74-GRN-6
                               (REPORT NUMBER)
AIR  POLLUTION  EMISSION  TEST
                     KANSAS CITY TERMINAL ELEVATOR
                             (PLANT NAME)
                     Kansas  City, Missouri
                           (PLANT ADDRESS)
           U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                 Office of Air and Water Programs
             Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
             Emission Standards and Engineering Division
                  Emission Measurement Branch
               Research Triangle Park, N. C.  27711

-------
\
                              Emission Testing Report

                              EMB Project No..74-GRN-6
                 KANSAS   C  I T Y   TERMINAL   EL E V A TO R

                                  Kansas City, Missouri
                                 Project Officer:
                                  Clyde E, Riley
                    1"     Environmental Protection Agency
                    .Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
                   Research Triangle Park, North Carolina  27711
                                     May  1974

-------
                       TABLE OF CONTENTS

                                                           Page Number(s)

  I.   INTRODUCTION	    1-3

 II.   SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS  .........    4-10

      TABLE I - Summary of .Results for Grain Loading Operations (English)
      TABLE I-A - Summary of Results for Grain Loading Operations (Metric)
      TABLE II - Summary of Results for Grain Cleaning Operations (English)
      TABLE II-A - Summary of Results for Grain Cleaning Operations. (Metric).

III.   PROCESS DESCRIPTION  . .  .  . . .	 . . . .    11-12

 IV.   PROCESS OPERATION  . . .  ...-.-.-'. .-..-.-,... . .    13-16.  .  .
      TABLE III - R.ailcar Loading Process Data  :   ,
      TABLE IV - Process Feed Rates During Tests

  V.   LOCATION OF,SAMPLING PORTS .  ,  .  .  .... ... .  .     17-20

      Figure 1 - Car Loading        .
      Figure 2 - Grain Cleaning
      Figure 3 - Sample Traverse Points

 VI.   SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES  ... ..... .  .     21-24

      Figure 4 - Particulate Sampling Train                 ,
                         APPENDICES

      APPENDIX A - Particulate Results

      APPENDIX B - Record of Visible Emissions

      APPENDIX C - Process Operational Log

      APPENDIX D - Field Data

      APPENDIX E - Test Log                     :

      APPENDIX F - Sample Identification Log

      APPENDIX G - Project Participants and Titles

      APPENDIX H - Preliminary Survey Report

-------
                        I.   INTRODUCTION

      In accordance with Section  111 of the Clean Air Act of  1970, the
 Environmental  Protection Agency  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.  A performance standard is a standard
 for emissions  of air pollutants  which reflects the best emission reduction
 systems that have been adequately demonstrated, taking into  account
 economic considerations.      r-—  -      -•- -^-*-•:	

      The development of realistic performance standards requires that -
 representative data for pollutant emissions be supported by  testing the
 various existing source categories.  In  the grain milling and handling
 industry,  the  emissions control  systems  (baghouses) of the Kansas City
 Terminal Elevator Company,  Kansas City,  Missouri, were designated by EPA
 as representing well-controlled  grain handling emission collectors. • These
 baghouses  were therefore selected for the emission testing program.  This
              *                     '
 report presents the results of the testing which was performed at the
 Kansas City  installation.

      The Kansas City Terminal  Elevator Company purchases grain from
 nearby, farms and smaller country el evators ~- The grain'is~ graded*, cl eaned
 and stored before being sold to  processing facilities.  Emissions from
 the grain  elevator are controlled by two separate control systems.  One
 system associated with the cleaning operation which removes  impurities and
 foreign matter from the grain  while the  other system collects fugitive.
 dust  emissions from the railcar  loading  operation.  The exhaust gases from
 each  control system are directed to separate baghouse collectors and then
'passed outward to the atmosphere through induced draft fans.
                     \         '      '
                             1

-------
     Modifications of the test sites were required before conducting  the
testing program.   A sixty foot duct.extension was installed on the
exhaust outlet of the grain cleaner baghouse and a twenty foot duct
extension was added to the exhaust output of the loading operations
baghouse.      .

     Testing at the grain cleaning baghouse included the-determination .   .
of filterable and total .particulate; matter using EPA sampling-Methods-1,
2, and 5.  The detailed procedures for these methods may be found in  the
Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources, Federal  Register,
Vol. 36, No. 247, December 23, 1971.  Tests at the loading-operation  --
included the determination of filterable and total particulate matter
and particle size measurements using a Brinks Cascade Impactor.   Each
particulate test was designed to measure average'emission rates  during
specified process operations.

     During the Week of October 16, 1973, Midwest Research  Institute
collected three particulate samples and one particle size sample at the
outlet of the loading operation baghouse along with .one particulate
sample from the grain cleaning baghouse outlet.  Three particulate tests
were planned along with one particle^size test at-each of the .two con-
trol system baghouses.  Problems occurred with plant operating schedules
and at the end of the week only three particulate tests had been obtained
at the loading collector and only a segment of one test at the cleaner
collector, however, this segment was later completed during the week

-------
of October 22, 1973.   A single particle size sample was  collected at
the loading baghouse but did not yield any results due  to  the  extremely
low grain loadings.  Visible emissions of process and  fugitive dust
discharges were observed on October 16 through  19, 1973, and the results
are reported in Appendix B.  The particulate and particle  size samples
were returned to the MRI laboratories  in Kansas City,  Missouri  for
analysis and evaluation.

-------
                  . SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

     Tables I and II summarize the results of the particulate sampling
at the railcar loading and grain cleaning baghouse collectors.   Addi-
tional data are presented in the Appendices to this report.   Gas         .
temperatures, moistures and velocities appeared relatively uniform during
the testing periods.  The cumulative results from each of the runs are
reasonably consistent, particularly for this type of process.
Railcar Loading Operation     .
     Tables I and IA-contain the stack gas and particulate emission data
for the railcar loading tests.  Average particulate emissions for the
three runs indicate negligible variations between the individual test- -
results.
     Two values are reported for the particulate concentrations and
emissions.  The value designated as "partial" represents the particulate
collected in the front half of the sampling train, namely, the probe and
filter.  The "total" value is the amount of particulate collected in the
entire train, which includes the front half plus the particulate collected
in the impingers.  The-particulate collected in the impingers amounted to
an average of 35% of the total particulate collected for the three tests. .'..
Isbkinetic sampling rates ranged between 103 and 106.

 -   The average "front" particulate concentration -for the three tests was
0.00781 grains per dry standard cubic foot and the average emission rate
was 0.34 pounds per hour.  Averaging the results for the "total" particu-
late indicates a concentration of 0.0125 grains per dry standard cubic foot

-------
\
                                 TABLE I
                           Summary of Results for
                          Grain Loading Operations
 PLANT:  KANSAS  CITY  TERMINAL ELEVATOR
 LOCATION:  KANSAS  CITY MISSOURI
 OPERATOR:  MIDWEST RESEARCH INSTITUTE
        PART ICULATE SUMMARY  IN   ENGLISH  UNITS
DESCRIPTION
DATE OF RUN
STACK AREA
NET TIME OF RUN
BAROMETRIC PRESSURE
AVG ORIFICE PRES DROP"
VOL DRY GAS-METER COND:
AVG GAS METER TEMP
VOL DRY GAS-STD COND
TOTAL H20 COLLECTED
VOL H20- VAPOR-STD COND
PERCENT MOISTURE BY VOL
MOLE FRACTION DRY GAS
PERCENT C02 BY VOL, DRY
PERCENT 02 BY VOL, DRY
PERCENT CO BY VOL, DRY
PERCENT N2 BY VOL, DRY
MOLECULAR WT-DRY STK GAS
MOLECULAR WT-STK GAS
AVG STACK TEMPERATURE
NET SAMPLING POINTS
STACK PRESSURE, ABSOLUTE
AVG STACK GAS VELOCITY
STK FLOWRATE, DRY,STD CN
ACTUAL STACK FLOWRATE
PERCENT 1 SDK 1 NET C
PARTI CULATE WT-PARTIAL
PARTI CULATE WT-TOTAL
PERC IMPINGER CATCH
PART. LOAD-PTL,STD CN
PART. LOAD-TTL,STD CN
PART. LOAD-PTL,STK CN
PART. LOAD-TT4_,STK CN
PART 1C EM IS- PART AL
PART 1C EMIS-TOTAL
PART EMIS/V/T PRO; FD PTL
PART EMIS/WT PRO FD TTL
>.i
i i
• '
! '
\ ;
UNITS

FT2
MIN
IN.HG
IN.H20
DCF
DEG.F
DSCF
ML
SCF








DEG.F

IN..HG
~FPS
DSCFM
ACFM

MG
. MG

GR/DSCF
GR/DSCF
GR/ACF
GR/ACF
LB/HR
LB/HR
LB/TON
, LB/TON


5

: 1
10-16-73
1.187
160.0
29.66
0.670
72.79
72.0
71.99
12.1
0.57
0.8
0.992
0.4
21.0
0.0
78.6
28.90
28.82
65.0
1
29.70
86.180
6099.
6136.
102.7
19.20
26.10
26.4
0.00411
0.00558
0.00408
0.00555
0.21
0.29
O.OOOfil
0.00084




2
10-17-73
1.187
160.0
29.58
0.465
61.46
79.0
59.80
9.9
0.47
0.8
0.992
0.4
21.0
0.0
78.6
28.90
28.82
75.0
1
,29.62
71.124
4926.
5064.
105.7
32.00
54.80
41.6
0.00824
0.01411
0.00801
0.01372
0.35
0.60
0.00112
0.00193


.

3
10-17-73
1.187
160.0
29.53
0.455
59.28
81.0
57.37
12.3
. 0.58
1.0
0.990
0.4
21.0
0.0
78.6
28.90
28.79
80.0
1
29.57
69.970
4782.
4982.
-104.4
41.30
66.90
38.3
0.01109
0.01796
0.01064
0.01723
0.45
0.74
0.00098
0.00158




AVERAGE

•
. '




- •













.' 75.758
'5269.
5394.
104.3
30.83
49.27
35.4
0.00781
0.01255
0.00758
0.01217
0.34
0.54
0.00091
0.00145





-------
                                TABLE I-A
                          Summary of Results for
                         Grain  Loading Operations
PLANT:  KANSAS CITY TERMINAL ELEVATOR
LOCATION:  KANSAS CITY MISSOURI
OPERATOR:  MIDWEST RESEARCH  INSTITUTE
       PARTICULATE  SUMMARY   IN  METRIC  UNITS
  DESCRIPTION

DATE OF RUN

STACK AREA
NET TIME OF RUN
BAROMETRIC PRESSURE
AVG ORIFICE PRES DROP"
VOL DRY GAS-METER COND
AVG GAS METER TEMP
VOL DRY GAS-STD COND
TOTAL H20 COLLECTED
VOL H20 VAPOR-STD COND
PERCENT MOISTURE BY VOL
MOLE FRACTION DRY GAS
PERCENT C02 BY VOL, DRY
PERCENT 02 BY VOL, DRY
PERCENT CO BY VOL, DRY
PERCENT N2 BY VOL, DRY
MOLECULAR WT-DRY STK GAS
MOLECULAR WT-STK GAS
AVG STACK TEMPERATURE
NET SAMPLING POINTS
STACK PRESSURE, ABSOLUTE
AVG STACK GAS VELOCIT-Y
STK FLOWRATE, DRY, STD "CN
ACTUAL STACK FLOWRATE
PERCENT ISOKINETIC
PARTICULATE WT- PARTIAL
PARTICULATE WT-TOTAL
PERC IMPINGER CATCH
PART. LOAD-PTL,STD CN
PART. LOAD-TTL,STD CN
PART/TOAD-PTL/STK CN "
PART. LOAD-TTL7STK CN
PART 1C EMIS-PARTIAL
PART 1C EMIS-TOTAL
                          UN: ITS
                              M2
                            MIN
                           MM.HG
                          MM.H20
                             DM3
                           DEG.C
                            DNM3
                              ML
                             NM3
PART
PART
EMIS/WT
EMIS/WT
PRO
PRO
FD
FD
                    PTL
                    TTL
                           DEG.C

                           MM.HG
                             M/S
                         ' DNM3/M
                           AM3/M

                              MG
                              MG

                          MG/NM3
                          MG/NM3
                          MG/AM3
                          MG/AM3
                           KG/HR
                           KG/HR
                         KG/MTON
                         KG/MTON
1
10-16-73
0.110
160.0
753.36
17.018
. 2.06
22.2
2. 04
12.1
0.02
0.8
0.992
0.4
21.0
0.0
78.6
28.90
28.82
18.3
1
754.38
26.268
173.
174.
102.7
19.20
26.10
26. 4
9.40
12.78
9.34
12.69
0.10
"0.13
0.00031
0.00042
-_2 -~
10-17-73
0.110
160.0
751.33
11.811
1.7U
26.1
1.69
9.9
0.01
0.8
0.992
O.U
21.0
0.0
78.6
28.90
28.82
23.9
1
752.35
21.. 6 7.9
139.
. 143.
105.7
32.00
54.80
41.6
18.86
32.29
18.34
31.40
0.16
0.27
0.00056
0.00096
3
10-17-73
0.110
160.0
750.06
11.557
1.68
27.2
1.62
12.3
0.02
1.0
"0.990.
0.4
21.0
0.0
78.6
28.90
28.79
26.7
1
751.08
21.327
135.
141.
104.4
.41.30-
66.90
38.3
25.37
41.10
24.34
39.43
0.21
0.33
0.00049
0.00079
AVERAGE..





















23.091
149.
153.
104.3
30.83
49.27
35.4
17.88
28.72
17.34
27.84
0.15
- 0.25
0.00045
0.00072

-------
 and  an  emission  rate  of 0.54  pounds  per  hour.   No  major  testing  problems
 occurred  during  sampling although  brief  delays  were  experienced  due  to
 exchanging  railcars at the  loading spout.   Further detailed  information
 pertaining  to  the  sampling  and  analytical  procedures  used  during the testing
                       . '    '  *              '                     •
 is presented  in  Section VI,  "Sampling and Analytical  Procedures."   - -
 Observations of  the rail car loading  collection  system during  the testing
 indicated that emissions were, control led adequately.   Visible emissions.....
-of fugitive dust from the loading  area did-not-exceed' 201.opac.rty-.for. more  •
 than three  minutes, .per hour..  ,

 Grain Cleaning Operation       .      .     .
      Due  to limited plant operation,  only  one  test was conducted at  this
 site.  The  results for this test are!presented  in  Tables II  and  IIA.
 Sampling  was  carried  out intermittently  over a  period of several  days,
 however,  the  test  results are considered to be  representative of the grain
 cleaning  process.

      Since  the air entering both collection systems  experiences  no change
 (i.e.,  combustion) an assumption of  atmospheric properties (air)  was made
 for  the calculations.

      During the  sample analysis volumetric measurements  of the solvent
 blanks  and  sample  washes were not  recorded prior to  evaporation, as  a
 result  the  quantity of wash solvent  could  not  be determined  exactly.
 MRI  offered to retest the facility at their expense  to correct this  error.
 An attempted  retest during  the  week  of January  28, 1974, proved  futile
 as only half  of  the required  number  of.grain cars  needed for the test were
 available thus preventing the collection of representative samples.

-------
                            TABLE II
                      Summary of Results for
                     Grain Cleaning Operations
PLANT:  KANSAS CITY TERMINAL ELEVATOR
LOCATION:  KANSAS CITY MISSOURI
OPERATOR:  MIDWEST RESEARCH  INSTITUTE
       PARTICULATE SUMMARY   IN   ENGLISH   UNITS
   DESCRIPTION

 DATE OF RUN

 STACK AREA
 NET TIME OF RUN
 BAROMETRIC PRESSURE
 AVG ORIFICE PRES DROP
 VOL DRY GAS-METER COND
 AVG GAS METER TEMP
 VOL "DRY GAS-S.TD CON.D
 TOTAL H20 COLLECTED
 VOL H20 VAPOR-STD COND
 PERCENT MOISTURE BY VOL
 MOLE FRACTION DRY GAS
 PERCENT C02 BY VOL, DRY
 PERCENT 02 BY VOL, DRY
 PERCENT CO BY VOL, DRY
 PERCENT N2 BY VOL, DRY
 MOLECULAR WT-DRY STK GAS
 MOLECULAR WT-STK GAS
 AVG STACK TEMPERATURE
 NET SAMPLING POINTS
 STACK PRESSURE, ABSOLUTE
 AVG STACK GAS VELOCITY
 STK FLOWRATE, DRY,STD CN
 ACTUAL STACK FLOWRATE
 PERCENT ISOKINETIC
 PART ICULATE WT-PARTIAL
 PART ICULATE WT-TOTAL
 PERC IMPINGER CATCH
 PART.  LOAD-PTL,STD CN
 PART.  LOAD-TTL, STD_CN
UNITS
AVERAGE
 PART. LOAD-PTL,STK CN
 PART. LOAD-TTL,STK CN
 PART 1C EM IS-PARTIAL
 PART 1C EMIS-TOTAL
 PART EMIS/WT PRD FD'PTL
 PART EMIS/WT PRD FD TTL


FT2
MIN .
IN.HG
1 IN.H20
ID DCF
DEG.F
.DSCF
. ML
ID SCF
'OL

iRY
1Y
1Y .-
:Y
GAS

! DF.G.F

.UTE IN.HG
'Y FPS
1 CN DSCFM
• ACFM

iL MG
MG

1 GR/DSCF
I GR/DSCF
GR/ACF
GR/ACF
LB/HR
LB/HR
TL LB/TON
TL LB/TON
10-16-73
10-23-73
2.182
105.0
29.70
1.170
61.29
74.0
60.55
29.5
1.40
2.3
0.977
0.4
21.0
0.0
78.6
28.90
28.66
59.0
1
29.74
29.467
3826.
3857.
96.5
10.90
15.60
30.1
- 0.00277
0.00397
0.00275
0.00393
0.09
0.13
0.00325
0.00465


' /•"
• - . - ' •




----- 	


1










29.467
3826.
3857.
96.5
10.90
15.60
30.1
0.00277
0.00397
0.00275
0.00393 --:- '
0.09
0.13
0.00325
0.00465
                          8

-------
                            TABLE  II-A
                       Summary of Results for
                      Grain Cleaning Operations
PLANT:  KANSAS  CITY TERMINAL ELEVATOR
LOCATION:   KANSAS  CITY MISSOURI
OPERATOR:   MIDWEST RESEAR-CK  INSTITUTE
       PARTICULATE  SUMMARY   IN  METRIC   UNITS
 -—DESCRIPTION
UNITS
AVERAGE,
DATE OF RUN

STACK AREA .
. NET TIME OF RUN
BAROMETRIC PRESSURE
AVG ORIFICE PRES DROP'
VOL DRY GAS-METER COND
AVG GAS METER TEMP
VOL DRY GAS-STD COND
TOTAL H20 COLLECTED
VOL H20 VAPOR-STD COND
PERCENT MOISTURE BY VOL
MOLE FRACTION DRY GAS
PERCENT C02 BY VOL, DRY
PERCENT 02 BY VOL, DRY
PERCENT CO BY VOL, DRY
PERCENT N2 BY VOL, DRY
MOLECULAR WT-DRY STK GAS
MOLECULAR WT-STK GAS
AVG STACK TEMPERATURE
NET SAMPLING POINTS
STACK PRESSURE, ABSOLUTE
AVG STACK GAS VELOCITY
STK FLOWRATE, DRY, STD CN
ACTUAL STACK FLOWRATE
PERCENT ISOKINETIC
PART ICU LATE WT- PARTIAL
PARTICULAT-E WT-TOTAL
PERC IMPINGER CATCH
PART. LOAD-PTL,STD CN
PART. LOAD-TTL,STD CN
PART. LOAD-PTL,STK CN
PART. LOAD-TTL,STK CN
PART 1C EM IS- PARTIAL
"PART 1C EMIS-TOTAL
PART EMIS/WT PRO FD PTL
PART EMIS/WT PRO FD TTL


M2
MIN .
MM . HG
MM.H20
DM3
DEG.C
DNM3
ML
NM3








DEG.C

MM.HG
M/S
- DNM3/M
AM3/M

MG
MG

MG/NM3
MG/NM3
MG/AM3
MG/AM3
KG/HR
KG/HR
KG/MTON
KG/MTON
10-16-73
10-23-73
0.203
105.0
751*. 38
29.718
I. 7k
23.3
1.71
29.5
O.OU
2.3
0.977
O.I*
21.0
0.0
78.6
28.90
28.66
15.0
1
755. UO
8.982
108.
109.
96.5
10.90
15.60
30.1
6.3U
9.08
6.29
9.00
0. OU
0.06
0.00162
0.00232




. .~f

















8.982
108.
109.
96.5
10.90
15.60
30.1
6.34 •
9.08
6.29
9.00
O.OI*
0.06 ' '
0.00162
0.00232

-------
     Consultations with MRI personnel and Gene Riley of EMB produced
the conclusion that acceptable test results could be obtained from the
initial tests.  This was achieved by calculating the average level of
particulate residue in the acetone blanks (0.001 grams/100 milliliters)
and estimating the volume of acetone from past experience to determine
the sample residue values.
                               10

-------
                          PROCESS DESCRIPTION

      The Kansas City Terminal  Elevator Company purchases corn, soybeans,
 wheat and milo from nearby farms and elevators.  They are subsequently
 sold to a variety of users and shipped primarily by railcar to the
 desired destination.             ,

      When^an order of-soybeans or corn is received, several grades with  . _.
sclffferent percentages of foreign-mater-tal--are-b-l-ended-to--ob^^
 desired for shipping.  Before  corn is shipped, it may be necessary to     -•_....:
 clean a portion of it to reduce the percentage of foreign material to
 the desired level.                                                               >'

      The grains are transported from their unloading points to,scales-in
 the headhouse where they are weighed.  They drop from the scale into a
 surge bin which continuously feeds one of two parallel-loading chutes.
 The grain then falls about 50  feet down the loading chute into a railcar.
 The loading area is covered by an overhead shed which is open at both ends.

 Railcar Loading
     "Boxcars and hopper cars are Toaded-on the same track through separate
 loading chutes.  The last 10 feet of the hopper car loading chute is a
 round flexible hose enabling-the flow of grain to be directed into the
 car.  Filling is started at one-end of the car and continued while the
 car is moved forward until it  is full (190,000 pounds of grain).

      A dust aspiration hood is located next to the loading spout.  Fugitive
 dust which boils out of the openings at the top of the car is aspirated to
                               11

-------
        .   \              •                   •
a fabric filter baghouse.  A "grain door" of wood or reinforced paper is
installed over the bottom half of the side openings in the boxcars.   The
loading chute protrudes into the top portion of the door opening and
has a deflector on the end.to direct the.grain to both ends of the car.

     An aspirator hood is located next to the track to collect any fugitive
dust that escapes from the car door.  This dust stream is then directed to
the same baghouse that is used for.the-top-loading rail.cars. ...        ,. .   ;
     Baghouse for Railcar Loading:  "Mikro Pul"
                                    Model 4858-20                       .
                                    "4,000 cfm
                                    AP across filter 3.5" water gauge
                                    16 ounce polypropylene bags
                                    A/C ratio 12:1

Grain Cleaning

     Foreign materials are separated from the corn as they are routed by
three inclined cleaning screens.  The maximum operating capacity of the  .
grain cleaner is 1000 bushels of corn -per hour.  The top of the cleaner
is enclosed thus allowing the air to-be.aspirated through-a fabric filter
baghouse.                                             ,

     Baghouse for Grain Cleaning:  "Mikro Pul"
                                   Model 130S8-30         '  '.  '
                                                            ' I
              i               •                         .       i
             ;;.                     12,000 cfm         ;       ..
                                   AP across filter 3.5" water gauge
             '.";,,                     16 ounce polypropylene bags.
             i''                                        .            . '    .
              ;,      ,    v           A/C ratio 12:1
                                12

-------
                          PROCESS OPERATION

     Emission tests at the car loading filter exhaust were conducted
October 16-19, 1973.  The process cycle was timed before testing began.
While filling hopper cars, grain flowed for five minutes, flow dis-
continued for about two minutes while the scales weighed a second draught,   .
then grain flowed for another five minutes.  Boxcars required only one
draught of grain from.the scales, therefore, grain flowed into each  car
for about five minutes.  No boxcars were loaded during the first two test
runs* but five were loaded during the third run.                          .
     The hopper car dust collection hood is most effective"when loading
center-hatch cars.  The hood-cannot be clamped to the car, however,  since
the car is moved during the loading process.  While the last (three feet
of the hopper car are being filled, the hood is not over the car,-.there-  .
fore, it is ineffective.  When loading round hatch type hopper cars  all
of the hatches are opened before the car enters the loading shed. Dust
boils out of the openings that grain is not flowing-into;  This hood-is  also
not very effective since it is in the center of the car and not directly
over any openings.  Currently, few round hatch-type cars are used for
transporting grains.        :        :

Rail car Loading
     During the first test 10 hopper cars-were loaded.  One car .was  filled
with 200,000 pounds of wheat, three cars were-filled-with 554,000 pounds
of corn and six cars were filled with 1,110,000 pounds of milo.  Sampling
was discontinued during the lull between cars.
                                 13

-------
     After  each  car was  filled,  readings  of  the  amount of  dust weighed
 by  the  automatic weigher were  recorded  to determine  the  amount of dust
 collected.
                            '   «              '            '
     Visible  emissions of  fugitive  dust from the loading shed were  read
 continuously  between  9:45  a.m. and  12:00  noon and between  12:53  p.m.  and
 1:43 p.m. .  Visible emissions exceeded 20  percent opacity for approximately
"-15  minutes-between 12:53 p.m.n.and,-J/.A3• p,.nw.cThis,.was v.due-  to^an, J-ncr.eas,e• — .•;
 in  wind velocity and  the fact  that  several round hatch .type cars were
 being loaded.

     During the  second test  run,  nine hopper cars were loaded with;1,650,000
 pounds  of milo.  Visible emissions-of-fugitive dust  from the loading  shed
 were read continuously between 11:00  a.m.  and 12:00  noon.  Visible  emissions
 did not exceed 20 percent  opacity for more~than  three minutes during  the
 hour.   The  filter outlet was observed continuously from  10:14 a.m.  to
 10:43 a.m.,  from 12:45  p.m.  to  1:44  p.m.,  and  from  2:15  p.m. to 3:14 p.m.
 No visible   emissions were  seen  throughout  this  time.
      During the third test run,  seven hopper cars  were filled with  1,300,000
 pounds  of milo, seven..boxcars^ and. two hopper cars  were filled with  1,000,000
 pounds  of wheat and one hopper car was filled with 180,000 pounds of soybeans.
 The filter outlet was observed continuously for one hour during  the test and
 no visible emissions were seen.   Visible.emissions of fugitive dust from
 the loading shed were read.continuously between 1:28 p.m.  and 2:34  p.m.  on
 October 18 and between 9:32 a.m. and 10:19 a.m. on October 19, 1973.
                                  14

-------
Visible emissions exceeded ten percent opacity for less than three

minutes during each of the two periods. .The following table summarizes

the railcar loading data for the individual test runs.


                        "  •              '.     '    '     '       '      '.
           TABLE III.  RAILCAR LOADING PROCESS DATA
Test"" Run Grain
#1-B Wheat
2Y Corn
2Y Milo

#2-B 2Y Milo

#3-B 2Y Milo
Wheat
Soybeans

Avg. Test
Weight
Ib/biT-. '
61.0
57.0
55.4

55.9

55.7
61.0
56.5

Average % .
" Moisture -
13.4
13.6
14.2

13.5

14.0
13.4
14.0

Averaqe %
;:-. FM1U .
0.5
3.2
6.0
TOTAL
7.0
1
6.0
0.5
2.4
TOTAL
Amount
Shipped-(lb-)
200,000
554,000
1,110,000
1,864,000
1,650,000
~~ ' '
1,300,000
1,000,000.
180,000
2,480,000
  (1) Foreign matter
                             15

-------
Grain Cleaning
     The grain cleaner was operated for about one hour between 9:30 a.m.
and 70:30 a.m. on October 16, 1973.  Sampling was conducted during this
period.  The cleaner was not operated again until October 23, 1973.  At
that time, MRI sampled at the filter outlet for about 45 minutes.   Both
sample periods were added together and considered as one test run.   The
following table presents the operating process data for the individual
test runs.                    --—   .  .

          TABLE IV.  PROCESS FEED RATES DURING TESTS
Date '
10-16-73
10-17-73 -
10-18-73
10-19-73
10-16-73
10-23-73
Test
Grain loading
- Grain loading
.Grain loading
Grain loading
Grain cleaning
Grain cleaning
Feed Rate
349.5 tons per hour
309.4 tons per hour
465 tons per hour ,
465 tons per hour
28 tons per hour
28 tons per hour
                              16

-------
                         LOCATION OF SAMPLE PORTS

 Grain  Loading  Baghouse

      In  order  to  meet the requirements of .Method 1, Federal  Register,
 Vol.  36, No. 247, it was necessary to install  a duct extension on the
 exhaust  outlet of the grain loading baghouse as shown in Figure 1.
 This  located the  port approximately 11 feet (9 stack diameters) down--- :
-"stream from the nearest disturbance-and approx-rma:tevly~'30' -i-nch-es' (-2--stack'-'
 diameters)  from the exit end of the extension.
      The sample port location for conducting the particle size measure-
 ments  was two  stack diameters upstream from the particulate  sampling
 port  on  the grain loading baghouse outlet duct.-    :  -
 Grain  Cleaning Baghouse

      Sample location requirements for this control  device were satisfied
 by the installation of a duct extension on the exhaust outlet.  The
 resulting sample  port was located approximately 15  feet (9 stack diameters)
 downstream of  the nearest disturbance and approximately 40 inches (2
 stack diameters)  upstream from the extension exit end as shown in Figure 2.

      Traverse  point locations and duct cross sections are shown in Figure 3.
                                   17

-------
  SAMPLE PORT
   HOPPER CAR
  LOADING CHUTE
oo
             HOPPER CAR HOOD
                              MWRO-PUL
                               FILTER
           RG. UCAR  LOADING-KANSAS  CITY TERMINAL  ELEVATOR

-------
GRAIN CLEANER
                           M\KRO -PUL
                             FILTER
                            DUST BIN
                                                                PORT
   FIG. e. GRAIN CLEANING-KANSAS CITY  TERMINAL   ELEVATOR

-------
\
       FIG. 3_ SAMPLE  TRAVERSE POINTS
          WEST PORT
                  PORT
                GRAIN  C.LEA.NIM& DUGT
         NORTH PORT
              SOUTH PORT
GRA\N
                            DUCT
                       20

-------
                  SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES
     The procedures for measuring particulate emissions were in accordance
with Method 5 of the Federal Register. Vol. 36, No. 247.  Contractor
personnel conducted all testirig, sample recovery and sample analysis.  The
sampling crew consisted of two meter and two probe operators, one Brinks
sample operator and a field laboratory technician.

Preliminary Testing Procedures'; ^ 1'    ~ •" "_!;_;
     Preliminary velocity traverses at sampling locations"determined   •   •
approximate nozzle sizes and isokinetic sampling conditions.  A 0.125 inch
I.D. nozzle was used-for the grain.loading testing and a 0.25 inch I.D:.~  -
nozzle was used for the grain cleaning testing.  Velocities were measured
at each sample port for determination of flow rates as prescribed in the
Federal Register.  The moisture content and molecular weight of the gas
stream were assumed to be the same as ambient air.

Particulate Sampling

     Particulate matter was sampled isokinetically during the grain loading
and cleaning operations with a sample train as described in Method 5 of the
Federal Register.  The loading baghouse sampling was conducted .for 20 minutes
at each point with data being recorded at 5 minute intervals.  The cleaning
baghouse samp.ling. was conducted for .15 minutes at each, point with data being
recorded every 5 minutes.  In all cases sampling was conducted isokinetically
during the test periods.
                                 21

-------
 Sample  Train  Description
     The  sample  train  consisted  of  a  stainless  steel  nozzle,  a  heated
 glass probe,  a heated  glass  fiber filter,  and four  impingers  connected
 in  series with glass ball  joint  fittings.   The  first  two  impingers were
"charged with  100 milliliters  of  water each,  the third was left  empty
 and the fourth charged with  approximately  200 grams of  preweighed silica
 gel.  (See  Figure  4.):
 Sample  Cleanup and Analysis •--:•••   " —- • -•    •--•---•
      Sample  train  cleanup  consisted  of  measuring  the water  collected  and
 transferring this  to  a  glass  container.   The  silica gel was  removed and
 weighed  to determine  the moisture  content.  The particulate  filter was
 placed in a  marked container.   The probe  and  front half of  the  train  were
 rinsed with  analytical  grade  acetone and  all  washings  collected in a  glass
 .container.   The  rear  half  of  the-train-was-first  rinsed with distilled
 water which  was  added to the  impinger contents and then was  rinsed with
 acetone-which was  collected in  a separate container.   Sufficient portions
 of  the acetone and water were prepared  for  subsequent  use as analysis
 blanks.  Volumetric measurements of  the acetone sample washes and acetone
 blanks were  not  recorded prior  to  evaporation, hence the quantity of
 acetone  used for the  washes had' to be estimated-.  Acceptable"test results...-
 were  achieved by using  this estimate based  on past experience to calculate
 the volume contained  in the washes.   An average blank  value  was obtained
 by  averaging ten (TO) acetone blank  values  which  yielded 0.001  grams/100
 milliliters.
                             22

-------
 PROBE


  fi^
                                                                            THERMOMETER
                STACK WALL
HEATED
REVERSE TYPE x

 P1T07 TU3S
ro
CO
                 PITOT
                                                   *— J=f FlUf ER HOLDER
                                        -I — >•
                                                              CHECK VALVE.
                   ORIF\CE
              (OPTIONAL')]    I
                            L»    - -     '      i
                cfcLcas      j                ,f



                                      ICE WATER BATH

         .THERMO METERS,
                           BY-PWS VALVE     ; VACUUM
                                                                                     _J
_J£
               o
                                                                     MAIN VALVE
                                                                               9

                                                                                1
                                                                                                    UMi
                                      DRY TEST MEtER '  AIR TlG-HT PUWP
                      FIG.  4.     PARTICUL^E   SAMPLING  TRAIN

-------
     This method was felt to be representative because the mass weighing
error in this case is at least ± 0.005 grams/100 milliliters, and all
washes were estimated to within ± 100 milliliters of the actual volume.
Further information pertaining to these procedures may be found in
Appendix F.

     All sample containers were sealed and marked with EPA identification
labels as listed in Appendix F.  Analyses-were conducted by MRL personnel
who later shipped the samples to EPA for subsequent .storage.-   -

Particle Size Measurement Procedures
     A description of the procedure used and field data obtained is
located in Emission Measurement-Branch's file under No. 74-GRN-6.
                              24

-------