&EPA
          United States
          Environmental Protection
          Agency
          Industrial Environmental Research  EPA-600/7-80-086
          Laboratory         April 1980
          Research Triangle Park NC 27711
Environmental
Assessment of a Coal-fired
Controlled Utility Boiler
          Interagency
          Energy/Environment
          R&D Program Report


                                         •

-------
                  RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES


Research reports of the Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, have been grouped into nine series. These nine broad cate-
gories were established to facilitate further development and application of en-
vironmental technology. Elimination of traditional  grouping was  consciously
planned to  foster technology transfer and a maximum interface in related fields.
The nine series are:

    1.  Environmental Health Effects Research

    2.  Environmental Protection Technology

    3.  Ecological Research

    4.  Environmental Monitoring

    5.  Socioeconomic Environmental Studies

    6.  Scientific and Technical Assessment Reports (STAR)

    7.  Interagency Energy-Environment Research and Development

    8.  "Special" Reports

    9.  Miscellaneous Reports

This report has been assigned to the INTERAGENCY ENERGY-ENVIRONMENT
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT series. Reports in this series result from the
effort  funded  under the  17-agency Federal Energy/Environment Research  and
Development Program. These studies relate to EPA's mission to protect the public
health  and welfare from adverse effects of pollutants associated with energy sys-
tems.  The goal of the Program is to assure the  rapid development of domestic
energy supplies in an environmentally-compatible manner by providing the nec-
essary environmental data and control technology. Investigations include analy-
ses of  the transport of energy-related pollutants and their health and ecological
effects; assessments of,  and development of, control technologies for energy
systems; and integrated assessments of a wide range of energy-related environ-
mental issues.
                        EPA REVIEW NOTICE
This report has been reviewed by the participating Federal Agencies, and approved
for publication.  Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect
the views and policies of the Government, nor does mention of trade names or
commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.

This document is available to the public through the National Technical Informa-
tion Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.

-------
                                    EPA-600/7-80-086

                                              April 1980
Environmental Assessment of a
        Coal-fired Controlled
                Utility Boiler
                         by
                C. Leavitt, K. Arledge, C. Shih,
               R. Orsini, A. Saur, W.,Hamersma,
             R. Maddalone, R. Beimer, G. Richard,
                 S. Linger, and M. Yamada

                      TRW, Inc.
                    One Space Park
               Redondo Beach, California 90278
                 Contract No. 68-02-2613
                      Task No. 8
               Program Element No. EHE624A
            EPA Project Officer: Michael C. Osborne

           Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
        Office of Environmental Engineering and Technology
              Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
                     Prepared for

          U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
              Office of Research and Development
                  Washington, DC 20460

-------
                                 ABSTRACT

     A comprehensive multimedia emissions assessment was performed on the
cyclone-fired La Cygne No.  1  boiler.   The unit is equipped with SO^ and
particulate emission control.   Level  1 and Level  2 procedures were utilized
to characterize pollutant emissions in gaseous, liquid,  and solid process
streams.  Results of the comprehensive assessment, in conjunction with
assumed typical and worst case meteorological  conditions, were utilized to
estimate the environmental  impact of emissions from this type of unit.
Principal conclusions indicated are as follows:  1) The  risk of violating
National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS)  for 24 hour and annual average
levels is low.  However, units utilizing high  sulfur fuel may exceed short
term NAAQS for SOg.  2) Little adverse health  effect is  anticipated as a
result of S02> S0,~, and particulate emissions projected from widespread use
of coal-fired units of the type tested.  3) Increases in the concentrations
of cadmium and lead in soil and plant tissue as a result of trace element
emissions could cause plant damage and adverse health effects to animals
consuming vegetation in the affected areas.  4) Plant damage due to NO
                                                                      rt
emissions is likely to occur since estimated NO  concentrations approach or
                                               ^
exceed threshold concentrations.  5) Damage to sensitive plant species may
result from predicted short-term S02 concentrations which are in the damage
threshold range.
                                    n

-------
                                CONTENTS

Abstract	   il
Metric Conversion Factors  and Prefixes  	   1v

     1.   Introduction 	    1
     2.   Summary and Conclusions	    3
     3.   Test Setting 	    8
     4.   Assessment of a Coal-fired Utility Boiler	   26
     5.   Environmental Impact Assessment          	   66

Appendices
     A.   Simplified Air Quality Model	105
     B.   Organic Analysis Methods 	  Ill
     C.   Inorganic Analysis Methods 	  164
                                    in

-------
                                  TABLES
Number                                                                Page
 2-1       Summary of Flue Gas Pollutant Emissions	     4
 3-1       Design Characterization of Gas Stream in the Air Quality
          Control System (1  Module Only) 	    17
 3-2      Composition of Spent Scrubber Slurry 	    20
 3-3      Settling Pond Water Quality	    21
 3-4      Cooling Lake Water Quality	    21
 3-5      Stream Descriptions	    24
 4-1       Summary of Test Conditions 	    27
 4-2      Summary of Ultimate Fuel Analysis	    29
 4-3      Concentration of Major Trace Elements in Coal Feedstock. .    30
 4-4      Existing and Proposed Federal Emission Standards for
          Coal-fired Utilities 	    32
 4-5      Average Measured Criteria Pollutant Emissions	    32
 4-6      Summary of Criteria Pollutant Emissions	    33
 4-7      Comparison of Criteria Pollutant Emissions With EPA AP-42
          Emission Factors for Coal-fired Utility Boilers (Cyclone).    34
 4-8      Scrubber Inlet and Outlet Particulate Size Distribution  .    38
 4-9      S02,  S03, and S04~ Emissions	    40
 4-10     Summary of Sulfate Emissions	    42
 4-11     Emission Concentrations of Trace Elements - Test 135 ...    43
 4-12     Emission Factors for Trace Elements - Test 135 	    44
 4-13     Spark Source Mass Spectrometer Analyses of Trace Element
          Emissions - Test 135	    46
 4-14     ESCA Depth Profile Data for Selected Samples From the
          Method 5 Sampling Train - Test 135	    47
 4-15     Chloride and Fluoride Emissions	    49
 4-16     POM Emissions From Coal Firing Prior to Scrubbing - Test
          134	    50
 4-17     Water Quality Parameters 	    52
 4-18     Trace Element Concentrations in Wastewater Discharges From
          Coal  Firing - Test 135	    53
 4-19     Organics in Wastewater Discharges	    54
 4-20     GC/MS Analyses of Organics in Wastewater Streams 	    55
                                    IV

-------
                            TABLES (Continued)
Number                                                                Page
 4-21     Trace Element Content of Scrubber Discharge Solids -
          Test 135	   57
 4-22     Trace Element Content of Bottom and Fly Ash - Test 135 ..   58
 4-23     Mass Balance of Trace Elements (Full Load) 	   60
 4-24     Organics in Solid Waste Streams	   61
 5-1      Emission Rates From a Controlled 874 MW (Gross) Coal-fired
          Utility Boiler 	   68
 5-2      Annual Emissions 	   69
 5-3      Comparison of Federal Air Quality Standards With Air
          Quality Predicted to Result From Coal Combustion in a 874
          MW Utility Boiler	   71
 5-4      Effects of Coal Combustion in Power Plants in Central U.S.   74
 5-5      Health Impacts of Sulfate Aerosol	   77
 5-6      Expected Trace Element Concentrations in Vicinity of a
          874 MW Controlled Coal-fired Utility Boiler	   79
 5-7      Annual Deposition of Trace Elements in Vicinity of
          Controlled Coal-fired Utility Boilers	   81
                                           S
 5-8      Long Term Effect of Controlled Coal-fired Utility Boiler
          Emissions on Soil Concentrations of Trace Elements  ....   81
 5-9      Long Term Effect of Controlled Coal-fired Boiler Emissions
          on Concentrations of Elements in Plants	   82
 5-10     Trace Element Concentration in Runoff Water in Vicinity of
          Controlled Coal-fired Utility Boiler 	   85
 5-11     Projected Ozone Concentrations Which Will Produce,  for
          Short Term Exposures, 20 Percent Injury to Economically
          Important Vegetation Grown Under Sensitive Conditions. .  .   87
 5-12     Sensitivity of Common Plants to S02  Injury 	   90
 5-13     Trace Element Content of Fly Ash and Bottom Slag From Coal
          Firing	   94
 5-14     Trace Element Content of Scrubber  Discharge Solids  From
          Coal Firing	   95
 5-15     Leaching Rates for Three Landfill  Designs	   97
 A-l      Stack Parameters and Plume Rise	108
 A-2      Predicted Maximum Ambient Concentrations of Criteria
          Pollutants	109
 B-l      Level 1 Data Assessment	114
 B-2      General Level 1 Reporting Points  	  116
 B-3      Level 2 Data Assessment	120

-------
                            TABLES (Continued)
Number                                                                Page
 B-4      Boiling Ranges of n-Alkanes 	    124
 B-5      TCO of Sample Concentrates and Neat Solutions	    125
 B-6      Sample Code for Organic Samples Analyzed	    126
 B-7      Gravimetry of Sample Concentrates  	    128
 B-8      Interpretation of Infrared Spectra of Sample Concentrates    129
 B-9      TCOs of Liquid Chromatography Fractions  	    134
 B-10     Gravimetry of LC Fractions	    135
 B-ll     Interpretation of Infrared Spectra of LC  Fractions.  ...    136
 B-12     Results of Gas Bag Analysis 	    147
 B-13     Probe Rinses, Particulate Extracts, Cyclone Rinses.  .  .  .    149
 B-14     Analysis of Cyclone Rinse Test 134, Scrubber Inlet
          Sampling Train	    150
 B-15     Absorbent Resin Extracts	    151
 B-16     Module Rinses and Condensate Extracts 	    155
 B-17     Acidified Process Water and Slurry Samples	    157
 B-18     Analysis of Selected Acidified Process Water Extracts  on
          OV-17 GC Column	    158
 B-19     Neutral and Basic Process Water Extracts  (Concentration,
          yg/1 of Water Sample) 	    162
 C-l      TGA/DSC Results	    166
 C-2      Overall Size Distributions	    169
 C-3      Composition of Samples	    170
 C-4      Spark Source Mass Spectrometry Analysis of  Coal  Feed -
          Test 132 (132-CF)	    202
 C-5      Spark Source Mass Spectrometry Analysis of  Coal  Feed -
          Test 133 (133-CF)	    203
 C-6      Spark Source Mass Spectrometry Analysis of  Coal  Feed -
          Test 134 (134-CF)	    204
 C-7      Spark Source Mass Spectrometry Analysis of  Coal  Feed -
          Test 135 (135-CF)	    205
 C-8      Spark Source Mass Spectrometry Analysis of  Coal  Feed -
          Test 136 (136-CF)	    206
 C-9      Combined Spark Source Mass Spectrometry Analyses of  Flue
          Gas Particulates - Test 135	    207
 C-10     Spark Source Mass Spectrometry Analysis of  Boiler Feed-
          water - Test 132 (132-6-1-1)	    208
                                    VI

-------
                              TABLES (Continued)
Number                                                                Page
 C-ll     Spark Source Mass Spectrometry Analysis of Demister
          Inlet - Test 132 (132-6-2-1)	    209
 C-12     Spark Source Mass Spectrometry Analysis of Settling
          Pond Overflow - Test 132 (132-6-3-1)	    210
 C-13     Spark Source Mass Spectrometry Analysis of Inlet
          Scrubber Water - Test 132 (132-6-4-1)	    211
 C-14     Spark Source Mass Spectrometry Analysis of Water to
          Slag Pond - Test 132 (132-6-5-1)	    212
 C-15     Spark Source Mass Spectrometry Analysis of Lime Feed -
          Test 135 (135-LF)	    213
 C-16     Spark Source Mass Spectrometry Analysis of Inlet Scrubber
          Slurry Liquid - Test 135 (135-6-Liquid)	    214
 C-17     Spark Source Mass Spectrometry Analysis of Inlet Scrubber
          Slurry Solids - Test 135 (135-6-Solid)	    215
 C-18     Spark Source Mass Spectrometry Analysis of Outlet
          Scrubber Slurry Liquid - Test 135 (135-7-Liquid)	    216
 C-19     Spark Source Mass Spectrometry Analysis of Outlet
          Scrubber Slurry Solids - Test 135 (135-7-Solid) 	    217
                                           ^
 C-20     Spark Source Mass Spectrometry Analysis of Bottom Ash -
          Test 133 (133-18-BA)	    218
 C-21     Summary of  XRD Analyses of Coal-fired Samples	    219
                                     vn

-------
                                 FIGURES
Number                                                                Page
 3-1      Layout of Plant Site	      9
 3-2      Material  Flow Diagram 	     10
 3-3      Schematic of Boiler 	     11
 3-4      Schematic of Burner and Cyclone	     12
 3-5      Scrubber System Flow Diagram	     15
 3-6      AQC Module	     16
 3-7      Flow Diagram Ash Disposal	     19
 3-8      Schematic of Coal-fired Boiler Showing Sampling Locations     23
 5-1      Health Effects from Sulfate Levels  Resulting From Coal
          Combustion in Controlled Utility Boilers	     75
 5-2      Increase in Mortality Rates in Vicinity of Coal-fired
          Utility Boilers as a Result of S02  and Total Particulate
          Emissions	     78
 5-3      N02 Threshold Concentrations for Various  Degrees of  Plant
          Injury	     88
 5-4      S02 Dose-Injury Curves for Sensitive Plant Species.  ...     90
 5-5      Geographical Distribution of Typical Sulfate Levels  in
          the United States	     92
 B-l      Flow Chart of Sample Handling and Analysis Procedures  .  .    113
 B-2      Retention Times Versus Boiling Points for n-Alkanes  ...    123
 B-3      Logic Flow Chart for Level 2 Organic Analysis 	    143
 B-4      Analysis of Samples for Organic Content 	    144
 B-5      Total Ion Chromatogram of Concentrated Extract of
          Acidified Process Water Sample	    160
 C-l      135-OUT-PFa Showing the Three Types of Crystallized
          Minerals Found in These Samples; Partially Uncrossed
          Polars (PUP), 131X	    171
 C-2      133-18 Shoring the Crushed Slag; Plane Polarized Light
          (PPL); 51X	    173
 C-3      135-IN-CYC Showing Flyash, Magnetite, and Partially
          Combusted Coal; PPL, 51X	    175
 C-4      135-IN-CYC Showing the Same Field of View as Figure  C-3
          But at a Higher Magnification; PPL, 131X	    176
 C-5      SEM Photograph (1400X) of 135-IN-CYC Showing Cenospheres
          and Air Pockets in Broken Cenosphere	    177
                                   vm

-------
                            FIGURES (Continued)
Number                                                                Page
 C-6      Closeup (4000X) of Smaller Cenospheres that Fill  Into
          Fractured Cenosphere ...................    178
 C-7      135-IN-PF Before Desiccation, Shows Flyash; PUP,  131X  .  .    180
 C-8      135-IN-PFa Before Desiccation, Shows Flyash;  PUP, 131X.  .    181
 C-9      135-IN-PFb Before Desiccation, Shows Flyash;  PUP, 131 X.  .    182
 C-10     SEM Photograph of Section of 135-IN-PFa Filter Sample
          With Type I Crystal in Upper Right Hand Corner ......    183
 C-ll     9000X Enlargement of Type I Crystal in Figure 3.   EDX
          Analysis:  High, Fe, Si, S; Medium Zn; Low K, and Ca.  .  .    184
 C-12     135-LF Showing a General View of Crushed Limestone
          "Rock"; PUP, 51X .....................    186
 C-13     135-LF Showing Soil Agglomerates Which Contaminate the
          "Dust" Samples; PUP, 131X ................    187
 C-14     135-6 Showing Limestone; PUP, 51X  ............    189
 C-15     135-7 Showing General View of This Sample at Low
          Magnification; PUP, 51X .................    190
 C-16     135-7 Showing CaSOs'l/ZHgO Laths, Limestone, Flyash, and
          Magnetite; PUP, 131X ........ ' ...........    191
 C-17     135-OUT-CYC Showing Type 2 Crystallized "Crust" With
          Flyash Embedded in it; PUP, 51X  .............    193
 C-18     SEM Photograph of 135-OUT-CYC Showing Flyash and Crystal-
          line Material Aggregates .................    194
 C-19     SEM- EDX  (2000X) Photograph of Crystalline Material in
          135-OUT-CYC.  EDX Analysis:  High Fe and S; Low Si, Zn,
          Ca ............................    195
 C-20     135-OUT-PF Showing the Crystal Types Present in This and
          the 135-OUT-PFa Samples; PUP, 51X  ............    197
 C-21     SEM of 135-OUT-PFa Filter  (500X) Showing Donut-Shaped
          Particles  ........................    198
 C-22     SEM-EDX  Enlargement (5500X) of Single Nodule from 135-
          OUT-PFa.  Arrow 1 EDX:  High S,  Fe, Zn; Low Ca, Si, K.
          Arrow 2  EDX:  High S, Fe,  Zn; Medium Si; Low K, Ca. . . .    199
 C-23     SEM-EDX  of 135-OUT-PF Showing Cubic and Platelet
          Materials.  Arrow 1 EDX:   High S, Fe, Zn; Low K.  Arrow 2
          EDX:  High Fe, Si, Ca, Zn, S ...............    200
 C-24     Outlet MRI Weight Data for Runs  135 & 136 ........    221
                                     ix

-------
                    METRIC  CONVERSION  FACTORS AND  PREFIXES
To convert from
Degrees Celsius  (°C)
Joule  (J)
Kilogram (kg)
Kilojoule/kilogram  (kJ/kg)
Megagram (Mg)
Megawatt (MW)
Meter  (m)
Meter3 (m3)
Meter3 (m3)
Meter3 (m3)
Manogram/joule (ng/J)
Picogram/joule (pg/0)
Prefix
Symbol
Peta
Tera
Giga
Mega
Kilo
flilli
Micro
Nano
Pico
P
T
G
M
k
m
y
n
P
                              CONVERSION  FACTORS
                       To
Multiply by
Degrees Fahrenheit (°F)
Btu
Pound-mass (avoirdupois)
Btu/lbm
Ton (2000 Ib )
m
Horsepower (HP)
Foot (ft)
Barrel (bbl)
^ •*
FootJ (ft )
Gallon (gal)
Ibm/mi11ion Btu
lbm/million Btu
PREFIXES
Multiplication
Factor
-, 15
10 °
, J2
10
IO9
IO6
IO3
, -3
10 J
io-6
io-9
io-12
t(°F) = 1.8 t(°C) + 32
9.478 x IO"4
2.205
4.299 x IO"1
1.102
1.341 x IO3
3.281
6.290
1
3.531 x IO1
2.642 x 102
2.326 x 10"3 ,
2.326 x 10"6


Example
15
1 Pm = 1 x 10 meters
12
1 Tm = 1 x 10 meters
g
1 Gm = 1 x 10 meters
1 Mm = 1 x 10 meters
1 km = 1 x 10 meters
_3
1 mm = 1 x 10 meter
1 ym = 1 x 10" meter
_o
1 nm = 1 x 10 meter -
12
1 pm = 1 x 10 meter

-------
                                SECTION 1
                              INTRODUCTION

     Conventional methods for conversion of fuels into usable forms  of
energy historically have impacted all segments of the environment.   Most
conventional combustion processes emit sulfur oxides, nitrogen oxides,
carbon oxides, particulate matter and other potentially harmful pollutants
to the air.  Solid wastes from the combustion process, or from control
technologies associated with it, present potential disposal problems, as
well as health and environmental problems.  Adverse water-related health
and ecological effects may result when chemical compounds and heavy  metals
are leached from solid residues.
     Conventional fuel combustion processes are playing an increasing role
in the movement toward national energy independence.  As a result,  the
potential for adverse environmental impact is also increasing.  In recogni-
tion of these facts, IERL-RTP established the'Conventional Combustion
Environmental Assessment program (CCEA) to conduct comprehensive assessments
of the effects of combustion pollutants on human health, ecology, and the
general environment.  The assessments will result in recommendations for
control technology and standards development  to control adverse effects
within acceptable limits.
     This report details results of a comprehensive multimedia emissions
assessment  performed at the La Cygne No. 1 utility boiler in Kansas.  This
unit is a supercritical cyclone-fired boiler  with a net electric generating
capacity of 820 MW.  High sulfur, high ash, subbituminous coal is typically
burned in Unit No. 1.  Sulfur and particulate emissions are controlled by
limestone scrubbers.  Based on 1978 data, cyclone-fired units comprise only
11% of the  installed generating capacity from bituminous and subbituminous
coal-fired  utility boilers.  The average installed capacity for cyclone-
fired  boilers is 250 MW, nearly 3.5  times smaller than  the test unit.
Further, 61%  of  all cyclone-fired  units  (83%  on  a capacity basis) utilize
electrostatic precipitators for particulate control.  Hence, emissions  from

-------
the tested unit should not be considered typical  for coal-fired utility
boilers.  Owing to the high ash and sulfur contents of the La Cygne fuel,
the unit's capacity and method of emission control, measured emissions from
the La Cygne No. 1 unit may be atypical  for cyclones in general.  Emissions
data presented herein should be considered in light of these limitations
and extrapolation should be avoided.

-------
                                SECTION 2
                         SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

     A comprehensive multimedia emissions assessment was  performed on the
number 1 unit at the La Cygne power station in Kansas.  This  unit is
operated by Kansas City Power and Light Company (KCP&L) although it is
owned jointly by KCP&L and Kansas Gas and Electric  Company.   The unit is
a cyclone-fired Babcock and Wilcox supercritical, once-through  boiler with
a net electrical output of 820 MW.  Typically, a  high  sulfur, high ash
subbituminous coal is burned as fuel.  Coal is obtained locally from
surface mines owned by KCP&L and operated by Pittsburgh and Midway Coal
Mining Company.  Emissions of SOg and particulates  are controlled by eight
venturi-absorber scrubber modules utilizing limestone  slurry.  Spent
                                          2
scrubber slurry is discharged to a 0.65 km  settling pond.  Water for
                                        2
cooling purposes is drawn from a 10.5 km  cooling reservoir constructed
adjacent to the plant site.
     Major effluent streams from the site are flue  gas, combined bottom
and fly ash, scrubber solids, settling pond overflow and  ash  pond overflow.
With the exception of the ash pond overflow, samples were obtained from
each of these streams.  Characteristics of the ash  pond overflow were
estimated from analyses of liquid discharged into the  ash pond  from the
ash dewatering tanks.
     Flue gas emissions are summarized in Table 2-1.  Tabulated emissions
of NO  represent lower limit values since samples were collected in bags
     A
and sample degradation has since been determined significant.  The apparent
NO  removal by scrubbing is attributed to degradation  of  the  bag samples
  A
rather than actual removal from the flue gas.  No attempt was made to
accurately measure CO emissions; indicated upper limits  result  from a 1000
ppm detection limit.
     Measured S02 emissions indicate 78% removal  by scrubbing which exceeds
the design removal efficiency of 76%.  Approximately 98%  of uncontrolled
sulfur emissions were as S02 while 1.1% and 0.4% were  as  S03  and particulate
SO-", respectively.

-------
          TABLE 2-1.  SUMMARY OF FLUE GAS POLLUTANT EMISSIONS

Pollutant
NOX* (as N02 near full load)
C0f
.
so2
**
SO,
Emission
Before Scrubber
>715
<520
***
3380 ± 400
***
48 ± 24
Factor, ng/J
After Scrubber
>385
<520
***
740 ± 90
***
10 ± 11
so,
   **
              ft
Total Organics

Total Parti culates**
  _**
Cl
 _**
          ***
  22 ± 9.0

2.77 - 4.07
          ***
1090 ± 270
                                        0.6 ± 0.4
                                                 ***
                                                                    ***
 2.7 ± 1.9

1.45 - 2.60

       80



     <0.14
    NOX was determined by chemiluminescent analysis of bag samples (Level
    2).  Due to potential for NOX degradation in bag samples, measured
    values are considered to be lower limit values.  Apparent NOX removal
    by limestone scrubbing is attributed to sample degradation.

    CO was determined by gas chromatographic analysis of bag samples
    (Level 2).  Indicated values represent the detection limit of 1000 ppm.
      _ was determined by pulsed fluorescence analysis of bag samples  and
    by the CCS (Level 2).
 **         _
    S03, $04 , Cl  , and F  were determined by analysis of the CCS (Level
    2).
 " C-|-C-|(j fractions were determined by gas chromatograph while the >Cj6
    fraction was determined gravimetrically (Level  1).  Upper limit values
    include detection limits of fractions which were not detected.

    Total particulates were determined by a modified Method 5 procedure
    (Level 2) and from the SASS train particulate catch (Level  1).
***
    Indicated uncertainties represent one standard deviation.

-------
     Total particulate emissions data indicate 91% removal by scrubbing
which is lower than the design removal of 98%.  Scrubber inlet particulates
consisted primarily of particles larger than 3 ym; 13% of the particulates
were 3-10 ym and 87% were larger than 10 ym.  After scrubbing, 82% were
less than 1 ym, 11% were 1-3 ym, 1% were 3-10 ym and 6% were larger than
10 ym.  Scrubber removal efficiencies were essentially zero for particles
smaller than 3 ym and approximately 99% for particles larger than 3 ym.
     Atomic absorption analysis (AAS) was utilized to determine concentra-
tions of 18 trace elements in the flue gas.  Concentrations of most elements
exceeded health-based Discharge Multimedia Environmental Goal (DMEG)  values
at the scrubber inlet.  At the scrubber outlet As, Cd, Cr, Fe, Ni, Pb, and
Zn exceeded their respective health-based DMEG values.  Comparison of AAS
data with spark source mass spectroscopy (SSMS) analysis indicated that SSMS
corresponds to the more accurate AAS results only to within one or two
orders of magnitude for most elements.
     Speciation of organic compounds in the flue gas indicated the presence
of aliphatic hydrocarbons, substituted benzenes, ethylbenzaldehyde, dimethyl-
benzaldehyde, 2,6-pereriden-dione-4, and 2,6-dimethyl-2,5-heptadion-4-one,
and the methyl ester of long chain acid, at concentrations ranging from 0.2
to 20  g/m  prior to scrubbing.  Only ethylbenzaldehyde, substituted benzenes,
and aliphatic hydrocarbons were identified at the scrubber outlet.  Most POM
compounds  identified at the scrubber inlet are naphthalene,  substituted
naphthalenes, biphenyl and substituted biphenyls.  Concentrations of these
compounds were several orders of magnitude lower than their  respective DMEG
values.   No POM compounds were detected at the scrubber outlet.
     Liquid wastes were analyzed by AAS to determine trace elements and by
gas chromatograph to determine organics.  Liquid to the ash  pond was found
to contain Al, Ca, Cd, Fe, V, and Zn at concentrations exceeding ecology-
based DMEG values while only Fe exceeded its health-based DMEG value.  The
scrubber  slurry settling pond overflow contained Ca, Cd, Mn, Ni, and Pb at
concentrations exceeding health and ecological DMEG values and, in addition,
Al, Fe, and Zn exceeded their respective ecological DMEG values.  Total
organics  were detected at 0.06 mg/1 in liquid to the ash pond and at 0.6
mg/1 in settling pond overflow.  Liquid to the ash pond did  not contain >C,g
organics  while the settling pond overflow organics were primarily >C-ig.
                                     5

-------
     AAS analysis of solid wastes indicated that Al, As, Ca,  Cd,  Fe,  Mn,  Ni,
Pb, and Zn concentrations in scrubber solids, and Al, Ca, Cr, Fe, Mn, Ni,
Pb, and Zn concentrations in bottom ash/fly ash samples exceeded  health-
based DMEG values.  Organic concentrations in scrubber solids and bottom
ash/fly ash samples were 6.6 mg/kg and 86.2 mg/kg, respectively.   No
organics >C-jg were detected.  POM compounds were not detected in  scrubber
solids.
     Bioassay tests were performed on six samples obtained at the La  Cygne
unit:  1) cyclone particulate catch (scrubber inlet); 2) raw  limestone;
3) combined bottom ash/fly ash; 4) scrubber outlet slurry solids; 5)  cooling
water; and 6) scrubber outlet slurry.  Tests performed include Ames mutage-
nicity assay, CHO clonal toxicity, RAM cytotoxicity, WI-38 human  cell  cyto-
toxicity, rhodent toxicity, and freshwater toxicity assays.  In general,.no
toxicity was detected.  However, the RAM cytotoxicity assay indicated low
toxicity for bottom ash/fly ash, scrubber outlet solids, and  the  cyclone
particulate catch.  Also, the scrubber outlet slurry exhibited low toxicity
in WI-38 cytotoxicity assay and moderate toxicity in the CHO  cytotoxicity
assay.
     An environmental impact assessment was performed based upon  emission
rates measured at the La Cygne number 1 boiler and assumed typical and worst
case type meteorological parameters.  Principal conclusions indicated by
this assessment are as follows:
     •   The environmental acceptability of emissions from coal-fired
         boilers is largely dependent on site-specific factors such as
         background pollution levels and meteorology.  However, the
         risk of violating NAAQS due to criteria pollutant emissions
         from a coal-fired boiler (874 MW gross output scale) like La
         Cygne utilizing a cyclone furnace appears low in terms of 24
         hour and annual average levels.  Units utilizing high sulfur
         fuel, such as that utilized in the La Cygne number 1 boiler,
         may exceed short term NAAQS for S02-
     t   Based on the Lundy-Grahn Model for health effects associated
         with suspended sulfate levels, limited adverse health
         effects would result from these emissions.   Similar  results
         were obtained with this model considering the effects of
         S0£ and total particulate emissions on people older  than
         30 to 40 years of age.

-------
The impact of trace element burdens on drinking  water  and air
quality as a result of measured emissions from this coal-fired
utility boiler is generally orders of magnitude  less than
allowable or acceptable exposure levels.   However,  substantial
increases in Cd are predicted in soil.  Similarly,  substantial
increases in Cd and Pb are predicted in plant tissues. While
long-term accumulation of Cd may cause plant damage and
serious health effects to animals consuming vegetation in the
affected areas, accumulation of other trace elements is  not
expected to result in concentrations which would be toxic
to human or plant life.

Plant damage due to NOX emissions is likely to occur since
estimated NOX concentrations (both short and long term)
approach or exceed threshold concentrations.  Predicted  short
term concentrations of S02 are also in the threshold range-,
hence, SOg emissions may result in damage to sensitive plant
species.  Plant damage is not likely to result from predicted
concentrations of other criteria pollutants.  The effects of
secondary pollutants formed by reactions between NOX and
hydrocarbons, and the synergistic effects of 862 in the
presence of ozone are uncertain.

-------
                                SECTION 3
                              TEST SETTING
PLANT DESCRIPTION
     The coal-fired utility boiler tested was  the  number 1  unit at  the  La
Cygne power station in Kansas.   The unit is operated by Kansas City Power
and Light although it is owned  jointly by KCP&L  and Kansas  Gas and  Electric
Company.  It burns local coal and has  an air quality control  system for
reducing S02 and particulate emissions.
     The La Cygne Station is located about 88 km south of downtown  Kansas
City, Missouri, and 0.8 km west of the Missouri  state line.  The  plant  site
was selected primarily because  of availability of coal, water and limestone
locally.  Figure 3-1 shows general plot plan of the entire facility.
Figure 3-2 shows the general material  flow diagram for the unit  tested.
Boiler
     Boiler Number 1 was designed to burn coal as  the primary fuel.  It is
a cyclone-fired, super critical, once-through, balanced draft Babcock &
Wilcox unit rated at 46.8 Mg/s  of steam.  This corresponds to a  maximum
heat input rate of approximately 137 GJ/s.  The generator is rated  at 874
MW, gross (measured at the generator with no allowance for powering fans or
pumps).  The net output, that is the power leaving the plant, is  820 MW.
Construction of the unit began  in 1969.  Commercial operation began in  mid-
1973.
     Figure 3-3 is a schematic  of the boiler.   Figure 3-4 shows  a schematic
of the burner-cyclone furnace combination.  In most boilers the  fuel and all  or
part of the combustion air are  mixed in the burner but the bulk  of  the  actual
fuel burning occurs in the boiler (more accurately called the boiler furnace).
In cyclone-fired units the fuel-air mixture is ejected from the  burner  into
the cyclone furnace.  The cyclone furnace is a barrel shaped plenum into
which the combustion air is injected (see Figure 3-4).  Essentially complete
                                    8

-------
vo
                              WAREHOUSE
TRANS. I
TOWER I
COAL STORAGE ««L

COAT STORAGE TT
FACM
0.27
•vX
AUXI
TACW
jo/y
MAINT
BUII

ESP
LLARYCZ
SCRUBBER
ABSORB
UNIT
ENANCE
.DING
1 BOILER
UNIT
NO 2
3 BOILERS
BOILER
UNIT
NO. 1

GENERATORS
(SERVICE
BLDG.

                                                                                              SWITCH YARD
                                                                                                 AREA
                                                COOLING LAKE - 2600 ACRES
                                              Figure  3-1.  Layout of Plant Site

-------
Figure 3-2.  Material Flow Diagram

-------
                                  BOILER
                                 FURNACE
                                      HOT
                                    COMBUSTION
                                      GASES
BURNER
        CYCLONE FURNACE
                                 WATER FILLED

                                   SLAG TANK
                 TO ASH DISPOSAL
                 Figure  3-3.   Schematic of Boiler
                                    11

-------
               SECONDARY^,	.^^^                 FURNACE
               AIH    ^^^^     ^--—^_                EXIT TO
                                                        BOILER
              PRIMARY.
              AIR
            TERTIARY^   T ^^\-^         CYCLONE
            AIR          /        \              FURNACE
                         /         CRUSHED
                   CYCLONE         COAL
                   BURNER
              Figure 3-4.  Schematic of Burner and Cyclone
combustion of the fuel but relatively little heat transfer occurs in the
cyclone.  The hot combustion products then enter the boiler furnace where
most of the heat is transferred to the steam.  This unit has 18 such cyclone
furnaces.
     Combustion air is supplied to the main boiler unit by three forced
draft fans.  Combustion air enters the combustion zone at three locations.
Primary air which constitutes approximately 20% of the total, enters the
burner tangentially and imparts a swirling motion to the incoming coal.
Secondary air, approximately 75% of the total, enters the main barrel of
the cyclone furnace tangentially and imparts additional swirl and centrifu-
gal motion to the coal.   Entrance velocities for secondary air of 91 m/s
are typical.   Tertiary air, approximately 5% of the total, enters through
the center of the burner.
     Crushed coal from overhead bunker storage is admitted at the top of
the burner.  Upon entering the cyclone the fuel is burned quickly and
                                    12

-------
essentially completely.  Temperatures are high enough to melt the ash
constituents in the fuel and form a liquid slag.  Because of the whirling
action in the cyclone, the liquid slag and much of the particulate matter
are propelled by centrifugal force to the outside of the cyclone.  The slag
with captive particulates drains to the bottom of the cyclone and then to
the boiler furnace.  On entering the boiler furnace the liquid slag begins
to cool.   Prior to solidification it drains from the boiler furnace bottom
via a slag tap to a water filled slag tank where further cooling and
solidification takes place.
     The  boiler furnace absorbs most of the heat contained in the hot
gases produced in the cyclone furnace.  Additional heat transfer occurs in
the super heaters,  economizer and air heaters.
     The  boiler is  scheduled to operate on a 24-hour per day, 7 days per
week basis.  It is  scheduled to be off line no less than once each year for
various types of maintenance.
     The  coal burned is mined locally.  The mining area, located near the
site, is  owned by the utility company and operated by the Pittsburgh and
Midway Coal Mining  Company.  The coal is surface mined and delivered to
the site  by 109 Mg off-the-road trucks.   The  trucks bottom  dump  their
loads into a 908 Mg capacity receiving hopper; the typical top size of this
coal as received is 0.8 m.  From the receiving hopper the coal is trans-
ported through the plant by a network of conveyors.
     The  coal is low grade sub-bituminous with an as-fired heating value
of 20.9 to 22.6 MJ/kg, an ash content of approximately 25%, and a sulfur
content of 5 to 6%.  It is estimated that the coal deposits are approxi-
mately 63.5 Tg.
     Under some circumstances coke is mixed with the coal to increase the
energy per unit weight of the fuel burned.  At times 10  to 20% of the fuel
can be coke.  No information as to coke supplier and analysis was available;
however,  no coke was fired during testing.
     There are three oil-fired auxiliary boilers which are only used inter-
mittently to provide heat for the plant when Unit No. 1  is down and for
powering  a 20 MW turbine-generator to provide electricity for powering
ancillary equipment during startup.
                                    13

-------
Scrubber
     Sulfur dioxide and particulate emissions are controlled by a flue gas
scrubber system.  The scrubber was designed by Babcock and Wilcox as an
integral part of the steam generation plant.  It consists of eight two-stage
venturi-absorber scrubber modules.  The system was designed to treat boiler
flue gas at a flow rate of 1209 Mm /s.  Each module was designed to treat
151 Nm3/s per module at 413 K.
     The gas handling system (boiler and scrubber) is balanced draft.
Three forced draft fans supply combustion air to the furnace and six fans
located downstream of the scrubbing system induce draft in the boiler and
scrubber.
     As shown in Figure 3-5, the flue gas from the boiler enters the air
quality control system through a common plenum.  From the common plenum
the gas stream is sent to the individual scrubber modules, as indicated.
No provisions exist for allowing the flue gas to bypass the scrubber.
     As shown in Figure 3-6, upon entering the scrubber module the hot flue
gases pass through the venturi section, where they are sprayed with lime-
stone slurry.  Up to 99% of the particulate matter is removed from the gas
stream at this point.  The particles are entrained in the liquid which
drops into the bottom sump.  The gas stream then makes a 180° turn and
passes through the S02 absorber section.  The SC^ is removed by absorption
as the gas stream is drawn through stainless steel sieve trays which are
sprayed with the limestone slurry solution.  This slurry with the absorbed
SOg drops into the bottom sump.  The gas stream then passes through a
demister section in which excess moisture and mist are removed.  The gas
stream then passes through a reheat section which increases the gas tempera-
ture approximately 303 K to improve gas buoyancy and to reduce the probabil-
ity of deposits on the induced draft fans.  Upon exiting the scrubber module
the gas stream enters a common plenum from which it is drawn through one
of the six induced draft fans and then sent to the stack.  Table 3-1 shows
typical characteristics of the flue gas before and after scrubbing, res-
pectively.
                                    14

-------
                                                                                           FAN (7000 HP) TYPICAL
CTT
        FLUE GAS
        FROM BOILER'
                                        Figurs 3-5.  Scrubber System Flow Diagram

-------
                      TO OUTPUT PLENUM,
                       .0. FANS S STACK
                                                                 122 KG/S
                                                                    7KG/S
                                                                   1 KG/S
                                                                   1 KG/S
                                                                    413 K
                                                                 163 W*/S
                                      352 K
                                   163M3/S
                                     »i kPa
                                                              121 KG/S
                                                               11 KG/S
                                                             0.01 KG/S
                                                              0.3 KG/S
                                                                323 K
                                                              141 M3/S
                                                                91  kPi
                                                       THROAT FLUSH
                                                    GRIT SEPARATOR
ABSORBER RECWC. PUMP
0.6M3/S
RECIRCULATION TANK
14% SOLIDS
pH-6.8
CaCO-,
                           FLYASH
                                           46 KG/M3
                                           50 KG/M3

                                           16 KG/M3

                                           30 KG/M3
                                                     ! — DISPOSAL POND 0401 M3/S
                                                            RECIRC. PUMP O4 M It
SPENT SLURRY TO POND
ao4M3/s

      TO DISPOSAL POND
      37 KG/S TOTAL
      FOR ALL 8 MODULES
              LIMESTONE SLURRY FEED
               •APPROXIMATE VALUES
                        Figure 3-6.   AQC  Module
                                      16

-------
        TABLE 3-1.   DESIGN CHARACTERIZATION OF GAS STREAM IN THE
                     AIR QUALITY  CONTROL SYSTEM (1 MODULE ONLY)


Dry Gas
H20 Vapor
Ash
so2
Temperature
Volumetric Flow Rate
Pressure
Inlet
122 kg/s
7 kg/s
1 kg/s
1 kg/s
413 K
163 m3/s
95 kPa
Outlet
121 kg/s
11 kg/s
0.01 kg/s
0.3 kg/s
323 K
141 m3/s
91 kPa

     The  limestone  utilized in making up the scrubber  slurry is mined
locally and brought to the site by off-the-road trucks.  Ground limestone
is mixed  with water for the slurry.  The limestone  processing and storage
facility  is capable of supplying 15 Mg/s of slurry  to  the  scrubber system.
                                                 2
     The  slurry water is recycled from the 6.5 Km  settling pond.  The flow
                                                             3
rate of the makeup  water to the system is approximately  0.01 m /s.
     Sulfur dioxide (S02) and sulfur trioxide (SOj) are  removed from the
flue gas  stream by  reaction with the aqueous slurry of limestone.  The major
component of limestone is calcium carbonate (CaCOj).  The  products from the
S02 reaction are  carbonic acid (H2C03) and calcium  sulfite hemi-hydrate
(CaS03-l/2 H20).  The products from the S03 reaction are carbonic acid and
calcium sulfate dihydrate (CaS04'2H20).  These reactions are shown below:

          S02  +  1 1/2 H20  +  CaC03 -»  H2C03  +   CaS03'l/2 HgO

          S03  +  3 H20  +  CaC03 -*•  H2C03  +  CaS04»2 H20
                                    17

-------
     The pH of the slurry is maintained at 5.5 to 6.0.  Optimum pH for the
chemical reactions is 5.6 to 5.8.  If the pH exceeds 5.8 the amount of CaCOo
                                                                           O
(limestone) required increases and soft scale begins to accumulate rapidly.
If the pH drops below 5.6 a hard gypsum (CaSO^-2 HgO) scale builds up.  The
pH of the slurry is controlled by adjusting the rate at which limestone is
added to the slurry.
Liquid Effluent
     The plant produces three major liquid and slurry effluent streams:
     0   Slurry from the slag tank containing slag and fly ash;
     •   Spent slurry from the scrubber;
     §   Effluent from equipment wash down, especially the induced
         draft fans.
     The slurry from the slag tank contains suspended solids from the boiler
furnace bottom and the economizer hopper.  The solids from the boiler
furnace bottom are made up of various non-volatile materials and inorganics
which were present in the fuel.  The solids from the economizer hopper are
made up primarily of fly ash.
     Figure 3-7 is a simplified flow diagram of the ash handling system.
                                             3
As shown in the diagram, approximately 0.08 m /s is pumped from the cooling
water lake into the ash system.  Fly ash from the economizer hoppers is
gravity fed to the mixing tanks.  Fly ash and water are mixed in these tanks
and the mixture is piped to one of the slag tanks.  Molten slag from the
boiler furnace is gravity fed to the liquid filled slag tank.  Clinker
grinders at the bottom of the slag tank reduce the solidified slag to an
appropriate size for transport via jet pumps to dewatering bins.  Transport
water is drawn from the cooling water lake.  Two streams are piped from each
dewatering bin.  One stream is sent directly to the ash (solid waste) dis-
posal site and the other is piped to the ash pond.  Once discharged into the
ash pond the suspended solids settle out of the solution and the clear water
is recycled to the cooling lake.
     The effluent from the scrubbing system is a side stream of the slurry
                                       3
recycling system.  Approximately 0.04 m /s of spent slurry is discharged
from each scrubber module and piped to the on-site settling pond.  Table 3-2
                                    18

-------
                                                           ECONOMIZER HOPPERS
vo
        ,.   WATER
         ) FROM COOLING WATER LAKE
                                                                                                          TO ASH DISPOSAL

                                                                                                             TO ASH POND
                                             Figure 3-7.   Flow Diagram Ash Disposal

-------
gives the average analysis of the spent slurry  solution.   Upon entering
the settling pond the slurry is  diluted and  the suspended  solids  settle
out.  The clear solution is recycled  to the  scrubber system and also dis-
charged into the cooling lake.
     Effluents from surface housekeeping wash down  and  maintenance wash
downs (e.g., induce draft fan wash downs)  are piped to  the settling pond.
                              2
The settling pond is a 0.65 km  pond  which is used  as the  primary sink  for
the liquid effluent from the air quality control system.   Since the pond
is an open basin, surface water  run-off enters  the  pond.   However, core
tests conducted by an independent testing  firm  indicate that the  likelihood
of leaching problems is quite remote.   Typical  water quality parameters for
the pond are given in Table 3-3.  Part  of  the clarified water is  used as
makeup water for the scrubber and part  flows to the cooling  lake.
                2
     The 10,5 km  cooling lake is the primary source for all  water used by
the facility.  It receives fresh water  from La  Cygne Creek,  surface water
run-off, settling pond overflow, ash  pond  overflow,  and wash down water.
Typical  lake water quality parameters are  presented in Table 3-4.  The  lake
is stocked with various varieties of fish  and the plant and  KCP&L Company
is presently negotiating with several public agencies to open the lake  to
public use for boating and fishing.
            TABLE  3-2.  COMPOSITION OF SPENT SCRUBBER SLURRY

CaC03
CaSOj
CaS04
Fly Ash
Total Solids
PH
Total Solids removed per day
Total Solids removed per year
Volume Displaced by Solids/year
46 kg/m3
50 kg/m3
16 kg/m3
30 kg/m3
14%
5.6
3.2 Tg
0.63 Tg
559,000 m3
                                   20

-------
          TABLE 3-3.  SETTLING POND WATER QUALITY
Cations
    Calcium (Ca)                           808 ppm
    Magnesium (Mg)                         106 ppm
    Sodium (Na)                             53 ppm
    Potassium (K)                           42 ppm
Anions
    Alkalinity (as HC03)                    79 ppm
    Chloride (Cl)                          314 ppm
    Sulfate (S04=)                        1995 ppm
    Sulfite (S03=)                        None detected
    Silica (SiO?)                           52 ppm
Others
    pH                                       8
    Conductivity                          3500 micromhos/cm
    Solids, suspended                        5 ppm
    Dissolved                             3450 ppm
          TABLE 3-4.  COOLING LAKE WATER QUALITY
Cations
    Calcium (Ca)                           126 ppm
    Magnesium (Mg)                          16 ppm
    Sodium (Na)                             31 ppm
    Potassium (K)                            5 ppm
Anions
    Alkalinity (as HC03)                   112 ppm
    Chloride (Cl)                           45 ppm
    Sulfate (S04=)                         295 ppm
    Sulfite (SOo3)                         None detected
    Silica (Si02)                            1 ppm
Others
    pH                                       8
    Conductivity                           820 micromhos/cm
    Solids, suspended                        5 ppm
    Dissolved                              610 ppm
                             21

-------
Solid Wastes
     The solid wastes,  primarily ash,  generated by combustion  are removed
from the system as liquid slurries.  The  solids which  settle to the bottom
of the settling pond are periodically  dredged.   The majority of the solid
waste is disposed of in a company owned landfill  northwest of the facility.
COAL-FIRED UTILITY TESTS
     The integrated scrubber,  scrubber waste  disposal  and combustion waste
(ash) disposal systems  at the  coal-fired  utility plant are extremely complex.
Because the boiler and  scrubber were designed and built as an  integrated
unit a large number of  streams had to  be  sampled to allow a complete
characterization of both the boiler and scrubber.  A total of 13 separate
process streams were sampled.   Figure  3-8 shows the sampling location for
each stream and Table 3-5 provides stream descriptions.   These 13 streams
do not constitute all possible sampling locations.  However, given the time
and budget constraints, these  samples  did provide sufficient information to
conduct a comprehensive emissions assessment  of the plant.
     Emissions were characterized using EPA's phased approach  to sampling
and analysis.  This approach utilizes  two separate levels of sampling and
analytical effort (Level 1  and Level 2).   Level 1 is a sampling and analysis
procedure accurate within a factor of  about 3.   This level provides pre-
liminary assessment data and identifies problem areas  and information gaps.
These data are then utilized in the formulation of the Level 2 sampling and
analysis effort.  Level 2 provides more accurate detailed information that
confirms and expands the information gathered in Level 1.  The methods and
procedures used during  this study are, in some  instances, modified Level 1
sampling and/or analysis procedures and are documented in the manual,
"Combustion Source Assessment  Methods  and Procedures Manual for Sampling
and Analysis", September 1977.  The Level 2 methods and procedures included
"state-of-the-art" techniques  as adapted  to the needs  of this  site.  Details
of Level 2 procedures are presented in the Appendices.  Normally all Level
1 samples are analyzed  and evaluated before moving to  Level 2.  However,
because of program time constraints, the  Level  1 and Level 2 samples were
obtained during the same test  period.
                                    22

-------
                                                   All

                                                   HEAICI
ro
GJ
                       Figure  3-8.  Schematic of Coal-fired  Boiler Showing Sampling  Locations.

-------
                     TABLE  3-5.  STREAM DESCRIPTIONS
Stream Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Stream Description
Coal feed
Scrubber inlet
Scrubber outlet
Stack
Boiler feedwater
Demister wash
Settling pond overflow
Scrubber make-up water
Scrubber feed slurry
Spent scrubber slurry
Thickener overflow
Thickener underflow
Limestone feed
Type of Sample
Solid fuel
Flue gas
Flue gas
Flue gas
Liquid
Liquid
Liquid
Liquid
Slurry
Slurry
Slurry
Solid ash
Solid

     The Source Assessment  Sampling System  (SASS) was  used  to  collect both
gaseous and particulate  emission samples at the scrubber  inlet and outlet
for Level 1 organic  and  inorganic analysis.  The train was  run for 6  to 8
                            " 3
hours until a minimum of 30 m  of gas  had been collected.
     Previous sampling and  analysis efforts had indicated possible inter-
ference of SASS train materials on certain  organic  and inorganic  analysis
when at the lower detection limits of  Level 2  methods. To  avoid  this
possibility, all glass sampling trains were used to collect Level  2 samples.
Two Method 5 sampling trains were modified  for Level  2 organic and inorganic
sample acquisition.   Each train samples approximately 10  cubic meters of
flue gas during a 6- to  8-hour run time.
     A controlled condensate train (Goksoyr-Ross) was  used  at  each location
during testing to obtain samples for S02, S03  (as H2S04), particulate
sulfate, HC1 and HF.
                                   24

-------
     During  Level  2 test runs, MRI impactors were used to obtain  particulate
size distribution  data for the scrubber outlet gas.   However,  due to  the
high particulate loading in the flue gas prior to scrubbing,  particulate
size distribution  data was obtained by polarized light microscopic analysis
(PLM) of particulate collected by the modified Method 5 procedure.
     Liquid  and solid samples were obtained by using appropriate  composite
dipper and grab sampling techniques.
     Each stream was analyzed, as appropriate, for criteria pollutants,
inorganics,  organics, and wastewater parameters.  A variety of analytical
techniques were employed to determine both total elemental emissions  and,
in some cases,  specific compounds.  These techniques are discussed in detail
in the Appendices.
                                    25

-------
                                SECTION 4
           EMISSION ASSESSMENT OF A  COAL-FIRED UTILITY  BOILER

TEST CONDITIONS
     Five tests were performed on the bituminous  coal-fired site.   In
addition to these five  tests, designated 132-136,  six runs  were made on
other days using the Goksoyr-Ross Controlled  Condensation System (CCS)  to
collect supplementary data  on SOg, S03, S0^~,  Cl", and  F~ emissions.  These
runs are designated I through V  and  0, and  are discussed in the appropriate
sections.  Specific conditions for tests 132-136  are summarized in Table
4-1.  Unit loading ranged from 620 to 760 MW  (gross), which corresponds to
between 71 and 87% of full-load  operation.  Tabulated coal  feed rates are
nominal, although their accuracies have been  estimated  from fuel analyses
and steam production rates  under the assumption of 90%  thermal  efficiency.
Nominal coal  feed rates appear to be accurate to  within 17%.  Because of
possible air leakage into the flue gas bag  sampling system, two sets of
oxygen concentrations were  used  to calculate  emission factors.   Oxygen con-
centrations from gas bag samples were used  to calculate S02, NOX,  CO, and
C-j-Cg hydrocarbon emissions, since these were also determined from grab bag
sampling.  Other emissions  were  calculated  using  the average oxygen concen-
tration determined by continuous monitoring of the scrubber during runs I-V
and 0.  Due to possible air leakage  into upstream ducting operating at
sub-atmospheric pressure, tabulated  oxygen  concentrations are not necessarily
representative of concentrations at  the furnace outlet.  Oxygen concentra-
tions of 2.8% in the furnace after combustion are typical for this unit
during full-load operation; this corresponds  to an excess air input of 15%
computed using the ultimate coal analysis.  During less than full-load
operation the excess air level is higher.
     Flue gas flow rates were calculated from the oxygen concentration at
the scrubber, fuel analyses, and fuel feed  rates  (estimated from steam
production rate data) using the  following expression:
                                   26

-------
                                                       TABLE  4-1.   SUMMARY OF  TEST  CONDITIONS
ro
•vj

Test No.

132
133
134
135
136
Electrical
Output
(Gross)
MW
620
640
690
760
760
1! of
Maximum
Load

71
73
79
87
87
Nominal
Fuel Feed
Rate.
kg/hr
254,000
254,000
295,000
318.000
300.000
Steam
Production
Rate, ,
kg/hr x 10°
2.27
2.34
2.38
2.77
2.65
Overall t
Efficiency
X
28
28
30
28
29
Oxygen Concentration
Average Oj
at Scrubber
X
6
6
6
6
6
Average 0?
1n B»g Samples
*
7.5
9.2
8.4
8.7
9.3
Excess A1r Flue Gas
At Fumacet Flow Rate
X dscm/s
v!5 830
v!5 850
v!5 870
vlS 1,000
vIS 970
                          Efficiencies  are based on the gross electrical output and the steam production rates, assuming
                          90* efficiency for steam production.


                          Values are for full load.  For less than full load, slightly higher levels are expected.

-------
                4.762 (nc +  ns  +  .45  nN) +  .9405  nH  -  3.762
        n
         FG
                              1  - 4.762  (02/100)
where:
        nFG  =  gram moles of dry effluent  per gram  of fuel
        n-   =  gram moles of element j  per gram  of  fuel
        02   =  volumetric 02 concentration in percent

Flue gas flow rates are  expressed as dry standard cubic meters  per second;
standard temperature and pressure are defined  as  293 K and  101.3 kPa,
respectively.
     Ultimate analyses of the fuel  feed  are presented in Table  4-2.
Differences among the fuel analyses for  the five  test days,  although  gener-
ally small, may result from  sampling and analysis problems  or may reflect
actual changes in the feed stock during  the test  period.  However, because
of the difficulties associated with sampling large quantities of coal and
the limited number of samples acquired,  the average  coal analysis is
considered to be the best estimate  of the fuel  composition  during the test
period.  Hence, the average  analysis was utilized to compute all emission
factors presented in this report.
     Additional analyses were performed  on  a coal feed sample from test
135 to determine concentrations  of  15 trace elements (As, Be, Cd, Co, Cr,
Cu, Hg, Mn, Ni, Pb, Sb,  Se,  Sr,  V,  and Zn)  and three minor  elements (Al,
Ca, and Fe).  These data are presented in Table 4-3.  The coal  was analyzed
using atomic absorption  spectroscopy (AAS), except for aluminum, which was
analyzed by neutron activation analysis  (NAA).
     Considering the uniformity  of  coal  ultimate  analyses obtained during
the test periods, it appears reasonable  to  assume that tabulated trace and
minor element analyses for test  135 are  typical for  the coal fired during
the five day test period. Although analyses of other coal  samples from the
same source are not available for direct comparison, analyses of most trace
and minor elements presented in  Table 4-3 appear  to  be consistent with
concentration limits typifying Appalachian and Eastern Interior Basin coals.
No coal strontium analyses were  found for comparison.  Calcium, lead, and
                                    28

-------
                                    TABLE 4-2.  SUMMARY OF ULTIMATE FUEL ANALYSIS
ro
(0
Component
Moisture
Carbon
Hydrogen
Nitrogen
Chlorine
Sulfur
Ash
Oxygen
Heating Value (kJ/kg)

132
1.41
58.95
3.93
0.87
0.03
6.29
25.19
3.33
24,579

133
1.39
56.79
3.87
0.93
0.06
5.54
27.06
4.36
23,800

134
1.30
58.13
3.91
1.20
0.04
4.57
26.04
4.81
24,354
Test
135
1.23
57.36
3.79
1.07
0.05
4.91
26.24
5.35
23,986

136
1.36
55.17
3.68
0.98
0.04
5.96
28.25
4.56
23,502

Average
1.34
57.28
3.84
1.01
0.04
5.45
26.56
4.48
24,027

a*
0.07
1.28
0.09
0.12
0.01
0.64
1.03
0.66
384
            a = one standard deviation.


            Oxygen concentration by difference.

-------
 TABLE 4-3.  CONCENTRATION OF MAJOR TRACE  ELEMENTS IN COAL FEEDSTOCK

Element
AT
As
Be
Ca
Cd
Co
Cr
Cu
Fe
Hg
Mn
N1

Pb
Sb
Se
Sr
V
Zn
ppm in
Coal*
2.5**
36
0.1
1.2%
24
11
41
3.3
3.0%
1.6
114
45
**
2,350
6
13
NA
35*
1,550
Typical Range
ppm
0.4-40,700
0.5-93
0.6-4.1
0-1 ,600
0.1-65
0.5-43
4-144
3-61
0.3-40,000
0.07-0.49
6-181
2-80

4-218
0.2-8.9
0.4-74
No Data
2-147
6-5,350
Reference
2,
1,

2,

1,
1.
1,
2,


1,

1,

2,

1. 2,

4
2
1
4
2
2
3
2
4
1
2
2

2
2
3

3
2
   Coal  sample  from  test  135.  Except where noted, analyzed by  atomic
   absorption spectroscopy.

   Typical  ranges for Appalachian and Eastern Interior Basin  coals.

 * Analyzed by  neutron activation (Level 2).
**
   The concentration of lead appears inordinately high.  However,
   repeat analyses were not performed.
                                 30

-------
mercury were  found  to  be  present at higher concentrations  than  are  indicated
to be typical  by  the limited published  data.   Beryllium was  found to  be  at
a somewhat  lower  than  typical  concentration.
FLUE GAS  EMISSIONS
Criteria  Pollutants
     Federal  New  Source Performance Standards  (NSPS)  currently  in effect
define allowable  emission rates  of NOX  (as NOg),  S02  and total  particulates
from fossil fuel  fired utility boilers  having  25  MW or greater  output.   More
stringent limitations  have been  proposed by EPA for NO , S0« and total
particulate emissions. Federal  NSPS currently address neither  CO nor total
hydrocarbon emissions. Existing NSPS and corresponding proposed emission
standards for coal-fired  utility boilers are summarized in Table 4-4.  It
should be noted that this plant  is not  required to meet NSPS; they  are
presented for comparison  only.
     A total  of 5 tests were performed  to determine the emissions from the
coal-fired  boiler.  A  summary of the criteria  pollutant emissions data for
the 5 test  series is presented in Table 4-5.   Criteria pollutant emissions
data for the  individual tests are presented in Table  4-6.   Additionally,
the average scrubber inlet data  are compared with the EPA AP-42 emission
factors  for uncontrolled  sources (5) in Table  4-7. The emissions data are
discussed by  specific  pollutant in the  ensuing subsections.
Nitrogen Oxides—
     NOV emissions from  the coal-fired  boiler  were determined by chemilu-
       X
minescence  analysis of grab bag  samples.  The  measured NO  emission factors
                                                         A
near full load conditions were 715 ng/J prior to scrubbing.  HOX data
generally indicate a  significant reduction of NO  across the scrubber.
                                                A
However, it has been recently established that NO  decay inside these grab
                                                 A
bags is  rapid with respect to time in the presence of air (6).   Due to the
proximity of  the stack sampling location, delays  between bag sample acquisi-
tion and analysis were at least 30% longer for outlet samples than  for inlet
samples.  Hence,  NOV removal by the FGD system at the coal-fired power plant
                   A
was probably  not a real  phenomena but,  rather, the result of NO  degredation
                                                               A
in bag samples.  Additional data from on-line  monitoring would  be needed
                                    31

-------
      TABLE 4-4.  EXISTING AND PROPOSED FEDERAL EMISSION STANDARDS
                  FOR COAL-FIRED UTILITIES
  Pollutant
                            NSPS
     Proposed Standard
NOX (as N02)
SO,
Total
Particulates
                          300 ng/J
                       (0.7 Ib/MM Btu)
                          520 ng/J
                       (1.2 Ib/MM Btu)
                           43 ng/J
                       (0.10 Ib/MM Btu)
 260  ng/J  (0.60  Ib/MM Btu)
 for  bituminous  coal;
 220  ng/J  (0.50  Ib/MM Btu)
 for  sub-bituminous  coal.

.520  ng/J  (1.2 Ib/MM Btu)
 max. with  85% reduction to
 85 ng/J  (0.20 Ib/MM Btu).

 13 ng/J  (0.03 Ib/MM Btu)
 max. with  99% reduction.
       TABLE 4-5.  AVERAGE MEASURED CRITERIA POLLUTANT EMISSIONS
     Pollutant
                                           Emission Factor (ng/J)
                                  Before Scrubber
                                                            After Scrubber
N0¥  (as NO? near
  x   full Toad)
CO*
SO,
   **
              J.4.
Total Organics
Total Particulates'
                                       3380

                                    2.77-4.07**

                                       1090
                                                               >385n
                 740

             1.45-2.60**

                  80

   NOX was determined by chemi luminescent analysis of bag samples (Level 2).
   Tabulated NOX emissions are from tests 135 and 136.  These two tests were
   performed at 87% boiler load.  Due to possible NOX degradation in the
   sampling bags, these values represent lower limit emissions.

   CO was determined by gas chroma to graphic analysis of bag samples (Level 2).

   S0£ was determined by two Level 2 methods: 1) pulsed fluorescence analysis
   of bag samples, and 2) wet chemical analysis of the controlled condensation
   system's impinger catch.
J.J,
   The Ci-C-jg fractions were determined by gas chromatographi c analysis while
   the >Cl6 fraction was determined gravimetrically (Level 1).

** Upper limit values include detection limits of fractions which were not
   detected.

   Total particulates were determined by a modified Method 5 procedure (Level
   2) and from the SASS train parti culate catch (Level 1).
JL- i i
                                    32

-------
                                 TABLE  4-6.   SUMMARY OF  CRITERIA POLLUTANT EMISSIONS
CO
Toct* No
1 Co L I1U •


132 Inlet
132 Outlet
133 Inlet
133 Outlet
134 Inlet
134 Outlet
135 Inlet
135 Outlet
136 Inlet
136 Outlet
Average Inlet
Average Outlet
Emission Factor (ng/J)
MA
X
(as N02)
460
300
250
190
480
380
700
370
730
400
520
330
+
CO

S500
1500
1500
1500
*500
1500
*550
1550
1550
1550
1520
1520
4.
SO/
2
3210
640
3440
820
2970**
240
3650
ND*
2560
770
3380tf
740
r -f
Ll L6
Organics
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
1-2.3
0.85-2.0
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
1-2.3
0.85-2.0
r* r
7 1 6
Organlcs
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
0.45
0.12
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
0.45
0.12
>r
>U16
Organlcs
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
1.32
0.48
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
1.32
0.48

Total
Organics
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
2.77-4.07
1.45-2.60
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
2.77-4.07
1,45-2.60

Total
Particulates
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
1280
ND*
900
80
ND*
ND*
1090
80
        CO emission factor was based on  the detection  limit of 1000 ppm.
        S02 emissions were determined from grab  bag  sampling for test Nos. 132-134, and from the Implnger
        solution of the controlled condensation  system for test Nos. 135 and 136.

        ND - data not available.

        Determination of SOg emissions at  the  scrubber outlet for test No. 134 appears to be in error.  This
        data point was Judged to  be an outlier at  90%  probability level by the method of Dixon, and discarded
        in the computation of average SOg  emissions.

      ^Additional data were used to calculate this  average; see Table  4-9.
**

-------
         TABLE 4-7.  COMPARISON OF CRITERIA POLLUTANT EMISSIONS
                     WITH EPA AP-42 EMISSION FACTORS FOR
                     COAL-FIRED UTILITY BOILERS (CYCLONE)

                                  	Emission Factor (ng/J)
    Pollutant                        Test Data                  AP-42
                                  Before Scrubber          Emission Factor
NOV (as N02 near
x full load)
CO*
so2
Total Organ ics
Total Parti culates
>715

<520
3380
2.8-4.1
1090
1020

18.5
4440
5.5
980

 *
  No effort was made to accurately determine CO emissions.
to confirm any NO  reduction across the scrubber.  Although inlet NOV
                 A                                                  X
samples may also be subject to degradation, concentrations determined from
these samples may be utilized as lower limit values.
     The measured NOX emissions at both the scrubber inlet and the scrubber
outlet exceed the NSPS limit of 300 ng/J for coal-fired utility boilers.
The relatively high NOX emissions are attributed to:  (1) higher thermal
NOX generation in cyclone furnaces because of extremely high heat release
rates and the resulting high furnace gas temperatures, and (2) high fuel
nitrogen content in the coal.
     The Environmental Protection Agency is currently developing a low-NO
                                                                         A
coal burner for utility boilers.  This burner relies on a distributed fuel/
air mixing concept in which fuel and primary air are injected with a moderate
axial component.  A surrounding secondary air stream is injected with a swirl
component for stabilization.  Tertiary air for burnout is added axially
around the burner periphery.  Pilot tests conducted have shown that the EPA
burner is capable of reducing NO  emissions to less than 86 ng/J (7).
                                A
However, these burners are designed for pulverized coal firing and are not
applicable to cyclone furnaces.
                                    34

-------
Carbon Monoxide-
     No effort was made for accurate determination of CO from the  coal-fired
boiler.  The reported CO emission factor of less  than 520 ng/J  for the  coal-
fired boiler was based on detection limit of the  instrumentation.   However,
CO emissions should be comparable in magnitude to the AP-42 tabulations.
Sulfur Dioxide—
     S02 emissions were determined by two methods during the test  period.
Bag samples of flue gas from the inlet manifold and stack were  analyzed for
S02 by pulsed fluorescence during tests 132 through 134.  The controlled
condensation system (CCS) was utilized for S02 determination during tests
135 and 136.
     Average S02 emissions were 3380 ng/J prior to scrubbing.  These un-
controlled emission factors are lower than the AP-42 value of 4440 ng/J for
coal firing.  Average S02 emission rates from the coal-fired boiler were
740 ng/J after scrubbing.  This represents a mean scrubber efficiency of
78% for S02 removal.  For comparison, the NSPS units for S02 emissions  after
scrubbing are 520 ng/J for coal-fired utility boilers.
     The AP-42 value for uncontrolled coal firing is based on approximately
95% of the fuel sulfur being converted to S02, whereas the present study
found only 75% of the fuel sulfur as S02, using the gas bag and the con-
trolled condensation system (CCS) impingers as sampling devices.  The
remaining sulfur was not accounted for by S03 or particulate sulfate and
was not detected in other effluent streams.  Tests performed recently under
the EPA sponsored project "Environmental Assessment of Conventional
Combustion Sources" at three lignite-fired utility boilers using the gas
bag sampling technique have demonstrated problems with this technique.
S02 apparently degraded in the gas bag to such an extent that expected  S02
concentrations of 390, 230 and 670 ng/J were reduced to 96, <1  and <1 ng/J,
respectively.  These data indicate that the gas bag sampling method is
probably not adequate for accurate S02 determinations.  However, results
from bag samples correspond well with S02 data from the CCS.  This correla-
tion appears to mutually validate these analytical techniques and associated
02 measurements despite the fact that incomplete sulfur recovery was
obtained.

                                    35

-------
Total Organics—
     In the determination of organic emissions, gas chromatographic analyses
were performed on grab bag samples of flue gas and catches from the Level 1
sampling (SASS train).  Additionally, gravimetric analyses were performed
on Level 1 samples to quantify high molecular weight organics.  Each bag
sample was collected over an interval of 30 to 45 minutes, with a single
sample being collected per test.  These samples were utilized to measure
C^ to Cg hydrocarbons.  The SASS train collects approximately 30 m3
of flue gas which are drawn isokinetically during the test.  Samples from
the SASS train were analyzed to determine organics higher than Cg.  The Cj
to C,g fraction was determined by gas chromatograph while organics higher
than C.jg were determined gravimetrically.
     Average organic emissions were 2.8-4.1 ng/J for coal firing prior to
scrubbing.  The higher organic value includes the detection limit concen-
trations for fractions which were not detected and, as such, represents an
upper limit.  The measured organic emission corresponds well with the AP-42
value of 5.5 ng/J for coal-fired utility boilers.
     Emissions of organics after scrubbing were 0.85-2.0 ng/J for the C,-Cg
fraction, 0.12 ng/J for the Cy'C-ig fraction, and 0.48 ng/J for the high
molecular weight fraction.  The data indicate scrubber removal efficiencies
of 14% for the C-j-Cg fraction, 72% for the Cy-C-jg fraction, and 63% for
higher molecular weight fractions.
Total Particulates--
     Average emissions of total particulates were 900 ng/J for coal  firing
prior to scrubbing.  The particulate emission factor for the coal-fired
boiler tested is in excellent agreement with the AP-42 value of 980 ng/J
for coal-fired cyclone boilers.  Total  particulate emissions after scrubbing
were 80 ng/J.  This corresponds to 91% particulate removal efficiency for
the scrubber.  The NSPS limit for utility boilers is 43 ng/J.
Particulate Size Distribution
     Size distributions of particulates at the scrubber inlet and outlet
were determined by two methods.  Due to the high particulate loading at the
scrubber inlet, polarized light microscopic analyses (PLM) were utilized
to obtain a size distribution in terms of optical diameter and number of

                                   36

-------
particles per size range.  All  other participate size distribution deter-
minations involved streams with substantially lower solids  loadings and,
therefore, a Meteorology Research Institute (MRI) cascade impactor was  used.
The cascade impactor data differs from PLM analyses in that size  distribu-
tions are determined in terms of aerodynamic diameter and weight  percent in
each size range.  Thus, data from the two methods cannot be directly
compared.  For this reason, the PLM data have been converted to the same
basis as the impactor data by assuming that particulate density is inde-
pendent of particle diameter.  This is generally a reasonable assumption
because the major components of the particulates generated  from coal com-
bustion, the aluminosilicates and iron oxides, are known to partition
equally among small and large particulates.* With the constant density
assumption, the weight distribution in each size range would be proportional
to the product of the number distribution and the particulate volume
representing the size range.  The particulate volume was calculated based
on the geometric mean diameter for the size range.
     Particulate size distribution data from tests 135 (inlet) and 136
(outlet)* are summarized in Table 4-8.  These data show a significant
change in particulate size distribution before and after scrubbing.  The
increase in the fraction of finer particulates across the scrubber indicates
that coarse particulates were removed more efficiently than fine  particu-
lates.  Particulates larger than 3 ym were removed with efficiencies of
greater than 99% while particulates smaller than 3 ym actually showed a net
increase in emission rates across the scrubber.  This net increase raises
the possibility that fine particulates may be generated within the scrubber,
or that the particulate size distribution may be modified during  the high
energy scrubbing process.  It is more probable that the high particulate
loading at the inlet caused agglomeration of the fine particulates on the
test train filter.  PLM analysis of the  resulting sample may not  be able to
 Although data presented subsequently indicate that partitioning of Al may
 occur, this simplifying assumption was required in order to present all size
 distribution data in terms of a common basis.  The error associated with
 this assumption is unknown.  Raw data from PLM analyses are presented in
 Appendix C.
 The reason for this choice of runs is discussed in Appendix C.
                                    37

-------
                 TABLE 4-8.  SCRUBBER INLET AND OUTLET PARTICULATE SIZE  DISTRIBUTION*
CO
00

Aerodynamic
D1 ameter
Size Range,
Microns
< 1
1 - 3
3-10
> 10
Total
Weight %f
Scrubber
Inlet
<0.01
<0.3
13
87
100
Scrubber
Outlet
82
11
1
6
100
Emission Factor (ng/J)
Scrubber
Inlet
<0.1
<3
117
783
900
Scrubber
Outlet
65.6
8.8
0.8
4.8
80
Removal
Efficiency,
<0
<0
99.3
99.4
91.1

        *
         Determined by Level  2 methods.
        '''Size distribution data from test 135 were used for the scrubber Inlet while  data  from test 136
         were used for the scrubber outlet.   Total particulate loadings  from test 135 were used to  compute
         emission factors.  The reason for this  choice of runs is discussed in Appendix  C.

-------
distinguish the agglomerated fine participates from the larger participates,
and the distribution is probably weighted towards  the larger particulates.
Since there was no similar problem with the outlet size distribution,
removal efficiencies calculated from these data could be less than zero.
     In a recent draft document issued by the Health Effects Research
Laboratory (HERL) of EPA (8), it is stated that larger particulates (from
3 to 15 ym) deposited in the upper respiratory system (in the nasopharynx
and conducting airways) can also be associated with health problems.   This
is in contrast to the past belief that particulates of health consequence
were those less than 3 ym size and deep-lung penetrable.  The area of
concern now is particulates which are 15 ym and less, which have been
designated as "inhalable particulates" (IP).  Emissions of inhalable  parti-
culates after scrubbing were approximately 75 ng/J.
Sulfur Compounds:  SOp, S03, and SO^"
     Sulfur species were determined using several  methods.  Bag samples of
flue gas from the inlet manifold and stack were analyzed for S02 using the
pulsed fluorescent analyzer during tests 132-134.   The CCS was used at the
same sampling points during tests 135 and'136 to collect S02, SOg, and SO^"".
Additional testing was performed at the inlet and outlet of one of the eight
scrubbers  (module "H") using the CCS.  These tests are designated I through
V  (inlet)  and 0  (outlet).  The above data are listed in Table 4-9.  An
average of 98.4% of the output sulfur is emitted as S02 during uncontrolled
coal firing while approximately 1.1% and 0.4% are emitted as S03 and parti-
culate sulfate,  respectively.  Average removal efficiencies were computed
by comparing the average inlet and outlet values for each species.  The SOg
and S04~ values  from test 0 were discarded because of probable entrainment
of particulate.su!fate at the scrubber outlet sampling point.  The outlet
S09 value  for  test 134 was also discarded.  This low value is thought to be
  ^                                     *
due to sample  degradation in the gas bag .  The removal efficiency for S02
by the scrubber system averaged 78%, which compares with 76% design removal
efficiency (9).  About 80% of the S03 was also removed by the scrubber.
 Degradation of SO? in gas bags  has  been suspected in other  cases as well,
 as discussed previously.
                                    39

-------
          TABLE 4-9.    SOg,  S03,  AND SO^ EMISSIONS*

Sul fur
Compound
SO,
z










so.
•)







so4-









Test No.

132
133
134
135
136
I
II
HI
IV
V
0
Average
135
136
I
II
III
IV
V
0
Average
135
136
I
II
III
IV
V
0
Average

Sampling Sampling
Points Method
Plenum/Stack Gas bag
»
•
Plenum C S
H
Nodule H
H
H
H
H
H

Plenum/Stack CCS
n
Nodule H






Plenum/Stack CCS
•
Module H






Coal Mr
Inlet
ng/J
3210
3440
2970
3650
2560
3260
3450
3980
3640
3610

3380
99.4
53.7
49.3
39.3
23.6
35.3
38.6

48.5
15.5
18.2
41.2
22.2
24.2
18.6
15.3

22.2
ng
Outl et
ng/J
643
824
238t
NO
NO





766
744
17.2
1.87





18.8*
9.54
5.09
2.39





15.9*
3.74

Mole i of Total Removal
Sulfur Species Efficiency,
In Flue Gas <
._
—
--
97.6
97.8
98.0
98.7
99.1
98.9
98.8

98.4 78.1
2.13
1.64
1.18
0.899
0.470
0.767
0.846

1.13 80.3
0.276
0.464
0.826
0.423
0.402
0.337
0.277

0.429 83.1
Level 2 procedures were utilized.

This value was not used 1n computing averages, as sample degradation In the sample bag was
suspected.

These values were not used 1n computing averages, as the sampling point was close enough to
the scrubber that entralnment of participate  sulfate was probable.

-------
This figure appears to be high as S03 is usually associated with  water
present as fine aerosols in the flue gas stream, which are less efficiently
scrubbed.  The removal efficiency for S04= averaged 83%, which is lower than
the total particulate removal efficiency.  This indicates that the SO^" may
be associated with the fine particulates in the flue gas stream,  which  are
less efficiently scrubbed.
     Sulfate emissions broken down into water- and acid-soluble fractions
are presented in Table 4-10.  This distribution was changed somewhat by
scrubbing, as 97% of the inlet sulfates and 99% of the outlet sulfates  were
water-soluble.
Inorganics
     Trace elements present in the flue gas were determined using atomic
absorption spectroscopy (AAS).  Concentrations of 18 major trace  elements
present in the flue gas are presented in Table 4-11.  To assess  the hazard
potential of these emissions, the emission concentrations are compared  with
the Discharge Multimedia Environmental Goal (DMEG) values. The DMEG values  are
emission level goals developed under direction of EPA, and can be considered
as concentrations of pollutants in undiluted emission streams that will
not adversely affect those persons or ecological systems exposed  for short
periods of time (10).  The DMEG values tabulated represent air concentra-
tions which were derived from human health considerations based on the
most hazardous compound formed by the element in question.  Analysis of the
flue gas indicates that 16 elements exceeded their respective DMEG values
at the scrubber inlet and 7 exceeded their DMEG values at the scrubber  out-
let.  These seven elements which are of potential concern are arsenic,
cadmium, chromium, nickel, lead, iron, and zinc.  The DMEG value  for arsenic
is low because it is a cumulative poison producing chronic effects in humans.
Considerations for the potential carcinogenic, oncogenic, and teratogenic
effects of cadmium upon humans have led to a low DMEG value for this element.
Chromium and nickel have low  DMEG values due to considerations of potential
human carcinogenicity.  Lead is a cumulative poison which results in lesions
in human organs.
     Emission factors for the 18 trace elements analyzed are presented  in
Table 4-12, as are scrubber removal efficiencies for each element.  An
overall removal efficiency of 94% was obtained for these trace elements.

                                    41

-------
                                                 TABLE 4-10.   SUMMARY OF  SULFATE EMISSIONS^
ro
Test No.
135
136
I
II
III
IV
V
0
Average
Sampling
Point
Plenum/Stack
H
Module H
•
H
II
H
N

Scrubber Inlet
Water Soluble Sul fates
ng/J I of Total
>15.5
16.7
>41.2
>22.2
23.0
17.1
>15.3

>21.6
>99.5
91.4
>99.6
>99.5
94.9
92.2
>99.5

96.7
Acid Soluble Sul fates
ng/I i of Total
<0.07
1.6
<0.1
<0.1
1.2
1.4
<0.08

.6
<0.5
8.6
<0,4
98,6
52.9





>99,5
>99.3
Acid Soluble Sulfates
ng/J S^oT Total
«0.07 <1.4
1.1 47.1





<0.07 
-------
   TABLE  4-11.   EMISSION CONCENTRATIONS  OF TRACE  ELEMENTS - TEST 135
3
Concentration, mg/m
El etnent
Al
As
Be
Ca
Cd
Co
Cr
Cu
Fe
Hg
Mn
Ni
Pb
Sb
Se
Sr
V
Zn
Scrubber
Inlet
130
0.98
0.021
49
5.1
0.19
1.3
1.2
400
0.095
0.70
2.0
11
0.78
0.37
0.46
0.78
100
Scrubber
Outlet
3.0
0.94
0.0018
2.0
0.58
0.013
0.12
0.19
13
0.0057
0.15
0.054
2.9
0.27
0.088
0.038
0.083
21
DMEG For Air
(Health Basis),
mg/m3
5.2
0.002
0.002
16
0.010
0.050
0.001
0.20
1.0
0.050
5.0
0.015
0.15
0.50
0.20
3.0
0.50
4.0
Discharge
Scrubber
Inlet
25
500
10
3.1
520
3.7
1000
6.0
400
1.9
0.14
130
73
1.6
1.8
0.15
1.6
26
Severity
Scrubber
Outlet
0.58
500
0.9
0.13
58
0.26
100
0.95
13
0.11
0.03
3.6
19
0.54
0.44
0.013
0.17
5.2
  Level 2 procedures were utilized.

* Discharge severity is defined as the ratio of the discharge
  concentration to the DMEG value.
                                    43

-------
TABLE 4-12.  EMISSION FACTORS FOR TRACE ELEMENTS - TEST 135
Emission Factor, nq/J
Element
Al
As
Be
Ca
Cd
Co
Cr
Cu
Fe
Hg
Mn
N1
Pb
Sb
Se
Sr
V
Zn
Total
Scrubber
Inlet
49
0.37
0.0079
18
1.9
0.069
0.48
0.45
150
0.035
0.26
0.73
4.1
0.28
0.14
0.17
0.29
39
265
Scrubber
Outlet
1.1
0.35
0.00067
0.73
0.21
0.0047
0.046
0.072
4.9
0.0021
0.054
0.020
1.1
0.099
0.033
0.014
0.030
7.7
17
Removal
Efficiency,
%
98
4
91
96
89
93
90
84
97
94
79
97
74
66
76
92
89
80
94
     Level  2 procedures were  utilized.
                              44

-------
     Because removal efficiencies for Al, Ca, Fe, and Ni are higher than
the average trace element removal efficiency of 94%, concentrations of these
elements in the particulate appear to be lower at the scrubber outlet than
at the scrubber inlet.  Similarly, concentrations of non-volatile elements
removed with less than average efficiency must be higher in the scrubber
outlet particulate than in the scrubber inlet particulate.  Highly volatile
trace elements such as Hg and Se may not be associated with particulates but
may, at least in part, be present as elemental vapors.  As such, no conclu-
sion may be drawn regarding particulate concentrations of these elements.
     Spark source mass spectrometry (SSMS) analysis results are presented
in Table 4-13 for the 17 elements which were also analyzed by AAS (mercury
was not analyzed by SSMS).  Also presented are ratios of SSMS analyses to
AAS analyses.  Analysis by SSMS is generally used as a screening tool, and
is considered to be less accurate than AAS.  Comparison of the 17 elements
analyzed by both methods shows good agreement (values within a factor of
two) for inlet and outlet concentrations of Co, Ni, Sb, Se, and V.  Order
of magnitude agreement was obtained for Ca, Cd, Be, Fe, Mn, Pb, Sr, and Zn.
SSMS analysis of other elements, such as Al, As, Cu, and Cr, correspond to
the AAS values only to within approximately two orders of magnitude.
     To characterize the distribution of the major elements present in the
flue gas particulates and to look at the depth profile of these elements in
the particulates, Electron Spectroscopy for Chemical Analysis (ESCA) and
x-ray diffraction (XRD) were performed on particulate samples.  ESCA depth
profile data are presented in Table 4-14 for selected Method 5 train particu-
late catches (test 135 inlet and outlet).  The data are presented as atom
percentages, normalized to 100%, of iron, oxygen, calcium, carbon, silicon,
and aluminum.  These are relative values, not absolute concentrations, since
not all elements present in the particulate are included.  However, tentative
conclusions may be drawn under the assumption that the elements analyzed con-
stitute the major surface components.  The Method 5 filter catches were
analyzed on the silicon-containing filter which may have caused some inter-
ference.
     Data presented in Table 4-14 indicate that the concentration of sulfur
in both the scrubber inlet and outlet particulate is enriched at the surface
and decreases with increasing depth. A possible mechanism which is consistent

                                    45

-------
       TABLE 4-13.  SPARK SOURCE MASS SPECTROMETER ANALYSES
                    OF TRACE ELEMENT EMISSIONS -  TEST 135

Element
Al
As
Be
Ca
Cd
Co
Cr
Cu
Fe
Mn
N1
Pb
Sb
Se
Sr
V
Zn
Concentration
Scrubber
Inlet
1.9
> 95
0.0034
180
0.86
0.088
> 0.97
> 2.0
>130
> 1.6
> 1.0
>100
0.89
0.38
> 1.7
1.0
>130
, mg/m
Scrubber
Outlet
> 0.14
> 9.0
0.001
>44
0.32
0.007
>26
>26
>63
0.02
0.036
>90
0.12
0.13
0.047
0.13
>76
SSMS
Scrubber
Inlet
0.015
>97
0.16
3.7
0.17
0.46
> 0.75
> 1.6
> 0.34
> 2.3
> 0.52
> 9.1
1.1
1.0
> 3.6
1.3
> 1.3
* +
/AASf
Scrubber
Outlet
> 0.05
> 9.6
0.6
22
0.54
0.54
>220
>140
> 4.8
0.1
0.67
> 31
0.43
1.5
1.2
1.5
> 3.6

SSMS Is a Level 1 analysis.

AAS is a Level 2 analysis for cations.
                                 46

-------
                     TABLE 4-14.   ESCA DEPTH  PROFILE DATA FOR  SELECTED SAMPLES
                                   FROM THE METHOD 5 SAMPLING TRAIN - TEST 135*
Scrubber Inlet (Atom Percent)
Sample
135-IN-CYC
135-IN-CYC
135-IN-CYC
135-IN-CYC
135-IN-CYC
135-IN-CYC
135-IN-CYC

135-IN-PFb
135-IN-PFb
135-IN-PFb
135-IN-PFb
135-IN-PFb
135-IN-PFb
135-IN-PFb
135-IN-PFb
Depth
0
100 A
150 A
200 A
300 A
400 A
500 A

0
50 A
100 A
150 A
200 A
300 A
400 A
500 A
Fe
2,5
4.1
4.3
4.4
5.6
4.8
4.1

1.3
4.4
4.6
5.0
5.1
5.6
5.1
4.0
0
47.4
38.0
35.0
35.3
34.9
34.9
35.6

51.7
60.9
60.5
60.9
60.7
58.2
60.4
62.0
Ca
1.3
1.7
1.7
1.6
2.3
2.3
2.5

0.7
2.4
2.7
2.4
3.0
3.2
4.1
3.8
C
28.0
36.0
38.1
38.3
40.7
41.2
38.1

20.6
8.3
5.5
4.1
4.0
3.4
<1

-------
with this observation involves adsorption or deposition of sulfur-containing
compounds on the surface of parti culates.  Scrubber inlet particulates were
found to contain CaS04 by XRD analysis.  Formation is probably by H2S04
adsorbing on and reacting with calcium compounds after combustion, which
would result in surface enrichment of sulfur relative to bulk parti cul ate
concentrations.  The presence of carbon in the bulk of the inlet and outlet
cyclone parti cul ate catches indicates unburned coal particles.  Bulk con-
centrations of carbon in the inlet and outlet filter catches appear to be
at least an order of magnitude lower than those in the cyclone catches based
on data at depths of 200 A to 1000 A.  This may indicate that unburned coal
particulates are mostly found in the larger size fractions.  Surface enrich-
ment of carbon relative to bulk concentrations in the filter catches may
result from adsorption of organics or, in the case of scrubber outlet
particulates, deposition of
Chloride and Fluoride Emissions
     Specific am* on analysis was performed on extracts from parti cul ate
catches and impinger solutions from the Goksoyr-Ross sampling train.
Emissions data for chloride and fluoride are presented in Table 4-15.  HC1
and HF concentrations are measured from the impingers and incorporated in
the chloride and fluoride emission factors reported in Table 4-15.  Fluo-
rides are removed at greater than 62-84% efficiencies by the scrubber.
Computation of chloride removal efficiency is not possible because the
chloride concentrations were below the detection limit.  Assuming that the
chloride level is just below the detection limit, 8% of the fuel chlorine
was analyzed in the parti cul ate extract, and the remainder was found in the
impinger solution as HC1 .
Specific Organic Compounds
     Selected samples were analyzed by combined gas chromatography/mass
spectrometry (GC/MS) for the identification of organic compounds present.
The organic compounds identified include aliphatic hydrocarbons, substituted
benzenes, ethyl benzaldehyde, dime thy Ibenzaldehyde, 2,6-pereriden-dione-4,
and 2,6-dimethyl-2,5-heptadion-4-one, and the methyl ester of long chain
acid, at concentration levels ranging from 0.2 to 20 yg/m  in the flue gas
                                    48

-------
              TABLE 4-15.  CHLORIDE AND FLUORIDE EMISSIONS*
                       CT
    Test     InletOutletRemoval      InletOutlet    Removal
                             Efficiency                     Efficiency
             ng/J     ng/J        %         ng/J     ng/J        %
135 <0.1
136 <0.1
<0.1 ~ 0.37 <.l
<0.1 ~ 0.9 <.l
4 >62
4 >84

       Level  2  procedures were  utilized.
prior to scrubbing.   With  the  exception  of ethylbenzaldehyde, substituted
benzenes, and aliphatic hydrocarbons,  none of the  other organic compounds
were identified at the scrubber outlet.
     Emissions of polycyclic organic matter (POM)  determined by GC/MS are
summarized in Table 4-16.   Most of the POM compounds  identified are
naphthalene, substituted naphthalenes, biphenyl,  and  substituted  biphenyls.
No POM compounds were identified at the scrubber  outlet.  POM  compounds
found at the scrubber inlet are at levels several  orders of magnitude below
their respective DMEG values.
LIQUID WASTE
     The two major wastewater streams  are wastewater discharge from  the
slag tank to the ash pond and overflow from the settling pond  for spent
scrubber slurry.  The flow rates for these two wastewater streams are
approximately 2.89 Gg/hr and 0.77 Gg/hr, respectively.  Two additional
streams were sampled, although these streams are not actually  wastewater
streams because they are not discharged  from the site.  These  streams  are
the scrubber make-up water and the scrubber discharge liquid.   The scrubber
make-up water stream is taken from the settling pond and its analysis
should be similar to the settling pond overflow.  The scrubber discharge
stream is the scrubber slurry  liquid  and discharges to  the1settling pond.
                                    49

-------
               TABLE 4-16.   POM EMISSIONS FROM COAL FIRING
                            PRIOR TO SCRUBBING -  TEST 134*
Emission
Compound Concentration
yg/m3
Decahydronaphthalene
Dltert-butyl naphthalene
Dimethyl Isopropyl naphthalene
Hexamethyl blphenyl
Hexamethyl, hexahydro Indacene
Dlhydronaphthalene
CIO substituted naphthalene
CIO substituted decahydro-
naphtha1enet
Methyl naphthalene
Anthracene/phenanathrene
1-1 ' blphenyl
9,10-dlhydronaphthalene /
1-T dlphenylethene
I,l-b1s(p-ethyl phenyl)-ethane/
tetramethyl blphenyl *
j, j,
5-methyl -benz-c-acr1d1 ne
2,3 dimethyl decahydro-
naphthalenet
0.1
0.3
0.3
0.6
1.0
0.03
0.06
1.0
1.6
0.3
4.0
0.2
9.0
0.2
<0.03
DMEG
Value
yg/m3
130,000
230,000
230,000
1,000
No data
130,000
230,000
130,000
130,000
1,590
1,000
130,000
1,000
11,000
130,000
Discharge
Severity
<0.0001
<0.0001
<0.0001
0.0006
<0.0001
<0.0001
<0.0001
<0.0001
0.0002
0.004
<0.0001
0.009
<0.0001
< 0.0001
Total                                  18.7
  Level  2 procedures were utilized.

  The DMEG values for decahydronaphthalene, dlhydronaphthalene and any
  substituted decahydronaphthalene are assumed to be the same as  that for
  tetrahydronaphthalene.

  The DMEG values for alkyl  naphthalenes are assumed to be the same as
  that for methyl naphthalene.
**
  The DMEG value for hexamethyl  blphenyl 1s assumed to be the same as
  that for blphenyl.

  The DMEG value for 5-methyl-benz-c-acr1d1ne-1s  assumed to be the same
  as that for benz(c)acn'd1ne.
                                    50

-------
Water Quality Parameters
     Table 4-17 summarizes the waste water parameters for the sampled
streams.
Inorganics - Wastewater
     Analysis results of major inorganic cations in the wastewater stream
from the slag tank to the ash pond and the scrubber slurry settling pond
overflow are presented in Table 4-18.  Also presented are the analysis
results for the scrubber make-up water obtained from the settling pond, and
for the scrubber discharge liquid (filtrate from the spent slurry).  Of the
18 elements analyzed, iron exceeds its health DMEG value and iron, calcium,
aluminum, cadmium, vanadium and zinc exceed their respective ecological
DMEG values for the wastewater stream to the ash pond.  For the scrubber
slurry settling pond overflow, calcium, cadmium, manganese, nickel, and
lead exceed both their health and ecological DMEG values, and additionally
aluminum, iron, and zinc exceed their respective ecological DMEG values.
Comparison of the inorganic data for the scrubber slurry pond overflow and
the scrubber make-up water (from the settling pond) indicates that the
trace element concentrations for these two streams are almost identical.
This agreement supports the reliability and accuracy of sampling and
analysis of trace elements for the wastewater streams.
Organics - Wastewater
     Concentrations of C, to C,g organics and high molecular weight  (>C-j6)
organics measured in the wastewater streams are summarized in Table 4-19.
The total organics detected are low, ranging from 0.06 mg for the
wastewater to the ash pond to 0.6 mg for the scrubber  slurry settling
pond overflow.
     GC/MS analyses were  performed to  identify  the organic compounds present
in the wastewater streams.   In the extraction of the aqueous samples,  the
samples were first acidified to pH 2 and extracted with methylene chloride.
The samples were  then adjusted to pH 7 and  reextracted with methylene
chloride.  A final extraction was made at pH 11.
     The  results  of  the  GC/MS analyses are  presented in Table 4-20.  In
general,  the detected compounds consist of  oxygenates  such as ketones,
                                    51

-------
                                             TABLE  4-17.   WATER QUALITY PARAMETERS
Oi
IVi
Test
No.
pH
Conductivity TSS
umhos/cm wg/1
Hardness
(as CaC03)
Alkalinity Acidity Acidity
(as CaCO-j) (methyl orange (phenol phtaleln
as CaCO-)) as CaCOa)
mg/1 mg/1 mg/1
Ammonia
Nitrogen
mg/1
Cyanide Nitrate
mg/1 mg/1
Phosphate
mg/1
so3-
mg/1
pg/i

132
133
135
136

132
133
135
136
6.5
6.5
7.4
6

7.0
6.5
7.8
6.5
3500
3600
4000
4000

850
870
800
820
150
82
15
0

0
5
15
5
2750
2350
2800
2800

400
400
315
410
0 33 1.85
0 R5
74 Q
65 0

-00
— 0
112 0
105 0
2.5
»
1.1

0.59
0.45
0.32
0.68
0 0
0 1
1
0 1

0 0
0 0
0
0 0
.9
.3
.7
.4

.5
.2
.7
.7
0.30
0.45
4.2
0.3

0.22
0.25
4.3
0.31
1750
0
0
150

0
1.0
0
5
6000
35
2250
2050

150
4.0
200
290
            Level 1 procedures were utilized.

-------
                            TABLE 4-18.
TRACE  ELEMENT  CONCENTRATIONS IN  WASTEWATER DISCHARGES
FROM COAL FIRING - TEST 135*
en
DMEG Value, ma/1
Element
Al
As
Be
Ca
Cd
Co
Cr
Cu
Fe
Hg
Mg
Mn
N1
Pb
Sb
Sr
V
Zn
Health
80
0.250
0.030
240
0.050
0.75
0.25
5.0
1.5
0.010
90
0.2S
0.23
0.25
7.5
46
2.5
25
Ecology
1.0
0.050
0.055
16
0.001
0.25
0.25
0.050
0.25
0.250
86
0.10
0.010
0.05
0.20
No HATE
0.15
0.10
Hater to Ash Pond
mg/1
3.5
0.012
0.0003
150
0.020
0.002
0.012
0.008
3.0
< 0.0002
13.8
<0.38
0.01
0.030
0.002
0.84
0.25
0.13
Discharge
Health
0.044
0.048
0.010
0.61
0.40
0.003
0.048
0.002
2.0
<0.02
0.15
<1.5
0.04
0.12
0.0003
0.018
0.10
0.0052
Severi ty
Ecology
3.5
0.24
0.005
9.1
20
0.008
0.048
0.2
12
<0.0008
0.16
<3.8
1
0.6
0.01
_.
1.7
1.3
Settling Pond Overflow
mg/1
1.5
0.021
<0.0008
930
0.059
0.043
<0.002
0.004
1.1
<0. 00008
N/A
1.9
0.70
0.60
0.044
6.4
0.064
2.2
Discharge
Health
0.019
0.084
<0.03
3.9
1.2
0.057
<0.008
0.0008
0.73
<0.008
—
r.e
3.0
2.4
0.0059
0.14
0.026
0.088
Severity
Ecology
1.5
0.42
<0.01
58
60
0.17
<0.008
0.08
4.4
<0.0003
—
19
70
10
0.22
--
0.43
22
Scrubber Make-up
mg/1
1.2
0.017
0.0001
910
0.052
0.047
0.001
0.003
0.63
<0. 00008
11
1.7
0.86
0.024
0.041
5.9
0.080
1.7
Discharge
Health
0.015
0.068
0.003
3.8
1.0
0.063
0.004
0.0006
0.42
<0.008
1.2
6.8
3.7
0.096
0.0055
0.13
0.032
0.068
Water
Severi ty
Ecology
1.2
0.34
0.002
57
50
0.19
0.004
0.06
2.5
<0.0003
1.2
17
86
0.5
0.21
—
0.53
17
Scrubber Discharge
mg/1
0.083
0.06
0.0011
380
0.0005
0.005
0.004
0.004
0.014
<0. 00008
270
<0.38
0.20
. 0.03
0.063
3.4
0.095
0.005
Discharge
Health
0.0010
0.24
0.037
1.6
0.01
0.007
0.02
0.0008
0.0097
<0.008
3.0
1.5
0.87
0.1
0.0084
0.074
0.038
0.0002
Liquid
Severity
Ecology
0.083
1.2
0.020
24
0.5
0.02
0.02
0.08
0.058
<0.0003
3.1
3.8
20
0.6
0.31
--
0.63
0.05
          * Determined by Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy (Level 2).

-------
         TABLE 4-19.  ORGANICS IN WASTEWATER DISCHARGES
Concentration, mg/1

C7
C8
C9
C1n
10
cn
11
C12
C13
C1A
14
C15
C16
>C16
Total
Water to
Ash Pond
0
0.02
0
0

0.02

0
0
0

<0.01
0.01
0
0.06
Settling
Pond
Overflow
0
0
0
0

0.04

0.01
0
0

<0.01
0.01
0.5
0.6
Scrubber
Make-up
Water
0
0
0
0

0.04

0
0
0

<0.01
0.01
0.3
0.4
Scrubber
Discharge
Liquid
0
0
0
0

0

0
0
0

0
0
0.1
0.1
Level 1 procedures were utilized.
                                54

-------
                                        TABLE  4-20.    GC/MS  ANALYSES  OF  ORGANICS  IN  WASTEWATER  STREAMS*
en
en
                                          Compound
                                                    Water to Ash Pond          Settling  Pond
                                                 Add .   Neutral    Basic        Overflow
                                               Extract"   Extract   Extract     Acid Extract
               Scrubber Make-up Water
               NeutralBasic
               Extract        Extract
Olefln or ketone; Cg -  C^

Tetrachloropropane (possible)

e-chloro-N-ethyl-N'-O-methyl ethyl)-l,3,5-
  tr1az1ne-2,4-d1am1ne

8-methy1-3a-d1hydronaphthalene-one

3a.7a-d1hydro-5-raethyl-1ndene-l,7(4h)-d1one

Qulnollne

Butyl  naphthalene(4) (plus a possible alkyl
  substituted naphthalene)

l-chloro-2,4-hexad1ene

Cg nltrlle or Cj alcohol

01-2-ethyl-hexyl ester  of nonane dfolc  acid

2,2,5,5-tetramethyl hexane

01phenylheptane  (possible)
  4 vg/1

0.5 wg/1
                                                                                                                         0.3 yg/1
                                                                                                                           2 ug/1
    Scrubber
Discharge Liquid
 Basic  Extract
                            Level  2 procedures were utilized.

                          f Identified  compounds are present In this extract at concentrations below 15 yg/1.

-------
alcohols, ethers, and cyclic ethers.  Some of these are lightly halogenated.
Typical DMEG values for these classes of compounds are greater than  1000
yg.  Thus, the levels of organics present in the wastewater streams
from coal firing do not appear to warrant any environmental  concern.
SOLID WASTE
     The two major solid waste streams generated are bottom slag/fly ash
from the slag tank and scrubber sludge from the FGD operation.  These two
solid wastes are generated at the rates of 0.11 Gg/hr and 0.13 Gg/hr,
respectively, on a dry basis at full load.
Inorganics
     The scrubber sludge is composed predominantly of relatively insoluble
solids:  45-60% limestone, 30-45% CaSO,-l/2 H90, 5-10% fly ash, 5-10%
                                      J      *-            *
magnetite, and <2% partially combusted coal on a dry basis .  Trace  elements
in the fly ash may contribute to the leachate from the scrubber sludge and
are of special concern.  The concentrations of 18 trace and minor elements
in the scrubber discharge solids are presented in Table 4-21.   With  respect
to the human health based DMEG values for solids, 9 elements exceeded their
DMEG values.  Eleven elements exceeded their ecology based DMEG values.
This is the consequence of transforming a high volume, low concentration
pollution stream to a low volume, high concentration stream which can be
more readily contained.  The discharge severity for over half of the trace
elements analyzed is sufficiently high to warrant disposal of these  solid
wastes in a specially designed landfill.
     The concentrations of 18 trace and minor elements present in the bottom
slag/fly ash from coal firing are presented in Table 4-22.  In 8 cases, the
trace element concentration exceeds its human health based DMEG value for
solids, and in 12 cases the ecology based DMEG value is exceeded. Again,
specially designed landfills should be considered for disposal of these
wastes.
*
 From PLM analysis.
                                    56

-------
         TABLE 4-21.
TRACE ELEMENT CONTENT OF SCRUBBER
DISCHARGE SOLIDS - TEST 135*
El ement
AT
As
Be
Ca
Cd
Co
Cr
Cu
Fe
Hg
Mg
Hn
Ni
Pb
Sb
Sr
V
Zn
Concentration
mg/kg
24,000
no
2.5
51 ,000
36
22
52
190
50,000
< 1.0
0.49
560
96
1,100
38
990
190
6,500
DMEG value
Health
16,000
50
6
48,000
10
150
50
1,000
300
2
18,000
50
45
50
1,500
9,200
500
500
, mg/kg
Ecology
200
10
11
3,200
0.2
50
50
10
50
50
17,400
20
2
10
40
NDf
30
20
Discharge
Health
1.5
2.2
0.4
1.1
3.6
0.15
1.0
0.19
170
< 0.5
0.000027
11
2.1
22
0.025
0.11
0.38
13
Severi ty
Ecology
120
11
0.22
16
200
0.44
1.0
19
1,000
< 0.02
0.000028
28
5
no
0.95
6.3
320
Level 2 procedures  were utilized.
ND - data not available.
                                57

-------
TABLE 4-22.  TRACE ELEMENT CONTENT OF BOTTOM AND FLY ASH - TEST 135*
El ement
AT
As
Be
Ca
Cd
Co
Cr
Cu
Fe
Hg
Mg
Mn
Ni
Pb
Sfa
Sr
V
Zn
Concentration
mg/kg
82,000
11
8.2
66,000
1.2
44
210
820
170,000
< 1
ND*
700
330
160
7.0
280
86
1,500
DMEG value
Health
16,000
50
6
48,000
10
150
50
1,000
300
2
18,000
50
45
50
1,500
9,200
500
500
. mq/kq
Ecol ogy
200
10
11
3,200
0.2
50
50
10
50
50
17,400
20
2
10
40
NDf
30
20
Discharge
Health
5.1
0.21
1
1.4
0.12
0.29
4.2
0.82
580
< 0.5
14
7.3
3.2
0.0047
0.03
0.17
3.0
Severity
Ecology
410
1.1
0.75
21
6
0.88
4.2
82
3,500
< 0.02
35
200
16
0.17
2.9
75
  Level 2 procedures were utilized.
* ND - data not available.
                                  58

-------
     An  overall  mass  balance for these trace and minor elements  is  presented
in Table 4-23.   The percent of the trace element in the influent streams
which could  be  located in the effluent streams is taken as a measure  of mass
balance  closure.   Very good mass balance closure was obtained for aluminum,
arsenic, and strontium.   Closures for most other elements were within a fac-
tor of two,  but recoveries for beryllium and copper values were  >700%, and
mercury and  lead values  were low.  Stream flow rates were obtained  from
several  sources and it is possible that uncertainties in several of these
which were obtained from design values, contributed to poor mass balance
closure for some elements.  However, process streams of principal importance
to the trace element  balance are feed coal, bottom ash, and scrubber slurry
solids (inlet and outlet).  The generally acceptable trace element  balances
obtained tend to validate flow rates for these streams.  Hence,  large closure
discrepancies may be  the result of analytical problems.
Organics - Solid Waste
     Concentrations of Cy to C^g organics and high molecular weight
organics measured in the solid wastes are summarized in Table 4-24.  The
total organics amount to 86.2 mg/kg for the combined bottom ash/fly ash
and 6.6 mg/kg for the scrubber discharge solids.  High molecular weight
organics were not detected for either solid waste.
     Organics present in the bottom ash/fly ash are probably the result of
incomplete combustion, or the adsorption of organics by fly ash particulates.
Organics are present in the scrubber discharge solids because of the partial
removal of these compounds from the flue gas stream in the FGD system.  GC/
MS analysis of the scrubber discharge solids did not reveal the presence of
any POM.  Although no other specific organic compound identification in-
formation is available, the high trace element content of these solid wastes
far outweighs the concern for the organic content.  Disposal in specially
designed landfills should be satisfactory to handle the potential degree
of hazard.
BIOLOGICAL TESTING
     Selected process samples including solid, liquid, and slurry samples
were submitted for bioas say testing.  A listing of the samples tested is as
f ol 1 ows :

                                    59

-------
                                 TABLE 4-23.   MASS BALANCE OF  TRACE ELEMENTS  (FULL LOAD)
cn
o
Influent Streams
Element
A1
As
Be
C«
Cd
Co
Cr
Cu
Fe
Hg
Mn
N1
Pb
Sb
Sr
V
Zn
Coal
Feed
kg/hr
11,600
17
0.046
5.566
U.I
5.1
20
1.5
13,921
0.72
53
21
1,091
2.9
20
41
720
Ash
Water
kg/hr
2.1
O.H
0.0013
1,718
0.11
0.085
0.0061
0.015
1.8
2.4x10'4
3.3
0.85
0.072
0.072
13
0.13
3.0
SI urry
Solids
1.000
1.8
0.022
23.772
0.17
0.071
3.5
15
742
0.091
47
2.2
1.8
0.71
135
6.4
2.85
Inlet, kg/hr
Liquids
3.7
7x1 O*4
3x1 O"4
240
0.0015
0.0015
7x1 O'4
0.0011
6x1 0"4
2x1 O"4
0.14
0.022
0.0037
0.0018
3.6
0.0084
0.011
Scrubber
Water.
kg/hr
0.40
0.022
2xlO"4
331
0.023
0.016
0.0012
0.0029
0.35
SxlO'5
0.64
0.16
0.014
0.014
2.4
0.023
0.58
Total
kg/hr
12,606
18.9
0.070
31 .627
11.40'
5.27
23.5
16.5
14,665
0.811
104
24.2
1.093
3.7
174
47.6
726
Bottom
Ash,
kg/hr
9,063
1.1
0.91
7,291
0.10
4.9
23
91
19.238
0.11
77
37
17
0.77
31
9.5
167
Ash
Water
kg/hr
10.5
0.11
9.1x10"4
443
0.060
0.0061
0.037
0.024
9.1
6.1x10"4
1.1
0.030
0.91
0.0061
2.5
0.76
0.39
Effluent Streams
Scrubber
Solids
3.170
15
0.33
6,737
4.8
2.9
6.9
25
6,605
0.13
75
13
143
5.0
131
25
857
Slurry, kg/hr
liquids
0.056
0.040
7x1 O'4
259
3x1 O'4
0.0034
0.0027
0.0027
0.0098
5x1 0'5
0.26
0.13
0.020
0.043
2.3
0.064
0.0034
Flue Gas
kg/hr
12
3.9
0.0076
8.2
2.4
0.053
0.52
0.81
55
0.024
0.61
0.22
12
1.1
0.15
0.35
86
Total
kg/hr
12,256
20.15
1.25
14,738
7.36
7.86
30.5
116.8
25,907
0.265
154
50.4
173
6.9
167
35.7
1.110
Recovery
97
106
>1 .000
47
65
149
130
707
177
33
148
208
16
187
96
75
153
        * Level 2 procedures were utilized.

-------
      TABLE 4-24.  ORGANICS IN SOLID WASTE STREAMS
Carbon
Number
C7
C8
C9
C10
cn
c12
C13
C14
C15
C16
>C16
Total
Concentration
Bottom Ash/
Fly Ash
0
33.0
28.8
0
0
0
0
0
0
24.4
0
86.2
, mg/kg
Scrubber
Discharge Solids
0
0
4.7
1.9
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6.6
Level 1  procedures were utilized.
                             61

-------
     •   Cyclone participate  catch  (test 136  scrubber  inlet  gas)
     •   Raw limestone (composite of tests  135  and 136)
     •   Fly ash/bottom ash  (test 133)
     •   Scrubber outlet slurry solids  (composite of tests 135 and  136)
     •   Cooling water (composite of tests  132, 133, 135, and 136)
     0   Scrubber outlet slurry (composite  of tests 134  and  136)
     Detailed test descriptions and analytical  results have  been  reported
by Litton Bionetics (11). A  summary of the bioassay test results is
provided in the ensuing paragraphs.
     The six samples were examined  for  their  mutagenie activity as  well as
for their toxicity effects in the in vitro  microbial assays  employing
Salmonella indicator organisms (Ames mutagenicity assay).  The genetic
activity of a sample is measured by its ability to revert Salmonella indi-
cator strains from histidine  dependence to  histidine independence.  The
toxicity is measured by the reduction in number of colonies  growing on n
nutrient agar plates.  The samples  were tested  directly  and  in the  presence
of liver microsomal enzyme preparations from  Aroclor induced rats (referenced
as S9).
     The samples did not exhibit toxicity with  any of  the indicator organisms
employed directly or in the  presence of S9.  The tests with  all  the samples
were repeated because of inconsistent population counts  with some of the
indicator strains in the initial test.   The results of the  repeat tests
indicated that these six samples were not toxic to the indicator strains at
any of the doses tested.
     The results of mutagenicity assays conducted on these  six  samples  in
the presence and absence of metabolic activation systems were negative  in
the initial as well as in the repeat tests.  The repeat tests were  con-
ducted with all the samples  because of inconsistent population  counts
observed in the initial test.  The  tests performed with  raw limestone  and
fly ash/bottom ash were repeated once again with the indicator  strain  TA1535
in the presence of S9 because of an increase in the number  of  revertants
observed at all doses in the repeat test.  The final repeat test performed
with this strain using duplicate plates per dose level were negative.
                                    62

-------
     Effects  of the two liquid-containing samples, cooling water and
scrubber outlet slurry, on the colony-forming ability of cultured Chinese
hamster cells (CHO) were determined.   Test materials were applied to  cell
cultures for  24 hours  at five concentrations from 10 ml/1 to 600 ml/1.
The cooling water sample caused only  a small depression in the colony-
forming ability of the CHO cells.   This effect was nearly constant from
30 ml/1 to 600 ml/1 and did not reduce the relative cloning efficiency
below about 85%.  Therefore, there was no concentration of cooling water
which would reduce the colony number  by 50% (EC50), and the cooling water
was classified as having nondetectable toxicity.
     The limestone scrubber slurry test material was toxic at all applied
concentrations.  The relative cloning efficiency was 71.6% at the lowest
applied concentration of 10 ml/1,  and no survivors were obtained at 100
ml/1.  Since the EC50 value was determined to be 19 ml/1, the slurry was
moderately toxic to CHO cells.  It was not established whether the cells
responded to the particulate or soluble fractions of the slurry.
     Cytotoxic effects of the four solid samples on cultured rabbit alveolar
macrophanges (RAM) were determined.  Test samples were applied to primary
cell cultures for 20 hours at concentrations ranging from 3 mg/1 to 1000
mg/1.   Five cellular parameters were monitored:  percent viability; viabi-
lity index; total protein; total ATP; and ATP/106 cells.  Of these five
parameters, the ATP content was the most sensitive.  Concentrations that
reduced the culture ATP content by 50%  (EC50) were  250 mg/1 for  the cyclone
particulate catch,  370 mg/1 for the scrubber solids, and  1000 mg/1 for the
fly ash/bottom  ash  sample.  These samples are evaluated  to  have  low toxi-
city.   The raw  limestone  samples had  little effect  on  the cells  and, at the
highest dose of 1000 mg/1,  all five assay parameters were approximately 90%
of the  negative control values.  As such, the raw limestone had  no detectable
toxi ci ty.
     Rhodent toxicity  effects  of  five  samples  (the  cyclone  particulate catch
was not tested) were determined by oral  administration of sample aliquots
at a dose  level  of 10  g/kg.   Test  results indicate that the samples  are
non-toxic  when administered to young  rats at this dose level.  Because
neither the  male  nor female rats  died  during  the  14-day  test period, LD50
concentrations  for these  samples  is greater than  10 g/kg.
                                    63

-------
     The cytotoxic effects of the cooling water and scrubber slurry samples
on cultured VII-38 human cells were determined.  Sample material  was applied
to cell cultures for 20 hours at concentrations ranging from 3 ml/I to
600 ml/I.  Five cellular parameters were examined:  percent viability;
viability index; total protein; total ATP; and ATP/10  cells. The cooling
water sample had little effect on the cells at concentrations up to 600 ml/1;
the viability index was the most sensitive assay parameter and it decreased
at the 600 ml/1 dose level to 60% of the negative control.  Hence, the
cooling water sample was evaluated as having nondetectable toxicity to the
WI-38 cells.  The limestone scrubber slurry reduced the culture  ATP content
by 50% at 180 ml/I (EC50 value).  The EC50 for the viability index was 350
ml/1 and the ATP per 10  cells parameter gave about 340 ml/1. Thus, the
scrubber slurry sample was evaluated as having low toxicity.  The slurry
sample produced a strong color reaction with the Lowry reagents  and pre-
vented determination of the protein content by this method.
     The acute toxicities of raw limestone, fly ash/bottom ash,  and scrubber
solids were determined for freshwater fish (fathead minnows), invertebrate
(Daphnia pulex), and algae (selenastrum capricornutum).  Fish toxicity tests
were conducted using static acute 96-hour tests, Daphnia tests were con-
ducted using 48-hour static acute tests, and algal assays were bottle tests.
In addition, algal assays were also conducted on scrubber slurry and cooling
water.
     For all samples, no detectable toxicity was observed.  For the fish
acute assays, LC50 values were greater than 1000 mg/1.  For the  Daphnia
assay with raw limestone, the LC50 was greater than 1800 mg/1 and for the
other samples LC50 values were greater than 1000 mg/1.  Results  of the algal
assays for the solid and slurry samples indicate that population growth at
nominal concentrations of 100, 180, 320, 560, and 1000 mg/1 of the test
materials was not significantly different from the controls.  Assays per-
formed in 100% cooling water indicated 8-15% less growth than lower concen-
trations or the control.  Growth in 10, 32, and 56% cooling water was
statistically the same as in the control.  Growth in 18% cooling water was
5-15% greater than growth in the control.  Algal assays therefore indicated
no detectable toxicity.
                                    64

-------
                         REFERENCES  FOR SECTION 4


 1.   Magee,  E.M.,  H.J. Hall,  and G.M. Varga, Jr.  Potential Pollutants in
     Fossil  Fuels.   Report  prepared  by ESSO Research and Engineering Co.
     for EPA under contract No. 68-02-0629.  June 1973.

 2.   Ruch, R.R., H.J. Gluskoter, and N.F.  Skimp.  Occurrence and Distribu-
     tion of Potentially  Volatile Trace Elements in Coal:  A Final Report.
     Illinois State Geological Survey Environmental Geology Notes.  Number
     72. August 1974.

 3.   Hamersma,  J.W.  and M.L.  Kraft.  Applicability of the Meyers Process
     for Chemical  Desulfurization of Coal:  Survey of Thirty Five Coals.
     Report  prepared by TRW Systems  Group  for EPA under contract No.
     68-02-0647.   September 1975.

 4.   Koutsoukos, E.P., M.L. Kraft, R.A. Orsini, R.A. Meyers, M.J. Santy,
     and L.J. Van  Nice.   Meyers Process Development for Chemical Desulfur-
     ization of Coal, Vol.  I.  Report prepared by TRW Systems Group for EPA
     under contract No. 68-02-1336.  May 1976.

 5.   Compilation of Air Pollution Emission Factors, AP-42, Part A.  Third
     Edition.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  August 1977.

 6.   Emissions Assessment of  Conventional  Combustion Systems.  Progress
     Report  No. 21. Prepared by TRW Energy Systems Group for U.S. Environ-
     mental  Protection Agency.  June 1978.

 7.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. NOV Control Review.  Vol. 3,
     No. 4.   Fall  1978.                        x

 8.   Miller, S.S.   Inhaled  Particulates.   Environmental Science and Tech-
     nology  12 (13): 1353-1355.   December  1978.

 9.   Melia,  H.  et  al.  EPA  Utility FGD Survey:  August-September 1978.
     Report  prepared by PEDCo Environmental,  Inc. for the U.S. Environmental
     Protection Agency.   EPA-600/7-79-022a.   January 1979.

10.   Cleland, J.G. and G.L. Kingsbury.  Multimedia Environmental Goals for
     Environmental Assessment.  Volumes 1  and  2.  EPA-600/7-77-136a.
     November 1977.

11.   Level 1 Bioassays on Six Conventional Combustion Samples, Final Report.
     Report  prepared by Litton Bionetics,  Inc.  for the U.S. Environmental
     Protection Agency under  contract No.  68-02-2681, TON 104.  July 1979.
                                    65

-------
                                 SECTION 5
                      ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

     Future energy policies will affect the social, economic, energy, and
physical environments.  One of the major policy issues involves intensifica-
tion of coal utilization.  It is essential that the effects of increased coal
utilization be determined so that national energy policies may be developed.
     This section evaluates the impacts of emissions resulting from coal
combustion in utility boilers, based on the La Cygne station test results.
As indicated previously, La Cygne is unique with respect to several charac-
teristics including boiler size and furnace type.  Hence, environmental
impacts estimated from La Cygne data may not be indicative of other coal-
fired utility boilers.  The analysis is conducted in five parts.   The first
part introduces background information pertinent to the development of the
environmental assessment, including a review of relevant studies, plant emis-
sions, and air quality forecasts.  In the succeeding parts, the major health,
ecological, and economic impacts resulting from coal firing in controlled
utility boilers of the type tested are estimated.  The final section assesses
the implications of the impacts for energy development by considering:  1)
the additional controls which may be needed to mitigate the expected damage
levels, and 2) the potential effect of such control needs on energy cost and
energy resource development.
INTRODUCTION
     Economic and environmental concerns over the nation's energy develop-
ment policies have precipitated several research efforts to evaluate the
consequences of all phases of energy development, from fuel production to
fuel end use.  To organize the various efforts into a systematic, coordinated,
environmental assessment structure, the Environmental Protection Agency is
implementing a Conventional Combustion Environmental Assessment (CCEA)
Program.  This program has been established for the purpose of integrating
together separate data generated by past and current studies into a complete
environmental assessment of conventional combustion processes.  The integra-
tion procedure involves coordination and information exchange between EPA

                                    66

-------
related studies to:   1) determine the extent to which the total  environmental,
economic,  and energy impacts of conventional combustion process can be
assessed,  2) identify additional information needed for complete assessment,
3) define  the requirements for modifications or additional developments of
control technology,  and 4) define the requirements for modified or new
standards  to regulate pollutant emissions.  The CCEA Program coordinates
and integrates current and future studies encompassing a wide spectrum of
environmental assessment areas and conventional combustion processes.
Integration of these studies, including the present effort, will provide
the basis  for energy policies which result in the expanded use of conven-
tional combustion processes at reasonable environmental, economic, and
energy costs.
AIR QUALITY
Model Plant Emissions
     Air quality impacts were estimated based on a hypothetical model plant.
The model  plant was  characterized using emission factors derived from the
La Cygne plant test  data and assumed meteorological parameters.  The model
plant was  assumed to have the same fuel and boiler characteristics as the
La Cygne plant.  The criteria pollutant emission rates utilized are shown
in Table 5-1.  Comparison of the measured trace element emission concentra-
tions with DMEG values revealed that the flue gas contained 7 trace elements
which exceeded their DMEG values.  Hence, these trace elements were also
included in this analysis.
Annual Emissions
     Estimated annual emissions for hypothetical coal-fired plants generating
874 MW are presented in Table 5-2.  These estimates are based on the emis-
sion factors determined for the La Cygne coal-fired plant.  The hypothetical
plant was  assumed to operate at 87% of its maximum load with 29% overall
efficiency.
Impact on Air Quality
     The duration of exposure is important  in determining effects of changing
air quality.  The highest concentrations occur for short periods (usually
less than one hour) under meteorological conditions causing plume trapping.
                                    67

-------
   TABLE 5-1.  EMISSION RATES FROM A CONTROLLED 874 MW
               (GROSS) COAL-FIRED UTILITY BOILER*
   Pollutant                         Emissions, gm/sec
   S02                                     1 ,940
   NO
     X
   Parti culates                              200
   Organics                             3.80 - 6.82
   As1"                                     0.92
   Cd1"                                     0.55
   Crf                                     0.12
   Fef                                       13
   Nif                                     0.052
   Pbf                                     2.9
   Znf                                       20
*
 These emission rates are based upon data from a cyclone-
 fired boiler burning high sulfur, high ash coal.  This
 unit is not required to meet NSPS and, as such, emission
 rates may be considered to represent worst case values.
 Trace element concentration in the flue gas exceeded the
 DMEG value.
                            68

-------
                      TABLE 5-2.   ANNUAL  EMISSIONS
        Pollutant
                                             Emission Rate, kg/year
                                       Scrubber  Inlet
          Scrubber Outlet
Gaseous N0>
        SO,
        SO,
        so]
        CO
        Total  Organics
8
    >4.24 x 10'
     2.00 x 10
     2.87 x 106
     1.32 x 106
    <3.08 x 107
1.64xl05 - 2.41xl05
    >4.24 x 10'
     4.39 x 107
     5.65 x 105
     2.22 x 105
    <3.08 x 107
8.59xl04 - 1.54xlOJ
crce
VC16
>C16
Total Parti culates
10y
5.93x10
2.
7.
6.
<
<
6.
4.
H
67
82
46
6
2
93
64
1
x
x
X
X
X
X
X
.36x10°
104
104
107
103
105
106
107
5.04x10* -
7
2
4
3
5

2
•
•
•
•
•

•
11
84
7
99
2
5
8
1
x
x
X
X
X
X
X
.19x1
103
104
106
106
105
104
105
Liquid  (1) Wastewater:
            Slag tank to ash pond
        (2) Scrubber Slurry:
            Settling pond overflow
 1.57 x 10
 4.21 x 10-
                                                            10
Solid   (1) Bottom Slag/Fly Ash
        (2) Scrubber Sludge
 6.01 x 10
 7.10 x 10
  Coal-fired plants generating 874 MW (gross)  operating 6278 hours/year,
                                    69

-------
The stack emissions are trapped under an inversion layer,  with the plume
spreading downward.  The frequency of occurrence and the severity of such
trapping conditions varies depending on the site.  As a conservative worst
case estimate in this study, plume trapping conditions were assumed to
persist for periods as long as three hours.  Typical 24 hour maximum con-
centrations were estimated assuming Gaussian steady state plume dispersion
under conditions of low wind speed and stable atmosphere.   Typical 24 hour
levels were translated to annual expected concentrations by applying ratios
for the one day maximum and annual mean as empirically derived from the
Continuous Air Monitoring Project (1, 2, 3, 4).  The effective stack height
was estimated based on assumed meteorological conditions,  and the actual
stack height.
     Table 5-3 shows the maximum predicted levels for criteria pollutants
in the vicinity of the model plant.  Estimated ambient concentrations result-
ing from the controlled coal-fired boiler are in excess of the air quality
standards for short term SO- emissions, while concentrations of other
                           /\
criteria pollutants are in conformance with the air quality standards.
Carbon monoxide was not accurately measured during testing and will not be
considered in this section.  It should be noted, however, that CO emissions
typically are insignificant relative to NAAQS.  For  any of the pollutants,
the short term maximum concentrations present the most significant air
pollution problem.  It should be noted that the short term maximum concen-
trations generally occur infrequently depending on site meteorology,  and
are usually of very brief duration  (about 1 hour or less).  The maximum
concentration levels are localized within a distance of about one-half to
four miles from the boiler stack.  These concentrations diminish to about
one-half the peak  level another one to eight miles further downwind.
     The absolute value of the predicted concentrations depends on many
variables, not the least of which are assumptions of adverse case meteoro-
logical conditions employed in the theoretical air quality models.  Stack
height is also an important factor which may vary greatly among units, and
will generally depend on prevailing meteorology at the boiler site.  Meteo-
rological parameters were selected conservatively in the present analysis,
resulting in predicted air quality which may be overstated in terms of
                                    70

-------
         TABLE  5-3.   COMPARISON OF FEDERAL  AIR QUALITY  STANDARDS
                     WITH AIR QUALITY  PREDICTED TO  RESULT  FROM
                     COAL COMBUSTION  IN A 874 MW UTILITY BOILER

3
Concentration, yg/m
Pollutant
Annual Average
NOV
X
so2
Total Organics
Total Particulates
24 Hour1"
NOV
X
so2
Total Organics
Total Particulates
1-3 Hour*
NOV
X
so2
Total Organics
Total Particulates
Model
Plant

12

12
0.05
1

46

48
0.2
5

2800

2900
10
310
NAAQS

100

80
—
75

• •»•

365
—
260

« M

1300
160
— — —
PSD Increments**
Class I Class II Class III

_«.• «»••. •••_

2 20 40
— — —
5 19 37

••»• B«W • • •

5 91 182
— — —
10 37 75

«M» rm • •» ^ ^ ^

25 512 700
— — —
— — — — — — — — —

**
The expected annual average levels were estimated based on the conser-
vative end of the range of typical ratios for 24 hour maximum to annual
as reported in the Air Quality Criteria Documents (1, 2, 3, 4).
Based on typical meteorological conditions for 24 hour period.
Based on worst case meteorological conditions (plume trapping).
Prevention of significant deterioration standards (PSD).
                                    71

-------
adversity.  However, the calculated levels of air pollutants do illustrate
the potentially high concentrations which may occur in the vicinity of some
controlled coal-fired utility boilers, and this underscores the necessity
for careful siting and design of utilities to avoid potential violations of
the NAAQS.  Concentrations of total organics are seen to be negligible
relative to short term NAAQS.  Hence, these emissions will not be considered
further.
     Federal standards limiting deterioration of air quality are generally
more restrictive than the NAAQS.  Included in Table 5-3 is a list of the
allowable increments of deterioration for the three classes of growth and
development areas.  Hence, depending on the existing air quality and the
allowable deterioration increment, emissions of total particulates from
the model plant may not be acceptable in certain locations.  Again, siting
of the plants would be a major consideration in their environmental accept-
ability, since areas which already experience marginally acceptable air
quality could not tolerate the increases projected to occur.
HEALTH IMPACT
     The health effects of exposure to high concentrations of the various
pollutants are well known and have been tabulated throughout the literature
(5).  However, the specific extent to which health is affected by ambient
pollutant exposure levels (dose-response relationships) is unclear.  More-
over, it is unclear how pollutant specific dose response curves may be
related to the overall health effects of the gas-aerosol  complex associated
with fossil fuel combustion products.
     Most attempts to establish dose response functions for ambient pollu-
tion levels involve the formulation of some indicator which is then assumed
to represent the entire spectrum of primary and secondary pollutants pre-
sent.  The indicator (usually sulfur dioxide, total particulates, or sulfates)
is then related to mortality or morbidity data for various areas by various
statistical approaches designed to factor out effects of other variables
(e.g., population age, climatology, etc.).  Dose-response curves derived
from these studies are then employed to estimate health effects of air
quality changes-resulting from proposed projects.
                                    72

-------
     Recently, the health effects model by Lundy and Grahn (6) has been
developed for application in the National Coal Utilization Assessment
Studies being conducted at Argonne National Laboratories.  The model  com-
bines mortality functions for suspended sul fates as developed by Finch and
Morris (7) and age-dependent and established response curves for cigarette
smoke.  The mortality dose-response functions for suspended sulfates  are
based on statistical studies of various populations experiencing different
sulfate exposures.  Unlike the dose-response air pollution studies, inves-
tigations of smokers have been relatively well controlled with respect to
age, degree of exposure, and effect.  Thus, to expand the predictability
of the sulfate dose-response curves to populations of different age distri-
bution (e.g., future populations), the cigarette response curves are ad-
justed to fit the observed mortality/sulfate data, resulting in a model
which predicts age-specific death rates.  This elaboration is important
because death rates vary exponentially with age, and shifts in the age
distribution of a population will result in substantial shifts in total
mortality.  Accordingly, the Lundy-Grahn Model utilizes projections of the
population age distribution to estimate the age-specific and total death
rates due to air pollution at any specific time in the future.  The basic
relationship of the model is:
                                        bX
                     B(X' Xo> =        -
where B is the number of excess deaths per year for the population of age
                                                            o
X which was exposed to the sulfate concentration S (in ug/m ) since age Xo.
The constants a,b,c and d are coefficients to fit the model to cigarette
smoking mortality data and response data for a specific population subgroup
exposed to air pollution.
     The Lundy-Grahn Model is being used in the ongoing National Coal Utili-
zation Assessment Program to estimate excess mortality resulting from in-
creased coal utilization.  Air diffusion modeling was conducted first to
predict a population-weighted exposure increase for suspended sulfates.  The
Lagrangian Statistical Trajectory Model of Argonne National Laboratory (8)
                                    73

-------
which assumes a constant transformation of S02 to sulfate,  is  employed in
the estimation procedure.   Then,  based on the predicted exposure  increase
and projections of the population age distribution, excess death  rates are
calculated for each age and summed to yield the expected mortality  asso-
ciated with coal  combustion.   Table 5-4 shows the estimated effects of an
                                       3
average exposure increment of 8.95 yg/m  suspended sulfates predicted to
result from coal-firing of power  plants throughout the Central  United
States.  The plants are assumed to emit sulfur oxides  at the ceiling levels
of the NSPS, and the degree of power plant coal firing is assumed to in-
crease in the region from the current level of 161 Tg/y to 744 Tg/y in 2020,
The projected levels of power plant coal utilization are predicted  to cause
significant health effects in future years.
             TABLE 5-4.  EFFECTS OF COAL COMBUSTION IN POWER
                         PLANTS IN CENTRAL U.S.*
        Year
        1985
        2000
        2020
Increase in Death Rate,
   Number of deaths/
 Million persons/Year
         28-130
        181-809
        150-665
    Reduction In
 Expectation of Life
      At Birth t
      17 - 79 days
136 days -1.7 years
160 days - 1.8 years
        Reference 30.
        The range of values represents the expected and upper 80%
        confidence limit given by Finch and Morris (7).  The effects
        are calculated corresponding to an expected average exposure
        increment of 8.95 ug/m3 suspended sulfates.
                                    74

-------
     Figure  5-1  shows  the expected health  effects  caused by air pollution
(as indexed  by  suspended sulfates) which might result  from coal-fired
utility boilers  emitting S02 at the rate observed  in this study, and also1
the effects  which  would be expected under  coal-firing  conforming to the
ceiling levels  of  the  NSPS.  The maximum impact is expected to occur in
the year 2000,  when the proportion of population in the highest risk age
groups will  be  greatest.  For each million persons, the number of  increased
deaths expected to occur annually due to accelerated use of coal-fired
utility boilers  is 222 in the year 2000.
                                  Effect of coal-fired,  power plant and
                                  associated 11.0 yg/m^  ambient  sulfate
                                  exposure from model  plant emissions.
                                           Effect of coal  burning  power
                                            plants emitting S02  at NSPS
                                            and creating 9 yg/m3 ambient
                                            sulfate exposure.
           1985
2000
2020
                         YEAR
        Figure  5-1.   Health effects  from sulfate levels resulting  from
                     coal  combustion in controlled utility boilers.
                                    75

-------
     Health effects caused by sulfate levels  may also be expressed  in  terms
of morbidity.  Table 5-5 presents  data for increases  in incidents of health
disorders due to ambient sulfate exposures.  In those areas  which already
experience high sulfate levels,  respiratory disease may increase signifi-
cantly with increases of suspended sul fates due to increased fuel consumption,
                                                       3
For example, in areas where the  threshold level 10 yg/m  is  exceeded
                                        3
regularly, the contribution of 11.0 ug/m  of sulfate  concentration  associated
with controlled coal -fired boilers would be estimated to produce a  150%
increase in the incidence of chronic respiratory disease caused at  the
threshold level.  Based on the expected ambient exposure attributable  to
coal firing of power plants, other mortality effects  (aggravation of asthma,
living disease, etc.) would also occur.
     In addition to potential health effects  created  by long range  sulfate
levels from utility boilers, high  concentrations of pollutants  in the  pro-
ximity of the power plant pose a potentially serious  health  problem.  The
Lundy-Grahn model may also be applied to estimate mortality  effects caused
by ambient levels of S02 and total suspended parti culates.   The model  gives
the following relationships when fitted to Lave and Seskin  dose response
data (5) for S02 and total suspended particulates (TSP):
             c
       per 10b males:  -       o/v YA\    (-835 TSP + .715 S09)
                        1 + lOOe   v    '
             f                ncco*
       per 10b females:  -       otv yn\   (-835 TSP + .715 SOJ
                                  ~*A~AO;
 If the model is applied for average concentrations expected to occur in the
 vicinity of a power plant (Table 5-3), the expected increase in mortality
 is appreciable.  Figure 5-2 illustrates the estimated impact on mortality.
 For example, when boilers are coal -fired, populations of the age 50 are
 predicted to experience increases in death rates of 176 male and 29
 female deaths per million persons per year.
                                    76

-------
                 TABLE 5-5.  HEALTH IMPACTS OF SULFATE AEROSOL
Pollutant and
Health Effect
S'j1 fates
T.ortaTity
Aggravation of
Heart and lung
Disease in Elderly
Aggravation of
Asthnia
Lo*or Respiratory
Disease in Children
Chronic Respiratory
Disease
Hons^.okers •
Smokers
Population at Risk .
Total Population-
Same as above for
oxidonts function
Sarce as above for
oxidants function
Sane as above for
nitrogen dioxide
function
62 percent of
population age 21
or older
33 percent of
population age 21
or older
Assumed Baseline
Frequency of
Disorder v.'ithin
' Population at Risk
Daily death rate of
2.58 per 100,000
Same
Same
Same
Two percent
prevalence
Ten percent
prevalence
Pollutant
Concentration
Threshold
For Effect
25 vg/m3 for
one day or
more
9 vg/n3 for
one day or
rore
6 tJfi/m3 for
one* day or
mere
13 vg/m3 for
several years
10 uci/ni3 for
several years
15 ug/m3 for
several years
Effect Increase as ~
of Saseline Per
Folluinnt Unit Above
Thrc:.'~old
2.5S per 10 vg/n3
14.12 par 10 vg/ir;*
33.5- per 10 vg/n3
76.9% per 10 vg/rc3
134^ per 10 pg/n3
73.8S per 10 vg/n3
Reference 9.

-------
O UJ
•z. >-
LU CO
  CO
•— « o
300

250

200

150
       100-
 50-
         0
                                          Male response
                                    /*  Female  response
                  30     40    50
                     POPULATION AGE
                              60
     Figure 5-2.  Increase in mortality rates in vicinity of coal-fired
                  utility boilers as a result of S02 and total particulate
                  emissions.
Effect of Trace Elements--
     Trace elements from coal combustion emissions enter the atmosphere  and
are then dispersed to the upper atmosphere or deposited in the environment
around the sources.  The principal routes of entry to man are by  inhalation,
drinking water and food.
     Table 5-6 summarizes estimates of the annual average atmospheric
concentrations of various elements expected in  the vicinity of a  single
controlled coal-fired utility boiler of 874 MW  capacity.  The elements
included in this listing are those which exhibited stack concentrations
                                     78

-------
      TABLE 5-6.  EXPECTED TRACE ELEMENT CONCENTRATIONS IN VICINITY
                  OF A 874 MW CONTROLLED COAL-FIRED UTILITY BOILER
Element
As
Cd
Cr
Fe
Ni
Pb
Zn
Annual Ambient
Concentration,
ug/m
0.006
0.003
0.001
0.08
OoOOOS
0.02
0.1
Typical
Urban Air
Concentration *
u9/m3
.010
.300
.010
1.60
1.40
2.40
.67
Allowable
Exposure
Level t
yg/m3
50
20
50
1000
100
20
500
        Based on data reported in References 10, 11  and 12.
        Based on ambient air objectives proposed for hazardous
        waste management facilities (13).
exceeding the DMEG values.   Also included in Table 5-6 is a listing of
concentrations considered acceptable for continuous ambient exposure.   The
allowable concentrations  are based on proposed regulations for control  of
air pollution from hazardous waste management facilities, as required  by
Section 3004 of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.  It is  clear
that the air concentrations of elements resulting from operation of the
utility boiler are several  orders of magnitude (3 to 6) below the allow-
able exposure level.    Moreover, the predicted maximum concentrations  are
also less than typical  urban ambient background levels.
     A primary concern  in emissions of trace elements is the contribution
of these elements  to body burden due to exposure to water and food. To
estimate this contribution, pollutant deposition rates are approximated by
the product of the ambient concentrations and the deposition velocity  of
the pollutant.  The deposition rate is dependent on particle size.   Test
results of the present  study show that particles emitted from the controlled
                                    79

-------
coal-fired boiler are predominantly three vm or less  in diameter.
The deposition velocity of particles this size over grass surfaces  is  appro-
ximately 0.1 to 0.2 cm/sec (14).   Accordingly, the deposition rates of the
various trace elements were approximated and are shown in Table 5-7.
     The significance of the deposition rates is evaluated by considering
the associated effect on drinking water and diet.  The pathway to drinking
water is by run-off of soil particles containing deposits of trace  elements,
and the pathway to the diet is by plant uptake from trace elements  in  the
soil.  In either pathway, the incremental concentration of elements in the
soil determines the extent of the potential impact.  Table 5-8 summarizes
the maximum predicted soil concentration in the vicinity of coal-fired
utility boiler of 874 MW capacity.  The concentrations are estimated by
assuming mixing of the deposited elements to a depth  of 10 cm, and  over a
period of 40 years.  For the majority of the trace elements, only minor
increases over the background soil levels would be expected.  However, the
concentration of cadmium may increase significantly.   It is predicted  that
coal firing will cause an 80% increase in the cadmium soil concentration.
The significance of elevated soil concentrations is evaluated by considering
the associated increase in trace element concentration in plant tissues and
drinking water.
     The concentration of elements in plant tissues is related to the
biologically available fraction of the elements in the soil.  This  is  often
expressed as the soluble concentration in the soil, and is some fraction of
the total concentration reported in Table 5-8.  Plant possess the ability
to concentrate elements from dilute soil solutions.  This ability is de-
pendent on the concentration of elements in the soil, and usually increases
with decreasing soil concentrations.  The ratio of concentration of elements
in plants to the concentration in the soil is known as the concentration
ratio.  Table 5-9 lists average plant concentration ratios for various
elements.  The data are based on various published data as compiled in a
study by Battelle (15).  The effect of increased trace element soil  loadings
(caused by 40 years of boiler emissions) on concentration of the elements
in plants is then estimated by assuming that the soluble portion of the
loadings are available for plant takeup.  For all elements except chromium
                                    80

-------
    TABLE 5-7.   ANNUAL DEPOSITION OF TRACE ELEMENTS  IN  VICINITY OF
                CONTROLLED COAL-FIRED UTILITY BOILERS
    Element
Annual Deposition Rate,  g/m -yr
As
Cd
Cr
Ni
Pb
Zn
3.8 x 10"4
1.9 x 10"4
6.3 x 10"5
1.9 x 10"5
1.1 x 10"3
7.8 x 10"3

      Calculated by assuming a particulate deposition velocity of
      0.2 cm/sec.  The deposition velocity is multiplied by the
      annual  average concentration to estimate the total deposition
      rate.  The deposition rate is calculated for the location
      where the maximum average annual concentration occurs.
        TABLE 5-8.  LONG TERM EFFECT OF CONTROLLED COAL-FIRED
                    UTILITY BOILER EMISSIONS ON SOIL
                    CONCENTRATIONS OF TRACE ELEMENTS
              Increased Soil
Element       Concentration
             After 40 Years,*
                   mg/kg
     Typical
      Soil    .
 Concentration
      mg/kg
  Increase Over
  Average Soil
Concentrations, %
As
Cd
Cr
Ni
Pb
Zn
0.1
0.05
0.02
0.01
0.3
2
6.0
0.06
40
40
10
50
2
80
0.05
0.02
3
4
* Based on deposition rate (Table 5-7), an assumed mixing depth of 10 cm
  and soil density of 1.5 Mg/m3.

* Based on data compiled in Reference 13.
                                   81

-------
      TABLE 5-9.  LONG TERM EFFECT OF CONTROLLED COAL-FIRED BOILER
                  EMISSIONS ON CONCENTRATIONS OF ELEMENTS IN PLANTS
Element
As
Cd
Cr
N1
Pb
Zn
Concentration
Ratios*
4.2
222
250
331
2
40
Solubility
Of Elements*
%
9
40
0.004
0.1
—
8
Typical Con-
centration
in plants,*
mg/kg
.08- .55
.04- .50
.23
3
2.7
100
Increase in
Concentration
of plants ,t
mg/kg
0.04
4
.0.0002
0.003
0.6
7
   Extracted from Reference 15.   3.
   Calculated by multiplying concentration ratio by the incremental
   increase in soil concentration (Table 5-8) by the fraction of the
   element which is soluble.
and nickel, coal firing appears to exert an appreciable impact on trace
element plant burden.  The elements predicted to produce the most notable
burdens in plant tissue are cadmium and lead.  Coal  firing is predicted to
result in plant concentrations of cadmium about 8 to 100 times greater than
the endogenous levels, and is expected to produce a  20% Increase in lead
concentrations.
     Cadmium is considered highly toxic to plants and animals.  Mammals
tend to absorb cadmium continually, accumulating high body levels which ad-
versely affect the respiratory, cardiovascular, nervous, and reproductive
systems, disrupt kidney and liver functions, and cause intestinal disorders,
Cadmium levels as low as 15 mg/kg in plants may cause injury to man (16).
Cadmium levels in some areas are believed to be approaching threshold
levels, and it is believed that cadmium concentrations in cigarettes might
                                    82

-------
cause smokers to exceed thresholds of observable symptoms of cadmium
poisoning  if exposed  to additional sources of cadmium  (17).   Consequently,
the addition of cadmium to the environment  in significant quantities is
a  serious  concern.
     In contrast to cadmium,  lead is considered to exhibit a lower order of
toxicity.  Both natural and agricultural vegetative species have been found
growing in soil with  lead  concentrations exceeding 700 mg/kg.  Soil concen-
trations of 1000 mg/kg are  suspected to be lethal to lettuce.  Domestic
animals tend to exhibit considerable susceptibility to lead concentration
in some situations.   It is believed that lead concentrations of 300 mg/kgin
foliage will induce lead poisoning in grazing animals.  By contrast, animal
populations in the wild have  been observed in areas with high background
levels of  lead in soil and vegetation (200-400 mg/kg in the soil and 121
mg/kgin leaves) with  no adverse health effects reported.
     The actual impact of  trace element emissions on plant burden depends
greatly on many site-specific variables, such as temperature, precipitation,
soil type, water chemistry, and plant species at a given site.  Of major
concern are the concentrations of elements in soil, water, and the atmos-
phere.  Where trace element concentrations are approaching threshold limits,
emissions from power  plants will exert a greater influence on health impacts<
This consideration is particularly relevant with respect to environmental
buildup of cadmium because high background levels of this element already
exist in many areas.  It is anticipated that long term accumulation of
cadmium emissions from coal firing would cause serious health effects to
animals consuming vegetation  grown in the affected areas.  Accumulation of
other trace elements  in nearDy soils is not expected to result in soil
concentrations which would be toxic to plants or in plant concentrations
toxic to man.
     Trace elements also enter the plant via foliar absorption.  Intake
from the leaf surface to the  interior occurs through stomatal  openings,
walls of epidemal cells,  and  leaf hairs.   Although relatively little is
known regarding the efficiency of foliar intake, it would appear that the
plant burden produced by soils containing long term deposits is several
orders of magnitude greater than that which could be transferred from
                                    83

-------
foliar interception of trace elements in the atmosphere.  Soil concentra-
tions are the result of accumulation of elements over the long-term, and
crops raised in these soils tend to concentrate the trace elements in the
plant tissue.  By contrast, the foliar intake rate can be no greater than
the deposition rate on the plant surface, and there is much uncertainty
regarding the efficiency of the plant in absorbing the deposited particles.
Thus, it is clear that the soil uptake scenario (Table 5-8) represents the
more adverse case for plant uptake of trace elements.  This scenario assumes
no interference (e.g., animal or crop uptake) with trace element buildup in
soils over a 40 year period, and a fixed concentration of elements in the
soil despite crop uptake.
     Trace element emissions also affect the quality of drinking water.  The
impact of trace element particle deposition on runoff water concentration
will be related to the relative increase in soil concentration due to long
term atmospheric deposition of elements.  The actual runoff concentrations
may be estimated by applying average sediment burden rates for representative
runoff per unit of watershed area.  The sediment is assumed to carry the
cumulative deposits of metals originating from the boiler emissions.  Table
5-10 summarizes estimates of increased soluble metals concentrations for
runoff waters in the vicinity of the model plant.  The estimated concentra-
tions are substantially less than the standards for livestock drinking water
and potable water.  The concentration of lead is predicted to approach
background concentrations in runoff water after 40 years of coal firing.
However, hazard to human health by drinking water impacts appears remote.
IMPACT ON ECOLOGY
     The ecological environment will be affected by air emissions and by
solid waste residuals generated by air pollution control equipment.
Effects of Air Emissions
     A major ecological impact category most likely to be affected by
utility boiler emissions is plant life.  Of the major gaseous pollutants
emitted by fossil fuel combustion, plant life is most affected by S02 and
NOV in the concentration ranges expected.  Concentrations of CO and hydro-
  J\
carbons produced by coal firing of utility boilers would be expected to
                                    84

-------
                             TABLE 5-10.
TRACE ELEMENT CONCENTRATION IN RUNOFF WATER IN
VICINITY OF CONTROLLED COAL-FIRED UTILITY BOILER
Element
As
Cd
Cr
Ni
Pb
Zn
Typical
Background
Concentration
of Soluble
Metals In
Runoff Water*
mg/1
4 X 10"4
1 X 10"4
1 X 10"5
1 X 10"4
7 X 10"4
3 X 10"3
Increase In
Soluble Metals
Concentration
In Soil After
40 yearst
mg/kg
9 x 10"3
2 x 10"2
8 x 10~7
1 x 10"5
3 x 10"1
2 x 10"1
Increase In
Soluble Metals
Concentration
In Runoff Water*
After 40 years
mg/1
9 x 10"6
2 x 10"5
8 x ID"10
1 x 10"8
3 x 10"4
2 x 10"4
EPA Proposed
Maximum
Acceptable
Concentration
For Livestock
mg/1
2 X 10"1
5 X 10"2
1
• •» w
1 X 10"1
25
Standard
As Critical
Concentration
In Potable
Water
mg/1
1 X 10"2
1 X 10"2
2 X 10~2
5 X 10"2
1 X 10"2
5 X 10"2
00
en
          Based on average soil particulate runoff rate of 1000  mg/1  of runoff water, and soluble endogenous
    concentration of metals in soils (15).

         '''Based on increase in trace element concentration (Table 5-7) and solubility of elements (Table 5-8).

         *Based on average soil particle runoff rate of 1000  mg/1  of runoff water, and increased soluble
    metals concentration in soil after 40 years.

-------
cause negligible impact on vegetation (4, 18).  The maximum levels  of NO
                                                                       A
and SOp expected to occur in the vicinity of utility boilers are near or
exceed the threshold injury values for these pollutants.   Sensitive plants
in the vicinity of the utility boiler could suffer injury, although such
injury would be limited to a downwind sector a few miles  from the plant.
     The secondary pollutants (ozone and peroxyacytylnitrates} formed by
reaction of hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides are considerably more  toxic
than either of the precursors alone.  The formation of secondary compounds
in boiler stack plumes and the impact of the boiler nitrogen oxides emis-
sions on urban photochemical smog depend on complex relationships which are
not yet totally understood.  Therefore, it is not possible to reliably
estimate the effect of NO  emissions levels on levels of photochemical
                         A
compounds.  However, based on typical regional emissions  figures, it appears
that emissions from power plant fuel combustion provide a significant source
of the regional emissions of NOX necessary for photochemical smog.   Approxi-
mately 28% of the nation's NO  emissions are produced by combustion in
                             A
power plants (19).
     If NOY emissions from utility boilers are a significant contributor  to
          /v
photochemical smog, then there is valid concern that boiler emissions may
contribute to plant injury.  The effects of photochemical air pollution on
plant life have been observed frequently at various different severities
throughout the United States.  In addition, the effect of the major consti-
tuents of photochemical smog (products of nitrogen oxides and organic com-
pounds) on plants has been investigated separately.  The pigmentation of
small areas of palisade cells is characteristic of ozone injury, and a
bronzing of the undersurface of leaves is typical for peroxyacytylnitrate
injury.  Table 5-11 illustrates the relatively low levels of ozone  which
will produce significant plant injury to crops.  The concentrations shown
are typical of many areas experiencing photochemical air pollution, and
suggest the necessity for concern over sources emitting high levels of NOX.
     Nitrogen oxides may also cause injury to vegetation by direct  contact.
The significant oxides of nitrogen are NO and NOg.  The major oxide in com-
bustion emissions is NO.  However, after residence in the atmosphere, NO  is
                                    86

-------
   TABLE 5-11.  PROJECTED OZONE CONCENTRATIONS WHICH WILL PRODUCE, FOR
                SHORT TERM EXPOSURES, 20 PERCENT INJURY TO ECONOMICALLY
                IMPORTANT VEGETATION GROWN UNDER SENSITIVE CONDITIONS*

Concentrations
Time, Hr
0.2
0.5
1.0
2.0
4.0
8.0
producing injury
Sensitive
0.40-0.90
0.20-0.40
0.15-0.30
0.10-0.25
0.07-0.20
0.05-0.15
in three types
Intermediate
0.80-1.10
0.35-0.70
0.25-0.55
0.20-0.45
0.15-0.40
0.10-0.35
of plants, ppm
Resistant
1.00 and up
0.60 and up
0.50 and up
0.40 and up
0.35 and up
0.30 and up

*
  Reference 20.
converted to N02 by photolysis and by photochemical interaction with hydro-
carbons.  The effect of N0£ on plant life has been studied under controlled
laboratory conditions.  Acute injury is characterized by collapse of cells
and subsequent development of necrotic patterns.  Chronic injury, caused by
exposure to low concentrations over long periods, is characterized by
chlorotic or other pigmented patterns in leaf tissue.  Such injury results
in reduction of growth and reproduction.  Only limited data are available
to characterize the effect of NO on plants.  Generally, it appears that NO
leads to effects somewhat similar to those observed for N02, but at slight-
ly higher threshold concentrations.  Therefore, for worst case evaluations
of the  impact of ambient NOX levels, it is assumed that NOX exists as N0£,
and that the NOX levels are not depleted by the photochemical reactions
which typically occur in urban areas.
     Figure 5-3 illustrates the threshold concentrations at which various
degrees of damage result from exposure to N02-  Based on the expected con-
centration of NOX in the vicinity of the coal-fired utility boiler, and
the assumption it is converted entirely to N02, it appears that acute leaf
damage  may be anticipated to occur as a result of short term plume trapping.

                                    87

-------
              0.01
                         0.1
                                DAYS
                                 1.0
       1000
    ex
    a.
o
z
u.
o
        100
   3   1.0
        0.1
                                                10
                                                       100.
                                THRESHOLD FOR FOLIAR LESIONS  -
          0.1
            METABOLIC AND GROWTH EFFECTS
                             •i
                                10
                                       i
fcr
                                                                  HOOO
                                                                      CO
                                                                        E
                                                                        cv;
                                                                       o
                                                                 4-10
                                                                 r-1.0
1000
10.000
                      DURATION OF EXPOSURE  (HOURS)
           Figure  5-3.   NOg threshold concentrations for  various
                         degrees of plant injury (21).
Chronic effects, including growth and yield reductions, may  also be  noticed
over the long term.  However, the extent of the damages would  be localized
within a few miles of the boiler, and would be expected to occur to  those
plants most sensitive to NO, injury (i.e., cotton, navel  orange, spinach,
etc.).
                                    88

-------
     Acute short term injury to vegetation by S02 exposure is characterized
by damaged leaf areas which first appear as water soaked spots,  and  later
appear as bleached white areas or darkened reddish areas.  Chronic S(L  injury
is usually characterized by chlorosis (yellowing) which develops from lower
concentrations over extended periods of time.  Either acute or chronic  S02
injury may result in death or reduced yield of the plant if the  extent  of
the damaged tissue exceeds 5 to 30 percent of the total amount of foliage.
     The impact of the expected SOg concentrations varies with the plant
species.  Threshold injury in sensitive plants may be caused by  short term
                            o
S02 levels as low as 30 yg/m  (22).  Table 5-12 summarizes the broad cate-
gories of sensitivity for different plants.  Grain, vegetable, pasture, and
forage crops are susceptible to SOg damage for most of the growing season.
These crops may suffer yield reductions in areas where power plants  such as
that of the present study are located, although the damage would be  relati-
vely localized.  Data presented in Figure 5-4 indicate that peak SOg
concentrations expected to occur near the coal-fired boiler may  possibly
cause leaf damage to occur in the more sensitive plant species.
      It should be noted that the plant damage thresholds illustrated by
Figure 5-4 apply to conditions of temperature, humidity, soil moisture,
light intensity, nutrient supply, and plant age which cause maximum sus-
ceptibility to injury.  The occurrence of such conditions are rare.   In
tact, in the unlikely event that all such conditions are met, the dose-
response curves indicate that plant injury could occur without a violation
of the federal air quality standard for the 3 hour or 24 hour concentration
of SOg.  Additional susceptibility may also result from synergistic  effects
of sulfur dioxide and other pollutants.  Particularly relevent to the  urban
environment are combinations of sulfur dioxide and ozone.  Moderate  to
severe injury of tobacco plants have been observed for four hour exposures
to concentrations of 0.1 ppm (262 yg/rn^) S02 in combination with 0.03 ppm
ozone.  Because high ozone levels are a frequent problem in the vicinity
of urban areas, susceptibility to plant injury by S02 pollution is greater
when utility boilers are also sited in urban areas.  One of the major con-
cerns associated with fossil fuel utilization is acid precipitation  result-
ing from wet deposition of suspended sulfur and nitrate compounds.   Data
                                    89

-------
TABLE  5-12.  SENSITIVITY OF  COMMON PLANTS TO
                                                            INJURY
r - -
Sensitive
i l.'riilc pine
Gclder.rcd
Cntlor-tfOOd
Viroir.ia creeper
.V.'.or
i Sosscberry
Elr-
Wild grcpe
Arericd'i eln
Wnite ash
i Virginia pine
I Tulip tree
Vecetetion
Jntcrr.;c-tliate Rcsistarit
Kaple Sugar maple
Virt|inia creeper Phlox '
KM to oak fok
Elm fe pic-
Short leaf pine Shrubby willow
Aster
Linden





* "
Crops
Sensitive
Alfalfa
Bsrlpy
Oats
Rye
Ki,e?.t
Sweet potato
Soybean
Sweet clever
Cotton Tobacco
Clover


JnterneJiatc Resistant
Irish Potato Corn
Clover .Sorjhysi
Sweet clover








Reference 23.
                          SO, DOSE-INJURY CURVES
                         FOR SENSITIVE PLANT SPECIES
                               DAMAGE LIKELY
                INJURY OR DAMAGE
                    POSSIBLE
                (THRESHOLD RANGE!
                   2    345    6
                      DURATION OF EXPOSURE. l»»
      Figure  5-4.  S02 dose-injury  curves for sensitive
                    plant  species (22).
                                 90

-------
show that there has been an intensification of acidity in the northeastern
region of the U.S. since the mid 1950's.  Precipitation in a large portion
of the eastern U.S. averages between pH 4.0 and 4.2 annually.  Values
between pH 2.1 and 3.6 have been measured for individual storms at distances
several hundred miles downwind of urban centers.  The areas experiencing
highest acidity are typically downwind of the areas where sulfur emissions
are highest (17, 21).
     Acid rain affects plant life in varying degrees depending on the pH
and-the type of plant species.   Experiments show that the effects on plants
may include reduction in growth or yield, leaf damage, death, and chlorosis.
Acid rain also has been shown to affect aquatic organisms, and it is be-
lieved that thousands of lakes  are now experiencing reductions in fish
population due to acidification between pH 5.0 and 6.0 (21).
     The impact of fossil  fuel  combustion in controlled utility boilers  on
acid precipitation and plant damage is potentially significant.  In the
previous discussion,  it was estimated that controlled coal-fired boilers
                                      3
could account for a level  of 11.0 u9/m  suspended sulfate in the central
region of the U.S.   This level  is approximately equivalent to ambient
sulfate concentrations associated with areas experiencing significant acid
precipitation.   Typical ambient sulfate levels prevalent in the U.S. are
shown in Figure 5-5 .
     Vegetation may also sustain injury from elevated levels of trace
elements.  As shown previously (Table 5-9), concentrations of cadmium in
vegetation near coal-fired utility boilers may exceed levels observed to
be toxic in plants.  The effects of cadmium toxicity in plants are wilting,
chlorosis, necrosis,  and reduction of growth.  Substantial declines in
yield of the soybean, wheat and lettuce have been observed when the tissue
concentration of cadmium in foliar parts of these species was as low as
7, 3, and 11.5 mg/kg, respectively.  Based on tests of the utility boiler
of this study, it appears that emissions from coal firing may  result in
high cadmium  plant burdens and potential plant injury.
                                    91

-------

                                   (A) Urban Levels
<-v*-   •
{::-.:;::-' b.O --6.
tiol^Cu


     ? 7.0 - 8.9M/mJ

                                   (B)  Rurc-,1 Levels
       Figure 5-5.   Geographical distribution of typical sulfate
                     levels  in the  United States (23).
                                       92

-------
Effect of Solid  Wastes
     A major environmental  concern  involving  the  use of fossil fuels is the
generation of  coal  ash  and  flue  gas  desulfurization (FGD) sludges.  The
quantity of such wastes  depends  on  the proportion of coal utilization and
the amount of  S02 removed from stack gases.   It has been estimated that by
1985 coal ash  will  be generated  at  a rate of  83 Tg/y and FGD sludges at a
rate of 30 Tg/y  (dry basis).  Landfill is the common means of disposal for
these wastes.  By 1980,  it  is estimated that  2000 to 3000 m2 of land per MW
of boiler capacity will  be  required  for disposal  purposes (24).  The compo-
sition of the  wastes will depend on  the fuel  source, the boiler design, and
the flue gas desulfurization system.  Most FGD processes generate a waste
sludge consisting predominantly  of calcium sulfite and sulfate.  Various
trace elements are also  found in the FGD sludge.  The trace elements originate
from reagents  used in SO  removal, from process water, from trace elements
                         yv
in the combusted coal, and  from  fly  ash which is  collected by the FGD system.
Fly ash and bottom ash usually consist of about 80 percent silica, alumina,
iron oxide, and lime.  The  composition of trace elements found in bottom
and fly ash is similar.
     Based on  tests of the  coal-fired boiler, the rate of generation of
solid waste from a 874 MW coal-fired boiler would be 0.11 Gg/hr of bottom
slag/fly ash and 0.13 Gg/hr of scrubber sludge from the FGD operator.
     The concentrations of  trace elements in  the  combined fly ash/bottom
slag and in the scrubber sludge  are shown in Table 5-13 and 5-14.  For
almost all  elements, the concentrations far exceed both the health and
ecological  DMEG values for  both  solids.  The waste is considered hazardous,
creating difficult waste disposal problems.
     FGD scrubber wastes and coal ash are usually disposed in impoundment
ponds or landfills.   The major concern in either disposal approach is the
release of trace elements to ecosystems in localized areas surrounding the
disposal  sites.  Lateral and upward movement of trace elements through the
soil  to plant rooting zones  may be possible, and contamination of ground
and surface waters may occur.   Additional  adverse consequences include the
diversion  of land from other uses, and aesthetic degradation at the dis-
posal  site.

                                    93

-------
            TABLE 5-13.  TRACE ELEMENT CONTENT OF FLY  ASH  AND
                         BOTTOM SLAG FROM COAL FIRING

El ement
Al
As
Be
Ca
Cd
Co
Cr
Cu
Fe
Hg
Mg
Mn
Ni
Pb
Sb
Sr
V
Zn
Concentration
mg/kg
82,000
11
8.2
66,000
1.2
44
210
820
170,000
< 1
*
ND
700
330
160
7%0
280
86
1,500
DM EG value
Health
16,000
50
6
48,000
10
150
50
1,000
300
2
18,000
50
45
50
1,500
9,200
500
500
, mg/kg
Ecology
200
10
11
3,200
0.2
50
50
10
50
50
17,400
20
2
10
40
NDf
30
20
Discharge
Health
5.1
0.21
1
1.4
0.12
0.29
4.2
0.82
580
< 0.5
14
7.3
3.2
0.0047
0.03
0.17
3.0
Severity
Ecology
410
1.1
0.75
21
6
0.88
4.2
82
3,500
< 0.02
35
200
16
0.17
2.9
75
  Level 2 procedures were utilized.

f ND - data not available.
                                  94

-------
       TABLE 5-14.  TRACE ELEMENT CONTENT OF SCRUBBER DISCHARGE
                    SOLIDS FROM COAL FIRING
El ement
Al
As
Be
Ca
Cd
Co
Cr
Cu
Fe
Hg
Mg
Mn
Ni
Pb
Sb
Sr
V
Zn
Concentration
mg/kg
24,000
110
2.5
51 ,000
36
22
52
190
50,000
< 1.0
0.49
560
96
1,100
38
990
190
6,500
DMEG value
Health
16,000
50
6
48,000
10
150
50
1,000
300
2
18,000
50
45
50
1,500
9,200
500
500
, mg/kg
Ecology
200
10
11
3,200
0.2
50
50
10
50
50
17,400
20
2
10
40
NDf
30
20
Discharge
Health
1.5
2.2
1
1.1
3.6
0.15
1.0
0.19
170
< 0.5
0.000027
11
2.1
22
0.025
0.11
0.38
13
Severity
Ecology
120
11
0.22
16
200
0.44
1.0
19
1,000
< 0.02
0.000028
28
5
110
0.95
6.3
320
Level 2 procedures were utilized.
ND - data not available.
                                  95

-------
     Because of the limited experience concerning land disposal of wastes,
and the long time lags preceding future potential adverse impacts, there
is significant uncertainty regarding the level of restrict!"veness necessary
to assure the environmental adequacy of various land disposal  methods.
Because of such uncertainty, it seems likely that stringent waste disposal
regulations will be proposed to prevent the migration of waste sludges
in the terrestrial environment and the movement of leachate to
underground water sources.
     Disposal of FGD sludges and coal ash is already subject to regulations
at the state level.  Recent federal  legislation (the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act) now requires that  criteria be developed to classify wastes
and suitable disposal  management techniques.  Under the proposed criteria
it is plausible that FGD sludges and coal ash may be classified as
hazardous waste, and that disposal of these wastes will be restricted by
the stringent requirements now being proposed for hazardous waste
management facilities.  Typically, these requirements would restrict
the land disposal of hazardous wastes to "secure landfills" de-
signed to provide protection for all-time of the quality of ground and
surface waters.  By definition, the secure landfill would prevent signifi-
cant adverse impact to certain environmental sectors (i.e., public health
and ecology).  Unfortunately, the secure landfill, is, by definition, an
ideal design which cannot be attained except at very great cost.  There is,
therefore, a need to define reasonably attainable land disposal designs
which offer a high level of environmental protection.
     Various recent efforts have been conducted to define appropriate land-
fill criteria.  In one pertinent study (25), the effectiveness of three
scenario landfill designs for the disposal of FGD scrubber cake were
evaluated.  The scrubber cake considered is that generated by the Double
Alkali FGD system utilized at the reference industrial boiler of this study.
Migration of leachate to the groundwater and the loading rate of dissolved
solids into the groundwater were estimated by considering the permeability
of the landfill layers and the solubility of solids as determined from
laboratory tests.  Table 5-15 summarizes the analysis of the three landfill
cases.  As indicated, permeability of the soils and the scrubber waste is
                                    96

-------
       TABLE 5-15.   LEACHING RATES  FOR THREE  LANDFILL  DESIGNS
Case

I
II
III
h
(m)
5.5
5.5
6.1
L2
(m)
0.6
0.6
0.3
L3
(m)
3.0
3.0
3.0
Kl
(m/sec)
10'7
io~7
io-7
K2
(m/sec)
ID'10
ID'8
ID'11
K3
(m/sec)
ID'6
io-10
io-6
Keff
(m/sec)
7.7 x 10"8
1.5 x 10'10
3.0 x 10"10
t
(years)
1
200
100
12
(years)
20
6000
3000
Q 	
(kg/m2/yr)
5.08
0.016
0.032
       Liner or
       Cor;;p;r.cted
       Filter Cake
Double
Alkali
Filter Cake
f •.'•' . ', v . '.' • :' .'•'• ' .';'•! ' '•'. '• '.'• •'.
} Soil
VI
• ' 't
7>

L2
*
                                          A (	 Ground
                                            (Water
                                                    Table
L,   =  Depth of  uncompacted filter cake  (m)

L-   =  Depth of  compacted filter cake or liner (Case III)  (m)

1-2   =  Depth of  soil (m)

Kl'  K2'  K3   = Coeff''cients of permeability of layers 1,  2,  and 3, respectively
             (m/sec)
        Effective permeability of overall filter cake plus soil layers (m/sec)

        Time for migration of leachate to groundwater table (years)

        Time for washout of major dissolved solids from filter cake (years)
                                                                o
        Loading rate of total  dissolved solids to groundwater (kg/m /yr)
                                    97

-------
the primary factor in initiating leachate migration.   In the first case,
all net precipitation becomes leachate, and the time  to reach groundwater
is about one year while the time to wash out the major portion of the
soluble solids is about 20 years.  The overall  washout rate of soluble
                                                              2
solids during the 20 year period is calculated  to be  5.08 kg/m /yr.  Con-
tamination of groundwater sources over significant landfill  areas  at this
washout rate is clearly unacceptable.   In the second  and third cases, 200
and 100 years elapse before leachate reaches groundwater, and leaching  of
                                                             —2     2
soluble substances occurs at the low loading rate of  1.6 x 10   kg/m /yr
              2     2
and  3.2 x 10  fc kg/m /yr,  respectively.  The time for total  washout of  all
soluble solids would be 6000 and 3000 years, respectively.   The extent  of
impact of such a leaching rate would depend on  the size of the landfill
and the flow of the underground aquifer.  For example, for case II, a 1
acre landfill over a small underground water source flowing at one million
gallons per year would cause an increase of 2 ppm in  the dissolved solids
content of the underground water.  Most of the  2 ppm  increase would be
composed of lime and sodium sulfate and sulfite salts.  As indicated by
Tables 5-13 and 5-14 trace element would comprise a small fraction of the
incremental increase, and considering the low solubility of the trace
elements, their concentration in the underground water would be at least
three orders of magnitude less than the lime, sulfate, and sulfite con-
centrations, and well below the standard for potable  water (see Table 5-10).
The rate of leaching can be minimized still further by mixing bentonite
with a layer of soil to provide a layer over the filter cake after it has
been landfilled to the desired level.   The bentonite  soil mixture achieves
a low permeability of 10"11 m/sec.  By contrast, the  permeability of silty
clay and permeable soils is about 10"10 m/sec,  and 10"  m/sec,  respective-
ly.  The permeability of the double alkali scrubber cake is 10"  m/sec,
whereas it is about  10"6 m/sec  for lime/limestone type scrubber sludges.
     Estimated leaching rates can be confirmed  by tracking the migration
of leachate in the landfill.  In one experimental landfill used for dis-
posal of FGD scrubber wastes (25), and which contains no seal or barrier
other than the native clay silt (permeability of 10   m/sec),  tests show
that no leachate has migrated as far as six inches below the disposal layer
after the first year of operation.  The results and analyses indicate that

                                    98

-------
 landfills  of untreated scrubber cake can be constructed  such that signifi-
 cant  adverse impacts will  not occur.   Moreover,  it  is  conceivable that a
 completed  landfill  can be  reclaimed for use as a park  or farmland, provided
 a  sufficient soil  cover is applied and care is exercised not to disrupt
 the stabilized  waste or to permit its migration  entry  into the terrestrial
 environment.
      The environmental  concerns  associated  with  the wastewater holding and
 settling ponds  for  the fly ash/bottom slag  and scrubber  sludges are similar
 to those of  the landfill operation.   Leaching of water soluble constituents
 of the wastewater  into the underlying soil, and  into the groundwater, can
 occur.  In one  study (26)  of  the Teachability of trace elements from ash
 and scrubber sludge  settling  ponds,  samples of leachate  from five different
 coal-fired generating  stations were  found to contain concentrations of
 trace elements  exceeding proposed EPA standards  for Public Water Supply
 Intake.  The  rate of leakage  is  affected by the  type of  element, soil type,
 and depth of  water table.   To prevent leakage, settling  ponds are often
 lined with impervious material.   As with landfills, evidence has shown that
 the absorption  capacity of impervious  soils  can  reduce concentrations of
 elements in the leachate before  reaching the water table  (26).   With pro-
 per design of the settling ponds,  it  is  expected  that  the impact of leach-
 ing can be minimized to an insignificant degree.  It is  expected that such
 designs will  become  mandatory under rules established  by the authority of
 the Resource  Conservation  and Recovery Act.
 ECONOMIC IMPACT
      The direct economic impacts  associated with  residuals of fuel combus-
 tion  involve  the costs of  damages  (or benefits) sustained when the residuals
 enter the environment.  Second order economic impacts  associated with the
 residuals involve the  alterations that  occur in employment, the tax base,
 energy prices,  income, and  land  values due  to the damages (or benefits)
 resulting from  combustion  residuals.  The quantification of direct economic
 impacts involves the difficult task of ascribing economic values to environ-
mental changes.   Quantification of second order economic effects are yet
more difficult  because of  gaps in knowledge which make it impossible to
determine the complex relationships between cost and the numerous socio-
economic factors involved.

                                    99

-------
     A number of ongoing energy related studies are attempting to develop
sophisticated economic models which will predict the cost of environmental
damages (6, 23, 27).  The models address the cost of visibility reduction,
health effects (morbidity and mortality), and certain second order effects.
Utilization of the models requires substantial  input data involving regional
demography and emission source distributions.  The models require further
refinement and are currently under continuing development.  The data base
or scope of the present program did not permit the adaption and utilization
of such models.
     The extent of the economic impacts resulting from residuals of coal-
fired utility boilers is proportional  to the extent of the environmental
damages which occur.  The analyses have shown that the impact of emissions
from coal-fired boilers tested in this study is substantial.  Ambient con-
centrations of gaseous pollutants and trace elements are estimated to be
significant in the vicinity of the model coal-fired boiler.  In fact, based
on the worst case circumstances assumed for the analysis of maximum ambient
concentrations, federal ambient air quality standards for sulfur oxides may
be violated in the vicinity of the plant.  Trace element concentrations in
soils (i.e., especially cadmium) near coal-fired boilers may result in
toxic accumulation of these elements in plants.  Localized crop damage will
be significant, and additional land requirements will be required at coal-
fired plants for disposal of wastes.  The cost of these impacts will be
significant in the affected areas.  Higher medical costs and loss of
productivity will be experienced in the area of coal firing.  Annual cost of
cleanup and maintenance for soiling damages will be greater in the affected
areas, revenue for crop sales will be reduced somewhat, and esthetic blight
in the area of landfills will diminish the value of land and activities
nearby.
     Whatever the extent to which additional controls may be required for
coal-fired boilers, the comparative cost of such controls will probably be
significant  compared to the overall operating cost of a boiler and other
factors affecting the overall costs.  Control of NOX emissions from cyclone-
fired units would probably require either thermal decomposition or catalytic
reduction; the cost of these technologies is rather uncertain at this time.
                                   100

-------
Costs of NO  control  for these units may be on the order of those  for SO
           /v      "                                                     y\
control.  Even when predicted pollutant loadings meet environmental standards,
it is not entirely clear whether the increasing use of fossil  fuels may be
continued at the forecasted levels of control  technology without potential
long term environmental damages.  If it is found that long  term effects of
pollution (e.g., trace metals accumulation, lake acidity, land use) are
unacceptable, then more stringent environmental regulations can be expected,
and it is clear that energy costs will increase with increasing control
requirements.
                                    101

-------
                               REFERENCES


 1.  U.S. Department of Health, Education,  and Welfare.  Air  Quality Criteria
     for Sulfur Oxides.  AP-50.  March  1967.

 2.  U.S. Department of Health, Education,  and Welfare.  Air  Quality Criteria
     for Nitrogen Oxides.  January 1971.

 3.  U.S. Department of Health, Education  and Welfare.   Air Quality Criteria
     for Particulate Matter.   January 1969.

 4.  U.S. Department of Health, Education  and Welfare.   Air Quality Criteria
     for Carbon Monoxide.  March 1970,

 5.  Waldbott, G.  Health Effects of Environmental  Pollutants.   1973.

 6.  Lundy, R.T. and D. Grahn.  Argonne National  Laboratory.   Predictions
     of the Effects of Energy Production on Human Health,  a paper  presented
     at the Joint Statistical Meetings  of  the American  Statistical Associa-
     tion Biometric Society,  Chicago, Illinois.  August 1977.

 7.  Finch, S. and S. Morris.  Brookhaven  National  Laboratory.  Consistency
     of Reported Health Effects of Air Pollution, BNL-21808.

 8.  Shin, C.  Application of a Langrangian Statistical  Trajectory Model to
     the Simulation of Sulfur Pollution over North  Eastern United  States.
     Preprints of Third Symposium on Atmospheric  Turbulence,  Diffusion, and
     Air Quality.  1976.

 9.  Nelson, W., Knelson, J,, Hasselblad,  V.   Health  Effects  Research
     Laboratory of Environmental Protection Agency.   Air Pollutant Health
     Effects Estimation Model, EPA Conference on  Environmental  Modeling
     and Simulation.  Cincinnati.  April 1976.

10.  Effects of Trace Contaminants from Coal  Combustion.   Proceedings of a
     Workshop Sponsored by Division of  Biomedical and Environmental Research
     and Development Administration.  August 1976.  Knoxville,  Tennessee.

11.  Sullivan, R.J.  Litton Systems,  Inc.   Air Pollution Aspects of Iron
     and Its Compounds.  U.S. Department of Commerce/National  Bureau of
     Standards.  September 1969.

12.  Athanassiadis, Y.C.  Litton Systems..  Inc. Air Pollution Aspects of
     Zinc and Its Compounds,  U.S. Department of Commerce/National  Bureau
     of Standards.   September 1969.
                                   102

-------
13.  Draft of proposed rules for "Standards Applicable to Owners  and
     Operators of Hazardous Waste Treatment, Storage and Disposal
     Facilities," obtained from Office of Solid Waste, Environmental
     Protection Agency.  March 1978.

14.  Sehmel, G.  Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratories, Pacific Northwest
     Laboratory Annual Report for 1972, BNWL-1751,  Vol.  II.   1973.

15.  Vaughan, B., et al.   Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratories,  Review
     of Potential Impact on Health and Environmental Quality from Metals
     Entering the Environment as a Result of Coal  Utilization.  August
     1975.

16.  Berry, W. and A. Wallace.  Trace Elements in the Environment - Their
     Role and Potential Toxicity as Related to Fossil Fuels, University of
     California Laboratory of Nuclear Medicine and Radiological Biology.
     1974.

17.  Argonne National Laboratory, Assessment of the Health and  Environmen-
     tal Effects of Power Generation in the Midwest, Vol. II Ecological
     Effects.  April 1977.

18.  Department of Health Education and Welfare, Air Quality Criteria  for
     Hydrocarbons.  March 1970.

19.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1975 National Emissions Report.
     May 1978.

20.  Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Air Quality Criteria  for
     Photochemical Oxidants.  March 1970.

21.  Glass, N.  Office of Health and Ecological Effects, Ecological Effects
     of Gaseous Emissions from Coal Combustion.  November 1977.

22.  Argonne National Laboratory, The Environmental Effects of Using  Coal
     for Generating Electricity, prepared for Nuclear Regulatory  Commis-
     sion, Washington, D.C.  May 1977.

23.  Argonne National Laboratory, A Preliminary Assessment of the Health
     and Environmental Effects of Coal Utilization in the Midwest.  January
     1977.

24.  Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development,
     Office of Energy Minerals and Industry, Health and Environmental
     Impacts of  Increased Generation of Coal Ash and FGD Sludges, Report
     to the Committee on Health and Ecological Effects of Increased Coal
     Utilization.  November 1977.

25.  Krizek, R. and J. Fitzpatric.  Northwestern University, Double Alkali
     Landfill Tests Evaluation, Technical Report 120.  April 1976.
                                    103

-------
26.  Holland, W.F.   Environmental  Effects of Trace Elements from Ponded Ash
     and Scrubber Sludge, Report 202,  Electric Power Research Institute,
     Palo Alto, California.   1975.

27.  Ford, A. and H.W. Lorber.   Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory,
     Methodology for the Analysis of the Impacts of Electric Power Pro-
     duction in the West.  January 1977.

28.  Argonne National Laboratory,  Environmental Control  Implications of
     Generating Electric Power from Coal, Technology Status Report
     Volume I, Coal Utilization Program.  December 1976.

29.  Science and Public Policy Program, University of Oklahoma,  Energy
     Alternatives:   A Comparative Analysis.  May 1975.
                                   104

-------
                                 APPENDIX A
                         SIMPLIFIED AIR QUALITY MODEL

     Simple ambient air quality models were used to estimate the maximum
expected ground level concentrations of criteria pollutants.  It is impor-
tant to recognize that these air quality values are estimates only, based
upon simplifying assumptions, as discussed below.  Two sets of meteoro-
logical conditions were considered: worst case and typical.  Conditions
were selected that are representative of what could reasonably be expected
to occur almost anywhere in the country but are not specific to the area of
the plant from which the pollutant emission rates were obtained.  It was
assumed that all species were inert.  No photochemical reactions were
considered.
     There are several meteorological conditions which can produce high
ground level pollutant concentrations.  These conditions can result in plume
coning, looping, fumigation, and trapping, all of which can cause high
ambient concentrations.  In the case of coning, high levels occur along the
plume centerline.  Looping causes high ground level concentrations at points
where the plume impacts the ground.  Fumigation causes high ground level
concentrations which are generally lower than those from plume trapping.
For this study it was assumed that plume trapping constituted the worst
case in terms of ground level concentrations.
     Trapping conditions occur when an inversion layer or stable air aloft
inhibits upward dispersion of the plume.  Although the plume is trapped by
the capping stable layer at height L, the plume distribution is still
Gaussian in the horizontal and uniform in the vertical directions.  Ambient
concentrations can be estimated by the following equation (1):
                                    105

-------
E
 -l   |_
                      P -i/2          +  exp -1/2
              N-l             "z
              exp -1/2             + exp
                          °z                     °z
Where: X (x,y,z;H) = Concentration  at  point  (x,y,z) assuming an
                     effective  stack height  of H, yg/m3
                H  - Effective  stack height, m
                Q  = Pollutant  emission rate, kg/hr
                y  = Mean wind  speed,  m/s
                a  = Concentration  distribution within the plume
                     in the horizontal (oy)  and vertical (oz)
                     directions, m
                z  = Height above the  ground, m
                J  = Maximum wind speed class index, unitless
                N  = Wind speed class  index, unitless
                L  = Height of  the  stable layer, m
     At ground level  (z = 0)  and at the plume center line (y = 0)
Equation (1) reduces  to:
                                - zf]+
                                                                     (2)
                      / U  OWI I «- I I
            + exp -1/2|


     For typical  conditions, ground level concentrations were calculated
using a Gaussian  solution  to the convective diffusion equation  (2):

X (x,y,o) = ^-fy- exp  - {(H2/2az2) + (y2/2ay2)|                     (3)
                                   106

-------
                                        3
where            X  = Concentration, g/m
                 Q  = Pollutant release rate, g/s
             a ,o   = Crosswlnd and vertical plume standard deviations, m
                £s  = Mean wind speed, m/s
                 H  = Effective stack height, m
               x,y  = Downwind and crosswind distances, m
At the plume center! ine, Equation (3) reduces to:
                 * (x....) -          "P  '     -                      M)
The maximum value of this equation occurs at the distance where
     In Equations (3) and (4!), H is defined by:
                            H = HS +  AH                                 (5)
Where H  = physical height of the stack and  H = plume rise, both expressed
in meters.  There are more than 30 plume-rise formulas in the literature.
All of which require empirical determination, of one or more constants.   For
the purpose of this study, the Briggs plume rise formula was chosen to  cal-
culate the final plume rise in stable conditions,
                                          1/3
                          AH-2.6f-f-\                               (6)
Where:     AH = Plume rise, m
            y = Wind speed, m/s
            s = Stability parameter, unitless
            F = Buoyancy flux.
The stability parameter, s, is defined as:

                            S=*-                                     (7)
                            *   0 9z                                     V  '
                                           
-------
               atmosphere of -0.0065 K/m, a value of ,0033 K/m was
                            80
               employed for -r— in this study.
                            oZ
The buoyancy flux, F, is defined as:
                        F=flgwr2                                     (8)
                             s
Where    AT  =  Stack temperature minus the ambient air temperature, K
         Ts  =  Stack temperature,  K
          g  =  Gravitational constant, m/s2
          w  =  Stack exit velocity, m/s
          r  =  Inside radius of the stack, m.
     The plume rise was calculated using Equation (6),  The data used for
the calculations are shown in Table A-l.  The values selected for wind speed
are discussed below.

              TABLE A-l.   STACK  PARAMETERS AND PLUME  RISE

         Stack temperature,  K                         463
         Ambient temperature, K                        293
         Stack exit velocity, m/s                       33
         Stack area, irr                                 41
         Stack height, m                               213
     Equation (2) was used to estimate maximum ambient concentrations result-
ing from short term meteorological conditions causing plume trapping.  As a
worst case estimate for this study, plume trapping conditions were assumed to
persist for periods as long as three hours.  Equation (4) was used to
estimate maximum ambient concentrations for conditions which could
typically persist over a 24 hour period.  For the 24 hour concentration
forecasts, typical conditions of wind speed (4 m/sec) and atmosphere sta-
bility (Class D stability) were assumed to persist.  For the short-term
plume trapping, conditions of low wind speed (1 m/sec) and a moderately
                                    108

-------
unstable atmosphere (Class B stability) were assumed to persist throughout
the applicable averaging period.  These conditions were selected because
they produce high ground level concentrations.  The inversion inducing plume
trapping was assumed to be at an elevation equivalent to the effective
stack height (817 m).   Results of these calculations are presented in

Table A-2.
            TABLE A-2.  PREDICTED MAXIMUM AMBIENT CONCENTRATIONS
                        OF CRITERIA POLLUTANTS
         Pollutant
Pollutant Concentration,
        •]ig/rt|3
         24 hour period:

             NOX
             CO
             S02
             Particulates
             Total  organics

         Plume trapping:
             NOX
             CO
             S02
             Particulates
             Total  organics
           46
         <34
           48
            5
            0.2
         2800
       <2100
         2900
          310
           10
                                    109

-------
                       REFERENCES FOR APPENDIX A
1.  Bierly, E.  W., and E.  W.  Hewson.   Some Restrictive Meteorological
    Conditions  to be Considered in the Design of Stacks, Journal  Applied
    Meteorology, 1,3, 383-390, 1962.

2.  Slade, D.  H.  Meteorology and Atomic Energy, U.  S. Atomic Energy
    Commission, 1968.
                                   110

-------
                               APPENDIX B
                    ORGANIC ANALYSES FROM COAL  FIRING

Sample Preparation
     For coal firing, samples were prepared for both phases  (Level  1  and  2)
of organic analyses at the same time and aliquots were divided to meet  the
requirements of each phase.  Runs 133 and 134 were made using the SASS
train and were to supply all the organic samples.  However,  only 134  was
prepared and fully analyzed because this sampling was  taken  when the
facility was operating at a slightly higher percentage of capacity.   The
full data assessment, therefore, has been generated only for run 134  and
is representative of organic emissions from this source.
     The compound identification phase of this  effort (Level  2)  used  gas
chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS) as the only analytical  technique.
Compounds of low volatility, high molecular weight or with a strong
affinity to those GC columns used would not have been identified.  There-
fore, for this environmental assessment, closure with the Level  1 non-
volatile organics (> C^g) was not expected.
     Samples were prepared using procedures detailed in Reference B-2  with
modifications whenever required to ensure Level 2 quality data would  be
produced.  The steps involved for each sample type are summarized below.
     Water samples:  Samples were taken on each of six sampling days  at the
site.  Ten t composites were prepared for each  sample stream.  Each compo-
site was extracted three times with a total of 450 ml  of methylene  chloride
at each of three pH levels.  First the water was acidified to a pH  of 2 with
HC1; then it was neutralized to pH 7; and finally, it was made basic  to
pH 11 with NaOH.
     XAD-2 module condensates:  Each sample was extracted three times with
methylene chloride at each of three pH conditions:  2, 7, and 11.  The  volume
of methylene chloride used was 10 percent of the condensate  volume.
                                   Ill

-------
     Solids (filters and loose participate):  Each sample was  extracted
with methylene chloride in a Soxhlet apparatus for 24 hours.
     XAD-2 resins:  Each sample was extracted in a Soxhlet apparatus  for
24 hours with methylene chloride.
     Slurries:  The solids and liquids were separated by filtration and a
liquid composite was made for each stream to represent the total  sampling
period of six days.  The water composite was extracted three  times with a
total of 450 ml of methylene chloride at each of three pH conditions.  In
this case, the pH was first adjusted to 11, then the water acidified  to
pH 7; and finally to pH 2.  A portion of the solid composites  was extracted
1n a Soxhlet apparatus for 24 hours with methylene chloride.
     1 ml aliquots were taken of each methylene chloride extract  for  TCO
and GC/MS analyses.  Then the solutions were concentrated to  10 ml in
Kuderna-Danish evaporators.  Aliquots taken for analyses included 1 ml for
TCO and GC/MS and 1 ml for GRAV/IR.  The flow diagram in Figure B-l shows
the sample handling and analysis procedures used.
Summary
Level 1 —
     Table B-l is a complete overview of Level 1 data generated from  the
SASS sampling, run 134, both into (IN) and out of (OUT) the scrubber.  The
resultant Level 1 weight data are tabulated under "Level 1 Data Assess-
                  3                  3
ment, 134 IN, yg/m  and 134 OUT, yg/m ".  These data have been compared to
the most toxic MEG compound for that Level  1 reporting point.   The Level 1
reporting points are C1-C6, C7-C17 and LC1-LC7.  The C1-C6 and C7-C17 cate-
gories are organized by boiling point ranges and the LC1-LC7  are  organized
by column separation fractions.  Table B-2 gives a general outline of
the Level 1 reporting points.
     The results of this Level 1 assessment, by MEG categories and DMEG
concentrations are:
     •  The Level 1 reporting points which were identified for Level  2
        based on the presence of low probability (not likely  present
        under these source conditions) MEG compounds were C3,  C5, C6,
        C9, CIO, LC5, and LC6.
                                   112

-------
                             ORGANIC
                             RINSE OR
                             EXTRACT
                                DRY
    1 ML ALIQUOT
                          SOLUTION
                         rBULK
 TCO
GC/MS [
                  KUDERNA
                  DANISH
                  CONCENTRATION
               ^ 1 ML ALIQUOT
< 8 ML ALIQUOT   1 ML ALIQUOT^
                              IS THE
                              SAMPLE
                            ADEQUATELY
                           CHARACTERIZED
    SPECIAL
    ANALYSES
                             SPECIAL
                             ANALYSES
 Figure  B-1.  Flow chart of sample  handling and analysis procedures
                                113

-------
TABLE B-l.  LEVEL 1 DATA ASSESSMENT
Level 1
SampHng
Point
CI-C6 Cl
C2


C3






C4
C5







C6



Total C1-C6


C7-C16 C7

CB
C9




CIO


Cll
•

C12
C13


C14
CIS
C16


Total C7-C16
134 In 134 Out
1.8x10? 1.2x10?,
< 6.5x10 (O ppm) < 6.5x10^

7 ")
< e.Sxlo'M ppm) < 6.5x10^






7.4x10? 6.5xlQ2
< 6.5x10' < 6.510*







< e.sxio2 < e.sxio2



Z.SxlO3 to 1.9xl03
5.2x10* to ,
4.5xlOJ


4.7xl02 2.3xl02
1.3x10 4.0x10




2.6xl02 1.9x10


S.OxlQ2 1.5x10


7.1x10 1.2x10
7,4


2.4
2.7x10 S.OxlO"1
4.2x10 7.1

•» •»
1.2xlOJ 3.3xlOJ
Most Toxic
MEG Compound
Methane
Acetylene


Ethylen*1mine






Ethylamtne
Acroleln







N,N-D1methy1-
hydrazlne





Tetramethyl
Lead
Malelc Add
N-N1troso-
dlflethylamlne



N-Nltroso-
dlethylamine

Hexachloro-
cyclohexane

2.4-D1chloro-
Hexachloro-
cyclo-
pentadlene
An1s1d1ne$
4-Amtnob1phenyl
Phthalates



DMEGj
3.2x10?
5.3X10"1


3.3xl02






1.8x10?
2.5xlO£







3.7x10






l.SxlO2

l.OxlO3
1.2




1.2x10


S.OxlO2


7.0xl03
l.lxlO2


S.OxlO2
4.5xlOJ
S.OxlO3



Probable
MEG Category
1. Aliphatic Hydro
1. Aliphatic Hydro


10. Amines






10. Amines
7. Aldehydes/
Ke tones






11. Azo Compounds






26. Organo-
MetalKcs
8. Carboxyltc
Acids
12. N1trosam1nes




12. N1trosam1nes


2. Halogens ted
Aliph.
Hydrocarbons
19. Halophenols
2. Halogenated
AHph.
Hydrocarbons
10. Amines
10. Anines
8. Carboxyllc
Adds and
Esters

Sample
DMEG
134 In 134 Out *»«"«nt Notes
'.< 1 « 1 Level2 not required -
« 1 « 1 Difference between IN
and OUT within SiA
accuracy.
< 2 < 2 Most Toxic MEG
compound Is reactive •
the nonresctlve com-
pound Is a factor of 10
higher
6.5x10?) Formaldehyde at
1.6x10 ). Level 2 required
< 1 « 1 Level 2 not required -
c 2.6 < 2.6 Difference with IN and OUT
within SiA accuracy.
Host toxic MEG Is reactive
and ratio Is within SiA
uncertainty - next most
toxic Is Methyl Iodine
at 8.5x10 . Level 2
required.
'20 < 20 Most toxic MEG Is
reactive - next most toxic
1s dlchloro-propenes at
1.1 xlO' Level I required.




Solvent contaminants were
Q B „ - the major cau« of these
concentrations.
10.0 33.0 Most toxic MEG Is
reactive - next most toxic
Is chloropyridine at
4.8xl03 - IN and OUT
within SSA uncertainty
22.0 1.5 Host toxic MEG Is
reactive - next most toxtc
1s trlbromomethane at
0.6 0.03 Level 2 not required.


« 1 « 1 Level 2 not required.
« 1 « 1 Level 2 not required.


"1 "1 Level 2 not required.
« 1 =< 1 Level 2 not required.
« 1 « 1 Level 2 not required




-------
                                                              TABLE  B-l   (Continued)
cn
Level 1
Sampling
Point
LC1-LC7 LCI
LC2
LC3
LC4
LC5
LC6
LC7
134 In
ug/m
1.6x10
6.3x10
2.4x10
2.4xl02
l.OxlO3
5.7xl02
3.1xl02
134 Out
ug/m
1.0x10
3.0
9.0
2.6x10
6.2xl02
Z.OxlO2
5.4x10
Host Toxic
MEG Compound
Tetraethyl Lead
PolychloHnated
Blphenyls
Benzo(a)pyrene
4-Nitrobiphenyl
n-Methyl-
n-n1trosoan1Hne
Perchloromethyl-
mereaptan
Pentachlorophenol
1-Amlnonaphthalene
DMEG
ug/m
l.OxlO2
S.OxlO2
2.1xlO-z
1.3xl03
1.3xl03
S.OxlO2
S.OxlO2
5.5x10?
Probable
MEG Category
26. Organometallics
16. Halogenated
21 . Fused Aromatic
Hydrocarbons
17. Aromatic Nltro
Compounds
12. N1trosam1nes
13. Mercaptans
19. Halophenols
10. Amines
Sample
DMEG
134 In 134 Out
« 1 « 1
1 1
l.lxlO3 4.3
1 1
0.77 0.5
0.71 0.25
0.62 0.11
0.56 0.1
Assessment Notes
Level 2 not required (IR
Identified aliphatic
hydrocarbons.)
Level 2 not required (IR
Identified aliphatic and
aromatic hydrocarbons)
POM screening necessary.
Level 2 required for POM
species.
Level 2 not required.
Most toxic compound
reactive - next most toxic
Dlnltrotoluene at 1.5xl03
- Level 2 required (IR
Identified hydrocarbons,
alcohols, esters and MEG.)
Level 2 required.
Level 2 required on
134 IN
               TOTAL LC1-LC7    2.2xl03    9.2xl02



            TOTAL LC2HC3+LC6    6.6x102    2.1xlOZ

-------
        TABLE B-2.  GENERAL LEVEL 1 REPORTING POINTS
General Level 1
Sample Classes
                Level 1
            Reporting Point
Inorganics
•    SSMS data in yg/m  for each element
                            3
t    Hg, As, Sb data in yg/m
Organics
     C1-C6 on site in yg/m  for each
     boiling point range
     C7-C12 in yg/m  for each boiling
     point range
     LC1-LC8 in yg/m3 for each MEG
     category
   LC Fraction
      1
          MEG Category Present
   (Theoretically Predicted Compounds)
 1.  Aliphatic Hydrocarbons (HCs)
 2.  Halogenated Aliphatic HCs
                          2.  Halogenated Aliphatic HCs
                         15.  Benzene, Substituted Benzene HCs
                         16.  Halogenated Aromatic HCs
                         21.  Fused Aromatic HCs
                         22.  Fused Nonalternate Polycylic HCs
                         15.  Benzene, Substituted Benzene HCs
                         16.  Halogenated Aromatic HCs
                         21.  Fused Aromatic HCs
                         22.  Fused Nonalternate  Polycyclic HCs
                         23.  Heterocyclic  Nitrogen  Compounds
                              116

-------
                  TABLE B-2  (Continued)
LC Fraction
MEG Category Present
                       3.  Ethers
                       4.  Halogenated Ethers
                       9.  Nitriles
                      17.  Aromatic Nitro Compounds
                      21.  Fused Aromatic HCs
                      22.  Fused Nonalternate Polycyclic HCs
                      23.  Heterocyclic Nitrogen Compounds
                      25.  Heterocyclic Sulfur Compounds
                       7.  Aldehydes, Ketones
                       9.  Nitriles
                      13.  Mercaptans
                      17.  Aromatic Nitro Compounds
                      18.  Phenols
                      24.  Heterocyclic Oxygen Compounds
                       5.  Alcohols
                       7.  Aldehydes, Ketones
                       8.  Carboxylic Acids, Derivatives
                       9.  Nitriles
                      10-.  Amines
                      18.  Phenols
                      19.  Halophenols
                          117

-------
                         TABLE B-2   (Continued)
      LC Fraction
          MEG Category Present
                             18.  Phenols

                             20.  Nitrophenols
                              8.   Carboxylic Acids,  Derivatives

                             10.   Amines

                             11.   Azo Compounds, Hydrazine Derivatives
          8*
 8.  Carboxylic Acids, Derivatives

14.  Sulfuric Acid, Sulfoxides
 Recent studies have shown that fraction 8 does not actually contain these
theoretically predicted categories.   Sulfuric acid and sulfoxides may not
be removed from the samples by the original extraction process.
                                  118

-------
     •  The Level 1 reporting points which were identified for Level  2  by
        weight criteria only and did not have supportable infrared  (IR)  or
        low resolution mass spectral (LRMS) data to indicate that toxic
        species were present were LC5 and LC6.

     •  The Level 1 reporting point clearly requiring Level 2 analysis
        based both on high probability and IR and LRMS were LC2 and LC3
        for the Halogenated Aromatic Hydrocarbons and the Fused Aromatic
        Hydrocarbons.

     •  For the C1-C7 species the Level 1 "IN" and "OUT" concentration
        variations are within the sampling and analytical accuracy.  For
        reporting points CIO, Cll, C13, C15, C16, LC2, LC3, LC4 and LC7
        the "OUT" concentrations are lower than the "IN" concentrations.
        Even though In most cases the "IN" concentrations do not exceed a
        DMEG criterion, the scrubber has reduced organic emissions.

Level 2—

     Compounds identified and quantified have been organized on Table B-3
by Level 1 reporting points.  This provides for some comparison with the
Level 1 data.

     An important analytical decision which was made when conducting this
data evaluation was to remove from consideration and tabulation most of the
common background compounds, e.g., phthalate esters, silicones and freons.

Therefore, the data reported are adjusted for background variations except
when a good deal of uncertainty existed.

     The Level 2 effort identified unusual background contributions:  In the
C8 range, acetone condensation products; and 1n the LC2 and LC3 fractions,
resin contributions.  These are clearly identified on Table B-3.

     The Level 2 analytical phase therefore:

     t  Verified that in the C1-C6 range, with good closure to the Level 1
        data, the compounds emitted were not the most toxic for these
        reporting points.  Those emitted did not exceed DMEG concentrations.

     •  Identified that the C8 and C9 species were condensation products
        of the SASS rinse solvents and not source related.

     t  Identified those Fused Aromatic Hydrocarbons and Aromatic Hydro-
        carbons required in LC2 and LC3 and those compounds identified  as
        source emissions did not exceed DMEG concentrations.

     In general the organic emissions were low and compounds did not  exceed
DMEG concentrations.
                                    119

-------
                      TABLE  B-3.   LEVEL  2 DATA ASSESSMENT
Level 1
Sampling Point
Cl
C2
C3

C4
C5
134 In
Level 2 Compound Identified vg/m3
None
None
Dichlorofl uoromethane
Vinyl Chloride
None
Methyl ene Formate -
134 Out
ug/m3


1.3 x 102
8.0 x 10
1.0 x 102
      C6


 TOTAL C1-C6


      C7



      C8




      C9


      CIO

      Cll

      C12

      C13

      C14

      CIS

      C16

TOTAL C7-C16
Diethyl  Ether
Carbon TetrachloHde

Tetrahydrofuran
Hethylmethacrylate
C7 Hydrocarbon
Unsaturated  Hydrocarbon
Hydrocarbon

Toluene
Tr1chloroethylene
MethylIsobutyl Ketone
  (Solvent Source)

3-Methylene-2-pentanone
  (Solvent Source)

Trlmethylbenzene
1.1 x 10J


1.8 x 102
  3 x 103

4.3 x 103
4.0 x 10
5.0 x 103
6.6 x 102

1.1 x 103
4.0 x 103
2.5 x 103
1.0 x 102
   0.6
1.8 x 10'
1.0 x 103

1.5 x 103
4.0 x 10
5.0 x 102
4.0 x TO2
                                 1.3 x
                  9.4 x 10£
                                         120

-------
                              TABLE  B-3    (Continued)
Level 1
Sampling Point
LCI
LC2
Level 2 Compound Identified

Phenyl (2.2.3-trlmethyl
134 In
ug/m3

2.0
134 Out
wg/m3


     LC3
TOTAL Per LC3

     LC5
     LC6
TOTAL Per LC6

     LC7



TOTAL LC2+LC3+LC6
  cyclopentlUdene)
  Methane

4(2-Butenyl}-l ,2-d1methyl-
  benzene
Decahydronaphthalene
D1-tert-buty1naphthalene
DimethylIsopropylnaphthalene
Hexaroethylbiphenyl
Cyclohexylbenzene
Hexamethyl, hexahydrolndacene
Trimethylna phthalenylsllane
1,3-D1ethylbenzene
Cg Substituted Benzene
Dlhydronaphthalene
1,3,5-TH ethyl benzene
Cio Substituted Naphthalene
Cio Substituted Decahydro-
  naphthalene
Methyl naphthalene (2 Isomers)
Anthracene or Phenanthrene
l-r-B1phenyl
9,10-D1hydropheiwnthrene  or_
  1-1'-Dlphenylethene
1,1-Bis (p-ethyl  phenyl)-
  ethane or tetramethyl-
  blphenyl (three Isomers)
"Another" tetramethylblphenyl
  2-phenylnaphtha1ene
Tetramethylbenzene
5-Methy1benz-c-acr1d1ne
2,6-D1methy1-2,5-heptad1on-4-one
Phthalates
Benzole Add
Aromatic Hydrocarbons
Butylacetate

2,6-PI perlden-d1one-4,4-
  dlmethyl
Long Chain Acid;  Methyl Ester
2,3-D1methy1decahydronaph-
  thalene
Ethylbenzaldehyde
Dimethylbenzaldehyde
2,4-Dlmethylacetophenone
Trimethylcydohexenone
Nitric Acid Decylester
o-Methylbenzaldeoxlm*  (C=N-OH)
Methyl Ester of Carboxyllc
  Add
  3.0 x 10'1

  1.0 x lO"1
  3.0 x 10']
  3.0 x 10-'
  6.0 x 10-]
  3.0 x 10"'
  3.0 x 10-1
     1.0
     2.0
     1.0
  3.0 x 10-2
  3.0 x 10-1
  6.0 x ID"2
     1.0

     1.6
  3.0 x 10-1
     4.0
                                                                   ,-1
                                                            2.0 x 10'
                                                               8.0
                                                               1.0
  2.0 x TO"1
  1.0 x 10
   ^

  2.3 x 10
                                                          Not Quantltated
                                                            2.0 x  10
                                                            2.0 x  10-1

                                                          < 3.0 x  10-2
                                                               4.0
                                                            6.0 x  10-'
  4.0 x 10

Not Quantltated



  6.5 x 10
                                                                              3.0 x 10
                                                                                      -1
                                                                              < 3 x TO"2
                   Not  Quantltated

                     3.0  x 10-1
   3.0

6.0 x lO'1
   1.0
3.0 x ID'1

   8.0
3.0 x 10-1

   8.3
                                           121

-------
Level 1 Data
Total Chromatographable Organics Analysis--
     The gas chromatographic analyses (6C-TCO) were performed using either
a Perkin-Elmer Sigma 1, a Varian 1860, or a Varian 5860 chromatograph with
differential flame ionization detectors.  The operating parameters were as
fol1ows:
     t  Column-10 percent OV-101 on Supelcoport, 100/120 mesh,
        0.32 X 183 cm stainless steel.
     •  Temperatures-detectors, 300°C; injectors, 200°C; column, begin
        and hold at ambient for 5 min., then program temperature increase
        from 30°C to 250°C at 15°C/min.
     •  Flowrates-column, 30 mi/min.   He; detectors, 300 m«./min air and
        30 ma/min H2-
     •  Electrometer-! X 10-10 A/mV
     •  Recorder- 1 mV full scale
     •  Injections-1 p£.
     These conditions provide a lower detectable limit of 0.7 ng/y£ for
n-alkanes.  This is equivalent to a hydrocarbon concentration of 2 X 10~4
mg/m3 in 30 rr>3 of sample gas (the quantity of gas required in these tests)
or 7 X 10-4 mg/£ in 10 i of a water sample.
     The instrument is calibrated so that results can be expressed in terms
of the quantity of n-alkanes boiling in the temperature ranges shown in
Table B-4.  Calibration of the GC requires synthetic mixtures of the appro-
priate n-alkanes be chromatographed.   A plot of retention times versus
normal boiling points is then constructed, as illustrated in Figure B-2.  The
retention time intervals corresponding to the boiling points of interest
are then determined graphically.
     Quantisation of the peak areas on the chromatograms is based upon the
instrument response to n-decane.   A thorough description of the calibration
1s given In Reference B-2.  Data reduction and quantitation of chromatograms
obtained from the actual samples are done In two steps;  First, all peak
areas observed within the overall retention time Interval of interest are
added together.  The total concentration of chromatographable organic
                                   122

-------
ro
oo

r

320



7flO



240



200



160



120





,


40





• t

i -
• I
. i.


i

i



1
• i
i

^
.ji-
2
f°-

1
JQ
19
i .




ii






• i

. i
i
1

!
1
!
1
1
1
1
i
I
1
I

I
!
i
1
i
!
i
i
|-




?T?

i
. j. .
i :
; i ;
: i
i
i
i
4





























-







00

























-"•


1


1
1
t

1
1































































<-"'







\—



\
4

.:
— -





















X-












10























^




























•








^



if"
































/














5







.













X




t~ f










50





















/


I
'
1 «.->



.
•



























(^

(

6

































'1

4
n,'-
a












6^



















X



-
5












0

















1


















6






















c.
f,
(












f






•











/
\


-10
a
fr
1
.









i
w
7
















(•*
(




y J
)












/T
20















!/

S
xc
7
















rT




: ,














5
ii
















/














'
?



:

















z
(



|[j









V
Y$
ji
r




















100





il;






(»<


M
15




























i



/

rt






















•3


,

iij








'-f
9










r





iii





rr<
e


':.


I.



X^


i
- -























80








^
V
'























••
\








'
>
1

,1
^l
f?'


























jj





tf?



0

























9






/I
J
g
—
c


























50





i^



§
ft































/




0
-*>





















.;











^'
<}





























1C

: |




(j
^5





























40
'






3





































_



































































1





































2C

















































































































1





































20





































3
;-|
















































































































































i



1


                                                         Retention Time, Sec.
                           Figure  B-2.   Retention  times versus  boiling points  for n-alkanes

-------
                  TABLE  B-4.  BOILING RANGES OF n-ALKANES
C7
C8
C9
C10
Cll
90-110°C
110-140°C
140-160°C
160-180°C
180-200°C
C12
C13
C14
C15
C16
200-220°C
220-240°C
240-260°C
260-280°C
280-300°C
material  (TCO) In the sample Is determined by dividing the total  peak area
by the sensitivity of n-decane and then multiplying by the appropriate
                                                                         3
dilution  sample volume factors.  Whenever the TCO is greater than 75 wg/m ,
the concentration of all peaks in each n-alkane equivalent boiling range
fraction  is determined.  Peak areas are summed within each specific retention
Interval  and the response factor for the corresponding n-alkane is used to
determine the weight of material eluted from the GC.  As before,  the total
amount of material in each sample is determined by multiplying the concen-
tration by the sample volume and the fraction of sample extracted.
     All  samples were analyzed both prior to and after the Kuderna-Danlsh
concentration step.  The results of these Cj - C16 analyses are given in
Table B-5.  (An explanation of sample codes is given in Table B-6.)
Gravimetry for C^y and Higher Hydrocarbons--
     Gravimetric determinations were performed on the concentrates of sol-
vent rinses and extracts in accordance with the procedure in Reference B-2:
a one milliliter aliquot was taken from each sample and evaporated to dry-
ness in an aluminum pan.  The residues were then weighed on a microbalance.
The results are presented in Table B-7.
Infrared Analyses (IR) on Samples Concentrated in Kuderna-Danish  Evaporators--
     Each of the concentrates weighing more than 0.5 mg was also  scanned by
infrared  (IR) spectroscopy.  After the final  weighing, the residue in each
weighing  bottle was redissolved in methylene chloride and smeared onto a
NaCl window.  The resulting spectra and the compound classes whose presence
was identified are summarized in Table B-8.
                                   124

-------
TABLE B-5.  TCO OF SAMPLE CONCENTRATES AND NEAT  SOLUTIONS
Sample Hydrocarbon Content
C7 C8 C9 CIO Cll C12 C13 C14 C15 C16
132/6-1-LE-GC -- --..-.-„
132/6-2-LE-GC -- ........
132/6-3-LE-GC -- ........
132/6-4-LE-GC -- -- - ---.
132/6-5-LE-GC -- --.-.---
132/6-61-LE-GC -- --------
132/6-6S-SE-GC -- -- - .---
132/6-7L-LE-GC -- -- - ....
132/6-7S-SE-GC -- --------
134-IN-CD-LE-GC -- -- - .---
134-OUT-CD-LE-GC -- ........
134-IN-PR-GC - 1313 - - - ... -
134-OUT-PR-GC - 507 44.2 - 6.1 - - - 1.1
134-IN-MR-GC -LB -- - ....
134-OUT-MR-GC -- -10.5- - - --
134-IN-CYR-GC - 7460 - 55.9 37.3 37.3 - - -
134-IN-XR-SE-GC - - - - 52.7 39.5 - - -
134-OUT-XR-SE-GC . - - - - - - --
134-IN-1C-SE-GC -- -- - .---
134-IN-3C-SE-GC -- - - - - ...
134-IN-10C-SE-GC -- -- - .---
134-IN-PF-SE-GC - - --------
. 134-OUT-PF-SE-GC -- -- - ....
133-18-SE-GC -- --------
132/6-1-LE-KD-GC - - ... 0.02 - g/i
0 ng/£
0 ing/i
0 ng/ii
0 ing/kg
0 ing/t
0 mg/kg
0 ug/m3
0 vg/m3
1313 Ug/m3
558 vg/m3
0 ug/i*3
10.5 ug/m3
7590 ug/m3
92.2 ug/m3
0 ug/m3
0 ug/m3
0 ug/m3
0 yg/m3
o ug/m3
0 ug/n3
0 ing/kg
0.02 mg/i
0.14 Dg/i
0.06 mg/l
0.05 ng/i
0.05 mg/l
0 ng/t
0 «g/kg
0 «g/i
6.6 »g/kg
0 pg/"3
1.6 ug/»3
26 ug/"3
139 Ug/n3
318 vS/»3
26. -3 ug/m3
626 ug/n3
189 us/"3
14.9 ug/»3
0 vg/ti3
0 »g/»3
o ug/»3
0 vg/n3
146 iig/n3
86.2 «9/kg
                          125

-------
                                         TABLE B-6.   SAMPLE CODE  FOR ORGANIC  SAMPLES  ANALYZED
                                                                     SAMPLE CODE
                                                                       - XX - XX - X
                 Site Identification
Sample Type
                                                               Sample Preparation
                                           First Level  Analysis
•Second Level
  Analysis
                                                                                                                               Third Level
                                                                                                                                Analysis
132-1N, each test at
Inlet to
scrubber
133- IN
134-IN
135-IN
136- IN
132-OUT, each test
at scrubber
outlet

133-OUT
134-OUT
135-OUT .
136-OUT
132/5 represents
composites of all
sanples taken










1 - boiler feedMater
2 - tnlet to demlsters
3 - settling pond over-
flow
4 - scrubber water Inlet
5 - water to slag pond
6L - scrubber makeup
liquid
7L - scrubber out liquid
65 - scrubber makeup
solids
75 - scrubber out sol Ids
CD - condensate from
XAD-2 module
PR - solvent probe rinse
CAR - cyclone rinse
MR - solvent XAD-2 'module
rinse
HM - HNOa XAD-2 module
rinse
HI - H202 Implnger
AI - APS 1mp1ngers
XR - XAD-2 resin
PF - fllter(s)
1C - l-3u cyclone
3C - 3-10u cyclone
IOC - >10p cyclone
CF - solid fuel feed (coal)
Number and corresponding
preparation steps are as
follows:
0 - no preparation
LEA - liquid-liquid
extraction, ad-
fled sample
SE - solvent extraction
A - acidified aliquot
B - basic aliquot
PB - Parr bomb com-
bustion
HW - hot water extrac-
*4nn
t ion
AR - aqua reals
extraction •
LEN - liquid-liquid
extraction, neu-
tralized sample
LEB - liquid-liquid
extraction, basl-
fled sample







Numbers and corresponding
procedures are as follows:
Organic
0-no cone
require
GC-C7-C17
KD-K-D Cor
















Inorganic
SS-SSHS
AAS-Hg,As,Sb
S04-S04
N03-N03
CF-C1.F
















Organic analyses on
cone samples will
be coded as follows:
GM-GC/MS for PAHs
GI-Grav., IR
HS-LRHS
LC-LC separation
















Resulting LC
fractions for
grav./IR/LRMS
analyses will be
numbered In
order, 1-8

















ro
CTi

-------
                                                                              TABLE  B-6    (Continued)
ro
                      Water Samples:
                      132/6-1-LEA
                      132/6-2-LEA
                      132/6-3-LEA
                      132/6-4-LEA
                      132/6-5-LEA
                      Slurry Samples:
                      132/6-6L-LEA
                       132/6-6S-LE
                       132/6-7L-LEA
                       132/6-7S-LE
SASS Train  Samples:
134-IN-PR
134-OUT-PR
134-IN-1C-SE
134-IN-3C-SE
134-IN-10C-SE
134-IN-CYR
134-IN-PF-SE
134-OUT-PF-SE
134-IN-XR-SE
134-OUT-XR-SE
134-IN-MR
134-OUT-MR
134-IN-CD-LEA
134-OUT-CD-LEA
                       Blanks
                       H20 Blank-LEA
                       133-MCB
                       133-MAB
                       133-XRB-SE
                       133-PFB-SE
                       COB
                                                            132/6-1-LEN
                                                            132/6-2-LEN
                                                            132/6-3-LEN
                                                            132/6-4-LEN
                                                            132/6-5-LEN
                                                            132/6-6L-LEN
                                                            132/6-7L-LEH
                                                                                   134-IH-CD-LEN
                                                                                   134-OUT-CO-LEN
                                                            H20 Blank-LEH
132/6-1-LEB
132/6-2-LEB
132/6-3-LEB
132/6-4-LEB
132/6-5-LEB
132/6-6L-LEB
132/6-7L-LEB
134-IN-CO-LEB
134-OUT-CD-LEB
H20 Blank-LEB

-------
TABLE B-7.  GRAVIMETRY OF SAMPLE CONCENTRATES
Sample
132/6- 1-LE-KD-GI
132/6-2-LE-KD-GI
132/6- 3-LE-KD-GI
132/6-4-LE-KD-GI
132/6- 5-LE-KD-GI
132/6- 6L-LE-KD-GI
132/6-6S-SE-KD-GI
132/6- 7L-LE-KD-GI
132/6-7S-SE-KD-GI
133-18-SE-KD-GI
134-IN-CD-LE-KD-GI
134-OUT-CD-LE-KD-GI
134-IN-PR-O-KD-GI
134-OUT-PR-O-KD-GI
134-IN-MR-O-KD-GI
134-OUT-MR-O-KD-GI
134-IN-CYR-KD-GI
134-IN-1C-SE-KD-GI
134-IN-3C-SE-KD-GI
134-IN-10C-SE-KD-GI
134-IN-PF-SE-KD-GI
134-OUT-PF-SE-KD-GI
134-IN-XR-SE-KD-GI
134-OUT-XR-SE-KD-GI
133-XRB-SE-KD-GI
133-MCB-O-KD-GI
133-MAB-O-KD-GI
133-CDB-LE-KD-GI
132/6-LEB-LE-KD-GI
Weight
mg/nu
0.4
0
0.5
0.3
0
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0
0.4
0.4
0.9
0.1
0.9
0.8
7.5
0
0
0
0
0.52
1.89
3.65
0.47
0.1
0
0.3
0
Corrected
for Blank
mg/m£
0.4
0
0.5
0.3
0
0.2
0.1
0.1
0
0
0.3
0.4
0.9
0.1
0.9
0.8
7.5
0
0
0
0
0.26
1.45
3.17





Aliquot
Factor
X10
X10
XI 0
X10
XI 0
X10
X10
X10
XI 0
XI 0
X10
X10
X10
X10
X10
XI 0
X10
XI 0
X10
X10
X10
XI 0
X10
XI 0





Sample
Volume
10JI
10*
104
10*
10£
8.5£
10. 2g
8.U
10. 6g
6.2g
31.1m3
36.5m3
31.1m3
36.5m3
31.1m3
36.5m3
31.1m3
31.1m3
31.1m3
31.1m3
31.1m3
36,5m3
31.1m3
36.5m3





Net
Gravimetry
0.4 mg/Ji
0
0.5 mg/£
0.3 mg/a
0
0.2 rng/A
98.0 mg/kg
0.1 mg/£
0
0
96.5 yg/m3
109.6 yg/m3
289 yg/m3
27.4 yg/m3
289 yg/m3
219 yg/m3
2412 ug/m3
0
0
0
0
71.2 yg/m3
446 yg/m3
868 yg/m3





                     128

-------
TABLE B-8.  INTERPRETATION OF INFRARED SPECTRA OF SAMPLE CONCENTRATES
Sampl e
Identification
134-IN-XR-SE-
KD-GI














134-OUT-XR-SE-
KD-GI






Band
Location
cm"1
3280
2920
1695
1600
1450
1365
1320
1270
1170
1130-1050
925
855
795
750
700

2910
2650
2560
1680
1600,1580
1450
1420
Band
Intensity
W
S
S
W
M
W
W
S
W
M
W
w)
J
w(
«)

M
W
W
S
W
. w
M
Compound
Classification
OH or NH or C=0
overtone
C-H stretch
C=0
aromatics
-CH2
-C(CH3)X
S=0 antisym stretch
C-O-C stretch
S=0 sym stretch
ester and ether
unas signed

aromatics

Indicates: esters,
aldehydes/ketones,
ether, sulfone -
significant amount of
aromatic species
C-H stretch
acid
acid
C=0
aromatics
CH2
acid
                                 129

-------
TABLE B-8  (Continued)
Sample
Identification
134-OUT-XR-SE-
KD-GI (con't.)










134-IN-CYR-KD-GI









Band
Location
cm"1
1320
1285
1175
1130-1055
1020
925
800
705
680
660

3400
2920
1745-1650
1600
1510
1455
1390-1355
1270-1010
1235
1170
1110
Band
Intensity
M
S
W
W
W
M
vA
M(
W (
w/

M
S
S
W
w
M
M
S
S
M
M
Compound
Classification
sulfone S-0 antisym
stretch
C-O-C stretch
sulfone, S=0 sym.
stretch
ester and ether
unassigned
acid


aroma tics

indicates: esters,
carboxylic acids, ether
& sulfone (reasonable
amount of aromatic
species)
OH, NH
C-H stretch
C=0
aromatics
benzene rings or nitro
compound
-CH2
-C(CH3)x & nitro com-
pound
not sufficiently
resolved
ester, acid sulfate or
C-O-C in ring
ester, sulfate, phenol
alchol
         130

-------
TABLE B-8  (Continued)

Sample
Identification
134-IN-CYR-KD-GI
(Con't).

134-OUT-PF-SE-
KD-GI





























Band
Location
cm-1

1030
830

2910
1740-1675
1640,1630
1605
1505


1460
1410
1385-1360
1290
1235



1180


1135-1090
1035
825










Band
Intensity

M
W

S
M
W
W
S


M
W
W
W
S



S


M
M
M










Compound
Classification

S=0 sulfoxide
1,4-disubst benezene

C-H stretch
C=0
C=C (mono or disubst.)
aromatic
aromatic nitro
compound (or benzene
ring)
-CH2
carboxylic acid
-C(CH3)x
C-O-C stretch
C-O-C stretch for
ester or alkyl acid
sulfate or C-O-C in
ring
C-O-C stretch for
ester, sulfate or
C-O-C in ring
ether
S=0 stretch, sulfoxide
1,4 disubst. benzene
Indicates: esters,
aldehydes/ ketones,
carboxylic acid,
ether, covalent
sulfate, alkyl acid
sulfate, sulfoxide,
possible nitro
compound/significant
aromatic character
         131

-------
TABLE B-8  (Continued)
Samp] e
Identification
134-IN-MR-KD-GI


134-OUT-MR-KD-GI






134-IN-PR-KD-GI








Band
Location
cirri
2920


2920
1725
1650
1450
1290-1210
1120-1060

2920
1690
1730
1505
1460
1290
1230
1180

Band
Intensity
W


S
S
W
M
M
W

S
S
M
W
W
W
M
W

Compound
Classification
C-H stretch
no identifiable
species
C-H stretch
C=0
C-C (mono or disubst.)
-CH2
C-O-C stretch
ester or ether
Indicates: ester,
possible ether
C-H stretch
C-0
C=0
benzene ring or^nitro
compound
-CH2
unassigned
C-O-C stretch
unassigned
Indicates:
unsaturated aldehyde
or ketone & ester
          132

-------
Liquid Chromatographic (LC) Separations and Subsequent Analyses —
     Liquid chromatographic separations are performed on only those samples
                                               3
having an organic content in excess of 500 yg/m  as determined by the gravi-
metric and TCO analyses.  Whenever more than 10 percent of the total organic
content is observed in the chromatographable portion, i.e., volatile mate-
rials represent a significant portion of the sample, special precautions
are taken in preparing the sample for fractionation, and additional GC-TCO
analyses are performed on the resultant samples.  Using this criterion, a
liquid chromatographic fractionation was needed and performed on samples
134-IN-XR-SE-KD, 134-OUT-XR-SE-KD and 134-IN-CYR-O-KD.  In order to preserve
volatile organics, all samples were introduced onto the LC column using
the solvent exchange procedure described in Reference B-2.   The seven
fractions collected from the XAD-2 resin sample were analyzed for TCO
just as were the original samples.  The results of these C,-C,g analyses
are presented in Table B-9. All fractions were then evaporated to dryness in
tared aluminum dishes.  After the residues were weighed, an infrared analy-
sis was done on all having a weight greater than 0.5 mg.  The procedures
followed were the same as used on the original samples.  The gravimetric
results for nonvolatile materials are shown in Table B-10. Table B-ll summa-
rizes the classes of compounds identified in the infrared spectra produced
by the residues.
Low Resolution Mass Spectroscopy (LRMS) —
     Only fraction 5 of sample 134-OUT-XR contained enough material to
require LRMS.   Phthalates, benzoic acid, and aromatics, including the
possibility of  a nitro compound were reported as present.
Level 2 Data
Introduction—
     With a few exceptions discussed below, the samples were prepared and
extracted according to the procedures for Level 2 comparative assessment.
These procedures are discussed elsewhere (Reference B-l).  Details of special
handling which  is different from the Level 2 procedures are discussed in the
following subsections.  Compound identifications were made on the basis of
the computerized mass spectral search of the 25,000 plus compounds in the
                                    133

-------
                                 TABLE  B-9.   TCOs  OF LIQUID CHROMATOGRAPHY FRACTIONS




134-IN-XR-LC1
LC2
LC3
LC4
LC5
LC6
LC7

134-IN-CYR-LC1
LC2
LC3
LC4
LC5
LC6
LC7

134-OUT-XR-LC1
LC2
LC3
LC4
LC5
LC6
LC7




C7
ND
ND
ND
ND
29
ND
IB

ND
ND
ND
ND
LB
ND
LB

ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
16
ND




C8
ND
ND
ND
ND
380
ND
37

ND
ND
ND
127
453
ND
15

ND
ND
ND
ND
330
ND
40




C9
ND
ND
ND
61
ND
ND
43

ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
60

ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND


J 1 I
Hydrocarbons in Fraction, yg

CIO
25
35
37
ND
ND
ND
88

ND
ND
ND
ND
1065
ND
ND

10
10
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND


Cll
158
ND
ND
34
20
ND
ND

ND
ND
ND
220
43
ND
ND

ND
ND
ND
49
20
ND
ND


C12
292
20
23
65
35
ND
ND

ND
ND
ND
ND
19
ND
ND

ND
ND
ND
108
34
ND
ND


C13
125
ND
ND
ND
126
ND
ND

ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND

ND
ND
ND
29
132
ND
ND


C14
ND
20
21
ND
34
ND
ND

ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND

ND
9
ND
ND
26
ND
ND




C15
ND
149
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND

24
ND
ND
ND
39
ND
ND

ND
16
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND




C16
88
182
11
ND
31
ND
ND

51
18
ND
ND
20
ND
ND

ND
ND
50
ND
19
ND
ND




Total
688
406
92
160
655
0
168
H69
75
18
ND
347
1639
ND
75
215T
10
35
50
186
561
16
40
S98~

Amount
Applied
to Column







3730







52742







1085
CO

-------
TABLE B-10.  GRAVIMETRY OF LC FRACTIONS

GRAV. of
Material Applied
to Column
LCI
LC2
LC3
LC4
LC5
LC6
LC7
Total
Blank Correction
Net Gravimetry

LCI
LC2
LC3
LC4
LC5
LC6
LC7
Total
134-IN-XR
9.45 mg
1.60
0.56
0.33
0.43
3.18
2.41
0.99
9.50
0.46
9.04
BLANK
0.12 mg
0.03
0.04
0.03
0.04
0.13
0.07
0.46
134-IN-CYR
15.00 mg
0.14
0
0
0.09
3.22
2.78
1.49
7.72
0.39
7.33









134-OUT-XR
18.25 mg
0.29
0.05
0.15
0.32
10.79
3.80
1.01
16.41
0.46
15.95









                   135

-------
TABLE B-ll.  INTERPRETATION OF INFRARED SPECTRA  OF  LC  FRACTIONS
Sample
Identification
134-IN-XR-LC1


134-IN-XR-LC2









134-IN-XR-LC5








Band
Location,
cnrl
3000-2800
1450
1380
3020
3000-2900
1600
1490
1450
1110
1050
1030
890
830
800
750
700

3300
3060
3000-2800
1710
1610
1590
1460
1420
1370
Band
Intensity
S
M
W
M
S
Ml
M|
M
M
W)
wf






S, broad
W
S
S, broad
M
W
. S
W
W
Compound
Classification
Aliphatic HC
Aliphatic HC
Aliphatic HC
Indicates:
Aliphatic hydrocarbon
Unsaturated or
aromatic HC
Aliphatic HC
Aromatic
CH2 (aliphatic)

Unassigned


Aromatic substitution


Indicates: Aliphatic
& aromatic hydrocarbons
OH, NH
aromatic CH
Aliphatic CH
C=0 ester, ketone
aromatic
aromatic
methyl
methyl
methyl
                              136

-------
TABLE B-ll  (Continued)
Sample
Identification










134-IN-XR-LC6









Band
Location
cm-1
1270
1180
1120
1070
1030
810
760
720


3350
3050
3000-2800
1700
1600
1550
1450
1400
1320
1260
Band
Intensity
S, broad
W
W
W
W \
W (
W j
S )


M
W
S
S, broad
S
S
M
S
W
M
Compound
Classification
C-0 of benzoate esters

C-0


aromatic substitution


Indicates:
aliphatic & aromatic
hydrocarbons, alcohols,
esters, ketones '
OH, NH
unsaturated or aromatic
CH
aliphatic CH
C=0 - acid, aryl/
unsaturated ester or
ketone
aromatic ring, skeletal
or amine
COO"
aliphatic CH2
COO", alkenes
sulfone
C-0, ester, carboxylic
acid
          137

-------
TABLE B-ll  (Continued)

Sample
Identification










134-IN-XR-LC7







134-OUT-XR-LC-5
















Band
Location,
cm~l
1170
1120
715







3000-2800
1730
1550
1400
1270



3200-2500
1690
(1720-1680)

1600
1580
1490
1450
1420
1320
1290

1180
1120

1070
1020

Band
Intensity
W
M
M







S
M
M, broad
M, broad
M, broad



S, broad

S, broad

M|
Ml
W
M
M
M
S

M
M




Compound
Classification
sulfone, ether
C-0, alcohol
aromatic subst.
Indicates: aromatic &
aliphatic species: aryl
or unsaturated ester,
ketone, nitro compound,
carboxylate, carboxylic
acid; possible amine,
alcohol
aliphatic CH
C=0, broad, ester
coo-
coo-
C-0, ester
Indicates: aliphatic
ester, carboxylic acid
salt
acid OH

C=0, ester, ketone,
acid
aromatic ring

unassigned
-CH2
C-0, acid
C-0, acid, sulfone
C-0 of acid, phthalate
ester
sulfone
C-0 of ester, possibly
phthalate


          138

-------
TABLE B-ll  (Continued)
Sample
Identification
134-OUT-XR-LC-5



134-OUT-XR-LC6












134-OUT-XR-LC7




Band
Location
cm~l
920
800
710

3350
3050
3000-2800
1670
(1645-1720)
1600
1540
1450
1400
1260
(1230-1280)
1170
1060
710

3300
3050
3000-2800
1720
1600
Band
Intensity
X


1
S, broad
W
S
W, broad
S

W
S
S, broad
W
M
S

M
W
S
S
S
Compound
Classification

aromatic substitution

Indicates: carboxylic
acids, ester & nitro
aromatic
OH, NH
aromatic CH
aliphatic CH
C=C or amide (C=0
buried?)
aromatic
-C00~; amide
-CH2
-COO'
C-0 of aromatic ester,
acid, alcohol
phenol
C-N of amine
aromatic subst.
Indicates: aliphatic &
aromatic esters, alcohol,
carboxylic acid, car-
boxylate, nitro compound,
possible amine
OH, NH
aromatic C-H
aliphatic C-H
C=0 - ester, ketone
aromatic ring
          139

-------
TABLE B-ll  (Continued)
Sample
Identification
134-OUT-XR-LC7
(Con't)







134-IN-CYR-LC5











Band
Location
cm~l
1550
1450
1400
1370
1270
1100
710

3400
3050
3000-2800
1700
(1650-1720)
1450
1370
1260
1180
1130
730
710

Band
Intensity
S
M
S
M
S
M
M

S
W
S
S, broad
S
S
S, very
broad
W
W
W
W

Compound
Classification
COO", or nitro
compound
-CH2
COO"
CHg, nitro compound
C-O-C stretch, ester
C-0, alcohol, ester,
ether
aromatic substitution
Indicates: aliphatic &
aromatic ester, alcohol,
possible carboxylate,
nitro compound, ether
OH, NH
aromatic CH
aliphatic CH
-C=0, unsaturated
ester, ketone acid
possible amine
aliphatic HC
possible sulfonate
C-0, ester, ether, acid,
alcohol possible
sulfonate, amine


unassigned

Indicates: ester,
ketone ether, acid
alcohol some
unsaturation, possible
phenols, sulfonate
           140

-------
TABLE B-ll  (Continued)
Sample
Identification
134-IN-CYR-LC6








134-IN-CYR-LC7



Band
Location
cm"l
3300
3050
3000-2800
1720
1610
1465
1375
1150
(1050-1300)

t
3000-2800
1700
1110

Band
Intensity
M
W
S
S
S
M
W
M


W
W
W

Compound
Classification
OH or NH
unsaturated CH
aliphatic CH2
C=0 ester, ketone
C=C, amine
CH2
dimethyl, possible
sulfonate
C-0, alcohol ether,
ester, amine N-H
stretch
possible sulfonate
Indicates: aliphatic
ester, ketone, alcohol,
ether; possible phenol,
sulfonate .
aliphatic CH
C=0

no identifiable
activity
          141

-------
National  Bureau of Standards  compound  Horary.  Acceptance  of the  search
results Involves judgemental  factors.   Some  incorrect  identifications  may,
therefore, exist in the tables.   A final  confirmation  by  GC relative
retention time and spectral  comparison with  known  standards was  not  per-
formed.  However, not all  samples were subjected to  quantisation or
confirmation because the initial  screening showed  very low  concentration
levels and budget and schedule considerations  limited  further efforts.
     Several representative samples from the various sample groups e.g.,
probe rinses, resin extracts, condensates, etc. have undergone a procedure
to estimate compound concentrations.  Each representative sample was
selected on the basis of the greatest number of compounds detected and the
highest apparent  levels.  The remaining samples have fewer detected compounds
and/or lower levels.  The next step was to identify potentially hazardous
compounds which exceed minimum established levels (Figure B-3, Logic Flow
Chart for Level 2 Organic Analysis and Figure B-3, Analysis of Samples from
Sampling Train).   The process water extracts have been analyzed to the
point  prior to  concentrations for LC  fractionation (see Figure B-4).
Estimation of Concentration Level s--
     The  following is a summary  of the procedure by which compound
concentrations  in selected samples were estimated for comparison with DMEG
values.  An internal standard solution of naphthalene and chloronapthalene
was  prepared in methylene chloride at 10 ug/ml for each standard.   One
hundred yl of this solution was  blended with one hundred yl of a sample to
be reanalyzed by  GC/MS for quantitative purposes.   The result was a solu-
tion containing the internal standards at 5 yg/ml  and the original sample
solution at one half of its original concentration.   This solution was ana-
lyzed by GC/MS using the same conditions as  with the original screening
analysis.  A total  ion chromatogram was obtained and the areas for all
chromatogram peaks of interest were obtained.   One of the compounds in the
sample was selected as a secondary standard and its concentration estimated
on the basis of the known concentration of the internal standard and the
ratio of the peak areas of the secondary standard and the internal standard.
Then, having an estimated concentration of the compound used as a secondary
standard, the data  from the original screening analysis was used to obtain
                                   142

-------
      DOES LEVEL 1 DATA
      INDICATE ANY POTEN
      TIALLY HAZARDOUS
      MATERIAL IN EXCESS
      OF ITS ESTABLISHED
      MINIMUM?
                                     IS IT COST EFFECTIVE
                                     OR A PROGRAM REQUIRE
                                     MENT TO ANALYZE THIS
                                     SAMPLE FURTHER?
    IDENTIFY COMPOUNDS
    USING ORGANIC
    ANALYSIS FLOWCHART
                                       IS THERE SUFFICIENT
                                       MATERIAL FOR
                                       ANALYSIS?
     ESTIMATE QUANTITY
     OF EACH COMPOUND
    DO ANY POTENTIALLY
    HAZARDOUS COMPOUNDS
    EXCEED OR APPROXIMATE
    MINIMUM ESTABLISHED
    LEVELS?
   QUANTITATE POTENTIALLY
   HAZARDOUS COMPOUNDS
                                              QUANTITATE THOSE
                                              COMPOUNDS FOR
                                              WHICH IT IS COST
                                              EFFECTIVE TO DO SO
IS FURTHER
QUANTITATION
COST EFFECTIVE?
          LEVEL 2
          ANALYSIS
          COMPLETE
Figure  B-3.   Logic flow chart  for  Level  2 organic analysis
                                    143

-------
HCW WASH
SAMPLE

FILIEU
t<3")

CYCtONt
<>lK>

XAD-J
KSIN















EXT RAO
M.0j

EXTRACT
M.O,

EXTRACT
M.CI2

EXTRACT


I/N EXTRACT
PH >n






.





^
OC/MS ©
ALIQUOT




CONCtNTIIATE
X100





                       ACID EXTRACT
                       PH < 2
OC/MS      (T)
TINAX OC    ^

H,P04/CARIOWAX
ALIQUOT
0 QMAYMUSEFUITOEASE
   SPeaHAL INTKPKTATION

@ NITIOSOAMINES Att EXPtCTEO ONIY
   AT LOW CONCENTRATIONS, IF PKSENT
   SPECIAL PREPARATION Will K KQUIHED ,,
   FOLLOWED IV GC/MS ANALYSIS USING '
   CAKIOWAX 20 M AND SELECTED ION
   MONITOMNC (SIM)
OC/MS <33
FFAPOR
SP-2I4-PS
-

DERIVITIZE
t
OC/MS
OV-»
                     Figure B-4.   Analysis  of samples  for organic  content

-------
peak areas for all compounds of interest.  Concentration estimates were
obtained for all significant compounds on the basis of peak areas relative
to the secondary standard.  Using total ion  chromatogram  peak areas for
different types of compounds is only useful for estimates because of several
variable factors affecting the recorded ion output per unit amount of any
group of compounds.  The levels presented in the tables are believed to be
accurate to plus or minus a factor of 10.  Should the need arise for more
accurate concentrations for any given compound, then special mixtures con-
taining known amounts of internal standard and the compounds of interest
will have to be prepared and run on the GC/MS to determine relative response
factors.  These relative response factors can then be applied to the ori-
ginal sample data.  Alternatively the original samples solutions can be
spiked with known added amounts of specific compounds and reanalyzed.  This
generally is called the method of standard additions.
GC/MS Analysis of Gas Bag Samples-
     Handling of these samples proceeded as follows.  Two liters of gas bag
sample was passed through a pre-conditioned Tenax column.   The Tenax column
was then heated and the absorbed species transferred to a liquid nitrogen
cooled trap.  The LNg trap was then allowed to come to room temperature
while isolated from the system with closed valves.  The contents of the
trap were then injected onto a GC column.  The GC separation was accomplished
using the following conditions:

          Column      - 6 ft stainless steel containing
                        Poparak Q 60-80 mesh
          Carrier     - Helium at 30 cc per minute
          Temperature - Programmed from 50°C to 230°C at 8°C per
                        minute and held at 230°C for 15 to 30 minutes
     The mass spectrometer was used as the GC detector in a mode which
scanned the mass range in continuous cyclic recordings.  Quantification of
the compounds was performed using peak areas.  Determination of instrument
response to the detected compounds (i.e., calibration) was done directly
using a synthetic gas blend.
                                   145

-------
     A summary of the organic compounds found in the gas bag samples and
their calculations is presented in Table B-12.  Units of concentration are
expressed in milligrams per cubic meter of gas sample at 1 atmosphere and
21°C.
     The results generally indicate that the levels found in the samples
do not significantly exceed the levels found in the blank.  The background
levels for these compounds in the blank sample appear to be rather high.
     There are scattered instances where six compounds have consistently
higher concentrations than those found in the blank sample.  The six com-
pounds are methyl methacrylate, a 67 hydrocarbon, an additional hydrocarbon
of similar but not accurately known molecular weight, trichloroethylene,
methylisobutyl ketone, and xylene.  It is believed that these higher levels
result from variation in blank levels but this cannot be statistically con-
firmed because several blanks would be required to determine a range of
variation and these multiple blanks were not obtained.
GC/MS Analysis of SASS Train Sample Catches—
     This section presents the results of the GC/MS analysis on the
extracts and rinses taken from the SASS train components.  These samples
are  reported in the following groups:
     •  Probe rinses, cyclone catch extracts, particulate filter extracts,
        and cyclone rinses.
     •  Sorbent resin extracts.
     0  Resin module rinses and condensate extracts.
     These groupings were made to report samples most likely to contain
similar compounds.
Analysis of Probe Rinse, Particulate Catch and Cyclone Rinse Samples--
     This section describes the results of the analysis of the probe and
cyclone rinses as well  as the extracts from the particulate matter which
was found in the cyclones and filters.  These samples as a unit repre-
sent the organic compounds found in the train upstream of the resin module.
No compounds of any significance were found in any of the unconcentrated
extracts.  The following discussion deals with the analysis of the samples
                                   146

-------
                                        TABLE  B-12.  RESULTS OF GAS BAG ANALYSIS
Compound
Dichlorofluoromethane
Vinyl Chloride
Methyl Formate
Methyl ene Chloride
Diethyl Ether
Tetrahydrofuran
Unsaturated Hydrocarbon
Carbontetrachloride
Methyl Methacrylate
Hydrocarbon (Cy)
Toluene
Hydrocarbon
Trichloroethylene
Methyl i sobutyl ketone
Xylene
Concentration, mg/m^
132
(Blank)
0.13
0.05
0.18
11.9
5.9
1.8
1.2
12.7
1
ND *
6.9
0.17
ND *
ND *
ND *
132
In
0.13
0.05
0.15
11.2
5.5
2.4
0.4
5.1
2
0.8
4.6
0.33
4.
0.3
ND*
132
Out
0.39
0.08
0.25
11.9
5.9
3.0
1.2
5.7
2
0.4
6.5
ND*
5.
0.3
ND*
134
In
0.04
0.02
0.15
11.2
7.0
3.6
1.7
8.2
4
0.04
8.0
0.83
4.
2.5
ND*
134
Out
0.26
0.13
0.28
11.2
5.1
3.6
1.7
10.8
2
0.04
5.8
ND*
ND*
0.4
ND*
135
In
0.08
0.05
0.20
13.0
7.0
3.0
1.7
7.0
2
0.13
8.4
ND*
4.
1.7
3.5
135
Out
0.85
0.18
0.18
13.0
6.3
3.9
0.4
11.4
2
0.4
8.0
ND*
ND*
1.2
ND*
136
In
0.30
0.08
0.07
11.6
5.9
3.9
1.7
7.6
3
ND*
9.6
ND*
4.
ND*
0.4
136
Out
0.08
0.08
0.25
13.6
7.0
4.5
2.1
12.7
3
0.4
10.0
ND*
ND*
1.2
4.4
-p.
•-J
        ND = Not detected - limit of detection is 0.02 mg/m3.

-------
which were concentrated by sample evaporation.   Separation by liquid chro-
matography was not necessary.  Identified compounds are summarized in
Table B-13. Estimated concentrations are presented for the major components.
     Both probe rinse samples contain large quantities of 3-methylene-2-
pentanone.  This is an acetone condensation product.   The acetone is part
of the rinse solvent and it is likely that this compound has its origin
in the rinse solvent.  The probe rinse from the SASS train at the scrubber
inlet contained only the diacetone condensation product at significant
levels.  The concentrated probe rinse from the  sample train at the scrubber
outlet contained additional compounds.  Table B-13 shows additional  ketones,
a possible 65 tertiary amine and a naphthalene  substituted si lane.  The
concentrated extracts from the particulate material caught in the cyclones
and on the filter of the scrubber Inlet sample  train contained very little
organic material.  A freon, either C^Cl.Fg or C,C13F7 was common to all
these samples.  The 1 micron cyclone catch had  three peaks which could not
be confidently identified using the computerized library search.  They cur-
rently remain unknown and are not believed to be present at levels greater
than the other reported species.
     The combined cyclone rinse concentrate was found to contain an exten-
sive number of compounds as shown in Table B-14. Ketones, substituted naphtha-
lenes and benzenes predominated. Several small  condensed aromatics were also
believed to be present.  These include acridine, and a possible acenaphtha-
lene.  Concentration levels for the compounds found in the cyclone rinse were
estimated using total ion GC peak areas.
     The estimated concentrations of compounds  found in the cyclone rinse
were compared to the appropriate DMEG values as shown in Table B-14.  In
most cases, compounds in the sample could not be found in the DMEG charts;
in those cases, the DMEG value for the most similar compound listed was used.
All DMEG values were at least 1000 times larger than the concentrations of
corresponding compounds found in the cyclone rinse.
     Sorbent Resin Extracts—The compounds which were extracted from the
sorbent resin and are believed to have been present in the sample effluent
gas are presented in Table B-15.  The concentrated extracts were analyzed
                                   148

-------
TABLE B-13.  PROBE RINSES, PARTICULATE EXTRACTS, CYCLONE RINSES
134 Scrubber Inlet
Sample
Probe
rinse



1 Micron
Cyclone
Catch
Extract
3 Micron
Cyclone
10 Micron
Cyclone
Catch
Extract
Partlcu-
late
Filter
Extract
Extract Gas
Concentration Concentration
Compound vg/ml ug/m3
3-Methylene-2-pentanone



Freon, C4C13F7 or CaC^Fe 2 0.6
Unknown, apparent molec. wt. 4 1
529
Unknown, apparent molec. wt. 7 2
470
Freon, [C4C13F7 or C4C14F6]
0-Methyl-benzaide-oxlme
3-Methylene-2-pentanone
Unknown.
Freon, C.Cl.Fy or C^Cl.F,
134 Scrubber Outlet
Extract Gas
Concentration Concentration
Compound wg/ml vg/m3
3-Methylene-2-pentanone
3-Methylene-3-pentanone
Possible N,N-D1methyl butanamlne
2-Methyl-2-octen-4-one
2,5-D1methyl-2,5-hepad1ene-4-one
Trlmethylnaphthalenyl Sllane
No cyclones used on scrubber
outlet SASS train.
No cyclones used on scrubber
outlet SASS train.
No cyclones used on scrubber
outlet SASS train.
Freon, [C4Cl3Fy or C4C14F6]
MW 154: Dihydroacenaphthalene
or Biphenyl .

-------
                   TABLE B-14.  ANALYSIS OF CYCLONE RINSE  TEST 134,  SCRUBBER  INLET SAMPLING TRAIN
en
O
Compound
3-Methylene-2-pentanone
THmethyl benzene
2,6-Piperiden-d1one-4,4-dimethyl
2,6-D1methyl-2,5-heptad1en-4-one
4(2-buteny1 )-l ,2-d1methyl benzene
Decahydronaphthal ene
Phenyl (2,2,3-trlmethyl cyclopentilidene
methane)
Trlmethyl naphtha! enylsllane
5-Methyl-benz-c-acrldine
2,6-bis (1,1 -Dimethyl ethyl) naphthalene
Hexamethylhexahydrolndacene
Long Chain Acid; Methyl ester (> C,4)
D1 Tert-butyl naphthalene
Dimethyl 1 sopropyl naphtha! ene
Hexamethyl bl phenyl
Cycl ohexy 1 benzene
Concentration
In Extract
yg/ml
4 x 102
2
6 x 101
4 x 101
1
0.3
5

4
0.7
0.9
1
0.6
1
1
2
0.8
Emission
Concentration
In Gas Stream
yg/m3
1 x 102
0.6
2 x 101
1 x 101
0.3
0.1
2

1
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.6
0.3
Representative
DMEG Value
pg/m3
2.5
1.2
4
2.5
2
2
6
1
5
5
2


2
2
1
2
x 104
x 105
x 104
x 104
x 105
x 105
x 104
x 106
x 104
x TO4
x 105
N
N
5
X 10°
x 105
x 103
x 105
       N = No DMEG value given:   either compound  structure  Is  unclear or  no biological toxicity data
           Is available in the literature.

-------
                  TABLE B-15.  ABSORBENT RESIN EXTRACTS
Compound
mcfRlJBRFR
2,3-Dimethyldecahydronaphthalene
1 ,3-Diethyl benzene
Cg substituted Benzene
1 ,2,3,4-Tetrahydronaphthalene
Di hydronaphthal ene
1 , 3, 5-Tri ethyl benzene
CIQ substituted Naphthalene
C,Q substituted Decahydronaphthalene
Ethyl benzal dehyde
Dimethyl benzal dehyde
Methyl naphtha! ene
Unknown: possible substituted
Anthracene p_r Phenanthrene
Methyl naphtha! ene
1 ,1 '-Biphenyl
9,10-Dihydrophenanthrene p_r
1-1 '-Diphenylethene
Unknown - Apparent mole wt. 242
1,1-Bis (p-ethylphenyl )-ethane or
Tetramethylbiphenyl. Three
isomers present
Another Tetramethylbiphenyl
2-Phenyl naphthalene


C3 substituted Benzene
Ethyl benza 1 dehyde
Tetramethyl benzene
2,4-Dimethylacetophenone
Trimethylcychexenone
Nitric acid decy Tester

yg/ml
INI FT

7
3
<0.1
1
1
0.2
4
11
2
4
1
I
2
12
0.6
5

25

4
1
nilTI FT

1
10
<0.1
2
4
1

ug/m

<0.03
2
1
<0.03
0.03
0.3
0.06
1
4
0.6
1
n ^
U . 
-------
by GC/MS using an OV-17 column with  a temperature program from 50°C to
280°C.  (See Reference B-l  for details.)
     Both extracts from the trains at the scrubber inlet and outlet had
extensive amounts of the many compounds  that were also extracted from the
blank resin sample.  The relative amounts of materials common to both samples
and the blank vary somewhat between  the  two resin extract samples, and the
following general observations can be made.  Of the compounds common to the
blank and the outlet resin samples,  the  amounts found in the outlet sample
generally were 1/4 to 1/2 the amount found in the blank.  Ten to 15 times
greater amounts were found at the scrubber inlet than in the resin blank.
All of these resins had been precleaned  in the same lot, therefore, lot to
lot variation is not suspect.
     The cause of these variations is the resin cleaning specification.  The
program specifications for clean XAD-2 resin is as follows:
     •   Acceptable - TCO and Grav.  < 5  mg/150 g
         -  TCO < 1.5 mg/150 g
         -  Grav. < 3.75 mg/150 g
     0   Marginal - TCO and Grav. 5-7 mg/150 g
     •   Unacceptable - TCO and Grav. >  7 mg/150 g
The SASS train resin module contains 150 g of resin.  These  specifications
were developed at the beginning of the EACCS program, and they are compatible
with the latest revision of the Level 1  manual.  The total of TCO compounds
                                                      3                  3
found at the scrubber inlet (Table B-15)  was 26.3 yg/m  or 789 yg in 30 m
or 789 yg in 150 g of resin.  Similarly,  the total of compounds found at the
                                         3                  3
scrubber outlet (Table B-15) was 5.2 yg/m  or 156 yg in 30 m  or 156 yg in
                                                                          3
150 g of resin.  The TCO requirement for resin acceptability was < 50 yg/m
(1500 yg per 150 g) which was greater than the levels of compounds being
sought.  Thus, the blank ranged from 1.9 to 9.6 times greater than the levels
being sampled.
     This shows that resin cleaned  For Level 1 is not suitable for Level 2
sampling and analysis.  The problem  described above will occur whenever
Level 2 analyses are performed on resin  samples acquired by Level 1 procedures,
                                   152

-------
     A computerized data manipulation and compound search technique was used
to increase the level  of confidence in the reported compounds presented in
Table B-15.  The procedure was required because of the presence of resin
artifact background interference.  The blank resin extract data were searched
for the presence of every compound found in the two sample resin extracts.
The technique consisted of selecting a peak which was present in the inlet
or outlet sample resin extracts.  A mass spectrum was obtained for the peak
and several characteristic masses specific to the compound were noted.
The blank resin data was searched for a peak caused by the selected charac-
teristic masses.  If a peak occurred in the appropriate retention time
window the entire mass spectrum was searched for compound identification.
If the Library search results or the spectra were the same the compound was
deemed to be a resin artifact.  If no peak was observed in the blank resin
chromatogram, the compound was deemed to be not from the resin but rather
from the sample effluent gas.  This selected mass search technique was
performed for each peak where any doubt existed as to origin.  The compounds
which passed this test and are believed to originate in the sample effluent
gas are the ones presented in Table B-15.
     The compounds seen in the scrubber inlet resin extract generally con-
sist of substituted benzenes, naphthalenes, and biphenyls.  A few benzal-
dehydes were also found.  A few possible condensed aromatics such as sub-
stituted phenanthrenes were tentatively identified but further confirmation
would be required for certainty.  The scrubber outlet resin extract contains
substituted benzenes and ketones.  It is important to note that one of the
major classes of compounds extracted from the blank resin are also sub-
stituted benzenes, naphthalenes, and biphenyls.  Thus, some of the reported
substituted benzene compounds may still be artifacts, i.e., compounds
remaining in the resin after pre-cleam'ng and blank extraction but which
become extractable after being used in the sample train.
     The resin extract samples from both the scrubber inlet and scrubber
outlet sample trains were subjected to the concentration estimation pro-
cedures and these estimates were compared with DMEG values (Table B-15). In
nearly all cases, the ratio of the DMEG values to the estimated concen-
trations in the LaCygne effluent exceeded 10,000 to 1.  Exceptions were
                                    153

-------
biphenyl and four compounds believed  to  be alkyl  substituted biphenyls.
The ratios of DMEG values to effluent gas  concentration estimates  for these
exceptions ranged between 100 to 1  and 1000 to  1.   These effluent  compounds
are believed to be present in the resin  extracts  at concentration  levels
much lower than those levels at which further analysis  would be recommended.
     Analysis of Resin Module Rinsings and Aqueous  Condensate Extracts—
This section summarizes the results of the analysis on  the module  rinses
and module condensates from the scrubber inlet  and  scrubber outlet sample
trains.  These two sample groups are  discussed  together as they are
intended to contain materials which do not advance  as far as the resin
canister or which pass through the  resin module without being trapped on
the resin.  The condensates were extracted after  sequential  pH adjustment
to acidic, neutral and alkaline conditions.  The  module rinses in  acetone/
methylene chloride required no such extraction.  These  extracts were  ana-
lyzed in both concentrated and non-concentrated forms.   The details of
these procedures are presented in Reference B-l.

     The unconcentrated extract solutions  and rinses were analyzed to check
for volatile species present in a sample effluent which could be lost as
a result of evaporation during solvent removal.  No volatile compounds
were seen in the unconcentrated extracts or rinses  at detectable levels
other than solvent species.  Instrument  detection levels, calculated  to
reflect gaseous effluent concentration levels,  are  0.03 pg/rn^.
     The results of these module rinses  and condensate  analyses are sum-
marized in Table B-16.  The module  rinse from the scrubber inlet train con-
tained only a diacetone condensation  product and  one unknown.  The diacetone
is believed to be from the acetone/methylene chloride rinse solution. The
module rinse from the scrubber outlet train has four carboxylic esters,
a €4 Freon and one GS ketone.  This sample was  reanalyzed by GC/MS with
an internal standard to estimate concentration  levels.   The species were
estimated to be present at gaseous  effluent levels  all  below 1 yg/m3.
     The concentrated extract of the  acidified  condensate from the scrubber
inlet train was found to contain no reportable  levels of material. The
                                   154

-------
                                       TABLE  B-16.   MODULE RINSES AND CONDENSATE EXTRACTS

Sample


Module
Rinse



Acidified
Condensate
Extract;
pH < 2
Neutral
Condensate
Extract;
pH 7

Daelr
Condensate
Extract;
pH 11

134- Scrubber Inlet
Compound

3-Methylene-2-pentanone
Unknown



No Compounds Detected



Possible Methyl Isopropyl phenol
Freon: C4C13F7 or C4d4Fg
Possible 5,7-D1hydro-6H-
d1 benzo/A ,C/cyc loheptene-6-
one




Concen- Concen-
tration tratlon Typical
In sample 1n flue gas DMEG
pg/ml pg/m^ Value





















134-Scrubber Outlet
Compound

Butylacetate
l-{2^methyl) cyclopropylethanone
Freon
Methyl ester of carboxyllc Acid
(3 Separate Compounds)
5-Ethy1-2-methyl-t-heptene-3-one
1 Butanol-3-methylbenzoate


Possible 5,7-D1hydro-6H-
d\ benzo/A ,C/cycloheptene-6-one




Possible 5,7-D1hydro-6H-
dl benzo/A ,C/cycl oheptene-6-one

Concen-
tration
in sample
wg/ml
1
0.3
0.4
1












7
2


Concen-
tration
1n flue-gas
ug/mj
0.3
0.1
0.1
0.3

Quantlfled-



Quantlfled-




2
0.6



Typical
DMEG
Value
1 x 105
6 x 106
N
N












N
4 x 10*


tn
           N - No DMEG value given:  No biological toxldty data 1n literature.

-------
lower limit of detection expressed in terms of concentration in a gaseous
effluent is estimated to be 0.03 yg/m^.   The acidified condensate extract
from the scrubber outlet train contained what is believed to be a branched
CIQ ketone and a butyl ester of methyl  benzoate.  No repeat analysis was
made to quantify these compounds but inspection of the total ion chroma-
tograph data indicated their presence at gaseous effluent levels of much
less than 1 yg/m3.  The condensate extracts after adjustment to neutral and
alkaline pH also showed very little material.  Table B-16 shows one ketone,
one phenyl substituted hydrocarbon, a Freon and a possible 64 substituted
phenol.  The possible presence of the phenol in a neutral fraction is
unexplained except for the possibility that the compound identification on
the basis of mass spectral data is in error.  No reanalysis of this sample
was made to resolve this anomaly because of the apparently Insignificant
concentrations.
     The basic condensate extract from Run 134 was rerun with an internal
standard to estimate concentration levels of the two species that were
identified.  Table B-16 shows mlcrogram and submlcrogram per cubic meter
levels.  Again these levels are at least a factor of a thousand below
typical DMEG values.
Process Water and Slurry Extracts—•
     This section summarizes the results of the GC/MS analyses on the
process water and slurry extracts.  Two GC column systems were used for
effective separation of the acid species and the basic species as separate
entities.  Refer to Reference B-l  for procedural details.  Additional chro-
matography, i.e., the OV-17 screening GC/MS was also employed to analyze
the acidic fractions for neutral species as well as to provide backup data
for reporting confidence in observed species.  The order of presentation
in Tables B-l7 and B-l8 1s acidified extracts followed by the neutral and
basic extracts.
     The procedure used for the extraction of the aqueous samples such as
the process waters, the slurries and the aqueous SASS train condensates
                                   156

-------
                TABLE  B-17.   ACIDIFIED  PROCESS WATER AND SLURRY  SAMPLES
                                           132/6-1     132/6-2     132/6-3     132/6-4     132/6-5     1 32/6-6L     132/6-7L
4-Hydroxy-4-methyl-2-pentanone                  X                                              XX
2,2,4-Trlmethyl cyclohexene-1-methanol                 _
2-Ethyl  hexanolc Acid           _
2H-Pyran-2-one or_ 2-cyclohexene-l-one           X                                  X
4-Chloro-trsns cyclohexanol                     X                     _
Acetophenone                                   X _ _
Possible Cg 01ol                               X        _
Possible Propyl ether.                          X
C,.j SL^-it Acldt Methylestep
Phenol
Possible Dlmethoxy propane
fllodomethane (AKA Hethylene Iodide)
2-Cyclohexen-l-Ol
B1cyclo/3.1.O/hexane-3-one
l-Bromo-2-chloro-cls-cyclohexane
2-Chloro-trans-cyclohexanol
2,5-Dtethyl-tetra hydrofuran
Dlmethoxy methane or Trlmethoxy methane
       e.g. l-chloro-2-l-buten-3-yne
2-Ethoxy-l-methoxy-ethoxy ethane
 5-Hethyl-1,2-hexad1ene
 1-(2-Methy1-2-eyclopenten-l-yl)-ethanone
      ketone
 Butyl oxyrane
 2-Im1dazol1d1none
 Vinyl Acetate
 C4H3C1 (e.g.) Chloro  butatrlene

-------
TABLE B-18.  ANALYSIS  OF SELECTED ACIDIFIED PROCESS
             WATER EXTRACTS ON  OV-17 GC  COLUMN
Sample Extract

132/6-3-LEA-KD
(settling pond
overf 1 ow)



132/6-5-LEA-KD
(water to
slag pond)


132/6-6L-LEA-KD
(acidified
extract of liquid
portion of inlet
scrubber slurry)
Identified Species
(Estimated Concentrations pg/1 water)
• Butyl naphthalene (4)
(Plus possible an (1)
Alkyl substituted
naphthalene)
• l-Chloro-2,4-hexadine (0.5)
• Unknown (3)
• Freon Cmpd; C^Cl^Fg (1)
0 Olefin or Ketone; CS-GH
t Tetrachloropropane (possible)
• 6-Chloro-n-ethyl-n'-(l-methyl ethyl -1 ,3,5-
tr1azine-2,4-diamine
• Octyldipheny Tester of phosphoric acid.
t Freon; C.CKFg

                         158

-------
represents a deviation from established Level 2 procedures outlined in
Reference B-l.  These samples were first acidified to pH 2 and extracted
with methylene chloride.  The samples were then adjusted to pH 7 and re-
extracted with methylene chloride.  A final  extraction was made at pH 11.
This reversal in pH adjustment order results in the possibility that some
neutral compounds were extracted into the acid extract solution for analysis
on the Carbowax/H3P04 column.  These neutrals are more suitably screened on
the OV-17 column.  As a result, the acid pH  extracts were also screened on
the OV-17 column to search for neutral  compounds.  The discussion below
discusses the results of these additional analyses.

     Acidified Process Water Extracts—The results of the GC/MS screening
analysis of extracts from the acidified process water samples  are presented
in Table B-l7.  These results were obtained  using the Carbowax 20M-
phosphoric acid column.  In general, the detected compounds consist of
oxygenates such as ketones, alcohols, ethers, and cyclic ethers.  Some of
these are lightly halogenated.  One carboxylic acid, 2-ethyl  hexanoic acid,
and phenol were seen in these samples.   Some unsaturated hydrocarbons were
also identified.

     Each of the acidified process water samples was generally found to
contain compounds not found in any of the other acidified water extracts.
However, two compounds were common to two or more samples.  They were
2-cyclohexenol and a dt- or tri-methoxy methane.
     The mixture of compounds from extracts  of the acidified process water and
slurry liquid samples were not well resolved using the Carbowax 20M/phosphoric
acid column.  The resulting chromatograms had high backgrounds and broad
peaks indicative of complex mixtures.  Estimates of concentration levels
of the individual compounds believed to exist in these extracts proved too
unrealistic because of the high degree of background interference.  Figure
B-5 is a GC/MS total ion chromatogram for the acidified extract of the
132/6-3 process water stream.  The incomplete peak separation is evident.
If one makes a worst case assumption that some of the biggest peaks in these
chromatograms are single compounds, then the highest concentrations for any
                                   159

-------
O1
o
               100.01
                 RIC_
                                                                              DATA: 13263LEAO II1894
                                                                              CALI: C0627 13
BIG
86/27/78 13:24:9%
SAMPLE: 10 UL
RANGE. C   1.2080  LABEL:  H 0. 46 f'UAN:  A  0.  1.0  BASE: U 20.  3
                                                                  1038
SCANS  160 TO 28»8
                                                                33:2«
                                                           15*8
                                                           50:88
                                                                                                             1893
                                                                                        462848.
            2800  SCAN
            66:48 TIME
               Figure B-5.  Total  1on chromatogram of  concentrated extract  of acidified process  water sample

-------
one compound in these process waters would not exceed  10 to  15 micrograms
per liter of water (vg/i).
     Three acidified water extracts were selected for  additional  GC/MS
analysis on the OV-17 GC column intended for analysis  of base/neutral com-
pounds.  The three selected samples are identified in  Table  B-18  along with
compound identifications.  It is interesting to note that there is  no agree-
ment in the qualitative identifications between the data for the  same sample
run under different GC conditions.  The computerized data enhancement and
library search results on the acidified extracts run on the  Carbowax 20M/
Phosphoric acid column should be considered more suspect. This is  because
of the high backgrounds and compound interferences are causes of  incorrect
background subtraction.  No additional  analysis have been carried out on
the acidified process water extracts at this time due  to budget and schedule
limitations as well as the relatively insignificant estimated concentrations
being observed.

     Neutral and Basic Process Water Extracts—The results of the GC/MS
analysis of the neutralized and basic process water extracts are  presented
in Table B-19.  The six or seven compounds for which reasonable identifi-
cations exist are ketones, a di-acid ester, an aliphatic hydrocarbon and
an aromatic hydrocarbon.  Three ketones are common to  at least two  samples.
The remaining compounds are found in individual samples.

     Several of the samples did not contain compounds  at detectable or
identifiable levels.  They are:
     •   132/6-1-LEN
     •   132/6-1-LEB
     •   132/6-2-LEB
     •   132/6-3-LEN
     t   132/6-3-LEB
     •   132/6-6L-LEN
     •   132/6-7L-LEN
                                    161

-------
                                                TABLE  B-19.
NEUTRAL  AND BASIC  PROCESS  WATER EXTRACTS
(CONCENTRATION, yg/1  OF  WATER  SAMPLE)
ro
                                                             132/6-2-Neut  U?/6-4-l»«ut   132/6-4-Baslc   132/6-5-Nfut  132/6-5-8as1c  132/6-6L-Ba$1c  !32/6-7L-tas1c   132/6-6S

                                 3-Hethyt-2-cyc1ohexen- 1-one            X           1          n           X           X
                                   (Also called Dlacetone)
R-Nethyl-M-dlhydro
naphthalene-one
3«,7A Dtltydro-S-iiethyl
1ndene-1,7(4H)-d1l ester of
                                  Nonene dlolc acid
                                 Possible l-(4-Chlorophenyl)-
                                  1,4-D1hydro-2.3-b1phen>l
                                  Qulnollne
Unkno.it
Z ,2 .5 ,5-Tetn»ethylhe«in«
A freon. e.g., 1,1.3,4-
Hcuf lucre tuttnc
Dlphtnyl Heptane (Possible)
Mixture of Trlchtoro propenes
DtMthylhe»ne
4-H«thyl-2-propyl pcntino!
C9 or Clo Drinched hydro-
carbon
TMnethylhexanft
Clo Hydroxylanlne
Dl-tert-butyl-mthylphenol
(»KT)
Freon: C^CljF, or C4Cl4Fj
1 ,1-Olpheny1-3-MtliylbuUn»
1 (1 ,6 ^"Tetraphtnylhexane
I
I

X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
                                     X • Compound Detected In Swiple Extract.
                                     *   DME6 Value for tutanoni It 6 K 10* ug/1.
                                     t   OKG Value for Indene t« 4 x 104 ug/1.
                                     *   No ONES Value It given for Acid Esters.

-------
     Part of the reason why these samples did not contain any significant
material may be due, at least in part to the reversed extraction sequence
(acidified first) in which compounds normally found in the neutral  extracts
were found in the acidified estracts.  This appears to be borne out by the
results shown in Table B-16 for the acidified extracts. Many apparent neutral
compounds are found there.  The concentration  in the final  concentrated
water extracts at which a compound would have to be present in a sample
in order to be detected is estimated to be 3 yg/ml.  This corresponds to a
water concentration of 3 yg/£.
     The neutral extract of process water sample 4 was additionally analyzed
with an internal standard to estimate the concentration of the detected
species.  The concentrations for the three compounds identified in  the
sample are shown in Table B-19.  The presence of compounds found in the
remaining samples are indicated by an X.
     The solids portion of the 132/6-6 and 132/6-7 slurry samples were also
extracted with methylene chloride after separation from the slurry.
These extracts were also screened on the GC/MS using the OV-17 column.
The extract of the solids from the process slurry sample 6 had a mixture
of hydrocarbons, 2 halogenated species, an ajcohol, a hydroxylamine and BHT,
a common antioxidant (Table B-19).  The slurry solids extract from  process
stream 7 had three compounds at levels too low to identify above sample
background.  These levels were not specifically determined but inspection
of peak areas for the 3 unknowns are estimated to be very much less than a
water concentration of 1 yg/£.
                                    163

-------
                                APPENDIX C

                    LA CY6NE INORGANIC ANALYSIS  RESULTS


     The comparative assessment tests conducted at the La Cygne Power Plant
were designed to study the effect of emission control  devices on the flue

gas composition.  As part of this program, Level 1 and comprehensive Level 2

sampling and analysis procedures were used to study the inorganic compounds
in the flue gas streams.  The Level  2 sampling consisted of using a modified

Method 5 train for particulate matter in the flue gas  and the controlled

condensation system for the H2SO. content of the flue  gas.

     After the Level 1 data was reviewed, specific analytical techniques
were used as part of the comprehensive Level 2 approach.  These methods
included:

        •   Thermogravimetric Analysis (TGA) and Differential Scanning
            Calorimeter (DSC) — Used to determine drying temperatures
            or stability data.

        •   Polarized Light Microscopy (PLM) — Used visually to
            identify materials present in the sample.

        •   Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy (AAS) — Used to determine
            accurate inlet/outlet concentration of elements.

        0   Particle Induced X-Ray Emission (PIXE) - Used to
            determine elemental composition  of individual
            impactor stages.

        a   Fourier Transform IR (FTIR) - Used to identify inorganic
            compounds from specific  IR band correlations.

        0   X-Ray Diffraction (XRD)  - Used to directly identify
            crystalline material in  the solid samples.

        0   Electron Spectroscopy for Chemical Analysis (ESCA) —
            Used to study the surface and sub-surface  sulfur
            concentrations and oxidation state of bulk samples.

        0   Secondary Ion Mass Spectrometry (SIMS) — Used to study
            the surface and sub-surface composition of bulk samples.

        0   Scanning Electron Microscope with Energy Dispersive X-Ray
            Fluorescence (SEM-EDX) — Used to obtain high resolution
            photographs and elemental composition of single particles.
                                    164

-------
     In addition to these Instrumental  methods, specific  anlon  analyses for
Cl~, F~, and SO." were run on the CCS train samples.
     The following sections will  discuss the results  from TGA/DSC,  PLM,
SEM/EDX, SSMS, XRD and MRI Impactor analyses.  PIXE,  FTIR, and  SIMS analyses
did not give meaningful results and are not reported  here.  The results of
other analytical techniques (AAS, ESCA, and specific  anion analyses)  have
been discussed in the text.
RESULTS OF ANALYSES
     Complete sets of samples were available for the  135  run.   Only this
sample set was analyzed.  The following sections contain  the data from each
of the methods employed for each sample analyzed.   In some cases, two or
more methods will be discussed together for comparison purposes.
TGA/DSC Results
     Differential Scanning Calorimeter (DSC) measures the energy required
to maintain a sample at the same temperature as a reference material  as both
temperatures are raised.  In this way the area under  the  peak is a  direct
measure of the enthalpy of a physical or chemical  change.  Thermogravimetric
analysis (TGA) measures weight gain or loss as the temperature  is steadily
increased.  By comparing DSC and TGA results, phase changes can be  differ-
entiated from chemical decomposition.
     TGA and DSC's were run on:  133-18-BA (bottom ash),  135-6  (scrubber
slurry in), 135-7 (scrubber slurry out), 135-LF (lime feed), and 135-OUT-CYC
(SASS cyclone catch).  In addition TGA's were run on  135-IN-PF  (SASS filter
catch), 135-IN-PFa (SASS filter catch; "a" denotes second filter used during
run), 135-OUT-PF, and 135-IN-CYC.  The analyses were  run  using  DuPont 950
TGA/DSC system in a N2 atmosphere at temperatures up  to 650°C.
     Table C-l summarizes the results of the TGA and  DSC  results.   The inlet
cyclone and filter catches show similar weight loss profiles.   The  inlet
filter samples show an additional feature on the TGA  at 170°C which does not
appear in the cyclone TGA.  While both inlet filter samples have the same
profile, the weight loss for 135-IN-PF is over twice  as much than 135-IN-PFa.
Also the inlet filters have more of a weight loss than the inlet cyclone
catch.
                                    165

-------
                      TABLE C-l.   TGA/DSC RESULTS
  Sample
           DSC
             TGA
135-IN-CYC    No significant features
135-IN-PF
135-OUT-CYC
133-18-BA


135-6


135-7
135-LF
Not Run
135-IN-PFa    Not Run
- Three large endothermic
  peaks at 87°C,  120°C,
  and 190°C.   Small  endo-
  thermic peak at 220°C.
135-OUT-PF    Not Run
No significant features
  Small  endothermic peak
  at 113°C

  Small  endothermic peak
  at 128°C and a large,
  sharp endothermic peak
  at 407°C
- Possible endothermic peak
  at 33°C
- Slow loss of weight (1.3%)
  up to 550°C.  Slight
  increase in weight loss up
  to 650°C.

- 20% weight loss up to
  175°C.
- An additional weight loss
  of 8% until ^525°C.
- Sharp weight loss after
  550°C.

- Loss of 9.7% weight up to
  170°C.
- An additional 2.8% lost
  up to 550°C.
- Sharp increase in weight
  loss at up to 650°C limit

- Large weight loss (36.7%)
  over a range of 50°C to
  350°C.
- Sharp increase in weight
  loss at 550°C.

- Loss of 6.3% weight up to
  6QOC.
- Slow, consistent weight
  loss (5%) from 60<>C to
  475<>C.

- Loses no weight from 25°C
  to 65QOC.

- Slight weight loss starts
  at ^525°C.

- 0.8% weight loss up to
  360°C.
- 2.1% lost from 395 to
  420°C.
- Stable to 600°C.

- Weight loss of 1.9% at
  500C.
- Slow weight loss from
  400° to 650°C (<3%) -
  possibly due to
  instrument interference
                                  166

-------
     At the scrubber outlet the cyclone sample weight  loss  is  far  greater
than the filter.  The DSC of the outlet cyclone shows  three large  endothermic
peaks at 87°C, 120°C, and 190°C with several  smaller shoulders at  140°C and
230°C.  The major peaks roughly correspond to the dehydration  of CaSOj-
1/2 H20 (100°C), CaS04-2H20 (to the half hydrate - 128°C) and  CaS04-l/2 HgO
(163°C).  The profiles for the outlet samples may indicate  that the  outlet
material is modified with respect to the inlet particulate.
     DSC can be influenced by the heating rate.  At high heating rates the
sample temperature may tend to lag behind the temperature of the reference
material for endothermic reactions.  The DSC spectra of the 135-OUT-CYC was
repeated at a heating rate of 2°C/min (original 10°C/min).   The scan is
quite different, showing peaks at 47°C, 94°C, 160°C, and shoulders at 115°C
and 175°C.  The 47°C peak is probably due to surface water  and baseline
drift.  The 94°C and the 160°C may correspond to the CaSCyl/2 H20 -»• CaS03
and the CaS04'l/2 H20 -»• CaS04 dehydrations.  The shoulder at 115°C might be
due to the dehydration CaSO^ZHgO.  The 175°C shoulder is unidentified, but
may represent a phase change of CaSO^ between o & B forms or a reaction of
an unidentified material.
PLM and SEM-EDX Results
    Polarized light microscope analyses were completed on the following
samples:
        133-18-BA                   135-6
        135-IN-CYC                  135-7
        135-IN-PF                   135-OUT-CYC
        135-IN-PFa                  135-OUT-PF
        135-IN-PFb                  135-OUT-PFa
        135-LF
Where SEM-EDX analysis emphasizes the PLM results, the photos  are  used
to illustrate the result.
Size  Distributions
     Where possible a size distribution of each sample  was  determined.
Materials which appeared to have crystallized on the  filter or within
a sample after collection were not included in the size distribution.
                                   167

-------
The outlet filter samples, 135-OUT-PF and 135-OUT-PFa were composed
almost exclusively of these crystallized materials.  For this reason,
no size distribution of these samples was determined.
     All of the particles in 133-18 are too large to be sized with
optical microscopy.  The samples containing limestone as the major com-
ponent, 135-LF and 135-6 are composed of a large number of particles
which are too big to be sized with optical microscopy.  With such a great
size range (
-------
TABLE C-2.  OVERALL SIZE DISTRIBUTIONS
Size Ranges (urn)
<1.0
1.0-2.0
2.0-3.0
3.0-4.0
4.0-6.0
6.0-8.0
8.0-10.0
10.0-14.0
14.0-20.0
>20.0
Arithmetic Mean
Diameter

<3.2
3.2-6.4
6.4-12.8
12.8-19.2
19.2-32.0
32.0-48.0
>48.0
Arithmetic Mean
Diameter
135-IN-
CYC
16.2%
19.8%
21.6%
14.4%
14.4%
4.5%
4.5%
2.7%
1.8%
0
3.5 ym
135-7
32.5%
26.3%
23.0%
13.9%
3.8%
0.5%
0
7.7 ym
135-IN-
PF
54.9%
34.6%
9.3%
0.2%
0
0
0
0
0
0
1.0 ym








135-IN-
PFa
53.1%
34.9%
9.3%
2.7%
0
0
0
0
0
0
1.1 ym








135-IN-
PFb
62.2%
28.6%
7.6%
1.3%
0.4%
0
0
0
0
0
1.0 ym








135-OUT-
CYC
40.9%
28.8%
15.6%
8.6%
4.7%
1.2%
0.4%
0
0
0
1.5 ym








                  169

-------
                                          TABLE  C-3.   COMPOSITION OF SAMPLES
COMPONENTS             133-18  135-IN-CYC  135-IN-PF  135-IN-PFa  135-TN-PFb  135-LF  135-6  135-7   135-OUT-CYC   135-OUT-PF  135-OUT-PFa
Limestone                                                                   95% +   98% +  45-60%
Flyash                          80-95%     35-50%      35-50%      40-55%                   5-10%    15-30%
Magnetite              <2%        5-15%                                                     5-10%
Partially Combusted
Coal                            <2%        <2%         <2%         <2%                     <2%       <2%
Crystallized  Minerals                                                                                            95%         95% +
   Type I                                  50-65%      50-65%      40-60%
   Type II                                                                                          70-85%
   Type III
CaS03'l/2 H20                                                                            30-45%

-------
Figure C-l  - 135-OUT-PFa  Showing the  Three Types  of Crystallized  Minerals  Found  in
              These Samples;  Partially Uncrossed  Polars  (PUP),  131X

-------
        Type 2:  The second type of crystallized mineral is either in thin
        plates or irregular round chunks.   In the photomicrograph it is
        the mottled angular plate upon which the spherulites are sitting.
        It has a birefringence of approximately 0.01.  The refractive
        indices are difficult to determine  since the plates are composed
        of many tiny,  independent crystals.  This mineral type is found
        in all three outlet samples but in  none of the others.
        Type 3:  These are the brown nodules seen in the photomicrograph.
        They are brown in transmitted light and white in reflected light.
        Air bubbles within the nodules are  probably responsible for the
        white color.   They also show a maltese cross on their surfaces
        with crossed polars.  The refractive indices of these particles
        are between 1.515 and 1.600 (closer to the latter).  They have
        very low birefringence, probably less than 0.010 and show parallel
        extinction.  These nodules are only found in the filter outlet
        samples, 135-OUT-PF and 135-OUT-PFa.
     The above crystals will  be refered to as Type 1,  Type 2,  and Type  3
in the text.
     Other than the crystals,  the most frequently encountered  emissions
are flyash and magnetite.  Partially combusted coal  is seen in most  samples
but always as a minor component.   Calcium sulfite hemi-hydrate
(CaS03'l/2 H20) laths were found as a major component of the scrubber
cake.  Limestone was also found in the scrubber cake.
     Descriptions of the individual  samples follow.
133-18-BOTTOM ASH
     The particles  in this sample were much too large to be analyzed  with
optical microscopy.   For this  reason,  a small  portion of the sample was
crushed with  a mortar and pestle for the analysis.
     The slag is composed of glassy, isotropic particles which show  con-
coidal fracture (Figure C-2).   They have a refractive index of about
1.595 and are an olive-green color.   The glassy nature of the  slag indicates
that the temperatures reached  were sufficient to vitrify the mineral  con-
taminants of the coal.

                                    172

-------
0,1
                   Figure C-2 -  133-18 Showing the Crushed Slag; Plane Polarized Light (PPL); 51X

-------
     Incorporated within the slag is magnetite, most of which is less
than lym in diameter.  These spheres are speckled throughout the glassy
slag.  Irregularly shaped magnetic fragments are also associated with
the slag.
135-IN-CYC-INLET CYCLONE
                                                    Average
  Components                   Concentration     Diameter (urn)

  Flyash                          80-95%               4           
-------
--4
on
                  Figure C-3 - 135-IN-CYC Showing Flyash, Magnetite, and Partially Combusted Coal
                                                     PPL, 51X.

-------


en

                                                                                                  I
              Figure C-4 - 135-IN-CYC Showing the Same Field of View as Figure C-3 but at a Higher
                                             Magnification; PPL, 131X.

-------
Figure C-5 - SEM Photograph  (1400X)  of 135-IN-CYC Showing
             Cenospheres  and Air Pockets  in  Broken  Cenosphere
                             177

-------
Figure C-6 - Closeup
(4000X)  of Smaller Cenospheres that Fill
  Into Fractured Cenosphere
                             17R

-------
     The photomicrographs of this sample (Figure C-7) and of the other two
inlet filter samples (Figures C-8 and C-9) are of the undesiccated samples.
This is because after desiccation the particles agglomerated making dis-
persion impossible.  After desiccating the samples, Type 1 spherulites
was the major sample component.  Since the photos are of wet samples,  the
particles shown do not include the soluble Type 1 spherulites.
     By far the most numerous particulate found in this sample is flyash.
Almost all of the flyash is less than 4ym in diameter.  The average flyash
diameter is about lym.  The color of the glassy flyash spheres are primarily
golden brown with a few spheres which are colorless, red, or brown.
     Partially combusted coal was the only other combustion product
detected.  It is a minor sample component, not more than 2% of the sample
mass.  Magnetite which was 5-15% of the 135-IN-CYC sample is not present
in this sample.  This is probably because the magnetite spheres are too
large and heavy to pass the cyclone.
135-IN-PFa, 135-IN-PFb-Filter Samples
                                                Average         Size
                             Concentration   Diameter (ym)   Range (vim)
  135-IN-PFa
  Flyash                        35-50%             1           
-------
< •
-
                         Figure C-7 - 135-IN-PF  Before  Desiccation,  Shows  Flyash; PUP, 131X.

-------
                *.
00
                                                                                *•£*        «e** * *
                                                                                 ^^^k A      A      *
                                                                                '   ^rv •  •**,%*« •. •
                      Figure C-8 - 135-IN-PFa  Before Desiccation, Shows Flyash; PUP, 131X

-------
CX>
                    T*v**a'
                        •  . *.
                      > *• .4
                      • \^,
                                                €       .


                                              ;    '-
                           •„
                            1»
                Figure C-9 - 135-IN-PFb Before Desiccation, Shows Flyash; PUP, 131X.

-------
Figure C-10 - SEM Photograph  of  Section  of  135-IN-PFa Filter Sample
              With Type I  Crystal  in  Upper  Right Hand Corner
                                 183

-------
Figure C-ll  -  9000X  Enlargement of Type  I Crystal in Figure 3.
              EDX Analysis:   High, Fe, Si, S; Medium Zn; Low K, and Ca
                                 184

-------
may only be the result of a possible difference in crystallizing conditions
between the samples.  The elemental analysis showed Fe, Si and S to be
the major elements, Zn, K and Ca were also present.  It could be possible
that H2S04 impinging on the flyash dissolved Fe and formed the crystals.
However, the strong (30 kV) beam strength probably excited the flyash
underneath the Type I crystals, which resulted in the apparent Fe line.
     As in the 135-IN-PF sample, flyash is the most numerous particulate.
The colors and modal size of the flyash spheres are approximately the
same in all three samples.  Even though spheres greater than 4ym in diam-
eter are present, 99% of the flyash is less than 4pm in diameter.
     Partially combusted coal,  (average diameter: 3ym) is <2% of both
samples.  As in 135-IN-PF, no magnetite was seen.
135-LF-Limestone Feed
     Probably greater than 95%  of this sample is limestone.  Other com-
ponents can be regarded as contaminants and the degree of contamination
is highly dependent upon which  portion of the sample was used for the
analysis.  Approximately 10 slides were made.  Several were made of a
large crushed limestone "rock".  The rest of the slides were prepared
of the fine limestone dust in the sample.
     The samples prepared from  the crushed rock were almost exclusively
composed of limestone (Figure C-12). Much less than 1% of these samples
was contaminants.  These contaminants were primarily quartz and clays and
there was a very trace amount of coal or humus.  These contaminants were
probably those which adhered to the outside of the rock and are not
incorporated within it.
     The samples of dust or fine particles were much more heavily con-
taminated.  Some samples contained as much as 10-25% contaminants.  As
in the crushed rock, clays and  quartz were the predominant contaminants.
     Most of the quartz fragments were heavily speckled with clays and
humus and there are individual  clay particles as well.  Agglomerates of
clay and quartz (Figure C-13) were commonly seen. A trace of coal (or
humus) is present, too.  In reflected light some of the limestone chunks
have a yellow surface coating.  This is probably a thin coating of hydrated
iron oxide.
                                    185

-------
CD
              Figure C-12 - 135-LF Showing a General View of Crushed Limestone "Rock"; PUP, 51X.

-------
03
- I
                Figure  C-13  -  135-LF Showing Soil Agglomerates Which Contaminate the "Dust" Samples
                                                    PUP, 131X.

-------
     Determination of the actual  percent of contaminants is impossible
since they are so unevenly distributed within the sample received.   By
far the greatest sample mass is involved in the limestone "rock" and its
purity would imply greater than 99% is limestone.  However, if limestone
dust is a large sample component, then the sample may not be this pure.
135-6-SLURRY IN
     This sample of limestone (Figure C-14) seems to be much cleaner than
the 135-LF sample.  In no slide prepared of this sample were contaminants
greater than 2% of the sample mass.  In most samples, the contaminants
were difficult to find and contributed considerably less than 1% of the
mass.
     The major contaminants found in 135-6 were humus, coal fragments,
and quartz.  Individual clay particles and soil agglomerates are much
lesser contaminants than in 135-LF sample.  Some of the limestone chunks
have an iron oxide coating making them appear yellow in reflected light.
135-7-Scrubber Cake

                                            Average           Si ze
    Components        Concentration      Diameter (ym)      Range (pm)

   CaS03-l/2 H20         30-45%           15 (length)       3-60 (length)
   Limestone             45-60%            9               <1-200
   Flyash                 5-10%            5               <1-40
   Magnetite              5-10%           20                5-80

     The primary components are calcium sulflte hemi-hydrate (CaSO,*l/2 H^O
laths and limestone (Figures C-15 and C-16).  Though the laths appear to
be more numerous, the limestone particles are generally larger and thereby
contribute a greater mass to the sample.
     The CaSCL-1/2 tU) laths compose 30-45% of the overall sample mass.
These laths are transparent and have refractive indices:  a=1.596,  0=1.598,
Y=1.634.  The birefringence of the lath surface usually observed is about
0.028.  The modal lath length is about 15ym though they range from 3-60ym
in length.  Most have about a 3:1 aspect ratio (length:  width).  The
maximum thickness of a lath seen was only about 5ym - most were less than
2ym thick.
                                    188

-------
•
                                   Figure C-14 - 135-6 Showing  Limestone;  PUP,  51X

-------
1'..
< >
                 Figure C-15  -  135-7 Showing General View of This Sample at Low Magnification:  PUP  51X.

-------
                                                                                                  f
U i
   *
J


                Figure C-16 - 135-7 Showing CaSCL •  1/2HLO Laths,  Limestone,  Flyash, and Magnetite;

                                                    PUP,  131X.

-------
     The limestone is present both as single crystals and as aggregates
of smaller crystals.  They range in size from 
-------
1C
0 '
7
 V u"
           Figure C-17 -  135-OUT-CYC  Showing  Type  2  Crystallized  "Crust"  With  Flyash Embedded in it:
                                                     PUP,  51X.

-------
Figure C-18 - SEM Photograph of 135-OUT-CYC  Showing
              Flyash  and  Crystalline  Material  Aggregates
                          194

-------
Figure C-19 - SEM-EDX (2000X)  Photograph  of Crystalline Material in
              135-OUT-CYC.   EDX  Analysis:  High  Fe & S; Low Si, Zn, Ca
                                  195

-------
     Flyash is 15-30% of this sample.   There are some flyash spheres
which are 40pm in diameter though the average size is only about 2ym.
As in most samples, the flyash spheres are predominantly golden brown
and a small percentage are plerospheres.
     Partially combusted coal accounts for less than 2% of the sample  mass.
The average diameter is about 2ym and the diameters of these irregular
chunks range from 
-------
ID
- i
                                      o
                Figure C-20 - 135-OUT-PF Showina the Crystal Types Present in This and the 135-OUT-
                                              PFa Samples; PUP, 51X.

-------
Figure C-21  -  SEM of 135-OUT-PFa  Filter (500X)
              Showing Donut-Shaped Particles
                      198

-------
Figure C-22 - SEM-EDX  Enlargement  (5500X) of Single Nodule from
              135-OUT-PFa.  Arrow  1 EDX:  High S, Fe, Zn; Low Ca,
              Si,  K.   Arrow 2 EDX:  High S, Fe, Zn; Medium Si; Low K, Ca
                                   199

-------
Figure C-23  - SEM-EDX of 135-OUT-PF Showing Cubic and Platelet Materials
             Arrow 1 EDX:  High S, Fe, Zn; Low K.  Arrow 2 EDX:   High
             Fe, Si, Ca, Zn, S
                                   200

-------
SSMS

     Trace element analyses by SSMS of the following  coal  firing samples

are presented in Tables C-4 to C-20:

     -  Coal Feed (tests 132-136)
     -  Combined Flue Gas Particulates (test 135)
     -  Boiler Feedwater (test 132)
     -  Demister Inlet (test 132)
     -  Settling Pond Overflow (test 132)
     -  Inlet Scrubber Water (test 132)
     -  Water to Slag Pond (test 132)
     -  Lime Feed (test 135)
     -  Inlet Scrubber Slurry Liquid (test 135)
     -  Inlet Scrubber Slurry Solids (test 135)
     -  Outlet Scrubber Slurry Liquid (test 135)
     -  Outlet Scrubber Slurry Solids (test 135)
     -  Bottom Ash (test 133)

XRD

     All samples, powders and filters, were analyzed  on  the  Diano-8000

x-ray diffractometer with Cu,,  radiation.   Instrument parameters were

constant for all samples.  Powder samples  were ground to ca  40y size and

then packed in a sample holder.  Filter samples were  pressed to ensure a

smooth surface and were mounted on a flat  surface  with double-back Scotch

tape.  A filter blank was run.  No diffraction pattern was observed.  Thus,

the glass fiber filters did not interfere  in the analysis of filter

samples.

     Results of these analyses are summarized in Table C-21.  Standard ASTM

d-spacings were used for matching compounds.

MRI Impactor Data

     PLM analysis was performed on the inlet particulates for test 135.

MRI impactor data were gathered for tests  135 and  136 at the outlet.  The

impactor data was reduced using the procedure developed  by Ensor  (Reference

C-l).  In this approach the data is normalized so  that a smooth curve can

be drawn through the limited number of data points obtained  from  the

impactor.  In order to draw a smooth curve, the geometric mean of the D's
*
  The DSQ of an impactor stage is the calculated aerodynamic  particle
  diameter for which the stage achieves 50% efficiency:   one  half of the
  particles of that diameter are captured and one half are not.


                                    201

-------
         TABLE C-4.   SPARK SOURCE MASS  SPECTROMETRY  ANALYSIS
                       OF COAL FEED - TEST 132  (132-CF)
                          CONCENTRATION IN PPAA WEIGHT
ELEMENT
Uranium
Thorium
Bismuth
Lead
Thallium
Mercury
Gold
Platinum
Indium
Osmium
Rhenium
Tungsten
Tantalum
Hafnium
Lutetium
Ytterbium
Thulium
Erbium
Hoi mi urn
Dysprosium
CONC.
14
10
<0.2
*360
<1
NR





<0.9

2
.0.2
0.9
0.1
0.8
1
2
ELEMENT
. Terbium
Gadolinium
Europium
Samarium
Neodymium
Praseodymium
Cerium
Lanthanum
Barium
Cesium
Iodine
Tellurium
Antimony
Tin
Indium
Cadmium
Silver
Palladium
Rhodium

CONC.
0.4
1
0.5
4
10
5
52
41
320
5
4
iO.3
14
2
STD
0.7
2



ELEMENT
Ruthenium
Molybdenum
Niobium
Zirconium
Yttrium
Strontium
Rubidium
Bromine
Selenium
Arsenic
Germanium
Gallium
Zinc
Copper
Nickel
Cobalt
Iron
Manganese
Chromium

CONC.

20
9
160
29
140
77
2
11
62
4
13
59
96
37
17
MC
300
100

ELEMENT
Vanadium
Titanium
Scandium
Calcium
Potassium
Chlorine
Sulfur
Phosphorus
Silicon
Aluminum
Magnesium
Sodium
Fluorine
Oxygen
Nitrogen
Carbon
Boron.
Beryllium
Lithium
Hydrogen
CONC.
90
MC
5
MC
MC
13
MC
150
MC
MC
MC
MC
=780
NR
NR
NR
21
0.7
6
NR
NR - Not Reported

AM elements not reported <0.1 ppm weight

MC - Major Component
                 *Hetcrogeneous
                                    202

-------
        TABLE  C-5.   SPARK  SOURCE MASS SPECTROMETRY ANALYSIS
                      OF COAL  FEED -  TEST  133 (133-CF)
                           CONCENTRATION IN PPM WEIGHT
ELEMENT
Uranium
Thorium
Bismuth
Lead
Thallium
Mercury
Gold
Platinum
Iridium
Osmium
Rhenium
Tungsten
Tantalum
Hafnium
Lutetium
Ytterbi urn
Thul i urn
Erbium
Holmium
Dysprosium
CONC.
17
12
<0.2
340
<2
NR





<0.8

1
0.3
1
0.2
1
2
3
ELEMENT
Terbium
Gadolinium
Europium
Samarium
Neodymium
Praseodymi urn
Cerium
Lanthanum
Barium
Cesium
Iodine
Tellurium
Antimony
Tin
Indium.
Cadmium
Silver
Palladium
Rhodi urn

CONC.
0.6
2
0.8
7
10
7
55
37
380
5
3
<0.5
11
1
STD
1
2



ELEMENT
Ruthenium
Molybdenum
Niobium
Zirconium
Yttrium
Strontium
Rubidium
Bromine
Selenium
Arsenic
Germanium
Gallium
Zinc
Copper
Nickel
Cobalt
Iron
Manganese
Chromi urn

CONC.

32
7
91
21
180
81
2
43
39
6
16
185
84
10
14
MC
57
54

ELEMENT
Vanadium
Titanium
Scandium
Calcium
Potassium
Chlorine
Sulfur
Phosphorus
Silicon
Aluminum
Magnesium
Sodium
Fluorine
Oxygen
Nitrogen
Carbon
Boron
Beryl 1 i urn
Lithium
Hydrogen
CONC.
47
MC
8
MC
MC
20
MC
970
MC
MC
MC
MC
=390
NR
NR
NR
5S
1
49
NR
NR - Not Reported
All elements not-reported <0-"2ppm weight
MC - Major Component
                                   203

-------
       TABLE C-6.  SPARK SOURCE MASS SPECTROMETRY ANALYSIS
                     OF  COAL  FEED -  TEST  134 (134-CF)
                           CONCENTRATION IN PPAA WEIGHT
ELEMENT
Uranium
Thorium
Bismuth
Lead
Thallium
Mercury
Gold
Platinum
Iridium
Osmium
Rhenium
Tungsten
Tantalum
Hafnium
Lutetium
Ytterbium
Thul i urn
Erbium
Hoi mi urn
Dysprosium
CONC.
*63
13
<0.1
200
<0.2
MR




<0.2
<2

1
0.2
1
0.1
0.8
1
2
ELEMENT
Terbium
Gadolinium
Europium
Samarium
Neodymium
Praseodymium
Cerium
Lanthanum
Barium
Cesium
Iodine
Tellurium
Antimony
Tin
Indium
Cadmium
Silver
Palladium
Rhodi urn

CONC.
0.4
1
0.7
4
10
6
66
120
480
5
3
<0.3
16
2
STD
0.8
4



ELEMENT
Ruthenium
Molybdenum
Niobium
Zirconium
Yttrium
Strontium
Rubidium
Bromine
Selenium
Arsenic
Germanium
Gallium
Zinc
Copper
Nickel
Cobalt
Iron
Manganese
Chromi urn

CONC.

13
6
73
*120
180
39
2
55
31
10
33
130
60
15
11
MC
57
34

ELEMENT
Vanadium
Titanium
Scandium
Calcium
Potassium
Chlorine
Sulfur
Phosphorus
Silicon
Aluminum
Magnesium
Sodi urn
Fluorine
Oxygen
Nitrogen
Carbon
Boron
Beryllium
Lithium
Hydrogen
CONC.
45
MC
2
MC
MC
17
MC
170
MC
MC
MC
MC
=39
NR
NR
NR
17
0.6
6
NR
NR - Not Reported
All elements not-reported <0.l ppm weight

MC - M.JOT Component  *Heter0geneOUS
                                   204

-------
        TABLE  C-7.   SPARK  SOURCE MASS SPECTROMETRY ANALYSIS
                      OF COAL FEED -  TEST  135 (135-CF)
                          CONCENTRATION IN PPM WEIGHT
ElEMENT
Uranium
Thorium
Bismuth
Lead
Thallium
Mercury
Gold
Platinum
Iridium
Osmium
Rhenium
Tungsten
Tantalum
Hafnium
Lutetium
Ytterbium
Thulium
Erbium
Hoi mi urn
Dysprosium
CONC.
46
31
<0.1
470
0.3
NR





0.7

0.8
0.2
0.8
0.1
0.6
0.8
1
ELEMENT
Terbium
Gadolinium
Europi urn
Samarium
Neodymi urn
Praseodymium
Cerium
Lanthanum
Barium
Cesium
Iodine
Tellurium
Antimony
Tin
Indium
Cadmium
Silver
Palladium
Rhodium

CONC.
0.3
0.8
0.4
5
9
7
38
34
770
4
3
<0.1
6
1
STD
0.5
0.5



ElEMENT
Ruthenium
Molybdenum
Niobium
Zirconium
Yttrium
Strontium
Rubidium
Bromine
Sel eni urn
Arsenic
Germanium
Gallium
Zinc
Copper
Nickel
Cobalt
Iron
Manganese
Chromium

CONC.

16
7
47
14
100
70
1
10
68
16
5
95
19
18
10
MC
no
25

ELEMENT
Vanadium
Titanium
Scandium
Calcium
Potassium
Chlorine
Sulfur
Phosphorus
Silicon
Aluminum
Magnesium
Sodium
Fluorine
Oxygen
Ni trogen
Carbon
Boron
Beryllium
Lithium
Hydrogen
CONC.
33
MC
2
MC
MC
18
MC
140
MC
MC
MC
MC
=76
NR
NR
NR
14
0.2
3
NR
NR - Not Reported
All elements not-reported <0.1 ppm weight
MC — M«|o' Component
                                  205

-------
         TABLE C-8.   SPARK SOURCE MASS  SPECTROMETRY  ANALYSIS
                       OF COAL FEED - TEST 136   (136-CF)
                           CONCENTRATION IN PPM WEIGHT
ELEMENT
Uranium
Thorium
Bismuth
Lead
Thai 1 1 urn
Mercury
Gold
Platinum
Iridium
Osmium
Rhenium
Tungsten
Tantalum
Hafnium
Lutetlum
Ytterbium
Thulium
Erbium
Holmium
Dysprosium
CONC.
22
16
<0.2
170
<1
NR





2

2
0.2
1
0.1
0.2
1
2
ELEMENT
Terbium
Gadolinium
Europium
Samarium
Neodymi urn
Praseodymium
Cerium
Lanthanum
Barium
Cesium
Iodine
Tellurium
Antimony
Tin
Indium
Cadmium
Silver
Palladium
Rhodi urn

CONC.
0.8
2
1
5
10
11
36
42
440
5
11

29
2
STO
*3
2



ELEMENT
Ruthenium
Molybdenum
Niobium
Zirconium
Yttrium
Strontium
Rubidium
Bromine
Selenium
Arsenic
Germanium
Gallium
Zinc
Copper
Nickel
Cobalt
Iron
Manganese
Chromi urn

CONC.

41
11
48
30
150
35
3
45
38
9
14
*150
55
38
18
MC
310
35

ELEMENT
Vanadium
Titanium
Scandium
Calcium
Potassium
Chlorine
Sulfur
Phosphorus
Silicon
Aluminum
Magnesium
Sodium
Fluorine
Oxygen
Ni trogen
Carbon
Boron
Beryllium
Lithium
Hydrogen
CONC.
69
MC
2
MC
MC
52
MC
160
MC
MC
MC
MC
=130
NR
NR
NR
22
1
6
NR
NR - Not Reported
All elements not-reported <0.1 ppm weight
MC — Major Component
                *Hetcrogeneous
                                     206

-------
TABLE C-9.  COMBINED SPARK SOURCE MASS SPECTROMETRY ANALYSES
            OF FLUE GAS PARTICULATES - TEST 135
Element
Al
Ag
As
B
Ba
Be
Bi
Ca
Cd
Ce
Cl
Co
Cr
Cs
Cu
F
Fe
Ga
Ge
K
La
Li
Mg
Mn
Mo
Na
Nb
Nd
Ni
P
Pb
Rb
Sb
Se
Si
Sn
Sr
Ti
Tl
U
V
Y
Zn
Zr
Concentration,
Inlet
1.94
> 20.6
> 95.1
0.300
> 2.34
0.0034
0.012
179.6
0.862
0.688
> 0.524
0.088
0.975
0.106
1.958
0.27
>134.9
0.889
0.415
>101.0
0.670
0.108
> 49.0
> l'.62
0.994
> 49.0
0.233
0.136
> 1.03
>100.8
>100.4
0.557
0.888
0.376
> 1.92
0.160
> 1.658
>100.4
0.192
> 0.786
1.008
0.262
>134.9
0.833
mg/m
Outlet
> 0.139
0.036
> 9.00
0.039
0.320
0.001
0.002
>44.0
0.316
0.011
0.206
0.007
>26.0
0.003
>26.0
0.062
>62.6
0.020
0.070
10.4
0.003
0.011
> 0.122
0.02
0.155
> 0.372
0.004
0.001
0.036
62.6
>90.0
0.007
0.117
0.130
41.0
0.025
0.047
> 9.00
0.043
0.09
0.128
0.004
>76.00
0.005
                             207

-------
TABLE C-10.  SPARK  SOURCE MASS SPECTROMETRY ANALYSIS
             OF BOILER FEEDWATER - TEST 132 (132-6-1-1)
                  CONCENTRATION IN
                                vg/ml
ELEMENT CONC.
Uranium 0.07
Thorium 0.4
Bismuth 0.03
Lead 0.09
Thallium
Mercury NR
Gold
Platinum
Irldium
Osmium
Rhenium
Tungsten 
-------
     TABLE C-11.  SPARK SOURCE MASS  SPECTROMETRY ANALYSIS
                    OF DEMISTER  INLET  -  TEST 132 (132-6-2-1)
                          CONCENTRATION IN
ELEMENT CONC.
Uranium o.04
Thorium
Bismuth
Lead o.Ol
Thallium
Mercury NR
Gold
Platinum
Iridium
Osmium
Rhenium <0.005
Tungsten
Tantalum
Hafnium
Lutetium
Ytterbium
Thulium
Erbium
Hoi mi urn
Dysprosium
ELEMENT
Terbium
Gadolinium
Europium
Samarium
Neodymium
Praseodymium
Cerium
Lanthanum
Barium
Cesium
Iodine
Tellurium
Antimony
Tin
Indium
Cadmium
Silver
Palladium
Rhodium

CONC.





0.001
0.003
0.003
0.5

0.3
10.004
0.01

STD
0.009
0.001



ELEMENT
Ruthenium
Molybdenum
Niobium
Zirconium
Yttrium
Strontium
Rubidium
Bromine
Selenium
Arsenic
Germanium
Gallium
Zinc
Copper
Nickel
Cobalt
Iron
Manganese
Chromium

CONC.

0.5
0.005
0.008
0.004
3
0.02
0.9
0.1
0.05
0.01
0.002
0.5
0.1
0.07
0.01
0.3
0.6
<0.03 -

ELEMENT
Vanadium
Titanium
Scandium
Calcium
Potassium
Chlorine
Sulfur
Phosphorus
Silicon
Aluminum
Magnesium
Sodium
Fluorine
Oxygen
Ni trogen
Carbon
Boron
Beryllium
Lithium
Hydrogen
CONC.
0.004
0.04
<0.001
MC
MC
1
>8
0.09
1
0.04
MC
>3
=0.4
NR
NR
NR
2

0.02
NR
NR - Not Reported
All elements not reported <0.001 U9/IB.1
MC - Major Component
                                   209

-------
     TABLE C-12.   SPARK SOURCE MASS  SPECTROMETRY ANALYSIS
                    OF SETTLING POND OVERFLOW -  TEST 132  (132-6-3-1)
                         CONCENTRATION IN
ELEMENT CONC.
Uranium 0.02
Thorium
Bismuth
Lead 0.06
Thallium <0.002
Mercury NR
Gold
Platinum
Irldium
Osmium
Rhenium 0.004
Tungsten 0.003
Tantalum
Hafnium
Lutetian
Ytterbium
Thulium
Erbium
Holmlum
Dysprosium
ELEMENT
Terbium
Gadolinium
Europium
Samarium
Neodymium
Praseodymium
Cerium
Lanthanum
Barium
Cesium
Iodine
Tellurium
Antimony
Tin
Indium
Cadmium
Silver
Palladium
Rhodium

CONC


<0.001
0.002
<0.001
<0.001
0.004
0.003
0.2
<0.001
0.2
<0.002
0.02
0.001
STD
0-.02
0.001



ELEMENT
Ruthenium
Molybdenum
Niobium
Zirconium
Yttrium
Strontium
Rubidium
Bromine
Selenium
Arsenic
Germanium
Gallium
Zinc
Copper
Nickel
Cobalt
Iron
Manganese
Chromium

CONC.

0.3
0.003
0.003
0.001
4
0.02
0.6
0.1
0.5
0.02
0.001
5
0.01
INT
0.01
0.3
>3
0.02

ELEMENT
Vanadium
Titanium
Scandium
Calcium
Potassium
Chlorine
Sulfur
Phosphorus
Silicon
Aluminum
Magnesium
Sodium
Fluorine
Oxygen
Nitrogen
Carbon
Boron
Beryllium
Lithium
Hydrogen
CONC.
0.002
<.0.008
<0.001
MC
>4
MC
>2
0.04
0.5
0.1
MC
>1
=0.5
NR
NR
NR
&
<0.001
0.02
NR
NR - Not teportad
All tltmenu not reported <0. 001
«*c - M*ior component  INT- Inte rference
                                 210

-------
   TABLE C-13.   SPARK  SOURCE MASS  SPECTROMETRY ANALYSIS
                  OF INLET SCRUBBER  WATER -  TEST 132  (132-6-4-1)
                          CONCENTRATION IN
ELEMENT CONC.
Uranium 0.01
Thorium
Bismuth
Lead 0.01
Thallium
Mercury NR
Gold
Platinum
Irldlum
Osmium
Rhenium <0.004
Tungsten
Tantalum
Hafnium
Lutetium
Ytterbium
Thulium
Erbium
Holmlum
Dysprosium
ELEMENT
Terbium
Gadolinium
Europium
Samarium
Neodynri um
CONC.




0.002
Praseodym1um<0.001
Cerium
Lanthanum
Barium
Cesium
Iodine
Tellurium
Antimony
Tin
Indium
Cadmium
Silver
Palladium
Rhodium

0.002
0.003
0.2
0.001
0.3
<0.002
0.02
0.002
STD
0/005
0.001



ELEMENT
Ruthenium
Molybdenum
Niobium
Zirconium
Yttrium
Strontium
Rubidium
Bromine
Selenium
Arsenic
Germanium
Gallium
'Zinc
Copper
Nickel
Cobalt
Iron
Manganese
Chromium

CONC.

0.6
0.003
0.009
0.003
2
0.02
0.2
0.08
0.06
iO.Ol
0.001
0.6
0.009
0.07
0.01
0.3
1
0.08

ELEMENT
Vanadium
Titanium
Scandium
Calcium
Potassium
Chlorine
Sulfur
Phosphorus
Silicon
Aluminum
Magnesium
Sodium
Fluorine
Oxygen
Ni trogen
Carbon
Boron
Beryllium
Lithium
Hydrogen
CONC.
0.004
0.4
<0.001
MC
>8
3
>4
0.05
2
0.03
MC
>2
~2
NR
NR
NR
1

0.02
NR
NR - Not Reported
All elements not reported < 0.001
MC - M*ior Component
                                211

-------
TABLE C-14.  SPARK SOURCE MASS SPECTROMETRY ANALYSIS
             OF WATER TO SLAG POND  -  TEST 132 (132-6-5-1)
                     CONCENTRATION IN
ELEMENT CONC.
Uranium Q.05
Thoriun
Bismuth o.2
Lead Q.09
Thallium
Hercury NR
Gold
Platinum
Iridium
Osmium
Rhenium
Tungsten
Tantalum
Hafnium
Lutetlum
Ytterbium
Thulium
Erbium
Hoi mi urn
Dysprosium
NR - Not Rcporttd
All ftlftmcnts not rftporttc
MC - MtoiBr Camaanant
ELEMENT CONC.
Terbium
Gadolinium
Europium
Samarium
Neodymium
Praseodymium
Cerium 0.009
Lanthanum 0.009
Barium i
Cesium
Iodine 0.4
Tellurium 0.006
Antimony
Tin
Indium STD
Cadmium 0.006
Silver
Palladium
Rhodium

J <0.002 yg/nrt
ELEMENT
Ruthenium
Molybdenum
Niobium
Zirconium
Yttrium
Strontium
Rubidium
Bromine
Selenium
Arsenic
Germanium
Gallium
Zinc
Copper
Nickel
Cobalt
Iron
Manganese
Chromium


CONC.

0.1
0.004
0.005

2
0.004
0.4
0.01
0.04

0.003
0.5
0.05
0.08
<0.003
1
0.08
0.1


ELEMENT
Vanadium
Titanium
Scandi urn
Calcium
Potassium
Chlorine
Sulfur
Phosphorus
Silicon
Aluminum
Magnesi urn
Sodium
Fluorine
Oxygen
Nitrogen
Carbon
Boron
Beryllium
Lithium
Hydrogen

CONC.
0.01
0.06
<.0.002
MC
MC
9
MC
0.1
0.7
>2
7
>5
*0.3
NR
NR
NR
0.4

0.007
NR

                            212

-------
  TABLE  C-15.   SPARK  SOURCE MASS SPECTROMETRY ANALYSIS
                 OF LIME FEED -  TEST  135 (135-LF)
                         CONCENTRATION IN PPM WEIGHT
ELEMENT
Uranium
Thorium
Bismuth
Lead
Thallium
Mercury
Gold
Platinum
Indium
Osmium
Rhenium
Tungsten
Tantalum
Hafnium
Lutetium
Ytterbium
Thul i urn
Erbium
Hoi mi urn
Dysprosium
CONC.
18
10
0.3
20
<0.2
NR





0.7
<0.3
0.3
<0.1
0.5
<0.1
0.5
0.6
1
ELEMENT
Terbium
Gadolinium
Europium
Samarium
Neodymi urn
Praseodymi urn
Cerium
Lanthanum
Barium
Cesium
Iodine
Tellurium
Antimony
Tin
Indium
Cadmium
Silver
Palladium
Rhodium

CONC.
0.4
1
0.7
5
5
5
30
23
220
1
11
10.4
1
1
STD
1
0.3



ELEMENT
Ruthenium
Molybdenum
Niobium
Zirconium
Yttrium
Stronti urn
Rubidium
Bromine
Selenium
Arsenic
Germanium
Gallium
Zinc
Copper
Nickel
Cobalt
Iron
Manganese
Chromi urn

CONC.

6
5
65
7
MC
20
0.9
0.6
5
0.3
4
15
15
9
1
MC
>520
19

ELEMENT
Vanadium
Titanium
Scandi urn
Calcium
Potassium
Chlorine
Sulfur
Phosphorus
Silicon
Aluminum
Magnesium
Sodium
Fluorine
Oxygen
Nitrogen
Carbon
Boron
Beryl 1-ium
Lithium
Hydrogen
CONC
30
800
0.7
MC
MC
13
MC
870
MC
MC
MC
NR
=180
NR
NR
NR
3
0.2
7
NR
NR - Not Reported
All elements not reported
MC - Major Component
<0.1 ppm weight
                                  213

-------
   TABLE C-16.   SPARK SOURCE MASS SPECTROMETRY ANALYSIS
                  OF INLET SCRUBBER SLURRY  LIQUID -  TEST 135
                  (135-6-LIQUID)
                         CONCENTRATION IN pg/ml
ELEMENT . CONC.
Uranium 0.1
Thorium
Bismuth
Lead 0.02
Thallium
Mercury NR
Gold
Platinum
Irldlun
Osmium
Rhenium
Tungsten <0.03
Tantalum
Hafnium
Lutetlum
Ytterbium
Thulium
Erbium
Hoi ml urn
Dysprosium
ELEMENT
Terbium
Gadolinium
Europium
Samarium
Neodymlum
Praseodyml urn
Cerium
Lanthanum
Barium
Cesium
Iodine
Tellurium
Antimony
Tin
Indium
Cadmium
Silver
Palladium
Rhodium

CONC.






0.008
0.01
0.1
<0.001
0.2
<0.01
0.03
0.005
STD
0.01
0.002



ELEMENT
Ruthenium
Molybdenum
Niobium
Zirconium
Yttrium
Strontium
Rubidium
Bromine
Selenium
Arsenic
Germanium
Gallium
Zinc
Copper
Nickel
Cobalt
Iron
Manganese
Chromium

CONC.

1
0.01
0.02
<0.009
8
0.02
1
0.07
3
0.03
0.02
0.3
0.05
INT
0.02
0.1 '
0.04
0.04

ELEMENT
Vanadium
Titanium
Scandium
Calcium
Potassium
Chlorine
Sulfur
Phosphorus
Silicon
Aluminum
Magnesium
Sodium
Fluorine
Oxygen
Nitrogen
Carbon
Boron
Beryllium
Lithium
Hydrogen
CONC.
0.008
<0.03
10.002
MC
MC
MC
>8
0.1
1
0.02
MC
>3
MC
NR
NR
NR
8

<0.1
NR
NR *~ Not
All •tantnts net reported
MC - M*ior Component
<0.002 vg/ml
       INT-Interference
                                  214

-------
    TABLE C-17.
  SPARK  SOURCE MASS SPECTROMETRY ANALYSIS
  OF  INLET SCRUBBER SLURRY  SOLIDS  -  TEST 135
  (135-6-SOLID)
                         CONCENTRATION IN PPM WEIGHT
ELEMENT CONC.
Uranium 11
Thorium 7
Bismuth
Lead 12
Thai 1 i urn
Mercury NR
Gold
Platinum
Indium
Osmi urn
Rhenium
Tungsten
Tantalum
Hafnium
Lutetium <0.1
Ytterbium 0.7
Thulium 0.2
Erbium 0.6
Hoi mi urn 0.8
Dysprosium 1
ELEMENT
Terbium
Gadolinium
Europium
Samarium
Neodymium
Praseodymi urn
Cerium
Lanthanum
Barium
Cesium
Iodine
Tellurium
Antimony
Tin
Indium
Cadmium
Silver
Palladium
Rhodium

CONC.
0.6
2
0.8
4
2
4
40
31
320
4
7

1
2
STD
1
0.7



ELEMENT
Ruthenium
Molybdenum
Niobium
Zirconium
Yttrium
Strontium
Rubidium
Bromi ne
Selenium
Arsenic
Germanium
Gallium
Zinc
Copper
Nickel
Cobalt
Iron
Manganese
Chromium

CONC.

15
3
29
10
MC
13
0.8
2
4
1
6
45
4
12
1
MC
>690
19

ELEMENT
Vanadium
Titanium
Scandi urn
Calcium
Potassium
Chlorine
Sulfur
Phosphorus
Silicon
Aluminum
Magnesium
Sodium
Fluorine
Oxygen
Ni trogen
Carbon
Boron
Beryllium
Lithium
Hydrogen
CONC.
13
200
0.2
MC
MC
17
MC
230
MC
MC
MC
MC
=240
NR
NR
NR
3
<0.1
4
NR
NR - Not Reported
All elements not reported
MC ~~ MA jor
<0.1 ppm weight
                                 215

-------
    TABLE C-18.  SPARK  SOURCE MASS SPECTROMETRY ANALYSIS
                  OF OUTLET SCRUBBER SLURRY  LIQUID - TEST 135
                  (135-7-LIQUID)
                         CONCENTRATION IN yg/ml
ElEMENT CONC.
Uranium 0.01
Thoriun
Bismuth
Lead <0.004
Thallium
Mercury NR
Gold
Platinum
Iridium
Osmium
Rhenium <0.01
Tungsten
Tantalum
Hafnium
Lutetium
Ytterbium
Thulium
Erbium
Hoi mi urn
Dysprosium
ELEMENT
Terbium
Gadolinium
Europium
Samarium
Neodymium
Praseodymium
Cerium
Lanthanum
Barium
Cesium
Iodine
Tellurium
Antimony
Tin
Indium
Cadmium
Silver
Palladium
Rhodi urn

CONC.





0.001
0.001
0.009
0.2
<0.001
2
<0.007
0.07
0.003
STD
0.003
0.003



ELEMENT
Ruthenium
Molybdenum
Niobium
Zirconium
Yttrium
Strontium
Rubidium
Bromine
Selenium
Arsenic
Germanium
Gallium
Zinc
Copper
Nickel
Cobalt
Iron
Manganese
Chromi urn

CONC.

4
0.01
0.02
<0.006
6
0.03
3
0.5
5
0.4
0.007
0.06
0.005
INT
<0.003
0.01
0.5
0.2

ELEMENT
Vanadium
Titanium
Scandium
Calcium
Potassium
Chlorine
Sulfur
Phosphorus
Silicon
Aluminum
Magnesium
Sodium
Fluorine
Oxygen
Ni trogen
Carbon
Boron
Beryllium
Lithium
Hydrogen
CONC.
0.01
10.02
<0.001
MC
MC
HC
>6
0.06
MC
0.004
MC
>3
»8
NR
NR
NR
MC

0.1
NR
NR- Net Reported
All elements not reported

-------
  TABLE C-19.  SPARK SOURCE MASS SPECTROMETRY ANALYSIS
                OF OUTLET SCRUBBER  SLURRY SOLIDS - TEST 135
                (135-7-SOLID)
                         CONCENTRATION IN PPM WEIGHT
ELEMENT
Uranium
Thorium
Bismuth
Lead
Thallium
Mercury
Gold
Platinum
Iridium
Osml urn
Rhenium
Tungsten
Tantalum
Hafnium
Lutetium
Ytterbium
Thul 1 urn
Erbium
Hoi mi urn
Dysprosium
CONC.
44
11
0.2
820
6
NR





<0.3

0.6
0.3
1
0.2
1
2
3
ELEMENT
Terbi urn
Gadolinium
Europi urn
Samarium
Neodymi urn
Praseodymium
Cerium
Lanthanum
Barium
Cesium
Iodine
Tellurium
Antimony
Tin
Indium
Cadmium
Silver
Palladium
Rhodium

CONC.
0.6
2
1
5
13
3
65
47
270
4
6
<0.4
44
5
STD
33
3



ELEMENT
Ruthenium
Molybdenum
Niobium
Zirconium
Yttrium
Strontium
Rubidium
Bromine
Selenium
Arsenic
Germanium
Gallium
Zinc
Copper
Nickel
Cobalt
Iron
Manganese
Chromium

CONC.

25
13
73
12
910
22
5
7
120
17
19
MC
50
23
9
MC
>580
16

ELEMENT
Vanadium
Titanium
Scandium
Calcium
Potassium
Chlorine
Sulfur
Phosphorus
Silicon
Aluminum
Magnesium
Sodium
Fluorine
Oxygen
Nitrogen
Carbon
Boron
Beryll-ium
Lithium
Hydrogen
CONC.
19
880
2
MC
MC
130
MC
970
MC
MC
MC
MC
=260
NR
NR
NR
13
0.7
5
NR
NR - Not Reported
All elements not reported
MC - Major Component
<0.1 ppm weight
                                 217

-------
    TABLE C-20.   SPARK SOURCE  MASS SPECTROMETRY ANALYSIS
                   OF BOTTOM ASH - TEST  133 (133-18-BA)
                          CONCENTRATION IN
ELEAAENT
Uranium
Thorium
Bismuth
Lead
Thallium
Mercury
Gold
Platinum
Indium
Osmium
Rhenium
Tungsten
Tantalum
. Hafni urn
Lutetium
Ytterbium
Thulium
Erbium
Holmium
Dysprosium
CONC.
1
0.4
MC
1

NR





0.01
<0.001
0.03
0.002
0.04
0.004
0.04
0.06
0.09
ELEMENT
Terbium
Gadolinium
Europium
Samarium
Neodymium
Praseodymium
Cerium
Lanthanum
Barium
Cesium
Iodine
Tellurium
Antimony
Tin
Indium
Cadmium
Silver
Palladium
Rhodium

CONC.
0.04
0.1
0.1
0.2
1
0.2
2
2
MC
0.3
0.004
<0.007
0.04
0.004
STD
0.007
0.005



ELEAAENT
Ruthenium
Molybdenum
Niobium
Zirconium
Yttrium
Strontium
Rubidium
Bromine
Selenium
Arsenic
Germanium
Gallium
Zinc
Copper
Nickel
Cobalt
Iron
Manganese
Chromium

CONC.

0.1
1
2
1
3
3
0.02
0.05
0.03
0.03
0.1
MC
0.3
0.8
0.3
MC
>5
0.4

ELEAAENT
Vanadium
Titanium
Scandi urn
Calcium
Potassium
Chlorine
Sulfur
Phosphorus
Silicon
Aluminum
Magnesium
Sodium
Fluorine
Oxygen
Nitrogen
Carbon
Boron
Beryllium
Lithium
Hydrogen
CONC. .
1
MC
0.03
MC
>6
0.2
>3
8
MC
>1
MC
>1
.0.1
NR
NR
NR
0.1
0.01
0.4
NR
NR - Not Reported
All elements not reported <0. 001
MC - Major Con*>on*n*
                                   218

-------
                            TABLE C-21.  SUMMARY OF XRD ANALYSES OF COAL-FIRED SAMPLES
           Sample
                           Compound  Definitely  Present
    Compounds Possibly Present
         135-Out-PF

         135-Out-PFa
                           CaS04;  a-S102;  CaS03'l/2
Kaolinite; Fe2Al4Si5018; Na2S12

Fe,,Si04; barium aluminosilicate
         135-In-PF

         135-In-PFa
                           CaSO/
ro
         135-In-CYC

         135-6   j

         135-LF  (
                           Fe3°4
                           CaC03;  a-Si02
Li2B204-16H20; CagAlgO^

Ba3Ca2Ti2Og; Mg3Ca(C03)4
         135-7

         133-18-BA

         135-PFB
                           CaC03;  a-Si02;  CaS03
-------
for stages n and n-1 is taken as the average diameter  of the  particles in
stage n.  In this case two assumptions were made:   (1) the  upper  limit of
the first stage was arbitrarily set at lOOy and (2)  the final  filter
absolute collection point was set at 0.2y.   Figure C-24 shows  the differential
mass loading at the outlet for tests 135 and 136 plotted against  the geo-
metric mean D5Q for each stage.  This method of data presentation allows
comparison of mass loadings for the individual  Impactor stages, which is
difficult if the data are presented as cumulative mass loadings.  There is
good agreement between tests 135 and 136 for outlet  loadings  on impactor
stages 2 to 7.  Stage 8 for test 135 showed a weight loss and  this data
point was discarded.  The weight for stage  1 of test 135 was  considerably
higher than for test 136.  The high value was considered to be in error,
since this stage catch contains the coarse  partlculate and  most of the
coarse particulate is expected to be removed by scrubbing.  The high weight
was probably due to some extraneous matter  which was found  on  the Impactor
plate.  Because the outlet impactor data agreed quite  well  for the two
tests, with the exception of the two points which could reasonably be dis-
carded, the data from test 136 was used to  calculate the outlet weight
distribution data for comparison with the inlet PLM data from  test 135.
This is presented in the text in Table 4-9.
                                    220

-------
   1000
o
o
                             i.o                    10.0


                          GEOMETRIC AERODYNAMIC DIAMETER,
                                                                         100.0
           Figure C-24.  Outlet  MRI Weight Data for Runs 135  &  136
                                     221

-------
                        REFERENCES FOR APPENDIX C
C-l.   Ensor, D.S., et al.   Evaluation of a Particulate Scrubber on a  Coal
      Fired Utility Boiler.  Prepared by Meteorology Research,  Inc. for
      the U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency.   EPA 600/2-75-074.
      November 1975.
                                   222

-------
                               TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
                         (Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
 . REPORT NO.
 EPA-600/7-80-086
                          2.
                                                     3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION-NO.
4, TITLE AND SUBTITLE
 Environmental Assessment of a Coal-fired
 Controlled Utility Boiler
                                 5. REPORT DATE
                                 April 1980
                                 6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7.AUTHoms) c  Leavitt,K.Ar ledge. C.Shih.R.Orsini,
A. Saur, W. Hamers ma, R. Maddalone, R. Beimer,
G. Richard, S. Unges. and M.Yamada
                                                     8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
I. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
TRW, Inc.
One Space Park
Redondo Beach,  California 90278
                                                     10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
                                 EHE624A
                                 11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.

                                 68-02-2613, Task 8
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
 EPA, Office of Research and Development
 Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
 Research Triangle Park, NC  27711
                                                     13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD C
                                                     Task Final; 6/78-12/79
                                                                           COVERED
                                 14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
                                  EPA/600/13
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES ffiRL-RTP project officer is Michael C. Osborne,  Mail Drop 62,
 919/541-3996.
  . ABSTRACT The repor|. giVQS results of a comprehensive multimedia emissions assess-
 ment of the cyclone-fired La Cygne No. 1 boiler, equipped with SO2 and particulate
 emission controls. Levels 1 and 2 procedures were used to characterize pollutant
 emissions in gaseous,  liquid, and solid process streams. Assessment results,  in
 conjunction with assumed typical and worst case meteorological conditions, were
 used to estimate the  environmental impact of emissions from this type of unit. Prin-
 cipal conclusions were: (1) The risk of violating NAAQS for 24 hour and annual aver-
 age levels is low; however,  units using high sulfur fuel may exceed short term
 NAAQS for SO2. (2) Little adverse health effect is anticipated as a result of SO2,
 SO4 (—), and particulate emissions projected from widespread use of coal-fired
 units of the type tested. (3) Increases in the concentrations of Cd and Pb in soil and
 plant tissue as a result of trace element emissions  could damage plants and adver-
 sely affect the health of animals consuming vegetation in the  affected areas. (4)
 Plants may be damaged by NOx emissions since estimated NOx concentrations ap1-
 proach or exceed threshold concentrations.  (5) Sensitive plant species may be
 damaged by predicted short-term SO2 concentrations which are in the damage
 threshold range.
17.
                             KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
                DESCRIPTORS
                                         b.IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
                                               COS AT I Field/Group
 Pollution
 Assessments
 Boilers
 Coal
 Combustion
 Sulfur Oxides
Dust
Nitrogen Oxides
Cadmium
Lead
Pollution Control
Stationary Sources
Environmental Asses-
 sment
Utility Boilers
Particulate
13B
14B
13A
21D
2 IB
07B
11G
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
 Release to Public
                     19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report)
                     Unclassified
                        21. NO. OF PAGES
                             233
                     20. SECURITY CLASS (This page)
                     Unclassified
                                             22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
                                        223

-------