EPA REPORT NUMBER 74-SRY-3
AIR POLLUTION
EMISSION TEST
O
,* * * •
CHAMPLIN PETROLEUM COMPANY
Wilmington, Calf form'a
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Air and Waste Management
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Emission Measurement Branch
, Research Triangle Park. North Carolina
-------
P.O. Box 13454 "UNIVERSITY STATION • GAINESVILLE, FLORIDA 32604* 904/372-3318
environmental science and enaineerina9 inc.
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
73-011-034
IENTAL SCIENCES atftRFNft ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING
^HOROLOGY v Am QUALITY MANAGEMENT
JUATIC BIOLOGY DISPERSION MODELING
fisHEtues BIOLOGY OCEANOGRAPHY
POLLUTION BtOASSAYS COASTAL ENGINEERING
WtLOUFf ECOLOGY . _ HYDROLOGY
fTANY MA V*p |-| TO 7/1 GEOLOGY
Af/SWV I IU I \*l I I ./ / T GEOLOGICAL ENGINEERING
ocHfMisrnv WASJEWATER MANAGEMENT
TATlSTKS SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
JAL ECONOMICS OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY/HEALTH
SOURCE TEST REPORT
EMISSIONS FROM SULFUR RECOVERY PLANT
Champlin Petroleum Company
Wilmington, California
for
The Environmental Protection Agency
United States Government
Report No. 74-SRY-3
E. R. Hendrickson, Ph.D., P.E.
Senior Advisor
John D. Bonds, Ph.D.
Project Manager
OFFICE/LABORATORY LOCATION: FIVE MILES WEST OF INTERSTATE 75 ON STATE ROAD 26 (NEWBERRY ROAD)
-------
SOURCE TEST REPORT
REPORT NO:
74-SRY-3
PLANT TESTED:
Champ!in Petroleum Corporation
Wilmington, California
EMISSIONS FROM: Sulfur Recovery Plant
TESTOR:
Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc.
Post Office Box 13454
University Station
Gainesville, Florida 32604
CONTRACT NO:
68-02-0232, Task Order No. 34
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
2.0 SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS 3
3.0 PROCESS DESCRIPTION 8
4.0 LOCATION OF SAMPLING POINTS ......... 18
5.0 ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES 20
APPENDICES
A. EMISSION TEST RESULTS
A-l CALCULATIONS A-l
A-2 SULFUR COMPOUNDS BY GAS CHROMATOGRAPHY A-4
A-3 C02, CO, AND 02 BY CONTINUOUS MONITORING A-8
A-4 HYDROCARBONS A-ll
A-5 TOTAL SULFUR BY MELOY ANALYZER . A-14
A-6 S02 BY EPA METHOD 6 A-17
A-7 SOURCE TEST CALCULATIONS A-25
A-8 VISIBLE EMISSIONS . . . . A-31
A-9 NOX BY EPA METHOD 7 A-32
A-10 ORSAT DATA A-34
A-ll ODOR RESULTS A-40
B. FIELD DATA
B-l SULFUR COMPOUNDS BY GAS CHROMATOGRAPHY ...... B-l
B-2 HYDROCARBONS . B-20
B-3 TOTAL SULFUR B-24
B-4 S02 BY EPA METHOD 6 . B-28
B-5 MOISTURE B-36
B-6 TRAVERSE POINTS . . B-42
B-7 VISIBLE EMISSIONS B-45
environmental science and engineering, inc.
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS continued
B-8 ODOR EMISSIONS B-60
C. LABORATORY REPORT
C-l SO BY EPA METHOD 6 C-l
C-2 NOV BY EPA METHOD 7 C-6
A
D. CALIBRATION STANDARDS D-l
E. PROJECT PARTICIPANTS E-l
ii
environmental science and engineering, inc.
-------
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Under Section III of the Clean Air Act of 1970, as amended, the
Environmental Protection Agency is charged with the establishment
of standards of performance for new stationary sources which may
contribute significantly to air pollution. A performance standard
is based on the best emission reduction systems which have been
shown technically and economically feasible
In order to set realistic performance standards, accurate data on
pollutant emission is normally gathered from the stationary source
category under consideration.
The sulfur recovery system at Champlin Petroleum Company's refinery
at Wilmington, California, was designated as a well-controlled sta-
tionary source and was therefore selected by the Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards (OAQPS) for an emission testing program. Tests
were conducted on the sulfur recovery unit during March 14-15, 1974.
The tests were performed by personnel from Environmental Science and
Engineering, Inc. (ESE), Gainesville, Florida, and the U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency, Emission Testing Branch, OAQPS, Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina.
The sulfur recovery system consists of a Claus Sulfur Recovery Unit
followed by a SCOT tail gas treatment unit before the incinerator. The
environmental science and engineering, inc.
-------
SCOT process unit treats the Claus off-gas to remove additional sul-
fur before incineration. The incinerator converts all remaining
reduced sulfur compounds to sulfur dioxide prior to release to the
atmosphere.
Tests were conducted on the system at sampling points before and
after the incinerator. The tests were designed to determine the
average emission rates during four-hour sampling periods on the speci-
fied sampling dates. The emissions measured were: sulfur compounds
(hydrogen sulfide, carbonyl sulfide, sulfur dioxide and carbon di-
sulfide), hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, visible
emissions and odors.
2
environmental science and engineering, inc.
-------
2.0 SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
2.1 A summary of the data collected for the two tests completed at
Champlin Petroleum Company, Wilmington, California, is included
as Table 1. To facilitate a comparison of results, all concentra-
tions are presented as ppmv dry (except % dry for C02 and 02 and
odor units (o.u.) per standard cubic foot (scf) for odor testing
results), and all emission rates are standardized (with the exception
of odor) as grams per hour (gm/hr). Additional partial data
collected on dates other than March 14 and 15 are presented in the
Appendix. Sample calculations and conversions are presented in
Appendix A.
2.2 Sulfur compound concentrations were determined by gas chromatography
(COS, H2S, S02, CS2 and total sulfur), EPA Method 6 (S02), and
Meloy Sulfur Analyzer (total sulfur).
Sulfur dioxide concentrations, as measured by EPA Method 6 and gas
chromatography, averaged 5.2 and 9.6 ppmv, respectively, at the inlet
sampling location. These results are considered to be in good
agreement, especially since EPA Method 6 cannot be expected to yield
accurate results at the low concentration present at the inlet sampling
location. Concentration at the outlet sampling points for the
two days were 50.6 and 86.8 ppmv by EPA Method 6 and 220 and 118 ppmv
by gas chromatography. The 220 ppmv value obtained on the first day
of testing is based on one observation and is not considered repre-
sentative. The other values are considered to be within reasonable
agreement.
3
environmental science and engineering, inc.
-------
TABLE I
DATA SUMMARY - SCOT SULFUR RECOVERY UNIT
CHAMPLIN PETROLEUM COMPANY
WILMINGTON, CALIFORNIA
CM| SSI Oil COHCEMT_HAT|QNS. Pixmr. dry
rim. titt
0*U* lH«t
s.t
Wj|<) CCSIO HjS(l) CSjfO U(S) «»'»,
2» U.O — .1.7 J»0
7.4 n.4 «0 l.t I» 490
lit M.O U «1l.t 2» 1(0
Mi.i M.t w .11. t tro §22
• in 17.0 U «*.* 240 1U
f.t 41.1 4» «*.! 470 UO
IK. cpn>(7) Oder ConcrMnlloft Vlllbl*
<( CH4 BO,, PCn(8) (Xl/iit (>) CcUllont {!•
O.J7 « 0
7.4 0
u.o -• to o
U.O js 2CO. .-_
U.O 0.27 SO 0
9.7 0 20* -
MASS EMISSION RATES, gm/hr
COO)
3/K/74 Ogllit -
J/15/J4 Outlit I7M
til
U70
22SO
2140
CC$(4)
17) -
«S2 MO
«240
nu) nu) tHCt?) »„(!;
2
-------
The total sulfur results were obtained by summation of the individual
sulfur compounds determined by gas chromatography as sulfur dioxide
and by use of the Meloy total sulfur analyzer. The values obtained
at the inlet ranged from 320 to 620 ppmv by the summation method and
between 490 and 630 ppmv by the direct instrumental method. Values
obtained at the outlet sampling location varied from 230 to 240
ppmv by summation and 160 ppmv by the instrumental method. The
inlet and outlet concentrations obtained on March 15 by the two
methods appear to be in reasonable agreement.
Hydrogen sulfide was the major constituent present at the inlet
sampling point and the concentration ranged from 290 to 560 ppmv.
At the outlet, hydrogen sulfide was determined by gas chromatography
to be 58 ppmv by the tests conducted March 15, 1974.
Carbonyl sulfide concentrations, as determined by gas chromatography,
ranged from 18 to 56 ppmv at the outlet location and from 25.4 to
59.8 ppmv at the inlet sampling location. No comparative method
was available for the determination of COS.
The carbon disulfide concentration was determined to be 1.6 ppmv at
the inlet sampling location on the tests conducted March 14, 1974.
On all subsequent tests the dilution factor was so large that exact
carbon disulfide concentrations could not be determined. The overall
concentration of carbon disulfide, however, was determined to be less
than 11.5 ppmv at the inlet and outlet sampling locations.
environmental science and engineering, inc.
-------
2.3 Carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide and oxygen were determined by continuous
methods (NDIR and paramagnetic) and by the Orsat method. The following
paragraphs compare the results obtained by the various methods.
Carbon dioxide concentrations were determined by NDIR and by Orsat. The
results obtained varied from 1.8 to 3.6% (Orsat) and 4.3% (NDIR) at the
outlet sampling location, and 4.6 to 4.8% (Orsat) and 4.S to 5.6% (NDIR) at
the inlet sampling point. These results are considered to be in reasonable
agreement, especially when consideration is given to the fact that the
system was not stable throughout the entire test and the Orsat is a sample
at one point in time, whereas the NDIR results are the average obtained for
the entire testing period.
Average oxygen values obtained were 12.7 (Orsat) and 12.0% (paramagnetic)
at the outlet and 0.8 (Orsat) and 0.2% (paramagnetic) at the inlet
sampling point. The average versus grab sample argument for the conditions
prevalent, and the analyzing methods used can be applied to explain the
differences observed in the values obtained by the two methods.
Carbon monoxide concentrations were measured by NDIR and Orsat. The concen-
trations determined by NDIR ranged from 12 to 29 ppmv at the inlet location
and 1100 ppmv was the average value found at the outlet location. These con-
centrations of carbon monoxide are below the range applicable to the Orsat
method as is shown by the fact that no carbon monoxide was measured by the
Orsat method.
2.4 Nitrous oxides were determined by EPA Method 7. NOX was determined to
be 0.27 ppmv at the outlet, and less than detectable at the inlet on the
day of testing.
6
environmental science and engineering, inc.
-------
2.5 Total hydrocarbons were determined by flame ionization detector.
Inlet concentrations ranged from 7.4 to 12.0 ppmv as CH. and the outlet
concentration was determined to be 16.0 ppmv as Cfy.
2.6 Visible emissions were determined by qualified observers in accordance
with EPA Method 9. Visible emissions averaged zero for the duration
of all tests.
2.7 Odor concentrations were determined according to an EPA draft method
(Dilution Method) and ranged from 80 o.u./scf at the outlet to
200 o.u./scf at the inlet sampling location.
2.8 Moisture and flow rates were determined according to EPA Method 1,
2 and 4. The moisture content at the inlet varied from 6.7 to 9.1%
and at the outlet from 2.6 to 9.5%. Flow rates at the outlet varied
from 65.28 to 115.52 DNM3/min with an average value of 90.4 DNM3/min.
2.9 The overall results from the various tests (S02, CO, C02, H2$, C$2,
COS, total sulfur, total hydrocarbons, etc.) are varied. Good
agreement was obtained between some parameters as determined by different
analysis methods, however, all parameters do not agree as well as
would be expected. This variation in the results is attributed to the
fact that the general overall operating conditions of the plant were
not smooth, due to technical problems. The operating difficulties are
explained in detail in Section 3.4 of this report.
7
environmental science and engineering, inc.
-------
3.0 PROCESS DESCRIPTION
3.1 Claus Sulfur Recovery
In petroleum refining, various processes generate "sour" gas streams
which contain not only sufficient amounts of hydrocarbons to be used
as a fuel gas, but also contain excessive contaminants such as carbon
dioxide and hydrogen sulfide. These fuel gases are treated to remove
C0£ and H2S, but in regenerating the treating solutions by steam strip-
ping "acid" gases are evolved which contain concentrated H«S and some
co2.
Most refineries recover the H2S as elemental sulfur by the Claus process
shown below:
Reheat
Reheat
Reheat
Acid Gas
' To Tail Gas Sulfur
Removal Unit
Boiler Feed Water
4 Liquid
Sulfur
Figure 1. Schematic diagram of Claus Process.
For the high concentrations of II2S usually found in refinery acid gases
the "straight through" variation of the Claus process is used,
8
-------
In this process, H2S is partially oxidized in the reaction furnace:
H2S + 3/2 02 > S02 + H20 + 131 Kcal
The S02 then reacts with the remaining H2S:
2H2S + S02 > 3S + 2H20 + 28 Kcal
The overall reaction, commonly called the Claus Reaction, is:
3H2S + 3/2 02 > 3S + 3H20 + 150 Kcal
Stagewise condensation, reheating, and catalytic conversion steps push
the Claus reaction to the right and remove most of the sulfur gases as
elemental sulfur. The efficiency of the Claus Process increases with
increasing H2S inlet concentration and the number of conversion stages.
Some side reactions occur in the reaction furnace which lower Claus effi-
ciencies. Carbonyl sulfide (COS) and carbon disulfide (CS2) are formed
at high temperatures if the acid gas contains C02 or hydrocarbons or both:
CH4 + 4S > CS2 + 2H2S
C02 + H2S > COS + H20
COS + H2S > H20 + CS2
Though present in relatively small quantities, COS and CS2 are not
e?. mrseS. cfgegenffttreng^ inc.
-------
recovered in the Claus process and do become significant in the Claus
tail gas after H2S and S02 levels have been reduced by 90-95% or more.
Also, the Claus reaction, being exothermic, is favored by lower tempera-
tures, hence the reaction continues in the tail gas to some extent. A
typical tail gas analysis from a Claus plant at 94% sulfur removal is:
Component % Volume
H2S 0.85
S02 0.42
S8 0.05
COS 0.05
CS2 0.04
H20 33.10
CO 0.22
C02 2.37
N2 61.30
H2 1.60
Thus, any tail gas treatment to remove sulfur levels to below 500 ppm
must address all five sulfur constituents. One of these processes
to remove sulfur from tail gases is the SCOT Process, described in
the following section.
10
me.
-------
3.2 Shell's SCOT Process - Commercial Status
The SCOT Process is licensed by Shell Development Company. The follow-
ing table summarizes the status of SCOT units applied to Claus tail
gases:
Company/Location
Onstream Data
Number/Capacity of
Claus Plant, LT/D
Champlin Petroleum
Company/Hi 1mington,
California
Douglas Oil Company/
Paramount, California
Shell Canada, Naterton
Gas Treating Plant/
Alberta, Canada
British Petroleum
Standard Oil of Ohio/
Marcus Hook,
Pennsylvania
Sun Oil Co./Duncan
Oklahoma
Marathon Oil Co./
Detroit, Michigan
Murphy Oil Co./
Meraux, Louisiana
Shell Oil/Houston,
Texas
June 1973
June 1973
December 1974
October 1974
1/15*
1/9
1/2100
1/160
Late 1974
Late 1974
Late 1974
*During EPA tests, sulfur recovery averaged 13 LT/D.
3.3 Shell's SCOT Process - Process Description
In the SCOT Process, as shown by Figure 2, essentially all sulfur
species are hydrogenated
11
environmental science and engineering, inc.
-------
Reducing Gas
Exit Gas To
Incinerator
Claus Unit
rrp.
Steam
Rich Amine To
Regenerator
Figure 2. Schematic diagram of SCOT Process.
12
-------
and hydrolyzed in a reducing atmosphere over an alumina based Co-Mo
catalyst. The reactions are:
S02 + 3H2 -* H2S + 2H20
CS2 + 2H20 —" 2H2S + C02
COS + H20 —»• H2S + C02
S8 + 8H2~~" 8H2S
Water vapor is then removed from the tail gas by a quenching tower
and returned to sour water strippers. After quenching, the gas is
contacted with an alkanolamine solution which absorbs the H2$ plus
about 30% of the C02 in the gas. Trace amounts of unabsorbed H2$,
plus the remaining COS and CS2 which were not converted in the hy-
drogenator, are incinerated before discharge to the atmosphere. Over-
all sulfur recovery for the combined Claus and SCOT units is projected
to be 99.8+%.
The H2S and C02 are stripped from the rich alkanolamine solution in
a conventional stripper and recycled to the Claus plant inlet. The
regenerated alkanolamine solution is continually recycled to the
absorber for contacting additional gases.
13
environmental science and engineering, inc.
-------
3.4 Plant Operation During Emission Measurements
During the test period, process variables were monitored to assure
that emissions measured would be representative of normal process
operation. For the Champ!in refinery the monitored variables included:
(1) acid gas fee to Claus.
(2) tail gas H2S/S02 ratio.
(3) SCOT reactor temperatures.
(4) SCOT absorber liquid feed rate & temperature.
(5) SCOT absorber off-gas flow rate & temperature.
(6) incinerator temperature.
(7) fuel gas & air feed rates to incinerator.
On March 1 the Claus plant feed was very unstable with surges in
the acid gas feed passing through both the Claus and SCOT units. The
SCOT unit experienced upsets twice over the weekend (March 1-3) during
which the catalyst bed apparently became coated with sulfur. March 4
analyses showed significant quantities of COS/C$2 which had not been
present on March 1.
On March 14 the plant supply of natural gas was cut off, resulting
in a drop in plant fuel gas. The coker was adjusted to produce more
fuel gas and offset the losses, but the increase in gas flow throughout
the fuel gas/acid gas system upset the Claus and SCOT sulfur units.
The unsteady operation was noted in variables (1) and (5).
On March 15 natural gas supply was resumed and the acid gas flow
to the Claus returned to normal levels. During the first half of the
14 ;
environmental science and engineering, inc.
-------
test period the feed to the Claus and SCOT units stabilized somewhat,
then upset again when the daily vapor heating of the coker began.
Upon vapor heating, the fuel gas/acid gas flows dropped. Once the
Claus and SCOT units stabilized at the lower flows; emission rates
were much lower as evidenced by the low flows observed on the SCOT
absorber off-gas.
The sulfur plant, rated at 15 LT/D, was operated at 80-90 percent
of design during the emission tests. The Claus efficiency was not
measured so that the total sulfur feed to the SCOT unit was not deter-
mined. From acid gas feed rates and Tutweiler ^S determinations
on the acid gas, the sulfur feed to the Claus was calculated:
Date Sulfur Feed, LT/D
2/28 11.5 (during vapor heat)
3/1 13.6
11.1 (during vapor heat)
3/14 12.8
3/15 13.2
11.1 (during vapor heat)
Corresponding process data taken during these emission tests are
cummarized in Tables 2.0 and 3.0. Data pending confidential determin-
ation are maintained in the confidential files of the Emission Standards
and Engineering Division, OAQPS, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
27711.
15
environmental science and engineering, inc.
-------
Table 2.0 PROCESS DATA SHEET - CHAMPLIN PETROLEUM TEST
Emissions From Sulfur Plant Measured March 14-15, 1974
LOCATION: Wilmington, Calif
DATE: 3/14/74
Time
Acid gas to Claus, MSCFD
Air to Claus, MSCFD
Claus furnace temp, °F
H2S/S02 ratio
Amine flow rate, gpm
Fuel gas to reactor, SCFH
Air to reactor, SCFH
Reactor Temp: Inlet, °F
Outlet, °F
Absorber gas to Claus, SCFH
Absorber gas to incin., SCFH
ornia
1600
384
795
1080
2.4
• -*•
31500
1630
378
795
1080
2.8
OBSEI
1700
378
795
1100
3.2
CONFIDENTIAL
WER: C
1730
378
795
1100
2.8
STATUS.
. Sedman
1800
372
780
1100
2.6
- . .
BEING DETERMINED
33750
30750
30750
30750
1830
U
P
S
E
T*
1900
1930
2000
V
*Acid gas to Claus fluctuating between 324 and 456 MSCFD; entire system upset,
ARCO cut off natural gas fuel gas/acid gas increased to make up deficit.
-------
Table 3.0 PROCESS DATA SHEET - CHAMPLIN PETROLEUM TEST
Emissions From Sulfur Plant Measured March 14-15, 1974
LOCATION: Wilmington, Cali
DATE: 3/15/74
Time
Acid gas to Claus, MSCFD
Air to Claus, MSCFD
Claus furnace temp, °F
H2S/S02 ratio
Amine flow rate, gpm
Fuel gas to reactor, SCFH
Air to reactor, SCFH
Reactor Temp: Inlet, °F
Outlet, °F
Absorber gas to Claus, SCFH
Absorber gas to incin., SCF
form' a
1000
432
915
1110
3.6
\ 37500
1030
408
870
1120
3.0
OBS
1100
420
900
1110
2.8
.ERVER:
1130
408
855
1110
2.2
C. Sedm
1200*
372
780
1100
2.6
an
1230
378
795
1100
3.0
1300
384
780
1110
2.5
CONFIDENTIAL STATU
BEING DETERMINED
35000
33500
32250
30750
37500
37500
1330
360
750
1100
2.1
S
31500
' 1400
372
780
1090
2.8
30000
1430
372
780
1090
3.6
30000
1500**
372
780
1090
3.2
27500
[ 1530
312
660
1090
2.5
25000
*natural gas resumed
**began vapor heat of coker
-------
4.0 LOCATION OF SAMPLING POINTS
The sampling points selected for emission tests at Champlin Petroleum
Company's Wilmington, California refinery are shown in Figure 3.
The inlet sample location (outlet from the SCOT absorber) was used
to obtain samples for the EPA van (gas chromatographic systems), sulfur
dioxide, moisture, velocity, integrated bag, fixed gases (carbon mon-
oxide, carbon dioxide and oxygen), Orsat and odor analysis panel.
The sampling port at this point consisted of a 3/4" gate valve con-
nected into the main 8" pipe between ten SCOT Absorber and the thermal
oxidation unit.
The outlet sample location (after the thermal oxidation unit) was
used to obtain samples for the same systems as the inlet. The pres-
ence of an existing sampling port, normally used by the manufacturer
to monitor sulfur gas emissions, facilitated sampling of the outlet.
This sampling port consisted of a 1 1/4" tee preceded by a shut-off
va]ve.
No major problems were encountered in using these locations for sampling.
18
environmental science and engineering, inc.
-------
By-Pass
By-Pass Closed
Off Normally
Inlet Sample Point
Fan
Dilution
Air
3/4" Sampl
Pipe
Valve
John
Zink
Therma'
Oxidize
8" Pipe
-> -
34"
T
Stack Wall
1 V4".Fitting/ |
10'
Thermocouples |
5'
5'
IT
J
^k^f^y^igif^: 'p^if ''M^^j^^^^^^^S^^^&^M^^^^^
^i.i^^-ii^!i^5j^^^iii.F^i;l^iii,/^3.;;.s=^,i,==H*o;-s^!li^5||M^'.t'^3i'i^^»/!i^
Shut-Off Valve
Outlet Sample Point
IV Tee
Champ!in's Sample
Line S.S.
2V I.D.
3V I.D. Nipple
Process Gas Inlet
(From Scot Absorber)
3/4" Sample Pipe
(Uelded to Duct)
Figure 3. Schematic of sampling locations, Champlin
Petroleum Company, Wilmington, California.
-------
5.0 ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES
A brief summary of each procedure is presented in this section.
5.1 Sampling Procedures
Sample gases were extracted from the emission source for the deter-
mination of sulfur-containing compounds using a 3/16" FEP Teflon
tubing sample line, heated and maintained at 100°C. This sample
line terminated in the dilution manifold in the EPA mobile laboratory.
Either direct or diluted sample could be withdrawn from the system as
dictated by the analytical range of the instruments. The samples
were simultaneously analyzed for total sulfur, carbon disulfide,
sulfur dioxide, hydrogen sulfide and carbonyl sulfide. FEP Teflon
parts or Teflon coated parts (including the sample pump heads) were
used throughout the system to take advantage of-the minimum reactivity
of the Teflon to low level concentrations of sulfur compounds. Figures
4, 5, and 6. show" the sample dilution system in the EPA mobile laboratory
the sample handling system for CO, C02 and 02, and a flow system for
the sample from.the source to the collection and analysis locations.
Sample gases for the determination of CO, C02 and 02 were obtained
from the EPA sample line and the concentrations of the gases were
determined by instruments located in a truck adjacent to the EPA
mobile laboratory. An integrated bag sample v/as obtained at the same
source point as the EPA sample and this sample was used for NOX analysis
• and Orsat determination of CO, C0« and 02. NOX and SOg were determined
in situ in the mobile laboratories assembled by ESE.
20
aciuncc and cnejincc.ring, inn.
-------
Probe
Stack Wall
Filter
Filter
(glass wool)
Heating Sample line-
Permeation
Tube
Calibration
Gas
Diaphragm
Pump
(Heated)
10:1
TO INSTRUMENTS
102:1 103:1
Y
\
IT
P^
-^
t • i-
** r
JVent
t
S"
-/
?
jr
v^
c
\.
^ *
— |Vent
8
*»
^
_/
)
•
-------
To Atmosphere ^rr
ro i
ro •
Ollutten Syjtcra
Excess
Sample to
Atmosphere
Standard
CoHbration
Cos (0?)
1
SUica
Ctfl
Aicarite
NOIR
CO
Atnosphcre
Jl
cre <-~ -• — >
Cas
Cor.t'
S/5M
Figure 5.0. • Schematic of sampling system for CO., CO, and
-------
Emission Source
ro
CO
Heated Teflon Lines
Swage!ok
Tee
S02
H20
Odor
Bag
Orsat
NOX'
Bnq
EPA
6
EPA
4
Non-Heated Lines
Pump and Dry Pump and Flowmeter
Gas Meter
Fiqure 6.0. Schematic of sampling systems.
-------
5.2. Analytical Procedures for Sulfur Compounds . • .
Sulfur compounds were measured by qas chromatography and by wet
•chemical methods. The analytical methods for the various sulfur
compounds are described in the following paragraphs.
5.2.1 Sulfur compounds by Gas Chromatography
•
Sulfur compounds, when introduced into a hydrogen-rich flame, produce
strong luminescent emissions between 300 and 423 nm. Through the
use of a narrow band optical filter that permits transmission at
394 nm, a flame photometric detector (FPD) can measure the chemilum-
inescent emissions produced by the $2 species and can differentiate
between sulfur containing and non-sulfur containing compounds.
Through the use of a gas chroma'tograph (GC) equipped with the
appropriate analytical columns, it is possible to separate and
quantify the various sulfur compounds.
•*
• * •
Applicability of Method .
The compounds of interest in emissions from sulfur recovery systems
are hydrogen sulfide (I^S), carbon disulfide (C$2), sulfur dioxide
(S02) and carbonyl sulfide (COS).
The two GC/FPD systems available in the EPA mobile laboratory are
capable of the separation and quantisation of all of the compounds
24
environmental actenee esnei. engineering, inc.
-------
of interest vn'th the exception that COS and I-^S could not be determined
simultaneously on any one system due to the relatively small dif-
ference in the retention times and the relatively large differences
in concentration which results in the overlap of peaks. The
difficulty presented by the I^S - COS separation and determination
was overcome through the use of a scrubbing system which effectively
•
removes one component (HgS) from the sample. Silver wool, which
reacts readily with HpS, was installed in one of the GC systems
between the sample loop and the analytical column. Removal of the
makes possible the determination of COS while the other system
determines HpS + COS. The difference between the two systems
gives the F^S concentration.
Instrumentation and Standards
GC/FPD System - The system provided in the EPA mobile laboratory
was assembled from components available from various commerci'al
sources.
Sulfur Compound Permeation Tubes - Provided by EPA and gravi-
metrically calibrated by EPA personnel.
Analysis of Samples
The sample gas was extracted from the test source and diluted with
clean, dry, sulfur-free air in the dilution system. Diluted sample
was continuously flowed through the sample loop and injected at
fifteen minute intervals throughout the test. The fifteen minute
interval was selected due to the retention time of CS2.
environmental science nntl engineering, ine.
-------
Responses obtained from each compound were compared to the standard
curve for that component and the concentrations were determined. In
the series of tests conducted, two GC/FPD systems were utilized.
GC#1 was equipped with a scrubbing system and was used for a direct
determination of COS concentration. GC#2 was used to determine
S02> CS2 and H2S was determined on GS#2 by subtracting the COS con-
centration. The analytical methods used for the analysis of sulfur
compounds in this series of tests were the same as described in an
EPA preliminary draft method entitled "Semicontinuous Determination
of Malodorous Reduced Sulfur Emissions From Stationary Sources."
Example calculations for the determination of I^S by difference are
given in Appendix A.
5.2.2. Total Sulfur by the Meloy Analyzer
The detection system of this instrument is the same as for the gas
i
chromatograph. The major difference between the two systems is
that no analytical column is present to effect a separation of the
various sulfur compounds. Another difference between the systems
is that sulfur compounds in the sample gas are oxidized to sulfur
dioxide by passage through a tube furnace maintained at 1500°C in
the presence of excess oxygen before entering the Meloy Analyzer.
The principle of the method and the applicability, however, are the
same for the two systems.
Instrumentation and Standards
Detector System - Meloy Sulfur Analyzer, Model 160SA
Oxidation System - Lindberg Hevi - Duty Tube Furnace, Model 55035
26
environmental science and engineering, inc.
-------
Calibration Standards - Permeation tubes provided by and gravi-
metrically calibrated by EPA personnel.
Analysis of Samples
The sample was obtained from the test source and diluted with clean,
dry, sulfur-free air in the dilution system. Diluted sample was
flowed through the tube furnace and into the Meloy Analyzer. A
continuous read-out of total sulfur concentration was displayed
on a strip chart recorder. Comparison of the recorder response
with the analytical curve obtained by plotting response versus con-
centration gave the total sulfur (as SCL) concentration presence
in the sample stream at any given point in time.
5.2.3 Titrimetric Method for the Determination of Sulfur Dioxide
Sulfur dioxide was oxidized to sulfate in the presence of hydrogen
peroxide according to EPA Method 6 as outlined in the Federal
Register, Vol. 36, No. 59, Part II, August 17, 1971. The sulfate
which was formed and collected was subsequently titrated with a
standardized solution of barium perchlorate in the presence of
thorin indicator, and the sulfur dioxide concentration was
calculated.
27
environmental science and engineering, inc.
-------
5.3 Analytical Procedures for Carbon Monoxide, Carbon Dioxide and Oxygen.
Carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide and oxygen were monitored continuously
from the source during the three four-hour tests. The sample was
obtained as described in section 5.1.
Instrumentation and Standards
Carbon Dioxide - Beckman Model 315A NDIR configured for 0-5% carbon
dioxide.
Carbon Monoxide - Beckman Model 315B NDIR configured for 0-1000 ppm
carbon monoxide.
Oxygen - Beckman Model F-3, paramagnetic oxygen analyzer capable of
measuring 0-25% oxygen.
Standard Gases - Obtained from Matheson Gas Products, Inc., Cucamonga,
California. All standards were either primary or certified and were
analyzed by Matheson Gas Products, Inc. All standards consisted of
the. component of interest with the balance of the mixture as nitrogen.
Analysis of Samples
The sample gas was extracted from the test source and flowed through
the instruments. In the case of the carbon dioxide the sample was
diluted with clean, dry, carbon-dioxide free nitrogen in order to
maintain the concentration within the operating range of the instrument.
A schematic of the instrument flow system is presented as Figure 5.
Responses obtained from the instrument were displayed on a strip chart
recorder and these responses were compared to the appropriate standard
curve to obtain the concentrations of the different constitutents.
28
ttcicncc and <>nyinccring^ inc.
-------
EPA Method 10 (Federal Register, 39., No. 47, March 8, 1974) was used
as a guideline in the determination of carbon monoxide concentrations.
5.4 Determination of Hydrocarbons by Flame lonization
Hydrocarbons (as methane, CfL) were measured by a flame ionization
detector according to the instruction manual as provided by the manu-
facturer. Sample gas was obtained from the dilution system in the EPA
Mobile Laboratory and diluted as necessary to maintain the concentration
within the operating range of the instrument.
Instrumentation and Standards
Hydrocarbons - Beckman Model 400 Total Hydrocarbon Analyzer with a range
of 0 - 1000 ppm hydrocarbons as methane.
Standard Gases - obtained from Matheson Gas Products, Inc., Cucamonga,
California. The standards consisted of methane in air and concentrations
were certified and analyzed by Matheson Gas Products, Inc.
5.5 Analytical Procedure for Nitrogen Oxides
Nitrogen oxides were measured according to EPA Method 7 (Federal Register,
39, No. 47, March 8, 1974). A portion of the contents of the integrated
bag sample was collected in an evacuated flask which contained sulfuric
acid and hydrogen peroxide. After the oxides of nitrogen had'been oxidized
to nitrate, the nitrate was reacted with phenoldisulfonic acid and a spectro-
photometric method was used to determine concentration.
29
Kcicncv and engineering, inc.
-------
5.6 Procedure for the DeterminatIon of Moisture
The moisture content was measured in accordance with EPA Method 4
which appeared in Federal Register, 36, No. 59, Part II, August 17,
1974.
5.7 Procedure for the Determination of Stack Gas Velocity
The stack gas velocity was determined after sample and velocity traverse
points were located. EPA Method 1 and 2 as they appeared in Federal
Register. 36, No. 59, Part II, August 17, 1974 were used for these
determinations. .
5.8 Procedure for the Determination of Visible Emissions
EPA Method 9, as outlined in the Federal Register. 36_, No. 247, Part II,
December 23, 1971 was used as the guideline in the determination of
visible emissions. A certified observer was used to observe emissions
from the sample source.
5.9 Carbon Dioxide, Oxygen and Carbon Monoxide by Orsat
Orsat determinations were made on the integrated bag sample in accordance
with EPA Method 3 which appeared in Federal Register, 36_, No. 247, Part II,
December 23, 1971.
5.10 Analytical Method for Odor Emissions
The Determination of Odor Potential from Stationary Sources (Dilution
Method), an EPA draft method, was used as a guideline for the odor
emissions portion of the report. This method is based on the fact that
30
tteivncc and e.eagiswcrimtji inc.
-------
the human olfactory sense is very perceptive to trace quantities of
odorous compounds and that by standardizing the selection of the odor
panel, methods of dilution of sample gas, etc., odor potentials may
be determined.
Selection of the Odor Panel
Students from a local high school were selected by conducting a screen-
ing test as outlined in Figure 7.0. In the screening test the potential
panel members were required to identify the odd sample in each set of 3.
Sample concentrations ranged from 1% to .001% of vanilla extract and
methyl salicylate in benzyl benzoate. Additional information on the
screening test is found in Section A-ll of Appendix A.
Collection and Analysis of Samples
The samples for odor analysis were collected in the apparatus shown in
Figure 8.0.
Analysis of Samples
The samples were collected at each site as prescribed by the product
officer. The teflon bags containing the samples were transported to
the high school by the personnel responsible for the analysis. The
samples were diluted with clean, dry, odor-free air and analyzed by
the panel on a detectable, non-detectable basis. Blank sample (clean,
dry, odor-free air) were given to the panel periodically to insure the
integrity of the odor panel procedure.
31
KC it etwee aetd. enesiKeerina^ inc.
-------
The data obtained were plotted on log probability paper and the best
line through the plotted data was determined by the method of least
squares. The odor concentration for each sample was used to calculate
the odor emission rate according to the equation E = CVA, where:
E = odor emission rate, odor units/minute
C = odor concentration, odor units/SCF
V = velocity of source, feet/minute
and A = cross-sectional area of the stack, square feet.
32
environmental ttcivncu nmi vnejinev.rinffi inc.
-------
Layout of Scrcc-rn'nn Test
V* Van ill,•» Extract l-',« Kothyl SalicyjiLo
BIJ= Dc-n^yl Hcnzontc
3
0.5%
0.015J
o.ooir,
o.oou;
33
-------
co
Vacuum
Pressure Pump
Pipe to Tubing
ItfMI
\f
Clanp,
Rubber Gasket
Teflon Bag
Rigid Container
VX
k«*M.
1 /^
Lire
vx
Rubber Tubing
Stainless Steel
Swag2 Lck
Heated Tcflcn Sar.pla
On-Off Valve
Sampling Bag Assembly
Figure 8.0
-------
APPENDIX A
COMPLETE EMISSION TEST RESULTS
WITH SAMPLE CALCULATIONS
environmental science and engineering* inc.
-------
A-l CALCULATIONS
A. 1.1. General Calculations
A. 1.1.1. Flow Rate
= flow rate dry in DNM3/min
/V.f't)
\rnin /
(A, ft2) (F) f 530 \ f Ds _ 1 x 2.832 x 10"2m3
where V = stack velocity in ft/min,
o
A = stack area in ftr,
F = fraction of dry air
T = stack temperature in degrees F,
and PS= stack pressure in inches of Hg
>ion Kate in gms/nr
gms/hr = I ppmv x mw /mg\| x flow rate I nr_ J x 60 min x 1 gm
L 24.45\m^| Iminy hr 1000 me
= ppmv x mw x flow rate x 2.453 x 10~3
A.1.1.3. Conversion From Wet to Dry Gas Basis
ppmv dry = ppmv wet = ppmv wet
fraction of dry air 1-moisture fraction
A.1.2. Specific Calculations
A.1.2.1. Sulfur Compounds by G.C.
The individual sulfur compounds (with the exception of I^S) were
determined directly from a standard curve.
A-l
environmental science and engineering, inc.
-------
A.1.2.2 Hydrogen Sulfide Determination by Difference (G.C.1)
GUI GC£2
•• J
cos
Time, t
COS
COS
Concentration, pp.nv
Time, t
Concentration, ppmv
a. Calibration plots were prepared on GC#1 for COS and GC#2 for
H2S and COS.
b. The response for COS (iCOs) and for cos + H2S ^T^ were determined
for each injection sample.
c. The COS concentration (Ccos) was determined from the calibration
curve for GC#1 and subsequently converted to an equivalent response
for GC#2 (icos.).
d. The equivalent COS response (icos') was subtracted from ij to
determine the H2S response (in2s)-
e. Using in2s> the hydrogen sulfide concentration (CH2S) was determined
from the calibration curve.
A-2
environmental science and engineering, inc.
-------
A. 1.2. 3. Total Sulfur Calculations from G.C. Data
stotal as SO = (PPmv S02^ + (pPmv H2S) + (PPmv cos)
e.g. at 1635 hrs on 14 March 1974
stotal as S02 = 7-6 + 24° + 146 + 2(1-6) = 396-8 = 40° PPmv as S02
A. 1.3. Calculations for NOX, C02, $2* ^> ^2 anc^ m°isture are found in the
raw data sheets in Appendix B.
A. 1.4. Gas Chroma tograph Dilution Factor
Concentration before dilution _
Dilution Factor (D.F.) - Concentration determined after dilution
0.44
Test #1 D.F. = 0.040 = 11.0
Test #2 D.F. = 2.2 = 10.0
0.22
AVERAGE DILUTION FACTOR - 11.0 + 10.0
2 = 10.5
A-3
environmental science and engineering, inc.
-------
A-2
SULFUR COMPOUNDS BY GAS CHROMATOGRAPHY
CHAMPLIN PETROLEUM
14 MARCH 1974
WILMINGTON, CALIFORNIA
Source
Outlet
Inlet
n
"
"
»
«
n
"
n
»
'•
»
»
»
»
'•
-
Time
1620
1635
1650
1700
1710
1721
1730
1740
1750
1800
1805
1810
1815
1820
1825
1830
1835
1840
COS(l),
ppmv
18.0
146*
12.3
12.3
15.7
20.3
18.0
25.9
15.7
13.5
31.5
15.7
22.5
39.4
65.2
20.2
46.1
25.9
H2S(D,
ppmv
—
240
180
150
190
250
350
510
340
—
220
290
280
210
620
300
210
220
S02(l), CS?(1), Total S as S02(l),
ppmv ppmv ppmv ***
220 <1.7 240
7.6 1.6 400
<10 1.6 190
<10 <10 160
<10 <10 210
<10 <10 270
<10 <10 370
<10 <10 580
<10 <10 360
<10 <10
<10 <10 250
<10 <10 310
<10 <10 300
<10 <10 250
<10 <10 690
<10 <10 320
<10 <10 260
<10 <10 260
A-4
environmental science and engineering, inc.
-------
Continued
Source
Inlet
Time
1845
1850
Maximum
Inlet — Minimum
Mean
COS(l)
ppmv
31.5
25.9
146
12.3
25.4
H2S(1)
ppmv
190
390
620
150
290
S02(l) CS2(1) Total S as S02(l),
ppmv ppmv ppmv ***
<10 <10 230
<10 <10 420
<10 <10 690
<10 <10 160
7.6** 1.6 320
Maximum 18.0** —**
Outlet—Minimum 18.0** --**
Mean 18.0** —**
220** < 1.7**
220** < 1,7**
220** < 1.7**
240**
240**
240**
(1) All values reported on a dry gas basis.
* considered non-representative
** based on one observation only
*** does not include indeterminate value
A-5
environmental science and engineering, inc.
-------
SULFUR COMPOUNDS BY GAS CHROMATOGRAPHY
CHAMPLIN PETROLEUM
15 MARCH 1974
WILMINGTON, CALIFORNIA
Source
Inlet
»
"
'•
"
n
"
n
»
"
n
n
"
»
"
n
" it
n
•'
»
..
Time
1010
1020
1030
1040
1050
1100
1110
1120
1130
1140
1151
1200
1210
1220
1231
1241
1250
1300
1310
1320
1330
COS(l),
ppmv
55.4
69.3
54.3
60.0
104
56.6
48.5
—
85.5
55.4
38.1
38.1
40.4
42.7
50.8
30.0
—
280**
68.1
78.5
79.7
H2S(1),
ppmv
470
460
520
980
730
510
570
—
680
510
350
350
380
440
460
—
—
1500**
570
620
840
S02(l), CS2(1),
ppmv ppmv
<11.5 <11.5
<11.5 <11.5
<11.5 <11.5
-------
Continued
Source
Inlet
n
ii
Outlet
n
n
n
Time
1340
1350
1400
1410
1420
1430
1440
Maximum
Inlet— — Minimum
Mean
Maximum
Outlet — Minimum
Mean
COS(l),
ppmv
104
50.8
45.0
63.6
66.8
56.1
37.7
280**
30.0
59.8
66.8
37.7
56.0
H2S(1),
ppmv
810
480
480
71
67
56
38
1500**
350
560
71
38
58
S02(l),
ppmv
-------
A-3
Carbon Monoxide (NDIR)
Carbon Dioxide (NDIR)
Oxygen (Paramagnetic)
CHAMPLIN PETROLEUM COMPANY
14 MARCH, 1974
WILMINGTON, CALIFORNIA
SOURCE
Inlet
"
n
n
»
»
»
»
n
MAXIMUM
MINIMUM
MEAN
TIME
1620-1635
1635-1650
1650-1705
1705-1720
1720-1735
1735-1750
1750-1805
1805-1820
1820-1835
CO (ppm) m
45
39
39
47
37
31
30
18
16
55
12
29
COo (%) (1)
4.9
4.9
4.9
4.9
5.0
5.0
4.7
4.9
4.8
5.2
4.6
4.9
0,'(«) (1)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
(1) All values reported on a dry gas basis.
A-8
environmental science and engineering, inc.
-------
Carbon Monoxide (NDIR)
Carbon Dioxide (NDIR)
Oxygen (Paramagnetic)
CHAMPLIN PETROLEUM COMPANY
15 MARCH, 1974
WILMINGTON, CALIFORNIA
SOURCE
Inlet
n
n
"
n
»
'•
n
»
»
"
'•
"
„
"
n
TIME
1000-1015
1015-1030
1030-1045
1045-1100
1100-1115
1115-1130
1130-1145
1145-1200
1200-1215
1215-1230
1230-1245
1245-1300
1300-1315
1315-1330
1330-1345
1345-1400
MAXIMUM
MINIMUM
MEAN
CO, ppmv (1).
18
10
20
28
23
13
17
16
8
6
8
8
4
6
4
3
46
23
12
co2. % (i)
5.8
5.8
5.8
5.7
5.7
5.4
5.6
5.5
5.5
5.4
.5.4
5.4
5.7
5.5
5.7
5.7
5.9
5.0
5.6
22,
0)
0
0
0
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.7
0.7
0.7
0
0.3
(1) All values reported on a dry gas basis
A-9
environmental science and engineering, inc.
-------
SOURCE
Outlet
TIME
1400-1415
1415-1430
1430-1445
Carbon Monoxide (NDIR)
Carbon Dioxide (NDIR)
Oxygen (Paramagnetic)
CHAMPLIN PETROLEUM COMPANY
15 MARCH, 1974
WILMINGTON, CALIFORNIA
1100
1100
1090
4.3
4.5
4.2
0?.(*)
12
11.9
12
MAXIMUM
MINIMUM .
MEAN
1120
1080
1100
4.7
4.1
4.3
12.2
11.7
12
A-10
environmental science and engineering, inc.
-------
A-4
HYDROCARBONS AS METHANE (CH4) BY FLAME IONIZATION
CHAMPLIN PETROLEUM COMPANY
15 MARCH 1974
WILMINGTON, CALIFORNIA
Source
Inlet
it
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
it
n
n
ii
n
n
n
n
Time Mean
1627
1632
1637
1642
1647
1652
1657
1702
1707
1712
1717
1722
1727
1732
1737
1742
1747
1752
1757
1802
Inlet
•
, pptnv CH4(1 ) . Source
7.1 ' Inlet
7.6
7.4
7.3
7.4
8.4
8.3
7.8
7.5
7.3
7.1 ' "
6.9
7.0 ' "
8.0
8.9 ' "
9.0
8.5 * ..
8.0
7.4
7.1
•
(Maximum 9.0
^Minimum 5 8'
(Mean 7.4
Time
1807
1812
1817
1822
1827
1832
1837
1842
1847
1852
1857
1902
190.7
1912
1917
1922
1927
1932
Mean, ppmv CH/j
. 7.6
7.8
7.5
7.4
7.4
7.4
7.5
7.8
8.0
8.4
7.3
6.6
6.4
5.8
6.2
5.9
5.9
6.3
(1) All values reported on a dry gas basis.
A-ll
environmental science and engineering, inc.
-------
HYDROCARBONS AS METHANE (CH4) BY FLAME IONIZATION
CHAMPLIN PETROLEUM COMPANY
15 MARCH 1974
WILMINGTON, CALIFORNIA
Source
Inlet
"
"
»
»
"
"
»
»
"
«
»
11
n
"
"
"
n
"
„
»
"
Outlet
»
»
Time
1015
1020
1025
1030
1035
1040
1045
1050
1055
1100
1105
1110
1115
1120
1125
1130
1135
1140
1145
1150
1155
1200
1405
1410
1415
Mean, ppmv as CH4 (1) Source
•
13 Inlet
13 ' "
13 '
13 '
13
12
11
11
n
11 '
11 » .
. 11
11
11
12
13
13
13
15 »
15 '
14
12 '
•I
15
11
14
Time
1205
1210
1215
1220
1225
1230
1235
1240
1245
1250
1255
1300
1305
1310
1315
1320
1330
1135
1340
1345
1 350
1355
1400
Mean, as ppmv CH,
12
11
9.9
11
11
n
14
13
12
12
12
11
11
12
13
13
15
14
14
14
14
14
11
A-12
environmental science and engineering, inc.
-------
Source
Outlet
"
"
«
„ .
"
"
n
Inlet, as
Outlet. a<
Time
1420
1425
1430
1435
1440
1445
1450
1455
ppmv CH4
; DDmv CH*
Mean, ppmv as CH^O)
14
13
14
20
21 '
*
24
18
12
Maximum Minimum Mean
15 10 12
24 H 16
(1) All values reported on a dry gas basis.
A-13
environmental science and engineering, inc.
-------
A-5
TOTAL SULFUR (AS S02) USING MELOY SULFUR ANALYZER
CHAMPLIN PETROLEUM COMPANY
14 MARCH 1974
WILMINGTON, CALIFORNIA
Time
1810
1820
1830
1840
1850
1900
Inlet
Maximum ppmv as $02(1
580
450
940
1300
600
620
(Maximum
(Minimum
(Mean
) Minimum ppnv as $02(1)
250
230
230
240
230
300
1300
210
490
wean ppmv as $02(1)
410
340
; 580
760
i 410
460
ppmv as S02
'
(1) All values reported here on a dry gas basis.
A-14
environmental science and engineering, inc.
-------
TOTAL SULFUR (AS S02) USING MELOY SULFUR ANALYZER
CHAMPLIN PETROLEUM COMPANY
15 MARCH 1974
WILMINGTON, CALIFORNIA
Source
Inlet
ii
n
ii
n
n
n
u
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
Outlet
n
n
n
Time Maximum ppmv as S0£(l)
1020
1040
1050
1100
1110
1120
1130
1140
1150
1200
1210
1220
1230
1240
1250
1300
1310
1320
1330
1340
1350
1400
1410
1420.
1430
1440
670
1100
860
920
750
650
690
620
650
500
550
650
880
670
1500
<1500
1200
630
1100
1100
960
810
230
200
180
140
Minimum ppmv as SOo
420
550
520
390
460
410
390
410
350
330
390
370
460
240
250
1200
540
350
470
470
440
440
150
160
130
87
Mean ppmv as 502(1)
550
830
680
660
610
530
540
510
510
420
460
510
670
460
900
--
880
480
770
790
700
630
200
180
160
no
A-15
environmental science and engineering, inc.
-------
Continued
Source Time Maximum ppmv as S0?(l) Minimum ppmv as SO^ Mean ppmv as SOn(l)
(Maximum <1500 ppmv as SO
Inlet (Minimum 240 " " "
(Mean 630 " " "
(Maximum 230 ppmv as SO,,
Outlet (Minimum 140 ••••••.
(Mean 160 '
(1) All values reported on a dry gas basis
A-16
vnvirommemtal science and engineering, inc.
-------
A-6
SULFUR DIOXIDE
EMISSION DATA
EPA METHOD 6
PLANT CHAMPI.IN PETROLEUM COMPANY
STACK SULFUR RECOVERY SYSTEM - INLET
Run Ho.
Date
.Time of Ssniple
Barometric Pressure, "HG
Stack pressure, "HG
Final Mstsr Reading, FT3
Initial Meter Readinq, FT3
o
Average i-'rter Temp. F
o
Average Stack Temp. F
Gas Voluir.3 Sampled, FT3, VSTPD *
SQ2 Conc.,LB/FT3 (CS01
S02 Cone., P. P.M. (PPM)
f
2 -A
3/1/74
10:40
30
30
142.85
141 .46
87
90
1 .3553
3 .5844tf~7.
2.1655
• 2-7?
3/1/74
1 :05 - 2:50
30
30
1.44.53
143.03
90
90
1/4513
4.3954F 7
2.6555
* VSTPD = Dry, 29.92 "HG, 70°F
VSTPD = VM ' Pbav
CSO=
PPM = CSO x 6041500
Tstd
(VT-VTB)(N)(Vso1n)
VA
VMSTD
A-17
-------
SULFUR DIOXIDE
EMISSION DATA
EPA METHOD 6
>LAHT CHAMPLIN PETROLEUM COMPANY
STACK SULFUR RECOVERY SYSTEM - INLET
Run No.
Date
.Time of Sample
Barometric Pressure
, "HG
Stack pressure, "HG
Final M2t?r Readinq
Initial Meter Readi
Average Meter Temp.
Average Stack Temp.
Gas VoluiTiS Sampled,
SQ2 Conc.,LB/FT3
S02 Cone., P. P.M.
, FT3
no, FT3
0
F
o
F
FT3, VSTPD *
(CSO)
(PPM)
3 -A
3/1/74
6:40
30
30
146.19
145. 26
90
230.
0 .90 244
6.1314Z7~6
37 .043
.
* VSTPD = Dry, 29.92 "HG, 70°F
VSTPD = VM
CSO-
Pbar + AH
]3_. 6
Pstd
Tstd
(VT-VTB)(N)(Vsoln)
VA
VMSTD
PPM = CSO x 6041500
A-18
-------
SULFUR DIOXIDE
EMISSION DATA
EPA METHOD 6
plA(,T CHAMPLIN PETROLEUM COMPANY
STACK
SULFUR RECOVERY SYSTEM - OUTLET
Run No.
Date
Time of Sample
Barometric Pressure, "HG
Stack pressure, "HG
Final ttetar Reading, FT3
3
Initial Meter Reading, FT
o
Average Meter Temp. F
o
Average Stack Temp. F
Gas Volume Sampled, FT3, VSTPD *
SQ2 Conc.,LB/FT3 (CSO)
S02 Cone., P. P.M. (PPM)
t
2-A
3/1/74
11:10 - 13:10
30
30
88.9
87.4
74
1040
1.4927 .
7 . 889/7~7
4 . 7 6 G 2
2-B
3/1/74
13:35 - 15 :35
30
30
90 .32
89.1
75
1040
1 . 2118
1 .3193tf~5
79.707
* VSTPD = Dry, 29.92 "HG, 70°F
VSTPD =
CSO=
PPM = CSO x 6041500
(VT-VTB)(N)(Vso1n)
VA
VMSTD
A-19
-------
SULFUR DIOXIDE
EMISSION DATA
EPA METHOD 6
PLANT CHAMPLIN PETROLEUM COMPANY
STACK'SULFUR RECOVERY SYSTEM - OUTLET
Run No.
Date
Time of Sample
Barometric Pressure, "HG
Stack pressure, "HG
3
Final Meter Reading, FT
Initial Meter Reading, FT3
o
Average Meter Temp. F
0
Average Stack Tenip. F
Gas Volume Sampled, FT3, VSTPD *
SQ2 Conc.,LB/FT3 (CSO)
S02 Cone., P. P.M. (PPM)
3-4
3/1/74
4:15-6:15
30
30
92.115
90.5
87
10 20
1.569
8.631577 5
5 21.47
3- F
3/1 /74
6: 35-6 : 50
30
30
92. 631
92.3
87
1020
0.32157
r./. if,- -
0 .000.14113
852.66
* VSTPD = Dry, 29.92 "HG, 70°F
VSTPD = VM
CSO=
PPM = CSO x 6041500
(VT-VTB)(N)(Vso1n)
VA
VMSTD
A-20
-------
SULFUR DIOXIDE
EMISSION DATA
EPA METHOD 6
PLANT CHAMPLIN PETROLEUM COMPANY
STACK SULFUR RECOVER? SYSTEM - INLET
Run No.
Date
.Time of Sample
Barometric Pressure, "HG
Stack pressure, "HG
Final Mater Reading, FT3
Initial Meter Readino, FT3
o
Average i-teter Temp. F
o
Average Stack Temp. F
Gas Volunrs Sampled, FT3, VSTPD *
SQ2 Conc.,LB/FT3 (CSO)
S02 Cone., P. P.M. (PPM)
4-/1
3/14/74
16:00-18 :30
30
30
159.49
157.1
85
94
2.3 295
7 .72352? 7
4. 6662
.
* VSTPD = Dry, 29.92 "HG, 70°F
VSTPD =
CSO=
PPM = C-SO x 6041500
/Tstd_
TM
(VT-VTB)(N)(Vso1n)
VA
VMSTD
A-21
-------
SULFUR DIOXIDE
EMISSION DATA
EPA METHOD 6
PLANT CHAMPLIN PETROLEUM COMPANY
STACK 'SULFUR HECOVFin VII IT - OUTLET
Run No.
Date
Time of Sample
Barometric Pressure, "HG
Stack pressure, "HG
Final Mater Reading, FT3
3
Initial Meter Reading, FT
o
Average Mater Temp. F
o
Average Stack Temp. F
Gas Volmrs Sampled, FT3, VSTPD *
SQ2 Conc.,LB/FT3 (CSO)
S02 Cone., P. P.M. (PPM)
*
4-/.
3/14/71
4:00-6:30
30
30
129 .19
127
81
1045
2.1463
8 .38 26£~6
50.644
"
* VSTPD = Dry, 29.92 "HG, 70°F
VSTPD * VM
CSO=
PPM = CSO x 6041500 .
(VT-VTB)(N)(Vso1n)
VA
VMSTD
A-22
-------
SULFUR DIOXIDE
EMISSION DATA
EPA METHOD 6
PLANT CHAMPLIN PETROLEUM COMPANY
STACK SULFUIl UECQVEPY SYSTEM - HI LET
Run No.
Date
.Time of Sample
Barometric Pressure, "HG
Stack pressure, "HG
3
Final Matsr Reading, FT
Initial Meter Reading, FT3
o
Average Meter Temp. F
0
Average Stack Temp. F
Gas Volume Sampled, FT3, VSTPD *
SQ2 Conc.,LB/FT3 fcso)
2 Cone., P. P.M. (PPM)
»
5 -A
3/15/74
9:30-11 :15
30
30
1G1.98
159.7
80
92
2. 2438
7.471877~7
4.5141
5-Z?
3/15/74
11 : 45-13 : 30
30
30
16 2. 28
161 . 2
81
92
1 .0589
1 ._1739;7~6
7 .092 5
\
* VSTPD = Dry, 29.92 "HG, 70°F
VSTPD -
VblPD
CSO=
PPM = CSO x 6041500
VMSTD
A-23
-------
SULFUR DIOXIDE
EMISSION DATA
EPA METHOD 6
PLANT CHAMPLIN PETROLEUM COMPANY
STACK 'SULFVK RECOVER? UNIT - OUTLET
Run No.
Date
Time of Sample
Barometric Pressure, "HG
Stack pressure, "HG
3
Final f-teter Reading, FT
Initial Meter Reading, FT3
o
Average Mster Temp. F
o
Average Stack Temp. F
Gas Volun-iS Sampled, FT3, VSTPD *
SQ2 Conc.,LB/FT3 (CSO)
S02 Cone., P. P.M. (PPM)
*>
5 -A
3/15/74
9:30-11 :15
30
30
134.08
132.4
70
1055
1 .6815
1 .8301I7~5
110. 5G
5-7?
3/15/74
11:45-1:30
30
30
136. 23
134. 4
84
1040
1.7838
1 .0418E~5
62.942
VSTPD = Dry, 29.92 "HG, 70°F
VSTPD = VH
CSO=
Pbar H- AH
13.. 6
Pstd
Tstd_ x
TH '
(VT-VTB)(N)(ysoTn.)
VA
VMSTD
PPM = CSO x 6041500
A-24
-------
A-7
SOURCE TEST CALCULATES
RUN
BAR. PRESS, PB
STACK AREA, AS.
HS, STACK PRESS, PS.
IN. C
"Hg. STACK DIMENSIONS
S FT2. EFF. STACK AREA, AS* _ FT2, AVE. STACK TEMP, TS
"HoO. AVE. METER ORIFICE AH
»H?0
Min
AVE. METER TEMP, TH OV ___*F. AVE.,/VSL. HEAD. H .
METER VOL, VM // <^-^/7 FT3. MOISTURE PLUS SILICA GEL, VC_C2__M1, SAMPLE TIME
NOZZLE DIA, _ 331, NOZZLE AREAS i 1/8 — 0.000085 FT2» 3/16 — 0.0001916 FT2j 1/U ~ 0.0003^1 FT2
3/8 — 0.00076? FT2i 1/2 — 0.0013 FT2. ORSAT t CO?,. ?,O %. 03 //a*. %. CO <^y U %
_ SCF
VWV = (0.0^74) X (VC)
VSTPD = (17.71) X (VM) X (PO) 4- (TM + WO) , Where PO = (PE
VT • (VWV) + (VSTPD)
W «= MOISTURE FRACTION = (VWV) 4- (VT) °*K V*rft Ki»» i,
FDA o'FRACTION OF DRY AIR =» (1.0) - (W)
KD » [(O.Wi) X ( ,
-------
SOURCE TEST CALCINATIONS
BAR. PRESS, PB.
STACK AREA, AS_^
IN. C
STACK PRESS, PS t!f£> "Hg. STACK DIMENSIONS
FT2. EFF. STACK AREA, AS« _ FT2, AVE. STACK TEMP, TS
RON NO.
O .
°F
"H20> AVE« KETER ORIFICE AH / x7
, SAMPLE TIME
MH?0
Min
AVE. METER TEMP, TM *x*5"" °F. AVE.VVEL. KEAP.H .../
HETER VOL, VM //? ^ffiT FT?. MOISTURE PLUS SILICA GEL,
NOZZLE DIA, _ IN, NOZZLE AREAS i 1/8 — 0.000085 FT2s 3/16 — 0.0001916 FT2? 1/4 — 0.000341 FT2
3/8 — 0.000767 FT2; 1/2 — 0.0013 FT2. ORSAT I CO? O,^7 £. 03 Jc* '0$. CO ^ ^ g
VWV B (0.0474) X (VC)
VSTPD = (17.71) X (VJ-i) X (P_0) -r (TM + 460) , Where PO
VT B (VWV) + (VSTPD)
W B MOISTURE FRACTION = (VWV) -f- (VT)
FDA B FRACTION OF DRY AIR = (1.0) - (W)
W) B £(0.44) X ( J£li/
-------
SOURCE TEST CALCULATIONS
?#M O6,
STACK
NO
. /
' '
°F
BAR. PRESS, PBu2£2_"Hg, STACK PRESS, PS .?£) "Hg. STACK DIMENSIONS Cc^ IN. CF
STACK AREA, AS X3& / ^T7 FT2. EFF. STACK AREA, AS' _ FT2, AVE. STACK TEMP, TS
AVE. METER TEMP, TM SV *F. AVE . VVEL . HEAD. H . c£cff "HoO . AVE. METER ORIFICE AH />
HETER VOL, TO /cJ • &"?< FT3. MOISTURE PLUS SILICA GEL, VC /^ Ml. SAMPLE TIKE /cT£> Min
KOZZLE DIA,
3/8 -- 0.00076? FT2? 1/2 — 0.0013 FT2. ORSAT I COg
.IN, NOZZLE AREAS I 1/8 — 0.000085 FT2( 3/16 — 0.0001916 FT2j 1/4 — 0.000341 FT2
i co ^ • & #
SCF
Where PO = (PB +
VWV = (0.0474) X (VC)
TSTPD » (17.71) X (Wi) X (PO) -r (TM +
VT » (VWV) -f (VSTPD)
W " MOISTURE FRACTION = (VWV) -f (VT)
FDA = FRACTION OF DRY AIR = (1.0) - (W)
MD » [(0.44) X (
-------
SOURCE TEST CALCULATIONS
RUN NO.
BAR. PRESS, PB
STACK AREA, AS.
IN.
H£, STACK PRESS, PS pO "Hg. STACK DIMENSIONS_
, EFF. STACK AREA, AS' FT2, AVE. STACK TEMP, TS_
AVE. METER TEMP, TO "7*7 "F. AVE.//VEL. KEAD.H . /c^c# "H20. AVE. METER ORIFICE AH /• 7 "H20
KETER VOL, TO /?T, Cfefl FT?. MOISTURE PLUS SILICA GEL, VC <£/-tX Ml. SAMPLE TIME /^"^ Min
NOZZLE DIA, IN, NOZZLE AREAS i 1/8 — 0.000085 FT2} 3/16 — 0.0001916 FT2j 1/U — 0.0003M FT2
3/8 — 0.000767 FT2i 1/2 — 0.0013 FT2. ORSAT i COg^'^%. 03 /e*7' V 3. CO
Where PO
VWV = (0.(W) X (VC)
VSTPD = (17.71) X (VI-I) X (PO) -f (TM +
VT " (VWV) + (VSTPD)
W *> MOISTURE FRACTION = (VWV) -f (VT)
SCF
SCF
FDA o FRACTION OF DRY AIR = (1.0) - (W)
r 32?* •} r
KD = [(o.i*) x (>3^'&o?)J + [(0.32) x
[(0.28) X
KS = j(MD) X (FDA)] + p8) X (W)j '
OS = SPECIFIC GRAVITY REFERRED TO AIR = (MS) -^ (28.99)
fet ,/3i%COJ
EA = EXCESS AIR =
[(0.266) x
JtCO)
X 100
0 » AVE. VELOCITY = (1?4) X (CP) X (V5)
QS = GAS FLOT RATE = (U) X (AS1)
QSTPD = GAS FLOT RATS AT S.T.P. = (QS) X (FDA) X
46°
) X
ACFM
VI = ISOKINETIC VOL. = (U) X (AN) X (FDA) X (TIKE) X
PERCENT ISOKINETIC BY E.S.E. = (100 X VSTPD) -f- (VI)
PERCENT ISOKINETIC BY E.P.A. =
C(0. 0026? X VC X T3)] + L(PO X TS X VS. -f- T.'U
X 100
::3 x u x PS x AK)J
PARTICULATE COXC. 9 S.T.P., ESTP = (15.^3 X GRAMS) 4- (VSTPD)
PARTICULATE CCMC. 3 STACK COND., HJ\CF = (ESTP) X (17-71) X (PS) X (FDA) -j- (TS +
PARTICULATS COKC. CCRRSCTSD TO 12^ C02, El2 = (12 X ESTP) -7- ($ C02)
PARTICULATE CO!:C. CORRECTED TO 50.3 EXCESS AIR, E50 = (ESTP) X (EA + 100) ~ (150)
PARTICULATE E-!I5SIC:-1 R-XTS, 31 = (ESTP) X (QSTPD) X (0.00657)
LAB ANALYSIS, GRAMS
PARTICULATE CONCENTRATIONS
GRAINS/ FT3
n O f-
rt-2o
PART. EMISSION RATE
LBS/ HR
-------
SOURCE TEST CALCULATIONS
CO
RUN NO.
STACK AREA, AS
IN.
BAR. PRESS, P3 i2£"Hg, STACK PRESS, PS_J^2_"Hg, STACK DIMENSIONS
~~~ 9 o rs»
FT2 . EFF. STACK AREA, AS' _ FT2, AVE. STACK TEMP, TS Xj> "F
*F. AVE.//VEL. HEAD. H / "HoO. AVE. METER ORIFICE AH
FT?. MOISTURE PLUS SILICA GEL, VC oty Ml. SAMPLE TIME t Min
AVE. METER TEMP, TM_
HETER VOL, VM //•
NOZZLE DIA, IN, NOZ2XE AREAS t 1/8 — 0.000085 FT2? 3/16 -- 0.0001916 FT2j 1/1*. — 0.0003W FT2
3/8 — 0.000767 FT2; 1/2 — 0.0013 FT2. ORSAT t CO? ¥' % $>. 03 / &.__ %. CO / °^- %
VWV « C
X (VC)
VSTPD = (17.7D X (VM) X (PO) -r (TM + 460) ,
VT " (VWV) + (VSTPD)
W = MOISTURE FRACTION = (VWV) -f (VT)
FDA a FRACTION OF DRY AIR = (1.0) - (W)
HD = [(O.W) X (;ftff'fctefj + £(0.32) X
MS o [(HD) X (FDA)| + ((18) X (V/)j
GS = SPECIFIC GRAVITY REFERRED TO AIR = (MS) 4 (28.99)
[( *02)-
EA « EXCESS AIR =
Where PO = (PB +
/ , 13 ff SCF
//< 423 SCF
SCF
[(0.
28) X
..gfcoj cgy.go'Q
[(0.266)
- [
(
3CO)J
X 100
U6°
) X
0 = AVE. VELOCITY = (1?*) X (CP) X
-------
SOURCE TEST CALCULATION
BAR. PRESS, PB^J^f^Hg, STACK PRESS, PS ^& "Hg. STACK DIMENSIONS_
STACK AREA, AS 6?(J^&>-f FT2. EFT. STACK AREA, AS' FT2, AVE. STACK TEMP, TS.
iVE. METER TEMP, TO <^_S _ «F. AVE.,/VEL. KEAD,H
BETER VOL, VH^,"
ROZZLE DIA,
*P
HoO. AVE. HETER ORIFICE AH /•
FT3. MOISTURE PLUS SILICA GEL, VC /5^ Kl. SAMPLE TIKE / &• & Hin
"HgO
IH, NOZZLE AREAS i 1/8 — 0.000085 FT2; 3/16 — 0.0001916 FT2; 1/4 — 0.000341 FT2
3/8 ~ 0.00076? FT2j 1/2 ~ 0.0013 FT2. ORSAT I CO? X $T *. 03 /^ ^ ^. CO ^ <^ <
(0.0474) X (VC)
VSTPD » (17.7D X (VI-;) X (PO) -f (TO + 460) , Where PO = (PI
VT " (VWV) + (VSTPD) •' .'•".'•.•:•
W » MOISTURE FRACTION = (VWV) -f- (VT) ' "
FDA •> FRACTION OF DRY AIR = (1.0) - (W)
KDn [(0.44) X (/.f-fcOp)] + [(0.32) X f/3S'4o>)| + [(0.28) X
KS •* [(CT) X (FDA)] + {(18) X (W)J .'..-..."'.
GS » SPECIFIC GRAVITY REFERRED TO AIR = (MS) ~ (28.99)
EA « EXCESS AIR =
SCF
SCF
SCP
£(0.266) X (
.0 e AVE. VELOCITY = (1?4) X (CP) X (VS):
X 100
FPM
QS » GAS FLOT RATE = (U) X (AS') •__•".'
QSTPD = GAS FLOT RATE AT S.T.P. = (QS) X (FDA) X
VI » ISOKIN2TIC VpL. = (U) X (AM) X (FDA) X (TIXE).X
X .(2579?
)
SCF
PERCENT ISOKINETIC BY E.P.A.
'X 100
PERCENT ISOKIKETIC BY E.S.E. = (100 X VSTPD) -f (VI)
[(0.0026? X VC X TS>] +U?0 X TS X TO ~ TX
t(T2-S X U X PS X AN)J
PARTICULATE COMC. 9 S.T.P., ESTP = (15-43 X GRAMS) -f- (VSTPD)
PARTICULATE CC:!C. 0 STACK COM3., &\CF = (£STP) X (17-71) X (F3) X (FDA) ~ (TS + 460)
PARTICULATE COv.'C. CCHRECTSD TO 123S C02, El 2 a (12 X ESTP) 4- (£ CC^)
PARTICULATE CO:,'C. CORRECTED TO 50i EXCESS AH, E50 = (ESTP) X (EA + 100) 4" (150)
PARTICULATE EMISSION RATS, S-I = (ESTP) X (QSTPD) X (O.OOS57)
LAB ANALYSIS, GRAMS
PARTICULATE CONCEliTRATIONS
GRAINS/ FTJ
A- 30
PART. EMISSI
IBS/ HR
-------
A-8
VISIBLE EMISSIONS BY EPA METHOD 9
CHAMPLIN PETROLEUM COMPANY
WILMINGTON, CALIFORNIA
Date
1 March
14 March
15 March
1974
1974
1974
Time
1045 -
1600 -
930 -
Avg. Visible Emissions
1445
2000
1330
0
0
0
0)
(2)
(3)
(1) Observer located 125' south-southeast of stack. Wind was from
south at 5 mph and the aky was cloudy (brownish haze).
(2) Observer located 120' south-southeast of stack. Wind was from
west at 10 mph and the cky was clear.
(3) Observer located 120' south-southeast of stack. Wind was from
west at 5 mph and the sky was overcast (smog).
A-3i
environmental science and engineering, inc.
-------
A-9'
TEST I! UMBER -W
PLAINT iiAHE -
SOURCE TESTED -
TYPE OF PLAUT -
C0117ZOL EO.UIPI'EliT-
POLLUTAUT SAMPLED-
2)DATE
5)7F - FLASK AIJD VALVE VOLUME, ML I™~!/J^^III™j3IZiIIir
6)7/1 - A330R3IUG SOLUTION VOLUME, ML i ,££, 1 ^ll 1 __£
-------
ILQ.Z S.Q
TEST ;; UMBER
PLAKT :IAM.E
S0Un CT. TES TED
TYPI-; OF PLA;IT
COUTROL EQUIP::EIIT
POLLUTAUT SAMPLED
i);?i/;/ DUMBER . 1 ____ j£ ____ i ___ /_ _____ i ____ _ ____ j.
2)DATE ' • i ___ ^/5^?5L_l__>S//y2^__l ___ I
3) THIS • i _'2^___ l_ZZ'_^i ____ 1__ ___ i
t)FLA5Z irJl-!3ER. 1 ____ eL _____ i ____ -4 _____ i _________ J.
5)VF - FLASK AllD VALVE VOLUME, 11L i-._^?'CSl— 1 __ ^-^t ___ i ________ i
6)K/T - 'A330R3I1:G SOLUTION VOLUME, HL 1_ j££_ ___ i __ &2~___ 1 _____ ____ I
7)P3 - BAROMETRIC PRESSURE, 1,7 5C 1 _ ^2.^ ___ i___
-------
PLANT.
DATE_
A-10
DRY MOLECULAR WEIGHT DETERMINATION
ORSAT BY EPA METHOD 3
A
COMMENTS:
SAMPLING TIME (24-hr CLOCK).
SAMPLING LOCATION
SAMPLE TYPE (BAG, INTEGRATED, CONTINUOUS).
ANALYTICAL METHOD \
AMBIENT TEMPERATURE __
OPERATOR
\^ RUN
GAS ^\
C02
Q£ (NET IS ACTUAL 02
READING MINUS ACTUAL
C02 READING)
CO(NET IS ACTUAL CO
READING MINUC ACTUAL
02 READING)
N2 (NET IS 100 MINUS
ACTUAL CO READING)
1
ACTUAL
READING
Z.O
JO.Z-
/o.t
ft. 8
NET
-&.O
7^
0.0
893
i
ACTUAL
READING
NET
3
ACTUAL
READING
NET
AVERAGE
NET
VOLUME
f,o
-7,£
6.0
m
MULTIPLIER
44/100
l.__™
32/100
T . i
28/ioo
ffl/100
MOLECULAR WEIGHT OF
STACK GAS (DRY BASIS)
Md, Ib/lb-mole
/.^2
J. 30 4
0
^./^
TOTAL J1.-M
I
CO
EPA (Dur) 230
4/72
-------
DRY MOLECULAR WEIGHT DETERMINATION
ORSAT BY EPA METHOD 3
PLANT.
DATE_
COMMENTS:
SAMPLING TIME (24-hr CLOCK).
SAMPLING LOCATION
SAMPLE TYPE (BAG, INTEGRATED, CONTINUOUS).
ANALYTICAL METHOD '.
AMBIENT TEMPERATURE ^_
OPERATOR
>s\x^ RUN
GAS ^\
C02
02(NET IS ACTUAL 02
READING MINUS ACTUAL
C02 READING)
CO(NET IS ACTUAL CO
READING MINUS ACTUAL
02 READING)
N£ (NET IS 100 MINUS
ACTUAL CO READING)
1
ACTUAL
READING
3.4-
*&
M
&f
NET
34
fZ.6
0,0
64.1
2
ACTUAL
READING
NET
3
ACTUAL
READING
NET
AVERAGE
NET
VOLUME
#.
-------
PLANT.
DATE_
14-. J974*
SAMPLING TIME (24-hr CLOCK)
SAMPLING LOCATION
SAMPLE TYPE (BAG, INTEGRATED, CONTINUOUS)
ANALYTICAL METHOD
AMBIENT TEMPERATURE
OPERATOR.
DRY MOLECULAR WEIGHT DETERMINATION
ORSAT BY EPA METHOD 3
Co.
COMMENTS:
\. RUN
GAS ^\
C02
02 (NET IS ACTUAL 02
READING MINUS ACTUAL
C02 READING)
COfNET IS ACTUAL CO
READING MINUS ACTUAL
02 READING)
N£(NET is 100 MINUS
ACTUAL CO READING)
1
ACTUAL
READING
^,8
6.2.
y. 3
%-7
NET
EPA(Dur)230
4/72
-------
PLANT.
DATE_
DRY MOLECULAR WEIGHT DETERMINATION
ORSAT BY EPA METHOD 3
COMMENTS:
SAMPLING TIME (24-hr CLOCK)
SAMPLING LOCATION
SAMPLE TYPE (BAG, INTEGRATED, CONTINUOUS)
ANALYTICAL METHOD (9/£5 /? 7"
AMBIENT TEMPERATURE
OPERATOR
- JZT//7T
J".
\. RUN
GAS ^\
C02
02(NET IS ACTUAL 02
READING MINUS ACTUAL
C02 READING)
CO(NET IS ACTUAL CO
READING MINUS ACTUAL
02 READING)
N£
3$.$*o
I
CO
00
EPA (Dur) 230
4/72
-------
PLANT.
DATE_
DRY MOLECULAR WEIGHT DETERMINATION
ORSAT BY EPA METHOD' 3
, COMMENTS:
SAMPLING TIME (24-hr CLOCK)
SAMPLING LOCATION
SAMPLE TYPE (BAG, INTEGRATED, CONTINUOUS)
ANALYTICAL METHOD
AMBIENT TEMPERATURE
OPERATOR ^
\. RUN
GAS ^\
C02
02(NET IS ACTUAL 02
READING MINUS ACTUAL
C02 READING)
CO(NET IS ACTUAL CO
READING MINUS ACTUAL
02 READING)
N£ (NET IS 100 MINUS
ACTUAL CO READING)
1
ACTUAL
READING
/>f
/*/'$
/+t
fi^'A
NET
/*
0-0
0.0
&£
2
ACTUAL
READING
NET
3
ACTUAL
READING
NET
AVERAGE
NET
VOLUME
/f
/$,&
2,0
f&£
MULTIPLIER
44/ioo
32/100
L~' ..I
28/ioo
00
/8/100
MOLECULAR WEIGHT OF
STACK GAS (DRY BASIS)
Md, Ib/lb-mole
S, 7
-------
A-ll
ODOR BY EPA DRAFT METHOD (DILUTION METHOD)
ODOR PANEL SCREENING TEST
UNION OIL COMPANY
Wilmington, California
Participant No. A^e % Positive Response Stability(l) Acceptability(2) Se1ected(3)
1 15 71.4 0 OK —
2 16 57.1 0 OK
3 17 57.1 0 OK -
4 16 71,4 + OK +
5 17 57.1 + OK +
6 15 71.4 + OK +
7 17 57.1 0 OK -
8 17 42.8 0 .
9 17 14.3 +
10 17 28.6 + OK +
11 17 85.7 +
12 17 71.4 + OK +
13 17 57.1 0 OK -
14 17 57.1 + OK +
15 17 42.8 + OK +
16 17
17 17 57.1 + -
18 17 71.4 + OK -+
19 15 71.4 + OK
20 16 42.8 + OK +
21 16 42.8 + OK +
22 16 28.6 + OK +
23 17 28.6 + OK -
24 17 42.8 + OK +
25 16 14.3 + OK -
26 18 71.4 + OK
27 15 57.1 0
I
1 Based on consistency of response as concentrations decreased.
2 Based on personal observation of conduct during screening test.
3, Based on stability, acceptability, and % positive response (as compared with the group
as a whole).
A-40
environmental science nnd engineering, inc.
-------
12
* No. of Participants - 26'
* 10 Panel Members and 2 Alternates were selected using the results of this plot and
other factors
10
0)
to
c
o
CL
in
-------
SOURCE
INLET
OUTLET
INLET
OUTLET
INLET
OUTLET
SUMMARY OF ODOR SURVEY
CHAMPLIN PETROLEUM COMPANY
WILMINGTON, CALIFORNIA.
FEB. & MARCH, 74
DATE
DILUTION FACTOR
PERCENT REPORTING
POSITIVE RESPONSE
2/27/74
2/27/74
2/28/74
2/28/74
3/1/74
3/1/74
1,000.
5,000.
10,000.
50,000.
100,000.
10.
10.
20.
50.
50.
100,000.
200,000.
500,000.
5.
10.
20.
50.
100.
100.
100.
5,000.
10,000.
50,000.
100,000.
100,000.
5.
5.
5.
10.
10.
20.
100.
90.
90.
40.
50.
80.
60.
60.
.40.
20.
80.
60.
30.
90.
70.
50.
20.
50.
40.
30.
90.
70.
30.
. 60.
70.
80.
60.
50.
50.
10.
30.
A-42
-------
SUMMARY OF ODOR SURVEY, Continued
PERCENT REPORTING
SOURCE DATE DILUTION FACTOR POSITIVE RESPONSE
INLET 3/15/74 20. 77.
50. 77.
50. 55.
100. 0.
200. 0.
OUTLET 3/15/74 10. 88.
100. 55.
500. v 44.
10,000. 11.
A-43
-------
ODOR EMISSIONS
CHAMPLIN OIL COMPANY
WILMINGTON, CALIFORNIA
FEB. 27-28 MAR.l & 15, 1974
C=ODOR CONCENTRATION IN ODOR UNITS PER CUBIC FOOT
(DERIVED AT 50 PERCENTILE DETECTION POINT)
VA= VOLUME FLOW RATE IN STACK, STANDARD CONDITIONS, SCFM
(70°F AND 29.92 IN Hg)
SOURCE
E= ODOR EMISSION RATE, IN ODOR UNITS PER MINUTE,
DATE C VA E
• INLET
OUTLET
INLET
OUTLET
INLET
OUTLET
INLET
OUTLET
•
2/27/74
C-l C.1 1 /H
0/07/7/1
C./ £// /t
o/op/7/i
LI c.of m
o /OQ tin
C./ C.O/ 1 *\
0/1 l-lfi
,5/Jv'T'
3/1/74
3/15/74
3/15/74
-
RE; nnn
99
C.C. .
or nrin
CD ,UUU .
00
OU .
cn nnn
3U jUUU .
7.
200.
80.
»
A-44
2646.42
276^.87
3973.21
18,500.
552,000.
318,000.
•
-------
APPENDIX B
FIELD DATA
environmental science and engineering, inc.
-------
B-l
7
/ 7.
/ 7
£.40
/$- /
j*Lz°-
./JL.£A'
3-70
7/lAJ
/$ *
2-00
B-l
-------
r
J"
/7
O, 13
0.01%.
0.023
0.0,2.4
0,058
0,017
3,1
0,
O..I3
o.
Oi3.O.
o.ao
0,5.5!..
col:
o
-------
«*RCH
CALIBRATION PLOT
!
10.00
-------
i
0
i
Ss2
i
P
-f r
i
__ SO,
CALIBRATION PLOT
/XIO
/xco
1.60
o.o/
-------
I
CM.
i
(U. M J. - - ,.
CALIBRATION PLOT
0.01
-------
- ~ ,50,
OIL
CALIBRATION PLOT
I
CM <
a"'
,.
I
l
-------
OIL
m
CALIBRATION PLOT
*
-I,
8.
o
a
i.o*«o
|.a>c/o
-------
af'i^'a.'i.'l'jL' ."»• '*L ett*y/.ii '. foSWklsijSk1. if /;.riai J>iiais.^A'.«tei'i'«.Sr U-i1* «ui'^y< U •u»».<« »i»'^A • ;J,. «1Uji'.V''^.'l"/_
i*-^%il^fXW^*Kpi^p^.!3K'^^
-------
v ** y*i/ j ' * i1 •• * • I*'- -,,...,
-i'iiT'/•«*._ oxL7"^A&j>!«.^iivV'*«»fL«'»»irui*i^«4'r>rt-J.KS»«^»-Jk'*>K«'-*< >
-M--M-
a ____ !—.._,
j_6os__
i.1
:v_-
-J061.L.
£(H F
"rr
I
LT.
Trt
Ljfi4
Zs^[
""-1-
/,«
/^^l
"i"! r
3* l£f_
I \ \
._!_]-
_i i
J L
i M
! i
i
• L
(O.
-8
ksil
! i
4-!^-
_iZL
jZu
£L
i
i j.
rZT/o""7"
.L4_J_.
eLj*f /fe' | L
J_i_Li
.'
Ai?Jf/.<>il
!
I !
T~T
*f.<5L*.LV. _i_J L ^-
"FT i" Li M
>/£f:Unz
M i ,! M i
1
f'ijirfL
-7 \
J,_ !_4_
j...
-
B^9-
n
_j_! i ! 1
j_LJJLi
r
U.
LJ
|._
_L._
_ U..
_
f-
_j_>
!
i
._ ...... ^
.J.
-------
.
.&>*-,
J
It
/I
ff
f ,
/t
So
if
/I
f >
II
fl
/ r
) o
It
•V
'f
-------
7X
37
1 B-11
-------
. o 'i £•
(J
1
2.
3
{/
^B)
to
7
%
^
I3 |
\
H
#~ 1
/(,
n .
"
a»;
a/
cP<3
43
a-f
X
f -3S"
Lb
f{
'•a*
UIS
0. o4S
o.o4r»
o.ov?
: O . Os5\2
".
0.049 /.,
i
o. o IPS
0.07V '
o.o«/-g
0.03^
0.0 33
0,03V
O.037
o.ovv
O.Oit
— _
o,^
o.Okr
0.070
0.0^
o. o43
o. o4o
KXO« 1 1 / I
(UL*
.- • •
.•/..'.!.:.:.
- ' --
1
o, osr
0/5 c- AL> ,
0.&
°-W ..
^L,l-
o. 4-7
— '
0^F
6. SI.
0.30
0,3S~
0 32
0.^
0.41°
^— .
/..-
.*£'"..
*M
0,^1 ' '
0,4*.
,011
,OS1
/» p n.^ . .
.03^
\--\2
S1 O o °
"4, y, .a c o
C.C
,
-• • • •
: ......
0.13
OJ&
0,1)
--, « --• - * •**/.- ^
0.67b
/ '
•
- • -
•
-------
-*M C
N »
|
I
— >- ll
8L
!
CALIBRATION PLOT
I • :__[___! _T^j- •!' • j !_V
' ' i :'. . I .
_. ! _ :l • 'I - I-:
ll~n T—T-;—f.;;j.:: i::
i LJ.-I
i i i i i
i ! .LI. I_ L
|__|.U l-flTll-l-
: . iiiii
16.0
0.100
Q.oiO
B-13
-------
G.OL * j - -
...CALIBRATION PLOT
I
(M <
I
I
2S
I -I
H u
^H
I
J »
JM
-------
I
I
%
1
-9
\.vfio
CALIBRATION PLOT
I.6*|
f
A^
1^
|,«^/57
\**lio
***
I.O^LIO
t.:f:r:i:p.^_n';:/J;-±r:t-;pdi:i::i:±t:::t:rMrJ:;:i-::;:
i I
-------
OIL.
IS
01 -i
I
0
o
Jo:
u
01
!
-; t; *
I J J
t- (j a
H
J n
1
.CALIBRATION PLOT
. ..__h i-r-}-hr
L
10.0
1,00
O.QIO
-------
1
0
u
^ *
l" J
H u w
•^te b-
I
-- HX5
CALIBRATION PLOT
OU.
IS
l.o t to
.J.J_4-._[_L_I._L;
" r':1 ' '
0.0(0
-------
-L.:
i
!
,
'tf/fytrw '/f fT^f L i ' i
1 i I 1 j j ! j i 1 i i
1
1
—— —
1
1 1
!
1" "
! j
i 1
I I
—LJ.-4.
-_U_LJ J_L_L_i_
^//tf/#_i_j -&T^:*!&
U-L-U-i U
-L_i—
I
LJJ.
i J'!
JIL
nrr
JL..LJ
JILT"
IDH
1 I !
-
T
II
TT
.
" I T
"T
i i
J L_
t
__.! I....
=.bt
JJ_LL
I
1-JJ.
r~\ r-"f
I UUI—_
~i~p
j,.. i
r"
—r
_J......i.
_J_L.
..L.LL
B-18
-------
',''*'>
*'.,'
.,'.r.:/.y-r/^5-
.•••-.' 3.17.
..-,ifi....-g\2*.tO-*-Jr
_ • A i
•;;fr; ^^"n
'
••#
/J}
*
-8
\
B
,
,
*
g
8
-8
7
.8
*
ft*
/
~T
•i
>
•
•** /"
3O
1
"*"
!
~
^
?/
«•
^
•
£3)
t
/./
». 2
j>.<3
#<:
j-j
J?«
•^
p
x
/.
/.
#<
_
: X
x
sx
rx
C" ix
' **
?x
*— »w
7^
3 :
5.
:>/*
3^
^•H-
* I *
r*
* *
?*•
v_
V
•"
y /
•»"
X^"
/<•;
/ ^
^»
{/i
S S
*/e.
x/
'/-<
//
-^
_
/^
/K>
/^
<9*
fd)'
^,
c*
-6
•/
-(i
r/a
~"
'
>"*
^
ft
o~
-
^
.^
/) •
-C
-6
-d
C,
-ts
^
i
i
6<
i
(i
6
»
^
1
1
//
|
•x*.....
-d
\
~9
/•**
?',
fit
.
' *>
I •
\ '
I \
\
\
I
r -
J
I
\
I
\
\
1
I
\
|
i
1
|
\ '
I
\
—
l^-..^..r-«-...
B-19 i
-------
B-2
_ N: V*cV l?nd '£\j^$J^
\
££/_L3 I
.._._£_„__
_|_o_t
\ DO
__Lk2JL
__/^^Z_
_/-Z^J_
_Z1L7_
i2_
i __/.Z^2
._A.Z4"?_
7. I
6,9
J17.
7.0
__./_te_
y_?w.
_.zi___._
4iC£^ 4-jg
_...,,:..7/3
B-20
-------
o
_. £&UA^_.$£
xJijtw a &*- (hu
(J
a
>
jfJ.+
/32.0
B-21
-------
t> u
/$W.... 11.3
Wf.F 13.*
13,3.
M.6
.1.3,Q.
-------
•'::"' "-'--' --:-il_.L. r; I -lL^"r":"
: ;!':..;'_ j- i: T~.r^~'~~~t
A
~-^~
&r~&7&
&.
-' • i: -:.!. 7:71:7
-_-:,-ril;ftk
:!"- i- :i ' -f
-j-^.—l-.J-
;r.:l ; i-. I:
^N^^iiL^LiJiil^l^liiiF^l^nliti
^ii^4S'3i 1 ^ iiM •. i ^"^T
^^^^^^^liirf^ii^
m
•r--:i-:::l
~1 • ~;~~^~~-'r-::f~~ (•— '!-•
t - -lii.!
—:H^-t
i:' r:'"i ••r;7 "^~ • !
•• i:1'' •' ! :::i
3aid
^c
-^—'---L^
•(.:
r-jr
:j~:
:1^7
ip-'n
-f:74-:}
-'^-"- U-iU
{•p^-lS^tpEEp
-------
Cs?-i<2£'v-"7'''
-------
//
(
/, v5 /
17 X 10
|0
'
1.2-
7, 2-
3.2-
! /Sy i
i
I J.O A
/, 7..
./..
/o
-i
" f
Z. 0
„_. AA
B-25
i ..
\ O , 2 /
~ I
f
; o, 28
-------
IB/// ^J
/#'/#
o
O/o
l«
i:
p.o y 10'
3f2.'.
O x /o
/.$
7 Jf /O
>/
A -/.
u
v- /
/./
7,6
c?,
QUTL&T
i
\>
/7 y/o •
£.* P
../^7
. 7V
.2*.
./?
, (O
. />
%a^b
//CO
m 10
«/ *~) A
/ oi C>
f^0
.00
1 ^
J^_ __.__
•i
« /Tv //"7
d.^? •*/£ . / pjxio''*' \ ,(,3 .jj-
/.y ^ y.0 '\7 ~""- ~'^
/^ .A/0 _".''. ///^I'/Y)'7 V4" .^^
/, / ff
/ / * v rf
/j/. / / <— f
IF / ^*"> -O *7 !
j ft / £) / \C f /~\ ' {T~~^r -? ^-*
o <-" , ^7 / ^
o/, O _ (o /, / ^ |
J;/,,o'L i'?/D-7 \ u ,22-
y /) , ~ ~ _5_^ "•• ~ '
/> ' u , L=> G(
-------
CALIBRATION PLOT
-------
B-4
SAMPLING DATA SHEET FOR
Plant
s *a c k
Remarks
,j
Run No.
Date
Time of Sample /?, ',«
Barometric Pressure, "Hg
Stack Pressure, "Hg
Final Dry Test Meter Reading, Ft3
Initial Dry Test Meter Reading, Ft3
Meter Volume Sampled @ Meter Cond,, Ft^
Average Meter Temperature, °F
Average Stack Temperature, °F
Average Meter Vacuum, "Hg
Average Meter Orifice AH, "H20
Observed Sampling Rate, tWI ^(^
Gas Volume Sampled, Ft3, Dry, 70°F, 29.92 "Hg
^>
3/,feL\
- " r ~r •
jft&W
3"
*i:$6
30
•30
M.S&?
/*/5. 030
/.&>£
?0
3&°
/
/47
.0/3
Calculations:
B-28
-------
SAMPLING DATA SHEET FOR
Plant
Stack
Remarks
Run No.
Date • - - .
Time of Sample
Barometric Pressure, "Hg
Stack Pressure, "Hg
Final Dry Test Meter Reading, Ft3
Initial Dry Test Meter Reading, Ft3
Meter Volume Sampled @ Meter Cond., Ft3
Average Meter Temperature, °F
Average Stack Temperature, °F
Average Meter Vacuum, "Hg
Average Meter Orifice AH, "H20
Observed Sampling Rate, EPM f^1*]
Gas Volume Sampled, Ft3, Dry, 70°F, 29.92 "Hg
#/h
,5/x/7/
rtrt firt
//:/6/ts:/0
/
3&
3&
&%, 9<*o
&7.W0
/,^de
74
S040
— -
/: 7
,4/7
•-•
. ^
3/'/7Y
'tfv / />/*
/3/&/#r.'tt
so
30
90.320
8?, /&>
/.3JO
7^
/#4$
—
/7
,
-------
SAMPLING DATA SHEET FOR
plant
Stack
Remarks
ix'/f/y —
Run No.
Date
tr^'^cT fM
Time of Sample t+jz^-jj*
1 f-f-ri / (Cy7!
Barometric Pressure, "Hg
Stack Pressure, "Hg
Final Dry Test Meter Reading, Ft3
Initial Dry Test Meter Reading, Ft3
Meter Volume Sampled @ Meter Cond,. , Ft^
Average Meter Temperature, °F
Average Stack Temperature, °F
Average Meter Vacuum, "Hg
Average Meter Orifice AH, "H20
Observed Sampling Rate, L^W (£/y
Gas Volume Sampled, Ft3, Dry, 70°F, 29.92 "Hg
3^
^/A/~
. ^..«_^._A.y |
/v? //«/
^^
30
*&./& .
wjQgy
c&y
<$&*
~—
AJ7
'^Z/____
•34
3/*M
' f
Calculations:
B-30
-------
SAMPLING DATA SHEET FOR
Plant
Remarks £
fCO/^ £0.
to
Stack f^/fd/i !?fX&)F&
u
Run No.
Date
Time of Sample
Barometric Pressure, "Hg
Stack Pressure, "Hg
Final Dry Test Meter Reading, Ft3
Initial Dry Test Meter Reading, Ft3
Meter Volume Sampled @ Meter Cond,, Ft^
Average Meter Temperature, °F .
Average Stack Temperature, °F
Average Meter Vacuum, "Hg
Average Meter Orifice AH, "HgO
Observed Sampling Rate, C£B <-/=/*/
Gas Volume Sampled, Ft3, Dry, 70°F, 29.92 "Hg
3- A \ 3-5
3-/--7
I./?!?
81
lO2t)
- —
/,7
*0l~*
-X233ES:
-ls££&^>~-
^
J&
^U^L-
^7 .3^6
,^//
Z7
/#Z&
^
/ ^
,6/J1
'0
Calculations:
B-31
-------
SAMPLING DATA SHEET FOR
~>
-f -^~- T,f i:-f
Plant
Remarks
SfrTft?/)
Stack.
Run No.
Date
Time of Sample
Barometric Pressure, "Hg
Stack Pressure, "Hg
Final Dry Test Meter Reading, Ft3
Initial Dry Test Meter Reading, Ft3
Meter Volume Sampled @ Meter Cond., Ft^
Average Meter Temperature, °F
Average Stack Temperature, °F
Average Meter Vacuum, "Hg
Average Meter Orifice AH, "H20
Observed Sampling Rate, ±££4 ^^
Gas Volume Sampled, Ft3, Dry, 70°F, 29.92 "Hg
:'*/#'
5/A//7//
/AMjtf.w
/
30
3$
trt. *#?
/.<7,/W
3,327
X^
94
. - —
///
J,o£
--
-
i
;
Calculations:
B-32
-------
Plant
SAMPLING DATA SHEET FOR
5&
f*~
dal'4.
^™ ^~\
Stack <^£ So /feg
uM tl - Q
Run No.
Date
Time of Sample
Barometric Pressure, "Hg
Stack Pressure, "Hg
Final Dry Test Meter Reading, Ft3
Initial Dry Test Meter Reading, Ft3
Meter Volume Sampled @ Meter Cond,, Ft^
Average Meter Temperature, °F
Average Stack Temperature, °F
Average Meter Vacuum, "Hg
Average Meter Orifice AH, "H20
Observed Sampling Rate, fcPtt- CfW
Gas Volume Sampled, Ft3, Dry, 70°F, 29.92 "Hg
4-fl
3-^-7^
PM
y:oo-&>,
Sd
30
t W. 18*
\-L~1 tOOO
•2.1^5-
&i
10^6
/,r
,011
4-6
I
6\
i
\ /
\l
A
A
/ \
/ 1
/ |
1
Calculations:
B-33
-------
SAMPLING DATA SHEET FOR
Plant <
Remarks /^ rff/x&J?
Stack
Run No.
Date
Time of Sample
Barometric Pressure, "Hg
Stack Pressure, "Hg
Final Dry Test Meter Reading, Ft3
Initial Dry Test Meter Reading, Ft3
Meter Volume Sampled @ Meter Cond,, Ft3
Average Meter Temperature, °F
Average Stack Temperature, °F
Average Meter Vacuum, "Hg
Average Meter Orifice AH, "H20
Observed Sampling Rate, "t£M- ^"/^
Gas Volume Sampled, Ft3, Dry, 70°F, 29.92 "Hg
;^f
3t#>/?y
/ /
0Z&///.X
/
33
30
/£/.7?0
/37. •?#>
£.3?
%t
• . —
/,67
0.0£
--•
^^
^//r/x/
/ /
///#$//Z'j&
/
3#
'10
/t3.#7$
/6/,£00
/.07?
&/
f£
/J7
0,0/
-
\
Calculations:
B-34
-------
SAMPLING DATA SHEET FOR
So-
Plant
Remarks /gP/1
6
0
Stack *
Run No.
Date
Time of Sample
Barometric Pressure, "Hg
Stack Pressure, "Hg
Final Dry Test Meter Reading, Ft3
Initial Dry Test Meter Reading, Ft3
Meter Volume Sampled @ Meter Cond,, Ft3
Average Meter Temperature, °F
Average Stack Temperature, °F
Average Meter Vacuum, "Hg
Average Meter Orifice AH, "H20
Observed Sampling Rate, IPM-dfm
Gas Volume Sampled, Ft3, Dry, 70°F, 29.92 "Hg
3 A
^-is-14
„ . AM .
Y.30-/A/S
S<3
36
1*4. G-}-?
rti, ^oo
t.fc7V
70
tozs
' ' —
/ 73
.oi&
H&
/iw
• (I'ttlS-i
3o
30
n&iTitt
i3>4 VCCJ
/•Rzfc
84
loim
r3<3
Calculations:
B-35
-------
B-5
SAMPLING DATA SHEET FOR
Plant
Remarks
Stack
Run No.
Date
Time of Sample j:
-------
SAMPLING DATA SHEET FOR
plant ,
c)iK Co,
Remarks
Stack
Sjtf
oK
Run No. .
Date
Time of Sample
Barometric Pressure, "Hg
Stack Pressure, "Hg
Final Dry Test Meter Reading, Ft3
Initial Dry Test Meter Reading, Ft3
Meter Volume Sampled @ Meter Cond,, Ft3
Average Meter Temperature, °F
Average Stack Temperature, °F
Average Meter Vacuum, "Hg
Average Meter Orifice AH, "H20
Observed Sampling Rate, tW CFM
Gas Volume Sampled, Ft3, Dry, 70°F, 29.92 "Hg
3-/-7^
30
i^b.bSB
1 *) & //•)>)
1 C* ft £g tx U
n.o&
if
/o£o
1
.01$
0,075
i
i
1
Calculations:
B-37
-------
SAMPLING DATA SHEET FOR
Plant
Remarks
Stack
Run No.
Date '
Time of Sample
Barometric Pressure, "Hg
Stack Pressure, "Hg
Final Dry Test Meter Reading, Ft3
Initial Dry Test Meter Reading, Ft3
Meter Volume Sampled @ Meter Cond., Ft3
Average Meter Temperature, °F
Average Stack Temperature, °F
Average Meter Vacuum, "Hg
Average Meter Orifice AH, "H20
Observed Sampling Rate, CPff fftf
Gas Volume Sampled, Ft3, Dry, 70°F, 29.92 "Hg
/
3//y/?.
£J.f?7
&>,
-------
SAMPLING DATA SHEET FOR _fVfc?/S:•/-.&.£/£..
P1ant Q J 1 1
Remarks
K
f o /4
stack
\-\dJtflW
fgc^
Ou^lfi T
tt<
Run No.
Date
Time of Sample
Barometric Pressure, "Hg
Stack Pressure, "Hg
Final Dry Test Meter Reading, Ft3
Initial Dry Test Meter Reading, Ft3
Meter Volume Sampled @ Meter Cond,, Ft^
Average Meter Temperature, °F
Average Stack Temperature, °F
Average Meter Vacuum, "Hg
Average Meter Orifice AH, "H20
Observed Sampling Rate, -tP-M <^Fm
Gas Volume Sampled, Ft3, Dry, 70°F, 29.92 "Hg
1
-*- /c/- 7«/
Pm
4',ao~&:3
3e>
<30
3o7, q^e
•zfl 4. loo
1&.3&)
~77
10<4Z
/
• O1O
,12^>
,
n
•
i
r i T «.•
Calculations:
j
/ *
B-39
-------
SAMPLING DATA SHEET FOR
Plant
Remarks
Stack
Run No.
Date
Time of Sample
Barometric Pressure, "Hg
Stack Pressure, "Hg
Final Dry Test Meter Reading, Ft3
Initial Dry Test Meter Reading, Ft3
Meter Volume Sampled @ Meter Cond,, Ft3
Average Meter Temperature, °F
Average Stack Temperature, °F
Average Meter Vacuum, "Hg
Average Meter Orifice AH, "H20
Observed Sampling Rate, CPff fjZM
Gas Volume Sampled, Ft3, Dry, 70°F, 29.92 "Hg
^
&//S/7*/
?<&//3:?e
^
30
-7#/?
-------
SAMPLING DATA SHEET FOR
Plant CjUi'W/wrfnn/ , (ft /it. Stac
" / i_
Remarks fzf^ A tylS-TkoG •£*-" Q
Run No.
Date
Time of Sample
Barometric Pressure, "Hg
Stack Pressure, "Hg
Final Dry Test Meter Reading, Ft3
Initial Dry Test Meter Reading, Ft3
Meter Volume Sampled @ Meter Cond,, Ft3
Average Meter Temperature, °F
Average Stack Temperature, °F
Average Meter Vacuum, "Hg
Average Meter Orifice AH, "H20
Observed Sampling Rate,-tPM CFW
Gas Volume Sampled, Ft3, Dry, 70°F, 29.92 "Hg
k .Vlrj/2 fCt
~2
-*>- i5*'7^
3', 3O-I90
3O
30
^30MBc
30
J
)fij,.f. - CJLJ-)
(
Calculations:
B-41
-------
B-6
PRELIMINARY VELOCITY TRAVERSE
PLANT
DATE
LOCATION..
STACK I.D._
BAROMETRIC PRESSURE, in. Hg_
STACK GAUGE PRESSURE, in. H20.
OPERATORS. '"' """
SCHEMATIC OF TRAVERSE POINT LAYOUT
TRAVERSE
POINT
NUMBER
/
2-
3
4
J-
&
7
$
?
/#
//
/>
/J-
/ZL
>t>3
,t>f
,o(>
it>&
,#6
,<>>£
.£>&
,#7
,°$
,#<£
,0%
,#<{
,0%
,M
,6$
,0$
,07
-fr <£f
STACK
TEMPERATURE
(Ts), °F
-------
PRELIMINARY VELOCITY TRAVERSE
PLANT.
DATE_
VZ
«
LOCATION.
STACK I.D..
BAROMETRIC PRESSURE, in. Hg
STACK GAUGE PRESSURE, in. H20_
OPERATORS (=>> B£fi/roAJ
/? 74-
•30
SCHEMATIC OF TRAVERSE POINT LAYOUT
TRAVERSE
POINT
NUMBER
/
•2-
3
4
$
4
7
8
9
lv
II
11
/3
14-
15
&
n
/B
n
-2.D
AVERAGE
VELOCITY
HEAD
kps),in.H20
O
<9
O.O1/
O.O&
<5.-osr
o-oy
<=>- Off
o.o^
o-o 8
O-o*
-------
PRELIMINARY VELOCITY TRAVERSE
PLANT.
DATE_
LOCATION..
STACK I.D..
BAROMETRIC PRESSURE, in. Hg_
STACK GAUGE PRESSURE, in. H20.
OPERATORS
SCHEMATIC OF TRAVERSE POINT LAYOUT
TRAVERSE
POINT
NUMBER
/
£
3
4-
3
£>
7
8
9
/o
//
/£
/3
14-
/$
U
/7
/8
rt
to
AVERAGE
VELOCITY
HEAD
fcps), in.H20
—
*./
,16
./£>
J6
—
fc, 3%
STACK
TEMPERATURE
(Ts), °F
TRAVERSE
POINT
NUMBER
AVERAGE
VELOCITY
HEAD.
(Aps), in.H20
•
STACK
TEMPERATURE
(Ts), °F
EPA (Our) 233
4/72
B-44
-------
B-7
Source of Air Contaminants
*! Ox'Jti
' Type of Air Contaminants
SO*, -f CO* + f/,0
Point of Discharge: Stack []/'
Other
Point of Observation:
Distance to Base of Point of Discharge, feet / /# ~
-Pi-.
Height of Point of Discharge Above Ground Level,4s®t
Background Description 4l/% £/wc(
Weather: Clear
Overcast
Partly Cloudy
Other
Wind Direction ^ -re»y
Wind Velocity, mi/hr.
Plume Description:
Detached: Yes
Color: Black
No
White
Other
Plume Dispersion Behavior: Looping
Lofting
Coning
Fumigating
Fanning
See Comments
Estimated Distance (feet) Plume Visible (Maximum)
(Minimum)
Comments 10
- N£. )
is vete^v Poov -
-h>
ked
sT
U^XH /V -KG/ w^iTe ?' •;
Signed
Title 7ec
B-45
-------
COMPANY NAME.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
C,o.
EQUIPMENT LOCATION ( ADDRESS) W l' **> I H T (OtQ . C-«\J \_~f~ .
~~ A.M/ . /A.M.
nncoRD OF
VISIBLE EMISSIONS
TIME OK ODSERVATION: FROM
02 03 0-1 Ob W (IV 08 (/J 10 11 12 13
TiTi: rfrj i n i .• iT:T!"n
LU-LJ-iJ—i- 44-U.L -LtJJ-LiJ
LJ j P TTLuJ • • i M i i i: i
i_._J—I—t—1-4-.*—i—J—> . —* -.-^^ ._!_; _j j <—, (
: iTTTi : nTT • , . i : 11 i M
R. No.
B
Mm.
;i 22
23 2< 25 ?8 ?7 i8 29 30 31 32 33 _3i 3b _ :-G__ 37 33 39 <0
^iOTiXIi^Ip^^
h4^:lrni±:!:it4TiiJ4^
NOTE: Each small SI.IIKHC represonts nn nulividual rcadinf) of ir.icnsily conosponding to thnt sliov/n in llic loft-hand column
Over n limo span of '', minutt!. Ins "I m\ "S" in Ilio lop row of blank squmvs lo indicntc tlic oxiicl minute of Ilio start of
observation. In the next scni.ire after the 'S' . insert tho hour in which the mnnsurcmonl was niiiriu. Each page of this loim
can thus he used to iccord 1 hour of mi-nsuromenis.
B-46
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
COMPANY-NAME
EQUIPMENT LOCATION (ADDRESS).
TIME OF OBSERVATION; FnoMj2_
RECORD OF
VISIBLE EMISSIONS
A.M.
A.M.
oe ov pa oa IP n i? •, ?,
14 1T> 1C I/ 19 19 20
rMftSS
- I I i i i . ! i : i i i j ;
29 27 20 :'9 JO 31. 3? 33
Mm. :i 22 23 ?< " 70
1~^i T"h • H~r-H"i n"j tH "j pHi"'"r"h"H M '; "H
rhT 'T^~trrf~i~i"tTT'M h~iT i~!"!"'H~i*rr r!"Tt' "h
PW^I^^HifiJn
rii^-1-J^tii?
~i—' |fT~"~ -|"!-*T-t~'' M • {-!
i-<—J-H^-t (. |-»—t-j i.(i. 4 •••>•—*—*—*-*
ID4-LUHIU-(_UjX!4
IIlIIlJlLpilLiJj
ffliMM
jvvv Tig. . 1 . ! . I . - - I : : ^r*i • ;, i ! i • j L ' • i ] < ; f ; ' I | j ; j 1 : ' ' ' *^' ^<^ ' - ' ' i • ' ' '"*i^" '
iall snuJre represents ;in individual readinn of intensity corter-pondmg to thfit shown in the loft-hand column
an of 'i minute. lns':'t an "S" in the top low of lilank s(|u;iros to indicato the oxnct -niinutu of the start of
the next square after the 'S' . insert (lie hour in winch tho monsurement wns mado. Each page of this form
NOTE: Ench small
over o timo span
observation. In the next square
can thus bo used to mcord 1 hour of
B-47
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
COMPANY NAME.
RHCORD OF
VISIBLE EMISSIONS
EQUIPMENT LOCATION ( ADOnESS)
TIME OF OBSERVATION: FROM
Mm. 01 02 03 IM 0
TO 07 OB 00 10 11 1? 13 M If, 1C 17 I!) 19
J44 .|| |
WRWf
rrn TiTi
l-MJ-fj-
. ; r ' i ! ! ' : i II
H-H-i I ' —r-TH-H-H-H-f- -H-H-H-H-tH-
SffiSj^
rMI iTtn~^trrrt; -; r;; Tirn-^Tif
i • ' jj U.J44J
HTH-H-HtTT^
NOTE: Em:h small square re-presents an individual readinrj of ii-.tonsity conospoiuling to thnt shown in the lud hand cohnin
Over n timo span of S minutr. lns"M ;n\ "S" in tin; top low of blank sc|uan:s to indicntc the oxnct minute of. Iho Start ol
observation. In the next square after the '8' . insert tho hour in which the monsurement was made. Each p;i(in of this lorm
con thus bo usod to record 1 hour o( mi-nr.uinrnenls.
B-48
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
COMPANY NAME
EQUIPMENT LOCATION (,
TIME or ODSERVATION: FROM.
RECORD Or
vismi-r; EMISSIONS
P.M.
% Mm. 01 02 03 fi< 05 00 07 09 H9 10 11 t2 13 M 15
EBMM5E
N itTn11 ni MM
±:j_i.iit:tif.i±lm:
^i.j. -I,-.
i i !
_^_4-..-»-J 1 4 ••-.» •) .<-•«--
itilSM
LUJJ-i-LMJ-fJjJ
i! i TH mi n < \
:ii:mi::titc
4H+JHJ-&
LiUiLLLLLLLU4a4-Lj
i • i • i nTrn ! i i , •• i
-Jjt, J-1 JLuiU
!
rH-t-rrhfir rrt
NOTE: Ench snutll squ^ifp rr;i;<'sonls nn nulividtinl reading nf ir.lonsity coticsponfluif) to that shown in the left-hand column
over a timo span of !i minuif. li\s'"l ;m "S" in lln; top row of blank squares to indicate the oxnct minutf ol the stnrt o(
observation. In the iu:xt square after the 'S' . insert thu hour in which the imiusurumunt wns niado. Each poflu of this lonn
con thus bo usod to record 1 hour of nvtir.uromenls.
B-49
-------
Source of Air Contaminants
- ( C^//
Type of Air Contaminant
Point of Discharge: Stack IXJ Other
Point of Observation:
Distance to Base of Point of Discharge, feet
Height of Point of Discharge Above Ground Level, feet
Background De. ription
Weather: Clear
Overcast
Partly Cloudy
Other
Wind Direction
Wind Velocity, mi/hr
Plume Description:
Detached: Yes
Color: Black
No
White
Other
•Plume Dispersion Behavior: Looping
Lofting
Coning
Fumigating
Fanning
See Comments
Estimated Distance (feet) Plume Visible (Maximum)
Comments
(Minimum),
Signed
Title Tec.
B-50
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
COMPANY NAME.
EQUIPMENT LOCATION ( ADDRESS) /g */ £ 3-
. .
TIME OF ODSEKVATION: FROM l(-C>O _ KM* io;ii5±_ P.M. DATE Afc«-y
PA -
urrcoRo OF
VIEIDI.r EMISSIONS
i a_i.,j_ini:3zizEi]
10 I/ IS 1 | i : i i j_i J_M I i L i i ; | M l i_i_ J i I i ill : '
j^5i SEffifeHiil j pfiS!
P ^J^l^Li4J^JffiU^ l^UIJJ^
2C. 29 30 3'. 3? 33 , 3-1
—i——»-f-l < <• .,—i— -;--^-i-i-i.l-
-.^-UItni:-J.-:.uIL-;-.!.
^^.-,1-4-H-*1 u *' *-i-*"t-*-i-'ff '^presents 'in ntdividuul rrodinQ of intensity conosponding to tlidt shown in the lufl-hand colunnn
over o timo span of 'j muuilo. lns'"l ;in "S" in tin1 lop anv of blank scuiaivs to indicium the nxnct minute of the start of
observation. In tlic npxt siiunic after IMC 'S' . insert the1 hour in which thu mrmsureniunl was maiio. Each pa(jc of this form
C8n thus l>o used to iccoid 1 hour of measurements.
B-51 - .
-•PC
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
COMPANY NAME.
EQUIPMENT LOCATION ( ADDRESS)
TIME OF ODSERVATION: FROM
RHCODD Or
VISIFJLI: (-MISSIONS
*.'£ DATE
Mm. (j\ 02 03 04 05 OS ('7 OH 09 10 11 12 13 M IS ifi I/ Ifj 19 20
fhilitiitt
4-L_u-
,-ULU
feU
10
TiJTTnl ~, rlrlT
_ _
...-. _»—_—-—.-__,- —-r-
. , , , . , ^±4^-\-L^-r^-iJr^44
r^tn'^r^<'1^ti'^Tri'j^:Ti-^itt|-i-jf
gg|i|jj^jSMdMt
111 i I I ! • I .' I ' I '
IlteTtlTiJIinTjT
Sion
/hour
H. No.
J'l
4'.i
3H
% Mm. Tl 22
23 ?? 20 29 3J 3! 32 33 3-S
30 37 ?.? 33
JitL)ji4
... 44-i.lllLp
(,0 ! M . i . Mil .
IpfMjTfP
";vr
nrtn
1% i :-s
i I ^ T^T T II
.LL4-U^-f-14-(J4
^t-144
LUajJltnil^iiiilULi-
i I i: ' L J : H H .'Mi; I
44.U
i_i.
TT
J.L I
4444U4
-i-hf-W-
i444-4UJ44.L
t 1 I i ' I
U1444-U444444.
-14-1—!.
-Hfi
ipi
Sto'Vuour
R. A'o.
Mm. 41 42 ti 59 CO
NOTE: Each small squ.irr ipptesfints nn uulividual roadiiif) of irtensily coiirsponding to lh(U shown in the loft-hand column
Over a timo span ol 'i minute. Ins "I ;in "S" in thc> top row of blank squares to indicute the (ivnct minute1 of the stait of
observation. In the nex.t seni.iro afti-r ihc 'S' . insert the hour in which tho ninnsurcmonl was made:. Each poyc of this form
con thus bo used to record 1 hour of mcnsurcmcnts.
B-52
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL. PROTECTION AGENCY
COMPANY NAME
EQUIPMENT LOCATION ( ADOHESS),
TIME OF OBSERVATION: FROM 6 •& °
ntrcono or
VIEl;'ll.e_TMISSIOMS
19 20
39 40
02 03 04 05 TO (>/ 00 O'l 10 11
JESSIE
ttttttttto
PL jjl
! 1 M i I '
irrrri
JijTjj J-UjJJ J jp.jjL|J JJ.LJJ.1! JrJJJr
--HHrfH^iH-ftK
L
J.J.Li.LL' .JUj-Li-4.i_)-UJ-JJ-i
S^SrSfeHiri-S
U L I ! LJJi j
jljjj.il. JJJ.J
59 60
NOTE: Esch Km;ill sciu.irt1 rcpresctils .in individual rcaciinf) o( ir.lonsily corrcs|jonfling to Hint shown in Hie; left-hand column
Ovor o timo span of '< minulo. Ins "t ;») "S" in tin1 top low of hlnnk scuuircs to indicule the oxiict minute of the stnrt of
observation. In the next sciunrc af'tiT tho 'S' . insert the hour in which tlio mrinsuremonl was inaiio. Each pnyo of this fonn
con thus t)o usod to IOCOK) 1 hour (if nv.isuronients.
B-53
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
COMPANY NAME
EQUIPMENT LOCATION ( ADDRESS).
TIME OP OBSERVATION: HTOM
nircono OP
VISIIJI. (REMISSIONS
nnru
L_L_L
Mm. 01 02 03 04 l"i 03 07 OU 03 10 11 12 13 11 lri 10 >/ 16 1'J 20
rniTnTr
jnjrnira:
TEniDTjiiTTrir
i in11 n r i
i TT T^n-- ;* !~ rrrr
tn "-rtrnV-itrMi+nrh;
-r-H-r-r^*+-.-t-H-^~'~*-*-?-i.iii'-H--;-'--M-'*-i-"r-
i.,.:
J-U_-i-LL -LLLJ-J-LLulJ-l-iJ
LL.Li4i.U4.UJJJ
1 ' I r1 !l 1 :l I I i r !
tHMi±H±Htri-H-H--H-r
iTTi rrrfnTiTiTi n r -rrr rrr
NOTE: Ench small square rpptesonls nn individual ip;iclinrj of ir.iensily coitospondmg to Ihnl shown in llio Icd-liand column
Over a timo span of 'i minute. Ins vi ;in "S" in tlio lop row of hlonk st|u>'ircs to indicnli? Ilic oxnct minulo of the start of
observation. In the next square after ihr "S' . insuil tlio hour in which tho inuiisurcnicint wos made. Each payc of this form
con thus bo used to iccoul 1 hour of nifiisuipnients.
B-54
-------
Source of Air Contaminants
Type of Air Contaminants
Point of Discharge: Stack
Other
Point of Observation:
Distance to Base of Point of Discharge, feet
Height of Point of Discharge Above Ground Level, feet £<2-/?/-.
Background Description
C )'ou-o/y - ($) v e ^cua.r/ -
Vi/eather: Clear
Overcast
Partly Cloudy
Other
Wind Direction
Wind Velocity, mi/hr.
Plume Description:
Detached: Yes
Color: Black
No
White
Other
Plume Dispersion Behavior: Looping
Coning
Lofting |_J Fumigating
)
Fanning
See Comments
Estimated Distance (feet) Plume Visible (Maximum)
Comments
<£
(Minimum)
Signed
Title
B-55
-------
COMPANY NAME.
~\fli'il
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
/' f
IUI.IA '-a •
rttrcoriD OF
VISIDI.I: EMISSIONS
EQUIPMENT LOCATION ( ADDRESS)
A.M.
TIME OF ODSERVATION: FROM y.'3o t&g>. T0
A.M.
. DATE _
r _[—[-]—]--[- | | p-]
L_L_LJ
X> Mm. 01 02 O'j 0-1 05 OS 07 08 W 10 11 1? 13 M IS 10 17 18 I!) ?0
KMffl
-^.-^-H-;-; j J.,1 j .,_4-t_4_*-*_4-4-l
un
23 29 30 31 3? 33 34 31. 35 3V 33 39 10
% Mm. :i 22 23 21 75 29
• J • I I ill i 1 I i : ! . '• • |
nat-ntnTJ^-Trii
'—H"H-H-H-H •
L..LJ.J ijjjZL;j.
lJJJ-LJJ-44-i-^iJJ
JjJJJJJOij.^
NOTE: Ench snmll si|uori> repiesonts nn nulividual riMding of intensity cortcsporidmrj to thnt sliowt\ in the lo't-luincl column
over o tirno ;;pnn of !i minute. IMS'"! an "S" in Hit: top row of blank snuaros to indicnle the exnct minute; of tho stnrt of
observation. In tlio noxl stuiarc after the 'S' , insert ttie liour in which tho mcosuremcnl was nmdu. Encli pn()0 of this lonn
COn thus be usod to record 1 hour of m";ir.urnmer.ts.
B-56
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
COMPANY NAME.
RECORD OF
visinui: EMISSIONS
EQUIPMENT LOCATION ( ADDRESS)
TIME OF OBSERVATION: FROM
\.M. A'.M.
5©. TO"//,'JO ggft. DATE
% Mm. 01 02 03 0-1 05 06 P7 00 09 10 11 12 13 11 IB 1C> IV 18 19 20
27 20 29 30 31 32 33 34
'45 47 48 49
NOTE: Each small square represents an individual rondinfj of ir.tensily corresponding to thnt shown in the lo'l hnnd column
over a timo span of ", minute. Ins i-t an "S" in thu top row of blank squares to indicntc tlio ev.tict minuti1_ of tho start of
observation. In the nuxt square aftor the 'S' . insert the hour in which tho monsurcment was mado. Each payc of this form
con thus bo used to record 1 hour of nvfisurernei'.ts.
B-57
-------
•t
C
c
B-8
ODOR PANEL RESPONSES
Source
Port
Date
3> /
Panel Member
Dilution
/hie.
X
/(&
&©
ca
i
1.
2.
3.
5.
6.
7.
8. lAxrlc
9. .\Ot-K
10.
tOAT
Art A 0 Mo
-f
4-
-V
+
-h
-f
t
-f
t-
t
-t-
-P
-f-
4-
4-
Number of Positive Responses
O
2.
3
Percent Positive Responses
10
(0
Zo
SO
-------
^
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
COMPANY NAME.
EQUIPMENT LOCATION (ADDRESS).
TIME OF OBSERVATION; FHOM_Z£L,
RtTCOHD OF
VISIBLE (EMISSIONS
as*. A.M.
-P.M. TO/J&LP.M. DATE
L_i_l_L_lJ_i
01 02 03 04 05 C>6 (>/ 0(J (19 |Q 11 1? 13 M IS 10 1
NOTE: Ench small square represents nn individual reading of intensity coriosponcling to thot shown in llic left-hand column
over o timo span of !< minute. Ins1;'! an "S" in tlm top row of blank st|uan;s to indicntu the exiict minute of the start of
obsarvation. In the noxt squaic after-this "S' . insert the hour in which tho mnnsurnrnent was macio. Each page of this form
can thus bo used to rucoid 1 hour of mfai.
B-59
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PPOTECTION AGENCY
COMPANY NAME.
nncoRD OF
vision: EMISSIONS
EQUIPMENT LOCATION (ADDRESS)
TIME OP OBSERVATION:
A.M.
_*S5». TO/3l££_P.M. DATE
L_ L_L_i_ni
01 02 03 (M 00 OS 07 08 d!) 10 11 1? 13 14
:i 22 23 24 25 ?0 27 23 29 33 31 32 33 , 34
NOTE: Each small square represents an individual reading of intensity concsponding to thnt shown in tlic loft-hand column
over n timo span of '.; minute. Ins "I an "S" in tin; top row of blank squares to indicnto the oxnct minute of the start of
obsorvntion. In the nuxt square after \\w "S' . insert the hour in which tho mrinsurcment WHS made. F.ach pnjje of this form
can thus 1)0 usod to roc.oid 1 hour of nu'ar.urements.
B-58
-------
-i
ODOR PANEL RESPONSES
Source T65T
-------
ODOR PANEL RESPONSES
Source ct\c&)\ Gil Co.
Port
Date
/4
Panel Member
1. K*~«*te. S«*-&ev'oiv%M
2. OO*-»Q »fii»i
v/
-i ^D. «L» =*"
•*• 3£*£fe. 7d3&Hvtk««.
4. 3>0lly L«*3"t>y
5. ,!J^\ce £> /tt
6- J^Iie Afevtle
7. A? .'If?. >f*/c4Ve
«5Uv jp>t^e^
8,-^U- XW**t*«J
9. C'.ioJv Skerutoocj
10. TWflry vSto/eeTiiei m
Number of Positive Responses
Percent Positive Responses
y
^
—
- —
-h
•t-
_—
—
•—
. ^
H-
Ll
W-
><
^
H-
+-
•f
-h
-H
+
•-t-
-4-
4-
^
n
^
^
~Y
-P
•+'
~h
-h
-h
-i-
4
-h
?
^ .
>c
y0
-1-
-f
-f-
4-
t
4
4-
4-
,-t-
1
^?
/
/?,>
&
&
@^
--k
tiSE*
4
A
^.
A
je
&
(*
a.
Dil/t
y
^
4
4
4
4
-h
—
4
•4-
4-
*
W
ion/
//oo
-J-
4-
4
— .
-f-'
— .
:
H-
5
S3
/,
V
'
+
4
—
—
—
- —
4-
V
yy
/
Y
//cocv
— •
—
r^
( — )
—•
+
~~~
—
—
—
/
//
^
'4*.
—
4
• — •
—
— .
—
— •
/
//
CO
I
en
ro
-------
ODOR PANEL RESPONSES
Source Ch*t«l\K &» I Co
Port T
Panel Member
!• JS»r>^ct SfCH«vW»\«J
2t o«u4 nli^i
3'3!§fcN 3^?**$.
4«^I>oMy Ueo^'lvy
5< JftHtCC "*" i>/&.
6. jfc lie A1«viol«.
7. M;i(e ^rvi/ckic
'->>TCi\r'l A^ I>-'SC-V^
8. A4^^ y^fl^**!^
g.C.'vJL «5Ue.^^w4
10. r ttfvxft m
Number of Positive Responses
Percent Positive Responses
Dilution
ho
—
t-
O
-h
—
'-4-
4-
—
—
•t-
5
55
'Too
—
—
&
—
— •
—
-
—
—
—
o
J
o
^
-^
•+
0
r
-r
t
•f-
•f
1-
4.
W,9
7?
^oO
— .
—
O
-—
—
— •
— '
—
.
-—
o
^
0
^00
— -
f-
O
-f-
-f-
4-
— *
-f
—
••h
G
j
fr
^oo
—
—
O
—
— .
—
—
- —
—
—
0
0
*0
1-
-h
0
f
-h
4-
— .
- —
-h.
4-
7
V
77
./tO
—
4-
<9
•4
t1
4-
• —
4-
If
4
7
^
77
i
CO
I
CO
-------
ODOR PANEL RESPONSES
Source
Port _
Date
Panel Member
A\\L
lO D11ution
CO
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
7.
8.
9.
10.
/r/',w,cA<
t-
-I-
-v-
f
-f-
4-
-h
t
-h
+•
'+-
-H
V
•h
•H
+•
f
4-
Number of Positive Responses
s-
Percent Positive Responses
?<=>
-------
Panel Member
ODOR PANEL RESPONSES
Source (c&r /Mo.
Port _
Date
CO
en
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
HA R.I
\/vs
£- 1 u
-4-
-
-t-
4-
4-
4r
4-
4
4-
-f
H-
4-
4-
4-
-r
-t-
-f
4
-f
4-
+•
4-
-v-
t
•h
Number of Positive Responses
ID
10
Percent Positive Responses
(06
So
A *S7
-------
ODOR PANEL RESPONSES
Source l£5T AOo. 3*
Port .
Date •
Panel Member
Dilution
/Too
/K
co
i
2.
3.
4.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
4-
4-
4
-V"
-f-
v-
-t-
-f
4-
-V
4
•+
4
-h
•v-
-V-
-f-
-V-
Number of Positive Responses
Percent Positive Responses
10
70
-------
ODOR PANEL RESPONSES
Source
Port I
Date ^
1_
oJ
Panel Member
Dilution
Aift.
k
.pea;
C3
I
•Jr
4-
+
4-
4
4
4-
4
4
•V
-V
•h
4
+
•+-
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4-
4
4
4-
4
4
4
4
4
4-
+
4
4-
4-
1-
•f
4
Number of Positive Responses
ro
-2L
\o
V
Percent Positive Responses
foo
(00
IOD
(0
STC3
4-
^r-l
— 4- -T 4
~ + 4- •*•
4-
-i
-------
27r
3.0
3.5
6.5
7.0
B-68
-------
100
00(5.
3.0
3.5
4.0
I Tin
5.0
PROBITS
B-69
-------
2%
9
6
7
10 15 20
PERCCNTACC
30 40 SO CO
70
30 85 90
95
,., ^^
'."*
U-
3 5
i
zQ
1 /O,
9
8
7
6
I/.
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
PROBITS
I Tl I I I I
5.5 6.0
6.5
7
7.0
B-70.
-------
10 15 20
30
PERCENTAGE Po»,'h've
40 SO CO 70 UO
00
95
.000.000.
—• 1 / 000,000.
3.0
3.5
B-71
-------
10
20
30
PERCENTAGE Posi"fivc
40 GO CO 70
80 85
90
95
0871
~l_-__:"_. '.' ,"-.." .1 :~; ^iT-'^—-4 —-- _(--.—-_—I ~"~ ..'".' . ') . . ^~. j
/. O
3.0
3.5
6.5
7.0
B-72
-------
^1000,009
i 100.OOO
9 *
00 R5 90
r——p
3.0
3.5
6.5
7.0
B-73
-------
BO 85 90 95
"R)d(ev% I
1—^j£o_ rr!"~r~:Ti ~
/ ct a oo,
3.0
3.5
4.0
I i I I i I I I I II I i I I I f TTT
4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0' 6.5
PROBITS 0
7.0
B-74
-------
APPENDIX C
LABORATORY REPORT
environmental science and ene/inceyHnef, inc.
-------
• c-1
EUVIIlOIiraiTAL ENGINEERING, INC.
LAB DATA SHEET
. SULFUR DIOXIDE ANALYSIS
Plant Neir.o
Analyzed By
Date Analyzed 3-/~
Hours
s~
Stack
2*st-&r
it
0 UTL-&T
,,
--
• . Sample lio.
V.T.
i
'sd^ £4 -
«
^Bu*. zs?
i »
.
O.fZ
#./. 01
N.
<^. £>//&>
Q. O//b
0.WC,
0.4 fft,
-
V.Soln.
33
33
32
32
'
•
V.A.
/0
/a
SO
,6
V.T. = Volurr.e of Barium perchlorate titrant used for sample (ml)
V.T.B. = Volure of Barium perchlorate titrant used for blank (ml)
N. = Norr.ality of Be rim perchlorate
V.Soln. = Total solution vo!u,~2
V.A. = Volu.T.o of sar.pl e aliquot titrated (ml)
C-l
-------
EIIVIP.OIu'EllTAL EKGIKEERII.'G, INC.
LAB DATA SHEET
. SULFUR DIOXIDE A.'.'ALYSIS
Plant Hera
Date Analyzed 3 -J? -
Hours
•
Stack
j£JL>L(;T
„
dUrJLer
ft
.TL>L E r
n
Qur^fr
-.->•
/.
O/IT/.ST
<,
Sar;,ple lio.
V.T.
V.T.B.
i
L/9 3 7?
/I't/jU C*- '«
//
c^ 33
,<
^-f&.-c*'~j ^3 n
«
^^ ^
a
a
<^o-J3
..
^2-d,
^>. 22
vT,7^ "
^.7f
-?.^
y-fg
&6.-J*
02/.JJ
f.Vd
^. ?3-
9.9*
O.fif
o. of
O ,£> f
£>.£>/
d. Of
6 . Of
d • O f
fi.ct
0.*f
J.Of
0 . £> f
N.
*.6f,L
a. £>//(,
0. £//&
'*.*,*
<3 . 0/fb
o.*r/L
0. €>//b
*•*'&
0. *,rl
d '. &//&
d.&// b
V.Soln.
^30
30
34
3
S0
CT
3-
*.
^~
*-
&*-&~- /ftL&UHs £w^£ /rf?t^Lj?JZt^'S<-^&-'~rC
V.T. = Volu.r.e of Barium perch! orate titrant used for sample (ml)
V.T.B. = Volure of Barium perchlorate titrant used for blank (ml)
N. e= Normlity of Bariun perchlorate
V.Soln. = Total solution volurr..2
V.A. = Volu.7.o of scr.pl e aliquot titrated (ml)
C-2.
-------
Plant Hera
ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING, INC.
LAB DATA SHEET
. SULFUR DIOXIDE ANALYSIS
Date Analyzed 3 ~3 -
Analyzed By ^ms'-M. Hours
Stack
fJULfrT
„
&UrlEr
It
JTut-gr
ft
6Kri.fr
,.
QtiTtPr
it
^ ,-
• Sample No.
L^^ Zft
,<
^^c as
„
Udc^c, 3 ft
*
^^ 34
,,
K
^7&•
9. £i
9.9*
C.fif'
o. or
o .or
e.o,
6. Of
£ . O (
6 . Of
0.0?
O.*f
O.Of
0 . 6 f
N.
0.6f,e,
6. C,&
0. £>//&>
*.*„&
O.Oftt,
6.6UL
0.0* t.
*.*'/£>
0. Offt,
0. £>//{,
0.6 f/6,
V.Soln.
^30
Go
3(- O
J-t
V.A.
/O
/O
/c
/£>
/£>
S0
^
,5-
A
^~
CT-
&K&- /??L£L£AS v-**^ /?7t^^f^vc^zfc>-^c
\."\. - Volu.r.2 of Barium perch! orate ti trant used for sarr:ple (ml)
V.T.B. .= Volu~-2 of Eariu." perchlorate titrant used for blank (ml)
N. ' = Nonr.nlity of Barii.-n perchlorate
V,.Soln. = Total solution volurr.o • ...
V.A. - = Yolu-'.o of sar.pl e aliquot titrated (ml)
' .C-3
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING, INC,
LAB DATA SHEET
. SULFUR DIOXIDE ANALYSIS
Plant lie TO Uj^j&^^z&djc^fid
Analyzed By ^h^+xJb
Stack .
^JUl
H
(Ld*
n
t,
Date Analyzed s-/^-"7i/
Hours
~S
Sample No.
' W? J.a -
/txx^-J 4-/f
/ 1
L^O^M-J 4/f
„
ft
^dux; 4 B TZA^
•
V.T.
0.ffb
O.Cfft,
Wt,
*fi«
'
V.Soln.
/f>
/jtJLt^)
V.T. = Voluir.e of Barium perch! orate titrant used for sample (ml)
V.T.B. = Volu~o of Barium perchlorate titrant used for blank (ml)
N. = N'orr.ali ty of Barium perchlorate
V.Soln. = Total solution volur.o
V.A. = Volu.-o of sample aliquot titrated (ml)
C-4
-------
EllVll'.O.'ir.EIITAL ENGINEERING, INC,
LAB DATA SHEET
. SULFUR DIOXIDE ANALYSIS
Plant Hairs
Analyzed By
Date Analyzed
Hours
Stack
Ser.pl c No.
V.T.
V.T.B.
N.
V.Soln.
V.A.
d.Qf
-f/
. Of
4-f
, Off&>
H
0. Of/to
"ST" B
/£>
if
.£> I
0.
.6 f
11-
/f
??
-------
n-o-j CTT"NO .
Project T
Project Coordinator:
No. Hours:
b.V.:-.p)0
Kur.'.bcr
B
L
F
ADS.
.02V
.17*
Col)
Size
ampe
Volume
Dilution
Factor
Cone
0
V"
/
3
(r
O
1
ro
Notes;
-------
"UYr-
Title:
Project Coordinator:
.....list.
Date:
No. Hours
JCix.bcr
If
ADS.
,(>(*?
Coll
Size
Sample
Volume
Dilution
Factor
Cone
33.
ADS.
Lei 1
Size
Sample
VoluisiO
DiluLion
factor
***** //*-
22. S"
O.O
7.2. S*
Cone
Sample Calculation:
Notes:
-------
APPENDIX D
CALIBRATION STANDARDS
environmental science and engineering^ inc.
-------
Syi CSA2S
POST OFFICE BOX 6O8
CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA 9I73O
TELEPHONE: (7141 987-4G1I
A DIVISION OF WILL ROSS, INC.
i- r
Environmental Science S'"lLt;t0.
P.O. Box 13454 . ft.
University Station • 'M/? ,
Gainesvilie, Fl. 32601 "* /$
Attn: Charles L. Stratton
Date
2-25-74
• Our Invoice No. C98823
Your P.O. No. 949
Lot No. 1"2-21
Cientlemen:
Below are the results of the analysis you requested, as reported by our laboratory. Results are in volume percent, unless
otherwise indicated.
LABORATORY REPORT ON GAS ANALYSIS
COMPONENT
CARBON DIOXIDE
OXYGEN
HYDROGEN
CARBON MONOXIDE
NITROGEN
ARGON
AIR
METHANE
HELIUM
Cyl. N
Requested
4.9%
5000ppm 5175ppm
BAL. BAL. ' BAL.
BAL.
ryi. NI» FF21809 Cyl. No.
Actual Requested Actual Requested Actual
9.9%.
BAL.
10.21%
BAL.
Analyst
KEN ROPER
The only liability of this Comp.my fur j;as which fails to comply with this analysis shall lie replacement
by the Company without extra cost.
D-l
MANUFACTUKITHS AND DISTRIDUTODS OF LAOOnATOHY COMPRCSSKD GAStS AND ASSOCIATED CQUIf'MCNT
-------
LABORATORY REPORT ON GAS ANALYSIS - Conf'd
Your P.O. ^
COMPONENT
CARBON DIOXIDE
OXYGEN
HYDROGEN
CARBON MONOXIDE
NITROGEN
ARGON
AIR
METHANE
HELIUM
Cyl. No. ££18305
Requested Actual
1.0%
BAL.
1.03%
Date ...2-2.6-7^.
Cyl. No.FJE22S.15
Requested Actual
7 c
Cyl. No.
Requested
Actual
BAL.
BAL.
BAL.
COMPONENT
^CARBON DIOXIDE
OXYGEN
HYDROGEN
CARBON MONOXIDE
NITROGEN
ARGON
AIR
METHANE
HELIUM
Cyl. No.
Requested
Actual
Cyl. No.
Requested
Actual
Cyl. No.
Requested
Actual
Analyst ..KENJROPER,
MATHESON GAS PRODUCTS
The only liaMlity of this Comp.iny for pis which fails to comply with (his analysis slnll lie replacement thereof
hy the Company without e.vtr.i CUM. n ?
-------
POST OFFICE oox 108 / A DIVISION OF WILL ROSS, INC.
NEWARK, CALIFOMNIA Q45GO >
TELEPHONE: (415) 793 2559 / TWX • 010 - 381-6051
Date
Our Invoice Nn C98823 _
P.O. # _ Cr].6 YOUR P.O. #9*19
MATHESON GAS PRODUCTS .
POST OFFICE BOX 608
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
.91.730
LABORATORY- REPORT ON GAS ANALYSIS
cyi.# 5-2941 cyi.# FF-28768
Mixture Reg. _ Analysis - Mixture Req. Analysis
5 .058%!. 02% — 2&M - OXYGEN - 1-3^9-8% '. 02%
BAL NITROGEN BAL BAL NITROGEN BAL
Cyl.# FF-10068 CyL# FF-26737
Mixture Req. Analysis . Mixture Req. Analysis
4 £
500 PPM CARBON MONOXIDE 499 PPM 1000 PPM CARBON MONOXIDE 99 PPM
BAL NITROGEN BAL BAL NITROGEN BAL
OF COMPONENT 1,0% OF COMPONENT
Cyl. f Cyl. #
Mixture Req. Analysis Mixture Req. Analysis
' Analyst R. L. KUNDE/y^
MATHESON GAS PRODUCTS • •
The only liability of This Company for gas which fails to comply with this analysis shall be replacement
thereof by the Company without extra cost.
G*™ Division: Compresuul Gavos iinc) Controls . . . MMheson Colom.in & Bell Division: Riuiflent CltcnMCOIs
D-3
-------
EEA52
POST OFFICE BOX 6O8
CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA 9I73O
TELEPHONE: (714) 987-4611
Environmental Science
£• Eng ineer i ng
P.O. Box 13W
Un I vers i ty Stat ion
Gainesville, Fl. 32601
Attn: Charles L. Stratton
A DIVISION OF WILL ROSS. INC.
Date
Our Invoice No. C99509
Your P.O. No. Add ' 1
Lot No. 1 -2-4?
Gentlemen:
Below are the results of the analysis you requested, as reported by our laboratory. Results are in volume percent, unless
otherwise indicated.
COMPONENT
CARBON DIOXIDE
-OXYGEN
HYDROGEN
CARBON MONOXIDE
NITROGEN
ARGON
AIR
METHANE
HELIUM
LABORATORY REPORT ON GAS ANALYSIS
Cyl. No. FF32629 . Cyl. No.F£30085
Requested Actual Requested Actual
BAL.
SOOppm
BAL.
Cyl. No.
Requested
Actual
BAL. BAL.
100ppm 106ppm
Analyst KEN ROPER -
The only liability of this Company for j;.is which fails to comply with this analysis shall be replacement thereof
l>y the Company without e.Ctra cost.
D-4 • . •
- ~ n i ••~,r>w
GASES AND ASSOCIATED CQUM'MCNT
-------
APPENDIX E
i
PROJECT PARTICIPANTS (
environmental science and engineering, inc.
-------
PROJECT PARTICIPANTS
• Environmental Protection Agency
Winton E. Kelly Project Officer
Charles Sedman. . Project Officer
Frank Butler Chemist
Gary McAllister Chemist
Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc.
John R. Dollar, M.S.* Project Manager/Engineer
John D. Bonds, Ph.D. Project Manager/Chemist
A. L. Wilson, M.S. Engineer
Al Linero, M.S. Engineer
Mary L. Smith, B.S. Chemist
Lee Roby Technician
Greg Benton Technician
Mike Jackson Technician
* No longer associated with Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc.
mc.
------- |