technical support document for draft/proposed air …

Technical Support Document, Permit Action Number: 05300480 - 003 of 28 Date: 1/9/2012

TECHNICAL SUPPORT DOCUMENT For

DRAFT/PROPOSED AIR EMISSION PERMIT NO. 05300480-003 This Technical Support Document (TSD) is intended for all parties interested in the draft/proposed permit and to meet the requirements that have been set forth by the federal and state regulations (40 CFR § 70.7(a)(5) and Minn. R. 7007.0850, subp. 1). The purpose of this document is to provide the legal and factual justification for each applicable requirement or policy decision considered in the preliminary determination to issue the draft/proposed permit.

1. General Information

1.1 Applicant and Stationary Source Location:

Table 1. Applicant and Source Address

Applicant/Address Stationary Source/Address (SIC Code: 5093)

Northern Metals, LLC 2800 Pacific Street North Minneapolis, MN 55411

Northern Metals, LLC 2800 Pacific Street North Minneapolis, MN Hennepin County

Contact: Thomas Swafford Phone: 612-305-7310

1.2 Facility Description Northern Metals, LLC (Northern Metals or the Permittee) is a metal recycling company whose wholly-owned subsidiary, American Iron & Supply Company, operates the Pacific Street Yard at 2800 Pacific Street North in Minneapolis, MN (the facility). Northern Metals operates a hammermill metal shredder at the facility (Minneapolis Shredder or shredder). The Minneapolis Shredder reduces the size of the scrap metal, removes dirt and non-metallic materials from the shredded metal, and separates ferrous and nonferrous metals. The shredder installation includes an in-feed conveyor system, the shredder itself, size separation equipment, cleaning equipment (referred to collectively as the cascade cleaning system), initial magnetic separation equipment, manual separation stations, finished product conveyor system, and the associated air pollution control system. For the purpose of the air permit, the Minneapolis Shredder installation is divided into two emission points, or emission units, the hammermill shredder (EU 001) and the cascade cleaning system (EU 002). The two units vent to a common stack (SV 001) and are each controlled by a high efficiency cyclone, venturi scrubber, and fabric filter. The shredder equipment is totally


enclosed in a Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) -designed building. The primary pollutants emitted from the shredding process are total particulate matter (PM), particulate matter less than 10 microns (PM10), and particulate matter less than 2.5 microns (PM2.5). All three pollutants are limited in the air permit and controlled by the shredder’s pollution control equipment. The facility also has small combustion equipment onsite that qualifies as insignificant activities under Minn. R. 7007.1300 as well as fugitive particulate emission sources from paved roads and material handling. The facility holds a non-expiring State Total Facility Operating Permit. The facility has accepted limits to avoid classification as a major source with respect to the Part 70 Operating Permit Program, the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) Program, and the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) Program. Many of the permit conditions are based on an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) conducted in 1995 prior to the construction of the facility and a second EAW conducted concurrent with this permit action. See Section 1.5 “Facility History” for further explanation.


1.3 Changes to the Permit through this Permit Action This permit action is a major amendment to a State Total Facility Operating Permit to revise site-specific conditions. The permit does not authorize construction. Northern Metals has made several changes to the Pacific Street Yard since the previous permit was issued in 1998 (referred to throughout this document as the “original permit”). Those changes are described under Section 1.6 “Changes to the facility since the issuance of Permit 05300480-002”. Changes to the permit through this permit action include:

What Why 1) Modifying the PM/PM10 Limit: New limits take into account condensable particulate matter and are protective of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)

Although the original permit contained the requirement that PM and PM10 limits include organic condensibles, the limits were not originally calculated taking into account organic condensable emissions. This permit action corrects that inconsistency. In the original permit, the MPCA added “organic condensibles” as part of the Total PM and PM10 emission limits because of regulatory activity at the federal level that occurred between the negative declaration on the need for an EIS and the resumption of work on American Iron’s permit. During that time period, EPA completed revisions to the PM10 NAAQS and the ambient air measurements that made it clear that condensable matter at ambient conditions must be included in the calculation of particulate matter. However, during the 1995 Risk Assessment and EAW process, these federal regulations had not been promulgated, and quantitative analysis and the permit limit were based only on filterable particulate matter, not filterable and condensable particulate matter. (See Table 9 for Comparison of filterable and condensable particulate emissions.)

2) Adding a PM2.5 Limit: New limit is the same as the PM/PM10 limits and is protective of the NAAQS

Although the EPA promulgated the first NAAQS standard for PM2.5 in 1997 (prior to the issuance of the facility’s permit), in the early stages of implementation of this new NAAQS, it was not common to put PM2.5 emission limits in permits. However, now it is standard practice to have PM2.5 limits in permits for facilities that also have PM and PM10 limits. It is common for the MPCA to add PM2.5 limits to permits that already have PM and/or PM10 limits if the permit is going through the major amendment or reissuance process.

3) Adding a daily shredder output limit Daily shredder output limit of 2,400 tons/day

The daily output limit was added to ensure on-going compliance with the PM/PM10/PM2.5 limits.


What Why 4) Removing requirements that have been completed or are obsolete a) Requirement to pave roads b) Requirement to record

weight of all residue and material collected by the pollution control equipment

a) The requirement to pave roads at the facility is removed because the facility has completed all road paving per MPCA requirements.

b) The requirement to record the weight of residue and material collected by the pollution control equipment was included in the original permit because all Potential to Emit (PTE) calculations were based entirely on a mass-balance approach, and it was thought that this data could be useful in future mass balance calculations. However, this information is not needed going forward for permit calculations or compliance demonstrations because many of the PTE calculations for this permit use stack test results to obtain the data that residue weight may have been used to calculate. Additionally, the setup of the Minneapolis Shredder’s pollution control equipment makes it difficult to accurately perform this measurement.

5) Incorporating performance test frequencies: Once every 60 mos. for PM/PM10/PM2.5 and opacity Annual for mercury (until 3 consecutive yrs of compliance, then once every 36 mos.)

Performance test frequencies are incorporated into the permit based on the results of the facility’s initial performance tests and the MPCA’s guidance for establishing a testing frequency. Additional testing for metals other than mercury is not included in the permit because the initial performance tests demonstrated compliance, provided enough information to conduct the risk assessment, and compliance with the metals limits is ensured through other permit conditions. See Section 3.6 “Metal HAP Limits” for further explanation of these conditions.

6) Removing restrictions on the amount of aluminum, brass, copper, and stainless steel scrap processed in the shredder, and modifying metal emissions limits

These metal feedstocks were limited in the original permit because of assumptions made in the 1995 EAW and Risk Assessment. These assumptions were not used in the 2011 EAW and risk assessment. Removal of the restrictions does not cause the facility to exceed any risk guidelines. Metal emissions limits were modified based on new information obtained through stack testing that was not available when the limits were set through the 1995 EAW and Risk Assessment. This permit action also incorporates monitoring and recordkeeping to support the limits. See Section 3.4 “Feedstock Restrictions: Aluminum, Brass, Copper, and Stainless Steel” and Section 3.6 “Metal HAP Limits”


What Why 7) Removing the restriction on processing auto hulks

This restriction was incorporated into the original permit based on concerns that shredding auto hulks would allow unacceptable amounts of mercury switches into the feedstock. The combination of the facility’s mercury limit, feedstock control plan, and control equipment provides a reasonable assurance that mercury emissions will not be increased from the original permitted limit by allowing the shredding of auto hulks. See Section 3.4 “Feedstock Restrictions: Auto Hulks” and Section 3.5 “Mercury Limit”.

8) Modifying the form of the mercury limit and compliance demostration: The limit is changed from a lb/hr limit to a 12-month rolling sum lb/yr limit

The mercury emissions allowed by the permit are not increased with this permit action. With the new form of the limit the Permittee will now be required to demonstrate compliance with this limit on an on-going basis vs. once per year through a stack test (to measure lb/hr emissions), as was required in the original permit. See Section 3.5 “Mercury Limit”.

9) Incorporating an updated feedstock control plan

The Permittee was required to create a feedstock control plan in the original permit; this permit action incorporates that plan as an enforceable part of the permit. See Section 3.3 “Feedstock Control Plan”.

10) Incorporating standard Tier 3 modeling requirements

Based on the results of the facility’s PM2.5 ambient air modeling and the MPCA’s policy for determining under what circumstances remodeling should be required by the facility, the facility falls into what is termed “Tier 3”. The Tier 3 requirements for remodeling are incorporated at the Total facility level of the permit. See Section 3.2 “Ambient Air Quality Modeling”.

11) Updating standard citations and formatting

This is standard practice when processing major amendments.

12) Adding standard pollution control equipment requirements

The original permit simply referenced the monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements of the Minnesota control equipment rule. This permit lists the requirements directly in the permit rather than simply referencing the requirements because all applicable requirements should be contained in the permit.

13) Updating PTE calculations New data on process emissions obtained from the Minneapolis Shredder’s performance test was used to update the calculations supporting this permit action. See Section 3.7 “Calculations of Potential to Emit”.

14) Updated insignificant activities list

The list in the original permit was out of date.


What Why 15) Modifying fugitive source requirements and adding requirements to manage fugitive sources through a fugitive dust control plan

The original permit did not require any monitoring to support the Minnesota Rule for Control of Fugitive Particulate Matter for FS 001 and FS 003. This permit action removes requirements that were not supported with periodic monitoring and recordkeeping and instead requires submittal of, and compliance with, a fugitive dust control plan that will ensure that the requirements of the rule are met.

1.4. Facility Emissions

Table 2. Increase Summary: Controlled and Limited Potential Emissions from SV 001

Pollutant Permit Action 002

(tpy) Permit Action 003

(tpy)

Increase due to Permit Action 003

(tpy)

PM 0.81 7.93 7.12

PM10 0.81 7.93 7.12

Total HAPs 0.04 0.12 0.08

Table 3. Total Facility Limited and Controlled Potential to Emit Summary

PM tpy

PM10 tpy

PM2.5 tpy

SO2 tpy

NOx tpy

CO tpy

CO2e tpy

VOC tpy

HAPs tpy

Total Facility Limited Potential Emissions

8.85 8.12 7.98 0.00** 0.00** 0.00** 0.00** 0.00** 0.12

Total Facility Actual Emissions (2009)

0.87 0.73 * 0.00 0.00 0.00 * 0.00 *

* Not reported in 2009 MN emission inventory ** The emission units at the facility do not emit these pollutants, but the facility has insignificant activities that emit these pollutants (See Attachment 1 for the insignificant activity PTE summary)

Table 4. Facility Classification

Classification Major/Affected Source

Synthetic Minor/Area

Minor/Area

PSD PM10, PM2.5 CO, NOx, VOC Part 70 Permit Program

PM, PM10, PM2.5 CO, NOx, VOC

Part 63 NESHAP HAP


1.5 Facility History In 1995, MPCA prepared an Environmental Assessment Worksheet and a Screening Level Human Health Risk Assessment for the Permittee’s subsidiary company, American Iron and Supply Company (American Iron), on a proposed metal shredder at the same facility. (American Iron was then an independent company.) After the MPCA Board’s negative declaration on the need for an EIS, American Iron applied for an air emission permit. The application proposed the following control equipment: CE001 High Efficiency Cyclone on the hammermill shredder; CE002 High Efficiency Cyclone on the Cascade Cleaning system; and CE003 Common Fabric Filter (Baghouse) following both cyclones. But before the MPCA could act on American Iron’s application, the City of Minneapolis (City) brought litigation challenging the negative declaration on the need for an EIS. After the litigation concluded in early 1998, the MPCA resumed work on American Iron’s air emission permit application. In writing the Air Permit, the MPCA listed the pollution control equipment proposed in the application and incorporated a 0.43 pounds per hour particulate emission rate as a permit condition for PM and PM10 emissions. The MPCA issued an Air Emission Permit to American Iron for installation and operation of the Minneapolis Shredder, on December 8, 1998. In the permit, the MPCA added “organic condensibles” as part of the Total PM and PM10 emission limits because of regulatory activity at the federal level that occurred between the negative declaration on the need for an EIS and the resumption of work on American Iron’s application. During that time period, EPA completed revisions to the PM10 National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and the ambient air measurements that made it clear that condensable matter at ambient conditions must be included in the calculation of particulate matter. However, during the 1995 Risk Assessment and EAW process, these federal regulations had not been promulgated, and both documents were based on filterable particulate matter, not condensable particulate matter. After the MPCA issued the Air Permit in 1998, further litigation between American Iron and the City delayed the Minneapolis Shredder installation until a settlement was agreed to in late 2002. Minor preparatory activities related to the storm water management system commenced, but an internal ownership dispute further delayed the Minneapolis Shredder installation. In early 2007, Northern Metals purchased American Iron. Construction of the Shredder Building and Minneapolis Shredder installation began in August of 2008. Soil remediation work was completed in the same year.


The Minneapolis Shredder commenced operation on June 18, 2009. The stack testing required by the Air Permit was conducted November 30 through December 4, 2009. Because the filter bags had been changed the day before the test, and had not been conditioned to provide typical removal, a re-test for particulate matter emissions was conducted on December 22, 2009. Additional stack testing for mercury emissions was conducted on June 22, 23 and 29, 2010, in accordance with the Air Emissions Compliance Plan for the Hammermill Metal Shredder at the Pacific Street Yard in Minneapolis, Minnesota (Compliance Plan) submitted April 16, 2010. 1.6 Changes to the facility since the issuance of Permit 05300480-002 Completion of Soil Remediation Including Paving. Northern Metals completed the soil remediation activities required by the MPCA Voluntary Response Action Plan (VRAP). This included paving all unpaved portions of the Pacific Street Yard except a small area behind the North Warehouse and Metal Recycling Plant Building as specified in the VRAP. Replacement of Rail Tracks. Northern Metals replaced the internal rail system at the Pacific Street Yard with a new system at new grades and a new rail scale. This work included paving around and between the new tracks with six inches of asphalt to meet the paving requirement in the VRAP. Storm Water Management System. Northern Metals installed an underground storm water management system that directs all paved areas of the Pacific Street Yard to a storm water storage and treatment system as previously permitted by the MPCA. See American Iron and Steel Company NPDES/SDS Permit No. MN0063380 (NPDES Permit). Northern Metals replaced the two barge docks on the Mississippi River with a modern, single dock. Unlike the two old docks, all storm water from the new dock is directed to the storm water management system. Minneapolis Shredder Installation. Northern Metals constructed a LEED-designed Shredder Building and installed a Metso Texas hammermill metal shredder inside the building as it was being built. The Minneapolis Shredder installation included the in-feed conveyor system, the shredder itself, size separation equipment, cleaning equipment (referred to collectively as the cascade cleaning system), initial magnetic separation equipment, manual separation stations, finished product conveyor system, and the associated air pollution control equipment. Each exhaust stream is controlled by a high efficiency cyclone, a wet scrubber, and a fabric filtration system. New Metal Recycling Plant. The North Warehouse was modified to accommodate a new Metal Recycling Plant that further separates and recovers ferrous and non-ferrous metals from the shredding process.


New Entrance, Truck Scale, and Scale House. Northern Metals reorganized the flow of materials through the Pacific Street Yard by opening a new entrance on Pacific Street North at 30th Avenue North, installing a new truck scale at this entrance, building a new scale house to serve the new truck and rail scales, and changing the old entrance/exit at Pacific Street North and 28th Avenue North to an exit only.

2. Regulatory and/or Statutory Basis

New Source Review (NSR)

The facility has accepted limits to remain a minor source with respect to NSR regulations. The previous permit incorrectly categorized the source as a “true minor” source. Because the source relies on control equipment to limit its PTE below NSR thresholds, it is not a true minor source. In practical terms, this doesn’t affect the permit other than citing the requirement to operate control equipment (and associated control equipment parameters and monitoring) as a Title I Condition. Other than correcting the miscategorization, the changes authorized by this permit do not affect the facility’s status with respect to NSR regulations.

Part 70 Permit Program

The facility has accepted limits to remain below the Part 70 permitting thresholds. The facility was also miscategorized as a “true minor” source under Part 70 in the previous permit action. Because the source relies on control equipment to limit its PTE below Part 70 thresholds, it is not a true minor source.

New Source Performance Standards (NSPS)

There are no New Source Performance Standards applicable to the operations at this facility.

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP)

The facility has taken limits to remain an area source under 40 CFR pt. 63, the NESHAP regulations. Thus, no major source NESHAPs apply. In addition, the Permittee has stated that no area source NESHAPs apply to the facility.

Compliance Assurance Monitoring (CAM)

CAM does not apply to the modifications allowed in this permit amendment because CAM only applies to facilities required to hold a Part 70 permit. The facility is not required to hold a Part 70 permit.

Environmental Review & Air Emissions Risk Analysis (AERA)

Although the proposed emissions increases do not trigger the need for environmental review with this permit action, the Permittee submitted a voluntary EAW and complete AERA with the permit amendment.

Minnesota State Rules


Portions of the facility are subject to the following Minnesota Standards of Performance: • Minn. R. 7011.0715 Standards of Performance for Post-1969 Industrial Process

Equipment • Minn. R. 7011.0150 Preventing Particulate Matter from Becoming Airborne

Table 5. Regulatory Overview of Units Affected by the Modification/Permit Amendment

Level* Applicable Regulations

Comments:

FC

Minn. Stat. Section 116.07; Minn. R. 7009.0010-0080

Ambient Air Quality Standards: The permit contains Tier 3 remodeling requirements based on the results of the PM2.5 ambient air modeling (See Section 3.2). The permit also requires the submittal of a fugitive control plan, and compliance with the plan.

Minn. R. ch. 4410 Environmental Review: The Permittee is subject to requirements based on environmental review because the Permittee conducted a legislatively-mandated EAW in 1995 and a voluntary EAW with this permit action. The findings of the EAWs informed the permit conditions cited “Minn. R. ch. 4410.” Based on the EAW, the Permittee shall comply with a Feedstock Control Plan.

Minn. R. 7011.0150 Minnesota Rule for Control of Fugitive Particulate Matter: This rule is a general applicable requirement for facilities with fugitive particulate emission sources. To comply with this rule, the facility shall comply with a fugitive dust control plan.

EU 001 (Scrap Metal Hammermill Shredder)

Minn. R. ch. 4410 Environmental Review: Shredder output limits based on EAW findings

Minn. R. 7007.0800 Minnesota Rule for Permit Content: The facility is limited to operating the shredder only between certain hours on weekdays, weekends, and holidays. These hours of operation were specified in Special Council Permit No. 62483 issued by the city of Minneapolis (City) on June 11, 1990, and the Conditional Use Permit issued by the City on November 1, 2002. The requirement is carried forward with this permit action.



Comments:

SV 001 (combined shredder and cascade cleaning system stack)

Minn. R. ch. 4410 Environmental Review: Limits on PM/PM10/PM2.5 and metal HAPs based on EAW findings

Minn. R. 7011.0715 Industrial Process Equipment Rule: This rule applies to EU 001 and EU 002 individually, but is listed at SV level because these two units vent to a common stack. The units are subject to this rule because they are not subject to any other standard of performance and were constructed after 1969.

CE 001 (high efficiency cyclone)

40 CFR Section 52.21 & Minn. R. 7007.300; 40 CFR Section 70.2 & Minn. R. 7007.0200; 40 CFR Section 63.2

PSD/Part 70/NESHAPs: The facility relies on control equipment to limit their PTE below the major source threshold for all three of these programs.

CE 004 & CE 005 (venturi scrubbers)



CE 006 & CE 007 (fabric filters)



FS 001 (product storage piles)

Minn. R. 7011.0150 Minnesota Rule for Control of Fugitive Particulate Matter: Preventing Particulate Matter from Becoming Airborne. There are negligible emissions from this fugitive source, and its PTE qualifies it as an insignificant activity under Minn. R. 7007.1300 3(I), but the requirement remains in the permit to ensure that it is managed according to the facility’s fugitive dust control plan.



Comments:

FS 002 (paved roads)

Minn. R. 7011.0150 Minn. Stat. Section 116.07; Minn. R. 7009.0010-0080

Minnesota Rule for Control of Fugitive Particulate Matter: The facility complies with this rule through a fugitive dust control plan and daily road cleaning. Ambient Air Quality Standards: The facility demonstrated that fugitive PM10 emissions fall below the threshold for inclusion in the PM10 ambient air quality monitoring using silt loading data for facilities that conduct daily road cleaning; therefore, the facility is required to conduct daily road sweeping except under certain circumstances as outlined in the permit. This approach is consistent with other facilities that have daily road sweeping/watering requirements. It should be noted that the PTE of this source qualifies it as an insignificant activity under Minn. R. 7007.1300 3(I), but the requirement remains in the permit to ensure that it is managed according to the facility’s fugitive dust control plan.

FS 003 (material handling)

Minn. R. 7011.0150 Minnesota Rule for Control of Fugitive Particulate Matter: There are minimal emissions from this fugitive source, and its PTE qualifies it as an insignificant activity under Minn. R. 7007.1300 3(I), but the requirement remains in the permit to ensure that it is managed according to the facility’s a fugitive dust control plan.

*Where the requirement appears in the permit (e.g., EU, SV, GP, etc.). .

3. Technical Information 3.1 Air Emissions Risk Analysis An AERA was performed for this permit action. The AERA Impact Statement and the MPCA Risk Manager’s Form are attached to the TSD. Both documents provide more information on the AERA. The risk analysis captured any potential changes in emissions due to the elimination of feedstock restrictions and changes in permit limits. The analysis found that all facility risk estimates were below facility risk guidelines, except for the urban gardener cancer risk estimates. Refined facility urban gardener cancer risk estimates were at facility risk guidelines at the potentially most impacted residentially zoned area.


The metal feedstock restrictions were included in the original permit because of assumptions about the feedstock compositions used in the 1995 risk assessment and EAW. These feedstock restriction assumptions were not used in the 2011 EAW and AERA. The Minneapolis Shredder output limits, in combination with the shredder’s control equipment, ensure that the emission rates of the air toxics remain below the emission rates determined to be at or below risk guidelines through the AERA. In addition, it should be noted that the emission estimates used in the AERA are conservative estimates to ensure that the calculated potential risk at the facility was not under-predicted. The emission estimates used in the AERA for the proposed facility changes are either based on permit emission limits or PTE. The emissions used in the AERA are conservative estimates because:

• The annual tons per year emission rates assume that the highest potential emission rate per ton shredder output (lb/ton shredder output) is emitted for all material processed during the year (377,800 tons/yr, permit limit). This is actually a physically impossible scenario since the worst case scenarios assume 100% of a given scrap metal makes up all the shredder output, but the worst case scrap metal is different for different pollutants. Thus the annual emission rates are likely overestimates and could contribute to an overestimation of long term risks.

• When deriving potential emission rates from stack test data, the detection limit for pollutants that were not detected (such as specific PCB’s and dioxin/furan congeners) and the highest stack test run (rather than the average of the stack test runs) was used.

• Emission estimates based on Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) data used worst-case pollutant content for a given scrap metal, and for each pollutant assumed that the metal with the highest content of each pollutant constituted 100% of the metal feedstock. In reality, metal feedstocks will be made up of several types of metals, and the percentages of given pollutants in scrap metals will be in the entire range of the MSDS data (not just the highest percentage).

Considering the emission estimates for the risk driver pollutants were based on stack testing and permit limits on limit of 377,800 tons/yr shredder output, a recalculation of the risk estimates should be considered if the shredder output limit were to be increased. 3.2 Ambient Air Quality Modeling The facility conducted PM10 and PM2.5 modeling of the emissions from SV 001 for this permit action. The Air dispersion Modeling Analysis Report is attached to this TSD and provides further information on the modeling. The modeling results demonstrate compliance with the NAAQS and the MAAQS. Table 6 summarizes the results of the PM2.5 and PM10 dispersion modeling

Table 6. PM2.5 and PM10 Air Dispersion Modeling Results


Pollutant Averaging

Time

Modeled Impacts (μg/m3)

Background Value

(μg/m3)

Total Predicted Impacts (μg/m3)

NAAQS (MAAQS) (μg/m3)

% of NAAQS

(MAAQS)

MPCA Modeling Language Tier

Recommendations

PM10 24-hr

12.04270

47 59.04270 150 39.36% Tier 1

Annual 1.41883 27 28.41883 50 56.84%

PM2.5 24-hr 8.91298 26 34.91298 35 99.75%

Tier 3 Annual 1.57711 10 11.57711 15 77.18%

Based on the MPCA’s tiered modeling policy, the results of the facility’s modeling, the facility falls into Tier 3 for PM2.5 and Tier 1 for PM10. The tier dictates what level of remodeling is required if the facility makes changes to any of the modeled parameters. The tier requirements are at the “Total Facility” level of the permit.

Table 7. MPCA Tiered Modeling Policy % of NAAQS/MAAQS: > 90% 90% - 75% < 75% PSD - Limits Tier 4 Tier 2 Tier 1 PSD – No Limits Tier 3 Tier 2 Tier 1 Not PSD - Limits Tier 3 Tier 2 Tier 1 Not PSD – No Limits Tier 1 Tier 1 Tier 1

The original modeling analysis did not include fugitive emissions, but they were included in subsequent MPCA modeling. The MPCA confirmed that the addition of PM2.5 and PM10 fugitive emissions would not substantially affect the modeling. Consistent with the MPCA’s PSD and Title V Modeling Guidance, particulate emissions from insignificant activities were not modeled because emissions from each activity were less than 0.10 lb/hr. The Permittee modeled an emission rate of 4.2 lb/hr of PM10 and 4.2 lb/hr PM2.5. These emission rates are incorporated into the permit as limits. There is a large margin of compliance between the emission rate tested from SV 001 during the December 22, 2009 performance test (1.32 lb/hr) and the permit limit. The performance test was conducted at about 100 tons/hr shredder output. Even if the shredder output was tripled, and assuming that the emission rate is directly proportional to the shredder output, the short term emissions would still be below the modeled rate. The daily limit on the shredder ouput (2,400 tons/day) provides a reasonable assurance that short term shredder output will not exceed a value that jeopardizes the PM10 or PM2.5 limit. 3.3 Feedstock control plan Because emissions from the Minneapolis Shredder are highly dependent on the composition of the feedstock, the Permittee has implemented an extensive feedstock control plan. The plan is


an enforceable part of the permit and appears in Appendix B of the permit. At the time of permit issuance, the plan contained in the appendices of the permit is the most up to date version of the plan. It is expected that the Permittee may need to make changes in the plan based on normal changes in operational procedures. Thus, the Permittee is required to update the plan if there are any changes and submit the updated plan to the Commissioner for approval. This approach is consistent with how waste management plans are treated in permits for waste combustors. Northern Metals’ feedstock control plan is based on five key components: internal practices and training, restriction on incoming scrap materials, supplier education and certification, load inspections, and recordkeeping. Each component is described in detail in the plan. 3.4 Feedstock Restrictions Aluminum, Brass, Copper, and Stainless Steel The discussion under Section 3.1 “Air Emissions Risk Analysis” provides further justification for removing the restrictions on shredding aluminum, brass, copper, and stainless steel based on risk assessment results. These metal feedstocks were limited in the original permit because the 1995 EAW and Risk Assessment relied on the assumptions that incidental amounts of these metals were shredded. These assumptions were also essentially duplicates of emission limits that already existed in the permit (emission limits for arsenic, beryllium, and hexavalent chromium). The EAW and Risk Assessment that support this permit did not rely on those assumptions (instead they assume that any amount of any of the metal feedstocks can be shredded). Additionally, more information about the emissions from the Minneapolis Shredder was obtained through stack testing (information that was not available at the time of the 1995 EAW). Namely, for a feedstock that is 95% metallic, roughly 5% of the particulate matter emissions are metal particulate. Based on this new information, assuming the possibility of shredding even 100% of any of the previously limited feedstock metals, does not put the facility risk above any risk guidelines. The shredder output limits and the shredder’s control equipment ensure that the emission rates of these pollutants, as well as other air toxics, remain below emission rates determined to be health protective through the AERA. Auto Hulks The prohibition on shredding auto hulks was incorporated into the original permit based on concerns about mercury switches entering the feedstock. Through this permit action, a detailed feedstock control plan was incorporated as an enforceable part of the permit, which ensures that mercury switches or other devices are removed to the greatest extent possible for any material that enters the shredder.


The facility will not accept any unprocessed vehicles. All vehicles must be processed by a certified end of life vehicle supplier or by the company’s trained employees before arriving on-site. Furthermore, the permit contains a mercury limit with associated monitoring, recordkeeping, reporting, and performance testing. The combination of these permit conditions provides a reasonable assurance that unacceptable amounts of mercury are not emitted from the shredding process. As permitted, the facility’s risk, based on potential mercury emissions is well below all risk guidelines. Used Oil Filters The facility’s original permit unnecessarily prohibited the shredding of used oil filters. The facility’s feedstock control plan addresses used oil filters. Used oil filters are listed on the “Unacceptable Materials List”. Under Minn. R. 7045.0990, used oil filters must be sent to scrap metal recyclers or burned for energy recover, unless they are disposed of as hazardous waste (used oil filters themselves may be recycled under the scrap metal exemption of part 7045.0125, subp. 4(C), but filter media must be treated as hazardous waste).

3.5 Mercury limit Through this permit action the form of the mercury limit is modified, but mercury emissions are not increased. The mercury limit in the original permit was 0.00079 lb/hr, and is converted to a 3 lb/yr limit. The conversion does not authorize an increase in mercury emissions. An annual limit is a more appropriate form for the limit, for three main reasons:

1) Risks associated with short term exposure are at least an order of magnitude below risk driver levels, so a short term limit is not needed.

2) The new form of the limit requires the Permittee to demonstrate compliance with daily records, monthly rolling sum calculations, adherence to the feedstock control plan, and periodic stack testing. The original permit only required periodic stack testing, so compliance could only be determined at a “snapshot in time” during the performance test rather than on an ongoing basis through 12-month rolling sum calculations supported by daily records.

3) A 12-month rolling sum lb/yr limit is also more appropriate because it acknowledges and accommodates the facility’s variability in feedstock without allowing an increase in mercury emissions or increasing risk to human health and the environment.

The Permittee will be required to conduct annual performance tests to establish a mercury emission factor in the units of pounds of mercury per ton of shredder output. The Permittee shall use a minimum of 3, and a maximum of 6, test runs to obtain data for the emission factor. On a monthly basis the Permittee shall calculate the 12-month rolling sum mercury emissions by applying the mercury emission factor to the monthly shredder output totals. The monthly shredder output shall be determined by summing the daily and monthly shredder output


records. After MPCA approval of the next year’s performance test results, the Permittee will calculate a new emission factor and begin using that factor in the 12-month rolling sum calculations. The MPCA has a reasonable assurance that the facility can comply with a 3 lb/yr limit. Using the data from the 9 performance test runs that the facility has conducted since it began operating in 2009, every possible unique combination of six runs, when converted to an emissions factor, and multiplied by the facility’s production limit, shows that the Permittee can achieve compliance.

Table 8. Mercury Emissions Stack Test Results by Testing Date

Stack Test Results (lb/hr)

Date: 12/2009 Dates: 06/22/2010-06/23/2010

Date: 06/29/2011

0.00047 < 0.00021 0.00046

0.0003 < 0.00022 0.00028

.00236 < 0.00022 0.00027 < indicates non-detect *Shaded cells are the 6 highest test runs, converted to a lb/yr based on maximum operating potential yields an emission rate of 2.6 lbs/yr. It is expected that mercury switches in recycled automobiles and appliances will continue to decrease. Several national mercury reduction programs have been implemented since the original air permit was issued in 1998. Mercury switches have been eliminated in automobiles since model year 2003. In 2006, the US EPA instituted the National Vehicle Mercury Switch recovery Program (NVMSRP) which encourages removal of mercury switches in automobiles through 2017. Northern Metals is a participant in NVMSRP. Based on this projected decrease in switches in the feedstock, it is reasonable to allow the Permittee to conduct performance tests no less than once every three years after they have demonstrated compliance with the mercury limit for three consecutive years. This approach is consistent with how test frequencies are established for units with variable feedstock through federal regulations (e.g. NSPS for waste combustors). 3.6 Metal HAP Limits This permit action also modifies metal HAP emissions limits. These limits were modified in two ways:


1) The new values of the limits represents a more defendable calculation method that represents the worst-case scenario at the facility and takes into account new emissions data from the facility’s performance tests (see discussion under “Section 3.7 Calculations of Potential to Emit: Metal HAPs with Permit Limits).

2) Similar to the mercury limits, the metal HAP limits are converted from a lb/hr to a lb/yr (or ton/yr) format based on the limited hours of operation (3,778 hr/yr). As with the mercury limit, these are more appropriate forms of the limits because

a. Many of the pollutants do not have acute risk values. For those pollutants that do, the hourly risk estimates, based on hourly PTE, are below all risk driver levels, so short term limits are not needed.

b. An annual limit is enforceable on an ongoing basis. Demonstration of compliance with the annual limits is incorporated into this permit through daily and monthly monitoring of the shredder output and operation of the control equipment.

3.7 Calculations of Potential to Emit Attachment 1 to this TSD contains detailed spreadsheets and supporting information prepared by the MPCA and the Permittee. Theses spreadsheets document the calculations and assumptions used in determining the PTE for the facility. PM, PM10, and PM2.5 Stack Emissions The limited and controlled PTE of EU 001 and EU 002 is expressed as the permit limit on PM/PM10/PM2.5 at the stack vent level. There are no published emission factors for particulate emissions from hammermill metal shredders. To calculate the uncontrolled filterable particulate emission rate from EU 001, the hammermill shredder was assigned a mass loading of 5.0 grains per cubic foot and an air displacement of 47,000 ft3/min was assumed (5.0 gr/dscf represents the industry standard estimate of grain loading produced by a hammermill shredder multiplied by a safety factor). The dust loading rate represents filterable particulate matter emissions only. The stack test performed on December 22, 2009, measured an actual air flow rate of 94,000 acfm from the combined stack SV001. The air flow rate is produced by two fans of equal size. One fan is for the exhaust stream from the shredder, and the other fan is for the exhaust stream for the cascade cleaning system. The air flow rate for the shredder is estimated to be 47,000 acfm for this calculation. Uncontrolled filterable PM10 is assumed to be 5% of the total uncontrolled particulate matter emission rate based on particle size distributions for a shredder used in the 1995 EAW. Uncontrolled filterable PM2.5 is assumed to be the same as uncontrolled filterable PM10.


To calculate the pound per hour uncontrolled filterable particulate PTE from EU 002, the cascade cleaning system, a conservative waste loading rate to the cascade cleaning system determined from operating data, and a shredder output of 267 tons/hr (daily output limit divided by 9 hr/day weekend/holiday hours of operation limit) was used. To determine the ton per year uncontrolled, filterable particulate PTE, the same approach was used, but with a shredder output of 377,800 tons/yr. The uncontrolled, filterable PTE also takes into account the control equipment rule efficiencies for a high efficiency cyclone because, for the cascade cleaning system, the cyclone is considered inherent process equipment. Controlled, filterable PTE for both EU 001 and EU 002 were calculated assuming theoretical control efficiencies for control equipment used in series and control equipment efficiencies based on the control equipment rule. It is important to note that the PTE calculations described above are only used for the purposes of determining whether or not the facility is a “true minor” or “synthetic minor” source with respect to Part 70 and PSD regulations. The calculations do not reflect permit limits or actual emissions. Condensable particulate matter (gases or vapors that condense to form particulate matter after discharge to the atmosphere) is difficult to quantify from this operation and is not captured in this mass-balance approach for calculating PTE for EU 001 and EU 002. Condensable particulate is represented in the controlled and limited PTE for SV 001. Although SV 001 PTE should by calculated by the combining the PTE of EU 001 and EU 002, this approach would only yield filterable particulate PTE. For the purposes of representing both filterable and condensable particulate emissions in the PTE, the lb/hr limit on PM/PM10/PM2.5 (which takes into account condensable particulate) is converted to an annual emission rate based on the operating limit of 3,778 hrs/yr. The lb/hr limit on PM/PM10/PM2.5 is greater than the combined controlled and limited hourly PTE from EU 001 and EU 002. This is because the limit takes into account the presence of condensable particulate matter; the mass balance approach to calculated PTE from EU 001 and EU 002 only takes into account filterable particulate matter. For reference, Table 9 below shows that the tested filterable particulate matter only makes up about 25% of the total particulate matter.

Table 9. Comparison of Emission Rates of Filterable and Condensible

Particulate Matter Based on Results of December 22, 2009 Stack Testing

Type of Particulate Matter Measured Particulate Emission Rate (lb/hr)

Dry Catch Only (Filterable) 0.34


Dry Catch + Organic Condesibles 0.87

Dry Catch + Organic Condesibles + Aqueous Phase Condensibles

1.32

PM, PM10, and PM2.5 Fugitive Emissions Fugitive PM/PM10/PM2.5 potential emissions were calculated using AP-42 equations for paved roads and aggregate handling and storage piles. Data for raw material moisture content and silt loading was not available for this type of facility, so conservative values were used based on data from iron and steel production (for material moisture content) and ethanol facilities (for silt loading). Metal HAPs Emissions (HAPs without Permit Limits) The metal HAPs that could be emitted from the shredding process, but do not have permit emission limits are: antimony, cobalt, and selenium. Permit emission limits for these pollutants are not needed because risk estimates based on the PTE of these pollutants is below risk guidelines. The limited, controlled PTE for these pollutants is calculated using a “composite MSDS” sheet that was prepared for the 1995 EAW based on the major commodities handled by scrap recyclers (see Attachment 1 for a compilation of this data). The constituents of the scrap were identified by review of analytical data gathered through research on wastes from scrap materials, MSDSs from the manufacturers of the original materials, and process and industrial hygiene references. Where a material content range was found for a given pollutant, the highest number in the range was used in the assessment. To determine worst case emissions of antimony and cobalt, it was assumed that 100% of the feedstock consisted of the scrap metal with the highest composition of each of the pollutants (e.g. the highest percentage of antimony is found in Aluminum, at 1%, and the highest percentage of cobalt is found in stainless steel, at 12%). The conservative scenario in which 100% of the metal feedstock would consist of either of these scrap metals or either of the other two scrap metals with relatively high percentages of HAP metals (brass and copper) is theoretical only for the purposes of determining that the risk from these feedstocks is below risk guidelines. If the Permittee had a large portion of any of these metals by themselves, it would be more economical to sell off the homogeneous scrap rather than send it through the shredder. The worst case shredder output was then multiplied by the product of the particulate matter permit limit (4.2 lb/hr) and a conservative estimate of the portion particulate emissions that are


metallic (the metallic portion is calculated from stack test data, with a safety factor of 2 applied). By multiplying by the permit limit, rather than the tested rate of 1.32 lb/hr, the calculations take into account the possibility of a higher hourly emission rate based on shredding more than 100 tons/hr. Selenium is not expected to constitute more than incidental amounts in any of the scrap metals analyzed, and therefore the PTE of this compound could not be calculated according to the same methods as antimony and cobalt. Instead, the highest stack test run was multiplied by a factor of 3.2. The scaling factor represents the ratio of the proposed particulate emission rate (4.2 lb/hr) to the actual stack test results (1.32 lb/hr). Uncontrolled PTE for these pollutants was back calculated from the controlled, limited PTE using pollution control efficiency.

Metal HAPs Emissions (HAPs with Permit Limits)

The permit contains limits for arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, hexavalent chromium, lead, manganese, mercury, nickel. With the exception of hexavalent chromium and mercury, the controlled, unlimited PTE of these metals were calculated in the same manner as antimony and cobalt, as described above, but using the respective worst-case percent compositions for each pollutant. The limited and controlled PTE of all of these metal HAPs, however, is based on the permit limits. Hexavalent Chromium was calculated from chromium PTE. The chromium PTE was calculated according to the same material balance-based method. Hexavalent and total chromium were both measured in the stack test analyses. The ratio of hexavalent chromium to total chromium of 3.21% was applied to the total chromium PTE to determine the hexavalent chromium PTE. The limits for metals in the original permit were determined by multiplying the original particulate limit (0.43 lb/hr) by their assumed respective weighted average composition percentages from the composite MSDS. With this permit action, the approach was altered to take into account data obtained from performance testing that was not available at the time of the original risk assessment. The performance tests from the facility shows that only a small percentage of the particulate emissions were metallic particulate emissions. The new limits limit, also more accurately represents the possible maximum percentage of a metal HAP in given metal feedstock because rather than using the weighted average composition percentages, the calculations use the highest percentage in any of the scrap metals. Uncontrolled PTE for these pollutants was back calculated from the controlled, limited PTE using pollution control efficiency. PCB and Dioxin/Furan Emissions


Limited and controlled PTE of PCBs and Dioxin/Furans were calculated based on stack test results. However, not all PCBs and Dioxin/Furans were detected during the performance test. To produce a calculation of PCB and Dioxin/Furan for determining possible health effects, MPCA staff used the average instrument detection limit for the pollutants that were not detected. The performance test results were used to calculate the combined TCDD toxic equivalents of PCBs and Dioxins/Furans by summing the TCDD toxic equivalents calculated for PCBs and Dioxins/Furans. The TCDD toxic equivalents were calculated conservatively using the highest stack test run for each compound, or if the compound was not detected, the average instrument detection limit was used. The combined TCDD toxic equivalents was multiplied by a scaling factor of 1.6 . The scaling factor represents the potential 60 percent increase in processed shredder residue from shredding of processed automobiles. The Minneapolis Shredder residue is likely to contain plastics. The formation of dioxin/furan is a complex process known to occur when chlorine containing materials, like plastics, paper, etc. are heated and catalyzed by metals. This potential increase in non-metallic residue, due to lifting the auto hulk restriction and its possible affect on Dioxin/Furan/PCB emissions is addressed by applying this scaling factor to the performance test results. It should be noted that the facility tests the shredder fluff quarterly for the presence of PCBs and Dioxin/Furans and has not yet detected the pollutants in its testing to date. Additionally, the facility has stated that they do not believe that the conditions in the shredder are appropriate for the formation of PCBs and Dioxin/Furans. Insignificant Activity Emissions The unlimited, uncontrolled PTE from insignificant activities is calculated based on AP-42 emission factors for the fuel(s) used and the maximum rated capacity of the combustion equipment. The boiler, hot water heaters, evaporators, space heaters and rooftop heaters burn natural gas, so emission factors for natural gas combustion from AP-42, 5th Ed., Tables 1.4-1 – 1.4-4 were used. The evaporators evaporate the wastewater from the two venturi scrubbers. The evaporators include oil/water separators to remove any oily waste prior to evaporation. Solid products settle out and are collected in the bottom of the evaporators, removed, tested, and sent to an appropriate offsite treatment or disposal facility. The majority of the HAPs generated by the shredding process are particulate metal HAPs. These HAPs are not water soluble, and would settle out if they were in water. Thus, it is not expected that any metal HAP would be emitted from the evaporators other than that produced from the combustion of natural gas.


Additionally, the type of mercury most likely to be present in the mercury exhaust is elemental mercury (as mercury switches are manufactured using elemental mercury). Elemental mercury is also not soluble in water and, therefore, is unlikely to be emitted when the scrubber water is evaporated; therefore, it is appropriate to evaluate only combustion pollutants when quantifying the emissions from the two evaporators. For the oil-fired heaters, PTE was calculated using worst case emissions factors for space heaters combusting waste oil from AP-42, 5th Ed., Tables 1.11-1 – 1.11-5. To calculate GHG emissions from the oil-fired heaters, emission factors for methane and nitrous oxide from fuel oil combustion were used because there are no emissions factors for these two compounds in AP-42 for waste oil combustion. It should be noted that the potential emissions from the insignificant activities did not affect the risk characterization of the facility. The MPCA confirmed that the risks from PTE from insignificant activities were below the risk driver levels even when considered together. 3.8 Periodic Monitoring

In accordance with the Clean Air Act, it is the responsibility of the owner or operator of a facility to have sufficient knowledge of the facility to certify that the facility is in compliance with all applicable requirements.

In evaluating the monitoring included in the permit, the MPCA considers the following:

• The likelihood of violating the applicable requirements; • Whether add-on controls are necessary to meet the emission limits; • The variability of emissions over time; • The type of monitoring, process, maintenance, or control equipment data already

available for the emission unit; • The technical and economic feasibility of possible periodic monitoring methods; and • The kind of monitoring found on similar units elsewhere.

The table below summarizes the periodic monitoring requirements for those emission units for which the monitoring required by the applicable requirement is nonexistent or inadequate

Table 10. Periodic Monitoring

Level* Requirement (rule basis)

Additional Monitoring

Discussion




Discussion

EU 001 (the shredder)

Shredder output ≤ 377,800 tons/yr

Shredder Output ≤ 2,400 tons/day

(Minn. R. ch. 4410, findings of 1995 and 2011 EAWs)

Daily records, monthly records, 12-mo. rolling sum calculations

On a daily basis, the Permittee will record the shredder output. By the 15th of the month, the Permittee will calculate the 12-month rolling sum shredder output. The daily limit on shredder output provides a reasonable assurance that short term emissions will not exceed the emission rates used in the NAAQS modeling.

SV 001

(combined shredder and cascade cleaning system stack)

PM ≤ 4.2 lb/hr

PM10 ≤ 4.2 lb/hr

PM2.5 ≤ 4.2 lb/hr

Hg ≤ 3.0 lb/yr

Pb ≤ 15.1 lb/yr

As ≤ 2.42 lb/yr

Be ≤ 7.56 lb/yr

Cd ≤ 4.91 lb/yr

Cr6+ ≤ 1.40 lb/yr

Ni ≤ 60.4 lb/yr

Mn ≤ 33.2 lb/yr

(Minn. R. ch. 4410, findings of 2011 EAW)

PM ≤ 0.30 gr/DSCF

Opacity ≤ 20%

(Minn. R. 7011.0715)

1) Performance testing for PM, PM10, PM2.5, Hg, & Opacity;

2) Feedstock control plan monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting;

3) Shredder output daily records, 12-mo. rolling sum calculations; and

4) Control equip. monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting;

1) The Permittee shall conduct performance testing on a periodic basis to ensure compliance with the PM, PM10, PM2.5, Hg, & Opacity limits.

2) On a daily basis the Permittee will follow the requirements of the feedstock control plan to ensure that unwanted materials do not enter the feedstock.

3) On a daily basis the Permittee will record the shredder output, and on a monthly basis calculates the 12-month rolling sum material shredder output to ensure that the facility operates beneath the shredder output limits. Metals limits are set assuming maximum shredder output of a single metal that contains the greatest percentage of the given pollutant. Although neither of this scenarios are likely, by monitoring the shredder output there is a reasonable assurance of compliance with the metals limits. 4) The control equipment controls all of the pollutants for which the facility has limits. Although the limits were not calculated assuming a specific control efficiency, the proper operation of the control equipment ensures that the process is well-controlled and that there is a reasonable assurance that the permit limits will be met.




Discussion

CE 001 (high efficiency cyclone)

1.0 ≤ ΔP ≤ 11.0 in. H2O Control efficiencies: PM ≥ 90% PM10 ≥ 78% PM2.5 ≥ 78% HAP-metal ≥ 78%

Pressure drop monitoring, Recordkeeping, O & M, inspections, corrective actions

Monitoring based on the Minnesota Performance Standard for Control Equipment is adequate to have a reasonable assurance of compliance.

CE 004 & CE 005 (venturi scrubbers)

4.0 ≤ ΔP ≤ 9.0 in. H2O 7.0 ≤ liq. Level ≤ 7.5 gauge Control efficiencies: PM ≥ 90% PM10 ≥ 78% PM2.5 ≥ 78%

HAP-metal ≥ 78%

Pressure drop monitoring, scrubber liquid level monitoring, Recordkeeping, O & M, inspections, corrective actions


CE 006 & CE 007 (fabric filters)

1.8 ≤ ΔP ≤ 8.0 in. H2O Control efficiencies: PM ≥ 90% PM10 ≥ 78% PM2.5 ≥ 78%

HAP-metal ≥ 78%

Pressure drop monitoring, Recordkeeping, O & M, inspections, corrective actions


FS 002 (paved roads)

Preventing particulate matter from becoming airborne (Minn. R. 7011.0150)

Recordkeeping, corrective actions

The Permittee shall maintain daily records of road cleaning, or, if the roads are not cleaned, the Permittee shall maintain a record of the reason the road could not be cleaned (e.g. ice covered or > 0.1 inch/day of rain).




Discussion

FS 001 & 003

Preventing particulate matter from becoming airborne (Minn. R. 7011.0150)

Fugitive dust control plan

Monitoring described in an MPCA-approved fugitive dust control plan is considered adequate to provide a reasonable assurance of compliance. A fugitive dust control plan prepared by the Permittee, and approved by the MPCA is a common way to incorporate fugitive control measures, monitoring, and recordkeeping into a permit. This approach is consistent with how the MPCA addresses fugitive control at many other facilities, including facilities with much greater fugitive emissions.

*Where the requirement appears in the permit (e.g., EU, SV, GP, etc.).

3.9 Insignificant Activities

Northern Metals has several operations which are classified as insignificant activities. These are listed in Appendix A to the permit.

The permit is required to include periodic monitoring for all emissions units, including insignificant activities, per EPA guidance. The insignificant activities at this facility are only subject to general applicable requirements. Using the criteria outlined earlier in this TSD, the following table documents why no additional periodic monitoring is necessary for the current insignificant activities. See Attachment 1 of this TSD for PTE information for the insignificant activities.

Table 11. Insignificant Activities

Insignificant Activity

General Applicable Emission limit

Discussion

Brazing, soldering or welding equipment

(Minn. R. 7007.1300 subp. 3(H)(3))

PM, variable depending on airflow Opacity < 20%

(Minn. R. 7011.0710/715)

Northern Metals has welding equipment used for maintenance.

For these units, based on EPA published emissions factors, it is highly unlikely that they could violate the applicable requirement. In addition, these units are typically operated and vented inside a building, so testing for PM or opacity is not feasible.


Insignificant Activity

General Applicable Emission limit

Discussion

Individual units with PTE less than 1) 2000 lb/yr PM, PM10, PM2.5, NOx, VOC, and ozone and 2) 4000 lb/yr CO, and 3) 1000 tpy of CO2e

(Minn. R. 7007.1300 subp. 3(I))

PM, variable depending on airflow Opacity < 20% (with exceptions)

(Minn. R. 7011.0715 and Minn. R. 7011.610)

or

SO2 < 0.5 lb/MMBtu Opacity < 20%

(Minn. R. 7011.2300)

Northern Metals has: • 384,000 Btu/hr natural gas fired boiler • Five 64,000 Btu/hr natural gas fired

rooftop heaters • Four 173,250Btu/hr natural gas fired

space heaters • 750,000 Btu/hr and 395,000 Btu/hr

evaporators • CO2 gas used in welding, 176 CF tanks

containing 75% argon/ 25% CO2

For the combustion units, based on the fuels used and EPA published emissions factors, it is highly unlikely that they could violate the applicable requirement. In addition, all of these units are operated and vented inside a building, so testing for PM or opacity is not feasible. The CO2 gas from the welding is not expected to generate particulate matter.

Fugitive Emissions from unpaved roads and parking lots

(Minn. R. 7007.1300, subp. 3(J))

Requirement to take reasonable measures to prevent PM from becoming airborne (Minn. R. 7011.0150)

Nearly all surfaces are currently paved, but the facility has a small unpaved area behind the North Warehouse. The draft/proposed permit does contain a general requirement that this standard must be met. It is unlikely that any additional unpaved surfaces will be added in the future.

3.10 Permit Organization

In general, the permit meets the MPCA Delta Guidance for ordering and grouping of requirements. One area where this permit deviates slightly from Delta guidance is in the use of appendices. While appendices are fully enforceable parts of the permit, in general, any requirement that the MPCA thinks should be tracked (e.g., limits, submittals, etc.), should be in Table A or B. The main reason is that the appendices are word processing sections and are not part of the tracking system. Violation of the appendices can be enforced, but the computer system will not automatically generate the necessary enforcement notices or documents. Staff must generate these.

3.5 Comments Received

To be completed after public notice and EPA 45-day review period

Public Notice Period: <start date> - <end date> EPA 45-day Review Period: <start date> - <end date>


4. Permit Fee Assessment

Attachment 5 to this TSD contains the MPCA’s assessment of Application and Additional Points used to determine the permit application fee for this permit action as required by Minn. R. 7002.0019. The permit action includes a permit application for a major amendment received after the effective date of the rule (July 1, 2009). The permit action also includes an AERA, air dispersion modeling, and an EAW. Only the AERA is assessed additional points under Minn. R. 7002.0019 subp. 2. The EAW is not assessed additional points because it is a discretionary EAW, and the air dispersion analysis is not assessed additional points because it is part of an AERA, and the AERA additional points account for the air dispersion modeling review.

5. Conclusion

Based on the information provided by Northern Metals, the MPCA has reasonable assurance that the proposed operation of the emission facility, as described in the Air Emission Permit No. 05300480-003 and this TSD, will not cause or contribute to a violation of applicable federal regulations and Minnesota Rules.

Staff Members on Permit Team: Kelsey Suddard (permit writer/engineer) Brent Rohne (enforcement) Curt Stock (stack testing) Steve Gorg (peer review) Heather Magee-Hill (risk assessment) Melissa Sheffer (modeling) Bill Lynott (environmental review)

AQ File No. 2406; DQ <>, <> Attachments: 1. Calculation Spreadsheets

2. AERA Impact Statement 3. MPCA Risk Manager’s Form 4. CD-01 Forms 5. Fee Points Calculator

Attachment 1: Calculation Spreadsheets

Emis

sion

s Su

mm

ary

SV 0

01 P

erm

it A

ctio

n 00

3SV

001

Per

mit

Act

ion

002

PMPM

10PM

2.5

HA

PsPM

PM10

PM2.

5H

APs

lb/h

r4.

24.

24.

26.

44E-

020.

340.

34N

A2.

05E-

02un

cont

rolle

d tp

y2.

02E+

041.

57E+

031.

57E+

034.

15E+

022.

46E+

044.

61E+

02N

A1.

26E+

03co

ntro

lled

and

limite

d tp

y7.

937.

937.

930.

120.

810.

81N

A0.

04

Fugi

tive

Sour

ces

(pav

ed r

oads

)PM

PM10

PM2.

5lb

/hr

0.49

0.

10

0.02

unco

ntol

led

tpy

0.92

0.

18

0.05

cont

rolle

d an

d lim

ited

tpy

0.92

0.

18

0.05

Insi

gnifi

cant

Act

iviti

esPM

PM10

PM2.

5VO

CCO

NO

xSO

2CO

2elb

/hr

1.49

E-01

1.31

E-01

2.38

E-02

1.75

E-02

2.28

E-01

3.12

E-01

1.62

E-01

3.85

E+02

unco

ntro

lled

tpy

6.52

E-01

5.75

E-01

1.04

E-01

7.67

E-02

9.99

E-01

1.37

E+00

7.10

E-01

1.69

E+03

cont

rolle

d an

d lim

ited

tpy

6.52

E-01

5.75

E-01

1.04

E-01

7.67

E-02

9.99

E-01

1.37

E+00

7.10

E-01

1.69

E+03

Tota

l Fac

ility

(not

incl

udin

g in

sign

ifica

nt a

ctiv

ities

)PM

PM10

PM2.

5H

APs

cont

rolle

d an

d lim

ited

tpy

8.85

8.

12

7.98

0.

12

Filterable PM/PM10/PM2.5 Emissions CalculationsEU 001 Hammermill Shredder

Potential to Emit Calculation:The uncontrolled filterable emissions from the shredder are based on an estimated mass loading of 5.0 grainsper cubic foot and an air displacement of 47,000 cubic feet per minute. The dust loading rate is fromthe October 9, 1995 EAW for the facility. It is based on the industry standard estimate of the grainloading produced by a hammermill shredder of 0.2 gr/dscf with a a safety factor of 25 applied.The dust loading rate represents filterable particulate matter emissions only.

The stack test performed on December 22, 2009 measured an actual air flow rate of94,000 acfm from the combined stack SV001. The air flow rate is produced by two fansof equal size. One fan is for the exhaust stream from the shredder and the other fan is for the exhaust stream for the cascade cleaning system. The air flow rate for the shredder is estimated to be 47,000 acfm forthis calculation.

For filterable particulate matter only - the emission rate of PM10 is 5% of the total particulate matter emission rate (1995 EAW, Table 24.2).PM2.5 emissions are assumed to be equal to PM10 emissions.

Uncontrolled hourly emission rate:PM(filterable): 5.0 grains/cf x 47,000 cf/min x 60 min/hr x lb/7,000 grains = 2,014 lb/hr PM10/PM2.5 (filterable): 2,014 lb/hr x 0.05 = 100.71 lb/hr

( Note: the uncontrolled emission rate was 1,714 lb/hr in the 1995 EAW; however, the estimated air displacement prior to construction was only 40,000 cubic feet per minute.)

Uncontrolled, Hours of Operation-Limited tons/year:PM(filterable): 2,014 lb/hr x 3,778 hr/yr x ton/2,000 lb = 3,804 tons/yrPM10/PM2.5 (filterable): 100.71 lb/hr x 3,778 hr/yr x ton/2,000 lb = 190.24 tons/yrThe facility is limited to 3,778 hr/yr in their Air Emissions Permit.

Controlled emissions are combined with emissions from the cascade cleaning system in the combined stack SV001.

2009 Actual Emissions Calculations:Actual emissions are calculated from the actual tons of material shredded in 20092009 operating data represents a partial year because the shredder started operation in June 2009.

Uncontrolled 2009 emissions:PM(filterable): 1,137 tonsPM10/PM2.5 (filterable): 56.84 tons

Controlled emissions are combined with emissions from the cascade cleaning system in the combined stack SV001.

Filterable Uncontrolled PM/PM10/PM2.5 Emissions CalculationsEU 002 Cascade Cleaning System

Maximum ton/hr throughput*(2400 ton/day)/(9 hrs/day) 267 tons/hrManufacturer's metals output rating (rounded up)(377,800 tons/yr)/(3,778 hrs/yr) 100 tons/hr*Maximum shredder output is unknown due to the variability of materials shredded. The estimate of 267 tons/hr is used for applicability determinations only

The waste loading to the Cascade Cleaning System was based on estimated average percent of the shredder output that is waste that and maximum design capacity and manufacturer's rating(2) Waste loading estimate is conservative because part of the waste will be removed at the manual sortingstations and will not actually present a load to the pollution control system.

Potential to Emit Calculation:The uncontrolled PTE takes into account control equipment rule control efficiency high efficiency cyclones because the cyclone is considered inherent process equipment, 90% for total PM and 78% for PM10.The emission rate of filterable PM10 is 10% of the total particulate matter emission rate (Table 24.4, EAW).Filterable PM2.5 emissions are assumed to be equal to PM10 emissions.

Uncontrolled hourly emission rate (based on theoretical maximum capacity):69,020 lb/hr x (100-90)/100 = 6902 lb/hr of total PM emissions form the cyclone prior to control by the wet scrubber and fabric filter systemPM10 and PM2.5 emission = 690 lb/hr prior to control by the wet scrubberand fabric filter system

Uncontrolled hourly emssion rate (based on manufacturer's metals output rating (rounded up)):25,882 lb/hr x (100 - 90)/100 = 2588 lb/hr of total PM emissions form the cyclone prior to wet scrubber and fabric filter system.PM10 and PM2.5 emissions = 259 lb/hr prior to control by the wet scrubber and fabric filter system.

Uncontrolled, hours of operation-limited tons/year (based on nominal capacity):PM(filterable): 2,588 lb/hr x 3,778 hr/yr x ton/2000 lb = 4,889 ton/yrPM10/PM2.5 (filterable): 220 lb/hr x 3,778 hr/yr x ton/2000 lb = 489 ton/yrThe facility is limited to 3,778 hr/yr in their Air Emissions Permit.

Controlled emissions are combined with emissions from the shredder in the combined stack SV001.

2009 Actual Emissions Calculations:Actual emission are calculated from the actual ton of waste processed in 20092009 operating data represents a partial year because the separation equipment was started in July 2009.

Uncontrolled 2009 emissions:PM(filterable): 1,045 tonsPM10/PM2.5 (filterable): 105 tons

Controlled emissions are combined with emissions from the shredder in the combined stack SV001.

Emis

sion

s Ca

lcul

atio

nsCa

lcul

atio

ns fo

r EC

-01,

Gen

eral

Em

issi

ons

Calc

ulat

ion

Form

Ope

ratin

g ca

paci

ty =

100

tons

/hr

2009

Unc

ontr

olle

dM

axim

umA

ctua

lPo

llutio

nM

axim

umA

ctua

lLi

mite

dLi

mite

dEm

issi

onem

issi

onun

cont

rolle

dun

cont

rolle

dco

ntro

lco

ntro

lled

cont

rolle

dco

ntro

lled

cont

rolle

d

Sour

cePo

lluta

ntfa

ctor

rate

emis

sion

sem

issi

ons

effic

ienc

y(3)

emis

sion

sem

issi

ons(4

)em

issi

ons

emis

sion

slb

/ton

lb/h

rto

ns/y

rto

ns/y

r%

tons

/yr

tons

/yr

lb/h

rto

ns/y

rEU

001

PM (f

ilter

able

)20

.14

2,01

4.29

88

22.5

71,

137.

00

99.9

9%0.

530.

39PM

10 (f

ilter

able

)1.

01

100.

71

44

1.13

56.8

5

99.7

5%1.

090.

26PM

2.5

(filt

erab

le)

1.01

10

0.71

441.

1356

.85

99

.75%

1.09

0.26

EU00

2PM

(filt

erab

le)

25.8

5

6,

902.

00

1133

6.32

1,04

5.00

99

.94%

6.80

0.36

PM10

(filt

erab

le)

0.54

69

0.20

1133

.63

104.

50

98

.88%

12.7

00.

48PM

2.5

(filt

erab

le)

0.54

69

0.20

1133

.63

104.

50

98

.88%

12.7

00.

48

SV00

1(1

)PM

(2)

45.9

9

8,

916.

29

2015

8.89

2,18

2.00

99

.99%

18.4

00.

754.

207.

93

PM10

(2)

1.55

79

0.91

1574

.76

161.

35

99

.83%

18.4

00.

754.

207.

93PM

2.5

(2)

1.55

79

0.91

1574

.76

161.

35

99

.83%

18.4

00.

754.

207.

93

(1) S

V001

is th

e co

mbi

ned

stac

k fo

r EU

001

and

EU00

2.

The

faci

lity

is li

mite

d to

3,7

78 h

ours

per

yea

r in

its

Air

Em

issi

on P

erm

it.

(2) T

he e

mis

sion

fact

or, u

ncon

tolle

d em

issi

on r

ate,

max

imum

unc

ontr

olle

d em

issi

ons,

and

act

ual u

ncon

trol

led

emis

sion

s ar

e th

e su

mof

EU

001

and

EU00

2 em

issi

on fa

ctor

s an

d em

issi

on r

ates

and

thus

rep

rese

nt fi

ltera

ble

part

icul

ate

mat

ter

only

.Th

e m

axim

um c

ontr

olle

d, li

mite

d em

issi

on r

ate

is c

alcu

late

d fr

om th

e lim

ited

emis

sion

rat

e of

4.2

lb/h

r ba

sed

on th

e D

ecem

ber

22, 2

009

initi

al p

erfo

rman

ce te

st, N

AA

QS

mod

elin

g an

alys

is a

nd th

e A

ERA

rep

ort;

ther

efor

e,th

e m

axim

um c

ontr

olle

d em

issi

on r

epre

sent

s to

tal p

artic

ulat

e m

atte

r em

issi

ons

incl

udin

g fil

tera

ble,

org

anic

con

dens

able

and

aqu

eous

pha

se c

onde

nsab

le p

ortio

ns.

(3) T

he p

ollu

tion

cont

rol e

ffic

ienc

ies

for

EU00

1 an

d EU

002

for

the

two

cycl

ones

, tw

o w

et s

crub

bers

and

two

bagh

ouse

s ar

e ba

sed

on th

e co

ntro

l equ

ipm

ent r

ule

cont

rol e

ffic

ienc

ies

in M

inn.

Rul

es 7

011.

0070

, PC

E =

[1-(

1-0.

90) x

(1-0

.94)

x (1

-0.9

9)] x

100

% =

99.

99%

The

over

all p

ollu

tion

cont

rol e

ffic

ienc

y fo

r SV

001

was

cal

cula

ted

usin

g th

e te

sted

PM

em

issi

on r

ate

of 1

.32

lb/h

r an

d th

e m

axim

um e

stim

ated

unc

ontr

olle

d em

issi

on r

ate

of 4

214.

29 lb

/hr.

PCE

= (1

- 1.

32 lb

/hr

/ 42

14.2

9 lb

/hr)

x 1

00%

= 9

9.97

% fo

r To

tal P

MPC

E =

(1 -

1.32

lb/h

r /

320.

71 lb

/hr)

x 1

00%

= 9

9.59

% fo

r PM

10 a

nd P

M2.

5

(4) T

he a

ctua

l par

ticul

ate

mat

ter

emis

sion

rat

e is

1.3

2 lb

/hr

per

100

tons

shr

edde

d de

term

ined

from

the

Dec

embe

r 22

, 200

9 st

ack

test

.Es

timat

ed a

ctua

l em

issi

ons

from

EU

001

and

EU00

2 ar

e ca

lcul

ated

usi

ng th

e pr

opor

tion

of th

e un

cont

rolle

d ac

tual

em

issi

ons

from

eac

h em

issi

on u

nit.

Act

ual E

U00

1 =

0.75

ton/

yr (S

V001

) x 1

137

ton/

yr (E

U00

1 un

c.) /

[113

7 to

n/yr

(EU

001

unc.

) + 1

045

ton/

yr (E

U00

2 un

c.)]

Met

al H

AP

PTE

Pote

ntia

l Em

issi

ons

Curr

ent

Prop

osed

Pr

opos

ed

Prop

osed

M

axim

umM

axim

umM

axim

um

Max

imum

Ave

rage

Air

Em

issi

onA

ir E

mis

sion

Air

Em

issi

on

Air

Em

issi

on

Unl

imite

d,Li

mite

d M

axim

umM

axim

umCo

ntro

lled

Lim

ited

and

HA

P N

ame

Stac

k Te

stPe

rmit

Perm

it Pe

rmit

Perm

itCo

ntro

lled

Cont

rolle

d Po

llutio

n un

cont

rolle

dun

cont

rolle

dH

AP

Emis

sion

Co

ntro

lled

Resu

ltsLi

mit

Lim

it Li

mit

Lim

itH

AP

Emis

sion

HA

P Em

issi

onCo

ntro

lH

AP

Emis

sion

HA

P Em

issi

onRa

te (2

)H

AP

Emis

sion

Sour

ce(C

ontr

olle

d)(C

ontr

olle

d)(C

ontr

olle

d)(C

ontr

olle

d)(C

ontr

olle

d)Ra

teRa

teEf

ficie

ncy

(1)

Rate

Rate

tons

/yr

Rate

lb/h

rlb

/hr

lb/h

rlb

/yr

tpy

lb/h

rlb

/hr

lb/h

rto

ns/y

rto

ns/y

rSV

001

Ant

imon

y co

mpo

unds

0.00

0031

NA

NA

NA

NA

2.40

E-03

2.40

E-03

99.7

5%0.

974.

274.

54E-

034.

54E-

03A

rsen

ic c

ompo

unds

0.00

0026

0.00

052

6.40

E-04

2.42

1.21

E-03

2.40

E-03

6.40

E-04

99.7

5%0.

974.

274.

54E-

031.

21E-

03Be

rylli

um c

ompo

unds

<0.0

0000

40.

0002

22.

00E-

037.

563.

78E-

037.

20E-

032.

00E-

0399

.75%

2.92

12.8

01.

36E-

023.

78E-

03Ca

dmiu

m c

ompo

unds

0.00

011

0.00

034

1.30

E-03

4.91

2.46

E-03

7.20

E-03

1.30

E-03

99.7

5%2.

9212

.80

1.36

E-02

2.46

E-03

Hex

aval

ent C

hrom

ium

0.00

035*

0.00

031

3.70

E-04

1.40

6.99

E-04

6.48

E-02

3.70

E-04

99.7

5%26

.31

115.

241.

22E-

016.

99E-

04Co

balt

com

poun

ds<0

.000

014

NA

NA

NA

NA

2.88

E-02

2.88

E-02

99.7

5%11

.69

51.2

25.

44E-

025.

44E-

02Le

ad c

ompo

unds

0.00

042

0.00

093

4.00

E-03

15.1

17.

56E-

032.

16E-

024.

00E-

0399

.75%

8.77

38.4

14.

08E-

027.

56E-

03M

anga

nese

com

poun

ds0.

0006

90.

0088

8.80

E-03

33.2

51.

66E-

021.

20E-

028.

80E-

0399

.75%

4.87

21.3

42.

27E-

021.

66E-

02M

ercu

ry c

ompo

unds

0.00

053

0.00

079

7.90

E-04

2.98

1.49

E-03

99.7

5%0.

321.

401.

49E-

031.

49E-

03N

icke

l com

poun

ds0.

0002

50.

0041

1.60

E-02

60.4

53.

02E-

028.

64E-

021.

60E-

0299

.75%

35.0

815

3.65

1.63

E-01

3.02

E-02

PCBs

(133

6363

)TE

F A

djus

ted,

Tot

al T

EQ1.

47E-

09N

AN

AN

AN

Aex

pres

sed

as

TCD

D E

quiv

expr

esse

d as

TC

DD

Equ

ivSe

leni

um c

ompo

unds

<0.0

0001

4N

AN

AN

AN

A9.

10E-

059.

10E-

0599

.75%

0.04

0.16

3.99

E-04

1.72

E-04

2,3,

7,8-

Tetr

achl

orod

iben

zo-p

-di

oxin

(174

6016

)TE

F A

djus

ted,

Tot

al T

EQ2.

10E-

09N

AN

AN

AN

Aex

pres

sed

as

TCD

D E

quiv

expr

esse

d as

TC

DD

Equ

ivTC

DD

Equ

ival

ents

: PCB

's,

Dio

xin/

fura

ns3.

57E-

09N

AN

AN

AN

A8.

68E-

098.

68E-

09To

tal H

APs

6.44

E-02

415.

400.

440.

12

(1)

pollu

tion

cont

rol e

ffic

ienc

y ba

sed

on li

sted

PM

10 c

ontr

ol e

ffic

ienc

y in

Min

n. R

. 701

1.00

70 fo

r a

high

eff

icie

ncy

cycl

one,

ven

turi

scr

ubbe

r, a

nd fa

bric

filte

r in

ser

ies.

[1-(

(1-0

.78)

*(1-

0.84

)*(1

-0.9

3))]

*100

=

99.7

5%

(2) t

akes

into

acc

ount

the

3778

hrs

/yr

limit,

but

not

the

indi

vidu

al H

AP

limits

* St

ack

test

res

ult f

or to

tal c

hrom

ium

Cont

rolle

d, L

imit

ed M

etal

HA

P PT

E

Stoc

k Co

mpo

siti

on (%

) Bas

ed o

n M

SDS

Dat

a (h

igh

end

of r

ange

s)A

lum

inum

Bras

sCo

pper

Stai

nles

s St

eel

Alu

min

um70

82

5A

ntim

ony

11

00

Ars

enic

01

10.

1Be

rylli

um1

03

0Bo

ron

00

00.

1Ca

dmiu

m3

02

0Ca

lciu

m0

00

0.1

Carb

on0

00

3Ch

rom

ium

10

227

Coba

lt3

03

12Co

pper

1149

945

Iron

24

345

Lead

98

20.

1Li

thiu

m4

00

0M

agne

sium

1113

00

Man

gane

se2

00

5M

olyb

denu

m0

00

10N

icke

l3

43

36N

iobi

um0

00

0.1

Silic

on23

60

3Si

lver

11

20

Tin

207

20.

1Ti

tani

um0

00

0.1

Tung

sten

00

020

Vana

dium

10

05

Vana

dium

10

05

Zinc

951

00

Zirc

oniu

m0

00

0.1

Tota

l17

515

311

917

6.8

Esti

mat

ed C

ompo

siti

on b

ased

on

MSD

S D

ata

com

bine

d w

ith

Stac

k te

st R

esul

tsCh

rom

ium

(VI)

0.03

20

0.06

40.

866

Stac

k te

st r

esul

ts (1

2/20

09):

Chro

miu

m (t

otal

)0.

0003

5lb

/hr

Chro

miu

m (V

I)<

1.11

E-05

lb/h

rhi

gh e

nd e

stim

ate

of %

Cr(

VI)

3.21

%Pr

opos

ed P

M10

em

issi

on r

ate

4.2

lb/h

rEs

t. m

etal

em

issi

ons

base

d on

sta

ck te

st0.

2161

lb/h

rA

ssum

ed m

etal

thro

ughp

ut10

0.00

%fr

om v

arie

ty fe

edst

ock

10.0

0%in

clud

es a

100

% s

afet

y fa

ctor

- 5%

is c

ited

as n

on-m

etal

lic c

onte

nt in

199

5 A

ERA

0.24

0lb

/hr

est.

% o

f non

-met

allic

thro

ughp

ut a

t tim

e of

sta

ck te

stes

t. m

etal

lic e

mis

sion

s fo

r 10

0% m

etal

lic

thro

ughp

ut

page

6

Cont

rolle

d, L

imit

ed M

etal

HA

P PT

E

Max

imum

est

imat

ed e

mis

sion

s fo

r 10

0% n

on-f

erro

us fe

edst

ock,

lb/h

rM

ax. E

mis

sion

Rat

eA

lum

inum

Bras

sCo

pper

Stai

nles

s St

eel

lb/h

rA

lum

inum

0.16

8070

870.

0192

0809

90.

0048

0202

50.

0120

0506

20.

1680

7A

ntim

ony

0.00

2401

012

0.00

2401

012

00

0.00

240

Ars

enic

00.

0024

0101

20.

0024

0101

20.

0002

4010

10.

0024

0Be

rylli

um0.

0024

0101

20

0.00

7203

037

00.

0072

0Bo

ron

00

00.

0002

4010

10.

0002

4Ca

dmiu

m0.

0072

0303

70

0.00

4802

025

00.

0072

0Ca

lciu

m0

00

0.00

0240

101

0.00

024

Carb

on0

00

0.00

7203

037

0.00

720

Chro

miu

m0.

0024

0101

20

0.00

4802

025

0.06

4827

336

0.06

483

Coba

lt0.

0072

0303

70

0.00

7203

037

0.02

8812

149

0.02

881

Copp

er0.

0264

1113

70.

1176

4960

90.

2256

9516

90.

0120

0506

20.

2257

0Ir

on0.

0048

0202

50.

0096

0405

0.00

7203

037

0.10

8045

559

0.10

805

Lead

0.02

1609

112

0.01

9208

099

0.00

4802

025

0.00

0240

101

0.02

161

Lith

ium

0.00

9604

050

00

0.00

960

Mag

nesi

um0.

0264

1113

70.

0312

1316

20

00.

0312

1M

anga

nese

0.00

4802

025

00

0.01

2005

062

0.01

201

Mol

ybde

num

00

00.

0240

1012

40.

0240

1N

icke

l0.

0072

0303

70.

0096

0405

0.00

7203

037

0.08

6436

448

0.08

644

Nio

bium

00

00.

0002

4010

10.

0002

4Si

licon

0.05

5223

286

0.01

4406

075

00.

0072

0303

70.

0552

2Si

lver

0.00

2401

012

0.00

2401

012

0.00

4802

025

00.

0048

0Ti

n0.

0480

2024

90.

0168

0708

70.

0048

0202

50.

0002

4010

10.

0480

2Ti

tani

um0

00

0.00

0240

101

0.00

024

Tung

sten

00

00.

0480

2024

90.

0480

2Va

nadi

um0.

0024

0101

20

00.

0120

0506

20.

0120

1Z i

nc0.

0216

0911

20.

1224

5163

40

00.

1224

5Zi

nc0.

0216

0911

20.

1224

5163

40

00.

1224

5Zi

rcon

ium

00

00.

0002

4010

10.

0002

4

page

7

Nor

ther

n M

etal

sH

ow M

etal

HA

P Pe

rmit

Lim

its

wer

e Se

t

Stoc

k Co

mpo

siti

on (%

) Bas

ed o

n M

SDS

Dat

a (h

igh

end

of r

ange

s)A

lum

inum

Bras

sCo

pper

Stai

nles

s St

eel

Alu

min

um70

82

5A

ntim

ony

11

00

Ars

enic

01

10.

1Be

rylli

um1

03

0Bo

ron

00

00.

1Ca

dmiu

m3

02

0Ca

lciu

m0

00

0.1

Carb

on0

00

3Ch

rom

ium

10

227

Coba

lt3

03

12Co

pper

1149

945

Iron

24

345

Lead

98

20.

1Li

thiu

m4

00

0M

agne

sium

1113

00

Man

gane

se2

00

5M

olyb

denu

m0

00

10N

icke

l3

43

36N

iobi

um0

00

0.1

Silic

on23

60

3Si

lver

11

20

Tin

207

20.

1Ti

tani

um0

00

0.1

Tung

sten

00

020

Tung

sten

00

020

Vana

dium

10

05

Zinc

951

00

Zirc

oniu

m0

00

0.1

Tota

l17

515

311

917

6.8

Esti

mat

ed C

ompo

siti

on b

ased

on

MSD

S D

ata

com

bine

d w

ith

Stac

k te

st R

esul

tsCh

rom

ium

(VI)

0.03

20

0.06

40.

866

Stac

k te

st r

esul

ts (1

2/20

09):

Chro

miu

m (t

otal

)0.

0003

5lb

/hr

Chro

miu

m (V

I)<

1.11

E-05

lb/h

rhi

gh e

nd e

stim

ate

of %

Cr(

VI)

3.21

%Pr

opos

ed P

M10

em

issi

on r

ate

1.32

lb/h

rEs

t. m

etal

em

issi

ons

base

d on

sta

ck te

st0.

0679

lb/h

rA

ssum

ed m

etal

thro

ughp

ut10

0.00

%fr

om v

arie

ty fe

edst

ock

10.0

0%in

clud

es a

100

% s

afet

y fa

ctor

- 5%

is c

ited

as n

on-m

etal

lic c

onte

nt in

199

5 A

ERA

0.07

5lb

/hr

est.

% o

f non

-met

allic

thro

ughp

ut a

t tim

e of

sta

ck te

stes

t. m

etal

lic e

mis

sion

s fo

r 10

0% m

etal

lic

thro

ughp

ut

page

8

Nor

ther

n M

etal

sH

ow M

etal

HA

P Pe

rmit

Lim

its

wer

e Se

t

Max

imum

est

imat

ed e

mis

sion

s if

100%

of t

hrou

ghpu

t w

ere

desi

gnat

ed s

tock

, lb/

hrA

lum

inum

Bras

sCo

pper

Stai

nles

s St

eel

Exis

ting

Perm

it lim

itA

rsen

ic0

0.00

049

0.00

063

0.00

004

0.

0005

2Be

rylli

um0.

0004

3

0

0.00

190

00.

0002

2Ca

dmiu

m0.

0012

9

0

0.00

127

00.

0003

4Ch

rom

ium

(VI)

0.00

001

00.

0000

4

0.

0003

7

0.00

031

Lead

0.00

388

0.00

395

0.00

127

0.00

004

0.

0009

3M

anga

nese

0.00

086

00

0.00

213

0.

0088

Mer

cury

00

00

0.00

079

Nic

kel

0.00

129

0.00

197

0.00

190

0.01

537

0.

0041

Ant

imon

y0.

0004

3

0.

0004

9

-

-

0.00

049

Boro

n-

-

-

0.

0000

40.

0000

4Co

pper

0.00

474

0.02

417

0.05

961

0.00

213

0.05

961

Vana

dium

0.00

043

-

-

0.00

213

0.00

213

Zinc

0.00

388

0.02

515

-

-0.

0251

5

Max

imum

per

cent

age

of t

hrou

ghpu

t th

at c

an b

e de

sign

ated

sto

ck a

nd s

till

mee

t ex

isti

ng p

erm

it li

mit

Alu

min

umBr

ass

Copp

erSt

ainl

ess

Stee

lA

rsen

icN

A10

5%82

%12

18%

Bery

llium

51%

NA

12%

NA

Cadm

ium

26%

NA

27%

NA

Chro

miu

m (V

I)22

42%

NA

762%

84%

Lead

24%

24%

73%

2179

%M

anga

nese

1020

%N

AN

A41

2%M

ercu

ryN

AN

AN

AN

AN

icke

l31

7%20

8%21

6%27

%A

ntim

ony

114%

100%

NA

NA

Ant

imon

y11

4%10

0%N

AN

ABo

ron

NA

NA

NA

100%

Copp

er12

57%

247%

100%

2793

%Va

nadi

um49

5%N

AN

A10

0%Zi

nc64

8%10

0%N

AN

A

Effe

ctiv

e %

of a

ny s

tock

tha

t st

ill m

eets

the

exi

stin

g pe

rmit

lim

itA

lum

inum

Bras

sCo

pper

Stai

nles

s St

eel

24%

24%

12%

27%

limiti

ng m

etal

Lead

Lead

Bery

llium

Nic

kel

Max

imum

per

cent

age

of t

hrou

ghpu

t th

at c

an b

e de

sign

ated

sto

ck a

nd s

till

mee

t ne

w p

erm

it li

mit

Alu

min

umBr

ass

Copp

erSt

ainl

ess

Stee

lN

ew li

mits

, lb/

hrFa

ctor

Ars

enic

NA

130%

101%

1499

%0.

0006

41.

2194

6332

8Be

rylli

um46

4%N

A10

5%N

A0.

002

8.64

7103

597

Cadm

ium

100%

NA

103%

NA

0.00

133.

8047

2558

3Ch

rom

ium

(VI)

2676

%N

A91

0%10

0%0.

0003

71.

1917

8657

2Le

ad10

3%10

1%31

5%93

72%

0.00

44.

2426

2510

2M

anga

nese

1020

%N

AN

A41

2%0.

0088

0.24

2506

912

Mer

cury

NA

NA

NA

NA

0.00

26as

pro

pose

d 8/

2010

Nic

kel

1237

%81

1%84

1%10

4%0.

016

3.74

7619

008

page

9

Nor

ther

n M

etal

sH

ow M

etal

HA

P Pe

rmit

Lim

its

wer

e Se

t

Max

imum

est

imat

ed e

mis

sion

s fo

r 10

0% n

on-f

erro

us fe

edst

ock,

lb/h

rM

ax. E

mis

sion

Rat

eA

lum

inum

Bras

sCo

pper

Stai

nles

s St

eel

lb/h

rA

lum

inum

0.05

2822

274

0.00

6036

831

0.00

1509

208

0.00

3773

020.

0528

2A

ntim

ony

0.00

0754

604

0.00

0754

604

00

0.00

075

Ars

enic

00.

0007

5460

40.

0007

5460

47.

5460

4E-0

50.

0007

5Be

rylli

um0.

0007

5460

40

0.00

2263

812

00.

0022

6Bo

ron

00

07.

5460

4E-0

50.

0000

8Ca

dmiu

m0.

0022

6381

20

0.00

1509

208

00.

0022

6Ca

lciu

m0

00

7.54

604E

-05

0.00

008

Carb

on0

00

0.00

2263

812

0.00

226

Chro

miu

m0.

0007

5460

40

0.00

1509

208

0.02

0374

305

0.02

037

Coba

lt0.

0022

6381

20

0.00

2263

812

0.00

9055

247

0.00

906

Copp

er0.

0083

0064

30.

0369

7559

10.

0709

3276

70.

0037

7302

0.07

093

Iron

0.00

1509

208

0.00

3018

416

0.00

2263

812

0.03

3957

176

0.03

396

Lead

0.00

6791

435

0.00

6036

831

0.00

1509

208

7.54

604E

-05

0.00

679

Lith

ium

0.00

3018

416

00

00.

0030

2M

agne

sium

0.00

8300

643

0.00

9809

851

00

0.00

981

Man

gane

se0.

0015

0920

80

00.

0037

7302

0.00

377

Mol

ybde

num

00

00.

0075

4603

90.

0075

5N

icke

l0.

0022

6381

20.

0030

1841

60.

0022

6381

20.

0271

6574

10.

0271

7N

iobi

um0

00

7.54

604E

-05

0.00

008

Silic

on0.

0173

5589

0.00

4527

623

00.

0022

6381

20.

0173

6Si

lver

0.00

0754

604

0.00

0754

604

0.00

1509

208

00.

0015

1Ti

n0.

0150

9207

80.

0052

8222

70.

0015

0920

87.

5460

4E-0

50.

0150

9Ti

tani

um0

00

7.54

604E

-05

0.00

008

Tung

sten

00

00.

0150

9207

80.

0150

9Va

nadi

um0.

0007

5460

40

00.

0037

7302

0.00

377

Vana

dium

0.00

0754

604

00

0.00

3773

020.

0037

7Zi

nc0.

0067

9143

50.

0384

8479

90

00.

0384

8Zi

rcon

ium

00

07.

5460

4E-0

50.

0000

8

page

10

AP-42 Section 13.2.1 Paved Roads, 1/11

E = [k x (sL)^0.91 x (W)^1.02] x (1 - P/4N)

k= lb/VMT, particle size multiplier from Table 13.2.1-1:

k, lb/VMT

PMtot 0.011

PM10 0.0022

PM2.5 0.00054

sL= 1.6 g/m^2, based on typical silt loading of paved roads at a facility using sweeping and watering to control fugitive dust

W= 28.5 tons, average truck weight at facility (40 tons loaded, 17 tons empty)

P= 110 for uncontrolled emissions, number of days with at least 0.01 inch of precipitation during the averaging period

Data from Figure 13.2.1-2 of AP-42.

N= 365 number of days in the averaging period, (365 for annual, 91 for seasonal, 30 for monthly)

RoadSection

Distancesat Facility**: Feet

ARoad to scale 550

B

Scale to shredder raw material pile 150

C

Shredderraw material pile to exit scale 420

Total: 1,120 feet0.21 miles

**These distances are estimated using GoogleEarth.

Potential to Emit Potential Truck Traffic:

PollutantEmission

Factor 377,800 tons/yr from permit limit(lb/VMT) (lb/hr) (ton/yr) 16,426 inbound trucks/yr at 23 tons/load

PM 0.48 0.49 0.92 4.3 inbound trucks/hr at 23 tons/load and 100 tons/hrPM10 0.10 0.10 0.18 1,800 outbound waste trucks/yr at 23 tons/load (estimated)PM2.5 0.02 0.02 0.05 0.5 outbound waste trucks/hr at 23 tons/load

Northern Metals, LLCPaved Road Emissions Calculations

Potential to Emit

Material Handling PTE (used for MPCA modeling check)

Source: Factor Information and Retriecal System, Versions 2.62, April 1994 (used in 1995 EAW)(emission factor for ore loading)

0.0012 lb PM10/ton 0.0024 lb PM/ton

Source: AP-42 13.2.4 Aggregate Handling and Storage Piles

E = k(0.0032)*[(U/5)^1.3]/[(M/2)^1.4]

whereE = emission factor (lb/ton)k = particle size multiplie (dementionless)U = mean wind speed (mph)M = material moisture content (%)

Aerodynamic Particle Size Multiplier (k)< 30 um < 15 um < 10 um < 5 um < 2.5 um

0.74 0.48 0.35 0.2 0.053

assumeU = 10.6 mph (based on MSP historical data)M = 2.2 % (based on mean moisture content for lump ore from iron and steel production)processing rate of 240 tons/hr

E(total) 0.005504 lb/ton1.32093 lb/hr

E(10) 0.002603 lb/ton0.624764 lb/hr

E(2.5) = 0.000394 lb/ton0.094607 lb/hr

Nor

ther

n M

etal

sBo

iler/

Furn

ace

Emis

sion

s Ca

lcul

atio

nsCr

iteri

a Po

lluta

nts,

Haz

ardo

us A

ir P

ollu

tant

s an

d G

reen

hous

e G

ases

Unc

ontr

olle

dLi

mite

dA

nnua

lEm

issi

onPo

tent

ial t

oPo

tent

ial t

oA

ctua

lFu

elR

ate

Emit

(PTE

)Em

it (P

TE)

Emis

sion

sU

nit N

ame

Use

dPo

lluta

nt(lb

/uni

ts)

(Ref

. No.

)(lb

/hr)

(ton/

yr)

(ton/

yr)

(ton

/yr)

Boi

ler

Nat

ural

Gas

Tota

l VO

C0.

0004

MM

scf

3.30

MM

scf

5.50

E+0

01

2.07

E-0

39.

07E

-03

9.07

E-0

338

4,00

0 B

tu/h

rN

atur

al G

asTo

tal P

M0.

0004

MM

scf

3.30

MM

scf

7.60

E+0

01

2.86

E-0

31.

25E

-02

1.25

E-0

2M

ain

Offi

ceN

atur

al G

asTo

tal P

M10

0.00

04M

Msc

f3.

30M

Msc

f7.

60E

+00

12.

86E

-03

1.25

E-0

21.

25E

-02

Nat

ural

Gas

Tota

l PM

2.5

0.00

04M

Msc

f3.

30M

Msc

f7.

60E

+00

12.

86E

-03

1.25

E-0

21.

25E

-02

Nat

ural

Gas

CO

0.00

04M

Msc

f3.

30M

Msc

f8.

40E

+01

13.

16E

-02

1.39

E-0

11.

39E

-01

Nat

ural

Gas

SO

20.

0004

MM

scf

3.30

MM

scf

6.00

E-0

11

2.26

E-0

49.

89E

-04

9.89

E-0

4N

atur

al G

asN

Ox

0.00

04M

Msc

f3.

30M

Msc

f1.

00E

+02

13.

76E

-02

1.65

E-0

11.

65E

-01

Nat

ural

Gas

Pb

0.00

04M

Msc

f3.

30M

Msc

f5.

00E

-04

11.

88E

-07

8.24

E-0

78.

24E

-07

Nat

ural

Gas

Ben

zene

0.00

04M

Msc

f3.

30M

Msc

f2.

10E

-03

17.

91E

-07

3.46

E-0

63.

46E

-06

Nat

ural

Gas

Dic

hlor

oben

zene

0.00

04M

Msc

f3.

30M

Msc

f1.

20E

-03

14.

52E

-07

1.98

E-0

61.

98E

-06

Nat

ural

Gas

Form

alde

hyde

0.00

04M

Msc

f3.

30M

Msc

f7.

50E

-02

12.

82E

-05

1.24

E-0

41.

24E

-04

Nat

ural

Gas

Hex

ane

0.00

04M

Msc

f3.

30M

Msc

f1.

80E

+00

16.

78E

-04

2.97

E-0

32.

97E

-03

Nat

ural

Gas

Nap

htha

lene

0.00

04M

Msc

f3.

30M

Msc

f6.

10E

-04

12.

30E

-07

1.01

E-0

61.

01E

-06

Nat

ural

Gas

Tolu

ene

0.00

04M

Msc

f3.

30M

Msc

f3.

40E

-03

11.

28E

-06

5.61

E-0

65.

61E

-06

Nat

ural

Gas

PO

M0.

0004

MM

scf

3.30

MM

scf

8.82

E-0

51

3.32

E-0

81.

45E

-07

1.45

E-0

7N

atur

al G

asA

rsen

ic0.

0004

MM

scf

3.30

MM

scf

2.00

E-0

41

7.53

E-0

83.

30E

-07

3.30

E-0

7N

atur

al G

asB

eryl

lium

0.00

04M

Msc

f3.

30M

Msc

f1.

20E

-05

14.

52E

-09

1.98

E-0

81.

98E

-08

Nat

ural

Gas

Cad

miu

m0.

0004

MM

scf

3.30

MM

scf

1.10

E-0

31

4.14

E-0

71.

81E

-06

1.81

E-0

6N

atur

al G

asC

hrom

ium

0.00

04M

Msc

f3.

30M

Msc

f1.

40E

-03

15.

27E

-07

2.31

E-0

62.

31E

-06

Nat

ural

Gas

Cob

alt

0.00

04M

Msc

f3.

30M

Msc

f8.

40E

-05

13.

16E

-08

1.39

E-0

71.

39E

-07

Nat

ural

Gas

Man

gane

se0.

0004

MM

scf

3.30

MM

scf

3.80

E-0

41

1.43

E-0

76.

27E

-07

6.27

E-0

7N

atur

al G

asM

ercu

ry0.

0004

MM

scf

3.30

MM

scf

2.60

E-0

41

9.79

E-0

84.

29E

-07

4.29

E-0

7N

atur

al G

asN

icke

l0.

0004

MM

scf

3.30

MM

scf

2.10

E-0

31

7.91

E-0

73.

46E

-06

3.46

E-0

6N

atur

al G

asS

elen

ium

0.00

04M

Msc

f3.

30M

Msc

f2.

40E

-05

19.

04E

-09

3.96

E-0

83.

96E

-08

Nat

ural

Gas

CO

20.

0004

MM

scf

3.30

MM

scf

1.20

E+0

51

4.52

E+0

11.

98E

+02

1.98

E+0

2N

atur

al G

asC

H4

0.00

04M

Msc

f3.

30M

Msc

f2.

30E

+00

18.

66E

-04

3.79

E-0

33.

79E

-03

Nat

ural

Gas

N2O

0.00

04M

Msc

f3.

30M

Msc

f2.

20E

+00

18.

28E

-04

3.63

E-0

33.

63E

-03

Nat

ural

Gas

Tota

l CO

2e0.

0004

MM

scf

3.30

MM

scf

14.

55E

+01

1.99

E+0

21.

99E

+02

Hot

Wat

er H

eate

rN

atur

al G

asTo

tal V

OC

0.00

01M

Msc

f0.

60M

Msc

f5.

50E

+00

13.

77E

-04

1.65

E-0

31.

65E

-03

70,0

00 B

tu/h

rN

atur

al G

asTo

tal P

M0.

0001

MM

scf

0.60

MM

scf

7.60

E+0

01

5.22

E-0

42.

28E

-03

2.28

E-0

3M

ain

Offi

ceN

atur

al G

asTo

tal P

M10

0.00

01M

Msc

f0.

60M

Msc

f7.

60E

+00

15.

22E

-04

2.28

E-0

32.

28E

-03

Nat

ural

Gas

Tota

l PM

2.5

0.00

01M

Msc

f0.

60M

Msc

f7.

60E

+00

15.

22E

-04

2.28

E-0

32.

28E

-03

Nat

ural

Gas

CO

0.00

01M

Msc

f0.

60M

Msc

f8.

40E

+01

15.

76E

-03

2.52

E-0

22.

52E

-02

Nat

ural

Gas

SO

20.

0001

MM

scf

0.60

MM

scf

6.00

E-0

11

4.12

E-0

51.

80E

-04

1.80

E-0

4N

atur

al G

asN

Ox

0.00

01M

Msc

f0.

60M

Msc

f1.

00E

+02

16.

86E

-03

3.01

E-0

23.

01E

-02

Nat

ural

Gas

Pb

0.00

01M

Msc

f0.

60M

Msc

f5.

00E

-04

13.

43E

-08

1.50

E-0

71.

50E

-07

Nat

ural

Gas

Ben

zene

0.00

01M

Msc

f0.

60M

Msc

f2.

10E

-03

11.

44E

-07

6.31

E-0

76.

31E

-07

Max

imum

Rat

eM

axim

um R

ate

Emis

sion

Fac

tor

(uni

ts/h

r)(u

nits

/yr)

Nor

ther

n M

etal

sBo

iler/

Furn

ace

Emis

sion

s Ca

lcul

atio

nsCr

iteri

a Po

lluta

nts,

Haz

ardo

us A

ir P

ollu

tant

s an

d G

reen

hous

e G

ases

Unc

ontr

olle

dLi

mite

dA

nnua

lEm

issi

onPo

tent

ial t

oPo

tent

ial t

oA

ctua

lFu

elR

ate

Emit

(PTE

)Em

it (P

TE)

Emis

sion

sU

nit N

ame

Use

dPo

lluta

nt(lb

/uni

ts)

(Ref

. No.

)(lb

/hr)

(ton/

yr)

(ton/

yr)

(ton

/yr)

Max

imum

Rat

eM

axim

um R

ate

Emis

sion

Fac

tor

(uni

ts/h

r)(u

nits

/yr)

Nat

ural

Gas

Dic

hlor

oben

zene

0.00

01M

Msc

f0.

60M

Msc

f1.

20E

-03

18.

24E

-08

3.61

E-0

73.

61E

-07

Nat

ural

Gas

Form

alde

hyde

0.00

01M

Msc

f0.

60M

Msc

f7.

50E

-02

15.

15E

-06

2.25

E-0

52.

25E

-05

Nat

ural

Gas

Hex

ane

0.00

01M

Msc

f0.

60M

Msc

f1.

80E

+00

11.

24E

-04

5.41

E-0

45.

41E

-04

Nat

ural

Gas

Nap

htha

lene

0.00

01M

Msc

f0.

60M

Msc

f6.

10E

-04

14.

19E

-08

1.83

E-0

71.

83E

-07

Nat

ural

Gas

Tolu

ene

0.00

01M

Msc

f0.

60M

Msc

f3.

40E

-03

12.

33E

-07

1.02

E-0

61.

02E

-06

Nat

ural

Gas

PO

M0.

0001

MM

scf

0.60

MM

scf

8.82

E-0

51

6.05

E-0

92.

65E

-08

2.65

E-0

8N

atur

al G

asA

rsen

ic0.

0001

MM

scf

0.60

MM

scf

2.00

E-0

41

1.37

E-0

86.

01E

-08

6.01

E-0

8N

atur

al G

asB

eryl

lium

0.00

01M

Msc

f0.

60M

Msc

f1.

20E

-05

18.

24E

-10

3.61

E-0

93.

61E

-09

Nat

ural

Gas

Cad

miu

m0.

0001

MM

scf

0.60

MM

scf

1.10

E-0

31

7.55

E-0

83.

31E

-07

3.31

E-0

7N

atur

al G

asC

hrom

ium

0.00

01M

Msc

f0.

60M

Msc

f1.

40E

-03

19.

61E

-08

4.21

E-0

74.

21E

-07

Nat

ural

Gas

Cob

alt

0.00

01M

Msc

f0.

60M

Msc

f8.

40E

-05

15.

76E

-09

2.52

E-0

82.

52E

-08

Nat

ural

Gas

Man

gane

se0.

0001

MM

scf

0.60

MM

scf

3.80

E-0

41

2.61

E-0

81.

14E

-07

1.14

E-0

7N

atur

al G

asM

ercu

ry0.

0001

MM

scf

0.60

MM

scf

2.60

E-0

41

1.78

E-0

87.

82E

-08

7.82

E-0

8N

atur

al G

asN

icke

l0.

0001

MM

scf

0.60

MM

scf

2.10

E-0

31

1.44

E-0

76.

31E

-07

6.31

E-0

7N

atur

al G

asS

elen

ium

0.00

01M

Msc

f0.

60M

Msc

f2.

40E

-05

11.

65E

-09

7.21

E-0

97.

21E

-09

Nat

ural

Gas

CO

20.

0001

MM

scf

0.60

MM

scf

1.20

E+0

51

8.24

E+0

03.

61E

+01

3.61

E+0

1N

atur

al G

asC

H4

0.00

01M

Msc

f0.

60M

Msc

f2.

30E

+00

11.

58E

-04

6.91

E-0

46.

91E

-04

Nat

ural

Gas

N2O

0.00

01M

Msc

f0.

60M

Msc

f2.

20E

+00

11.

51E

-04

6.61

E-0

46.

61E

-04

Nat

ural

Gas

Tota

l CO

2e0.

0001

MM

scf

0.60

MM

scf

18.

29E

+00

3.63

E+0

13.

63E

+01

Hot

Wat

er H

eate

rN

atur

al G

asTo

tal V

OC

0.00

00M

Msc

f0.

34M

Msc

f5.

50E

+00

12.

16E

-04

9.45

E-0

49.

45E

-04

40,0

00 B

tu/h

rN

atur

al G

asTo

tal P

M0.

0000

MM

scf

0.34

MM

scf

7.60

E+0

01

2.98

E-0

41.

31E

-03

1.31

E-0

3M

ain

Offi

ceN

atur

al G

asTo

tal P

M10

0.00

00M

Msc

f0.

34M

Msc

f7.

60E

+00

12.

98E

-04

1.31

E-0

31.

31E

-03

Nat

ural

Gas

Tota

l PM

2.5

0.00

00M

Msc

f0.

34M

Msc

f7.

60E

+00

12.

98E

-04

1.31

E-0

31.

31E

-03

Nat

ural

Gas

CO

0.00

00M

Msc

f0.

34M

Msc

f8.

40E

+01

13.

29E

-03

1.44

E-0

21.

44E

-02

Nat

ural

Gas

SO

20.

0000

MM

scf

0.34

MM

scf

6.00

E-0

11

2.35

E-0

51.

03E

-04

1.03

E-0

4N

atur

al G

asN

Ox

0.00

00M

Msc

f0.

34M

Msc

f1.

00E

+02

13.

92E

-03

1.72

E-0

21.

72E

-02

Nat

ural

Gas

Pb

0.00

00M

Msc

f0.

34M

Msc

f5.

00E

-04

11.

96E

-08

8.59

E-0

88.

59E

-08

Nat

ural

Gas

Ben

zene

0.00

00M

Msc

f0.

34M

Msc

f2.

10E

-03

18.

24E

-08

3.61

E-0

73.

61E

-07

Nat

ural

Gas

Dic

hlor

oben

zene

0.00

00M

Msc

f0.

34M

Msc

f1.

20E

-03

14.

71E

-08

2.06

E-0

72.

06E

-07

Nat

ural

Gas

Form

alde

hyde

0.00

00M

Msc

f0.

34M

Msc

f7.

50E

-02

12.

94E

-06

1.29

E-0

51.

29E

-05

Nat

ural

Gas

Hex

ane

0.00

00M

Msc

f0.

34M

Msc

f1.

80E

+00

17.

06E

-05

3.09

E-0

43.

09E

-04

Nat

ural

Gas

Nap

htha

lene

0.00

00M

Msc

f0.

34M

Msc

f6.

10E

-04

12.

39E

-08

1.05

E-0

71.

05E

-07

Nat

ural

Gas

Tolu

ene

0.00

00M

Msc

f0.

34M

Msc

f3.

40E

-03

11.

33E

-07

5.84

E-0

75.

84E

-07

Nat

ural

Gas

PO

M0.

0000

MM

scf

0.34

MM

scf

8.82

E-0

51

3.46

E-0

91.

51E

-08

1.51

E-0

8N

atur

al G

asA

rsen

ic0.

0000

MM

scf

0.34

MM

scf

2.00

E-0

41

7.84

E-0

93.

44E

-08

3.44

E-0

8N

atur

al G

asB

eryl

lium

0.00

00M

Msc

f0.

34M

Msc

f1.

20E

-05

14.

71E

-10

2.06

E-0

92.

06E

-09

Nat

ural

Gas

Cad

miu

m0.

0000

MM

scf

0.34

MM

scf

1.10

E-0

31

4.31

E-0

81.

89E

-07

1.89

E-0

7N

atur

al G

asC

hrom

ium

0.00

00M

Msc

f0.

34M

Msc

f1.

40E

-03

15.

49E

-08

2.40

E-0

72.

40E

-07

Nor

ther

n M

etal

sBo

iler/

Furn

ace

Emis

sion

s Ca

lcul

atio

nsCr

iteri

a Po

lluta

nts,

Haz

ardo

us A

ir P

ollu

tant

s an

d G

reen

hous

e G

ases

Unc

ontr

olle

dLi

mite

dA

nnua

lEm

issi

onPo

tent

ial t

oPo

tent

ial t

oA

ctua

lFu

elR

ate

Emit

(PTE

)Em

it (P

TE)

Emis

sion

sU

nit N

ame

Use

dPo

lluta

nt(lb

/uni

ts)

(Ref

. No.

)(lb

/hr)

(ton/

yr)

(ton/

yr)

(ton

/yr)

Max

imum

Rat

eM

axim

um R

ate

Emis

sion

Fac

tor

(uni

ts/h

r)(u

nits

/yr)

Nat

ural

Gas

Cob

alt

0.00

00M

Msc

f0.

34M

Msc

f8.

40E

-05

13.

29E

-09

1.44

E-0

81.

44E

-08

Nat

ural

Gas

Man

gane

se0.

0000

MM

scf

0.34

MM

scf

3.80

E-0

41

1.49

E-0

86.

53E

-08

6.53

E-0

8N

atur

al G

asM

ercu

ry0.

0000

MM

scf

0.34

MM

scf

2.60

E-0

41

1.02

E-0

84.

47E

-08

4.47

E-0

8N

atur

al G

asN

icke

l0.

0000

MM

scf

0.34

MM

scf

2.10

E-0

31

8.24

E-0

83.

61E

-07

3.61

E-0

7N

atur

al G

asS

elen

ium

0.00

00M

Msc

f0.

34M

Msc

f2.

40E

-05

19.

41E

-10

4.12

E-0

94.

12E

-09

Nat

ural

Gas

CO

20.

0000

MM

scf

0.34

MM

scf

1.20

E+0

51

4.71

E+0

02.

06E

+01

2.06

E+0

1N

atur

al G

asC

H4

0.00

00M

Msc

f0.

34M

Msc

f2.

30E

+00

19.

02E

-05

3.95

E-0

43.

95E

-04

Nat

ural

Gas

N2O

0.00

00M

Msc

f0.

34M

Msc

f2.

20E

+00

18.

63E

-05

3.78

E-0

43.

78E

-04

Nat

ural

Gas

Tota

l CO

2e0.

0000

MM

scf

0.34

MM

scf

14.

73E

+00

2.07

E+0

12.

07E

+01

Hot

Wat

er H

eate

rN

atur

al G

asTo

tal V

OC

0.00

00M

Msc

f0.

34M

Msc

f5.

50E

+00

12.

16E

-04

9.45

E-0

49.

45E

-04

40,0

00 B

tu/h

rN

atur

al G

asTo

tal P

M0.

0000

MM

scf

0.34

MM

scf

7.60

E+0

01

2.98

E-0

41.

31E

-03

1.31

E-0

3M

aint

enan

ceN

atur

al G

asTo

tal P

M10

0.00

00M

Msc

f0.

34M

Msc

f7.

60E

+00

12.

98E

-04

1.31

E-0

31.

31E

-03

Nat

ural

Gas

Tota

l PM

2.5

0.00

00M

Msc

f0.

34M

Msc

f7.

60E

+00

12.

98E

-04

1.31

E-0

31.

31E

-03

Nat

ural

Gas

CO

0.00

00M

Msc

f0.

34M

Msc

f8.

40E

+01

13.

29E

-03

1.44

E-0

21.

44E

-02

Nat

ural

Gas

SO

20.

0000

MM

scf

0.34

MM

scf

6.00

E-0

11

2.35

E-0

51.

03E

-04

1.03

E-0

4N

atur

al G

asN

Ox

0.00

00M

Msc

f0.

34M

Msc

f1.

00E

+02

13.

92E

-03

1.72

E-0

21.

72E

-02

Nat

ural

Gas

Pb

0.00

00M

Msc

f0.

34M

Msc

f5.

00E

-04

11.

96E

-08

8.59

E-0

88.

59E

-08

Nat

ural

Gas

Ben

zene

0.00

00M

Msc

f0.

34M

Msc

f2.

10E

-03

18.

24E

-08

3.61

E-0

73.

61E

-07

Nat

ural

Gas

Dic

hlor

oben

zene

0.00

00M

Msc

f0.

34M

Msc

f1.

20E

-03

14.

71E

-08

2.06

E-0

72.

06E

-07

Nat

ural

Gas

Form

alde

hyde

0.00

00M

Msc

f0.

34M

Msc

f7.

50E

-02

12.

94E

-06

1.29

E-0

51.

29E

-05

Nat

ural

Gas

Hex

ane

0.00

00M

Msc

f0.

34M

Msc

f1.

80E

+00

17.

06E

-05

3.09

E-0

43.

09E

-04

Nat

ural

Gas

Nap

htha

lene

0.00

00M

Msc

f0.

34M

Msc

f6.

10E

-04

12.

39E

-08

1.05

E-0

71.

05E

-07

Nat

ural

Gas

Tolu

ene

0.00

00M

Msc

f0.

34M

Msc

f3.

40E

-03

11.

33E

-07

5.84

E-0

75.

84E

-07

Nat

ural

Gas

PO

M0.

0000

MM

scf

0.34

MM

scf

8.82

E-0

51

3.46

E-0

91.

51E

-08

1.51

E-0

8N

atur

al G

asA

rsen

ic0.

0000

MM

scf

0.34

MM

scf

2.00

E-0

41

7.84

E-0

93.

44E

-08

3.44

E-0

8N

atur

al G

asB

eryl

lium

0.00

00M

Msc

f0.

34M

Msc

f1.

20E

-05

14.

71E

-10

2.06

E-0

92.

06E

-09

Nat

ural

Gas

Cad

miu

m0.

0000

MM

scf

0.34

MM

scf

1.10

E-0

31

4.31

E-0

81.

89E

-07

1.89

E-0

7N

atur

al G

asC

hrom

ium

0.00

00M

Msc

f0.

34M

Msc

f1.

40E

-03

15.

49E

-08

2.40

E-0

72.

40E

-07

Nat

ural

Gas

Cob

alt

0.00

00M

Msc

f0.

34M

Msc

f8.

40E

-05

13.

29E

-09

1.44

E-0

81.

44E

-08

Nat

ural

Gas

Man

gane

se0.

0000

MM

scf

0.34

MM

scf

3.80

E-0

41

1.49

E-0

86.

53E

-08

6.53

E-0

8N

atur

al G

asM

ercu

ry0.

0000

MM

scf

0.34

MM

scf

2.60

E-0

41

1.02

E-0

84.

47E

-08

4.47

E-0

8N

atur

al G

asN

icke

l0.

0000

MM

scf

0.34

MM

scf

2.10

E-0

31

8.24

E-0

83.

61E

-07

3.61

E-0

7N

atur

al G

asS

elen

ium

0.00

00M

Msc

f0.

34M

Msc

f2.

40E

-05

19.

41E

-10

4.12

E-0

94.

12E

-09

Nat

ural

Gas

CO

20.

0000

MM

scf

0.34

MM

scf

1.20

E+0

51

4.71

E+0

02.

06E

+01

2.06

E+0

1N

atur

al G

asC

H4

0.00

00M

Msc

f0.

34M

Msc

f2.

30E

+00

19.

02E

-05

3.95

E-0

43.

95E

-04

Nat

ural

Gas

N2O

0.00

00M

Msc

f0.

34M

Msc

f2.

20E

+00

18.

63E

-05

3.78

E-0

43.

78E

-04

Nat

ural

Gas

Tota

l CO

2e0.

0000

MM

scf

0.34

MM

scf

14.

73E

+00

2.07

E+0

12.

07E

+01

Nor

ther

n M

etal

sBo

iler/

Furn

ace

Emis

sion

s Ca

lcul

atio

nsCr

iteri

a Po

lluta

nts,

Haz

ardo

us A

ir P

ollu

tant

s an

d G

reen

hous

e G

ases

Unc

ontr

olle

dLi

mite

dA

nnua

lEm

issi

onPo

tent

ial t

oPo

tent

ial t

oA

ctua

lFu

elR

ate

Emit

(PTE

)Em

it (P

TE)

Emis

sion

sU

nit N

ame

Use

dPo

lluta

nt(lb

/uni

ts)

(Ref

. No.

)(lb

/hr)

(ton/

yr)

(ton/

yr)

(ton

/yr)

Max

imum

Rat

eM

axim

um R

ate

Emis

sion

Fac

tor

(uni

ts/h

r)(u

nits

/yr)

Roo

ftop

Hea

ters

Nat

ural

Gas

Tota

l VO

C0.

0003

MM

scf

2.75

MM

scf

5.50

E+0

01

1.73

E-0

37.

56E

-03

7.56

E-0

35

x 64

,000

Btu

/hr

Nat

ural

Gas

Tota

l PM

0.00

03M

Msc

f2.

75M

Msc

f7.

60E

+00

12.

38E

-03

1.04

E-0

21.

04E

-02

Nat

ural

Gas

Tota

l PM

100.

0003

MM

scf

2.75

MM

scf

7.60

E+0

01

2.38

E-0

31.

04E

-02

1.04

E-0

2N

atur

al G

asTo

tal P

M2.

50.

0003

MM

scf

2.75

MM

scf

7.60

E+0

01

2.38

E-0

31.

04E

-02

1.04

E-0

2N

atur

al G

asC

O0.

0003

MM

scf

2.75

MM

scf

8.40

E+0

11

2.64

E-0

21.

15E

-01

1.15

E-0

1N

atur

al G

asS

O2

0.00

03M

Msc

f2.

75M

Msc

f6.

00E

-01

11.

88E

-04

8.24

E-0

48.

24E

-04

Nat

ural

Gas

NO

x0.

0003

MM

scf

2.75

MM

scf

1.00

E+0

21

3.14

E-0

21.

37E

-01

1.37

E-0

1N

atur

al G

asP

b0.

0003

MM

scf

2.75

MM

scf

5.00

E-0

41

1.57

E-0

76.

87E

-07

6.87

E-0

7N

atur

al G

asB

enze

ne0.

0003

MM

scf

2.75

MM

scf

2.10

E-0

31

6.59

E-0

72.

89E

-06

2.89

E-0

6N

atur

al G

asD

ichl

orob

enze

ne0.

0003

MM

scf

2.75

MM

scf

1.20

E-0

31

3.76

E-0

71.

65E

-06

1.65

E-0

6N

atur

al G

asFo

rmal

dehy

de0.

0003

MM

scf

2.75

MM

scf

7.50

E-0

21

2.35

E-0

51.

03E

-04

1.03

E-0

4N

atur

al G

asH

exan

e0.

0003

MM

scf

2.75

MM

scf

1.80

E+0

01

5.65

E-0

42.

47E

-03

2.47

E-0

3N

atur

al G

asN

apht

hale

ne0.

0003

MM

scf

2.75

MM

scf

6.10

E-0

41

1.91

E-0

78.

38E

-07

8.38

E-0

7N

atur

al G

asTo

luen

e0.

0003

MM

scf

2.75

MM

scf

3.40

E-0

31

1.07

E-0

64.

67E

-06

4.67

E-0

6N

atur

al G

asP

OM

0.00

03M

Msc

f2.

75M

Msc

f8.

82E

-05

12.

77E

-08

1.21

E-0

71.

21E

-07

Nat

ural

Gas

Ars

enic

0.00

03M

Msc

f2.

75M

Msc

f2.

00E

-04

16.

27E

-08

2.75

E-0

72.

75E

-07

Nat

ural

Gas

Ber

ylliu

m0.

0003

MM

scf

2.75

MM

scf

1.20

E-0

51

3.76

E-0

91.

65E

-08

1.65

E-0

8N

atur

al G

asC

adm

ium

0.00

03M

Msc

f2.

75M

Msc

f1.

10E

-03

13.

45E

-07

1.51

E-0

61.

51E

-06

Nat

ural

Gas

Chr

omiu

m0.

0003

MM

scf

2.75

MM

scf

1.40

E-0

31

4.39

E-0

71.

92E

-06

1.92

E-0

6N

atur

al G

asC

obal

t0.

0003

MM

scf

2.75

MM

scf

8.40

E-0

51

2.64

E-0

81.

15E

-07

1.15

E-0

7N

atur

al G

asM

anga

nese

0.00

03M

Msc

f2.

75M

Msc

f3.

80E

-04

11.

19E

-07

5.22

E-0

75.

22E

-07

Nat

ural

Gas

Mer

cury

0.00

03M

Msc

f2.

75M

Msc

f2.

60E

-04

18.

16E

-08

3.57

E-0

73.

57E

-07

Nat

ural

Gas

Nic

kel

0.00

03M

Msc

f2.

75M

Msc

f2.

10E

-03

16.

59E

-07

2.89

E-0

62.

89E

-06

Nat

ural

Gas

Sel

eniu

m0.

0003

MM

scf

2.75

MM

scf

2.40

E-0

51

7.53

E-0

93.

30E

-08

3.30

E-0

8N

atur

al G

asC

O2

0.00

03M

Msc

f2.

75M

Msc

f1.

20E

+05

13.

76E

+01

1.65

E+0

21.

65E

+02

Nat

ural

Gas

CH

40.

0003

MM

scf

2.75

MM

scf

2.30

E+0

01

7.22

E-0

43.

16E

-03

3.16

E-0

3N

atur

al G

asN

2O0.

0003

MM

scf

2.75

MM

scf

2.20

E+0

01

6.90

E-0

43.

02E

-03

3.02

E-0

3N

atur

al G

asTo

tal C

O2e

0.00

03M

Msc

f2.

75M

Msc

f1

3.79

E+0

11.

66E

+02

1.66

E+0

2

Spa

ce H

eate

rsN

atur

al G

asTo

tal V

OC

0.00

07M

Msc

f5.

95M

Msc

f5.

50E

+00

13.

74E

-03

1.64

E-0

21.

64E

-02

4 x

173,

250

Btu

/hr

Nat

ural

Gas

Tota

l PM

0.00

07M

Msc

f5.

95M

Msc

f7.

60E

+00

15.

16E

-03

2.26

E-0

22.

26E

-02

2 - S

outh

War

ehou

seN

atur

al G

asTo

tal P

M10

0.00

07M

Msc

f5.

95M

Msc

f7.

60E

+00

15.

16E

-03

2.26

E-0

22.

26E

-02

2 - N

orth

War

ehou

seN

atur

al G

asTo

tal P

M2.

50.

0007

MM

scf

5.95

MM

scf

7.60

E+0

01

5.16

E-0

32.

26E

-02

2.26

E-0

2N

atur

al G

asC

O0.

0007

MM

scf

5.95

MM

scf

8.40

E+0

11

5.71

E-0

22.

50E

-01

2.50

E-0

1N

atur

al G

asS

O2

0.00

07M

Msc

f5.

95M

Msc

f6.

00E

-01

14.

08E

-04

1.79

E-0

31.

79E

-03

Nat

ural

Gas

NO

x0.

0007

MM

scf

5.95

MM

scf

1.00

E+0

21

6.79

E-0

22.

98E

-01

2.98

E-0

1N

atur

al G

asP

b0.

0007

MM

scf

5.95

MM

scf

5.00

E-0

41

3.40

E-0

71.

49E

-06

1.49

E-0

6N

atur

al G

asB

enze

ne0.

0007

MM

scf

5.95

MM

scf

2.10

E-0

31

1.43

E-0

66.

25E

-06

6.25

E-0

6N

atur

al G

asD

ichl

orob

enze

ne0.

0007

MM

scf

5.95

MM

scf

1.20

E-0

31

8.15

E-0

73.

57E

-06

3.57

E-0

6

Nor

ther

n M

etal

sBo

iler/

Furn

ace

Emis

sion

s Ca

lcul

atio

nsCr

iteri

a Po

lluta

nts,

Haz

ardo

us A

ir P

ollu

tant

s an

d G

reen

hous

e G

ases

Unc

ontr

olle

dLi

mite

dA

nnua

lEm

issi

onPo

tent

ial t

oPo

tent

ial t

oA

ctua

lFu

elR

ate

Emit

(PTE

)Em

it (P

TE)

Emis

sion

sU

nit N

ame

Use

dPo

lluta

nt(lb

/uni

ts)

(Ref

. No.

)(lb

/hr)

(ton/

yr)

(ton/

yr)

(ton

/yr)

Max

imum

Rat

eM

axim

um R

ate

Emis

sion

Fac

tor

(uni

ts/h

r)(u

nits

/yr)

Nat

ural

Gas

Form

alde

hyde

0.00

07M

Msc

f5.

95M

Msc

f7.

50E

-02

15.

10E

-05

2.23

E-0

42.

23E

-04

Nat

ural

Gas

Hex

ane

0.00

07M

Msc

f5.

95M

Msc

f1.

80E

+00

11.

22E

-03

5.36

E-0

35.

36E

-03

Nat

ural

Gas

Nap

htha

lene

0.00

07M

Msc

f5.

95M

Msc

f6.

10E

-04

14.

14E

-07

1.82

E-0

61.

82E

-06

Nat

ural

Gas

Tolu

ene

0.00

07M

Msc

f5.

95M

Msc

f3.

40E

-03

12.

31E

-06

1.01

E-0

51.

01E

-05

Nat

ural

Gas

PO

M0.

0007

MM

scf

5.95

MM

scf

8.82

E-0

51

5.99

E-0

82.

62E

-07

2.62

E-0

7N

atur

al G

asA

rsen

ic0.

0007

MM

scf

5.95

MM

scf

2.00

E-0

41

1.36

E-0

75.

95E

-07

5.95

E-0

7N

atur

al G

asB

eryl

lium

0.00

07M

Msc

f5.

95M

Msc

f1.

20E

-05

18.

15E

-09

3.57

E-0

83.

57E

-08

Nat

ural

Gas

Cad

miu

m0.

0007

MM

scf

5.95

MM

scf

1.10

E-0

31

7.47

E-0

73.

27E

-06

3.27

E-0

6N

atur

al G

asC

hrom

ium

0.00

07M

Msc

f5.

95M

Msc

f1.

40E

-03

19.

51E

-07

4.17

E-0

64.

17E

-06

Nat

ural

Gas

Cob

alt

0.00

07M

Msc

f5.

95M

Msc

f8.

40E

-05

15.

71E

-08

2.50

E-0

72.

50E

-07

Nat

ural

Gas

Man

gane

se0.

0007

MM

scf

5.95

MM

scf

3.80

E-0

41

2.58

E-0

71.

13E

-06

1.13

E-0

6N

atur

al G

asM

ercu

ry0.

0007

MM

scf

5.95

MM

scf

2.60

E-0

41

1.77

E-0

77.

74E

-07

7.74

E-0

7N

atur

al G

asN

icke

l0.

0007

MM

scf

5.95

MM

scf

2.10

E-0

31

1.43

E-0

66.

25E

-06

6.25

E-0

6N

atur

al G

asS

elen

ium

0.00

07M

Msc

f5.

95M

Msc

f2.

40E

-05

11.

63E

-08

7.14

E-0

87.

14E

-08

Nat

ural

Gas

CO

20.

0007

MM

scf

5.95

MM

scf

1.20

E+0

51

8.15

E+0

13.

57E

+02

3.57

E+0

2N

atur

al G

asC

H4

0.00

07M

Msc

f5.

95M

Msc

f2.

30E

+00

11.

56E

-03

6.84

E-0

36.

84E

-03

Nat

ural

Gas

N2O

0.00

07M

Msc

f5.

95M

Msc

f2.

20E

+00

11.

49E

-03

6.55

E-0

36.

55E

-03

Nat

ural

Gas

Tota

l CO

2e0.

0007

MM

scf

5.95

MM

scf

18.

20E

+01

3.59

E+0

23.

59E

+02

Eva

pora

tor

Nat

ural

Gas

Tota

l VO

C0.

0007

MM

scf

6.44

MM

scf

5.50

E+0

01

4.04

E-0

31.

77E

-02

1.77

E-0

275

0,00

0 B

tu/h

rN

atur

al G

asTo

tal P

M0.

0007

MM

scf

6.44

MM

scf

7.60

E+0

01

5.59

E-0

32.

45E

-02

2.45

E-0

2N

atur

al G

asTo

tal P

M10

0.00

07M

Msc

f6.

44M

Msc

f7.

60E

+00

15.

59E

-03

2.45

E-0

22.

45E

-02

Nat

ural

Gas

Tota

l PM

2.5

0.00

07M

Msc

f6.

44M

Msc

f7.

60E

+00

15.

59E

-03

2.45

E-0

22.

45E

-02

Nat

ural

Gas

CO

0.00

07M

Msc

f6.

44M

Msc

f8.

40E

+01

16.

18E

-02

2.71

E-0

12.

71E

-01

Nat

ural

Gas

SO

20.

0007

MM

scf

6.44

MM

scf

6.00

E-0

11

4.41

E-0

41.

93E

-03

1.93

E-0

3N

atur

al G

asN

Ox

0.00

07M

Msc

f6.

44M

Msc

f1.

00E

+02

17.

35E

-02

3.22

E-0

13.

22E

-01

Nat

ural

Gas

Pb

0.00

07M

Msc

f6.

44M

Msc

f5.

00E

-04

13.

68E

-07

1.61

E-0

61.

61E

-06

Nat

ural

Gas

Ben

zene

0.00

07M

Msc

f6.

44M

Msc

f2.

10E

-03

11.

54E

-06

6.76

E-0

66.

76E

-06

Nat

ural

Gas

Dic

hlor

oben

zene

0.00

07M

Msc

f6.

44M

Msc

f1.

20E

-03

18.

82E

-07

3.86

E-0

63.

86E

-06

Nat

ural

Gas

Form

alde

hyde

0.00

07M

Msc

f6.

44M

Msc

f7.

50E

-02

15.

51E

-05

2.42

E-0

42.

42E

-04

Nat

ural

Gas

Hex

ane

0.00

07M

Msc

f6.

44M

Msc

f1.

80E

+00

11.

32E

-03

5.80

E-0

35.

80E

-03

Nat

ural

Gas

Nap

htha

lene

0.00

07M

Msc

f6.

44M

Msc

f6.

10E

-04

14.

49E

-07

1.96

E-0

61.

96E

-06

Nat

ural

Gas

Tolu

ene

0.00

07M

Msc

f6.

44M

Msc

f3.

40E

-03

12.

50E

-06

1.10

E-0

51.

10E

-05

Nat

ural

Gas

PO

M0.

0007

MM

scf

6.44

MM

scf

8.82

E-0

51

6.49

E-0

82.

84E

-07

2.84

E-0

7N

atur

al G

asA

rsen

ic0.

0007

MM

scf

6.44

MM

scf

2.00

E-0

41

1.47

E-0

76.

44E

-07

6.44

E-0

7N

atur

al G

asB

eryl

lium

0.00

07M

Msc

f6.

44M

Msc

f1.

20E

-05

18.

82E

-09

3.86

E-0

83.

86E

-08

Nat

ural

Gas

Cad

miu

m0.

0007

MM

scf

6.44

MM

scf

1.10

E-0

31

8.09

E-0

73.

54E

-06

3.54

E-0

6N

atur

al G

asC

hrom

ium

0.00

07M

Msc

f6.

44M

Msc

f1.

40E

-03

11.

03E

-06

4.51

E-0

64.

51E

-06

Nat

ural

Gas

Cob

alt

0.00

07M

Msc

f6.

44M

Msc

f8.

40E

-05

16.

18E

-08

2.71

E-0

72.

71E

-07

Nor

ther

n M

etal

sBo

iler/

Furn

ace

Emis

sion

s Ca

lcul

atio

nsCr

iteri

a Po

lluta

nts,

Haz

ardo

us A

ir P

ollu

tant

s an

d G

reen

hous

e G

ases

Unc

ontr

olle

dLi

mite

dA

nnua

lEm

issi

onPo

tent

ial t

oPo

tent

ial t

oA

ctua

lFu

elR

ate

Emit

(PTE

)Em

it (P

TE)

Emis

sion

sU

nit N

ame

Use

dPo

lluta

nt(lb

/uni

ts)

(Ref

. No.

)(lb

/hr)

(ton/

yr)

(ton/

yr)

(ton

/yr)

Max

imum

Rat

eM

axim

um R

ate

Emis

sion

Fac

tor

(uni

ts/h

r)(u

nits

/yr)

Nat

ural

Gas

Man

gane

se0.

0007

MM

scf

6.44

MM

scf

3.80

E-0

41

2.79

E-0

71.

22E

-06

1.22

E-0

6N

atur

al G

asM

ercu

ry0.

0007

MM

scf

6.44

MM

scf

2.60

E-0

41

1.91

E-0

78.

37E

-07

8.37

E-0

7N

atur

al G

asN

icke

l0.

0007

MM

scf

6.44

MM

scf

2.10

E-0

31

1.54

E-0

66.

76E

-06

6.76

E-0

6N

atur

al G

asS

elen

ium

0.00

07M

Msc

f6.

44M

Msc

f2.

40E

-05

11.

76E

-08

7.73

E-0

87.

73E

-08

Nat

ural

Gas

CO

20.

0007

MM

scf

6.44

MM

scf

1.20

E+0

51

8.82

E+0

13.

86E

+02

3.86

E+0

2N

atur

al G

asC

H4

0.00

07M

Msc

f6.

44M

Msc

f2.

30E

+00

11.

69E

-03

7.41

E-0

37.

41E

-03

Nat

ural

Gas

N2O

0.00

07M

Msc

f6.

44M

Msc

f2.

20E

+00

11.

62E

-03

7.09

E-0

37.

09E

-03

Nat

ural

Gas

Tota

l CO

2e0.

0007

MM

scf

6.44

MM

scf

18.

88E

+01

3.89

E+0

23.

89E

+02

Eva

pora

tor

Nat

ural

Gas

Tota

l VO

C0.

0004

MM

scf

3.39

MM

scf

5.50

E+0

01

2.13

E-0

39.

33E

-03

9.33

E-0

339

5,00

0 B

tu/h

rN

atur

al G

asTo

tal P

M0.

0004

MM

scf

3.39

MM

scf

7.60

E+0

01

2.94

E-0

31.

29E

-02

1.29

E-0

2N

atur

al G

asTo

tal P

M10

0.00

04M

Msc

f3.

39M

Msc

f7.

60E

+00

12.

94E

-03

1.29

E-0

21.

29E

-02

Nat

ural

Gas

Tota

l PM

2.5

0.00

04M

Msc

f3.

39M

Msc

f7.

60E

+00

12.

94E

-03

1.29

E-0

21.

29E

-02

Nat

ural

Gas

CO

0.00

04M

Msc

f3.

39M

Msc

f8.

40E

+01

13.

25E

-02

1.42

E-0

11.

42E

-01

Nat

ural

Gas

SO

20.

0004

MM

scf

3.39

MM

scf

6.00

E-0

11

2.32

E-0

41.

02E

-03

1.02

E-0

3N

atur

al G

asN

Ox

0.00

04M

Msc

f3.

39M

Msc

f1.

00E

+02

13.

87E

-02

1.70

E-0

11.

70E

-01

Nat

ural

Gas

Pb

0.00

04M

Msc

f3.

39M

Msc

f5.

00E

-04

11.

94E

-07

8.48

E-0

78.

48E

-07

Nat

ural

Gas

Ben

zene

0.00

04M

Msc

f3.

39M

Msc

f2.

10E

-03

18.

13E

-07

3.56

E-0

63.

56E

-06

Nat

ural

Gas

Dic

hlor

oben

zene

0.00

04M

Msc

f3.

39M

Msc

f1.

20E

-03

14.

65E

-07

2.04

E-0

62.

04E

-06

Nat

ural

Gas

Form

alde

hyde

0.00

04M

Msc

f3.

39M

Msc

f7.

50E

-02

12.

90E

-05

1.27

E-0

41.

27E

-04

Nat

ural

Gas

Hex

ane

0.00

04M

Msc

f3.

39M

Msc

f1.

80E

+00

16.

97E

-04

3.05

E-0

33.

05E

-03

Nat

ural

Gas

Nap

htha

lene

0.00

04M

Msc

f3.

39M

Msc

f6.

10E

-04

12.

36E

-07

1.03

E-0

61.

03E

-06

Nat

ural

Gas

Tolu

ene

0.00

04M

Msc

f3.

39M

Msc

f3.

40E

-03

11.

32E

-06

5.77

E-0

65.

77E

-06

Nat

ural

Gas

PO

M0.

0004

MM

scf

3.39

MM

scf

8.82

E-0

51

3.42

E-0

81.

50E

-07

1.50

E-0

7N

atur

al G

asA

rsen

ic0.

0004

MM

scf

3.39

MM

scf

2.00

E-0

41

7.75

E-0

83.

39E

-07

3.39

E-0

7N

atur

al G

asB

eryl

lium

0.00

04M

Msc

f3.

39M

Msc

f1.

20E

-05

14.

65E

-09

2.04

E-0

82.

04E

-08

Nat

ural

Gas

Cad

miu

m0.

0004

MM

scf

3.39

MM

scf

1.10

E-0

31

4.26

E-0

71.

87E

-06

1.87

E-0

6N

atur

al G

asC

hrom

ium

0.00

04M

Msc

f3.

39M

Msc

f1.

40E

-03

15.

42E

-07

2.37

E-0

62.

37E

-06

Nat

ural

Gas

Cob

alt

0.00

04M

Msc

f3.

39M

Msc

f8.

40E

-05

13.

25E

-08

1.42

E-0

71.

42E

-07

Nat

ural

Gas

Man

gane

se0.

0004

MM

scf

3.39

MM

scf

3.80

E-0

41

1.47

E-0

76.

45E

-07

6.45

E-0

7N

atur

al G

asM

ercu

ry0.

0004

MM

scf

3.39

MM

scf

2.60

E-0

41

1.01

E-0

74.

41E

-07

4.41

E-0

7N

atur

al G

asN

icke

l0.

0004

MM

scf

3.39

MM

scf

2.10

E-0

31

8.13

E-0

73.

56E

-06

3.56

E-0

6N

atur

al G

asS

elen

ium

0.00

04M

Msc

f3.

39M

Msc

f2.

40E

-05

19.

29E

-09

4.07

E-0

84.

07E

-08

Nat

ural

Gas

CO

20.

0004

MM

scf

3.39

MM

scf

1.20

E+0

51

4.65

E+0

12.

04E

+02

2.04

E+0

2N

atur

al G

asC

H4

0.00

04M

Msc

f3.

39M

Msc

f2.

30E

+00

18.

91E

-04

3.90

E-0

33.

90E

-03

Nat

ural

Gas

N2O

0.00

04M

Msc

f3.

39M

Msc

f2.

20E

+00

18.

52E

-04

3.73

E-0

33.

73E

-03

Nat

ural

Gas

Tota

l CO

2e0.

0004

MM

scf

3.39

MM

scf

14.

68E

+01

2.05

E+0

22.

05E

+02

Oil-

Fire

d H

eate

rW

aste

Oil

Tota

l VO

C0.

0015

Mga

l13

.14

Mga

l1.

00E

+00

21.

50E

-03

6.57

E-0

36.

57E

-03

6.19

E-0

4

Nor

ther

n M

etal

sBo

iler/

Furn

ace

Emis

sion

s Ca

lcul

atio

nsCr

iteri

a Po

lluta

nts,

Haz

ardo

us A

ir P

ollu

tant

s an

d G

reen

hous

e G

ases

Unc

ontr

olle

dLi

mite

dA

nnua

lEm

issi

onPo

tent

ial t

oPo

tent

ial t

oA

ctua

lFu

elR

ate

Emit

(PTE

)Em

it (P

TE)

Emis

sion

sU

nit N

ame

Use

dPo

lluta

nt(lb

/uni

ts)

(Ref

. No.

)(lb

/hr)

(ton/

yr)

(ton/

yr)

(ton

/yr)

Max

imum

Rat

eM

axim

um R

ate

Emis

sion

Fac

tor

(uni

ts/h

r)(u

nits

/yr)

Sou

th W

areh

ouse

Was

te O

ilTo

tal P

M0.

0015

Mga

l13

.14

Mga

l4.

29E

+01

26.

44E

-02

2.82

E-0

12.

82E

-01

2.66

E-0

2W

aste

Oil

Tota

l PM

100.

0015

Mga

l13

.14

Mga

l3.

71E

+01

25.

56E

-02

2.43

E-0

12.

43E

-01

2.29

E-0

2W

aste

Oil

Tota

l PM

2.5

0.00

15M

gal

13.1

4M

gal

1.25

E+0

02

1.87

E-0

38.

20E

-03

8.20

E-0

37.

73E

-04

Was

te O

ilC

O0.

0015

Mga

l13

.14

Mga

l2.

10E

+00

23.

15E

-03

1.38

E-0

21.

38E

-02

1.30

E-0

3W

aste

Oil

SO

20.

0015

Mga

l13

.14

Mga

l5.

35E

+01

28.

03E

-02

3.51

E-0

13.

51E

-01

3.31

E-0

2W

aste

Oil

NO

x0.

0015

Mga

l13

.14

Mga

l1.

60E

+01

22.

40E

-02

1.05

E-0

11.

05E

-01

9.90

E-0

3W

aste

Oil

Pb

0.00

15M

gal

13.1

4M

gal

5.50

E+0

02

8.25

E-0

33.

61E

-02

3.61

E-0

23.

40E

-03

Was

te O

ilB

enz(

a)an

thra

cene

/chr

ysen

e0.

0015

Mga

l13

.14

Mga

l4.

40E

-03

26.

60E

-06

2.89

E-0

52.

89E

-05

2.72

E-0

6W

aste

Oil

Ben

zo(a

)pyr

ene

0.00

15M

gal

13.1

4M

gal

4.30

E-0

32

6.45

E-0

62.

83E

-05

2.83

E-0

52.

66E

-06

Was

te O

ilB

is(2

-eth

ylhe

xyl)p

htha

late

0.00

15M

gal

13.1

4M

gal

2.20

E-0

32

3.30

E-0

61.

45E

-05

1.45

E-0

51.

36E

-06

Was

te O

ilB

utyl

benz

ylph

thal

ate

0.00

15M

gal

13.1

4M

gal

5.10

E-0

42

7.65

E-0

73.

35E

-06

3.35

E-0

63.

16E

-07

Was

te O

ilD

ibut

ylph

thal

ate

0.00

15M

gal

13.1

4M

gal

3.40

E-0

52

5.10

E-0

82.

23E

-07

2.23

E-0

72.

10E

-08

Was

te O

ilD

ichl

orob

enze

ne0.

0015

Mga

l13

.14

Mga

l8.

00E

-07

21.

20E

-09

5.26

E-0

95.

26E

-09

4.95

E-1

0W

aste

Oil

Nap

htha

lene

0.00

15M

gal

13.1

4M

gal

1.30

E-0

22

1.95

E-0

58.

54E

-05

8.54

E-0

58.

05E

-06

Was

te O

ilP

hena

nthr

ene/

ant

hrac

ene

0.00

15M

gal

13.1

4M

gal

1.10

E-0

22

1.65

E-0

57.

23E

-05

7.23

E-0

56.

81E

-06

Was

te O

ilP

heno

l0.

0015

Mga

l13

.14

Mga

l2.

40E

-03

23.

60E

-06

1.58

E-0

51.

58E

-05

1.49

E-0

6W

aste

Oil

Pyr

ene

0.00

15M

gal

13.1

4M

gal

7.10

E-0

32

1.07

E-0

54.

66E

-05

4.66

E-0

54.

39E

-06

Was

te O

ilA

ntim

ony

0.00

15M

gal

13.1

4M

gal

4.50

E-0

32

6.75

E-0

62.

96E

-05

2.96

E-0

52.

79E

-06

Was

te O

ilA

rsen

ic0.

0015

Mga

l13

.14

Mga

l6.

00E

-02

29.

00E

-05

3.94

E-0

43.

94E

-04

3.71

E-0

5W

aste

Oil

Ber

ylliu

m0.

0015

Mga

l13

.14

Mga

l1.

80E

-03

22.

70E

-06

1.18

E-0

51.

18E

-05

1.11

E-0

6W

aste

Oil

Cad

miu

m0.

0015

Mga

l13

.14

Mga

l1.

20E

-02

21.

80E

-05

7.88

E-0

57.

88E

-05

7.43

E-0

6W

aste

Oil

Chr

omiu

m0.

0015

Mga

l13

.14

Mga

l1.

90E

-01

22.

85E

-04

1.25

E-0

31.

25E

-03

1.18

E-0

4W

aste

Oil

Cob

alt

0.00

15M

gal

13.1

4M

gal

5.70

E-0

32

8.55

E-0

63.

74E

-05

3.74

E-0

53.

53E

-06

Was

te O

ilM

anga

nese

0.00

15M

gal

13.1

4M

gal

5.00

E-0

22

7.50

E-0

53.

29E

-04

3.29

E-0

43.

10E

-05

Was

te O

ilN

icke

l0.

0015

Mga

l13

.14

Mga

l1.

60E

-01

22.

40E

-04

1.05

E-0

31.

05E

-03

9.90

E-0

5W

aste

Oil

Pho

spho

rus

0.00

15M

gal

13.1

4M

gal

3.60

E-0

22

5.40

E-0

52.

37E

-04

2.37

E-0

42.

23E

-05

Was

te O

ilC

O2

0.00

15M

gal

13.1

4M

gal

2.20

E+0

42

3.30

E+0

11.

45E

+02

1.45

E+0

21.

36E

+01

Was

te O

ilC

H4

0.00

15M

gal

13.1

4M

gal

2.16

E-0

12

3.24

E-0

41.

42E

-03

1.42

E-0

31.

34E

-04

Was

te O

ilN

2O0.

0015

Mga

l13

.14

Mga

l2.

60E

-01

23.

90E

-04

1.71

E-0

31.

71E

-03

1.61

E-0

4W

aste

Oil

Tota

l CO

2e0.

0015

Mga

l13

.14

Mga

l2.

21E

+04

23.

31E

+01

1.45

E+0

21.

45E

+02

1.37

E+0

1

Oil-

Fire

d H

eate

rW

aste

Oil

Tota

l VO

C0.

0015

Mga

l13

.14

Mga

l1.

00E

+00

21.

50E

-03

6.57

E-0

36.

57E

-03

3.90

E-0

4N

orth

War

ehou

seW

aste

Oil

Tota

l PM

0.00

15M

gal

13.1

4M

gal

4.29

E+0

12

6.44

E-0

22.

82E

-01

2.82

E-0

11.

67E

-02

Was

te O

ilTo

tal P

M10

0.00

15M

gal

13.1

4M

gal

3.71

E+0

12

5.56

E-0

22.

43E

-01

2.43

E-0

11.

44E

-02

Was

te O

ilTo

tal P

M2.

50.

0015

Mga

l13

.14

Mga

l1.

25E

+00

21.

87E

-03

8.20

E-0

38.

20E

-03

4.86

E-0

4W

aste

Oil

CO

0.00

15M

gal

13.1

4M

gal

2.10

E+0

02

3.15

E-0

31.

38E

-02

1.38

E-0

28.

18E

-04

Was

te O

ilS

O2

0.00

15M

gal

13.1

4M

gal

5.35

E+0

12

8.03

E-0

23.

51E

-01

3.51

E-0

12.

08E

-02

Was

te O

ilN

Ox

0.00

15M

gal

13.1

4M

gal

1.60

E+0

12

2.40

E-0

21.

05E

-01

1.05

E-0

16.

23E

-03

Was

te O

ilP

b0.

0015

Mga

l13

.14

Mga

l5.

50E

+00

28.

25E

-03

3.61

E-0

23.

61E

-02

2.14

E-0

3

Nor

ther

n M

etal

sBo

iler/

Furn

ace

Emis

sion

s Ca

lcul

atio

nsCr

iteri

a Po

lluta

nts,

Haz

ardo

us A

ir P

ollu

tant

s an

d G

reen

hous

e G

ases

Unc

ontr

olle

dLi

mite

dA

nnua

lEm

issi

onPo

tent

ial t

oPo

tent

ial t

oA

ctua

lFu

elR

ate

Emit

(PTE

)Em

it (P

TE)

Emis

sion

sU

nit N

ame

Use

dPo

lluta

nt(lb

/uni

ts)

(Ref

. No.

)(lb

/hr)

(ton/

yr)

(ton/

yr)

(ton

/yr)

Max

imum

Rat

eM

axim

um R

ate

Emis

sion

Fac

tor

(uni

ts/h

r)(u

nits

/yr)

Was

te O

ilB

enz(

a)an

thra

cene

/chr

ysen

e0.

0015

Mga

l13

.14

Mga

l4.

40E

-03

26.

60E

-06

2.89

E-0

52.

89E

-05

1.71

E-0

6W

aste

Oil

Ben

zo(a

)pyr

ene

0.00

15M

gal

13.1

4M

gal

4.30

E-0

32

6.45

E-0

62.

83E

-05

2.83

E-0

51.

67E

-06

Was

te O

ilB

is(2

-eth

ylhe

xyl)p

htha

late

0.00

15M

gal

13.1

4M

gal

2.20

E-0

32

3.30

E-0

61.

45E

-05

1.45

E-0

58.

57E

-07

Was

te O

ilB

utyl

benz

ylph

thal

ate

0.00

15M

gal

13.1

4M

gal

5.10

E-0

42

7.65

E-0

73.

35E

-06

3.35

E-0

61.

99E

-07

Was

te O

ilD

ibut

ylph

thal

ate

0.00

15M

gal

13.1

4M

gal

3.40

E-0

52

5.10

E-0

82.

23E

-07

2.23

E-0

71.

32E

-08

Was

te O

ilD

ichl

orob

enze

ne0.

0015

Mga

l13

.14

Mga

l8.

00E

-07

21.

20E

-09

5.26

E-0

95.

26E

-09

3.12

E-1

0W

aste

Oil

Nap

htha

lene

0.00

15M

gal

13.1

4M

gal

1.30

E-0

22

1.95

E-0

58.

54E

-05

8.54

E-0

55.

06E

-06

Was

te O

ilP

hena

nthr

ene/

ant

hrac

ene

0.00

15M

gal

13.1

4M

gal

1.10

E-0

22

1.65

E-0

57.

23E

-05

7.23

E-0

54.

28E

-06

Was

te O

ilP

heno

l0.

0015

Mga

l13

.14

Mga

l2.

40E

-03

23.

60E

-06

1.58

E-0

51.

58E

-05

9.35

E-0

7W

aste

Oil

Pyr

ene

0.00

15M

gal

13.1

4M

gal

7.10

E-0

32

1.07

E-0

54.

66E

-05

4.66

E-0

52.

77E

-06

Was

te O

ilA

ntim

ony

0.00

15M

gal

13.1

4M

gal

4.50

E-0

32

6.75

E-0

62.

96E

-05

2.96

E-0

51.

75E

-06

Was

te O

ilA

rsen

ic0.

0015

Mga

l13

.14

Mga

l6.

00E

-02

29.

00E

-05

3.94

E-0

43.

94E

-04

2.34

E-0

5W

aste

Oil

Ber

ylliu

m0.

0015

Mga

l13

.14

Mga

l1.

80E

-03

22.

70E

-06

1.18

E-0

51.

18E

-05

7.01

E-0

7W

aste

Oil

Cad

miu

m0.

0015

Mga

l13

.14

Mga

l1.

20E

-02

21.

80E

-05

7.88

E-0

57.

88E

-05

4.67

E-0

6W

aste

Oil

Chr

omiu

m0.

0015

Mga

l13

.14

Mga

l1.

90E

-01

22.

85E

-04

1.25

E-0

31.

25E

-03

7.40

E-0

5W

aste

Oil

Cob

alt

0.00

15M

gal

13.1

4M

gal

5.70

E-0

32

8.55

E-0

63.

74E

-05

3.74

E-0

52.

22E

-06

Was

te O

ilM

anga

nese

0.00

15M

gal

13.1

4M

gal

5.00

E-0

22

7.50

E-0

53.

29E

-04

3.29

E-0

41.

95E

-05

Was

te O

ilN

icke

l0.

0015

Mga

l13

.14

Mga

l1.

60E

-01

22.

40E

-04

1.05

E-0

31.

05E

-03

6.23

E-0

5W

aste

Oil

Pho

spho

rus

0.00

15M

gal

13.1

4M

gal

3.60

E-0

22

5.40

E-0

52.

37E

-04

2.37

E-0

41.

40E

-05

Was

te O

ilC

O2

0.00

15M

gal

13.1

4M

gal

2.20

E+0

42

3.30

E+0

11.

45E

+02

1.45

E+0

28.

57E

+00

Was

te O

ilC

H4

0.00

15M

gal

13.1

4M

gal

2.16

E-0

12

3.24

E-0

41.

42E

-03

1.42

E-0

38.

41E

-05

Was

te O

ilN

2O0.

0015

Mga

l13

.14

Mga

l2.

60E

-01

23.

90E

-04

1.71

E-0

31.

71E

-03

1.01

E-0

4W

aste

Oil

Tota

l CO

2e0.

0015

Mga

l13

.14

Mga

l2.

21E

+04

23.

31E

+01

1.45

E+0

21.

45E

+02

8.60

E+0

0

CO

2 ga

s fo

r wel

ding

CO

22.

74C

F10

340

CF

0.03

3574

13

9.19

E-0

24.

02E

-01

4.02

E-0

11.

39E

-01

Tota

l CO

2e2.

74C

F10

340

CF

0.03

3574

13

9.19

E-0

24.

02E

-01

4.02

E-0

11.

39E

-01

TOTA

L VO

C E

MIS

SIO

NS

0.01

80.

077

0.07

7TO

TAL

PM E

MIS

SIO

NS

0.14

90.

652

0.65

2TO

TAL

PM10

EM

ISSI

ON

S0.

131

0.57

50.

575

TOTA

L PM

2.5

EMIS

SIO

NS

0.02

40.

104

0.10

4TO

TAL

CO

EM

ISSI

ON

S0.

228

0.99

90.

999

TOTA

L SO

2 EM

ISSI

ON

S0.

162

0.71

00.

710

TOTA

L N

Ox

EMIS

SIO

NS

0.31

21.

366

1.36

6TO

TAL

HA

P EM

ISSI

ON

S0.

023

0.10

20.

102

TOTA

L C

O2

EMIS

SIO

NS

382.

798

1676

.654

1676

.654

TOTA

L C

H4

EMIS

SIO

NS

0.00

70.

029

0.02

9TO

TAL

N2O

EM

ISSI

ON

S0.

007

0.02

90.

029

TOTA

L C

O2E

EM

ISSI

ON

S38

4.98

116

86.2

1516

86.2

15

Nor

ther

n M

etal

sBo

iler/

Furn

ace

Emis

sion

s Ca

lcul

atio

nsCr

iteri

a Po

lluta

nts,

Haz

ardo

us A

ir P

ollu

tant

s an

d G

reen

hous

e G

ases

Unc

ontr

olle

dLi

mite

dA

nnua

lEm

issi

onPo

tent

ial t

oPo

tent

ial t

oA

ctua

lFu

elR

ate

Emit

(PTE

)Em

it (P

TE)

Emis

sion

sU

nit N

ame

Use

dPo

lluta

nt(lb

/uni

ts)

(Ref

. No.

)(lb

/hr)

(ton/

yr)

(ton/

yr)

(ton

/yr)

Max

imum

Rat

eM

axim

um R

ate

Emis

sion

Fac

tor

(uni

ts/h

r)(u

nits

/yr)

VOC

= vo

latil

e or

gani

c co

mpo

unds

PM =

par

ticul

ate

mat

ter

PM10

= p

artic

ulat

e m

atte

r un

der

10 m

icro

nsPM

2.5

= pa

rtic

ulat

e m

atte

r un

der

2.5

mic

rons

CO =

car

bon

mon

oxid

eSO

2 =

sulfu

r di

oxid

eN

Ox

= ni

trog

en o

xide

sH

AP

= ha

zard

ous

air

pollu

tant

Pb =

lead

CO2

= ca

rbon

dio

xide

CH4

= m

etha

neN

2O =

nitr

ous

oxid

eCO

2e =

car

bon

diox

ide

equi

vale

nt

REF

EREN

CES

:

1. B

oile

r, H

ot W

ater

Hea

ters

, Eva

pora

tors

, Spa

ce H

eate

rs, R

ooft

op H

eate

rsEm

issi

on fa

ctor

s fo

r na

tura

l gas

com

bust

ions

from

AP-

42, 5

th E

d., T

able

s 1.

4-1,

1.4

-2, 1

.4-3

, and

1.4

-4, 7

/98.

Hea

ting

valu

e of

nat

ural

gas

is a

ssum

ed to

be

the

AP

-42

defa

ult v

alue

of 1

,020

Btu

/scf

.38

4,00

0 Bt

u/hr

x s

cf/1

,020

Btu

= 3

76.4

7 sc

f/hr

2. O

il-Fi

red

Hea

ters

Emis

sion

fact

ors

for

was

te o

il co

mbu

stio

n fr

om A

P-42

, 5th

Ed.

, Tab

les

1.11

-1, 1

.11-

2, 1

.11-

3, 1

.11-

4, 1

.11-

5.Em

issi

on fa

ctor

s fo

r fu

el o

il co

mbu

stio

n fr

om A

P-42

, 5th

Ed.

, Tab

le 1

.3-3

for

met

hane

.Em

issi

on fa

ctor

s fo

r fu

el o

il co

mbu

stio

n fr

om A

P-42

, 5th

Ed.

, Tab

le 1

.3-8

for

nitr

ous

oxid

e.W

orst

cas

e em

issi

on fa

ctor

s fo

r sp

ace

heat

ers

vapo

rizi

ng b

urne

r or

ato

miz

ing

burn

er w

ere

used

bec

ause

the

burn

er ty

pe is

unk

now

n.Es

timat

ed a

sh c

onte

nt fr

om A

P-42

Bac

kgro

und

Doc

umen

t for

Sec

tion

1.11

, Tab

le 2

-1, 6

500

ug/g

ave

rage

(0.6

5%)

Estim

ated

lead

con

tent

from

AP-

42 B

ackg

roun

d D

ocum

ent f

or S

ectio

n 1.

11, T

able

2-1

, 110

0 ug

/g a

vera

ge (0

.11%

)A

ctua

l lea

d co

nten

t in

was

te o

il ha

s de

crea

sed

sinc

e 19

82-8

3 sa

mpl

es w

ere

anal

yzed

.Es

timat

ed s

ulfu

r co

nten

t fro

m A

P-42

Bac

kgro

und

Doc

umen

t for

Sec

tion

1.11

, Tab

le 2

-1, 5

000

ug/g

ave

rage

(0.5

0%)

Emis

sion

fact

or fo

r PM

2.5

from

AP-

42, 5

th E

d., T

able

1.3

-7, D

istil

late

oil

com

bust

ion,

res

idua

l oil,

unc

ontr

olle

d co

mm

erci

al b

oile

rs36

gal

oil/

day

max

imum

cap

acity

, was

te o

il fr

om m

etal

turn

ings

. 36

gal/

day

x da

y/24

hr

= 1.

5 ga

l/hr

36 g

al/d

ay x

day

/24

hr x

140

,000

Btu

/gal

x M

MBt

u/1e

6 Bt

u =

0.21

MM

Btu/

hr

3. C

O2

gas

for

wel

ding

47 ta

nks

used

in 2

010;

tank

s ar

e 17

6 CF

, 75%

arg

on/2

5% C

O2

8 CF

= 1

lb fo

r m

ixtu

reM

axim

um u

sage

rat

e es

timat

ed b

y 17

6 CF

x 4

7 ta

nks

x 25

% C

O2/

377

8 op

erat

ing

hour

s x

5 (s

calin

g fa

ctor

) = 2

.74

CF/h

r

Nor

ther

n M

etal

sBo

iler/

Furn

ace

Emis

sion

s Ca

lcul

atio

nsCr

iteri

a Po

lluta

nts,

Haz

ardo

us A

ir P

ollu

tant

s an

d G

reen

hous

e G

ases

Unc

ontr

olle

dLi

mite

dA

nnua

lEm

issi

onPo

tent

ial t

oPo

tent

ial t

oA

ctua

lFu

elR

ate

Emit

(PTE

)Em

it (P

TE)

Emis

sion

sU

nit N

ame

Use

dPo

lluta

nt(lb

/uni

ts)

(Ref

. No.

)(lb

/hr)

(ton/

yr)

(ton/

yr)

(ton

/yr)

Max

imum

Rat

eM

axim

um R

ate

Emis

sion

Fac

tor

(uni

ts/h

r)(u

nits

/yr)

Arg

on 3

9.94

8 g/

mol

CO2

44.0

1 g/

mol

Emis

sion

fact

or: 1

lb/8

CF

x (0

.25

x 44

.01)

/ [(

0.25

x 4

4.01

) + (0

.75

x 39

.948

)] =

0.03

3574

lb C

O2/

CF

Nor

ther

n M

etal

s, L

LCBo

iler/

Furn

ace

Emis

sion

s Ca

lcul

atio

nsG

reen

hous

e G

ases

Unc

ontr

olle

dLi

mite

dA

nnua

lEm

issi

onPo

tent

ial t

oPo

tent

ial t

oA

ctua

lFu

elR

ate

Emit

(PTE

)Em

it (P

TE)

Emis

sion

sU

nit N

ame

Use

dPo

lluta

nt(lb

/uni

ts)

(Ref

. No.

)(lb

/hr)

(ton/

yr)

(ton/

yr)

(ton

/yr)

Boi

ler

Nat

ural

Gas

CO

20.

0004

MM

scf

3.30

MM

scf

120,

000

14.

52E

+01

1.98

E+0

21.

98E

+02

384,

000

Btu

/hr

Nat

ural

Gas

CH

40.

0004

MM

scf

3.30

MM

scf

2.30

18.

66E

-04

3.79

E-0

33.

79E

-03

Mai

n O

ffice

Nat

ural

Gas

N2O

0.00

04M

Msc

f3.

30M

Msc

f2.

20

1

8.28

E-0

43.

63E

-03

3.63

E-0

3N

atur

al G

asTo

tal C

O2e

0.00

04M

Msc

f3.

30M

Msc

f1

4.55

E+0

11.

99E

+02

1.99

E+0

2

Hot

Wat

er H

eate

rN

atur

al G

asC

O2

0.00

01M

Msc

f0.

60M

Msc

f12

0,00

0

1

8.24

E+0

03.

61E

+01

3.61

E+0

170

,000

Btu

/hr

Nat

ural

Gas

CH

40.

0001

MM

scf

0.60

MM

scf

2.30

11.

58E

-04

6.91

E-0

46.

91E

-04

Mai

n O

ffice

Nat

ural

Gas

N2O

0.00

01M

Msc

f0.

60M

Msc

f2.

20

1

1.51

E-0

46.

61E

-04

6.61

E-0

4N

atur

al G

asTo

tal C

O2e

0.00

01M

Msc

f0.

60M

Msc

f1

8.29

E+0

03.

63E

+01

3.63

E+0

1

Hot

Wat

er H

eate

rN

atur

al G

asC

O2

0.00

004

MM

scf

0.34

MM

scf

120,

000

14.

71E

+00

2.06

E+0

12.

06E

+01

40,0

00 B

tu/h

rN

atur

al G

asC

H4

0.00

004

MM

scf

0.34

MM

scf

2.30

19.

02E

-05

3.95

E-0

43.

95E

-04

Mai

n O

ffice

Nat

ural

Gas

N2O

0.00

004

MM

scf

0.34

MM

scf

2.20

18.

63E

-05

3.78

E-0

43.

78E

-04

Nat

ural

Gas

Tota

l CO

2e0.

0000

4M

Msc

f0.

34M

Msc

f1

4.73

E+0

02.

07E

+01

2.07

E+0

1

Hot

Wat

er H

eate

rN

atur

al G

asC

O2

0.00

004

MM

scf

0.34

MM

scf

120,

000

14.

71E

+00

2.06

E+0

12.

06E

+01

40,0

00 B

tu/h

rN

atur

al G

asC

H4

0.00

004

MM

scf

0.34

MM

scf

2.30

19.

02E

-05

3.95

E-0

43.

95E

-04

Mai

nten

ance

Nat

ural

Gas

N2O

0.00

004

MM

scf

0.34

MM

scf

2.20

18.

63E

-05

3.78

E-0

43.

78E

-04

Nat

ural

Gas

Tota

l CO

2e0.

0000

4M

Msc

f0.

34M

Msc

f1

4.73

E+0

02.

07E

+01

2.07

E+0

1

Roo

ftop

Hea

ters

Nat

ural

Gas

CO

20.

0003

MM

scf

2.75

MM

scf

120,

000

13.

76E

+01

1.65

E+0

21.

65E

+02

5 x

64,0

00 B

tu/h

rN

atur

al G

asC

H4

0.00

03M

Msc

f2.

75M

Msc

f2.

30

1

7.22

E-0

43.

16E

-03

3.16

E-0

3N

atur

al G

asN

2O0.

0003

MM

scf

2.75

MM

scf

2.20

16.

90E

-04

3.02

E-0

33.

02E

-03

Nat

ural

Gas

Tota

l CO

2e0.

0003

MM

scf

2.75

MM

scf

13.

79E

+01

1.66

E+0

21.

66E

+02

Spa

ce H

eate

rsN

atur

al G

asC

O2

0.00

07M

Msc

f5.

95M

Msc

f12

0,00

0

1

8.15

E+0

13.

57E

+02

3.57

E+0

24

x 17

3,25

0 B

tu/h

rN

atur

al G

asC

H4

0.00

07M

Msc

f5.

95M

Msc

f2.

30

1

1.56

E-0

36.

84E

-03

6.84

E-0

32

- Sou

th W

areh

ouse

Nat

ural

Gas

N2O

0.00

07M

Msc

f5.

95M

Msc

f2.

20

1

1.49

E-0

36.

55E

-03

6.55

E-0

32

- Nor

th W

areh

ouse

Nat

ural

Gas

Tota

l CO

2e0.

0007

MM

scf

5.95

MM

scf

18.

20E

+01

3.59

E+0

23.

59E

+02

Eva

pora

tor

Nat

ural

Gas

CO

20.

0007

MM

scf

6.44

MM

scf

120,

000

18.

82E

+01

3.86

E+0

23.

86E

+02

Max

imum

Rat

eM

axim

um R

ate

Emis

sion

Fac

tor

(uni

ts/h

r)(u

nits

/yr)

Nor

ther

n M

etal

s, L

LCBo

iler/

Furn

ace

Emis

sion

s Ca

lcul

atio

nsG

reen

hous

e G

ases

Unc

ontr

olle

dLi

mite

dA

nnua

lEm

issi

onPo

tent

ial t

oPo

tent

ial t

oA

ctua

lFu

elR

ate

Emit

(PTE

)Em

it (P

TE)

Emis

sion

sU

nit N

ame

Use

dPo

lluta

nt(lb

/uni

ts)

(Ref

. No.

)(lb

/hr)

(ton/

yr)

(ton/

yr)

(ton

/yr)

Max

imum

Rat

eM

axim

um R

ate

Emis

sion

Fac

tor

(uni

ts/h

r)(u

nits

/yr)

750,

000

Btu

/hr

Nat

ural

Gas

CH

40.

0007

MM

scf

6.44

MM

scf

2.30

11.

69E

-03

7.41

E-0

37.

41E

-03

Nat

ural

Gas

N2O

0.00

07M

Msc

f6.

44M

Msc

f2.

20

1

1.62

E-0

37.

09E

-03

7.09

E-0

3N

atur

al G

asTo

tal C

O2e

0.00

07M

Msc

f6.

44M

Msc

f1

8.88

E+0

13.

89E

+02

3.89

E+0

2

Eva

pora

tor

Nat

ural

Gas

CO

20.

0004

MM

scf

3.39

MM

scf

120,

000

14.

65E

+01

2.04

E+0

22.

04E

+02

395,

000

Btu

/hr

Nat

ural

Gas

CH

40.

0004

MM

scf

3.39

MM

scf

2.30

18.

91E

-04

3.90

E-0

33.

90E

-03

Nat

ural

Gas

N2O

0.00

04M

Msc

f3.

39M

Msc

f2.

20

1

8.52

E-0

43.

73E

-03

3.73

E-0

3N

atur

al G

asTo

tal C

O2e

0.00

04M

Msc

f3.

39M

Msc

f1

4.68

E+0

12.

05E

+02

2.05

E+0

2

Oil-

Fire

d H

eate

rW

aste

Oil

CO

20.

0015

Mga

l13

.14

Mga

l22

,000

2

3.30

E+0

11.

45E

+02

1.45

E+0

21.

36E

+01

Sou

th W

areh

ouse

Was

te O

ilC

H4

0.00

15M

gal

13.1

4M

gal

0.21

6

2

3.24

E-0

41.

42E

-03

1.42

E-0

31.

34E

-04

Was

te O

ilN

2O0.

0015

Mga

l13

.14

Mga

l0.

26

2

3.90

E-0

41.

71E

-03

1.71

E-0

31.

61E

-04

Was

te O

ilTo

tal C

O2e

0.00

15M

gal

13.1

4M

gal

22,0

85.1

4

23.

31E

+01

1.45

E+0

21.

45E

+02

1.37

E+0

1

Oil-

Fire

d H

eate

rW

aste

Oil

CO

20.

0015

Mga

l13

.14

Mga

l22

,000

2

3.30

E+0

11.

45E

+02

1.45

E+0

28.

57E

+00

Nor

th W

areh

ouse

Was

te O

ilC

H4

0.00

15M

gal

13.1

4M

gal

0.21

6

2

3.24

E-0

41.

42E

-03

1.42

E-0

38.

41E

-05

Was

te O

ilN

2O0.

0015

Mga

l13

.14

Mga

l0.

26

2

3.90

E-0

41.

71E

-03

1.71

E-0

31.

01E

-04

Was

te O

ilTo

tal C

O2e

0.00

15M

gal

13.1

4M

gal

22,0

85.1

4

23.

31E

+01

1.45

E+0

21.

45E

+02

8.60

E+0

0

CO

2 ga

s fo

r wel

ding

CO

22.

74C

F10

340

CF

0.03

39.

19E

-02

4.02

E-0

14.

02E

-01

1.39

E-0

1To

tal C

O2e

2.74

CF

1034

0C

F0.

03

3

9.19

E-0

24.

02E

-01

4.02

E-0

11.

39E

-01

TOTA

L C

O2

EMIS

SIO

NS

383

1,

677

1,

677

TOTA

L C

H4

EMIS

SIO

NS

6.72

E-0

32.

94E

-02

2.94

E-0

2TO

TAL

N2O

EM

ISSI

ON

S6.

59E

-03

2.88

E-0

22.

88E

-02

TOTA

L C

O2e

EM

ISSI

ON

S38

5

1,68

6

1,68

6

TOTA

L M

MB

TU/H

R3.

112

VOC

= vo

latil

e or

gani

c co

mpo

unds

PM =

par

ticul

ate

mat

ter

PM10

= p

artic

ulat

e m

atte

r un

der

10 m

icro

ns

Nor

ther

n M

etal

s, L

LCBo

iler/

Furn

ace

Emis

sion

s Ca

lcul

atio

nsG

reen

hous

e G

ases

Unc

ontr

olle

dLi

mite

dA

nnua

lEm

issi

onPo

tent

ial t

oPo

tent

ial t

oA

ctua

lFu

elR

ate

Emit

(PTE

)Em

it (P

TE)

Emis

sion

sU

nit N

ame

Use

dPo

lluta

nt(lb

/uni

ts)

(Ref

. No.

)(lb

/hr)

(ton/

yr)

(ton/

yr)

(ton

/yr)

Max

imum

Rat

eM

axim

um R

ate

Emis

sion

Fac

tor

(uni

ts/h

r)(u

nits

/yr)

PM2.

5 =

part

icul

ate

mat

ter

unde

r 2.

5 m

icro

nsCO

= c

arbo

n m

onox

ide

SO2

= su

lfur

diox

ide

NO

x =

nitr

ogen

oxi

des

HA

P =

haza

rdou

s ai

r po

lluta

ntPb

= le

adCO

2 =

carb

on d

ioxi

deCH

4 =

met

hane

N2O

= n

itrou

s ox

ide

CO2e

= c

arbo

n di

oxid

e eq

uiva

lent

REF

EREN

CES

:

1. B

oile

r, H

ot W

ater

Hea

ters

, Eva

pora

tors

, Spa

ce H

eate

rs, R

ooft

op H

eate

rsEm

issi

on fa

ctor

s fo

r na

tura

l gas

com

bust

ions

from

AP-

42, 5

th E

d., T

able

1.4

-2, 7

/98.

Hea

ting

valu

e of

nat

ural

gas

is a

ssum

ed to

be

the

AP

-42

defa

ult v

alue

of 1

,020

Btu

/scf

.38

4,00

0 Bt

u/hr

x s

cf/1

,020

Btu

= 3

76.4

7 sc

f/hr

2. O

il-Fi

red

Hea

ters

Emis

sion

fact

ors

for

was

te o

il co

mbu

stio

n fr

om A

P-42

, 5th

Ed.

, Tab

le 1

.11-

3 fo

r CO

2.Em

issi

on fa

ctor

s fo

r fu

el o

il co

mbu

stio

n fr

om A

P-42

, 5th

Ed.

, Tab

le 1

.3-3

for

met

hane

.Em

issi

on fa

ctor

s fo

r fu

el o

il co

mbu

stio

n fr

om A

P-42

, 5th

Ed.

, Tab

le 1

.3-8

for

nitr

ous

oxid

e.36

gal

oil/

day

max

imum

cap

acity

, was

te o

il fr

om m

etal

turn

ings

. 36

gal/

day

x da

y/24

hr

= 1.

5 ga

l/hr

36 g

al/d

ay x

day

/24

hr x

140

,000

Btu

/gal

x M

MBt

u/1e

6 Bt

u =

0.21

MM

Btu/

hr

3. C

O2

gas

for

wel

ding

47 ta

nks

used

in 2

010;

tank

s ar

e 17

6 CF

, 75%

arg

on/2

5% C

O2

8 CF

= 1

lb fo

r m

ixtu

reM

axim

um u

sage

rat

e es

timat

ed b

y 17

6 CF

x 4

7 ta

nks

x 25

% C

O2/

377

8 op

erat

ing

hour

s x

5 (s

calin

g fa

ctor

) = 2

.74

CF/h

rA

rgon

39.

948

g/m

olCO

2 44

.01

g/m

olEm

issi

on fa

ctor

: 1 lb

/8 C

F x

(0.2

5 x

44.0

1) /

[(0.

25 x

44.

01) +

(0.7

5 x

39.9

48)]

=0.

0335

74lb

CO

2/CF

Attachment 2: AERA Impact Statement

MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY AIR QUALITY 520 LAFAYETTE ROAD ST. PAUL, MN 55155-4194

AERA INTERNAL FORM-02 IMPACT ANALYSIS SUMMARY

Page 1 of 15

1. AQ Facility ID No.: 05300480 2. AQ File No.: 2406 3. Facility Name: Northern Metals, LLC 4. Date of Initial Submittal (and major revisions): 8/30/2010, EAW 11/29/10, 4/14/11 RASS’s, 5/9/11

same RASS’s electronic support documents and hard copies of write up, 8/12/11 complete final AERA package, 9/11 short term emission update

5. Date of Risk Manager Meeting: 8/29/11, memo 9/11 6. Project Team Members: Heather Magee-Hill, Melissa Sheffer, William Lynott, Kelsey Suddard,

Anne Jackson. 7. Assigned Section Manager: Don Smith 8. Standard Industrial Classification (SIC): 5093 Scrap and Waste Materials 9. General Summary

a. Facility and Project Description Northern Metals is the metal recycling facility formerly referred to as American Iron & Supply, Inc.

In 1995, MPCA completed a “screening level” human health and ecological risk assessment for the installation and operation of a Kondiratortm metal shredder/recycler at the Minneapolis location as part of a legislatively mandated EAW. An air emissions permit was subsequently issued allowing the shredding of auto parts but not auto hulks. The permit also specified limits on air emissions that reflected the outcome of the EAW and risk assessment analyses.

The matter generated a great deal of public interest at the time. In light of the level of public interest in the initial EAW and risk assessment, this 2011 AERA was prepared as part of a voluntary EAW.

The shredder began operating in June 2009. Northern Metals is proposing to update its 1998 air permit to reflect the pollution control equipment that is currently installed; update emission estimates and limits based on stack testing results; eliminate/reduce testing requirements for some pollutants (including metals, PCBs, dioxins/furans, asbestos, and mercury); eliminate feedstock restrictions in order to be able to shred auto hulks instead of only auto parts; and eliminate feedstock restrictions on the amount of aluminum, brass, copper and stainless steel scrap the facility can shred. The shredder is enclosed in a building and is equipped with pollution control equipment, including high efficiency cyclones, venturi scrubbers, and fabric filters. Other shredders in the state are not enclosed, have less control equipment and, with the exception of one shredder at a Part 70 steel mini-mill source, are all regulated through registration permits. The individual state permit being sought by Northern Metals is more stringent in terms of limits, reduced flexibility, monitoring and recordkeeping than a registration permit.

b. General Site Setting Description The facility is located in an industrially zoned area in the Hawthorne neighborhood of North

Minneapolis, adjacent to the Mississippi River. There are no farms or other fishable water bodies within 3km radius. There are several schools, nursing homes, and daycare facilities within 3km but none in the industrial park in which the facility is located. The closest and potentially most impacted area zoned for residential use is approximately 200m east of the facility across the Mississippi River. See Appendix A for maps of the area.



Page 2 of 15

c. Emissions Summary The emission estimates were based on existing and proposed permit limits, stack testing conducted at

the facility, and Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS). The risk drivers (pollutants with risks greater than 10% of facility risk guidelines) for this analysis were: PCB’s, dioxins/furans, arsenic and nickel. Emission estimates for PCBs and dioxins/furans were based on stack testing results from the facility with a scalar incorporated to account for the proposed increase in plastics-containing feedstock due to the shredding of auto hulks. Of the PCB's/dioxins/furans tested, 8-TCDD-c, PCB 169, and PCB 126, did not have instrument stack testing results. For these pollutants the average instrument detection limit was used. The majority of the PCB risk estimate came from PCB 126, which was not detected. It should also be noted that several of the highest instrument stack testing results used in this analysis had notes explaining that there might have been potential blank contamination or a concentration that was “less than the stated minimum quantification limit and should be considered an estimated value”. The inclusion of the scalar, instrument detection limits and highest instrument results contributes to the likelihood that the emission estimates for PCB’s/dioxins/furans for this project are overestimates. Emissions for arsenic and nickel were based on proposed permit limits.

d. Dispersion Summary Unitized dispersion factors for the stack emissions were generated by AERMOD for the RASS’s. e. Facility Risk Summary The areas of maximum impact were found to be along the eastern property boundary of the facility

from the annual modeling and western property boundary from the hourly modeling. In addition to quantifying maximum risk estimates, refined chronic risk estimates at the potentially most impacted area zoned residential were also calculated. Facility risk estimates were below facility risk guidelines, except for the urban gardener cancer risk estimates. Maximum urban gardener cancer risk estimates were above facility risk guidelines and refined facility urban gardener cancer risk estimates were at facility risk guidelines at the potentially most impacted residentially zoned area. The urban gardener cancer risk estimates were dominated by PCBs and dioxins/furans. An additional analysis based on asbestos stack testing at the facility was conducted and cancer risk estimates from asbestos were found to be well below risk driver levels when compared to the US EPA IRIS Health Benchmark for asbestos.

f. Cumulative Inhalation Risk Summary Cumulative inhalation risks were estimated by summing maximum facility-specific risks, estimated

risks from the nearest ambient air monitors and screening level risks from a nearby facility (Hard Chrome Inc.). These summed risk estimates were at facility risk guidelines for respiratory effects and above facility risk guidelines for cancer. Inhalation cancer risk estimates from ambient air monitoring data are above facility risk guidelines throughout the state but within EPA’s excess cancer risk goal range of 1 in 1,000,000 to 1 in 10,000. The risk estimates from the incremental changes proposed were about 4% of the total summed cumulative inhalation cancer risk, 5% of chronic respiratory risk estimates and 9% of the total summed acute respiratory risk estimates. Overall risk estimates were similar to other facilities and areas in the state.



Page 3 of 15

Quantitative Summary Summary of Potential Changes in Emission Rates

Pollutant Existing lb/hr

Existing tons/yr Note

Proposed lb/hr

Proposed tons/yr Note

Potential tons/yr Increase

Particulate Matter (PM) PM10 0.43 0.81 1 4.2 7.9 2 7.1 PM2.5 Not regulated in original permit 4.2 7.9 2 N/A Antimony compounds 0.000086 0.00016 3 0.0024 0.0045 5 0.0044 Arsenic compounds 0.00052 0.0010 1 0.0024 0.0012 2 0.00023 Barium compounds 0.00033 0.00062 6 0.0011 0.0020 7 0.0014 Beryllium compounds 0.00022 0.00042 1 0.0072 0.0038 2 0.0034 Boron 0.0013 0.0025 6 0.0042 0.0079 7 0.0055 Cadmium compounds 0.00034 0.00064 1 0.0072 0.0025 2 0.0018 Hexavalent chromium 0.00031 0.00059 1 0.0021 0.00070 2 0.00011 Copper compounds 0.0040 0.0076 4 0.23 0.43 5 0.42 Lead compounds 0.00093 0.0018 1 0.02 0.0076 2 0.0058 Manganese compounds 0.0088 0.017 1 0.012 0.017 2 0 Mercury compounds 0.00079 0.0015 1 0.00079 0.0015 1 0 Nickel compounds 0.0041 0.0077 1 0.086 0.030 2 0.022 Selenium compounds 0.000028 0.000053 6 0.000091 0.00017 7 0.00012 TCDD Equivalents (PCBs/dioxins/furans) 5.42E-09 1.02E-08 8 8.68E-09 1.64E-08 9 6.14E-09 Vanadium oxide 0.00043 0.00081 3 0.012 0.023 5 0.022 Zinc compounds 0.023 0.043 6 0.12 0.23 5 0.19 *Calculation Notes 1 Current permit limit. 2 Calculated from proposed potential to emit (lb/hr) or permit limit (tons/yr) at 4.2 lb/hr PM. 3 2% throughput limit mass balance calculation assuming current PM permit limit. 4 1% throughput limit mass balance calculation assuming current PM permit limit. 5 Worst case scenario based on 100% throughput (at 4.2 lb/hr PM limit) of alternative feed stocks assuming ~95% PM is metal (as tested) at the proposed permit limit plus a safety factor, since there will always be some percent that is dirt and other non-metalic feedstock. 6 Highest stack test value. 7 Highest stack test value adjusted by the PM limit scalar 3.2. 8 Highest detected stack test values and average instrument detection limits (when the pollutant was not detected). 9 Highest detected values or average instrument detection limit (when the pollutant was not detected) and a scalar of 1.6 to represent the potential 60% increase in non-metalic feedstock from processing auto hulks.



Page 4 of 15

10. What is the source of the following summaries? MPCA adapted RASS’s At X:\Old_P_Fo\AQPRJ\TOXTEAM\Airstream\Projects\Northern Metals (previously Kondirator or American Iron)\Internal Documents\Support Documents\5_6_11 submittal RASS with 6_11 emissions

Note: The hazard index (HI) against which facility risks are compared for acute, sub-chronic and chronic non-cancer risks is 1. The cancer risk against which facility risks are compared is 1 E-5 (or 1 chance in 100,000). These facility risk guidelines are risk management-based. They are not discrete indicators of observed adverse effect. If a risk estimate falls below facility risk guidelines, the MPCA may conclude that the assessed health effects from the proposed action are unlikely to occur or will be negligible. A risk estimate that is higher than a guideline may trigger further consideration. Although the risk guidelines are compared to results given in one significant figure some results are summarized below in two significant figures because they were used in additional cumulative calculations.

a. Maximum (Fence line) Facility Risk Estimates with Existing Permit Requirements Total Inhalation Screening Hazard Indices and

Cancer Risks Total Multi-pathway Screening Hazard Indices and

Cancer Risks

Acute Sub-chronic Noncancer

Chronic Noncancer Cancer

Urban Gardener Noncancer

Urban Gardener

Cancer

Resident Noncancer

Resident Cancer

0.042

0.001

0.032

0.18 E-5

0.04 (*0.01)

2 E-5 (*0.7 E-05)

0.04 (*0.01)

0.3 E-5 (*0.09 E-5)

*Refinement for maximum residentially zoned receptor.

b. Maximum (Fence line) Facility Risk Estimates with Proposed Permit Changes Total Inhalation Screening Hazard Indices and

Cancer Risks Total Multi-pathway Screening Hazard Indices and

Cancer Risks




Urban Gardener

Cancer

Resident Noncancer

Resident Cancer

0.23

0.004

0.096

0.41 E-5

0.1 (*0.04)

3 E-5 (*1 E-5)

0.1 (*0.03)

0.6 E-5 (*0.2 E-5)

*Refinement for maximum residentially zoned receptor c. Incremental Increase in Maximum (Fence line) Risk Estimates from Proposed Permit Changes

Total Inhalation Screening Hazard Indices and Cancer Risks

Total Multi-pathway Screening Hazard Indices and Cancer Risks




Urban Gardener

Cancer

Resident Noncancer

Resident Cancer

0.19 0.003 0.064 0.23 E-5 0.07 (*0.02)

1 E-5 (*0.5 E-5)

0.06 (*0.02)

0.3 E-5 (*0.1E-5)

*Refinement for maximum residentially zoned receptor



Page 5 of 15

11. Mass and Percent Mass Assessed in each RASS Analysis Scenario Description Mass HAPS (tons per year) In

RASS % HAPS in permit analyzed

Before Permit Changes 0.03 75 After Permit Changes 0.07 87.5

12. For each exposure pathway below list the risk drivers and their percent contribution to the

hazard indices or cancer risks. Acute Exposure Pathway after proposed permit changes

Chemical Acute risk % contribution Exposure/Health End Point Arsenic 0.12 52% Max inhalation at property boundary

Developmental; Cardiovascular; Nervous system

a. Inhalation Exposure Pathway after proposed permit changes

Chemical Cancer risk % contribution

Exposure

Nickel 1.2 E-6 29% Max inhalation at property boundary

b. Indirect Exposure Pathway after proposed permit changes

Chemical Cancer risk % contribution

Exposure

Arsenic 1.8E-6 6% Max urban gardener at property boundary TCDD Equivalents 2.7E-5 93% Max urban gardener at property boundary

c. Total Risks after proposed permit changes Chemical Cancer risk %

contribution

Exposure

Arsenic 2.2E-6 6% Max urban gardener at property boundary Nickel 1.2 E-6 4% Max urban gardener at property boundary TCDD Equivalents 2.8E-5 85% Max urban gardener at property boundary

13. Were surrogate inhalation health benchmarks used for risk drivers? Yes. Which ones and what

further analysis might better inform the risks? Nickel sulfide was a surrogate for nickel and no further nickel analysis is recommended.

14. Are the criteria pollutants compared to the AAQS using “high first high” modeled concentrations (rather than the regulatory standard)? Yes, the table below shows the AERA-modeled ratios of criteria pollutant concentrations divided by their respective AAQS from the RASS.



Page 6 of 15

While this is not used as an approach for assessing compliance with the standard, it provides a rough measure of how much the emitted criteria pollutant concentrations may be affected by the facility. Additional criteria pollutant modeling was conducted for PM10 and PM2.5. This information may be found in the modeling analysis report. This information is considered together with the air toxics hazard indices.

Criteria Pollutant Screen

Chemical Fraction of 1-hr

std

Fraction of 3-hr

std

Fraction of 24-hr

std

Fraction of qtrly std

Fraction of annual

std SO2 PM10 0.089 0.014 PM2.5

1 0.381 0.045 NOx CO Pb 0.008

15. Mercury (Hg) Analysis: The draft permit does not contain a permit limit increase for Hg. The Northern Metals August 2011 AERA write up explains, “The most significant and closest water body is the Mississippi River, which forms the Pacific Street Yard’s eastern boundary. The SLHHRA for the original American Iron and Steel project found that potential emissions of PBTs from the facility would not impact fish tissue concentrations in the Mississippi River substantially (ICR, 1995). This was predominantly the result of estimated low facility-specific air concentrations and the huge watershed and volumetric flow of the river. In addition to the Mississippi River, a number of small lakes are located at approximately two miles [>3km] distance from the facility. The unitized dispersion results show that concentrations of pollutants, essentially all associated with particulate matter, drop off substantially after approximately 100 meters from the facility boundary.” See Appendix A figure 2 for unitized dispersion factors. MPCA staff confirmed these assertions using screening spreadsheets that the MPCA is developing to analyze potential risks from the fish ingestion pathway for lakes and rivers.

Qualitative Evaluation 16. Exposure Setting See Appendix A Figure 1 for a map of the area.

The facility is located in an industrially zoned area in North Minneapolis, adjacent to the Mississippi River. There are no farms or other fishable water bodies within a 3km radius. The closest and potentially most impacted area zoned for residential use is across the Mississippi River approximately 200m east of the facility.



Page 7 of 15

17. Describe multimedia issues that may be relevant to this facility. PBT’s such as PCB’s, dioxins and furans are emitted from this facility. Thus, ingestion multimedia

issues are relevant to this facility. 18. Describe current or future exposure based on zoning and land use information. The facility is

located in an industrially zoned area in North Minneapolis, adjacent to the Mississippi River.

19. Describe the types of sensitive receptors within 1.5 kilometers from the facility. There are several schools, nursing homes, and daycare facilities within 3km, but none in the industrial park. See Appendix A Figure 1.

20. Summarize evidence that land in the area of impact will or will not be used for agriculture.

Describe agricultural setting. North Minneapolis is a densely populated urban area. There are no farms within 3 km of the project. However, residents could garden and raise chickens for eggs within 3 km. Thus an urban gardener exposure was assessed assuming the residential inhalation and consumption of produce (1.4 lbs/week), incidental soil ingestion (0.7 grams/week) plus the consumption of 7 eggs per week.

21. If PBTs are emitted, list and describe fishable water bodies within appropriate radius [3 km] from facility/property boundary. The Northern Metals August 2011 AERA write up explains, “The most significant and closest water body is the Mississippi River, which forms the Pacific Street Yard’s eastern boundary. The SLHHRA for the original American Iron and Steel project found that potential emissions of PBTs from the facility would not impact fish tissue concentrations in the Mississippi River substantially (ICR, 1995). This was predominantly the result of estimated low facility-specific air concentrations and the huge watershed and volumetric flow of the river. In addition to the Mississippi River, a number of small lakes are located at approximately two miles [>3km] distance from the facility. The unitized dispersion results show that concentrations of pollutants, essentially all associated with particulate matter, drop off substantially after approximately 100 meters from the facility boundary.” (See Appendix A figure 2). MPCA staff confirmed these assertions using screening spreadsheets that the MPCA is developing to analyze potential risks from the fish ingestion pathway for lakes and rivers.

Cumulative Analysis 22. What other permitted facilities that have air emissions are located within a 1.5 kilometer radius

of the facility? There are approximately 20 facilities with air emissions located within a 1.5 km radius of the facility. The majority of these facilities have registration permits, with the exception of G & K Services, Diamond Vogel North Inc., GAF Materials Corp., and Hard Chrome. Of these facilities, the MPCA has air toxics modeling from Hard Chrome Inc. The screening values from Hard Chrome Inc. are included below in addition to risk estimates based on air monitoring data.



Page 8 of 15

23. Describe general statewide monitoring data and how it relates to the chemicals emitted at this facility. If monitor is within vicinity, provide data. Risk estimates based on 2006-2008 data from the City of Lakes monitor (the nearest air monitor), plus an average of the available NOx metro Twin Cities monitoring data is given below. NOx is currently not measured in the downtown area. More information about the City of Lakes Monitor can be found in the MPCA annual air monitoring network plans at http://www.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/air/air-monitoring-and-reporting/air-emissions-and-monitoring/air-monitoring-network-plan.html.

Chemicals

Risk Driver Estimated Risks from Measured Ambient Air Concentrations

Acute Non-Cancer Hazard Quotient

Chronic Noncancer HQ

Cancer Risk in 100,000

Formaldehyde 0.26 0.75 1.12 Carbon tetrachloride 0.82 Benzene 0.53 Butadiene, 1,3- 0.37 Arsenic 0.59 Acetaldehyde 0.14 0.27 Methyl chloride 0.18 Chromium (divided by 10 for hexavalent chromium) 0.21 Nickel Compounds (Subsulfide) 0.09 Dichlorobenzene (p) 0.04 Manganese 0.12 Nitrogen Dioxide* 0.19

* Continuous hourly nitrogen dioxide measured average of 3 current metro Twin Cities NO2 monitors.

Note: Two significant figures do not characterize the correct degree of uncertainty in these estimations of risk; however two significant figures are shown for transparency of the risk summation.



Page 9 of 15

Cumulative Inhalation Risk Estimates

Max Acute Respiratory Hazard Index

Max Chronic Respiratory Non-Cancer Hazard Index

Max Inhalation Cancer Risk

Risks from City of Lakes Monitoring Data plus NOx

0.53 1.09 4.4 in 100,000

Hard Chrome Screening 0.49 0.05 0.2 in 100,000

Maximum Facility risk estimates after proposed permit changes

0.10 0.09 0.4 in 100,000

Total Cumulative Sum 1.12 1.23 5 in 100,000 Change in Risks from proposal

0.10 0.06 0.2 in 100,000

% contribution from proposal 9% 5% 4%

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION 24. Missing chemicals or sources: We assume a reasonable effort was made to find chemicals and

sources. We are not claiming that we know what all of the chemicals or sources are at the facility. a. Are there any potentially missing sources from the emission list not included in the RASS

or Q/CHI workbook? No, MPCA staff confirmed that risks from emissions reported from sources listed as insignificant activities were below risk driver levels, even when considered all together.

b. Is there information suggesting additional chemicals are emitted (e.g., based on

experience at similar facilities)? No, MPCA staff searched for other sources of emissions information. MPCA staff looked at emission estimates from similar facilities in Michigan and did not find information suggesting additional chemicals are emitted.

25. List chemicals emitted but lacking inhalation health benchmarks.

Calcium compounds Iron compounds Lithium compounds Magnesium compounds Molybdenum compounds Niobium compounds Tin compounds

Titanium compounds Tungsten compounds Zirconium and its insoluble compounds Fine mineral fibers Cobalt Compounds

26. List known respiratory sensitizers emitted: Beryllium and nickel.



Page 10 of 15

27. List developmental toxicants emitted: Arsenic and mercury, neither of which exceeded

ceiling values.

28. Where is the maximum modeled concentration (risk) for acute? Chronic? Annual emission dispersion factors were highest along the eastern boundary of the facility. See Appendix A Figure 2 for a map of annual results. Unitized hourly emission dispersion factors were highest along the western boundary of the facility. As with all air dispersion modeling, the exact locations of maximum risk carry some uncertainty because the actual dispersion depends on weather conditions at the time of emission.

29. Incident Management System data on facility reports of SSM events from the last 5 years. There is one complaint in the incident management system (Incident report #166447) about fugitive emissions. No further detail is given because the complainant never followed up with the MPCA enforcement staff.

30. Internal Combustion Engines. (AERA-04 Certification for Emergency Internal

Combustion Engines) There are no emergency generators so this is not applicable.

31. Describe known community concerns as they relate to health risks associated with this facility. When initially permitted, environmental review was required as a result of legislation and community concerns.

32. Is there the possibility that emissions from diesel trucks idling on the facility property maybe equivalent or greater than 2 or more trucks idling continuously for an hour or longer on the facility property? Describe idling truck patterns. Is an idling truck prevention plan recommended? Two or more idling trucks are not expected to idle continuously for an hour or longer on the facility property. The facility is located within the City of Minneapolis, which has idling restrictions.

33. Should a risk recalculation requirement be included in the permit? Summary of rationale. Since that the emission estimates for the risk driver pollutants were based on stack testing and permit limits at a through put of 377,800 tons per year a recalculation of the risk estimates should be considered if the material through put limit were to be increased.

34. Additional Considerations: An analysis comparing modeled stack testing results for asbestos fibers and the EPA health benchmark published in IRIS found that cancer risks from asbestos were below risk driver levels.

35. These additional information topics weren’t considered applicable or noteworthy for

this facility: Additional IEUBK modeling for lead was not considered, since the RASS indicated that the modeled highest monthly concentration was not approaching the current NAAQS 3-month rolling average of 0.15 ug/m3.



Page 11 of 15

Uncertainty Analysis Summary 36. How close are the emission estimates to what the facility will actually emit? What are

the factors that impact this? The annual tons per year emission rates are based on the highest tested hourly emission

rates times 3778 operating hours per year. Thus the annual emission rates could contribute to an overestimation of long term risks.

Some emission estimates are from a limited number of stack test results and thus could contribute to over or underestimating risks.

Using the detection limits and results with notes explaining that there might have been potential blank contamination or a concentration that was “less than the stated minimum quantification limit and should be considered an estimated value”, for pollutants that were not detected (such as specific PCB’s and dioxin/furan congeners) could contribute to an overestimation of risk.

As with all facilities, there may be other pollutants emitted from the facility which have not been tested. This may contribute to an underestimation of risk.

Emission estimates based on MSDS data used worst-case pollutant content for a given metal, and for each pollutant assumed that the metal with the highest content of each pollutant constituted 100% of the metal feedstock. In reality, metal feedstocks will be made up of several types of metals. This approach may contribute to an overestimate of risk.

37. How accurate is the dispersion model to the actual site dispersion? What are the

factors impacting the accuracy? In general, air dispersion modeling analyses are designed not to underestimate air

concentrations. The most refined modeling methods currently available were used to model facility emissions. As with all air dispersion modeling, the exact locations of maximum risk carry some uncertainty because the actual dispersion depends on weather conditions at the time of emission.

The air dispersion factors used in the Hard Chrome risk estimates were generic screening level dispersion factors, which are likely to be overestimates.

38. What is the impact of the toxicity values on the risk analysis? What are the factors

impacting the analysis? Toxicity values may contribute to an over or under estimate of risk, although uncertainty

factors are included in the derivation of toxicity values in order to minimize the likelihood of underestimating risk.

Using older toxicity values that were developed without consideration of early childhood exposures could contribute to underestimating risk. The MPCA incorporates toxicity values that consider early childhood exposure as they are updated by MDH, EPA and CalEPA. If a default screening level multiplier of 1.6 were to be applied to non-dioxin/furan carcinogens, none of the individual pollutants would have been above health benchmarks. Furthermore, the overall facility risk characterizations would be the same.



Page 12 of 15

A lack of health benchmarks for at least 12 chemicals potentially emitted could result in an under-prediction of risks.

RASS multimedia factors are not clearly over or under protective.

39. What is the impact of the exposure assumptions on the risk analysis? What are the factors impacting the analysis?

The exposure assumptions may over or under predict actual exposures (e.g., this depends on the applicability of the exposure scenario assumptions with respect to individuals actual ingestion rates of homegrown products grown at the locations of maximum impact locations). The exposure assumptions are generally chosen to over predict actual exposures. For example the cancer and chronic non-cancer inhalation risk estimates are based on the assumption of 70 years of exposure to the given ambient air concentration. 40. What is the impact of other factors on underestimating and/or overestimating risks in

the analysis? Risk estimates based on ambient monitoring data and screening results from nearby

facilities may contribute to over or under estimating the risks in this analysis. For example, in this case the NO2 based risk estimates from the suburban monitors may contribute to underestimating risks from NO2 in this urban area, while the screening risk estimates from Hard Chrome (where NO2 is the major risk driver) may contribute to over estimating risks from NO2.

The AERA assumes that pollutants with the same endpoint act additively. MDH and EPA guidance indicates that the assumption of additivity for interactions of chemicals is protective. Since pollutant interaction may result in greater (synergistic) or lesser (antagonistic) effects than the summation of the effects of each individual chemical, the exclusion of synergism/antagonism from the analysis may result in over- or underestimation of risk.

41. Staff Conclusions and Recommendations MDH Coordination: MDH was not asked to provide comments and did not provide comments. Staff team recommendations: (permit conditions, refinements, stack testing) 42. The MPCA staff recommends that the proposed project should move forward through the

environmental review process. Considering the emission estimates for the risk driver pollutants were based on stack testing and permit limits at a through put of 377,800 tons per year a recalculation of the risk estimates should be considered if the material through put limit were to be increased.



Page 13 of 15

Appendix A Figure 1 Sensitive Receptor Locations and Gram per Second Unitized Emissions Grid



Page 14 of 15

Appendix A Figure 2 Maximum Annual Unitized Emission Rates



Page 15 of 15

Appendix A Figure 3 Census Tract and Neighborhood Map

Attachment 3: MPCA Risk Manager’s Form

Attachment 4: CD-01 Forms

MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCYAIR QUALITY520 LAFAYETTE ROADST. PAUL, MN 55155-4194 COMPLIANCE PLAN CD-01

Facility Name: Northern Metals LLC

Permit Number: 05300480 - 003

28 Oct, 2011 14:37Page 1 of 22

Subject Item: Total Facility

NC/CA

Type Citation Requirement

CD hdr SITE-SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS1.0

CD Minn. R. 7007.0800, subp. 2 Permit Appendices: This permit contains appendices as listed in the permit Table ofContents. The Permittee shall comply with all requirements contained in theappendices.

2.0

CD Minn. Stat. Section 116.07, subd.4a; Minn. R. 7007.0100; Minn. R.7007.0800, subp. 2; Minn. R.7011.0150; Minn. R. 7009.0020

Fugitive Emissions Control Plan: The Permittee shall submit to the Commissionerand implement a fugitive emissions control plan within 60 days of the date of permitissuance. The plan shall identify all fugitive emission sources, primary andcontingent control measures, and recordkeeping. The Permittee shall follow theactions and record keeping specified in the control plan. If the Commissionerdetermines the Permittee is out of compliance with Minn. R. 7011.0150 or thefugitive emission control plan, then the Permittee may be required to amend thecontrol plan.

3.0

CD Minn. R. ch. 4410; Findings of1995 EAW; Findings of 2011 EAWFindings; Minn. R. 7007.0800,subp. 2

Feedstock Control Plan: The Permittee shall follow the actions and recordkeepingspecified in the feedstock control plan in Appendix B of this permit. The Permitteeshall modify the plan whenever the feedstock control practices change. ThePermittee shall submit the amended plan to the Commissioner for approval within30 days of making the change(s). Upon approval, the amended plan supersedesthe previous plan as an enforceable part of the permit. The Permittee shall keepthe most up-to-date feedstock control plan onsite and available to the MPCA uponrequest.

4.0

CD hdr MODELING REQUIREMENTS5.0

CD Minn. Stat. Section 116.07, subds.4a & 9; Minn. R. 7007.0100, subp.7(A), 7(L), & 7(M); Minn. R.7007.0800, subps. 1, 2 & 4; Minn.R. 7009.0010-7009.0080

The parameters used in PM10, and PM2.5 modeling for the EnvironmentalAssessment Worksheet under Minn. R. ch. 4410 for permit number 05300480-003are listed in Appendix D of this permit.

6.0


Modeling Triggers: For changes that do not require a permit amendment and affectany modeled parameter or PM2.5 emission rate documented in Appendix C, or arean addition to the information documented in Appendix C, a Remodeling Submittalrequirement is not triggered at the time of the change. The Permittee shall keepupdated records on site of all parameters and emission rates. The Permittee shallsubmit any changes to parameters and emission rates with the next requiredRemodeling Submittal.

For changes that require a minor, moderate, or major permit amendment and affectany modeled parameter or PM2.5 emission rate documented in Appendix C, or arean addition to the information documented in Appendix C, a Remodeling Submittalrequirement is triggered. The Permittee shall include previously made changes toparameters and PM2.5 emission rates that did not trigger a Remodeling Submittal.

7.0


For PM2.5 Modeling Only:Remodeling Submittal: The Permittee must submit to the Commissioner forapproval changes meeting the above criteria and must wait for a written approvalbefore making such changes. For minor amendments, written approval of themodeling may be given before permit issuance; however, this approval applies onlyto the modeling and not to any other changes. The information submitted mustinclude, for stack and vent sources, source emission rate, location, height,diameters, exit velocity, exit temperature, discharge direction, use of rain caps orrain hats, and, if applicable, locations and dimensions of nearby buildings. Fornon-stack/vent sources, this includes the source emission rate, location, size andshape, release height, and, if applicable, any emission rate scalars, and the initiallateral dimensions and initial vertical dimensions and adjacent building heights.

8.0

CD Minn. Stat. Section 116.07, subds.4a & 9; Minn. R. 7007.0100, subp.7(A), 7(L), & 7(M); Minn. R.7007.0800, subps. 1, 2 & 4; Minn.R. 7009.0010-7009.0080,continued

For PM2.5 Modeling OnlyThe plume dispersion characteristics due to the revisions of the information mustbe equivalent to or better than the dispersion characteristics modeled in the August2010 "National Ambient Air Quality Standards Modeling Analysis for a MetalRecycling Facility" Report. The Permittee shall demonstrate this equivalency in theproposal. If the information does not demonstrate equivalent or better dispersioncharacteristics, or if a conclusion cannot readily be made about the dispersion, thePermittee must submit full remodeling.

9.0

CD Minn. Stat. Section 116.07, subds.4a & 9; Minn. R. 7007.0800,subps. 1, 2 & 4

The parameters used in air toxics modeling for the Environmental AssessmentWorksheet under Minn. R. ch. 4410 for permit number 05300480-003 are listed inAppendix D of this permit.

10.0




28 Oct, 2011 14:37Page 2 of 22

CD hdr OPERATIONAL REQUIREMENTS11.0

CD 40 CFR pt. 50; Minn. Stat. Section116.07, subds. 4a & 9; Minn. R.7007.0100, subp. 7(A), 7(L), &7(M); Minn. R. 7007.0800, subps.1, 2 & 4; Minn. R.7009.0010-7009.0080

The Permittee shall comply with National Primary and Secondary Ambient AirQuality Standards, 40 CFR pt. 50, and the Minnesota Ambient Air QualityStandards, Minn. R. 7009.0010 to 7009.0080. Compliance shall be demonstratedupon written request by the MPCA.

12.0

CD Minn. R. 7011.0020 Circumvention: Do not install or use a device or means that conceals or dilutesemissions, which would otherwise violate a federal or state air pollution control rule,without reducing the total amount of pollutant emitted.

13.0

CD Minn. R. 7007.0800, subp. 2;Minn. R. 7007.0800, subp. 16(J)

Air Pollution Control Equipment: Operate all pollution control equipment wheneverthe corresponding process equipment and emission units are operated.

14.0

CD Minn. R. 7007.0800, subps. 14and 16(J)

Operation and Maintenance Plan: Retain at the stationary source an operation andmaintenance plan for all air pollution control equipment. At a minimum, the O & Mplan shall identify all air pollution control equipment and control practices and shallinclude a preventative maintenance program for the equipment and practices, adescription of (the minimum but not necessarily the only) corrective actions to betaken to restore the equipment and practices to proper operation to meet applicablepermit conditions, a description of the employee training program for properoperation and maintenance of the control equipment and practices, and the recordskept to demonstrate plan implementation.

15.0

CD Minn. R. 7019.1000, subp. 4 Operation Changes: In any shutdown, breakdown, or deviation the Permittee shallimmediately take all practical steps to modify operations to reduce the emission ofany regulated air pollutant. The Commissioner may require feasible and practicalmodifications in the operation to reduce emissions of air pollutants. No emissionsunits that have an unreasonable shutdown or breakdown frequency of process orcontrol equipment shall be permitted to operate.

16.0

CD Minn. R. 7011.0150 Fugitive Emissions: Do not cause or permit the handling, use, transporting, orstorage of any material in a manner which may allow avoidable amounts ofparticulate matter to become airborne. Comply with all other requirements listed inMinn. R. 7011.0150.

17.0

CD Minn. R. 7030.0010-7030.0080 Noise: The Permittee shall comply with the noise standards set forth in Minn. R.7030.0010 to 7030.0080 at all times during the operation of any emission units.This is a state only requirement and is not federally enforceable.

18.0

CD Minn. R. 7007.0800, subp. 9(A) Inspections: The Permittee shall comply with the inspection procedures andrequirements as found in Minn. R. 7007.0800, subp. 9(A).

19.0

CD Minn. R. 7007.0800, subp. 16 The Permittee shall comply with the General Conditions listed in Minn. R.7007.0800, subp. 16.

20.0

CD hdr PERFORMANCE TESTING21.0

CD Minn. R. 7017.2018; Minn. R.7017.2030, subps. 1-4, Minn. R.7017.2035, subps. 1-2

Performance Test Notifications and Submittals:

Performance Tests are due as outlined in Table A and B of the permit.

For each Performance Test listed in Table A and/or B of this permit, the followingactions and submittals are due as outlined below:Performance Test Notification (written): due 30 days before each Performance TestPerformance Test Plan: due 30 days before each Performance TestPerformance Test Pre-test Meeting: due 7 days before each Performance TestPerformance Test Report: due 45 days after each Performance TestPerformance Test Report - Compact Disc Copy: due 105 days after eachPerformance Test

The Notification, Test Plan, and Test Report may be submitted in alternative formatas allowed by Minn. R. 7017.2018 or as allowed by the MPCA Electronic SubmittalPolicy of March 3, 2010.

22.0

CD Minn. R. ch. 7017 Performance Testing: Conduct all performance tests in accordance with Minn. R.ch. 7017 unless otherwise noted in Tables A and/or B.

23.0

CD Minn. R. 7017.2025, subp. 3 Process or operational limits set as a result of a performance test (conductedbefore or after permit issuance) apply until superseded as stated in the MPCA'sNotice of Compliance letter granting preliminary approval. Preliminary approval isbased on formal review of a subsequent performance test on the same unit asspecified by Minn. R. 7017.2025, subp. 3. The limit is final upon issuance of apermit amendment incorporating the change. For performance tests conducted onSV 001, this condition applies to operating limits on shredder output.

24.0

CD hdr MONITORING REQUIREMENTS25.0




28 Oct, 2011 14:37Page 3 of 22

CD Minn. R. 7007.0800, subp. 4(D) Monitoring Equipment Calibration: The Permittee shall calibrate all requiredmonitoring equipment at least once every 12 months (any requirements applying tocontinuous emission monitors are listed separately in this permit).

26.0

CD Minn. R. 7007.0800, subp. 4(D) Operation of Monitoring Equipment: Unless otherwise noted in Tables A and/or B,monitoring a process or control equipment connected to that process is notnecessary during periods when the process is shutdown, or during checks of themonitoring systems, such as calibration checks and zero and span adjustments. Ifmonitoring records are required, they should reflect any such periods of processshutdown or checks of the monitoring system.

27.0

CD hdr RECORDKEEPING28.0

CD Minn. R. 7007.0800, subp. 5(C) Recordkeeping: Retain all records at the stationary source, unless otherwisespecified within this permit, for a period of five (5) years from the date of monitoring,sample, measurement, or report. Records which must be retained at this locationinclude all calibration and maintenance records, all original recordings forcontinuous monitoring instrumentation, and copies of all reports required by thepermit. Records must conform to the requirements listed in Minn. R. 7007.0800,subp. 5(A).

29.0

CD Minn. R. 7007.0800, subp. 5(B) Recordkeeping: Maintain records describing any insignificant modifications (asrequired by Minn. R. 7007.1250, subp. 3) or changes contravening permit terms (asrequired by Minn. R. 7007.1350, subp. 2), including records of the emissionsresulting from those changes.

30.0

CD Minn. R. 7007.1200, subp. 4 If the Permittee determines that no permit amendment or notification is requiredprior to making a change, the Permittee must retain records of all calculationsrequired under Minn. R. 7007.1200. For nonexpiring permits, these records shall bekept for a period of five (5) years from the date that the change was made. Therecords shall be kept at the stationary source for the current calendar year ofoperation and may be kept at the stationary source or office of the stationarysource for all other years. The records may be maintained in either electronic orpaper format.

31.0

CD hdr REPORTING/SUBMITTALS32.0

CD Minn. R. 7019.1000, subp. 3 Shutdown Notifications: Notify the Commissioner at least 24 hours in advance of aplanned shutdown of any control equipment or process equipment if the shutdownwould cause any increase in the emissions of any regulated air pollutant. If theowner or operator does not have advance knowledge of the shutdown, notificationshall be made to the Commissioner as soon as possible after the shutdown.However, notification is not required in the circumstances outlined in Items A, B,and C of Minn. R. 7019.1000, subp. 3.

At the time of notification, the owner or operator shall inform the Commissioner ofthe cause of the shutdown and the estimated duration. The owner or operator shallnotify the Commissioner when the shutdown is over.

33.0

CD Minn. R. 7019.1000, subp. 2 Breakdown Notifications: Notify the Commissioner within 24 hours of a breakdownof more than one hour duration of any control equipment or process equipment ifthe breakdown causes any increase in the emissions of any regulated air pollutant.The 24-hour time period starts when the breakdown was discovered or reasonablyshould have been discovered by the owner or operator. However, notification is notrequired in the circumstances outlined in Items A, B and C of Minn. R. 7019.1000,subp. 2.

At the time of notification or as soon as possible thereafter, the owner or operatorshall inform the Commissioner of the cause of the breakdown and the estimatedduration. The owner or operator shall notify the Commissioner when the breakdownis over.

34.0

CD Minn. R. 7019.1000, subp. 1 Notification of Deviations Endangering Human Health or the Environment: As soonas possible after discovery, notify the Commissioner or the state duty officer, eitherorally or by facsimile, of any deviation from permit conditions which could endangerhuman health or the environment.

35.0




28 Oct, 2011 14:37Page 4 of 22

CD Minn. R. 7019.1000, subp. 1 Notification of Deviations Endangering Human Health or the Environment Report:Within 2 working days of discovery, notify the Commissioner in writing of anydeviation from permit conditions which could endanger human health or theenvironment. Include the following information in this written description:1. the cause of the deviation;2. the exact dates of the period of the deviation, if the deviation has been corrected;3. whether or not the deviation has been corrected;4. the anticipated time by which the deviation is expected to be corrected, if not yetcorrected; and5. steps taken or planned to reduce, eliminate, and prevent reoccurrence of thedeviation.

36.0

S/A Minn. R. 7007.0800, subp. 6(A) Semiannual Deviations Report: due 30 days after end of each calendar half-yearstarting 12/08/1998 If no deviations have occurred, the Permittee shall submit thereport stating no deviations.

37.0

CD Minn. R. 7007.1150 through Minn.R. 7007.1500

Application for Permit Amendment: If you need a permit amendment, submitapplication in accordance with the requirements of Minn. R. 7007.1150 throughMinn. R. 7007.1500. Submittal dates vary, depending on the type of amendmentneeded.

38.0

CD Minn. R. 7007.1400, subp. 1(H) Extension Requests: The Permittee may apply for an Administrative Amendment toextend a deadline in a permit by no more than 120 days, provided the proposeddeadline extension meets the requirements of Minn. R. 7007.1400, subp. 1(H).Performance testing deadlines from the General Provisions of 40 CFR pt. 60 andpt. 63 are examples of deadlines for which the MPCA does not have authority togrant extensions and therefore do not meet the requirements of Minn. R.7007.1400, subp. 1(H).

39.0

S/A Minn. R. 7007.0800, subp. 6(C)(1)

Compliance Certification: due 30 days after end of each calendar year starting12/08/1998 (for the previous calendar year). To be submitted on a form approvedby the Commissioner.

40.0

CD Minn. R. 7019.3000 - 7019.3100 Emission Inventory Report: due on or before April 1 of each calendar year followingpermit issuance, to be submitted on a form approved by the Commissioner.

41.0

CD Minn. R. 7002.0005 - 7002.0095 Emission Fees: due 60 days after receipt of an MPCA bill.42.0

CD hdr NOISE TESTING43.0

S/A Minn. R. ch. 4410; 1995 EAWFindings

Performance Test: due before end of each calendar year following Initial Startup tomeasure noise.

44.0

S/A Minn. R. ch. 4410; 1995 EAWFindingsand Minn. R. 7030.0060

Performance Test Plan: due 30 days before Performance Test. A Noise MonitoringPlan, in accordance with Minn. R. 7030.0060, shall be submitted for MPCAapproval. (30 days before each Noise Performance Test.)

45.0

S/A Minn. R. ch. 4410; 1995 EAWFindings

Performance Test Report: due 60 days after end of each calendar year followingPerformance Test (60 days after each Noise Performance Test).

46.0




28 Oct, 2011 14:37Page 5 of 22

Subject Item: SV 001

Associated Items: EU 001 Scrap Metal Hammermill Shredder

EU 002 Cascade Cleaning System

NC/CA


CD hdr See EU 001, CE 001, and CE 004-007 for monitoring, recordkeeping, and reportingthat support the limits listed at SV 001.

1.0

CD hdr INDUSTRIAL PROCESS EQUIPMENT RULE LIMITS2.0

LIMIT Minn. R. 7011.0715, subp. 1(B) Opacity: less than or equal to 20 percent opacity Note: This limit applies individuallyto EU 001 and EU 002, but is listed at the SV level because the units vent to acommon stack.

3.0

LIMIT Minn. R. 7011.0715, subp. 1(A) Total Particulate Matter: less than or equal to 0.30 grains/dry standard cubic foot ofexhaust gas unless required to further reduce emissions to comply with the lessstringent limit of either Minn. R. 7011.0730 or Minn. R. 7011.0735.

Note: This limit applies individually to EU 001 and EU 002, but is listed at the SVlevel because these units vent to a common stack.

4.0

CD hdr ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW-BASED LIMITS AND REQUIREMENTS5.0

LIMIT Minn. Stat. Section 116.07, subds.4a & 9; Minn. R. 7007.0100, subp.7(A), 7(L), & 7(M); Minn. R.7007.0800, subps. 1, 2 & 4; Minn.R. 7009.0010-7009.0080 andMinn. R. ch. 4410; Findings of2011 EAW

Total Particulate Matter: less than or equal to 4.20 lbs/hour This limit is morestringent than Minn. R. 7011.0715, subp. 1(A) limit for total particulate matter.

6.0


PM < 10 micron: less than or equal to 4.20 lbs/hour7.0


PM < 2.5 micron: less than or equal to 4.20 lbs/hour8.0

LIMIT Minn. R. ch. 4410; Findings of2011 EAW

Lead: less than or equal to 15.1 lbs/year9.0


Arsenic compounds: less than or equal to 2.42 lbs/year (The limit is on the weightof arsenic itself.)

10.0


Beryllium: less than or equal to 7.56 lbs/year11.0


Cadmium compounds: less than or equal to 4.91 lbs/year (The limit is on the weightof cadmium itself.)

12.0


Chromium compounds: less than or equal to 1.40 lbs/year (The limit is on theweight of hexavalent chromium itself.)

13.0


Manganese compounds: less than or equal to 33.2 lbs/year (The limit is on theweight of manganese itself.)

14.0


Nickel compounds: less than or equal to 60.4 lbs/year (The limit is on the weight ofnickel itself.)

15.0

CD Minn. Stat. Section 116.07, subd9(b); Minn. R. 7007.0800, subp. 2

TCDD Toxic Equivalents: The MPCA reserves its authority to require one-timeperformance testing for PCBs and dioxins/furans.

The performance testing shall be used to calculate the combined TCDD toxicequivalents of PCBs and dioxins/furans. The Permittee shall sum the TCDD toxicequivalents calculated for PCBs and dioxins/furans. The TCDD toxic equivalentsshall be calculated using the highest stack test run for each compound, or if thecompound was not detected, the average instrument detection limit.

16.0




28 Oct, 2011 14:37Page 6 of 22

CD Minn. R. 7017.2035, subp. 3;Minn. R. 7007.0800, subp. 2

Performance Test Requirements: Unless otherwise specified in anMPCA-approved performance test plan, during the performance test, the Permitteeshall record the total weight of material output, and, at a minimum of 15 minuteintervals, the control device parameters. The Permittee shall record theparameters specified below:CE 001 - pressure drop in inches of water columnCE 004 - pressure drop in inches of water column, and scrubber liquid levelCE 005 - pressure drop in inches of water column, and scrubber liquid levelCE 006 - pressure drop in inches of water columnCE 007 - pressure drop in inches of water column

17.0

CD Minn. R. 7017.2025, subp. 3;Minn. R. 7007.0800, subp. 2

Performance Test Requirements Continued:

For the purposes of determining "worst case conditions" under Minn. R. 7017.2025,subp. 3. The Permittee shall use daily records of output and hours of operationfrom the previous 12-month period to estimate worst case ton/hr output.

E.g. the Permittee shall determine the 90th percentile of (total daily shredderoutput)/(daily hours of operation) for the previous 12-month period. That numbershall be used for worst case shredder output.

18.0

S/A Minn. R. 7017.2020, subp. 1;Minn. R. ch. 4410; Findings of2011 EAW

Performance Test: due before end of each calendar 60 months starting 12/22/2009to measure the emission rate of particulate matter from SV 001.

19.0


Performance Test: due before end of each calendar 60 months starting 12/22/2009to measure the emission rate of particulate matter less than 10 microns from SV001.

20.0


Performance Test: due before end of each calendar 60 months starting 12/22/2009to measure the emission rate of particulate matter less than 2.5 microns from SV001.

21.0


Performance Test: due before end of each calendar 60 months starting 12/22/2009to measure the opacity of SV 001.

22.0

CD hdr MERCURY LIMIT AND REQUIREMENTS23.0


Mercury: less than or equal to 3.0 lbs/year using 12-month Rolling Sum to becalculated by the 15th day of each month for the previous 12-month period asdescribed later in this permit.

24.0

CD Minn. R. 7007.0800, subp. 4 & 5 Monthly Recordkeeping - Mercury EmissionsBy the 15th of the month, the Permittee shall calculate and record the following1) The total shredder output, in tons, using daily output records (as required underEU 001 of this permit);2) The Mercury emissions from the previous month using the formulas specifiedbelow; and3) The 12-month rolling sum Mercury emissions for the previous 12-month periodby summing the monthly Mercury emissions data for the previous 12 months

25.0

CD Minn. R. 7007.0800, subp. 4 & 5 Monthly Calculation - Mercury EmissionsThe Permittee shall calculate Mercury emissions using the following equations:

Ehg = EFhg x A

Where:Ehg = Total mercury emissions in lbs/monthEFhg = Mercury emission factor calculated as described below in lbs/ton outputA = the total shredder output in the past month in tons/month

26.0


Performance Test: due 180 days after achieving normal operation while processingauto hulks. The performance test is for mercury. The Permittee shall conduct aminimum of 3 test runs, but may conduct up to a maximum of 6 test runs. For eachtest run, the Permittee shall measure and record the weight of shredder outputduring each test run in tons/hr.

27.0




28 Oct, 2011 14:37Page 7 of 22


Performance Test: due before end of each calendar year following InitialPerformance Test for mercury. This condition applies starting in the calendar yearfollowing the initial performance test. The time between the initial performance testand the subsequent performance test shall not exceed 18 months.

The performance test shall be conducted while processing auto hulks. ThePermittee shall conduct a minimum of 3 test runs, but may conduct up to amaximum of 6 test runs. For each test run, the Permittee must measure and recordthe weight of shredder output during each test run in tons/hr.

If the Permittee demonstrates compliance with the mercury emission limit for threeconsecutive years after the first performance test conducted while shredding autohulks, the Permittee may implement testing for mercury not less than once everythree years.

28.0

CD Minn. R. 7007.0800, subp. 4 & 5 Mercury Emission Factor Calculation:Within 15 days after receipt of a Notice of Compliance from the MPCA for themercury performance test, the Permittee shall calculate a mercury emission factorbased on the performance test results. The emission factor shall be calculated asfollows:

EFhg = [sum(A1 + A2 + A3... + A6)/sum(B1 + B2 + B3... + B6)]/n

Where:EFhg = Mercury emission factor (lb/ton output)A# = Test run # mercury emission rate (lb/hr)B# = Test run # shredder output (tons/hr)n = total number of test runs

Where the test run mercury emission rate is below the method detection limit, themethod detection limit shall be used in the emission factor calculation.

The Permittee shall begin using the new emission factor in the first monthlymercury emissions calculation that is performed after the emission factor iscalculated and until a new emission factor is calculated based on the nextperformance test.

29.0

CD Minn. R. 7007.0800, subp. 4 & 5 Mercury Emission Factor Continued:

After permit Issuance, and until an emission factor is calculated based on theperformance test required by this permit, the Permittee shall use the total of all sixvalid test runs from the June 22, 23, and 29, 2010 performance tests to calculate amercury emission factor according to the equation above.

30.0




28 Oct, 2011 14:37Page 8 of 22

Subject Item: EU 001 Scrap Metal Hammermill Shredder

Associated Items: CE 001 Centrifugal Collector - High Efficiency

CE 004 Venturi Scrubber

CE 006 Fabric Filter - Low Temperature, i.e., T<180 Degrees F

SV 001

NC/CA


CD Title I Condition: To avoidclassification as a major sourceunder 40 CFR Section 52.21 andMinn. R. 7007.3000; under 40CFR Section 70.2 and Minn. R.7007.0200; and under 40 CFRSection 63.2

The Permittee shall vent emissions from EU 001 to control equipment meeting therequirements of CE 001, CE 004, and CE 006 (control equipment in series), at alltimes that EU 001 is operating.

1.0

LIMIT Minn. R. ch. 4410; Findings of1995 EAW; Findings of 2011 EAW

Process Throughput: less than or equal to 377,800 tons/year using 12-monthRolling Sum to be calculated by the 15th of the following month. This limit is onshredder output of metals. (This limit is based on a nominal output of 100 tons/hrand limited operating hours of 3,778 hrs/yr.)

2.0

LIMIT Minn. R. ch. 4410; EAW; Findingsof 2011 EAW

Process Throughput: less than or equal to 2,400 tons/day This limit is on shredderoutput of metals.

3.0

CD Minn. R. 7007.0800, subps. 4 and5; Minn. R. ch. 4410; Findings of1995 EAW; Findings of 2011 EAW

Recordkeeping:

The Permittee shall maintain the following records:1) Hours of operation of the shredder, daily, when the shredder is in operation.Records shall be generated by the end of each day of operation.2) Weight of all ferrous metals processed at the shredder (shredder output), daily.Records shall be generated by the end of each day of operation.4) Weight of all non-ferrous metals processed at the shredder (shredder output), atleast monthly. Records for the previous month shall be compiled by the 15th of themonth.

4.0

CD Minn. R. 7007.0800, subps. 4 and5; Minn. R. ch. 4410; Findings of1995 EAW; Findings of 2011 EAW

Recordkeeping Continued:

By the 15th of the month, the Permittee shall calculate and record the following1). The total shredder output of metals during the previous calendar month usingdaily records records of ferrous metals output and monthly records of non-ferrousmetals output.2). The 12-month rolling sum shredder output of metals for the previous 12-monthperiod by summing the monthly output data for the previous 12 months.

5.0

CD Minn. R. 7007.0800, subp. 2 The Permittee shall operate EU 001 only during the hours listed below:Monday through Friday: 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.Saturday, Sunday and Legal Holidays: 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

6.0




28 Oct, 2011 14:37Page 9 of 22

Subject Item: EU 002 Cascade Cleaning System

Associated Items: CE 005 Venturi Scrubber

CE 007 Fabric Filter - Low Temperature, i.e., T<180 Degrees F

SV 001

NC/CA


CD Title I Condition: To avoidclassification as a major sourceunder 40 CFR Section 52.21 andMinn. R. 7007.3000; under 40CFR Section 70.2 and Minn. R.7007.0200; and under 40 CFRSection 63.2

The Permittee shall vent emissions from EU 002 to control equipment meeting therequirements of CE 005 and CE 007 (control equipment in series), at all times thatEU 002 is operating.

1.0

CD Minn. R. 7007.0800, subp. 2 The Permittee shall operate EU 002 only during the hours listed below:Monday through Friday: 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.Saturday, Sunday and Legal Holidays: 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

(Associated recordkeeping requirements at EU 001)

2.0




28 Oct, 2011 14:37Page 10 of 22

Subject Item: CE 001 Centrifugal Collector - High Efficiency


NC/CA


CD hdr EMISSION AND OPERATIONAL LIMITS1.0

CD Title I Condition: To avoidclassification as a major sourceand modification under 40 CFRSection 52.21 and Minn. R.7007.3000; To avoid classificationas a major source under 40 CFRSection 70.2 and Minn. R.7007.0200; Minn. R. 7007.0800subp 2 & 14

The Permittee shall operate and maintain the cyclone (CE 001) at any time that theprocess equipment controlled by the cyclone (EU 001) is in operation. ThePermittee shall document periods of non-operation of the control equipment.

2.0

LIMIT Title I Condition: To avoidclassification as a major sourceand modification under 40 CFRSection 52.21 and Minn. R.7007.3000 and To avoidclassification as major sourceunder 40 CFR Section 70.2 andMinn. R. 7007.0200; Minn. R.7007.0800 subp 2 & 14

The Permittee shall operate and maintain the control equipment such that itachieves an overall control efficiency for filterable Total Particulate Matter: greaterthan or equal to 90 percent control efficiency

3.0

LIMIT Title I Condition: To avoidclassification as a major sourceand modification under 40 CFRSection 52.21 and Minn. R.7007.3000 and To avoidclassification as major sourceunder 40 CFR Section 70.2 andMinn. R. 7007.0200; Minn. R.7007.0800 subp 2 & 14

The Permittee shall operate and maintain the control equipment such that itachieves an overall control efficiency for filterable PM < 10 micron: greater than orequal to 78 percent control efficiency

4.0

LIMIT Title I Condition: To avoid majorsource classification under 40CFR Section 63.2; To avoid majorsource classification under 40CFR Section 70.2 and Minn. R.7007.0200; Minn. R. 7007.0800subp 2 & 14

The Permittee shall operate and maintain the control equipment such that itachieves an overall control efficiency for filterable PM < 2.5 micron: greater than orequal to 78 percent control efficiency

5.0

LIMIT Title I Condition: To avoidclassification as a major sourceand modification under 40 CFRSection 52.21 and Minn. R.7007.3000 and To avoidclassification as major sourceunder 40 CFR Section 70.2 andMinn. R. 7007.0200; Minn. R.7007.0800, subp 2 & 14

The Permittee shall operate and maintain the control equipment such that itachieves an overall control efficiency for HAP-Metal: greater than or equal to 78percent control efficiency

6.0

LIMIT Title I Condition: To avoidclassification as a major sourceand modification under 40 CFRSection 52.21 and Minn. R.7007.3000; To avoid classificationas a major source under 40 CFRSection 70.2 and Minn. R.7007.0200; Minn. R. 7011.0800subp 2 & 14; and Minn. R.7017.2025, subp. 3

Pressure Drop: greater than or equal to 1.0 inches of water column and less than orequal to 11.0 inches of water column , unless a new range is set pursuant to Minn.R. 7017.2025, subp. 3 based on the values recorded during the most recentMPCA-approved performance test where compliance was demonstrated. The newrange shall be implemented upon receipt of the Notice of Compliance lettergranting preliminary approval. The range is final upon issuance of a permitamendment incorporating the change.

7.0

CD hdr MONITORING AND RECORDKEEPING8.0




28 Oct, 2011 14:37Page 11 of 22

CD Title I Condition: To avoidclassification as a major sourceand modification under 40 CFRSection 52.21 and Minn. R.7007.3000; To avoid classificationas a major source under 40 CFRSection 70.2 and Minn. R.7007.0200; Minn. R. 7011.0800,subp. 4 & 5

Recordkeeping: Once every 24 hours when in operation, the Permittee shall recordthe time and date of each pressure drop reading and whether or not the recordedpressure drop was within the range specified in this permit.

9.0

CD Minn. R. 7007.0800, subps. 4, 5,and 14

Corrective Actions: The Permittee shall take corrective action as soon as possible ifany of the following occur:- the recorded pressure drop is outside the required operating range; or- the cyclone or any of its components are found during the inspections to needrepair.Corrective actions shall return the pressure drop to within the permitted range,and/or include completion of necessary repairs identified during the inspection, asapplicable. Corrective actions include, but are not limited to, those outlined in the O& M Plan for the cyclone. The Permittee shall keep a record of the type and date ofany corrective action taken for the cyclone.

10.0

CD Minn. R. 7011.0800, subp. 4 Monitoring Equipment: The Permittee shall install and maintain the necessarymonitoring equipment for measuring and recording pressure drop as required bythis permit. The monitoring equipment must be installed, in use, and properlymaintained when the monitored cyclone is in operation.

11.0

CD Minn. R. 7007.0800, subps. 4, 5and 14

Periodic Inspections: At least once per calendar quarter, or more frequently asrequired by the manufacturing specifications, the Permittee shall inspect the controlequipment components. The Permittee shall maintain a written record of theseinspections.

12.0

CD Minn. R. 7007.0800, subp. 14 The Permittee shall operate and maintain the fabric filter in accordance with theOperation and Maintenance (O & M) Plan. The Permittee shall keep copies of theO & M Plan available onsite for use by staff and MPCA staff.

13.0




28 Oct, 2011 14:37Page 12 of 22

Subject Item: CE 004 Venturi Scrubber


NC/CA



CD Title I Condition: To avoidclassification as a major sourceand modification under 40 CFRSection 52.21 and Minn. R.7007.3000; To avoid classificationas a major source under 40 CFRSection 70.2 and Minn. R.7007.0200; Minn. R. 7007.0800subp. 2 and 14

The Permittee shall operate and maintain the scrubber (CE 004) at any time thatthe process equipment controlled by the scrubber (EU 001) is in operation. ThePermittee shall document periods of non-operation of the control equipment.

2.0

LIMIT Title I Condition: To avoidclassification as a major sourceand modification under 40 CFRSection 52.21 and Minn. R.7007.3000; To avoid classificationas a major source under 40 CFRSection 70.2 and Minn. R.7007.0200; Minn. R. 7007.0800subp. 2 and 14


3.0



4.0



5.0

LIMIT Title I Condition: To avoid majorsource classification under 40CFR Section 63.2; To avoid majorsource classification under 40CFR Section 70.2 and Minn. R.7007.0200; Minn. R. 7007.0800subp. 2 and 14


6.0

LIMIT Title I Condition: To avoidclassification as a major sourceand modification under 40 CFRSection 52.21 and Minn. R.7007.3000; To avoid classificationas a major source under 40 CFRSection 70.2 and Minn. R.7007.0200; Minn. R. 7007.0800subp. 2 and 14 and Minn. R.7017.2025, subp. 3

Pressure Drop: greater than or equal to 4.0 inches of water column and less than orequal to 9.0 inches of water column , unless a new range is set pursuant to Minn.R. 7017.2025, subp. 3, based on the values recorded during the most recentMPCA-approved performance test where compliance was demonstrated. The newrange shall be implemented upon receipt of the Notice of Compliance lettergranting preliminary approval. The range is final upon issuance of a permitamendment incorporating the change.

7.0




28 Oct, 2011 14:37Page 13 of 22

CD Title I Condition: To avoidclassification as a major sourceand modification under 40 CFRSection 52.21 and Minn. R.7007.3000; To avoid classificationas a major source under 40 CFRSection 70.2 and Minn. R.7007.0200; Minn. R. 7007.0800subp. 2 and 14 and Minn. R.7017.2025, subp. 3

Scrubber Liquid Level: greater than or equlat to 7.0 gauge and less than or equal to7.5 gauge, unless a new range is set pursuant to Minn. R. 7017.2025, subp. 3,based on the values recorded during the most recent MPCA-approved performancetest where compliance was demonstrated. The new range shall be implementedupon receipt of the Notice of Compliance letter granting preliminary approval. Therange is final upon issuance of a permit amendment incorporating the change.

8.0



Recordkeeping: The Permittee shall do the following, once every 24 hours when inoperation: 1). Read and record the scrubber liquid level;and 2). Read and recordthe pressure drop across the scrubber.

10.0


Corrective Actions: The Permittee shall take corrective action as soon as possible ifany of the following occur:- the recorded scrubber liquid level is outside the required operating range; or- the recorded pressure drop is outside the required operating range; or- the scrubber or any of its components are found during the inspections to needrepair.Corrective actions shall return the pressure drop within the permitted range, and/orscrubber liquid level to within the permitted range, and/or include completion ofnecessary repairs identified during the inspection, as applicable. Corrective actionsinclude, but are not limited to, those outlined in the O & M Plan for the scrubber.The Permittee shall keep a record of the type and date of any corrective actiontaken.

11.0

CD Minn. R. 7007.0800, subp. 4 Monitoring Equipment: The Permittee shall install and maintain the necessarymonitoring equipment for measuring and recording pressure drop and scrubberliquid level as required by this permit. The monitoring equipment must be installed,in use, and properly maintained when the monitored scrubber is in operation.

12.0



13.0

CD Minn. R. 7007.0800, subp. 14 The Permittee shall operate and maintain the scrubber in accordance with theOperation and Maintenance (O & M) Plan. The Permittee shall keep copies of theO & M Plan available onsite for use by staff and MPCA staff.

14.0




28 Oct, 2011 14:37Page 14 of 22

Subject Item: CE 005 Venturi Scrubber

Associated Items: EU 002 Cascade Cleaning System

NC/CA



CD Title I Condition: To avoidclassification as a major sourceand modification under 40 CFRSection 52.21 and Minn. R.7007.3000; To avoid classificationas a major source under 40 CFRSection 70.2 and Minn. R.7007.0200; Minn. R. 7007.0800subp. 2 and 14

The Permittee shall operate and maintain the scrubber (CE 005) at any time thatthe process equipment controlled by the scrubber (EU 002) is in operation. ThePermittee shall document periods of non-operation of the control equipment.

2.0



3.0


The Permitee shall operate and maintain the control equipment such that itachieves an overall control efficiency for filterable PM < 10 micron: greater than orequal to 84 percent control efficiency

4.0



5.0

LIMIT Title I Condition: To avoid majorsource classification under 40CFR Section 63.2; To avoid majorsource classification under 40CFR Section 70.2 and Minn. R.7007.0200; Minn. R. 7007.0800subp. 2 and 14


6.0

LIMIT Title I Condition: To avoidclassification as a major sourceand modification under 40 CFRSection 52.21 and Minn. R.7007.3000; To avoid classificationas a major source under 40 CFRSection 70.2 and Minn. R.7007.0200; Minn. R. 7007.0800subp. 2 and 14 and Minn. R.7017.2025, subp. 3

Pressure Drop: greater than or equal to 4.0 inches of water column and less than orequal to 9.0 inches of water column , unless a new range is set pursuant to Minn.R. 7017.2025, subp. 3, based on the values recorded during the most recentMPCA-approved performance test where compliance was demonstrated. The newrange shall be implemented upon receipt of the Notice of Compliance lettergranting preliminary approval. The range is final upon issuance of a permitamendment incorporating the change.

7.0




28 Oct, 2011 14:37Page 15 of 22

CD Title I Condition: To avoidclassification as a major sourceand modification under 40 CFRSection 52.21 and Minn. R.7007.3000; To avoid classificationas a major source under 40 CFRSection 70.2 and Minn. R.7007.0200; Minn. R. 7007.0800subp. 2 and 14 and Minn. R.7017.2025, subp. 3

Scrubber Liquid Level: greater than or equlat to 7.0 gauge and less than or equal to7.5 gauge, unless a new range is set pursuant to Minn. R. 7017.2025, subp. 3,based on the values recorded during the most recent MPCA-approved performancetest where compliance was demonstrated. The new range shall be implementedupon receipt of the Notice of Compliance letter granting preliminary approval. Therange is final upon issuance of a permit amendment incorporating the change.

8.0



Recordkeeping: The Permittee shall do the following, once every 24 hours when inoperation: 1). Read and record the scrubber liquid level; and 2). Read and recordthe pressure drop across the scrubber.

10.0


Corrective Actions: The Permittee shall take corrective action as soon as possible ifany of the following occur:- the recorded scrubber liquid level is outside the required operating range; or- the recorded pressure drop is outside the required operating range; or- the scrubber or any of its components are found during the inspections to needrepair.Corrective actions shall return the pressure drop and/or scrubber liquid level towithin the permitted range, and/or include completion of necessary repairsidentified during the inspection, as applicable. Corrective actions include, but arenot limited to, those outlined in the O & M Plan for the scrubber. The Permitteeshall keep a record of the type and date of any corrective action taken.

11.0

CD Minn. R. 7007.0800, subp. 4 Monitoring Equipment: The Permittee shall install and maintain the necessarymonitoring equipment for measuring and recording pressure drop and scrubberliquid level as required by this permit. The monitoring equipment must be installed,in use, and properly maintained when the monitored scrubber is in operation.

12.0



13.0

CD Minn. R. 7007.0800, subp. 14 The Permittee shall operate and maintain the scrubber in accordance with theOperation and Maintenance (O & M) Plan. The Permittee shall keep copies of theO & M Plan available onsite for use by staff and MPCA staff.

14.0




28 Oct, 2011 14:37Page 16 of 22

Subject Item: CE 006 Fabric Filter - Low Temperature, i.e., T<180 Degrees F


NC/CA



CD Title I Condition: To avoidclassification as a major sourceand modification under 40 CFRSection 52.21 and Minn. R.7007.3000; To avoid classificationas a major source under 40 CFRSection 70.2 and Minn. R.7007.0200; Minn. R. 7007.0800,subps. 2 and 14

The Permittee shall operate and maintain the fabric filter (CE 006) at any time thatthe process equipment controlled by the fabric filter (EU 001) is in operation. ThePermittee shall document periods of non-operation of the control equipment.

2.0

LIMIT Title I Condition: To avoidclassification as a major sourceand modification under 40 CFRSection 52.21 and Minn. R.7007.3000 and To avoidclassification as major sourceunder 40 CFR Section 70.2 andMinn. R. 7007.0200; Minn. R.7007.0800, subps. 2 and 14


3.0



4.0



5.0

LIMIT Title I Condition: To avoid majorsource classification under 40CFR Section 63.2; To avoid majorsource classification under 40CFR Section 70.2 and Minn. R.7007.0200; Minn. R. 7007.0800,subps. 2 and 14


6.0

LIMIT Title I Condition: To avoidclassification as a major sourceand modification under 40 CFRSection 52.21 and Minn. R.7007.3000; To avoid classificationas a major source under 40 CFRSection 70.2 and Minn. R.7007.0200; Minn. R. 7007.0800,subps. 2 and 14; Minn. R.7017.2025, subp. 3


7.0





28 Oct, 2011 14:37Page 17 of 22

CD Title I Condition: To avoidclassification as a major sourceand modification under 40 CFRSection 52.21 and Minn. R.7007.3000; To avoid classificationas a major source under 40 CFRSection 70.2 and Minn. R.7007.0200; Minn. R. 7011.0800subp. 4 & 5


9.0


Corrective Actions: The Permittee shall take corrective action as soon as possible ifany of the following occur:- the recorded pressure drop is outside the required operating range; or- the fabric filter or any of its components are found during the inspections to needrepair.Corrective actions shall return the pressure drop to within the permitted range,and/or include completion of necessary repairs identified during the inspection, asapplicable. Corrective actions include, but are not limited to, those outlined in the O& M Plan for the fabric filter. The Permittee shall keep a record of the type and dateof any corrective action taken for each filter.

10.0

CD Minn. R. 7007.0800, subp. 4 Monitoring Equipment: The Permittee shall install and maintain the necessarymonitoring equipment for measuring and recording pressure drop as required bythis permit. The monitoring equipment must be installed, in use, and properlymaintained when the monitored fabric filter is in operation.

11.0



12.0


13.0




28 Oct, 2011 14:37Page 18 of 22

Subject Item: CE 007 Fabric Filter - Low Temperature, i.e., T<180 Degrees F

Associated Items: EU 002 Cascade Cleaning System

NC/CA



CD Title I Condition: To avoidclassification as a major sourceand modification under 40 CFRSection 52.21 and Minn. R.7007.3000; To avoid classificationas a major source under 40 CFRSection 70.2 and Minn. R.7007.0200; Minn. R. 7007.0800,subps. 2 and 14

The Permittee shall operate and maintain the fabric filter (CE 007) at any time thatthe process equipment controlled by the fabric filter (EU 002) is in operation. ThePermittee shall document periods of non-operation of the control equipment.

2.0



3.0



4.0



5.0

LIMIT Title I Condition: To avoid majorsource classification under 40CFR Section 63.2; To avoid majorsource classification under 40CFR Section 70.2 and Minn. R.7007.0200; Minn. R. 7007.0800,subps. 2 and 14


6.0

LIMIT Title I Condition: To avoidclassification as a major sourceand modification under 40 CFRSection 52.21 and Minn. R.7007.3000; To avoid classificationas a major source under 40 CFRSection 70.2 and Minn. R.7007.0200; Minn. R. 7007.0800,subps. 2 and 14; Minn. R.7017.2025, subp. 3


7.0





28 Oct, 2011 14:37Page 19 of 22

CD Title I Condition: To avoidclassification as a major sourceand modification under 40 CFRSection 52.21 and Minn. R.7007.3000; To avoid classificationas a major source under 40 CFRSection 70.2 and Minn. R.7007.0200; Minn. R. 7011.0800subp. 4 & 5


9.0


Corrective Actions: The Permittee shall take corrective action as soon as possible ifany of the following occur:- the recorded pressure drop is outside the required operating range; or- the fabric filter or any of its components are found during the inspections to needrepair.Corrective actions shall return the pressure drop to within the permitted range,and/or include completion of necessary repairs identified during the inspection, asapplicable. Corrective actions include, but are not limited to, those outlined in the O& M Plan for the fabric filter. The Permittee shall keep a record of the type and dateof any corrective action taken for each filter.

10.0

CD Minn. R. 7007.0800, subp. 4 Monitoring Equipment: The Permittee shall install and maintain the necessarymonitoring equipment for measuring and recording pressure drop as required bythis permit. The monitoring equipment must be installed, in use, and properlymaintained when the monitored fabric filter is in operation.

11.0



12.0


13.0




28 Oct, 2011 14:37Page 20 of 22

Subject Item: FS 001 Product storage piles

NC/CA


CD Minn. R. 7011.0150 The Permittee shall take reasonable measures to prevent particulate matter frombecoming airborne.

The Permittee shall comply with the Fugitive Dust Control Plan referenced underthe Total Facility Section of this permit.

1.0




28 Oct, 2011 14:37Page 21 of 22

Subject Item: FS 002 Paved roads

NC/CA


CD Minn. R. 7007.0800, subp 2 The Permittee shall incorporate the following requirements into the Fugitive DustControl Plan referenced under the Total Facility Section of this permit.

1.0

CD Minn. R. 7011.0150 and Minn.Stat. Section 116.07, subds. 4a &9; Minn. R. 7007.0100, subp. 7(A),7(L), & 7(M); Minn. R. 7007.0800,subps. 1, 2 & 4; Minn. R.7009.0010-7009.0080

The Permittee shall clean, once per calendar day, all primary road entrances,internal roads, and exits of the Permittee's property, except as provided below:1) If there was a 0.1 inch rainfall during the previous 24 hours, or2) If the areas to be cleaned are covered with snow or ice, or3) During freezing conditions

2.0

CD Minn. R. 7011.0150; Minn. R.7007.0800, subp. 2 and Minn.Stat. Section 116.07, subds. 4a &9; Minn. R. 7007.0100, subp. 7(A),7(L), & 7(M); Minn. R. 7007.0800,subps. 1, 2 & 4; Minn. R.7009.0010-7009.0080

The Permittee shall maintain daily records of:

1) The date and time of each dust control measure;2) The roads/areas that were cleaned;3) If dust control measures were not taken because of a rainfall event or becausean area is snow or ice-covered, documentation of the event or condition along withthe source of measurement for rainfall (i.e. on-site rain gauge);4) If dust control measures were not taken because of weather conditions,documentation of the date and those conditions (e.g. records of the date(s) and astatement that there were freezing conditions).4) Any cleaning equipment breakdown and corrective actions.

3.0




28 Oct, 2011 14:37Page 22 of 22

Subject Item: FS 003 Raw material handling

NC/CA


CD Minn. R. 7011.0150 The Permittee shall take reasonable measures to prevent particulate matter frombecoming airborne.

The Permittee shall comply with the Fugitive Dust Control Plan referenced underthe Total Facility Section of this permit.

1.0

Attachment 5: Fee Points Calculator

Points Calculator

1) AQ Facility ID No.: 05300480 Total Points 552) Facility Name: Northern Metals, LLC3) Small business? y/n? N ��4) DQ Numbers (including all rolled) : 3056 ��5) Date of each Application Received: 08/30/20106) Final Permit No. 05300480-0027) Permit Staff kelsey suddard8) "Work completed" in which .xls file (i.e. unit 2b, unit 1a, biofuels)?

TotalApplication Type DQ No. Qty. Points Points DetailsAdministrative Amendment 1 0Minor Amendment 4 0Applicability Request 10 0Moderate Amendment 15 0Major Amendment 3056 1 25 25Individual State Permit (not reissuance) 50 0Individual Part 70 Permit (not reissuance) 75 0

Additional PointsModeling Review 3056 1 15 15

BACT Review 15 0LAER Review 15 0CAIR/Part 75 CEM analysis 10 0NSPS Review 10 0NESHAP Review 10 0Case-by-case MACT Review 20 0Netting 10 0Limits to remain below threshold 10 0Plantwide Applicability Limit (PAL) 20 0Plantwide Applicability Limit (PAL) 20 0AERA review 3056 1 15 15Variance request under 7000.7000 35 0Confidentiality request under 7000.1300 2 0EAW reviewPart 4410.4300, subparts 18, item A; and 29 15 0Part 4410.4300, subparts 8, items A & B; 10, items A to C; 16, items A & D; 17, items A to C & E to G; and 18, items B & C

35 0

Part 4410.4300, subparts 4; 5 items A & B; 13; 15; 16, items B & C; and 17 item D

70 0

Add'l Points 30

NOTES:

(DQ DQ#)