United States        Office of Air Quality Planning     EPA-340/1-82-007
            Environmental Protection   and Standards           June 1982
            Agency          Washington DC 20460     ^-r-,^ ,
            	TJCfc?- IK 551
            Stationary Source Compliance Series
o-EPA     Portland Cement
            Plant
            Inspection Guide

-------
                                  EPA-340/1 -82-007
Portland  Cement Plant
     Inspection Guide
                  by

          PEDCo Environmental, Inc.
            11499 Chester Road
           Cincinnati, Ohio 45246
          Contract No. 68-01-6310
              Task No. 35
      EPA Project Officer: Joseph Gearo, Jr.
                  for

        Office of Air, Noise and Radiation
      Stationary Source Compliance Division
          Washington, D.C. 20460
               June 1982      y 5 Environmental Protection Ageno,  r
                            Region 5, Library (PL-12J)
                            77 West Jackson Boulevard, 12th Flqor
                            Chicago, IL  60604-3590

-------
                           DISCLAIMER
     This report was furnished to the U.S. Environmental Protec-
tion Agency (EPA) by PEDCo Environmental, Inc., in fulfillment
of Contract No. 68-01-6310, Task No. 35.  The contents are as
received from the contractor.  The opinions, findings, and
conclusions expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily
those of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  Mention of
company, process, or product name is not to be considered as an
endorsement by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
                                11

-------
                            CONTENTS
Figures
Tables
Acknowledgment

1.   Introduction                                               1

     1.1  Purpose and scope                                     1
     1.2  Industry overview                                     2

2.   General Preparatory and Inspection Procedures              3

     2.1  File review                                           3
     2.2  Plant entry procedures and pre-inspection
            interview                                           5
     2.3  Exterior plant observations                           9
     2.4  Safety precautions                                   12
     2.5  Inspection equipment                                 12

3.   Process Description and Sources of Atmospheric
       Emissions                                               14

     3.1  Simplified chemical and physical description
            of cement formation                                14
     3.2  Feed preparation                                     15
     3.3  Clinker production                                   22
     3.4  Clinker cooling                                      27
     3.5  Finish grinding and air separation                   30
     3.6  Final product storage,  packaging and loading         30

4.   Atmospheric Emission Control Systems                      31

     4.1  Electrostatic precipitators                          31
     4.2  Fabric filters                                       38
     4.3  Cyclone separators                                   41
     4.4  Gravel-bed filters                                   46
     4.5  Containment and dust suppression practices           50
                               111

-------
                      CONTENTS  (continued)
5.    Plant Operating Conditions and Compliance Determi-
       nation

     5.1  Proper operating conditions and emission prob-
            lems due to process malfunctions and upsets
     5.2  Startup and shutdown problems
     5.3  Compliance determination and emission calcula-
            tions
References

Appendix A


Appendix B


Appendix C

Appendix D

Appendix E
New Source Performance Standards for
  Portland Cement

1981 Directory of Portland Cement Manu-
  facturing Plants

Sample Forms

Method 9—Visible Emission Evaluation

Description of Atmospheric Emission
  Control Systems
Appendix F     A Portland Cement Inspection Report
                                                             Page
 55


 55
 63

 64

 72


A-l


B-l

C-l

D-l


E-l

F-l
                                 IV

-------
                             FIGURES

Number                                                       Page

  1       Sample Form for Information About Previous           4
            Abatement Activities

  2       Sample Form for Information on Process               6

  3       Sample Form for Information on Control Equipment     7

  4       Sample Visible Emission Evaluation Form             11

  5       Schematic Diagram of Portland Cement Process        16
            Flow

  6       Types of Primary Crushing Equipment                 17

  7       Secondary Crusher of the Hammermill Design          19

  8       Ball and Rod Mills Used for Fine Grinding           21

  9       Rotary Kiln With Attached Planetary Clinker         23
            Cooler

 10       Two Variations of Hanging Chains as a Means of      24
            Heat Exchange in the Kiln

 11       Methods of Returning Collected Material to the      28
            Kiln

 12       Types of Clinker Coolers                            29

 13       Example of ESP Electrical Data Checklist for a      37
            Portland Cement Kiln

 14       Representative Arrangement of Gravel-Bed Filter     47
            Modules

 15       Portland Cement Plant Inspection Checklist          57

 16       Particulate Emission Estimate From Portland         67
            Cement Kiln Including Comparison to AP-42
            Emission Factor
                               v

-------
                             TABLES

Number                                                       Page

  1       Application of Emission Control Devices to          32
            Portland Cement Processes

  2       Detection and Solution of ESP Operating Problems    34

  3       Application of Fabric Filters in the Portland       39
            Cement Industry

  4       Fabric Filter Malfunctions and Remedies             42

  5       Cyclone Separator Malfunctions and Remedies         45

  6       Dust Suppression Practices                          52

  7       Quantification of Fugitive Emissions From           54
            Portland Cement Manufacturing

  8       Summary of Inspection Points                        56

  9       Summary of Compliance Determination Methods for     66
            Various Processes
                                VI

-------
                         ACKNOWLEDGMENT

     This inspection guide was prepared by PEDCo Environmental,
Inc., for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Division of
Stationary Source Enforcement.  Mr. John R. Busik was the
Project Officer, and Mr. Joseph R. Gearo, Jr., was the Task
Manager.
     Mr. Thomas C. Ponder, Jr., was PEDCo's Project Director,
and Mr. Richard Gerstle was the Project Manager.  Principal
author of the guide was Mr. Douglas J. Orf.  Additional tech-
nical support was provided by Mr. Donald J. Loudin and Ronald L.
Hawks.
                               vn

-------
                            SECTION 1
                          INTRODUCTION

1.1  PURPOSE AND SCOPE
     This guide has been prepared to assist state and local
regulatory personnel in the inspection of portland cement plants
to determine whether they are in compliance with atmospheric
emission regulations.  Unless otherwise indicated, atmospheric
emissions shall refer to total suspended particulate matter and
visible emissions.  When plants are suspected of being out of
compliance, the guide will assist in determining reasons for
violation, which should help the plant to locate problem areas.
Offering specific process-related recommendations should be
avoided, however, so that neither the agency nor the inspector
personally can be held responsible for problems that could arise
from following these recommendations.
     This guide describes each of the processes associated with
the manufacture of portland cement, the types of equipment used
to control emissions from the processes, and associated operating
and maintenance problems, and it provides procedures for in-
specting the various processes to determine compliance.  Because
each jurisdiction has its own specific emission requirements,
regulations other than the Federal New Source Performance
Standards  (NSPS) for Portland Cement Plants  (Appendix A) have
not been included in this guide.  The inspector must become
familiar with the regulations appropriate to the plant and
specific sources prior to an inspection.
Portland Cement Plant           1             Introduction
Inspection Guide 2/82

-------
1.2  INDUSTRY OVERVIEW
     The primary process in portland cement manufacturing is the
calcining or sintering of carefully ground and mixed raw mate-
rials in an inclined rotary kiln fired by fossil fuel.  The raw
materials are clay, sand, iron ore, limestone shale, feldspar,
etc., which contain calcium carbonate, silica, alumina, ferric
oxide, etc.  Five types of portland cement are manufactured in
the United States.  Each type differs in the composition of the
raw materials and the production methods.
     0    Type I is used for general concrete construction when
          the special properties of the other four types are not
          required.
     °    Type II is used in general concrete construction ex-
          posed to moderate sulfate action or where moderate
          heat of hydration is required.
     0    Type III is used when high early strength is required.
     0    Type IV is used when a low heat of hydration is re-
          quired.
     0    Type V is used when high sulfate resistance is re-
          quired.
     Chemical reactions that occur during calcining result in
the formation of a clinker.  Pulverizing these clinkers with
gypsum yields a powder called portland cement.  Mixed with
water, portland cement forms a slowly hardening paste; when sand
and gravel are added to the mixture, it becomes concrete.
Approximately 1.6 tons of raw materials are required to produce
1 ton of cement.  On the average, about 35 percent  (0.6 ton) of
                                                           2
raw material weight is removed as carbon dioxide and water.
     In 1980, a total of 89.6 million tons of portland cement
were produced by 156 plants in the United States.   The States
of California, Pennsylvania, Michigan, New York, and Texas
accounted for 43 percent of this production; Puerto Rico and  34
other states produced the remaining 57 percent.   Appendix B
lists portland cement manufacturing plants in the United States
according to ownership.
Portland Cement Plant           2                  Introduction
Inspection Guide 2/82

-------
                             SECTION 2
           GENERAL PREPARATORY AND INSPECTION PROCEDURES

      The  compliance  status  of a  plant  sometimes  can  be determined
 by  visible emission  observations.   Frequently, however,  com-
 pliance determination  requires detailed  information  concerning
 the operation  and maintenance of the process and abatement
 equipment.   Because  the  inspector is responsible for obtaining
 this information,  this guide presents  a  procedure for accomplish-
 ing this  task.   In some  cases, a definite  conclusion on  compli-
 ance may  require a source emission test, and the inspector must
 have sufficient  reason to recommend such a test.

 2.1  FILE REVIEW
      Before  conducting an inspection,  the  inspector  should
 thoroughly review the  pertinent  files  at the regulatory  agency to
 acquire the  necessary  regulatory information and to  become
 familiar  with  the  types  of  process and pollution control equip-
 ment used at the cement  plant being inspected.   Being prepared
 before entering  the  plant saves  valuable time for both the in-
 spector and  plant  personnel.   Also by  reviewing  the  files, the
 inspector becomes  aware  of  information gaps  and  the  inspection
 provides  a means of  updating  and completing  the  files.  By being
 informed  about the source,  the inspector also creates a favorable
 impression of being  knowledgeable  and  interested;  such an im-
 pression  makes plant personnel more inclined to  be helpful in
 providing information.
      Figure  1 is an  example of a completed checklist  of spe-
 cific information  concerning  previous  abatement  activities that
 the inspector should obtain  from the files.   Process  and control

Portland Cement Plant           3          Preparatory and
Inspection Guide 2/82                      Inspection Procedures

-------
                        PRE-INSPECTION ABATEMENT ACTIVITIES CHECKLIST

         Name of company:     A  fd ft la. flit
         Address:     P/W/5W      ;   f/W  1/S.-1

         Responsible  person:     JTahn
                                  m - -  -

         Previous Inspection:

              Date:   rtt>r)«l«Y ,
F1 ndinos:   Mii» y-> t/f. 'cA»Xtr
Process rate:  	/fc 70  tons
                                            fttr vef j. -
                                            s/day  Kiln 0?:
                                              F   Gas flow
Gas temperature"          100  ^F   Gas flow rate:   l^^aoo  acfm
Emission control  equipment parameters:  K///J £^P • SO A V /<./-<.' & a >**
c-linXer ccc/er fF'£p-•»./?- f>-,O, LfjshfrH>,AA fi^al'er  ff ,'&f; -vm. Ht O—
          Stack Test:
              Testing company:   PiACo
              Date of test:    yt!r.h
                                  .          _ . _ . - . -
              Results (obtain copy 1f possible):    cofy  ohhunt'tJ _
              Visible emissions observations:    ftiifi- '.r* lo %  ftvefag* /aa//^ ~u 3 9a
              Compliance  status:   A/ fas/ie 'am € _ _^__
              Action taken:
                                  _ _ _____
              Process rate:       JA3r £&p :+' ^ F-*, - J/j-^/

          Visible Emission Observations  (other than above):
               Date:   3.-J-8/a-*( 7-Jt)-g/
               Average readings:  }'*-gl -te ). -** -x///> ?,v^'fcWr/y r)-

          Complaints:

               Dates, nature, and findings:  V-ff' PLatf fr&nplarf
                          '
                 .. •    a*',i tit          -a            -
               H-/3-ZI P!un>f.  frw f>Ja,i} ~&ay& ifj F.F. on tJinKtr- o^/er

          Malfunctions:

               Dates, nature,  duration, and action taken:   £S/"f FF et-oi/errts, c/'/  hr&    Ma action taX.*r\


          Compliance Schedule:
               Figure 1.   Sample  form  for information  about previous
                                  abatement activities.
Portland  Cement  Plant                4               Preparatory and
Inspection  Guide  2/82                                Inspection  Procedures

-------
 equipment information (described in later sections)  also should
 be obtained at this time and recorded as seen in Figures 2 and
 3.  These checklists can be duplicated and used to obtain in-
 formation during the inspection.  Appendix C includes blank
 forms for this purpose.   The comparison of past information,
 particularly data recorded during stack testing and other
 inspections, with information obtained during the current
 inspection can be helpful.  The previous information should
 indicate a normal range  of operating conditions for the process
 and abatement equipment, so that deviations from these are
 readily apparent.  For example,  excess visible emissions in
 conjunction with a lower than previously recorded pressure drop
 across a fabric filter would indicate broken or missing bags.

 2.2  PLANT ENTRY PROCEDURES AND PRE-INSPECTION INTERVIEW
      If the agency policy is to advise the plant of an upcoming
 inspection,  the inspector should give the plant ample notice.
 For some plants that may be only a day's notice,  whereas for
 others,  it may be a week or more.   Advance notice to key plant
 personnel can help the inspection to progress smoothly because
 it allows these individuals to plan their schedules so they are
 available to answer questions and take part in the inspection.
      When arriving at the plant,  the inspector should have
 proper agency identification.   Often this will include a photo-
 graph and physical description of the inspector.   Also,  the
 inspector should have the name of the official plant contact.
      It is also important that the inspector bring proper pro-
 tective equipment for the inspection,  including hard hat,  safety
 glasses with side shields,  steel-toed safety shoes,  dust mask,  a
 long-sleeved-shirt,  trousers,  and ear plugs.
      The inspector should describe the scope of the  inspection
 to the official plant contact.   This will include the purpose of
 the inspection,  a listing of the processes to be  observed,  and
 the approximate duration of the  inspection.
Portland Cement Plant           5          Preparatory and
Inspection Guide 2/82                      Inspection Procedures

-------
                     CHECKLIST FOR PROCESS DATA
Kiln:
Dimensions:
Chains:
Process:
Slurry:
                  13.
                  Ye
                     wet
     Feed rate  )9O
    Type cement produced:
    Dry solids    S3.V    tons/h
    Fuel:
         Type:
                                          No
                                            Dry

                                       gal/min  Moisture
                                                %  Carbonate  73.
     Quality:
                                 /o  Ib/h  Source *
Flue gas:
     Volume  /?0j6i?e>  acfm
                         °F
                                       (,&    tons/h
                      Temperature
                      % oxygen     3
                        V7.T
             Clinker Cooler:

                  Type:  osc/.'/nf'»^ grate
                  Flue gasi         Q
                      Volume _ J
     Temperature
                                           3SQ
                      Clinker cooling  rate

             Finishing Mill:

                  Number:     £	   	
                  Volume handled by each:
                  Type:     baH art rod
                                     acfm
                                     CF
                                     tons/h
                                      tons/h
                  Flue gas:
                      Vol ume
                      Temperature
                     rj^.^a? acfm
                      sco- °F
Crusher
                  Number:  hl'tl-S"
                  Volume handled by each:
                  Type:   gyraiory
                                     tons/h
                  Flue gas
                      Volume h3oo
                              r r^'/ il
                          acfm
         Temperature
   Figure 2.   Sample  form  for  information on  process.
Portland  Cement Plant
Inspection Guide  2/82
                                               Preparatory and
                                               Inspection  Procedures

-------
CHECKLIST FOR CONTROL
Kiln:
Fabric filter: Yes ' No
Cloth
Area
Air-to-cloth ratio
Pressure drop
Collection efficiency
Electrostatic precipitator: */ Yes
Total plate area 63,3*8
Wire length 3S~.<)6O
Specific collection area 'sis'. 9
Collection efficiency 97. 1
Precleaner: Type rvul+iplt cychut
Description & Uf,if-, f jy-/,,. «//fl«ek
Clinker Cooler:
Fabric filter: 
Area ^?33 ft*
Air-to-cloth ratio g-. ,
Pressure drop 7. P
Collection efficiency 9?.?


ft*
acfm/ft2
in. H20
%
No
~ Ft?
ft
ft*/
1000 acfm

r

tM/S
acfm/
ft2
in. H20
5!

^ No
ft
ft2/
1000 acfm
in. H20

%
3 acfm/
ft*
in. H20
%

EQUIPMENT
Fields (f
Chambers S
Superficial velocity 1
Number T/R sets /P
Water rate
Type of bag cleaning:
Shaker
7" Pulse jet
Reverse air
Fields
Chambers
Superficial velocity
Number T/R sets
Water rate
Type of bag cleaning:
i/" Shaker
Pulse jet
Reverse air



s.J~ ft/s

gal/min


ft/s

gal/min

       Figure  3.  Sample form for information on  control  equipment.
Portland  Cement Plant
Inspection  Guide 2/82
Preparatory and
Inspection Procedures

-------
     The plant official may request the following:  the authority
for conducting the inspection, the organizational arrangement of
the agency represented, and the method for handling confidential
material.  The inspector should be able to provide a satisfactory
answer to all of these questions.  (In announced inspections,
this information is sometimes requested at the time the inspec-
tion is  scheduled.)
     The inspector should ask the plant official if there are
currently any malfunctions or unusual operating conditions at the
plant, their nature, and expected duration.  Based upon the
severity and duration of any malfunction or operating condition,
the inspector should decide whether to postpone the inspection
until such time as conditions are normal.
     The inspector should tell the plant official what type of
equipment  (described in Section 2.5) will be used to obtain
measurements during the inspection and indicate that plant-spe-
cific Union rules  (where applicable) will be honored.  If nec-
essary,  plant personnel can be instructed in the use of the
equipment.
     If  possible, the inspector should obtain a plot plan of the
facility so that, with the assistance of the plant official, a
methodical inspection itinerary can be developed.
     Occasionally, the plant official may request the inspector
to sign  forms waiving legal rights resulting from an accident or
restricting access to certain areas of the plant.  The inspector
should immediately notify the agency supervisor and let the
supervisor describe the agency policy to the plant officials and
explain  the reasons why the inspector should not sign the forms.
     The inspector should advise the plant that a report will be
written describing the findings of the inspection.  Depending on
the policy of the agency, a copy of the report may or may not be
provided to the plant.  The inspector should not make any com-
ments concerning compliance status during the inspection.
Portland Cement Plant           8          Preparatory and
Inspection Guide 2/82                      Inspection Procedures

-------
      If refused entry to the plant either when scheduling an
 inspection or during an unannounced inspection, the inspector
 should obtain a reason and the name of the person authorizing the
 refusal.  No attempt should be made to identify the legal ramifi-
 cations of the refusal.  The inspector should simply notify the
 regulatory agency supervisor so that appropriate action can be
 taken.

 2.3   EXTERIOR PLANT OBSERVATIONS
      Before entering plant property or while moving from one
 process operation to another, the inspector can gain considerable
 information by viewing the exterior of the plant.  Sources of
 fugitive dust which should be observed are raw material storage
 piles, heavy equipment movement on plant property, and transfer
 points for the material being moved from one process to the next.
 The inspector should also note the weather conditions  (especially
 precipitation and windspeed) during and prior to the inspection.
 Evidence of excessive cement dust in the area surrounding the
 plant may indicate an emission problem.  The inspector should
 look  for dust accumulation on parked automobiles, houses, side-
 walks, etc.  Some dust in the area is natural because of the
 materials and processes involved.   Odors resulting from the
 combustion of fossil fuels and raw materials may also be detected
 in the area of the kiln and should be noted if excessive.
      These activities also provide an opportunity to observe the
 general housekeeping practices of the plant and give the in-
 spector an overall picture of the plant layout for comparison
 with  information obtained from the files.   The inspector also can
 get an idea of the level of activity by observing the raw mate-
 rial and product loading operations,  plant traffic,  and equipment
 in operation.
     While off plant property,  the inspector can normally use a
 camera to photograph excessive visible emissions or fugitive
dust;  however,  some state laws prohibit the use of a camera
Portland Cement Plant           9          Preparatory and
Inspection Guide 2/82                      Inspection Procedures

-------
without the prior permission of the plant.  Data regarding any
photographs taken (e.g., date, time of day, weather conditions,
position relative to the source) must be recorded immediately.
In all cases, permission to take photographs within must be
obtained from plant officials.
     Visible emission observations are important in determining
the operating conditions of processes and associated control
equipment.  When observing opacity from stacks, the inspector
should follow the procedures of Federal EPA Method 9  (Appendix
D).   Windspeed, sky condition, and other weather data are im-
portant because the reading may be challenged  in court.  Also
important  is a diagram  identifying the particular source being
read  (e.g.,  the Nordberg hammermill for secondary crushing)  and
the observer's position in relation to the  sun and the source.
A sample visible emission observation form is  shown in Figure  4.
      The inspector  should record  opacity  readings on  the obser-
vation  form for a specified duration, depending upon  the  local
requirements.  Although the regulation may specify a  plume
opacity below  a certain average for  say a 6-minute period,  the
inspector  may  want  to  take  the reading  for a  longer period,  say
30 minutes, and  look  for  a   6-minute  period that exceeds  the
 limit.
      Opacity readings  are usually obtained most easily  before
entering the plant  for the  inspection or  after leaving  plant
property.   The inspector  should compare the recorded  opacities
 for a source with values  obtained by the  plant's continuous
 emission monitoring equipment (if available)  for that source
 during the same time period.   The frequency of calibration of
 these instruments should also be checked.
      If the agency's policy is to provide the plant with a copy
 of the opacity readings,  the plant official receiving the copy
 should sign and date the original.
 Portland Cement Plant           10         Preparatory and
 Inspection Guide 2/82                      Inspection Procedures

-------
    (PAIR '01
                        VISIBLE EMISSION OBSERVATION FORM
•OUftCE NAME
ADDRESS

STATE ZIP

PHONE
^
SOURCE ID NUMBER
OBSERVATION X X
DATE >T -X'
OBSIRVER'SNAME (PRINT)
ORGANIZATION
T^

CERTIFIEOBY
^^ VL^ \.
^^-"^ BUN SHADOW LINE ^^^

PROCESS

OPERATING MODE

CONTROL EQUIPMENT
OPERATING MODE



ABOVE GROUND LEVEL
DISTANCE TO
f MISSION POINT
EMISSION POINT HEIGHT
RELATIVE TO OBSERVER
DIRECTION TO
EMISSION POINT
DESCRIBE EMISSIONS

COLOR OF EMISSIONS
WATER VAPOR PRESENT
NO O VSS Q
CONTINUOUS D FUGITIVE C
INTERMITTENT D
IF YES. is PLUME
ATTACHED DETACHED
D D



COLOR OF BACKGROUND

AMBIENT TEMPERATURE





SKY CONDITIONS


RELATIVE HUMIDITY






;
tMISSI
OBSERVER'S SIGNATURE DATE X x



START TIME
0 IB 10 45
1
2
3
4
5
6

a
9
10
1 1
1}
13
14
15
16
17
16
19
20
21
22
73
24

26
28
29
30




















































































































AVERAGE OPACITY
c
ATE f J

• TOP TIME
0 IB JO 48
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
36
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47

49
SO

52
S3
54

66
58
G9
60




















































































































NUMBER OF READINGS ABOVE
kM/FRF
RANGE OF OPACITY
DRAW NORTH ARROW
ON PT. ^*-~ -^
1 HAVE RECEIVED A COPY OF THESE OPACITY OBSERVATIONS.

              Figure 4.  Sample visible emission evaluation form.
Portland Cement  Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
11
Preparatory and
Inspection Procedures

-------
2.4  SAFETY PRECAUTIONS
     Although the use of  proper protective equipment should
provide some degree of safety,  the inspector should be aware of
the routine hazards inherent in cement plants and the following
precautions should be observed:
     0    Do not touch the moving parts of any of the process
          equipment.
     0    Do not touch the kiln, clinker cooler, or associated
          equipment; they are extremely hot.
     0    Do not enter roped-off areas of the plant.
     0    Do not start up a ladder until the person immediately
          ahead has reached a landing.
     0    Do not lean on platform guardrails; they may not be
          secure.
     0    Be mindful of footing at all times; there could be
          obstacles.
     0    Be alert; there may be moving vehicles  in the area,
          temporary platforms,  and danger from  falling objects.
     0    Be aware of  and obey  warning  signs.
     0    Be aware of  specific  safety features  governing each
          type  of  control equipment;  always let plant personnel
          open  doors,  etc.
      0    Discuss  any special  safety  precautions peculiar  to this
          plant with  plant  personnel.

 2.5  INSPECTION EQUIPMENT
      The equipment used  during an inspection varies according to
 the time allotted and the  complexity  of the inspection.  For
 example, a  detailed inspection involving several days at the
 plant could require the  following:  a pitot tube to measure the
 gas stream flows,  a manometer  for measuring the pressure drop
 across control  equipment,  a thermometer for measuring stack gas
 temperatures,  a tachometer for measuring fan speed, an ammeter
 Portland Cement Plant           12         Preparatory and
 Inspection Guide 2/82                      Inspection Procedures

-------
for measuring fan motor current, an oxygen meter for concentra-
tion of the kiln gases, and a flashlight for observing unlighted
areas inside the control equipment.  For a less detailed and
shorter inspection, the inspector may only need a camera, a
compass, and the proper protective equipment.  Readings obtained
from plant instruments  (e.g., oxygen monitors on the kiln,
thermocouples indicating temperatures of stack gases) should be
recorded, however.
     If permitted on plant property, a camera provides a useful
tool, not only to illustrate excessive opacity levels, but also
to describe problems arising from corrosion, poor housekeeping,
missing bags or motors for the control equipment, proximity of
sources to each other, etc.  Immediately after taking a photo-
graph, the inspector should write descriptions of the situation
represented in each photograph and the time, date, weather con-
ditions, and directional information.
     A compass is useful in determining directions of sources
relative to each other, to the sun, and to the inspector.
     The volume of heavy equipment and raw material movement
makes portland cement plants dusty and noisy by nature.  Use of
the proper protective equipment is important for the safety of
the inspector.  A dust mask and safety glasses with side shields
are required in the dusty environment.   A long-sleeved shirt and
trousers provide some protection against hot materials.  Steel-
toed shoes and a hard hat are required to protect against over-
head hazards and heavy objects.  Ear plugs are required to pre-
vent hearing damage in high noise areas such as crushing and
grinding operations.   Neckties, ribbons, and finger rings should
not be worn during the inspection.
Portland Cement Plant           13         Preparatory and
Inspection Guide 2/82                      Inspection Procedures

-------
                            SECTION 3
    PROCESS DESCRIPTION AND SOURCES OF ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS

     Offsite processes that contribute to air pollution in the
Portland cement industry are the quarrying of raw materials and
the transport of those materials to the plant site.  Manufactur-
ing plant sources of air pollution are the crushing, grinding,
mixing, and blending of raw materials; clinker production;
clinker cooling operations; finish grinding of the clinker with
gypsum; and storage, packaging, and loadout of the finished
product.  Although this guide concerns itself only with the
processes at the manufacturing site, it should be emphasized that
quarrying contributes a significant amount of atmospheric emis-
sions.

3.1  SIMPLIFIED CHEMICAL AND PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION OF CEMENT
     FORMATION
     The basic raw materials in portland cement manufacturing
contain calcium carbonate, silicon oxide, alumina, and ferric
oxides with minor amounts of sulfate, alkali, and carbonaceous
materials.  Chemically combined water and carbonaceous materials
are removed because of the heat from the feed end of the kiln.
As the temperature is increased, the alkali materials are vola-
tilized and removed with the kiln gases.  Limestone  (calcium
carbonate) dissociates to calcium oxide and carbon dioxide under
atmospheric pressure at 1650°F, and alumina begins to decompose
at about 1800°F.  (These initial reactions begin before any
liquid has formed.  Liquid formation takes place at the surface
and extends into the grains only by the slow process of dif-
fusion.)  Interaction between CaO and SiO,, begins to occur in a

Portland  Cement Plant           14      Processes  and Emission
Inspection Guide  2/82                   Sources

-------
 liquid phase when the material reaches about 2000°F.  The reac-
 tion speeds up at 2500°F, and dicalcium silicate forms in the
 presence of liquid, which first appears at about 2350°F.  The
 interaction of dicalcium silicate with additional CaO to form
 tricalcium silicate (which is essential for the formation of
 Portland cement)  is slow, even at higher temperatures,  but the
 presence of alumina and ferric oxide considerably increases the
 rate of formation.  If the temperature fails to exceed 2500°F,
 only small amounts of tricalcium silicate are formed.  In this
 case (referred to as dusting)  the cement is valueless.

 3.2  FEED PREPARATION
      Upon receipt from the quarry,  the raw materials are crushed,
 screened, and ground to the appropriate size for mixing and
 blending before they are charged to the kiln.   As Figure 5
 shows,  crushing sometimes takes place in two or three stages.
 Crushing, screening, and grinding operations may be vented to
 the atmosphere, and all are potential sources of particulate
 emissions.   The emission rate  depends on the kind of raw material
 and its moisture  content,  characteristics of the crusher, the
 kind of control equipment,  and its  operation and condition.
 3.2.1  Crushing and Screening
      Crushing reduces  the size of rock obtained from the quarry.
 Crushing equipment typically consists of primary and secondary
 crushers,  but sometimes tertiary crushers also  are  needed.   Pri-
 mary crushing reduces  the quarry rock (often as large as 4  to  5
 feet in diameter)  to 6  to 10 inches in diameter by  use  of jaw,
 gyratory,  and roll crushers.   The type of crusher used  depends
 on  the  hardness,  lamination, and size of rock.
      Figure  6  presents  schematics and illustrations  of  the
 different types of crushers.   Jaw crushers  consist  of two steel
 jaws that accept  material to be  crushed.  As  the swing  jaw moves
Portland Cement Plant           15       Processes and Emission
Inspection Guide 2/82                   Sources

-------
                                                            to
                                                            to
                                                            OJ
                                                            o
                                                            o

                                                            Q-
                                                            QJ

                                                            CU
                                                            O
                                                            S-
                                                            o
                                                            Q.
                                                           ns

                                                           -a

                                                           o
                                                           fO
                                                           I
                                                           o
                                                           LTJ


                                                           O)
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection  Guide 2/82
16
Processes  and Emission
Sources

-------
                                                        SCHEMATIC OF
                                                         JAW CRUSHER
                                         JAW CRUSHER
                                                         SCHEMATIC OF
                                                       GYRATORY CRUSHER
                                         GYRATORY CRUSHER
                                                        SCHEMATIC OF
                                                        ROLL CRUSHER
                                         ROLL CRUSHER
              Figure 6.   Types of primary  crushing equipment.
Portland Cement Plant             17       Processes and Emission
Inspection Guide 2/82                      Sources

-------
 downward and  toward  a  stationary  jaw,  it  crushes  upward  and  back
 while  allowing  the crushed  material  to exit.
     Gyratory crushers  have a  conical  head with a gyratory  (not
 rotary)  movement  inside an  outer  concave  bowl.  The  crushing
 force  results from the  steel cone pressing the material  against
 an outside  steel  wall.
     Roll crushers have a steel roller equipped with knobs that
 extend 3 or 4 inches beyond the surface of the roller, and the
 rock is  crushed between the knobs and  a steel plate.
     A conveyor transports  the rock  from  the primary crusher to
 a vibrating screen where varying  sizes of rock are classified
 and separated according to  size.  The  process consists of drop-
 ping the crushed  rock onto  a screening surface with  uniformly
 sized  apertures.  Particles  larger than the openings are rejected
 and transported back to the  crusher  for further size reduction.
 Smaller particles pass  through the openings to a  secondary
 crusher, which  is usually a  hammermill (see Figure 7).  This
 crusher can reduce the  diameter of the rock to less  than 3/4
 inch.  The  material is  fed  into a chute leading to a series  of
 hammers that  strike the rock at a high rate of speed and force
 it into a collision with a breaker plate.
     Occasionally, a tertiary crusher  is  necessary,  in which
 case the material is sent through a  finer hammermill operation,
which  reduces it to about 5/16 inch.   After each  crushing opera-
 tion,  the rock  enters a screening operation.   After  the last
 crushing step,  a bucket elevator  transports each  kind of raw
material to separate compartments for  storage prior  to fine
 grinding.
     Particulate emissions result from the open transporting of
 the crushed material and from the crushing and screening opera-
 tions  that  are  vented to the atmosphere.
 3.2.2  Fine Grinding, Mixing, and Blending
     Raw materials are  drawn from their separate  storage compart-
ments  and proportioned  for the proper  composition before being

Portland Cement Plant           18      Processes and Emission
 Inspection Guide 2/82                   Sources

-------
                              HAMMERMILL
                              SCHEMATIC OF
                               HAMMERMILL


           Figure  7.  Secondary crusher of the hammermill design.'
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide  2/82
19
Processes and Emission
Sources

-------
charged to the kiln.  Composition of the feed material depends
on whether a "wet process" or a "dry process" is to be used.
(Figure 5 depicts each of these techniques.)
     In the dry process, hot gases provided by direct-firing of
separate furnaces or by the flow of exit gases from the kilns
reduce the moisture content of the crushed material to less than
1.0 percent.  These crushed raw materials are proportioned as
they enter the fine grinding mill.  The material must be finely
ground and thoroughly mixed to produce uniform clinker composition
(the end result of kiln calcining).  In closed-loop operations,
air separators or screens return oversized material to the mill
for further grinding and the appropriately sized fraction is
transported to the storage area.
     In the wet process, crushed raw materials and water are fed
to a fine grinding operation.  The resulting slurry, which is
about one-third water,  is discharged from the mill and stored  in
open tanks, where additional mixing takes place.  From the
tanks, the slurry is either pumped directly  to the kilns or
dewatered first so that the kiln  feed is approximately 65 per-
cent solids.
     Ball and rod mills of the type shown in Figure 8 are used
in both methods of  fine grinding.  These consist of cylindrical
shells with protruding  ridges that move either steel balls  or
rods partially up the interior side of the cylinder as it rotates
at 15 to  18 revolutions per minute.  The balls or  rods cascade
back down into the  raw  material  and grind it to a  fine consisten-
cy.  The mills are  charged to about 45 percent of  their  volume
with steel balls up  to  5  inches  in diameter  or with steel rods 2
to 5 inches in diameter.
     Particulate emissions are only a problem  in the  dry grinding
and air  separation  processes; the water  retains the particles  in
the slurry during wet grinding.
     In  the dry  process,  mixing  and blending of the finely
ground material  occurs  in silos.   Open  tanks are used in the wet
process.
Portland Cement Plant           2Q       Processes and Emission
Inspection Guide 2/82                    Sources

-------
                 BALL MILL
            CUT-AWAY OF BALL  MILL
              ROD MILL


           Figure 8-  Ball and rod mills used for  fine grinding.
          CUT-AWAY OF ROD MILL

                         5
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide  2/82
23       Processes  and Emission
         Sources

-------
3.3  CLINKER PRODUCTION
     The rotary kiln is the major potential source of atmospheric
emissions at portland cement plants.  These kilns also emit
oxides of nitrogen (NO )  and sulfur dioxide (SO9) [and possibly
                      X                        ^
some sulfur trioxide (SO ) ] , ammonia (NH3>, and hydrogen sulfide
(H S) as a result of the high temperature (2600° to 3000°F)
  &
combustion of fossil fuels and the nature of the feed material.
Figure 9 depicts a rotary kiln with an attached planetary
clinker cooler.
     The rotary kiln has three stages of operation:  feed, fuel
                                         4
firing, and clinker cooling and handling.   The raw materials
are fed into the elevated end of a slightly inclined refractory-
lined steel cylinder which rotates at about 50 to 90 revolutions
per hour.  The kiln is usually 150 to 500 feet in length and 8
to 16 feet in diameter, although some may be considerably  larger.
The various burning zones within the kiln are lined with dif-
ferent types of refractory material to withstand the varying
temperature ranges in the kiln.  Fuel (pulverized coal, fuel
oil, or natural gas) is blown in from the lower  end with hot air
that has been pre-heated by passing over the clinker in the
coolers at the lower end of the kiln.  Combustion gases pass
through the kiln counterflow to the material. '
     As the kiln rotates,  its slightly inclined  position causes
the  feed to travel slowly  downward, and  it becomes exposed to
increasing heat.  First, the water  is evaporated with  the  aid  of
various types of heat exchangers; a bank  of hanging  steel  chains
 (Figure 10) is one of the  most common types.  As the temperature
of the charge  increases, organic compounds are  volatilized,
sulfates are decomposed, and chlorides and alkali  salts are
partially volatilized.  About midsection of the kiln,  calcium
and  magnesium  carbonates are decomposed  and carbon dioxide is
 liberated.  Calcium  oxide  and magnesium  oxide are  also formed.
 In the hot  zone  (2700°F),  about  20  to  30 percent of  the charge
 is converted to  liquid.   It is through this medium that the
 chemical reactions  proceed and the  material turns  incandescent.
Portland Cement Plant          22        Processes and Emission
Inspection Guide 2/82                    Sources

-------
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
23
Processes and Emission
Sources

-------
               Figure 10.  Two  variations of hanging chains
                as a means of heat exchange in the  kiln.
Portland  Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
24
Processes  and Emission
Sources

-------
At this stage, the clinker appears as round, marble-sized, hard
glass balls. ' '
     The kiln is a large source of particulate emissions and
consumes large quantities of fuel (an average of one million
Btu's are required to calcine one barrel of cement—376 pounds).
Several design and operational changes are possible to reduce
these tendencies.  Design features that would reduce emissions
include larger kiln diameters at the feed end and the addition
of suspension preheaters.  Enlarging the kiln diameter reduces
the gas velocity and results in less dust entrainment.  Sus-
pension preheaters reduce emissions by feeding the raw material
through a series of cyclones against an upward gas flow, which
results in an effective countercurrerit heat exchange.
     Kiln designs vary.  Some of the newer designs result in
more efficient fuel combustion.  The types of kilns used in the
dry process are short rotary units (either with or without
preheaters), rotary kilns with a suspension preheater, long
rotary kilns with a built-in preheater, or an ACL kiln  (Lepol)
with double gas flow.  The Lepol, a semidry process, is typical
of traveling grate preheaters, where exit gas is used to heat a
layer of pelletized raw feed spread on a traveling grate.
Because the raw material is dried and preheated on the grate
before entering the kiln, the combined length of the kiln and
the grate is about 40 percent shorter than conventional units.
This process reduces energy consumption to about 700,000 Btu's
           4
per barrel.
     Wet process kilns are either short kilns with cyclone pre-
heaters or long kilns with internal chain preheaters.  In the
United States, rotary kilns are used, and most new plants use
long kilns with chains or some other kind of preheating system.
The chains have been proved effective for heat transfer and for
improving fuel consumption.  They are suspended in the preheat-
ing zone of the kiln and arranged so as to lift the slurry into
the path of the hot gases and simultaneously to convey materials
toward the burning zone.
Portland Cement Plant          25        Processes and Emission
Inspection Guide 2/82                    Sources

-------
     Some preheating and heat exchange methods for energy con-
servation can also be used.  The Humbolt preheater provides a
series of cyclones through which the gases exiting the kiln pass
before they reach the dust collectors.  The dry feed enters the
top chamber, falls through each cyclone, and is swept upward by
moving gases.  (The feed is heated to about 1380°F before
reaching the kiln.)
     The Mieg process allows exit gases and dust from the kiln
to pass through a slowly rotating drum that contains heat
exchange members.  As the slurry passes through the drum, its
moisture content is reduced from 30 percent down to 7 percent.
     The Vickers desiccator is an enlarged section at the feed
end of the kiln; the slurry passes over a double screw attached
to the shell of the desiccator before entering the kiln.  A
section of similar length follows the screw and contains chains
where the diameter tapers to normal.  This system reduces the
moisture content of the slurry from 40 percent to 8 percent.
     The Holderbank heat exchanger consists of lifters that
raise the charge and cascade it back through the hot gases.  A
vortex is produced by a row of guide vanes that increase the gas
flow rate.  This heat exchanger reduces fuel consumption by 21
percent.
     Depending on  its alkali content, dust collected in the
initial stages of  the kiln control devices often can be returned
to the kiln, which reduces disposal problems and the use of raw
materials.  Two methods used to return this dust are direct
return by mixing with the kiln feed and direct return parallel
to the kiln feed.  The dust can also be returned by scoop feeders
in front of the chain system or by use of a leaching system in
which collected dust is mixed with large volumes of water and
then dewatered to  remove water-soluble alkali material before  it
is remixed with the kiln feed and spray impinged onto the chain
system.  Still another method is insufflation, which returns dry
dust to the burning zone,  either through the  fuel pipe or by a
separate pipe running parallel to the fuel pipe.  This latter
Portland Cement Plant          26        Processes and Emission
Inspection Guide 2/82                    Sources

-------
method results in about 8 percent fuel savings, but it can in-
crease emission levels.  No one method is satisfactory for all
kilns.  Figure 11 depicts these various methods of returning
collected material to the kiln.

3.4  CLINKER COOLING
     The clinker leaving the lower end of the kiln has a tempera-
ture of approximately 2700°F.  The clinker cooler serves a dual
purpose; it reduces the temperature of the clinker so that proc-
essing can continue; and it provides a means of recovering the
heat from the clinker to preheat primary or secondary combustion
air.
     The three general types of coolers are shown in Figure 12.
The early coolers were rotary coolers, which consisted of one-
third refractory-lined cylindrical steel shells with lifters
that raised, cascaded, and advanced the hot clinker through a
stream of cooling air as it rotated.  More recent designs are
planetary (or multicylinder) coolers  (attached to the kiln
shell) and grate-type coolers.  The planetary cooler consists of
a series of tubes located around the circumference of the
discharge end of the kiln which rotates with the kiln.  The
material flows from the kiln into the tubes which contain in-
ternal baffles that transfer heat from the material to the
cooling air being pulled in.  This heated air is returned to the
kiln as preheated combustion air.
     In a grate cooler, the hot clinker is cooled by passing air
upward through the moving bed of clinkers on a perforated grate.
The bed is uniform in thickness.  Heat may be recirculated back
to the kiln for preheating purposes.   Grate coolers are a
source of particulate emissions because the air passing through
the clinker bed is vented to the atmosphere.
Portland Cement Plant          27        Processes and Emission
Inspection Guide 2/82                    Sources

-------
        A) RETURNED
           WITH
           FEED
        B) RETURNED
          BY SCOOPS
           BEFORE
         CHAIN SYSTEM
        C) INSUFFLATION
                   TO DISPOSAL
      Figure 11.  Methods of returning collected material  to  the  kiln.
Portland  Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
28
Processes  and  Emission
Sources

-------
                         ROTARY CLINKER COOLER
                        PLANETARY CLINKER COOLER
                     TRAVELLING GRATE  CLINKER COOLER
                                                     c
                    Figure 12.   Types of clinker coolers."
Portland Cement  Plant

Inspection Guide 2/82
29
Processes and Emission

Sources

-------
3.5  FINISH GRINDING AND AIR SEPARATION
     From the cooler, the clinker may be taken to a storage
area or transferred immediately to the finishing mills (see
Figure 5).   The mills are of the rotary ball type (previously
described).   The process consists of grinding the clinker
with about 5 percent gypsum to regulate the setting time of
the cement.   The finishing mills are sometimes sprayed with
water to keep them sufficiently cool and to minimize dehydration
of the gypsum, which could lead to "false set" problems.
The degree of fineness desired for the final product is
controlled by air separators.  Oversized material is returned
to the mill for finer grinding.
     Uncontrolled, the finish grinding operation can contribute
substantial amounts of particulate emissions.  If control
devices are used, the collected dust, which represents about
15 percent of the feed, is usable product.  Transfer of the
material after grinding can also generate fugitive emissions.

3.6  FINAL PRODUCT STORAGE, PACKAGING AND LOADING
     Some of the product leaving the finish mills is conveyed
to bulk storage silos, where it is held until bulk-loaded
onto barges, tank trucks, or hopper bottom cars.  Some is
sent to a packaging building, where machines pneumatically
load the finished cement into bags  (94 Ib/bag) and seal the
bags for shipment by truck.  Unless properly controlled,
these operations can result in considerable loss of product
and substantial particulate emissions.
Portland Cement Plant                    Processes and Emission
Inspection Guide 2/82           30        Sources

-------
                            SECTION 4
              ATMOSPHERIC EMISSION CONTROL SYSTEMS

     Atmospheric emissions from portland cement manufacturing
processes can be controlled by a variety of add-on devices and by
containment practices.  Table 1 presents a summary of the control
devices and their effectiveness on specific processes.  As the
summary shows, fabric filters are effective on most of the
processes listed, whereas the other devices have limited appli-
cation.
     Appendix E provides a description of specific operating
parameters and instrumentation necessary for proper operation of
each control device.
     Containment practices include either hooding or enclosing
storage areas, processes, transfer points, and loading and un-
loading operations and application of water or chemical dust
suppressants to storage piles and roadways to reduce fugitive
dust.

4.1  ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATORS
4.1.1  Process Applications
     Electrostatic precipitators can operate economically and at
high control efficiencies on exhaust gas streams with high-volume
flow rates (>20,000 cfm)  and temperatures in the 300° to 600°F
range.  In the portland cement industry, they are used to control
particulates in the exhaust gas flow streams from cement kilns
and clinker coolers.  If exhaust gas streams contain a large
amount of moisture, such as those from wet process kilns and
Portland Cement Plant           31   Emission Control Systems
Inspection Guide 2/82

-------
2 o
en h
•O rt
fl> M
o PJ
rt 3
H-d,
O
3 O
  0>
H-0
a rt
oo
        TABLE  1.  APPLICATION OF  EMISSION  CONTROL  DEVICES TO PORTLAND CEMENT PROCESSES
Process
Raw material
crushing and
grinding
Calcining
Clinker cool ing
Finish grinding
Product storage
packaging and
loadout
General housekeeping
and fugitive controls
Effectiveness of emission control device
Cyclone
separator
Unsatisfactory
Successful
Successful c
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Impractical
ESP
Impractical
Successful
Successful
Impractical
Impractical
Impractical
Fabric
filter
Successful
Successful
Successful
Successful
Successful
Successful
Gravel bed
f 1 1 ter
Impractical
Impractical
Successful
Impractical
Impractical
Impractical
  U)
  w
  3
  H-
  CO
  IQ
  n
  o
  3
  rt
  i-i
  o
  en
  rt
  CO

  tn
Wet collectors are  generally  not  used  for  portland

Preliminary cleaning  only;  used with ESP or  fabric

In some states multiple cyclones  are effective for
they are used in  conjunction  with an ESP or  fabric
cement processes.

filter.

achieving emission  limits;  in  other states
filter.

-------
clinker coolers, care must be taken to maintain the gas tempera-
ture well above the dewpoint to prevent condensation in the
precipitator.  Such condensation will not only cause corrosion of
precipitator elements, but will also cause cement coating of the
ESP interior and material bridging in the ESP hoppers.  The gas
temperature can be maintained above the dewpoint by designing to
maintain a sufficiently high gas temperature to the ESP, by ade-
quately designed insulation of the ducts and ESP surface,  and
by the use of electric heaters and insulation on the surface of
the particle collection hoppers.
4.1.2  Operating Parameters
     Typical specific collection area  (SCA) values range from 300
         2                                        89
to 400 ft /1000 acfm for wet process precipitators '  and from
             2                                         9
200 to 500 ft /1000 acfm for dry process precipitators.   For a
secondary current of 1000 milli-amperes, secondary voltages would
                                                             2
typically vary from 40 to 50 kV for wet process precipitators
                                           9
and from 20 to 30 kV for dry process units.
     If gas flow rate and temperature level are within design,
high control efficiency of a precipitator can be maintained by a
steady electrode voltage and efficient removal of collected
particles from the plates and from the collection hopper.  This
latter effort minimizes sparking caused by excessive particle
collection on the electrodes or the possibility of high levels of
hopper material grounding plates and wires.
4.1.3  ESP Malfunctions and Inspection
     Proper operation of an ESP depends on the proper design and
on proper maintenance.  Table 2 presents some of the more common
problems associated with ESP operation.  It is evident from this
listing that most malfunctions result from lack of maintenance
and attention to the system.  Particularly notable are malfunc-
tions caused by air leakage into the system and by inadequate
removal of collected particles from electrodes and hoppers.  All
Portland Cement Plant           33   Emission Control Systems
Inspection Guide 2/82

-------
3  O
en  n
•O  rt
(D  I-1
O  OJ
rt 3
                                 TABLE 2.  DETECTION AND SOLUTION OF ESP  OPERATING PROBLEMS
Q
(D
00
   o
   fl>
   3
   (D
   0
   rt
   W


   H-
   CO
   ro
   H-
   O
   n
   o
   o
   rt
   H
   o
   en
   rt
   2

   en
                    Control panel indicators
Primary
voltage
(a.c.), V.
350b
285


400


350-400








240


240



400





Primary
current,
A
40b
120


30


40-150








40


170



40





Secondary
current,
mA
160b
500


140


100-700








200


400



160





Condition at
precipitator/
panel
Normal operation
Gas volume and
dust load de-
decreases
Dust load
increases

In wet processes,
temperature in-
creases but re-
sistivity is
constant. In
dry processes,
temperature and
resistivity in-
crease
Gas temperature
decreases

Arcing between
electrodes


Added primary
voltage is re-
quired to main-
tain constant
current; spark
rate increases
ESP control
efficiency,3
Normal
Higher than
normal

Usually,
higher than
normal
Higher than
normal for
wet processes,
but lower than
normal for dry
processes



Normal un-
less below
dew point
Less than
normal


Less than
normal




Possible problem



















Higher hopper
level
Dust bridging in
hopper
Failure of discharge
electrode rapper to
remove dust buildup
from electrodes


Probl em
solution
















Raise process
temperature.

Increase dust
removal rate.
Use hopper
vibrator.
Increase rap-
ping inten-
sity.
Repair rapper
system.

                  (continued)

-------
    O)
    c:
    o
    o
   C\J













































in
O
ie
u

TJ
••-
Ol
c
s.


s
+J
c
o
o





c
15
1— +J
JD 3
CL in



1
o
L
0,

Ol
|—
£
in
0
D.
ID
"o >1
i- U
4J C
C Ol
O -i-
U U
O- H-
CO f-
LU Ol

•^

10 O

C 10
O 4J i—
•r- t- Ol
4J O. C
TJ 0 S.
0 CL
IO C
TJ Ol
C i-
O S_ 
L. en «
IO IO *•— ^
E <-> •
5- "5 "
0. > 10





1 L.
0. 01
IO 1 D-
i~ C 0.
Ol ID
O> 4-> S. .
in c E
IO *r- • 5- Ol
0) >."- +J
i- cn+J 10 in
(J c ••- Q. >,
C 1- V) Ol VI
1-1 Oi
coo.
O +J 3
TJ
S- 0>r-
Ol 4J-P-
0.10 3
0..— XI
10 0.
i. +J
C in

3!— O
•— •— E
i- 0 Ol
ID U i.
U_

C
ID
.C i—
4-> IB

in C
in o
Oi c


•

c c
>> O O Ol
s- in 4J o J- 01
10 t- S- +J in
E TJ C 3 IO Ol
i- 01 Oi i- L> t- in
i. cn s. 10 ID
CL (TJ -r- +J +_> .V 0>
*> 3 C C J- S-
in .— cri- 10 10 (j
in o Ol ID •+-» O. c
O> > i- E in CO -r-
	 1


o
IO
" —





o
*J"




o
CM



01 TJ
C T) Ol
O O U
•i- I- IO
+J 4-> i—
U U O.
Ol Ol Ol
in .— s-
Oi
Oi Oi
IO •»-
•— +J C
o c 10
in 3 u
i— »


Ol
TJ
O +-> -^
1- J- 0
4J IO IO
U CL-0
Ol £
i— CL Cn*J
Ol O C L.
4-> -r- 0
C cmt-
oi.cc
0 -r- 'i "c
i. 2 in 10
CO


O i—
•<-> ID

£c5
Ol C
IVI

1 i
IO IO
3 U
+J i- Ol
u TJ in
3 C .C i-
^•r- cno
^^2C
+J O cn
c •• c
Oi c ini-
r— o s- u
O i- O J-
•i- 4J +J 10
o
vo

1
o





o
^~
o


o
LO
n
i
o






o:
i
I—
s-
O 0)
u
i- 10
•r- i— •
IO CL4->
Q. O) Ol
Ol L. in
ce


4J '—
O 1
f 1 1— Ol 4J
in s-^-- I. 3
l#- Q) t- O
IO U O) TJ
U +J O -i- I- O)
••- •!->*- f- O TJ
I- 3 in f- c
•U O C +> "3
O S- IO L> *> O
Ol *r~ ^ O) O) L.
r— 
r- 10
If- 4->

^J TT%
Ol u
te
3 CL
u
0


o







o
CM




0








.
in Oi
4J O1.C
c 10 o

o 10 10 •
Q. 01 .c in
S*~ t- "io o
O Ol TJ
I/) LO

jc ^i in
cn cn 01
3 3 -C
o • o u
S- .* i- *J
£ S. .C ID
01 *J ai c
cn o cn o
IO 3 ID •»-
.* TJ It +J
ID IO U
Ol +J Ol Ol
i— Ol •— O-
t— in
S- C 1- C
5 5 ^

c
ID
.C r—
•»J IO

in o
01 C


Ol

ID


\s
m
in
.c
cn
•r-





















.
^ *
c c
•»— o
V) QJ O -r-
n i- o.4-> u
o> .3 5 *a OJ
4-* Q> f— Q. •
C ID "O ZJ D. V>
•i- t. w o i-
10 Q> O) C ^ O)
CEO "D *G
•r- 5> -O  r-
S ^ c 0.1-
o +•>
+J in o s- ^*-
10  in c
ID cm 2
cn in -r- E cn o
Ol O OJ C TJ
4-> L. O-i— •>- 4->
Ol 3 S J3 S- 3
r— 4J 0) O 3 -C
C <0 TJ 1- TJ in
•-I D.
Ol
ID
•r-
•g*J


"" t
g 0)




c
•r—

r— ^"^
C 10 C
o c o
•£ Jr."
« O> 4->
O 4-> O
l_ C 
                                                                           in


                                                                          "a>
                                                                        0.  g
                                                                        10
                                                                        +->  +J
                                                                        ^-  01
                                                                        3 •
                                                                        o-
                                                                        C M-
                                                                        O
                                                                           Cn
                                                                        "O  c
                                                                        01 -^
                                                                        *J  >
                                                                        IO  O

                                                                           E
                              o*
                              .0
                                 in
                                                                             in
                                                                        >)  Ol i—
                                                                        r—  in Ol
                                                                        C  ID t-
                                                                        O  Ol If-


                                                                        C  O +J
                                                                        ID  O) Ol
                                                                        O  TJ •—
                                                                            4->
                                                                        in  Ol 3

                                                                        ST.  °* °
                                                                        QJ  ID
                                                                        e  ?+,
                                                                        CL    01
                              O  »-.

                              10 ••- E
                              *>  >- o
                              1-  CL J-

                              5"  *"
                              u  •• cn
                                So. c
                                CO-r-
                              CL UU >


                              •s ^§
                                 o> c
                              in 1-1-
                              4-> If-
                              O   in
                              tt)  Ol Ol

                              
-------
 the malfunctions  listed will decrease the particulate  removal
 efficiency.  Although the degree of efficiency loss resulting
 from  a  specific malfunction cannot be assessed, such loss will  be
 reflected by increased opacity of the exhaust gas  stream and
 higher  particulate concentrations in stack emissions.
      Many malfunctions can be determined only by an internal in-
 spection of the ESP, which can take place only when the unit is
 deactivated and locked out to prevent inadvertent  reactivation.
 The unit must also be satisfactorily purged and cooled before the
 inspector enters.  Plant personnel should accompany the inspec-
 tor,  and someone  should be stationed outside the unit  in case of
 an emergency inside.
      During external inspections, the inspector should record the
 primary and secondary voltage, current rate, and spark rate for
 each  section, as  shown in Figure 13.  Later these  values should
 be compared with  values obtained during previous inspections and
 stack tests.  If  the spark rate meter is out of order, the rate
 may be  estimated  by noting the other gauges on the control panel,
 which will jump when the field sparks.  When the spark meter is
 not operating, the inspector can determine the spark rate by
 counting the number of times these meters oscillate in 30 seconds
 and multiplying by 2.    A check of the daily log  of readings will
 show  whether readings are representative.
      The inspector should also record rapping frequency and
 intensity.  Irregular sounds from an individual rapper indicate
 improper operation or damage.  He or she also should note inop-
 erative meters, the number of power supplies on manual control,
 and power supplies on automatic control that are set for operat-
 ing voltages below design specifications  (sometimes done to
 reduce  wire breakage).
      The inspector should record the condition of  the  ESP rela-
 tive  to corrosion, leaks around seals or modules,  number of
 electrical fields operating, etc., to set up a cause-and-effeet
 relationship for  inappropriate readings.
Portland Cement Plant           36   Emission Control Systems
Inspection Guide 2/82

-------
      §
          10 E
          L. 1.

          |Q IB
          0. Q.
          /» 
-------
     Opacities of the gas stream from the source controlled by
the ESP should be recorded on the form previously described in
Section 2.  Operating parameters for the processes being con-
trolled by the ESP also should be recorded on the form described
in Figure 3 and provided in Appendix C.  This provides a means
for comparison against previously recorded data and design in-
formation.
     Breakdowns or scheduled shutdowns provide an opportunity for
the inspector to perform an internal inspection of the unit.  An
internal inspection enables the inspector to observe the condi-
tion of the collecting plates (warped or bowed) and the discharge
electrodes (some wires may be missing), the condition of the gas
distribution plate, corrosion of interior, and the build-up of
dust on the collecting plates and discharge wires.  Problems
resulting from such conditions were addressed in Table 1 and
should be carefully noted.

4.2  FABRIC FILTERS
     Fabric filter systems are widely used at portland cement
plants, for control of both large and small point sources of
emissions.
4.2.1  Process Application
     Fabric filters are applied to many portland cement produc-
tion processes.   Table 3 presents a listing of these applications
together with operating temperatures, fabrics used,  and air-to-
cloth ratios.   Temperatures range from ambient to 500°F, and all
modes of bag cleaning are represented.  Selection of bag fabric
is based on the chemical and thermal capability of the fabric for
the gas be.ing handled.  For example, fiberglass bags can with-
stand higher gas stream temperatures than cotton bags.
     All types of collectors and cleaning methods described may
use natural or synthetic filter media.  Not all collector designs
are adaptable to the use of relatively fragile fiberglass fabrics,
Portland Cement Plant           38   Emission Control Systems
Inspection Guide 2/82

-------
    TABLE 3.  APPLICATION OF FABRIC FILTERS IN THE PORTLAND CEMENT INDUSTRY
Operation
Primary
crushing
Secondary
crushing
Grinding
Storage silos


Feeders, belt
conveyors

Kilns
Clinker cooler

Finish mills
Finish mills
Air separators

Packing and
bulk loading

Coal dryer
Exhaust
temperature,
op
Ambient
Ambient
Ambient
to 225
Ambient


Ambient

500
350

170
200
200

Ambient


Type of
bag
cleaning
Mechanical
shaking
Reverse-air
Mechanical
shaking
Mechanical
shaking
Reverse-air
Mechanical
shaking
Mechanical
shaking
Pulse- jet
Reverse-air
Pulse- jet
Reverse-air
Mechanical
shaking
Pulse- jet
Mechanical
shaking
Pulse-jet
Mechanical
shaking
Pulse-jet
Mechanical
shaking
Air-to-
cloth
ratio, ft
2-3
2
2.5-3
3
1.7-1.9
1.0-2.9
3.5
7
1.7
5.0-7.1
1.7
2.5
6-8
2.5
6
1.9-3.5
7
2
Common
bag
material
Cotton
Cotton
Cotton
Cotton
Cotton
Cotton or
Dacron
Cotton
Cotton
Fiberglass
Dacron
Fiberglass
Dacron
Dacron
Dacron
Dacron
Cotton or
polypro-
pyl ene
Dacron
Dacron
Reference
8,11
8
11
11
8
12
11
11
11
8,11
11
11,12
8,11
11
11
13,14
6,13
13
Portland  Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
39   Emission Control  Systems

-------
which call for avoidance of undue flexing.   Felted media are
suitable for medium- and high-pressure cleaning methods that
operate at higher air-to-cloth ratios on more rapid cleaning
frequencies.  Woven fabrics are largely applicable to mechanical
shaking and low-pressure gas or reverse-air cleaning methods.
4.2.2  Operating Parameters
     The air-to-cloth ratio used in cement plants depends on the
filter cleaning method, the particle properties, grain loading,
etc.; for example:
           Bag cleaning method          A/C ratio range
           Mechanical shaking               2 to 3
           Reverse-air                      1 to 2
           Pulse-jet                        5 to 7
     The operating pressure of a fabric filter designed according
to these criteria is normally 2 to 10 in. HO when the filter is
clean, and 2 to 3 in. higher when the filter is coated with dust.
Therefore, monitoring fabric filter operation consists of check-
ing the pressure drop across the system, the gas flow rate and
temperature, and the opacity of the exit gases.  Another import-
ant consideration is the moisture content of the exhaust gas
especially under cold startup conditions.  If the temperature of
the gas falls below its dewpoint, condensation will occur within
the filter.  The undesirable effects of condensation are 1) cor-
rosion of the structural metal components of the filter, 2)
muddying and blinding of the fabric filter media, and 3) bridging
of dust in the hopper.  Methods of circumventing this problem are
to insulate the filter housing and structural members and to
maintain the gas temperature above its dewpoint by regulation of
process conditions or preheating.
4.2.3  Fabric Filter Malfunctions and Inspection
     Efficient operation of a fabric filter for particulate
emission control depends on proper design,  correct operating
Portland Cement Plant           40   Emission Control Systems
Inspection Guide 2/82

-------
procedures, and efficient maintenance practices.  Table 4 pre-
sents a listing of the potential causes for the malfunctioning of
fabric filters.
     Although some problems are caused by improper design or
selection of components, many of the problems are associated with
the operation and maintenance of the filter system.  If care and
attention are given to the operation and maintenance for the
system, chances are good that the system will operate efficient-
ly.  Failure to operate and maintain the system properly will
result in frequent filter downtime and atmospheric emissions of
gases with high particulate content and opacity.
     While conducting the external inspection of a fabric filter,
the inspector should record production information such as in-
duced fan current and speed, gas temperature, and other informa-
tion specified earlier in Figure 3 and on the forms provided in
Appendix C.  Pressure drop and opacities for each of the compart-
ments in the fabric filter should also be recorded.  Manometers
or gages located on the units shown provide both clean-side and
dirty-side readings.  The inspector should also use visual
observations to determine if there are leaks around seals, com-
partments, etc., and note any findings.
     If an internal inspection is conducted, the same safety
precautions apply as those for ESP inspections.   Problems to look
for are excess dust buildup on the clean side of the filter, bag
deterioration at the bottom thimbles, dryness of the filter cake,
plugging or corrosion problems in the hopper, and missing or
broken bags.   The inspector should record all of this information
to provide a basis for poor equipment operation if such be the
case.

4.3  CYCLONE SEPARATORS
     Use of cyclone separators has been somewhat limited in the
Portland cement industry.  These separators are relatively inex-
pensive and easy to operate, but they cannot readily achieve high
efficiencies in the removal of small particles.
Portland Cement Plant           41   Emission Control Systems
Inspection Guide 2/82

-------
            TABLE  4.   FABRIC FILTER MALFUNCTIONS AND REMEDIES
                                                            15
       Problem
     Possible cause0
          Remedy
High stack opacity
High filter pressure
 drop
High bag failure:
 wearing out
Bag holes
                         Bag  bleeding

                         Insufficient filter
                         cake
Bag cleaning mechanism
 not adjusted properly
                         Cleaning  time failure
                         Failure  to remove dust
                          from  bags
                         Incorrect  pressure
                          reading
Baffle plate erosion

High grain loading

Cleaning cycle too
 frequent

Shaking too violent
 (S)
Replace bags.
Tie off bags and  replace  at
 a later date.
Isolate leaking compartment,
 if allowable without  upset-
 ting system.

Reduce gas volume (A/C).

Allow greater dust buildup
 on bags by cleaning  less
 frequently.

Increase cleaning frequency.
Clean for longer  duration.
Clean more vigorously
 (check with manufacturer
 before implementing).

Check to see if  timer is
 indexing to all  contacts.
Check output on  all terminals,

Send sample of dust to  manu-
 facturer.
Send bag to lab  for analysis
 for blinding.
Dryclean or replace bags.
Reduce air flow.

Clean pressure taps.
Check hoses for  leaks.
Check for proper  fluid  in
 manometer.
Check diaphragm  in gage.

Replace baffle plate.

Install primary  collector.

Slow down cleaning cycle.
                                                 Slow down shaking mechanism
                                                  (consult manufacturer).
(continued)
Portland  Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
             42    Emission Control Systems

-------
TABLE 4 (continued)
       Problem
          Possible cause0
         Remedy
 High bag failure:
 High  bag failure:
 decomposition

 Moisture in bag house
Material bridging in
  hopper
     Repressuring pressure
      too high (RF)

     Pulsing pressure too
      high (PJ)

     Failure of cooling
      device

     Operating below acid
      dew point

     System not purged
      after shutdown
                         Wall temperature below
                          dewpoint
                         Compressed air intro-
                          ducing water (PJ)
     Moisture in baghouse
                         Dust being stored in
                          hopper

                         Hopper slope insuffi-
                          cient

                         Conveyor opening  too
                          small
                                                  Reduce  pressure.
                                                  Reduce  pressure.
Replace thermocouple
Increase gas temperature.
Bypass on startup.

Keep fan running for at least
 10 minutes after process
 is shut down.

Raise gas temperature.
Insulate unit.
Lower dewpoint  by keeping
 moisture out of system.

Check automatic drains.
Install aftercooler.
Install dryer.

See above.
Add hopper heaters.

Remove dust continuously.
                             Modify or replace hoppers.
                              Use a wide-flared trough.
  The following code is used to refer to the specific  type of fabric filter:
               RF
               PJ
                S
Reverse-flow cleaning  mechanism
Pulse-jet cleaning  mechanism
Shaker cleaning mechanism
Portland  Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
                  43    Emission Control  Systems

-------
4.3.1  Process Applications
     Because of its inherent removal-efficiency limitations,  the
cyclone separator is used by itself only on the clinker cooler,
where the particle size range of the emissions is sufficiently
large that achievement of up to about 95 percent removal effi-
              •ui  16,17
ciency is possible.
     The cyclone separator is also used as an auxiliary control
device for effluent gases from operations such as kilns and fin-
ish mills.  In these applications, the gases are sent first
through a cyclone separator and then through a high-efficiency
removal device such as an ESP or a fabric filter.  Even though
the cyclone separator's control efficiency is only 50 to 75 per-
cent, by reducing the amount of dust entering the high-perform-
ance device, it permits more efficiency for that device.  The
large dust fraction removed by the cyclone is easily recyclable
if desired.  Its use can also extend the useful life of major
control devices by reducing the wear from abrasion and erosion to
which they might otherwise be subjected.
4.3.2  Operating Parameters
     Pressure drop for a cyclone separator is normally designed
for a range of 2 to 5 in. H20 at the design gas flow rate.  If
the operating gas  flow rate is much lower than design flow, the
differential pressure across the separator will decrease mark-
edly, as will the  separation efficiency.  If gas flow is appre-
ciably greater than design flow, the pressure drop across the
separator will increase, but the separation efficiency will
decrease as a result of  gas bypass within the separator and dust
re-entrainment.
4.3.3  Malfunctions and  Inspection
     Anything that interferes with  the  proper gas flow  through
the  cyclone separator will decrease  separator efficiency.  Table
5  lists  the various symptoms of gas  flow malfunction, together
with possible causes and suggested  remedies.
Portland Cement Plant           44   Emission Control Systems
Inspection Guide 2/82

-------
            TABLE 5.  CYCLONE SEPARATOR  MALFUNCTIONS AND REMEDIES
     Symptoms
     Possible causes
     Remedies
 Low pressure differ-
  ential
 High pressure differ-
 ential and high
 stack opacity
 High stack opacity
Low process gas flow
Erosion or corrosion  of
 tubes causing gas  to
 short-circuit cyclone

High process gas flow
 or plugged cyclone tubes

Air inleakage

Separator inefficiency
 due to:

 High dust level

 Dust bridging due  to
  moisture condensation
 Separator vane or  tube
  wear by abrasion
For multiple-cyclone
 installations,  damper
 off flow to some
 units.

Replace  defective  tubes,
Add more separators
 and clean out tubes.

Seal leaks.
                                                      Increase speed of dis-
                                                       charge valve.
                                                      Insulate separator and
                                                       heat hopper.
                                                      Replace components with
                                                       abrasion-resistant
                                                       materials.
Portland  Cement  Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
             45   Emission Control  Systems

-------
     Because operation of the cyclone separator is relatively
simple, malfunctions are generally minimal.   The major problems
are high dust levels in the hopper or moisture condensation in
  »
the hopper  (which causes plugging).   The use of a hopper level
indicator, hopper heating, and separator insulation helps to
avoid these problems.  Blockage of the cyclone tube, especially
on those with smaller diameters (~4 inches), can also be a prob-
lem.
     An external inspection of the cyclone helps to determine
possible leaks at joints, inspection doors,  or corroded areas.
Leakage of air into the cyclone disrupts the internal gas flow
pattern and decreases the cyclone's efficiency.  This inspection
will also reveal any plugged and eroded tubes and eroded inlet
vanes.  The system must be turned off, thoroughly purged, and
cooled before an internal inspection is made.

4.4  GRAVEL-BED FILTERS
     Gravel-bed filters have been used successfully in the port-
land cement industry for many years, although their application
is  limited.
4.4.1  Process Application
     A gravel-bed filter control  system consists of 6 to 20
modules, each of which may contain from one to three gravel beds.
Figure 14 shows a typical modular arrangement.  All modules are
one standard size; for a two-bed  arrangement they have an outside
diameter of 9 ft, 2-5/8  inches and a straight shell height of  24
                 18
ft, 7-1/2 inches.    The gravel beds have an effective flow area
of  40  square feet each.*
     The one process point in a portland cement plant where the
gravel-bed  filter has been widely used is the clinker cooler.
The cooler  is frequently  subjected to process upsets that cause
*
  Personal communication between D. J. Loudin, PEDCo, and R.
  Schumway, Rexnord Corp., November 19, 1981.
Portland Cement Plant           46   Emission Control Systems
Inspection Guide 2/82

-------
      Figure  14. Representative arrangement of gravel-bed filter modules,
                      (Courtesy of  Rexnord Corporation)
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide  2/82
47    Emission Control Systems

-------
high-temperature-gas excursions,  a condition that is easily
accommodated by the gravel-bed filter.   The filter does an ex-
cellent job of removing the abrasive particulate from the cooler
exhaust gases.  In this application, stack tests show that the
gravel-bed filter has a particulate removal efficiency averaging
              19
99.85 percent.
4.4.2  Operating Parameters
     Because of the inherent ability of the gravel bed to with-
stand temperatures in excess of 1000°F, inlet gas streams require
no cooling.  The gravel bed is also resistant to attrition and
therefore can be used to filter abrasive particulate materials.
The primary parameter for operation of  a gravel-bed filter is the
pressure drop resulting from the gas flow through the filter bed.
The beds are designed to have a pressure drop of 6 to 12 in. H_0.
During filter operation, particulate captured on the bed plugs
the interstitial openings in the bed and causes the bed pressure
drop to rise to values 50 to 100 percent higher than normal.
When this occurs, the bed must be removed from service and
cleaned by the backflushing procedure described earlier.  The
removal and cleaning operation takes about 12 to 20 minutes* and
is performed at regular  (45- to 60-minute) intervals.  The tran-
sition from operation to cleaning and back to operation is made
automatically via instrumentation.
     Although the filter system normally is not affected by inlet
gas temperature and flow surges,  these  variables should be moni-
tored as a matter of record and good engineering practice.
Recorders or indicators would be normally panel-mounted at the
clinker cooler control station.
     The pressure differentials across  each of the modules also
should be monitored, as the differential indicates the condition
of the gravel bed.  The differential pressure gages are locally
mounted at each module and calibrated from 0 to 30 in. HO.
*
  Personal communication between D. J. Loudin, PEDCo, and R.
  Schumway, Rexnord Corp., November 19, 1981.
Portland Cement Plant           48   Emission Control Systems
Inspection Guide 2/82

-------
     Other instrumentation required by gravel-bed filters are
cycle timers and controls for the dampers that direct the entry
of backflushing gas to the individual filter modules.  Damper
positions are indicated on a control panel for the system, but
damper activators are locally mounted at the module.
4.4.3  Malfunctions and Inspection
     Because of the relative simplicity of this particulate
control system, most installations have a history of trouble-
free operation.  A couple of installations, however, have had
temperature-related malfunctions that resulted in damage to the
filter-bed equipment and subsequent increases in particulate
emissions.
     In one case, a system designed for a working temperature
of 400°F was subjected to long-term exposure of temperatures
             20
above 1000°F.    The resulting metal expansion caused the
rabble arms used to turn the bed during the cleaning cycle to
tear the gravel-bed support screen.
     At another installation, the use of ambient temperature
air for backflushing the filter modules caused thermal stress
cracks to develop within the modules, which allowed dust-laden
gas to contaminate the clean gas stream.    Use of hot recycled
clean gas instead of ambient air for backflush eliminated the
thermal shock to the filter system and the subsequent cracking
of the internals of the modules.
     Moisture in the backflush gas or air is also a problem for
gravel-bed filters.  Rain may enter through breaks in the duct-
work or flanges and be transmitted into the gravel beds.  When
water enters a bed, it hydrates the cement dust and can cause
the bed to solidify.  Therefore, a program of frequent checking
and preventive maintenance should be set up to prevent leakage
into the system.
     During an external inspection of the gravel-bed filter,
the inspector should record the pressure differential for each
of the modules in the assembly and the opacity of gas from the

Portland Cement Plant           49      Emission Control Systems
Inspection Guide 2/82

-------
stacks.  In addition to gas temperature and gas volume,  produc-
tion information should be recorded for the clinker cooler being
controlled.  These should be recorded on the form provided in
Appendix C.
     An internal inspection permits the inspector to observe and
record the condition of the support screen and other internal
members for signs of cracks or fatigue.  The inspector also
should note any inleakage problems or clogging in the isolating
valves or screw conveyor for removing collected material.

4.5  CONTAINMENT AND DUST SUPPRESSION PRACTICES
     Many portland cement processes are not vented to emission
control equipment.  Because of the volume of material processed,
these  sources have the potential of contributing significant
amounts of atmospheric emissions.  Containment and dust  suppres-
sion practices prevent these sources from generating excessive
emissions, however.
     Feeding, transfer, and discharge operations are all  sources
of emission problems, and spilled product and wind are respon-
sible  for entrainment of the dust.  Most of the entrained dust
results from spillage and agitation of material at the transfer
points.   (Movement of clinker, particularly from the coolers,  is
one of the worst transfer problems.)   Such emissions are  con-
tained by either enclosing or hooding  these transfer points.
Incomplete enclosure, however, sometimes enhances the problem  by
creating a wind tunnel effect.
     Loading and unloading operations  of both  raw materials  and
final  product create an emission problem because of the  mechani-
cal agitation of the material as it strikes the sides and bottom
of the receiving vessel and because of  displaced air during
loading or unloading.  Ousting winds can intensify this  problem.
Various containment practices are  used, frequently in combina-
tion.  Such practices  include enclosing the operation,  choke-
feeding or using a  telescoping chute to limit  the  free-fall
distance  of the material,  and using movable hoods  ducted back
into  the  unloading  vessel.
Portland  Cement Plant          50       Emission Control Systems
Inspection Guide 2/82

-------
     Potential emission problems result from spilled product, mud
 trackout  from heavy equipment, and roadway and parking  surface
 deterioration.  This material becomes reentrained by contact with
 vehicle tires and air  turbulence caused by passing vehicles.
 This dust can be controlled by the use of sweeper trucks  and the
 application of water or oil coatings.
     Dusting from storage piles occurs when the material  is
 dumped onto the pile and when wind blows across the pile.  Con-
 tainment  methods,are enclosure of the storage area or the appli-
 cation of water or chemical dust suppressants to the material.
 Enclosure should be complete to prevent a tunneling effect from
 the wind.  The type of material stored determines which method
 should be used  (e.g.,  the application of water is not a suitable
 containment method for stored finished cement).  Use of tele-
 scoping chutes is also an effective containment practice  during
 the dumping of material onto these storage piles.
     Disposal of material collected by the control devices also
 can be a  source of emissions.  The disposal process consists of
 loading,  unloading, and transporting of the waste, and  each can
 generate  emissions.  Containment methods for loading include en-
 closing the loading area and reducing the free-fall distance into
 the disposal vehicle.  Containment in transport can be  accom-
 plished by the use of  an enclosed vehicle.  Containment during
 the unloading of the waste at the disposal site can be  accom-
 plished by reducing the free-fall distance and covering or chem-
 ically stabilizing the material at the site to prevent  wind
 erosion.  Table 6 summarizes the various containment practices.
     During the inspection, the inspector should note whether
 these operations are causing a fugitive dust problem.   If pos-
 sible, visible emission readings should be obtained and recorded
 on the appropriate form  (Section 2).  It may be possible  for the
 inspector to observe some containment methods  in practice during
 the  inspection; if so, the success of the practice  should be
 noted.
Portland Cement Plant           51   Emission Control Systems
Inspection Guide 2/82

-------
                   TABLE 6.   DUST SUPPRESSION PRACTICES
Operation
Transfer and conveying
Loading and unloading
Paved and unpaved roadways
Storage piles
Disposal
Enclosing
X
X

X
X
Hooding
X
X



Telescoping or
choke-feeding

X

X
X
Chemical or
water spray


X
X
X
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
52   Emission  Control Systems

-------
     Table 7 provides a summary indicating the magnitude of the
fugitive emissions problem at portland cement plants.  It in-
cludes fugitive emission factors and an inventory of emissions
obtained during the inspection of a portland cement plant.
Portland Cement Plant           53   Emission Control Systems
Inspection Guide 2/82

-------
3 O
W h
•d rt
fl> I-1
O JU
ft 3
H-O,
O
P n
  (D
o 3
£ CD
  •XI
00 3
N) rt
               TABLE 7.   QUANTIFICATION OF FUGITIVE EMISSIONS  FROM PORTLAND CEMENT MANUFACTURING
Source
Raw material unloading
Transfer points and
associated conveying
Unloading outfal 1 to
storage^
Raw blending0
Unloading—clinker/gypsum
outfall to storaged
Cement silo vents
Cement loading
Cement packaging
Paved and unpaved roads
Uncontrolled fugitive
emission factor
0.03-0.4 Ib/ton
0.2-0.4 Ib/ton
3.0-5.0 Ib/ton

0.05 Ib/ton
5.0-10.0 Ib/ton
Negligible
0.236 Ib/ton
0.01 Ib/ton
6.1 g/VMTe
Plant fugitive emission inventory
Operating parameter,
tons/year
177,576
651,338
650,687

649,355
446,059
-
413,485
30,980
-
Uncontroi led
emissions,3
tons/year
19
98
1,300

13
1,671
-
49
Negligible
-
  en
  W

  H-
  tn
  en
  H-
  O
  n
  o

  rt

  o
  M

  cn
   rt
   0)
   3
   tn
aBased on average of emission  factors.

Emissions include raw material storage and transfer  to  conveyor.

Emissions include blended materials  storage.

Emissions include clinker/gypsum  storage  and  loadout.

eGrams per vehicle miles travelled.

-------
                             SECTION 5
      PLANT OPERATING CONDITIONS AND COMPLIANCE DETERMINATION

      The plant inspection effort will depend on the main purpose
 of the inspection.   While a detailed internal and external
 inspection of all process and control equipment could take a few
 days,  a "walk through"  inspection,  where only major emission
 sources are observed,  can be accomplished in less than one day.
      The main potential emission problem areas in any cement
 plant  relate to the calcining operations and their control.   The
 kiln and its control system should  thus  be carefully inspected.
 Inspection of material  handling systems  should receive the next
 highest priority followed by the various crushing and grinding
 operations.   Table  8 provides a summary  of items  to be observed,
 and  Figure 15 is an inspection checklist to be used during the
 inspection.

 5.1  PROPER  OPERATING CONDITIONS AND  EMISSION PROBLEMS DUE TO
     PROCESS  MALFUNCTIONS AND UPSETS
     The  inspector  should be  able to  distinguish  between  a
 smoothly  operating  plant  and  one that  is  experiencing  malfunc-
 tions or  upsets  that could  lead  to excess  atmospheric  emissions.
     Movement  of raw materials  from quarrying  operations  should
 occur without  entraining  fugitive dust, either  from vehicle
 movement  in the  plant or  from  the dumping  of  the  raw material.
 The delivered  raw material  should be stored in  an enclosed area
 so that wind cannot dislodge  loose particles  and  create a  fugi-
 tive dust problem.  If necessary, the  stored material  should  be
 sprayed with a dust suppressant.  Dust generation is generally a
 function of the type and moisture content of the raw materials.

Portland Cement Plant           55       Operating Conditions and
 Inspection Guide 2/82                    Compliance Determination

-------
                   TABLE 8.  SUMMARY OF INSPECTION  POINTS
      Operation
       Inspection items
 Kilns and clinker coolers
 Kiln  and  clinker cooler emission
  control  systems
 Material  handling systems
 Crushing  and  grinding systems
  Production rate
  Exhaust gas flow rate  and  temperature
  Percent 02 in exhaust  gas
  Fuel type, firing rate,  and  composition
   in the kiln
  Degree of dust recycled  to the  kiln

  Opacity
  Leaks in control system  housing
   (corrosion and other  reasons)
  ESP voltage and power  levels
  Pressure drop across control equipment
  Exhaust flow rate and  temperature
  Percent 02 in exhaust  gas
  Rapping frequency and  intensity in ESP
  Operative vs. inoperative  instruments
  Manual vs. automatic ESP power  supplies
  Operative vs. inoperative  ESP fields
  Internal observations  (wires, bags,
   tube blockage, full or  plugged hopper,
   efficiency of cleaning  operation, etc.)
  Moisture content of gas  stream
  Fan current and speed  for  flow  calculations

  Placement and condition  of covers
   and hoods
  Operation of exhaust fans
  Evidence of spills and leaks
  Opacity of exhaust air
  Volume of material handled
  Fugitive emissions
  Handling practices

  Covers and seals in position
  Evidence of leaks
  Volume of material handled
  Exhaust gas flow rate
  Opacity of exhaust gas
  Material handling practices
  Fugitive emissions
  If controlled: pressure  drop across
   device
       Full or plugged dust  collection
        hoppers
       Internal observations (bags,  tube
        blockage, efficiency of cleaning
        operation)        	
Portland  Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
56
Operating Conditions  and
Compliance Determination

-------
             Name of company:
             Address:    	
             Responsible person:
             Date of inspection:
             Time in:    	
                                 Time out:
              Inspection group:  	


              A.  Kiln
              Slurry feed rate	tons/h
              Dry solids feed rate	tons/h
              Moisture content 	X
              Feed end temperature	°F
              Burner end temperature 	°F
              Firing rate	106  Btu/h
              Firing rate (coal) 	tons/h
                        (oil)  	tons/h
                        (gas)  	tons/h

              If ESP control:
                  Inlet temperature	°F
                  ID fan current 	amperes
                            Production Equipment
                  ID fan pressure drop _
                  ID fan speed	rpm
                    (calculated) gas volume 	
             Oxygen content  (ESP exit) 	%
             Outlet temperature 	°F
                            in.H20
                               acfm
              Corona power
                watts
                                       watts/10  acfm
Specific power density
Rapper condition 	
Hopper discharge 	
               For information not applicable, indicate N/A.
                                                Kiln rotation rate 	rev/h
                                                Carbonate content 	%
                                                Alkali content 	X (Na, K)
                                                Water cooling rate 	gal/min
                                              •  Clinker production rate 	tons/h
                                                Insufflation rate 	
                                                Recycle rate 	
                                                Oxygen content 	%
                                                Opacity 	%

                                                If  Fabric Filter Control:
                                                     Inlet temperature 	°F
                                                     ID fan current  	 amperes
                     _in.H20
Power output:
No. 1 Field
No. 2 Field
No. 3 Field
No. 4 Field
1 "current




1 "voltage




2°current




2°voltage




    ID fan pressure drop
    ID fan speed 	rpm
      (calculated)gas volume 	acfm
    Outlet temperature 	"F
    Moisture content 	%
    Pressure drop per
     compartment 	in. H20
    Bag condition 	
If precleaner:
    Inlet temperature 	°F
    ID fan current 	amperes
    ID fan pressure drop 	in. H^O
    ID fan speed 	rpm
      (calculated) gas volume 	acfm
    Moisture content 	%
                Figure  15.    Portland  cement plant inspection  checklist.
Portland  Cement  Plant
Inspection  Guide 2/82
                                      57
Operating  Conditions  and
Compliance  Determination

-------
Figure 15.    (continued)
              Name of company:
              Address:
              Responsible person:
              Date of inspection:
              Time in:
          Time out:
              Inspection group:
              B.   Clinker Cooler8
              Clinker process rate
              Inlet temperature 	
              Outlet temperature 	
tons/h
              Condition of equipment 	
              Opacity	t

              If ESP control:
                   Inlet temperature	°F
                   ID fan current	amperes
                   ID fan pressure drop	 in. ^0
                   ID fan speed	rpm
                    (calculated) gas volume 	acfm
              Outlet temperature	°F
If gravel bed control:
    Inlet temperature
    Exhaust flow rate
              Corona power
                              watts
              Specific power density
              Rapper condition 	
              Hopper discharge 	
  watts/10 acfm
°F
 acfm
                            Pressure drop per
                             module 	 in. H20
                        If fabric filter control:
                            Inlet temperature 	
                            ID fan current
                                              amperes
                             ID fan pressure drop
                            in. H20
                             (calculated) gas volume 	acfm
                            Outlet temperature 	°F
                            Moisture content 	%
                            Pressure drop per
Power output:
No. 1 Field
No. 2 Field
No. 3 Field
No. 4 Field
1 "current




1 "voltage




2°current




2°voltage




                             compartment
                            Bag condition
                     in. H20
                                                             If precleaner:
                                                                  Inlet temperature
                                                                  ID fan current
                                                                                    amperes
     ID fan  pressure drop 	
     ID fan  speed 	rpm
      (calculated) gas volume
     Moisture content 	%
                                                                                         in. H20
                                                      acfm
               For information not applicable,  indicate N/A.
 (continued)
Portland  Cement  Plant
Inspection  Guide 2/82
              58
    Operating Conditions  and
    Compliance  Determination

-------
 Figure 15,   (continued)
              Name of company:
              Address:
              Responsible person:
              Date of inspection:
              Time in:    	
       Tine out:
              Inspection group:
             C.  Other Processes8
             Process rate per unit:
Crushing _
Grinding _
Conveying
  tons/h
                                                             tons/h
                                                            tons/h
                                     Mixing and blending
                                     Packaging, loading,
                                     and unloading 	
                        tons/h
                        tons/h
             Storage:
Raw material
                        tons
                                     Processed material
                                     Finished product _
                        tons
                        tons
              If fabric filter control: per unit

Inlet temperature °F
ID fan current amperes
ID fan pressure drop in. H,0
ID fan speed rpin
(Calculated) gas volume acfm
Outlet temperature °F
Bag condition 	
Opacity *
Pressure drop in. HjO

Crushing

Grinding

Conveying

Mixing/
Blending

Packaging/
loading.
Unloading

Storage

              For information not applicable, indicate N/A.
Portland  Cement  Plant
Inspection  Guide 2/82
         59
Operating Conditions  and
Compliance  Determination

-------
Sometimes the material is extremely wet, in which case fugitive
dust is not a problem.  As the wet material enters subsequent
crushing and grinding operations,  however,  wet bags in the
fabric filters controlling these processes  can create problems
that render the control device ineffective.
     In the crushing and grinding operations,  fugitive dust can
be released through leaks in worn seals around nuts and bolts in
the walls of the crushers and grinders.  Such leaks will occur
regardless of the efficiency of a control device.^  Fugitive
emissions may also escape from the charging end of some crushers.
Occasionally, crushers are enclosed to eliminate the dust prob-
lem, but in principle, the amount of fugitive dust generated
depends on the type and moisture content of the raw material,
and the type and characteristics of the crusher.  Properly
operated plants should be able to eliminate these potential
problems.6
     The transfer of material at various stages of processing is
also critical.  Leaks in conveying ductwork, hoods, and enclo-
sures and spillage of material that can become reentrained by
wind or vehicle movement can contribute substantially to fugitive
emissions.  Efficiently run plants, realizing how abrasive 'the
material can be to equipment, correct these items by performing
timely maintenance before they become a serious problem.
     Leaks around seals and in ductwork also create problems in
the mixing and blending operations.  Preventive maintenance can
reduce malfunction and upset occurrences in these operations.
     The occurrence of malfunctions in the kiln system is not
uncommon.  For example, the introduction of improperly prepared
feed material to the burning zone can increase kiln exhaust gas
temperatures to the point that fabric filter bags are damaged
and ESP collection plates become warped.  Both of these problems
increase atmospheric emissions.
Portland Cement Plant           60       Operating Conditions and
Inspection Guide 2/82                    Compliance Determination

-------
     Nonuniform feeding of the kilns also results in excess
atmospheric emissions and less efficient kiln operation.  A
plugged feeding system can result in a loss of flame, which
leads to incomplete combustion, a condition that can produce an
explosion hazard in ESP's.   (Occasionally combustion analyzers
are wired to the ESP so that if an explosive condition exists,
the ESP will be automatically deenergized.)
     Spillage of feed materials also contributes to the genera-
tion of fugitive dust.  Spilled material should be picked up
and reused before becoming entrained via wind and vehicle
movement in the area.
     Leaks in the seals and ductwork ahead of the control
system can result in excess emissions, for a control device
cannot be effective unless the contaminated gases enter it.
Inleakages can also be a problem, in that they lead to corrosion
and excessive gas volumes to be handled by the equipment.
     The injection of collected material from wet process kilns
is a source of concern in that it contributes to the tendency
for the cement dust to hydrate and solidify in the presence of
                 21
the slurry water.
     A problem that occurs in the kiln itself results from a
tendency of layers of particulate to build up and form rings on
the inside of the kiln.  This buildup decreases the cross-sec-
tional area, which causes an unstable kiln flame.  When these
kiln rings break off, the clinker rolls down the kiln and
causes heavy particulate loading.  (Ring formation is considered
to be a normal occurrence, not a malfunction.  )
     Malfunctions also can result from some of the preheating
improvements used to reduce kiln emissions.  For example,
chains may break or suspension preheaters and grate preheaters
may no longer operate efficiently and thus not fulfill their
purpose.
     Because of the abrasive nature of the material being pro-
cessed, the inspector should check cyclones being used in clinker
coolers for deterioration.  The occurrence of excessive visible
Portland Cement Plant                   Operating Conditions and
Inspection Guide 2/82                   Compliance Determination

-------
emission from the cooler probably also indicates a pollutant mass
rate problem resulting from the large size of particles emitted
by this process.
     The abrasiveness of clinker can cause problems during the
transfer of the product to storage.  This abrasiveness can cause
ductwork and storage vessels to develop leaks, and fans and
bearings to become less efficient because of the wear, which can
in turn result in spilled product becoming airborne and creating
a fugitive dust problem.  The use of telescoping or ladder chutes
in storage areas to reduce freefall distances during clinker un-
loading is a means of reducing emissions, but to be effective,
these devices must be free of splits, holes, or breaks.
     Partially enclosed storage areas do not eliminate dust en-
trainment resulting from wind and loading and unloading opera-
tions.  Complete enclosure is necessary.
     The inspector should note the method used to dispose of col-
lected particulate not returned for processing.  The use of open
trucks  (a common occurrence) results in reentrainment of the col-
lected material.  The proper removal method is by enclosed
trucks.  Over-loaded collection hoppers also can result in in-
efficient operation of the control equipment.
     The inspector should note the condition of paved and unpaved
roads in the plant.  At properly operated plants, fugitive dust
is suppressed with water or chemical coatings.  Larger quantities
of spilled material on the roads are picked up and reused.
     The inspector should note the condition of the plant's pro-
cess monitoring equipment.  Malfunctions can occur if it is not
operating properly.  Frequently, instruments are not properly
maintained or used, or have not been calibrated recently.  The
mere presence of the instruments can give a plant a false sense
of security until a serious problem of excess emissions results
from lack of proper attention.
Portland Cement Plant          g2       Operating Conditions and
Inspection Guide 2/82                   Compliance Determination

-------
 5.2  STARTUP AND SHUTDOWN PROBLEMS
      For economic reasons, scheduled startup and shutdowns of ce-
 ment kilns are kept to a minimum (usually about once every 100
 days),  but malfunctions in some part of the kiln system can
                               22
 result in unplanned shutdowns.    When a kiln has been shut down
 long enough to become cold, some type of preheating is necessary
 before restarting it.  (Such preheating is not required to start
 up a kiln that has been down for only 3 or 4 hours because it
 will still be hot.)  The preheating procedure normally requires
 4 to 12 hours, but it can take as long as 48 hours.  The firing
 temperature is gradually raised to prevent damage to the refrac-
 tory material lining the kiln.  The length of time required for
 this depends upon the age of the refractory.  Newer refractory
 takes less time because it has a greater resistance to thermal
 stress.
      In coal-fired units equipped with ESP's, the heat-up proce-
 dure usually begins by firing with natural gas or fuel oil,
 rather than coal.  During this initial period, the ESP is not
 energized because of the explosion hazard created by subjecting
 incomplete combustion products (CO) to sparking.  Feed material
 is not introduced until the temperature of the kiln has stabi-
 lized and coal firing has begun and become stabilized.  The ESP
 is energized only after the temperature stabilizes above the
 dewpoint and the CO levels are considered safe.
      Heat-up time can be drastically reduced if the CO levels
 are monitored.  One major ESP manufacturer indicates that the
 ESP can be partially energized throughout the entire heat-up
 procedure if CO and temperature are carefully monitored.  Of
 course, should the monitor detect an explosion hazard or a
                                                             22
 critical temperature increase, the ESP must be de-energized.
      Excessive particulate and visible emissions usually occur
 during the startup of kilns equipped with ESP's, either because
 the units are not completely energized or not energized at all.
 In this situation, the ESP functions simply as a settling cham-
 ber.  The use of fuel oil or natural gas as the preheating fuel
Portland Cement Plant           63      Operating Conditions and
Inspection Guide 2/82                   Compliance Determination

-------
 will not only reduce the time needed for heat-up, but also
reduce the atmospheric emissions.
     During the preheating period,  particulate emissions normally
are not significant until rotation of the kiln begins and the
feed material is introduced;  however, preheating the kiln with
coal while introducing feed material and operating a de-energized
ESP will result in significant visible emissions.
     Also important to the reduction of particulate and visible
emissions during startup is the retention of heat within the kiln
during the shutdown.  This reduces the time needed for heat-up
and thus, total emissions.  Techniques for keeping dust within
the kiln during these shutdowns are also important.  Chains have
been effective for this purpose.  Pre-cleaners before the ESP
(such as cyclones and multiple cyclones, which can operate
throughout the entire preheat) also provide a good method for
reducing emissions.  They can remove 85 percent of the particu-
late that would normally be emitted if the ESP were not ener-
      ??
  •   -\ £* £*
gized.
     The shutdown procedure can also increase particulate and
visible emissions.  One way to alleviate this problem is to op-
erate the ESP until coal firing ceases or until the CO in the gas
                                      22
stream approaches the explosive level.
     Normally, kilns controlled by fabric filters do not have a
problem with excessive emissions during startup and shutdown, as
the collector continues to operate at full capacity during these
periods.  It should be noted, however, that a plant occasionally
could choose to bypass the fabric filter during startup proce-
dures to prevent the bags from being overloaded.  When this
occurs, excessive particulate emissions could result.

5.3  COMPLIANCE DETERMINATION AND EMISSION CALCULATIONS
     The ultimate objective of portland cement plant inspections
is to determine the compliance status of each of  the sources.
Federal, state, and local regulations set limits  on atmospheric
particulate emissions, usually according to process weight and
Portland Cement Plant           64      Operating Conditions  and
Inspection Guide 2/82                   Compliance Determination

-------
opacity.  Occasionally, plants also must meet production rate
requirements.
     A variety of methods can be used to determine compliance
status.  Table 9 provides a summary of methods that can be used
for various processes.  The greatest variety apply to the kiln.
The inspector should record opacity readings according to the EPA
Method 9 procedures (presented in Appendix D).  These readings
should not include the uncombined water (steam) fraction of the
plume that frequently forms some distance from the stack outlet.
Stack test data and transmissometer readings are based only on
the primary formation within the stack.  The inspector should
also record opacity readings of fugitive emissions from the kiln
and compare these readings with the applicable Federal, state, or
local limit.  The inspector's report should describe compliance
of the kiln based on the opacity limit.
     If opacity readings were obtained from the kiln during
previous stack tests, opacity readings taken during this inspec-
tion provide an indication of control equipment operation and can
be related to mass emissions.  Conditions during the inspection
must be identical to those during the stack test. The source must
be operating at the same production level, gas flow rate must be
the same, and the plume must be of the same diameter and observed
from the same path, angle, and location. If the plant inspection
opacity readings significantly exceed opacities recorded during
the stack test, the mass emission rate is also likely to be
higher.  This is particularly critical as the measured mass
emission rate approaches the limit of the emission regulation.
This situation warrants further stack tests to determine com-
pliance .
     Material balance calculations for the kiln also can indicate
whether emissions are approaching the allowable limits and a
stack test is warranted.  Figure 16 shows calculations for
determining allowable and uncontrolled emissions, and then  (by
application of the Deutsch-Anderson equation  for electrostatic
precipitator  efficiency) gives  an estimate of  controlled  (actual)

                                65
Portland Cement  Plant                  Operating Conditions  and
Inspection  Guide 2/82                  Compliance Determination

-------
              TABLE 9.  SUMMARY OF COMPLIANCE DETERMINATION
                     METHODS  FOR VARIOUS PROCESSES

Opacity
Relate opacity to mass emission rate
Material balance
Change in operating parameters:
Decreased ESP power
Reduction in ESP fields
Decreased gas stream moisture
content
Increased flow rate
Increased insufflation
Increased 0^ content
Increased fuel consumption or
production rate
Deteriorated bags
Kiln
X
X
X

X
X

X
X
X
X
X
Clinker cooler
X



X
X
X
X


X
X
Finish mill
X






X


X
X
Other
X











Portland  Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
66
Operating  Conditions and
Compliance Determination

-------
                                     PARTICULATE EMISSION CALCULATION FOR KILN

                     Given:  Wet process kiln producing 31 tons/h of clinker or 62,000 Ib/h.
                            Kiln feedrate (volume) at 190 gal/min and a slurry density of
                            106.9 Ib/ft3.  Thus, the wet weight is 162,922 Ib/h and dry solids
                            are 106,876 Ib/h because there is 34.4 percent moisture in the  feed.
                            Kiln controlled by ESP,  designed for 250,000 acfm and 103,680 ft?
                            of collecting area.

                     1.  Allowable Emissions (AL)

                         Per NSPS:   kiln is permitted 0.30 Ib/ton of dry feed
                         Per Section 1.2 of this report:  1.6 tons dry feed per ton cement  produced
                         Based on kiln producing 31  tons per hour

                             AL =  31 tons/h x 1.6 tons/ton x 0.3 Ib/h
                             AL *  14.9 Ib/h

                     2.  a)  Uncontrolled Emission Rate Per Mass Balance (UN)

                         Dry feed = 162,922 Ib/h wet feed x (0.656)  dry solids = 106,876 Ib/h
                         CO- lost during calcining = dry feed (Ib/h) x carbonate content (0.7275)
                                                  x C02 loss to oxidation  (0.44)
                             CO., lost = 106,876 (0.7275)(0.44)
                               c     = 34,211 Ib/h

                             UN =  dry feed - (C02 lost + clinker production  rate)
                                =  106,876 Ib/h - (34,211 Ib/h + 62,000 Ib/h)
                                =  10,665 Ib/h

                        b)  Uncontrolled Emissions Per AP-42 (UN1)

                             AP-42 emission factor  for uncontrolled wet process kilns is 228
                               Ib/ton of clinker produced

                             UN1 = 31 tons/h x 228  Ib/ton
                                = 7068 Ib/h

                     3.  Actual  Emissions Per Deutsch Anderson Equation for ESP Efficiency (AE)

                        a)  Design  efficiency for ESP per Deutsch-Anderson equation:

                                               u *
                                      r,  =  0 - e   V)100

                             where:  n =  collection efficiency, %
                                    W =  migration  velocity,  ft/s     ,
                                    A =  electrode  collecting area,  ft
                                    V =  gas volume,  acfs

                         Assume:  Migration  velocity of 0.34  ft/s  per reference.
                                (The Mcllvaine Company, the Electrostatic Precipitator
                                Manual,  1975,  plus updates.)

                    Given:   Electrode plate  area is  103,680  ft2 and  gas flow  is 250,000  acfm.
                            Specific collection area is 103,680 T  250 = 414.7 ft2/103  acfm

                    Calculation:

                    Convert V of  250,000 acfm to 4166.66 acfs by dividing by  60.

                                                 r 103,680,
                                 n = (1 -

                                 n = (1 - e-8'46)loo

                                 n = (1 - 4723)10°

                                 n = (1 - 0.0002117)100

                                 n = 99.98% collection efficiency
          Figure  16.    Particulate emission  estimate  from  portland cement
                  kiln  including  comparison  to AP-42 emission  factor.


Portland  Cement  Plant                   67           Operating  Conditions  and
Inspection  Guide  2/82                                 Compliance  Determination

-------
Figure 16  (continued)
                      b)  Actual Efficiency for ESP Per Deutsch-Anderson equation


                                  „ - 100 (1 - e-°-06 K $)

                           where:   K = constant value
                                  P = corona power, watts
                                  Q = flow, 103 ft3/min

                       K  is derived from previous stack tests where inlet and outlet values
                       have been measured and an efficiency for the ESP determined at a given
                       power input. The efficiency is substituted into the above formula
                       along with the power input and solved for K.

                       In this case, we will assume an efficiency of 99 percent was measured
                       1n the test, where p = 69,993 watts and Q = 170 x 10^ acfm

                       Therefore K = 0.186 for this kiln

                       During the inspection, p = 66,250 watts and Q = 125 x 10  ft /min


                       Therefore n Ml - e'0'06 <°'186) ^100

                               n • (1 - e-5'9148)100
                               n Ml - 0.0026992)100

                               n = 99.73% collection efficiency

                       AE = UN x (100 - collection efficiency)/100

                       AE = 10,665 Ib/h x 0.0027
                       AE = 28.80 Ib/h or 0.54 Ib/ton of dry feed
Portland  Cement  Plant                 68           Operating Conditions  and
Inspection  Guide  2/82                               Compliance  Determination

-------
 emissions from the kiln.   The Deutsch-Anderson equation is also
 presented in a manner that shows the ESP was designed for ade-
 quate control efficiency.   Figure 16 also shows that the average
 emission factor from AP-42 for wet-process kilns is not accurate
 for this case.   It may be  a valid average for several kilns,  but
 it does not represent an accurate emission value for an indi-
 vidual kiln.
      The material  balance  calculation shown in Figure 16 for
 uncontrolled emissions is  also valid if  the kiln is controlled by
 a  fabric filter.   The control efficiency of the fabric filter
 (actual emissions)  is based on the amount of dust removed from
 the collection  hoppers of  the device per unit of time.   The plant
 routinely maintains data on the amount of material removed from
 the control device.   Actual emission estimates from the ESP or
 fabric filter can  then be  compared with  allowable emissions.   If
 the estimated values exceed or approach  allowable values,  an
 emission test is warranted.
      Other indicators of potential compliance problems  are lower
 power levels  to the  ESP, increased fuel  usage or production
 rates,  reduction in  ESP operating  fields,  increased  exhaust flow
 rate,  deterioration  of  fabric  filter  bags,  increased insuffla-
 tion,  and  increased  oxygen  to  the  control  device.  The  combina-
 tion  of  one or more  of  these parameters  and  an  increase  in opac-
 ity indicates that the mass emission  rate may  be  higher  than  the
 values measured during  the  stack test.   Stack  tests  for  verifica-
 tion  of  compliance are needed.
     Fewer clear-cut methods are available  for  determining the
 compliance status of clinker coolers.  Regardless of  the control
method used by source, opacity readings generally are not  a good
 indicator.  For example, a significant increase  in the mass
emission rate is not alway detectable because of the  size  of  the
particles.  If visible emissions are observed, however, an in-
crease in mass emissions is likely, and stack tests  are necessary
for final compliance determination.
Portland Cement Plant                   Operating Conditions and
 Inspection Guide 2/82            69      Compliance Determination

-------
      A better indicator of compliance for clinker coolers is to
 compare the operating parameters observed during the emission
 test with parameters recorded during this inspection.  The
 nature of the clinker cooler prohibits material balance calcu-
 lations.  If the unit is controlled by an ESP, parameters that
 can contribute to higher mass emissions are lower power levels to
 the ESP, reduction in ESP operating fields, increased process
 rate, increased exhaust flow rate, and decreased moisture content
 in the gas stream.  Moisture content of less than 4 to 10 percent
 causes resistivity problems and lowers collection efficiency.
 Depending on how closely the mass emission rate obtained from the
 stack tests compared with the standard and how widely operating
 parameters varied during the inspection, additional stack tests
 may be necessary to determine clinker cooler compliance.
      If the clinker cooler is controlled by a fabric filter,
 pressure drop across the modules is not highly definitive.
 Several bags must be broken before the pressure drop decreases
 significantly.  In general, the best parameter for determining
 compliance, short of stack testing, is to check the condition of
 the bags inside the fabric filter.  Bag deterioration or excess
 dust buildup on the clean side of the bag may indicate an in-
 crease in mass emissions over those measured in the last stack
 test.  A current stack test is warranted for definitive compli-
 ance determination.
      The inspector can determine the compliance status of finish
 mills by comparing opacity readings made during the inspection
 with the opacity limit.  Another method is to note if operating
 parameters differ from those recorded during previous compliance
 stack tests.  These parameters include production level, exhaust
 flow rate, and the condition of the bags in the fabric filter.
 If there is significant variation in any one parameter or some
 variation in several parameters, additional stack tests are
 necessary for compliance determination.
      As indicated in Section 4.5, fugitive emissions can present
 a problem in several areas of a plant, particularly around ele-
 vators, transporting areas, and storage piles.  The inspector
Portland Cement Plant                   Operating Conditions and
Inspection Guide 2/82           70      Compliance Determination

-------
should take visible emission readings at these sources.  The
following calculation shows an emission estimate of uncontrolled
fugitive emissions resulting from unloading, storing, and trans-
fer of raw materials.
     Emission factor (per Section 4.5)  = 3.0 to 5.0 Ib/ton
     Assume 4.0 Ib/ton of uncontrolled emissions.
     Emission estimate based on 650,000 tons per year delivered:
     650,000 tons/yr x 4.0 Ib/ton x ton/2000 Ib = 1300 tons/yr.

     The final product of a compliance inspection is a report.
Appendix F provides an example format for presenting the in-
spector's observations, calculations, assumptions and conclu-
sions .
Portland Cement Plant                   Operating Conditions and
Inspection Guide 2/82          71       Compliance Determination

-------
                          REFERENCES
 1.  Kirk-Othmer Encyclopedia of Chemical Terminology.  Second
     completely revised edition.  Volume 4.  Cement.  1967.

 2.  Ackerson, Dennis H.  Compilation of Air Pollution Emission
     Factors.  Third Edition.  U.S. Environmental Protection
     Agency Office of Air and Water Programs.  Portland Cement
     Manufacturing.

 3.  Mineral Industry Surveys.  U.S. Department of Interior.
     Bureau of Mines.  November 12, 1981.

 4.  Midwest Research Institute.  Particulate Pollutant System
     Study.  Vol. Ill, Handbook of Emission Properties.  Cement
     Manufacture   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  1971.

 5.  Pit and Quarry Handbook and Buyers Guide 1975/1976.  Pit and
     Quarry Publications, Inc.  Chicago.  1976.

 6.  Kulujian, N. J.  Inspection Manual for the Enforcement of
     New Source Performance Standards:  Portland Cement Plants.
     PEDCo Environmental, Inc.  Prepared for U.S. Environmental
     Protection Agency under Contract No. 68-02-1355, Task'No. 4.
     January 1975.

 7.  U.S. Department of  Interior.  Mineral Facts and  Problems.
     1980 Edition.  Cement.  U.S. Bureau of Mines.  1980.

 8.  Hawks, R., and J. Richards.  Field Inspection  Report—Martin
     Marietta  Cement Co., Martinsburg, West Virginia.  Prepared
     for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency by  PEDCo
     Environmental, Inc., under Contract No. 68-02-4147.  November
     1980.

 9.  The Mcllvaine Co.   The  Electrostatic  Precipitator Manual.
     Northbrook,  Illinois.   December  1976.

 10.  PEDCo Environmental, Inc.  Industrial Boiler Inspection
     Guide.  Prepared  for the  U.S.  Environmental Protection
     Agency under Contract No.  68-01-6310, Task No. 9.  October
     1981.
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
72
References

-------
 11.   The Mcllvaine Company.   The Fabric Filter Manual.   North-
      brook,  Illinois.   1975  plus updates.

 12.   Szabo,  M.,  and J.  Richards.  Field Inspection Report--
      Columbia Cement Company,  Bellingham,  Washington.   Prepared
      for the U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency by PEDCo
      Environmental,  Inc.,  under Contract No.  68-01-4147, Task No.
      89.   January  1980.

 13.   Szabo,  M.  F.,  and  Y.  M.  Shah.   Inspection Manual  for Eval-
      uation  of Electrostatic  Precipitator Performance.   PEDCo
      Environmental,  Inc.   EPA-340/1-79-007.   February  1979.

 14.   Oglesby, S.,  Jr.,  and G.  B. Nichols.   Electrostatic Pre-
      cipitation In:   Air  Pollution,  3rd Edition,  Vol.  IV.  Engi-
      neering Control of Air  Pollution.   Academic  Press,  New York.
      1977.

 15.   PEDCo Environmental,  Inc.   Inspection and Operating and
      Maintenance Guidelines  for Secondary Lead Smelters.  (Draft)
      Prepared for  the U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency under
      Contract 68-03-2924.   November  1981.

 16.   PEDCo Environmental,  Inc.   Inspection Report for  Visit to
      Ideal Cement  Co. Plant,  Okay, Arkansas.   Prepared for Region
      VI  of U.S.  Environmental  Protection Agency.   August 3, 1979.

 17.   PEDCo Environmental,  Inc.   Inspection Report for  Visit to
      Arkansas Cement Corporation Plant,  Foreman,  Arkansas.  Pre-
      pared for  Region VI  of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
      August  3,  1979.

 18.   Rexnord Corporation.   Plan and  Elevation drawings  dated
      January 1979.

 19.   Jefferson  County Air  Quality Control  Department.   Stack test
      data for Universal Atlas  Corp.,  Portland Cement Plant, Lead,
      Alabama.   September  30,  1976.

 20.   PEDCo Environmental,  Inc.   Source  Evaluation of Region IV
      Nonattainment  Areas  to Determine TSP  Emission Reduction
      Capabilities.   Prepared  for the U.S.  Environmental  Protec-
      tion Agency under  Contract No.  68-02-2603, Task No. 2.  June
      1978.

 21.   Katari,  V.  Preparation  of Process  Description for  Engineer-
      ing  Manual—Cement Plants.   (Preliminary Draft.)   Prepared
      by  PEDCo Environmental,  Inc., for  the U.S. Environmental
      Protection  Agency.   December 1978.
Portland Cement Plant           73                     References
Inspection Guide 2/82

-------
22.  Szabo, M., and Y. Shah.   A Review of Particulate Emission
     Problems During Startup of Cement Kilns Equipped with Elec-
     trostatic Precipitators.  Prepared by PEDCo Environmental,
     Inc., for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  March
     1979.
Portland Cement Plant           74                     References
Inspection Guide 2/82

-------
                                             APPENDIX  A

                 New Source  Performance  Standards  for Portland Cement
       Subpart F—Standards of Performance
           for Portland Cement Plants

       160.60  Applicability and designation of
           affected facility.
             [42 FR 37936, July 25, 1977J

       .  (a)  The provisions of this subpart are
       applicable to the following affected fa-
       cilities in Portland cement plants: kiln,
       clinker cooler,  raw mill  system, finish
       mill system, raw mill dryer, raw material
       storage, clinker storage, finished product
       storage, conveyor transfer points, bag-
       cing and bulk loading and unloading sys-
       tems.
         (b)  Any facility tinder  paragraph (a)
       of this section that commences construc-
       tion or modification  after August 17,
       1971, is subject to the requirements of
       this subpart.

       (60.61  Definition*.
         As used in this  subpart, all terms not
       defined herein shall have the meaning
       given them In the Act and in Subpari A
      .of this part.

         .(a)  "Portland  cement plant"  means
       any facility manufacturing Portland ce-
       ment by either the wet or dry process.

       § 60.62  Standard for paniculate matter.
         (a)  On and  after the  date on which
       the performance test required to be con-
       ducted by  {-608 is completed, no owner
       or operator subject to  the provisions of
       this subpart shall cause to be  discharged
       Into the atmosphere from any kiln any
       gases  which:
         (1)  Contain  particulate matter in ex-
       cess of 0.15 kg per metric ton  of  feed
       (dry basis)  to the kiln  (0.30 Ib per ton).
         (2)  Exhibit  greater  than  20  percent
       opacity.

           [39 FR 39872, November 12, 1974|
         (b)  On and  after the  date on which
       the performance test required to be con-
       ducted by 5 60.8 Is  completed, no owner
       or operator subject to  the provisions of
       this subpart shall cause to be discharged
       Into  the  atmosphere from any clinker
       cooler any gases which:
         < 1)  Contain  particulate matter ui ex-
       cess of 0 050 kg per metric ton of  feed
       (dry basis) jo the kiln (040 Ib oer ton^
         (2)  Exhibit  10  percent  opacity., or
       greater.
         (c)  On and  after the  date on which
       the  performance test required to be con-
       ducted by § 60 8 is  completed, no owner
       or operator subject to the provisions of
       this subpart shall cause to be discharged
       into the atmosphere from any  affected
       facility other than the kiln and clinker
       cooler any gases which exhibit 10 percent
       opacity, or  greater.
          (d) (Deleted).
       [39  FR  20790,  June  14, 1974, 40  FR
       36250, October 6, 1975J

       § 60.63  Monitoring of operations.
          (a) The owner or operator  of  anv
       Portland cement plant subject to the pro-
       visions of this part shall record the daily
       production rates and kiln feed rates.
             [39 FR 20790, June  14, 1974]

       (Sec. 114  of the dean Air  Act as  tmended
       (42 U.S.C. 7414).)

       § 60.64   Test methods and procedure*.
         (a)  The reference methods In Appen-
       dix A  to this part, except as provided for
       In  J 60.8(b), shall be used to determine
       compliance  with the   standards  pre-
       scribed in { 60.62 as follows:
         (1)  Method 5 for the concentration
       of  particulate matter and the associated
       moisture content;
         (2)  Method 1  for sample and velocity
       traverses;
         (3)  Method 2 for velocity and volu-
       metric flow rate;  and
        (4)  Method  3  for  gas  analysis.
         (b)  For Method 5, the  minimum sam-
       pling time and minimum sample volume
       for each run, except wnen process varia-
       bles or other factors justify otherwise to
       the satisfaction  of  the  Administrator,
       shall be as follows:
         (1)  60 minutes and 0.85  dscm (30.>
       dscf) for the kiln.
         (2)  60 minutes and 1.15  dscm (40.6
       dscf) for the clinker cooler.
         (c)  Total kiln feed rate (except fuels),
       expressed in metric  tons per hour on a
       dry basis, shall  be determined  during
       each testing period by suitable methods;
       and shall be confirmed by a material bal-
       ance over the production system.
         (d)  For each run, particulate  matter
       emissions, expressed in g 'metric ton 'of
       kiln feed, shall be detejmmH  by divid-
       ing the emission  rate in g/hr b the kiln
       feed  rate. The emission rate .*M»U be
       determined by the equation, g/hr=QiX
       c, where  Q.=volumetrtc  flow rate of the
       total effluent In dscm/hr as  determined
       in  accordance  with paragraph Xa> (3) 01
       this section, and c=particulate concen-
       tration in g/dscm as determined in ac-
       cordance with paragraph (a)(D  of this
       section.
             [39 FR 20790, June  14, 1974)

       (Sec. 114  of the Clean Air  Act  as amendec
       (42 U.S.C. 7414).)
Portland Cement  Plant
Inspection  Guide  2/82
A-l
                                     Appendix  A

-------
                           APPENDIX B

     1981 DIRECTORY OF PORTLAND CEMENT MANUFACTURING PLANTS
     Company (Division)

Alpha Portland Industries,
 Inc. (Alpha Portland Cement
 Co.)

Alpha Portland Industries,
 Inc. (Alpha Portland
 Cement Co.)

Alpha Portland Industries
 Inc. (Alpha Portland
 Cement Co.)

Alpha Portland Industries
 Inc. (Alpha Portland
 Cement Co.)

Arkansas Louisiana Gas Co.
 (Arkansas Cement Corp.)

Ash Grove Cement Co.

Ash Grove Cement Co.

Canada Cement Lafarge Ltd.
 (Citadel Cement Corp.)

California Portland Cement
 Co.

California Portland Cement
 Co.

California Portland Cement
 Co. (Arizona Portland Cement
 Co.)

Centex Corp. (Illinois
 Cement Co.)
      Location
Lime Kiln, Maryland
St. Louis, Missouri
 (to be closed end of
 1981)

Cementon, New York
Orange, Texas



Foreman, Arkansas


Chanute, Kansas

Louisville, Nebraska

Demopolis, Alabama


Colton, California


Mojave, California


Rillito, Arizona



LaSalle, Illinois
Process

   Wet



   Wet



   Wet



   Wet



   Wet


   Wet

  Wet-Dry

   Dry


   Dry


   Dry


   Dry



   Dry
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
                                B-l
                        Appendix B

-------
APPENDIX B (continued)

     Company (Division)

Centex Corp. (Sevada
 Cement Co.)

Centex Corp. (Centex Cement
 Corp.)

Centex Corp. (Texas Cement
 Co.)

Crane Co.  (Medusa Corp.)

Crane Co.  (Medusa Cement
 Co.)

Crane Co.  (Medusa Cement
 Co.)

Crane  Co.  (Medusa Cement
 Co.)

 Cyprus  Mines Corp.  (Cyprus
  Hawaiian Cement Corp.)

 Filtrol Corp.  (Columbia
  Cement Corp.)

 Filtrol Corp.  (Columbia
  Cement Corp.)

 General Portland, Inc.
   (California Div.)

 General Portland, Inc.
   (Florida Div.)

 General Portland, Inc.
   (Florida Div.)

 General Portland, Inc.
   (Victor  Div.)

 General Portland, Inc.
   (Peninsular Div.)

 General  Portland,  Inc.
   (Whitehall Cement)

  General  Portland,  Inc.
   (Signal Mountain  Div.)

 Portland  Cement Plant
 Inspection  Guide 2/82
      Location

Fernley, Nevada


Corpus Christi, Texas


Buda, Texas


Clinchfield, Georgia

Charlevoix, Michigan


Wampum,  Pennsylvania


York,  Pennsylvania


Barbers Point, Hawaii


 Zanesville,  Ohio


 Bellingham,  Washington


 Los Robles, California


 Miami, Florida


 Tampa, Florida


 Fredonia, Kansas


 Paulding, Ohio


 Cementon,  Pennsylvania


  Chattanooga,  Tennessee
 Process

    Dry


    Wet


    Dry


   Dry-Wet

    Wet


    Dry


    Wet


    Dry


    Wet


    Wet


     Dry


     Wet


     Wet


     Wet


     Wet


     Dry


     Wet


Appendix B
                                 B-2

-------
 APPENDIX B (continued)

      Company (Division)

 General Portland,  Inc.
  (Trinity North Div.)

 General Portland,  Inc.
  (Trinity North Div.)

 General Portland,  Inc.
  (Trinity North Div.)

 Genstar Corp.  (Genstar
  Cement and Lime Co.)

 Genstar Corp.  (Gala Veras
  Cement Div.)

 Giant Portland  and Masonry
  Cement Co.

 Gifford-Hill and Co.,  Inc.
 Gifford-Hill and Co.,  Inc.
  (Phoenix Cement Co.)

 Gifford-Hill and Co.,  Inc.
  (Riverside Cement Co.)

 Gifford-Hill and Co.,  Inc.
  (Riverside Cement Co.)

 Gifford-Hill and Co.,  Inc.
  (Peerless Cement Co.)

 Gifford-Hill and Co.,  Inc.
  (Gifford-Hill  Portland
  Cement  Co.)

 Gulf  & Western  Industries,
  Inc.  (Marquette Co.)

 Gulf  & Western  Industries,
  Inc.  (Marquette Co.)

 Gulf  & Western  Industries,
  Inc.  (Marquette Co.)

 Gulf  & Western  Industries,
  Inc.  (Marquette Co.)
      Location            Process
Dallas, Texas                Wet
Fort Worth, Texas            Wet
New Braunfels, Texas         Dry
Redding, California          Dry
San Andreas, California      Wet
Harleyville, South           Wet
 Carolina

Harleyville, South           Dry
 Carolina

Clarkdale, Arizona           Dry
Crestmore, California        Dry
Oro Grande, California       Dry
Detroit, Michigan            Wet
Midlothian, Texas            Wet
Rockmart, Georgia            Dry
Oglesby, Illinois            Dry
Hagerstown, Maryland         Dry
Brandon, Mississippi         Wet
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
                               B-3
                       Appendix B

-------
APPENDIX B (continued)

     Company (Division)

Gulf & Western Industries,
 Inc. (Marquette Co.)

Gulf & Western Industries,
 (Marquette Co.)

Gulf & Western Industries,
 Inc. (Marquette Co.)

Gulf & Western Industries,
 Inc. (Marquette Co.)

Heidelberger Zeraent AG
 (Lehigh Portland Cement Co.)

Heidelberger Zement AG
 (Lehigh Portland Cement Co.)

Heidelberger Zement AG
 (Lehigh Portland Cement Co.)

Heidelberger Zement AG
 (Lehigh Portland Cement Co.)

Heidelberger  Zement AG
 (Lehigh Portland Cement Co.)

Heidelberger  Zement AG
 (Lehigh Portland Cement Co.)

Heidelberger  Zement AG
 (Lehigh  Portland Cement Co.)

 Heidelberger  Zement AG
  (Lehigh  Portland  Cement  Co.)

 Heidelberger  Zement AG
  (Lehigh  Portland Cement  Co.)

 Heidelberger Zement AG
  (Lehigh  Portland Cement Co.)

 Heidelberger Zement AG
  (Lehigh  Portland Cement Co.)

 Heidelberger Zement AG
  (Lehigh  Portland Cement Co.)
      Location
Cape Girardeau, Missouri
Catskill, New York
Superior, Ohio
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Leeds, Alabama
Buffington,  Indiana
Mitchell,  Indiana
 Mason City,  Iowa
 Independence,  Kansas
 Union Bridge,  Maryland
 Hannibal, Missouri
 Alsen, New York
Process
   Wet
   Wet
   Dry
   Wet
   Dry
  Grinding
    Dry
    Dry
    Dry
    Dry
    Wet
    Dry
 Northhampton, Pennsylvania   Wet
 Waco, Texas
                            Wet-Dry
 Metaline Falls, Washington   Dry
 Milwaukee, Wisconsin
   Grinding
 Portland Cement Plant
 Inspection Guide 2/82
                                                       Appendix  B
                                B-4

-------
APPENDIX B (continued)

     Company (Division)

H.B. Zachry Co.  (Capitol
 Aggregates,  Inc.)

H.K. Porter Co., Inc.
  (Missouri Portland Cement
 Co.)

H.K. Porter Co., Inc.
  (Missouri Portland Cement
 Co.)

H.K. Porter Co., Inc.
  (Missouri Portland Cement
  (Co.)

Holderbank Group
  (Dundee Cement Co.)

Holderbank Group
  (Dundee Cement Co.)

Holderbank Group
  (Santee Portland Cement
 Corp., Dundee Cement  Co.)

Ideal Basic Industries, Inc.
  (Cement Div.)

Ideal Basic Industries, Inc.
  (Cement Div.)

Ideal Basic Industries, Inc.
  (Cement Div.)

Ideal Basic Industries, Inc.
  (Cement Div.)

Ideal Basic Industries, Inc.
  (Cement Div.)

Ideal Basic Industries, Inc.
  (Cement Div.)

Ideal Basic Industries, Inc.
  (Cement Div.)

Ideal Basic Industries, Inc.
  (Cement Div.)
      Location            Process
San Antonio, Texas           Wet
Joppa, Illinois              Dry
St. Louis, Missouri          Wet
Sugar Creek, Missouri        Dry
Dundee, Michigan             Wet
Clarksville, Missouri        Wet
Hollyhill, South Carolina    Wet
Theodore, Alabama
Okay, Arkansas
Boettcher, Colorado
Portland, Colorado
Trident, Montana
Superior, Nebraska
 Tijevas, New  Mexico
 Castle  Hayne,  North
  Carolina
Dry
Wet
Dry
Wet
Wet
Wet
Dry
Wet
 Portland Cement Plant
 Inspection Guide 2/82
                                B-5
                         Appendix  B

-------
APPENDIX B (continued)
     Company (Division)

Ideal Basic Industries,  Inc.
 (Cement Div.)

Ideal Basic Industries,  Inc.
 (Cement Div.)

Ideal Basic Industries,  Inc.
 (Cement Div.)

Ideal Basic Industries,  Inc.
 (Cement Div.)

Ideal Basic Industries,  Inc.
 (Cement Div.)

Institute Finanziano Indus-
 trial  (Hercules Cement Co.)

Institute Finanziano Indus-
 trial  (River Cement Co.)

Kaiser Cement Corp.

Kaiser Cement Corp.

Kaiser Cement Corp.

Kaiser Cement Corp.

Kaiser Cement Corp.

Keystone Portland  Cement Co.

Lake Ontario Cement Ltd.
  (Aetna Cement  Corp.)

Lone Star  Industries, Inc.
  (Cement and Construction
 Mat. Group)

Lone Star  Industries, Inc.
  (Cement and Construction
 Mat. Group)

Lone Star  Industries, Inc.
  (Cement and Construction
 Mat. Group)

Lone Star  Industries, Inc.
  (Cement and Construction
 Mat. Group)

Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
    Location

Ada, Oklahoma
Knoxville, Tennessee
Galena Park, Texas
Devils Slide, Utah
Seattle, Washington
Process

  Wet
  Dry
  Wet
  Wet
  Wet
Stockertown, Pennsylvania    Dry
Festus, Missouri
  Dry
 Lucerne Valley,  California   Wet

 Permanente,  California       Wet

 Waianae,  Hawaii              Wet

 Montana City,  Montana        Wet

 San  Antonio,  Texas           Dry

 Bath,  Pennsylvania           Wet

 Essexville,  Michigan       Grinding


 Santa Cruz,  California       Dry



 Dixon, Illinois              Dry



 Greencastle, Indiana         Wet



 Bonner Springs, Kansas       Wet




                       Appendix B
                               B-6

-------
APPENDIX B (continued)

     Company (Division)
  I,
Lone Star Industries, Inc.
  (Cement and Construction
 Mat. Group)

Lone Star Industries, Inc.
  (Cement and Construction
 Mat. Group)

Lone Star Industries, Inc.
  (Cement and Construction
 Mat. Group)

Lone Star Industries, Inc.
  (Cement and Construction
 Mat. Group)

Lone Star Industries, Inc.
  (Cement and Construction
 Mat. Group)

Lone Star Industries, Inc.
  (Cement and Construction
 Mat. Group)

Lone Star Industries, Inc.
  (Cement and Construction
 Mat. Group)

Lone Star Industries, Inc,
  (Portland Cement Co. of
 Utah)

Lone Star Industries, Inc,
  (Lonestar Florida
 Pennsuco, Inc.)

Louisville Cement Co.

Louisville Cement Co.

Louisville Cement Co.
  (Bessemer Cement Co.)

Marmac Corp. (Gulf Coast
 Portland Cement Co.)

Martin Marietta Corp.
  (Martin Marietta Cement
 Div.)
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
      Location

New Orleans, Louisiana



Pryor, Oklahoma



Nazareth, Pennsylvania



Houston, Texas



Maryneal, Texas



Roanoke, Virginia



Seattle, Washington



Salt Lake City, Utah



Miami, Florida



Logansport, Indiana

Speed, Indiana

Bessemer, Pennsylvania


Houston, Texas


Calera, Alabama
  Process

     Wet



     Dry



     Dry



     Wet



     Dry



     Dry



     Wet



     Wet



     Wet



     Wet

     Dry

     Wet


     Wet


     Dry


Appendix B
                                B-7

-------
APPENDIX B (continued)

     Company (Division)

Martin Marietta Corp.
 (Martin Marietta Cement
 Div.)

Martin Marietta Corp.
 (Martin Marietta Cement
 Div.)

Martin Marietta Corp.
 (Martin Marietta Cement
 Div.)

Martin Marietta Corp.
 (Martin Marietta Cement
 Div.)

Martin Marietta Corp.
 (Martin Marietta Cement
 Div.)

Martin Marietta Corp.
 (Martin Marietta Cement
 Div.)

Martin Marietta Corp.
 (Martin Marietta Cement
 Div.)

Martin Marietta Corp.
 (Martin Marietta Cement
 Div.)

The Monarch Cement Co.

The Monarch Cement Co.

Monolith Portland Cement Co.

Monolith Portland Cement Co.

Moore McCormack Cement, Inc.
 (Florida Mining & Materials
 Corp.)

Moore McCormack Cement, Inc.
 (Kosmos Cement Co.,  Inc.)

Moore McCormack Cement, Inc.
  (Glens Falls Portland
  Cement Co.,  Inc.)

Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
      Location            Process
Lyons, Colorado              Dry
Atlanta, Georgia             Dry
Davenport, Iowa              Wet
West Des Moines,  Iowa        Wet
Thomaston, Maine             Wet
Tulsa, Oklahoma              Dry
Northhampton, Pennsylvania  . Dry
Martinsburg, West Virginia   Wet
Des Moines, Iowa

Humboldt, Kansas

Monolith, California

Laramie, Wyoming

Brooksville, Florida



Kosmosdale, Kentucky


Glens Falls, New York



 B-8
     Wet

     Dry

     Wet

     Wet

     Dry



     Dry


     Dry



Appendix B

-------
  APPENDIX  B  (continued)
      Company  (Division)

  Moore  McCormack Cement,  Inc.
   (Glens Falls Portland
   Cement Co.,  Inc.)

  Moore  McCormack Cement,  Inc.
   (Dixie Cement Co.,  Inc.)

  Moore  McCormack Cement,  Inc.
   (Dixie Cement Co.,  Inc.)

  National Gypsum Co.
   (Allentown Cement Div.)

  National Gypsum Co.
   (Huron Cement  Div.)

  National Gypsum Co.
   (Huron Cement  Div.)

  National Portland Cement Co.
  of Florida,  Inc.

  Newmont Mining  Corop.
   (Atlantic Cement Co., Inc.)

 Northwestern States Portland
  Cement, Co.

 Oregon Portland Cement Co.

 Oregon Portland Cement Co.

 Oregon Portland Cement Co.
  (Idaho Portland Cement Div.)

 Penn-West Cement Co., Inc.
 Presa S.P.A.  Cementeria  di
  Robilante (Alamo Cement
  Co.)  (joint venture)

 Puerto Rican  Cement Co.,  Inc.

 Rinker Materials  Corp.
  (Rinker  Portland Cement
  Corp.)

 San Juan  Cement Co., Inc.

Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
     Location

 Howes Cave, New York



 Kingsport, Tennessee


 Richard City,  Tennessee


 Evansville, Pennsylvania


 Alpena,  Michigan


 Superior,  Wisconsin


 Bradenton,  Florida


 Ravena,  New York


 Mason City,  Iowa


 Durkee,  Oregon

 Lake Oswego, Oregon

 Inkom, Idaho
West Winfield, Pennsyl-
 vania

Cementville, Texas
Ponce, Puerto Rico

Miami, Florida



Dorado, Puerto Rico



B-9
    Process

     Grinding



       Wet


       Wet


       Dry


       Dry


     Grinding


     Grinding


       Wet


       Dry


     Dry-Wet

       Wet

       Wet


       Wet


       Wet



       Wet

       Wet



      Wet


Appendix B

-------
APPENDIX B (continued)

     Company (Division)

Societe Anonyme des Ciments
 Vicat  (National Cement Co.,
 Inc.)

Societe des Ciments Francais
 (Coplay Cement Co.)

Societe des Ciments Francais
 (Coplay Cement Co.)

Societe des climents Francais
 (Coplay Cement Co.)

South Dakota Cement Plant
 Commission

Southdown, Inc.
 (Southwestern Portland
 Cement Co.)

Southdown, Inc.
 (Southwestern Portland
 Cement Co.)

Southdown, Inc.
 (Southwestern Portland
 Cement Co.)

Southdown, Inc.
 (Southwestern Portland
 Cement Co.)

Southdown, Inc.
 (Southwestern Portland
 Cement Co.)

Standard Machine and Equip-
 ment Co.  (SME Cement, Inc.)

Standard Machine and Equip-
 Co.  (SME  Cement,  Inc.)

St.  Mary's Cement  Ltd
 (Wyandotte Cement Inc\)  •

Texas Industries,  Inc.

Texas Industries,  Inc.
  (TXI Cement Co.)

Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
      Location
Ragland, Alabama
Coplay, Pennsylvania
Nazareth, Pennsylvania
Nazareth, Pennsylvania
  Process
     Dry
   Grinding
     Dry
   Grinding
Rapid City, South Dakota    Wet-Dry
Victorville, California



Fairborn, Ohio



Amarillo, Texas



El Paso, Texas



Odessa, Texas



Middlebranch, Ohio


Sylvania, Ohio


Wyandotte,  Michigan


Midlothian,  Texas

New  Braufels, Texas
     Dry-Wet



     Dry-Wet



      Wet



      Dry



      Dry



      Dry


      Dry


    Grinding


      Wet

      Dry


Appendix B
                               B-10

-------
  APPENDIX  B  (continued)
      Company  (Division)

 Texas Industries,  Inc.
   (United Cement Co.)
     Location            Process

Artesia, Mississippi       Wet
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
                       Appendix  B
                                B-ll

-------
                            APPENDIX C



                           SAMPLE  FORMS
Portland Cement Plant          C-l                    Appendix C
Inspection Guide 2/82                                 Appendix C

-------
                          PRE-INSPECTION  ABATEMENT ACTIVITIES CHECKLIST

           Name of company:	.	.—

           Address:  	____	
           Responsible person:

           Previous Inspection:
                Date:  .	
                Findings:		
                Process rate:   	tons/day  Kiln 03:  	%.
                Gas temperaturel                 "F   Gas flow rate:  	acfm
                Emission control  equipment parameters:	
           Stack Test:
                Testing company:
                Date  of test:
                Results  (obtain copy  1f possible):                                _.
                Visible  emissions observations:	
                Compliance status:  	,	
                Action taken:	-
                Process  rate:  	tons/day   Kiln 02 	%
                Gas temperature:  	°_f_   Gas flow rate:  	acfm
                Gas moisture content:	*
                Emission control equipment parameters:  	
           Visible Emission Observations  (other than above):
                Date:
                Average readings:  	

            Complaints:

                Dates,  nature, and findings:
            Malfunctions:

                Dates, nature, duration, and  action taken:
            Compliance Schedule:
Portland Cement Plant              C-2                              Appendix  C
Inspection  Guide  2/82

-------
                                     CHECKLIST FOR PROCESS  DATA
               Kiln:
                   Dimensions:
                   Chains:  	
                   Process:  	
                   Slurry:
                        Feed rate
          Yes
             Wet
                   Type cement produced:
                   Dry sol Ids	tons/h
                   Fuel:
                        Type:
__	

	Dry

gal/min  Moisture
                                                     ft
                                                                 %  Carbonate
                        Quality:
                   ash;
            % sulfur;
                        Firing rate	tons/h
                   Alkali  content of feed:
Btu/lb heat
 content
                   Volume  of clinker production:  	
                   Dust reentrainment:
                        Volume	Ib/h  Source
                   Flue gas:
                        Volume           acfm
                                             °F
                                     J,
                                     tons/h
Temperature
% oxygen
              Clinker Cooler:

                   Type:  	
                   Flue gas:
                       Volume
                       Temperature
                       Clinker cooling rate

              Finishing Mill:

                   Number:
                             acfm
                             °F
                             tons/h
                   Volume handled  by each:
                   Type:
                              tons/h
                   Flue gas:
                       Volume
                       Temperature
                 acfm
                 CF
              Crusher
                  Number:	
                  Volume handled by each:
                  Type:
                             tons/h
                  Flue gas:
                       Volume
                       Temperature
                acfm
Portland  Cement Plant
Inspection  Guide  2/82
                      C-3
                                                       Appendix  C

-------
CHECKLIST FOR CONTROL
Kiln:
Fabric filter: Yes No
Cloth
Area
Air-to-cloth ratio
Pressure drop
Collection efficiency
Electrostatic precipitator:
Total plate area
Wire length
Specific collection area
Collection efficiency
Precleaner: Type
Description
Clinker Cooler:
Fabric filter: Yes
Cloth type
Area
Air-to-cloth ratio
Pressure drop
Collection efficiency
Multiple cyclone: Yes
Number of tubes
Tube diameter
Pressure drop
Collection efficiency
Electrostatic precipitator:
Plate area
Wire length
Specific collection area
Collection efficiency
Gravel bed: Yes
Pressure drop
Number of compartments
Collection efficiency
Finishing Mill :
Fabric filter: Yes
Cloth type
Area
Air-to-cloth ratio
Pressure drop
Collection efficiency


ft*
acfm/ft^
in. H?0
%
Yes No
ft^
ft
,Aft'X
1000 acfm
%


No


acfm/
ft*
in. H?0
%
No

in.
in. H20
%
Yes No
ftz
ft
ft*/
1000 acfm
%
No
in. H20

%
No

ft*
acfm/
ft*
in. H20
%

EQUIPMENT
Fields
Chambers
Superficial velocity ft/s
Number T/R sets
water rate qal/min
Type of bag cleaning:
Shaker
Pulse jet
Reverse air
Fields
Chambers
Superficial velocity ft/s
Number T/R sets
Water rate gal/min
Type of bag cleaning:
Shaker
Pulse jet
Reverse air

Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
C-4
Appendix C

-------
                                                 APPENDIX  D

                            Method  9  -  Visible  Emission  Evaluation
            lOETHOD  •	VISUAL  DETERMINATION  OF  THE
             OPACITY  OP EMISSIONS  PROM  8TATIONABT
             SOURCES

             Many stationary sources discharge visible
           •missions into the atmosphere; these emis-
           sions are  usually in the shape at a plume.
           This method involves the determination of
           plume opacity  by qualified observers.  The
           method includes procedures for the training
           and certification of observers, and procedures
           to be used in the field for determination of
           plume opacity. The appearance of a plume as
           viewed by an observer depends upon a num-
           ber of variables, some of which may be con-
           trollable and some  of which may not be
           controllable In the field. Variables which can
           be controlled to an. extent to which they no
           longer exert a significant influence upon
           plume appearance include:  Angle of the ob-
           server with respect to the plume; angle of the
           observer with respect to the sun; point of
           observation of attached and detached steam
           plume; and angle  of the observer with re-
           spect to a plume emitted from a rectangular
           stack with  a large length to width ratio. The
           method Includes specific criteria  applicable
           to these variables.
             Other variables which may not be control-
           lable in the field are luminescence and color
           contrast between  the plume and the back-
           ground against which the plume is viewed.
           These variables exert an Influence upon the
           appearance of a plume as viewed by an ob-
           server, and can affect the ability of the ob-
           server  to  accurately assign opacity values
           to the observed plume. Studies of the theory
           of plume opacity and field studies have dem-
           onstrated that a plume Is most visible  and
           presents the greatest apparent opacity when
           viewed against a contrasting background. It
           follows from  this, and  is confirmed by field
           trials, that the opacity of a plume, viewed
           under conditions where a contrasting back-
           ground Is  present can be assigned with the
           greatest degree of accuracy. However, the po-
           tential for a positive error is also the greatest
           when a plume is viewed under ouch contrast*
           Ing conditions. Under conditions  presenting
           a less contrasting background, the apparent
           opacity of a plume  is less and approaches
           cero as the color and luminescence contrast
           decrease toward zero. As a result; significant
           negative bias and  negative  errors can b»
           made when a plume Is  viewed under less
           contrasting conditions. A  negative bias de-
           creases rather than increases the possibility
           that a plant operator will be cited for a vio-
           lation of opacity standards due  to observer
           error.
             Studies have been undertaken to determine
           the magnitude of positive errors  which can
           be made by  qualified observers while read-
           ing plumes under contrasting conditions and
           using  the  procedures  set forth  in  this
           method. The results of these  studies (field
           trials)  which involve a total of 769 sets of
           26 readings each are as follows:
             (l) For black plumes (133 sets at a smoke
           generator), 100  percent of  the  sets were
           read with  a  positive error1 of less than ".5
           percent opacity; 99 percent were read with
            a positive error of less than 5 percent opacity.
   (2) For white plumes (170 sets at a smoke
generator, 168 sets at a coal-fired power plant,
298 sets at a sulfurlc acid plant), 99 percent
of the sets were read with a positive error of
less than 7.5 percent opacity; 95 percent were
read with a positive error of less than 6 per-
cent opacity.
  The positive observational error associated
with  an  average of twenty-five readings is
therefore established. The accuracy of the
method must be taken into account when
determining possible violations of  appli-
cable opacity standards.
  1 For a set, positive error=average opacity
determined  by observers' 25 observations —
average opacity determined from transmte-
soometor's  26 recordings.

  1. Principle and applicability.

  U  Principle.  The opacity of emissions
from  stationary sources  is  determined vis-
ually  by a qualified observer.
  1.2  Applicability.  This method Is appli-
cable  for  the determination of  the opacity
of emissions from  stationary sources pur-
suant to  $60.ll(b)  and  for qualifying ob-
servers for  visually  determining opacity of
•missions.
  2.  Procedures.  The observer qualified in
accordance with paragraph 8 of this method
shall  use  the following procedures for vis-
ually  determining the opacity of emissions:
  2.1  Position.  The qualified observer shall
stand at a  distance sufficient to provide a
clear  view of the emissions with  the sun
oriented in the 140' sector to his back. Con-
sistent with maintaining the above require-
ment, the observer shall, as much as possible,
make  hl3  observations from a position such
that  his  line  of vision  Is approximately
perpendicular to the plume direction, and
when  observing opacity  of emissions from
rectangular  outlets (e.g. roof monitors, open
baghouses,  noncircular  stacks),   approxi-
mately perpendicular to  the longer axis of
the outlet. The observer's line of sight should
not include  more than one plume at a time
when  multiple stacks are  Involved, and In
any case the observer should make his ob-
servations with his line of sight perpendicu-
lar to the longer axis of such a set-of multi-
ple stacks (e.g. stub stacks on  baghouses).
  2.2  Field  records.  The observer shall  re-
cord  the name of the plant, emission loca-
tion,  type  facility,   observer's  name  and
affiliation, and the date on a field data sheet
(Figure 9-1). The time,  estimated  distance
to the emission location, approximate wind
direction,  estimated  wind speed, description
of the sky condition (presence and color of
clouds), and plume background are  recorded
on a field data sheet at the time opacity read-
ings are initiated and completed.
Portland  Cement  Plant
Inspection  Guide  2/82
                                                        D-l
                                      Appendix  D

-------
  a.3  Observations.  Opacity  observation.
 shall be made at the point of greatest opacity
 In  that  portion  of the  plume  where con-
 densed water vapor Is not present. The ob-
 server shall  not look continuously at the
 plume, but Instead shall observe the plume
 momentarily at 16-second  Intervals.
  2.S.1  Attached steam plumes. When con-
 densed water vapor  Is present within the
 plume as It emerges from the emission out-
 let, opacity observations shall be made be-
 yond the point In the plume at which con-
 densed water vapor Is no longer visible. The
 observer shall record  the  approximate dis-
 tance  from the emission outlet  to the point
 In  the plume at  which the observations are
 made.
  2.32  Detached steam plume.  When water
 vapor in the plume condenses and becomes
 visible at a distinct distance from the emis-
 sion outlet, the opacity of emissions should
 be  evaluated at the emission outlet prior  to
 the condensation of water vapor  and the for-
 mation of the steam plume.
  2.4  Recording observations.  Opacity ob-
 servations shall be  recorded to the nearest 6
 percent  at 15-second Intervals on an ob«
 servatlonal record sheet. (See Figure 9-2 for
-an example.) A minimum of 24  observations
 shall be recorded. Each momentary observa-
 tion recorded shall be deemed  to represent
 the average  opacity of emissions for a 15-
 second period.
  2.6  Data Reduction. Opacity  shall be de-
 termined  as an  average  of 24 consecutive
 observations recorded at  15-sccond intervals,
 Divide the observations recorded on the recj
 ord sheet  into sets of 24 corsecutlve obser-
 vations, A set Is composed of  any 24 con-
 secutive observations. Sets need not be con-
 secutive In time and IB no case shall two
 sets overlap. For each set of 24 observations,
 calculate the average by summing the opacity
 of  the 24 observations and dividing this sum
 by 24. If an applicable standard specifies  an
 averaging time requiring more  than 24 ob-
 servations, calculate the average, for all ob-
 servations made during  the specified time
 period. Record the average opacity on a record
 she2t. (See Figure 9-1 for an example.)
    3. Qualifications and testing.
    3.1  Certification requirements. To receive
 certification as a qualified observer, a can-
 didate must be tested and demonstrate the
 ability to assign opacity readings In 6 percent
 increments to 26 different black plumes and
 26 different white plumes,  with an error
 not to exceed 15 percent opacity 'on any one
 reading and an  average error not to exceed
 7.5 percent opacity in each category. Candi-
 dates shall  be tested according to  the pro-
 cedures described  In paragraph 3.2. Smoke
 generators used pursuant to paragraph  3.2
 shall be equipped with a smoke meter which
 meets the requirements of paragraph 3.3.
    The certification shall be valid for a period
 of 6 months, at which time the qualification
 procedure must  be repeated by  any observer
 In order to retain certification.
    3.2 Certification procedure. The certifica-
 tion test consists of showing the candidate a
 complete run of 50 plumes—26  black plumes
 and 25  white plumes—generated by a smoke
 generator. Plumes  within each set of 25 black
 and 25 white runs shall be presented In ran-
 dom order. The candidate assigns an opacity
 value to each plume  and records his obser-
 vation on a suitable form. At the completion
 of each run of 60  readings,  the score of  the
 candidate is determined. If a candidate falls
 to qualify, the complete run of 50 readings
 must be repeated  In  any retest. The smoke
 test may  be administered as part of a smoke
 school or training program, and may be pre-
ceded by training or familiarization runs of
the smoke generator during which candidates
are shown black and white plumes of known
opacity.
  3.3  Smoke  generator specifications. Any
smoke generator  used for the purposes of
paragraph 3.2 shall be equipped with a smoke
meter installed to measure  opacity  across
the diameter of the smoke generator stack.
The smoke  meter output shall display in-
stack opacity based upon a pathlength equal
to the stack exit diameter, on a full 0 to 100
percent  chart  recorder  scale.  The smoke
meter optical design and  performance shall
meet  the specifications shown in Table 9-1.
The smoke meter shall be calibrated as pre-
scribed  In paragraph 3.3.1 prior to the con-
duct  of each  smoke reading  test.  At the
completion of each test, the zero  and span
drift.shall be checked and  if the drift ex-
ceeds ±1 percent opacity, the condition shall
be  corrected prior to conducting any subse-
quent test runs.  The smoke meter shall be
demonstrated, at the time of Installation, to
meet the specifications listed In Table 9-1.
This  demonstration shall be repeated fol-
lowing any subsequent repair or replacement
of the photocell or associated electronic cir-
cuitry Including the chart recorder or output
meter, or every 6 months, whichever occurs
first.
    TABLE •-!—SMOKE METES DESIGN AND
         PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATIONS

Parameter:              Specification
a. Light source	 Incandescent    lamp
                       operated at nominal
                       rated voltage.
b.  Spectral response Photoplc   (daylight
     of photocell.      spectral response of
                       the   human  eye—
                       reference  4.3).
c. Angle of view	 15* maximum  total
                       angle.
d.  Angle of projec-  15* maximum total
     tlon.              angle.
e. Calibration  error. ±3%  opacity,  maxi-
                       mum.
f. Zero   and  span ±1%    opacity,  30
      drift.              minutes.
g. Response  tune... £5 seconds.
   3.3.1   Calibration.  The smoke  meter  Is
calibrated after allowing a minimum of 30
minutes warmup by alternately  producing
simulated opacity of 0 percent and  100 per-
cent. When stable response at  0 percent or
 100 percent is  noted, the  smoke meter is ad-
justed  to produce an output of 0 percent or
 100 percent, as appropriate. This calibration
shall be repeated until stable 0 percent and
 100 percent readings are produced  without
 adjustment. Simulated  0 percent and 100
percent opacity values  may  be produced by
alternately switching the power to the light
source  on and off while the smoke generator
Is  not producing smoke.
   8.3.2  Smoke meter evaluation. The smoke
 meter  design  and  performance are  to  be
 evaluated as follows:
   3.3.2.1 Light source.  Verify  from manu-
 facturer's data and from voltage  measure-
 ments  made at the lamp, as Installed, that
 the lamp  is operated within ±6^ percent of
 t.v>A nominal rated voltage.
   3.3.2.2  Spectral   response  of  photocell.
Verify  from manufacturer's data  that  the
photocell has a photoplc response:  I.e., the
spectral sensitivity  of the cell  shall closely
approximate the standard spectral-luminos-
ity curve for photopic vision which is refer-
enced In (b) of Table 9-1.
  3.3.2.3  Angle of view. Check construction
geometry to ensure that the total angle of
view of the smoke plume,  as seen by the
photocell, does  not exceed 15*. The total
angle of view  may be calculated from: 9=9
tan-'  d/2L,  where  9=total angle  of view;
d = the sum of the photocell  diameter+the
diameter  of  the  limiting aperture;  and
L=the  distance from the photocell  to the
limiting aperture. The limiting aperture ta
the point in the path between the photocell
and the smoke plume  where  the angle  of
view Is  most restricted. In smoke  generator
smoke meters this  Is normally an  orifice
plate.
  3.3.2.4  Angle of projection.  Check con-
struction geometry to ensure that the total
angle  of projection  of  the  lamp on  the
smoke plume  does not exceed  16°. The total
angle of projection may be calculated from:
6=2 tan-1 d/2L, where 9= total angle of pro-
jection;  d= the  sum of the  length  of th*
lamp filament + the diameter of the limiting
aperture; and L= the distance  from the lamp
to the limiting aperture.
  3.3.2.5  Calibration error. Using neutral-
density filters of known opacity,  check  the
error'between the  actual response and  the"
theoretical  linear  response of the  smoke
meter.  This check is accomplished by first
calibrating  the smoke  meter according  t»
S.3.1  and then inserting a series of three

 neutral-density filters of nominal opacity of
 20, 60. and 76 percent in the smoke meter
 pathlength. Filters callbarted  within ±3 per-
 cent shall  be used. Care should  be takea
 when inserting the filters  to prevent stray
 light from affecting the meter. Make a total
 of five nonconsecutlve  readings  for  each
 filter. The maximum error on any one read-
 Ing shall be 3 percent opacity.
   3.3.2.6 Zero  and  span  drift.  Determine
 the zero and span drift  by calibrating  and
 operating the smoke generator in a normal
 manner over a  1-hour period. The  drift is
 measured by checking the zero and  span at
 the end of this period.
   3.3.2.7 Response time. Determine the re-
 sponse  time  by producng the series of five
 simulated 0 percent and 100 percent opacity
 values and  observing the  time required to
 reach  stable response. Opacity values  of 0
  percent and  100 percent may be simulated
  by alternately switching the power to  the
  light source off and  on while  the smoke
  generator is not operating.


    4. References.
    4.1  Air Pollution Control District  Rules
  and  Regulations,  Los  Angeles County Air
  Pollution  Control District,  Regulation  IV,
  Prohibitions, Rule 60.
    4.2  Welsburd, Melvln I., Field Operations
  and Enforcement Manual for Air, UJ3. Envi-
  ronmental Protection Agency, Research Tri-
  angle  Park.  N.C., APTD-1100, August  1972.
  pp. 4.1-4.36..
    4.3   Condon, E. XT., and Odlshaw, H., Hand-
  book of Physics, McGraw-Hill Co., N.T., N.T,
  1068, Table 3.1, p. 6-52.
      Portland  Cement  Plant
      Inspection  Guide  2/82
                                                               D-2
                                                            Appendix  D

-------
Jj
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
RE
COMPANY
LOCATION
TEST NUMBER
DATE
TYPE FACILITY
CONTROL DEVICE

FIGURE 9-1
CORD OF VISUAL DETERMINATION or OPACITY PAGE 	 of

HOURS OF OBSERVATION
OBSERVER
OBSERVER CERTIFICATION DATE
OBSERVER AFFILIATION
POINT OF EMISSIONS
HEIGHT OF DISCHARGE POINT


u
00
    0>
    3
    d.
    H-
    X

    O
CLOCK TIME

OBSERVER LOCATION
  Distance to  Discharge

  "Direction from Discharge

  Height of Observation Point

BACKGROUND DESCRIPTION

WEATHER CONDITIONS
  Wind Direction

  Wind Speed

  Ambient Temperature

SKY CONDITIONS (clear,
  overcast, % clouds, etc.)

PLUME DESCRIPTION
  Color

  Distance Visible

OTHER I;;FOR;JATJOII
Initial



































Final














SUMMARY OF AVERAGE OPACITY
Set
Number










Urn*
Start—End










Opacity
Sum










"verage










Readings ranged from 	 to 	 X opadiy
The source v/as/was not 'In compliance with .at
the time evaluation was made.

-------
ortland Cement
nspection Guid<
COMPANY
LOCATION
tEST NUMBER
DATE
FIGURE 9-2 (



N)
\
00
  •5
  •d
   fD
                                   OBSERVATION RECORD

                                           OBSERVER
PAGE
OF
                                           TYPE FACILITY
                                           POINT OF EMISSlMT
Hr.






























M1n.
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
71
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29

0






























Seconds
15






























30






























£b






























STEAM PLUME
(check 1f applicable)
Attached






























Detached






























COMMENTS






























FIGURE 9-2 C
(Cor
COMPANY
LOCATION
TEST
DATE
Hr.






























NUMBER



M1n.
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
Seconds
0






























Ib






























30






























4b






























(cf
At






























OBSERVATION RECORD
PAGE
                                                                                    OF
                                                        OBSERVER 	
                                                        TYPE FACILITY
                                                        POINT OF EMISSWT

-------
                            APPENDIX E
        DESCRIPTION OF ATMOSPHERIC EMISSION CONTROL  SYSTEMS

 I.  ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATORS
     The mechanism by which an electrostatic precipitator  (ESP)
 removes particulate matter from a gas stream consists of three
 steps:  1) the suspended particles in the gas  stream are given  a
 charge, 2) the electrically charged particles  are attracted  to  an
 oppositely charged surface, and 3) the collected particles are
 discharged from the surface and fall into a hopper.
     The electrostatic precipitator  (as  shown  in Figure E-l)
 consists of a shell of metal, tile, or some similar  material in
 which are suspended grounded  steel plates, which act as collect-
 ing electrodes, and negatively charged metal wires or rods,  which
 act as discharge electrodes.   The wires are suspended between
 the plates, and weights are attached to  them to keep them taut.
     A high-voltage transformer-rectifier  (TR) system provides
 the wires with a high-voltage direct current  (dc) power source.
 The transformer steps up the  alternating current  (ac) supply
 generated at the plant to the desired value before the rectifier
 converts it to dc voltage.  Each T-R set forms one field; thus
 the unit pictured has three fields  (i.e., three T-R  sets).   Gas
 flow uniformity across the precipitator  cross  section is regu-
 lated by the use of perforated distribution plates in the gas
 inlet to the precipitator.  Particles are removed from the col-
 lecting electrodes by periodic rapping or vibration  of the
 plates.  The plate cleaning mechanism is activated either pneu-
                          2
 matically or electrically.
     The design of an electrostatic precipitator is  based on a
 specific collection area  (SCA) measured  in terms of  collecting

Portland Cement Plant          E-l                  Appendix E
Inspection Guide 2/82

-------
                                                       TRANSFORMER-RECTIFIER
        TOP  END
         FRAMES
   HIGH VOLTAGE
      CONDUCTOR
      HIGH TENSION
 SUPPORT INSULATORS
     PERFORATED
   DISTRIBUTION
         PLATES
                                                                GROUND SWITCH  BOX
                                                                OR TRANSFORMER
    BOTTOM END
        FRAMES

   UPPER HIGH TENSION
     HANGER ASSEMBLY
   (HANGER AND HANGER
             FRAME)
   UPPER  HIGH TENSION
   WIRE SUPPORT FRAME
                           HORIZONTAL
                           BRACING STRUT
                              WIRE WEIGHTS
                                          STEADYING BARS
                                                                      DISCHARGE ELECTRODE
                                                                      VIBRATOR
                                                                         COLLECTING
                                                                         ELECTRODE
                                                                         RAPPERS
                                                                         TOP HOUSING
                              HOT ROOF
                              ACCESS  DOOR

                              HOT ROOF


                              SIDE
                              FRAMES

                              DISCHARGE
                              ELECTRODE
                              WIRES
                              ACCESS  DOOR BETWEEN
                              COLLECTING PLATE
                              SECTIONS
                              PRECIPITATOR
                              BASE PLATE
                              SLIDE PLATE
                              PACKAGE
                              SUPPORT STRUCTURE
                              CAP PLATE
                       LOWER HIGH TENSION
                       STEADYING FRAME
                      COLLECTING
                      ELECTRODE
                      PLATES
                   Figure E-l.   Typical electrostatic  precipitator
                              assembly with top  housing.
                             (Courtesy of Research-Cottrell)
Portland  Cement  Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
E-2
Appendix  E

-------
 electrode plate area required per unit of gas flow rate (square
 feet per 1000 actual cubic feet of gas per minute),  the gas flow
 rate and temperature,  and the power density required by particle
 resistivity and size.   The Deutsch-Anderson equation sets the
 relationship between required collection efficiency, velocity
 migration of the dust  particles toward the collecting electrode,
 and the ratio of plate collection area to the gas volume:
                                     A
                          n - (1-e w V)  100
 where n = efficiency,  %
       w = particle migration velocity,  ft/s
                         2
       A = plate area,  ft
       V = gas flow,  ft3/s
      In operation,  the precipitator efficiency is affected  by the
 gas flow rate,  gas temperature,  and the electrical voltage  and
 amperage used to create the electrostatic fields  in  the precipi-
 tator.   The gas flow and temperature are established by the
 process unit from which the exhaust gas stream emanates.  Nor-
 mally,  the voltage and current  applied  to the discharge elec-
 trodes  are automatically controlled by  the electrical rectifier
 circuit in response  to an established electrical  spark rate in
 the precipitator.  As  voltage increases,  both precipitator  effi-
 ciency  and spark rate  increase until excessive sparking overrides
 the efficiency  gains from high voltage.   A spark  is  a short cir-
 cuit that  causes a momentary voltage drop and efficiency loss.3
      Figure E-2  illustrates the  instrumentation required for
 monitoring and  controlling  an electrostatic precipitator instal-
 lation.  These  instruments  fall  into two  classifications:   1)
 direct  instrumentation  (directly  involved in  ESP  operation),  and
 2)  indirect instrumentation (indirectly associated with ESP
 operation).
Portland Cement Plant          E-3                  Appendix E
Inspection Guide 2/82

-------
                                                                 to

                                                                 en
                                                                O



                                                                O
                                                                 O)
                                                                 I/)
                                                                 c:
                                                                 CM

                                                                 I
                                                                 O)
                                                                 13
                                                                 en
Portland  Cement Plant
Inspection  Guide 2/82
E-4
Appendix  E

-------
  Direct  Instrumentation
       The  instruments directly  involved with ESP operation are
  those that relate  to the electrical power used to charge the
  precipitator electrodes.  These instruments measure the supplied
  voltage and current, the electrode voltage and current, and the
  spark rate for the electrodes  for each transformer-rectifier set
  in the ESP.  Figure E-3 shows  the arrangement of meters on a
  typical control panel.
  Indirect  Instrumentation

       Those instruments indirectly associated with ESP operation
  are those that measure parameters that affect or are affected by
  ESP performance.   These instruments measure the inlet gas flow
  rate and temperature,  the oxygen and carbon monoxide content of
  the exhaust gas,  outlet gas opacity,  and levels of particles in
  the collecting hoppers (see again Figure E-2).   Measurement
 readouts are  made at  the ESP control  panel.   Figures E-4  and E-5
 show examples of  these panel meters.

 II.   FABRIC FILTERS

      A fabric filter system  consists of a woven or felted textile
 material,  usually  in the  shape  of  a cylindrical bag, housed  in  a
 metal  enclosure having  inlet and outlet gas connections, a dust
 discharge  hopper, and a means for  periodic cleaning of the fab-
 ric.   Figure E-6 depicts a  fabric filter system.
      The particulate-laden gas  enters the filter through the
 inlet  gas  connection and passes through the filtering medium,
 where  the  particulate matter  is retained.  The gas then leaves
 the filter via the outlet gas connection.
     The operation cycle of most fabric filters has two phases:
 1) a filtration phase during which material is deposited on the
 fabric while the pressure drop across the deposited material in-
creases and the total flow decreases;  2)  a cleaning phase, with
Portland Cement Plant          E-5                  Appendix E
Inspection Guide 2/82                               Appendix E

-------
                  Figure  E-3.  Typical ESP control panel.
                   (Courtesy of Babcock and Wilcox Co.)
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide  2/82
E-6
Appendix E

-------
                Figure  E-4.  Photograph of an oxygen meter
                           on a control  board.
Portland  Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
E-7
Appendix E

-------
EMISSION
 CONTROL
EQUIPMENT
      GAS  FLOW
                TRANSITION
                   DUCT
                                           LIGHT SOURCE
   !  :
   !  i
DUCT  TO STACK
                                      Xn
         DETECTOR
                                                           O
                                                           O
                                                           o
                                                 CONTROL UNIT
                                        O
                                        o
                                 o    o
                             STRIP CHART RECORDER
      Figure  E-5.  Connection diagram of the opacity monitoring  system.
Portland Cement  Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
E-8
                                                    Appendix E

-------
         SHAKER
          MOTOR
                          DUST CONVEYING
                              SYSTEM
                        HANGERS

                        CLEAN  AIR
                          SIDE
                                                             OUTLET
                                                              PIPE
                                                             FILTER
                                                              BAGS
                                                             TUBE
                                                             SHEET
                                                           HOPPER
         Figure E-6.  Typical fabric filter arrangement with shaker
                             for dust  removal.
    (Courtesy of Wheelabrator-Frye Corporation  [Wheelabrator Dust-Tube])
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection  Guide 2/82
E-9
Appendix E

-------
no filtration flow during dust removal.   One at a time,  compart-
ments of bags are shut down and isolated from the gas flow for
cleaning; this allows the total gas flow from the process to be
maintained reasonably constant.  This cleaning procedure, which
can be automatic, permits continuous operation of the fabric
filter.  The residual dust deposited and retained within the
fabric interstices gradually reaches an equilibrium after numer-
ous filtration and cleaning cycles, and the residual filtering
pressure drop remains more or less constant throughout the useful
life of the fabric.
     Three methods are generally used to remove dust from the
surfaces of the filter bags.  The dust may be removed by vigor-
ously oscillating the suspension rack through an amplitude of a
few inches  (mechanical shaking).  Reverse-air cleaning and pulse-
jet cleaning are two other common methods.  In reverse-air clean-
ing, a bag is taken out of filtering service and air is intro-
duced to flow through the bag in reverse direction to the normal
filter flow path.  In pulse-jet cleaning, a jet of high pressure
air is released into a bag in the reverse direction to the regu-
lar filter flow.  This jet of reverse air momentarily distends
the bag wall, and this distension, coupled with reverse flow,
dislodges the dust collected on the bag surface.  In all of these
methods the dust falls to the hopper situated below for removal.
     Fabric filters have an 'inherently high efficiency for remov-
ing both fine and coarse particles from a gas stream.  An effi-
ciency of 99+ percent is normal for a properly designed unit.
     The filter is sized in terms of cloth area as a function of
the amount of gas handled and the method of filter cleaning.  The
area is determined from the air-to-cloth  (A/C) ratio, which is
arrived at by dividing total air flow  (in acfm) by the cloth area
                                                          2
 (in square feet).  Thus, the ratio is expressed in acfm/ft  .
     The instrumentation required for monitoring a fabric filter
installation consists mainly of differential pressure gages.
Each isolatable compartment should be equipped with such a gage
Portland Cement Plant          E-10                      Appendix E
Inspection Guide 2/82

-------
so that the condition of the bags within the compartment can be
determined.  The pressure gages are locally mounted on the filter
units, as illustrated in Figure E-7. The photograph in Figure
E-8 shows the total instrument array as viewed from the end of a
fabric filter installation.
     Awareness of the flow rate and temperature of the inlet gas
stream is also essential to the proper operation of a fabric
filter.  The gas stream temperature is normally a part of the
information gathered for process control purposes and appears
on a central control panel of the process to which the filter
unit is attached.  Measuring the fan motor current gives an
indication of fan horsepower, which can be used to determine the
flow rate by using gas stream temperature, the fan speed in rpm,
and fan curves provided by the fan manufacturer.  Where the gas
temperature is critical by reason of its proximity to the upper
operating limit of the fabric used, temperature limit switches
are used to activate dampers on the inlet side of the fabric
filter unit or water spray nozzles.  The dampers admit ambient
air to the filter unit and thus prevent thermal damage.  The
nozzles introduce water to evaporatively cool the gas stream.

III.  CYCLONE SEPARATORS
     A cyclone separator uses centrifugal force to remove partic-
ulate from a gas stream.  As shown in Figure E-9 the dust-laden
gas enters the upper cylindrical section tangentially, which
produces a centrifugal force that preferentially throws the
larger, heavier particles outward to the walls of the cylinder.
The gas spirals downward into the conical section, where the gas
velocity increases and greater centrifugal force is generated.
The particulate matter collected at the walls is swept to the
bottom of the cone section, where it is discharged through a
valve into a collection hopper or drum.  The cleaned gas exits
from the unit through an outlet at the top center of the cylin-
drical section.
Portland Cement Plant          E-ll                      Appendix E
Inspection Guide 2/82

-------
BAG
           TENSION SPRINGS

              BAG CAPS -
               TUBESHEET
                                CLEAN SIDE
IilT
                                                   PRESSURE
                                                     GAGE
                                                 DUST HOPPER
           Figure E-7.  Cross section of fabric filter, showing
                  filter internals and a pressure gage.^
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
                        E-12
                           Appendix E

-------
        Figure E-8.  Photograph of  fabric filter, showing upper and lower
         catwalk,  compartment access doors,  and Magnehel ic®gages.3
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
E-13
                             Appendix E

-------
                                             CLEAN AIR
                                                OUT
                                              •:.'•*-
                           TOP  VIEW OF CYCLONE
                       DIRTY AIR
                           IN
  OUTLET PIPE EXTENDS
   INTO THE CYCLONE
 TO PREVENT INLET  AIR
 FROM SHORT-CIRCUITING
DIRECTLY TO THE OUTLET
                                   CLEAN AIR OUT
'? it
••• i 	 —
              SLEEVE TO
                PREVENT
              PARTICULATE
            FROM BLOWING OUT
                                                             DIRTY AIR
                                                               INLET
              THE SPINNING AIR FORCES THE
               PARTICULATE TO THE WALL
                   OF THE CYCLONE
            A SLOW-SPEED MOTOR TURNS
          THE "STAR" VALVE  THAT  SEALS
           THE COLLECTION HOPPER FROM
                  THE  CYCLONE
                                          PARTICULATE
                                          COLLECTION
                                            HOPPER
                                            OR DRUM
              Figure E-9. Flow diagram of a  dry  cyclone collector.3
Portland  Cement  Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
E-14
Appendix  E

-------
      A single cyclone separator unit may be utilized for partic-
 ulate removal from a given gas stream, but the use of several
 smaller separators in a parallel arrangement enhances separation
 efficiency.  When multiple cyclone separators are used, gas dis-
 tribution and pressure drop across them must be relatively equal
 to achieve the maximum efficiency benefit.
      The comparative advantages of cyclones include the rela-
 tively small amount of space occupied, low capital investment and
 operating costs, and modest pressure drop.   Figure E-10 shows
 the fraction of dust emitted (penetration) for three sizes of
 multiple cyclones at various particle sizes.   The larger-sized
 tubes have a lower pressure drop and lower collection efficiency.6
      The performance of the cyclone separator is not sensitive to
 temperatures or such particulate properties as electrical resis-
 tivity or filterability.   Particulates with high moisture con-
 tent, however,  tend to plug the discharge tube.   The operating
 parameters of interest are the  gas flow rate  and the pressure
 drop across the separators.
      Because the design of the  cyclone separator is such that op-
 eration at an optimum gas flow  rate is necessary for the most ef-
 ficient separation of particulates from the gas,  the gas flow
 rate and pressure differential  across the separator provide indi-
 cators of the relative efficiency of the separator's operation.
 Figure E-ll presents a data sheet of typical  information on a
 cyclone separator.
      The only instrumentation required for cyclone separators is
 a  differential  pressure gage calibrated in inches  of water  for
 each separator.   The gages should be locally  mounted where  they
 are  relatively  accessible and easy to read.   Gas  stream  tempera-
 ture readings can be obtained from the instrumentation at the
 appropriate process control  panel,  and gas  flow  rate can be cal-
 culated  by recording fan  motor  current and speed.
Portland Cement Plant          E-15                      Appendix E
Inspection Guide 2/82

-------
 S o
 en i-l
•d rt
 01 M
 o su
 rt
   D.
 3 O
   0)
 O 3
 CD

 to
\
 oo
 to
   M
    (B
    H-
    IX
                                                             c
   i

   o
c.
cr -a
ro  ro
to  3
   CD
o  f+
-t> -s
   01
Q. rh

-h O
-h 3
fD
-s  n
fD  C
3  -S
r+ <
   n>
                                                          eu -h
                                                          3 O
                                                          n> -s
                                                          -s c:
                                                             •a
                                                             —i
                                                             a>

                                                             o

                                                             o

                                                             o
                                                             3
                                                             ro
                                      PENETRATION

                          o   oooo   oooo

-------
                                       CYCLONE DESCRIPTION
Source Name
Inspector
                    X YZ  r
                                           Date
Cyclone No.
                                                               C- /
       Type of cyclone.
       Manufacturer.
                                                  Installation date
       Number of tubes.
       Dimensions	i_
       Gas flow, acfm
       Gas temperature,  °F
       Pressure drop across the collector, in. water
       Audible air leakage at hatches  /I/O	
                                                               Design
                                                                 . <)do
                                                                         Actual
       Solids discharge rate,
                                       K
       Comments:
                                    SKETCH THE CYCLONE SYSTEM
                                                                           f\
            Figure  E-ll.   Example of  cyclone  description data sheet.0
Portland Cement  Plant
Inspection  Guide 2/82
                                   E-17
                           Appendix E

-------
IV.   GRAVEL-BED FILTERS
     The gravel-bed filter applies the principles of  centrifugal
force and impingement to the removal of particulates  from an
exhaust gas stream.  As depicted in Figure E-12,  as the particu-
late-laden gas enters the gravel-bed filter,  it is subjected to
centrifugal forces which move the larger particulates outward to
the walls, from which they subsequently fall  to the bottom for
removal via an air lock.  The partially cleaned gas first flows
up through a riser to one or more filter chambers located above
and then passes down through gravel beds, which are each approxi-
mately 4-1/2 inches in depth and supported on wire mesh screens.
The particulate in the gas impinges upon the gravel surface and
is captured by deposition.  The cleaned gas stream from the beds
is exhausted through a clean-gas chamber into an exhaust duct
that conveys it to a stack for discharge to the atmosphere.
     After a module has been in service a while, the gravel-bed
filter becomes clogged with collected particulate.  It must be
removed from service at regular intervals and subjected to clean-
ing by backflushing it with air.  The agglomerated dust is blown
from the bed and the bed rake mechanism is used to stir the bed.
The entrained  particles from the bed pass down through the riser
tube into the  collector section, where a major portion of them
settle out and are removed via the  air lock at the bottom.  The
remaining particles enter the dirty gas duct, where they either
settle out and are removed by screw conveyor or are removed by
the other operating modules.
Portland Cement Plant          E-18                      Appendix E
Inspection Guide 2/82

-------
                     VALVE
                   CYLINDER
  BACKFLUSH DUCT
       BACKFLUSH
     CONTROL VALVE
        EXHAUST
          PORT
           DIRTY
            GAS
            DUCT
                                                                 STIRRING RAKE
                                                                MOTOR/REDUCERS
                           GAS CHAMBER


                            STIRRING RAKE


                             GRAVEL BED
                             CLEAN GAS
                              CHAMBER
                            SCREEN
                            SUPPORT
                            FOR BED
                           RISER TUBE

                             PRIMARY
                           COLLECTOR
                            (CYCLONE)
                                                            DOUBLE TIPPING GATE
                                                             (DUST DISCHARGE)
             Figure E-12.   Gas flow diagram for  a  gravel-bed filter. 7
                          (Courtesy of Rexnord Corporation)
Portland  Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
E-19
Appendix  E

-------
                    REFERENCES fOR APPENDIX E


    Szabo, M. F., and Y. M. Shah.  Inspection Manual for Evalua-
    tion of Electrostatic Precipitator Performance.  PEDCo
    Environmental, Inc.  EPA-340/1-79-007, February 1979.

    Oglesby,  S., Jr., and G. B. Nichols.  Electrostatic Precipi-
    tation In:  Air Pollution, 3rd Edition, Vol.  IV.  Engineer-
    ing Control of Air  Pollution.  Academic Press, New York.
    1977.

    PEDCo Environmental, Inc.  Industrial Boiler  Inspection
    Guide.  Prepared  for the U.S. Environmental Protection
    Agency under Contract No.  68-01-6310, Task No.  9.  October
    1981.

    The Mcllvaine  Company.  The  Fabric  Filter Manual.  North-
    brook, Illinois.   1975  plus  updates.

    Barrett,  K.  W.  A Review of  Standards of  Performance  for New
     Stationary Sources—Portland Cement Industry.  Metrek Divi-
     sion  of  MITRE  Corporation.   EPA-450/3-79-012.  October  1978.

    Theodore, L.,  and A.  Buonicore.   Industrial  Air Pollution
     Control  Equipment for  Particulates.   CRC Press.   1976.

     Rexnord  Corporation.   Descriptive Brochure  for Rex Gravel-
     Bed Filters.   Air Pollution Control Division.
Portland Cement Plant          E-20                      Appendix E
Inspection Guide 2/82

-------
                             APPENDIX F


                          A PORTLAND CEMENT
                          INSPECTION REPORT
                             PLANT, USA
                                by

                            Inspector
                 Environmental Protection Agency
Portland Cement Plant           F-1                   Appendix F
Inspection Guide 2/82

-------
               A PORTLAND CEMENT INSPECTION REPORT
                           PLANT,  USA
I.  INTRODUCTION
     On April 8, 1981,  Inspector                        i  in-
spected A Portland Cement Company,                        plant,
            , Texas.  The mailing address of the firm is the
same.  The Vice President of A Portland is                      ;
the corporate mailing address is
                            I met with Mr.                  , Plant
Manager, and                 / Production Manager, and informed
them of the nature of the inspection.

II.  ACTIVITY SUMMARY
     I arrived at the plant at 10:15 a.m. and observed the  cement
operations.  I contacted                     and
and discussed the plant operations and air pollution control
equipment.  I then  inspected                       , the cement
plant, and the particulate control devices with
             I  inspected the cement plant Kiln No. 3 with regard
to New Source Performance Standards.  During the  inspection, I
read visible emissions from the  Kiln 2 clinker cooler.  The VEO
form is  in Appendix A.

III.  PROCESS DESCRIPTION
     This  cement  plant  (Photograph No. 1) uses  about  180  tons/h
of  limestone,  shale, sand,  and  iron  ore  in  a water slurry to make
cement  by  the wet process.   The  limestone and  shale  are quarried
 Portland Cement Plant         F-2                     Appendix F
 Inspection Guide 2/82

-------
at the site.   Sand,  iron ore,  and gypsum are purchased from
outside sources.
     Raw materials (limestone and shale) are mined in a quarry
(Photograph No. 2).   The quarried materials are transferred to
the primary crusher by truck or conveyor (Photograph No. 3).  A
Stanler feeder breaker reduces the limestone to a size suitable
for conveyor handling (8 inches or less in diameter).  The pri-
mary crushing facility  (Photograph No. 5)  is equipped with a
hammermill.  The hammermill particulate emissions are controlled
by a fabric filter (Photograph No. 6).  The crushed material
(3/4-inch diameter or less) is conveyed to the raw material
storage building  (Photograph No. 7).
     Sand, iron ore,  and gypsum are received by truck or railcar.
Iron ore is stored in the raw mill feed bins or raw material
storage building.  The gypsum is stored in another silo.
     Limestone, shale, sand, and iron ore are milled and combined
with water into a 40 weight percent water slurry.  The slurry is
stored in the kiln feed storage tanks  (Photograph No. 8).  Slurry
is fed into one of three coal-fired rotary kilns  (Photographs No.
8 and 9).  Particulate emissions from each kiln are controlled by
an ESP on the feed inlet of the kiln  (Photograph No. 9).   Cement
clinker cooler particulate emissions  at the outlet of the  kiln
are controlled by fabric filters.  The fabric filter stack out-
lets are shown as EPN 3, EPN 7, and EPN 13  (Photograph No. 9).
Clinker is generally stored in silos  (Photograph No. 10).  During
the winter the company makes excess clinker, which is stored  in
an outside pile  (Photograph No. 11) adjacent to the raw material
storage building.  Clinker and gypsum are fed to two finish mills,
where the materials are milled into finish cement.  Two fabric
filters control emissions  from these  mills.  One  fabric filter
exhaust vent is shown in Photograph No. 12.  Finished cement  from
the mills  is transferred to storage  silos and then  shipped out by
truck  (occasionally by  railcars)  (Photograph No.  13).   Two fabric
filters control emissions  from the finished cement  storage silos.
The fabric filter vents are shown  in  Photographs  No. 14 and  15.

Portland  Cement Plant         F~3                    Appendix F
Inspection Guide  2/82

-------
     The company uses coal to fuel the kilns.   Coal is received
by railcars which are unloaded at a maximum of 1700 tons/8 hours
(Photograph No.  16).   Particulate emissions during unloading are
controlled by a  water spray system.  The coal  is stored in piles
(Photograph No.  17).   The company blends 85 to 90 percent low-
sulfur (0.5 percent)  coal with 10 to 15 percent high-sulfur (2.5
to 4.0 percent)  coal.  After the coal is blended, it is conveyed
to coal storage  silos (Photograph No. 18)  before it is crushed
and fed into the kilns.

IV.  OBSERVATION OF PROCESS
     I inspected the following operations:
     1.   Quarry operations
     2.   Raw material crushing
     3.   Three kilns and clinker coolers
     4.   Two finish mills
     5.   Two truck  loading facilities
     6.   Coal unloading and storage
     The  company normally hauls  about  850  tons  of  limestone and
shale  per hour out of the quarry.  The  raw material is crushed  to
a  size less  than 3 inches in diameter  at  about  640 tons  per hour.
A  fabric  filter controls particulate  emissions  from the  crusher.
Raw material was being fed  to  Kilns  2  and 3 at  a rate of 58
tons/h each.  Kiln 1 was not operating.   The  two kilns were
burning about 17 tons of coal  per hour.   The  visible  kiln stack
emission  in  Photograph No.  1  is  a steam plume.   The clinker
cooler stack on  Kiln 2 had  visible emissions  from 0 to 10 percent
opacity.   The finish mills  were  operating at  59 tons/h each.
Truck  loading was  operating at 250 tons/h during the  inspection.
There  was no coal  being  conveyed during the inspection.
      On August  11,  1978,  the company was  issued a PSD permit to
add  a dry kiln  process  to the existing wet plant operation.   The
company has  not begun construction of the plant for economic
 reasons.

Portland  Cement Plant          F-4                    Appendix F
 Inspection Guide 2/82

-------
                                     INSPECTION CHECKLIST
                                                  Date(s) of Inspection
                                                           April 8, 1981
          Company name  _

          Mail ing address
                       Time In  10:15 a.m.  Out  3:00 p.m.

A Portland Cement Company, Inc.	
          Location of facility
                              Plant, USA
          (Include county  or parish)

          Type of industry 	Portland Cement Company
          Form of ownership
          Company personnel

          Responsible for
           facility

          Responsible for
           environmental
           matters

          Company personnel
           contacted
          Confidential ity
           Statement given to

          EPA personnel
          Inspector

          State or local
           agency personnel
           Name
Title
Phone
                       Production Manager
                        Manager	
                        Plant Manager
Portland  Cement  Plant
Inspection  Guide  2/82
                                            F-5
                                                    Appendix  F

-------
•0 rt
0> M
O fU
rt 3
0
H* f~\
OS

H-O
CD
Ni I—1
00 0
N) rt



i
en







>
V
a>
H-
X
PARTICULATE
PARTICULATE T
50 ,n(J ,IA',HL
X A x FABRIC
1 FILTERS PARTfriii flTF
PARTICULATE c • o i
ESP'S f 5 * 9 t
7, fiT X 1 i | 	 1 	 ,
1? FABRIC FABRIC
' i FILTERS FILTERS
3, 7, & 13 10 4 11
, '

^nipRY KIINC ritNKFR FINISH FINISHED ToADOUT
SLURRY KILNS CLINKtK ^ MILL 	 ». rFMFriT
4 STORAGE 1,2, S3 tuuLLK ' COOT -J^j.
X y 4< " LOADOUT
/ X| GYPSUM
sr , COAL
plLt * SIOKAGE
TANKS
PARTICULATE
FABRIC
FILTER 1 SAND AND IRON
• ORL
1 IMESTONE .?Ct!,.i 	 .. Mflirpini 	 *• MATERIAL
rMAir 	 ~* MAILRIAL * MATLKIHL
SHALE CRUSHING STORAGE "ILUNG
1 	 • 0 JLU' 1

Process Flow Diagram.

-------
13 O
tn hj
>d rt
(D I-1
O 0>
rt 3
H- CL
O
3 O
   CD
0 3
fD

N>
\
00
  •a
  CD
  3
  a
  H-
  x
PRODUCTION  INFORMATION
                          1
Process/Unit
Raw material
crushing
Raw material
grinding mil'
Raw material
grinding mi 1 '
Kiln 1
Kiln 2
Kiln 3
Finish mil 1
Fi nish mil 1
Truck loadout
No. 1
Truck loadout
No. 2
Coal feed to
kilns
Production r;
Process Input
Rate
640

108

108

38
38
38
59
59
300

300

25

:cs are in ton/h
Product
Raw feed

Raw feed

Raw feed

C1 inker
Clinker
Cl inker
Cement
Cement
Cement

Cement

Hp.it

unless stated (
Production Rate
Design
850.0

120.0

120.0

39.5
39.5
39.5
65.0
65.0
300.0

300.0

25.0

therwi se
Actual
Avg.
640. n

108.0

108.0

38.0
33.0
33.0
59.0
59.0
250.0

250.0

20. C


-Max
850.0

120.0

120.0

39.5
39.5
39.5
65.0
65.0
300.0

300.0

25.0


Emission Point
(including fugitive
emissions)
1

--

--

2,3
6,7
12,13
5,9
5,9
10,11

10,11

2,6,12


Status of Process
at time of inspec-
tion
Not operating

108

103

Not operating
38
38
59
59
250

Not operating

16.6



-------
3 O
CO hi
•0 rt
(!) I-1
O fU
ft 3
p-a
O
3 n
   (D
C 3
c n
0)
   hj
M M


00 (3
NJ rt
    I

   00
EMISSION POINT INFORMATION
Emi 55 ion
Point
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Proces j/Uni t Description
Raw material crushing
Kiln No. 1
Kiln Mo. 1 clinker cooler
Cl inker storage
Finished cement mill
Kiln No. 2
Kiln No. 2 clinker cooler
Cl inker storage
Finished cement mill
Cement storage
Cement storage
Kiln No. 3
Kiln No. 3 clinker cooler
Stack D

-------
O
t—
<

o
    UJ
    ^
    Q.


    o-
    ca
    : O. QJ
' — * E v^-
ra 
D.
m
C

21 --^
' — '"- U
. 	 ^
LL.
LLJ >— ~-
*— JD
2 Si QJ
a- 3
-p
X
o S
>- j-j
3
QJ
;- in
z; c
in u
QJ C
Q_ ^— '






Q.
•^















OJ
c:
0


un
in




o
10




o o o
r— O O
en o \o
CO •— r-
ro ro
CM






i






o
•4-J
ro
-(-J
CL
(J
QJ
S_
o.
S- 0 S-
QJ T- QJ
-!_> 4-> -t-"
•r- -U T-
U- I/I <4-
o
O S- O
•i — 4-^ >i —
U U U
-Q GJ JD
fO f~~ H3
U- UJ U_


Q)
C"
O


LO
ID




0
V£>




O O O O O
o o c o o
o in o ro o
co r~-. o en co
in o CM
CM






VD to 1 1 — VO
1






o
4-1
ro
4->
CL
U
QJ
s_
CL
S- 1- U S- 5-
QJ QJ -r- QJ QJ
J-> 4-> 4-> 4-1 4->
• r- -r- 4J -r- -r-
4— H— 1/1 <+- V-
o
o o i- u o
•i- -t- 4J -^- -r-
S- S_ U S- S-
-Q -Q QJ -Q -Q
ro rrj r— ro ro
Li- U- LU lJ_ Lu


QJ
C
O


o
CO



^J-
0
1 —




o o o o
o o o o
LT> O O O
I — i — CM O
LO i— r- ro
r~






1





S-
o
4_)
ro
•»->
Q.
O
QJ
^_
CL
i- S_ I- (J
GJ QJ QJ T-
4-> 4-> 4-> 4->

M — H— H— un
O
U O O S_
•r- .,- -i- 4-1
s- s- s- o
-Q _O J3 Q)
rO ro ro i —
1 1 l i i i i i t
II


















O
O
CO
CM
ro




1
1

^














S-
QJ
4J
7^.
*+-

U
• , —
s_
JD
'ro
U-
                                                                                                      QJ
                                                                                                      E GJ
                                                                                                     •i- 4~>
                                                                                                     -)-> TJ
                                                                                                        S-
                                                                                                      GJ
                                                                                                      o 3
                                                                                                      c o
                                                                                                      GJ i—
                                                                                                     •a •*-

                                                                                                      ui "C
                                                                                                      QJ C
                                                                                                       - C
                                                                                                      QJ O

                                                                                                      S- T-
                                                                                                      ro J-
                                                                                                      S- 4->
                                                                                                      QJ C
                                                                                                      a. cj
                                                                                                      E u
                                                                                                      QJ c
                                                                                                     r— O
                                                                                                        U
                                                                                                      01
                                                                                                      c c
                                                                                                     ••- o
                                                                                                   /-^. *J •!-
                                                                                                   U ro 4->
                                                                                                   - — - !- 3
                                                                                                   ^^ QJ ,—
                                                                                                   ro Q. o
                                                                                                   < — ' O CO
                                                                                                   I
                                                                                                      I
                                                                                                        I
                                                                                                        c
                                                                                                        O
                                                                                          CJ
                                                                                          U
                                                                                         ••-
                                                                                          >
                                                                                          QJ
                                                                                         •o
                                                                                              n
                                                                                              o
                                                                                               to c
                                                                                               s- o
                                                                                               QJ -^
                                                                                              ^2 4->  U
                                                                                               E (J  rtJ
                                                                                               ro ro  GJ
                                                                                              jz QJ ce
                                                                                              o a:

                                                                                               >,• —  ro
                                                                                              -»-> ro  u
                                                                                            00 ._ E .r-
                                                                                            S-  > S-  E
                                                                                            QJ  ro QJ  QJ
                                                                                            jz  s- jr jc.
                                                                                            *->   U L)
                                                                                              O  ro ro ro U
                                                                                              QJ
                                                                                              S-
                                                                                                   S-
                                                                                                   Ql
                                                                                              CT   r—
                                                                                              ft)    -r- LO
                                                                                              S-    U- S_

                                                                                                 QJ    QJ
                                                                                              LA  f- 1 1 O


                                                                                              QJ  •— S- 3
                                                                                              *J  U J3 S- C^

                                                                                              QJ  >, ro (_! <-/>
                                                                                              E  CJ Ll_ OO UJ
                                                                                              ro
                                                                                              Q_
                                                                                              *
Portland  Cement Plant
Inspection  Guide  2/82
                                                                              Appendix  F
                                                F-9

-------
 This  checklist should be filled  out  only  for hydrocarbons  with  vapor pressures
 greater than 1.5 psia at storage conditions.

 STORAGE
Tank No.
21















' Capaci ty
(units)
2000















Type (1)
U















Product
Stored
Gasol ine















Vapor
Pressure
(units)
@ Max.
Storage
Temp
6.2















Maximum
Storage
Temp.
70















Vapor (2)
Controls
SF















-Remarks*
















Footnotes:
(1)  C-=  fixed  roof; F = floating roof;  p = pressure;  0 - open top; S =
     spheroid;  H =  horizontal; U = underground
(2)  N =  None,  CV = conservation vents;  F = floating  roof (SS - single seal;
     DS = double seal); VR = Vapor recovery (describe); VD = vapor disposal
     (describe); VB = vapor balance;  SF  = submerged fill.
*    Date installed, etc.
 Portland Cement Plant
 Inspection  Guide 2/82
Appendix  F
                                     F-10

-------
0 O
W H
•O rt
CD M
O PJ
ft D
H-a
O
2 O
   (D
O 3
£ fD
H- »
O. ft
(D
00
    I
    I—1
    M
  I
  (t
  H-
  X
                             VOLATILE  HYDROCARBON  LOADING/UNLOADING  FACILITIES
Loddnig

Faci1ity

Des ign.it ion
Source
lypt1  Trjust IM 7'j i IP

(RH C.ir-,, Tiuck-,)
                                        None
Monthly
rin u-|uit
(100(1 G.il )
Type Vii
ControI
Syo toni
      ProrjiK t s	

Type      Vapor Pressure

         	(ps ia)	

-------
STATIONARY GASOLINE STORAGE CONTAINER(S)
Emission
Point
None
Container Size

Date
Installed

Submerged
Fill Line

Type
Roof

Vapor Recovery
System Type

WATER SEPARATOR
Emi ssion
Point
None
Volatile Hydrocarbons
Type
Separated

Vapor
Pressure
(psia)

Amount
Volatile
Hydrocarbon
Entering/day

Type Vapor Control

ORGANIC  SOLVENT EMISSIONS
Types of  Operation  None
Max.  Amount  Emitted Per Hour:
     Method  Used To Determine
Max.  Amount  Emitted Per Day:
     Method  Used To Determine:

Controls  On  Emissions:
/Hr
/Day
 Portland Cement Plant
 Inspection Guide 2/82
            Appendix F
                                    F-12

-------
                          FIELD OBSERVATIONS SUMMARY
 Emi ssion
 Point
Opaci ty
Reading  IStarT
line
Comments
                            End; (Instantaneous  Reading, 6 min.  Reading   etc.)
           0 to 5
          1:11   1:26  Opacities  from Kiln No.  2 clinker cooler fabric
           p.m.   a.m   filter  ranged from 0 to 10  percent over 15 min-
                       utes.
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
                                                   Appendix  F
                                   F-13

-------
                      CEMENT KILN EMISSIONS


Plant burn = a combination of 85 to 90 percent low sulfur coal
with 10 to 15 percent high sulfur coal.  Average properties of
the coal mixture are:

                    Sulfur       = 0.7 to 0.8%
                    Ash          = 10 to 13%
                    Heat content = 12,500 Btu/lb  (dry basis)

The maximum kiln production is 38 ton/h cement.  Using ESP's with
efficiencies of 99.8 percent  (from 1976 EIQ) and AP.42 emission
factors* the kiln and dryer emissions are:

     Particulate:  Kiln emission factor = 228  Ib/ton

                   228 Ib/ton x  38 ton/h x  10°~Q9'9 =17.3  Ib/h

                   Dryer emission factor =  32  Ib/ton

                   32 Ib/ton  x  33 ton/h x  10°Q99'8 =2.4  Ib/h

                   Total =  17.3  + 2.4  = 19.7  Ib/h

     Sulfur  dioxide:  Mineral source  emission  factor  =  10.2  Ib/ton

                      75% adsorption  of S02 by limestone  dust

                      10.2  Ib/ton x  8  ton/h x  10°QQ5  =96.9  Ib/h

                      Coal  combustion emission factor = 6.85
                       (S =  0.8%)  Ib/ton

                      6.8  Ib/ton x  0.8 x  35 ton/h x  1Q^~Q5 =51.7 Ib/h

                      Total = 96.9  + 51.7  = 148.6 Ib/h

     Nitrogen oxides:   Emission factor =2.6  Ib/ton

                        2.6  Ib/ton x 36 ton/h  =98.8  Ib/h

 Using  AP.42 emission factors kiln particulate emissions are 25.9
 Ib/h.   Regulation I  limits  emissions to  84.8  Ib/h.   At a kiln
 feed rate of 58 ton/h,  kiln emissions from stack tests are:

                6-5 lb/h x 58 ton/h = °'11 lb/ton of  kiln feed

 NSPS limits kiln emissions to 0.3 lb/ton of kiln feed.
 *
  AP.42, Page 8.6-3, Table 8.6-1, cement manufacturing emissions.
 Portland Cement Plant          p-14                    Appendix F
 Inspection Guide 2/82

-------
                       VISIBLE EMISSION OBSERVATION
Portland Cement Plant           F_15                    Appendix F
Inspection Guide 2/82

-------

BOURCt NAME
/I \0(.JifttJD
VISIBLE EMISSION OBSERVATION FORM
^^^ A

ADDRESS p . ,. _ _ '
f>. jfrjf L/^/J'
BTATE ZIP P

HONE
^
C
SUN SHAC
PROCESS A/Q-2~ /''/K, OPERATING MODE
6 Pe-fA TI^G--
CONTROL EQUIPMENT
DESCRIBE EMISSION POINT
(MISSION POINT HEIOHT
ABOVE OROUND LEV4L ,
f MISSION POINT ,
3oo (V€^'"
DESCRIBE EMISSIONS ^

COLON OF EMISSIONS
L I $ k f" & /~\. p K
AMBIENT TEMPERATURE
"73 T
COMMENTS
f
SKY CONDITIONS
WIND DIRECTION
RELATIVE HUMIDITY
3 £"%
	
	
SOURCE LAYOUT SKETCH
OBSERVER:* SIGNATURE/

DATE
IMISI
/*A
VERIFIED BY


V /£/fo

5RGANIZATION srP/l)-
>-
OW LINE .

"" //
START TIME / ' / / Jri
0 IS 30 «S

4






14

17

20
21
22
73
24
2S
76
27
28
29
30


O
o
*r
/<>

	 a

s~












/O
un-




c>
o
y











-^=-
Q
6"
,»fj.
_5~

_^ 	

^r
r
*












-V
— ^~
_5~
_s~
O

s. 	
o
*r











AVERAGE OPACITY
S.A V0
STOP TIME/ £(,, arf
0 IS '»0 «
32
34
36
37
38
39
41
42
44
45
47
48
49
SO
SI
\
S3
65
se
57
SS
S9
SO




















































































NUMBER OF READINGS ABOVE
RANGE OF OPACITY
READINGS FROM 	 £2 	 .TO 	 1± 	
ION FT.
0 bsW
~£d 5(M
DRAW NORTH ARROW
4V
J
1 HAVE RECEIVED A COPY OF THESE OPACITY OBSERVATIONS.
SIGNATURE -/^l/il iff . 'f/st"^-^^
TITLt
t
DATE X /
r s>t/r/
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
                               F-16
Appendix F

-------
                              PHOTOGRAPHS
Portland Cement Plant            F-17                   Appendix  F
Inspection Guide 2/82

-------
                        STACK TEST RESULTS
Portland Cement Plant                                  Appendix F
Inspection Guide  2/82           F-18

-------
                                  TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
                           (Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1  REPORT
       3^0/1-82-007
                                                           I. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION-NO
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
                                                          5 REPORT DATE
  Portland Cement Plant Inspection  Guide
                                                               June  1982
                                6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7 AUTHOR(S)
   D.  J.  Orf, R. W. Gerstle,  D.  J.  Loudin
                                8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO

                                    PN 3560-1-35
9. PERFORMING ORG "^NIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
  PEDCo Environmental, Inc.
  11499 Chester Road
  Cincinnati, Ohio  45246
                                                           10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
                                11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.

                                   68-01-6310, Task No.  35
12 SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
   Division of Stationary Source  Enforcement
   U.S. Environmental Protection  Agency
   401 M Street, S.W.
   Washington, D.C.  20460
                                13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
                                     Final Report
                                14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

   DSSE Project Officer:
John R. Busik, EN  341
(202) 382-2835	
16. ABSTRACT
                                        ABSTRACT
 The inspection guide  describes the procedures that an  inspector  should follow
 before, during, and after  conducting an inspection of  a  portland cement plant.  The
 specific areas addressed are:   1)  review of agency files  prior to plant inspection,
 2) procedures for  entering the plant and conducting the  preinspection interview, 3)
 information to be  obtained from the plant exterior, 4) safety precautions, and 5)
 equipment needed to conduct an inspection.  The guide  describes  each of the processes
 and sources of atmospheric emissions:  feed preparation,  clinker production, clinker
 cooling, finish grinding,  and  final product storage, packaging,  and loading.  Means
 for controlling atmospheric emissions are detailed along  with specific descriptions
 of ESP's, fabric filters,  cyclone separators, gravel bed  filters, and containment
 and dust suppression  practices.  Also described are proper plant operating conditions,
 emission problems  due to malfunctions and upsets, and  startup and shutdown problems.
 After all information has  been gathered, example emission calculations are provided
 to assist in determining the compliance of a plant.
17.
                               KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
                  DESCRIPTORS
                                             b. IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
                                             c.  COSATI Field/Group
 Air Pollution  Control
 Portland Cement
 Inspection Guide
 Control Equipment
                    Kilns, clinker, coolers
                     crushers, grinders,
                    Malfunction, Startup,
                     shutdown.
                    ESP, fabric filter,
                     cyclone, gravel bed
                     filters
  13B
  11B
  14D

13H, 13K
13 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
  Unlimited
                                              19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report)
                                              Unclassified
                                                                        21. NO. OF PAGES
                                                  138  p.
                                             20. SECURITY CLASS (This page)
                                              Unclassified
                                                                        22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)

-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 5, Library (PL-12J)
77 West Jackson Boulevard, 12tft Flop
Chicago. IL  60604-3590

-------
If your address is incorrect, please change on the above  label
tear off; and return to the above address.
If you do not desire to continue receiving these technical
reports, CHECK HERE CD, tear off label, and return it to the
above address.

-------