cxEPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Air Quality EMB Report No. 88-EPP-01
Planning and Standards Volume I
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 January 1989
Air
Elemental Phosphorus
Production -
Calciner Off-Gases
Emission Test Report
Monsanto
Soda Springs, Idaho
-------
DCN 89-222-124-20-08 EMB Report No. 88-EPP-01
Radian No. 222-124-20
EMISSION TEST REPORT
MONSANTO ELEMENTAL PHOSPHORUS PLANT
SODA SPRINGS, IDAHO
VOLUME I
EPA Contract No. 68-02-4338
Work Assignment Nos. 20/26
Prepared for:
Robert T. Harrison, Task Manager
Emissions Measurement Branch
Technical Support Division
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
Prepared by:
Radian Corporation
Post Office Box 13000
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709
January 1989
JES/055
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
VOLUME I
Section Page
1.0 Executive Summary 1-1
1.1 Introduction/Background 1-1
1.1.1 Test Program Objectives 1-1
1.1.2 Overview of Testing Activities 1-2
1.1.3 Uncertainties in Radionuclide Analysis 1-7
1.2 Summary of Emission Results 1-7
1.2.1 PM and Radionucl ides (MM 111) 1-7
1.2.2 Particle Size Distribution 1-9
1.3 Test Report Organization 1-13
2.0 Description of Process and Air Pollution Control Systems ... 2-1
2.1 Process Description 2-1
2.2 Air Pollution Control Equipment (Calcining Operation) . 2-1
2.3 Process and Pollution Control Data 2-3
3.0 Summary and Discussion of Results 3-1
3.1 Particulate Matter and Radionuclide Results 3-1
3.1.1 Inlet 3-7
3.1.2 Outlet 3-7
3.1.3 Venturi Scrubber Efficiencies - Method 111 3-8
3.1.4 Front/Back Half Distribution of Emissions
in MM 111 Trains 3-10
3.2 Particle and Radionuclide Size Distribution Data 3-10
3.2.1 Particle Size Distribution Data 3-10
3.2.2 Radionuclide Distribution Data 3-12
3.3 Process Samples 3-12
4.0 Sampling and Analysis 4-1
4.1 Sampling Locations 4-1
4.1.1 Scrubber Inlet 4-1
4.1.2 Outlet Stacks 4-4
4.1.3 Process Feed Sampling Location 4-4
JES/055 ii
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
VOLUME I
(Continued)
Section Page
4.2 Sampling Procedures 4-4
4.2.1 Particulate Matter and Radionuclides -
Modified EPA Method 111 4-4
4.2.2 Particle Size Distribution - Andersen MK III ... 4-6
4.2.3 Flue Gas Volumetric Flow Rate - EPA Method 2 ... 4-9
4.2.4 Flue Gas Molecular Weight Determination -
EPA Method 3 4-10
4.2.5 Flue Gas Moisture Content - EPA Method 4 4-10
4.2.6 Process Feed Samples - Composite Grab 4-10
4.3 Sample Recovery and Analysis 4-11
4.3.1 Particulate Matter and Radionuclides 4-11
4.3.2 Particulate Size Distribution and
Radionuclides 4-13
4.4 Sample Custody 4-15
5.0 Quality Assurance and Quality Control (QA/QC) 5-1
5.1 Quality Assurance/Quality Control for Sampling
and Recovery 5-1
5.2 Radionuclide Analysis QA/QC 5-9
5.3 QA/QC Results for Particle Size Sampling 5-11
5.4 Duplicate Analyses by an Independent Laboratory 5-13
VOLUME II
Appendix A - EPA Method 111 Protocol A-l
Appendix B - EERF Radiochemical Analysis Procedures B-l
Appendix C - Method 111 Sampling Parameter Summaries C-l
Appendix D - MM 111 Field Data Sheets D-l
Appendix E Sampling Parameter Summaries E-l
JES/055 iii
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
VOLUME II
(Continued)
Section Page
Appendix F PSD Field Data Sheets F-l
Appendix G Moisture and ORSAT Analysis Field Data G-l
Appendix H - MM 111 Analytical Weights H-l
Appendix I - PSD Analytical Weights 1-1
Appendix J - Preliminary Sampling Point Location and Traverse Data . J-l
Appendix K - Sample Custody Log K-1
Appendix L - Radionuclide Analytical Data L-l
Appendix M Cal ibration Data M-l
Appendix N - Process Data and Description N-l
JES/055 iv
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1-1 Planned Sampling and Analysis Matrix for Monsanto Elemental
Phosphorus Plant 1-3
1-2 Summary of the Sampling Intervals for the Monsanto
Test Program 1-5
1-3 Summary of Particulate Matter and Radionuclide Emission
Results, Calciner Offgases, Monsanto, Soda Springs,
Idaho 1-8
1-4 Venturi Inlet Particle Sizing - Mass Collected per Stage,
Calciner Offgases, Monsanto, Soda Springs, Idaho 1-10
1-5 Venturi Outlet Particle Sizing - Mass Collected per Stage,
Calciner Offgases, Monsanto, Soda Springs, Idaho 1-11
1-6 Consolidated Cumulative Mass Fraction Results, Monsanto,
Soda Springs, Idaho 1-15
1-7 Consolidated Differential Mass Concentration Results,
Monsanto, Soda Springs, Idaho 1-15
1-8 Summary of PSD-Radionuclide Results at the Inlet and
Outlet C, Monsanto, Soda Springs, Idaho 1-16
1-9 Consolidated Cumulative Activity Fraction Results,
Monsanto, Soda Springs, Idaho 1-19
3-1 Summary of Particulate Matter and Radionuclide Emission
Results, Calciner Offgases, Monsanto, Soda Springs,
Idaho 3-2
3-2 Summary of Run 1 Modified Method 111 Results, Monsanto,
Soda Springs, Idaho 3-3
3-3 Summary of Run 2 Modified Method 111 Results, Monsanto,
Soda Springs, Idaho 3-4
3-4 Summary of Run 3 Modified Method 111 Results, Monsanto,
Soda Springs, Idaho 3-5
3-5 Summary of Run 4 Modified Method 111 Results, Monsanto,
Soda Springs, Idaho 3-6
3-6 Venturi Scrubber Removal Efficiency for PM, Po-210,
and Pb-210, Monsanto, Soda Springs, Idaho 3-9
JES/055
-------
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
Table Page
3-7 Summary of Front/Back Half Distribution of Emissions,
MM 111 Sampling Trains, Monsanto, Soda Springs,
Idaho 3-11
3-8 Inlet Data for Cumulative Mass Fraction vs. Particle
Size, Monsanto, Soda Springs, Idaho 3-15
3-9 Outlet A and Outlet B Data for Cumulative Mass Fraction
vs. Particle Size, Monsanto, Soda Springs, Idaho 3-16
3-10 Outlet C and Outlet D Data for Cumulative Mass Fraction
vs. Particle Size, Monsanto, Soda Springs, Idaho 3-17
3-11 Inlet Data for Differential Concentration vs. Particle
Size, Monsanto, Soda Springs, Idaho 3-20
3-12 Outlet A and Outlet B Data for Differential Concentration
vs. Particle Size, Monsanto, Soda Springs, Idaho 3-21
3-13 Outlet C and Outlet D Data for Differential Concentration
vs. Particle Size, Monsanto, Soda Springs, Idaho 3-22
3-14 Cumulative Activity Fractions, Monsanto, Soda Springs,
Idaho 3-27
3-15 Radionuclide Concentrations in Process Feedstock
Samples, Monsanto, Soda Springs, Idaho 3-28
4-1 Modified Method 111 Sampling Train Components to be
Sent to EERF for Radionuclide Analysis, Monsanto,
Soda Springs, Idaho 4-14
4-2 Andersen Impactor Sampling Train Components, Monsanto,
Soda Springs, Idaho 4-16
5-1 Summary of Acceptance, Criteria, Control Limits and
Corrective Action and Achieved Results 5-2
5-2 Summary of Isokinetic Results for Method 111 Sampling
Trains, Monsanto, Soda Springs, Idaho 5-3
5-3 Summary of Isokinetic Results for Particle Sizing
Sampling Trains, Monsanto, Soda Springs, Idaho 5-4
5-4 Summary of Leak Check Results for Particle Sizing
Sampling Trains, Monsanto, Soda Springs, Idaho 5-5
JES/055 vi
-------
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
Table Page
5-5 Summary of Leak Check Results for Modified Method 111
Sampling Trains, Monsanto, Soda Springs, Idaho 5-6
5-6 Duplicate Results for Radionuclide Analyses at Monsanto
Soda Springs, Idaho 5-10
5-7 Summary of MM 111 Radionuclide Field Blank Values for
the Test Program, Monsanto, Soda Springs, Idaho 5-12
5-8 Flue Gas Interaction Sample Weight Gains, Monsanto,
Soda Springs, Idaho 5-14
5-9 Duplicate Analyses for Polonium Performed by an
Independent Laboratory 5-15
JES/055 vii
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1-1 Cumulative Mass Fraction as a Function of Particle
Size. Probability-Log Plot. Monsanto, Soda Springs,
Idaho 1-12
1-2 Differential Mass Concentration vs. Particle Size
Calciner Offgases Monsanto, Soda Springs, Idaho 1-14
1-3 Cumulative Polonium-210 Activity Fraction as a Function
Particle Size. Probability-Log Plot (consolidated).
Monsanto, Soda Springs, Idaho 1-17
1-4 Cumulative Lead-210 Activity Fraction as a Function
of Particle Size. Probability-Log Plot (consolidated).
Monsanto, Soda Springs, Idaho 1-18
2-1 Schematic of Monsanto Rotary Kiln and Pollution Control
System 2-2
3-1 Cumulative Mass Fraction as a Function of Particle Size
for Venturi Inlet Particulate Matter. Probability-Log
Plot. Monsanto, Soda Springs, Idaho 3-13
3-2 Cumulative Mass Fraction as a Function of Particle Size
for Controlled Particulate Matter. Probability-Log Plot.
Monsanto, Soda Springs, Idaho 3-14
3-3 Venturi Inlet Differential Mass Concentration vs.
Particle Size for Runs 1, 2, and 3 Calciner Offgases
Monsanto, Soda Springs, Idaho 3-18
3-4 Venturi Outlet Differential Mass Concentration vs.
Particle Size for Runs 1, 2, and 3 Calciner Offgases
Monsanto, Soda Springs, Idaho 3-19
3-5 Cumulative Polonium-210 Activity Fraction as a Function
of Particle Size for Venturi Inlet Particulate Matter.
Probability-Log Plot Monsanto, Soda Springs, Idaho 3-23
3-6 Cumulative Polonium-210 Activity Fraction as a Function
of Particle Size for Controlled Particulate Matter.
Probability-Log Plot Monsanto, Soda Springs, Idaho 3-24
3-7 Cumulative Lead-210 Activity Fraction as a Function
of Particle Size for Venturi Inlet Particulate Matter.
Probability-Log Plot Monsanto, Soda Springs, Idaho 3-25
JES/055 viii
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
3-8 Cumulative Lead-210 Activity Fraction as a Function
of Particle Size for Controlled Particulate Matter.
Probability-Log Plot Monsanto, Soda Springs, Idaho 3-26
4-1 Schematic of Monsanto Rotary Kiln and Pollution Control
System 4-2
4-2 Schematic of the Inlet Sampling Location 4-3
4-3 Schematic Showing the Outlet Sampling Locations 4-5
4-4 Schematic of the Modified Method 111 Sampling Train 4-7
4-5 Schematic of the Andersen MK III Cascade Impactor Train .... 4-8
4-6 Modified Method 111 Recovery and Analysis Scheme 4-12
4-7 Example of Alphanumeric ID Codes for the Monsanto
Test Program 4-17
JES/055 ix
-------
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.1 INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND
The Environmental Protection Agency is currently developing additional
data on the quantities of radionuclide emissions released during the
phosphate rock processing operation (calcining). The data generated during
this program will form the basis for a National Emission Standard for
Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) which will limit the quantities of
radionuclide emissions from this industry. EPA's Office of Radiation
Programs (ORP) and Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS) are
jointly participating in this regulatory effort.
Emission tests at two elemental phosphorus plants, calciner emission
control systems were performed for this program. The results from the first
of these tests, which was conducted at the Monsanto Soda Springs, Idaho,
plant are the subject of this report. Since the radionuclides in the offgas
streams are associated with the particulate matter (PM), emission testing
procedures involved collection of PM from these streams and subsequent
analyses of these samples for their radionuclide content. The emissions
that are being studied include particulate matter, particle size
distribution (PSD) and two specific radionuclides: Polonium-210 (Po-210)
and lead-210 (Pb-210).
1.1.1 Test Program Objectives
The purpose of this document is to present the results from the August
1988 test program at the Monsanto phosphorus plant in Soda Springs, Idaho.
The focus of this report is on the presentation of measured emissions. No
attempt is made to perform rigorous analyses of these data such as are
commonly performed in support of NESHAP development. The ORP AND OAQPS will
analyze the data generated during this test program to develop the specific
JES/055 1-1
-------
information needed to support regulatory development. The primary
objectives of the Monsanto test program were:
• to quantify the particulate matter, polonium-210, and lead-210
emission rates in the calciner offgases including both the venturi
scrubber inlet and outlet streams, and
• to determine the distribution of particulate matter, polonium-210,
and lead-210 by particle size in both these streams.
In addition, grab samples were collected to quantify the concentration
of polonium-210 and lead-210 in the calciner feedstock. Testing was per-
formed using a single set of process and control device operating
conditions.
1.1.2 Overview of Testing Activities
On-site activities began on August 15 and were completed on August 20,
1988. The sampling and analysis matrix as planned and presented in the
project test plan is included in Table 1-1. During the test program, slight
deviations from the planned approach were made to compensate for sampling
difficulties encountered during the first and second day of testing. These
difficulties and the corrective actions taken are discussed in detail in
Sections 3.0 and 4.0 of this document.
Samples were collected simultaneously at both the venturi scrubber
inlet and each of the calciner's four venturi scrubber stack outlet
locations, which were designated A, B, C, and D. Thus, for each run, five
samples were collected; one at the inlet and one at each of the four
scrubber outlet stacks.
The sampling intervals are summarized for each test run in Table 1-2.
In order to collect at least three MM 111 samples at each location that met
isokinetic QA requirements, four test runs at the inlet and outlet were
conducted. Also, a fifth outlet D test run was conducted since two previous
outlet D test runs did not meet isokinetic QA requirements.
Three test runs were performed where inlet and outlet particle size
samples were collected simultaneously using in-stack Andersen impactors.
JES/055 1-2
-------
m
TABLE 1-1. PLANNED SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS MATRIX FOR MONSANTO ELEMENTAL PHOSPHORUS PLANT
«->
en
tn
Target Emission
Sampling Location Sampling Method or Stack Parameter
Scrubber Inlet Modified Method 111* Particulate Matter
Radionuclides
Andersen Impactor Particulate size
Radlonuclldes
Outlet Stack »1 Modified Method 111* Particulate Matter
Radionuclides
Andersen Impactor Partlculate size
Radionuclides
Outlet Stack *2 Modified Method 111* Particulate Hatter
b
i_i Radionuclides
i
CA>
Andersen Impactor Particulate size
Radionuclides
Outlet Stack »3 Modified Method 111* Particulate Matter
Radionuclides
Andersen Impactor Partlculate size
Radionuclides
Outlet Stack f> Modified Method 111* Particulate Mgtter
Radlonuc 1 ide s
Andersen Impactor Particulate size
Radionuclides
Analytical
Method
Gravimetric
alpha spec.
Gravimetric
alpha spec .
Gravimetric
alpha spec.
Gravimetric
alpha spec.
Gravimetric
alpha spec.
Gravimetric
alpha spec .
Gravimetric
alpha spec.
Gravimetric
alpha spec.
Gravimetric
alpha spec.
Gravimetric
alpha spec.
Number of Number of
Number of Sample Fractions Radlonuclide
Test Runs Per Test Run Samples
3 2 (front /back)0 6
3 6d 18
3 2 (front/back)0 6
3 6d 18C
3 2 (front/back)0 6
3 6d
3 2 (front/back)0 6
3 6d
3 2 (front/back)0 6
6d
Process Feed
Grab
Radionuclides
Alpha spec.
-------
m
TABLE 1-1. (Continued)
o
in
in
Sampling Location
Field Blanks
Reagent Blanks
Performance
Audit Samples
TOTAL
Sampling Method
Modified Method 111*
Andersen Impactor
Modified Method 111*
Filters, Acetone,
Nitric Acid
Andersen Impactor
Substrates
NA
Target Emission
or Stack Parameter
Partlculate Matter
Radlonuc 1 ide s
Particulate size
Radionuclides
Radionuclides
Radionuclides
Radionuclides
Analytical
Method
Gravimetric
alpha spec.
Gravimetric
alpha spec.
Alpha spec.
Alpha spec.
Alpha spec .
Number of Number of
Number of Sample Fractions Radi.onucli.de
Test Runs Per Test Run Samples
1 2 (front/back) 2
16 6
NA NA 0£
NA NA Of
NA NA 5
82
Implnger solutions of the Method 111 train were 0.1 N nitric acid.
Target radionuclides included Polonlum-210 and Lead-210.
Front half consisted of filter and probe and nozzle rinses, back half consisted of impinger contents and rinses.
Andersen Impactor stages were combined into 6 fractions as follows: No. 1 - precutter stages 0 and 1; No. 2 - stages 2, 3, 4, and 5;
No. 3 - stage 6; No. 4 - stage 7i No. 5 - stage 81 and No. 6 - stage 9 (back-up filter).
Radionuclide analyses were performed on particle size samples collected at only one of the four outlet stacks. This particle size
sample was selected after reduction of the particle size distributions for all four stacks.
Reagent blanks (filters and solvents) were collected and archived. Radionuclide analysis was performed on these samples if
the field blanks showed contamination.
-------
TABLE 1-2. SUMMARY OF THE SAMPLING INTERVALS FOR THE MONSANTO TEST PROGRAM
(24-hour clock)
m
CO
o
en
en
I n
Date Run Inlet
Method 111
8/16/88 1 16:25-18:10
8/17/88 2 09:40-10:55
8/17/88 3 15:25-16:35
8/18/88 4 10:35-11:43
8/18/88 5
Particle Sizing
8/17/88 1 19:01:30-19:16:30
Outlet A Outlet B Outlet C Outlet D Comments
16:25-18:40 16:25-18:40 16:24-18:40 16:25-18:40 The inlet sample and outlet D sample
did not meet Isokinetic requirements.
09:40-11:15 09:40-11:15 09:42-11:15 09:40-11:15 The outlet D sample did not meet
isokinetic QA requirements.
15:25-17:05 15:25-17:05 15:25-17:05 15:25-17:05
10:35-12:00 10:35-12:00 10:35-12:00 10:35-12:00
11:35-12:55
20:00-22:00 19:28-21:28 19:27-21:27 19:31-21:31 A buttonhook nozzle was used to
collect the inlet sample.
8/18/88
8/19/88
8/18/88
14:50-15:05
12:00-12:10
blank 17:20-17:35
15:25-19:04 14:45-18:36 14:45-18:36 14:50-18:44
13:15-17:05 13:15-17:15 13:02-17:02 13:17-17:17
16:45-19:45
-------
Particulate emissions and associated radionuclldes were collected from
the streams using a modification of EPA Method 111. The specific sampling
portion of Method 111 is identical to those procedures described in EPA
Method 5.
The modifications made to the Method 111 train for this program
included using 0.1 N nitric acid for impinger solutions instead of water,
and recovery and analysis of all sampling train fractions. The purpose of
the nitric acid impinger solutions was to minimize surface effects that
might inhibit recovery of radionuclides (gaseous metals) from sampling train
glassware. The use of nitric acid as an impinger solution and recovery
solvent was implemented for quality assurance purposes.
The purpose for analyzing all train components was to quantify total
radionuclide content of the offgas streams. The MM 111 sampling trains were
recovered in two fractions (front and back halves). The front half
consisted of the filter and rinses from the probe, nozzle and filter holder;
whereas, the back half consisted of the impinger contents and rinses. Both
front and back half sample fractions were analyzed separately by EPA's
Eastern Environmental Radiation Facility (EERF) for radionuclide content.
(All Method 111 radionuclide results presented in this report include both
front half and back half sample train fractions.)
Particle sizing samples were collected using heated Andersen MK-III
in-stack cascade impactors with right angle precutter. Impactor operating
parameters were selected to optimize the separation of the fine particulate
fraction (less than 2 microns). Particle size distributions were determined
at all five sampling locations for a total of 15 distinct particle
collection episodes. However, radionuclide analysis of the particle size
fraction was done for only a selected portion of the samples to reduce the
number of radionuclide analyses. Several of the impactor stages for the
larger particle size cuts were composited into a single sample for
radionuclide analysis. The final four impactor stages were analyzed for
radionuclides as individual samples. The particle size samples collected at
outlet C were chosen as representative of the outlet and were submitted for
radionuclide analysis.
JES/055 1-6
-------
Process feed samples were collected during the testing and composited
to determine the activity in the blended feedstock ore. Field blanks and
reagent blanks were collected during the Monsanto test program and are
presented and discussed in the Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC)
section of this document.
1.1.3 Uncertainties in Radionuclide Analysis
For the polonium-210 (Po-210) measurements, there is a high degree of
confidence in the data. The analytical errors in the polonium-210
measurement were less than 10 percent at the 95 percent confidence level for
the test program.
For the lead-210 (Pb-210) measurements, there is an acceptable level of
confidence in the data. All Method 111 Pb-210 measurements were above the
minimum detection limit (MDL). Six (6%) of particle size fraction
radionuclide measurements were below the MDL (see footnote in Table 1-8).
1.2 SUMMARY OF EMISSION RESULTS
Emission testing was performed while operating the process was
operating at normal conditons. A constant pressure drop was maintained
across each of the venturi scrubbers during each of the testing periods.
The measured pressure drop is considered confidential by the facility.
1.2.1 PM and Radionuclides (MM 111)
Table 1-3 contains a summary of the particulate matter and radionuclide
emissions measured during the program. As seen in the table, particulate
matter concentrations at the inlet for the three valid test runs (runs 2, 3
and 4) averaged 595 mg/dscm (0.26 gr/dscf). The outlet particulate matter
concentration averaged 27.3 mg/dscm (0.012 gr/dscf) during these test runs.
On a mass emission rate basis, particulate matter emission rates at the
inlet averaged 104 kg/hr (230 Ibs/hr) and the outlet averaged 4.90 kg/hr
(10.8 Ibs/hr).
JES/055 1-7
-------
m
CO
o
en
en
TABLE 1-3. SUMMARY OF PARTICIPATE MATTER AND RADIONUCLIDE EMISSION RESULTS,
CALCINER OFFGASES, MONSANTO, SODA SPRINGS, IDAHO (August 1988)
CD
Particulate Matter
Location
Inlet
Outlet8
Run
Number
1
2
3
4
Average
Runs 2-4
2b
3
4
Average
Runs 2-4
Annual
Emissions
Concentration
gr/dscf
0.2106
0.2530
0.2556
0.2714
0.2600
0.01249
0.01129
0.01206C
0.01195
mg/dscm
482
579
585
621
595
28.6
25.8
27.6C
27.3
Mass Rate
Ib/hr
213
228
224
237
230
11.5
10.1
10. 9C
10.8
44.9 tons/yr
kg/hr
96.5
103
102
107
104
5.20
4.58
4.93C
4.90
Polonium-210
Concentration
pCi/dscf
NA
693
594'
678
655
35.4
21.3
24.4
27.0
pCi/dscm
NA
24484
20977
23959
23140
1250
751
862
954
Emission
Rate
uCi/hr
NA
4370
3644
4142
4052
227
133
155
172
1.43 Ci/yr
Lead-210
Concentration
pCi/dscf
NA
256
159
204
207
7.7
5.3
6.1
6.4
pCi/dscm
NA
9051
5629
7212
7297
273
187
216
225
Emission
Rate
uCi/hr
NA
1615
978
1247
1280
49.6
33.1
39.0
40.6
0.338 Ci/yr
aOutlet concentration values for each run are the averages of the four outlet locations, and the mass rate values are the
sum of the four outlet locations.
Outlet D values were not used due to nonisokinetic sampling, run 5 outlet 0 values were used to calculate average results
for run 2.
C0utlet D PM results for run 4 not included in average because of suspected contamination.
Annual Emissions - Calculated based upon typical production and maximum expected hours of operation of 8,322 hr/yr.
NA = Not analyzed.
-------
The Po-210 and Pb-210 concentrations in the inlet flue gas stream
averaged 23,140 and 7,297 pCi/dscm (655 and 207 pCi/dscf), respectively, for
the three valid test runs (see footnotes b and c in Table 1-2). The
concentration of Po-210 and Pb-210 in the outlet streams averaged 954 and
225 pCi/dscm (27 and 6.4 pCi/dscf), respectively. On an emission rate
basis, Po-210 and Pb-210 emissions at the inlet averaged 4,050 and
1,280 uCi/hr, and at the outlet, 172 and 41 uCi/hr, respectively.
1.2.2 Particle Size Distribution
Particle size analysis quantifies the particle mass in a given size
range. The mass collected on each stage are presented for each run in
Tables 1-4 and 1-5 for the venturi inlet and outlet, respectively.
The particle size results are presented in two ways in this report.
The first is a plot of the cumulative mass fraction versus the interval
endpoint (Dp50) as shown in Figure 1-1. Dpc0 represents the effective stage
cut diameter calculated for the specified sampling run. Ideally, each
impactor stage collects all particles having an aerodynamic diameter greater
than the stage cut diameter (Dp50). In reality, the effective stage cut
diameter (Dp,.g) is assumed to be equal to the particle diameter for which
the stage collection efficiency is 50 percent. The stage cut diameter is
calculated from the sampling run conditions, the physical dimensions of the
impactor, and a theoretical calibration value (Stokes number). This curve
is used to estimate the fraction of the particulate less than a specific
particle diameter.
For the inlet location, 50 percent of the particulate mass is composed
of particles that are less than 0.5 microns in diameter. For the outlet
locations, 50 percent of the particulate mass comprises particles that are
less than about 0.3 microns in diameter. The particulate mass at the inlet
consists of approximately 99 percent PM1Q (i.e., particulate matter less
than 10 microns in diameter). At the outlet, PMjQ accounts for about
97.6 percent of the particulate mass. Considering the precision of the
measurements methods, the mass fraction of PMjQ at the inlet and outlet is
considered equivalent.
JES/055 1-9
-------
TABLE 1-4. VENTURI INLET PARTICLE SIZING - MASS COLLECTED PER STAGE,
CALCINER OFFGASES, MONSANTO, SODA SPRINGS, IDAHO
(August 1988)
Stage
la
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Back-up
Total
Run 1
0.00041
0.00040
0.00074
0.00043
0.00147
0.00596
0.00970
0.01719
0.01302
0.04932
Mass collected per stage (grams)
Run 2
0.00030
0.00038
0.00053
0.00074
0.00253
0.01024
0.01377
0.01925
0.01580
0.06354
Run 3
0.00042
0.00004
0.00004
0.00021
0.00016
0.00063
0.00245
0.00417
0.01145
0.01957
Stage 1 includes the pre-impactor stage.
JES/055
1-10
-------
m
o
JJJ TABLE 1-5. VENTURI OUTLET
PARTICLE SIZING
- MASS COLLECTED PER STAGE, CALCINER OFFGASES, MONSANTO,
, SODA SPRINGS, IDAHO
(August 1988)
Outlet A
Stage Run 1
1* 0.00031
2 0.00000
3 0.00000
4 0.00000
5 0.00021
J_ 6 0.00137
7 0.00152
8 0.00170
Back-up 0 . 00910
Total 0.01421
Run 2
0.
0.
0.
0
0.
0.
0
0
0
0,
.00032
.00014
.00029
.00030
.00033
.00215
.00228
.00283
.01466
.02330
Run 3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.00150
.00017
.00009
.00035
.00132
.00327
.00356
.00414
.01227
.02667
Run 1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.00067
.00000
.00000
.00000
.00006
.00038
.00204
.00247
.00794
.01356
Mass collected per stage (grams)
Outlet B Outlet C
Run 2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.00065
.00025
.00047
.00056
.00093
.00268
.00335
.00456
.01453
.02798
Run 3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.00155
.00031
.00047
.00040
.00121
.00554
.00488
.00599
.08875
.10910
Run 1
0.00027
0.00017
0.00018
0.00017
0.00011
0.00053
0.00176
0.00264
0.01000
0.01583
Run 2
0.00021
0.00005
0.00022
0.00007
0.00000
0.00037
0.00108
0.00173
0.00675
0.01048
Run 3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.00046
.00036
.00042
.00044
.00070
.00395
.00600
.00778
.01117
.03128
Run 1
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00192
0.00169
0.00264
0.00737
0.01362
Outlet D
Run 2
0.00069
0.00020
0.00027
0.00031
0.00051
0.00191
0.00320
0.00433
0.01159
0.02301
Run 3
0.00048
0.00016
0.00030
0.00024
0.00045
0.00188
0.00334
0.00491
0.01272
0.02448
Stage 1 Includes the pre-impactor stage.
-------
c
o
o
CD
CO
0)
'•J3
JO
3
(3
Dpw (microns)
100
Figure 1-1. Composite curves of cumulative mass fraction as a
function of particle size.
Probability-Log plot.
Monsanto, Soda Springs, Idaho.
JES/055
1-12
-------
The second presentation method is to plot differential mass
concentration versus the particle geometric mean diameter as shown in
Figure 1-2. The differential mass concentration is the particulate
concentration in the flue gas normalized per unit of particle size. This
curve is used to estimate the particulate concentration in the flue gas for
a specific particle diameter. The majority of particulate matter at both
the inlet and outlet locations is distributed in the less than 1 micron
range with evidence of bimodal distributions. The figure also provides an
indication of venturi scrubber removal efficiency by particle size fraction.
The data used to prepare these curves are presented in Tables 1-6 and 1-7.
Radionuclide activity was measured for the samples collected from the
inlet and outlet C. For each test run, stages 2 through 5 were combined
into one sample for analysis. Stages 1, 6, 7, 8 and the backup filter were
each analyzed individually. The results are summaries as pico Curies per
sample in Table 1-8.
In order to present an overall summary of the radionuclide data, the
cumulative activity fraction was plotted against the interval endpoint
(Dp50) determined from the PSD run. The cumulative activity fraction is
plotted in Figure 1-3 for polonium-210 and in Figure 1-4 for lead-210. The
data plotted in these figures is summarized in Table 1-9. Figures 1-3
and 1-4 represent a composite of the data consolidated from individual PSD
test runs.
These data indicate that the radioactivity is associated with small
particles. Particles less than 1 micron contained 90 percent of the
radioactivity for both Po-210 and Pb-210. Particles less than 0.5 micron
contained 60 to 70 percent of the radioactivity.
1.3 TEST REPORT ORGANIZATION
This emission test report is presented in tfrre« volumes. Information
presented in this document (Volume I) is organized as follows: Section 2.0
contains a brief description of the calcining process and the air pollution
control systems at the plant; Section 3.0 presents a summary and discussion
of the results; Section 4.0 describes the specific sampling locations and
JES/055 1-13
-------
O 10 "'-
(/)
T3
Q)
Q_
Q 10 ~2-
Q)
O
10 "3-
10
i 1—i—i—r
0.01
0.1 1 10
Aerodynamic Particle Diameter (um)
Figure 1-2. Composite curves of differential mass
concentration as a function of particle size.
Calciner offgases.
Monsanto, Soda Springs, Idaho.
JES/055
1-14
-------
TABLE 1-6. CONSOLIDATED CUMULATIVE MASS FRACTION RESULTS,
MONSANTO, SODA SPRINGS, IDAHO (August 1988)
Interval3
Endpoint
(microns)
0.5
1
2.5
5
10
Mass fraction less than 1
Inlet
55
83
96
98
98.9
\.'°)
Outlet
64
84
94
96.5
97.5
'Dp
50
the theoretical stage endpoint (interval endpoint) is the aero-
dynamic diameter of the smallest particles collected on a stage
with an efficiency of 50 percent.
TABLE 1-7. CONSOLIDATED DIFFERENTIAL MASS CONCENTRATION RESULTS,
MONSANTO, SODA SPRINGS, IDAHO (August 1988)
Geometric
Midpoint
(microns)
0.5
1
2.5
5
10
Interval
Range
(microns)
0.4
0.6
1.7
3.0
6.5
- 0.6
- 1.7
- 3.0
- 6.5
- 50
Differential Mass Concentration
(gr/dscf/interval)
Inlet Outlet
0.200
0.100
0.015
0.006
0.004
0.005
0.003
0.0006
0.0003
0.0002
JES/055
1-15
-------
m
oo
o
en
01
TABLE 1-8. SUMMARY OF PSD-RADIONUCLIDE RESULTS AT THE INLET AND OUTLET C, MONSANTO, SODA SPRINGS, IDAHO (August 1988)
Run 1
Radioactivity (pico Curies per sample)
Run 2
aThe data should be considered significant to three figures.
ND = Not detected. Value in brackets is the minimum detection limit.
minimum detection limit was essentially zero.
Run 3
Stage
Inlet
1
2-5
6
7
8
Back-up
Total
Outlet C
1
2-5
6
7
8
Back-up
Total
Po-210
1.2089E+01
1.0907E+02
1.4688E+02
4.1752E+02
8.2206E+02
7.8091E+02
2.2885E+03
3.4873E+00
2.6530E+01
2.6630E+01
7.0923E+01
5.2845E+01
5.6920E+02
7.4962E+02
Pb-210
NDb C1.2284E+OOJ
2.3146E+01
5.4986E+01
1.5248E+02
2.9061E+02
2.2684E+02
7.4929E+02
ND I9.4110E-01]
O.OOOOE+00
9.6510E+00
1.8104E+01
1.7854E+02
1.0075E+02
3.0799E+02
Po-210
1.7832E+01
1.1942E+02
2.3206E+02
4.1396E+02
8.4784E+02
8.8097E+02
2.5121E+03
3.8732E+00
1.7920E+01
2.6446E+01
5.3508E+01
1.1692E+02
3.9526E+02
6.1393E+02
Pb-210
4.6583E+00
4.1654E+01
8.2314E+01
2.4539E+00
3.1207E+02
2.8405E+02
7.2720E+02
ND
4.4086E+00
7.5207E+00
1.7671E+01
3.0524E+01
7.6876E+01
1.3700E+02
Po-210
8.8912E+00
4.5394E+01
4.2332E+01
1.4775E+02
2.9479E+02
8.0629E+02
1.3454E+03
1.1181E+01
8.1826E+01
1.H56E+02
2.0381E+02
4.0921E+02
6.0003E+02
1.4206E+03
Pb-210
ND
1.0126E+01
9.1078E+00
3.3080E+01
6.4943E+01
1.2710E+02
2.4436E+02
2.9967E+00
1.5440E+01
3.9859E+01
7.9302E+01
1.2205E+02
1.6909E+02
4.2874E+02
Uhen no value is presented in brackets, the
-------
o
u
ta
o
CN
I
*>»
JO
3
(J
Dp*, (microns)
Figure 1-3. Composite curves of cumulative Polonium-210 activity
fraction as a function of particle size.
Probability-Log plot.
Monsanto, Soda Springs, Idaho.
JES/055
1-17
-------
o
u
CO
o
CN
O
10
DpM (microns)
100
Figure 1-4. Composite curves of cumulative Lead-210 activity
fraction as a function of particle size.
Probability-Log plot.
Monsanto, Soda Springs, Idaho.
JES/055
1-18
-------
TABLE 1-9. CONSOLIDATED3 CUMULATIVE ACTIVITY FRACTION RESULTS,
MONSANTO, SODA SPRINGS, IDAHO (August 1988)
Interval
Endpoint
(microns)
0.5
1
2.5
5
10
Activity Fraction
Po-210
Inlet Outlet C
60 70
90 90
96 96
98.5 98.5
99.4 99.4
Less than (%)
Pb-210
Inlet Outlet C
60 60
90 90
97 98.0
99.3 99.0
99.85 99.5
Developed from all valid particle size samples collected and analyzed for
Po-210 and Pb-210, then, plotted in Figures 1-3 and 1-4.
Selected particle sizes.
JES/055
1-19
-------
the sampling and analysis procedures that were used; and Section 5.0
describes the specific quality assurance and quality control measures that
were taken to ensure useful and valid data.
The supporting data for the results presented in this volume are
included as appendices. The—appendices are presented in two A^ktmes.
Volume II contains sampling and analytical protocols, all field and lab
data sheets, data reduction summaries, a*4 calibration data. -Ye^-ume—H4—
\ j
CH^^Q. rr^j^
•eeftt-a-vns confidentialjkprocess data gathered during the emission testing
program.
JES/055 1-20
-------
2.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROCESS AND AIR POLLUTION CONTROL SYSTEMS
2.1 PROCESS DESCRIPTION
The Monsanto, Soda Springs, Idaho, plant produces elemental phosphorus
from phosphate ore. Phosphate rock is continuously fed to a large rotary
kiln calciner where the rock is heated for the purpose of removing organic
material and forming heat hardened nodules. The phosphate rock nodules
produced by the calcining process are subsequently cooled, crushed, and
blended with coke and silica and fed into an electric reducing furnace.
High temperature reactions in the reducing furnace drive off gaseous
phosphorus and carbon monoxide and leave molten residues of slag and
ferrophosphorus. The offgases from the reducing furnace pass through
electrostatic precipitators for dust removal before entering a condenser,
where the phosphorus is condensed and collected. The carbon monoxide
generated from the phosphorus reduction process is vented from the reducing
furnace to the rotary kiln where it is used as fuel.
The emission test program described in this document focused on the
offgases from the calcining process. Figure 2-1 contains a simple process
flow schematic showing feed and offgas streams around the rotary kiln and
related air pollution control equipment.
2.2 AIR POLLUTION CONTROL EQUIPMENT (CALCINING OPERATION)
The offgases from the kiln are vented to a settling chamber and a spray
tower and then split into four parallel streams each containing a venturi
scrubber, dual cyclone demisters and an induction (ID) fan. After passing
through their respective ID fans, the exhaust gases are discharged to the
atmosphere through four similar 27 m (90 ft) tall stacks.
JES/055 2-1
-------
Sampling Locations
c_
m
o
en
en
[Dj
Outlet Stack *1
Outlet Stack * 2
Outlet Stack f 3
Outlet Stack *4
Scrubber Inlet
Process Feed
Ore Feed
Fuel
r
I
I
I
Kiln
Product
to Reducing
Furnace
Recycle _
Fines
Offgases
Dual
Venturi Cyclone
Scrubbers Demisters
CM
r-
Figure 2-1. Schematic of Monsanto Rotary Kiln and Pollution Control System
-------
2.3 PROCESS AND POLLUTION CONTROL DATA
The radionuclide emission test program at Monsanto was performed while
process and pollution control systems were operated at "normal" operating
conditions. Normal operational ranges for each parameter were established
by EPA's Industrial Studies Branch (ISB) and Monsanto personnel prior to
testing based on historical plant data and full production capacity. Key
parameters were monitored throughout the testing period by both Monsanto's
automated data acquisition system and by manual readings. During testing
periods, Radian personnel periodically monitored these data from the plant's
control room to ensure the sample collection activities occurred at the
correct process/control device conditions. The key process parameters that
were monitored are reported in Volume II - Appendix N because they are
considered confidential by Monsanto. The following is a listing of the
process parameters recorded:
Kiln speed
Bed depth
Ore feed rate
Primary air flow
Carbon monoxide feed rate
Coal feed rate
Kiln offgas temperature
Dust chamber gas temperature
Spray tower pH
Venturi P (per scrubber train)
Venturi fan amperage (per scrubber train)
Venturi liquid flow rate (per scrubber train)
JES/055 2-3
-------
3.0 SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
The results of the August 1988 test program conducted at the Monsanto
facility are presented in this section. The particulate matter data
presented are adjusted for blanks. However, radionuclide data presented are
not blank corrected. Field blanks were collected on both inlet and outlet
MM 111 trains and the results are presented and discussed in Section 5.0 of
this document. For reference purposes, the radionuclide activities in the
field blank collected at the inlet location were less than 1 percent of the
average activities of the samples collected at that location (0.7% for
Po-210, 0.1% for Pb-210). At the outlet, the field blank activities for
Po-210 and Pb-210 were approximately 3.4 percent and 2.7 percent,
respectively, of the average outlet sample activities.
Dual units (metric and English) are presented in each table where
applicable. The supporting data for the results are included in the
appendices (Volume II) of this report.
3.1 PARTICULATE MATTER AND RADIONUCLIDE RESULTS
Particulate matter and associated radionuclide emissions were collected
simultaneously at each of the inlet/outlet offgas sampling locations using
a modification of EPA Method 111. An overview of results from the four
inlet/outlet test runs is presented in Table 3-1. Specific sampling
measurements from each individual test run are presented in Tables 3-2
through 3-5 for runs 1 through 4, respectively. As mentioned in Section 1.0
of this document, slight deviations from the planned test matrix were made
to compensate for sampling difficulties encountered during the first and
second day of testing. Sampling difficulties during the first day of
testing included unacceptable leak rates at the inlet location and non-
isokinetic sampling at two of the five sampling locations. The specific
problem on the second test day was nonisokinetic sampling at one of the four
outlet locations (outlet D). To compensate for these difficulties, a fourth
JES/055 3-1
-------
TABLE 3-1. SUMMARY OF PARTICIPATE MATTER AND RAOIONUCLIDE EMISSION RESULTS,
CALCINER OFFGASES. MONSANTO, SODA SPRINGS, IDAHO (August 1988)
o
en
tn
Particulate
Run
Location Number
Inlet 1
2
3
4
Average
Runs 2-4
Outlet8 1
2b
3
4
Average
Runs 2-4
Concentration
gr/dscf ng/dscn
0.2106
0.2530
0.2556
0.2714
0.2600
0.01053
0.01249
0.01129
0.01206C
0.01195
482
579
585
621
595
24.1
28.6
25.8
27. 6C
27.3
Matter
Poloniun-210
Mass Rate
Ib/hr
213
228
224
237
230
7.6
11.5
10.1
10. 9C
10.8
Concentration
kg/hr pCi/dscf
96.5
103
102
107
104
3.45
5.20
4.58
4.93C
4.90
NA
693
594
678
655
NA
35.4
21.3
24.4
27.0
pCi/dsca
NA
24484
20977
23959
23140
NA
1250
751
862
954
Emission
Rate
uCi/hr
NA
4370
3644
4142
4052
NA
227
133
155
172
Lead-210
Concentration
pCi/dscf
NA
256
159
204
207
NA
7.7
5.3
6.1
6.4
pCi/dscm
NA
9051
5629
7212
7297
NA
273
187
216
225
Emission
Rate
uCi/hr
NA
1615
978
1247
1280
NA
49.6
33.1
39.0
40.6
Outlet concentration values for each run are the averages of the four outlet locations, and the mass rate values are the
sum of the four outlet locations.
Outlet D values Mere not used due to nonisokinetic sampling, run 5 outlet D values were used to calculate average results
for run 2.
C0utlet D PM results for run 4 not included in average because of suspected contamination.
NA = Not analyzed.
-------
C-i
m
GO
o
en
en
TABLE 3-2. SUMMARY OF RUN 1 METHOD 111 RESULTS, MONSANTO, SODA SPRINGS, IDAHO (August 1988)
to
i
u>
Sampling Parameters
Volume gas sampled (dscf)
Volume gas sampled (dscm)
Stack gas flourate (dscfm)
Stack gas flowrate (dscm)
Stack temperature (F)
Stack temperature (C)
Percent Moisture (X vol)
Percent Isokinetic (X)
Particulate Emission Results
Particulate concentration (gr/dscf)
Particulate concentration (mg/dscm)
Particulate rate (Ibs/hr)
Particulate rate (kg/hr)
Inlet
29.31
0.8300
31299
886.4
160.8
71.55
33.53
78.6
0.2106
481.8
56.49
25.62
Outlet
A
34.37
0.9730
27156
769.1
157.8
69.91
38.09
104.5
0.01064
24.35
2.477
1.123
Outlet
B
33.92
0.9610
26639
754.4
158.5
70.28
38.26
105.1
0.009050
20.72
2.066
0.9373
Outlet
C
34.51
0.9770
27126
768.2
156.8
69.31
38.66
105.0
0.006930
15.86
1.611
0.7309
Outlet
D
35.64
1.009
26258
743.6
159.3
70.69
39.41
112.0
0.006490
14.86
1.461
0.6625
Average
Outlet
A-D
.
-
26795
758.8
158.1
70.05
38.61
-
0.008278
18.95
1.904
0.8635
Radionuclide Emission Results
Polonium-210
(pCi/dscf)
(pCi/dscm)
(uCi/hr)
(pCi/g paniculate)
Lead-210
(pCi/dscf)
(pCi/dscm)
(uCi/hr)
(pCi/g paniculate)
Not Analyzed ]
-------
TABLE 3-3. SUMMARY OF RUN 2 MODIFIED METHOD 111 RESULTS, MONSANTO, SODA SPRINGS, IDAHO (August 1988)
o
en
en
co
Sampling Parameters
Volume gas sampled (dscf)
Volume gas sampled (dscm)
Stack gas flow rate (dscfm)
Stack gas flow rate (dscmm)
Stack temperature (F)
Stack temperature (C)
Percent Moisture (X vol)
Percent Isokinetic (X)
Particulate Emission Results
Particulate concentration (gr/dscf)
Particulate concentration (mg/dscm)
Particulate rate (Ibs/hr)
Particulate rate (kg/hr)
Radionuclide Emission Results
Polonium-210
(pCi/dscf)
(pCi/dscm)
(uCi/hr)
(pCi/g particulate)
Lead-210
(pCi/dscf)
(pCi/dscm)
(uCi/hr)
(pCi/g particulate)
Inlet
32.57
0.9220
105051
2975
161.2
71.78
40.66
97.9
0.2530
578.78
227.76
103.31
693.3
24484
4370
42302
256.3
9051.1
1615.5
15638
Outlet
A
32.77
0.9280
27581
781.1
161.2
71.76
37.70
97.3
0.0102
23.38
2.416
1.096
22.19
783.6
36.72
33517
6.602
233.1
10.93
9972
Outlet
B
30.72
0.8700
26237
743.0
158.5
70.28
38.48
96.6
0.0127
29.08
2.858
1.296
44.53
1572.6
70.10
54077
8.88lJ
313.6^
13.98^
10785°
Outlet
C
32.23
0.9130
26113
739.5
155.9
68.84
38.38
101.9
0.0116
26.51
2.594
1.177
15.84
559.4
24.82
21101
4.754
167.9
7.448
6333
Outlet
D
Run 5
32.80
0.9290
27047
766.0
160.7
71.48
39.76
100.1
0.0155
35.42
3.589
1.628
59.00
2083
95.74
58822
10.64
375.7
17.26
10607
Average
Outlet
A-C, and
D Run 5
-
-
26744
757.4
159.1
70.59
38.58
-
0.0125
28.60
2.864
1.299
35.39
1250
56.85
41879
7.719
272.6
12.40
9424
&All radionuclide data significant to 3 places.
Lead-210 was not detected in the back half fraction.
-------
TABLE 3-4. SUMMARY OF RUN 3 MODIFIED METHOD 111 RESULTS, MONSANTO, SODA SPRINGS, IDAHO (August 1988)
m
co
o
en
en
CO
en
Sampling Parameters
Volume gas sampled (dscf)
Volume gas sampled (dscm)
Stack gas flow rate (dscfm)
Stack gas flow rate (dscmm)
Stack temperature (F)
Stack temperature (C)
Percent Moisture (X vol)
Percent Isokinetic (X)
Participate Emission Results
Paniculate concentration (gr/dscf)
Paniculate concentration (mg/dscm)
Particulate rate (Ibs/hr)
Particulate rate (kg/hr)
Radionuclide Emission Results8
Polonium-210
(pCi/dscf)
(pCi/dscm)
(uCi/hr)
(pCi/g particulate)
Lead-210
(pCi/dscf )
(pCi/dscm)
(uCi/hr)
(pCi/g particulate)
Inlet
31.17
0.8830
102240
2895
161.7
72.06
41.00
96.3
0.2556
584.9
224.0
101.6
594.0
20977
3644
35864
159.4^
5629 ?
977-8b
9624°
Outlet
A
29.15
0.8260
24864
704.1
158.0
70.00
38.61
96.0
0.01175
26.89
2.504
1.136
13.79
487.0
20.57
18110
4.249C
150. 1C
6.339C
5580°
Outlet
B
31.73
0.8990
26323
745.5
158.4
70.23
39.67
99.5
0.01342
30.71
3.028
1.373
22.87
807.6
36.12
26299
5. 731*
202-4d
9.051^
6590d
Outlet
C
31.56
0.8940
26776
758.3
157.1
69.49
39.18
97.3
0.01115
25.51
2.559
1.161
21.37
754.7
34.33
29583
5.188
183.2
8.335
7182
Outlet
D
33.11
0.9380
26417
748.1
159.8
71.02
39.77
103.5
0.00886
20.26
2.006
0.910
26.45
934.1
41.92
46104
6.0096
212. 2e
9.524e
10474e
Average
Outlet
A-D
-
-
26095
739.0
158.3
70.18
39.31
-
0.01130
25.84
2.524
1.145
21.12
745.8
33.24
30024
5.294
187.0
8.312
7457
aAll radionuclide data significant to 3 places.
Lead-210 was not detected in the back half fraction.
Inlet-Run 3 back hald sample was 0.297 pCi/dscf.
GLead-210 was not detected in the back half fraction.
Outlet A-Run 3 back halfsample was 0.979 pCi/dscf.
Lead-210 was not detected in the back half fraction.
Outlet B-Run 3 back half sample was 0.0493 pCi/dscf.
eLead-210 was not detected in the back half fraction. The minimum detection limit for the
Outlet D-Run 3 back half sample was 0.0060 pCi/dscf.
The minimum detection limit for the
The minimum detection limit for the
The minimum detection limit for the
-------
TABLE 3-5. SUMMARY OF RUN 4 MODIFIED METHOD 111 RESULTS, MONSANTO, SODA SPRINGS, IDAHO (August 1988)
o
in
en
co
i
cr>
Sampling Parameters
Volume gas sampled (dscf)
Volume gas sampled (dscn)
Stack gas flow rate (dscfm)
Stack gas flow rate (dscnm)
Stack temperature (F)
Stack temperature (C)
Percent Moisture (X vol)
Percent Isokinetic (X)
Participate Emission Results
Particulate concentration (gr/dscf)
Particulate concentration (mg/dscm)
Particulate rate (Ibs/hr)
Particulate rate (kg/hr)
Radionuclide Emission Results8
Polonium- 210
(pCi/dscf)
(pCi/dscm)
(uCi/hr)
(pCi/g paniculate)
Lead-210
(pCi/dscf)
(pCi/dscm)
(uCi/hr)
(pCi/g paniculate)
Inlet
31.60
0.8950
101759
2882
161.1
71.74
42.62
98.1
0.2714
621.1
236.7
107.4
678.4
23959
4142
38578
204. 2C'
7212C'
1247°'
11613°'
Outlet
A
30.02
0.8500
25883
733.0
161.1
71.71
37.93
95.0
0.01383
31.64
3.068
1.392
22.33
788.6
34.68
24923
d 5-580
d 197'1
° 8.666
d 6228
Outlet
B
31.32
0.8870
26466
749.5
158.3
70.18
39.12
97.7
0.01153
26.38
2.616
1.186
27.59
974.3
43.81
36934
7.436
262.6
11.81
9954
Outlet
C
31.69
0.8980
26647
754.7
157.0
69.44
38.91
98.2
0.01081
24.73
2.469
1.120
23.84
841.9
38.12
34044
4.949
174.8
7.913
7067
Outlet
D
33.19
0.9400
27106
767.6
159.6
70.88
39.27
101.1
0.03953
90.44
9.184
4.166
23.87
843.0
38.82
9321
6.528C'
230.5C<
10.62^'
2549 '
Average
Outlet
A-D
-
-
26526
751.2
159.0
70.55
38.81
-
0.012068
27.58a
2.7188
1.2338
24.41
861.9
38.86
319678
e 6.123
e 216.2
e 9-75i
c 7750*
All radionuclide data significant to 3 places.
Average values do not include Outlet D results because of suspected PM contamination. If Outlet D
results are included, the average PM concentration is 0.01893 gr/dscf (43.30 mg/dscm), average mass
rate is 4.334 Ib/hr (1.966 Ib/hr) per stack, average Po-210 activity to PM ratio is 26305 and average
Pb-210 activity to PM ratio is 6450.
CLead-210 was not detected in the back half fraction.
The minimum detection limit for the Inlet-Run 4 back half sample was 0.123 pCi/dscf.
eThe minimum detection limit for the Outlet D-Run 4 back half sample uas 0.0064 pCi/dscf.
-------
test run was performed at each of the inlet and outlet locations to replace
run 1. A fifth test run at outlet D was performed to replace run 2. The
outlet D run 5 test results are included in Table 3-3.
Data from all test runs are presented in the summary tables of this
report, although only those runs meeting the specified quality assurance
criteria were used in calculating the average results reported.
3.1.1 Inlet
Particulate matter concentrations at the inlet to the venturi scrubber
averaged 595 mg/dscm (0.26 gr/dscf) for the three valid test runs. As
described in Section 2.0 of this document, the venturi scrubber inlet
location is actually the midpoint of the pollution control system and,
therefore, these values do not represent uncontrolled emissions.
Po-210 concentrations in flue gases at the inlet location averaged
23,100 pCi/dscm (655 pCi/dscf) for the three test runs. On an activity per
gram of particulate basis, values for the three inlet runs averaged
38,900 pCi/g PM.
Pb-210 concentrations in flue gases at the inlet location averaged
7,300 pCi/dscm (207 pCi/dscf)- On an activity per gram of particulate
basis, values for the three inlet runs averaged 12,300 pCi/g PM.
3.1.2 Outlet
As shown in Table 3-1, particulate matter concentration at the outlet
averaged 27.3 mg/dscm (0.012 gr/dscf). This average does not include the
results for the outlet D stack sample for run 4. The results for this
sample were excessively high and are suspected to be an outlier. The
emissions measured at outlet D were approximately three times higher than
those of the other stacks (see Table 3-5 for run 4). This affected the
overall outlet average for run 4 which was approximately 50 percent higher
than the other valid runs.
Additional evidence for this assumption is supported by examination of
the raw analytical weights. For this particular test run, the probe rinse
for outlet D contributed approximately 85 percent of the total particle mass
JES/055 3-7
-------
collected compared to the 50 percent contribution which was the average from
all other runs at the outlet locations. Further, examination of the
radionuclide concentration (pCi/g PM) of the collected particulate for run 4
is approximately 3.5 times lower at outlet D than at the other outlet
locations for the same test period. These evidences strongly suggest that
the probe rinse particulate values were biased high, either by contamination
during recovery procedures, contamination during acetone dry down
activities, or possibly by accidental bumping of the nozzle against the
interior stack wall during sampling. The remainder of the results were
fairly evenly distributed among the stacks and were relatively constant
across the runs.
Po-210 concentrations in flue gases at the outlet location averaged
954 pCi/dscm (27.0 pCi/dscf) for the three test runs. On an activity per
gram of particulate basis, the average Po-210 activity for the three outlet
runs was 34,600 pCi/g PM.
Pb-210 concentrations in flue gases at the outlet location averaged
225 pCi/dscm (6.38 pCi/dscf). On an activity per gram of particulate basis,
Pb-210 activity averaged 8,210 pCi/g PM.
3.1.3 Venturi Scrubber Efficiencies - Method 111
Table 3-6 summarizes the incremental efficiencies of the venturi
scrubber control systems for removal of particulate, Po-210, and Pb-210.
Efficiencies are reported as incremental since the venturi scrubber system
is located at the midpoint in the series of air pollution control equipment.
Prior to entering the venturi scrubber system, emissions have already been
reduced by both the settling chamber and the spray tower. Therefore,
"incremental" refers to the additional removal afforded by the venturi
system. As apparent from the individual values presented in the table, the
average particulate matter reduction was approximately 94 percent, while the
reduction for Po-210 and Pb-210 averaged 96 and 97 percent, respectively.
JES/055 3-8
-------
TABLE 3-6. VENTURI SCRUBBER REMOVAL EFFICIENCY FOR PM, Po-210, AND
Pb-210, MONSANTO, SODA SPRINGS, IDAHO (August 1988)
Run
No. Parameter
2 PM (gr/dscf)
Po-210 (pCi/dscf)
Pb-210 (pCi/dscf)
3 PM (gr/dscf)
Po-210 (pC1/dscf)
Pb-210 (pCi/dscf)
4 PM (gr/dscf)
Po-210 (pC1/dscf)
Pb-210 (pCi/dscf)
Emission
Inlet
0.2530
693.3
256.3
0.2556
594.0
159.4
0.2714
653.8
204.1
Concentration
Outlet3
0.01249
26.21
6.067
0.01129
21.26
5.290
0.01906
24.41
6.103
Removal
Efficiency
(percent)
94.97
96.15
97.60
95.49
96.35
96.60
92.68
96.11
96.87
aAverage outlet concentration of four stacks.
bRemoval efficiency calculated based on mass rates at the venturi
inlet and sum of mass rates at the four venturi outlet stacks.
JES/055
3-9
-------
3.1.4 Front/Back Half Distribution of Emissions in MM 111 Trains
Table 3-7 presents a summary of the distribution of emissions as
collected in the MM 111 sampling trains during the Monsanto test program.
As seen in the table, approximately 93 percent of the Po-210 collected was
present in the front half of the train. This percentage was consistent for
samples collected at both inlet and outlet locations. The distribution for
Pb-210 is similar in that on average about 99 percent is collected in the
front half.
Because nitric acid was used in the impingers, the back half
particulate weights could not be evaluated and front/back half distributions
could not be determined. However, a distribution of PM between the front
half components was evaluated. As seen in the footnotes to Table 3-5, this
distribution varied by the sampling location. On average, 80 percent of the
PM collected at the inlet was found on the filter, while the remaining
20 percent was collected in the probe and nozzle. At the outlet, the
average distribution was approximately 50 percent on the filter and
50 percent in the probe and nozzle.
3.2 PARTICLE AND RADIONUCLIDE SIZE DISTRIBUTION DATA
The PSD samples were analyzed for both particulate mass and Po-210/
Pb-210 radioactivity. For the particulate mass analyses, each of the nine
individual stages were analyzed separately. For the radionuclide analyses,
stages 2-5 were combined and stages 1, 6, 7, 8, and 9 were analyzed
individually. The particulate and radionuclide results are discussed below.
3.2.1 Particle Size Distribution Data
The mass collected on each stage was presented previously in Tables 1-4
and 1-5. These data were presented two ways: first as a plot of cumulative
mass fraction versus the particle interval endpoint (Dp^g) and second as a
plot of differential mass concentration versus the geometric mean particle
diameter. The individual data points were plotted and curves were fitted to
the data to represent the characteristics of the particulate at each
JES/055 3-10
-------
TABLE 3-7. SUMMARY OF FRONT/BACK HALF DISTRIBUTION OF EMISSIONS,
MM 111 SAMPLING TRAINS, MONSANTO, SODA SPRINGS, IDAHO
(August 1988)
Location
Inlet
Outlet
Parameter
Parti cul ate
Po-210
Pb-210
Particulate
Po-210
Pb-210
Front Half
100a
93.4
99.6
100C
92.5
98.9
Back Half
NAb
6.6
0.4
NA
7.5
1.1
aOn average, 80 percent of the particulate matter collected at the inlet was
found on the filter, while the remaining 20 percent was collected in the
probe and nozzle.
bNA =• Not applicable. The addition of 0.1 N HN03 in the impingers prevented
drying and weighing of the impinger catch.
C0n average, 50 percent of the particulate matter collected at the outlet was
found on the filter, and 50 percent was collected in the probe and nozzle.
JES/055 3-11
-------
sampling location. The data were evaluated for the following particle size
intervals: 0.5, 1, 2.5, 5, and 10 microns. The representative curves were
presented previously in Figures 1-1 and 1-2.
For the cumulative mass fraction results, the individual inlet data
are shown in Figure 3-1 and outlet data are shown in Figure 3-2. The inlet
test runs agreed well. The outlet data show that particle characteristics
were similar at all four outlet locations and also formed a linear curve.
The data are presented in tabular form in Tables 3-8 through 3-10.
For the differential mass concentrations, the individual inlet data
pairs are plotted in Figure 3-3 and the outlet pairs are plotted in
Figure 3-4. Both the inlet and outlet data formed a linear curve and agreed
well. The data are presented in tabular form in Tables 3-11 through 3-13.
3.2.2 Radionuclide Distribution Data
The radioactivity collected on each stage was presented previously in
Table 1-8. In order to evaluate the radionuclide data, the cumulative
activity fraction was plotted against the interval endpoint (Dpc0)
determined from the PSD data.
The polonium-210 and lead-210 data were plotted separately. The inlet
and outlet polonium-210 cumulative activities are plotted in Figures 3-5
and 3-6, respectively. The data showed good agreement between runs and
formed a linear curve.
The inlet and outlet lead-210 cumulative activities are plotted in
Figures 3-7 and 3-8, respectively. These data also showed good agreement
between runs and formed a linear curve. The inlet and outlet data are
presented in tabular form in Table 3-14.
3.3 PROCESS SAMPLES
Table 3-15 presents the measured concentrations of Po-210 and Pb-210 in
the feedstock samples. The average concentrations of these radionuclides in
the feedstock samples were 126 and 127 pCi/g, respectively. The concen-
trations varied between runs by 10 percent for Po-210 and 12 percent for
Pb-210, indicating a constant level of radioactivity in the feedstock.
JES/055 3-12
-------
o
I
•4-rf
»
I
U
0.1
1.0
10
100
DpBO(microns)
Figure 3-1. Cumulative mass fraction as a function of particle size for
venturi inlet particulate matter. Probability-Log plot.
Monsanto, Soda Springs, Idaho.
JES/055
3-13
-------
c
o
u
a
to
-------
TABLE 3-8. INLET DATA FOR CUMULATIVE MASS FRACTION VS. PARTICLE SIZE,
MONSANTO, SODA SPRINGS, IDAHO (August 1988)
Stage
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
°P50a
9.48
6.19
4.04
2.85
1.69
0.96
0.59
0.37
Run 1
Mass Fraction
Less Than
0.99
0.98
0.97
0.96
0.93
0.81
0.61
0.26
°PSOJ
9.77
6.38
4.16
2.94
1.74
0.99
0.61
0.38
Run 2
Mass Fraction
Less Than
1.00
0.99
0.98
0.97
0.93
0.77
0.55
0.25
°P5o°
10.20
6.66
4.35
3.07
1.82
1.03
0.63
0.40
Run 3
Mass Fraction
Less Than
0.98
0.98
0.97
0.96
0.96
0.92
0.80
0.59
aDpcn = The theoretical stage endpoint (interval endpoint) is the
aerodynamic diameter of the smallest particles that are collected
on a stage with an efficiency of 50 percent.
bThe cumulative mass fraction equals the mass fraction of particulate
collected less than a given interval endpoint.
JES/055 3-15
-------
m
to
\ TABLE 3-9.
O
in
en
OUTLET A AND OUTLET B DATA FOR CUMULATIVE MASS
FRACTION VS.
PARTICLE
SIZE, MONSANTO, SODA SPRINGS, IDAHO (August 1988)
Outlet A - Run 1
Stage DPsn
1 10.61
2 6.93
3 4.52
4 3.19
5 1.89
6 1.07
7 0.66
10
1
i— • 8 0.41
b
Mass Fraction
Less Than
0.98
0.98
0.98
0.98
0.96
0.87
0.76
0.64
Outlet
A - Run 2
b
Mass Fraction
Dp Less Than
8.98
5.86
3.83
2.70
1.60
0.91
0.56
0.35
0.99
0.98
0.97
0.95
0.94
0.85
0.75
0.63
Outlet
A - Run 3
b
Mass Fraction
• ~.
Dp Less Than
10.32
6.74
4.40
3.11
1.84
1.04
0.64
0.40
0.94
0.94
0.93
0.92
0.87
0.75
0.62
0.46
Outlet
B - Run 1
Mass Fraction
Dp, Less Than
10.74
7.01
4.57
3.23
1.91
1.08
0.66
0.41
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.92
0.77
0.59
Outlet
B - Run 2
Mass Fraction
Dp Less Than
10.69
6.98
4.56
3.22
1.90
1.08
0.66
0.42
0.98
0.97
0.95
0.93
0.90
0.80
0.68
0.52
Outlet
B - Run 3
b
Mass Fraction
Dp Less Than
10.47
6.84
4.46
3.15
1.87
1.06
0.65
0.41
0.99
0.98
0.98
0.97
0.96
0.91
0.87
0.81
Dp, - The theoretical stage endpolnt (interval endpoint) is the aerodynamic diameter of the smallest particles that are collected on a
stage with an efficiency of 50 percent.
The cumulative mass fraction equals the mass fraction of partlculate collected less than a given interval endpoint.
-------
c_
m
co
*J> TABLE 3-10. OUTLET C AND OUTLET D DATA FOR CUMULATIVE MASS FRACTION VS.
in
Outlet C - Run 1
Mass Fraction
Stage ^P«jO Less Than
1 10.60 0.98
2 6.92 0.97
3 4.52 0.96
4 3.19 0.95
5 1.89 0.94
6 1.07 0.91
Y* 7 0.65 0.80
^J 8 0.41 0.63
Outlet
C - Run 2
b
Mass Fraction
Dp Less Than
10.43
6.81
4.44
3.14
1.86
1.05
0.65
0.41
0.98
0.98
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.91
0.81
0.64
Outlet C - Run 3
Mass Fraction
Dp Less Than
10.35 0.99
6.76 0.97
4.41 0.96
3.12 0.95
1.84 0.92
1.05 0.80
0.64 0.61
0.40 0.36
PARTICLE
Outlet
SIZE, MONSANTO, SODA SPRINGS, IDAHO (August 1988)
D - Run 1
b
Mass Fraction
Dp Less Than
10.35
6.76
4.41
3.12
1.84
1.05
0.64
0.40
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.86
0.73
0.54
Outlet
D - Run 2
t
Mass Fraction
Dp Less Than
10.00
6.53
4.26
3.01
1.78
1.01
0.62
0.39
0.97
0.96
0.95
0.94
0.91
0.83
0.69
0.50
Outlet D - Run 3
Mass Fraction
Dp Less Than
10.48 0.98
6.84 0.97
4.46 0.96
3.15 0.95
1.87 0.93
1.06 0.86
0.65 0.72
0.41 0.52
"Dp - The theoretical stage endpoint (interval endpoint) is the aerodynamic diameter of the smallest particles that are collected on a
stage with an efficiency of 50 percent.
The emulative mass fraction equals the mass fraction of partlculate collected less than a given interval endpoint.
-------
0 10
(/)
TJ
Q 10
O)
O
~o 10 ~3-
10
0.01
Inlet
a a a a a Run 1
A iA a A Run 2
ooooo Run 3
0.1 1 10
Aerodynamic Particle Diameter (um)
Figure 3-3. Differential mass concentration as a function of
particle size for venturi inlet particulate matter.
Calciner offgases.
Monsanto, Soda Springs, Idaho.
JES/055
3-18
-------
i*'
•a 10-*-
Outlet A
oo.oo Run 1
«..•• Run 2
••••• Run 3
Aerodynamic Particle Diameter (um)
u 10"
H
V
a io~
1,.-
Outlet 8
oooo Run I
.... Run 2
•f» Run 3
' .
01 I 10
Aerodynamic Particle Diameter (um)
Outlet C
• • • •• Run 2
• • • * • Run 3
&»-
i 111 in 1—i—i i 111ii 1—i * i 11 «i—
0.1 i 10
Aerodynamic Particle Diameter (um)
Outlet 0
• a a•• Run 1
Run 2
i • « • • Run 3
O.I 1 10
Aerodynamic Particle Diameter (um)
Figure 3-4. Differential mass concentration as a function
of particle size for controlled particulate matter.
Calciner offgases.
Monsanto, Soda Springs, Idaho.
JES/055
3-19
-------
TABLE 3-11. INLET DATA FOR DIFFERENTIAL CONCENTRATION VS. PARTICLE SIZE,
MONSANTO, SODA SPRINGS, IDAHO (August 1988)
Run 1 Run
Geometric Differential Geometric Di
Stage Midpoint3 Massb Midpoint3
1 21.7 0.0016 22.1
2 7.67 0.0060 7.90
3 5.00 0.0111 5.15
4 3.39 0.0079 3.50
5 2.20 0.0180 2.26
6 1.27 0.0675 1.31
7 0.75 0.1267 0.77
8 0.47 0.2389 0.48
Back-up 0.04 0.0194 0.04
3Geometric midpoint is defined as:
[(Dp5o) * (°5o) 11//2
Differential mass concentration is defined
mass on stage "n"
2
fferential
Massb
0.0013
0.0063
0.0088
0.0151
0.0343
0.1286
0.1995
0.2971
0.0259
as:
A
Geometric
Midpoint3
22.6
8.24
5.38
3.65
2.36
1.37
0.80
0.50
0.04
M
Run 3
Differential
Massb
0.0030
0.0011
0.0011
0.0068
0.0034
0.0125
0.0558
0.1004
0.0294
log (Dp50)n+1 - log (Dp5Q)n A(log Dp50)
JES/055 3-20
-------
CO
TABLE 3-12. OUTLET A AND OUTLET B DATA FOR DIFFERENTIAL CONCENTRATION VS. PARTICLE SIZE, MONSANTO, SODA SPRINGS, IDAHO (August 1988)
cn
en
Outlet
Geometric
Stage Midpoint
1 23.0
2 8.57
3 5.60
4 3.80
5 2.46
6 1.42
**> 7 0.84
ro
"-* 8 0 . 52
Back-up 0 . 05
Geometric midpoint
UDp5
b
Differential mass
A - Run 1
Differential
Mass1
0.0002
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0004
0.0023
0.0030
0.0035
0.0020
is defined as
0>n+l * (D50>n
concentrat ion
mass on stage
Outlet
Geometric
Midpoint
21.2
7.26
4.74
3.22
2.08
1.21
0.71
0.44
0.04
,1/2
is defined
•n"
A - Run 2
Differential
Massb
0.0001
0.0002
0.0005
0.0006
0.0004
0.0026
0.0032
0.0042
0.0023
as :
AM
Outlet A - Run 3 Outlet B - Run 1 Outlet B - Run 2 Outlet B - Run 3
Geometric Differential Geometric Differential Geometric Differential Geometric Differential
Midpoint* Mass Midpoint* Mass Midpoint* Mass Midpoint" Mass
22.7 0.0004 23.2 0.0004 23.1 0.0003 22.9 0.0005
8.34 0.0002 8.68 0.0000 8.64 0.0004 8.46 0.0003
5.45 0.0001 5.66 0.0000 5.66 0.0007 5.53 0.0005
3.70 0.0005 3.84 0.0000 3.83 0.0011 3.75 0.0005
2.39 0.0012 2.48 0.0001 2.48 0.0012 2.42 0.0011
1.39 0.0027 1.44 0.0007 1.43 0.0032 1.40 0.0047
0.82 0.0033 0.85 0.0040 0.85 0.0045 0.83 0.0047
0.51 0.0041 0.52 0.0052 0.52 0.0066 0.51 0.0062
0.04 0.0013 0.05 0.0018 0.05 0.0022 0.05 0.0096
108
(Dp50>n AU°8 ^SO*
-------
m
TABLE 3-13. OUTLET C AND OUTLET D DATA FOR DIFFERENTIAL CONCENTRATION VS. PARTICLE SIZE, MONSANTO, SODA SPRINGS, IDAHO (August 1988)
cn
cn
Outlet
Geometric
Stage Midpoint*
1 23.1
2 8.56
3 5.59
4 3.79
5 2.45
6 1.42
V 7 0.84
ro
1X1 8 0.52
Back-up 0.05
Geometric midpoint
UDP.
Differential mass
log (
C - Run 1 Outlet C - Run 2 Outlet
Differential Geometric Differential Geometric
Mass1 Midpoint* Massb Midpoint*
0.0002 22.8 0.0001 22.8
0.0004 8.43 0.0001 8.37
0.0004 5.50 0.0003 5.46
0.0005 3.73 0.0001 3.71
0.0002 2.41 0.0000 2.40
0.0009 1.40 0.0004 1.39
0.0034 0.83 0.0014 0.82
0.0053 0.51 0.0024 0.51
0.0021 0.05 0.0010 0.05
is defined as:
) * (D „) ]1/2
0 n+1 50 n
concentration is defined as:
mass on stage "n* A M
Dp ) - log (Dp ) A (log Dp«fl)
C - Run 3 Outlet D - Run 1 Outlet D - Run 2 Outlet D - Run 3
Differential Geometric Differential Geometric Differential Geometric Differential
Mass*3 Midpoint* Mass1 Midpoint* Mass** Midpoint* Massb
0.0001 22.8 0.0000 22.4 0.0003 22.9 0.0002
0.0004 8.37 0.0000 8.08 0.0003 8.47 0.0002
0.0005 5.46 0.0000 5.27 0.0004 5.53 0.0004
0.0006 3.71 0.0000 3.58 0.0005 3.75 0.0004
0.0006 2.40 0.0000 2.31 0.0006 2.43 0.0005
0.0032 1.39 0.0032 1.34 0.0020 1.41 0.0021
0.0057 0.82 0.0032 0.79 0.0039 0.83 0.0043
0.0078 0.51 0.0053 0.49 0.0056 0.51 0.0067
0.0012 0.05 0.0016 0.04 0.0016 0.05 0.0018
-------
o
u
(Q
CN
4
-------
o
u
CN
£
u
=t
xC
*±±E
i* « ** & -o —
0.1
1.0
10
100
Dpgo( microns)
Figure 3-6. Cumulative Polonium-210 activity fraction as a function
of particle size for controlled paniculate matter.
Probability-Log plot
Monsanto, Soda Springs, Idaho.
JES/055
3-24
-------
c
o
o
(0
o
<
o
CNI
01
'
CJ
II
0.1
1.0
10
100
Dpgo(microns)
Figure 3-7. Cumulative Lead-210 activity fraction as a function
of particle size for venturi inlet particulate matter.
Probability-Log plot.
Monsanto, Soda Springs, Idaho.
JES/055
3-25
-------
c
0
'
o
03
+3
O
0
O
100
DpBO(microns)
Figure 3-8. Cumulative Lead-210 activity fraction as a function
of particle size for controlled particulate matter.
Probability-Log plot.
Monsanto, Soda Springs, Idaho.
JES/055
3-26
-------
m
o
in
in
TABLE 3-14. CUMULATIVE ACTIVITY FRACTIONS, MONSANTO, SODA SPRINGS, IDAHO (August 1988)
Inlet - Run 1 Inlet - Run 2 Inlet - Run 3 Outlet C - Run 1 Outlet C - Run 2 Outlet C - Run 3
Cumulative Cumulative Cumulative Cumulative Cumulative Cumulative
Activity Fraction Activity Fraction Activity Fraction Activity Fraction Activity Fraction Activity Fraction
Stage Dp5Q Po-210 Pb-210 Dp Po-210 Pb-210 Dp Po-210 Pb-210 Dp Po-210 Pb-210 Dp5Q Po-210 Pb-210 Dp Po-210 Pb-210
1 9.48 0.9947 0.9984 9.77 0.9929 0.9936 10.20 0.9934 1.0000 10.60 0.9953 0.9969 10.43 0.9937 1.0000 10.35 0.9921 0.9930
2-5 1.69 0.9471 0.9675 1.74- 0.9454 0.9363 1.82 0.9597 0.9586 1.89 0.9600 0.9969 1.86 0.9645 0.9678 1.84 0.9345 0.9570
^ 6 0.96 0.8829 0.8941 0.99 0.8530 0.8231 1.03 0.9282 0.9213 1.07 0.9244 0.9656 1.05 0.9214 0.9129 1.05 0.8539 0.8640
i
ro
7 0.59 0.7004 0.6906 0.61 0.6882 0.8197 0.63 0.8184 0.7859 0.65 0.8298 0.9068 0.65 0.8343 0.7839 0.64 0.7104 0.6791
8 0.37 0.3412 0.3027 0.38 0.3507 0.3906 0.40 0.5993 0.5201 0.41 0.7593 0.3271 0.41 0.6438 0.5611 0.40 0.4224 0.3944
-------
TABLE 3-15. RADIONUCLIDE CONCENTRATIONS IN PROCESS FEEDSTOCK SAMPLES,
MONSANTO, SODA SPRINGS, IDAHO (August 1988)
Radionuclide Concentration
MM 111
Type of Sample Run No.
Feedstock 1
Feedstock 2
Feedstock 3
Feedstock 4
Feedstock 5
Average
Relative standard deviation (%)
Po-210
Date (pico Curies per gram,
8/16/88 NA
8/17/88 142
8/17/88 112
8/18/88 124
8/19/88 125
126
10
Pb-210
dry basis)
NA
147
114
118
127
127
12
NA = Not analyzed.
JES/055
3-28
-------
4.0 SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS
This section describes specific sampling and analysis activities
performed during the August 15-20, 1988, test program at the Monsanto
facility. As described in the Executive Summary of this document (see
Table 1-1) the test matrix consisted of test runs at the venturi scrubber
inlet and each of the four outlet stacks to collect particulate matter and
particulate size samples for subsequent radionuclide analysis.
The following subsections describe the sampling locations at the
Monsanto site (Section 4.1), the sampling procedures that were used
(Section 4.2), the recovery and analysis procedure for each of the collected
samples (Section 4.3), and the sample custody procedures (Section 4.4).
4.1 SAMPLING LOCATIONS
Figure 4-1 identifies each of the sampling locations during the
Monsanto test program. The following subsections present a description of
each of these locations.
4.1.1 Scrubber Inlet
The scrubber inlet sampling location is the common duct point at which
the kiln offgases leave the spray tower prior to being split into the four
streams feeding the venturi scrubbers. The emissions measured at this
location do not represent uncontrolled emissions since this location is
actually the midpoint (after the spray tower) in the air pollution control
system.
The scrubber inlet sampling was performed in a vertical 2.7 m (9 ft)
diameter duct. A schematic of the inlet sampling location is shown in
Figure 4-2. The sampling location was recognized as a nonideal location
due to flow disturbances both up and down stream. During each MM 111 test
run, 24 traverse points were sampled in order to minimize the effect of
these disturbances on sample representativeness. There was no evidence of
cyclonic flow based on preliminary velocity traverse data.
JES/055 4-1
-------
Sampling Locations
m
o
en
in
[A | Outlet Stack #1
[§] Outlet Stack #2
[C] Outlet Stack #3
[O] Outlet Stack #4
[E] Scrubber Inlet
p" Process Feed
Ore Feed
Fuel
Kiln
T
Product
to Reducing
Furnace
_ Recycle
Fines '
Offgases
Dual
Venturi Cyclone
Scrubbers Demisters
Figure 4-1. Schematic of Monsanto Rotary Kiln and Pollution Control System
-------
Flow from
Spray Tower
5.5m (1ST
-VQ9
1.8m (60
•2.7m (9')
To Venturi
Scrubber
cc
(N
Figure 4-2. Schematic of the Inlet Sampling Location
JES/055
4-3
-------
4.1.2 Outlet Stacks
Controlled flue gases are discharged to the atmosphere through four
separate stacks. Outlet sampling was performed at each of the four stacks
All four of the outlet stacks shared a common sampling platform. A
schematic showing the outlet location is shown in Figure 4-3. The outlet
stacks were ideal sampling locations which required 12 points, 6 from each
port. There was no evidence of cyclonic flow based on the preliminary
velocity profiles conducted at each outlet stack.
4.1.3 Process Feed Sampling Location
Blended phosphate rock feedstock was collected from the conveyor belt
(#114) assembly, just prior to the kiln feed hood.
4.2 SAMPLING PROCEDURES
EPA reference sampling methods were used during this test program to
collect flue gas samples for particulate matter and particulate size
distribution. These particulate samples were analyzed for radiation from
radionuclides, specifically polonium-210 and lead-210. EPA reference
sampling methods were also used to measure stack gas velocity/volumetric
flow, moisture content, and molecular weight.
Each sampling method used during the test program is described in
detail in the following subsections.
4.2.1 Particulate Matter and Radionuclides - Modified EPA Method 111
Particulate matter in both the inlet and outlet streams was collected
using a modification of EPA Method 111. For reference purposes, EPA
Method 111 is included in Appendix A of this document. The specific
modifications included:
• use of 0.1 N HN03 in the impingers instead of water;
JES/055 4-4
-------
o
tn
en
27.7 m
(91 ft.)
No.
4
(D)
Sampling
Platform
with Safety
Rail
No.
3
(0
No.
2
(B)
No.
1
(A)
\
Ladder
with Safety
Rail
Outlet
Sampling
Ports
6.7m
(22 ft.)
21 m
(69 ft.)
Ladder
with Safety
Rail
Figure 4-3. Schematic Showing the Outlet Sampling Locations
-------
t insertion of an extra impinger (empty) following the filter and
heater box (due to the high moisture content of the streams); and
• modification in recovery procedures (discussed in Section 4.3).
A schematic of the Modified Method 111 (MM 111) train that was used in
this test program is shown in Figure 4-4. Flue gas was pulled from the
stack through a stainless steel nozzle and a glass-lined probe. Particulate
matter was removed from the gas stream by a glass fiber filter housed in a
Teflon* sealed, glass filter holder maintained at 120 + 14°C (248 + 25°F).
The filter holder contained a Teflon'-coated stainless steel screen to
support the filter. After the filter box, an empty knockout condenser was
used to remove excess moisture, followed by two impingers containing 0.1 N
HNOj, another empty knockout condenser, and a silica gel impinger.
4.2.2 Particle Size Distribution - Andersen MK III
Particle size distribution (PSD) measurements at both the inlet and
outlet locations were made using in-stack Andersen MK III cascade impactors,
equipped with right angle preseparators. The Andersen MK III impactor is an
eight-stage cascade impactor which classifies particles according to their
aerodynamic diameter. Inlet and outlet PSD sampling required different
sampling durations due to the different mass loading rates at each of these
locations.
An example of the sampling train is shown in Figure 4-5. Many of the
components are similar to those used in EPA Method 5 sampling. Stack gas
velocity and temperature profiles were obtained from pretest stack gas
traverses at each sampling location. Based on the resulting profile data,
two points that were representative of the stack gas velocity and
temperature profile were selected for collecting the PSD sample. For each
test run (both inlet and outlet), all traverse points were selected from a
single port. Subsequent test runs were sampled using similar point
selection criteria; although points were selected from the opposite port.
Stack gas moisture content was based on data from the preceding MM 111 test
runs. Sampling train flow rates were maintained at constant rates and were
selected to optimize the particle size definitions for the lower size
JES/055 4-6
-------
m
co
o
ui
tn
\/ Heated
/r Area
Thermocouple [J Probe
4S" Type Pltot ^
Stack Wall X
Pltot
Thermometer
Filter
'Holder
Thermocouple
f Check Valve
Silica Gel
(300 grams)
Knockout
Manometer Knockout
O.1N HNO,
Bv • Pass
Thermocouples ^
Orifice
Main Valve
Air-Tight
Pump
Vacuum Line
Figure 4-4. Schematic of the Modified Method 111 Sampling Train
tr
in
CM
s
CO
co
-------
o
in
en
0<
Andersen
Mark III
Check Valve
Vi" Diameter
Steel Pipe Probe
oo
Manometer
DC
o
Figure 4-5. Schematic of the Andersen MK III Cascade Impactor Train
-------
ranges (less than 2 microns). The goal of each PSD run was to achieve
isokinetic sampling (100 + 20%) and to achieve good size separation in the
less than 2 microns particle size.
Due to the high moisture content at each of the sampling locations,
both the preseparator and the impactor were pre-heated above the flue gas
dew point temperature prior to testing. During the test run, heating was
accomplished by wrapping the impactor with heating tape, insulating the
impactor body and waterproofing the entire assembly. Impactor temperatures
during the test runs were maintained above the stack gas dew point using a
variac to regulate electrical current to the heat tape. Impactor outlet
temperatures were monitored and recorded throughout each run with a type K
thermocouple. A condenser system was used to remove moisture and deliver
dry gas to the metering system. Rieve Angel 934 AH glass fiber substrates
were used to collect the samples. The final filter (back-up filter) met the
requirements of ASTM Standard Method D (99.95% collection efficiency on
0.3 micron dioctylphthalate particles).
Preliminary PSD samples were collected at each location to determine
and establish proper sampling collection parameters. These preliminary
samples were evaluated for evidence of particle bounce, reentrainment,
overloading or underloading. Based on analyses of these preliminary test
runs, sampling rates and durations were established for each of the
subsequent test runs.
4.2.3 Flue Gas Volumetric Flow Rate - EPA Method 2
The volumetric stack gas flow rate for both stack outlet and inlet
locations was determined using procedures described in EPA Method 2. Based
on this method, the volumetric flow rate is determined by measuring the
cross-sectional area of the stack and average velocity of the flue gas
through this cross-sectional area.
The average velocity of the flue gas was calculated from the average
gas velocity pressure, the average flue gas temperature, the wet molecular
weight, and the absolute static pressure. Pressure and temperature profiles
were obtained by traversing the stack.
JES/055 4-9
-------
Pressure and temperature profiles were obtained by an S-type pitot tube
and type K thermocouple at each of the traverse points. An inclined oil
manometer was used to measure pressure differential across the S-type pitot
tube. A calibrated aneroid barometer was used to obtain barometric
pressure. Static gas pressure was measured by an S-type pitot tube with the
face aligned at right angles to the gas stream flow. One side of the pitot
was disconnected after proper placement and static pressure determined using
an inclined manometer.
4.2.4 Flue Gas Molecular Weight Determination - EPA Method 3
The molecular weight of the flue gas at each location was determined
during each MM 111 run using a single point grab sample collected in Tedlar®
bags. The molecular weight analysis was performed using Orsat procedures as
described in EPA Method 3.
4.2.5 Flue Gas Moisture Content - EPA Method 4
The moisture content of the flue gases at both the stack outlet and
inlet locations was determined using procedures described in EPA Method 4.
Based on this method, a known volume of particulate-free gas is pulled
through a chilled impinger train. The quantity of condensed water is
gravimetrically determined and then related to the volume of gas sampled.
The moisture content of the flue gas was determined simultaneously
during the operation of the MM 111 trains. The impingers used with these
trains were weighed before and after sampling. The mass increase in
moisture was related to the volume of gas sampled to calculate the moisture
content of the flue gas.
4.2.6 Process Feed Samples - Composite Grab
Grab samples of the blended ore feedstock were collected periodically
during flue gas sampling periods. The samples were collected from the
conveyor belt assembly just prior to discharging into the kiln. Approxi-
mately 1 kg (2.2 Ibs) of sample was collected in each grab. At the end
JES/055 4-10
-------
of each flue gas sampling period, the grab samples were combined, mixed and
quartered. A single 1 kg (2.2 Ibs) composite grab sample corresponding to
each sampling period was retained for radionuclide analysis.
4.3 SAMPLE RECOVERY AND ANALYSIS
4.3.1 Particulate Hatter and Radionuclides
Upon completion of each test run, the MM 111 trains were leak checked,
disassembled and filter and impingers were transported to the on-site
recovery trailer. Probes and nozzles were recovered at each of the sampling
locations. (The environment in the vicinity of the sampling platforms was
relatively free of dust.) Openings on each of the disassembled sampling
train components were covered with Teflon* tape or parafilm* prior to
transporting to the recovery site. As soon as possible after completion of
the testing, the trains were recovered. The MM 111 recovery and analytical
scheme is shown in Figure 4-6. The modifications from EPA Method 111 are as
follows:
• the back half of the sampling train (impingers) were recovered
for subsequent radionuclide analyses;
• the front half (probe and filter holder) acetone rinses were
followed by rinses with 0.1 N HN03; and
• radionuclide analyses were performed on the total train catch.
Front half consisted of both the filter and the probe, nozzle
and filter holder rinses; back half consisted of impinger
contents and rinses.
Train recovery and gravimetric determinations were performed by Radian.
The gravimetric determinations were done on-site for the filter and probe
rinse acetone (PRA) components of the sampling train. For each of the
MM 111 trains, samples for radionuclide analyses were sent to EERF in four
components. These four components are listed in Table 4-1. During the
analytical digestion procedures the front half nitric acid rinses (PRN) were
combined with the dried acetone rinses (PRA) and both were combined with the
filter (F) to provide a front half sample for analysis. Radionuclide
JES/055 4-11
-------
Front Half Sample Recovery Fractions
Nozzle, probe, cyclone,
brush/rinse
No. 1 acetone
rinse
Back Half Sample Recovery Fractions
Evaporate;
dessicate; weigh;
Paniculate (mg)
Add tracers
to residue
1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, Impingers
contents and rinses
Particulate (mg)
Filter
Add 16 M HNO,
to residue
and digest
Transfer residue in
acid solution to teflon
beaker containing filter
and 0.1N nitric rinse
Reduce volume
by heating
Digest with 30 ml
29 M HF and heat to
near dryness. Repeat
digestion as necessary
Add 100ml 16 M HNO,
acid. Digest.
Evaporate to
near dryness
Add 50 ml 16 M
HNO,, heat to 85 °C
Add 10ml 12 M
perchloric acid
and heat
Adjust sample to
known volume (250 ml)
using 3 M HCI
Analysis for Po-210
by alpha spectrometry
and Pb by beta
and gamma counts
i Field 4
| Recovery |
I Laboratory
1 Analysis
\
Reduce volume
to ~20 ml
by heating
Evaporate to
near dryness
Add 50mM6 M
HNO,, heat to 85 °C
Add 10ml 12 M
perchloric acid
and heat
Adjust sample to
known volume (250 ml)
using 1 M HCI
Analysis for Po-210
by alpha spectrometry
and Pb by beta
and gamma counts
Figure 4-6. Modified Method 111 Recovery and Analysis Scheme
oo
m
CN
CO
co
JES/055
4-12
-------
analyses were performed separately for front and back half train catches.
The specific analytical protocol used by EERF for radionuclide analysis is
included in Appendix B.
4.3.2 Particulate Size Distribution and Radionuclides
Upon completion of each test run, the impactors were removed from the
duct, oriented vertically and purged for approximately 10 minutes to prevent
water condensation in the impactor assembly. The nozzles were loosely
covered with aluminum foil or Teflon« tape and the impactor placed in a
vertical position where it would not be bumped. After the impactors had
cooled, they were transported to the field laboratory for recovery.
Each stage was inspected for particles that might have accumulated on
surfaces other than the stage collection substrate. By convention, any
particles lost to surfaces upstream of a stage substrate were added to that
substrate's catch. A camel hair brush was used to clean the surfaces.
The substrates were removed from the impactor and placed in their
respective petri dishes using a flat-ended set of forceps and flat-bladed
spatula. Particles from the preseparator were brushed onto the first stage
collection substrate.
After each test run, the substrates were closely examined to determine
if the selected operating conditions were effective. The following criteria
were used to determine if the test run was valid:
• no signs of particle bounce or reentrainment,
• no signs of overloaded deposits or secondary deposition,
/
• dry filters with no condensed water, and
• minimal particle catch (approximately 2-5 mg per lower stages).
Both reentrainment and overloaded deposits are typically characterized by
increased internal losses to the inner surfaces of the impactor. When
reentrainment and/or overloading occur, primary depositions (from impaction)
are ill-defined and secondary deposition is evident around the primary
deposits. Particle deposition on the substrate should be due to impaction
JES/055 4-13
-------
TABLE 4-1. MODIFIED METHOD 111 SAMPLING TRAIN COMPONENTS TO BE SENT
TO EERF FOR RADIONUCLIDE ANALYSIS, MONSANTO, SODA SPRINGS,
IDAHO (August 1988)
Contai ner/Component
Code
Description
Component Number 1
Component Number 2
Component Number 3
F
PRA
PRN
Filter
Acetone rinses of nozzle, probe,
and front half of filter holder
Nitric rinses of probe, and
front half of filter holder
Component Number 4
IR
Rinses of back half of filter
holder, filter support; and
first, second, third, and fourth
impinger contents and rinses
JES/055
4-14
-------
only. Consequently, when reentrainment and/or overloading do not occur,
deposits are uniform and well-defined (conical) with no evidence of
disturbance. The collected particle size samples were uniform and well-
defined.
Impactor recovery and gravimetric determinations were performed in the
field by Radian. For each of the Andersen impactor trains, samples for
radionuclide analyses were sent to EERF in six components. These six
components are listed in Table 4-2. Radionuclide analyses were performed on
each of these components, separately. Analytical digestion procedures were
identical to those described in Figure 4-6 for the MM 111 filters. The
specific analytical protocol used by EERF for radionuclide analysis is
included in Appendix B.
4.4 SAMPLE CUSTODY
Sample custody procedures followed during this program are based on EPA
recommended procedures. The custody procedures emphasize careful
documentation of sample collection and field analytical data and the use of
chain-of-custody records for samples being transported.
The team leader for the field testing effort was Mr. R. F. Jongleux.
The team leader was responsible for ensuring that proper custody and
documentation procedures were followed for the field sampling and field
analytical efforts.
All sampling data, including information regarding sampling times,
locations, and any specific considerations associated with sample
acquisition were recorded on preformatted data sheets.
A master sample logbook was used to document all sample collection
activities (Notebook #21088).
Following sample collection, all samples were given a unique
alphanumeric (Radian) sample identification code. Figure 4-7 contains an
example of the alphanumeric ID codes and abbreviations used for the Monsanto
samples. Sample labels and integrity seals were completed and affixed to
the sample container. As the samples were packed for shipment,
chain-of-custody forms were completed for each shipment box specifying
treatment of samples.
JES/055 4-15
-------
TABLE 4-2. ANDERSEN IMPACTOR SAMPLING TRAIN COMPONENTS,
MONSANTO, SODA SPRINGS, IDAHO (August 1988)
Contai ner/Component
Code
Description
Component Number 1
Component Number 2
Component Number 3
Component Number 4
Component Number 5
Component Number 6
PSD-1
PSD-2
PSD-3
PSD-4
PSD-5
PSD-6
Preseparator Stages 0 and 1
Stages 2, 3, 4, and 5
Stage 6
Stage 7
Stage 8
Stage 9 (back-up filter)
JES/055
4-16
-------
m
o
en
en
MSS-081688-MM111-IN-1-F
Plant:
Date:
Sampling Method:
Modified Method 111
PSD = Particle Size
Distribution
GR = Grab
Sampling Location:
Inlet
OTA = Outlet A
OTB = Outlet B
OTC = Outlet C
OTD = Outlet D
Run: Sample Fraction:
Filter
PR = Probe Rinse
IR = Impinger Contents
and Rinses
ST1 = PSD Stage 0,1 and
Preseparator
ST2-5 = PSD Stages 2,
3, 4, and 5
ST6 = PSD Stage 6
ST7 = PSD Stage 7
ST8 = PSD Stage 8
ST9 = PSD Stage 9
(Back-up filter)
Figure 4-7. Example of Alphanumeric ID Codes for the Monsanto Test Program
-------
5.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE AND QUALITY CONTROL (QA/QC)
Specific quality assurance and quality control procedures were
incorporated into the Monsanto test program to ensure the production of
useful and valid data. The overall quality assurance/quality control
(QA/QC) objective is to ensure precision, accuracy, completeness,
comparability, and representativeness for each parameter measured in this
test program. The QA/QC procedures and results described in this section
represent an integral part of the overall sampling and analysis scheme. The
acceptance criteria, control limits and corrective action that were used for
the test program and the results achieved are summarized in Table 5-1.
Section 5.1 presents QA/QC results for the particulate and PSD sampling
activities, Section 5.2 presents QA/QC results for radionuclide analysis,
and Section 5.3 presents QA/QC results for particulate analysis.
5.1 QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL FOR SAMPLING AND RECOVERY
The isokinetic results for the modified Method 111 (MM 111) and
particle sizing sampling trains are summarized in Tables 5-2 and 5-3,
respectively. Of the 36 sampling trains operated, three MM 111 trains did
not meet the QA/QC isokinetic objective of 100 + 10 percent. The inlet
train isokinetics for MM 111 run 1 was 79 percent. The isokinetics from
outlet D run 1 and outlet D run 2 were 112 percent and 77 percent,
respectively. Therefore, one additional run at all locations and two at
outlet D were performed to ensure representative particulate matter data.
The leak check results for the MM 111 and particle sizing sampling
trains are summarized in Tables 5-4 and 5-5. All of the final leak rates
met the QA/QC leak rate criteria of less than 0.02 acfm for the particulate
sampling trains. Particle size operating procedures dictate that no final
leak check is performed on the impactor because to do so may dislodge the
particles impacted on the individual substrates and bias the data.
Therefore, only pretest leak checks were performed on PSD trains.
JES/055 5-1
-------
TABLE 5-1. SUMMARY OF ACCEPTANCE, CRITERIA, CONTROL LIMITS AND CORRECTIVE ACTION AND ACHIEVED RESULTS
C-.
m
to
o
0»
01
Criteria
Control Limits
Achieved (X)
Corrective Action
OI
ro
Particulate Sampling
Isoklnetics
- Method 5
- Particle Size°
Final leak rate (after each port)
Dry gas meter calibration
Individual correction factors ( Vi)
Average correction factor
Nozzles
Radionuelide Analysis
Duplicate analysis
Performance standards
Analytical reagent blanks
Yield
100 + 10X
100 + 201
£ 0.02 acfm or 4X
of sampling rate,
whichever is less
Post average factor ( V)
agree + 51 of prefactor
Agree within 21 of
average factor
1.00 ± IX
Any two diameter measurements
should agree within 0.004 Inches
802 should agree within 2 Sigma
as determined in EPA 620/5-82-012
90Z should agree within 2 Sigma
as determined in EPA 620/5-82-012
Below MDL
SOX
100 Performed additional test run.
100
100 None required, criteria met.
100 None required, criteria met.
100 None required, criteria met.
100 None required, criteria met.
100 None required, criteria met.
91 Met criteria. Rerun sample, check reagents
and procedure.
>90 Met criteria. Rerun sample, check reagents
and procedure JMH 88.5355 RERUN.
100 Met criteria. Check glassware and reagents.
91 Met criteria. Rerun low yield samples to
confirm yield and results.
Percentage represents fraction of test runs for which the QA objective was achieved.
Additional test runs were conducted to meet the quality objective.
For the PSD trains, a constant sampling rate was maintained at point of average velocity.
-------
TABLE 5-2. SUMMARY OF ISOKINETIC RESULTS FOR MODIFIED METHOD 111 SAMPLING
TRAINS, MONSANTO, SODA SPRINGS, IDAHO (August 1988)
Run Date Location
1 8/16/88 Inlet
Outlet A
Outlet B
Outlet C
Outlet D
2 8/17/88 Inlet
Outlet A
Outlet B
Outlet C
Outlet D
3 8/17/88 Inlet
Outlet A
Outlet B
Outlet C
Outlet D
4 8/18/88 Inlet
Outlet A
Outlet B
Outlet C
Outlet D
5 8/19/88 Outlet D
Isokinetics (%)a
78. 6b
104.5
105.1
105.0.
112.0°
97.9
97.3
96.6
101.9.
76. 6b
96.3
96.0
99.5
97.3
103.5
98.1
95.0
97.7
98.2
101.1
100.1
alsokinetic QA/QC objective is 100 + 10%.
blsokinetics did not meet QA/QC criteria.
JES/055
5-3
-------
TABLE 5-3. SUMMARY OF ISOKINETIC RESULTS FOR PARTICLE SIZING SAMPLING
TRAINS, MONSANTO, SODA SPRINGS, IDAHO (August 1988)
Run Date Location
1 8/17/88 Inlet
Outlet A
Outlet B
Outlet C
Outlet D
2 8/18/88 Inlet
Outlet A
Outlet B
Outlet C
Outlet D
3 8/19/88 Inlet
Outlet A
Outlet B
Outlet C
Outlet D
Isokinetics (%)a
120.1
99.1
99.9
102.1
104.9
116.8
99.8
101.5
102.2
109.5
108.4
103.7
97.8
101.9
103.9
alsokinetic QA/QC objective is 100 ± 20 percent. The sampling points
selected allowed the isokinetics to be within 100 + 20 percent, while
maintaining a constant sampling rate.
JES/055 5-4
-------
TABLE 5-4. SUMMARY OF LEAK CHECK RESULTS FOR PARTICLE SIZING SAMPLING
TRAINS, MONSANTO, SODA SPRINGS, IDAHO (August 1988)
Run Date Location
1 8/17/88 Inlet
Outlet A
Outlet B
Outlet C
Outlet D
2 8/18/88 Inlet .
Outlet AD
Outlet B
Outlet C
Outlet D
3 8/19/88 Inlet
Outlet A
Outlet B
Outlet C
Outlet D
Initial
Leak Rate3
(acfm)
0.010
0.015
0.020
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.030
0.018
< 0.020
< 0.020
0.001
0.010
0.016
0.004
0.008
Vacuum0
(in. Hg)
10
15
4
7
7
10
4
4
> 3
> 3
10
15
4
7
> 3
aLeak rate QA/QC objective is less than 0.02 acfm or 4 percent of sampling
rate whichever is less.
bLeak rate through impingers and probe was 0.010 acfm 9 4 in. Hg.
cVacuum at which leak check was performed. Highest vacuum encountered
during test runs was less than the selected leak check vacuum.
JES/055 '
5-5
-------
m
en
in
TABLE 5-5. SUMMARY OF LEAK CHECK RESULTS FOR MODIFIED METHOD 111 SAMPLING TRAINS,
MONSANTO, SODA SPRINGS, IDAHO3 (August 1988)
en
Run
1
2
3
4
5
Date Location
8/16/88 Inlet
Outlet A
Outlet B
Outlet C
Outlet D
8/17/88 Inlet
Outlet A
Outlet B
Outlet C
Outlet D
8/17/88 Inlet
Outlet A
Outlet B
Outlet C
Outlet D
8/18/88 Inlet
Outlet A
Outlet B
Outlet C
Outlet D
8/19/88 Outlet D
Initial -
Leak Rate
(acfm)
0.016
0.010
0.010
0.016
0.008
0.010
0.020
0.016
0.020
0.005
0.01
0.016
0.016
0.008
0.006
0.010
0.019
0.012
0.012
0.008
0.012
1st Port
Vacuum
(in. Hg)
15
15
10
10
9
15
4
15
10
7
10
15
8
5
9
10
10
6
5
6
11
Final -
Leak Rate
(acfm)
ND
0.012
0.008
0.010
0.004
ND
0.010
0.010
0.020
0.008
ND
0.015
0.010
0.010
0.008
ND
0.011
0.010
0.016
0.006
0.018
1st Port
Vacuum
(in. Hg)
ND
ND
8
10
5
ND
8
6
11
6
ND
6
5
5
4
ND
8
8
9
5
5
Initial -
Leak Rate
(acfm)
> 0.04
0.015
0.010
0.015
0.009
< 0.020
0.01
0.008
0.012
0.008
0.010
0.016
0.010
0.012
0.008
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.008
0.008
0.010
2nd Port
Vacuum
(in. Hg)
5
5
10
10
5
5
8
6
5
5
10
6
5
10
4
10
8
8
5
6
5
Final - 2nd Port
Leak Rate
(acfm)
0.014
0.015
0.005
0.005
0.011
0.010
0.001
0.008
0.010
0.010
0.015
0.010
0.005
0.012
0.007
0.010
0.016
0.018
0.008
0.005
0.014
Vacuum
(in. Hg)
5
8
8
15
7
9
8
6
5
9
10
8
6
5
5
12
12
5
5
5
5
aLeak rate QA/QC objective is less than 0.02 acfm or 4 percent of sampling rate, whichever is less.
final leak checks performed at highest vacuum encountered during test run.
ND = Not determined.
All
-------
In addition, to isokinetics and the leak check criteria, the following
QA/QC procedures were satisfied for the purpose of ensuring valid results:
• All sampling equipment passed a thorough visual and operation
check prior to and after shipment to ensure clean and operable
parts. Equipment which failed to pass this check was not used in
the field.
• Manometers were leveled and zeroed (no drift allowed) before
measuring the pressure across the S-type pitot tubes.
• The temperature measurement system was capable of measuring the
ambient temperature prior to each traverse to within ± 2 C of the
average measured ambient temperature.
t The field personnel reviewed sampling data forms daily on-site
during testing. Data that were incomplete or inaccurate were not
considered acceptable.
• A Modified Method 111 field blank was collected for both the inlet
and outlet locations during the test period to evaluate any
background contamination. This field blank train (FB) was
recovered from a sampling train that had been previously used to
collect particulate and radionuclide samples at a particular
sampling location. The purpose of the field blanks was to
identify background contamination levels introduced to the sample
from the glassware, sample recovery, recovery solvents, or from
handling of the train and components in the field during typical
situations.
• Blanks of filters and reagents were collected and archived.
Filter and reagent blanks were analyzed for radionuclides. No
unacceptable levels of contamination were found.
• The trains were assembled and recovered in a laboratory trailer.
The trailer was swept daily to minimize dust. Filters were
recovered without drafts and glassware was covered or capped
prior to assembly.
Ice was maintained in the impinger baths at all times,
temperatures were maintained less than 20 C (< 68 F).
exit
• Any unusual occurrences during testing were noted on the
field data forms or recovery notebooks.
• Sampling nozzles and S-type pitot tubes were measured and
passed the required inspection.
JES/055 5-7
-------
0 The roll and pitch axis of the S-type pitot tube and the sampling
nozzle were maintained at 90 to the flow during sampling.
t Each leg of the S-type pitot tube achieved the prescribed leak
check criterion described in EPA Method 2.
• The entire sampling train was checked to ensure that the leakage
rate was less than or equal to 0.02 cfm or 4 percent of the
average sampling rate (whichever is less) before and after moves
from one sampling port to another during a run.
• Readings of the dry gas meter, AP, AH, temperature, and vacuum
pump were made during sampling at each traverse point.
• Filters were handled out of drafts and transferred with tweezers.
t Sample trains were disassembled and the samples recovered in
clean areas to prevent contamination.
• The nozzle was capped prior to and following recovery.
• The samples were transferred to appropriate storage containers
and clearly labeled.
• Reagent dispenser bottles were clearly labeled.
• Sampling glassware was routinely rinsed three times with each
reagent to remove all of the sample.
• Reagent lot numbers were recorded.
• All sampling and recovery glassware was capped or covered when
not in use.
• Probe and nozzle brushes, tweezers, and scrapers were rinsed
before use with the proper reagent(s) to minimize any possible
sample contamination.
The particle sizing results were of high quality because the following
QA/QC procedures were implemented and achieved:
t All substrates were desiccated and weighed to a constant weight
(to the nearest 0.05 mg).
• Each impactor stage was visually inspected for proper alignment
and uniform seating by an experienced technician.
JES/055 5-8
-------
• Preliminary test runs were conducted at each location (inlet and
outlet) to define operating conditions. Substrates from these
runs were evaluated for evidence of particle bounce, or
reentrainment and sampling parameters for subsequent runs were
modified to reflect the necessary corrective actions.
• All impactor stages were visually inspected for proper peak shape
and substrate loading by a qualified, experienced individual.
• The impactor stages were characterized by well-defined, tall
piles. There was little evidence of particle bounce on the
impactor substrates.
• Impactors were heated and insulated specifically to prevent
moisture condensation on the impactor substrates. The impactor
exit temperature was maintained above the water dew point of the
flue gas stream. Impactor runs with wet substrates were rejected
if water condensation occurred and filter substrate recovery was
compromised.
• Blank impactor runs were performed at each location to identify
interactions with substrates.
• Every tenth filter was weighed in duplicate.
t The balance zero was adjusted every tenth weighing.
5.2 RADIONUCLIDE ANALYSIS QA/QC
During the radionuclide analyses, every tenth sample was analyzed in
duplicate. The duplicate results are presented in Table 5-6.
Statistical analyses were performed on duplicate samples in accordance
with EPA 620/5-82-012. Ninety-one (91) percent of the Monsanto samples
agreed within the 2 sigma error. Analyses with error terms over 100 percent
were not included in the statistical analyses.
Yields for the radionuclide analyses for Po-10 and Pb-210 were above
the QA criteria (50%) for 91 percent of the samples analyzed during the
program. (Refer to Appendix L for the yield results.)
The minimum detectable level was calculated by EERF as 1.2 pCi/analysis
for Po-210. The minimum detectable level was calculated by EERF as 1.7 pCi/
analysis for Pb-210. The equation for calculating the minimum detectable
level is in Appendix L. An extensive list of EERF internal QA samples were
analyzed during the project. This list of crosscheck samples (internal to
EERF) is contained in Appendix L.
JES/055 5-9
-------
c. TABLE 5-6. DUPLICATE RESULTS FOR RADIONUCLIDE ANALYSES AT MONSANTO, SODA SPRINGS, IDAHO (August
rn
t/j
en
en
EERF
No.
88.05650
88.05800
88.05660
88.05663
88.05670
88.05820
88.05830
88.06080
88.05800
Run Analysis 1
No. (pCi/sample)
OTB-2-FH
IN-FB-FH
OTA-3-BH
OTC-3-FH
OTA-4-FH
PSD-IN-2-ST8
PSD-IN-3-ST6
HN03 Blank
IN-FB-FH
aDifference(%) = First value
1364
127
27.0
533
601
820
42.5
0.426
127
- second val
Po-210
Analysis 2
(pCi/sample)
1233
117
28.0
540
654
876
42.2
1.12
117
m6- v mn
Difference3 Analysis 1
(%) (pCi/sample)
10.1 273
8.1 8.89
3.3 0.888
1.3 155
8.5 147
6.6 315
0.9 9.28
-------
As described in the previous sections, a field blank was collected at
each of the two sampling locations (inlet and outlet). A field blank is a
complete sampling train that is equipped, prepared, and handled in a manner
identical to those trains used to collect samples. The one difference
between field blank trains and test sampling trains is that the field blank
trains are not inserted into the stack and do not pull sample. The field
blank trains for Monsanto were prepared using glassware and components
previously used at that location during the test program to collect actual
flue gas samples. The field blank train components were assembled and
handled in the same fashion and recovery environment as the standard
sampling train components. The field blank train components were then
recovered using the same solvents and sample containers as the field
samples.
Table 5-7 contains the field blank results from each location. As seen
in the table, radionuclide activities in the inlet field blank were less
than 1 percent of the average activities for that location. At the outlet,
the field blank activities were approximately 3.4 percent for Po-210 and
2.7 percent for Pb-210. These results are within the acceptance criteria
for this program.
5.3 QA/QC RESULTS FOR PARTICLE SIZE SAMPLING
A blank (substrate media interaction) impactor run was performed to
assess the degree of substrate-flue gas interaction. The blank PSD train
was operated for the same time interval as the sample trains. Flue gas
constituents can react with substrate materials and, therefore, bias the
final filter weights. Where bias occurs, it may be either negative or
positive. The flue gases' interaction with substrate materials will be
uniform; that is, it effects all substrates not just one or two. This
interaction ideally will be negligible. The criterion for determining if
bias exists is that the average recorded blank substrate weight loss/gain
should be no greater than 10 percent of the minimum acceptable substrate
weight gain. The minimum weight gain was 2-5 mg + 0.05 mg. Thus, a
significant weight gain or loss would be 0.2 mg (0.0002 g) + 0.05 mg.
JES/055 5-11
-------
TABLE 5-7. SUMMARY OF MM 111 RADIONUCLIDE FIELD BLANK VALUES FOR THE
TEST PROGRAM, MONSANTO, SODA SPRINGS, IDAHO (August 1988)
Inlet
Description
Field Blank
Average Test Value
Minimum Test Value
Po-210
(pCi/train)
158.9
21,274
18,516
Pb-210
(pCi/train)
8.8
6,589
4,968
Outlet
Po-210
(pCi/train)
26.9
797
402 ,
Pb-210
(pCi/train)
5.1
192
124
Field Blank Expressed
as Percentage of
Average Test Value
Field Blank Expressed
as Percentage of
Minimum Test Value
0.7%
0.9%
0.13%
0.18%
3.4%
6.7%
2.7%
4.1%
JES/055
5-12
-------
Filter interaction impactor runs were performed at both the inlet and
outlet locations. The run was performed identically to a standard run
except that the nozzle of the train was oriented opposite of the flue gas
flow direction and a regular filter (back-up filter) replaced the substrate
on the zero stage. The weight gains for the blank interaction runs are
presented in Table 5-8.
The average net gain was -0.00011 grams for the outlet blank and
0.00001 grams for the inlet blank. Both these blanks are below the weight
gain criteria, indicating that there was no consistent positive or negative
bias. Thus, the variability of the net weights is due to the imprecision of
weighing and substrate handling. However, the back-up filter weight gain is
real. The weight gain exhibited by the back-up filter is most likely due to
condensing moisture running back from the probe. The PSD data was not
adjusted for flue gas interaction.
5.4 DUPLICATE ANALYSES BY AN INDEPENDENT LABORATORY
Extracts prepared by EERF for four samples were split into two aliquots
and sent to TMA Norcal Laboratories for additional independent analyses.
The samples were analyzed for polonium-210 only by TMA Norcal Laboratories.
The results are presented in Table 5-9. The difference between the
duplicate analyses ranged between 5 to 19 percent, indicating good agreement
between the analyses performed by the two laboratories.
JES/055 5-13
-------
TABLE 5-8. FLUE GAS INTERACTION SAMPLE WEIGHT GAINS,
MONSANTO, SODA SPRINGS, IDAHO (August 1988)
Sample Weight3
Filter Number (g)
Outlet - Blank
MB-0C
MB-1
MB-2
MB-3
MB-4
MB-5
MB-6
MB-7
MB-8
MB-9 .
Average (stages 1-8)
Inlet - Blank
AH-0C
AH-1
AH-2
AH-3
AH-4
AH-5
AH-6
AH-7
AH-8
AH-9
Average (stages 1-8)
0.67148
0.85016
0.81748
0.84369
0.82486
0.84493
0.82623
0.85018
0.81092
0.95828
0.52915
0.67834
0.66543
0.68831
0.67097
0.68916
0.65634
0.69941
0.66602
0.79193
Tare Weight3
(9)
0.67103
0.84995
0.81788
0.84368
0.82545
0.84505
0.82622
0.85002
0.81106
0.95513
0.52904
0.67842
0.66531
0.68818
0.67083
0.68927
0.65647
0.69933
0.66609
0.79004
Net Gainb
(9)
0.00045
0.00021
-0.00040
0.00001
-0.00059
-0.00012
0.00001
0.00016
-0.00014
0.00315
-0.00011
0.00011
-0.00008
0.00012
0.00013
0.00014
-0.00011
-0.00013
0.00008
-0.00007
0.00189
0.00001
^Weighed to a constant weight (± 0.00005 g).
Average net gain should be less than 0.0002 + 0.00005 g to meet the QA
.criteria.
These stages were not evaluated for flue gas interaction. Weight gain
.on these stages is expected during the flue gas interaction run.
Weight gain on stage 9 is suspected to be condensing moisture running
back from the probe.
JES/055
5-14
-------
TABLE 5-9. DUPLICATE ANALYSES FOR POLONIUM-210 PERFORMED
BY AN INDEPENDENT LABORATORY
Dico Curies oer samole
EERF No.
88.5659
88.5661
88.5663
88.5665
Run
No.
OTA-2-FH
OTB-3-FH
OTC-3-FH
OTD-3-FH
Analysis 1
(by EERF)
375
652
533
810
Analysis 2a
(by TMA Norcal)
425
689
505
977
Difference
(%)
12.5
5.5
5.4
18.7
aNorcal Po-210 results at analysis (10/4/88) were decayed to collection date
(8/17/88) for comparison with EERF data using this equation.
ACTPo0c = ACTPo@a • e X Po ~
\ • • ru ••ru
where:
ACTp « = Activity of Po at collection.
ACTp - = Activity of Po at analysis.
Xp = Radiological decay constant (fraction/day) of Po.
Pb@a = Activity of Pb at analysis.
Xpb = Radiological decay constant (fraction/day) of Pb.
T = Time between analysis and collection (days). Since no Pb
data was associated with the Norcal data, the EERF Pb data
was decayed to 10/4/88 using the following equation and
entered into the first equation for
A = Activity on EERF analysis date.
t = Days between EERF analysis and 10/4/88.
bn-rr /o/\ First valU6 - second value inn
Difference (%) = 0.5 (f1rst + second value) x 10°
JES/055 5-15
------- |