EMISSION TESTING REPORT
ETB TEST NUMBER 71-MM-13
Emissions From
Wet Process Cement K11n
at
OREGON PORTLAND CEMENT
LAKE OSMEGO, OREGON
Project Officer
Clyde E. Rlley
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of A1r Programs
Research THanqle Park, North Carolina 27711
-------
li'.g <,'ovk reported herein -v/as cmr;»jete^ by the Environmental Protection
f
Agency (!£FA), Office of Air Programs, Erission Testing Branch (ETB)S Metal-
lurgical and Mechanical Section. Fir. Clyde Riley served as the Project
Officer and directed the ETB field team consisting of Mr. Ray Mobley and
Mr. James Harris. Mr. Philip K. York served as Project Engineer and Mr.
Howard Crist and Mr. Allan Riley performed the participate analyses at the
EPA laboratories.
Approved:
Environmental Protection^ Agency
Gene VI. Smith
Chief9 Metallurgical & Mechanical Section
March 29, 1972
-------
I. List of Tables : 2
II. Introduction 3
III. Summary of Results 4
IV. Process Description 6
V. Location of~Samp1ing Points . 8
VI. Process Operation 8
VII. Sampling And Analytical Procedures 8
APPENDIX A - Particulate Results 9
APPENDIX B - Operation Results 14
APPENDIX C - Field Data 14
APPENDIX D - Standard Sampling Procedures 39
APPENDIX E - Laboratory Report 39
APPENDIX F - Test Log .. 41
APPENDIX G - Project Participants and Titles ~ 41
-------
I. LIST OF TABLES
Table No. Title " " Paje_
I Summary of Part.lculate Testing 5
II Summary of Gaseous Testing 6
A»I Particulate and Gaseous Emission 10
Data
A-II Particulate Calculations 12
E-I Particulate Mass Determination . 40
F-I Sampling Log 41
FINM
- 2
-------
ii. j^rn^lioji
Under tha Clean Air Act9 ss a;r.r:r,dsd0 -he Environmental Protection
Pgency is charged with the establishment of performance standards for
new installations or modifications of existing installations in stationary
source categories which may contribute significantly to air pollution.
The development of realistic performance standards requires accurate
data on pollutant emissions within the various source categories. In the ,
cement industry, the Oregon Portland Cement plant located in Lake Oswego, Ore-
gon was designated by EPA as representative of a well controlled operation,
and was thereby selected for emission testing. This report presents the re-
sults of tests conducted at that plant.
The Oregon Portland Cement plant operates at a production rate of
approximately 4600 barrels per day. The plant recently (July,, 1967), installed
a 135,000 ACFfl baghouse.
The gases from the rotating kiln are directed through the 10 compartment
baghouse prior to emission, to. the r>tmo.sphere.
Three particulate runs were conducted at the baghouse stack. Also two
cumulative gas samples were collected during two of the particulate runs.
The following sections of this report treat (1) a summary of results,
(2) a description of the process8 (3) the location of sampling points, (4)
process operating conditions, and (5) sampling and analytical procedures.
-------
III. SUMMARY OF RESULTS
Tables I and II present a summary of results from the particulate and
gas emission testing.
The kiln baghouse emissions collected 1n the front-half catch (probe
and filter) ranged from 0.501 to 0.676 pounds per ton of kiln feed. The total
catch (includes impinger portion) ranged from 0.773 to 1.298 pounds per ton
of kiln feed. - .
It should be noted that during periods of the particulate and gaseous
sampling the kiln was not operating properly, and several upset conditions
occurring during testing may ...have, altered the measured emission levels
significantly.
-------
TAB:.?- i
SUMMARY.OF PAk^C'M.r^ TESTING
Run Number
Date
'Vrv.. t II:;cc:,- ;'-ir
r?> C.'-.-ii, Uo'/iiiOt iC
Star. !.<:- lev; R; co - SCFM* dry
St..-'.;; Flow Rate - ACFM wot
V-..V:'-.5 of Dry f-js S-:.:'plod - SCF*
Fe^;! F:nte - tons/hr
Pc'-rtirulotos
Pro!io5 Cycl on& ,__£_ Fj 1 te r_ ^Ca tcji
mg
or/SCF* dry
ar/C.r @ Stack Conditions
Ibs/hr.
Ibs/ton feed
mg
gr/SCF* dry
gr/CF Q Stack Cor.d'itions .
Ibs/hr
Ibs/ton feed
51 Inpinger Catch
J_
8-26-?l
74.2
107.2
539941
146,147
82.18
59.55
_
344.8
0.0646
0.0238
29.83
0.501
531.6
0.0996
0.0367
46.01
0.773
35.1
_2_
'"8-27-71
29.7 :'-
.T0678
53,782
141,376
81.62
56.46
-
439.5
0.0829
0.0315
38.19
0.676
843.3
0.159
0.060S
73.30
1.298
47.9
JL
8-27-71
1 29.7
105,5
52,162
137,566
78.22
53.75
379.8
000748
0.0283
33.38
0.621
616.2
0.121
0.0460
54.20
1.008
38.4
70°F, 29.92" Hg
-------
TABLE II
SUMMARY OF GASEOUS TESTING"
i Gas Composition (Vol. % Dry)
Run CO, CL CO NO
'- ~* £ ~""t. iira--^- ""TL
1 14.9 8.6 <1 76.5
2 21.0 4.5. <1 74.5
IV. PROCESS DESCRIPTION
Limestone (81 percent) and sand (12 percent) are brought to the plant
by barge from British Columbia., Canada and clay-(6 percent) is trucked from
a quarry about 15 miles from the plant. These materials are ground and blended
with (1) percent iron oxide in a rotating ball mill to form a slurry of about
32 percent water.
The blended slurry is fed into the upper end of a sloping, slowly revolving
(one revolution per minute) kiln. This gas-fired kiln (No. 4) is 450 feet long,
13 1/2 feet in diameter-afc.. &ban.fsedead «sd'-: 12,-feet,it. the front end. Fuel con-
sumption is approximately 1,000,QUO BTU per barrel of cement produced. During
passage through the ki^r*;, *he^-3b?-->^*2irid^s.are^estf.d to about 2500°F to pro-
duce calcium and aluminum silicate known in the trade as "clinker". This marble-
sized clinker material is discharged from the lower end of the kiln at tempera-
tures exceeding 2000°F and fed immediately into an air-quenching cooler unit
which reduces the clinker temperature to about 150°F. The newly-formed clinker
material is conveyed to a storage silo from the cooler.
A small amount of gypsum (4.45 percent by weight) is added to the clinker
material and this mixture is fed to the finish grinding mill. The dust-laden
6
-------
air leaving the mill (air sweep) is fed to an air-separator or classifier where
-the coarse material is returned to the mill and the~finished cement (90 percent
through 325 mesh screen) is conveyed to storage silos. Kiln No. 4 can produce
about 4000 barrels of cement in a day.
The control equipment of interest in this report consists of a Wheelabrator
baghouse collector which was installed in 1967 at an approximate cost of
$705,000.00. The flow of dust-laden gases is downv/ard to a manifold between
the collector hoppers. From the manifold the gases move upward through-the col-
lector, then downward through a duct to a fan and are exhausted into an 87 feet
high stack with a velocity cone at the top.
The basic unit of the baghouse collector is a compartment which contains
2
96 graphite impregnated glass-fiber bags with a surface area of 90 ft per bag.
There are ten (10) compartments in the baghouse, and each compartment is cleaned
sequentially by reverse air flov,'. The particular matter is collsctr.d on ths
inside of the glass-fiber bags and falls by gravity to the hopper below where
the material is removed by a screw conveyor and returned to the" kiln-by scoop
feeders located in front of the chain system*Approximately 60 to 80 percent of
the dust collected is normally returned to.the kiln.
The Mheelabrator baghouse collector is designed to handle an air volume of
135,000 ACFM @ 410°F. The equipment manufacturer would not guarantee the effi-
ciency of this baghouse, since this unit was the first one they had installed
on a wet process plant. The effective collecting surface area of the baghouse is
2
86,400 ft which gives an air-to-cloth ratio of 1.62:1 or 1.8:1 ft per minute
when one compartment is being cleaned. The pressure drop across a bag filter is
3 to 4 inches of water. The expected life of the bags is from 2 1/2 to 3 years
and each bag costs about $25.00. The expected life of the collector is 20 years
and the annual operating cost averages about $22,500.00.
7
-------
V. LOCATION OF SAHf-'LIMG^POINTS,
The sampling ports located on the effluent stack were positioned
approximately 32 feet (4.6 stack diameters) above the breeching inlet
,and 18 feet (2.6 stack diameters) below the section of the cone-shaped
cap. The number and locations of the sampling points within the stack
cross-section used for the three particulate runs were determined from the
Federal Register, "Standards of .Performance for New Stationary Sources'/, ;
(23 'December, 1971). .
For the gaseous sampling the probe was positioned at one of the two
existing particulate sampling ports and extended approximately two feet into
the stack.
VI. PROCESS OPERATION
Process-operation was frequently 1nt*»rr!inted by major upsets occurring
within the kiln during the particulate and gaseous testing. Several condi-
tions contributing to this were: (1) burning zone temperatures too high,
(2) feed material not. sintering, properly, .and (3) change in kiln feed com-
position. It was esimated by the Project Officer that the kiln stack opacity
ranged from 10 to 39.-percent during the testing periods.
- VII. SAMPLING AMD ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES
Particulate samples were collected with the train specified in Method 5
of the Federal Register, "Standards of Performance For New Stationary Sources"
(3 December, 1971) including impingers as described.
The procedures for sampling and analyzing the particulate and gaseous
samples are described in Methods 1 through 5 of the December 23, 1971 Federal
Register. In addition, the impinger catch was analyzed for particulate residue,
-...'. 8
-------
APPENDIX A
PARTICIPATE RESULTS
Table A - I lists the complete results for the participate and
gaseous runs. Table A - II lists the equations used for the calculations.
Also shown in Table A - II are example calculations from Run No. 1.
Standard conditions are taken as 70°F and 29.92 in. Hg.
-------
TABLE A - I
PARTICIPATE AND GASEOUS EMISSION
Sampling nozzle diameter, in.
Net time of tes't, .min..
Barometric pressure, in.
Hg absolute
Average Orifice pressure
drop, in. HpO
Volume of dry gas sampled,
ft at meter conditions
Average gas meter temperature, °F
Volume of dry gas sampled at
standard-conditions*, SCF
Total FLO collected in impingers
and silica gel , rnl
Volume of water vapor collected
at standard conditions*, SCF
% Moisture in the stack gas by
volume
Mole fraction of dry gas
/
Excess Air Percent
Molecular weight of stack gas,
dry basis
Molecular weight of stack gas,
wet basis
P1tot tube coefficient
Average velocity head of stack gas,
- in. H90
2
Average stack -temperature, °F
Net sampling points
Static pressure of stack gas, in. Hg
Stack gas pressureyin. Hg absolute
Stack gas velocity at stack conditions, fpm
2
Stack area, in.
Dry stack gas volumetric flow rate at
standard conditions*, SCFM
Stack gas volumetric flow rate at stack
conditions, ACFM
Porrpnt: icnlc fnpHr
DATA
1 "
8-26-71
0.250
160
30.02
0.980
86.095
98.
82.18
1218.3
57.75
41.27
0.587
14.9
8.6
**
76.5
74.2
30.73"
25.48
0.85
0.69
.390
32
0.15
30.17
3798
5542
53,941
146,147
107.2
2.
8-27-71
- 0.250
160
29.98
0.939
83.333
83
81.62
-
1206.1
57.17
41.19
0.588
21.0
4.5
.
-------
T/\BLE A - I (Concluded
1 . _ 2
Tc
«fi
t
Ic
can
Cao
Cat
°au
Caw
Cax
ptf
ptt
Unit Feed Rate-
Tons/hr
Particulate - probe
and filter, mg
Particulate - total
% impinger catch
Particulate - probe
and filter, gr/SCF*
Particulate - total
, cyclone
, mg
, cyclone,
, "qr/SCF*
Particulate - probe, cyclone,
and filter, gr/cf at stack
conditions
Parti CD! a-tr1 - -tot a 1
stack conditions
Particulate - probe
and filter, Ib/hr.
Particulate - total
Particulate - orobe
and filter, Ib/ton
Particulate - total
, gr/cf at
, cyclone,
, Ib/hr.
, cyclone,
feed
, Ib/ton feed
59.55
344.8
531.6
35.1
0.0646
0.0996
0.0238
0.0367
29.83
46.01
0.501
0.773
56.46 f
439.5
843.3
47.9
0.0829
0.159
0.0315
0.0605
38.19
73.30
0.676
1.298
53.75
379.8
616.2
38.4
0.0748
0.121
0.0283
0.0460
33.38
54.20
0.621
1.008
*70°F, 29.92 in. Hq, dry.has.ts....
.11
-------
TABLE A - II
PARTICULATE CALCULATIONS
1. Volume of dry gas sampled at standard conditions: /0C'F, '29.>
'Pv I'*'i ) -17.7 x 86.095(30.-02+ .98)
.1-.T3~.fT _ 133: ~
,
17.7 x V-
'
v
'in
std
2. Volume of water vapor at 70°F and 29.92 In. Hg, SGF
V = 0.0474 x V - 0.0474 x 1218.3 = 57.75 SCF
gas
3. Percent moisture i-R stack gas-
100 x V
% M =
oas
+ y 82.18^57.75
'mstcl wgas
4. fiole fraction of dry gas
= 100 -41.27 =
TOO
0.587
5, Average molecular weight of dry stack gas
(14.9 x
28
(76.5 K^ ) = 30.73
6. Molea4ar v.'eight of stack gas
HW = MWd x Md + IS (1 - Hd) =30.73 x.587 + 18.(1 -.587 ) = 25.48
7. Stack gas velocity at stack conditions, fpni
r ]
x ll
=. 4,360 x\
4,360 x 24.15
12
-------
TABLE A - II (Concluded)
8. Stack o,r..~ voluiiic-tric flow rate at stcnc!;>rci conditions'''-'., SCFM
:" vt^ni&r**:'
9. Stack Q?S volumetric flew rate at st?-ck conditions, ACFM
Q - .05645^. n,^v (Ts -i- ^60) , .0^5 x 53.94] x(390* 460) ,146,147 ACFM
a Ps x '":d 30.17-x .587
10. Percent isokinetic
1,032 x (T~ + 460) x Vm -
' %l ^Ji6_ = V,:.32 x (390 + 460) x 82.18 = 107.2%
V x Tt x P x M. x (D Y 3798 >:l 60^30.17x<,587x(.25d2
O U O vJ U
11. Particulste: probe, cyclone and filtE-r., yr/SCF* Dry Basis
Can - 0.0154 x -^ = 0.01 £-'. .-344^ . Q Q646 gr/SCF
mstd 82.18
]?. Psrtici;1.3tn total. ar/SCT* Dry R^is
Cao = °'0154 x \T"~~ = °'0154 x531'6 =0.0996 gr/SCF
m . QO T Q *
mstd 8Z-18
13. Particulcte: probe, cvclone and filter. or/CF at stack conditions
17.7 x C. x K x M. 17.7 x. 0646 x30.17x.587
390
14. Particulate: total, gr/CF at stack conditions
17.7 x Cfto x PS x H^" 17.7 x .0996 x 30.17x.587
Cau B - (T^rGO) - B - T390TT60) - ~ = °'0367 gr/CF
15. Particulate: probe, cyclone, and filter, Ib/hr
C,,, = 0.00357 x Can x 0 = 0,00857 x .0646 x 53,941 =29.83 Ib/hr
&\'i an -s
16. Particulcte: total, Ib/hr
C = 0.00857 x C x Qr = 0.00357 x .0996 x 53, 941 = 46.0Hb/hr
ax QO s
17. Particulateip probe, cyclone, and filter, Ib/ton feed
P. - - ^- " |S4?= 0.501 "ib/ton feed
tf 'c. tiy.oo
lg. ParLicuuuc: coLal, Ib/ton feed
C
P,t - -f - = 10^'" °-773 lb/ton feed
\f
* 70°F, 29.5? in. Hg '
-------
APPENDIX B
OPERATION RESULTS
Presented in this section is a summary prepared from the process Tog
located in tha plant control room and the particulate field data sheets. -
On Thursday morning (8-26-71)E operator was having trouble with kiln
(burning zone temperature too high). Back to normal at 1100. Feed to kiln
averaged 59,,55-tons per hour (dry basis) during sampling period 1123 to 1430.
(Run No. 1)
On Friday morning (8=27-71) operator was again having trouble with kiln
(feed material not .sintering properly). Run No. 2 obtained over a period
from 0737 to 1238 and sampling had to be stopped three (3) times. Feed rate
to kiln averaged 56.46 tons per hour.
On Friday afternoon, kiln operating smoothly with average feed rate of
53.75 tons per hour during sampling period of 1335 to 1622 for Run No. 3,
Plant personnel had forgotten to tell the kiln operator of a change in feed
to kiln (omitted iron oxide). During these three runs, alTof the dust col-
lected in the baghouse was returned to the kiln.
- - -APPENDIX C
FIELD DATA
This section presents the actual field data recorded during the testing.
14
-------
RESUKYFY - PROCESS INDUSTRY & POWER PLANTS
NAME OF COMPANY d
ADDRESS
a
DATE OF PRESURVEY .?-J 2 - 7;
CITYo&A. : ^
NAME OF CONTACT
')%Li-~cJ\ T I T
STAT
- PHONED A3 - 63. $j
.
PROVIDE FLOW DIAGRAM OF EACH PROCESS TO BE SAMPLED, INCLUDING FEED COMPOSITIONS AND
RATES, OPERATING TEMPERATURES AMD PRESSURES, PRODUCT RATES, AND PROPOSED SAMPLING SITES:
-------
L. ,
PROVIDE DIAGRAM OF EACH SAMPLING SITE. INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION: '"
DIMENSIONS TO-NEAREST OBSTRUCTION IN ALL DIRECTIONS FROM SAMPLING
PORT. - .
COMPLETE DESCRIPTION OF ALL PORTS INCLUDING ALL DIMENSIONS. DESCRIPTION
OF ANY UNUSUAL FEATURES ABOUT ENVIRONMENT; HEIGHT, ODORS, TOXIC CONDITIONS
TEMPERATURE. DUST, ETC.
M^^t ^
_> ^'-33 ~b (\fofld**
ftjt&cHL ' ;,
'^jLjLifc^
'7 // '
.l/Vrusi*^ V-
C(U^
I"
16
-------
«?a
-$jj^
"
23' \
71-5
LJ
17
n
'4-
t
i
-------
RIG HOURS OF'PLANT PERSONNEL
liiG SCHEDULE FOR EACH PROCESS TO BE SAMPLED
ROCESSES BATCH OR CONTINUOUS?
FEED RATES AND COMPOSITION FOR EA.CH PROCESS
.j/H/y__
ANY CONTROL EQUIPMENT, INCLUDING SIZE ?^JkjJ$l*t^. $>
EXPECTED CONSTITUENTS OF STACK GAS FOR EACH SAMPLING SITE
:; DATA:
HEIGHT $ ]
7 ' WIDTH
7 "-
DIAMETER 7
It v
'-^ I.D.
//
O.D. AMOUNT OF INSULATION v/fc&*^&''.W:J* ' i^Jal Tftlgi&S-SS- ' /
RIAL OF CONSTRUCTION /2J GAS TEMPERATURE ft 4 £ - f .S
SURE : WET BULB TEMPERATURE
AGE PITOT TUBE READING , ^ -../.. ft. j^> Ht^D :
AHCE TO NEAREST UPSTREAM RESTRICTION S~jhj~ TYPE OF RESTRICTION
'AMCE TO NEAREST DOWNSTREAM RESTRICTION JL j /U TYPE OF RESTRICTION
PORTS EXISTING? /T YES, SIZE ...'"'
£^T NO, WHO'WILL PROVIDE THEM?
18
-------
SCAFFOLDING OR OTHER MA.'IS OF SUPPORT PRESENT?
£7 YES - - -
i, WHO WILL PROVIDE IT?
SOURCE OF ELECTRICITY AVAILABLE?
YES, MAXIMUM AMPERAGE PER CIRCUIT =->-
LJ
DI STANCE .£"£> -/ » ""//T WHO WILL PROVIDE EXTENSION CORDS?
-^~
LOCATION OF FUSE BOX
PARKK.'G FACILITIES AVAILABLE-FOR TRAILER OR VAN?_
SIGNATURE REQUIRED ON PASSES? _
WAIVERS?
WEARBY RESTAURANTS AND MOTELS
t**
1
LIST AKY SPECIAL SAFETY EQUIPMENT OR RULES
..-'.-. 7
. -/-
C.C.-&M
* -
<7
19
-------
I--.-'
20
-------
OREGON PORTLAND CEMENT COMPANY
ro
Air
Oil or Gasl^
Kiln
Clinker
Cooler
Returnj Dust
C-^-
Product
Bag house
Limestone Slurry
.-A
Sampling
Point
A
B
C
B
Type of
Sample
Slurry
Part.
Return
Dust
Excess
Air
Initial Analysis
tlo. of
Samples
i
3
i
2-$
Analysis
Mass -'
COo,00,C8
L_ Organization
, How-ard Crist
Ray Mob ley
-------
c-
LRjyjlJ]ML£lMJM
Stack Geometry
Plant
(f
Sketch of stack cross -section
showing sampling holes
Calculations:
TT~
19'
Calculator
7
N(j/vi'-2S (12/G7)
Test No._
Location_
Date
A. Dist. from inside of far v/all xto outside of
near v/all, in., = ff/7^
B. Wall thickness, in., = _U/?
Inside"diameter of stack = A-B- ~8ty
Stack Area =
Comments: i, r
Point
J3_
8
7
s~
% Dia. fcr
circular stack
U
#,5"
J3.-5
M.9
2$, 3
37, -S'
7/7
1&
17,5
u.s
Dist. frc.:r, outsfdc-
of saninle port, in.
7J3
/£>J
7(*. 7 -
'$*/
22
-------
'
>7
Test
Location
Date
. VF.LGCI7Y TRAVERSE FHID DATA
Derator
Meter AH
IOCU ,
i Time ! Point
n;nfj i Po
.-Ap, teXo
T
4_.
L..
i
1
V"
i
/s
£_
"'2
>
« /
3 i
2
»_«-^_
r
i u~.«£ ' «J?-/:_
\'; / "il\ 'in,. i-!,.,G AverhfjC?
If2} A!\ IP., H^C Average
id.
0
23
NCAF-29_ ( It/67)
-------
r'm Mo.
Location ..
Date __ £_k
Operator
Sample Box No. {
I'foter Bo;i Hi. .:_ i //
Me tar a H
C Factor
?A;Vn'.:'j;.ATF. F-iiLiXATA
TMPO^'f^MT - F'T' >
'. Re?.d arid record at the start of '
each tsst point. . .
i.xr. Press. "Ho
'read 2nd ror.cra' eviry 5 ir.-jr.-.;tos. ^,
M-2cr.&r r^ox Settlvivi °^jn_;".
robe l.er.fjt;-!
Probe Haatar Ssttl-g1
Avg. A P
Clock j Dry Gas
iint Tims j i-^etgr, CF
j Dry Gc.s Ten-p. j Vacuum pox ] 1-r.pv.i.jar
i In: Hg i'Vc:r,;.}.|
"
Dssiroo 'j ^^-1 i_iili^:_l Qutlef j Gaura j °F j CF '
L_X. £__ 1-1-14Li
j v ; ;
-------
.
.C;: DATA FOR
iletcr il
2
Avg. miter tempt ( ambient +
3. Moisture (voUrne)
4. A'/g. statiu \~rii *^
5'. Bar. press sampling
n. HVOX.073 -
^_in Jig © _^
____ 'In. fig,.
_ (static press in! Ho}
6. Bar press .-of r.itor
7 p /P =
'
J> 2L in. Hg.
80 A\'q. stack temperature
"
£/£>£>
" f .« ...-.
F,
9. Avg. stack velocity UP)
C factor (1)
10. Probe Tip size
in H90. MAX. VELOCITY
(2)
A
u
25
-------
PI un
Location
I
^rt^&M^
?ARTK:U'.ATS' Fiti.LJ DATA
p-rslcr ^..
Sample Bex No. \/ ' 2. ty _ '
WvNi-s* -?^iv M *,
JiiJtV.il ^<\JJ\ «V«K e '
Rc-cd and record <>i. thft start ov
j 'each test polric.
pt'.fijrii t"^»rfl- 7r""--v-p:;'Tnnc
,' /i: sioL*.i; -;^,i'_ i-i.* t.,'.,!.?.i 'JI.-.:-
Car, Press. "Hg_; __ 3.. .^L.AJr. ____
Assumed Ho^sturs ^ ____ I5_? ____
Clock
T1r.2
Dry Scii
=j=--
j ?lbt.
in. H-
. 0t>&
.
L_.yji_
tr/₯T"'l3ftr
Cb;ia£ii'.?T
AP
Probo Tip D1?..5
Probe Long*.h
*-* JN
Prob'.1 slj.att-r Setting . /_^,_
vrv G. 3 Temp.
I V in H,,0 _J __ 'i _
L ;:,.^1r-d""~':rAcVu;-i Jl^- fOyiiTet
o j f:.;: '..(K-. i ;
2 C"
* 3
In. Hg
GJIJ.-.J
r~
T
.sr
:__5.j:__iil
_. __
i. -
'-.ox iiTip'iiiijOr
//
.___ .-
JJL.I .?JrL_._l A,.J.7
, 1LJ>^ JZ_f._.J_ 4/^
& . I
iiCAP-3?- (J2/57) i
-------
77
Clock
Dry £os
-a-ccr, CF
;>rc(,'C
in. H20 ! in
AP [ DcrsTreci
Or',; :C;; *'.'
__..in. !UO_
Actual
LJTV Go.! i cii.n .
Sleek
-H
nTet~~liuFTeF
.j In. i'ig jTc-.-np. ]
Gauqe
in. He
.ff
AS
x T7
^L
2"
If
/
/VTTe
//
/?'
' <}15L
.Tf
. /^ 7
T
fir?
i/<7?
-2
.7
A
75'
,7
7$
AI_I
, 2-
-U2_L
{,-L.
-^A
±
H i
/'i
X^
'79
-UL
MA /
-------
!
location
fJa.,..e 5) ^ 2 "? -7 /
Operator
^:rcd r.nd record r.t t.'ie sitr't r.v
PATHOLOGICAL 1NCTMEKA7CP.S-
regjj snc record ev-- ^K
£2;:,^ le Sox r!y.
i^t&r Box Ko«
M«Ur A H '.
Probe Length
A.VQ. A ? / £ 7
r~
i '
i -
} -f 76 00 \ PivCt ! U
j Dry 3fiS j lr.. H?0 [
S '!'.v,..:r, -:r
or-;v;c
T
3L
zir.~
llf./.JLfeU. . .,§J :
"
2
U
_ / J. V/ I
Z.:J5L'1L'.
/_.."!.
_£ _..
$,?.
zr.z
7
..// i_
72Z"i"
://.zs:
V ?
_ 7
1J i._ rr_>. iZHZ/LZ-'. -ZZLZJ
.7
^D\P-37-{ii/57}/^V;^--.-'
1
J.
. ]
itz
.1 S <^
?.
l
x^/-
^^.7^^f
-------
\_M\o
-------
Hlc.,-»t
* V tnXxha^
PAHTICULATE Fi£LD DATA
Ko.
i.o ca ti on
ract:>r
1L
Rs^d ar-d record at tht t.tsrt of
each v'vst pol^.t.
r-e-? d arid v'i cord e\ crv._;;":; -:'i^
-1 S 'CUV'tr ^
£/_..'...
?
T-
'"''),- i
... ) './^, .V '
Dr
Or") fic-i
in M.
'oi.-t i T1n;e
CF
\4
ir2
LZZIZ__k£_
_i_
"1
.2_4i_
__?__Tj.
/' ! ^7'
j__^.7 i.._^.Z__j..//^_.. \JtM_
"I""
., , ,
ij. :Jj,
"~'~"'"~~"'~~~~
.! .' 1
IJL^ L|^.
-\~^Arff
T
3
I i) i -7 -
Con-T.&f.r.s:
XCAP-27-(1^/67) i
-------
&
1
fj.
"^7
*.
r
i
7
?
<
/^
If
1 1-
n
/r
/c
oo
'
Clock
Tir.ic
?.V3-
f
/*
/f
20
2f
W
r
lU
If
l&
If
10
r
1C
/f
H
1 D!"-' r-- -.,-.-
i- Mi-cs-,-, CF
7 "? /
7 Of,.//>
7 / /Sf()
7/ //.£?
7/7,45-
13LOJ?
7o2 7 .2 2.
-j3Lb..ot
12$ .77
7 ?/ tUlf
7 3 L^jO'-f
1 3 b . *>&
7 7 g ,. 7"^'
7# / f 2. 2-
.
.^/.- '7 '$'£?
1
s'TLO'C
in. Kc.O
a?"
(f ?
.(, F
A
, *£
>7r
.9"
.7f
.."7
, v '
k*
r ^
, j"
.j*
< ^?3 oZ
/X"^
/ 3.
>
i
0'.*-' i ':£.>
r
__^^
*-/ &
6.
6
6
'7
C?
6
I
5"
5"
f
.
';:!;.:< Ii.i[r.':'!>K' r ! 1)''.:^!: ';.:...:.
Tc.i:p. '-.Y. :.;o' ' Vr.-^j :
i >i
/ / i / ^^ 1 / ; 7 ^v '
// ! ^^-^ ^7^ : / ??';
// -:
// ^> l\ !^-' '
it %/ \\ ' i K^ :
'/ 77 ! \ HV
7^ 1 \ i ? ^ i
// i 7^? i \i7SV i
/ / 7^ | , \ ? ?' 7
/^ 7^7 ! / >*>
i /
; 7i
| /
i / 'r' :i
i / i !
i / i
i / !
i / i
/ i
i 1
J i
! !
k
l\
I \
I \
i '\ !
i \
i \! /
! I i
1 i /
I -- / .
1 /
i / 1
i ! / . i
i /
-------
ORSAT FIELD DATA
-I
Location
Date
Comments:
Time //
°$ i/
Operator
Test
) .
L
3
(co2) ._
- Reading 1 -
/!>, s
/ / 1 Wv
/ /~1 t/
fi.^..
./; ' " . :
A*,.
ft'*
(o2)
Reading 2
j( V# £= ^
./?, t-/AcV- fy£
A^'^-^q Q
"''"*.
~
1.L
(CO)
Reading 3
fi - «
^ ff ' M
: df^ji
' 0/^H.
2>
«-1 ^is_ .
0 ' fa ' ~n7 T"
/ V v-'
31 (12/67) J3,'0 '
-,/
,/
/
-------
ORSAT FIELD DATA
Location
Date f
Time
Operator £?. t
7
Comments:
Test
t
(co2)
Reading 1
zo.c.
l/. /
(o2)
Reading 2
(CO)
Reading 3
I .
33
NCAP-31 (12/67)
-------
Date:
PARTICULAR CLEANUP SHEET
Plant: Ow?.
G"^ r
Run number:
Operator:
//-'.'<,.,,
Sample box numberf
* / . /
y
Location of sample port:
Barometric pressure:
Ambient temperature:
2.
Impinger
Volume after sampling
Impinger prefilled with
Volume collected / j g£>ml
Container No., //y
Extra No.
Ether-chloroform extraction
' of 1mP1nSer water
Impinger water residue /£, *f, / mg
I A
Impingers and back half of
filter, acetone wash:
Container No,
Extra No.
Weight results
/ 7, 7
nig
Dry probe and cyclone catch:
Container No.
Extra No. / \ Weight restilts_
mg
Probe, cyclone, flask, and
front half of filter,
acetone wash:
Container No. / d,
Extra No. JG~j Weight results^
Total-particulate weight
, C-
mg
Filter Papers and Dry Filter Particulate
Filter number Container no- Filter number Container no.
Filter particulate
weight /'/£ . £ nig
mg
Silica Gel
Weight after test: lj>, j,
Weight before test: 2&& .'
Moisture weight collected:
Container number: 1./2/ ?
;/ g o
Moisture total
4.
gm
Sample number:
Method determination:
Comments:
Analyze for: /
ZJ
rtsV-i ?&&,?).
34
-------
Date:
PARTICIPATE CLEANUP SHEET
Plant:
Run number;
Operator:
Sample box number:
Location of-ample port:
Barometric pressure';-
Ambient temperature:
' tf
Impinger
Volume after sampling }]tia? ml
Impinger prefilled \-ritht£>o ml
Volume collected /
Container
Extra No.
Ether-chloroform extraction
""of impinger v/ater
mg
Impinger v/ater residue 3%/f L> mg
Impinc/ers.and back half of
filter, acetone wash:
Container
Extra No.
Weight results
Dry probe and cyclone catchr ' Containerffcr.
. . Extra No.
Weight results
mg
Probe, cyclone, flask, and
front half of filter,
acetone wash:
Container No
Extra Mo.
V/eight results
^, J>
jng
Filter Papers and Dry Filter Particulate
Filter-number Container
--JL3L.
_ r.
i
- i-
. i.
Filter number. Container no.~
To tatpa rticulate weigh t
particulate
we i ght // S^H) |"9
8*3*3 rcg
Silica Gel
Weight after test:
Weight before test:
Moisture weight collected:
Container number: 1.
3.
4.
/. /
Moisture total;206>. I
Sample number:
Method determination:
Comments; /
Analyze for;
35
-------
Date:
* rj
,4..-
PARTICULATE CLEANUP SHEET
Plant:
Run number: - _ -I?
Operator: (f? - £* x<
Sample box number: £ i
.
'A.:
'-//
Location of sample port: %
- Barometric pressure: " 2. /
Ambient temperature: "
. ' 'j .it
?.. ?/
Vr v~ ti-
/
Impinger H20
Volume after sampling /£<^.ml
Impinger prefilled with^^ ml
Volume collected
Container No..
Extra No. 3A-)
Ether-chloroform extraction
""of impinger water
Impinger v/ater residue^ j?3.
Filter Papers and Dry Filter Particulate
Filter number Container no. Filter number Container no.
3.P
I
-Filter particulate
weigh t 77.
Total -particulate v/eight
mg
Impincjers and back half of
filter, acetone wash:
Dry probe and cyclone catch:
Probe, cyclone, flask, and
front half of filter,
acetone wash:
Container No. ;3/3
Extra No.
_ ._ . . - ' j
Container No. \f
"M~
Extra No. / \
/ N
Container No. -5£^
Extra Mo. 3C-I
Weight results
Weight results
SJeiglit results 3 u
-
'/.y,0 mg
__^
-
mg
Silica Gel
Weight after test:
Weight before test:
Moisture weight collected: JJ>
Container number: 1.
Moisture total I Oj-3, ff.
2.
Sample number:
Method determination
Comments
Analyze for:
36
-------
SAMPLING SUMMARY SilCFTS
inMFLED iOiif;:E_
Train Dati
.- 4
>
Run
No.
//
'2
.CJ
Date
5'»>* //
;V>-7/
£-.3 ''-.?/
Ro.'^zTe
d-ia.
i n .
<32J>
z s> $
,^5*&
Net
time
L mi n .
/ ~y
.<.>>, ->4
2. ?.. $£
Orifice
diff.^H
"H20
, V$0
,?35-
^'3^ r?c?3
#A >^^
Meter
temp.
°F
9$. n
;?x v
^,-v. g
Volume sampled
standard cond.
cu. ft.
/f.2'. /3^
,? / , St» fy
/X.2?0
Moisture arid Gas Data
Run
No.
/
^
v3
Total
moisture
nil.
) 3*3.3
)2oL. r
/673,X
1 "_ ' '' .- _ - _ '
Moisture
std. cond.
cu. ft.
^?, i>1?
.^7, //
$1. ^, fi
Stack
temp.
oF
J/3
3 b'S'
3$L
Velocity and Calculation Data
CNo.
;
Z
^3 '
Average
,/ Velocity x temperature UR
2t/fi5
23. S7
23. O^L
Stack
velocity fprn
stack cond.
3?8?
3'£6>7
367, 9
Stack
gas volume
scfm
S3 $?V
S 3 , C6/
s
Percent
isokin'etic
}£?,3
ItiL. 9
/£>g~t >
t
I
53.70
-------
670
/i
&o . v 3,
& 0 X ?
^0 >c 2,
to.* 3
6- 0 fc ' 2.
? C A 2
7,. * A1 1
to >r ?
X
j.t
7-6
VfA
/iSA^: 38
-------
APPENDIX D
STANDARD SAMPLING PROCEDURES
The sampling procedures used are identical to those outlined in the
Federal Register, "Standards of Performance for flev/ Stationary Sources"
(23 December, 1971).
APPENDIX E '
LABORATORY REPORT
Table E - I presents the particulate analysis results which were re-
ported by the EPA laboratory.
39
-------
TA8LC E - I
PARTICULATE i -US Di.f£fWIf
-------
APPENDIX F
TEST LOG
Table F - I presents the actual time during which sami
Run Date Sampling
1 8-26-71 - .. 1
2
2 8-27-71 1
1
2
2
3 8-27-71 1
2
PROJECT
Table F - I
Sampling Log
Port Began
11:33-
13:07
07:37
10:48
1U08
11:48
13:35
15:02
APPENDIX G
PARTICIPANTS AND TITLES
Ended
12:53
14:27
08:50
10:55
11:38
12:38
14:55
16:22
Elapsed Time(min)
80
80
73
7
30
50
80
80
Name
Howard Crist
James Harris
Raymond Mobley
"Allan Riley
Clyde Riley
Gene Smith
Philip York
Title
Analytical Chemist, ETB
Engineering Aid, ETB
Technician, ETB
Technician, ETB
Technician, ETB
Chemical Engineer, ETB
Chemical Engineer, SDID
41
------- |