United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
EPA-4S4/R-99-044a
September 1999
Air
©EPA
Final Report - Volume I of II
Lime Manufacturing
Emissions Test Report
Chemical Lime Company
(Formerly Eastern Ridge Lime
Company)
Ripplemead, Virginia
-------
LIME MANUFACTURING
EMISSION TEST REPORT
CHEMICAL LIME COMPANY
(FORMERLY APG LIME COMPANY)
RIPPLEMEAD, VIRGINIA
VOLUME I OF II
REPORT TEXT
APPENDICES A & B
EPA Contract No. 68D70069
Work Assignment No. 2-12
Prepared for:
Michael L. Toney (MD-14)
Work Assignment Manager
SMTG, EMC, EMAD, OAQPS
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
September 1999
p:\i532\finrpt\APG\finalapg.rep (WP.61)
Submitted by:
PACIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.
5001 S. Miami Blvd., Suite 300
Post Office Box 12077
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-2077
(919) 941-0333 FAX (919) 941-0234
-------
DISCLAIMER
This document was prepared by Pacific Environmental Services, Inc. (PES) under EPA
Contract No. 68D70069, Work Assignment No. 2-12. The field sampling, analyses, and draft
report were completed under EPA Contract No. 68D20162, Work Assignment No. 4-01. This
document has passed PES' internal quality assurance review and has been approved for
distribution. The contents of this document do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of
the U.S. EPA. Mention of trade names does not constitute endorsement by the EPA or PES.
11
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
VOLUME I Page
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1-1
2.0 SUMMARY OF RESULTS 2-1
3.0 PROCESS DESCRIPTION 3-1
4.0 SAMPLING LOCATIONS 4-1
4.1 NO. 1 KILN 4-1
4.2 NO. 2 KILN COOLER STACK 4-1
5.0 SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES 5-1
5.1 LOCATION OF MEASUREMENT SITES AND SAMPLE/
VELOCITY TRAVERSE POINTS , 5-1
5.2 DETERMINATION OF STACK GAS VOLUMETRIC FLOW RATE ... 5-1
5.3 DETERMINATION OF DRY MOLECULAR WEIGHT AND
EMISSION CORRECTION FACTORS 5-1
5.4 DETERMINATION OF STACK GAS MOISTURE CONTENT 5-2
5.5 DETERMINATION OF POLYCHLORINATED DIBENZO-P-DIOXINS
AND POL YCHLORINATED DIBENZOFURANS 5-2
.5.6 DETERMINATION OF TOTAL HYDROCARBONS 5-2
5.7 DETERMINATION OF PARTICULATE MATTER AND METALS 5-6
5.8 PULVERIZED COAL FEED SAMPLING 5-6
5.9 PULVERIZED COAL RATE 5-6
5.10 VISIBLE EMISSIONS 5-12
6.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL PROCEDURES
AND RESULTS 6-1
6.1 CALIBRATION OF APPARATUS 6-1
6.2 ON-SITE MEASUREMENTS ' 6-4
APPENDICES A & E
VOLUME II APPENDICES C-F
in
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
VOLUME I Page
Figure 1.1 Key Personnel and Responsibility for Testing at APG Lime Company,
EPA Contract No. 68D20162, Work Assignment No, 4-01 1-2
Figure 1.2 Sampling/Monitoring Location, at APG Lime,
Ripplemead, VA 1-3
Figure 4.1 APG Lime Kiln Baghouse Inlet Sampling Location 4-2
Figure 4.2 APG Lime Kiln Baghouse Outlet Sampling Location , 4-3
Figure 4.3 APG Lime Cooler Stack Sampling Location 4-4
Figure 5.1 Method 23 CDD/CDF Outlet Sampling Train 5-3
Figure 5.1 A Method 23 CDD/CDF Inlet Sampling Train 5-4
Figure 5.2 Method 25A Measurement System for THC 5-5
Figure 5.3 Method 29 Particulate Matter/Metals Baghouse Outlet and Cooler
Sampling Train 5-7
Figure 5.3A Method 29 Particulate Matter/Metals Inlet Sampling Train 5-8
Figure 5.4 Method 29 Sample Recovery Scheme (Sample Fractions 1-4) 5-9
Figure 5.5 Method 29 Sample Recovery Scheme (Sample Fraction 5) 5-10
Figure 5.6 Method 29 Sample Preparation and Analysis Scheme 5-11
IV
-------
LIST OF TABLES
VOLUME I
Page
Table 2.1 Emissions Test Log APG Lime Company - Ripplemead,
VA , 2-2
Table 2.2 CDD/CDF Emissions Sampling and Exhaust Gas Parameters
Kiln No. 1 Baghouse Inlet, APG Lime Company -
Ripplemead, VA 2-4
Table 2.3 CDD/CDF Exhaust Gas Concentrations and Emission Rates
Kiln No. 1 Baghouse Inlet, APG Lime Company -
Ripplemead, VA 2-5
Table 2.4 CDD/CDF Exhaust Gas Concentrations and 2378 Toxic Equivalent Stack
Gas Concentrations Adjusted to 7 Percent Oxygen, Kiln No. 1 Baghouse
Inlet, APG Lime Company - Ripplemead, VA 2-6
Table 2.5 CDD/CDF Emissions Sampling and Stack Gas Parameters
Kiln No. 1 Baghouse Outlet, APG Lime Company -
Ripplemead, VA 2-7
Table 2.6 CDD/CDF Stack Gas Concentrations and Emission Rates
Kiln No. 1 Baghouse Outlet, APG Lime Company -
Ripplemead, VA 2-8
Table 2.7 CDD/CDF Stack Gas Concentrations and 2378 Toxic Equivalent Stack
Gas Concentrations Adjusted to 7 Percent Oxygen, Kiln No. 1 Baghouse
Outlet, APG Lime Company - Ripplemead, VA 2-9
Table 2.8 Particulate/Metals Emissions Sampling and Exhaust Gas Parameters
Kiln No. 1 Baghouse Inlet, APG Lime Company - Ripplemead, VA .... 2-11
Table 2.9 Particulate Matter Concentrations and Emission Rates, Kiln No. 1
Baghouse Inlet, APG Lime Company - Ripplemead, VA 2-12
Table 2.10 Exhaust Gas Metals Concentrations and Emission Rates, Kiln
No. 1 Baghouse Inlet, APG Lime Company - Ripplemead, VA 2-13
Table 2.11 Particulate/Metals Emissions Sampling and Stack Gas Parameters
Kiln No. 1 Baghouse Outlet, APG Lime Company - Ripplemead, VA .. 2-15
Table 2,12 Particulate Matter Concentrations and Emission Rates, Kiln No. 1
Baghouse Outlet, APG Lime Company - Ripplemead, VA 2-16
Table 2.13 Stack Gas Concentrations and Emission Rates, Kiln No. 1 Baghouse
Outlet, APG Lime Company - Ripplemead, VA 2-17
Table 2,14 Summary of Total Hydrocarbon Emissions - Kiln No. 1
APG Lime Company - Ripplemead, VA 2-18
-------
LIST OF TABLES (Concluded)
Page
Table 2.15 Particulate/Metals Emissions Sampling and Stack Gas Parameters
Kiln No. 2 Cooler Exhaust Stack, APG Lime Company -
Ripplemead, VA 2-19
Table 2.16 Particulate Matter Concentrations and Emission Rates, Kiln No. 2
Cooler Exhaust Stack, APG Lime Company - Ripplemead, VA 2-21
Table 2.17 Stack Gas Concentrations and Emission Rates, Kiln No. 2
Cooler Exhaust Stack, APG Lime Company - Ripplemead., VA 2-22
Table 5.1 Sources, Test Parameters, and Test Methods Summary
APG Lime Company - Ripplemead, Virginia 5-2
Table 6.1 Summary of Temperature Sensor Calibration Data 6-2
Table 6.2 Summary of Pitot Tube Dimensional Data 6-3
Table 6.3 Summary of Dry Gas Meter and Orifice Calibration Data 6-5
Table 6.4 Summary of Orsat Analyzer Calibration Results 6-7
Table 6.5 Summary of Method 23/Proposed Method 29 Field Sampling
QA/QC Data 6-8
Table 6.6 Summary of Calibration Gas Cylinders 6-9
Table 6.7 Summary of Method 23 Standards Recovery Efficiencies 6-10
Table 6.8 Summary of Method 29 Analysis QC Data 6-11
VI
-------
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Emissions Standards Division,
Minerals and Inorganic Chemicals Group (ESD/MICG) is investigating lime manufacturing
processes to obtain air emissions data to support development of the lime manufacturing
NESHAP. Because lime manufacturing is similar to portland cement manufacturing, it is
believed that lime plants may have similar emissions. There are limited data on HAP
emissions from lime manufacturing processes; therefore additional data are needed to identify
which of the 189 HAPs listed in Section 112(b) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), as amended in
1990, are emitted from these sources.
As part of its investigation, the ESD/MICG requested that the EPA's Emissions,
Monitoring and Analysis Division (EMAD) test two lime manufacturing facilities. EMAD
issued a work assignment to Pacific Environmental Services, Inc. (PES) to plan and conduct
the air emissions testing program to gather emissions data from lime manufacturing processes
as specified in the ESD/MICG test request. The Eastern Ridge Lime Company in
Ripplemead, Virginia was one of the host facilities selected by the EPA for testing. The
testing program was conducted through EPA Contract No. 68D20162, Work Assignment
No. 4-01.
The primary objective of the testing program was to obtain data on air emissions from
Kiln No. 2. Measurements were made of total hydrocarbons (THC) at the common inlet to the
two scrubber stacks, and dioxin/furan (CDD/CDF), paniculate matter, metals, and THC at the
separate outlets of the two scrubber stacks. A secondary objective of the testing program was
to obtain data on the emissions of particulate matter and metals from the hydrator exhaust
stack.
In addition, another EPA contractor assessed HAP emission concentrations at the Kiln
No. 2 exhaust, the outlets of the two scrubbers, and the hydrator exhaust stack using Fourier
transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIRS). These results were documented by the other
contractor on a separate report to the EPA.
Figure 1.1 presents the test program organization and major lines of communication.
Figure 1.2 shows the sampling/monitoring locations at Eastern Ridge Lime Company.
1-1
-------
tv)
Eastern Ridge Lime Company
J. Steven Castleberry
(618)465-7741
i
PES
OA/OC Officer
Wayne Westbrook
(919)941-0333
!
Work Assignment Manager
Micheal L. Toney
(919)541-5247
EPA/ESD
Joseph Wood
(919)541-5446
PES
Program M an age r
John Chehaske
(703)471-8383
PES
Project Manager
Frank Meadows
(919)941-0333
Pretest Site SSTP
Survey
PES PES
ESD Contractor
EH
Cybele Brockman
(919)990-8603
Field Testing
PES
Subcontractors
DEECO
Triangle Laboratories, Inc
Analyses Report
Preparation
PES PES
Subcontractor
Triangle Laboratories, Inc.
Figure 1.1 Key Personnel and Responsibility for Testing at Eastern Ridge Lime Company,
EPA Contract No, 68D20162, WA No. 4-01.
-------
Stack Sampling
PM/Metals
CDD/CDF
THC
02
Stack Sampling
THC
From
Kiln
No. 2
Scrubber
A
Scrubber
B
Roof
Stack Sampling
PM/Metals
Hydrator Stack
Figure 1.2 Sampling/Monitoring Locations at Eastern Ridge Lime Company, Ripplemead, VA.
-------
2.0 SUMMARY OF RESULTS
This section provides summaries of the test results obtained from the testing program at
the Eastern Ridge Lime Company. Included are the results of the tests conducted for THC,
CDD/CDF, and particulate matter/metals on Kiln No. 2 and particulate matter/metals on the
hydrator.
2.1 EMISSIONS TEST LOG
Sampling on Kiln No. 2 was conducted on three consecutive days from October 16,1996
through October 18,1996. Sampling on the hydrator was conducted on October 19 and
20,1996. Table 2.1 summarizes the emissions test log. Presented are the ran numbers, test
dates, pollutants, run times and downtime for filter changes, port changes, and CEM calibrations.
2.2 KILN NO. 2
2.2.1 CDD/CDF
The Method 23 sample extracts were first analyzed using a DB-5 capillary column to
determine the concentration of each isomer of CDD's and CDF's (tetra- through octa-). Tetra-
chlorinated dibenzofurans were detected in this analysis; therefore, another aliquot of the sample
was analyzed using a DB-225 capillary column to measure the 2,3,7,8 tetra-chloro dibenzofuran
isomers.
The CDD/CDF test results are presented in actual concentrations and mass emission
rates, concentrations adjusted to 7% oxygen (O2), and concentrations adjusted to 7% O2 in 2378
toxic equivalents. The concentrations, adjusted to 7% O2, were adjusted by each congeners
respective Toxic Equivalency Factor (TEF). The TEFs used are the international TEF values.
Scrubber "A"
Table 2.2 summarizes the CDD/CDF emissions sampling and stack gas parameters. The
total sampling time for each run was 240 minutes. The average sample volume was 118.115 dry
standard cubic feet (dscf) or 3.327 dry standard cubic meters (dscm). The average stack gas
temperature was 136°F and contained 21.9 percent (%) carbon dioxide (CO2), 6.1% oxygen (O^),
and 18.5% moisture (100% of saturation). The average stack gas volumetric flow rate was
26,249 actual cubic feet per minute (acfm) or 18,054 dry standard cubic feet per minute (dscfm)
or 511 dry standard cubic meters per minute (dscmm).
2-1
-------
TABLE 2.1
EMISSIONS TEST LOG
EASTERN RIDGE LIME COMPANY - RIPPLEMEAD, VIRGINIA
Run No,
Kiln Exhaust
M25A-1
M25A-2
M25A-3
Scrubber "A"
M25A-A-1
M23A-1
M29A-1
M25A-A-2
M23A-2
M29A-2
M25A-A-3
M23A-3
M29A-3
Scrubber "B"
M25A-B-1
M23B-1
M29B-1
M25A-B-2
M23B-2
M29B-2
M25A-B-3
M23B-3
M29B-3
Hvdrator
M29-5
M29-6
M29-7
Date
10/16/96
10/17/96
10/18/96
10/16/96
10/16/96
10/16/96
10/17/96
10/17/96
10/17/96
10/18/96
10/18/96
10/18/96
10/16/96
10/16/96
10/16/96
10/17/96
10/17/96
10/17/96
10/18/96
10/18/96
10/18/96
10/19/96
10/20/96
10/20/96
Pollutant
THC
THC
THC
THC
CDD/CDF
PM/Metals
THC
CDD/CDF
PM/Metals
THC
CDD/CDF
PM/Metals
THC
CDD/CDF
PM/Metals
THC
CDD/CDF
PM/Metals
THC
CDD/CDF
PM/Metals
PM/Metals
PM/Metals
PM/Metals
Run Time
1508-1721
1739-2005
1140-1330
1400-1536
1545-1630
1010-1200
1215-1400
1415-1605
1515-2000
1510-2038
1510-2038
1140-1615
1140-1630
1140-1630
1010-1430
1100-1543
1100-1543
1530-2015
1511-2027
1514-2037
1200-1630
1140-1630
1140-1630
1030-1615
1100-1540
1100-1550
1339-1541
1008-1213
1233-1436
Downtime,
minutes
159
88
88
150
50
50
140
43
48
165
76
83
135
50
50
120
40
50
2
5
3
2-2
-------
TABLE 2.2
CDD/CDF EMISSIONS SAMPLING AND STACK GAS PARAMETERS
KILN NO. 2 SCRUBBER "A" OUTLET
EASTERN RIDGE LIME COMPANY - RIPPLEMEAD, VA
Run No.
Date
Total Sampling Time, min.
Average Sampling Rate, dscfma
Sample Volume:
dsc?
dscmc
Average Stack Gas Temp.,°F
O2 Concentration, % by volume
C02 Concentration, % by volume
Moisture, % by volume
Stack Gas Volumeric Flow Rate:
acfmd
dscfma
dscmm6
Isokinetic Sampling Ratio, %
M23-A-1
10/16/96
240
0.531
127.343
3.587
138
6.6
21.1
19.3
26,779
18,276
517
101.3
M23-A-2
10/17/96
240
0.462
110.767
3.120
135
5.0
23.7
18.1
24,919
17,273
489
101.0
M23-A-3
10/19/96
240
0.484
116.234
3.274
135
6.7
21.0
18.1
27,049
18,613
527
98.3
Average
0.492
118.115
3.327
136
6.1
21.9
18.5
26,249
18,054
511
100.2
a Dry standard cubic feet per minute at 68 °F and 1 atm
b Dry standard cubic feet at 68 °F and 1 atm
c Dry standard cubic meters at 20 °C and 1 atm.
d Actual cubic feet per minute at stack conditions.
e Dry standard cubic meters per minute at 20CC and 1 atm.
2-3
-------
Table 2.3 presents the CDD/CDF stack gas concentrations and emission rates. The
average concentration of total CDD was 0,31 nanograms per dry standard cubic meter (ng/dscm).
The average concentration of total CDD/CDF was 0.76 ng/dscm. These values corresponded to
average emission rates of 9.4 micrograms per hour (ug/hr) and 23 ug/hr, respectively.
Table 2.4 presents CDD/CDF concentrations adjusted to 7% 02. The measured average
stack gas O2 concentration was 6.1 percent (%). Therefore, the adjusted CDD/CDF
concentrations were about 6% lower than the actual concentrations. The average adjusted
concentration of total CDD was 0.29 ng/dscm @ 7% O2. The average adjusted concentration of
total CDD/CDF was 0,71 ng/dscm @ 7% O2.
Table 2.4 also presents the adjusted concentrations in 2378 toxic equivalents. The
average TEF concentration for total CDD/CDF was 0.00523 ng/dscm @ 7% O2.
Scrubber "B"
Table 2.5 summarizes the CDD/CDF emissions sampling and stack gas parameters. The
total sampling time for each run was 240 minutes. The average sample volume was 140.196 dscf
or 3.949 dscm. The average stack gas temperature was 133°F and contained 19.6% CO2, 7.7%
O2, and 16.7% moisture (98% of saturation). The average stack gas volumetric flow rate was
16,783 acfm or 11,831 dscfinor 335 dscmm.
Table 2.6 presents the CDD/CDF stack gas concentrations and emission rates. The
average concentration of total CDD was 0.20 ng/dscm. The average concentration of total
CDD/CDF was 0.52 ng/dscm. These values corresponded to average emission rates of 4.0 ug/hr
and 11 |ig/hr, respectively.
Table 2.7 presents the CDD/CDF concentrations adjusted to 7% O2. The measured stack
gas O2 concentration was 7.7%. Therefore, the adjusted CDD/CDF concentrations were about
5% greater than the actual concentrations. The average adjusted concentration of total CDD was
0.21 ng/dscm @ 7% O2. The average adjusted concentration of total CDD/CDF was
0.55 ng/dscm @ 7% O2.
Table 2.7 also presents the adjusted concentrations in 2378 toxic equivalents. The
average TEF concentration for total CDD/CDF was 0.00359 ng/dscm @ 7% O2.
2.2.2 Participate Matter/Metals
Scrubber "A"
Table 2.8 summarizes the particulate matter/metals emissions sampling and stack gas
parameters. The total sampling time for each test run was 240 minutes. The average sample
volume was 131.593 dscf or 3.726 dscm. The average stack gas temperature was 128°F and
2-4
-------
TABLE 2.3
CDD/CDF STACK GAS CONCENTRATIONS AND EMISSION RATES
KILN NO. 2 SCRUBBER "A" OUTLET
EASTERN RIDGE LIME COMPANY - RIPPLEMEAD, VA
CONGENER
Digxins
2378 TCDD
Total TCDD
12378 PeCDD
Total PeCDD
1 23478 HxCDD
123678 HxCDD
123789 HxCDD
Total HxCDD
1 234678 HpCDD
Total HpCDD
Octa CDD
Total CDD
Furans
2378 TCDF
Total TCDF
12378PeCDF
23478 PeCDF
Total PeCDF
123478 HxCDF
123678 HxCDF
234678 HxCDF
123789 HxCDF
Total HxCDF
1234678 HpCDF
1 234789 HpCDF
Total HpCDF
Octa CDF
Total CDF
Total CDD + CDF
CONCENTRATION3
ng/dscm, as measured
M23-A-1
(0,0028)
0.042
(0.0056)
0.0084
(0.0056)
(0.0056)
{0.0020}
0.056
0.011
0.020
0.025
0.15
0.0084
0.28
0.0028
0.0028
0.061
0.0084
0.0028
0.0028
(0.0056)
0.028
0.011
(0.0056)
0.02
0.017
0.40
0.55
M23-A-2
(0.0032)
0.067
(0.0064)
0.019
(0.0064)
(0.0064)
(0.0064)
0.038
0.058
0.11
0.20
0.43
0.0064
0.13
(0.0032)
0.0032
0.013
0.016
0.0064
0.016
(0.0064)
0.054
0.064
0.019
0.13
0.20
0.51
0.95
M23-A-3
(0.0031)
0.14
(0.0061)
0.092
(0.0061)
(0.0061)
(0.0061)
0.049
0.0092
0.021
0.040
0.35
0.0092
0.34
0.0061
0.0061
0.082
{0.0061}
0.003 1
0.0031
(0.0061)
0.015
0.0061
(0.0061)
0.0061
0.0092
0.45
0.79
Average
0.00
0.084
0.00
0.04
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.048
0.026
0.050
0.088
0.31
0.0080
0.25
0.0029
0.0040
0.052
0.012
0.0041
0.0073
0.00
0.033
0.027
0.019
0.052
0.074
0.45
0.76
EMISSION RATEb
Mg/hr
M23-A-1
(0.087)
1.3
(0.17)
0.26
(0.17)
(0.17)
{0.060}
1.7
0.35
0.61
0.78
4.7
0.26
8.6
0.087
0.087
1.9
0.26
0.087
0.087
(0.17)
0.87
0.35
(0.17)
0.52
0.52
12
17
M23-A-2
(0.094)
2.0
(0.19)
0.56
(0.19)
(0.19)
(0.19)
1.1
1.7
3.2
5.8
13
0.19
3.8
(0.094)
0.094
0.38
0.47
0.19
0.47
(0.19)
1.6
1.9
0.56
4.0
5.7
15
28
M23-A-3
(0.097)
4.5
(0.19)
2.9
(0.19)
(0.19)
(0.19)
1.5
0.29
0.68
1.3
11
0.29
11
0.097
0.19
2.6
{0.19}
0.097
0.97
(0.19)
0.48
0.19
(0.19)
0.19
0.29
14
25
Average
0.00
2.6
0.00
1.2
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.5
0.78
1.5
2.6
9.4
0.25
7.7
0.092
0.12
1.6
0.37
0.12
0.22
0.00
0.98
0.81
0.56
1.6
2.2
14
23
a Nanogram per dry standard cubic meter at 20 °C and 1 atm.
3 Micrograms per hour.
() Non Detectable - Results are below target analyte detection limits. ND values are not counted in totals or
averages.
{ } Estimated Maximum Possible Concentration. EMPC values are not counted in totals or averages.
2-5
-------
TABLE 2.4
CDD/CDF STACK GAS CONCENTRATIONS AND 2378 TOXIC EQUIVALENT STACK
GAS CONCENTRATIONS ADJUSTED TO 7 PERCENT OXYGEN
KILN NO. 2 SCRUBBER "A" OUTLET
EASTERN RIDGE LIME COMPANY - RIPPLEMEAD, VA
CONGENER
Dioxins
2378 TCDD
Total TCDD
12378 PeCDD
Total PcCDD
123478 HxCDD
1 23678 HxCDD
123789 HxCDD
Total HxCDD
1234678 HpCDD
Total HpCDD
Octa CDD
Total CDD
Furans
2378 TCDF
Total TCDF
12378 PeCDF
23478 PeCDF
Total PeCDF
123478 HxCDF
123678 HxCDF
234678 HxCDF
123789 HxCDF
Total HxCDF
1234678 HpCDF
1234789 HpCDF
Total HpCDF
Octa CDF
Total CDF
Total CDD + CDF
CONCENTRATION3
ng/dscm, adjusted to 7 percent O2
M23-A-1
(0.0027)
0.041
(0.0054)
0.0081
(0.0054)
(0.0054)
{0.0019}
0.054
0.011
0.019
0.024
0.15
0.0081
0.27
0.0027
0.0027
0.060
0.0081
0.0027
0.0027
(0.0054)
0.027
0.011
(0.0054)
0.016
0.016
0.39
0.53
M23-A-2
(0.0028)
0.059
(0.0056)
0.017
(0.0056)
(0.0056)
(0.0056)
0.034
0.050
0.095
0.17
0.38
0.0056
0.11
(0.0028)
0.0028
0.011
0.014
0,0056
0.014
(0.0056)
0.048
0.056
0.017
0.12
0.17
0.45
0.83
M23-A-3 .
(0.0030)
0.14
(0.0060)
0.090
(0.0060)
(0.0060)
(0.0060)
0.048
0.0090
0.021
0.039
0.34
0.0090
0.33
0.0030
0.0060
0.081
{0.0060}
0.0030
0,0030
(0.0060)
0.015
0.0060
(0.0060)
0.0060
0.0090
0.44
0.78
Average
0.00
0.080
0.00
0,038
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.045
0.023
0.045
0.079
0.29
0.0076
0.24
0.0028
0.0038
0.051
0.011
0.0038
0.0066
0.00
0.098
0.024
0.017
0.047
0.065
0.43
0.71
2378-
TCDDb
Toxic
Equiv.
Factor
1.000
0.500
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.010
0.001
0.100
0.050
0.500
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.010
0.010
0.001
2378 TOXIC EQUIVALENCIES
ng/dscm, adjusted to 7 percent 02
M23-A-1
(0.0027)
(0.0027)
(0.00054)
(0.00054)
{0.00019}
0.00011
0.000024
0.00013
0.00081
0.00014
0.0014
0.00081
0.00027
0.00027
(0.00054)
0.00011
(0.000054)
0.000016
0.00383
0.00396
M23-A-2
(0.0028)
(0.0028)
(0.00056)
(0.00056)
(0.00056)
0.00050
0.00017
0.00067
0.00056
(0.00014)
0.0014
0.0014
0.00056
0.0014
(0.00056)
0.00056
0.00017
0.00017
0.00622
0.00689
M23-A-3
(0.0030)
(0,0030)
(0.00060)
(0.00060)
(0.00060)
0.000090
0.000039
0.00013
0.00090
0.00015
0.0030
{0.00060}
0.00030
0.00030
(0.00060)
0.000060
(0.000060)
0.0000090
0.00472
0.00485
Averag
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00023
0.000079
0.00031
0.00079
0.00014
0.0019
0.0011
0.00038
0.00066
0.00
0.00024
0.00017
o.ooooe;
0.00492
0.00523
Nanogram per dry standard cubic meter adjusted to 7 percent oxygen at 20 °C and 1 atm.
North Atlantic Treaty Organization, Committee on the Challenges of Modem Society, Pilot study on International Information
Exchange on Dioxins and Related Compounds: International Toxicity Equivalency Factor (I-TEF) Methods of Risk Assessment
for Complex Mixtures of Dioxins and Related Compounds. Report No, 176, August 1988.
Non Detectable - Results are below target analyte detection limits. ND values are not counted in totals or averages.
Estimated Maximum Possible Concentration. EMPC values are not counted in totals or averages.
2-6
-------
TABLE 2.5
CDD/CDF EMISSIONS SAMPLING AND STACK GAS PARAMETERS
KILN NO. 2 SCRUBBER "B" OUTLET
EASTERN RIDGE LIME COMPANY - RIPPLEMEAD, VA
Run No.
Date
Total Sampling Time, min.
Average Sampling Rate, dsefm8
Sample Volume;
dscf
dscmc
Average Stack Gas Temp.,°F
O2 Concentration, % by Volume
CO2 Concentration, % by Volume
Moisture, % by Volume
Stack Gas Volumetric Flow Rate:
acfmd
dsefrn3
dscmm6
Isokinetic Sampling Ratio %
M23-B-1
10/16/96
240
0.721
172.998
4.873
135
7.8
19.0
17.6
16,653
11,667
330
101.3
M23-B-2
10/17/96
240
0.443
106.346
2.996
131
7.7
20.0
15.5
14,168
10,192
289
104.3
M23-B-3
10/18/96
240
0.589
141.244
3.979
134
7.6
19.7
17.0
19,530
13,633
386
103.5
Average
0.584
140.196
3.949
133
7.7
19.6
16.7
16,783
11,831
335
103.0
a Dry standard cubic feet per minute at 68 °F and 1 atm
b Dry standard cubic feet at 68 °F and 1 atm
c Dry standard cubic meters at 20°C and 1 atm
d Actual cubic feet per minute at stack conditions
6 Dry standard cubic meters per minute at 20°C and 1 atm
2-7
-------
TABLE 2.6
CDD/CDF STACK GAS CONCENTRATIONS AND EMISSION RATES
KILN NO. 2 SCRUBBER "B" OUTLET
EASTERN RIDGE LIME COMPANY - RIPPLEMEAD, VA
CONGENER
2378 TCDD
Total TCDD
12378 PeCDD
Total PeCDD
123478 HxCDD
123678 HxCDD
123789 HxCDD
Total HxCDD
1234678 HpCDD
Total HpCDD
Octa CDD
Total CDD
Furans
2378 TCDF
Total TCDF
12378 PeCDF
23478 PeCDF
Total PeCDF
123478 HxCDF
123678 HxCDF
234678 HxCDF
123789 HxCDF
Total HxCDF
1234678 HpCDF
1 234789 HpCDF
Total HpCDF
Octa CDF
Total CDF
Total CDD + CDF
CONCENTRATION'
ng/dscm, as measured
M23-B-1
(0,0021)
0.041
(0.0041)
0.016
(0.0041)
(0.0041)
(0.0041)
0.041
0.010
0.018
0.070
0.19
0,0082
0.29
0.0041
0.0062
0.088
0.0082
0.0041
0.0041
(0.0041)
0.033
0.014
0.0021
0.016
0.12
0.42
0.61
M23-B-2
(0.0033)
0.090
(0.0067)
0.030
(0.0067)
(0.0067)
(0.0067)
0.040
0.010
0.017
{0.030}
0.18
0.0067
0.12
(0.0033)
(0.0033)
0.020
0.0067
0.0020
(0.0033)
(0.0067)
0.020
{0.0067}
(0.0067)
{0.0067}
{0.0067}
0.16
0.34
M23-B-3
(0.0025)
0.15
(0.0020)
0.030
(0.0075)
(0.0050)
(0.0050)
0.033
0.010
0.010
{0.085}
0.23
0.010
0.30
(0.0025)
(0.0025)
0.065
0.0075
0.0020
{0.0025}
(0.0050)
0.013
0.0075
(0.0075)
0.0075
0.015
0.39
0.62
Average
(0.00)
0.095
0.00
0.026
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.038
0.010
0.015
0.070
0.20
0.0083
0.24
0.0041
0.0062
0,058
0.075
0.0027
0.0041
0.00
0.022
0.011
0.0021
0.012
0.014
0.33
0.52
EMISSION RATE"
Mg/hr
M23-B-1
(0.041)
0.81
(0.081)
0,33
(0.081)
(0.081)
(0.081)
0.81
0.20
0.37
1.4
3.7
0.16
5.7
0.081
0.12
1.7
0.16
0.081
0.081
(0.081)
0.65
0,28
0.041
0.33
0.24
8,3
12
M23-B-2
(0.058)
1.6
(0.12)
0.52
(0.12)
(0.12)
(0.12)
0.69
0.17
0.29
{0.52}
3.1
0.12
2.1
(0.058)
(0.058)
0.35
0.12
0.035
(0.058)
(0.12)
0.35
{0.12}
(0.12)
{0.12}
{0.12}
2.8
5.9
M23-B-3
(0.058)
3.6
(0.050)
0.70
(0.17)
(0.12)
(0.12)
0.76
0.23
0.23
{2.0}
5.2
0.23
7.0
(0.058)
(0,058)
1.5
0.17
0.047
{0.058}
(0.12)
0.29
0,17
(0.17)
0.17
0.35
9.1
14
Average
0.00
2.0
0.00
0.51
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.75
0.20
0.30
1.4
4.6
0.17
4.9
0.081
0.12
1.2
0.15
0.054
0.081
0.00
0.43
0.23
0.041
0.25
0.30
6.8
11
* Nanogram per dry standard cubic meter at 20°C and 1 atm.
b Micrograms per hour,
() Non Detectable - Results are below target analyte detection limits. ND values are not counted in totals or averages.
{ } Estimated Maximum Possible Concentration. EMPC values are not counted in totals or averages.
2-8
-------
TABLE 2.7
CDD/CDF STACK GAS CONCENTRATIONS AND 2378 TOXIC EQUIVALENT STACK
GAS CONCENTRATIONS ADJUSTED TO 7 PERCENT OXYGEN
KILN NO. 2 SCRUBBER "B" OUTLET
EASTERN RIDGE LIME COMPANY - RIPPLEMEAD, VA
CONGENER
Dioxins
2378 TCDD
Total TCDD
12378PeCDD
Total PeCDD
123478 HxCDD
123678 HxCDD
123789 HxCDD
Total HxCDD
1 234678 HpCDD
Total HpCDD
Octa CDD
Total CDD
Furans
2378 TCDF
Total TCDF
12378 PeCDF
23478 PeCDF
Total PeCDF
123478 HxCDF
123678 HxCDF
234678 HxCDF
123789 HxCDF
Total HxCDF
1 234678 HpCDF
1 234789 HpCDF
Total HpCDF
Octa CDF
Total CDF
Total CDD + CDF
CONCENTRATION"
ng/dscm, adjusted to 7 percent O2
M23-B-1
(0.0022)
0,044
(0.0044)
0.017
(0.0044)
(0.0044)
(0.0044)
0.044
0.011
0,020
0.074
0.20
0.0087
0.30
0.0044
0.0065
0.094
0.0087
0.0044
0.0044
(0.0044)
0.035
0.014
0.0022
0.017
0.013
0.45
0.64
M23-B-2
(0.0035)
0.095
(0.0070)
0.032
(0.0070)
(0.0070)
(0.0070)
0.042
0.011
0.018
{0.032}
0.19
0.0070
0.13
(0.0035)
(0.0035)
0.021
0.0070
0.0021
(0.0035)
(0.0070)
0.021
{0.0067}
(0.0070)
{0.0070}
{0.0070}
0.17
0.36
M23-B-3
(0.0026)
0.160
(0.0021)
0.032
(0.0079)
(0.0053)
(0.0053)
0.034
0.011
0.011
{0.089}
0.24
0.011
0.32
(0.0026)
(0.0026)
0.068
0.0079
0.0021
0.0026
(0.0053)
0.013
0.0075
(0.0079)
0.0079
0.016
0.41
0.65
Average
0.00
0.10
0.00
0.027
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.04
0.011
0.016
0.074
0.21
0.0087
0.25
0.0044
0.0065
0.061
0.0079
0.0029
0.0035
0.00
0.023
0.011
0.0022
0.013
0.014
0.34
0.55
2378-
TCDD*
Toxic
Equiv.
Factor
1.000
0.500
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.010
0.001
0.100
0.050
0.500
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.010
0.010
0.001
2378 TOXIC EQUIVALENCIES
ng/dscm, adjusted to 7 percent O2
M23-B-1
(0.0022)
(0.0022)
(0.00044)
(0.00044)
(0.00044)
0.00011
0.000074
0.00018
0.00087
0.00022
0.0033
0.00087
0.00044
0.00044
(0.00044)
0.00014
0.000022
0.000013
0.00632
0.00650
M23-B-2
(0.004)
(0.004)
(0.00070)
(0.00070)
(0.00070)
0.00011
{0.000032}
0.00011
0.00070
(0.00018)
(0.0018)
0.00070
0.00021
(0.00035)
(0.00070)
{0.000067}
(0.000070)
{0.0000070}
0.00161
0.00172
M23-B-3
(0.003)
(0.0011)
(0.00079)
(0.00053)
(0.00053)
0,00011
{0.000089}
0.00011
0.001 1
(0.00013)
(0.0013)
0.00079
0.00021
0.00026
(0.00053)
0.000075
(0.000079)
0.000016
0.00245
0.00256
Average
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0001 1
0.000074
0.00013
0.00087
0.0022
0.0033
0.00079
0.00029
0.00035
0.00
0.00011
0.000022
0.000014
0.00156
0.00359
' Nanogram per dry standard cubic meter adjusted to 7 percent oxygen at 20 °C and 1 atm.
b North Atlantic Treaty Organization, Committee on the Challenges of Modern Society. Pilot study on International Information
Exchange on Dioxins and Related Compounds: International Toxicity Equivalency Factor (I-TEF) Methods of Risk Assessment for
Complex Mixtures of Dioxins and Related Compounds. Report No. 176, August 1988.
()Non Detectable - Results are below target analyte detection limits. ND values are not counted in totals or averages.
{ } Estimated Maximum Possible Concentration. EMPC values are not counted in totals or averages.
2-9
-------
TABLE 2.8
PARTICULATE/METALS EMISSIONS SAMPLING AND STACK GAS PARAMETERS
KILN NO. 2 SCRUBBER "A" OUTLET
EASTERN RIDGE LIME COMPANY - RIPPLEMEAD, VA
Run No.
Date
Total Sampling Time, min.
Average Sampling Rate, dscfm3
Sample Volume:
dscf
dscmc
Average Stack Gas Temp., °F
O2 Concentration, % by Volume
CO2 Concentration, % by Volume
Moisture, % by Volume
Stack Gas Volumetric Flow Rate:
aefmd
dscfma
dscmme
Isokinetic Sampling Ratio, %
M29-A-1
10/16/96
240
0.539
129.347
3.663
128
6.6
21.1
15.0
25,740
18,799
532
102.4
M29-A-2
10/17/96
240
0.548
131.430
3.772
126
5.0
23.7
14.2
25,454
18,754
531
100.3
M29-A-3
10/18/96
240
0.558
134.001
3.794
129
6.7
21.0
15.4
28,226
20,250
573
101.7
Average
0.548
131.593
3.726
128
6.1
21.9
14.9
26,473
19,268
546
101.5
* Dry standard cubic feet per minute at 68°F and 1 atm.
b Dry standard cubic feet at 68 "F and 1 atm.
c Dry standard cubic meters at 20°C and 1 atm.
d Actual cubic feet per minute at stack conditions.
° Dry standard cubic meters per minute at 20°C and 1 atm.
2-10
-------
contained 21.9% CO2, 6.1% O2, and 14.9% moisture (100% of saturation). The average stack
gas volumetric flow rate was 26,473 acfin or 19,268 dscfin or 546 dscmm.
Table 2.9 summarizes the stack gas particulate matter concentrations and emission rates.
The average concentration was 5.38 E-02 grains per dry standard cubic foot (gr/dscf) or
1.23 E-01 grams per dry standard cubic meter (g/dscm). The concentrations are also shown
adjusted to 7% O2. The average mass emission rate was 8,86 pounds per hour (Ib/hr) or 4.02
kilograms per hour (kg/hr).
Table 2.10 summarizes the stack gas metals concentrations and emission rates. All of the
target metals were found to be present in all three samples. Average concentrations ranged from
1.93 micrograms per dry standard cubic meter (ug/dscm) for arsenic to 33.7 ug/dscm for
selenium.
Scrubber "B"
Table 2.11 summarizes the particulate matter/metals emissions sampling and stack gas
parameters. The total sampling time for each test run was 240 minutes. The average sample
volume was 131.312 dscf or 3.718 dscm. The average stack gas temperature was 133 °F and
contained 19.6% CO2, 7.7% O2, and 16.6% moisture (97% of saturation). The average stack gas
volumetric flow rate was 15,795 acfm or 11,153 dscfm or 316 dscmm.
Table 2.12 summarizes the stack gas particulate matter concentrations and emission rates.
The average concentration was 4.14 E-02 gr/dscf or 9.48 E-02 g/dscm. The concentrations are
also shown adjusted to 7% O2. The average emission rate was 3.90 Ib/hr or 1.77 kg/hr.
Table 2.13 summarizes the stack gas metals concentrations and emission rates. All of the
target metals were found to be present in all three samples. Average concentrations ranged from
1.54 ug/dscm for arsenic to 36.9 ug/dscm for selenium.
2.2.3 Total Hydrocarbons
Total hydrocarbons (THC) were measured using a flame ionization analyzer (FIA)
calibrated with propane-in-air gases. Two FIAs were used, one for the Kiln No. 2 exhaust and
one for the outlets of Scrubbers "A" and "B". The outlet FIA was used to alternately sample the
outlet stacks of scrubber A or B at approximately 15-minute intervals. The FIAs were operated
on a 0-100 parts per million by volume (ppmv) range. The instrument sensitivity was ±2% of
span or 2 ppmv. The sample lines, pump, and detector were heated; therefore the THC
concentrations were measured on a wet basis. The measured moisture contents in each stack
were used to correct the measured concentrations on a wet basis to concentrations on a dry basis.
At the scrubber outlets the average moistures obtained for each run from the Method 23 and
Method 29 moisture determinations were used.
2-11
-------
TABLE 2.9
PARTICULATE MATTER CONCENTRATIONS AND EMISSION RATES
KILN NO. 2 SCRUBBER "A" OUTLET
EASTERN RIDGE LIME COMPANY - RIPPLEMEAD, VA
Run No.
Date
Clock Time, 24-hr clock
Concentration:
gr/dscf
gr/dscf@7%O2b
g/dscmc
g/dscm @ 7% O2d
Emission Rate:
lb/hre
kg/hrf
M29-A-1
10/16/96
1510-2038
0.0454
0.0301
0.104
0.0688
7.31
3.32
M29-A-2
10/17/96
1140-1630
0.0687
0.0455
0.157
0.104
11.0
5.01
M29-A-3
10/18/96
1100-1548
0.0474
0.0314
0.108
0.072
8.22
3.73
Average
0.0538
0.0356
0.123
0.0815
8.86
4.02
a Grains per dry standard cubic foot at 68°F and 1 atm.
b Grains per dry standard cubic foot at 68°F and 1 atm adjusted to 7 percent O2.
c Grams per dry standard cubic meter at 20°C and 1 atm.
d Grams per dry standard cubic meter at 20°C and 1 atm adjusted to 7 percent O2.
e Pounds per hour.
f Kilograms per hour.
2-12
-------
TABLE 2.10
STACK GAS METALS CONCENTRATIONS AND EMISSION RATES
KILN NO. 2 SCRUBBER "A" OUTLET
EASTERN LIME COMPANY - RIPPLEMEAD, VA
Run No.
Date
Clock Time, 24-hr Clock
Antimony (Sb)
^g/dscm"
Mg/dscm @ 7% O2b
g/hr*
Arsenic (As)
£ig/dscma
Mg/dscm @ 7% O2b
g/hrc
Ber>'llium (Be)
Mg/dscma
^g/dsem @ 7% O2b
g/hrc
Cadmium (Cd)
^ig/dscm"
Mg/dsem @ 7% O2b
,g/hrc
Total Chromium (Cr)
/^g/dscma
Mg/dscm @ 7% 02b
g/hr£
Cobalt (Co)
^g/dscm*
^g/dscm @ 7% O2b
g/hrc
Lead (Pb)
^g/dsema
^g/dsem @ 7% O2b
g/hrc
Manganese (Mn)
Mg/dsema
Mg/dscm @ 7% O2b
sfa°
Mercury (Hg)
^g/dscma
^g/dscm @ 7% O2b
g/hrc
Nickel (Ni)
/^g/dscma
/^g/dscm @ 7% O2b
g/hrc
Selenium (Se)
/^g/dscm"
Mg/dscm @ 7% 02b
g/hr°
M29-A-1
10/16/96
1510-2038
6.42
6.24
0.205
2.50
2.43
0.0800
10.4
10.1
0.332
1.03
1.01
0.0330
15.3
14.9
0.490
10.5
10.2
0.335
20.3
19.7
0.647
21.4
20.8
0.684
2.78
2.71
0.0889
26.2
25.5
0.836
53.0
51.5
1.69
1M29-A-2
10/17/96
1140-1630
4.65
4.06
0.148
2.02
1.77
0.0645
20.6
18.0
0.656
5.21
4.56
0.166
14.5
12.7
0.461
15.2
13.2
0.483
42.5
37.1
1.35
53.5
46.7
1.70
1.69
1.48-
0.0538
23.0
20.1
0.734
28.5
24.9
0.908
M29-A-3
10/18/96
1100-1548
3.00
2.94
0.103
1.26
1.23
0.0432
16.7
16.3
0.573
1.53
1.50
0.0528
7.35
7.20
0.253
16.8
16.4
0.577
11.7
11.5
0.403
20.1
19.6
0.690
1.84
1.80
0.0634
17.9
17.5
0.616
19.5
19.1
0.672
Average
4.69
4.41
0.152
1.93
1.81
0.0626
15.9
14.8
0.520
2.59
2.35
0,0840
12.4
11.6
0.402
14.1
13.3
0.465
24.8
22.8
0.801
31.6
29.1
1.03
2.10
2.00
0.0687
22.4
21.0
0.729
33.7
31.8
1.09
Micrograms per dry standard cubic meter i
b Micrograms per dry standard cubic meter!
c Grams per hour.
!20°Cand 1 atm.
! 20°C and 1 atm, adjusted to 7% O2.
2-13
-------
TABLE 2.11
PARTICULATE/METALS EMISSIONS SAMPLING AND STACK GAS PARAMETERS
KILN NO. 2 SCRUBBER "B" OUTLET
EASTERN RIDGE LIME COMPANY - RIPPLEMEAD, VA
Run No.
Date
Total Sampling Time, min.
Average Sampling Rate, dscftna
Sample Volume:
dscf
dscmc
Average Stack Gas Temp., °F
O2 Concentration, % by volume
CO2 Concentration, % by volume
Moisture, % by volume
Volumetric Flow Rate:
acfmd
dscfin"
dscmme
Isokinetic Sampling Ratio, %
M29-B-1
10/16/96
240
0.717
172.068
4.872
135
7.8
19.0
17.5
16,444
11,510
326
100.5
M29-B-2
10/17/96
240
0.416
99.783
2.826
130
7.7
20.0
15.6
13,754
9,907
281
100.7
M29-B-3
10/18/96
240
0.509
122.085
3.457
133
7.6
19.7
16.7
17,185
12,044
341
101.3
Average
0.547
131.312
3.718
133
7.7
19.6
16.6
15,795
11,153
316
100.8
" Dry standard cubic feet per minute at 68°F and I atm.
b Dry standard cubic feet at 68°F and 1 atm.
c Dry standard cubic meters at 20°C and 1 atm.
d Actual cubic feet per minute at stack conditions.
e Dry standard cubic meters per minute at 20°C and 1 atm.
2-14
-------
TABLE 2.12
PARTICULATE MATTER CONCENTRATIONS AND EMISSION RATES
KILN NO. 2 SCRUBBER "B" OUTLET
EASTERN RIDGE LIME COMPANY - RIPPLEMEAD, VA
Run No.
Date
Clock Time, 24-hr clock
Concentration:
gr/dscf
gr/dscf@7%O2b
g/dscmc
g/dscm @ 7% O2d
Emission Rate:
lb/hre
kg/hrf
M29-B-1
10/16/96
1514-2037
0.0325
0.0215
0.0743
0.0493
3.20
1.45
M29-B-2
10/17/96
1140-1630
0.0540
0.0360
0.124
0.0824
4,58
2.08
M29-B-3
10/18/96
1100-1550
0.0378
0.0253
0.0864
0.0578
3.90
1.77
Average
0.0414
0.0276
0.0948
0.0631
3.90
1.77
" Grains per dry standard cubic foot at 68°F and 1 atm.
b Grains per dry standard cubic foot at 68 °F and 1 atm adjusted to 7 percent O2.
0 Grams per dry standard cubic meter at 20°C and I atm,
d Grams per dry standard cubic meter at 20°C and 1 atm adjusted to 7 percent O2.
e Pounds per hour.
f Kilograms per hour.
2-15
-------
TABLE 2.13
STACK GAS METALS CONCENTRATIONS AND EMISSION RATES
KILN NO.2 SCRUBBER "B" OUTLET
EASTERN RIDGE LIME COMPANY - RIPPLEMEAD, VA
Run No.
Date
Clock Time, 24-hr Clock
Antimony (Sb)
Mg/dsem*
Mg/dscm @ 7% O2b
g/hrc
Arsenic (As)
fjig/dscm"
Mg/dsem @ 7% O2b
g/hrc
Beryllium (Be)
£ig/dsema
Mg/dscm @ 7% O2b
g/hrc
Cadmium (Cd)
^g/dscm°
Mg/dscm @ 7% O2b
g/hrc
Total Chromium (Cr)
^g/dscma
Mg/dscm @ 7% O2b
g/hr"
Cobalt (Co)
/^g/dscma
^g/dscm @ 7% O2b
g/hrc
Lead (Pb)
^g/dscma
Mg/dscm @ 7% O2b
g/hr*
Manganese (Mn)
/^g/dscm3
Mg/dscm @ 7% O2b
g/hr=
Mercury (Hg)
Mg/dscm"
Mg/dscm @ 7% O2b
g/hr0
Nickel (Ni)
^g/dscm'
jUg/dscm @ 7% O2b
g/hr1
Selenium (Se)
^g/dscma
Mg/dscm @ 7% O2b
g/hr=
M29-B-1
10/16/96
1514-2037
3.69
3.92
0.0722
1.51
1.60
0.0295
11.1
11.8
0.218
1.98
2.11
0.0388
7.78
8.25
0.152
14.7
15.6
0.287
14.2
15.1
0.278
9.05
9.60
0.177
2.79
2.96
0.0546
16.0
17.0
0.313
46.6
49.4
0.911
M29-B-2
10/17/96
1140-1630
5.91
6.22
0.0995
2.09
2.20
0.0351
16.6
17.4
0.279
4.71
4.96
0.0792
.16.7
17.6
0.282
16.0
16.8
0.269
52.7
55.5
0.888
61.6
64.8
1.04
2.25
2.37
0.0379
26.9
28.3
0.453
38.9
41.0
0.655
M29-B-3
10/18/96
1100-1550
3.12
3.26
0.0639
1.03
1.08
0,0211
16.8
17.6
-0.344
1.37
1.43
0.0281
7.00
7.32
0.143
16.4
17.1
0.336
13.6
14.2
0.279
21.3
22.3
0.436
1.99
2.08
0.0407
18.9
19.7
0.386
25.3
26.4
0.517
Average
4.24
4.47
0.0785
1.54
1.63
0.0286
14.8
15.6
0.280
2.69
2.83
0.0487
10.5
11.1
0.192
15.7
16.5
0.297
26.9
28.3
0.482
30.6
32.2
0.550
2.34
2.47
0.0444
20.6
21.7
0.384
36.9
39.0
0.695
Micrograms per dry standard
b Micrograms per dry standard
c Grams per hour.
cubic meter @ 20° C and 1 atm.
cubic meter @ 20°C and 1 atm, adjusted to 7% O2.
2-16
-------
At the kiln exhaust, it was not possible to measure stack gas velocity. In order to
determine the kiln exhaust volumetric flow rate, it was necessary to calculate this value based
on the measured flow rates at the scrubber outlets and accounting for dilution air. Also, at the
kiln exhaust, measurements were made of stack gas CO2, O2, and moisture content so that
corrections could be made for dilution air and wet-to-dry THC concentrations. On average
20% dilution air entered the duct between the kiln exhaust and scrubber outlet.
Kiln No. 2
Table 2.14 summarizes the exhaust gas conditions at the Kiln No. 2 exhaust. The
average exhaust gas temperature was 926°F and contained 25.1% CO2,4.0% O2, and 9,9%
moisture. The average exhaust gas volumetric flow rate was 78,038 acfm or 25,203 dscfin or
714dscmm.
Table 2.15 summarizes the THC emissions from Kiln No. 2. In all cases the THC
concentrations were very low, being only about 3 ppmv above the instrument detection of 2
ppmv. At the kiln exhaust the average THC concentration was 4.6 ppmv, dry basis, or 3.8
ppmv adjusted to 7% O2. The average emission rate was 0.80 Ib/hr. At the outlet of scrubber
"A" the average THC concentration was 5.7 ppmv or 5.3 ppmv adjusted to 7% O2. The
average emissions rate was 0.73 Ib/hr. At the outlet of scrubber "B" the average THC
concentration was 5.2 ppmv or 5.5 ppmv at 7% O2. The combined THC emission rate from
both scrubbers was 1.13 Ib/hr.
2.3 HYDRATOR
Table 2.16 summarizes the particulate matter/metals emissions sampling and stack gas
parameters. The total sampling time for each test run was 120 minutes. The average sample
volume was 48.307 dscf or 1.368 dscm. The average stack gas temperature was 185°F and
contained 57.9% moisture. The stack gas composition (on a dry basis) was assumed to be
20.9% O2 and no CO2. The average stack gas volumetric flow rate was 3,278 acfm or 1,065
dscfm or 30.2 dscmm.
Table 2.17 summarizes the stack gas particulate matter concentrations and emission
rates. The average concentration was 4.16 E-02 gr/dscf or 9.53 E-02 g/dscf. The
concentrations are also shown adjusted to 7% O2. The average emission rate was 3.79 E-02
lb/hrorl.72E-01kg/hr.
Table 2.18 summarizes the stack gas metals concentrations and emission rates. All of
the target metals except beryllium and mercury were found to be present in all three samples.
Average concentrations of those metals detected ranged from 0.879 u-g/dscm for cadmium to
22.9 [ig/dscm for manganese.
247
-------
TABLE 2.14
SUMMARY OF STACK GAS CONDITIONS
KILN NO. 2 EXHAUST
EASTERN RIDGE LIME COMPANY - RIPPLEMEAD, VA
Run No.
Date
Average Stack Gas Temp., °F
O2 Concentrations, % by volume
CO2 Concentration, % by volume
Moisture, % by volume
Stack Gas Volumetric Flow Rate:
acfma-b
dscfma>c
dsemma'a
1
10-16-96
924
3.5
25.0
11.0
73,534
23,901
677
2
10-17-96
905
•2.7
27.4
10.3
72,171
22,975
651
3
10-18-96
950
5.4
23.0
8.4
88,409
28,732
814
Average
926
4.0
25.1
9.9
78,038
25,203
714
" Calculated using combined outlet volumetric flow rates from scrubbers "A" and "B" and adjustments for
dilution air.
b Actual cubic feet per minute at stack conditions.
c Dry standard cubic feet per minute at 68°F and 1 atm,
* Dry standard cubic meters per minute at 20°C and 1 atm.
2-18
-------
TABLE 2.15
SUMMARY OF TOTAL HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS - KILN NO. 2
EASTERN RIDGE LIME COMPANY - RIPPLEMEAD, VA
Run No.
Date
Kiln No. 2 Exhaust
Flow Rate, dscfma'b
Oxygen, %
THC Concentration
ppmvdc
ppmvd @ 7% O2d
THC Emission Rate
lb/hre
Scrubber "A" Outlet
Flow Rate, dscfma
Oxygen, %
THC Concentration
ppmvdc
ppmvd @ 7% O2d
THC Emission Rate
Ib/hr6
Scrubber "B" Outlet
Flow Rate, dscfma
Oxygen, %
THC Concentration
ppmvdc
ppmvd @ 7% O2d
THC Emission Rate
lb/hrs
Scrubbers Outlet Total
Flow Rate, dscfm3
Oxygen, %
THC Concentration
ppmvd0
ppmvd @ 7% O2d
THC Emission Rate
Ib/hr*
25 A- 1
10-16-96
23,901
3.5
2.3
1.8
0.38
18,548
6.6
3.4
3.3
0.43
11,589
7.8
5.0
5.3
0.40
30,137
7.1
4.0
4.0
0.83
25A-2
10-17-96
22,975
2.7
6.9
5.3
1.1
18,014
5.0
7.6
6.7
0.94
10,050
7.7
6.0
6.3
0.41
28,064
6.0
7.0
6.6
1.35
25A-3
10-18-96
28,732
5.4
4.7
4.2
0.93
19,432
6.7
6.1
6.0
0.81
12,839
7.6
4.7
4.9
0.41
32,271
7.1
5.5
5.6
1.22
Average
25,203
3.9
4.6
3.8
0.80
18,665
6.1
5.7
5.3
0.73
11,493
7.7
5.2
5.5
0.41
30,158
6.7
5.5
5.4
1.13
* Dry standard cubic feet per minute at 68°F and 29.92" Hg.
h Calculated from combined outlet flow rate corrected for dilution air.
c Parts per million by volume, as propane, dry basis.
d Parts per million by volume, as propane, dry basis, adjusted to 7 % oxygen.
c Pounds per hour.
2-19
-------
TABLE 2.16
PARTICULATE/METALS EMISSIONS SAMPLING AND STACK GAS PARAMETERS
HYDRATOR EXHAUST STACK
EASTERN RIDGE LIME COMPANY - RIPPLEMEAD, VA
Run No.
Date
Total Sampling Time, min.
Average Sampling Rate, dscfma
Sample Volume:
dsej*
dscm€
Average Stack Gas Temp., °F
02 Concentration, % by volume
CO2 Concentration, % by volume
Moisture,, % by volume
Stack Gas Volumetric Flow Rate:
acfmd
dscfm"
dscmm6
Isokinetic Sampling Ratio, %
M29-5
10/19/96
120
0.443
53.142
1.505
185
20.9
0
58.6
3,403
1,088
30.8
107.0
M29-6
10/20/96
120
0.352
42.234
1.196
185
20.9
0
56.3
3,002
1,015
28.7
92.0
M29-7
10/20/96
120
0.413
49.544
1.403
186
20.9
0
58.7
3,428
1,094
31.0
99.2
Average
0.403
48.307
1.368
185
20.9
0
57.9
3,278
1,065
30.2
99.4
' Dry standard cubic feet per minute at 68°F and 1 atm.
b Dry standard cubic feet at 68°F and 1 atm.
c Dry standard cubic meters at 20 °C and 1 atm.
d Actual cubic feet per minute at stack conditions.
* Dry standard cubic meters per minute at 20°C and 1 atm.
2-20
-------
TABLE 2.17
PARTICULATE MATTER CONCENTRATIONS AND EMISSION RATES
HYDRATOR EXHAUST STACK
EASTERN RIDGE LIME COMPANY - RIPPLEMEAD, VA
Run No,
Date
Clock Time, 24-hr Clock
Concentration:
gr/dscf
g/dscmb
Emission Rate:
lb/hrc
kg/hrd
M29-5
10/19/96
1339-1541
0.0361
0.0825
0.336
0.153
M29-6
10/20/96
1008-1213
0.0460
0.105
0.400
0.182
M29-7
10/20/96
1233-1436
0.0428
0.0980
0.402
0.182
Average
0.0416
0.0953
0.379
0.172
a Grains per dry standard cubic foot at 68 °F and 1 atm.
b Grams per dry standard cubic meter at 20°C and 1 atm.
c Pounds per hour.
d Kilograms per hour.
2-21
-------
TABLE 2.18
STACK GAS METALS CONCENTRATIONS AND EMISSION RATES
KILN NO.2 HYDRATOR OUTLET
EASTERN RIDGE LIME COMPANY - RIPPLEMEAD, VA
Run No.
Date
Clock Time, 24-hr Clock
Antimony (Sb)
^g/dsem*
Sfta*
Arsenic (As)
Mg/dscm1
g/hrc
Beryllium (Be)
Mg/dscm*
g/hr*
Cadmium (Cd)
jUg/dscm"
gftef
Total Chromium (Cr)
Mg/dscm*
g/hl*
Cobalt (Co)
Mg/dscma
g/hr*
Lead (Pb)
Mg/dscm"
g/hr'
Manganese (Mn)
^g/dscm"
g/hrc
Mercury (Hg)
Mg/dscma
gtoc
Nickel (Ni)
^ig/dscm"
g/hrc
Selenium (Se)
Mg/dscm"
g/hr1
M29-5
10/19/96
1339-1541
13.0
0.0241
3.28
0.00605
0.00
0.00
0.970
0,00179
25.5
0.0472
5.95
0.0110
4.35
0.00803
31.3
0.0578
0.00
0.00
17.5
0.0324
12.5
0.0231
M29-6
10/20/96
1008-1213
4.26
0.00735
2.30
0.00396
0.00
0.00
0.853
0.00147
27.3
0.0470
6.31
0.0109
8.20
0.0141
23.9
0.0412
0.00
0.00
9.45
0.0163
3.71
0.00640
M29-7
10/20/96
1233-1436
5.89
0.0110
0.948
0.00176
0.00
0.00
0.813
0.00151
13.7
0.0254
3.07
0.00571
6.21
0.0115
13.5
0.0250
0.00
0.00
14.0
0.0261
5.77
0.0107
Average
7.73
0.0141
2.17
0.00393
0.00
0.00
0.879
0.00159
22.2
0.0399
5.11
0.00919
6.25
0.0112
22.9
0.0414
0.00
0,00
13.7
0.0249
7.33
0.0134
Micrograms per dry standard cubic meter @ 20° C and 1 atm.
b Micrograms per dry standard cubic meter @ 20°C and 1 atm, adjusted to 7% O2.
c Grams per hour.
2-22
-------
3.0 PROCESS DESCRIPTION
The Eastern Ridge Lime Company is located in Ripplemead, Virginia. The facility has
three coal-fired rotary kilns. The emissions from each kiln are controlled by two parallel
Ducon wet scrubbers. Kiln No. 2 is rated at 350 tons per day.
In addition to the kilns, the facility also operates a hydrator where lime is converted to
hydrated lime. The hydrator operates continuously. Water sprays are used as an integrated
part of the hydrating process to prevent product loss.
During this testing program, Research Triangle Institute (RTI), under contract to the
ESD/MICG, was responsible for monitoring and documenting all process and emission control
system operational parameters, and development of a detailed process section for the report.
Contained in this section is a condensed narrative and process conditions. RTFs complete
process description and detailed process conditions are contained in Appendix A.
3.1 PROCESS DESCRIPTION FOR EASTERN RIDGE PLANT
Lime (CaO) is typically produced in the U.S. by crushing and then heating limestone
(CaCO3) in an inclined, rotating kiln. The limestone is heated to temperatures of around 2000
degrees Fahrenheit (°F) which cause it to breakdown chemically into lime and CO2. At
Eastern Ridge, most of the lime is sold as CaO; a small amount (ten percent of production) is
converted into hydrated lime (Ca(OH)2).
Limestone at the Eastern Ridge plant is surface-mined from a quarry located at the
plant. The quarried limestone is crushed and screened into several sizes and then transferred
to a storage area. Prior to entering the kiln, the sized stone is washed with water to remove
dirt.
Kiln No. 2 is an inclined rotating kiln with a design capacity of 350 tons of lime per
day (115,150 tons per year). The kiln is 392 feet long with a tapered diameter (11 feet in
diameter at the front end of the kiln and 10 feet in diameter the remaining length of the kiln).
The incline of the kiln is '/2 inch per foot. Limestone enters the kiln at its back end (the highest
point of incline) and tumbles through the kiln via gravity and the rotating motion of the kiln
(typical rotating rates are 55 to 65 revolutions per hour). The residence time of the feed mate-
rial in the kiln is four hours. Approximately two tons of limestone are required to produce a
ton of lime.
3-1
-------
The combustion of fuel, which consists of pulverized coal suspended in air, occurs at
the front end of the kiln (the origin and chemical composition of the coal at the time of testing
are unknown). The coal is pulverized to the consistency of powder in a bowl mill (the bowl
mill is exclusive to the number two kiln). Air from the firing hood, located directly above the
combustion end of the kiln, is pulled into the bowl mill. The air preheats and dries the coal. A
fan on the mill blows the air and dry pulverized coal from the mill into the kiln. Typically a
quarter to a third of a ton of coal is consumed per ton of lime.
As the lime exits the kiln, it drops into one often satellite coolers that are attached to
the exterior of the kiln. The coolers are long cylindrical tubes (30 feet long by 8 feet wide in
diameter) filled with chains. As the coolers rotate with the kiln, the lime tumbles through the
chains which conduct heat away from the lime. Lime drops from the cooler tubes onto a
conveyor belt. The lime is conveyed to a screen, separated by particle size, and stored. Fines
from product screening are collected, stored, and used in hydrate production.
Approximately ten percent of the lime produced at Eastern Ridge is chemically reacted
with water to form a hydrated product. The chemical reaction for hydration is as follows;
CaO + H2O * Ca(OH)2 + heat
Lime Hydrate
At Eastern Ridge, the hydration process is carried out in seven steps. In step one, lime fines
are mixed with water in a pug mill to form a partially hydrated product. The pug mill is a
horizontal cylinder that contains a shaft fitted with short, heavy paddles that push and mix the
materials through the mill. The source of water to the pug mill is effluent from the wet
scrubber that treats exhaust from steps two through seven (the scrubber is discussed further
under Hydrator Emissions Control). In steps two through seven, the partially hydrated product
passes through a series of six mixing barrels which allow the mixture to fully react (the
transfer time through all six mixing barrels is approximately thirty minutes). After the lime is
hydrated, it is transferred to a storage bin, milled, and separated from impurities (such as
unreacted lime and limestone) with a whizzer separator (similar to a cylone). Approximately
28,000 tons of hydrate are typically produced annually.
3.2 EMISSIONS CONTROL
3.2.1 Kiln Emissions Control
Exhaust from Kiln No. 2 is routed to two, parallel spray towers. The spray
towers/scrubbers were manufactured by Ducon and were installed at the plant in the 1970's.
Each scrubber is equipped with a fan which draws the kiln exhaust up through the tower.
Water is sprayed into the tower at various points upstream of the fan and into the fan itself.
The exhaust from the fan exits through a stack. Effluent from the scrubbers is directed to a
3-2
-------
series of four settling ponds where solids are removed. Clarified water is recycled back to the
scrubbers.
3.2.2 Hydrator Emissions Control
The hydration process is exothermic, and part of the water in the hydrate mixture is
vaporized. Gases from the hydrator, containing water and lime particles, are pulled by fan to a
Ducon scrubber, scrubbed with 10 gallons per minute (gpm) of water (typical), and then
vented to the atmosphere. (The flow rate of scrubbing water varies somewhat with the
moisture content of the lime fines in step one of the hydration process. For example, newly
processed lime fines have less moisture than fines which have been kept in storage; thus, the
former may require more than 10 gpm while the latter may require less than 10 gpm.) Effluent
from the scrubber is added to the lime fines in step one. The Ducon scrubber is the same type
of spray tower used to control the kiln exhaust.
Refer to Figure 1 in Appendix A for a diagram of the kiln, hydrator and associated
emissions control. The diagram indicates the relative locations for each unit operation,
direction of flow for material and gas, input and output of materials and gas, and approximate
locations where process parameters were measured.
3.3 PROCESS OPERATION DURING TESTS
Data indicating the operation of the kiln, the scrubbers treating the kiln exhaust, and
the scrubber treating the hydrator exhaust are presented in this section. All process data for
the kiln were manually recorded by RTI every 15 minutes during the emissions testing and
taken from computer screens in the kiln control room; the recorded data were measured with
instruments already in place and used by the plant for process control of the kiln.
Table 3.1 summarizes the kiln operating conditions during each of the three test runs.
The average feed rates for coal and limestone were 3.65 and 26.39 tons per hour (t/hr),
respectively. The average temperatures at the kiln front and back were 1817°F and 992°F,
respectively. The average oxygen content at the kiln back was 0.9 percent (%).
Three different sizes of calcitic limestone were fed to the number two kiln during
testing; the stone sizes were referred to as "twos", "threes", and "fours". The sizes of these
stones are based on mesh size. "Twos" are stones that pass through a 1 and 3/8 inch mesh and
are retained on a 7/8 inch mesh. "Threes" are stones that pass through a 7/8 inch mesh and are
retained on a 3/8 inch mesh. "Fours" are stones that pass through a 3/8 inch mesh and are
retained on a 3/16 inch mesh. During testing, the size two stone was fed to the kiln separately
while the size three and four stones were combined and fed to the kiln as one feed. The
decision to use a stone size during the testing was dictated by the existing supply of the stone.
Neither size two stone nor sizes three and four stones were available in a large enough supply
to feed the number two kiln the same stone size during the entire three days of testing.
3-3
-------
TABLE 3.1
SUMMARY OF KILN NO. 2 OPERATING CONDITIONS
EASTERN RIDGE LIME COMPANY - RIPPLEMEAD, VA
Kiln Ooeratine Conditions
Run
No.
1
2
.3
Average
Coal Feed
t/hr*
3.69
3.65
3.61
3.65
Limestone Fee
t/hr»
25.21
28.16
25.81
26.39
Kiln Temperature °F
a
Front End
1741
1869
1840
1817
Back End
1010
945
1020
992
Oxygen Content at
Back End of Kiln, %
1.2
0.3
1.3
0.9
Tons per hour.
3-4
-------
For the scrubbers treating the kiln exhaust, PES measured the pressure drop across
each of the scrubbers and measured/calculated the volumetric flow rates of water entering and
exiting each of the scrubbers. To measure pressure drop, PES drilled pressure taps upstream
of each scrubber tower and at the end of each exhaust stack. The pressure drop across the
upstream tap and exhaust tap of each scrubber was measured using a U-tube manometer. The
pressure drop across each scrubber was measured and recorded once during each run, just prior
to testing.
PES measured the volumetric flow rate of water exiting the bottom of the each
scrubber by placing a container of known volume below the water outlet and recording the
time to fill the container. The opening of the container was slightly smaller than the water
outlet, thus, the container only collected approximately 80 percent of the exiting water. PES
took two measurements of the water flow rate exiting the bottom of each scrubber; the
measurements were taken back-to-back during run 2 of the kiln 2 scrubber tests.
PES measured the temperature, gas flow, and moisture content of the kiln exhaust just
prior to each scrubber tower and exiting each scrubber stack; based on these measurements,
PES calculated the volumetric flow rates of water vapor entering and exiting each scrubber.
These calculated flow rates, along with the measured flow rate of water exiting each scrubber,
were entered into a mass balance of water across the system to calculate the flow rate of water
injected into each scrubber (see Figure 2 in Appendix A for a mass balance of water of the
scrubber system).
Table 3.2 summarizes the scrubbers operating conditions during each of the three test
runs. The pressure drop across each scrubber was very erratic. On scrubber A the average
pressure drop was 3.9 inches of water (in. H2O) ranging from 2,9 to 4.9, On scrubber B the
average pressure drop was 2.3 in. H2O ranging from 0,9 to 4.9. The average water flow rate
into each scrubber was estimated to be 261 and 165 gallons per minute (gpm) in scrubbers A
and B, respectively.
During emissions testing, RTI manually recorded the water flow rate to the scrubber
treating the hydrator. The water flow rate was measured by an instrument already in place and
used by the plant for control of the hydrator. The water flow rate was initially recorded every
15 minutes; however, after no change was noted during the first hour, and after the operator of
the hydrator stated that the flow rate would remain fairly constant, the readings were recorded
less frequently. The average water flow rate to the scrubber was 9.5 gprn.
3-5
-------
TABLE 3.2
SUMMARY OF SCRUBBERS A AND B OPERATING CONDITIONS
EASTERN RIDGE LIME COMPANY - RIPPLEMEAD, VA
Run
No.
1
2
3
Average
Pressure Drop in.
A
2.9
4.9
3.8
3.9
B
1.0
0.9
4.9
2.3
Water Flow Rate.
A
—
261
—
261
gpmb
B
—
165
—
165
a Inches of water.
b Gallons per minute, estimated.
3-6
-------
4.0 SAMPLING LOCATIONS
4.1 NO. 2 KILN
4.1.1 Kiln Exhaust
The common inlet to the two Dueon scrubbers was located in a tapered (large-to-small)
rectangular duct that was oriented at a 45 ° angle to horizontal. This section of duct was six
feet wide by four feet high at the kiln discharge and five feet wide by four feet high at the
point where the duct split for discharge to the two scrubbers. The site was accessible via stairs
and a permanent platform. This location did not meet EPA Method 1 criteria for location of a
measurement site for velocity or sample traverses. Therefore, sampling at this location was
limited to gas composition (carbon dioxide and oxygen), moisture content, and total
hydrocarbons (THC). Sampling of these parameters was accomplished through a six-inch
inside diameter (ID) sample port located on the top of the duct. Figure 4.1 shows a simplified
schematic of the kiln exhaust measurement site.
4.1,2 Kiln No. 2 Scrubbers A and B
The two scrubbers were of similar design/operation and each had its own dedicated
exhaust stack. The measurement site at each scrubber outlet was located in a 48-inch ID round
vertical stack, 142 inches (2.95 equivalent stack diameters) downstream of the scrubber outlet
and 98 inches (2.04 equivalent stack diameters) upstream of the atmosphere. According to
EPA Method 1 criteria this location required 24 sample traverse points, 12 along each of two
perpendicular diameters.
Figure 4.2 shows a simplified schematic of the scrubbers outlet stacks measurement
sites. Access to the scrubber stacks was provided by a contractor who erected temporary
scaffold. Each stack was checked for the presence of cyclonic or non-parallel flow. The
results indicated cyclonic or non-parallel flow was present to the extent that modifications to
the stacks would be required. The average angle of rotation was about 35°, ranging from 24 to
45 °. This condition was corrected by re-installing flow straightening vanes that the facility
had used in the past. After installation of the straightening vanes the average angle of rotation
was reduced to 4°.
4.2 HYDRATOR
The measurement site for the hydrator stack was located in a 23.5-inch ID round
vertical stack 144 inches (6.12 equivalent stack diameters) downstream of the hydrator and
4-1
-------
From
Kiln
Sample Port
6-inch ID Sample Port
To Scrubber A
To Scrubber B
To Scrubbers
Side View
Figure 4.1 Eastern Ridge Lime Kiln No. 2 Kiln Exhaust Sampling Location.
-------
Flow
Straightening
Vanes
Blocked Off
Scrubber
A
48" ID
Cross-Section
SAMPLE TRAVERSE POINT LOCATIONS
Old Duct
Not In Use
o
Flow
Straightening
Vanes
Point
Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Fraction of
Stack ID
.021
.067
.118
.177
.250
.356
.644
.750
.823
.882
.933
.979
Distance
Inches
1.00
3.19
5.69
8.50
12.00
17.06
30.94
36.00
39.50
42.31
44.81
47.00
Port Depth
Inches
3.25
3.25
3.25
3.25
3.25
3.25
3.25
3.25
3.25
3.25
3.25
3.25
Port Location
Inches
4.25
6.44 / \
8.94 / \
11.75 / \
15.25 / \
20.31 / \
34.19
39.25
42.75
45.56
48.06
50.25
Scrubber
B
Figure 4.2 Eastern Ridge Lime No. 2 Kiln Scrubbers A and B Outlet Sampling Locations.
-------
120 inches (5.10 equivalent stack diameters) upstream of the atmosphere. According to EPA
Method 1 criteria, this location required 16 sample traverse points, eight along each of two
perpendicular diameters. Figure 4.3 shows a simplified schematic of the hydrator stack
sampling location and sample traverse points. The stack was accessible via stairs to the roof
and temporary scaffold.
4-4
-------
o
23.5" ID
SAMPLE TRAVERSE POINT LOCATIONS
Point Fraction of Distance Port Depth Port Location
Number Stack ID Inches Inches Inches
Cross Section
I
2
3
4
5
6
1
8
.032
.105
.194
.323
.677
.806
.895
.968
0.75
2.44
4,96
7.96
15.94
18.94
21.06
22.75
3.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
3.75
5.44
7.56
10.56
18.94
21.94
24.06
22.75
Pitched
Roof
Figure 4.3 Eastern Ridge Lime Hydrator Stack Sampling Location.
4-5
-------
5.0 SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES
Table 5.1 summarizes the sources, test parameters, test methods, number of tests, and
planned duration of each event. Sampling of both scrubber exhausts was conducted
simultaneously for CDD/CDF, THC, and PM/Metals. Sampling for THC at the kiln exhaust
was conducted simultaneously with the outlet sampling. Brief descriptions of each method
follow:
5.1 LOCATION OF MEASUREMENT SITES AND SAMPLE/VELOCITY
TRAVERSE POINTS
EPA Method 1, "Sample and Velocity Traverses for Stationary Sources," was used to
select the measurement sites and to establish velocity and sample traverse point locations. The
measurement sites are discussed in Section 4.0.
5.2 DETERMINATION OF STACK GAS VOLUMETRIC FLOW RATE
EPA Method 2, "Determination of Stack Gas Velocity and Volumetric Flow Rate
(Type S Pitot Tube)," was used to determine stack gas volumetric flow rate at the scrubber
outlets and hydrator stack, A Type S pilot tube, constructed according to Method 2 criteria
and having an assigned coefficient of 0.84 and connected to an inclined-vertical manometer
was used to measure velocity pressure. A calibrated Type K thermocouple attached directly to
the pitot tube was used to measure stack gas temperature. The average stack gas velocity was
calculated from the average square roots of the velocity pressure, average stack gas
temperature, stack gas molecular weight, and absolute stack pressure. The volumetric flow
rate is the product of velocity and the stack cross-sectional area.
At the scrubber inlet it was not possible to determine volumetric flow rate by direct
measurement. Instead the volumetric flow rate was calculated from the combined outlet flow
rates corrected for dilution air. No correction for moisture was necessary since the scrubber
outlet flow rates were on a dry basis. The following equation was used:
20.9 - %O.,
Q = Q
*-' c'rn. *-*
STDi ~STDo 20.9 -
2o
where: QSTDi — volumetric flow rate at the kiln exhaust, dscfm.
QsTDo = combined volumetric flow rate at the scrubbers outlets, dscfm.
O2i = % oxygen at the kiln exhaust
O2o — % oxygen (flow-weighted) at the scrubbers outlets.
5-1
-------
TABLE 5.1
SOURCES, TEST PARAMETERS, AND TEST METHODS SUMMARY
EASTERN RIDGE LIME COMPANY - RJPPLEMEAD, VA
Source
Scrubber Inlet
Scrubber Outlets (A&B}
Hvdrator Stack
Parameter
C02/02
Moisture
THC
Flow Rate
CO2/O2
Moisture
CDD/CDF
THC
PM/Metals
Flow Rate
Moisture
PM/Metals
EPA Test
Methods
3B
4
25A
1&2
3B
4
23
25A
29
1&2
4
29
No. Of
Tests
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Time per Test,
Minutes
240
240
240
240
240
240
240
240
240
120
120
120
5-2
-------
5.3 DETERMINATION OF DRY MOLECULAR WEIGHT AND EMISSION
CORRECTION FACTORS
EPA Method 3B, "Gas Analysis for the Determination of Emission Rate Correction
Factor or Excess Air," was used to measure carbon dioxide and oxygen content of the stack
gases. Gas samples were extracted from each stack using the integrated, single-point bag
sampling technique. The bag contents were analyzed onsite within six hours after sample
collection using an Orsat® analyzer to determine percent concentrations of carbon dioxide and
oxygen. The Orsat analyzer had 0.1 percent subdivisions.
5.4 DETERMINATION OF STACK GAS MOISTURE CONTENT
EPA Method 4, "Determination of Moisture Content in Stack Gases," was used to
determine stack gas moisture content. The quantity of condensed water was determined
gravimetrically and then compared to the total volume of gas sampled to determine the volume
percent moisture content.
At the scrubber outlets there was potential for the presence of water droplets in the gas
streams. Therefore, a second determination of the moisture content was made simultaneously
with the reference method by measuring the stack temperature at each sample traverse point
and assuming that the gas streams were saturated at that temperature. The moisture content
was then calculated using vapor pressure tables. If the results were found to be lower than
those obtained using the reference method then the gas streams contained water droplets. The
lower of the two results were used in all calculations.
5.5 DETERMINATION OF POLYCHLORINATED DIBENZO-P-DIOXINS AND
POLYCHLORINATED DIBENZOFURANS
EPA Method 23, "Determination of Polychlorinated Dibenzo-p-Dioxins and
Polychlorinated Dibenzofurans From Stationary Sources" was used to determine
polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins (CDD's) and polychlorinated dibenzofurans (CDF's).
Samples were withdrawn from the gas stream isokinetically and collected in the sample probe,
on a glass fiber filter, and on a packed column of XAD®-2 adsorbent material. The CDD's and
CDF's were extracted from the samples, separated by high resolution gas chromatography, and
measured by high resolution mass spectrometry. Triangle Laboratories, Inc., Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina prepared the filters and adsorbent traps, and performed the
required analyses. A schematic of the Method 23 sampling apparatus is shown in Figure 5.1.
5-3
-------
Temperature
Sensor
Stack
Button Hook ^Jal1
Nozzle
Temperature
Sensor
Gas
Flow
TypeS si
PitotTubc N
Empty 100 ml HPLC Water Empty Silica Gel
Vacuum
Gauge
Inclined
Manometer
Vacuum
Pump
Vacuum
Line
Figure 5.1 Method 23 CDD/CDFSampling Train.
-------
5.6 DETERMINATION OF TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
EPA Method 25A, "Determination of Total Gaseous Organic Concentrations Using a
Flame lonization Analyzer" was used to measure total hydrocarbon (THC) concentrations at
the kiln exhaust and scrubber outlets. Two flame ionization analyzers (FIAs) were used, one
for the inlet and one for the outlets. The outlet FIA alternately sampled each outlet stack for
15 minute periods. Heated sample lines and FIAs were used due to the high moisture content
in the stack gases. THC concentrations were expected to be less than 25 parts per million by
volume (ppmv) as propane. Therefore, both FIAs were operated on a 100 ppmv range. Span
gases consisting of propane-in-air, prepared according to EPA Protocol, were used.
Figure 5.2 is a schematic of the FIA sampling system. The two FIAs were equipped
with a strip chart recorder and a data logger. Prior to beginning the testing program, the two
FIA systems were assembled and a bias check and a response time test was conducted.
Acceptability criteria for the bias check, is a difference of not more than five percent between
the value measured by direct injection of calibration gas at the analyzer and the value obtained
by injection of the calibration gas at the calibration gas valve. (Details of the bias check are
presented in EPA Method 6C).
Prior to testing, PES performed the bias checks, response time tests, and calibration
error tests. Calibration drift checks were performed hourly and at the conclusion of each
measurement run.
5.7 DETERMINATION OF PARTICULATE MATTER AND METALS
EPA Method 29, "Determination of Metals Emissions From Stationary Sources," was
used to determine filterable particulate matter and metals. The target metals included:
Antimony (Sb), Arsenic (As), Beryllium (Be), Cadmium (Cd), Chromium (Cr), Cobalt (Co),
Lead (Pb), Manganese (Mn), Mercury (Hg), Nickel (Ni), and Selenium (Se). Samples were
withdrawn from the gas stream isokinetically and collected in the sample probe, on a tared
quartz-fiber filter and in a series of impingers containing acidic hydrogen peroxide solution
followed by acidified potassium permanganate. The probe and filter fractions were analyzed
gravimetrically in the PES laboratory to determine filterable particulate matter. Upon
completion of the particulate matter analyses, the particulate fractions and aqueous fractions
were submitted to the laboratory for metals analyses. Triangle Laboratories, Inc. performed the
metals analyses.
A schematic of Method 29 sampling train is shown in Figure 5.3. The sample recovery
scheme for metals is shown in Figure 5.4. The sample recover)' scheme for the additional Hg
fraction is shown in Figure 5.5. The sample preparation and analysis scheme is shown in
Figure 5.6. Metals other than Hg were be analyzed by inductively coupled argon plasma (ICP)
emission spectroscopy. Hg was analyzed by cold vapor atomic absorption spectroscopy
(CVAAS).
5-5
-------
Flow
SS Probe
Ul
Sample/Calibration
Valve
Teflorf Sample Line
Slack
4
I—| lOOcc/min
= t» Rale Meter
1 — I
T
Healed FIA
With Integral
Pump
Data
Logger
Chart
Recorder
Figure 5.2 Method 25A Measurement System for THC.
-------
Ul
Glass Probe
Tip
Temperature
Sensor
Temperature
Sensor
Manometer
Empty
(Optional) 10%
xx—i—x^—f
5%HNQ/ -„_... 4%KMnO./ '
Empty 4%KMn04/ ^
10%
Gel
Orifice
Vacuum
Line
1 I
Figure 5.3 Method 29 Participate Matter/Metals Sampling Train.
-------
andNoofe
f&KMU)
acetone
Front Hal of
filter Houng
Bnshwith
notmetafc brush
andriEewitti
Fit?
and Back ^
of Fits Hwang
Bushtner
bru*i rinse
will acetone
OH* finer to see
ifpartatte
reroffid; tf not,
repeat step AM
Rinse three
UnesvKli
MIHC3
F
0
acetone
Rinse t
times »
a-NH
4
V
tree
rith
IB
Ad
m
remwe filter
fronsflxrt
wtthTefbn-
coatritwears
andpbcein
petrid&h
Brush bose
pertiotle
ortonier
tlKSVKh
O.HW03
Salpetricfeti
wlhlape
beginrg
oftet)
Measut
*p»p
contents
Empty the
contents Mo
ccrtaher
tlnsvth
O.WHN03
2nd 8.3-d
^P*ps
praasj
Mwe
IfUjEf
contents
Empty the
ontentsinto
ottlner
Bnsetlree
ttewtth
»
BH
W
* Nu*er in parettheses Wales container wtter
Figure 5,4 Method 29 Sample Recovery Scheme (Sample Fractions 1-4).
5-8
-------
4th Impinger
(Bnpty)&5th
and 6th irpingers
(Acidified KMn04)
Measure
Hnpinger
contents
J
Ennpty the &npty the
impingerNo.4 tnpingers
contents into Nos.5&6
container contents into
Rinse
conti
with Rinse
liner
three
100 ml times with
0.1NHN03 permanganate
reagent, then
with
Remov
water
eany
residue with
25ml8N
HCIa
0.1NHN03 KMn04
(5A) (5B)
D kit ion
I
8NHCI
(5Q
Last hpinger
Weigh for
moist ire
Discard
Figure 5.5 Method 29 Sample Recovery Scheme (Sample Fraction 5).
5-9
-------
CMilNf}
WdProWRffit
(IstoWBfl
Figure 5.6 Method 29 Sample Preparation and Analysis Scheme.
-------
5.8 DETERMINATION OF SCRUBBER WATER FLOW RATE
There were no scrubber water flow rate indicators on either scrubber. In order to
estimate the water flow rate to each scrubber, PES placed a 33 gallon container under the
water discharge of each scrubber and measured the time required to fill the containers. Due to
the cross-sectional area of the discharge being larger than the container, PES assumed that
80% of the water was collected. Two measurement were made on each scrubber. The results
were calculated in gallons per minute. PES then calculated the amount of water entering each
scrubber by difference using the following equation:
Qwi - Qwof + Qws ~ Qwk
where: Qni = Water flow rate into the scrubber, gpm
Qm>f ~ Water flow rate from scrubber outfall, gpm
Qws = Water discharged from outlet stack, gpm
Qwk ~ Water discharged from kiln exhaust, gpm
5-11
-------
6.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL
PROCEDURES AND RESULTS
This section describes the specific QA/QC procedures employed by PES in performing
this series of tests. The procedures contained in the "Quality Assurance Handbook for Air
Pollution Measurement Systems, Volume III, Stationary Source Specific Methods," EPA-
600/77-027B, and in the reference test methods served as the basis for performance for all
testing and related work activities in this project.
6.1 CALIBRATION OF APPARATUS
The preparation and calibration of source sampling equipment is essential in
maintaining data quality. Brief descriptions of the calibration procedures used by PES follow.
6.1.1 Barometers
PES used aneroid barometers which are calibrated against a station pressure value
reported by a nearby National Weather Service Station corrected for elevation.
6.1.2 Temperature Sensors
Bimetallic dial thermometers and Type K thermocouples were calibrated using the
procedure described in Section 3.4.2 of the Quality Assurance Handbook. Each temperature
sensor was calibrated over the expected range of use against an ASTM 3C or 3F thermometer.
Table 6.1 summarizes the type of calibrations performed, the acceptable levels of variance,
and the results. Digital thermometers were calibrated using a thermocouple simulator having a
range of 0-2400°F.
6.1.3 Pitot Tubes
PES used Type S pilot tubes which are constructed to EPA Method 2 specifications.
Pitot tubes meeting these specifications are assigned to a baseline coefficient to 0.84 and need
not be calibrated. The dimensional criteria and results for each pilot tube used are summarized
in Table 6.2.
6-1
-------
TABLE 6.1
SUMMARY OF TEMPERATURE SENSOR CALIBRATION DATA
Temp.
Sensor
I.D.
5A
5C
5E
4B
4C
SH-1
SH-2
SH-3
Usage
Stack Gas
Stack Gas
Stack Gas
Stack Gas
Stack Gas
Impinger
Outlet
Impinger
Outlet
Impinger
Outlet
Temperature, °F
Reference
85
32
190
36
82
199
284
33
73
242
67
32
196
366
71
33
209
383
64
34
63
33
64
34
Sensor
84
37
188
38
83
198
280
33
74
244
71
33
201
373
70
34
208
386
64
34
63
33 •
66
34
Temp.
Difference
0.2
-1.0
0.3
-0.4
-0.2
0.2
0.5
0.0
-0.2
-0.3
-0.8
-0.2
-0.8
-1.1
0.2
-0.2
-0.2
-0.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
-0.2
0.0
EPA
Criteria
<±1.5
<±1.5
<±1.5
-------
TABLE 6.2
SUMMARY OF PITOT TUBE DIMENSIONAL DATA
Measurement
ocl
-2
PI
p2
Y
e
A
Z
w
D,
A/2Dt
Criteria
<10°
<10°
<5°
<5°
-
-
-
£ 0.125 in.
< 0.03 125 in.
0.1875"sD,s
0.375"
1.05Dts As
1.50Dt
Acceptable
Assigned Coefficient
RESULTS
Pilot Tube Identification
5A
1
0
1
0
1
1
1.012
0.018
0.018
0.375
1.35
Yes
0.84
5C
1
1
0
0
1
0
1.004
0.018
0.0
0.375
1.34
Yes
0.84
5E
2
1
• 0
0
0
0
1.000
0.0
0.0
0.374
1.34
Yes
0.84
4B
0
0
0
1
0
0
0.945
0.0
0.0
0.375
1.26
Yes
0.84
4C
0
0
0
0
0
1
0.973
0.0
0.017
0.375
1.30
Yes
0.84
4D
0
1
0
0
0
0
0.938
0.0
0.0
0.375
1.25
Yes
0.84
6-3
-------
6.1.4 Differential Pressure Gauges
PES uses Dwyer inclined/vertical manometers to measure differential pressures. These
include velocity pressure, static pressure, and meter orifice pressure. Manometers are selected
with sufficient sensitivity to accurately measure pressures over the entire range of expected
values. Manometers are primary standards and require no calibration.
6.1.5 Method 23 and Method 29 Dry Gas Meter and Orifice
The Method 23 and 29 dry gas meters and orifices were calibrated in accordance with
Section 3.3.2 of the Quality Assurance Handbook. This procedure involves direct comparison
of the dry gas meter to a reference dry test meter. The reference dry test meter is routinely
calibrated using a wet test meter or a liquid displacement technique. Before its initial use in
the field, the metering system was calibrated over the entire range of operation. After field
use, the metering system was calibrated at a single intermediate setting based on the previous
field test. Acceptable tolerances for the initial and final dry gas meter factors and orifice
calibration factors are ± 0.05 and ± 0.20 from average, respectively. The results for the gas
meter and orifice used in this test program are summarized in Table 6.3.
6.2 ON-SITE MEASUREMENTS
The on-site QA/QC activities include:
6.2.1 Measurement Sites
Prior to sampling, the stack was checked dimensionally to determine measurement site
locations, location of velocity and sample test ports, inside stack dimensions, and sample
traverse point locations. Inside stack dimensions were checked through both test ports to
ensure uniformity of the stack inside diameter. The inside stack dimensions, wall thickness,
and sample port depths were measured to the nearest 0.1 inch.
6.2.2 Velocity Measurements
All velocity measurement apparatus were assembled, leveled, zeroed, and leak-checked
prior to use and at the end of each determination. The static pressure was determined at a
single point near the center of the stack cross-section.
6.2.3 Flue Gas Sampling
Integrated flue gas samples were collected in Tedlar® gas bags from the kiln exhaust and
scrubber outlets. Prior to use the bags were leak checked and purged with nitrogen to ensure
cleanliness. Prior to and after completion of each sampling run the entire sampling system
was leak checked from the tip of the probe.
6-4
-------
TABLE 6.3
SUMMARY OF DRY GAS METER AND ORIFICE CALIBRATION DATA
Meter
No.
MB- 13
MB- 14
MB- 15
M5-6
M5-9
Gamma
Pre-test
0.985
1.003
1.004
0.990
1.009
Post-test
0.976
1.008
1.010
0.999
1.023
% Diff.
0.90
-0.50
-0.60
-0.90
-1.39
EPA Criteria
±5%
±5%
±5%
±5%
±5%
Orifice Coefficient
Average
1.66
1.77
1.68
1.84
1.88
Range
1.56-1.74
1.68-1.84
1.66-1.71
1.72-1.94
1.82-2.02
EPA Criteria
I.66±0.20
1.77±0.20
1.68±0.20
1.84±0.20
1.88±0.20
6-5
-------
The bag samples were analyzed on-site using an Orsat® analyzer. Prior to use the Orsat
analyzer was assembled and replenished with fresh reagents and leak checked as per the
manufacturer's procedures. Known concentrations of EPA Protocol carbon dioxide and
oxygen in nitrogen were then analyzed to confirm proper operation of the Orsat analyzer.
These results are shown in Table 6.4.
6.2.4 Moisture
During sampling, the exit gas of the last impinger was maintained below 68 °F to ensure
complete condensation of stack gas water vapor. The total moisture was determined
gravimetrically using a digital reading top-loading electronic balance. At the scrubber outlets
there was potential for the presence of water droplets in the gas streams. Therefore, a second
moisture determination was made simultaneously with the reference method by measuring the
stack gas temperature at each sample traverse point and assuming that the gas streams were
saturated at mat average temperature. The moisture content was then calculated using vapor
pressure tables. The lower moisture value obtained using the reference method and saturation
method was subsequently used in all Method 23 and Method 29 calculations.
6.2.5 Method 23/Method 29
The field sampling QA/QC for Method 23 and method 29 were similar. Table 6.5
summarizes the critical measurements made and the EPA's acceptability criteria. All pre- and
post-test sample train leaks met the acceptance criteria. The isokinetic sampling rates deviated
by no more than 8% thereby meeting each method criteria of 90-110%.
Method 23 and Method 29 field blanks were collected near the sampling locations to
check for any sample contamination at the sites. Sample trains were assembled and pre- and
post-test leak checks were conducted. The sample trains were recovered in the same manner
as the actual sample runs.
An acetone blank and quartz fiber filter were taken as control samples for the particulate
analysis and subsequent analysis for the target metals. Blanks were taken of the metals
absorbing and recovery reagents.
6.2.6 Method 25A
The field QA/QC activities for Method 25 A included the use of EPA Protocol calibration
gases; pretest calibration error tests, system bias checks, and response time tests; and post-test
zero and calibration drift determinations. Table 6.6 lists the calibration gas cylinder numbers,
concentrations, and expiration dates. Calibration error tests, system bias checks, calibration
drift checks, and response time checks are shown in Appendix B.I.4.
6-6
-------
TABLE 6.4
SUMMARY OF ORSAT ANALYZER CALIBRATION RESULTS
Cylinder No.
ALM058589
ALM057024
Contents
16.1%C02inN2
9.85%C02inN2
13.1%02inN2
Expiration
Date
07/26/98
05/20/99
Analysis
1
16.1
9.9
13.1
2
16.1
9.9
13.1
3
16.0
9.8
13.0
Avg.
16.1
9.9
13.1
Absolute
Diff., %
0.0
0.0
0.0
6-7
-------
TABLE 6.5
SUMMARY OF METHOD 23/METHOD 29 FIELD SAMPLING QA/QC DATA
Date
10/16/96
10/17/96
10/18/96
10/19/96
10/20/96
Site
Scrubber "A"
Scrubber "B"
Scrubber "A"
Scrubber "B"
Scrubber "A"
Scrubber "B"
Hydrator
Hydrator
Run No.
M23
M29
M23
M29
M23
M29
M23
M29
M23
M29
M23
M29
M29
M29
M29
Pre-Test
Leak Rate
acfm
0.010 @ 16" Hg
0.002 @ 15"Hg
0.006 @ 15" Hg
0.012 @ 15" Hg
0.018 @ 18" Hg
0.000 @ 15" Hg
0.008 @ 15" Hg
0.010@ 15" Hg
0.006 @ 18" Hg
0.006® 15" Hg
0.005 @ 15" Hg
0.010® 16" Hg
0.005 @ 15" Hg
0.003 @ 15" Hg
0.002 @ 15" Hg
Post-Test
Leak Rate
acfm
0.002 @ 18" Hg
0.002 @ 13" Hg
0.004 @ 16" Hg
0.005 @ 17" Hg
0.015 @ 19" Hg
0.000 @ 14" Hg
0.004 @ 16" Hg
0.008 @ 12" Hg
0.002 @ 20" Hg
0.002 @ 13" Hg
0.004 @ 16" Hg
0.005 @ 14" Hg
0.002 @ 9" Hg
0.004 @ 10" Hg
0.003 @ 10" Hg
EPA
Criteria
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
Percent
Isokinetic
103.1
102.4
101.3
100.5
102.8
101.1
104.3
100.7
100.1
101.7
103.5
101.3
105.2
92.0
99.3
EPA
Criteria
90-110%
90-110%
90-110%
90-110%
90-110%
90-110%
90-110%
90-110%
90-110%
90-110%
90-110%
90-110%
90-110%
90-110%
90-110%
-------
TABLE 6.6
SUMMARY OF CALIBRATION GAS CYLINDERS
Cylinder Number
AAL2583
ALM012950
ALM-029561
ALM060903
Contents
Hydrocarbon Free Air
30.04 ppm C3H8 in air
49.72 ppm C3H8 in air
87.86 ppm C3Hg in air
Expiration Date
-
03-17-98
04-18-98
05-15-99
6-9
-------
6.3 ANALYSIS
6.3.1 Particulate Matter
Particulate matter analysis consisted of front half acetone sample rinses and quartz fiber
filters. Prior to the field testing program, the filters were tared in the PES laboratory, stored in
petri dishes, and sealed with Teflon® tape. Several beakers were also cleaned and tared for
subsequent use in evaporating the acetone rinses. Upon receipt in the PES laboratory, the
acetone rinses were placed in the tared beakers and evaporated to dryness at room temperature.
The filters and beakers were desiccated and weighed to a constant weight. All weighings were
within the method requirements of 0.5 milligrams between two consecutive weighings taken at
least six hours apart.
6.3.2 Method 23 CDD/CDF
Prior to the field testing program, TLI prepared PES' XAD®-2 absorbent modules and
precleaned the glass fiber filters. TLFs laboratory QA/QC program consisted of adding
isotopically labeled standards to each sample at various stages of the project to determine
recovery efficiencies. The following types of standards were used:
Internal Standards were spiked in the TLI laboratory after the field sampling program and
prior to sample extraction. Recovery efficiencies for these compounds are used in
quantifying the actual CDD/CDF isomers measured in the samples.
Surrogate Standards were spiked in the TLI laboratory on the XAD®-2 absorbent prior to
the field sampling program. Recovery efficiencies for these compounds provide for
sample collection efficiency and analytical matrix effects.
Alternate Standards were spiked in the TLI laboratory after the field sampling program
and prior to sample extraction. Recovery for these compounds provides for extraction
efficiencies.
Recovery Standards were added in the laboratory after extraction just prior to GC/MS
analysis.
Table 6,7 summarizes the recovery efficiencies for the various standards and the
respective quality control limits. The recovery efficiencies for the XAD® blank, field blank,
and samples were all within the method QC limits.
6-10
-------
TABLE 6.7
SUMMARY OF METHOD 23 STANDARDS RECOVERY EFFICIENCIES
FULL SCREEN
ANALYSIS
Internal Standards
2,3,7,8-TCDF
2,3,7,8-TCDD
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-
HpCDF
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-
HpCDD
1,2,3,4,6,7,8,9-
OCDD
Surrogate Standards
2,3,7,8-TCDD
2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF
1, 2,3,4, 7,8-HxCDF
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD
1,2,3,4,7,8,9-
HpCDF
Alternate Standards
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF
2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF
CONFIRMATION
ANALYSIS
Internal Standards
2,3,7,8-TCDF
Percent Recovery
TLI 23FB-4
XAD- Field
2 Blank
Blank
81.3
78.2
66.9
63.8
82.5
86.8
72.1
75.3
49.6
111
103
117
104
68.9
82.1
99.3
81.2
86.5
77.7
72.2
95.1
99.5
96.3
94.8
71.4
96.3
93.0
103
97.3
95.8
104
93.5
M23A-1
85.0
88.5
83.1
75.6
89.2
102
101
102
103
105
106
113
104
105
109
109
93
M23A-2
66.8
69.2
62.7
57.8
64.0
75.3
73.5
76.0
71.7
111
111
123
107
126
84.6
80.6
75.1
M23A-3
78.4
82.4
75.7
70.2
81.4
90.8
89.1
89.1
80.7
107
107
117
108
117
103
100
86.0
M23B-1
73.0
76.8
72.4
66.1
74.0
83.0
81.6
84.3
69.1
112
110
121
110
110
100
95.9
82.4
M23B-2 M23B-3
76.5
78.0
74.4
68.8
78.9
86.1
82.1
82.0
58.8
107
101
119
110
106
93.9
91.6
82.3
64.6
63.0
56.5
56.6
72.0
70.6
67.0
71.2
51.1
133
123
139
124
128
104
94.4
71.1
QC Limits
40-130%
40-130%
40-130%
40-130%
40-130%
40-130%
25-130%
25-130%
25-130%
70-140%
70-140%
70-140%
70-140%
70-140%
40-130%
40-130%
40-130%
6-11
-------
6.3.3 Method 29
Method 29 samples consisting of nine stack gas samples, one field blank and reagent
blanks were analyzed for antimony (Sb), arsenic (As), beryllium (Be), cadmium (Cd),
chromium (Cr), cobalt (Co), lead (Pb), manganese (Mn), mercury (Hg), nickel (Ni), and
selenium (Se), Metals other than Hg were analyzed either by graphite furnace atomic
absorption (GFAA) or by inductively coupled plasma emission spectroscopy (ICP). Specific
TLI QA/QC activities for GFAA and ICP analyses consisted of laboratory control spikes,
post-digestion matrix spikes of one sample set, duplicate analysis of one sample set, serial
dilution and analysis of one sample set, analysis of a method blank, and analysis of field and
reagent blanks. Hg was analyzed by cold vapor atomic absorption spectroscopy (CVAAS).
Specific TLI AQ/AC activities for CVAAS analyses consisted of analysis of a method blank
and analysis of field and reagent blanks. The results of these QA/QC activities are
summarized in Table 6.8. Complete QA/QC data are contained in Appendix C.3.
6-12
-------
TABLE 6.8
SUMMARY OF METHOD 29 ANALYSIS QC DATA
Lab Control
Analyte
As
Be
Cd
Co
Cr
Mn
Ni
Pb
Sb
Se
Spikes
Spike Amt /^g
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
LCS Recovery LCS 2 Recovery
89% 92%
108% 101%
98% 93%
84% 94%
96% 96%
97% 95%
94% 91%
94% 96%
98% 98%
88% 90%
Recovery Limits
80-120%
80-120%
80-120%
80-120%
80-120%
80-120%
80-120%
80-120%
80-120%
80-120%
Matrix Spikes fPost-DieestioiA Run No. M29-1-B
Analyte
As
Be
Cd
Co
Cr
Mn
Ni
Pb
Sb
Se
Spike Amt /ug
50
2.5
2.5
25
50
50
50
50
50
50
* LS - Low spike; % Recovery
recovered amount
Recovery *
62%
94%
100%
78%
63%
LS
LS
LS
58%
LS
is not considered valid when spike amount
Recovery Limits
75-125%
75-125%
75-125%
75-125%
75-125%
75-125%
75-125%
75-125%
75-125%
75-125%
is less than 20% of
6-13
-------
TABLE 6.8 (Continued)
Duplicate, Run No. M29-2-A
Analyte Sample ,ug
As 7.53
Cr 53.9
Mn 199
Ni 85.7
Pb 158
Sb 17.3
Se 106
Note: Duplicate analysis not
analyzed by GFAA
Duplicate /^g RPD
75.3
54.3
200
86.3
160
17.9
106
0.0%
0.7%
0.5%
0.7%
1.3%
3.4%
0.0%
reported for elements analyzed by GFAA.
RPD
Limits
± 20%
± 20%
± 20%
± 20%
± 20%
± 20%
± 20%
Be, Cd, and Co were
Serial Dilution. Run M29-1-A
Analyte Sample //g
As 9.17
Be 38.1
Cd 3.79
Co 38.4
Cr 56.2
Mn 78.4
Ni 95.9
Pb 74.2
Sb 23.5
Se 194
Serial Dilution
11.7
45.8
4.17
44.9
76.9
85.1
112
91.1
26.9
232
Atg RPD*
< 10 RDL
<5RDL
< 5 RDL
15.6%
31.0%
8.20%
15.5%
20.4%
< 10 RDL
17.8%
RPD
Limits
± 10%
± 10%
± 10%
± 10%
± 10%
± 10%
± 10%
± 10%
± 10%
± 10%
* < 10 RDL / 5 RDL - Serial dilution analyte results are not considered valid when the concentration
in the analyte is less than 10 times the Reported Detection Limit (RDL) for ICP analysis and 5 times
the RDL for GFAA analysis. RPD = Relative percent deviation.
6-14
-------
TABLE 6.8 (Continued)
Method Blank*
Analyte
As
Be
Cd
Co
Cr
Mn
Ni
Pb
Sb
Se
* Method
Detection Limit
^g/L
5
1
1
1.5
2
2
3
2
4
3
Blank considered
MB Recovered
Amount fJ.g/L
-2.37
0.01
0.00
0.00
-0.02
0.49
-1.26
-0.40
2.02
-3.06
"Pass" when recovered
MB 1 Recovered
Amount fj.g/L
-2.62
0.04
-0.67
-0.83
-0.06
0.94
-2.70
0.76
0.40
-0.26
amount is less than the detection limit
Field Blank and Reaaent Blank
Analyte
As
Be
Cd
Co
Cr
Mn
Ni
Pb
Sb
Se
Field Blank
Vg
< 0.500
< 0.100
0.380
0.170
6.31
4.95
3.26
1.37
2.79
2.14
1 A Reagent Blank
Mg
1.24
< 0.100
0.430
0.490
14.7
1.38
8.70
2.24
7.35
"6.82
2A Reagent
Blank ^g
<0.500
<0.100
<0.100
<0.150
0.392
1.40
0.300
0.983
0.883
0.300
6-15
-------
TABLE 6.8 (Continued)
Lab Control Spikes - Mereurv Summarv Report
Sample ID
LCS 1
LCS 1 Dup
LCS 2
LCS 2 Dup
LCS 3
LCS 3 Dup
LCS 4
LCS 4 Dup
LCS
LCS Dup
Matrix Spikes
Sample ID
M29-1-A
M29-l-ADup
M29-1-B
M29-l-BDup
M29-2-A
M29-2-A Dup
M29-2-B
M29-2-B Dup
M29-3-A
M29-3-A Dup
M29-3-B
M29-3-B Dup
M29-5
M29-5 Dup
M29-6
M29-6 Dup
M29-7
M29-7 Dup
Spike Amt fj.g
. 5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
(Pre-DigestiorA - Mercurv
Spike Amt fj,g
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
Recovery
102%
103%
94%
98%
87%
90%
95%
95%
98%
103%
Summary Report
Recovery
104%
101%
105%
107%
114%
109%
107%
111%
98%
98%
97%
97%
92%
92%
55%
68%
84%
84%
Recovery Limits
80-120%
80-120%
80-120%
80-120%
80-120%
80-120%
80-120%
80-120%
80-120%
80-120%
Recovery Limits
75-125%
75-125%
75-125%
75-125%
75-125%
75-125%
75-125%
75-125%
75-125%
75-125%
75-125%
75-125%
75-125%
75-125%
75-125%
75-125%
75-125%
75-125%
6-16
-------
TABLE 6.8 (Concluded)
Method Blank -
Sample ID
MB-1
MB-1 Dup
MB-2
MB-2 Dup
MB-3
MB-3 Dup
MB-4
MB-4 Dup
MB
MB Dup
Field Blank and
Sample ID
FH
FH-Dup
BH
BH- Dup
HNO3
HNO3 - Dup
KMnO4
KmnO4 - Dup
HCL
HCL - Dup
Mercury Summarv
Detection Limit
Mg/L
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
Report
Recovered Amount
ftg/L
0.026
0.033
0.003
0.003
-0.006
-0.008
0.025
0.020
-0.026
-0.026
Reagent Blank - Mercury Sumrnarv Reoort
Field Blank //g
< 0.40
<0.40
<0.60
<0.60
<0.21
. <0.21
<1.52
<1.52
<0.96
<0.96
Reagent Blank /zg
< 0.40
<0.40
<1.20
<1.20
< 0.40
<0.40
<1.60
<1.60
<0.92
<0.92
6-17
-------
APPENDIX A
PROCESS DATA
-------
ESEARCH TRIANGLE INSTITUTE
/RTi
inter for Environmental Analysis
MEMORANDUM
TO: Joseph Wood, ESD/MICG (MD-13)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Ub
FROM: Cybele Brockmann, RTI
DATE: July 31, 1997
SUBJECT: Process Description for Eastern Ridge Lime
REFERENCE: Information Gathering and Analysis for the Lime
Manufacturing Industry NESHAP
EPA Contract 68-D1-0118
ESD Project 95/06
RTI Project 6750-017
Attached is the description of processes at Eastern Ridge;
processes were monitored during testing at the plant October 16-
19, 1997.
040 Cornwailis Road • Post Office Box 12194 • Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709-2194 USA
Telephone 919 990-8603 • Fax 919 990-8600
-------
I. Process Description for Eastern Ridge Plant
Lime (CaO) is typically produced in the U.S. by crushing and
then heating limestone (CaCO3) in an inclined, rotating kiln.
The limestone is heated to temperatures of around 2000 degrees
Fahrenheit (deg F) which cause it to breakdown chemically into
lime and C02. At Eastern Ridge, most of the lime is sold as CaO;
a small amount (ten percent of production) is converted into
hydrated lime (Ca(OH)2.1
Limestone at the Eastern Ridge plant is surface-mined from a
quarry located at the plant. The quarried limestone is crushed
and screened into several sizes and then transferred to a storage
area. Prior to entering the kiln, the sized stone is washed with
water to remove dirt.
The number two kiln is an inclined rotating kiln with a de-
sign capacity of 350 tons of lime per day (115,150 tons per
year),2 The kiln is 392 feet long with a tapered diameter (11
feet in diameter at the front end of the kiln and 10 feet in
diameter the remaining length of the kiln).3 The incline of the
kiln is 1/2 inch per foot.4 Limestone enters the kiln at its
back end (the highest point of incline) and tumbles through the
kiln via gravity and the rotating motion of the kiln (typical
rotating rates are 55 to 65 revolutions per hour). The residence
time of the feed material in the kiln is four hours. Approxi-
mately two tons of limestone are required to produce a ton of
lime.5
The combustion of fuel, which consists of pulverized coal
suspended in air, occurs at the front end of the kiln (the origin
and chemical composition of the coal at the time of testing are
unknown). The coal is pulverized to the consistency of powder in
a bowl mill (the bowl mill is exclusive to the number two kiln).
Air from the firing hood, located directly above the combustion
end of the kiln, is pulled into the bowl mill. The air preheats
and dries the coal. A fan on the mill blows the air and dry
pulverized coal from the mill into the kiln. Typically a
quarter to a third of a ton of coal is consumed per ton of lime.6
As the lime exits the kiln, it drops into one of ten satel-
lite coolers that are attached to the exterior of the kiln. The
coolers are long cylindrical tubes (30 feet long by 8 feet wide
in diameter) filled with chains. As the coolers rotate with the
kiln, the lime tumbles through the chains which conduct heat away
from the lime.7 Lime drops from the cooler tubes onto a conveyor
belt. The lime is conveyed to a screen, separated by particle
size, and stored. Fines from product screening are collected,
stored, and used in hydrate production.
-------
Approximately ten percent of the lime produced at Eastern
Ridge is chemically reacted with water to form a hydrated
product.8 The chemical reaction for hydration is as follows:
CaO + H2O * Ca(OH)2 + heat
Lime Hydrate
At Eastern Ridge, the hydration process is carried out in seven
steps. In step one, lime fines are mixed with water in a pug
mill to form a partially hydrated product. The pug mill is a
horizontal cylinder that contains a shaft fitted with short,
heavy paddles that push and mix the materials through the mill.
The source of water to the pug mill is effluent from the wet
scrubber that treats exhaust from steps two through seven {the
scrubber is discussed further under Hydrator Emissions Control).9
In steps two through seven, the partially hydrated product passes
through a series of six mixing barrels which allow the mixture to
fully react (the transfer time through all six mixing barrels is
approximately thirty minutes). After the lime is hydrated, it is
transferred to a storage bin, milled, and separated from impu-
rities (such as unreacted lime and limestone) with a whizzer
separator (similar to a cylone). Approximately 28,000 tons of
hydrate are typically produced annually.10
II. Emissions Control
Kiln Emissions Control
Exhaust from the number two kiln is routed to two, parallel
spray towers. The spray towers/scrubbers were manufactured by
Ducon and were installed at the plant in the 1970's. Each scrub-
ber is equipped with a fan which draws the kiln exhaust up
through the tower. Water is sprayed into the tower at various
points upstream of the fan and into the fan itself.11 The
exhaust from the fan exits through a stack. Effluent from the
scrubbers is directed to a series of four settling ponds where
solids are removed. Clarified water is recycled back to the
scrubbers.
Hydrator Emissions Control
The hydration process is exothermic, and part of the water
in the hydrate mixture is vaporized. Gases from the hydrator,
containing water and lime particles, are pulled by fan to a Ducon
scrubber, scrubbed with 10 gallons per minute (gpm) of water
(typical), and then vented to the atmosphere.12 (The flow rate
of scrubbing water varies somewhat with the moisture content of
-------
the lime fines in step one of the hydration process. For
example, newly processed lime fines have less moisture than fines
which have been kept in storage; thus, the former may require
more than 10 gpm while the latter may require less than 10
gpm.)13 Effluent from the scrubber is added to the lime fines in
step one. The Ducon scrubber is the same type of spray tower
used to control the kiln exhaust.
Refer to Figure 1 for a diagram of the kiln, hydrator and
associated emissions control. The diagram indicates the relative
locations for each unit operation, direction of flow for material
and gas, input and output of materials and gas, and approximate
locations where process parameters were measured.
III. Process Operation
Data indicating the operation of the kiln, the scrubbers
treating the kiln exhaust, and the scrubber treating the hydrator
exhaust are presented in this section. All process data for the
kiln were manually recorded by RTI every 15 minutes during the
emissions testing and taken from computer screens in the kiln
control room,- the recorded data were measured with instruments
already in place and used by the plant for process control of the
kiln.
For the scrubbers treating the kiln exhaust, PES measured
the pressure drop across each of the scrubbers and
measured/calculated the volumetric flow rates of water entering
and exiting each of the scrubbers. To measure pressure drop, PES
drilled pressure taps upstream of each scrubber tower and at the
end of each exhaust stack. The pressure drop across the upstream
tap and exhaust tap of each scrubber was measured using a U-tube
manometer. The pressure drop across each scrubber was measured
and recorded once during each run, just prior to testing.
PES measured the volumetric flow rate of water exiting the
bottom of the each scrubber by placing a container of known
volume below the water outlet and recording the time to fill the
container. The opening of the container was slightly smaller
than the water outlet, thus, the container only collected
approximately 80 percent of the exiting water. PES took two
measurements of the water flow rate exiting the bottom of each
scrubber; the measurements were taken back-to-back during run 2
of the kiln 2 scrubber tests.
PES measured the temperature, gas flow, and moisture content
of the kiln exhaust just prior to each scrubber tower and exiting
each scrubber stack; based on these measurements, PES calculated
-------
the volumetric flow rates of water vapor entering and exiting
each scrubber. These calculated flow rates, along with the
measured flow rate of water exiting each scrubber, were entered
into a mass balance of water across the system to calculate the
flow rate of water injected into each scrubber (see Figure 2 for
a mass balance of water of the scrubber system).
During emissions testing, RTI manually recorded the water
flow rate to the scrubber treating the hydrator. The water flow
rate was measured by an instrument already in place and used by
the plant for control of the hydrator. The water flow rate was
initially recorded every 15 minutes; however, after no change was
noted during the first hour, and after the operator of the hydra-
tor stated that the flow rate would remain fairly constant, the
readings were recorded less frequently.
Table 1 is a statistical summary of the process data
collected during testing. Tables 2a, 2b, and 2c display all of
process data collected during testing.
Table 3 is a comparison of the values of the process
parameters recorded during testing to previously cited values of
these parameters. Previously cited values were extracted from
emission test reports provided by the plant (private testing was
comissioned in 1989 and 1995);14 a trip survey of the plant
written by Research Triangle Institute in 1995,-15 a questionnaire
filled out by the plant for EPA in 1995,-16 and standard operating
procedures (SOP) of Eastern Ridge Lime plant.17 Values cited by
the kiln operator during testing are also included in Table 3.
Notes Pertaining to Test Data
Coal feed rate, limestone feed rate, kiln speed
Table 4 compares calculated coal feed rates with the average
coal feed rates recorded during testing. Coal feed rates were
calculated using previously cited values for tons of coal per ton
of lime and tons of lime per ton of limestone and using the
average limestone rates recorded during testing. Using the
questionnaire values for tons of coal per ton of lime and tons of
lime per ton of limestone, the calculated coal feed rates were
1.85, 2.06, and 1.89 tons of coal per hour. Using the value for
tons of coal per ton of lime cited by the kiln operator and the
1995 test data, and using the questionnaire value for tons of
lime per ton of limestone, the calculated coal feed rates were
4.36, 4.46, and 4.87 tons of coal per hour. The recorded average
coal feed rates were 3.69, 3.65 and 3.61 tons of coal per hour
(Table 4).
-------
Front erid temperature, back end temperature, excess air
As shown in Table 3, the average back end temperatures
during testing were below both ranges of temperature specified in
the SOP. The front end temperature fell within the operating
range specified by the SOP. The percentage of oxygen in the kiln
exhaust exceeded the SOP ranges on two of the test days.
Despite the fact that the back end temperature and the
oxygen level were not within the ranges specified by the SOP, all
of the kiln operators stated that they were operating the kiln
under normal conditions during testing. They also stated that
the operation of the kiln varies on a day to day basis depending
on the weather, the size of the limestone, the moisture content
of the coal, the BTU value of the coal, and other factors. These
factors may explain why the average oxygen content in the kiln
exhaust varied between days 10/17 and 10/18. According to the
kiln operator, the process was operating under normal conditions
on both of these days.
Stone size
Three different sizes of calcitic limestone were fed to the
number two kiln during testing; the stone sizes were referred to
as "twos", "threes", and "fours". The sizes of these stones are
based on mesh size. "Twos" are stones that pass through a 1 and
3/8 inch mesh and are retained on a 7/8 inch mesh. "Threes" are
stones that pass through a 7/8 inch mesh and are retained on a
3/8 inch mesh. "Fours" are stones that pass through a 3/8 inch
mesh and are retained on a 3/16 inch mesh.18 During testing, the
size two stone was fed to the kiln separately while the size
three and four stones were combined and fed to the kiln as one
feed. The process data in Tables 2a through 2e indicate the
times when the different stone sizes were fed to the kiln. The
decision to use a stone size during the testing was dictated by
the existing supply of the stone. Neither size two stone nor
sizes three and four stones were available in a large enough sup-
ply to feed the number two kiln the same stone size during the
entire three days of testing.
-------
Table 1. Statistical Summary of Process Data Collected at Eastern Ridge Lime Company
Run 1 of Kiln 2 Scrubber Tests
10/16/96; data recorded from 3:04 pm to 8:40 pm
Parameters for Kiln 2
Tons of coal per hour
Tons of limestone per hour
Front end temperaturejdejf FJ
Back end temperaturejdeg FJ
Kiln revolutions per hour
Percent oxygen at back end kiln
mean
3.69
25.21
1741
1010.3
59
1.2
std. dev.
0.1
2.0
48.1
14.4
4.8
0.8
mm.
3.55
21.65
1600
979.4
50
0.1
max.
3.78
27.64
1826
1038.1
64
4.1
# recordings
21
20
21
21
21
21
Run 2 of Kiln 2 Scrubber Tests
10/17/96; data recorded from 11:42 am to 4:21 pm
Parameters for Kiln 2
Tons of coal per hour
Tons of limestone per hour
Front end temperature (deg F)
Back end temperature (deg F)
Kiln revolutions per hour
Percent oxygen at back end kiln
mean
3.65
28.16
1869
945.0
66
0.3
std. dev.
0.1
0.8
19.1
8.4
2.1
0.2
mm.
3.53
26.66
1840.00
931.2
62
0
max.
3.85
29.04
1900
965.0
68
0.7
f recordings
14
14
14
14
14
14
Run 3 of Kiln 2 Scrubber Tests
10/18/96; data recorded from 11:05 am to 3:47 pm
Parameters for Kiln 2
Tons of coal per hour
Tons of limestone per hour
Front end temperature (deg F)
Back end temperature (deg F)
Kiln revolutions per hour
Percent oxygen at back end kiln
mean
3.61
25.81
1840
1020.1
60
1.3
std. dev.
0.0
1.4
15.6
17.6
3.4
0.4
mm.
3.54
23.73
1800.00
1003.6
55
0.8
max.
3.71
29.34
1858
1054.9
68
2.5
# recordings
15
15
15
15
15
15
Run 1 of Hydrator Tests
Sat 10/19/96; data recorded from 10:00 am to 3:35 pm
Parameters for Hydrator
Water flow rate (gal/min)
mean
9.6
std. dev.
0.1
mm.
9.4
max.
9.6
f recordings
11
Runs 2 & 3 of Hydrator Tests
Sun 10/20/96; data recorded from 8:00 am to 3:00 pm
Parameters for Hydrator
Water flow rate (gal/min)
mean
9.5
std. dev.
0.1
mm.
9.4
max.
9.6
# recordings
8
-------
Table 2a. Process Data
10/16/96; Run 1 of Kiln 2 Scrubber Tests
Day kiln operator = Tony
Night kiln operator = James
KILN PARAMETERS
Time CFR LSFR FET BET RPH % O2
2:50 PM Kiln burners turned off for approximately 5 minutes to allow sampling probes to be inserted
upstream of scrubbers; the burners were turned off to reduce the heat of the exhaust where the probes were
being inserted.
currently burning small stone
3:04 PM 3.71 21.65 1668
3:1 9PM 3.77 21.74 1731
3:34 PM 3.68 25.68 1800
3:49 PM 3.74 27.08 1750
4:04 PM 3.7 27.61 1734
4:1 9PM 3.74 27.48 1734
4:34 PM 3.78 27.24 1757
4:49 PM 3.66 26.95 1719
5:04 PM 3.75 27.03 1319
('oxygen high because coal grate clogged up; coal feed
5:12 PM 3.73 27.19 1600
Break for filter change for Method 23
5:40 PM 3.72 24.22 1728
5:55 PM 3.72 24.35 1709
new operator came; changed to large size stone around
6:1 0PM 3.64 24.35 1733
6:25 PM 3.72 24.59 1705
6:40 PM 3.59 24.39 1732
6:59 PM 3.62 1780
Stopped for testing change; resumed around 7:20
7:30 PM 3.7 24.58 1760
7:45 PM 3.7 27.64 1793
8:00 PM 3.7 27.01 1763
8:1 5PM 3.71 23.37 1780
8:30 PM 3.55 23.33 1755
8:40 PM 3.67 23.67 1826
979.4
1002.7
1014.5
1013.3
1007.5
1007.5
998
1001.6
989.5
turned off for a
979.8
1004.7
1012.9
6:00
1012.7
1017.4
1020.6
1028.2
1009.5
1008.9
1009.7
1014.3
1035.2
1038.1
50
50
60
64
63
63
64
63
63
few minutes
63
56
56
56
56
56
56
64
64
63
54
54
54
1.9
1.4
1.1
1
1.1
1.1
0.1
0.7
16.5*
to unclog)
4.1
1.1
1.5
1.1
1
0.7
1.5
0.6
0.9
0.6
0.7
1.6
1.4
SCRUBBER PARAMETERS
Pressure drop of exhaust
Scrubber fi Scrubber B
2.9 in. H2O1.0in. H2O
CFR = coal feed rate (tons per hour)
LSFR = limestone feed rate (tons per hour)
FET = front end temperature of kiln (deg F)
BET = back end temperature of kiln (deg F)
RPH = kiln revolutions per hour
% O2 = percent oxygen at back end kiln
-------
Table 2b. Process Data
10/17/96; Run 2 of Kiln 2 Scrubber Tests
Day kiln operator = Chuck
KILN PARAMETERS
Time CFR LSFR FET BET RPH %O2
11:42 AM
12:15 PM
12:30PM
12:51 PM
1:06 PM
1:27 PM
stone size
1:43 PM
2:00 PM
2:17 PM
3:06 PM
3:21 PM
3:49 PM
4:04 PM
4:21 PM
3.7
3.85
3.7
3.7
3.63
3.66
change
3.67
3.8
3.6
3.54
3.53
3.55
3.62
3.55
26.66
27.57
27.35
27.67
27.61
27.58
28.19
28.22
28.95
28.95
28.85
28.85
29.04
28.81
1860
1889
1860
1850
1900
1840
1880
1880
1850
1850
1900
1870
1860
1870
965
953.2
952.9
948.2
949.1
940.2
942.3
931.2
936.8
939.8
938.7
945.6
944.1
942.8
62
64
64
64
64
64
66
66
68
68
68
68
68
68
0.5
0.1
0.3
0.2
0.6
0.1
0.2
0
0.1
0.4
0.7
0.5
0.3
0.3
SCRUBBER PARAMETERS
Pressure drop Water Effluent
Scrubber A Scrubber B Scrubber A Scrubber B
4.9 in. H2O 0.9 in. H2O 33 gal /9 se 33 gal /15 sec
33 gal /10 s< 33 gal /15 sec
CFR = coal feed rate (tons per hour)
LSFR = limestone feed rate (tons per hour)
FET = front end temperature of kiln (deg F)
BET = back end temperature of kiln (deg F)
RPH = kiln revolutions per hour
% O2 = percent oxygen at back end kiln
-------
Table 2c. Process Data
10/18/96; Run 3 of Kiln 2 Scrubber Tests
Day kiln operator = Chuck
KILN PARAMETERS
Time
11:05 AM
11:20 AM
11:40 AM
11:57 AM
12:15 PM
12:36 PM
12:56 PM
port changes
1:37 PM
1:53 PM
2:15 PM
2:35 PM
2:59 PM
3:17 PM
3:39 PM
3:47 PM
CFR
3.58
1:55 PM
3.6
3.69
3.62
3.54
2:38 PM
; resumed
3.6
3.59
3.62
3.55
3.59
3.71
3.58
3.62
LSFR
29.34
27.48
26.43
25.94
25.77
26.12
25.71
around 1 :35
26.22
25.68
23.99
23.94
23.73
26.06
25.43
25.34
FET
1855
1841
1847
1850
1845
1840
1821
1840
1831
1824
1857
1800
1850
1858
1840
BET
1005.1
1003.6
1008.5
1006.1
1007.2
1011.8
1015.3
1015.8
1017.2
1015.4
1018.3
1019.6
1054.9
1052.7
1050.5
RPH
68
64
62
60
60
60
60
60
60
55
55
55
60
60
60
%O2
1.2
0.9
0.8
1
1.9
2.5
1.2
1.3
0.9
1.3
1.5
1.2
1.3
1.5
1.3
SCRUBBER PARAMETERS
Pressure drop
Scrubber A Scrubber B
3.8 in. H2O 4.9 in. H2O
CFR = coal feed rate (tons per hour)
LSFR = limestone feed rate (tons per hour)
FET = front end temperature of kiln (deg F)
BET = back end temperature of kiln (deg F)
RPH = kiln revolutions per hour
% O2 = percent oxygen at back end kiln
-------
Table 2d. Process Data
10/19/96; Runs 1 & 2 on Hydrator*
operator = Shockey
Time HzO flow rate to scrubber
10:00 AM 9.6
10:35 AM 9.6
10:50 AM 9.6
11:50 AM i.6
12:03 PM 9.6
12:20PM 9.6
12:45 PM 9.6
1:1 5PM 9.6
1:27 PM 9.6
3:22 PM 9.6
3:35 PM 9.4
"Run 1 test data was discarded due to non isokinetic conditions
Table 2e. Process Data
10/20/96; Runs 3&4 on Hydrator
Operator = Dave
Time HzO flow rate to scrubber
8:00 AM 9.6
9:00 AM 9.6
10:00 AM 9.6
11:00 AM 9.6
12:OOPM 9.4
1:00 PM 9.4
2:00 PM 9.4
3:00 PM 9.4
10
-------
Table 3. Comparison of Values of Operating Parameters Recorded During Testing to Values of Parameters Cited from Other Sources
Operating Parameters
Tons per hour of coal
Tons per hour of limestone
Tons limestone/ton lime
Tons coal/ton of lime
Kiln speed
(revolutions per hour)
Back end temp, of kiln
(degF)
Front end temp, of kiln
(deg F)
% Oa in exhaust
Water flow rate to hydrator
scrubber (gpm)
1Ref 2.
Average values
recorded during
testing
3.69; 3.65; 3.61
25.21; 28.16; 25.81
59; 66; 60
1010; 945; 1020
1741; 1869; 1840
1.2; 0.3; 1.3
9.6; 9.5
Values from standard operating
and procedures manual for
Eastern Ridge Lime
1050 to 1 150 (operating range)
1 100 to 1 120 (desired range)
1200 to 1950 (operating range)
1700 to 1850 (desired range)
0.1 to 1 (operating range)
0.1 - 0.3 (desired range)
Values from Values from Values
Values from kj|n 1995 site from 1995
questionnaire1 operator survey2 test data3
2.045 3.9-4 3.96 4
27.8S6 Max 27
1.91
0.14 0.33 0.25-0.33
55 to 65 65
1050-1200 1100
Avg 1800 1620
10
Values
from 1989
test data4
4
19
928
1863
4.5
zRef1.
3Ref2
4Ref2
i not specified directly in questionnaire; value calculated from reported tons coal/ton of lime (0.14) and reported tons of lime per day (350).
i not specified directly in questionnaire; value calculated from reported tons of limestone/ton of lime (1.91), and reported tons of lime per
day (350).
-------
Table 4. Comparison of Calculated and Recorded Coal Feed Rates
Calculated coal rate Calculated coal rate Recorded
(tons/hr) based on (tons per hour) based average coal rate
0.14 tons coal/ton of on 0.33 tons coal/ton (tons per hour)
lime1 of lime2 during testing
Run 1 of kiln 2 scrubber tests 1.85 4.36 3.69
Run 2 of kiln 2 scrubber tests 2.06 4.87 3.65
Run 3 of kiln 2 scrubber tests 1.89 4.46 3.61
'Ekjuatimfcrcdculatingooalfeedrates based on0.14tons of coal / ton of lime
, , , ,. . O.i4tonsooal . . tonoflime . . average tons of limestone . , , ,
calculated coal feed rate = (questionnaire data) (questionnaire data) — (recoideddata)
tonlime 1.91 tons limestone hr
calculated coal feed rate fiomrun 1 of kiln 2 scrubber tests = 0.14* * 2521 = 1.85 tons coal per hour
1.91
caWatedcoalfeedratefitmnm2ofk^ = 0.14* * 280.6 = 2.06 tons coal per hour
1.91
<^culatolcnalfeedrateframnin3ofMln2scnibbertests = 0.14* * 25.81 = 1.89 tons coal per hour
1.91
*?_
Equation for calculating coal feed rates based on 0.33 tons of coal / tonoflime:
i i_ A it~j . 0.33tonscoal jtnne.~.j.\ tonofline . ... average tons of limestone t , ., ,
calculated coal feed rate = (kiln operator and 1995 test data) (questionnaire data) -2- (recotdeddata)
ton lime 1.91 tons limestone hr
calculated coal feed rate fromnm 1 of kiln 2 scrubber tests = 0.33* * 2521 = 4.36 tons coal per hour
1.91
calc^atedc«alfeedratefromiun2ofldln2scnil*ertests = 0.33* * 2E16 = 4.87 tons coal per hour
1.91
caMated coal feed rate famrim 3 cfkto = 0.33* * 25.81 = 4.46 tons coal per hour
1.91
-------
Coal
Limestone Feed
Exhaust / \ Scrubber B
" " i tsr
Stack \ 4
Water
f
Exhaust f ^
' <
/ el
K
'V*
1 fan i
Stack \ J Scrubber A
\
\
f
' aicr ^--.--
f
F Q
Water
a: Location of coal feed measurement
b: Location of limestone feed measurement
c: Location of front end temperature measurement
d: Location of back end temperature and % oxygen measurement
Gas Flow
Material Flow
Cooled Lime
J
Screening
Hydrator
Pulverizing Mill
Water
1
Fit
i
r
ies
' i
P
P
Spray
Tower
Scrubber
1
Exhaust
Hydrated Product
Figure 1. Process Diagram of Kiln # 2, Hydrator, and Associated Emission Control System at Eastern Ridge Lime.
-------
10 gpm water
vapor in
exhaust from
kiln2
6 gpm water
vapor in
exhaust from
kiln2
22 gpm water
vapor2
A
Scrubber A
_water in = 273 gpm (by difference)
water out = 261 gpm1
18 gpm water
vapor2
A
Scrubber B
water in = 177 gpm (by difference)
1,
water out =165 gpm1
1 Average of two measurements taken during run 2 of kiln 2 scrubber tests
2Calcuated from air flow, temperature, and moisture measurements at this location during run 2
of kiln 2 scrubber tests
Figure 2. Mass Balance of Water Across Kiln 2 Scrubbers
14
-------
REFEREMCES
1. Heath, Elizabeth, Research Triangle Institute. "Site Survey
of Eastern Ridge Lime, Inc., Rippleraead, Virginia."
February 1, 1996.
2. Eastern Ridge response to questionnaire sent out in 1995 by
the National Lime Association as part of a voluntary effort
with the Environmental Protection Agency to obtain
data/information for the MACT program.
3. Ref 1
4. Ref 1
5. Ref 2
6. Ref 1
7. Telecommunication between Cybele Brockmann of Research
Triangle Institute and John Collins, Safety & Enviornmental
director of Eastern Ridge Lime, November 21, 1996.
8. Ref 1
9. Ref 7
11. Ref 1
12. Ref 7
13. Ref 2
14. Ref 7
15. Ref 2
16. Ref 1
17. Standard Operating and Procedures Manual of Eastern Ridge
Lime Plant
18. Ref 7
15
-------
PACIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.
Project No.
Client
Location
Page of
/ /
Ce) .
Prepared By
Date Checked By Date Sheet Title
I
1.0
a
3
.?" //2.0
-------
mm
PACIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES,
Project No.r. I
S^Q 1.002
Client
Location
Page
Prepared By
Date
Checked By
Date
Sheet Title
. z
/7
Z /6/n/%
i^ 10
13
H, 30
HOU
11-
-AP/'HzU
3.3
3,1
42.
3.3
3-1
/, u
/.a
ho
1,6
°r=
9/6
9/7
95V
V
-------
PACIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.
Project No.
Client
Location
Page of
Prepared By
/
Date
Checked By
Date
Sheet Title
A
/3
^ >c
-------
APPENDIX B
RAW FIELD DATA
-------
Appendix B.I
Raw Field Data
Kiln No. 2
-------
Appendix B. 1.1
Raw Field Data
Kiln No. 2 Exhaust
-------
GAS ANALYSIS DATA FORM
PLANT_
DATE /0-Hf^fl TE ST N0_
SAMPLING TIME (24* CLOCK)
SAMPLING LOCATION tfli-W fJo. Z
COMMENTS;
3-1
SAMPLE TYPE (BAG, INTEGRATED, CONTINUOUS).
ANALYTICAL METHOD
AMBIENT TEMPERATURE
OPERATO
^^^ RUN
GAS ^\
C02
O£(NET is ACTUAL o2
READING MINUS ACTUAL
C02 READING)
CO(NET IS ACTUAL CO
READING MINUS ACTUAL
02 READING)
N2(NET IS IN MINUS
ACTUAL CO READING)
1
ACTUAL
READING
3&0
21
NET
3 £.6
3 ¥
— -
7/.G
2
ACTUAL
READING
Jf.O
J*.f
NET
as..
3.f
->,»-
3
ACTUAL
READING
**.»
u.s
NET
V.*
\r?
3,£*
—
7/.r
AVERAGE
NET
VOLUME
s^.o
3 "
„ __
7f-r
MULTIPLIER
H'Mt
32 '100
^/lOO
28 '100
TOTAL
MOLECULAR WEIGHT OF
STACK GAS (DRY BASIS)
//, oacJ
1,1 zd
O
2O, Qt~6
«.,Y
-------
FIELD DATA SHEET
Y-/
i Mini. ^ *cL»j0_ dfi PQ£ £--€?**^>x"
^" A -""*"»
Sampling Location 6 c/- ^ of) 5 cfm® /J?in. Hg.
Pretest Leak Check: Pitot: Orsat:
Sample Type: /»-V Operator:
Pbar: 7^. ^^ Ps:
CO2: LO O2: ^
Probe Lengtti/Type: -V' 5-5 Pitot #:
Stack Diameter: As:
Nozzle ID: Thermocouple #:
Assumed Bws: Filter #:
Meter Box #: ^3 Y: .WAH®: /. 6ff(^
Post-Test Leak Rate: cfm @ in. Hg.
Post-Test Leak Check: Pitot: Orsat
Traversa
Point
Number
Sampling
Thro
(min)
l>
ci,-?
LZ.b
16
?$*o
qi.o
G5
135
1*43
/5¥
%5
'ft5
2(&
z/7
ZA
/rS0
/*?/«
^32
lc) 5C>
-to /3
Gas Mater
Reading
(Vm)ft3
lW.f>ZB
in s
1*3- 4
IZG.5
IUU. 710
kA> y
/-75. 3
/7^^
/^f
/*7, 7 ,
2c/.o
206.C1
20* fi
i/^,5
-ziS.^
2^.Z
^3"?- *
*^/G>. if d»
/W»3-(*>-
. 1,52-
Velocity
Head (Ap)
inH2O
Orifice Pressure Differential
(AH) in H2O
Desired
Actual
Stack
Temp.
(Ts)
Temperature
°F
Probe | Rrter
(mptnger
Temp.
°F
Dry Gas Meter Temp.
Inlet
(Tmin°F)
Outlet
(Tmout°F)
Pump
Vacuum
(in. Ha)
y////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////.
. 5"
.5
f »;
. 5
- jS
, -r
. JJ
-5
,5
,5
. ^
.5
,5
- . 5
-:?
, j
, 5
'^^^
[<«*$
^^.§^
?3
Is
93
^,3
<$q
<*&)
LO~£
Az-z
S6J
S£>0
^0
f7
^T
?J
?*
?a
f/
9?
TV
9 0
7C
f^
<7<7
9y
W
97
«??
^
,5-9-
5-^
J-/
1
*f
~1
\
^
1
S
-3
3
1
V
j*
c
1
*
AVm=
Ts=
Tm=
-------
Plant
Date*
SAMPLE RECOVERY DATA
jL/Mtf 49. Run No.;
Job No.:
Sampli Location-
Sample Typa-
Sample Box No,;.
tip, Z- £jttttrttfT
Rlter No.: —
Sample Recovery Person:
Comments;
FRONT HALF
Acetone
Container No.;
Rlter
Container No.:
Liquid
Level Marked:.
Sealed:
Sealed:
Description of Rlter:
Samples Stored and Locked;
BACK HALF/MOISTURE
Container NO..V
Liquid Level Marked;.
Sealed:
IMP. NO.
£
-------
GAS ANALYSIS DATA FORM
PUNT
DATE to-n~*t(*
COMMENTS:
.TEST NO.
J-2.
SAMPLING TIK (2M» CLOCK!
SAMPLING LOCATION
t}0, Z g?/f**t&r
SAMPLE TYPI (BAG, INTEGRATED. COMTWUOUS) 3:fJTT£-SJZ#-rt~l>
ANALYTICAL METHOD
AMBIENT TEMPERATURE.
OPERATOR.
-70 */="
^^^^^ RUN
6AS ^\
C02
02(NET IS ACTUAL 02
READING MINUS ACTUAL
C02 READING)
CORNET IS ACTUAL CO
READING MINUS ACTUAL
02 READING)
N2(NET IS 100 MINUS
ACTUAL CO READING)
1
ACTUAL
READING
,27. «/
3&. 1
NET
^7.v/
3<7
0
^1.1
2
ACTUAL
READING
a-?.^
3o.l
NET
J7.y
an
d
^f.i
3
ACTUAL
READING
;*?.«/
Jo. I
NET
Z7.<4
2, 1
0
^11
AVERAGE
NET
VOLUME
27- V
2,1
o
0^
MULTIPLIER
M/19B
32/100
a/lM
a'iw
TOTAL
MOLECULAR WEIGHT OF
STACK GAS (DRY BASIS)
,«d.
/2.0S~k
fl/.S-4^
O
1 f , SI 3-
32,^? 2-
-------
UM i M once i
Plant: TSfur j? ~ dL/ ^< &••*
•ff
Sampling Location Sz/tsbfas JJV»U-*
Run Number: ^ S-*2_ Date: io-n-^^
Pretest Leak Rate: 002 cftn @ /•$' in. Hg.
Pretest Leak Check: Phot: Orsat:
Sample Type: /h-*/ Operator: T/r
Pbar: 2&, 5"V Ps:
CO2: O2:
Probe Length/Type: ^'55 Pitot#:
Stack Diameter: As:
Nozzle ID: Thermocouple #:
Assumed Bws: ,'2, Rfter #: /^
Meter Box #: jfjj Y: , ^g5 AH@: /. i s" t
Post-Test Leak Rale: ^CQ^ <*" @ / $• in. Hg.
Post-Test Leak Check: P'rtot: Orsat:
Traversa
Point
Number
SAmpKng
Tune
(min)
O
10
to
(^
/<&
iZQ
)5®
I$O
20O
"Lib
U\Q
CtodcTmw
(24-hour
dock)
\\HO
IZ&Q
mo
IZHO
/wo
/35g
/^20
)'-52A
&&
/6oZ
;6>^
Gas Meter
Reading
(Vm)fl3
2.%. GGI
2.«5 ^
•Z63. 6=>
^T- 5-
2-^D.3
9«
^3
?JF
9^
90
fo
?/
?/
2
'^>
6
u
I
>
2
<*
£
"21,
^
AVm=
AH=
Ts=
-------
SAMPLE RECOVERY DATA
>»•> Q^Ma^ Lssttn-j Run No.:
Date: Ib-W-VL Sample Box No.: Job No.:
Plant!
Sample Location*
Sample Type- M- j/
Rlter No.:
Sample Recovery Person:
Comments :
FRONT HALF ^f^^//^/
j£VJU* W c*™* <
Acetone -=>•****«' ^^ Uqu|d
Container No.- Level Marked:
Filter
Container No.: "
/U2^?*~«rM4r XL«£P*M
Sealed:
Sealed:
Description of Filter:
Samples Stored and Locked:
BACK HALF/MOISTURE
Container No.:
Liquid Level Marked:.
Sealed:
IMP. NO.
CONTENTS
INITIAL
VOL (ml)
WEIGHT (grams)
INITIAL
FINAL
NET
2.3. 2,
6
v
TOTAL
22^.7
Description of Impinger Catch:
'
-------
GAS ANALYSIS DATA FORM
PLANT
DATE
_TEST NO.
SAMPLING TIME (24-ta CLOCK)
SAMPLING LOCATION ft IL.KJ
. 2.
£X
f$ UL.U
SAMPLE TYPE (BAG, INTEGRATED, CONTINUOUS) XA/ygg-£4-nrD
ANALYTICAL METHOD
AMBIENT TEHIPERATURi;
OPERATOR
COMMENTS:
3*J LGTJ
^*^^ RUN
GAS ^"^^-^
C02
02i
NET
23,0
s-.t
0
7/,6>
2
ACTUAL
READING
J3.0
Mr.y
NET
.23,0
.s.y
0
m.(*
3
ACTUAL
READING
-23,0
3.S-.V
NET
23,0
S^
0
11,1.
AVERAGE
NET
VOLUME
*3.G
5-V
O
nt.to
MULTIPLIER
W/MQ
32/IOO
28/100
28 '100
TOTAL
MOLECULAR WEIGHT OF
STACK GAS (DRY BASIS)
Md-
to. ii-o
L71%
O
20,Q
-------
FIELD DATA SHEET
Piftflt*
I Idl II,
Samp
Runri
Pretes
Prete:
Traverse
Point
Number
g$4 Pftrfifin "Rl^t/a, L\b*s •^nif-^ Pbar: 2^, 3— '(/
ate: faOtf cfm@ J5 in
heck: Pftot: Orsat:
QockTime
(24-hour
dock)
tl&O
1{2£>
M%&
fl&5
,12$
tzyo
f^CO
\y&
>*h5£
jtf/S
,^?>5
^5^0
' CO2: O2:
Hg. Probe Length^Type: yVS Pitot*:
Slack Diameter:
As:
Gas Meter
Reading
S50. (*OD
*v&*4
'l(Jb .5
•b-T7. S
'W8T7. 3
"5/L./- ^"^
JLJ^^t "*3k
**/ / j? * ^"'
"^ZL 1
-V30. 3
^3,#. ^
^^G. ^4^
Velocity
Head
-------
SAMPLE RECOVERY DATA
Plant- £#-£JBZ-itf
fal>GC JLIML
, Sample Box No.:
t-fij A)Q. 2. ^jt-ti-ft-LtZr
l STU PL£ EtPfr ^
Run No.;
Job No.:
tf-3
•3 ~3
SW/.0Q3
/ £cfZc*&k5(l-3 4X/L€r)
Rlter No.:
^— -
Sample Recovery Person:
Comments:_
FRONT HALF
Acetone
Container No.;
Rlter
Container No.:
Liquid
Level Marked:.
Sealed;
Sealed;
Description of Filter:
Samples Stored and Locked;
BACK HALF/MOISTURE
Container No.;
Liquid Level Marked:.
Sealed:
IMP. NO.
1
2
3
4
5
6
CONTENTS
C-0~V*- cLfL4^^J^\
£JL<^ C^JL
TOTAL
INITIAL
VOL (ml)
Vv
INITIAL
m£ ,o
H?lr,0
(EIGHT faramsl
FINAL
4/t/-4,0
=H 906.0
NET
'/<4Sr.o
3.S-.0
I (riff ^
Description of Impinger Catch:
-------
Appendix B. 1.2
Raw Field Data
Kiln No, 2-Scrubber "A"
-------
EPA METHOD 1
TRAVERSE POINT LOCATION FOR CIRCULAR DUCTS
PLANT
CITY
SAMPLING LOCATION
STATE
INSIDE OF FAR WALL TO OUTSIDE
OF NIPPLE, (DISTANCE AJ
i
INSIDE OF NEAR WALL TO OUTSIDE
OF NIPPLE, (DISTANCE B) 3
NEAREST UPSTREAM DISTURBANCE
DISTURBANCE ^^D/,.^
NEAREST DOWNSTREAM DISTURBANCE^
DISTURBANCE -• ;,. Q,\^.
SAMPLER /*}ti /-sft
DATE
SCHEMATIC OF SAMPLING LOCATION
TRAVERSE
POINT
NUMBER
/•
2
X
L\
r
6
7
>
cl
10
n
11
FRACTION
OF STACK I.D.
r> . o i /
(P .,06")
,^0
0.5S-&
0. £fV
0.7 To
c?. ^^i
o.t?x
o.^/??
0^?1
STACK
I.D.
V8-"
f
i
t *
I
j
i
I
f
J.
.. PRODUCT OF
COLUMNS 2 AND 3
(TO NEAREST 1/8-INCH)
i . '" ''
3 V •
' ,_ S~x
& ^
/a "
/7>
• 3 o. ^ "
J^ "'
.. 1<7 ^
H a V "
. w V" '
V7
DISTANCE B
/
1
t
•
.
,
1
I
' 1
TRAVERSE DISTANCE
FROM OUTSIDE OF NIPPLE
(SUM OF COLUMNS 4 & 5)
/
62 -
7 -s ^
/ / % '
/ r-^- "
^o|"
?¥,,! "
?^ ^ '"
V«^ "V
¥T ^"
. V^ "'
/
^
^
-------
GAS ANALYSIS DATA FORM
. PLANT F/»57Tgg.*/ /£ipG-i£ t- (*>»£- Co.
PITE
Jn -/(, -t 6
TEST NO
SAMPLING TIKE (24* CLOCK)
SAMPLING LOCATION illL-*J *Jo. 2-
SAMPLE TYPE (SAG, INTEGRATED, CONTINUOUS)
ANALYTICAL METHOD
AMBIENT TEMPERATURE^.
OPERATOR
COMMENTS:
Xs\^ RUN
GAS ^^"^
C02
02
7Z3
2
ACTUAL
READING
^L/
«m
NET
^/./
6.t
c/
7^,3
3
ACTUAL
READING
^/,0
57.7
NET
a/,o
6,7
o
~7
-------
GAS ANALYSIS DATA FORM
PLANT
DATE /6 -/-7-y C,
Get ,
COMMENTS:
SAMPLING TIME (24-hr CLOCK)
SAMPLING LOCATION Itll-tJ
TEST HO
3 ft- - 2-
A/a. Z £cJiuB>8>&L A
SAMPLE TYPE (BAG, INTEGRATED, CONTINUOUS)
ANALYTICAL METHOO
AMBIENT TEMPERATURE
OPERATOR
3XfTerg-e4-Tg3>
*=•
^\^ RUN
GAS ^""^^
C02
OjfNET IS ACTUAL 02
READING MINUS ACTUAL
C02 READING)
COfNET IS ACTUAL CO
READING MINUS ACTUAL
0| READING)
NICNET is IM MINUS
ACTUAL CO READING)
1
ACTUAL
READING
.21, B
aF.S-
NET
33, fr
6^.0
^7
7/.Z-
2
ACTUAL
READING
»23,7
55-. T
NET
23,7
S*U
O
*7/.3
3
ACTUAL
READING
-------
GAS ANALYSIS DATA FORM
PLANT.
DATE_
COMMENTS:
-IB-
.TEST N0_
34 -3
SAMPLING TIME (24-hr CLOCK)
SAMPLING LOCATION
*J0> Z SdiUjL&i!>\sfL. 'V? "
SAMPLE TYPE (BAG, INTEGRATED, CONTINUOUS).
ANALYTICAL METHOD OfLSKT
AMBIENT TEMPERATURE^
OPERATOR
G.[ZAT&> &A
^^ RUN
GAS ^\^
C02
02(NET IS ACTUAL 02
READING MINUS ACTUAL
C02 READING)
CO(NET IS ACTUAL CO
READING MINUS ACTUAL
02 READING)
N 2 (NET IS 100 MINUS
ACTUAL CO READING)
1
ACTUAL
READING
c2/.cJ
,27,7
NET
J-/.0
(*,7
0
7Z3
2
ACTUAL
READING
J-/.0
37.8
J*~
NET
21,0
(*>?
o
?Z,2
3
ACTUAL
READING
3-1. 6
^"7,7
NET
21, 0
(0,~1
a
72,3
AVERAGE
NET
VOLUME
3-1,0
6,7
o -
72,3
MULTIPLIER
H'lOO
32/100
M/100
28 '100
TOTAL
MOLECULAR WEIGHT OF
STACK GAS (DRY BASIS)
Md-
9, ;W6'
a, my
0
30. -2VY
3/.6Z6
-------
METHOD 5 TESTING FIELD DATA SHEET
PAGE 1 of I?
• E*^» pj ° £,;./« ^Ji/''
/G/y. /
0££w-'.lc,u//~ A-
/v^
™l%8~l :•'/
:;jE»j»
Illl
Ill
7 ,
WSH1lplp
FA PEf
7
He*
€>
_JL7..
IS?,
/r
Q.Q
rs~-.
-3-Q-
/37
lit.
JVL
in,
117
(SO
j-x-Ss-KwM-tvtvK-x-x-:-:
'"'-. /I
JIT"
-------
EMISSION TESTINC
DATA
Page
ot 7
PLANT ANQ CITY
DATE5
."/SAMPLING LOCATION
'"SAMPLE TYPE
u ;' RUN NUMBER
Or^to Tc-^- A
:;s
.:
•HI
SAMPLE
STRAIN;
lAGUU/
/ 7
'/37
rr
10
OAM
7
O.IG
/17
/o
^31,31
f.r
/J,
m,?/
rr
cc
lie
Co
17
/JO
hit
rr
ft
fro
/vf
in
SI-
V?
sc>
Sir
IT-7
O.HI
an
77
0.33
AVG SQRJ
p '
" ,AVG
/. H
/AVG
'STK F
X
Checked By:
i I t ,
Da/e
-------
/V '
/a
Ilffitliil
wmmm
SAMPLE
IJtHAiW
imu
ic
?r
o
77
7
7?
/fro
m
7?
3.
a. •
Ci
5-00
I 3-7
n
3-
a
O -(*>(»
17
ro T,
&C3
tzv/
Q.X3
77
in
77
-in
Co
77
OX*
Ci
77
577, rr
0X7
77
. }W
Sheet Checked By:
Date
17.11
-------
METHOD 23 CDD/CDF SAMPLE RECOVERY DATA fi
Plant:
Run
Sample Date:
Filter No.(s):
Sample Location:
, £
Recovery Date: )$-
XAD-2 Trap No.(s):
Sample Recovery Person:
At
Moisture Data
Impingers
XAD-2
Trap
^
(knockout)
(100 mi H2O)
(100mlH2O)
(tipped)
4
(knockout)
(untipped)
Silica gel
(untipped)
Final wt. p/^,
initial wt.
g
Train System:
Probe:
Filter: Color-
Loading -
Impinger Contents:
Silica Gel: ©Grams Used -
D Color -
Spent- K
Condensate Observed In Front Half:
Recovered Sample Fractions
Filter Container No.
marked/sealed:
XAD Module Container No.:
marked/sealed:
Probe (FH) & Back Half Rinse (Acetone) Container No.
Liquid level
marked/sealed:
Probe (FH) & Back Half Rinse (Toluene) Container No.
Liquid level
marked/sealed:
Impinger Contents Container No.:
Liquid level
marked/seated:
Unse (Ace
Impinger Rinse (Acetone/MeCI2) Container No
ntafRerj
Liquid level
arked/sealed
f #
-------
METHOD 5 TESTING FIELD DATA SHEET
PAGE 1 of
.
T~
s
A
/••) t-t -^
/* **^ u ' O g"S
Lcn
r
. rv
/o
, O
6
)0
JSv
J3- '
Jil
rs"
0.
(r,
-------
D UAIA
Page
of J
fifiMil
mrns®
iilMiii
>:;::::;::;:;:
IKEMBl
SAMPLE
ftttiN
lieuuO
O-21
(9.71
as?
fro
3
fi
to
too
lot-
d.c*
I1H
10,
no
(*)<<*! 1
10
Co
?7
l.Ol
/n
77
r
?c
I re?
TS
arr
1.
/
AVQSQRI
, PHI
s
0,o(\
CheckedDy,
Dale
-------
lllililfllBflliiilill
c, k,, 0*3 )
-------
J-t^ ^ />^UMETHOD 23 CDD/CDF SAMPLE RECOVERY DA,TA SSL™-*
Ptent: B*J^ ILJLi L^,
Sample Date: /^5-/7~ 9 ^,
Job No.: S 4^ /
Sample Location: fi/6 , <£__ "J^LO^ &^ct*L*4 A
Recovery Date: J0~n~ 4L XAD-2 Trap No.(s): //Z
J3 /Sw, J A-
Sample Recovery Person: <£-- & o^
Impingers
Final wt.
Initial wt.
Netwt.
Moisture Date
1 2 3
XAD-2 (knockout) (100mlH2O) (100mlH2O)
Trap (untipped) ^ — (tipped)-^.
1J//* 1 / //i y i_> y _T* *7 \ <^ O 1 * / ^
^Ifcf) fyDS'l ^^fy 7 3^ 7^ (*
~2>J~t>~S g'YL t &D,1~ — W ft
— ~;- '..'*"'. V". -; . . . ; ...'--7:,. / . .
57^ Description
4
(knockout) Silica gel
a (untipped) (untippedj
,^77, Y | U.g- g
4/7^.J5 E3*A ^? g
C / ^^ f g
':' toblo^
Train System: /7 — i- 3
Probe:
4//t
Filter: Color - J-tLcA jtf^e*^ Loading - MotL^
Impinger Contents: /Ju^^~ *
Silica Gel:
•n ddLi^+ii Id&J)
y ^^t /^>
©Grams Used - ^ p t> Color -^Ji-^ff % Spent - £? £l)
Condensate Observed In Front Half: /l&is**^ /L^w-aC^.
" ° .'. ..•-'....'.' , . * i ... " i )
Recovered Sample Fractions
Filter Container No.
XAD Module Container No.:
Probe (FH) & Back Half Rinse (Acetone) Container No.:
Probe (FH) & Back Half Rinse (Toluene) Container No.:
X V N
Impinger Contents Container No.: \
Impinger Rin\e (Acetone/MeCI2) Container No.:
J$ ^fyy»* (***€?*< ~ , 2.&C , ?y$ ? ' & '/ / '//")
ii ^~~ " * A
^^, — £/-}Jn;j £Laz£*n^ stttutoj /
marked/sealed: «-^
marked/sealed:
Liquid level ' ^^
marked/sealed:
Liquid level .x
marked/sealed:
Liquid level
marked/sealed:
Liquid level
marked/sealed:
i
faA^ty+vs^ fe frtd'XJ^
-------
METHOD 5 TESTING FIELD DATA SHEET
PAGE 1 of ?
e" A
mm
mMmmm
Jl 4£_
3-1 -Q,Q->
G
•I
121.
rr
"7?
10
/-a.
r/
JO.
6.7V
1.
Hi.
ill.
so
-------
EMISSION TESTINC
DDATA
Page
of 7
PATE"
SAMPLE TYPE
NUMBER
./?/*(.£.(*
J
SAMPLE
J'Y
10
o-n
051
r?
to
O.lt,
O.HI
/i
rr
v/
O. 2.1
r
rr
fT
10
I?
nr
a
O-VI
/-L
A/?
n
/Jo1"
n
10
I HO
Be
Y
/rr
756
YV
DGM
AVGSQRT
H
AVG
-STK P
- AVG ^
DOM F
Shoot Checked By:
Data
-------
:<<<:-x-:-:-:-:-X':":
- 3
liioirwi
iillilll
::':
-.-
SAMPLE
lAcou
.OV
g?*M
i.f9
n
Q57
il_
Orto
r
3-V
•7t- 61
l.tt
art
/r-3
v
L/o
¥¥
o.v/
VY
.,-
7/
11.0
ZL
17.0
AMGtSQRt
S/7flaf Checked By:
Date
-------
METHOD 23 CDD/CDF SAMPLE RECOVERY DATA BBL~-~~
V&&
;
>
Plant: £? A^f^l^
Sample Date: ? 0 ^}f
Sample Location: ft t
Recovery Date: } $ <~)\
&^A L^^
f^e^
^i Filter No.(s): /V 7k
*. L. ^1, /)^J^
Run No.: 43 A 6^
Job No.: 5 & t}
Netwt. L'L %
- ' , • ' " •
Moisture Data
1 2 3
nockout) (100 ml H2O) (100mlH2O)
^L^rlll^-rpCt*^^ .^lll^lJOtl^-^^
^f^ ^L!^^> (-?*~^ ^ ' ^
$l*q ^"6^T ^~C5I, 7
1 b.L> — 2. fa. —6,j
Description
4
(knockout) Silica gel
(untipped) (untipped)
1 ^fXD f^-/ 9
077, V 'ftb'Z.D g
^,6? "^ // / a
x?^&>fi
Train System: /"^ — ^2-^3
Rrobe: ^^7 ' '
Filter: Color- * ZS^L
Impinger Contents:
/ ^ —
P^AJ) ^L>^i
\ • •'••'•-.•.-•''. '. •
marked/sealed: * —
marked/sealed:
Liquid level
marked/sealed:
Liquid level
marked/sealed: '^
Liquid level
marked/sealed:
Liquid level
marked/sealed^ * .
^ /T^n^kx*^ % &>JUt»~>
•^
-------
METHOD 5 TESTING FIELD DATA SHEET
PAGE 1 of.
:;Xffl>X;^;j'>X-j;y^:'^X<;X;>:;.;
*™*****™
.
"73*
l
48"
•2D-
PES
-------
EMISSION TEST1NC
DDATA
Page "Z. of
PLANT AND
P.ATE
i^ra^HYfliK:,'ft.,:*;
SAMPLE TYPE
CRUN NUMBER
>:¥»»»;«'i«-::*^
IfffiMili
SAMPLE
roAiN
AGOtJ.
. -57
4
7D
-------
BSEp
I*
0:$:::$£:::S'S':'^:':$;READlwC3::^^
illiil
SAMPLE
STRAIN
lAGtJUS
46
So
/.DO
/3
"7
4T2
SiSi.
65
2.7
/r?
55
67
(3
0
75
57
6?
4-
2--
5B
7
L 60
4-7
6.34-
7
034-
ft
43,2.4-
AS/
67
a
IbS
44 -
67
0.47
744-
4ZJL
M3.
j6z
/£>
Checked By.
Dale
-------
MULTI-METALS SAMPLE RECOVERY DATA
mm
OPACBVCBHMM
Plant:
Run No.
Date:
Sample Box No.: 7^-A-l.
Job No.:
Sample Location:
SampleType;
Sample Recovery Person
Container
Description
Volume, ml
Sealed/Level Marked
Filter No.(s)
\od\»
Fl
Acetone Rinse
Nitric Rinse
Back Half
Nitric Rinse - Imp. 1,2,3, + Back 1/2 Filter
5A
Nitric Rinse - Impinger No. 4
5B
KMN04/H2O Rinse - Impingers 5 & 6
5C
HCl Rinse - Impingers 5 & 6
Impinger
No.
Contents
Initial
Volume, ml
Initial
Weight, grams
Final
Net
l
•4
\t>0
JPO. /
•o
4 It**
, ;
~ 0. L
A
u
(00
cl (Pfffo
-, 1
Total
sL&^Lsi.
. L
Comments:
' A JZ
-------
METHOD 5 TESTING FIELD DATA SHEET
PAGE 1 o( 3
HMTL,
•use:
I O»X*trt«i>¥inHntiHrt*——
28.64-
-O./D
.
-------
EMISSION TESTINC
DDATA
Page
of
€&•
PLANT AND CITY
T5.
TRAV.
POINT
NO.
/o
A-/2,
/o
Tote/.?
ELAPSED
TEST
TIME
7*
-75
65
105
lit)
115
Zoo
10
75
36
35
TIME
CLOCK
TIME
(24-hr)
1360
/BOS
BfO
/330
'335
430
I'blO
V0)(«3) r-
/02-.
112.^0
.VOLUME
-, SAMPLING UOCATJQN
/;< p-
veuocitv
~
D./3
0.44-
0.4/
0.4^
AVG SORT
:* -U '
H;
ORIFICE
6.55
:%AVG
• " H;
; STACK
- TEMP '
/28
/2I7
\~2JL,
/Z5
130
- -'AVG
'STK f
SAMPLE TYPE
-TEMP,
•za
750
25Z
Z55
Z5Z
2-44
233
2,3
FILTER
OV^N
TEMP
C FK
2.W
s RUN NUMBER
-SILGEL
IMPINGEH
TEMP
'(•'R
57
4-2^
43
6.5
^Z
4-3
DGM
IN/OUT
TEMP
C F)
87
SS
-AVG '
DGM F
AUX,
TEMP.
( B
S/joo/ Chockod By:
SAMPLE
TRAIN
ACUU
Cn.Hg)
4
7
SL_
n
n
/Z-
14-
Oslo
-------
tMED
IDSMII
M<3!HI
1EM8I
tllfEMR
SAMPLE
•IfflAlNi?
PiGtIUl
Z35
46
3-
/3D
46
3
/6Z5
/3D
/530
4-
65
1b
0,26
3
75
m
-2^3
4-
60
6.25
/.DO
/So
-
/ 85.22^
51
0-30
/3D
50
/DO
/30
43
4-2,
1&2J)
-21*0
4/
5
//S
/22>
5
AMGI3QB1
-,.-. •••:•• ,-:«*»£ M-X'>-I'>
240 H
u,
Sheet Chocked By:
Data
-------
MULTI-METALS SAMPLE RECOVERY DATA
Plant 6tt»* JKofc Lv^ 4-
Date: ^//^/^
Sample Box No.: i^-^-'L
Run No.: 7€i-A-~z-
Job No.: ^-44J-~
Sample Location: (du* /L l Cun^r rr~
Sample Type: M^fep ??
Sample Recovery Person: r^i/ft
Container
Description
Volume, ml
Sealed/Level Marked
FrbritHalf •v'.'" '' '"' ", ' ''" ' "'• ,: • "" •" ; ^''-"'^ -:^-/;- ---r-y—
1
2
3
Filter No.(s) *3 £) t L L ?/^° ^
'/
Acetone Rinse
Nitric Rinse
?
PI ^
frg 1, ^
J=~#3> -^
Back:Half- , vv '•] '''•""• ^':':'\-'^"' /;0;;^'^ •..•'>': "-V-. ."; / ,. •.''•';;
4
5A
5B
5C
Nitric Rinse - Imp. 1,2,3, + Back 1/2 Filter
Nitric Rinse - Impinger No, 4
KMN04/H2O Rinse - Impingers 5 & 6
HCI Rinse - Impingers 5 & 6
n»*/ ^
$~A ^
S2 ^
5"c ^
Moisture Data
Impinger
No.
f
I
1
4
iw\lfr
"
^ Cif.
7
Initial
Volume, ml
6.
(6>
/fr>
6
/6o
^Otf
^
Weight, grams
Initial
??£. ^
<^^. I
^?.
-------
METHOD 5 TESTING FIELD DATA SHEET
PAGE 1 of 3
MMTL
::--:
ZS.32-
Q.fD
si*
II
••:•:•••••••;• v'-z- ••:••••:•••
«m
i'SiSSKSgaSBSa*
pes
-------
EMISSION TESTINC
DDATA
Page "2- of 3
PLANT AND31TY
DATE
::,:. SAMPLING LOCATION
SAMPLE TYPE
. RUN NUMBER
MHTL-
TRAV:
POINT
NO.
ELAPSED
TEST
TIME
(mln)'
CLOCK
TIME
(24~hr>
BEADINQ'/ '
VELOCftY
N
,
.ORIFICE
\
PR08£
-TEMP,
( ft '
FILTER
OVEN
TEMP
( F)
-SILGEL
PlNG
TEMP
DGM
IN/OUT
TEMP
C F)
AUX.
TEMP.
( F)
SAMPLE
TRAIN
ACUU
(tn.Hg)
A'B
Z5B
SO
73
75
0.74-Z.3£
So
230
Z3/
-Z54-
/2SO
&
A3
/2B
Z65
/.3f
/£>
0.40
•244
//S
•2.45
53
B-J
zo
72S
-2.77-4^
0.62-
77
Z33
. S/
"Z33
77
4-5
735
7
4-7-
-7
4
0,97
IK
/.s/
0
Page
To(als
'TOTAU
TIME
VOLUME
AVG SORT
1AVG '
'- H-
'AVG
STK
AVG
DGM F
Checked By:
Date
-------
MMTL.
oiNl
iMMEIi
:::::x:;:
ISlill
lllitilil
•tiEMB
SAMPLE
•Z.05
0.-73
/•z—•
0.73
•Z43
7
o./o
Z33
44-
D.3/
•2-44
4?
O./O
a3/
2*7
78
O.fD
•Z.4-Z
70
77
324- //
a
40
76
s
*f
33D-45
Z36
3-7
7
220
33z.
B-7
6S
232^
to
/Z-
734
3^
344: OS/
Checked fly:
Date
-------
MULTI-METALS SAMPLE RECOVERY DATA
Sample Location:
Sample Type:
74.
Sample Recovery Person:
Container Description
Volume, ml Sealed/Level Marked
Front Half
1
Filter No.(s) *3»t / L 7 D /3D lL>7
P/
Acetone Rinse
Nitric Rinse
Back Half
Nitric Rinse - Imp. 1,2,3, + Back 1/2 Filter
5A
Nitric Rinse - Impinger No. 4
SA
5B
KMNO4/H2O Rinse - Impingers 5 & 6
5C
HCI Rinse - Impingers 5 & 6
Moisture Data
Impinger
No.
Contents
Initial
Volume, ml
Initial
Weight, grams
Final
Net
(00
{Ub
0
C
L*>
II
o
if.i
Total
DZ.l-
Comments:
-------
Appendix B. 1.3
Raw Field Data
Kiln No. 2-Scrubber"B"
-------
GAS VELOCITY AND VOLUMETRIC FLOW RATE
Plant;
Sampling Location:
Run #:
Date:
- /*/-
Clock Time:
Operators:.
Barometric Pressure.in. Ha: 2.7. **> Static Pressure, in. hkO: -.10
Moisture, %: IS Molecular wt., Dry:_z2^_ PitotTube, Cp:
Stack Dimension, in. Diameter or Side 1: V#* Side 2:
Wet Bulb, °F:.
Traversa
Point
Number
I
i
t
1
I/
It
H
7
it
n
Velocity
Head
in. H2O
.2-5
,t>ci
,1-0
10
01
01
Stack
Temp.
°F
Dry Bulb, °F:
Md =
V/.
!*<*
3V
/37
Md = (0.44X
Md= ^
(0.32 X%O2) + (0.28x%Nl2)
3.2. 2<
(0.32X ^O ) + (0.2BX
% H.0
% HO
p8 = pb+-§£^=<
13,8
13.8
Ps=
in.Hg
Vs = 85.49 x Cp X
PsxMs
Vs = 85.49 x ( •, »7 ) x ( ) x
13 ft/8
?, r?
08 •
adm
P»
'std
x 17.647 x-
dscfm
• x (1 )
100
-------
Plant;
Run#:
GAS VELOCITY AND VOLUMETRIC FLOW RATE
l,-/r\*- Date: /(^ -
ling Location: S^y**- 0w4trf' S Clock Time:
*: OJ
netric P
ure, %:
Dimen,
lulb,°F
venw
oint
mber
1
Z.
3
^
5
G?
7
ff
^
/O
I/
/Z.
/
Z
^
¥
5
c,
7
f
^
/£
H
a,
dJo/?.xC /-Voi/J Onarators: ~7H~JBF
ressure, in. 1-
jq; 25 • 5^ Static Pressure, in. HUO:
Molecular wt.. Drv: PitotTube*"Cp: ,#^
sion, in. Diameter or Side
: DrvE
Velocity
Head
in. H20
2°
2?
rf
0°
1°
6°
5^
1°
3°
^L°
1*
0*
se
5a
Sd
7°
3d
(D6
**
/^
^*
-------
Plant: 9A
GAS VELOCITY AND VOLUMETRIC FLOW RATE
Date: )& ~
Sampling Location:
Run #: ~Pr£.l '/V
B
Clock Time: /o
Operators:
Barometric Pressure, in. Ha: IB^L Static Pressure, in. HgO: -.
Moisture, %: /5 Molecular wt., Dry: Pilot Tube, Cp;^.
Stack Dimension, in. Diameter or Side 1: ^8' Side 2:
Wet Bulb, °F:.
Dry Bulb, °R.
Traverse
Point
Number
i
7
3
V
5
6
7
tf
q
10
)/
i2
1
7.
3
. 4/
5
C
7
f
^
10
I/
11
Velocrty
Head
in. H20
, /^
,d>^
• 07
. 05
.0*
.07
.09
. / Z
.1?
,zo
•12-
.Li
• 21
-ZO
,19,
, II
, G~I
.05
•a?
.1-2.
.10
,/ 7
-/*?
./6
JBF-^35S
Stack
Temp.
°F
/J2
/3Z
/^v
/3J
/33
/3Y
/^2
llT
/32-
l3^
/.??
/-S3
/3Z
' J2
;3^
/3Z
/33
/S2,
/3V
'34
' -*Z
/3Z.
/32
; 3^
T*. y>3
Md = (0.44 X
Md = (0.44x
+ (0.32 x %O2) + (0.2i X
+ {0.32x 8 ) + (0.28x
%H,,O
Mi.|Mx(1.-^-)+1.( 1QO
% HO
2
Ms = (
Ms =
) x (1 •
'F-
'5
100
Tif'
ia.e
13,6
ln.Hg
Vs = 85.48 X Cp X
Vs = 85.49 X (
Vs= Z/tt W8
— J TsfR)
PsxMs
)x
I
Qs = Vs x As x 60 8/m
Qs- x
x60
/^Z3I «*"
Ps ^HjO,
"Qsx17.647x ^X(1- &-)
Ts 100
°w
Qsstd1
x17.e47x-
'(? -
fiv-
100
-------
GAS ANALYSIS DATA FORM
PLANT
DATE
COMMENTS:
JEST NO
3 & - (
SAMPLING TIME (»4it CLOCK)
SAMPLING LOCATION /
, Z,
SAMPLE TYPE (BAG, INTEGRATED, CONTINUOUS),
ANALYTICAL METHOD
AMBIENT TEMPERATURE.
OPERATOR_
^^^ RUN
GAS ^\,
C02
OjfNET IS ACTUAL 02
READING MINUS ACTUAL
C02 READING)
CO(NET IS ACTUAL CO
READING MINUS ACTUAL
02 READING)
NjCNET IS 100 MINUS
ACTUAL CO READING)
1
ACTUAL
READING
11.0
26,7
NET
I to
7.7
0
73,3
2
ACTUAL
READING
•/?. o
2£,0
NET
t9,o
7.f
0
7^2-
3
ACTUAL
READING
/?.
-------
I IL-l-l-/ I-//-V I n
ll_l_ 1
Sampling Location
Run Number: 7
S>
Date:
Sample Type: /P? 23 Operator: v"«v ^
Pbar: Jg. fa£ Ps:
CO2: "Zo^t, O2: "3.0
Pretest Leak Rate: foO(s cfrn @ i
Pretest Leak Check: Pitot: l^~ Orsat:
in. Hg. Probe Length/Type:
Pitot #:
Stack Diameter: yff " As:
Nozzle ID: f),37f Thermocouple #:
Assumed Bws: /r% Filter #:
Meter Box #: ^jf^Y: /.aa3 AH@: A 76.5"
Post-Test Leak Rate: ^^y cftn @^^in. Hg.
Post-Test Leak Check: Pitot: Orsat:
raverse
Point
lumber
Sampling
Time
(mln)
dock Time
(24-hour
clock)
Gas Meter
Reading
Velocity
'Mead(Ap)
!nH20
Orifice Pressure Drfferenfial
(AH) in H2O
Desired
Actual
Stack
Temp.
(Ts)
Temperature
°F
Probe
Filter
Impinger
Ternp.
°F
Dry Gas Meter Ternp.
Inlet
(Tm in°F)
Outlet
(Tm out°F)
Pump
Vacuum
fln.Hg)
O
(i, 270
r/, 4?s
/O
f'fB.o
6, a
4-.6Z
I??
5b
to
IZ
it
4,0 1
(1
\
sv
££/
O.tf
244
7
SO
Q.Of
a, of
f
96
?4
"L-
/eo
5
23-3.*
X 33,ai/
//
>,
I£
/so
^
/yo
g?4
K
£>*(*
74-1
I
, Tr.
/ce
o.zi
90
55
&
u.
t
ZJ0
a:
in
3L-2.
2.
-------
. i
METHOD 23 CDD/CDF SAMPLE RECOVERY DAT>
Plant:
Run
Sample Date:
Filter No.(s):
Job No.
Sample Location:
- LA*
Recovery Date:
XAD-2 Trap No.(s):
Sample Recovery Person:
Moisture Data
Impingers
(100mlH2O)
(untipped)
(100mlH2O)
4
(knockout)
(untipped)
Silica gel
(untipped)
Netwt.
- J. i )
Descripti
Train System:
Probe:
Filter: Color-
Loading -
Impinger Contents:
Silica Gel: ©Grams Used - j£ p D Color -
Spent-
Condensate Observed In Front Half:
Recovered Sample Fractions
Filter Container No.
marked/sealed:
XAD Module Container No.:
marked/sealed:
Probe (FH) & Back Half Rinse (Acetone) Container No.
Liquid level
marked/sealed:
Probe (FH) & Back Half Rinse (Toluene) Container No.
Liquid level
marked/sealed:
Impinger Contents Contpiner No.: \
Liquid level
marked/sealed:
inse (Acetone/MbCI2) ContainerNo.:
Impinger Rinse (Aceton
Liquid level
marked/sealed:
S
-------
GAS ANALYSIS DATA FORM
PUNT £"/f-sre6-£- Liwt=r
DATE
co
/tf-H~f4
TEST HO
3 B~Z-
SAMPLING TIME (24-fct CLOCK)
SAMPLING LOCATION
*J0, Z-
SAMPLE TYPE (BAG, INTEGRATED, CONTINUOUS).
ANALYTICAL METHOD.
AMBIENT TEMPERATURE,
OPERATOR
COMMENTS:
\*. RUN
GAS ^\
C02
(tyNET IS ACTUAL 02
READING MINUS ACTUAL
C02 READING)
CO(NET IS ACTUAL CO
READING MINUS ACTUAL
02 READING)
N2(NET IS 1M MINUS
ACTUAL CO READING)
1
ACTUAL
READING
M.O
<27t~7
NET
**..
7,7
O
w
2
ACTUAL
READING
AQ.t
•27» £-
NET
*>./
7.7
0
V*
3
ACTUAL
READING
JLO .0
2-},8-
NET
**0
7.8
o
V^.x
AVERAGE
NET
VOLUME
*>.<>'
fhOr
J&r**!
A 1*1
•/*•
o
/^ &
*12jC
MULTIPLIER
««-,,o
32/100
H/lOO
28 '100
TOTAL
MOLECULAR WEIGHT OF
STACK GAS (DRY BASIS)
«„,
fr.frcto
^?« vcy
0
jo.wy
*,.**.
-------
Plant S&f 9CAc,*
Sampling Lx>cation fife? ICJ^
FIELD DATA SHEET
_,, ^ Sample Type: /v> -23 Operator:
l§ Pbar lB,<& Ps: t.o6
Nozzle ID: „ 3/*3 Thermocouple #:
Assumed Bws: ;5 Filter #:
CO2:
O2:
Run Number: Z3-£-'Z. Date: /p-/7- "?6
Pretest Leak Rate:Q ,QoB cfm @ /-^ in. Hg. Probe Length/Type:4'«t^ Q L Pitot #:
Pretest Leak Check: Pitot: Orsat: Stack Diameter: oS* As:
Meter Box #: 0/1 if./4 Y: /.^f&H@:
Post-Test Leak Rate: . go y dm @ |^_ in. Hg.
Post-Test Leak Check: Pitot: Orsat
Traverse
Point
Number
SampKng
Time
(min)
Dock Time
(24-hour
dock)
Gas Mater
Reading
Velocity
Head (Ap)
inH20
Orifice Pressure Differentia!
(AH) in H2O
Desired
Actual
Stack
Temp.
(Ts)
Temperature
°F
Probe
Rrter
tmpinger
Temp.
°F
Dry Gas Meter Temp.
Inlet
(Tmin°F)
Outlet
(Tmout°F)
Pump
Vacuum
(in.Hfl)
a
\\4o
/o
a.
26
111
12(6
•y
50
a 10
7
10
3I
•24-7
(o
3
$0
0,2-2-
o.
4£-
4-
K>
a.
MT
"pTIF'
A
11
o
1.
(71
^
-2./0
.MO
7,20
AH
JA.
o.W
K
130
4i
0
lOt-
M.
Ts
Tm=
-------
METHOD 23 CDD/CDF SAMPLE RECOVERY DATA ..
i
IN
Plant: ^ ^l^tfco/n Q^JLaji l^^mj
^A
Sample Date: /0-r7~2& | Filter No.(s): //fr
Sample Location: Jyt . ^ %Jls\ O ^Ci>4 ^1
SSL.
n^
Run No.: -2J3J5 $
Job No
•• 5 o. t> i
R/'
Recovery Date: /^ "/ 7^^> XAD-2 Trap No.(s): ULI*~T. £(££
Sample Recovery Person: *-— *&-$(
Moisture Data
1 2 3
Impingers XAD-2 (knockout) (100mlH2O) (100mlH2O)
Final wt, 32 O 7 95 *5~ *&t$7*JJ (^7^ 3> >
Initial wt. 3<^^,^ UO^.Q ^T8 %^t ^> 7L C/
Netwt. ^5" %^1^,3 — L I — /,/
Description
4
(knockout)
(untipped)
> 4^?^.^
lj $D* D
ttb
Silica gel
(untipped)
/ / 4^ f^-f 9
£^7. il a
(Oft » o g
4^y^s; 4/
Train System: /*^ — Z-2>
Probe: LC^Li^-^J itt$L*^J
/ /A * /T r /
Impinger Contents: fjc&4^-^ V
Silica Gel: @Grams Used- lf,
-------
GAS ANALYSIS DATA FORM
PUNT
DATE
£fiS7l£B-tJ
COMMENTS:
tO -I8-K.
TEST MQ
B -3
SAMPLING THE (24-Jw CLOCK)
SAMPLING LOCATION
iJO,Z.
SAMPLE TYPE (BAG, INTEGRATED, CONTINUOUS) X*UTS»TT£2>
ANALYTICAL METHOD.
AMBIENT TEMPERATUR
OPERATOR
^*>^ RUN
GAS ^\
C02
OjCNET IS ACTUAL 02
READING MINUS ACTUAL
C02 READING)
CO(NET IS ACTUAL CO
READING MINUS ACTUAL
0; READING)
N2
7*7
2
ACTUAL
READING
/9,0
J7.3
NET
;f.g
7,5^
Cr
72,"?
3
ACTUAL
READING
/9.7
^7,3
NET
/9.7
7,6-
a
7Z.7
AVERAGE
NET
VOLUME
/?.-?
7.^
o
72,1
MULTIPLIER
44 .IN
32 100
8/180
28 '100
TOTAL
MOLECULAR WEIGHT OF
STACK GAS (DRY BASIS)
«d.
S-.G^B
2.^3^
6
alO,3S^
3L
-------
FIELD DATA SHEET
'Plant: gp/3
Sampling Location .. ^ruM*'- CS)~\A\ £1
Run Number: Z'5-fi-3 Date: /
Pretest Leak Rate: £?,gQ$s"cfm @ iSl in. Hg,
Pretest Leak Check: Pilot: Orsat:
Sample Type:
Pbar: ^g..?
CO2: to.0
• 23 Operator:
Ps:
O2:
Probe Length/Type:
Stack Diameter:
Pftot #: */# -
As:
Nozzle ID: , 3/6 Thermocouple
Assumed Bws: ,/g Filter #:
Meter Box #: ^V Y: /.#?3 AH@: /
Post-Test Leak Rate: , t^Q^ cfm @ /& in. Hg.
Post-Test Leak Check: Pftot: Orsat:
Traverse
Point
Number
6
Sampling
Time
(min)
O
dock Time
(24-hour
dock)
Gas Meter
Reading
(Vm)ft3
Velodty
Head
inH20
Orifice Pressure Differential
(AH) in H2O
Stack
Temp.
(Ts)
Temperature
°F
Impinger
Temp.
OF
Dry Gas Meter Temp.
Outlet
(Tmout°F)
Pump
-
Vacuum
(in.Hg)
/O
O.M
. si
4
743
4
6
o.e?
H
b. 't
6'Ao
4.
5
(14
749
C
0,^0
2*16
a. 7.0
75 f
/O
/co
60
/o
flf
•24-?-
12.
1360
.-?, ^37
0,76
ge
560
,30
2.
2,2(4
z.56?
83
0
0,?!
ZJ
0/34
7,26,
Q(
CL
1
_^J
"7?^
6, ID
/O
I
2-30
r
AVm=
&H=
-------
METHOD 23 CDD/CDF SAMPLE RECOVERY DATA, . SBB_-. .
CHI,
/
Plant: &*^L]JU^ ^Ul*
s
Sample Date: j& 1^"fL
Sample Location: J}/t>, ?L. -,
Recovery Date: ) # - J$-^?l
/"*
Sample Recovery Person: C—
1
Impingers XAD-2 (knockout)
Trap
Final wt. 32k$ §~?$,3
Initial wt. 3J2L2.3 'tfb&l
Netwt. ^,5~S74^2~
Train System: M - 2-3
Probe: L/ }j^-
Filter: Color- JfstL^ /^%_4—
Impinger Contents: ^lW>
$ ^^
1 / s\
|l L^^^A RunNo.:£S^ ^^
Filter No.(s): //A Job No.: <>ODJ
%d^ 'DuJ&A 32
XAD-2 Trap No.(s): ^_ ~{&
^^
Moisture Data
2 3 4
(100mlH2O) (100mlH2O) (knockout) Silica gel
(untipped) (tipped) (untipped) (untipped)
C"?6, 14 ^Jfa.b Lt%£.\ ?¥7,& g
(S"V 7, 73 t5"7.5l:3 ¥%%£> *9J4f.fy g
;^r7^3 //3 1.} "2,^ i> g
Description ^ ./4C 4^
/
r \
( Loading- Jk*t*^\ ( oi^^L&J JLta^)
•\
Silica Gel: ©Grams Used - y <, O Color - ^^ 0/0 Spent - 7 tb
Condensate Observed In Front Half: sui
Recovered Sample Fractions
Filter Container No.
XAD Module Container No.:
marked/sealed: *xX
marked/sealed:
Liquid level
Probe (FH) & Back Half Rinse (Acetone) Container No.: marked/sealed:
Liquid level
Probe (FH) & Back Half Rinse (Toluene) Container No.: marked/sealed: L^
\ \ \ Liquid level
Imjajnger ContentsContainer No\ marked/sealed:
Impinger Rinse (Acetohe/MeCI2)
\ Liquid level
Container Np.: ^~* * marked/sealed.^ A a
ftt f^ct^^ — P $J f># &
-------
Plant:
Sampling Location
Run Number;
Date:
Sample Type:
Pbar: j&
CO2:
Operator:
zo
Ps:
O2:
Pretest Leak Rate:
<_z cfm @ <5 in. Hg.
Pretest Leak Check: P'rtot: ^_ Orsat: *~-
Probe Length/Type:
Stack Diameter:
Ptot#:
As:
Nozzle ID: 0,37$ Thermocouple #:
Assumed Bws: xT^ilter #: 30 / C?
Meter Box »: /.jr Y: /.a^&H®: /
Post-Test Leak Rate: ,.ooS c*n @ U_ '"•
Post-Test Leak Check: Pilot: Orsat:
Traverse
Point
Number
Sampling
Time
(min)
Oock Time
(24-hour
dock)
Gas Meter
Reading
Velocity
Head (Ap)
fnH2O
Orifice Pressure Differential
in H2O
Stack
Temperature
°F
hnpmger
Temp,
°F
Dry Gas Meter Temp.
Inlet
(Tmin°F)
Outtet
(Tmout*^
Pump
Vacuum'
3
50.^
,11
I, U
7
6,2-
7?
f
.10
5-0
7.
11. r5
. 11
1, Ls
/3G
7f . 3
/- 5
/. 5
/37
2^_
go
^M.
X
/. 2,
•2-50
ff
90
ncn
LZ
./B
/c
^lA.
i-O
/I
/JO
235
53
y
/ye-
735
/ft
zs/
2^6
s/.
f/
/70
Z. .
3.7
tO
6/7 V
25 /
/36
v
Z
£00
rf}-7.
a
-/
z/o
/.o
6
2,0/7
/35
ZJO
'35
•2.$
AVm»
Tip
-------
MULTI-METALS SAMPLE RECOVERY DATA
Plant:
L
^t^e.
Run No.:
Date:
Sample Box No.:
Job No.:
Sample Location:
j
t*
D
Sample Type:
79
Sample Recovery Person:
£LJL_
Container Description
Volume, ml Sealed/Level Marked
Front Half
1
/3 \
Filter No.(s)
Acetone Rinse
' 3
Nitric Rinse
Back Half
Nitric Rinse - Imp. 1,2,3, + Back 1/2 Filter
5A
Nitric Rinse - Impinger No. 4
5B
KMNO4/H2O Rinse - Impingers 5 & 6
5C
HCI Rinse - Impingers 5 & 6
Impinger
No.
Contents
Initial
Volume, ml
Initial
Weight, grams
Final
Net
1
(I
6
3. /
Total
Comments:
-------
ur\
Plant: fjfr Ri
^61 1
'-^ '* '-
^75, /
/. 6
i.o
/^/-S*
. SB
/OQ
.88
Z&2.
!(»*>
A^L
j±_
5a
3±
3
fib
,26
93
-T
,20
-233
Jo-
tzo
M-
nH
so
•2.50
w
12.
iO
fhi*
-------
MULTI-METALS SAMPLE RECOVERY DATA
ffSS
rtr > i • M. •MUM
Plant: (^ifal&H r-($&£ U*w? Co .
Date: (o //97$? 1 Sample Box No. : 7^ - 5-7-
, , . /A/ -) V , A U.
Sample Location: //"&/ Hffaf (JiftUsr D
Sample Type: /MgTfAtf ~K
Sample Recovery Person: ]MW^ CJ- »^--
Container Description
Run No.: ff-6-2-
JobNo.: 5-4^ (
Volume, ml
Sealed/Level Marked
FrbntHaif "•""'". "^ ''":'.''•'.''• ' :" "
1 Filter No.(s) jol&C'B
2 Acetone Rinse
3 Nitric Rinse
1^1 ^
ML ^
tH-y ^
'iwti^;-''^y:^^ ['.:•"' :
4 Nitric Rinse - Imp. 1,2,3, + Back 1/2 Filter
5A Nitric Rinse - Impinger No. 4
5B KMNO4/H2O Rinse - Impingers 5 & 6
5C HCI Rinse - Impingers 5 & 6
fitiG ^
SA ^
5/3 ^
^c ^.
Moisture Data ' .Y'.' '••/•./ ': "':•.: :'; •"". . :-: - ' • :• " .•"•••'••..••' '.•". "••'••' •
Impinger
No.
f
^
5
4.
<~
6
f-
Total
Contents
^r
tfMJlti \bb-
^
Initial
Volume, ml
6
lu>
1C*
IMT , 0
$IQnk§ll(j{lk*i lft>
<(
^yiJWF
Comments: Ti~9^ti/v^^\ JL&&~Ai
(Gl>
*—
Weight, grams
Initial
14-2-4-
(g^W D
\@j>*2-. *O
<&&4
M-l
6*1^
&{& 1
Final
i&to. I
^4o.Z-
bn.9'
^0^
bfiT-4"
.D
1-1
f). ?
~ £>.$ •
n, ft
<39t>'
-------
Plant: £
Sampling Location
Run Number: 2.9-
5
Date:
Sample Type: /H - 2 ? Operator:
Pbar: 28. 3 O Ps: "*" , /2
CO2: z_n O2: 4
Pretest Leak Rate: ^QfQ cfm @ yifc in. Hg.
Pretest Leak Check: P'rtot: f Orsat: ^-"
Probe Length/Type:
Stack Diameter:
Pitot #:
As:
Nozzle ID: , 3/£ Thermocouple #:
Assumed Bws: ,/5 Filter #:
Meter Box #:
Post-Test Leak Rate: ot> 3 dim @ H in. Hg.
Post-Test Leak Check: Pitot: Great:
Traverse
Point
Number
Desired
Actual
Probe
Filter
Sampling
Time
(min)
30
Clock Time
(24-hour
dock)
Gas Meter
Reading
(Vm)ft3
Vetecfty
Head ( Ap)
inH2O
Orifice Pressure Differential
(AH) in H2O
Stack
Tamp.
(Ts)
Temperature
°F
Impinger
Temp.
°F
Dry Gas Meter Temp.
Inlet
(Tm in°F)
Outtet
(Tm out°F)
Pump
Vacuum
fm.Hg)
'70-
¥0
5S2. 2.
fz
/SO
359,
/33
. 5"
/3V
9
13
J_
12.10
37/, 6.
<57
. 6,
O.V7
3V
f/
,03
a -20
a
, 03
^5d.
±.
HO
3
'I
i'bSS
3%. ^
, ¥7
, VI
zvf
'56
JL^
M2S
0-67
. 67
S5?
. o
/sv
HL
O.
"7
*./
z-J
JZ^
/•I
i 5
20
/'£>
220
1,1
I.I
J^L
J.N
xqC,
_2±
/D
AVm=
Tm=
-------
ULTI-METALS SAMPLE RECOVERY DATA
Plant:
Run No.:
Date:
Sample Box No.:
Job No.:
Sample Location:
ufttr
v)
Sample Type:
Sample Recovery Person: 1/MwK
Container Description
Volume, ml Sealed/Level Marked
Front Half
1
Filter No.(s) JfyUeffl
PI
Acetone Rinse
Nitric Rinse
BackHalf
Nitric Rinse - Imp. 1.2.3. + Back 1/2 Filter
5A
Nitric Rinse - Impinger No. 4
5B
KMNO4/H2O Rinse - Impingers 5 & 6
5C
HCI Rinse - Impingers 5 & 6
Moisture Data
-------
Appendix B.I.4
Raw Field Data
Kiln No. 2 - Total Hydrocarbons
-------
;»
t
itf.ib
-H-4
— 1 :-: — i—
„! J _4i_
-4-M
•U40B
4—
_L-4-
10-
-g-
.;..
—f—•
Lntzri}::.:
Ad 3tC.lta\
o
V^Q; sftcon.
0 !i
!
!
|
1*111 1
<: i
i , !
p;—r
;~ ,J___
i i
; 0 i
ftp
_Ql
JftT.gfcf
r
T=B
fiB3_
^z.
A J.
.1
-------
_.
-Ok
r?
i i
—I
..TO i
] !
T\\C
_J._L
_i
n
,m.72
-e-
1
.- _ r ._«~^,.
....I...
t~-T
i . 1 ,
i i • : .
i l*7.%,\» s . i i
i \f • . f~
I • ' ;•- • : ' - ; • ' •
i |J , i ; i <
i : :
S | :?».-o4 : '• •'
•K^ni i i i i .
", " ;*•;•:. ~T-~ --—.-- — -• f -, ---
jSY*T6»w.i C*.ciC>«*rne'3
_L_ _|_ , , , (
o
(- —
I I
MOai
i ! !
-------
-------
J i
L
/ A
.
1 4
-------
-7—.—6 **—r—4- ——
-------
.72.
: i i
-U
-------
-------
i
-------
-------
-------
_.; 4 I- 4-
-H-4
!
Ma 12,.
Aw
-------
1~-T"T
—t-
_u
-------
l_
if-
._; ; ; J_
! i !
.4 : £_
1- -.J J-J.—I. L
_» :
2,4001
T
oz
J
*
;!•¥!!;
\m
-------
1
^
J.
4—
4_M--J-4-
4
0(4
-------
-------
_l_i
tr
i -i
? - t-i -»-
-H-
4--
i I
i
-••
1 I
}
i
T
! i i
-M-+H
T'"
-------
D
OEM DATA REDUCTION - BAG ANALYSIS OR STEADY READINGS
Plant: £^OT£RM 'Ritx^e LIME. Co. Parameter: SO2, CO2, QZ.
Location:
Date:
Operator: P
Project#: S4ot .00-5
„ H * * M/ (Chart Division - b) (CD-[.2.1-4)
Pollutant, ppm/% = —i i— = —i ' Iy
m (o.^qsu )
Run
#
Time**
(24-Hr)
Average
Chart
Division
Concentration
Comments
IfiO.
-IS' 46
4.2.
3.0
*- Ivwt.
3.3
-//, -' A5
4.5
4.7
3.5
/L'46
3,5
3.1
4.5
2.5
3.1
3,1
4,5
2.5
1.3
l.b
.U
I.I
* For NOx Indicate whether NO, NO + NO2, or NO2 for specific interval.
** Indicate whether time interval is from beginning of first time to beginning
of second time or to end of second time (circle one, or describe alternate).
Calculated By:
Checked Bv:
Date:
Date:
-------
n,
GEM DATA REDUCTION - BAG ANALYSIS OR STEADY READINGS
D a
ryoeiE.
Location: K,LKi K]O. 2
Date: m_ i-
z. ^. Parameter: SO2, CO2, O2, NQx*.(lHg?CQ
Operator: ft
Project #:
Pollutant, ppm/% =
(Chart Division - b) _ (CD-0.531)
m
(
Run
#
Time**
(24-Hr)
11-45 -IT'.nb
-ii'. is
-IT'.-»»0
^12:4^
-IS'.hft
-»VI^
-12,1^
I4'.on - i4'.K
- 14 '.Vi
- I4-.44
- i-s: DO
-i4-,i*>
-l-S-AO
15 '.45- lb:eft
-IU-.I6
-IU:?»0
-16,: 45?
- IT. oo
Average
Chart
Division
k.5
k.5
lo.O
U.b
k.7
t.fc
7.3
9.5
7.0
\>A
t.o
5.5
5-5
t.i
^.5
t.7
t.6
•7.Z?
Concentration
PP1*^
t.4
t,4
5fl
s.q
t,t
U,7
7.3
^.t
\o!=\
L.Z
5,9
5..^
5.3
lo.O
fo.4
t-.L
U,7
b,^
Comments
* For NOX Indicate whether NO, NO + NO2, or NO2 for specific interval.
**
Indicate whether time interval is from beginning of first time to beginning
of second time or to end of second time (circle one, or describe alternate).
Calculated By:
Checked Bv:
Date:
Date:
sD-
-------
Q B
'SSL £3
aa GEM DATA REDUCTION - BAG ANALYSIS OR STEADY READINGS
Plant:
Location; Kiua K\o. Z
Date; \A_iR-qu
Parameter: SO2, CO2. O2, NOx*,o
- 10:45
- 1 1 •. oo
- 1 1 \ 1 5
- 1 1 ' AO
-II '.4S
- 1 1 ; pp
il'. S-^'^o
-I2-.4.-S
-l^'.rtO
-I3%, (S
.-l^'.-a,p
-IS!4^
-|4-'.,TO
Average
Chart
Division
t.2
L,D
5.5
5,0
4.8
4.3
4.0
f5.0
*.o
4.6
4.£?
4.^
4.^
4 A
Concentration
PP^^
s,e>
5,5
s.n
4.6
4.2.
^.~7
3.4
4.S
4.5
3.^
3.S
.3,^
3.^
^,1
Comments
* For NOX Indicate whether NO, NO + NO2, or NO2 for specific interval.
**
Indicate whether time interval is from beginning of first time to beginning
of second time or to end of second time (circle one, or describe alternate).
Calculated By:
Checked
Date:
Date:
/O-/6-94
//- /?-
-------
GEM DATA REDUCTION - BAG ANALYSIS OR STEADY READINGS
- SQ». COg. Oa. NOX*.
.ocation: Kii_y Mo. 2 (.JLET Operator: p. <*ie£.et-
Date: |0_ ^.q^ Protect #: .8> )
_ mm . Average i
/SUti ' Chart Concentration i Comments
i^-nrj Division pp^ ^^ i
4M5- 4:?>0 T. O
k.U i
n _ ^; 7^1 •: ^ ^ i (
1 -S'.oo U.O ' 5.5 !
- S' ?»o
- lt>'.r>o
4 ^
4.0
3.7
3,4
2.3
.
* For NOX indicate whether NO, NO + NO2, or NO2 tor specific interval.
**
Indicate whether time interval is from beginning of first time to beginning
of second time or to end of second time (circle one, or describe alternate).
Calculated By:
Date:
-------
-------
-------
-------
I 01 I I I I I ' 401 I ! 50
i I
i1 i 'so' i 111 bb • I ''
11 11 ] .!i
-------
-------
-------
-------
-------
-------
-------
-------
>'••* -,
-------
OEM DATA REDUCTION - BAG ANALYSIS OR STEADY READINGS
Plant: EASTBRKI "fip^E LIME do. Parameter: SO2, CO2. O2. NOX*,<$H^ CO
Location: KILM Mo 2. S^uf^fegR- A Operator: /f ^ "
Date: /&-/i-qk Project #: v
(Chart Division - b) _ (CD-i.gos)
Pollutant, ppm/% =
m
( o.
Run
#
Time**
(24-Hr)
/£:/£-/£:3&
/5.'45-/2-*0&
/^'2/ -/4.'j£
/^5/-/7:o6
/B<75~/&3Q
'/B'4$- fl'co
tf<'/5-ft'.zr.
tf 46 -40' GO
Average
Chart
Division
4.Z
5,^
^.^
05", 2.
3.J
4.6
4n
44
Concentration
PPM^
l.lo
3.0
3. 1
Z.R
^.0
2.C
2.2.
1.^
Comments
too1 ^A. SO1 6f
Ke*J-
-------
3 DO C3
r" GEM DATA REDUCTION - BAG ANALYSIS OR STEADY READINGS
Rant: E/^TCTJJ Ui^t LIME <^o Parameter: SO2, CO2, O2l NOx*,tHQPcO
Location: Kim Nio 2 SLRUC^BL ^ Operator: "R ^^^eu
Date: /d-/&-q& Project #: ^s4o!.6O3
Pollutant, ppm/% =
Run
Time**
(24-Hr)
/S''3o-/j:4£
/L:ht*-IL'.7.\
(Chart Division - b) (CD-i.^ox)
m ( ofl5"7S )
Average
Chart
Division
4.5
,5.7
Concentration
3.1
4.t
/L'-3k- H.'-5>\ 5.7 1 4. t>
/7£>-/~}'.2.l •• -4.0
/B'3O-/d'T^
M'.oo-m&
Wizo-tf:^
±0',DO-20'J<
4,7
42>
4.S
Comments
75' *~.»t "75' Of /t«*-iW
Jamp/e. /Sr?e
2,g,
3,5
3.
3.3
* For NOX Indicate whether NO, NO + NO2, or NO2 for specific Interval.
** Indicate whether time interval is from beginning of first time to beginning
of second time or to end of second time (circle one, or describe alternate).
Calculated By:.
Checked By:_
Date:.
Date:
-------
••» •• mm
OEM DATA REDUCTION - BAG ANALYSIS OR STEADY READINGS
Plant:
Parameter: S02,
. NOX*,
Location:
Date:
Operator: p,
Project #:
Pollutant, ppm/% =
(Chart Division - b) _ (CD-1.742)
m
)
Run
#
Time**
(24-Hr)
//:4S~/2frt>
/j:zo~/y;4£
/3:ov-/3:/£
/J'.ffD ~/i'./^
/4:zo~/4'.4£
/5".'^Z?-/-5.'/.^"
/S'3£>-/S^S
/&: 00 -/{?',/£
Average
Chart
Division
fe.7
A.
7^
4.fe
7.3
l.o
Lo
fc.O
Concentration
PPm ^-f
5.b
1, 2.
t.g
1.
(o..^
5.^
-4. A
4.8
Comments
For NOX indicate whether NO, NO + NO2, or NO2 for specific interval.
**
Indicate whether time interval is from beginning of first time to beginning
of second time or to end of second time (circle one, or describe alternate).
Calculated By:
Checked Bv:
Date:
Date:
-------
CEM DATA REDUCTION - BAG ANALYSIS OR STEADY READINGS
Plant:
Location: tf,LH Ak. 2
Date:
10-T7 -
Parameter: SO2, CO2. O2. NOx*.(fHC)co
Operator: _
Project #:
Pollutant, ppm/% =
_ (Chart Division - b) _ (CD-i.3bQ )
m
)
Run
#
Time**
(24-Hr)
/J:/5-/2^D
/J-^S- /3'.00
/3'-/S - /3>:-zo
/4:/z - /4:z&
M'43 - /^:aO
/S'/.^~/S!^Q
/&4£-/i:nn
St-VS -/&.-30
Average
Chart
Division
k.O
.5",&
L.I
7.0
tn.Z
*5.^
5.^
5,5
Concentration
W^
4.B
4. la
5.^
5.^
5,0
4,3
4.
4,3
Comments
* For NOX Indicate whether NO, NO + NO2 , or NO2 for specific interval.
**
Indicate whether time interval is from beginning of first time to beginning
of second time or to end of second time (circle one, or describe alternate).
Calculated By:
Checked Bv:
Date:
Date:_
-------
ca_ oa
a aca era
CEM DATA REDUCT|ON - BAG ANALYSIS OR STEADY READINGS
Plant:
lfc,F
Location: Kiu4 KJo. Z - g ^
Parameter: SO2 CO2. O2, NOxIHc)CO
Project #:
. 003
Pollutant, ppm/% =
_ (Chart Division - b) _ (CD -1.347)
m
(0.850& )
Run
#
Time**
(24-Hr)
(OMD- \OM>0
10-45- n:oo
US- U'.-io
1 MS- lx-. oo
ISU5- i^s^n
13:45- 14' r^
14'. 15 -i4'.*o
15-15 - 15:30
I5'-45-lUoo
Average
Chart
Division
*>.*>
t.S
^.2.
j^OS.O
5.S
5.1
t.2
^.S
5.0
Concentration
PP^^
5.B
5 ,&
5.~7
4. A
4,q
5.1
5,1
4^
4,3
Comments
* For NOX Indicate whether NO, NO + N02 , or NO2 for specific interval.
**
Indicate whether time interval is from beginning of first time to beginning
of second time or to end of second time (circle one, or describe alternate).
Calculated By: y£/7T
Checked
Date:
Date:
-------
OEM DATA REDUCTION - BAG ANALYSIS OR STEADY READINGS
Plant: EAATPRNJ "R
Location: XII.M NJo 2.
Date: ir^-fo.
/^g
Cn Parameter: SO2, CO2, O2. NOX*.
Operator: p.
Project #: S40f.
Pollutant, ppm/% =
(Chart Division - b) _
m
( 0,817^ )
Run
#
Time**
(24-Hr)
iD.iO-lO'.'iS
I '00- IV.V5
i '-BO - ir-4S
iZ'oo-l-L'.iS
13: in- i^:4S
14' DO- l^'.lft
14'. so -i 4: 4S
IS:^D-lft'.4S
Lb'-OO-tlo'. jcj
Average
Chart
Division
5.1
5.2
4. ft
4,4
4. -7
4.5
4. &
4.5
4,0
Concentration
Pf* u. Jt
4.4
4.4-
5,^
3.5
.a, 6
_3.U
3.^
3.t>
3.0
Comments
* For NOX Indicate whether NO, NO + NO2 , or NO2 for specific interval.
**
Indicate whether time interval is from beginning of first time to beginning
of second time or to end of second time (circle one, or describe alternate).
Calculated By:
Checked Bv:
Date:.
Date:
-ff- f
-------
Appendix B.2
Raw Field Data
Hydrator
-------
EPA METHOD 1
TRAVERSE POINT LOCATION FOR CIRCULAR DUCTS
PLANT
CITY
SAMPLING LOCATION
fflt,
CATI
STATE i/X-
INSIDE OF FAR WALL TO OUTSIDE
OF NIPPLE, (DISTANCE A}
INSIDE OF NEAR WALL TO OUTSIDE
OF NIPPLE, (DISTANCE B) *>
NEAREST UPSTREAM DISTURBANCE
DISTURBANCE
Icy
NEAREST DOWNSTREAM DISTURBANCE
DISTURBANCE
SAMPLER
DATE
to
r
SCHEMA TIC OF SAMPLING LOCA TION
TRAVERSE
POINT
NUMBER
}
^' '
1
V
r
6
•7
R
«jl
FRACTION
OF STACK I.D.
OolD
o.io?
0. 111
n.i^
V.t"n
o.\o(?
o,wr
0.161-
••
STACK
I.D.
ia-i
A
I
^
PRODUCT OF ' '
COLUMNS 2 AND 3
(TO NEAREST 1/8-INCH)
\ .
5-i
/vi
'^%
$y "
/r T
y? "
'/
7L\
>
ai>
DISTANCE B
)
I
\.
«L
TRAVERSE DISTANCE
FROM OUTSIDE OF NIPPLE
(SUM OF COLUMNS 4 & 5}
*4*
r*<
~>i"
, Sx '" '
Jo -^
r ts''
H ^
•Z> ''
2*, *
. ^r.| .'"
1
-------
£3,
D
Plant:
Sampling Location:
Run#: ?f£J:*v
GAS VELOCITY AND VOLUMETRIC FLOW RATE
Date:
Clock Time:
Operators :
Barometric Pressure, in. Hg: Zff.zf _ Static Pressure, in. HUP:
Moisture, %: %(& _ Molecular wt., Dry: _ Pilot Tube, Cp: ,fV
Stack Dimension, in. Diameter or Side 1 : ^2,5 side 2:
Wet Bulb, R
°
Dry Bulb,°F:.
Traversa
Point
Number
/
z
3
4
6
(*
7
$ .
/
i
<_
3
H
5
I/
*)
f
Velocity
Head
in. H2O
,,//
./3
i A7
, ^?L?
.^.-3
.0(J>
0 5
.OU
.Hi
,^l
.01
.02
ff)1
,G<&
, of
., o(^
^p =
Stack
Temp.
°F
no
it\
1*1
t<{\
IT*
)-j$
ni
tlH
i~l 2.
11 *-/
nl
1-lS
if)
H6
ntff
M
ij. n^
0,0
- 0.
-------
HtLU
Plant:
TS.il ft f~*t?*ffi\ K '?$,£.. ^,,'I-KX Sample Type: /*•-£'! Operator: Tr'/^?/=
Sampling Location fhjl^«t^ Pbar: ~z^ . 2-5 Ps: , )1
Run Number:
^^-^5 Date: tc- iq-'K CO2: c O2: e./
Pretest Leak Rate: • 005" dm@ /< in.
Hg. Probe Length/Type: ^Y c. !<.'/' Pilot #:*!£.
Pretest Leak Check: Ptet: ,X Orsat: *//•"- Stack Diameter: •« * • * As:
\
Z-&*
V
Traverse
Point
Number
O
1
t
1
n
$
a
•7
^
j
/
1
5
4
5
(7
1
4
Sampling
Time
(min)
O
-?.S
)*>
jr. 5
-*>c
fl<$
*-/$
52,5
ifO
L1.S
f 75
90
°ns
iQ5
n2,f
rtd
dock Time
(24-tiour
dock)
)i3^
/i^/6
^ =75
W *^
iMy "?
t 4tl ( £
1 ^i J p
/^ 2 5
/HbO
1*1 51
il* \ 5^
* in H2O
Desired
Actual
Stack
Temp,
(Ts)
Nozzle ID
: *4
39 Thermocouple #: i*<~-
Assumed Bws: 3^ Filter #:
JcV GtjS"
Meter Box #:_j£5^Y:^U££3_AH@: i
Post-Test Leak Rate: ,0^2 cfm@ *?
Post-Test Leak Check: Ptet:
Temperature
Op
Probe
Filter
Impinger
Temp.
°F
,t,£S
in. Hg.
Ctsafc A/'»^
Dry Gas Meter Temp.
Inlet
Outlet
(Tm«it°F)
Pump
Vacuum
(5, en
6 . c>> 1
o.c~\
/. °\
] .-)
O *•/'?
0. 1C
o. ic
0 -jc
&**f,2S
C-JSc"*'
O, j "i
d, 05
0.05
^. / s
0, ,3
c^./^
;.*)
1,1
i ,ei
j.-i
C' i/ 1
O' 7^>
$ -
/^Y
/ -j i
/y"1
/^'S
»^5
ifG-
If 5
i*H
i%i»
/f Cj>
'S3
'f6
l$^i
j$5
O/2
~t $3
'"Z ^T^.
2/ f
•— 7 ^j*
•a-^T
2.H1
1^(j
t.^3
T~5t
2-5 /
Z-5^
Z53
Ht
LlL
LJ5
^6
SO
5'2-
5t/
5Z.
5c;«
S'Z-
^1
ij
nil
H
L
4
1
^4
^
^3
(j 2
&'*"7
6^
•70
~l "?
01
a(j
u"i
6-5
05
^ ?>
U>2.
6^
GZ.
Cz
1(2-
Oo
(jO
iff
(_jt.
d z
Lt Z_
U '
t*c
U I
u<
J-CJ
^5f
LfO
<*<•••
d>f
-5
,5
v5"
3
-3
^
t/
"L.
2-
J
I
i
*
l
r
Tm
-------
MULTI-METALS SAMPLE RECOVERY DATA
JOB
OSaic »>««ci
Plant: /=
/J)
Run
Date: Z>~
Sample Box No.:
Job No.: 3 —
Sample Location:
Sample Type:
Sample Recovery Person:
Container Description
Volume, ml Sealed/Level Marked
Front Half
1
Filter No.(s) 3 £
Acetone Rinse
Nitric Rinse
Back Half
Nitric Rinse - Imp. 1,2,3, + Back 1/2 Filter
5A
Nitric Rinse - Impinger No. 4
5B
KMN04/H20 Rinse - Impingers 5 & 6
5C
HCI Rinse - Impingers 5 & 6
Moisture Data
Impinger
No,
Contents
Initial
Volume, ml
Initial
Weight, grams
Final
Net
1
15 w. a,
£)V
-77,6
£
t>
r
) PC?
L
A n
J P D
7
#03.6
/ u ?.« v
y//.fr.
Total
-------
rici_u LJM i M once
Plant:
tr/V/ Jcv» vJt-, i ' A.'Otx L]iu f't.- Sample Type: /n-2*/ Operator: -7/7 /fe^
Sampling Location -fh/J/c. -)t>.- Pbar: 28. Z 6 Ps: „'#
Run Number:
Jfla^-G? Date: f^~2c -^6- CO2: D
£'!.<
g2.^
°}Q
n.s
//4*.5
'ZO
Clock Time
(24-hour
dock)
/6O&
10)^
!C22
X)5o
/05ji
/O^t*
/C53
1100
)lC&
n IQ
/'l"l
//33
inJS
II 30
l>5£
J-UQ3£. 52.$
Hg. Probe Length/Type: ^-/' 6 /<.'' Pitot#: *¥£.&<»
t- Stack Diameter: "22 . ^ As:
Velocity
Head (Ap)
inH2O
Nozzle ID: ,^/3T Thermocouple*: *7< £rs
Assumed
Bwrs:t.^i Filter*: ?o; vy^
Meter Box #: /5 Y:y. &f
O -78
C} • i> U
0 /j
O ,t Lc
O. iL>
<^. 5"/
£3). ->V
a, 6-8
c , 7 0
d, ^,,f
O . /' 5
O ^(j
c. tc.
0 . / 1 t/
O, g*-]
&,£<-/
WO
i$y
!$<>
tff
"4? imf
iff *™^
t c"5< 'C
&6>
/?3
,
*•'2
t
-------
MULTI-METALS SAMPLE RECOVERY DATA
Plant:
Run No.: «< Y —
Date: /£)- 1 0
Sample Box No.: ^^
Job No.: 5 -
Sample Location:
Sample Type:
2-
Sample Recovery Person: CL- *C- S
Container Description
Volume, ml Sealed/Level Marked
Front Half
1
Filter No.(s)
° 1 ^ 'V "?
Acetone Rinse
MIL
Nitric Rinse
Back Half
"L-
Nitric Rinse - Imp. •f.S, + Back 1/2 Filter
5A
Nitric Rinse - Impinger No. 4
5B
KMNO4/H2O Rinse - Impingers 5 & 6
5C
HCI Rinse - Impingers 5 & 6
S"C
Moisture Data:
-------
MtLU UA ! A
Plant:
icP/* &*>4"A R;A«,x £,-^ fi. Sample Type: ^-re Operator: 7-ft /Kf
Sampling Location 4^uj,fcW' Pbar: 2f. . 2
1
Z
-•>
*/
f
i.
7
<3
/
l
3
it
*>
d
j
%
Sampling
Time
(min)
0
"7. 5
>5
-7^*5
Jo
57, 5
•^5
^.5
(SQ
t>\*>
75
S1?. f
<9Q
th.^
}$5
H2±5
ilo
dock Time
(24-hour
dock)
/235
l2Lll
I1LI%
US*
,303
/3/0
^3>n
/•32»5
1133
/J.^3
,v,5£.
/35^
Hd(e
m. S
6S^, z
651, f
6(4!, lio
(iL L If
&-~?t3- O>
~CtiH, ^
j ««b«| ^
6T?<5
^f2.C-l(-
$• Stack Diameter: '
Velocity
Head (&p)
inH2O
z*.s As:
Nozzle ID: ^ ^iq> Thermocouple*: V^
Assumed BWS:J 5
Meter Box #: /$
j_ Filter #:
Y: /.w
Post-Test Leak Rate: , oo3
Post-Test Leak Check: P'rtot:
Orifice Pressure Differential
(A^O in H2O
Desired
Actual
Stack
Temp.
Temperature
°F
Probe
Fitter
tmpinger
Temp.
°F
^
O, -'o
o./^
o. is
o. /*y
o. o3
'. 0~7
o.&i
£7,S')
^-S'l
(^,3$
O,O C»
O, Z7
0. LH
O-6V
0-6^
O^t.
O-6iC
o< $
7^
75
?
7 O
-S
,5
j
Z_
-5"
£
-jT
6
c*
-?"
2—
3
*y
^
-------
MULTI-METALS SAMPLE RECOVERY DATA
ftfffl
• nfliini iinaiir
Plant
Run No.:
« V
Date: Jo-
Sample Box No.:
Job No.: 3-
Sample Location:
Sample Type:
JtZ*~ei 2-
Sample Recovery Person:
Container Description
Volume, ml Sealed/Level Marked
FrbritHalf
1
Filter No.(s)
Acetone Rinse
Nitric Rinse
Back Half
Nitric Rinse - Imp. 1 ,2,3, + Back 1/2 Filter
5A
Nitric Rinse - Impinger No. 4
5B
KMNO4/H2O Rinse - Impingers 5 & 6
5C
HCI Rinse - Impingers 5 & 6
Jc
Moisture Data
Irnpinger
No.
Contents
Initial
Volume, ml
Initial
Weight, grams
Final
Net
O
f1? 77,
t>
744.9
127D
*7,l
(*. 7
CL (s
^.
L
/T
Li
0. 2
a.
Total
Comments:
**Vf^
-------
1. REPORT NO.
EPA-454/R-99-044a
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Lime Manufacturing
Emissions Test Report
Chemical Lime Company
(Formerly Eastern Ridge Lime Company)
Ripplemead, Virginia
Volume I of II
7. AUTHOR(S)
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
Please read instructions on the reverse before completing
2.
A -75^,
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Pacific Environmental Services, Inc.
Post Office Box 12077
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-2077
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Emission, Monitoring and Analysis Division
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
5. REPORT DATE
September 1999
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
68D70069
1 3. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA/200/04
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
This report presents the results of a testing program conducted at the Chemical Lime Company (formerly Eastern Ridge Lime Company), Ripplemead,
Virginia to obtain air emissions data to support the EPA's development of the lime manufacturing NESHAP. Testing was conducted on a coal-fired rot
kiln to (1) determine total hydrocarbons (THC) at the common inlet and individual outlets of two parallel wet scrubbers and (2) determine concentratior
and mass emission rates of particulate matter (PM) metals, and dioxin/furan (CDD/CDF) at the individual outlets of the two scrubbers. In addition,
testing was conducted on the hydrator exhaust to determine emissions of PM and metals.
Volume I of 11 - Report Text and Appendices A & B (21 3 Pages)
17.
a. DESCRIPTIONS
Baghouse
Dioxio/Furan
Lime Manufacturing
Metals
Particulate Matter
Total Hydrocarbons
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Unlimited
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
b.IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report)
Unclassified
20. SECURITY CLASS (This page)
Unclassified
c. COASTI Field/Group
21. NO. OF PAGES
1042
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (Rev. 4-77} PREVIOUS EDITION IS OBSOLETE
p:\s401.005\s40105-2.trd (wp6.l)
------- |