United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park NC 27711
EMB Report 80-MET-6
May 1980
Air
Metallic Minerals
Emission Test Report
New Jersey Zinc
Company
Ogdensburg,
New Jersey
-------
York Services Corporation
• Energy and Environmental Systems Engineering
• Atmospheric Sciences Services
• Emission Measurement Services
One Research Drive
Stamford, Connecticut 06906
Telephone (203)325-1371
TWX 710-474-3947
FINAL REPORT
EMISSIONS TEST PROGRAM
ZINC PROCESSING PLANT
CONDUCTED AT:
NEW JERSEY ZINC COMPANY
STERLING MINE
OGDENSBURG, NJ 07439
EPA CONTRACT NO. 68-02-2819
TASK ASSIGNMENT: 21
EPA PROJECT NO. 80-MET-6
YRC PROJECT NO. 01-9517-21
NOVEMBER 1, 1980
A Subsidiary of York Research Corporation
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
PREFACE iii
LIST OF TABLES V
LIST OF FIGURES vii
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
2.0 SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS 3
2.1 Particulate Emissions
2.2 Particle Size Distribution
2.3 Visible Emissions
2.4 Particulate Radioactivity
2.5 Trace Element Analysis
2.6 Ore Samples
3.0 PROCESS INFORMATION 55
3.1 Process Description
3.2 Process Operation
4.0 LOCATION OF TEST SITES 63
4.1 Particulate Test Port and Sampling
Point Locations
4.2 Visible Emission Test Locations
5.0 SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL METHODS 85
5.1 Sampling Apparatus
5.2 Gas Velocity and Temperature
5.3 Moisture Determination
5.4 Gas Composition
5.5 Particulate Tests
5.6 Particle Size Distribution Tests
5.7 Ore Samples
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Con't)
6.0 APPENDICES
6.1 Complete Computer Data Printouts
6.2 Field Data Sheets
6.3 Laboratory Data
6.4 1) Psychrometric Graph
2) Particulate Calculations
6.5 Project Participants
6.6 Schedule of Testing Program
6.7 Lists of Apparatus and Calibration Data
-11-
-------
PREFACE
The work reported herein was conducted by personnel from the
York Research Corporation (YRC), the GCA/Technology Division
(GCA), and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
The scope of the work issued under EPA Contract No. 68-02-2819,
Work Assignment No. 21 was under the supervision of the YRC
Project Director, Mr. James W. Davison. Mr. Roger Kniskern of
YRC served as Project Manager. Analyses of the particulate
samples were performed at the YRC lab located in Stamford, Con-
necticut under the direction of Mr. Robert Q. Bradley- Trace
element analyses were performed on two particulate samples by
Ledoux and Company, Teaneck, New Jersey. Ore samples were
analyzed for radioactivity by Eberline Albuquerque Labs,
Albuquerque, New Mexico and for hardness by Bridgeport Testing
Labs, Bridgeport, Connecticut.
Mr. Thomas Henderson of GCA was responsible for monitoring the
process operations during the testing program.
The assistance and guidance of Sterling Mine Plant Superinten-
dent Oscar Cobos contributed greatly to the success of the test
program.
Mr. Dennis Holzschuh, Office of Air Quality Planning and Stan-
dards, Emission Measurement Branch, EPA, served as Technical
Manager and was responsible for coordinating the emission test
program.
-111-
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Paqe
SUMMARY OF EMISSION TEST RESULTS (A: ENGLISH UNITS AND
B: METRIC UNITS)
Table 1.1 - TP #1 - Baghouse I (Dryer) Inlet 6-7
Table 1.2 - TP #2 - Baghouse I (Dryer) Outlet 8-9
Table 1.3 - TP #5 - Baghouse II Outlet 10-11
Table 1.4 - TP #9 - Baghouse II Inlet From Hummer Screens 12-13
Table 1.5 - TP #11- Baghouse II Inlet From Tertiary Crusher 14-15
Table 1.6 - TP #18- Baghouse II Inlet From Automatic Hopper
and Hummer Screens 16-17
Table 1.7 - TP #19- Baghouse II Inlet From Chain Elevator,
Rod Deck Screen, Tertiary Crusher, and
Rod Mill 18-19
Table 1.8 - TP #20- Baghouse II Inlet From Mixing Screw
Conveyor 20-21
Table 2.1 - Baghouse I - Comparison of Inlet and Outlet
Emission Test Results and Determination of
Baghouse Collection Efficiency
(A: English Units and B: Metric Units) 22-23
Table 2.2 - Baghouse II - Comparison of Inlet and Outlet
Emission Test Results and Determination of
Baghouse Collection Efficiency
(A: English Units and B: Metric Units) 24-25
SUMMARY OF PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST RESULTS:
Table 3.1 - TP #1 - Baghouse I (Dryer) Inlet 26
Table 3.2 - TP #2 - Baghouse I (Dryer) Outlet 27
Table 3.3 - TP #5 - Baghouse II Outlet 28
Table 3.4 - TP #9 - Baghouse II Inlet From Hummer Screens 29
Table 3.5 - TP #11- Baghouse II Inlet From Tertiary Crusher 30
-v-
-------
Paqe
Table 3.6 - TP #18- Baghouse II Inlet From Automatic
Hopper and Hummer Screens 31
Table 3.7 - TP #19- Baghouse II Inlet From Chain Elevator,
Rod Deck Screen, Tertiary Crusher,
and Rod Mill 32
Table 3.8 - TP #20- Baghouse II Inlet From Mixing Screw
Conveyor 33
SUMMARY OF OPACITY AND EMISSION FREQUENCY MEASUREMENTS
Table 4.1 - TP #3 - Baghouse I (Dryer) Outlet Stack 42
Table 4.2 - TP #4 - Hardinge Dryer Outlet 43
Table 4.3 - TP #12- Distribution Hopper To Storage Bin 44
Table 4.4 - TP #13- Inlet To Baghouse II At Mixing Screw
Conveyor 45
Table 4.5 - TP #14- Hummer Screens 46
Table 4.6 - TP #16- Automatic Hopper 47
Table 4.7 - TP #17- Baghouse II Outlet Stack 48
Table 5 - Determination of Polonium - 210 49
Table 6 - Trace Element Analyses 50
Table 7 - Ore Moisture Content 52
Table 8 - Determination of Ore Hardness 53
Table 9 - Baghouse I - Summary of Method 9 and
Method 22 Data 60
Table 10 - Baghouse II - Summary of Method 9 and
Method 22 Data 61
-vi-
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
1.1 - TP #1 - Particle Size Distribution 34
1.2 - TP #2 - Particle Size Distribution 35
1.3 - TP #5 - Particle Size Distribution 36
1.4 - TP #9 - Particle Size Distribution 37
1.5 - TP #11- Particle Size Distribution 38
1.6 - TP #18- Particle Size Distribution 39
1.7 - TP #19- Particle Size Distribution 40
1.8 - TP #20- Particle Size Distribution 41
2 - Schematic Of Sterling Mine Processes 56
3 - Particulate Test Sites - Baghouse I and II Inlets
and Outlets 64
4 - TP #1 - Sampling Point Locations 70
5 - TP #2 - Sampling Point Locations 71
6 - TP #9 - Sampling Point Locations 72
7 - TP #11- Sampling Point Locations 73
8 - TP #18- Sampling Point Locations 74
9 - TP #19- Sampling Point Locations 75
10 - TP #20- Sampling Point Locations 76
11 - TP #5 - Sampling Point Locations 77
12 - TP #3 and TP #17 - Position of Observer 78
13 - TP #4 - Position of Observers 79
14 - TP #12- Position of Observers 80
15 - TP #13- Position of Observers 81
16 - TP #14- Position of Observers 82
17 - TP #16- Position of Observers 83
18 - Andersen Stack Sampler 87
19 - Particulate Sampling Train 90
20 - Andersen Sampling Train 94
Al - Psychrometric Graph Used To Determine Moisture
Content of Gas App.6.4.1
-vii-
-------
1.0 INTRODUCTION
York Research Corporation (YRC) was requested by the
United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) to
perform an emission test program at a zinc processing
plant. This request was based on a pretest survey con-
ducted on October 22, 1979. The test program was con-
ducted at New Jersey Zinc Company's Sterling Mine - West
Circuit in Ogdensburg, New Jersey on November 19-21, 1979,
November 27-29, 1979, and December 3-5, 1979.
The Sterling Mine was selected for its design and opera-
tion characteristics which provided the opportunity to
sample many sources with the Best Available Control Tech-
nology (BACT) in a worst-case situation (i.e., there are
large quantities of dry process particulate). The objec-
tive of the test program was to provide data useful in the
determination of an appropriate level at which to set the
New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for the metallic
mineral processing industry.
The test program consisted of sampling and analysis of
particulate emissions generated by crushing, screening,
drying and conveying operations. Samples were collected
for determination of particulate emission rate, particle
size distribution, particulate radioactivity (i.e. Po^O)
and trace element concentration and ore moisture content
and crushing strength (hardness). In addition, visible
emission methods were employed for percent opacity and
fugitive emission frequency measurements.
-1-
-------
2.0 SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
2.1 Particulate Emissions
Tables 1.1 through 1.8 present the results of the
particulate tests, in English and metric units, for
each location. The baghouse collection efficiencies
(E) are determined from the particulate emission
rates at the inlet(s) and outlet from this equation:
E (%) = ( Inlet Rate) - (Outlet Rate) x 100
( Inlet Rate)
The results are given in Tables 2.1 and 2.2. For
Baghouse II, the flow rates of TP #18, TP #19 and TP
#20 were combined for the inlet value.
2.2 Particle Size Distribution
Tables 3.1 through 3.8 present the percent (by mass)
of particles for various size ranges (diameter in
microns) at each test location.
Although a cyclone preseparator was used to precut
particles >10u (see 5.1, Sampling Apparatus), a large
percentage of particles at the baghouse inlets (>60%)
were greater than lOu regardless of the particulate
concentration (compare TP #1 with other inlets). The
percentage of particles >10u decreases at the
baghouse outlets.
Particle size vs. cumulative percent by weight plots
are shown for each test site in Figures 1.1 - 1.8.
-3-
-------
2.3 Visible Emissions
Tables 4.1 through 4.7 summarize the results of opa-
city measurements and fugitive emission frequencies.
Opacity measurements were recorded every 15 seconds,
and the average value in a six-minute interval is
presented.
The high opacity readings for Baghouse I (especially
Test 1 and 2), were indicative of abnormal process
operation (See 3.2 Process Operation).
Fugitive emissions were constant at the Distribution
Hopper (TP #12). The observer reported that during
Test 3 the process was being run at half load, so the
opacity values were lower than in Test 2 and Test 4.
At the Hummer Screens (TP #14), the emission fre-
quency increased to 100% (from 63% and 78%) during
Test 3 when the dust hoods were removed while plant
personnel worked on the screens. The hoods were
replaced 10 minutes into Test 4, but the emissions
remained constant. There was no change in opacity
corresponding to the removal and subsequent
replacement of the dust hoods.
2.4 Particulate Radioactivity
The particulate samples (i.e., filters and acetone
wash residues) from the Baghouse I inlet and outlet
(TP#1 and TP#2) were analyzed for polonium - 210.
The results, in picocuries per gram are shown in
Table 5.*
* Laboratory result were reported for more than one test
program. The results for this test program are circled
on the report, see Appendix 6.3.
-4-
-------
2.5 Trace Element Analysis
Two particulate samples were analyzed for trace
elements. The filter catch (one of two filters) from
TP#1, Test 2 and TP#19, Test 3 were analyzed by spark
source mass spectroscopy (SSMS). The results, in
parts-per-million, are presented in Table 6.*
2.6 Ore Samples
Grab ore sampes were taken from various locations
during emission testing to ascertain if a correlation
between ore moisture content and inlet emissions may
be developed. The moisture results are summarized in
Table 7.
Ore from the crushing pit was measured for its
crushing strength to determine whether there was a
relationship between degree of hardness and potential
emissions. The results of the ore hardness analyses
are presented in Table 8.* Higher numerical values
indicate greater hardness. "C" refers to the highest
(i.e. hardest) Rockwell® scale.
* Laboratory result were reported for more than one test
program. The results for this test program are circled
on the report, see Appendix 6.3.
-5-
-------
TABLE 1.1A
SUMMARY OF EMISSION TEST RESULTS
TP #1 - BAGHOUSE I (DRYER) INLET
ENGLISH UNITS
Test 1 Test 2
Test 3 Average
Date
Time
11-20-79 11-20-79 11-20-79
0930-1117 1255-1447 1526-1705
Volume of Dry Gas
Sampled (DSCF)a
Percent Moisture By
Volume
Average Stack
Temperature, °F
Stack Volumetric Flow
Rate (DSCFM)b
Percent Isokinetic
Total Particulate
Filter Catch and
Front Half Acetone
Wash
mg
gr/DSCF
Ib /hr
79.94
1.3
70.0
3354
98.5
94.22
5.8
70.0
4134
94.2
73.88
4.2
70.0
2915
104.8
82.68
3.8
70.0
3468
99.2
10112.51 69934.80 26743.66 35596.99
1.94805 11.43107 5.57455 6.31789
56.01 405.09 139.29 200.13
f-Dry Standard Cubic Feet at 68°F, 29.92 inches Hg.
bDry Standard Cubic Feet Per Minute at 68°F, 29.92 inches Hg.
-6-
-------
TABLE 1.1B
SUMMARY OF EMISSION TEST RESULTS
TP #1 - BAGHOUSE I (DRYER) INLET
METRIC UNITS
Date
Time
Volume of Gas
Sampled (DNM3)a
Percent Moisture by
Volume
Average Stack
Temperature, °C
Stack Volumetric Flow
Rate, (DNM3/Min. )b
Percent Isokinetic
Total Particulate
Filter Catch and
Front Half Acetone
Wash
mg
mg/DNMJ
Kg/Hr
Test 1 Test 2
11-20-79 11-20-79
0930-1117 1255-1447
2.26 2.67
1.3 5.8
21.1 21.1
95 117
98.5 94.2
10112.51 69934.80
4457.87 26158.62
25.41 183.75
Test 3 Average
11-20-79
1526-1705
2.09 2.34
4.2 3.8
21.1 21.1
83 98
104.8 99.2
26743.66 35596.99
12756.67 14457.72
63.18 90.78
Normalized Cubic Meters at 20°C, 760 mm Hg.
Normalized Cubic Meters Per Minute at 20°C, 760 mm Hg.
-7-
-------
TABLE 1.2A
SUMMARY OF EMISSION TEST RESULTS
TP #2 BAGHOUSE I (DRYER) OUTLET
ENGLISH UNITS
Date
Time
Volume of Dry Gas
Sampled (DSCF)a
Percent Moisture By
Volume
Average Stack
Temperature, °F
Stack Volumetric Flow
Rate (DSCFM)b
Percent Isokinetic
Total Particulate
Filter Catch and
Front Half Acetone
Wash
mg
gr/DSCF
Ib /hr
Test 1
11-20-79
0937-1126
50.17
2.2
70.0
4422
102.3
57.91
0.01778
0.67
Test 2
11-20-79
1251-1451
51.85
3.7
100.0
4309
108.5
648.05+
0.19249+
7.11 +
Test 3
11-20-79
1531-1709
49-96
2.8
93.6
4560
98.8
86.82
0.02676
1.05
Average
-
50.66
2.9
87.9
4430
103.2
264.26
0.07901
2.94
f-Dry Standard Cubic Feet at 68°F, 29.92 inches Hg.
*>Dry Standard Cubic Feet Per Minute at 68°F, 29.92 inches Hg.
+Not Operating at Normal Conditions.
-------
TABLE 1.2B
SUMMARY OF EMISSION TEST RESULTS
TP #2 - BAGHOUSE I (DRYER) OUTLET
METRIC UNITS
Date
Time
Volume of Gas
Sampled (DNM3)a
Percent Moisture by
Volume
Average Stack
Temperature, °C
Stack Volumetric Flow
Rate, (DNM3/Min. )b
Percent Isokinetic
Total Particulate
Filter Catch and
Front Half Acetone
Wash
mg
mg/DNMJ
Kg/Hr
Test 1
11-20-79
0937-1126
1.42
2.2
21.1
125
102.3
57.91
40.68
0.31
Test 2 Test 3
11-20-79 11-20-79
1251-1451 1531-1709
1.47 1.41
3.7 2.8
37.8 34.2
122 129
108.5 98.8
648.05+ 86.82
440.48+ 61.24
3.22+ 0.47
Average
1.43
2.9
31.0
125
103.2
264.26
180.80
1.33
aDry Normalized Cubic Meters at 20°C, 760 mm Hg.
bDry Normalized Cubic Meters Per Minute at 20°C, 760 mm Hg.
+Not Operating at Normal Conditions.
-9-
-------
TABLE 1.3A
SUMMARY OF EMISSION TEST RESULTS
TP #5 - BAGHOUSE II OUTLET
ENGLISH UNITS
Date
Time
Volume of Dry Gas
Sampled (DSCF)a
Percent Moisture By
Volume
Average Stack
Temperature, °F
Stack Volumetric Flow
Rate (DSCFM)b
Percent Isokinetic
Total Particulate
Filter Catch and
Front Half Acetone
Wash
mg
gr/DSCF
Ib /hr
Test 1
11-27-79
1430-1614
63.04
0.7
62.3
5251
108.2
157.52
0.03848
1.73
Test 2
11-28-79
0857-1037
57.18
1.2
70.5
4673
110.3
189.19
0.05096
2.04
Test 3
11-28-79
1300-1440
57.76
1.3
73.3
4769
109.2
238.41
0.06357
2.60
Average
-
59.33
1.1
68.7
4898
109.3
195.04
0.05100
2.12
fDry Standard Cubic Feet at 68°F, 29.92 inches Hg.
toDry Standard Cubic Feet Per Minute at 68°F, 29.92 inches Hg.
-10-
-------
TABLE 1.3B
SUMMARY OF EMISSION TEST RESULTS
TP #5 - BAGHOUSE II OUTLET
METRIC UNITS
Date
Time
Volume of Gas
Sampled (DNM3)a
Percent Moisture by
Volume
Average Stack
Temperature, "C
Stack Volumetric Flow
Rate, (DNM3/Min )b
Percent Isokinetic
Total Particulate
Filter Catch and
Front Half Acetone
Wash
mg
mg/DNMJ
Kg/Hr
Test 1 Test 2
11-27-79 11-28-79
1430-1614 0857-1037
1.79 1.62
0.7 1.2
16.8 21.4
149 132
108.2 110.3
157.52 189.19
88.06 116.61
0.79 0.93
Test 3 Average
11-28-79
1300-1440
1.64 1.68
1.3 1.1
23.0 20.4
135 139
109.2 109.3
238.41 195.04
145.47 116.71
1.18 0.96
aDry Normalized Cubic Meters at 20°C, 760 mm Hg.
bDry Normalized Cubic Meters Per Minute at 20°C, 760 mm Hg.
-11-
-------
TABLE 1.4A
SUMMARY OF EMISSION TEST RESULTS
TP #9 - BAGHOUSE II INLET FROM HUMMER SCREENS
ENGLISH UNITS
Date
Time
Volume of Dry Gas
Sampled (DSCF)a
Percent Moisture By
Volume
Average Stack
Temperature, °F
Stack Volumetric Flow
Rate (DSCFM)b
Percent Isokinetic
Total Particulate
Filter Catch and
Front Half Acetone
Wash
mg
gr/DSCF
Ib /hr
Test 1
11-27-79
1441-1611
42.86
6.0
87.5
157
103.6
1443.66
0.51871
0.70
Test 2
11-28-79
0902-1032
42.16
5.1
82.4
158
101.0
1406.81
0.51383
0.70.
Test 3
11-28-79
1300-1430
42.21
4.1
83.3
159
100.4
1299.76
0.47420
0.65
Average
-
42.41
5.1
84.4
158
101.7
1383.41
0.50225
0.68
aDry Standard Cubic Feet at 68°F, 29.92 inches Hg.
bDry Standard Cubic Feet Per Minute at 68°F, 29.92 inches Hg.
-12-
-------
TABLE 1.4B
SUMMARY OF EMISSION TEST RESULTS
TP #9 - BAGHOUSE II INLET FROM HUMMER SCREENS
METRIC UNITS
Date
Time
Volume of Gas
Sampled (DNM3)a
Percent Moisture by
Volume
Average Stack
Temperature, °C
Stack Volumetric Flow
Rate, (DNM3/Min )b
Percent Isokinetic
Total Particulate
Filter Catch and
Front Half Acetone
Wash
mg
mg/DNM3
Kg/Hr
Test 1 Test 2
11-27-79 11-28-79
1441-1611 0902-1032
1.21 1.19
6.0 5.1
30.8 28.0
4 4
103.6 101.0
1443.66 1406.81
1187.00 1175.84
0.32 0.32
Test 3 Average
11-28-79
1300-1430
1.20 1.20
4.1 5.1
28.5 29.1
5 4
100.4 101.7
1299.76 1383.41
1085.16 1149.33
0.29 0.31
aDry Normalized Cubic Meters at 20°C, 760 mm Hg.
bDry Normalized Cubic Meters Per Minute at 20°C, 760 mm Hg.
-13-
-------
TABLE 1.5A
SUMMARY OF EMISSION TEST RESULTS
TP #11 - BAGHOUSE II INLET FROM TERTIARY CRUSHER
ENGLISH UNITS
Test 1 Test 2
Test 3 Average
Date
Time
11-27-79 11-28-79 11-28-79
1610-1751 0850-1028 1300-1439
Volume of Dry Gas
Sampled (DSCF)a 47.11
Percent Moisture By
Volume 2.6
Average Stack
Temperature, °F 65.0
Stack Volumetric Flow
Rate (DSCFM)b 378
Percent Isokinetic 101.4
Total Particulate
Filter Catch and
Front Half Acetone
Wash
mg 70377.67
gr/DSCF 23.00488
lb /hr 74.55
41.70
1.8
66.9
46.64
2.0
73.8
45.15
2.2
68.5
326 368 357
104.0 103.1 102.8
27068.40 51685.77 49710.62
9.99571 17.06581 16.68880
27.96 53.82 52.11
f-Dry Standard Cubic Feet at 68°F, 29.92 inches Hg.
bDry Standard Cubic Feet Per Minute at 68°F, 29.92 inches Hg.
-14-
-------
TABLE 1.5B
SUMMARY OF EMISSION TEST RESULTS
TP #11 - BAGHOUSE II INLET FROM TERTIARY CRUSHER
METRIC UNITS
Date
Time
Volume of Gas
Sampled (DNM3)a
Percent Moisture by
Volume
Average Stack
Temperature, °C
Stack Volumetric Flow
Rate, (DNM3/Min )b
Percent Isokinetic
Total Particulate
Filter Catch and
Front Half Acetone
Wash
mg
mg/DNM3
Kg/Hr
Test 1 Test 2
11-27-79 11-28-79
1610-1751 0850-1028
1.33 1.18
2.6 1.8
18.3 19.4
11 9
101.4 104.0
70377.67 27068.40
52643.86 22873.96
33.81 12.68
Test 3 Average
11-28-79
1300-1439
1.32 1.28
2.0 2.2
23.2 20.3
10 10
103.1 102.8
51685.77 49710.62
39053.03 38190.28
24.41 23.64
aDry Normalized Cubic Meters at 20°C, 760 mm Hg.
bDry Normalized Cubic Meters Per Minute at 20°C, 760 mm Hg.
-15-
-------
TABLE 1.6A
SUMMARY OF EMISSION TEST RESULTS
TP #18 - BAGHOUSE II INLET FROM
AUTOMATIC HOPPER AND HUMMER SCREENS
ENGLISH UNITS
Date
Time
Volume of Dry Gas
Sampled (DSCF)a
Percent Moisture By
Volume
Average Stack
Temperature, 8F
Stack Volumetric Flow
Rate (DSCFM)b
Percent Isokinetic
Total Particulate
Filter Catch and
Front Half Acetone
Wash
mg
gr/DSCF
Ib /hr
Test 1
11-27-79
1443-1619
54.46
1.2
90.4
417
93.5
752.54
0.21281
0.76
Test 2
11-28-79
0855-1033
56.31
3.9
75.0
414
97.4
748.11
0.20461
0.73
Test 3
11-28-79
1256-1432
46.06
2.1
80.8
330
99.9
820.85
0.27446
0.78
Average
-
52.28
2.4
82.1
387
96.9
773.83
0.23063
0.75
aDry Standard Cubic Feet at 68°F, 29.92 inches Hg.
bDry Standard Cubic Feet Per Minute at 68°F, 29.92 inches Hg.
-16-
-------
TABLE 1.6B
SUMMARY OF EMISSION TEST RESULTS
TP #18 - BAGHOUSE II INLET FROM
AUTOMATIC HOPPER AND HUMMER SCREENS
METRIC UNITS
Date
Time
Volume of Gas
Sampled (DNM3)a
Percent Moisture by
Volume
Average Stack
Temperature, °C
Stack Volumetric Flow
Rate, (DNM3/Min )b
Percent Isokinetic
Total Particulate
Filter Catch and
Front Half Acetone
Wash
mg
mg/DNM3
Kg/Hr
Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Average
11-27-79 11-28-79 11-28-79
1443-1619 0855-1033 1256-1432
1.54 1.59 1.30 1.48
1.2 3.9 2.1 2.4
32.5 23.9 27.1 27.8
12 12 9 11
93.5 97.4 99.9 96.9
752.54 748.11 820.85 773.83
486.98 468.23 628.06 527.76
0.35 0.33 0.35 0.34
aDry Normalized Cubic Meters at 20°C, 760 mm Hg.
bDry Normalized Cubic Meters Per Minute at 20°C, 760 mm Hg.
-17-
-------
TABLE 1.7A
SUMMARY OF EMISSION TEST RESULTS
TP #19 - BAGHOUSE II INLET FROM CHAIN ELEVATOR, ROD
DECK SCREEN, TERTIARY CRUSHER, AND ROD MILL
ENGLISH UNITS
Test 1 Test 2
Test 3 Average
Date
Time
11-27-79 11-28-79 11-28-79
1437-1619 0858-1039 1304-1443
Volume of Dry Gas
Sampled (DSCF)a
Percent Moisture By
Volume
Average Stack
Temperature, °F
Stack Volumetric Flow
Rate (DSCFM)b
Percent Isokinetic
Total Particulate
Filter Catch and
Front Half Acetone
Wash
mg
gr/DSCF
Ib /hr
50.53
1.8
56.8
2462
95.0
58.67
1.9
57.8
2947
92.2
39.46
1.6
58.2
1834
99.6
49.55
1.8
57.6
2414
95.6
16696.74 13376.40 15387.68 15153.61
5.08894 3.51124 6.00478 4.86832
107.39 88.69 94.41 96.83
aDry Standard Cubic Feet at 68°F, 29.92 inches Hg.
t>Dry Standard Cubic Feet Per Minute at 68°F, 29.92 inches Hg.
-------
TABLE 1.7B
SUMMARY OF EMISSION TEST RESULTS
TP #19 - BAGHOUSE II INLET FROM CHAIN ELEVATOR, ROD
DECK SCREEN, TERTIARY CRUSHER, AND ROD MILL
METRIC UNITS
Date
Time
Volume of Gas
Sampled (DNM3)a
Percent Moisture by
Volume
Average Stack
Temperature, °C
Stack Volumetric Flow
Rate, (DNM3/Min )b
Percent Isokinetic
Total Particulate
Filter Catch and
Front Half Acetone
Wash
mg
mg/DNMJ
Kg/Hr
Test 1 Test 2
11-27-79 11-28-79
1437-1619 0858-1039
1.43 1.66
1.8 1.9
13.8 14.4
70 83
95.0 92.2
16696.74 13376.40
11645.43 8035.04
48.71 40.23
Test 3 Average
11-28-79
1304-1443
1.12 1.40
1.6 1.8
14.5 14.2
52 68
99.6 95.6
15387.68 15153.61
13741.22 11140.56
42.82 43.92
aDry Normalized Cubic Meters at 20°C, 760 mm Hg.
t>Dry Normalized Cubic Meters Per Minute at 20°C, 760 mm Hg.
-19-
-------
TABLE 1.8A
SUMMARY OF EMISSION TEST RESULTS
TP #20 - BAGHOUSE II INLET FROM MIXING SCREW CONVEYOR
ENGLISH UNITS
Date
Time
Volume of Dry Gas
Sampled (DSCF)a
Percent Moisture By
Volume
Average Stack
Temperature, 8F
Stack Volumetric Flow
Rate (DSCFM)b
Percent Isokinetic
Total Particulate
Filter Catch and
Front Half Acetone
Wash
mg
gr/DSCF
Ib /hr
Test 1
11-27-79
1447-1628
54.65
1.5
65.0
459
104.6
6720.76
1.89387
7.45
Test 2
11-28-79
0851-1031
53.76
1.9
65.0
443
106.5
2661.29
0.76230
2.90
Test 3
11-28-79
1256-1435
51.28
1.5
65.0
422
106.8
2321.80
0.69731
2.52
Average
-
53.23
1.6
65.0
441
106.0
3901.28
1.11783
4.29
aDry Standard Cubic Feet at 68°F, 29.92 inches Hg.
bDry Standard Cubic Feet Per Minute at 68°F, 29.92 inches Hg.
-20-
-------
TABLE 1.8B
TP #20 - BAGHOUSE II INLET FROM MIXING SCREW CONVEYOR
METRIC UNITS
Date
Time
Volume of Gas
Sampled (DNM3)a
Percent Moisture by
Volume
Average Stack
Temperature, °C
Stack Volumetric Flow
Rate, (DNM3/Min )b
Percent Isokinetic
Total Particulate
Filter Catch and
Front Half Acetone
Wash
mg
mg/DNM3
Kg/Hr
Run 1 Run 2
11-27-79 11-28-79
1447-1628 0851-1031
1.55 1.52
1.5 1.9
18.3 18.3
13 13
104.6 106.5
6720.76 2661.29
4333.90 1744.43
3.38 1.31
Run 3 Average
11-28-79
1256-1435
1.45 1.51
1.5 1.6
18.3 18.3
12 13
106.8 106.0
2321.80 3901.28
1595.70 2558.01
1.14 1.95
aDry Normalized Cubic Meters at 20°C, 760 mm Hg.
bDry Normalized Cubic Meters Per Minute at 20°C, 760 mm Hg.
-21-
-------
TABLE 2.1A
BAGHOUSE I - COMPARISON OF INLET AND OUTLET
EMISSION TEST RESULTS AND DETERMINATION OF
BAGHOUSE COLLECTION EFFICIENCY
(ENGLISH UNITS)
Location
Date
Volume of Gas Sampled
(DSCF)a
Percent Moisture by
Vo 1 ume
Average Stack
Temperature, °F
Stack Volumetric Flow
Rate (DSCFM)b
Percent Isokinetic
Total Particulate
Filter Catch and Front
Half Acetone Wash
t
mg
Lb. /Hr.
Collection Efficiency0
Test #1
Inlet Outlet
TP #1 TP #2
11/20/79 11/20/79
79.94 50.17
1.3 2.2
70.0 70.0
3354 4422
98.5 102.3
10112.51 57.91
56.01 0.67
98
Test #2
Inlet Outlet
TP #1 TP #2
11/20/79 11/20/79
94.22 51.85
5.8 3.7
70.0 100.0
4134 4309
94.2 108.5
S9934.80 648.05
405.09 7.11
98.2
Test #3
Inlet Outlet
TP #1 TP #2
11/20/79 11/20/79
73.88 49.96
4.2 2.8
70.0 93.6
2915 4560
104.8 98.8
26743.66 86.82
139.29 1.05
99.2
Average
Inlet Outlet
TP #1 TP #2
82.68 50.66
3.8 2.9
70.0 87.9
3468 4430
99.2 103.2
35596.99 264.26
200.13 2.94
98.5
aDry Standard Cubic Feet at 68°F, 29.92 Inches Hg.
bDry Standard Cubic Feet Per Minute at 68°F, 29.92 Inches Hg.
cBased On Rate (Lb./Hr.)
-------
TABLE 2.IB
BAGHOUSE I - COMPARISON OF INLET AND OUTLET
EMISSION TEST RESULTS AND DETERMINATION OF
BAGHOUSE COLLECTION EFFICIENCY
(METRIC UNITS)
Location
Date
Volume of Gas Sampled
( DNM3 ) a
Percent Moisture by
Volume
Average Stack
Temperature, °C
Stack Volumetric Flow
Rate (DNM3/Min.)b
Percent Isokinetic
Total Particulate
Filter Catch and Front
Half Acetone Wash
mg
Kg/Hr.
Collection Efficiency0
Test #1
Inlet Outlet
TP #1 TP #2
11/20/79 11/20/79
2.26 1.42
1.3 2.2
21.1 21.1
95 125
98.5 102.3
10112.51 57.91
25.41 0.31
98.8
Test #2
Inlet Outlet
TP #1 TP #2
11/20/79 11/20/79
2.67 1.47
5.8 3.7
21.1 37.8
117 122
94.2 108.5
59934.80 648.05
183.75 3.22
98.2
Test #3 .
Inlet Outlet
TP #1 TP #2
11/20/79 11/20/79
2.09 1.41
4.2 2.8
21.1 34.2
83 129
104.8 98.8
26743.66 86.82
63.18 0.47
99.2
Average
Inlet Outlet
TP #1 TP #2
2.34 1.43
3.8 2.9
21.1 31.0
98 125
99.2 103.2
35596.99 264.26
90.78 1.33
98.5
aDry Normalized Cubic Meters at 20°C, 760 mm Hg.
bDry Normalized Cubic Meters per Minute at 20°C, 760 mm Hg/min.
GBased On Rate (Kg/Hr.)
-------
TABLE 2.2A
BAGHOUSE II - COMPARISON OF INLET AND OUTLET
EMISSION TEST RESULTS AND DETERMINATION OF
BAGHOUSE COLLECTION EFFICIENCY
(ENGLISH UNITS)
Location
Date
Stack Volumetric Flow
Rate (DSCFM)b
Total Particulate
Filter Catch and Front
Half Acetone Wash
mg
Lb/Hr
Collection Efficiency,
Percentc
Run #1
Inlet Outlet
TP#18,19,20 TP #5
11/27/79 11/27/79
3338 5251
24170.04 157.52
115.60 1.73
98.5
Run #2
Inlet Outlet
rP#18,19,20 TP #5
11/28/79 11/28/79
3804 4673
16785.80 189.19
92.32 2.04
97.8
Run #3
Inlet Outlet
TP#18,19,20 TP #5
11/28/79 11/28/79
2586 4769
18530.33 238.41
97.71 2.60
97.3
Average
Inlet Outlet
TP#18,19,20 TP #5
3242 4898
19828.72 195.04
101.88 2.12
97.9
K)
I
aDry Standard Cubic Feet at 68°F, 29.92 Inches Hg.
bDry Standard Cubic Feet Per Minute at 68°F, 29.92 Inches Hg,
°Based On Rate (Lb/Hr)
-------
TABLE 2.2B
BAGHOUSE II - COMPARISON OF INLET AND OUTLET
EMISSION TEST RESULTS AND DETERMINATION OF
BAGHOUSE COLLECTION EFFICIENCY
(METRIC UNITS)
Location
Date
Stack Volumetric Flow
Rate (DNM3/Min)b
Insoluble Particulate
Filter Catch and Front
Half Acetone Wash
mg
Kg/Hr
Collection Efficiency,
Percentc
Run #1
Inlet Outlet
TP#18,19,20 TP #5
11/27/79 11/27/79
95 149
24170.04 157.52
52.44 0.79
98.5
Run #2
Inlet Outlet
TP#18,19,20 TP #5
11/28/79 11/28/79
108 132
16785.80 189.19
41.87 0.93
97.8
Run #3
Inlet Outlet
TP#18,19,20 TP #5
11/28/79 11/28/79
73 135
18530.33 238.41
44.31 1.18
97.3
Average
Inlet Outlet
TP#18,19,20 TP #5
92 139
L9828.72 195.04
46.21 0.96
97.9
I
to
aDry Normalized Cubic Meters at 20°C,760 mm Hg.
bDry Normalized Cubic Meters at 20°C, 760 mm Hg.
GBased On Rate (Kg/Hr)
-------
TABLE 3.1
SUMMARY OF PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST RESULTS
TP #1 - BAGHOUSE I (DRYER) INLET
NEW JERSEY ZINC CO., STERLING MINE
Particulate Particle
Test Test Test Concentration Size Range
Number Date Time (gr/DSCF) (Microns)
1 11/21/79 0919-0949 0.01873 >10.58
10.58- 6.60
6.60- 4.47
4.47- 3.05
3.05- 1.95
1.95- 0.97
0.97- 0.60
0.60- 0.42
<0.42
2 11/21/79 1016-1101 0.01985 >10.58
10.58- 6.60
6.60- 4.47
4.47- 3.05
3.05- 1.95
1.95- 0.97
0.97- 0.60
0.60- 0.42
<0.42
Mass In
Size Range
(%)
65.46
7.23
3.96
1.72
2.05
2.18
0.86
2.04
14.05
62.16
10.55
12.09
5.51
2.83
0.35
0.00
0.58
5.92
3 11/21/79 1109-1154 0.10688
>10.62
10.62- 6.63
6.63- 4.49
4.49- 3.06
3.06- 1.96
1.96- 0.98
0.98- 0.60
0.60- 0.41
<0.41
63.13
15.87
13.35
4.31
0.68
0.61
0.00
0.14
1.90
-26-
-------
TABLE 3.2
SUMMARY OF PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST RESULTS
TP #2 - BAGHOUSE I (DRYER) OUTLET
NEW JERSEY ZINC CO., STERLING MINE
Test Test Test
Number Date Time
1 11/21/79
Particulate Particle
Concentration Size Range
(gr/DSCF) (Microns)
0.00173 >13.75
13.75- 8.59
8.59- 5.83
5.83- 3.97
3.97- 2.55
2.55- 1.29
1.29- 0.79
0.79- 0.55
<0.55
Mass In
Size Range
(%)
15.02
21.74
14.62
16.21
8.70
3.56
9.49
3.95
6.72
-27-
-------
TABLE 3.3
SUMMARY OF PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST RESULTS
TP #5 - BAGHOUSE II OUTLET
NEW JERSEY ZINC CO., STERLING MINE
Particulate
Test Test Test Concentration
Number Date Time (gr/DSCF)
1 12/05/79 0854-1054 0.01528
Particle
Size Range
(Microns )
>15.57
15.57- 9.72
9.72- 6.58
6.58- 4.48
4.48- 2.87
2.87- 1.43
1.43- 0.88
0.88- 0.61
<0.61
Mass In
Size Range
10.09
18.91
20.56
11.70
15.67
14.24
7.11
1.37
0.35
-28-
-------
TABLE 3.4
SUMMARY OF PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST RESULTS
TP #9 - BAGHOUSE II INLET FROM HUMMER SCREENS
NEW JERSEY ZINC CO., STERLING MINE
Particulate Particle
Test Test Test Concentration Size Range
Number Date Time (qr/DSCF) (Microns)
1 12/04/79 1317-1402 1.22916 >14.83
14.83- 9.27
9.27- 6.28
6.28- 4.29
4.29- 2.76
2.76- 1.39
1.39- 0.86
0.86- 0.60
<0.60
2 12/04/79 1440-1510 0.93996 >15.71
15.71- 9.80
9.80- 6.64
6.64- 4.52
4.52- 2.90
2.90- 1.45
1.45- 0.89
0.89- 0.61
<0.61
3 12/04/79 1533-1603 3.63653 >15.71
15.71- 9.80
9.80- 6.64
6.64- 4.52
4.52- 2.90
2.90- 1.45
1.45- 0.89
0.89- 0.61
<0.61
Mass In
Size Range
(%)
78.52
3.39
3.98
4.37
4.47
3.51
1.41
0.30
0.07
82.91
1.10
3.13
3.85
4.70
3.11
1.17
0.02
0.00
92.37
0.38
1.03
1.35
1.88
1.84
0.83
0.28
0.04
-29-
-------
TABLE 3.5
SUMMARY OF PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST RESULTS
TP #11 - BAGHOUSE II INLET FROM TERTIARY CRUSHER
NEW JERSEY ZINC CO., STERLING MINE
Particulate Particle
Test Test Test Concentration Size Range
Number Date Time (gr/DSCF) (Microns)
1 12/04/79 1407-1437 7.09291 >14.88
14.88- 9.28
9.28- 6.28
6.28- 4.28
4.28- 2.74
2.74- 1.36
1.36- 0.83
0.83- 0.58
<0.58
2 12/04/79 1602-1632 8.17872 >14.58
14.58- 9.10
9.10- 6.16
6.16- 4.19
4.19- 2.68
2.68- 1.33
1.33- 0.81
0.81- 0.56
<0.56
3 12/04/79 1649-1719 6.90459 >14.59
14.59- 9.10
9.10- 6.16
6.16- 4.19
4.19- 2.68
2.68- 1.34
1.34- 0.81
0.81- 0.57
<0.57
Mass In
Size Range
95.69
0.99
1.39
1.03
0.61
0.25
0.03
0.01
0.00
92.56
1.57
2.67
1.66
1.03
0.41
0.07
0.01
0.01
91.21
2.48
3.06
1.89
0.95
0.35
0.06
0.00
0.00
-30-
-------
TABLE 3.6
SUMMARY OF PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST RESULTS
TP #18 - BAGHOUSE II INLET FROM HUMMER SCREENS
AND AUTOMATIC HOPPER
NEW JERSEY ZINC CO., STERLING MINE
Particulate Particle
Test Test Test Concentration Size Range
'umber Date Time (gr/DSCF) (Microns)
1 12/04/79 0840-0940 0.71566 >13.75
13.75- 8.58
8.58- 5.80
5.80- 3.95
3.95- 2.53
2.53- 1.26
1.26- 0.76
0.76- 0.55
<0.55
2 12/04/79 1005-1050 0.37248 >13.75
13.75- 8.58
8.58- 5.80
5.80- 3.95
3.95- 2.53
2.53- 1.26
1.26- 0.76
0.76- 0.53
<0.53
3 12/04/79 1110-1140 0.67958 >14.04
14.03- 8.76
8.76- 5.93
5.93- 4.03
4.03- 2.58
2.58- 1.28
1.28- 0.78
0.78- 0.55
<0.55
Mass In
Size Range
(%)
91.26
1.05
2.11
1.59
1.98
1.27
0.31
0.14
0.27
88.61
3.38
1.85
0.86
1.67
2.42
1.07
0.12
0.03
83.62
0.36
1.33
2.91
4.29
4.51
1.82
0.44
0.70
-31-
-------
TABLE 3.7
SUMMARY OF PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST RESULTS
TP #19 - BAGHOUSE II INLET FROM CHAIN-ELEVATOR, ROD DECK
SCREEN, TERTIARY CRUSHER, AND ROD MILL
NEW JERSEY ZINC CO., STERLING MINE
Particulate Particle
Test Test Test Concentration Size Range
Number Date Time (gr/DSCF) (Microns)
1 12/05/79 0902-0932 1.41914 >14.67
14.67- 9.15
9.15- 6.20
6.20- 4.22
4.22- 2.70
2.70- 1.34
1.34- 0.82
0.82- 0.57
<0.57
2 12/05/79 1005-1035 4.38642 >14.81
14.81- 9.24
9.24- 6.25
6.25- 4.26
4.26- 2.73
2.73- 1.36
1.36- 0.83
0.83- 0.54
<0.54
3 12/05/79 1050-1120 1.13009 >14.94
14.94- 9.32
9.32- 6.31
6.31- 4.30
4.30- 2.75
2.75- 1.37
1.37- 0.84
0.84- 0.58
<0.58
Mass In
Size Range
(%)
93.24
1.41
1.77 j
1.52
1.26
0.63
0.15
0.00
0.00
89.49
1.93
3.16
2.45
1.62
1.09
0.25
0.01
0.00
89.44
1.74
2.62
2.05
2.28
1.34
0.46
0.07
0.00
-32-
-------
TABLE 3.8
SUMMARY OF PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST RESULTS
TP #20 - BAGHOUSE II INLET - FROM MIXING SCREW CONVEYOR
NEW JERSEY ZINC CO., STERLING MINE
Particulate Particle
Test Test Test Concentration Size Range
lumber Date Time (gr/DSCF) (Microns)
1 12/03/79 1443-1513 1.13526 >14.36
14.36- 8.96
8.96- 6.07
6.07- 4.13
4.13- 2.64
2.64- 1.32
1.32- 0.80
0.80- 0.56
<0.56
2 12/03/79 1546-1616 0.81318 >14.47
14.47- 9.03
9.03- 6.11
6.11- 4.16
4.16- 2.66
2.66- 1.33
1.33- 0.81
0.81- 0.56
<0.56
3 12/03/79 1632-1702 0.47702 >14.57
14.57- 9.09
9.09- 6.15
6.15- 4.19
4.19- 2.68
2.68- 1.33
1.33- 0.81
0.81- 0.57
<0.57
Mass In
Size Range
(%)
97.33
0.12
0.40
0.41
0.74
0.64
0.33
0.00
0.02
97.14
0.27
0.36
0.33
0.66
0.80
0.34
0.05
0.05
95.06
0.80
1.33
1.03
0.83
0.45
0.04
0.14
0.31
-33-
-------
PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION
IOO.O
90.0
80.0
99.99 99.9 99.8 99 98 95 90
2 1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.09 0.01
100.0
70 60 SO 43 30 20
TP#1
Baghouse I Inlet
O - Test 1
- Test 2
- Test 3
20 30 40 50 60 70 30 90 95 96 99 99.8 S9.9 9?99
CUMULATIVE PER CENT SY WEIGHT LESS THAN(Dp)
O.I
FIGURE 1.1
-34-
-------
PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION
99.99 99.9 99.8
99 98 95 90
0-05 0.0 ,00.0
TP#2
Baghouse I
Outlet
0.01 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 95 9899
CUMULATIVE PER CENT BY WEIGHT LESS THAN(Dp)
FIGURE 1.2
-35-
0.2
99.8 99.9 99.99
O.I
-------
PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION
99.99 99.9993 9998 95 90 80706050403020 10 5
2 1 OS 02 0.1 0.05 0.01
TP#5
Baghohouse II
Outlet
100.0
800
90 95 96 99
99.8 99.9 99.99
CUMULATIVE PER CENT BY WEIGHT LESS THAN(Dp)
FIGURE 1.3
-36-
-------
99.99 99.9 99.8
PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION
99 98 95 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.05 0.01
TP#9
Baghouse II Inlet from
Hummer Screens
O - Test 1
Q- Test 2
A - Test 3
20 30 40 SO 60 70 80
ai
0.01 0.05 0.1 0.2 0£ 1 2
CUMULATIVE PER CENT BY WEIGHT LESS THAN(Dp)
FIGURE 1.4
-37-
-------
PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION
99.99 99.9 99.8
99 98 95 90
1 0.5 02 0.1 0.05 0.01
100.0
SOLO
80 70 60 50 40 30 20
TP#11
Baghouse II
Inlet from Tertiary Crusher
- Test 1
- Test 2
- Test 3
O 30 JO 50 60 70 80 90 55 96 99
CUMULATIVE PER CENT BY WEIGHT LESS THAN(Dp)
99.8 59.9 99.99
O.I
FIGURE 1.5
-38-
-------
PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION
99.99 99.9 99.8
99 98 95 90
70 60 50 40 30 20 10 S 2 1 0.5 0.2 0.1.0.05 0.01 t0Qo
aao
7O.O
eao
5QO
40D
30D
20.0
20 30 40 50 60 70 80
TP#18
Baghouse II Inlet from
Automatic Hopper and
Hummer Screens
O - Test 1
D - Test 2
A - Test 3
0.01 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2
iao
9.0 *S
8.0 £
7.0 «n
6.0 O
CE
5.0 O
3.0 UJ
N
2.0
O
H
a:
<
a.
i.o
0.9
0.9
0.7
O.6
O.S
0.4
0.3
0.2
99.8 99.9 99.99
CUMULATIVE PER CENT BY WEIGHT LESS THAN(Dp)
FIGURE 1.6
-39-
-------
PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION
99.99
0.5-
0.4
0.2
O.I
0.01
TP#19-Baghouse II
Inlet from Chain Elevator,
Rod Deck Screen, Tertiary
Crusher and Rod Mill
O
D
A
Test 1
Test 2
Test 3
100.0
80.0
70.0
6QO
500
400
300
ZQO
100
9.0
8.0
7.0
6.0
9.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
UJ
J
0
h
1C
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.9
0.4
0,3
0.2
0.1
0.01 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 1
10
20 30 40 50 60 70 80
90 95
98 99
99.8 99.9
CUMULATIVE PER CENT BY WEIGHT LESS THAN(Dp)
99.99
FIGURE 1.7
-40-
-------
PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION
99.99 99.9 99.8
2 1 0.5 02 0.1 0.05 0.01
100.0
a 0.0
80 70 60 50 40 30 20
TP#20
Baghouse II Inlet
from Mixing Screw
Conveyor
O - Test 1
D - Test 2
A - Test 3
20 30 40 50 60 70 30 90 95 9899
59.8 99.9 99.99
-4- 0.2
0.1
O.I
0.01 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2
CUMULATIVE PER CENT Bf WEIGHT LESS THAN(Dp)
FIGURE 1.8
-41-
-------
TABLE 4.1
TP #3 - BAGHOUSE I (DRYER) OUTLET
SUMMARY OF OPACITY AND EMISSION FREQUENCY MEASUREMENTS
Date 11/20
Time(s) 0957-1035
Test No. 1
Average
Opacity
(Based On
Six Min.
Intervals)
0
1
15
34
37
41a
14
30
42
37
31
27
26
—
—
Emission
Frequency
(%)
Not
Measured
11/20
1257-1454
1042-1124
2
Average
Opacity
(Based On
Six Min.
Intervals)
23
2
1
5
2
4
5
5
9
10
7
7
33
34
33
32b
Emission
Frequency
(%)
Not
Measured
11/20
1530-1645
J
Average
Opacity
(Based On
Six Min.
Intervals )
0
0
3
15
1
2
6
15
5
5
4
0
2C
__
1B«~
~~^
Emission
Prequenq
(%)
Not
Measured
aBased on 4.5 Min. Observation
bBased on 4.75 Min. Observation
GBased on 2.75 Min. Observation
-42-
-------
TABLE 4.2
TP #4 - HARDINGE DRYER EXHAUST AREA
(BAGHOUSE I INLET)
SUMMARY OF OPACITY AND EMISSION FREQUENCY MEASUREMENTS
te 11/20
me 0940-1100
st No. 1
Average
Opacity3
0.00
Emission
Frequency
(%)
0.00
11/20
1300-1430
2
Average
Opacity3
0.00
Emission
Frequency
(%)
0.00
11/20
1530-1640
3
Average
Opacity3
0.00
Emission ,
Frequency!
(%)
0.00
alue given is for entire test period,
-43-
-------
TABLE 4.3
TP #12 - DISTRIBUTION HOPPER TO STORAGE BIN
(BAGHOUSE II INLET)
SUMMARY OF OPACITY AND EMISSION FREQUENCY MEASUREMENTS
Date 11/27/79
Time 1430-1530
Test No. la
Average
Opacity ( % )
(Based On
Six Min.
Intervals )
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
Emission
Frequency
(%)
100
11/27/79
1600-1700
2b
Average
Opacity(%)
(Based On
Six Min.
Intervals )
16
15
15
14
15
15
15
15
15
15
Emission
Frequency
(%)
100
11/28/79
0850-0950
3b
Average
Opacity( %)
(Based On
Six Min.
Intervals )
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
Emission
Frequency
(%)
100
11/28/79
1315-J.415
4b
Average
Opacity( %)
(Based On
Six Min.
Intervals )
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
Emission
Frequency
(%)
100
aObservers were measuring emissions from duct leading to storage bin.
'-'Observers were measuring emissions escaping from top of distribution hopper.
-------
TABLE 4.4
TP #13 - MIXING SCREW CONVEYOR
(BAGHOUSE II INLET)
SUMMARY OF OPACITY AND EMISSION FREQUENCY MEASUREMENTS
1
U1
Date 11/27/79
Time 1430-1530
Test No. 1
Average3
Opacity( %)
0
Emission
Frequency
0
11/27/79
1600-1700
2
Average3
Opacity ( %)
0
Emission
Frequency
0
11/28/79
0850-0950
3
Average3
Opacity ( % )
0
Emission
Frequency
0
11/28/79
1315-1415
4
Average3
Opacity (%)
0
Emissio
Frequen
0
aValue given is for entire test period.
-------
TABLE 4.5
TP #14 HUMMER SCREENS
(BAGHOUSE II INLET)
SUMMARY OF OPACITY AND EMISSION FREQUENCY MEASUREMENTS
Date 11/27/79
Time 1430-1530
Test No. 1
Average
Opacity(%)
(Based On
Six Min.
Intervals)
12
12
18
18
21
12
10
8
8
8
Emission
Frequency
(%)
63
11/27/79
1550-1650
2
Average
Opacity(%)
(Based On
Six Min.
Intervals)
15
12
11
11
12
12
10
11
11
11
Emission
Frequency
(%)
78
11/28/79
0850-0950
3
Average
Opacity( %)
(Based On
Six Min.
Intervals)
10
10
10
10
11
10
11
10
10
14
Emission
Frequency
(%)
100
11/28/79
1315-1415
4
Average
Opacity ( %)
(Based On
Six Min.
Intervals )
10
10
10
10
6
5
5
5
5
5
Emission
Frequency
(%)
100
CTl
I
-------
TABLE 4.6
TP #16 - AUTOMATIC HOPPER
(BAGHOUSE II INLET)
SUMMARY OF OPACITY AND EMISSION FREQUENCY MEASUREMENTS
Date 11/27/79
Time 1430-1530
Test No. 1
Average3
Opacity( %)
0
Emission
Frequency
(%)
0
11/27/79
1600-1700
2
Average3
Opacity( %)
0
Emission
Frequency
(%)
0
11/28/79
0850-0950
3
Average3
Opacity(%)
0
Emission
Frequency
(%)
0
11/28/79
1315-1415
4
Average3
Opacity(%)
0
Emission
Frequency
(%)
0
aValue given is for entire test period.
-------
TABLE 4.7
TP #17 - BAGHOUSE II OUTLET
SUMMARY OF OPACITY AND EMISSION FREQUENCY MEASUREMENTS
Date 11/27
Time 1430-1612
Test No. 1
Average
Opacity
(Based On
Six Min.
Intervals '
3
2
2
3
4
2
1
3
• 3
3
4
5
: 2
0
3
5
5
Emission
Frequency
(%)
Not
Measured
11/28
0953-1135
2
Average
Opacity
(Based On
Six Min.
Intervals )
5
5
4
4
4
5
4
3
4
5
5
5
4
3
4
4
4
Emission
Frequency
(%)
Not
Measured
11/28
12b9-1441
3
Average
Opacity
(Based On
Six Min.
Intervals )
1
0
3
3
3
5
4
3
3
6
5
5
5
5
6
7
5
Emission
Frequency
(%)
Not
Measured
-48-
-------
TABLE 5
DETERMINATION OF POLONIUM - 210
New Jersey Zinc Company
Sterling Mine
Location
TP#1
(Inlet)
TP#2
(Outlet)
Test
1
2
3
1
2
3
POLONIUM - 210 (pc/q)
Filter
0 . 0+1 . 0
0.0+1.0
0.96+.34
0.0+1.0
0 . 0+1 . 0
0 . 0+1 . 0
Front Halt
Acetone
Residue
2 . 0+0 . 6
1 . 1+0 . 5
1 . 3+0 . 5
0.0+1.0
0 . 0+1 . 0
0 . 0+1 . 0
-49-
-------
TABLE 6
TRACE ELEMENT ANALYSES
New Jersey Zinc Company
Sterlin Mine
Element
URANIUM
THORIUM
BISMUTH
LEAD
THALLIUM
MERCURY
GOLD
PLATINUM
IRIDIUM
OSMIUM
RHENIUM
TUNGSTEN
TANTALUM
HAFNIUM
LUTETIUM
YTTERBIUM
THULIUM
ERBIUM
HOLMIUM
DYSPROSIUM —
TERBIUM
GADOLINIUM --
EUROPIUM
SAMARIUM
NEODYMIUM
PRASEODYMIUM
CERIUM
LANTHANUM
BARIUM
CESIUM
IODINE
TELLURIUM
ANTIMONY
TIN
INDIUM
CADMIUM
SILVER
PALLADIUM
RHODIUM
RUTHENIUM
MOLYBDENUM —
NIOBIUM
ZIRCONIUM
CONCENTRATION (ppm)
TP#1 - Test 2 TP#19 - Test 3
<1.
100.
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.5
200.
<1.
5.
50.
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
1.
200
5.
<2.
2.
-50-
-------
TABLE 6 (Con't)
Element
YTTRIUM
STRONTIUM
RUBIDIUM
BROMINE
SELENIUM
ARSENIC
GERMANIUM
GALLIUM
ZINC •
COPPER
NICKEL
COBALT
IRON
MANGANESE
CHROMIUM
VANADIUM
TITANIUM
SCANDIUM
CALCIUM
POTASSIUM
CHLORINE
SULFUR
PHOSPHORUS
SILICON
ALUMINUM •
MAGNESIUM
SODIUM
FLUORINE
BORON
BERYLLIUM
LITHIUM
CONCENTRATION
TP#1 - Test 2
10.
200.
<]_.
<0.5
<0.5
20.
-------
TABLE 7
ORE MOISTURE CONTENT
New Jersey Zinc Company
Sterling Mine
Location
Date
Time
% Moisture
Tertiary Crusher Entrance
Entrance to Hummer Screens
Conveyor Leaving Tertiary
Crusher
Symons Rod Deck Screen
Entrance
11/20 1315
11/28 1355
*AVERAGE*
11/20 1315
11/28 1355
*AVERAGE*
11/20 1315
11/28 1355
*AVERAGE*
11/20 1315
11/28 1355
*AVERAGE*
0.099
0.274
0.187
0.656
0.318
0.487
0.145
0.197
0.171
0.025
0.219
0.122
-52-
-------
TABLE 8
DETERMINATION OF ORE HARDNESS
New Jersey Zinc Company
Sterling Mine
Sample Location
Test No,
Degree of
Hardness
TP#1 & 2 From
Crusher Entrance
From Conveyor
Leaving Crusher
From Crusher
Entrance
From Conveyor
Leaving Crusher
RC 65-68
RC 68-70
RC 68-70
RC 66-70
-53-
-------
3.0 PROCESS INFORMATION
3.1 Process Description
A schematic flow diagram of Sterling Mine is shown in
Figure 2. The zinc ore, predominantly calcite having 2-5%
moisture, is mined underground. The entire process is dry
so no tailings are produced. Normally there are 2 mine
shifts and 3 mill shifts. The design plant daily capacity
is 910 metric tons (MT) (1000 tons (t)), and average daily
production is 730MT (800t). Ore is first crushed by two
8m x I.Ira (30 inches x 42 inches) underground jaw crushers
located at separate ore pockets which reduce the ore to
0.13m (5 inch) pieces. It is then carried to the surface
via a 6.2MT (7t) skip to a single 277MT (250t) ore bin.
The ore from the bin passes through a Jeffrey vibrating
feeder and is then conveyed to a 1.2m x 2.4m (4 ft. x 8
ft.) Symons screen. The screened ore is conveyed to the
secondary crusher, a 1.3m (4-1/4 ft.) Symons crusher that
reduces pieces to 0.04m (1.5 inches). The crusher
operates on the average of 5 hours per day. The crushed
ore is fed to a 1088MT (1200t) bin.
From the bin, the ore is separated into 2 process
streams which convey the ore to two parallel Hardinge
dryers that are concurrently fired using No. 4 oil at a
rate of 19m3 (5000 gallons) per month. Moisture content
is reduced to approximately 0.6 - 1%. Each ore stream
passes a Symons rod deck screen. The undersized ore goes
to a 14.5MT (16t) surge bin and the oversized ore to the
tertiary crusher, a shorthead Symons. The crusher
discharge is conveyed by chain elevators which are in
closed circuit with the rod deck screen. The surge bin
-55-
-------
-------
product is then fed into one of two Hummer screens with
the undersized pieces going to product storage bins and
the oversized to a rod mill with Syntron vibratory feeders
on each end. The mill is in closed circuit with the
Hummer screens. The screened product is -10 mesh with 20%
- 200 mesh. The ore process streams meet at a mixing
screw conveyor where wet suppression, a Johnson March
spray system, brings moisture to about 1%. The ore is
then conveyed to one of four enclosed 270MT (300t) product
bins and is then loaded into covered hopper railcars for
shipment to smelters in Pennsylvania.
A. Baghouse I
Emissions from the west process steam's Hardinge dryer are
controlled by a W.W. Sly Dynalcone Type "A" baghouse.
There are 168 Dacron filter bags in a 3-tier configuration
in 10 sections. The net cloth area is 335m2 (3606 ft.2).
Bags are inspected daily and replaced, on the average,
every 6 months. The design efficiency is 99.9% for
particulate matter >_ 0.5 um. No previous plant emission
test data were available.
B. Baghouse II
Emissions are picked up from grinding, screening, tertiary
crusher and transfer points associated with these
operations. These emissions are ducted to a Sly Dynaclone
Type "A" baghouse with 204 nylon filter bags in a 3-tier
configuration in 12 sections. The cloth area is 417m2
(4488 ft.2) and has a design efficiency of 99.9% for
particulate matter >_ 0.5 um. Bags are inspected daily and
last more than one year. No previous plant emission test
data were available.
-57-
-------
A Johnson-March Chem-Jet wet suppression system is used
with compound MR mixed at a 1:3000 ratio. This keeps the
final product at 1% moisture. One system operates inside
the mixing screw conveyor which leads to the final belt
conveyor before the final storage (product) bins. Water
can also be sprayed at this belt conveyor. The systems
are manually operated.
3.2 Process Operation
A. Baghouse I
This baghouse controls emissions from the West processing
dryer. There were no pressure gauges. Also, no dryer
process rate gauge was available. For the period, October
26 - November 28, 1979, the total mill daily average
production was 661MT (728t). During emission testing on
November 20, 1979, total mill production was 795MT
(875t). These tests are considered unrepresentative
because the dryer was operated at a higher feed rate and
much lower outlet moisture content than design and normal
practice (0.1% versus 0.6 to 1.0%). Also, the outlet
emissions had abnormally high opacity (see Table 9), and
the dryer operation was not continuous. The dryer was
manually operated according to visual estimates of ore
moisture content at dryer outlet. (Also, plant management
considered this operation to be unrepresentative of normal
operations because of the abnormally high opacity.)
B. Baghouse II
This baghouse controls emissions from grinding, screening,
tertiary crusher, product storage bins and transfer points
associated with these operations. Pressure gauges on the
baghouse and process rate gauges on the individual
-58-
-------
operations were not available. Process rate was
considered to be operating normally if the conveyor belt
was full of ore. Plant management considered results
unrepresentative of normal operations. Also, as shown in
Table 7, ore moisture content at various locations were
considerably lower than the normal dryer outlet moisture
(0.6 - 1.0%). Emission testing was performed on November
27-28, 1979. The total daily mill production rates for
the two days were 810MT (890t) and 627MT (690t). This
corresponds with the daily rate for the period between
October 26 - November 28, 1979 of 661MT (728t). A summary
of Methods 9 and 22 observations is shown in Table 10.
-59-
-------
TABLE 9
BAGHOUSE I
SUMMARY OF METHOD 9 AND METHOD 22 DATA
New Jersey Zinc Company
Sterling Mine
Method 9
Opacity Reading (%)
Location
Dryer
Dryer
Dryer
Stack
Stack
Stack
Exhaust Area
Exhaust Area
Exhause Area
Outlet
Outlet
Outlet
Time
940-1100
1300-1430
1530-1640
957-1124
1257-1454
1530-1645
No. of 6 min.
Intervals
10
10
10
12
15
12
( 6-min.
Average
0
0
0
25
12
5
average)
Maximum
0
0
0
42
34
15
Method 22
Location
Dryer Exhaust Area
Date
11/20/79
Test Duration Fugitive Emissions
(Seconds) Seconds %
10800
0
-60-
-------
TABLE 10
BAGHOUSE II
SUMMARY OF METHOD 9 AND METHOD 22 DATA
New Jersey Zinc Company
Sterling Mine
Method 9
Location
Distribution hopper to
storage bins
ii ii n
M n n
Mixing Screw Conveyor
Mixing Screw Conveyor
Mixing Screw Conveyor
Mixing Screw Conveyor
Hummer Screens
Hummer Screens
Hummer Screens
Hummer Screens
Baghouse Inlet
Baghouse Inlet
Baghouse Inlet
Baghouse Inlet
Baghouse Outlet
Baghouse Outlet
Baghouse Outlet
Date
11/27/79
11/28/79
11/28/79
11/27/79
11/27/79
11/28/79
11/28/79
11/27/79
11/27/79
11/28/79
11/28/79
11/27/79
11/27/79
11/28/79
11/28/79
11/27/79
11/28/79
11/28/79
No. of 6 min.
Intervals
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
17
17
17
Opacity Reading (%)
(6-min. average)
Average Maximum
5
15
5
0
0
0
0
13
12
11
7
0
0
0
0
3
4
4
5 I
16
5
0
0
0
0
21
15
14
10
)
0
0
0 j
0
5
5
7
Location
Method
Date
22
Test Duration
( Seconds )
Fugitive
Seconds
I
;
Emissions
%
Distribution Hopper to
storage bins
II II M
Mixing Screw Conveyor
Mixing Screw Conveyor
i
Hummer Screens
Hummer Screens
Hummer Screens
Baghouse Inlet
Baghouse Inlet
11/27/79
11/28/79
11/27/79
11/28/79
11/27/79
11/27/79
11/28/79
11/27/79
11/28/79
7200
7200
7200
7200
3600
3600
7200
7200
7200
7200
7200
0
0
2260
2805
7200
0
0
100
100
0
0
63
78
100
0
o
-61-
-------
4.0 LOCATION OF TEST SITES
4.1 Particulate Test Port and Sampling Point Locations
There were eight particulate test sites. The loca-
tion of the test ports and sampling points at each
site were determined in accordance with guidelines
outlined in EPA Method 1 (Sample and Velocity
Traverses for Stationary Sources). The inlets and
outlets of two baghouses were tested (Figure 3).
A. , Baghouse I
Baghouse I collects emissions from the Hardinge
Dryer. The inlet and outlet were tested simul-
taneous ly-
TP #1 - Baghouse I (Dryer) Inlet
The inlet duct to the Baghouse venting the 5' x
30' Hardinge Dryer had an inner diameter of 24
inches. The ports were arranged in an angle
slightly less than 90°. Sixteen traverse points
per port were tested for three minutes each.
The total test time was 96 minutes (Figure 4).
TP #2 - Baghouse I (Dryer) Outlet
The outlet stack of Baghouse I was 24 inches in
diameter. Sixteen traverse points were tested
in each port for 3 minutes each, resulting in a
total test time of 96 minutes (Figure 5).
B. Baghouse II
Emissions from tertiary crushing, ore storage,
-63-
-------
TP4
PRIMARY CRUSHING
1. 2-30" x 42"
2. 7 Ton Skip
3. 250 Ton Bin
Jaw Crushers
SECONDARY CRUSHING
4. 3' x 4' Jeffrey Vibratory Feed
5. 30" Belt Conveyor
6. 4' x 8' Symons Screen
7. 36" Pick Belt Conveyor
8. 4>s' Standard Symons Crusher
9. 30" Belt Conveyor
DRYING
10. 1200 Ton Storage Bin
11. 2-18" x 36" Jeffrey Vibratory Feeders
12. 18" Belt Conveyor
13. 5' x 30' Hardinge Dryer
TERTIARY CRUSHING
14. Chain Elevator
15. 3* x 8' Symons Rod Deck Screen
16. 16 Ton Surge Bin
17. 4' Short Head Symons Crusher
GRINDING
18. Belt Elevator
19. Automatic Hopper
20. Feed Divider
21. 4' x 10' Hummer Screens
22. 6)5' x 12' Rod Mill
23. Syntron Vibratory Feeder
24. 16" Mixing Screw Conveyor
25. 24" Belt Conveyor
SHIPPING
26.
27.
Distribution Hopper
300 Ton Storage Bin
DUST COLLECTION
28. Baghouse
PARTICULATE TEST SITES
FIGURE 3
-------
screening, and transfers are collected in
Baghouse II. There were five inlet locations
and one outlet location where testing was
conducted simultaneously.
TP #9 - Baghouse II Inlet
Sampling was conducted in the duct venting emis-
sions from the 4' x 10' Hummer Screens to Bag-
house II. The duct had a 9.25 inch inner dia-
meter. Only one of the two ports was used for
sampling because of equipment interference with
a nearby duct. Ten traverse points were sampled
for nine minutes each, resulting in a 90-minute
test (Figure 6).
TP #11 - Baghouse II Inlet From Tertiary Crusher
The outlet duct of the 4' Short Head Symons
Crusher (tertiary crusher) also vents emissions
to Baghouse II. The duct had an inner diameter
of 8.69 inches. Eight traverse points per port
were sampled for six minutes each, resulting in
a total test time of 96 minutes (Figure 7).
TP #18 - Baghouse II Inlet From Automatic Hopper
and Hummer Screens
A common duct vents emissions from both the
Hummer Screens and Automatic Hopper. At the
particulate test site, the diameter was 13.9
inches. Only the horizontal port was used for
sampling because of particulate build-up on the
lower duct wall. Problems such as nozzle clog-
-65-
-------
ging could have occurred. Twelve points were
sampled for eight minutes each resulting in a 96
minute test (Figure 8).
TP #19 - Baghouse II Inlet From Chain Elevator,
Rod Deck Screen, Tertiary Crusher and Rod Mill
Effluent emissions from the 6 1/2' x 12' Rod
Mill, 3' x 8' Symons Rod Deck Screen, 4' Short
Head Symons Crusher and the Chain Elevator enter
the Baghouse II through a common 17 inch (inner
diameter) duct. Six traverse points in each
port were sampled at four-minute intervals to
give a total test time of 96 minutes (Figure
9).
TP #20 - Baghouse I Inlet From Mixing Screw
Conveyor
The duct venting emissions from the 16" Mixing
Screw Conveyor to Baghouse II was 9 inches in
diameter at the test site. Six traverse points
in each port were sampled for eight minutes
each, giving a 96 minute test (Figure 10).
TP #5 - Baghouse II Outlet
The Baghouse II outlet stack was 24 inches in
diameter. Sixteen points were sampled at
three minute intervals resulting in a total test
time of 96 minutes (Figure 11).
-66-
-------
Particle Size Distribution
Samples were collected for particle size distri-
bution at all the particulate test sites. Three
tests were run except at the baghouse outlet
stacks (TP #2 & TP #5), where only one test was
run.
4.2 Visible Emissions Test Sites1
Measurements of emissions opacity were made in
accordance with EPA Method 9 guidelines (Visual
Determination of the Opacity of Emissions From
Stationary Sources) by a certified observer. The
frequency of fugitive emissions was measured in
accordance with EPA Method 22 guidelines (Visual
Determination of Fugitive Emissions From Material
Processing Sources).
Two sites were observed (TP #3 and TP #4)
simultaneously with the particulate sampling of
Baghouse I inlet and outlet. Five sites were
observed while sampling of Baghouse II related
processes was conducted.
-'-The figures presented in this section are meant to
interpret the comments and/or diagrams given by the
observers during testing (see also Appendix 6.2 for
original field data sheets). Some photographs and
personal communications with the observers have also
provided additional information. Directions (e.g., North,
South) and distance are given where available.
-67-
-------
TP #3 - Baghouse I (Dryer) Outlet Stack
The exhaust stack of Baghouse I is on the roof of the
(Mill) building. Emissions were observed for opacity
measurements only. The observer was positioned ap-
proximately 300 ft. away from the building, standing
approximately 100 feet above the ground on the shaft
building (Figure 12).
TP #4 - Hardinge Dryer Outlet
A duct collects the exhaust from the Hardinge Dryer.
This duct was observed for opacity and fugitive emis-
sion frequency measurements. The two observers stood
20-25 feet away from the exhaust end of the dryer on
its northwest side (Figure 13).
TP #12 - Distribution Hopper To Storage Bin
The crushed ore is delivered to a 3,000 ton storage
bin via a distribution hopper. The process was ob-
served for opacity and emission frequency measure-
ments. The emissions from one of the ducts leading
to the storage bin was observed during the first
test, but the observers were instructed to measure
the emissions coming from the top of the hopper for
the remaining tests. For the first test they stood
approximately 6 feet away from the hopper (the top of
the hopper was approximately at eye level). During
the remaining tests they were positioned 8 to 10 feet
above the hopper, on a stairway, approximately 15
feet away (Figure 14).
TP #13 - At Mixing Screw Conveyor
Ducting collects the exhaust when the ore is
-68-
-------
transferred from the mixing screw conveyor to a 24
inch belt conveyor and was observed for opacity and
emission frequency measurement. The observers stood
on a walkway above the belt conveyor where they were
approximately 3 feet from the hood and duct (Figure
15).
TP #14 - Hummer Screens
The Hummer Screens were observed for opacity and
emission frequency measurements. Hoods collect the
exhaust and vent it to Baghouse II. The observers on
the second floor level were able to view the entire
length of the conveyor (Figure 16).
TP #16 - Automatic Hopper
After tertiary crushing, the ore is transferred to an
automatic hopper where it is then transferred to a
feed divider. Emissions from these transfers were
collected by ducting which led to Baghouse II. The
ducting was observed on two sides by the observers
standing 10-15 feet away on the second floor level
(Figure 17).
TP 117 - Baghouse II Outlet Stack
The observer viewed the Baghouse II stack for opacity
measurement only from the same positon as for TP #3
(Figure 12).
-69-
-------
o'
I
1
2
3
It
5
e
7
3
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
DISTANCE FKOM DUCT HALL (INCHES)
1.06
1.80
2.62
3.50
4.51
5.66
7.10
9.17
14.83
16.90
18.34
19.49
20.50
21.38
22.20
22.94
PORT
B
to
Baghcmse I
PORT A
from
HardInge
Dryer
TP#1- SAMPLING POINT LOCATIONS
FIGURE 4
-------
PORT B
PORT A
,ING POINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
DISTANCE FROM STACK HALL (INCHES)
1.06
1.80
2.62
3.50
4.51
5.66
7.10
9.17
14.83
16.90
18.34
19.49
20.50
21.38
22.20
22.94
PORT A
PORT B
Outlet stack of
Baghouse I
TP#2- SAMPLING POINT LOCATIONS
FIGURE 5
-------
Isj
I
SAMPLING
1
2
3
4
5
e
7
8
9
10
PORT A
DISTANCE FROM DUCT WALL (INCHES)
1.16
1.56
2.0A
2.62
3.47
5.78
6,63
7.22
7.69
8.09
only this port
was sampled
from Hummer
Screens
TP#9- SAMPLING POINT LOCATIONS
FIGURE 6
-------
POUT i
I
-J
U)
I
FOOT Q
SAMPLING POIHT DISTANCE FBOM DtiCT WALL (INCHES)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
1.03
1.54
2.17
3.09
5.60
6.52
7.15
7.66
to
Baghouse II
from Short
Head Symons
Crusher
TP#U- SAMPLING POINT LOCATIONS
FIGURE 7
-------
from
Hummer
Screens
and '
Automatic
Hopper
SAMPLING POINT
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
DISTANCE FROM DUCT HALL (INCHES)
1.12
1.65
2.23
2.90
3.73
4.95
8.24
9.46
10.29
10.96
11.54
12.07
only
horlzonta
port was
sampled
Baghouse II
TP#18- SAMPLING POINT LOCATIONS
FIGURE 8
-------
POflt B
to
Baghouse II f/
SAMPLING FOIBT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
PORT A
DISTAHCE FROM DUCT HALL (INCHES)
1.45
2.13
2.87
3.74
4.81
6.38
10.63
12.19
13.26
14.13
14.88
15.56
PORT A
from Chain Elevator,
Symons Crusher, Symons
Rod Deck Screen, and
Rod Mill
TP#19- SAMPLING POINT LOCATIONS
FIGURE 9
-------
CTl
I
SAMPLING POINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
to
Baghouse II
DISTANCE FBOH DUCT HALL (INCHES)
1.31
2.03
3.08
5.92
6.97
7.69
PORT
B
/ from
Mixing
Screw
Conveyor
TP#20- SAMPLING POINT LOCATIONS
FIGURE 10
-------
PORT
I
-j
PORT A
SAMPLIMC POINT
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
li
12
13
14
15
16
...... wi..^i\ nni,!, unLrtca^
1.06
1.80
2.62
3.50
4.51
5.66
7.10
9.17
14.83
16.90
18.34
19.49
20.50
21.38
22.20
22.94
PORT
B
^PORT A
Outlet stack of
Baghouse II
TP#5-SAMPLING POINT LOCATIONS
FIGURE 11
-------
— EPA 9 observer
building
edge
shaft building
VIEW PROM TOP
roof
top
ground
level
ELEVATION VIEW
TP#3 and TP#17- POSITION OF OBSERVER
FIGURE 12
-78-
-------
Od
Hardlnge
Dryer
Q — EPA 9 observer
O —EPA 22 observer
OD
observers standing on
first floor level
VIEW FROM TOP
(/
,
^
^J
( \
Hardlnge V1
Dryer \
1 04-
1 3T f 1 rtrt-r. T «i
SIDE VIEW
POSITION OF OBSERVERS
FIGURE 13
-79-
-------
emissions from this duct
observed during test 1
when observers are 61
away, standing on floor leve,
top edge of.
distribution
hopper
ducts to
storage bin
below
VIStf PHOM TOP
observers [GO
on stairs]
10« above
hopper top —
observer
SPA. 22
observer
JE7I
-. level of-
hopper top
' floor level
SIDE VIEW
TP#12- POSITION OP OBSERVERS
FIGURE 11*
-80-
-------
•wall
x
/
x
x
x
^
x
^
£
T
QO
walkway
C
[
Mixing Screw
Conveyor <-
O-EPA 9 observer
Q-EPA 22 observer
VIEW PROM TOP
qp
observers
standing
on walkway
3' away
from duct
collects emissions
when ore is transferred
from Miring.Screw Conveyor
to Belt Conveyor
belt conveyor
runs under the
walkway
walkway
"Level
SIDE VIEW
TP#13- POSITION OP OBSZEVEBS
FIGURE 15
-81-
-------
ceiling
2nd floor
level
SIDE VIEW
Hummer
Screens
a photograph
showed the observer
standing here
DO
Q _ EPA 22 observer
O- EPA 9 observer
VIEW PROM TOP
TP#H*- POSITION OF OBSERVERS
FIGURE 16 '
-82-
-------
O
O
O-EPA 9 observer
Q-EPA 22 observer
CROSS SECTION THROUGH A-B
A B
floor level
SIDE VIEW
TP#l6- POSITION OF OBSERVERS
FIGURE 1?
-83-
-------
5.0 SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES
5.1 Sampling Apparatus
The sampling probes at all baghouse inlets, except
TP #9 (duct from Hummer Screens), were stainless
steel with a 5/8 inch outside diameter. They were
wound from the entrance with heater tape. The bag-
house outlets (TP #2 and TP #5) and TP #9 were sam-
pled with glass lined probes (also 5/8 inch outside
diameter). The glass lining was wrapped logarithmic-
ally with 26 gauge nickel cromium wire. The heating
elements were connected to variable transformers to
maintain a gas temperature of 225-250°F in the probes
during sampling.
A stainless steel, button-hook nozzle of an appropri-
ate diameter was attached to the probe by a stainless
steel coupling during particulate sampling. A pre-
calibrated S-type pitot tube and a thermocouple were
rigidly attached to the probe to measure gas velocity
pressure and temperature.
Greenburg-Smith designed impingers were used. Some,
however, were modified by replacing the tip with a
1/2 inch inner diameter glass tube. The impinger
train was kept in an insulated box, surrounded by an
ice bath.
From the impinger train, gas flowed through a check
valve, flexible rubber vacuum tubing, a vacuum gauge,
a needle valve, a leakless pump and a dry gas meter.
A calibrated orifice at the end of the train measured
instantaneous flow rates. An inclined vertical, dual
manometer across the orifice was graduated in
-85-
-------
hundredths of an inch of water from 0 to 1.0 inch and
in tenths of an inch of water from 1 to 10 inches.
During particulate testing, tared, glass fiber fil-
ters were contained in coarse fritted glass filter
holders. The filter holder was sealed with heat re-
sistant and black electrical tapes to prevent leak-
age. They were maintained in a heated area where the
temperature was approximately 250°F.
An Andersen Cascade Impactor was used to collect sam-
ples for particle size distribution analysis. The
impactor consists of multiple stages which collect
different particle sizes (Figure 18). Each stage
consists of an orifice of a specific diameter above a
collection plate. The orifice sizes of each stage
are different and are arranged in descending order,
the largest being stage 1.
The gas sample flows through each orifice and is de-
flected off a tared, glass fiber substrate placed on
the collection plate. Particles of a specific size
become impacted on the substrate while the remaining
particles entrained in the gas stream proceed to the
next collection stage. The range of particle sizes
retained on the substrate varies according to the
velocity of the gas (as determined by the sampling
rate and orifice diamter) along with the gas
viscosity and the particle density- Since the
orifices are arranged in descending diameters, the
gas velocity increases and the particle size
collected on each stage decreases.
-86-
-------
ANDERSEN STACK SAMPLER
JET STAGE (9 TOTAL)
NOZZLE
SPACERS
GLASS FIBER
COLLECTION
SUBSTRATE
BACKUP
FILTER'
PLATED
HOLDER
CYCLONE
PRESEPARATOR
INLET
X\
CORE
FIGURE 18
-87-
-------
During the sampling a cyclone preseparator was used
to precut particles above 10 microns and avoid over-
loading the collection substrate.
5.2 Gas Velocity and Temperature
Gas velocity and temperature were measured at each
test location in accordance with EPA Method 2 (Deter-
mination of Stack Gas Velocity and Volumetric Flow
Rate). The pitot tube on the probe was connected to
an inclined vertical, dual manometer and the
thermocouple was connected to a pyrometer. Gas
velocity pressure and temperature were measured at
every traverse point at each test location.
5.3 Moisture Determination
Stack gas moisture content was determined from the
average stack temperature as related in a
psychrometric graph (Appendix 6.4-1). The gas was
assumed to be saturated.
5.4 Gas Composition
The gas compositon at each test location was assumed
to be air (20.5% 02) since there was no combustion
involved in most of the refining processes at the
Sterling Mine.
5.5 Particulate Tests - Sampling
The sampling procedure was in accordance with EPA
Method 5 (Determination of Particulate Emissions From
Stationary Sources). Data from the velocity traverse
-88-
-------
were used to determine the proper nozzle diameter.
The probe, with nozzle attached, was connected to the
filter holder. Depending on the location, the filter
was either joined directly to the impinger train with
glass joints, or was connected to the impinger train
with a flexible sample line.
The impinger train was made up of four impingers in
series. The first two were each filled with 100 ml
v
of distilled water, the third was empty and the
fourth was filled with 300g of silica gel. The
first, third and fourth impingers were modified. The
train was completed as previously described (see
Sampling Apparatus). The particulate sampling train
is shown in Figure 19.
Possible clogging of the nozzle was avoided at TP #18
by sampling only in the horizontal port (see 4.1,
Particulate Test Port and Sampling Point Locations).
During each run, the following readings were taken at
each point:
• Point designation
e Sampling time
• Dry gas meter reading (CF)
• Velocity head &p in inches water)
0 Desired pressure drop across orifice (AH in
inches water)
• Actual pressure drop across orifice (AH in
inches water)
« Gas meter inlet dry gas temperature (°F)
« Gas meter outlet dry gas temperature (°F)
-89-
-------
PARTICULATE SAMPLING TRAIN
Coarse
control
valve
Thermometers
Inclined manometer
(AP)
Air-tight
pump
ampling —
nozzle
Stack'
thermocouple
Pyrometer
Impinger
train
Check
valve
Dry gas
meter
Vacuum gauge
Ice
bath
Inclined
manometer
(A h)
FIGURE 19
-------
• Vacuum pump gauge readings (in. Hg)
• Filter box temperature (°F)
• Dry gas temperture (°F) at the discharge of last
impinger
• Stack temperature (°F)
The relationship of the Ap reading with the AH read-
ing is a function of the following variables:
• Pitot tube calibration coefficient
• Orifice calibration factor
• , Gas meter temperature
• Percent moisture in the flue gas
• Ratio of flue gas pressure to barometric pres-
sure
• Stack temperature
• Sampling nozzle diameter
The operators were able to sample isokinetically
using a nomograph which provides a direct relation-
ship between Ap and AH so that the sampling rate
could quickly be adjusted when Ap changed.
Test 1 at TP #11 was delayed because the nomograph
was set at an incorrect value. The test was re-
started when the other locations were nearly com-
pleted.
Sample Recovery
Sample recovery was performed at each test site.
Four samples were retained from each test:
1) The filter was removed from the filter holder
and placed in its original container.
-91-
-------
2) The silica gel was returned to its original
container.
3) The front half of the filter holder (and glass
joints, where applicable) was rinsed with ace-
tone. The probe and nozzle were brushed
thoroughly and rinsed with acetone three times.
The wash was collected in a glass sample jar.
4) A blank sample of acetone was taken from the
field supply at each test site. The sample was
, collected in a glass jar.
All glass sample jars had Teflon lined lids. Each
sample container was sealed and labeled. The label
indicated the sample number, location, date, test
number, and contents of the container.
The volume of water in the first three impingers was
measured and recorded. The water was not retained as
a sample.
Analysis
The samples were analyzed as follows:
1) The filter was removed from its sealed container
and placed on a tared watch glass. The filter
and watch glass were dessicated with anhydrous
CaSC>4 and weighed to a constant weight. The
weight was recorded to the nearest 0.01 mg.
-92-
-------
2) The silica gel was weighed to the nearest O.lg
on a beam balance.
3) The acetone was transferred to a tared beaker.
The acetone was then evaporated at ambient tem-
perature and pressure, dessicated, and weighed
to a constant weight. The weight was recorded
to the nearest 0.01 mg.
The particulate samples from the inlet and outlet of
the baghtfuse controlling the Hardinge Dryer were
analyzed for Po210 by measuring the radioactivity of
the sample. The filters from two inlet locations
were analyzed for trace elements by SSMS.
5.6 Particle Size Distribution - Sampling
The Andersen sampling train was set up as shown in
Figure 20. The impinger train was identical to that
used for the particulate tests (EPA Method 5), and
served to remove any moisture from the gas stream
before it entered the pump.
The sampler was positioned at the traverse point
where the average Ap occurs. The average Ap value
was obtained from the velocity traverse data of each
site. The sampling was conducted isokinetically,
also based on the velocity traverse data of each
site.
Sample Recovery
At the completion of each test, the contents of the
preseparator and an acetone wash of the nozzle,
preseparator and inlet pieces of the sampler were
-93-
-------
ANDERSEN SAMPLING TRAIN
ANDERSEN
SAMPLER
I
UD
IMPINGERS
PUMP
GAS METER
ORIFICE
MANOMETER
FIGURE 20
—r>p A
-------
placed in a glass sample jar. All sample jars had
Teflon lined lids and were sealed and labled. The
glass fiber substrate filters were returned to their
original containers, brushing any remaining particles
on the spaces and orifices into the corresponding
containers before sealing.
Analysis
The Andersen test samples were analyzed as follows:
The .fiberglass substrate filters were dessicated with
anhydrous CaSC>4 and weighed to a constant weight.
The weight was recorded to the nearest 0.01 mg.
The acetone rinse of the cyclone preseparator, nozzle
and inlet piece was transferred to a tared beaker.
The acetone was evaporated at ambient temperature and
pressure. The beaker was dessicated and weighed to a
constant weight. The weight was recorded to the
nearest 0.01 mg.
5.7 Ore Sampling
Grab ore samples were taken simultaneously at or near
two process areas during Tests 2 and 3. The samples
were placed in self-locking air-tight plastic bags.
Each bag was then placed in another plastic bag which
was tied.
-95-
-------
Analysis
The ore samples were analyzed for moisture content by
first weighing to the nearest 0.01 gin. The ore was
then dried at 103°C to a constant weight and re-
weighed. Moisture content was determined by this
equation:
Mass Lost (g) x 100 = Moisture (%)
Mass Initial(g)
Ore hardness was measured on a Rockwell® C-Scale
Tester.
-96-
-------
PROJECT 01-9517-21
Prepared by:
Maria Denai
Project Scientist
Emissions Measurement Department
Reviewed by:
Roger/A.Knisker^cf/
Manager
Emissions Measurement Department
Approved by:
6
s W. Davison
e-President, Operations
------- |