Report No.  78-BEZ-4
   CD



O    !
                                                EXXON COMPANY

                                          PHILADELPHIA7, PENNSYLVANIA
                 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

-------
                             SET  1683 01 0278
                               FINAL REPORT:
                       BENZENE CONTROL EFFICIENCY OF
                       VAPOR PROCESSOR AT THE EXXON
                               BULK GASOLINE
                             LOADING TERMINAL
                        PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA

                        EPA Contract No. 68-02-2813

                          Work Assignment No. 12
                               Prepared For:

                        Emission Measurement Branch
                            ESED, Mail Drop 13
                      Environmental Protection Agency
                     Research Triangle Park, NC  27711
                               February 1978
                   SCOTT ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY, INC.
                   Plumsteadville, Pennsylvania  18949
Scott Environmental Techndosy '

-------
                             TABLE OF CONTENTS
                                                                     Page
1.0  INTRODUCTION 	    1
2.0  SUMMARY OF RESULTS	    2
3.0  PROCESS DESCRIPTION  	    4
4.0  TEST PROCEDURE	    7
     4.1  HYDROCARBON SAMPLING.METHOD ...... 	    7
     4.2  HYDROCARBON AND BENZENE ANALYSIS OF VAPOR SAMPLES ....    8
     4.3  LIQUID GASOLINE SAMPLES 	   10
     4.4  FLOW MEASUREMENT	   10
     4.5  GASOLINE PUMPED DURING TEST 	   11
5.0  CALCULATIONS	   12
     5.1  TOTAL HYDROCARBON AND BENZENE RECOVERY EFFICIENCY ....   12
6.0  PRESENTATION OF DATA	   15
     6.1  GASOLINE VAPOR ANALYSIS	 .  .  .   15
     6.2  BENZENE CONCENTRATIONS IN LIQUID GASOLINE SAMPLES ....   15
     6.3  GASOLINE DISPENSED DURING TEST  ....'...'	   21
     6.4  METER AND SAMPLE LOGS	   21
7.0  LABORATORY EVALUATION OF 10 LITER TEDLAR BAG SAMPLING TECHNIQUES 26
8.0  REFERENCES	   29

-------
                                    -1-
SET 1683 01 0278

                             1.0  INTRODUCTION
          Under EPA Contract 68-02-2813, Work Assignment No. 12, Scott
Environmental Technology, Inc. has performed hydrocarbon emission measure-
ments on the vapor recovery processor at the Exxon gasoline bulk loading
terminal in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.  The EPA Project Number was 78-BEZ-4.
At this Exxon bulk loading terminal, gasoline is bottom loaded into tank
trucks.  The recovered tank truck vapors are processed in a compression-
refrigeration-abSOrption \vapor recovery unit.  The primary objective of the
test program was to determine the processor unit efficiency in the removal
of benzene from the collected gasoline vapors.  This loading terminal has
been studied previously as a complete system by the EPA and the results are
reported in Reference 1.  The current program was done specifically for the
study of the processor benzene efficiency.
          Measurements were made of the total hydrocarbon concentration and
the hydrocarbon characteristics at the inlet arid outlet to the processor,
and the volume of exhausted vapors.  Total hydrocarbon and benzene concen-
trations were measured by taking integrated Tedlar bag samples and analyzing
them by gas chromatography.  Other data collected included 'the amount of
gasoline loaded into the tank trucks during the test period.
Scott Environmental Technology Inc.

-------
                                    -2-
 SET   1683 01 0278

                          2.0  SUMMARY OF RESULTS
          The efficiency of a Parker-Hannifin compression-refrigeration-
 absorption vapor recovery unit for removing hydrocarbons and benzene was
 determined on the unit installed at the Exxon Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
 bulk  loading terminal.  The results of five test runs performed on December
 16, 1977 are summarized in Table 2-1.  The hydrocarbon removal efficiency
 relates the amount of hydrocarbons recovered by the processor to the amount
 present at the inlet of the processor.  Similarly the benzene removal
 efficiency relates the amount of benzene recovered by the processor to
 the amount of benzene present at the processor inlet.  Emission rates of
 benzene in grams per  run  and grams per gallon of gasoline dispensed are
 also  presented.
          The weighted average efficiency for hydrocarbons was 90.6% and
 that  for benzene was 95.6%.  The run to run variation in efficiency was
 very  small, and all efficiency data for individual test runs were within
 2% of the weighted average.  Since the inlet concentrations and processor
 operating conditions were much the same in each test, no conclusions can
 be drawn on efficiencies at other conditions, e.g. different ambient
 temperatures.  The efficiency for benzene removal is seen to be 5% better
 than  for total hydrocarbons.  The average benzene emissions were 0.0004
 grams per gallon of gasoline dispensed.
*Mention of manufacturer or trade name does not constitute EPA endorsement.
Scott Environmental ^chnoJogy Inc

-------
   SET 1683 01 0278
                                       -3-
                                    TABLE 2-1

                                  TEST RESULTS
                                 (1)
Hydrocarbon Benzene
Removal Removal
Run Efficiency Efficiency
No. % as C0H0 %
1
2
3
4(2)
5
6
J u
89.2 94.7
90.5 95.5
90.4 95.3
N 0
91.4 96,3
91.6 96.4
Benzene
Emitted
grams
14,7
17.6
13.3
DATA
9.26
14,6
Benzene
Emitted
Micrograms/gal
of Gasoline
378
453
414

389
375
Benzene
Emitted
ppm V
(as C&H6
61.8
62.8
63.4

54.2
55.7
Gallonage
Weighted
Averages
90.6%
95.6%
14.3
402
59.9
    (1)   The test results presented do not consider the effects  of truck leaks,
         These results describe emissions  of the processor only.   •


    (E)  The bag samples for run 4 were not valid due to a leak in the  inlet
        sample line and a defective pump in the outlet sampling system.
   Scott Environmental Technology Inc.

-------
                                    -4-

SET  1683 01 0278

                         3.0  PROCESS DESCRIPTION
          At the Exxon Philadelphia Terminal, three out of the eight tanker
loading racks dispense gasoline.   Each of the three racks is equipped with
an automatic bottom load dispenser for regular, premium, and unleaded grades
of gasoline.  On one of the gasoline racks, two grades of aviation fuel are
also dispensed.  A vapor return hose at each rack is manifolded overhead to
a common piping system which routes the collected vapors to the vapor
processor.  Figure 3-1 is a schematic of the loading system.  The processor
is a Parker-Hannifin 300 cfm compression-refrigeration-absorption unit.
This processor is shown schematically as Figure 3-2.
          The gasoline vapors collected from tank truck loading operations
are first sprayed with gasoline in a saturator to raise the concentration
above the explosive range.  They are then stored in a vapor holder.  When
a sufficient volume of vapors has accumulated in the vapor holder, the
processor is activated.  The vapors are drawn from the holding tank, com-
pressed to 50 psig and then passed through a finned tube heat exchanger for
cooling.  The water and heavy hydrocarbons that condense are collected in
a separator.  The remaining vapors are absorbed by bubbling through gasoline
chilled to 0°F.  The liquid gasoline in the absorber is continuously
recirculated, cooled and replenished with fresh gasoline.  Air with some
residual hydrocarbons collects in the top of the absorber and is vented
to the atmosphere through a control valve and flame arrester.
          Premium gasoline from storage is used both to cool the refrigerant
condenser and as a source of fresh absorbent.  The fresh absorbent stream
is first used in the saturator, then it passes through an economizing heat
exchanger as it enters the absorber.  The absorbent also passes through
the economizing heat exchanger before being pumped back to storage.
          The vapors from A to 5 tanker trucks are required to fill the
storage tank.  The processor then operates until the storage tank is drained
to its low limit.  The processor running time is dependent on the number of
trucks which continue to load after initial start-up.  During these tests, the
minimum running time was about 8 minutes, and the maximum was 14 minutes.
Scott Environmental "technology Inc.

-------
SET  1683 01  0278
                                  -5-
/1ATION
FUEL
AVI 00
AV80
&SOLINE
PLEADED
EXTRA
EXXON

(g







C
)
i

1
J




3




GASOLINE
UNLEADED
EXTRA
_ EXXON

® ®







C
>
\




-J
_J
1
J
j)
1



6ASOL1ME
UNLEADED
EXTRA
EXXON

® ®





r

c
i




"i
_j
~\
^
>
i




^^
~^^ *.


® ©




-7







DISTILLATE
PRODUCTS
(NO VAPOR
^RECOVERY)


»
© RACK NUMBER
         VAPOR RETURN  LINE
TO SATURATOR
                    FIGURE 3-1  DISPENSER RACK LAYOUT
                               EXXON BULK GASOLINE LOADING TERMINAL
                               PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA
Scott Environmental Technology Inc.

-------
                                    -6-
SET  1683 01 0278
                                  A/WVV\/\/\/V\AAAA
                                      ABSORBER
                                                                   REFRIGERATOR
                                                                    MODULE
CHILLER
                                                         CONDENSER

r
i
i
i
r.-z
i
' T

-j-- ._— -^-— ^





r- 	 FUEL -
STORAGE



                                                                LOADING  RACK
                                   SATURATOR
       FIGURE 3-2  SCHEMATIC OF COMPRESSION-REFRIGERATION-ABSORPTION
                   VAPOR RECOVERY PROCESSOR AT
                   EXXON BULK GASOLINE LOADING TERMINAL
                   PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA
Scott Environmental Technology Inc.

-------
                                    -7-

SET  1683 01 0278

                            4.0  TEST PROCEDURE
          The processor collection efficiency for benzene and hydrocarbons
was determined by measurements of the inlet and outlet hydrocarbon concen-
trations and outlet flow rate.  At the outlet, a Rockwell T-9 turbine flow
meter was installed using an adapter flange to mate the 4 inch outlet vent
to the 3 inch meter.  The outlet sample port was located on the turbine flow
meter.  A 10 liter Tedlar bag was filled at a constant rate from this sample
port during the course of a processor run.  The temperature and pressure of
the gas in the flow meter was measured using a 0 - 10 inch water manometer
and an iron - constantan thermocouple.  The inlet sample port was located
in the 6 inch line from the vapor holder to the compressor near the compressor
inlet.  The inlet vapor temperature and pressure were measured using an iron -
constantan thermocouple and a 0 - 10 inch water manometer.  A 10 liter Tedlar
bag was filled at a constant rate from the inlet sample port during the
course of a processor run.  The sampling pumps, control valves, flow meters
and Tedlar sample bags were located in the processor control house and
connected to the inlet and outlet sample ports by approximately 30 foot
lengths of % inch Teflon tubing.
          A mobile laboratory was located adjacent to the processor and
powered from AC mains.  This laboratory housed the hydrocarbon analysis
equipment which consisted of a Shimadzu GC-1 gas chromatograph and a
Chromatopac E1A integrator and a Beckman Model 108 total hydrocarbon
analyzer modified for sample injection.  These analyzers were calibrated
with precision standards of 51.4% propane in nitrogen, 1.22% propane in
nitrogen, and 49.8 ppm benzene in nitrogen.
4.1  HYDROCARBON SAMPLING METHOD
          During processor runs, the inlet and outlet sample ports were
continuously sampled.  Ten liter Tedlar bags were filled at a constant rate
in order to obtain an integrated sample over the duration of the processor
Scott Environmental Technology Inc

-------
SET  1683 01 0278

run.  Figure 4-1 is a schematic of the apparatus'used to fill the Tedlar
bags.  The sample was pumped by a stainless steel metal bellows pump through
a Teflon sample line at a rate of 6 - 10 SCFH.  Approximately one-tenth of
this flow was directed through a stainless steel flow control valve into the
ten liter Tedlar sample bag.  All surfaces in contact with the sample were
either stainless steel or Teflon.  Flow rate to the Tedlar bag could be
checked and adjusted by momentarily directing the sample flow through a
selector valve to a 0 - 2 SCFH rotameter.  Bypass flow rate was measured in
a 0 - 16 SCFH rotameter.  Sample flow into the Tedlar bag was set at 1 SCFH
for the reported test.  Identical systems were used for processor inlet and
outlet sampling.
4.2  HYDROCARBON AND BENZENE ANALYSIS OF VAPOR SAMPLES
          The Tedlar bag samples were analyzed for individual hydrocarbons
and benzene using a Shimadzu - GC - Mini 1 gas chromatograph equipped with
dual flame ionization detectors.  A Chromatopac E1A Shimadzu Data Processor
was used to measure peak areas.  The column used was a Supelco 20% SP
2100/0.1% Carbowax 1500 on 100/120 mesh Supelcoport (D-4536) packed in
10 feet of 1/8 inch stainless steel tubing.  The chromatograph was programmed
from 40°C to 160°C initially at a rate of 4°C/minute for ten minutes then
the program rate was increased to 20°C/minute.  Upon reaching 160°C, it was
held isothermally until no more peaks eluted.  The total analysis time was
twenty minutes.  The calibration gases were a 1.22% propane in nitrogen
and 49.8 ppm benzene in air.
          Samples for injection into the chromatograph were extracted from
the Tedlar bags through a rubber septum into a 100 cc gas sampling syringe.
The inlet samples were diluted 50% with room air before injection into the
chromatograph.  The outlet samples were analyzed without dilution.   Approxi-
mately 42 hydrocarbon species were identified and measured by chromatographic
separation.
Scott Environmental "fechnoJogy Inc

-------
 SET  1683 Ql Q278
                                      -9-
% Teflon
Sample Line
S.S. Surge
   Tank
                Metal Bellows
                MB-21 Pump
                                                    0-2 SCFH
Flow Control
Needle Valve
                       t
                              Flow
                              Control
                              Valve
                                                                      Vent
                                                                   Flow Meter
                                                                   0-16
                FIGURE 4-1  INTEGRATED BAG SAMPLER APPARATUS
Scott Environmental Technology Inc.

-------
                                    -10-
SET  1683 01 0278

          As a check on the total hydrocarbon levels In the sample bags,
the contents of each sample bag was measured using a modified Beckman
Model 108 analyzer.  This analyzer which uses a flame ionization detector
was modified by adding a *£ ml injection loop at the sample inlet to the
analyzer.  Hydrocarbon free air was used as a carrier gas.  Syringe samples
from the Tedlar bags were admitted into the sample loop.  The resulting
peak-shaped response to an injection of a hydrocarbon sample was integrated
by the Chromatopac Integrator producing a response in units of millivolts-
seconds just like a chromatograph.  This total hydrocarbon analyzer was
calibrated by injection of the same propane in nitrogen standard as the
chromatograph.
4.3  LIQUID GASOLINE SAMPLES
          One sample of each gasoline product was collected during the time
of the processor tests.  These samples of Regular, Unleaded, Premium, Avgas 80
and Avgas 100 gasolines were analyzed for benzene using a gas chromatograph.
          Since it is difficult to duplicate liquid injections into a
chromatograph and because of the complexity of gasoline, the following
procedure was adopted for the liquid analysis.  The density of each sample
was determined by weighing 50 ml at room temperature prior to each analysis.
100 yl of the sample was injected into a glass 6 liter dilution flask and
vaporized.  A vapor sample from the dilution flask was injected into the
chromatograph and analyzed in the same manner.as the vapor samples collected
in the field  (Section 4.2) using the 49.8 ppm benzene standard for calibration.
By applying standard gas law corrections, the weight percent of the benzene
in the gasoline was then calculated.
4.4  FLOW MEASUREMENT
          The flow at the outlet of the processor was measured using a
Rockwell Model T-9 turbine flow meter.  This meter was installed in place of
the normal vent pipe using a four to three inch reducer.  An eight foot length
of 3" ID rubber hose was added to the outlet of the flow meter to duct the
Scott Environmental Technology Inc.

-------
                                    -11-
SET  1683 01 0278

the exhaust vapors away from the processor and to provide normal back
pressure usually supplied by the vent pipe.
          The T-9 meter dial is calibrated in cubic feet with interpolation
to 0.1 cubic foot.  The flow meter was read before and after each processor
run and at two minute intervals during processor runs.
4.5  GASOLINE PUMPED DURING TEST
          The gasoline loaded into the tank trucks displaces the vapors
which then enter the processor.  The quantity of gasoline pumped was
recorded by reading the gasoline totalizers before and after each truck
fill.  The time of the truck fill was logged and the processor run number
to which the vapors contributed was noted.
Scott Environmental "fechnotosy Inc

-------
                                    -12-
SET  1683 01 0278
                             5.0  CALCULATIONS
          Using the raw data inputs of outlet flow volume, inlet and outlet
total hydrocarbon and benzene concentrations and gasoline volume dispensed
the following parameters were calculated:
          1.  Removal efficiency for benzene
          2.  Removal efficiency for total hydrocarbons
          3.  Benzene emitted in grams per test
          4.  Benzene emitted in grams per gallon of gasoline pumped
          5.  Gallonage weighted averages of efficiency and emissions
          In discussing the efficiency of a compression refrigerator -
absorption gasoline vapor processor the device may be considered as having
three ports.
                                       .2 )Vent
                                       I
                               Vapor
                             Processor
                   Vapor
                   Inlet
FIGURE 5-1
                                  SjLiquid Outlet
          Figure 5-1 represents the processor and is characterized by the
 gas vapor inlet at uO» the liquid outlet at MM and the "air" vent at \2
 Subscript numbers 1 and 2 will be used to reference the engineering param-
 eters at the vapor inlet and vent.
 5.1  TOTAL HYDROCARBON AND BENZENE RECOVERY EFFICIENCY
          The hydrocarbon and benzene removal efficiency was calculated
 from the inlet and outlet benzene and total hydrocarbon concentration and
 the outlet volume.  The inlet and outlet gas is a mixture of hydrocarbons
 and air.  It is assumed that all the air entering the system exits the
Scott Environmental Technotogy Inc

-------
                                   -13-
 SET 1683 01 0278

 .system at  the vent.  Only  the  liquified hydrocarbons  are removed at port 3.
 Expressed  mathematically:
           Air in at (T) =  air  out  at  (T)                            (1)
                 HC,           HC
          Where V, and V^.are  the  inlet and  outlet  gas volume at standard
 conditions respectively.  HC..  and  HC2  are  the  inlet and  outlet concentrations
 of  hydrocarbons expressed as volume percent.. These actual hydrocarbon concen-      /
 trations were  calculated from  the  individual hydrocarbon constituent concentrations
 measured  (as propane) by the instrument and  adjusted for the actual effective
 carbon  number  of  each constituent.  (The actual hydrocarbon concentration of each
 constituent  is shown in Tables 6-4 and 6-5.)

 Equation  (2) is rearranged  to  solve for V,.
          v  0 v       100
           1    9
                       100
          Since V-^ and V"2 are now known  the hydrocarbon  recovery efficiency
as propane can be calculated.
                                                                    (A)
                     VHC1P>
       (HC. ) and  (HC«  ) are  the  inlet and outlet  concentrations  as propane
         Ip         2p  •	c	
expressed in parts per million by volume.   Similarly  the  benzene recovery
efficiency can be calculated.
                 V (Bz ) - V (Bz )
          EBE7 = ^	             '                      (5)
           BEZ        V1(Bz1)
Where  Bz^ and Bz2 are  the inlet  and outlet  benzene  concentrations expressed
in parts per million by volume.
Scott Environmental Technology inc.

-------
                                    -14-
SET  1683 01 0278

          The recorded outlet volume was first corrected to standard
conditions before being used in equations 2-5.

          v  (*r^ - 17 fis v    BP + 0.07355 P9
          V2(SCF) - 17.65 V2R    T  + 46Q                         (6)
Where Von/is the recorded meter volume in cubic feet, P2 is the outlet sample
pressure in inches of water, BP is the barometric pressure in inches of
mercury and T2 is the outlet sample temperature in °F.
          The emitted benzene in grams for each processor, run was obtained
from the average benzene concentration and outlet volume,

              = 91.96 V2(Bz2) x io"6                              (7)

          The hydrocarbon mass emitted was similarly obtained.

          M^ = 51.6 V2(HC2p) x 10"6                              (8)

          The benzene emitted per gallon pumped is obtained by dividing by
the amount of gasoline pumped which contributed to' the given processor run.
Where  (M/L)  m  is grams benzene per gallon of gasoline pumped, and L, is
           e oz            .                                          d
the total number of gallons of gasoline pumped.
Scott Environmental Techndosy Inc

-------
                                   -15-
SET 1683 01 0278

                         6.0  PRESENTATION OF DATA
          The test data used in the calculation of the results is presented
in Table 6-1.  Table 6-2 compares the total hydrocarbon analyses (as propane)
obtained with the GC to those data obtained with the modified Beckman 108
analyzer.  The results calculated using the considerations of Section 5.0
are presented in Table 6-3.
6.1  GASOLINE VAPOR ANALYSIS
          The results of the analysis of the gasoline vapor sample from the
inlet and outlet of the processor are tabulated in Tables 6-4 and 6-5.  The
concentrations are reported as per cent by volume.  Table 6-4 lists the inlet
samples and Table 6-5 lists the outlet samples.
6.2  BENZENE CONCENTRATIONS IN LIQUID GASOLINE SAMPLES
          The gasoline samples collected at the Exxon Philadelphia loading
terminal were analyzed for benzene concentration using the Shimadzu GC-1
gas chromatograph.  The procedure used is described in Section 4.3 of this
report.  Five samples of product were analyzed.  The results are tabulated
in Table 6-6.  The concentrations of benzene are reported in per cent by
weight.

                                 TABLE 6-6
                BENZENE ANALYSIS OF LIQUID GASpLINE SAMPLES

                                    Benzene Concentration
                  Product Sample         % by Weight
                    Premium                 1.28
                    Regular                 1.81
                    Unleaded                2.49
                    Avgas 80                0.-36
                    Avgas 100               1.06
Scott Environmental Technotogy Inc

-------
©
Scott Environmental "
5

^^
R


Inlet
HC
Run Cone .
No. %V C0
.3
1 30.17
2 35.64
3 34 . 85
4*
5 36.69
6 39.13
* Inlet pump
Outlet
HC
Cone.
%v c3
3.94
4.28
4.21
—
4.03
4.33
failed
Average C Number
Inlet Outlet
4.53 3.92
4.48 3.84
4.48 3.85
—
4.50 3.88
4.46 3.86
during test
TABLE 6-1
TEST DATA
Benzene Cone.
ppmV CgH,-
Volume
Inlet Outlet cu. ft.
968.6 61.8 2227
1091 62.8 2604
1072 63.4 1959
1460
1136 54.2 1622
1165 55.7 2442

Outlet
Temp.
OF
4.3
1.8
5.4
7.0
12.4
4.6


Press.
Inches
H00
5.3
5.9
5.3
5.5
5.6
6.1

Gasoline
gallons
39,001
38,933
32,001
22,786
23,804
38,907

Operating
Time
(minutes)
12.23
14.00
10.88
7.87
8.88
13.33

w
H-
CO
o
I-1
0
to
oo






Ancillary Data
Test Date:  December 16, 1977




Barometric Pressure:  30.24 inches Hg




Air Temperature:  30-45°F

-------
Sc
£
$
TABLE 6-3
CALCULATED DATA
Run
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
Inlet
Volume
SCF
3142.6
3876.3
2870.3
—
2382.9
3733.8
Outlet
Volume
SCF
2593
3053
2275
1691
1858
2847
Actual
Hydrocarbon
Cone. (%)
Inlet
19.98
23.87
23.34
—
24.46
26.32
Outlet
3.02
3.34
3.28
—
3.12
3.37
HC Mass
as CgHg
(grams)
Inlet
48923
71286
51616
—
45113
75390
Outlet
5272
6443
4942
—
3864
6361
Benzene
Mass
(grams)
Inlet
279.9
388.9
283.0
—
248.9
400.0
Outlet
14.74
17.63
13.26
—
9.26
14.58
Outlet
Benzene
y gm/gal
378
453
414
—
389
375
Benzene
Removal
Efficiency
% as CfiH,
94.7
95.5
95.3
—
96.3
96.4
en
. w
H
oo
u>
o
HC
o
Removal N>
Efficiency oo
% as CH.
J O "
89.2
90.5
90.4
—
91.4
91.6 £

-------
                                    -17-
SET 1683 01 0278
                                 TABLE  6-2
      COMPARISON OF TOTAL HYDROCARBON ANALYSES  USING TWO INSTRUMENTS
                         Total Hydrocarbons  as  Propane
Gas Chromatograph
Run No.
1
2
3
5
6
Inlet
30.17
35.64
34.85
36.69
39.13
Outlet
3.94
4.28
4.21
4.03
4.33
Modified Beckman 108
Inlet
31.7
38.2
35.9
38.9
41,0
Outlet
4.20
4.39
4.05
3.99
4.46
Scott Environmental Technolosy Inc

-------
                                    -19-
SET 1683 01 0278                 TABLE 6"4
           COMPOSITION OF HYDROCARBON VAPOR AT PROCESSOR INLET
                                 Volume  %
"~" — -— -^Samj>le Number
Compound • 	 _
TOTAL HC (% C7)
METHANE
ETHANE
PROPANE
ISOBUTANE
N-BUTANE+C°
2-BUTENES
3-ME-l-BOTENE
ISOPENTANE
N-PENTANE+Cs
2-ME-2-BUTENE
2, 2-DiME- BUTANE
Cfi OLEFIN
2-ME-PENTANE+CYCLOPENTANE
3-ME-PENTANE 	
N-HEXANE+Cg
Cf, OLEFIN
C^ OLEFIN
2 , 4-DiME-PENTANE+ME-CYCLOPENTANE
BENZENE
CYCLOHEXANE
2-ME-HEXANE+2 , 3-DiME-PENTANE
3-ME-HEXANE
ISO-OCTANE
N-HEPTANE
C7 OLEFIN
C7 SATURATE
2,2, 3-TRI-ME-PENTANE+C8 SATURATES
TOLUENE+2 , 3 , 4-TRI-ME-PENTANE
C% SATURATE
Cg SATURATE
N-OCTANE
Cg SATURATE
Cg SATURATE
M+P-XYLENE+ETHYL-BENZENE
0-XYLENE
N-NONANE
ISOPROPYL-BENZENE
l-ET,4-ME-BENZ+l-ET,3-ME-BENZ+MESITYLENt
1-ETHYL , 2-METHYL-BENZENE
1,2, 4-TRI-ME- BENZ+N-PR-BENZ
CIQ AROMATIC
Cio AROMATIC
TOTAL (%)
1
30.17
0.2616
0.0609
0.3634
2.3280
. 8.9194
0.0531
0.0133
: 3.9806
1.9700
0.3151
0.0781
0.0239
0.5871
0.2396
0.2362
~
~
0.1434
0.0969
~
0.1203
—
0.1246
0.0326
~
0.0124
0.0210
0.1566
—
0.0122
0.0065
0.0013
0.0023
0.0365
0.0092
—
0.0003
0.0041
0.0006
0.0016
—
—
19.977
2
35.64
0.3261
0.0754
0.4339
2.7164
10.6175
0.0646
0.0157
4.7153
2.2939
0.3643
0.0927
0.0278
0.6892
0.2809
0.2884
—
—
0.1664
0,1091
—
0.1351
—
0.1352
0.0356
—
0.0136
0.0214
0.1629
—
0.0118
0.0063
0.0015
0.0027
0.0420
0.0146
—
0.0029
0.0125
0.0022
0.0068
0.0017
0.0006
23.89
3
34.58
0.3066
. 0.0729
0.4096
2.6712
10.3458
0.0550
0.0149
4.6268
2.2453
0.3588
0.0912
0.0279
0,6743
0.2764
0.2839
—
—
0.1632
0.1072
--
0.1319
—
0.1345
0.0339
—
0.0133
0.0218
0.1632
—
0.0121
0.0066
0.0014
0.0023
0.0411
0.0131
—
0.0022
0.0119
0.0018
0.0062
—
—
23.33
5
36.69
0.3102
0.0762
0.4186
2.8477
10.9302
0.0592
0.0151
4.8751
2.3718
0.3767
0.0972
0.0294
0.7164
0.2911
0.3035
—
—
0.1722
0.1136
—
0 . 1380
—
0.1386
0.0366
—
0.0140
0.0219
0.1607
—
0.0114
0.0060
0.0012
0.0018
0.0351
0.0100
—
0.0011
6
39.13
0.3036 '
0.0807 3
0.4446
2.8941
12.1476 S
0.0642
0.0158
5.1161
2.4636
0.3920
0.1013
0.0315
0.7381
0.3037
0.3103
—
—
0.1777
0.1164
—
0.1387
—
0.1409
0.0381
—
0.0141
0.0225
0.1607
—
0.0115
0.0064
0.0011
0.0017
0.0352
0.0105
—
0.0016
0.0068 0.0072
, 0.0008 0.0010
0.0033 0.0032
~
—
—
24.44 26.30

-------
SET 1683 01 0278
  -20-
TABLE 6-5
           COMPOSITION OF HYDROCARBON VAPOR AT PROCESSOR OUTLET
                                  Volume %
" Sample Number
Compound ' 	
TOTAL HC (% C,)
METHANE
•ETHANE
PROPANE
ISOBUTANE .
N-BUTANE+C"
2-BUTENES
3-ME-l-BUTENE
ISOPENTANE
N-PENTANE+C°
2-ME-2-BUTENE
2, 2-DiME- BUTANE
Cf, OLEFIN
2-ME-PENTANE+CYCLOPENTANE
3-ME-PENTANE
N-HEXANE+Cg
Cf. OLEFIN
Cfi OLEFIN
2,4-DiME-PENTANE+ME-CYCLOPENTANE
BENZENE
CTCLOHEXANE
2-ME-HEXANE+2 , 3-DiME-PENTANE
3-ME-HEXANE
ISO-OCTANE
N-HEPTANE
Cy OLEFIN
C7 SATURATE
2,2,3-TRI-ME-PENTANE+Cn SATURATES
TOLUENE-t-2 , 3 , 4-TRI-ME-PENTANE
CR SATURATE
C? SATURATE
N-OCTANE
Cg SATURATE
Cn SATURATE
M+P-XYLENE-f-ETHYL-BENZENE
0-XYLENE
N-NONANE
ISOPROPYL-BENZENE
1-ET , 4-ME-BENZ+L-ET , 3-ME-B.ENZ+MESITYLENI
1-ETHYL , 2-METHYL- BENZENE
1,2, 4-TRI-ME-BENZ+N-PR-BENZ
CIQ AROMATIC
Cm AROMATIC
TOTAL (%)
1
3.94
0.3375
0.0562
0.1280
0.4095
.1.3496
0.0061
0.0013
;. 0.3881
0.1612
0.0228
0.0058
0.0017
0.0401
0.0158
0.0155
	
—
0.0088
0.0062
—
0.0086
—
0.0095
0.0018
—
0.0006
0.0016
0.0132
—
0.0012
0.0009
—
• —
0.0097
0.0050
—
0.0027
0.0056
—
0.0024
0.0005
0.0013
3.02
2
4.28
0.4050
0.0633
0.1430
0.4591
1.4897
0.0066
0.0013
0.4236
0.1746
0.0244
0.0065
0.0019
0.0428
0.0167
0.0164
	
—
0.0091
0.0065
—
0.0086
—
0.0108
0.0021
—
0.0006
0.0017
0.0133
—
0.0011
0.0004
<0.0001
0.0003
0.0070
0.0022
—
0.0001
0.0037
0.0006
0.0027
0.0005
0.0013
3.35
3
4.21
0.4107
. 0.0642
0.1402
0.4463
1.4566
0.0063
0.0013
0.4123
0.1696
0.0234
0.0062
0.0018
.0.0457
0.0160
0.0156
	
—
0.0088
0.0063
—
0.0071
—
0.0079
0.0017
—
0.0006
0.0012
0.0116
—
0.0010
0.0004
—
—
0.0057
0.0021
—
0.0004
0.0035
—
0.0028
0.0009
0.0014
3.28
5
4.03
0.3636
0.0631
0.1326
0.4264
1.4089
0.0063
0.0013
0.3993
0.1630
0.0227
0.0058
0.0017
0.0391
0.0151
0.0146
	
—
0.0080
0.0054
—
0.0062
—
0.0067
0.0014
—
0.0004
0.0009
> 0.0035
—
0.0007
0.0004
—
—
0.0051
0.0023
—
0.0008
0.0032
—
0.0025
0.0010
0.0029
3.12
6
4.33
0.3864 !
0.0690 1
0.1454
0.4585
1.5367
0.0061
0.0013
0.4336
0.1765
0.0245
0.0064
0.0019
0.0419
0.0161
0.0155
__
—
0.0085
0.0056
—
0.0061
—
0.0065
0.0013
—
0.0004
0.0008
0.0071
—
0.0003
6.0002

—
0.0035
0.0018
—
0.0004
0.0022
—
0.0013
0.0002
0.0004
3.37

-------
                                 -21-

SET 1683 01 Q278

6.3  GASOLINE DISPENSED DURING TEST
          Table 6-7 is a synopsis of the gasoline loading  activity  on the
processor test day of December 12, 1977.  The events are in order of
occurrence and the processor run to which the vapors contributed is marked.
6.4  METER AND SAMPLE LOGS
          Table 6-8 is the log of the outlet meter readings and Tedlar bag
sampling times.  These are reproductions of the original field logs.
Scott Environmental TechnoSosy Inc

-------
                                   -22-
SET  1683 01 0278
                                 TABLE  6-7

          GASOLINE LOADING RECORD AT EXXON PHILADELPHIA TERMINAL

                             December 12, 1977
Run
No.
 1
 1
 1
 1
 1
Truck
 No.
  1
  2
  3
  4
  5
 Total Run No. 1
 2
 2
 2
 2
 2
  6
  7
  8
  9
 10
 Total-Run No. 2
 3
 3
 3
 3
 11
 12
 13
 14
 6
 6
 6
 6
 21
 22
 23
 24
Rack
 No.
  8
  4
  6
  4
  6

  8
  6
  6
  4
  8

  6
  4
  6
  8
 Total Run No. 3
 4      15
 4      16
 4      17
 Total Run No. 4
 5      18
 5      19
 5      20
 Total Run No. 5
  8
  6
  4


  6
  6
  4

  8
  6
  4
  6
 Time
 EST
 0842
 0908
 0911
 0935
 0940

 1000
 1020
 1033
 1035
 1038

 1121
 1226
 1240
 1249

 1306
 1309
 1317

-1450
 1500
 1505

 1545
 1546
 1552
 1558
 Total Run No. 6
 TOTALS
Unleaded
  2900
  2300
  3000
  2300
  2300
 12800
  2301
  2727
  2901
  5898

 13827
  2300
  3000
  4002
  3001
 12303
  3298
  3002
   901
  7201
  5702*
  2799
  8501
  5201
  6301
  3600
  2301
 17403

72,035
 Premium
  1101
  1800
  1101
  1101
  1699
  6802
  2104
  1001
  1800
  2101

  7006
  2101
  1100
  1099
  2099
  6399
   701
  1100
  1799
  3600
                                      4603*
                                      1.101
                                      5704
  2804
  1100
  2100
  6004

35,515
 Regular
  4000
  2900
  3900
  4599
  4000
 19399
  3600
  4100
  3300
  5100
 16100
  3600
  3899
  2900
  2900
 13299
  4000
  3900
  4085
 11985
  5700*
  3900
  9600
  1701
  6898
  3300
  3601
 15500

85,883
Avgas 80
 2000
 2000
                                                            2,000
 *Trucks 18 and 19 combined.
 Scott Environmental Technology Inc.

-------
                                            -23-
                                         TABLE  6-8

                                     METER DATA SHEET

                                      Project 1683
   Date    / X// 6 /7 >

   Site
                                                    Barometer
                                                   Technician
                                                   Meter S/N
 Bag
 No.
Start/Stop
Clock
Time
 Bag
Elapsed
 Time
 Meter
Reading
\\
 Static
   P.
Temo.
Notes
                                                          . o
                                                          . 1
                                                                   1
                                                 O
//*?
                                                      ftj>>
                                        lot  (
                                                          /O
                                       10
                                                                  .r
      /ft;?
             ( f 1 0
                                                                  r
                                       2.0? 1
                                                           3
                                                                  2,
                                                      T ^« 3,
                                                           0
                                                                   6
       IC,oO
                                                           0
                    I&&O
        Scott Envircnmenta] T^dinc-Jc^y

-------

-24-
TABLE 6-8
(Continued)
METER DATA SHEET
Project 1683
Date lH/fto/77 Barometer 3> °, 2. *-f
Site ,£""# 7f 0 n Technician / C^/' ±s ^ —
/u./Tr* Meter S/N /&*/Lu^ VM

Sag
fo.
) /





"" >>»








3-S











Start/Stop
cirx



#W (

/0*
/
/i^2_











Clock
Time
o^x?
$r, r
6'nfa


t*$£^*&
\G 2. ^?
10^ 0
10 3 Z.
10 m
fOllf
/o3^
to to

i^^fZ-
(^ V
lu-1 b
IM,?
12. TO
/^rz
/^s~3>




Bag
Elapsed
Time




/v /v








j^f.' a1*






/(}' ' 5\'f
j#




Meter
Reading
ityrity
1 ' O ^f fe? ^
/ te-7
1- 4-'(
r6. X"
^.5^


*^( ^ ''
*-rif
^,1JL4
^ /
^ /
P^. 6
^7 7


y r, b
r^-x
T f»0
fr-^
. rv ~~ -
•f^v *





Temp.
10
JT"
X
0


^
3
^?
0
0
0
o
(3

f (f}
/o
(^
f
f
^o
/)
0




Notes




/7 "fcA^y


•





^ 3^,2.3







A/, 3ar^0





_tr\f\-
{\} Scott Environmental "technology Inc

-------
                                            -25-
                                         TABLE 6-8
                                        (Continued)

                                     METER DATA SHEET

                                      Project  1683
   Date    /;L

   Site
                             7
                               Barometer
                                                    Technician
                                                    Meter S/N

Bag
No.
Start/Stop
Clock
Time
 Bag
Elapsed
 Time
 Meter
Reading
Static
  P.
Temp.
Notes
ftf
                                                                   -0
                              /c/.1 n-
                                                                                 Qj  
-------
                                    -26-
   7.0  LABORATORY EVALUATION OF 10 LITER TEDLAR BAG SAMPLING TECHNIQUE

          The test procedure specified by EPA for the reported program
was the 9/27/77 draft benzene test method (Reference 1).   In  this  procedure
50 liter Tedlar or aluminized mylar sample bags  are filled at 0.5  1pm
using the specified apparatus which is reproduced as Figure 7-1.   The
sample bag is evacuated prior to sampling then connected  to the sample
probe and filled by drawing air out of the "rigid leak-proof  container".
                                                                       \
          A modified procedure was used during the test  program because
the intermittent operation of the process limited the use of  the draft
procedure.  The length of the vapor processor sampling runs varied from
7 to 14 minutes and use of the 50 liter sample bags would have required
either sampling at an increased sampling rate or integrating  the single
sample over several processor runs.  This would  have been necessary to
collect a sufficient volume of sample to minimize the potential  error
introduced by the residual volume of air in the  evacuated bag.   There is
also a significant period of time required between sampling runs to
properly follow the draft procedure whereas the  truck loading operation
could not be controlled that closely without disrupting  plant operation.
As a result an alternative procedure was employed with smaller 10  liter
bags using the apparatus shown in Figure 4-1.  A laboratory test was
conducted prior to field use to evaluate the sampling method  and materials..
A gasoline vapor sample drawn from an automobile fuel  tank was  used to
fill a 100 liter Tedlar bag in a barrel  container.  Some  of the contents
of the 100 liter bag were transfilled to a 10 liter bag using the
apparatus of Figure 4-1.

-------
      SET  1683 01  0278
                                          -27-
                   STACKWALL
                  /
FILTER (GLASS WOOL) /

               /X    PROBE
                                                  TEFLON
                                                 SAMPLE LINE
                                                     NO
                                         CHECKS  r—! CHECKS
                      QUICK
                     CONNECTS
                      FEMALE
                          TEDLAR-
                           BAG
                            OR
                        ALUMINIZED
                          MYLAR
PUMP
                                                          RIGID LEAK-PROOF
                                                            CONTAINER   '.
               FIGURE 7-1  BENZENE METHOD INTEGRATED-BAG SAMPLING TRAIN
     Scott Environmental Technoiogy Inc

-------
                                         -28-
Syringe samples from both the 100 liter bag and the ten liter bag were
analyzed for total hydrocarbons by a modified Beckman 109 total hydrocarbon
analyzer and a Shimadzu gas chromatograph.  Samples from the ten liter bag
were also analyzed after 24 hour bag storage.  The results of this test are
presented in Table 7-1.
          The agreement between the two bag samples was within 5% by both
analysis techniques.  The agreement between the two techniques was within 9%,
These data were taken during the development of the total hydrocarbon injec-
tion method and better agreement between the chromatograph and total hydro-
carbon analyzer were experienced during the field sampling.  The benzene
concentrations in the two bags agreed within 6% for the low concentration
bags and within 4% for the high concentration bags.  For the high concentration
case, the GC shows one bag higher than the other with the .THC vice-versa.  For
the low concentration bag, the differences between bags and instruments is
reversed.  The conclusion was that e?;perimental errors were larger than the
differences between the two sampling systems and that the ten liter bag and
its associated sampling apparatus would give equivalent results to using 50
liter bag of the draft benzene procedure.

                                 TABLE 7-1
                     10 LITER TEDLAR BAG TEST RESULTS
10 liter bag
100 liter bag
10 liter bag
100 liter bag
Cone,  as
  by THC
    37
    36
     5.01
     5.10
Cone, as
   by GC
   33.8
   35.1
    4.53
    4.38
Cone,
Cr11,
—6-6—
1180
1235
 165
 155
    Remarks
10 liter bag sample after
storage by THC - 37%
Scott Environmental Technology

-------
                                   -29-

SET  1683 01 0278

                              8.0  REFERENCES

1.  Emissions from Gasoline Transfer Operations  at Exxon  Company,  U.S.A.,
    Philadelphia Terminal, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
    US Environmental Protection Agency EMB Report No.  75-GAS-10, December  1974.

2.  EPA Draft Benzene Test Method.  September  27, 1977.
Scott Environmental Technology Inc.

-------
                                    Ar-1
SET 1683 0.1 0278
                                APPENDIX A
                         ANALYSIS OF AUDIT SAMPLES
          An audit sample consisting of a benzene in nitrogen mixture con-
tained in a B size aluminum high pressure cylinder was delivered to Scott
by EPA.  The analysis of this audit sample was used to verify the validity
of Scott's benzene analysis technique.
          The audit sample was analyzed in the field by gas chromatogr.aph
against Scott's laboratory standards using exactly the same GC, column,
instrumentation and procedure as was used for the reported gasoline vapor
analysis.  The cylinder was then returned to Scott's Plumsteadville labora-
tory and reanalyzed using the same equipment and procedure.  In the
reanalysis, the concentration results could not be duplicated.  It was felt
that the concentration in the cylinder changed while gradually warming to
room temperature (~70°F).  It had been outside (average temperature 30°F)
for two days prior to the field analysis.  To confirm this temperature
instability, the cylinder was again allowed to stand outside overnight and
then a series of duplicate analyses was performed using two analysts and
two instruments.  All samples were taken directly from the cylinder.  The
following results were obtained:
            Cone, (ppm)
Date
12/16
12/16
12/19
12/20
12/20
12/20
12/20
12/20
12/20
281
280
281-286
281
286
295
297
285
285
 Instrument
Shimadzu
Shimadzu
Shimadzu
Perkin Elmer

Shimadzu

Perkin Elmer

Shimadzu

Perkin Elmer

Shimadzu
       Notes
Field analysis
Field analysis
Several lab analyses
During warm up from
outside ambient (~30°F)
During warm up from
outside ambient (~30°F)
After warming on hot
plate to >100°F
After warming on hot
plate to >100°F
After equilibrating to
room temperature
After equilibrating to
room temperature
Scott Environmental Technology Inc.

-------
                                    A-2
SET 1683 01 0273

          Out conclusion from these results is that wall adsorption occurred
in the audit cylinder.  This resulted in gradual desorption and concentration
increase upon warming and vice versa upon cooling.  Wall adsorption can  also
cause a gradual overall increase in concentration as cylinder pressure drops.
At the time of analysis, the pressure was in the neighborhood of  500 psi.
Scott Environmental Technology Inc.

-------