r/EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Air Quality EMB Report 84-ASP-8
Planning and Standards November 1984
Research Triangle Park NC 27711
Air
Asphalt Concrete
Industry
Emission Test
Report
Sloan Company
Cocoa, Florida
Volume 1
-------
DCN 84-222-078-19-01
EMISSION TEST REPORT
SLOAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY
ASPHALT CONCRETE PLANT
COCOA, FLORIDA
Final Report 84-ASP-8
Volume I
Prepared for:
Mr. Clyde E. Riley
Task Manager
Emissions Measurement Branch
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
EPA Contract No. 68-02-3850
Work Assignment 09
ESED Project No. 83-05
Prepared by:
L. A. Rohlack
E. P. Anderson
M. R. Fuchs
Radian Corporation
November 1984
-------
This report has been reviewed by the Emission Standards
and Engineering Division, Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards, Office of Air, Noise and Radiation,
Environmental Protection Agency, and approved for pub-
lication. Mention of company or product names does not
constitute endorsement by EPA. Copies are available
free of charge to Federal employees, current contractors
and grantees, and nonprofit organizations—as supplies
permit—from the Library Services Office, MD-35, Environ-
mental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711.
Order: EMB Report 84-ASP-8, Volume 1
-------
PREFACE
The work reported herein was performed by personnel from Radian
Corporation, Midwest Research Institute (MRI), and the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA).
Radian's Project Director, Michael Fuchs, directed the field sampling
and analytical effort. Larry Rohlack was responsible for summarizing the
test and analytical data presented in this report. Sample analysis was
performed by Radian Corporation in Austin, Texas. The test work was per-
formed under EPA Contract No. 68-02-3850, Work Assignment No. 9.
MRI Project Monitor, Jack Butler, was responsible for monitoring process
operations during the emissions testing program, and for reporting those data
to EPA. Radian was responsible for incorporating the process data into report
form (Section 3.0). The assistance of Sloan Construction Company personnel
contributed substantially to the success of this emission test program.
Sloan Construction Company personnel included Mr. Paul Haigler, Vice Presi-
dent, Mr. Kelly Sherrill, Plant Manager, Mr. Harry Thomas, Plant Superintendent,
and Mr. Randy Watkins, Plant Foreman.
Mr. Michael Glowers, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Indus-
trial Studies Branch, EPA, served as Project Lead Engineer and was responsible
for coordinating the process operations monitoring.
Mr. Clyde E. Riley, Office of the Air Quality Planning and Standards,
Emission Measurements Branch, EPA, served as Task Manager and was responsible
for overall test program coordination.
iii
-------
CONTENTS
Section Page
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1-1
1.1 Background 1-1
1.2 Objectives 1-2
1.3 Brief Process Description 1-2
1.4 Emissions Measurement Program 1-4
1.5 Description of Report Sections 1-6
2.0 SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS 2-1
2.1 Particulate Emission Results 2-1
2.2 Total Organic Carbon Results 2-8
2.3 Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons Emission Test
Results 2-11
2.4 Particle Size Distribution Results 2-11
2.5 Visible Emissions Results 2-14
2.6 Scrubber Water Monitoring and Grab Sample Analysis
Results 2-14
2.7 Process Sampling Results 2-20
3 .0 PROCESS DESCRIPTION AND OPERATION 3-1
3.1 Process Description 3-1
3.2 Process Operation 3-6
3.3 Process Monitoring During the Emission Test Program 3-6
3.4 Emission Control System Monitoring 3-7
4.0 SAMPLING LOCATIONS 4-1
4.1 Venturi Scrubber Inlet Sampling Locations 4-1
4.2 Venturi Scrubber Outlet Sampling Locations 4-5
4.3 Visible Emissions Observation Locations 4-5
4.4 Venturi Scrubber Water Sampling Locations 4-10
4.5 Venturi Scrubber Process Monitoring Locations 4-10
4.6 Asphalt Concrete Process Sampling Locations 4-13
5.0 SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS 5-1
5.1 Sampling Procedures 5-1
5.2 Analytical Methodology 5-17
5.3 Data Reduction 5-26
6.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE 6-1
6.1 Standard Quality Assurance Procedures. 6-1
6.2 Test Program Specific Quality Control/Quality
Assurance Procedures 6-9
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
2-1 Summary of Farticulate and Total Organic Carbon
Emissions (Metric Units) 2-2
2-2 Summary of Farticulate and Total Organic Carbon
Emissions (Metric Units) 2-3
2-3 Summary of Uncontrolled Particulate and Total
Organic Carbon Emissions 2-5
2-4 Summary of Controlled Particulate and Total Organic
Carbon Emiss ions 2-6
2-5 Comparison of Particulate Emission Rates Calculated
by Concentration Method Vs. Area Ratio Method 2-9
2-6 Summary of Uncontrolled Particle Size Distribution Tests 2-13
2-7 Opacity Readings on the Venturi Scrubber Outlet 2-15
2-9 Summary of Scrubber Water pH and Temperature Measurements.... 2-21
2-9 Summary of Scrubber Water Analytical Results 2-22
2-10 Summary of Process Sample Measurements 2-23
2-11 Summary of Recycle Asphalt Pavement (RAP) Smoke Point
Results and Asphalt Cement (AC) Smoke Point and
Flash Point Results 2-24
3-1 Technical Data on the Asphalt Concrete Plant Operated
by the Sloan Construction Company, Cocoa, Florida 3-2
3-2 Technical Data on the Wet Venturi Scrubber at the
Sloan Plant, Cocoa, Florida 3-5
3-3 Summary of Process and Control Device Operating Data
Collected During Emission Testing at the Sloan Asphalt
Concrete Plant, Cocoa, Florida - May 8, 1984 3-8
3-4 Summary of Process and Control Device Operating Data
Collected During Emission Testing at the Sloan Asphalt
Concrete Plant, Cocoa, Florida - May 10, 1984 3-9
3-5 Summary of Process and Control Device Operating Data
Collected During Emission Testing at the Sloan Asphalt
Concrete Plant, Cocoa, Florida - May 11, 1984 3-11
3-6 Product Mix Sieve Analysis Results 3-13
vii
-------
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
Table Page
5-1 Summary of Source Sampling Parameters and Methodology 5-2
5-2 GC-MS Conditions 5-24
5-3 Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons Determined by GC-MS 5-24
6-1 Summary of Calibrated Equipment Used in Performing
Source Sampling 6-2
6-2 Summary of Total Organic Carbon Audit Sample
Measurements 6-14
6-3 Summary of Cleanup Results 6-15
viii
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1-1 Schematic of the Sloan Asphalt Concrete Process 1-3
2-1 Particle Size Distribution Curves of Uncontrolled
Emissions Collected during Recycle Operation 2-12
2-2 Six-Minute Average of the Visible Emissions from the
Venturi Scrubber Stack during Particulate/TOC Run 1
at the Sloan Construction Company Asphalt Concrete
Plant, Cocoa, Florida on May 8, 1984 2-16
2-3 Six-Minute Averages of the Visible Emissions from the
Venturi Scrubber Stack during Particulate/TOC Run 2
of the Sloan Construction Company Asphalt Concrete
Plant, Cocoa, Florida on May 10, 1984 2-17
2-4 Six-Minute Averages of the Visible Emission from the
Venturi Scrubber Stack during Particulate/TOC Run 3
at the Sloan Construction Company Asphalt Concrete
Plant, Cocoa, Florida on May 10, 1984 2-18
2-5 Six-Minute Averages of the Visible Emissions from the
Venturi Scrubber Stack during Particulate/TOC Run 4
at the Sloan Construction Company Asphalt Concrete
Plant, Cocoa, Florida on May 10, 1984 2-19
3-1 Schematic of Emission Control System Used at the
Sloan Asphalt Concrete Plant, Cocoa, Florida 3-4
3-2 Record of Mix Temperature 3-12
4-1 Schematic of the Sloan Asphalt Concrete Process
Including General Sampling Point Locations and
Test Parameters 4-2
4-2 Side View of Duct Work Upstream and Downstream of
the Sloan Uncontrolled Emissions Sampling Location 4-3
4-3 Sloan Uncontrolled Emissions Sampling Traverse
Point Locations 4-4
4-4 Sloan Uncontrolled Emissions PSD Sampling Point
Location 4-6
4-5 Side View of Duct Work Upstream and Downstream of the
Sloan Controlled Emissions Sampling Location 4-7
4-6 Sloan Controlled Emissions Sampling Traverse Point
Location 4-8
IX
-------
LIST OF FIGURES (continued)
Figure
4-7 Locations of Visible Emissions Observations at the
Sloan Construction Company Asphalt Concrete
Plant, Cocoa, Florida 4-9
4-8 Layout of Sloan Effluent and Influent Scrubber
Ponds Including Sample Collection Locations 4-11
4-9 Location of Flosensor® Used to Monitor the Total
Water Flow to the Sloan Venturi 4-12
5-1 Modified EPA Method 5E Sampling Train Designed to
Collect Particulate and Total Organic Carbon
Samples at the Venturi Scrubber Inlet 5-6
5-2 EPA Reference Method 5E Impinger Train Configuration
and Contents Used during Uncontrolled Emissions
Source Testing at the Sloan Construction Co.,
Cocoa, Florida 5-8
5-3 EPA Reference Method 5E Impinger Train Configuration
and Contents Used during Controlled Emissions
Source Testing at the Sloan Construction Co.,
Cocoa, Florida 5-9
5-4 Sampling Train Designed to Collect Polynuclear
Aromatic Hydrocarbon Samples at the Sloan Venturi
Scrubber Inlet and Outlet 5-11
5-5 In-Stack Andersen High Capacity Stack Sampler Sampling
Train Used to Determine the Particle Size Distribution
at the Sloan Venturi Scrubber Inlet 5-13
5-6 Schematic of the Andersen Model HCSS High Grain-Loading
Impactor 5-14
5-7 Particulate and TOG Sample Recovery Analytical Matrix... 5-19
5-8 Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons Sample Recovery
Analytical Matrix 5-20
5-9 Scrubber Water Samples Analytical Matrix 5-21
5-10 HCSS Impactor 50% Cutpoint, Micrometers (pm) 5-30
-------
SECTION 1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Section 111 of the Clean Air Act of 1970 charges the Administrator of
the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) with the responsibility for
establishing Federal standards of performance for new stationary sources
which may significantly contribute to air pollution. When promulgated,
these new source performance standards (NSPS's) are to reflect the degree of
emission limitation achievable through application of the best demonstrated
emission control technology. Emission data, obtained from selected indus-
trial sources, are used in the development and/or review of NSPS regula-
tions. Information is presently being collected and analyzed for a review
of the NSPS for the asphalt concrete industry.
1.1 BACKGROUND
An NSPS for asphalt concrete plants was promulgated March 8, 1974 and
established a particulate matter limit of 0.04 grains per dry standard cubic
foot and a visible emission limit of 20 percent opacity. Following a review
of the asphalt concrete industry in 1979, no revisions to the standard were
proposed; however, a second review of the NSPS was initiated in November of
1982. As part of the review, particulate matter and opacity limits are being
evaluated for plants processing recycled asphalt pavement (RAP). The review
of the NSPS was requested by the National Asphalt Pavement Association (NAPA).
The request was made from the concern that possible higher emissions (parti-
culate matter and visible emissions) were generated during asphalt concrete
production with RAP. Increased hydrocarbon emissions during RAP processing
are considered to result in greater plume opacity due to the generation of
a "blue haze" created by condensed hydrocarbons.
1-1
-------
EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards selected the Sloan
Construction Company (Sloan) asphalt concrete plant in Cocoa, Florida as an
emission test program site. Selection was based upon (1) processing of
RAP, (2) prior results obtained during NSPS compliance testing, and (3) suit-
ability for testing.
1.2 OBJECTIVES
The purpose of the test program was to obtain and evaluate emission data
(particulate matter, hydrocarbons, and visible emissions) from an asphalt
concrete plant processing RAP. The plant was tested during recycle operation.
1.3 BRIEF PROCESS DESCRIPTION
Figure 1-1 presents a schematic of the Sloan asphalt concrete process.
Recycle operation is the term used to denote process operation when feeding
both virgin aggregate, i.e., unused aggregate material, and RAP to the rotary
drum simultaneously. The advantages of recycle operation include use of less
virgin aggregate, usually in areas with a limited supply of virgin aggregate,
and the use of less asphalt cement due to the inclusion of asphalt material
in the RAP.
The virgin aggregate is loaded into the natural gas-fired rotary drum
mixer via a belt conveyor. The quantity and mix of virgin aggregate is fed
from two bins and controlled by a computer located in the control room. RAP
is fed into the center portion of the rotary drum mixer via a belt conveyor.
The RAP feed rate is dependent upon the production rate and the percentage
of RAP desired, relative to the virgin aggregate feed rate. Liquid asphalt
is injected into the drum about three-fourths of the distance of the drum
from the burner end. The asphalt concrete falls from the drum onto a conveyor
and is transported to a temporary storage silo for truck load-out.
Gaseous emissions from the rotary drum enter a knockout box which reduces
the gas velocity to allow reduction of entrained particulate matter by settling.
1-2
-------
VIRGIN AGGREGATE
AND SAND FEED
PORT
BURNER
VIRGIN AGGREGATE
AND SAND FEED BINS
i CJ
CONVEYOR
RAP Feed Bins
Q_
HEATED
ASPHALT
STORAGE
TANK
WEIR-
CONVEYOR
SCRUBBER
PONDS
Figure 1-1. Schematic of the Sloan Asphalt Concrete Process
-------
From the knockout box, the emissions are ducted to a wet venturi scrubber.
Water is sprayed at the venturi throat to control emissions. Additional
water is flushed through a collection box below the venturi. Scrubber
water is contained in two earthen ponds. One pond is approximately
18 feet.by 60 feet, and the other pond is approximately 24 feet by 60 feet.
Both ponds have an effective depth of approximately 5 feet. Scrubber effluent
flows into the end of one pond while scrubber supply water is pumped from the
end of the other pond. The ponds are interconnected by means of an eight-inch
diameter PVC pipe which serves as a weir to reduce the suspended particulate
matter in the scrubber water supply pond.
1.4 EMISSIONS MEASUREMENT PROGRAM
The emissions measurement program was conducted at the Sloan Construction
Company asphalt concrete plant in Cocoa, Florida, May 7-11, 1984. The emis-
sion tests were designed to characterize and quantify uncontrolled (venturi
scrubber inlet) and controlled (venturi scrubber outlet) emissions during
recycle operation.
Radian personnel were responsible for sampling and analyzing process
emissions. Midwest Research Institute (MRI) was responsible for coordinating
the test program with plant officials and for assuring that operating conditions
for process and control equipment were suitable for the test program. MRI
was also responsible for monitoring and recording all necessary process and
control equipment operating parameters.
1.4.1 Particulate Mass Loading
Total particulate loading measurements were performed simultaneously at
the scrubber inlet (uncontrolled) and outlet (controlled) using a modified
version of EPA Method 5E. A total of four particulate mass runs were
conducted during recycle operation.
1-4
-------
1.4.2 Total Organic Carbon Loading
Total organic carbon (TOC) samples were collected at the scrubber inlet
and outlet simultaneously during the EPA Method 5E determinations described
in Section 1.4.1. Each sample consisted of organic matter collected on the
glassware downstream of the filter holder and in the two impingers containing
0.1N NaOH. TOC impinger samples (O.lN NaOH impinger -and rinse solution) were
analyzed to determine the total organic carbon content. Four test runs were
conducted during recycle operation.
1.4.3 Gas Stream Analysis
The CC>2 and 02 concentrations of the inlet and outlet flue gases were
determined using individual Fyrite® 02/C02 units according to EPA Method 3.
1.4.4 Particle Size Distribution
Two particle size distribution (PSD) test runs were performed for uncon-
trolled emissions during recycle operation.
1.4.5 Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons
One inlet sample and one outlet sample were collected during recycle
operation for polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH).
1.4.6 Visible Emissions
Visible emissions were measured by a certified reader during testing
periods when a clear, blue sky was available. The blue sky background was
necessary to determine the opacity of the plume.
1-5
-------
1.4.7 Scrubber and Process Sample Analysis
The two process waters sampled were scrubber water to the venturi and
scrubber water from the venturi. Multiple grab samples of process waters
were collected during each particulate/TOC and PAH run. Samples collected
during each test run were composited and analyzed for total dissolved solids,
total suspended solids, and total organic carbon. Selected samples were
analyzed for polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons. The temperature and pH of
water entering and exiting the scrubber were measured at the respective samp-
ling locations coincident with the recycle process sampling.
Grab samples of the three process solids streams virgin aggregate, RAP,
and asphalt cement were obtained during the test program. Virgin aggregate
and RAP were analyzed for moisture content. Samples of asphalt cement and
RAP were analyzed to determine the smoke point temperature. The flash point
of the asphalt cement was also determined.
1.4.8 Scrubber Operation and Process Production Monitoring
The total flow of scrubber water to the venturi scrubber and the scrubber
pressure drop were monitored and recorded during each test run. Flow rate
and pressure drop data were recorded during each emission test run.
MRI monitored and recorded the process operations data presented in
this report.
1.5 DESCRIPTION OF REPORT SECTIONS
The remaining sections of this report present the Summary and Discus-
sion of Results (Section 2), Process Description and Operation (Section 3),
Location of Sampling Points (Section 4), Sampling and Analytical Methodology
(Section 5), and Quality Assurance Procedures (Section 6). Detailed des-
criptions of methods and procedures, field and laboratory data, and calcula-
tions are presented in the various appendices, as indicated in the Table of
Contents.
1-6
-------
SECTION 2
2.0 SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
This section includes a presentation and discussion of the results of
emission and process characterization tests conducted at the Sloan asphalt
concrete plant in Cocoa, Florida. Uncontrolled and controlled gaseous emis-
sion streams were tested. Process characterization included testing of scrubber
waters and feed materials. Testing was conducted during recycle operation.
Table 2-1 (English units) and Table 2-2 (metric units) include a summary
of particulate and total organic carbon (TOC) emission test results conducted
at the Sloan asphalt concrete plant. Particulate mass and TOC test results
are presented and discussed in Sections 2.1 and 2.2, respectively. Section
2.3 presents polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbon results. Particle size dis-
tribution data and visible emission results are presented in Sections 2.4
and 2.5 Sections 2.6 and 2.7 present scrubber characterization results and
process sampling results.
Difficulties encountered in either sample collection or process con-
trol during testing are discussed as applicable to data interpretation.
The test results are also discussed and comparisons made, when applicable,
to help explain variabilities or discrepancies within the test results.
Field data may be found in Appendices A and C. Additional analytical
data may be found in Appendix E.
2.1 PARTICULATE EMISSION RESULTS
A modified version of EPA Method 5E was used to collect particulate
mass samples during recycle operation. A total of four uncontrolled and
2-1
-------
TABLE 2-1. SUMMARY OF PARTICULATE AND TOTAL ORGANIC
CARBON EMISSIONS (ENGLISH UNITS)
Run Number
Date
Type Emissions
Scrubber Pressure
Drop (in. H20)
Scrubber Water Flow
Rate (GPM)
Process Nix Type
Production Rate (tons/hr)
Average Opacity (percent)
Mean, Range
Participate and Total
Organic Carbon (TOO)
Results
Front Half Catch -
Partlculate (probe.
cyclone, and filter)
mass - mg
gr/dscf
Ibs/hr
Ibs/ton production
Collection eff. (Z)b
Back Half Catch - TOC
(Implnger solutions
and rinses)
mg - mass
gr/dscf
Iba/hr
Ibs/ton production
Collection eff. (Z)b
Total Catch
mass - mg
gr/dscf
Ibs/hr
Ibs/ton production
Collection Eff. (X)b
Run 1
0508
Uncontrolled Controlled
15
377
207
8.4
8470
8.09
1310
6.33
365
0.349
56.4
0.272
8830
8.44
1370
6.60
18
376
S-l
209
(5.4-11.9)
416
0.115
15. 9a
0.0763
98.8
83
0.023
3.47
0.017
93.8
499
0.138
19.4
0.093
98.5
Run 2
0510
Uncontrolled Controlled
17
360
190
13.6
5640
5.54
861
4.53
52
0.051
7.92
0.042
5690
5.59
867
4.56
17
360
S-l
190
(9.6-17.5)
356
0.130
19.9
0.105
97.7
69
0.025
3.86
0.020
51.3
425
0.155
23.8
0.125
97.3
Run 3
0510
Uncontrolled Controlled
19
366
192
12.5
5990
6.15
949
4.94
53
0.054
8.40
0.044
6040
6.21
957
4.99
20
365
S-l
195
(7.3-16.9)
393
0.143
21.4
0.110
97.7
68
0.025
3.70
0.019
56.0
461
0.167
25.1
0.129
97.4
Run 4
0510
Uncontrolled Controlled
20
362
205
9.8
4910
5.28
748
3.65
48
0.050
7.12
0.035
4960
5.33
753
3.67
20
361
S-l
204
(6.7-12.9)
298
0.113
16.1
0.079
97.8
50
0.019
2.78
0.014
61.8
348
0.132
18.9
0.093
97.4
Average0
—
Uncontrolled Controlled
19 19
363 362
—
196 196
12.0 (6.7-17.5)
5510 349
5.66 0.129
853 19.1
4.37 0.097
97.7
51 62
0.052 0.023
7.81 3.45
0.041 0.018
56.2
5560 411
5.71 0.153
859 22.6
4.41 0.115
97.4
in
i
S
z
.Results determined from average of concentration and area ratio methods
Collection efficiency percent determined using Ibs/hr values
Average values determined from Runs 2, 3, and 4 only
-------
TABLE 2-2. SUMMARY OF PARTICULATE AND TOTAL ORGANIC
CARBON EMISSIONS (METRIC UNITS)
NJ
I
U)
Run Number
Date
Type Emissions
Scrubber Pressure
Drop (cm H20)
Scrubber Water Flow
Rate (Ips)
Process Mix Type
Production Rate (Kg/a)
Average Opacity (percent)
Mean, Range
Partlculate and Total
Organic Carbon (TOC)
Results
Front Half Catch -
Partlculate (probe,
cyclone, and filter)
mass - mg
mg/dscm
g/s
g/kg production
Collection eff. (Z)b
Back Half Catch - TOC
(Implnger solutions
and rinses)
mg - mass
mg/dscm
g/s
g/kg production
Collection eff. (X)b
Total Catch
mass - mg
mg/dscm
g/s
g/kg production
Collection eff. (Z)b
Run 1
0508
Uncontrolled
38.1
23.8
S-l
51.2
8.4 (5.4-11
8470
18,500
165
12.7
98.8
365
799
7.11
0.136
93.8
8830
19,300
173
3.30
98.5
Controlled
45.7
23.7
52.7
.9)
416
263
2.00a
0.038a
83
52.6
0.438
0.009
499
316
2.44
0.047
Run 2
0510
Uncontrolled Controlled
43.2
22.7
47.9
13.6
5640
12,700
109
2.26
52
117
0.999
0.021
5690
12,800
109
2.28
43.2
22.7
S-l
47.9
(9.6-17.5)
356
298
2.51
0.052
97.7
69
57.2
0.487
0.010
51.3
425
355
3.00
0.062
97.3
Run 3
0510
Uncontrolled Controlled
48.3
23.1
48.4
12.5
5990
14,100
120
2.47
53
124
1.06
0.022
6040
14,200
121
2.50
50.8
23.0
S-l
49.1
(7.3-16.9)
393
327
2.70
0.055
97.7
68
57.2
0.467
0.010
56.0
461
384
3.17
0.065
97.4
Run 4
0510
Uncontrolled
50.8
22.8
S-l
51.7
9.8 (6.7-12
4910
12,100
94.3
1.82
97.8
48
119
0.918
0.018
61.8
4960
12,200
95.0
1.84
97.4
Controlled
50.8
22.8
51.4
.9)
298
259
2.03
0.040
50
43.5
0.351
0.007
348
302
2.38
0.047
Average0
—
Uncontrolled Controlled
48.3 48.3
22.9 22.8
S-l
49.4 49.4
12.0 (6.7-17.5)
5510 349
13,000 295
108 2.41
2.18 0.049
97.7
51 62
120 52.6
0.992 0.435
0.020 0.009
56.2
5560 411
13,100 348
108 2 . 84
2.21 0.058
97.4
1
^Results determined from average of concentration and area ratio methods (Table 2-5)
Collection efficiency percent determined using g/s values
CAverage values based on Runs 2, 3, and 4 only
-------
controlled particulate emission tests were conducted at the Sloan asphalt
concrete plant. Results of the Sloan uncontrolled and controlled particulate
emission tests are presented in Tables 2-3 and 2-4, respectively. Particulate
emission results, identified in the data tables as the "front-half catch,"
are presented and discussed in this section.
2.1.1 Uncontrolled Particulate Emission Results
Uncontrolled particulate loadings (refer to Table 2-3) were 8.09, 5.54,
6.15, and 5.28 grains per dry standard cubic feet (gr/DSCF) for Runs 1, 2,
3, and 4, respectively. The average uncontrolled particulate mass loading
for Runs 2, 3, and 4 was 5.66 gr/DSCF. Run 1 uncontrolled mass loading data
was not included in the average because the Run 1 controlled particulate
loading test was collected under anisokinetic conditions (83%).
2.1.2 Controlled Particulate Emission Results
Controlled particulate loadings (refer to Table 2-4) were 0.115, 0.130,
0.143, and 0.113 gr/DSCF for Runs 1, 2, 3', and 4, respectively. The average
controlled particulate mass loading for Runs 2, 3, and 4 was 0.129 gr/DSCF,
which is above the present NSPS standard of 0.04 gr/DSCF. Run 1 controlled
mass loading data was not included in the average because the test was con-
ducted under anisokinetic conditions (83%).
2.1.3 Discussion of Particulate Emission Test Results
Three topics are discussed in this section. They include:
• difficulties encountered in collecting particulate mass
samples,
• anisokinetic effect on particulate mass emission calculations,
and
• venturi scrubber particulate emissions removal efficiency.
2-4
-------
TABLE 2-3. SUMMARY OF UNCONTROLLED PARTICULATE AND
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON EMISSIONS
to
Run Number
Date
Volume Gas Sampled (DSCF)
Stack Gas Flow Rate (DSCFM)
Stack Temperature (°F)
Percent Moisture by Volume
Percent Isokinetic
Production Rate (tons/hr)
Particulate and Total Organic
Carbon (TOC) Results
Front Half Catch - Particulate
(probe, cyclone, and filter)
mass - mg
gr/dscf
Ibs/hr
Ibs/ton production
Back Half Catch - TOC
(impinger, solutions and rinses)
impinger number
mass - mg
gr/dscf
Ibs/hr
Ibs/ton production
Percent TOC catch3
Run 1
0508
16.1
18,900
287
30.3
99.7
207
8470
8.09
1310
6.33
1 2&3
353 12
0.349
56.4
0.272
96.7 3.3
Run 2
0510
15.7
18,100
304
29.0
101.2
190
5640
5.54
861
4.53
1 2&3
39 13
0.051
7.92
0.042
75.0 25.0
Run 3
0510
15.0
18,000
291
30.4
97.5
192
5990
6.15
949
4.94
1 2&3
32 21
0.054
8.40
0.044
60.4 39.6
Run 4
0510
14.4
16,500
293
32.2
101.5
205
4910
5.28
748
3.65
1 2&3
36 11
0.050
7.12
0.035
76.6 23.4
Average"
__
15.0
17,500
296
30.5
100.0
196
5510
5.66
853
4.37
1 2&3
36 15
0.052
7.81
0.041
70.6 29.4
Percent of total impinger catch.
Average values calculated from Runs 2, 3, and 4 only.
-------
TABLE 2-4. SUMMARY OF CONTROLLED PARTICULATE AND
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON EMISSIONS
N>
I
Run Number
Date
Volume Gas Sampled (DSCF)
Stack Gas Flow Rate (DSCFM)
Stack Temperature (°F)
Percent Moisture by Volume
Percent Isokinetic
Production Rate (tons/hr)
Particulate and Total Organic
Carbon (TOC) Results
Front Half Catch - Particulate
(probe, cyclone, and filter)
mass (mg)
gr/dscf
Ibs/hr
Ibs/ton
Back Half Catch - TOC
impinger number
mass (mg)
gr/dscf
Ibs/hr
Ibs/ton
Percent TOC catchc
Run 1
0508
55.7
17,600
159
29.5
82.6
209
416
0.115
15. 9a
0.076a
16,2 3&4
71 12
0.023
3.47
0.017
85.5 14.5
Run 2
0510
42.2
17,800
154
24.8
102.1
190
356
0.130
19.9
0.105
16,2 3&4
59 10
0.025
3.86
0.020
85.5 14.5
Run 3
0510
42.5
17,500
160
30.2
104.7
195
393
0.143
21.4
0.110
1&2 3&4
57 10
0.025
3.70
0.019
85.1 14.9
Run 4
0510
39.6
16,700
161
30.4
102.3
204
298
0.113
16.1
0.079
16,2 36,4
44 6
0.019
2.78
0.014
88.0 12.0
Average^
—
41.4
17,300
158
28.5
103.0
196
349
0.129
19.1
0.097
16,2 36,4
53 8,7
0.023
3.45
0.018
85.9 14.1
Average Emission Rate determined from concentration and Area Ratio Methods (Table 2-5)
""Average values determined from Runs 2, 3, and 4 only
"Percent of total impinger catch
-------
2.1.3.1 Particulate Mass Sampling Difficulties—
Problems encountered during particulate mass sampling were limited to
the controlled emissions sampling location. The sampling problems included:
• development of high sampling system pressure drop during
sample acquisition, and
• source sampling equipment malfunctions.
During the first half of controlled particulate emissions test Run 1,
the sampling system pressure drop increased from 3 inches of mercury
(Hg) to 22 inches of Hg due to the build up of particulate matter on the fil-
ter. At this point the run was stopped because the isokinetic sampling rate
could not be maintained. The filter was replaced and sampling resumed.
During the second half of controlled particulate emissions test Run 1,
the sampling system pressure drop again increased from 3 inches Hg
to 22 inches Hg. The run was terminated one minute early because isokinetic
sample gas flow could not be maintained. To alleviate this problem, the
sampling time was reduced from 5 minutes per point to 3 minutes per point
for the remaining controlled runs.
During controlled particulate emissions test Run 2, the temperature
controller used to control the temperature of the gas sample exiting the
filter holder, malfunctioned. To alleviate this problem a variac was used
to control the gas temperature exiting the filter holder at 250 + 10°F.
2.1.3.2 Discussion of Anisokinetic Test Results—
Controlled particulate emissions Run 1 was collected at subisokinetic
conditions (83%). In order to allow a review of possible effects introduced
by anisokinetic sampling into the normal mass emission rate calculations,
two methods were used to calculate mass emission rates for controlled parti-
culate mass emission Run 1. The method normally used to calculate particu-
late mass emission rates is the concentration method. This method involves
multiplying the particulate loading (sample mass divided by gas sample
volume) by the volumetric gas flow rate. The second particulate mass
2-7
-------
emission rate calculation method is the area-ratio method. Based on the
area-ratio method, the sample mass is divided by the sampling time and then
multiplied by the ratio of the stack area to nozzle area to obtain the
particulate mass emission rate.
0,
The difference between the emission rates calculated by these two
methods is an estimate of the maximum bias in the measured emission rate due
to anisokinetic sampling. Table 2-5 includes particulate emission rates
calculated using the concentration method and the area-ratio method. The
average particulate emission rate listed in Table 2-5 was used as the true
value for the particulate emission run that was outside of the isokinetic
sampling limit of 100 + 10%.
i
2.1.3.3 Discussion of Venturi Scrubber Particulate Emissions Removal
Efficiency—
The venturi scrubber particulate emissions removal efficiency ranged
from 97.7 to 98.8 percent during Runs 1 through 4. The average venturi
scrubber particulate emissions removal efficiency was 97.7 percent for
Runs 2, 3, and 4.
2.2 TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON RESULTS
Uncontrolled and controlled total organic carbon (TOC) mass samples were
collected simultaneously with particulate mass samples using the modified
EPA Method 5E sampling train. The TOC content of the 0.1 N NaOH impinger
and rinse solutions were analyzed directly using an instrumental technique.
Results of the Sloan uncontrolled and controlled particulate emission tests
are presented in Tables 2-3 and 2-4 respectively. TOC results, identified
in the data tables as the "back-half catch," are presented and discussed in
this section.
2-8
-------
S3
TABLE 2-5. COMPARISON OF PARTICULATE EMISSION RATES CALCULATED
BY CONCENTRATION METHOD VS. AREA RATIO METHOD
Particulate Mass Emission Rate(lbs/hr)
Date
5-08-84
Time
1426-1739
Run
Description
Controlled
Part. Run 1
Percent
Isokinetic
82.6
Concentration
Method
17.4
Area-Ratio
Method
14.4
Average
15.9
-------
2.2.1 Uncontrolled TOG Emission Results
Uncontrolled TOC loadings (refer to Table 2-3) were 0.349, 0.051,
0.054, and 0.052 gr/DSCF for Runs 1, 2, 3, and 4 respectively. The average
uncontrolled TOC loading was 0.052 gr/DSCF for Runs 2, 3, and 4. Run 1
uncontrolled TOC mass loading was not included in the average because the
Run 1 controlled TOC loading test was collected under anisokinetic condi-
tions (83%).
2.2.2 Controlled TOC Emission Results
Controlled TOC loadings (refer to Table 2-4) were 0.023, 0.025, 0.025,
and 0.019 gr/DSCF for Runs 1, 2, 3, and 4 respectively. The average con-
trolled TOC loading was 0.023 gr/DSCF for Runs 2, 3, and 4. Run 1 TOC data
was not included in the average because the sample was collected under
anisokinetic conditions.
2.2.3 Discussion of TOC Emission Results
The uncontrolled Run 1 TOC loading (0.349 gr/DSCF) was approximately
7 times greater than the average TOC loading (0.052 gr/DSCF) for Runs 2, 3,
and 4. Reanalysis of the sample verified the higher TOC results. Uncontrolled
Run 1 is believed to be an outlier due to possible contamination.
One of the objectives of this program was to determine the removal
efficiency of the 0.1 N NaOH impingers. Based on data from Runs 2, 3, and
4, the average percentage of TOC collected in the first NaOH impinger sample
relative to the total mass of TOC collected in the impinger train was 68.0
for the uncontrolled emissions tests and 83.4 for the controlled emission
tests.
The venturi scrubber TOC removal efficiency was 93.9, 51.3, 56.0, and
61.8 percent for Runs 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. The average TOC removal
efficiency across the venturi was 56.2 percent for Runs 2, 3, and 4.
2-10
-------
2.3 POLYNUCLEAR AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS EMISSION TEST RESULTS
Polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) samples were collected in the
uncontrolled and controlled air emissions, during this program, using an
adaptation of EPA Method 5E. The technique, described in Section 5, includes
the use of the Method 5E "front-half" (filter) for particulate collection
and the "back-half" (XAD-2 resin) for adsorption of organic compounds. One
set of uncontrolled and controlled PAH samples was collected during recycle
operation.
During the preparation of the PAH emission samples for analysis, the
extraction device malfunctioned and the solvent evaporated to dryness. As
a result, the PAH emission samples were destroyed and no analysis could be
performed. For this reason no gas phase PAH emission results are presented.
2.4 PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION RESULTS
An Andersen High Capacity Stack Sampler (AHCSS) was used during this
program to determine the particle size distribution (PSD) of uncontrolled
emissions. The AHCSS sizes particles aerodynamically and is designed to
determine the PSD of gas streams with high grain loadings. The AHCSS collec-
tion stages allow for the collection of a greater mass of particulate matter
as opposed to conventional impaction type PSD samplers. This in turn allows
for the collection of sample over a longer and more representative period.
A total of three PSD runs were performed at Sloan. Of the three PSD
runs, only two were valid because of a leak that developed in the impinger
train during sampling. The results of the two uncontrolled PSD runs are
presented graphically in Figure 2-1 and tabularly in Table 2-6. Based on
the PSD data, the mass mean diameter for both PSD runs is greater than 15 Vm.
2-11
-------
8
w
99.9
99.8
99.5
99
98
95
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
5
1
0.5
0.2
0.1
• PSD 01
• PSD-02
10
100
Particle Size Microns
Figure 2-1. Particle Size Distribution Curves of Uncontrolled Emissions
Collected during Recycle Operation.
-------
TABLE 2-6. SUMMARY OF UNCONTROLLED PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION TESTS
K>
I
Date
5-10-84
5-11-84
Flow Rate
Time Run No. (ACFM) Stage
1411-1545 PSD-01 0.584 1
2
cyclone
filter
1230-1400 PSD-02 0.549 1
2
cyclone
filter
Mass
Collected
4.6491
0.1629
0.4727
0.2676
5.6909
1.2100
0.9406
0.3505
% in Size
Range
83.7
2.9
8.5
4.8
69.5
14.8
11.5
4.3
Cumulative
% Less than
Size Range
16.2
13.3
4.8
—
30.6
15.8
4.3
__
Size DPso
Range (ym) (ym)
>11.8 11.8
6.0-11.8 6.0
1.7-6.0 1.7
<1.7
>12.1 12.1
6.4-12.1 6.4
1.8-6.4 1.8
<1.8
Percent
Isokinetic
96.2
96.0
-------
2.5 VISIBLE EMISSIONS RESULTS
Visible emissions were measured by a certified reader during testing
periods when a clear, blue sky was available. Visible emissions were not
measured during test periods when overcast conditions existed. The blue sky
background was required for detection of emissions caused by condensed hydro-
carbons in the plume. Opacity readings are presented in Table 2-7. Visible
emission results obtained during the four particulate/TOC loading runs are
graphically presented in Figure 2-2, 2-3, 2-4, and 2-5.
The average opacity measurement was 8.4, 13.6, 12.5, and 9.8 during Runs
1, 2, 3, and 4 respectively. The maximum six-minute opacity measurement was
11.9, 17.5, 16.9, and 12.9 percent for Runs 1, 2, 3, and 4 respectively. The
average opacity measurement during Runs 2, 3, and 4 was 12-0 percent.
2.6 SCRUBBER WATER MONITORING AND GRAB SAMPLE ANALYSIS RESULTS
This section presents results of scrubber water pH and temperature
measurements and analytical results performed on scrubber water samples.
2.6.1 Scrubber Water pH and Temperature Results
Periodically during each sampling run, the pH and temperature of the
venturi scrubber water influent and effluent were measured. Results of pH
and temperature measurements during recycle operation are presented in Table
2-8. The average pH measurements for the venturi scrubber water influent were
6.16, 6.14, 6.12, 6.10, and 6.14 for particulate/TOC Runs 1, 2, 3, 4 and PAH
Run 1, respectively. The average venturi scrubber water effluent pH readings
corresponding to the above sampling runs were 5.80, 5.76, 5.74, 5.77, and
5.74, respectively.
The average venturi scrubber water influent temperatures were 137°F,
118°F, 138°F, 140°F, and 143°F for particulate/TOC Runs 1, 2, 3, 4 and PAH
Run 1, respectively. The average corresponding scrubber water effluent
2-14
-------
TABLE 2-7. OPACITY. READINGS ON. THE VENTURI SCRUBBER OUTLET
Run
Dace Description Time
5-08-84 Part./TOC-l 1425-1430
1431-1436
1437-1442
1443-1448
1449-1454
1455-1500
1501-1506
1507-1512
1513-1518
1555-1600
1601-1606
1607-1612
1640-1645
1646-1651
1652-1657
1658-1703
1704-1709
1710-1715
1716-1721
1722-1727
1728-M733
1734-1739
1740-1745
Average
5-10-84 Part./TOC-3 1139-1144
1145-1150
1151-1156
1157-1202
1203-1208
1209-1214
1323-1328
1329-1334
1335-1340
1341-1346
1347-1352
1353-1358
1359-1404
1405-1410
Average
Opacity for
6 Minutes Date
10.2 5-10-84
8.5
7.1
8.5
10.6
7.7
8.8
6.2
8.1
6.7
7.3
8.1
5.4
7.5
5.4
11.9
9.2
11.0
11.4
11.2
8.1
7.9
6.9
8.4
10.0 5-10-84
12.7
12.5
11.2
12.7
7.3
13.3
15.0
16.9
7.3
13.1
13.3
14.1
15.2
Run
Description Time
Part . /TOC-2 0800-0805
0806-0811
0818-0823
0824-0829
0830-0835
0914-0919
0920-0925
0926-0931
0932-0937
0938-0943
0946-0951
0952-0957
0958-1003
1004-1009
1010-1015
1016-1021
1022-1027
Average
Part./TOC-4 1540-1545
1546-1551
1552-1557
1558-1603
1604-1609
1610-1615
1623-1628
1629-1634
1635-1640
1641-1646
1647-1652
1653-1659
Average
Average
Opacity for
6 Minutes
10,6
12.3
9.6
12.7
12.9
10.6
13.1
12.3
17.5
14.4
15.6
17.5
16.2
11.8
14.8
16.2
11.5
13.6
7.7
6.7
7.7
8.3
10.6
12.9
11.0
7.5
10.2
10.6
11.4
12.9
9.8
Average
12.5
2-15
-------
NJ
I
UJ
o
DC
8!
18-
16.5-
15-
13.5-
12-
10.5-
9-
_n
6-
4.5-
3-
1.5-
1400
1430
1500
1530
1600
TIME
1630
1700
1730
1800
Figure 2-2. Six-Minute Averages of the Visible Emissions from the Venturi Scrubber
Stack during Particulate/TOC Run 1 at the Sloan Construction Company
Asphalt Concrete Plant, Cocoa, Florida on May 8, 1984.
-------
r-o
I
u
§
(C
18-
16.5-
15-
13.5-
12-
10.5-
9-
7.5-
6-
4.5-
3-
1.5-
n
r
J
nl
0730
0800
0830
0900
0930
1000
1030
1100
TIME
Figure 2-3. Six-Minute Averages of the Visible Emissions from the Venturi Scrubber
Stack during Particulate/TOC Run 2 of the Sloan Construction Company
Asphalt Concrete Plant, Cocoa, Florida on May 10, 1984.
-------
18-
16.5-
15-
13.5-
12-
10.5-
ro
I
oo
9-
O
a.
O
UJ
o
DC
s: /.SH
6-
4.5-
3-
1.5-
rui
1100
1130
1200
1230
1300
1330
14G
1430
TIME
Figure 2-4. Six-Minute Averages of the Visible Emission from the Venturi
Scrubber Stack during Particulate/TOC Run 3 at the Sloan Con-
struction Company Asphalt Concrete Plant, Cocoa, Florida on
May 10, 1984.
-------
NJ
I
U
z
O
18
16.5-
15-
13.5-
12-
10.5-
9-
ui
o
DC
K 7.5-
6-
4.5-
3-
1.5-
1500
1530 1600 1630 1700 1730
TIME
Figure 2-5. Six-Minute Averages of the Visible Emissions from the Venturi "
Scrubber Stack during Particulate/TOC Run 4 at the Sloan Construction
Company Asphalt Concrete Plant, Cocoa, Florida on May 10, 1984
-------
temperatures were 156°F, 150°F, 157°F, 156°F, and 158°F, respectively. Also
included in Table 2-8 are pond temperature data collected by MRI personnel.
2.6.2 Scrubber Water Analytical Results
During each sampling run, at least two venturi scrubber water influent
and effluent samples were collected. The grab samples during each run were
composited and then filtered to determine total suspended solids. An aliquot
of the filtrate was then analyzed for dissolved solids. The remaining fil-
trate was analyzed for TOC and polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons and major
organics.
Table 2-9 presents the scrubber water analytical results. Total sus-
pended solids (TSS) concentrations for the venturi scrubber water influent
samples were 57.3, 18.0, 33.5, 48.8, and 110 mg/1 for particulate/TOC Runs
1, 2, 3, 4, and PAH Run 1, respectively. The corresponding total dissolved
solids (TDS) concentrations were 14,700; 12,100; 13,000; 13,800; and 14,200
mg/1. TSS concentrations for the venturi scrubber water effluent samples
were 1970, 864, 774, 960, and 1040 mg/1 for particulate/TOC Runs 1, 2, 3, 4
and PAH Run 1, respectively. The corresponding TDS concentrations were
15,000; 12,300; 13,400; 14,200; and 14,100 mg/1.
Polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons were not detected in the scrubber water
samples collected during PAH Run 1. The major organic species quantified in
the scrubber water samples are included in Table 2-9.
2.7 PROCESS SAMPLING RESULTS
During each test period, samples of virgin aggregate and recycled asphalt
pavement were collected and analyzed for percent moisture. Care was taken
to obtain a representative sample. To accomplish, this a large sample
(approximately 10 pounds) was collected and coned-and-quartered to yield
500-700 grams for analysis. Table 2-10 presents moisture values of the
virgin aggregate and RAP samples. The percent moisture by weight values
2-20
-------
TABLE 2-8. SUMMARY OF SCRUBBER WATER pH AND
TEMPERATURE MEASUREMENTS
K>
I
fO
Date
5-08-84
5-10-84
5-10-84
5-10-84
5-11-84
Run Number Time
Part./TOC-l 1440-1445
1555-1559
1650-1655
Average
Part . /TOC-2 0820-0825
0945-0950
Average
Part./TOC-3 1144-1148
1332-1336
Average
Part./TOC-4 1540-1545
1644-1647
Average
PAH Run 1 1112-1116
1230-1232
Average
Water
pH
6.28
6.11
6.10
6.16
6.25
6.02
6.14
6.09
6.16
6.12
6.09
6.12
6.10
6.28
6.00
6.14
to Venturi
Temperature
(°F)
134
136
140
137
111
126
118
143
132
138
140
140
140
142
144
143
Venturi
PH
5.87
5.77
5.75
5.80
5.75
5.77
5.76
5.75
5.73
5.74
5.74
5.80
5.77
5.86
5.61
5.74
Exit Water
Temperature
(°F)
154
157
156
156
147
152
150
158
156
157
156
156
156
157
158
158
Pond
Water3
Temperature
Inlet Outlet
136
136
139
137
___
126
126
143
134
138
140
140
140
144
144
144
154
154
154
154
152
152
158
156
157
156
155
156
157
158
158
Data recorded by MRI personnel.
-------
TABLE 2-9. SUMMARY OF SCRUBBER WATER ANALYTICAL RESULTS
Part Bun 1 Part Run 2
0508 0310
Saaple Type Venturi Exit Hater Venturi Bait Hater
pa 6.16 5.80 6.14 5.76
Te^arature *F 137 196 118 150
Total Organic Carbon
Result*
M/l (*• C) 1120 1110 830 . 920
Total Solid. Reeulte
Smpenqed Solid*
nj/1 57.3 1970 18.0 864
Olaeolved Solid*
M/l 14,700 15,000 12,100 12.300
Polynuciear Aromatic
Hydrocarbon Reeulta
Active Carcinogenic0
Serlaa (n«/l>
Bens(a)anthrecene
Chryaene
Bento(o) I luoranthen*
Benxo(j)fluoranthene
Benxo(e)pyrene
Banxo(e)pyrene
Indeno(l,2.3-c.d)
pyrene
Hon~actlve Carcinogenic
Serlea (ua/1)
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
Fluoranthane
Pyrena
Bento(k)f luorenthana
Perylene
Benso(g,h,l)perylena
Pert Run 3 Part Run 4 PAH
0310 0910 0!
Vaoturi Bait Uatar Venturi Bait Hater Venturi
6.12 9.74 6.10 9.77 6.14
138 157 140 156 143
930 960 990 990 —
33.5 774 48.8 960 110
13.000 13,400 13,800 14.200 14,200
HD
TO
HD
HD
HD
HD
HD
HD
HD
HD
HD
HD
«0
HD
Run 1 Avaraga
110
Ealt Ueter Venturi Bait Hater
5.74 6.14 J.76
158 133 153
— 970 980
1040 33.3 1120
14,100 13,600 13,800
HD
HD
HD
m
HD
HD
HO
HD
HD
ND
HD
HD
HD
HD
Halor Organic Speclea Inn/1)
Phenol «0 870
Creo«>l 97 200
Methoiy phenol "O M
C2-Phenol »» M
Onknovn* " "
Unknown 60 KD
CfBenien. "0 190
Cj-Ph«nol 106 170
Hydroiy»etno»y-phenyl ethanon* 10° 20°
Unknovn '0 57
Unkoon "° 5'
^Unknown coapounda quantified by relative reaponaa (actor.
Futoaa. David, at al.
2-22
-------
TABLE 2-10. SUMMARY OF PROCESS SAMPLE MEASUREMENTS
N>
Virgin Aggregate
Run Number
Part./TOC-l
Part./TOC-2
Part./TOC-3
Part./TOC-4
PAH/Run I
Average
Date
0508
0510
0510
0510
0511
—
Time
1515
0920
1200
1600
1140
—
Sample
Wt.(g)
466
454
461
564
799
549
Moisture
by Weight
4.14
5.91
6.44
5.73
5.93
5.63
Recycled Asphalt Pavement
Time
1615
0930
1325
1615
1150
—
Sample
Wt.(g)
462
452
458
885
600
571
Moisture
by Weight
2.64
1.64
1.88
1.80
2.42
2.08
-------
were 4.14, 5.91, 6.44, 5.73, and 5.93 for the virgin aggregate and 2.64,
1.64, 1.88, 1.80, and 2.42 for the RAP collected during particulate/TOC Runs
1, 2, 3, 4, and PAH Run 1, respectively.
Samples of RAP were also collected during each test period for smoke
point determination. Each RAP sample was analyzed by the Oklahoma Testing
Laboratory and by Radian. The RAP smoke point test results are recorded
in Table 2-11. RAP smoke point test results obtained by the Oklahoma
Testing Laboratory ranged from 330°F to 350°F with an average of 341°F.
RAP smoke point test results obtained by Radian ranged from 360°F to 373°F
with an average of 368°F.
A sample of the asphalt cement (AC) used by the plant was collected
for smoke point and flash point analysis. The AC smoke point and flash
point analysis was performed by the Oklahoma Testing Laboratory and the
results are included in Table 2-11.
2-24
-------
TABLE 2-11. SUMMARY OF RECYCLE ASPHALT PAVEMENT (RAP)
SMOKE POINT RESULTS AND ASPHALT CEMENT
(AC) SMOKE POINT AND FLASH POINT RESULTS
Collection
Date
5-08-84
5-10-84
5-10-84
5-10-84
5-11-84
5-10-84
Time
1615
0930
1325
1615
1130
0830
Sample
Type
RAP
RAP
RAP
RAP
RAP
AC
Oklahoma Testing
Smoke Point
°F
350
340
340
330
345
360
Radian
Smoke Point Flash
°F Point °F
360
370
373
370
367
580
Flash Point Analysis performed by Oklahoma Testing Laboratory.
2-25
-------
eoapoojcn
SECTION 3
3.0 PROCESS DESCRIPTION AND OPERATION
This section provides a brief description of the asphalt concrete plant
operated by the Sloan Construction Company in Cocoa, Florida. The procedures
used to monitor the operation of the asphalt concrete plant and the process
parameters recorded during recycle emissions testing are also presented in
this section.
3.1 PROCESS DESCRIPTION
A description of the Sloan asphalt concrete plant (including the
emissions control system) is presented in this section.
3.1.1 Process Equipment Description
Sloan Construction Company operates an ASTEC drum-mix asphalt concrete
plant on Clear Lake Road off State Highway 528 (Beeline Expressway) near
Cocoa, Florida (refer to Figure 1-1). The plant was installed in 1981.
Table 3-1 presents a summary of technical data on the Sloan asphalt concrete
plant.
The ASTEC drum at Sloan is 42 feet long and 7 feet in diameter. The
Sloan plant utilizes four cold feed bins: two for RAP, one for virgin
aggregate, and one for sand. The virgin aggregate and sand enter the burner
end of the rotating drum. The RAP enters the rotating drum through a collar
around the center of the drum. Fuel for the burner is No. 5 fuel oil.
3-1
-------
TABLE 3-1. TECHNICAL DATA ON THE ASPHALT CONCRETE PLANT
OPERATED BY THE SLOAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY,
COCOA, FLORIDA
Type plant
Manufacturer
Percent RAP on current project
Estimated completion date for current project
Year installed
Design capacity, tph (% moisture)
Dryer fuel
Firing rate, gal/ton
Burner manufacturer
Drum size,
Length, ft
Diameter, ft
Recycle entrance point
AC injection point (ft upstream from discharge
end of drum)
Asphalt type
n
Smoke point, °F
Blue haze observed?
Drum-mix
AS TEC
51
May 31, 1984
1981
293 (4)
252 (5)
221 (6)
196 (7)
176 (8)
No. 5 fuel oil
1.5-2.5
Hauck
42
7
Mid drum
11-17
Chevron HMA-175
>400
Yes
Heat content of No. 5 fuel oil was reported by Mr. Sherrill to be
44,000 Btu/gal.
Dependent on moisture content and production rate.
"Estimated by Mr. Sherrill.
During testing.
3-2
-------
Asphalt cement is injected into the drum at a point approximately
4 to 10 feet downstream from the RAP collar. The liquid asphalt is stored in
a heated storage container maintained at about 230°F. The final product
exiting the drum is transported by conveyor to a temporary holding silo where
the product is loaded onto trucks for transportation.
3.1.2 Emission Control System Description
Figure 3-1 illustrates the emission control system (venturi scrubber)
used by Sloan. Process emissions from the drum-mixer exit the discharge end
of the drum and enter a knockout box to remove some of the larger particles
by reducing the air velocity. From here the emissions are ducted up from the
top face of the knockout box through an approximately 3-foot diameter, inverted
U- or V-shape duct and back down to the venturi scrubber. This duct consists
of three elbows separated by two approximately 6-foot long, straight duct
sections.
Specifications for the wet venturi scrubber are listed in Table 3-2.
Scrubber water is injected through a nozzle spray bar located just prior
to the venturi throat. The venturi pressure drop is variable from 15 to
21 inches of water column. Upon exiting the scrubber, the process gases enter
a horizontal water knockout drum and then pass through the induced draft (I.D.)
fan. Water sprays are located in the fan housing to help prevent the buildup
of material on the fan blades. The process gases exit the fan into a tan-
gential-entry, 10-foot diameter knockout box, pass through straightening vanes,
and out a 4-foot diameter steel stack.
Scrubber water is contained in two adjacent earthen ponds that are inter-
connected by means of an 8-inch diameter PVC pipe. One pond is 18 feet by
60 feet and the other is 24 feet by 60 feet. Scrubber effluent flows into
the end of one pond while scrubber supply water is pumped from the other
pond. The dike dividing the two ponds serves as a weir to reduce the suspended
particulate matter in the scrubber supply pond. Pond make-up water is supplied
from the water table which is about 1 foot below the ground surface in this
3-3
-------
OUTLET
SAMPLING
LOCATIONS
INLET
SAMPLING
LOCATIONS
U)
DRUM
MIXER
\
STACK
Figure 3-1. Schematic of Emission Control System Used at the
Sloan Asphalt Concrete Plant, Cocoa, Florida.
-------
TABLE 3-2. TECHNICAL DATA ON THE WET VENTURI SCRUBBER
AT THE SLOAN PLANT, COCOA, FLORIDA
Type scrubber
Manufacturer
Date installed
Design air flow, acfm
Water circulation rate, gpm
Makeup water source
Scrubber water discharge temp, °?c
Scrubber pond temp at surface, °FC
Scrubber outlet
Scrubber inlet
Blue haze observed?'
Venturi
ASTEC
1981
43,000
300-400
Water table
140-160
100-145
4-ft diameter
circular steel
stack with
sampling ports
3-ft diameter
circular steel
duct
Yes
During test period.
3-5
-------
area. Plant personnel believed the ponds to be about 10 feet deep. Crude
measurements made at the time of testing indicated the ponds were approximately
5 feet deep,
Sloan personnel do not normally treat the pond water in any manner, so
it was not treated during this test. (Scrubber pond water can be treated
with a floculant to remove suspended solids or with lime to control the pond
water pH.)
3.2 PROCESS OPERATION
Operation of the Sloan plant is typical of other drum-mix plants.
During testing, the plant operated about 11 hours per day and was re-
surfacing a section of Interstate 95. Limestone aggregate and local
sand were used at the Sloan plant during testing. The RAP was obtained
from the section of 1-95 being resurfaced. The asphalt cement used
during the test period was Chevron HMA-175 which was stored and used at
about 230°F. Chevron HMA is a basic asphalt to which light Arabian crude
is added and is available in a number of viscosities. The viscosity of
Chevron HMA actually used is dependent upon the viscosity of the RAP
being utilized.
The rate of asphalt concrete production is dependent upon the temperature
of the product and the moisture content of the raw feed material. The maximum
rated capacity of the Sloan plant is 293 tons per hour with a feed moisture
content of 1-2 percent.
3.3 PROCESS MONITORING DURING THE EMISSION TEST PROGRAM
Operation of the drum-mix asphalt plant was monitored by MRI personnel
during emission test periods. The sampling crew from Radian set up equipment
and prepared for testing on Monday, May 7, 1984. The plant was not operating on
this date. Testing began on May 8, 1984; however, the controlled emissions re-
sults during the first day's test were not acceptable because the sampling was
3-6
-------
performed at less than 90 percent of the prescribed isokinetic sampling rate.
Rain prevented the plant from operating on May 9, 1984, so no tests were per-
formed. The majority of the testing was done of May 10 and 11, 1984. Tables
3-3, 3-4, and 3-5 contain a summary of the process data collected during the
test periods on May 8, 10, and 11, respectively.
Two barometers were available at the plant during the testing; one
supplied by EPA/EMB, and the other by the Radian sampling crew. These baro-
metric readings differed consistently by 0.28 in. Hg. Averaged values are
presented in Tables 3-3, 3-4, and 3-5. Charts recording the mix temperature
during plant operation and testing on May 10 and 11, 1984, are shown in
Figure 3-2. The final product temperature during testing was about 290°F. The
product mix sieve analyses results for May 8, 10, and 11 are shown in Table 3-6.
As noted in Tables 3-3, 3-4, and 3-5, problems encountered with plant
operation included shortages of sand and aggregate in the hoppers, clogging
of the RAP feed, power failures, truck shortages, and a broken ram to operate
a bin door. It should be noted that shortages of sand and/or aggregate in
the dryer drum resulted in a sudden increase in mix temperature and the
emission of dense clouds of light tan smoke.
3.4 EMISSION CONTROL SYSTEM MONITORING
MRI personnel monitored the operation of the venturi scrubber emission
control system during the test periods. Emission control system parameters
that were monitored during testing included:
• venturi scrubber pressure drop,
• venturi inlet gas temperature,
• total scrubber water flow to the scrubber system, and ,
• the scrubbet water inlet and outlet temperature.
A summary of the venturi scrubber operating data collected during the test
program is presented in Tables 3-3, 3-4, and 3-5.
3-7
-------
TABLE 3-3. SUMMARY OF PROCESS AND CONTROL DEVICE OPERATING DATA
COLLECTED DURING EMISSION TESTING AT THE SLOAN ASPHALT
CONCRETE PLANT, COCOA, FLORIDA - MAY 8, 1984
Time
Hr:Mln
10:35
10:40
10:54
11:15
11:30
11:45
1:15
2:23
2:30
2:45
3:00
3:15
3:50
4:00
4:15
4:30
4:45
5:00
5:15
5:30
5:42
MlK
Produc-
Rate,
(tph)
184
184
190
189
188
190
213
204
206
211
209
214
205
205
213
210
203
210
214
209
214
Virgin
Rate,
(tph)
88
90
93
90
91
90
100
96
98
100
97
99
95
98
99
100
98
97
99
97
99
RAP
Rate,
(tph)
92
90
93
95
93
95
107
'103
103
105
107
110
105
102
109
105
100
108
110
107
110
Aaphalt
Rate,
(tph)
4.
4.
4.
4.
4.
4.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
0
0
1
1
1
5
7
1
2
5
3
4
2
2
5
3
1
2
4
2
1
Mil
Temp. ,
CF)
280
282
293
298
279
284
294
285
296
280
275
291
294
277
296
289
287
293
283
293
298
Burner
Setting,
(I)
50
50
50
45
45
44
80
60
52
62
56
64
80
75
75
70
56
62
62
62
55
Concump-
tion
Rate,
(gpm)
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.0
4.8
4.8
5.8
5.4
5.4
5.4
5.2
5.5
5.8
5.7
5.8
5.8
5.2
5.5
5.5
5.4
5.2
Scrubber
AP
(In.
HjO)
18
19
19
17
15
19
21
17
16
17
15
21
10
15
15
21
21
21
21
20
21
Inlet
Caa
Temp..
CF)
280
300
280
280
273
274
280
275
277
. 280
278
275
275
275
275
280
275
275
275
285
278
Scrubber
Water
Flow
Rate,
(gP»)
370
370
370
370
370
370
370
375
375
375
370
370
380
380
380
370
380
380
380
380
380
Scrubber
Water
In Out 1
108
120
124
127
134
135
135
136
136
137
136
136
137
139
139
139
140
140
141
144
143
145
145
152
154
154
154
154
154
154
157
155
155
154
134
155
155"
153
Ambient
Ambient Air Bare-
Blue -Air Relative meter Wind
Ha« Temp.CF) Humidity Preaaure Speed Dir.
Preaent Wet Dry (I) (in. ng) (mph) Cements
Yea 75 86 60 30.16 1 N
75 86 60 30.15 1 N
No
No
1" "• 85 59 30.15 1 N Blue haze la
alight
Y" '« 86 57 30.13 1 N Power failure
Yea 1:30-1:50 p.m.
Yea
Yea 79 89 64 30.07 3 w
Yea
Yea
Yes 77 85 69 30.04 4 U
YcB Water in manometer
line •
Yes 77 85 69 30.03 3 w
Yea
Yea
Yea
Yea 77 86 66 30.02 4 w
Yea
Yea
Yea 75 83 68 30.01 10 U
Notes:
1. Moisture content of aggregate - 4 percent; moisture content of RAP « 2.5 percent. f
2. Water flow rate Is average of reading from Sloan's meter and Radian's meter. (Sloan's meter read 20 gpm lower than Radian s)
3. Barometric pressure Is average of readings from two barometers which differed by about 0.28 In Hg.
-------
W
TABLE 3-4. SUMMARY OF PROCESS AND CONTROL DEVICE OPERATING DATA
COLLECTED DURING EMISSION TESTING AT THE SLOAN ASPHALT
CONCRETE PLANT, COCOA, FLORIDA - MAY 10, 1984
Time
Hr:Hln
8:00
8:15
8:30
9:15
9:30
9:45
10:00
10:15
10:25
11:15
11:30
11:45
12:00
12:15
1:20
1:30
1:45
2:00
2:15
2:30
3:00
3:15 '
3:30
3:45
4:00
Hl>
Produc-
tion
Rate,
(tph)
175
191
195
186
190
175
183
184
217
213
201
207
197
215
189
181
184
190
193
183
197
195
198
206
204
Virgin
Feed
Rate,
(tph)
82
88
90
86
87
81
86
85
100
97
93
95
91
99
87
84
86
87
90
84
91
89
91
95
94
RAP
Feed
Rate,
(tph)
89
98
100
96
98
90
92
94
113
111
103
107
101
111
97
92
93
98
98
94
101
101
102
106
105
Asphalt
Feed
Rate,
(tph)
4.4
4.8
5.0
4.8
4.6
4.4
4.7
4.7
5.2
5.6
5.1
5.2
5.1
5.4
5.0
4.6
4.7
4.7
5.0
4.6
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.2
5.1
Ml.
Temp.,
CF)
292
288
288
281
291
287
303
298
287
283
299
282
294
267
278
299
292
298
295
293
288
292
294
284
287
Burner
Setting,
(X)
62
62
62
62
64
64
58
60
70
100
92
75
68
100
72
64
64
80
72
54
55
58
63
58
60
Fuel
Consump-
tion
Rate,
(gpm)
5.3
5.3
5.3
5.3
5.3
5.3
5.3
5.3
5.3
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.6
5.3
5.3
5.3
5.4
5.3
5.0
5.2
5.2
5.2
5.2
5.2
Scrubber
AP
(in.
H20)
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
. 16
21
22
22
21
22
17
17
17
16
21
21
21
19
21
21
20
Inlet
Gaa
Temp.,
CF)
290
285
285
280
280
280
285
283
280
278
284
280
283
270
280
285
284
286
290
286
285
280
275
273
273
Water
Flow
Rate,
(gpm)
360
360
360
360
360
360
360
360
360
370
360
360
360
360
370
370
370
370
370
360
360
360
360
360
360
Scrubber
Water
In Out
107
112
119
121
126
130
129
133
139
141
143
140
143
136
134
133
135
137
137
138
139
138
140
140
142
144
148
148
152
151
151
155
159
158
158
155
163
156
156
155
156
154
152
153
155
155
156
155
Blue
Haze
Present
Yea
Yea
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yea
Yea
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yea
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Ambient
Ambient Air Baro-
Air Relative meter Wind
Teap.CF) Humidity Pressure Speed Dlr.
Wet Dry (Z) (In. Hg) («ph) Cements
60 62 88 30.14 1 SE
60 65 74 30.14 1 SE
Plant down
8:33-9:05
due to truck
shortage. Blue
haze la slight.
64 70 30.14 1 SE
Blue haze la
slight.
63 73 57 30.16 1 SSU
62 73 53 30.18 1 S
62 75 47 30.19 3 SE
62 75 47 30.17 2 SE Plant down due
to broken ran
from 12:16-1:19
64 77 48 30.17 1 S
64 77 48 30.17 1 S
64 77 48 30.15 2 S Plant down
2:45-2:55
63 76 48 30.15 1 S
-------
U>
I
TABLE 3-4 (continued)
Time
Hr:Hln
4:15
4:30
4:45
5:00
Mix
Produc-
tion
Rate.
(tph)
202
213
204
201
Virgin
Feed
Rate,
(tph)
93
99
94
93
RAP
Feed
Rate,
(tph)
104
108
105
103
Asphalt
Feed
Rate,
(tph)
5.1
5.7
5.2
5.2
Mix
Tenp. ,
CF)
281
278
284
282
Burner
Setting,
(X)
60
66
67
67
Consuap-
tlon
Hate,
(gp»)
5.2
5.2
5.2
5.2
Scrubber
AP
(tn.
H20)
20
20
20
20
Inlet
Oft
Tenp.,
CF)
275
283
283
285
Water
Flow
Rate,
-------
u>
I
TABLE 3-5. SUMMARY OF PROCESS AND CONTROL DEVICE OPERATING DATA
COLLECTED DURING EMISSION TESTING AT THE SLOAN ASPHALT
CONCRETE PLANT, COCOA, FLORIDA - MAY 11, 1984
Time
Hr:Mln
8:15
8:30
8:45
9:00
9:15
9:30
Him
Produc-
tion
Rate,
(tph)
198
196
199
207
211
131
Virgin
Feed
Rate,
(tph)
90
92
94
95
98
62
RAP
Feed
Rate,
(tph)
103
100
110
107
108
66
Asphalt
Feed
Rate,
(tph)
5.1
4.4
5.3
5.2
5.1
3.2
Hlx
Temp.,
CF)
296
292
285
288
280
337
Burner
Setting,
(S)
90
90
92
94
95
94
tlon
Rate,
(gpm)
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
AP
(in.
16
16
17
15
14
16
C«s
Temp . ,
CF)
290
290
285
280
280
305
Flow
Rate,
(gpm)
340
340
350
350
340
340
Scrubber
Water
In Out
129
133
136
139
140
140
154
154
157
156
152
152
Ambient
Ambient Air
Blue Air Relative
Hate Temp.CF) Humidity
Present Wet Dry (X)
No
T" 65 73 65
Yes
Yes
Yes
Ves 67 76 62
Baro-
meter Hind
Pressure Speed Dlr.
(In. Hg) (mph) Coonents
30.18 2 S Blue haze
developed
between
8:15 and 9:
30.20 2 S Ran out of
15.
Band
9:28-9:32 RAP
feed clogged —
10:00
10:15
10:30
10:45
11:00
11:15
11:30
11:45
12:00
12:15
12:30
12:45
1:00
1:15
1:30
1:45
2:0(1
201
195
201
199
165
200
210
216
206
195
193
203
206
220
196
215
92
90
93
92
78
93
98
100
95
90
89
94
95
101
90
100
104
100
103
102
83
102
107
111
106
100
99
104
106
114
101
110
5.2
4.9
5.0
5.0
4.1
4.9
5.2
5.3
5.1
5.0
5.0
5.4
5.3
5.4
5.4
5.4
274
295
287
308
313
275
294
285
284
370
288
275
289
279
295
306
293
100
98
98
70
72
66
75
73
100
100
75
66
72 '
100
85
76
75
5.5
5.7
5.6
5.3
5.3
5.3
5.3
5.3
5.8
5.8
5.3
5.3
5.3
•5.8
5.5
5.3
5.3
14
14
14
16
17
15
15
15
13
19
16
16
14
16
280
282
285
290
280
275
280
282
272
370
290
280
282
280
283
285
283
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
141
142
142
144
144
144
142
143
144
144
144
144
145
146
156
158
158
153
148
157
158
156
161
154
158
158
157
160
Yes
Yes
Yes 65 77 59
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes 67 79 53
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes 67 79 53
Yes
Yes
*es 66 80 47
Yea
Yes
Yes
plant down
9:51-9:55
30.22 2 S
30.23 2 SE
Ran low on
sand 11:45
Ran low on
Sand 12:11
Ran out of
aggregate-
plant down
12:15-12:30
30.23 4 S
30.24 4 S
Notes:
1. Moisture content of aggregate • 4.5 percent; moisture content of RAP ** 2.5 percent.
2. Water flow rate is reading from Sloan's meter plus 10 gpm to correct to readings in Table 4. (Radian's meter would not operate.)
3. Barometric pressure is average of readings from two barometers which differed by about 0.28 in Hg.
-------
5
E
a ion.-
a *an »oa 3OQ -«XJ :
^E A
MAY 10, 1984
KEY
A = PLANT STARTUP—6:30 A.M.
B = WATER PUMP CLOGGED
C = TRUCK SHORTAGE
0 = BROKEN RAM
E = PLANT SHUTDOWN—6:00 P.M.
F = RAN OUT OF SAND
G = FEED CLOGGED
H = RAN OUT OF SAND AND AGGREGATE
I = PLANT SHUTDOWN—5:00 P.M.
".,
^^- -100^:1200 ^jfco-.M ooo.:
400
MAY 11, 1984
Figure 3-2. Record of mix temperature.
3-12
-------
TABLE 3-6. PRODUCT MIX SIEVE ANALYSIS RESULTS1
Mix type
Asphalt cement
Percent asphalt in mix
Aggregate sieve/
screen analysis
(percent passing)
3/4 in.
1/2 in.
3/8 in.
No. 4
No. 10
No. 40
No. 80
No. 200
May 8, 1984
S-l
HMA-175
2.7
100
96
85
63
48
37
15
3.9
May 10, 1984
S-l
HMA-175
5.42
100
99
83
59
45
35
14
6.1
May 11, 1984
S-l
HMA-175
6.3
100
99
87
64
47
37
13
5.4
Sieve Analysis Conducted by Florida DOT Personnel.
3-13
-------
CORPORATION
In addition to the scrubber water flow meter already at the plant, the
Radian Corporation (Radian) sampling crew installed a Signet Scientific paddle
wheel Flosensor®, flow meter. The Flosensor® meter read 20 gpm higher than
the existing meter. An average of these two readings was recorded during
operation and testing on May 8, 1984. On May 10 and 11, 1984, the Flosensor®
meter was not operable. On these dates, the existing meter was used and the
flow rate recorded was the value from the meter plus 10 gpm to yield values
comparable to those recorded on May 8, 1984.
3-14
-------
SECTION 4
4.0 SAMPLING LOCATIONS
A schematic diagram of the asphalt concrete process is presented in
Figure 4-1. The general location of each sampling point and the parameters
measured at each sampling location are also presented in Figure 4-1. Sec-
tion 4 contains a brief description of each of the sampling locations used
at Sloan during the emissions testing program.
4.1 VENTURI SCRUBBER INLET SAMPLING LOCATIONS
Uncontrolled emissions samples were collected in the duct work between
the drum mixer and the wet venturi scrubber. A side view of the duct work
immediately upstream and downstream of the uncontrolled emissions sampling
location is illustrated in Figure 4-2. Flue gas exiting the rotating drum
enters the knockout duct that carries the flue gas upward about 5 to 6 feet
where it then enters a circular duct that connects the outlet of the
knockout box to the venturi inlet. The circular duct is approximately
3 feet in diameter and is shaped like an inverted U or V. This duct consists
of three elbows separated by two approximately 6 feet long, straight duct
sections. Uncontrolled emissions samples were collected in the circular duct
immediately above the venturi scrubber.
Two ports were used to measure the gas flow rate and collect uncontrolled
emissions samples. A 3-inch port was located on the north side of the inlet
duct and a 4-inch port was located on the east side of the inlet duct. The
two sampling ports were located less than 12 inches from the nearest upstream
and downstream flow disturbance. Figure 4-3 includes a description of the
16 sampling points used to characterize the inlet duct.
4-1
-------
IS
Recycled
Asphalt
Pavement
Asphalt Cement
#5 Fuel
Oil
Virgin
Aggregate
Moisture Content
Flash Point
Smoke Point
Flow Rate
Paniculate (front half)
TOO1 (back half)
Particle Size Distribution
PAH*
Gas Composition (C02, 02,
N2. H20)
Moisture
Content
Flow Rate
Particulate (front half)
TOC1 (back half)
PAH1*
Gas Composition (C02, 02,
N2, H20)
Opacity
'TOC - total organic carbon
2TSS - total suspended solids
3TDS - total dissolved solids
''PAH - polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons
Scruhber Pond
Figure 4-1. Schematic of the Sloan Asphalt
Concrete Process Including General
Sampling Point Locations and Test
Parameters.
-------
SAMPLING
PORTS
///////// ///////// / / 7 i I
Figure 4-2. Side View of Duct Work Upstream and Downstream
of the Sloan Uncontrolled Emissions Sampling
Location.
4-3
-------
D PORT 2
(NORTH)
TRAVERSE POINT LOCATION
TRAVERSE
POINT
NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
TRAVERSE POINT
LOCATION FROM
OUTSIDE OF DUCT
(INCHES)
1.5
4.9
9.1
15.2
31.8
37.9
42.1
45.5
g
PORT1
(EAST)
Figure 4-3. Sloan Uncontrolled Emissions Sampling Traverse Point Locations,
-------
Particle size distribution (PSD) samples were collected through the
4-inch port mounted on the east side of the inlet duct. PSD samples were
collected at a point 15.2 inches from the east wall. Figure 4-4 includes a
description of the sampling point used to collect PSD samples of the uncon-
trolled emissions. The gas velocity at this point approximated the average
gas velocity.
4.2 VENTURI SCRUBBER OUTLET SAMPLING LOCATIONS
Controlled emissions samples were collected at the outlet of the venturi
scrubber from two sets of sampling ports on a circular stack. A side view
of the duct work immediately upstream and downstream of the controlled emissions
sampling location is illustrated in Figure 4-5. Flue gas exiting the venturi
scrubber entered a horizontal water knockout drum and then passed through an
induced draft (I.D.) fan. Gases exiting the fan then enter a vertical water
knockout drum at the base of the 4-foot diameter steel stack.
Two 3-inch ports were used to measure the gas flow rate and collect
samples of the controlled emissions. One of the 3-inch ports was positioned
on the northeast side of the duct and the second port was positioned on the
southeast side. Both ports are located approximately 10 feet from the nearest
upstream disturbance and 4 feet from the nearest downstream disturbance.
Figure 4-6 illustrates the position of the two ports and the locations of the
twenty-four sampling points used to collect controlled emissions samples.
4.3 VISIBLE EMISSIONS OBSERVATION LOCATIONS
Visible emissions observations were made of the plume exiting the stack.
A total of six locations were used to make the opacity observations during
this program. Figure 4-7 presents the layout of the Sloan asphalt plant and
the approximate location of the observer with respect to the stack at each
position during visible emissions measurements.
4-5
-------
POINT LOCATION
POINT
NUMBER
1
POINT LOCATION
FROM OUTSIDE
OF DUCT
(INCHES)
15.2
70A3765
PORT1
(EAST)
Figure 4-4. Sloan Uncontrolled Emissions PSD Sampling Point Location.
-------
-48"
O
SAMPLING
PORTS
SAMPLING
PLATFORM
SECONDARY
WATER KNOCKOUT
TRAILER
// ///////////////////////
GROUND
Figure 4-5. Side View of Duct Work Upstream and Downstream
of the Sloan Controlled Emissions Sampling
Location.
4-7
-------
PORT 2
(NORTHEAST)
00
PORT 1
(SOUTHEAST)
TRAVERSE POINT, LOCATION
TRAVERSE
POINT
NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
TRAVERSE POINT
LOCATION FROM
OUTSIDE OF DUCT
(INCHES)
1.0
3.2
5.6
8.4
11.9
16.9
30.6
35.6
39.1
41.9
44.3
46.5
2
3
S
Figure 4-6. Sloan Controlled Emissions Sampling Traverse Point Locations.
-------
Storaqe
Sand
Virgin Gravel
Recycle
Rotary Kiln
Loading Area
1 1
Position
No.
1
9
3
^
Dace
5-08-84
5-10-84
5-10-81
5-10-84
Time
1425-1746
0800-0836
0914-1027
and
1139-1410
1540-1649
Approximate
Distance
from Stack (ft)
175
100
150
150
Direction of
Observer
from Discharge
Point
NE
SE
SE
SL
Figure 4-7. Locations of visible emissions observations at the Sloan
Construction Company asphalt concrete plant, Cocoa, Florida.
-------
4.4 VENTURI SCRUBBER WATER SAMPLING LOCATIONS
Samples of water supplied to the venturi scrubber and samples of venturi
scrubber effluent water were collected during emissions testing. Samples
of pond water being supplied to the venturi scrubber spray nozzles were
collected from a valve installed on the discharge side of the scrubber feed
pump. A general layout of the two scrubber water ponds and the influent and
effluent sample collection points is presented in Figure 4-8. The scrubber
pump intake line floats in the pond and access to the intake is by means
of a floating platform.
Venturi scrubber water drains into a collection box below the venturi
mist eliminator and in the base of the stack. The scrubber water then drains
back to the settling pond by means of an 8-inch diameter plastic pipe. Samples
of the scrubber effluent water were collected in a sample container as the
effluent water exited the pipe.
4.5 VENTURI SCRUBBER PROCESS MONITORING LOCATIONS
The venturi scrubber pressure drop and venturi scrubber water flow rates
were monitored during the emissions test program.
4.5.1 Venturi Scrubber Pressure Drop Monitoring
Previously installed pressure taps were located upstream and downstream
of the venturi scrubber. An attempt was made to use these sample taps to
measure the venturi pressure drop. The sample tap downstream of the venturi
was plugged with solids and could not be cleared. As a result, MRI personnel
used a water manometer installed by Sloan for process control to monitor the
venturi pressure drop.
4-10
-------
TO
SCRUBBER
SCRUBBER INLET
SAMPLE LINE
(DISCHARGE SIDE
OF PUMP)
~60 FT.-
INLET TEMPERATURE
SAMPLING LOCATION
SCRUBBER WATER
INTAKE LINE
UNDERGROUND
WEIR (8" PVC)
8-INCH DIAMETER-
RETURN PIPE -
SCRUBBER EFFLUENT
' SAMPLING LOCATION
70A3787
Figure 4-8. Layout of Sloan Effluent and Influent Scrubber
Ponds Including Sample Collection Locations.
4-11
-------
SLOAN
FLOW SENSOR
FLOSENSOR®
TOTAL WATER FLOW -
TO VENTURI
3-INCH
SCHEDULE 40
BLACK PIPE
WATER TO
SCRUBBER SYSTEM
70A3766
PUMP
Figure 4-9. Location of Flosensor® Used to Monitor the
Total Water Flow to the Sloan Venturi.
4-12
-------
4.5.2 Venturi Scrubber Water Flow Rate Monitoring
The total flow rate of water to the venturi was monitored using a Signet
Scientific paddle-wheel Flosensor® and a flow sensor provided by the Sloan
Company. Figure 4-9 depicts the location of the two flow sensors in the
scrubber system. The Flosensor® was mounted in a vertical section of pipe
while Sloan's flow sensor was mounted in a horizontal section of pipe. During
the first day of testing both readings were taken and an average flowrate
reported. On 5-10-84 the Signal Scientific Flosensor® malfunctioned and all
subsequent data was taken from Sloan's flow sensor exclusively. A ten-gallon
per minute correction factor was applied to all of the Sloan flow sensor
readings to yield values comparable with those recorded on 5-8-84. All data
was recorded by MRI personnel.
4.6 ASPHALT CONCRETE PROCESS SAMPLING LOCATIONS
During emissions testing, samples of the virgin aggregate and recycled
asphalt pavement were collected from the conveyor belts that transport the
raw materials to the drum mixer from the storage bins.
Samples of the liquid asphalt cement were obtained from a vendor truck
that transported the asphalt cement to the plant.
4-13
-------
SECTION 5
5.0 SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS
This section contains general descriptions of sampling equipment, sam-
ple collection techniques, and sample recovery techniques used during the
emissions testing program at the Sloan asphalt concrete plant. Also
included are analytical preparation techniques and analytical methodology
used to analyze the samples collected during sampling. Additional information
is provided in Appendix J.
5.1 SAMPLING PROCEDURES
This section provides a description of the sampling procedures that
were used to collect samples of the flue gases, scrubber waters, and process
solids for analysis.
5.1.1 Source Sampling Procedures
Included in Table 5-1 is a list of the various parameters that were
measured at the inlet and outlet of the venturi scrubber and the sampling
methodology that was used during source sampling. Each of the sampling
methods listed in Table 5-1 are described in this section. Whenever possi-
ble, EPA referenced source sampling methods were used. The EPA reference
methods were taken from the Environmental Reporter, Volume I - Federal
Regulations, Section 121, "Air," Appendix A. If an.EPA reference method did
not exist, a detailed description of.the methodology is provided.
5.1.1.1 Gas Phase Composition—
Following are discussions of the methods which were used to measure gas
phase composition.
5-1
-------
TABLE 5-1. SUMMARY OF SOURCE SAMPLING PARAMETERS AND METHODOLOGY
I
NJ
Parameter Measured
Number and location of
sampling points, gas
velocity and volumetric
gas flow
Gas phase composition/
dew point
Gas phase composition
and molecular weight
Gas phase composition
moisture content
Particulate loading
TOG
Polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons
Particle size
distribution
Test
Location
Inlet/outlet
Inlet/outlet
Inlet/outlet
Inlet/outlet
Inlet/outlet
Inlet/outlet
Inlet/outlet
Inlet
Sample Frequency
Methodology
Uncontrolled
Controlled
EPA Methods 1 & 2
Wet bulb/dry bulb
EPA Method 3
EPA Method 4
Modified EPA Method 5E
Modified EPA Method 5E
with 0.1N NaOH impinger
solutions
Modified EPA Method 5E
with XAD-2 resin canister
Andersen High Capacity
Stack Sampler
16
4
4
3
4
1Number of valid sampling runs performed
-------
Molecular Weight Determination—The dry molecular weight of the gas
stream was determined using the grab sampling technique described in EPA
Method 3. The dry molecular weight of the gas was calculated based upon the
0 , C0~, and N concentration. CO and 0 concentrations were determined
using individual Fyrite® units. N was determined by difference.
A stainless steel probe and hand-held squeeze pump were used to collect
the gas sample directly in the Fyrite® analyzer. A specific volume of gas is
collected in the Fyrite®. During analysis, the gas sample is passed through
an absorbing solution designed to selectively remove either CO or 0„. The
decrease in the gas volume in the Fyrite® container is proportional to the dry
concentration of the absorbed species. The balance of the gas mixture was
assumed to be N . If more than six passes were required to obtain a constant
(0.3% difference, absolute) reading for either 0 or CO , the appropriate
absorbing solution was replaced.
5.1.1.2 Volumetric Gas Flow Rate Determinations—
Total gas flow rates at the scrubber inlet and outlet were determined
using procedures described in EPA Method 2. The volumetric gas flow rate was
determined by measuring the cross sectional area of the inlet duct and the
stack and the average velocity of the gas stream. The cross-sectional areas of
the inlet duct and the stack were determined by direct measurement.
The number of sampling points required at each sampling location to
statistically measure the average gas velocity in the stack was determined
using the procedures outlined in EPA Method 1. The number of sampling points
and their distance from the duct wall is a function of the proximity of the
sampling location to its nearest upstream and downstream flow disturbances.
The inlet and outlet sampling locations (refer to Section 4) did not meet
EPA Method 1 criteria, but represented the best possible location available
for collecting uncontrolled and controlled emission samples. The number of
inlet sampling points were limited to 16 because of the high particulate
loading, resulting in a limited sample collection time. A total of 24
sampling points were used at the outlet stack sampling location.
5-3
-------
Moisture Determination—The moisture content of the inlet and outlet gas
streams was determined using a modified version of the methodology described in
EPA Method 4. This method requires that a known volume of particle free gas
be pulled through a chilled impinger train. The quantity of condensed water
is determined gravimetrically and then related to the volume of gas sampled
to determine the moisture content.
The moisture content of the two gas streams was determined simultaneously
during each EPA Method 5E test and each particle size distribution determi-
nation. The absolute filter in the EPA Method 5E and particle sizing trains
removed the particulate matter from the gas stream, allowing condensed water
to collect in the impinger train.
The moisture content of the gas stream is required to calculate the
molecular weight of the gas (wet) and the isokinetic gas sampling rate.
Relative Humidity—A wet bulb/dry bulb apparatus was used in conjunc-
tion with a psychrometric chart to determine the relative humidity of the
scrubber gas streams. The wet bulb/dry bulb apparatus consists of two
thermocouples strapped together. The front end of the first thermocouple
extended out about three inches further than the second thermocouple. A
cloth sock was placed tightly over the front two inches of the first thermo-
couple (wet bulb). Prior to sampling, the cloth sock was saturated with
water. The thermocouples .were then inserted into the center of the duct and
the temperature of the wet bulb thermocouple monitored. After the tempera-
ture of the wet bulb thermocouple stabilized (reached equilibrium), the
temperature of the dry thermocouple was measured. The wet bulb and dry bulb
temperatures were used with a psychrometric chart to determine the relative
humidity and moisture content of the gas stream. A high temperature psych-
rometric chart (dry bulb temperature ~500°F) was used during this program
because of the high temperature (-*300°F) of the uncontrolled emissions gas
stream. The moisture content of uncontrolled emissions was determined twice
during each Method 5E run due to the rapidly varying moisture content of the
stream
5-4
-------
The gas stream velocity was calculated from the average pitot differen-
tial pressure measurements (AP), the average flue gas temperature, wet mole-
cular weight, and absolute pressure. AP and temperature profile data were
measured at each of the sampling points using an S-type pitot tube and type-K
thermocouple. A Magnehelic® gauge was used to measure the AP across the
S-type pitot.
Barometric pressure readings were obtained daily by reading two baro-
meters on-site and taking the average. The static pressure was measured by
inserting a stainless steel probe into the duct. A Magnehelic® gauge attached
to the probe was used to measure the static pressure within the duct.
5.1.1.3 Particulate Loading Determination—
A modified version of the sampling procedure specified in EPA Reference
Method 5E was used to determine the uncontrolled and controlled particulate
emissions. Modifications to EPA Reference Method 5E included:
• eliminating the probe and nozzle water rinse prior to the
acetone probe and nozzle rinse,
• installing a variable transformer to control the probe
temperature to 250°F + 25°F, and
• installing a time proportioning temperature controller
to maintain the temperature of the gas stream at the
filter to 250°F + 10°F (controlled accuracy + 1% of
full scale of 400°F).
Figure 5-1 illustrates the EPA Method 5E sampling train. A sample of
particulate-laden flue gas was collected isokinetically through a stainless
steel gooseneck nozzle. A glass-lined heat traced probe transported the flue
gas from the duct to the heated filter. (The filter holder and associated
glassware are contained in an insulated, heated enclosure.) The probe tempera-
ture was closely monitored and controlled at 250°F + 25°F. Particulate matter
was removed from the gas stream by means of a glass fiber filter housed in a
glass holder. The temperature of the sampled gas was monitored and controlled
at the filter using a time proportioning temperature controller to a tempera-
ture of 250°F + 10°F.
5-5
-------
HEATED
GLASS LINER ~~J
PROBE LINER
-TEMPERATURE
SENSOR
DRY
IMPINGER
TEMPERATURE
SENSOR
TEMPERATURE
SENSOR
GOOSENECK
NOZZLE
Ui
I
TEMPERATURE CONTROLLER
FOR MAINTAINING FILTER
HOLDER TEMPERATURE (250'F)
ORIFICE
MAGNAHELIC
70B3477
Figure 5-1. Modified EPA Method 5E Sampling Train Designed to Collect
Particulate and Total Organic Carbon Samples at the
Venturi Scrubber Inlet.
-------
The filtered gas stream then entered a series of irapingers immersed in
an ice bath. The configuration and contents of the impingers depended on
whether the impinger train was used at the uncontrolled or controlled samp-
ling location. Figure 5-2 and Figure 5-3 illustrate the configuration and
contents of the uncontrolled and controlled impinger trains,respectively.
The uncontrolled impinger train consisted of four impingers. The first,
third, and fourth impingers were of the modified Greenburg-Smith design and
the second impinger was of the Greenburg-Smith design. Impingers 1 and 2
contained approximately 200 ml of 0.1 N NaOH for TOC absorption. The third
impinger was dry and the fourth impinger contained about 200 grams of indicat-
ing type silica gel for final moisture removal.
The controlled impinger train consisted of five impingers. The config-
uration and contents of the controlled impinger train is similar to the un-
controlled impinger train except that an initial dry modified Greenburg-Smith
impinger was placed in front of the other four impingers for collection of
water condensate. The additional impinger was necessitated by the high mois-
ture content of the stream and gas sample volumes.
During sampling, the flue gas velocity was monitored by an S-type pitot
tube attached to a Magnehelic® gauge. The isokinetic sampling rate was
maintained through a system of valves and a leakless pump. The sampling
rate was monitored using a calibrated orifice with a Magnehelic® gauge and
the total sample volume was measured using a calibrated dry gas meter. The
gas stream temperature was monitored using a type-K thermocouple and a
pyrometer.
When sampling was complete, the filter was removed and placed in the
original petri dish. A water rinse of the nozzle, probe liner, and front half
of the filter holder was not performed because TOC analysis of the front half
catch was not required during this program. The nozzle, probe liner, and front
half of the filter holder were rinsed and brushed three times using acetone.
The acetone rinses were stored in a 500 ml glass bottles with teflon lid insert.
5-7
-------
FROM
HEATED
PROBE
Ln
I
00
ICE BATH
TO
'CONSOLE
TOG SAMPLING TRAIN-RUNS 1, 2, 3, AND 4
IMPINGER NO.
TYPE
CONTENTS
CONCENTRATION (N)
VOLUME (ml)
1
MOD-
GREENBURG-
SMITH
NaOH
0.1
200
2
GREENBURG-
SMITH
NaOH
0.1
200
3
MOD-
GREENBURG-
SMITH
DRY
4
MOD-
GREEN BURG-
SMITH
SILICA GEL
CM
r—
t-
CO
Figure 5-2. EPA Reference Method 5E Impinger Train Configuration and
Contents Used During Uncontrolled Emissions Source Testing
at the Sloan Construction Co., Cocoa, Florida.
-------
FROM
HEATED
PROBE
H
FILTER
1
^ TO
i
2
l
1
3
i
t
4
~ — — ~
i
5
1
>
^CONSOLE
Ol
I
VO
ICE BATH
TOC SAMPLING TRAIN-RUNS 1. 2, 3, AND 4
IMPINGER NO.
TYPE
CONTENTS
CONCENTRATION (N)
1
MOD-
GREENBURG-
SMITH
DRY
2
MOD-
GREENBURG-
SMITH
NaOH
n i
3
GREENBURG-
SMITH
NaOH
n i
4
MOD-
GREEN BURG-
SMITH
DRY
5
MOD-
GREENBURG-
SMITH
SILICA GEL
Figure 5-3. EPA Reference Method 5E Impinger Train Configuration
and Contents Used During Controlled Emissions Source
Testing at the Sloan Construction Co., Cocoa, Florida.
-------
All impingers were weighed before and after sampling using a top loader
balance. The impinger weight gain data were used to calculate the moisture
content of the flue gas. After weighing, the contents of the NaOH impingers
were quantitatively transferred to individual 500 ml glass bottles with Teflon
lid inserts. All of the glassware from the filter holder exit to the exit of
the first NaOH impinger was rinsed with two aliquots of O.lN NaOH. This rinse
solution was added to the first NaOH impinger sample container. The glassware
from the second NaOH impinger to the silica gel impinger was also rinsed with
two aliquots of O.lN NaOH. This rinse solution was added to the second NaOH
impinger sample container. The NaOH impinger samples were analyzed individ-
ually to determine the collection efficiency of the impinger trains.
The filters, impinger solutions, and acetone rinses were carefully
packaged for shipment back to Radian for weighing and analysis.
5.1.1.4 Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons Sample Collection—
Figure 5-4 illustrates the sampling train that was used to collect
samples of the gas stream for PAH analysis. The PAH sample collection
procedure is similar to the particulate loading procedure described in
Section 5.1.1.3. The major differences between the two systems include
impinger configuration, contents, and sample recovery procedures.
The PAH impinger train consisted of a dry impinger for cooling down the
gas before entering the glass canister containing XAD-2 resin for PAH ad-
sorption. The temperature of the gas entering the resin canister was moni-
tored using a thermocouple. Following the XAD-2 resin canister was a second
dry impinger for collection of any condensate occurring downstream of the
XAD-2 resin. The third impinger contained silica gel for final moisture
removal. The filter glassware, the two dry impingers, and the XAD-2
resin canister were wrapped with aluminum foil to reduce sample exposure to
ultraviolet radiation, which is refuted to cause photodegradation of the
PAH'S.
5-10
-------
HEATED
GLASS LINER
TEMPERATURE
SENSOR
GOOSENECK
NOZZLE
Ui
I
TEMPERATURE CONTROLLER
FOR MAINTAINING FILTER
HOLDER TEMPERATURE (250'F)
ORIFICE
MAGNAHELIC
PUMP
70B3478
Figure 5-4. Sampling Train Designed to Collect Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbon
Samples at the Sloan Venturi Scrubber Inlet and Outlet.
-------
Upon completion of sampling, the sampling train was returned to the
mobile laboratory for sample recovery. Incandescent lights were used in the
mobile laboratory during sample recovery to minimize sample exposure to
ultraviolet radiation. The nozzle and glass probe liner were brushed and
rinsed with methylene chloride. All interconnecting glassware in the hot box
and impinger train (except the silica gel impinger) were also rinsed with
methylene chloride. The methylene chloride rinses were stored in amber glass
bottles with Teflon lid inserts. The filter was transferred to a glass petri
dish and wrapped with aluminum foil to protect it from direct light during
storage and shipment. The XAD-2 resin was transferred from the canister to
a glass jar and wrapped with aluminum foil for storage. Methylene chloride
was used to rinse the resin into the jar. A lid with a Teflon insert was
used to seal the jar.
5.1.1.5 Particle Size Distribution Determination—
During this project the particle size distribution at the inlet of
the scrubber was determined using the sampling train illustrated in Figure
5-5. Because of the high particulate loading encountered at the scrubber
inlet, an Andersen High Capacity Stack Sampler (AHCSS) was used to determine
the inlet particle size distribution. The AHCSS sampling train is designed
to classify particles present in the gas stream with respect to their aero-
dynamic size.
A cut-away view of the AHCSS is illustrated in Figure 5-6. The AHCSS
contains two impaction chambers followed by a cyclone and a backup absolute
thimble. Particles were automatically fractionated into four size ranges
and the results were then plotted to represent the size distribution (see
Figure 2-3).
A right angle probe was used at the scrubber inlet to allow the AHCSS
to be pointed into the gas stream. A straight-neck sampling nozzle was
attached to the AHCSS to minimize the impaction of larger particles that
would occur in a gooseneck nozzle.
5-12
-------
ABSOLUTE)
FILTER
Ul
(-•
OJ
ANDERSEN
HIGH CAPACITY
STACK SAMPLER
STRAIGHT I I
NOZZLE ~v\«-p-rj
I
- TEST DUCT
GAS FLOW
H20
IMPINQERS
DRY
IMPINGER
TEMPERATURE
SENSOR
1/2" DIA STEEL
PIPE PROBE
TEMPERATURE SENSORS
PUMP ORIFICE (\) (\,
ORIFICE
GAUGE
BY-PASS
VALVE
ICE BATH
VACUUM
GAUGE
MAIN
VALVE
SILICA GEL
DESSICCANT
VACCUM
LINE
70A3476
Figure 5-5. In-Stack Andersen High Capacity Stack Sampler Sampling
Train Used to Determine the Particle Size Distribution
at the Sloan Venturi Scrubber Inlet.
-------
ACCELERATION
JET
rO
VENT
TUBE
-10cm
SCALE
ISOKINETIC PROBE
FIRST IMPACTION STAGE
SECOND IMPACTION STAGE
CYCLONE STAGE
GLASS FIBER
THIMBLE FILTER
Figure 5-6. Schematic of the Andersen Model HCSS High Grain-
Loading Impactor
5-14
-------
Impactor sampling at the inlet was performed at a point of average
velocity in the gas stream. The isokinetic flow rate through the nozzle
was precalculated based on velocity data obtained during earlier sampling
(Method 5E). Operation of the AHCSS requires that the flow rate through
the impactor be kept constant. This requirement eliminates the possibility
of adjusting the flow rate if variations in gas velocity occurred.
Prior to sampling at the inlet, the AHCSS was allowed to preheat in the
duct for at least 45 minutes to allow ample time for the unit to reach the
flue gas temperature. After sampling, the AHCSS was carefully unloaded and
the solids and filter desiccated and weighed. The individual weight gains
of the stages and filters were used along with the impactor operating condi-
tions to calculate the particle size distribution of the scrubber inlet. The
impingers were weighed before and after sampling to determine the moisture
content of the gas stream.
5.1.1.6 Visible Determination of Opacity—
The visible opacity of the outlet stack plume was determined by visual
observation using the procedure described in EPA Method 9. When meteoro-
logical conditions permitted, observations were performed during stack gas
sampling runs for particulate and TOC loading and polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons. Visible opacity readings were performed when a clear blue sky
background existed. The clear blue sky background was required for detection
of emissions caused by condensed hydrocarbons in the plume.
5.1.2 Process Water Sampling
Scrubber water influent and effluent samples were collected during the
field testing program. Scrubber water was contained in two ponds located near
the venturi scrubber. Water supplied to the scrubber was pumped from the end
of one pond through a floating intake line. Water from the scrubber flows by
gravity to the second pond. The two ponds are interconnected by an eight-
inch diameter pipe that served as a weir to facilitate settling of solids.
5-15
-------
Following are descriptions of sampling methods for the scrubber water streams.
Scrubber Water Sample Collection—Samples of the process water pumped
to the venturi scrubber were collected at a valve installed on the discharge
side of the pump. The venturi scrubber return water samples were collected
at the discharge end of the plastic pipe as the water gravity fed to the
settling pond. Samples were collected in a beaker and then stored in 500 ml
amber glass bottles with Teflon liners. An attempt was made to collect at
least two samples during each particulate and TOC loading run and the poly-
nuclear aromatic hydrocarbons run.
Scrubber Water Flow Rate—The total flow rate of water to the venturi
was monitored using a Signet Scientific paddle-wheel Flosensor® and a flow
sensor provided by the Sloan Company. During the first day of testing both
readings were taken and an average flowrate reported. On 5-10-84 the Signal
Scientific Flosensor©-malfunctioned and all subsequent data was taken from
Sloan's flow sensor exclusively. A ten-gallon per minute correction factor
was applied to all of the Sloan flow sensor readings to yield values com-
parable to those recorded on 5-8-84. All data was recorded by MRI personnel.
Scrubber Water Temperature and pH—At the times of collection of venturi
scrubber water samples, the temperature and pH of the stream were measured.
Temperature was measured by direct insertion of a thermocouple into the water
stream at the collection point. pH measurements were performed using an
Orion digital hand-held pH meter. The pH meter was standardized with pH 7
and pH 10 buffers just prior to each set of measurements. The pH of the
venturi influent and effluent waters was measured by collecting a sample in
a beaker and then measuring the pH at the collection location.
MRI measured the temperature of the pond water at the location of the
scrubber water intake pump and at the scrubber water return location. These
measurements were taken using a thermocouple.
5-16
-------
5.1.3 Process Solids Sampling
Three process solids streams were sampled:
• virgin aggregate,
• recycled asphalt pavement, and
• asphalt cement.
The sampling and analytical requirements for virgin aggregate and
recycled asphalt pavement were the same. The two streams are belt-conveyed
individually from storage hoppers to the drum mixer. Samples were collected
from the belt conveyors in a large collection tray. The samples were coned
and quartered to obtain a representative sample and taken directly to the
mobile laboratory for moisture analysis. At least one sample was collected
and analyzed for moisture during each particulate/TOC loading run, and poly-
nuclear aromatic hydrocarbons run. Additional samples of the recycled asphalt
pavement were collected for shipment to Austin for smoke point analysis.
A sample of asphalt cement was collected during the testing program in
a one-gallon metal can. The asphalt cement sample was shipped to Austin
for smoke point and flash point analysis.
5.1.4 Process Parameters
MRI was responsible for monitoring the venturi pressure drop across the
venturi scrubber. MR! was also responsible for monitoring the total flow to
the venturi scrubber.
5.2 ANALYTICAL METHODOLOGY
The previous section described sampling procedures. This section des-
cribes the analytical procedures and identifies where samples for analysis
were retrieved from the various sample streams.
5-17
-------
The majority of analyses for this project were performed at Radian's
Austin laboratories. Samples for analysis resulted from the following:
particulate/TOC sampling train for controlled and uncontrolled
air emissions;
polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons sampling train for
controlled and uncontrolled air emissions;
scrubber water to and from the venturi; and
virgin aggregate, recycled asphalt pavement, and asphalt
cement.
Figures 5-7 through 5-9 present analytical schemes for the two sampling
trains and scrubber waters. These figures indicate where samples were re-
trieved from the various systems and the analyses performed. The following
analyses were performed:
• particulate mass,
• total organic carbon,
• polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons,
• total solids (suspended and dissolved),
• pH and temperature,
• moisture,
• smoke point, and
• flash point.
Particulate Mass Analysis—The EPA Method 5E particulate mass sample
consisted of the filter and the acetone front-half rinse. Filter analysis
consisted of dessicating the filter for 24 hours and then weighing at 24-hour
intervals to a constant weight.
The acetone rinse volumes were gravimetrically determined. The rinse
samples were transferred to individual clean, dry, tared 250 ml beakers
5-18
-------
Ul
i
Method 5E Sample Train
Front Half Probe Rinses/Filter
Probe Rinse
No. 1
Acetone
Dry; Weigh
Filter
DryjWeigh
Back Half Impinger Solution/Rinses
1st NaOH Impinger
Solution + 0.1N
NaOH Rinse
Aliquot
TOC
Analysis
2nd NaOH Impinger
Solution + 0.1N
NaOH Rinse
Aliquot
TOC
Analysis
i*
»
ID
Figure 5-7. Particulate and TOC Sample Recovery Analytical Matrix.
-------
PAII Sample Train
Front Half Probe Rinse/Filter
Back Half XAD-2 Resin and Impinger Solution
I
Probe Rinse
Methylene
Chloride
Filter
Ul
I
N>
o
Impinger Condensate
Before XAD-2
Resin With
Methylene
Chloride Rinse
XAD-2
Resin
Soxhlet Extraction
With Methylene
Chloride
Extract With
Methylene
Chloride
Impinger Condensate
After XAD-2
Resin With
Methylene
Chloride Rinse
Soxhlet Extraction
With Methylene
Chloride
Extract With
Methylene
Chloride
CC/MS
Analysis
GC/MS
Analysis
GC/MS
Analysis
Figure 5-8.
Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons Sample
Recovery Analytical Matrix.
-------
Grab No. 1
Grab No. 2
Grab No. 3
PH
Temperature
PH
Temperature
PH
Temperature
,Composite
Sample
I
ro
Total Solids
Analysis
TOC Analysis
PAH Analysis
| Filter |
Filtrate
Solids
Suspended
Solids On
Filter
Dissolved
Solids In
Filtrate
Extract With
Methylene
Chloride
Soxhlet Extract
With Methylene
Chloride
Figure 5-9.
Scrubber Water Samples
Analytical Matrix.
GC/MS
Analysis
GC/MS
Analysis
-------
for evaporation. The samples were evaporated to dryness at room temperature
and pressure. When the samples were dry they were dessicated for 24 hours
and weighed at 24-hour intervals to a constant weight.
Total Organic Carbon (TOG) Analysis—The TOG content of the EPA Method 5E
sodium hydroxide impinger solutions and scrubber water filtrate samples was
determined instrumentally using the procedure specified in EPA Method 5E.
A Beckman Model 915 B Total Carbon Analyzer was used to determine the total
carbon content and total inorganic carbon content of the sample. The con-
centration of carbon present in the sample was determined by comparing the
sample results with the results of standards prepared using potassium hydro-
gen phthalate. The total organic carbon content was determined by subtract-
ing the total inorganic carbon content from the total carbon content.
Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbon (PAH) Analysis—The original scope of
work called for the PAH analysis of samples retrieved from the PAH sampling
train and scrubber water samples. During the extraction of the PAH blank
samples and the gas phase PAH samples for GC/MS analysis, the extraction
apparatus malfunctioned causing the complete evaporation of the solvents and
subjecting the samples to excessive temperatures. For this reason, no gas
phase PAH sample analyses were performed.
Scrubber water samples were prepared for PAH analysis by extraction in a
continuous water extractor for twenty-four hours in methylene chloride.
The effluent scrubber water solid samples were prepared for analysis
by first spiking the solid samples with isotopically labeled benzo(a)pyrene-d,2
to serve as a sample recovery check. The solids were then extracted for
24 hours in methylene chloride using a soxhlet extractor.
Extracts were concentrated by means of a Kuderna-Danish evaporation
apparatus.
5-22
-------
The sample concentrates were analyzed by GC-MS with operation in the
selected ion monitoring mode (SIM). Individual PAH compounds were separated
by employing a fused silica capillary column. The chromatographic conditions
and other instrumental parameters are summarized in Table 5-?.. Mass spectral
data were stored on a magnetic disc for interpretation and reference.
Identification of individual PAH compounds was based primarily on two
criteria: chromatographic retention time and mass spectral characteristics.
The appearance of key fragment ions of the compounds at a precise retention
time is indicative of the presence of the compound. In general, PAH compounds
are relatively stable in the ion source of a mass spectrometer. The major
(base peak) fragment corresponds to the molecular weight of the compound (M ),
other fragments are generally found at M -2 and M /2 (corresponding to a double
charged ion). The relative intensities of these fragment ions are also
examined in order to confirm the identification. Table 5-3 lists the individual
PAH compounds measured. The internal standard, phenanthrene-d , served as
a marker to verify retention time to within +0.1 minute.
Once an individual PAH compound was identified, the selected ion area of
the chromatographic peak corresponding to the base peak fragment was obtained.
This area was compared to the corresponding area of the internal standard.
The concentration of the compound was then calculated using a known response
based on a calibration standard.
Total Solids—Total solids in the scrubber waters were determined by
the analysis of total suspended solids (TSS) and total dissolved solids (TDS)
on-site. During each test run, multiple samples of the influent and effluent
venturi scrubber waters were collected. The samples were collectively filtered
to determine a composite TSS concentration by measuring the residue collected
on the filter and relating the mass to the water volume determined gravi-
metrically. The TDS concentration in the resulting composite sample was
determined by pipetting a 50 milliliter aliquot of the sample into a tared
5-23
-------
TABLE 5-2. GC-MS CONDITIONS
Operating Parameter Experimental Conditon
Instrument Hewlett Packard 5985A
lonization voltage 70eV
Scan rate 1 scan/second
Scan range 40 •+• 450 amu
Column SE54 fused silica capillary
H2 flow rate 30 cm/sec
Initial temp 25°
Initial hold 2.0 min
Program rate 8°/min
Final temp 300°C
Final hold 20 min
Injector temp 25°C
Injection Cool on-column
Sample size 1 yL
TABLE 5-3. POLYCYCLIC AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS DETERMINED BY GC-MS
Phenanthrenes (178) Benzopyrenes (252)
Phenanthrene Benzo(a)pyrene
Anthracenes Benzo(e)pyrene
Perylene
Pyrenes (202 Benzo(b)fluoranthrene
Benzo(j)fluoranthrene
Pyrene Benzo(k)fluoranthene
Fluoranthene
Benzoperylenes (276)
Chrysenes (278)
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene
Chrysene Indeno(l,2,3-c,d)pyrene
Benz(a)anthracene
Triphenylene
Note: The molecular weight of each group is shown in parentheses.
5-24
-------
100 milliliter beaker and evaporating to dryness at 105°C, desiccating the
sample, and weighing. The concentration of TDS is the mass of residue remain-
ing related to the volume of the aliquot.
pH and Temperature—Samples of the influent and effluent venturi scrubber
waters were collected during each particulate/TOC loading and PAH runs. pH
measurements were performed at the sampling locations during sample collection
with a hand-held pH meter.
Scrubber water temperatures were monitored at the sampling location using
a thermocouple and portable read-out.
Moisture—During each particulate/TOC loading and polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbon run, at least one sample of the virgin aggregate and recycled
asphalt pavement were collected for moisture analysis. The samples were
collected in a large tray, coned-and-quartered to obtain a representative
sample and taken directly to the on-site mobile laboratory for moisture
analysis. In the mobile lab, approximately 500 grams of the material was
weighed into an aluminum pan and dried overnight at 105°C. The sample was
then weighed to within +0.1 gram.
Smoke Point Determination of Recycled Asphalt Payment—The smoke point
of RAP samples collected during the test program was determined using a test
procedure developed by the Oklahoma Testing Laboratory. Based on this method
a sample of RAP is first dried to a constant weight in an oven set at 140°F.
500 grams of the dried sample is then placed in a stainless steel bowl and
heated at a rate of 25 to 30°F per minute while stirring the RAP with a
stainless steel spatula. When the sample temperature is approximately 250°F
the heating rate is decreased so that the sample temperature rise is 5° to 10°F
per minute until the smoke point is reached. The smoke point is recorded as
the temperature at which the RAP starts to smoke.
5-25
-------
Smoke Point and Flash Point Determination of Asphalt Cement—The smoke
point and flash point of the asphalt cement used during testing was determined
by the ASTM D92-Cleveland Open Cup procedure. Based on this method, the
test cup is filled to a specified level with the asphalt sample. The temperature
of the sample is increased rapidly at first and then at a slow constant rate
as the smoke point is approached. As soon as smoke is detected, the
temperature of the sample is noted. To determine the flash point, the
temperature is increased and at specified intervals a small test flame is
passed across the cup. The lowest temperature at which application of the
test flame causes the vapors above the surface of the liquid to ignite is
taken as the flash point.
5.3 DATA REDUCTION
This section provides a discussion of the data reduction procedures
used to process the raw data generated during this sampling program. EPA
referenced data reduction procedures were used whenever possible. When an
EPA referenced data reduction procedure was not available, a detailed des-
cription of the data reduction procedure ,is provided. Further information
is given in Appendix B.
5.3.1 Gas Stream Sampling Data Reduction
Data reduction procedures and equations used for gas stream sampling
data reduction were taken from applicable parts of 40 CFR 60, Appendix A.
Raw field data were reduced to engineering units using Radian's Source
Sampling Data Reduction Computer Program. Copies of the data reduction
printouts are presented in Appendix A. As a verification check of the
computer reduction, several runs were hand calculated using the equations
outlined in Appendix B.
Annual Book of ASTM Standards, "Standard Test Method for Flash and Fire
Points by Cleveland Open Cup," Part 23, Petroleum Products and Lubricants(I),
D92-72, pages 27-32.
5-26
-------
Particulate Mass Emission Rate Data Reduction
In order to allow a review of possible effects introduced by an is ok i-
netic sampling into the normal mass emission rate calculations, two methods
were used to calculate mass emission rates for the particulate mass emission
runs. The method normally used to calculate particulate mass emission rates
is the concentration method. This method involves multiplying the particu-
late loading (sample mass divided by gas sample volume) by the volumetric
gas flow rate. The second particulate mass emission rate calculation method
is the area-ratio method. Based on the area-ratio method, the sample mass
is divided by the sampling time and then multiplied by the ratio of the
stack area to nozzle area to obtain the particulate mass flow rate.
Equation:
(m/t) x (A/A) = HER
where: m = mass of particulate matter collected during sampling (pounds)
t = elapsed sampling time (hours)
A0 = area of stack (square feet)
5
A_ = area of nozzle (square feet)
MER = mass emission rate (pounds per hour)
The difference between the emission rates calculated by these two
methods is an estimate of the maximum bias in the measured emission rate due
to anisokinetic sampling.
5-27
-------
Total Organic Carbon (TOG) Emissions Data Reduction
Equation:
(TOC(U x V - (TOC(B) x V
TOC
'(g) DGV
Nomenclature:
TOC. N = Total organic carbon in gas phase, mg/dscm
(g)
TOC. . = Total organic carbon in impinger catch, mg/1
(*•/
TOC. N = Total organic carbon in the impinger blank,
(B) mg/1
V = Total volume of impinger catch, 1
DGV = Volume of gas sampled, standard conditions
dry standard cubic meters, dscm
Particle Size Distribution Data Reduction (AHCSS)
The procedure for calculating the particle size distribution of the
particulate caught by the AHCSS was taken directly from the operating manual
for the AHCSS.
Add up the weight gains for the four stages to obtain the total parti-
culate collected.
Divide the amount collected in an individual stage by the total amount
collected to determine the percentage of the total collected in each stage.
Starting with stage 4 (backup filter) compute the cumulative percent
less than the staged size range. The cumulative percent less than stage 3
(the cyclone) is equal to the percent caught in stage 4. The cumulative
percent less than stage 2 is the sum of the percent caught on stage 3 and
the percent caught on stage 4. The cumulative percent less than stage 1 is
the sum of the percents caught on stages 4, 3, and 2.
5-28
-------
«J
Particle density is considered to be 1.0 gin/cur and the particles are
considered to be spherical. Particle sizes are reported as equivalent
aerodynamic diameters.
Using Figure 5-10 with gas flow rate at stack conditions and stack
temperature, determine the den (50% Effective Cut Off Diameter) for each
stage.
Plot the results on log probability graph paper with the particle
diameter (d,.n) as the ordinate and the cumulative percent less than the
stated size range by weight as the abscissa.
Visible Determination of Opacity
The procedure used to calculate the opacity of the outlet stack plume
was taken directly from the procedure specified in EPA Reference Method 9.
Based on this method, opacity is determined as the average of 24 consecutive
observations recorded at 15 second intervals (six minute average).
5-29
-------
1
9
8
7
6
5
4
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
LU
UJ
HI
H.
O
I-H
00
<••
of
t:
;' i
i
ili!
Ill
I'!
1MI
i '
iili
iii
|Ui
1
Figure 5-10
HCSS IMPACTOR 50% CUTPOINT,
MICROMETERS (urn)
AIR TEMP = 300'F
PARTICLE DENSITY =1.0 GM/CC
SPHERICAL PARTICLES
nil
I
0.1
0.
0.2 0.3 0.4 0
,5 j 0.7 | 0.9j
016
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Gas flow rate at stack conditions and stack temperature.
-------
5.3.2 Process Sampling Data Reduction
PAH in Scrubber Water Data Reduction
Equation:
PAH = w.
(W) 0.4
Nomenclature:
PAH,W_ = Concentration of PAH in the scrubber water, ug/liter
?CT\ = Total concentration of PAH specie, ug
0.4 = Volume of scrubber water extracted, liter
PAH in Scrubber Solids Data Reduction
Equation:
PAH(S) = -P
Nomenclature:
PAH, = Concentration of PAH specie in scrubber solids, ug/gram
P ,-* = Total concentration of PAH specie, ug
S = Weight of scrubber solids extracted, g
Weight Percent Solids Data Reduction
• Equation:
1 F - F
S = (F) Fm . nn
(WT) W(T) - 100
Nomenclature:
S(WT)= Wei§hc % solids
F(F) = Final filter weight, g
F(T-) = Filter tare weight, g
W(T) = Wei8ht of scrubber water filtered, g
100 - conversion from fraction to percent
5-31
-------
Total Dissolved Solids Data Reduction
Equation:
Nomenclature:
IDS = Total dissolved solids, mg/1
W._. = Weight of beaker and residue after evaporation, mg
W, . » Beaker tare weight, mg
0.05 = Volume of solution evaporated, liter
5-32
-------
SECTION 6
6.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE
Quality assurance/quality control guidelines outline pertinent steps
during the production of analytical and emission data to ensure the accept-
ability and reliability of the data generated. The measures outlined in
this section were followed to ensure the production of quality data from the
sampling and analytical efforts. Additional information is presented in
Appendix I of Volume 2.
6.1 STANDARD QUALITY ASSURANCE PROCEDURES
QA/QC procedures are followed during sampling and analysis to
ensure that the data generated are of acceptable quality. These quality
control and quality assurance procedures are used during EPA reference
method sampling and/or routine analysis. Additional QA/QC procedures may be
called for on a site-specific basis. This section describes QA/QC proce-
dures applicable to the methods used, as well as specific procedures used
during this test program.
6.1.1 Sampling Equipment Preparation
The checkout and calibration of source sampling equipment is vital to
maintaining data quality. Referenced calibration procedures were strictly
adhered to when available, and all results were documented and retained. If
a referenced calibration technique for a particular piece of apparatus is
not available, then a state-of-the-art technique was documented and fol-
lowed. Table 6-1 summarizes the parameters of interest and the types of
sampling equipment that were used to measure each parameter. The techniques
used to calibrate the equipment are as follows:
6-1
-------
I
N3
TABLE 6-1 SUMMARY OF CALIBRATED EQUIPMENT USED IN PERFORMING SOURCE SAMPLING
Type-S
Pitot
Parameter Tube
Volumetric Gas
Flow Rate
Gas Phase
Composition
Moisture
Molecular
Weight
Particulate
Mass & TOC
Polynuclear
Aromatic
Hydrocarbons
Particle Size
Distribution
EPA-1 , *
EPA-2
EPA-4
EPA- 3
Modified *
EPA-5E
Modified *
EPA- 5
*
Calibrated Equipment Used in Measuring Parameters
Differential Temperature Gas
Pressure Measuring Metering Isokinetic
Gauge Device System Fyrite Nozzles
* *
* * *
*
* * A * *
A * * A *
* * * * A
-------
• Prior to sampling, all equipment was cleaned and checked
to ensure operability.
• Equipment requiring pretest calibration (Table 6-1) was
calibrated in accordance with "Quality Assurance Handbook
for Air Pollution Measurements Systems, Volume III,
Stationary Source Specific Methods," (EPA 600 4-77-027b).
• Equipment calibration forms were reviewed for completeness
to ensure acceptability of the equipment required for each
specific application.
• The AHCSS was cleaned and visually inspected.
• Each component of the various sampling systems was carefully
packaged for shipment.
• Upon arrival on site—the equipment was unloaded, inspected
for possible damage, assembled for use, and checked for
operability.
6.1.2 Collection of Samples
The most important aspect of sample collection is obtaining a valid
sample. This section focuses on measures taken to obtain valid samples.
Those measures were:
• Pretest and posttest leak checks of the sampling trains
were made.
• Field blanks were collected for the particulate, TOG, and
PAH sampling trains prior to sample collection.
6-3
-------
• The sampling systems were visually inspected prior to
sampling to ensure proper assembly and operability.
• The S-type pitot tubes were leak checked before and after
sampling and inspected for damage.
• The Magnehelic® gauges were leveled and zeroed prior to
sampling.
• Temperature measurement systems were visually checked for
damage and operability by measuring the ambient temperature
prior to each sampling run.
• The nozzles were visually inspected for damage before and
after each sampling run.
« The AHCSS was preheated to prevent condensation of water in
the particle sizing device.
• Data requirements were reviewed prior to each sampling run.
• Ice was maintained in the icebaths during all sampling runs.
• Number and location of sampling points were checked prior to
each sampling run.
• Sampling ports were sealed to help prevent possible air
inleakage.
The molecular weight of the flue gas was determined using EPA Reference
Method 3 (4). Quality control for Method 3 focused on the following:
t The sampling train was purged prior to sample collection.
6-4
-------
• The Fyrite® analyzer fluid level was zeroed prior to use.
• The Fyrite® analyzer was thoroughly purged with sample prior
to analysis.
• Analyses were repeated until the analysis agreed within
0.5% absolute.
• The Fyrite® absorbing solutions were changed when more than six
passes were required to obtain a stable reading of any component.
The moisture determinations were made simultaneous with the modified
EPA Reference Method 5E. Quality control procedures for Method 4 focused on
the following:
• Before and after sampling each imp inger was carefully weighed
to the nearest 0.02 g. Care was taken to see the impingers
were dry and the stopcock grease was removed from the ball joints
prior to each weighing.
The particulate loading determinations were performed using a modified
EPA Reference Method 5E. Quality control procedures for this method focused
on the following:
• Prior to particulate sampling, preliminary velocity, temperature,
and moisture determinations were made. This aided in calculating
isokinetic flow rates.
• Prior to sampling, particulate filters were baked, desiccated
and weighed. They were then placed in clean petri dishes until
used.
• Particulate filters were handled with tweezers.
6-5
-------
The visible opacity of controlled emissions were observed using EPA
Reference Method 9. Quality control procedures for this method focused on
the following:
• The visible emissions observer was certified within six months
of the test program.
• The location of the observer was independently verified.
• A clear,blue sky was required to ensure valid visible emission
observations.
6.1.3 Sample Recovery
To ensure data integrity careful sample recovery techniques must be
adhered to. This section outlines quality control procedures followed to
ensure data integrity. These include:
• Particulate filters were handled out of drafts and transferred
with treezers.
• Sample trains were disassembled and the samples recovered in
clean areas to prevent contamination.
• The nozzle was capped prior to and following sampling.
• The samples were transferred to appropriate storage containers
and clearly labeled. Liquid levels were noted.
• Field blanks were included for each method. These consisted of
(i.e. unused) sampling trains which were assembled, dis-
assembled, recovered, and analyzed in the same manner as
actual sampling trains and samples.
6-6
-------
CORPORJmOM
• Samples were carefully labeled, logged into the field logbook
and assigned a unique identification code immediately after
collection.
• The impingers were rinsed three times with aliquots of
fresh imp inger solution.
6.1.4 Preparation of Samples for Analysis
Prior to analysis, each sample must be properly prepared. This
section outlines quality control procedures used to ensure proper sample
preparation. Included are:
• Each sample identification code was crosschecked for
accuracy against the sample logbook.
• The analytical requirements of each sample were reviewed.
• The sample containers were checked for leakage or damage and any
anomalies were noted.
6.1.5 Sample Analysis
The exact quality assurance/quality control procedures followed during
the analysis task were dependent on the specific analysis being performed.
One or more of the following steps were taken:
• Duplicate analyses were performed on 5-15% of the samples.
• Internal QC samples were analyzed to verify instrument or
procedural variance.
• Blind QC samples prepared by EPA were submitted to the Analytical
lab along with the field generated samples.
6-7
-------
• Blanks were analyzed to correct for background and/or matrix
interferences.
• The samples were spiked with known additions of the species
of interest.
6.1.6 Data Reduction
Several steps were taken to verify the correctness of the data reduc-
tion. Steps routinely used include:
• Alternate procedures were used to reduce the data. An
example is, reducing source sampling data by using Radian's
Source Sampling Data Reduction Program and comparing selected
results against hand calculations.
• A certain percentage (approximately 10%) of the results were
recalculated from raw data by someone unassociated with the
original data reduction.
• The data was carefully checked for unexplained variance and
internal consistency, i.e. are the results consistent with
expected and/or other results.
6.1.7 Data Documentation and Verification
Several measures were taken to verify the completeness and accuracy of
the data generated. These include:
• All sampling data was recorded on preformated data sheets.
• Analytical results and calculations were recorded in bound
laboratory notebooks.
6-8
-------
• Data tables were made and reviewed for completeness and
accuracy.
• All data that appeared to be outside expected ranges were
carefully scrutinized for process upsets and reanalyzed as
necessary.
• Data generated were compared to process operation and
system upsets.
6.2 TEST PROGRAM SPECIFIC QUALITY CONTROL/QUALITY ASSURANCE PROCEDURES
Each sampling site presents its own individual problems and peculiari-
ties. Because of this any QA/QC program must be custom tailored to each
specific site. This section presents the procedures that were specific to
the Sloan asphalt concrete sampling program.
6.2.1 Sampling Equipment Preparation
This section outlines equipment modifications that were used during
this program to ensure the sample data produced were valid. These measures
are in addition to the standard equipment calibration and checkout proce-
dures outlined in Section 6.1.1. These include:
• Variacs were used to control the probe heater temperature.
• Inline thermocouples were installed to monitor the gas
stream temperature as it exited the filter holder.
• A time-proportioning temperature controller was used to control
the hot box temperature to within +10°F.
6-9
-------
Hydrocarbons in the gas stream condense as a function of temperature.
As the temperature decreases more hydrocarbons condense as particulate. For
this program it was important to have very strict control of the collection
temperature since the collection temperature "defined" the particulate. If
temperature fluctuations were encountered an increase or decrease in the
amount of particulate collected could be observed depending on temperature.
An inline thermocouple positioned directly after the filter holder,
coupled to a time proportioning temperature controller, was used to control
the hot box so the gas temperature would remain at 250°F + 10°F. The vast
majority of the time temperature was controlled at 250°F + 5°F. A variac
was used to control the probe heat temperature. The constant voltage output
kept a more constant temperature and avoided the temperature fluctuations
encountered with standard oven heaters.
6.2.2 Sample Collection
The sampling program presented some special problems in sample collec-
tion. This section outlines special QC steps that were taken to aid in
reliable and representative sample collection. These are in addition to
such measures as visual inspection of sampling trains and equipment, leak
checks, and other measures outlined in Section 6.1.2.
6.2.2.1 Sampling Preparation—
Certain non-equipment items such as the filters and glassware required
special preparation. This section outlines that preparation. The measures
include:
• Particulate filters were baked at 500°F prior to use. They
were then desiccated, weighed, and placed in clean petri
dishes,
6-10
-------
• Particulate filters used during polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbon sampling were methylene chloride extracted
and then baked at 500°F prior to being stored in glass
petri dishes.
All glassware used during sampling was cleaned as follows:
• The glassware was first washed thoroughly with laboratory
soap and water.
• The glassware was kiln-fired at 500°C for 18 hours.
• After the glassware cooled, it was rinsed with methylene
chloride and all the ball joints were capped with aluminum
foil.
6.2.2.2 Preliminary Measurements—
This section outlines QC checks and measurements performed prior to
sampling to assist in the calculation of anisokinetic sampling rate. These
include:
• A check for cyclonic or turbulent flow was performed prior
to sampling at the uncontrolled emissions sampling location.
• Preliminary velocity, temperature,and moisture determinations
were performed to aid in conducting isokinetic sampling.
• Wet bulb/dry bulb moisture determinations were performed
prior to and during individual sampling runs.
6-11
-------
It was discovered early into the sampling program that the moisture
content of the scrubber inlet could vary drastically from run to run. For
this reason moisture determinations were performed prior to and during each
uncontrolled sampling run to calculate accurate isokinetic sampling rates
prior to each sampling run.
6.2.2.3 Sampling Procedures—
This section outlines measures taken to ensure that valid and repre-
sentative samples were collected. The measures include:
• Approximately 10 pound aggregate samples were collected. The
samples were coned and quartered to produce the 600 gram sample
used to determine the moisture content.
• Two to four scrubber water samples were taken during each
sampling run. The samples were composited and all subsequent
analyses were performed on the composite sample.
• All glassware, except the silica gel impinger was wrapped
with aluminum foil during the polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbon
sampling runs to help prevent photodegradation of the
organic species.
6.2.3 Sample Recovery
This section outlines special QA/QC measures taken during sample re-
covery. These measures are in addition to particulate filter handling,
performance of field blanks, labeling and logging in of samples and other
steps outlined in Section 6.1.3. Measures taken to further ensure the
integrity of the samples during recovery include:
• Incandescent lighting was used during recovery of the
polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons sampling trains. This was to
6-12
-------
reduce the chance of photodegradation of the organic
species by ultraviolet light.
• Polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons samples were stored in amber
glass bottles with Teflon lid inserts to prevent photo-
degradation and/or contamination of the sample during
storage and transport.
• Particulate filters used during the polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons sampling runs were stored after use in glass
petri dishes. The petri dishes were wrapped in aluminum
foil to prevent possible photodegradation of the sample.
6.2.4 Preparation of Samples for Analysis
Quality control procedures incorporated during the preparation of the
samples for analysis are outlined in this section. These were in addition
to visually checking the samples for damage and ensuring proper labeling and
other procedures outlined in Section 6,1.4. These measures include:
• Sample matrix sheets were developed as an aid in analytical
preparation and as a flow diagram for the actual analysis.
• Particulate filters and impactor substrates were desiccated
for at least 24 hours prior to their first weighing.
• The particulate filters were weighed at 24-hour intervals
to a constant weight.
6-13
-------
6.2.5 Sample Analysis
This section outlines additional QC procedures employed during the
program to evaluate the quality of the analytical data. These procedures
are in addition to such measures as duplicate analysis, blank analysis,
internal QC samples, and other measures outlined in Section 6.1.5. Included
are:
• Total organic carbon audit samples were submitted to the
analytical laboratory prior to the submission of the field
samples.
0 Field blanks (Section 6.1.3) were evaluated to determine
species background and possible contamination problems.
• Two laboratories performed smoke point determinations on
RAP samples to help evaluate data variability.
The results of the total organic carbon audit samples are presented in
Table 6-2.
The results of the field blanks are presented in Table 6-3. The clean-
up results were used to correct the analytical results for background.
6-14
-------
TABLE 6-2. SUMMARY OF TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON
AUDIT SAMPLE MEASUREMENTS
EPA PREPARED SAMPLE RESULTS
Sample No.
33790
33791
33792
33793
RADIAN PREPARED
Sample No.
Set
Radian #1
Radian #2
Radian #3
Radian #4
Set
Radian #1
Radian #2
Radian #3
Set
Radian //I
Radian #2
Radian #2
Radian #4
Radian #5
Radian #6
Date of
Analysis
5-17-84
thru
5-29-84
(A)
Actual
Values (mg/1)
4.1
61.2
4.1
61.2
SAMPLES RESULTS (A)
Date of
Analysis
1 submitted
2 submitted
3 submitted
Actual
Values (mg/1)
5-17-84
40
200
200
1000
6-21-84
1316
329
132
7-5-84
1316
329
132
1005 -
158
80.4
(R)
Radian
Analysis
Values (mg/1)
9.3
53.7
3.58
51.8
(R)
Radian
Analysis
Values (mg/1)
38.7
192
200
1000
1340
325
133
1385
322
133
1004
153
70
Percent
R-A/A x
127
-12.3
-12.7
-15.4
Percent
R-A/A x
-3.2
-4.0
0
0
1.8
-1.5
0.8
5.2
-2,1
0.8
-0.1
-3.2
-12.9
Error
•100
Error
100
-------
TABLE 6-3. SUMMARY OF CLEANUP RESULTS
Particulate and Total Organic Train 1 Train 2
Carbon Sample Blanks Uncontrolled Controlled Average
Front half probe rinses (rag) 7.3 5.5 6.4
Filter blanks (rag) 0.6 0.3 0.4
Total organic carbon (rag)
1st impinger <1 <1 <1
2nd & 3rd impinger 2 22
6-16
------- |