1 From: Boyd.Rochelle@epamail.epa.gov Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2011 2:51 PM To: Backfisch Don (NORALNM) Cc: Kisner Jeff (NORALNM); Putney.David@epamail.epa.gov Subject: Re: Noranda Responses to Attachment 1 for March 30 Site Visit

Thanks for your response. You guys were going to send less detailed process flow diagrams and a copy of the inspection checklist that you use as part of your work practice standard for minimizing emissions from the potrooms. That's the only additional da ta that I can recall at the moment. Rochelle Boyd, Environmental Engineer U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Sector Policies and Programs Division 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, RTP, NC 27711 Mail Drop D243

- 02 Ph: (919) 541

- 1390 Fax: (919) 541

- 3207 Email: boyd.rochelle@epa.gov

From: "Backfisch Don (NORALNM)" <BackfisD@noralnm.com>

To: Rochelle Boyd/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA
Cc: "Kisner Jeff (NORALNM)" <KisnerJ@noralnm.com>

Date: 04/12/2011 02:44 PM Subject: Noranda Responses to Attachment 1 for March 30 Site Visit



### Rochelle, Attached are the written responses to the questions in Enclosure 1 for your site visit on March 30. We covered most of the answers while you were here, but I told you I would send you a copy of our responses. The photos have been reviewed by our Management Team and have been approved to be sent to you. I will be sending the CD with them by mail in the next day or two. I have included the attached document as well as a listing of the picture descriptions on th e CD. Let me know if you have any problems with the CD or questions. <<Noranda Aluminum Response to Enclosure 1.docx>> 

### Don Backfisch Environmental Superintendent Noranda (NYSE: NOR) P. O. Box 70 New Madrid, MO 63869 Phone: (573) 643

- 2361 x2126 Fax: (573) 643 -6721 Email: backfisd@noralnm.com Website: www.norandaaluminum.comAttachment 1. p1 of 1 Noranda Aluminum

– New Madrid Responses to Enclosure 1

A.

1. Yes. We have a Boreal Laser in Line 1 that is used for work place practice development 2. No. There are no controls for any of the pollutants listed.

B.

1

. 2010 was the most recent normal operating year. We used 112,477 tons of coke with an

average Sulfur content of 1.84%. The range of the monthly averages was 1.63

– 2.05 % . The range of ind i vidual loads was 1.5

– 2.3%. We used 24,716 tons of pitch during 2010 with an average sulfur content of 0.5 8%. The range of the monthly averages was 0.55

– 0.61%. the range of the individual loads was 0.45

– 0.65%. The availability of pitch at the current sulfur levels does not appear to be an issue. The availabili ty of low sulfur coke is questionable and the costs to maintain our current sulfur levels will probably be increasing if it’s available at all. Our current coke supply is running higher than it did in 2010 at over 2% sulfur.

2

. We have 3 potlines at this fac ility. Lines 1 and 2 are Kaiser designed (P69) center work prebake pots. There are 174 pots per line. Line 3 are Alcoa designed (A697) center work prebake post. There are 160 pots in Line 3. The number of pots is the same as it was when the primary NE SHAP was first developed.

3

. Hard copies of the flow diagrams were given to Rochelle during the site visit.

4

. A summary of our 2010 emissions were given to Rochelle during the site visit.

5

. A summary of the particulate emissions required by the state agency was i ncluded in the emissions summary give to Rochelle.

6

. As part of our 2010 PSD permit we are required to test our incoming alumina for beryllium, manganese, and nickel. We are also required to test our coke for nickel. This data will be
used in a mass balanc e to determine our emissions of these metals. The emissions limits are
based on maximum allowable concentration of these metals in our raw materials.

7

. We have not replaced or significantly upgraded any of our control equipment or our processes since 1997.