-------
I
*—»
Qi
e
<:
£
2 g
I
o
Q.
UJ
_J
Q-
o
ea
a:
=3
CD
(0
OB
UJ
? OC
K
f-o
-------
TABLE 4-2. SUMMARY OF FEED AND ATMOSPHERIC DAMPER
CONDITIONS DURING THE TEST RUNS
Run Number
Feed Description
Atmospheric Damper
Run 01
Run 02
Run 03
Run 04
Run 05
Run 06
Wire only
Wire only
Wire & Transformers
Wire & Transformers
Wire & Transformers
Wire only
closed
closed
closed
open
open
open
4-4
-------
Primary chamber bottom ash and settling chamber ash samples were taken from
the incinerator after each test run.
Soil samples were collected from ten locations at the plant site.
The ten samples were combined into a single composite, which was held
for potential dioxin/furan analysis pending evaluation of the MM5
dioxin/furan emissions data.
4.2 PROCESS DATA COLLECTION
Process data were collected to characterize the operation of the wire
reclamation incinerator and the afterburner during the MM5 test periods. A
complete record of the incinerator charge weights and times was maintained,
along with natural gas consumption data. Thermocouples were installed in the
primary chamber, the settling chamber, and two locations in the afterburner
for measuring process temperatures. These data will be used in Section 5.1
with the CEM data to evaluate and compare combustion conditions during the MM5
test periods.
4.3 LABORATORY ANALYSES
Laboratory analyses performed on samples from test Site WRI-A included
dioxin/furan analyses, dioxin/furan precursor analyses, and total chloride
analyses. These analyses are discussed in Sections 4.3.1, 4.3.2, and 4.3.3,
respectively.
4.3.1 Dioxin/Furan Analysis
All dioxin/furan analyses for Site WRI-A samples were performed by
EMSL-RTP and ECL-Bay St. Louis, two of three EPA laboratories collectively
referred to as Troika. The three Troika laboratories are ERL-Duluth, ECL-Bay
St. Louis, and EMSL-Research Triangle Park.
Field samples requiring dioxin/furan analysis were prioritized based on
their relative importance to the Tier 4 program objectives. The priority
levels, in order of decreasing importance, were designated Priority 1 through
Priority 3.
Priority 1 samples were sent-to Troika with instructions to perform
immediate extraction and analysis. These included the MM5 train components
for the afterburner outlet exhaust stack sampling location, an MM5 field train
4-5
-------
blank, an MM5 proof train blank, field solvent blanks, primary chamber ash
samples, and settling chamber ash samples.
Priority 2 samples were sent to Radian/RTP for archiving. These samples
may be analyzed for dioxin/furan in the future, pending the results of the
Priority 1 analyses. Priority 2 samples at Site WRI-A include feed samples
taken for each test run.
Priority 3 samples included only the composite soil sample. The soil
sample is being held by Radian's Research Triangle Park (RTP), N.C. laboratory
pending evaluation of the Priority 1 and 2 analyses.
4.3.2 Dioxin/Furan Precursor Analysis
Dioxin/furan precursor analyses of incinerator feed samples were
performed by Radian/RTP. The specific dioxin/furan precursors to be analyzed
for included chlorophenols, chlorobenzenes, PCB's, total organic halogen
(TOX), and total chlorine.
4.3.3 Total Chloride Analysis
Total chloride analysis was performed on front-half and back-half HC1
train samples by Radian's Austin, Texas laboratory.
4-6
-------
5.0 TEST RESULTS
The results of the Tier 4 dioxin/furan emissions testing of wire
reclamation incinerator WRI-A are presented in this section.
A description of the sample periods and test runs is contained in
Section 5.1. Process data obtained during the test runs are presented
in Section 5.2, and flue gas parameter data are presented in Section
5.3.
The continuous monitoring results for 02, CO, C02, NO , and THC are
presented in Section 5.4. The dioxin/furan emissions data are contained in
Section 5.5. Feed sample dioxin/furan precursor analyses are presented in
Section 5.6, and auxiliary process sample analyses are presented in Section
5.7. Results of HC1 train sampling are presented in Section 5.8.
5.1 DESCRIPTION OF TEST PERIODS
Six test runs were performed at Site WRI-A during the period March 19
through.March 27, 1985. Three of the test runs were conducted during
conditions of wire-only feed to the incinerator, and the other three
test runs were conducted during conditions of wire and transformer feed.
The overlap of the MM5/Dioxin, MM5/HC1, and CEM sampling periods with
the tray charging history of the incinerator is represented in Figures
5-1 and 5-2.
Sampling was performed during all, or part of, at least three tray cycles
for each test run. Complete tray cycles were sampled to the extent possible
within the time constraints of the plant operating schedule and the sampling
procedures. Sampling was not performed during the first feed cycle of each
test day in order to allow the incinerator and afterburner temperatures to
achieve quasi-steady state. Because of the variable batch nature of the
process, the overlap of the sampling periods with the feed history of the
incinerator was different for the individual test runs. A brief description
of each test run is given below.
5-1
-------
CBM.
MM8/HCL.
MMS/Oloxln.
Tray 1.
Tray 2.
Tray 3.
Tray 4_
Tray 8.
Tray 6_
No Port Chang* for Run 01
Wlr*
Wlr*
.Tray 3
AtmoaplMrle Oamp*r
Ctoa*d
800
8 Traya only
~~~T 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 !
900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1800 1800 1700
TIME (HOURS)'
OEM.
MM8/HCL.
MMS/Dloiln.
Tray 1_
Tray 2_
Tray 3_
Tray 4.
Tray 8_
Tray 8.
_
Port_£hanfl*
•TSSU.
wlr* T 2
"*'7Vray 3,
*"* «Tr*Y 40
Wlf* • Tray 8 »
~Wlr*
* WlF*"
Atmo«ph«rle
Cto*«d
80O
900 100O 1100 120O 1300 140O 18OO HSOO 17OO
TIKE (HOOKS)"
OEM.
MM8/HCL.
MMS/Oloxln _
Tray 1_
Tray 2.
Tray 3_
Tray 4_
• Tray 8_
Tray 8-
^ -
Port_CJiana*
• A ' ' . •
^ IT**!?
1 La Transformer Tfay a
' Wlr* "Tf.y3
""^\Tra, 4
Wlf*
4 Traya Only
4 Traya Only
i i i i i i i i i
Atmo«ph*rle Oamp*r
Op*n
800 90O 1000 1100 1200 1300 140O 1SOO 1800 1700
TIME (HOUH8)-
FIGURE 5-1. STACK SAMPLING AND INCINERATOR CHARGING
HISTORIES FOR RUNS 01, 02, 06 (WIRE ONLY RUNS)
5-2
-------
v*cm-
MM8/HCL.
MMS/Dloxln_
Tray 1.
Tray 2_
Tray. 3.
Tray 4.
Tray 5.
Tray 6_
Port Chang* Plugged flKar
,000 A 1330 UM-lSfT"* 8 "" ldl° B 1UJ
Tray_1^ B
*"wiri T a Lwalt for tray tranafar
Wlra Tr-M a RUI
t Tray 3 a 3/2
1 03
1/88
,Tray 4t Atmoapnarte Dampar
Wlra, Enamalad Wlra Tr,y s Cloaad
2 Mad Tranaformara
3 Traya Only
800 »OO 1000 1100 1200 1400 14OO 1500 160O 1700
TIMC(HOUnS>-
CEMi
MMS/HCL.
MMS/Oloxln_
Tray 1.
Tray 2.
Tray 3.
Tray 4_
Tray 8.
Tray 8.
8<
Port Ctianga
Tray 1 A
*wTra%ray 2
Wlra+Y~Mad~*
Tranaformar , Tray 3 §
Wlra»1 Mad, 1 Sm T 4
8 Traya Only
10 900 1000 1100 1200 13OO 140O 1800
B '
•
,Tray
1 La
1800 17(
Atmoapharle Oampar
Opan
TIME (HOURS).
CEM_
MMS/HCL-
MMS/Oloxln_
Tray 1.
Tray 2.
Tray 3.
Tray 4.
Tray 8.
Tray 8.
.Tray 1
Wlra
RUN OS
3/28/88
Wlr*
Tray 3
1 La Tranaformar
4 Traya Only
4 Traya Only
t Tray 4
1 La Tranaformar
Atmoapharlc Oampar
Opan
800 900 1000 110O 12OO 1300 1400 1800 1600 170O
TIME (HOURS) ^-
FIGURE 5-2. STACK SAMPLING AND INCINERATOR CHARGING
HISTORIES FOR RUNS 03, 04, and 05
(WIRE & TRANSFORMER RUNS)
-------
Run 01
Run 01 was performed under conditions of wire-only feed with the
atmospheric damper closed. The MM5/dioxin traverse was performed using only
one sample port because there was insufficient time to perform a port change
with the water-cooled probe assembly. Using the largest available sampling
nozzle (0.5 in), isokinetic sample flow rates were fairly low (0.25 cfm). In
order to obtain the desired sample volume of 90 dscf in the time period that
the host plant operated the incinerator (0900 - 1700 hours daily), it was
decided to eliminate the port change for this run. This allowed an extra hour
or more of on-line MM5/dioxin sampling.
Run 02
Run 02 was performed under conditions of wire-only feed with the
atmospheric damper closed. A larger sampling nozzle was procured on-site, and
the resulting isokinetic sampling flow rate was high enough to allow time for
a port change. Port changes were made during each of Runs 02 through 06.
Run 03
Run 03 was performed under conditions of wire and transformer feed with
the atmospheric damper closed. Plant personnel reported that the pink-colored
opacity observed from the stack was atypical. After the test run it was
decided to open the atmospheric damper on the afterburner outlet stack because
this was the only unusual operating condition that could potentially have
caused the observed opacity.
Run 04
Run 04 was performed under conditions of wire and transformer feed with
the atmospheric damper open. Opacity from the unit was reduced to a level
that was considered typical by plant personnel. The opening of the
atmospheric damper also had the effect of increasing the length of the
afterburner flame, and at times the flame extended up past the sample ports.
5-4
-------
Run 05
Run 05 was performed under conditions of wire and transformer feed with
the atmospheric damper open, identical to Run 04.
Run 06
Run 06 was performed under conditions of wire-only feed with the
atmospheric damper open.
5.2 PROCESS DATA
Process data were collected to document incinerator and afterburner
operation during the test runs. These data included a complete record of the
feed cycle start/stop times, a complete record of tray weights before and
after incineration, and a series of natural gas consumption measurements. In
addition, temperatures were monitored at four locations: primary chamber,
settling chamber, afterburner, and afterburner stack. An overview of the
process data is given in Table 5-1, and more thorough discussions of the
process rate data and temperature data are given below.
5.2.1 Process Rate Data
The feed cycle start/stop times and tray weight data obtained during each
test period are listed in Table B-l of Appendix B. From these discrete raw
data, average hourly feed rates of bare metal, wire insulation, and
transformer combustibles were developed for each test run. Table 5-2
summarizes the resulting process rate data. As used in this report, the term
"total feed rate" represents the sum of the bare metal, wire insulation, and
transformer combustibles feed rates. The term "total combustibles feed rate"
represents the sum of the wire insulation and transformer combustibles feed
rates.
The mean total feed rate during the wire-only runs (i.e. Runs 01,
02, and 06) was approximately 360 kg/hr (800 Ib/hr), with a maximum
between-run deviation of about 16%. The mean total combustibles feed
rate (i.e., wire insulation feed rate) during these runs was approximately
45 kg/hr (100 Ib/hr), with a maximum deviation of about 11%. Thus, the
5-5
-------
CO
8
1-4
UJ
a.
to
LU
H*
3S
H-4
o:
O
4fl£
1
ft^
gg;
g
t
o:
LU
z
HH
C3
2;
f— 4
s
It^.
<5I
1—
oc
Q
C3
1-4
1—
Cw
LU
p^
C3
"J"
LU
^j^
•
r— 4
in
LU
CD
jS
X.
JJ ^^
i— 10 I.
a} C£ J=.
•P •>.
O ID J3
1- (D i-
© v^
U.
O
•r—
S-
0) £-
f O
a. a.
UJ E
O 10
EQ
<^
C
.2
^>
a.
•^
i.
o
UJ
(D
0
^^
0
(D
U.
c_
a>
c ^
3 E
ce 3
•-< o\ o m m
o o m m P» o
2 o co GI co co
»-4 i— 1 i-l
o o o o o - i uj o
o o a. o a.
i— •— O i— O
u o u
UJ UJ
i_ t-
>>»>, >» 0 0
r— i— i— (—14-14-
C C C C UJ UJ
O O O O C C
(O (0
0) d o0
O O
U L.
•^ *r»
S 2=
(A
C O
3 O
Cv *fc
CM
r-i CM vo c o on T
o o o ^
r**
^y
<0
UJ
3
UJ
•P
C
3
C
C
Q*
JC
UJ
(O
^^
>t
a.
•r—
4->
3
S
*
s_
jr
OJ
0
•p
s_
^r
x^
r^
f— •
£_
•P
a>
o
u
o
l—
0
CO
•
1-1
^
CM
on
i
LU
0
II
o
o
c
o
+J
-P
0)
UJ
3
^
O
0
o
•p
u_
0
c
4-
s_
>
o
u
o
1—
0
5-6
-------
CO
8
S
LU
Q.
LU
J—
CD
i— i
/"^
^
HH
OS
cu •
t-H
«3
a
o:
0
H-
<
QC
LU
^y
I-H
O
1— t
£
cr
i—
o
LU
h-
tr
CO
co
LU
8
a:
a.
§
LU
2£
&
>•
QJ
^C
jg^
^5^
CO
•
CM
|
LO
UJ
^J
CQ
*c
1^
(A (A
ID t.
r— 0)
*« 5 g E
•P -P O O
|2 3 i»_ tn
fc
2
O h-
0)
r- s.
O 3 -0 .0.
1— -0 ID r-
g O •—
O LU
0
•Kf o vO P*
*t ~* m m
>— 4 i— 1 f— 4 i—4
vo o r» 1-4
•«*• O CM O»
OO CO ^t VO
i-H. C3\ ' p^ OV
o in en o*
CO i— 4 C7> 00
•* m 1-1 m
CM O ^ CO
CO C^ ^^ of^
r*» vo PO m
IA (A (A
£ £ cs
£_ t. t_
O O O (A
M"* ^4— H— !•
(A (A U) CD
C C C <*3 £
10 4_
i- (A
|Q
0) CD (D t-
i. S. t. I—
*^ T^ ^g
•P
o
z
v
^^
in
o
^^
i^
j^
^~
x.
^^
^B—
c
>t
a.
•v~
3
^
i.
S
o
•p
i»
e^
-Q
t_
t^M
•P
m
^
C
o
0
o
h-
o
5-7
-------
average feed rates to the incinerator were relatively constant for the
wire-only test runs.
The mean total feed rate during the wire and transformer runs (i.e.,
Runs 03, 04, and 05) was approximately 310 kg/hr (690 Ib/hr), with a maximum
deviation of about 38%. The mean total combustibles feed rate (i.e., wire
insulation and transformer combustibles feed rate) during these runs was
approximately 65 kg/hr (140 Ib/hr) with a maximum deviation of about 20%.
Transformer combustibles represented about 70 percent of the total combustible
materials fed to the incinerator, with a range of 54 to 88 percent. Thus, the
feed rate data for the wire and transformer test runs show a higher degree of
variability than the wire-only runs. The reason for this is that the
transformers come in various sizes and designs, and the number of transformers
per tray is small (1-3 transformers per tray). Thus, significant tray-to-tray
differences exist when transformers and wire are fed to the incinerator, while
the wire-only trays tend to be quite similar to each other.
5.2.2 Temperature Monitoring Data
Temperature histories were obtained at four monitoring locations during
the test runs. Mean values for each run are summarized in Table 5-3. The
mean temperature data show fairly good consistency between runs, particularly
for the primary chamber and settling chamber locations. The mean primary
chamber temperature for all test runs was approximately 560°C (1045°F), and
the mean settling chamber temperature for all test runs was approximately
325 C (615 F). The afterburner temperatures showed more variability between
runs. The mean afterburner temperature for all test runs was "approximately
1030 C (1800 F), and the mean afterburner stack temperature was approximately
780 C (1440 F). It is difficult to generalize about temperature differences
between wire-only and wire and transformer runs because of the confounding
effect of the open/closed status of the atmospheric damper.
The within-run time/temperature histories for two test runs (Runs 01 and
Run 04) are illustrated in Figures 5-3 and 5-4. The data for Run 01 most
markedly show the effects of the tray feed cycle on incinerator temperatures.
Each time the primary chamber doors were opened to feed or remove a tray from
the incinerator, the primary chamber temperature dropped significantly from
5-8
-------
TABLE 5-3. MEAN OPERATING TEMPERATURES FOR INCINERATOR
WRI-A DURING THE TEST PERIODS
Run
Number Feed Description
01
02
06
Mean
01,02
03
04
05
Mean
03,04
Wire only
Wire only
Wire only
Runs Wire only
,06
Wire & Transformers
Wire & Transformers
Wire & Transformers
Runs Wire &
,05 Transformers
Primary
Chamber
(8F)
1087
984
1080
1050
1080
946
1085
1037
Settling
Chamber
TF)
609
612
633
618
634
584
620
613
Afterburner
Location 1
(6F)
ND
2001
1859
1930
1873
1805
1818
1832
Location -2
TF)
1543
1556
1371
1490
1511
1364
1276
1384
Note: Data shown in units used by host plant.
o To convert from °F to °C, use the equation °C = (°F - 32J/1.8
5-9
-------
*
i
II i
< a. to
* t t
I i i
o
o
-i—i—r
•T—i—T—r
T—r—i—r
e
e
o:
o
o
oo
. e
co
UJ g
S s
P 5
CO
I
LD
e
e
. o
e
o
e
e
o
e
e
1C
U0)
5-10
-------
J>
to
5 «•
| !
^ j
| s
T 1
I i
i 1
i A
o
0
IB
"
e
A > *
.-^ V-B--. "^ 4
* ""'"=? *" /
f * / x«
^ * / *'
^> Jrtf 4
\ X* /
^ "^F V
i j ** — •N*
/ /• * \
/ / \ \
/ ./ i \
/ N VN i
/ N> N \
* Cf «T x- ^
i ) > i
\ / / i
v Y <
\ / > ^-v
> x' ""A ^
^ <^- — ^ 1 '
> "tv'p ~~"~ ^•r^°-
f 5^ r"'"r-'^'"
\ 1 / i
-5 \- / / \
9 9 \ . •
1 1 \ / / ^
I S \ / / \
00 '• d tf 1?
»> « \ . \ '
5 - \ \ \ '
E = \ \ \ j
5 • \ \ \ i
T ? V \ \ 1
ii V x > *
\ xx
i i \ \ \ \
\ v "v
\ \ ^- \
\ \ N \
\ \ \\
\
~K
"
•
•
; o
• o
o
•
-
-
' e
^.e
" ^
•1 I
. **
i o
_e
r«
e
i 0
z
cc
(•^
o
U-
^
oo
1—4
LU
1—
"2 W ^
tt >
O g
Tr^
^
• 1—.
rf
.!|1
P LU
o
"o
e
-o
o
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 j 1 1 1 1 g
O O O o A
0000°
0 10 0 S
01 ~ ^
(d 0 ) 3 JdHl Vd3dW31
•
"^"
I
un
LU
0£
0
LU
5-11
-------
approximately 600°C (1100°F) to approximately 315°C (600°F). The primary
chamber temperature would quickly recover after the new feed tray was charged
and the primary chamber doors were closed. The settling chamber temperature
followed a similar pattern. Afterburner temperatures were less sensitive to
the feed cycle.
Figure 5-3 and 5-4 also show that during the course of a day-, the primary
chamber and settling chamber temperatures slowly increase. Afterburner
temperatures increase for a period of 2 to 3 hours in the morning after the
unit has been turned on, but these temperatures tend to level off during the
day.
5.2.3 Natural Gas Consumption Data
Natural gas consumption data were taken daily to estimate the firing rate
of the afterburner. These data are summarized in Table B-2 of Appendix B.
Typically, the natural gas usage rate was about 0.6 cu meter/min
(20 cu ft/min), which corresponds to about 1.2 MMBtu/hr energy input. The
data were not taken at frequent enough intervals to make a firm conclusion
regarding differences in natural gas usage between runs.
5.3 FLUE GAS PARAMETER DATA
Table 5-4 summarizes flue gas temperature, moisture, volumetric flowrate
and oxygen concentration data obtained at Site WRI-A. These parameters were
fairly consistent between test runs. The average flue gas temperature and
moisture content measured for the runs with wire-only feed were 700°C and
13.4%, while the averages for the runs with wire and transformer feed were
652 C and 14.1 %. The average gas flowrates for the wire-only feed and wire
and transformer feed runs under actual stack temperature and moisture
conditions were 58.8 acmm (2076 acfm) and 59.1 acmm (2087 ascfm),
respectively. The average dry standard flowrate was 15.1 dscmrn (534 dscfm)
for the wire-only feed runs and 15.7 dscmrn (556 dscfm) for the wire and
transformer feed runs. Standard EPA conditions are 20°C (68°F) and 1 atm.
5-12
-------
TABLE 5-4. FLUE GAS PARAMETERS AT SITE WRI-Aa
Wire-Only Feed
Flue Gas Parameter Run 01
Temperature (°C) 684
Moisture (Vol %) 14.6
Volumetric Flowrate
Actual (acmm) 55.6
Dry Standard (dscmm) 14.3
Oxygen Content
Radian CEM (Vol%, dry) 4.4
Run 02
706
14.2
59.4
15.0
3.7
Run 06
709
11.5
61.4
16.0
8.9
Wire and Transformer Feed
Run 03
637
15.0
54.6
14.5
5.2
Run 04
667
14.8
58.3
15.0
6.8
Run 05
651
12.4
64.4
17.7
10.3
Metric units are geported for all the flue gas measurement data.
alternate umts: °F = 1.8 (°C) + 32; cfm = cmm x 35.3.
To convert to
5-13
-------
5.4 CONTINUOUS EMISSIONS MONITORING DATA
• Mean values and standard deviations of the continuously monitored
combustion gases at the afterburner outlet location (02, CO, C02, NO , and
THC) are shown for each MM5 test run in Table 5-5. The data show a fairly
high degree of variability between runs for most of the gas species monitored.
Mean flue-gas oxygen values for the three test runs conducted with
the atmospheric damper closed (Runs 01, 02, 03) ranged from 3.7% 02 to
5.2% 02, with an average of 4.4% 02. As expected, flue gas oxygen values were
higher for runs with the atmospheric damper open than for runs with the
atmospheric damper closed. This is due to the fact that the CEM sampling
location was above (i.e., downstream of) the atmospheric damper, and the
exhaust gas was diluted with ambient air when the atmospheric damper was open.
The mean flue gas oxygen values for the three test runs conducted with the
atmospheric damper open (Runs 04, 05, 06) ranged from 6.8% 02 to 10.3% 02,
with an average of 8.7% 0-.
Mean carbon monoxide concentrations were found to be relatively high for
all test runs, regardless of the feed, type or the open/closed status of the
atmospheric damper. The mean values (corrected to 3% 02) ranged from
approximately 3400 ppmv CO (Run 01) to 8000 ppmv CO (Run 05), with an average
of 5100 ppmv CO for all runs. There is apparently no significant difference
between CO emissions during wire-only feeding and wire & transformer feeding.
Total hydrocarbon concentrations were found to be highly variable between
runs, with concentrations for wire-only runs (Runs 01, 02, 06) being lower
than concentrations for wire and transformer runs (Runs 03, 04, 05). The mean
total hydrocarbon concentration (corrected to 3% 02) ranged from approximately
30 ppmv to 650 ppmv for wire-only runs, with a mean value of 280 ppmv. The
mean values for wire & transformer runs ranged from approximately 350 ppmv to
1470 ppmv, with a mean value of 880 ppmv. These data are consistent with
visual observations of opacity and hydrocarbon build-up on the sample train
filters.
Five minute average concentration values for each of the continuously
monitored combustion gases are tabulated in Appendix A-Z and are shewn
graphically as functions of time in Figures 5-5 through 5-14. These data show
considerable short-term variations in each of the continuously monitored gas
concentrations.
5-14
-------
TABLE 5-5. MEAN VALUES AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF CONTINUOUSLY MONITORED
COMBUSTION GASES AT THE AFTERBURNER EXHAUST LOCATION
Parameter3'0'0 Run 01
02 (% vol) 4.4
(2.7)
CO (ppmv 0 3% 02) 3363.8
(2751.1)
C02 (% vol 0 3% 02) 12.7
(1.6)
NOX (ppmv 0 3% 02) 77.4
. (34.6)
THC (ppmv 0 3% 02) 32.5
(45.3)
Run 02
3.7
(2.8)
3846.9
(2463.5)
14.4
(1.8)
101.2
(44.9)
653.7
(615.6)
Run 03
5.2
(3.0)
4823.5
(3031.8)
14.1
(2.6)
52.4
(32.9)
1474.2
(1486.1)
Run 04
6.8
(3.3)
3972.3
(3521.6)
12.8
(2.0)
136.8
• (39 ..5)
802.4
(1288.0)
Run 05
10.3
(1.9)
8017.8
(3991.6)
15.4
(3.0)
189.0
(76.3)
355.9
(549.1)
Run 06d
8.9
(3.2)
6760.3
(5983.9)
11.6
(0.7)
N/A
143.2
(116.6)
outlet local 'o
performed at the afterburner exhaust
on a dry volume bas1s
for total hydrocarbon
onu-u p
concentrations, which are expressed on a wet volume basis.
Total hydrocarbon data are expressed in units of ppmv (wet) as propane
Th«n hy?n°C^°?n TJ the onjy ""tinuously monitored concentration during Run 06.
Ihe S^imadzu GC. 2 "^ developed from integrated. bag samples analyzed using
5-15
-------
SITE 06 - TEST 1
newt 4.4x v 02
STO. oev.i 2.7« v
RANSCt O-29X V 02
SITE 06 - TEST 2
mot
3.TX V 02
STO. oev.i 2.ax v
iNvmunarr KANWI t-23X v 02
SITE 06 - TEST 6
1
S \ / \B
,(• * :
a i i i « ' i
.1220 1320 1420 1S20 1820 1721
a.n v 02
STO. OCV. I 3.2X V
INSTMUnCNT RAMCi 9-23X V 02
T«t Ttw
FIGURE 5-5. OXYGEN CONCENTRATION HISTORY AT THE
AFTERBURNER OUTLET LOCATION
(WIRE ONLY RUNS)
5-16
-------
SITE 06 - TEST '3
oxvoot
1*
II
1T
!••
1S
14
13
ia
11
10
*
•
7
•
3
3
b
1000
a
1200
MEANl S.2X V
STO. OEV.I 3.BX V
INSTRUMENT RANSEi
8-2» V C«
, „
Ttst Tim
1400
a
I
SITE 06 - TEST 4-
ffi
o
1150
a
1305
MEANl 6.a« V 02
STO. DEV.t J.3X V
INSTMUtlENT RANGEt a-23* V 02
Tilt Tte
1SOS
SITE 06 - TEST 5
OXVQCH MIOFILC
A i
j
o
1105
ia..IX V 02
STO. OEV.i l.9». w
INSTRUMENT R«M>«3E« B-23X V 02
3
130S
Tut Til
1595
FIGURE 5-6. OXYGEN CONCENTRATION HISTORY AT
THE AFTERBURNER OUTLET LOCATION
(WIRE & TRANSFORMER RUNS)
5-17
-------
SITE 06 - -TEST 1
o
nos
a
I30S
INSTftUnCNT RANSCi
pgav CO
T«S6 TIM
IMS
SITE 06 - TEST 2
CMMOH MOMOKCC >HO»ILC
1205
3844.9 op«V CO « IX 02
STD. DEV.l 2443.3 aemH
RANSCI a-Aao« PO«V co
Ttst Tta
SITE 06 - TEST 6
o
1220
1323
2
1420
4768.3 qo«V CO • IX 02
3TO. OSW.i 3995.9 pgnv
INSTNUMCNT RANSCi 0-60M PO«V CO
I
1520
1*20
s
.1720
Tut Tt«»
FIGURE 5-7. CARBON MONOXIDE CONCENTRATION
HISTORY AT THE AFTERBURNER OUTLET
LOCATION (WIRE-ONLY RUNS)
5-18
-------
SITE 06 - TEST 3
a *
1200 1400
Tut Tim
3TO. 0€V. i
4823. S pp.W CO • 3X 02
1831. i ppnv
RANgCt 0-MM* po.v CO
SITE 06 - TEST 4
MEAN! 3»72..J pp«V CO 9 TX
STD. DEV.i 7321.6 pp*V
INSTRUMENT RANOCi B-6aO« ppaV
O2
SITE 06 - TEST 5
o
1105
. aatr.a opmv co a r/. a:
STO. OEV.I 3991.6 PD»V
INSTRUMENT RANGE) 3-4203 ppaivl CO
a
1305
1505
FIGURE 5-8. CARBON MONOXIDE CONCENTRATION HISTORY
AT THE AFTERBURNER OUTLET LOCATION
(WIRE & TRANSFORMER RUNS)
5-19
-------
SITE 06 - TEST 1
o-
o
110S
a
1305
MEANl 32.3 PP«V THC • 3* 02
STO. OEV.l 43.3 PP«V
INSTRUMENT RANNI a-saa PP«V THC
Tnt Tin
1503
SITE 06 - TEST 2
TOTA*. MVOftOCAMON M^FIIC
r
T
1
11
% i
1
f
/ ^~
w
y
u
^
u
/
./ ^
o a
105S 1255
1455
MEANi 693.7 ppmV THC 9 3% 02
STO. OEV.l 619.6 po»V
INSTRUMENT RANKt a-23aB pQnU THC
SITE 06 - TEST S
TOTAL
f
if
u
V ^x-
^^ ^-*^- *"
.* ' i » , * ' i
1220 ' 1320 1420 1520 ]620 172
T«£ Tfw
nEANt 143.2 ppmv THC 0 T/. 02
3TO. OEV.l 116.6 ppiM
INSTRtmCNT RANOKi a-23B« opmv THC
FIGURE 5-9. TOTAL HYDROCARBON.CONCENTRATION
HISTORY AT THE AFTERBURNER OUTLET
LOCATION (WIRE-ONLY RUNS)
5-20
-------
SITE 06 - TEST 3
1C
1*74.2 pp«v THC • 3* 02
STO. OSV.i 14»*.t OB.W
tN»TRlfl«WT KANOCi 0-1MM pp«v THC
T«t Till
1400
SITE 06 - TEST 4-
Z
1150
1350 1S50
T«t Tim
STO. ocv. i
aaa.4 Op«v THC • 35; QJ
i:sa.» DD«V
RANGE, a-ieae* po«v THC
SITE 06 - TEST 5
1105
I
IMS
«€««« 333.9 pp«V THC 9 -.7. D"
STO. OSV.i 349.1 ppmv
OPKV THC
Twt Tta
ISO!
FIGURE 5-10.
TOTAL HYDROCARBON CONCENTRATION
HISTORY AT THE AFTERBURNER OUTLET
LOCATION (WIRE & TRANSFORMER RUNS)
5-21
-------
SITE 06 - TEST 1
•a
I
i
13-
1
i.
— V**L J> *UJ \ itaJ \ f-
l*S*ff v ^^"^ U
1105 IMS Tornuc >.«»
•
MEANi 12.7* V COS • Z* 02
STD. DEV.i 1.6X V
INSTRUMENT R
-------
SITE 06 - TEST 3
OONCENTIWION
-------
SITE 06 - TEST 1
oxcm or Mimoaei
INSTMUriEMT RAMSCl
I • 3X O2
PBmV NO*
Txsr.nuc
*
I
9
SITE 06 - TEST 2
oxan or wmeaoi »ne«iu«
191.2 pomv NOx' 3 3X 0
STO. OEV. I 44.9 ppniV
INSTRUMENT RANQCl a-3Ba po»V NOx
TtSTTWe -M05
FIGURE 5-13. NITROGEN OXIDES CONCENTRATION
HISTORY AT THE AFTERBURNER OUTLET
LOCATION (WIRE-ONLY RUNS)
5-24
-------
SITE 06 - TEST 3
§
s
a
1000
2
1200
02
MCflNl S2.4 BP«V NO* •
STO. DEV.i 32.9 0P«V
INSTKUnOIT RANGCl a- 306 pp.v NOx
T«t Tta
SITE 06 - TEST 4
oxecs or MiraeocM M
PIEONi U6.« 0P«V NOx « 3X 02
STD. 06V. i 39.3 ppnV
INSTRUflENT RANGEl 3-3SM ppnv NQx
T«« Tta
1550
SITE 06 - TEST 5
189.a pernV NOx 9 3X 02
STO. DEV.i 74.J ppnV
tN3TmjHBNT RANGEl B-3B8 BpmV NOx
IMS
FIGURE 5-14.
NITROGEN OXIDES CONCENTRATION
HISTORY AT THE AFTERBURNER OUTLET
LOCATION (WIRE & TRANSFORMER RUNS)
5-25
-------
I
The time behavior of the monitored concentrations for runs with the
atmospheric damper closed (Runs 01-03) is different than that for runs with
the atmopsheric damper open (Runs 04-06). Runs 01-03 show a distinctly
cyclical behavior, particularly in flue gas oxygen, carbon monoxide, and total
hydrocarbon concentrations. The CO and THC concentrations show typical
inverse relationships with flue gas oxygen. When the flue gas oxygen
concentration is high, concentrations of both CO and THC become small, and
vice versa. Thus, when excess oxygen is high, combustion is more complete in
the afterburner. The measured variability in flue gas oxygen concentrations
is attributable to the batch nature of the process and to the irregular
adjustments of combustion air made by plant personnel.
In general, the continuous monitoring data for Runs 04-06 (atmospheric
damper open) show less short term variability than that for Runs 01-03. Large
changes in measured values occurred less frequently during Runs 04-06. The
most likely reason for this is that the incinerator has a more stable draft
behavior with the atmospheric damper open, which leads to less short-term
excess oxygen variability in the afterburner,,
i
5.5 DIOXIN/FURAN EMISSIONS DATA
This section presents the dioxin/furan emissions data measured at the
afterburner outlet exhaust stack. Due to analytical difficulties, results
were not reported for the complete set of target homologues for all test runs.
Average total PCDD and total PCDF emissions for the test runs were calculated
by summing the average "emissions of each homologue. Test runs where data were
not reported for a given homologue were not considered when calculating the
average emissions of that homologue. For example, hexa-CDD analytical data
were reported for Runs 01 and 06 of the wire-only feed set, but were not
reported for Run 02. Average hexa-CDD emissions for wire-only feed runs were
calculated as the average of values from Run 01 and 02 only.
Section 5.5.1 presents data for the wire-only feed runs (Runs 01, 02, and
06), and Section 5.5.2 presents data for the wire and transformer feed runs
(Runs 03, 04, and 05).
5.5.1 Wire-Only Feed Runs (Runs 01. 02 and
Emission concentrations and emission rate data for the wire-only feed
runs are shown in Table 5-6 and 5-7 for the 2378-TCDD, total PCDD, and total
5-26
-------
PCDF species. The data include dioxin and furan collected in the entire MM5
train, including filter, XAD sorbent trap, impingers, and sample train
clean-up rinses. Data are not available for some isomers due to contamination
of the sample extracts. This contamination led to low recovery efficiencies
for some isomers. As a result, in the following sections it will be noted
that for some isomer-specific analyses, the results were not reported by
Troika. In any case, the analyses indicated that the 2378 isomers are less
than 25 percent of the respective total TCDD and TCDF concentrations.
Average as-measured emissions concentrations of the 2378-TCDD, total
PCDD, and PCDF species, were 0.093 ng/dscm 2378-TCDD; 124 ng/dscm total-PCDD;
and 225 ng/dscm total PCDF. When corrected to 3% 02 using the Radian CEM
oxygen concentration data, these values correspond to 0.138 ng/dscm @ 3% 02;
173 ng/dscm @ 3% 02; and 305 ng/dscm @ 3% 0,,, respectively. Average emission
rates for the three species were 0.09 ug/hr 2378-TCDD, 114 ug/hr total PCDD,
and 205 ug/hr total PCDF. Comparison of data reported for individual
wire-only feed test runs indicates that dioxin/furan emissions for Run 06 were
considerably higher than emissions for Runs 01 and 02. The primary operating
difference between Run 06 and Runs 01/02 was that the atmospheric damper was
open for Run 06 and closed for Runs 01 and 02, However, this does not appear
to be responsible for the difference in the measured emissions because the
same trend was not observed for the wire and transformer feed runs (see
Section 5.5.2).
Isomer- and homologue-specific emission concentration data are summarized
in Tables 5-S and 5-9 for the three wire-only feed test runs'. Run-specific
data tables showing homologue emission concentrations in both ng/dscm and
parts-per-trillion units and homologue emission rates in ug/hr units are
included in Appendix D.
Figure 5-15 is a histogram that shows the relative distributions of the
2378-TCDD/TCDF isomers and the tetra-through octa PCDD/PCDF homologues in the
emissions (mole basis). Homologues for which analytical data were not
reported by Troika for Runs 01 and 02 were assigned zeroes for their
contribution to the total PCDD and total PCDF emissions, although these
homologues may actually have been present in the flue gas stream. Run 06 was
the wire-only feed run for which a complete set of analytical data were
reported by Troika. The hepta- and octa-chlorinated homologues were the
primary dioxin species present in the Run 06 samples, accounting for 50 and 45
5-27
-------
TABLE 5-6. OVERVIEW OF DIOXIN/FURAM EMISSIONS CONCENTRATION
DATA FOR SITE WRI-A (WIRE FEED ONLY)
Run Number
2378 TCDD
Total PCDD Total PCDF
Emissions Concentration
(as measured), ng/dscm
Run 01
Run 02
Run 06
Average
NR
NR
0.093
0.093
.51
34
277
124
96
103
457
225
Emissions Concentration
(corrected to 3% 02), ng/dscm 0 3% 02
Run 01 NR
Run 02 NR
Run 06 0.138
Average 0.138
55
35
412
173
104
107
680
305
NR - Not reported by Troika. 2378 isomers, if present, were minor components
of total amounts of TCDD's/TCDF's.
5-28
-------
TABLE 5-7. SUMMARY OF DIOXIN AND FURAN EMISSIONS RATE
DATA FOR SITE WRI-A (WIRE FEED ONLY)
Run Number
Run 01
Run 02
Run 06
Average
Dioxin/Furan
Emission
2378 TCDD Total PCDD
NR
NR
0.089
0.089
44
31
266
114
Rate, ua/hr
Total PCDF
82
93
439
205
NR = Not reported by Troika. 2378 isomers, if present, were
minor components of total amounts of TCDD's/TCDF's.
5-29
-------
TABLE 5-8. SUMMARY OF DIOXIN/FURAN EMISSIONS DATA
FOR SITE WRIrA (WIRE FEED ONLY)
(As-measured concentration)
Dioxin/Furan
Isomer
Isomer Concentration in Flue Gas
(ng/dson)
Run 01 Run 02 Run 06
Avg.
DIOXINS
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
Penta-CDD
Hexa-CDD
Hepta-CDD
Octa-CDD
Total PCDD
FURANS
NR
5.16E-01
NR
3.10E+00
3.18E+01
1.54E+01
5.G9E+01
NR !
NR i
NR
NR
2.15E+01
1.24E+01
3.39E+01
9.29E-02
1.24E+00
2.04E+00
8.82E+00
1.39E+02
1.26E+02
2.77E+02
9.29E-02
8.78E-01
.04E+00
.96E+00
6.41E+01
5.13E+01
2.
5.
1.24E+02
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDF
Total PCDF
NR
.39E+00
.28E+00
.23E+01
4.74E+01
2.70E+01
9.58E+01
NR
9.63E+00
NR
.18E+OQ
,12E+Oi
.92E+01
3.
6.
2.
1.03E+02
3.72E-01
1.63E+01
2.66E+01
6.06E+01
2.S4E+02
9.97E+OI
4.57E+02
3.72E-01
9.94E+00
.59E+01
.54E+01
.21E+02
.20E+01
1.
2.
1,
5.
2.25E+02
NOTE: Isomer concentrations shown are at as-measured oxygen conditions.
NR - Not reported by Troika. 2378 isomers, if present, were minor
components of total amounts of TCDO's/TCDF's.
ND = Not detected (detection limit in parentheses)
ng " 1.0E-09g
2080 operating hours per year
5-30
-------
TABLE 5-9. SUMMARY OF DIOXIN/FURAN EMISSIONS DATA
FOR SITE WRI-A (WIRE FEED ONLY)
(Concentrations corrected to 3% Oxygen)
Dioxin/Furan
Isomer
Isomer Concentration in Flue Gas
(ng/dscm @ 3% oxygen)
Run 01 Run 02 Run 06
Avg.
DIOXINS •
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
Penta-CDD
Hexa-CDD
Hepta-CDD .
Octa-CDD
Total PCDD
FURANS
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDF
Total PCDF
NR
5.59E-01
NR
3.36E+00
3.45E+01
1.67E+01
5.52E+01
NR
4.22E+00
5.72E+00
1.33E+01
5.14E+01
2.93E+01
1.04E+02
NR
NR
NR
NR
2.24E+01
1.29E+01
3.53E+01
NR
l.OOE+01
NR
3.31E+00
6.37E+01
3.04E+01
1.07E+02
1.38E-01
1.84E+00
3.04E+00
1.31E+01
2.07E+02
1.87E+02
4.12E+02
5.53E-01
2.42E+01
3.96E+01
9.02E+01
3.78E+02
1.48E+02
6.80E+02
NOTE: Isomer concentrations shown are corrected to 3% oxygen.
NR - Not reported by Troika. 2378 isomers, if present, were
components of total amounts of TCDD's/TCDF's.
ND = Not detected (detection limit in parentheses)
ng = 1.0E-09g
1.38E-01
1.20E+00
3.04E+00
8.23E+00
8.79E+01
7.24E+01
1.73E+02
5.53E-01
1.28E+01
2.27E+01
3.56E+01
1.64E+02
6.93E+01
3.05E+02
minor
2080 operating hours per year
5-31
-------
DIOXINS AT THE OUTLET (A)
W1KI-A
0.9-
O.8-
0.7-
0.8-
0.3-
ft A _
W«^ "
0.3-
0.2-
0.1 -
PCDD = 1 73 ng/dscm at 3% O2
Rn
|
^
I
I
I
1
I
I^V
17"
\
\
i
1
237B TCOD Othw TCOD P«nto-COD H«xo-COO H«pta-COO Octa-COO
za
01
FURANS AT THE OUTLET (A)
. WRI-A
rf** •'—' ' ^r* T'—»^ "T<
2378 TCOF Oth«r TCOF P«ita-COF HI«w-COF H«pta-COF Oete-CDF
223
01
JEU?AN HOMOLOGUE
TZZ& RUN 02
BCD
o«
Figure 5-15. Dioxin/furan homologue distribution
for the wire feed runs at Site WRI-A.
5-32
-------
percent of the total PCDD, respectively. Furan emissions were somewhat more
evenly distributed among the various homologues but the hepta- and
octa-chlorinated homologues were again the predominant species.
Emission factors based on the total incinerator feed rate (i.e., metals
and combustibles) for the afterburner outlet at site WRI-A are shown in
Table 5-10. Average emission factors for 2378-TCDD, total PCDD, and total
PCDF were 0.0002 ug 2378-TCDD emitted per kg total feed; 0.36 ug total PCDD
emitted per kg total feed; and 0.63 ug total PCDF emitted per kg total feed.
Emission factors for the various dioxin and furan homologues varied
considerably between runs.
5.5.2 Wire and Transformer Feed Runs (Runs 03. 04 and 05^
Emission concentrations and emission rate data for the wire and
transformer feed runs are shown in Tables 5-11 and 5-12 for the 2378-TCDD,
total PCDD, and total PCDF species. The data include dioxin and furan
collection in the entire MM5 train, including filter, primary XAD sorbent
trap, impingers, and sample train clean-up rinses.
Average as-measured emissions concentrations of the 2378-TCDD, total
PCDD, and PCDF species were 0.083 ng/dscm 2378-TCDD; 605 ng/dscm total PCDD;
and 715 ng/dscm total .PCDF. When corrected to 3% Qy using the Radian CEM
oxygen concentration data, these values correspond to 0.13 ng/dscm @ 3% 02,
705 ng/dscm @ 3% 02, and 866 ng/dscm 9 3% 02, respectively. Average emission
rates for the three species were 0.08 ug/hr 2378-TCDD, 520 ug/hr total PCDD,
and 630 ug/hr total PCDF. Dioxin/furan emissions were considerable higher for
Run 03 than for Runs 04 and 05. The primary operating difference between
Run 03 and Runs 04 and 05 was that the atmospheric damper was closed for
Run 03 and open for Runs 04 and 05. As noted in Section 5.1, the open/closed
status of the atmospheric damper had a marked effect on the opacity from the
incinerator under the wire and transformer feed conditions. The higher
opacity observed for Run 03 was consistent with the higher THC and
dioxin/furan emissions relative to Runs 04 and 05.
Isomer- and homologue specific emission concentration data are summarized
in Tables 5-13 and 5-14 for the three wire and transformer feed test runs.
Run-specific data tables showing homologue emission concentrations in both
5-33
-------
TABLE 5-10.
DIOXIN/FURAN EMISSION FACTORS FOR SITE WRI-A
(WIRE FEED ONLY)
Dioxin/Furan
Isomer
Dioxin/Furan Emission Factors (ug/kg)
Run 01 Run 02 Run 06
Avg.
DIOXINS
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
Penta-CDD
Hexa-CDD
Hepta-CDD
Octa-CDD
Total PCDD
FURANS
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDF
Total PCDF
NR - Not reports
NR
1.05E-03
NR
6.32E-03
6.50E-02
3.15E-02
1.04E-01
NR
7.94E-03
1.08E-02
. 2.50E-02
9.68E-02
5.51E-02
1.96E-01
2d by Troika. 2378
1
MR
MR
MR
MR
5.49E-02
3.15E-02
8.6I4E-02
NR
2.46E-02
NR
8.11E-03
1.56E-01
7.45E-02
2.63E-01
isomers, if ore
2.83E-04
3.77E-03
6.23E-03
2.69E-02
4.24E-01
3.84E-01
8.45E-01
1.13E-03
4.96E-02
8.10E-02
1.85E-01
. 7.74E-01
3.04E-01
1.39E+00
sent, were mine
2.83E-04
2.41E-03
6.23E-03
1.66E-02
1.81E-01
1.49E-01
3.56E-01
1.13E-03
2.74E-02
4.59E-02
7.26E-02
3.42E-01
1.44E-01
6.33E-01
r
components of total amounts of TCDD's/TCDF's.
ND - not detected (detection limit in parentheses).
ug - 1.0E-06g
2080 operating hours per year j
Note: Emission factors are based on the total feed rate to the incinerator
(i.e., metal and combustibles).
5-^34
-------
TABLE 5-11.
OVERVIEW OF DIOXIN AND FURAN EMISSIONS CONCENTRATION
DATA FOR SITE WRI-A (WIRE AND TRANSFORMER FEED)
Run Number
2378 TCDD
Total PCDD Total PCDF
Emissions Concentration
(as measured), ng/dscm
Run 03
Run 04
Run 05
Average
0.051
NR
0.115
0.083
1610
126
50
605
1450
493
164
715
Emissions Concentration
(corrected to 3% 02), ng/dscm 0 3%
Run 03
Run 04
Run 05
. Average
0.058
NR
0.194
0.126
1830
, 160
83
705
1650
625
276
866
NR = Not reported by Troika. 2378 isomers, if present, were minor components
of total amounts of TCDD's/TCDF's.
5-35
-------
TABLE 5-12. SUMMARY OF DIOXIN AND FURAN EMISSIONS RATE DATA
FOR SITE WRI-A (WIRE AND TRANSFORMER FEED)
Run Number
Run 03
Run 04
Run 05
Average
Dioxin/Furan Emission
2378 TCDD Total PCDD
0.045
NR
0.122
0.084
1400
113
53
522
Rate, ua/hr
Total PCDF
1260
444
174
626
NR - Not reported by Troika. 2378 isomers, if present, were minor components
of total amounts of TCDD's/TCDF's.
5-36
-------
TABLE 5-13.
SUMMARY OF DIOXIN/FURAN EMISSIONS DATA FOR
SITE WRI-A (WIRE AND TRANSFORMER FEED)
(As-measured concentrations)
Dioxin/Furan
Isomer
Isomer Concentration in Flue Gas
(ng/dscm)
Run 03 Run 04 Run 05
Avg.
DIOXINS
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
Penta-CDD
Hexa-CDD
Hepta-CDD
Octa-CDD
Total PCDD
FURANS
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDF
Total PCDF
5.12E-02
2.30E-01
4.27E+00
4.95E+01
3.41E+02
1.21E+03
1.61E+03
4.09E-01
2.59E+01
5.46E+01
1.77E+02
3.86E+02
8.08E+02
1.45E+Q3
NR
1.32E+00
NR
NR
6.19E+01
6.27E+01
1.26E+02
NR
5.42E+01
NR
3.78E+01
2.65E+02
1.37E+02
4.93E+02
1.15E-01
1.53E+00
3.23E+00
5.50E+00
2.07E+01
1.84E+01
4.95E+01
8.07E-01
2.15E+01
1.29E+01
2.10E+01
6.17E+01
4.61E+01
1.64E+02
8.31E-02
1.03E+00
3.75E+00
2.75E+01
1.41E+02
4.32E+02
6.05E+02
6.08E-01
3.39E+01
3.38E+01
7.85E+01
2.38E+02
3.30E+02
7.15E+02
NOTE: Isomer concentrations shown are at as-measured oxygen conditions.
NR = Not reported by Troika. 2378 isomers, if present, were minor
components of total amounts of TCDD's/TCDF's.
NO - Not detected (detection limit in parentheses)
ng = 1.0E-09g
2080 .operating hours per year
5-37
-------
TABLE 5-14.
SUMMARY OF DIOXIN/FURAN EMISSIONS DATA FOR
SITE WRI-A (WIRE AND TRANSFORMER FEED)
(Concentrations corrected to 3% Oxygen)
D1oxin/Furan
Isomer
Isomer Concentration in Flue Gas
(ng/dscm 9 3% oxygen)
Run 03 Run 04 Run 05
Avg.
DIOXINS
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
Penta-CDD
Hexa-CDD
Hepta-CDD
Octa-CDD
Total PCDD
FURANS
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDF
Total PCDF
5.83E-02
2.62E-01
4.87E+00
5.64E+01
3.89E+02
1.38E+03
1.83E+03
4.66E-01
2.95E+01
6.22E+01
2.01E+02
4.40E+02
9.21E+02
1.65E+03
I
NR
1.68E--00
NR
NR
7.85E+01
7.95E+01
1.60E+02
NR
6.86E+01
NR
4.79E401
3.35E+02
1.73E+02
6.25E+02
1.94E-01
2.57E+00
5.43E+00
9.26E+00
3.48E+01
3.10E-I-01
8.32E+01
1.36E+00
3.61E+01
2.17E+01
3-.52E+01
I.04E+02
7.75E+01
2.76E+02
1.26E-01
1.50E+00
5.15E+00
3.28E+01
1.67E+02
4.98E+02
7.05E+02
9.13E-01
4.48E+01
4.20E+01
9.48E+01
2.93E+02
3.90E+02
8.66E+02
NOTE: Isomer concentrations shown are corrected to 3% oxygen.
NR - Not reported by troika. 2378 Isomers, if present, were minor
components of total amounts of TCDD's/TCDF's.
ND « 'Not detected (detection limit in parentheses)
ng - 1.0E-09g
2080 operating hours per year
5-38
-------
ng/dscm and parts-per-trillion units and homologue emission rates in ug/hr
units are included in Appendix D. Figure 5-16 is a histogram that shows the
relative distributions of the 2378-TCDD/TCDF isomers and the tetra- through
octa PCDD/PCDF homologues in the emissions (mole basis). Homologues for which
analytical data were not reported by Troika for Run 04 were assigned zeroes
for their contribution to the total PCDD and PCDF emissions, although these
homologues may actually have been present in the flue gas stream.
The hepta- and octa-chlorinated homologues were the primary dioxin/furan
species present in the samples with smaller but measureable quantities of the
tetra- through hexa species also present. In general, the furan emissions
were more evenly distributed among the various homologues than the dioxin
emissions.
Emission factors for the wire and transformer feed runs are shown in
Table 5-15. Average emission factors for 2378-TCDD, total PCDD, and total
PCDF were 0.0004 ug 2378-TCDD emitted per kg of total feed, 1.4 ug total PCDD
emitted per kg total feed, and 1.8 ug total PCDF emitted per kg total feed,
respectively.
5-5-3 Comparison of Wire-Only Feed vs. Wire and Transformer Feed Runs
Table 5-16 compares the as-measured dioxin and furan concentrations and
emission rates for the wire-only feed runs to the corresponding data for the
wire and transformer feed runs. The data show considerable scatter, and it is
difficult to generalize which feed material had higher emissions. Runs 03,
which showed tha highest emissions of any test run, was a wire and transformer
feed run.
5.6 INCINERATOR FEED PRECURSOR DATA
As discussed in Section 4.3.2, the incinerator feed was sampled at Site
WRI-A. Two representative samples were taken for the 6 runs. One was a
sample of the combustibles from the wire only feed while the second sample
included combustibles from the wire and transformer feed. These samples were
analyzed for chlorinated benzenes, chlorinated biphenyls, and chlorinated
phenols.
5-39
-------
DIOXINS AT THE OUTLET (B)
1
WWI-A
0.9
0.8
0.7
.0.8
0.9-
0.4-
0.3-
0.2-
0.1 -
PCDD = 704ng/dscm at 3% O
J2_
2378 TCOD Oth«r TCOD P«nta-COO H«xo-COD H«pta-CDO Octa-COD
RUN 03 ^0TuNHO£OLCUE ES RUN 08
1
0.9-
0.8-
0.7-
0.6-
0.9-
0.4-
0.3-
0.2-
O.1 -
O
FURANS AT THE OUTLET (B)
WHi-A
PCDF= 866 ng/dscm at 3% O2
xa.
237« TCOr Othw TCOF P«nta-COF Hwa-COF H«pta-cOF Octa-COF
E2I RUN os 2223 RUN ci4 nog RUN os
Figure 5-16.
Dioxin/furan homologue distribution for the
wire and transformer feed runs at Site WRI-A.
5-40
-------
TABLE 5-15.
DIOXIN/FURAN EMISSION FACTORS FOR SITE WRI-A
(WISE AND TRANSFORMER FEED)
Dioxin/Furan
Isomer
Dioxin/Furan Emission Factors (ug/kg)
Run 03 Run 04 Run 05
Avg.
DIOXINS
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
Penta-CDD
Hexa-CDD
Hepta-CDD
Octa-CDD
Total PCDD
FURANS
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDF
Total PCDF
NR = Not reporte
1.16E-04
5.21E-04
9.68E-03
1.12E-01
7.73E-01
2.75E+00
3.65E+00
9.27E-04
5.88E-02
1.24E-01
4.00E-01
8.76E-01
1.83E+00
3.29E+00
id by Troika. 2378
NR
3.28E-03
NR
NRE+00)
1.53E-01
1.55E-01
3.12E-01
NR
1.34E-01
NR
9.38E-02
6.56E-01
3.39E-01
1.22E+00
isomers. if ores
6.31E-04
8.36E-03
1.77E-02
3.01E-02
1.13E-01
1.01E-01
2.71E-01
4.42E-03
1.18E-01
7.07E-02
1.15E-01
3.38E-01
2.52E-01
8.97E-01
ent. werp mi no
3.74E-04
4.05E-03
1.37E-02
7.11E-02
3.47E-01
l.OOE+00
1.44E+00
2.67E-03
1.04E-01
9.74E-02
2.03E-01
6.23E-01
8.07E-01
1.84E+00
r
components of total amounts of TCDD's/TCDF's.
NO » not detected (detection limit in parentheses).
ug - 1.0E-06g
2080 operating hours per year
5-41
-------
TABLE 5-16. SUMMARY OF DIOXIN/FURAN EMISSIONS
DATA FOR ALL RUNS AT SITE WRI-A
(As-measured concentrations)
Run
Number
Feed
Description
2378 TCDD
[ Total PCDD
Total PCDF
Concentration fno/dscm)
01
02
06
Average
03
04
05
Average
Emission
01
02
06
Average
03
04
05
Average
Wire only
Wire only
Wire only
Wire & Transformers
Wire & Transformers
Wire & Transformers
.
Rate fua/hr)
Wire only
Wire only
Wire only
Wire & Transformers
Wire & Transformers
Wire & Transformers
NR
NR
0.093
0.093
0.051
NR
0.115
0.083
NR
NR
0.0003
0.0003
0.0001
NR
0.0006
0.0004
i si
34
277
124
1610
126
50
\ 605
i
I
0.10
0.09
! 0.85
0.35
3.65
0.31
0.27
1.41
96
103
457
225
1450
493
164
715
0.20
0.26
1.39
0.62
3.29
1.22
0.90
1.80
NR - Not reported by Troika. 2378 isomers, if present, were minor components
of total amounts of TCDD's/TCDF's.
5-42
-------
Table 5-17 summarizes the results of the compound-specific precursor
analyses. Significant analytical difficulties were encountered when
performing the analyses. These difficulties are discussed in Section 8.3.2.
A small amount of chlorinated phenols were detected in both samples, but
overall the specific precursors analyzed for (chlorobenzenes, chlorophenols,
and chlorinated biphenyls) were not detected. This suggests that either (1)
the specific precursors analyzed for were not present in the samples, or (2)
the precursors were not easily detected using the 6C/MS procedure. Due to the
nature of the transformer samples, it was originally anticipated that PCB's
would be detected. A total organic halogen (TOX) screen of the samples using
a Hall detector indicated the presence of 201 ug/g TOX in the wire insulation
sample and 23 ug/g TOX in the transformer combustible samples.
Table 5-18 presents the results of incinerator feed total chloride
analysis of transformer combustible samples. The chloride concentration was
not very consistent among the samples analyzed. The average total chloride
content of the samples was 270 ug/g, with a range of 125 to 443 ug/g.
.5.7 'ASH'SAMPLE ANALYSES • -
Tables 5-19 and 5-20 summarize the dioxin/furan analyses performed on
primary chamber ash and settling chamber ash samples, respectively. Total
PCDD content of primary chamber ash samples ranged from 0.2 ppb (Run 05, wire
and transformer feed) to 368.2 ppb (Run 01, wire feed only). Total PCDF
content of primary chamber ash samples were consistently higher than the PCDD
content for all six runs. Total PCDF concentrations ranged from 3.0 ppb
(Run 05, wire and transformer feed) to 1335.6 ppb (Run 06 wire only feed).
Settling chamber ash samples consistently contained higher levels of
dioxin/furan than the corresponding primary chamber ash samples. Total PCDD
concentrations for the settling chamber ash samples ranged from 133.0 ppb
(Run 05, wire and transformer feed) to 2217.9 ppb (Run 06, wire feed only).
Corresponding total PCDF concentrations ranged from 681.9 ppb (Run 03, wire
and transformer feed) to 8332.4 ppb (Run 06, wire only feed.) Overall, for
both the primary chamber ash and the settling chamber ash, samples from the
wire-only runs contained higher levels of dioxin/furan than samples from the
wire and transformers feed runs.
5-43
-------
TABLE 5-17. SUMMARY OF DIOXIN PRECURSOR DATA
FOR SITE WRI-A FEED SAMPLES
Precursor Categories
Total Chlorinated Benzenes
Total Chlorinated Biphenyls
Total Chlorinated Phenols
Total Halogenated Organ ics (TOX)
Precursor Concentration, im/a (™m\
Wire
Insulation
ND
ND
trace
201
Wire and .
Transformer
ND
ND
0.2
20.9, 24.1
Analytical surrogates for the base-neutrals portion of the wire and
transformer sample were not detected. See Section 8.3.2.
ND » not detected.
5-44
-------
TABLE 5-18. TOTAL CHLORIDE ANALYSES OF THE INCINERATOR
FEED SAMPLES FOR SITE WRI-A
Feed Description
Run No.
Total Chloride
Concentration
(ug/g)
Wire only
01
NA
Wire & Transformers
03
04
05
Average
443
125
240
269
NA = not analyzed.
5-45
-------
I
H4
g
w
H
V>
Ut
(71
U
cyi
5 '
2
I
Cu
S
K
o
IH
O
a
i
M
03
C/}
«
w
i
o
X
£
n,
X
1
e/]
Ok
i-l
I
U
n
2*
H
J
C
C
£
^
^
«
L
E
a
J
j
T
04
Jt
e
~4
U
M
14
e
U
1
•
s
g
•i
m
S
Dloxln/Fur
o
1
a
o
i
.
o
o
a
o
1
**,
o
§
K
*•!
a
1
Hoaologu«
CM o Ok o o •* m ao CM -» ui CM m
' IH i-< en i-t e\i en en CM to
•
iH CM CM W> O CM Ckl IN ? ? Q •* \O O
o o o o f< o o o a r* in 1-1 o en
ggggg ;. g g g
Ok eN en N vo in ^ eN i-l o i-t Ok .-i <•
•• o o ••• •« f«« 01 o o OD m o -T oo
«-( Ck| .»
eN oo
O en o •* en «n «» ua cjk «« CA «-• •** en
o ex •« co CM r. •* caenooinoix u>
iH en ff>4 ^4 CM en Ok
A i-l
o oo m i^. o CM en Ok\or>moeN ON
o m CM en o m r» mrxrxok\o« CM
iHen-*eN 1-1 ototeneMen o
en es 01 o en ejk CM aj 01 en oo o •»• eN
o r» 01 •» m o oo ot<-iino rs en •« f-4 o oo
•H t-i m i-i CM en CM Ok
i ?!??!? ! i iMali §
1 a 1 1 S J | 1 1 S 1 i j I s 1
Ol CM O BU m OS O H Ail CM O Pi tS 33 O H
'
o
-4
; O
V
* -o
"3 "e u
o « o
S * *
-4 -1
3 30
* JS z
5-46
-------
1
§t
f-t
M
W
I
M
H
W
^
<
2
1
£l
2
X
M
Q
a
P^
§
M
B
^
I
3
0
C9
z
M
H
H
U
M
O
X
w
o
0)
1
m
"
H
^
J3
(
P
W
<
a
(A
^£
*
4
>•
£
C
a
6
a
c
•V
4J
«
M
C
C
_j
4J
d
4J
c
i
U
0
3
it
a
a
g
B
2
M
2
"e
«4
M
O
a
i
o
o
1
>
o
(^ •
o
N.
O
r-l
O
w
o
<-4
B
en i*. f* o en cn » 9>«eooo4>^ ^
CM * m en 4/1 •» i>» « o •* o en
«-• «M «H CM CM oo
oo
o CM en » o vo en o <« o»
o o •* -» r» o» m IH ei r» r» \o r» «H
eno^Ok en enp«Ok^in GO
CM |H \o m
. ix A S M M S m U2 2!
v*4 c4 m ^| ix g0 ^Q ^j
^o oo ^ MS en c^ CM *o *v 9 «v f-i CM ^o
o en OB *4 o ^ 01 ^ in «H ^4) in Ok CM
<-im
•H d <-l CN m
O C3 O C3 C3 ' ** (k^ C3 h4 ftt C3
OUOOOO U OUQPhQPu O
«l Ufr^CJQOO 04 OlHUOOQ &4
•4 1 H * 1 B 1 ^ Cl 1 M «• 1 it 1 -4
X 00 0 U « 4J K « Ml 00 0 U 01 U « «
o r^ j: e x o. u w M| r« j c x o.
-------
5.8 HC1 TRAIN CHLORIDE EMISSIONS DATA j
i • :
Table 5-21 summarizes HCl train chloride! emissions data measured at the
i
afterburner outlet sampling location. The data are reported as "front-half,"
"back-half," and "train-total" chloride emissions. The front-half emissions
represent chlorides captured in the probe rinse/filter fraction of the HCl
train, which may include metal chlorides contained in the particulate matter;
The back-half emissions represent chlorides captured in the HCl sample train
impingers, which would include HCl and any metal chlorides that pass through
•the sample train filter. The train total emissions represent the sum of the
front-half and back-half emissions.
As shown in Table 5-21, the average as-measured train-total chloride
emissions concentration was approximately 1120 mg/dscm (0.48 grains/dscf) for
the wire-only feed runs while the wire and transformer feed runs averaged
440 mg/dscm (0.19 grains/dscf). Corrected to 3% 02 using the Radian CEM data,
this corresponds to approximately 1190 mg/dscm (0.52 grains/dscf) and
530 mg/dscm (.23 grains/dscf), respectively. The average train-total chloride
mass emission rate for Runs 01, 02, and 06 (wire feed only) was about
1.0 kg/hr (2.2 Ib/hr), while an average of 0.39 kg/hr (0.86 Ib/hr) was emitted
during Runs 03, 04, and 05 (wire and transformer feed).
5-48
-------
«e
i
h-4
o:
2
UJ
r-
CO
„
£
JS
4^^
Q
CO
^j!*
o
CO
CO
t-H
S*
UJ
UJ
o
t— 1
ex
o
«_!
5
z
hH
4^£
Q£
H-
p—
o
CM
un
UJ
_J
r^Tl
^c
1—
CD
0)
IO
u
CD
>
^
Is
•a
CD C
CD 3
a. cr
i_
CD
E,,
0 0
14-
Ul C
C 3
IQ Q£
t.
H
•e
en
i- e
3 3
CX
0>
10
t_
CD
>
«e
§
c
3
cc
> CM
i— O
o e
3
^ Q£
CD
CO
U.
•^0
3 ^
O
e
cr
L.
CD
•P
i
10
u
<0
a.
1-4
en
1-4
r;
1-4
to
m
to
ov
»
a
in
r-
en
Ol
00
i-4
IO
o
en
r-
to
r-
o
S
c
o
•*••
•p
IO
L.
•P -^
e ~o
S E
C 3
Sin
10
co
CD E M-
•o i •—
•^ in 4- C
°8 2
r- T3 L.
IO ^
•P 0)
O E
o en
en ^
to
oo o
co m
i— i
•H
i-t (-.
en P>
S S
—4 O
J£ 2
PM|
to in
in TT
1-1 en
in r-i
in to
Ol CM
—1 CM
in CM
to en
CM 0
f*4
*O lO
CO CM
in co
^mf
10
<4- -P
r- 0
«J H-
X
c
J^£ •*•*
U 19
fl IK
CQ 1—
^,
e -H
t
0
CM
1—
CM
O
CM
OO
o
CD CM
•P tO
IO CM
O
e
0
In
in
"e
UJ
in
in
IO
CD "4-
i- "5
I- X
0 .
1— -p
J= C
°Z 2
•— .e u.
* -x
•P O>
0 J£
1
8 ot
CM en
• •
0 0
CM IO
01 in
0 1-4
o o
Sen
to
O 1-4
C3 C5
co in
• *
o o
-
O CM
O 00
r- o
o *4
in 01
2 CM
9 t
0 0
oo o
en 1-4
r- o
-4 CM
^» to
co <-t
CM t-4
O ^4
O CM
SO
Ov
O O
^^
IO
t- +J
^ 0
10 1-
X
c
^ •»•
U IO
IO t-
OQ 1-
14-
O
U)
•p
CD
CO
c
2
•p
o
x
•p
in
"4-
CD
<—
•P
C
C
o
•r-
4^
U
C
3
14-
IO
E
•o
CD
O
CD
ex
3
in
IO
o
•p
CO c
-M a
o
3 CD
O
-P
a
•p
in .
e
o
•j—
-p
IO
l_
^.J
c
CD
O
C
o
0
c
CD
1
O
II
CM
O
feO
£
CD
j:
X
5-49
-------
-------
6.0 SAMPLING LOCATIONS AND PROCEDURES
Samples were collected from six different locations at Site 06. Two of
the locations were for gaseous sampling, and four were for solids sampling.
The source sampling and analysis matrix in Table 4-1 lists the sample
locations, measured parameters, sampling methods, and analytical methods that
were used.
Details on the sampling locations and methods are discussed in
Sections 6.1 through 6.3 Continuous monitoring procedures for CO, C02, 0?,
NOX, and THC are included in Section 6.1.
6.1 GASEOUS SAMPLING
Four types of gaseous samples were taken during this test program:
Modified Method 5 (MM5), HC1, EPA Method 3, and continuous monitoring (CEM).
The sampling locations and methods are further discussed in this section.
6.1.1. Gaseous Sampling Locations
6.1.1.1 Afterburner Outlet Exhaust Stack. The afterburner outlet
exhaust stack sampling locations are shown collectively as point A in
Figure 4-1. These locations were used for dioxin sampling and HC1 sampling
using MM5 procedures described in Section 6.1.2, and also for CEM sampling.
Gas velocity, molecular weight, and moisture were determined using EPA Methods
1 through 4.
Dimensions of the afterburner outlet exhaust stack sampling locations are
shown in Figure 6-1 along with the temperature monitoring locations. The
stack consists of three 4 ft tal1 • refractory lined 24 inch 00 steel sections
and one 6 ft tall unlined 24 inch 00 steel section. The refractory lining is
3 inches thick and the steel is 1/4 inch thick.
Two 4 inch diameter sampling ports were installed approximately 0.5 duct
diameters below the top of the stack and 3 duct diameters downstream of the
nearest flow disturbance (end of the refractory lined section of the stack).
These ports were used for dioxin sampling using the MM5 procedure described in
Section 6.1.2.1. Based on EPA Method 1, 24 traverse points were required for
velocity determination at this location.
6-1
-------
TOP VIEW, SAMPLE PORTS
CEM- Port C
MM5- Port B
(Side Port)
MM5- Port A
(Front Port)
SIDE VIEW
ATMOSPHERIC DAMPER
6" Open Hole
(Runs 04, 05,
. 06)
A
9" Welded Plate
(Runs 01, 02, 03)
-*6"
-9"—»>
Thermocouple Designations
TCI 3 Primary Chamber
TC2 s Settling Chamber
TC3 3 Afterburner
TC4 s Afterburner Stack
Incinerator
.24".
o
A
ID-
B
TC4
- •
-' X
i
i 18"
15"
•MM5 Sample
Ports
6'
15"
t-
21"
CEM,Sample
Port
4' --
4'
4'
TC3
TC2
57"
Atmospheric
Damper
88"
Grade Level
Figure 6-1. AFTERBURNER OUTLET SAMPLING LOCATIONS
AND TEMPERATURE MONITORING LOCATIONS
6-2
-------
One 4 inch diameter sampling port was installed 1.75 duct diameters below
the MM5 location. This port was used for continuous monitoring of CO, C02,
0?, NO , and THC.
« rt
The center!ine of the atmospheric damper is located approximately
21 inches below the top of the refractory lined section of the stack, which is
about 1.5 duct diameters below the CEM sampling port. The damper consists of
a 9 inch diameter cylindrical piece of unlined duct that extends approximately
6 inches out from the stack. During Runs 01, 02, and 03, the 9 inch diameter
hole at the end of the damper was welded completely shut using a sheet metal
plate. A 6 inch diameter hole was re-opened in the plate prior to Run 04 to
allow additional combustion air to enter the stack. This returned the unit to
its original condition prior to the test program.
6-1-2 Gaseous Sampling Procedures
Gas sampling procedures used during this program are discussed in detail
in the Tier 4 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). A summary of the gas
sampling methods used at Site WRI-A is given in Table 6-1, and a brief
description of each method is provided in the following sections.
6.1.2.1 Modified Method 5 (MM5). Sampling for dioxin/furan was
conducted according to the October 1984 draft of the ASME chlorinated organic
compound sampling protocol. This sampling method is a modified version of EPA
Method 5 that includes a solid sorbent module for trapping vapor phase
organics. The only differences in the sampling protocol which were not
discussed in the Tier 4 QAPP are:
(1) Benzene was substituted for hexane or toluene as both the cleanup
and extractant solvent for both the MM5 filters and the XAD-2 resin.
This was because of a discrepancy between the draft ASME sampling
protocol and the draft ASME analytical protocol. (November 16, 1985)
(2) Methylene chloride was substitued for hexane as the final field
rinse solvent for the MM5 train. Methylene chloride was also
substituted for hexane in the glassware cleaning procedure. This
was due to a high field blank train. (February 27, 1985)
6-3
-------
TABLE 6-1. SUMMARY OF GAS SAMPLING METHODS FOR SITE WRI-A
Sample Location
Sample Type
or Parameter
Sample
Collection Method
Afterburner outlet
exhaust stack
Afterburner Outlet
(Point A on Figure 4-1)
Dioxin
Volumetric flow
Molecular weight
Moisture ;
HC1
j
co, co2, o2, m
and THC monitoring
Modified EPA Method 5
EPA Method 2
EPA Method 3
EPA Method 4
HC1 train
Continuous monitors
6-4
-------
The MM5 sampling train was used to collect samples at the exhaust stack.
A total of six MM5 test runs were conducted, with one test run being conducted
per test day. The MM5 samples were collected isokinetically over a minimum 4
hour on-line sampling period at the afterburner outlet in order to provide a
minimum sample volume of 90 dscf. Complete batch cycles were sampled to the
extent possible, but the variability in batch cycle length and the limited
operating hours of the plant made this difficult. A record of the sampling
periods in relation to the batch feed history of the incinerator was presented
previously in Section 5.1. The MM5 sampling rate ranged from approximately
0.25 dscfm (Run 01) to 0.5 dscfm (Runs 02-06). Following sample recovery, the
various parts of the sample (filter, solvent rinses, sorbent trap, etc.) were
sent to the EPA's Troika laboratories to quantify the 2378-TCDD, tetra-
through octa-dioxin homologues, and tetra- through octa-furan homologues
present in the samples.
A schematic diagram of the MM5 sampling train is shown in Figure 6-2.
Flue gas is pulled from the stack through a nozzle and a glass'probe. Due to
the high stack gas temperatures encountered, a water cooled probe was used at
this test site. Particulate matter is removed from the gas steam by means of
a glass fiber housed in a teflon-sealed glass filter holder maintained at 248
± 25 F. The gas passes through a sorbent trap similar to that illustrated in
Figure 6-3 for removal of organic constituents. The trap consists of separate
sections for cooling the gas stream and for adsorbing the organic compounds on
Amber!ite XAD-2R resin (XAD). A chilled impinger train following the sorbent
trap is used to remove water from the flue gas, and a dry gas meter is used to
measure the sample gas flow.
6.1.2.2 HC1 Determination. HC1 concentrations in the outlet exhaust
stack was determined using another modification of EPA Method 5. The HC1
sample train and operation are identical to those of Method 5 with the
following exceptions:
1. Water in the first two impingers was replaced with 0.1 m NaOH.
2. Sampling was single point isokinetic with the nozzle placed at
points in the stack with approximate average velocity.
3. The moisture/NaOH in the impingers were saved for laboratory
analysis by ion chromatography.
6-5
-------
IT)
•o
o
-------
28/12
Conct«n««r Coll
XAD-2
Trap
28/12
-------
Recovery of the HC1 train provided a sample consisting of three components:
probe rinse, filter, and back-half rinse/impinger catch. These samples and
appropriate sample blanks were sent to Radian's Austin, Texas laboratory for
total chloride analysis via ion chromotagraphy. The filter and probe rinse
for each run were combined and analyzed as the "front-half" total chloride,
and the impinger catch and rinses were analyzed as the "back-half" total
chloride.
6.1.2.3 Volumetric Gas Flow Rate Determination. The volumetric gas flow
rate was determined using EPA Method 2. Based on this method, the volumetric
gas flow rate was determined by measuring the average velocity of the flue gas
and the cross-sectional area of the duct. The average flue gas velocity was
calculated from the average gas velocity pressure (AP) across an S-type pitot
tube, the average flue gas temperature, the wet molecular weight, and the
absolute static pressure.
6.1.2.4 Flue Gas Moisture Determination,; The moisture content of the
flue gas was determined using EPA Method 4. Based on this method, a known
volume of particulate-free gas was pulled through a chilled impinger train.
The quantity of condensed water was determined gravimetrically and then
related to the volume of gas sampled to determine the mositure content.
6.1.2.5 Flue Gas Molecular Weight Determination. The integrated
sampling technique described in EPA Method 3 was used to obtain composite flue
gas-samples for fixed gas (02, C02, N2) analysis. A small diaphragm pump and
a stainless steel probe were used to extract single point flue gas samples.
The samples were collected at the MM5 sampling ports using TedlarR bags.
Moisture was removed from the gas sample by a water-cooled condenser so that
the fixed gas analysis was on a dry basis. !
The composition of the gas sample was determined using a Shimadzu Model
3BT analyzer instead of the Fyrite or Orsat analyzer prescribed in Method 3.
The Shimadzu instrument employs a gas chromatograph and a thermal conductivity
detector to determine the fixed gas composition of the sample.
6.1.2.6 Continuous Monitoring. Continuous monitoring was performed at
the afterburner exhaust sampling location for 02, C02, CO, NO , and THC
throughout the period that dioxin sampling was conducted. The primary intent
of the continuous monitoring effort was to observe fluctuations in flue gas
6-8
-------
parameters and to provide an indication of cbmbustion conditions. Sample
acquisition was accomplished using an in-stack filter probe and TeflonR sample
line connected to a mobile laboratory. The heat-traced sample line was
maintained at a temperature of at least 120°C (250°F) to prevent condensation
in the sample line. The stack gas sample was drawn through the filter and
sample line using pumps located in the mobile laboratory. Sample gas to be
analyzed for CO, C02, 02, and NOX were pumped through a sample gas
conditioner, which consisted of an ice bath and knockout trap. The sample gas
conditioner removes mositure and thus provides a dry gas stream for analysis.
A separate unconditioned gas stream was supplied to the THC analyzer for
analysis on a wet basis.
An Anarad Model 412 nondispersive infrared (NDIR) analyzer was used to
measure CO and C02; a Beckman Model 755 paramagnetic analyzer was used to
measure 02; and a Beckman Model 402 flame ionizatjon analyzer was used to
measure THC.
6.2 SOLID SAMPLING
Four types of solid samples were collected at Site WRI-A: incinerator
.feed, primary chamber ash, settling chamber ash, and soils. The sampling
locations and methods are discussed in this section.
6-2.1 Incinerator Feed Sampling
Representative feed samples were taken from each feed tray processed in
the incinerator during MM5/dioxin sampling. Tray samples taken during each
test run were composited at the end of the run. The composite incinerator
feed samples for Runs 01, 02, and 06 consisted solely of pieces of wire. The
different types of wire on each tray were sampled in visually representative
amounts using a manual wirecutter. The composite incinerator feed samples for
Runs 03, 04, and 05 consisted of pieces of wire and combustible materials
removed from the drained transformer cores.. The transformer combustibles
consisted primarily of paper, wood, and cardboard pieces that were removed
using wire cutters and a saw. Due to the complex construction of the
transformer cores, samples that would be representative on a more quantitative
basis would be very difficult to obtain.
6-9
-------
6.2.2 Incinerator Ash Sampling
Ash samples were obtained from both the primary chamber and the settling
chamber after each run. Primary chamber ash was removed from the floor of the
primary chamber using a cleaned shovel. Settling chamber ash was raked from
the floor of the settling chamber using a flat shovel-like tool. Both ash
samples for each run were obtained in the morning following the test run,
after the incinerator had cooled down from the previous day's operation. A
total of twelve ash samples were submitted to Troika for analysis (2 types of
ash samples for each of 6 test runs).
6.2.3 Soil Sampling •
A single composite soil sample comprised of 10 individual soil samples
was obtained at Site WRI-A. Soil sampling protocol for Tiers 3, 5, 6, and 7
of the National Dioxin Study are specified In the document, "Sampling Guidance
Manual for the National Dioxin Study." A similar protocol was used for soil
sampling at this test site. A total of 10 soil sampling locations were
selected on or near the plant property. The 10 individual soil sampling
locations are shown in Figure 6-4. Soil samples .were collected by forcing a
bulb planter into the soil to a depth of 3 inches. The soil samples were then
composited in a clean stainless steel bucket; A portion of the composite was
placed in a bottle and returned to Radian/ RTF for archiving.
6-10
-------
RMgefteM Road
Material Storage, Office,
Hand Sorting Building
Metal Scrap
Storage
d Settling
Chamber
/—Break
'— Room
Wire Reclamation
Incinerator
Natural .Gae .Line
aturalI Gaa
Meter
Radian Truck
[GEM System)
Radian
Clean-up
Trailer
Metal
Crueller
Driveway Area
Fence
R Tracka
Figure 6-4. Soil Sampling Locations for Site 06
6-11
-------
-------
7.0 ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES
Laboratory procedures used to quantify dioxins/furans and dioxin/furan
precursors in the Tier 4 samples are described in this section. MM5 train
samples were analyzed by EPA's Troika laboratories for dioxin/furan content.
Procedures used for these analyses are described in detail in the Analytical
Procedures and QA Plan for the Analysis of Tetra through Octa CDD's and CDF's
in Samples from Tier 4 Combustion and Incineration Processes (addendum to
EPA/600/3-85-019, April 1985). These procedures are summarized in
Section 7.1.
Combustion device feed samples from Site WRI-A were analyzed by Radian to
determine concentrations of chlorinated phenols (CP), chlorobenzenes (CB),
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), total organic halogen (TOX) and total
chlorine. Procedures used for these analyses are detailed in Section 7.2.
7.1 DIOXINS/FURANS
The analytical- procedures summarized in this section were used-by Troika
for dioxin/furan analysis of MM5 train samples from Site WRI-A. Samples
consisting of organic solvents, aqueous solutions, and solids were prepared
for analysis using slightly different procedures. The organic solvent samples
consisted of rinses from the MM5 probe, nozzle, filter housing and condenser
coil. Aqueous samples consisted of impinger catch solutions, and solid
samples included filters and XAD resin. Isotopically-labeled surrogate
compounds were added to all samples prior to extraction to allow determination
of method efficiency and for quantification purposes.
Organic liquid samples (e.g., acetone and methylene chloride-based MM5
train rinses) were concentrated using a nitrogen blowdown apparatus. The
residue, which contained particulate matter from the MM5 train probe and
nozzle, was combined with the filter and handled as a solid sample. Solid
samples were extracted with benzene in a Soxhlet apparatus for a period of at
least 16 hours. The extract was concentrated by nitrogen blowdown and
subjected to chromatographic cleanup procedures.
Aqueous solutions (e.g., MM5 train impinger samples) were extracted with
hexane by vigorous shaking for a three hour period. This extraction procedure
7-1
-------
was repeated three times, with the organic fractions ultimately being combined
and concentrated for chromatographic cleanup!
The cleanup procedure involved using chromatographic columns to separate
the compounds of interest from other compounds present in the samples. Four
different types of columns were used: a combination acid and base modified
silica gel column, a basic alumina column, a PX-21 carbon/eelite 545 column
and a silica/diol micro column. These were used in successive steps, with the
last two being used only if necessary.
The cleaned samples were analyzed using high resolution gas
chromatography/high resolution mass spectrometry (GC/MS). The conditions for
analysis were as follows:
:
Gas Chromatograph - Injector configured for capillary column, split!ess I
injection, injector temperature 280°C, helium carrier gas at 1.2 ml/min,
initial column temperature 100°C, final column temperature 240°C, interface
temperature 270°C. ;
Mass Spectrometer - Varian/MAT Model 311A, electron energy 70ev, filament
emission 1mA, mass resolution 8000 to 10,000, ion source temperature 270°C.
7.2 DIOXIN/FURAN PRECURSORS
Feed samples for Site WRI-A were analyzed by Radian/RTP for chlorophenols
(CP), chlorobenzenes (CB) and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) by GC/MS, total
organic halides (TOX) by GC/Hall detector and total chlorine-by Parr bomb
combustion followed by ion chromatography. Analytical procedures are
discussed in the following sections.
7.2.1 GC/MS Analyses !
i,
The analytical procedures used for determining CP, CB, and PCB
concentrations in feed samples are modified versions of procedures typically
used for the analysis of MM5 train components. These procedures involve
initial extraction of the sample with an appropriate solvent, preliminary
separation of the compounds of interest by solvent partitioning and liquid
chromatography, and analysis of the processed fractions. Solutions containing
CB and PCB are injected directly into the GC/MS, and solutions containing CP
7-2
-------
are derivatized prior to injection. Details on the procedures used for
Site WRI-A samples are provided in the sections below.
7.2.1.1 Sample Preparation
A flow chart for the sample preparation procedure used for Site ISW-A
feed samples is shown in Figure 7-1. The first step in the procedure involved
adding labeled surrogate compounds to provide a measure of extraction method
efficiency. The next step involved adding a mixture of 0.5 N NaOH and MeCl2
to the sample and sonicating the sample for 30 minutes. The NaOH and MeCl?
mixture converts the acid compounds to their salts and collects base/neutrals
in the organic solvent. The sonicated sample was filtered and rinsed with 0.5
N NaOH. The filtrate was extracted three times in a separatory funnel with
MeCl2 and the aqueous and organic fractions were saved for derivatization
and/or further cleanup. The aqueous fraction (or acids portion) was acidified
to pH 2.0 with HC1 and then extracted three times with MeClg. The MeCl-.from
this extraction was dried with anhydrous Na2S04, exchanged to benzene, and
concentrated using a nitrogen blowdown apparatus. Acetylation of any CP
present in the sample involved the following steps:
1. 2.0 ml .isooctane, 2.0 ml acetonitrile, 50 uL pyridine, and 20 uL
acetic anhydride were added to the extract. The test tube
containing the extract was placed in a 60°C water bath for 15
minutes and was shaken for 30 seconds every 2 minutes.
2. 6.0 ml of 0.01 N H-PO. were added to the test tube, and the sample
was agitated for 2 minutes on a wrist action shaker.
3. The organic layer was removed and the quantitation standard was
added. The sample was concentrated in a Reacti-Vial at room
temperature (using prepurified N,) to 1.0 ml prior to GC/MS
analysis. *
Cleanup of the organic (or base/neutrals) layer from the first MeCK
extraction involved successively washing the extract with concentrated H2S04
and deionized distilled water. The acid or water was added in a 30 ml portion
and the sample was shaken for two minutes. After the aqueous (or acid) and
organic layers were completely separated, the aqueous (or acid) layer was
discarded. The acid washing procedure was repeated until the acid layer was
colorless. The organic fraction from the final wash was dried with anhydrous
7-3
-------
50g Sample
1.0mL Baae/Nautral Surrogataa
t.OmL Acid Surrogate*
Sonicate with 250ml.
0.5 y NaOH and 15mL MeCI2
Filter thru Buchner and
Rlnae with 0.5 N NaOH
Extract 3x with MeCl2
In Separatory Funnel
Aqueoua
Organic
Adjuat to pH2 with HCt;
Extract 3x with MeCI2
Flltar with Na2SO4
Add 10mL Benzene
Concentrate to 1mL
To 1mL Benzene add:
2.0mL loo octane
2.0ml. Aeetonltrlle
50m<. Pyrldlne
20mL Acetic Anlydrlde
Put In 00 C HjO bath
for 15 minutes. Shaking
30 seconds every 2 minutes.
Add 6ml_ of O.O1 N
H3PO4; Shake 2 minutes.
Olacard Aqueous
Olacard All
Acld/H20 Layers
Pre-wet Columin
with 2OmL Hexaiiea
Add Quantltatlon Standards;
Concentrate to 1mL
Add 30mL Cone. H2SOj
Shake 4 mln; Alternate
with 3OmL distilled H2O;
Rapaat until acid la claar.
Fitter with NajSO4
1
Add 1OmL Haxanea;
Concentrate to 1ml.
Chromatography column with:
I.Og Silica
2.0g 33% NaOH Silica
2.0g Silica
Elute with 9OmL Hexanes;
Concentrate to ImL
Mini-column with
1.0g Alumina
Elute with 2OmL 50/50
MeCI2/Hexanes
GC/MS Analysis
Figure 7-1. Sample preparation flow diagram for
Site WRI-A precursor analysis.
7-4
-------
Na2S04, exchanged to hexane and concentrated. Final cleanup of the sample by
column chromatography involved the following procedure.
A glass macro-column, 20 mm o.d. x 230 mm in length, tapered to 6 mm o.d.
on one end was prepared. The column was packed with a plug of si 1 iconized
glass wool, followed successively by 1.0 g silica, 2.0 g silica containing 33%
(w/w) 1 N NaOH, and 2.0 g silica. After wetting the chromatography column
with hexanes, the concentrated extract was quantitatively transferred to the
column and eluted with 90 ml hexanes. The entire eluate was collected and
concentrated to a volume of 1 ml in a centrifuge tube.
A disposable liquid chromatography mini-column was constructed by cutting
off a 5-mL Pyrex disposable pipette at the 2.0 ml mark and packing the lower
portion of the tube with a small plug of silanized glass wool, followed by 1 g
of Woehlm basic alumina. The alumina had been previously activated for at
least 16 hours at 600°C in a muffle furnace and cooled in a desiccator for 30
minutes just before use. The concentrated eluate from above was
quantitatively transferred onto the liquid chromatography column. The
centrifuge tube was rinsed consecutively with two 0.3-ml. portions of a 3
percent MeCl2: hexanes solution, and the rinses were transferred to the liquid
chromatography column. -
The liquid chromatography column was eluted with 20 ml of a 50 percent
(v/v) MeCl2:hexanes solution, and the eluate was concentrated to a volume of
approximately 1 ml by heating the tubes in a water bath while passing a stream
of prepurified NZ over the solutions. The quantitation standard was added and
the final volume was adjusted to 1.0 ml prior to GC/MS analysis.
7.2.1.2 Analysis
Analyses for CP, CB and PCBs present in the feed sample extracts were
performed with a Finnigan Model 5100 mass spectrometer using selected ion
monitoring. A fused silica capillary column was used for chromatographic
separation of the compounds of interest. Analytical conditions for the GC/MS
analysis are shown in Table 7-1.
Tuning of the GC/MS was performed daily as specified in the Tier 4 QA
Project Plan. An internal-standard calibration procedure was used for sample
quantitation. Compounds of interest were calibrated against a fixed
7-5
-------
TABLE 7-1. INSTRUMENT CONDITIONS FOR GC/MS PRECURSOR ANALYSES
Parameter
Chlorobenzenes/
Polychlorinated biphenyls
Chlorophenols
Column
Injector Temperature
Separator Oven Temperature
Column Head Pressure
He flow rate
GC program
Emission Current
Electron Energy
Injection Mode
Mode
30 m WB DB-5 (1.0 u film
thickness) fused silica
capillary
290°C
290°C
9 psi
1 mL/min
40(4)-290°C,
10°/min & hold
0.50 ma
70 ev
290°C
290°C
9 psi
1 mL/min I
40(1)-290°C, ,
12%in & hold
0.50 ma •
i
70 ev
Splitless 0.6 min, then 10:1 split
Electron ionization, Selected Ion
Monitoring
7-6
-------
concentration of either d12-chrysene (for CB, PCB) or dg-naphthalene (for CP).
Components of the calibration solution are shown in Table 7-2. For
multi-point calibrations, this solution was injected at concentrations of 10,
50, 100, and 150 ng/ml. '
Compound identification was confirmed by comparison of chromatographic
retention times and mass spectra of unknowns with retention times and mass
spectra of reference compounds. Since the selected ion monitoring technique
was necessary for the samples analyzed, care was taken to monitor a
sufficiently wide mass region to avoid the potential for reporting false
positives.
The instrument detection limit for the analytes of interest (i.e., CP,
CB, and PCB) was estimated to be approximately 500 pg on column. For a 50 g
sample and 100 percent recovery of the analyte, this corresponds to a feed
sample detection limit of 10 ppb.
7.3 TOX ANALYSIS
Incinerator feed samples were analyzed for total organic halide (TOX) by
short-column GC and a Hall detector (GC/Hall). Solid samples were extracted
with benzene for at least 16 hours in a Soxhlet apparatus. The extracts were
washed three times with 100 ml portions of reagent-grade water concentrated to
10 ml.
An attempt to use a fused silica capillary column to separate surrogates
from target compounds was unsuccessful due to the complexity of the sample
constituents. Determinations for TOX were therefore performed on samples
without surrogates and no measure of extraction efficiency is available.
Instrument conditions are shown in Table 7-3. Sample quantisation was
based on an average response factor developed from a mixture of chlorinated
benzenes and brominated biphenyls. Individual CP, CB, and PCBs were also'
injected at various concentrations to develop a calibration curve for
comparison to the mixture response factors.
7-7
-------
TABLE 7-2. COMPONENTS OF THE CALIBRATION SOLUTION
Base/Neutrals
4-chlorobiphenyl
3,3'-dichlorobiphenyl
2,4',5-trichlorobiphenyl
3,3'4,4'-tetrachlorobiphenyl
2,2',6,6>-tetrachlorobiphenyl
2,2,4,5,6-pentachlorobiphenyl
2,2',4,4',5,5'-hexachlorobiphenyl
2,2',3,4,4',5',6-heptachlorobiphenyl
2,2',3,3',4,4',5,5'-octachlorobiphenyl
2,2',3,3',4,4',5,6,6'-nonachlorobiphenyl
decachlorobi phenyl
p-dichlorobenzene
1,2,4-tri chlorobenzene
1,2,3,5-tetrachlorobenzene
pentachlorobenzene
hexachlorobenzene
d4-l,4-dichlorobenzene (SS)1
3-bromobiphenyl (SS)
2,2',5,5'-tetrabromobiphenyl (SS)
2,2',4,4',6,6'-hexabromobiphenyl (SS)
octachloronaphthalene (QS)2
d10-phenanthrene (QS)
(QS)
Acids
2,5-dichlorophenol
2,3-dichlorophenol
2,6-dichlorophenol
3,5-dichlorophenol
3,4-dichlorophenol
2,3,5-trichlorophenol
2,3,6-trichlorophenol ;
3,4,5-trichlorophenol
2,4,5-trichlorophenol
2,3,4-trichlorophenol
2,3,5,6-tetrachlorophenol
pentachlorophenol i
dg-phenol (SS)
d.-2-chlorophenol (SS)
Cg-pentachlorophenol (SS)
dg-naphthalene (QS)
2,4,6-tribromophenol (QS)
djg-phenanthrene (QS)
d12chrysene (QS)
T
Surrogate standard.
•Quantitation standard.
7-8
-------
TABLE 7-3. ANALYTICAL CONDITIONS FOR TOX ANALYSIS
Hall Detector Conditions
Reactor temperature - 850°C
Solvent - n-propanol
Hydrogen flow rate - 35 mL/min
GC Conditions (Varian 3700^
Injection volume (1 - 5 uL)
Helium carrier gas flow rate - 60 mL/min
Column - 3-ft packed column with 1 in 10% 0V 101
Column temperature - 200°C isothermal
7-9
-------
-------
8.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL (QA/QC)
This section summarizes the results of the quality assurance and quality
control (QA/QC) activities for Site WRI-A. The flue gas dioxin/furan data for
this site were generally outside the QC specifications presented in the Tier 4
QAPP. Run 05 sample was the only run having surrogate recoveries within the
QC limit of 50 to 120 percent for the tetra-chlorinated homologues and 40 to
120 percent for hepta- and octa-CDD's. The results of the analysis of the
fortified laboratory QC sample were all within 50 percent of the true value,
which is within the Tier 4 objective of + 50 percent.
Analytical recovery efficiencies for six isotopically-labeled compounds
used as surrogates for the target precursor analytes in the Site WRI-A feed
samples varied considerably. Several of the recoveries were below the 50
percent QA objective stated in the Tier 4 QAPP. The base neutrals portion of
transformers combustible analyses were unsuccessful.
The following sections summarize the results of Site WRI-A QA/QC
activities. Manual gas sampling methods are considered in Section 8.1 and
continuous emission monitoring and molecular weight determinations are
considered in Section 8.2. The laboratory analysis QA/QC activities are
summarized in Section 8.3.
8.1 MANUAL GAS SAMPLING
Manual gas sampling methods at Site WRI-A included Modified Method 5
(MM5), EPA Methods 1 through 4, and HC1 testing. These methods are discussed
in Section 6.0. Quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) activities for
the manual sampling methods centered around (1) equipment calibration,
(2) glassware precleaning, (3) procedural QC checks and (4) sample custody
procedures. Key activities and QC results in each of these areas are
discussed in this section. Also discussed are problems encountered that may
have affected data quality.
8.1.1 Equipment Calibration and Glassware Preparation
Pre-test calibrations or inspections were conducted on pi tot tubes,
sampling nozzles, temperature sensors and analytical balances. Both pre-test
8-1
-------
and post-test calibrations were performed on the dry gas meters. All of the
field test equipment met the calibration criteria specified in the Tier 4
Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). Differences in the pre-test and
post-test dry gas meter calibrations were less than 2 percent (%)„
An extensive pre-cleaning procedure was used for all sample train
glassware and sample containers. This cleaning procedure, which is outlined
in Table 8-1, was implemented to minimize the potential for sample
contamination with substances that could interfere with the dioxin/furan
analysis. To minimize the potential for contamination in the field, all
sample train glassware was capped with foil prior to use. A sample trailer
was maintained for the specific purpose of sample train assembly and recovery.
8.1.2 Procedural PC Activities/Manual Gas Sampling
Procedural QC activities during the manual gas sampling for dioxin/furan
and HC1 focused on:
visual equipment inspections, ;
utilization of sample train blanks,
ensuring the proper locatioiii and number of traverse
points,
conducting pre-test and post-test sample train leak
checks,
. - maintaining proper temperatures • at the filter housing,
sorbent trap and impinger train,
maintaining isokinetic sampling rates, and ;
recording all data on Preformatted field data sheets. !
Unusual circumstances noted while carrying out the procedural QC activities
are discussed below. -
The first opportunity for a preliminary velocity traverse was on the
first test day. The average stack gas velocity was found to be approximately
1.2 meter/min (4 ft/min), which was lower than expected. Using the largest
available MM5 nozzle size (0.5 inch), the isokinetic gas sampling rate was
approximately 0.007 m3/min (0.25 cfm). In order to maximize the amount of gas
sampled with this low sample flow rate, the testing period for Run 01 was
increased from the usual 4-hour length to the maximum possible length under
the operating schedule constraints of. the plant. In addition, only one port
8-2
-------
TABLE 8-1. GLASSWARE PRECLEANING PROCEDURE
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
NOTE: USE DISPOSABLE GLOVES AND ADEQUATE VENTILATION
1. Soak all glassware in hot soapy water (AlconoxR) 50°C or higher.
Distilled/deionized H20 rinse (X3).a
ChromergeR rinse if glass, otherwise skip to 6.
High purity liquid chromatography grade H20 rinse (X3).
Acetone rinse (X3), (pesticide grade).
Methylene chloride rinse (X3), (pesticide grade).
Cap glassware with clean glass plugs or methylene chloride rinsed
aluminum foils.
l(X3) - three times.
8-3
-------
was traversed for Run 01, which eliminated the hour or more that would have
been necessary to change ports with the water cooled probe assembly. The
resulting on-line test period for Run 01 was 340 minutes long, and a sample
gas volume of 2.5 dscm (89 dscf) was obtained. While this sample gas volume
did not achieve the usual Tier 4 target of 1210 dscf for an outlet location, it
essentially met the Site 06 test plan target of 90 dscf. Following Run 01,
larger sample nozzles were obtained (1.7 cm, or 0.7 inch), which allowed for a
higher isokinetic sampling rate (approximately 0.014 m3/min, or 0.5 cfm).
Test durations for Runs 02-06 ranged from 240 to 300 minutes, and sample gas
collection.volumes ranged from 3.2 dscm (114 dscf) to 3.9 dscm (138 dscf).
Port changes during Runs 02-06 were carried out as originally planned (i;e.,
one port change per test run). •
The first HC1 run also led to sampling changes for successive test runs.
During the first HC1 run a water cooled probe was used, and condensed moisture
was observed running out of the probe and into the filter assembly. A second
HC1 run was performed on the first test day without water cooling and using a
cyclone to collect any condensate prior to the filter. Following these
modifications, moisture was still observed to be condensing out.in the probe
and cyclone, but the situation was improved relative to the first HC1 run.
One HC1 run was performed on each successive test day using the non-water
cooled probe and the cyclone, which resulted in a total of seven HC1 runs.
During the final MM5 leak check of Run 02, the sample train impinger
contents were inadvertently transferred back into the condensate knockout
trap. The XAD trap and filter were visually inspected and found to be
unaffected. During Run 03, a hole occurred in the MM5 sample train filter.
The hole was discovered when black particulate was observed in the condenser
coils. A new filter was installed, and the run proceeded. Runs 04, 05, and
06 were completed without any significant unusual occurrences from a sampling
perspective.
As discussed earlier, plant personnel reported that the incinerator
opacity was higher than normal during Runs 01-03, particularly during Run 03
(the first wire and transformer run). Before starting Run 04 a hole was cut
in the atmospheric damper plate that had been installed just prior to Run 01.
This hole provided additional combustion air downstream of the afterburner and
8-4
-------
resulted in a lengthening of the afterburner flame. Flames were observed
through the MM5 sample port holes and at times out of the top of the stack.
Visual opacity was significantly reduced. As a result,"the hole was left open
during Runs 04 through 06 and the testing was completed without any known
problems.
Results of the average isokinetics calculations for the six MM5 test runs
are shown in Table 8-2. The average isokinetics for Runs 01-04 exceeded the
quality assurance (QA) objective of 100 + 10 percent, but Run 01 was the only
test for which the exceedance was significant (120.5% isokinetics). The
average isokinetics for Runs 05 and 06 were within the QA objective. Based on
the magnitude of the isokinetics values and the high stack gas temperatures
measured, it is felt that the QA exceedances of isokinetics for Runs 01-04 did
not significantly affect the quality of the data.
The two main reasons for the difficulty in achieving the QA isokinetics
objective at Site WRI-A were the variability of stack gas flow rate and
temperature during the test runs. An inclined manometer graduated in
.0.01 inch increments was used to determine the pitot readings, which ranged
from 0.01 to 0.02 inches of water. At a typical stack temperature of 1300°F,
this corresponds to a 40 percent variation in stack gas velocity. Stack
temperatures also showed a high degree of variability, with the maximum
within-run deviation being about 220°C (400°F).
A field blank sample train was used at the MM5 sample location to
determine the background levels of contaminants that might interfere with
dioxin and furan analysis. The glassware in the field blank train had been
used in a previous test run at Site WRI-A and cleaned up according to the ASME
protocol. The field blank train was transported to and assembled at the
sample location. Recovery was performed in the same sequence as for a normal
test run. All solvents used in the recovery of blanks came from the same
containers as for normal test runs. The field blank sample train components
were submitted to Troika for dioxin analysis. A proof train blank consisting
of MM5 sample train recovery components from a train that had not been used in
a previous test run at Site WRI-A was also submitted to Troika for dioxin
analysis.
8-5
-------
TABLE 8-2. SUMMARY OF ISOKINETIC
RESULTS FOR MM5
MM5 Runa
01
02
03
04
05
06
% Isokinetic
120.5
111.3
110.1
111.1
100.2
103.5
Meets QC Objective3
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
aThe quality assurance objective for MM5 sampling was isokinetics of
100+10 percent.
8-6
-------
Initial, final, and port change leak checks for the MM5 and HC1 sample
trains achieved the QA objectives for all of the test runs. None of the
reported sample volumes required correction for sample train leakage. All
leak check data are noted on the MM5 field data sheets.
8.1.3 Sample Custody
Sample custody procedures used during this program emphasized careful
documentation of the samples collected and the use of chain-of-custody records
for samples transported to the laboratory for analysis. Steps taken to
identify and document samples collected included labeling each sample with a
unique alphanumeric code and logging the sample in a master logbook. All
samples shipped to Troika or returned to Radian/RTP were also logged on
chain-of-custody records that.were signed by the field sample custodian upon
shipment and also signed upon receipt at the laboratory. Each sample
container lid was individually sealed to ensure that samples were not tampered
with. No evidence of loss of sample integrity was reported for samples
collected at this site. However, minor leakages were reported by Troika for a
few of the sample bottles.
8.2 CONTINUOUS MONITORING/MOLECULAR WEIGHT DETERMINATION
Flue gas parameters measured continuously at the afterburner outlet
location during Runs 01-05 included CO, C02, 02, total hydrocarbons (THC) and
NOX. During Run 06, THC was the only continuously monitored parameter due to
a malfunction in the sample gas conditioner. The concentrations of 02, CO,
C02, and nitrogen (N2) were also determined for integrated bag samples of the
flue gas. Quality control results for these analyses are discussed in this
section.
Drift check results for the continuously monitored flue gas parameters
are summarized in Table 8-3. Data reduction was performed by assuming a
linear drift of the instrument response over the test day based on drift
checks at the beginning and end of the day. The largest calibration drifts
were observed for the NOX analyzer, which exceeded QC target goals of
+10 percent drift for 3 test runs. The smallest instrument drift was observed-
for the oxygen monitor. A power source disruption occurred on 3/25/85 after
the completion of Run 05 but before the completion of the final calibrations
8-7
-------
e u
M Q
0
^J
10
•P (-
3 -P
OB C
e jo
HH CJ
o
O
'
CD
•P
a
i.
(0
a.
•p
U) C
CD 3
H- CC.
•P CD
0) -H
CD a
H Q
J
01 01 01 01 01 co o) 01 01
CDCDCOCDCDI CDCDCD
i o 1-1 in o co co vp
I O r*» CN CM 1 1 ^ CO
o o o o o o
1 1 1
ao co o co ao CD a» 1-1 o
CM CM CM
CM CM CM
*
•^ ^ "^
>>>>> §.§.§.
CD o. o. a.
XQ fct hO k0 &0 |
ononcomoni ooo
o»oio»<*o> g vo vo
ooo
CM CM CM
01 Ol 01 01 T3 CD 01 01 Ol
CD CO CD CD 1 1 CDCDCD
>->->->-! 1 >->;>•
r*. on CM vo ~o a»
in m t-t »-4 i i cj\ • vo r*
• •••ii •••
o o o o CM «o m
i i
=»>>:»»>• >>>
§.§.§.
oooooo a. o. o.
r-l i-l i-l
in in in
CMCMCMCMCMCM QOQ
oooooo ooo
oooooo ooo
ScScSScScS 8808
o\o<-icMinvo o»o»-4
i-ICMCNCMCMCM r-ICMCM
^^^N>X^X>X ^^.^^
co co oo co on on on on on
,
Ol 01 01 01 O) 01 01 01 Ul
CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD
1
!
1
^3 ^D CO 1 ^™* O^ ^f ^O ^J
o o i-< cnocM--io
II II,
F
I
CM
OlCMO t**inCJ»vOCM O
ooa\vo cMonCMCMonon'
CM CM CM
CM CM CM
!
I
> > > i
§.§.§. >>>>>>
0. 0, 0.
&^ 6^ &^ &^ &^ 6^
ooo oooooo
vo vo vo ononooooonon
ooo
CM CM CN ;
01 XI CD I/I 0) -O CD
CD 1 1 CD CD O O 1 1 '
>- I i >- >» z z . i i :
i
I
1
i
•0 CD
o I I •-< in co <* -o CD i
• 1 1 ••••11
•* r— p* o T i i i
CM r-4
I
>>> >=»>=»> =»
see
(•^ O\ Q\ EkP &g hP ftp NO tjp
O. Q. O. LT> LT» LT> LO LO UO
O O O GO 00 00 QO OO OO
i-4 i-t •-!
in m in ;
CM CM CM CN CM CM
888 888888;
1
•«f m vo •— • CN co ^. m vo1
C3 C3 C3 C3 CO CO CO CO CO
1
m in in m in in m m in
CM in vo c3»OrHCMinvo
CMCMCM ^HCMCMCMCMCN
^x ^« ^^ *^* ^** ^* ^s **s. *^
oo co on on on co on co on
•
*~*
"O
CD
3
C
•^
-P
O
o
*-B*
8-3
-------
•Q
o
c
cS
c
o
•f"
+*
•P c
CO 3
I- a:
•P
CO <0
1- Q
in to ui
->->-
in to
3) ->-
«sf O* O\ CO
I • » • • |
o rn •«*
> > > > >
i. i. i. i. I.
a. o. a. a. a.
O O O O O I
0
o»
crt oo
O i-t IT) T3 (D
•••II
Ul O O> I I
-4 CM CM
III 11
0) ->•>->-
>:>.
O O O
i
i
®0
*-, «i
i2w
0(»
»
52
0
Illli
S
CM
i
SSSSS
CMCMCMCMCSJ
xxxx
555
555
Si
SSS
SSS
o
CNCMCNCNCN
^^V.^-^
mcnonmcn
m m m mm m
3-S
•P
a.
•t—
a>
•p
o
•p
(D
in
O
in
•p
14-
c.
(D
(D
•P
u)
c
u
o
u
Q. O
-p +»
o ®
+J 4* ^- 4-
co
t!8 »
c O O
~ °
,
a.
O
-------
for that day. THC was the only gas for which final calibrations had been
completed. As a result, drift check data for 02, CO, C02, and NO are not
'available for Run 05.
The quality control gases for this program consisted of mid-range
concentration standards different than those used for instrument calibration.
The QC gases were analyzed immediately after calibration each day to provide
data on day-to-day instrument variability. The acceptance criteria for the
analysis of each QC standard was agreement within + 10 percent of the running
mean value. This criteria was met for each of the monitored gases on each
test day for which continuous monitoring was performed. :
Continuous monitoring data for 02, CO, C02, and NOX were not obtained
during Run 06 because the sample gas conditioner had become blocked with
hydrocarbon residue deposited during Runs 01-05. As discussed in
Section 6.1.2.6, these instruments require a dry gas stream for analysis.
Continuous monitoring data for THC were still collected during Run 06 because
this instrument operates with a wet gas stream with no need for the gas
conditioner. Integrated bag samples analyzed using the Shimadzu gas
chromatograph were used to develop mean concentration data for 02, CO, and C02
during Run 06. The bag samples were taken during consecutive 30 minute
intervals. Quality control for the bag sample analysis involved duplicate
analyses of calibration gases immediately before and after sample analysis.
Analysis of the calibration gases was repeated until two consecutive analyses
within + 5 percent were obtained. This same criteria of + 5 percent applied
to duplicate analyses' required for sample quantification. These criteria were
met for all molecular weight determinations. The continuously monitored THC
data were then averaged over the time period that coincided with the bag
samples (30 minute periods) to provide mean THC concentration values at the
coincidental 02, CO and C02 data points.
For Runs 01-05 the flue gas molecular weight was calculated using the
average 02 and C02 values as determined by the continuous monitors. The
continuous monitoring data were used instead of the integrated bag sample data
generated using the gas chromatograph because the CEM data were considered
more reliable for this test site. For Run 06 the flue gas molecular weight
was calculated using the bag sample data because there were no CEM data
available for that run.
8-10
-------
8.3 LABORATORY ANALYSES
QA/QC activities were carried out for dioxin/furan, precursor, and total
chloride analyses performed on Site WRI-A samples. The dioxin/furan analyses
of MM5 train samples performed by Troika are considered in Section 8.3.1; the
precursor analyses of wire recovery incinerator feed samples performed by
Radtan/RTP are considered in Section 8.3.2; and the total chloride analyses
of HC1 train samples performed by Radian/Austin are considered in
Section 8.3.3.
8.3.1 Dioxin/Furan Analyses
Two individual topics related to the dioxin/furan analyses at Site WRI-A
are discussed in this section. Analytical recoveries of labeled surrogate
compounds spiked onto MM5 train samples are reported in Section 8.3.1.1.
Sample blank data are reported in Section 8.3.1.2.
8.3.1.1 Surrogate Recoveries of Test Samples
Table 8-4 presents the analytical recovery data reported by Troika for
four isotopically labeled, surrogate compounds spiked onto the MM5 train
samples. Samples from Runs 03 and 06, which were the first MM5 samples
analyzed, were analyzed in three separate parts. Part A was the liquid
portion from the MM5 sample train, while part B was particulate recovered from
the liquid portion. Part C was the XAD-2 and particulate filter sample. In
general, surrogate recoveries for MM5 samples from Site WRI-A were outside the
Tier 4 target ranges of 50-120 percent for the tetra-chlorinated homologues
and 40-120 percent for the hepta- and octa-chlorinated homologues. Run 05
(wire and transformer feed) was the only test run for which analytical
recoveries for all surrogates were within the Tier 4 target ranges.
Surrogate recoveries could not be determined or were outside of the
Tier 4 quality assurance ranges for the MM5 samples because of the relatively
large quantities of native COD and CDF species present in the samples. Since
no measure of extraction method efficiency is available for all of the MM5
samples, it should be noted that the reported analytical results for native
compounds may actually represent lower bounds on the true values.
8.3.1.2 Sample Blanks
Table 8-5 summarizes the analytical results reported by Troika for
internal laboratory blanks, laboratory fortified quality control (QC) samples,
8-11
-------
TABLE 8-4. PERCENT SURROGATE RECOVERIES FOR
SITE WRI-A DIOXIN/FURAN ANALYSES
Samp] e
MM5 Train Samples
Wire Feed Only
Run 01
Run 02
Run 06A
06B
06C
37C1
U4
TCDD
13
10
0
NS-
NR
13C
C12
TCDD
80
36
NS
66
NR
37C1
U4
Hepta-CDD
0
0
0.2
NS
NR
13C
L12
Octa-CDD
18
11 ;
NS
81
NR
Wire and Transformer Feed
Run 03A
Run 03 B
Run 03C
Run 04
. Run 05
NR » Not reported by
NOTE: Runs 03 and 06
0
NS
NS
5
92
Troika
were analyze
NS
76
54
76
96 j
id in three difft
0
NS
NS
20
53
jrent Darts. Th
NS ;
115
10
4
61
PV aro
NS
~* - ^ ^ •—• •— ••• w • • • •** w i* f • iwiwiiw hs u 1 w w • III C V did
segregated as follows:
A - Liquid portion
B - Particulate from liquid portion
C - XAD-2 and filter
Surrogate species was not spiked onto this portion of the MM5 train.
3-12
-------
V)
UJ
1
8
1—
Q
t-
g
d
1
V)
1—
_ J
CO
or
CO
t— 1
CO
«c
z
in
I
00
UJ
m
1—
in
0
"o
E
re
en
"o
•p
c
c
U
^_
"fl
o
in
^^
U
o
•p ^
a c
I- 10
O •—
i
«•«
CD
C
1C
IT
E
£
c
1C
•a
rn '-ooO'-m
CMOomoo^ — * Q m ir> co ~*
•O-ZZIO^CM ^rzeo
aaaoao oaoaoo -o
ZZZZZQ. zzzzzz o
01
03
•p
re
^. ^.^-, „ ^-~«^.£
O ^ ^^vOCMCft O^~OO*OG* *-
inoom^cri inoinin^r^ 3
,1. *~ *~ i «L ,L i "* i i i J. *"
^.^^^^^ «^^«««^
^rzzO ^
«C < < <
or v or o>
or 10 or <-i
z oo z r-
o
8 §
IO 1
a a +j 10
»r CM TT CM
o o*"1 o o"1
r» en r- m
in
CD
"o. ••
10 3
in .—
IO
CJ
(D
•O 3
CD 1-
— O
t 5
O
H- t9
C
>, n)
0 T3
+> CD
10 I-
I- 3
o in
JQ (O
o
•M -M
o c
-p a>
C CO
••- »
•p
•D - II.
a a. 3
in CD » i >4-
•P J= O O
C -P CO N N
33 C C
S — H 3 . J3 J3
U) 1 H3 -X "0 -O
CD •«- > —
JC U) 03 O "O "O
+j CD 3 a> t. o o
J= I— 3 H- P -P
•p -P re 1- .TJ 10
e c > I- >, . e c
OJ (D j3 03 — ' •»-
in i- -a .i—i-i.
OJ IO 03 ^ ^) ^ O O
u a. u co co 10 — i—
Q. = -P 4-> O J= Si
2C If 1- U — O O
i- re O Z Z Z II II
03 3 II II II O U-
3 i— C Q
t- 10 or Q «e o o
I— :>• z z z i— h-
IO J3
8-13
-------
and field recovery blank MM5 train samples. Samples from all test runs were
not analyzed at'the same time. Therefore there were different internal
laboratory blank and laboratory fortified QC samples for Runs 03 and 06 than
for Runs 01, 02, 03 and 04. In general, the surrogate recoveries for the
blank samples were within acceptable limits with values ranging from 46 to 106
percent. Comparison of the measured and spiked values for the laboratory
fortified QC samples showed agreement to within + 50 percent for all target
species except the hexa-CDD isomer. The measured value for the hexa-CDD
isomer was approximately 56 percent lower than the spiked value.
Small but detectable quantities of several dioxin and furan species were
found in the field blank MM5 train. Table 61-6 gives a comparison of the
dioxin/furan analytical results for the field blank MM5 train and the test run
MM5 trains. The only species which showed any sign of a blanking problem!was
"other TCDD" where the blank was 22 percent of the minimum test run value..
Most field blank values were less than one percent of the minimum test run
value. Overall, the field clean-up procedures were found to be adequate for
this test site. Emissions.data reported in Section 5.4 are not blank-corrected.
8.3.2 Precursor Analyses I
Table 8-7 presents analytical recovery efficiencies for six isotopically
labeled compounds used as surrogates for the target precursor analytes in the
Site WRI-A feed samples. Several of the recoveries are below the 50 percent
objective stated in the Tier 4 QA Project Plan and are below those generally
considered achievable when analyzing.for similar compounds in water or in MM5
train components. Recoveries of d^-dichlorobenzene, bromobiphenyl, and 2', 5,
5'tetra bromobiphenyl for the transformer combustible samples were negligible.
This indicates that the base-neutrals portion of the transformer combustibles
analyses was unsuccessful. Thus, it can be concluded that neither '
chlorobenzenes or PCB's were successfully analyzed for in these samples.
8.3.3 Total Chloride Analysis '.
Total chloride analyses were performed by Radian/Austin on the HC1 train
samples. QA/QC activities include total chloride analysis of field recovery
blank HC1 train samples and total chloride analysis-of an aliquot of the NaOH
solution used in the sample train impingers. Chlorides were detected in the
field recovery blank sample trains. The front-half of the train contained
8-14
-------
TABLE 8-6. FIELD BLANK DIOXIN/FURAN DATA FOR SITE WRI-A MM5 SAMPLES
Isomer/
Homo] ogue
Dioxins
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
Penta CDD
Hexa CDD
Hepta CDD
Octa CDD
Furans
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF,
Penta CDF
Hexa CDF
Hepta CDF
Octa CDF
Amount
Field Blank
Value
ND
0.2
ND
ND
0.2
0.5
ND
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.5
0.4
Detected, Nanoarams
Minimum Test
Run Value
ND
0.9
ND
7.8
70.3
38.8
ND
9.8.
13.3
10.4
119.4
68.0
oer Train
Percentage3
0
22
0
0
0.3
1.0
0
2.0
1.5
3.8
0.4
0.7
Percentage shown is the ratio of the field blank value to the minimum test
run value,.expressed as a percentage.
8-15
-------
TABLE 8-7. PERCENT SURROGATE RECOVERIES FOR SITE WRI-A FEED SAMPLES
Surrogate
Compound
d^-di chl orobenzene
bromobiphenyl
2', 5, 5' tetra
bromobiphenyl
dg-phenol
d4-2-chlorophenol
Cg-pentachl orophenol
Percent Surroaate Recovery
Wire Transformer
Insulation Combustibles
7 NDa
133
50
52
80
76
NO
NO
29
41
64
The base neutrals fractions of this sample could not be analyzed
successfully by GC/MS; the sample was analyzed for total organic
halogen and a chromatographic profile was obtained by gas chroma-
tography using electron capture detection.
8-16
-------
21 mg CL~/"Hter of sample while the back-half of the blank sample train
contained only 1 mg Cl"/liter of sample. The reported concentration and
emission rates are corrected by these blank values. Chlorides were not
detected in the blank NaOH aliquot.
8-17
-------
-------
. APPENDIX A
FIELD SAMPLING DATA
A-l
-------
-------
APPENDIX A-l
MODIFIED METHOD 5 AND
EPA METHODS 1-4 FIELD RESULTS
A-3
-------
-------
RADIAN SOURCE
EPA METHOD 2-5
(RAW DATA)
PLANT SITE 06-
ATLANTA
TEST
PLANT SITE
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST #
DATE
TEST PERIOD
, GA.
INCINERATOR OUTLET
06-MM5-01
03/19/1985
1105-1645 (SINGLE PORT TRAVERSE)
PARAMETER
VALUE
Sampling time (min.)
Barometric Pressure (in.Hg)
Sampling nozzle diameter (in.)
Meter Volume (cu.ft.)
Meter Pressure (in.H20)
Meter Temperature (F)
Stack dimension (sq.in.)
Stack Static Pressure (in.H20)
Stack Moisture Collected (gm)
Absolute stack pressuredn Hg)
Average stack temperature (F)
Percent C02
Percent 02
Percent N2
Delps Subroutine result
DGM Factor
Pitot Constant
340
29.48
.497
91.26999
.226
76.2
452.3904
-.01
323.33
29.47926
1263
11.8
4.4
83 .8
4.1915
1.004
.84
A-5
-------
RAD
EPA
FINAL
PLANT
PLANT SITE
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST f
DATE
TEST PERIOD
IAN SOURCE T
METHODS 2-5
R E -S
E S T
U L T S
SITE 0'6
ATLANTA , GA.
INCINERATOR OUTLET :
06-MM5-01
03/19/1985
1105-1645 (SINGLE PORT TRAVERSE)
PARAMETER
RESULT
Vm(dscf)
Vm(dscm)
Vw gas(sicf)
Vw gas (scm)
Z moisture
Md
MWd
MW
Vs(fpm)
Vs (mpm)
Flow(acfm)
Flow(acram)
Flow(dscfm)
Flow(dscmm)
Z I
Z EA
88.95685
2.519258
15.24501
.4317387
14.63027
.8536974
30.064
28.29901
625.2756
190.6328
1964.366
55.63084
506.3257
14.33914
120.5693
24.82622
Program Revis ion : 1/.16/
A-6
-------
RADIAN SOURCE
EPA METHOD 2 -
( R A W DATA)
PLANT SITE 06
PLANT SITE ATLANTA
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST #
DATE
TEST' PERIOD
TEST
, GA.
INCINERATOR OUTLET
06-MM5-02
3/20/85
1055-1255 / 1400-1600
PARAMETER
VALUE
Sampling time (min.) 240
Barometric Pressure (in.Hg) 29.5
Sampling nozzle diameter (in.) .685
Meter Volume (cu.ft.) 120.638
Meter Pressure (in.H20) .836
Meter Temperature (F) 86.8
Stack dimension (sq.in.) 452.3904
Stack Static Pressure (in.H20) -.01
Stack Moisture Collected (gm) 405.5
Absolute stack pressure(in Hg) 29.49927
Average stack temperature (F) 1303.041
Percent C02 . 13.9 •
Percent 02 3.7
Percent N2 82.4
Delps Subroutine result 4.500948
DGM Factor 1.004
Pitot Constant .84
A-7
-------
RADIAN SOURCE
EPA METHODS 2
FINAL RESULTS
PLANT SITE 06
PLANT SITE
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST #
DATE . .
TEST PERIOD
TEST
- 5
ATLANTA , GA.
INCINERATOR OUTLET
06-MM5-02
3/20/85
1055-1255 / 1400-1600
PARAMETER
RESULT
Vm(dscf)
Vm(dscm)
Vw gas(acf)
Vw gas (scm)
Z moisture
Md
MWd
MW
Vs(fpm)
Vs (mpm)
Flow(acfm)
Flow(acmm) '
Flow(dscfm)
Flow(dscmm)
Z I
% EA
115.5547
3.27251
19.11933
.5414593
14.19674
.8580326
30.372
28.61558
667.4871
203.5022
20-96 .-97 8
59.3864
531.2741
15.04568
111.3155
20.49453
Program Revis ion : I/ 16/ B\
A-3
-------
RADIAN SOURCE
EPA METHOD 2 -
( R A W DATA)
PLANT
PLANT SITE
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST #
DATE
TEST PERIOD
TEST
SITE 06
ATLANTA , GA.
INCINERATOR OUTLET
06-MM5-03
03/21/85
1000-1230 / 1320-1350 / 1430-1545 / 1610-1655
PARAMETER
VALUE
Sampling time (min.) 300
Barometric Pressure (in.Hg) 29.05
Sampling nozzle diameter (in.) .685
Meter Volume (cu.ft.) 142.2241
Meter Pressure (in.H20) .7423331
Meter Temperature (F) 71.63
Stack dimension (sq.in.) 452.3904
Stack Static Pressure (in.H20) -.01
Stack Moisture Collected (gm) 514.5301
Absolute stack pressure(in Hg) 29.04926
Average stack temperature (F) 1179.92
Percent C02 12.3
Percent 02 5.2
Percent N2 82.5
Delps Subroutine result 4.09
DGM Factor 1.004
Pitot Constant .84
A-9
-------
RADIAN SOURCE
EPA METHODS 2
FINAL RESULTS
PLANT
PLANT SITE
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST #
DATE
TEST PERIOD
TEST
- 5
SITE 06
ATLANTA , GA.
INCINERATOR OUTLET
06-MM5-03
03/21/85
1000-1230 / 1320-1350 / 1430-1545 / 1610-1655
PARAMETER
RESULT
Vm(dscf)
Vm(dscm)
Vw gas(scf)
7w gas (acm)
% moisture
Md
MWd
MW
Vs(fpm)
Vs (mpm)
Flow(acfm)
Flow(acmm)
Flow(dscfm)
Flow(dacmm)
Z I
% EA
137.953
3.906829
24.26009
.6870458
14.9557
.8504431
30.176
28.355
614.0261
187.2031
1929t.024
54.62997
512.8233
14.52315
110.1387
31.36309
Program Revision:I/16/
A-10
-------
R A D I A
EPA
(RAW
PLANT
PLANT SITE
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST #
DATE
TEST PERIOD
N SOURCE TEST
METHOD 2-5
DATA)
SITE 06
ATLANTA , GA.
INCINERATOR OUTLET
06-MM5-04
03/22/85 -
1152-1352 / 1500-1700
PARAMETER VALUE
Sampling time (min.) 240
Barometric Pressure (in.Hg) 28.95
Sampling nozzle diameter (in.) .685
Meter Volume (cu.ft.) 118.497
Meter Pressure (in.H20) .8164583
Meter Temperature (F) 70.07
Stack dimension (sq.in.) 452.3904
Stack Static Pressure (in.H20) -.01
Stack Moisture Collected (gm) 422.5
Absolute stack pressure(in Hg) 28.94927
Average stack temperature (F) 1232.917.
Percent C02 10.2
Percent 02 6.8
Percent N2 83
Delps Subroutine result 4.339637
DGM Factor 1 .004
Pitot Constant .84
A-ll
-------
RADIAN SOURCE
EPA METHODS 2
FINAL RESULTS
PLANT SITE 06
PLANT SITE
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST #
DATE
TEST PERIOD
TEST
- 5
ATLANTA , GA.
INCINERATOR OUTLET
06-MM5-04
03/22/85
1152-1352 / 1500-1700
PARAMETER
RESULT
Vm(dscf)
Vm(dscm)
Vw gas(scf)
Vw gas (scm)
Z moisture
Md
MWd
MW
Vs(fpm)
Vs (mpm)
Flow(acfm)
Flow(acmm)
Flow(dscfm)
Flow(dscmm)
Z I
% EA
114.9022
3.254031
19.92088
.5641591
14.77557
.8522443
29.904
28.14512
655.057
199.7125
2057.927
58.28049
529.2591
14.98862
111.1083
44.99736
Program Revision:I/16/8J
A-12
-------
RADIAN SOURCE
EPA METHOD 2-
(RAW DATA)
PLANT SITE 06
PLANT SITE ATLANTA
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST #
DATE
TEST PERIOD
TEST
, GA.
INCINERATOR OUTLET
06-MM5-05
03/25/1985
1105-1305 / 1430-1630
PARAMETER
VALUE
Sampling time (min.)
Barometric Pressure (in.Hg)
Sampling nozzle diameter (in.)
Meter Volume (cu.ft.)
Meter Pressure (in.H20)
Meter Temperature (F)
Stack dimension (sq.in.)
Stack Static Pressure (in.H20)
Stack Moisture Collected (gm)
Absolute stack pressureCin Eg)
Average stack temperature (F)
Percent C02
Percent 02
Percent N2
Delps Subroutine result
DGM Factor
Pitot Constant
240
29.55
.685
126.178
.942
81.03
452.3904
-.01
366.8
29.54926
1204.04
9.2
10.3
80.5
4.8709
1.004
.84
A-13
-------
RADIAN SOURCE
EPA METHODS 2
FINAL RESULT.!}
PLANT SITE 06
PLANT SITE
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST #
DATE
TEST PERIOD
TEST
- 5
ATLANTA , GA.
INCINERATOR OUTLET
06-MM5-05
03/25/1985
1105-1305 / 1430-1630
PARAMETER
RESULT
Vm(dacf)
Vm(dscm)
Vv gas(scf)
Vw gas (scm)
Z mo i s t ur e
Md
MWd
MW
Vs(fpm)
Vs (mpm)
Flow(acfm)
Flow(acmm)
Flow(dscfm)
Flow(dscmm)
Z I
Z EA
122.3891
3.466058
17.29462
.4897837
12.38128
.8761872
29.884
28.41261
724.3131
220.8272
2275.502
64.44223
624.7833
17.69386
100.2536
94.04676
Program Revision:I/16/
A-14
-------
RADIAN SOURCE
EPA METHOD 2 -
(RAW DATA)
PLANT
PLANT SITE
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST #
DATE
TEST PERIOD -
TEST
SITE 06
ATLANTA , GA.
INCINERATOR OUTLET
06-MM5-06
03/26/1985
1220-1420 / 1455-1655
PARAMETER
VALUE
Sampling time (min.)
Barometric Pressure (in.Hg)
Sampling nozzle diameter (in.)
Meter Volume (cu.ft.)
Meter Pressure (in.H20)
Meter Temperature (F)
Stack dimension (sq.in.)
Stack Static Pressure (in.H20)
Stack Moisture Collected (gm)
Absolute stack pressuredn Hg)
Average stack temperature (F)
Percent C02
Percent 02
Percent N2
Delps Subroutine result
DGM Factor
Pitot Constant
240
29.51
.685
119.283
.791
87.16001
452.3904
-.01
316.2
29.50927
1308
7.7
8.899999
83.4
4.6224
1.004
.84
A-15
-------
RADIAN S 0 0 R C I! TEST
EPA METHODS 2-5
FINAL RESULTS
PLANT SITE 06
ATLANTA , GA.
INCINERATOR OUTLET
06-MM5--06
03/26/1985
PLANT SITE
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST #
DATE
TEST PERIOD
1220-1420 / 1455-1655
PARAMETER
RESULT
Vm(dscf)
Vm(dscm)
Vy gas(scf)
Vw gas (scm)
Z moisture
Md
MWd
MW
Vs(fpm)
Vs (rapm)
Flow(acfm)
Flow(acmm)
Flow(dscfm)
Flow(dscmm)
% I
% EA
114.2075
3.234356
14.90883
.4222181
11.54682
.8845318
29.588
28.24996
689.8033
210.3059
2167.086
61.37187
564.5963
15.98937
103.5245
67.84776
Program Revision:I/16/
A-15
-------
APPENDIX A-2
CONTINUOUS EMISSION MONITORING RESULTS
A-17
-------
-------
CEMS DATA - SITE 06 - TEST 1
#»
»#
#»
»»
**
»*
»#
»*
*»
*»
*
*
*
*
*
•*
»
*
»
*>•»
•»
**
»»
»*
»»
»*
»*
#»
»»
*•»
**
»»
»»
»*
#*
»*
»»
»»
*»
»»
»»
»»
»»
**
»»
*»
»
*
*
*
»
»
+
»»
*•
»*
*#
*»
*»
NO. PTS.
MEAN
STD. DEV
FACTOR
FOR 37. 02
NORMALIZATION
OF
OTHER PROCESS
GASES
1 . 0932
0.9734
0. 9968
0.9710
a. 9717
1 . 0309
0. 9841
0. 3961
1 . 0336
1 . 1022
1 . 0845
1.1033
1 . 1592
1.4011
1 . 4946
I . 6342
1.8516
I . 0463
0. 9338
1.0175
1 . 0065
1 . 3064
0. 9654
0. 9842
I . 0569
1.0771
0. 9787
0. 9571
0. 9936
0.9883
' 1.0109
1.0174
1.2617
1.8960
1 . 5200
1 . 0026
0. 9675
1.0157
1 . 0354
a. 9682
0.9136
0. 9830
0. 9791
0. 9875
a. 9866
0. 9882
1 . 0033
1 . 0473
1.3021
1 . 6809
1.9193
"1 . 1844
1.1785
t . 2273
54
I. 1276
0.3
*•»
*•»
**
»*
»*
M
»#
»*
if*
»»
*
»
»
*
*
»
»»
»»
»*
•»»
»»
**
»*
»*
»»
**
»»
»»
»•*
»»
»»
»«
»»
»'»
»»
*»
»»
•»•»
»*
**
»*
»»
»*
»»
»»
**
**
*•»
*•»
**
' »*
»*
*•»
*
*
»
*
*
*
NORMALIZED / CORRECTED DATA
TIME 02 CO C02
1120
1123
1130
11 "3
1140
1143
lisa
1133
1200
1205
1210
1213
1220
1223
1230
1233
1240
1245
1250
1253
1300
1305
1310
1315
1320
1323
1330
1333
1340
1345
1330
1333
1400
1403
1410
1413
1420
1423
1430
1433
1440
1443
1430
1453
1300
1303
1510
1313
1329
1323
1339
1333
1340
1343
NO. PTS.
MEAN
STD. DEV.
(V.V)
4.5
2.5
2.9
2.S
2.5
3.3
2.7
0.9
3.6
4.7
4.4
4.7
3.5
8.1
8.9
9.9
11.2
3.8
2.1
3.3
3.1
3.1
2.4
2.7
4.0
4.3
2.6
2.2
2.9
2.8
3.2
3.3
6.7
11.3
9.1
3.0
2.4
3.3
3.6
2.4
1.3
2.7
2.6
2.8
2.8
2.8
3.1
3.3
7.2
10.3
11.6
3.8
3.7
6.3
34
4.4
2.7
(PPMV)
9 37. 02
3914.1
6042.6
6188.7
6029.7
6033.3
6404.4
6114.9
4724.0
430. 3
148.3
231.4
387.6
119.3
132.2
109.2
116.8
109.6
3477.4
5939. 2
6337.2
6269.8
6250.6
6016. 1
1523.2
109.6
94.3
2277.3
3270.7
6198.7
6168.1
6308.7
1347.0
79.6
91.7
622.2
4431.2
2248. 1
133.7
348.7
2109.3
5074.8
6147.2
6123.9
6177.7
6173.1
6184.2
6279.3
693.0
111.8
112.6
97.3
2447. 1
7384.9
7322.3
34
3363.3
2751.1
(XV)
a 3V. 02
12.6
13.3
13.3
13. 1
13.2
14.6
14. 1
11.0
11. 1
11.0
11.7
11.5
11.4
11.1
11.6
11.7
11.5
11.8
14.0
15.3
15.3
14.7
12.6
11.3
11.8
11.7
11.9
11.9
14.9
13.1
14.7
11.2
11.1
11.0
12.0
11.8
11. 9
11.6
11.7
11.7
12.2
15.1
14.3
14.9
14.6
14.6
14.7
11.1
11.0
10.9
11.1
12.3-
17.3
14.4
34
12.7
1.6
- WITH ACTUAL 02 »
NOX THC
3 37. O2
61.7
37.3
37.0
33.1
34.7
43.4
33.6
7.3
60.0
76.7
74.1
69.2
79.1
96.3
113.4
129.1
103.5
34.3
80.9
113.4
103.4
103.3
97.0
51.3
52.5
61.3
66.2
79.6
107.8
102.5
103.8
60.9
88.2
173.7
87.9
59.7
48.2
30.7
54.8
60.1
63.6
88.0
33.9
40.8
73.4
47.8
63.4
63.1
100.6
• 120.6
198.4
72.8
133.0
99.1
54
77.4
34.6
-------
GEMS DATA - SITE 06 - TEST 2
»» FACTOR
•» FOR 37. 02
•* NORMALIZATION
•• OF
•• OTHER PROCESS
*•
••
**
«*
•*
«•
**
«»
»*
*»
»*
#»
**
»•
»*
»*
»*
«*
*«
»»
*»
••
**
•#*
•»
•»
•»
*»
••
«»
*»
4H»
*»
«Hfr
•*
••
*»
**
*•
••
«*
«*
•*
•»
*•
«*
•*
»»
»»
**
*»
»*
»•
••
<*»
»*
*•
NO. PTS.
MEAN
STD. DEV.
GASES
0.9B4O
O.9466
0.9176
1 . 0049
O. 9302
.0631
.2710
.4743
.6744
.8820
.6649
.0263
0.3923
O.9O9Q
0.9912
0.9271
0. 9730
1.0023
O. 8783
0. 9323
0.9433
O. 8838
0.9317
1.1362
1.3893
1.9301
0.9773
0. 9732
0.9743
0.9726
0.9740
a. 9487
a. 931 7
0.9714
0.8716
0.9123
1.1379
1.2033
1.3479
1.3976
O.9S10
0.9743
0.9615
0.8870
0.9981
0.9761
0.9738
0.9738
0.9930
0.9734
O.9473
1.0372
1.1893
1.3223
1.3937
1.4530
1.1437
0.8939
0.9468
0.9827
O. 9733
0. 9848
0.9970
0. 9838
1.0413
O.9779
0.9799
67
1.0797
0.2
** NORMALIZED / CORRECTED DATA
**
»» TIME
•»•*
•»
»» 935
** 940
»• 943
»* 930
»» 935
»» 1000
*» 10O5
** 1010
*» IO13
»* 1020
•• 1023
*» 1030
** 1033
*» 104O
*» 1045
*» 1030
•» 1035
•»» 1100
*» 1105
»» 1110
»• 1115
** 1120
»» 1125
•»» 1 130
»» 1 135
»» 1140
»* 1145
»» 1 130
»* 1135
** 1200
•»* 1205
*« 1210
»• 1215
»* 1220
*• 1225
»• 1230
»* 1235
»• 1240
»» 1245
»* 1250
»» 1253
** 1300
»» 1305
»• 1310
»» 1315
»» 1320
' •• 1325
** 1330
•* 1333
•• 1340
»* 1343
•* 1330
•» 1333
•» 1400
»» 1403
•• 1410
»* 1413
•» 1420
»* 1423
»• 1430
»* 1433
•• 1440
»» 1443
•* 1430
»» 1433
•* 1500
»» . 1303
NO. PTS.
MEAN
STD. OEV.
02
C/.V)
2.7
2.0
1.4
3. 1
2. 1
4. 1
6.8
S. 3
10.2
11.4
10. I
3.3
0.3
1.2
2.3
1.6
2.3
3.0
0.3
1.7
2.0
0.7
2.1
3.1
8.0
11.6
2.6
2.3
2.3
2.3
2.3
2.0
2. 1
2.3
O.4
1.3
5.2
6.0
7.6
9.7
2.7
2.3
2.3
0.7
3.0
2.6
2.5
2.5
2.9
2.5
2.0
3.1
3.8
7.4
8.1
8.6
5.3
0.9
2.0
2.7
2.6
2.7
2.9
2.7
3.7
2.6
2.6
67
3.7
2.8
CO
(PPMV)
a 3% 02
6304. 1
5944.8
4996.8
3036.4
623.1
101.9
75.3
97.5
403. 7
1330.1.
5562.7
3377.6
334.0
4802. 4
6148.4
6193.7
5341.6
3403. 3
3313.3
4367.9
1398.5
314.4
366.5
493.7
5569.0
6092.0
6087. 4
6077.9
6081.5
3918.3
3931.7
6049. 8
5110.4
731.4
192.4
195.6
198.7
2355. 3
6073. 0
6028. 0
5769.3
4799.3
6083.3
6016.9
5997.6
6000.2
6103.9
3992. 3
3340. 2
170.3
174.9
177.6
186.3
206.9
1864.9
4418.2
4913.1
5986.6
3937. 7
3989.3
6038.6
3985.2
5628.5
5927. 3
3934.3
63
3846.9
2463.3
C02
(XV)
3 -•/. 02
16.3
14.3
13.2
12.6
13.0
12.7
13.2
13.2
13.4
13.3
13.3
13.4
14.2
13.8
13.3
14.9
17.1
16.2
12. 3
12.8
13.2
12.7
11.7
12.6
12.0
13.9
16.9
17.0
16.3
16.8
16.7
13.6
13.9
16.3
12.8
12.4
12.6
12.7
12.4
1,4.1
17.3
1,7.0
13.6
1.3.2
15.9
1,6.1
16. 1
1.6.3
16.5
16.2
13.7
12.0
12.2
12.6
11.9
12.3
13.8
13.3
13. O
17.1
16.6
16.0
16.8
16.3
13.6
16. 1
16.6
67
14.4
i.a
-WITH ACTUAL 02 »
NOX
(PPMV)
a 3% 02
146.6
121.7
75.3
76. I
77.3
95.6
128.4
152.9
174. 3
198.4
117.0
53.0
79.6
63.2
46.3
34.2
98.9
93. 3
46.9
52.2
50.6
47.9
43.6
73.6
114.6
148.3
108.2
110.0
98.6
90.7
90.7
103.1
112.3
102.9
63.2
49.6
78.9
103.3
MS. 1
142.5
127.7
96.4
33.3
83.4
163.6
112.9
30.3
44.7
113.4
46.6
34.7
30.4
118.7
136.3
136.9
151.1
83.5
38.0
64.7
139.9
89.8
46.3
213.4
174.1
169.3
243.7
50.3
67
101.2
44.9
THC
(PPMV)
a 37. 02
=«.
2O4.2
6O.9
102. a
171.7
5.9
744.6
1973.5
2269.8
1080. 2
1006.0
573. 3
443.9
336.4
1246.7
342.6
22.3
0.4
638. 5
1134.3
903.9
503.0
477.2
1309.3
1927.0
9O9.0
1012.3
1241.1
309.3
188.9
8.3
3.9
3.4
2.8
3.3
34
633.7
613.6
* CO, C02 NOX and THC valuv* »rm corrvctod to 3% O2.
To obtain actual measured valu«», divid* valu«* in thi
tabl« by tn« corresponding normalization factor.
A-20
-------
GEMS DATA - SITE 06 - TEST 3
FACTOR
FOR 32 02
NORMALIZATION
OF
NORMALIZED / CORRECTED DATA - WITH ACTUAL 02 »
*•» OTHER PROCESS
»•»
*
* a
»
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
»
»*
»#
»»
#»
*•»
»*
»»
*»
»»
*•»
»»
»•»
»»
**
»»
*
*
*
#
*
•»
»
*
»•»
»»
»»
»»
»•»
»•»
**
»»
*#
#•»
#•*
**
»#
#*
»•
**
»»
»»
**
•»•»
»»
»»
*»
»*
*»
»»
**
»»
NO. PTS.
MEAN
STD. DEV.
GASES
„„„„„
0.3621
0.3761
1 . 0200
0. 9750
0.9473
0. 9253
3.3401
1.2193
1 . 0399
1 . 0454
1.0211
1.1237
1 . 3354
1 . 8937
1 . 7695
1.2137
1.0813
1.0691
1. 1038
1 . 0335
1 . 0338
1. 1290
1.1056
1. 1033
1 . 0432
1 . 0469
1 . 0694
0. 9734
0. 9709
1.2190
1.3513
1 . 3734
1.7061
1.3939
1 . 0233
1 . 0046
1.0335
1. 1269
I . 0675
I . 0677
1.3135
0.9233
0. 9532
1.2017
1.3438
1.6133
1.1420
1.0910
1. 1305
1.0336
1.0491
1 . 0733
1 . 0946
1 . 0903
1 . 3662
1 . 2873
1 . 3440
1 . 2854
1 . 2763
39
1 . 2843
1.0
**
#»
»•»
»»
*•»
•»»
»*
*»
*•»
*»
»»
**
»»
»»
»#
*»
#»
»-»
»»
»»
»*
»#
*
»
*
»
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
»»
»*
»•» *
**
•»»
•»*
»»
»»
•»»
•*»
»»
**
»»
•»•»
*»
»*
»*
**
»*
*••
»*
»»
#»
*•»
»
*
»
*
*
*
TIME
1023
1030'
'1033
1040
1045
1050
1055
1100
1103
1110
1115
1120
1123
1130
1135
1140
1145
1150
1155
1200
1205
1210
1215
1220
1225
1230
1235
1240
1243
1230
1235
1300
1305
1310
1315
1320
1325
1330
1335
1340
1345
1330
1353
1400
1403
1410
1415
1420
1423
1430
1433
1440
1443
1430
1435
1500
1505
1510
1313
NO. PTS.
MEAN
STD. DEV.
02
C/.V)
0.1
0.3
3.4
2.3
2.0
1.6
13. a
6.2
3.7
3.3
3.4
3.0
3.0
U.3
10.3
6.2
4.3
4.2
4.7
3.6
3.6
3.0
4.7
4.7
3.3
3.3
4.2
2.3
2.5
6.2
7.7
9.3
10.4
9.7
3.4
3.1
3.9
3.0
4. 1
4.1
3.3
1.3
2.1
6.0
7.6
9.3
5.2
4.5
5.1
3.9
3.8
4.2
4.3
4.3
7.8
7.0
7.6
7.0
6.9
39
3.2
3.0
CO
(PPMV)
9 -7. 02
3313.1
334.0
279.9
2741.6
3931.2
4673.0
4356.2
4406.9
6732.9
6151.0
412.3
286.3
206.0
139.3
3388.2
7755. 9
7018.5
6941. 1
7169.0
6727.2
6731.3
7339.6
7189.3
7130.4
6320.3
6314.6
6963.2
3144.3
294.3
191.4
299.8
277.1
288. 9
314.0
3148.7
6197.7
6394.4
7362. a
6977.5
6980. 7
6661.3
2708.6
369.3
253.7
275.1
297.7
6729. 9
7151. I
7322. 1
6910.3
6883.3
• 7044.5
7136.3
7160.7
3973. 4
3463.2
8567. 1
8452. 4
8395. 7
59
4823.5
3031.3
C02
(2V)
a 3% 02
11. 1
10.6
11.5
U.2
11.2
10.0
14.6
12.7
14.7
13.0
10.6
10.2
10.6
11.3
14.5
17.3
16.6
15. 8
16.5
15.4
15.3
17.2
16.8
17.1
16.9
16.9
17.3
13.3
11.2
11.1
11.2
10.3
11.4
10.6
14.2
13.1
15.4
16.0
15.4
13.3
13.6
10.8
9.9
10.6
10.8
10.7
16.4
16.7
14.9
13.8
13.7
16.1
16.3
16.3
13.2
17.6
16.3
17.8
17.8
39
14.1
2.6
NOX
(PPMV)
a 3% 02
2.6
13.3
62.3
16.2
14.7
27.3
171.5
90. I
39.8
23. 1
59.2
81.2
111.0
138.2
98.9
44.1
41.3
41.1
42.3
33.7
36.1
43.4
42.7
42.6
36.7
39.3
43.7
20.0
38.9
65.3
79.2
89.7
114.2
93.4
74.3
35.2
44.3
40.4
40.4
43.3
35.4
20.9
2.4
3.4
37.7
111.7
37.5
46.0
42.8
41.2
36.9
38.1
38.5
38.3
30.0
46.3
44.6
62.4
51.2
59
52.4
32.9
THC
(PPMV)
9 3X 02
mmm
30. 1
33.3
3.7
1.9
19.6
33.3
2554. 5
209.2
38.2
1223.0
1809.5
1062.6
323. 8
232. 1
83. 1
13.3
7.3
1486.7
1744.6
3294.2
3300. 9
3604. 1
3536. 3
3535. 3
3362.5
3362.4
2631. 1
2098. 1
1531. 1
1949.6
20SS. 3
902.3
304.3
112.3
33.4
22.3
16.9
15.3
326.2
390.9
374.4
2301.1
2793.3
2443. 1
1732.2
1202.8
380.3
149.9
96.3
35.3
16.0
290.1
1363.9
3135.4
4373. 4
4320. 0
4316.6
4323.9
4272.9
39
1474.2
I486. 1
• CO, C02, NOX and THC -valuas »r» corr«ct«d to 3X O2.
To obtain actual maa«ur«d valu««, divid. valu.m in th»
table by th« corresponding normalization -factor.
A-21
-------
GEMS DATA - SITE 06 - TEST 4
FACTOR
NORMALIZED / CORRECTED DATA - WITH ACTUAL 02 »
•» FOR 37. O2
* NORMALIZATION
• OF
» OTHER PROCESS
» GASES
*
*
*
*
••
»
•
•
•
**
**
»*
•»
«*
•»
**
•»»
•*
*»
»*
•»
•*
**
**
•»
••
•»»
*»
»»
**
•*
«*
»*
»»
*»
•*
**
*•
•»
•*
»*
#»
*»
•»
•»
*•
*•
•*
NO. PTS.
MEAN
STD. DEV.
0. 8828
0.3956
0.9405
0.3737
0.3314
0.9380
1.0923
1.0605
1.0381
1.1193
1.1401
1.1921
.1822
.2129
.0630
. 1337
.2233
.3254
.4065
.4536
.5183
.6392
.6108
.6223
1.6821
1.8212
1.8464
1.9267
1 . 9882
2.1831
2.3791
2.0430
1.1037
1.1280
1.0943
i.osai
1. 1438
1.2321
1.3211
1.3760
1.3324
1.4837
1 . 4433
1.2995
1 . 2337
1.1717
1.2841
47
1.3448
O.4
*«
»* TIME
•*
**
»» 1025
»» 1030
»» 1035 .
.»» 1040
»» 1O45
** IOSO
»» 1150
»» 1 155
** 1200
** 1205
»» 1210
»* 1213
** 1220
»« 1223
»» 1230
•» 1233
»* 1240
»* 1243
»• 1230
»» 1255
»* 130O
»» 1305
»» 1310
»* 1313
•» 1320
•» 1323
*» 1330
»» 1335
*» 1340
•» 1343
*» 1330
•* 1335
*• 140O
** 1403
** 1410
»• 1413
»• 1420
»» 1423
»» 1430
»» 1435
«* 144O
»» 1443
** 1450
»» 1453
** 1500
•* 1505
»* 1510
NO. PTS.
MEAN
STD. DEV.
O2
CO
(PPMV)
C02
r/.v>
9 3V. 02 a 3V. O2
0.6
0.9
1.9
0.4
0.6
2.8
4.3
4.0
4.4
4.9
3.2
3.9
5.8
6. 1
4.1
5.1
6.3
7.4
8.2
8.6
9.1
1O.O
9.8
9.9
10.3
11. I
11.2
11.6
11.9
12.7
13.4
12.2
4.7
5.0
4.6
4.4
5.2
6.6
7.4
7.9
7.7
a. a
a. s
7.1
6.4
5.6
7.0
47
6.3
3.3
3510.6
2894.9
3200.6
5398. 3-
4107.6
627.9
7009.6
6807. 3
6937.3
7189.9
7326.4
7663.4
7602. 1
7802. 2
2935.4
214.5
213. S
249.9
296.7
297.7
232.0
325.7
331.9
233.0
256.5
400.4
400.7
314.2
422.3
413.6
491.8
503. O
6946.4
7307.7
7093. 1
7053.6
7417.4
8122.8
8373.6
8933.2
8732.3
9638.7
9383. 2
8448.3
1968.5
148.1
107.9
47
3972.3
3321.6
11.3
11.5
11.7
11.5
11.3
9.3
13. I
14.4
13.7
14.7
14.5
13.4
13.7
16.0
11.4
11. 1
11.1
11.1
11.3
11.3
11.3
10.3
11.4
11.3
11.1
11.3
11.2
11.0
10.7
10.3
10.6
10.9
14.8
13.3
13.0
14.7
14.4
14.3
13.0
13.4
13.2
16.3
16. 1
13.2
11.2
11.4
11. 5
47
12.8
2.0
NOX
(PPMV)
a 3V. 02
101.3
103.3
116.6
120.5
101.4
33.6
187.2
193.2
131.5
139.6
186.0
185.0
169.4
134.3
61.4
38.6
29.6
100.0
109.9
113.2
123.1
124.6
133.7
136.3
138.2
131.2
135.9
172.7
201.3
184. l'
220.3
182.7
126.7
146.4
132.5
133.6
150.0
148.2
162.7
146.3
131.3
162.2
144.1
102.6
82.6
97.3
109.0
47
136.8
39.3
THC
(PPMV)
a 3V. 02
143.5
237.7
443. 1
303.3"
295.9
340.7
20.3
644.3
2S70. 2
3483. 4
31.3
674.3
1563.2
1315.0
951.1
683.3
240.1
99.8
62.8
47.4
43.4
42.8
47.6
44.9
49.3
• 48.8
39.1
59.0
53.6
28.2
27. 1
26.7
26.2
23.3
28.8
357.2
767.3
847.8
1000.3
936.7
2307. 6
3730. 8
4099.2
3761.3
44
302.4
1288.0
» CO, CO2, NOX and THC values are corrected to 3V. 02.
To obtain actual measured valuns, divide values in the
table by the corresponding normalization factor." ~
A-22
-------
CEMS DATA - SITE 06 - TEST 3
*»
»»
»*
*
*
*
•»
*
»»
*«
»*
»»
»»
»»
»#
#»
*»
#»
*•»
»»
»*
»»
»»
»»
»»
»»
**
**
•»*
**
**
»«•
»»
»»
*»
»•»
*
*
•»
»
*
»
»
*
•
»*
»»
»•»
**
»*
**
»»
»»
»»
»*
*»
»»
*»
*•»
*»'
**
»»
»»
»* '
**
»»
#«
NO. PTS.
MEAN
STD. DEV
FACTOR • *»
FOR 37. 02 •**
NORMALIZATION •»
OF »»
OTHER PROCESS •*
GASES »*
**
»*
3.3103 »«
3.0938 »•
2.6110 »»
1.3661 »»
1.5613 »»
1.6691 »*
1 . 4466 **
1 . S569 •»
1.8353 **
1.3711 »»
1 . 7783 **
1.6180 . »*
1.4173 »»
1.7703 **
2. 2090 **
2.3103 »•
. 2.0536 »»
1.3066 **
1.4169 »*
1 . 5872 »»
1 . 5873 »»
1 . 5643 »*
1 . 4948 »•»
1.3993 »»
1.8421 **
1 . 7308 »»
1 . 6069 »»
1.3712 »»
1.6171' »»
1 . 3393 *»
1.4480 **
1.5129 »»
1.3917 »*
1 . 3926 •»*
1.4812 »•»
1.3300 »*
1 . 3824 »*
1.6371 . »*
1.3146 »*
1 . 6494 *»
1.3591 »»
1.4966 »*
1.3330 «»
1.4718 »»
•1.7132 »»
1 . 6037 »*
1.5962 •»
1 . 7743 •»
1.3641 •»
1.2795 •*
1.4541 **
1 . 5608 »*
1.3841 »•
1 . 3928 *»
1 . 9338 »»
2. 4507 »•
2. 2014 »»
2.0723 »*
3. 1602 »»
59
1 . 7568
0.4
NORMALIZED / CORRECTED DATA
TIME
950
953
1000
1003
1010
1013
1020
1023
1030
1035
1040
1043
1030
1033
1100
1103
1110
1115
1120
1125
1130
1133
1140
1143
1130
1133
1200
1203
1210
1213
1220
• 1223
1230
1233
1240
1243
1230
1233
1300
1303
1310
1313
1320
1323
1330
1333
1340
1343
1330
1333
1480
1403
1410
1413
.1420
1423
1430
1433
1440
NO. PTS.
MEAN
STD. DEV.
02
C/.V)
13.3
13. 1
14.0
11.3
9.4
10.2
8.5
9.4
11.1
9.5
10.3
9.8
3.3
10.8
12.3
13.2
12.2
9.0
8.3
9.6
9.6
9.3
8.9
9.7
11.2
10.6
9.8
11.3
9.8
9.3
8.5
9.1
3.0
9.7
8.8
7.4
3.0
10.1
11.0
10.0
9.4
3.9
7.7
8.7
10.5
9.8
9.7
10.3
9.3
6.9
3.6
9.4
9.6
11.4
11.7
13.6
12.3
12.3
13.2
39
10.3
1.9
CO
-------
CEMS DATA - SITE 06 - TEST 6
*• FACTOR
•»* FOR 3V. 02
*» NORMALIZATION
»* OF
»» OTHER PROCESS
•»*
»*
#*
**
•»»
»*
»»
*»
»»
**
NO. PTS.
MEAN ,
STD. DEV.
GASES
1. 1174
1.4818
2.3772
2. 0226
1.1139
1.7900
1.2980
7
1.6001
0.4
** NORMALIZED / CORRECTED DATA
** ACTUAL 02 *
»*
**
*» TIME
»»
»* <
»*
»» 1300
** 1330
*•» 1400
** 1430
** 1300
»» 1530
»* 1600
NO. PTS.
MEAN
STD. DEV.
02
(V.V)
a 37. 02
4.9
8.8
13.4
12.1
4.8
10.9
7.1
7
8.9
3.2
CO
(PPMV)
9 3V. 02
10776.9
1930.0
132.8
2901.2
12724.4
2247.0
16389.8
7
6760. 3
3983:. 9
C02
(XV)
a 3v. 02
11.4
12.0
11.7
12.2
10.7
12.6
10.5
7
11:6
0.7
- WITH
THC
(PPMV)
9 3V. 02
314.2
36.5
26.6
23.3
147. 1
145.0
307.6
7
143.2
116.6
* CO, C02, NOX and THC values ara corrected to 3V. 02.
To obtain actual measured values, divide values in the
tabla by th« corresponding normalization factor.
A-24
-------
APPENDIX A-3
HC1 TRAIN RESULTS
A-25
-------
-------
RADIAN SOURCE TEST
EPA METHOD 2-5
(RAW DATA)
PLANT SITE 06
PLANT SITE ATLANTA , GA.
SAMPLING LOCATION INCINERATOR OUTLET
TEST .# 06-HCL-01
DATE 03/19/1985
TEST PERIOD 1148-1348
PARAMETER
VALUE
Sampling time (min.) 120
Barometric Pressure (in.Hg) 29.48
Sampling nozzle diameter (in.) .485
Meter Volume (cu.ft.) • 44.61
Meter Pressure (in.H20) .41
Meter Temperature (F) 77.2
Stack dimension (sq.in.) 452.3904
Stack Static Pressure (in.H20) -.01
Stack Moisture Collected (gm) 152
Absolute stack pressure(in Hg) 29.47926
Average stack temperature (F) . 1293.2
Percent C02 11.8
Percent 02 4.4
Percent N2 83.8
Delps Subroutine result 5.3927
DGM Factor .9945
Pitot Constant .84
A-27
-------
RADIAN SOURCE; TEST
EPA METHODS 21-5
FINAL RESULTS
PLANT SITE 06
PLANT SITE ATLANTA , GA.
SAMPLING LOCATION INCINERATOR OUTLET
TEST # 06-HCL-01
DATE 03/19/1985
TEST PERIOD 1148-1348
PARAMETER
RESULT
Vm(dscf)
Vm(dscm)
Vw gas(scf)
Vw gas (scm)
Z moisture
Md
MVd
MW
Vs(fpm)
Vs (mpm)
Flow(acfm)
Flow(acmm)
Flow(dscfm)
Flow(dscmm)
% I
% EA
43 .00755
1.217974
7.1668
.2029638
14.28379
.8571621
30.064
28.3408
803.8736
245.0834
2525.449
71.52072
642.3315
18.19083
136.7098
24.82622
Program Revision:1/16/8'
A-28
-------
RADIAN
EPA
(RAW
PLANT
PLANT SITE
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST #
DATE
TEST PERIOD
SOURCE TEST
METHOD 2-5
DATA)
SITE 06
ATLANTA , GA.
INCINERATOR OUTLET
06-HCL-02
03/19/1985
1505-1635
PARAMETER
VALUE
Sampling time (min.)
Barometric Pressure (in.Hg)
Sampling nozzle diameter (in.)
Meter Volume (cu.ft.)
Meter Pressure (in.HZO)
Meter Temperature (F)
Stack dimension (sq.in.)
Stack Static Pressure (in.H20)
Stack Moisture Collected (gm)
Absolute stack pressure(in Hg)
Average stack temperature (F)
Percent C02
Percent 02
Percent N2
Delps Subroutine result
DGM Factor
Pitot Constant
90
29.48
.485
31.93
.38
87.56
452.3904
-.01
102.78
29.47926
1228
11.8
4.4
83.8
5.1184
.9945
.84
A-29
-------
RADIAN SOURCE
EPA METHODS 2
FINAL RESULTS
PLANT SITE 06
PLANT SITE
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST #
DATE
TEST PERIOD
TEST
- 5
ATLANTA , GA.
INCINERATOR OUTLET
06-HCL-02
03/19/1985
1505-1635
PARAMETER
RESULT
Vm(dscf)
Vm(dscm)
Vw gas(scf)
Vw gas (scm)
% moisture
Md
MWd
MW
Vs(fpm)
Vs (mpm)
Flow(acfm)
Flow(acmm)
Flow(dscfm)
Flow(dscmm)
% I
% EA
30.19835
.8552172
4.846077
.1372409
13.82838
.8617161
30.064
28.39575
762.2461
232.3921
2394.673
67.81713
635.9558
18.01027
129.2734
24.82622
Program Revision : I/16/81
A-30 -
-------
R A D I
EPA M
(RAW
PLANT
PLANT SITE
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST #
DATE
TEST PERIOD
AN SOURCE
E T H 0 D 2 -
DATA)
SITE 06
ATLANTA
TEST
, GA.
INCINERATOR OUTLET
06-HCL-03
03/20/1985
1050-1250
PARAMETER
VALUE
Sampling time (min.) 120
Barometric Pressure (in.Hg) 29.5
Sampling nozzle diameter (in.) .685
Meter Volume (cu.ft.) 60.665
Meter Pressure (in.H20) .839
Meter Temperature (F) 84.04
Stack dimension (sq.in.) 452.3904
Stack Static Pressure (in.H20) -.01
Stack Moisture Collected (gm) 215.2 .
Absolute stack pressure(in Hg) 29.49927
Average stack.temperature (F) 1282.75
Percent C02 13.9
Percent 02 3.7
Percent N2 82.4
Delps Subroutine result 4.4092
DGM Factor .9945
Pitot Constant .84
A-31
-------
RADIAN SOURCE TEST
EPA METHODS 2-5
FINAL RESULTS
PLANT SITE 0<>
PLANT SITE ATLANTA , GA.
SAMPLING LOCATION INCINERATOR OUTLET
TEST # 06-HCL--03
DATE 03/20/1985
TEST PERIOD 1050-1250
PARAMETER
RESULT
Vm(dscf)
Vm(dscm)
Vw gas(scf)
Vw gas (scm)
Z moisture
Md
MWd
MW
Vs(fptu)
.Vs (mpm)
Flow(acfm)
Flow(acmm)
Flow(dscfm)
Flow(dscmm)
% I
% EA
57.85139
1 .638351
10.14668
.287354
14.92201
.8507799
30.372
28..5258S
654.9088
199.6673
2057.462
58.26732
522.8744
14.8078
113.2486
20.49453
Program Revis ion : 1 / 1 6 /
A-32
-------
RADIAN SOURCE
TEST
EPA
(RAW
PLANT
PLANT SITE
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST #
DATE
TEST PERIOD
2-5
METHOD
DATA)
SITE 06
ATLANTA
, GA.
INCINERATOR OUTLET
06-HCL-04
03/21/1985
0957-1227
PARAMETER
VALUE
Sampling time (min.) 150
Barometric Pressure (in.Hg) 29.05
Sampling nozzle diameter (in.) .685
Meter Volume (cu.ft.) 82.514
Meter Pressure (in.H20) .79
Meter Temperature (F) 74.73001
Stack dimension (sq.in.) 452.3904
Stack Static Pressure (in.H20) -.01
Stack Moisture Collected (gin) 294.25
Absolute stack pressureCin Hg) 29.04926
Average stack temperature (F) 1198.5
Percent C02' 12.3
Percent 02 . 5.2
Percent N2 82.5
Delps Subroutine result 4.0725
DGM Factor .9945
Pitot Constant .84
A-33
-------
RADIAN SOURCE
EPA METHODS 2
FINAL RESULTS
PLANT
T
- 5
E S T
PLANT SITE
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST #
DATE
TEST PERIOD
SITE 06
ATLANTA , GA.
INCINERATOR OUTLET
06-HCL-04
03/21/1985
0957-1227
PARAMETER
RESULT
Vm(dacf)
Vm(dscm)
Vw gas(scf)
Vw gas (scm)
Z moisture
Md
MWd
MW
Vs(fpm)
Vs (mpm)
Flow(acfm)
Flow(acmm)
Flow(dscfm)
Flow(dscmm)
% I
% EA
78.82861
2.232426
13.87389
.3929085
14.96604
.8503396
30.176
28.35374
611.4126
186.4063
1920.814
54.39744
504.8585
14.29759
127.8559
31.36309
Program Revis ion : I/16/8J
A-34
-------
RADIAN SOURCE
EPA METHOD 2 -
( R A W DATA)
PLANT SITE 06
PLANT SITE ATLANTA
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST #
DATE
TEST PERIOD
TEST
, GA.
INCINERATOR OUTLET
06-HCL-05
03/22/1985
1147-1337
PARAMETER VALUE
Sampling time (min.) HO
Barometric Pressure (in.Hg) 28.98
Sampling nozzle diameter (in.) .685
Meter Volume (cu.ft.) 62.025
Meter Pressure (in.H20) 1.03
Meter Temperature (F) 74.36
Stack dimension (sq.in.) 452.3904
Stack Static Pressure (in.H20) -.01
Stack Moisture Collected (gm) 237.1
Absolute stack pressure(in Hg) 28.97926
Average stack temperature (F) 112,9.7
Percent C02 10.2
Percent 02 6.8
Percent N2 83
Delps Subroutine result 4.4631
DGM Factor .9945
Pitot Constant .84
A-35
-------
RADIAN SOURCE
EPA. METHODS. 2
FINAL RESULTS
PLANT
PLANT SITE
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST #
DATE
TEST PERIOD
TEST
5
SITE 06
ATLANTA , GA.
INCINERATOR OUTLET
06-HCL-05
03/22/1985
1147-1337
PARAMETER
RESULT
Vm(dscf)
Vm(dscm)
Vw gas(scf)
Vw gas (scm)
Z moisture
Md
MWd
MW
Vs
-------
RADIAN SOURCE TEST
EPA METHOD 2-5
.(RAW DATA)
PLANT SITE 06
PLANT SITE ATLANTA , GA.
SAMPLING LOCATION INCINERATOR OUTLET
TEST # 06-HCL-06
DATE 03/25/1985
TEST PERIOD 1100-1300
PARAMETER VALUE
Sampling time (min.) 120
Barometric Pressure (in.Hg) 29.55
Sampling nozzle diameter (in.) .685
Meter Volume (cu.ft.) ' 65.84
Meter Pressure (in.H20) .945
Meter Temperature (F) 70.04
Stack dimension (sq.in.) 452.3904
Stack Static Pressure (in.H20) -.01
Stack Moisture Collected (gm) 217.4
Absolute stack pressure(in Hg) 29.54926
Average stack temperature (F) 1176.9
Percent C02 9.2
Percent 02 .10.3
Percent N2 80.5
Delps Subroutine result 4.7665
DGM Factor .9945
Pitot Constant .84
A-37
-------
RADIAN SOURCE
EPA METHODS 2
FINAL RESULTS;
PLANT SITE 06
PLANT SITE
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST #•
DATE
TEST PERIOD
T
- 5
E S T
ATLANTA , GA.
INCINERATOR OUTLET
06-HCL--06
03/25/1985
1100-1300
PARAMETER
RESULT
Vm(dscf)
Vm(dscm)
Vw gas(scf)
Vw gas (scm)
Z moisture
Md
MWd
MW
Vs(fpm)
Vs (mpm)
Flow(acfm)
Flow(acmm)
Flow(dscfm)
Flow(dscmm)
Z I
Z EA
64.57074
1.828643
10.25041
.2902916
13.69988
.8630012
29.884
28.25591
710.7512
216.6924
2232.896
63.23561
613.8705
17.38481
107.6653
94.04676
Program Revis ion: 1 / 16/
A-33
-------
RADIAN SOURCE TEST
EPA METHOD 2-5
(RAW DATA)
PLANT' SITE 06"
PLANT SITE ATLANTA , GA.
SAMPLING LOCATION INCINERATOR OUTLET
TEST # 06-HCL-07
DATE 03/26/1985
TEST PERIOD 1217-1407
PARAMETER
VALUE
Sampling time (min.) 110
Barometric Pressure (in.Hg) 29.51
Sampling nozzle diameter (in.) .685
Meter Volume (cu . ft .) 53.95
Meter Pressure (in.H20) .65
Meter Temperature (F) 81.82
Stack dimension (sq.in.) 452.3904
Stack Static Pressure (in.E20) -.01
Stack Moisture Collected (gm) 154.1
Absolute stack pressureCin Hg) 29.50927
Average stack temperature (F) 1304.7
Percent C02 7.7
Percent 02 8.899999
Percent N2 83.4
Delps Subroutine result 4.2009
DGM Factor .9945
Pitot Constant .84
A-39
-------
RADIAN SOURCE
EPA METHODS 2
FINAL RES'DLTS
PLANT SITE 06
PLANT SITE
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST #
DATE
TEST PERIOD
TEST
- 5
ATLANTA , GA.
INCINERATOR OUTLET
06-HCL-07
03/26/1985
1217-1407
PARAMETER
RESULT
Vm(dscf)
Vm(dscm)
Vw gas(scf)
Vw gas (scm)
Z moisture
Md
MWd
MW
Vs(fpm)
Vs (mpm)
Flow(acfm)
Flow(acmm)
Flow(dscfm)
Flow(dscmm)
Z I
Z EA
51.65181
1.462779
7.265816
.2057679
12.33216
.8766784
29.583
28.15895
627.9148
191.4374
1972.657
55.86565
510.3308
14.45257
113.0157
67.84776
Program Revision:I/16/8J
A-40
-------
APPENDIX A-4
MODIFIED METHOD 5 AND EPA METHODS
1-4 SAMPLE CALCULATIONS
A-41
-------
-------
PARAMETER
RAD
EPA
IAN SOURCE
METHODS
DEFINITION
DEFINITION
2 -
0 F
TEST
5
TERMS
Tt(min.)
Dn(in.)
Ps(in.H20)
Vm(cu.ft.)
Vw(gm.)
Pm(in.H20)
Tm(F)
Pb(in'.Hg.)
% €02
Z 02
Z N2
SQR(DELPS)
As(sq.in.)
Ts(F)
Vm(dscf)
Vm(dscm)
Vw gas(scf)
Z moisture
Md
MWd
MW
Vs(fpm)
Flow(acfm)
Flow(acmm)
Flow(dscfm)
Flow(dacmm)
Z I
Z EA
DGM
Y
Pg
Cp
dH
dP
*** EPA
STANDARD
CONDITIONS
TOTAL SAMPLING TIME
SAMPLING NOZZLE DIAMETER
ABSOLUTE STACK STATIC GAS PRESSURE
ABSOLUTE VOLUME OF GAS SAMPLE MEASURED BY DGM
TOTAL STACK MOISTURE COLLECTED
AVERAGE STATIC PRESSURE OF DGM
AVERAGE TEMPERATURE OF DGM
BAROMETRIC PRESSURE
CARBON DIOXIDE CONTENT OF STACK GAS
OXYGEN CONTENT OF STACK .GAS
NITROGEN CONTENT OF STACK GAS
AVE. SQ. ROOT OF S-PITOT DIFF. PRESSURE-TEMP. PRODUCTS
CROSS-SECTIONAL AREA OF STACK(DUCT)
TEMPERATURE OF STACK
STANDARD VOLUME OF GAS SAMPLED ,Vm(std),AS DRY STD. CF
STANDARD VOLUME OF GAS SAMPLED,Vm(std),AS DRY STD. CM
VOLUME OF WATER VAPOR IN GAS SAMPLE,STD
WATER VAPOR COMPOSITION OF STACK GAS
PROPORTION, BY VOLUME,OF DRY GAS IN GAS SAMPLE
MOLECULAR WEIGHT OF STACK GAS,DRY BASIS LB/LB-MOLE .
MOLECULAR WEIGHT OF STACK GAS,WET BASIC LB/LB-MOLE
AVERAGE STACK GAS VELOCITY
AVERAGE STACK GAS FLOW RATE(ACTUAL STACK COND.)
AVERAGE STACK GAS FLOW RATE(ACTDAL STACK COND.)
AVERAGE STACK GAS VOLUMETRIC FLOW RATE(DRY BASIS)
AVERAGE STACK GAS VOLUMETRIC FLOW RATE(DRY BASIS)
PERCENT ISOKINETIC
PERCENT EXCESS AIR IN STACK GAS
DRY GAS METER
DRY GAS METER CORRECTION FACTOR
STACK STATIC GAS PRESSURE
PITOT COEFFICIENT
ORIFICE PLATE DIFF. PRESS. VALUE
PITOT DIFF. PRESS. VALUE
Temperature » 68 deg-F (528 deg-R)
Pressure « 29.92 in. Hg.
A-43
-------
RADIAN- SOURCE TEST
EPA METHOD 2-5
SAMPLE CALCULATION
PLANT
PLANT SITE
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST #
DATE
TEST PERIOD
SITE 06
ATLANTA , GA.
INCINERATOR OUTLET
06-MM5-06
.03/26/1985
1220-1420 / 1455-1655
Vm(std)
Vm(std)
1) Volume of dry gas sampled at standard conditions (68 deg-F ,29.92 in.
Y x Vm x [T(std) + 460] :s [Pb +(Pm/13.6)]
P(»td) x (Tm + 460)
1.004 x 119.283 x'528 x [ 29.51 + ( .791 /13.6)]
29.92 x ( 87.16001 + 460)
Vm(std) - 114.207dscf \
2) Volume of water vapor at standard conditions:
Vw(gas) - 0.04715 cf/gm x W(l) gm
Vw(gas) - 0.04715 x 316.2 - 14.909 sef
3) Percent Moisture in stack gas : j ",
100 x Vw(gaa)
Vm(std) + Vw(gas)
100 x 14.909
„_— , 11.55 Z
114.207 + 14.909
4) Mole fraction of- dry stack gas :
100 - ZM 100 - 11.55
100 LOO
ZM
ZM
Md
.8845318
A-44
-------
SAMPLE CALCULATION
PAGE TWO
5)Average Molecular Weight of DRY stack gas :
MWd - (.44 x ZC02) + (.32 x 202) + (.28 x ZN2)
MWd - (.44 x 7.7 ) + (.32 x 8.899999 ) + (.28 x 83.4 ) - 29.588
6)Average Molecular Weight of wet stack gas :
MW - MWd x Md + 18(1 - Md)
MW - 29.588 x .8845318 + 18(1 - .8845318 ) - 28.24996
7) Stack gas velocity in feet-per-minute (fpm) at stack conditions :
Vs - KpxCp x [SQRT (dP)]Savet x SQRT [Ts §avgt] x SQRT [l/(PsxMW)] x 60sec/min
Vs - 85.49 x .84 x 60 x 4.6224 x.SQRT[l/( 29.50927 X 28.24996 )]
Vs - 689.8033 FPM
8) Average stack gas dry volumetric flow rate (DSCFM) :
Vs x As x Md x T(std) x Ps
144 cu.in./cu.ft. x (Ts +460) x P(std)
689.8033 x 452.3904 x .8845318 x528x 29.50927
144 x 1768 x 29.92
Qsd - 564.5963 dscfm
Qsd
Qsd
A-45
-------
SAMPLE CALCULATION
PAGE THREE
9)Isokinetic sampling rate (Z) :
Dimensional Constant C « K4 x 60 x 144 x [1 / (Pi /4)]
K4 - .0945 FOR ENGLISH UNITS
C x Vm(std) x (Ts + 460)
IZ - • •
Vs x Tt x Ps x Md x (Dn)'»2
1039.574 x 114.2075 x 1768
IZ • •
689.8033 x 240 x 29.50927 x ,,8845318 x( .685 )°2
IZ - 103.5245
10) Excess air (Z) :
100 x Z02 100 x 8.899999
PA • _________________ ** ______ ______«_
£*A * «.«.—«. — — —« —^ — —. —— — B «.«..»....•««..«•>•.
(.264 x ZN2) - Z02 (.264 x 83.4 ) - 8.899999
EA - 67.85 .
11) Particulate Concentration :
Cs - ( grams part.) / Vm(std) - 0 / 114.2075
Cs - 0.0000000 Grama/DSCF
T(std) x Md x Ps x Cs'
Ca - .
P(std) x Ts
528 x .8845318 x 29.50927 x 0.0000000
29.92 x 1768
Ca - 0.0000000 Grams/ACF
LBS/HR - Cs x 0.002205 x Qsd x 60
LBS/HR - O.OOOOOOOx 0.002205 x
LBS/HR - 0. •
564.6 x 60
Program Revision:I/16/84
A-46
-------
APPENDIX B
PROCESS MONITORING DATA
-------
-------
m
e c >n
•*..«•— T9
.^ii
41
° * * -.
*P? |_ (^ -^
l*|"
"
n -a
a! ~*
41
m
5-
o
a.
(S
rd
*~
c.
z S
g *
OS
in in ^&
3 K S
I ii
o 5? 5? "^ S? "5 5? "^
o ™^ 2 2 ^^ i ^ o ^* 2 i
±±±± ii^i
^. S2 '^ St ^^ '^ *" 9? ^ ?5 "^ *^ ""*
-<-. — — in. -.—,—,-,,0
ON "•» ^O «o
ONONONO-C>«»' r»-r«-ooco^rN.r».
^ CT* CO C>4 ON in ^ C^ Qo O/-. O^. ON «O
1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0
1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0
1 1 1 1 1 O 1 1 1 1 1 1 0
S2§55B "^S^sSg
i^^clcss iSsSSss
^ 5c ^ ^"^ "^ iD ® **** ?9 &• ^ ^^ *^?
^" 04 ^^ ^^ ^» og <^ ^5 ^5 04 ^5 "^ ^o
^"
S o m os S- ^.r^oov^oo
^ jj* *^ ^r o «t» in ^ co o o
^* fN **• in r^ i ^k ^ c»< co in r** i
CO ^^ OP ^i <^S ^N ^^ ^^ (^ QQ
ceseeee ceeeeee
0 0 0 •=• 0 0 0 O O 0 0 O 0
41 4f 41 ^ 4i 4f i\t Qt 41 ^j <(f ^| qf
bt 3 3 i 3 3 3333333
-— ^
S -. S
J; _« in §2 5 "^
~— »CMco«rin^CM CN— • csco^m-o'eco
S2««5«m_>! — 5m5SS5(si$
— tit^i^ti:^^^ cMtiti^iiti^^^
e ^ — = —
^ S. D n
9 O in in
f"4 R S S
Ilii
8
o o in i
o ^S ** ^S i
i > i
o o o -
0
ON QO «O CO ON «^
in r» r» ?M co CM
§ TO ON — -O -O
CO O ON -^ h«. ON
O C-J CM CM S §
i i ~o i ON in '?.
p^ CO "^ r
CM ^ r~» j
^
1 1 ON 1 -O S
— cs
CO *O ^N
014 § S
£'£ ' S ' g
41
§s i — s '*
— S c" "**
i
ro
4>
?5 S **" **" *^
u
4i
ilisi, i
>- u
— ^> M»
O C 4t 41
G- * C. O
c: e s*. ^ • uk x
o o in <= Z <= o
«- t +» 41 S £ u
t- -9 41 e
* x! —
— CM * •£
O
l-««*«ls !
M N_ »^ *_ ^ *. ^^ -2
co >• ^ >• ^ 5» tn QC
52^22^*1 »
_ .s *— 2
§ " 2
-------
u-. in
O
o
C SJ
5* ^^
ii
II
5lS
c > ou
o *• e
• M 1^ ro •**
j- v— cn >-e
K S8
o in o
s I
?
o
8
««
o
0>
ii
*r
cS
S
K i
-
oo
CM
^ r*. i»«
3 S ' ' E5
-. is 2 co
"* °° rfi SS <">
^« ^ in o •^
40—1 * «o i
me. c. m
C. * 41 41 c.
>|a| ,.1 •
o 9 £ i« o m e
•
» >
^™ •••
^ ^
o o
iS
* £ 331 I"
* 3 -j *
S
CM —. CM CO
«>>->.
-in I *» I
+i I If) ^tf I «/S J^ i
^•lOeco iS4— CMCO^^OCV csi — cst co » o CH
>•>• >•>>• u» CO>V>>^~in
?J*XS ~????fi:5 ~" * •• «• <• -a >•
* * * .Z ,«££££* 2 - * ,!: ^ * « g
-------
TABLE B-2. NATURAL GAS CONSUMPTION DATA FOR INCINERATOR WRI-A
DURING TEST PERIODS
Differential
Meter Meter Natural Gas
Reading Reading Time Usage Rate Corresponding
'Date Time (Cu Ft) (Cu Ft) (hr) (cfm) Run No.
3/19/85
3/20/85
3/21/85
3/22/85
3/25/85
3/26/85
3/27/85
Avg.
0824 202590
1116 203890
0734 204540
0825 205670
0800 206890
0835 208020
0825 • 208970
- 208970
-
1300
650
1130
1220
1130
950
6380
Calculations based on afterburner
Spot checks: 3/20/85 20
3/25/85 20
3/26/85 20
Avg. 17
cu ft 1n
cu ft 1n
.cu ft 1n
.6 cfm
-
11.7
5.73
9.5
8.5
9.5
9.0
54.0
operation
64 sec. =
79 sec. =
64 sec. =
-
18.5
18.9
19.8
23.9
19.8
17.6
19.7 .
from 0800 to
18.8 cfm
15.2 cfm
18.8 cfm
—
Run 01
Run 02
Run 03
Run 04
Run 05
Run 06
Avg.
1700 dally.
3-3
-------
-------
APPENDIX C
SAMPLE SHIPMENT LETTER
-------
-------
March 27. ;«.:M
• ''•''• ! " ss.Ar:t Anc.lysis Center
!••-•-*. •^oc:T":i
..." " ' '* ' ;" • r:-.:-; \ :-.::.•;•-.: .s^trip::?:: frcm spsci •£::. c. Ti e--r 4 comb: is ti an s>i tp><-...
"i:^ '• • •v^:..-:,;.-t2 r;r-. I'.-Lter IK No. 6 an;i pertains to EPA Sits? Ha. •«- at
T:.. -.p.r.c.ir Nn. is "619, and St.C numtprs assicned tti 4-'-';- •-'*••- •-^
ni;in'>t----r DHro •_-);; through DDOC1599. " .
SC" -r-iLidheri.-. DGOOle.05 through IV?001.-OA and DGOOlo-?: thrrji-.n:: DW-'! .-
have t-.fisn ss^iyp.ad. to Troika for interr.cl QA/QC purposes. SCC r.-.-.nbsr
DOOvliO" th:-'3L-.gh L-DOOli37 have b=cr. assigned to -field san.pl es. A*'""
field •r.?i!ip!:-s w;th SCC numbers are included in this -rhjpn^nt s: c/?:-t
=f.-;:J nr- '•••"I £3~ -which arr being archived at Radian. SCC number: DC1----;•• • ,i ,r
t:-s:-p;ug!. !>.!i"."'l a"? are unused.
T!-._ s.v:::pl£i ship.rsfent -for Ef-A £!"£: No. O6 consists -f ^ i: = :.-^
r. =r.r.--i:-.. n;- 67 s/-.,T.pl <:-• ^cmpcrisr.ts i r: 61 containers. (Nrts: The I"!cd3 f - .-d
SL,.-:p]
consist cf i rosipam-Tits as listsd bainw and the ^r.-cc-f
"•.-:.-! i.n«: :.v= -.-f .;•• cr.7innr.snts r»s lister! below)
:' - 1. -jir*: =ir;.T.p 1 E="- rs=qi-.i~£i TJ'IMSTDiATE EXTRACT I T'iX' ar.ri --r-i •• -r
Fr actior.
DCOO16O7
DQOO1607
D20O1&O7
DQOO1607
DQOO16O7
DQO016O7
4
5
Filter
XAD Module
Probe Rinse
Back Half /
Coil Rinse
Condensate
Impinger Solution
C-l
-------
Radian Run * 06-MMS-O2
(Total a-f & train components)
SCC
Components
Fraction
O;7-.-•:•. UV16
D-1OO t A t .-
1
6
Fi i tar
XAD Mcduila
Probe Rinss
Back Hal-? /
Coil Rinse
Condensate
Impingar ?c:
nodi an
SCC
DCOOtil?
DQOO1619
UGOO1S19
DQOO1619
DQOO1619
DQO01619
* 06-MM^-O3
train Cf3irponent3>
Components
o
•7
4
5
Fraction
Filter
XAD Module
Probe Rinse
Back Hal-f /
Coil Rinse
•Con den sate
Impinger Solutii
Radian Run » 06-MM5-O4
(Total of 6 train components)
SCC
Components
Fraction
DQCOlaT
DQOO16V ~
DQOO1S23
1
6
4
5
Filter
XAD Module
Probe Rinse ;
Back Hal-f /
Coil Rinse
Condensate
Impinger Solatipn
Radian F:un » O6-MM5-05
(Total o-f a train components)
SCC #
Component-
Fraction
DQ00162S
DQ00162S
DQOO1628
DQOO1628
DQ001628
DQOO1628
1
6
2
3
4
5
Filter
XAD Module
Prob« Rinse
Back Hal-f /
Coil Rinse
Condensat* :
Impinger Solution
C-2
-------
Radian Run # O6-MMS-O6
-------
Settling Chamber Ash - Process Sampjle:
SCC tt #
Sample Type
DQOO1637
DQQO1&14
DQ^O1621
DCOOliCS
DQOO163!
O6-SCA-O1
O6-SCA-O2
06-SCA-O3
O6-SCA-O4
OA-SCA-Q5
O6-3CA-G6
ASH
ASH
ASH
ASH
ASH
ASH
Primar/ Chamber Ash - Prairsss Sample:
DQOO1613
DQOO1615
DQOO1&2O
DQOO1&24
DGOOloZO
DDOO1634
Ss.tiplo Type
06-PCA-O1
06-PCA-02
O6-PCA-O3
06-PCA-O4
O6-PCA-05
O6-PCA-O6
ASH
ASH
ASH
ASH
ASH
ASH
The -follawing Priority #2 samples for this site will be hald at,
at Radian --for analysis pending the results 6-f Priority #1 analyse;;
SCC 4*
Sample Type
DQOO1612
DQOO1&13
DQOO1633
DQOO1622
DOOO1626
DQOOla~9
O6-WIF-O1-A
06-WIF-02-A
O6-WIF-O6-A
06-TF-O3-A
06-TF-O4-A
06-TF-05-A
Wire Insulation Fsad
Wire Insulaticr. Feed
Wire Insulation Feed
Transformer Feed
Transformer Feed ',
Transformer Feed
It wilt
Ths soil sample is the only Priority *3 sample.
hald at Radian for analysis by Troika pending the results of
Priority #1 and Priority .#2 samples analyses.
SCC tt
DQOQ1627
Sani'pl's'Type
O6-S-O1
Soils
-------
" th!f!:e aile any questions concerning this sample shipment,, piea«
McReyn°lds or L«-"-y Keller at Radian Corporation "
Sincerely,
TEST TEAM LEADER
£. Hanks •• EPA/AMTB
A. :v!iias - Radian
F..acJ i «n Fi s ] d Fi I a
C-5
-------
-------
APPENDIX D
RUN-SPECIFIC DIOXIN/FURAN EMISSIONS DATA
-------
-------
APPENDIX D-l
WIRE FEED DIOXIN/FURAN EMISSIONS DATA
(As-measured concentrations)
D-l
-------
-------
TABLE D-l. WIRE FEED DIOXIN/FURAN EMISSIONS
DATA FOR RUN 1, SITE WRI-A
(As-measured concentrations)
Dioxin/Furan
Isomer
Isomer Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ng/dscm)
Isomer Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ppt)
Isomer Hourly
Emissions Rate
(ug/hr)
DIOXINS
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
Penta-CDD
Hexa-CDD
Hepta-CDD
Octa-CDD
Total PCDD
FURANS
NR
5.16E-OK
NR
3.10E+00(
3.18E+01(
1.54E+01(
5.09E+01
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
) 3.85E-02(
1.90E-01(
1.80E+00(
8.07E-01(
2.84E+00
NR
N/A
NR
N/A
N/A
N/A
NR
4.43E-01
NR
.66E+00
•73E+01
2.
2,
1.32E+01
4.3BE+01
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDF
Total PCDF
NR
.89E+00(
.28E+00(
.23E+01(
-74E+01(
,70E+01(
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
3.06E-01(
3.73E-01(
7.87E-01(
2.79E+00(
1.46E+00(
NR
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
9.58E+01
5.71E+00
NR
3.34E+00
4.53E+00
1.05E+01
4.07E+01
2.32E+01
8.22E+01
NOTE: Isomer concentrations shown are at as-measured oxygen conditions.
NR = not reported by Troika.
ND = not detected (detection limit in parentheses).
N/A = Not applicable. QA samples indicate the method capabilities and
minimum limits of detection when values are positive.
ng = 1.0E-09g
ug = 1.0E-06g
ppt = parts per trillion, dry volume basis
2080 operating hours per year
D-3
-------
TABLE D-2. WIRE FEED DIOXIN/RJRAN EMISSIONS
DATA FOR RUN 2, SITE WRI-A
(As-measured concentrations)
Dioxin/Furan
Isomer
Isomer Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ng/dscm)
Isomer Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ppt)
Isomer Hourly
Emissions Rate
(ug/hr)
DIOXINS
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
Penta-CDD
Hexa-CDD
Hepta-CDD
Octa-CDD
Total PCDD
FURANS
NR
NR
NR
NR
2.15E+01( N/A
1.24E+01( N/A
3.39E+01 .
1
NR
NR
NR
NR
,22E+00(
6.46E-01(
1.86E+00
N/A
N/A
NR :
NR ;
MR
NR
1.94E+01
11E+01
1
3.05E+01
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDF
Total PCDF
NR
9.63E+00( N/A
NR
,18E+00( N/A
NR
6.12E+01(
2.92E+01(
1.03E+02
N/A
N/A
7.57E-OK
NR
2.04E-01( N/A
3.60E+00( N/A
1.58E+00( N/A
6.14E+00
N/A )
NR :
8.67E+00
"NR •'
2.86E+00
5.51E+01
2.63E+01
9.29E+01
NOTE: Isomer concentrations shown are at as-measured oxygen conditions.
NR = not reported by Troika.
NO - not detected (detection limit in parentheses).
N/A = Not applicable. QA samples' indicate the method capabilities and
minimum limits of detection when values are positive.
ng = 1.0E-09g ,
ug » 1.0E-06g
ppt - parts per trillion, dry volume basis
2080 operating hours per year .
D-4
-------
TABLE D-3. WIRE FEED DIOXIN/FURAN EMISSIONS
DATA FOR RUN 6, SITE WRI-A
(As-measured concentrations)
Dioxin/Furan
Isomer
Isomer Concentration Isomer
In Flue Gas In
(ng/dscm)
Concentration
Flue Gas
(ppt)
Isomer Hourly
Emissions Rate
(ug/hr)
DIOXINS
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
Penta-CDD
Hexa-CDD
Hepta-CDD
Octa-CDD
Total PCDD
FURANS
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDF
Total PCDF
9.29E-02(
1.24E+00(
2.04E+00(
8.82E+00(
1.39E+02(
1.26E+02(
2.77E+02
3.72E-01(
1.63E+01(
2.66E+01(
6.06E+01(
2.54E-i-02(
9.97E+01(
4.57E+02
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
)
j
)
)
)
6.94E-03(
9.25E-02(
1.38E-01(
5.43E-01(
7.87E+00(
6.59E+00(
1.52E+01
2.92E-02(
1.28E+00(
1.88E+00(
3.89E+00(
1.49E+01(
5.40E+00(
2.74E+01
N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
8.92E-02
1.19E+00
1.96E+00
8.47E+00
1.33E+02
1.21E+02
2.-66E+02
3.57E-01
1.56E+01
2.55E+01
5.82E+01
2.44E+02
9.57E+01
. 4.39E+02
NOTE: Isomer concentrations shown are at as-measured oxygen conditions.
N/A = Not applicable. QA samples indicate the method capabilities and
minimum limits of detection when values are positive
ng = 1.0E-09g
ug = 1.0E-06g
ppt * parts per trillion, dry volume basis
2080 operating hours per year
D-5
-------
-------
• APPENDIX D-2
WIRE AND TRANSFORMER FEED DIOXIN/FURAN EMISSIONS DATA
(As-measured concentrations)
D-7
-------
-------
TABLE D-4. WIRE AND TRANSFORMER FEED DIOXIN/FURAN
EMISSIONS DATA FOR RUN 3, SITE WRI-A
(As-measured concentrations)
Dioxin/Furan
Isomer
Isomer Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ng/dscm)
Isomer Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ppt)
Isomer Hourly
Emissions Rate
(ug/hr)
DIOXINS
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
Penta-CDD
Hexa-CDD
Hepta-CDD
Octa-CDD
Total PCDD
FURANS
5.12E-02(
2.30E-01(
4.27E+00(
4.95E+01(
3.41E+02(
1.21E+03(
1.61E+03
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
3.82E-03(
1.72E-02(
2.89E-01(
3.05E+00(
1.93E+01(
6.35E+01(
8.62E+01
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
4.45E-02
2.00E-01
3.72E+00
4.31E+01
2.97E+02
1.06E+03
1.40E+03
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDF
Total PCDF
4.09E-01(
2.59E+01(
5.46E+01(
1.77E+02(
3:86E+02(
8.08E+02(
1.45E+03
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
3.22E-02(
04E+00(
86E+00
2.
3.
2.27E+01(
4.38E+01(
8.38E+01
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
3.56E-01
2.26E+01
4.75E+01
.54E+02
.36E+02
.03E+02
1,
3.
7.
1.26E+03
NOTE: Isomer concentrations shown are at as-measured oxygen conditions.
NO =
N/A =
ng =
ug =
ppt
not detected (detection limit in parentheses).
m?^™™1!1"1?!6- *Q5 f3"1?!65 ^cate the method capabilities and
? Sc nS of detection when values are positive.
A•ut~uyc|
1.0E-06g
parts per trillion, dry volume basis
•- I | • *••••!»)*} ^"'J
2080 operating hours per year
D-9
-------
TABLE D-5. WIRE AND TRANSFORMER FEED DIOXIN/FURAN
EMISSIONS DATA FOR RUN 4, SITE WRI-A
(As-measured concentrations)
Dioxin/Furan
Isomer
Isomer Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ng/dscm)
Isomer Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ppt)
Isomer Hourly
Emissions Rate
(ug/hr)
DIOXINS
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
Penta-CDD
Hexa-CDD
Hepta-CDD
Octa-CDD -
Total PCDD
FURANS
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDF
Total PCDF
1
6
6
1
5
3
2
1
4
NR
.32E+OOC
NR
NR
.19E+01(
.27E+01(
.26E+02
NR
.42E+01(
NR
.78E+01(
.65E+02(
.37E+02(
.93E+02
N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
~~N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
9
3
3
6
4
2
1
7
2
NR
,88E-02(
NR
NR
.50E+00(
.28E-i-00(
.88E+00
NR
.26E+00(
NR
.43E*00(
.56E+01(
.40E+00(
.96E+01
N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
•
N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
1
5
5
1
4
3
2
1
4
NR
.19E+00
NR
NR
.57E+01
.64E+01
.13E+02 '
NR
.87E+01
NR" ;
.40E+01
.38E+02
.23E+02
.44E+02
NOTE: Isomer concentrations shown are at as-measured oxygen conditions.
NR = not reported by Troika.
ND - not detected (detection limit in parentheses).
N/A - Not applicable. QA samples indicate the method capabilities and
minimum limits of detection when values are positive
ng = 1.0E-09g
ug - 1.0E-06g
ppt =* parts per trillion, dry volume basis
2080 operating hours per year
D-10
-------
TABLE D-6. WIRE AND TRANSFORMER FEED DIOXIN/FURAN
EMISSIONS DATA FOR RUN 5, SITE WRI-A
(As-measured concentrations)
Dioxin/Furan
Isomer
Isomer Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ng/dscm)
Isomer Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ppt)
Isomer Hourly
Emissions Rate
(ug/hr)
DIOXINS
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
Penta-CDD
Hexa-CDD
Hepta-CDD
Octa-CDD
Total PCDD
FURANS
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDF
Total PCDF
1
1
3
5
2
1
4
8
2
1
2
6
4
1
.15E-01(
.53E+00(
.23E+00(
.50E+00(
.07E+01(
.84E+01{
.95E+01
.07E-01(
.15E+01(
.29E+01(
.10E+01(
.17E+01(
.61E+01(
.64E-I-02
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
i
)
!
I
8.
1.
2.
3.
1,
9.
2.
6.
1.
9.
1.
3.
2.
1.
61E-03(
14E-01(
18E-OH
39E-01(
17E+00(
63E-01(
81E+00
34E-02(
69E+00(
13E-01(
34E+00(
63E+00(
50E+00(
01E+01
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A )
) 1
1
3
5
1 !
5
8
2
1
2
6
4
1
.22E-01
.62E+00
.43E+00
.85E+00
.20E+01 .
.96E+01
.25E+01
.57E-01
.28E+01
.37E+01
.22E+01
.55E+01
.89E+01
.74E+02
NOTE: Isomer concentrations shown are at as-measured oxygen conditions.
N° I IKJS?^,J*^J.™,I^J«."»«"»"«)..
ng = l.OE _
ug = 1.0E-06g
?iSft" parj? Pef trillion, dry volume basis
2080 operating hours per year
D-ll
-------
-------
APPENDIX D-3
WIRE FEED DIOXIN/FURAN EMISSIONS DATA
D-13
-------
-------
TABLE D-7. WIRE FEED DIOXIN/FURAN EMISSIONS DATA FOR RUN 1, SITE WRI-A
(Concentrations corrected to 3% Oxygen)
Dioxin/Furan
Isomer
Isomer Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ng/dscm @ 3% oxygen)
Isomer Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ppt @ 3% oxygen)
Isomer Hourly
Emissions Rate
(ug/hr)
DIOXINS
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
Penta-CDD
Hexa-CDD
Hepta-CDD
Octa-CDD
Total PCDD
FURANS
NR
5.59E-01( N/A
NR
3.36E+00( N/A
3.45E+01( N/A
1.67E+01( N/A
5.52E+01
NR
4.18E-02( N/A
NR
2.06E-01( N/A
1.95E+00( N/A
8.75E-01( N/A
3.08E+00
NR
4.43E-01
NR
.66E+00
.73E+01
2.
2.
1.32E+01
4.36E+01
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDF
Total PCDF
NR
4.22E+00( N/A
.72E+00( N/A
1.33E+01(
5.14E+01(
2.93E+01(
N/A
N/A
N/A
NR
3.32E-OH
4.05E-OH
8.53E-01(
3.02E+00(
1.59E+00(
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
NR
3.34E+00
4.53E+00
1.05E+01
4.07E+01
2.32E+01
1.04E+02 6.20E+00 8.22E+01
NOTE: Isomer concentrations shown are corrected to 3% oxyqen
NR = not reported by Troika.
NO
•N/A =
ng =
ug -
PPt
not detected (detection limit in parentheses).
Not applicable. QA samples indicate the method capabilities and
minimum limits of detection when values are positive
1.0E-09g
1.0E-06g
parts per trillion, dry volume basis
2080 operating hours per year
D-15
-------
TABLE D-8. WIRE FEED DIOXIN/FURAN EMISSIONS DATA FOR RUN 2, SITE WRI-A
(Concentrations corrected to 3% Oxygen)
Dioxin/Furan
Isomer
Isomer Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ng/dscm @ 3% oxygen)
Isomer Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ppt @ 3% oxygen)
Isomer Hourly
Emissions Rate
(ug/hr)
DIOXINS
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
Penta-CDD
Hexa-CDD
Hepta-CDD
Octa-CDD
Total PCDD
FURANS
NR
NR
NR
NR
,24E+01( N/A
,29E+01( N/A
3.53E+01
NR
NR
NR
NR
1.27E+00( N/A
6.72E-01( N/A
1.94E+00
NR :
NR
NR
NR
1.94E+01
11E+01
I
3.05E+01
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDF
Total PCDF
NR
1.00E+01( N/A
NR
.31E+00( N/A
6.37E+01(
3.04E+01(
1.07E+02
N/A
N/A
NR-
7.88E-OK N/A
NR
2.12E-01( N/A
3.74E+00( N/A
1.65E+00(
6.39E+00
)
N/A )
NR
8.67E+00
NR
2.86E+00
5.51E+01
2.63E+01
9.29E+01
NOTE: Isomer concentrations shown are corrected to 3% oxygen.
NR s not reported by Troika.
ND = not detected (detection limit in parentheses).
N/A = Not applicable. QA samples indicate the method capabilities and
minimum limits of detection when values are positive.
ng = 1.0E-09g
ug = 1.0E-06g
ppt = parts per trillion, dry volume basis
2080 operating hours per year
D-16
-------
TABLE D-9. WIRE FEED DIOXIN/FURAN EMISSIONS DATA FOR RUN 6, SITE WRI-A
(Concentrations corrected to 3% Oxygen)
Dioxin/Furan
Isomer
Isomer Concentration Isomer Concentration
In Flue Gas In Flue Gas
(ng/dscm 0 3% oxygen) (ppt @ 3% oxygen)
Isomer Hourly
Emissions Rate
(ug/hr)
DIOXINS
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
Penta-CDD
Hexa-CDD
Hepta-CDD
Octa-CDD
Total PCDD
FURANS
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDF
Total PCDF
1.38E-01(
1.84E+00(
3.04E+00(
1.31E+01(
2.07E+02(
1.87E+02(
4.12E+02
5.53E-01(
2.42E+01(
3.96E+OH
9.02E+01(
3.78E+02(
1.48E+02(
6.80E+02.
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A ]
N/A ;
N/A ;
N/A ;
N/A ;
N/A J
1.03E-02I
1.38E-01
2.05E-01
8.08E-01
1.17E+01
9.81E+00
2.27E+01
1 4.34E-02(
1.90E+OOI
2.80E+OOI
5.78E+OOI
2.22E+01I
8.03E+OOI
4.08E+01
[ N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
[ N/A •)
[ N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
8.
1.
1.
8.
1.
1.
2.
3.
1.
2.
5.
2.
9.
4.
92E-02
19E+00
96E+00
47E+00
33E+02
21E+02
66E+02
57E-01
56E+01
55E+01
82E+01
44E+02
57E+01
39E+02
NOTE: Isomer concentrations shown are corrected to 3% oxygen.
N/A = Not applicable. QA samples indicate the method capabilities and
mimmum limits of detection when values are positive
ng = 1.0E-09g
ug = 1.0E-06g
ppt - parts per trillion, dry volume basis
2080 operating hours per year
D-17
-------
-------
APPENDIX D-4
WIRE AND TRANSFORMER FEED DIOXIN/FURAN EMISSIONS DATA
0-19
-------
-------
TABLE D-10.
WIRE AND TRANSFORMER FEED DIOXIN/FURAN
EMISSIONS DATA FOR RUN 3, SITE WRI-A
(Concentrations corrected to 3% Oxygen)
Dioxln/Furan
Isomer
Isomer Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ng/dscm @ 3% oxygen)
Isomer Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ppt @ 3% oxygen)
Isomer Hourly
Emissions Rate
(ug/hr)
DIOXINS
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
Penta-CDD
Hexa-CDD
Hepta-CDD
Octa-CDD
Total PCDD
FURANS
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDF
Total PCDF
5.83E-02
2.62E-01
4.87E+00
5.64E+01
3.89E+02
1.38E+03
1.83E+03
4.66E-01I
2.95E+01
6.22E+01I
2.01E+02
4.40E+02
9.21E+02
1.65E+03
( N/A
; N/A
; N/A
: N/A
N/A
( N/A
[ N/A
: N/A ,
; N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
) 4.35E-03
1 1.96E-02
1 3.29E-01
1 3.47E+00
1 2.20E+01
) 7.23E+01
9.82E+01
) 3.66E-02I
) 2.32E+00<
4.40E+OOi
1.29E+01
2.59E+01
I 4.99E+01
9.55E+01
[ N/A
N/A
N/A
: N/A
: N/A
[ N/A
; N/A
; N/A
: N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
)
1
)
)
4.
2.
3.
4.
2.
1.
1.
3.
2.
4.
1.
3.
7.
1.
45E-02
OOE-01
72E+00
31E+01
97E+02
06E+03
40E+03
56E-01
26E+01
75E+01
54E+02 •
36E+02
03E+02
26E+03
NOTE: Isomer concentrations shown are corrected to 3% oxygen.
NO
N/A
ng
ug
ppt
not detected (detection limit in parentheses).
Not applicable. QA samples indicate the method capabilities and
minimum limits of detection when values are positive.
"*
1.0E-06g
parts per trillion, dry volume basis
2080 operating hours per year
D-21
-------
TABLE D-ll.
WIRE AND TRANSFORMER FEED DIOXIN/FURAN
EMISSIONS DATA FOR RUN 4, SITE WRI-A
(Concentrations corrected to 3% Oxygen)
Dioxin/Furan
Isomer
Isomer Concentration Isom«r Concentration
In Flue Gas In Flue Gas
(ng/dscm @ 3% oxygen) (ppt @ 3% oxygen)
Isomer Hourly
Emissions Rate
(ug/hr)
DIOXINS
2378 TCDD
Penta-CDD
Hexa-CDD
Hepta-CDD
Octa-CDD
Total PCDD
FURANS
NR
.68E+00( N/A
NR
NR
.85E+01( N/A
,95E+01( N/A
1.60E+02
NR
1.25E-OK N/A
4.44E+00( N/A
4.16E+00( N/A
8.72E+00
NR
1.19E+00
NR
NR .
5-.57E+01
5.64E+01
e.3/0 lout-
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDF
Total PCDF
NF
6.86E+01(
NF
4.79E+01(
3.35E+02(
1.73E+02(
6.25E+02
I
N/A
j
N/A
N/A
N/A
. )
)
)
NR
5.40E+00(
Mn
NR
3.07E+00(
1.97E+01(
9.38E+00(
3.76E+01
i
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
)
)
NR
4.87E+01
NR
' 3.40E+01
2.38E+02
1.23E+02
4.44E+02
NOTE:
NR
ND
N/A
ng
ug
: Isomer concentrations shown are corrected to 3% oxyqen
= not reported by Troika. '
- not detected (detection limit in parentheses).
3 m?L«f!p1i?al?le' J*i samples indicate the method capabilities and
- l!oE-09g detection when values are positive.
3 l!oE-06g
• parts per trillion, dry volume basis
operating hours per year
D-22
-------
TABLE D-12. WIRE AND TRANSFORMER FEED DIOXIN/FURAN
EMISSIONS DATA FOR RUN 5, SITE WRI-A
(Concentrations corrected to 3% Oxygen)
Dioxin/Furan
Isomer
Isomer Concentration Isomer Concentration
In Flue Gas In Flue Gas
(ng/dscm (? 3% oxygen) (ppt 0 3% oxygen)
Isomer Hourly
Emissions Rate
(ug/hr)
DIOXINS
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD •
Penta-CDD
Hexa-CDD
Hepta-CDD
Octa-CDD
Total PCDO
FURANS
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDF
Total PCDF
1.94E-01
2.57E+00
5.43E+00
9.26E+00
3.48E+01
3.10E+01
8.32E+01
1.36E+00{
3.61E+01
2.17E+01
3.52E+01
1.04E+02
7.75E+01I
2.76E+02
( N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
[ N/A )
[ N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
N/A
N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
1.45E-02
1.92E-01
3.67E-01
5.70E-01
1.97E+OOI
1.62E+00!
4.73E+00
1.07E-01(
2.84E+OOI
1.54E+OOJ
2.26E+00(
6.10E+00(
4.20E+00(
1.70E+01
( N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
: N/A
; N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
j
)
)
i
1
1
3
5
2
1
5
8
2
1
2
6
4
1
.22E-01
.62E+00
.43E+00
.85E+00
.20E+01 '
.96E+01
.25E+01
.57E-01
.28E+01
.37E+01
.22E+01
.55E+01
.89E+01
. 74E+02
NOTE: Isomer concentrations shown are corrected to 3% oxygen.
not detected (detection limit in parentheses).
NO
N/A
ng - 1.0E-09g
ug = 1.0E-06g
?nfin=nnParJ- Per trillion' d^ volume basis
2080 operating hours per year
D-23
-------
-------
APPENDIX E
ANALYTICAL DATA FOR SITE WRI-A
-------
-------
TABLE E-l. ANALYTICAL DATA FOR THE WIRE-ONLY TEST RUNS
Species
Dioxin
2378-TCDD
Other TCDD
Penta-CDD
Hexa-CDD
Hepta-CDD
Octa-CDD
Furans
2378-TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDF
Run 01
NR
1.3
NR
7.8
80.2
38.9
- NR
9.8
13.3
30.9
119.4
68.0
Nanoarams Per Samnle
Run 02
NR
NR
NR
NR
70.4
40.4
NR
31.5
NR
10.4
200.1
95.5
Train
Run 06
0.3
4.0
6.6
28.5
449.1
407.1
*
1.2
52.6
85.9
195.8
819.8
322.0
NR - data not reported by Troika
E-l
-------
TABLE E-2. ANALYTICAL DATA FOR THE WIRE AND TRANSFORMER TEST RUNS
Species
Dioxin
2378-TCDD
Other TCDD
Penta-CDD
Hexa-CDD
Hepta-CDD
Octa-CDD
Furans
2378-TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDF •
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDF
Run 03
0.2
0.9
16.7
193.6
1334.3
4747.3
1.6
101.4
213.5
690.9
1511.2
3160.4
Nanoarams Per Samole
Run 04
NR
4.3
NR
NR
201.2
203.8
NR
176.0
NR
122.9
859.7
443.8
Train
Run 05
0.;4
5,3
11.2
19.1
71.8
63.9
; -.,
2.8 *
74.5
44.8
72.7
214.0
159.9
NR « data not reported by Troika.
E-2
-------
APPENDIX F
RISK MODELING INPUT DATA FOR SITE WRI-A
-------
-------
APPENDIX F-l
WIRE-ONLY FEED
F-l
-------
-------
TABLE F-l. RISK MODELING INPUT PARAMETERS FOR RUN 01
SITE WRI-A (WIRE-ONLY FEED)
-
Dioxin/Furan Isomer
Isomer Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ng/dscm)
2378 TCDD . NR
Other TCDD 5.16E-01
2378 TCDF " NR
Other TCDF 3.89E+00
Penta-CDD NR
Penta-CDF 5.28E+00
Hexa-CDD 3.10E+00
Hexa-CDF 1.23E+01
Hepta-CDD - 3.18E+01 •
Hepta-CDF 4.74E+01
Octa-CDD 1.54E+01
Octa-CDF 2.70E+01
Isomer Hourly Relative
Emissions Potency
Rate Factor
(ug/hr)
NR 1.
4.43E-01
NR
3.34E+00
MD
NK
4.53E+00
2.66E+00
1.05E+01
2.73E+01
4.07E+01
1-.32E+01
2.32E+01
000
010
inn
1UU
001
500
100
040
010
001
001 .
000
000
Net 2378 TCDD Equivalent Atmospheric Loading
NR = not reported by Troika.
-------
2,3,7,8 - TCDD
Equivalent
Emissions
(mg/yr)
NR
9.21E-03
NR
6.94E-03
NR 1.
9.42E-01
2.21E-01 i
2.19E-01
5.68E-02
8.46E-02
.OOE+00
.OOE+00
1.54E+00
N/A = Hot d^ect?d (detection limit in parentheses).
N/A = detection limit not available
ng = 1.0E-09g
ug = 1.0E-06g
mg = 1.0E-03g
!S!> SSrXTS taSi pe?3y^2° C) ^°r«u™ "- 1 ^osphere pressure.
F-3
-------
TABLE F-2. RISK MODELING INPUT PARAMETERS FOR RUN 02
SITE WRI-A (WIRE-ONLY FEED)
Dioxin/Furan
Isomer
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDD
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDD
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDD
He'pta-CDF
Octa-CDD
Octa-CDF
Isomer ]
Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ng/dscm)
NR
NR
NR
9.63E+00
NR
NR
NR
3.18E+00
.2.15E+01
' 6.12E+01
1.24E+01
2.92E+01
:somer Hourly
Emissions
Rate
(ug/hr)
NR
NR
NR
8.67E+00
NR
NR
NR
2.86E+00
1.94E+01
5.51E+01
1.11E+01 '
2.63E+01
Relative
Potency
Factor
1.000
010
100
.001
.500
100
nan
.010
.001
. .001
.000
.000
2,3,7,8 - TCDD
Equivalent
Emissions
(mg/yr)
NR
MB"
INK
NR
1.80E-02
NR : =i
NP "*
MP
5.95E-02
4.03E-02
1.15E-01
.OOE+00
.OOE+00
Net 2378 TCDD Equivalent Atmospheric Loading 2.32E-01
not reported-fay Troika. "
not detected (detection limit in parentheses).
detection limit not available
1.0E-09g
1.0E-06g
1.0E-03g
IJIS^JS!??!*!?^: J93 K (20 C) temperature and
NR =
ND *
N/A -
ng »
ug »
mg
F-4
-------
TABLE F-3. RISK MODELING INPUT PARAMETERS FOR RUN 06
SITE WRI-A (WIRE-ONLY FEED)
Dioxin/Furan
Isomer
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDD
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDD
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDD
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDD
Octa-CDF
Isomer
Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ng/dscm)
9.29E-02
1.24E+00
3.72E-01
1.63E+01
2.04E+00
2.66E+01
8.82E+00
6.06E+01
1.39E+02
2.54E+02
1.26E+02
9.97E+01
Isomer Hourly
Emissions
Rate
(ug/hr)
8.92E-02
1.19E+00
3.57E-01
1.56E+01
1.96E+00
2.55E+01
8.47E+00
5.82E+01
1.33E+02
2.44E+02
1.21E+02
9.57E+01
Relative
Potency
Factor
1.000
.010
.100
.001
.500
.100
.040
.010
.001
.001 -
.000
.000
2,3,7,8 - TCDD
Equivalent
Emissions
(mg/yr)
1.85E-01
2.47E-02
7.42E-02
3.25E-02 ^
2.04E+00
5.31E+00 :
7.05E-01
1.21E+00
2.78E-01
5.07E-01
.OOE+00
.OOE+00
Net 2378 TCDD Equivalent Atmospheric Loading
1.04E+01
NO
N/A
ng
"9
mg
not detected (detection limit in parentheses).
detection limit not available
1.0E-09g
1.0E-06g
1.0E-03g
loSrtSrSCSs; pS^20 c) temperature a»d > «™^* p««««.
F-5
-------
-------
APPENDIX F-2
WIRE AND TRANSFORMER FEED
F-7
-------
-------
TABLE F-4. RISK MODELING INPUT PARAMETERS FOR RUN 03
SITE WRI-A (WIRE AND TRANSFORMER FEED)
Dioxin/Furan
Isomer
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDD
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDD
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDD"
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDD
Octa-CDF
Isomer
Concentration
In Flue Sas
(ng/dscm)
5
2
4
2
4
5
4
1
3
3
1
8
.12E-02
.30E-01
.09E-01
.59E+01
.27E+00
.46E+01
.95E+01
.77E+02
.41E+02
.86E+02
.21E+03
.08E+02
Isomer Hourly Relative
Emissions Potency
Rate Factor
(ug/hr)
4
2
3
2
3
4
4
1
2
3
1
7
Net 2378 TCDD Equivalent Atmospheric
ND = not detected (detection limit
N/A - detection limit not available
ng =» 1.0E-09g
ug = 1.0E-06g
mg = 1.0E-03g
.45E-02 1.
.OOE-01
.56E-01
.26E+01
.72E+00
•75E+01 . .
.31E+01
.54E+02
.97E+02
.36E+02
.06E+03
.03E+02
Loading
in parentheses)
000
010
100
001
500
100
040
010
001
001
000
000
2,3,7,8 - TCDD
Equivalent
Emissions
(mg/yr)
9
. 4
7
4
3
9
3
3
6
6
.26E-02
.17E-03
•41E-02
.69E-02
.86E+00
.88E+00
.58E+00
.20E+.00
.18E-01
.99E-01
.OOE+00
.OOE+00
2.21E+01
•
2080 operating "hours per^ea^ C) temperature and l atmosphere pressure.
F-9
-------
TABLE F-5. RISK MODELING INPUT PARAMETERS FOR RUN 04
SITE WRI-A (WIRE AND TRANSFORMER FEED)
Dioxin/Furan
Isomer
Isomer
Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ng/dscm)
Isomer Hourly
Emissions
Rate
(ug/hr)
Relative
Potency
Factor
2,3,7,8 - TCDD
Equivalent
Emissions
(mg/yr)
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDD
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDD
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDD
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDD
Octa-CDF
NR
1.32E+00
NR
5.42E+01
NR
NR
NR
3.78E+01
6.19E+01
2.65E+02
6.27E+01
1.37E+02
NR
.19E+00
NR
.87E+01
NR
NR
NR
.40E+01
.57E+01
.38E+02
.64E+01
1.23E+02
Net 2378 TCDD Equivalent Atmospheric Loading
1.000
.010
.100
.001
.500
.100
.040
.010
.001
.001
.000
.000
NR
2.48E-02
NR
1.01E-01
NR
NR
NR
7.08E-01
1.16E-01
4.95E-01
.OOE+00
.OOE+00
1.45E+00
NR « not reported by Troika.
ND - not detected (detection limit in parentheses).
N/A - detection limit not available
ng = 1.0E-09g
ug - 1.0E-06g
mg =• 1.0E-03g
Standard conditions: 293 K (20 C) temperature and 1 atmosphere pressure.
2080 operating hours per year
F-10
-------
TABLE F-6. RISK MODELING INPUT PARAMETERS FOR RUN 05
SITE WRI-A (WIRE AND TRANSFORMER FEED)
Dioxin/Furan Isomer
Isomer Concentration
In Flue Gas
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDD
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDD
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDD
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDD
Octa-CDF
(ng/dscm)
1.15E-01
1.53E+00
8.07E-01
2.15E+01
3.23E+00
1.29E+01
5.50E+00
2.10E+01
2.07E+01
6.17E+01
1.84E+01
4.61E+01
Isomer Hourly Relative
Emissions Potency
Rate . Factor
(ug/hr)
1.22E-01 1.
1.62E+00
8.57E-01
2.28E+01
3.43E+00
1.37E+01
5.85E+00
2.22E+01
2.20E+01
6.55E+01
1.96E+01
4.89E+01
000
010
100
001
500
100
040
010
001
001
000
000
Net 2378 TCDD Equivalent Atmospheric Loading
2,3,7,8 - TCDD
Equivalent
Emissions
(mg/yr)
2.55E-01
3.37E-02
1.78E-01
4.74E-02
3 . 56E+00
2.85E+00
4.86E-01
4,63E-01
4.57E-02
1.36E-01
.OOE+00'
.OOE+00
8.06E+00
ND - not detected (detection limit in parentheses).
N/A - detection limit not available
ng - 1.0E-09g
ug - 1.0E-06g
mg = 1.0E-03g
Standard conditions: 293 K (20 C) temperature and 1 atmosphere pressure
2080 operating hours per year
F-ll
-------
TECHNICAL- REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
EPA-450/4-84-014o
2.
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
National Dioxin Study Tier 4 - Combustion Sources
Final Test Report - Site 6
Wire Reclamation Incinerator WRI - A
5. REPORT DATE
April 1987
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
Lawerence E. Keller, James R. McReynolds,
Deborah J. Benson
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO
87-222-109-02-22
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Ra'dian Corporation
Post Office Box 13000
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
68-03-3148
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS .
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, OAQPS
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Office of Research and Development
Washington, DC 20460
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
EPA Project Officers:
Donald Oberacker, ORD
William B. Kuykendal, OAQPS
16. ABSTRACT
This report summarizes the results of a dioxin/furan emissions test of a wire reclama-
tion incinerator equipped with an afterburner for hydrocarbon emissions" control. The
wire reclamation incinerator is used for recovery of copper from coated copper wire anc
drained transformer cores. The test was the sixth, in a 'series of several dioxin/furan
emissions tests conducted under Tier 4 of the National Dioxin Study. The primary
objective of Tier 4 is to determine if various combustion sources are sources of dioxin
and/or furan emissions. If any of the combustion sources are found to emit dioxin or
furan, the secondary objective of Tier 4 is to quantify these emissions.
Wire reclamation incinerators are one of 8 combustion source categories that have been
tested in the Tier 4 program. The tested incinera.tor, hereafter referred to as incin-
erator WRI-A, was selected for this test after an initial information screening and a
one-day pretest survey visit. Incinerator WRI-A is considered representative, of the
wire reclamation incinerator population in the United States.
Data presented in the report include dioxin (tetra through octa homologue + 2378 TCDD)
and furan (tetra through octa homologue + 2378 TCDF) results for both stack samples and
ash samples. In addition, process data collected during sampling are also presented
17.
KEY WORDS ANO DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFlERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
c. COSATI Field/Group
Air Emissions
Combustion Sources
Dioxin
Furans
2,3,7,8 Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
Wire Reclamation Incinerator
Secondary metals
Air Pollution Emissions
Data
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Release Unlimited
19. SECURITY CLASS f This Report)
Unclassified
21. NO. Or PAGES
228
20. SECURITY CLASS (This page/
Unclas s±f -ferf
22. PRICE
EPA F«m 2220-1 (Rov. 4-77) PREVIOUS EDITION is OBSOLETE
-------