TEST NO. 73 - PSA - 1
TEXAS GULF, INC.
SUPERPHOSPHORIC ACID
AURORA, NORTH CAROLINA
AUGUST 29-30, 1972
. nc.
2324 S. W. 34th STREET / GAINESVILLE, FLORIDA 32601 / PHONE 904/372-3318
-------
TEST NO. 73 - PSA - 1
TEXAS GULF, INC.
SUPERPHOSPHORIC ACID
AURORA, NORTH CAROLINA
AUGUST 29 - 30, 1972
Test Conducted By:
Environmental Engineering, Inc,
Contract #68-02-0232
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Introduction 1
Summary of.Results 3
Process Description 5
Process Operation 6
Location of. Sampling Points 7
Sampling and Analytical Procedures 9
Appendices
Appendix A: Emission Calculations and Results
Appendix B: Field Data
Appendix C: Standard Analytical Procedures
Appendix D: Project Participants
n
-------
I. INTRODUCTION
Under the direction of the Environmental Protection Agency,
Environmental Engineering, Inc. conducted emission tests at the Texas
Gulf, Inc. phosphate complex in Aurora, North Carolina. On August
29 and 30, 1972, three 2-hour test runs were conducted on TGI's
superphosphoric acid production facilities. The purpose of the tests
was to obtain data for the use of both the Industrial Studies Branch
and the Performance Standards Branch of the EPA.
The outlet stack of the off-gas scrubber was measured for
soluble and insoluble fluorides. Grab samples of the scrubbing liquid,
the process reactant, and the process product were analyzed for
fluoride and P^Or content. A schematic flow diagram indicating the
sampling location is given in Figure 1.
Complete test results are listed in Appendix A.
-------
5 i
^
54:4 P?Qu ACID !
<- J 3
ro
CC
O
J~
STEAM
PRODUCT
COOLER
BARO';i:TRjC
CONDEUSER
SCRUBBER
!' !
1 r-
HOT
WELL
i
i
5
!
- EMISSIONS
SEPARATOR
BOX
Test
Location
STORAGE
Figure 1. VACUUf/i EVAPORATION SUPERPHOSPHOHiC ACiD
-------
II. SUMMARY OF RESULTS
The plant was operating under normal process conditions during
all of the test runs.
One deviation from standard testing procedure was necessary.
The velocity of the exit gas was too low to be measured by Method 2
of the Federal Register. As an alternative, the gas velocity was
measured by igniting a colored smoke bomb in the stack and measuring
the time required for the smoke to appear at the stack outlet. The
length of the stack from the sample port to the exit was known; conse-
quently, the stack gas velocity could be calculated. Nine such tests
were performed; the times from all the tests were averaged and this
average time was used to calculate the gas velocity.
A complete summary of stack gas conditions and emission levels
is given in Table 1.
-------
TABLE 1
SUMMARY OF RESULTS
FLUORIDES
TEXAS GULF, INC.
SUPER PHOSPHORIC ACID OUTLET
Run No.
Date
Barometric pressure, inches Hg
.Stack pressure, inches Hg
Stack gas moisture, % volume
Average stack gas temperature, °F.
Stack gas flow rate @ S.T.P?, SCFM
if
Volume of gas sampled @ S.T.P.
Fluoride, water soluble, mg
Fluoride, total , mg
Fluoride, water soluble, gr/SCF
Fluoride, total, gr/SCF
Fluoride, water soluble, gr/CF stk. cond.
Fluoride, total, gr/CF stk. cond.
Fluoride, water soluble, .lb/hour
Fluoride, total, Ib/hour
1
8/29/72
30
30
2.8
80
305
86.813
11.7
11.7
0.002
0.002
0.002
0.002
0.005
0. 005
2
8/29/72
30
30
3.6
82
302
86.279
10.4
10.4
0.002
0.002
0.002
0.002
0.005
0.005
3
8/30/72
30
30
1.5
80
308
86.492
14.8
14.8
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.007
0.007
Dry, 70°F., 29.92 inches Hg.
-------
III. PROCESS DESCRIPTION
Texas Gulf, Inc. operates two superphosphoric acid (SPA)
production trains at their Lee Creek, North Carolina operations.
Emissions were sampled from the south production train only. Texas
Gulf, Inc. produces SPA by concentrating 54 percent PpOr phosphoric
acid to 68-72 percent PpOr-
In concentrating the acid, 54 percent P^O,- phosphoric acid
is continuously fed to the vacuum evaporator.(Figure 1). The over-
heads, containing fluorides and water vapor, are condensed in a
barometric condenser. The barometric condenser water flows to the
barometric condenser hotwell after which it is sewered to the gypsum
pond. The .product acid (68-72 percent Pp^c) 1S continuously tapped
from the evaporator and pumped to the product acid cooling tank where
it is cooled before being pumped to storage.
Fluoride emissions from the barometric condenser hotwell and
the product acid cooling tank are controlled by a scrubber.
-------
IV. PROCESS OPERATION
The first two test runs were performed on August 29, 1972. The
plant operated at design production rates during these tests. The
third and final test was performed on August 30, 1972. During this
test run, the plant operated at 113 percent of the design production
rate. The process operated normally throughout the collection of
all samples.
-------
V. LOCATION OF SAMPLING POINTS
The sampling sites and number of traverse points were selected
as per "Method 1 - Sample and Velocity Traverses for Stationary Sources,
Part 60, Subchapter C, Chapter 1, Title 40," Federal Register. No; 247-
Pt. II-l.
The above method suggests using two perpendicular diameters of
traverse points per sampling station, however, on-site conditions neces-
sitated the use of only one traverse diameter.
Figure 2 is a schematic diagram of the stack configuration near
the sampling location, and the sampling points traversed during the
emission tests.
-------
FIGURE 2
SAMPLE PORT LOCATION
Port
o
20 1/2 ft.
A1
48 1/2 ft.
20.5 inches I.D.
A-A'
Port and
Traverse
Point No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
Distance
From Inside
Stack Wall
(in.)
1
3
6 1/16
14 1/2
17 1/2
19 1/2-
8
-------
VI. SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES
Preliminary Moisture Determination
The preliminary moisture content of the stack gas was found by
using the wet bulb-dry bulb method as referred to in the Federal
Register (Vol. 36, No. 247, Part II, December 23, 1971).
Preliminary Velocity Determination
Because of such a low flow rate, the velocity could not be
measured as per Method 2 of the above referenced Federal Register.
The method used consisted of igniting ~a smoke flare in the
stack at the sampling port and measuring the time required for the
smoke to travel the known distance to the stack outlet.
Several smoke tests were made before each fluoride test began.
The average time of nine smoke tests was used to calculate the velocity
of the stack gases.
The stack temperature and pressure measurements were also made
during the velocity determinations.
Sampling for Fluoride Emissions
The sampling procedure used for determining fluoride emissions
was similar to Method 5 of the Federal Register. The major difference
between the two methods was the configuration of the sampling train.
The sampling train described in the Federal Register has a heated box
containing the filter holder directly following the glass probe. The
sampling train used in these tests contained no heated'box, and the
-------
filter holder was placed between the third and fourth impingers (between
dry iinpinger and silica gel impinger) to prevent sample carry over.
Figure 3 is a schematic diagram of the sampling train used.
After the selection of the sampling site and the minimum number
of sampling points per Method 2 of the above referenced Federal Register,
three separate test runs were performed. For each run, the required
stack and sampling parameters were recorded on field data sheets. They
are included in Appendix B. Readings were taken at each traverse point.
Because of the low flow rate, it was decided to sample at the AHA of
the meter box (1.65 inches HpO). The traverse points were selected to
maintain at least one inch from the inner stack wall.
After each run, the liquid volume in the first three impingers
was measured volumetrically and the silica gel was reweighed. The im-
pinger liquid, the filter, plus the water washings of the probe and
other sampling train components up to the silica gel were placed into
a single polyethylene container.
Liquid and Product Grab Samples
Periodically, during each test run, grab samples of the raw
materials, finished product, and scrubber liquid were taken, and the
temperature and pH were determined at the site. The samples were
split with the plant personnel so that comparative analyses could be
performed,
10
-------
Laboratory Analysis Procedures
<
Water soluble fluorides were done by a sulfuric acid distillation
followed by the SPADNS - ZIRCONIUM LAKE Method. Water insoluble
fluorides were first fused with NaOH followed by a sulfuric acid dis-
tillation, then by the SPADNS - ZIRCONIUM LAKE Method.
P20r analysis of the stack effluent was done by EPA personnel.
All other P^Or analyses were done by plant personnel.
For more details of exact method, see Appendix C.
11
-------
19
Stainless Steel Nozzle
Heated Glass Probe
Glass Connector
Ice Bath
Ircpinger with 100 ml H_0 (Modified Tip)
Iir.pinger with 100 ml H^O (Standard Tip)
lupinger, Dry (Modified Tip)
Inipinger with 180 grams Silica Gel (Modified Tip)
Filter Holder with No. 1 Whatman Filter
Thermometer
Flexible Sample Line .
Vacuum Gauge
Main Control Valve
By-Pass Control Valve
Air Tioht Vacuum Pump
Dry Test Meter
Calibrated Orifice
Incli ned Manometer
17
S-Type
Pi tot Tube
Figure 3
FLUORIDE SAMPLING TRAIN
-------
APPENDICES
-------
APPENDIX A
Emission Calculations and Results
-------
E.E.I. SOURCE SAMPLING NOMENCLATURE SHEET
PB - Barometric pressure, inches Hg
PS - Stack pressure, inches Hg
As - Stack area, sq. ft.
AS'- Effective area of positive stack gas flow, sq. ft.
NPTS - Number of traverse points where the pitot velocity head was greater than zer
TS - Stack temperature, °R
TM - Meter temperature, °R
E_ - Average square root of velocity head, Vinches H20
AH - Average meter orifice pressure differential, inches H£0
AN - Sampling nozzle area, square feet
CP - S-type pitot tube correction factor
VM - Recorded meter volume sample, cubic feet (meter conditions)
VC - Condensate and silica gel increase in impringers, milliliters
Po - Pressure at the dry test meter orifice, fPB +A. H~] inches Hg
L 13.6]
STP - Standard conditions, dry, 70°F, 29.92 inches Hg
Conversion of condensate in milliliters to water vapor in cubic feet (STP)
Volume sampled, cubic feet (STP)
Total water vapor volume and dry gas volume sampled> cubic feet (STP)
Moisture fraction of stack gas
Dry gas fraction
Molecular weight of stack gas, Ibs/lb-mole (dry conditions)
Molecular weight of stack gas, Ibs/lb-mole (stack conditions)
Specific gravity of stack gas, referred to air
Excess air, %
Average square root of velocity head times stack temperature
Stack gas velocity, feet per minute
Stack gas flow rate, cubic feet per minute (stack conditions)
Stack gas flow rate, cubic feet per minute (dry conditions)
Stack gas flow rate, cubic feet per minute (STP)
Percent isokinetic volume sampled (method described in Federal Register)
-------
EQUATIONS FOR CALCULATING FLUORIDE EMISSIONS
VWV = (0.0474) x (VC)
VSTPD = (17.71 x (VM) x (PB + AH_ ) 4- TM
13.6
VT = (VWV) + (VSTPD)
W = (VWV)-r-(VT)
FDA = (1.0) - (W)
FMOIST = Assumed moisture fraction
MD = (0.44 x % CO ) + (0.32 x % 02) + (0.28 x % N2) + (0.28 x % CO)
MS = (MD x FDA) + (18 x W)
GS = (MS) -r- (28.99)
EA = [(100) x (% 02 - ^f^)] -7- Qo.266 x % NZ) - (Z 02 - %2C
U = (174) x (CP) x (H) x V^(TS x 29.92)-i-(GS x PS)
QS = (U) x (AS)
QD = (QS) x (FDA)
QSTPD = (QD) x ( 53°) x &
29.92 TS
PISO = (o.oo267 x VC x TS) + (PQ x TS x VM-l-TM) ~ (Time x U x PS x AN)
Fluoride Emissions:
MG = Milligrams of fluoride from lab analysis
Grains/SCF = (0.01543) x (MG) -~ VSTPD
Grains/CF, Stack Cond. = (17.71) x (PS) x (FDA) x (Grains/SCF) -j- (TS)
Lbs/hour = (Grains/SCF) x (0.00857) x (QSTPD)
P205 Fed = Tons/hour, determined from plant data
Lbs/ton P20 Fed = (Ibs/hour) -^- (Tons/hour P205 Fed)
-------
FLUORIDE EMISSIONS
-------
S.Q.U.RCE TES.T
PLAHT - TT.XAS GULF SULFVP
NO OF PUUS
A , 11. C.
SOUP.CF, - SUPER PVOS. ACID (,9. STAC1')
TYPF. OP PLAliT - Super Phosphoric Acid
C011TROL EQUIPilF.FT -
POLLUTAI1TS SAl'PLPri - Fluorides
- 3
l)RUi\' NUMBER
2 ) DA TE
3) TIME BEG A 11
UPTIME END
^BAROMETRIC PRESSURE, III EG
&)METEh' ORIFICE PRESSURE DROP, III 11 G
i i_ _
1 10:50
J_ 13 : 00
1 30
1 .1.63
7) VOL DRY GAS, METER C011D, CUBIC FEET 1 R7.52H
8) AVER AGE GAS METER TEMPERATURE, DEC
B)VOL DRY GAS, S.T.P. , CUBIC FEET
10)TOTAL 1120 COLLECTED, ML
11) VOL 1120 VAPOR COLLECTED, S.T.P. ,
12) STACK GAS MOISTURE, PERCENT VOLUME
F 1 77 . 9
JL R 6 . 8 i 3
J_ 52.5
CU FT], 2.H9
1 2.0
13) ASSUMED STACK GAS MOISTURE, PCT VOL \ 5
1H)PERCENT C02
IS) PERCENT 02
lb)PERCL'llT CO
IT) PERCENT 112
IB) PERCENT EXCESS AIR
19)MOLECULAR WEIGHT OF STACK GAS, DRY
2Q)MOLECULAR WEIGHT OF STACK GAS, STK
2DSTACK GAS SPECIFIC GRAVITY
23)AVMAGE STACK GAS TEMPERATURE, DEC,
2S)PITOT CORRECTION FACTOR
2B)STACK PRESSURE, III UG , ABSOLUTE
2DSTACK GAS VEL, STACK COi-JD, F.P.M.
28)STACK AREA, SQ FEET
2V)EFFECTIVE STACK AREA, SQUARE FEET
30)STACK GAS FLOW RATE, S.T.P. , SCFM
3DNST TIME OF TEST, MIHUTES
3 2 )S AMP LIN G UOZ ZLE DIAMETER , 1 1! CUES
33) PERCENT ISOKIIJETIC
3H)FLUORIDE - WATER SOLUBLE, MG
3S)FLUORIDE - TOTAL, MG
3&)FLUORIDE - WATER SOLUBLE, GR/SCF
31)FLUO:UDE - TOTAL, GR/SCF
3B)FLUORIDE - WATER SOL., GR/CF, STK
39)FLUORIDE - TOTAL, CR/CF, STK
HO)FLUO!UDE - WATER SOLUBLE, LB/UOUP
HI) FLUORIDE - TOTAL, LB/UOUR
«42)P20S FED - TOi:S/!!OUR
H3)FLUORIDL' - VAT EX SOL., LB/TOi! P205
HH)FLUO!UDE - TOTAL, LB/TOi! P205
1
1 _
1 - _
i
10
J_ 28.85
COIJDi 28-55
j_ o . a R
1
F J[ 80. 3
^
I 6~. 83
J_ 30
i r5"o . ,T
j^ 2". 7"7"
I
i
I
I
|
1
I
I
I
|
I
|
1
I
1
1
I
I
|
|
I
_[
j_
j^
_[
I
I
|
_[
I
1
j^
J_
pr.-mrTi j
CUD. l"T'2±£"IIIl
CUD. IJ^^I^
1 nr.njrrT) 'f^
1 1 ."fTTnr^P
i
.......t
I
1
FED l_p_. 1
FED 1. - ~
I
?- - 1
rt_£? 0^-70 _[
i i'r a 5 1
10:^5 1
30 _[
IJ.GH _ _1
87^6113 J.
02 j,
no A.27n _[
67.8 J_
3^21 J.
3^6 1
5 __1
1_
_1
_ 1
1
°- «1
28.85 _[
28.46 _[
0.98 J_
i
0 2.3 J_
_[
0.83 _[
30 J_
139 3 J.
2«_2°_ _- 1
.' . 29 I
s-sr '~-L
J.
(7*. 5~ i
' _' _[_
iij ~r i
^"^ j__
~Tr.~tTT71.T1 4~
~T7Y~7m~n ' i~
1 V J ' '_^' . .i __
_^j __!_ L, L_
'" run7' o j^
- _. _ 1
1
i
3
n/3
11 :
13 :
30
1. R
87 .
82
86 .
2 7 .
1. 3
1 . 5
5
0
20.
28 .
0 ,"?j
ffO
1) .1]
37)
13.2..
1
00 i
00 J_
1
.! __ 1
n c o i
1
'192 |
-° 1
2 1
1
._ _ i
1
_ [
._ _!
1
.- _ 1
05 J_
J.
n 1
1
J_
?' 1
1
3_ - 1
: __ i.
TfTiTi
71 /-T!
ir:"5
.- 'r .
j."*f . '
%£
1, ,
-(Sj ^f
^- '* -
t
. _ _ 1
j_
L,
J.
^ _[
J^"~Il
^ J
_^j L
[i
'.' i
js
Jl
- J1
***S.T.P. <->/)/? Y , 70
F, 29.92 IKCIIES MERCURY***
-------
APPENDIX B
Field Data
-------
Plan lg<(ti
Gainesville, Florida
SOURCE SAMPLING FIELD DATA SHEET
/?
Sampling Location
/?c.i &_ C5*
Run No.
Time Start /&3O Time End
/-/r/>;
Sampling Time/PointJ
D8 °F, WB °F, VP (? DP
_"Hg
Sketch of Stack
ff/
Bar- Press.
Moisture 5
We a t h e r _
Temp. __ __
%,FDA
11 Hg,Stack Press._£o__"Hg
__,Gas Density Factor__
//y
F, W/D
,W/S
Sample Box No. 5 Meter Box No. 5_
Meter AH@_/j*5>itot Ccrr. Factor Q. S3
Nozzle Pi a. ^.Jfo'n., Probe Length 4 ft
Probe Heater Setting Zl>% Nomograph Cf Q. 77
Stack Dimensions 2.O.!D in
Stack Area '^±^^L ft2
Stack Height 2.0 6 / $-c!»^> ft
~t
I
Mat'l Processing Rate
Final Gas Meter Reading
Initial Gas Meter Reading
<3 / & , /33 ft3
ftj
Filter No
Condensate Increase in Impingers
Moisture in Si 1 ica Ge 1 /S.,";
Silica Gel Container No,
Orsat: C02
02
CO
ml
9m
2.
Excess
Air
Test Conducted by:
Remarks:
Port and
Traverse
Point No,
/4W #/
/^. A
2
* 3
4-
$
(*
Distance
From Inside
Stack Wall
(in.)
/
3
& fa
///2
/7^
/9^/z
Clock
Time
/030
MJO
J/30
/^oo
£2ZO
J24-& LJ
/3^D
Gas Meter
Reading
(ft3)
*
7Z&.&/4-
74 3 .3
77^-2
78£>~£
8o/.o
B!(**/38
Stack
Velocity
Head
("H20)
tf, cf»/7
__
^_
Meter
Orifice
Press. Diff.
("H20)
Calc.
._
Actual
/;^5
/^
/.&o
[A^G
/, ^
/ ^
Stack Gas
Temp.
(°F)
_&f .
^5
74-
74
,.~"r,
/D
Pf;
Gas Sample
Temp. @ Dry
Gas Meter
(°F)
In
5b
,-fc
75
7<
' /^~.
77
Out
80
So
78
78
?&
73
Sample
Box
Temp.
(°F)
^_
Last
Impinger
Temp ,
(6F)
S ^
/ '
(" ';
& -
/ '
/ *
' "} '
£ . '"
Vacuum
on
Sample
Train
("Hg)
o
/
/£
/#]
/Z
/£'
1/2
/I34
-M4-4-
-------
PI/1 RUPNTA^RG i rUft NG flic.
Gainesville, Florida
SOURCE SAMPLING FIELD DATA SHEET
Plant *T
Sampling Location __$>.-
Da te-R u n No
Z.
Time Start/^,4jJ" Time End /^.'
Sampling Time/Point_
°F, WB °F, VP @ DP
Sketch of Stack
"Hg
Bar- press. ffo "Hg,Stack Press..,j?j±L_"H9
Moi s ture_Jif_*, FDA ,Gas Dens i ty Fac tor__
Weather Q^i/J^
Temp. °F> W/D ,W/S _'
Sample Box No. Meter Box No.
Meter
Nozzle Dia.,
Corr. Factor^?/
i9_in., Probe Length
ft
Probe Heater Setting Nomograph Cf
Stack Dimensions £ & * ^ in
Stack Area 2.29 ^t2
Stack Height ft
Mat'l Processing Rate
Final Gas Meter Reading
Initial Gas Meter Reading
o. 3.
- 13
F liter
Condensate Increase in Impingers
Moisture in Silica Gel " /6i B
Silica Gel Container No ;
Orsat:
02
CO
C02
Excess
Air
Test Conducted by:
Remarks :
* V ' Vo
ml
Port and
Traverse
Point No.
fl£J
v
/
2
J
i
s
i
Distance
From Inside
Stack Wall
(in.)
i
t
Clock
Time
/V.*T
f*'°S~}
tf/,£
Hfi 3
gl^^L 1
38%3
Stack
Velocity-
Head
("H20)
a en?'7!
. .
^
--
Meter
Orifice
Press. Diff.
("H,0)
Calc.
-~
^^
-
-
,
Actual
/^r
/^r
/.o-
A^
/
-------
IR W NT/^fc I lIHl N
Gainesville, Florida
SOURCE SAMPLING FIELD DATA SHEET
Samp! i ng Locati on y^
Date ^> -30'72, Run No.
Time
Time End /<->»
Sampl i ng Ti me/Poi nt <£?£>^'
DB
F, WB
F, VP @ DP
"Hg
Bar- press..tJo__"Hg,Stack Press. «Zfo "Hg
Moisture_vJ:Pjc,FDA_ ,Gas Density Factor_
Weather . C._/-a /^.
Temp.
T, W/D
,W/S
Sample Box No.__>5^_Meter Box No.__J;f
Meter AH@/£^(f_Pitot Corr. Factor
Nozzle Dia.A^^Jn., Probe Length
Probe Heater Settin
Stack Dimensions
Stack Area
Stack Height '
ft
/^Nomograph Cf >-?"?
in
Sketch of Stack
Mat'l Processing Rate_
Final Gas Meter Reading
Initial Gas Meter Reading ^p3,
Condensate Increase in Impingers
Moisture in Silica Gel / 7... <-{
Silica Gel Container No,. 4£* Filter
Orsat:
/Q_
Test Conducted by :
c L //./_
Do LL
- 4$,
_ft2
ft
Remarks ;
ml'
gm
: C07 \
o? i
CO
N2"
Excess
, Air
1 1
;
/ ? /> n ^/~ fa /-, 1
,/_'<<* 1 L-'o-,'* C J
Port and
Traverse
Point No.
$: 7
t
5
4
X
"?
^
Distance
From Inside
Stack Wall
(in.)
/
^
& '//I,
14- l/z
J3. & \
Clock
Time
1 1*' 00
UL%°
//>'^°
/2, C/73
/z: -L^
12^^/0
Gas Meter
Reading
(ft3)
qj^ltlj
.^ '
-l$, ^
1^'J. $
1J&< 7_
Stack
Velocity
Head
("H20)
C5 O'Ol 7
.
~-
L
.
Meter
Orifice
Press. Diff.
Calc.
_
Actual
/ 65
/. £s
/.6-f
Stack Gas
Temp.
80
/, if \ 8°
l&
/<^s-
So
ffo
Gas Sample
Temp. @ Dry
Gas Meter
In
ft C~S
CiJ *7
83
S3
ft 3
Out
0 o
fft
8 2-
g-?~
$2-
$3
Sample
Box
Temp.
.
~
.
.
f
Last
Impi nger
Ternp .
& o
7*
(> &
7 &
7o
Vacuum
on
Sample
Train
("Hg)
L,^ * ^J
6
6
&
£
-------
GRAB SAMPLE DATA
-------
I I
T - C-
-*
Mo.
o,
I
1
Dafe.
\ )-^ V-,cu «-,
Q « .x.
roiv\T
\"\ -
IT <-\ (\ ^A^fc
pluoricfes
AUtals
-------
\ -dr
r^»
*k- Mo.
Run Wo,
Pom"t"
Pa Os
Trace. AUtals
-------
c)v
EPR
Mo.
Wo,
1
Dafe.
iwe.
' A <
S
\\-*\
S5S
A
i-A
4LB.
! u
u
Re.tAfi.rks
-------
T 0- T
» ^ - o-
EPA Sarnie, tfo.
Ruvt Mo.
L
r i
«-*>-»« PcS-t'TC
Vo <, Ac. >
u
Vis ! \.A
\-4
AUtals
Re^iUrks
-------
)
*
EPA
Mo.
Run Wo.
Daf
we.
j -^ S>p^>->..
A
JfUi
fluort'cle.s
Me.1v\(
s
-------
ani
EPR
Run Wo.
ae.
V°F
H
P^ Os
Reworks
-------
\"l.
Os
EPA
o.
Run No.
Dafe.
«
hwe.
V
\A
M.S
-------
v--r
v
x>
H
E.PA Sam^k Mo.
Run Wo.
S
av
~\ e v
PH
Trace, AUt^ls
u2.vwks
-------
T-C-.
O
- v X 4- \r-v-"-"
EPA Sa« ie. f/o.
Run Wo.
Dafe
fjj
^
Trace.
-------
T-C-. T.
>tK, \ \
EPA Sample. No.
Mo,
Dafe.
M<7 Pe>iv\1"
H
Os
-------
\
-> ^ P c *~ r**- ^
F-\L^^c ft
*\\_ *~~)
^
f/0.
o,
3
ime-
\
ure
PH
,'evAArks
-------
75 <-^-0 iv Y\ »- ^
-------
APPENDIX C
Standard Analytical Procedures
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
Reply to '
Ann of: n , '
J ' Date: 12-21-72
Subject: Summary of Fluoride Analysis
*y-
°: R.* Neulicht, EMB, IRL
This memorandum is in response to your request for a brief
summary of our SPADNS-Zirconium Lake procedure for determination
of fluoride in stack emission samples.
Samples received in our laboratory are filtered through
fluoride free paper filters to yield water soluble and water insoluble
portions. The water insoluble particulate collected on. the filter
is rinsed throughly to be sure that all water soluble fluoride is
rinsed through. The water soluble fraction is distilled from sul-
furic acid to a maximum -temperature of '180 C. If chloride is suspected
in the sample Ag So . is added to the still. SPADNS solution is added
to an aliquot of the distillate and the absorbance is read at 570 nm.
The concentration of the sample is determined from a calibration curve
prepared from standard fluoride solutions. It is very important that
the temperature of the samples be the same as that of the standards
when absorbances are recorded.
The water insoluble fraction of the sample is evaporated to dry-
ness in the presence o± a slurry or CAU, and then lustd will* IJACII. TIi£
fusate is dissolved with distilled water, neutralized with dilute H So.,
distilled and analyzed as described for the soluble portion.
Paper filters containing particulate are cut into small pieces,
suspended in a slurry of CAO, evaporated to dryness and ashed prior
to the alkali fusion and distillation.
'If you have any questions about this procedure, let me know.
Howard L. Crist
Chief, Source Sample Analysis Section
SSFAB, QAEHL
cc:. R. E. Lee
-------
Phosphorous Pentoxide Determination
Colorimetric Molybdovanadophosphate Method
An 'aliquot of sample is hydrolyzed in the presence of HC1 and
HNO acids by boiling almost to dryhess. «
. <>
The sample is cooled to room temperature, transferred,, to a
250 ml volumetric flask and diluted to volume with distilled water.
A 20 ml aliquot is transferred to a 100 ml volumetric flask, 20 ml
of molybdovanadate reagent is added and the flask is diluted to
volume. . '
The absorbance of the yellow color is determined after ten min-
utes at 400 nm. The concentration of phosphorous pentoxide is de-
termined from a calibration curve prepared with standard solutions.
f
-------
APPENDIX D
Project Participants
-------
PROJECT PARTICIPANTS
Environmental Engineering, Inc.
Name Title
John R. Dollar, E.I.T., M.S.E. Project Manager
George Allen Environmental Specialist
Marvin Hamlin Environmental Specialist
Environmental Protection Agency
Name
Roy Neulicht
Lee Beck
Andrew Tremholm
------- |