Scroll to end: click web view. Heather Mcmurray 's research uncovering poisoning of 1000 square miles around El Paso by Asarco smelter through what the EPA & US DOJ said was illegal burning of illegal hazardous/radioactive wastes 1991 to 1998. We have never been told what actinides, forever chemicals, dioxins etc are present from illegal Asarco actions(see 73 page 1998 conf. for settlement purposes only DOJ EPA Asarco doc,10/06 nytimes) see "Asarco secret document"
Please donate (see sidebar) to help recoup costs of the work to uncover and blog the information contained here"THE ONLY THING NECESSARY FOR THE TRIUMPH OF EVIL IS FOR GOOD MEN TO DO NOTHING"
Tuesday, July 24, 2007
The following notices were issued during the period of January 24,
2006 through January 27, 2006.
"CITY OF EL PASO AND TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION,
which operate the City of El Paso Municipal Separate
Storm Sewer System (MS4), have applied for a renewal of NPDES Permit No. TXS000801 which authorizes storm water point source discharges to surface water in the state from the City of El Paso Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4). This permit will be renewed as TPDES Permit No. WQ0004527000. The MS4 is located within the corporate boundary of the City of El Paso, in El Paso County, Texas."
31 TexReg 908 February 10, 2006 Texas Register
Sunday, July 22, 2007
Asarco water contamination costs are picked up by you, the Taxpayer....
What then happened is that state and federal representatives went to their legislative bodies and got funding passed for City storm water system this past winter, because of the big 500-yr flood of AUG-2006.
Then, the City/County in spring this year in an un-televised 10'th floor City Council special meeting [City Council member Ms. Byrd told me that this meeting was audio-recorded] voted to authorize a Storm Water district, funded by the taxpayers. Taxpayers will not vote on this during elections.
No one has told the taxpayers that the unsampled/undisclosed toxic waste that runs off into the storm system will transfer liability now from Asarco to the taxpayers.
The Federal/TX general sector storm water permit was automatically renewed and authorized by TCEQ on June-25-2007 from the NOI (notice of intent) filed end of Aug-2006 by Asarco. Any Motions to Overturn must be submitted by 5 pm Austin time, tomorrow 7-23-07.
Just like the City-contracted Attorney, Erich Birch [whom I respect, but also respectfully disagree with], ignored the Federal Title V permit renewal last summer, not notifying local groups to send in comments/filing nothing; the renewal of the water permits have been ignored. The only permit being fought is the air emissions permit - and those emissions are worth cash-money on the commodities trading market as "emission credits" internationally to whomever owns them [I confirmed this with an International Sierra Club expert on such credits, sending them the list of Asarco allowable emissions]. We cannot find out who those credits go to if Asarco loses its permit.
In front of our own eyes, unknown sometimes to us, Asarco's environmental liabilities/costs are being "shed" and the company is emerging as a renewed-entity, with no liability for the toxic waste left unreported in the Paso del Norte region.
[thank you, Susie - I updated it per your email 7/24]
Saturday, July 21, 2007
Contract not Renewed
There was another punitive step: removing me on administrative leave for a never-named charge, and simultaneously barring me from communicating with anyone in the District. Fellow teachers just knew that I'd suddenly disappeared. I wish that it was as easy to get Asarco contamination to disappear.
I am the only H.S. science teacher involved in trying to find out what Asarco contaminated us with. The only one, in the entire region. I have 4 years teaching experience on the college level (labs), and students who told me that I was the best teacher that they'd ever had; but, can't get past that black mark on the record. Had I been willing to resign, I was told that I could be set up with several interviews - one with SISD. So the black mark has nothing to do with my teaching ability and everything to do with me speaking out when I saw racism and when I see environmental racism in this community.
Was the problem with my teaching (which I was told was typical for a 1st yr h.s. teacher) or was the problem that I spoke out? A friend who has worked on the Asarco contamination problem in her community with me, told me when I called about the termination, "Well, you expected it, No?"
Her community and the children have been literally sacrificed for 3 generations to Asarco contamination. When the Board (2 against because there was no evidence, 2 for (one now facing FBI investigation), and 1 who voted against me not because I had done anything wrong but instead on a technicality) many of the children from the community came to support me. Even with a contract termination and blacklisting, my life is far easier than those kids' lives and they give me courage I would not otherwise have. They are wonderful children in Anapra/Sunland Park. So were my students at Bel Air - excellent caring kids.
A 2001 post about Newspaper/Journalism teachers describes my own situation in teaching real science to kids (Chapter 1 of our state-approved text covered the topic of "conflict of interest" and ethics in science):
http://www.splc.org/report_detail.asp?id=793&edition=20
"...As Nelson’s example shows, it is possible to stand up to authority without paying the price of your employment. But one adviser who was not so lucky, and has suffered as a result, warned advisers that they should know the risks that come from taking principled positions.
“Tell your students the whole truth; they make decisions that will affect very much the rest of your life,” Lach-Smith said. “We try to teach students to make responsible editorial decisions because they affect their sources’ lives [and] also whole organizations. I think we often fail to tell them how their decisions affect our lives…. Be prepared to lose in more ways than one.”
As for Ransick, he said his sacrifice may have been well worth the price.
“Oddly enough, I think the students learned the lessons better by watching what happened than they would have in the abstract by reading it in a textbook. They’ve gotten the lesson better than they ever could have otherwise.”
Asarco wins extension in trial
http://www.azstarnet.com/allheadlines/192712
Friday, July 20, 2007
FL: residential limit for arsenic in soil or fill is 2.1 milligrams per kilogram
12.5 million instead of 200 million... @ 5% of estimated liability
http://www.azstarnet.com/business/192586
Wednesday, July 18, 2007
Reply from Carlos Rubinstein : Complaint remains unanswered and dismissed
fr: Heather McMurray
sb: Requests not considered as a complaint
I am amazed, Mr. Rubinstein, that my complaint asking the TCEQ to sample and identify chemical compounds left here from the illegal sham-recycling by Asarco is not regarded as a complaint. After all, those chemicals were deposited here from nearly a decade of sham-recycling and the environmental regulatory agencies have not looked for these. I want the toxic waste that was deposited here by the illegal actions investigated. The chemical analyses I asked for would let us know what was smelted here - why would that a huge problem for our environmental regulatory officials? If you cannot accept requests for testing under "complaints" then why did you ignore the complaint's text stating that illegal sham-recycling was done here and there is unknown contamination that needs addressed? I am reporting contamination to TCEQ through the complaint option, because that contamination has not been measured/addressed in our community.
1) The consent decree required that the company run spectrometer analyses asap, because historically they hadn't.
2) TCEQ is allowed to request these; you claim that there aren't any.
3) You are telling me that TCEQ refuses to run scientific tests (spectrometer, for example) that would reveal what contamination is there ["These requests are not considered as a complaint according to TCEQ. >"] Instead, all the remediation analyses you refer to looked for metals that Asarco would have been able to smelt/sell.
4) The 100 year old central Pond at Asarco is historically known, and even featured on postcards. You are not familiar with this pond? It handled all the circulating wastewater recovered as part of their storm and waste-water handling and routed it to the brine concentrator that was rated to removed radioactive waste.
4) "released some stormwater..." It was not "some" It was over 200,000 gallons, it spilled into our drinking water and the incident was never sent to EPA to enter in their spill database so that NOAA could respond with an ORR which they are legally allowed to do since that spill also entered the Rio Grande.
5) As you pointed out, all the TCEQ records for Asarco are on file with the Regional Office and they tell us that they do not have Asarco El Paso's EMS (environmental management report). Why is that missing?
6) "US Ecology is required to know what type of waste they receive for disposal. The agency is not required to receive analytical data of ASARCO’s waste. " TCEQ is allowed by law to request the analysis on file with TX US Ecology. The manifests TCEQ sent me were general and did not characterize the hazardous wastes -- in order to determine that the shipment was not radioactive (whereupon TX US Ecology should ship it to its other facility in WA state) that test had to be run. It is missing.
7) "The TCEQ has previously responded to your Public Information Act requests on the same subject." TCEQ continues to evade and not answer the question: What is here in El Paso from the burning of toxic-waste for profit by Asarco. Since we know that toxic waste was illegally and deliberately burned here for profit and the TCEQ continues to evade PIA's, I am assuming that the TCEQ is not giving me all the information available under the PIA, and I wish to direct the OAG's office to this continuing dilemma.
8) I believe that I have a letter from the Regional Director telling me that they do not cap; yet you use that term to describe remediation for one of the ponds.
9) Mr. Rubinstein, I am concerned that you do not treat my request for a scraping of the main stack seriously. You wrote that this, "would not be representative of overall emissions from the site". I am not talking about overall emissions. I am asking that the TCEQ use all options, including that one, to determine what toxic wastes we have been contaminated with. Since TCEQ does not possess any stack samples at all from Asarco El Paso, this omission is glaring.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [Fwd: Re: Please explain no answer to either TCEQ filing: TCEQ failing to enforce identification and
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 19:55:03 -0500
From: Carlos Rubinstein <CRubinst[at]tceq.state.tx.us>
July 18, 2007
VIA EMAIL[...] & CERTIFIED U.S. MAIL
Re: ASARCO-El Paso facility
Dear Ms. McMurray:
This letter is in response to your June 23, 2007 email to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality’s (TCEQ) internet site that receives complaints from citizens across the state. Your email states that you were filing a formal complaint asking the agency to conduct very specific technical analyses at ASARCO.
First, you asked the TCEQ to run a full spectrometer analysis of the material dredged from the bottom of the 100 year old ASARCO pond and that was sent to TX US Ecology near Robstown for storage, with the purpose of identifying the chemical compounds left from the illegal sham recycling by ASARCO. Second, you asked TCEQ to conduct a full spectrometer analysis of the present bottom of the 100 year old pond and where the most runoff would have contacted soil during the September 4, 2006 collapse of the ASARCO rubber lake. Third, you asked staff to run an analysis from a scraping of the ASARCO primary smoke stack and from the ionics brine concentrator’s concentrate chambers. Finally, you stated that the analysis should include ash incineration technique to check for alpha and beta particles. These requests are not considered as a complaint according to TCEQ.
Nevertheless, your requests indicate that there is confusion as to the identification of various ponds, the removal and disposal of solid waste, and sampling requirements, analyses, and results at the ASARCO El Paso Smelter. Thus, we are providing additional information in an attempt to clarify the issues.
There are several ponds at ASARCO. Staff confirms that ASARCO has three ponds that the company has investigated (Pond 1, Pond 5, and Pond 6) at the El Paso smelter. The water in Pond 6 has been used primarily for general supply, stormwater collection, anode cooling and fire water supply. Pond 5 was used for boiler feed backup and some stormwater collection. Pond 1’s primary function is for stormwater collection.
ASARCO has investigated these three ponds and has performed remedial actions in relation to these ponds. The TCEQ Remediation Division staff has reviewed the characterization of ASARCO’s site and is currently monitoring ASARCO’s remediation activities. ASARCO’s analyses of sediments from these ponds can be found in ASARCO El Paso Copper Smelter Remedial Investigation Report Phases I (October 1998 Vol 1), Phase II (July 2000 Vol 1), and Phase III (November 2001 Vol 1). These reports will also contain plats which will have the location of these ponds so you can correctly identify the pond of concern. The sediments from these ponds are dried on-site and disposed of in an engineered repository (i.e. landfill). The repository is lined and will have a cap and subsequent groundwater monitoring when completed. This documentation is available for public viewing at our El Paso Regional Office.
In addition, ASARCO has a large stormwater collection pond called the “rubber lake” a term that you use in your email. Since El Paso receives an average of 8 inches of rain a year, the rubber lake is dry most of the time. During the El Paso flood event of 2006, the rubber lake overtopped and released some stormwater. However, the liner for the rubber lake remained intact. The TCEQ El Paso Regional staff has oversight of the rubber lake and not agency Remediation staff. To date, the TCEQ staff have not received any sediment sample results from ASARCO of the rubber lake.
Next, you asked about waste sent to US Ecology from ASARCO. As you may recall, the TCEQ previously provided documents to you relating to a number of shipments that ASARCO sent to US Ecology, with accompanying waste manifests. These documents show that hazardous waste was sent off-site for permanent disposal. No analysis of this waste is provided to the TCEQ. This waste is from ASARCO’s process and includes the following: 1) wash down water, 2) cleanup activities, 3) sludges, and 4) brine waste from the wastewater treatment plant. ASARCO is responsible for characterizing their waste which is shipped offsite. US Ecology is required to know what type of waste they receive for disposal. The agency is not required to receive analytical data of ASARCO’s waste.
The waste analysis records do not contain spectrometer analysis per se because the agency does not require the facility or the Company receiving the waste to submit that information to the agency.
This is in compliance with 30 TAC Chapter 335 Subchapter R:
Persons who generate industrial solid waste or municipal hazardous waste shall comply with the provisions of this subchapter. . . . Persons who generate waste in Texas shall classify their own waste according to the standards set forth in this subchapter and may do so without any prior approval or communication with the agency other than notification of waste generation activities pursuant to §335.6 of this title (relating to Notification Requirements) and submittal of required documentation pursuant to §335.513 of this title (relating to Documentation Required).
A reading of Section 335.313 includes cross references to Section 335.511. Section 335.511 requires a company to maintain a list of chemical constituents found in its waste but does not require specific documentation to support its results. Information regarding waste analysis of materials that have been deposited in approved on-site waste repositories as a result of ongoing on site remediation activities can be found in Phase I through Phase IV of the “remedial investigation reports” available for review at the El Paso Regional Office. Spectrometer analysis (paper read-out) has not been located/identified in the TCEQ records regarding waste analysis to determine an appropriate disposal method for excavated material that may have been shipped off-site.
Regarding your request for analysis of scrapings of the ASARCO primary smoke stack and from the ionics brine concentrator’s concentrate chambers; this type of analysis is also not required in as much as the findings and results would not be representative of overall emissions from the site.
The TCEQ has previously responded to your Public Information Act requests on the same subject. Legal staff copied several boxes of files and sent them to the El Paso Office for your review. Please contact Ms. Sally Williams in our El Paso Regional Office at (915) 834-4949 when you are ready to review the information.
Sincerely,
Carlos Rubinstein, Area Director
Field Operations Division
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality
Tuesday, July 17, 2007
Pirates of Penzance Song, modified
[author: anonymous]
To be sung to the tune of the Gilbert and Sullivan
[Pirates of Penzance]
I am the very model of a modern Major-General
TITLE: I Am the Very Model of an Environmental Manager
I Am the Very Model of an Environmental Manager
I've information vegetable, animal, and mineral
I know the kings of Mining, and I quote the lies historical
-- From Arsenic to Cadmium, in order categorical!
I'm very well acquainted, too, with matters quite Political
I understand exaggeration, both the simple and hyperbole
About toxic waste now I'm teeming with a lot o' news
With many cheerful facts about how gardens grow now with its use!
[Chorus sings:]
With many cheerful facts about how gardens grow now with its use-
With many cheerful facts about how gardens grow now with its use-
With many cheerful facts about how gardens grow now with its use-
I'm very good at integral and differential calculus
To show how toxic waste now could not possibly ever injure us -
In short, in matters vegetable, animal, and mineral
I Am the Very Model of an Environmental Manager
[Chorus]
In short, in matters vegetable, animal, and mineral
He is the Very Model of an Environmental Manager
Song
DON'T CRY FOR ME, DEAR EL PASO....
THE TRUTH IS, I'VE NEVER LEFT YOU:
I'M IN YOUR WATER
I'M IN YOUR BONES NOW
I'M IN YOUR HOUSES
I'M IN YOUR CHILDREN.....
[Fwd: Re: Please explain no answer to either TCEQ filing: TCEQ failing to enforce identification and cleanup of contamination from illegal burning of
Not everyone and not all offices at the TCEQ are complicit in the cover-up. It is time that the honest people in the TCEQ (and in the EPA) removed the dishonest ones so that we can get to the bottom of the problem here in El Paso regarding contamination from Asarco.
We know that a cover-up was committed. We are in the process in El Paso of approaching several county and a district attorney regarding the criminal actions of Asarco in the burning of secret toxic wastes for profit (sham-recycling). Someone is responsible in the TCEQ and in my opinion your legal departments, instead of replying to me and committing further cover-up, should be investigating the responsible parties within the environmental regulatory agencies and removing them from their position(s).
Asarco is gearing up activity here. Sierra Blanca sludge-land has been purchased by the Texas G.L.O. and is slated to begin accepting sludge again, in the middle of endangered Chihuahuan desert and impoverished mexican-american peoples. Someone in the TCEQ and in the EPA has the knowledge to stop the lies and the ill-gained profits that happened here within Railroad District 8; and to stop using us as a test-case to remove environmental liabilities from a polluter who knowingly used us for toxic-waste disposal.
We need honest disclosure of what metal is present here that has been covered up-- it was knowingly smelted here against the La Paz accord. Your attorneys at one time were aware of what it was, since they argued over whether or not Asarco should pave surfaces for six years or simply let the toxins trickle down through the dirt. We are tired of being a dumping ground and tired of being poisoned. It is the TCEQ's responsibility to know what contaminants are here and let us know.
Thank you,
H.Mcmurray
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Please explain no answer to either TCEQ filing: TCEQ failing to enforce identification and cleanup of contamination from illegal burning of toxic waste by Asarco El Paso
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 15:54:49 -0500
From: WWW - CMPLAINT <cmplaint@tceq.state.tx.us>
To: <@earthlink.net>,<thornton.wood[at]oag.state.tx.us>, "WWW - OPA" <OPA[at]tceq.state.tx.us>, "Terry McMillan" <TMCMILLA[at]tceq.state.tx.us>
CC: <David.Edmonson[at]senate.state.tx.us>
Ms. M
We are coordinating a response to your questions with our Office of Legal Services. I am expecting a response to be forwarded to you by the end of this week. Let me know if that doesn't happen, and I'll check on it again. Thank you.
[no signature given from the TCEQ Complaint-email-address]
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
07/13/07 1:35 PM
I have not received a reply to this email and it has been over 12 business days.
Please explain the delay. thank you,
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: TCEQ failing to enforce identification and cleanup of contamination from illegal burning of toxic waste by Asarco El Paso Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2007 23:41:06 -0600
To: TCEQ complaint Fr: Heather McMurray, El Paso TX
sb: TCEQ failing to enforce identification and cleanup of contamination from illegal burning of toxic waste by Asarco El Paso
I am filing this as a formal complaint asking the _TCEQ_ to run a full spectrometer analysis of the material dredged from the bottom of the 100 year old Asarco pond and sent to TX US ecology for storage, with the purpose of identifying the chemical compounds left here from the illegal sham-recycling by Asarco. I also ask that a full spectrometer analysis be done of the present-bottom of that same pond at the Asarco site and where the most runoff would have contacted soil during the 9-4-06 collapse of Asarco rubber lake. Also, please run an analysis from a scraping of the Asarco primary smoke-stack; and from the Ionics brine concentrator's concentrate chambers. This analysis should include ash-incineration-technique to check for alpha and beta particles.
High level officials in the TCEQ and the EPA are violating honest services provision of the mail and wire fraud act by:
* failure to identify and enforce cleanup of the toxic poisons incinerated/stored by Asarco El Paso from its subsidiary in Corpus Christi, TX.
* _pretending to carry on a legitimate permitting process on the El Paso Asarco smelter while continuing to ignore that this site has NOT BEEN DECONTAMINATED from the burning of these wastes_
* failure to identify the wastes left here from this incineration/handling
* failure to explain the resulting health effects to the community
Public officials have known that these toxins are now in our water, the alluvial sediments and aquifer. The TCEQ is failing to continue metal testing of the river below Asarco saying it "isn't necessary any longer". The TCEQ is failing to identify the toxins left in our water supply from the decade of illegal Asarco sham-recycling.
Sunday, July 15, 2007
smelter-related lead exposure study
lead exposures in children: North Lake Macquarie, Australia, 1991–2002
Author: Willmore Alan ; Sladden Tim ; Bates Lucy ; Dalton Craig
Abstract:
Abstract
Background
To determine patterns of childhood lead exposure in a community living
near a lead and zinc smelter in North Lake Macquarie, Australia between
1991 and 2002.
Methods
An analysis of serial blood lead levels (BLL) of children less than 13
years of age in North Lake Macquarie participating in voluntary blood
lead screening. Distance to the smelter and soil lead concentration of
the child's place of residence was calculated. Categorical analysis of
BLL by residential distance from smelter, residential soil lead
concentration, age and year of sample was calculated. Linear regression
models were fit for blood lead levels against residential distance from
smelter, the log of residential soil lead concentration, age and year of
BLL sample.
Results
Geometric mean BLLs were statistically significantly higher for
distances less than 1.5 kilometres from the smelter and for residential
soil lead concentrations greater than 300 ppm. Yearly BLLs since 1995
were statistically significantly lower than for preceding years, with an
average decrease of 0.575 μg/dL per year since 1991. BLLs are
statistically significantly higher for children whose age is 1 to 3
years old. Linear regression modelling of BLL predicted a statistically
significant decrease in BLL of 3.0831 μg/dL per kilometre from the
smelter and a statistically significant increase in BLL of 0.25 μg/dL
per log of lead in residential soil. The model explained 28.2% of the
variation in BLL.
Conclusion
Residential distance to the smelter, log of residential soil lead
concentration, child's age and year of BLL sample are statistically
significant factors for predicting elevated BLLs in children living near
a North Lake Macquarie lead smelter.
Journal: International Journal of Health Geographics
Issn: 1476072X
EIssn:
Year: 2006
Volume: 5
Issue: 1
pages/rec.No: 30
Building homes on smelter site
"We have full disclosure," Snyder said.
The area was home to a smelter that operated in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, spewing arsenic that polluted much of the soil. [arsenic is odorless and tasteless; any amount is thought to be harmful according to experts that study it on the cellular level...] That soil had to be cleaned up to Department of Ecology standards when the Everett Housing Authority bought the land from Asarco LLC, a subsidiary of Grupo Mexico SA, in 2004. The City of Everett helped with the cleanup and Dye bought the seven acres for $3.2 million.
Snyder said that some people are familiar with the history when they come to view the homes.
Belmonte Heights has welcomed people of all ages, including seniors who are buying down. Part of that draw could be the lower maintenance.
"It has a lot to do with the quality," Snyder said.
With wainscoting and tile standard in the homes and wide open spaces and views outside, first-time homebuyers looking for a roomy new home can find something from $263,990 to $334,990. The largest home is more than 2,100 square feet."
http://www.heraldnet.com/article/20070715/BIZ/707150325
Saturday, July 7, 2007
Asarco El Paso crushed slag was used as ROOFING BALLAST
"Posted on July 6, 2007
Asarco Slags Off
In response to Sick ‘Em, City of El Paso: Going After Asarco, by Chris Cummings. [link]
Great article.
I think that it is interesting that we all look at the "reduced" pollution and repelling blight on the landscape; but, we ignore what is going into the ground. Years back, I was involved in a building renovation project where the existing roof ballast was crushed slag from ASARCO. The roof had leaked for a good while and the water seeped into the structural reinforced concrete roof deck. The acid from the rain and slag had completely corroded the steel reinforcing and the concrete was disintegrating.
How much longer will we allow this albatros to hang around the necks of those who are trying to sell El Paso to progressive, clean businesses. Maybe if we cleaned up our billboard blight, we could better get the full impact of the ASARCO view.
Thank you,
Mervin Moore"
http://www.newspapertree.com/opinion/1522-readers-responses
Friday, July 6, 2007
up to the end of 1996, Asarco's baghouse (Pugmill) had routed exhaust to the 308 ft stack NOT THE 828 FT STACK
.....
PROJECT OVERVIEW
ASARCO requested that they be allowed to reroute the baghouse stack exhaust from the pugmill from the present 308-foot stack to the 828-foot copper stack annulus. There will be no increase, or decrease, of emission rate from this facility.
REQUEST FOR COMMENTS
REGION: 6 Reviewed by: Archie Clouse
CITY:
.....
The exhaust gasses from the holding furnace and converters, which are rich in SO2, are cleaned of particulate matter before they are conditioned and converted to SO3. The SO3 gas is then scrubbed with water to produce 98% sulfuric acid. The particulate matter captured from this gas stream is sent to the pugmill where it is mixed with a little moisture and loaded in rail cars for recycling. Some of this material is recycled at this facility.
A safety inspection has shown that the 308-foot stack is in need of repairs. The stack was originally built over 80 years ago. The company wants to reroute the pugmill baghouse exhaust stack to the taller copper stack annulus. The old stack will be removed. The taller stack will give better dispersion of the emissions.
SOURCES, CONTROLS AND BACT
The pugmill is controlled by the baghouse, which is BACT. In my opinion, BACT has been applied to this facility.
IMPACTS EVALUATION
1. Was modeling done? No Type? N/A
2. Will GLC of any air contaminant cause violation of NAAQS?
NO
3. Is this a sensitive location with respect to nuisance?
NO
4. Is the site within 3000 feet of any school?
NO
5. Toxics Evaluation: This is a change of representation for the pugmill baghouse stack to vent into a taller stack. This will help lower the off-property impacts.
COMPLIANCE HISTORY
1. Was a NOV issued for construction without a permit?
NO
2. Was the NOV resolved by issuance of permit?
N/A
Comments:
MISCELLANEOUS
1. Is applicant in agreement with special conditions?
Yes
Company representative(s)?
Contacted via?
Date of contact?
2. Did the franchise tax verify the applicant to be in good standing?
N/A
Permit Engineer Date Team Leader/Section Manager/Backup Date
C:\NSRFORMS\FM\TECHRVW.FM
Revised
1997 Encycle applied to handle a metal-bearing liquid from US Army RMA, Colorado
CHEMICAL DIVISION STANDARD EXEMPTION REGISTRATION REVIEW Company: Encycle /Texas Inc. Registration Number: 34843 Record Number: 49506 Contact Name: Roger Norman Phone: 512-289-0300 ex 243 Fax: 6713 Description of Overall Unit: The company requests to handle a metal bearing liquid from the US Army’s Rocky Mountain Arsenal. Permit HW-50221 applies. Description of Facilities/Processes Claimed in this Registration and Exemptions Claimed: The company claims that all Requirements of Exemption 118 are met. Sources, Emissions and Control Summary: This review is being conducted under standard exemption rules only. The company claims that the liquid (analysis attached) should have emissions of approximately zero. The liquid is mixed with sodium sulfite to precipitate metals. The liquids will have any emissions vented through a scrubber. The only emissions based upon the analysis would be from dissolved low concentrations of ammonia and bromine. Any very small emissions of ammonia or bromine that would volatilize out of the liquid will be soluble and very scrubbable. Emissions should be approximately zero. The distance to the nearest receptor is estimated at 600'. The emissions of ammonia and bromine would be under a limit of (E = 18/65 = 0.28 lbs/hr) and (E = 0.7/65 = 0.011 lbs/hr). Pollution Reduction - Source or Device(s) None VOC__ No__ Sox__ CO__ PM__ HAS__ P.D. or Nonattainment Netting Required? No Submitted? NSPS: No NESHAPS No All General and Specific Conditions are met? Yes Reviewed By: John Gott Team Leader: Date: 2/27/97 Date:
https://webmail.tceq.state.tx.us/servlet/webpub