This document summarizes and evaluates five scenarios to reduce solvent emissions at the Toronto Solvent Reduction site in order to comply with future MOE standards. Scenario 1 would connect all process lines to an RTO system and increase oxidizer capacity, achieving compliance but with the highest cost. Scenario 2 would not achieve compliance due to n-propyl acetate emissions. Scenario 3 also fails compliance and has high air makeup costs. Scenario 4B achieves compliance by improving the adhesive laminator and connecting all lines to new oxidizer systems, though there is uncertainty about capture rates. Scenario 5B involves a rotary concentrator and replacing the laminator dryer.

1. Toronto Solvent
Reduction ESR Review

2. © 2 0 08 A L C A N I N C.Slide 2 Packaging
Toronto (Weston) Solvent Reduction ESR Review Topics
Project Goals
Current site Amended Certificate of Approval (C of A) / Previous
Air Toxics Dispersion Modeling
Potential Future Ministry of Environment (MOE) Control
Technology Standards
Current site process lines to APC equipment
Site solvent emissions (annual) and natural gas consumption
(annual) indexed to annual production rates
Options under consideration (Scenarios 1 – 3, 4B and 5B)

3. © 2 0 08 A L C A N I N C.Slide 3 Packaging
Project Goals
 Minimize Weston’s solvent emission footprint per unit of production by
50%
 CY 2007: 0.1089 ton (US) emission / ton (US) production
 Goal: 0.0545 ton (US) emission / ton (US) production
 Satisfy current and future MOE standards
 Decrease airflow volumes exhausted to APC equipment
 Minimize additional APC equipment capacity needed
 Reduce APC equipment natural gas consumption per unit of production
 Improve workplace air quality conditions
 Satisfy PACK EHS 009 explosion prevention directive for solvent adhesive
laminators (Adh Lam 461 and Adh Lam 411)

4. © 2 0 08 A L C A N I N C.Slide 4 Packaging
Current C of A / Previous Air Toxics Dispersion Modeling
Amended C of A Issued Oct. 30, 2005
Due for Expiration Oct. 30, 2010
Approved based on application and dispersion modeling submitted
in Sept. 2005 – Oct. 2005
Allowed for Adh Lam 461 and Flexo Press 306 emission to
atmosphere (uncontrolled)
Modeling (2005) was based on unrealistic (high) capture efficiency
rates and unrealistic (low) maximum short-term emission rates
Previous C of A approvals and dispersion modeling were based on
more representative capture efficiency rates

5. © 2 0 08 A L C A N I N C.Slide 5 Packaging
Potential Future MOE Control Technology Standards
Under consideration by MOE for approximately last five years
2006 - 2007
Stakeholder Meetings
Comments prepared and filed by Alcan Packaging
Facility Profile for Weston prepared by MOE consultant (one of
22); corrections/revisions for Weston filed by Alcan Packaging
MOE investigation in to viability of PTEs and overall cost-
effectiveness of control technology-based standards
2008 – Beyond
Policy/Promulgation via MOE Standards Development Branch

6. © 2 0 08 A L C A N I N C.Slide 6 Packaging
Current Site Process Lines to Oxidizer System
 Roto 207; approximately 20,000 scfm; est. 75% capture efficiency
 Roto 253; app. 60,000 scfm; est. 75% capture efficiency
 Roto 205; app. 36,000 scfm; est. 75% capture efficiency
 Roto 208; app. 40,000 scfm; est. 90% capture efficiency
 Adh. Lam. 461 (exhausted to atmosphere); app. 50,000 scfm; est. 70%
capture efficiency
 Flexo. 306 (exhausted to atmosphere); app. 3,000 scfm; est. 90% capture
efficiency
 Adh. Lam. 411; exhausted to atmosphere; app. 4,000 scfm; est. 80%
capture efficiency
 Ext. Lam. 421; exhausted to atmosphere; app. 9,000 scfm; est. 80%
capture efficiency
 Ext. Lam. 422; exhausted to atmosphere; app. 15,000 scfm; est. 80%
capture efficiency

7. © 2 0 08 A L C A N I N C.Slide 7 Packaging
Site Solvent Emissions and Natural Gas Consumption in
Relation to Production (Reported PDM Data)
Site Solvent Emissions (tons, US) 2002 - 2007
Highest CY = 2002 (1,553 tons/year)
CY 2004 – CY 2007 in 700 tons/year – 900 tons/year range
Natural Gas Consumption (million ft3) 2002 - 2007
CY 2002 = 63.0 million ft3/year
Highest CY = 2006 (153.3 million ft3/year)
CY 2007 decreased to 126.8 million ft3/year
Solvent Emission to Production Ratio (tons US/tons US)
CY 2005 – CY 2007 in 0.10 – 0.13 range
NG Consumption to Production Ratio (MMft3/tons US)
CY 2005 – CY 2007 in 0.015 – 0.022 range

8. © 2 0 08 A L C A N I N C.Slide 8 Packaging
Revised 2005 Baseline Dispersion Modeling
Summary
o Ethyl alcohol 164% of allowed
o Isopropyl acetate 581% of allowed
o Toluene 346% of allowed
o N-propyl acetate 1,010% of allowed (est. minimum
138% of allowed based on
AERMOD)
o Ethyl acetate 289% of allowed
o VM&P naphtha 486% of allowed
o Naphtha (aliphatic) 153% of allowed
-All exceed for odor, based on ½-hour allowed standard;
- N-propyl acetate AERMOD result is 24 hour based as allowed

9. © 2 0 08 A L C A N I N C.Slide 9 Packaging
MOE
June 1 each year – Annual C of A Written Summary/Certification
(air toxic certification to permit)
MOE Meeting on June 26,2008
Letter to Agency July 7, 2008 - requesting extension to September
5, 2008 for submitting June 1 data and compliance plan
Meeting to be scheduled week of July 28 with MOE

10. © 2 0 08 A L C A N I N C.Slide 10 Packaging
Project Options Under Consideration
Five Scenarios (1, 2, 3, 4B and 5B)
Solvent substitution has been reviewed with Weston technical
personnel but is not considered a viable option for MOE
compliance given several solvents with modeled baseline
exceedances, and quality and customer concerns
All five scenarios will help meet project goals other than MOE
compliance

11. © 2 0 08 A L C A N I N C.Slide 11 Packaging
Scenario 1 Evaluation – Changes to Plant Configuration
Four roto presses, PTE, to RTO system; and
New or replacement adh lam (for 461 and 411), PTE, airflow
reduced to 25,000 scfm; or
Replace 461 dryer, 461 + 411 in PTE, total adh lam airflow
reduced to 25,000 scfm; and
Shutdown Flexo 306; and
Increase certain stack heights to 18.5 m (61 feet) above ground
level; and
Roto press dryer and room/plant airflow management
improvements; and
Add at least 50,000 scfm RTO capacity (quadraplex)

12. © 2 0 08 A L C A N I N C.Slide 12 Packaging
Scenario 1 Evaluation – Changes to Plant Configuration
Scenario 1 Plant Emission Source Configuration
Process Line To Oxidizer or To Atmosphere Estimated Solvent Capture Efficiency
Roto 207 To Oxidizer 100%
Roto 253 To Oxidizer 100%
Roto 205 To Oxidizer 100%
Roto 208 To Oxidizer 100%
Adh Lam 461 To Oxidizer 100%
Adh Lam 411 To Oxidizer (or Shutdown) 100% (Unless Shutdown)
Ext Lam 421 1
To Atmosphere 80%
Ext Lam 422 1
To Atmosphere 80%
Table B Notes: 1. Scenario 1 presumes that Ext Lam 421 and Ext Lam 422 would not be operated
simultaneously due to machine-manning operating restrictions.

13. © 2 0 08 A L C A N I N C.Slide 13 Packaging
Summary of Scenario 1
In compliance with MOE air toxics standards
Cost of project $9.0 million (US) capital - $400,000 Expense

14. © 2 0 08 A L C A N I N C.Slide 14 Packaging
Scenario 2 Evaluation – Changes to Plant Configuration
Four roto presses, PTE, to RTO system; and
Adh Lam 411, Ext Lam 421 and Ext Lam 422 exhausted to a
relocated 30,000 scfm catalytic oxidizer; and
Shutdown Flexo 306; and
Increase certain stack heights to 18.5 m (61 feet) above ground
level; and
Roto press dryer and room/plant airflow management
improvements; and
Add at least 80,000 scfm RTO capacity (quadraplex)

15. © 2 0 08 A L C A N I N C.Slide 15 Packaging
Scenario 2 Evaluation – Changes to Plant Configuration
Scenario 2 Plant Emission Source Configuration
Process Line To Oxidizer or To Atmosphere Estimated Solvent Capture Efficiency
Roto 207 To Oxidizer 100%
Roto 253 To Oxidizer 100%
Roto 205 To Oxidizer 100%
Roto 208 To Oxidizer 100%
Adh Lam 461 To Atmosphere 70%
Adh Lam 411 To Oxidizer 80%
Ext Lam 421 1
To Oxidizer 80%
Ext Lam 422 1
To Oxidizer 80%
Table C Notes: 1. Scenario 1 presumes that Ext Lam 421 and Ext Lam 422 would not be operated
simultaneously due to machine-manning operating restrictions.

16. © 2 0 08 A L C A N I N C.Slide 16 Packaging
Summary of Scenario 2
Not in compliance with MOE air toxics standards (n-propyl acetate
at 264%)
Cost of project $5.2 million (US) capital and $400,000 expense.

17. © 2 0 08 A L C A N I N C.Slide 17 Packaging
Scenario 3 Evaluation – Changes to Plant Configuration
 No PTEs
 Replace 461 dryer, reduce airflow to 25,000 scfm; and
 Adh Lam 411, Ext Lam 421, Ext Lam 422 exhausted to a relocated 30,000
scfm catalytic oxidizer; and
 Shutdown Flexo 306; and
 Increase certain stack heights to 18.5 m (61 feet) above ground level; and
Roto press dryer and room/plant airflow management improvements:
 MUA units as needed
 Roto Press 253 thermal fluid system
 Added LEL monitoring for Roto Press 208
 Recirculation ductwork modifications for Roto Press 205

18. © 2 0 08 A L C A N I N C.Slide 18 Packaging
Scenario 3 Evaluation – Changes to Plant Configuration
Scenario 3 Plant Emission Source Configuration
Process Line To APC Equipment or To
Atmosphere
Estimated Solvent Capture Efficiency
Roto 207 To RTO System 75%
Roto 253 To RTO System 75%
Roto 205 To RTO System 75%
Roto 208 To RTO System 90%
Adh Lam 461 To RTO System 70%
Adh Lam 411 To Catalytic Oxidizer 80%
Ext Lam 421 To Catalytic Oxidizer 80%
Ext Lam 422 To Catalytic Oxidizer 80%

19. © 2 0 08 A L C A N I N C.Slide 19 Packaging
Summary of Scenario 3
Not in compliance with MOE air toxics standards (isopropyl acetate
at 184%)
Cost of project $6.9 million (US) capital and $200,000 expense
Cost includes air make-up at a cost of $1.05 million (US)

20. © 2 0 08 A L C A N I N C.Slide 20 Packaging
Scenario 4A
Same as Scenario 4B except relocate Alcoa adhesive laminator
(Instead of replacing dryer system for Adh Lam 461)
Engineering review has concluded the Alcoa laminator will not
feasibly fit in the available footprint at Weston

21. © 2 0 08 A L C A N I N C.Slide 21 Packaging
Scenario 4B Evaluation – Changes to Plant Configuration
 No PTEs
 Replace 461 dryer, reduce airflow to 25,000 scfm and improve capture
efficiency to 90%; and
 Install relocated 30,000 scfm catalytic oxidizer and connect with RTOs
(quadraplex); connect Adh Lam 411, Ext Lam 421 and Ext Lam 422; and
 Shutdown Flexo 306; and
 Increase certain stack heights to 18.5 m (61 feet) above ground level; and
 Roto press dryer and room/plant airflow management improvements:
 MUA units as needed
 Roto Press 253 - tie-in to Roto Press 208 thermal fluid system
 Added LEL monitoring for Roto Press 208

22. © 2 0 08 A L C A N I N C.Slide 22 Packaging
Scenario 4B Evaluation – Changes to Plant Configuration
Scenario 4B Plant Emission Source Configuration
Process Line To APC Equipment or To
Atmosphere
Estimated Solvent Capture Efficiency
Roto 207 To RTO/Catalytic Oxidizer
System
75%
Roto 253 To RTO/Catalytic Oxidizer
System
75%
Roto 205 To RTO/Catalytic Oxidizer
System
75%
Roto 208 To RTO/Catalytic Oxidizer
System
90%
Adh Lam 461 To RTO/Catalytic Oxidizer
System
90%
Adh Lam 411 To RTO/Catalytic Oxidizer
System
80%
Ext Lam 421 To RTO/Catalytic Oxidizer
System
80%
Ext Lam 422 To RTO/Catalytic Oxidizer
System
80%

23. © 2 0 08 A L C A N I N C.Slide 23 Packaging
Summary of Scenario 4B
In compliance with MOE air toxics standards
Cost of project $4.5 million (US) capital and $200,000 expense
Cost includes air make-up at a cost of $1.05 million (US)
There is a question if 461 can meet 90% capture.

24. © 2 0 08 A L C A N I N C.Slide 24 Packaging
Summary of Scenario 4C
In compliance with MOE air toxics standards
This scenario will include a new laminator for 461instead of new
oven or Alcoa laminator
Cost of project $5.6 million (US) capital and $750,000 Expense
Cost includes air make-up at a cost of $1.05 million (US)

25. © 2 0 08 A L C A N I N C.Slide 25 Packaging
Scenario 5A
Same as Scenario 5B except relocate Alcoa adhesive laminator
(Instead of replacing dryer system for Adh Lam 461)
Engineering review has concluded the Alcoa laminator will not
feasibly fit in the available footprint at Weston

26. © 2 0 08 A L C A N I N C.Slide 26 Packaging
Scenario 5B Evaluation – Changes to Plant Configuration
 No PTEs
 Replace 461 dryer, reduce airflow to 25,000 scfm and improve capture
efficiency to 90%; and
 Install rotary concentrator (Roto 207, Roto 253 & roto floor sweeps)
 Connect Adh Lam 411, Ext Lam 421 and Ext Lam 422 to RTOs; and
 Shutdown Flexo 306; and
 Increase certain stack heights to 18.5 m (61 feet) above ground level; and
 Roto press dryer and room/plant airflow management improvements:
 MUA units as needed
 Added LEL monitoring for Roto Press 208

27. © 2 0 08 A L C A N I N C.Slide 27 Packaging
Scenario 5B Evaluation – Changes to Plant Configuration
Scenario 5B Plant Emission Source Configuration
Process Line To APC Equipment or To
Atmosphere
Estimated Solvent Capture Efficiency
Roto 207 To Rotary Concentrator/RTO
System
75%
Roto 253 To Rotary Concentrator/RTO
System
75%
Roto Press
Room Floor
Sweeps
To Rotary Concentrator/RTO
System
Included
Roto 205 To RTO System 75%
Roto 208 To RTO System 90%
Adh Lam 461 To RTO System 90%
Adh Lam 411 To RTO System 80%
Ext Lam 421 To RTO System 80%
Ext Lam 422 To RTO System 80%

28. © 2 0 08 A L C A N I N C.Slide 28 Packaging
Summary of Scenario 5B
 Projected in compliance with MOE air toxics standards for n-propyl acetate and
isopropyl acetate; modeling needs to be further completed for remaining solvents
 Cost of project $4.3 million (US) capital and $200,000 expense
 To address the make-up air issue in the plant duct the air from concentrator to the make-
up air for ovens (cost $500,000 US) included above
 There is a question if 461 can meet 90% capture.
Pros
- New oven (decrease in waste and improved efficiency)
- Lower capital cost
- No write-off
- Energy reduction of $450,000 versus today $150,000 versus scenario 4)
Cons
- Time to shutdown and upgrade the process (3 months)
- Risk of achieving the goal of production (quality, drying and start-up time)

29. © 2 0 08 A L C A N I N C.Slide 29 Packaging
Summary of Scenario 5C
 In compliance with MOE air toxics standards
 This scenario will include a new laminator for 461instead of new oven or Alcoa laminator
 Cost of project $5.2 million (US) capital and $750,000 expense
 To address the make-up air issue in the plant duct the air from concentrator to the make-
up air for ovens (cost $500,000 US) included above
Pros
- Shutdown 411
- Increase speed and efficiency (400 m/min)
- Easy execution (not shutdown 461)
- No risk of not improving the quality
- Lower operating cost - energy of $450,000 versus today $150,000 versus scenario 4)
- 100% capture
Cons
- Cost of project
- Write-off of laminator 461

30. © 2 0 08 A L C A N I N C.Slide 30 Packaging
Summary of Scenarios
Scenario Capital cost Expense cost Total cost
Operating cost
for utilities Comments
1 $8,952,000 $431,000 $9,383,000 Increase
2 $5,216,000 $356,000 $5,572,000 Increase Not meet air toxic
3 $6,896,500 $200,000 $7,096,500 Increase Not meet air toxic
4A $4,550,100 $1,200,000 $5,750,100 Increase Alcoa laminator not fit
4B $4,548,500 $200,000 $4,748,500 Increase Scheduling downtime major issues
4C $5,653,500 $750,000 $6,403,500 Increase
5A $4,269,700 $1,200,000 $5,469,700 Dec $450,000 Alcoa laminator not fit
5B $4,312,100 $200,000 $4,512,100 Dec $450,000 Scheduling downtime major issues
5C $5,213,100 $750,000 $5,963,100 Dec $450,000 Preferred option