being atypical. I assured him that what I meant was that
I would visit a local plant to get firsthand knowledge of
operations and that, if given a choice, I would obviously
go to one with a good control system. I told him Bill Balgord
might steer me in the right direction here.
5. He felt the pages should be numbered in the Plan.
6. He will send out formal approval with a list of comments.
D-4
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE: June 1, 1978
PERSON CALLED:
ORGANIZATION:
ADDRESS:
TEL. NO.
TRC PERSONNEL:
A1 Conklin
Conn. DEP
Hartford, CT.
Enforcement Div.
(203) 566-4030
E.T. Brookman
SUBJECT MATTER:
I called DEP to see what information they might have regarding
secondary aluminum smelters. Mr. Conklin said he would prefer that
I talk to individual companies first. They have permits there, but
he would like a written request before releasing them for our
information (even though they are public domain).
D-5
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE: June 1» 1978
PERSON CALLED:
ORGANIZATION:
ADDRESS:
TEL. NO.
TRC PERSONNEL:
SUBJECT MATTER:
I called to see i£ they had any information on secondary
aluminum smelters. They said all they would have would be
what is included in CDS.
EPA - Region I
Boston, Mass.
Air Compliance
(617) 223-5610
E.T. Brookman
D-6
-------
REPORT OP TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE: June 7, 1978
PERSON CALLED: Ms. Barbara Sidler
ORGANIZATION: Illinois EPA
ADDRESS: 2200 Churchill Rd.
Springfield, 111. 62706
TEL. NO. (217) 782-7327
TRC PERSONNEL: E.T. Brookman
SUBJECT MATTER:
I called to see what information they might have. She
requested a written request be sent to them.
D-7
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
PERSON CALLED:
ORGANIZATION:
ADDRESS:
TEL. NO.
TRC PERSONNEL:
SUBJECT MATTER:
He was not
DATE: June 7, 1978
Bob Duprey
EPA - Region V
Air Branch
230 S. Dearborn St., Chicago, 111.
(312) 353-2212
E.T. Brookman
in. Someone will call back.
D-8
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE • 1» 19 7 8
PERSON CALLED:
ORGANIZATION:
ADDRESS:
TEL. NO.
TRC PERSONNEL:
SUBJECT MATTER:
I called regarding secondary aluminum plants in California.
The knowledgeable person in that area was not in. Someone will
call back.
Air Resources Board
P.O. Box 2815
Sacramento, Calif. 95812
(916) 322-2892
E.T. Brookman
D-9
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE: June 7, 1978
PERSON CALLED:
ORGANIZATION:
ADDRESS:
TEL. NO.
TRC PERSONNEL:
SUBJECT MATTER:
I called Mr. Ness to see what kind of information was available
through NARI regarding secondary aluminum manufacturing. He has no
statistical information at all. A membership list is available to
members only.
Howard Ness
National Association of Recycling Industries, Inc.
330 Madison Ave.
New York, N.Y. 10017
(212) 867-7330
E.T. Brookman
D-10
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE: June 7, 1978
PERSON CALLED: Mr. Ang
ORGANIZATION: Ohio EPA - Cleveland District
ADDRESS: Cleveland, Ohio
TEL. NO. (216) 664-3500
TRC PERSONNEL: E.T. Brookman
SUBJECT MATTER:
Mr. Ang had very little information on secondary plants in the
Cleveland area. He said the person who should know more is in India
for a month. He told me to call Alan Franks at the Public Information
Center (614-466-8508). Permit information is in Cleveland (2735
Broadway Ave.).
D-ll
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE: June 7, 1978
PERSON CALLED:
ORGANIZATION:
ADDRESS:
TEL. NO.
TRC PERSONNEL:
Alan Franks
Ohio EPA
Public Information Center
Columbus, Ohio
(614) 466-8508
E.T. Brookman
SUBJECT MATTER:
Mr. Franks said that the person who might know more would be
Howard Johnson of the Air Office (614-466-7390). He wasn't
available and I should call on June 8.
He also said to try the regional offices:
Akron - Norm Keckler (216) 375-2480
Trumbull - (216) 744-1928
Sandusky - (419) 352-8461
Toledo - Tom Kavachick (419) 247-6524
Uhrichville (SE office) - (614) 385-8501
D-12
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE: June 7, 1978
PERSON CALLED:
ORGANIZATION:
ADDRESS:
TEL. NO.
TRC PERSONNEL:
Robert Ogg
Region II EPA
Federal Office Building
26 Federal Plaza, N.Y., N.Y. 10007
(212) 264-2517
E.T. Brookman
SUBJECT MATTER:
He said to send a letter of questions and address it to Frank
Giaccone - Chief, Air Facilities Branch.
D-13
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE: June 7, 1978
PERSON CALLED: Jim Benson
ORGANIZATION: Penn. Dept. of Env. Resources
ADDRESS: Harrisburg, PA.
TEL. NO. (717) 787-4324
TRC PERSONNEL: E.T. Brookman
SUBJECT MATTER:
An emission inventory is not available yet but he has information
on Gettysburg Foundries which he will send up. He said to call the
regional offices for other plants:
York office: Terry Black (717) 771-4481
Lancaster office: (717) 299-7601
D-14
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE I June 8, 1978
PERSON CALLED:
ORGANIZATION:
ADDRESS:
TEL. NO.
TRC PERSONNEL:
Sy Epstein
Alum. Assoc.
818 Conn. Ave. N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20006
(202) 862-5100
E.T. Brookman
SUBJECT MATTER:
I talked to Sy about any information he might have. He said they
have limited information - they primarily represent the primary industry.
He said to try the ARA.
D-15
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
PERSON CALLED:
ORGANIZATION:
ADDRESS:
TEL. NO.
TRC PERSONNEL:
DATE: June 1978
Andrew Sunderland
Indiana State Board of Health
Indianapolis, Ind.
(317) 633-0665
E.T. Brookman
SUBJECT MATTER:
According to Andy, the best controlled plants in the state are:
1. Wabash Smelting
2. U.S. Reduction in E. Chicago.
The others are not so good. He said to send a questionnaire to:
State Board of Health
Air Poll. Control Div.
1330 W. Michigan St.
Indianapolis, Ind. 46206.
D-16
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE: June 8, 1978
PERSON CALLED:
ORGANIZATION:
ADDRESS:
TEL. NO.
TRC PERSONNEL:
Metallurgical Division
South Coast Air Quality Management District
El Monte, Cal.
(213) 572-6220
E.T. Brookman
SUBJECT MATTER:
I was informed that they have source test data and will send it
out through a questionnaire we will send them.
The Chief Engineer in that district is Bob McKnight (213-572-6205)
I should address the questionnaire to Alex Bailey.
D-17
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE: ^ne 9, 1978
PERSON CALLED:
ORGANIZATION:
ADDRESS:
Howard Johnson
Ohio EPA
Columbus, Ohio
TEL. NO. (614) 466-7390
TRC PERSONNEL: E*T* Brookman
SUBJECT MATTER:
Howard said to check with the local air agencies or district
offices. No one at the state office is familiar enough with the
plants to rate them according to best control. I can get Emission
Inventory information by contacting Bill Juris.
D-18
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE: June 9, 1978
PERSON CALLED:
ORGANIZATION:
ADDRESS:
Benson Hellwig
Region IV EPA
TEL. NO. (404) 881-4298
TRC PERSONNEL:
SUBJECT MATTER:
He does not have information on compliance. I should probably
contact the states. He'll call them and tell them to expect a call/
questionnaire.
D-19
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE: June 9, 1978
PERSON CALLED:
ORGANIZATION:
ADDRESS:
Bill Thurston
Region IX EPA
San Francisco, Cal.
TEL. NO.
TRC PERSONNEL:
(415) 556-6150
E.T. Brookman
SUBJECT MATTER:
He said that South West Alloys in Arizona is very poorly controlled.
He said that Los Angeles controls are stringent. He suggested I talk to
the Surveillance & Analysis Group - Mr. Arnold Den (415-556-8752).
D-20
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE: June 9, 1978
PERSON CALLED:
ORGANIZATION:
ADDRESS:
TEL. NO.
TRC PERSONNEL:
Arnold Den
Region IX - EPA
San Francisco, Cal.
Surveillance & Analysis
(415) 556-8752
E.T. Brookman
SUBJECT MATTER:
Mr. Den has some inspection files. He feels the Alcoa plants are
well controlled (but not really secondary aluminum smelters). U.S.
Reduction is good. Have to clean up chlorine in Los Angeles as well
as other pollutants. Metal Products in Riverside is well controlled.
They have controlled and uncontrolled test data available but we'll
have to send someone out since no personnel are available.
D-21
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE: June 9, 1978
PERSON CALLED:
ORGANIZATION:
ADDRESS:
TEL. NO.
TRC PERSONNEL:
Engineering Department
Ogden Metals
20521 Chargrin St.
Cleveland, Ohio
(216) 752-4000
E.T. Brookman
SUBJECT MATTER:
I called to see if the Wabash,
supposedly is a good one, according
I was told to contact Skip Brown on
Ind. plant is their cleanest (this
to the Ind. State Board of Health).
Wednesday.
D-22
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE: June 9, 1978
PERSON CALLED: Julius Gordon
ORGANIZATION: U.S. Reduction
ADDRESS: E. Chicago, Ind.
4610 Melville Ave.
TEL. NO. (312) 731-1000
TRC PERSONNEL: E.T. Brootanan
SUBJECT MATTER:
Mr. Gordon said their two cleanest plants are the Toledo, Ohio and
Ontario, Cal. plants. I should call on Monday and talk to Tom Hendon
(X-350) about plant visits or more information.
D-23
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE: June 9, 1978
PERSON CALLED:
ORGANIZATION:
ADDRESS:
TEL. NO.
TRC PERSONNEL:
Jim Smith
ALCOA
Pittsburgh, PA.
(412) 553-2504
E.T. Brookman
SUBJECT MATTER:
We talked about their plants in the Los Angeles area (and
Vernon and Corona). They are not strictly secondary aluminum
smelters. They melt down extrusions and castings. Further
information on this from Mr. George Herman (Manager of Can
Reclamation), (412) 553-4645. He might know of some secondary
plants in the area.
D-24
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE: June 12, 1978
PERSON CALLED: Jack Eagati
ORGANIZATION: Vulcan Materials Co. - Manager of Env. Control
ADDRES S:
Sandusky, Ohio
XEL. NO. (419) 626-4610
TRC PERSONNEL: E.T. Brookman
SUBJECT MATTER:
Jack said they have four plants:
Sandusky, Ohio
Corona, Cal.'
Oak Creek, Wis.
Hot Springs, Ark.
Corona has afterburners and Incineration equipment. He feels that
is better in order to control carcinogenics. They use some scrubbers —
no baghouses.
I'll have to write and give authority before setting up the plant
visits.
D-25
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE: June 12, 1978
PERSON CALLED:
ORGANIZATION:
ADDRESS:
TEL. NO.
TRC PERSONNEL:
Matt Lydon
Apex International Alloys, Inc.
Des Plains, 111.
(317) 297-1360
E.T. Brookman
SUBJECT MATTER:
I asked him about a plant visit. He said he would have to wait for
the EPA official request. He said all four plants are well controlled:
Cleveland, Ohio
Chicago, 111.
Checotah, Okla.
Bicknell, Ind.
D-26
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE: June 12, 1978
PERSON CALLED: Bill Juris
ORGANIZATION: Ohio EPA
ADDRESS:
TEL. NO. (614) 466-7390
TRC PERSONNEL: E. T. Brookman
SUBJECT MATTER:
He will send an Emission Inventory if they have any information on
secondary plants included in it.
D-27
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE: June 12, 1978
PERSON CALLED: Tom Hendon
ORGANIZATION: U.S. Reduction - Head of Env. Dept.
ADDRESS:
E. Chicago, Ind.
TEL. NO. (312) 731-1000
TRC PERSONNEL: E.T. Brookman
SUBJECT MATTER:
I talked to him about plant visits. He said he would not consider
It at this time due to legal actions currently going on at their Toledo,
Ohio plant (the one he feels is best controlled). In fact, he wouldn't
consider other plants at this time either. Very touchy situation with
the local people, themselves, and EPA.
He said the plant in Indiana is not as well controlled due to
easier regulations and enforcement. They comply with the regulations
and no further.
He said Rochester, N.Y. has a good plant, as do Cleveland (Apex)
and Sandusky (Vulcan).
I should send him a list of questions.
D-28
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE: June 12, 1978
PERSON CALLED: Steve Rothblatt/Mr. Kesari
ORGANIZATION: Region V EPA
ADDRESS:
Chicago, 111.
TEL. NO. (312) 353-2086
TRC PERSONNEL: E-T- Brookman
SUBJECT MATTER:
Steve said that Mr. Kesari (Engineering) would have information on
secondary aluminum smelters. I talked to him and he said that three well
controlled plants are:
Allied Metal Co.
Apex International
Harco Aluminum
all of which are in Chicago.
Permit information is at the state office in Springfield.
I could talk to Miles Zanco (Manager of Field Operations) or Paul
Shmearbok (Manager of Permit Section) at the state office if I need more
information.
D-29
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE: June 12, 1978
PERSON CALLED: Bill Balgord
ORGANIZATION: Consultant - ER & T
ADDRESS: Brookfield, CT.
TEL. NO. (203) 775-1523
TRC PERSONNEL: E.T. Brookaan
SUBJECT MATTER:
Bill will check further into plants with best technology. He will
send up a copy of Chapter 3 of the BNF Metals Technology Centre Report
as requested.
D-30
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE:
June 12, 1978
PERSON CALLED:
ORGANIZATION:
ADDRESS:
TEL. NO.
TRC PERSONNEL:
George Herman
ALCOA - Manager of Can Reclamation
Pittsburgh, PA.
(412) 553-4645
E.T. Brookman
SUBJECT MATTER:
He stated that the ALCOA plants are not secondary smelters under
our definition. He suggested Vulcan Materials (Corona, Cal.) and Apex
International (Long Beach, Cal.).
D-31
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE: June 13, 1978
PERSON CALLED: Bill Herring
ORGANIZATION: EPA
ADDRESS: Raleigh-Durham, N.C.
TEL. NO. (919) 541-5295
TRC PERSONNEL: E'T* Broolonan
SUBJECT MATTER:
Bill said to go ahead and make trip arrangements with Vulcan (either
plant) and Allied Metals in Chicago. The letters are on their way.
He will probably go along on one visit and George Crane on another.
D-32
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE: June 13, 1978
PERSON CALLED:
ORGANIZATION:
ADDRESS:
TEL. NO.
TRC PERSONNEL:
Jack Eagan
Vulcan Materials Co.
1 Huron St. P.O. Box 720
Sandusky, OH
(419) 626-4610
E. T. Brookman
SUBJECT MATTER:
They use scrubbers on their demagging process In both the Corona
and Sandusky plants. Afterburners are used on the furnaces and
driers. Both plants use chlorine for demagging.
D-33
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE: June 13, 1978
PERSON CALLED:
ORGANIZATION:
ADDRESS:
TEL. NO.
TRC PERSONNEL:
Mr. Martin
Allied Metal
2059 S. Canal St.
Chicago, IL
(312) 225-2800
E. T. Brookman
SUBJECT MATTER:
They will see about a plant visit after they receive a letter of
authorization. The letter should be addressed to Marvin Fink, V.P.
They have a chromatographic coated baghouse on their Chicago plant.
They use fluorine for demagging. They also have test results avail-
able.
D-34
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE: June 13, 1978
PERSON CALLED:
ORGANIZATION:
ADDRESS:
TEL. NO.
TRC PERSONNEL:
Barbara Sudler
Div. of Air Pollution Control
IL EPA
Springfield, IL
E. T. Brookman
SUBJECT MATTER:
She called to say she received the questionnaire and they have
no record of two plants:
Tower Metals
Apex International
Also, they have information on Reynolds Metal which was not on
the list. They will check with the firms about confidentiality
and then fill out the information.
D-35
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE: June 15, 1978
PERSON CALLED:
ORGANIZATION:
ADDRESS:
John Burckle
IERL
Cincinnati, OH
TEL. NO.
TRC PERSONNEL:
(513) 684-4491
E. T. Brookman
SUBJECT MATTER:
I called to see if he could send me a copy of the Draft version of
the Source Assessment Study. He said it has to go through EPA.
D-36
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE: June 19, 1978
PERSON CALLED:
ORGANIZATION:
ADDRESS:
TEL. NO.
TRC PERSONNEL:
Andy Sunderland
Ind. State Board of Health
1330 W. Michigan St.
Indianapolis, Ind.
(317) 633-0663
E. T. Brookman
SUBJECT MATTER:
I will go out there on Thursday, June 29 and obtain Emission Inventory
and file information. I should see Ed Stresino. They open at 8:15.
D-37
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE: June 19, 1978
PERSON CALLED: Eng. Dept.
ORGANIZATION: Apex International
ADDRESS:
Des Plaines, IL
TEL. NO. (312) 297-1360
TRC PERSONNEL: E. T. Brookman
SUBJECT MATTER:
They have a chromatographic coated baghouse Ofheelabrator-Frye - same
as Teller) and afterburners. They use fluorine for demagging.
D-38
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE: June 19, 1978
PERSON CALLED: Bill Herring
ORGANIZATION: EPA
ADDRESS: Raleigh-Durham, NC
TEL. NO. (919) 541-5295
TRC PERSONNEL: E. T. Brookman
SUBJECT MATTER:
I informed him of the plant visit schedule. He said he will be
joining me. He agreed to the two visits and the visits to the
Ind. State Board of Health and Region IX headquarters in San
Francisco on June 21.
D-39
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE: June 19, 1978
PERSON CALLED:
ORGANIZATION:
ADDRESS:
TEL. NO.
TRC PERSONNEL:
Marvin Fink
Allied Metal Co.
Chicago, IL
(312) 225-2800
E. T. Brookman
SUBJECT MATTER:
We set up a tentative plant visit for Wednesday, June 28 at the
Chicago plant between 9:00 - 10:00 a.m.
D-40
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE: June 19, 1978
PERSON CALLED:
ORGANIZATION:
ADDRESS:
TEL. NO.
TRC PERSONNEL:
Jack Eagan
Vulcan Materials
Sandusky, OH
(419) 626-4610
E. T. Brookman
SUBJECT MATTER:
We set up a tentative plant visit for Tuesday, June 27 at the Sandusky
plant between 9:00 - 10:00 a.m.
D-41
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE: June 26, 1978
PERSON CALLED: Jack Eagan
ORGANIZATION: Vulcan Materials
ADDRESS: Sandusky, OH
TEL. NO. (419) 626-4610
TRC PERSONNEL: E. T. Brookman
SUBJECT MATTER:
I confirmed the plant visit on Tuesday, June 27 at 9:00 a.m.
Directions to motel (Green Tree Inn, 1935 E. Cleveland Rd):
Rt. 80 to Rt. 250
All the way into Sandusky
Follow signs to Cedar Pt.
Just before entrance to Rt. 6 (Cleveland Rd.) is the motel.
Directions to plant:
Take Rt. 6 across town - about 1 mile, veer off at inter-
section of Monroe St.
Goes by plant - there will be no signs
South side of St. is Chrysler Plastics and G&C Foundry
They're on the north side - on the lake
Go up Superior St. (1 block) to the office
See receptionist and ask for Jack Eagan.
D-42
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE: June 26, 1978
PERSON CALLED:
ORGANIZATION:
ADDRESS:
TEL. NO.
TRC PERSONNEL:
Marvin Fink
Allied Metals
S. Canal St.
Chicago
(312) 225-2800
E. T. Brookman
SUBJECT MATTER:
I confirmed the plant visit on Wednesday, June 28 at 9:00 a.m.
Directions:
Take expressway - get off at 18th St.
Go east to Canal St.
Go down Canal to 20th St.
See receptionist - ask for Marvin Fink.
D-43
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE: July 5, 1978
PERSON CALLED:
ORGANIZATION:
ADDRESS:
Bill Herring
EPA
Raleigh-Durham, NC
TEL. NO. (919) 541-5295
TRC PERSONNEL: E. T. Brookman
SUBJECT MATTER:
Bill called concerning a few items.
1. He is sending me a copy of the trip report for Vulcan.
2. I should be preparing a Docket (copy of all documents -
anything not readily available).
3. He wanted to know the man-hours for June (370).
A. He contacted Fred Craig of IERL in Cinn. He will send me
a copy of the Rochester Smelting Report.
5. The final report should be in SI units with English in
parenthesis.
6. He feels another trip probably isn't warranted.
7. He said there is considerable fumes from fluoridation and
chlorination.
D-44
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE: July 5, 1978
PERSON CALLED:
ORGANIZATION:
ADDRESS:
TEL. NO.
TRC PERSONNEL:
Dr. Teller
Teller Env. Systems, Inc.
10 Faraday
Worcester, MA
(617) 755-8613
E. T. Brookman
SUBJECT MATTER:
I called Dr. Teller to see if he had any further information on
his baghouse. He is sending out an EPA report on it.
D-45
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE: July 11, 1978
PERSON CALLED:
ORGANIZATION:
ADDRESS:
Dr. Teller
Teller Env. Systems, Inc.
Worcester, MA
TEL. NO. (617) 755-8613
TRC PERSONNEL: E- T- Brookman
SUBJECT MATTER:
I called Dr. Teller to see if he had any information on the Derham
and ALCOA Processes. He said the Derham process was developed in
England and only one or two U.S. firms tried it. It is only used
for CI2 control - not for charging - would still need control for
charging emissions. It's a third well system (charging-combustion-
demagging). To his knowledge it is not used in U.S. today. The
ALCOA process is of the same order - only for demagging and not
for charging emissions. He thinks it may be used by a few plants
in the U.S.
D-46
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE: July 11, 1978
PERSON CALLED: Dick Cooperman
ORGANIZATION: Alum. Recycling Assoc.
ADDRESS: Washington., DC
TEL. NO. (202) 785-0550
TRC PERSONNEL: E. T. Brookman
SUBJECT MATTER:
I called to see if he could be of any help to this study. He said
the list of plants we have (Dept. of Commerce) is the same as theirs.
He said their annual capacities are as follows (based on 3 shifts/
day, 5 days/-week):
1973 - 1.8 billion lbs
1977 - 2.6 billion lbs
1978 - 2.5 billion lbs
by 1980 - 2.3 billion lbs
by 1983 - 2.6 billion lbs
Production in 1978 was 2.1 billion lbs or roughly 84% of capacity.
He anticipates plant shut downs through this year and next due to bad
economics.
He feels Jack Eagan of Vulcan is one of the most knowledgeable people
in the industry.
He is willing to cooperate with any thing we might ask. He requested
a letter from us giving the EPA contract no., etc.
D-47
-------
REPORT OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
SECONDARY ALUMINUM MANUFACTURING
DATE: July 12, 1978
PERSON CALLED: Bill Herring
ORGANIZATION: EPA
ADDRESS: Raleigh-Durham, N.C.
TEL. NO. (919) 541-5295
TRC PERSONNEL: E.T. Brookman
SUBJECT MATTER:
I called Bill to inform him of the project costs for the month of
June ($10,684.82) and the total cost ($15,513.49). I told him I received
the reports he sent up. I also told him the project report is proceeding
with no problem.
He questioned the use of the name of the coating material Allied
uses on the baghouse in the report. He's not sure if Teller considers
it proprietary. I told him I would doubt it since Allied picked it up
commercially. He is sending me a copy of the information sheet on
Teller's coating along with the Rochester smelter report.
D-48
-------
APPENDIX E
ADDITIONAL REFERENCES NOT CITED IN TEXT
-------
1. Gunterman, Karl L. Air Pollution Control in the Secondary Aluminum
Industry. In: Land Economics. Vol. 49, No 3. Univ. of Wisconsin
Press, Madison, WS. August 1973. p. 285-293.
2. Varner, Bruce A., Paul A. Boys, William F. Hamilton, and George B.
Crane. State Guidelines for Standards of Performance for Existing
Primary Aluminum Plants. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Second Draft. Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. August 1974.
3. Leonard, Richard P., Robert C. Ziegler, W. Richard Brown, John Y.
Yang, and Hans G. Reif. Assessment of Industrial Hazardous Waste
Practices in the Metal Smelting and Refining Industry (Vol. 2:
Primary and Secondary Nonferrous Smelting and Refining). Calspan
Corp., Buffalo, NY. Report Number SW-145c.2. April 1977. 309 p.
4. Train, Russel E., Andrew W. Breidenbach, Ph.D., Eckardt C. Beck,
Robert B. Schaffer, and Patricia E. Williams, P.E. Supplement for
Pretreatment to the Development Document for the Secondary Aluminum
Segment of the Nonferrous Metals Manufacturing Point Source Category.
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. Report Num-
ber EPA 440/1-76/081-a. August 1976.
5. Spendlove, Max J. A Profile of the Nonferrous Secondary Metals
Industry. In: Proceedings of the Second Mineral Waste Utiliza-
tion Symposium, Held in Chicago, March 18-19, 1970. p. 87-106.
6. U. S. Bureau of Mines Metallurgy Research Staff. Reclaiming and
Recycling Secondary Metals. Engineering and Mining Journal.
p. 94-98. July 1975.
7. Bender, Ren€ J. Air Pollution Control: Its Impact on the Metal
Industries. Power, p. 56-60. April 1972.
8. Mantle, E. C. Prevention of Air Pollution in the Non-Ferrous
Metals Industries. BNF Metals Technology Centre. August 1974.
p. 24-27, 147-153.
9. Lauber, Jack D., Frank W. Conley, and Robert D. Barshield. Air
Pollution Control of Aluminum and Copper Recycling Processes.
Pollution Engineering. 5}23-26. December 1973.
10. Heely, L. P., ed. Aluminum Statistical Review, 1976. The Alu-
minum Association, Inc., Washington, DC. Report Number 94. 67 p.
11. Jones, H. R. Pollution Control in the Nonferrous Metals Industry.
Park Ridge, NJ, Noyes Data Corporation, 1972. 200 p.
12. Ziegler, R. C., S. M. Taksich, R. P. Leonard, and M. Van Lier.
Environmental Impacts of Virgin and Recycled Steel and Aluminum.
Calspan Corp., Buffalo, NY. Report Number PB-253-487. Feb. 1974.
109 p.
E-2
-------
13. Stamper, John W. and Christine M. Monroe. Aluminum. In" Bureau
of Mines Minerals Yearbook. Washington, DC. U. S. Department of
the Interior, 1975. 25 p.
14. Zada, F. K., T. Briggs, and Devitt. Technical Guide for Review
and Evaluation of Compliance Schedules for Air Pollution Sources.
PED Co.-Environmental Specialists, Inc., Cincinnati, OH. Report
Number EPA-340/l-73-001-a. July 1973.
15. Duncan, L. J. Analysis of Final State Implement Plans-Rules and
Regulations. The Mitre Co., Washington. Report Number PB-213-498.
July 1972. 78 p.
16. Spendlove, Max J. Bureau of Mines Research on Resource Recovery -
Reclamation, Utilization, Disposal, and Stabilization. Bureau of
Mines, USDI. College Park, MD. Report Number PB-272-921. 1977.
104 p.
17. Gordon, Richard L., Wilfred A. Lambo, and George H. K. Schenck.
Effective Systems of Scrap Utilization: Copper, Aluminum, and
Nickel. The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA.
Report Number PB-210 795. July 1972. 220 p.
18. Ryan, N. V. and M. E. Franza. Design Manual for the TESI Chroma-
tographic Baghouse Control System. Teller Environmental Systems,
Inc., Worcester, MA. Report Number IERL-CI 164. January 1976.
40 p.
19. Effective Technology for Recycling Metal. National Association
of Secondary Material Industries, Inc., New York, NY. 1971.
20. Directory of Aluminum Suppliers in the United States. U. S. De-
partment of Commerce. January 1978.
Metals Week. Aluminum - Profile of an Industry. Vol. 39, No. 33,
August 12, 1968.
E-3
-------
|