AN AIR POLLUTION COMPLIANCE
ANALYSIS REPORT ON NINE
INDUSTRIES
VOLUME I
PRIMARY ALUMINUM INDUSTRY
FINAL REPORT
-------
RADIAN
CORPORATION
RC# 100-044-11
AN AIR POLLUTION COMPLIANCE
ANALYSIS REPORT ON NINE
INDUSTRIES
VOLUME I
PRIMARY ALUMINUM INDUSTRY
FINAL REPORT
Presented to:
Mr. Robert C. Marshall, Project Officer
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency-
Division of Stationary Source Enforcement
Waterside Mall
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
11 September 1975
Prepared by:
3.P. Cerepaka, Task Director
T. D. Raye
C. R. Batey
8500 Shoal Creek Blvd./P.O. Box 9948/Austin, Texas 78766/(512)454-4797
-------
RADIAN CORPORATION
This report is one of nine furnished to the
Environmental Protection Agency in fulfillment
of contracts 68-02-1319, Task 16 and 68-02-
1383, Task 11. The Project Officer was Mr.
Robert C. Marshall, Division of Stationary
Source Enforcement. This report does not
necessarily represent the views or policies
of the Agency.
-------
RADIAN CORPORATION
FOREWORD
This study of primary aluminum smelters is one of nine
concurrently accomplished tasks to locate individual plants and
production rates, analyze processes and air emissions, and pre-
sent compliance status data for nine large industries. The re-
maining eight, presented in individual volumes, are ferroalloy,
Portland cement, sulfuric acid, nitric acid, phosphate ferti-
lizer, coal cleaning, gray iron, and asphalt concrete. In this
study, Radian considered only the process emission points for
which EPA has published emission factors. One stydy estimated
totals for the emission points of these nine industries to be
1,975,000 tons of particulates and 600,000 tons of sulfur di-
oxide in 1967 (LE-125). Another study estimated 1968 particu-
late emissions from these nine to be 1,850,000 tons (VA-091).
Program Manager for the entire nine industry task was
Mr. C. P. Bartosh. Mr. B. P. Cerepaka was Task Director. Other
staff contributing to this study on primary aluminum smelters
were Mr. T. D. Raye and Mr. C. R. Batey.
i
-------
RADIAN CORPORATION
ABSTRACT
The following study involved the primary aluminum smel-
ters in the United States. Alumina plants were not considered.
The goals of the study were to locate all reduction facilities,
obtain all available process and emissions data, compute allowable
particulate emissions from the SIPs, and determine the compliance
status from the Compliance Data System (CDS) and, if needed,
regional office files.
In 1973 thirty-one aluminum smelters had a capacity of
4,893,000 tons of aluminum. Production was 4,529,000 tons or
about 9370 of capacity. A new smelter under construction will
reportedly have a 15,000 ton per year capacity by 1976 (US-144).
Using 1973 process and production data (EN-157) and EPA emission
factors (EN-071), Radian computed total potential particulate
emissions from the reduction processes (potrooms and anode baking
furnaces) at aluminum smelters in the United States to be about
201,000 tons. Also using the same 1973 data, potential fluoride
(gaseous and particulate) emissions were calculated to be about
103,000 tons. Using a 1971 industry average control level of 747.
estimated in another study (RU-055) and the potential emissions
estimated by Radian, actual emissions would have been about 55,000
tons in 1973. Actual fluoride emissions in 1971 were about 27,500
tons (RU-055). Using SIP regulations and the same 1973 data,
allowable particulate emissions were calculated by Radian to
total 20,500 tons per year or about an average control level of
90%. Control levels required by the SIPs range from 99% in New
York to 74% in Alabama.
For the thirty-one existing smelters, eleven (357«) were
reported to be in compliance, four (13%) out of compliance, and
sixteen (5270) unknown. These catagories are subdivided, as
follows: nine plants (29%) were in compliance with emission
limitations as determined by source test, inspection, or state
ii
-------
RADIAN CORPORATION
certification, two plants (6%) were in compliance with the in-
crements of progress of a schedule, one plant (3%) was out of
compliance with emission limitations, three plants (10%)
were out of compliance with the increments of progress of a
compliance schedule, twelve plants (39%) had unknown status
with respect to emission limitations, and four plants (1370)
had unknown compliance with increments of progress of a schedule.
Table 6.2-2a showing the compliance status breakdown by region
follows this page for easy reference.
iii
-------
RAD AN CORPORATIO
TABLE 6. 2-2a
EXISTING PRIMARY ALUMINUM PLANTS
CATEGORICAL SUMMARY OF COMPLIANCE STATUS BY REGION
MAY. 1975
IN
OUT
REGION
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
VIII
IX
X
a
W w
z£
M
hJ Z
ftS
o to
u cn
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
6
w w
OiJ
z s
< p
M Ed
hJ a
a« o
iw
U X
H
S H
M 5
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
sr
o
[d M
%%
M M
hJS
Pli H
sj
o
u z
o
tn M
O W
V]
H M
o £
o w
UNKNOWN
"ST
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
w
o
M u
•J J
n* ^
X Q
o w
U X
u
fa t/1
O
s
HH
D M
O £2
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
W O
O W
ZH
M H
O J
U
Z
go
5 h
o w
Z co
z
D
0
0
0
5
0
4
1
1
0
1
u
o
•J w
li
o o
u w
as
z u
5 to
o
Z M
D 5
0
0
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
TOTAL
0
2
2
7
2
7
1
I
0
9
TOTAL 9 2 1 3 12 4
(29%) (6%) (3%) (10%) (39%) (13%)
V ) V /V J
31
TOTAL
11
(35%)
4
(13%)
16
(52%)
31
IV
-------
R DIA CORPORATION
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
FOREWORD i
ABSTRACT ii
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Industry Definition and Characterization . . 1
1.2 Production and Capacity 2
2.0 PRIMARY ALUMINUM REDUCTION PROCESSES 6
3.0 EMISSIONS AND CONTROLS 12
3.1 Emission Sources 12
3.2 Potential Emissions 15
3.3 Control Equipment . . . 19
4.0 STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN REGULATIONS . . . . . .21
5.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY 25
6.0 DATA SOURCES, SUMMARIES, AND TABLES OF
INDIVIDUAL PLANTS 27
6.1 Sources of Data 27
6.2 Summary of Emissions and Compliance Status. .29
6.3 Data Tables of Individual Plants. 34
APPENDIX 1
CONTROL EQUIPMENT IDENTIFICATION CODES
-------
RADIAN CORPORATION
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
1.2-1 PRIMARY ALUMINUM SMELTERS 4
2.0-1 PREBAKE ALUMINUM REDUCTION CELL 8
2.0-2 VERTICAL STUD SODERBERG CELL 9
2.0-3 HORIZONTAL STUD SODERBERG CELL 10
2.0-4 SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM OF PRIMARY ALUMINUM REDUCTION
PROCESS 11
3.1-1 PREBAKE PLANT EMISSION POINTS 13
3.1-2 SODERBERG PLANT (horizontal and vertical stud)
EMISSION POINTS . . . 14
-------
RADI
CORPORATION
LIST OF TABLES
Page
1.2-1 PRIMARY ALUMINUM SMELTERS 3
3.2-1 EMISSION FACTORS FOR PRIMARY ALUMINUM PRODUCTION
PROCESSES 16
4.0-1 SIP AIR EMISSION REGULATIONS 22
6.2-1 PRIMARY ALUMINUM PLANTS
SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL EMISSIONS BY REGION 30
6.2-2a EXISTING PRIMARY ALUMINUM PLANTS
CATAGORICAL SUMMARY OF COMPLIANCE STATUS BY
REGION 31
6.2-2b EXISTING PRIMARY ALUMINUM PLANTS
SUMMARY OF COMPLIANCE STATUS BY REGION 32
6.2-3 COMPLIANCE STATUS CODES 33
DATA TABLES OF INDIVIDUAL PLANTS
6.3-1 REGION II 37
6.3-2 REGION III 40
6.3-4 CO 6.3-7 REGION IV 46
6.3-8 to 6.3-9 REGION V 58
6.3-10 to 6.3-12 REGION VI 64
6.3-13 REGION VII 73
6.3-14 REGION VIII 76
6.3-15 to 6.^-16 REGION X 79
-------
RADIAN
CORPORATION
1.0
INTRODUCTION
The major goals of this study of primary aluminum
producers were to (1) locate all reduction smelters; (2)
gather data on processes, production, and emissions; (3) cal-
culate allowable emissions based on state implementation plans
(SIPs); and (4) determine each source's compliance status as
given in the Compliance Data System (CDS) or through contact
with the regional offices. Plant size and location were the
priority goals.
The format of this report is as follows:
The remainder of this section presents a definition
and characterization of the industry and future
trends expected.
Section 2 describes the process of primary aluminum
production
Section 3 describes air pollutant emissions and
control devices.
Section 4 is a summary of the SIP regulations
applicable to primary aluminum smelters.
Section 6 presents the data gathered for
individual plants and also summaries.
This study is directed toward the domestic primary
aluminum smelters. Primary aluminum is defined as the product
1.1
Industry Definition and Characterization
-1-
-------
RAD A CORPORATION
arising from the electrolytic separation of aluminum oxide (alumina)
into its two atomic components, aluminum and oxygen. The industry
is classified by the Standard Industrial Classification Manual, 1972
by SIC Code 3334. There are a total of thirty-one plants within
the United States and its possessions with one additional plant
to start up in late 1975 or early 1976. For purposes of emissions
and allowables calculations, this report considers only the emis-
sion points from the following alternative reduction processes:
1. anode baking and prebake reduction cells,
2. horizontal stud Soderberg reduction cells., and
3. vertical stud Soderberg reduction cells.
1.2 Production and Capacity
Primary aluminum production in the United States is a
relatively new industry; the first plants were built in the early
1940's (EN-157). Design capacities at year-end 1972 of thirty of
the thirty-one plants as reported by the 1972 Minerals Yearbook
(US-144) are shown in Table 1.2-1. The Bureau of Mines listed
1973 domestic aluminum capacity as 4,893,000 tons and production
as 4,529,000 tons. Capacities range from 35,000 to 280,000 tons
per year. Average size is 157,000 tons per year. Also shown in
the same table are the production rates during 1973 reported by
the EPA (EN-157). Historically, the industry operated at 84%
capacity in 1971, 87% in 1972, 93% in 1973, and 100% in 1974.
Some individual plants may operate slightly above listed capacity.
This is due to the ability of plants to operate up to about 15%
above capacity for short periods by increasing the power levels
across the reduction cells.
Figure 1.2-1 presents the geographical distribution of
the thirty-two primary aluminum plants located in this study,
-2-
-------
TABLE 1.2-1
PRIMARY ALUMINUM SMELTERS
COMPANY AMD PLAHT
1. Aluminum Co. of American (Alcoa):
Alcoa, Tenn.
BadIn, N.C.
Evansvllle, (Warrick), Ind.
Hassena, N.Y.
Point Comfore, Tex.
Rockdale, Tex.
Vancouver, Wash.
Henacchee, Hash.
Palestine, Texas1
1972 DESIGN CAPACITY1
(thousands of short cons)
270
115
275
130
185
280
115
175
AGE
24
10
27
32
24
22
34
22
0
1973 PRODUCTION RATES*
(thousands of short tons)
275
100
225
125
175
275
100
175
2. Anaconda Aluminum Co.:
Columbia Falls, Mont.
Sebree, Ky.
3. Consolidated Aluminum Corp. (Con^lco):
Lake Charles, La.
Nev Johnsonville, Tenn.
4. Eastalco Aluminum Co.:
Frederick, Md.
5. Martin Marietta Aluminum, Inc.:
The Dalles, Ore.
Goldendale, Wash.
6. Intalco Aluminum Corp.:
Ferndale (Bellingham), Hash.
7. Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corp.:
Chalmette, La.
Mead, (fash.
Ravensuood, W. Va.
Tacoma, Hash.
8. Naeional-Southwire Aluminum Co.:
, Havesville, Ky.
9. Noranda Aluminum Inc.:
Nev Madrid, Mo.
10. Ormet Corp.:
Hannibal, Ohio
11. Revere Copper 6 Brass, Inc.:
Scottsboro, Ala.
180 180
— 120
35 3 35*
140 11 140
87 4 85
90 14 87
110 110
260 8 265
260 23 260
206 31 165
163 17 166
81 31 75
180 4 180
70 3 70
2S0 16 240
112 3 112
12. Reynolds Metals Co.:
Arfcadelphia, Ark. 63 21 68
Corpus Christi (San Patricio), Tex. Ill 22 111
Jones Mills, Ark. 122 31 125
Listerhill (Sheffield), Ala. 221 202
Longvieu, Hash. 200 32/5 190
Massena, N.Y. 128 16 126
Troutdale, Ore. 130 33 100
TOTAL 4744 4662
* Company name reported as Gulf Coast Aluminum Co.
1 US-144
1 EN-157
5 Pilot plant that will have 15 KTPY capacity in 1976
-3-
-------
FIGURE 1.2-1 - PRIMARY ALUMINUM SMELTERS
4>
>
MONTANA
MOUTH DAKOTA
c=>*;
PUtHfO BlCO
VIRGIN ISLANDS
SOUTH DAKOTA
MINNESOTA
tOWA
WISCONSIN)
ILUNOiS
NEBRASKA
U»Cr-
CMcag
COLORADO
* Denver
MISSOURI
^,V'\n
vib^w;
KANSAS
Kansas City
INDIANA
VtP.Oi^S
.*4A
^<
-------
RADIA o p rtion
including one facility which is currently under construction.
Since aluminum plants are extremely large users of electricity,
consuming some 80 to 100 billion kilowatt hours each year, site
selection is almost totally determined by availability of in-
expensive electrical power. This accounts for the concentration
of plants in the Pacific Northwest and the Tennessee Valley.
Arkansas is the only domestic supply of the raw material, bauxite.
The nine domestic alumina plants which convert imported bauxite
into the input of reduction plants are located away from the
primary aluminum plants except for two which have alumina and
aluminum facilities adjacent to each other.
-5-
-------
RADIAN CORPORATION
2.0 PRIMARY ALUMINUM REDUCTION PROCESSES
Aluminum can be made by a variety of processes. It
was first obtained in its pure form in 1825 by heating aluminum
chloride with a potassium-mercury amalgam. In 1854, aluminum
was made by heating sodium-aluminum chloride with metallic
sodium. This process was used commercially until 1886 producing
aluminum for about $8 a pound. In 1886, Charles Hall produced
aluminum by the electrolysis of alumina dissolved in a fused
bath of cryolite. In the same year, Paul Hgroult was granted a
French patent for a similar process. Today all aluminum is pro-
duced by the Hall-H£roult process, producing aluminum for 23.5
cents per pound* (SH-177).
The electrolytic process for the reduction of AI2O3 to
aluminum is conceptually very simple. Alumina is introduced in-
to a molten cryolite bath contained in a large carbon-lined
reduction pot. The reduction pot, which acts as the cathode,
may be from 12 to 20 inches deep and up to 10 feet wide and 30
feet long, depending on the type of cell and ampere load for
which it is designed (SH-177).
The anode is also composed of carbon and is lowered
into the cryolite bath. Under the influence of electrolysis,
alumina is split into aluminum and oxygen. The aluminum flows
to the bottom of the pot and is continually drawn off in molten
form. The oxygen flows to the carbon anode, combines with the
carbon to form CO2 and boils off as exhaust gas. This process
gradually destroys the carbon anode which must be replaced about
every three years.
*1964 price
-6-
-------
RADIA CORP ATION
There are two ways to replace the carbon anode, in-
termittently or continuously. The type anodes are referred to
as the prebaked anode (intermittent replacement) and the Soder-
berg anode (continuous replacement). For either system, anode
preparation begins in the anode paste plant where petroleum
coke and pitch are hot-blended. Prebaked anodes are formed
by pressing the anode paste in molds and baking in the anode
bake plant. The baked, solid anodes are then used to replace
consumed anodes. This is a manual operation with the old
anode butts being returned to the anode preparation area. A
reduction pot utilizing prebaked anodes is known as a Prebake
Cell. This type cell is depicted in Figure 2.0-1.
In the Soderberg anode system, the anode is continu-
ously replaced by feeding the anode paste, in the form of bri-
quettes, directly into the reduction cell, thus avoiding the
baking steps. As the paste approaches the hot bath, it is
baked in place to form the anode. Soderberg anodes are supported
in sleeves by vertical studs or horizontal studs, thus giving
rise to the Vertical Stud Soderberg cell and the Horizontal Stud
Soderberg cell. These types of cells are diagrammed in Figures
2.0-2 and 2.0-3. the primary aluminum reduction process is
shown schematically in Figure 2.0-4.
-7-
-------
p»To Primary
Control System
-------
Anode Studs
To Primary
Carbon Anode
Control System
Skirt
Burner
Exposed
Cell Surface
Gas and
Tar Burning
Alumina
Molten Cryolite
Molten Aluminum
FIGURE 2.0-2
VERTICAL STUD SODERBERG CELL
(SOURCE: EN-157)
-------
To Primary
Control Sys
Alumina Hopper
Hood Door
Carbon Anode
Alumina
Anode Studs
Molten Alunlnun
Molten Cryolite
FIGURE 2.0-3
HORIZONTAL STUD SODERBERG CELL
(SOURCE: EN-157)
-------
ALUMINA
SPENT
ELECTRODES
TO CONTROL DEVICE
ANODE
PASTE
BAKED
ANODES
ELECTROLYTE
TO CONTROL DEVICE
TO CONTROL DEVICE
ALUMINUM
PREBAKE
REDUCTION
CELL
HORIZONTAL
OR VERTICAL
SODERBERG
REDUCTION CELL
BAKING
FURNACE
ANOOE PASTE
FIGURE 2.0-4
SHEMATIC DIAGRAM OF PRIMARY ALUMINUM REDUCTION PROCESS
SOURCE: EN-071
-II-
-------
RJUM CORPORATION
3.0 EMISSIONS AND CONTROLS
3.1 Emission Sources
Two pollutants are considered in this study based on
EPA emission factors (EN-071). They are total particulates and
total fluorides, both gaseous and particulate. Emissions of
these two pollutants are presented quantitatively in Section 3.2,
while other pollutants are discussed qualitatively below. For
this study, the following major emission points for the three al-
ternative reduction processes have been selected based on EPA
emission factors:
1. prebake process - prebake reduction cells and
anode bake furnace (See Figure 3.1-1),
2. horizontal stud Soderberg process - horizontal
stud reduction cells (See Figure 3.1-2), and
3. vertical stud Soderberg process - vertical stud
reduction cells (See Figure 3.1-2).
Gaseous fluorides and total particulates are the major
emissions from an aluminum reduction cell. The source of fluoride
emissions is the fluoride electrolyte, which contains cryolite,
aluminum fluoride (A1F3), and fluorspar (CaFa). Particulate fluo-
rides vary from 14 weight percent of total particulate emission
in the vertical stud process to 25 weight percent in the prebake
process emissions. Emissions from the cells are vented through a
hood to the primary control system. Emissions which escape the
hooding system are exhausted through building roof monitors which
may include a secondary emission control system.
-12-
-------
FIGURE 3.1-1
PREBAKE PLANT EMISSION POINTS
-------
PRIMARY EMISSIONS
UCONOrtV
FIGURE 3.1-2
SODERBERG PLANT (horizontal and vertical stud) EMISSION POINTS
-------
RADIAN CORPORATION
Hydrocarbons and sulfur dioxide are emitted from the
anode baking process. For prebake cells, these emissions will
evolve at the anode bake plant. For Soderberg cells, these emis-
sions will evolve from the aluminum reduction cells, since this
is the point where the actual baking occurs.
Fugitive emissions at reduction plants occur from
materials handling and storage.
3.2 Potential Emissions
A Compilation of Air Pollution Emission Factors (EN-071)
lists emission factors for preparation of alumina from bauxite,
for the anode baking furnace, and for the three kinds of reduc-
tion cells. These are reproduced in Table 3.2-1.
Potential emissions for the reduction process major
emission points are (1) prebake process - 84.3 pounds particu-
lates per ton of aluminum produced (3.0 from the anode bake
furnace and 81.3 from the reduction cells), and 46.0 pounds
total fluorides per ton of aluminum produced (0.9 from the
anode bake furnace and 45.1 from the reduction cells; (2)
horizontal stud Soderberg process - 98.4 pounds particulates per
ton of aluminum produced and 41.0 pounds fluorides per ton alu-
minum produced from the reduction cells and; (3) vertical stud
Soderberg process - 78.4 pounds particulates per ton of aluminum
produced and 41.0 pounds fluorides per ton from the .reduction cells.
The horizontal stud Soderberg process has the highest particulate
potential emissions while the prebake process has the highest
total fluoride potential emissions. The emissions presented
here for the reduction cells are vented through the primary
and secondary points as shown in Figures 3.1-1 and 3.1-2. The
relative amount to primary and secondary systems depends on
the efficiency of the hood over the cells. Capture of emissions
-15-
-------
TABLE 3.2-1
EMISSION FACTORS FOR PRIMARY ALUMINUM PRODUCTION PROCESSES"
NA
Spray tower
1.8
0.90
Neg
Neg
NA
NA
Floating-bed
1.7
0.85
Neg
Neg
NA
NA
scrubber
Quench tower and
1.0
0.50
Neg
Neg
NA
NA
spray screen
Electrostatic pre-
0.12
0.060
Neg
Neg
NA
NA
cipitator
Calcining of aluminum
hydroxide3
Uncontrolled
200.0
100.0
Neg
Neg
NA
NA
Spray tower
60.0
30.0
Neg
Neg
NA
NA
Floating-bed
56.0
28.0
Neg
Neg
NA
NA
scrubber
Quench tower and
34.0
17.0
Neg
Neg
NA
NA
spray screen
Electrostatic pre-
4.0
2.0
Neg
Neg
NA
NA
cipitator
hAnode baking furnace-
Uncontrolled
3.0
1.5
0.93
0.47
Neg
Neg
(1.0 to 5.0)
(0.5 to 2.5)
Spray tower
NA
NA
0.0372
0.0186
Neg
Neg
Dry electrostatic
1.13
0.57
0.93
0.47
Neg
Neg
precipitator
Self-induced spray
0.06
0.03
0.0372
0.0186
Neg
Neg
hPrebaked reduction
cell
Uncontrolled
81.3
40.65
24.7
12.35
20.4
10.2
(11.9 to 177.0)
(5.95 to 88.5)
(13.8 to 34.8)
(6.9 to 17.4)
(9.8 to 35.5)
(4.9 to 17.8)
Multiple cyclone
17.9
&95
24.7
12.35
4.49
2.25
Fluid-bed dry
2.02
1.01
0.247
0.124
0.507
0.253
scrubber system
-------
Table 3.2-1 (Cont.)
EMISSION FACTORS FOR PRIMARY ALUMINUN PRODUCTION PROCESSES®
Type of operation
Total particulates'1
Gaseous fluorides (HF|
Particulate fluorides (F)
lb/ton
kg/MT
lb/ton
kg/MT
lb/ton
kg/MT
scrubber system
Coated filter dry scrubber
1.62
0.81
1.98 to 5.93
0.99 to 2.97
0.408
0.204
Dry electrostatic
1.62 to 8.94
0.81 to 4.47
24.7
12.35
0.408 to 2.24
0.204 to 1.12
precipitator
Spray tower
16.2
8.1
0.494 to 2.72
0.247 to 1.36
4.08
2.04
Floating-bed
16.2
8.1
0.494
0.247
4.08
2.04
scrubber
Chamber scrubber
12.2
6.1
2.96
1.48
3.06
1.53
Vertical flow
12.2
6.1
8.4
4.2
3.06
1.53
packed bed
Dry alumina ad-
1.62
0.81
0.494
0.247
0.408
0.204
sorption
+Horizontal-stud
Soderberg cell
Uncontrolled
98.4
4a.2
26.6
13.3
15.6
7.8
(93.6 to 104.0)
(46.8 to 52.0)
(25.2 to 28.8)
(12 6 to 14.4)
(14.4 to 16 2)
(7.2 to 8.1)
Spray tower
19.6 to 36.4
9.8 to 18.2
1.86 to 2.39
0.93 to 1.195
3.12 to 5.77
1.56 to 2.885
Floating-bed
21.6
10.8
0.532
0.266
0.343
0.1715
scrubber
Wet electrostatic
7.10
3.55
26.6
13.3
1.13
0563
precipitator
+Vertical-stud
Soderberg cell
Uncontrolled
78.4
39.2
30.4
15.2
10.6
5.3
(20.0 to 35.0)
(10.0 to 17.51
(5.6 to 55.3)
(2.8 to 27.7)
Spray tower
19.6
9.8
0.304
0.152
2.65
1.325
Self-induced
NA
NA
0.304
0.152
NA
NA
spray
Venturi scrubber
3.14
1.57
0.304
0.152
0.424
0.212
Wet electrostatic
0.784 to 7.84
0.392 to 3.92
30.4
15.2
0.106 to 1.06
0.053 to 0.53
precipitator
Multiple cyclones
3.92 to 4.7
1.96 to 2.35
30.4
15.2
5.30 to 6 36
2.65 to 3.18
Dry alumina ad-
1.57
0;784
0.608
0.304
0.212
0.106
sorption
Materials handling
Uncontrolled
10.0
5.0
Neg
Neg
NA
NA
Spray tower
3.0
1.5
Neg
Neg
NA
NA
-------
Table 3.2-1 (Cont.) emission factors for primary aluminum production processes3
Total particulates1*
Gaseous fluorides (HF)
Particulate fluorides (F)
Type of operation
lb/ton
kg/MT
lb/ton
kg/MT
lb/ton
kg/MT
Floating-bed
2.8
1.4
Neg
Neg
NA
NA
scrubber
Quench tower and
1.7
0.85
Neg
Neg
NA
NA
spray screen
Electrostatic
0.20
0.10
Neg
Neg
NA
NA
precipitator
a£ mission factors for bauxite grinding expressed as pounds per ton (kg/MT I of bauxite processed. Factors for calcining of aluminum hydroxide expressed
pounds |>L>r ion (kg/MT) of alumina produced. All other factors in terms of tons (MT) of molten aluminum produced.
^Includes particulate fluorides.
+ Operations considered in this study
-------
RADIAN COR PO RATI
from Che vertical scud Soderberg cells is most difficult because
of the physical location of the studs (See Figure 2.0-2).
3.3 Control Equipment
Gaseous fluorides are a major emission from aluminum
plants. Fortunately, they are very soluble in water and as a
result, scrubbers are frequently employed for both particulate
and gaseous removal. Dry adsorption techniques often used re-
quire injection of dry alumina into the exhaust stream to adsorb
the gaseous fluorides. The alumina particles are then collected
by a dry method (baghouse, cyclones, or electrostatic precipi-
tators) and recycled to the aluminum reduction pot thus affecting
an economic recovery of the valuable alumina.
The degree of hooding possible for the three types of
reduction cells is a major factor on the type of control system(s)
used. For capturing particulates, the following estimates have
been made for each process based on best available hooding:
new prebake - 957» capture possible, older prebake - 79%; vertical
stud Soderberg - 50%; and horizontal stud Soderberg - 807. (LE-125).
Emissions not captured by the hooding must be captured by the
secondary control system on the roof vents of the cell potroom
building (See Figures 3.1-1 and 3.1-2).
The following primary system control devices have been
recommended:
(1) Prebake - fluidized-bed dry scrubbers
(2) Vertical-stud Soderberg - dry ESP followed by
packed-bed wet scrubber^ and
-19-
-------
R DIA eo p ation
(3) Horizontal stud Soderberg - wet ESP followed by
packed-bed wet scrubber (LE-125).
Secondary control, used mainly for vertical stud
Soderberg systems, would utilize some type of spray screen device
Particulate collection efficiency for each of the primary devices
would be 99%. Again, overall efficiency of collection from
the potroom primary and secondary systems depends on the degree
of capture by the hooding over the cells. Anode bake plant emis-
sions can be controlled by electrostatic precipitators (EN-279).
-20-
-------
RADIAN CORPORATION
4.0 STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN REGULATIONS
SIP regulations were obtained from DSSE files in
December, 1974. A summary of particulate and fluoride emission
regulations is presented in Table 4.0-1 for those states which
have primary aluminum producers. Compliance analysis in this
report was restricted to those processes directly involved with
primary aluminum production, mainly the aluminum reduction cells.
The prebake process includes the anode baking furnace and the
reduction cells. Other fugitive emission points such as materials
handling and storage may be affected by the SIPs. Any compliance
schedules for such emission points will appear in the tables
in Section 6.3.
For comparative purposes, the allowable emissions for
a characteristic size prebake process aluminum smelter of 200 KTPY
capacity were computed for each SIP regulation. Continuous opera-
tion of 8760 hours per year was assumed. For simplicity, air flow
was estimated for only the primary collection system for Texas
regulation computations (RU-055). In actuality, some percent of
emissions escape from the primary system and must be accounted for
in the secondary system. The other SIP regulations were either a
standard process weight rate curve or a maximum allowable emission
factor in pounds particulate per ton of aluminum produced. New
York was another exception, requiring 99% control of potential
(uncontrolled) emissions. The range of allowables for a 200 KTPY
source are about 0.9 pounds particulate per ton of aluminum pro-
duced (New York) to 22 pounds particulate per ton of aluminum pro-
duced (Alabama) .
Proposed standards of performance for new primary alumi-
num plants would require fluoride emissions from the reduction pro-
cess be not greater than 2.00 lbs/ton or about an overall collec-
tion efficiency of 95 - 977» (EN-279) .
-21-
-------
TABLE 4.0-1
SIP AXR EMISSION REGULATIONS
EXISTING PRIMARY ALUMINUM SMELTERS
GovernmenC
Entity
Alabama
Arkansas
Indiana
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maryland
Particulate
Regulation
Nujber
A.10.2
Section 7(C)(2)
APC 5
AP 3-3(3)
284.2
Prebake Process
28.4.1
Horizontal Stud
Soderberg Pro.
10.03.37.03
Maximum Allowable
Particulate Emissions
22 lbs part/ton A1 produced
E - 3.59P#¦,, P s 30 ton/hour
E - 17.31P"-" P i 30 ton/hour
E » 4.10P°-*? P s, 30 ton/hour
E = 55.OP4" -40 P > 30 ton/hr
E - 4.10P#•11 -40P 2 30 ton/hr
E - 55.0P"-" -40 P > 30 ton/hr
10 lbs avg/ton A1 produced
20 lbs/ton A1 produced
0.03 Gr/SCFD or
E - 0.24 lb/hr P s 0.025 ton/hr
E - 4.504P®••0.02530 ton/hr
Whichever is more stringent
Allowable Particulate
Emissions (or
200 KTPY Source
(lbs/ton Al)
22
1.93
2.70
Missouri
5-1 D.l
E -
4.10P*•4 7
P$30 ton/hr
E -
55.OP"- "
-40 P>30 ton/hr
Montana
16-2.14(1)
E -
4.10P®•*'
Ps30 ton/hr
E -
55.0P#•'1
-40 P>30 ton/hr
2.70
10
20
2.73
2.70
Fluoride
Regulation
Number
None
None
None
Maximum Allowable
Fluoride Emissions
None
None
None
None
None
-------
TABLE 4.0-1 (Continued)
SIP AIR EMISSION REGULATIONS CONTINUED
Government
Entity
New York
Ohio
Oregon
Tennessee
Texas
Particulate
Regulation
Number
Title 6, Chap 3
Sec 212.3,
212.4
North Carolina 2.30
AP3-12a
25-265
New Plants
(after 1/1/73)
25-265
Existing Plants
(Before 1/1/73)
Chapter VII
Sec 2
Existing Sources
(on or before
9/9/69)
Sec 3
New Sources
(after 4/3/72)
105.1
Maximum Allowable
Particulate Emissions
E - 1Z of particulates
emitted from process (i.e.,
requires 991 control)
E - 4.10P®-" Ps30 ton/hr
E - 55.0P#-" -40 P>30 ton/hr
E - 4.10P8¦* * P£30 ton/hr
E - 55.OP*•1' -40 P>30 ton/hr
5.0 lbs/ton A1 produced
(annual average)
10.0 lbs/ton A1 produced
(annual average)
E - 3.59P#-PilO tons/hr
E - 17.31P" '• P>30 tons/hr
E - 0.04
-------
TABLE 4.0-1 (Continued)
SIP AIR EMISSION REGULATIONS CONTINUED
Government
Entity
Washington
Particulate
Regulation
Number
Maximum Allowable
Particulate Emissions
VAC 18-52-030(2) IS lbs/ton A1 produced
9.09
Pudget Sound APA E
E
Allowable Particulate
Emissions for
200 KTPY Source
(lbs/ton AX)
IS
5.02
Southwest APA
4.12P®•• p<50 ton/hr
d.344P•¦*,, 50
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Environmental Protection Agency, Compilation of Air
Pollutant Emission Factors, Second Edition, with
supplements. AP-42. Research Triangle Park, N.C.,
1973.
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air
and Water Programs, Effluent Guidelines Division.
Development Document for Effluent Limitations Guide-
lines and New Source Performance Standards for the
Primary Aluminum Smelting Sub-Category of the Aluminum
Segment of the Nonferrous Metals Manufacturing Point
Source Category, EPA 440/1-74-019-d, Washington,
D.C., 1974.
Environmental Protection Agency, Background Information
For Standards of Performance: Primary Aluminum Plants,
Two Volumes, Research Triangle Park, N.C., October,
1974.
LeSourd, D.A., and F. L. Bunyard, Eds. Comprehensive
Study of Specified Air Pollution Sources to Assess
the Economic Impact of Air Quality Standards. Volume
1, APTD-1547. Contract No. 68-02-008. PB 222 857.
Final Report. Research Triangle Park, N.C., Research
Triangle Institute, 1972.
Rush, Dumont, John C. Russell, and Reid E. Iverson,
"Air Pollution Abatement on Primary Aluminum Potlines:
Effectiveness and Cost", J. APCA 23(2), 98 (1973).
-25-
-------
RADI
SH-177
US-144
VA-091
CORPORATION
Shreve, R. Norris, Chemical Process Industries, 3rd
edition, N.Y., McGraw.
U.S. Bureau of Mines, Minerals Yearbook 1973, Volume
1, Metals, Minerals, and Fuels, Washington, D.C.,
1974.
Vandergrift, A. E., et al., Particulate Pollutant System
Study, Volume 1, Mass Emissions, PB 203 128,
Contract Wo. CPA-22-69-104, Kansas City Missouri,
Midwest Research Institute, 1971.
-26-
-------
RADIAN CORPORATION
6.0 DATA SOURCES, SUMMARIES, AND TABLES OF INDIVIDUAL PLANTS
6.1 Sources of Data
6.1.1 Processes and Emissions
Production and capacity for the aluminum smelters were
obtained from the Minerals Yearbook (US-144) and an EPA publica-
tion (EN-157). Process, emissions, and control equipment data
were obtained from a NEDS Point Source Listing for SCC 3-01-001
and 3-01-002 created on 6 December 1974. Only "Source Test"
emissions from NEDS were recorded for actual emissions in this
study. The process and emissions data collected for each alumi-
num smelter is presented in tabular form in Section 6.3.
6.1.2 Compliance Status
Two data sources were used in common for all EPA
Regions: (1) a CDS Quick Look Report (QL) of compliance status
of all sources in CDS as of 8 May 1975 and (2) a CDS QL report
created 8 May 1975 of all increments of progress scheduled beyond
1974. All regional offices were contacted by phone to obtain
compliance status information not in CDS. Some regions had data
which was in the process of being added to CDS and was unavailable.
The following supplementary data was available and was used in
this study.
Region I - None
Region II - CDS Source Data Reports for all sources
as of 23 April 1975. Data was obtained
by visit to Regional Office on 23 April
1975.
27
-------
RADIA corporati
Region III - None
Region IV - CDS Source Data Reports for all sources
and Semi-annual and Quarterly Reports from
the states in Region IV. This data was
available to Radian as a result of an on-
going contract with Region IV to update
CDS.
Region V - None
Region VI - CDS Source Data Reports for Louisiana and
Oklahoma and data from Texas Air Control
Board of compliance status of all sources
in the EMS system as of 30 April 1975.
Region VII - Status of all sources was obtained by visit
to RO on 21-23 April 1975.
Region VIII - Status of all sources as of 21 May 1975
was obtained by mail contact.
Region IX - The status of nine sources in neither NEDS
nor CDS was obtained over the phone. Status
was as of 23 May 1975.
Region X - None
-28-
-------
RADIAN cowpomriON
6.2 Summary of Emissions and Compliance Status
6.2.1 Emissions
Calculations of potential emissions for the reduction
process points at each plant were performed based both on design
capacities and operating rates. These are presented in Table
6.2-1. EPA Emission factors were used (EN-071). Emissions for
each individual plant are listed in the tables in Section 6.3.
Total potential particulate emissions for 1973 production rates
were calculated to be 201,000 tons. Total potential fluoride
emissions were 103,000 tons.
Total actual emissions from the reduction process
points studied in this report were not available by summation
of emissions data collected for individual plants. Estimates of
total industry emissions have been made elsewhere using emission
factors and an average degree of control for the industry. The
reports vary considerably. In one study, 1967 particulate emissions
were reported to be 32,000 tons with a 73% degree of control
(LE-125). Another study estimated emissions for 1968 to be
65,000 tons with a 51% average control (VA-091). An estimate
of average control of emissions for 1971 was 74% (RU-055).
Using this value and total potential emissions calculated for
1973, 201,000 tons, Radian estimates that particulate emissions
from reduction processes at primary aluminum smelters totaled
about 55,000 tons in 1973. Actual emissions of fluorides for
1971 were estimated to be 27,500 tons (RU-055).
6.2.2 Compliance Status
A summary of compliance status by region is presented
in Tables 6.2-2a and b according to current CDS compliance status
codes as given in Table 2.6-3. As of May, 1975, eleven plants (357»)
-29-
-------
RADIAN CORPORATION
IX
TABLE 6 ,2-1
PRIMARY ALUMINUM PLANTS
SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL EMISSIONS BY REGION
POTENTIAL EMISSIONS **
(TFY)
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
VIII
1972
DESIGN CONDITIONS
Particulates Fluorides
11,785
10,539
22,130
46,914
2,951
7,056
5,693
5,850
45,691* 23,346*
12,093
23,047
1,613
3,690
1973
OPERATING CONDITIONS
Particulates Fluorides
11,458
10,581
48,849
19,600
46,676
2,951
7,056
5,540
5,782
25,477
10,711
22,902
1,613
3,690
X
TOTAL
59,013
206,079
30,433
105,765
54,198
201,369
27,969
103,684
*Design information not available on one plant, so total
number will be somewhat larger.
**For anode baking plant (prebake process only) and reduc-
tion process
-30-
-------
RADIAN CORPORATION
TABLE 6.2-2a
EXISTING PRIMARY ALUMINUM PLANTS
CATEGORICAL SUMMARY OF COMPLIANCE STATUS BY REGION
MAY, 1975
IN
OUT
REGION
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
VIII
IX
X
—2"
o
M
H
W
CJ
z
<
M
hJ
ft
o co
cj co
S
M
hJ
z
o
z
M
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
6
w w
o .J
<3 Q
M td
JX
IX cj
a s
H
3 H
H s
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
s
o
w w
Ed
OH
CJ
zc
z
<£->
<
M M
w W
JS
•JvJ
Ph M
(X D
X>-J
so
o
o ta
CJ z
CJ 3S
o
CJ
fu M
En CO
O CO
O
CO
X
HH
Hh
^ £
D M
OH
O 3
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
UNKNOWN
HZ"
0
0
0
0
0
2
w o
CJ M
M H
hJ m
O J
u
z
2 O
3 w
O CO
Z CO
0
0
0
5
0
4
1
1
0
1
w
cj
z
<
M
J w
ll
o a
CJ Ed
3C
Z CJ
3 CO
o
a 3
0
0
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
TOTAL
0
2
2
7
2
7
1
I
0
9
TOTAL 9 2 1 3 12
(29%) (6%) (37,) (10%) (39%) (13%)
j v_
_*/V^
->'
31
TOTAL
11
(35%)
4
(13%)
16
(52%)
31
-31-
-------
RADIAN CORPORATION
TABLE 6.2-2b
EXISTING PRIMARY ALUMINUM PLANTS
SUMMARY OF COMPLIANCE STATUS BY REGION
ENTIRE SOURCE
COMPLIANCE STATUS CODE*
MAY 1975
REGION
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
TOTAL
I
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
II
. 0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
2
III
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
2
IV
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
7
V
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
2
VI
4
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
7
VII
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
VIII
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
IX
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
X
1
0
0
1
5
0
2
0
9
TOTALS
12
1
0
1
8
2
3
4
31
*Refer to Table 6.2-3
-32-
-------
RAO AN CORPORATION
TABLE 6.2-3
COMPLIANCE STATUS CODES
CODE DESCRIPTION
0 Unknown
1 Not in compliance - no schedule
2 In compliance - source test
3 In compliance - inspection
4 In compliance - certification
5 In compliance with increments of progress
6 Not in compliance with increments of progress
7 Unknown compliance with increments of progress
8 No applicable state regulation
9 Sources with potential emissions >100 TPY and <100 TPY
actual emissions - compliance status unknown
-33-
-------
RADIAN CORPORATION
were found to be in compliance with SIP regulations, four (13%)
out of compliance, and sixteen (52%) unknown. These catagories
are subdivided as follows: nine plants (29%) were in compliance
with emission limitations as determined by source test, inspec-
tion, or state certification, two plants (6%) were in compliance
with the increments of progress of a schedule, one plant (3%)
was out of compliance with emission limitations, three plants
(10%) were out of compliance with the increments of progress of
a compliance schedule, twelve plants (39%) had unknown status
with respect to emission limitations, and four plants (13%) had
unknown compliance with increments of progress of a schedule.
6.3 Data Tables of Individual Sources
This section presents the data gathered for each pri-
mary aluminum smelter. The data for each source is presented
in a three-page format described below. A referencing system
is used to consecutively number the sources in each state accord
ing to AQCR and county SAROAD number. The reference numbering
system starts at "1" for each state. The reference number is
also used to identify the source on PG 2/3 and PG 3/3.
PG 1/3 is an entire source (plant) summary of
company name, source location (city), AQCR
and particulate priority, SAROAD numbers,
NEDS, CDS, and state source identification
numbers, design and operating source pro-
duction rate in thousand tons of aluminum
per year, and entire source compliance status
code (See Table 6.2-3). Data sources are
referenced by superscript footnotes. Com-
pliance status was extracted from CDS entire
source compliance status unless footnoted
-34-
-------
RADIAN CORPORATION
otherwise. In those cases where the entire
source compliance status was found to be in-
consistent with the status of the individual
points, the proper CDS code for the entire
source was selected, entered, and footnoted.
If the source was listed in CDS with an SIC
code other than 3334, that SIC is presented
below the CDS source number.
PG 2/3 is a listing of point source processes (opera-
tions which have EPA emission factors), control
equipment, operating (production) rate from NEDS
in thousand tons per year (KTPY), total parti-
culate (PT) and total fluoride (FL) potential
emissions at design capacity and operating
production rate, actual particulate emissions,
and allowable emissions in pounds per hour (PPH)
and tons per year (TPY) both for design and
operating conditions. Allowables were computed
for the entire plant based upon assumed continu-
ous operation of 8760 hours per year. All data
from NEDS is footnotes. Control equipment
codes used are listed in Appendix 1.
PG 3/3 is a listing of compliance status for individual
processes as found in CDS. Only compliance
schedules are presented which have" final compliance
date of 1 January 19 75 and beyond-. Any CDS points
with schedules due before 1 January 19 75 are pre-
sented in this report with the designation
"SCHEDULE EXPIRED BEFORE 1975." Some CDS points
with schedules were listed with an improper
compliance status code. In this report these
-35-
-------
R DI N CORPORATION
points have compliance status code "7" with
a footnote to show the actual code found in
CDS. Any entire source listed as in compliance
with emission limitations, i.e., codes 2, 3, or
4 will have all points in compliance by definition.
Compliance schedule increments of progress are
01, plan submittal; 02, award contracts; 03,
initiate construction; 04, complete construction;
05, final compliance.
Tables 6.3-1 to 6.3-16 are the compilation of data for the
thirty-two primary aluminum plants located in this study.
-36-
-------
R AOIA CORPORATION
REGION II
TABLE 6.3-1
-------
TABLE 6.3-1 SOURCE SUMMARY - EXISTING SOURCES
REGION
industry Primary Aluminum
sir. 3334
STATE NEW YORK
PG 1/3
IFERENCE
NUMBER
SOURCE
LOC AXIOM
AQCR/
PRIORITY
SAROAD CODING
NUUBER8
SOURCE ID
NUMBERS
SOURCE PRODUCTION
RATE-KTPY
SOURCE
(MPLIANCE
STATUS
a.
PT
STATE
COUNTY
CITY
NEDS
CDS
STATE
DESIGN1
OPER2
O
1
Alcoa
Massena
159/11
33
5930
4180
00001
130
125
63
2
Reynolds
Massena
159/11
33
5930
4180
00003
NO SIC
128
126
4 "
FOOTNOTES:
1 Minerals Yearbook 1972
2 Primary Aluminum Smelting, EPA, March 1974 (EN-157)
3 Listed as 0 in CDS
* Regional Office
-------
TABLE 6.3-1
POINT EMISSIONS AND ALLOWABLES
REGION
II
industry Primary Aluminum
sic
3334
STATE
NEW YORK
PG 2/3
HI
o
r a-
* £
gr
Ul z
te.
POINT SOURCE
DESCRIPTION
o
a.
CONTROL
EQUIPMENT-
EFFICIENCY
NEDS
POINT
SOURCE
OPER
RATE
KTPY
EMISSIONS - TPY
POTENTIAL
DESIGN
OPER
ACTUAL
SIP ALLOWABLES
DESIGN
PPH
TPY
OPER
PPH
TPY
Prebake Cells 3
Anode Bake Furnace
HSS Cells
PT
FL
PT
FL
PT
FL
Dry Bag
Absorbtiort
Dry Bag ^
Absorbtion
WS 2
Floating
BED WS-
Floating
BED WS"
5290
2930
195
63
6300
2700
5070
2820
188
60
6200
2660
40.9 179 40.5
(Ambifent Regulation
177
41.2
(Ambi
180
mt Reg
40.7
llation
178
FOOTNOTES ,
'NEDS data
2Primary Aluminum Smelting (EN-157)
3Being Phased Out
cj ''Regional Office
oo
-------
TABLE 6.3-1 POINT COMPLIANCE STATUS - EXISTING SOURCES
REGION
11 iMmisTRY Primary Aluminum 333^
RTATF NEW YORK
PG3/3
UJ „
o 0£
z
UJ 0°
a. 2
UJ 3
u- z
111
IE
COS POINT DESCRIPTION
POLLUTANT
COS
POINT
POINT
COMPLIANCE
STATUS
COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE
INCREMENTS OF PROGRESS
01
02
03
04
05
1
Potroom N 40 Old
PT
003
6
4-30-73
12-30-75
8-30-76
DO
FL
004
6
DO
DO
DO
Carbon Baking Furnace
PT
005
6
1-1-74
11-1-74
DO
HC
006
6
DO
DO
Potroom N 40 New1
013
6
5-1-73
1-1-77
9-1-77
Point C
015
6
4-3-74
11-1-75
9-1-76
2
ALL
4 2
footnotes:
lProcess Change Scheduled for 1-1-76
2Regional Office
vO
i
-------
RAD AN coRPORATia
REGION III
TABLE 6.3-2
-------
TABLE 6.3-2
SOURCE SUMMARY - EXISTING SOURCES
region III industry Aluminum 31^ 3334 state MARYLAND
REFERENCE
NUMBER
SOURCE
LOCATION
AQCR/
PRIORITY
PT
SAROAD CODING
NUUBERS
SOURCE ID NUMBERS
SOURCE PRODUCTION
RATE-KTPY
SOURCE
COMPLIANCE
STATUS
STATE
COUNTY
CITY
NEDS
CDS
STATE
DESIGN1
OPER2
1
Eastalco
Frederick
112/11
21
0740
0001
00001
87
85
7
FOOTNOTES:
1 Minerals Yearbook 1972
2 Primary Aluminum Smelting, EPA, March 1974 (EN-157)
-------
TABLE 6.3-2
POINT EMISSIONS AND ALLOWABLES - EXISTING SOURCES
III industry Primary Aluminum S|C 3334 state MARYLAND PC 2/3
REFERENCE
NUMBER
POINT SOURCE
DESCRIPTION
POLLUTANT
CONTROL
EQUIPMENT-
EFFICIENCY
NEDS
POINT
SOURCE
OPER
RATE
KTPY
EMISSIONS - TPY
SIP ALLOWA3LES
POTENTIAL
ACTUAL
DESIGN
OPER
DESIGN
OPER
PPH
TPY
PPH
TPY
1
Prebake Cells
PT
WS1
3537
3455
34.1
149
33.4
146
FL
1962
1920
Anode Bake Furnace
PT
WS1
131
128
FL
42
41
FOOTNOTES
Primary Aluminum Smelting, EPA, March 1974 (EN-157)
-------
f. 01.,. COlu U4.AI.UU ST*».luJ unlSi.^ iiu uuunCLi)
rfgion III industry Primary Aluminum ftir 3334 rtatf MARYLAND "pr*/*
REFERENCE
number
CDS POINT DESCRIPTION
POLLUTANT
CDS
POINT
POINT
COMPLIANCE
STATUS
COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE
INCREMENTS OF PROGRESS
01
02
03
04
05
1
Potline "A" Operation
7 1
01/01/75
FOOTNOTES.'
Listed as 1 in CDS
i
¦p*
NJ
I
-------
TABLE 6.3-3
SOURCE SUMMARY - EXISTING SOURCES
REGION III INDUSTRY Primary Aluminum SIC 3334 state WEST VIRGINIA
U)
o K
. w
u) 5
Ul 2
c
SOURCE
LOCATION
AOCR/
PRIORITY
PT
SAROAD COOING
NUMBERS
SOURCE ID NUMBERS
SOURCE PRODUCTION
RATE-KTPY
SOURCE
COMPLIANCE
STATUS
STATE
COUNTY
CITY
NEDS
CDS
STATE
DESIGN1 | OPER2
1
Kaiser
Ravenswood
179/1
50
0720
0002
00002
163
166
7
FOOTNOTES:
1 Minerals Yearbook 1972
2 Primary Aluminum Smelting, EPA, March 1974 (EN-157)
3 Listed as 0 in CDS
-------
TABLE fi POINT EMISSIONS AND ALLOWABLES - EXISTING SOURCES
rfgion III industry Primary Aluminum 3334 state WEST VIRGINIA pg 2/3
REFERENCE
NUMBER
POINT SOURCE
DESCRIPTION
POLLUTANT
CONTROL
EQUIPMENT-
EFFICIENCY
NEDS
POINT
SOURCE
OPER
RATE
KTPY
EMISSIONS - TPY
SIP ALLOWABLES
POTENTIAL
ACTUAL
DESIGN
OPER
DESIGN
OPER
PPH
TPY
PPH
TPY
1
Prebake Cells
Anode Bake Furnace
PT
FL
PT
FL
BH1
6626
3767
245
79
6749
3740
249
81
32.8
144
FOOTNOTES
Primary Aluminum Smelting, EPA, March 1974 (EN-157)
-------
TABLE 6.3-3
POINT COMPLIANCE STATUS - EXISTING SOURCES
region 111 industry Primary Aluminum slc 3334 state WEST VIRGINIA PC3/3
U rv
o
z ^
U CD
cc 2
U 3
u- z
UJ
cc
CDS POINT DESCRIPTION
z
<
o
-------
RAD AN CORPORATION
REGION IV
TABLES 6.3-4 TO 6.3-7
-------
TABLE 6.3-4 SOURCE SUMMARY - EXISTING SOURCES
REGION
IV iwniiRTRv Primary Aluminum
ric 3334
STATE ALABAMA
PG 1/3
REFERENCE
NUMBER
SOURCE
LOCATION
AQCR/
PRIORITY
SAROAD CODING
NUUBERS
SOURCE ID
NUMBERS
SOURCE PRODUCTION
RATE-KTPY
SOURCE
JMPLIANCE
STATUS
PT
STATE
COUNTY
CITY
NEDS
CDS
STATE
DESIGN1
OPER2
U
O
1
Reynolds
Listerhill
007/1
oi
0800
0008
00006
00007
00008
221
202
73
2
Revere
Scottsboro
007/1
01
1920
0012
112
112
0
FOOTNOTES:
1 Minerals Yearbook 1972
2 Primary Aluminum Smelting, EPA, March 1974 (EN-157)
3 Listed as 0 in CDS
t
N.
Q\
I
-------
TABLE fi -\-L POINT EMISSIONS AND ALLOWABLES - EXISTING SOURCES
REI
3I0N IV INDUSTRY
Primary Aluminum
».* 3334
state ALABAMA
PG 2/3
REFERENCE
NUMBER
POINT SOURCE
DESCRIPTION
POLLUTANT
CONTROL
EQUIPMENT-
EFFICIENCY2
NEDS
POINT
SOURCE
OPER
RATE
KTPY
EMISSIONS - TPY
SIP ALLOWABLES
POTENTIAL
ACTUAL
DESIGN
OPER
DESIGN
OPER
PPH
TPY
PPH
TPY
1
HSS Cells
PT
WS3
10873
9938
221
2431
22 1
2222
FL
4663
4262
2
Prebake Cell
PT
WS3
4553
4553
221
1232
^4
CM
CM
1232
FL
2526
2526
Anode Bake Furnace
PT
ESP
168
168
7 2
99.0%
FL
54
54
FOOTNOTES
1LBS/TON
2NEDS Data
'Primary Aluminum Smelting, EPA, March 1974 (EN-157)
I
S
•J
I
-------
TABLE 6.3-4 POINT COMPLIANCE STATUS - EXISTING SOURCES
REGION
IV iNniisTRY Primary Aluminum ftir 3334
ftTATP ALABAMA
PG3/3
REFERENCE
NUMBER
CDS POINT DESCRIPTION
POLLUTANT
CDS
POINT
POINT
COMPLIANCE
STATUS
COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE
INCREMENTS OF PROGRESS
01
02
03
04
05
1
Potline No. 1
002
7 1
04/30/75
05/31/75
Potline No. 2
003
7 1
04/30/75
Potline No. 3
004
7 1
04/30/75
05/31/75
Potline No. 4
005
7 1
05/31/75
Potline No. 5
006
7 1
04/30/75
Potline No. 6
007
7 1
04/30/75
05/31/75
Potline No. 7
008
7 1
04/30/75
05/31/75
Potline No. 8
•009
7 1
04/30/75
05/31/75
2
No Data
footnotes;
1 Listed as 1 in CDS
I
00
I
-------
TABLE 6.3-5 SOURCE SUMMARY - EXISTING SOURCES
REGION
IV industry Primary Aluminum
sir 3334
STATE KENTUCKY
PG 1/3
REFERENCE
NUMBER
SOURCE
LOCATION
AQCR/
PRIORITY
SAROAO CODING
NUMBERS
SOURCE ID
NUMBERS
SOURCE PRODUCTION
RATE-KTPY
SOURCE
>MPUANCE
STATUS
PT
STATE
COUNTY
CITY
NEDS
CDS
STATE
DESIGN1
OPER2
U
O
1
Nat ional-Southwire
Hawesville
077/1
18
1580
0004
00004
180
180
73
2
Anaconda
Sebree
077/1
18
4020
120
0
FOOTNOTES:
1 Minerals Yearbook 1972
2 Primary Aluminum Smelting, EPA, March 1974 (EN-157)
3 Listed as 0 in CDS
-------
TABLE 6.3-5 POINT EMISSIONS AND ALLOWABLES - EXISTING SOURCES
RE(
3I0N IV INDUSTRY
Primary Aluminum
3334
statf KENTUCKY
PG 2/3
REFERENCE
NUMBER
POINT SOURCE
DESCRIPTION
POLLUTANT
i
CONTROL
EQUIPMENT-
EFFICIENCY
NEDS
POINT
SOURCE
OPER
RATE
KTPY
EMISSIONS - TPY
SIP ALLOWABLES
POTENTIAL
ACTUAL
DESIGN
OPER
DESIGN
OPER
PPH
TPY
PPH
TPY
1
Prebake Cells
PT
WS1
7317
7317
45
196
45
196
FL
4059
4059
Anode Bake Furnace
PT
270
270
FL
87
87
2
Prebake Cells
PT
NA
4878
45
196
41
180
FL
NA
2706
Anode Bake Furnace
PT
NA
180
FL
NA
58
FOOTNOTES
'Primary Aluminum Smelting, EPA, March 1974 (EN-157)
I
l_n
O
I
-------
TABLE 6.3-5 POINT COMPLIANCE STATUS - EXISTING SOURCES
REGION
IV inmistry Primary Aluminum Rtr
3334
STATF KENTUCKY
PG3/3
TERENCE
NUMBER
CDS POINT DESCRIPTION
V-
z
<
y-
3
_l
-1
CDS
POINT
POINT
COMPLIANCE
STATUS
COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE
INCREMENTS OF PROGRESS
uJ
a:
O
a.
01
02
03
04
05
i
Carbon Bake Stack
002
7 1
02/01/75
04/01/75
2
No Data
footnotes;
'Coded as I in CDS
i
Ln
M
I
-------
TABLE 6.3-6 SOURCE SUMMARY - EXISTING SOURCES
iFciftw IV industry Primary Aluminum Rir 3334 state NORTH CAROLINA P6 1/s
REFERENCE
NUMBER
SOURCE
LOCATION
AQCR/
PRIORITY
PT
SAROAD CODING
NUMBERS
SOURCE ID NUMBERS
SOURCE PRODUCTION
RATE—KTPY
SOURCE
compliance
STATUS
STATE
COUNTY
CITY
NEDS
CDS
STATE
DESIGN 1
OPER2
1
Alcoa
Badin
167/1
34
3460
0002
115
100
0
FOOTNOTES:
1 Minerals Yearbook 1972
2 Primary Aluminum Smelting, EPA, March 1974 (EN-157)
-------
TABLE A i-ft POINT EMISSIONS AND ALLOWABLES - EXISTING SOURCES
rfgion IV industry Primary Aluminum eir 3334 STAT|r NORTH CAROLINA PG ?/s
REFERENCE
NUMBER
POINT SOURCE
DESCRIPTION
i-
z
<
»-
-J
o
0.
CONTROL
EQUIPMENT-
EFFICIENCY
NEDS
POINT
SOURCE
OPER
RATE
KTPY
EMISSIONS - TPY
SIP ALLOWABLES
POTENTIAL
ACTUAL
DESIGN
OPER
DESIGN
OPER
PPH
TPY
PPH
TPY
1
Prebake Cells
Anode Bake Furnace
PT
FL
PT
FL
BH1
4675
2593
173
56
4065
2255
150
49
41
178
39
169
FOOTNOTES
'Primary Aluminum Smelting, EPA, March 1974 (EN-157)
i
Ul
u>
i
-------
TABLE 6.3-6 POINT COMPLIANCE STATUS - EXISTING SOUPXES
REGION
IV imhiiatrv Primary Aluminum 3334
ftTiTF NORTH CAROLINA
PG3/3
O OC
Z £
UJ CD
a. 2
UJ 3
u- z
CDS POINT DESCRIPTION
j-
z
<
V-
3
_l
_l
CDS
POINT
POINT
COMPLIANCE
STATUS
COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE
INCREMENTS OF PROGRESS
UJ
-------
TABLE 6.3-7 SOURCE SUMMARY - EXISTING SOURCES
REGION
IV industry Primary Aluminum
3334
TENNESSEE
PG 1/3
ui
2 UJ
£ CD
Ul 3
u. ^
Ul z
c
SOURCE
LOCATION
AQCR/
PRIORITY
SAROAD CODINC
NUMBERS
SOURCE ID
NUMBERS
SOURCE PRODUCTION
RATE-KTPY
SOURCE
>MPLI ANCE
STATUS
PT
STATE
COUNTY
CITY
NEDS
CDS
STATE
DESIGN 1
OPER2
w
O
1
Alcoa
Alcoa
207/1
44
0180
0008
00008
270
275
0
2
Consolidated Aluminum
New Johnsonville
208/1
44
1540
0006
140
140
0
FOOTNOTES:
1 Minerals Yearbook 1972
2 Primary Aluminum Smelting, EPA, March 1974 (EN-157)
-------
TABLE 6.3-7 POINT EMISSIONS AND ALLOWABLES - EXISTING SOURCES
RE<
3I0N IV INDUSTRY
Primary Aluminum
3334
statf TENNESSEE
PG 2/5
REFERENCE
NUMBER
POINT SOURCE
DESCRIPTION
POLLUTANT
CONTROL
EQUIPMENT-
EFFICIENCY
NEDS
POINT
SOURCE
OPER
RATE
KTPY
EMISSIONS - TPY
SIP ALLOWABLES
POTENTIAL
ACTUAL
DESIGN
OPER
DESIGN
OPER
PPH
TPY
PPH
TPY
1
Prebake Cells
PT
WS & ESP1
8780
8943
41
181
41
181
FL
4871
4961
Anode Bake Furnace
PT
324
330
FL
105
107
VSS Cells
PT
WS1
2117
2156
FL
1107
1128
2
Prebake Cells
PT
5691
5691
42
186
42
186
FL
3157
3157
Anode Bake Furnace
PT
210
210
FL
68
68
FOOTNOTES
'Primary Aluminum Smelting, EPA, March 1974 (EN-157)
-------
x'AB^b 6. j- / rOINi ^OMrL.j.AN'oii JTAiua - iiAiST.i.Nij SUURCES
REGION JV industry Primary Aluminum S|C 3334 RTATF TENNESSEE PG3/3
REFERENCE
NUMBER
CDS POINT DESCRIPTION
POLLUTANT
CDS
POINT
POINT
COMPLIANCE
STATUS
COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE
INCREMENTS OF PROGRESS
01
02
03
04
05
1
2
No Data
No Data
footnotes;
i
Ln
l
-------
E9l|yp AN CORPORATtO
REGION V
TABLES 6.3-8 TO 6.3-9
-------
TABLE 6.3-8 SOURCE SUMMARY - EXISTING SOURCES
•jFGinN v industry Primary Aluminum Rir 3334 state INDIANA PG 1/a
REFERENCE
NUMBER
SOURCE
LOCATION
AQCR/
PRIORITY
PT
SAROAD CODING
NUMBERS
SOURCE ID NUMBERS
SOURCE PRODUCTION
RATE-KTPY
SOURCE
COMPLIANCE
STATUS
STATE
COUNTY
CITY
NEDS
CDS
STATE
DESIGN1
OPER2
1
Alcoa
Warwick
077/1
15
4360
0002
00002
275
225
43
FOOTNOTES:
1 Minerals Yearbook 1972
2 Primary Aluminum Smelting, EPA, March 1974 (EN-157)
3 Listed as 1 in CDS
-------
TABLE 6.3-8 POINT EMISSIONS AND ALLOWABLES - EXISTING SOURCES
rfgion V industry Primary Aluminum Rte 3334 state INDIANA pg 2/3
REFERENCE
NUMBER
POINT SOURCE
DESCRIPTION
t-
z
<
»-
3
-J
_J
o
a
CONTROL
EQUIPMENT-
EFFICIENCY1
NEDS
POINT
SOURCE
OPER
RATE
KTPY
EMISSIONS - TPY
SIP ALLOWABLES
POTENTIAL
ACTUAL1
DESIGN
OPER
DESIGN
OPER
PPH
TPY
PPH
TPY
1
Prebake Cells
Anode Bake Furnace
PT
FL
PT
FL
WS, BH
97.5%
ESP2
250
11179
6201
413
133
9146
5074
338
109
309
49
214
47
206
FOOTNOTES
*NEDS Data
2Primary Aluminum Smelting, EPA, March 1974 (EN-157)
I
KO
I
-------
TABLE 6.3-8 POINT COMPLIANCE STATUS - EXISTING SOURCES
REGION
V industry Primary Aluminum eir
3334
INDIANA
PG3/3
REFERENCE
NUMBER
CDS POINT DESCRIPTION
V—
z
<
t—
3
-1
_l
CDS
POINT
POINT
COMPLIANCE
STATUS
COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE
INCREMENTS OF PROGRESS
Q.
01
02
03
04
05
1
ALL
4
footnotes:
i
o
-------
TABLE 6.3-9 SOURCE SUMMARY - EXISTING SOURCES
PFft.nN v industry Primary Aluminum cir 3334 &Tate ohi° pg i/a
REFERENCE
NUMBER
SOURCE
LOCATION
AOCR/
PRIORITY
PT
SAROAD CODING
NUMBERS
SOURCE ID NUMBERS
SOURCE PRODUCTION
RATE-KTPY
SOURCE
COMPLIANCE
STATUS
STATE
COUNTY
CITY
NEDS
CDS
STATE
DESIGN 1
OPER2
1
Ormet
Hannibal
181/1
36
4460
0003
00003
250
240
5
FOOTNOTES:
1 Minerals Yearbook 1972
2 Primary Aluminum Smelting, EPA, March 1974 (EN-157)
-------
TABLE 6.3-9 POINT EMISSIONS AND ALLOWABLES - EXISTING SOURCES
region _V industry Primary Aluminum S|C 3334 state OHIO pg 2/3
REFERENCE
NUMBER
POINT SOURCE
DESCRIPTION
POLLUTANT
CONTROL
EQUIPMENT-
EFFICIENCY
NEDS
POINT
SOURCE
OPER
RATE
KTPY
EMISSIONS - TPY
SIP ALLOWABLES
POTENTIAL
ACTUAL
DESIGN
OPER
DESIGN
OPER
PPH
TPY
PPH
TPY
1
Prebake Cells
PT
WS1
10163
9756
48
210
48
208
FL
5638
5412
Anode Bake Furnace
PT
375
360
FL
121
116
FOOTNOTES
'Primary Aluminum Smelting, EPA, March 1974 (EN-157)
I
ON
N5
I
-------
TABLE 6.3-9
POINT COMPLIANCE STATUS - EXISTING SOURCES
REGION
V
INDUSTRY Primary Aluminum
SIC
3334
STATE OHIO
PG3/3
o tc
z W
u CD
cc 3
Ul
ij- r
Ui
a
CDS POINT DESCRIPTION
z
<
o
a.
CDS
POINT
Ui
o
(O
3
*-
— _i
o a
<
a. 2
o
H
(0
o
COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE
INCREMENTS OF PROGRESS
01
02
03
04
05
No Data
footnotes;
-------
RAD AN CORPORATION
REGION VI
TABLES 6.3^10 TO 6.3-12
-------
TABLE 6.3-10 SOURCE SUMMARY - EXISTING SOURCES
REGION
VI industry Primary Aluminum
air. 3334
STATP ARKANSAS
PG 1/3
ui
o a.
z u,
tu (0
K 3
u z
e
SOURCE
LOCATION
AQCR/
PRIORITY
SAROAD CODING
NUMBERS
SOURCE ID
NUMBERS
SOURCE PRODUCTION
RATE-KTPY
SOURCE
impliance
STATUS
PT
STATE
COUNTY
CITY
NEDS
CDS
STATE
DESIGN1
OPER2
u
O
1
Reynolds
Arkadelphia
016/11
04
0380
0008
00008
63
68
0
2
Reynolds
Jones Mills
016/11
04
2320
0001
122
125
0
FOOTNOTES*
1 Minerals Yearbook 1972
2 Primary Aluminum Smelting, EPA, March 1974 (EN-157)
-------
TABLE 6.3-10 POINT EMISSIONS AND ALLOWABLES - EXISTING SOURCES
RE<
SION VI INDUSTRY
Primary Aluminum
..<* 3334
state ARKANSAS
PG 2/3
REFERENCE
NUMBER
POINT SOURCE
DESCRIPTION
POLLUTANT
CONTROL
EQUIPMENT-
EFFICIENCY
NEDS
POINT
SOURCE
OPER
RATE
KTPY
EMISSIONS - TPY
SIP ALLOWABLES
POTENTIAL
ACTUAL
0ESIGN
OPER
DESIGN
OPER
PPH
TPY
PPH
TPY
1
HSS Cells1
PT
WS-
2325
2509
22
94
23
99
FL
997
1076
Prebake Cells2
PT
WS3
64.83
640
691
168 3
75.0%
FL
355
383
1
Anode Bake Furnace
PT
24
26
i
FL
8
8
1
2
Prebake Cells
PT
WS1
4959
5081
31
134
31
134
FL
2751
2818
!
Anode Bake Furnace
PT
183
188
¦
FL
59
61
i
i
FOOTNOTES
l7570 of Production in 1973 (EN-157)
z25% of Production in 1973 (EN-157)
, 3NEDS Data
Si ''Primary Aluminum Smelting, EPA, March 1974 (EN-157)
-------
TABLE fi q-m POINT COMPLIANCE STATUS - EXISTING SOURCES
RFftmN VI industry Primary Aluminum Rir 3334 «tatf ARKANSAS pg3/*
REFERENCE
number
COS POINT DESCRIPTION
POLLUTANT
COS
POINT
POINT
COMPLIANCE
STATUS
COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE
INCREMENTS OF PROGRESS
01
02
03
04
05
1
2
No Data
No Data
footnotes;
a*
i
-------
TABLE 6.3-U SOURCE SUMMARY - EXISTING SOURCES
REGION
industry Primary Aluminum
3334
STATE LOUISIANA
PG 1/3
in
0 oe
z u
01 2
SOURCE
AQCR/
SAROAD CODING
NUUBERS
SOURCE ID
NUMBERS
SOURCE PRODUCTION
RATE-KTPY
tli
UI«CO
° < =>
=> -J <
U- 5
ul z
e
LOCATION
PRIORITY
9 O- K
co Z CO
PT
STATE
COUNTY
CITY
NEDS
CDS
STATE
DESIGN 1
OPER2
o
1
Kaiser
Chalmette
106/11
19
2500
0006
00006
260
260
0
2
Gulf Coast Aluminum
Lake Charles
106/11
19
0520
0011
35
35
1
FOOTNOTES:
1 Minerals Yearbook 1972
2 Primary Aluminum Smelting, EPA, March 1974 (EN-157)
-------
TABLE 6.3-11 POINT EMISSIONS AND ALLOWABLES - EXISTING SOURCES
RE<
3I0N VI INDUSTRY
Primary Aluminum
¦„,« 3334
state LOUISIANA
PG Z/li
REFERENCE
NUMBER
POINT SOURCE
DESCRIPTION
POLLUTANT
CONTROL
EQUIPMENT-
EFFICIENCY
NEDS
POINT
SOURCE
OPER
RATE
KTPY
EMISSIONS - TPY
SIP ALLOWABLES
POTENTIAL
ACTUAL
DESIGN
OPER
DESIGN
OPER
PPH
TPY
PPH
TPY
1
HSS Cells
PT
WS1
12792
12792
20 2
2600
202
.2600
FL
5486
5486
2
Prebake Cells
PT
ws1
1423
1423
102
175
102
175
FL
789
789
Anode Bake Furnace
PT
BH1
53
53
FL
17
17
FOOTNOTES
1Primary Aluminum Smelting, EPA, March 1974 (EN-157)
2
Lbs/Ton
CTv
00
i
-------
table 6.j-i1
FOINT COhri^xANuc STAiua - fcXiS'lINU SOURCES
region VI INDUSTRY Primary Aluminum Q,c 3334 state LOUISIANA PG3/3
REFERENCE
NUMBER
CDS POINT DESCRIPTION
POLLUTANT
CDS
POINT
POINT
COMPLIANCE
STATUS
COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE
INCREMENTS OF PROGRESS
01
02
03
04
05
1
2
No Data
No Data
footnotes;
I
ON
VO
I
-------
TABLE 6.3-12 SOURCE SUMMARY - EXISTING SOURCES
REGION
INDUSTRY
Primary Aluminum
3334
STATE TEXAS
PG 1/3
REFERENCE
NUMBER
SOURCE
LOCATION
AOCR/
PRIORITY
SAROAD CODING
NUMBERS
SOURCE ID
NUMBERS
SOURCE PRODUCTION
RATE-KTPY
LaJ
a. - t~
=>_!
-------
TABLE f, i-i 9
POINT EMISSIONS AND ALLOWABLES - EXISTING SOURCES
region VI industry Primary Aluminum S|C 3334 state TEXAS pe 2/3
REFERENCE
NUMBER
POINT SOURCE
DESCRIPTION
POLLUTANT
i
CONTROL
EQUIPMENT-
EFFICIENCY
NEDS
POINT
SOURCE
OPER
RATE
KTPY
EMISSIONS - TPY
SIP ALL0WA3LES
POTENTIAL
ACTUAL
DESIGN
OPER
DESIGN
OPER
PPH
TPY
PPH
TPY
1
VSS Cells
PT
WS1
7252
6860
131
573
124
544
FL
3793
3588
2
HSS Cells
PT
WS1
5461
5461
320
1400
320
1400
FL
2342
2342
3
Prebake Cells
PT
ESP & WS1!
11382
11179
462
2020
460
2010
FL
6314
6201
Anode Bake Furnace
PT
420
413
FL
136
133
4
No Data
FOOTNOTES
Primary Aluminum Smelting, EPA, March 1974 (EN-157)
-------
lABLt. a_3-12 ruINi uOMri-j-ANCr. oTAius - LAiSlino SUukCES
REGION
VI iMnusTRv Primary Aluminum 3334
ftTATF TEXAS
PG3/3
REFERENCE
NUMBER
COS POINT DESCRIPTION
POLLUTANT
COS
POINT
POINT
COMPLIANCE
STATUS
COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE
INCREMENTS OF PROGRESS
01
02
03
04
05
1
No Data
2
No Data
3
No Data
4
No Data
footnotes:
I
-sj
to
i
-------
RMDIAN; CORPORATION
REGION VII
TABLE 6.3-13
-------
TABLE 6.3-13 SOURCE SUMMARY - EXISTING SOURCES
qprion VII industry .Primary Aluminum Rin 3334 state MISSOURI PG 1/3
REFERENCE
NUMBER
SOURCE
LOCATION
AQCR/
PRIORITY
PT
SAROAD CODING
NUMBERS
SOURCE ID NUMBERS
SOURCE PRODUCTION
RATE-KTPY
SOURCE
COMPLIANCE
j STATUS
STATE
COUNTY
CITY
NEDS
CDS
STATE
DESIGN 1
OPER2
1
Noranda Aluminum
New Madrid
138/III
26
3300
3280
0008
70
70
0
FOOTNOTES:
1 Minerals Yearbook 1972
2 Primary Aluminum Smelting, EPA, March 1974 (EN-157)
-------
TABLE A i-n POINT EMISSIONS AND ALLOWABLES - EXISTING SOURCES
region VII industry Primary Aluminum 3334 state MTSSOIJRt pg 2/5
REFERENCE
NUMBER
POINT SOURCE
DESCRIPTION
Z
<
t-
3
_»
-1
O
D.
CONTROL
EQUIPMENT-
EFFICIENCY
NEDS
POINT
SOURCE
OPER
RATE
KTPY
EMISSIONS - TPY
SIP ALLOWABLES
POTENTIAL
ACTUAL
DESIGN
OPER
DESIGN
OPER
PPH
TPY
PPH
TPY
1
Prebake Cells
Anode Bake Furnace
PT
FL
PT
FL
BH1
2846
1579
105
34
2846
1579
105
34
17
72
17
72
FOOTNOTES
Primary Aluminum Smelting, EPA, March 1974 (EN-157)
-------
TABLE 6. J"-*-rOINi L.OMrL.iANLc. aTAiua - laiSIin^ SuimCE.S
RFfiinw VII iNnusTRv Primary Aluminum Rir 3334 statf MTSSOTIPT pg3/*
REFERENCE
number
CDS POINT DESCRIPTION
POLLUTANT
CDS
POINT
POINT
COMPLIANCE
STATUS
COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE
INCREMENTS OF PROGRESS
01
02
03
04
05
I
No Data
footnotes:
I
-sj
Ln
I
-------
RADIiyN CORPORATION
REGION VIII
TABLE 6.3-14
-------
TABLE 6.3-14 SOURCE SUMMARY - EXISTING SOURCES
region VIII industry Primary Aluminum Rir 3334 state MONTANA pG |/3
REFERENCE
NUMBER
SOURCE
LOCATION
AQCR/
PRIORITY
PT
SAROAO CODING
NUUBERS
SOURCE ID NUUBERS
SOURCE PRODUCTION
RATE-KTPY
SOURCE
COMPLIANCE
STATUS
STATE
COUNTY
CITY
NEDS
CDS
STATE
OESIGN 1
OPER2
1
Anaconda
Columbia Falls
144/1
27
0480
0270
0012
00012
180
180
0
FOOTNOTES:
1 Minerals Yearbook 1972
2 Primary Aluminum Smelting, EPA, March 1974 (EN-157)
-------
TABLE f, -1.1^ POINT EMISSIONS AND ALLOWABLES - EXISTING SOURCES
region VIII industry Primary Aluminum Rir 3334 state MONTANA pg 2/3
REFERENCE
NUMBER
POINT SOURCE
DESCRIPTION
POLLUTANT
CONTROL
EQUIPMENT-
EFFICIENCY
NEDS
POINT
SOURCE
OPER
RATE
KTPY
EMISSIONS - TPY
SIP ALLOWABLES
POTENTIAL
ACTUAL
DESIGN
OPER
DESIGN
OPER
PPH
TPY
PPH
TPY
1
VSS Cells
PT
FL
7056
3690
7056
3690
45
196
45
196
FOOTNOTES
-------
TABLE fi ^-1A POINT COMPLIANCE STATUS - EXISTING SOURCES
RPr.mu VIII inimistry Primary Aluminum «.,r 3334 ST&TF MONTANA pc-w*
reference
NUMBER
COS POINT DESCRIPTION
POLLUTANT
CDS
POINT
POINT
COMPLIANCE
STATUS
COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE
INCREMENTS OF PROGRESS
01
02
03
04
05
1
No Data
footnotes;
00
I
-------
RADII AN CORPORATION
REGION X
TABLES 6.3-15 TO 6.3-16
-------
TABLE fi q.is SOURCE SUMMARY - EXISTING SOURCES
REGION
X industry Primary Aluminum
«ir 3334
STiTt OREGON
PG 1/3
tal
o «
. ^
"i ffi
(C «
SOURCE
AOCR/
SAROAD CODING
NUMBERS
SOURCE ID
NUMBERS
SOURCE PRODUCTION
RATE-KTPY
tAi
ui£«o
° < =»
oe 5 »-
r> -i <
ID ^
u z
e:
LOCATION
PRIORITY
p a h
tfc 2 a>
PT
STATE
COUNTY
CITY
NEDS
CDS
STATE
DESIGN1
OPER2
o
1
Reynolds
Troutdale
193/1
38
1240
00024
130
100
0
2
Martin Marietta
The Dalles
190/11
38
1840
0001
00003
90
87
4
FOOTNOTES:
1 Minerals Yearbook 1972
2 Primary Aluminum Smelting, EPA, March 1974 (EN-157)
i
—i
vO
I
-------
TABLE a q-is POINT EMISSIONS AND ALLOWABLES - EXISTING SOURCES
region X industry Primary Aluminum S|C 3334 state OREGON pg 2/3
REFERENCE
NUMBER
PO INT SOURCE
DESCRIPTION
POLLUTANT
CONTROL
EQUIPMENT-
EFFICIENCY
NEDS
POINT
SOURCE
OPER
RATE
KTPY
EMISSIONS - TPY
SIP ALLOWABLES
POTENTIAL
ACTUAL
DESIGN
OPER
DESIGN
OPER
PPH
TPY
PPH
TPY
1
Prebake Cells
PT
WS2
5285
5285
4065
101
650
10 1
500
FL
2932
2255
2.51
163
2.51
125
Anode Bake Oven
PT
195
150
FL
63
49
2
VSS Cells
PT
ESP & WS2
3528
3410
450
435
FL
1845
1784
113
109
FOOTNOTES
1 Lbs/Ton
2Primary Aluminum Smelting, EPA, March, 1974 (EN-157)
-------
TABLE: A q.T; POINT COMPLIANCE STATUS - EXISTING SOURCES
REGION
X
iMrtiisTBv Primary Aluminum eir
3334
<5T&TP OREGON
PG3/3
FERENCE
NUMBER
CDS
POINT DESCRIPTION
h-
z
<
H
3
-1
CDS
POINT
POINT
COMPLIANCE
STATUS
COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE
INCREMENTS OF PROGRESS
UJ
a.
O
a
01
02
03
04
05
1
No Data
2
ALL
4
footnotes;
-------
TABLE 6.3-16
SOURCE SUMMARY - EXISTING SOURCES
region x industry Primary Aluminum SIC 3334 state WASHINGTON
REFERENCE
NUMBER
SOURCE
LOCATION
AOCR/
PRIORITY
SAROAD COOING
NUUBERS
SOURCE ID
NUMBERS
SOURCE PRODUCTION
RATE-KTPY
SOURCE
IMPLIANCE
STATUS
PT
STATE
COUNTY
CITY
NEDS
CDS
STATE
DESIGN 1
OPER2
W
O
1
Alcoa
Vancouver
193/1
49
0360
0011
00011
115
100
4
2
Reynolds
Longview
193/1
49
0480
0015
00015
200
190
6
3
Alcoa
Wentachee
227/11
49
0300
0001
00001
175
175
3
4
Kaiser
Tacoma
229/1
49
1560
0019
00019
81
75
4
5
Martin-Marietta
Goldendale
230/1
49
1060
0001
00001
110
110
4
6
Kaiser
Mead
062/1
49
2060
0016
00016
206
165
6
FOOTNOTES:
1 Minerals Yearbook 1972
2 Primary Aluminum Smelting, EPA, March 1974 (EN-157)
i
C3
fo
I
-------
TABLE
POINT EMISSIONS AND ALLOWABLES - EXISTING SOURCES
region X industry Primary Aluminum S|C 3334 state WASHINGTON pc 2/3
REFERENCE
NUMBER
POINT SOURCE
DESCRIPTION
POLLUTANT
CONTROL
EQUIPMENT-
EFFICIENCY
NEDS
POINT
SOURCE
OPER
RATE
KTPY
EMISSIONS - TPY
SIP ALL0WA3LES
POTENTIAL
ACTUAL
DESIGN
OPER
DESIGN
OPER
PPH 3
TPY
PPH 3
TPY
1
Prebake Cells
PT
WS2
4675
4065
15
863
15
750
FL
2593
2255
Anode Bake Furnace
PT
None1
1001
173
150
2741
FL
56
49
2
HSS Cells
PT
WS2
9840
8856
15
1500
15
1430
FL
4220
3798
3
Prebaked Cells
PT
WS&BH2"
7114
7114
15
1310
15
1310
FL
3946
3946
Anode Bake Furnace
PT
WS1
1781
263
263
6801
50%
FL
85
85
4
HSS Cells
PT
WS2
3985
3690
15
608
15
563
FL
1709
1583
5
VSS Cells
PT
WS&ESP2
4312
4312
15
825
15
825
FL
2255
2255
FOOTNOTES
*NEDS Data
2Primary Aluminum Smelting, EPA, March 1974 (EN-157)
3
Lbs/Ton
t
CO
OJ
I
-------
TABLE 6.3-16
POINT EMISSIONS AND ALLOWABLES - EXISTING SOURCES
region X industry Primary Aluminum sjC 3334 STATE WASHINGTON PG 2/3
ont' d
REFERENCE
NUMBER
POINT SOURCE
DESCRIPTION
POLLUTANT
CONTROL
EQUIPMENT-
EFFICIENCY 1
NEDS
POINT
SOURCE
OPER
RATE
KTPY 1
EMISSIONS - TPY
SIP ALLOWABLES
POTENTIAL
ACTUAL 1
DESIGN
OPER
DESIGN
OPER
PPH 2
TPY
PPH 2
TPY
6
Prebake Cells
PT
WS
166
8374
6707
1010
15
1550
15
1240
85%
FL
4643
3721
Anode Bake Furnace
PT
None
166
309
248
485
FL
100
80
FOOTNOTES
'NEDS Data
2
Lbs/Ton
1
00
-------
TABLE fi. -i-tfi POINT COMPLIANCE STATUS - EXISTING SOURCES
region X industry Primary Aluminum s,c 3334 STATE WASHINGTON PG3/3
REFERENCE
NUMBER
CDS POINT DESCRIPTION
POLLUTANT
CDS
POINT
POINT
COMPLIANCE
STATUS
COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE
INCREMENTS OF PROGRESS
01
02 .
03
04
05
1
ALL
4
2
No Data
3
'ALL
3
4
ALL
4
5
ALL
4
6
No Data
footnotes;
i
CO
Ln
i
-------
TABLE _£_3-l6
SOURCE SUMMARY - EXISTING SOURCES
region X industry Aluminum g|p 3334 state WASHINGTON
REFERENCE
NUMBER
SOURCE
LOCATION
AQCR/
PRIORITY
PT
SAROAD COOING
NUMBERS
SOURCE ID NUMBERS
SOURCE PRODUCTION
RATE-KTPY
SOURCE
COMPLIANCE
STATUS
STATE
COUNTY
CITY
NEDS
CDS
STATE
DESIGN 1
OPER2
7
Intalco
Femdale
228/11
49
2400
0001
00001
260
265
4
FOOTNOTES:
1 Minerals Yearbook 1972
2 Primary Aluminum Smelting, EPA, March 1974 (EN-157)
-------
TABLE 6.3-I6 POINT EMISSIONS AND ALLOWABLES - EXISTING SOURCES
rfgion X industry Primary Aluminum 3334 state WASHINGTON pg 2/3
REFERENCE
NUMBER
POINT SOURCE
DESCRJPTIflN
*-
z
<
V-
_l
O
o.
CONTROL
EQUIPMENT-
EFFICIENCY1
NEDS
POINT
SOURCE
OPER
RATE
KTPY1
EMISSIONS - TPY
SIP ALL0WA3LES
POTENTIAL
ACTUAL1
0ESIGN
OPER
DESIGN
OPER
PPH5
TPY
PPH5
TPY
7
Prebake Cells
2 Anode Bake Furn.
PT
FL
PT
FL
BH2&WS3
WS
90%
117
10570
5860
390
126
10770
5980
398
129
548"
762
15
1950
15
1990
FOOTNOTES
JNEDS Data ''Total for Potlines
2Primary - 98.0% 5Lbs/Ton
, 3Secondary - 90.0%
CO
I
-------
TABLE 6.3-16 POINT COMPLIANCE STATUS - EXISTING SOURCES
region X INDUSTRY Primary Aluminum gJC 3334 state WASHINGTON
reference
NUMBER
CDS POINT DESCRIPTION
POLLUTANT
CDS
POINT
POINT
COMPLIANCE
STATUS
COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE
INCREMENTS OF PROGRESS
01
02
03
04
05
7
ALL
4
FOOTNOTES."
i
oo
00
I
-------
APPENDIX 1
CONTROL EQUIPMENT IDENTIFICATION CODES
-------
CONTROL EQUIPMENT IDENTIFICATION CODES
CODES
EQUIPMENT
ws
Wet Scrubber
GC
Gravity Collector
CYCL
Centrifugal Collector
ESP
Electrostatic Precipitator
GS
Gas Scrubber
MIST ELIM
Mist Eliminator
BH
Fabric Filter
CAT
Catalytic Afterburner
INCIN
Direct Flame Afterburner
HES
High Energy Scrubber
------- |