Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

Environmental Protection

October 4 , 2012

Subject: Source Test Review

Sapa Extrusions, Inc. (Formerly Alcoa Extrusions, Inc. )

Group 1 Aluminum Melting Furnace # 9 (Source ID No. M 9 )

Cressona Borough, Schuylkill County

Title V Operating Permit No. 54

- 00022

PFID No. 510716

eFacts No. 1670060

To: Edward Dudick

Facilities Section

Air Quality Program

Northeast Regional Office

From: Robert Small

Source Testing Section

Division of Source Testing and Monitoring

Through: Rick Begley

Chief

Source Testing Section

PROCESS DESCRIPTION FOR GROUP 1 ALUMINUM MELTING FURNACE # 9

Group 1 aluminum m elting furnace no. 9 is a wet bath reverb aluminum melting furnace used to

melt prime aluminum, scrap aluminum, and alloying materials. Molten aluminum flows from the

melters to holding furnaces, and there it flows through a degassing unit on to a cast unit to be cast

into l ogs, which are eventually extruded to produce a variety of aluminum extrusions. Emissions

from this furnace are exhausted through a single, dedicated stack. The stack height is 67.6 feet

above grade, with the test ports located approximately 30 ft upstre am from the nearest flow

disturbance.

As is normal practice, prior to each test run the furnace is emptied to the maximum extent

possible by transferring molten aluminum to a holding furnace. Various charge material,

including prime aluminum and scrap al uminum, were placed into the furnace. This loading

process is referred to as “charging”.

Charging takes place until the desired weight is achieved. After the charge material i s placed

into the furnace, the furnace door i s closed and the burners initiall y operated at, or near,

maximum capacity. During the entire melt cycle, the furnace control system control s the burners

to achieve pre

- determined temperature set points. Later on in the melt cycle, the doors areSapa Extrusions, Inc. (Formerly Alcoa Extrusions, Inc.)

Cressona Borough, Schuylkill County 2 October 4 , 20 12

opened so that the dross c an be removed. This process of dross removal is referred to as

“skimming”.

Melting is continued until metal is in molten form, had achieved the desired chemistry, and until

metal from the holding furnace is transferred to the cast unit, thereby proving room in the holdi ng

furnace for metal to be transferred from the melting furnace. This process of transferring is

known as “tapping”.

PURPOSE OF TESTING

On April 11

- 13, 16

- 18, and 20, 2012 personnel from Air Analysis, LLC performed triplicate

filterable particulate (EPA Method 5), Polychlorinated Dibenzo

- P

- Dioxins

(PCDD)/Polychloronated Dibenzofurans (PCDF) (EPA Method 23), hydrogen chloride ( HCl

using EPA Method 26A) , and hydrogen fluoride (H F using EPA Method 26A) emissions testing

in Group 1 Aluminum Melting Furnace No. 9 (#9 FCE) exhaust stack. All of the emissions tests

were performed to demonstrate compliance according to the applicable conditions of Section E,

Group 4

, Title V Operat ing Permit No. 54

- 00022

.

During runs

, the facility was operating at the maximum rated capacity as stated in the

application. The Plan Approval also notes that if testing is performed at a rate of less than full

production, operation is restricted to the process

- input rate of testing at such level until a

subsequent compliance test is performed at a maximum rated capacity. In addition, each test run

was performed in accordance with approved test protocol and acceptable sampling practices.

The calculation s are correct and the results appear to be valid.

The filterable particulate, Polychlorinated Dibenzo

- P

- Dioxins (PCDD)/Polychloronated

Dibenzofurans (PCDF), hydrogen chloride , and hydrogen fluoride tests are acceptable to the

Department for the purpose of determining compliance (see below emission and control device

tables on page s 20

- 30 of this test review memorandum)

. In addition, the aforementioned tests

were all performed under two operating conditions and to demon strate compliance under

maximum operating conditions. The below three bullets details the aforementioned purpose of

testing:

On page 5 of the test protocol, the consultant stated that the above testing on melting furnace #9

will be performed under the below four different operating/test conditions. The operating

scenarios will vary in the ratio of 10/10 and painted scrap added to the melt. Three (3) test runs

for each pollutant will be performed while operating under conditions 1 and 2, but only a sin gle

test run for each pollutant will be performed under conditions 3 and 4.

 Test Condition #1

– This Condition is considered to be normal and is consistent with the

ratio of product being melted on a daily basis at the facility.Sapa Extrusions, Inc. (Formerly Alcoa Extrusions, Inc.)

Cressona Borough, Schuylkill County 3 October 4 , 20 12

 Test Condition #2

– This Condition is a trial for the evaluation of air emissions while

adding painted scrap in the melt. The company stated that they believe that this condition

will give the best chance of meeting the emission standards while adding scrap, which is

why thr ee (3) runs was proposed.

 Test Condition #3

– This Condition has a greater amount of painted scrap and the

company believes that there is a chance that the emission standards may be exceeded and

they only feel confident in conducting one (1) test run for each pollutant under these

conditions. If after reviewing the tests results, the company believes that this condition

has the potential for meeting with emission standards, more testing was proposed (ONE

RUN RESULT TO BE USED FOR INFORMATIONAL ONLY PURPOS ES)

.

 Test Condition #4

– This Condition is a trail for the evaluation of air emissions while

adding painted scrap in the melt. Also, this Condition has with addition of a greater

amount of painted scrap the company believes that there is a chance that th e emission

standards may be exceeded and they only feel confident in conducting one (1) test run for

each pollutant under these conditions. If after reviewing the tests results, the company

believes that this condition has the potential for meeting with e mission standards, more

testing was proposed (PROPOSED BUT NOT PERFORMED)

.

FOUR OPERATING/TEST CONDITIONS

OPERATING

CONDITION 10/10

SCRAP, (%) PAINTED

SCRAP, (%) SALT FLUX,

(LBS) # OF TEST

RUNS

1 65 0 70 3

2 50 15 70 3

3 40 25 70 1

4 * 30 35 70 1

*Note: Condition #4 was proposed by the consultant and company but not performed due to operational constraints with production requirements

.Sapa Extrusions, Inc. (Formerly Alcoa Extrusions, Inc.)

Cressona Borough, Schuylkill County 4 October 4 , 20 12

Filterable Particulate, Dioxin/ Furans , and Hydrogen Chloride /Hydrogen Fluoride Emission Testing Table

Test Condition #1

- Emissions/Control Device Summary Testing Table

Sources Sampling

Condition Sampling

Parameters Test Run No.

& Date Test Times Test Run

Duration

( minutes ) Regulatory

Requirement

Group 1 Aluminum

Melting Furnace #9

(Source ID No. M9 ) Test Condition # 1

( Completed during

full length of melt

cycle) Filterable Particulate

(EPA Method 5) Run No. 1

4/11/12 10:20

- 14:11 218.5

Title V Operating

Permit No. 54

- 00022

and

NESHAP for

Secondary

Aluminum

Maximum

Achievable Con trol

Technology (MACT)

Rule (40 CFR,

Subpart RRR) Run No. 2

4/12/12 7:47

- 12:08 240.0

Run No. 3

4/13/12 8:09

- 12:10 231.0

PCDD/PCDF

(EPA Method 23) Run No. 1

4/11/12 10:20

- 14:11 218.5

Run No. 2

4/12/12 7:47

- 12:08 240.0

Run No. 3

4/13/12 8:09

- 12:10 231.0

Hydrogen Chloride

& Hydrogen

Fluoride

(EPA Method 26A) Run No. 1

4/11/12 10:20

- 14:11 218.5

Run No. 2

4/12/12 7:47

- 12:08 240.0

Run No. 3

4/13/12 8:09

- 12:10 231.0

Summarized

Process/Control

Device Data Same as above See below Emission and

Process/Control Device

Summary Tables Process

Instruments N/A 218.5

- 240.0 Same as above

Filterable Particulate, Dioxin/Furans, and Hydrogen Chloride/Hydrogen Fluoride Emission Testing Table

Test Condition #2

- Emissions/Control Device Summary Testing Table

Sources Sampling

Condition Sampling

Parameters Test Run No.

& Date Test Times Test Run

Duration

(minutes) Regulatory

Requirement

Group 1 Aluminum

Melting Furnace #9

(Source ID No. M9 ) Test Condition # 2

(Completed during

full length of melt

cycle) Filterable Particulate

(EPA Method 5) Run No. 1

4/16/12 11:01

- 15:01 240.0

Title V Operating

Permit No. 54

- 00022

and

NESHAP for

Secondary

Aluminum

Maximum

Achievable Control

Technology (MACT)

Rule (40 CFR,

Subpart RRR) Run No. 2

4/17/12 11:01

- 15:08 238.0

Run No. 3

4/18/12 11:00

- 15:00 232.0

PCDD/PCDF

(EPA Method 23) Run No. 1

4/16/12 11:01

- 15:1 1 240.0

Run No. 2

4/17/12 11:01

- 15:08 238.0

Run No. 3

4/18/12 11:00

- 15:00 232.0

Hydrogen Chloride

& Hydrogen

Fluoride

(EPA Method 26A) Run No. 1

4/16/12 11:01

- 15:01 240.0

Run No. 2

4/17/12 11:01

- 15:08 238.0

Run No. 3

4/18/12 11:00

- 15:00 232.0

Summarized

Process/Control

Device Data Same as above See below Emission and

Process/Control Device

Summary Tables Process

Instruments N/A 232.0

- 240.0 Same as aboveSapa Extrusions, Inc. (Formerly Alcoa Extrusions, Inc.)

Cressona Borough, Schuylkill County 5 October 4 , 20 12

Filterable Particulate, Dioxin/Furans, and Hydrogen Chloride/Hydrogen Fluoride Emission Testing Table

Test Condition #3

- Emissions/Control Device Summary Testing Table (Proposed One Run)

Sources Sampling

Condition Sampling

Parameters Test Run No.

& Date Test Times Test Run

Duration

(minutes) Regulatory

Requirement

Aluminum Melting

Furnace #9

(Source ID No. M9 ) Test Condition # 3

(Completed

following the

“melting” portion

of the cycle but

prior to the

“transfer” of molten

aluminum to the

holding furnace) Filterable Particulate

(EPA Method 5) Run No. 1

4/20/12 11:03

- 15:12 240.0 Title V Operating

Permit No. 54

- 00022

and

NESHAP for

Secondary

Aluminum

Maximum

Achievable Control

Technology (MACT)

Rule (40 CFR,

Subpart RRR) PCDD/PCDF

(EPA Method 23) Run No. 1

4/20/12 11:03

- 15:12 240.0

Hydrogen Chloride

& Hydrogen

Fluoride

(EPA Method 26A) Run No. 1

4/20/12 11:03

- 15:12 240.0

Summarized

Process/Control

Device Data Same as above See below Emission

and Process/Control

Device Summary

Tables Process

Instruments N/A 240.0 Same as above

In evaluating the test results, please note the following comments/information.

OBSERVER INFORMATION

The following individuals participated in the stack test project on April 11

- 13

, 16

- 18, and 20,

2012 (see below test participants table):Sapa Extrusions, Inc. (Formerly Alcoa Extrusions, Inc.)

Cressona Borough, Schuylkill County 6 October 4 , 20 12

TEST PARTICIPANTS

Organization Participant and Function

Sapa Extrusions, Inc. (Formerly Alcoa Extrusions, Inc.) Mr. Clay Long, P.E. / Environmental Manager

Coordination between Contractors and Production

Mr. Dan McGoey / Environmental Technician

Contractor Safety/Coordination between Contractors and

Production

Pennsylvania Dept. of Environmental Protection

(PADEP) No Department personnel was present to observe testing

and process and control device operations.

Air Analysis, LLC (t/a SGF Consulting Services) Stephen Schell / Project Manager

Sampling Train, Probe Pusher, & Recovery Coordinator

Chet Sattizahn / Senior Scientist

Sampling Train, Probe Pusher, & Recovery Coordinator

Laurie Miller / Air Quality Technician

Site Preparation, AdministrativeSapa Extrusions, Inc. (Formerly Alcoa Extrusions, Inc.)

Cressona Borough, Schuylkill County 7 October 4 , 20 12



## TESTING NOTABLESSapa Extrusions, Inc. (Formerly Alcoa Extrusions, Inc.)

Cressona Borough, Schuylkill County 8 October 4 , 20 12

SAMPLING NOTABLES

On page 6 of the test report, t he co nsultant stated that t he first test run, was set

- up to be

performed over the course of five (5) hours in order to ensure sampling during the entire melt

cycle. This melt cycle, however, was completed while Air Analysis, LLC still had fifty

- eight

minutes remaining in the test r un, and prior to traversing the entire exhaust stack. Air Analysis,

LLC recovered the samples from the test run and have utilized the results in the determination of

compliance with emission standards. In an attempt to prevent the melt cycle from ending prior to

the completion of the remaining test runs, test runs 2 through 7 (or runs 2

- 3 for condition #1, runs

4

- 6 for condition #2, and run 7 for condition #3) were set

- up to be performed over the course of

four (4) hours rather than five hours. In the De partment test review memorandum, runs 1

- 7 is

denoted as runs 1

- 3 for condition #1, runs 1

- 3 for condition #2, and run 1 for condition #3

.

CONCLUSION

The aforementioned filterable particulate, dioxins/furans , HCl, and HF emission test results

should be c onsidered accurate and acceptable to the Department for the purpose of determining

compliance for the following reason:

 T he consultant and I discussed all notable issues that may have generally and/or adversely

affect testing and the final test results at the time of testing in the field or via telephone

and agreed upon the best and most accurate way to perform these test runs due to the

unpredictab i l it y of testing batch processes.

 There was no way to accurately predict beforehand the duration of each bat ch cycle. The

consultant made every reasonable effort to adjust his minutes per point from run to run so

that he would not have to re

- sample the traverse points to cover the entire batch cycle

duration (see below emission results tables for each pollutant at each condition). The

emission test results were also reported with and without the additional minute sample to

show that the isokinetic values were within permitted criteria before the additional

sampling and to also demonstrate that the emission woul d have likely been well below

their respective emission standards.

JUSTIFICATION FOR EMISSION TEST RESULTS VARIABILITY

During the above testing , the minor and notable test run variability likely resulted from normal

process variance

.Sapa Extrusions, Inc. (Formerly Alcoa Extrusions, Inc.)

Cressona Borough, Schuylkill County 9 October 4 , 20 12



# STACK TEST REVIEW COMMENTSSapa Extrusions, Inc. (Formerly Alcoa Extrusions, Inc.)

Cressona Borough, Schuylkill County 10 October 4 , 20 12

CYCLONIC FLOW CHECK @ OUTLET SAMPLING LOCATION

The below cyclonic flow check was performed because the downstream duct diameter distances

did not meet or were not greater than Section 2.2 of EPA Method 1 minimum flow disturbance

requirement. During runs 1

- 3, an acceptable pretest cyclonic flow check was performed at the

exhaust stack and produced average angular flow of 0.0 degrees that w as less than the maximum

angular flow of 20 degrees per Sections 2.4 and 2.5 of EPA Method 1 (see below table and pages

15 and 64 in the test report)

.

Cyclonic Flow Table

Sources Sampling

Location Test

Conditions Stack

Diameter Upstream

Duct

Diameter Downstream

Duct

Diameter Average

Angular

Flow

Group 1

Aluminum

Melting Furnace

#9

(Source ID No.

M9 ) Outlet 1

- 3 96.0”x36.0” 6.58 6.87 0.0

EPA Method 1

Requirement N/A N/A ≥2 ≥8 ≤ 20Sapa Extrusions, Inc. (Formerly Alcoa Extrusions, Inc.)

Cressona Borough, Schuylkill County 11 October 4 , 20 12

ACCEPTABLE FILTERABLE PARTICULATE RECOVERY PROCEDURES

All filterable particulate recoveries/rinses or procedures of the front

- half sample (FH) train

compo nents (consisting of a nozzle, 4

- foot probe and FH filter

- holder) were acceptable because

suff icient volume of acetone was used to rinse and brush the front

- h alf (FH) sample train

components. A minimum of three acetone rinses/brushes are required for glass probe liners (see

below filterable particulate recovery data table) . These procedures do meet the minimum rinse

volume of 200 milliliters (mls) of acetone needed to effectively recover/rinse the front

- half (or

filterable particulate) sample train components until no visible particle shows in the rinse /probe

and to determine the filterable part icul ate weights (mg ) (see below table and page 4 of 12 in

Appendix 4 of the test report)

.

Front

- Half (or Filterable ) Particulate Recovery Table

Recovery Date(s) 4/11

- 13/12 4/16

- 18/12 4/20/12

Tested Source Group 1 Aluminum Melting Furnace #9

Testing Condition 1 2 3

Recovery Location Outlet Outlet Outlet

Glass Probe Length, (ft) 4 4 4

Total/Required Number of Acetone Rinses

Per Run 3 3 3

Run 1 Total Acetone Rinse Volume, (ml) 350 340 340

Run 2 Total Acetone Rinse Volume, (ml) 340 370 Not Performed

Run 3 Total Acetone Rinse Volume, (ml) 240 260 Not Performed

Average Three Run Acetone Rinse Volume,

(ml) 310 323 340

Minimum Required Acetone Rinse

Volume Per Run, (ml) 200 200 200

Average Three Run Acetone Volume Per

Rinse, (ml) 103 108 113

Minimum Required Acetone Volume Per

Rinse, (ml) 67 67 67Sapa Extrusions, Inc. (Formerly Alcoa Extrusions, Inc.)

Cressona Borough, Schuylkill County 12 October 4 , 20 12

ANALYTICAL QA/QC RESULTS (EXTRACTED FROM TEST REPORT)

Analytical measurements of precision and accuracy were made on stack gas samples, and are

detailed in each analytical report (see pages 2 of 12

, 3 of 12 , and 11 of 12 in Appendix 4 for PM,

HCl, & HF of the test report and see page s 21 of 23 and 22 of 23 in Appendix 4 for PCDD/PCDF

of the test report )

.

 Table 1, a summary of the relevant analytical QA/QC results for EPA Method s 5, 26A is

provided for April 11

- 13, 16

- 18, and 20, 2012

.

 Table 2 and Table 2A , a summary of the relevant analytical QA/QC results for EPA

Method 23 is provided for April 11

- 13, 16

- 18, and 20, 2012

.

 Table 3 presents hydro gen chloride and hydrogen fluoride collection efficiencies at

Condition #1 of the EPA Method 26A sampling train for April 11

- 13, 2012

.

 Table 4 presents hydrogen chloride and hydrogen fluoride collection efficiencies at

Condition #2 of the EPA Method 26A sampling train for April 16

- 18

, 2012

.

 Table 5 presents hydrogen chloride and hydrogen fluoride collection efficiencies at

Condition #3 of the EPA Method 26A sampling train for April 20 , 2012

Table 1

- Summary o f Analytical QA/QC Results

– EPA Methods 5/26A

Test Condition #1

- Emissions/Control Device Summary Testing TableSapa Extrusions, Inc. (Formerly Alcoa Extrusions, Inc.)

Cressona Borough, Schuylkill County 13 October 4 , 20 12

Table 2

- Summary o f Analytical QA/QC Results

– EPA Methods 5/26A

Test Condition #1

- Emissions/Control Device Summary Testing TableSapa Extrusions, Inc. (Formerly Alcoa Extrusions, Inc.)

Cressona Borough, Schuylkill County 14 October 4 , 20 12

Table 2A

- Summary o f Analytical QA/QC Results

– EPA Methods 5/26A

Test Condition #1

- Emissions/Control Device Summary Testing TableSapa Extrusions, Inc. (Formerly Alcoa Extrusions, Inc.)

Cressona Borough, Schuylkill County 15 October 4 , 20 12

Table 3

- EPA Method 26A Sampling Train Efficiency

- Hydrogen Chloride/Hydrogen Fluoride

Test Condition #1 Performed on April 11

- 13, 2012

Sampling

Location Sampling

Condition Test Dates Run # Target

Compound Knockout Impinger + 1 st

Acidic Impinger

Catch Wt, ug 2 nd Acidic Impinger

Catch Wt, ug Total

Catch Wt, ug Collection *

Efficiency, %

Outlet

Test Condition #1 4/11/12 1

HCl 190,000 1,800 191,800 99.05

4/12/12 2 240,000 1,800 241,800 99.25

4/13/12 3 240,000 2,700 242,700 98.88

Outlet 4/11/12 1

HF 26,000 1100 27,100 95.77

4/12/12 2 170,000 2,100 172,100 98.76

4/13/12 3 43,000 1,400 44,400 96.74

Collection Efficiency = (Knockout Impinger + Impinger #1)/(Knockout Impinger + Impinger #1 + Impinger #2) = (Knockout Impinger + Impinger #1)/(Total Impingers

Table 4

- EPA Method 26A Sampling Train Efficiency

- Hydrogen Chloride/Hydrogen Fluoride

Test Condition #2 Performed on April 16

- 18 , 2012

Sampling

Location Sampling

Condition Test

Dates Run # Target

Compound Knockout Impinger

+ 1 st Acidic

Impinger

Catch Wt, ug 2 nd Acidic

Impinger

Catch Wt, ug Total

Catch Wt,

ug Collection *

Efficiency,

%

Outlet

Test Condition # 2 4/1 6 /12 1

HCl 99,000 2,100 101,100 97.88

4/17 /12 2 110,000 2,700 112,700 97.55

4/18 /12 3 160,000 2,200 162,200 98.63

Outlet 4/16/12 1

HF 17,000 1,000 18,000 94.12

4/17/12 2 18,000 1,100 19,100 93.89

4/18/12 3 16,000 980 16,980 93.88

Collection Efficiency = (Knockout Impinger + Impinger #1)/(Knockout Impinger + Impinger #1 + Impinger #2) = (Knockout Impinger + Impinge r #1)/(Total ImpingersSapa Extrusions, Inc. (Formerly Alcoa Extrusions, Inc.)

Cressona Borough, Schuylkill County 16 October 4 , 20 12

Table 5

- EPA Method 26A Sampling Train Efficiency

- Hydrogen Chloride/Hydrogen Fluoride

Test Condition #3 Performed on April 20 , 2012

Sampling

Location Sampling

Condition Test

Dates Run # Target

Compound Knockout Impinger

+ 1 st Acidic

Impinger

Catch Wt, ug 2 nd Acidic

Impinger

Catch Wt, ug Total

Catch Wt,

ug Collection *

Efficiency,

%

Outlet

Test Condition # 3 4/11/12 1 HCl 200,000 5,300 205,300 97.35

Outlet 4/11/12 1 HF 20,000 550 20,550 97.25

Collection Efficiency = (Knockout Impinger + Impinger #1)/(Knockout Impinger + Impinger #1 + Impinger #2) = (Knockout Impinge r + Impinger #1)/(Total Impingers

COMPLIANT FILTERABLE PARTICULATE , DIOXINS/FURANS , HCl, & HF

EMISSION TEST RESULTS

T he average filterable particulate , dioxins/furans

, hydrogen chloride, and hydrogen fluoride

emission concentration and rate results of ug TEQ/Mg of charge and lb/ton of charge at

condition s nos. 1

- 3 were less than their respective emission standards as outlined in Title V

Operating Permit No. 54

- 00022 (see Test Results Summary Table on page 3 of the test report)

.Sapa Extrusions, Inc. (Formerly Alcoa Extrusions, Inc.)

Cressona Borough, Schuylkill County 17 October 4 , 20 12

Filterable Particulate, Dioxins/Furans , HCl, & HF Emission Table

Test Conditions Nos. 1

- 3

Sources Test Dates Testing Conditions Tested Pollutants Three Run

Average Test

Results Emission

Limitations Compliance

Status

Aluminum

Melting

Furnace #9 4/11

- 13/12 Condition No. 1

This Condition is considered

to be normal and is consistent

with the ratio of product

being melted on a daily basis

at the facility. Filterable Particulate

(gr./dscf)

(lb/hr)

(lb/ton) 0.0110

1.62

0.15 N/A

N/A

0.40 Compliant

Hydrogen Chloride

(gr./dscf)

(lb/hr)

(lb/ton) 0.0202

2.99

0.293 N/A

N/A

0.40 Compliant

Hydrogen Fluoride

(gr./dscf)

(lb/hr)

(lb/ton) 0.0074

1.11

0.11 N/A

N/A

N/A No Standard

Dioxins and Furans *

Measured as Total Toxic

Equivalent as2,3,7,8 TCDD

(gr/dscf )

(lb/hr)

(lb/ton)

(ug/Mg) 1.28E

- 10

1.78E

- 08

1.75E

- 09

0.88 N/A

N/A

N/A

15.0 Compliant

Aluminum

Melting

Furnace #9 4/16

- 18/12 Condition No. 2

This Condition is a trail for

the evaluation of air

emissions while adding

painted scrap in the melt.

The company stated that they

believe that this condition

will give the best chance of

meeting the emission

standards while adding scrap,

which is why three (3) runs

was proposed. Filterable Particulate

(gr./dscf)

(lb/hr)

(lb/ton) 0.00609

0.944

0.0923 N/A

N/A

0.40 Compliant

Hydrogen Chloride

(gr./dscf)

(lb/hr)

(lb/ton) 0.0105

1.622

0.158 N/A

N/A

0.40 Compliant

Hydrogen Fluoride

(gr./dscf)

(lb/hr)

(lb/ton) 0.0015

0.23

0.02 N/A

N/A

N/A No Standard

Dioxins and Furans *

Measured as Total Toxic

Equivalent as2,3,7,8 TCDD

(gr/dscf )

(lb/hr)

(lb/ton)

(ug/Mg) 1.66E

- 10

2.44E

- 08

2.36E

- 09

1.18 N/A

N/A

N/A

15.0 Compliant

Aluminum

Melting

Furnace #9 Condition No. 3

This Condition has with

addition of a greater amount

of painted scrap and the

company believes that there

is a chance that he emission

standards may be exceeded

and the only feel confident in

conducting one (1) test run

for each pollutant under these

conditions. If after reviewing

the tests results, the company

believes that this condition

has the potential for meeting

with emission standards,

more testing was proposed. Filterable Particulate

(gr./dscf)

(lb/hr)

(lb/ton) 0.0091

1.40

0.21 N/A

N/A

0.40

Only One (1)

Run Performed

– Results are to

be used for

Company

Informational

Purposes and

Not for

Compliance Hydrogen Chloride

(gr./dscf)

(lb/hr)

(lb/ton) 0.0170

2.63

0.397 N/A

N/A

0.40

Hydrogen Fluoride

(gr./dscf)

(lb/hr)

(lb/ton) 0.0017

0.26

0.40 N/A

N/A

N/A

Dioxins and Furans *

Measured as Total Toxic

Equivalent as2,3,7,8 TCDD

(gr/dscf )

(lb/hr)

(lb/ton)

(ug/Mg) 6.71E

- 11

8.86E

- 09

1.34E

- 09

0.67 N/A

N/A

N/A

15.0

* Note: The consultant used International Toxic ity Equivalency F actors (ITEF) and WHO 2005 Toxicity Equivalency Factors.

.Sapa Extrusions, Inc. (Formerly Alcoa Extrusions, Inc.)

Cressona Borough, Schuylkill County 18 October 4 , 20 12



# PROCESS/CONTROL DEVICE OPERATING

DATA COMMENTSSapa Extrusions, Inc. (Formerly Alcoa Extrusions, Inc.)

Cressona Borough, Schuylkill County 19 October 4 , 20 12

PROCESS/CONTROL EQUIPMENT OPERATING DATA AND PROBLEMS

Aluminum Melting Furnace #9 Operating Conditions

The company stated that the Aluminum Melting Furnace #9 was operating at representative or

maximum operating conditions during testing (For operating data summary results, See

Appendix 5 in test report)

.

Aluminum Melting Furnace #9 and Control De vice Data Summary

Test Date 4/11

- 13/12 4/16

- 18/12 4/20/12 Average

Source Type Aluminum Melting Furnace #9 N/A

Pollutant Tested Filterable Particulate, Dioxins/Furans, and

Hydrogen Chloride, and Hydrogen Fluoride N/A

Test/Batch/Cycle Duration, (minutes) 241.4 246.0 378.6 288.7

Testing Condition 1 2 3 N/A

Number of Test Runs 3 3 1

Operating Condition Maximum

Normal Maximum

Normal Maximum

Normal N/A

P rocess and Control Device Data Summary

Alloy MC61 MC61 (Runs 1

- 2)

& HF25 (Run 3) FE35 N/A

P1020 0 0 0 0

RSI 0 0 0 0

Internal Scrap 26,153 27,488 24,195 25,945

10/10 Scrap 53,722 41,263 33,705 42,897

Coated Scrap 0 12,587 20,840 11,142

Purchased Press/Fab Scrap 0 0 0 0 0

Chips/Turnings 2,933 2,333 4,560 3,275

Commercial Metal 115 248 250 204

Total Charge Weight 82,923 83,919 83,550 83,464

Salt Flux, (lbs) 70 70 70 70

TRFIR, (lbs Cl/ton charged) 0.75 0.68 0.75 0.73

Chips, (%) 4 3 5 4

10/10 Scrap, (%) 65 49 40 51

Coated Scrap

--- 15 25 20

Total Purchased

--- 64 65 65Sapa Extrusions, Inc. (Formerly Alcoa Extrusions, Inc.)

Cressona Borough, Schuylkill County 20 October 4 , 20 12



# “Acceptable” Tested Location, Source, and Control

Device :

 Outlet Stack

 Group 1 Aluminum Melting Furnace # 9

(Source ID No. M9 )

 Uncontrolled

“Acceptable” Tested Pollutant, Test Method, and

Purpose :

 Filterable Particulate, PCDD/PCDF, HCl , & HF

Emissions

 EPA Methods 5, 23, and 26A

 Emission and Process & Control Device Data

Summary

“Acceptable” Test Condition #1 :

This Condition is considered to be normal and is

consistent with the ratio of product being melted on a

daily basis at the facilitySapa Extrusions, Inc. (Formerly Alcoa Extrusions, Inc.)

Cressona Borough, Schuylkill County 21 October 4 , 20 12

The following data was extracted from the test report:

Filterable Particulate

, Hydrogen Chloride , & Hydrogen Fluoride Emission and Process Data Summary

Group 1 Aluminum Melting Furnace #9 Exhaust Stack

– Condition #1

Test Date 4/11/12 4/12/12 4/13/12 Average

Test Run Number 1 2 3 N/A

Test Times 10:20

- 14:11 7:47

- 12:08 8:09

- 12:11 N/A

Test/Batch/Cycle Duration , (minutes) 218.5 240.0 231.0

Process and Control Device Data Summary

Charge Rate, (tons/hr) 10.98 9.63 10.35 10.32

Sampling/Stack Data Summary

Oxygen, (%) 17.0 17.5 18.3 17.6

Carbon Dioxide, (%) 3.5 2.5 1.8 2.6

Sample Volume, (dscf) 159.953 182.776 172.020

Minimum Required Sample Volume, (dscf) 50 N/A

Stack Gas Temperature, ( ̊F) 260 245 249 251

Stack Gas Moisture, (%) 3.03 3.40 3.03 3.15

Volumetric Flowrate, (dscfm) 17,109 17,549 17,041 17,233

Isokinetic Ratio, (%) * 100.0 101.4 102.1 101.2

Permitted Isokinetic Ratio, (%) 90

- 110 N/A

Filterable Particulate Emissions Summary

Amount of Acetone Used to Rinse FH Sample Train, (ml) 350 340 240 310

Emission Catch, (mg) 156.90 66.00 136.30 119.73

Filterable Particulate Emission Concentration, (gr/dscf) 0.0151 0.0056 0.0122 0.0110

Filterable Particulate Emission Rate, (lb/hr) 2.22 0.84 1.79 1.62

Filterable Particulate Emission Rate, (lb/ton) 0.20 0.09 0.17 0.15

Allowable Filterable Particulate Emission Rate, (lb/ton) N/A N/A N/A 0.40

Hydrogen Chloride (HCl) Emissions Summary

Emission Catch, (ug) 191,800 241,800 242,700

HCl Emission Concentration, (gr/dscf) 0.0185 0.0204 0.0218 0.0202

HCl Emission Rate, (lb/hr) 2.71 3.07 3.18 2.99

HCl Emission Rate, (lb/ton) 0.25 0.32 0.31 0.293

Allowable HCl Emission Rate, (lb/ton) N/A N/A N/A 0.40

Collection Efficiency , (%) 99.05 99.25 98.88 99.06

Permitted Collection Efficiency, (%) 90 N/A

Hydrogen Fluoride (HF) Emissions Summary

Emission Catch, (ug) 27,100 172,100 57,000 85,400

HF Emission Concentration, (gr/dscf) 0.0026 0.0145 0.0051 0.0074

HF Emission Rate, (lb/hr) 0.38 2.19 0.75 1.11

HF Emission Rate, (lb/ton) 0.03 0.23 0.07 0.11

Collection Efficiency , (%) 95.77 98.76 96.74 97.09

Permitted Collection Efficiency, (%) 90 N/A

* Refer to comments in memorandum on page 7 for detailed discussion of isokinetic ratio and it’s acceptability for this test program

.Sapa Extrusions, Inc. (Formerly Alcoa Extrusions, Inc.)

Cressona Borough, Schuylkill County 22 October 4 , 20 12

Dioxins and Furans Emission and Process Data Summar y

Group 1 Aluminum Melting Furnace #9 Exhaust Stack

– Condition #1

Test Date 4/11/12 4/12/12 4/13/12 Average

Test Run Number 1 2 3 N/A

Test Times 10:20

- 14:11 7:47

- 12:08 08:09

- 12:10 N/A

Test/Batch/Cycle Duration, (minutes) 218.5 240.0 231.0 230

Process and Control Device Data Summary

Charge Rate, (tons/hr) 10.98 9.63 10.35 10.32

Sampling/Stack Data Summary

Oxygen, (%) 17.0 17.5 18.3 17.6

Carbon Dioxide, (%) 3.5 2.5 1.8 2.6

Sample Volume, (dscf) 159.963 166.337 153.969 160.090

Required Sample Volume, (dscf) 144 N/A

Maximum Sorbent Trap Temperature, ( ο F) 65 63 59 62

Required Maximum Sorbent Trap Temperature, ( ο F) 68 N/A

Stack Gas Temperature, ( ̊F) 258 244 245 249

Stack Gas Moisture, (%) 3.50 3.71 3.65 3.62

Volumetric Flowrate, (dscfm) 16,241 16,613 15,574 16,143

Isokinetic Rate, (%) * 105.4 97.5 100.0 101.0

Permitted Isokinetic Rate, (%) 90

- 110 N/A

Total Toxic Equivalent Dioxins/Furans as 2,3,7,8

- Tetrachlorodibenzo

- p

- Dioxin, ITEF Factors Emission Summary #

Total PCDD/F Catch, (p g) 607 1,890 1,500 1,332

PCDD/F Emission Concentration, ( gr/ dsc f ) 5.86E

- 11 1.75E

- 10 1.50E

- 10 1.28E

- 10

PCDD/F Emission Concentration, ( u g/ Mg ) 0.37 1.30 0.97 0.88

Allowable Emission Rate, (ug/Mg) N/A N/A N/A 15.0

PCDD/F Emission Rate, (lb/hr) 8.15E

- 09 2.50E

- 08 2.01E

- 08 1.78E

- 08

PCDD/F Emission Rate, (lb/ ton ) 7. 42 E

- 10 2.59E

- 09 1.94E

- 09 1.75E

- 09

Note: # The emission limits are reported above for PCDD & PCDF, expressed as 2,3,7,8 TCDD equivalents.

* Refer to comments in memorandum on page 7 for detailed discussion of isokinetic ratio and its acceptability for this test program

.Sapa Extrusions, Inc. (Formerly Alcoa Extrusions, Inc.)

Cressona Borough, Schuylkill County 23 October 4 , 20 12

Filterable Particulate, Hydrogen Chlor ide, Hydrogen Fluoride, & Dioxins/Furans Process Data Summary

Group 1 Aluminum Melting Furnace #9 Exhaust Stack

– Condition #1

Test Date 4/11/12 4/12/12 4/13/12 Average

Test Run Number 1 2 3 N/A

Test Times 10:2 5

- 14:1 0 7:47

- 12:0 5 08:09

- 12:10 N/A

Test/Batch/Cycle Duration, ( minutes ) 225.0 258.0 241.2 241.4

Process and Control Device Data Summary

Alloy MC61 MC61 MC61 N/A

P1020 0 0 0 0

RSI 0 0 0 0

Internal Scrap 28,980 26,820 22,660 26,153

10/10 Scrap 53,360 53,705 54,100 53,722

Coated Scrap 0 0 0 0

Purchased Press/Fab Scrap 0 0 0 0

Chips/Turnings 0 2,320 6,480 2,933

Commercial Metal 120 115 110 115

Total Charge Weight 82,460 82,960 83,350 82,923

Salt Flux, (lbs) 70 70 70 70

TRFIR, (lbs Cl/ton charged) 0.76 0.75 0.75 0.75

Chips, (%) 0 3 8 4

10/10 Scrap, (%) 65 65 65 65Sapa Extrusions, Inc. (Formerly Alcoa Extrusions, Inc.)

Cressona Borough, Schuylkill County 24 October 4 , 20 12



# “Acceptable” Tested Location, Source, and Control

Device :

 Outlet Stack

 Group 1 Aluminum Melting Furnace #9

(Source ID No. 9 )

 Uncontrolled

“Acceptable” Tested Pollutant, Test Method, and

Purpose :

 Filterable Particulate, PCDD/PCDF, H Cl , & HF

Emissions

 EPA Methods 5, 23, and 26A

 Emission and Process & Control Device Data

Summary

“Acceptable” Test Condition # 2 :

This Condition is considered to be normal and is

consistent with the ratio of product being melted on a

daily basis at the facilitySapa Extrusions, Inc. (Formerly Alcoa Extrusions, Inc.)

Cressona Borough, Schuylkill County 25 October 4 , 20 12

The following data was extracted from the test report:

Filterable Particulate, Hydrogen Chloride, & Hydrogen Fluoride Emission and Process Data Summary

Group 1 Aluminum Melting Furnace #9 Exhaust Stack

– Condition # 2

Test Date 4/16/12 4/17/12 4/18/12 Average

Test Run Number 1 2 3 N/A

Test Times 11:01

- 15:01 11:01

- 15:08 11:00

- 15:00 N/A

Test/Batch/Cycle Duration, (minutes) 240 238 232 237

Process and Control Device Data Summary

Charge Rate, (tons/hr) 9.82 10.27 10.55 10.21

Sampling/Stack Data Summary

Oxygen, (%) 18.3 19.0 19.0 18.8

Carbon Dioxide, (%) 1.8 1.5 1.0 1.4

Sample Volume, (dscf) 169.736 194.474 188.997 184.402

Minimum Required Sample Volume, (dscf) 50 N/A

Stack Gas Temperature, ( ̊F) 263 265 240 256

Stack Gas Moisture, (%) 3.79 3.11 3.22 3.37

Volumetric Flowrate, (dscfm) 16,583 18,994 18,538 18,038

Isokinetic Ratio, (%) * 99.7 100.6 102.7 101.0

Permitted Isokinetic Ratio, (%) 90

- 110 N/A

Filterable Particulate Emissions Summary

Amount of Acetone Used to Rinse FH Sample Train, (ml) 340 370 260 323

Emission Catch, (mg) 62.90 80.70 75.40 73.00

Filterable Particulate Emission Concentration, (gr/dscf) 0.00572 0.00640 0.00616 0.00609

Filterable Particulate Emission Rate, (lb/hr) 0.813 1.042 0.978 0.944

Filterable Particulate Emission Rate, (lb/ton) 0.083 0.101 0.093 0.0923

Allowable Filterable Particulate Emission Rate, (lb/ton) N/A N/A N/A 0.40

Hydrogen Chloride (HCl) Emissions Summary

Emission Catch, (ug) 101,100 112,700 162,200 125,333

HCl Emission Concentration, (gr/dscf) 0.00919 0.00894 0.01324 0.0105

HCl Emission Rate, (lb/hr) 1.306 1.456 2.104 1.622

HCl Emission Rate, (lb/ton) 0.133 0.142 0.199 0.158

Allowable HCl Emission Rate, (lb/ton) N/A N/A N/A 0.40

Collection Efficiency , (%) 97.88 97.55 98.63 98.02

Permitted Collection Efficiency, (%) 90 N/A

Hydrogen Fluoride (HF) Emissions Summary

Emission Catch, (ug) 18,000 19,100 16,980 18,027

HF Emission Concentration, (gr/dscf) 0.0016 0.0015 0.0014 0.0015

HF Emission Rate, (lb/hr) 0.23 0.25 0.22 0.23

HF Emission Rate, (lb/ton) 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02

Collection Efficiency , (%) 94.12 93.89 93.88 93.96

Permitted Collection Efficiency, (%) 90 N/A

* Refer to comments in memorandum on page 7 for detailed discussion of isokinetic ratio and it’s acceptability for this test program

.Sapa Extrusions, Inc. (Formerly Alcoa Extrusions, Inc.)

Cressona Borough, Schuylkill County 26 October 4 , 20 12

Dioxins and Furans Emission and Process Data Summary

Group 1 Aluminum Melting Furnace #9 Exhaust Stack

– Condition # 2

Test Date 4/16/12 4/17/12 4/18/12 Average

Test Run Number 1 2 3 N/A

Test Times 11:01

- 15:11 11:01

- 15:08 11:00

- 15:00 N/A

Test/Batch/Cycle Duration, (minutes) 240 238 232 237

Process and Control Device Data Summary

Charge Rate, (tons/hr) 9.82 10.27 10.55 10.21

Sampling/Stack Data Summary

Oxygen, (%) 18.3 19.0 19.0 18.8

Carbon Dioxide, (%) 1.8 1.5 1.0 1.4

Sample Volume, (dscf) 155.096 171.460 175.706 167.421

Required Sample Volume, (dscf) 144 N/A

Maximum Sorbent Trap Temperature, ( ο F) 67 67 67 67

Required Maximum Sorbent Trap Temperature, ( ο F) 68 N/A

Stack Gas Temperature, ( ̊F) 269 267 243 260

Stack Gas Moisture, (%) 3.83 3.35 3.39 3.52

Volumetric Flowrate, (dscfm) 15,578 17,000 17,726 16,768

Isokinetic Rate, (%) * 97.0 99.1 99.9 98.7

Permitted Isokinetic Rate, (%) 90

- 110 N/A

Total Toxic Equivalent Dioxins/Furans as 2,3,7,8

- Tetrachlorodibenzo

- p

- Dioxin, ITEF Factors Emission Summary #

Total PCDD/F Catch , (p g) 1,060 1,460 2,990 1,837

PCDD/F Emission Concentration, ( gr/ dsc f ) 1.05E

- 10 1.31E

- 10 2.63E

- 10 1.66E

- 10

PCDD/F Emission Concentration, ( u g/ Mg ) 0.72 0.93 1.89 1.18

Allowable Emission Rate, (ug/Mg) N/A N/A N/A 15.0

PCDD/F Emission Rate, (lb/hr) 1.41E

- 08 1.91E

- 08 3.99E

- 08 2.44E

- 08

PCDD/F Emission Rate, (lb/ ton ) 1.43E

- 09 1.86E

- 09 3.78E

- 09 2.36E

- 09

Note: # The emission limits are reported above for PCDD & PCDF, expressed as 2,3,7,8 TCDD equivalents.

* Refer to comments in memorandum on page 7 for detailed discussion of isokinetic ratio and its acceptability for this test program

.Sapa Extrusions, Inc. (Formerly Alcoa Extrusions, Inc.)

Cressona Borough, Schuylkill County 27 October 4 , 20 12

Filterable Particulate, Hydrogen Chloride, Hydrogen Fluoride, & Dioxins/Furans Process Data Summary

Group 1 Aluminum Melting Furnace #9 Exhaust Stack

– Condition # 2

Test Date 4/16/12 4/17/12 4/18/12 Average

Test Run Number 1 2 3 N/A

Test Times 11:01

- 15:14 11:01

- 15:06 11:00

- 15:00 N/A

Test/Batch/Cycle Duration, ( minutes ) 253.0 244.8 240.0 246.0

Process and Control Device Data Summary

Alloy MC61 MC61 HF25 N/A

P1020 0 0 0 0

RSI 0 0 0 0

Internal Scrap 29,285 27,620 25,560 27,488

10/10 Scrap 41,024 41,780 40,985 41,263

Coated Scrap 12,540 12,380 12,840 12,587

Purchased Press/Fab Scrap 0 0 0 0

Chips/Turnings 0 2,040 4,960 2,333

Commercial Metal 135 318 290 248

Total Charge Weight 82,984 84,138 84,635 83,919

Salt Flux, (lbs) 70 70 70 70

TRFIR, (lbs Cl/ton charged) 0.75 0.74 0.74 0.68

Chips, (%) 0 2 6 3

10/10 Scrap, (%) 49 50 48 49

Coated Scrap 15 15 15 15

Total Purchased 65 64 64 64Sapa Extrusions, Inc. (Formerly Alcoa Extrusions, Inc.)

Cressona Borough, Schuylkill County 28 October 4 , 20 12



# “Acceptable” Tested Location, Source, and Control

Device :

 Outlet Stack

 Group 1 Aluminum Melting Furnace #9

(Source ID No. M9 )

 Uncontrolled

“Acceptable” Tested Pollutant, Test Method, and

Purpose :

 Filterable Particulate, PCDD/PCDF, HCl , & HF

Emissions

 EPA Methods 5, 23, and 26A

 Emission and Process & Control Device Data

Summary

“Acceptable” Test Condition # 3 :

This Condition is considered to be normal and is

consistent with the ratio of product being melted on a

daily basis at the facilitySapa Extrusions, Inc. (Formerly Alcoa Extrusions, Inc.)

Cressona Borough, Schuylkill County 29 October 4 , 20 12

The following data was extracted from the test report:

Filterable Particulate, Hydrogen Chloride, & Hydrogen Fluoride Emission and Process Data Summary

Group 1 Aluminum Melting Furnace #9 Exhaust Stack

– Condition # 3

Test Date 4/20/12

Test Run Number 1

Test Times 11:03

- 15:12

Test/Batch/Cycle Duration, (minutes) 240

P rocess and Control Device Data Summary

Charge Rate, (tons/hr) 6.62

Sampling/Stack Data Summary

Oxygen, (%) 19.5

Carbon Dioxide, (%) 1.5

Sample Volume, (dscf) 186.006

Minimum Required Sample Volume, (dscf) 50

Stack Gas Temperature, ( ̊F) 249

Stack Gas Moisture, (%) 3.80

Volumetric Flowrate, (dscfm) 17,999

Isokinetic Ratio, (%) * 100.7

Permitted Isokinetic Ratio, (%) 90

- 110

Filterable Particulate Emissions Summary

Amount of Acetone Used to Rinse FH Sample Train, (ml) 340

Emission Catch, (mg) 109.10

Filterable Particulate Emission Concentration, (gr/dscf) 0.0091

Filterable Particulate Emission Rate, (lb/hr) 1.40

Filterable Particulate Emission Rate, (lb/ton) 0.21

Allowable Filterable Particulate Emission Rate, (lb/ton) 0.40

Hydrogen Chloride (HCl) Emissions Summary

Emission Catch, (ug) 205,300

HCl Emission Concentration, (gr/dscf) 0.0170

HCl Emission Rate, (lb/hr) 2.63

HCl Emission Rate, (lb/ton) 0.397

Allowable HCl Emission Rate, (lb/ton) 0.40

Collection Efficiency, (%) 97.35

Permitted Collection Efficiency, (%) 90

Hydrogen Fluoride (HF) Emissions Summary

Emission Catch, (ug) 20,550

HF Emission Concentration, (gr/dscf) 0.0017

HF Emission Rate, (lb/hr) 0.26

HF Emission Rate, (lb/ton) 0. 04

Collection Efficiency, (%) 97.25

Permitted Collection Efficiency, (%) 90

* Refer to comments in memorandum on page 7 for detailed discussion of isokinetic ratio and it’s acceptability for this test program.Sapa Extrusions, Inc. (Formerly Alcoa Extrusions, Inc.)

Cressona Borough, Schuylkill County 30 October 4 , 20 12

Dioxins and Furans Emission and Process Data Summary

Group 1 Aluminum Melting Furnace #9 Exhaust Stack

– Condition # 3

Test Date 4/20/12

Test Run Number 1

Test Times 11:03

- 15:12

Test/Batch/Cycle Duration, (minutes) 240

Process and Control Device Data Summary

Charge Rate, (tons/hr) 6.62

Sampling/Stack Data Summary

Oxygen, (%) 19.5

Carbon Dioxide, (%) 1.5

Sample Volume, (dscf) 157.927

Required Sample Volume, (dscf) 144

Maximum Sorbent Trap Temperature, ( ο F) 67

Required Maximum Sorbent Trap Temperature, ( ο F) 68

Stack Gas Temperature, ( ̊F) 252

Stack Gas Moisture, (%) 3.86

Volumetric Flowrate, (dscfm) 15,397

Isokinetic Rate, (%) * 99.9

Permitted Isokinetic Rate, (%) 90

- 110

Total Toxic Equivalent Dioxins/Furans as 2,3,7,8

- Tetrachlorodibenzo

- p

- Dioxin, I89 Factors Emission Summary #

Total PCDD/F Catch, (p g) 687

PCDD/F Emission Concentration, (gr/dscf) 6.71E

- 11

PCDD/F Emission Concentration, (ug/Mg) 0.67

Allowable Emission Rate, (ug/Mg) 15.0

PCDD/F Emission Rate, (lb/hr) 8.86 E

- 09

PCDD/F Emission Rate, (lb/ton) 1.34E

- 09

Note: # The emission limits are reported above for PCDD & PCDF, expressed as 2,3,7,8 TCDD equivalents.

* Refer to comments in memorandum on page 7 for detailed discussion of isokinetic ratio and its acceptability for this test program.Sapa Extrusions, Inc. (Formerly Alcoa Extrusions, Inc.)

Cressona Borough, Schuylkill County 31 October 4 , 20 12

Filterable Particulate, Hydrogen Chloride, Hydrogen Fluoride, & Dioxins/Furans Process Data Summary

Group 1 Aluminum Melting Furnace #9 Exhaust Stack

– Condition # 3

Test Date 4/20 /12

Test Run Number 1

Test Times 11:03

- 17:21

Test/Batch/Cycle Duration, ( minutes ) 378.6

Process and Control Device Data Summary

Alloy FE35

P1020 0

RSI 0

Internal Scrap 24,195

10/10 Scrap 33,705

Coated Scrap 20,840

Purchased Press/Fab Scrap 0

Chips/Turnings 4,560

Commercial Metal 250

Total Charge Weight 83,550

Salt Flux, (lbs) 70

TRFIR, (lbs Cl/ton charged) 0.75

Chips, (%) 5

10/10 Scrap, (%) 40

Coated Scrap 25

Total Purchased 65

cc: Virendra Trivedi, Division of Permits, Title V Operating Permit No. 54

- 00022

(Electronic Only Copy)

Mark Wejkszner, Northeast Regional Office

Reading File, Source Testing Section

EPA/AKB

AKB/AIMS