&EHV
450484014)
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park NC 27711
EPA-450/4-84-014q
April 1987
Air
National Dioxin
Study Tier 4
Combustion Sources
Final Test
Report SiteS
Black Liquor
Boiler BLB C
-------
-------
EPA-450/4-84-014q
NATIONAL DIOXIN STUDY
TIER 4 COMBUSTION SOURCES
Final Test Report Site 8
Black Liquor Boiler BLB C
By
Carol L Jamgochian
Lawrence E. Keller
Radian Corporation
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709
Contract Number: 68-03-3148
Donald Oberacker, Project Officer
Hazardous Waste Engineering Research Laboratory
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office Of Air And Radiation
Office Of Air Quality Planning And Standards
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
And
Office Of Research And Development
Washington DC 20460
April 1987
-------
This report has been reviewed by the Office Of Air Quality Planning And Standards, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, and approved for publication as received from the
contractor. Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views and
policies of the Agency, neither does mention of trade names or commercial products
constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
EPA-450/4-84-014q
-------
FOREWORD
This report is the result of a cooperative effort
between the Office of Research and Development's Hazardous
Waste Engineering Research Laboratory (HWERL) and the
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standard's Monitoring
and Data Analysis Division (MDAD). The overall management
of Tier 4 of the National Dioxin Study was the responsi-
bility of MDAD. In addition, MDAD provided technical
guidance for the source test covered by this report.
HWERL was directly responsible for the management and
technical direction of the source test.
-------
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
1.0 Introduction 1-1
2.0 Summary and Conclusions 2-1
2.1 Overview of the Test Program 2-1
2.2 Summary of Results 2-4
3.0 Process (Description . . 3-1
3.1 Facility Description 3-1
3.2 Black Liquor Recovery Boiler Description 3-1
3.3 Electrostatic Precipitator Description 3-5
4.0 Test Description 4-1
4.1 Field Sampling 4-1
4.2 Process Data Collection 4-5
4.3 Laboratory Analyses 4-6
4.3.1 Dioxin/Furan Analyses 4-6
4.3.2 Dioxin/Furan Precursor Analyses 4-7
4.3.3 Total Chloride Analyses 4-7
5.0 Test Results. . .' 5-1
5.1 Process Data 5-1
5.1.1 Black Liquor Boiler Operating Data 5-1
5.1.2 Electrostatic Preciptator Operating Data 5-5
5.2 Flue Gas Parameter Data 5-7
5.3 Continuous Monitoring Data 5-10
5.4 MM5 Dioxin/Furan Emissions Data 5-18
5.4.1 Isomer and Homologue Specific Data at the ESP Inlet . 5-21
5.4.2 Isomer and Homologue Specific Data at the ESP Outlet. 5-26
5.4.3 Reduction of Dioxin/Furan Concentrations Due to
the ESP 5-25
5.5 Black Liquor Precursor Data 5-31
5.6 HC1 Train Data 5-31
5.7 Dioxin/Furan Results of ESP Ash 5-35
5.8 Soil Sampling Results 5-35
6.0 Sampling Locations and Procedures 6-1
6.1 Gaseous Sampling 6-1
6.1.1 Gaseous Sampling Locations 6-1
6.1.1.1 Electrostatic Precipitator
Outlet Exhaust Stack 6-1
6.1.1.2 Electrostatic Precipitator Inlet Location. . 6-4
6.1.1.3 Laminar Air Heater Ambient Air Intake Area . 6-7
6.1.2 Gaseous Sampling Procedures 6-7
6.1.2.1 Modified Method 5 (MM5) 6-7
6.1.2.2 HC1 Determination 6-12
6.1.2.3 Volumetric Gas Flow Rate Determination . . . 6-12
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(cont'd.)
Section
Page
6.1.2 Gaseous Sampling Procedures (cont'd.)
6.1.2.4 Flue Gas Moisture Weight Determination . . . 6-13
6.1.2.5 Flue Gas Molecular Weight Determination. . . 6-13
6.1.2.6 Continuous Monitors 6-13
6.2 Liquid Sampling 6-14
6.2.1 Strong Black Liquor Sampling 6-14
6.2.2 Fuel Oil Sampling 6-15
6.2.3 Auxiliary Black Liquor Circuit Sampling 6-15
6.3 Solid Sampling 6-16
6.3.1 Electrostatic Precipitator Catch Sampling 6-16
6.3.2 Make-up Lime Sampling 6-16
6.3.3 Soil Sampling 5-16
7.0 Analytical Procedures 7-1
7.1 Dioxin/Furan Analyses 7-1
7.2 Precursor Analyses 7-2
7.2.1 GC/MS Analyses 7-2
7.2.1.1 Sample Preparation 7-2
7.2.1.2 Analysis 7-5
7.3 TOX Analysis 7.7
7.4 Total Chloride Analyses '. '. 7.7
8.0 Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) 8-1
8.1 Manual Gas Sampling 8-1
8.1.1 Equipment Calibration and Glassware 8-2
8.1.2 Procedural QC Activities/ Manual Gas Sampling .... 8-2
8.1.3 Sample Custody 8-4
8.2 Continuous Monitoring/Molecular Weight Determination .... 8-6
8.3 Laboratory Analyses 8-8
8.3.1 Dioxin/Furan Analyses 8-8
8.3.1.1 Surrogate Recoveries of the Test Samples . . 8-8
8.3.1.2 Sample Blanks 8-10
8.3.2 Total Chloride Analysis 8-10
Appendix A Field Sampling Data
A-l Modified Method 5 and EPA Methods 1-4 Field Results. . . A-l
A-l.l Electrostatic Precipitator Outlet MM5 Results . . A-3
A-l.2 Electrostatic Precipitator Inlet MM5 Results
(East Duct) A-ll
A-l.3 Electrostatic Precipitator Inlet Velocity
Determination Results (West Duct) A-19
A-2 Continuous Emission Monitoring Results A-27
A-3 HC1 Train Results A-33
A-4 Modified Method 5 and EPA Methods 1-4
Sample Calculations A-41
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(cont'd.)
Section Page
Appendix B Process Monitoring Data
B-l Boiler Operating Log Sheets B-l
B-2 Electrostatic Precipitator Operating Log Sheets B-7
Appendix C Laboratory Analytical Data C-l
Appendix D Run-specific Dioxin/Furan Emissions Data
D-l As-measured Run-specific Dioxin/Furan Emissions Data . . D-l
D-2 Corrected to 3 Percent Oxygen Run-Specific Dioxin/Furan
Emissions Data D-9
Appendix E Run-specific Risk Modeling Input Data E-i
Appendix F Run-specific Homologue Distributions F-l
Appendix G Compound-Specific Precursor Results G-l
Appendix H Testing Personnel H-1
Appendix I Error Analysis of Control Device Efficiency Calculations 1-1
Appendix J Sample Shipment Letters j-1
-------
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
2-1 Source Sampling and Analysis Overview 2-3
2-2 Summary of Mean Dioxin and Furan Emissions Data for Site BLB-C . . 2-6
3-1 Liquor Circuit Input Materials During the Test Runs at Site BLB-C. 3-4
3-2 Chloride Concentrations in Liquor Circuit at Site BLB-C 3-6
4-1 Source Sampling and Analysis Matrix for Site 08 4-2
5-1 Mean Operating Parameters for Black Liquor Recovery Boiler BLB-C . 5-4
5-2 Mean Gas Temperatures and Flow Rate Data for the Electrostatic
Precipitator Serving Black Liquor Recovery Boiler BLB-C 5-6
5-3 Power Consumption Data and Electrical Field Operating Status for
the Electrostatic Precipitator Serving Black Liquor Recovery
Boiler BLB-C 5-8
5-4 Flue Gas Parameters at Site BLB-C 5-9
5-5 Mean Values and Standard Deviations of Continuously Monitored
Combustion Gases at the Electrostatic Precipitator Outlet. . . . 5-11
5-6 Overview of Dioxin and Furan Emissions Concentration Data for
Site BLB-C (Concentrations corrected to 3% 02) 5-19
5-7 Summary of Dioxin and Furan Emission Rate Data for Site BLB-C. . . 5-20
5-8 Summary of Dioxin/Furan Emissions Data at the ESP Inlet for
Site BLB-C 5-22
5-9 Summary of Dioxin/Furan Emissions Data at the ESP Inlet for
Site BLB-C 5.23
5-10 Dioxin/Furan Emission Factors at the ESP Inlet for Site BLB-C. . . 5-25
5-11 Summary of Dioxin/Furan Emissions Data at the ESP Outlet for
Site BLB-C 5-27
5-12 Summary of Dioxin/Furan Emissions Data at the ESP Outlet for
Site BLB-C (Concentrations corrected to 3% 0-) 5-28
5-13 Dioxin/Furan Emission Factors at the ESP Outlet for Site BLB-C . . 5-30
-------
LIST OF TABLES
(cont'd.)
Table Page
5-14 Air Pollution Control Device Removal Efficiencies at Site BLB-C. . 5-32
5-15 Summary of Dioxin Precursor Data for Site BLB-C Feed Sample* . . . 5-33
5-16 Chloride Concentrations at the Outlet Stack for Site BLB-C .... 5-34
5-17 Results of Dioxin/Furan Analysis of ESP Ash Samples at Site BLB-C. 5-36
6-1 Summary of Gas Sampling Methods for Site BLB-C 6-8
7-1 Instrument Conditions for GC/MS Precursor Analyses 7-6
7-2 Components of the Calibration Solution 7-8
7-3 Analytical Conditions for TOX Analyses 7-9
8-1 Glassware Precleaning Procedure 8-3
8-2 Summary of Isokinetic Results for MM5 8-5
8-3 Summary of Drift Check and Control Standard Results 8-7
8-4 Surrogate Recoveries for Site BLB-C Dioxin and Furan Analysis. . . 8-9
8-5 Percent Surrogate Recoveries for Site BLB-C Feed Samples 8-11
8-6 Analytical Results for Troika Quality Control Samples for
Site BLB-C 8-12
8-7 Analytical Results of QC MM5 Blanks for Site BLB-C 8-13
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
2-1 Simplified Process Flow Diagram of Black Liquor Recovery
Boiler System BLB-C 2-2
2-2 Data Summary for Site BLB-C 2-5
3-1 Schematic Diagram of Black Liquor Recovery Boiler System BLB-C . . 3-2
3-2 Schematic Electric Field Diagram of the Electrostatic Precipitator
Serving Black Liquor Recovery Boiler BLB-C 3-8
4-1 Sample Point Diagram for Site BLB-C 4-4
5-1 Continuous Steam Load and Exhaust Gas Composition Data
for Black Liquor Recovery Boiler BLB-C (Plant Data) 5-2
5-2 Oxygen Concentration History at the Electrostatic Precipitator
Outlet Location 5-12
5-3 Carbon Monoxide Concentration History at the Electrostatic
Precipitator Outlet Location 5-13
5-4 Total Hydrocarbon Concentration History at the Electrostatic
Precipitator Outlet Location 5-14
5-5 Nitrogen Oxides Concentration History at the Electrostatic
Precipitator Outlet Location 5-15
5-6 Sulfur Oxides Concentration History at the Electrostatic
Precipitator Outlet Location 5-16
5-7 Carbon Dioxide Concentration History at the Electrostatic
Precipitator Outlet Location 5-17
5-8 Homologue Distribution at the ESP Inlet 5-24
5-9 Dioxin and Furan Homologue Distributions at the ESP Outlet at
Site BLB-C 5-29
6-1 Electrostatic Precipitator Outlet Exhaust Stack and
Sampling Enclosure 6-2
6-2 Electrostatic Precipitator Outlet Exhaust Stack Sampling Ports
(Site BLB-C) 5.3
6-3 Electrostatic Precipitator Inlet Ductwork (Site 08, BLB-C) .... 6-5
XI
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
(cont'd.)
Page
6-4 Electrostatic Precipitator Inlet East Sampling Ports
(Site BLB-C) .......................... 6-6
6-5 Modified Method 5 Train ...................... 6-10
6-6 Adsorbent Sampling System ..................... 6-11
6-7 Soil Sampling Locations (Site BLB-C) ............... 6-17
7-1 Sample Preparation Flow Diagram for Site BLB-C Precursor Analyses. 7-3
-------
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report summarizes the results of a dioxin/furan3 emissions test of a
black liquor recovery boiler equipped with a dry-bottom electrostatic
precipitator for particulate emissions control. Black liquor recovery boilers
are used at Kraft pulp mills to produce process steam and to reclaim inorganic
chemicals from spent wood pulping liquors. This dioxin/furan emissions test
was conducted under Tier 4 of the National Dioxin Study. The primary
objective of Tier 4 is to determine if various combustion sources are sources
of dioxin and/or furan emissions. If any of the combustion sources are found
to emit dioxin or furan, the secondary objective of Tier 4 is to quantify
these emissions.
Black liquor recovery boilers are one of 8 combustion source categories
that have been tested in the Tier 4 program. The tested black liquor boiler,
hereafter referred to as Boiler BLB-C, was selected for this test after an
initial information screening and a one-day pretest survey visit. Boiler
BLB-C is considered representative of black liquor recovery boilers with dry
bottom electrostatic precipitators. The amount of chlorides present in the
black liquor circuit at this site is considered intermediate to high relative
to that found at other Kraft pulp mills.
This test report is organized as follows. A summary of test results and
conclusions is provided in Section 2.0, followed by a detailed process
description in Section 3.0. The source sampling and analysis plan is outlined
in Section 4.0, and the dioxin test data are presented in Section 5.0.
Sections 6.0 through 9.0 present various testing details. These include
descriptions of the sampling locations and procedures (Section 6.0),
descriptions of the analytical procedures (Section 7.0), and a summary of the
quality assurance/quality control results (Section 8.0). The appendices
contain data generated during the field sampling and analytical activities.
a
The term "dioxin/furan" as used in this report refers to the polychlorinated
dibenzo-p-dioxin and dibenzofuran isomers with four or more chlorine atoms.
1-1
-------
-------
2.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
2.1 OVERVIEW OF THE TEST PROGRAM
The host plant (Site BLB-C) is a Kraft pulp mill that produces pulp and
paper products. Black liquor recovery boiler BLB-C combusts concentrated
spent liquor from the pulping process and recovers the inorganic chemicals
used to produce pulp from wood chips. Particulate emissions from black liquor
boiler BLB-C are controlled by a dry bottom electrostatic precipitator. A
simplified process flow diagram of the system is shown in Figure 2-1.
The gaseous, liquid, and solid sampling performed during the test program
are summarized in Table 2-1. Sampling for dioxin and furan was performed
simultaneously at the electrostatic precipitator outlet exhaust stack and the
electrostatic precipitator inlet location (i.e., black liquor boiler outlet)
in each of a series of three test runs conducted on April 23 through 25, 1985.
The dioxin/furan sampling followed the October 1984 draft of the Modified
Method 5 (MM5) procedure developed by the American Society of Mechanical
Engineers (ASME) for measuring emissions of chlorinated organic compounds.
MM5 train components and train rinses were analyzed for dioxins and furans by
EMSL-RTP and ECL-BSL, two of three EPA laboratories collectively known as
Troika. Composite samples of electrostatic precipitator catch obtained for
each test run were also analyzed for dioxins and furans by these laboratories.
The dioxin/furan analysis of the MM5 sample train components and the
precipitator catch samples quantified 2,3,7,8-TCDD and the tetra- through
octa-dioxin/furan homologues present in the samples.
Dioxin/furan precursor analyses were performed on samples of the
concentrated black liquor fed to the boiler. The specific dioxin precursors
analyzed for were chlorophenols, chlorobenzenes, polychlorinated biphenyls,
and total chlorine. Samples of black liquor circuit streams (weak black
liquor, strong black liquor, and white liquor) and black liquor circuit input
streams (vanillin black liquor, caustic, make-up water, and make-up lime) were
taken and some of the samples were analyzed by Radian for total chlorine. The
total chlorine analyses of these streams were used to characterize the black
liquor circuit at Site BLB-C and to quantify the major chlorine inputs to the
2-1
-------
Preheated Combustion Air
Black Liquor Recovery Boiler
Strong
Black
Liquor
ro
i
ro
Smalt
Laminar
Air
Heater
T
Dry Bottom
Electrostatic
Preclpltator
(ESP)
Ambient Air
LIQUOR CIRCUIT
Oraan Liquor
White Liquor
Waak Black Liquor
Strong Black Liquor
To Stack
ESP Catch
Wood Chips
Make-up Lime
Mlcrosul (Sultur Make-up)
Vanillin Process Black Liquor
Cauatlc
Process Make-up Watar
Pulp to
Paparntaklng
Figure 2-1. Simplified Process Flow Diagram of Black Liquor Recovery Boiler System BLB-C
-------
TABLE 2-1. SOURCE SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS OVERVIEW FOR SITE BLB-C
Item
Item Description
1. Number of test runs
2. Gaseous Sampling
3. Liquid Sampling
4. Solids Sampling
Three identical test runs. (Runs 1, 2, 3).
MM5 sampling at electrostatic precipitator
outlet stack (Runs 1, 2, 3). Dioxin/furan
analysis.
MM5 sampling at electrostatic precipitator
inlet (Runs 1, 2, 3). Dioxin/furan analysis.
EPA Reference Methods 2 and 4 at electro-
static precipitator inlet and outlet
(Runs 1, 2, 3). Gas velocity and moisture.
Integrated bag sampling at electrostatic
precipitator inlet and outlet (Runs 1,2,3).
C02, 02, N- analysis for molecular weight
determination.
HC1 sampling at electrostatic precipitator
outlet (Runs i, 2, 3).
Continuous monitoring of CO, C02, 02, S02,
NO , and total hydrocarbons at electrostatic
prlcipitator outlet. (Runs 1, 2, 3).
Ambient combustion air sampling (two
composite samples for Runs 1, 2, 3).
Potential dioxin/furan analysis, dioxin
precursor analysis.
Strong black liquor sampling (Runs 1, 2, 3).
Dioxin precursor analysis, total chlorine
analysis.
Fuel oil sampling (Run 3 only) Dioxin/furan
analysis, dioxin precursor analysis, total
chlorine analysis.
Miscellaneous liquor circuit stream sampling
(Runs 1, 2, 3). Total chlorine analysis.
Electrostatic precipitator catch sampling
(Runs 1, 2, 3). Dioxin/furan analysis.
Soil sampling (one composite sample from
10 locations). Potential dioxin analysis.
2-3
-------
black liquor circuit. A single composite soil sample was also obtained, but
analysis of this sample was deferred pending evaluation of the dioxin/furan
emissions data.
Continuous emissions monitoring (CEM) was performed at the electrostatic
precipitator outlet location for CO, C02, NOX, S02, total hydrocarbons (THC),
and 02. The continuous monitoring data were used in conjunction with process
data to document the stability of combustion conditions during the test. HC;
train sampling was performed at the electrostatic precipitator outlet location
to determine the emission rate of total chlorides from the precipitator.
2.2 SUMMARY OF RESULTS
The data obtained at Site BLB-C during the Tier 4 test program is
summarized in Figure 2-2. Detectable quantities of all targeted dioxin ana
furan species except 2378 TCDD and 2378 TCDF were found in the stack gas at
the outlet from the ESP. As shown in Table 2-2, average as-measured stack gas
concentrations of the total PCDD and total PCDF at.the ESP outlet were 2.3
ng/dscm and 1.1 ng/dscm, respectively. The hourly emission rates were 680
ug/hr for total PCDO and 330 ug/hr for total PCDF. Octa-CDD was the most
prevalent of the tetra- through octa-chlorinated dioxin homologues, while the
furans were fairly evenly distributed among the tetra- through
octa-chlorinated furan homologues. The ESP appeared to have positive control
for reducing dioxin/furan emissions although analytical uncertainties inherent
in GC/MS analysis limited the ability to quantify the control efficiency
accurately.
The flue gas samples at the. ESP inlet were not analyzed specifically for
the 2378 TCDD and 2378 TCDF homologues. Detectable quantities of PCDD and
PCDF homologues were found in the inlet flue gas to the ESP. Average
as-measured stack gas concentrations of total PCDD and total PCDF at the ESP
inlet were 4.1 ng/dscm and 7.0 ng/dscm respectively. The hourly emission
rates were 1060 ug/hr for total PCOD and 1810 ug/hr for total PCDF. The
dioxins were fairly evenly distributed among the tetra- through
octa-chlorinated dioxin homologues, while tetra-chlorinated furans were
predominant among the furan homologues.
2-4
-------
Liquor Circuit Inputs
ro
i
en
ESP Ash
Species
Concentration
(ppb)
Total PCOD 0.02
Total PCDF 0.02
©
Stream
Vanill in. Black tiquur
Hicrosul
Make-up time
Fresh Water Make up
Flowrate
30 gpm
0.74 gpm
21 IPO
1600 gpm
Total chlorides
Concentration
(ppm, wet basis)
800
512
3
Average Mass
Klowrale of
Chloride (lu,hr)
12.0
0.3
2.3
.Runs 1 and 2 only
Run 3, only
Black tiquor Boiler Operating Data (A)
Feedrale
Operating hours
212 gpm
8,760 hrs/yr
Black liquor Feed Precursor Oata(£)
Chlotobenzenes NO
PCB's NO
Chloruphenols trace
Total chlorides 3350 ppm
I !« tl«K«f
4 UlctoMl llhiHiii M«h»-
« Vanillin («( Black I
Cavtllc
_.
l (I)
Oioxin/Fin dn tmissions Oata
Species
Concentration
(ng/dscm P 3X 02)
INLET:
2378 TCOD NR
Total PCDD 9.0
Total PCDF 15.1
OUTLET:
2378 TCOO NO
Total PCDF 2.9
Total PC 01 2.1
Emission Rate
(ug/hr)
NR
1060
1810
NO
680
330
Emissions Factur
(ng/kg Feed, dry)
NR
25
40
0
16
8
Chloride tmissions Data(6)
Continuous
°2
CO
CO
2
THC
SO
NO
2
X
Monitoring Oata©
12.
17.
863
23.
80.
40.
2
0
0
3
9
«vol,
Xvol
ppmv
ppmv
ppmv
ppmv
dry
? 3* 02,
? 3% 02,
? 3% 02,
? 3% 02,
» 3* 02,
dry
dry
wet
dry
dry
ESP Operating Data
Inlet temperature 156
Inlet gas flowrate:
East duct 2,100 dscn
West duct 2,600 dscir
Total 4,700 dscn
Flue Gas Parameter Data
INLET:
OUTLET:
Flowrate
Temperature
Moisture
Flowrate
Temperature
Moisture
4,700 dscmm
1558C
19.3 vol*
4,900 dscmm
146BC
19.5 voU
MR = not reported; NO = not detected.
Train Component
Concentration
(mg/dscm 9 3%02)
1 miss ion Rate
(k9/hr)
Emission Factor
(mg/kg feed, dry)
Front half 10.6 1.5 35
Back half 172.7 26.4 615
Train total 208.0 27.9 650
Figure 2-2. Data summary for Site BLB-C.
-------
TABLE 2-2. SUMMARY OF MEAN DIOXIN AND FURAN EMISSIONS DATA FOR SITE BLB-C
Parameter
2378 TCDDa Total PCDD Total PCDF
INLET:
Emissions Concentration (ng/dscm)
As-measured
Corrected to 3% 00
NR
NR
4.1
9.0
7.0
15.1
Emissions Rate (ug/hr)
NR
1,060
1,810
OUTLET:
Emissions Concentration (ng/dscm)
As -measured
Corrected to 3% 0~
Emissions Rate (ug/hr)
ND (0.006)
ND (0.01)
ND (1.6)
2.3
2.9
680
1.1
2.1
330
Values in parenthesis are detection limits expressed in the correspondinq
units. y
NR - not reported.
2-6
-------
Dioxin and furan homologues were detected at low concentrations in the
ESP ash. Only octa-CDD, octa-CDF and hepta-CDF were detected in these
samples. The total PCDD and total PCDF concentrations were both 0.02 ppb
which was near the minimum detection limit.
Chloride emissions at the ESP outlet were measured at 102 mg/dscm which
corresponds to 208.0 ng/dscm @ 3% 02- The average chlorides emission factor
was calculated to be 650 mg chloride emitted per kilogram of black liquor
fired on dry basis. The total chloride emissions were estimated to be 95%
HC1.
The black liquor feed rate to Boiler BLB-C was 212 gpm during the test
period. Precursor analysis of the black liquor did not detect chlorobenzenes
or polychlorinated biphenyls. A trace amount of chlorophenols were detectsa,
and the black liquor contained 3350 ppm of total chlorides. Of the liquor
circuit inputs sampled, vanillin black liquor was determined to contribute trv:
most chlorides to the liquor circuit.
The ESP treated an average of 4,700 dscmm at a temperature of 156°C. At
the outlet stack, the measured flowrate was 4,900 dscmm at a temperature of
146°C. Average flue gas concentrations measured at the ESP outlet by the
Radian continuous emissions monitoring system were: 0., 12.2 vol%; C02, 17.0
vol% 9 3% 02 (dry); CO, 863 ppmv 0 3% 02; THC, 23.0 ppmv 9 3% 02, wet; S02>
80.3 ppmv 9 3% 02, dry, and NOX, 40.9 ppmv 9 3% 02, dry.
The composite soil sample for Site BLB-C has not yet been analyzed for
dioxin/furan content.
2-7
-------
-------
SECTION 3.0
PROCESS DESCRIPTION
This section describes the host site and the black liquor recovery
boiler/electrostatic precipitator system that was tested.
3.1 FACILITY DESCRIPTION
The host site is a typical Kraft pulp mill with a rated capacity of
approximately 1150 tons per day (TPD) of air-dried pulp. A schematic diagram
of the black liquor recovery circuit is shown in Figure 3-1. The plant
maintains two black liquor recovery boilers that are rated at 500 and 850 TPD
air dried pulp, respectively.
The 500 TPD boiler, designated by the plant as the No. 3 recovery boiler,
was built in 1961 and uses a direct contact evaporator to perform the final
solids concentrations of the strong black liquor fired in the boiler. The 850
TPD boiler is designated by the plant as the No. 4 recovery boiler. It is a
low-odor boiler that was built in 1973. The No. 4 recovery boiler system was
tested in this program.
3.2 BLACK LIQUOR RECOVERY BOILER DESCRIPTION
Boiler BLB-C is a low-odor Combustion Engineering recovery boiler with a
rated capacity of 850 TPD of air dried pulp. The boiler was installed in 1973
and typically operates 7 days per week, 24 hours per day.
The black liquor circuit for Boiler BLB-C is common with that for the
other recovery boiler at Site^BLB-C from the point of weak liquor generation
in the pulp mill until final solids concentration prior'to combustion.
Wood chips fed to the pulp mill are obtained from a variety of sources.
Some of the wood processed by the plant at any given time is likely to have
been stored in salt water, but plant personnel could not estimate the fraction
of salt-laden wood in the system. To the best knowledge of plant personnel,
none of the wood had been treated with pentachlorophenol or other chlorinated
wood preservatives.
3-1
-------
2-1
I*
c
-5
(D
n
o
-5
QJ
3
CO
.0
O
-5
rc
n
o
*<
o
fD
-5
00
ro
'
I
{
1 1 1
I
I
-------
Weak black liquor produced by the pulp mill is first mixed with a
byproduct stream (i.e., vanillin black liquor) purchased from a synthetic
vanillin manufacturing plant. The primary feed material to the vanillin
manufacturing plant is spent red liquor from a nearby sulfite pulp and paper
mill. The vanillin black liquor by-product provides make-up sodium and sulfur
to the black liquor circuit at Site BLB-C.
After addition of vanillin black liquor, the weak black liquor undergoes
weak black liquor oxidation (BLO), which helps minimize total reduced sulfur
(TRS) emissions from the recovery boilers. The oxidized liquor is then
concentrated to approximately 53 wt% solids using a multiple effect evaporator
system. As shown in Figure 3-1, the resulting 53 wt% liquor is further
concentrated by one of two routes, depending on whether it is fired in the No.
3 or the No. 4 (BLB-C) recovery boiler system.
Liquor fired in Boiler BLB-C is concentrated to approximately 63 wt%
solids using a two-stage concentrator. The strong black liquor is then mixed
with captured particulate from the dry bottom electrostatic precipitator that
controls emissions from Boiler BLB-C. A petroleum by-product known as
Microsul is frequently added to the strong black liquor prior to firing in the
boiler. The microsul serves primarily as a source of make-up sulfur. It is a
viscous off-white liquid with an aromatic odor. The average total chloride
content of the strong black liquor was measured at 3350 ppm (wet basis) during
the test periods, which corresponds to 0.5 weight percent chloride on a dry
solids basis. Based on a comparison of available black liquor chloride
content data from other Kraft pulp mills, this is considered an intermediate
to high value.
The major potential input sources of chlorine to the black liquor circuit
are: salt contained in the wood chips fed to the pulp mill, vanillin black
liquor, make-up water, make-up lime, and microsul. Most of the chlorine input
to the black liquor circuit is in the form of inorganic chloride.
The rate of input for these materials during the test periods are shown
in Table 3-1. Vanillin black liquor was added during Run 1 and Run 2, but
microsul was substituted during Run 3. Caustic was not added during the test
period. The chloride concentrations of the input materials except for the
wood chips and make-up lime were analyzed and the results are presented in
3-3
-------
TABLE 3-1. LIQUOR CIRCUIT INPUT MATERIALS
DURING THE TEST RUNS AT SITE BLB-C
Run 01 Run 02 Run 03
Wood Chips NM NM NM
Vanillin Black Liquor 30 gpm 30 gpm None
Microsul None None 0.74 gpm
Make-up Lime 21 TPD 21 TPD 21 TPD
Fresh Water Make-up 1370 gpm 1640 gpm 1770 gpm
Caustic None . None None
NM = not measured
3-4
-------
Table 3-2. The results show that vanillin black liquor has the highest
concentration of chlorides and added approximately 12 Ib/hr of chlorides to
the liquor circuit. During Run 3, microsul was substituted for the vanillin
black liquor, which reduced the chlorides contribution from make-up sodium
sources to approximately 0.3 Ib/hr of chlorides.
Concentrated black liquor is fired in Boiler BLB-C through several
oscillating liquor guns. The total black liquor flow rate to the guns ranges
from about 0.7 to 1.0 cu meter/min (190 to 270 gpm), with an average of
approximately 0.85 cu meter/min (230 gpm). The solids content of the liquor
fired in the boiler is approximately 63 weight percent. Oil is fired as
auxiliary fuel when the black liquor feed rate is less than about 0.8 cu
meter/min (200 gpm).
The combustion air supplied to Boiler BLB-C is'preheated to approximately
135°C (275°F) using laminar air heaters which exchange heat from the boiler
exhaust gas. The laminar air heaters are located immediately upstream of the
electrostatic precipitator inlet, and they introduce a considerable amount of
ambient air inleakage into the boiler exhaust gas stream. Preheated
combustion air from the laminar air heaters is supplied to the boiler through
primary air nozzles and secondary air ports. The ratio of primary to
secondary air is typically about 1:1.3. The total air supply is controlled
using a Bailey Network 90 distributed control system. This system uses
combustibles and oxygen monitoring at the boiler outlet location to control
the combustion air supply to the boiler. The oxygen concentration at the
boiler outlet ranges from about 1.9 to 3 percent (wet volume basis), and the
carbon monoxide concentration ranges from 0 to 500 ppmv (wet volume basis).
Operating data recorded by plant personnel in the daily operating log
include black liquor flow rate, solids content, density, and temperature as
well as combustion air and exhaust gas flow rates and temperatures. The daily
boiler operating logs were obtained for each test day and are presented in
Appendix B.
3.3 ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR DESCRIPTION
Exhaust gases from black liquor recovery boiler BLB-C are cooled as they
pass through the laminar air heaters and are then split into two streams of
3-5
-------
TABLE 3-2. CHLORIDE CONCENTRATIONS IN LIQUOR CIRCUIT AT SITE BLB-C
Stream
Vanillin Black
Liquor
Microsul
Make-up water
Chloride Concentration ppm, wet basis
Run 01 Run 02 Run 03 Average
541.5 1052.7 NA 800
NA NA 511.6 512
1343
Average mass
flow rate
(Ib/hr)
12.0
0.3
2.3
NA = not added to liquor circuit during test run.
3-6
-------
approximately equal flow rate. The cooled gases are sent to a Wheelabrator
2-section, dry-bottom electrostatic precipitator. The operating temperature of
the precipitator is typically about 155°C (310°F) and ranges from
approximately 120 to 175°C (250°-350°F).
Particulate matter captured by the precipitator is screw conveyed (dry)
back to the black liquor circuit. Exhaust gases from the precipitator are
vented through a stack with a release height of 77 m (253 ft) relative to
grade level and an exit diameter of 3.4 m (11 ft). The grade level at the
base of the stack is 6.7 m (22 ft) above sea level.
A schematic diagram of the electrical field layout of the precipitator is
shown in Figure 3-2. Electrical operating data recorded in the daily
precipitator log include voltage and current measurements for the inlet,
middle, and outlet fields of the east and west sections of the precipitator.
Inlet gas temperature data for the precipitator are recorded on the daily
boiler log. The daily precipitator operating logs were obtained for each test
day, and are presented in Appendix B.
3-7
-------
Outlet Gas to
Exhaust Stack
East & West Outlet
(Common Field)
West Outlet
(Independent
Field)
West Middle
(Independent
Field)
East Outlet
(Independent
Field)
East Middle
(Independent
Field)
East & West Inlet
(Common Field)
Inlet Gas From Laminar
Air Heaters
Figure 3-2. Schematic Electric Field Diagram of the
Electrostatic Precipitator In Black Liquor
Recovery Boiler System 3LB-C
3-8
-------
4.0 TEST DESCRIPTION
This section describes the field sampling, process monitoring, and
analytical activities that were performed at Site BLB-C. The purpose of this
section is to provide sufficient descriptive information about the test so
that the test data presented in Section 5.0 can be easily understood.
Specific testing details (specific sampling locations and procedures) will be
presented later, in Section 6.0.
This section is divided into three parts. Section 4.1 summarizes field
sampling activities, Section 4.2 summarizes process monitoring activities, and
Section 4.3 summarizes analytical activities performed during the test
program.
4.1 FIELD SAMPLING
Table 4-1 shows the source sampling and analysis matrix for Site BLB-C.
Three dioxin/furan emissions tests (Runs 01, 02, 03) were performed, with
simultaneous testing at the electrostatic precipitator outlet exhaust stack
and the electrostatic precipitator inlet location. These locations are shown
as Points A and B on Figure 4-1. Dioxin/furan sampling followed the Modified
Method 5 (MM5) sampling protocol developed by the American Society of
Mechanical Engineers (ASME) for measuring emissions of chlorinated organic
compounds. Several modifications which are discussed in Chapter 6, were made
in the ASME protocol. Testing was performed at the electrostatic precipitator
outlet stack for a period corresponding to 240 minutes of on-line sampling.
Testing was performed during the same time period at the electrostatic
precipitator inlet location, but due to a number of filter changes and sample
port changes the on-line sampling period for the inlet train was typically
about 200 minutes.
Concentrations of HC1 in the flue gas were determined during each MM5
test run at the electrostatic precipitator outlet stack using another
modification of EPA Method 5. The sampling train was identical to that of
Method 5 except that water in the impingers was replaced with 0.1 M KOH.
4-1
-------
TABLE 4-1. SOURCE SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS MATRIX FOR SITE 08
ro
Sample location
Sample Type
or Parameter
3. Laminar air heater
area (Location M.
Figure 4-1)
Moisture
Diox in/fur an
Dioxin precursors
Sampling Method
Analytical Method
Number if Samples or Frequency
Gaseous Sampling
1. Electrostatic precipitator Dioxin, furan
outlet exhaust stack
(Location A, Figure 4-1)
Volumetric flow
Molecular weight
Moisture
HC1
CO/CO,
U2
N0x
S(L
Total hydrocarbons
(THC)
2. Electrostatic precipitator Dioxin, furan
inlet South Duct
(Location B, Figure 4-1)
Volumetric flow
Molecular weight
Modified EPA Method 5 (MM5) Gas chromatograph/mass
spectrometer
EPA Method 2
EPA Method 3
EPA Method 4
Modified EPA Method 5
(MM5/HC1)
S-type pilot
Gas chromatogrdphy/thermal
conductivity detector
Gravimetric balance
Ion chromatography
In-stack filter probe and Nondispersive infrared
heat-traced Teflon sample analyzer
line
Same as CO/COp
Same as CO/CO.
Same as C0/C02
Same as C0/C02
Modified EPA Method 5
EPA Method 2
EPA Method 3
EPA Method 4
Ambient XAD train
Paramagnetic analyzer
Chemiluminescent analyzer
Pulsed fluorescence
analyzer
Flame ionization
analyzer
Gas chromatograph/mass
spectrometer
S-type pi tot
Gas chroma togi-aphy/thermal
conductivity detector
Gravimetric balance
Gas chromatograph/
mass spectrometer
Three teit runs; one per test day
Once per MM5 test run
Two integrated bag samples per
MM5 test run
Once per MM5 test run
Once per MM5 test run
Continuously during MM5 test runs
Continuously during MM5 test runs
Continuously during MM5 test runs
Continuously during MM5 test runs
Continuously during MM5 test runs
Three test runs; one per test day
One per MM5 test run
Two integrated bag samples per
MM5 test run
Once per MM5 test' run
Two identical integrated samples
during entire test program.
-------
TABLE 4-1. SOURCE SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS MATRIX FOR SITE 08 (Continued)
Sample Location
Sample Type
or Parameter
Sampling Method
Analytical Method
Number of Samples or Frequency
i
CO
Liquid Sampling
4. Strong black liquor feed
guns
5. Fuel oil transfer line
6. White liquor storage tank
7. Weak black liquor transfer
line
8. Vanillin black liquor
transfer line
9. Microsul transfer line
10. Pulp washer line shower
11. Caustic line from storage
Solid Sampling
12. Electrostatic precipitator
screw conveyor
13. Make-up lime screw
conveyor
14. Plant property
Strong black liquor Dipper samples
for dioxin/furan,
dioxln/furan pre-
cursors, and total
chloride analyses
Fuel oil for dioxm/ Tap valve samples
furan, dioxin/furan
precursors, and total
chloride analyses
White liquor for
total chloride
analysis
Weak black liquor
for total chloride
analysis
Vanillin black
liquor for total
chloride analysis
Microsul for total
chloride analysis
Make-up water for
total chloride
analysis
20% caustic for
analysis
Dioxin/furan
Make-up 1ime tor
total chloride
analysis
SoiIs for dioxin ,
furan
Dipper samples
Tap valve samples
Tap valve samples
Tap valve samples
Grab samples
Dipper samples
Grab samples
i.tub samples
(ii ub samples
Gas chromatography/mass
spectrometer, ion
chromatography
Gas chromatoyraphy/mass
spectrometer, ion
chromatography
Ion chromatography
Ion chromatography
Ion chromatography
Ion chromatography
Ion chromatography
Ion chromatography
Gas chromatogrdphy/
mass spectrometer
Ion chromdtoyr'dphy
Gas chromatograph/mass
spectrometer
Three identical composites per MM5
test run of hourly samples taken
during each run.
Three identical composites of two
samples taken during Run 3 only
One composite per MM5 test run of
two samples taken during the run.
One composite per MM5 test run of
two samples taken during the run.
One composite per MM5 test run of
two samples taken during the run.
(Runs 1 and 2 only)
One composite per MM5 test run of
two samples taken during Run 3 only
One composite per MM5 test run of
two samples taken during the run.
One sample for the entire test
program
One composite per MMb test run of
two samples taken during the run.
One composite per MM5 test run of
two samples taken during the run.
One composite of ten samples taken
at various locations
-------
» TO NO. 3 SycUm
MO. 4 fUcll««l«llc
MO. 4
total O»cl»»ik
HO. 4 >!
HOC MO
» M..U. M
I 'f Aak
4 |« .......... C*«*
i r
* "MO. 4 »»! | »
---- f likracl OH
to«U«l*« !
M* »
If (If*
M.
ML
tO
k klMk
! kwck W««*i
Figure 4-1. Sample Point Diagram for Site 08, BLB-C
-------
Continuous emissions monitoring (CEM) of 02, CO, CO-, S02, NO , and total
hydrocarbons (THC) was performed at the electrostatic precipitator outlet
stack during the three MM5 test runs. These data were obtained to assess
variations in combustion during the sampling periods. Integrated average
concentration values for each species monitored were determined every-five
minutes by the CEM system.
Ambient air sampling near the fresh air intake for the laminar air
heaters was performed during the MM5 test runs using an ambient XAD train.
Two identical trains were operated in parallel during the three MM5 runs, such
that two identical integrated samples were obtained for the entire test
program. One of the sample trains was analyzed for dioxin/furans. The other
train was originally to be analyzed for dioxin precursors, but was not
analyzed.
Two samples of electrostatic precipitator catch were obtained during each
MM5 test run, and a single composite sample was developed for each run. The
composite samples were analyzed for dioxin/furans. These samples were taken
to develop data for the Tier 4 ash sampling program.
Hourly samples of strong black liquor were taken during each test run,
and 3 identical composite samples were developed for each run. The strong
black liquor composites for each run were submitted for dioxin/furan analysis,
for dioxin precursor analysis and for total chloride analysis. Fuel oil
samples were taken twice during Run 03, and three identical composites were
prepared. The fuel oil composites were submitted for dioxin/furan analysis,
for dioxin precursor analysis, and total chloride analysis. Several
additional process samples were taken during the test runs to provide
information on chlorine inputs to the black liquor circuit. These included
white liquor, weak black liquor, vanillin black liquor, microsul, make-up
water, and make-up lime. Samples of these materials were taken twice per MM5
test run, and one sample composite of each material was prepared for each test
run. The composite samples were submitted for total chloride analysis.
Soil samples were collected from ten locations at the plant site. The
ten samples were combined into a single composite, which was held for
potential dioxin/furan analysis pending evaluation of the MM5 dioxin/furan
emissions data.
4-5
-------
4.2 PROCESS DATA COLLECTION
Process data were collected to characterize the operation of the black
liquor boiler and the electrostatic precipitator during the MM5 test periods
Computer graphics displays available in the control room were printed and
obtained for black liquor solids content; boiler steam flow and pressure;
boiler exhaust gas oxygen, carbon monoxide and combustibles concentrations:
black liquor feed rate; and combustion air flow rates. In addition, daily
operating log reports were obtained for the boiler and the electrostatic
precipitator. These process data will be used in Section 5.1 with the CEM
data to evaluate and compare combustion conditions during the three MM5 test
periods.
4.3 LABORATORY ANALYSES
Laboratory analyses performed on samples from test Site BLB-C included
dioxin/furan analyses, dioxin/furan precursor analyses and total chloride
analyses. Samples analyzed for dioxin/furan are discussed in Section 4.3.1
and samples analyzed for dloxin precursors are discussed in Section 4.3.2.
Samples analyzed for chloride (CT) are discussed in Section 4.3.3.
4..3.1 Dioxin/Furan Analyses
All dioxin/furan analyses for Site BLB-C samples were performed by
EMSL-RTP and ECL-8SL laboratories, two of the three EPA laboratories
collectively known as Troika. Dioxin/furan analyses were performed by gas
chromatography/mass spectroscopy. Specific isomers identified included 2378
TCDD and 2378 TCDF. Other dioxin/furan compounds were quantified in groups
according to the number of chlorine atoms per molecule. The tetra-through
octa-chlorinated homologues were quantified.
4-6
-------
4.3.2 Dioxin/Furan Precursor Analysis
Dioxin/furan precursor analyses of strong black liquor samples were
performed by Radian using gas chromatograph/mass spectroscopy. The specific
dioxin/furan precursors to be analyzed for included chlorophenols,
chlorobenzenes, and PCB's. Composite feed samples were also analyzed for
total chlorine by Parr Bomb Combustion followed by ion chromatography and for
total organic halide by gas chromatography and Hall detector.
4.3.3 Total Chloride Analysis
Chloride analysis was performed on the combined probe-rinse/filter sample
and on the back half-rinse/impinger solution sample for each HC1 train (i.e.,
front half and back half analysis). Chloride analysis only was also performed
on the strong black liquor, microsul, vanillin black liquor, and the make-up
water.
4-7
-------
-------
5.0 TEST RESULTS
The results of the Tier 4 dioxin/furan emission test of Boiler BLB-C are
presented in this section. The individual test runs are designated as Runs
01-03.
Process data obtained during the test runs are presented in Section 5.1.
and continuous monitoring results for 02, CO, C02, NOX, S02> and THC are
presented in Section 5.2. The dioxin/furan emissions data are contained in
Section 5.3. Results of HC1 train sampling at the precipitator outlet and
chlorine analysis of various process samples are presented in Section 5.4.
Dioxin/furan analysis and dioxin/furan precursor analysis data for the strong
black liquor samples and dioxin/furan analysis data for the electrostatic
precipitator catch samples are presented in Section 5.5.
5.1 PROCESS DATA
Process data were obtained to document black liquor boiler and electro-
static precipitator operation during the test runs. The boiler operating data
are summarized in Section 5.1.1, and the electrostatic precipitator operating
data are summarized in Section 5.1.2. In general, the data show that process
operations were stable during the three test runs. Runs 01 and 02 were very
similar in most respects, while Run 03 showed some differences in black liquor
feed rate, auxiliary fuel firing rate, liquor circuit input materials, and
electrostatic precipitator operation relative to Runs 01 and 02.
5.1.1 Black Liquor Boiler Operating Data
Mean values of plant-maintained operating data for black liquor boiler
BLB-C during the three MM5 test runs are shown in Table 5-1. The data show
that the overall boiler steam load was fairly constant between runs and
averaged about 140 x 103 kg/hr (305 x 103 Ib/hr) of steam at 2900 kPa
(4300 psig). The maximum between-run variation in boiler load was about 4
percent. Black liquor feed rates were nearly equivalent for Runs 01 and 02
(0.83 cu meter/min, or 220 gpm), but were about 11 percent lower for Run 03
5-1
-------
TABLE 5-1. MEAN OPERATING PARAMETERS FOR BLACK LIQUOR RECOVERY BOILER BLB-C
Parameter3
Black Liquor Flow (gpm)
Black Liquor Solids (%)
Fuel Oil Flow (gpm)
Boiler Steam Pressure (psig)
Steam Flow (103 Ib/hr)
% Oxygen b
% Combustibles15
Run 01
221
63.2
0
437
313
3.4
0
Run 02
212
62.1
0
423
301
2.6
0.1
Mean
Run 03 Runs 01-03
197
64.1
1.8
420
300
2.1
0.1
212
63.1
--
427
305
2.7
0.1
Data shown in units used by host plant:
To convert from: to:
gpm cu meter/min
psig kPa
Ib/hr kg/hr
multiply by:
0.00379
6.893
0.454
Oxygen and combustibles monitoring performed by host plant at boiler outlet
(prior to air dilution by laminar air heaters)
5-2
-------
(0.75 cu meter/min, or 197 gpm). Approximately 0.008 cu meter/min (2 gpm) of
Bunker C fuel oil was fired during Run 03 in order to maintain the boiler load
at a constant value. The fuel oil is estimated to have provided roughly 10
percent of the total energy input to the boiler during Run 03. No fuel oil
was fired during Runs 01 and 02.
The test program average black liquor feed rate of 0.8 cu meter/min
(212 gpm) was approximately 20 percent below normal for boiler BLB-C, which
more typically operates at a black liquor feed rate of 1.0 cu meter/min
(270 gpm). A continuous digestor at the host plant went down for repair
before Run 01 began, which led to a reduction in the amount of black liquor
available for combustion during the test program. Although the digestor was
repaired during Run 03, the load on Boiler BLB-C was maintained at a constant
value until the testing was complete. The black liquor feed rate to the
boiler was increased back to about 1.0 cu meter/min (270 gpm) shortly after
Run 03 was complete.
The oxygen content of the boiler exhaust gas ranged from 2.1% 0? (wet) to
3.4% 02 (wet), as measured by the plant's monitors located upstream of the
laminar air heaters. A significant amount of ambient air leakage occurs
across the laminar air heaters. Total combustibles concentrations measured by
the plant upstream of the laminar air heaters were near the lower sensitivity
limit of the monitoring instrument, with the mean value for each test run
being 0.1 percent or less.
Plant-maintained continuous monitoring data for boiler load (i.e., steam
flow) and boiler exhaust gas concentrations of oxygen, carbon monoxide, and
combustibles are shown in Figure 5-1 for each run. These plots are tracings
of figures generated by a computer in the boiler control room. The data show
that the boiler operation was stable during the test runs, with each run
showing a comparable degree of variability.
Other parameters continuously monitored in the boiler control room at the
host plant included black liquor feed rate and black liquor solids content.
These parameters showed very little within-run variability. The mean black
liquor solids content for the three test runs was 63.1 weight percent.
5-3
-------
VMllul teal* 0-MO > 10>lb/lw SU.rnl
BoIlM O»|«M> IVMIIcd «! 0-IOk Vol. O
MUM CO (V«»e«l «! O-1OOO ppm., w.l)
O»»M CMkwIlklM IVMllol ! 0-»»Ve*. »»ll
^ --^^_^^
'*->-» " ^ -^,./-'"~%M>
*i.~' V\~^~-
00 1*
Ml FI0M 1
"~ ^V.Miro.W.^
:7^v~M^x-/' \
00 14
^-A _AV
^. ;*-*> ***** -~**S*-J
v^!SX«^^-v-
OO
Mw
*/ai
.~"Y
^-^-v
1C
oi
/
^._ .. " -
^V^.^N^-^-^..*^-' ^^- -
iisrcT^w.^^
M> 1*
^.^.^-fp
w^
' ^-J-^
00 17
'T??.
00
cn
i
1
, i
-~ /Jv.
\'
7^*^
11
ok.t L.MI
^"^^v.^ ^9-.
00 ti
..^,..^__,. -..yv..
~ ^ y - "-' _ >.
-N^^-^/^-V^
00 1*
\~/-«.
*>-
OO
-v_
^.^.-^.^.-^'k^..'
Vy**" ^^^-\/\*vJ
MM C^pkullk
JL
"i.
14
/^x. ^ ...->
^^ 1 /"
00 If
~ -^v- ^^. ^.
X-v./--. _.r^VX^^
^.£ ...rf _...l ^.AJ 1>^-***
OO 11
yv^ ^
-^xt/^_
^"> ~~- >*
OO
-v.^.., _.. ^
^^
..u^^r.1!^"^
1 , ,
HIM 0*
a/ai/ts
., M.
^^^ °*u
^-V v^-^-^^ | A»M«»W
^..j^-.'^-..-* - -*.. j^-^. -s*~ L-
^^
kS^^'x-'~"-
^Nv-. ._-
-.^,..^..^..^ < ^,.
|i
^^Wrf^J^ 1 1
. ^.^- ^J-«
x -^-^^^'SfQ^'^V"^-'"^< Jl!
I00 1000 1 too taoct uoo noo «<
Figure 5-1. Continuous Steam Load and Exhaust Gas Composition Data for Black Liquor
Recovery Boiler BLB-C (Plant Data)
-------
The liquor circuit input materials changed between'Run 2 and Run 3. The
vanillin black liquor used during Runs 01 and 02 was replaced with the
microsul used during Run 03. The vanillin black liquor and microsul serve as
sources of make-up sodium and sulfur for the black liquor circuit. The
replacement of vanillin black liquor with microsul was performed by plant
personnel in order to maintain the desired sodium to sulfur ratio in the
1iquor circuit.
5.1.2 Electrostatic Precioitator Operating Data
Mean operating data for the electrostatic precipitator are shown for each
test run in Table 5-2. The data show that the measured gas flow rates and
temperatures were fairly consistent between runs. The mean total inlet gas
flow rate to the precipitator was 4700 Nm3/min (166,000 dscfm), with a maximum
deviation from the mean being less than 7 percent for any run. The total
inlet gas flow rate was calculated as the sum of the flow rates measured in
the two halves of the split inlet ductwork. The gas flow rates measured in
the west half of the inlet ductwork were an average of 20 percent higher than
those measured in the east half of the inlet ductwork. As discussed in
Section 6.1.1.2, the inlet sampling locations did not meet the requirements
specified in EPA Method 1 for velocity determination and the port locations on
the two ductwork halves were not identical. Thus, it is difficult to
determine whether the measured flow data reflects a real difference in flow
rates for the two ductwork halves or whether the measured difference is
attributable to sampling uncertainty. The total outlet gas flow rates
measured at the exhaust stack location agreed with the total inlet gas flow
rates. The average deviation between the two values was approximately 4
percent. This indicates very little gas inleakage across the precipitator.
The mean gas inlet temperature to the precipitator was 156°C (312°F), with a
maximum deviation for any run of less than 3 percent from the mean.
Temperatures measured in the west inlet duct were typically about 3°C (5°F)
higher than those measured in the east inlet duct.
5-5
-------
TABLE 5-2. MEAN GAS TEMPERATURE AND FLOW RATE DATA FOR THE ELECTROSTATIC
PRECIPITATOR SERVING BLACK LIQUOR RECOVERY BOILER BLB-C
Parameter
a,b
Run 01
Run 02
Run 03
Average
Gas Temperatures ( F)
East Inlet
West Inlet
Avg. Inlet
Outlet Stack
Gas Flow Rates (dscfm)
East Inlet
West Inlet
Total Inlet
Outlet Stack
315
318
317
292
76,500
97,700
174,200
175,300
302
307
305
294
76,600
92,700
169,300
174,300
310
315
313
297
71,600
84,000
155,600
169,100
309
313
312
294
74,900
91,500
166,400
172,900
alnlet gas temperature data obtained from host plant measurements.
Outlet stack temperatures measured by Radian. To convert from F to °C, use
the formula °C - (°F - 32)/1.8
Gas flow rate measured by Radian. To convert from dscfm to dscmm, multiply
value in dscfm by 0.0283
5-6
-------
Electrical power consumption data and the operating status of the
electrical fields of the precipitator are shown for each run in Table 5-3.
The electrostatic precipitator power consumption data show that the average
power consumption of the precipitator was about 240 kw (0.8 MM Btu/hr) during
Runs 01 and 02. When the final electrical field was brought on-line prior to
Run 03, the power consumption increased about 20 percent to 290 kw (1.0 MM
Btu/hr). These values were calculated from load voltage and load current data
monitored by the host plant for each electrical field of the precipitator.
The voltage and current data obtained during the test periods are summarized
in Appendix B.
The final electrical field common to the east and west halves of the
precipitator (i.e., "E & W Outlet") was not operating during Runs 01 and 02.
A diode in the transformer for that field malfunctioned the week before the
testing was performed. The diode was repaired during the week that testing
was performed, and the electrical field was brought back on-line after the
completion of Run 02. The decision to proceed with testing prior to the
repair of the electrical field was based primarily on EPA Method 5 testing
performed by the host plant on April 18, after the malfunction occurred. The
Method 5 data indicated that participate emissions from the precipitator were
on the order of 0.024 gr/dscf (0.03 gr/dscf corrected to 8% 02), which was
about a factor of 3 lower than the level allowed by the applicable local
permit (0.10 gr/dscf corrected to 8% 0,,). The opacity of the stack gases from
the precipitator was approximately 12 percent with the final field out of
service. This was within the permitted value of 35 percent opacity for
recovery boilers. Plant personnel indicated there was no significant increase
in either the particulate emissions or the outlet opacity with the final
common electrical field out of service, relative to levels measured previously
with all fields of the precipitator operating.
5.2 FLUE GAS PARAMETER DATA
Table 5-4 summarizes flue gas temperature, moisture, volumetric flowrate
and oxygen concentration data obtained at Site BLB-C. These parameters were
5-7
-------
TABLE 5-3. POWER CONSUMPTION DATA AND ELECTRICAL FIELD OPERATING
STATUS FOR THE ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR SERVING
BLACK LIQUOR RECOVERY BOILER BLB-C
Parameter
Run 01
Run 02
Run 03
Average
Total Electrical Power
Consumption (kw)
Operating Status of
Electrical Fields
239
245
290
258
E i W Inlet
E Middle
E Outlet
W Outlet
E & W Outlet
Operating
Operating
Operating
Operating
Not
Operating
Operating
Operating
Operating
Operating
Not
Operating
Operating
Operating
Operating
Operating
Operating
Always Operating
Always Operating
Always Operating
Always Operating
Operating Run 03
only
Total electrical power consumption data calculated from load voltage and load
load current data maintained by the host plant for each electrical field
To convert from kw to MMBtu/hr, multiply value in kw by 0.003413
5-8
-------
TABLE 5-4. FLUE GAS PARAMETERS AT SITE BLB-C
Parameter Run 01 Run 02 Run 03 Average
Inlet to ESP:a
Temperature ( C) 158 154 152 155
Moisture (vol%) 18.1 20.0 19.8 19.3
Volumetric Flow Rate:
actual (acmm) . 8800 8600 7900 8400
dry standard (dscmm} 4900 4800 4400 4700
Oxygen Content (vol%):
EPA Method 3 12.7 13.3 12.1 12.7
Outlet Stack:
Temperature (°C) 144 146 147 146
Moisture (vol%) 19.1 19.8 19.7 19.5
Volumetric Flowrate:
actual (acmm) 8700 8700 8500 8600
dry standard (dscmm) 5000 4900 4800 4900
Oxygen Content (vol%):
Radian CEM 12.3 12.1 12.2 12.2
EPA Method 3 13.8 14.0 13.6 13.8
Method 5 sampling was conducted in the east inlet duct to the ESP, and
Method 2 was conducted in the west inlet duct, these values are based
on the results from both sides as follows:
- temperature: average
- moisture: east duct
- oxygen content: east duct
- volumetric flowrate: sum of east and west duct
EPA standard conditions: 20 C (68 F) and 1 atm
5-9
-------
consistent for all three test runs. At the inlet to the ESP, the average gas
temperature was 155°C, the average moisture content of the stack gas was 19.3
vol%, the average volumetric flowrate was 8400 acmm and the average oxygen
content as measured by EPA Method 3 was 12.7 vol %. At the ESP outlet, the
average gas temperature was 146°C, the average moisture was 19.5 vol%, the
average volumetric flowrate was 8600 acmm and the average oxygen content was
13.0 vol%. Radian CEM and EPA Method 3 oxygen data agreed within the
measurement error of the methods. The flue gas parameters at the inlet and
outlet to the ESP are in fair agreement, which indicates that little air
inleakage occurred across the ESP.
5.3 CONTINUOUS EMISSIONS MONITORING DATA
Mean values and standard deviations of the continuously monitored
combustion gases at the electrostatic precipitator outlet location (0?, CO,
02, S02, NOX and THC) are shown for each MM5 test run in Table 5-5. The
overall mean values for the three tast runs are as follows: oxygen, 12.2
percent by volume (dry); carbon monoxide, 860 ppmv (dry 9 3% OJ; carbon
dioxide, 17 percent by volume (dry 9 3% 02); sulfur dioxide, 80 ppmv (dry 9 3%
02); nitrogen oxides, 41 ppmv (dry 9 3% 02); and total hydrocarbons, 23 ppmv
(wet 9 3% 02, as propane).
The mean oxygen, carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen oxides
concentrations showed little between-run variability. The maximum deviation
between the mean concentration for any run and the overall mean value for all
runs was less than 20 percent for these species. The mean carbon monoxide and
total hydrocarbon concentrations showed considerable variability between runs.
The total hydrocarbon concentration for Run 01 (46 ppmv 9 3% 0~) was
approximately four times higher than that for Runs 02 and 03 (approximately 11
ppmv 9 3% 02), while the carbon monoxide concentration for Run 01 (570 ppmv 9
3% 02) was nearly a factor of two lower than that for Runs 02 and 03 (1000
ppmv 9 3% 02). This trend does not show the expected positive relationship
between carbon monoxide and total hydrocarbon concentrations.
Five-minute average values of the continuously monitored combustion gases
are tabulated in Appendix A-2 and are shown graphically as functions of time
in Figures 5-2 through 5-7. The oxygen concentration showed regular, cyclical
5-10
-------
TABLE 5-5. MEAN VALUES AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF CONTINUOUSLY MONITORED
COMBUSTION GASES AT THE ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR OUTLET
Parameter3'13'0
02 (% vol )
CO (ppmv 9 3% 02)
C02 (% vol 9 3% 02)
S02 (ppmv 9 3% 02)
NOX (ppmv 9 3% 02)
THC (ppmv 9 3% 02)
Mean
Run 01
12.3
(1.1)
586.6
(304.9)
17.1
(0.5)
NDe
40. Of
46.3
(21.9)
Value and
Run 02
12.1
(1.2)
997.7
(396.8)
16.6
(0.7)
64.9
(30.1)
42.7
(3.9)
10.6
(4.8)
Standard Deviati
Run 03
12.2
(1.1)
1023.6
(371.0)
17.2
(0.5)
95.6
(51.1)
39.9
(3.7)
12.2
(6.0)
ond
Overal 1
Mean
12.2
863
17.0
80.3
40.9
23.0
Gas sampling for the continuous monitors was performed at the electrostatic
precipitator outlet location.
All concentrations are expressed on a dry volume basis except for total
hydrocarbon concentrations, which are expressed on a wet volume basis.
/«
Total hydrocarbon data are expressed in units of ppmv (wet) as propane.
Mean values shown on top, with standard deviation below in parenthesis.
eND = no data available for the test run.
Mean nitrogen oxides concentration for Run 01 includes only the data
obtained after the instrument range was changed from 0 - 1000 ppmv to
0 - 250 ppmv.
5-11
-------
SITE 08 - TEST 1
TOT TTMC (HCUMS)
SITE OS - TEST 2
i^jl^Jb^J\JllJj^
TOT IMC (HOUHS)
SITE 08 - TEST 3
OXYOO4 mmarujc
. !!,! K I,! Jt
,U , H
u\/\/W\
TOT m« (Mourn)
NCANl I2.3X 02
3TO. DCV.i l.ir.
INSTRUMCNT RANSCl 9-23X 02
MCANi 12.IX 02
STD. DCV.i I.2X
INSTHUnCNT XANOCi >-29X 02
nCAMl 12. 2X 02
STO. 0V. I 1.17.
mweci »-23r. 02
Figure 5-2. Oxygen Concentration History at the Electrostatic
Precipitator Outlet Location
5-12
-------
a.a -
2.A-
^ 3 J "*
8 .4-
'.«
t^
i.a
O.fl
o.*
SITE 08 - TEST 1
CMtaoN MONOXIQC PWOFH.C
§
a
if
r
8
S1 '
^.
/« /v
? > I
.,' "! t.?*a\ ' \a v
"r " v~ " ^ "*\
03*1
TSST TIME (fOUftS)
SITE 08 - TEST 2
C**aON MONOXIQC PWOFH.C
.;j i
T\ i
U.J1 ~'
I « I B II /
1A-JL J^^Vt A/
K *»; ? T
i j^A/ i /
\rf*^ *U
5TD. QEV.: 334.9 ppmv
INSTRUHENT RANGE: 3-3000
MCANl 997.7 pomV CO TT. 01
STO. DEV.: 396.9 ppnv
RANBEt a-aaaa ORIV co
TOT TIMC (HOUMI)
SITE 08 - TEST 3
MONOXIDE p*onue
^ , r^ 1
« I. /%*J V
"CAN! ia:i.6 opmv ca « -r. 02
5TD. OEU.I T71.0 OP«V
INSTRUHENT RANGEI a-eOee opmu CO
TOT TIMC (MOUMS)
Figure 5-3. Carbon Monoxide Concentration History at the
Electrostatic Precipitator Outlet Location
5-13
-------
SITE 08 - TEST 1
rent. MroROCMMN morn*
ne«Nl 46.3 PP*U THC * 3% 02
STO. OEV.I :t.9 ggmV
INSTRUMENT RANGE I a-lOOB ap«V THC for fir.t I
1-lOT BBOV THC for r.finunn
s
3
1
i
r«ST T1MC (HOU«)
SITE 08 - TEST 2
i B/
w^s:
lEANl IB.4 pp»U THC I 3X 02
STO. OEV.i 4.a opmv
RANGE. li-IlM BP»» rHC
SITE 08 - TEST 3
11AN1 12.2 gginv TMC 9 TX 02
STO. OEV.: 6.a apmv
[NSTRUrlENT RANGE I 3-108 opmV THC
TOT T1M« (NOUN*)
Figure 5-4. Total Hydrocarbon Concentration History at the
Electrostatic Precipitator Outlet Location
5-14
-------
8 »
S 70
SITE 08 - TEST 1
oxioa or NtmoocN
nEANi 26.3 pp«V NOx a -% 02
STD. DCV.i 12.7 pp»v
INSTRUMENT RANGEI 0-1BBB pp«v NOx far firit l
t-230 Qpmy NOx far r»m*ind«
rar -nut
SITE 08 - TEST 2
oxioa of NtrvtoacN omon\.t
TOT TMC (HOUK1)
HE AN I 42.7 pomv NOx I 37. 02
STD. OEV.i 7.9 ppmv
INSTRUTIENT RANGE! a-:3B pp«V NOx
SITE 08 - TEST 3
OXiQCS Of MrTrtOOCN
«ANi 39.9 opmV NOx 4 Tr. 02
STD. OEV.: 3.7 opmW
INSTRUMENT OANGEt a-2Sa opmV NOx
(mxim)
Figure 5-5. Nitrogen Oxides Concentration History at the
Electrostatic Precipitator Outlet Location
5-15
-------
300
£
8
> 300
I
5 20O
z
100
SITE 08 - TEST 2
SULFUR BIOXIOE PROFILE
:1EAN: = 4.a SDiTlV =0:
STD. DEV. : -Q.Z 3C'nV
INSTRUMENT PANGE: 2-IZB0
TEST TIME (HOURS)
SITE 08 - TEST 3
SULFUR OIOXIOC PROFILE
.^
*«0
$
9
> 3OO -
6
J
1 1
z
UJ
_J
z
0 100 -1
.^
'.
O -
. JW\J
3} ,V k a , *l^| *i\ 1
j% y S /^ ^^
qO s 7 tg QB/
as J" o^
Z 4.
TEST TIME (HOURS)
MEAN: =?=.6 ppmV =02 ~i "/: GZ
STD. DEV.: 51.1 npmV
INSTRUMENT RAMGE: <3- 16300 ;jpm
-------
SO -
U-
u -
SITE 08 - TEST 1
CMVBON oioxtoe paonue
8
X
I
I
ne«Ni i?. ir. v C02 a r/. a:
STD. DEV. : 3.37. V
INSTRUMENT PANGED 3-Z3V. V CQ2
SITE 08 - TEST 2
u-
12 -
20
11-
1O-
«-
-
I6.6X v ca: a 3?. 02
STO. oev.i a.rx v
INSTRUMENT RANGEl 3-rar. V C02
TOT -nut (Mourn)
SITE 08 - TEST 3
CAMOON aioiaoe
» -
'» .
11-
ie-
nEANi I7.;v. V
STO. DEV. i a.sr. v
INSTMUIENT RANQEl
TOT TIUC (noun)
Figure 5-7. Carbon Dioxide Concentration History at the
Electrostatic Precipitator Outlet Location
5-17
-------
variation from about 11% 02 to 14% 0-, with a period of about 15 minutes
between the 14% 02 peaks. These variations are not associated with combustion
conditions in the black liquor boiler itself. Continuous monitoring performed
at the boiler outlet by the host plant showed steady behavior with no cyclical
trends. The extra "tramp" air entering the flue gas system is believed to be
associated with a regular air pulse cleaning cycle on the laminar air heaters.
The total hydrocarbon and nitrogen oxides data for Run 01 show anomalous
behavior during the beginning of the run that is associated with range changes
on the monitoring instruments. The sudden rise in measured concentration for
these parameters that occur after approximately 2 hours of run time does not
reflect a change in combustion condition in the boiler. The first 2 hours of
concentration data for both total hydrocarbon and nitrogen oxides are
considered invalid because the instrument ranges were not appropriate for the
concentrations being measured.
5.4 DIOXIN/FURAN EMISSIONS DATA
Emission concentrations and emission rates measured at the ESP inlet and
outlet locations are summarized in Tables 5-6 and 5-7 for the 2378 TCDD, total
PCDD, and total PCDF species. The entire MM5 train was analyzed, which
included the filter, primary XAD sorbent trap, impingers, and sample train
clean-up rinses was analyzed.
Values were not reported for 2378 TCDD and 2378 TCDF at the ESP inlet.
Average as-measured emissions concentrations at the ESP inlet of total PCDD
and total PCDF were 4.1 ng/dscm for total PCDD and 7.0 for total PCDF.
Corrected to 3% CL using the Radian Method 3 data, the concentrations were
9.00 ng/dscm 0 3% 02 for total PCDD and 15.1 ng/dscm 0 3% 02 for total PCDF.
At the ESP outlet average as-measured emissions concentrations of the
total PCDD, and total PCDF species were 2.3 ng/dscm for total PCDD; and 1.1
ng/dscm for total PCDF. 2,3,7,8 TCDD was not detected at the ESP outlet.
Corrected to 3% CL using the Radian CEM oxygen concentration data, these
values correspond to 2.94 ng/dscm PCDD 0 3% 02; and 2.11 ng/dscm PCDF 0 3% 07,
respectively.
5-18
-------
TABLE 5-6. OVERVIEW OF DIOXIN AND FURAN EMISSIONS
CONCENTRATION DATA FOR SITE BLB-C
Emissions Concentration, ng/dscm
Run 2378 TCDD* Total PCDD Total PCDF
ng/dscm as-measured
Inlet:
Run 01 NR 5.76 17.7
Run 02 NR 3.28 1.8
Run 03 NR 3.38 1.38
Average NR 4.14 6.97
Outlet:
Run 01 ND (0.010) 0.53 0.38
Run 02 ND (0.005) 4.94 1.26
Run 03 ND (0.003) 1.33 1.76
Average ND (0.006) 2.27 1.13
nq/dscm 0 3% 0^
Inlet:
Run 01 NR 12.5 38.4
Run 02 NR 7.66 4.21
Run 03 NR 6.83 2.80
Average NR 9.00 15.1
Outlet:b
Run 01 ND (0.02) 1.32 0.96
Run 02 ND (0.004) 4.27 1.08
Run 03 ND (0.006) 3.24 4.28
Average ND (0.01) 2.94 2.11
bThe value in parenthesis is the detection limit converted to ng/dscm
Flue gas concentration data corrected to 3% 0- using the average
Radian CEM data in Table 5-5. z
NR = not reported
ND = not detected
ng - 1 x 10 g
5-19
-------
TABLE 5-7. SUMMARY OF DIOXIN AND FURAN EMISSION
RATE DATA FOR SITE BLB-C
Run
INLET:
Run 01
Run 02
Run 03
Average
OUTLET:
Run 01
Run 02
Run 03
Average
Emission
Rate (ua/hrl
2378 TCDDa Total PCDD
NR
NR
NR
NR
ND (2.9)
ND (1.3)
ND (0.7)
ND (1.6)
1500
850
820
1060
160
1500
380
680
Total PCDF
4610
470
340
1810
115
370
500
330
Values in parenthesis are detection limits expressed in
corresponding units.
NR = not reported.
ND = not detected
5-20
-------
Average emission rates at the ESP inlet were 1060 ug/hr for total PCDD
and 1810 ng/hr for total PCDF. At the ESP outlet, average emission rates were
680 ug/hr for total PCDD and 330 ug/hr for total PCDF.
The PCDD and PCDF emission rates appear to be significantly different.
However, for the ESP inlet data, the total PCDD and total PCDF emission rates
for Run 1 are signficantly higher than Runs 1 and 3. If these values are
removed from the averages, the inlet and outlet values for PCDDs are still
significantly different, but the PCDF values are not significantly different.
5.4.1 Isomer and Homoloque Specific Data at the ESP Inlet
Isomer and homologue specific emissions concentration data at the ESP
Inlet are summarized in Tables 5-8 and 5-9 for the three test runs.
Run-specific data tables showing homologue emissions concentrations in
ng/dscm, parts-per-trillion and ug/hr units are included in Appendix 0. All
dioxin/furan isomers were detected at the inlet to the ESP. Penta-CDF and
octa-CDF were not detected in the Run 3 sample and were close to the minimum
detection in the Run 2 sample.
Analysis of the inlet and outlet samples did indicate that the
2378 TCDD/TCDF isomers were minor components (less than 25 percent) of the
total TCDD/TCDF concentrations in most cases. Isomer-specific analyses were
performed on all samples in those cases where the first analysis (not
isomer-specific) indicated that the 2378-TCDD/TCDF isomers were present in
higher than normal or expected concentrations. As a result, it will be noted
that for some isomer-specific analyses the results were not reported (NR) by
Troika. In these cases, it should be assumed that the 2378-TCDF/TCDF isomers
are a minor component of the total TCDD/TCDF concentrations.
The relative distribution of the dioxin and furan isomers for the ESP
inlet are shown graphically in Figure 5-8. For the dioxin homologues,
hexa-CDD was the most prominent homologue at 30 mole %, while other TCDD,
penta-CDD, hepta-CDD and octa-CDD were evenly distributed among the remaining
70 mole %. Other-TCDF dominated the furan homologues at 45 mole %. Penta-CDF
and hexa-CDF were about the same at 25 mole % each, followed by hepta-CDF at 7
mole % and octa-CDF at 3 mole %.
Isomer and homologue-specific emission factors for the ESP inlet are
summarized in Table 5-10. The emission factors are reported as micrograms of
5-21
-------
TABLE 5-8. SUMMARY OF DIOXIN/FURAN EMISSIONS
DATA AT THE ESP INLET FOR SITE BLB-C
Dioxin/Furan
Isomer
Isomer Concentration in Flue Gas
Run 01
(ng/dscm)
Run 02
Run 03
Avg,
DIOXINS
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
Penta-CDD
Hexa-CDD
Hepta-CDD
Octa-CDD
Total PCDD
FURANS
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDF
Total PCDF
NR
8.10E-01
1.03E+00
1.59E+00
1.40E+00
9.35E-01
5.76E+00
NR
6.17E+00
5.89E+00
4.36E+00
1.15E+00
1.56E-01
1.77E+01
NR
3.26E-01
4.81E-01
1.02E+00
7.92E-01
6.52E-01
3.28E+00
NR
6.37E-01
3.73E-01
5.12E-01
1.86E-01
9.32E-02
1.80E+00
NR
3.86E-01
4.50E-01
1.09E+00
7.72E-01
6.75E-01
3.38E+00
NR
7.07E-01
ND( 4.18E-01)
5.14E-01
1.61E-01
ND( 9.65E-02)
1.38E+00
NR
5.07E-01
6.53E-01
1.24E+00
9.88E-01
7.54E-01
4.14E+00
NR
2.50E+00
2.09E+00
1.80E+00
5.00E-01
8.30E-02
6.97E+00
NOTE: Isomer concentrations shown are at as-measured oxygen conditions.
NO - not detected (detection limit in parentheses).
ng = 1.0E-09g
8760 operating hours per year
NR = not reported.
5-22
-------
TABLE 5-9. SUMMARY OF DIOXIN/FURAN EMISSIONS
DATA AT THE ESP INLET FOR SITE BLB-C
(Concentrations Corrected to 3% Oxygen)
Dioxin/Furan
Isomer
Isomer Concentration in Flue Gas
(ng/dsctn @ 3% oxygen)
Run 01 Run 02 Run 03
Avg.
DIOXINS
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
Penta-CDD
Hexa-CDD
Hepta-CDD
Octa-CDD
Total PCDD
FURANS
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDF
Total PCDF
NR
1.76E+00
2.23E+00
3.45E+00
3.04E+00
2.03E+00
1.25E+01
NR
1.34E+01
1.28E+01
9.46E+00
2.50E+00
3.38E-01
3.84E+01
NR
7.62E-01
1.13E+00
2.40E+00
1.85E+00
1.52E+00
7.66E+00
. NR
1.49E+00
8.71E-01
1.20E+00
4.36E-01
2.18E-01
4.21E+00
NR
7.80E-01
9.10E-01
2.21E+00
1.56E+00
1.37E+00
6.83E+00
NR
1.43E+00
ND( 8.45E-01)
1.04E+00
3.25E-01
ND( 1.95E-01)
2.80E+00
NR
1.10E+00
1.42E+00
2.68E+00 -
2.15E+00
1.64E+00
9.00E+00
NR
5.43E+00
4.55E+00
3.90E+00
'1.09E+00
1.85E-01
1.51E+01
NOTE: Isomer concentrations shown are corrected to 3% oxygen.
ND = not detected (detection limit in parentheses).
ng = 1.0E-09g
8760 operating hours per year
NR = not reported
5-23
-------
MOLE FRACTION
MOLE FRACTION
o
o '-»
tO
C
1
ID
in
i
00
en
I
a>
CL
r*-
-S
(D
s
RUN
nt
FU
Oth«r TCOF Pan
HOMOLOGUES
RUN 02
RUN 03
a>
CO
a-CDF H«pta-COF Octa COF
p
>
_1_
p
in
_l_
p
in
_1_
p
v|
_i_
~n
c
;o
>
z
i
o
^
o
r
o
c^
Tc
o m
I/)
>
-H
I
m
z
r
rn
ooopppppp
O -- N U V U '» 'vl Ci tO -
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
' 1 ' I 1 1 -i
Othar TCOD Panta COD Haxa COD Hapta COD Oota COD
DIOXIN HOMOLOGUES
1771 RUN 01 &77X RUN O2 POq RUN 03
\\V\^
Us
\\\SS]
in?
yQQq
\S^\\SS[
i^M^^il^)
^v$0$^0$l
X\\NX
W§^
CWM
^n
^^^
w?
DIOXIN HOMOLOGUES AT THE INLET
BLB-C
-------
TABLE 5-10. DIOXIN/FURAN EMISSION FACTORS
AT THE ESP INLET FOR SITE BLB-C
Dioxin/Furan
Isomer
Dioxin/Furan Emission Factors (ug/kg)
Run 01 Run 02 Run 03
Avg.
DIOXINS
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
Penta-CDD
Hexa-CDD
Hepta-CDD
Octa-CDD
Total PCDD
FURANS
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDF
Total PCDF
NR
4.68E-03
5.94E-03
9.18E-03
8.10E-03
5.40E-03
3.33E-02
NR
3.56E-02
3.40E-02
2.52E-02
6.66E-03
9.00E-04
1.02E-01
NR
2.02E-03
2.98E-03
6.35E-03
4.91E-03
4.04E-03
2.03E-02
NR
3.94E-03
2.31E-03
3.17E-03
1.15E-03
5.77E-04
1.12E-02
NR
2.29E-03
2.67E-03
6.49E-03
4.58E-03
4.01E-03
2.00E-02
NR
4.20E-03
ND( 2.48E-03)
3.05E-03
9.54E-04
ND( 5.73E-04)
8.21E-03
NR
3.00E-03
3.87E-03
7.34E-03
5.86E-03
4.48E-03
2.45E-02
NR
1.46E-02
1.21E-02
1.05E-02
2.92E-03
4.92E-04
4.06E-02
ND = not detected (detection limit in parentheses).
ug = 1.0E-06g
8760 operating hours per year
NR = not reported
5-25
-------
isomer per kilogram of black liquor fired on a dry solids basis. The average
emission factors for total PCDD and total PCDF are 0.025 ug/kg and 0.041
ug/kg, respectively. Since the black liquor feed rates are consistent between
test runs, the dioxin/furan emission factors have the same variability as the
dioxin/furan concentrations.
5.4.2 Isomer and Homoloaue Specific Data at the ESP Outlet
Isomer and homologue specific emissions concentration data at the ESP
outlet are summarized in Tables 5-11 and 5-12 for the three test runs. All
other dioxin/furan isomers were detected at the outlet to ESP except for
2378-TCDD and 2378-TCDF. Run-specific data tables showing homologue emissions
concentrations in both ng/dscm and parts-per-trillion units and homologue
emissions rates in ug/hr units are included in Appendix D.
The relative distributions of the 2,3,7,8 TCDD/TCDF isomers and the
tetra-through octa- PCDD/PCOF homologues are shown in Figure 5-9. For the
dioxin homologues, octa-CDD accounted for 50 mole% of the homologues, followed
by hepta-CDD at 30 mcle% and hexa-CDD at 10%. Penta-CDD and other TCDD were
about equal at 5% each. 2,3,7,8 TCDD was not detected. The furan homologues
were about evenly distributed at 25% for TCDF, penta-CDF, hexa-CDF and
hepta-CDF. 2,3,7,8 TCDF and octa-CDF accounted for about 5%.
Emission factors for the ESP outlet at Site BLB-C are shown in
Table 5-13. The emission factors are reported as micrograms of isomer per
kilogram of black liquor fired on a dry basis. The average emission factors
are 0 ug/kg for 2,3,7,8 TCDD, 0.016 ug/kg for total PCDD and 0.008 ug/kg for
total PCDF. The emission factors have the same variability as the
dioxin/furan concentrations since black liquor feed rates were consistent
between test runs.
5.4.3 Reduction of Dioxin/Furan Concentrations Due to the ESP.
The dioxin/furans which condense on particulate in the stack gas are
removed from the stack gas along with the particulate by the pollution control
device. The dioxin/furan removal efficiency of the control device is
calculated from the difference of the inlet and outlet concentration of each
dioxin/furan homologue divided by the inlet concentration of each homologue.
5-26
-------
TABLE 5-11.
SUMMARY OF DIOXIN/FURAN EMISSIONS
DATA AT THE ESP OUTLET FOR SITE BLB-C
Oioxin/Furan
Isomer
Isomer Concentration in Flue Gas
(ng/dscm)
Run 01 Run 02 Run 03
Avg.
DIOXINS
2378 TCDO
Other TCDD
Penta-CDD
Hexa-CDD
Hepta-CDD
Octa-CDD
Total PCDD
FURANS
ND(
N0(
9.57E-03)
4.78E-02
2.39E-02)
7.18E-02
1.20E-01
2.87E-01
5.26E-01
ND( 4.52E-03) ND( 2.51E-03)
1.24E-01 6.28E-02
2.49E-01 1.01E-01
4.75E-01 2.39E-01
1.38E+00 4.77E-01
2.71E+00 4.52E-01
4.94E+00
1.33E+00
.OOE+00
.84E-02
.16E-01
.62E-01
6.59E-01
1.15E+00
2.27E+00
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDF
Total PCDF
ND( 1.44E-02)
ND(
1.20E-01
78E-02)
1.20E-01
9.57E-02
4.78E-02
3.83E-01
1.81E-02
2.99E-01
2.49E-01
2.60E-01
3.85E-01
4.52E-02
1.26E+00
N0(
2.51E-03)
3.39E-01
4.77E-01
15E-01
77E-01
03E-02
6.03E-03
2.52E-01
2.42E-01
2.98E-01
2.86E-01
4.78E-02
1.76E+00 1.13E+00
NOTE: Isomer concentrations shown are at as-measured oxygen conditions.
NO - not detected (detection limit in parentheses).
ng - 1.0E-09g
3760 operating hours per year
5-27
-------
TABLE 5-12.
SUMMARY OF DIOXIN/FURAN EMISSIONS
DATA AT THE ESP OUTLET FOR SITE BLB-C
(Concentrations Corrected to 3% Oxygen)
Dioxin/Furan
Isomer
Isomer Concentration in Flue Gas
(ng/dscm 0 3% oxygen)
Run 01 Run 02 Run 03
Avg.
OIOXINS
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
Penta-CDD
Hexa-CDD
Hepta-CDD
Octa-CDD
Total PCDD
FURANS
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDF
Total PCDF
ND( 2.39E-02)
1.20E-01
ND( 5.98E-02)
1.79E-01
2.99E-01
7.18E-01
1.32E+00
ND( 3.59E-02)
2.99E-01
N0( 1.20E-01)
2.99E-01
2.39E-01
1.20E-01
9.57E-01
ND( 3.90E-03)
1.07E-01
2.15E-01
4.10E-01
1.19E+00
2.34E+00
4.27E+00
1.56E-02
2.58E-01
2.15E-01
2.25E-01
3.32E-01
3.90E-02
1.08E+00
ND( 6.11E-03)
1.53E-01
2.44E-01
5.81E-01
1.16E+00
1.10E+00
3.24E+00
ND( 6.11E-03)
8.25E-01
1 . 16E+00
1.25E+00
9.17E-01
1.22E-01
4.28E+00
.OOE+00
1.27E-01
1.53E-01
3.90E-01
8.84E-01
1.39E+00
2.94E+00
5.21E-03
4.61E-01
4.59E-01
5.92E-01
4.96E-01
9.36E-02
2.11E+00
NOTE: Isomer concentrations shown are corrected to 3% oxygen.
ND » not detected (detection limit in parentheses).
ng = 1.0E-09g
8760 operating hours per year
5-28
-------
z
2
DIOXIN HOMOLOGUES AT THE OUTLET
BLB-C
2378 TCDO Olh.r TCOD
\7~7\ RUN 01
H«xa-C00 H«p*a-CDO Orta-CDD
IOXIN HOMOLOGUCS
RUN 02
1X73 RUN 03
C
FURAN HOMOLOGUES AT THE OUTLET
O.9
0.3
0.7
O.S -
2378 TCOF Olh.r TCOF
RUN 01
Hnca-COF M«pic-C0r Oata-CDF
RUN O3
HOMOUOCUCS
RUN 02
Figure 5-9. Dioxin and furan homologue distributions
at the ESP Outlet at Site BLB-C.
5-29
-------
TABLE 5-13.
DIOXIN/FURAN EMISSION FACTORS
AT THE ESP OUTLET FOR SITE BLB-C
Oioxin/Furan
Isomer
Dioxin/Furan Emission Factors (ug/kg)
Run 01 Run 02 Run 03
Avg.
OIOXINS
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
Penta-CDD
Hexa-CDD
Hepta-CDD
Octa-CDO
Total PCDO
FURANS
2378 TCOF
Other TCOF
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDF
Total PCDF
ND( 6.33E-05)
3.17E-04
ND( 1.58E-04)
4.75E-04
7.92E-04
1.90E-03
3.48E-03
N0( 9.50E-OS)
7.92E-04
ND( 3.17E-04)
7.92E-04
6.33E-04
3.17E-04
2.53E-03
ND( 3.19E-05)
8.78E-04
1.76E-03
3.35E-03
9.73E-03
1.91E-02
3.49E-02
1.28E-04
2.11E-03
1.76E-03
1.84E-03
2.71E-03
3.19E-04
8.86E-03
ND( 1.76E-05)
4.40E-04
7.04E-04
1.67E-03
3.35E-03
3.17E-03
9.33E-03
ND( 1.76E-05)
2.38E-03
3.35E-03
3.61E-03
2.64E-03
3.S2E-04
1.23E-02
.OOE^OO
5.45E-04
8.20E-04
1.83E-03
4.52E-03
8.07E-03
1.59E-02
4.26E-05
1.76E-03
1.70E-03
2.08E-03
2.00E-03
3.29E-04
7.91E-03
NO - not detected (detection limit in parentheses).
ug - 1.0E-06g
8760 operating hours per year
5-30
-------
Each value is considered to have an analytical uncertainty of + 50%. An
analysis of the uncertainty of the control device efficiency (contained in
Appendix I) indicates that with a measured efficiency of greater than 66.7%,
the removal efficiency is most likely positive. With measured efficiencies
between 66.7% and -200%, a definite conclusion cannot be drawn concerning the
true removal efficiency, and below -200%, the removal efficiency is most
1ikely negative.
The measured ESP removal efficiencies for each dioxin/furan homologue at
Site BLB-C are summarized in Table 5-14. In general, the average removal
efficiencies for all the homologues indicate positive true removal
efficiency for the ESP. However, some of the homologues had measured removal
efficiencies in the inconclusive range.
5.5 BLACK LIQUOR PRECURSOR DATA
The strong black liquor fired in the Boiler BLB-C was analyzed for
chlorinated benzenes, chlorinated phenols, and total chlorides. These
compounds are believed to be dioxin/furan precursors which when present in the
feed will aid in the formation of dioxin/furans during combustion.
Table 5-15 summarizes the results of the precursor analyses. Trace
levels of penta chlorophenols were detected for Runs 02 and 03, but PCB's and
CB's were not detected. The compound-specific dioxin precursor results are
contained in Appendix C.
The average chlorides content of the black liquor was 3350 ppm. For Run
03, the total chlorides concentration was lower, which may be attributed to
the substitution of microsul for vanillin black liquor in the liquor circuit.
The strong black liquor was not analyzed for total organic halogens
(TOX). However, the fuel oil fired during Run 3 was analyzed and organic
halogens were not detected.
5.6 HC1 TRAIN CHLORIDE EMISSIONS DATA
Table 5-16 summarizes HC1 train chloride emissions data measured at the
ESP outlet sampling location. The data are reported as "front half," "back
5-31
-------
TABLE 5-14. ESP REMOVAL EFFICIENCIES AT SITE BLB-C
u _ ESP Removal Efficiency, (%)
Homologue Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Average
Dioxins
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
Penta-CDD
Hexa-CDD
Hepta-CDD
Octa-CDD
Total PCDD
Furans
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDF
Total PCDF
NR
93.2
100.0
94.8
90.2
64.6
89.4
NR
97.8
100.0
96.8
90.4
64.5
97.5
NR
86.0
81.0
82.9
35.7
-53.9
44.3
NR
82.7
75.3
81.3
23.9
82.1
74.3
NR
80.4
73.2
73.7
25.6
19.7
52.6
NR
42.3
NR
-20.2
-182.2
NR
-52.9
NR
86.5
84.7
83.8
50.5
(10.1)a
62.1
NR
74.3
87.6
(52.6)
(-22.6)
73.3
(39.6)
NR = not reported.
aValues in parentheses ( ) indicate averages calculated from positive
and negative values.
5-32
-------
TABLE 5-15. SUMMARY OF DIOXIN PRECURSOR DATA
FOR SITE BLB-C FEED SAMPLES
Precursor Categories
Total Chlorinated Benzenes
Total Chlorinated Biphenyls
Total Chlorinated Phenols
Total Chlorides
Precursor Concentration, uq/q (ppm)
Black Liquor Feed Samples
Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Average
ND ND ND ND
ND ND ND ND
ND trace3 0.01a trace
3100 4760 2180 3350
Only pentachlorophenol was detected in these samples.
ND = not detected.
5-33
-------
TABLE 5-16. CHLORIDE CONCENTRATIONS AT THE OUTLET STACK FOR SITE BLB-C
Emissions Cnnrpnt^tinn
Sample
f.nmnnnpnt
Train Total
Front Half
Back Half
Test
Run
01
02
03
Average0
01
02
03
Average
01
02
03
Average0
mg/dscm
64.6
138.4
3952.8
101.5
2.4
10.7
3.3
5.5
62.3
127.7
3949.5
95.0
pprnv3
43.9
94.0
2684.8
68.9
1.6
7.3
2.2
3.7
42.3
86.7
2682.6
64.5
mg/dscm
0 3% 02b
134.5
281.5
8132.8
208.0
3.3
21.8
6.8
10.6
85.5
259.8
8126.0
172.7
Emissions Rate
(kg/hr)
18.8
37.5
1049.3
28.2
0.7
2.9
0.9
1.5
18.1
34.6
1048.4
26.4
ppmv = parts per million chloride by volume, dry basis at actual stack 0
k concentration 2
Concentration corrected to 3% 02 using the equation:
[Cl ] @ 3% 02 = [CT], as measured x (20.9-3)/(20.9-%02)
where %02 = oxygen concentration in stack gas as measured by Radian CEM
csystem. See Table 5-5.
Average does not include Run 03.
5-34
-------
half," and "train total" chloride emissions. The front half emissions
represent chlorides captured in the probe rinse/filter fraction of the HC1
train, which may include metal chlorides contained in the particulate matter.
The back half emissions represent chlorides captured in the HC1 sample train
impingers, which would include HCL and any metal chlorides that pass through
the sample train filter. The train total emissions represent the sum of the
front half and back half emissions.
The results indicate that about 95% of the chlorides were captured in the
back half of the train. The total chlorides results for the back half of Run
03 are inconsistently high and are considered invalid. The Run 03 sample may
have been contaminated. The average emissions concentration for Runs 01 and
02 were 100 mg of chlorides per dscm of flue gas which is equivalent to 70
ppmv of chlorides. In units which can be compared with other sites, chloride
emissions were 200 mg/dscm 9 3% 0« which is equivalent to 28 kg/hr. Compared
with other Tier 4 test sites, the chlorides emissions for Site BLB-C are in
the low range. For all test sites for which HC1 sampling was performed, the
chloride emissions ranged from 2.4 to 880 mg/dscm @ 3% 02 (0.001 to 3.8
gr/dscf 9 3% 02)
5.7 DIOXIN/FURAN RESULTS OF ESP ASH
The results of the dioxin/furan analyses of the ESP ash samples are
summarized in Table 5-17. Low levels of octa-CDD, octa-CDF and hepta-CDF were
detected in the ESP ash. The concentrations of the homologues that were
detected are close to the minimum detection limits.
5.8 SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS
The soil sample was archived pending evaluation of analytical data.
5-35
-------
TABLE 5-17.
RESULTS OF DIOXIN/FURAN ANALYSIS
OF ESP ASH SAMPLES AT SITE BLB-C
Homologue
Parts per billion (ppb)
Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Average
Dioxins
All tetra-CDD
Penta-CDD
Hexa-CDD
Hepta-CDD
- Octa-CDD
Total PCDO
ND (0.02)
ND (0.02)
ND (0.01)
ND (0.03)
0.03
0.03
ND (0.01)
ND (0.01)
ND (0.02)
ND (0.02)
0.02
0.02
ND (0.01)
ND (0.01)
ND (0.01)
ND (0.01)
ND (0.03)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.02
0.02
Furans
All tetra-CDF
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDF
Total PCDF
ND (0.04)
ND (0.02)
ND (0.04)
ND (0.02)
0.02
0.02
ND (0.05)
ND (0.01)
ND (0.03)
ND (0.03)
ND (0.01)
ND
ND (0.02)
ND (0.008)
ND (0.02)
0.01
0.01
0.02
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.01
0.02
ND = not detected, minimum detection limit is shown in parenthesis.
5-36
-------
6.0 SAMPLING LOCATIONS AND PROCEDURES
6.1 GASEOUS SAMPLING
Five types of gaseous samples were taken during this test program:
Modified Method 5 (MM5), HC1, EPA Method 3, ambient XAD and continuous
monitoring (CEM). The sampling locations and methods are further discussed in
this section.
6.1.1 Gaseous Sampling Locations
6.1.1.1 Electrostatic Precipitator Outlet Exhaust Stack.
The electrostatic precipitator outlet exhaust stack sampling location is
shown as point A in Figure 4-1. This location was used for dioxin/furan
sampling and HC1 sampling using MM5 procedures described in Section 6.1.2 and
for continuous monitoring of 02, CO, C02, NOX, S02, and THC. Continuous
monitoring was performed at this location rather than at the outlet from
boiler BLB-C because the distance from the boiler outlet to any of the
potential staging locations of the Radian instrument trailer was greater .than
the length of available heat traced sample line (i.e., greater than 200 feet)
Gas velocity, molecular weight, and moisture were determined using EPA Methods
1 through 4.
At the ESP outlet stack location, four sampling ports were located around
the circumference of the circular exhaust stack, which was surrounded by a
rectangular sampling enclosure. A diagram of the exhaust stack and the
sampling enclosure is shown in Figure 6-1. The orientation of the sample
ports around the circumference of the stack is indicated in Figure 6-2. The
distance from each port to the wall of the rectangular sampling enclosure is
also shown in Figure 6-2.
The inside diameter of the stack at the plane of the sample ports was
4.3 m. (14 ft). The sample ports were located approximately 5.7 duct
diameters from the nearest downstream flow disturbance, which was the
electrostatic precipitator exhaust gas entrance to the stack. The distance
6-1
-------
Rectangular Sampling
Enclosure
approximately 1SO'
to top of stack exhaust
14'-
10
Greater than 2
Duct Olametere
Circular Exhauet
Stack
l_?*J9Pi*. Port Plane
140'
above grade
5.7
Ouct Diameter*
approximately 75' to
Stack Inlet from ESP
Figure 6-1. Electrostatic Precipitator Outlet Exhaust
Stack and Sampling Enclosure
6-2
-------
en
i
CO
Enclosure Wall
Figure 6-2. Electrostatic Precipitator Outlet Exhaust Stack Sampling Ports
(Site 08, BLB-C)
-------
from the sample ports to the nearest upstream flow disturbance (top of stack)
was greater than 2 duct diameters. A total of 24 traverse points were
specified by EPA Method 2 for velocity determination at this location. Two
sample probes of different lengths (4 ft and 10 ft.) were used at sample ports
A, B, C, and D of Figure 6-2 to access the traverse points. The number of
traverse points from each sample port is shown on Figure 6-2. Due to the
limited clearance between Port C and the sampling enclosure, only 3 of the 5
traverse points at Port C could be reached. Thus, 22 of the 24 total traverse
points were sampled at this location.
6.1.1.2 Electrostatic Precipitator Inlet Location.
The electrostatic precipitator inlet sampling location is shown as point
B in Figure 4-1. This location was used for dioxin/furan sampling using MM5
procedures described in Section 6.1.2. Gas velocity, molecular weight, and
moisture were determined using EPA Methods 1 through 4.
A diagram of the ductwork leading from the laminar air heaters (i.e.,
Boiler BLB-C exhaust) to the electrostatic precipitator inlet is shown in
Figure 6-3. The ductwork consisted of two identical rectangular sections
that direct approximately equal volumetric flowrates of boiler exhaust gas to
the East and West chambers of the electrostatic precipitator. Each of the two
rectangular ductwork sections had two sample ports on one side of the duct.
Due to logistical problems associated with moving the sampling equipment
between the two ducts, only the east side of the precipitator inlet ducting
was sampled for dioxin/furan using the MM5 train. Volumetric gas flow rate
measurements were obtained for both the east and west ducts to determine the
relative gas flow rates.
The approximate distances of the electrostatic precipitator inlet duct
sampling ports from the nearest flow disturbances are shown in Figure 6-4.
Two ports were located on each half of the inlet ductwork. The ductwork was
approximately 2.0 m (6.7 ft) wide and 4.1 m (13.6 ft) deep, with an equivalent
duct diameter of approximately 2.7 m (9.0 ft). The ports were located on the
narrow side of the duct, and were about 0.5 duct diameters from the nearest
upstream flow disturbance (bend in duct) and 0.7 duct diameters from the
6-4
-------
Boiler
Exhaust
Gas
CTl
I
U1
East Halt
of
Prcclpltator
West Half
of
Praclpltator
Figure 6-3. Electrostatic Precipitator Inlet Ductwork (Site 08, BLB-C)
-------
522^^^^^^^^
01
o
O
0)
o
5
£2
_l
C2
CO
o
oo
00
O
Q.
C7>
c
o>
O
4-J
rO
OJ
s_
Q.
CJ
I/I
o
u
OJ
I
U3
OJ
6-6
-------
nearest downstream flow disturbance (ESP inlet). A total of 24 traverse
points were specified by EPA Method 2 for velocity determination at this
location. However, due to the location of the existing sample ports, the
depth of the duct, and the breakage potential of glass probes longer than
about 3.0 (10 ft), only 20 points were traversed for the MM5/dioxin sampling
at the east duct and for the velocity determinations at both ducts. This was
the maximum number of traverse points that could be accessed in the ducts
using a conventional 10 foot probe/pitot assembly. The sampling approach was
considered adequate for semi-quantitative determination of dioxin/furan
concentrations and gas flow rates at this location.
6.1.1.3 Laminar Air Heater Ambient Air Intake Area.
Ambient air sampling was performed near the laminar air heater (LAH) air
intake point using ambient XAD trains. The ambient XAD trains were stationed
inside the recovery boiler building at the level of the LAH air intake point.
Air entering the LAH's ultimately serves as combustion air for boiler BLB-C.
Tramp air also enters the exhaust gas stream at this location. Based on
oxygen monitoring data obtained by the host plant prior to the LAH's and CEM
data obtained by Radian downstream of the LAH's, tramp air is estimated to
account for as much as 50 percent of the exhaust gas stream at the MM5/ dioxin
sampling locations.
6.1.2 Gaseous Sampling Procedures
Gaseous sampling procedures used during the testing at Site BLB-C are
listed in Table 6-1. These procedures are discussed in detail in the Tier 4
Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). A brief description of each method and
any necessary deviations from the procedures outlined in the QAPP are provided
in the following section.
6.1.2.1 Modified Method 5 (MM5K
Gas sampling for dioxins and furans was conducted according to the most
current draft (October 1984) of the ASME chlorinated organic compound sampling
protocol. This sampling method is a modified version of EPA Method 5 that
6-7
-------
TABLE 6-1. SUMMARY OF GAS SAMPLING METHODS FOR SITE BLB-C
Sample Location
Sample Type
or Parameter
Sample
Collection Method
ESP outlet exhaust stack
(Point A on Figure 4-1)
ESP inlet
(Point D on Figure 4-1)
Laminar air heater air
intake point
Dioxin/furan
Volumetric flow
Molecular weight
Moisture
HC1
CO, CO-, 02, SO-,
NO , Snd THC *
monitoring
Dioxin/furan
Volumetric flow
Molecular weight
Moisture
Ambient
combustion air
Modified EPA Method 5
EPA Method 2
EPA Method 3
EPA Method 4
HC1 Train
Continuous monitors
Modified EPA Method 5
EPA Method 2
EPA Method 3
EPA Method 4
Ambient XAD train
6-8
-------
includes a solid sorbent module for trapping vapor phase organics. The MM5
sampling train was used to collect samples at the electrostatic precipitator
outlet exhaust stack and at the electrostatic precipitator inlet location. A
total of three MM5 test runs were conducted at the two sampling locations,
with one test run being conducted per test day. The MM5/dioxin samples at the
electrostatic precipitator outlet exhaust stack were collected isokinetically
during 240 minute on-line sampling periods to provide sample train gas volumes
ranging from 4.0 to 4.4 dscm (140 to 156 dscf). The MM5/dioxin samples at the
electrostatic precipitator inlet ductwork were collected isokinetically during
200 minute on-line sampling periods to provide sample train gas volumes
ranging from 3.1 to 3.2 dscm (110 to 114 dscf). Following sample recovery,
the various components of the sample (filter, solvent rinses, sorbent trap,
etc.) were sent to the EPA's Troika laboratories to quantify the 2,3,7,-TCDD,
tetra- through octa- dioxin homologues, and tetra- through octa- furan
homologues present in the samples.
A schematic diagram of the MM5 sampling train is shown in Figure 6-5.
Flue gas is pulled from the stack through a nozzle and a heated glass probe.
Parti oil ate matter is removed from the gas stream by means of a glass fiber
filter housed in a teflon-sealed glass filter holder maintained at 248 ± 25°F.
The gas passes through a sorbent trap similar to that illustrated in Figure
6-6 for removal of organic constituents. The trap consists of separate
sections for cooling the gas stream and for adsorbing the organic compounds on
0
Amberlite XAD-2 resin (XAD). A chilled impinger train following the sorbent
trap is used to remove water from the flue gas, and a dry gas meter is used to
measure the sample gas volume.
Modifications to the ASME protocol that were instituted for this test
site include the following:
1. Sample recovery was modified to include water in the sample train
rinsing scheme. Water, acetone, and methylene chloride were used in
series to recover the probe, back half/coil, and first impinger
samples. Previous black liquor boiler sampling experience has shown
that water is necessary because the black liquor boiler particulate
is soluble in water but insoluble in acetone.
6-9
-------
Filter Holder
Thermocouple
Type Pltot **""
tf
Probe
Stack
en
i
Thermocouple
yclone
Thermometer
^Check Valve
Heated Zone
I
ist
*HJ
LJ
..
Manometer
Water Knockout
Reclrculatlon Pump Implnger
ThermometersQ Q *tt
Orifice
Main Valve
Dry Gas Alr-Tlght
Meter Pump
Vacuum Line
Figure 6-5. Modified Method 5 Train
-------
Jl
28/12
I
Condenser Coil
Ji 28/1:
XAO-2
Trap "^
Coarse Frit
Thermocouple Well
"^^^M mmmm^
7 V
28/12
Figure 6-6. Adsorbent Sampling System
6-11
-------
2. The probe brush is specified in the ASME protocol as being inert
material with a stainless steel handle. To ensure cleanliness, a
separate nylon bristle brush attachable to a stainless steel handle
was used for each probe cleaning.
6.1.2.2 HCL Determination.
HC1 concentrations in the electrostatic precipitator outlet exhaust stack
were determined using another modification of EPA Method 5. The sample train
components and operation were identical to those' of Method 5 with the
following exceptions:
1. No knockout impinger was used.
2. Water in the first two impingers was replaced with 0.1M KOH.
3. Sampling was single point isokinetic with the nozzle placed at
points in the stack with approximate average velocity.
4. The moisture/KOH in the impingers was saved for laboratory analysis
by ion chromatography for total chlorides. The impinger catch was
analyzed by Radian's Austin, Texas laboratory.
Recovery of the HC1 train provided a sample consisting of three components:
probe rinse, filter, and back-half rinse/impinger catch.
A total of three HC1 train runs were performed at the electrostatic
precipitator outlet stack sampling location. The HC1 samples were collected
over on-line sample times of 120 minutes at a sample flow rate of
approximately 0.02 dscm (0.6 dscfm).
6.1.2.3 Volumetric Gas Flow Rate Determination
Volumetric gas flow rates were determined in conjunction with the
MM5/dioxin sampling at the electrostatic precipitator inlet and outlet
sampling locations using EPA Method 2. Based on this method, the volumetric
gas flow rates was determined by measuring the average velocity of the flue
gas and the cross-sectional area of the duct. The average flue gas velocity
was calculated from the average gas velocity pressure across an S-type pi tot
tube, the average flue gas temperature, the wet molecular weight, and the
absolute static pressure.
6-12
-------
6.1.2.4 Flue Gas Moisture Determination.
The moisture content of the flue gas was determined at the electrostatic
precipitator inlet and outlet sampling locations using EPA Method 4. Based on
this method, a measured volume of particulate-free gas was pulled through a
chilled impinger train. The quantity of condensed water was determined
gravimetrically and then related to the volume of gas sampled to determine the
moisture content.
6.1.2.5 Flue Gas Molecular Weight Determination.
The integrated sampling techniques described in EPA Method 3 was used at
the electrostatic precipitator inlet and outlet sampling locations to obtain a
composite flue gas sample for fixed gas (CL, CO-, N-) analysis. The fixed gas
analysis was used to determine the molecular weight of the gas stream. A
small diaphragm pump and a stainless steel probe were used to extract single
p
point flue gas samples. The samples were collected in a Tedlar bag.
Moisture was removed from the gas sample by a water-cooled condenser so that
the fixed gas analysis was on a dry basis.
The composition of the gas sample was determined using a Shimadzu Model
3BT analyzer instead of the Fyrite or Orsat analyzer prescribed in EPA Method
3. The Shimadzu instrument employs a gas chromatograph and a thermal
conductivity detector to determine the fixed gas composition of the sample.
6.1.2.6 Continuous Monitors.
Continuous monitoring was performed at the electrostatic precipitator
outlet sampling location for 02, C02, CO, NOX, S02, and THC throughout the 4
to 6-hour period that MM5 dioxin sampling was being conducted each test day.
The primary objectives of the continuous monitoring were to observe
fluctuations in flue gas parameters and to provide an indication of combustion
conditions. Sample acquisition was accomplished using an in-stack filter
probe and a 150 ft length of heat-traced TeflonR sample line connected to a
mobile laboratory. The heat-traced sample line was maintained at a
temperature of at least 120°C (250°F) to prevent condensation in the sample
line. The stack gas sample was drawn through the in-stack filter and
6-13
-------
heat-traced sample line using pumps located in the mobile laboratory. Sample
gas to be analyzed for CO, C02, 02, S02, and NOX was pumped through a sample
gas conditioner, which consisted of an ice bath and knockout trap. The sample
gas conditioner removes moisture and thus provides a dry gas stream for
analysis. A separate unconditioned gas stream was supplied to the THC
analyzer for analysis on a wet basis.
An Anarad Model 412 non-dispersive infrared (NDIR) analyzer was used to
measure CO and C02; a Beckman Model 755 paramagnetic analyzer was used to
measure 02; a Teco Model 10 chemiluminescent analyzer was used to measure NO ;
a Teco Model 40 pulsed fluorescence analyzer was used to measure S02; and a X
Beckman Model 402 flame ionization analyzer was used to measure THC.
6.2 LIQUID SAMPLING
Several types of liquid samples were obtained during this test program:
strong black liquor, white liquor, weak black liquor, vanillin black liquor
and make-up water. The corresponding sampling locations are shown on Figure
4-1 as points C, H, 6, F and K, respectively. During Run 3, microsul and
fuel oil were also sampled.
6-2.1 Strong Black Liquor Sampling
Strong black liquor samples were taken during each run directly from the
feed guns that introduce the liquor into the boiler. The host site performs
periodic liquor sampling at this location for solids content analysis. A
dipper-type sampler was used by plant personnel to obtain hourly strong black
liquor samples during the test program.
Three identical composite strong black liquor samples were obtained
during each of the three tests: a 1 liter composite for dioxin/furan analysis,
another 1-liter composite for dioxin precursor analysis, and a 125 ml
composite for total chlorine analysis. The composite strong black liquor
samples for each run were comprised of hourly grab samples from the feed guns.
It was necessary to heat the running hourly sample composite to prevent the
sample from solidifying prior to taking the final sample aliquots. This was
6-14
-------
accomplished by wrapping the sample composite bottle with rubber-coated heat
tape.
6.2.2 Fuel Oil Sampling
Fuel oil samples were taken only during Run 03, since no fuel oil was
fired during Runs 01 and 02. The samples were taken twice during the run by
plant personnel, using a tap valve in the fuel oil transfer line.
Three identical 125 ml composite fuel oil samples were prepared: one
sample was for dioxin/furan analysis, one sample for dioxin precursor
analysis, and one sample for total chlorine analysis.
6.2.3 Auxiliary Black Liquor Circuit Sampling
Samples of white liquor, weak black liquor, vanillin black liquor,
microsul, make-up water and caustic were obtained during some or all of the
test runs to indicate the relative amounts of chlorine entering the black
liquor circuit through various input sources. One 125 ml composite sample of
each stream was obtained during each test. Individual samples were taken
twice during each test run, and the composite samples were prepared
accordingly. The samples were analyzed for total chlorine content only. The
chlorine-content data were used in conjunction with mass flow data to
determine the relative amounts of chlorine associated with each potential
source of chlorine input to the black liquor circuit.
White liquor, weak black liquor, and make-up water samples were taken
twice during each test run. The white liquor samples were taken from a
short-term storage tank using a dipper-type sample. Weak black liquor samples
were taken from a sample tap in a section of the weak black liquor transfer
line upstream of the vanillin black liquor mix point. Make-up water samples
were taken directly from spray nozzles on the pulp washer line.
Vanillin black liquor samples were taken only during Runs 01 and 02,
since no vanillin black liquor was being added to the liquor circuit during
Run 03. These samples were taken from a sample tap in the vanillin black
liquor transfer line.
6-15
-------
Microsul samples were taken only during Run 03, since no microsul was
being added to the liquor circuit during Runs 01 and 02. The microsul samples
were taken from a sample tap in the microsul transfer line.
6.3 SOLID SAMPLING
Three types of solid samples were obtained at Site BLB-C: electrostatic
precipitator catch, make-up lime, and soils from plant property. The sampling
locations and methods are discussed below.
6.3.1 Electrostatic Precipitator Catch Sampling
Samples of electrostatic precipitator catch were obtained twice during
each test run from the screw conveyor serving the precipitator. Approximately
250 grams of dry catch were obtained at the beginning and end of each test
run. The two samples were composited in a 950 ml bottle at the end of the
test run and submitted for dioxin/furan analysis.
6.3.2 Make-up Lime Sampling
Samples of make-up lime were obtained twice during each run to determine
the amount of chloride entering the liquor circuit with the make-up lime.
Approximately 250 grams of pebble lime were obtained at the beginning and each
of each test run. The two samples were composited at the end of the test run,
and a portion of the sample was submitted for total chloride analysis.
6.3.3 Soil Sampling
A single composite soil sample comprised of 10 individual soil samples
was obtained at Site BLB-C. Soil sampling protocol for Tiers 3, 5, 6, and 7
of the National Dioxin Study are specified in the document, "Sampling Guidance
Manual for the National Dioxin Study." A similar protocol was used for soil
sampling at this test site. A total of 10 soil sampling locations were
selected on plant property surrounding the black liquor/power complex. The 10
individual soil sampling locations are shown in Figure 6-7. Soil samples were
collected by forcing a bulb planter into the soil to a depth of 3 inches. The
6-16
-------
CTl
I
s=M^^S^^==e£S:
'IF ! i. r "'1 - «)( i
0 © I ' ' ll .1
^w_=hDCjT>o «:oo oo>:<' -j
:.l
«-»"»
MIHIM AM (CMIIIIM
MM! « MCO»f«* Ml*
WWtllHI
CHIT tlMAM
1NO* AM) »10MI
HMHD FOIL tIMAU
AMHOUtt
CMIH »UILMH«
fmuUI PMMAJI* CLA(
OM moll CLAMWH
ACfMMU lUMI AlUtlW
MCOHOMn
B.KIMCM.
MIIMIIIt STMIMt
M.UMI ifMIIMM tUM.ni
pMHAIIt l*t MAIKH.
IMIIINt* llflM
. MO. 4 MCOVUIV MMUI
OOOCH» IAI4XA*
MOO ruit STOMMC
MTLUIHI Lirf >TAf
UW.OAOUM SVtTIH
Figure 6-7. Soil Sampling Locations
-------
soil samples were then composited in a Tier 4 cleaned stainless steel bucket.
Five hundred grams of the composite was placed in a 950 ml glass amber bottle
and returned to Radian/RTP for archiving.
6-18
-------
7.0 ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES
Laboratory procedures used to quantify dioxins/furans and dioxin/furan
precursors in the Tier 4 samples are described in this section. Analyses for
dioxins/furans were performed by EPA's Troika laboratories. The procedures
used for these analyses are described in detail in the Analytical Procedures
and QA Plan for the Analysis of Tetra through Octa CDD's and CDF's in. Samples
from Tier 4 Combustion and Incineration Processes (addendum to
EPA/600/3-85/019, April 1985).
Black liquor boiler feed samples from Site BLB-C were analyzed to
determine concentrations of chlorinated phenols (CP), chlorobenzenes (CB),
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB's), total organic halogen (TOX), and total
chlorine. Procedures used for these analyses are detailed in Section 7.2.
7.1 DIOXINS/FURANS
The analytical procedures described in this section were used for the
determination of PCDD and PCDF in stack effluent samples (MM5). Samples
consisting of organic solvents, aqueous solutions and solids were prepared for
analysis using slightly different procedures. The organic solvent samples
consisted of rinses from the MM5 probe, nozzle, filter housing and condenser
coil. Aqueous solutions consisted of impinger catch and solid samples
including filters, and XAD resin. Isotopically-labeled surrogate compounds
were added to all samples prior to extraction to allow determination of method
efficiency and for quantification purposes.
Organic liquid samples (acetone and hexane or methylene chloride) were
concentrated using a nitrogen blowdown apparatus. The residue, which
contained particulates from the train probe and nozzle, was combined with the
filter and handled as a solid sample. Solid samples were extracted with
benzene in a Soxhlet apparatus for a period of at least 16 hours. The sample
was then concentrated by nitrogen blowdown and subjected to chromatographic
cleanup procedures.
Aqueous solutions were extracted with hexane by vigorous shaking for a
three hour period. This extraction procedure was repeated three times, with
the organic fractions ultimately being combined and concentrated for
chromatographic cleanup.
7-1
-------
The cleanup procedure involved using liquid chromatographic columns to
separate the compounds of interest from other compounds present in the
samples. Four different types of columns were used: a combination acid and
base modified silica gel column, a basic alumina column, a PX-21 carbon/eelite
545 column and a silica/diol micro column. These were used in successive
steps, with the last two being used only if necessary.
The cleaned samples were analyzed using high resolution gas
chromatography/high resolution mass spectrometry (GC/MS). Conditions for the
analyses were as follows:
Gas Chromatograph - Injector configured for capillary column, split!ess
injection; injector temperature 280°C; helium carrier gas at 1.2 ml/min;
initial column temperature 100°C: final column temperature 240°C; interface
temperature 270°C.
Mass Spectrometer - Varian/MAT Model 311A; electron energy 70ev; filament
emission IMA; mass resolution 8,000 to 10,000; ion source temperature 270°C.
7.2 DIOXIN/FURAN PRECURSORS
Feed samples for Site BLB-C were analyzed by Radian/RTP for chlorophenols
(CP), chlorobenzenes (CB) and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB's) by GC/MS;
and total chlorine by Parr Bomb combustion followed by ion chromatography.
Analytical procedures are discussed in the following sections.
7.2.1 GC/MS Analyses
The analytical procedures used for determining CP, CB, and PCS
concentrations in feed samples are modified versions of procedures typically
used for the analysis of MM5 train components.
7.2.1.1 Sample Preparation
A flow chart for the sample preparation procedure used for Site BLB-C
feed samples is shown in Figure 7-1. The first step involved adding 200 mi of
7-2
-------
2Sg Sample
Add 200ml. MeOH
1.0 mL Saie/Neutral Surrogate*
1.0 mL Acid Surrogate*
Sonicate with Methanol
tor 30 minute*
Filter thru tuchner and add
SS mL MeClj and Olatllled Mj
Extract 3x with SO mL UeCI2
In Separatory Funnel
Aqueou*
Organic
Dl*card
Aauoou* Layer
Adjuat to pH 2 with HCl;
Extract with SO mL MeClj (3i)
Olacard Acid and
Aqueou* Layer*
Olacard
Aqueou* Layer
Cleanup with MaMCO3(2x)
Add 30 mL Concentrated
Shake 4 minute*: Alternate with
30 mL Claimed HjO;
Repeat until Acid la clear
liter MeCt* thru HaaSO4 filter
[ "liter through MaaSO4 Filter
Add 10 mL Senxenc;
Concentrate to 1 mL
Add 10 mL Hexanea;
Concentrate to 1 mL
To 1 mL lenxene Add:
2.0 mL lao Octane
2.0 mL Acetonltrlle
SO uL yrldhte
20 uL Acetic Anhydride
Pro-wet Column
with 20 mL
Hexanea
Chromatography Column with:
1.0 g Silica
2.0 g 33% NaOH Silica
2.0 g Silica
Put In eO~C HjO tath for
IS minute*, Shaking
3O aeeonde every 2 minute*
Elut* with go mL Hexane*;
Concentrate to 1 mL
Mini-Column with 1.0 g Alumina
Add 6 mL Of 0.01 (t
Shake 2 mlnutee
Clute with 20 mL SO/SO
MeClj/Hexane*
Add Ouantltatlon Standarda:
Concentrate to 1 mL
QC/MS Anelyaia
Figure 7-1.
Sample preparation flow diagram
Site BLB-C precursor analyses
for
7-3
-------
methanol to the sample. The next step in the procedure involved adding
labeled surrogate compounds to provide a measure of extraction method
efficiency. The next step involved sonicating the sample for 30 minutes. The
sonicated sample was. filtered and rinsed with 85 ml MeCK and distilled H20.
The filtrate was extracted three times with 50 ml MeCl2 in a separatory funnel
and the resulting aqueous and organic fractions saved for derivatization
and/or further cleanup. These procedures involve initial extraction of the
sample with an appropriate solvent, preliminary separation of the compounds of
interest by solvent partitioning and liquid chromatography, and analysis of
the processed fractions. Solutions containing CB and PCB are injected
directly into the GC/MS, and solutions containing CP are derivatized prior to
injection. Details on the procedures used for Site 05 samples are provided in
the sections below.
The aqueous fraction (or acids portion) was acidified to pH2 with HC1 and
then extracted three times with MeCl2, then two times with NaHCCL. The MeCl?
from this extraction was dried with anhydrous Na2S04, exchanged to benzene,
and concentrated using a nitrogen blowdown apparatus. Acetylation of any CP
present in the sample involved the following steps:
1. Add 2.0 mL iso-octane, 2.0 mL acetonitrile, 50 uL pyridine, and 20
uL acetic anhydride to the extract. Put the test tube containing
the extract in a 60°C water bath for 15 minutes, shaking 30 seconds
every 2 minutes.
2. Add 6 ml of 0.01 N H3P04 to the test tube and agitate the sample for
2 minutes on a wrist action shaker.
3. Remove the organic layer and add the quantisation standard.
Concentrate the sample in a Reacti-Vial at room temperature (using
prepurified NZ) to 1 mL prior to GC/MS analysis.
Cleanup of the organic (or base/neutrals) layer from the initial MeCU
extraction involved successively washing the extract with concentrated H^SO.
and deionized water. The acid or water was added in a 30 ml portion and the
sample was shaken for two minutes. After the aqueous and organic layers were
completely separated, the aqueous or acid layer was discarded.
7-4
-------
The acid washing procedure was repeated until the acid layer was colorless.
The sample was then dried with anhydrous Na2S04, exchanged into hexanes and
concentrated. Final cleanup of the sample by column chromatography involved
the following procedure.
A glass macro-column, 20 mm o.d. x 230 mm in length, taper to 6 mm o.d.
on one end was prepared. The column was packed with a plug of silanized glass
wool, followed successively by 1.0 g silica, 2.0 g silica containing 33% (w/w)
1 M NaOH, and 2.0 g silica. The concentrate was quantitatively transferred to
the column and eluted with 90 ml hexanes. The entire eluate was collected and
concentrated to a volume of 1 ml in a centrifuge tube, as above.
A disposable liquid chromatography mini-column was constructed by cutting
off a 5-mL Pyrex disposable pipette at the 2.0 mL mark and packing the lower
portion of the tube with a small plug of silanized glass wool, followed by 1 g
of Woehlm basic alumina, which has been previously activated for at least 16
hours at 600°C in a muffle furnace and cooled in a desiccator for 30 minutes
just before use. The concentrated eluate from above was quantitatively
transferred onto the liquid chromatography column, and the centrifuge tube was
rinsed consecutively with two 0.3-mL portions of a 3 percent MeCU'hexanes
solution, and the rinses were transferred to the chromatography column.
The column was eluted with 20 ml of a 50 percent (v/v) MeCK:hexanes, and
the elute was retained. The retained fraction was concentrated to a volume of
approximately 1 ml by heating the tubes in a water bath while passing a stream
of prepurified N~ over the solutions. The quantitation standard was added and
the final volume was adjusted to 1.0 ml prior to GC/MS analysis.
7.2.1.2 Analysis
Analyses for CP, CB and PCBs present in the feed sample extracts were
"performed using a Finnigan Model 5100 mass spectrometer using selected ion
monitoring. A fused silica capillary column was used for chromatographic
separation of the compounds of interest. Analytical conditions for the GC/MS
analysis are shown in Table 7-1.
Tuning of the GC/MS was performed daily as specified in the Tier 4 QA
Project Plan. An internal standard calibration procedure was used for sample
quantitation. Compounds of interest were calibrated against a fixed
7-5
-------
TABLE 7-1. INSTRUMENT CONDITIONS FOR GC/MS PRECURSOR ANALYSES
Column
Injector Temperature
Separator Oven Temperature
Column Head Pressure
He flow rate
GC program
Emission Current
Electron Energy
Injection Mode
Mode
Chlorobenzenes/
Polychlorinated biphenyls Chlorophenols
30 m WB DB-5 (1.0 u film
thickness) fused silica
capillary
290°C
290°C
9 psi
1 ml/min
40(4)-290°C,
10%in & hold
0.50 ma
70 ev
290°C
290°C
9 psi
1 mL/min
40(1)-29XTC,
12°/min & hold
0.50 ma
70 ev
Splitless 0.6 min, then 10:1 split
Electron ionization, Selected Ion
Monitoring
'-6
-------
concentration of either djg-chrysene (CB, PCB) or dg-naphthalene (CP).
Compounds of the calibration solution are shown in Table 7-2. For multi-point
calibrations, this solution was injected at levels of 10, 50, 100, and 150
ng/mL.
Compound identification was confirmed by comparison of chromatographic
retention times and mass spectra of unknowns with retention times and mass
spectra for reference compounds. Since the selected ion monitoring technique
was necessary for the types of samples analyzed, care was taken to monitor a
sufficiently wide mass region to avoid the potential for reporting false
positives.
The instrument detection limit was estimated to be approximately 500
picograms on column. For a 50 g sample and 100 percent recovery of the
analyte, this corresponds to a feed sample detection limit of 10 ppb.
7.3 TOX ANALYSIS
Boiler feed samples were analyzed for total organic halide (TOX) by
short-column GC and a Hall detector (GC/Hall). Samples were extracted with
benzene for at least 16 hours in a Soxhlet apparatus. The extracts were
washed three times with 100 ml portions of reagent-grade water concentrated to
10 ml.
An attempt to use a fused silica capillary column to separate surrogates
from target compounds was unsuccessful due to the complexity of the sample
constituents. Determinations for TOX were therefore performed on samples
without surrogates and no measure of extraction efficiency is available.
Instrument conditions are shown in Table 7-3. Sample quantitation was
based on an average response factor developed from a mixture of chlorinated
benzenes and brominated biphenyls. Individual CP, CB and PCB's were also
injected at various concentrations to develop a calibration curve for
comparison to the mixture response factors.
7.4 TOTAL CHLORINE ANALYSIS
Total chlorine concentrations in feed samples were determined by Parr
Bomb combustion followed by ion chromatography (1C). A 0.5 g sample was
7-7
-------
TABLE 7-2. COMPONENTS OF THE CALIBRATION SOLUTION
Base/Neutrals
4-chlorobiphenyl
3,3'-dichlorobiphenyl
2,4',5-trichlorobiphenyl
3,3'4,4'-tetrachlorobiphenyl
2,2',6,6'-tetrach1orobiphenyl
2,2,4,5,6-pentachlorobiphenyl
2,2',4,4',5,5'-hexachlorobiphenyl
2,2',3,4,4',5',6-heptachlorobiphenyl
2,2',3,3',4,4',5,5'-octachlorobiphenyl
2,2',3,3',4,4',5,6,6'-nonach1orobiphenyl
decachlorobiphenyl
p-dlchlorobenzene
1,2,4-trichlorobenzene
1,2,3,5-tetrachlorobenzene
pentachlorobenzene
hexachlorobenzene
d4-l,4-dichlorobenzene (SS)
3-bromobiphenyl (SS)
2,2' ,5,3'-tetrabromobiphenyl (SS)
2,2',4,4',6,6'-hexabrbmobiphenyl (SS)
octachloronaphthalene (QS)2
d,g-phenanthrene (QS)
d^-chrysene (QS)
Acids
2,5-dichlorophenol
2,3-dichlorophenol
2,6-dichlorophenol
3,5-dichlorophenol
3,4-dichlorophenol
2,3,5-trichlorophenol
2,3,6-trichlorophenol
3,4,5-trichlorophenol
2,4,5-trichlorophenol
2,3,4-trichlorophenol
2,3,5,6-tetrachlorophenol
pentachlorophenol
dg-phenol (SS)
d.-2-chlorophenol (SS)
Cg-pentachlorophenol (SS
dg-naphthalene (QS)
2,4,6-tribromophenol (QS)
djQ-phenanthrene (QS)
d12chrysene (QS)
1
Surrogate standard.
Quantitation standard.
7-8
-------
TABLE 7-3. ANALYTICAL CONDITIONS FOR TOX ANALYSIS
Hall Detector Conditions
Reactor temperature - 850 C
Solvent - n-propanol
Hydrogen flow rate - 35 mL/min
GC Conditions (Varian 3700)
Injection volume (1 - 5 uL)
Helium carrier gas flow rate - 60 mL/min
Column - 3-ft packed column with 1 in 10% 0V 101
Column temperature - 200°C isothermal
7-9
-------
placed in the Parr Bomb with 10 ml of a 50 g/L Na2C03 solution. After
combustion of the samples according to standard procedures (ASTM 2015), the
contents of the bomb were rinsed into a 100 ml flask and diluted to 100 ml.
The resulting solution was analyzed for chloride concentration (CT) by 1C
using standard anion conditions. For samples difficult to combust (such as
sludges), 25 drops of paraffin oils were added to the bomb prior to
combustion.
7-10
-------
8.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE/ QUALITY CONTROL (QA/QC)
This section summarizes results of the quality assurance and quality
control (QA/QC) activities for field sampling and laboratory analyses for
Site BLB-C. The flue gas and ESP ash dioxin/furan data for Site BLB-C were
within the QC specifications presented in the Tier 4 QAPP. Surrogate
recoveries for all the samples were within the specified limits of 50 to 120
percent for labeled TCDD's and 40 to 120 percent for hepta- and octa-CDD's.
The results of the analysis of the fortified laboratory QC sample were within
25 percent of the true values for all homologues except for hepta-CDD/CDF.
The measured values for the hepta homologues were within 50 percent of the
measured values.
The dioxin/furan precursor analysis of the feed samples was not as
accurate as the dioxin/furan homologue analysis. Surrogate recoveries of the
base neutrals fraction were generally within the specified QC limits of 50 +
100 percent; however, the surrogate acid fraction recoveries were well below
the limits. This was due to difficulties with the clean up and extraction of
the feed samples. In spite of the low recoveries of the acid fractions, the
dioxin/furan precursor results are considered a reasonable approximation of
the true precursor concentration in the feed samples.
The following sections summarize the results of all Site BLB-C QA/QC
activities. Manual gas sampling methods are considered in Section 8.1 and
continuous monitoring and molecular weight determinations are considered in
Section 8.2. The laboratory analyses QA/QC are summarized in Section 8.3.
8.1 MANUAL GAS SAMPLING
Manual gas sampling methods at Site BLB-C included Modified Method 5
(MM5), HC1, EPA Methods 1 through 4, and ambient air/XAD sampling. These
methods are discussed in Section 6.0. Quality assurance and quality control
(QA/QC) activities for the manual sampling methods centered around (1)
equipment calibration, (2) glassware pre-cleaning, (3) procedural QC checks
and (4) sample custody procedures. Key activities and QC results in each of
these areas are discussed in this section. Also discussed are problems
encountered that may have affected data quality.
3-1
-------
8.1.1 Equipment Calibration and Glassware Preparation
Pre-test calibrations or inspections were conducted on pitot tubes,
sampling nozzles, temperature sensors and analytical balances. Both pre-test
and post-test calibrations were performed on the dry gas meters. All of the
field test equipment met the calibration criteria specified in the Tier 4
Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). Differences in the pre-test and
post-test dry gas meter calibrations were less than 2 percent (5).
A pre-cleaning procedure was used for all sample train glassware and
sample containers. This cleaning procedure, which is outlined in Table 8-1,
was implemented to minimize the potential for sample contamination with
substances that could interfere with the dioxin/furan analysis. To minimize
the potential for contamination in the field, all sample train glassware was
capped with foil prior to use and stored in a dust controlled environment.
Sample train assembly and recovery were performed in the on-site laboratory
trailer.
8-1.2 Procedural QC Activities/Manual Gas Sampling
Procedural QC activities for dioxin/furan, HC1 and ambient air sampling
focused on:
- Visual equipment inspections,
- Preparation of sample train blanks,
- Ensuring the proper location and number of traverse points
(dioxin/furan and HC1 sampling)
- Conducting pre-test and post-test sample train leak checks,
- Maintaining proper temperature at the filter housing, sorbent trap
and impinger train
- Maintaining isokinetic sampling rates (dioxin/furan and HC1 sampling)
- Recording all data on Preformatted field data sheets.
Site-specific observations related to these areas are discussed below.
The electrostatic precipitator inlet and outlet sampling locations at
Site BLB-C were not ideal for traverse sampling because of traverse point
access limitations. Details of the sampling locations were discussed in
Section 6.1.1. At the inlet location, the first 10 traverse points at each of
the two sample ports on the east half of the inlet duct were sampled. The
8-2
-------
TABLE 8-1. GLASSWARE PRECLEANING PROCEDURE
NOTE: USE DISPOSABLE GLOVES AND ADEQUATE VENTILATION
R o
1. Soak all glassware in hot soapy water (alconox ) 50 C or higher.
2. Distilled/deionized H20 rinse (X3).a
3. Chromerge rinse if glass, otherwise skip to 5.
4. High purity liquid chromatography grade H^O rinse (X3).
5. Acetone rinse (X3), (pesticide grade).
6. Methylene chloride rinse (X3), (pesticide grade).
7. Cap glassware with clean glass plugs or methylene chloride rinsed
aluminum foils.
a(X3) - three times.
3-3
-------
last two sample points at each port were not sampled because they could not be
reached using a 10 ft sample probe. The 10 ft probe was considered the best
compromise between probe length and probe linear breakage considerations for
this test location.
At the outlet location, 22 of the 24 traverse points were sampled. Two
traverse points at Ports C (Figure 6-3} could not be reached because of the
limited clearance (4 ft) between Port C and the wall of the sampling
enclosure.
Results of the isokinetic calculations for the MM5 and HC1 sampling runs
are shown in Table 8-2. The average isokinetic sampling rate was within the
QA objective of 100 ± 10 percent for each run except for the second MM5 run at
the precipitator outlet location (Run 08-MM5-PO-2), which was at 114.1 percent
isokinetic. This minor deviation from the QA objective does not significantly
affect the data quality for the test run. The average isokinetic sampling
rate was back within the QA objective for the third MM5 run at the
precipitator outlet location.
Initial, final and port change leak checks for the MM5 and HC1 sample
trains were acceptable for all of the test runs. None of the reported sample
volumes required correction for sample train leakage. All leak check data are
noted on the MM5 and HC1 field data sheets.
8.1.3 Sample Custody
Sample custody procedures used during this program emphasized
documentation of the samples collected and the use of chain-of-custody records
for samples transported to the laboratory for analysis. Steps taken to
identify and document samples collected included labeling each sample with a
unique alphanumeric code and logging the sample in a master logbook. All
samples shipped to Troika or returned to Radian-RTP were also logged on
chain-of-custody records that were signed upon receipt at the laboratory.
Each sample container lid was individually sealed to ensure that samples were
not tampered with.
One or more of the samples from Site BLB-C were reported by Troika to
have leaked during shipment to the laboratory. This resulted in sample labels
from nine samples being partially removed, and sample labels from two samples
8-4
-------
TABLE 8-2. SUMMARY OF ISOKINETIC RESULTS FOR MM5
Run
MM5/Diox1n Sampling
Precipitator Precipitator
Inlet Meets QC Outlet Meets QC
% Isokinetic Objective % Isokinetic Objective
HC1 Sampling
Precipitator
Inlet Meets QC
% Isokinetic Objective
01
105.4
Yes
109.6
Yes
105.9
Yes
02
105.5
Yes
114.1
No
101.6
Yes
03
109.2
Yes
105.7
Yes
102.3
Yes
3-5
-------
being completely removed. Troika was able to determine the identity of all
the samples except the two for which the labels were completely removed. By
the process of elimination, the two unknown samples were determined to be the
impinger rinse from the inlet MM5 train for Run 01 and the probe rinse from
the outlet MM5 train for Run 01.
8.2 CONTINUOUS MONITORING/ MOLECULAR WEIGHT DETERMINATION
Flue gas parameters measured continuously at the electrostatic
precipitator outlet location during the MM5 test runs included CO, C02, 02,
S02, total hydrocarbons (THC) and NOX- The concentration of 02, C02 and
nitrogen (N2) were also determined for integrated bag samples of the flue gas.
Quality control results for these analyses are discussed in this section.
Drift check results for the continuously monitored flue gas parameters
are summarized in Table 8-3. The QC target goal of + 10% drift for any test
run was achieved for each instrument. Data reduction was performed by
assuming a linear drift of the instrument response over the test day based on
drift checks at the beginning and end of the day. The largest calibration
drifts were observed for the S02 analyzer and the smallest instrument drift
was observed in the 02 monitor.
The quality control standards for this program consisted of mid-range
concentration standards that were intended for QC purposes and not for
instrument calibration. The QC gases were analyzed immediately after
calibration each day to provide data on day-to-day instrument variability.
The acceptance criteria for the analysis of each QC standard was agreement
within + 10 percent of the running mean value.
During test Run 01, it was determined that the concentrations of S02, NOX
and THC were too low to be detected using the ranges initially selected for
these instruments. One hour and fifty minutes into Run 01, the instrument
ranges were lowered to get viable readings on the instruments. This change
resulted in the loss of SO, data for Run 01, but the NO and THC data were
b «
reduced and reported. The gases initially selected for QC purposes were used
to perform the calibrations of these instruments after the range changes were
made. As a result, there are no QC data for S02, NOX, and THC for this test
site.
8-6
-------
TABLE 8-3. SUMMARY OF DRIFT CHECK AND CONTROL STANDARD RESULTS
OD
Drift Check
Test
Date
5/23/85
5/24/85
5/25/85
5/23/85
5/24/85
5/25/85
5/23/85
5/24/85
5/25/85
5/23/85
5/24/85
5/25/85
5/23/85
5/24/85
5/25/85
5/23/85
5/24/85
5/25/85
Test
Run
01
02
03
01
02
03
01
02
03
01
02
03
01
02
03
01
02
03
Parameter
0
0
°2
CO
CO
CO
C09
co£
co£
S09
so£
so2
NO
N0x
N0x
THC
THC
THC
Input
Concentration
21.1% V
21.1% V
21.1% V
5580 ppmv
5580 ppmv
5580 ppmv
18.0% V
18.0% V
18.0% V
_-
239 ppmv
239 ppmv
__
155 ppmv
155 ppmv
90 ppmv
90 ppmv
90 ppmv
Instrument Meets
Drift, %a QC?D
-0.55
0.27
0.24
1.24
-3.87
-2.29
0.78
4.06
0.39
d
7.15
-1.45
d
1.08
-6.02
d
2.02
3.77
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
d
Yes
.Yes
d
Yes
Yes
d
Yes
Yes
Input
Concentration
9.3% V
9.3% V
9
2006
2006
2006
13
13
13
239
155
90
.3% V
.0 ppmv
.0 ppmv
.0 ppmv
.0%
.0%
.0%
.0 ppmv
e
e
ppmv
e
e
.0 ppmv
e
e
QC Standard
Output
Concentration
9.40
9.51
9.53
2220.0
2278.0
2328.4
13.21
12.85
13.16
232.6
e
e
165.9
e
e
92.85
e
e
d Instrument drift is defined as the percent difference between the instrument response
.concentration at the beginning and end of the
QC criteria
C.QC criteria
uNo data
eNo data
test run.
Difference From
Running Mean, %
0
0
1
2
-1
0
to the i
..
.10
.21
.29
.33
--
.38
.69
e
e
--
e
e
--
e
e
nput
QC?C
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
e
e
Yes
e
e
Yes
e
e
was instrument drift within i 10 percent.
was output
Initial and
. QC
gas used
concentration
final calibrati
for calibration
within ±
on gases
10 percent
of the
differed because
running
of change
mean concentration for this test
in instrument
range during test
site.
run.
of instrument.
-------
Molecular weight was determined by analyzing integrated bag samples of
flue gas for 02, C02, and N2> Quality control for this analysis involved
duplicate analyses of calibration gases immediately before and after sample
analysis. Analysis of the calibration gases was repeated until two
consecutive analyses within ± 5 percent were obtained. This sample criteria
of + 5 percent applied to duplicate analyses required for sample quantifi-
cation. These criteria were met for all molecular weight determinations.
8.3 LABORATORY ANALYSES
QA/QC activities were carried out for dioxin/furan, dioxin precursor, and
total chloride analyses performed on Site BLB-C samples. The dioxin/furan
analyses of MM5 train samples performed by Troika are considered in
Section 8.3.1; the dioxin precursor analyses of black liquor boiler feed
samples performed by Radian/RTP are considered in Section 8.3.2; and the total
chloride analyses of HC1 train samples and process samples are considered in
Section 8.3.3.
8.3.1 Dioxin/Furan Analyses
Two individual topics related to the dioxin/furan analyses at Site BLB-C
are discussed in this section. Analytical recoveries of labeled surrogate
compounds spiked onto MM5 train samples are reported in Section 8.3.1.1.
Sample blank data are reported in Section 8.3.1.2.
8-3.1.1 Surrogate Recoveries of the Test Samples
To meet QA objectives, the surrogate recoveries should be within 100 +
50%. Table 8-4 presents the analytical recovery data reported by Troika for
four isotopically labeled surrogate compounds spiked onto the samples
requiring dioxin/furan analysis. MM5 train samples were spiked with all four
of the surrogates. Average recovery for the MM5 train samples was 75 percent
for the inlet and 74 percent for the outlet.
The ESP ash samples were spiked with two isotopically labeled surrogate
compounds. The average recovery was 77 percent.
The black liquor feed samples were analyzed for dioxin/furan precursors
and spiked with six isotopically labelled compounds. The analytical recovery
8-8
-------
TABLE 8-4. SURROGATE RECOVERIES FOR SITE BLB-C DIOXIN AND FURAN ANALYSES
Surroaate Recoveries (%)
Sample
MM5 Samples
Inlet:
Run 01
Run 02
Run 03
Outlet:
Run 01
Run 02
Run 03
ESP Ash Samples
Run 01
Run 02
Run 03
37r1 TCDD
U4
100
84
84
96
96
100
96
98
94
13r TCDD
L12
94
68
66
96
96
92
NS
NS
NS
37r, Hepta-CDD
U4
69
74
74
42
55
48
NS
NS
NS
13- -OCDD
L12
56
65
66
59
62
42
54
56
62
NS = not spiked. For ash samples, only 37C-, TCDD and 13C OCDD are spiked
for surrogate recovery. 4 12
3-9
-------
efficiencies of these surrogate compounds are summarized in Table 8-5. The
average recovery was 42 percent.
8.3.1.2 Sample Blanks
Table 8-6 summarizes the analytical results reported by Troika for
internal laboratory blanks and laboratory fortified quality control (QC)
samples. In general, the data showed good surrogate recoveries, with values
ranging from 55 to 102 percent. Comparison of the measured and spiked values
for the laboratory fortified QC samples showed agreement to within +25 percent
for all target species except the hepta-CDD and hepta-CDF isomers. The
measured value for the hepta homologues were 50 percent higher than the spiked
value. To meet QA objectives, the measured value should be within + 50% of
the spiked value.
The analytical results of the quality control field and laboratory MM5
train blanks are summarized in Table 8-7. Dioxin/furan homologues were not
detected in the MM5 laboratory proof blank except for octa-CDD. The MM5
laboratory proof blank is a set of cleaned glassware that has never been used
for a test run at Site BLB-C. The results indicate that the glassware did not
contain background levels of dioxin/furans.
The inlet field blank did not contain any dioxin/furan homologues except
for octa-CDD, and field recovery of the MM5 samples is considered adequate for
the inlet. However, the outlet field blank contained significant quantities
of dioxin/furan homologues except for 2378 TCDD, 2378 TCDF and penta-CDF. The
ratio of the field blank value to the minimum test value was at least 60%.
The very large quantities of hepta- and octa-CDD were significantly higher
than the values detected in the test runs, which indicates that the outlet
field blank may have been contaminated and may be invalid. The test run data
reported in Section 5.4 were not blank-corrected.
8.3.2 Total Chloride Analysis
Total chloride analyses were performed by Radian/Austin on the HC1 train
samples. QA/QC activities included total chloride analysis of field recovery
blank HC1 train samples, total chloride analysis of an aliquot of the KOH
solution used in the sample train impingers, and duplicate total chloride
8-10
-------
TABLE 8-5. PERCENT SURROGATE RECOVERIES FOR SITE BLB-C FEED SAMPLES
Surrogate
Compound
Base Neutrals Fraction
d. -dichlorobenzene
bromobiphenyl
Run 1
73
76
Percent Surrogate
Black Liquor Feed
Run 2
58
72
Recovery
Samples
Run 3
ND
47
Average
44
65
2', 5, 5' tetra
bromobiphenyl
114
70
61
82
Acids Fraction
dg-phenol
d.-2-chlorophenol
C-pentachlorophenol
10
20
NO
9
26
27
16
38
39
12
28
22
3-11
-------
TABLE 8-6. ANALYTICAL RESULTS FOR TROIKA QUALITY
CONTROL SAMPLES FOR SITE BLB-C
Compound
Pi ox ins
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
Penta CDD
Hexa CDD
Hepta CDD
Octa CDD
Furans
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta CDF
Hexa CDF
Hepta CDF
Octa CDF
37C14-TCDD
C12-TCDD
37C1. -Hepta CDD
13
10C12-Octa CDD
Proof
Blank
MM5 Train
Troika Flue Gas
Troika
Laboratory
Blank
Quality Control Samples
Fortified Laboratory
OC Samole
Measured
Value
True
Valuea
Amount Detected (Nanoarams npr Samni
NR
ND (0.1)
ND (0.1)
ND (0.1)
ND (0.2)
0.3
NR
ND (0.2)
ND (0.04)
ND (0.1)
ND (0.05)
ND (0.04)
82
114
42
84
ND (0.02)
ND (0.03)
ND (0.2)
ND (0.06)
ND (0.2)
0.2
ND (0.02)
ND (0.03)
ND (0.01)
ND (0.04)
ND (0.02)
ND (0.02)
Surroqate
102
98
72
88
0.4
ND (0.03)
ND (0.05)
1.4
3.6
3.1
0.5
ND (0.04)
0.8
1.2
3.5
3.0
Recoveries
100
102
62
55
0.4
ND
ND
1.6
2.4
3.2
0.4
ND
0.8
1.6
2.4
3.2
(Percent)
NA
NA
' NA'
NA
Difference
(Percent)
le)
0
0
0
-13
50
-3
25
0 '
0
-25
46
-6
True values represent the amounts of each homologue spiked into the
blaboratory fortified QC samples.
Value shown in parenthesis is the percentage difference between the measured
and true value: M , ., ,
-------
TABLE 8-7. ANALYTICAL RESULTS OF QUALITY CONTROL MM5 BLANKS FOR SITE BLB-C
Compound
Field
Blank
Value
Inlet
Minimum
Test Run Ratio
Val ue %
Field
Blank
Value
Outlet
Minimum
Test Run Ratio
Value %
Radian
Laboratory
Proof Blank
Dioxlns
23/8 TCDD
Other TCDD
Penta CDD
Hexa CDD
Hepta CDD
Octa CDD
Furans
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta CDF
Hexa CDF
Hepta CDF
Octa CDF
ND (0.05)
ND (0.2)
ND (0.1)
ND (0.1)
ND (0.1)
0.6
Amount detected (Nanograms per sample)
NR
1.1
1.4
3.3
2.4
2.1
ND
0
0
0
0
29
(0.02)
0.4
0.2
1.2
25.7
109.3
ND (0.01)
0.55
ND (0.1)
0.3
0.5
1.2
0
73
200
400
5140
9100
Surrogate Recoveries (Percent)
NR ,
ND (O.I)1
ND (0.1)
ND (0.1)
ND (0.1)
0.3
ND (0.16)
ND (0.2)
ND (0.2)
ND (0.1)
ND (0.2)
ND (0.2)
NR
2.1
ND (1.3)
1.7
0.50
ND (0.3)
-
0
0
0
0
0
ND (0.1)
0.3
ND (0.2)
1.4
5.2
3.5
ND (0.01)
0.5
ND (0.2>
0.5
0.4
0.2
0
60
0
280
1300
1750
NR b
ND (0.2)D
ND (0.04)
ND (0.1)
ND (0.05)
ND (0.04)
J/C1,,-TCDD
fi
13C12-TCDD
37C4-Hepta CDD
13C12-Octa CDD
76
92
43
52
90
92
72
93
82
114
42
84
NR = not reported
a
Ratio of the field blank value to the minimum test run value expressed as a percentage,
3These values represent all tetra-homologues.
8-13
-------
analyses of all individual train components. The KOH blank contained
7 nig/liter of chlorides. The HC1 train probe rinse/filter blank contained
less than 1 mg/L of chlorides and the HC1 train impinger rinses contained
8 mg/L which is equivalent to 4.3 mg of chloride in the sample blank.
Therefore, the impinger rinse results were blank-corrected by subtracting
4.3 mg from the total milligrams of chloride in each test run sample.
8-14
-------
APPENDIX A
FIELD SAMPLING DATA
-------
-------
APPENDIX A-l
MODIFIED METHOD 5 AND EPA METHODS 1-4 FIELD RESULTS
A-l
-------
-------
A-l.l
ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR OUTLET MM5 RESULTS
A-3
-------
-------
RADIAN
SOURCE
PLANT
PLANT SITE
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST *
DATE
TEST PERIOD
TEST
EPA METHOD
(RAW DATA)
2-5
SITE #08
ESP OUTLET
08-MM5-PO-1
4/23/85
1220-1330 1357-1417 1430-1450 1512-1622 1635-1725
PARAMETER
Sampling time (min.)
Barometric Pressure (in.Hg)
Sampling nozzle diameter (in.)
Meter Volume (cu.ft.)
Meter Pressure (in.H20)
Meter Temperature (F)
Stack dimension (sq.in.)
Stack Static Pressure (in.H20)
Stack Moisture Collected (gm)
Absolute stack pressure(in Hg)
Average stack temperature (F)
Percent C02
Percent 02
Percent N2
Delps Subroutine result
DGM Factor
Pitot Constant
VALUE
235
30.02
.304
146.418
1.28
66.8
22167 .13
-.42
740.1
29.98912
292.4
7.4
13.8
78.8
13.33708
1
.84
A-5
-------
RADIAN
EPA MET
FINAL
PLANT
PLANT SITE
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST *
DATE
TEST PERIOD
SOURCE
HODS 2 -
U L T S
SITE #08
RES
E S T
ESP OUTLET
08-MM5-PO-1
4/23/85
1220-1330 1357-1417 1430-1450 1512-1622 1635-1725
PARAMETER
RESULT
Vm(dscf)
Vm(dscm)
Vw gas(scf)
Vw gas (scm)
Z moisture
Md
MWd
MW
Vs(fpm)
Vs (mpm)
Flow(acfm)
Flow(acmm)
Flow(dscfm)
Flow(dscmm)
Z I
Z EA
147.7036
4.182967
34.89572
.9882466
19.11054
.8088946
29.736
27.49319
2001.3
610.1524
308076.9
8724.738
175282.4
4963.998
109.5753
197.0528
Program Revision:I/16/
A-6
-------
R A D I
EPA
W
AN SOURCE
METHOD 2 -
T E S T
( R A
PLANT
PLANT SITE
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST *
DATE
TEST PERIOD
DATA)
SITE *8
ESP OUTLET
08-MM5-PO-2
4/24/85
1035-1125 1140-1240 1315-1345 1350-1420 1425-1555
PARAMETER
VALUE
Sampling time (min.)
Barometric Pressure (in.Hg)
Sampling nozzle diameter (in.)
Meter Volume (cu.ft.)
Meter Pressure (in.H20)
Meter Temperature (F)
Stack dimension (sq.in.)
Stack Static Pressure (in.H20)
Stack Moisture Collected (gm)
Absolute stack pressure(in Hg)
Average stack temperature (F)
Percent C02
Percent 02
Percent N2
Delps Subroutine result
D6M Factor
Pitot Constant
240
30.25
.304
155.685
1 .373333
73 .38
22167 .13
-.42
818.7
30.21912
294.4792
7 .22
14.04
78.74
13.34398
.9993
.84
A-7
-------
SITE *8
RADIAN SOURCE
EPA METHODS 2
FINAL RESULTS
PLANT
PLANT SITE
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST *
DATE
TEST PERIOD
TEST
- 5
ESP OUTLET
08-MM5-PO-2
4/24/85
1035=1125 1140-1240 1315-1345 1350-1420 1425-1555
PARAMETER
RESULT
Vm(dscf)
Vm(dscm)
Vw gas(scf)
Vv gas (scm)
Z moisture
Md
MWd
MW
Vs(fpm)
Vs (mpm)
Flow(acfm)
Flow(acmm)
FlowUscfm)
Flow(dscmm)
Z I
Z EA
156.2252
4.424297
38.60171
1 .0932
19.81334
.8018666
29.7168
27.39531
1998.261
609.2258
307609.1
8711.489
174344.5
4937.435
114.0931
208.0814
Program Revision:1/16,
A-8
-------
D I A N S C
A M E T H C
AW DAT/
ITE
G LOCATION
tRTOD
(URGE T
> D 2-5
L )
SITE #8
ESP OUTLET
08-MM5-EO-3
4/25/85
0925-1035
R A
E P
( R
PLANT
PLANT !
SAMPLING
TEST
DATE
TEST
1055-1155 1205-1235 1241-1311
E S T
1324-1414
PARAMETER
VALUE
Sampling time (min.)
Barometric Pressure (in.Hg)
Sampling nozzle diameter (in.)
Meter Volume (cu.ft.)
Meter Pressure (in.H20)
Meter Temperature (F)
Stack dimension (sq.in.)
Stack Static Pressure (in.H20)
Stack Moisture Collected (gm)
Absolute stack pressure(in Hg)
Average stack temperature (F)
Percent C02
Percent 02
Percent N2
Delps Subroutine result
DGM Factor
Pitot Constant
240
30.29
.304
142.234
1.07
82.5
22167 .13
-.42
730.5
30.25912
296.9167
6.98
13.58
79.44
12.95228
.9993
.84
A-9
-------
RADIAN SOURCE
EPA METHODS 2
FINAL
PLANT
PLANT SITE
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST t
DATE
TEST PERIOD
RESULTS
SITE #8
TEST
5
ESP OUTLET
08-MM5-EO-3
4/25/85
0925-1035 1055-1155 1205-1235 1241-1311 1324-1414
PARAMETER
RESULT
Vm(dscf)
Vm(dscm)
Vw gas(scf)
Vw gas (scm)
Z moisture
Md
MWd
MW
Vs(fpm)
Vs (mpm)
Flow(acfm)
Flow(acmm)
Flow(dscfm)
Flow(dscmm)
Z I
Z EA
140.4099
3 .976408
34.44308
.9754279
19.69831
.8030169
29.66
27 .36318
1939.459
591.2984
298557 .2
8455.139
169134.7
4789.895
105.7016
183.7081
Program Revision:I/16/
A-10
-------
A-1.2
ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR INLET MM5 RESULTS
(EAST DUCT)
A-ll
-------
-------
RADIAN
EPA MET
(RAW DA
PLANT
PLANT SITE
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST *
DATE
TEST PERIOD
S C
H (
T /
)URCE TEST
> D 2-5
I )
SITE *8
ESP INLET
08-MM5-EI-1
4/23/85
1222-1322 1355-143
5
1440-1500 1515-1635
PARAMETER
VALUE
Sampling, time (min.)
Barometric Pressure (in.Hg)
Sampling nozzle diameter (in.)
Meter Volume (cu.ft.)
Meter Pressure (in.H20)
Meter Temperature (F)
Stack dimension (sq.in.)
Stack Static Pressure (in.H20)
Stack Moisture Collected (gm)
Absolute stack pressure(in Hg)
Average stack temperature (F)
Percent C02
Percent 02
Percent N2
Delps Subroutine result
DGM Factor
Pitot Constant
200
30.04
.311
112.885
1 .203
65.99
10800
.08
530.3
30.04588
313.85
8.899999
12.7
78.4
12.18476
.9945
.84
A-13
-------
RADIAN
EPA
M E
NAL
FI
PLANT
PLANT SITE
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST t
DATE
TEST PERIOD
SOURCE
T H 0 D S 2
RESULTS
SITE #8
TEST
- 5
ESP INLET
4/23/85
1222-1322 1355-1435 1440-1500 1515-1635
PARAMETER
RESDLT
Vm(dscf)
Vm(dscm)
Vw gas(scf)
Vv gas (scm)
Z mo isture
Md
MWd
MW
Vs(fpm)
Vs (mpm)
Flow(acfm)
Flow(acmm)
Flow(dacfm)
Flow(dscmm)
Z I
Z EA
113.4783
3.213705
25.00365
.7081032
18.05553
.8194447
29.932
27 .77762
1817.284
554.05
136296.3
3859,911
76525.16
2167.193
105.4744
158.7977
Program Revision:1/16/
A-14
-------
RADIAN SOURCE TEST
EPA METHOD 2-5
(RAW DATA)
PLANT
PLANT SITE
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST *
DATE
SITE *8
ESP INLET
08-MM5-EI-2
4/24/85
TEST PERIOD
334-1059 1108-1138 1142-1227 1229-1309 1319-1409 1444-1454
PARAMETER VALDE
Sampling time (min.) 200
Barometric Pressure (in.Hg) 30.27
Sampling nozzle diameter (in.) .311
Meter Volume (cu.ft.) 113.742
Meter Pressure (in.H20) 1.21575
Meter Temperature (F) 73.4375
Stack dimension (sq.in.) 10800
Stack Static Pressure (in.H20) .05
Stack Moisture Collected (gm) 601.4
Absolute stack pressure(in Eg) 30.27368
Average stack temperature (F) 311.05
Percent C02 8.7
Percent 02 13 .3
Percent N2 78
Delps Subroutine result 12.33872
DGM Factor .9945
Pitot Constant .84
A-15
-------
RADIAN S
EPA M E T H
HAL
R B
F I
PLANT
PLANT SITE
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST t
DATE
TEST PERIOD
OUR
0 D S
E
2
S 0 L T S
SITE *8
T
5
E S T
ESP INLET
08-MM5-KI-2
4/24/85
134-1059 1108-1138 1142-1227 1229-1309 1319-1409 1444-1454
PARAMETER
RESULT
VmUscf)
Vm(dscm)
Vw gas(scf)
Vw gas (scm)
Z mo is ture
Md
MWd
MW
Vs(fpm)
Vs (mpm)
Flov(acfn)
Plov(acan)
Flow(dscfm)
Flov(dscan)
Z I
Z EA
113.6076
3.217368
28.35601
.8030423
19.97414
.8002586
29.924
27.54229
1841.125
561.3188
138084.4
3910.55
76564.94
2168.319
105.5397
182.3917
Program Revision:1/16/84
A-16
-------
RADIAN S
EPA M E T H
(RAW DATA
PLANT
PLANT SITE
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST 4
DATE
TEST PERIOD
0 D
0 D
RGB
2-5
TEST
SITE *8
ESP INLET
08-MM5-EI-3
4/25/85
0941-1051 1103-1133 1137-1217 1226-1326
PARAMETER
VALDE
Sampling time (min.)
Barometric Pressure (ia.Hg)
Sampling nozzle diameter (in.)
Meter Volume (cu.ft.)
Meter Pressure (in.H20)
Meter Temperature (F)
Stack dimension (sq.in.)
Stack Static Pressure (in.H20)
Stack Moisture Collected (gm)
Absolute stack pressureCin Hg)
Average stack temperature (F)
Percent C02
Percent 02
Percent N2
Delps Subroutine result
DGM Factor
Pitot Constant
200
30.32
.311
108.293
1 .06
65.6
10800
.05
577 .3
30.32368
308.65
9
12.1
78.9
11.48137
.9945
.84
A-17
-------
SITE #8
RADIAN SOURCE
EPA METHODS 2
FINAL RESULTS
PLANT
PLANT SITE
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST *
DATE
TEST PERIOD
T
5
E S T
ESP INLET
08-MM5-BI-3
4/25/85
0941-1051 1103-1133 1137-1217 1226-1326
PARAMETER
RESULT
VmUscf )
Vm(dscm)
Vw gas(scf)
Vw gas (scm)
Z moisture
Md
MWd
MW
Vs(fpm)
Vs (mpm)
Flov(acfa)
Flov(acmm)
Flow(dscfa)
Flov(dscmm)
Z I
Z EA
109.9174
3 .11286
27.2197
.7708618
19.84853
.8015147
29.924
27 .55726
1711.317
521 .7431
128348.8
3634.838
71619.09
2028.253
109.1631
138.6089
Program Revision:1/16/84
A-18
-------
A-1.3
ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR INLET VELOCITY DETERMINATION RESULTS
(WEST DUCT)
A-19
-------
-------
& A D I A
EPA
M
(RAW
PLANT
PLANT SITE
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST #
DATE
TEST PERIOD
N S (
E T H (
D A T I
TION
) D R C E T
) D 2-5
L )
SITE *8
ESP INLET
08 VELOCITY
4/23/85
AM
E
01
PARAMETER
VALUE
Sampling time (min.)
Barometric Pressure (in.Hg)
Sampling nozzle diameter (in.)
Meter Volume (cu.ft.)
Meter Pressure (in.H20)
Meter Temperature (F)
Stack dimension (sq.in.)
Stack Static Pressure (in.H20)
Stack Moisture Collected (gm)
Absolute stack pressure(in Hg)
Average stack temperature (F)
Percent C02
Percent 02
Percent N2
Delps Subroutine result
DGM Factor
Pitot Constant
30.04
10800
.04
30.04294
317.7
8.899999
12.7
78.4
15.6325
.84
A-21
-------
RADIAN SOURCE
EPA METHODS 2
NAL RESULTS
TEST
5
F I
PLANT
PLANT SITE
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST *
DATE
TEST PERIOD
SITE *8
ESP INLET
08 VELOCITY 01
4/23/85
AM
PARAMETER
RESULT
Vm(dscf)
Vm(dscm)
Vw gas(scf)
Vv gas (sent)
Z mo ist ure
Md
MWd
MW
Vs(fpm)
Vs (mpm)
Flow(acfm)
Flov(acmm)
Flov(dscfo)
Flov(dscmm)
Z I
Z EA
18.05553
.8194447
29.932
27 .77762
2331 .608
710.8561
174870.6
4952.335
97687.53
2766.511
Program Revision:I/16/
A-22
-------
RAD
EPA
AN S
M E T H
0 D R C
0 D 2
(RAW
PLANT
PLANT SITE
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST *
DATE
TEST PERIOD
TEST
DATA)
SITE *8
ESP INLET
08-VELOCITY-2
4/24/85
AM
PARAMETER
VALUE
Sampling time (min.)
Barometric Pressure (in.Hg)
Sampling nozzle diameter (in.)
Meter Volume (cu.ft.)
Meter Pressure (in.H20)
Meter Temperature (?)
Stack dimension (sq.in.)
Stack Static Pressure (in.H20)
Stack Moisture Collected (gm)
Absolute stack pressure(in Hg)
Average stack temperature (F)
Percent C02
Percent 02
Percent N2
Delps Subroutine result
DGM Factor
Pitot Constant
30.27
10800
.13
30.27956
308.95
8.7
13.3
78
14.9021
.84
A-23
-------
SITE #8
RADIAN SOURCE
EPA METHODS 2
FINAL RESULTS
PLANT
PLANT SITE
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST *
DATE
TEST PERIOD
TEST
5
ESP INLET
08-VELOCITY-2
4/24/85
AM
PARAMETER
RESDLT
VmUscf)
Vm(d8cm)
Vw gas(scf)
Vw gas (scm)
Z moisture
Md
MVd
MW
VsCfpm)
Vs (mpm)
Flov(acfm)
Flow(acmm)
Flow(dscfm)
Flow(dscmm)
Z I
Z EA
19.97414
.8002586
29.924
27.54229
2223.405
677.8673
166755.3
4722.511
92732.91
2626.196
Program Revision:I/16/
A-24
-------
RADIAN S
EPA M E T H
(RAW DATA
PLANT
PLANT SITE
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST t
DATE
TEST PERIOD
0 0
0 D
R C
2
E
- 5
TEST
SITE #8
ESP .INLET
08-VELOCITY-3
4/25/85
AM
PARAMETER
VALDB
Sampling time (min.)
Barometric Pressure (in.Hg)
Sampling nozzle diameter (in.)
Meter Volume (cu.ft.)
Meter Pressure (in.H20)
Meter Temperature (F)
Stack dimension (sq.in.)
Stack Static Pressure (in.H20)
Stack Moisture Collected (gm)
Absolute stack pressure(in Hg)
Average stack temperature (F)
Percent C02
Percent 02
Percent N2
Delps Subroutine result
DGM Factor
Pitot Constant
30.32
10800
-.16
30.30824
300.65
9
12.1
78.9
13.32505
.84
A-25
-------
RADIAN SOURCE TEST
EPA METHODS 2-5
FINAL RESULTS
PLANT
PLANT SITE
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST #
DATE
TEST PERIOD
SITE *8
ESP INLET
08-VELOCITY-3
4/25/85
AM
PARAMETER RESULT
VmCdscf)
Vm(dscm)
Vv gas(scf)
Vw gas (sen)
Z moisture 19.84853
Md .8015147
MWd 29.924
MW 27.55726
Vs(fpm) 1986.627
7s (mpm) 605.679
Flow(acfm) 148997.1
Flow(acmm) 4219.596
FlowUscfm) 83972.52
Flov(dscmm) 2378.102
Z I
Z EA
Program Revision:1/16/84
A-26
-------
APPENDIX A-2
CONTINUOUS EMISSION MONITORING RESULTS
A-27
-------
-------
CEMS DATA - SITE as - TEST 2
FACTOR
FOR -/. 02
NORMALIZATION
OF
OTHER PROCESS
OASES
NORMALIZED / CORRECTED DATA - WITH ACTUAL O2
»
»
*
*
4»
»
*
»*
«
»
»
»*
«
»
«
«
«
«
*
»
*
*
»
«*
«
«
»*
*«
«
*
»»
»
*
»
«
««
«
»
*
«
»
**
*
»
NO. PT9.
MEAN
STO. DEV.
7.9486
1.9921
i.aas4
2.1813
1.8932
1.931B
2. 3747
2.2864
1 . 9939
1 . 8979
2.6039
1 . 3907
1.3801
2.6334
1 . 9023
1.8873
2. 3220
2.asia
1.9967
1 . 8926
2.6177
1 . 3S98
1 . 9899
2.6B37
1.8772
1 . 9896
2.3787
1 . 3928
1.8030
1.9200
2. 4792
1.8947
1 . 8770
2.3912
1.8764
1.8347
2.3277
1.0334
1.0341
2.3702
1.9297
1.0904
1.8233
2.3401
1.8390
1.9400
2.3314
1.9237
1.9222
2.4301
1 . 8732
1.9221
2.a4BO
2. 1926
1.9341
1.8332
2.3838
1.8176
1.9077
2.3231
1 . 3338
1.8233
2.8196
2. 1073
1.8103
1.8311
2.3344
1 . 8434
1.8207
2.3421
1.8370
71
2.0870
0.4
*
»
*«
*
»
«
**
»^
*
»*
*
«
«
*
»
«
»«
»
»
»»
»
«
»
»*
»
»*
*«
.
»
«
»
*
*
«
«
*«
**
»
»
*
*
*
«
*
»»
TIME
ia33
1940
1343
iasa
16)53
nee
uaa
1 1 IB
1113
112B
1123
1130
1133
1140
1143
11:0
1133
1290
1203
1210
1213
1220
1223
1210
1233
1240
1243
1230
1233
130*
1303
1310
1313
1329
1323
133*
1339
1340
1349
139*
1799
1400
1403
1410
1413
1420
1423
14.30
1433
1440
1443
1430
1433
1300
1303
1310
1313
1320
1323
1330
1333
1340
1343
1330
1353
1600
1609
1610
1613
1620
1623
NO. PTS.
MEAN
STD. OCV.
02
(XV)
16.2
1. 4
1.4
4. a
1.3
1.4
2. 3
13. 1
11.3
11.5
14.0
11.4
11.4
14. 1
11.3
11.4
13.2
12.2
11.3
11.4
14. I
11.4
11.4
14. a
11.4
11.4
14. a
11.4
11.4
11.6
13.7
11.3
11.4
14.0
11.4
11.1
13.0
11.1
U.I
13.3
11.6
11.2
11.1
13.9
" 11.2
11.2
13.9
11. 1
11.1
13.3
11.3
11.' 1
12. 1
12.7
1 1. I
11.1
14. a
ii.t
11. a
13. a
11.1
it. i
12.0
12.7
11.0
11. 1
13. 9
11.2
11.1
13.9
11.1
71
12.1
1.2
CO
(PPMV)
1673.4
1269. a
848.:
tiai. t
i3»a.s
1ZS1. 6
g<)6.
(PPMV)
43.3
43. 1
42. a
78. 1
:9.9
78. T
37.2
4;. 9
42.3
42.2
42. a
42.4
42.8
44. 4
30. 1
49.8
43.8
47.6
49. a
«7.8
43.2
43.4
43. 1
43.3
47. 3
47.9
46. a
43. 3
47.8
sa. a
301.2
48.6
47.9
46.2
44.8
41.0
30.3
40.9
40.8
37.9
41.7
41.4
40.6
40.0
42.4
42.8
39.4
40.2
41.7
39.2
41. 1
37. 4
36.3
49. 4
49.8
41.9
37. 3
38. I
39. 7
38.3
39. 1
40.0
38.3
41.6
39.8
41.4
40. 1
42.8
39.7
38.0
30.1
71
42.7
3.9
THC
(PPMV)
21.7
19. a
;;=. :
19. =
11.4
'. 1 . 3
14.3
i :. i
8.6
7.3
14. a
IB. 4
9.6
13.3
8.3
6.9
9.3
7. 7
4.2
3.3
a. a
6. 1
7. 1
8.9
3.2
3.4
9.2
3.6
6.3
7.1
7.0
3.9
6.0
7.4
3.6
7.8
10.4
0.0
9.2
11.8
9.9
9.2
9.0
13.1
8.3
8.8
12.3
9.6
11.4
13.4
=>.S
3.6
'.1.3
14.2
'. 4
:.a
7 . 4
3. a
9.4
ia.4
12.6
8.9
a. 3
13.3
11.6
ta. a
18. 3
12.9
11.7
19.2
22. 1
71
10.6
4.8
A-30
-------
CEMS DATA - SITE as - TEST 1
»*
**
»*
FACTOR * NORMALIZED / CORRECTED DATA
FOR 3V. 02 »«
NORMAL. I Z A T I ON »*
OF
** OTHER PROCESS
»*
»*
**
»*
» TIME
GASES »*
2. 1763 » I23a
I.
9888
»» 1.9970
»*
^ t
9119
** 1.3949
**
*»
»*
»*
»*
»*
**
*»
**
**
#*
*+
»*
**
**
**
*»
*+
»»
*»
»*
»*
**
**
»*
«
**
**
**
»*
**
*»
**
#*
»*
»*
**
»*
*»
*+
**
»»
**
1.
2.
1.
1.
^ f
2.
1.
1.
2.
1.
1.
2.
1.
1.
2.
1.
1.
1.
2.
1.
1.
2.
1.
t.
2.
1.
1.
2.
2.
1.
1.
2.
1.
1.
2 .
1.
1.
2.
2.
1.
1.
2.
1 .
3994
6548
9085
9849
1454
2478
8993
9826
6938
9887
9883
6322
9029
9108
5919
9665
9164
9314
7432
9612
9320
7333
9483
9664
7843
9838
9399
2994 <
1896 i
9422 <
9338 «
7318 i
9336 «
9388 <
7224 .
9238
»« 1255
13B8
'. 303
»» 1310
1315
»» 1320
» 1325
» 1330
* 1333
1348
1 343
1338
1333
* 1400
* 1405
1410
» 1413
i42a
1425
1430
* 1433
* 1448
1445
1438
« 1433
* 1388
* 1583
* 1318
1313
* 1328
» 1323
1330
> 133S
"» 1340
> 1343
»* 1330
» 1333
»« 1688
>« 1 603
>* 1618
9064 » 1613
3777 <
0392
9138
9314 .
3627 .
9198 .
** i.*/ if/
** 2.6731
»« 1.9477
*»
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
»*
mmmmmmmmm
NO. PTS.
rtEAN
STD. DEV.
1.
2.
1.
1.
1.
2.
1.
1.
2.
1.
1.
2.
1.
2.
7232
3618
96 ia
9619
9233
3829
8307
8406
3730
8408 t
3384 <
3378 <
8396
64
1332
0.3
> 1628
> 1625
>* 1638
> 1635
"» 1648
1643
* 1638
1633
1788
1783
* 1718
1713
* 1728
1723
1738
* 1733
1748
» 1743
» 1738
1733
* 1880
t8as
NO. PTS.
MEAN
STD. DEV.
02
r/.v)
12.7
11.3
11.5
14.9
11.3
11.5
14.2
11.5
11.3
12.6
12.9
11.5
11.3
14.3
11.3
11.3
14. 1
11.5
11.5
14. a
11.9
11.6
11.6
14.4
11.8
11.6
14.4
11.7
11.8
14.3
11.9
11.8
13.1
12.7
11.7
11.6
14.3
11.7
11.7
14.3
11.6
11.5
IT. 4
12. 1
11.6
11.7
13.9
11.6
11.6
14.2
11.7
11.6
13.9
11.3
11.3
11.6
13.4
11.2
11.2
13.9
11.2
11.2
13.9
11.2
64
12.3
1. 1
CO
C02
(PPMV) (%V>
369.7
613.
2
542. 4
638.
9
739. 1
921.
9
1320.3
lass.
1183.
969.
a
7
9
913.9
787.
2
688.6
638.
839.
1239.
1824.
234.
199.
332.
498.
367.
226.
518.
728.
689.
369.
728.
839.
72a.
338.
632.
369.
78S.
694.
637.
331.
398.
383.
343.
727.
331.
968.
789.
721.
683.
637.
336.
337.
497.
638.
623.
483.
139.
169.
148.
187.
39.
184.
110.
183.
183.
21.
61.
9
7
9
7
3
7
a
9
i
3
1
a
2
6
1
a
8
3
9
6
6
3
7
2
6
3
6
3
2
a
3
6
5
4
7
4
3
9
3
3
3
7
1
7
3
3
3
1
3
4
2
64
368.6
334.9
13.6
17.
17
17.
2
7
17.2
17.
17
17.
2
4
1
17.2
16.
2
18.9
17.
1
16.3
17.
6
17. 1
17.
17.
17.
17.
17.
17.
17.
17.
17.
17.
17.
17.
17.
17.
17.
17.
17.
16.
18.
17.
17.
17.
17.
17.
17.
16.
16.
16.
17.
16.
16.
19.
16.
16.
17.
17.
17.
17.
17.
16.
16.
18.
16.
16.
17.
16.
16.
17.
16.
1
2
1
2
2
4
1
1
a
i
a
4
a
a
2
2
1
2
4
8
a
4
1
a
2
9
9
a
6
a
2
2
9
9
3
a
a
4
a
9
1
2
9
9
a
a
a
i
a
64
17. 1
0.3
-WITH ACTUAL 02
NOX
(PPMV)
a.
0.
a.
a.
0.
a.
a.
0.
0.
0.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
0.
0.
a.
28.
34.
48.
41.
48.
39.
32.
26.
23.
26.
28.
30.
28.
33.
29.
36.
33.
38.
31.
31.
21.
30.
30.
20.
21.
27.
29.
24.
30.
38.
33.
60.
58.
37.
67.
63.
62.
63.
63.
66.
66.
67.
4
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
9
a
a
4
a
a
a
a
a
a
0
a
4
2
1
3
a
6
3
2
a
3
9
S
4
2
a
4
8
2
9
3
6
4
3
9
1
6
1
7
4
6
3
9
7
7
4
9
9
9
3
a
2
6
64
26.3
22.7
THC
(PPMV)
2.3
2/. 4
44. l
29.2
31.5
45. a
38.3
37.3
38. 7
41.6
32. a
29. 1
37.6
22.7
21.6
34. 7
29.9
19.9
23.4
17. 3
23.2
73.6
98.2
73.2
77. 1
183. 1
69.8
66.4
87.7
68.9
63.2
74.1
72.7
60.9
39.2
78.8
38.2
32.3
64.4
38.8
33. 6
74.2
68.3
68.2
34.3
72.4
48.3
48.4
33.3
48. 4
41.9
37.8
33. 1
26.3
26.8
34. 1
23.6
21.3
28.3
22.9
23.2
32.4
19.3
64
46.3
21.9
A-29
-------
CEHS DATA - SITE 98 - TEST 3
« FACTOR
« FOR 3X 02
NORMALIZATION
« Of
OTHER PROCESS
a
*»
»
**
*
»
»
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
»*
»*
«
»
*
*
*
«
«
»
«
*
*
»
-
«*
*H»
*
*
»
"
*»
»»
«
«
»
*
*
*
**
**
**
**
»
**
**
*
**
**
**
NO. PTS.
MEAN
STD. OCV.
GASES
2.6299
1.3723
1 . 9694
2.6355
V . 3333
1 . 9906
2.3190
2. 3329
1.8771
t . 3673
2. 6382
1.9780
1 . 8724
2.6020
t . 3824
1.9019
2.6333
1.9110
I . 9036
1 . 9603
2.4662
t . 8793
I . 9880
2.6380
t . 8996
1.9009
2.6183
1.9842
1.8988
2.3206
1.9331
1.8927
1.9841
2.6673
1.8899
1.8856
2.6818
1.8881
1.8748
2.4836
1.9346
1.8883
2.9869
2.3013
1 . 8738
1.8866
2.3892
1.8389
1.8336
2.6281
1.8617
1 . 3307
:. nai
2.2321
1 . 8938
1.3812
2.3832
1.8378
1 . 8493
2.3922
1.8379
1.3388
2.3238
1 . 8663
1.8340
1 . 8679
2.3831
1.8461
68
2.0960
0.3
NORMALIZED / CORRECTED DATA
»
TIME
n
.. -«
39
33
** 49
43
*» 39
933
1000
« 1003
* 1010
1013
1020
1923
1930
* 1033
1940
1043
* 1959
1333
» 1190
i ias
** iiia
« 1113
** 1 1 2B
« 1123
1130
1133
« 1140
» 1143
1 130
« 1133
1208
1203
;2i0
1213
1228
1223
1238
* 1233
1248
» 1243
1238
1233
1308
1303
1318
1313
1 328
1323
» 1 330
1 333
1 340
1343
» 1 330
« 1 333
1408
» 1403
1410
« 1413
1420
* 1429
1438
1433
* 1440
1443
1438
» 1433
1308
NO. PTS.
MEAN
STD. DEV.
02
(XV)
'4 1
11.3
11. 3
14. 1
11.4
11.4
13.2
12.2
U.4
11. 3
14.2
11.4
11.3
14.0
U.4
11.3
14. 1
11.3
11.3
11.8
13.6
11.4
11.4
14. 1
11.3
11.3
14. 1
11.3
11.3
13.8
11.7
11.4
11.3
14.2
11.4
11.4
14.0
11.4
11.4
13.7
11.7
11.4
12.3
13.1
11.4
11.4
14.0
11.3
11.3
14. 1
11.3
11.2
12.4
12.9
11.3
11.4
14.0
11.3
11.2
14.0
11.2
11.2
13.8
11.3
11.2
11.3
13.7
11.2
68
12.2
1. 1
CO
(ppnvi
1231. <5
1496.9
1438.9
1344. 7
1337. 7
1239. 1
1102.4
1343.7
1338.6
1439.4
1239.6
1203.8
1233. 1
1216.7
1011.6
928.4
1044.9
912. 1
947. 9
1944.2
1189.7
1132.3
1246.7
1064.3
923.3
1087.2
1092.2
889.4
999.3
909.3
1431.4
1437.0
1620.8
1469.7
1731.1
1381.4
1611.6
1472.6
1678.6
1468.3
1379.6
1118.3
1992.9
767.9
623.9
269.2
423.4
298.2
388.0
432.2
313.9
533.3
488.3
637.9
791.2
633.6
331.9
723.2
399.3
304.0
738.4
608.2
624.0
960.3
817.0
684.0
993.7
912.9
60
1023.6
371.0
CO2
(7.V)
17.6
17. a
17.9
17. i
17.9
17.3
16.9
18. 1
16.9
17. a
17.6
17.9
17.0
17.4
17.0
17. I
17.3
17. I
17. a
16.2
13.6
17. I
17.9
17.3
17. 1
17. 1
17.3
17.2
17.1
16.9
17.4
17.0
17.0
17.3
17.0
17.0
17.4
17.1
17.0
16.9
17.4
17.9
16.0
18.7
17.1
17. 1
17.7
17.3
17.0
17.6
17.1
17.0
16.0
18.7
17. 1
17.2
18. 1
17. 1
17.3
18.0
17.3
17.4
17.2
17.7
17.2
16.9
18.1
17.2
68
17.2
9.3
- WITH ACTUAL 02
SQ2
-------
-------
APPENDIX A-3
HC1 TRAIN RESULTS
A-33
-------
-------
IAN
RAD
EPA
(RAW
PLANT
PLANT SITE
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST t
DATE
TEST PERIOD
SOURCE TEST
METHOD 2-5
DATA)
SITE #8
ESP OUTLET
08-HCL-PO-l
4/23/85
1234-1435
PARAMETER
VALUE
Sampling time (min.) 121
Barometric Pressure (in.Hg) 30.02
Sampling nozzle diameter (in.) .308
Meter Volume (cu.ft.) 74.57
Meter Pressure (in.H20) 1.175
Meter Temperature (F) 78.25
Stack dimension (sq.in.) 22167.13
Stack Static Pressure (in.H20) -.42
Stack Moisture Collected (gm) 365.1
Absolute stack pressure(in Hg) 29.98912
Average stack temperature (F) 295.4167
Percent C02 7.4
Percent 02 13.8
Percent N2 78.8
Delps Subroutine result 13.03279
DGM Factor .9993
Pitot Constant .84
A-35
-------
RADIAN SOURCE
EPA METHODS 2
FINAL RESULTS
PLANT SITE *8
PLANT SITE
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST t
DATE
TEST PERIOD
TEST
- 5
ESP OUTLET
08-HCL-PO-l
4/23/85
1234-1435
PARAMETER
RESULT
VrnUscf )
Vm(dscm)
Vw gas(scf)
Vw gas (sen)
Z moisture
Md
MWd
MW
Vs(fpm)
Vs (mpm)
Flov(acfm)
Flow(acmm)
Flov(dscfm)
Flow(dscmm)
Z I
Z EA
73.55413
2.083053
17.21447
.4875137
18.96522
.8103478
29.736
27 .51024
1955.034
596.047
300954.9
8523.041
170852.9
4838.553
105.9188
197.0528
Program Revision:l/16/
A-36
-------
RADIAN S
EPA M E T H
(RAW DATA
PLANT
PLANT SITE
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST t
DATE
TEST PERIOD
0 0
0 D
R C E
2 -
TEST
SITE *8
ESP OUTLET
08-HCL-PO-2
4/24/85
1033-1233
PARAMETER
VALDE
Sampling time (min.) 120
Barometric Pressure (in.flg) 30.25
Sampling nozzle diameter (in.) .308
Meter Volume (cu.ft.) 66.044
Meter Pressure (in.H20) 1.141667
Meter Temperature (F) 78.16666
Stack dimension (sq.in.) 22167.13
Stack Static Pressure (in.H20) -.42
Stack Moisture Collected (gm) 341.7
Absolute stack pressure(in Eg) 30.21912
Average stack temperature (F) 293.3
Percent C02 7.22
Percent 02 14.04
Percent N2 78.7
Delps Subroutine result 12.16768
DGM Factor .9933
Pitot Constant .84
A-37
-------
SITE #8
RADIAN SOURCE
EPA METHODS 2
FINAL RESULTS
PLANT
PLANT SITE
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST *
DATE
TEST PERIOD
TEST
- 5
ESP OUTLET
08-HCL-PO-2
4/24/85
1033-1233
PARAMETER
RESULT
VmUscf)
Vm(dscm)
Vw gas(scf)
Vw gas (scm)
I moisture
Md
MWd
MW
Vs(fptn)
Vs (mpm)
Flov(acfm)
Flov(acam)
Flov(dscfm)
Flov(dscam)
Z I
Z EA
65.25267
1.847956
16.11116
.456268
19.80138
.8019862
29.7056
27 .38773
1822.362
555.5983
280531.6
7944.654
159270.3
4510.535
101.6379
208.4076
Program Rev is ion:1/ 1 6,
A-38
-------
RADIAN SOU
EPA METHOD
(RAW DATA)
PLANT
PLANT SITE
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST #
DATE
TEST PERIOD
R C
2
TEST
- 5
SITE *8
ESP OUTLET
08-HCL-EO-3
4/25/85
0957-1157
PARAMETER
VALUE
Sampling time (min.)
Barometric Pressure (in.Hg)
Sampling nozzle diameter (in.)
Meter Volume (cu.ft.)
Meter Pressure (in.HZO)
Meter Temperature (F)
Stack dimension (sq.in.)
Stack Static Pressure (in.H20)
Stack Moisture Collected (gm)
Absolute stack pressure(in Hg)
Average stack temperature (F)
Percent C02
Percent 02
Percent N2
Delps Subroutine result
DGM Factor
Pitot Constant
120
30.29
.308
65.302
1 .12
88.03
22167 .13
-.42
334
30.25912
301.5
6.98
13.58
79.44
12.02712
1.0086
.84
A-39
-------
SITE #8
RADIAN SOURCE
EPA METHODS 2
FINAL RESULTS
PLANT
PLANT SITE
SAMPLING LOCATION
TEST i
DATE
TEST PERIOD
TEST
- 5
ESP OUTLET
08-HCL-EO-3
4/25/85
0957-1157
PARAMETER
RESULT
7m(dscf)
Vm(dscm)
Vv gas(scf)
Vv gas (scm)
Z moisture
Md
MWd
MW
Vs(fpm)
7s (mpm)
Flov(acfm)
7low(acmm)
Flov(dscfm)
Flov(dscmm)
Z I
Z EA
64.41573
1.824253
15.7481
.4459862
19.6449
.803551
29.66
27 .36941
1800.722
549.0006
277200.3
7850.311
156194.5
4423.429
102.3101
183.7081
Program Revision:1/16/
A-40
-------
APPENDIX A-4
MODIFIED METHOD 5 AND EPA METHODS 1-4 SAMPLE CALCULATIONS
A-41
-------
-------
PARAMETER
RADIAN SOU
EPA METHOD
DEFINITION
DEFINITION
R C
E
2
0 F
TEST
5
TERMS
.ft.)
.)
Tt(»in.)
Dn(in.)
P«(in.H20)
Vm(cu
Vw(g»,
Pm(in.H20)
Tm(F)
Pbdn.Hg.)
Z C02
Z 02
Z H2
SQR(DELPS)
As(tq . in . )
T.(F)
Vm(dscf)
Vm(dscn)
Vw gas(scf)
Z moisture
Md
MWd
MW
V.(fpm)
Flow(acfm)
Flow(acam)
Flow(dscfv)
Flov(dscmm)
Z I
Z EA
DCM
Y
P*
Cp
dH
dP
*** EPA
STANDARD
CONDITIONS
TOTAL SAMPLING TIME
SAMPLING NOZZLE DIAMETER
ABSOLUTE STACK STATIC GAS PRESSDRE
ABSOLUTE VOLUME OF GAS SAMPLE MEASURED BY DGM
TOTAL STACK MOISTURE COLLECTED
AVERAGE STATIC PRESSURE OF DGM
AVERAGE TEMPERATURE OF DGM
BAROMETRIC PRESSURE
CARBON DIOXIDE CONTENT OF STACK GAS
OXYGEN CONTENT OF STACK GAS
NITROGEN CONTENT OF STACK GAS
AVE. SQ. ROOT OF S-PITOT DIFF. PRESSURE-TEMP. PRODUCTS
CROSS-SECTIONAL AREA OF STACK(DUCT)
TEMPERATURE OF STACK
STANDARD VOLUME OF GAS SAMPLED ,Vm(std),AS DRY STD. CF
STANDARD VOLUME OF GAS SAMPLED,Vm(std),AS DRY STD. CM
VOLUME OF WATER VAPOR IN GAS SAMPLE,STD
WATER VAPOR COMPOSITION OF STACK GAS
PROPORTION, BY VOLUME,OF DRY GAS IN GAS SAMPLE
MOLECULAR WEIGHT OF STACK GAS,DRY BASIS LB/LB-MOLE
MOLECULAR WEIGHT OF STACK GAS.WET BASIC LB/LB-MOLE
AVERAGE STACK GAS VELOCITY
AVERAGE STACK GAS FLOW RATE(ACTUAL STACK COND.)
AVERAGE STACK GAS FLOW RATE(ACTDAL STACK COND.)
AVERAGE STACK CAS VOLUMETRIC FLOW RATE(DRY BASIS)
AVERAGE STACK GAS VOLUMETRIC FLOW RATE(DRY BASIS)
PERCENT ISOKINETIC
PERCENT EXCESS AIR IN STACK GAS
DRY GAS METER
DRY GAS METER CORRECTION FACTOR
STACK STATIC GAS PRESSURE
PITOT COEFFICIENT
ORIFICE PLATE -DIFF. PRESS. VALUE
PITOT DIFF. PRESS. VALUE
Temperature - 68 deg-F (528 deg-R)
Pressure - 29.92 in. Hg.
A-43
-------
KADIAH SOURCE TEST
EPA METHOD 2-5
SAMPLE- CALCULATION
»T : SITE #08
PLANT SITE :
SAMPLIHG LOCATION gs? OUTLET
"ST * : 08-MM5-PO-1
DA" : 4/23/85
TEST PERIOD
1220-1330 1357-1417 1430-1450 1512-1622 1635-1725
1) Volume of dry ga. ...pled at .tandard condition. (68 deg-F ,29.92 in. Bg)
. x [T(.td) * 460]
_
P(itd) x (Tn « 460)
f .,% * * V. x [T(.td) * 460] x [Pb *(P»/13.6)J
vni.tdj ________________
1 x 1*6.418 x 528 x [ 30.02 + ( 1.28 /13.6)]
Yin V, ft t a ) * """""""- -.«.._... -.-. «__.
29.92 x ( 66.8 * 460)
7«(.td) - 147.704d.cf
2) Volume of water vapor at .tandard condition.:
Vw(ga.) - 0.04715 ct/gm x W(l) g«
Vv(gaa) - 0.04715 x 740.1 - 34.896 .cf
3) Percent Moi.ture in .tack ga. :
100 x 7v(ga.)
ZM - -------------- ! _____
V.(.td) + Vv(ga«)
ZM . 19.11 Z
100 x 34.896
147.704 + 34.896
4) Mole fraction of dry »tack ga. :
100 - ZM 100 - 19.11
100 100
A-44
-------
SAMPLE CALCULATION
PAGE TWO
5)Av«rag* Molecular Weight of DRY stack gas :
MWd - (.44 x ZC02) + (.32 x Z02) + (.28 x ZH2)
MWd - (.44 x 7.4 ) + (.32 x i3.8 ) > (.28 x 78.8 ) - 29.736
6)Average Molecular Weight of vet stack gas :
MW - MWd x Md + 18(1 - Md)
MW - 29.736 x .8088946 * 18(1 - .8088946 ) - 27.49319
7) Stack ga« velocity in feet-per-»inute (fpm) at stack conditions :
Vs - KpxCp x [SQRT (dP)]»avet x SQRT [Ts lavgt] x SQRT [l/(PsxMW)] x SOsec/min
Vs - 85.49 x .84 x 60 x 13.33708 x SQRT[l/( 29.98912 I 27.49319 }]
7s - 2001.3 FPM
8) Average stack gas dry volumetric flov rate (DSCFM) :
Vs x As x Md x T(std) x Ps
Qid -
144 cu.in./cu.ft. z (Ts +460) z P(std)
2001.3 z 22167.13 z .8088946 z528z 29.98912
Q,d -
144 z 752.4 z 29.92
Qsd - 175282.4 dscfm
A-45
-------
SAMPLE CALCDLATIO
PAGE THREE
9)Iaokin«tic aaapling rate (Z) :
Dimensional Conatant C - K4 z 60 z 144 z [1 / (Pi /4)]
K4 .0945 FOR ENGLISH UNITS
C x Vm(std) z (Ts > 460)
IZ .
Vs z Tt z Ps x Md x (Dn)«2
1039.574 z 147.7036 z 752.4
U .
2001.3 z 235 z 29.98912 z .8088946 z( .304 ) «2
IZ - 109.5753
10) Ezcess air (Z) :
100 z Z02 100 z 13.8
EA - .
(.264 x ZN2) - Z02 (.264 z 78.8 ) - 13.8
EA - 197.05
11) Particulate Concentration :
Ca - ( grama part.) / V«(sco) - 0 / 147.7036
Ca 0.0000000 Crama/DSCF
T(atd) x Md z Pa z Ca
Ca -
P(atd) z Ta
528 z .8088946 z 29.98912 z 0.0000000
C. »
29.92 z 752.4
Ca - 0.0000000 Grams/ACP
LBS/HR - Ca z 0.002205 z Qad z 60
LBS/HR - O.OOOOOOOz 0.002205 z!75282.4 z 60
LBS/HR 0
Program Revision:1/16/84
A-46
-------
APPENDIX B
PROCESS MONITORING DATA
-------
-------
APPENDIX B-l
BOILER BLB-C OPERATING LOG SHEETS
B-l
-------
-------
30-146-88
14 RECOVERY DAILY REPORT
TIME
Black Liq. Flow
Black Liq. Solids
81k. Liq. Dens. PMT
81k. Liq. Dens. SCMT
Nozzle Press.
Prim. L1q. Temp.
Sec. Liq. Temp.
Green Liq. Flow
W/W Flow
BEn East G.L. Diss.
BE° West G.L. Diss.
G.L. Total #4
G.L. Total (Comp. )
W/W Flow E.' Scrubber
W/W Flow W. Scrubber
Total Air
Prim. Air
Prim. Duct Press.
Sec. Duct Press.
S.H. Draft
Boiler Out
Temp. £. Precip. IN
Temp. W. Precip. IN
Air To £. LAH
A1r From E. LAH
Air To W. LAH
A1r From W. LAH
Gas To E. LAH
Gas From E. LAH
Gas To U. LAH
Gas From U. LAH
1.0. Fan Out
Boiler Press.
Steam Flow
Inst. Air Press.
S Oxygen
X Combustibles
Smoke Density
TRS ; a - 1
Salt Cake 1 Min.
Salt Cake Scale Wt.
12
J71
(.::
W ' 3
li-l
-?/
317
}}
>; ;'
^ -
"
'
j-i
JY
^
iff
/
i J.
I'd
J
2. n
. 7
rr
fl-
2
J7J-
tt,2 '
d'J 9
l><< '
?(/
211
Jl4
!fil
::f.
' ~
; ,
fff
fJ
z->
"7
1 1
i i
5'
/, /
"jd
T>.tJ
?/
*
Ht
»
.? £, 1 j? ,tff
6
Jll
c^-
',
' '
- , :
"--''
«.. r
LI
I"1
c.l
1,0
' r
.-..
,' 'O
-
/
-
-'
?. _
" f
S
2
;;
' -
/ ^
; -
-,
C3
r-3*
^ £)
6 /
- -,
-
-
-
c
/ J
3 7
,' 7
7 ?
-/'
:- ;"
3i.-?
.- -
- - ,
; 2
^U
-7 [
~)o
,-,
y ,-
^^-'
/ yv
x
/
, ,
3' 7
?2.
/ 1
?<£>
j-
/. 3
^
/V
jj 7
.-
V.y/,
A9 V
7fe
". z
,_,
/
6
** ^ 3
f-2.f
i? ^
6-7-^>
_;/ '
7,1-C.
2. i-t<
,-.'7
, 7^
' LJ
^ --
"5
/.-f
?~ /
r-/
x-^
r -,
,, ^
?- (i
"f ''
/ /
?/
- "
T -
^
/ -/
12:00 M - 3-00 a m < /V?
8:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m.: ,f^ >-
4:00 p.m. - 12:00 p.m.: J9
SR. Operators
12:00 - 8:00
8:00 - 4:00
4:00 - 12:00
,it-tZ«C
^.-AtfiL---'
S-^L
Figure B.I Boiler BLB-C Operating Log Sheet, Run 01
B-3
-------
30-146-88
TIME
Black Liq. Flow
Black Liq. Solids
Blk. Liq. Dens. PMT
BU. Liq. Dens. SCMT
Nozzle Press.
Prim. Liq. Temp.
Sec. Liq. Temp.
Crsen Liq. Flo,.
W/W Flow
BE." East G.L. Diss.
8E° West G.L. Diss.
G.L. Total 14
G.L. Total (Comp.)
W/W Flow £. Scrubber
W/W Flow W. Scrubber
Total Air
Prim. Air
Prim. Duct Press.
Sec. Duct Press.
S.H. Draft
Boiler Out
Temp. E. Precip. IN
Temp. W. Precip. IN
Air To E. LAH
Air From E. LAH
Air To W. LAH
Air From W. LAH
Gas To E. LAH
Gas From £. LAH
Gas To W. LAH
Gas From W. LAH
1.0. Fan Out
Boiler Press.
Steam Flow
Inst. Air Press.
1 Oxygen
S Combustibles
Smoke Density
TRS ,3 - 3.
Salt Cake » Win.
Salt Cake Scale wt.
..-/-.
12
>J-
3-<5
22
53
.2 /
. -f
^
1?
£1
5
2V
iS-O
.5
,6
i -,> 5
2 n
9v
/
7/
. ff
t-Y
?₯
/'&
?,y
. S'
r/ff
?<7d
~?₯-
j't
&
/' /
/ 7
LV
', . c-
2
tf1
-?.#
63-t,
2 &
?2.&
"32*
^7?
i ~
- .
. ^
i? 7
«
22$
Utr
, 7
. /
> ?
i 'rf
ill
'-'//;
S. '
£6
.7
/ 7
" 3
l-i
-7
*4?>C.
07^
£.4
2
a
1. /
.**
Tf
RCl.U»t
If-
£4-
6~./
3-3
-?
' -j .'
'.' ^.r
-
£" 1
c <4
A :/
il?
. /;
, ^
. /
1-7
~- 7
-₯
,j
7-'
j£.
i 3
"?- 5
l t
i Y
yV2.
3V
2. .
Salt i? 7:00 t.m.f^
9 11:00 p.m. / ^7 £"62. 37
Salt 9 3:00 p.m. #$ + &*? /0&
9 7:00 a.m. 4--£-3 f?J 3
Salt « 11:00 p.m.^/x a/ 7. -\
9 3:00 o.m. Z./6 . 6.
Date y - y. y - ;?<
x^wi
6
i"?./
~-O
'- ' X
TV-*/
''?/
2 '-^
- ^
.V-
^f-
1 ^0
J ' 7
7
L"
1 .
l.i
<9 .5
j-/.-
? "
>*/
/; -
/
/ ^
7
- -
" -~l
f
,/
/ ~-
J.j'
/ 7
*.-»
JOT
7 /7
^ ?
^
/ .?
Water:
UHI
10
. «
^ .. .
i 1
;,--'--,-,
12
~
1 n
J ' '
£«£r
i_f* ^<«
2.2.
6. -7
<7./
4/ 1
T ^
// '
«-
'. :.'
*^ /O
7
7 Q
y
/ J~
T .£)
1 J
a o
.7
*/^J*'
7, -<
^ >
r
-
i
*.-'
' '. i
f..f
^- *
* ',
-n
:,
- ,~
-
^
- ~ -^
*/ '
/ 7
p
f ,,
V f
f }
J ^f
7
*}{-
yi.-
Si.
: ,-
^
/ T
2
-
/
,
-
*x ^T
_J^" 5^
.-?$"
->. 7,
(i ^
<>'
.
-
- 7
7
- -
.
- -
-
I
4
'./'/
'"''L.
i ' '
; =r
'i(j
76?
' n
,- .
rV
'9
./
' i>
x £
-
7
-7 to
V
, /
y 2.
7
-/ZJ_
- J
.
J ,
2.
2_
'-/ ,
' 7 ,
,'
-!* 5
c-
^1-2L
-7 ^
-92.
,-,
,-,'
J'/
"i
r .
- .,
-
x
, -7
/ -/
. .
... _
. -
-
»
j
, S
7^-
\
- -. .
'<-»
v-,<-
-'s
/
~"V
-v
,*/
-
^
, .-
- -
- > "i.
/i-
V
'.. (,
. r
y ,
, -
, ..
- ^ -f
-,
, .
^ -'^ ^w ' » \* ^ ^." p"^s
12:OOM - fl- QO an- 2.
-------
30-146-88
TIME
Black Llq. Flow <
Black Liq. Solids
Blk. Llq. 0-i
/.I
J/l
.7
/.I
3.0
2 -J
li
3 3
2.*
l.t
JjT
/ 6
V 3
,? 1
Jo?
/ 7
a 3
TO
7. /
77
/ j
/ J
J 7_
is
T.M
-7.2
/ 7
I a*
l17Cr/37X'
12:00 H
\ a v
8:00
8 10
^
y <
2. 5
7. /
7-
iJL
. f
V i'
3.3
T.C
7.
£S-
/<-
/ -7
v /
/ r
3:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m.
4:00 p.m. - 12:00 p.m.
:00 p
US-if
J a 6>
/£%rc*z*J<2,
3i I ~- 1-1,* ^
12:00 - 8^00
i / 7 ,3
8:00 - 4:00
4:00 - 12:00
Figure B.3 Boiler BLB-C Operating Log Sheet, Run 03
R-5
-------
-------
APPENDIX B-2
ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR OPERATING LOG SHEETS
B-7
-------
-------
tt-146-77
PRECIP. REPORT 14 RECOVERY
DATE
E & W OUTLET
W. LOAD VOLTS
E. LOAD VOLTS
PRIM. VOLTS
W* LOAD AMPS
E. LOAD AMPS
PRIM. AMPS
E & M INLET
W. MIDDLE FIELD
LOAD VOLTS
PRIM. VOLTS
LOAD AMPS
PRIM. AMPS
W. OUTLET
1 12
2
4
6
8
10
12
2
4 I 6
8
10
£>
o
o
o
b
o
0
Q
0
o
0
o
o
o
o
c
o
o
o
ft
d
d
0
&
W. LOAD VOLTS
E. LOAD VOLTS
PRIM. VOLTS
W. LOAD AMPS
E. LOAD AMPS
PRIM. AMPS
y<
<-?
.-?//)
:V "
T
/'VJ
Sy
ry
lkd>
J*-/
l/*
!*fl
r/
r>
,750
77
7^
fr?
-Tr
5-v
25Z?
_yy
-?</
?<""
,- ^
5"?
?/, -
7
' '^y
//. 7
W
t-%
?7?
">?
?%
i"-:
L* 0
/, -
S '
-7 ~
-r -;
/ - .-
-S'x
-";/
^/ _;
.7 ;
-7^
-S?
SY
-?57J
^^
j^:
//jO
^/ O
6 G
J2")O
J--s
2f
' i -.
f 0
"*:/./
___, ~
_^i .^
. -
/, ^
--J
^
^:-
' 'O
3/fc
J/o
LOAD VOLTS
PRIM. VOLTS
LOAD AMPS
PRIM. AMPS
<~^
~ -.')
-
.5^0
^^
^yo
/. /<~
J?^5
rj?
T?^>
r /?~
*9T
5-?
J^fe)
/./v
^^
7^^
/
- , ..
*3
?- ;
i ,/-
-...-
V ^
?- -
/ ^
-:. . -
<-.
*'w' '
,/ ,, .-
f ' "
"^T
svo
/./r
^rr,
~~s7
7^/6
IK
~ '"- -
±-t/
J'/O
< >T
-- ^
JZ)
x'^-
//vr
/JcJ
52>
J>yr
'./oO
13°
^_ '
-. , -
/ ~ '"
^' ','
- :
--
,'--.'
-y -.
?r
/5"^
/./ -
*> V -
/ .-
/''-
5~3
300
/ / '
-?/r^
"T3
^0
1. 1^
Ih
f3
?^O
l./t>
tf/t)
5"^
??<"
l.iC
ai-C'
/./C
^/<
!?
Lf%
c? /O
70
/3O
K'
-}'?
VA
«?ro
i- ^
.*?
f
} )
2>?
LJ
. '* *"
^'y
-:' /-
. "^
." -^
/ -
*" -
-I. y
SR. HELPERS: 12-8.
8-4
4-12.
Figure B.4 Electrostatic Precipitator Operating Log Sheet, Run 01
B-9
-------
PRECIP. REPORT 14 RECOVERY
DATE
E & W OUTLET '
W. LOAD VOLTS
E. LOAD VOLTS
PRIM. VOLTS
W. LOAD AMPS
E. LOAD AMPS
PRIM. AMPS
12
2
4
6
8
10
12
2
4
6
8
10
E i W INLET
W. LOAD VOLTS
E. LOAD VOLTS
PRIM. VOLTS
W. LOAD AMPS
E. LOAD AMPS
PRIM. AMPS
W. MIDDLE FIELD
LOAD VOLTS
PRIM. VOLTS
LOAD AMPS
PRIM. AMPS
W. OUTLET
LOAD VOLTS
PRIM. VOLTS
LOAD AMPS
PRIM. AMPS
I. MIDDLE FIELD
LOAD VOLTS
PRIM. VOLTS
LOAD AMPS
PRIM. AMPS
E. OUTLET
LOAD VOLTS
PRIM. VOLTS
LOAD AMPS
PRIM. AMPS
f',0
i A
(_J L''
2%y
^2
32.
J 2<2
-r
. >
/ ^"
<-^
Jl7
27 J
j»i?
~3°
i J*-S
f7
r-^
" r^
T -
7 -
' T '
/^
/ -.
^?T
.T-3
r>
-
5?
C" ..
? - -
r -
2 -
-
-5-7
TV
^7?
."c
.? -
/? /-
60
//O
3V
.3
S^fc^
s£ d
j--. '
- . *^ "v
-, ,-:
/, '
_^?
'
/
.- '-
- '
. '' '-""
/ ,
..-
r^ -
.?C
.' ' -
<- '
T
. V.
^y^
300
£5"
/^
^p-
-?s
x'-/r
-Tl?
-'j-^
,' _*'
£**>
L/-r
J^
~~ . '
' r
rj>
y-'i
X ' i
.-?.^
'/fr
2?#
3^
/ So
'/''
'.'. '
'
- ,
l"
T - ''
''.
.' :'
- - ,-
'
*>_
? -
f;
?<''>
- - -
_5~i/
^Wo
/./^*
,500
j5"^
.S3O
/, /<^
^00
^/
3^
/./<>
^o
sV
5?o
f-^ C
^u
- - -
.-.
- >
- - .
. -
it -7
- .
' -' '-s
£"£>
3(DO
.S6"
/7^T
}'&
~?C'
,,,$
?i*
-'2.
5.XJ
//r
2/2.
^ 2
£*y
>
.-^
} _I_
' "V
/ ,'
i' / ',
%1
? «--. >j
..
S'W
^jc1
' .,"
->,-'
zr-?
"',-
c>2.
*Z*r
' ' Ci"
- 1 _
v5«£.
c^^O
j.;^
5/0
n%
2>t>0
t<=jO
/S-^
^cR
300
//5
1//5
7^>
3C£>
,90
/
^
^6
j - -
^ L.
i
\^
v
^^t)
^.^f
4.'^
,
SR. HELPERS: 12-8.
8-4
4-12.
Figure B.5 Electrostatic Precipitator Operating Log Sheet, Run 02
B-10
-------
-146-77
PRECIP. REPORT 14 RECOVERY
DATE
\ 12 \ 2
4
6
8
10
12 1 2
4
6
8
10 |
E 4 W OUTLET
W. LOAD VOLTS
E. LOAD VOLTS
PRIM. VOLTS
W. LOAD AMPS
E. LOAD AMPS
BRIM. AMPS
E 4 W INLET
W. LOAD VOLTS
E. LOAD VOLTS
PRIM. VOLTS
W. LOAD AMPS
E. LOAD AMPS
PRIM. AMPS
H. MIDDLE FIELD
LOAD VOLTS
PRIM. VOLTS
LOAD AMPS
PRIM. AMPS
«. OUTLET
LOAD VOLTS
PRIM. VOLTS
LOAD AMPS
PRIM. AMPS
E. MIDDLE FIELD
LOAD VOLTS
PRIM. VOLTS
LOAD AMPS
PRIM. AMPS
E. OUTLET
LOAD VOLTS
PRIM. VOLTS
LOAD AMPS
PRIM. AMPS
V?
c/ -
fl
JT?
C
T4/
.30
100
MO
too
l/,r\
£a
200
X.XJ
JO
JJ
y
,/r
V8
70
SR. HELPERS: 12-8.
8-4
Figure B.6 Electrostatic Precipitator Operating Log Sheet, Run 03
B-ll
-------
Table B-l. Mean Electrostatic Precipitator
Operating Data During Test Periods
Run 01
Run 02
Run 03
E & W Outlet
W. Load Voltage (kV)
E. Load Voltage (kV)
Prim. Volts (V)
W. Load Amps (A)
E. Load Amps (A)
Prim. Amps (A)
E & W Inlet
W. Load Voltage (kV)
E. Load Voltage (kV)
Prim. Volts (V)
W. Load Amps (A)
E. Load Amps (A)
Prim, Amps (A)
W. Middle Field
Load Voltage (kV)
Prim. Volts (V)
Load Amps (A)
Prim. Amps (A)
W. Outlet
Load Voltage (kV)
Prim. Volts (V)
Load Amps (A)
Prim. Amps (A)
E. Middle Field
Load Voltage (kV)
Prim. Volts (V)
Load Amps (A)
Prim. Amps (A)
E. Outlet
Load Voltage (kV)
Prim. Volts (V)
Load Amps (A)
Prim. Amps (A)
Not Operating
Not Operating
Not Operating
Not Operating
Not Operating
Not Operating
59
59
268
0.28
0.28
110
56
310
0.85
160
54
340
1.15
200
48
283
0.71
135
54
300
1.15
2.15
Not Operating
Not Operating
Not Operating
Not Operating
Not Operating
Not Operating
59
59
280
0.33
0.33
128
53
300
0.85
160
54
340
1.15
200
48
290
0.80
150
53
298
1.15
2.15
48
48
250
0.47
0.50
214
58
58
273
0.31
0.32
55
304
0.85
161
54
344
1.15
200
48
280
0.78
148
53
298
1.15
2.15
B-12
-------
APPENDIX C
LABORATORY ANALYTICAL DATA
-------
-------
TABLE C-l. DIOXIN/FURAN ANALYTICAL RESULTS
FOR THE ESP OUTLET MM5 SAMPLES
ANALYTICAL DATA INPUT MATRIX FOR SITE BLB-C (OUTLET)
(picograms per sample train)
RUN 01 RUN 02
Species Value DL Value DL
RUN 03
Value DL
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDD
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDD
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDD
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDD
Octa-CDF
.00
200.00
.00
500.00
.00
.00
300.00
500.00
500.00
400.00
1200.00
200.00
40.00
.00
60.00
.00
100.00
200.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
550.00
80.00
1320.00
1100.00
1100.00
2100.00
1150.00
6100.00
1700.00
12000.00
200.00
20.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
250.00
.00
1350.00
400.00
1900.00
950.00
2050.00
1900.00
1500.00
1800.00
200.00
10.00
.00
10.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
Value = amount detected in MM5 sample train.
DL = detection limit of GC/MS analysis.
C-l
-------
TABLE C-2. DIOXIN/FURAN ANALYTICAL RESULTS
FOR THE ESP INLET MM5 SAMPLES
Species
ANALYTICAL DATA INPUT MATRIX FOR SITE BLB-C
(picograms per sample train)
RUN 01 RUN 02 RUN 03
Value DL Value DL Value DL
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDD
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDD
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDD
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDD
Octa-CDF
.00
2600.00
.00
19800.00
3300.00
18900.00
5100.00
14000.00
4500.00
3700.00
3000.00
500.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
1050.00
.00
2050.00
1550.00
1200.00
3300.00
1650.00
2550.00
600.00
2100.00
300.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
1200.00
.00
2200.00
1400.00
.00
3400.00
1600.00
2400.00
500.00
2100.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
1300.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
300.00
Value * amount detected in MM5 sample train.
DL - detection limit of GC/MS analysis.
C-2
-------
TABLE C-3. COMPOUND-SPECIFIC DIOXIN PRECURSOR
DATA FOR SITE BLB-C FEED SAMPLES
Precursor Precursor Concentration, ug/q (pom)
Compounds Black Liquor Feed Samples
Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Average
Base Neutrals Fraction
Chlorinated Benzenes:
Dichlorobenzenes ND ND ND
Trichlorobenzenes ND ND ' ND
Tetrachlorobenzenes ND ND ND
Pentachlorobenzenes ND ND ND
Hexachlorobenzenes NO ND ND
Total Chlorinated Benzenes 000
Chlorinated Biphenyls:
Chlorobiphenyls ND ND ND
Dichlorobiphenyls ND ND ND
TriChlorobiphenyls ND ND ND
Tetrachlorobiphenyls ND ND ND
Pentachlorobiphenyls ND ND ND
Hexachlorobiphenyls ND ND ND
Heptachlorobiphenyls ND ND ND
Octachlorobiphenyls ND ND ND
Nonachlorobiphenyls ND ND ND
Decachlorobiphenyls ND ND ND
Total Chlorinated Biphenyls 000
Acids Fraction
Chlorinated Phenols:
Dichlorophenols ND ND ND
Trichlorophenols ND ND ND
Tetrachlorophenols ND ND ND
Pentachlorophenols 0 trace 0.01
Total Chlorinated Phenols 0 trace o!oi
C-3
-------
-------
APPENDIX D
RUN-SPECIFIC DIOXIN/FURAN EMISSIONS DATA
-------
-------
APPENDIX D-l
AS-MEASURED RUN-SPECIFIC DIOXIN/FURAN EMISSIONS DATA
D-l
-------
-------
TABLE D-l. SITE BLB-C DIOXIN/FURAN EMISSIONS
DATA FOR RUN 1 AT THE ESP OUTLET
(As-measured Concentrations)
Dioxin/Furan
Isomer
Isomer Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ng/dscm)
Isomer Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ppt)
Isomer Hourly
Emissions Rate
(ug/hr)
DIOXINS
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
Penta-CDD
Hexa-CDD
Hepta-CDD
Octa-CDD
Total PCDD
FURANS
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDF
Total PCDF
4
7
1
2
5
1
1
9
4
3
ND
[ 9.57E-03)
.78E-02( N/A )
ND
.18E-02
.20E-01
.87E-01
.26E-01
ND |
.20E-01
ND
.20E-01
.57E-02I
.78E-02I
.83E-01
[ 2.39E-02)
[ N/A )
; N/A
k N/A
)
)
3
4
6
1
2
L 1.44E-02)
N/A
)
9
4.78E-02)
N/A
[ N/A
[ N/A
)
)
7
5
2
2
ND (
.57E-03(
ND (
.42E-03(
.77E-03(
.50E-02(
.98E-02
ND (
.40E-03(
ND (
.67E-03(
.63E-03(
.59E-03(
.53E-02
7.15E-04)
N/A )
1.62E-03)
N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
1.13E-03)
N/A )
3.39E-03)
N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
ND
1
ND
2
3
8
1
ND
3
ND
3
2
1
1
( 2.85E+00)
.43E+01
( 7.13E+00)
.14E+01
.56E+01
.55E+01
.57E+02
( 4.28E+00)
.56E+01
( 1.43E+01)
.56E+01
.85E+01
.43E+01
.14E+02
NOTE: Isomer concentrations shown are at as-measured oxygen conditions.
ND = not detected (detection limit in parentheses).
N/A = detection limits not available. For positive samples the QA samples
indicate the method capability and detection limits.
ng = 1.0E-09g
ug = 1.0E-06g
ppt = parts per trillion, dry volume basis
8760 operating hours per year
D-3
-------
TABLE D-2. SITE BLB-C DIOXIN/FURAN EMISSIONS
DATA FOR RUN 2 AT THE ESP OUTLET
(As-measured Concentrations)
Dioxin/Furan
Isomer
Isomer Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ng/dscm)
Isomer Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ppt)
Isomer Hourly
Emissions Rate
(ug/hr)
DIOXINS
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
Penta-CDD
Hexa-CDD
Hepta-CDD
Octa-CDD
Total PCDD
FURANS
ND ( 4.52E-03)
1.24E-01(
2.49E-01(
4.75E-01(
.38E+00(
,71E+00(
1
2.
4.94E+00
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
ND ( 3.38E-04)
9.30E-03(
1.68E-02(
" 92E-02(
81E-02(
1.42E-01(
2.75E-01
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
ND ( 1.34E+00)
3.69E+01
7.37E+01
1.41E+02
4.09E+02
8.04E+02
1.46E+03
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDF
Total PCDF
1.81E-02
2.99E-01
.49E-01
.60E-01
2,
2,
3.
4.
85E-01(
52E-02(
1.26E+00
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
1.42E-03(
2.35E-02(
1.76E-02
1.67E-02
2.26E-02
2.45E-03
8.43E-02
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
5.36E+00
8.85E+01
7.37E+01
7.71E+01
1.14E+02
1.34E+01
3.72E+02
NOTE: Isomer concentrations shown are at as^measured oxygen conditions.
ND = not detected (detection limit in parentheses).
N/A = detection limits not available. For positive samples the QA samples
indicate the method capability and detection limits.
ng = 1.0E-09g
ug = 1.0E-06g
ppt = parts per trillion, dry volume basis
8760 operating hours per year
D-4
-------
TABLE D-4. SITE BLB-C DIOXIN/FURAN EMISSIONS
DATA FOR RUN 1 AT THE ESP INLET
(As-measured Concentrations)
Dioxin/Furan
Isomer
Isomer Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ng/dscm)
Isomer Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ppt)
Isomer Hourly
Emissions Rate
(ug/hr)
OIQXINS
2373 TCDD ND ( N/A )
Other TCDD 8.10E-01( N/A )
Penta-CDD 1.03E+00( N/A )
Hexa-CDD 1.59E+00( N/A )
Hepta-CDD 1.40E+00( N/A ]
Octa-CDD 9.35E-01( N/A )
Total PCDD 5.76E+00
FURANS
2378 TCDF ND ( N/A ]
Other TCDF 6.17E+00( N/A ]
Penta-CDF 5.89E+00( N/A
Hexa-CDF 4.36E+00( N/A
Hepta-CDF 1.15E+00( N/A
Octa-CDF 1.56E-01( N/A
Total PCDF 1.77E+01
NOTE: Isomer concentrations shown
ND = not detected (detection linr
N/A = detection limits not availat
indicate the method capabiV
ng = 1.0E-09g
ug = 1.0E-06g
ppt = parts per trillion, dry voli
ND ( N/A )
6.05E-02( N/A )
6.95E-02( N/A )
9.77E-02( N/A )
7.93E-02( N/A )
4.89E-02( N/A )
3.56E-01
ND ( N/A )
4.85E-01( N/A )
4.17E-01( N/A )
2.80E-01( N/A )
6.78E-02( N/A )
i 8.44E-03( N/A )
1.26E+00
are at as -measured oxygen
't in parentheses) .
)le. For positive samples
ty and detection limits.
jme basis
ND ( N/A
2.11E+02
2.67E+02
4.13E+02
3.65E+02
2.43E+02
1.50E+03
ND ( N/A
1.60E+03
1.53E+03
1.13E+03
3.00E+02
4.05E+01
4.61E+03
conditions.
the QA samples
D-6
-------
TABLE 0-3. SITE BLB-C DIOXIN/FURAN EMISSIONS
DATA FOR RUN 3 AT THE ESP OUTLET
(As-measured Concentrations)
XT'
Dioxin/Furan
Isomer
Isomer Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ng/dscm)
Isomer Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ppt)
Isomer Hourly
Emissions Rate
(ug/hr)
DIOXINS
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
Penta-CDD
Hexa-CDD
Hepta-CDD
Octa-CDD
Total PCDD
FURANS
6.28E-02(
1.01E-01(
2.39E-01(
4.77E-01(
4.52E-01(
1.33E+00
NO ( 2.51E-03)
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
ND (
4.69E-03(
6.79E-03(
1.47E-02(
2.70E-02(
2.37E-02(
7.68E-02
1.88E-04)
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
ND ( 7.22E-01)
1.81E+01
2.89E+01
6.86E+01
1.37E+02
1.30E+02
3.83E+02
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDF
Total PCDF
ND
3.39E-01I
4.77E-01
5.15E-01
3.77E-01
5.03E-02I
2.51E-03)
[ N/A )
N/A )
N/A
N/A )
[ N/A )
1.76E+00
ND ( 1.98E-04)
2.67E-02( N/A )
3.38E-02 N/A
3.30E-02 N/A
2.22E-02 N/A
2.72E-03 N/A
1.18E-01
ND ( 7.22E-01)
9.75E+01
1.37E+02
1.48E+02
1.08E+02
1.44E+01
5.05E+02
NOTE: Isomer concentrations shown are at as-measured oxygen conditions.
ND = not detected (detection limit in parentheses).
N/A = detection limits not available. For positive samples the QA samples
indicate the method capability and detection limits.
ng = 1.0E-09g
ug = 1.0E-06g
ppt = parts per trillion, dry volume basis
8760 operating hours per year
D-5
-------
TABLE 0-6. SITE BLB-C DIOXIN/FURAN EMISSIONS
DATA FOR RUN 3 AT THE ESP INLET
(As-measured Concentrations)
Dioxin/Furan
Isomer
Isomer Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ng/dscm)
Isomer Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ppt)
Isomer Hourly
Emissions Rate
(ug/hr)
DIOXINS
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
Penta-CDD
Hexa-CDD
Hepta-CDD
Octa-CDD
Total PCDD
FURANS
ND (
3.86E-01(
4.50E-01
1.09E+00
7.72E-01
6.75E-01
3.38E+00
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
ND (
2.88E-02(
3.04E-02
6.73E-02
4.37E-02(
3.53E-02(
2.05E-01
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
ND (
9.39E+01
1.10E+02
2.66E+02
1.88E+02
1.64E+02
8.22E+02
V H
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDF
Total PCDF
ND
7.07E-01
ND
5.14E-01
1.61E-01I
ND <
[ N/A )
N/A
4.18E-01
N/A
: N/A
9.65E-02)
ND
5.56E-02
ND
3.30E-02
9.46E-03
ND
N/A )
N/A )
2.96E-02
N/A
N/A
5.23E-03
1.38E+00
9.81E-02
ND ( N/A
1.72E+02
ND ( 1.02E+02)
1.25E+02
3.91E+01
ND ( 2.35E+01)
3.37E+02
NOTE: Isomer concentrations shown are at as-measured oxygen conditions.
ND = not detected (detection limit in parentheses).
N/A = detection limits not available. For positive samples the QA samples
indicate the method capability and detection limits.
ng = 1.0E-09g
ug = 1.0E-06g
ppt = parts per trillion, dry volume basis
8760 operating hours per year
D-8
-------
TABLE D-5. SITE BLB-C DIOXIN/FURAN EMISSIONS
DATA FOR RUN 2 AT THE ESP INLET
(As-measured Concentrations)
Dioxin/Furan
Isomer
Isomer Concentration Isomer
In Flue Gas In
(ng/dscm)
Concentration
Flue Gas
(ppt)
Isomer Hourly
Emissions Rate
(ug/hr)
DIOXINS
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
Penta-CDD
Hexa-CDD
Hepta-CDD
Octa-CDD
Total PCDD
FURANS
NO (
3.26E-01(
4.81E-01(
1.02E+00(
7.92E-01(
6.52E-01(
3.28E+00
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
NO (
2.44E-02(
3.25E-02)
6.31E-02I
4.48E-02(
3.41E-02(
1.99E-01
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
V "V " /
( N/A )
( N/A )
ND ( N/A
8.48E+01
.25E+02
.67E+02
.06E+02
.70E+02
1.
2.
2.
1
8.53E+02
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDF
Total PCDF
ND (
6.37E-01(
3.73E-01(
5.12E-01(
1.86E-01(
9.32E-02(
1.80E+00
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
ND (
,OOE-02(
.64E-02
.29E-02
.10E-02
.05E-03
1.25E-01
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
ND ( N/A
1.66E+02
9.70E+01
1.33E+02
4.85E+01
2.42E+01
4.69E+02
NOTE: Isomer concentrations shown are at as-measured oxygen conditions.
ND = not detected (detection limit in parentheses).
N/A = detection limits not available. For positive samples the QA samples
indicate the method capability and detection limits.
ng = 1.0E-09g
ug = 1.0E-06g
ppt = parts per trillion, dry volume basis
8760 operating hours per year
D-7
-------
APPENDIX D-2
CORRECTED TO 3 PERCENT OXYGEN RUN-SPECIFIC DIOXIN/FURAN EMISSIONS DATA
D-9
-------
-------
TABLE D-7. SITE BLB-C DIOXIN/FURAN EMISSIONS
DATA FOR RUN 1 AT THE ESP OUTLET
(Concentrations Corrected to 3% Oxygen)
Dioxin/Furan
Isomer
Isomer Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ng/dscm @ 3% oxygen)
Isomer Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ppt @ 3% oxygen)
Isomer Hourly
Emissions Rate
(ug/hr)
DIOXINS
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
Penta-CDD
Hexa-CDD
Hepta-CDD
Octa-CDD
Total PCDD
FURANS
ND ( 2.39E-02)
ND ( 1.79E-03)
1.20E-01( N/A ) 8.94E-03( N/A )
ND (
1.79E-01(
2.99E-01(
7.18E-01(
1.32E+00
5.98E-02)
N/A
N/A
N/A
1
ND ( 4.04E-03)
10E-02(
1.69E-02(
3.75E-02(
7.44E-02
N/A
N/A
N/A
ND ( 2.85E+00)
1.43E+01
ND ( 7.13E+00)
2.14E+01
3.56E+01
8.55E+01
1.57E+02
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDF
Total PCDF
ND ( 3.59E-02)
2.99E-01(
ND (
2.99E-01(
2.39E-01
1.20E-01
N/A )
1.20£-01)
N/A )
( N/A )
( N/A )
ND ( 2.82E-03)
9.57E-01
2.35E-02(
ND (
1.92E-02(
1.41E-02(
6.48E-03(
6.32E-02
N/A
8.46E-03
N/A
N/A
N/A
ND ( 4.28E+00)
3.56E+01
NO ( 1.43E+01)
3.56E+01
2.85E+01
1.43E+01
1.14E+02
NOTE: Isomer concentrations shown are corrected to 3% oxygen.
ND = not detected (detection limit in parentheses).
N/A = detection limits not available. For positive samples the QA samples
indicate the method capability and detection limits.
ng = 1.0E-09g
ug = 1.0E-06g
ppt = parts per trillion, dry volume basis
8760 operating hours per year
0-11
-------
TABLE D-8. SITE BLB-C DIOXIN/FURAN EMISSIONS
DATA FOR RUN 2 AT THE ESP OUTLET
(Concentrations Corrected to 3% Oxygen)
Dioxin/Furan
Isomer
Isomer Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ng/dscm @ 3% oxygen)
Isomer Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ppt @ 3% oxygen)
Isomer Hourly
Emissions Rate
(ug/hr)
DIOXINS
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
Penta-CDD
Hexa-CDD
Hepta-CDD
Octa-CDD
Total PCDD
FURANS
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDF
Total PCDF
. ND (
1.07E-OK
2.15E-01(
4.10E-01(
1.19E+OOI
2.34E+00(
4.27E+00
1.56E-02
2.58E-01
2.15E-01
2.25E-01
3.32E-01
3.90E-02
1.08E+00
3.90E-03)
N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
; N/A ).
; N/A )
( N/A )
ND <
8.02E-03I
1.45E-02
2.52E-02
6.74E-02
1.23E-01
2.38E-01
1.23E-03
2.03E-02
1.52E-02
I.44E-02
1.95E-02
2.12E-03
7.27E-02
2.92E-04)
k N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
[ N/A )
( N/A ]
N/A
! N/A
( N/A
( N/A
( N/A
ND
3
7
1
4
8
1
5
8
7
7
1
1
3
( 1.34E+OC)
.69E+01
.37E+01
.41E+02
.09E+02
.04E+02
.46E+03
.36E+00
.85E+01
.37E+01
.71E+01
. 14E+02
.34E+01
.72E+02
NOTE: Isomer concentrations shown are corrected to 3% oxygen.
ND = not detected (detection limit in parentheses).
N/A = detection limits not available. For positive samples the QA samples
indicate the method capability and detection limits.
ng = 1.0E-09g
ug = 1.0E-06g
ppt = parts per -trillion, dry volume basis
8760 operating hours per year
D-12
-------
TABLE D-9. SITE BLB-C DIOXIN/FURAN EMISSIONS
DATA FOR RUN 3 AT THE ESP OUTLET
(Concentrations Corrected to 3% Oxygen)
Dioxin/Furan
Isomer
Isomer Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ng/dscm @ 3% oxygen)
Isomer Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ppt @ 3% oxygen)
Isomer Hourly
Emissions Rate
(ug/hr)
DIOXINS
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
Penta-CDD
Hexa-CDD
Hepta-CDD
Octa-CDD
Total PCDD
FURANS
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDF
Total PCDF
1
2
5
1
1
3
8
1
1
9
1
4
ND (
.53E-01(
.44E-01(
.81E-01(
.16E+00(
.10E+00(
.24E+00
ND (
.25E-01(
.16E+00(
.25E+00(
.17E-01(
.22E-01(
.28E+00
6.11E-03
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
6.11E-03,
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
)
1
) 1
1 3
6
I 5
1
I
6
.... 8
8
5
6
2
ND (
.14E-02(
.65E-02(
.57E-02(
.57E-02(
.75E-02(
.87E-01
ND (
.49E-02(
.22E-02(
.04E-02(
.39E-02(
.62E-03(
.88E-01
4.57E-04)
N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
4.80E-04)
N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
N/A )
ND
1
2
6
1
1
3
ND
9
1
1
1
1
5
( 7.22E-01
.81E+01
.89E+01
.86E+01
.37E+02
.30E+02
.83E+02
-
( 7.22E-01
.75E+01
.37E+02
.48E+02
.08E+02
.44E+01
.05E+02
)
)
NOTE: Isomer concentrations shown are corrected to 3% oxygen.
ND « not detected (detection limit in parentheses).
N/A = detection limits not available. For positive samples the QA samples
indicate the method capability and detection limits.
ng = 1.0E-09g
ug = 1.0E-06g
ppt = parts per trillion, dry volume basis
8760 operating hours per year
D-13
-------
TABLE D-10. SITE BLB-C DIOXIN/FURAN EMISSIONS
DATA FOR RUN 1 AT THE ESP INLET
(Concentrations Corrected to 3% Oxygen)
Dioxin/Furan
Isomer
Isomer Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ng/dscm @ 3% oxygen)
Isomer Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ppt @ 3% oxygen)
Isomer Hourly
Emissions Rate
(ug/hr)
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
Penta-CDD
Hexa-CDD
Hepta-CDD
Octa-CDD
Total PCDD
FURANS
ND (
1.76E+00(
' 23E+00(
45E+00(
04E+00(
03E+00(
1.25E+01
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
ND (
1.31E-01
1.51E-01
2.12E-01(
1.72E-01(
1.06E-01(
7.72E-01
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
ND ( N/A
2.11E+02
2.67E+02
4.13E+02
3.65E+02
2.43E+02
1.50E+03
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDF
Total PCDF
ND (
.34E+01(
,28E+01(
,46E+00(
,50E+00(
,38E-01(
3.84E+01
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
ND (
1.05E+00(
9.03E-01(
6.07E-01
1.47E-01
1.83E-02
2.73E+00
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
ND ( N/A
1.60E+03
1.53E+03
1.13E+03
.OOE+02
.05E+01
3.
4.
4.61E+03
NOTE: Isomer concentrations shown are corrected to 3% oxygen.
ND = not detected (detection limit in parentheses).
N/A = detection limits not available. For positive samples the QA samples
indicate the method capability and detection limits.
ng = 1.0E-09g
ug = 1.0E-06g
ppt = parts per trillion, dry volume basis
8760 operating hours per year
D-14
-------
TABLE D-ll.
SITE BLB-C DIOXIN/FURAN EMISSIONS
DATA FOR RUN 2 AT THE ESP INLET
(Concentrations Corrected to 3% Oxygen)
Dioxin/F.uran
Isomer
Isomer Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ng/dscm @ 3% oxygen)
Isomer Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ppt @ 3% oxygen)
Isomer Hourly
Emissions Rate
(ug/hr)
DIOXINS
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
Penta-CDD
Hexa-CDD
Hepta-CDD
Octa-CDD
Total PCDD
FURANS
ND (
,62E-01(
,13E+00(
,40E+00(
,85E+00(
.52E+00(
7.66E+00
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
ND (
5.69E-02(
7.60E-02(
1.47E-01(
1.05E-01(
7.97E-02(
4.65E-01
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
ND ( N/A
8.48E+01
1.25E+02
.67E+02
.06E+02
.70E+02
2.
2.
1,
8.53E+02
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDF
Total PCDF
1
ND (
.49E+00
8.71E-01
1.
4.
2.
20E+00
36E-01
18E-01
4.21E+00
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
1
ND (
.17E-01
6.16E-02
68E-02
56E-02
18E-02
2.93E-01
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
ND ( N/A
1.66E+02
9.70E+01
1.33E+02
4.85E+01
2.42E+01
4.69E+02
NOTE: Isomer concentrations shown are corrected to 3% oxygen.
ND = not detected (detection limit in parentheses).
N/A = detection limits not available. For positive samples the QA samples
indicate the method capability and detection limits.
ng = 1.0E-09g
ug = 1.0E-06g
ppt = parts per trillion, dry volume basis
8760 operating hours per year
D-15
-------
TABLE D-12.
SITE BLB-C DIOXIN/FURAN EMISSIONS
DATA FOR RUN 3 AT THE ESP INLET
(Concentrations Corrected to 3% Oxygen)
Dioxin/Furan
Isomer
Isomer Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ng/dscm ? 3% oxygen)
Isomer Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ppt @ 3% oxygen)
Isomer Hourly
Emissions Rate
(ug/hr)
DIOXINS
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
Penta-CDD
Hexa-CDD
Hepta-CDD
Octa-CDD
Total PCDD
FURANS
NO (
.80E-01(
,10E-01(
.21E+00(
.56E+00(
.37E+00(
6.83E+00
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
ND (
5.83E-02(
6.15E-02(
1.36E-01(
8.83E-02(
7.14E-02(
4.16E-01
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
ND ( N/A
9.39E+01
.10E+02
.66E+02
1.88E+02
1.64E+02
1
2.
8.22E+02
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDF
Total PCDF
ND (
1.43E+OOI
ND
1.04E+00
3.25E-01
ND
k N/A )
, N/A )
k 8.45E-01)
N/A )
N/A )
1.95E-01)
2.80E+00
ND (
1.12E-01I
ND <
6.67E-02I
1.91E-02I
ND <
k N/A )
k N/A )
[ 5.98E-02)
I N/A )
N/A )
1.06E-02)
1.98E-01
ND ( N/A )
1.72E+02
ND ( 1.02E+02)
1.25E+02
3.91E+01
ND ( 2.35E+01)
3.37E+02
NOTE: Isomer concentrations shown are corrected to 3% oxygen.
ND = not detected (detection limit in parentheses).
N/A = detection limits not available. For positive samples the QA samples
indicate the method capability and detection limits.
ng = 1.0E-09g
ug = 1.0E-06g
ppt = parts per trillion, dry volume basis
8760 operating hours per year
0-16
-------
APPENDIX E
RUN-SPECIFIC RISK MODELING INPUT DATA
-------
-------
TABLE E-2. SITE BLB-C RISK MODELING PARAMETERS FOR RUN 2
Latitude - 47 15 58
Longitude = 122 25 29
Stack Height (From Grade Level) = 77.1 m
Stack Diameter (ID) - 3.35 m
Flue Gas Flow Rate (Dry Standard) = 4937 dscmm
Flue Gas Exit Temperature = 419 K
Flue Gas Exit Velocity (Actual) = 986.6 mpm
Dioxin/Furan
Isomer
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDD
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDD
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDD
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDD
Octa-CDF
Isomer
Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ng/dscm)
NO ( 4.52E-03)
1.24E-01
1.81E-02
2.99E-01
2.49E-01
2.49E-01
4.75E-01
2.60E-01
1.38E+00
3.85E-01
2.71E+00
4.52E-02
Isomer Hourly
Emissions
Rate
(ug/hr)
NO ( 1.34E+00)
3.69E+01
5.36E+00
8.85E+01
7.37E+01
7.37E+01
I.4IE+02
7.71E+01
4.09E+02
1.14E+02
8.04E+02
1.34E+01
Relative
Potency
Factor
1.000
.010
.100
.001
.500
.100
.040
.010
.001
.001
.000
.000
2,3,7,8 - TCDD
Equivalent
Emissions
(mg/yr)
ND ( 1.17E+01)
3.23E+00
4.70E+00
7.75E-01
3.23E+02
6.46E+01
4.93E+01
6.75E+00
3.58E+00
9.98E-01
.OOE+00
.OOE+00
Net 2378 TCDD Equivalent Atmospheric Loading
4.57E+02
ND = not detected (detection limit in parentheses).
N/A = detection limit not available
ng = 1.0E-09g
ug = 1.0E-06g
mg = 1.0E-03g
Standard conditions: 293 K (20 C) temperature and 1 atmosphere pressure.
8760 operating hours per year
E-2
-------
TABLE E-l. SITE BLB-C RISK MODELING PARAMETERS FOR RUN 1
Latitude = 47 15 58
Longitude = 122 25 29
Stack Height (From Grade Level) = 77.1 m
Stack Diameter (ID) = 3.35 m
Flue Gas Flow Rate (Dry Standard) = 4964 dscmm
Flue Gas Exit Temperature = 418 K
Flue Gas Exit Velocity (Actual) = 988.1 mpm
Dioxin/Furan
Isomer
Isomer
Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ng/dscm)
Isomer Hourly
Emissions
Rate
(ug/hr)
Relative
Potency
Factor
2,3,7,8 - TCDD
Equivalent
Emi ssions
(mg/yr)
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDD
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDO
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-CDD
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDD
Octa-CDF
ND ( 9.57E-03)
4.78E-02
ND ( 1.44E-02)
1.20E-01
ND
ND
7.18E-02
1.20E-01
1.20E-01
9.57E-02
2.87E-01
4.78E-02
( 2.39E-02)
( 4.78E-02)
ND ( 2.85E+00) 1.000
1.43E+01 .010
ND ( 4.28E+00) .100
3.56E+01 .001
ND ( 7.13E+00) .500
ND ( 1.43E+01) .100
2.14E+01 .040
3.56E+01 .010
3.56E+01 .001
2.85E+01 .001
8.55E+01 .000
1.43E+01 .000
Net 2378 TCDD Equivalent Atmospheric Loading
ND ( 2.50E+01)
1.25E+00
ND ( 3.75E+00)
3.12E-01
ND ( 3.12E+01)
ND ( 1.25E+01)
7.49E+00
3.12E+00
3.12E-01
2.50E-01
.OOE+00
.OOE+00
1.27E+01
ND =
N/A =
ng =
ug =
mg
not detected (detection limit in parentheses).
detection limit not available
1.0E-09g
1.0E-06g
1.0E-03g
Standard conditions: 293 K (20 C) temperature and 1 atmosphere pressure
8760 operating hours per year
E-l
-------
TABLE E-3. SITE BLB-C RISK MODELING PARAMETERS FOR RUN 3
Latitude - 47 15 58
Longitude - 122 25 29
Stack Height (From Grade Level) = 77.1 m
Stack Diameter (ID) = 3.35 m
Flue Gas Flow Rate (Dry Standard) = 4790 dscmm
Flue Gas Exit Temperature = 420 K
Flue Gas Exit Velocity (Actual) = 957.5 mpm
Dioxin/Furan
Isomer
2378 TCDD
Other TCDD
2378 TCDF
Other TCDF
Penta-CDD
Penta-CDF
Hexa-CDD
Hexa-CDF
Hepta-COD
Hepta-CDF
Octa-CDD
Octa-CDF
Isomer
Concentration
In Flue Gas
(ng/dscm)
NO ( 2.51E-03)
6.28E-02
ND ( 2.51E-03)
3.39E-01
1.01E-01
4.77E-01
2.39E-01
5.15E-01
4.77E-01
3.77E-01
4.52E-01
5.03E-02
Isomer Hourly
Emissions
Rate
(ug/hr)
ND ( 7.22E-01)
1.81E+01
ND ( 7.22E-01)
9.75E+01
2.89E+01
1.37E+02
6.86E+01
1.48E+02
1.37E+02
1.08E+02
1.30E+02
1.44E+01
Relative
Potency
Factor
1.000
.010
.100
.001
.500
.100
.040
.010
.001
.001
.000
.000
2,3,7,8 - TCDD
Equivalent
Emissions
(mg/yr)
ND ( 6.33E+00)
1.58E+00
ND ( 6.33E-01)
8.54E-01
1.27E+02
1.20E+02
2.40E+01
1.30E+01
1.20E+00
9.49E-01
.OOE+00
.OOE+00
Net 2378 TCDD Equivalent Atmospheric Loading
2.88E+02
ND = not detected (detection limit in parentheses).
N/A = detection limit not available
ng = 1.0E-09g
ug = 1.0E-06g
mg = 1.0E-03g
Standard conditions: 293 K (20 C) temperature and 1 atmosphere pressure.
8760 operating hours per year
E-3
-------
-------
APPENDIX F
RUN-SPECIFIC HOMOLOGUE DISTRIBUTIONS
-------
-------
TABLE F-l. SITE BLB-C HOMOLOGUE DISTRIBUTION AT THE OUTLET
HOMOLOGUES HOMOIOGUE FRACTION
RUN 01 RUN 02 RUN 03
DIOXINS MASS MOLE MASS MOLE MASS MOLE
2378 TCDD 000000
Other TCDD 0.0909 0.1201 0.0252 0.0338 0.0472 0.0611
Penta-CDD 0 0 0.0503 0.0611 0.0755 0.0884
Hexa-CDD 0.1364 0.1483 0.0961 0.1061 0.1792 0.1911
Hepta-CDD 0.2273 0.2274 0.2792 0.2836 0.3585 0.3516
Octa-CDD 0.5455 0.5042 0.5492 0.5155 0.3396 0.3078
FURANS
2378 TCDF 0 0 0.0144 0.0169 0 0
Other TCDF 0.3125 0.3717 0.2378 0.2786 0.1929 0.2253
Penta-CDF 0 0 0.1982 0.2089 0.2714 0.2853
Hexa-CDF 0.3125 0.3033 0.2072 0.1981 0.2929 0.2791
Hepta-CDF 0.25 0.2225 0.3063 0.2684 0.2143 0.1873
Octa-CDF 0.125 0.1025 0.036 0.0291 0.0286 0.023
F-l
-------
-------
APPENDIX G
COMPOUND-SPECIFIC PRECURSOR RESULTS
-------
-------
TABLE 6-1. COMPOUND-SPECIFIC DIOXIN PRECURSOR
DATA FOR SITE BLB-C FEED SAMPLES
Precursor
Compounds
Precursor Concentration, ua/a foom^
Black Liauor Feed Samples
Run 1 Run 2 Run 3
Base Neutrals Fraction
Chlorinated Benzenes:
Dichlorobenzenes ND ND ND
Trichlorobenzenes ND ND ND
Tetrachlorobenzenes ND ND ND
Pentachlorobenzenes NO ND ND
Hexachlorobenzenes ND ND ND
Total Chlorinated Benzenes ND ND ND
Chlorinated Biphenyls:
Chlorobiphenyls ND ND ND
DiChlorobiphenyls ND ND ND
TriChlorobiphenyls ND ND ND
Tetrachlorobiphenyls ND ND ND
Pentachlorobiphenyls NO ND ND
Hexachlorobiphenyls ND ND ND
Heptachlorobiphenyls ND ND ND
Octachlorobiphenyls ND ND ND
Nonachlorobiphenyls ND ND ND
Decachlorobiphenyls ND ND ND
Total Chlorinated Biphenyls ND ND ND
Acids Fraction
Chlorinated Phenols:
Dichlorophenols ND ND ND
Trichlorophenols ND ND ND
Tetrachlorophenols ND ND ND
Pentachlorophenols o trace 0.01
Total Chlorinated Phenols 0 trace o!oi
G-l
-------
-------
APPENDIX H
TESTING PERSONNEL
-------
-------
TABLE H-l. TESTING PERSONNEL
Name
Affiliation
Larry E. Keller
Bob Jongleux
Jim McReynolds
Lee Garcia
Gary Henry
Dave Savia
Mike Hartman
Deborah Benson
Carol Jamgochian
Radian
Radian
Radian
Radian
Radian
Radian
Radian
Radian
Radian
Corporation
Corporation
Corporation
Corporation
Corporation
Corporation
Corporation
Corporation
Corporation
H-l
-------
-------
APPENDIX I
ERROR ANALYSIS OF CONTROL DEVICE EFFICIENCY CALCULATIONS
-------
-------
APPENDIX I
ERROR ANALYSIS: CONTROL DEVICE EFFICIENCY CALCULATIONS
Objective: Given the analytical uncertainty of the dioxin/furan analyses
(± 50% accuracy), estimate the uncertainty of the control device
efficiency calculations.
Let: Cout meas = the measured concentration of a given dioxin/furan
' homologue at the outlet location.
Cin meas = the measured concentration of a given dioxin/furan
' homologue at the inlet location.
Cout max = t'ie maxinujm possible concentration of the dioxin/
furan homologue given the measured value C .
out,meas'
Cout min = the minimum possible concentration of the dioxin/
' furan homologue given the measured value C ^
out,meas'
Cin max * the maximum possible concentration of the dioxin/
' furan homologue, given the measured value C.
in,meas
Cin min " the m1nimum possible concentration of the dioxin/
' furan homologue, given the measured value C.
in,meas'
E - the removal efficiency of the control device
Assuming ± 50 percent analytical accuracy:
Cmin = Sneas ' °'5 Cmeas = °'5 Cmeas
Cmax - Cmeas + °'5 Cmeas = l'* Cmeas
Note that: Em,Y = Cin.max " Cout.min ' l ' cout.min
HlaA '
in>i"ax in, max
c = 1 - out.meas - 1 - V^ (1 - E
1.5 C. 3 meas'
in,meas
1-1
-------
and:
C. - C A
in.mm out.max
in,min
1 - ' out.meas
0.5 C4
in,meas
out.max
C.
in,mm
Now,
min meas
Ennn
<3En,eas ' 2>
"meas
positive control (i.e., emissions
reduction across the control device)
Therefore, if Emeas is larger than 66.7 percent, the true removal efficiency
can safely be assumed to be greater than zero.
And,
max
negative control (i.e., emissions
increase across the control device)
/3 Emeas < °
meas
Therefore, if Emgas is less than -200 percent, the true efficiency can safe!
be assumed to be less than zero.
To summarize:
Emeas > 66'7 Percent
positive control
-200 < Emeas < 66.7 percent
Emeas < 20° Percent
no definitive conclusions
can be drawn
no negative control
1-2
-------
TABLE I.I VALUES OF Emax and Emin FOR VARIOUS MEASURED CONTROL EFFICIENCIES
Control
meas
100
95
90
85
80
75
50
25
0
-25
-50
-100
-200
Device Efficiency M
max
100
98.3
96.7
95.0
93.4
91.7
83.4
75.0
66.7
58.4
50.0
33.4
0
6)
min
100
85
70
55
40
25
-50
-125
-200
-275
-350
-500
-800
max meas
- 20°
1-3
-------
-------
APPENDIX J
SAMPLE SHIPMENT LETTERS
-------
-------
April 26,1985
LJ. S. EPA ECC Toxicant Analysis Center
Building 1105
Bay St. Louis, MS 39529
Attention: Danny McDaniel
Subject: Tier 4 - Analysis Instructions
Site OS
Site 03
Dear Sir:
The c. ;ective o-f this letter is to clari-fy instructions and
priorities tor individual samples from specific Tier 4 combustion
sites. This instruction letter is No. 9 and pertains to EPA Site
No. 08 at Tacoma, WA.
The Episode No. is 2634, and SCC numbers assigned to this
site were numbers DQOO08OO through DQ000899.
SCC numbers DQQ008OO through DQO00805 have
been assigned to Troika for internal QA/QC purposes. SCC numbers
DQ000806 through DQQQO826 have been assigned to
samples included in this shipment and numberDQ000827 has been
assigned to a sample being archived at Radian. All remaining SCC
numbers are unused.
The sample shipment for EPA Site No.. 08 consists of 4
boxes containing 64 samples in 67 containers.(Note-The Modified
Method 5 samples are comprised of 6 components as listed
below.Three (3) MM5 sample runs have more than one container per
component as indicated by asterisk.) The sample shipment was
shipped air freight on Agri.!. 26 ^.1985 by Federal. Express under
Airbiiils.). NQi2S97a3395 and No..544545665.
Instructions for extraction and analysis follow.
Priority #1 samples include the MM5 sample train components,
the MM5 field blanks, the MM5 proof blank, the solvent blanks,
and the electrostatic precipitator catch samples. These
samples require immediate extraction and analysis, as follows:
J-l
-------
MM5 TRAINS
Radian Run
(Total o-f 6 train components)
SCC *» Component
DQOOOS06
DQOO0806
DQOOO806
DQOOO806
DQOOO806
DQOOOS06
(++ The probe
chloride.)
1
2*(2 containers)
3
4
Fraction
Filter
Probe Rinse (++>
Back Half/Coil Rin<
Condensats
Impinger Solution
XAD Module
rinse consists o-f water, acetone and methylene
Radian Run # QS-MM5-E1-02
(Total o-f 6 train components)
SCC #
DQOO0811
DQOOO811
DQOO0811
DQOOO811
DQOOO811
DQ000811
Component'
1
2.
3
4
5
6
Fraction
Filter
Probe Rinse (++)
Back Hal-f/Coil Rinse
Condensate
Impinger Solution
XAO Module
(++) The
chloride.
probe rinse consists of water, acetone, and methylene
Radian Run # Q8-MM5-EI.-03
(Total a-f 6 train components)
SCC #
DQOOOS22
DQOOO822
DQ000822
DQOOO822
DQ000822
DQOOOS22
Components
1
2* (2
ji
4
5
6
containers)
Fracti on
Filter
Probe Rinse (++)
Back Hal-f/Coil Rinse
Condensate
Impinger Solution
XAD Module
yne probe
chloride.
rinse consists o-f water, acetone, and methylene
J-2
-------
Radian Run # Qi-MM5rIQzQi
(Total o-f 6 train components)
SCC #
DQ000807
DQOOO807
DQOOO8O7
DQOOO8O7
DQOOOS07
DQOO0807
Components
Fraction
1 Filter
2 Probe Rinse (++)
3 Back Haif/Coil Rinse
4 Condensate
5 Impinger Solution
6 XAD Module
Tne probe rinse consists o-f water, acetone, and me'thylene
chloride.
Radian Run # Q8;:MM5-Eg-02
(Total o-f 6 train components)
SCC #
DQ000812
DQOOOS12
DQOOO812
DQ000812
DQOOO812
DQOOO812
Components
1
2
-T
^
4
5
6
Fracti on
Filter
Probe Rinse (++)
Back Half/Coil Rinse
Condensate
Impinger Solution
XAD Module
The probe rinse consists o-f water, acetone and methylene
chloride.
Radian Run # Qa-MM5rEQrQ3
(Total o-f 6 train components)
SCC #
Components
Fracti on
DQOOOS21
DQOOO821
DQOOO821
DQOOOS21
DQOOO821
OQOOO821
1 Filter
2*(2 containers) Probe Rinse (++)
3 Back Hal-f/Coil Rinse
4 Condensate
5 Impinger Solution
6 XAD Module
(++) The probe rinse consists o-f water, acetone and methylene
chloride.
J-3
-------
MMS EliLD BLANK JRA1NS
Run # Qi
(Total of 6 train components)
sec a
DQOOOS15
DQ000815
DQOO0815 ,
DQOOO815
DQOOO815
DQOO0815
(-i-+) The probe
chlori de.
Components
6
Fraction
Filter
Probe Rinse (++)
Back Half/Coil Rinse
Condensate
Impinger Solution
XAD Module
rinse
consists of water, acetone, and methylene
Radian Run # Q8-MM5-EQ-BL
(Total o-f 6 train components)
sec «
DQO00816
DQOO0816
DQOOO816
DQO00816
DQOOO816
DQOOQS16
Components
3
4
5
6
Fraction
Filter
Probe Rinse (++)
Back Half/Coil Rinse
Condensate
Impinger Solution
XAD Module
The probe rinse consists of water, acetone and methylene
chlori de.
PROOF BLANK
The MMS proof blank is recovered unused field sampling glassware tra
components. The proof train consists of the following fractions:
SCC #
CONTAINER
DQOO0810 1
DQ000810 2
DQOO0810 3
FRACTION
Filter
Probe Rinse
Methylene Chloride Rinse
of probe.
filter housing.
Coil, Sorbent Moduli
Impingers
and
J-4
-------
AMBIENT TRAIN
SCC # CONTAINER
DQOO0825
DQ000825
1
SAMPLE CODE
OS-AMB-A-PR
08-AMB-A-SM
DESCRIPTION
PROBE RINSE
XAD MODULE
REAGENT BLANKS
sec #
RADI.AN SAMPLE
CODE
DQOOOS19 08-FBL
DQ000817 08-FBL
DQoooaia oa-FBL
.00000820 08-FBL
ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPIIAIQR CATCH
SCC # RADIAN SAMPLE
DQOOO8O9
DQ000814
DQQOOS24
08-EPC-01
08-EPC-02
08-EPC-03
SAMPLE TYPE
Acetone (Lot #851502)
HPLC Water (Lot #851325)
HPLC Water (Lot #745854)
Methylene Chloride
(Lot #740854)
SAMPLE TYPE
ESP Catch, Run # 1
ESP Catch, Run # 2
ESP Catch, Run # 3
2. The Priority # 2 samples include three strong black liquor
samples, one -fuel oil sample , and a ambient air sample train.
Ib§§§ samel.es should be held by for analyses by TROIKA P.endi.ng
s of Pr.iQri.ty i
STRONG BLACK LIQUOR SAMPLES
SCC # RADIAN SAMPLE
QQDE
DQOO08O8 08-SBL-O1
DQ000813 08-SBL-02
DQ000823 08-SBL-O3
FUEL OIL SAMPLE
SCC # RADI.AN SAMPLE
CODE
DQ000826 08-FO-A
SAMPLE IYPE
Strong Black
Strong Black
Strong Black
Liquor, Run 1
Liquor, Run 2
Liquor, Run 3
SAMPLE TYPE
Fuel Oil, Run 3
J-5
-------
AMBIENT. SAMPLE T.RAI.N
SCC # RADIAN SAMPLE SAMPLE JYPE
QQBi
DQOO0825 08-AMB-A-PR Probe Rinse
DQ000825 08-AMB-A-SM XAD Module
The soil sample is the only Priority #3 sample. It will
be held by Radian -for analysis by Troika pending the result-
o-f Priority #1 and Priority #2 sample analyses.
SCC #
DQOOO827 » 08-S Soils
I-f there are any questions concerning this sample shipment,
Please contact either Larry Keller or Bob Jong leu:-: at Radian
Corporation (919) 541-9100 or (919) 4S1-O212.
Si ncerel y ,
Robert Jongleux
TEST TEAM LEADER
cc.E. Hanks-EPA/AMTB
A. Miles-Radian
Radian Field File RTP/PP
J-6
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
EPA-450/4-84-014q
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
National Dioxln Study Tier 4
Final Test Report - Site 8
Black Liquor Boiler BLB - C
- Combustion Sources
5. REPORT DATE
April 1987
!. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
Carol L. Jamgochian
Lawrence E. Keller
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
87-222-109-02-24
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Radian Corporation
Post Office Box 13000
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
68-03-3148
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, OAQPS
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Office of Research and Development
Washington, DC 20460
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
EPA Project Officers: Donald Oberacker, ORD
William B. Kuykendal, OAQPS
16. ABSTRACT ~~ ~~
This report summarizes the results of a dioxin/furan emissions test of a black
liquor recovery boiler equipped with a drybottom electrostatic precipitator for par-
ticulate emissions control. Black liquor recovery boilers are used at kraft pulp mills
to produce process steam and to reclaim inorganic chemicals from spent wood pulping
liquors. This dioxin/furan emissions test was conducted under Tier 4 of the National
Dioxin Study. The primary objective of Tier 4 is to determine if various combustion
sources are sources of dioxin and/or furan emissions. If any'of the combustion sources
are found to emit dioxin or furan, the secondary objective of Tier 4 is to quantify
these emissions.
Black liquor recovery boilers are one of 8 combustion source categories that have
been tested in the Tier 4 program. The tested black liquor boiler, hereafter referred
to as Boiler BLB-C, was selected for this test after an initial information screening
and a one-day pretest survey visit. Boiler BLB-C is considered representative of black
liquor recovery boilers with dry bottom electrostatic precipitators. The amount of
chloride present in the black liquor circuit at this site is considered intermediate to
high relative to that found at other kraft pulp mills.
Data presented in the report include, dioxin (tetra through octa homologue +2378
TCDD) and furan (tetra through octa homologue +2378 TCDF) results for both stack
samples and ash samples. In addition, process data collected during sampling are also
presented.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS c. COSATI Field/Group
Air Emissions
Combustion Sources
Dioxin
Furans
2,3,7,8 Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
Black Liquor Boiler
Pulp and Paper
Air Pollution Emissions
Data
8. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Release Unlimited
19. SECURITY CLASS (TIlis Report)
Unclassified
21. NO. OF PAGES
236
20. SECURITY CLASS (This pa$et
TTri P 1 A ^ *3 "I f7 "1 f*c\
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (R«v. 4-77) PREVIOUS eoi TION is OBSOLETE
-------
-------
United Stales
Environmental Protection
Agency
Oflu c of Air and Radiation
Old.-i- of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Ri'<:< ,-Mch Tiiangle Park NC 27711
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use
S300
If your address is incorrect, p lease change on the above label.
tear off; and return to the above address.
II you do not desire tpcdhtir le receiving this technical report
series, CHECK HERE D; tent off label; arid return it to the
nhovp address
-------
------- |