Hazardous Waste Combustion Unit
Permitting Manual
COMPONENT 4
How To Conduct Trial Burn Test Oversight
U.S. EPA Region 6 Center for Combustion
Science and Engineering
Tetra Tech EM Inc.
-------
COMPONENT FOUR
HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST
OVERSIGHT
JANUARY 1998
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
CONTENTS
Section Page
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS 4-iv
BIBLIOGRAPHY 4-v
1.0 OVERVIEW OF TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT 4-1
2.0 PREPARATION ACTIVITIES 4-3
2.1 REVIEWING THE TRIAL BURN PLAN AND QUALITY ASSURANCE
PROJECT PLAN 4-5
2.1.1 Gathering General Facility Information 4-7
2.1.2 Reviewing Proposed Stack Gas Sampling Procedures 4-9
2.1.3 Reviewing Waste Feed and Air Pollution Control Device Effluent Sampling
Information 4-10
2.2 DEVELOPING A HEALTH AND SAFETY PLAN 4-11
3.0 CONDUCTING FIELD ACTIVITIES 4-16
3.1 CONDUCTING A PRETEST MEETING 4-18
3.2 CONDUCTING A PRETEST FACILITY SURVEY 4-19
3.3 REVIEWING EQUIPMENT CALIBRATION RECORDS 4-21
3.3.1 Reviewing Stack Sampling Equipment Calibration Records 4-23
3.3.2 Reviewing Feed Spiking Equipment Calibration Records 4-26
3.3.3 Reviewing Process Control Equipment Calibration Records 4-30
3.3.4 Reviewing Continuous Emission Monitoring System Calibration
Records 4-43
3.3.5 Reviewing Field Laboratory Instrumentation Calibration Records 4-48
3.4 OBSERVING STACK SAMPLING ACTIVITIES 4-49
3.4.1 Reviewing Sampling Port Location 4-52
3.4.2 Reviewing Cyclonic Flow Measurements 4-56
3.4.3 Reviewing Traverse Point Location 4-59
3.4.4 Reviewing Sampling Train Assembly 4-61
3.4.5 Observing Leak Checks Prior To Sampling 4-63
3.4.6 Observing Sampling Train Temperatures 4-65
3.4.7 Observing the Field Data Logsheet 4-68
3.4.8 Observing Leak Checks During Sampling 4-71
3.4.9 Observing Sampling Train Disassembly 4-72
3.4.10 Completing Stack Sampling Checklists 4-73
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering 4-i
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
CONTENTS (Continued)
Section Page
3.5 OBSERVING WASTE FEED AND AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DEVICE
EFFLUENT SAMPLING 4-78
3.6 OBSERVING PROCESS OPERATION ACTIVITIES 4-82
3.7 OBSERVING SAMPLE RECOVERY 4-85
3.8 COLLECTING TRIAL BURN TEST INFORMATION 4-88
3.9 CONDUCTING DAILY MEETINGS 4-90
3.10 CONDUCTING FIELD DOCUMENTATION ACTIVITIES 4-91
3.11 OBSERVING AUDIT GAS SAMPLING 4-93
4.0 PREPARING THE OVERSIGHT REPORT 4-96
EXHIBITS
Exhibit Page
2.1.1-1 CHECKLIST FORGATHERING GENERAL FACILITY INFORMATION 4-8
2.2-1 EXAMPLE SUMMARY HEALTH AND SAFETY PLAN HAZARDOUS
SUBSTANCES SECTION 4-13
3.3.1-1 BLANK DIGITAL TEMPERATURE INDICATOR CALIBRATION FORM 4-25
3.3.2-1 SPIKING PUMP CALIBRATION FORM 4-28
3.3.2-2 SPIKING CHEMICAL CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS 4-29
3.3.3-1 EXAMPLE PROCESS CONTROL EQUIPMENT CALIBRATION FORM 4-32
3.3.3-2 INFRARED THERMOMETER CALIBRATION REPORT 4-33
3.3.3-3 EXAMPLE THERMOCOUPLE TEMPERATURE TRANSMITTER CALIBRATION
RECORD 4-34
3.3.3-4 EXAMPLE DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE FLOW TRANSMITTER CALIBRATION
RECORD 4-37
3.3.3-5 EXAMPLE MISCELLANEOUS FLOW TRANSMITTER CALIBRATION RECORD . 4-40
3.3.4-1 EXAMPLE CEMS MULTIPOINT CALIBRATION DATA SHEET 4-45
3.3.4-2 EXAMPLE PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATION TEST RESULTS 4-46
3.3.4-3 EXAMPLE RELATIVE ACCURACY TEST RESULTS 4-47
3.4.1-1 EXAMPLE STACK DIAGRAM 4-55
3.4.2-1 EXAMPLE CYCLONIC FLOW CHECK SHEET 4-57
3.4.3-1 EXAMPLE PRELIMINARY VELOCITY TRAVERSE DATA AND SAMPLING
LOCATION DATA SHEET 4-60
3.4.7-1 EXAMPLE FIELD DATA SHEET 4-69
3.4.10-1 METHOD 0010 SEMIVOLATILE SAMPLING CHECKLIST 4-74
3.5-1 EXAMPLE WASTE FEED SAMPLE LOGSHEET 4-80
3.5-2 EXAMPLE CHAIN-OF-CUSTODY RECORD 4-81
3.7-1 METHOD 0030 VOLATILE ORGANIC SAMPLING TRAIN RECOVERY
CHECKLIST 4-86
3.8-1 EXAMPLE FIELD DATA CALCULATION SHEET 4-89
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
ATTACHMENTS
Attachments
A METHOD 0010 SEMIVOLATILE POHC AND PIC ORGANICS SAMPLING CHECKLIST
B METHOD 0010 SEMIVOLATILE POHC AND PIC ORGANICS SAMPLE RECOVERY
CHECKLIST
C METHOD 0012 MULTIPLE METALS SAMPLING CHECKLIST
D METHOD 0012 MULTIPLE METALS SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST
E METHOD 0013 HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM SAMPLING CHECKLIST
F METHOD 0013 HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST
G METHOD 23 PCDD/PCDF SAMPLING CHECKLIST
H METHOD 23 PCDD/PCDF SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST
I METHOD 0030 VOLATILE ORGANICS SAMPLING TRAIN CHECKLIST
J METHOD 0030 VOLATILE ORGANICS SAMPLING TRAIN SAMPLE
RECOVERY CHECKLIST
K METHOD 0040 TOTAL ORGANIC TEDLAR BAG SAMPLING CHECKLIST
L METHOD 0040 TOTAL ORGANIC TEDLAR BAG SAMPLE RECOVERY
CHECKLIST
M METHOD 0050 PARTICULATE/HC1/C12 SAMPLING CHECKLIST
N METHOD 0050 PARTICULATE/HC1/C12 SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST
O METHOD 0060 MULTIPLE METALS SAMPLING CHECKLIST
P METHOD 0060 MULTIPLE METALS SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST
Q METHOD 0061 HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM SAMPLING CHECKLIST
R METHOD 0061 HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST
S METHOD 0031 VOLATILE ORGANICS SAMPLING TRAIN CHECKLIST
T METHOD 0031 VOLATILE ORGANICS SAMPLING TRAIN SAMPLE
RECOVERY CHECKLIST
U METHOD 0023A PCDD/PCDF SAMPLING CHECKLIST
V METHOD 0023A PCDD/PCDF SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST
W METHOD 0011 FORMALDEHYDE (ALDEHYDE AND KETONE) SAMPLING
CHECKLIST
X METHOD 0011 FORMALDEHYDE (ALDEHYDE AND KETONE) SAMPLE RECOVERY
CHECKLIST
Y HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT REVIEW CHECKLIST
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering 4-iii
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
APCS Air pollution control system
BIF Boiler and industrial furnace
CEMS Continuous emissions monitoring system
40 CFR Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations
°C Degrees Celsius
CO Carbon monoxide
DACS Data acquisition control system
DAR Data acquisition recorder
DRE Destruction and removal efficiency
DTI Digital temperature indicator
°F Degrees Fahrenheit
gpm gallons per minute
GC/FID Gas chromatograph/flame ionization detector
F£AF Halogen acid furnace
Hg Mercury
HSP Health and safety plan
Ib/hr pounds per hour
LEL Lower explosive limit
mg/m3 milligrams per cubic meter
mL milliliters
O2 Oxygen
OSHA Occupational Safety & Health Administration
OSWER Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
PCDD/PCDF Polychlorinated dibenzopdioxin/polychlorinated dibenzofuran
PPE Personal protection equipment
ppm parts per million
POHC Principal organic hazardous constituent
QA Quality assurance
QAPP Quality assurance project plan
QA/QC Quality assurance/quality control
RBP Risk burn plan
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
RTP Research Triangle Park
SOP Standard operating procedure
SVOC Semivolatile organic compound
TBO Trial burn oversight
TBP Trial burn plan
UB Utility boiler
U.S. EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
VOA Volatile organic analysis
VOST Volatile organic sampling train
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-iv
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
BIBLIOGRAPHY
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). "Appendix A — Test Methods." 40 CFR Part 60,
Appendix A.
U.S. EPA. "Appendix B — Performance Specifications." 40 CFR Part 60, Appendix B.
U.S. EPA. "Appendix F to Part 60 — Quality Assurance Procedures." 40 CFR Part 60, Appendix F.
U.S. EPA. 1977. "Quality Assurance (QA) Handbook for Air Pollution Measurement Systems,
Volume III: Stationary Source-Specific Methods." EPA-600/4-77-027B.
U.S. EPA. 1986. "Practical Guide — Trial Burns for Hazardous Waste Incinerators." Office of
Research and Development. Cincinnati, Ohio. EPA/600/2-86/050. April.
U.S. EPA. 1989. "Trial Burn Observation Guide." Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
(OSWER). Washington, D.C. EPA/530-SW-89-027. March.
U.S. EPA. 1989. "Handbook: Hazardous Waste Incineration Measurement Guidance Manual."
OSWER. Washington, D.C. EPA/625/6-89/021. June.
U.S. EPA. 1990. "Handbook: Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) Procedures for Hazardous
Waste Incineration." OSWER. Washington, D.C. EPA-625/6-89-023. January.
U.S. EPA. 1990 "Methods Manual for Compliance with BIF Regulations." OSWER. Washington,
D.C. EPA/530-SW-91-010. December.
U.S. EPA. 1993. "Regulatory Interpretation of Automatic Waste Feed Cutoffs in Boilers and Industrial
Furnaces." OSWER.
U.S. EPA. 1994. "Memorandum on Trial Burns." OSWER. Washington, D.C. EPA530-F-94-023.
July.
U.S. EPA. 1996. "Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste Physical/Chemical Methods (SW-846),
Third Edition." December.
U.S. EPA. 1997. "Generic Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP)." Center for Combustion Science
and Engineering, Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division, U.S. EPA Region 6. Dallas,
Texas. December.
U.S. EPA. 1997. "Generic Trial Burn Plan (TBP)." Center for Combustion Science and Engineering,
Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division, U.S. EPA Region 6. Dallas, Texas. December.
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering 4-v
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
1.0
OVERVIEW OF TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
Regulations:
Guidance:
Explanation:
Check For:
Example Situation:
No regulations are applicable to this section of the manual.
No specific references are applicable to this section of the manual.
To ensure that the trial burn or risk burn is conducted in accordance with the
approved trial burn plan (TBP) or risk burn plan (RBP), the quality assurance
project plan (QAPP), and the standard operating procedures (SOP) identified in
various regulatory and guidance documents, comprehensive trial burn oversight
(TBO) is conducted. Findings of the trial burn oversight determine whether trial
burn results are acceptable.
Stack gas sampling and recovery checklists that can be used as tools in conducting
trial burn test oversight are included as Attachments A through X to this
component of the Hazardous Waste Combustion Unit Permitting Manual.
Attachment Y is a checklist that an observer may use in the field to ensure that all
necessary activities are completed. This checklist summarizes all important
aspects of every section in this component.
Before mobilizing to the facility for oversight, the observer should be familiar
with:
Q Preparation activities
Q Conducting field activities
Q Writing the TBO report
Q Stack gas sampling and recovery checklists (Attachments A through X)
Q TBO checklist (Attachment Y)
XYZ Company submitted to U.S. EPA (1) destruction and removal efficiency
(DRE) burn plans for the utility boiler (UB) and the halogen acid furnace (HAF),
(2) RBPs for the UB and the HAF, and (3) a multimedia risk assessment work
plan for the UB and the HAF. U.S. EPA has approved the TBPs for both boilers
and requested that the XYZ Company provide additional information to document
types of wastes to be combusted in the UB and the HAF during the risk burn,
representing worst-case waste. In response to U.S. EPA's request for information,
XYZ Company certified that the facility will combust worst-case waste streams
and will also spike additional amounts of higher-risk compounds to ensure that a
worst-case waste situation exists during the risk burn. After reviewing the
information, U.S. EPA approved the RBPs for the UB and the HAF.
Lois and Clark of Metropolis were selected to conduct oversight of trial burn
testing at XYZ Company. Before mobilizing to the facility, Lois and Clark
reviewed the DRE burn plan and RBPs and were informed of (1) the type and
design of BIF units to be tested, (2) types of tests to be performed, (3) samples to
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-1
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
Example Action:
be collected, (4) sampling procedures to be followed, and (5) process operating
conditions that would be maintained during the tests. Lois and Clark prepared an
HSP that addressed all applicable regulatory requirements, personnel
responsibilities, personal protective equipment (PPE), and health and safety and
emergency response procedures.
Lois and Clark conducted oversight of the trial burn that included (1) auditing
equipment calibration records, (2) observing the sampling activities and process
operating conditions, (3) evaluating conformance with procedures described in
approved burn plans, (4) recording observations, and (5) collecting process
operating data and field logsheets. Lois and Clark returned to Metropolis and
wrote a report to document stack sampling activities, process operating conditions,
and observation and oversight activities.
U.S. EPA will use the oversight report provided by Lois and Clark to
(1) determine the acceptability of the DRE and risk burn tests, (2) evaluate the
trial burn and risk burn reports, and (3) prepare permit conditions based on the
DRE and risk burn test conditions.
Notes:
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-2
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
2.0
PREPARATION ACTIVITIES
Regulation:
Guidance:
Explanation:
Check For:
No regulations are applicable to this section of the manual.
No specific references are applicable to this section of the manual.
Trial burn oversight consists of several prefield activities, including (1) developing
a health and safety plan (HSP), (2) reviewing the TBP, (3) contacting facility trial
burn personnel, (4) obtaining audit gas samples, and (5) mobilizing to the field.
To ensure that the trial burn is conducted in strict accordance with the approved
TBP and that the data collected are of adequate quality to establish permit
conditions that protect human health and the environment, members of the
oversight team should familiarize themselves with the TBP, RBP, and QAPP. To
ensure oversight safety, a site-specific HSP that details site hazards and provides
routine and emergency safety procedures should be developed prior to mobilizing
to the field.
Complete the following tasks before arriving at the facility to conduct trial burn
oversight:
a
Review TBP
Review RBP
Example Situation:
Q Review QAPP
Q Prepare a site-specific HSP
Q Collect appropriate stack gas sampling and recovery checklists to be
completed on site (see attachments)
Q Gather appropriate health and safety equipment
Sections 2.1 and 2.2 describe the above items in detail.
Lois and Clark review the TBP, RBP, and QAPP thoroughly in accordance with
procedures suggested in Component 1—How to Review a Trial Burn Plan and
Component 2—How to Review a Quality Assurance Project Plan. After the
review of the TBP, RBP, and QAPP have been reviewed, Lois and Clark collect
appropriate stack gas sampling and recovery checklists to be completed during the
trial burn. Clark identifies test site hazards and prepares a list of hazardous
chemicals present at the test site along with their concentrations. Lois and Clark
make sure that oversight equipment includes field notebook, hard hat, steel-toed
boots, and flame resistant coveralls. Lois prepares a site-specific HSP that
addresses routine and emergency safety procedures and the PPE required for the
trial burn. Lois and Clark then make travel arrangements to arrive at the facility.
Example Comments: Trial burns often pose both unique and challenging field problems. To resolve
these issues promptly and effectively, the oversight team may need to refer to
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-3
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
numerous guidance documents, contact appropriate regulatory personnel, or both.
The oversight team should carry to the field various guidance documents and
names and telephone numbers of the regulatory personnel who are experienced in
trial burn observations and related issues.
Notes:
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering 4-4
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
2.1 REVIEWING THE TRIAL BURN PLAN AND QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT
PLAN
Regulation: No regulations are applicable to this section of the manual.
Guidance: No specific references are applicable to this section of the manual.
Explanation: To ensure thorough oversight of a trial burn, it is important to review and
understand the TBP, RBP, and QAPP before mobilizing the oversight team to the
field. Specifically, the oversight personnel should complete the portions of the
oversight checklist that can be filled out before the trial burn begins.
Check for: Confirm that all members of the oversight team understand the following:
Q General facility information
Q Proposed stack gas sampling procedures
Q Proposed waste feed and process residuals sampling procedures
Example Situation: Clark reads the Project Organization section of the TBP as follows:
"ABC Environmental, under contract to XYZ Company, will be conducting the
trial burn and will provide personnel experienced with Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA) methodologies, support tasks, and Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (OSHA) safety standards. The project leader will
coordinate services related to the trial burn and will be the primary contact with
XYZ Company. Mr. Any Joe of ABC Environmental will act as an independent
third-party auditor of the trial burn."
Does the Project Organization section of the TBP provide all necessary
information?
Example Action:
To ensure the highest quality results for stack gas and waste feed samples, it is
required that certified laboratories be used to analyze samples. The Project
Organization section of the trial burn plan does not identify the laboratory
responsible for analyzing samples collected during the trial burn. Clark asks Lois
to add this observation to the list of items that require additional information from
the facility. Clark also notices that the project organization identifies a member of
the stack testing company as the QA Officer. Since the QA Officer is not
independent of the sample collection team, a potential conflict of interest is
identified. Clark notified the U.S. EPA project leader. The U.S. EPA project
leader discusses the issue with the facility and suggests the organization chart be
revised to make the QA Officer independent of the stack sampling crew. If the
facility fails to follow the direction of the U.S. EPA project leader, Lois and Clark
now are solely responsible for checking the quality of the data.
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-5
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
Notes:
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering 4-6
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
2.1.1 Gathering General Facility Information
Regulation:
Guidance:
Explanation:
Check For:
Example Situation:
Example Action:
No regulations are applicable to this section of the manual.
No specific references are applicable to this section of the manual.
The checklist below shows general facility information that must be compiled from
the TBP or RBP. A checklist that may assist in compiling a summary of general
facility information is included as Exhibit 2.1.1-1, see page 4-8.
Q Facility name
Q Facility contact
Q Facility address
Q Facility telephone number
Q U.S. EPA facility identification number
Q Facility employee responsible for trial burn
Q Combustion units to be tested
Q Proposed test schedule
Q Health and safety requirements
Lois calls Charlie of XYZ Company, who is responsible for the trial burn, and
informs him that she and Clark will be conducting trial burn oversight.
Lois asks Charlie for details of any health and safety training requirements, and
any documents that need to be signed before entry into the facility. Lois inquires
about other personnel who will be observing the trial burn and asks Charlie to
arrange for a pretest meeting the day before the start of the first test run for all
agencies involved. Finally, she asks for directions to the facility.
Charlie told Lois that members of the oversight team should carry—at a
minimum—safety shoes, safety glasses, ear plugs, hard hat, and Tyvex suits, if
required. They should prepare for foul weather conditions, such as rain and high
winds. Training in the use of respirators or emergency breathing apparatus is also
needed. In addition, Charlie explained which gate to come in and how to check in
at the facility.
Notes:
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-7
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
EXHIBIT 2.1.1-1
CHECKLIST FOR
GATHERING GENERAL FACILITY INFORMATION
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Facility Name:
Facility Identification Number:
Facility Address:
Facility Telephone Number:
Facility Contact:
Contact Telephone Number:
Trial Burn Coordinator:
Organization:
Address:
Telephone Number:
BIF Units To Be Tested:
Proposed Test Schedule:
Health & Safety
Requirements:
Notes:
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-8
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
2.1.2 Reviewing Proposed Stack Gas Sampling Procedures
Regulation: No regulations are applicable to this section of the manual.
Guidance:
Explanation:
Check For:
Example Situation:
Example Action:
No specific references are applicable to this section of the manual.
Check for stack gas sampling information and compare it with standard operating
procedures (SOPs) identified in the U.S. EPA Region 6 generic trial burn plan or
other applicable guidance documents.
Verify the adequacy of the following items:
Q Sampling methods
Q Sample port locations
Q Sampling time
Q Sample recovery
Q Sample holding times
Q Sample handling procedures
Q Field analysis of samples
Q QA/QC procedures
Lois reviewed the stack gas sampling procedures portions of the TBP. She noted
a table which listed all the stack gas sampling methods and their respective
sampling times. While this information appeared accurate, it was not clear which
sample would be collected at what time during a test run and from which sample
port.
Lois contacted the facility to get clarification on which sample port locations
would be used to collect the various stack gas samples. She suggested they create
a table that lists: (1) stack gas sampling method, (2) sample collection duration,
(3) stack port (or ports for isokinetic sampling) to be used during the trial burn,
and (4) approximate time of day each sample will be collected.
Notes:
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-9
-------
_ COMPONENT 4— HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
2.1.3 Reviewing Waste Feed and Air Pollution Control Device Effluent Sampling Information
Regulation: No regulations are applicable to this section of the manual.
Guidance:
Explanation:
No specific references are applicable to this section of the manual.
To carry out a combustion unit evaluation, waste feed and APCS effluent are
sampled concurrently with stack gas. Check for the following waste feed and
APCS effluent sampling information and compare it with SOPs identified in the
U.S. EPA Region 6 generic trial burn plan and applicable guidance documents.
Check For:
Q Number of samples
Q Volume of each sample
Q Frequency of sampling
Q Sample collection, handling, and storage procedures
Example Situation: Clark reads the liquid organic waste sampling section of the TBP, as follows:
"Grab samples of liquid organic waste will be collected every 15 minutes during
each run, and each set of grab samples will be composited into a single container
in the field. A minimum volume of 50 milliliters (mL) will be collected for each
grab sample; the total volume for each composite sample for each run will be
about 500 mL. Additionally, volatile organic analysis (VOA) vial samples of
liquid organic waste will be collected at the same frequency."
Example Action:
The QA/QC procedures handbook recommends that the samplers (1) use specific
types of containers for sampling specific waste types, (2) follow preservation
techniques, and (3) ensure holding times are met for specific analyses.
Clark determines that the TBP does not address these issues. In reviewing the
handbook for QA/QC procedures, he realizes that the facility should prepare a
sampling table, or sampling matrix, that clearly lists each sampling location, the
waste type, the sample container, preservation techniques, and holding times.
Clark notes the importance of this omission and contacts the facility immediately
to request this information.
Notes:
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-10
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
2.2
DEVELOPING A HEALTH AND SAFETY PLAN
Regulation:
Guidance:
Explanation:
Check For:
29 CFR 1910.120
40 CFR 165.5
No specific references are applicable to this section of the manual.
An HSP is prepared to monitor field personnel and specify routine and emergency
safety procedures. Only contractors to the U.S. EPA are required to develop an
HSP as part of a trial burn oversight. The HSP should identify all hazards and
problems that may be encountered on site and should discuss how they need to be
addressed. The HSP should also discuss personnel responsibilities, PPE, health
and safety procedures and protocols, decontamination procedures, personnel
training, and the type and extent of medical surveillance.
In the chemical manufacturing industry, visitors are often required to complete
site-specific health and safety training before entering the facility. Most facilities
require that the oversight personnel have completed a 40-hour hazardous materials
incident response operations training (see 29 CFR 1910.120 or 40 CFR 165.5).
An example summary of a hazardous substances section of an HSP is included as
Exhibit 2.2-1, see page 4-13.
Typical hazards of concern during a TBO include operating on elevated platforms
and scaffolds and working near extremely hot surfaces and flammable or explosive
materials, usually in a noisy environment. Observers should follow general health
and safety procedures of the facility and obey directions of plant personnel in the
event of an emergency.
These elements should be included in an HSP for TBO:
Q Oversight objectives
Q Site description and history
Q Waste management practices
Q Waste types and characteristics
Q Hazards of concern
Q Summary of hazardous substances
a PPE
Q Site personnel and responsibilities
Q Emergency contacts
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-11
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
Q Medical emergency
Q Site map
Example Section: Lois' contractor for TBO submitted a HSP for review and approval by U.S. EPA.
Example Comments: Lois informed her contractor that EPA does not "approve" contractor HSPs, they
simply require that one be in place before field work begins.
Notes:
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering 4-12
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
EXHIBIT 2.2-1
EXAMPLE SUMMARY
HEALTH AND SAFETY PLAN HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES SECTION
Hazardous Materials Summary (Indicate waste type by category):
Chemicals:
Acrylontirile
Mixed alcohols
Tetrahydrofuran
Polytetrahydrofuran
Toluene diamine
vicinals
1,4-Butanediol
Morpholine
Amines
Solids:
Boiler ash
Sludges:
Solvents:
Oils:
TCLP Toxicity:
Notes:
Fire or Explosion Potential: High Medium Low Unknown
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-13
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
EXHIBIT 2.2-1 (continued)
EXAMPLE SUMMARY
HEALTH AND SAFETY PLAN HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES SECTION
Chemicals Present at Site
Acrylonitrile
Ammonia
Butyl alcohol
Diethylamine
n-Ethylmorpholine
Highest Observed
Concentration
(specify units and
media)
5% by volume in
gaseous fuels
5% by volume in
gaseous fuels
40% by weight in
liquid fuels
10% by weight in
liquid fuels
20% by weight in
liquid fuels
PEL/TLV
specify
ppm or mg/m3
2 ppm
50 ppm
100 ppm
25 ppm
20 ppm Skin
IDLH
specify
ppm or mg/m3
CARC [85 ppm]
300 ppm
1,400 ppm
[LEL]
200 ppm
100 ppm
Symptoms and Effects of Acute Exposure
Asphyxia; irritated eyes; headache; sneezing; nausea,
vomiting; weakness, light-headedness; skin vesiculation
and scaling dermatitis; (CARC)
Eye, nose, throat irritation; dyspnea; bronchospasm;
chest pain; pulmonary edema; pink, frothy sputum; skin
burns and vesiculation; liquid: frostbite
Irritated eyes, nose, and throat; headache; vertigo;
drowsiness; corneal inflammation, blurred vision,
lacrimation, photophobia; dermatitis; possible auditory
nerve damage, hearing loss; CNS depression
Eye, skin, and respiratory irritation; in animals:
myocardial degeneration
Eyes, nose, and throat irritation; vision disturbances;
corneal edema, blue-gray vision, and colored haloes
Photo-
ionization
Potential
(eV)
10.91
10.15
10.04
8.01
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-14
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
EXHIBIT 2.2-1 (continued)
EXAMPLE SUMMARY
HEALTH AND SAFETY PLAN HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES SECTION
Chemicals Present at Site
Morpholine
n-Propyl alcohol
Tetrahydrofuran
o-Toluidine
Notes:
Highest Observed
Concentration
(specify units and
media)
50% by weight in
liquid fuels
40% by weight in
liquid fuels
10% by weight in
liquid fuels
10% by weight in
liquid fuels
PEL/TLV
specify
ppm or mg/m3
20 ppm Skin
200 ppm
200 ppm
5 ppm Skin
IDLH
specify
ppm or mg/m3
1,400 ppm
[LEL]
800 ppm
2,000 ppm
CARC [50
ppm]
Symptoms and Effects of Acute Exposure
Visual disturbances; nose irritation; cough, and
respiratory irritation; eye and skin irritation
Mildly irritated eyes, nose, and throat; dry cracking
skin; drowsiness, headache; ataxia; Gl pain; abdominal
cramps; nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea; in animals:
narcosis
Irritated eyes and upper respiratory system; nausea;
dizziness; headache; CNS depression
Irritated eyes; anoxia, and headache; cyanosis;
weakness, dizziness, and drowsiness; microhematuria;
eve burns; and dermatitis; (CARC)
Photo-
ionization
Potential
(eV)
8.88
10.22
9.45
o 7.44
m, p 7.50
A =Air Gl = Gastrointestinal NA = Not available SW = Surface Water
CA = Cancer GW= Groundwater NE = None established TCLP = Toxicity characteristic leaching
procedure
CARC = Carcinogenic IDLH = Immediately dangerous to life or health PEL = Permissible exposure limitTLV =
Threshold limit value
CNS = Central Nervous System LEL = Lower explosive limit PPM = Parts per million U = Unknown
eV = Electron volts mg/m3 = Milligrams per cubic meter S = Soil
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-15
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
3.0
CONDUCTING FIELD ACTIVITIES
Regulation:
Guidance:
Explanation:
Check For:
No regulations are applicable to this section of the manual.
No specific references are applicable to this section of the manual.
To accomplish valid trial burn and risk burn tests with the highest data quality, the
oversight team conducts various field activities. To determine the validity and
representativeness of a trial burn, the oversight team should complete an
exhaustive observation of all test activities and evaluate conformance with SOPs
and techniques identified in the approved TBP, RBP, and QAPP.
During a trial burn, it is common to experience problems associated with process
operation, sampling systems, or bad weather conditions. Some problems that may
require suspension or cancellation of a test run are listed below:
• Operation of the combustion unit is a hazard to the health and
well-being of test personnel, community, or the environment
• Weather conditions that pose a potential to contaminate trial burn
samples
• Significant deviations from an approved TBP or RBP that can not
be resolved in the field
• Loss of sample during sampling or sample recovery
• Stack gas sampling is interrupted for an extended period of time
(more than 4 hours)
The following specific field activities are conducted during a trial burn oversight:
Q Conducting a pretest meeting
Q Conducting a pretest facility survey
Q Reviewing equipment calibration records
Q Observing stack sampling
Q Observing waste feed and APCS sampling
Q Observing process operations
Q Observing sample recovery
Q Collecting trial burn test information
Q Conducting daily meetings
U.S. EPAmegiEffA Region 6
Center foiQSotebfetifik)8itimHtiemfiiiEngff
meeting
4-16
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
Q Compiling field documentation
Q Observing audit gas sampling
Sections 3.1 through 3.11 provide a detailed explanation of the above-listed
activities.
Example Section:
Example Comments:
Lois and Clark conduct a pretest meeting with all responsible personnel, including
the facility trial burn, stack sampling, and QA/QC coordinators, and emphasize
the need for adhering to SOPs and procedures identified in the approved TBP,
RBP, and QAPP. Lois and Clark briefly tour the facility to familiarize themselves
with process, sampling, and spiking areas. Lois observes the stack, waste feed,
and APCS sampling. Clark observes process operating conditions and the sample
recovery. Lois and Clark record their observations in field logbooks and on
observer checklists. At the end of the day, Lois and Clark meet with all
responsible personnel, summarize their observations, provide recommendations,
evaluate trial burn progress, and discuss test schedules for the following day.
During a trial burn, the oversight team should carry out their duties quietly and
accurately, conversing as little as practical with sampling and process control
personnel. Any deviations to or changes from procedures identified in the
approved TBP, RBP, and QAPP should be discussed directly and if appropriate,
immediately with the facility trial burn coordinator. The oversight team should
also avoid touching any sampling or process equipment and assisting in any
sampling or handling any sampling equipment during the trial burn.
Notes:
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-17
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
3.1 CONDUCTING A PRETEST MEETING
Regulation:
Guidance:
Explanation:
No regulations are applicable to this section of the manual.
No specific references are applicable to this section of the manual.
For oversight to be conducted in a cohesive manner, a pretest meeting with the
various agencies involved in the trial burn is necessary. All personnel involved in
the trial burn must understand that SOPs identified in the approved TBP and RBP
must be followed for the test to be successful.
Check For:
a
Explain the role of the oversight team to trial burn personnel
Example Situation:
Example Comments:
Q Identify the individuals responsible for stack testing, waste feed sampling,
APCS sampling, waste feed spiking, and recording process operating data
Q Determine the schedule and plan for trial burn testing
Q Identify any deviations from SOPs indicated in the TBP or RBP
In the pretest meeting, Lois and Clark explain that they will be observing (1) stack
gas, waste feed, and scrubber effluent sampling, (2) waste feed spiking,
(3) continuous emissions monitoring system (CEMS), and (4) general facility
operating procedures. They will also record process operating data. Lois
emphasizes that any deviations from or changes to SOPs in the approved TBP or
RBP must be discussed and resolved with the oversight team. Lois and Clark also
state that the calibration of all equipment involved in testing will be audited during
the test.
Because the trial burn involves numerous activities occurring simultaneously, the
oversight team should make prior arrangements with appropriate test personnel to
observe important activities, such as leak checks, sample recovery, sample field
analysis, and sample auditing. To the extent practicable, any problems that may
jeopardize the validity of the results should be resolved on site after appropriate
personnel have been consulted.
Notes:
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-18
-------
3.2
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
CONDUCTING A PRETEST FACILITY SURVEY
Regulations:
Guidance:
Explanation:
Check For:
No regulations are applicable to this section of the manual.
No specific references are applicable to this section of the manual.
Before the test begins, personnel should tour the facility, with the facility trial burn
coordinator, to familiarize themselves with (1) the facility, (2) sampling locations,
(3) procedures being followed, and (4) personnel associated with each specific
activity.
Q Examine the unit to be tested and observe general process operating
procedures
Q Inspect the APCS associated with the unit to be tested and observe general
operating procedures
Q Identify stack gas, waste feed, and APCS effluent sampling areas
Q Whether the stack includes a rain hat or an obstruction to gas flow
Q Sketch the stack gas sampling location
Q Examine the sampling platform or scaffold
Q Match the sampling trains with the appropriate sampling ports and
become familiar with the order the trains will be employed
Q Inspect the stack gas sample recovery area and the field laboratory, if any
Q Determine the method and location of sample storage and labeling
procedures
Q Identify persons responsible for monitoring process operating conditions
and recording them at regular intervals
Q Identify stack sampling personnel and their individual responsibilities
Q Identify waste feed and APCS sampling personnel and their individual
responsibilities
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-19
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
Example Situation:
Example Comments:
Temporary scaffolding is often used during stack
sampling.
Lois and Clark briefly tour the combustion unit, generally observing the process
operations and ensuring that all monitoring equipment and sampling locations are
acceptable, functional, and calibrated when necessary. Lois and Clark meet all
personnel involved in the trial burn and identify their individual responsibilities.
The pretest field survey presents an opportunity to become familiar with the BIF
unit and to meet key participants in the trial burn. It is recommended that
observers make efforts to obtain answers for questions before the trial burn
begins. This minimizes interfering with test personnel during testing when their
attention should be focused on their individual responsibilities.
Notes:
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-20
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
3.3 REVIEWING EQUIPMENT CALIBRATION RECORDS
Regulation:
Guidance:
Explanation:
Check For:
Example Situation:
No regulations are applicable to this section of the manual.
No specific references are applicable to this section of the manual.
Calibration of all process and sampling equipment is required to ensure the
validity of data collected in the field. An audit of equipment calibration records is
a critical component of trial burn or risk burn oversight. Obtain and review
calibration records of all items in the "Check For" section. It is acceptable to
request that the facility provide to the permit writer records of all completed
calibrations one to two weeks before testing begins. The remainder of all
calibration records should be available for review the day before testing begins.
Q Stack sampling equipment
Q Feed spiking equipment
Q Facility process control equipment
a CEMS
Q Field laboratory instrumentation
These items are further explained in Subsections 3.3.1 through 3.3.5.
During the pretest briefing, Lois and Clark ask all organizations involved in the
trial burn to provide a list of calibration records identified in Subsections 3.3.1
through 3.3.5 and a detailed description of maintenance procedures.
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-21
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
Example Action:
This combination mass flow meter/controller/
transmitter is often used to regulate, measure,
and monitor the mass flow rate of hazardous
waste fuel. Calibration records should be
obtained for all flow meters.
Stack sampling equipment are usually calibrated before stack testing and after
testing completion. Lois and Clark ask ABC Environmental to provide
post-calibration records of all sampling equipment at the end of testing.
Comparing pretest and post-test calibration records provides important
information on the quality of the field data collected.
Notes:
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-22
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
3.3.1 Reviewing Stack Sampling Equipment Calibration Records
Regulation: No regulations are applicable to this section of the manual.
Guidance: No specific references are applicable to this section of the manual.
Explanation:
Check For:
Example Section:
Obtain calibration records of stack sampling equipment identified in the following
checklist.
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
Pitot tubes
Differential pressure
gauges
Temperature indicators
Dry gas meters
Probe nozzles
Rotameters
Barometer
A blank digital temperature indicator calibration form is included as Exhibit 3.3.1-
1, see page 4-25.
Example Comments: Manufacturers of most stack sampling equipment provide specific
troubleshooting, calibration, and maintenance procedures. If records provided by
the stack sampling company are inadequate, the oversight team should request
then review the manufacturer-supplied literature for calibration and maintenance
procedures.
Notes:
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-23
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
This rotameter arrangement is often used in
conjunction with the Method 0040 sampling train
to monitor vacuum flow rate. Oversight
personnel should ensure that flow remains
constant by periodically checking the level of the
rotameter during the trial burn test.
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-24
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
EXHIBIT 3.3.1-1
BLANK DIGITAL TEMPERATURE INDICATOR CALIBRATION FORM
DIGITAL TEMPERATURE INDICATOR NO.
CALIBRATION DATA
Date:
Medium
Ambient air
Ice bath
Boiling water
Oven
Oven
Oven
Oven
Note: DTI = E
Meter Adjusted? \
Time
Mercury Temperature
)igital Temperature Indicator
^es No
DTI (°F)
Signature of Calibrator
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-25
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
3.3.2 Reviewing Feed Spiking Equipment Calibration Records
Regulation:
Guidance:
Explanation:
Check For:
Example Section:
No regulations are applicable to this section of the manual.
No specific references are applicable to this section of the manual.
Feed spiking equipment usually consists of a pump, a flow meter, a data
acquisition control system (DACS), and feed spiking chemicals. It is essential to
audit calibration and maintenance records of the spiking equipment to ensure
accurate spiking of the waste feed.
Q Pump and flow meter calibration records
Q Pump and flow meter maintenance procedures
Q Certificates of analysis for spiking chemicals
Attached are a calibration form for a spiking pump flow meter system (Exhibit
3.3.2-1, see page 4-28) and a certificate of analysis for a spiking chemical
(Exhibit 3.3.2-2, see page 4-29).
Waste feed sampling apparatus should be inspected to identify all
equipment associated with waste feed spiking.
Example Comments: Waste feed spiking companies work on multiple projects in a congested schedule
and, therefore, increases the potential to overlook calibration and maintenance of
the equipment. It is important to verify whether equipment was recently calibrated
for the project at hand.
Exhibit 3.3.2-1 (see page 4-28) should include the signatures of the field
technicians and field manager. Also, the significance of the slope and intercept
values should be presented in the equipment operating manual. The units (for
example, pounds per hour [Ib/hr] or gallons per minute [gpm] or percent input
value) for the flow measurements should be included in the table.
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-26
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
Notes:
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering 4-27
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
EXHIBIT 3.3.2-1
SPIKING PUMP CALIBRATION FORM
CALIE
Date:
Pump
Slope
Interc
Appro
Field
NOTE
3RATION FORM
12/03/96
>#: 11
Run Number
Scale
Flow Meter
DACS
% Deviation
Scale vs
FlowMeter
Scale vs DACS
1
4.06
4.00
4.05
Run 1
: 33.74321
eot: -99.8772
ved bv:
2
4.03
4.00
4.03
Run 2
Manaqer:
.S:
3
4.02
4.00
4.00
Run 3
DACS = Data acquisition control system
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-28
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
EXHIBIT 3.3.2-2
SPIKING CHEMICAL CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS
CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS
Customer:
Product:
Batch #:
Chromium, CR+6
Amount, Ibs.
ABC Company
Somewhere, USA
AMSPERSEENV 280-1
Sodium Bichromate Solution
4458
P.O. #:
B3-97012.01
RESULTS OF ANALYSIS
ISSUED BY:
0.4%
900#
Ann Alysis
Lab Tech
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-29
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
3.3.3 Reviewing Process Control Equipment Calibration Records
Regulation: No regulations are applicable to this section of the manual.
Guidance:
Explanation:
Check For:
No specific references are applicable to this section of the manual.
The operation of a combustion unit is usually controlled by numerous pieces of
process control equipment. To ensure that data collected during a trial burn are
precise and accurate, the oversight team should audit calibration and maintenance
records of all relevant process control equipment before the start of testing. Verify
calibration and maintenance records of the items in the following
check list:
Q Waste feed flow meters
Q Atomization air pressure transmitters
Q Pyrometers
Q Differential pressure gauges across APCSs
Q pH meters
Q Oxidation and reduction potential meters
Q Integral orifice meters
Q Thermocouples and temperature indicators
Local control panels often include meters and local data readouts
that should also have calibration records.
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-30
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
Example Section: Attached are a blank calibration form for a pH meter (Exhibit 3.3.3-1, see page 4-
32) and a calibration report for an infrared thermometer (Exhibit 3.3.3-2, see page
4-33).
Also attached are completed control room and field loopcheck and inspection
sheets: Exhibits 3.3.3-3 (see page 4-34), 3.3.3-4 (see page 4-37), and 3.3.3-5 (see
page 4-40).
Example Comments: Instruments should be calibrated at multiple measurement points evenly spaced
over a range. When practical, at least one calibration point should approximate
levels anticipated in the actual test measurement.
Exhibit 3.3.3-1 (see page 4-32) should include the date of calibration. It is also
helpful to include the instrument tag number or model number to be more specific
than simply meter number. In addition, a description of the instrument's location,
for example pH meter in acid gas scrubber number 1, would aid in understanding
how and where the instrument is used.
Almost all of the values recorded on the Exhibits 3.3.3-3 (see page 4-34), through
3.3.3-5 (see page 4-40), calibration sheets reflect acceptable expected values.
These values indicate that the instrument is operating within recommended limits.
It is helpful to review the instrument operating manuals to better understand the
calibration procedures.
As seen on Exhibit 3.3.3-5, see page 4-42, Field Inspection Sheet, items 1, 2, and
3 are circled and unanswered. The significance of these omissions is unclear. The
facility should explain the situation surrounding these omissions and determine
whether the calibration results are suspect.
Notes:
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-31
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
EXHIBIT 3.3.3-1
EXAMPLE PROCESS CONTROL EQUIPMENT CALIBRATION FORM
pH METER NO.
CALIBRATION FORM
Date:
Meter Adjusted?
Meter Adjusted?
Meter Adjusted?
Run No.
Yes No
Run No.
Yes No
Run No.
Yes No
Measured Value
pH— Buffer 1
Measured Value
pH— Buffer 2
Measured Value
pH— Buffer 3
Signature of Calibrator
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-32
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
EXHIBIT 3.3.3-2
INFRARED THERMOMETER CALIBRATION REPORT
CERTIFICATE OF CALIBRATION
FOR
INFRARED THERMOMETER
Model MR-OR05-32F-1-1/0-0-0 Test Report No. RD-106965
Serial No. 26009 Date Februarys, 1997
INDICATED TEMPERATURE VS BLACKBODY STANDARD TEMPERATURE
Blackbody Indicated Correction Factor Thermometer Output
Temperature Temperature T CORR (°F or °C) (If Applicable)
TTRUE (°F or °c) T IND (°F or °c)
1800°F
2100°F
2400°F
2800°F
3200°F
°F
1800°F
2098°F
2398°F
2799°F
3200°F
°F
0°F
2°F
2°F
1°F
0°F
°F
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NOTES: Indicated Temperature (T,ND) is temperature displayed on built-in meter of thermometer.
' TRUE ~ ' IND ' ' CORR
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering 4-33
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
EXHIBIT 3.3.3-3
EXAMPLE THERMOCOUPLE TEMPERATURE TRANSMITTER CALIBRATION RECORD
CONTROL ROOM LOOPCHECK SHEET
THERMOCOUPLE TEMPERATURE TRANSMITTER
Tag#
TT-41944
Fail Position
Upscale
Description:
/ 1.
Interface I/O
AI-I7623
Calib.
0-1550
Range
Deg. C
T/C Type
S
BNR-410 Combustion Chamber Temperature #1
Call up "AIV" (Table 22) on Fox & Dog. Record the "AIV" values at the applied inputs.
Input
Signal
AIV
(Table 22)
Fox Dog
Expected
AIV values
4 ma
12 ma
20 ma
3,6
3,6
6,0
6,0
1.2
3.6
6.0
The voltages on the Fox & Dog should not differ by more than 0.05 volts. The voltage on the
"Left" computer, with 4 ma applied, should be 1.2 volts +/- .01 volts.
**Notify the owner's representatives if either of these tolerances are exceeded.
2. Call up the "AI" on one of the computers and record the "AT reading 28
3. Have the field disconnect one sensor wire from transmitter. Verify the proper sensor failure
mode (HI/LO).
4. The field will simulate an input to the transmitter as given below. Record the "AI" (Table 20)
values and the "AIV (Table 22) values for the applied inputs.
Input
(% of range)
0%
50%
100%
AI
Eng. Units
Expected
AI values
AIV
values
0 DEG. C
0
775 DEG. C
774
1550
1550 DEG. C
774
1550
/ 5. When the sensor wires are reconnected, the "AI" should read the same as the "AI" recorded in
step #2.
Sign/Date: Cat E. BttWf
8/4/97
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-34
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
EXHIBIT 3.3.3-3 (Continued)
EXAMPLE THERMOCOUPLE TEMPERATURE TRANSMITTER CALIBRATION RECORD
Tag#
TT-41944
Fail Position
Upscale
Description:
/ 1.
/ 2.
/ 3.
/ 4.
/ 5.
/ 6.
/ 7.
FIELD LOOPCHECK SHEET
THERMOCOUPLE TEMPERATURE TRANSMITTER
Interface I/O Calib. Range T/C Type
AI-I7623 0-1550 Deg. C S
BNR-410 Combustion Chamber Temperature #1
Hook up communicator to transmitter & check/program:
Taa#:
Description:
Ranee:
Message (Mod5 I/O):
Sensor type:
Place the transmitter in the "loop test" mode and send 4, 12 & 20 ma signals to the CR.
Have CR document the "AIV" (Table 22) on both computers while at 4, 12, & 20 ma.
Exit the "test" mode and return the transmitter to the "normal operating" mode.
Call up the "PV" on the communicator. The "PV" should indicate the current process
temperature and should agree with the CR. Record the "PV": 30. 6.
Disconnect one sensor wire from the transmitter. The transmitter should go into its
sensor failure mode. Verify with the CR. If the transmitter fails in the wrong direction,
move the failure mode jumper to the correct position. Disconnect the other sensor wire
from the transmitter.
Hook up a T/C temperature simulator to the transmitter. Simulate 0, 50, & 100% of its
range. Have the CR check and document the engineering units and "AFV" values.
Reconnect the sensor wires to transmitter. Verify indication is the same as recorded in
step #3.
Secure cover on transmitter.
Sign/Date: Cal E. Brator 8/4/97
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering 4-35
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
EXHIBIT 3.3.3-3 (Continued)
EXAMPLE THERMOCOUPLE TEMPERATURE TRANSMITTER CALIBRATION RECORD
PROJECT:
TAG# :
I/O# :
Place a
by each
Yes
Yes
Yes
NA
NA
Yes
Yes
NA
Yes
Yes
NA
FIELD INSPECTION SHEET
F-410
TT-41944
A 1-7623
"yes" or "no" by each applicable item after verifying proper compliance. Place "N/A"
non-applicable item.
1 . All equipment is tagged and labeled properly as per drawings and job
instructions.
2. Tag items installed in proper location as per drawings. (If drawings not
available have Company Rep. locate and identify tag items.)
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
EXHIBIT 3.3.3-4
EXAMPLE DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE FLOW TRANSMITTER CALIBRATION RECORD
Tag#
FT-41991
Flow Range
0-9340 CFM
Description:
NOTE: Input
/ 1.
/ 2.
/ 3.
CONTROL ROOM LOOPCHECK SHEET
FLOW TRANSMITTER (DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE)
Interface I/O Calib. Range Characteristic
AI-7604 0-52.18" H20 SQ. Foot
Fail Position
Upscale
AIR FLOW FROM BLOWER 410 TO F-410
in transmitter memory under message - 0-43,500 #/HR
Call up "AIV" (Table 22) on Fox & Dog. Record the "AIV" values at the applied
AIV
(Table 22)
Input Fox Dog Expected
Signal AIV values
4 ma 1.2 1.2 1.2
12 ma 3.6 3.6 3.6
20 ma 6.0 6.0 6.0
inputs.
The voltages on the Fox & Dog should not differ by more than 0.05 volts. The voltage
on the "Left" computer, with 4 ma applied, should be 1.2 volts +/- .01 volts.
**Notify the owner's representatives if either of these tolerances are exceeded.
Call up the "AI" on one of the two computers. The field will apply inputs to the
transmitter as given below. Record the "AI" (Table 20) values and the "AIV" (Table 22)
values for the applied inputs.
Input AI Expected AIV
(% of ranee) Ens. Units A 1 values values
n% n n 19
50% fifinn fifinn ifi
100% qi4n Qi4n fin
Have the field place the transmitter back in service.
Could not get valves to line up.
Sign/Date: Cal E. Brator 8/4/97
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering 4-37
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
EXHIBIT 3.3.3-4 (Continued)
EXAMPLE DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE FLOW TRANSMITTER CALIBRATION RECORD
FIELD LOOPCHECK SHEET
FLOW TRANSMITTER (DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE)
Tag # Interface I/O Calib. Range Characteristic
FT-41944 AI-7604 0-52.18" H20 SQ. Root
Flow Range Fail Position
0-9340 CFM Upscale
Description: AIR FLOW FROM BLOWER 410 TO F-410
NOTE: Input in transmitter memory under message - 0-43,500 #/HR
/ 1. Hook up communicator to transmitter & check/program:
Tag #: FT-41991
Description: Air Flow from Blower
Range:
Message (Mod5 I/O): _
Output characteristics:.
/ 2. Place the transmitter in the "loop test" mode and send 4, 12 & 20 ma signals to the CR.
Have CR document the "AIV" (Table 22) on both computers while at 4, 12, & 20 ma.
Exit the "test" mode and return the transmitter to the "normal operating" mode.
/ 3. Block and bleed both sides of the transmitter. The "PV" should indicate "0".
/ 4. Pump up transmitter to 50% & 100% of its range and have the CR check and document
the engineering units and "AIV" values.
NA 5. Close and plug bleed valves and open block valves to process.
/ 6. Verify the proper position of the failure mode jumper.
/ 7. Secure covers on transmitter.
Sign/Date: Cal E. Brator 8/4/97
7.
2. No tubing clips for over 5" run
4. Could not reach main block valves to open to process
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering 4-38
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
EXHIBIT 3.3.3-4 (Continued)
EXAMPLE DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE FLOW TRANSMITTER CALIBRATION RECORD
PROJECT:
TAG# :
I/O# :
Place a
by each
/
/
/
/
/
NA
NA
/
FIELD INSPECTION SHEET
F-410
FT-41991
A 1-7604
"yes" or "no" by each applicable item after verifying proper compliance. Place "N/A"
non-applicable item.
1 . All equipment is tagged and labeled properly as per drawings and job
instructions.
2. Tag items installed in proper location as per drawings. (If drawings not
available have Company Rep. locate and identify tag items.)
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
EXHIBIT 3.3.3-5
EXAMPLE MISCELLANEOUS FLOW TRANSMITTER CALIBRATION RECORD
CONTROL ROOM LOOPCHECK SHEET
MISCELLANEOUS FLOW TRANSMITTER (SMART MAGMETER, VORTEX, ETC.)
Tag # Interface I/O Calib. Range Characteristic
FT-41801 AI-7601 0-1400 #Per/Hr. Linear
Flow Range Manufacturer Type
0-1400 #Per/Hr. Rosemount Micro-Motion
Description: FUEL GAS FLOW TO BNR-410
/ 1. Call up "AIV" (Table 22) on Fox & Dog. Record the "AIV" values at the applied
inputs.
AIV
(Table 22)
Input Fox Dog Expected
Signal AIV values
4 ma 12 12 1.2
12 ma 3.6 3.6 3.6
20 ma 6.0 6.0 6.0
The voltages on the Fox & Dog should not differ by more than 0.05 volts. The voltage
on the "Left" computer, with 4 ma applied, should be 1.2 volts +/- .01 volts.
**Notify the owner's representatives if either of these tolerances are exceeded.
/ 2. Call up the "AI" on one of the two computers. The field will apply inputs to the
transmitter as given below. Record the "AI" (Table 20) values and the "AIV" (Table 22)
values for the applied inputs.
Input AI Expected AIV
(% of range) Eng. Units AI values values
0#PER/HR
0% 0 U
700#PER/HR
50% 700
1400#PER/HR
100% urn
/ 3. Have the field place the transmitter back in service.
Sign/Date: Cal E. Brator 8/4/97
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering 4-40
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
EXHIBIT 3.3.3-5 (Continued)
EXAMPLE MISCELLANEOUS FLOW TRANSMITTER CALIBRATION RECORD
Tag#
FT-41801
FIELD LOOPCHECK SHEET
THERMOCOUPLE TEMPERATURE TRANSMITTER
Interface I/O Calib. Range Characteristic
AI-7601 0-1400 #PER/HR Linear
Flow Range Manufacturer Type
0-1400 #Per/Hr. Rosemount Micro-Motion
Description
NOTE: Do
the
/ 1
/ 2
/ 2
/ 4
FUEL GAS FLOW TO BNR-410
Not perform this check until all the software parameters have been entered and/or verified in
field device.
. If the device is field-powered, verify that the power source location on the appropriate
documentation is correct by turning off the power at that location. Turn power back on
after verification is complete.
. Hook up communicator to transmitter and verify:
Taa#:
Description:
Ranee:
. Place the transmitter in the "loop test" mode and send 4, 12 & 20 ma signals to the CR.
Have CR check and document the "AIV" (Table 22) values on both computers while at 4,
12, & 20 ma. Have the CR check and document the engineering units on one computer
and the "AIV" on the other while at 4, 12, & 20 ma. Exit the "test" mode and return the
transmitter to the "normal operating" mode.
. Secure cover on transmitter.
Sign/Date: Cal E. Brator 8/4/97
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering 4-41
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
EXHIBIT 3.3.3-5 (Continued)
EXAMPLE MISCELLANEOUS FLOW TRANSMITTER CALIBRATION RECORD
PROJECT:
TAG# :
I/O# :
Place a
by each
O 1.
O
/
/
/
/
/
NA
NA
/
O
FIELD INSPECTION SHEET
F-410
FT-41801
A 1-7601
"yes" or "no" by each applicable item after verifying proper compliance. Place "N/A"
non-applicable item.
All equipment is tagged and labeled properly as per drawings and job instructions.
2. Tag items installed in proper location as per drawings. (If drawings not
available have Company Rep. locate and identify tag items.)
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
3.3.4 Reviewing Continuous Emission Monitoring System Calibration Records
Regulation:
Guidance:
Explanation:
Check For:
Example Section:
No regulations are applicable to this section of the manual.
No specific references are applicable to this section of the manual.
CEMS do not operate accurately and reliably without well-planned and frequent
maintenance. To ensure that data collected during a trial burn are of high quality,
the maintenance oversight team should audit the certification and calibration
records of all CEMS.
Q Latest CEMS certification report
Q Automatic daily calibration records
Q Periodic manual calibration records
Q Certificates of analysis of calibration gases
Performance specifications of CEMS are defined below. In addition, a sample
multipoint CEMS calibration data sheet (Exhibit 3.3.4-1, see page 4-45) and
examples of performance specification test results (Exhibit 3.3.4-2, see page 4-46)
and relative accuracy test results (Exhibit 3.3.4-3, see page 4-47), are also
attached.
Calibration Drift—difference in the CEMS output reading from
the established reference value after a stated period of operation
during which no unscheduled maintenance, repair, or adjustment
took place
• Calibration Error—difference between the concentration indicated
by the CEMS and the known concentration of the cylinder gas
Relative Accuracy—a comparison of the CEMS response to a
value measured by a reference method (that is, Method 3, 3a, 10,
10A, or 10B) described in 40 CFR Part 60.
Response Time—time interval between the start of a step change
in system input and the time when recorder displays 95 percent of
the input value.
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-43
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
Example Comments:
Calibration records should be collected for all
CEMS, including units such as this carbon
monoxide and oxygen monitoring system.
CEMS calibration should not drift or deviate from the reference value of the
reference gas cylinder, gas cell, or optical filter by more than 2.5 percent of the
span value. Relative accuracy of the CEMS should be no greater than 20 percent
of the mean value of the reference method test data in terms of units of the
emission standard or 10 percent of the applicable standard, whichever is greater.
The response time for CO and Ch monitors should not exceed 2 minutes.
Notes:
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-44
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
EXHIBIT 3.3.4-1
EXAMPLE CEMS MULTIPOINT CALIBRATION DATA SHEET
Site
-nqmeer
Date (hour)
^
nstrument model ol
nstrument S/N CD
nstrument range =
Q.
Standards $
i_
V
N
5^
cc
c
Unadjusted: Recalibrate if Response Greater <
Than ±10 Percent
Input
Response
Parameter
Input Concentration (ppm)
%Difference
RF
(Inputs Response)
Overall Mean
RF
Adjusted: Adjust Analyzer Response at 40 Percent of Full Scale
Comments RF is response factor. The instrument linearity is acceptable if the RF at each point is within
2.5 percent of overall mean RF. A linearity check calibration is completed before the system is first
placed into operation.
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-45
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
EXHIBIT 3.3.4-2
EXAMPLE PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATION TEST RESULTS
SUMMARY OF RESULTS
RELATIVE ACCURACY, CALIBRATION DRIFT, CALIBRATION ERROR AND RESPONSE TIMES
Paramete
r
Carbon
Monoxide
Oxygen
Carbon
Monoxide
Oxygen
System
1
1
2
2
Relative
Accuracy
5.33%
3.27%
1.44%
3.12%
Maximum Calibration
Drift
Low Level
1 ppm
0.1%02
1 ppm
0.2% 02
High
Level
8 ppm
0.4% 02
8 ppm
0.4% 02
Calibration Error
High
Low Level Mid Level Level
0.47 ppm 0.67 ppm 2.33 ppm
0.04% 02 0. 1 1 % 02 0.08% 02
0.87 ppm 2.00 ppm 8.33 ppm
0.05% 02 0.19%02 0.27% 02
Response
Time
1.42 min
1.48 min.
1.22 min.
1.29 min.
Allowable
Relative Calibratio Calibration Response
Accuracy n Drift Error Time
10.0% or 15 ppm 25 ppm 2 min.
10 ppm
20% 0.5% 02 0.5% 02 2 min.
10.0% or 16 ppm 25 ppm 2 min.
10 ppm
20% 0.5% 02 0.5% 02 2 min.
COMMENTS: A calibration drift test is completed to demonstrate the stability of CEMS calibration over a period of time. A calibration error test is
conducted to document the accuracy and linearity
of CEMS over the entire measurement range. A risk assessment test is conducted to verify the
representativeness and accuracy of CEMS measurements.
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-46
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
EXHIBIT 3.3.4-3
EXAMPLE RELATIVE ACCURACY TEST RESULTS
SUMMARY OF RESULTS
Carbon Monoxide Monitor Certification
Run Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Average
Date
08/01/96
08/01/96
08/01/96
08/01/96
08/01/96
08/01/96
08/01/96
08/01/96
08/01/96
Time
0854-0915
0927-0948
0959-1020
1030-1051
1134-1155
1206-1227
1238-1259
1311-1332
1343-1404
Reference
Method
ppm CO
66.3
61.5
65.0
42.3
57.6
56.0
56.9
57.0
41.9
56.06
Monitor
Reading
ppm CO
63.41
58.64
62.22
39.71
54.57
52.89
54.04
54.06
39.33
53.21
Difference
ppm CO
-2.89
-2.86
-2.78
-2.59
-3.03
-3.11
-2.86
-2.94
-2.57
-2.85
Standard Deviation = 0.18 ppm CO
Confidence Coefficient = 0.14 ppm CO
I Mean Difference I + Confidence Coefficient = 2.99 ppm CO
Relative Accuracy = I Mean Difference I + Confidence Coefficient x 100 = 5.39%
Average Reference Method
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-47
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
3.3.5 Reviewing Field Laboratory Instrumentation Calibration Records
Regulation: No regulations are applicable to this section of the manual.
No specific references are applicable to this section of the manual.
Guidance:
Explanation:
Check For:
A field laboratory usually consists of numerous analytical reagents, analytical
balances, certified gases, and field GC/FID. Component 5 contains detailed
checklists and an explanation of a laboratory audit. While Component 5 focuses
on off-site laboratories, many of the audit techniques can be used for field
laboratories as well.
Q Certificates of analysis
Q Calibration records
Q Maintenance procedures
Example Section: Please refer to Component 5—How to Conduct a Laboratory Audit.
Example Comments: Please refer to Component 5—How to Conduct a Laboratory Audit.
Notes:
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-48
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
3.4 OBSERVING STACK SAMPLING ACTIVITIES
Regulation:
Guidance:
Explanation:
Check For:
No regulations are applicable to this section of the manual.
No specific references are applicable to this section of the manual.
Stack gas sampling constitutes a substantial portion of a trial burn or risk burn
test. The performance of the trial burn depends significantly on how stack
sampling is conducted. To ensure the highest data quality, the facility should
conduct stack sampling in strict accordance with SOPs identified in guidance
documents and the approved TBP, RBP, and QAPP.
Q Whether the sampling ports are properly cleaned before the test run to
minimize the chance of sampling-deposited material
Q Whether the probe and filter heating systems measure up to 120 ± 14
degrees Celsius (°C) or 248 ± 25 degrees Fahrenheit (°F) before sampling
begins
Q Whether the probe and pitot tube are positioned to point directly into the
direction of stack gas flow
Q Whether the openings around the probe and port hole are blocked off
during sampling to prevent an unrepresentative dilution of the gas stream
Sections 3.4.1 through 3.4.10 describe, in detail, the following specific sampling
issues that should be carefully evaluated during a trial burn:
Q Sampling port location
Q Cyclonic flow check
Q Traverse point calculations
Q Sampling train assembly
Q Leak checks prior to sampling
Q Sampling train temperatures
Q Field data logsheet
Q Leak checks during sampling
Q Sampling train disassembly
Q Sampling checklists
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-49
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
Method 0030 sampling train console and sorbent
tube. The sampling train is used in collection of
samples for VOC analysis and includes two
sorbent tubes: one containing Tenax resin, and
the other containing Tenax resin and
petroleum-based charcoal. The observer should
inspect each train to ensure proper construction.
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-50
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
Example Situation:
Example Action:
This photograph shows a Method 0050 sampling train being
pushed into the sample port. The observer should check to ensure
that the probe is properly positioned at each sampling location.
Lois and Clark observe that temporary scaffolding erected for the trial burn test is
too small to allow them to watch stack sampling from the scaffold platform safely
and comfortably. What should they do?
Lois notes that the top of a nearby baghouse is nearly at the same level as the
sampling platform. The top of the baghouse is surrounded by a railing and would
allow the observers to watch the testing from about 10 feet away. Lois requests
approval from the facility to use the baghouse as an observation platform so that
the team may observe sampling activities safely without being in the way.
Notes:
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-51
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
3.4.1 Reviewing Sampling Port Location
Regulation: No regulations are applicable to this section of the manual.
Guidance:
Explanation:
Check For:
No specific references are applicable to this section of the manual.
For a representative measurement of the pollutant emission rate, a sampling port
should usually be located at least eight stack or duct diameters downstream and
two diameters upstream from any flow disturbance—such as a bend, expansion,
or contraction in the stack or from a visible flame. This rule of thumb is known as
the "eight-and two-diameter criterion."
Q Stack diameter
Q Distance from sampling port to the nearest disturbance in upstream and
downstream directions
Q Process unit diagram
This stack measures 4.7 square meters (50 square feet in cross-
sectional area and 18 meters [60 feet] high). The oversight team
should verify the dimensions of each stack.
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-52
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
Stack sampling ports on this horizontal duct are
placed at a 90 degree angle to each other.
Example Section:
Example Action:
In the pretest briefing, Lois and Clark were provided with a stack diagram by the
stack sampling crew leader. Use the attached stack diagram (Exhibit 3.4.1-1, see
page 4-55) and determine whether stack gas sampling from the indicated sampling
port is acceptable.
The team should ensure that the sampling site is selected at a location that aids in
collection of a representative sample, by verifying Method 1 of Test Methods,
Appendix A, 40 CFR Part 60. Clark reads the stack diagram and collects the
following data:
Stack inside diameter: 96 inches
Port location upstream from disturbance: 253 inches
Port location downstream from disturbance: 315 inches
Clark determines that the sampling site is located 2.64 stack diameters upstream
and 3.28 stack diameters downstream from a flow disturbance and that it does not
satisfy the eight-stack-diameter downstream criterion. Clark reviews Method 1
and ascertains that the method also allows selection of an alternate location at least
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-53
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
one-half stack diameter upstream and two stack diameters downstream from any
flow disturbance, if necessary.
The number of sampling ports in a stack varies, based on stack inside diameter
and stack wall thickness. Generally, if the stack identification and stack wall
thickness plus 6 inches is less than 10 feet, then two ports (located 90 degrees
apart) are used. If the stack inside diameter and stack wall thickness plus 6 inches
is more than 10 feet, then four ports (located 90 degrees apart) are used.
Notes:
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering 4-54
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
EXHIBIT 3.4.1-1
EXAMPLE STACK DIAGRAM
Traverse
Point
Distance from
Inside Wall (inches)
K 96'^
y
9s
2.64 D
Method 5 v
Sampling y
Location
3
3.28D
>
V.
3'
ameters
^
<
5 '
ameters
^
s
O
***~—
360'
V
A
VOST
Volatile
Organic
Sampling
Train
Sampling
-96.10
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-55
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
3.4.2 Reviewing Cyclonic Flow Measurements
Regulation: No regulations are applicable to this section of the manual.
Guidance: No specific references are applicable to this section of the manual.
Explanation:
Check For:
Example Situation:
Example Action:
To measure the pollutant emission rate, a sampling port should be located at a
point where the gas flow is not turbulent so that a representative stack gas sample
can be collected.
Q Cyclonic flow check data sheet
Q Cyclonic flow calculations
In the pretest briefing, the stack sampling crew leader provided Lois and Clark
with a Cyclonic Flow Check Sheet. Using the attached Cyclonic Flow Check
Sheet (Exhibit 3.4.2-1, see page 4-57), determine whether the port is acceptable
for sampling.
To ensure that the sampling site is at a location where the direction of the stack
gas flow is known, the team should confirm the absence of cyclonic flow. Lois
reviews the cyclonic flow check sheet and checks the rotation angle, a, for all
traverse points.
Lois determines that the average value of the rotation angle, a, is less than
20 degrees, which indicates that the overall flow condition in the stack is
acceptable.
Cyclonic flow usually exists (1) after certain APCS units, such as cyclones and
venturi scrubbers; and (2) in stacks having tangential inlets or other configurations
that induce swirling of the gas flow. Cyclonic flow problems can normally be
corrected by inserting flow-straightening vanes or baffles in the stack that make
stack gas flow parallel to stack walls.
Notes:
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-56
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
EXHIBIT 3.4.2-1
EXAMPLE CYCLONIC FLOW CHECK SHEET
Project Number:
Client:
Test Location:
Operator:
Date:
Start Time:
Finish Time:
Test Number:
Traverse Point
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
3D PROBE VO]
767.
XYZ
U3 Boiler
RPM
35240
05:OOPM
07:00 PM
I
Temperature
235.00
258.40
268.80
273.20
277.20
266.80
28760
290.40
290.80
290.90
268.00
262.00
275.60
279.90
284.40
284.60
287.80
288.20
288.20
290.60
284.00
288.20
29200
294.80
29640
297.40
29780
298.00
29780
299.20
254.00
261.00
278.40
287.60
29220
998 40
LUMETRIC FLOW RATE DATA SHEET
Bar. Pressure (in. Hg):
Probe Length (ft):
% 02:
% CO2:
Stack Dia. (ft):
Leak Check:
Static Pressure (in.ILo):
Stack Area: ST2
Moisture (%):
Stack Bp (in. Hg):
Yaw Angle
(degree from zero)
17
22
15
14
15
9
10
9
10
0
0
1
0
0
4
0
0
0
5
5
0
6
0
5
0
4
5
0
0
0
6
0
0
5
3
1
Pl-Patm
0..12
0.13
0.11
0.12
0.13
0.14
0.15
0.16
0.15
0.15
0.22
0.14
0.09
0.13
0.10
0.11
0.15
0.12
0.15
0.13
0.17
0.07
0.17
0.17
0.17
0.17
0.17
0.17
0.15
0.13
0.08
0.07
0.07
0.08
0.10
n 1 1
P1-P2
0.16
0.18
0.16
0.16
0.14
0.14
0.15
0.15
0.14
0.13
0.10
0.11
0.10
0.13
0.13
0.10
0.13
0.12
0.12
0.12
0.18
0.15
0.18
0.17
0.17
0.17
0.17
0.15
0.15
0.12
0.08
0.08
0.09
0.08
0.11
n 09
29.20
6.00
9.60
10.30
3.33
OK
0.50
8/73
12.50
29.24
P4-P5
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.00
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
n m
%
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-57
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
Project Number:
Client:
Test Location:
Operator:
Date:
Start Time:
Finish Time:
Test Number:
Traverse Point
37
38
39
40
Averaae
3D PROBE VO]
767.
XYZ
U3 Boiler
RPM
35240
05:OOPM
07:00 PM
I
Temperature
29660
297.80
29900
300.60
283.99
LUMETRIC FLOW RATE DATA SHEET
Bar. Pressure (in. Hg):
Probe Length (ft):
% 02:
% CO2:
Stack Dia. (ft):
Leak Check:
Static Pressure (in.ILo):
Stack Area: ST2
Moisture (%):
Stack Bp (in. Hg):
Yaw Angle
(degree from zero)
2
4
0
10
4.6750
Pl-Patm
0.08
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.1280
P1-P2
0.09
0.10
0.11
0.11
0.1305
29.20
6.00
9.60
10.30
3.33
OK
0.50
8/73
12.50
29.24
P4-P5
0.02
0.02
0.03
0.03
0.0090
%
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-58
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
3.4.3 Reviewing Traverse Point Location
Regulation: No regulations are applicable to this section of the manual.
Guidance:
Explanation:
Check For:
Example Situation:
Example Action:
No specific references are applicable to this section of the manual.
To ensure that the sample for measuring the pollutant emission rate is
representative, the team should collect the sample from each of the equal areas that
are obtained by dividing the cross section of the stack into equal areas.
Q Traverse point calculation sheet
In the pretest briefing, the stack sampling crew leader provided Lois and Clark
with a Preliminary Velocity Traverse Data and Sampling Location Data sheet.
Use the attached Preliminary Velocity Traverse Data and Sampling Location Data
Sheet (Exhibit 3.4.3-1, see page 4-60) to verify that traverse points are properly
located.
To ensure that a sample is collected uniformly from the entire cross section of the
stack being sampled, the team should verify locations of traverse points. Lois
(1) obtains from Clark the sampling site location relative to any flow disturbances,
both upstream and downstream, (2) reads Figure 1-1 of Method 1 of Test
Methods, Appendix A, 40 CFR Part 60, and (3) determines the following:
For a sampling port located 2.64 stack diameters upstream and 3.28 stack
diameters downstream from a flow disturbance, the minimum number of traverse
points required for particulate traverse is 24.
Lois understands that the 24 points may be located on two perpendicular
diameters, in accordance with Table 1-2 and the example shown in Figure 1-3 of
Method 1 of Test Methods, Appendix A, 40 CFR Part 60. Lois verifies the
Preliminary Velocity Traverse Data and Sampling Location Data Sheet and
concludes that the traverse point locations are acceptable.
Notes:
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-59
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
EXHIBIT 3.4.3-1
EXAMPLE PRELIMINARY VELOCITY TRAVERSE DATA
AND SAMPLING LOCATION DATA SHEET
pRajMiNARY vaocitY TRW/ESSS DATA
AND
SAMPLING LOCATION DATA
Job Nurnbar,
Job Name
Sampling Location..
Data _____
Slack Height.
Sarnping Port Hoighl Above Ground
POH ao
Pan 4 Insida Diameter fin.)
Port 4 Wall Trijcl«8ss (h.)
InsWs Slack Diameter (in.)
Samplng Ports ara
Samplng Ports are
sta^JjJMjefers) upstream from eJisturbanca
constriction, band, expansion)
Pilot Tubs No. /if* '/
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
3.4.4 Reviewing Sampling Train Assembly
Regulation:
Guidance:
Explanation:
Check For:
No regulations are applicable to this section of the manual.
No specific references are applicable to this section of the manual.
Effective stack sampling is pivotal to trial burn success. One of the vital elements
of stack sampling is sampling train assembly. The oversight team must ensure
that trains are prepared in strict accordance with the SOPs of the test methods and
the approved TBP, RBP, or QAPP.
Q Availability of clean area for train assembly to prevent any contamination
Q Proper probe markings for traversing within the stack
Q Use of correct amount of reagents in the impingers
Q Storage of sorbent traps at below 20 °C
Q Use of proper connectors and sealants
Q Proper assembly of filter in the filter holder
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-61
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
Example Situation:
Example Action:
•J
The Method 0010/Total Chromatographicable Organics semivolatile
organic compound (SVOC) sampling train consists of a heated
paniculate filter, condenser, and XAD resin trap. The sampling train
is used in SVOC collection. The front half solution, the paniculate
filter, and XAD resin trap are analyzed for total chromatographic
SVOCs (boiling point at 100 °C to 300 °C) and the gravimetric
fraction (boiling point greater than 300 °C) in the combined
components from the sampling train.
During the assembly of a Method 23—Fob/chlorinated dibenzopdioxin
(PCDD)/polychlorinated dibenzofuran (PCDF) sampling train, prior to beginning
the risk burn, Clark watches the operator use acetone-insoluble, heat-stable
silicone grease on a glass connector to connect the 100-mL high performance
liquid chromatography water impingers. Is this an acceptable procedure?
No. Clark refers to the sample transfer lines connection procedure for Method 23
in Test Methods, Appendix A, 40 CFR Part 60 and determines that the method
does not recommend the use of sealing greases for sample line connections. He
instructs the operator to discontinue the use of sealant grease and to replace the
glass connector coated with grease.
Notes:
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-62
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
3.4.5 Observing Leak Checks Prior To Sampling
Regulation:
Guidance:
Explanation:
Check For:
Example Section:
No regulations are applicable to this section of the manual.
No specific references are applicable to this section of the manual.
Before a sampling run begins, each sampling train should be checked for leaks to
ensure that a sample of stack gases (1) enters the sampling train through the probe
nozzle, (2) travels through various components (such as the probe, filter, sorbent
trap, impingers, and pump) of the train, and (3) exits the train through the orifice
at the end of the dry gas meter.
Q Visible breakage of glass components (visual inspection)
Q Leak in pitot tube
Q Leak in fully assembled sampling train
Please see the following sampling train photograph and read the comments about
the sampling train leak check.
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-63
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
Example Comments:
Check for leaks by watching the gas flow meter
in the upper right corner of the meter box (black
rotating dial) and recording the amount of flow
overtime.
After the train is assembled, it is leak-checked by plugging the probe nozzle and
pulling a 380-millimeter mercury (Hg) (15 inches Hg) vacuum. Observe the dry
gas meter dial and record the leakage rate. Leakage rates in excess of 4 percent of
the average sampling rate or 0.02 cubic feet per minute are not acceptable, and the
stack tester is required to fix the leak in the train before starting a sampling run.
Notes:
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-64
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
3.4.6 Observing Sampling Train Temperatures
Regulation:
Guidance:
Explanation:
Check For:
Example Situation:
No regulations are applicable to this section of the manual.
No specific references are applicable to this section of the manual.
Stack gas test methods require that specific temperatures be maintained at various
locations in the sampling train to ensure proper collection or sorption of pollutants
onto the collection media. It is, therefore, important to verify proper placement of
thermocouples at different locations in the sampling train.
Q Thermocouple locations
Q Proper condenser operation
Q Ice in the impinger box
Please see the following sampling train photograph and read the comments about
observing sampling train temperatures.
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-65
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
Example Action:
The temperature readout is located in the upper
left corner of this meter box. The dial below it
changes the readout between various
thermocouples attached to the sampling train. If
the dial is not labeled, the observer and the
sampling train operator should determine
corresponding thermal couples for each setting.
Method 23 requires that for efficient capture of PCDDs and PCDFs the XAD-2
sorbent trap temperature never exceed 20° C during testing. During a stack
sampling area survey, Lois looks at a Method 23—PCDD/PCDF sampling train
and observes that a thermocouple was placed in the middle of the shell side of the
condenser before the XAD-2 sorbent trap, and that no thermocouple was placed at
the gas entry point on the XAD-2 sorbent trap. Is this procedure correct?
No. The thermocouple in the middle of the condenser reads the temperature of
recirculating water rather than the temperature of the gas sample that is entering
the XAD-2 sorbent trap. Lois instructs the train operator to move the
thermocouple to either the tube side of the condenser or to the gas entry position
on the XAD-2 sorbent trap.
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-66
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
Notes:
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering 4-67
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
3.4.7 Observing the Field Data Logsheet
Regulation: No regulations are applicable to this section of the manual.
Guidance:
Explanation:
Check For:
Example Situation:
No specific references are applicable to this section of the manual.
Stack gas flow and properties vary during trial burn testing, depending on process
operating conditions. To calculate average stack gas conditions that represent the
state of the stack gas during an entire test run, the sampling train console operator
must observe and record instantaneous stack gas conditions at regular intervals
during the entire sampling period.
Q Number of sampling ports
Q Number of traverse points
Q Field Data Sheet
Observe the elements of the attached Field Data Sheet (Exhibit 3.4.7-1, see page
4-69) and determine the number of traverse points and sampling ports used for
stack gas sampling.
Example Comments: The Field Data Sheet shows that stack testing involved sampling from four
sampling ports with six traverse points per port. Sampling was conducted for
1 hour in each port. Field data was recorded every 5 minutes for the entire
sampling period. Leak checks were conducted once during every port change.
Notes:
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-68
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
EXHIBIT 3.4.7-1
EXAMPLE FIELD DATA SHEET
Poinl
Tnia
"W
Hit-
It il
l
/£}">
SVo
DiyGas
Uefet. CF
•g/.w
•555 %•
ra.'sas
0, "/V
aw
r>.f,~f
./i
Ufa art
•H,o
1-1*
l-ft
1-7 f
/,8f
910
/.70
fl./t
HH
O.HJ
Orifice AH
flfi
/•'a
/.TO
or,-*
4,11
Pump
Vacuum
•Hq Guwa
-j.o
1/2.
/e.o
lo.t
Co
f.f
f.o
If
I/O
Vi*
4/i.
w.
il
2/3
-31,0
a/;
2H
2*1
art
_S£L_
JSi_
li-
76
OJ_
3t_
71?
7-7
Or^Gas
Tamp. 'F
Ouila
7J_
36.
il_
~7*<
7±_
ik £>-,-/<
n.
ii.
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-69
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
EXHIBIT 3.4.7-1 (Continued)
EXAMPLE FIELD DATA SHEET
Run Number _
Unil *£ p.
Dale l_
s
fl/l
If fo
Iffi
tilt
Dry Gas
kli.CF
1,01
I./0
'Wof
•HO
O.fo
O.H
0:1°
0.17
Pump
Vacuum
*Hq Guaqe
20_
Hal
Timp
741
Li
/ff
D^G
Temp.
Tj
XL
Oy Gas
71
JJJ_
71
1\
£7_
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-70
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
3.4.8 Observing Leak Checks During Sampling
Regulation: No regulations are applicable to this section of the manual.
Guidance:
Explanation:
Check For:
Example Situation:
Example Action:
No specific references are applicable to this section of the manual.
Moving the sampling train between sampling ports is cumbersome, because
(1) stack gas sampling trains consist of numerous glass components, and (2) the
front half of the train (probe and filter assembly) is usually heated to 120 ± 14 °C
or 248 ± 25 °F. It is important to leak-check the trains whenever they are removed
from, or inserted into, a sampling port. Although this check is not required by
EPA methods, leak checking between port changes can help ensure that the data
will be valid by providing a check on the sampling during the run. Otherwise, the
stack tests may not reveal a problem caused by movement during a port change
until the run is complete, thereby jeopardizing the viability of the sample.
Q Field Data Sheet
During the trial burn test, Lois and Clark were notified that the Method 23
sampling train failed a leak check before the start of sampling in the second
sampling port. ABC Environmental reports that the sampling probe was
disconnected from the filter holder. The stack sampling crew leader states that it
might have happened while the train was being moved from one port to the other
and recommend that sampling be continued after the leak is fixed. Lois asks
whether a leak check was completed after the train was removed from the first
sampling port. She discovers that it was not. Should ABC Environmental be
allowed to proceed with the sampling run?
No. Because it cannot be established that the leak developed during the port
change, the sampling run should be invalidated. To determine when a leak
developed in the train, it is important to conduct a leak check immediately after
removing the train from a port and again after moving the train to the next port.
Notes:
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-71
-------
_ COMPONENT 4— HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
3.4.9 Observing Sampling Train Disassembly
Regulation: No regulations are applicable to this section of the manual.
Guidance:
Explanation:
Check For:
No specific references are applicable to this section of the manual.
To minimize sample loss or contamination, probe pushers and train movers are
expected to handle the train with extreme caution during train operation and while
disassembling and moving train components to the sample recovery area.
Example Situation:
Q Whether the probe nozzle was allowed to touch the stack wall or the
platform
Q Whether a final leak check was conducted
Q Whether train components were disassembled without any breakage or
loss of sample
Q Whether train components were properly capped, or sealed and labeled,
before being transported to the sample recovery area
ABC Environmental reports that the final leak check of the Method 0010-SVOC
sampling train failed, and that the leak rate was 0.04 cubic feet per minute.
However, the leak check between port changes indicated no leak was present.
Charlie of XYZ Company informs Lois and Clark that they would correct the
sample volume on the basis of the leak rate and report the results. Is this
procedure acceptable?
Example Comments: Yes. In case of a final leak check failure, Method 5 of Test Methods,
Appendix A, 40 CFR, Part 60 provides options to either calculate a volume
correction on the basis of the leak rate or repeat the sampling run. It is important
that the stack sampling team inform the facility contact and permitting agency trial
burn observers when a sampling train fails a leak check so that an agreed upon
course of action can be taken. Had the leak rate been cause for concern, the
facility or agency may have required a repeat of the sampling run. It is much less
expensive to repeat a sampling run while already mobilized for a trial burn, then to
return to the facility at a later date.
Notes: _
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-72
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
3.4.10 Completing Stack Sampling Checklists
Regulation: No regulations are applicable to this section of the manual.
Guidance:
Explanation:
Check For:
Example Section:
No specific references are applicable to this section of the manual.
Observing stack gas sampling activities and documenting these observations as
part of the trial burn oversight report are important. Organized observation of
sampling procedures can be attained best with the use of checklists for specific
procedures being used. Specific items that should be checked for each of the
sampling methods followed during a trial burn should be compiled in the form of a
checklist for completion during stack sampling. Relevant checklists for observing
sample train operation and recovery are included as Attachments A through N.
Q Method-specific checklists
Attached is a checklist for Method 0010—Semi volatile Sampling Checklist
(Exhibit 3.4.10-1, see Page 4-74).
Example Comments: The oversight team should read and understand items identified in the checklist
before arriving at the stack testing platform for observation of stack sampling
activities.
Notes:
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-73
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
EXHIBIT 3.4.10-1
METHOD 0010 SEMIVOLATILE POHC AND PIC ORGANICS SAMPLING CHECKLIST
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number: _
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:.
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Did the train components appear to be clean and were all glassware
openings covered with Teflon® film, aluminum foil, or noncontaminating
caps before the train was assembled?
Was the train assembled by personnel in a manner that minimized
contamination potential?
Was the train constructed of the components and materials identified in
Method 0010 (See Figure 0010: nozzle, heated probe, particulate filter, one
condenser and recirculating cooling -water system, one XAD-2 resin trap,
four impingers, control console, etc.)?
Were the dry gas meter, thermocouples, nozzle, and critical orifice devices
calibrated prior to the test? If yes, provide the calibration dates in the
Comment column. If available, attach a copy of the calibration records.
Were weather conditions adverse to sampling (rain, snow, etc.)? If so,
describe the measures taken to protect the sampling equipment in the
Comment column.
Was the sampling area (i.e., platform) kept clean and orderly during the
run?
Were the traverse sample points determined in accordance with Method 1?
Was a cyclonic flow check made before the start of testing? If yes, record
the date and time the check was completed in the Comment column.
Were stack gas oxygen, carbon dioxide, and carbon monoxide
concentrations measured by orsat, fyrite, or CEMS?
Was the manometer leveled and zeroed before the start of sampling? Were
periodic checks made by the operator during the test run?
YES
NO
Comment
Dry gas meter
Thermocouples
Critical orifice
Nozzle
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-74
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
EXHIBIT 3.4.10-1 (Continued)
METHOD 0010 SEMIVOLATILE POHC AND PIC ORGANICS SAMPLING CHECKLIST
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number: _
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:.
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Was the stack static pressure properly measured? At what traverse point
was this determined?
Was the sampling time uniform at each traverse sample point?
Was the total sampling time at least 120 minutes?
Were at least 3 dry standard cubic meters of gas sample collected during
the run?
Were the sample train and console adequately monitored by operators and
did the operators properly log sampling data on field data sheets during the
test run?
YES
NO
Comment
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-75
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
EXHIBIT 3.4.10-1 (Continued)
METHOD 0010 SEMIVOLATILE POHC AND PIC ORGANICS SAMPLING CHECKLIST
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number: _
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:.
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Were dry gas meter readings recorded at each traverse sample point?
Was the nozzle sealed with Teflon® film, aluminum foil, or a
noncontaminating cap after being removed from the stack at the completion
of the run and during leak checks?
Was particulate matter carefully wiped from the external surfaces of the
probe at the completion of the run?
Was the temperature of the filter box and sample probe maintained at 248 ±
25 °F throughout the test run?
Did protracted or frequent "holds" occur during the sampling run? If so,
describe the apparent cause and duration in the Comment column.
Inspect the field data sheets. Are they clear and completely filled out?
Were XAD-2 Resin Tubes packed, and spiked by the analytical laboratory
with sampling surrogates for semivolatiles?
Were Field Blanks collected during each run?
Was the Blank Train set up identically to the actual sampling trains and
placed on the stack or at the base of the stack for the duration of one
complete sampling run? Was the Blank Train leak checked and heated to
temperature throughout the run?
Were Reagent Blanks collected once during the three runs?
Were Trip Blanks collected once for each sample shipment?
Were spiked Resin Blanks prepared and analyzed before the trial burn?
YES
NO
Comment
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-76
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
EXHIBIT 3.4.10-1 (Continued)
METHOD 0010 SEMIVOLATILE POHC AND PIC ORGANICS SAMPLING CHECKLIST
Facility Name: Run Number:
Test No./Description: Run Start Time:
Unit: Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering 4-77
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
3.5 OBSERVING WASTE FEED AND AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DEVICE EFFLUENT
SAMPLING
Regulation: No regulations are applicable to this section of the manual.
Guidance: No specific references are applicable to this section of the manual.
Explanation: To assess the performance of a combustion unit, samplers should collect samples of
waste feed and APCS effluent streams with stack gas samples. To ensure collection of
a representative sample, samplers should collect samples in strict accordance with
SOPs identified in the approved TBP, RBP, and QAPP.
Check For: Q Whether the liquid in the sampling line was drained before a sample was collected
Q Whether there are any visible air bubbles in the VOA vials
Q Whether samples are collected in accordance with procedures specified in the
approved TBP, RBP, and QAPP and at the specified frequency
Q Whether logsheets—showing date, time, run number, and sampler name—are
completed for each sample
Q Whether sample containers are labeled—showing date, time, and identification
number—with a permanent marker pen
Q Whether sample containers are handled and stored in accordance with procedures
specified in the approved TBP, RBP, and QAPP
Q Whether sample traceability and chain-of-custody records are being initiated and
maintained for each sample
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-78
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
Example Section:
Example Comments:
Waste feed sampling
Attached are example Waste Feed Sample Logsheet (Exhibit 3.5-1, see
page 4-80) and Chain of Custody Record (Exhibit 3.5-2, see page 4-81) forms.
To the extent practicable, all sampling activities should be observed a number of
times throughout the trial burn testing. Each type of sampling should be observed
during the first run, at a minimum, to ensure that sampling techniques are in
accordance with the approved TBP and QAPP.
Notes:
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-79
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
EXHIBIT 3.5-1
EXAMPLE WASTE FEED SAMPLE LOGSHEET
DATA SHEET FOR 1997 RISK TRIAL BURN DATE
BOILER NO 6 TEST RUN 1,2,(j)4
//.-/.<" y
//'.3V ,/
INITIALS
' / SK*
/e£> * &£2 iS^
/ ^ ^/^ \f
/<-•-,. X
/•3 . J a ^/
2 _£^ ^/
(X
Of
V
^ &-
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-8
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
EXHIBIT 3.5-2
EXAMPLE CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD
Kill!,
Job* ___ Unit Tested
CHAIN OK CUSTODY RECORD
flag*. f i
Facility Name/Location
ed by:
Analyzed by:
Date: Time:
C
SAMPLE ANALYSIS REQUIRED
Transported by:'
' 1 .-j. .'
Data Reviewed by:
Date: Time: Remarks:
Received at Lab by:
^,, . .. .-
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-81
-------
_ COMPONENT 4— HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT _
3.6 OBSERVING PROCESS OPERATION ACTIVITIES
Regulation: No regulations are applicable to this section of the manual.
Guidance: No specific references are applicable to this section of the manual.
Explanation: The oversight team must periodically observe and document process operating
conditions during the trial burn to ascertain whether the BIF unit is being operated
in accordance with target operating conditions identified in the approved TBP or
RBP. All process operating parameters for which permit limits may be
established should be measured during the test.
Check For: Q Process
Q Combustion chamber temperature
Q Combustion gas temperature
Q Combustion chamber atomization and burner pressure
Q Combustion gas velocity
Q Excess air flow rate
Q Kiln rotational speed
Q CO concentration
Q O2 concentration
Q Total hydrocarbon concentration
Q Unit production rates
Waste feed
Q Feed rates
Q Chlorine input rates
Q Ash loading rates
Q Feed spiking compound rates
Q Atomization fluid pressure
Q Combustion chamber atomization and burner pressure
Residue generation rates
Q Bottom ash
Q Fly ash
Q Scrubber mud and solid residue
Cyclone
Pressure drop
Inlet temperature
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering 4-82
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
Q Dry scrubber
Q Reagent flow rate
Q Atomizer rotational speed
Q Atomizer nozzle pressure
Q Inlet temperature
Q Outlet temperature
Q Baghouse
Q Pressure drop
Q Inlet temperature
Q Electrostatic precipitator
Q Voltage
Q Current
Q Sparking rate
Q Flue gas flow rate
Q Mist Eliminator
Q Pressure drop
Q Quencher
Q Exit temperature
Q Water flow rate
Q Packed tower scrubber
Q Pressure drop
Q Liquid flow rate
Q Effluent pH
Q Venturi scrubber
Q Pressure drop
Q Liquid flow rate
Q Effluent pH
Q Gas-to-liquid flow rate ratio
Q Scrubbing reagent concentration
Q Scrubbing reagent flow rate
Q Maximum solids content in effluent
Q Whether the data acquisition recorder (DAR) is a digital or an analog system
Q Whether the digital readout agrees closely with the value on the strip chart
recorder
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering 4-83
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
Q Whether process operating conditions are as specified in the approved
TBP or RBP
Q Whether there is a way of cross-checking the flow rate on the basis of the
volume change in the feed tank; if yes, do flow rates agree closely (±10
percent)?
Example Situation:
Example Action:
Observers should check for consistent readings between the
control room DAR and local readouts, as is shown in the center of
this photograph.
During a trial burn test run, Lois and Clark observe that the recorder associated
with the alcohol waste fuel feed is oscillating more than usual. In addition, the
hazardous waste fuel feed rate is recorded by a wide band of ink rather than a fine
line as during previous test runs. Should sampling be discontinued?
Because the alcohol waste fuel feed rate would be established as a permit
condition based on trial burn operating conditions, it is important that the alcohol
waste fuel feed rate is monitored and accurately recorded throughout trial burn
testing. Lois contacts the trial burn coordinator to discuss the problem. It is
discovered that the waste feed rate flow meter is malfunctioning in addition to the
recorder pen leaking ink. It is decided that sampling will be discontinued until the
flow meter and recorder can be repaired.
Notes:
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-84
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
3.7 OBSERVING SAMPLE RECOVERY
Regulation:
Guidance:
Explanation:
Check For:
Example Situation:
Example Action:
No regulations are applicable to this section of the manual.
No specific references are applicable to this section of the manual.
Sample recovery operations have the highest potential for contamination or loss of
a sample. To ascertain that samples are recovered in accordance with specified
methods and reagents identified in the approved TBP or RBP, the oversight team
should observe the sample recovery using method-specific sample recovery
checklists.
Q Reagents used and number of rinses with each reagent
Q Whether samples are recovered in accordance with procedures specified in
the approved TBP or RBP
Q Whether liquid levels on sample containers are clearly marked with a
permanent marker pen
Q Whether sample labels—showing identification number, date, and
time—are affixed firmly to the sample containers
Q Whether a sample identification number logsheet and chain-of-custody
records are completed for each sample
Q Whether sample containers are sealed and packaged securely and chilled
on ice in ice chests or coolers for transportation
During the trial burn, Clark observes that the Tenax and Tenax/charcoal tubes of
Method 0030—Volatile Organics Sampling Train were tightly capped with
stainless-steel caps and placed in culture tubes with Teflon®-lined lids. Then, the
culture tubes, in addition to an unopened charcoal tube, were put in a zip-lock bag,
sealed, and placed in a cooler for transporting to the laboratory. Is this procedure
acceptable?
No. The charcoal tube in the zip-lock bag should be opened before the bag is
sealed for transportation. The charcoal tube is placed in the bag to capture any
hydrocarbons that may contaminate the samples. Analysis of the charcoal tube
provides an indication of whether contaminant mass is lost during transportation
of the sample. This is also known as a trip blank.
The attached Method 0030 - Volatile Organic Sampling Train Recovery Checklist
(Exhibit 3.7-1, page 4-86) shows elements of a sample recovery checklist.
Notes:
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-85
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
EXHIBIT 3.7-1
METHOD 0030 VOLATILE ORGANIC SAMPLING TRAIN RECOVERY CHECKLIST
Facility Name:
Test No. / Description:
Run Start Time:
Unit:
Run No.:
Run Stop Time:
Observer:
Date:
Observation / Requirement
Was the sampling train disassembled at the sampling port location? If so, were
the openings of the test train components (adsorbent traps, condensate trap,
and so on) sealed before being relocated to the recovery area? Were
components sealed with Teflon® tape or noncontaminating caps?
Was the condensate sample collected for each tube set?
Was the total condensate sample collected at the conclusion of the test run?
Were the openings of the adsorbent traps capped after removal from the
sampling train and replaced into the original storage vials?
Was the condensate sample collected into an amber glass VOA vial with a
Teflon® septum screw cap?
Was organic-free water added to the condensate VOA vial to ensure that no air
bubbles were present?
Were at least three tube sets collected during the test run?
Was a fourth tube set collected during the test run for archiving purposes?
Was a reagent blank of the organic-free water collected according to the
sampling plan? If so, indicate the sample identifier name in the Comment
column.
Was a blank sampling train prepared and recovered at the sampling location?
How long did the blank train remain intact before recovery?
Were the condensate VOA vial and adsorbent tubes properly labeled and stored
on ice promptly after recovery?
Was a trip blank pair of adsorbent tubes included with each sample shipment
to the laboratory?
YES
NO
Comment
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-86
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
EXHIBIT 3.7-1 (Continued)
METHOD 0030 VOLATILE ORGANIC SAMPLING TRAIN RECOVERY CHECKLIST
Facility Name:
Test No. / Description:
Run Start Time:
Unit:
Run No.:
Run Stop Time:
Observer:
Date:
Observation / Requirement
Were chain-of-custody and request for analysis forms completed by recovery
personnel ?
Were the appropriate signature(s) affixed to the chain-of-custody forms?
YES
NO
Comment
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-87
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
3.8
COLLECTING TRIAL BURN TEST INFORMATION
Regulation:
Guidance:
Explanation:
Check For:
Example Situation:
Example Action:
No regulations are applicable to this section of the manual.
No specific references are applicable to this section of the manual.
It is important to obtain copies of all field data and review them, if possible, before
the start of the next run or before leaving the facility. Isokinetic sampling involves
uniformly sampling particulates or gases in a stack. Uniform sampling is
achieved by maintaining the velocity of the gas stream entering the probe nozzle at
a level that is exactly equal to the stack gas velocity. An isokinetic sampling run
is valid only if the average sampling rate during the run is ± 10 percent of the
isokinetic sampling rate. Before the start of the next run, stack sampling field data
sheets should be compiled, and calculations must be verified.
Q Whether gas temperatures at different locations in the sampling train
during the trial burn test are consistently within the ranges indicated in
specific test methods
Q Whether the volumes of stack gas samples collected remained consistently
within the ranges indicated in specific test methods
Q Whether isokinetic sampling variations are within ±10 percent of the
isokinetic sampling rate
Q Whether all sampling trains have passed final leak checks
Q Whether process operating conditions maintained during the trial burn test
conform with process conditions in the approved TBP or RBP
Q Whether waste feed and APCS effluent samples are collected in
conformance with procedures specified in the approved TBP or RBP
Briefly review the attached Field Data Calculation Sheet (Exhibit 3.8-1, see page
4-89), and determine whether the sampling flow rate during the test run was
acceptable.
Yes. The stack gas sampling rate was about 95.5 percent of the isokinetic
sampling rate, which remains in the acceptable isokinetic variation range of 90 to
110 percent.
Notes:
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-8
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
EXHIBIT 3.8-1
EXAMPLE FIELD DATA CALCULATION SHEET
impinger Box No.
Impinger t
Impingar Z
Impinger 3
Impinger 4
Impinger 5
Impingar 6
Imptngar 7
Moisture Content
final Weight
Initial Weight
Increase
R raw-Weight
Initial Weight
Increase
final Weight
Initial Weight
Increase
Rnal Weight
Initial Weight
Increase
Final Weight
Initial Weight
Increase
Final Weight
Initial Weight
Increase
Final Wetght
Initial Weight
Increase
%M =
Water Weight Gain
$•3
gso, = -_
v. »
P»- 2^
V. = 11,137
V, -
P.
Avg <1P
6.3"? i
Impinger 1
Impioger S
Impinger 3
Impinger 4
Impinger 5
Impinger a
Impinger 7
Total
•SCO, =
%co =
A, =
T, =
f.f
T,=
MW
= 17.65 Vm
13.6
460
.f
17.65
13.6
Vwln = 0.0472 X Vw = 0.0472 X
% Moisture = Vw^_ x 100 = H
<$a + 460
sft1
x 100 =
V. =. 5123.8 K
%l ... 1,039 X
f&°i
• U.o4$
x 0.^3 , aifrif (^
. ^.^ %
ACFM:
SCFMr
%EA:
'Hg
sdm
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-89
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
3.9
CONDUCTING DAILY MEETINGS
Regulation:
Guidance:
Explanation:
Check For:
Example Situation:
Example Action:
No regulations are applicable to this section of the manual.
No specific references are applicable to this section of the manual.
Trial burns are both time-intensive and expensive. To (1) assess progress,
(2) identify any changes to and deviations from the approved TBP or RBP, and
(3) evaluate the impact of changes or deviations on the quality of test data, the
oversight team should meet with responsible facility and test personnel at regular
intervals and when the oversight team feels that a briefing is necessary to resolve
an issue.
During daily meetings, the oversight team should summarize the following:
Q Trial burn test runs planned for the day
Q Major changes to or deviations from the approved TBP or RBP
Q Problems encountered and their resolution
Q Trial burn progress and completion schedule
During sample recovery of a Method 23 A sampling train for PCDDs/PCDFs,
Clark observes that front-half and back-half rinses contained three acetone rinses
followed by three methylene chloride rinses. Clark recalls that Method 23A
requires two toluene rinses to follow the three acetone rinses and three methylene
chloride rinses in the sample recovery of front-half and back-half components.
Should Clark wait until the end of the day to brief the testing team on the recovery
of the Method 23 A sampling train?
No. Clark informs the stack testing coordinator immediately regarding the
deviation to the method and requires that the correct procedure be followed. To
the extent practicable, problems and issues should be discussed and resolved
immediately in the field through consultations with cognizant regulatory personnel.
Notes:
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-90
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
3.10 CONDUCTING FIELD DOCUMENTATION ACTIVITIES
Regulation:
Guidance:
Explanation:
Check For:
No regulations are applicable to this section of the manual.
No specific references are applicable to this section of the manual.
The oversight team should keep comprehensive notes of daily activities throughout
the trial burn. Good field documentation helps in preparing a detailed TBO report
that would assist the trial burn report reviewer in evaluating the validity and
representativeness of the trial burn tests and the permit writer in establishing
permit limits based on process operating conditions observed during the test. The
oversight team should also obtain photographs of the process unit being tested,
waste feed tank, stack sampling platform, and all sampling activities during the
trial burn.
Documentation of field activities should include the following:
Q Process operating parameters for each run
Q General impressions of stack sampling activities
Q General impressions of stack sample recovery activities
Q General impressions of waste feed and APCS sampling activities
Q Deviations from and changes to the approved TBP or RBP
Photodocumentation should include the following:
Q BIF unit being tested
Q Stack showing any obstructions to the flow of stack gases
Q Waste feed storage tanks
Q APCS units
Q Location of stack sampling ports and sampling platform
Q Location of CEMS probe
Q Location of waste feed sampling
Q Location of waste feed spiking
Q Various stack sampling trains used during the trial burn
Q Waste spiking system
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-91
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
Q Waste feed and APCS sampling systems
Q Modifications to or deviations from any standard sampling systems and
procedures identified in the approved TBP or RBP
Example Situation:
Example Action:
Notes:
Lois and Clark notice that hazardous waste feed and APCS samples for SVOC
analysis were collected in clear glass bottles and were not stored on ice or in ice
chests throughout the first trial burn test run sampling period. Lois does not recall
whether collection of hazardous waste feed samples in clear glass bottles is an
acceptable procedure. Lois photographs the waste feed sampling system.
Lois refers to the approved TBP and QA/QC handbook and determines that
samples should have been collected in amber glass bottles and stored on ice in ice
chests. Lois requests that the facility follow procedures identified in the approved
TBP for the remainder of trial burn test runs. The facility uses amber glass
bottles for waste feed sample collection and stores them on ice in ice chests for all
remaining test runs. Lois photographs the modified waste feed sampling system.
Lois and Clark include photographs of both waste feed sampling systems in the
TBO report and recommend that trial burn report reviewer evaluate the impacts of
this deviation on data quality of the first trial burn test run.
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-92
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
3.11 OBSERVING AUDIT GAS SAMPLING
Regulation: No regulations are applicable to this section of the manual.
Guidance: No specific references are applicable to this section of the manual.
Explanation: An audit is an assessment of the data by estimating accuracy. Generally, an audit is
conducted either to determine the efficacy of a source testing organization's sampling
procedures or to quantitatively evaluate the data produced by sample collection,
sample recovery, sample analysis, and data processing. CEMS are also audited by
introducing known concentrations of gases received from EPA. The results of the
performance audit are submitted along with the trial burn results.
Check For: Q Relative Accuracy Test Audit — Absolute mean difference between gas
concentration and the value determined by reference method, plus the 2.5 percent
error confidence coefficient of a series of tests divided by the mean of the reference
method tests.
Q Cylinder Gas Audit — Challenge the CEMS with an audit gas of known
concentration at two points within 20 to 30 percent value and 50 to 60 percent of a
known value and assess the accuracy of CEMS by determining the difference
between the actual concentration of the audit gas and the concentration indicated
by the monitor. These audit gas cylinders are available from most major gas
suppliers.
Q Volatile Organic Sampling Train (VOST) — A gas sample containing principal
organic hazardous constituents (POHC) is passed from an audit gas cylinder into a
glass manifold. A portion of the gas is drawn through a VOST in accordance with
method specifications. Collected POHCs are analyzed by the methods identified in
the TBP. The analytical results are compared to the known concentrations. The
VOST audit gas cylinder is available from Ellen Strieb at U.S. EPA Research
Triangle Park (RTP), 919-544-7834. This agency can be contacted only by EPA
or state agencies to request a VOST audit gas. It is suggested that 4 weeks lead
time be provided for procurement.
Q PCDDs and PCDFs Audit — A performance audit sample containing tetra
through octa-isomers of PCDD and PCDF is analyzed in accordance with the
methods identified in the TBP. The analytical results are compared to the known
concentrations. These performance audit samples are available from Easter
Coptedge at U.S. EPA RTP, 919-541-7863. There have been times in the past
when inadequate funding severely delayed or suspended audit sample availability.
It is suggested that 4 to 6 weeks lead time be provided to obtain the audit sample.
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-93
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
Example Situation:
Example CEMS probe location on a stack.
During a cylinder gas audit, the observer should
ensure that the audit gas passes through the entire
gas conditioning system. This should ideally
include as much of the sample line (after the
probe) as possible.
During sampling of the VOST audit gas cylinder, Lois observes that (1) audit
gases are passed into a heated glass manifold, and (2) a portion of the gases are
drawn from the manifold at a rate of 1.0 liter per minute into a pair of sorbent
tubes. Lois notices that the condensers positioned before the sorbent tubes do not
have water recirculating through them. Is this an acceptable procedure ?
A letter accompanying the audit gas cylinders describes the origin of the cylinder
gas, purpose of the audit, and procedures/instructions to be followed for the audit.
In reviewing the instructions for sampling POHC from the audit gas cylinder using
VOST, Lois realizes that the volume of sample for any pair of sorbent traps
should not exceed 10 liters and that the gas stream at the inlet to the first sorbent
trap should be maintained at 20 °C during sample collection. Lois contacts the
trial burn coordinator and requests that the VOST operator circulate chilled water
through the condensers and install a thermocouple that indicates the temperature of
the gas stream at the inlet to the first sorbent trap.
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering 4-94
Example Comments:
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
Notes:
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering 4-95
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
4.0 PREPARING THE OVERSIGHT REPORT
Regulation:
Guidance:
Explanation:
Check For:
No regulations are applicable to this section of the manual.
No specific references are applicable to this section of the manual.
The trial burn oversight report (1) summarizes sampling and process control
operations, (2) identifies any deviations from or changes to methods in the
approved TBP, (3) describes problems encountered and their resolution,
(4) comments on the representativeness of the trial burn and the data quality, and
(5) provides recommendations on permit conditions that should be specified for
the facility. The TBO report also documents observations and field notes of the
observers and data collected during the trial burn.
The following is an example outline for a typical TBO report.
Q Overview of the TBO
Q Facility description
Q Engineering description
Q Characterization of hazardous waste feed stream
Q Process operating conditions
a CEMS
Q Implementation of the trial burn
Q Test conditions
Q Stack sampling
Q Waste feed sampling
Q Other sampling activities
Q Sample analysis
Q Process monitoring, control, and DAR
Q Trial burn completion schedule
Q Field Observations
Q Daily activities of observers
Q General impressions of observers
Q Deviations from approved TBP or RBP
Q Other problems and issues and their resolution
Q Conclusions and recommendations
Example Situation: Following is an issue that Lois and Clark encountered during a trial burn.
"During the first run of the Utility Boiler, Method 0050 and particle size
distribution sampling trains were put on hold for a short period when the feed to
the boiler was tripped. The run was completed when waste feed to the boiler
restarted at a substantially reduced feed rate."
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering
4-96
-------
COMPONENT 4—HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT
Example Action: In the TBO report, Lois and Clark recommend that the XYZ Company evaluate
how the waste feed cutoff during run one impacts the emission rates of particulate
matter, hydrogen chloride, and chlorine gas. They also ask the facility to compare
these emission rates with those of the second and third risk burn runs.
Notes:
U.S. EPA Region 6
Center for Combustion Science and Engineering 4-97
-------
ATTACHMENT A
METHOD 0010 SEMIVOLATILE POHC AND PIC ORGANICS SAMPLING CHECKLIST
(5 Sheets)
-------
METHOD 0010 SEMIVOLATILE POHC AND PIC ORGANICS SAMPLING CHECKLIST
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Did the train components appear to be clean and were all glassware openings
covered with Teflon® film, aluminum foil, or noncontaminating caps before
the train was assembled?
Was the train assembled by personnel in a manner that minimized
contamination potential?
Was the train constructed of the components and materials identified in
Method 0010 (See Figure 0010: nozzle, heated probe, p articulate filter, one
condenser and recirculating cooling water system, one XAD-2 resin trap,
four impingers, control console, etc.)?
Were the dry gas meter, thermocouples, nozzle, and critical orifice devices
calibrated prior to the test? If yes, provide the calibration dates in the
Comment column. If available, attach a copy of the calibration records.
Were weather conditions adverse to sampling (rain, snow, etc.)? If so,
describe the measures taken to protect the sampling equipment in the
Comment column.
Was the sampling area (i.e., platform) kept clean and orderly during the run?
Were the traverse sample points determined in accordance with Method 1?
Was a cyclonic flow check made before the start of testing? If yes, record the
date and time the check was completed in the Comment column.
Were stack gas oxygen, carbon dioxide, and carbon monoxide concentrations
measured by orsat, fyrite, or CEMS?
Was the manometer leveled and zeroed before the start of sampling? Were
periodic checks made by the operator during the test run?
YES
NO
Comment
Dry gas meter
Thermocouples
Critical orifice
Nozzle
4-A-l
-------
METHOD 0010 SEMIVOLATILE POHC AND PIC ORGANICS SAMPLING CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Was the probe marked or alternative provisions made to ensure nozzle
placements at the traverse point locations determined by Method 1?
Was the filter inspected before being placed in the filter holder? Was the
filter made of quartz or glass fiber?
Was the filter supported by a glass or Teflon® frit?
Was a leak check of the sample train performed before and after each port
change?
(Note: Allowable leak rate is 0. 02 cfm or 4% of the average sampling rate,
•whichever is less, at 15 inches Hg vacuum or lower if 15 inches is not
exceeded during the run.)
Were pretest and post test leak checks conducted on the pilot tube?
Was silicone grease used on any connections upstream of the resin trap?
Was the nozzle tip positioned at the proper traverse sample point
throughout the test run?
Did operators make timely adjustments to sampling rates to maintain
isokinetic conditions throughout the run?
Was the annulus between the probe and the sampling port sealed during
sampling?
Was the sample gas temperature entering the resin trap maintained and
demonstrated to be at or below 68 °F throughout the test run?
Was the sample gas temperature exiting the last impinger maintained at or
below 68°F throughout the test run?
YES
NO
Comment
Time Result
Traverse # 1 Before
Traverse # 1 After
Traverse # 2 Before
Traverse # 2 After
4-A-2
-------
METHOD 0010 SEMIVOLATILE POHC AND PIC ORGANICS SAMPLING CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Was the stack static pressure properly measured? At what traverse point
was this determined?
Was the sampling time uniform at each traverse sample point?
Was the total sampling time at least 120 minutes?
Were at least 3 dry standard cubic meters of gas sample collected during the
run?
Were the sample train and console adequately monitored by operators and
did the operators properly log sampling data on field data sheets during the
test run?
Were dry gas meter readings recorded at each traverse sample point?
Was the nozzle sealed with Teflon® film, aluminum foil, or a
noncontaminating cap after being removed from the stack at the completion
of the run and during leak checks?
Was particulate matter carefully wiped from the external surfaces of the
probe at the completion of the run?
Was the temperature of the filter box and sample probe maintained at 248 ±
25 °F throughout the test run?
Did protracted or frequent "holds" occur during the sampling run? If so,
describe the apparent cause and duration in the Comment column.
Inspect the field data sheets. Are they clear and completely filled out?
Were XAD-2 Resin Tubes packed, and spiked by the analytical laboratory
with sampling surrogates for semivolatiles?
Were Field Blanks collected during each run?
YES
NO
Comment
4-A-3
-------
METHOD 0010 SEMIVOLATILE POHC AND PIC ORGANICS SAMPLING CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Was the Blank Train set up identically to the acutal sampling trains and
placed on the stack or at the base of the stack for the duration of one
complete sampling run? Was the Blank Train leak checked and heated to
temperature throughout the run?
Were Reagent Blanks collected once during the three runs?
Were Trip Blanks collected once for each sample shipment?
Were spiked Resin Blanks prepared and analyzed before the trial burn?
YES
NO
Comment
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS
4-A-4
-------
METHOD 0010 SEMIVOLATILE POHC AND PIC ORGANICS SAMPLING CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name: Run Number: Observer Signature:
Test No./Description: Run Start Time:
Unit: Run Stop Time: Date of Observation:
4-A-5
-------
1 REVERSE - TYPE PITOT TUBE
2 PROBE
3 THERMOCOUPLE
4 STACK WALL
5 MANOMETER
6 THERMOCOUPLE
7 FILTER HOLDER
8 THERMOCOUPLE
9 CHECK VALVE
10 FLEXIBLE VACUUM LINE
11 VACUUM GAUGE
12 MAIN VALVE
13 BY-PASS VALVE
14 AIR-TIGHT PUMP
15 DRY GAS METER
16 THERMOCOUPLE
17 ORIFICE
18 MANOMETER
19 RECIRCULATION PUMP
20 COOLING WATER
21 CONDENSER
22 XAD-2 ADSORBENT TRAP
23 THERMOCOUPLE
14
Figure 0010. Semivolatile Organic Sampling Train
4-A-5
-------
ATTACHMENT B
METHOD 0010 SEMIVOLATILE POHC AND PIC ORGANICS
SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST
(5 Sheets)
-------
METHOD 0010 SEMIVOLATILE POHC AND PIC ORGANICS SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Was the sample train disassembled at the sample port location? If so, were
the openings of the test train components (probe, filter bell, resin trap,
impinger train, etc.) sealed before being relocated to the recovery area? Were
the components sealed with Teflon® tape or noncontaminating caps?
Was particulate matter visible on the filter? If so, describe the appearance
(color, particle size, etc.) in the Comment column.
Was there any evidence that particulate matter may have bypassed the
filter? If so, describe in the Comment column.
Was the filter recovered with tweezers and loose particulate inside the filter
bell collected into the original petri dish? Was the petri dish sealed with
Teflon® tape? Was the petri dish made of glass?
Was the filter recovered intact without loss of particulate?
Did the "front half sample train recovery include: an acetone rinse followed
by methylene chloride solvent rinses in triplicate while brushing of the
nozzle, liner, front half of the filter bell inlet, optional cyclone, and a final
rinse of the brush?
Were all of the "front half rinses collected in labeled amber glass bottles
with Teflon®-lined lids?
Did the recovery personnel visually inspect the "front half sample train
components after the final rinses?
Were EPA Level III cleaned and certified bottles used for collecting these
"ultra trace level" samples? Were bottle certifications available for
inspection?
Were petri dishes made of glass?
Note: Plastic is a source of phthalates and should not be used.
YES
NO
Comment
4-B-l
-------
METHOD 0010 SEMIVOLATILE POHC AND PIC ORGANICS SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Were glass containers the narrow neck or Boston Round design instead of the
wide mouth Packer Bottle design?
Were the openings of the resin trap sealed with tight fitting
noncontaminating plugs or caps? Was the resin trap wrapped with
aluminum foil and properly labeled?
Were the contents of the knockout impingers and deionized water imping ers
recovered into an amber glass bottle with a Teflon ®-lined lid?
Were the knockout impingers and the deionized water impingers rinsed three
times with deionized water followed by methylene chloride?
Was the moisture gain of each impinger recorded before recovery of the
contents was commenced?
Was the impinger composite and deionized water rinse volume recorded
separately than the moisture gain in the impingers?
Did the "back half sample train recovery include triplicate acetone followed
by methylene chloride rinses of the back half of the filter bell outlet, filter
support, coil condenser, and interconnecting glassware?
Were the contents of the back half sample collected into an amber glass
bottle with a Teflon®-lined lid?
At the conclusion of the sample train recovery, were the openings of the
sample train components sealed with Teflon® tape or noncontaminating
caps?
Was the condensate in the impingers collected for this test program in
accordance with the approved trial burn plan?
YES
NO
Comment
4-B-2
-------
METHOD 0010 SEMIVOLATILE POHC AND PIC ORGANICS SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Were reagent blanks of the stock solutions collected? If so, indicate the
sample identifiers in the Comment column.
Was a blank sample train prepared and recovered at the sample location?
How long did the blank train remain intact before recovery?
Was the blank train placed on the stack or at the base of the stack for a
period of time equivalent to one run, leak checked before and after the test,
and heated to temperature for the duration of one test run?
At the conclusion of the sample train recovery, were liquid levels in the
sample containers marked so that losses due to leakage or evaporation could
be detected?
Were all samples properly labeled and stored on ice promptly after
recovery?
Were the chain of custody and request for analysis forms completed by the
recovery personnel?
Were the appropriate signature(s) affixed to the chain of custody forms?
Were field blanks of the XAD-2 resin tubes collected during each run?
Was a trip blank collected for each shipment of MM- 5 train samples to the
laboratory?
YES
NO
Comment
Acetone
Methvlene chloride
Particulate filter
Deionized water
4-B-:
-------
METHOD 0010 SEMIVOLATILE POHC AND PIC ORGANICS SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Was a tracking system and labeling of samples conducted in such a way as to
assist the laboratory in processing as separate samples the following train
components:
( 1 ) The particulate filter, and the front half of the filter holder, nozzle and
probe acetone, methylene chloride solvent rinses
(2) The XAD-2 resin tube and the back half of the filter holder, coil
condenser, and connecting glassware acetone, methylene chloride solvent
rinses
(3) Knockout imping er and deionized water imping er composite with
deionized water and methylene chloride rinses.
Was a tracking and labeling system used which was clearly understood by
the observer and would this system be clear to the receiving laboratory?
Was the recovery facility kept clean at all times?
YES
NO
Comment
4-B-4
-------
METHOD 0010 SEMIVOLATILE POHC AND PIC ORGANICS SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name: Run Number: Observer Signature:
Test No./Description: Run Start Time:
Unit: Run Stop Time: Date of Observation:
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS
4-B-5
-------
ATTACHMENT C
METHOD 0012 MULTIPLE METALS SAMPLING CHECKLIST
(5 Sheets)
-------
METHOD 0012 MULTIPLE METALS SAMPLING CHECKLIST
Facility Name:
Test No. / Description:
Run Start Time:
Unit:
Run No.:
Run Stop Time:
Observer:
Date:
Observation / Requirement
Did the train components appear to be clean and were all glassware openings
covered with Teflon® film before the train was assembled?
Was the acidic potassium permanganate absorbing solution made fresh on the
test day and stored in an amber glass container with a Teflon® lined cap?
Was the train assembled by personnel in a manner that minimized
contamination potential?
Was the train constructed of the components and materials identified in
Method 0012 (See Figure 0012: nozzle, heated probe, filter holder, 4-7
impingers in ice bath, control console, etc.)?
Was the nozzle and probe liner constructed of glass or quartz?
Was the dry gas meter, thermocouples, nozzle, and critical orifice devices
calibrated prior to the test? If yes, provide the calibration date in the
Comment column. If available, attach a copy of the calibration records.
Were weather conditions adverse to sampling (rain, snow, etc.)? If so,
describe the measures taken to protect the sampling equipment in the
Comment column.
Was the sampling area (i.e., platform) kept clean and orderly during the run?
Were the traverse sample points determined in accordance with Method 1?
Was a cyclonic flow check made before the start of testing? If yes, record the
date and time the check was completed in the Comment column.
YES
NO
Comment
Dry gas meter
Thermocouples
Critical orifice
Nozzle
4-C-l
-------
METHOD 0012 MULTIPLE METALS SAMPLING CHECKLIST
Facility Name:
Test No. / Description:
Run Start Time:
Unit:
Run No.:
Run Stop Time:
Observer:
Date:
Observation / Requirement
Was stack gas oxygen, carbon dioxide, and carbon monoxide concentration
measured by orsat, fyrite, or CEMS?
Was the manometer leveled and zeroed before the start of sampling? Were
periodic checks made by the operator during the test run?
Was the probe marked or alternative provisions made to ensure nozzle
placements at the traverse point locations determined by Method 1?
Was the filter tared and inspected before being placed in the filter holder?
Was the filter made of quartz or glass fiber?
Was the filter supported by a Teflon® frit?
Was a leak check of the sample train performed before and after each port
change?
(Note: Allowable leak rate is 0. 02 cfm or 4% of the average sampling rate,
•whichever is less, at 15 inches Hg vacuum or lower if not exceeded during
the run.)
Was a pre-test leak check conducted on the pilot tube?
Was the nozzle tip positioned at the proper traverse sample point
throughout the test run?
Did operators make timely adjustments to sampling rates to maintain
isokinetic conditions throughout the run?
YES
NO
Comment
Time Result
Traverse # 1 Before
Traverse # 1 After
Traverse # 2 Before
Traverse # 2 After
4-C-2
-------
METHOD 0012 MULTIPLE METALS SAMPLING CHECKLIST
Facility Name:
Test No. / Description:
Run Start Time:
Unit:
Run No.:
Run Stop Time:
Observer:
Date:
Observation / Requirement
Was the annulus between the probe and the sampling port sealed during
sampling?
Was the sample gas temperature exiting the last impinger maintained at or
below 68°F throughout the test run?
Was the stack static pressure properly measured? At what traverse point
was this determined?
Was the sampling time uniform at each traverse sample point?
Was the total sampling time at least 120 minutes?
Were the sample train and console adequately monitored by operators and
did the operators properly log sampling data on field data sheets during the
test run?
Were dry gas meter readings recorded at each traverse sample point?
Was the nozzle sealed with Teflon® film after being removed from the stack
at the completion of the run?
Was particulate matter carefully wiped from the external surfaces of the
probe at the completion of the run?
Was the temperature of the filter box and sample probe maintained at 248 ±
25 °F throughout the test run?
Did protracted or frequent "holds" occur during the sampling run? If so,
describe the apparent cause and duration in the Comment column.
Inspect the field data sheets. Are they clear and completely filled out?
YES
NO
Comment
4-C-2
-------
METHOD 0012 MULTIPLE METALS SAMPLING CHECKLIST
Facility Name: Unit: Observer:
Test No. /Description: Run No.: Date:
Run Start Time: Run Stop Time:
4-C-4
-------
METHOD 0012 MULTIPLE METALS SAMPLING CHECKLIST
Facility Name: Unit: Observer:
Test No. /Description: Run No.: Date:
Run Start Time: Run Stop Time:
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS
4-C-5
-------
STACK GAS FLOW
ICE BATH
4%KMnO4/10%H2SQ,
1 REVERSE - TYPE PITOT TUBE
2 GLASS PROBE
3 THERMOCOUPLE
4 STACK WALL
5 MANOMETER
6 THERMOCOUPLE
7 FILTER HOLDER
8 THERMOCOUPLE
9 CHECK VALVE
10 FLEXIBLE VACUUM LINE
11 VACUUM GAUGE
12 MAIN VALVE
13 BY-PASS VALVE
14 AIR-TIGHT PUMP
15 DRY GAS METER
16 THERMOCOUPLE
17 ORIFICE
18 MANOMETER
Figure 0012. Multiple Metals Sampling Train
TO ATMOSPHERE
1
, 1 ,
4-C-5
-------
ATTACHMENT D
METHOD 0012 MULTIPLE METALS SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST
(4 Sheets)
-------
METHOD 12 MULTIPLE METALS SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST
Facility Name:
Test No. / Description:
Run Start Time:
Unit:
Run No.:
Run Stop Time:
Observer:
Date:
Observation / Requirement
Was the sample train disassembled at the sample port location? If so, were the
openings of the test train components (probe, filter bell, impinger train, etc.)
sealed before being relocated to the recovery area? Were the components sealed
with Teflon® tape or noncontaminating caps?
Was particulate matter visible on the filter? If so, describe the appearance (color,
particle size, etc.) in the Comment column.
Was there any evidence that particulate matter may have bypassed the filter? If
so, describe in the Comment column.
Was the filter recovered with tweezers and loose particulate inside the filter bell
collected into the original petri dish (Container 1)? Was the petri dish sealed
with Teflon® tape?
Was the filter recovered intact without loss of particulate?
Was a "front half recovery of the sample train conducted for particulate matter
(Container 2) in the following manner: acetone rinse of the nozzle; brushing and
acetone rinse of the liner; brushing and acetone rinse of the filter bell inlet; and,
an acetone rinse of the brush?
Was a Teflon® or nonmetallic brush used for cleaning the inside surfaces of the
sample train "front half components?
Were all of the particulate matter "front half acetone rinses collected in a
labeled sample container?
YES
NO
Comment
4-D-l
-------
METHOD 12 MULTIPLE METALS SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST
Facility Name:
Test No. / Description:
Run Start Time:
Unit:
Run No.:
Run Stop Time:
Observer:
Date:
Observation / Requirement
Was a "front half recovery of the sample train conducted for metals (Container
3) in the following manner: rinse of nozzle, liner, and filter bell inlet with 100
mL of 0.1 N nitric acid?
Were all of the metals "front half rinses collected into the same prelabeled
container?
Was a final nonsample rinse of the "front half sample train components
conducted with deionized water and acetone? Were the openings sealed with
Teflon® tape or noncontaminating caps?
Were the impingers weighed or measured for moisture content determination
before recovery of the solution contents?
Were the liquid contents of impingers 1, 2, and 3 collected in a prelabeled
sample bottle (Container 4)?
Was the filter holder outlet inspected for condensate and, if condensate was
present, was it added to Container 4 ?
Was the filter holder outlet, the filter support, impingers 1-3, and all connecting
glassware rinsed with 100 mL of 0.1N nitric acid and added to Container 4?
Was the liquid contents in impinger 4 collected in an amber glass sample bottle
with a Teflon®-lined lid (Container 5a)?
Was impinger 4 rinsed with 100 mL of 0.1N nitric acid and added to Container
5a?
Were the liquid contents of impingers 5 and 6 collected in an amber glass bottle
with a Teflon®-lined lid (Container 5b)?
YES
NO
Comment
4-D-2
-------
METHOD 12 MULTIPLE METALS SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST
Facility Name:
Test No. / Description:
Run Start Time:
Unit:
Run No.:
Run Stop Time:
Observer:
Date:
Observation / Requirement
Were impingers 5 and 6 and connecting glassware triple rinsed with 100 mL of
the acidified potassium permanganate solution and the rinsate added to
Container 5b?
Were impingers 5 and 6 and connecting glassware triple rinsed with 100 mL of
deionized water and the rinsate added to Container 5b?
Did the recovery personnel visually inspect impingers 5 and 6 for residue
deposits following the deionized water rinse?
If residue deposits remained in impingers 5 and 6, were they rinsed with 25 mL
of 8N hydrogen chloride and collected into an amber glass bottle with a Teflon®-
lined cap containing 200 mL deionized water (Container 5c)?
Was the silica gel impinger weighed to the nearest 0.5g?
At the conclusion of the sample train recovery, were the openings of the sample
train components sealed with Teflon® tape or noncontaminating caps?
Were reagent blanks of the stock solutions collected according to the sampling
plan? If so, indicate the sample identifiers in the Comment column
Was a blank sample train prepared and recovered at the sample location? How
long did the blank train remain intact before recovery?
Were all samples properly labeled and stored on ice promptly after recovery?
YES
NO
Comment
Acetone
Deionized Water
0.1NHNO,
HNO,/H2O2
H2SO4/KMnO4
8NHC1
Filters (3)
4-D-3
-------
METHOD 12 MULTIPLE METALS SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST
Facility Name:
Test No. / Description:
Run Start Time:
Unit:
Run No.:
Run Stop Time:
Observer:
Date:
Observation / Requirement
YES
NO
Comment
Were the chain of custody and request for analysis forms completed by the
recovery personnel ?
Were the appropriate signature(s) affixed to the chain of custody forms?
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS
4-D-4
-------
ATTACHMENT E
METHOD 0013 HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM SAMPLING CHECKLIST
(4 Sheets)
-------
METHOD 0013 HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM SAMPLING CHECKLIST
Facility Name:
Test No. / Description:
Run Start Time:
Unit:
Run No.:
Run Stop Time:
Observer:
Date:
Observation / Requirement
Did the train components appear to be clean and were all glassware openings
covered with Teflon film before the train was assembled?
Was the train assembled by personnel in a manner that minimized
contamination potential?
Was the train constructed of the components and materials identified in
Method 0013 (See Figure 0013 - recirculating glass or Teflon probe, Teflon
sample line, 5 chilled impingers, etc.)!
Was the dry gas meter calibrated prior to the test?
If yes, provide the calibration date in the Comment column. If available,
attach a copy of the calibration record.
Were weather conditions adverse to sampling (rain, snow, etc.)? If so,
describe the measures taken to protect the sampling equipment in the
Comment column.
Was the sampling area (i.e., platform) kept clean and orderly during the run?
Were sampling locations determined in accordance with Method 1?
Was a cyclonic flow check made before the start of testing? If yes, record the
date and time the check was completed in the Comment column.
Were stack gas oxygen, carbon dioxide, and dry molecular weight determined
using an Orsat analyzer?
Was the manometer leveled and zeroed before the start of sampling?
Y
N
Comment
4-E-l
-------
METHOD 0013 HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM SAMPLING CHECKLIST
Facility Name:
Test No. / Description:
Run Start Time:
Unit:
Run No.:
Run Stop Time:
Observer:
Date:
Observation / Requirement
Was the probe marked or alternative provisions made to ensure nozzle
placements at the points identified by Method 1?
Was a pre-test leak check performed?
Was a leak check performed before and after each port change? Note:
Allowable leak rate is 0.02 cfm or 4% of the average sampling rate,
whichever is less, at 15 inches Hg vacuum or lower if not exceeded during
the run.
Was the probe consistently repositioned at the proper time and to the
proper sampling point throughout the run?
Did operators make timely adjustments to sampling rates to maintain
isokinetic conditions throughout the run?
Was the annulus between the probe and the sampling port sealed during
sampling?
Was the absorbing liquid from the first impinger continuously recirculated
through the sample line during the run?
Was the probe maintained at a temperature below 200 °F throughout
sampling to prevent the boiling of the recirculating liquid?
Was the stack static pressure properly measured?
Y
N
Comment
Time Result
Traverse # 1 Before
Traverse # 1 After
Traverse # 2 Before
Traverse # 2 After
4-E-2
-------
METHOD 0013 HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM SAMPLING CHECKLIST
Facility Name:
Test No. / Description:
Run Start Time:
Unit:
Run No.:
Run Stop Time:
Observer:
Date:
Observation / Requirement
Were pilot tubes leak checked?
Was the sampling time at each point uniform?
Was the sampling time at least 120 minutes?
Were the sampling train and console adequately monitored by operators and
did the operators properly log sampling data on field data sheets during
sampling?
Was the nozzle covered with aluminum foil after being removed from the
stack at the completion of the run?
Was particulate matter carefully wiped from the external surfaces of the
probe at the completion of the run?
Was the probe capped at both ends before being removed to the recovery
area?
Did protracted or frequent "holds" occur during the sampling run?
If so, describe the apparent cause and duration in the Comment column.
Inspect the field data sheets. Are they clear and complete and were they
reviewed by a senior member of the sampling team following the run?
Y
N
Comment
4-E-3
-------
METHOD 0013 HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM SAMPLING CHECKLIST
Facility Name: Unit: Observer:
Test No. /Description: Run No.: Date:
Run Start Time: Run Stop Time:
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS
4-E-4
-------
STACK GAS FLOW
15
1 PROBE
2 STACK WALL
3 RECIRCULATING LIQUID IN TEFLON® LINE
4 THERMOCOUPLE
5 CHECK VALVE
6 FLEXIBLE VACUUM LINE
7 VACUUM GAUGE
8 MAIN VALVE
9 BY-PASS VALVE
10 AIR-TIGHT PUMP
11 DRY GAS METER
12 THERMOCOUPLE
13 ORIFICE
14 MANOMETER
15 TEFLON6IMPINGERS
16 GLASS IMPINGER
Figure 0013. Hexavalent Chromium Sampling Train
RECIRCULATES
0.1NKOHFROM /
FIRST IMPINGER
TO ATMOSPHERE
10
4-E-5
-------
ATTACHMENT F
METHOD 0013 HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST
(2 Sheets)
-------
METHOD 0013 HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST
Facility Name:
Test No. / Description:
Run Start Time:
Unit:
Run No.:
Run Stop Time:
Observer:
Date:
Observation / Requirement
Was the train disassembled in a clean area in a manner that minimized the
potential for sample loss and/or contamination?
Was the pH of impinger 1 checked and determined to be greater than 8.5?
Was nitrogen bubbled through the impinger train at approximately 10 liters
per minute for 30 minutes?
Were the liquid contents of impingers 1, 2, 3, and 4 measured or weighed,
and recorded on the recovery data sheets?
Were the liquid contents of impingers 1,2,3, and 4 placed in an amber glass
sample bottle (Container 1)?
Were the nozzle, probe, recirculating sample line, and first four impingers
rinsed four times with distilled deionized water and were the rinses added to
Container 1?
Were the "back half of the filter holder, the filter support, and all
connecting glassware rinsed with 100 mL of 0.1N nitric acid and were the
rinses added to Container 3?
Were the contents of Container 3 filtered to remove insoluble matter?
Was Container 3 rinsed 3 times with distilled deionized water and was the
rinse solution filtered?
Were the filter and reservoir rinsed 3 times and were these rinses filtered?
Was the silica gel impinger weighed to the nearest 0.5g?
Y
N
Comment
4-F-l
-------
METHOD 0013 HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST
Facility Name:
Test No. / Description:
Run Start Time:
Unit:
Run No.:
Run Stop Time:
Observer:
Date:
Observation / Requirement
Were reagent blanks collected according to the sampling plan?
Were all samples properly labeled and stored on ice promptly after
recovery?
Were the chain of custody and request for analyses forms completed by
recovery personnel ?
Were the appropriate signature(s) affixed to the chain of custody forms?
Y
N
Comment
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS
4-F-2
-------
ATTACHMENT G
METHOD 23 PCDD/PCDF SAMPLING CHECKLIST
(6 Sheets)
-------
METHOD 23 PCDD/PCDF SAMPLING CHECKLIST
Facility Name:
Test No. / Description:
Run Start Time:
Unit:
Run No.:
Run Stop Time:
Observer:
Date:
Observation / Requirement
Did the train components appear to be clean and were all glassware openings
covered with Teflon® film, aluminum foil, or noncontaminating caps before
the train was assembled?
Was the aluminum foil prerinsed with hexane?
Was the train assembled by personnel in a manner that minimized
contamination potential?
Was the train constructed of the components and materials identified in
Method 23 (See Figure 23: nozzle, heated probe, particulate filter, one
condenser and recirculating cooling water system, XAD-2 resin trap, five
impingers, control console, etc.)!
Was the dry gas meter, thermocouples, nozzle, and critical orifice devices
calibrated prior to the test? If yes, provide the calibration date in the
Comment column. If available, attach a copy of the calibration records.
Were weather conditions adverse to sampling (rain, snow, etc.)? If so,
describe the measures taken to protect the sampling equipment in the
Comment column.
Was the sampling area (i.e., platform) kept clean and orderly during the run?
Were the traverse sample points determined in accordance with Method 1?
Was a cyclonic flow check made before the start of testing? If yes, record
the date and time the check was completed in the Comment column.
YES
NO
Comment
Dry gas meter
Thermocouples
Critical orifice
Nozzle
4-G-l
-------
METHOD 23 PCDD/PCDF SAMPLING CHECKLIST
Facility Name:
Test No. / Description:
Run Start Time:
Unit:
Run No.:
Run Stop Time:
Observer:
Date:
Observation / Requirement
Was stack gas oxygen, carbon dioxide, and carbon monoxide concentration
measured by orsat, fyrite, or CEMS?
Was the manometer leveled and zeroed before the start of sampling? Were
periodic checks made by the operator during the test run?
Was the probe marked or alternative provisions made to ensure nozzle
placements at the traverse point locations determined by Method 1?
Was the XAD-2 resin prepared within the last four weeks? Indicate the
preparation date in the Comment column.
Was the resin trap covered with aluminum foil and the openings sealed with
glass stoppers?
Was high-performance liquid chromatography grade water used for in the
impingers?
Was the filter tared and inspected before being placed in the filter holder?
Was the filter made of glass fiber?
Was the filter supported with a Teflon® frit or Teflon® -coated wire?
Was a leak check of the sample train performed before and after each port
change?
(Note: Allowable leak rate is 0. 02 cfm or 4% of the average sampling rate,
•whichever is less, at 15 inches Hg vacuum or lower if not exceeded during
the run.)
YES
NO
Comment
Time Result
Traverse # 1 Before
Traverse # 1 After
Traverse # 2 Before
Traverse # 2 After
4-G-2
-------
METHOD 23 PCDD/PCDF SAMPLING CHECKLIST
Facility Name:
Test No. / Description:
Run Start Time:
Unit:
Run No.:
Run Stop Time:
Observer:
Date:
Observation / Requirement
Were pre-test and post-test leak checks conducted on the pilot tube?
Was silicone grease used on any connections of the sample train?
Was the nozzle tip positioned at the proper traverse sample point
throughout the test run?
Did operators make timely adjustments to sampling rates to maintain
isokinetic conditions throughout the run?
Was the annulus between the probe and the sampling port sealed during
sampling?
Was the sample gas temperature entering the resin trap maintained at or
below 68°F throughout the test run?
Was the sample gas temperature exiting the last impinger maintained at or
below 68°F throughout the test run?
Was the stack static pressure properly measured? At what traverse point
was this determined?
Was the sampling time uniform at each traverse sample point?
Was the total sampling time at least 120 minutes?
Were at least 3 dry standard cubic meters of gas sample collected during the
run?
YES
NO
Comment
4-G-3
-------
METHOD 23 PCDD/PCDF SAMPLING CHECKLIST
Facility Name:
Test No. / Description:
Run Start Time:
Unit:
Run No.:
Run Stop Time:
Observer:
Date:
Observation / Requirement
Were the sample train and console adequately monitored by operators and
did the operators properly log sampling data on field data sheets during the
test run?
Were dry gas meter readings recorded at each traverse sample point?
Was the nozzle sealed with Teflon® film, aluminum foil, or a
noncontaminating cap after being removed from the stack at the completion
of the run?
Was particulate matter carefully wiped from the external surfaces of the
probe at the completion of the run?
Was the temperature of the filter box and sample probe maintained at 248 ±
25 °F throughout the test run?
Did protracted or frequent "holds" occur during the sampling run? If so,
describe the apparent cause and duration in the Comment column.
Inspect the field data sheets. Are they clear and completely filled out?
YES
NO
Comment
4-G-4
-------
METHOD 23 PCDD/PCDF SAMPLING CHECKLIST
Facility Name: Unit: Observer:
Test No. /Description: Run No.: Date:
Run Start Time: Run Stop Time:
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS
4-G-5
-------
1 REVERSE - TYPE PITOT TUBE
2 PROBE
3 THERMOCOUPLE
4 STACK WALL
5 MANOMETER
6 THERMOCOUPLE
7 FILTER HOLDER
8 THERMOCOUPLE
9 CHECK VALVE
10 FLEXIBLE VACUUM LINE
11 VACUUM GAUGE
12 MAIN VALVE
13 BY-PASS VALVE
14 AIR-TIGHT PUMP
15 DRY GAS METER
16 THERMOCOUPLE
17 ORIFICE
18 MANOMETER
19 RECIRCULATION PUMP
20 COOLING WATER
21 CONDENSER
22 XAD-2 ADSORBENT TRAP
23 THERMOCOUPLE
20
^.
:
<.
S.
AJl/
.^
a
^.<
n>
a
iMPTY A y
x»
I
/
^
kA,
>
-^
>
:MPTY
HPLC WATER —" ICE BATH
16 16
TO ATMOSPHERE
Figure 0023. PCDD/PCDF Sampling Train
18
4-G-6
-------
ATTACHMENT H
METHOD 23 PCDD/PCDF SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST
(4 Sheets)
-------
METHOD 23 PCDD/PCDF SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST
Facility Name:
Test No. / Description:
Run Start Time:
Unit:
Run No.:
Run Stop Time:
Observer:
Date:
Observation / Requirement
Was the sample train disassembled at the sample port location? If so, were the
openings of the test train components (probe, filter bell, resin trap, impinger
train, etc.) sealed before being relocated to the recovery area? Were the
components sealed with Teflon® tape, hexane rinsed aluminum foil, or
noncontaminating caps?
Was particulate matter visible on the filter? If so, describe the appearance (color,
particle size, etc.) in the Comment column.
Was there any evidence that particulate matter may have bypassed the filter? If
so, describe in the Comment column.
Was the filter recovered with tweezers and loose particulate inside the filter bell
collected into the original petri dish (Container 1)? Was the petri dish sealed
with Teflon® tape or placed in an amber glass container with a Teflon®-lined
cap?
Was the filter recovered intact without loss of particulate?
Were the openings of the resin trap sealed with tight fitting noncontaminating
plugs or caps? Was the resin trap wrapped with aluminum foil and labeled?
YES
NO
Comment
4-H-l
-------
METHOD 23 PCDD/PCDF SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name:
Test No. / Description:
Run Start Time:
Unit:
Run No.:
Run Stop Time:
Observer:
Date:
Observation / Requirement
Did the recovery of the "front half and "back half components of the sample
train (Container 2) include:
1) A triplicate rinse with acetone and brushing of the nozzle, liner, filter bell
inlet, and optional cyclone?
2) A triplicate rinse with methylene chloride of the nozzle, liner, filter bell inlet,
and optional cyclone?
3) A triplicate rinse with acetone of the filter bell outlet, condenser coil, and
interconnecting glassware?
4) Three separate soakings of the interconnecting glassware and condenser coil
with methylene chloride (each soak period at least 5 minutes in duration)?
Were all of the "front and back half rinses identified above for Container 2
collected into an amber glass bottle with a Teflon®-lined lid?
Did a second recovery of the "front half and "back half components of the
sample train (Container 3) include:
1) A triplicate rinse with toluene of the nozzle, liner, filter bell inlet, and
optional cyclone?
2) A triplicate rinse with toluene of the filter bell outlet, condenser coil, and
interconnecting glassware?
Were all of the "front and back half rinses identified above (second recovery)
for Container 3 collected into an amber glass bottle with a Teflon®-lined lid?
Were the impingers weighed or measured for moisture content determination
before discarding the solution contents?
YES
NO
Comment
4-H-2
-------
METHOD 23 PCDD/PCDF SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name:
Test No. / Description:
Run Start Time:
Unit:
Run No.:
Run Stop Time:
Observer:
Date:
Observation / Requirement
At the conclusion of the sample train recovery, were the openings of the sample
train components sealed with Teflon® tape, hexane rinsed aluminum foil, or
noncontaminating caps?
Was the condensate in the impingers collected for this test program in
accordance with the sampling plan?
Were high-performance liquid chromatography grade acetone, methylene
chloride, and toluene used during the recovery?
Were reagent blanks of the stock rinsate solutions collected according to the
sampling plan? If so, indicate the sample I.D. names in the Comment column
Was a blank sample train prepared and recovered at the sample location? How
long did the blank train remain intact before recovery?
Were all samples properly labeled and stored on ice promptly after recovery?
Were the chain of custody and request for analysis forms completed by the
recovery personnel?
Were the appropriate signature(s) affixed to the chain of custody forms?
YES
NO
Comment
methylene chloride
acetone
toluene
4-H-3
-------
METHOD 23 PCDD/PCDF SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name: Unit: Observer:
Test No. /Description: Run No.: Date:
Run Start Time: Run Stop Time:
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS
4-H-4
-------
ATTACHMENT I
METHOD 0030 VOLATILE ORGANICS SAMPLING TRAIN CHECKLIST
(4 Sheets)
-------
METHOD 0030 VOLATILE ORGANICS SAMPLING TRAIN CHECKLIST
Facility Name:
Test No. / Description:
Run Start Time:
Unit:
Run No.:
Run Stop Time:
Observer:
Date:
Observation / Requirement
Did the train components appear to be clean and were all glassware openings
covered with Teflon® film or noncontaminating caps before the train was
assembled?
Was the train assembled by personnel in a manner that minimized
contamination potential?
Were the adsorbent tube cartridges stored on ice before use?
Was the train constructed of the components and materials identified in
Method 0030 (See Figure 0030: probe, valve, Tenax cartridge, condenser,
condensate impinger, condenser, Tenax/charcoal cartridge, silica gel
impinger, etc.)?
Were the dry gas meter, thermocouples, and rotameter devices calibrated
prior to the test? If yes, provide the calibration dates in the Comment
column. If available, attach a copy of the calibration records.
Were weather conditions adverse to sampling (rain, snow, etc.)? If so,
describe the measures taken to protect the sampling equipment in the
Comment column.
Was the sampling area (i.e., platform) kept clean and orderly during the run?
Were pre-test and post- test leak checks of the sample train conducted?
(Note: Pre-test leak check should be <2.5 mm Hg over 1 minute. Post-test
leak check should be <2.5 mm Hg over 1 minute at the highest sample train
vacuum encountered during the test period)
YES
NO
Comment
Dry gas meter
Thermocouples
Rotameter
4-1-1
-------
METHOD 0030 VOLATILE ORGANICS SAMPLING TRAIN CHECKLIST
Facility Name:
Test No. / Description:
Run Start Time:
Unit:
Run No.:
Run Stop Time:
Observer:
Date:
Observation / Requirement
Was the sample rate approximately 1 liter/minute?
Was ice maintained in the condensing bath throughout the sampling period?
Was the annulus between the probe and the sampling port sealed during
sampling?
Was the probe temperature maintained above 130°C throughout the test
run?
Was the gas sample temperature entering the Tenax cartridge maintained
below 20° C?
Were the sample train and console control adequately monitored by the
operator and did the operator properly log sampling data on field data sheets
during the test run?
Was the probe tip sealed with Teflon® film or noncontaminating caps after
being removed from the stack at the completion of the run?
Was the total sampling time at least 20 minutes?
Did protracted or frequent "holds" occur during the sampling run? If so,
describe the apparent cause and duration in the Comment column.
Inspect the field data sheets. Are they clear and completely filled out?
YES
NO
Comment
4-1-2
-------
METHOD 0030 VOLATILE ORGANICS SAMPLING TRAIN CHECKLIST
Facility Name: Unit: Observer:
Test No. /Description: Run No.: Date:
Run Start Time: Run Stop Time:
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS
4-1-2
-------
STACK GAS FLOW
TO ATMOSPHERE
14
15
1 GLASS WOOL
2 HEATED PROBE
3 STACK WALL
4 RECIRCULATING PUMP
5 COOLING WATER
6 CONDENSER
7 THERMOCOUPLE
8 TENAX TRAP
9 CONDENSATE IMPINGER
10 CONDENSER
11 TEN AX/CHARCOAL TRAP
12 SILICA GEL
13 ROTAMETER
14 VACUUM GAUGE
15 AIR-TIGHT PUMP
16 BY-PASS VALVE
17 DRY-GAS METER VALVE
Figure 0030. Volatile Organic Sampling Train (VOST)
4-1-4
-------
ATTACHMENT J
METHOD 0030 VOLATILE ORGANICS SAMPLING TRAIN
SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST
(2 Sheets)
-------
METHOD 0030 VOLATILE ORGANICS SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST
Facility Name:
Test No. / Description:
Run Start Time:
Unit:
Run No.:
Run Stop Time:
Observer:
Date:
Observation / Requirement
Was the sample train disassembled at the sample port location? If so, were the
openings of the test train components (adsorbent traps, condensate trap, etc.)
sealed before being relocated to the recovery area? Were the components
sealed with Teflon® tape or noncontaminating caps?
Was the condensate sample collected for each tube set?
Was the total condensate sample collected at the conclusion of the test run?
Were the openings of the adsorbent traps capped after removal from the sample
train and replaced into the original storage vials?
Was the condensate sample collected into an amber glass volatile organic
analysis (VOA) vial with a Teflon® septum screw cap?
Was organic-free water added to the condensate VOA vial to ensure no air
bubbles were present?
Were at least three tube sets collected during the test run?
Was a fourth tube set collected during the test run for archiving purposes?
Was a reagent blank of the organic-free water collected according to the
approved TBP? If so, indicate the sample identifiers in the Comment column.
Was a blank sample train prepared and recovered at the sample location? How
long did the blank train remain intact before recovery?
Were the condensate VOA vial and adsorbent tubes properly labeled and stored
on ice promptly after recovery?
YES
NO
Comment
4-J-l
-------
METHOD 0030 VOLATILE ORGANICS SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST
Facility Name:
Test No. / Description:
Run Start Time:
Unit:
Run No.:
Run Stop Time:
Observer:
Date:
Observation / Requirement
Was a trip blank pair of adsorbent tubes included with each sample shipment
to the laboratory?
Were the chain of custody and request for analysis forms completed by the
recovery personnel ?
Were the appropriate signature(s) affixed to the chain of custody forms?
YES
NO
Comment
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS
4-J-2
-------
ATTACHMENT K
METHOD 0040 TOTAL ORGANICS TEDLAR® BAG SAMPLING CHECKLIST
(5 Sheets)
-------
METHOD 0040 TOTAL ORGANICS TEDLAR® BAG SAMPLING CHECKLIST
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Did the train components appear to be clean and were all glassware openings
covered with Teflon® film or noncontaminating caps before the train was
assembled?
Was the train assembled by personnel in a manner that minimized
contamination potential?
Was the train constructed of the components and materials identified in
Method 0040 (See Figure 0040: probe, filter holder, three-way valves,
condenser assembly, knockout impinger, Tedlar® bag, rigid container, control
console, etc.)?
Were the dry gas meter, thermocouples, pilot, and critical orifice devices
calibrated prior to the test? If yes, provide the calibration dates in the
Comment column. If available, attach a copy of the calibration records.
Were weather conditions adverse to sampling (rain, snow, etc.)? If so,
describe the measures taken to protect the sampling equipment in the
Comment column.
Was the sampling area (for example, the platform) kept clean and orderly
during the run?
Were the traverse sample points determined in accordance with Method 1?
Was a cyclonic flow check made before the start of testing? If yes, record
the date and time the check was completed in the Comment column.
Were stack gas oxygen, carbon dioxide, and carbon monoxide concentration
measured by orsat, fyrite, or CEMS?
Was the Tedlar® bag purged three times with high purity nitrogen before
sampling?
YES
NO
Comment
Dry aas meter
Thermocouples
Pilot
Critical orifice
4-K-l
-------
METHOD 0040 TOTAL ORGANICS TEDLAR® BAG SAMPLING CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Were the three-way valve bodies constructed of Teflon® or glass? Were the
stopcock valves constructed of Teflon®?
Was the manometer leveled and zeroed before the start of sampling? Were
periodic checks made by the operator during the test run?
Was the probe marked or alternative provisions made to ensure nozzle
placements at the traverse point locations determined by Method 1?
Was the filter tared and inspected before being placed in the filter holder?
Was the filter made of quartz fiber?
Were pre-test and post- test leak checks of the sample train conducted?
(Note: Allowable leak rate is 0.1 inch Hgover 1 minute or 4% of the
sampling rate, whichever is less, at 15 inches Hg vacuum or lower if not
exceeded during the run.)
Was a pre-test leak check conducted on the pilot tube?
Was the probe tip positioned at the centroid of the gas stream for
proportional sampling criteria?
— OR—
Was the probe tip positioned at the average velocity point for constant rate
sampling criteria?
Were stack gas temperature and velocity head measurements recorded at
5 minute intervals throughout the test run?
Was ice maintained in the condensing bath throughout the sampling period?
Was the annulus between the probe and the sampling port sealed during
sampling?
YES
NO
Comment
4-K-2
-------
METHOD 0040 TOTAL ORGANICS TEDLAR® BAG SAMPLING CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Was the stack static pressure properly measured? At what traverse point
was this determined?
Was the sampling time uniform at each traverse sample point?
Was the total sampling time at least 60 minutes?
Were the sample train and console control adequately monitored by
operators and did the operators properly log sampling data on field data
sheets during the test run?
Were dry gas meter readings recorded at each traverse sample point?
Was the condenser temperature maintained between 39.2 and 68°F
throughout the run?
Was the probe, sampling lines, and filter box maintained between 266 and
284°F throughout the run?
If the stack temperature exceeded 284°F, was the stainless steel sheath on
the probe properly cooled?
Was the probe tip sealed with Teflon® film or noncontaminating caps after
being removed from the stack at the completion of the run?
Did protracted or frequent "holds" occur during the sampling run? If so,
describe the apparent cause and duration in the Comment column.
Inspect the field data sheets. Are they clear and completely filled out?
YES
NO
Comment
4-K-3
-------
METHOD 0040 TOTAL ORGANICS TEDLAR® BAG SAMPLING CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name: Run Number: Observer Signature:
Test No./Description: Run Start Time:
Unit: Run Stop Time: Date of Observation:
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS
4-K-4
-------
TO CONSOLE
1 PROBE
2 PITOT TUBE
3 STACK
4 THERMOCOUPLES
5 MANOMETER
6 3-WAY VALVES
7 HEATED FILTER HOLDER
8 CONDENSER
9 CONDENSATE TRAP
10 ICE WATER BATH
11 SPIKING INJECTION PORT
12 WATER PUMP
13TEDLAR6BAG
14 QUICK-CONNECT FITTINGS
15 SILICA GEL
16 ROTAMETER
17 RIGID, OPAQUE CONTAINER
Figure 0040. Total Organics Tedlar®Bag Sampling Train
17
4-K-5
-------
ATTACHMENT L
METHOD 0040 TOTAL ORGANICS TEDLAR®BAG SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST
(2 Sheets)
-------
METHOD 0040 TOTAL ORGANICS TEDLAR®BAG SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Was at least 15 liters of gas sample collected over the test period?
Was the Tedlar® bag at least 80% full at the conclusion of the test period?
Was the sample train disassembled at the sample port location? If so, were
the openings of the test train components (condenser, condensate trap, etc.)
sealed before being relocated to the recovery area? Were the components
sealed with Teflon® tape or noncontaminating caps?
If present, was condensate in the trap, condenser, and sample line recovered
into a measuring cylinder?
Did the sample train recovery include a triplicate rinse of the condensate
trap, condenser, and sample line with high-performance liquid
chromatography (HPLC) grade water?
Were the component rinses collected in the measuring cylinder with the
condensate? Was the total volume recorded?
Were the contents in the measuring cylinder transferred to an amber glass
volatile organic analysis (VOA) vial with a Teflon® septum screw cap?
Was HPLC grade water added to the VOA vial to ensure no air bubbles were
present?
Did the recovery personnel visually inspect the sample train components
after the rinses?
At the conclusion of the sample train recovery, were the openings of the
sample train components sealed with Teflon® tape or noncontaminating
caps?
Was a reagent blank of the HPLC grade water collected according to the
sampling plan? If so, indicate the sample identifiers in the Comment
column.
YES
NO
Comment
4-L-l
-------
METHOD 0040 TOTAL ORGANICS TEDLAR®BAG SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Was a blank sample train prepared and recovered at the sample location?
How long did the blank train remain intact before recovery?
Was the VOA vial properly labeled and stored on ice promptly after
recovery?
Were the chain of custody and request for analysis forms completed by the
recovery personnel ?
Were the appropriate signature(s) affixed to the chain of custody forms?
Were the Tedlar® bag and VOA vial samples transported to the laboratory
immediately after recovery?
Were the samples analyzed within 72 hours of collection by GC/FID?
YES
NO
Comment
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS
4-L-2
-------
METHOD 0040 TOTAL ORGANICS TEDLAR®BAG SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name: Run Number: Observer Signature:
Test No./Description: Run Start Time:
Unit: Run Stop Time: Date of Observation:
4-L-2
-------
ATTACHMENT M
METHOD 0050 PARTICULATE/HC1/C12 SAMPLING CHECKLIST
(5 Sheets)
-------
METHOD 0050 PARTICULATE/HC1/C1, SAMPLING CHECKLIST
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Did the train components appear to be clean and were all glassware openings
covered with Teflon® film or noncontaminating caps before the train was
assembled?
Was the train assembled by personnel in a manner that minimized
contamination potential?
Was the train constructed of the components and materials identified in
Method 0050 (See Figure 0050: nozzle, heated probe, filter holder, 5-6
impingers in ice bath, control console, etc.)!
Was the dry gas meter, thermocouples, nozzle, and critical orifice devices
calibrated prior to the test? If yes, provide the calibration date in the
Comment column. If available, attach a copy of the calibration records.
Were weather conditions adverse to sampling (rain, snow, etc.)? If so,
describe the measures taken to protect the sampling equipment in the
Comment column.
Was the sampling area (i.e., platform) kept clean and orderly during the run?
Were the traverse sample points determined in accordance with Method 1?
Was a cyclonic flow check made before the start of testing? If yes, record
the date and time the check was completed in the Comment column.
Was stack gas oxygen, carbon dioxide, and carbon monoxide concentration
measured by orsat, fyrite, or CEMS?
Was the manometer leveled and zeroed before the start of sampling? Were
periodic checks made by the operator during the test run?
Was the probe marked or alternative provisions made to ensure nozzle
placements at the traverse point locations determined by Method 1?
YES
NO
Comment
Dry aas meter
Thermocouples
Critical orifice
Nozzle
4-M-l
-------
METHOD 0050 PARTICULATE/HC1/C12 SAMPLING CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Was the filter tared and inspected before being placed in the filter holder?
Was the filter made of Teflon®, quartz, or glass fiber?
Was the filter labeled or marked so as to identify it in the trian or elsewhere
whould it be removed?
Was the filter supported with a Teflon® frit?
Was the nozzle made of glass?
Was stopcock grease used to seal ground glass ball joints?
Was a leak check of the sample train performed before and after each port
change?
(Note: Allowable leak rate is 0. 02 cfm or 4°/o of the average sampling rate,
whichever is less, at 15 inches Hg vacuum or lower if not exceeded during
the run. )
Was a pre-test leak check conducted on the pilot tube?
Was the nozzle tip positioned at the proper traverse sample point
throughout the test run?
Did operators make timely adjustments to sampling rates to maintain
isokinetic conditions throughout the run?
Was the annulus between the probe and the sampling port sealed during
sampling?
Was the sample gas temperature exiting the last impinger maintained at or
below 68°F throughout the test run?
YES
NO
Comment
Time Result
Traverse # 1 Before
Traverse # 1 After
Traverse # 2 Before
Traverse # 2 After
4-M-2
-------
METHOD 0050 PARTICULATE/HC1/C12 SAMPLING CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Was the stack static pressure properly measured? At what traverse point
was this determined?
Was the sampling time uniform at each traverse sample point?
Was the total sampling time at least 120 minutes?
Were the sample train and console adequately monitored by operators and
did the operators properly log sampling data on field data sheets during the
test run?
Were dry gas meter readings recorded at each traverse sample point?
Was the nozzle sealed with Teflon® film or noncontaminating caps after
being removed from the stack at the completion of the run?
Was particulate matter carefully wiped from the external surfaces of the
probe at the completion of the run?
Was the temperature of the filter box and sample probe maintained at 248 ±
25 °F throughout the test run?
Did protracted or frequent "holds" occur during the sampling run? If so,
describe the apparent cause and duration in the Comment column.
Inspect the field data sheets. Are they clear and completely filled out?
Was sampling conducted at a rate of < 0.75 meters /hour? Higher sampling
rates can cause a loss of scrubbing efficiency in the impingers.
YES
NO
Comment
4-M-3
-------
METHOD 0050 PARTICULATE/HC1/C12 SAMPLING CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name: Run Number: Observer Signature:
Test No./Description: Run Start Time:
Unit: Run Stop Time: Date of Observation:
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS
4-M-4
-------
STACK GAS FLOW
1 REVERSE - TYPE PITOT TUBE
2 PROBE
3 THERMOCOUPLE
4 STACK WALL
5 MANOMETER
6 THERMOCOUPLE
7 FILTER HOLDER
8 THERMOCOUPLE
9 CHECK VALVE
10 FLEXIBLE VACUUM LINE
11 VACUUM GAUGE
12 MAIN VALVE
13 BY-PASS VALVE
14 AIR-TIGHT PUMP
15 DRY GAS METER
16 THERMOCOUPLE
17 ORIFICE
18 MANOMETER
Figure 0050. Particulate, Hydrogen Chloride,
and Chlorine Sampling Train
15
14
4-M-5
-------
ATTACHMENT N
METHOD 0050 PARTICULATE/HC1/C12 SAMPLING RECOVERY CHECKLIST
(3 Sheets)
-------
METHOD 0050 PARTICULATE/HC1/C1, SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Was condensate present in the sample train "front half or did the filter
appear to be wet? If so, how long was the post test conditioning period
conducted on the sample train and at what AH rate? Was the ambient air
purified through ascarite, sodium hydroxide, activated carbon or some other
media?
Was the sample train disassembled at the sample port location? If so, were
the openings of the test train components (probe, filter bell, impinger train,
etc.) sealed before being relocated to the recovery area? Were the
components sealed with Teflon® tape or noncontaminating caps?
Was particulate matter visible on the filter? If so, describe the appearance
(color, particle size, etc.) in the Comment column.
Was there any evidence that particulate matter may have bypassed the
filter? If so, describe in the Comment column.
Was the filter recovered with tweezers and loose particulate inside the filter
bell collected into the original petri dish? Was the petri dish sealed with
Teflon® tape?
Was the filter recovered intact without loss of particulate?
Did the "front half sample train recovery include: an acetone rinse of the
nozzle; triplicate brushing and an acetone rinse of the liner; brushing and
acetone rinse of the filter bell inlet; and, an acetone rinse of the brush?
Were all of the "front half rinses collected in a labeled sample container?
Did the recovery personnel visually inspect the "front half sample train
components after the rinses?
Were the impingers weighed or measured for moisture content determination
before recovery of the solution contents?
YES
NO
Comment
4-N-l
-------
METHOD 0050 PARTICULATE/HC1/C12 SAMPLING CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Did the hydrogen chloride sample catch include: recovery of the optional
knockout condenser; sulfuric acid contents of the next two impingers; and, a
deionized water rinse of the filter bell outlet, impingers, and interconnecting
glassware?
Was the hydrogen chloride sample catch collected into a prelabeled amber
glass bottle with a Teflon® lined lid?
Were the sample containers the narrow neck Boston Round type rather than
the wide mouth Packer Bottle type? Boston Rounds are for liquid samples,
the packer bottles are for solids.
Did the chlorine sample catch include: sodium hydroxide contents of the
next two impingers; and, a deionized water rinse of the impingers and
interconnecting glassware?
Was the chlorine sample catch collected into a prelabeled amber glass bottle
with a Teflon® lined lid?
Was the pH of the O.lNNaOH impinger catch checked after the test?
Was the pH of the 0. IN NaOH impinger catch > 8.0? A neutral or acidic
pH will not capture C12.
At the conclusion of the sample train recovery, were the openings of the
sample train components sealed with Teflon® tape or noncontaminating
caps?
Were reagent blanks of the stock rinseate solutions collected according to the
sampling plan? If so, indicate the sample I.D. names in the Comment
column.
YES
NO
Comment
Acetone
Deionized Water
Sulfuric Acid
Sodium Hydroxide
4-N-2
-------
METHOD 0050 PARTICULATE/HC1/C12 SAMPLING CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Was a blank sample train prepared and recovered at the sample location?
How long did the blank train remain intact before recovery?
Were all samples properly labeled and stored on ice promptly after
recovery?
Were the chain of custody and request for analysis forms completed by the
recovery personnel ?
Was a tracking and labeling system used which was clearly understood by
the observer and would this system be clearly understood by the receiving
laboratory?
Were the appropriate signature(s) affixed to the chain of custody forms?
YES
NO
Comment
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS
4-N-3
-------
ATTACHMENT O
METHOD 0060 MULTIPLE METALS SAMPLING CHECKLIST
(4 Sheets)
-------
METHOD 0060 MULTIPLE METALS SAMPLING CHECKLIST
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Were all of the train's glassware components cleaned before testing by
rinsing with hot tap water, and then washed in hot soapy water, rinsed with
tap and deionized water? Was this washing followed by soaking in
10 percent HNO3 for 4 hours, rinsing with deionized water, and final rinsing
with acetone?
Did the train components appear to be clean and were all glassware openings
covered with Teflon® film before the train was assembled?
Was the acidic potassium permanganate absorbing solution made fresh on
the test day and stored in an amber glass container with a Teflon® lined cap?
Was the train assembled by personnel in a manner that minimized
contamination potential?
Was the train constructed of the components and materials identified in
Method 0060 (See Figure 0012: nozzle, heated probe, filter holder,
4-7 impingers in ice bath, control console, etc.)?
Was the nozzle and probe liner constructed of glass or quartz?
Was the dry gas meter, thermocouples, nozzle, and critical orifice devices
calibrated prior to the test? If yes, provide the calibration date in the
Comment column. If available, attach a copy of the calibration records.
Were weather conditions adverse to sampling (rain, snow, etc.)? If so,
describe the measures taken to protect the sampling equipment in the
Comment column.
Was the sampling area (for example, the platform) kept clean and orderly
during the run?
Were the traverse sample points determined in accordance with Method 1?
YES
NO
Comment
Dry gas meter
Thermocouples
Critical orifice
Nozzle
4-O-1
-------
METHOD 0060 MULTIPLE METALS SAMPLING CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Was a cyclonic flow check made before the start of testing? If yes, record
the date and time the check was completed in the Comment column.
Was stack gas oxygen, carbon dioxide, and carbon monoxide concentration
measured by orsat, fyrite, or CEMS?
Was the manometer leveled and zeroed before the start of sampling? Were
periodic checks made by the operator during the test run?
Was the probe marked or alternative provisions made to ensure nozzle
placements at the traverse point locations determined by Method 1?
Was the filter tared and inspected before being placed in the filter holder?
Was the filter made of quartz or glass fiber?
Was the filter supported by a Teflon® frit?
Was a leak check of the sample train performed before and after each port
change?
(Note: Allowable leak rate is 0. 02 cfm or 4°/o of the average sampling rate,
whichever is less, at 15 inches Hg vacuum or lower if not exceeded during
the run. )
Was a pre-test leak check conducted on the pilot tube?
Was the nozzle tip positioned at the proper traverse sample point
throughout the test run?
Did operators make timely adjustments to sampling rates to maintain
isokinetic conditions throughout the run?
Was the annulus between the probe and the sampling port sealed during
sampling?
YES
NO
Comment
Time Result
Traverse # 1 Before
Traverse # 1 After
Traverse # 2 Before
Traverse # 2 After
4-O-2
-------
METHOD 0060 MULTIPLE METALS SAMPLING CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Was the sample gas temperature exiting the last impinger maintained at or
below 68°F throughout the test run?
Was the stack static pressure properly measured? At what traverse point
was this determined?
Was the sampling time uniform at each traverse sample point?
Was the total sampling time at least 120 minutes?
Was the sampling rate kept at or below 0.75 m3 per hour (<0.75 m3/hour)?
Were the sample train and console adequately monitored by operators and
did the operators properly log sampling data on field data sheets during the
test run?
Were dry gas meter readings recorded at each traverse sample point?
Was the nozzle sealed with Teflon® film after being removed from the stack
at the completion of the run?
Was particulate matter carefully wiped from the external surfaces of the
probe at the completion of the run?
Was the temperature of the filter box and sample probe maintained at 248 ±
25 °F throughout the test run?
Did protracted or frequent "holds" occur during the sampling run? If so,
describe the apparent cause and duration in the Comment column.
Inspect the field data sheets. Are they clear and completely filled out?
YES
NO
Comment
4-O-3
-------
METHOD 0060 MULTIPLE METALS SAMPLING CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name: Run Number: Observer Signature:
Test No./Description: Run Start Time:
Unit: Run Stop Time: Date of Observation:
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS
4-O-4
-------
STACK GAS FLOW
ICE BATH
4%KMnO4/10%H2SQ,
1 REVERSE - TYPE PITOT TUBE
1 GLASS PROBE
3 THERMOCOUPLE
4 STACK WALL
5 MANOMETER
6 THERMOCOUPLE
7 FILTER HOLDER
8 THERMOCOUPLE
9 CHECK VALVE
10 FLEXIBLE VACUUM LINE
11 VACUUM GAUGE
12 MAIN VALVE
13 BY-PASS VALVE
14 AIR-TIGHT PUMP
15 DRY GAS METER
16 THERMOCOUPLE
17 ORIFICE
18 MANOMETER
Figure 0060. Multiple Metals Sampling Train
15
14
4-0-5
-------
ATTACHMENT P
METHOD 0060 MULTIPLE METALS SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST
(5 Sheets)
-------
METHOD 0060 MULTIPLE METALS SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Was the sample train disassembled at the sample port location? If so,
were the openings of the test train components (probe, filter bell,
impinger train, etc.) sealed before being relocated to the recovery area?
Were the components sealed with Teflon® tape or noncontaminating
caps?
Was particulate matter visible on the filter? If so, describe the
appearance (color, particle size, etc.) in the Comment column.
Was there any evidence that particulate matter may have bypassed the
filter? If so, describe in the Comment column.
Was the filter recovered with tweezers and loose particulate inside the
filter bell collected into the original petri dish? Was the petri dish
sealed with Teflon® tape?
Was the filter recovered intact without loss of particulate?
NOTE: The acetone rinses are to be eliminated from the sample
recovery procedure if stack gas particulate is not being collected on the
Method 0060 Sampling Train.
Was a "front half recovery of the sample train conducted for
particulate matter in the following manner: acetone rinse of the nozzle;
brushing and acetone rinse of the liner; brushing and acetone rinse of
the filter bell inlet; and, an acetone rinse of the brush?
Were glass containers the narrow neck or Boston Round design instead
of wide mouth packer bottle design?
Were EPA Level III cleaned and certified bottles used for collecting
these "trace level" samples? Were bottle certifications available for
inspection?
YES
NO
Comment
4-P-l
-------
METHOD 0060 MULTIPLE METALS SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Was a Teflon® or nonmetallic brush used for cleaning the inside
surfaces of the sample train "front half components?
Were all of the particulate matter "front half acetone rinses collected
in a labeled sample container?
Was a "front half recovery of the sample train conducted for metals in
the following manner: rinse of nozzle, liner, and filter bell inlet with
100 mL of 0.1 N nitric acid?
Were all of the metals "front half rinses collected into the same
prelabeled container?
Was a final nonsample rinse of the "front half sample train
components conducted with deionized water and acetone? Were the
openings sealed with Teflon® tape or noncontaminating caps?
Were the impingers weighed or measured for moisture content
determination before recovery of the solution contents?
Were the liquid contents of impingers 1, 2, and 3 collected in a
prelabeled sample bottle?
Was the filter holder outlet inspected for condensate and, if condensate
was present, was it added to the impinger sample?
Was the filter holder outlet, the back half of the filter support,
impingers 1-3, and all connecting glassware rinsed with 100 mL of
0.1N nitric acid and added to the impinger sample?
Was the liquid contents in impinger 4 collected in a separate amber
glass sample bottle with a Teflon®-lined lid?
Was impinger 4 rinsed with 100 mL of 0.1N nitric acid and added to
the impinger 4 sample?
YES
NO
Comment
4-P-2
-------
METHOD 0060 MULTIPLE METALS SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Did the 4 percent KmnO4/10 percent H2SO4 impingers maintain their
deep purple color through the sampling and sample recovery process?
Were the liquid contents of impingers 5 and 6 collected in a separate
amber glass bottle with a Teflon®-lined lid?
Were impingers 5 and 6 and connecting glassware triple rinsed with
100 mL of the acidified potassium permanganate solution and the
rinsate added to the impinger 5 and 6 sample?
Were impingers 5 and 6 and connecting glassware triple rinsed with
100 mL of deionized water and the rinsate added to the impinger 5 and
6 sample?
Did the recovery personnel visually inspect impingers 5 and 6 for
residue deposits or discoloration following the deionized water rinse?
If residue deposits or discoloration remained in impingers 5 and 6,
were they rinsed with 25 mL of 8N hydrogen chloride and collected
into a separate amber glass bottle with a Teflon®-lined cap containing
200 mL deionized water?
Was the silica gel impinger weighed to the nearest 0.5g?
At the conclusion of the sample train recovery, were the openings of
the sample train components sealed with Teflon® tape or
noncontaminating caps?
YES
NO
Comment
4-P-3
-------
METHOD 0060 MULTIPLE METALS SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Were reagent blanks of the stock solutions collected according to the
sampling plan? If so, indicate the sample identifiers in the Comment
column.
Was a blank sample train prepared and recovered at the sample
location? How long did the blank train remain intact before recovery?
Was the blank train placed on the stack or at the base of the stack for a
period of time equivalent to one run, leak checked before and after the
test, and heated to temperature for the duration of one test run?
Were all samples properly labeled and stored on ice promptly after
recovery?
Were the chain of custody and request for analysis forms completed
by the recovery personnel ?
Was a tracking and labeling system used which was clearly understood
by the observer and would this system be clearly understood by the
receiving laboratory?
Were the appropriate signature(s) affixed to the chain of custody
forms?
YES
NO
Comment
Acetone
Deionized water
0.1NHNO,
5%HNO,/10%H2O2
4%KMnO4/ 1 0%H2SO4
8NHC1
Particulate Filters (3)
4-P-4
-------
METHOD 0060 MULTIPLE METALS SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name: Run Number: Observer Signature:
Test No./Description: Run Start Time:
Unit: Run Stop Time: Date of Observation:
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS
4-P-5
-------
ATTACHMENT Q
METHOD 0061 HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM SAMPLING CHECKLIST
(3 Sheets)
-------
METHOD 0061 HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM SAMPLING CHECKLIST
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Did the train components appear to be clean and were all glassware openings
covered with Teflon film before the train was assembled?
Was the train assembled by personnel in a manner that minimized
contamination potential?
Was the train constructed of the components and materials identified in
Method 0061 (See Figure 0061: recirculating glass or Teflon probe, Teflon
sample line, 5 chilled Teflon impingers, etc. )?
Note: The method prescribes a 0. IN KOH impinger solution for trapping
Cr+6. Experience has demonstrated that 0.1N is not sufficiently
concentrated to maintain a pH > 8.5 in the first impinger. The run will be
ruled invalid if the pH in the 1st impinger drops below 8.5, therefore, it is
recommended that at least a l.ON KOH solution be used in the entire train.
Was the dry gas meter calibrated prior to the test? If yes, provide the
calibration date in the Comment column. If available, attach a copy of the
calibration record.
Were weather conditions adverse to sampling (rain, snow, etc.)? If so,
describe the measures taken to protect the sampling equipment in the
Comment column.
Was the sampling area (for example, the platform) kept clean and orderly
during the run?
Were sampling locations determined in accordance with Method 1?
Was a cyclonic flow check made before the start of testing? If yes, record
the date and time the check was completed in the Comment column.
Were stack gas oxygen, carbon dioxide, and dry molecular weight determined
using an Orsat analyzer?
Was the manometer leveled and zeroed before the start of sampling?
Y
N
Comment
4-Q-l
-------
METHOD 0061 HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM SAMPLING CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Was the probe marked or alternative provisions made to ensure nozzle
placements at the points identified by Method 1?
Was a pre-test leak check performed?
Was a leak check performed before and after each port change? Note:
Allowable leak rate is 0.02 cfm or 4% of the average sampling rate,
whichever is less, at 15 inches Hg vacuum or lower if not exceeded during
the run.
Was the probe consistently repositioned at the proper time and to the
proper sampling point throughout the run?
Did operators make timely adjustments to sampling rates to maintain
isokinetic conditions throughout the run?
Was the annulus between the probe and the sampling port sealed during
sampling?
Was the absorbing liquid from the first impinger continuously recirculated
through the sample line during the run?
Was the probe maintained at a temperature below 200 °F throughout
sampling to prevent the boiling of the recirculating liquid?
Was the stack static pressure properly measured?
Were pilot tubes leak checked?
Was the sampling time at each point uniform?
Was the sampling time at least 120 minutes?
Y
N
Comment
Time Result
Traverse # 1 Before
Traverse # 1 After
Traverse # 2 Before
Traverse # 2 After
4-Q-2
-------
METHOD 0061 HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM SAMPLING CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Were the sampling train and console adequately monitored by operators and
did the operators properly log sampling data on field data sheets during
sampling?
Was the nozzle covered with aluminum foil after being removed from the
stack at the completion of the run?
Was particulate matter carefully wiped from the external surfaces of the
probe at the completion of the run?
Was the probe capped at both ends before being removed to the recovery
area?
Did protracted or frequent "holds" occur during the sampling run?
If so, describe the apparent cause and duration in the Comment column.
Inspect the field data sheets. Are they clear and complete and were they
reviewed by a senior member of the sampling team following the run?
Y
N
Comment
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS
4-Q-3
-------
STACK GAS FLOW
15
1 PROBE
2 STACK WALL
3 RECIRCULATING LIQUID IN TEFLON® LINE
4 THERMOCOUPLE
5 CHECK VALVE
6 FLEXIBLE VACUUM LINE
7 VACUUM GAUGE
8 MAIN VALVE
9 BY-PASS VALVE
10 AIR-TIGHT PUMP
11 DRY GAS METER
12 THERMOCOUPLE
13 ORIFICE
14 MANOMETER
15 TEFLON6IMPINGERS
16 GLASS IMPINGER
Figure 0061. Hexavalent Chromium Sampling Train
RECIRCULATES
0.1NKOHFROM /
FIRST IMPINGER
TO ATMOSPHERE
10
4-Q-4
-------
ATTACHMENT R
METHOD 0061 HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST
(3 Sheets)
-------
METHOD 0061 HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Was the train disassembled in a clean area in a manner that minimized the
potential for sample loss and/or contamination?
Was the pH of impinger 1 checked and determined to be greater than 8.5?
Did the pH of the first impinger drop below 8.5 during the run?
Was nitrogen bubbled through the impinger train at approximately 10 liters
per minute for 30 minutes?
Were the liquid contents of impingers 1, 2, 3, and 4 measured or weighed,
and recorded on the recovery data sheets?
Were the liquid contents of impingers 1,2,3, and 4 placed in a polyethylene
sample container?
Were the nozzle, probe, recirculating sample line, and first four impingers
rinsed four times with distilled deionized water and were the rinses added to
the impinger sample?
Note: The 0. IN HNO3 back half rinse can be eliminated whenever Total
Chomium is not being determined on this sampling train.
Were the "back half of the filter holder, the filter support, and all
connecting glassware rinsed with 100 mL of 0.1N nitric acid and were the
rinses added to a separate polyethylene container?
Were the contents of the 0.1N KOH impinger composite filtered through a
0.45u acetate filter to remove insoluble matter?
Was the sample container rinsed 3 times with distilled deionized water and
was the rinse solution filtered with the sample?
Were the filter and reservoir rinsed 3 times and were these rinses added to
the sample being filtered?
Y
N
Comment
4-R-l
-------
METHOD 0061 HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Was the silica gel impinger weighed to the nearest 0.5g?
Were reagent blanks of 0.1N KOH impinger solution and deionized water
collected according to the sampling plan?
Were arrangements made with a laboratory that set up analysis of these
samples within the 24 hour holding time required in SW-846 Method 7199?
If the 24 hour holding time is not being used, is field spiking of the final
sample being conducted immediately after filtering is complete?
If field spiking is being conducted, were three portions of the original sample
set up so that one portion could be submitted to the analytical laboratory
unspiked, and the other portions spiked at 10 ppb and 25 ppb (or other
appropriate spike level)? All spiked samples are to be analyzed by the
laboratory.
Were all samples properly labeled and stored on ice promptly after
recovery?
Were the chain of custody and request for analyses forms completed by
recovery personnel ?
Were the appropriate signature(s) affixed to the chain of custody forms?
Y
N
Comment
4-R-2
-------
METHOD 0061 HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name: Run Number: Observer Signature:
Test No./Description: Run Start Time:
Unit: Run Stop Time: Date of Observation:
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS
4-R-2
-------
ATTACHMENT S
METHOD 0031 VOLATILE ORGANICS SAMPLING TRAIN CHECKLIST
(3 Sheets)
-------
METHOD 0031 VOLATILE ORGANICS SAMPLING TRAIN CHECKLIST
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Note: The VOST is being used to characterize the stack gas for Products of
Incomplete Combustion (PICs). Some PICs have very low boiling points
which requires that the sampling rate be < 0.5 liters/minute and that the gas
sample entering the first Tenax resin tube be < 10°C. Otherwise losses of
analyte will occur. This is a three tube configuration.
Are all adsorbent tubes prepared for use on this trial burn prepared from
new resin material, and specifically not been used at other sites?
Did the train components appear to be clean and were all glassware openings
covered with Teflon® film or noncontaminating caps before the train was
assembled?
Was the train assembled by personnel in a manner that minimized
contamination potential?
Were all adsorbance tubes prepared within 2 weeks of the test?
Were the adsorbent tube cartridges stored on ice before use?
Are all adsorbent tubes prepared for use on this trial burn prepared from
new resin material, and specifically not been used at other sites?
Was the train constructed of the components and materials identified in
Method 0031 (See Figure 0031: probe, valve, Tenax cartridges, condenser,
condensate impinger, condenser, Anasorb® cartridge, silica gel impinger,
etc.)?
Were the dry gas meter, thermocouples, and rotameter devices calibrated
prior to the test? If yes, provide the calibration dates in the Comment
column. If available, attach a copy of the calibration records.
Were weather conditions adverse to sampling (rain, snow, etc.)? If so,
describe the measures taken to protect the sampling equipment in the
Comment column.
YES
NO
Comment
Dry aas meter
Thermocouples
Rotameter
4-S-l
-------
METHOD 0031 VOLATILE ORGANICS SAMPLING TRAIN CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Was the sampling area (i.e., platform) kept clean and orderly during the run?
Were pre-test and post- test leak checks of the sample train conducted?
(Note: Pre-test leak check should be <2.5 mm Hg over 1 minute. Post-test
leak check should be <2.5 mm Hg over 1 minute at the highest sample train
vacuum encountered during the test period)
Was the sample rate approximately 0.5 liter/minute?
Was ice maintained in the condensing bath throughout the sampling period?
Was the gas temperature entering the first Tenax resin tube maintained at
<10°C during sampling?
Was the annulus between the probe and the sampling port sealed during
sampling?
Was the probe temperature maintained above 130°C throughout the test
run?
Were the sample train and console control adequately monitored by the
operator and did the operator properly log sampling data on field data sheets
during the test run?
Was the probe tip sealed with Teflon® film or noncontaminating caps after
being removed from the stack at the completion of the run?
Was the total sampling time at least 40 minutes per VOST tube set?
Did protracted or frequent "holds" occur during the sampling run? If so,
describe the apparent cause and duration in the Comment column.
Inspect the field data sheets. Are they clear and completely filled out?
YES
NO
Comment
4-S-2
-------
METHOD 0031 VOLATILE ORGANICS SAMPLING TRAIN CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name: Run Number: Observer Signature:
Test No./Description: Run Start Time:
Unit: Run Stop Time: Date of Observation:
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS
4-S-3
-------
STACK GAS FLOW
3
TO ATMOSPHERE
1 2
9
14
15
17
1 GLASS WOOL
2 HEATED PROBE
3 STACK WALL
4 RECIRCULATING PUMP
5 COOLING WATER
6 CONDENSER
7 THERMOCOUPLE
8 TENAX TRAP
9 CONDENSATE IMPINGER
10 CONDENSER
11 ANASORBQTRAP
12 SILICA GEL
13 ROTAMETER
14 VACUUM GAUGE
15 AIR-TIGHT PUMP
16 BY-PASS VALVE
17 DRY-GAS METER VALVE
Figure 0031. Volatile Organics Sampling Train (VOST)
-------
ATTACHMENT T
METHOD 0031 VOLATILE ORGANICS RECOVERY CHECKLIST
(2 Sheets)
-------
METHOD 0031 VOLATILE ORGANICS SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Was the total condensate sample collected at the conclusion of the test run?
Was the volume of the condensate measured and recorded at the end of the
run?
Were the openings of the adsorbent traps capped after removal from the
sample train and replaced into the original storage vials?
Was the condensate sample collected into an amber glass volatile organic
analysis (VOA) vial with a Teflon® septum screw cap?
If the volume of the condensate was less than 40 mLs, was organic-free
water added to the condensate VOA vial to ensure no air bubbles were
present? If the volume of the condensate is > 40 mLs, only one VOA
should be filled with no air bubbles, and the remainder discarded.
Were at least three tube sets collected during the test run?
Was a fourth tube set collected during the test run for archiving purposes?
Was a reagent blank of the organic-free water collected according to the
approved TBP? If so, indicate the sample identifiers in the Comment
column.
Were the condensate VOA vial and adsorbent tubes properly labeled and
stored on ice promptly after recovery?
Was a trip blank set of adsorbent tubes included with each sample shipment
to the laboratory?
Was a deionized water trip blank included with each shipment of condensate
samples to the laboratory?
Was a set of adsorbance tubes collected as field blanks during each trial burn
run?
YES
NO
Comment
4-T-l
-------
METHOD 0031 VOLATILE ORGANICS SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Were two sets of spiked resin blanks prepared and analyzed before the trial
burn commenced?
Were the chain of custody and request for analysis forms completed by the
recovery personnel ?
Does the tracking and labeling system clearly indicate that for each set of
VOST tubes, the two Tenax tubes are to be analyzed together and the
Anasorb® tube analyzed separately?
Were the appropriate signature(s) affixed to the chain of custody forms?
YES
NO
Comment
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS
4-T-2
-------
ATTACHMENT U
METHOD 0023 PCDD/PCDF SAMPLING CHECKLIST
(4 Sheets)
-------
METHOD 0023A DIOXIN AND FURAN SAMPLING CHECKLIST
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Did the train components appear to be clean and were all glassware openings
covered with Teflon® film, aluminum foil, or noncontaminating caps before
the train was assembled?
Was the train assembled by personnel in a manner that minimized
contamination potential?
Was the train constructed of the components and materials identified in
Method 0023A (See Figure 0023A: nozzle, heated probe, particulate filter,
one condenser and recirculating cooling water system, one XAD-2 resin trap,
four impingers, control console, etc.)?
Were the dry gas meter, thermocouples, nozzle, and critical orifice devices
calibrated prior to the test? If yes, provide the calibration dates in the
Comment column. If available, attach a copy of the calibration records.
Were weather conditions adverse to sampling (rain, snow, etc.)? If so,
describe the measures taken to protect the sampling equipment in the
Comment column.
Was the sampling area (i.e., platform) kept clean and orderly during the run?
Were the traverse sample points determined in accordance with Method 1?
Was a cyclonic flow check made before the start of testing? If yes, record
the date and time the check was completed in the Comment column.
Were stack gas oxygen, carbon dioxide, and carbon monoxide concentrations
measured by orsat, fyrite, or CEMS?
Was the manometer leveled and zeroed before the start of sampling? Were
periodic checks made by the operator during the test run?
YES
NO
Comment
Dry gas meter
Thermocouples
Critical orifice
Nozzle
4-U-l
-------
METHOD 0023A DIOXIN AND FURAN SAMPLING CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:_
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:.
Run Stop Time:_
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Was the probe marked or alternative provisions made to ensure nozzle
placements at the traverse point locations determined by Method 1?
Was the filter inspected before being placed in the filter holder? Was the
filter made of quartz or glass fiber?
Was the filter supported by a glass or Teflon® frit?
Was a leak check of the sample train performed before and after each port
change?
(Note: Allowable leak rate is 0. 02 cfm or 4% of the average sampling rate,
•whichever is less, at 15 inches Hg vacuum or lower if 15 inches is not
exceeded during the run.)
Were pretest and post test leak checks conducted on the pilot tube?
Was silicone grease used on any glassware connections?
Was the nozzle tip positioned at the proper traverse sample point
throughout the test run?
Did operators make timely adjustments to sampling rates to maintain
isokinetic conditions throughout the run?
Was the annulus between the probe and the sampling port sealed during
sampling?
Was the sample gas temperature entering the resin trap maintained and
demonstrated to be at or below 68 °F throughout the test run?
Was the sample gas temperature exiting the last impinger maintained at or
below 68°F throughout the test run?
YES
NO
Comment
Time Result
Traverse # 1 Before
Traverse # 1 After
Traverse # 2 Before
Traverse # 2 After
4-U-2
-------
METHOD 0023A DIOXIN AND FURAN SAMPLING CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:_
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:.
Run Stop Time:_
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Was the stack static pressure properly measured? At what traverse point
was this determined?
Was the sampling time uniform at each traverse sample point?
Was the total sampling time at least 120 minutes?
Were at least 3 dry standard cubic meters of gas sample collected during the
run?
Were the sample train and console adequately monitored by operators and
did the operators properly log sampling data on field data sheets during the
test run?
Were dry gas meter readings recorded at each traverse sample point?
Was the nozzle sealed with Teflon® film, aluminum foil, or a
noncontaminating cap after being removed from the stack at the completion
of the run and during leak checks?
Was particulate matter carefully wiped from the external surfaces of the
probe at the completion of the run?
Was the temperature of the filter box and sample probe maintained at 248 ±
25 °F throughout the test run?
Did protracted or frequent "holds" occur during the sampling run? If so,
describe the apparent cause and duration in the Comment column.
Inspect the field data sheets. Are they clear and completely filled out?
Were XAD-2 Resin Tubes packed, and spiked by the analytical laboratory
with the 5 sampling surrogates for dioxins and furans?
Were Field Blanks collected during each run?
YES
NO
Comment
4-U-3
-------
METHOD 0023A DIOXIN AND FURAN SAMPLING CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:_
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:.
Run Stop Time:_
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Was the Blank Train set up identically to the actual sampling trains and
placed on the stack or at the base of the stack for the duration of one
complete sampling run? Was the Blank Train leak checked and heated to
temperature throughout the run?
Were Train Blanks handled the same way as the actual sampling train?
Were Reagent Blanks collected once during the three runs?
Were Trip Blanks collected once for each sample shipment?
Were Spiked Resin Blanks prepared and analyzed before the trial burn?
YES
NO
Comment
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS
4-U-4
-------
METHOD 0023A DIOXIN AND FURAN SAMPLING CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name: Run Number: Observer Signature:
Test No./Description: Run Start Time:
Unit: Run Stop Time: Date of Observation:
4-U-5
-------
1 REVERSE - TYPE PITOT TUBE
2 PROBE
3 THERMOCOUPLE
4 STACK WALL
5 MANOMETER
6 THERMOCOUPLE
7 FILTER HOLDER
8 THERMOCOUPLE
9 CHECK VALVE
10 FLEXIBLE VACUUM LINE
11 VACUUM GAUGE
12 MAIN VALVE
13 BY-PASS VALVE
14 AIR-TIGHT PUMP
15 DRY GAS METER
16 THERMOCOUPLE
17 ORIFICE
18 MANOMETER
19 RECIRCULATION PUMP
20 COOLING WATER
21 CONDENSER
22 XAD-2 ADSORBENT TRAP
23 THERMOCOUPLE
Figure 0023A. PCDD/PCDF Sampling Tram
20
^.
:
<.
S.
AJl/
.^
a
^.<
n>
a
iMPTY A y
x»
I
/
^
kA,
>
A~
*
:MPTY
HPLC WATER —" ICE BATH
16 16
TO ATMOSPHERE
18
4-U-5
-------
ATTACHMENT V
METHOD 0023A PCDD/PCDF SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST
(4 Sheets)
-------
METHOD 0023A DIOXIN AND FURAN SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Was the sample train disassembled at the sample port location? If so, were
the openings of the test train components (probe, filter bell, resin trap,
impinger train, etc.) sealed before being relocated to the recovery area? Were
the components sealed with Teflon® tape or noncontaminating caps?
Was particulate matter visible on the filter? If so, describe the appearance
(color, particle size, etc.) in the Comment column.
Was there any evidence that particulate matter may have bypassed the
filter? If so, describe in the Comment column.
Was the filter recovered with tweezers and loose particulate inside the filter
bell collected into the original petri dish? Was the petri dish sealed with
Teflon® tape?
Was the filter recovered intact without loss of particulate?
Did the "front half sample train recovery include: an acetone rinse followed
by methylene chloride solvent rinses in triplicate while brushing of the
nozzle, liner, front half of the filter bell inlet, optional cyclone, and a final
rinse of the brush?
Was a final rinse of the "front half sample train components conducted
using toluene?
Were all of the "front half rinses collected in labeled amber glass bottles
with Teflon®-lined lids?
Did the recovery personnel visually inspect the "front half sample train
components after the final rinses?
YES
NO
Comment
4-V-l
-------
METHOD 0023A DIOXIN AND FURAN SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Were EPA Level III cleaned and certified bottles used for collecting these
"ultra trace level" samples? Were bottle certifications available for
inspection? Alternately, the bottles and petri dishes can be cleaned by the
prescribed glassware cleaning procedure in Method 0023A (Sections 4.2.4,
4.2.8, and 6. 1.4).
Were petri dishes made of glass?
Note: Plastic is a source of phthalates and should not be used.
Were glass containers the narrow neck or Boston Round design instead of the
wide mouth Packer Bottle design?
Were the openings of the resin trap sealed with tight fitting
noncontaminating plugs or caps? Was the resin trap wrapped with
aluminum foil and properly labeled?
Was the moisture gain of each impinger recorded before recovery of the
contents was commenced?
Did the "back half sample train recovery include triplicate acetone followed
by methylene chloride rinses of the back half of the filter bell outlet, filter
support, coil condenser, and interconnecting glassware?
Was a final rinse of the back half components of the sample train conducted
using toluene?
Were the contents of the back half sample collected into an amber glass
bottle with a Teflon®-lined lid?
At the conclusion of the sample train recovery, were the openings of the
sample train components sealed with Teflon® tape or noncontaminating
caps?
YES
NO
Comment
4-V-2
-------
METHOD 0023A DIOXIN AND FURAN SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Were reagent blanks of the stock solutions collected? If so, indicate the
sample identifiers in the Comment column.
Was a blank sample train prepared and recovered at the sample location?
How long did the blank train remain intact before recovery?
Was the blank train placed on the stack or at the base of the stack for a
period of time equivalent to one run, leak checked before and after the test,
and heated to temperature for the duration of one test run?
Were all samples properly labeled and stored on ice promptly after
recovery?
Were the chain of custody and request for analysis forms completed by the
recovery personnel?
Were the appropriate signature(s) affixed to the chain of custody forms?
Were field blanks of the XAD-2 resin tubes collected during each run?
Was a trip blank collected for each shipment of MM- 5 train samples to the
laboratory?
Was a tracking system and labeling of samples conducted in such a way as to
assist the laboratory in processing as separate samples the following train
components:
(1) The participate filter, and the front half of the filter holder, nozzle and
probe acetone, methylene chloride, and toluene solvent rinses (toluene rinse
separate)
(2) The XAD-2 resin tube and the back half of the filter holder, coil
condenser, and connecting glassware acetone, methylene chloride and toluene
solvent rinses (toluene rinse separate)
YES
NO
Comment
Acetone
Methvlene chloride
Toluene
Particulate filter
4-V-3
-------
METHOD 0023A DIOXIN AND FURAN SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Was a tracking and labeling system used which was clearly understood by
the observer and would this system be clear to the receiving laboratory?
Was the recovery facility kept clean at all times?
YES
NO
Comment
4-V-4
-------
METHOD 0023A DIOXIN AND FURAN SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name: Run Number: Observer Signature:
Test No./Description: Run Start Time:
Unit: Run Stop Time: Date of Observation:
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS
4-V-5
-------
ATTACHMENT W
METHOD 0011 FORMALDEHYDE (ALDEHYDE & KETONE) SAMPLING CHECKLIST
(5 Sheets)
-------
METHOD 0011 FORMALDEHYDE (ALDEHYDE & KETONE) SAMPLING CHECKLIST
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Note: Acetone is a severe background contaminate for this train. Since
acetone is required for use on any of the Method 0010 trains (semivolatiles,
PCDD/PCDFs, PAHs, PCB, unspeciated mass) the Method 001 1
equipment should be handled in a completely separate area.
Did the train components appear to be clean and were all glassware openings
covered with Teflon® film, aluminum foil, or noncontaminating caps before
the train was assembled?
Was the train assembled by personnel in a manner that minimized
contamination potential?
Were the first two impingers charged with 100 mLs each of the acidified
DNPH solution?
Was the third impinger left empty during testing?
Was the train constructed of the components and materials identified in
Method 00 11 (See Figure 0011: nozzle, heated probe, four impingers,
control console, etc.)?
Were the dry gas meter, thermocouples, nozzle, and critical orifice devices
calibrated prior to the test? If yes, provide the calibration dates in the
Comment column. If available, attach a copy of the calibration records.
Were weather conditions adverse to sampling (rain, snow, etc.)? If so,
describe the measures taken to protect the sampling equipment in the
Comment column.
Was the sampling area (for example, the platform) kept clean and orderly
during the run?
Were the traverse sample points determined in accordance with Method 1?
YES
NO
Comment
Dry gas meter
Thermocouples
Critical orifice
Nozzle
4-W-l
-------
METHOD 0011 FORMALDEHYDE (ALDEHYDE & KETONE) SAMPLING CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Was a cyclonic flow check made before the start of testing? If yes, record
the date and time the check was completed in the Comment column.
Were stack gas oxygen, carbon dioxide, and carbon monoxide concentrations
measured by orsat, fyrite, or CEMS?
Was the manometer leveled and zeroed before the start of sampling? Were
periodic checks made by the operator during the test run?
Was the probe marked or alternative provisions made to ensure nozzle
placements at the traverse point locations determined by Method 1?
Was a leak check of the sample train performed before and after each port
change?
(Note: Allowable leak rate is 0. 02 cfm or 4°/o of the average sampling rate,
whichever is less, at 15 inches Hg vacuum or lower if 15 inches is not
exceeded during the run. )
Were pretest and post test leak checks conducted on the pilot tube?
Was silicone grease used on any glass connections?
Was the nozzle tip positioned at the proper traverse sample point
throughout the test run?
Did operators make timely adjustments to sampling rates to maintain
isokinetic conditions throughout the run?
Was the annulus between the probe and the sampling port sealed during
sampling?
Was the DNPH impinger solution prepared within 5 days of sampling use in
the field?
YES
NO
Comment
Time Result
Traverse # 1 Before
Traverse # 1 After
Traverse # 2 Before
Traverse # 2 After
4-W-2
-------
METHOD 0011 FORMALDEHYDE (ALDEHYDE & KETONE) SAMPLING CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Was all glassware washed with soapy water, rinsed with water followed by
methanol and methylene chloride? The glassware must not be rinsed with
acetone.
Was the sample gas temperature exiting the last impinger maintained at or
below 68°F throughout the test run?
Was the stack static pressure properly measured? At what traverse point
was this determined?
Was the sampling time uniform at each traverse sample point?
Was the total sampling time at least 120 minutes?
Were at least 2 dry standard cubic meters of gas sample collected during the
run?
Were the sample train and console adequately monitored by operators and
did the operators properly log sampling data on field data sheets during the
test run?
Were dry gas meter readings recorded at each traverse sample point?
Was the nozzle sealed with Teflon® film, aluminum foil, or a
noncontaminating cap after being removed from the stack at the completion
of the run and during leak checks?
Was particulate matter carefully wiped from the external surfaces of the
probe at the completion of the run?
Was the temperature of the filter box and sample probe maintained below
248 ± 25°F throughout the test run?
YES
NO
Comment
4-W-3
-------
METHOD 0011 FORMALDEHYDE (ALDEHYDE & KETONE) SAMPLING CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Was the sampling rate kept at or below 0.75 meters3/hour? Higher sampling
rates cause loss of scrubbing efficiency in the DNPH and cause carry over of
the impinger contents.
Did protracted or frequent "holds" occur during the sampling run? If so,
describe the apparent cause and duration in the Comment column.
Inspect the field data sheets. Are they clear and completely filled out?
Was a Train Blank set up, leak checked and heated to temperature through
one complete sampling run of the trial burn?
Were Field Blanks collected during the trial burn?
Were Train Blanks handled the same way as the actual sampling train?
Were Reagent Blanks collected once during the three runs?
Were Trip Blanks collected once for each sample shipment?
Were Field Spikes collected during the trial burn? Were field spikes applied
to DNPH impinger solution according to the Trial burn Plan?
YES
NO
Comment
DNPH impinger solution
Methvlene chloride
Deionized water
4-W-4
-------
METHOD 0011 FORMALDEHYDE (ALDEHYDE & KETONE) SAMPLING CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name: Run Number: Observer Signature:
Test No./Description: Run Start Time:
Unit: Run Stop Time: Date of Observation:
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS
4-W-5
-------
STACK
GAS
FLOW
15
12
1 PROBE
2 STACK WALL
3 THERMOCOUPLE
4 FLEXIBLE VACUUM LINE
5 VACUUM GAUGE
6 MAIN VALVE
7 BY- PASS VALVE
8 AIR-TIGHT PUMP
9 DRY GAS METER
10 THERMOCOUPLE
11 ORIFICE
12 MANOMETER
13 TEFLON6IMPINGERS
14 THERMOCOUPLE
15S-TYPEPITOTTUBE
TO ATMOSPHERE
Figure 0011. Formaldehyde Sampling Train
12
4-W-6
-------
ATTACHMENT X
METHOD 0011 FORMALDEHYDE (ALDEHYDE & KETONE) SAMPLE RECOVERY
CHECKLIST
(4 Sheets)
-------
METHOD 0011 FORMALDEHYDE (ALDEHYDE & KETONE) SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Note: The two DNPH impinger contents and rinses are to be analyzed
separately from these trains in order to assess breakthrough. Carry over of
the contents from the first impinger to the second should be avoided or the
assessment will be invalid. Moisture knockout impingers or additional
DNPH impingers may be added at the front of the train to prevent carry
over.
Was the sample train disassembled at the sample port location? If so, were
the openings of the test train components (probe, filter bell, resin trap,
impinger train, etc.) sealed before being relocated to the recovery area? Were
the components sealed with Teflon® tape or noncontaminating caps?
Were wash bottles made of Teflon or glass? Polyethylene wash bottles or
plastic should not be used.
Did the "front half sample train recovery include: methylene chloride
solvent rinses in triplicate while brushing of the nozzle and liner, and a final
rinse of the brush?
Were the fluid levels on the sample bottles marked in order to demonstrate
that sample contents were not lost during shipments to the laboratory?
Were all of the "front half rinses collected in labeled amber glass bottles
with Teflon®-lined lids?
Did the recovery personnel visually inspect the "front half sample train
components after the final rinses?
Were EPA Level III cleaned and certified bottles used for collecting these
"ultra trace level" samples? Were bottle certifications available for
inspection? Alternately, the bottles can be cleaned by the prescribed
glassware cleaning procedure in Method 001 1 (Section 5.4.1).
YES
NO
Comment
4-X-l
-------
METHOD 0011 FORMALDEHYDE (ALDEHYDE & KETONE) SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Were glass containers the narrow neck or Boston Round design instead of the
wide mouth Packer Bottle design?
Were the contents of the 1st DNPH impinger recovered into a separate
amber glass bottle with a Teflon®-lined lid?
Were the contents of the 2nd and 3rd impingers recovered in a separate
amber glass bottle with a Teflon lined lid?
Were the knockout impingers, DNPH impingers and connecting glassware
rinsed three times with deionized water followed by methylene chloride?
Was the moisture gain of each impinger recorded before recovery of the
contents was commenced?
At the conclusion of the sample train recovery, were the openings of the
sample train components sealed with Teflon® tape or noncontaminating
caps?
Were sample containers sealed with Teflon tape prior to shipment to the
laboratory?
Were reagent blanks of the stock solutions collected? If so, indicate the
sample identifiers in the Comment column.
Was a blank sample train prepared and recovered at the sample location?
How long did the blank train remain intact before recovery?
Was the blank train placed on the stack or at the base of the stack for a
period of time equivalent to one run, leak checked before and after the test,
and heated to temperature for the duration of one test run?
Were all samples properly labeled and stored on ice promptly after
recovery?
YES
NO
Comment
Methvlene chloride
DNPH solution
Deionized water
4-X-2
-------
METHOD 0011 FORMALDEHYDE (ALDEHYDE & KETONE) SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name:
Test No./Description:
Unit:
Run Number:
Run Start Time:
Run Stop Time:
Observer Signature:
Date of Observation:
Observation / Requirement
Were the chain of custody and request for analysis forms completed by the
recovery personnel?
Were the appropriate signature(s) affixed to the chain of custody forms?
Was a tracking system and labeling of samples conducted in such a way as to
assist the laboratory in processing as separate samples the following train
components:
(1) First DNPH impinger contents and rinses
(2) Second DNPH impinger composite with deionized water and methylene
chloride rinses
Was a tracking and labeling system used which was clearly understood by
the observer and would this system be clear to the receiving laboratory?
Was the recovery facility kept clean at all times?
YES
NO
Comment
4-X-3
-------
METHOD 0011 FORMALDEHYDE (ALDEHYDE & KETONE) SAMPLE RECOVERY CHECKLIST (CONTINUED)
Facility Name: Run Number: Observer Signature:
Test No./Description: Run Start Time:
Unit: Run Stop Time: Date of Observation:
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS
4-X-4
-------
ATTACHMENT Y
HOW TO CONDUCT TRIAL BURN TEST OVERSIGHT REVIEW CHECKLIST
(13 Sheets)
-------
1.0 OVERVIEW OF TRIAL BURN OVERSIGHT
D Preparation Activities
D Conducting Field Activities
n Writing the TBO Report
D Stack gas sampling and recovery checklists (Attachments A through X)
a TBO Checklist (Attachment Y)
2.0 PREPARATION ACTIVITIES
Complete the following tasks before arriving at the facility to conduct trial burn oversight:
n Review TBP
n Review RBP
n Review QAPP
D Prepare a site-specific HSP
D Collect specific checklists to be completed on site
D Gather appropriate health and safety equipment
2.1 REVIEWING THE TRIAL BURN PLAN AND QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT
PLAN
D General facility information
D Proposed stack gas sampling procedures
D Proposed waste feed and process residuals sampling procedures
2.1.1 Gathering General Facility Information
D Facility name
D Facility contact
D Facility address
D Facility telephone number
D U.S. EPA Facility Identification Number
4-Y-l
-------
D Facility employee responsible for trial burn
D Combustion units to be tested
D Proposed test schedule
D Health and safety requirements
2.1.2 Reviewing Proposed Stack Gas Sampling Procedures
Verify the accuracy of these TBP items by comparing them to the specified procedures identified in
the guidance documents.
D Sampling methods
D Sample port locations
D Sampling time
D Sample recovery
D Sample holding times
D Sample handling procedures
D Field analysis of samples
D QA/QC procedures
2.1.3 Reviewing Waste Feed and Air Pollution Control Device Effluent Sampling Information
D Number of samples
D Volume of each sample
D Frequency of sampling
D Sample collection, handling, and storage procedures
2.2 DEVELOPING A HEALTH AND SAFETY PLAN
These elements should be included in an HSP for a TBO:
D Oversight objectives
D Site description and history
D Waste management practices
4-Y-2
-------
D Waste types and characteristics
D Hazards of concern
D Summary of hazardous substances
D Personal protective equipment
D Site personnel and responsibilities
D Emergency contacts
D Medical emergency
D Site map
3.0 CONDUCTING FIELD ACTIVITIES
The following specific field activities are conducted during a trial burn oversight:
D Conducting a pre-test meeting
D Conducting a pre-test facility survey
D Reviewing equipment calibration records
D Observing stack sampling
D Observing waste feed and APCS sampling
D Observing process operations
D Observing sample recovery
D Collecting trial burn test information
D Conducting daily meetings
D Compiling field documentation
D Observing audit gas sampling
3.1 CONDUCTING A PRE-TEST MEETING
D Explain the role of the oversight team to the trial burn personnel.
D Identify the individuals responsible for stack testing, waste feed sampling, APCS
sampling, waste feed spiking, and recording process operating data.
4-Y-3
-------
D Determine the schedule and plan for the trial burn testing.
D Identify any deviations from the SOPs indicated in the TBP or RBP
3.2 CONDUCTING A PRE-TEST FACILITY SURVEY
D Examine the unit to be tested and observe general process operating procedures.
D Inspect the APCSs associated with the unit to be tested and observe general operating
procedures.
D Identify the stack gas, waste feed, and APCS effluent sampling areas.
D Whether the stack includes a rain hat or an obstruction to the flow of the gas
D Sketch the stack gas sampling location.
D Examine the sampling platform or scaffold.
D Match the sampling trains with the appropriate sampling ports and become familiar with
the order the trains will be employed.
D Inspect the stack gas sample recovery area and the field laboratory, if any.
D Determine the method and location of sample storage and labeling procedures.
D Identify persons responsible for monitoring process operating conditions and recording
them at regular intervals.
D Identify the stack sampling personnel and their individual responsibilities.
D Identify the waste feed and APCS sampling personnel and their individual responsibilities.
3.3 REVIEWING EQUIPMENT CALIBRATION RECORDS
D Stack sampling equipment
D Feed spiking equipment
D Facility process control equipment
a CEMS
D Sampling methods
3.3.1 Reviewing Stack Sampling Equipment Calibration Records
n Pitot tubes
4-Y-4
-------
D Differential pressure gauges
D Temperature indicators
D Dry gas meters
D Probe nozzles
D Rotameters
D Barometer
3.3.2 Reviewing Feed Spiking Equipment Calibration Records
D Pump and flow meter calibration records
D Pump and flow meter maintenance procedures
D Certificates of analysis for spiking chemicals
3.3.3 Reviewing Process Control Equipment Calibration Records
D Waste feed flow meters
D Atomization air pressure transmitters
D Pyrometers
D Differential pressure gauges across APCSs
D pH meters
D Oxidation and reduction potential meters
D Integral orifice meters
D Thermocouples and temperature indicators
3.3.4 Reviewing Continuous Emission Monitoring System Calibration Records
D Latest CEMS certification report
D Automatic daily calibration records
D Periodic manual calibration records
D Certificates of analysis of calibration gases
4-Y-5
-------
3.3.5 Reviewing Field Laboratory Instrumentation Calibration Records
D Certificates of analysis
D Calibration records
D Maintenance procedures
3.4 OBSERVING STACK SAMPLING ACTIVITIES
D Are the sample ports properly cleaned before the test run to minimize the chance of
sampling deposited material?
D Do the probe and filter heating systems measure up to 120 ± 14° C or 248 ± 25° F before
the sampling begins?
D Are the probe and pitot tube positioned to point directly into the direction of stack gas
flow?
D Are the openings around the probe and port hole blocked off during sampling to prevent an
unrepresentative dilution of the gas stream?
The following specific sampling issues that should be carefully evaluated during a trial burn:
D Sampling port location
D Cyclonic flow check
D Traverse point calculations
D Sampling train assembly
D Leak checks prior to sampling
D Sampling train temperatures
D Field data logsheet
D Leak checks during sampling
D Sampling train disassembly
D Sampling checklists
3.4.1 Reviewing Sampling Port Location
D Stack diameter
4-Y-6
-------
D Distance from sampling port to the nearest disturbance in upstream and downstream
directions
D Process unit diagram
3.4.2 Reviewing Cyclonic Flow Measurements
D Cyclonic flow check data sheet
D Cyclonic flow calculations
3.4.3 Traverse Point Location
D Traverse point calculation sheet
3.4.4 Reviewing Sampling Train Assembly
D Availability of clean area for train assembly to prevent any contamination
D Proper probe markings for traversing within the stack
D Use of correct amount of reagents in the impingers
D Storage of sorbent traps at below 20°C
D Use of proper connectors and sealants
D Proper assembly of filter in the filter holder
3.4.5 Observing Leak Checks Prior To Sampling
D Visible breakage of glass components (visual inspection)
D Leak in Pitot tube
D Leak in fully assembled sampling train
3.4.6 Observing Sampling Train Temperatures
D Thermocouple locations
D Proper condenser operation
D Ice in the impinger box
3.4.7 Observing the Field Data Logsheet
D Number of sampling ports
4-Y-7
-------
D Number of traverse points
D Field data sheet
3.4.8 Observing Leak Checks During Sampling
D Field data sheet
3.4.9 Observing Sampling Train Disassembly
D Was the probe nozzle allowed to touch the stack wall or the platform?
D Was a final leak check conducted?
D Were the train components disassembled without any breakage or loss of sample?
D Were the train components properly capped, or sealed and labeled, before they were
transported to the sampling recovery area?
3.4.10 Completing Stack Sampling Checklists
D Method-specific checklists
3.5 OBSERVING WASTE FEED AND AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DEVICE EFFLUENT
SAMPLING
D Whether the liquid in the sampling line was drained long enough before a sample was
collected
D Whether there are any visible air bubbles in the VOA vials
D Whether the samples are collected in accordance with the procedures specified in the
approved TBP, RBP, and QAPP and at the specified frequency
D Whether logsheets—showing date, time, run number, and sampler name—are completed
for each sample
D Whether sample containers are labeled—showing date, time, and identification
number—with a permanent marker pen
D Whether sample containers are handled and stored in accordance with the procedures
specified in the approved TBP and QAPP
D Whether sample traceability and chain-of-custody records are being initiated and
maintained for each sample
4-Y-8
-------
3.6 OBSERVING PROCESS OPERATION ACTIVITIES
D Process
D Combustion chamber temperature
D Combustion gas temperature
D Combustion chamber atomization and burner pressure
D Combustion gas velocity
D Excess air flow rate
D Kiln rotational speed
D CO concentration
D O2 concentration
D Total hydrocarbon concentration
D Unit production rates
n Waste feed
D Feed rates
D Chlorine input rates
D Ash loading rates
D Feed spiking compound rates
D Atomization fluid pressure
D Combustion chamber atomization and burner pressure
D Residue generation rates
D Bottom ash
n Fly ash
D Scrubber mud and solid residue
Cyclone
Pressure drop
Inlet temperature
Dry scrubber
Reagent flow rate
Atomizer rotational speed
Atomizer nozzle pressure
Inlet temperature
Outlet temperature
Baghouse
Pressure drop
Inlet temperature
4-Y-9
-------
D Electrostatic precipitator
n Voltage
D Current
D Sparking rate
D Flue gas flow rate
D Mist Eliminator
D Pressure drop
D Quencher
D Exit temperature
D Water flow rate
D Packed tower scrubber
D Pressure drop
D Liquid flow rate
a Effluent pH
D Venturi scrubber
D Pressure drop
D Liquid flow rate
a Effluent pH
D Gas-to-liquid flow rate ratio
D Scrubbing reagent concentration
D Scrubbing reagent flow rate
D Maximum solids content in effluent
D Whether the data acquisition recorder (DAR) is a digital or an analog system
D Whether the digital readout agrees closely with the value on the strip chart recorder
D Whether the process operating conditions are close to the operating conditions specified in
the approved TBP or RBP
D Whether there is a way of cross-checking the flow rate on the basis of the volume change
in the feed tank; if yes, do the flow rates agree closely (± 10 percent)?
3.7 OBSERVING SAMPLE RECOVERY
D Reagents used and number of rinses with each reagent
D Whether the samples are recovered in accordance with the procedures specified in the
approved TBP or RBP
4-Y-10
-------
D Whether the liquid levels on the sample containers are clearly marked with a permanent
marker pen
D Whether the sample labels—showing identification number, date, and time—are affixed
firmly to the sample containers
D Whether sample identification number logsheet and chain-of-custody records are filled out
for each sample
D Whether sample containers are sealed and packaged securely, and chilled on ice in ice
chests or coolers for transportation
3.8 COLLECTING TRIAL BURN TEST INFORMATION
D Whether the gas temperatures at different locations in the sampling train, during the trial
burn test are consistently within the ranges indicated in the specific test methods
D Whether the volumes of the stack gas samples collected remained consistently within the
ranges indicated in the specific test methods
D Whether the isokinetic sampling variations are within ±10 percent of the isokinetic
sampling rate
D Whether all sampling trains have passed the final leak checks
D Whether the process operating conditions maintained during the trial burn test conform
with the process conditions in the approved TBP or RBP
D Whether the waste feed and APCS effluent samples are collected in conformance with the
procedures specified in the approved TBP or RBP
3.9 CONDUCTING DAILY MEETINGS
During the daily meetings, the oversight team should summarize the following:
D Trial burn test runs planned for the day
D Major changes to or deviations from the approved TBP or RBP
D Problems encountered and their resolution
D Progress and completion schedule of the trial burn
3.10 CONDUCTING FIELD DOCUMENTATION ACTIVITIES
Documentation of field activities should include the following:
D Process operating parameters for each run
4-Y-ll
-------
D General impressions of stack sampling activities
D General impressions of stack sample recovery activities
D General impressions of waste feed and APCS sampling activities
D Deviations from and changes to the approved TBP or RBP
Photodocumentation should include the following:
D Combustion unit being tested
D Stack showing any obstructions to the flow of stack gases
D Waste feed storage tanks
a APCSs Units
D Location of stack sampling ports and sampling platform
D Location of CEMS probe
D Location of waste feed sampling
D Location of waste feed spiking
D Various stack sampling trains used during the trial burn
D Waste spiking system
D Waste feed and APCS sampling systems
D Modifications to or deviations from any standard sampling systems and procedures
identified in the approved TBP or RBP
3.11 OBSERVING AUDIT GAS SAMPLING
D CEMS Relative Accuracy Test Audit
n CEMS Cylinder Gas Audit
D Volatile Organic Sampling Train (VOST)
n PCDDs and PCDFs Audit
4.0 PREPARING THE OVERSIGHT REPORT
n Overview of the TBO
4-Y-12
-------
Facility description
D Engineering description
D Characterization of hazardous waste feed stream
D Process operating conditions
a CEMS
Implementation of the trial burn
D Test conditions
D Stack sampling
D Waste feed sampling
D Other sampling activities
D Sample analysis
D Process monitoring, control, and DAR
D Trial burn completion schedule
Field Observations
D Daily activities of the observers
D General impressions of the observers
D Deviations from approved TBP or RBP
D Other problems and issues, and their resolution
D Conclusions and recommendations
4-Y-13
------- |