United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park NC 27711
EMB Report 81-PLY-4
January 1982
Air
Plywood/Veneer

Emission Test Report
Georgia-Pacific
Springfield Plant
Springfield, Oregon

-------
                                                 PLYWOOD/VENEER
                                             EMISSION TEST REPORT
                                      GEORGIA-PACIFIC PLYWOOD PLANT
                                              SPRINGFIELD, OREGON
                                                     JUNE 1981
                                  Environmental
                                  Consultants, Inc.
EMB Report 81-PLY-4
ESED Project 80/02
EPA Contract No. 68-02-3543
Work Assignment No. 1
TRC Project No. 1460-E80-51

Prepared for:
C.E. Riley

Task Manager
          Prepared by:
   Peter W. Kalika, P.E.
        Program Manager
Eugene A. Brackbill, P.E.
 Work Assignment Manager
        John H. Powell
      Project Scientist
        Eric A. Pearson
      Project Scientist

          January 1982
                             800  Connecticut  Blvd.
                             East Hartford, CT 06108
                             (203)  289-8631

-------
This  report  has been  reviewed  by the  Emission Standards  and  Engineering
Division,  Office of Air  Quality  Planning  and  Standards,  Office of  Air,
Noise  and Radiation,  Environmental Protection  Agency,  and  approved  for
publication.   Mention  of  company or  product  names  does  not  constitute
endorsement  by  EPA.   Copies  are  available  free  of charge  to  Federal
employees, current contractors and grantees,  and nonprofit  organizations -
as  supplies  permit  -  from  the  Library Services  Office,  MD-35,  Environ-
mental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711.

Order:  EMB Report 81-PLY-4

-------
                                    PREFACE






    The work  described herein was conducted  by  personnel from TRC  - Environ-




mental  Consultants,  Inc., Research Triangle  Institute (RTI),  Del Green Asso-




ciates   (DGA);  CH~MHill,  Engineers,   Planners,   Economists   and  Scientists;




Pollution  Control Science, Inc., (PCS); Georgia-Pacific  (G-P)  in Springfield,




Oregon; the National Council  of  the Paper  Industry for Air and Stream Improve-




ment,  Inc.  (NCASI);   and  the United   States  Environmental Protection  Agency




(EPA) Emission Measurement Branch (EMB).




    The  scope of  work was issued under EPA Contract  68-02-3543,  Work Assign-




ment 1.  The  work was  performed  under  the supervision  of  Eugene  A.  Brackbill,




P.E., TRC  work assignment manager, and  John H. Powell, TRC field crew chief.




    Robert L. Chessin  of  RTI  monitored process operations  and  was assisted by




Paul Willhite of  DGA.   RTI was responsible for preparing  Section 3  and Appen-




dix I of this report,  both of which deal with process  descriptions  and opera-




tions.   Mark  S.   Boedigheimer  supervised Method  5X  analyses  performed  by




CHJIHill.   David   Robinson  supervised  Method 25  analysis performed by  PCS.




Victor  Dallons  supervised NCASI  sampling  and analysis activities  as  well as




providing  helpful suggestions and  comments  in  support of the  test program.




Mitch  Steffensen  and  Pete   Fetter  of Georgia-Pacific,  provided   invaluable




assistance and guidance to TRC,  EPA and  RTI in  the  performance of  the  test




program.   Clyde  E.  Riley,   Office  of Air  Quality   Planning  and  Standards




(OAQPS),  Emission Measurement  Branch, EPA,  served  as task  manager and  was




responsible for coordinating  the test program.




    Edwin  J.  Vincent,  OAQPS, Chemical and  Petroleum  Branch,  EPA,  served as




project lead  engineer.  He was also  responsible  for coordinating and directing




the process operations monitoring.
                                     -11-

-------
                              TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION                                                                    PAGE

                PREFACE	      ii

  1.0           INTRODUCTION	     1-1
     1.1          Background	     1-1
     1.2          Summary of Process  and  Emissions	     1-2
     1.3          Applicability  of EPA Reference  Test Methods	     1-3
        1.3.1       EPA Method 5X (Provisional)	     1-3
        1.3.2       EPA Method 25	     1-5
        1.3.3       Comparability of  Test Methods	     1-6
     1.4          Measurement Program Summary 	     1-7
        1.4.1       Scrubber Inlet	     1-7
        1.4.2       Scrubber Outlet	     1-7
        1.4.3       Georgia-Pacific Scrubber System 	     1-8
        1.4.4       Fugitive Emissions	     1-8
        1.4.5       Ambient Air  Measurements	     1-8
        1.4.6       Clean-Up Evaluations   	     1-9
     1.5          Report Sections	     1-9

  2.0           SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS	     2-1
     2.1          Background and Definitions  	     2-1
        2.1.1       Particulate  Emissions 	     2-1
        2.1.2       Condensible  Emissions 	     2-2
        2.1.3       Noncondensible Emissions  	     2-2
        2.1.4       Total Organic Emissions 	     2-2
     2.2          Method 5X - Particulate/Condensible
                    Organics Emission Tests 	     2-3
        2.2.1       Scrubber Inlet	     2-6
        2.2.2       Scrubber Outlet	     2-8
     2.3          Method 25 - Total Organic Tests	    2-13
        2.3.1       Scrubber Inlet	    2-16
        2.3.2       Scrubber Outlet	    2-16
     2.4          Visible Emissions 	    2-21
     2.5          Scrubber Operational Summary	    2-21
     2.6          Summary of Fugitive Emissions 	    2-23
     2.7          Ambient Air Measurements	    2-23
     2.8          Clean-Up Evaluation 	    2-27
     2.9          Possible Test  Interferences 	    2-27

  3.0           PROCESS DESCRIPTION AND OPERATIONS  	     3-1
     3.1          Process Equipment 	     3-1
     3.2          Emission Control Equipment  	     3-1
     3.3          Production and Control Equipment Monitoring 	     3-2
     3.4          Process Operating Conditions During Test Program. . .     3-2

  4.0           DESCRIPTION OF SAMPLING LOCATIONS 	     4-1
     4.1          Scrubber Inlet	     4-1
     4.2          Scrubber Outlet	     4-1
     4.3          Scrubber Operational Measurement Locations	     4-5
     4.4          Fugitive Emissions	     4-5
                                     -111-

-------
                         TABLE OF CONTENTS  (Continued)

SECTION                                                                    PAGE

  5.0           SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL METHODS 	    5-1
     5.1          EPA Reference Methods	    5-1
     5.2          Preliminary Measurements  	    5-2
     5.3          Measurements for Particulate, Condensible and
                    Noncondensible Emissions  	    5-2
        5.3.1       EPA Method 5X (Provisional) - Particulate and
                      Condensible Organic Compounds 	    5-2
        5.3.2       EPA Reference Method 25 - Condensible and
                    Noncondensible Organic Compounds  	   5-10
     5.4          Preliminary Moisture Determination	   5-22
     5.5          Preliminary Velocity Determination  	   5-22
     5.6          Visible Emissions 	   5-23
     5.7          Pressure Drop Measurements	   5-23
     5.8          Scrubber Solution Samples 	   5-23
     5.9          Fugitive Emissions  	   5-24
     5.10         Ambient Temperature and Relative Humidity 	   5-25

  6.0           QUALITY ASSURANCE 	    6-1
     6.1          Method 5X	    6-1
     6.2          Method 25	    6-3
     6.3          Method 9	    6-3
                                     -IV-

-------
                                LIST OF FIGURES

SECTION                                                                    PAGE

  1-1           Veneer Dryer Exhaust and Scrubber System  	     1-4

  4-1           Veneer Dryer Exhaust and Scrubber System
                  Sampling Locations  	     4-2

  4-2           Scrubber Inlet Sampling  Port Configuration and
                  Traverse Point Locations  	     4-3

  4-3           Scrubber Outlet Sampling Port Configuration and
                  Traverse Point Locations  	     4-4

  5-1           Modified EPA Particulate and Condensible Organics
                  Sampling Train  	     5-4

  5-2           Method 25 Sampling Train	    5-11

  5-5           Method 25 Flow Control Assembly Adjustment  	    5-13

  5-6           TRC Nonmethane Organic Analyzer 	    5-18

  5-7           TRC Condensate Recovery and Conditioning Apparatus  .  .    5-21


                                LIST OF TABLES

  2-la          Summary of Method 5X Particulate and Condensible
                  Organic Collection Efficiency for Georgia-Pacific
                  Scrubber System (English Units) 	     2-4

  2-lb          Summary of Method 5X Particulate and Condensible
                  Organic Collection Efficiency for Georgia-Pacific
                  Scrubber System (Metric Units)	     2-5

  2-2           Summary of Method 5X Particulate and Condensible
                  Organic Measurements for Gases Entering the
                  Georgia-Pacific Scrubber System 	     2-7

  2-3           Summary of Method 5X Particulate and Condensible
                  Organic Measurements for Gases Exiting the
                  Georgia-Pacific Scrubber System 	     2-9

  2-4           Comparison of Particulate and Condensible Measured
                  Emissions with Calculated Emissions 	    2-10

  2-5a          Summary of Method 25 Total Organic Collection
                  Efficiency for Georgia-Pacific Scrubber System
                  (English Units) 	    2-14

  2-5b          Summary of Method 25 Total Organic Collection
                  Efficiency for Georgia-Pacific Scrubber System
                  (Metric Units)	    2-15
                                      -v-

-------
                          LIST OF TABLES (Continued)

SECTION                                                                    PAGE

  2-6           Summary Method 25 Individual Total Organic
                  Measurements for Gases Entering the Georgia-Pacific
                  Scrubber System	    2-17

  2-7           Summary Method 25 Individual Total Organic
                  Measurements for Gases Exiting the  Georgia-Pacific
                  Scrubber System 	    2-18

  2-8           Summary of Method 25 Individual Total Organic Trap,
                  Tank Measurements for Gases Entering the
                  Georgia-Pacific Scrubber System 	    2-19

  2-9           Summary of Method 25 Individual Total Organic Trap,
                  Tank Measurements for Gases Exiting the
                  Georgia-Pacific Scrubber System 	    2-20

  2-10          Georgia-Pacific Scrubber System Operational
                  Data Summary	    2-22

  2-lla         Fugitive Emission Summary 	    2-24

  2-llb         Fugitive Emission Summary 	    2-25

  2-llc         Fugitive Emission Summary 	    2-26

  2-12          Method 5X Clean-up Evaluation Results 	    2-28
                                     -vi-

-------
1.0 INTRODUCTION




1.1 Background




    Section 111 of  the  Clean  Air  Act of 1970 charges the  administrator  of the




United  States  Environmental   Protection  Agency  with  the  responsibility  of




establishing  Federal  Standards  of   Performance  for  New  Stationary  Sources




(SPNSS) that may  significantly contribute to air  pollution.   When promulgated,




these  standards of  performance for  new stationary  sources are to  reflect the




degree of emission  limitation achievable  through application of  the  best dem-




onstrated  emission  control  technology.   Emission   data  collected  from  con-




trolled sources in the plywood  industry will provide a portion  of the database




used by EPA to develop SPNSS.




    EPA's Office  of Air Quality  Planning  and Standards selected the Georgia-




Pacific (G-P) plywood plant in Springfield,  Oregon, as a site  for  an emission




test program because it is considered  to  employ process and  emission techno-




logy representative of modern plywood manufacturing  plants.




    The test program was designed to determine  the emission rate  of particu-




late matter  and condensible and  noncondensible  organic  material  emitted from




the veneer drying operation.   A second  objective  was to  measure the collection




efficiency of  the  Georgia-Pacific scrubber  system for  condensible  and non-




condensible organic emissions.




    TRC -  Environmental Consultants,  Inc.  was  retained  by the  EPA Emissions




Measurement Branch  (EMB)  to perform  emission measurements at  the  G-P plywood




plant  in Springfield,  Oregon.  Testing was  performed  during the week of June




8,  1981  on  the veneer  dryer  emissions  and  their pollution  control,   a G-P




scrubber system.   This report  has  been prepared in accordance  with  EPA Con-




tract No.  68-02-3543 under the provisions of Work Assignment No. 1.
                                      1-1

-------
     The Research Triangle  Institute  (RTI),  the New Source Standard  (NSS)  con-




 tractor/ was  responsible  for coordinating  the overall  test  program with  G-p




 personnel and  for  assuring that process  and  control equipment operating  con-




 ditions  were   suitable  for  testing.    All  process  data  were  monitored  and




 recorded by RTI.  Fugitive emissions  from the veneer dryers/ ambient air  tem-




 perature and relative humidity were monitored  and  recorded  by  RTI.




     Additional  testing  for   total  organic  compounds  was  performed  by  the



 National Council of  the Paper Industry  for  Air  and  Stream  Improvement,  Inc,




 (NCASI)  simultaneously with the TRC test program.  This testing was  performed




 at  the  request of the American Plywood Association (APA) for  research purposes




 and to  provide an additional measure of  quality assurance.









 1.2 Summary of  Process and  Emissions




     The  G-P Springfield plant  is a combination veneer and lay-up facility,  and




 is  considered  to employ process  and emission control technology representative




 of  modern plywood manufacturing plants.   The plywood production  rate for  the




 drying  operation is  approximately 800,000  square feet  (3/8-inch  basis)   per




 24-hour  day.




    The  veneer  drying operation  begins  after  the  veneer has  been  peeled  from




the  log  at the lathe operation and  is  transferred  to  the  drying  operation.




Here, the veneer  is  continuously  hand-fed  onto  the  dryer feed conveyor  and




 into the dryer.   The  purpose of  the operation  is  to  thermally drive the mois-




ture out of the veneer in preparation  for the lay-up and laminating operations




which follow.    During the drying operaion, organic compounds  are driven out of




the veneer.  These organic compounds are the emissions of interest.
                                      1-2

-------
    The G-P Springfield plant  has  four  veneer  dryers.   Each is a steam heated,




multideck  unit,  with the number of drying  zones  varying.   Each dryer  has two




exhausts from the heated  zones,  except  dryer 4, which has  three exhausts.  The




nine  exhausts  are ducted to  a common manifold which  carries the  dryer  emis-




sions  to the G-P  scrubber system.   A  schematic drawing  of the  veneer  dryer




exhaust system is presented in Figure 1-1.









1.3 Applicability of EPA Reference Test Methods




    EPA is required  to publish a national reference test  method  for  each reg-




ulated  source  category  and   pollutant  for which  a  New Source  Performance




Standard  (NSPS)  is  established.  Reference test methods are  usually  specified




by a  State regulatory agency during  the State  Implementation Planning process




and may be different from national reference test methods.




    The purpose  of  establishing a national reference test  method  is  to ensure




that emission data  collected  from a  specific source  is representative of that




source and comparable  to data  collected at other  designated sources.   The pri-




mary purpose of  this test program  was to collect  emission  data using standard-




ized test  methods  which allow the data  to be  evaluated to develop a national




SPNSS.  Two different  test methods were  selected by EPA  to measure emissions




from plywood veneer  drying operations.   These  methods are  briefly described in




the following subsections and  are described in detail in Section 5.









    1.3.1  EPA Method  5X (Provisional)




    Provisional  Method 5X  is  similar  to the Oregon Department of Environmental




Quality  (ODEQ)  Method  7  used to  measure  condensible  organic  emissions.   EPA




Method 5X  measures  particulate  matter  and condensible organic  matter.   "Par-




ticulate matter" is defined as  any   finely divided  solid   or  liquid  material,
                                      1-3

-------
                                                                Spray-JJ
                                                              Nozzles
                                                 Dryer  4
               Dryer  2
Dryer  1
                  Figure 1-1.  Veneer Dryer Exhaust  and  Scrubber  System
                               Georgia-Pacific  Plywood Plant
                               Springfield, Oregon
                                    1-4

-------
other than uncombined water, that condenses at or  above  the filtration temper-




ature  range  of  350 +25 F  (177 +_14  C) ,  and  is  collected  by  the  probe  and




filter  (front  half of  the  sampling  train).   "Condensible  organic matter"  is




defined  as  any  material  remaining after extraction,  filtration and  ambient




evaporation of  the ether-chloroform  extract of  the  impinger  portion of  the




sampling train.  Particulate matter and condensible  organic matter are quanti-




fied gravimetrically and results are  expressed as  the mass  of collected mater-




ial.



    The  purpose  of the 350 F  filtration temperature  is  to precondition  the




Method 25 slipstream sample being  withdrawn from  the  Method  5X sample stream.




This temperature was  selected  on the basis  of average  veneer  dryer  operating




temperatures  throughout the  industry.   This temperature  condition  excludes




from the Method  25 samples only matter than can  condense  at  or  above 350 F.




It does not affect Method 5X results  because  the remaining  sample is  caught in




the condenser portion of the train.
    1.3.2  EPA Method 25




    EPA  Reference  Method 25,  as promulgated  in the  October  3,  1980  Federal




Register  (volume 145,  no.   194,  65959  ff.),  applies  to  the measurement  of




organic compounds as  total  gaseous  nonmethane  organics (TGNMO).   Emissions are




expressed  as equivalent  carbon  (C,)  mass.   Method  25  sample   fractions  are




separated  by a gas chromatographic  column,  oxidized  to  carbon  dioxide  (C0_),




and reduced  to methane  (CH.)  prior to  analysis by flame  ionization detector




(FID).   Since all the  sample  organic compounds are reduced  to  CH  ,  the pro-




blems associated  with the variable  FID response characteristic  for different




organic compound structures  is eliminated.   This allows comparison of emission




data  on  a uniform  C   basis.   Method  25  is  discussed  in  greater  detail  in




Section 5 of this report.




                                      1-5

-------
     Major  procedural modifications made to Method  25  were required to measure




 accurately emissions from  plywood veneer drying  facilities.   These modifica-




 tions  are  discussed in Section  5.  An additional  condensate  trap immersed in




 water  ice  was placed in  the  sampling train ahead  of  the  standard dry  ice  im-




 mersed condensate trap.  The purpose of  the additional  trap is  to condense



 moisture that would freeze  in the dry ice immersed trap and cause a premature




 sample flow stoppage.   In  this  manner  gas stream  moisture  content,  which may




 range  from 30 to  60  percent by volume,  may effectively be reduced to 3 percent




 or less before entering the dry  ice immersed trap.




     The use of the  Method  5X sampling train  as a  sample preconditioner also




 represents  a  major modification.   In  addition to the  350 F  sample  stream




 temperature,  isokinetic  sample extraction from  the source using  Method 5X was




 also deemed necessary to obtain a representative  Method  25  sample.   This is




 particularly  the  case  when  moisture-saturated gas  streams, such  as  those




 following  wet scrubbing  devices, are being sampled.   Entrained water droplets




may  contain organic materials  that would  not  be  collected  using the normal




Method 25 constant sampling rate procedure.








     1.3.3  Comparability of Test Methods




     Methods 5X and 25 are not related and measured results can not be compared




under  any  circumstances.   Condensation  temperatures  differ  by  more  than




100  F  between the  two  methods,  and consequently  different  condensible com-




pounds are  collected by each  method.   In addition,  it has  been demonstrated




that Method 5X has limited  collection capabilities for organic compounds with




high-vapor  pressures.  A  loss of  organic  material  is  experienced  even during




normal Method  5X  sample recovery and analysis operations.
                                      1-6

-------
1.4 Measurement Program Summary

    The measurement program was conducted  at  the  G-P Springfield facility dur-

ing the week of June 8, 1981.  The emission tests were designed  to  measure the

veneer dryer  organic  emissions and  to  determine  the collection  efficiency of

the G-P  scrubber  system  for  those  emissions.    Tests  were  performed  at  the

veneer dryer  exhaust  duct (scrubber  inlet) and at  the  outlet of the  scrubber

system.

    All emission  testing  was performed by TRC  and  NCASI personnel.  RTI per-

sonnel monitored  process  operating conditions, while DGA personnel monitored

fugitive emissions/ ambient temperature and relative humidity.   Scrubber  oper-

ational data and solution samples were collected by  TRC  personnel.



    1.4.1  Scrubber Inlet

    Preliminary Measurements

    Preliminary testing was  performed on  June  8  to  determine volumetric flow
    rate and stack gas moisture content.

    Method 5X - Particulate and Condensible Organics Tests

    Three Method 5X tests were performed,  one each  on June  9, 10, and  11, con-
    currently with tests performed at the scrubber outlet.

    Method 25 - Total Organic Tests

    Eighteen  Method  25 samples were  taken at this  location  concurrently with
    the Method  5X tests  performed.  Six Method  25  samples were  taken  concur-
    rently with each Method 5X test.



    1.4.2  Scrubber Outlet

    Preliminary Measurements

    Preliminary tests  were performed  on  June  8  to  determine volumetric flow
    rate and stack gas moisture content.

    Method 5X - Particulate and Condensible Organics Tests

    Three Method 5X tests were performed at this  location,  one each on  June 9,
    10, and 11 concurrently with tests performed at the  scrubber  inlet.

                                      1-7

-------
     Method  25  -  Total Organic Tests

     Eighteen Method 25  samples  were taken at  this  location concurrently with
     the  Method 5X samples  (six  per  test run),  and  simultaneously with Method
     25 samples taken at  the scrubber inlet.

     Method  9 - Visible Emissions

     Scrubber outlet visible emissions were not monitored as planned because of
     overcast sky background conditions.   The  scrubber outlet plume was bluish-
     white and  was therefore indistinguishable from the overcast sky.  Overcast
     skies were present  on  June  8,  9 and  10.   During the last  test day,  June
     11 /  the sky  began to clear  and  only scattered clouds were  present in the
     afternoon.   However,  the final test sequence  was nearly completed by this
     time.   Consequently, no visible  emission observations were recorded.

     Although the  scrubber outlet  stack  had an attached steam plume, the Method
     9  observations were not cancelled  because of this  condition.  The method
     provides for  attached  steam plumes by requiring  that  observations be made
     at the  point where the  condensed water vapor is no longer visible.
    1.4.3  Georgia-Pacific Scrubber System

    Static  pressure upstream  and  downstream of  the system  induced  draft fan

was measured with  U-tube water manometers and  recorded at  30-minute inter-

vals.   These measurements  were used  to calculate  pressure drop  (AP) across

the scrubber system.

    Scrubber solution  samples  were taken every 30  minutes during the  scrubber

outlet Method  5X test  period.   One-hundred-mi samples  were  collected from the

scrubber recirculation  tank  every  30  minutes during each test.  The  individual

samples collected during each test were composited for  analysis.



    1.4.4  Fugitive Emissions

    Fugitive emissions from the veneer  dryers  were  monitored by DGA during

each Method 5X test.



    1.4.5  Ambient Air Measurements

    Ambient air  temperature  and relative humidity were monitored  and  recorded

by DGA at the beginning and end of each Method 5X test.
                                      1-8

-------
    1.4.6  Clean-Up Evaluations




    Prior to any emission testing, two Method  5X  sampling  trains were prepared




and charged, ready to perform  a  test.   The unexposed trains were  then cleaned




according to the method and samples recovered.   The samples were  analyzed to




establish background  and/or contamination  levels from  the .sample  collection




equipment.









1.5 Report Sections




    The  remaining  sections  of this report  present the Summary  and Discussion




of  Results   (Section   2),   Process  Description  and  Operations  (Section  3),




Description of  Sampling Locations  (Section 4),  Sampling  and Analytical  Pro-




cedures  (Section  5),   and  Quality  Assurance  (Section  6).   Descriptions  of




methods  and procedures, field and laboratory  data,  and calculations  are pre-




sented in various appendices as noted in the Table of Contents.
                                      1-9

-------
2.0 SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS


    A summary of  all emission measurements and collected data  is  presented in


this section.   Section  2.1 provides a brief background discussion  and  defini-


tions of measured  parameters.   Section  2.2  presents  Method  5X  particulate/


condensible organics  results  with  a complete breakdown and discussion  of par-


ameters  at both  sampling  sites.   Method 25 total organic emission  results are


described in detail in  Section 2.3, which includes a discussion of  emissions


at  both sampling  sites  as  well  as  a  breakdown  of  major  analytical  data.


Section  2.4  discusses visible emissions observations.  A summary  of  scrubber


operational  data is  presented  in  Section 2.5.  Fugitive  emissions are dis-


cussed  in Section 2.6.  A summary  of ambient air measurements  is  presented in


Section  2.7.   A  full  discussion  of  the Method  5X  clean-up  evaluation  and


results may be found in Section 2.8.






2.1 Background and Definitions


    The  test program was designed  to  measure particulate  matter/  condensible


and noncondensible  organic material emitted from veneer dryers, and  to deter-


mine the collection  efficiency  of the  G-P  scrubber  system  as a  control for


those emissions.






    2.1.1  Particulate Emissions


    Particulate  emissions are defined  as any  finely divided  solid  or  liquid

                                                                             o
matter,   other  than  uncombined  water,  that  condenses  at  or  above  350  +25 F


(177 _+14°C)  and  is collected  in  the  probe  and  filter  (front  half)  of  the


Method 5X sampling train.
                                      2-1

-------
     2.1.2  Condensible Emissions




     Condensible  emissions  are  defined  differently  in  Methods  5X  and  25.




 Although called by the  same  name, these two  sample fractions differ  signifi-




 cantly in content and composition and may  not under any circumstances be  com-




 pared.




     Method 5X condensibles are  collected  in glass impingers containing  deion-




 ized distilled water  and immersed  in a water ice bath, and on a  back-up  filter




 following those  impingers.   Any material  remaining  after extraction, filtra-




 tion and  ambient  evaporation  of  the  impinger  solution,  plus  any  material




 collected on the desiccated  back-up  filter,  is defined as Condensible organic




 matter.   Quantification  of this  matter is done  gravimetrically.




     Method 25  condensibles  are collected  in  two stainless-steel  traps,  one




 immersed   in  water ice  followed  by  another   packed  in   dry  ice.    Material




 collected in the traps  is oxidized,  reduced  and analyzed by flame  ionization.




 Results are  expressed  as a concentration of carbon (C,).









     2.1.3  Noncondensible Emissions




    Noncondensible  emissions  are measured  by Method 25 only and are those  that




pass  through both  ice traps  to the  evacuated  sample tank  at  the  end of  the




Method  25 train.   These samples are  oxidized, reduced  and analyzed  by  FID.




Results are expressed  as concentrations of carbon  (C,).









    2.1.4  Total Organic Emissions




    Total  organic emissions are  those collected by the complete Method 25  sam-




pling  train  drawing   a  preconditioned  sample  slipstream  from  a  Method 5X




train.   These emissions  include Condensible  and  noncondensible  emissions as




defined above.
                                      2-2

-------
2.2 Method 5X - Particulate/Condensible Organics Emission Tests




    A  summary of  Method 5X data collected at the  scrubber  inlet and outlet is




presented  in Tables 2-la  (English  units)  and  2-lb  (metric   units) .   These




tables  include  relevant emission data:   stack  gas temperature,  moisture con-




tent and volumetric  flow rate;  veneer  dryer production rate; and a summary of




the  total  measured  particulate/condensible emissions  by  concentration,  mass




emission rate, and emission rate per unit production.




    Emission data are presented for the  three  test series.  Testing  was per-




formed concurrently  at  the  scrubber  inlet and outlet.   Emissions at the scrub-




ber  inlet  averaged 18.3 Ibs/hr  (8.29  kg/hr) or  0.53 lbs/1000 ft2  veneer  on a




3/8-inch  basis   (2.56  kg/1000   m2  on  9.5  mm   basis)  for  the  three  tests.




Emissions  from  the scrubber outlet averaged 14.9  Ibs/hr (6.77  kg/hr)  or 0.43




lbs/1000 ft2  veneer  (2.10  kg/1000 m2)  for the  three tests.   The concentra-




tions  of the  emissions from the two sources, however,  differed markedly.  The




average  scrubber  inlet  concentration  was 0.164 gr/DSCF  (0.376  g/NM3),  while




the  scrubber  outlet averaged only  0.103 gr/DSCF  (0.236  g/NM3)  for  the three




tests.




    The  removal  efficiency  of  the  G-P  scrubber  system  for  particulate/




condensible organics averaged  16.4 percent for  the  three tests.  Efficiencies




ranged from 29 percent  during test 1 to 6 percent  during  test 3.




    Detailed summaries  of this  test data are  presented  in  Sections  2.2.1 and




2.2.2  and  in  Appendix A.   Sample  equations and calculations are presented in




Appendix B.  Field  data sheets  appear in Appendix C.  Sampling  logs  and sum-




maries are shown  in Appendix D.  Calibration data for the  Method 5X sampling




train  are  found  in Appendix F.   Laboratory analysis data  are  presented  in




Appendix G.
                                      2-3

-------
                                                          TABLE 2-la (English Units)

                                           GUMMARY OF METHOD SX PARTICULATE AND CONUENS1BLE ORGANIC
                                           COLLECTION EFFICIENCY FOR UEORGIA-PACIFIC SCRUBBER SYSTEM

                                              Georgia-Pacific Plywood Plant, Springfield, Oregon
Run Number
Date
Emission Description!
Volume Gas Sampled (DSCF)a
Stack Gas Flow Rate (DSCFM)b
Stack Temperature (°F)
Percent Moisture of Volume0
Percent isoklnesis
M Scrubber Pressure Drop (inches lljO)
"•*• Production Rate (1000 ft«/hr)d
Particulate-Condensible Results
Total Catch
gr/DSCF
Ibs/hour
lbs/1000 ft1
Scrubber System Collection Efficiency
Run 1
6-9-81
Uncontrolled Controlled
45.3 38.3
12400 15200
303 166
31.9 38.3
07.4)e
116.5 120.4
14.2
35.7

0.198 0.115
23. Of 16. 3£
0.644 0.456
(») 29.1
Run 2
6-10-B1
Uncontrolled Controlled
42.1 37.3
12000 17500
314 166
34.0 37.5
(37.4)e
111.4 102.1
15.0
34.4

0.169 0.107
18. 5£ 15.9
0.538 0.462
14.1
Run 3
6-11-81
Uncontrolled Controlled
42.4 37.4
12600 16100
309 168
31.8 39.6
(39.3)e
99.2 111.3
13.9
34.1

0.124 O.OB6
13.4 12. 6£
0.393 0.370
5.97
Average
Uncontrolled Controlled
43.3 37.7
12300 16300
309 167
32.6 3U.5
(38.0)a
109.0 111.3
14.4
J4.7

U.164 0.10J
18.3 14.9
0.525 0.429
16.4
a Standard conditions!  29.92 inches Hg at 6B°F.
b Outlet volumetric flows (DSCFM) suspected to be slightly biased high due to possible wind Interference.
0 Outlet moisture results calculated with psychometric equation.  (See Section 5.)
d 1000 square feet veneer per hour on 3/8 inch basis) includes trim factor; does not account for redry material.
e Theoretical moisture content at saturation ( )) all results based on this.
f Results are average of concentration and area ratio methods due to high isokinetic values.  (Bee Table 2-4.)

-------
                                                                           TABLE 2-lb (Metric Units)

                                                           SUMMARY OP METHOD 5X PARTICULATE AND CONDENSIBLE ORGANIC
                                                           COLLECTION EFFICIENCY FOR GEORGIA-PACIFIC SCRUBBER SYSTEM

                                                              Georgia-Pacific Plywood Plant, Springfield, Oregon
ro
I
ui
Run Number Run 1
Date 6-9-81
Emission Description! Uncontrolled Controlled
Volume Gas Sampled (NM')a 1.28 1.08
Stack Gas Flow Rate (NM»/Min)b 351 430
Stack Temperature (°C) 151 74.4
Percent Moisture of Volume0 31.9 38.3
(37.4)e
Percent Isokinesis 116.5 120.4
Scrubber Pressure Drop (mm HjO) 55.9
Production Rate (1000 m'/hr)d 3.32
Particulate-Condenslble Results
Total Catch
g/NM» 0.454 0.263
kg/hour 10. 4£ 7.39£
kg/1000 ft» 3.14 2.23
Scrubber System Collection Efficiency % 28.9
Run 2 Run 3
6-10-81 6-11-81 Average
Uncontrolled Controlled Uncontrolled Controlled Uncontrolled controlled
1.19 1.06 1.20 1.06 1.23 1.07
340 495 357 456 348 461
157 74.4 154 75.6 154 75.0
34.0 37.5 31.8 39.6 32.6 38. 5
(37.4)e (39.3)e (3B.O)8
111.4 102.1 99.2 111.3 109.0 111.3
59.1 54.7 56.7
3.20 3.17 3.22
0.387 0.245 0.284 0.197 0.376 0.236
8.39£ 7.21 6.08 5.72£ 8.29 6.77
2.62 2.26 1.92 1.80 2.56 2.10
14.1 5.92 16.3
               a Standard conditional  760 nun llg at 20°C.
               b Outlet volumetric flows  (NM'/min) suspected to be slightly biased high due to possible wind interference.
               c Outlet moisture calculated with psychometric equation.   (See Section 5.)
               d 1000 square meters veneer per hour on 9.5 millimeter basisi included trim factor) does not account for redry material.
               e Theoretical moisture content at saturation  ( )j all results based on this.
               £ Results are average of concentration and area ratio methods due to high isoklnetic values.  (See Table 2-4.)

-------
     2.2.1  Scrubber Inlet




     A summary of Method 5X data collected at the  scrubber inlet is  presented




 in Table 2-2.   Data presented include sample volume; stack gas flow rate,  tem-




 perature, and  moisture content; isokinesis  for each  test;  veneer production




 rate; front half (particulate)  and  total (particulate/condensible) emissions.




     Tests 1, 2  and  3  were performed at the  scrubber  inlet on June 9, 10,  and




 11,   respectively.   Measured particulate  emissions ranged  from  0.77  to  2.93




 Ibs/hr  (0.02   to  0.08 lbs/1000  ft2  veneer),   averaging  1.83   Ibs/hr   (0.05




 lbs/1000 ft2  veneer).  Total  particulate/condensible  emissions  ranged  from




 13.4 to  23.0  Ibs/hr  (0.39 to  0.64  lbs/1000 ft2  veneer)  for  an  average of




 18.3 Ibs/hr  (0.53  lbs/1000 ft* veneer).   Particulate  matter  accounted  for




 approximately  10 percent  of the total  sample  weight  while  the  remaining 90




 percent  of  the  catch was condensible  organics.




     Measured particulate grain loadings averaged 0.016 gr/DSCF  for  tests 1,  2




 and  3;  ranging from  0.007 to  0.025 gr/DSCF.   Total particulate/condensible




 grain loadings  ranged  from 0.124 to 0.198 gr/DSCF,  for a three-test average of




 0.164 gr/DSCF.   The bulk of the total emission concentration was accounted  for




 by condensible  organics (90 percent).




     The  average  stack gas temperature  was  309 F with  an  average  moisture




 content  of  32.6  percent.   Moisture content  varied from 31.8 percent to  34.0




 percent  over the  three tests.   The average  stack gas  flow rate  was  12,300




 DSCFM and did not vary significantly  among the three tests.




     Isokinesis  averaged 109 percent  for  the  three tests performed.  Isokinesis




 for  test  1  was  116.5 percent due to  a nomograph calculation error,  while  test




 2 was high  at 111.4 percent due to  a higher  than expected gas stream moisture




content.  Isokinesis was acceptable for test 3  at 99.2  percent.   Leak  checks




were  performed  at the  conclusion of  each  test and leak  rates were acceptable




at less than 0.02 cfm.




                                      2-6

-------
                                                                          TABLE 2-2

                                            SUMMARY OF METHOD SX PARTICIPATE AND CONDENSIBLE ORGANIC MEASUREMENTS
                                                    FOR GASES ENTERING THE GEORGIA-PACIFIC  SCRUBBER SYSTEM


                                                     Georgia-Pacific  Plywood Plant, Springfield, Oregon
to
-4
Run Number
Date
Volume Gas Sampled (DSCF)a
Stack Gas Flow Rate (DSCFM)
Stack Temperature (°F)
Percent Moisture by Volume
Percent Isokinesis
Production Rate (1000 ft'/hr)b
Particulate-Condensible Results
Front Half Catch (Probe and Filter)
milligrams
gr/DCSF
1 be/hour
1000 ft*
Total Catch
milligrams
gr/DSCF
Iba/hour
lbs/1000 ft1
Percent Condensible Emissions
Run 1
6-9-B1
45.3
12400
303
31.9
116.5
35.7
74.2
0.0253
2.93C
0.082
582. 3
0.198
23.0°
0.644
87.3
Run 2
6-10-81
42.1
12000
314
34.0
111.4
34.4
44.2
0.0162
1.67°
0.049
459.6
0.169
18.5°
0.538
90.4
Run 3
6-11-81
42.4
12600
309
31.8
99.2
34.1
19.7
0.0072
0.77
0.023
340.6
0.124
13.4
0.393
94.2
Averaqe
43.3
12300
309
32.6
109.0
34.7
46.0
0.0162
1.71
0.049
460.8
0.164
18.3
0.525
90.0
                                   a   Standard Conditionsi  29.92 inches llg at 68°F.
                                   b   1000 square  feet  veneer per  hour  on 3/8  inch  baslsi  Includes trim  factor)  does
                                       not account for redry material.
                                   c   Results  are  average  of  concentration  and  area  ratio  methods  due  to  high
                                       isokinetic values.  (See Table 2-4.)

-------
     The mass emission rates for tests 1 and 2 were  recalculated  using  the area




 ratio method because of the unacceptable anisokinetic conditions.  The  results




 are presented in  Table 2-4 and  are  only slightly  higher  than  those  obtained




 from the concentration method, which is the normal approach.   This result  is




 probably due to the  small  percentage of particulate matter  in the gas  stream




 which would  escape collection by  the  sampling nozzle  under superisokinetic




 sampling conditions.  An explanation  of  the area ratio method for  calculating




 mass emission rates is presented  in  Section  5.3.1.4  of  this  report.   Mass




 emission rates presented in  Tables 2-1 and  2-2 represent the average of the




 two  calculation methods for tests 1 and 2.








     2.2.2  Scrubber Outlet




     A summary of Method 5X data collected at  the scrubber outlet is presented




 in Table 2-3.  Data presented  include sample volume; stack gas flow rate,  tem-




 perature,  and moisture content;  isokinesis for  each test;  veneer production




 rate;  front half (particulate) and total  (particulate/condensible) emissions.




     Three  emission tests were  performed  at the  scrubber  outlet.  Testing was




 performed concurrently with tests at  the scrubber inlet on June 9, 10 and  11.




     Measured  particulate emissions  for tests  1,  2 and 3 ranged from 2.59  (0.08




 lbs/100  ft2)  to  3.70  Ibs/hr  (0.11  lbs/1000   ftM,   averaging 3.20  Ibs/hr




 (0.09   lbs/1000    ft2   veneer).     Total   measured   particulate/condensible




 emissions  ranged   from  12.6 Ibs/hr   (0.37  lbs/1000  ft2)  for  test  3  to  16.3




 Ibs/hr  (0.46  lbs/1000 ft2) for  test   1.  The  average total  emission  rate was




 14.9  Ibs/hr   (0.43  lbs/1000  ft2  veneer).   Particulate  material  collected




during these  three tests  accounted for  approximately 21 percent of the  total




emissions  on  the   average,  while  the remaining  79  percent  was  condensible




organics.
                                      2-8

-------
to
I
                                                                        TABLE 2-3

                                          SUMMARY OF METHOD  5X PARTICULATE AND CONDENSIBLE ORGANIC MEASUREMENTS
                                                  FOR GASES  EXITING THE GEORGIA-PACIFIC SCRUBBER SYSTEM
Georgia-Pacific Plywood
Run Number
Date
Volume Gas Sampled (DSCP)a
Stack Gas Flow Rate (DSCFH)b
Stack Temperature (°F)
Percent Moisture by Volume0
Percent Isoklnesia
Production Rate (1000 ft»/ht)d
Particulate-Condensible Results
Front Half Catch (Probe and Filter)
milligrams
gr/DCSF
Ibs/hour
lbs/1000 ft1
Total Catch
milligrams
gr/DSCF
Ibs/hour
lbs/1000 ft1
Percent Condenslble Emissions
Plant, Springfield, Oregon
Run 1 Run 2 Run 3
6-9-81 6-10-81 6-11-81
38.3
15200
166
38.3
(37.4)e
120.4
35.7
56.9
0.023
3.30f
0.092
286.9
0.115
16.3*
0.457
80.2
37.3
17500
166
37.5
(37.4)a
102.1
34.4
41.9
0.017
2.59
0.075
257.6
0.107
15.9
0.462
83.7
37.4
16100
168
39.6
(39.3)e
111.3
34.1
61.6
0.025
3.70f
0.109
208.8
O.OB6
12. 6f
0.370
70.5
Average
37.7
16300
167
38.5
(38.0)e
111.3
34.7
53.5
0.022
3.20
.092
251.1
0.103
14.9
0.430
78.7
                                  a   Standard Conditionsi   29.92 inches Hg at 68°F.
                                  b   Outlet  volumetric  flows  (DSCFM)  suspected  to  be  slightly  biased  high  due  to
                                      possible wind interference.
                                  c   Actual  measured  moisture  adjusted  to  saturated  conditions  using  psychometric
                                      equation.   (See Section 5.)
                                  d   1000   ft'  per  veneer  hour  on  3/8  in.  basis;  includes  trim factor;  does  not
                                      account  tor  redry material.
                                  0   Theoretical  moisture content  at  saturation  (  ),  all  results based  on this.
                                  f   Results  are average  of   concentration and  area   ratio  methods   due  to   high
                                      isokinetlc values.   (See Table 2-4.)

-------
                                 TABLE 2-4

       COMPARISON OF  PARTICULATE AND CONDENSIBLE MEASURED EMISSIONS
                         WITH CALCULATED EMISSIONS
                (Concentration Method vs. Area Ratio Method)

             Georgia-Pacific  Plywood Plant, Springfield, Oregon
Emission Rate (Ibs/hr)
Sample No.
Sample Fraction
Concentration
Method
Area-Ratio
Method
Average
5X-l-Inlet
(%I* = 116.5)

5X-2-Inlet
(%I* = 111.4)

5X-l-Outlet
(%I* = 120.4)

5X-3-Outlet
(%I* = 111.3)

Front half
Back half
Total
Front half
Back half
Total
Front half
Back half
Total
Front half
Back half
Total
2.69
18.4
21.1
1.67
15.7
17.4
2.98
12.0
15.0
3.51
8.39
11.9
3.16
21.6
24.8
1.88
17.7
19.6
3.59
14.5
18.1
3.89
9.30
13.2
2.93
20.0
23.0
1.78
16.7
18.5
3.30
13.3
16.3
3.70
8.85
12.6
* isokinesis
                                  2-10

-------
    Particulate grain loadings  measured  at the scrubber outlet  averaged  0.022




gr/DSCF for  these  tests,  ranging from 0.017  gr/DSCP to 0.025 gr/DSCF.   Total




grain loadings  (particulate/condensible)  ranged from  0.086  to  0.115  gr/DSCF,




averaging 0.103 gr/DSCF for the three tests.




    The  average stack  gas temperature  measured during  the  three tests  was




167 F.  The  measured moisture  content  of  the  gas   stream  averaged 38.5  per-




cent for the three tests with slight variation.




    The  moisture  content of  the  gas  stream  as  measured  during each  test




exceeded  saturation at  the  measured temperature.   This phenomenon  was  not




surprising since entrained water droplets were  observed  in  the gas stream by




TKC  and EPA personnel.   In  accordance  with  EPA   Method  4,  the gas  stream




moisture content was recalculated assuming  saturation  of  the gas stream at the




average stack gas  temperature  for each  test.   An explanation of  this procedure




is  presented in Section  5.3.1.4.   Recalculated  gas stream moisture  contents




ranged from 37.4 percent for tests  1  and  2  to 39.3  percent  for test 3, averag-




ing  38.0  percent.   These  saturation  moisture values were carried through the




remainder of the emission  calculations.




    Measured  stack gas flow  rates  ranged from  15,200  DSCFM  to 17,500  DSCFM,




averaging  16,300 DSCFM.   The average outlet  stack  gas flow rate  was  measured




to  be  approximately  25  percent  greater  than that  measured  entering  the




scrubber system.   One  reason for the difference  in the flow rate  measurements




may be leaks within  the  system (around  spray nozzles,  in the cyclone ductwork,




and  before the  fan)  which would draw  ambient  air into the  system.   Another




reason may be the  inherent inaccuracy of EPA Method 2  at stack  gas velocities




of  approximately  500 feet per  minute (fpm) .   A third  possible  reason is wind




interference.   Since sampling  was  performed  only  9 feet  from  the top of a  9




foot  i.d.  stack,  even  a small  gust of wind  created turbulence within the
                                      2-11

-------
 duct.   Momentary negative flow rates were indeed observed during the test pro-



 gram.   These  reasons may  account  for  the  differences between  the measured



 inlet  and outlet  flow  rates as  well as the  wide variation  in measured flow



 rates  from test to test.



     Isokinesis was acceptable only for test  2  at 102 percent.  Isokinesis was


 unacceptable for tests 1  and 3 at 120.4 percent and 111.3 percent, respective-


 ly.   The  average  isokinesis  for  the three tests  performed  was 111.3 percent.


 Varying stack  gas moisture content was a major factor affecting the unaccept-


 able isokinetic conditions.   The preliminary determination indicated 15.8 per-



 cent moisture/  but  measured moistures were  more than  twice  this  during the



 subsequent tests.   It  was  later  discovered that different  grades  of veneer



 with varying  moisture  contents  were dried  throughout  the  test  program,  as



 shown  in  Table 3-1.


     The mass emission rates  for  tests 1 and 3 were recalculated using the area



 ratio  method  because of  unacceptable  superisokinetic  conditions.   The results


 are  presented  in  Table 2-4  and are  only  slightly higher than those obtained



 from the  concentration method,  which is  the  normal  approach.  This  fact  is



 probably  due  to the small percentage  of  particulate matter  in the gas stream



 which  would escape collection by  the sampling nozzle under anisokinetic sampl-



 ing  conditions.   An explanation  of the area  ratio method for calculating mass



 emission  rates  is presented  in Section 5.3.1.4 of this  report.  Mass emission


 rates  presented  in Tables 2-1 and 2-3  are  the average of the two calculation


methods for  tests 1 and  3.   Leak checks were  performed at  the conclusion  of


 each test and  leak rates were acceptable at  less than 0.02  cfm.   Some diffi-



culty  was  encountered maintaining probe and filter  outlet temperatures at 350


   o
+25 F  during  these  tests.   Further  discussion  is  presented  in  Section



5.3.1.1.
                                     2-12

-------
2.3 Method 25 - Total Organic Tests




    A summary of  the Method 25 total organic data  (condensible and nonconden-




sible) collected  at  the  scrubber  inlet  and outlet is presented  in Tables 2-5a




(English  units),   2-5b   (metric units).   These  tables  include  TRC,  PCS,  and




NCASI average emission  data:   stack gas  flow  rate,  moisture content  and tem-




perature;  veneer  drying production  rate,  and  a  summary  of the  total organic




emissions  by concentration, mass emission  rate,  and  emission rate  per unit




production.   All  emissions  are expressed  as  carbon   (C,).  NCASI calculates




the  emission  rate  as   Ibs/hr equivalent   methane   (CHJ  instead  of  carbon




(C ).   Their  data  in  the  tables  have  been  converted  to  Ibs/hr  C   to




present the data on a consistent basis,  conforming with Method 25.




    Emission data are presented for the  three  test series.  Testing  was per-




formed simultaneously at the scrubber inlet and  outlet on  June 9,  10 and 11.




Total organic  emissions entering  the scrubber  system  ranged from 23.8  Ibs/hr




(10.6  kg/hr)  or  0.67 lbs/1000 ft2  veneer  (3.20 kg/1000  m2)  to  35.8  Ibs/hr




(16.2  kg/hr)  or  1.05  lbs/1000 ft2  (5.10 kg/1000 ra2), averaging  30.2  Ibs/hr




(13.6  kg/hr)  or  0.87   lbs/1000   ft2   veneer   (4.22  kg/1000  m2).    Emissions




exiting  the  scrubber  system  ranged from  30.9  Ibs/hr (13.8  kg/hr)   to 43.6




Ibs/hr  (19.6 kg/hr)  or 1.22  lbs/1000  ftz  (5.87 kg/1000  m2)  for  an average




emission  rate  of 38.8  Ibs/hr  (17.5 kg/hr)  or  1.12  lbs/1000 ft2  veneer  (5.39




kg/1000  m2).  The  collection  efficiency of  the system  was  measured  to  be




less  than zero for  tests  1 and  2  and  13.7 percent  for  test  3.   The average




collection efficiency of the scrubber system was less than zero.




    Detailed summaries of  these test data are presented  in Sections  2.3.1 and




2.3.2, and in Appendix  A.   Sample equations and  calculations  are presented in




Appendix  B.   Field data sheets appear  in Appendix C.  Sampling  logs  and sum-




maries are shown  in Appendix  D.    Laboratory  analysis data are  presented  in




Appendix G.




                                     2-13

-------
                                                          TABLE 2-5a  (English Units)

                                                 SUMMARY OF METHOD 25 TOTAL ORGANIC COLLECTION
                                                EFFICIENCY FOR GEORGIA-PACIFIC SCRUBBER SYSTEM

                                              Geocgia-Pacific Plywood Plant, Springfield, Oregon
Run Number
Date
Emission Description!
Stack Gas Flow Rate (DSCFM)3' b
Stack Temperature (°F)
Percent Moisture by Volume0
Scrubber Pressure Drop (inches H2O)
Production Rate (1000 ft'/hr)a
to
1
£ Total Organic Results8
parts/million, Cj
gr/DSCF, Cj
Ibs/hour, Cj
lbs/1000 ft1 , Cj
System Collection Efficiency (%)
Run 1 Run 2 Run 3
6-9-81 6-10-81 6-11-81
Uncontrolled Controlled Uncontrolled Controlled Uncontrolled Controlled
12,400 15,200 12,000 17,500 12,600 16,100
303 166 314 166 309 168
31.9 37.4 34.0 37.4 31.8 39.3
14.2 15.0 13.9
35.7 34.4 34.1
1,027 1,536 1,389 1,286 1,524 1,030
0.22 0.33 0.30 0.28 0.33 0.22
23.6 43.6 31.1 42.0 35.8 30.9
0.67 1.22 0.90 1.22 1.05 0.91
<0 <0 13.7
Average
Uncontrolled
12,300
304
32.6
14.
34.
1,313
0.21)
30.2
0.87
<0
Controlled
16,300
167
38.0
4
7
1,284
0.28
38.8
1.12

a   Standard conditions!  29.92 inches Hg at 68°F.
b   Outlet volumetric flows (DSCFM) suspected to be slightly biased high due to possible wind interference.
c   Actual measured moisture adjusted to saturated conditions using psychometric equation (controlled emissions only).
d   1000 square feet veneer per hour on 3/8 inch basis) includes trim factor) does not account for redry material.
e   Emission results  calculated  and reported as  Cj.   Does not  include front half  results  from Method 5X  collector,  and cannot be  compared
    with Method 5X mass determinations.

-------
                                                           TABLE 2-5b  (Metric Units)


                                                 SUMMARY OF METHOD 25 TOTAL ORGANIC COLLECTION
                                                 EFFICIENCY FOR GEORGIA-PACIFIC  SCRUBBER SYSTEM


                                               Georgia-Pacific Plywood  Plant,  Springfield, Oregon
 Run Number
 Date	
         Run 1
         6-9-81
                  Run 2
                 6-10-81
                                Run 3
                               6-11-81
                                                                                                                              Average
 Emission  Description:

 Stack  Gas Flow Rate  (NM'/Hln)3'  b

 Stack  Temperature  (°C)

 Percent Moisture by Volume0

 Scrubber  Pressure Drop  (nun IIjO)

 Production Rate (1000 meters'/hr)d

 Total  Organic  Results8

       parts/million, C^

       g/USCP,  Cj

       kg/hour,  Cj

       kg/1000  m> , Cj

 System Collection Efficiency (%)
Uncontrolled  Controlled  Uncontrolled  Controlled  Uncontrolled  Controlled  Uncontrolled  Controlled
   351.2

   150.6

    31.9
430.2

 74.4

 37.4«
         360.7

          3.32



  1,027         1,536

   0.50          0.76

   10.6          19.5

   3.20          5.87

           <0
339.8

156.7

 34.0
495.6

 74.4

 37.4«
                  381.0

                   3.20




           1,389          1,286

            0.69           0.64

            14.0           19.1


            4.37           5.95

                   <0
356.8

153.9

 31.8
456.0

 75.6


 39.3£
                                353.1

                                 3.17



                         1,524          1,030

                          0.76           0.50

                          16.2           14.0

                          5.10           4.42

                                  13.6
348.3       461.6

  154        74.8

 32.6        JB.UC


     365.8

      3.22
                                    1,313

                                     0.62

                                     13.6


                                      4.22
                                     1,284

                                      0.63

                                      17.5


                                      5.41
                                                                                      <0
a   Standard conditions:  760 mm Hg at 20%.
b   Outlet volumetric flows  (NM'/min) suspected to be slightly biased high due to possible wind interference.
0   Actual measured moisture adjusted to saturated conditions using psychometric equation (controlled emissions only).
d   1000 square meters veneer per hour on 9.5-mm basis) includes trim factor) does not account for redry material.
8   Emission results  calculated and reported  as  Cj.   Does  not  include front half  results  from Method 5X  collector,  and cannot be  compared
    with Method 5X mass determinations.
f   Theoretical moisture content at saturation.

-------
     2.3.1  Scrubber Inlet




     A  summary  of  Method  25  condensible  and  noncondensible  organics  data




 collected at the scrubber inlet is presented in Tables 2-6 and 2-8.  Table 2-6




 shows relevant  emission  data  and presents  total  organic emissions  calculated




 by TRC,  PCS, and NCASI as concentration, mass emission rate, and emission  rate




 per unit  production.   Table  2-8 presents  a breakdown  of the  total  organic




 emissions into  condensible and  noncondensible  organics as  analyzed  by  the




 three laboratories.  In addition, individual sample train analyses results  are




 shown.   The  relative  standard deviation between  the paired  sample  trains  is




 also presented.




     Emissions of carbon  (C.)  from  the  scrubber as  analyzed  by TRC,  PCS  and




 NCASI  showed good overall correlation.   The precision of the test data  between




 paired   samples   (relative   standard  deviation-RSD)   was  excellent  overall,




 averaging 19.8 percent RSD  for  the three laboratories  involved.








     2.3.2 Scrubber Outlet
    A  summary  of  Method  25  condensible  and  noncondensible  organics  data




collected  at the scrubber outlet  is presented  in  Tables 2-7 and  2-9.   Table




2-7 shows  relevant  emission  data and presents total organic emissions calcula-




ted by TRC,  PCS and NCASI as  concentration,  mass emission  rate,  and emission




rate per unit production.  Table 2-9 presents a breakdown of the total organic




emissions  into condensible  and  noncondensible  organics  as  analyzed by  the




three laboratories.  In  addition,  individual sample train analyses results are




shown.   The  relative standard deviation  between paired sample  trains is also




presented.




    Emissions of  carbon  (C-)  from  the  scrubber  as  measured by TRC  and  NCASI




showed  good  correlation.   The  average  emissions  calculated  by  TRC  were




slightly greater than those calculated by NCASI  and  PCS.   There  is no apparent




                                     2-16

-------
                                                                                TABLE 2-6


                                                         SUMMARY METHOD 25 INDIVIDUAL TOTAL ORGANIC MEASUREMENTS
                                                         FOR GASES ENTERING THE GEORGIA-PACIFIC SCRUBBER SYSTEM


                                                           Georgia-Pacific Plywood Plant Springfield, Oregon
to
I
Run Number
Date
Stack Gas Flow Rate (DSCFM)a
Stack Temperature (°F)
Percent Moisture by Volume
Production Rate (1000 ft»/hr)b
Laboratory Performing Analysis
Total Organic Results*-
parts/million, Cj
g/DSCF, Cj
Ibs/hour, Cj
lbs/1000 ft»r, Cj
Run 1
6/9/81
12,400
303
31.9
35.7
TRC PCS NCASI

1016 655 1210
0.22 0.19 0.26
23.7 19. B 28.1
0.66 0.55 0.78
Run 2
6/10/81
12,000
314
34.0
34.4
TRC PCS NCASI

1482 1392 1295
0.32 0.30 0.28
33.3 31.2 29.1
0.97 0.91 0.84
Run 3
6/11/81
12,600
309
31.8
34.1
TRC PCS NCASI

2137 1101 1334
0.47 0.24 0.29
50.4 25.9 31.4
1.48 0.76 0.92
Average
12,300
J09
32.6
34.7
TRC PCS

1545 1116
0.34 0.24
35.8 25.6
1.03 0.74




NCASI

1280
0.28
29.5
0.85
               a   Standard Conditions:   29.92 inches llg  at  68°F, NCASI  uses O°C.
               b   1000 square  feet  veneer per hour  on 3/B inch basis;  includes  trim  factor) does not account for redry material.
               c   Emission reaults  calculated and  reported  as  Cj .   Does  not  include front  half results  from Method  5X  collection,  cannot  be
                   compared with Method  5X mass determination.

-------
N)
I
                                                                                     TABLE 2-7

                                                            SUMMARY OF METHOD 25 INDIVIDUAL TOTAL ORGANIC MEASUREMENTS
                                                               FOR GASES EXITING THE GEORGIA-PACIFIC SCRUBBER SYSTEM

Run Number
Date
Stack Gas Flow Rate (DSCFM)a> b
Stack Temperature °F
Percent Moisture by Volume0
Production Rate (1000 ft«/hr)d
Laboratory Performing Analysis
Total Organic Results0
parts/million, Cj
gr/DSCF, G!
Ibs/hour, Cj
lbs/1000 ft« , Cj
Georgia-Pacific
Run 1
10/9/81
15,200
166
37.4
35.7
TRC PCS NCASI
1762 1538 1306
0.38 0.33 0.28
50.1 43.7 37.2
1.40 1.22 1.04
Plywood Plant, Springfield, Oregon
Run 2 Run 3
10/10/81 10/11/81
17,500 16,100
166 168
37.4 39.3
34.4 34.1
TRC PCS NCASI TRC PCS NCASI
1694 941.6 1221 1264 903 923
0.37 0.20 0.27 0.28 0.20 0.20
55.5 30.8 40.0 38.1 27.2 27.8
1.61 0.90 1.16 1.12 0.80 0.82

Average
16,300
167
38.0
34.7






TRC PCS NCASI
1573 1127
0.34 0.25
48.0 34.2
1.38 0.99
1150
0.25
35.1
1.01
                 a   Standard Conditional   29.92 Inches Hg at 6B°F,  NCASI  uses O°C.
                 b   Outlet flows suspected to be slightly biased high due to wind Interference.
                 c   Theoretical  moisture  content at  saturation.   (See Section 5.)
                 d   1000 square  feet  veneer per hour on 3/8 inch basis;  Includes trim factort does  not  account  for  redry material
                 8   Emission results calculated and  reported  as Cj.  Does  not include front half results from Method 5X  collector, and cannot  be  compared with
                     Method 5X mass determinations.

-------
                                                            TABLE 2-8
                              SUMMARY OF METHOD 25 INDIVIDUAL TOTAL ORGANIC TRAP,  TANK MEASUREMENTS
                                      FOR GASES ENTERING THE GEORGIA-PACIFIC SCRUBBER SYSTEM
Georgia-Pacific Plywood Plant, Springfield, Oregon
Condensible Catch



Run 1
June 9






Run 1
June 10






Run 3
June 11






Overall Average
Stack Gas
Flow Rate Sample
DSCFM3 I.D. No.

12,400 1-A
1-B
1-C
1-D
9-1
9-2
Average

12,000 2-A
2-B
2-C
2-D
10-1
10-2
Average

12,600 3-A
3-B
3-C
3-D
11-1
11-2
Average
12,300


Lab

TRC
TRC
PCS
PCS
NCASI
NCASI


TRC
TRC
PCS
PCS
NCASI
NCASI


TRC
TRC
PCS
PCS
NCASI
NCASI


HjO
Ice Trap
(ppm)

477
245
509.7
720.1
N.A.b
N.A.b
488

483
489
539
549.7
N.A.b
N.A.b
515

545
940
469.0
576.7
N.A.b
N.A.b
639
547
C02
Ice Trap
(ppm)

300
601
267.7
164.1
1231.4
1045.6
601.6

163
212
352.2
367.9
1531.1
863.2
5B2

469
433
550. 8
315.9
1143.1
1155.2
678
621

NonCondensible Catch
(ppm)

409
n.d.
25.0
22.5
60.9
82.3
100

804
814
433
541.8
63.3
132.0
465

1102
786
159.2
102.6
161.1
209.4
420
328
Total
Catch
(ppm)

1186
846
802.4
906.7
1292
1128
1027

1450
1515
1324
1459
1594
995
1389

2116
2159
1206
995.2
1304
1365
1524
1314
Pair
Average
(ppra)

1016

855

1210

1027

1482

1392

1295

1389

2137

1101

1334

1524
1314
Emission
Rate
(Ibs/hr)

23.7

19.8

28.1

23.8

33.3

31.2

29.1

31.1

50.4

25.9

31.4

35.8
30.2
Relation
Standard
Deviation

4.22

11.6

4.0

6.6

32.2

14.6

3.06

16.6

70.3

7.4

31.2

36.3
19.8
a Standard Conditionsi   29.92 inches Hg at  60°F;  NCASI  uses  0°C.
b NCASI does not use an 1)2° ice trap in their  train.

-------
                                                                             TABLE  2-9
                                               SUMMARY OF METHOD 25 INDIVIDUAL TOTAL ORGANIC TRAP, TANK MEASUREMENTS
                                                       FOR GASES EXITING THE GEORGIA-PACIFIC SCRUBBER SYSTEM
NJ
 I
N)
o
Georgia-Pacific Plywood Plant, Springfield, Oregon
Condensible Catch
Stack Gas
Flow Rate Sample
DSCFM3 I.D. No.
Run 1
June 9 15,200




Run 2 17,500

June 10


Run 3 16,000
June 11
/



Overall Average 16,300

1-A
1-B
1-C
1-D
9-1
9-2
Average
2-A
2-B
2-C
2-D
10-1
10-2
Average
3-C
3-D

3-A
3-B
11-1
11-2
Average

11 20
Ice Trap
Lab (ppm)

TRC
TRC
PCS
PCS
NCASI
NCASI

TRC
TRC
PCS
PCS
NCASI
NCASI
TRC
TRC

PCS
PCS
NCASI
NCASI



815
758
1180.2
905.0
N/Ab
N/Ab
915
465
792
579.9
571.0
N/Ab
N/Ab
606
831
441

534.6
414.3
N/Ab
N/Ab
555
692
C02 Total
Ice Trap Non-Condensible Catch Catch
(ppm) (ppm) (ppm)

278
740
405.6
116.6
1242.9
1276.3
676.6
332
303
117.5
102.4
1270.2
1039.9
527
196
193

176.8
641.1
949.4
743.4
483
562

546
388
323.3
145.5
49.2
44.9
249
687
810
316.8
177.5
23.6
108.5
354
443
424

0
39.0
68.6
85.2
177
260

1639
1886
1909
1167
1292
1321
1536
1484
1905
1032
. 850.9
1294
1148
1286
1470
1058

711.4
1094
1018
828.6
1030
1284
Pair
Average
(ppm)

1762

1538
1307
1536
1694

941.6

1221
1286
1264

903

923
1030
1284
Emission
Rate
(Ibs/hr)

50.1

43.7
37.2
43.6
55.5

30.8

40.0
42.0
38.1

27.2

27.8
30.9
38.8
Relation
Standard
Deviation

10

2.9
63
25.3
5.7

7.3

11. a
8.3
4.3

3.3

b.9
4.8
12.8
                  a Standard condltionsi  29.92 inches llg at 68°F|  NCASI uses 0°C.
                  b NCASI does not use an II20 ice trap in their train.

-------
explanation  for  this  difference.   The precision  of  the  test  data  between




paired samples  (relative  standard deviation)  was excellent  overall,  averaging




12.8 percent RSD for the three laboratories involved.









2.4 Visible Emissions




    Visible  emissions  observations  were not  conducted during  this  sampling




program as planned.  Overcast skies  prevented  an  accurate  determination of the




scrubber outlet plume  opacity.   Further details of the decision to  abort this




phase of the test program are presented in Sections 1.4 and 5.7.









2.5 Scrubber Operational Summary




    A summary of  operational  parameters of the G-P  scrubber system  during the




test  program is  presented in  Table  2-10.   Pressure  drop measurements  (AP)




across the scrubber  system  are presented as  well  as scrubber solution analysis




data.




    Scrubber solution  samples were taken from  the  recirculating tank every 30




minutes and  then composited  into one  sample  per  test.   Sample analyses for




total organic carbon (TOC)  ranged from  3,010 mg/1 for  test 1 to  2,860 mg/1 for




test 3, averaging 2,956 mg/1 for the three tests.




    Pressure  drop  (AP)   measurements   across  the  scrubber  were  made at  30




minute intervals  during  the  test  program.   The AP  gradually  increased during




tests 1 and  2,  and  averaged 14.2 and 15.0 inches water,  respectively.   During




test  3, however,  the  AP  peaked  shortly after the  start  of testing  and then




gradually declined for the  rest of the  test,  averaging 13.9 inches  water.  The




three test average AP was 14.4 inches water.
                                     2-21

-------
                       TABLE 2-10

GEORGIA-PACIFIC SCRUBBER SYSTEM OPERATIONAL DATA SUMMARY

   Georgia-Pacific Plywood Plant, Springfield, Oregon
                       June  1981
Pressure Drop
Measurements
Run Number Date Time
1 June 9 1400
1430
1500
1530
1600
1630
1700
1730
Average
2 June 10 1300
1400
1430
1500
1530
1600
1630
Average
3 June 11 1145
1215
1245
1315
1345
1415
1445
Average
AP
(in. H90)
12.5
13.0
14.0
14.8
14.5
14.7
15.1
15.2
14.2
14.7
14.8
15.0
14.8
15.2
15.4
15.3
15.0
13.8 -
14.5
14.0
13.9
13.8
14.2
12.9
13.9
Scrubber Solution
Volume Collected TOC
(ml) (mg/1)








800 3010







. 700 3000







700 2860
                         2-22

-------
2.6 Summary of Fugitive Emissions (Provided by RTI)




    The temperature  and  pressure changes that a  veneer dryer is  subjected  to




make it very difficult for a dryer to be completely air  tight.   Door  seals and




skins, green  and dry end  baffles,  and  abort stacks  will  with time  all  even-




tually develop leaks.  Door  seals and dryer  skins  most readily develop  them.




At Springfield all the dryers  had fugitive emissions.  The  three  older  dryers




leaked more  from around  the elephant ears  than from  individual door  seals.




The jet dryer  also  experienced door leaks with quality  checks showing varying




amounts from one day to another.  It was  impossible to  estimate  volume of fug-




itive gases from any fugitive source.




    At the abort stacks  there were  also  fugitive emissions.  Very  little was




seen from the  jet dryer  abort  stacks,  while opacities  (unofficially)  up  to 30




percent were  seen from the  other three dryer  abort  stacks.  Cooling section




air volumes  are  large.   No  bluish  haze  was seen coming from cooling section




exhausts from the three  longitudinal dryers.   However, the  jet dryer cooling




stacks showed some bluish opacity.



    All  of the  fugitive  emissions evaluations  were  purely qualitative and




visual.  Tables 2-lla, 2-llb and 2-llc contain fugitive emission data.








2.7 Ambient Air Measurements




    A summary  of  ambient  temperature  and  relative humidity measurements  by RTI




and DGA  is presented  along  with process  information  in  Table  3-1.   Ambient




temperatures  ranged from 54   to 75 F,  while relative  humidity  ranged from




36 percent to  76 percent during the test program.
                                     2-23

-------
                                                                   TABLE 2-1la


                                                            FUGITIVE EMISSION SUMMARY


                                               Georgia-Pacific Plywood Plant,  Springfield, Oregon

                                                                (Provided by RTI)

                                                                  June 9,  1981
to
I
CO





Abort
Dryer I/Time Green End
1 2ilO
2:45
3>40
4:50
Si 30
2 It 50
2i45
3:45
4:50
5:30
3 2:00
2:45
3:45
4:45
5:30
4 1:45
2:45
' 3:40
4:40
5:27

Building
Pans

H
11






H
H
H
II
II
H
N
N
N
N
N
1


L
25%
30%
M
H
M
II
II
L
10%
10%
30%
30%
10%
20%
N
N
N
N
N
2



Stacks
Dry End
L
M 30%
II 20%
II 30%
H 30%
L
L
M
M 10%
M 10%
II 20%
M 30%
M 30%
L
H 30%
N
N
N
N
N
3




Cooling
N
N
H
N
N
N
N
N
H
N
N
N
H
N
N
5%
10%
10%
10%
15%
4








Overall1
L
H
M
H
II
M
M
M
M
M
H
II
H
M
11





5


100
200
200
250
300
150
200
200
150
150
250
250
250
ISO
300
L -
L -
L -
VL
L
6


cfm
cfm
cfm
cfm
cfm
cfm
cfm
cfm
cfm
cfm
cfm
cfm
cfm
cfm
cfm








(Opacity)

2:00

5%

5%

-

5%

-



not


Time
2:10
3:25
4:15
5:05
5:40
2:05
3:25
4:15
5:05
5:40
2:05
3:15
4:13
5:00
5:40
2:00
3:18
4:12
5:00
5:40


N »
T •
VL •
L •
observed M -
2:45
3:45
4:45
5:30
5%
5%
5%
5t
10%
10%
5%
5%
-
-
-
-
5%
5%
5%
10%
-
-
-
5%




«
•
••
M
II »
VII "



Door
Seals
2M
2L, 2T
4M
1L
3L
1L
H
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
1M, 1L
1L
1H, 1L
111, 1L
2M


None
Trace
Inside

Elephant Above
Ears Dryers
1M
1M, 1L
1M, 211
4M, III
2M
1L
N
1M
1L
1L
N
N
N
N
N
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA

KEY
M
M
H
II
M
L
L
M
M
H
H
H
11
H
H
L
L
L
L
M


1 cfm estimates
are gross
Very Light estimates
Light


Moderate % opacity
Heavy
on blue

Very Heavy plumes







-------
                                                                              TABLE 2-llb

                                                                       FUGITIVE EMISSION SUMMARY

                                                          Georgia-Pacific Plywood Plant, Springfield, Oregon
                                                                           (Provided by RTI)
                                                                            June 10, 1981)
NJ


Ul
Inside Appearance

Dryer
1






2






3

'i




4


















I/Time
12:20
1:15
2:20
2:45
3:45
4:15
4:45
12:17
1:15
2:15
2:50
3:45
4:15
4:45
12:15
1:15
2:15
2:50
3:50
4:15
4:40
12:13

1:12
2:15
2:48
3:50
4:15
4:40

Roof
Vents
12:20
1:15
2:15
2:45
3:45
4:15
4:40
Abort
Green End
S 10%
11
H
M 10
M 15
L 10
L 10
11
II
H
L 10%
L
L 5t
L 10
M 20t
L
M 10%
11 20%
M 10
H 20
II 20
N

N
H
N
N
N
N
907 908


5 5
5
5 5
5 5
5 5
5 5
5
Stacks
Dry End
M 20
M
II 20
H 20
11 30
H 30
M 20
M
S
M 101
M 10%
M 10
M 10
M 10
M 20%
L
M 10%
M 20
11 20
II 20
H 20
N

N
N
N
N
N
N
909


N
-
-
-
-
-
-
Door Elephant
Cooling
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
10-15

5
10%
10-15
N
5-10
5
910


5
-
5
5
5
5
-
Overall1
M 150 cfm
M 150 cfm
H 250 cfm
M 150 cfm
M 200 Cfm
11 250 cfm
M 200 cfm
M 300 cfm
M 150 cfm
M 200 cfm
L 150 cfm
L 150 cfm
L 100 cfm
L 150 cfm
M 200 cfm
50 cfm
M 100 cfm
II 250 cfm
H 250 cfm
11 250 cfm
II 250 cfm
Had at Dry
End
H
H
II
N
It
H
911 912


5 5
5
-
5
-
-
5
Time
12:10
1:25
2:07
2:40
3:40
4:05
4:38
12:08
1:25
2:06
2:40
3:40
4:05
4:35
12:05
1:20
2:05
2:40
3:35
4:05
4:33
12:03

1:20
2:03
2:38
3:35
4:00
4:33



N -
T «
VL -
L •
M *
II "
VII "
Seals
1 VL
2 VL
2 VL
1 S, 1 L
2 L
2 L
2 L
2 M
2 VL
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
1 L, 1 M

2 M
1 L
1 L
1 L
1 M
1 M, TR


KEY
None
Trace
Very Light
Light
Moderate
Heavy
Very Heavy
Ears Top
N L
N L
N L
1 L M
1 L M
1 L L
1 L M
IS L
IS M
1 M M
1 L II
1 L M
1 L L
1 L L
N M
N M
N II
N II
N H
N M
N H
NA M

NA M
NA L
NA L
NA L
NA M
NA L



cfm estimates
are gross
estimates

t opacity
on blue
plumes
Comments
M S mid fans






Mod. around
mid fans





11 at dry end
None at Green

Large leakage
around
exhaust dry
end stk.
Cooling stks.
from this
dryer and
roof vents
are the major
roof-ton
emitters.












-------
                                                                                TABLE 2-llc
                                                                         FUGITIVE EMISSION SUMMARY
                                                            Georgia-Pacific Plywood Plant, Springfield, Oregon
                                                                             (Provided by RTI)
                                                                              June 11, 1981)
to
I
cn







Abort Stacks
Dryer/Time
1






2






3






4
















10:50
Ilt46
ill 20
12:55
1(06
2:28

11:10
11:45
12:20
12:55
1:46
2:28

11:10
11:45
12120
12:55
1:48
2:27

11:10
11:45
12:17
12t55
1:48
2:26


Roof
Vents
11:10
11:45
12:19
12:55
1:48
2:27

Green End
II
II
M 5
M 5
M 5
M 10

II
H
II
II
II
M 10

H 30
II
H
II 10
II 10
M 20

N
N
N
N
N
N

907 908


5
5
5
10 5
5 10
10 5

Dry End
H
II 20
H 10
H 10
H 30
H 20

M
H 10
M 10
L
M 10
M 10

1! 20
H 20
H 20
H 20
II 20
II 20

N
N
N
N
N
N

909


-
-
5
-
-
-

Cool ing
N
N
N
N
N
N

N
N
H
N
N
N

N
N
N
N
N
N

lot
5-10
0-5
5-10
5
5-10

910


5
-
-
5
5
5

Ov«rall'
300 H
300 H
250 H
250 II
300 II
250 H

350 H
300 H
250 11
150 M
300 H
200 M

350 H
350 11
350 11
350 11
300 H
250 H








911 912


5
5
-
-
-
5

Time
10:42
11:32
12:08
12:45
1:26
2:17
2:47
10:39
11:30
12:07
12:45
1:26
2:16
2:47
10>38
11:30
12:06
12:43
1:27
2:15
2:48
10:37
11:28
12:06
12:43
1:27
2:14
2:47



N
T
VL
L
H
H
VH
Inside
Appearance
Door Elephant
Seals
3 L
3 L
2 L
2 VL
2 VL
2 L
1 L
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
2 VL, 3 T
2 VL
N
N
N
N
N

KEX

• None
» Trace
« Very Light
» Light
» Moderate
- Heavy
» Very Heavy
Ears
1 L
1 L
1 M
1 M
1 L
1 L
1 L
1 L
1 L
1 L
1 L
1 L
1 L
1 L
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA



Cfm
Top
L
M
M
L
M
11
M
L
L
M
L
L
M
M
H
H
11
H
M
H

L
L
VL
VL
VL
VL
VL



estimates
Comments
M e top
center Cans





M 9 center
fans at top





Stack leaks
k middle fans
hlgn
emissions














are gross
estimates

% »


opacity
on blue



plumes

-------
2.8 Clean-Dp Evaluation



    Results of  the clean-up evaluations  performed  on both Method  5X sampling


trains  are  presented in  Table 2-12.  Clean-up  evaluation rationale and  pro-


cedures  are presented  in Section  1.4.6  and  Section 6.1.   Front half  total


residue  collected  was 55.5 mg  and  12.1 rag for  the inlet and outlet sampling


trains,  respectively.  Back half  total  residue collected  was  39.8 mg and 164.2


mg, respectively.  Total  residue  collected during the clean-up  evaluation was


96.3 mg  and 176.3 mg for the inlet and outlet trains, respectively.


    The  high blank value  of the  inlet probe  wash is probably due to the  fact


that  the probe  was  not  acid  washed before  the evaluation.   The  high  value


detected as  impinger residue was probably  due to  a  large amount of chromium


residue  (2.50 mg/1)  remaining  from  the  pretest chromic  acid wash of the glass-


ware.  Further analysis for chromium was  performed  on the actual test impinger


solutions with  only  a trace amount  being  detected  in test 1  samples.   There-


fore, it is  believed no test  sample interference resulted from chromium  con-



tamination.  Chromium analytical data are presented in Appendix G.






2.9 Possible Test Interferences


    A possibility  exists  that  components  and reagents used  in  the  Method 5X


sampling train may cause  interferences with  the Method 25 samples  drawn  from


the Method  5X  train.  At the  time  of  this report,  a study is  being performed


by  TRC  to  quantify  the   possible   interfering  effects  of  acetone,  silicone


vacuum grease, and silicone rubber sealant  (RTV)  on the Method 25 procedures.


    The  scrubber  outlet Method 5X  filtration temperature could not be  main-

                               o
tamed  in  the planned  350 H^25 F range due  to   insufficient  heater capacity.


Temperatures  ranged  from  310°  to  340°F.   Although  not  a   factor  in  the
                                     2-27

-------
                                  TABLE  2-12

             METHOD 5X CLEAN-UP EVALUATION RESULTS, JUNE 8, 1981

              Georgia-Pacific  Plywood Plant, Springfield, Oregon
    Train
  Component
   Sample Fraction
 Residue Weight (g)
Inlet         Outlet
  Front Half
Probe Wash (DD H20)
Probe Wash (acetone)
Front Filter

Front Half Total
0.0337*
0.0448
 NAt

0.0785
0.0116
0.0113
 NAt

0.0229


Back Half




Impinger Water
Organic Extraction
Evaporation
Acetone Rinse
Back-up Filter
Back Half Total
Total Sample

0.0014
0.0230
0.0151
NAt
0.0395
0.1180

0.0019
0.1360**
0.0260
NAt
0.1639
0.1868
 * Probe not acid washed prior to test program.
** Upon further  analysis,  it was  discovered  that  Sample 5X-0-0-4  contained
   2.50 mg/liter chromium, indicating residue  remaining  from the chromic acid
   cleaning solution used in the pretest preparation of the glassware.
 t Filters not inserted into trains.
                                    2-28

-------
Method 5X  sample collection,  this may have  resulted  in a slight  low  bias for



the Method 25  samples.   Organic materials which would  have  passed through the

                   o
filter  at  350  +25 F may  instead  have  condensed  and been  collected  on the



lower temperature filter.
                                      2-29

-------
3.0 PROCESS DESCRIPTION AND OPERATIONS (Provided by RTI)




    This section describes the plywood manufacturing process,  specifically  the




veneer drying process  and its emission  control/ a G-P  scrubber system. Pro-




duction monitoring  as  well as process  operational conditions during  the  test




program are also discussed.









3.1 Process Equipment




    The veneer  drying  operation  begins after  the  veneer has  been  peeled  from




the log at the  lathe operation.  The  veneer  then proceeds  to the drying opera-




tion.  Here, the veneer  is continuously hand-fed onto the  dryer feed conveyor




and into  the  dryer.  The  purpose  of the operation is  to thermally  drive  the




moisture out of the veneer in preparation for the  layup and laminating opera-




tions which follow.  During the drying  operation,  organic compounds  are  also




driven out of the veneer.




    The G-P Springfield plant has  four  veneer  dryers.   Each is a steam heated,




multideck  unit,  with the number  of  drying  zones  varying  between  dryers.




Dryers 1,  2 and 3  are longitudinal dryers, with 22, 18  and 18 zones, respect-




ively.  Dryer  4, a new  unit,  is  a  22 zone  jet  dryer.   Each  dryer  has  two




exhausts from the heated  zones,  except  dryer 4 which  has three exhausts.  Atop




each exhaust is an  abort damper  for  emergency  use  only.   These are  a source of




fugitive emissions. The  eight  exhausts are ducted to  a common manifold which




carries the exhaust to the Georgia-Pacific scrubber system.









3.2 Emission Control Equipment




    The Georgia-Pacific  scrubber  system shown  in Figure  1-1  includes  a  wet




spray  zone,  six  wet cyclones,  a packed  tower,  and  a mesh pad  entrainment




separator.  As  dryer  exhaust  gases pass through the 35.25-inch  inside diameter
                                      3-1

-------
 duct,   six  nozzles  inject  water  countercurrently  into  the  gas  stream  to




 saturate and cool  the  gas stream,  thereby condensing the organics.  Solids are




 separated  and  agglomerated  droplets  are collected  in  the  six  wet  cyclones




 which follow.   The remaining moisture  laden  gases are drawn through an induced




 draft fan and forced through a packed  tower  and a mesh pad to rid the effluent




 of  aerosols.  All  water within the  scrubber system  is  recirculated.   The gas




 stream,  at  approximately  165 F  and  35 percent  moisture  by   volume,  then




 discharges to the  atmosphere through a 9-foot i.d. stack.









 3.3 Production  and Control Equipment Monitoring




    All production monitoring  data collected  by RTI  and DGA is  presented  in




 Table  3-1.   Scrubber  operational  data,  collected  by  TRC,  is   presented  in




 Table 2-10.








 3.4 Process Operating Conditions During Test Program




    The operation  of  each dryer is set  according to  the  size,  thickness, and




 kind of wood being dried.  The operation of  the three longitudinal dryers does




 not  frequently  vary,   but it appears  that the  jet  dryer makes  more  frequent




 changes.  During  the  testing  hours  of  the  first day  (June 9)  there was  a




 change  of  production,  despite  efforts on Georgia-Pacific's  part to  keep the




 dryer operation  steady state.  Dryer  4 changed  from drying 1/6-inch sapwood to




 1/6-inch heartwood.   This was not  considered to be  a major change worthy  of




cancelling the test run.




    It is normal for small plugups  in  the feeding and outloading  mechanisms to




occur and this  did happen during the  tests.  On the third test day  (June 11)




there was more  of  this type upset  than  usual on Dryer  4,  but these  were con-




sidered minor and  insufficient cause for cancelling a test.
                                      3-2

-------
                                     TABLE  3-1

                 SUMMARY OF OPERATING CONDITIONS  (Provided by RTI)

                Georgia-Pacific Plywood Plant, Springfield,  Oregon
                       June 8
             June 9
               June 10
                  June 11
  I Production
     (ft2, per hour
     on 3/8-in.  basis)

    S apwood
    Heartwood

      Total
19,935
12,090

31,424
21,604
14,143

35,747
21,509
12,863

34,372
19,847
14,221

34,068
 II Redry Rate (%)
 9.7
 9.0
 9.6
 11.4
III Steam Use (Ibs
     per hour)
    No
Evaluation
51,430
50,467
51,450
 IV Temperatures
    No
Evaluation
 steady
325-375°F
 steady
325-375°F
 steady
325-375°F
  V Fugitives


    1.  abort stacks

    2.  door leaks


    3.  above dryers



    4.  cooling stacks
    No
Evaluation
              150-300 CFM*

              nos. 1&4
              nos. 1 & 3 had
               blue haze
                150-300 CFM*
                  150-300 CFM*
                nos. 1,2 & 4 less small leaks
                than on June 9

                                  noticeable
                                  above all
                                  dryers
VI Weather No cloudy,
Evaluation showers,
mid 60s
53-74%
rel.
humidity
cloudy, small
showers,
60°-75°
36-70%
rel.
humidity
morning fog,
sunny ,
54°-66°
51-76%
rel.
humidity
 *Per dryer, except no. 4
                                      3-3

-------
    Steam  usage,  dryer temperatures, and  drying times were  maintained evenly




throughout  the   three  days   of   tests.    Process  operating  conditions  are



summarized in Table 3-1.




    Production  figures provided  are not  the actual  square  footage  of green




veneer dried in  the steam-heated  dryers but rather a  figure  that accounts for




trim and  shrinkage.   A full green veneer  sheet  is approximately  54  inches by




101 inches and will eventually be trimmed  to 48 inches by  96 inches  following




shrinkage  in  the  dryer.    The amount  of  shrinkage  depends  on  the  original




moisture  level.    As  is  the  case with  all western  softwoods,  Douglas  fir




sapwood will  shrink  more than heartwood.   An  expected  shrinkage  loss  is  5




percent to 7 percent.  The  production figures reported are, therefore, approx-




imately 85 percent of  the  actual throughput of  the  dryers.  All veneer has




been converted to a 3/8-inch basis.
                                      3-4

-------
4.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE SAMPLING LOCATIONS




    This section presents a  description  of each sampling location and  a sum-




mary of  the work  performed  at each  site.  Figure 4-1  presents a  schematic




layout of the  veneer  dryer exhaust system and identifies all  sampling loca-




tions.









4.1 Scrubber Inlet




    The inlet to the  scrubber  system  was sampled employing EPA Methods 1,  2,




4,  5X  and 25  in the  35.25-inch  inside  diameter  insulated  duct at  sampling




ports 45  above  the horizontal duct axis.   These  ports were located  30 feet




downstream  (>8  diameters)   and  24  feet  upstream  (>2  diameters)  from  the




nearest respective  flow  disturbances.   In accordance with EPA  Method  1, sam-




pling was performed at 12 traverse points.  Sampling port and  traverse point




locations  are  presented  in  Figure   4-2.  Duct   static  pressure  was  also




measured at this location.




    Method 5X tests performed  at this  location were 60  minutes  in duration as




were the Method  25 tests performed simultaneously.   A total of three Method




5X and 18 Method 25 tests was performed at this location.









4.2 Scrubber Outlet




    Sampling ports were  located  9  feet upstream (1 diameter) from  the top of




the 9-foot i.d.  stack and approximately  6 feet (2/3 diameter)  downstream from




the  mesh  pad  entrainment  separator.   In accordance  with   EPA  Method  1,




sampling  was  performed  at 48  traverse  points.   Sampling  port  and traverse




point locations are presented  in Figure 4-3.
                                      4-1

-------
                                          Scrubber
                                          Outlet _
                                          Sampling
                                          Location
                                         Scrubber
                                         Solution
                                         Sampling
                                         Location
                                                          Spray- -J
                                                        Nozzles
                                                                  Inlet
                                                                  Location
                                        PRESSURE MEASUREMENT LOCATIONS
Figure 4-1.  Veneer Dryer Exhaust and Scrubber System Sampling  Locations
             Georgia-Pacific Plywood Plant
             Springfield, Oregon
                                 4-2

-------
                                                                          351/4"I.D.
To Scrubber
Traverse Point
Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
Traverse Point Location
From Inside Duct Wall
(Inches)
1.6
5.1
10.4
24.8
30.1
33.7
      Figure 4-2.  Scrubber Inlet Sampling Port Configuration and Traverse
                   Point Locations, Georgia-Pacific Plywood Plant
                   Springfield, Oregon
                                     4-3

-------
              108"
              From
            Scrubber
                       T
                        108"
                                                                 108"I.D.
Traverse
Point
Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Traverse Point Location
From Inside Duct Wall
1.2
3.5
5.9
8.5
11.3
14.3
17.4
21.0
24.8
29.4
34.9
43.0
65.0
73.1
78.6
83.2
87.0
90.6
93.7
96.7
99.5
102.1
104.5
106.8
Figure 4-3.   Scrubber Outlet Sampling Port Configuration and Traverse
             Point Locations Georgia-Pacific Plywood Plant,
             Springfield Oregon
                                   4-4

-------
    Method 5X  tests  performed at this  location  were 96 minutes  in duration.




Method 25 sampling  began 18 minutes into each Method  5X test and  ran  for  60




minutes, leaving  18  minutes of  Method 5X testing after  the  completion  of the




Method 25 tests.  A total of three Method 5X and  18  Method  25 tests were per-




formed at this location.









4.3 Scrubber Operational Measurement Locations




    Scrubber solution  samples were  taken from  the scrubber  recirculation tank




during each  test.   Pressure  drop across the  scrubber  system  was calculated




from  static  pressures  in the duct  measured  at  the scrubber  inlet  and  at two




pressure taps  each  located 2 feet  from the scrubber  fan   inlet  and outlet.




These sampling locations are shown  in Figure 4-1.








4.4 Fugitive Emissions




    Fugitive emissions were observed by RTI and  DGA around the veneer dryers




and their abort dampers.
                                      4-5

-------
5.0 SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL METHODS

    This  section presents  descriptions  of sampling  and analysis  procedures

employed during  the emission testing conducted at  the Georgia-Pacific plywood

facility in Springfield, Oregon during the week of June  8,  1981.   EPA Methods

1, 2, 4, 5X*, 9, 22 and 25 were used to measure emissions at  the  veneer  dryer

exhaust and from the scrubber outlet.  These methods are presented in greater

detail in Appendix G.



5.1 EPA Reference Methods Used in This Program

    The following EPA Reference Methods were  used  for  the testing at the  G-P

plywood plant.   These  methods** were taken from  CFR 40, July  1, 1980, part

60,  "Standards  of Performance  for New Stationary  Sources,"  Appendix A,  pp.

183 ff.;  and  Federal  Register,  volume 45, no.  194,  Friday, October 3,  1980,

pp. 65959 ff.


    Method 1 - Sample and Velocity Traverses for Stationary Sources

    This method  specifies the number and  location  of  sampling points within a
    duct, taking into account duct size and shape and local flow disturbances.

    Method 2 - Determination of Stack Gas Velocity and Volumetric Flow Rate

    This method  specifies the measurement of gas  velocity  and flow rate using
    an  S-type pitot tube,  manometer,  and temperature  sensor.    The  physical
    dimensions of the  pitot tube and its  spatial  relationship  to the  temper-
    ature sensor and a sampling probe are also specified.

    Method 4 - Determination of Moisture Content in Stack Gases

    This method  specifies the procedures  by which the water  vapor content of
    a gas stream be can determined.
*  Method  5X  will be  assigned a  reference  letter  designation  when  the  NSS
   regulation  is  proposed in the  Federal  Register.   This method  was  derived
   from EPA Method 5 and ODEQ Method 7.

** With  the  exception  of the  Provisional Method  5X,  which has  yet  to  be
   proposed.


                                      5-1

-------
    Method 5X -   Determination   of  Particulate   and   Condensible   Organic
     (Provisional) Emissions from Stationary Sources in the Plywood Industry

    This  method,  based upon  EPA  Method 5 and  ODEQ  Method 7,  describes pro-
    cedures  for  measuring emissions  in the  context of  the  following defini-
    tions.   Particulate matter is  material which  condenses at  or  above fil-
    tration  temperature and is collected  by  the  front  half of  the  sampling
    train.   Condensible organic matter  is that material which  remains  after
    extraction,  filtration,  and evaporation  of the  impinger  portion of  the
    train.

    Method 9 -    Visual  Determination  of  the Opacity of Emissions From Sta-
                  tionary Sources

    This  method  specifies the  procedures  by which  opacity of  emissions  are
    measured.

    Method 22 -   Visual  Determination  of  Fugitive  Emissions   from  Material
                  Processing Sources

    This method specifies the  procedures for  visual  determination of  the pre-
    sence and total time  of occurence of fugitive process emissions.

    Method 25 -   Determination of  Total Gaseous Nonmethane  Organic Emissions
                  as Carbon

    This method describes procedures  for the  sampling  and analysis of gaseous
    nonmethane organic  emissions.   An emission  sample  is drawn  through a con-
    densate trap and into an evacuated  tank.  Trap and  tank  contents  are oxi-
    dized to carbon dioxide, reduced to methane, and  analyzed by a flame ion-
    ization detector.
5.2 Preliminary Measurements

    Before the start of  emission  sampling,  each  location was tested according

to EPA Methods 1, 2 and  4 to determine  the  preliminary stack gas velocity and

moisture content within  the ducts.



5.3 Measurements for Particulate,  Condensible and Noncondensible Emissions

    5.3.1 EPA Method 5X  (Provisional)  -  Particulate and Condensible  Organic
          Compounds

    This section presents a summary of procedures  followed  by TRC during par-

ticulate and Condensible organic  sample collection,  recovery and preparation,

analysis,  and data  reduction.   Deviations  from  the  specified  method  are


                                     5-2

-------
explained in  this  section.   Further details of  this method are  presented  in



Appendix G.









    5.3.1.1  Method 5X - Sample Collection




    The  sampling  train  was  a modified  EPA  Method  5X train   as  shown  in




Figure 5-1.    This  train was  designed  and  built  by  TRC.   A  slipstream was




drawn from behind  the heated Method  5X  filter  to quadruplicate TRC and dupli-




cate NCASI Method  25 sampling  trains.   Vacuum  grease was used  in  the assembly




of the Method 5X train ahead of the  Teflon  sample line-impinger train connec-




tion  for  test 1.   This  may have  caused  contamination  of  the total  organic




compound samples for test 1.  No  vacuum grease  was  used at  those  locations




during tests  2  and 3.  A minimum  amount of grease  was used  in  the impinger




train.  Leak  checks were performed  on  the  complete sampling  train  (modified




5X train attached  to the six  Method 25  trains)  before and after each test.




Field data were  recorded on  standard EPA  Method 5 data  sheets which are pre-




sented in Appendix C.




    The Method 5X  sampling train is  essentially  the  same as that described by




EPA Method 5  with  the following modifications.  A flexible  Teflon sample line




was used to connect the  outlet of the  4-1/2  inch glass-fiber  Gelman Spectro-




grade no.  64948 filter  to  the  impinger  train.   Since the filter  was  at  a




higher elevation than the impinger train, condensation in the  sample line ran




into the first impinger and not back into the  filter.   The  Method 5X impinger




train consisted  of four impingers and  a 2-1/2  inch glass-fiber  filter.  The




first  impinger  was  a modified  Greenburg-Smith  (impingement  plate removed)




charged with  100 ml of deionized distilled  (D.D.) water.  The second impinger




was a regular Greenburg-Smith  unit also charged with  100 ml D.D. water.  The




third was  another  modified  Greenburg-Smith  and was  empty.  The  fourth was
                                      5-3

-------
            if,
j
          STACK WALL-
17
                            13
          LEGEND

 1  -  NOZZLE
 2  -  PROBE
 3  -  FILTER HOLDER
 4  -  HEATED FILTER BOX
 5  -  IMPINGER  ICE BATH
 6  -  UMBILICAL CORD
 7  -  VACUUM GAUGE
 8  -  MAIN  VALVE TO PUMP
 9  -  PUMP
10  -  BYPASS VALVE
11  -  DRY GAS METER
12  -  ORIFICE AND MANOMETER
13  -  PITOT TUBE AND MANOMETER
14  -  THERMOCOUPLE READOUT
15  -  FLEXIBLE TEFLON SAMPLE LINE
16  -  BACK-UP FILTER HOLDER
17  -  THERMOCOUPLES
                     I  I  I  II  I
                     SLIPSTREAM" TO
                    METHOD 25 TRAINS
                          12
              Figure  5-1.  Modified EPA participate  and condensible organics  sampling train,
                          (August 18, 1977 Federal  Register)

-------
also a modified Greenburg-Smith type and was charged with  200 grams  of  silica




gel.  A 2-1/2 inch glass-fiber  filter  (similar  to the 4-1/2 inch filter)  was




inserted  between  the  third  and  fourth  impinger  to  collect  any organic




material condensed but not collected in the impingers.




    Prior to initial  field use, all glassware  was washed with a chromic  acid



solution and rinsed with D.D. water and acetone according to Method  5X.




    Sampling train operations  were identical to  those of  EPA Method 5,  with




several exceptions.   In order  to  prevent condensation of organic materials in




the probe and on the  4-1/2 inch glass-fiber  filter, the  stainless steel probe




and  the  filter were heated  to  350° +25°F.    Thermocouples  were  inserted




into the  probe  and the  filter outlet gas stream to  ensure that proper  tem-




peratures were  maintained.   These  temperatures  were  noted on the  field  data



sheet during routine data recording intervals.




    During  sampling  at  the  scrubber  outlet it  was  sometimes impossible to




maintain  probe  and  filter  outlet  temperatures   in the  range  of  350   +25 F




because of  insufficient heater capacity.   Probe  and  filter outlet tempera-




tures  ranged between  310   to  340 F at  the scrubber  outlet throughout  the




test program and averaged  about   320 F.   Filter box  temperatures  were main-




tained at 350  ^25 F with no problems.




    Impinger  outlet   temperatures were monitored and maintained  below   68 F




throughout  the  test  program.  These temperatures were not,  however, recorded




on the scrubber outlet field data  sheets.




    Velocity pressure at the  scrubber  outlet was extremely low as measured by




the S-type  pitot tube,  hovering near the lower  detection  limit of  EPA Method




2.  In  addition,  wind gusting across the top of the stack  sometimes  caused




turbulence  within  the  9-foot i.d.  duct,  creating the  illusion of negative




flows.  If  this phenomenon was more than momentary,  sampling was halted until




flows again appeared positive, and  then restarted.




                                      5-5

-------
     A 2 1/2-inch  filter  was used  in the  front half  of the  inlet sampling

 train for  tests 1 and 2,  and the outlet sampling train  for  test  2.   This was

 done because the  4  1/2-inch filter assembly would  not pass the  leak  check.

 During outlet  test  3,  the  filter assembly  was broken in  the process  of

 changing sampling ports.   The filter was recovered  and replaced  with another

 filter assembly to complete  the test.



     5.3.1.2  Method  5X - Sample Recovery and Preparation

     Sample  recovery  was  performed  in an  improvised  laboratory  on  site.

 Because this area  had a clean, wind-free environment and was well lighted,  it

 was  suited for  sample recovery and  preparation for shipment.

     Sample recovery  was performed  in accordance with EPA Methods  5  and 5X as

 presented in Appendix G.   At the conclusion of each test run, separate sample

 fractions were  collected from each  Method 5X sampling train by a three-person

 clean-up  crew.   The  liquid  samples were placed in glass  sample  jars  with

 Teflon-lined  lids, and the filters  were  placed  in inert  petri dishes  and

 sealed.  The sample  fractions collected were as follows:
Container 1 - 4-1/2  inch glass-fiber  filter  (2-1/2  inch  filters were  used
              during test 1-1, 1-2, and 0-2).

Container 2 - D.D.  H2O wash  of  nozzle,  probe and  front half  of the  4-1/2
              inch filter holder.

Container 3 - Acetone  wash  of nozzle,  probe and front  half  of the 4-1/2 inch
              filter holder.

Container 4 - Exposed  impinger solution  from  impingers 1,  2  and 3  and  D.D.
              H^  wash of  impingers,  connectors,  Teflon  sample line,  back
              half of  4-1/2 inch filter  holder  and  front half of  2-1/2  inch
              filter holder.

Container 5 - Acetone  wash  of first three impingers, connectors,  Teflon  sam-
              ple line, back  half of 4-1/2  inch  filter  holder, and front  half
              of 2-1/2 inch filter holder.

Container 6 - 2-1/2 inch glass-fiber filter.


                                     5-6

-------
    The probe  and  nozzle were brushed and rinsed  three  times with D.D.  H-O,




which was deposited  in  container  2.   The  front half of the 4-1/2  inch filter




holder  was  also rinsed with D.D. H2O,  which was  deposited  in container  2.




The probe, nozzle and front  half of  the 4-1/2  inch filter  holder  were brushed




and rinsed with acetone in the same manner and deposited  in container  3.




    The Teflon sample  line was drained into  the impinger train.   The Teflon




sample line was not  brushed  because  the particulate catch in the  sample  line




is generally considered to be insignificant.   Impinger contents  were weighed




to determine moisture catch  and  deposited in  container 4.  The Teflon sample




line, impingers, connectors  and the  back  half  of the  4-1/2 inch filter holder




were  rinsed  three  times with  D.D.   HO  into container  4,  and  then  rinsed




three times with acetone into container 5.




    Prior to tests 2 and 3 both  the  probe and Teflon sample  line  were washed




with  D.D.  H_0  after the  acetone  wash to  remove  any  acetone residue  which




might have  contaminated the  EPA  Method 25 samples.   These washes were  dis-




carded and the components allowed to dry at  ambient conditions  before  being




reassembled.   A possibility  of  Method  25 acetone  contamination  exists  for




test 1.




    Both  filters  were  removed from  their  holders and  deposited  into  their




respective petri dishes, containers  1  and 6.   Filter  residue on  the filter




holders was  scraped  and deposited into  the  same  acetone  rinse containers as




the front halves of  their respective filter holders.   The stainless steel and




glass filter  frits used  in  the  filter holders were  not  rinsed during sample




recovery, because  any  organic  material collected  on the frits  is generally




considered  to  be  insignificant.   Glass  and/or  metal particles  could become




detached and contaminate sample fractions.




    Silica  gel samples  were weighed immediately at  the conclusion  of  each




test  and  the weights recorded  by the clean-up  crew.   All Method  5X samples




                                      5-7

-------
 were packed in  shock-proof  containers and driven  to the CH_MHill  laboratory

 in Corvalis, Oregon for  analysis  at the conclusion  of the test program.



     5.3.1.3 Method 5X - Sample Analysis

     With the exception  of the silica gel  samples,  all sample  fractions  were

 analyzed  by  CHJlHill.    CHJIHill  was  chosen  to  perform   the   analytical
                 *L           ft
 phase of the Method 5X  sampling program because of their  extensive  experience

 with Oregon DEQ  Method 7,  from which EPA Method 5X was derived.  All  analyses

 were performed in  accordance  with  EPA Method 5X and as  approved by  EPA/EMB.

 The sample  fractions were  analyzed  as  follows:


 Container  1 -  (4-1/2  inch glass-fiber filter) - desiccate and weigh  after  24
               hours.

 Container  2 -  (D.D. 1^0  probe  rinse)  - evaporate, desiccate  and weigh after
               24  hours.

 Container  3 -  (acetone probe  rinse)  -  evaporate,  desiccate  and weigh after
               24  hours.

 Container 4 -  (impinger  water solution  and  D.D.  ^0  rinse)  -   extract,
              desiccate  and weigh.

 Container 5 -  (impinger  acetone wash)  -  evaporate,  desiccate and weigh.

 Container 6 -  (2-1/2 inch  glass-fiber  filter) - desiccate  and weigh after  24
              hours.


    Silica  gel samples were weighed on site with a triple-beam  balance at the

 conclusion  of  each test by  the Method  5X  sample  recovery crew.   The weight

 gain of  the silica  gel was determined  to the  nearest  0.5 gram  and recorded.

    All  analytical data were  recorded  on the  data  sheets  as  presented  in

Appendix H.  Sample residue remaining  after analysis was~ retained for 90 days

 after the end of  the  field program after which  they  were discarded according

 to  EPA instructions.
                                      5-8

-------
    5.3.1.4  Method 5X Data Reduction

    All Method  5X data  reduction  was performed in a manner  identical  to pro-

cedures described  by EPA Method  5.   (See  Appendices B  and  G.)   The  only

variation   from  these  calculations   was  as   follows.    Because   of   the

unacceptable  super-  isokinetic sampling conditions  during tests  1  and  2  at

the scrubber  inlet and  tests  1 and 3 at the scrubber  outlet,  the particulate

mass emission rate  (MER) for  these runs were calculated by  two methods:   the

concentration method  (by which calculations are  normally  done)  and  the area

ratio  method.*   With  the  former  method,  the concentration  of  particulate

matter  entering  the   nozzle  is   calculated   and  then   multiplied  by  the

volumetric flow rate to obtain the mass emission rate:


                (m/V) x  Q  =  MER (Ibs/hr)                          (Eq. 5-1)

  where   m  =  amount of particulate sampled  (Ibs)
          V  =  volume of sampled  gas (DSCF)
          Q  =  volumetric flow rate  (DSCF/hr)


If  the nozzle  sampling velocity  is  greater than  the   stack  gas   velocity

(superisokinetic  sampling  conditions),  then  the calculated  mass flow rate

will  be less than the  true MER.   This  is because the heavier particles will

leave  their  streamlines (gas  streamlines  diverted into the nozzle)  and will

not enter  the nozzle, as they would under  isokinetic conditions.   Since the

volume of gas sampled  is greater  than what  would  be sampled under isokinetic

conditions,  the concentration  (m/V)  will  be less than that under isokinetic

conditions.

    With the area ratio method,  the mass of  particulate  matter  collected  is

divided by  the sampling time and then multiplied  by  the ratio  of  the  stack

area  to the  nozzle area  to  obtain  the mass emission  rate:
* Brenchley,  D.F.,  C.D. Turley and R.F.  Yarmac.   Industrial Source  Sampling.
  Ann Arbor Science Publishers, Inc., 1973, p. 173 ff.

                                      5-9

-------
           (m/t)  x (A /A )   =  HER (Ibs/hr)                            (Eq.  5-2)
                     s  n


     where          m = amount of  particulate sample (Ibs)
                    t = sampling time  (hrs)
                   As = area of stack  (ft2.)
                   An = area of nozzle (ft"2.)


Again,  if  the  nozzle  sampling  velocity  is  greater  than  the  stack   gas

velocity,  then the  MER calculated by  this method will be  somewhat greater

than the true MER.   The  lighter particles follow  the diverted  streamlines

into the nozzle;  the  amount of  particulate  matter  sampled in  time  (t)  is

therefore assumed to be greater  than what  should  be  sampled.   The volume  of

sampled gas  is  not a  factor  in  this  calculation.   The  average  of  the  two

calculated MERs was  used as  an estimate of the true MER.

    Gas stream moisture content  measured at the  scrubber outlet exceeded  the

saturation  values  for the  duct  temperatures  measured.   Therefore moisture

values were recalculated using the following psychometric equation:
            HO =
                      B
    where Py = vapor pressure of air at a given temperature
          PB = barometric pressure
    5.3.2 EPA  Reference Method  25 -  Condensible and  Noncondensible Organic
          Compounds

    This section presents a  summary  of procedures followed by TRC during con-

densible  and  noncondensible  organic  sampling  equipment  preparation,  sample

collection, field  sample recovery,  and sample  analysis.   The  TRC  Method  25

sampling train  is  shown in Figure 5-2.  Deviations  from  the  method are also
                                     5-10

-------
                 SWAGELOK
                CONNECTORS
H2°-l£
ICE  W**
             CONDENSATE TRAPS
                                                                  VACUUM
                                                                   GAUGE
   FLOW
   RATE
CONTROLLER
                                       ON/OFF FLOW
                                          VALVE
                                                            OUICK   r±|
                                                           CONNECT  '1
             EVACUATED
              SAMPLE
               TANK
       Figure 5-2.  Method  25 Sampling Train

-------
 explained in  this  section.  Further  details of  Method 25  are presented  in




 Appendix  G.   NCASI  Method 25  procedures  are  also  presented  in Appendix G.








     5.3.2.1   Method 25 - Sampling  Equipment  Preparation




     This  procedure is based  on  and  supplements EPA Method 25 /  "Determination




 of  Total  Gaseous  Nonmethane Organic  Emissions as  Carbon."*








     Condensate Trap




     After being checked  for any sign of physical damage, each trap was  inter-




 connected to a hydrocarbon (HC)-free air cylinder,  flowmeters  and C0_ moni-




 tor  (nondispersive  infrared  detector  (NDIR))  and inserted in the furnace  as




 shown  in  Figure 5-3.   The trap was then purged with  the HC-free air at a  100




 ml/min  flow  rate with  the furnace  operating  at a  temperature of  600 C. A




 propane torch was used to heat those portions  of the trap and  probe assembly




 that extend  outside   the  furnace.   The  purge was  performed until the   C02




 monitor indicated a concentration  of  10 ppra or  less.








     Sample Tank




     Each  sample  tank  was connected  to  a cylinder of  HC-free  air,  a   vacuum




 pump, and a mercury manometer as shown in Figure  5-4.  The tank was evacuated




 to  29  inches Hg  vacuum  after which  the  three-way valve  was  switched and  the




 tank pressurized  to 10  inches Hg  with HC-free  air.  This  cycle was repeated




 three times.   After the third pressurization,  the tank  was  connected  to  the




TGNMO analyzer  and  a  sample analysis was  performed.   If a nonmethane organic




concentration greater  than 10 ppm  was measured,  the  tank was again subjected






* Federal Register, volume  45, no.  194, October 3, 1980, pp.  65959-73.
                                     5-12

-------
® FLOW
T METER
HC __
FREE I
""


Figure 5-3
t
3-WAY
/— v VALVE
T

HC
FREE
AIR
co2
\^\ ANALYZER "*"
FLOW
\ METER
-* ^ TUflP
iw '»"'
|
*— J !?5? ^- rURNACE
Mm%
. Method 25 Trap Preparation

nilTTK

TANK
v^x
     Figure 5-4.  Method 25 Tank Purging and Evacuation
                              ADJUSTMENTVALVE
FLOWMETER
ON/OFF
VALVE
                                                 FLQW CONTROL
                                                   ASSEMBLY
PRESSURE GAUGE
            TRAP
                                         QUICK CONNECT
                                   TANK
       Figure  5-5.   Method  25  Flow  Control  Assembly  Adjustment

                            5-13

-------
 to  the  evacuation-pressurization  analysis  procedure  until  accepted.   Each

 tank  was  then  evacuated  and  pressurized with dry nitrogen for shipment to the

 field.



    Flow  Control Assembly

    The   sampling  train  was  assembled  as   shown  in Figure 5-5  and  leak

 checked.   The  probe end cap was  removed  and the  probe  connected to  a flow

 meter as  shown.   The sample  flow shut-off valve was opened  and  the flow con-

 trol  valve adjusted  to achieve a  flow  rate of 50 +5 ml/minute.  The flow con-

 trol  adjustment screw was  sealed after the flow  rate  was achieved.   The flow

control valve  number and calibration data were recorded on forms presented in

Appendix  E.



    5.3.2.2  Method  25 - Sample Collection

    The sampling  train  was a modified EPA Method  25  apparatus.   The modifi-

cation consists  of  placing  an  additional  condensibles  trap, immersed  in  a

water  ice  bath,  ahead  of  the  trap  immersed   in  dry   (C0_)  ice.   (See

Figure 5-2.)   The  additional trap is  intended  to  remove the high  moisture

content associated with  the  process emission  streams  and prevent freezeup in

the dry ice trap which leads to premature sample flow stoppage.*

    The sample tanks were  shipped to  the  site slightly  pressurized  with dry

nitrogen.    Immediately  prior to  each  test,   tanks  were  evacuated.   The tank

vacuum, ambient  temperature  and  barometric   pressure  were  recorded on the

field sampling data sheet.   (See Appendix C.)
* "Method Development for  the  Plywood/Plywood Veneer Industry,"  EPA Contract
  68-02-3543, Work Assignment  1.   TRC  -  Environmental  Consultants,  Inc.,
  August 1981.
                                     5-14

-------
    With  the  flow  shut-off  valve  in  the  closed position,  the  train  was




checked again  after a minimum period of  10 minutes.  If the  indicated  vacuum



had not changed,  the portion  of the sampling train behind the  shut-off valve




did not leak and  was considered acceptable.   Assuring that the probe tip  was




tightly capped,  the front part of the  sampling  train was  leak checked  by




opening the  flow shut-off valve.    After a  short period to allow  pressure




stabilization  (not  more   than  2  minutes),  the  indicated gauge  vacuum  was




formed.  The  tank vacuum  as  indicated  by the vacuum gauge  was recorded  and




assembled  as  shown  in Figure  5-2.  The pretest  leak  check  was then  per-




formed.  After a minimum period of 10 minutes, the indicated  vacuum was again




noted.  The  leak check was  considered   acceptable  if  no  visible change  in




vacuum occurred.  The  pretest  leak  rate  (inches Hg/10 minutes) was  recorded




if observed.   At  the completion of the leak checks,  the  sample flow  shut-off




valve was closed.




    After the  leak check  had  been  performed, the  sample tank number  and trap




numbers for  each sampling train were recorded on  the  field  data sheet  with




the  respective test run  number and  sampling site.  Four  TRC and two NCASI




sampling  trains  were  connected  to  each Method  5X  sampling train   at  the




insulated  outlet of their respective hotbox  filters.   Immediately  prior to




sampling,  the gauge vacuum and clock  time  were  noted.   The flow  shut-off




valve was opened  and sampling begun.  TRC gauge  vacuum readings were recorded




every  5  minutes  during  the  sampling period.   At  the end  of the  sampling




period, the  flow shut-off valve was  closed,  the time and  final  gauge vacuum




recorded.  After  the Method  5X sampling  was  completed,  the Method  25 probe




lines were disconnected from the Method 5X interface and tightly capped.




    A post-test leak check was  performed  prior to disassembly of the sampling




train.  After  assuring  that the probe had been tightly capped, the flow shut-
                                     5-15

-------
off  valve was  opened and  the gauge  vacuum monitored  for  a minimum  of 10




minutes.   The leak check was acceptable  if  no visible change in tank vacuum




occurred.   The  post-test  leak rate  (inches Hg/10  minutes)   was  recorded if




observed.  At the completion of the leak check,  the flow  shut-off valve was



closed.









    5.3.2.3  Method 25 - Field Sample Recovery




    After  the post-test  leak  check  was  completed,  the TRC sampling train com-




ponents were  disconnected.   Both  ends of  each  condensibles  trap were tightly




sealed.   The  traps were then packed  in  dry  ice  for sample  preservation and




shipment to the laboratory.








    5.3.2.4  Method 25 - Sample Analysis




    Two inlet  sampling  trains and  two  outlet sampling trains from each test




were  analyzed  by TRC.   The other  two  inlet sampling  trains and  two outlet




sampling  trains  from each  test were analyzed  by Pollution  Control Science,




Inc.,  (PCS).   NCASI  analyzed  the  samples  collected  with  their  equipment.




Additional analyses  of  the  PCS analyzed  samples  were  performed at  the TRC




laboratory.  The  purpose of  this approach was to identify  the cause  of the




poor paired sample data  precision obtained during  the method development pro-




gram.




    The analyses were performed in  general accordance with the method as pub-




lished  (Appendix  F).   Prior  to the nonmethane organic  analysis of  the tank




samples, a preliminary  analysis was performed  with  an  FID  to  determine the




relative sample concentrations.  The  purpose of this analysis was  to provide




additional information for the resolution of  any poor precision.  If the pre-
                                     5-16

-------
liminary tank  sample  analyses  indicated relatively equal tank  concentrations

for  paired samples/  the  nonmethane  organic  analyses  should  also  produce

relatively equal values.  These data are presented in Appendix F.



    Preliminary Sample Tank Analysis

    The preliminary  sample tank analysis was  performed  using  the  nonmethane

organic analyzer.   However, the  separation column,  oxidation catalyst,  and

reduction catalyst were bypassed.   The sample  tank  was pressurized  to approx-

imately 100 mmHg  gauge  and then connected  to  the analyzer.  The sample  loop

was  purged  an
-------
Ul
I
CD
I
                                                           SEPARATION
                                                             COLUMN
                                                  NONMETHANE
                                                   ORGANIC
                                                  (BACKFLUSH)
                                                     CO
                                                     C02
                                                  1  CH4
                                                     COLUMN
                                                 BACKFLUSH VALV
                             OXIDATION
                             CATALYST
                           HEATED CHAMBER
      VALVE
AIR
                                                                        SAMPLE
                                                                        INJECT
                                                                         VALVE
                              REDUCTION
                              CATALYST
                           HEATED CHAMBER   I
                                            |
  DATA
RECORDER
                                                          SAMPLE
                                                           TANK
                                                        CALIBRATION
                                                         CYLINDERS
MOLECULAR
SIEVE



                                                                                                                    FLOW
                                                                                                                   METER
                                                CARRIER
                                                  GAS
                                                  He
                                         Fiaure 5-6.  TRC Nonmetharie Organic Analyzer

-------
    A six-port valve  (Carle Model 5521) was  substituted  for  the two four-port



valves in the  oxidation catalyst flow scheme.   One  four-port valve was  used




instead of  two four-port valves  in the reduction catalyst  flow  scheme.   In




effect the  latter  valving  modification precluded hydrogen venting  within  the



laboratory.




    The exit line  from the oxidation furnace to the six-port valve was  heat




traced to avoid condensation.  Additionally, all four  switching  valves  incor-



porated  in  the  analyzer  were  enclosed  in  a  heated,  insulated  compartment




thermostatically controlled to maintain a constant 100°C temperature.




    The separation column  used was  prepared  by Supelco, Inc.   It  was  a 4-1/2




foot  long,  1/8-inch  diameter stainless steel  tube  with two  packed sections.




The  injection  side section  was  3  feet  long and contains 10  percent  OV-101




(liquid methyl  silicone)  on 80/100 mesh  Supelcoport.   The  following  section




was 1-1/2 feet long packed with 60/80 mesh Poropak Q.




    The  reduction  catalyst  was  a  Byron  Instruments  unit  with  integral




heater.  This  was  mounted  within the Varian gas chromatograph oven to ensure




constant temperature operation.



    Although not clearly  shown in Figure 5-6,  a single combustion air source




services  both  the oxidation  catalyst  and  the flame  ionization detector.




Individual  metering valves are used after  the  flow splitter  to regulate the




supply to each device.




    The condensate recovery and  conditioning  apparatus equipment was assem-




bled  by TRC as shown  in Figure  5-7  and was essentially the  same  as the con-




figuration  detailed  by the method.   The NDIR  incorporated  was an Anarad AR




400,  with a range of 0  to  10,000 ppm C02>



    The TRC arrangement did not  incorporate  the vacuum  pump  in a direct link




with  other  equipment.  Instead  it was  located  remotely.   This  was  done to




avoid contamination by  the oil mist vented from  the vacuum pump.




                                     5-19

-------
     A  tube  furnace  was   used  for  volatilization  of  the  condensate  trap

 sample.  This provides  more even, high  temperature heating  of  the trap.   A

 propane torch was used  to  heat those parts  of the trap,  including  the probe,

 which  remain outside  the furnace  during  the  sample  recovery  procedure.

 Valves A, B, C and  D  in Figure 5-7  and their connecting  tubing  were  enclosed

 in a  thermostatically  controlled oven maintained  at  180°C  to  prevent  con-

 densation.   An  oxygen  rich  carrier  gas  passed through  the condensate  trap

 during heating and  oxidized the  organic compounds  to C0_  and  water  vapor.

 The  flow exited the trap,  passed  through a water trap  and NDIR, and  entered

 the  intermediate  collection vessel.


    Analyzer  Operating Conditions;

    Gas               Regulator Pressure (psig)          Flow Rate (cc/min)

    Helium                       42                       25
    Air                         45                       30 FID
                                                          50 Oxidation Catalyst
    Hydrogen                     20                       30

    Separation column  normal temperature - 0°C
    Separation column  backflush temperature - 100°C
    Oxidation catalyst temperature - 750°C
    Reduction catalyst temperature - 100°C (32 VAC)

    Condensate Recovery  Conditions;

    Gas                Regulator Pressure  (psig)          Flow Rate  (cc/min)

    Oxygen                       10                               150
    Air                          15                                50

    Oxidation catalyst temperature - 850°C

    Details of the NCASI analyzer and procedures are presented in Appendix H.


    Nonmethane Organic Analysis Procedure

    The  analysis  was  performed  in  accordance with  the  published  procedure.

 (See Appendix  H.)   However, the condensate  trap  carbon dioxide purge  (Section

A.3.2  of the  published  procedure) was modified.   After  briefly  purging the

trap  according  to the procedure,  the  valves  were  switched so  that  the trap

                                     5-20

-------
L±3
          FLOW
         METERS

          FLOW
       xCONTROL\
      V.  VALVES^
                              HEATED
                                            SWITCHING
                                              VALVES
                           CONNECTORS
                                                                     CATALYST
                              HEATED
                              CHAMBER
                                   I
                                   I
                                    i  ' I ' '
                                    Llt-i
                                                  I SAMPLE
                                                 CONDENSATE
                                                  |  TRAP
                                                  I
                                                         OXIDATION
                                                          CATALYST
           I

 HEATED    |
_CHAMBER,_ J
                                VENT

1 1 \~* J
NDIR
ANALYZER
_,


              VALVE   A

               QUICK  A
              CONNECT[Q|
                                                                     HoO
                                                                    TRAP
       MERCURY     INTERMEDIATE
      MANOMETER
Figure 5-7.   TRC Condensate Recovery and Conditioning Apparatus
                                  5-21

-------
 was bypassed.  After  the  trap had been  bypassed,  the carrier  gas flow con-

 tinued  through the system and into the tank  for approximately 5 minutes.   It


 was then vented to the atmosphere through the valve located downstream of  the


 NDIR.   (See  Figure 5-7.)   This time period was sufficient to purge the inter-


 connecting  tubing and NDIR cell  volume.   Prior to  resuming  flow through  the

 condensate  trap,  the valve was switched  to introduce  again  the flow into  the


 sample  tank.   The trap was removed from  the dry ice bath and allowed to warm

 to  room temperature  (determined by touch) .  The trap was placed back into  the


 dry ice bath and  the  valves  switched to resume carrier  gas  flow through  the


 trap after  frosting  appeared on  external  trap surfaces.  The procedure  was


 then completed as described.   This modification to the procedure was intended


 to  assure  the  removal  of  any  CO   which  may  be  trapped  within the   ice


 crystals  present  in  the trap.*




 5.4  Preliminary Moisture Determination


     Preliminary  moisture  tests   were performed  at  the  scrubber   inlet   and


 outlet  prior  to  emission  testing.   Testing  was performed  in accordance with

 EPA  Method  4.  Data  were  recorded on field  moisture determination  forms  as


 presented in Appendix  C.




 5.5  Preliminary velocity Determination


     Preliminary  velocity measurements were  made  at  the scrubber  inlet   and


outlet  prior  to  emission testing.   EPA Methods  I  and  2  were  followed  in

measuring the  velocity of the gas stream.   Data  were recorded on  the field


data  sheets  (Traverse point Location  for  Circular  Ducts  and  Preliminary


Velocity Traverse, Appendix C).
* "investigation of Carbon Dioxide Interference with Method 25." EPA Contract
  68-02-2814,  Work Assignment  41.   Midwest  Research  Institute,  April  15,
  1981, p. 7.
                                     5-22

-------
5.6 Visible Emissions




    Scrubber  outlet visible emissions were  not monitored as  planned because




of overcast sky  background  conditions.  The  controlled  emissions  were bluish-



white which made it impossible  to distinguish the emissions  from the overcast



sky.  Overcast skies were present on June 8, 9 and 10.  During the  last test




day, June  11, the sky began to clear and only scattered clouds  were present



in the  afternoon.   However, the  final test  sequence was nearly  completed by




this time.  Consequently, no visible emission observations were recorded.




    Although  the  scrubber  outlet  stack   had an  attached   steam plume,  the




Method  9  observations  were not cancelled  because of  this  condition.   The




method  provides  for attached steam  plumes by requiring that  observations be




made at the point where the condensed water vapor is no longer visible.








5.7 Pressure Drop Measurements




    The  pressure drop across  the scrubber  system was  measured  in  order to




determine  if  the  unit  was  operating  at  design conditions  and  to  provide  a




means  of  correlating  a scrubber  operating   parameter  with collection  effi-




ciency.   O-tube water  manometers were  used  to measure  static pressure at




three  points at 30-minute  intervals  during  the test  period.   Measurements



were made at the  inlet sampling  location,  just before,  and  just  after  the




induced  draft fan.  Pressure drop across the  scrubber system was  then  cal-




culated from  the static pressures.








5.8 Scrubber  Solution Samples




    Scrubber  solution samples were taken   from the  holding  tank  of the  recir-




culating system  concurrently  with the particulate/condensible organics test-




ing performed at the scrubber  outlet.  These samples  were  taken to  determine
                                     5-23

-------
 the relationship  between the  total organic  carbon content  of the  scrubber




 solution and the actual measured emissions.




     A 100-ral sample was  taken  approximately  every 30 minutes while Method  5X




 was being performed at the outlet.   These samples were taken  by dipping a 100




 ml graduated cylinder  into  the holding  tank.   Sample numbers and collection




 times  were  recorded on  the  Scrubber  Solution  Sample Collection  form.   The




 100-ral aliquots collected during a  test were composited  into one sample jar




 for that test.




     The composite  samples were placed  in shock-proof containers  and trans-




 ported to  CH2MHill at  the  conclusion of  the  test  program.   The   scrubber




 solution samples were  analyzed for total organic carbon  (TOC) following Stan-




 dard Method 415.1.  All  analyses were  performed  within  two  weeks  of sample




 collection.








 5.9 Fugitive Emissions




     The purpose of these measurements was to visually determine the frequency




 of  occurrence of  emissions  that are  not emitted  directly from  the  process




 stack  or duct.   These are generally  referred  to  as fugitive  emissions and




 include  such emissions as those:   (1)  escaping capture  by process equipment




 exhaust  hoods;  (2)  emitted during material  transfer;  (3)  emitted from build-




 ings housing material  processing or handling  equipment;  (4)  emitted  directly




 from process equipment.




     EPA Method  22  modified guidelines, as presented  in Appendix F,  were used




 to  determine  fugitive  emissions  from  the  veneer  dryer doors  and  abort




 stacks.   The method does not  require that the opacity of emissions be deter-




mined.   Instead,  the amount  of  time  that any visible emissions occur during




 the observation period is measured.
                                     5-24

-------
    Fugitive emissions from the  veneer  dryers were monitored by  RTI  and DGA.




Observations were recorded periodically throughout the test program.








5.10 Ambient Temperature and Relative Humidity




    Outdoor ambient  air  temperature and relative humidity were measured with




a psychrometer  at the beginning  and end of  each test period.   Measurements



were  made by  RTI  and  their  subcontractor   to  determine  if  a  relationship



exists between  ambient  temperature and  relative  humidity, and the emissions




from the veneer dryers.  Data was recorded on a form presented in Appendix I.
                                      5-25

-------
6.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE




    The  TRC quality  assurance  program  is  designed to  ensure that  emission




measurement  work is  performed  by  qualified  people using  proper  equipment




following written  procedures in order to  provide accurate, defensible  data.




This program is  based  upon  the  EPA Quality Assurance Handbook  for  Air Pollu-




tion Measurement Systems, Volume III (EPA-600/4-7-027b).




    At the  beginning  of  each day,  a meeting was  held  to orient  personnel  to




the activities  scheduled for that day and to discuss  results from  the  pre-




vious day,  and  to  determine if any  special considerations were appropriate




for the day's work.









6.1 Method 5X




    TRC's measurement devices,  pitot  tubes,  dry gas meters,  thermocouples,




probes and  nozzles are  uniquely  identified and  calibrated with  documented




procedures  and  acceptance  criteria  before  and after  each  field  effort.




Records  of  all  calibration data  are  maintained  in TRC  files.    Samples  of




these calibration forms are presented in Appendix F.




    All  Method  5X  sampling  shall  be  100 +10  percent isokinetic.   Probe and




hotbox temperatures were maintained  at 350°  +25°F.   Deviations  from  these




criteria were  reported to the EPA/EMB task  manager  to decide  whether a test




run should be repeated or continued.




    A  single  clean-up evaluation  test  was performed  on  each  initial set




(collector train) of  glassware  prior  to collecting  field  samples.   The eval-




uation tests  (Method  5X)  were performed  in  the  field  clean-up laboratory and




were observed by the  EPA  task manager.   Necessary changes  or modifications to




the  clean-up procedures  were  specified by  the  EPA  task  manager  prior  to




collecting  field samples.    The  sets  of   glassware,   including  the  probes,
                                      6-1

-------
were  prepared  and  precleaned  before  conducting  the  clean-up  evaluation




tests.   The impingers were  precharged  as specified  in the  actual  test pro-




gram.   Afterward,  the sample collectors,  including  probes,  were  cleaned and




the blank samples  recovered  and  analyzed  as  specified in the actual test pro-




gram.  Results are presented in Section 2 of this report.




    In  summary, the  evaluation  tests  were designed to precondition the sample




collectors, to establish  blank  background values,  and to educate the clean-up



personnel in specific sample recovery procedures.




    Acetone was  provided  by CH_MHill  in glass-lined  containers.  Both the




acetone  and D.D.  water were analyzed by  CH  MHill prior to  field  use.  Resi-




due data from this  preliminary analysis  was  evaluated by  the EPA/EMB task




manager  with  respect  to  the  suitability for  use during  the  test  program.




These data  are presented  in Appendix H.  In  addition, three  blank  samples of




D.D.  water,  acetone,  and  both  2-1/2   inch  and  4-1/2  inch  filters  were




collected for background  analysis.  All clean-up evaluation and blank samples




were analyzed in conjunction with the actual test samples.




    All  sample  recovery   was   performed   by a  three-person clean-up  crew.




Appropriate sample recovery data were  recorded  on the  sample  identification




log, sample handling log, chain-of -custody form,  and  analytical data forms as




presented in Appendix D.




    Recovered  samples were  secured  in  padlocked,   shock-proof,  steel  con-




tainers for storage and shipment for analysis.




    All  preparation  and  analysis  of Method  5X  samples  were performed  by




     111,  which  has extensive  experience  with Oregon  DEQ  Method   7,  from
which  Method  5X  derives.   CH MHill  adhered  to  the  standards  of  quality




assurance  set  forth in  the  Quality  Assurance  Handbook  for Air  Pollution
                                      6-2

-------
Measurement  Systems,  Volume   III   (EPA-600/4-7-027b)  and  the  Handbook  for




Analytical Quality  Control  in Water  and Wastewater Laboratories  (EPA-600/4-




79-019, March 1979).









6.2 Method 25




    Method 25 traps were  burned  out according to the method  prior to testing




and  spot-checked for  contamination.   All Method 25  tanks were  flushed with




nitrogen and checked for contamination prior to field use.




    Six sampling trains were  used  to provide a check on  data precision.  Two




trains were analyzed by TRC;  two by PCS, and NCASI  analyzed the remaining two




trains.  All tanks  and traps  have permanently engraved identification numbers.




    Analyzers were  calibrated over the specified ranges using certified cali-




bration gases.   Certification forms are  provided in Appendix F.









6.3 Method 9




    The  TRC  observer  had been certified within the past  6 months to  perform




visible emission evaluations.
                                       6-3

-------