EPA-910/9-76-033
November 1976
CASE STUDY OF
PARTICULATE EMISSIONS FROM
SEMI-SUSPENSION INCINERATION OF
MUNICIPAL REFUSE
FINAL REPORT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
AIR AND HAZARDOUS MATERIAL DIVISION
12OO SIXTH AVENUE, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 981O1
-------
CASE STUDY OF
PARTICULATE EMISSIONS FROM
SEMI-SUSPENSION INCINERATION
OF MUNICIPAL REFUSE
Errata
Page v Appendix C, "Page 34" should read "Page 35"
Page II Line 12, "7.500 C.F.M." should read "7,500 C.F.M."
Page 18 Table 5, "9.2xl09 ohm-cm" should read "9.2xl08 ohm-cm"
Page 29 "Table 6" should read "Table 7"
-------
FINAL REPORT
EPA-910/9-76-033
CASE STUDY OF PARTICULATE EMISSIONS FROM
SEMI-SUSPENSION INCINERATION OF MUNICIPAL REFUSE
Prepared by
Wesley D. Snowden, P.E.
Alsid, Snowden and Associates
And
Kenneth D. Brooks, EPA Project Officer
Region X, Surveillance and Analysis Division
Purchase No. WY-6-99-0872-A
Prepared for
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Solid Waste Program
Air and Hazardous Material Division
1200 Sixth Ave., Seattle, Washington 98101
November, 1976
-------
This report is issued by Region X, Environmental Protection Agency,
to assist state and local air pollution control agencies in carrying out
their program activities. Copies of this document may be obtained, for
a nominal cost, from the National Technical Information Service, 5285
Port Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia 22151.
This report was jointly written by Alsid, Snowden and Associates,
13240 Northrup Way, Suite 21, Bellevue, Washington 98005 in fulfillment
of EPA Purchase No. WY-6-99-0872-A and the project officer. It was sub-
sequently reviewed by the Air and Hazardous Materials Division, U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region X and approved for publication.
Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views
and policies of the Environmental Protection Agency, nor does mention of
trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation
for use.
Region X Publication No. EPA-910/9-76-033
ii
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The genuine cooperation of The Regional Municipality of Hamilton
Wentworth and the assistance of Mr. Harold Saunders, Plant Engineer and
the staff at the East Hamilton Solid Waste Reduction Unit are gratefully
acknowledged. The authors also wish to acknowledge the collaborative
data furnished by Mr. Rick Reid, CHoM/Hill; Mr. Jimmie Wilkerson, Winzler
and Kelley; Messrs. Alex Topley and Donald Neal, Babcock and Wilcox Canada
Ltd; and Messrs. Bill Reeves and Kurt Glockner, Babcock and Wilcox.
-------
CONTENTS
Page
ACKNOWLEDGMENT 111
LIST OF TABLES vi
LIST OF FIGURES vi
I. INTRODUCTION ]
II. SUMMARY OF RESULTS 5
III. PROCESS DESCRIPTION AND OPERATION 8
IV. TESTING AND ANALYTICAL METHODOLOGY 18
V. DETAILED RESULTS 28
APPENDIX A PLUME EVALUATION 30
APPENDIX B STEAM FLOW CHARTS 32
APPENDIX C OPERATING LOG 34
APPENDIX D SOURCE TESTING DOCUMENTATION 42
-------
LIST OF TABLES
1. SUMMARY OF RESULTS
2. BOILER OPERATING CONDITIONS DURING TEST PERIODS
3. APPARENT FACTORS AFFECTING BOILER OPERATIONS
4. ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR OPERATING CONDITIONS DURING TEST PERIODS
5. ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR INLET ASH RESISTIVITY
6. CENTROID LOCATIONS FOR ELEMENTAL AREAS OF STACK
7. SUMMARY OF TEST DATA
8. TERMINOLOGY AND EQUATIONS FOR REPORTING ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS
LIST OF FIGURES
1. SAMPLING SCENARIO
2. EAST HAMILTON SOLID WASTE REDUCTION UNIT FLOW DIAGRAM
%
3. PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION - RUN #1 - EAST HAMILTON MUNICIPAL
INCINERATOR
4. SCHEMATIC OF EPA METHOD 5 TYPE SAMPLING TRAIN
5. STACK CROSS SECTION AND EQUAL AREA CENTROID LOCATIONS
VI
-------
INTRODUCTION
The concurrent growth of energy demands and increasing cost and
scarcity of commonly-used conbustible fuels has prompted national inter-
est in alternative sources of thermal energy. One specific example in-
volves the energy recovery concept of burning municipal refuse in spreader-
stoker fed boilers either as a supplement to hogged woodwastes or as
the sole fuel. Since the environmental impact of this concept was
largely unknown, the State of Oregon, where hog-fuel boilers are widely
used by wood products industries to generate steam and electrical energy
to serve their plants, requested Region X, U. S. Environmental Protection
Agency to provide particulate emission data on hog-fuel type boilers
firing refuse.
The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality suggested the
East Hamilton Solid Waste Reduction Unit (SWARU), Hamilton, Ontario
for a case study. Though this facility was designed to burn 100% refuse
while the boilers in Oregon are envisioned to fire small percentages of
processed refuse, 10-20%, in combination with hog fuel, the SWARU proved
to be the only North American facility designed for semi-suspension
combustion similar to Oregon's hog fuel spreader-stoker boilers. In
addition, Oregon officials were interested in the application of elec-
trostatic precipitators to such boilers and each of the boilers at the
SWARU are equipped with an ESP.
-1-
-------
As a result of the cooperation and assistance from The Regional
Municipality of Hamilton-Wentworth personnel, source sampling was
conducted October 12-15, 1976 by Alsid, Snowden and Associates under
contract to EPA at the East Hamilton Solid Waste Reduction Unit. During
this period, particulate concentrations and emission rates were determined
in accordance with EPA Method 5 equipment and procedures, modified to
include the impinger catch as requested by the Oregon DEQ.
Though six EPA Method 5 and two Brinks impactor samples were scheduled
to be collected, erratic boiler operation caused by chronic fuel feed
problems, precluded this goal. Sampling boiler emissions at variable,
yet constant loadings, was intended. However, feed problems greatly
inhibited any reasonably steady-state operation and often prompted the
supplemental burning of natural gas. Consequently, three complete EPA
Method"5 samples and no Brinks impactor sample were obtained.
Since the SWARU facility is rather unique, several equipment manu-
facturers and governmental agencies were interested in various operating
parameters. Individual sampling plans of those organizations identified
in the following table, were discussed and an overall sampling scenario
developed to minimize disruption of the SWARU operation and yet satisfy
respective data needs.
-2-
-------
Organization Role
Winzler & Kelly Co-contractor for Humbolt County,
California
CHpM/Hill Co-contractor for Humbolt County,
California
Ontario Research Foundation Subcontractor for CH^M/Hill and
Contractor for the Ontario Ministry
of the Environment
Babcock and Mil cox Boiler manufacturer
Babcock and Wilcox Canada Ltd. Boiler manufacturer
Alsid, Snowden and Associates Contractor for U.S. EPA
The SWARU sampling scenario is shown in Figure 1. This figure is
intended to inform the reader of (1) the parameters that were measured,
(2) where sampling occurred in the system, and (3) who conducted which
tests.
The purpose of this report is to document and interpret the emission
sampling results of Alsid, Snowden and Associates. In addition, data
furnished by the above mentioned organizations were included if they
were deemed to be pertinent to the emission results.
If the reader is interested in data beyond the scope of this report,
a complete compilation of each organization's data will be jointly
prepared by Winzler & Kelly and CH2M/Hin for Mr. Bill Kuntz, County of
Humbolt, Department of Public Works, 1106 Second Street, Eureka, Cali-
fornia 95501.
-3-
-------
FIGURE I
SAMPLING SCENARIO
SOURCE
SOLID WASTE AND RESIDUE
PROCESS WATER
GASES AND PARTICIPATES
FLOW
SAMPLING PORT
I STACK |
"
CONDENSERS 8
TURBINES
ELECTROSTATIC !_
PRECIPITATOR ,
SHREDDED
REFUSE BIN
ASH
SEPARATOR
_^
• '
DISPOSAL
A DC* A *-.
nrt E>n . j
I) CH2M/ HILL- FUEL SAMPLING
2) BaW-CONTROL PANEL MONITORING
v3) BaW- PARTICULATE CONCENTRATION WITH SLM
^ METHOD
(?) BaW- PARTICLE SIZING WITH CASCADE
-^ IMPACTOR.
(?) ORF- GASEOUS SAMPLING (SOU.NOy.HC,
w ALDEHYDES) 2 *
6) ASA - PARTICULATE CONCENTRATION WITH
E.PA. METHOD 5.
7) ASA- PARTICLE SIZING WITH MECHANICAL
SIEVE.
CH2M/H ILL-OPACITY READINGS
ORF- SAMPLING FOR PCB
WINZLER a KELLY-SLURRY SAMPLING
WINZLER a KELLY-SAMPLING FURNACE ASH
-------
SUMMARY OF RESULTS
The results of sampling the No. 1 boiler at the East Hamilton
Solid Waste Reduction Unit for particulate emissions must be prefaced
by the fact that boiler operation during each run widely fluctuated.
Reasons for this chronic unstable mode of operation are discussed in
Section III. However, at this point it should be noted that unstable
operating conditions will generally produce higher particulate loadings
than stable operating conditions. Therefore, the Alsid, Snowden and
Associates emission results summarized in Table 1, reflect not only
specific boiler and ESP equipment but the operating conditions of that
system.
Since the particulate catch of an EPA Method 5 sampling train can
be defined as either the front half (i.e. nozzle, heated probe, and
heated filter) or the front half plus the back half (i.e. impingers),
results using both interpretations were calculated. Accordingly, the
3-run average particulate concentration, corrected to 12% CCL, for the
front half and for the front and back halves was 0.528 gr/dscf and
0.624 gr/dscf, respectively.
The front half constituted an average of 84.3% of the total sample
weight for the three samples.
The mean particle size determined by mechanically sieving Sample
Number One was found to be 200 microns.
A resistivity analysis of the electrostatic precipitator inlet
ash collected by Babcock & Wilcox indicated a relatively favorable
value of less than 10 ohm-cm.
-5-
-------
Opacity readings by Mr. Mark Boedigheimer, CH2M/Hill averaged 15
percent over a 30-minute period coincidental to sampling run 3. Indi-
vidual readings are furnished in Appendix A.
-6-
-------
TABLE 1. SUMMARY OF RESULTS
Run Number 'a' 1
Date 10/13/76
Process Data
Design Steam Prod. Rate,
1000 Ibs/hour 105
Avg. Steam Prod. Rate,
1000 Ibs/hour 88
Range of Steam Production
1000 Ibs/hour 45-115
Stack Data
Temperature, °F 487
Gas Velocity, ft/sec, . 38.3
Gas Flow Rate, DSCFM^ 44,265
C02 Content, percent 10.35
Isokineticity, percent 110.6
Emission Results (Front Half Catch) (c)
Particulate Catch, mg. 2103.8
Particulate Concentration, 0.574
grains/DSCF10'
Particulate Concentration @ 12% C0?
grains/DSCF^D; 07666
Pollutant Mass Rate, Ibs/hour 218.0
Emissions Results (Total Train Catch) (d)
Particulate Catch, mg. 2179.6
Particulate Concentration,
grains/DSCF^D; 0.595
Particulate Concentration/fax
12% C0? grains/DSCF^D' 0.690
Pollutant Ma§s Rate, Ibs/hour 225.9
3
10/14/76
105
53
25-114
498
36.0
42,968
6.4
106.5
829.2
0.243
0.455
89.3
976.9
0.286
0.536
105.2
4
10/14/76
105
46
25-114
487
36.9
46,334
4.53
103.1
622.5
0.175
0.462
69.2
869.8
0.244
0.645
96.7
"(a") Run number 2 was curtailed.
(b) Dry Standard Cubic Feet with standard defined as 70°F. and 29.92
inches of Hg.
(c) Particulate includes nozzle, heated probe and heated filter catch of
EPA Method 5.
(d) Particulate includes front half plus condenser catch after the filter.
7
-------
PROCESS DESCRIPTION AND OPERATION
The East Hamilton Solid Waste Reduction Unit includes two identical
boilers with a combined capacity of 600 tons per 24 hour day. This
facility, engineered by 6.L. Sutin and Associates Ltd. and costing
$8,250,000 (1972 Canadian Dollars), is based upon the concept of semi-
suspension burning of shredded municipal refuse in a water-walled boiler
exhausted through an electrostatic precipitator. A process flow diagram
showing the common fuel feed system and one of the boiler/ESP systems at
this facility is illustrated in Figure 2.
Municipal refuse is delivered in trucks to the receiving pit.
Before dumping, the trucks are weighed. Next, the refuse fuel is trans-
ported from the pit by four variable-speed, independently operated, con-
veyor belts. These belts each feed a dedicated shredder. The output of
each of the four shredders is combined and transported by conveyor belt to
a magnetic metal pick-up. The refuse is then conveyed to the boiler
where it is fed into the furnace pneumatically with the overfire air.
It should be noted that there is no functional surge capacity in this
fuel feed system. Though a shredded refuse holding bin was originally
built into the system, it has since been bypassed due to plugging problems
and deterioration. As a result, boiler operation is plagued by lagging
response to fuel feed rate commands.
Before presenting process and control system conditions during
test periods, these systems will be discussed in greater detail. The
subsequent boiler and ESP design specifications were respectively fur-
nished by Alex Topley and Donald Neal, Babcock & Wilcox Canada Ltd.
-8-
-------
FIGURE 2. EAST HAMILTON SOLID WASTE REDUCTION UNIT FLOW DIAGRAM
MUNICIPAL
REFUSE
COLLECTOR
TRUCKS
(NO INDUSTRIAL REFUSE) /SCALE
TOTAL CARIVCITY-600 T/DAY
ATMOSPHERIC
EMISSION
DEMOLITION
LUMBER
(NO LONGER AVAILABLE)
4 PORTS ACROSS DUCT\(NOT ACCEPTABLE
N FOR EFA 5 )
BY-PRODUCT
STEAM
SAMPLING PORTS
PNEUMATIC
FEED
AUXILLARY N.G
OPACITY
MONITOR I.D.
FAN
PNEUMATIC CONVEYOR
FERROUS
WASTE
BOILER (DESIGN-105,000 #STM,/HR.)
ASH
SEPARATOR!
CONVEYOR
LAND FILL
-------
Boiler Design Specifications
Babcock & Wilcox Canada Ltd. balanced draught single pass two
drum Stirling baffleless boiler with water cooled membraned furnace and
vertical tubular air heater.
The boiler is fitted with a Babcock-Detroit Rotograte stoker
12'-1 1/2" wide x 18'-8" shaft centers and two Babcock & Wilcox circular
type multi-spud auxiliary gas burners.
The boiler will generate 105,700 Ibs. of steam per hour when
burning 50,000 Ibs. of refuse per hour. The refuse has an average heating
value of 6,000 BTU per Ib. and contains 10% moisture. The refuse fuel
is municipal garbage, shredded in pulverizers and all metal removed prior
to injection into the furnace. The fuel is injected into the furnace
through three windswept spouts in the furance frontwall above the stoker.
The lighter material burns in suspension while the heavier materials falls
to the stoker grate and burns there. The stoker grate is continuously
moving and constantly discharges the ash into an ash hopper at and under
the front of the boiler. The speed of the stoker grate can be adjusted
to suit load and fuel conditions. The hot gases generated from the com-
bustion of the fuel pass up the furnace through the generating bank where
most of the steam is generated, through an air heater to preheat the
combustion air, through an electrostatic precipitator to clean the flue
gas and then to the stack through an induced draft fan.
The combustion air is supplied to the boiler - under grate when
the stoker is in service and to the gas burners when auxiliary fuel is
being fired - by means of a turbine driven forced draught fan. An
electric motor drive is also fitted to the fan for use when no steam
-10-
-------
is available. This fan has a test block rating of 203,400 Ibs. of
air per hour at a static pressure of 10.6" water gauge and a temper-
ature of 105° F.
The combustion gases are removed from the unit by means of a
turbine driven induced draught fan with a test block rating of 234,600
Ibs. of flue gas per hour at a static pressure of 2.88" water gauge and
a temperature of 615° F. This fan can also be driven by an electric
motor when no steam is available.
In order to control and complete combustion overfire air is supplied
to the furnace through ports at two levels at front and rear above the
stoker grate. The air for this service is supplied by a turbine drive
overfire air blower having a test block rating of 7.500 C.F.M. at 30"
water gauge static pressure and a temperature of 105° F. This blower
also supplies air to the windswept refuse spouts located at the front of
the boiler through which the refuse is distributed evenly into the furnace
over the grate.
To increase the thermal efficiency of the unit and for more complete
carbon burn out cinders collected in the boiler and air heater hoppers are
reinjected at the rear of the furnace just over the grate. This is done
through nozzles using an electric motor driven blower supplying 700 C.F.M.
of air at a pressure of 30" water gauge and 105° F.
11
-------
WheelabratorLurgi Electrostatic Precipitator Design Specifications
Technical Data
1.0 Gas Operating Conditions
1.1 Source
1.2 Quantity
1.3 Temperature
1.4 Pressure
1.5 Dust Content
Two (2) 300 ton water wall
incinerators
184,200 Ibs./hr.
590° F.
•^ 20 inches WC (design)
5.33#/1000# gas at 50% excess air
2.0 Precipitator Data (for one (1) unit, two (2) required)
2
2.1 Cross Section
2.2 Velocity
2.3 Treatment time
2.4 Gas Passages
2.5 Field height
2.6 No. of fields
2.7 Field length
2.8 Collecting Area
2.8.1 Projected
2.8.2 Actual
2.9 Collecting Surface
2.9.1 Type
2.9.2 Material
2.10 Plate Spacing
388 ft.'
3.48 f.p.s.
5.38 sees.
18
25 ft.
Two (2)
9'-4"
17,500 ft.2
21,000 ft.2
Pocketed 18-3/4" x 18 ga. x 25 ft.
Cold rolled steel
10" on centers
-12-
-------
3.0 Discharge Electrodes
3.1 Type
3.2 Material
3.3 Total length of electrodes
3.4 Supports
4.0 Casing
4.1 Gas distribution devices
5.0 Rappers
5.1 Collecting surface
5.2 Discharge electrode
6.0 Electrical
6.1 High voltage sets
6.2 Type
6.3 Number and Size
6.4 Transformer coolant
6.5 Power supply
6.6 Power consumption
(precip., insulator
heaters and rappers)
6.7 Rectifier rating
6.8 High voltage conductors
6.9 Automatic power control
6.10 Rapper control
Star-shaped, .288" diameter in
1" diameter pipe frame
Cold rolled mild carbon steel
16,200
8 - fused silica insulators
3 - 12 ga. perforated plates
carbon steel
2 drives - 38 hammers
2 drives - 36 hammers
Full wave (double half wave not
required)
Silicon diode rectifier
2 - 500 ma, 45 KV
Askarel or Pyranol
500 volt, 60 cycle, 3-phase
34.4 KW
70 KVA
2
2
1 cabinet with 2 timers Eagle
Flexopulse repeat cycle timer
adjustable from 2-40 sees.
operating, 10-300 interval.
-13-
-------
Performance Guarantee
When operating with an inlet dust loading of 5.33#/1000# gas with
50% excess air and a gas volume of 81,000 actual cubic feet per minute
at 590°F the collection efficiency is guaranteed to be 98.5% resulting
in a dust loading at the precipitator outlet of 0.08#/1000# gas at 50%
excess air.
Boiler/ESP System Test Conditions
The competence of emission results is a function of the sampling
procedure and the operation of process and control equipment during sample
periods. The sampling and analytical procedures used at SWARU will be
discussed in the next section while operating conditions of the boiler/ESP
system will be presently discussed.
Though both boiler/ESP systems, designated No. 1 and No. 2, can be
operated simultaneously, only the No. 1 system was operational during the
week of testing. Therefore, all subsequent comments pertain to this
system.
A temporal relationship between boiler operation and testing is shown
in Table 2. The determination of operating conditions results from inter-
preting steam flow strip charts shown in Appendix B.
Table 2. Boiler Operating Conditions During Test Periods
Test
1
3
4
Date
10/13
10/14
10/14
Time
(hours)
1745
1930
1500
1615
1745
1915
STEAM PRODUCTION RATE Drum
Average Range Pressure
(Ibs/hr) (Ibs/hr) (psi)
88,000
53,000
46,000
45,000-115,000
25,000-114,000
24,000-114,000
220
215
200
-14-
-------
It is obvious from the above information that boiler operation widely
fluctuated from design specifications during testing. The most apparent
factors contributing to the erratic boiler operation are listed in Table 3,
The general interruptive effect these, and possibly other factors, had on
the operation of boiler No. 1 can be seen in the operating log provided
in Appendix C. This log was recorded by Mr. Rick Reid of CH2M/Hill.
Table 3. Apparent Factors Affecting Boiler Operation
Factor
Fuel Feed
- Erratic overfire air
- Improper spread
- Non-uniform feed
Reason
Turbine drive impractical with
fluctuating steam pressure.
Rotary drive on feeder inoperative,
Erratic overfire air,
Too much through center chute.
Plugging feed chute,
No surge in feed system.
- Slow feed rate change response No surge in feed system.
Low BTU content
Gas Flow
Poor ID fan control
- Insufficient ID fan capacity
- Non-uniform spread of fuel on
grate
Boiler Controls
Less than expected paper.
Sticking damper,
Auto control inoperative
Part of damper welded shut.
Too much through center chute.
- Many instruments not operative Maintenance not emphasized.
most not calibrated.
Unfortunately there is no means to quantitively determine the effect of
these factors on stack emissions. Though it is reasonable to assume that
erratic boiler operation will result in higher particulate loadings than
steady-state operation, operation of the SWARU boiler has been typically
erratic, therefore, particulate emissions from the SWARU boiler could
-15-
-------
be reduced by steady-state operation but such operation has not yet been
achievable.
A temporal relationship between ESP operation and testing is shown
in Table 4. These data reflect panel board reading provided by the project
officer.
Table 4. ESP Operating C onditions During Test Periods
ZONE 1 ZONE 2
Time PRIMARY PRECIP. PRIMARY PRECIP.
Test Date (hrs) (volts) (amps) (milliamps) (volts) (amps) (milliamps)
1
3
4
10/13
10/14
10/14
1745
1930
1500
1615
1745
1915
190
190
180
185
190
190
59
58
59
59
59
59
290
290
290
285
285
290
200
210
205
225
220
210
54
54
53
56
55
54
270
270
270
265
260
250
During each stack sampling period, the electrical input to the precipi-
tator remained constant. However, any attempt to meaningfully establish its
collecting efficiency during sampling (design collection efficiency was 98.5%)
would be futile due to the large chunks, up to several inches in diameter,
being carried into the ESP. In lieu of this information, the following com-
ments, furnished by Mr. Donald Neal, Babcock and Wilcox Canada Ltd., are
presented to indicate the condition of the ESP during sampling.
"On October 26, 1976 Peter Finnis and John Underwood from Wheelabrator
and the writer conducted a visual examination of the #1 precipitator.
From the visual inspection it was found that collector plates 3, 4,
9 and 17 on the inlet were warped. The walkway grating at the inlet
was piled with tin foil, paper and charred material. This effectively
stops all the flow from passing through the bottom 18 inches of the
collectors. This build-up was removed and the walkway cut out and
removed.
-16-
-------
"The 9th and 17th collector on the primary field were warped for their
total length.
The second field was in good shape. The 13th collector was warped at
the outlet. Also there was rapper seized on the outlet field. (This
effectively reduces the collector area by 5% on the 2nd field.)
The electrode wires are in good shape and none are down.
Generally the precipitator on #1 unit is in pretty fair shape. It
has had about 15 to 20 percent of its collector area negated due
to the above reasons."
In summary, the design specifications and operating conditions of
the subject boiler/ESP system have been described in this section to
properly qualify the particulate emission results of this single case
study. Given similar circumstances, similar grain loadings can be expected.
Though measured grain loadings could be reduced by design and operational
improvements, the magnitude of such reductions must remain a subjective
consideration of the reader.
-17-
-------
TESTING AND ANALYTICAL METHODOLOGY
Atmospheric emissions characterizations as to participate mass and
size of emissions were determined from the limited number of samples col-
lected by the EPA Method 5 type train and mechanical sieving respectively.
Three complete Method 5 type samples were collected during the available
four days of representative incinerator operating times.
Particle sizing via a cascade impactor was planned but the erratic
nature of the boiler operation precluded sample collection. A mechanical
sieving analysis of the filter catch on Run Number One (approximately 1.2
grams total) was performed to gain some understanding of the size of the
particles. The results of the particle sizing analysis indicates that
the mean particle size by weight is 200 microns in diameter. The last
two stages of the sieve analysis were washed with acetone to facilitate
passage of the particles through the respective sieves. The results of
the particle sizing analysis are shown in Figure 3.
A boiler flyash sample taken by Babcock & Wilcox at the inlet to
the electrostatic precipitator was analyzed as to its charging adap-
tability reported as "resistivity" in terms of ohm-cm. The ash sample
at a 10% moisture by volume condition was found to have a relatively
favorable charging characteristic of less than 10 ohm-cm. The
resistivity versus temperature data is shown in Table 5.
Table 5. ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR INLET ASH RESISTIVITY
TEMPERATURE
400 °F
450°F
500 °F
550°F
650°F
MOISTURE
10%
10%
10%
10%
10%
RESISTIVITY
4. IxlOJ ^ohm-cm
1 . 5x1 ol ohm-cm
7.2xlOgOhm-cm
3.4xlQgOhm-cm
9.2x10 ohm- cm
*Moisture in percent by volume. Sample was 7.5 grams allowing
one moisture condition.
-18-
-------
h, I M-!.; I-
PARTICLE SIZE,DISTRIBUTION
PRECIPITATOR INLET
East Hamilton Solid
Waste Reduction Unit
vH+i-h-H-l
HHHH f •!.-•!•]-M
7TOUT ! ! I j
0.01 a 05 Ol 0.2 0.5
•r-!4f CUMULATIVE % LESS THAN BY WEIGHT M-\-] ,
10 ig 20 30 4O 50 60 70
80
90
95
98
-------
Stack gas sampling equipment designed by the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), office of Air Programs was
used in this evaluation. A schematic of the sampling equipment is
shown in Figure 4.
Sampling was performed according to the following:
Sampling ports were existing and locations noted. The number of
sampling points were determined considering the number of duct dia-
meters between obstructions in the duct upstream and downstream of
the sampling ports. Stack pressure, temperature, moisture content,
-20-
-------
WALL
S"
TUBE
VJIJH
PROBE
UMBILICAL CO/CO
w7
Figure 4.
EPA METHOD 5 PARTICULATE SAMPLING TRAIN
DAT
ALSID, SNOWDEN S ASSOCIATES
13240 Northrup Way, Suite 21
Bellevue, WA 98005
-------
and maximum velocity head readings were measured. An EPA designed
nomograph was set up using this data and the correct nozzle diameter
was selected using this nomograph. A sketch of the stack cross section
and the equal areas selected is shown in Figure 5.
Thirty-two elemental areas were selected for traverse sampling
of the stack. The stack area is composed of a combination of semi-
circle, rectangle and another semi-circle. Three ports were already
installed and selected for sample collection to collect the most re-
presentative sample. The thirty-two elemental areas were divided into
two parts, a 22 elemental point traverse along the longest diameter
direction and a 10 point elemental point traverse along the shortest
diameter. The sampling port installed for sampling the shortest
diameter was not at the center of the longest diameter.
The 22 and 10 elemental areas selected are shown in Table 6.
The dimensions and centroids of the elemental areas were determined by
trial and error calculations knowing that each elemental area along
the longest diameter is 1/22 of the total area and each elemental area
along the shortest diameter is 1/11 of the total area.
A leak test was performed on the assembled sampling train. The
leak rate did not exceed 0.02 cfm at a vacuum of 24 inches Hg. The probe
was heated so that the gas temperature at the probe outlet was approxi-
mately 250° F. The filter was heated to approximately 250° F. to avoid
condensation of moisture on the filter. Crushed ice was placed around
the impingers at the beginning of the test with new ice being added as
required to keep the gases leaving the sampling train below 70° F.
-22-
-------
16"
3 PORTS AT 6"0 TYPIC
Mr""
FIGURE 5:
48
CROSS SECTION OF EXHAUST STACK AT THREE SAMPLING
PORTS WITH EQUAL ELEMENTAL AREA TRAVERSE POINT
LOCATIONS.
-------
Table 6
Centroid Location for Elemental Areas
Shortest Diameter, # Areas = 10
Area No.
1
2
3
4
5
S
6
7
8
9
10
Centroid (from
inside wall )
4.5"
11.81"
17.43"
23.00"
28.58"
34.42"
39.9"
45.57
51.19
58.5"
Longest Diameter # Areas = 22
(Enter thru 2 ports @ ends)
Area No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Centroid (from
inside wall )
7.02"
13.28"
18.35"
22.86"
27.31"
31.62"
35.92"
40.22"
44.52"
48.82"
53.22"
TOTAL AREA - 42.65 ft'
-24-
-------
The train was operated as follows:
The probe was inserted into the stack to the first traverse point
with the nozzle tip pointing directly into the gas stream. The pump was
started and immediately adjusted to sample at isokinetic velocities.
Equal time was spent at selected points of equal elemental areas of the
duct with the pertinent data being recorded from each time interval. The
EPA nomograph was used to maintain isokinetic sampling throughout the
sampling period. At the conclusion of the run the pump was turned off,
the probe was removed, and the final readings were recorded.
-25-
-------
Clean-up of the EPA train was performed by carefully removing the filter
and placing it in a container marked "Run X, Container A". Reagent grade
acetone and brushes were used to clean the nozzle, glass probe and
pre-filter connections. The acetone wash was placed in a container marked
"Run X, Container B". The volume of water in the impinger and bubblers
(glassware) was weighed in their respective containers to the nearest
0.1 gram. The original weights which included approximately 100 ml in
the bubbler and 100 milliliters in the impinger were then subtracted
and the difference added with the water weight gain of the silica gel
constituted the amount of water collected during the run. The silica
gel was weighed in a bubbler before and after the run. The water from the
glassware and a water rinse of the glassware were placed in a container
marked "Run X, Container C". An acetone rinse of the glassware and
all post-filter glassware (not including the silica gel container) was
performed and placed in a container marked "Run X, Container D".
Analysis of the samples in each container was performed according to the
following:
Run X, Container A - Transfer the filter and any loose particulate from
the sample container to a tared glass weighing dish and desiccate
for 24 hours in a desiccator or constant humidity chamber containing
a saturated solution of calcium chloride or its equivalent. Weigh to
a constant weight and report the results to the nearest 0.1 milligram.
Run X, Container B - Measure the volume to the nearest 0.1 milliliter.
Transfer acetone washings from container into a tared beaker and
evaporate to dryness at ambient temperature and pressure. Desiccate
for 24 hours and weigh to a constant weight. Report the result to the
nearest 0.1 milligram.
-26-
-------
Run X, Container C - Measure the volume to the nearest 0.1 milliliter.
Extract organic particulate from the water solution with three 25 milliliter
portions of chloroform and three 25 milliliter portions of ethyl ether.
Combine the ether and chloroform extracts and transfer to a tared beaker.
Evaporate until no solvent remains at about 70° F. This can be accomplished
by blowing air that has been filtered through activated charcoal over
the sample. Desiccate for 24 hours and weigh to a constant weight. Report
the results to the nearest 0.1 milligram. After the extraction, evaporate
the remaining water to dryness and report the results to the nearest
0.1 milligram.
Run X, Container D - Measure the volume to the nearest 0.1 milliliter.
Transfer the acetone washings to a tared beaker and evaporate to dryness
at ambient temperature and pressure. Desiccate for 24 hours and weigh
to a constant weight. Report the results to the nearest 0.1 milligram.
Blanks were taken on the acetone, ether, chloroform, and deionized water
and subtracted from the respective sample volumes. The filter paper used
with the EPA train was a Mine Safety Appliance 1106 BH, heat treated glass
fiber filter mat.
-27-
-------
DETAILED RESULTS
A detailed summary of the test data collected on this project is
shown in Table 7. Table 7 was compiled from the computer printouts of
the data. The computer printouts for the four samples are placed in
the Appendix D.
-28-
-------
Table 6 • Summary of Test Data
CLIENT EPA REGION 10 Test Date(s) October 13 & 14. 1976
SAMPLING LOCATION WASTE INCIN. #1 STACK PROCESS
Start Time
Finish Time
Elapsed Sampling Time, Min.
0
Volume Sampled, ft
Volume Sampled Standard*, ft
Moisture Content of Stack Gas, %
Molecular Weight of Stack Gas, Ib/lb
Mole
Stack Pressure, in Hg
Pi tot Coefficient
Velocity of Stack Gas, ft/sec
Stack Gas Flow Rate, ft3/min
Temperature of Stack, °F
Stack Gas Flow Rate, S* ft3/min
Diameter and Area of Nozzle, in., ft
Percent Isokinetic of Test
Weight Parti cul ate Collected, mg
Particulate Concentration,
grains/ S* ft3
C02 Content of Stack Gas, %
Particulate Concentration @ 12% C0?,
gr/S* ft3
Pollutant Mass Rate (Concentration
Method), Ib/hr
Run # 1
Date 10-13-76
1751
1829
64
56.997
56.373
17.3
27.93
29.214
0.827
38.3
98,006
487
44,265
3/8" .000767
110.6
2179.6
0.595
10.35
0.690
225.9
INCINERATION OF WASTE
Run # 2
Date 10-14
1133
1144
11
-o
70
0
o
m
oo
CO
»— i
~z*
— {
m
•ya
PD
cr
-i
i — i
<— i
•ZL
\
\
OO
2
-a
r-
t—i
•ZL
CD
O
C
—t
J»
t— (
|—
O
Run # 3
Date 10-14
1458
1621
64
53.363
52.662
14.08
27.94
29.351
0.827
36.0
92,152
498
42,968
3/8" .000767
106.5
976.9
0.286
6.4
0.536
105.2
Run # 4
Date 10-14
1743
1917
64
55.442
55.001
10.8
?R.11
29.381
0.823
36.9
94,535
487
46,334
3/8" .000767
103.1
869.8
0.244
4.53
0.645
96.7
^Standard, 70°F, 29.92 in Hg, dry
-29-
-------
APPENDIX A
PLUME EVALUATION
-30-
-------
CH2M
Appendix A
KHILL
engineers PLUME EVALUATION
planners
economists Date tM- 0C/T ~!(t>
scientists
Name of Firm
Plant and Location
H^WMWTPM tfNTAMC?
Project No.
Opacity
Ringelmann
Source Identity R>OU-EP>, Mp.l ^TA6J<- EXHAUiT £PA TEST HP1 A^
Time
"V *>^
V* 4 V J
1' 1J *
d ' &*r
?'.V1
3'.2>te
3:3^
V40
i-:«-H
3^41
sOF"
3." 4-4
3 45
2>-'4^
V.«17
3;4&
3i4^
Va0
3-^1
3:sz
V.'D'S
1' e-d
O i
4:05
^O1-
0
lS>
ir?
±o
10
IO
1"=?
10
10
IS
\o
15
iS
IS
\o
K?
26
S
IO
to
10
S
15
15
;X>
35
*5
15
10
\b
1/4
10
10
2S
<5
»o
1C?
•S
W
f5
25
I'o
IO
10
10
10
vo
1C?
10
10
10
15
10
l^
tb
IO
15
»S
20
15
15
1/2
Z5>
25
15
*O
IC7
15
(0
Z5
10
2£?
10
2.C?
(5
<0
20
S
»Q
10
(0
^
I'd
\*>
15
2.0
20
25
K)
IS
2^
lb
3/4
2.5
2>O
l^
2X5
5
\0
(0
3>5
1C?
UP
2O
15
iO
iO
10
S
5
iO
«=>
5
S
10
20
15
Z5
^0
10
1S
l^
10
Time
0
1/4
1/2
3/4
Point of Observation
*T** gXXT
Distance to Source £ f5£? YAW^
Direction to Source MO'^'T'^
Wind Direction lA7f=ST
Wind Velocity £>- 15 MPt-t
Cloud Cover 1 0 %
Comments ^pj^-^HlTtT fcR0WMi£.*4 COUO5
PLU^E- . fMOTn «?
No. 5 (100%) Units
No. 4 (80%) Units
No. 3 (60%) Units
No. 2 (40%) Units
No. 1 (20%) Units
No. 0 (0%) Units
Total Units
Minutes of Observation
Minutes of Violation
Offic <•
KWK) S W Wi'stcrn Rlvd . PO Uox 428 Corvallis. On-jjon 97VU) S()1/7S2--)271 C.ililc CM2M CVf)
-------
APPENDIX B.
STEAM FLOW CHARTS
-------
CO
STEAM FLOW SCALE '. O -
-------
DATE : lo/H/74
STEAM FLOW SCALE: p->a£opo
-------
APPENDIX C.
OPERATING LOG
-------
Appendix C
OPERATING LOG
EAST HAMILTON SWARU TEST
OCTOBER 12-18 1976
DATE
Tuesday
10/12/76
TIME
8:30
9:00
10:15
10:45
11:15
12:00
13:00
13:30
14:00
14:20
14:50
15:00
15:30
OPERATING CONDITION
Refuse delivery started
Boiler up to temperature on gas
Refuse feed begun
3 pulverizers on line
Refuse feed system plugged
Refuse feed started
Steam load held reasonably
constant at 85% load
Lunch break - boiler operated by
plant personnel
Refuse feed plugged
Refuse feed plugged
Refuse feed plugged
Restart refuse
Lost feed
Restart refuse
Attempt to operate at about
70% load
REMARKS
Dumped into pit
No air flow control - I.D.
fan damper stuck
Boiler back on gas
Lost it after 15 minutes
inconsistent feed
On gas
On gas
On gas
10 minutes
Load swings of + 20%
-------
16:00
16:20
16:40
17:20
18:00
Attempt to operate at full
load
Lost feed - partially plugged
Lost feed - chutes plugged
Restart refuse feed
Lost feed
+ 4% - good operation
Attempted to continue operation
at low feed rate
On gas
Uneven feed rates
Bridge breaker in feed
chute stuck
Wednesday
10/13/76
8:30
9:23
11:00
12:00
13:50
14:05
15:20
First refuse truck arrived
Start refuse feed
Lost feed
Restart refuse feed
Boiler up to full load
Lost feed - bridge breakers stopped
Restart refuse feed
166 ton loaded in pit
Attempted to bring unit up to
full load. —Feed variations
and minor plugging plagued
operation.
Bridge breaker stuck on gas
1 1/2 hr. operation at 80%
Load + 20%. B&W and EPA doing
preliminary measurements.
15 minutes - lost feed
Gear box defective. Replacement
took just over an hour. Boiler
on gas.
Boiler brought up to 80% load
maintained there + 20% for
3 1/2 hours. ID Fan dampers
stuck in open position. Parti-
culate test runs by EPA and
B&W. No loss of feed during
this period.
-------
Thursday
10/14/76
20:00
8:15
10:05
10:50
11:05
11:15
11:40
12:00
12:20
12:40
12:50
13:20
Boiler shutdown
Start refuse feed
Feed chute plugged
Restart refuse feed
Lose feed
Restart feed
Lose feed
Restart feed
Lose feed
Restart feed
Lose feed
Restart feed
Out of refuse
Boiler up to load 3 times in
first hour. Plugged feed each
time. Problems with bridge
breakers and overfire air turbine
drive.
On gas. Bridge breaker drives
burnt-out. New drives Sptffiea for
installation tomorrow morning.
System operated at reduced load
remainder of day w/o bridge
breakers.
Plugged chutes
Plugged chutes
Overfire air turbine drive
kicking out
Operated @ 50% load for 1 1/2
hours w/o loss of feed. Then at
45% load for one hour. Both at
+ 30%. Particulate & gas testing
(luring this period.
-------
16:00
Began to experience kick-out
problems with overfire air fan
turbine
No consistent operation the
remainder of the day.
Friday
10/15/76
8:00
10:45
11:10
15:35
16:05
17:00
Change bridge breaker drives
Start refuse feed
Lost feed
Restart refuse
Shut down feed
Similar kick-out problems to
previous day with overfire air
turbine
New gear motors installed with
chain drives to bridge breaker
sprockets.
Bridge breakers stuck. Necessary
to cut cleanout holes in chutes.
Fuel piling on grates-overfire
air fan turbine kicking out.
No consistent operation the
remainder of the day.
Saturday
10/16/76
8:20
Start refuse feed
10:40
11:15
11:35
Refuse feed shut off
Restart refuse
Shut down feed
Continue to have problems with
overfire air turbine and settings
on stokers. No consistent
operation.
Working on overfire air turbine
governor.
Still air problems
Replace worn shaft in turbine
governor
13:20
Restart refuse feed
-------
13:45
17:00
17:05
Begin gas sampling
Erratic operation - chute plugging
Gas on
2 hr. run at 70% load
45 minutes @ full load
Sunday
10/17/76
9:40
10:30
Monday
10/18/76
11:40
13:00
8:30
9:30
10:15
10:35
11:40
11:50
12:15
12:25
12:40
Start refuse feed
No. 1 pulverizer plugged
Slowed conveyors - blowing
off safeties.
Lost refuse feed
Exercise emergency generation
Start refuse feed
Stop feed
Restart feed
Stop feed
Restart feed
Stop feed
Restart feed
Start B&W test
Speed up No. 3 & 4
B&W ran 2 1/2 hr test at
80 to 90% load
Lost control of steam load
for 30 minutes.
Erratic operation for rest
of day.
Required weekly - interrupts
electrical circuits
Bridge breaker stuck
Bridge breaker
Bridge breaker
Average load ^ 75% + 20%
-------
13:30
13:35
14:35
16:05
Stopped two pulverizers to clear
feed conveyors
Restart pulverizers
Lost smooth feed
Plugged No. 1 pulverizer
Only one left running
Shutdown pulverizer for
the day.
Last hour of test at about
60% load + 25%.
17:00
Plugged No. 4 pulverizer
Stopped feed - on gas
-------
APPENDIX D.
SOURCE TESTING DOCUMENTATION
-------
ALSID, SNOWDEN & ASSOCIATES / COMPUTER PRINT-OUT OF ATMOSPHERIC EMISSION DATA
JO.N*M«'^>31
PREPARED nv lJ» rmrvi-M^.t* A»»»QVFP PAGE.
SUBJECT L.
/
29»4,i5.Pm
1 a • 1 3 3 2 0 0.5 3068
0-21VH.
' 500 •
14* 1965S147943
Of. 27
450*
1 5 • 6 7 48 2 0 5 7 34 3
3 b
7 31 i 3 i J 4 4 2 VOL Std
MF
V •931795^0^19 Ww
^Cd
0* 50
5 4 0 •
000
17«j
-------
ALSID, SNOWDEN & ASSOCIATES/ COMPUTER PRINT-OUT OF ATMOSPHERIC EMISSION DATA
SUBJECT-
JOBNAME DATE
PREPARED BV * Zj / A • APPROVED PAGE___2e_ OF
**- >
0 • 2 7 VH 947.0312500000 J$
4 5 0 • TS
15«C746<:057313 15*4*959*0 08 3 0 Kd
•5J41434790DS3
I 0«27VH
I 450-TS
15-674 82057513 0-^27
450- 4,-o5As
,r <* 800 6-39096339
4426b-28171045Q«
J • 28
450- _
0-UC0767An
42-377634 9 9 3
2179 • 6 rt
•'^354226974^66^0
10-35
225-9C201S531& PMRp
2 3 7 • 9 3 7 & .91 2 6 4 'i
r'
•7270E9M604UO*-
PMR
-------
ALSID, SNOWDEN & ASSOCIATES COMPUTER PRINT-OUT OF ATMOSPHERIC EMISSION DATA
JOB NAME C*'
PREPARED av
APPROVED.
PAGE.
OF.
SUBJECT.
It - 124 VOL m
2 9 • ^ 6 e Pm
ro j • Tstd
;• 1 3 • Tm
. ,. j...? : 27-, 251 VOLstd
1- 5^ VOLw
1 1 • 9 J V ^ . i t ; i •? f. % M
• :> '/ J •> L 7 i o 4 1 :: !. 4 MF
3 u • >J 1 6 Wd
2 . • ? a r- i e. 3 <: U .1 J 2 Ww
17-32
0-24 VH
5^0- TS
UO2VH 973-OOuOOG 0000
0' 30
5*0*
, 540.TS
17«33e543&1999
0*30
0« 51
17'1510u22J17-
0» 5C
4 90 •
5425o79137i74
:?;:£
4 2•5 5
10 'j £ ^ ^ -76fco233
49634 • bl
Qs
i • o i. • ('.
Cd
29-^1 P$n
i • 0 J > 4 / /. 'J t V !J 1 fc C$
11-
C • J >. U 7 5 7
4 3 • 4 ; b b e 4 1J 1 6 3 1 Vn
VH
TS
1 -• 4 • S
. J u 3 t U 0 7 i y 5 0
1 J • i 5
PMRp
PMRr
45
7 • 1 'j ! j i 6 (, <; 7 y :- PMR
-------
ALSID, SNOWDEN & ASSOCIATES/ COMPUTER PRINT-OUT OF ATMOSPHERIC EMISSION DATA
JOB NAME £P* Q
PREPARED
APPROVED.
DATE_
PAGE.
OF.
j3J« Tstd
533* Tm
5.*h-o2075: 6 BIS VOL Std
6 ^ 7VOLw
MF
29-564 Wd
7 . ;, 5 6 2 o 0 r 4 6 ^ 4
VH
VH
51 0 • TS , 5 0 5 • TS
2 =j 7 7 b 4 (• ;> 3 2 0 11*89798644112
0*24
510-
U • i 4
510*
i 7 7 3 4 t- 9 3 2 0
U . 2^
497-
U • 2 5
4^7*
lj*46770J29325
G* 'i'i^. 1971 23 57
497*
15*l:ibly7l28i7
500-
0*^4
5 0 f •
15*l347j^93j^7
49 o
0 • Jtr21 '-j 8 j S 3 6
) • t J
7 ^> 1 5 ^. 2 9 "> $ 2 5
0 • 17
i2 *'j 082004* y 11
U • 2<;
4 9 '3 •
I 4 • 4 9 A fa 2 6 fa 6 5 3 3
1 ri • 4 9 1 9 i 5
-------
ALSID, SNOWDEN & ASSOCIATES/ COMPUTER PRINT-OUT OF ATMOSPHERIC EMISSION DATA
JOB NAME
PREPARED BY
APMOVfD
PAGE
OF
G.23VH
U-17VH
4 9 7 • TS
<* 9 9 • T5
55159924046 i?«7b49iJ9ul999
0 • ^ 2
453 •
1 4 • ' , 1 7 1 7 i :• 5 5 i 6
u • 08
496-
8«745264443630
953'0<>375uuOOCy$
1 4 • 6 0 S L 7 5 r, ^ 5 5 8 |(a
•471345504l7i.4 Kb
-
L"3t:7v
i i u i '"• 6 v 4 4 \. *®
• 5 5
Qos
.•^j.o^isid Q»
(j 4. T
^ • J L J 7 6 7 An
• 3 * f- b 5 9 1 6 4 6 1 Vn
1 j •..
9 7 6•y t
t o :." (i 7 5 4 J f- 4 4 1 ? Co
6 • 4 N
T) j 3 6 4 1 3 v <;'/ (j 5 6 C
• <: I j» 1 7 7 u 0 2 6 PMRp
PMRr
1 «./ < • 6 i.' j ":• .-) :: rj .' 0 t
PMR
7
Jj
C'
-------
ALSID, SNOWDEN & ASSOCIATES/ COMPUTER PRINT-OUT OF ATMOSPHERIC EMISSION DATA
JOB NAME f^J.
PREPARED BY -
n^ ,
cunirrT " '
55
29
f~n <*.j ff/vruL^ow o
~b.4£A0*£}
' SA>0tn/££sr%e. £
•442VOLm
•570Pm
*rs
»»»«OV*D
U-26VH
4 9 1 • TS
D»TF /
PAGE
0-23
490'
0 *~ / / "" / 6
/ ^ Z
14-L
VH
TS
,-<:
4
b 5 J» Tstd
526* Tm
) !i •.-;. j i -i y 311 !-• ^. 7 7 J'-'
0-23
G'270
5 •
1 4 - V 6 7 2 9 7 ( 3 '.» 2 3 15-717^^4 ;• 7691
0 • 2 6
15'b91 3 9 8 '.' 1 7 3 7
494-TS
1'•4 6 2 2 ? 3iu339
0'23f
c • L> y o
3 £ 5 • 4 b 0 •
1 3 P :-3 4 j t 4 U b 0 1 5 • V 6 2 4 -ro 9 : 1 3 fi
4 ? 7 •
1 5 • 3 9 f 3 o '3 t: 6 j 4 ;;
A '> 2 *
7 T»'/' 2 < 7 t -j u 4 7
0 « 2 6
0 • 26 u
0.2!'
1 '3 - 9 ° t. b L 9 r, 1 2 2 7 1 'j • 4 6 f u > 1 S« 4 3 3 4
4^9
1 h • 5 0 L 9 ^ J k. 1 9 4
4 -JO •
1 * 7 o 1 7 - 0 < > ? U 9
0 ' 19
0" 24
0 • 2 7 l,
•51 U •
1 '. • * 7 b 7 i 'j 6 o 9 2 5
450*
1 4 • 7 7 ? j 6 2 5 6 1 -J 2
4 -j •
1 3
48
-------
ALSID, SNOWDEN & ASSOCIATES/ COMPUTER PRINT-OUT OF ATMOSPHERIC EMISSION DATA
JOB NAME &-r/T V- /y/yyy/fc-cv'*s DATE.
0*240
5 0 0 •
0 • 1 j.
478'
49
PREPARED •** -S • IC^tXST<-_rj APPtOVID PACIF «^- OF.
SUBJECT
C• • 2. 8 5 VH VH 947»1^500 00000 Y$
4 9 3•TS TS
!y5521 15-11394015^89 Ko
•4311 I 31067654 Kb
Cp
0 • 13
4 t! • IS i A$
•» U 7 -
64- T
o - ^ o j 7 o 7 An
iS'ijii'>j^^H24 Vn
Pt
Co
* • J 5 N
PMRp
-------
Table 8
PARTICULATE CONCENTRATION AND PMR-CALCULATION TERMINOLOGY
VOLm » Dry gas meter volume @ mefcer temperature and pressure, ,dry - acf
Pm • Dry gas meter pressure (recorded as inlet deflection accross orifice
meter) - "Hg
Tm • Dry gas meter temperature (average of inlet and outlet)
PSTD - Standard atmospheric pressure (29.92" Hg)
TSTD " Standard Temperature (520 or 530° R)
VOLW - Volume of water collected (expressed as vapor at standard temperature
and pressure) - scf
% M • Z water, calculated from amount the train collected in impinger,
bubblers, and on silica gel
MF • Mole fraction of dry gas
WD - Molecular weight of dry stack gas - Ib/lb mole
Wy « Molecular weight of wet stack gas - Ib/lb mole
Ua * Molecular weight of air - Ib/lb mole
CQ " Velocity correction coefficient for gas density
PSN " Stack pressure (static + barometric) - "Hg
C s " Velocity correction coefficient for stack 'pressure
VHn - Pitot tube pressure differential - "H^
V0 - Stack veloi Lty @ stack conditions - fps
Qo • Stack flow rate at stack conditions - acfm
T8 • Average stack temperature - °F
Q_ • Stack flow rate at standard conditions - scfm
T - Time over which satnple was collected - minutes
Vn - Velocity of gases inside nozzle during sampling - fps
I - % isokinetlc (+ 10% desirable)
CQ • Partlculate concentration - grains/scf
N • Z CO 2 by volume in stack (12 indicatesno Z C02 correction is to
be made)
T = Temperature of stack gas at sampling point - °F
-------
Table 8 (Continued)
PARTICIPATE CONCENTRATION & PMR CALCULATIONS
1. VOL
STD
2. ?. M
(VOLJ (Pm) (TSTD)
(PSN>
(TS)
(VOLSTD) (PSTD)(TS)
(MF) (TSTD) (PSN) (T) (A,,) (60)
V
(100) _n
o
rm (0.0154)
VOLSTD
14. C
Cp
-------
Table 8 (Continued)
PARTICULATE CONCENTRATION AND PMR CALCULATION TERMINOLOGY
C • Particulate concentration corrected to 12% C02
PMRp • Pollutant mass rate - "concentration method" - Ib/hr
P-j • Total Particulate collected by sampling train - mg
Ag • Area of Stack - FT2
AJJ • Area of Nozzle - FT2
VH * Velocity head readings for pitot tube - inches water
VOLSTD • Standardized gas that passed through the sampling train -
cubit feet, 70* F., 1 atmosphere pressure, and dry.
C_ • Velocity correction coefficient for type pitot tube - dimensionless
0.83 to 0.87 for "S" type pitot tube normally and 1.0 for "P"
type pitot tube.
-------
LAB NO.
.METER BOX AH«
PORT LOCATION
RUN NO /
OPtRATOR/S /?/frl
SAMPLE BOX NO. ^cr.1
FILTER NO. jlLll-TARE
FINAL WT. gm INITIAL WT. qm NET WT. gm
II BUBBLER
12 IMPINGER
13 BUBBLER
l<< SILICA GEL(fl54-. 8
ALSID, SNOWDEN y ASSOCIATES
TRAVERSE SAMPLING DATA SHEET
DISTANCE UPSTREAM R DOWNSTREAM FROM OBSTRUCTION.
i~'A t,
- 7
BOX AND PROBE HEATER SETTING _z2L
BAROMETRIC PRESSURE (Pp) ^ '?- -' ^
I LEAK RflTF .gJ> CFH 0 c' V •*>"
PORT PRESSURE (Ps)
PSN = PB + PS
ASSUMED MOISTURE
C FACTOR '
REP. A P.
. s _'-.•_•'-
;V "Hg
"HG
"H,0
__
STACK DIMENSIONS*'' * ^AREA1
TOTAL WATER VOLUME (Igm - I mP '^ .^X'0,0^7^/l.f 3 Prj SCHEMAnc Qf TRAVERSE poINT LAYOUT
PROBE NOZZLE niA.
IN: AN
PROBE LENGTH_2_I_NUMBER J2^_ SIDE
'INSTANTANEOUS READINGS: RECORDED e BEGINNING OF TIME INTERVAL,
AVERAGE VALUES. READ WITHIN THE TIME INTERVAL
CLOCK
TIME
(24 HRS)
ELAP.
TIME
(MIN)
DRY GAS METER
(CUBIC FEET)
DRY GAS TEMP.
INLET
OUTLET
BOX
TEMP.
IMPINGER
TEMP.
rn
POINT
PITOT VH
"H20)
ORIFICE AH
T"H Of
DESIRED
ACTUAL
PUMP
VACUUM
("Hg GA)
STACK
TEMP.
CF)
OPACITY
OR
XC02
O
7- ~
££_
.
/£'
.
62..
2 -
.7-5
49.
3V
.i-s
<:
6 .'2
V.o
3>.)
5'X
...7.
7.?
•V-
i'.SVL
r> ^
,U.'1J>
tc
— &-.
-------
CLIENT
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON
TRAVERSE SAMPLING DATA SHEET
IMPORTANT: FILL IN ALL BLANKS.
INSTANTANEOUS READINGS: RECORDED 9 BEGINNING OF TIME INTERVAL
AVERAGE VALUES READ WITHIN THE TIME INTERVAL
CLOCK
TIME
(24 HRS.)
ELAP.
TIME
(MIN)
DRY GAS METER
DRY GAS TEMP.
INLET OUTLET
BOX
TEMP.
IMPINGER
TEMP.
POINT
PITOT VH
("H20)
ORIFICE A H
f"H20)
DESIRED ACTUAL
PUMP
VACUUM
("Hg.GA.)
STACK
TEMP.
CF.)
OPACITY
OR
73.5T
7ZT
^ 7
"~
-y\
-7/1*7
7
z. .->
.2-7
^4
• V
/o
/ TOTAL/
M~
PB
°R
VFT/AP1E
-------
ORSAT DATA AND CALCULATION SHEET
CLIENT X^
SAMPLING POINT LOCATION
DATE /
-------
.3
i---y -*!•/ ->_•«•? /z. & ^•fM
S./efiA'/ ^.7-f.^ ^^Q -„,,„, _ZJ?.jT _V .G^0 *•'•'•
HTFNT &P/1 ^/tWn, |/o>, (OvT/ SEATTLE. WASHINGTON
PORT LOCATI
DATE
ON~Tn*•
/O-/^, i£
OpFRATnR/^ /V.'-;...»^J . .i >>3oJ 3iH / 7£
BERS<^«f4 &
v
)>'$ 9 TARE mq
i plANKS *
HEATER SETTING ^V & <£*»?'
TRAVERSE SAMPLING DATA SHEET
IMPORTANT: FILL IN ALL BLANKS
SCHEMATIC OF TRAVERSE POINT LAYOUT
INSTANTANEOUS READINGS: RECORDED 9 BEGINNING OF TIME INTERVAL
CLOCK
TIME
(24 HRS)
f) _>*<3
_ . _
_._...
^AVERAGE/
ELAP.
TIME
(MIN)
&
£,
•^
f
1
1 f
'////
DRY GAS METER
(CUBIC FEET)
ST^1 - ? ^'r*'
^"2 . ?•;>
t-7%-^1 ', 2. 5T
•o'S'
£0
'2.10
2-/0
/ / / /
'///,
IMPINGER
TEMP.
CF)
/X//
B
;
P
P
;
c
F
s
P
P
ARJ1METRIC
IMBIENT COr
ORT PRESSl
SN * PB +
iSSUMED MO]
FACTOR
PRESSURE (
IDITIONS
RE (PS)-^I.
PS
PB) ?_?# >"79 "Hg
?C"HoO» -.0'? "Hg
(i1-"? .5^ / "Hn
STIIRE J ~7 1
EF.AP / 19
TACK DIME^
ROBE NOZZL
ROBE LENGT
SIONS : AREA F2
E DIA.I^S
& /
H S
' IN; AH F2
FT. ^Ai IH.
AVERAGE VALUES READ WITHIN THE TIME INTERVAL
POINT
t
— ^~
«/
— ^
, , ,.f
/ / /
•^f ^"**"y Cff^ *f' ^ J * -^ / / j£^" f~^
~^ * ^^ f
PITOT VH
("H20)
. ^ -y
^
- V
">/
-p
.
^^--~- -
/////,
/////
ORIFICE AH
("H20)
DESIRED
2 ,2.
2. $?
3, f
^? .5
3 f>
3.-0
'
— ...
////
ACTUAL
^
2 &
^) &
3 &
*» (J
/b,?'H20
?.yH,"H20 -.J.oT'Hg
Pm • PB *AH • ^.T^^ "Hg
PUMP
VACUUM
("Hg GA)
^
•5
•"2- S~
3
•3 . ^"
•> ^^"
-
'////
•^//^./.
STACK
TEMP.
CF)
Xs^& /
^s~*y c
$?0
j^
^f^tP
/I fo
~
1
°R
OPACITY
OR
XC02
Sit
VFT/AP1E
-------
cn
CLIENT
PORT LOCATION
DATE
SAMPLE & METER BOX NUMBERS
METER BOX AH
FILTER NO. ^" 0 TARE
E. WASHINGTON
"TRAVERSE SAMPLING DATA SHEET
IMPORTANT: FILL IN ALL BLANKS ?
BAROMETRIC PRESSURE (Pg)
AMBIENT CONDITIONS
PORT PRESSURE (Ps)
PC* • PB + PS 2.
OPERATOR/S
RUN NO. \
CLEAN-UP NO
BOX & PROBE HEATER SETTING
VFT/AP1E
-------
CLIENT
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON
TRAVERSE SAMPLING DATA SHEET
IMPORTANT: FILL IN ALL BLANKS.
INSTANTANEOUS READINGS: RECORDED 9 BEGINNING OF TIME INTERVAL
AVERAGE VALUES READ WITHIN THE TIME INTERVAL
CLOCK
TIME
(24 HRS.)
ELAP.
TIME
(MIN)
DRY GAS METER
DRY GAS TEMP.
INLET OUTLET
BOX
TEMP.
IMPINGER
TEMP.
POINT
PITOT VH
("H20)
ORIFICE A H
f"H20)
DESIRED ACTUAL
PUMP
VACUUM
("Hg.GA.)
STACK
TEMP.
OPACITY
OR
JJC02
£__
eg)
5^5
G.2JL
Ot Z $
/2
-tt
OO
Jjy
Mi
6, t-
8
e_s
,_B_5_
ISo
^8o
20
ZI±-
.so
s:a
21
tf.._
-------
ORSAT DATA AND CALCULATION SHEET
CLIENT J: .,-y ^/l- £"'
i
SAMPLING POINT LOCATION
DATE . O /
RUN
TIME OF SAMPLE COLLECTION
.. HOW
TIME OF ANALYSIS
CUMULATIVE
% BY VOL. (DRY)
C02
C02 + 02
C02 + 02 + CO
COMPONENT
% BY VOL. (DRY)
C02
02
CO
N? (100-Above)
ANALYSIS
#1
-------
;>ORT LOCATION
HUN MB.
'*?-
LAB NO.
SAMPLE BOX
mien HO.
NETER BOX
ALSID. SNOWDEN W ASSOCIATES
TRAVERSE SAMPLING DATA SHEFT
DISTANCE UPSTREAM & DOWNSTREAM FROM OBSTRUCTION.
-'•
TAW
FINAL WT. gm INITIAL WT. gm NET WT. gm
#1 BUBBLER ~"
!2 IMPINGER
#3 BUBBLER ^3& 7 336>'% - i^
fh SILICA GEL,
TOTAL WATER VOLUME (igm • i mi)
BOX AND PROBE Hi^iER SETTING .?£fL < _
BAROMETRIC PRESSURE (PB) ?Jl 'S^-9 "Hg
LEAK PATE«i2^>Y_...CFM (J Z fa ^ "HG
— PORT PRESSURE (Pr) - -2y'_"H20 • ~'&/B "Hg
PSN z pB + PS 2^7 >3>?)l "Hg
ASSUMED MOISTURE /7 ^ MAX VH "H,0
C FACTOR _Q8$_ "
STACK DIMENSIONS
.AREA1.
.f2
SCHEMATIC OF TRAVERSE POINT LAYOUT
PROBE NOZZLE DIA.^ffiLlN; AN
PROSE Li'NC.TH %f HiiMCER /3 SI BE
-------
CLIENT
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON
TRAVERSE SAMPLING DATA SHEET
IMPORTANT: FILL IN ALL BLANKS.
INSTANTANEOUS READINGS: RECORDED 3 BEGINNING OF TIME INTERVAL
AVERAGE VALUES READ WITHIN THE TIME INTERVAu
CLOCK
TIME
(24 HRS.)
ELAP.
TIME
(MIN)
DRY GAS METER
(CUBIC FEET)
DRY GAS TEMP.
(•F)
INLET
OUTLET
BOX
TEMP.
CF.)
IMPINGER
TEMP.
POINT
PITOT VH
("H20)
ORIFICE A H
("H20)
DESIRED
ACTUAL
PUMP
VACUUM
"Hg.GA.)
STACK
TEMP.
CF.)
OPACITY
OR
XC02
TOTAL,
BH2o
-,/7/"Hg
|Pr = Pg
VFT/AP1E
-------
ORSAT DATA AND CALCULATION SHEET
CLIENT
.O-3? (*
SAMPLING POINT LOCATION
DATE
/ ,.• /i- *
&//£/ / *
RUN NO.
HOW COLLECTED
TIME OF SAMPLE COLLECTION
TIME OF ANALYSIS
CUMULATIVE
% BY VOL. (DRY)
C02
C02 + 02
/
C02 + 02 + CO
COMPONENT
% BY VOL. (DRY)
C02
02
CO
N? (100-Above)
ANALYSIS
#1
<^
/-v
/ <%
/^^
O.o
<$• ?
n
4,(*
1^,3
O'O
ANALYSIS
#3
^
/•£?
/?,*
#3
*.<
/s.a.
CO,/
ANALYSIS
#4
#4
AVG.
1f,«
/^•L2
.03
*.i/
RATIO \WT./MOLE
MOLE WT\ (DRY)
44/100
52/100
2a/ioo
28/100
V-
AVG. MOLECULAR
I.W3
^.?74
,008
2Z,4*1
z^&y
WT. DRY STACK GAS
VFT/AP43
-------
ALSID, SNOWDEN 6? ASSOCIATES
LABORATORY ANALYSIS AND TOTAL PARTICULATE SHEET
CLIENT A Xr?gQX? -g
RINSE & BRUSHING OF NOZZLE, PROBE AND GLASSWARE BEFORE
FILTER.
FINAL W39J-2 (mg) - TARE 77 4T3 7 , 3 (mg)
-BLANK (( ,Q/9 mg/ml) ( ZOO ml) = g. g mg ) = &>**> ' 7 mg.
II. FILTER CATCH MS4 //O 6 ~AH #?!'£' (Media Type & #)
FINAL /63? ,J (mg) - TARE 33^.3. (mg) = )l$3, / mg. i) , /;
•
III. HYDROCARBON OBTAINED BY ETHER-CHLOROFORM EXTRACTION ON \J
WATER IN IMPINGER AND BUBBLERS. '!/
FINAL 7^6^0-6 (mg) - TARE 7^0/^^ 9 _ (mg)
-BLANK ( 0,1 _ mg) = 3,6 mg.
IV. PARTICULATE FROM EVAPORATION OF 43O _ (ml) WATER
IN IMPINGER AND BUBBLERS FOLLOWING EXTRACTION -
FINAL ^%)/4. 3- (mg) - TARE ?g
FINAL 77B20-S (mg) - TARE -77% / "7 , j _ (mg)
-BLANK (( ,0/9 ing/ml) ( .Cjf ml) = /. Q mg) = "^^ mg.
VI. TOTAL PARTICULATE = I + II + III + IV + V = 2j 7 ^ , 6 mg.
BLANKS
, fl , FINAL /v mg.
ACETONE = //y mg/ /
-------
ALSID, SNOWDEN 9 ASSOCIATES
LABORATORY ANALYSIS AND TOTAL PARTICULATE SHEET
CLIENT
£ 7 (mg) -TARE YXeT>
-------
ALSID, SNOWDEN & ASSOCIATES
LABORATORY ANALYSIS AND TOTAL PARTICULATE SHEET
CLIENT £ P£ ^g-g/on ib DATE OF ANALYSIS Jd
EVALUATION LOCATION /-//4/WiTd'V 0*T. L/UfoTiL /vH/V.^RUN NO. 3
EVALUATION DATE /A -/
-------
CLIENT
EVALUATION LOCATION
EVALUATION DATE /G-/4-76
ALSID, SNOWDEN & ASSOCIATES
LABORATORY ANALYSIS AND TOTAL PARTICULATE SHEET
DATE OF ANALYSIS
t RUN NO.
LAB NO.
I.
EVAPORATION OF
7 Q
(ml) OF
RINSE & BRUSHING OF NOZZLE, PROBE AND GLASSWARE BEFORE
FILTER.
FINAL 7£5"£d.9 (mg) - TARE 7^
-BLANK (( ,Q/9 mg/ml) (_
II. FILTER CATCH AQS/I J/06 ~
FINAL
ml) =
(mg)
mg)
#9(3-5" (Media Type & #)
(mg) - TARE 37^2. (mg)
III. HYDROCARBON OBTAINED BY ETHER-CHLOROFORM EXTRACTION ON
WATER IN IMPINGER AND BUBBLERS.
FINAL Sb 0^0,0 (mg) - TARE %O O"7
-BLANK ( _ ^)// _ mg)
IV. PARTICULATE FROM EVAPORATION OF
(mg)
(ml) WATER
IN IMPINGER AND BUBBLERS FOLLOWING EXTRACTION -
FINAL '72&5.1 (mg) - TARE 7733^' ^ (mg)
-BLANK (( / OO2,^ mg/ml) ( fyO ^ _ ml initial
/ 7 mg)
i(>
ml CONDENSED =
ml)
V. PARTICULATE FROM
(ml) OF X/C-g 7t>")Q g RINSE OF IMPINGER,
BUBBLERS, AND CONNECTORS AFTER FILTER:
//
FINAL
(mg) - TARE
m
-BLANK (( ,0/9 mg/ml) (_
VI. TOTAL PARTICULATE = I + II + III +• IV + V
BLANKS
mg/
(mg)
l) = // / mg)
ACETONE =
ETHER-CHLOROFORM
WATER =
ml =
mg. (FINAL
FINAL
_mg/ml TARE
mg - TARE
mg/
ml =
mg/ml. FINAL
TARE
/ mg. v H
mg.
mg.
mg.
•V
<*
mg.
mg.
_mg.
mg.
mg)
mg.
mg.
-------
ALSID,
SNOWDEN
& ASSOCIATES
CONSULTANTS IN AIR, WATER. SAFETY. HYGIENE & MANAGEMENT
13240 Northrup Way, Suite 21, Bellevue, Washington 98005 (206)641-5130
SAMPLE CHAIN-OF-CUSTODY RECORD
Client:
Run Number:
/
Sample Phase
Laboratory Number:
/
Personnel
Sample Box Preparation
Sample Collection
Sample Clean-up
Sample Analysis
Calculation of Results
Report Preparation
Date(s)
Comments:
67
-------
ALSID,
SNOWDEN
& ASSOCIATES
CONSULTANTS IN AIR, WATER, SAFETY, HYGIENE & MANAGEMENT
13240 Northrup Way, Suite 21, Bellevue, Washington 98005 (206)641-5130
SAMPLE CHAIN-OF-CUSTODY RECORD
Client;
Run Number:
Sample Phase
Laboratory Number:
Personnel
Sample Box Preparation
Sample Collection v
Sample Clean-up
Sample Analysis
Calculation of Results
Report Preparation
.Date(s)
Comments :
nts :
"*
, •/•;-. J
68
-------
ALSID,
SNOWDEN
& ASSOCIATES
CONSULTANTS IN AIR, WATER, SAFETY, HYGIENE & MANAGEMENT
13240 Northrup Way, Suite 21, Bellevue, Washington 98005 (206)641-5130
SAMPLE CHAIN-OF-CUSTODY RECORD
Cl lent:
Run Number:
3
Sample Phase
Sample Box Preparation
Sample Collection
Sample Clean-up
Sample Analysis
Calculation of Results
Report Preparation
Laboratory Number:
Personnel
Date(s)
Comments:
69
-------
ALSID,
SNOWDEN
& ASSOCIATES
CONSULTANTS IN AIR, WATER, SAFETY, HYGIENE & MANAGEMENT
13240 Northrup Way, Suite 21, Bellevue, Washington 98005 (206)641-5130
SAMPLE CHAIN-OF-CUSTODY RECORD
Cl i en t :
Run Number: _ _ Laboratory Number:
Comments:
Sample Phase Personnel Date(s)
Sample Box Preparation
Sample Collection
Sample Clean-up
Sample Analysis
Calculation of Results
Report Preparation
70
-------
H INSTll
' D\P
-------
0.4AOA
,
•si
FC
O &0O0
07 OOQ
e.
--•
> I •*- 3 ^
•
- 5" 6 7 8 1
U
*
*/z,
t
*'
*
3 If (2. IS I4 If (6 IT I
idle
P 11 lj
-/ a^2
•
,
."?
0 tl IZ 1.3 l^t!
/^
"
,
0
yt.6 17 a
A
»t!«T3J
I
*
02.1 31"33>I-^
rat 3738-314
•-
,
O
1
1
1 1
j ALSID, SNOWDEN 6? ASSOCIATES
-------
/^//;
ft.? OOP .
01*3
6 7 9 1 I (ML 13 14 1C* ffe 17 ' H W tl i* 13
17 OJ tT 3P2>| 3133
^fO
-------
^1
£»
z. /
7
0.7310.97
: Z.3.S"
0.^11 I.
/,
\fj^
/, 33 U,
a £23
•3 /. 23
-------
jUOQO
O.9OOA
^j
cn
O ftdOO
o 70oo
c
> I «- 3 '
2
!
'679
1 1
1
C.
-
•
n
If IJL IS T4 II
^•IB^'jS'1^
r ifc IT is i^ li
1
J 0.^23
*
*
oil rl 1.3 i^ i
/l 3133 >»• 3
S-3fc373gV14
-
-_
0
!
!
j ALSID, SNOWDEN 6? ASSOCIATES 1
-------
,*
ZT
o ftooo
o
i
S" 6 7 «
10 u a
I4TTT4 17 19
tl
1.3
17
3* 35*3637 38 "ST ^O
-------
ALSID, SNOWDEN & ASSOCIATED r/r
13240 Northrup Way, Suite 21
98005
•-/?/•
/K ,''///•.*?.„
~77
73.
7-7-75'
I
0.5'
73
'I 73
7J>
"33
to
Al-t-
' A '
'
/, 5V?
... .-
•j-S) if! 83? I
9___ J.oolZ'
/, 7 ^^ 7
735*6
3b,
/<£>,£># ..j..^
i n ' i
I • ' & D
/=
7
i ,
77' a
f-
P o,o^i7//.i"'--» - v fit/rue) / (1^> •+ *'*i ] *
Pj-fcn *-w, ( 'CF«J ~/~
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1
4.
REPORT NO.
EPA-91 0/9-76-033
TITLE ANDSUBTITLE
2.
Case Study of Particulate Emissions From
Semi-Suspension Incineration of Municipal
7.
AUTHOR(S)
Refuse
W. D. Snowden and K. D. Brooks
g.
PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Alsid, Snowden and Associates
13240 Northrup Way
Bellevue, WA 98005
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Sixth Ave., M/S 530
Seattle, WA 98101
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSIOWNO.
5. REPORT DATE
November 1976
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT
NO.
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
WY-6-99-0872-A
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
Prepared in cooperation with The Regional
16. ABSTRACT
One aspect of the environmental
refuse is the emission of parti
this essential, but nonexisting
operating facility of this type
Hamilton, Ontario. Based upon
October 13-14, 1976, the no. 1
17
subject facility emitted 0
to 12% carbon dioxide.
.528
KEY
Municipality
of Hamil ton-Wentworth
impact of semi -suspension incineration of municipal
culate matter to the atmosphere. In order to provide
data, sampling was conducted at the
, the East
three runs
boiler and
grains per
only known
Hamilton Solid Waste Reduction Unit,
of EPA Method 5 during the period
electrostatic preci pita tor at the
dry standard
cubic foot, corrected
WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
a. DESCRIPTORS
Incinerators
Air Pollution
Performance Tests
8
. DISTRIBUTION STATEMbN 1
Release Unl united
b. IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
East Hamilton Solid
Waste Reduction Unit
Semi -suspension
Incineration
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report/
Unclassified
20. SECURITY CLASS (This page)
Unclassified
c. COSATI Field/Group
21. NO. OF PAGES
77
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
997-466
------- |