74-KPM-12
                               (REPORT NUMBER)
AIR  POLLUTION  EMISSION  TEST
                       BRUNSWICK PULP AND  PAPER
                             (PLANT NAME)

                               COMPANY
                          BRUNSWICK, GEORGIA
                           (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

-------
  EPA REPORT NUMBER 74-KPM-12

BRUNSWICK PULP AND PAPER COMPANY

       BRUNSWICK, GEORGIA
        FINAL REPORT
          Submitted to

Environmental Protection Agency
     Office of Air Programs

    Contract No. 68-02-0225

          Task No. 24
          Submitted by

   Engineering-Science, Inc.
      7903 Westpark Drive
    McLean, Virginia   22101
      December 1974

-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section              Title                                             Page

    I          INTRODUCTION                                              l

   II          SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS                         2

  III          PROCESS DESCRIPTION AND OPERATION                         9

                  A.  Process Description                                *
                  B.  Process Operation                                 10

   IV          SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES                       16

                  A.  Location of Sampling Points                       16
                  B.  Sampling Procedures                               *7
                  C.  Analytical Procedures                             17
  (Appendices omitted from this copy.)

-------
                             LIST OF TABLES

Table                  Title                                           Page

  II-l         Particulate Emission Summary                              3

  II-2         Particulate Emission Summary (Metric System)              4

  II-3         System Performance                                        6

  H-4         System Performance (Metric System)                        7

 III-l         Summary of Calculations of Equivalent Pulp
               Production Rate                                          15



                             LIST OF FIGURES

Number                 Title                                          Page

 III-l         The Kraft Pulping Process                               10

 III-2         No. 5 Recovery Furnace and Electrostatic Precipitator   12

  IV-1         General Layout, Brunswick Unit #5 Precipitators         17

  IV-2         Stack Dimensions, Brunswick Pulp & Paper Company        18

  IV-3         Cross Section Outlet Stack (One of Two)                 19
                                     ii

-------
 I     INTRODUCTION


      Under  Section  111  of  the  Clean Air Act of 1970, as amended,  the Environ-


 mental  Protection Agency  (EPA)  is  charged with the establishment  of perfor-


 mance standards  for new stationary sources which may contribute significantly


 to  air  pollution.   A performance standard is based on  the best emission systems


 which have  been  shown to be  technically and economically feasible.  In order


 to  set  realistic performance standards, accurate data  on pollutant emissions


 are normally  gathered from the stationary source category under consideration.


      The  No.  5 black liquor  recovery  furnace at the Brunswick Pulp and Paper


 Company in  Brunswick, Georgia,  was designated as a well-controlled stationary


 source  in the Kraft pulp industry  and was thereby selected by the Office of


 Air Quality Planning and Standards for an emission testing program.  Tests


 were  conducted by Engineering-Science, Inc. personnel  during January 22-25, 1974.


      This facility  processes about 1,500 tons of bleached Kraft pulp per day.


 The No. 5 recovery  furnace burns approximately 136,750 pounds/hour of black


 liquor  solids.   Air pollution  abatement equipment for  this furnace consists


 of  an electrostatic precipitator with two parallel chambers.


      A  total  of  six particulate samples from each of the two chambers of the


 electrostatic precipitator were collected.  These samples were taken down-


 stream  of the respective chamber to determine filterable and total particu-

                           /
 late  emissions.  As  this process operated continuously with no known periods


 of  peak emissions,  testing was  conducted during normal operating  conditions.


      Opacity  observations  of the two  outlet ducts were conducted  during the


 particulate testing  by  personnel from Environmental Science and Engineering,


 Inc., Gainsville, Florida.   This work was performed under a different contract


 and was reported separately.


     The  test team and  the EPA  are greatly indebted to Mr. Andy Ryfun of Bruns-


wick Pulp and Paper  Company  for his cooperation in this sampling  program.

-------
II   SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS



     The purpose of this test was to establish emission levels from a well-con-


trolled black liquor recovery furnace.  The twelve particulate runs conducted


provide a strong and consistent data base for the determination of emissions


from this unit.


     Exhaust gases from the No. 5 recovery furnace are controlled by an electro-


static precipitator with two parallel chambers.  The outlet of the north


chamber is designated the "A" stack while the "B" stack is the outlet of the


south chamber.  Individual tests are specified by a letter and number corres-


ponding to the stack and test run number.

     A summary of the individual test results is given in Tables II-l and II-2.


Each stack individually shows little variation but the south chamber (B stack)


emissions are about 3 times heavier than those of the north chamber (A stack).


An average of the particulate concentrations established by the sample train

                                                                3
front-half catches for the  A  stack is 0.013 gr/scf (29.0 mg/Nm ) while for

                                          3
the  B  stack is 0.054 gr/scf (124.1 mg/Nm ).  An average of concentrations

                                                                           3
determined by total train catches yields values of 0.023 gr/scf (53.2 mg/Nm )

                                   3
for A and 0.064 gr/scf (146.4 mg/Nm ) for B.  Using these averages shows that


the front-half catch accounts for approximately 56% of A stack and 84% of


B stack total emissions.  The data also reveals that the sample train back-half


catches are about the same for all the test runs in both the A and B stacks.


The average exhaust flow rates for the stacks were 94,930 scfm for A and


108,370 scfm for B.  The maintenance histories for the two chambers are not the


same and could account for some of the differences.  Approximately one month


prior to the testing, the north chamber was down for its periodic maintenance


and repair.  The south chamber maintenance shutdown was about 3 months before


the testing.

-------
                      TABLE II-l
PARTI  CULATE   EMISSION   SUMMARY
Run code
Test A-l
Test R-l
Test A-2
Test B-2
w Test A-3
Test B-3
Tost A-t*
Test B-l*
Test A-5
Test B-5
Test A-6
Test B-6
stop
sru's:2.7
i
Dry gas
vol ume
(scf)
17.05
111.10
85.77
97.31
?<5.06
100.50
01. OR
loi.oi
88.99
98.81
91.95
102.07

Mo! sture
(%>
27.17
27.87
30.71*
27.75
28.1*8
29.1*6
29.67
29. nit
29.61*
29.67
28.76
29.09

Orsat
C02
12.6
11*. 9
11*. 7
11*. 7
lit. 1
ll.i*
13.U
13.2
1U. 0
11*. 0
13.1
13.2

analysis
(S)
02 CO
6.8 .1
I*. 7 0.
1*.7 .1
«* . 7 .1
5.«* 0.
8.5 0.
6.n 0.
6.1 0.
5.2 .2
5.2 .2
6.6 .2
6.2 0.

Exhaust
flow rate
(scfm)
99113.
112163.
02668.
106305.
91296.
107637.
95835.
107018.
93029.
108315.
07637.
108768.

Stack
temp.
(F)
i*0i*. 9
it i»8. 5
1*1*5.0
«*02.5
1*32.5
1*01.1
1*31*. 0
1*0?. 0
1*30.1*
3"9.9
1*33.8
393.0

IsokJn-
etlc
(%>
105.6
106.9
101*. 5
18.7
101.7
10.0.7
102.5
101.8
103.2
98.1*
101.6
101.2

Part. cone.
Ur/scf)
front total
.011
.058
.018
.055
.013
.052
.010
.057
.010
.051
.Oil*
.052

.017
.067
.030
.063
.027
.062
.020
.061*
.021
.061
.025
.065

Emission rate
(Ib/hr)
front total
9.1*1
56.03
11*. 36
50.1*6
9.91
1*8.38
8.22
51.90
8.1«*
U7.03
11.80
1*8.59

11*. 02
6U.70
23.51
57.51
20.95
57.53
16.1*0
59.02
17.07
56.81*
21.01
61.00


-------
                       TABLE II-2





PARTICULATE   EMISSION



                   (Metric  System)
SUMMARY
Run code
Test A-l
Test R-\
Test A-2
Test B-2
Test A-3
Test 3-3
Test A-!*
Tost B-i*
Test A-5
Test B-5
Test A-5
Test B-6
Dry gas
vol ume
(Nm3)
2.75
3.15
2.51*
2.76
2.i»l*
2.85
2.58
2. 86
2.52
2.80
2.60
2.89
Mo! sture
U)
27.17
27.87
50.71*
27.75
28.1*8
29.1*6
29.67
29.01*
29.6it
29.67
28.76
29.09
Orsat
C02
12.6
11*. 9
1U. 7
U. 7
It*. 1
11. I*
13.1*
13.2
11*. 0
11*. 0
13.1
13.2
analysis Exhaust
(%) flow rate
02 CO (Nm3/m)
6.8 .1
i*.7 0.
i*.7 .1
it. 7 .1
5.1* 0.
8.5 0.
6.0 0.
6.1 0.
5.2 .2
5.2 .2
6.6 .2
6.2 0.
2806.
3176.
2621*.
3010.
2585.
301*8.
2711*.
3030.
2631*.
3067.
2765.
3080.
Stack
temp.
(C)
207.2
231.'*
229.5
205.3
222.5
205.1
223.3
208.9
221.3
201*. I*
223.2
200.6
Isokin- Part. cone.
etlc (mg/N'm3)
(%) front total
105.6
106.9
101*. 5
98.7
101.7
100.7
102.5
101.8
103.2
98.1*
101.6
101.2
25.31*5
133.376
U1.375
126.751*
28.993
120.030
22.906
129.502
23.365
115.91*3
32.272
119.289
37.763
151*. 025
68.029
11*1*. 1(63
61.261
11*2.718
1*5. G97
11*7.260
1*8.987
l'*0.123
57.1*53
11*9.71*2
Emission rate
(kg/hr)
front total
i*.27
25.1*1
6.51
22.89
i*.50
21.95
3.73
23.51*
3.59
21.33
5.35
22.01*
5.36
29.35
10.71
26.09
5.50
26.10
7.1*1*
26.77
7.7U
25. 7S
9.53
27.67

-------
     Tables  II-3  and  II-4  provide  a  tabulation  of  system performance  for  the

No. 5 recovery furnace. The  total  furnace emission rates were obtained by

adding the emission rates  from  the individual chambers.  Based on the front-

half catch,  the average total furnace emission  rate was 60.7 Ibs/hr (27.5

Kg/hr).  The corresponding average total furnace emission rate, based on

total catch, was  78.3 Ibs/hr (35.5 Kg/hr).  A weighted average concentration

was selected as an appropriate  characterization of the particulate loading

of the effluent gas stream of the  total system.  The weighted average concen-

tration is defined by the following equation:


                                (gr/scf x SCFM)  +  (gr/scf x SCFM)_
Weighted Avg. Cone, (gr/scf)	(SCFM)  + (SCFM)	'     ^ (II
                                             A         B

The mean value of the weighted  average concentration for the six experimental

                                 3
runs was 0.035 gr/scf (79.7 mg/Nm  ), based on the front-half catch,  and 0.045

                  o
gr/scf (103  mg/Nm ), based on the  total catch.

     Process emission rates  (i.e., particulate emission rate/production rate)

were computed for each of the individual chambers and for the total system.

Based on the furnace production rates expressed in equivalent tons of

unbleached air dried pulp per hour, and on the particulate emission rates for

the total system, the following average process emission rates were determined


for the No.  5 recovery furnace:

                                                 3
     Front-half catch =1.33 Ib/ton = 0.667 Kg/10 Kg
                                                 3
     Total catch      =1.72 Ib/ton = 0.860 Kg/10 Kg


     Some minor equipment problems were encountered during the test program


that resulted in  short time delays but had no adverse effect on test results.

During test  run A-l, the heater element in the filter holding section of  the

sample box malfunctioned and,resulted in the formation of condensate in the


cyclone prior to  the filter.  A total of 43 ml of condensate was collected

-------
TABLE II-3
PARTICULATE EMISSIONS SUMMARY
(English Units)

Production Rate, (tons/hr,
unbleached air-dried
pulp basis)
Front-Half Particulate :
Weighted Average Concen-
tration, (gr/dscf)
Total Furnace Emission
Rate, (Ib/hr)
Process Emission Rates:
Chamber A, (Ib/ton)
Chamber B, (Ib/ton)
Total System, (Ib/ton)
Total Particulate:
Weighted Average Concen-
tration, (gr/dscf)
Total Furnace Emission
Rate, (Ib/hr)
Process Emission Rates:
Chamber A, (Ib/ton)
Chamber B, (Ib/ton)
Total System, (Ib/ton)
1


45.8


0.036

65.4

0.21
1.22
1.43


0.044

78.7

0.31
1.41
1.72
2


45.7


0.038

64.8

0.31
1.10
1.41


0.048

81.1

0.52
1.26
1.78
Run Number
3 4


44.9


0.034

58.3

0.22
1.08
1.30


0.046

78.5

0.47
1.28
1.75


45.8


0.035

60.1

0.18
1.13
1.31


0.043

75.4

0.36
1.29
1.65
5


45.4


0.032

55.2

0.18
1.04
1.22


0.042

73.9

0.38
1.25
1.63
6


45.3


0.034

60.4

0.26
1.07
1.33


0.046

82.0

0.46
1.35
1.81
Avg.


45.5


0.035

60.7

0.23
1.11
1.33


0.045

78.3

0.42
1.31
1.72

-------
TABLE II-4
PARTICULATE EMISSIONS SUMMARY
(Metric Units)

3
Production Rate, (10 Kg/hr,
unbleached air-dried pulp
basis)
Front-Half Particulate:
Weighted Average Concen-
tration, (mg/Nm3)
Total Furnace Emission
Rate, (Kg/hr)
Process Emission Rates:
Chamber A, (Kg/103Kg)
Chamber B, (Kg/103Kgl
Total System, (Kg/103Kg)
Total Particulate:
Weighted Average Concen-
tration, (mg/Nm3)
Total Furnace Emission
Rate, (Kg/hr)
Process Emission Rates:
Chamber A, (Kg/10^Kg)
Chamber B, (Kg/103Kg)
Total System, (Kg/103Kg)
1


41.6


82.7

29.7

0.103
0.612
0.715


99.5

35.7

0.153
0.706
0.859
2


41.5


87.0

29.4

0.157
0.552
0.709


109

36.8

0.258
0.629
0.887
3


40.7


78.3

26.4

0.110
0.539
0.649


105

35.6

0.233
0.641
0.874
4


41.5


79.1

27.3

0.090
0.567
0.657


99.3

34.2

0.179
0.644
0.823
5


41.2


73.2

25.0

0.090
0.518
0.608


98.0

33.5

0.188
0.626
0.814
6


41.1


78.1

27.4

0.130
0.536
0.666


106

37.2

0.232
0.673
0.905
Avg.


41.3


79.7

27.5

0.113
0.554
0.667


103

35.5

0.207
0.653
0.860

-------
in the cyclone and this measured volume was included in the moisture deter-




mination.  This liquid catch was added to the front-half wash for particulate




analysis.  During this same test, it was noticed that arcing had occurred




between the stack port and the probe nozzle, resulting in a small section of




the knife edge being burned away.  The nozzle was replaced for subsequent




tests and both probes were grounded to the stacks to prevent reoccurrence.




Temperatures on stack B were mostly taken with a long stem thermometer




generally positioned in one place.  An inoperable pyrometer prevented




obtaining the temperature readings at the traverse points as is normally




done.




     An integrated bag sample of exhaust gas was taken during each test at




both stacks for Orsat analysis.  During the twelve test runs, two of the




sample results were not obtainable.  A pump malfunctioned during test




run B-2 and no gas sample was obtained.  The pump was repaired before the




next test proceeded.  The bag sample obtained during test run B-5 was




voided because analysis showed that the sample was contaminated with ambient




air.  Exhaust gases in both stacks originated in the same boiler thus




constituent concentrations should be the same for each test run.  Because




of this, the data obtained from A-2 and A-5 were used for calculations




purposes for the missing B-2 and B-5.

-------
Ill  PROCESS DESCRIPTION AND OPERATION





     The Brunswick Pulp and Paper mill at Brunswick, Georgia, produces 1500



tons of bleached kraft pulp per day.  The pulp is made into various paper and



board products.



     The EPA test program at this mill consisted of six particulate tests on



both stacks of the No. 5 recovery furnace precipitator.



A.  Process Description



    1.  General



     Kraft pulp is produced from wood as shown in Figure III-l.  In the process,



wood is chipped into small pieces, then cooked in 18 batch digesters at ele-



vated temperature and pressure.  The cooking chemicals, called white liquor,



are sodium hydroxide and sodium sulfide in water solution.  The white liquor



chemically dissolves lignin from the wood; the remaining cellulose (pulp) is



filtered from the spent liquor and washed.  The pulp is then made into the



various paper products.



     The balance of the process is designed to recover the cooking chemicals.



Spent cooking liquor and the pulp wash water are combined for treatment.  The



combined stream, called weak black liquor, is concentrated in evaporators to



about 65 percent solids, and then fired in a recovery furnace.



     Combustion of the organics in the black liquor provides most of the heat
                \


needed to generate process steam.  Inorganic chemicals from the black liquor



are recovered as a molten smelt at the bottom of the furnace.  The smelt, con-



sisting of sodium carbonate and sodium sulfide, is dissolved in water and



transferred to a causticizing tank.  Lime added to this tank converts sodium



carbonate to sodium hydroxide, completing the regeneration of white liquor,



which is then recycled to the digesters.  The calcium carbonate mud, that pre-



cipitates from the causticizing tank, is recycled to a kiln to regenerate lime.

-------
                                                                  FIGURE  III-1
                     THE KRAFT PULPING  PROCESS
   	 Wood -

White Liquor
(NaOH + Na2S)
DIGESTER
SYSTEM


	 Pulp 	 *


u
PULP
WASHERS

eak Black Lioun
                                                                 Pulp

                                                                 Water
                     RECOVERY
                      FURNACE
                      SYSTEM
                  Heavy
                  Black
                  Liquor
(Na2C03
          •Water
o
CJ
Of.
                 Smelt
                  3

                  t
                               Air
                                I
                         Na2S)
                                                        MULTIPLE
                                                         EFFECT
                                                       EVAPORATOR
                                                         SYSTEM
                    SMELT
                  DISSOLVING
                    TANK
                     I
                Green Liquor
   t
     White Liquor
     (recycle to
     digester)
                 CAUSTICIZING
                     TANK
                    .Lime
                                   Calcium
                                  Carbonate
                                     Mud
                                  10
                                                    ENGINEERING-SCIENCE, INC

-------
    2.  Recovery Furnace




     The No. 5 recovery furnace was designed by the Babcock and Wilcox Company




to burn 338 gallons of black liquor per minute at a solids content of 64 per-




cent; this corresponds to a pulp production rate of 1100 air dried tons per




day.  This direct fired (no direct contact evaporator) recovery furnace was




installed in 1972.  Soot is continuously blown from the boiler tubes with




steam.  Each soot blowing cycle takes about two hours and ten minutes.




    3.  Electrostatic Precipitator




     Exhaust gases from the No. 5 recovery furnace are cleaned in an electro-




static precipitator.  The precipitator was designed for a collection efficiency




of 99.8 percent and installed in 1972 by the Koppers Company.  The unit was




designed to treat 415°F combustion gases at a rate of 393,000 ACFM.  As shown




in Figure III-2, the precipitator has two separate chambers in parallel; each




chamber has five electrical fields.  The precipitator is situated on the roof




of the recovery building.  The gases from each chamber exhaust through a




separate stack.




     Dust collecting on the precipitator electrodes is shaken loose by a sys-




tem of rappers.  The rappers operate in a continuous cycle, with each cycle




lasting about 1 1/2 minutes.  The dust falls to the bottom of the precipitator




where it is removed by drag conveyors to a mix tank.  In the tank, the dust is



dissolved in the black liquor and recycled to the process.






B.  Process Operation



    1.  Recovery Furnace and Electrostatic Precipitator




     The purpose of the tests was to measure particulate emission levels during




normal furnace operation.  The information was to help demonstrate actual con-




trol levels for recovery furnace operations.
                                    11

-------
                            NO,  5 RECOVERY FURNACE  AND ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR
10
      AIR
tn
   ESP
N Chamber
    A
                                                                                        ESP
                                                                                     S Chamber
                                                                                         B
                                                                                                    t
                                                                                                        — SAMPLE
                                                                                                         LOCATION
                                                                                                    1
                                                                                                        —SAMPLE
                                                                                                         LOCATION
                                                                                                                  ŁT>

                                                                                                                  73
                                                                                                                  \
                                                                                                                  ro

-------
     During the particulate tests,  significant  furnace  and  precipitator para-

meters were monitored.  Readings were made  every half hour  and recorded on  the

process data sheets  contained  in Appendix C.

     As far as known from the  process data  and  conversations with the operators,

the equipment operated normally during  the  tests.  The black liquor charge  rate

was 345 gallons per  minute during each  test.  The percentage of solids in the

black liquor ranged  between 59.8 and 61.8 percent.  No auxiliary fuel was

fired during the tests.


    2.  Equivalent Pulp Production  Rate

     The operation of the recovery  furnace  is quantitatively related to the

pulp production rate in the digesters.  As  a result, pollutant emission rate

can be expressed on  the basis  of equivalent pulp production, as shown below:

 (Emission Rate\  _   /Emission  Rate\   / /Equivalent Pulp\
  (lb/ton pulp)]      (  (Ib/hr)     I /  (Production Rate) .        Eq. (III-l)
              /      \             //   V   (tons/hr)    /


     To use Equation III-l, the equivalent  pulp production was calculated from

the black liquor charged during the tests,  as shown below:

/Equivalent Pulp\    /Black Liquor\/       \ //Solids to Pulp\
I   Production   1=  I   Charge  )(% Solids)/1    Ratio     ).    Eq. (III-2)
\    (tons)     /    \    (Ibs)    /\ 100   // \   (Ibs/ton)   /

     The solids-to-pulp ratio  used  in Equation  III-2 was  3000 pounds of black

liquor per ton of unbleached air-dried  pulp.  This is based on the assumption

(used by the recovery furnace's manufacturer) that 3000 pounds of solids re-

sult for each ton of unbleached pulp produced.

     Equation III-2  was used to calculate the equivalent  pulp production during

each test on the recovery furnace.  Dividing by the time elapsed while

charging the black liquor, gave the equivalent unbleached pulp production rate.
                                       13

-------
The calculations are summarized in Table  III-l.   As  shown,  the average rate

was found to be 45.5 tons per hour.   Substituting into  Equation III-l gives the

following equation, which was used to calculate mass emission rates:
/Emission Rate
\ (Ib/ton)
>\   =  /Emission Rate\   /  /  45.5 \              >      .
/      I  (Ib/hr)     j /  (fcon/hr))  '         Eq.(III-3)
                                     14

-------
                                                  TABLE III-l
                           SUMMARY OF CALCULATIONS OF EQUIVALENT PULP PRODUCTION RATE



Black
Hours (1)
Date T
Jan.
Jan,
Jan.
Jan.
Jan.
Jan.
1974
22
23
23
24
24
25
Start
1401
0935
1551
0909
1526
0804
Finish
1932
1337
1920
1311
1913
1134
Liquor Readings
Integrator (2)
Start
515,387,000
519,327,000
520,739,000
524,337,000
525,753,000
529,167,000
Finish
516,632,000
520,237,000
521,521,000
525,248,000
526,602,000
529,959,000
Avg. %
Solids
60.7
60.3
60.3
60.5
60.9
60.0
Black
Liquor
Charged
(Ibs)
1,245,000
910,000
782,000
911,000
849,000
792,000
Equivalent
Pulp Elapsed
Production (3) Time
(tons) (hrs)
251.9
182.9
157.2
183.1
172.4
158.4
5.5
4.0
3.5
4.0
3.8
3.5
Equivalent
Pulp
Production
Rate (4)
(tons/hr)
45.
45.
44.
45.
45.
45.
45.
8
7
9
8
4
3
5 (Avg.)
(1)  Item 12 on the process data sheets.
(2)  Item 11 on the process data sheets.
(3)  Calculated from Equation 2.
(4)  Calculated by dividing Equivalent Pulp Production by Elapsed Time.

-------
IV  SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES






A.  Location of Sampling Points



     The two pricipltator outlet stacks are identical as far as dimensions and


port locations are concerned.  They are rectangular and protrude from the


building roof about 10 feet with a cross section of 270" x 72".  Each has six



4" pipe ports evenly spaced along the long dimension.  From the centerline of


the sampling ports it is 7'-0" down stream to the stack outlet and an


estimated minimum distance of 7'-0" up stream to a flow disturbance in the


precipitators.  The stacks have an equivalent diameter of about 113" thus



flow disturbances are less than one diameter from the sample points in both



directions.  Because of the sampling location it was decided that nine sampling


points would be utilized along each traverse.  This resulted in an elemental


sampling area of 8" x 45" which is not ideal but the best that could be done


with the given conditions.  The north chamber stack is called the A stack


and the south chamber stack the B stack.  Looking at the test side


of the stacks, the ports are labled 1 thru 6 reading from left to right on


both units.  The sampling points for each port are numbered 1 through 9 with


point 1 located closest to the port and point 9 located nearest the far wall.
                             t

Thus, a specific point could be called  A-2-3, which would be the #3 point


in the #2 port in the A stack.   No sample point was closer than 4" to the


stack wall.  Each stack had six traverses with nine test points for a total



of 54 sampling points.  Figures IV-1, IV-2,  and IV-3 fully describe the stacks,



port arrangements, and sample point locations.
                                         16

-------
                                                            FIGURE IV-1
                              GENERAL LAYOUT
                    BRUNSWICK UNIT #5  PRECIPITATORS
                   Stack Test Ports
                                           ~"*-o  o  o
                  Gas      i
             jDistributing I
             i    Plates—*l
             Electrostatic
             jPrecipitator
  Elevator
   Stops
   Here
                                         To N.    To S.
                                        Chamber  Chamber
 From
Recovery
 Boiler
                                    17
                                                     ENGINEERING-SCIENCE, INC

-------
                                                 STACK  DIMENSIONS

                                         BRUNSWICK PULP & PAPER COMPANY
oo
 Z
 O
 m
 m

o








V
-

1

rh
                                              270"
      V///////.
        Some vertical electrical conduits  and
        pneumatic lines, 2-3'  from stack

A Stack-


r*.
i


I


B Stack "3/16" Steel



\o
co
9,
                                          North Chamber
/ /////ft'///////////^7,

       t- Roof Line     LFlange
             South Chamber
                                                                                                             11"
 Z

 9
 CO
 o

 m
 Z
 O
 m
                                            CD
                                            C
                                            73
 Z
 O

-------
                                                      FIGURE IV-3
                CROSS SECTION OUTLET'STACK

                        (ONE OF TWO)
CM
CM
CM X-
tn
     Port
         #(1
                E
           D   E
          D   E
          D  E
    Traverse Points


  234  56789

  I   I  I   I   I  I   I  I
I  I   I  I   I   I  I   I  I
                                              o
                                              r»
                                              CM
                            72"
                            19
                                            ENGINEERING-SCIENCE, INC.

-------
B.   Sampling Procedures




     The sample train box and eight-foot probe assembly, used for  the  testing,




was suspended from a monorail fixture which stands on four 7' long plastic




pipe legs.  The trolley, which supports the weight of the test equipment, rolls




along the rail and allows for a simple means of traversing the stack.  This




portable set-up was convenient for accommodating the six ports on each stack




because it was not necessary to disassemble the test equipment when moving the




support rig to the next port.  Two monorail assemblies were utilized so that




the two stack could be tested simultaneously.  Some difficulty was encountered




when moving the supports because some vertical electrical conduits were located




in the area.  The varying port heights, due to the sloping roof,  were handled




by changing the hanger length to the sample box.




     A standard EPA sampling train with a cyclone separator was used during




all the testing.  The cyclone was installed up stream of the  filter holder




inside the heated box.   A manometer with an expanded lower scale  was  used




instead of the standard unit in the RAC meter box.   The  0-0.25 in WG manometer




was necessary because of the low gas velocities encountered in the  stacks.




     The sampling was conducted as specified by EPA Methods 1 through 5 with




the additional requirement that the impinger contents were collected  and




analyzed for particulate content.  These methods were published in the Federal




Register.  Volume 36,  No. 247, Part II,  Thursday,  December  23, 1971.   The




procedure  for recovery and analysis of  the impinger contents are published  in




the Federal Register, Volume 36, No. 159,  Part II,  Tuesday, August  17,  1971.







C.  Analytical Procedures^




     The clean-up area was located in an unused control  room  on  the third



floor of the recovery boiler building.   All sample  train preparation and  clean-up
                                         20

-------
was performed in this clean, well-lighted area.  The trains were capped and




sealed during all movement to and from the test site on the roof.  The probes




were capped before and after testing and cleaned in a small well-lighted




enclosed area on the eleventh floor level.  This eliminated the time and




handling necessary to move them in the small elevator to the third floor




area.  All the integrated gas samples taken during the particulate sampling




were run through the Orsat analysis the same day they were collected, soon




after the test run was completed.




     All samples obtained during testing at the Brunswick Pulp and Paper




Company were sealed in lead-free Wheaton glass bottles.   The bottles, which




were not previously used, were acid washed in preparation for the testing.




All the sample containers were sent back to the laboratory for final  analysis.




An outline of the analytical procedures followed by the  laboratory  is included




in Appendix E.
                                       21

-------