AP42 Section      APPENDIX B.1
                PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION DATA AND
                SIZED EMISSION FACTORS FOR SELECTED
SOURCES

                Originally "C.1" in 4th edition

References;       Assorted 1.8 through 12. xxx

-------
                   United States
                   Erivironmentat Protection
                   Agency
    Office of Air Quality
    Planning and Standards
    Research Triangle Park NC 27711
                   Air
U
                                                jjjj,
                    Emission Test Report
uar
                     ryant.
                                               nv




-------
         NONFOSSIL FUELED BOILERS
           Emission Test Report
            U.S. Sugar Company
              Bryant, Florida
          Project No.:  80-WFB-6
               Prepared for

      Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
        Emission Measurement Branch
          Research Triangle Park
           North Carolina  27711
                    by

    James A. Peters and Charles F. Duncan
 Contract  68-02-2818, Work Assignment No. 25
                 May 1980
        MONSANTO RESEARCH  CORPORATION
             DAYTON LABORATORY
             1515 Nicholas Road
             Dayton, Ohio  454C7

-------
  TABLE 4.   SUMMARY  OF INTEGRATED  GAS ANALYSES,  U.S.
              SUGAR-BRYANT MILL, DECEMBER  17-18,  1979
Run
number
1
2
3
Average
Date
12/17/79
12/18/79
12/18/79
CO 2
10.
11,
11.
11.
«
8
1
3
1
CO
y
jt
0.
0.
0.
0.
/
0
0
0
0
°l
9.
9.
9.
9,
-
2
0
4
2
Nz,
80.
79.
79.
79.

0
9
3
1
Ib/lb
30.
30.
30,,
30.
mole
1
1
2
1
TABLE  5.   SUMMARY OF ANDERSEN PARTICLE SIZING RESULTS,
           U.S.  SUGAR-BRYANT MILL,  DECEMBER 17-18,  1979
                            Run No.  1
                            Discarded
                            Run No.  2
       Flow  rate = 0.927 acfro
       Isokinetic rate = 107.1%
                                               Cumulative  %
                                                ]
>]
50
30
95
88
94
58
39
.0

10.50
L0.50
- 10.50
- 6.50
- 4.30
- 2.95
-1.88
-0.94
-0,58
- 0.39
Run No.
3
1
3
7
11
12
12
19
16
11
3
.99
.46
.06 •
,98
.30
.40
.90
.15
.49
.30

94.
94.
91.
83.
72.
59.
• 46.
27,
11.
0

55
55
52
54
24
94
94
79
30


       Flow rate = 0.908 acfm
       Isokinetic rate = 105,5%
          stage
            Size range
              Percent in
              size range
                      Cumulative!
                      10.60
              >10.60
           6.60 - 10.60
                   60
4.40
3.00
1,90
0.96
0.59
0.40
 0.0
- 6,
-4.40
               - 3,00
               - 1.90
               - 0.96
               -0.59
               - 0.40
 6,56
 2.01
 4.28
 7.47
 8.66
 8.66
10.48
20.60
16.68
14,59
91.43
91.43
87.14
79.67
71.01
62.35
51.87
31.27
14.59
 0

-------
            United States
            Environmental Protection
            Agency
Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park NC 27711
EMB Report 80-WFB-1
February 1980
            Air
vvEPA      Nonfossil  Fueled  Boik
            Emission Test Report
            City of Salem
            Salem, Virginia

-------
          NONFOSSIL FUELED BOILERS



            Emission Test Report
                City of Salem
               Salem, Virginia

              5-8 November 1979


           Project No.:  80-WFB-l
                Prepared for

       Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
         Emission Measurement Branch
           Research Triangle Park
           North Carolina  27711
                     by

   James A.  Peters and Windle H. McDonald
 Contract 68-02-2818, Work Assignment No. 23


                February 1980
        MONSANTO RESEARCH CORPORATION
              DAYTON LABORATORY
              1515 Nicholas Road
              Dayton, Ohio  45418

-------
   TABLE 4.  SUMMARY^^ INTEGRATED GAS ANALYSIS RESULTS, CITY
             OF  SALEM WASTE  DISPOSAL PLANT,  NOVEMBER 6-7, 1979
Run no.
Average
                    C0
                       2,
                           CO,
           Date
             N2,    Molecular weight,
                       lb/lb»mole
6-1
7-1
7-2
11-6-79
11-7-79
11-7-79
7
6
7
.8
.2
.2
0.
0.
0.
0
0
0
11
13
12
.0
.2
.0
81.
80.
80.
2
6
8
29.
29.
29.
69
52
63
                    7.1
0.0
12.1
80.8
29.61
 TABLE 5.  SUMMARY OF PARTICLE  SIZING  RESULTS,  WEST STACK, CITY
           OF SALEM WASTE DISPOSAL  PLANT,  NOVEMBER 6-7,  1979
Run : 1

Stage
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Backup filter
Run: 2

Stage
t
0 !
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Backup filter
Run: 3

Stage
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Backup filter
Date: 11-6-7$
Wt % in
size range
29.4
10.6
5.5
3.7
3.3
6.9
11.9
10.7
18.0
Date: 11-7-79
Wt » in
size range

7.0
3.1
0.7
4.7
5.9
7.5
13.1
14.6
43.4 -
Date: 11-7-79
Wt » in
size range
62.6
0.1
0.2
1.3
2.1
1.2
6.6
10.2
15.7
Flow rate,

Cum. %
m
70.6
60.0
54.5
50.8
47.5
40.6
28.7
1B.O
Flow rate,

Cum. »

B
93.0
89.9
89.2
84.5
78.6
71.1
58.0
43.4
Flow rate,

Cum. »
«
37.4
37.3
37.1
35.8
33.7
32.5
25,9
15.7
acfm: 1.10
Size range,
microns
>10.6
6.6 - 10.6
4.5 - 6.6
3.05 - 4.5
1.94 - 3.05
0.99 - 1.94
0.62 - 0.99
0.43 - 0.62
0 - 0.43
acfm: 1.01
Size range.
macrons

>11.1
6.9 '-'11.1
4.7 - 6.9
3.19 - 4.7
2.04 - 3.19
1.03 - 2.04
0.65 - 1.03
0.43 - 0.65
0 - 0.43
acfm: 0.82
Size range.
microns
>12.4
7.6 - 12.4
5.21 - 7.6
3.55 - 5.21
2.26 - 3.55
1.14 - 2.26
0.72 - 1.14
0.49 - 0.72
0 - 0.49

-------
SERIES NO: 00234
• STREAM DESIGN CH
COMPONENT
NO NAME
1 PROBE*10 CYC
2 3 UM CYCLONE
3 1 UM CYCLONE
4 FILTER
STREAM NO: 01 TEST ID NO: 1 SAMPLE NO: 02
DESCRIPTION
%
STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE!
STAGE HEIGHTS
STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE!
STAGE HEIGHT:
STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE:
STAGE WEIGHT:
STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZES
STAGE HEIGHT:
VALUE
6. 30
1.30E+01
1.90
.60
8.10E+00
.01
8.00E-01
PAGE 10
SERIES FORM 7 DATE 06/21X63
UM
MG
UH
MS
UM
MG
UM
M6
PARTICLE SIZE TABLE	

  STAGE •

  DS6C MICRONS I
  STAGE HEIGHTS(MILLIGRAMS 1
  MICROGRAHS/DNCM/STAGE
  NUMBER/DNCn/STAGE
  CUM.  XMASS
-------
                                              ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT DATA SYSTfHS
                                                       ..FPEIS SERIES REPORT
                                                                            SERIES FORM 1
                                            PAGE        1
                                            DATE 06/21/83
fl
23<»  DESCRIBES SAMPLINS AT, SITE FROM 02/W/78 TO 02/14/78 BY KVB,  INC.
                       X     -  •
 SPONSOR ORGANIZATION:   CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD
 CONTRACT NUMBER: ,       A6-191-30           PURPOSE or TEST: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS tMULTIMEDIA!
 TASK/DIRECTIVE NUrtBIR!,  000
  SOURCE DESCRIPTION-
                   soufiCE CATEGORY;
                   SOURCE TYPE:
                   PRODUCT/DEVICE:
                   PROCESS TYPE:
                   DESIGN PROCESS RATE:
                   FEED MATERIAL  CATEGORY:
                   PRIMARY CONTROL  DEVICE!
                    FABRICATED MTL PROD
                    METAL PRODUCTS
                    AUTOMOBILES
                    SURFACE COATING
                       307   KG/HR
                    INORG CHEM
SOURCI NAHEs
SITE NAME:
ADDRESS:
                                                 sic  CODE:
CONFIDENTIAL
               LOS ANGELES
                           00000
  EADS HASTE STREAM DATA BASES-
 REFERENCE REPORT-
                   HASTE STREAM DATA FROM OTHER MEDIA WHICH HERE COLLECTED CONCURRENTLY WITH  THIS TEST SERIES
                   ARE AS FOLLOHStTEST SERIES NUMBER-TSN):
                        LEDS TSN:          BEDS TSN:  00086     SODS TSN:
                   TITLE
                   AUTHOR
                   SPONSOR REPORT NUMBER     NTIS NUMBER
                                           PUBLICATION DATE
                   FINE PARTICLE EMISSIONS FROM STATIONARY AND MISCELLANEOUS SOURCES
                   IN THE SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN,
                   TABACK H.J.
                   KVB REPORT 5806-783      PB 293 923/AS          FEBRUARY 1979
 TEST SERIES COMMENTS-
                         PROGRAM OBJECTIVES TO INVENTORY TSP EMISSIONS,TO PREPARE  A  COM-
                         PREHENSIVE INVENTORY OF EMISSIDNStI.E.  BY SIZE  DISTRIBUTION AND
                         CHEMICAL COMPOSITION),AND TO OESCRIBf ALT. METHODS OF  CONTROL,
                         EQUIPMENT TESTED IS CUSTOM MADE SPRAY BOOTH,  PAINT USED IS  A
                         HATER-BASED ENAMEL.

-------
FPEIS TEST SERIES NO:  00234
STREAM NO: 01
                                      TEST ID NO:
SAMPLE NO: 01
                                                                                                      SERIES  FORM  7
                                                                                        PAGE        7
                                                                                        DATE 06/31/83
  EFFLUENT STREAM DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS-
COMPONENT
NO  NAME
                            DESCRIPTION
                                                   VALUE
           I  PROBE+10 CYC
           2  3 UH CYCLONE
           3  1 UM CYCLONE
              FILTER
                            STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE!
                            STAGE WEIGHT:
                            COMPONENT (ALIQUOT) MASS/VOLUME-"
                            CHEMICAL ANALYSIS LABORATORY NAME:
                            STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZES
                            STAGE WEIGHT:
                            STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE:
                            STAGE WEIGHT:
                            STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE!
                            STAGE HEIGHT:
                                                     9.EQ     UM
                                                    1.18E*OZ MG
                                                     41.500  MG
                                                   ARMAME
                                                     3.80     UM
                                                    5.20E+00 MG
                                                     1.30     UM
                                                    7.60E»OD MG
                                                      .01     UN
                                                    8.10E400 HG
STAGE •
050( MICRONS)
STAGE WEIGHTS(MILLIGRAMS)
MICROGRAMS/ONCM/STAGE
NUMBER/ONCM/STASE
CUM. XMASS
-------
AIR  POLLUTION  EMISSION  TES
                      PHILLIPS PETROLEUM COMPANY
                            (PLANT NAME

                      Carbon Black Division
           U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                Office of Air and Water Programs
            Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
            Emission Standards and Engineering Division
                 Emission Measurement Branch
               Research Triangle Park, N. C. 27711

-------
 EMB Test Number 73-CBK-l

Phillips Petroleum Company
   Carbon Black Division
       Toledo, Ohio
      R E.V I S I 0 N
      September 1974.

-------
               CUMULATIVE WEIGHT PERCENT  LESS THM  STATED  MICRON  SIZE
                     10    15   20
  PERCENTAGE
40    SO     GO
         '----'•••-~-"~ "• J-'rV;': • * -'-'''t-   "•'  r''' '';	;'_-•_ :.'-?..!" " -":
                                                                   70
                                                                          83   85     90
                                                                                               95


    ~~J_T.±±u"	' !—i^— : '.	';.''[	:.- ::_..!":•	

            j   ". — .'"-"I --Z..11;1 ,  -"':"

                                                                    ..mm*,-*.	 .,„„ nnLmnnm..-.— ..-!...	J» . .»•
                                                                    nir^iiss




                                                      :(-:::-::



             I  L  '
                                          -U....




                                                   ^i
                                                                                              L-S"°L..^j -'. "^°S" r ^ *^1

U
b


                              -- --  -^  .-v::.,, r  flr — ..- —       -- ----     ~ '  ". — ..- -H-^»*- -. -~. . .- "   . ............. .~-L  .. —  -«
                     f-; :—^- » "^-- -- f -^  .-^v:.:.,,  ^ir — ..
                     t^m -- irrr^j"- j ILT — c^"t ^i_: --- t.




                       1 ' 1 !
< ,1
                       I i I





                                                 -'i;r. I""-—--i—--;•-•-<• ••r_p-_£±—^••"	-'~ " }•—-— — •—;—— -•—~~J^~



                       =-=-t
                          ~Si"imrz.T:f~^r::' "I'Trrfi.—^T'.::! ,„_i_

                    rz->...r^	in i  r™ ~iir"  r~vro.-.ff.-.4-	•,^1^1..'^^
 ,t..L. „
                                                          B                  FIGURE  4
                                                            PARTICLE  SIZING  SUMMARY  OF  RESULTS
                                                                             PBE-1 -  A
                                                                             PBE-2 -  B
                                                                             PBE-3 -  C
                            4.0
                                         4.5
    I   I  I   i
      5.0
    PRQBiTS
 i  I   I
5.5
                                                                            t   I  I   i  I
                                                                              6.0
                                                                                                      7,0

-------
EPA-450/2-77-019
September 1977
           FINAL GUIDELINE DOCUMENT:
            CONTROL OF SULFURIC ACID
          MIST EMISSIONS FROM EXISTING
        SULFURIC ACID PRODUCTION  UNITS
             U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                Office of Air and Waste Management
             Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
             Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711

-------
                                     EPA-450/2-77-019
   FINAL GUIDELINE  DOCUMENT:
    CONTROL OF SULFURIC ACID
  MIST EMISSIONS FROM EXISTING
SULFURIC ACID PRODUCTION UNITS
          Emission Standards and Engineering Division
          U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
            Office of Air and Waste Management
          Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
          Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711

                September 1977

-------
6.  Reference  3,  above,  p.  30.

7.  Reference  2,  above,  p.  111-9.

8.  Reference  2,  above,  p.  111-10.

9.  Kurek, R.W.  Special Report on EPA Guidelines  for State
    Emission Standards for Sulfuric Acid Plant Vist dated
    June 1974.  L.I. du Pont de Nemours ft Co., Inc., Industrial
    Chemicals Department.  Wilmington, Delaware.   Prepared for
    U.S. Environmental Protection/"nency,  Office of Air
    Quality Planning & Standards.  October 4, 1974.  Exhibit 15.

10.  Reference 3, above, p. 32.

11.  Brink, J.A., Jr.  Cascade Impactor for Adiabatic Measure-
    ments.  Industrial & Engineering Chemistry. 50: 647,
    April 1958.

12.  Reference  9, above, Exhibit 12.

13.  Reference 2, above, pp. 111-14, 15 and 22.

14.  Reference 2, above, p. IV-15.

15.  Brink, J.A., Jr. and C.N. Dougald.  Particulate Removal
    from Process Exhaust Gases.  Proceedings of International
    Sulfite Conference, TAPPI and CPPA, Boston, Mass., October
    30  - November 1, 1972.  October 30, 1972.  pp. 377-309.
                      4-13

-------
ibseade   tmpactor  for  Adiabatic  Measurements
|j!jpiftfo on development, design,
w«e of a practical instrument
JM&eJifcid make tt possible  to
Mrtocpnvenient tested device
(fefflfecial purposes.    Particle-
•s_i                    i         •
K» .oeosurements  make possi-
;iJ4ftWrnim.ition of acceptable
«S^i; -.discharges  of   aerosols,
      'ion of installed collection
      srtf, rational se!&cffon and
     R.of etiuipihonf, and recog-
  5rtTi of  pofenlial   problems
  c!^.%m  .she   development   of
  i' processes,
IprtsWJiKNT uiivirxs have K-. ,1  uwcl
$(•• fin Vr i.vup.i-11; aas-b ,rj,i  |»;tni-
jjp'if^j'  < .''•*'•'>•< U') a in! I'^riy, l''an,
ftvfiliriMjnii •'/_! >i»r;il 2) sii>!;nl ;. I and ii
JPflfel ididr I-i .  'Ici'I SUHM,H<> Hi" mis
?* «  •                           * *
nj*j.&ya-  i Sii',[/>'!id!:d  iii y
        g !ii ji.iviide size iVftta i ID 50
     .   La.«kin '/"* >i*:;l May's iiujKic-
eWb.ivy ..rru.Mji |);ii-- of ttiicroii
       'icri.it ,»'.-;•*.  A iu.:(|i;ii'fl CiiS-
 -';3^ !i>hiisi!ni(! u', -'1, fti'd i.'.hi-rs in
         'ir  ui"  llliii.ii?     ''ih-iu-i-,
         j  TliMiD.ii  (/iy) an,, \\'i!«.<».\
  :-75] i:ivfjiijiated ilie «-!i.ir;,i M risiivi
          .isiii  II"»K!I: "liti-ilir  i.v  iin-
           iits!;"i;i] jilani'. acr. .;t>[» .:ic
    i-'i Iliglt cmu-<:nu'aiii>ijs in g«i»i:5
  atii' *vi;ji vaiior ai 30" to _'-Og  (.':.
  '      .       .     ......
       riTu'- IKi:'iU'li>3l-'<' '.'j^i- M-MiUn'^
Impoctor and Auxiliary Apparatus

  % uc c.tscacie impactor haa five tii-iinc
iHiiji'S, c;;th of which h,(5 ;> ;-t dial uiiii/i'S
u n>ilcccnn  cup as an inij>a''.i>  i.tip hi
JJ|;K <:,  The panicles  stiSpcjidrJ in ihc
)j:iM-s  pass thrxiiijh y  \r.(, ]>;i'l:i-l<-d with
suMii icnt iiirr'.t impart aj;."t-4i ;i «;icp,
jnul the rcinaiiifft.T pusri ilnu"r,'i •uinuUir
sK>'i located around the cup.   K.i'.'ti noi-
li:i:iifui cup hits annular sluu v.'iih a ii.u.il
ci'iWs-scctionHl area 3(> ciim:; 'lit' ii'.'ea uf
(In: largi-.st jcl;  tticbtilcin cl.'-<.:•; ;i( »!>c
siou 'vcrc  Jicgli'^ible  widi  ihi-,  dcsi^ii.
The dimensions  of  iht  imj^iccif  jets
f I'iililt: I)  were Mtlcciod oj etl by
Kan/.  ;md Wong  {//).  'P.   iiii|iact>ir
ii  IS'/j inches ''ing :>,nd  w.i1- ,n,u-!iinrd
rrniii 3K) siainlfM stci-t.  r:i:'sii'U-» i'i ()»•
t».3- l», 3.0-micron ranijc aic • 4i>-ciflass cyrlone, %vidi the .^iine iliiiicu-
ai'im ;i5 that describee)  by < !i!!csi)ic (2, .i),
i.<  used upstn-aiu from  rof im,	
Two  filters, coissisung of (....ming  Ki
9480 filter tubes packed ti^'iiiy with >'••
800  Pyrcx  glass  u-ool, co!i'---: pariirici
less than 0.3 micron in dior-.-tcr.  T!i--
cyclone-,   impartor,   and   ultitrs  .'n--
mounted in  a  box  with a  removable
side.  A  No. 2'/5 L-lt  Matuilacutiin-..
Co. b'owcr, inside the box, is driven b\ ;>
8WO r.p.in.  I'.iiirhilcl Jnih!s;ii>:s (M<«\--!
Table I,



Jet Ko,
l
2
j
4
5
" From
Dimensions of C
p actor Jef-f
Dimccr-lov

Jcl dinnt.
0.219
0.1775
O.UV6
0.0946
0.0731
roller! ion <•>!(» .'uri'ic,'
.iscade 1'

. CtTI.
-'•incinp o
. i openiit.-
0,747
0.533
0.41'."
0.282
0.220

                                                                                       COLLECTION
                                                                                           CUP
                                                 SPRING


                                                 JET SPINDLE

                                                 GASKET
                                                                       ^
                                                    \/ft* Kx ^   '   c\vK'-'>/y
                                                    m    -"    /;>  m
                                                    •:/A         •  "'     w'S.
                                                    ikZt  _A
                                                           v
                              , a_ ..h.
                                           in-line  ii^poct-^r l,,r.  I-...  '.lo.iijs.   f'oi licit"

-------
        •3   SLOTS
Collection  cups are positioned so that
the  distance from the  jet  decreases
as the  jet diameter  becomes smaller.
Annular slots   around  cup  minimize
turbulence


1401) motor on the back side of the box.
A  heater,  consisting  of  dircc  12-inch
sections of  Nichromc  resistance  wire
                                                       >  •}}(,, A\if  I, I'MiIrd  I Mi' ,
                                                     •  i'  M'1?,  t.-f'.K I* flM'l'>H«'«1 i'i <••)).
                                                     i  :i  100" (i) 1''D" !•'.  tin-	;il
                                                     i..«..  (,';it;it"i',  N.I.  IV'-i.ii},
                                                     r- * N'MljilHtl  ;< i ch.it .:!' MIH'JJ
                                                     "ii ,il ;: tiinh vrlnriiv pn-n  'tic
                                                     •-i;i*i«*liii'.   ;iuil  lilii'i,-   'i In
                                              :••; HIM ii.iij;r.< .'III ' liiri"r,'ilurc of the ;iii"  entering  (he
                                           blower  at»l  leaving the  healer.  Two
                                           ni;im>iiic!'.'i.s, mounted mi (he removable
                                           sidf  of ihc  lx>x ;ind  connected 10  Ihc
                                           impatuor, ine.Tsurc ihc  static  pressure at
                                           the iuicl and (lie pressure drop across the
                                           iiupactor.                             ,
                                             A  Kiiu^lc line, hca\cd wiih  !lexi!»k'
                                           wpc  heaters  (dtclromagneiic  healing
                                           t.-ipe,  Mr>wc 
                                           fUnv  ihrnu^h  the impar.tur w;is FUn'U-d
  SWITCHES
  GASES  FROM
 PROCESS  LINE

 GLASS  CYCLONE
  THERMOSTAT-
  GASES  TO
 ASPIRATOR\J

               ^•-NEEDLE  VALVE
                                               vGLASS  WOOL  FILTERS
Compocf make-up  of itnpoclor  and its  ouxiliary equipment make  ii  suiicble  for
tests ihrougHo"' fhc pUiuf
     I- [(I  - ll!i"l l"i

      A I'.'ICIHII.I  !P '" >?"
  I „.. ||v. W •   •*•

      .  |  •!!  I»M  •

          * iu' •i.U*'
      • .til, iiinin-i
                     lii III'1 L'lid  lit I  >»«,
                     i.i," ivcitn 5f iis:11"''"
                                                                                                        •i! <•••  pnr .-tintitc.'

                                                                                                        up '•• :.'ut:  cf the in-
                                                                                                        • >" i MH: svns limilc 1
                                                                                                         (...,,, i|ii> cup;  a :;•  ^
                                                                                              • I'.  .»l,l»il;i;'" ('I'll''! !«' ' IlllcCtlifi  • '
                                                                                             •;i  n'iiti'iti1   ( I'li'i rti'iliU*11(<  'I In*
                                                                                             ,ni: ,|>':* i;i"f n/lS '(Scd, Sn tlfl'
   'ill
iiiltcf  .up-.   \Viih  'in<-  trlnl niii,}l!i"'
(lew t;iu- I'm' xnlt«'ji|tn'in mnj ivassctai f.[
level  li'-ai wcntld give  inaxiinurn collet**
linn mi, ih<: ihivd in middle stage of.lhS'
impacior, ;u)tl the sample  lime was, 5c5.
;il lite maximum limr Icasihle-widioU't.
ic-i'iitraiiiinent.              '   ; '
  Aftt-r nanh  irst  (he  raniplo cup's*Wnf;
reiiiovcd fuMii itie inipartor with twft'E-
i-i-n.   'Ihc  (uinniii)' t-tiliecteij 'oH*''eacIi;
rnj» \\"if dr.l«*rnu!u:tj In' ivctghing an'd/or1
••hcmicnl  analyses.  Tiie  glass  'cycloi'C'
was \vn«hed \vitii svalev and (he soSutto
aiu'ly/rd.   The  glass  unol (liters Wt'tc'
Icarhocl  with  HTilcr  and  tiir  resultin|'
si'luiiwi \v;if an'il\v,i:d' "•' the glass wool
n-as iciHin'fd, tin* lilk-r hnUli'i was riiijfi!.
;in(! die gla-i.i \\'!'dl and stjiutiuii were ai'.i'-
ly/ed  other vuliiiiu'ti  ie.'ilh* or grnvimi't*
licalH. depending t>n  the  type  01" aet'c'-'
51'1.   O-.-'ih wcigliinit and chemical anaiv-
Kvf  '-.rvc  used whr-n r.undi'usatton.-i*
'•vp.|v-i'fitioii was  ,! |to(rnii<~it source oi
      MANOMETERS
                                                                                           /
                                                                                              NK
                                                                                                  s
                                                                                                /
                     .^Lj
                                                                                             /
                                                                                          —THERMOMETERS
                                                                                              'ntri'o  ' 
-------
                                                                                       CASCADEIMPAGTOR
 . cnnr;  double atinKsi'ii shouxd ifuii er-
  yoii due ti> ixmden.H uion ur ovaporiilinii
  were negligible and s;uti|>Hiig v.-as adi.'i-
  baiic.
                                       i
  Calibration ot'lmpacfor
    I  iic  ill-line  imprict'ij-  wi\i  deiiyr.t.d
  with ihe  internal dina-.isiemj used bv
  Rani and  Wong  (/?), except ihai die
  gases leaving any  stage  parsed through
  Annular slots armmd the O'lUxtion  cups
  rather lluut,mu the side.  As tin;  vrliioi-
  litj  lluvugh* (lie slots'  \vovt: l/J»  Hi  '/aw
  the  jt!i  vclueilrea,  the in-line  iiii|i;n:uir
  Wsexpccjwl In [ii'ifonn in iht: same xvay
  W iiiipaclurn used by Ran/, and \Vt sliunld  have  liie muiw
 , Calibrai ioi* ;IN tlcu:nuincti by ihoju,
  *  U'iili .1 gas mcicr, (In; in-lin<: hii|i,tctor
  was calibrated as a i!o»»'ii'n;lei'.  The rc-
  lani):ialiip lieiu'cen gas How t!>rougb ihe
  iiiipactor and  pressure drop  across che
 'ir.  density.

  PorliclB-Siia   Distribution
 •Calculations
    C!|ilcti!aiioil  (if  p.iniule-iizc. disiiibii-
 ^ioiu \va» based un lln: j-ciierali'/ccl «-a!i-
  bf,.., F.qnationS
                                            2, 4, and u ir.in l-ii. <-(,tnbir.,:d to give
./where (v''to)';f = 0.33 for loumljcts (II).
.  "However,  as the C t'aciiiv is a function of
  Dp, taleiilaliuu uf Dtt  is not ai slraigbt-
  Ijrvvai-L) as indicated by Kri ,n<: <-.\|;,indi;d ilu'fsiisjli a jci,
the l« H:|::'t;iHiii i>h:titi*c cut be ijitimntcd
on the ba»ii 01' Jnciioolcis adiabatic ilow
for a perfd.'l gaa f..i)    Mowevcr, in most
cases this  iein|KT.ttni<.- change is negli-
gible and the  veiueicy of the gases at the
jet throat, <•«, can be csiiumed as follows:
                                                         ^  + -T-f^  ^ :_'..-•
                                         The characwristic  diamvicrs for each
                                      stage <)f the impactor can be calculated
                                      directly from Equation 7.  \Vhcn Df/
                                      L X (iO)-4 < 2.7, Equations 2, 3, and 6
                                      must be solved by approximutioii.   For
                                      any  lest,  afier f>/tc  was calculated  for
         30
     Sz.o
     o
     a:  1.5
     o
CL
         ,.o
         08
     £  0.6
         0.4
         0.3
     UJ
         02
     o:
     2
         O.I

—
—
f**?


^



	 —
.^H








^->^









	 ^>-^









*•
•z^-





>"








,•





p^





x^

0
9
V


x**"^




X



^




&


^




^



f^


^_^.
y






^
%
^


	


MIST RETENTION
LOADING TIME
(MG SOS/S.C.FS (MSN)
14. 1 0!
19.3 O.I .
11.7 12.0
1


1

             12     5    10   20  30    50    70       90 95       99
             CUMULATIVE  MASS  PERCENT  LESS. THAN   Dp
Figure  I,   Cumulative particle iiie  distribution  of sulfurte  acid mist  generated in
the laboratory is  o function of mist  loading and retention  t»me
PARTICLE DIAMETER, Dp (MICRONS)
O opoop— _ ro c».tiCj
•o iti 'f* ij<  CD o bio ooc
...


.

	



y
—
0 X



---$

, —




-^1.



r




k~J
'X
^X^



IX






X*







/




m


s
^ 	





^
*





.X"!




.
^^
)




^




ilium i
MIST LOADING
(MG.S03/S.C.F)
0 1.17
X 1.69

[
!
	 	 ij 	 ir ,r'



          ""I   ?     5   IO   2030    50    70       90  9S      99
              CUMULATIVE   MASS  PERCENT  LESS THAN  Dp
  Figure  2.   Giiwiktlivo particle size  distribution of sulfuiic  odd  ;ikmt aerosols
                                                                                             VOI, 30, NO, 1  «  At'tlil »95B   647!

-------
                                OillllllullOr
             Curvo Calculation
                  .1.11      0.30     U'».t,l
                  1.63      O.ftS     OH.9.»
                  I. 1(1      .i.7-1     Hfi. IU
                  0.57     i I. fill     74.5'J
                  (I.J.I     54.7.1     lO.Hfi
   'I In'   i V !•<•!•• !ii/,r.  flisli if/iiiiiu)   itiiil
,,i,|il|l "_ nl 'I i  ',il I |('Hvlllf( "  U''«' I'lMllil'- I
.snlllhi'  HI ill |.{ nil :sri' jilumn ill 1'i^iiii* '«'«
 Hi*:*  j'l.'iH K i.l  sh<* i .coanr*l-MiiMS.inii'
ilr$i;;n,  ;• •iiiix'1'  (mil u'ilh ;i  rjilcrl r;<|>;i>'
lIV .-I" 'M>0 tut,-. |	||iy  (111 ll IflO1^, -Mil
 Ginis liilcr
 e;icii singe, ctiiTiulaiirc  disinbulions  ,ns
 shown  in Figtircs 1 to 3 were calculated.
 l-'«ir example, Ctinsider ihc curve given for
 a IIMKI l9%.   This calculation  was contin-
 u<.'fl  ;),*  shown in 'Table  11  and then the
 Ciirvr was plotted as shown in Figure 1.

 Field Measurements
   'i in- impaetor and auxiliary apparatus
 Ii;ivc. l)c:cn  used  extensively  ;it  plants
 llirouijiioui the country.  Measurements
 of p.'ii'iiele-sizc distributions of aerosols
 wiltun  and  Ipaving eight 'didi-iem  acid
 plains Ijave been measured, and  collec-
 tion efficiencies :iiri'  Me >  Mtrtni'nl.s -H'e  rccjiiiixxt
                                                 A  H j'i'*i!  JI.'H iiH*'-sivt;  fJi^lriljiuion  Hfsr
                                                 ilir  in "!  COM f«':r ing ;i |jltt>s|j|j(>ric aei'l
                                                 jila'ii i< i;i-.'i"n in I igurc 3.
                                                    I'i'nii l>-  «i,'r i|rirriiiiiKili«iui by cliriin-
                                                 cal  II)III;KI[)V  prrsuiiiK'l  niiiku  jHissibli/.
                                                 (li'lcniiinalioii  i.'f acceptable siar.k  ili.«-
                                                 rluii'j>rs  nl" in'ros/'ls,  evalu.'itiiin of  in-
                                                 siallnl  (nllrciion  r.(]uipnn:nt,   ratiunnl
                                                 seSectidii  and design of equipment,  and
                                                 recogniiini! of potential  ptobleins early
                                                 in the dovi'lopnirni  of new processes.


                                                 Acknowledgment

                                                   The  many Ix'ipful suggi'stions  in.'ide
                                                 by H. 1:. .ff>lin.<-1"iif,W. E. Kanz,  Mcrhert
                                                 Kraenirr, .{.  B ^'ung, ami G. U. Gtllcs-
                                                 pie on  (he dc3ii>u and  operation of cas-
                                                 cade imjiarkirs  arc gratefully acknowl-
                                                 edged.
                                                   Jl. P.  \Vilif.i  .'ui^f  ;\  ctm'.pany  report  on
                                                 which this discussion  H based.   W. ,M,
                                                 Davis made scvrrni  heljjful sugyestiDtis.


                                                 Nomenclature

                                                 C    — empirical  i  orn-<:ii(ni   far lor  fiir
5 pi
,U
^"* A, A
tn ^.U
z
o ~* n
*-s a.U
DC
O
___ d.O
'% t S
O i. 3
UJ i'i-k
H 1.0
UJ n Q
^ U.o
5
•~ ri c
O U.b
f\ e;
u 0-5
-J n A
0 °4
h r» ^
a: U-J
S
Op


0
X








/


R
Rl







J
^
i «

IN r
JN r







Y

> i

*jn i
40.2









0 2








Q.
.-jX-



0 3








X>



0







k^




5







/




0







'




7






^1^





0
"'""




i—., ..
/£




.

9
• 01



0
"^



j


0 9
;;ig I'" mo



uX^







5 9
               CUMULATIVE  MASS  PERCENT  LESS   THAN,  Dp
Figure 3.   Distribution of phosphoric acid  mlsl  leaving  typical  plant can bo tied
to control process.  Analysis of aerosols unde> varying plant conditions aids in  (lie
selection of np.w  eq'jipmeni
                                                .},"

                                                'I',
                                                l''n
                                                                                                            nl* Mimll  |i;Ii li' I' .t !i i (!i f !()€
                                                                                                            l'ljl
                                                                                                                                ' r>f
      mi. uiii.'i
    I  •>. ) (,iliu.'l< MI..•«.••"•..)*
   l«n ;lil her p.till (i'l j'.ii Iti'ilcClllf
      i Hi   /, "  'i>/in'
--•- ;il).v.,luic  pi't-iiin:   ;>t  Uiicl   i

 - pn's'tiiic jilii'r j''i, iiiin.
"• pivssiiri'  drop  ni'iu"!  impaclo.

•-> lcin|>i'i;iliin' :iltri }<•>.. "K.
-• i>iis  fltiw  at  inl'.-i  !«'  impaclo;
      i:r./.«rctniel.   I',, = 2-1.5 (A/*)c''
      fur  nir iH   25"  ':.  and  1'i.
      p.s.i.a,                   '.  , ''
=- average  linc:ir  velncily   of pa
      (hrough  jci, nl /'j ."Hid '.T-
      ctn. per sccfintl             ',*  .
•- average  inrdivulnr   veliM'ity  q
      g;is, t'tii, per SCCDII'.I i? =•  (10)
        I'Bgf I\'C< .013}         ,/v
                                                          V-'
                                                     -- diin'~i»ionl<.'ss incriial  parameter
                                                                                 _
                                                    -•  iii'Tiial  punuiiclcr fur  inijjactO;
                                                         eniei«-m:y of 5t)';o
                                                    —  K.'O  fU'iisuy nfiev 'y\  M "l'%  ahc
                                                         /'-.. gran) PIT IT,            '  •
                                                    •' ii M«ii\  ol  :n'tiK''il j'.'n'ick', gr.lft
                                                         ! ({"r i't'..                      .  .
                                                    ••  vi-ii't -sin of i^as ;tflrr )>", ill  /;anc
                                                         /',.  .  li'in.ir.-i.-.,)          '  '•
                                               Literature Cilcd
                                                 (l|  I riry. R.  ,\|., J.'nn-. I,. I'... Ibil'nann,
                                                       M. «.!., O,em. Km. i-l,  «'.' (I-.-9),
                                                 (2)  Cillr-pk:,  C.'.  l< .  I'.ilft.  l;X|d.  Stn.
                                                       Univ.   (llinoi?.   I ireh.  Rcpt.  3;
                                                O) Cilloiiii-.  G^  R.. .Inhnsinne,  H.1 F.,1
                                                       C.7iJ.i. £•>£. r>»K,. -,\.'U\- (1MS).
                                                l-n i:ir,.n',uri(,' I...  Smith. C.  W  , V,$,
                                                   .    tin..  Minn  Kr>.(.  hi', tit   MJl'l
                                                       '.DJ..II,
                                                ("1,1 lla'trl,, T.  U'arrcn,  It..  1 Jrirtkrr, I1'
                                                       .,'.  (H.:. lift. '1'iM'ctl. M, JOt  ;s932J.
                                                ((>) Kai/..  S.   Jl..  ot!irr«.  l!.  S.  Pub.'
                                                       ifeali,. Unlj;,  Hi,!,'.' (1925).   •"•  J
                                                (7) L;if  Uranium   Coni-1
                                                       poitiuis,"  ftl,  ijy G. Vot:<{tlii\ 'anil'
                                                       H. C. Hwlft,', MrGraw-Hill, New"
                                                       York-, 194'.)."             .    ' ' '•
                                                /S) iM:!y,  .1. !<.,  ,'  AV-. fmf. M,  181
                                                       (I'j.if)!.                       «  •
                                                \')) Owens,  ,1. S., I'm,: Hn: ,V»,: (Londin)
                                                       A t(JI, 1M (19221    "           .'.'  ;
                                               (Ki) I'itcli-'.r, J.  M.,   Mitch':)!,   R,  I.:
                                                       'riii«ii!«s,  H,  K., 1'iot.  Chen*.  Sjxt!
                                                       Mni. A.nur,  tlkrecinlter I'-'TiS;.  •  i'
                                               (II) Han*.  W.  K.,'  \V.mSl .1.  H,,  AM.t,
                                                       Att.lt,  In,!.  /A,",  anil  Oitil/mlaiul',
                                                       Mr,l. 5,4M  (I;)'.S2).              I |
                                               (12) Raiv/.,  W.  ]•'.,.  W0nB.   .1.  11..  INC/
                                                       I'.NC  CHUM. •*•!, '.V;i  (l'J52).
                                               (131 Smtkiii.  !.. S.,  ./,  /«,/. rfi.".  Tnvi'«i,:
                                                       UB, 2f-')  1 1 WC.'.             '      i
                                               (1-1! Wilr-,i»,  .f.  p.. ,l,1,'..r.-l;<-/i. /«».  H)t.\
                                                       nml II. , „/.::!!,>•:, it Mr,l. 7, .^.6  ''I'l.SS),
                                               1)5! n'ilo.v.  .1,  IX, Vuu Anuvtp. >\"  R.,
                                                       Jr..  ?H/.I ,li^-.  /••,»'. /,Vn;"l II,  422:
                                                                                                      Rr!;i:n-i:i> :V-r ccvimi- Maicli 2], 195'''
                                                                                                                Acc.Kr i i-.u .\\iRirtt 14, 1957

                                                                                                Annual M»'i-.tir.( , AlChK.  IV.ision,  NJasi.,
                                                                                                Heerin!}<;i  !n>i6 '                        •
648
                         ENGIWEERINO CHR

-------
PARTiCULATE EMISSIONS
FROM NON-FIRED SOURCES
IN PETROLEUM REFINERIES:
A REVIEW OF EXISTING DATA
API PUBLICATION NO. 4363
                     American Petroleum institute
                     2101 L Street, Northwest
                     Washington, D.C. 20037

-------
                                     DCN-82-203-007-10
     PARTIOJLATE EMISSIONS

     FROM NON-FIRED SOURCES

    IN PETROLEUM REFINERIES:

   A REVIEW OF EXISTING DATA
         FINAL  REPORT
         Prepared for:

 American Petroleum Institute
 The Particulates Task Force
         Prepared by:

G. E. Harris and L. A. Rohlack
      Radian Corporation
        P. 0. Box 9948
      Austin, TX   78766

-------
RADIAN
                               ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

           Those individuals and companies who supplied unpublished data de-
 serve a special commendation.

           The API Particulates Task Force is to be commended for its respon-
 siveness and aid in determining the objectives and approach to the study.

           Tnose Radian employees who worked on this project and their
 contributions include:  W,  D.  Balfour,  review of test methods; M. A.
 Capalongan,  data source reviews; S. R.  Fernandes, program management;
 S.  L. Henneman, report production;  W. R.  Hearn, engineering review; J.  L.
 Meling, data source reviews;  and the library staff, source identification
 and retrieval.

-------
RADIAN
 1.0       INTRODUCTION

           This report presents the results of a study of particulate emissions
 from non-fired sources in petroleum refineries.  These sources include cata-
 lytic cracking processes, coking, sulfur species control operations, cooling
 towers, asphalt blowing,  solids handling, and other miscellaneous sources.
 The objective of this API-funded study was to gather and evaluate all availabl
 data on refinery non-fired particulate emissions.  In addition to mass emissio
 data, the particle size distribution (PSD) and the chemical composition of the
 particulate matter were of interest.

 1.1       Te_chn i c a 1 App r oach

           The task of data collection was accomplished by a literature search
 for published data and a limited survey to find unpublished data.  Published
 data were identified by a combination of computer based on-line searches and
 a manual search of recent issues of appropriate journals.  The on-line data
 bases searched are listed in Table 1-1.  After completing the collection of
 published literature, Radian sent a request for unpublished data to the EPA,
 several states, vendors,  and six major oil companies.  The unpublished data
 thus obtained were used to supplement the literature data and to provide an
 accurate picture of the available data on refinery non-fired particulate
 emissions.

           Each piece of test data was carefully reviewed to.determine whether
 or not it was suitable for inclusion in the data base.  -Review criteria in-
 cluded documentation of methodology, acceptability of test methods, documenta-
 tion of process conditions, and representativeness of process conditions.
 Based on these criteria,  each source was rated as good, fair, poor, unknown,
 or unacceptable quality..  Only sources of good and fair quality were included
 in the final data base.  Guidelines for assessing data quality are given in
 Table 1-2.
                                      1-1

-------
                             TABLE OF CONTENTS
                                                                        Page
Acknowledgements	i
1.0       INTRODUCTION	1-1
          1.1  Technical Approach	 1-2
          1.2  Summary of Results	1-4
2-0       SUMMARY OF AVAILABLE DATA	2-1
          2.1  Available Data by Source Type	2-1
               2.1.1   Catalytic Cracking Processes  	 2-1
               2.1.1.1 Fluid Catalytic Cracking Units (FCCU).  	 2-3
               2.1.1.2 Other Catalytic Cracking Processes  	 2-19
               2.1.2   Fluid Coking  . . . '	2-19
               2.1.3   Sulfur Species Control Operations	2-19
               2.1.3.1 Sulfur Recovery	 2-19
               2.1.3.2 Sulfuric Acid Production 	 2-23
               2.1.4   Cooling Towers	2-23
               2.1.5   Asphalt Blowing	2-30
               2.1.6   Miscellaneous Solids  Handling	2-30
          2.2  Study Limitations	'...,.	2-30
          2.3  Data Source References	2-31

-------
                             LIST OF FIGURES
Figure                                                                  Page
 2-1     PSD for FCCU's with Internal Cyclones	2-5
 2-2     PSD for FCCU's with Internal Cyclones	2-6
 2-3     PSD for FCCU's with Internal Cyclones	2-7
 2-4     PSD for FCCU with External Cyclone	2-8
 2-5     PSD for FCCU with CO Boiler	2-9
 2-6     PSD for FCCU with ESP	2-10
 2-7     PSD for FCCU's with ESP and CO Boiler	2-11
 2-8     PSD for FCCU with CO Boiler and Scrubber	2-12
 2-9     Comparison of FCCU PSD:  Internal Cyclones vs. ESP
           and CO Boiler	2-13
 2-10    Mean PSD for FCCU's with Various Control Technologies	2-14
 2-11    PSD for Fluid Cokers	'	2-22
 2-12    PSD for Sulfuric Acid Plants (Duros, R#ll)	2-24
 2-13    PSD for Sulfuric Acid Plants (Brink, R/M)	2-25
 2-14    PSD for Sulfuric Acid Plants (Donovan, R#10)	2-26
 2-15    PSD for Mechanical Draft Cooling Towers	2-28
 2-16    PSD for Natural Draft Cooling Towers 	   2-29

-------
RADIAN
                                LIST  OF TABLES
  Table                                                                  Page
   1-1     On-Line  Data  Bases  Searched	1-2
   1-2     Criteria for  Evaluating  Data	1-3
   2-1     Summary  of  Available  Particulate  Data for  Refinery
            Non-Fired Sources	2-2
   2-2     FCCU  Mass Emission  Data	2-4
   2-3     Elemental Composition of FCCU Particulate	__.   2-16
   2-4     FCCU  Particulate  Polycyclic  Organic Matter Content  	   2-17
   2-5     Mass  Emission Data  for other Cracking Processes	2-20
           /
   2-6     Other Cracking Particulate  Polycyclic Organic
            Matter Content  	   2-21

-------
RADIAN
                  TABLE 1-1.  ON-LINE DATA BASES SEARCHED
               Data Base
              Description
 APILIT

 APTIC

 CHEMICAL ABSTRACTS

 COMPENDEX


 COMPREHENSIVE DISSERTATION
 INDEX

 CONFERENCE PAPERS INDEX

 DOE ENERGY

 ENVIROLINE

 NTIS

 POLLUTION
Worldwide refining literature.

Broad air pollution data base.

Papers on pure and applied chemistry.

Worldwide coverage of major journals,
publications, and societies.

Guide to doctoral dissertations from
American Universities.

Papers from technical meetings.

Literature on all aspects of energy.

Environmental literature.

Government sponsored research.

Worldwide environmental literature.

-------
RADIAN
                   TABLE 1-2.  CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING DATA
           1.   Good Quali_ty - Well documented, standard procedures
               have been used to acquire these data; these data have
               withstood peer review (i.e., publication in a respect-
               journal) ; data precision and accuracy have been
               statistically evaluated.

           2.   Fair Quality - the procedure (or individual steps
               within a procedure) is either poorly defined, not
               well documented, or has been modified.

           3.   Poor Quality - Data need replacement; inappropriate
               or perhaps invalid procedures have been used in data
               acquisition; data does not withstand peer analysis;
               the accuracy and precision of the data are unknown
               or undefined.

           4.   Unknown Quality - Data require corroboration; samp-
               ling and/or analytical techniques are new or unknown;
               applicability of methods used for data acquisition
               to a specific problem is uncertain.

           -* •  ^° Practical Utility - Data cannot fce substantiated;
               data are known to be unreliable and should not be
               used; data lack some critical piece of information
               (for instance, if mass emission data is expressed in
               Ib/hr and no process capacity is given, the data can-
               not be normalised for comparison to other units).
                                       1-3

-------
RADIAN
           A worksheet was  completed  for  each  data  source.   These worksheets
 provided  a quick  summary of  the  data  source,  refinery  source,  emission  data,
 and data  quality  rating.   The  completed  worksheets  are  included as Appendix
 A,  and  the existing  data base  is  summarized in  Section  2.

 1.2       s\irnmary of Results

           A  large volume of  data on  particulate emissions  from non-fired  re-
 finery'  sources was located.  The existing data  base was deemed to be  adequate
 for the following sources:

           •    Fluid Catalytic Cracking  Units (FCCU) with  conventional
               control  technology (cyclones,  CO Boilers, electrostatic
               precipitators,  and scrubbers)

           •    sulfuric acid plants,  and

           •    cooling  towers.

           A  second group of  sources  was  found to be only partially  character-
 ized, but of  little  significance due to  extremely  low  particulate emissions
 and/or  unit  populations.   That group included:

           •    other cracking  processes,

           •    sulfur recovery operations,

           •    asphalt  blowing/incineration,  and

           •    fluid coking.

           A  third group was  identified as possibly needing further  characteri-
 zation.  These units have  little or  no data in the existing data  base ar».d
 either  have  significant current populations or growth  potential.   Included

-------
RADIAN
 in this  group  are  delayed  cokers and FCCU's with emerging technology (heavy
 oil cracking,  SC>2  adsorbing catalyst, etc,)-
                                     1-5

-------
RADIAN
 2.0       SUMMARY  OF  AVAILABLE  DATA

          Available published and  unpublished data  on  participate  emissions
 from  refinery non-fired  sources have been  reviewed  for this  study.  Table  2-1
 summarizes  the  resulting data base by  source  type/control  technology  catego-
 ries.   The  term "data element," as used  in the table,  denotes  an independent
 piece  of  data on a process unit.   If one literature reference  presented  data
 on three  different units, that was considered as  three data  elements.  If  a
 source was  tested  three  times on successive days,  the  results  were averaged
 and considered  as  one data element.  If, however,  that source  was  tested at
 three  widely separated times  (e.g., start~of-run, mid-run, end-of-run),  each
 test was  considered a data element.

          The data have  been  sorted by the type of  refinery  process and, where
 appropriate, by  the type of emission control  applied.   The data have  been
 further subdivided into  mass  emission  data, particle size  distribution (PSD)
 data,  and chemical composition  data.   The  PSD data  are presented in the  range of
 0.1 to 10 microns.  This was  done  because  most of  the  available data  fell  with-
 in that range.   The following subsections  summarize the data by those catego-
 ries.   More detailed  data can be found in  the individual worksheets in Appendix
.A.  Each  worksheet has a reference identification which corresponds to the
 reference list  at  the end of  this  section,

 2.1       Available.Data by Source Type
                                                         i-
 2.1.1     Catalytic Cracking  Processes

          Most  of  the data found in the  open  literature were associated  with
 Fluid  Catalytic  Cracking Units  (FCCU).   The FCCU  data  are  presented by control
 type,  followed  by  a brief summary  of data  on  other  catalytic cracking processes.
                                     2-1

-------
                    TABU' 2-1.   SUMMARY OF  AVAj.LAHLF, PAHT.F CUl-ATE DATA  FUR KEF I.NF.RY NON-FI.HEI) SOUKCKS
I-J
I


Source Type/Emission Control
Fluid Catalytic Cracking Units (FCCU)/
Internal Cyclones
External Cyclones
CO Boiler
Electros tatlc I'recf pit.Tt.or (F,SP)
ESP and CO Boiler
CO Boiler and Wet Scrubber
Granular Bed Filter
Centrifugal Swirl Vane Separator
lilfili Temperature Regeneration and
SO? Absorbing Catalyst
Thermofor Catalytic Cracking Unit (TCCU)
Moving Bed Catalytic Cracking Unit
Houdriflow Catalytic Cracking Un,it (TCCU)
Fluid Cokcrs
Sulfur Species Control Operations
Clans Units
Claua plus Beavon/Stretford . '
Sulfur storage vent
Sulfuric Acid Plants,.
Cooling Towers - Mechanical Draft
- Natural Draft
Asphalt Blowing/ Incineration
Other Miscellaneous Solids Handling
Number of.
Mans
Emissions

9
1
2
/,
20
3
0
]
L

3
1
0
5

0
2
1
1.
2
1
0
0
Acceptable
PartJclc
Sizes
/"~\
M
w
i
2
5
1
.1
1
0

0
0
0
2

0
0
0
3
2
2
0
0
Data Elements

Composition

1
0
2
0
5
0
0
0
0

3
0
1
0

1
0
0
0
2
2
1
0
Number of
Unusable
Data Elements





14






1

3


n


.1

1
0
                                                                                                                            0
                                                                                                                            I

-------
2.1.1.1   Fluid Catalytic^ Cracking Units (FCCU)

          The FCCU is potentially the most significant particuiate emitter of
all refiner}1 processes, but a variety of sophisticated emission control sys-
tems has greatly reduced those emissions.  A large body of FCCU test data was
found in both the open literature and from unpublished sources, but because of
the many diverse emission controls, this source category is still only partially
characterized.

          The FCCU data have been subdivided into mass emission data, particle
size distribution (PSD) data, and chemical composition data.  The available
aiass emission data have been summarized in Table 2-2.  Each mass emission data
element is given along with its reference identification.  The range and mean
of the available data are also presented.

          The available particle size distribution (?SD) data are presented
graphically in Figures 2-1 through 2-10.  Figures 2-1 through 2-3 present data
for FCCU's with internal cyclones.  Figures 2-4, 2-5, and 2-6 present data for
external cyclones, CO Boiler, and ESP, respectively.  Figure 2-7 presents PSD
data for units with both an ESP and CO Boiler.  Figure 2-8 presents data on
FCC units with wet scrubbers.  Figure 2-9 presents the range of PSD data for
the two best characterized cases, units with internal cyclones and units with
both ESP and CO boiler.  Figure 2-10 presents  a "typical" PSD for each control
technology.

          A few observations can be made concerning  the FCCU PSD data.  The
median particle size ranged from under 1 to over 10  microns, with a mean value
in the 2 to 3 micron range.  Submicron particles accounted for from 10 to 50
percent of the total particuiate mass, and that percentage increased with in-
creasing control efficiency.  Particles of greater than 10 microns were a sig-
nificant component of uncontrolled FCCU emissions (15 to 60%), but were only a
cinor proportion when highly efficient controls were used  (1 to 20%).
                                    2-3

-------







KJ
1
JO



Crafs0i0n Control Synteea
Inte rnn I Cyc loneft
Ksicrnfi 1 Cyclone(s)
CO Bnl Icr


ESr and CO Boiler
CO Boiler nod Scrubber
Complete Rcgencral Ion find
SOj Absorbing Cutily^t
TABLE 2-2. FCCtl MASS EMISSION PATA
Ih/ln1 1*1 » FtUSil Feed
Hiss Bnlssion ftjt.,1 Hlownts
(Reference 1)
244 ) 5! to BHJ (»ll«)
10.1 (UIO)
6B.2 (DA) 10.8-657 (BdlB)

»*.9 (R*J)
i? (RI34) 20 (RIMi 11 (RI34)
21,1 (RI23) IJ.ft (Rl)i) 20.9 (RI31)
64.6 (HIJI) 12.4 (Mil) 9,1 (M»ll)
2fl.8 (RI31) 13.3 (RI31) 10.1 (R»J!)
18. 1 (RI31) 15. J (Rill) 33.5 {BI21)
U.2 (R»,13) ? - 150 (RI5)
10 
(255)


9.1 - 150
(29.9)
8.1 - 10
(9.1}
(*J.'>

I1 — ATM2 ™~
Factor
(Pcfcrince 15
'=«
-
'


45
(Hi 30)
-
-
P
IS
z








-------
CO
z
O
DC
O
OC
UJ
   100
    9,0
    n.o
    7.0
    6.n

    5.0
    3.0
-i   20
Q

UI
O
K
OC
<
Q.

O
O
O
(X
uu
<
LLJ
    t.O
    0.9
    0,8
    0.7

    0.6

    0.5

    0.4


    0.3
O   0.2
LU
U.
U.
LU
    0.1
      o
      ci
ITS — CM  in ~
°. a o  o
                                     V-
                                                 frt
                                                                                    i Unpublished Source  // 6
                                                                                              I Unpublished Source // 7
                                                                                               Unpublished Source ft 8
                                                                                             OUnpublished Source ff 10
                            m  o    o  o  o
                                                     O
                                                     (O
                                                          O
                                                          o»

-------
                                                                         Unpublished  Source  ff  12
                                                                         Unpublished  Source  tf  13
                                                                         Unpublished  Source  //
                                                                     O   Unpublished  Source  I  15
                                                                     D   Unpublished  Source  0  15
               CUMULATIVE PERCENTAGE
              (% BY WEIGHT < DIAMETER)
70A29B7
Figure 2-2.   PSD for FCCU's  with Internal  Cyclones

-------
o
a:
(j
5

a:
LU

LU
10.0
 
a
O
oc
UJ
<
UJ
>

u
UJ
UJ
    1.0
    0.9
    0.8

    0.7

    0.6
    0.5
    0.2
    0.1
                        O
           in *- cvj  m  •- f^J    f
                                                                           (Q Ol

                                                                           CT) Ol
                                                                           Ol CD
                                                                                   Oi
                                                                                   Oi
                                 CUMULATIVE PERCENTAGE

                                (% BY WEIGHT <  DIAMETER)
                                                                                              • Unpublished  Source ti  9
                                                                                                Unpublished  Source //  9
                                                                                              A Unpublished  Source //  9
                                                                                             D Unpublished  Source //  16
                                                                                                Unpublished  Source if  17
                                                                                70A2987
                 Figure  2-3.  TSI)  for FCDU's  with  Internal Cyclones

-------
IU U
8n
fn 7 n
*- 60
o
o: *o
0 5'°
^ 40

DC
LLJ 30
H J
U.I
< ", r.
Q
01
Q
H-
tr
 *-
>





























t\

























































.

u


















/
y /
^-—
RJ







T C
















/
J
/










3













^
P
/













C
c













/ y
9














3 C
si r*











^
7
















\ 5







/•
/
Jf
f


















" C
If


J
/
~T~
/
r j
^
^




















? s
p
^

-•
p
/























3 C
3 t-

/
/


























» C
d
W




























J
3





























S





























> If
s O





























•j
^



























































a
o





























J 0
1 O





























n a
» a
O





























) c
{ 5





























' 2
T m
                                                                  O
                                                                      Unpublished Source I  10
                                                                      External €%rclone  Exit
Unpublished Source 9 10
Cyclone. Inlet
           CUMULATIVE PERCENTAGE
          <% BY WEIGHT < DIAMETER)
Figure 2-4.   PSD For FCCLI with External  Cyclone

-------
1 U U

»« 7 n
z 60
o

0


DC
m T n
UJ
5
< an
O
UJ
_J
O
f-
tr
 -
i C




























- c
3 C




























U tj
D C




















»







r» •
D




























f



















-^








a




























u


















;3p-"*








•«
n c

















^~~










3

















	










C
r
















— •-•











3 C
^ r















J
4











> c
•>













/
/













y c
i u












1
I














"> «










/
/
r















J S



y
/
•
7
/
/
r


















3 C
- n
/
/


























g




























c
c




























3 U
n c




























•>
i

























































<




























g i




























ji a
" «
c




























1 t
n e
n <




























?* c
R 8!
               Unpublished  Source //  4
           CUMULATIVE PERCENTAGE
          (% BY WEIGHT < DIAMETER)

F.igure 2-5.  PSD for FCCU with CO Boiler
70A29R7

-------
o
100


(/} ' u
Z R ft
o
cc s n
0


CK
UJ

Q
Ltj
_J
O
1 10


O 0.8
2 °-7
 C
3




























- r
3 C




























M U
D C




























1 ~~
3




























(S




























>j


























, ,

ij




























n c




























5




























C
r




























•> c
y r




























S C
1 *













/














3 C
f il







j

1
I
f
\















? f


I

1



/
J
f

















I i



j
1
.

I




















3 e
Q

J
(

























I
r



























i




























J U
B c




























T
n

























































a
c




























0 C
n c




























I> a
" c




























3 C
n (
•> (




























D 0
* a
                                                                                              OJ
                                                                                                  Unpublished
                                                                                                  Source if 20
                                       CUMULATIVE PERCENTAGE
                                      (% BY WEIGHT < DIAMETER)
?0A208?
                              Figure 2-6,  PSD for FCCU with ESP

-------
fO
I
         O
         CC
         O

         i

         erf
         tu
         h-
         IU
   10.0
    9.0

    8.0

    7.0

    6.0

    5.0


    4.0



    3.0
         Q.

         O
         O
         O
         oc
         LU
         <
         UJ
         (J
         UJ
         11.
         LL
         LU
-S   an
Q
UJ
j
O
h-
cr
    i.O
    0.9
    on

    0.7

    0.6

    0.5


    0.4



    0.3
    0.2
             0.»
               a
               d
                                                                     z
                            •  Unpublished  Source d  19
!                                                                                                           Unpublished

                                                                                                           Source //  23
                                                                                                        _
                                                                                                            2.1..  Re I sman
                            O  29. Taback
                                                         s
                                                       s   §
co
en
03 OT

0i oi
Ol
O1

2?
o>
                                          CUMULATIVE PERCENTAGE

                                         (% BY WEIGHT < DIAMETER)
                       Figure 2-7,   PSD for  FCCU'S  with ESP  and CO  BniJ.Kr

-------
10.0
o n


(/) '-U
*2" R ft
o
ft n n
0


cc
iij in

5
< , n
Q
LU
a:


1 O 0.8
*-* ^ n 7
K> 5 a/
 C
">











/

/














3 C
i tf












/
it














> c
T 
n

























































a
e




























0 C
i S




























B o
a




























3 C
1 t
1 <




























3 8
:n Ch
                                                                       •   Unpublished  Source  ff  5
                                                                                     moan ^5*range
                CUMULATIVE PERCENTAGE
               (% BY WEIGHT < DIAMETER)
70A2987
Figure 2-8.    PSD for FCCU with CO Boiler and  Scrubber

-------
NJ

I
U)
z
o
a:
o
oc
IU
\-
U.I
             10 U
             9.0

             no

             7.0

             6.0
              1.0



              3.0
S  ?n
o

UJ
_l
y


oc
<  1.0
a.  0.9

O  08

5  0.7

<  0.6
Z

>  0.5


g  01

UJ

"*  0.3
UJ



O
LU
U-
u.
UJ
             0.2
             0.1
                q
                o
                                                    IX

                                                       ix
                                                          Z
z
             S»-  CN

           .  CS  C3
          O
                                                 o  o  o  o  o
                                                                   01
                                          CUMULATIVE PERCENTAGE

                                         (% BY WEIGHT < DIAMETER)
                                                                                            en
                                                                                            01
                                                                                70A2987
                                                                                             "*   Ijit:ernn.l  Cyclones

                                                                                                 f.nrne Boundary


                                                                                             -O   In te enn I  Cyc lones

                                                                                                 .Smnll Boundary


                                                                                             «  ESP  6,  €0  Roller

                                                                                                Largo  Boundary
                                                                                                ESP & c;o  Boiler

                                                                                                Small Boundahy
            Figure  2-9.  Comparison of  FCCU FSH:   InLcrnnl  Cyclones vs  ESP and  CO Boiler

-------
i to
 I
IU.U
a n
Bn
ir\ 70
f~ fi f)
O
fC r, n
0
5 A n

n:
LU TO
LU
< TO
O
ID
0
1—
a:

8
                                       CUMULATIVE PERCENTAGE

                                      (% BY WEIGHT < DIAMETER)
                                                                                                    Intern.'tl Cv«:lones
                                                                                                    External, Cyclones
                                                                                                O  ESP and Co Boiler
                                                                                                D   CO Boiler and  Scrubber
                                                                                                    Crnnu.lar Bed Filter
                                                                       A   Centrifugal Swirl

                                                                           Vane Separator
                  Figure 2-1.0.  Mean PSD  for  KCCU' s  with Various Control Technologies

-------
          Data on the chemical composition of particulates from FCCU's were
found for seven units.  The majority of the data were inorganic elemental
analysis, and these data are summarized in Table 2-3.  Some data were also
found concerning particulate polycyclic organic material (PPOM) which are
presented in Table 2-4.

          A brief discussion of the factors which can potentially affect
particulate emissions from an FCCU is worthwhile at this point.  The most
significant factor is certainly the type of emission control equipment em-
ployed, and all of the data presented here are organized by type of particulate
control,  Particulate emissions can also be affected by the type of regenera-
tion, the type of catalyst, and the feed to the FCCU.  Since such detailed
process information was not available for most of the test data, these
factors cannot be accounted for quantitatively.  The following general dis-
cussion will point out the directional effects of these factors.

          Conventional operation of an FCCU regenerator combusts the coke on
catalyst at temperatures ranging from 1000 to 1100°F and results in a flue
gas with roughly equal concentrations of CO and C02.  The combustion of the
flue gas is often completed in a downstream CO Boiler.  During the mid-1970's,
refiners began to experiment with completing the flue gas combustion in the
regenerator.  This was initially accomplished- by raising the regenerator
temperature to the 1100 to 1350DF range and was called high temperature re-
generation.  This new type of regeneration offered  many benefits, but its
acceptance was slow because the regenerator metallurgy in many existing units
could not withstand the higher temperatures.  That  problem was largely
circumvented by the development of combustion promoters which  allowed com-
plete flue gas combustion at or near conventional regeneration temperatures.
   t
A breakdown of the type of regeneration used in August 1978 is presented below.
Although more .recent  figures have not been located,  it is anticipated that cur-
rent operations have  shifted to favor the promoted  combustion  type of regenera-
tion.
                                     2-15

-------
                             Table  2-3.   IJLJiHKNTAI. COMPOSITION OF FCCU PARTI.CIJI.ATK
NJ
t


Element

Alum (mum
Arsenic
Barium
I'adnvium
CnJ.c I urn
Chromium
Copper
I r on
Lead
Magnesium
Mercury
Nickel
Potassium
Seleni urn
Silicon
Silver
Sod I ura
Tin
Vanadium
Z i.nc
Total. Carbon
Vol.; n tile Carbon
Solvent Extractables
Hydrogen
Nl trogen
Reference Number

3/1 3f> 11 m
(Stark 11)* (Stack I/.)*
ppmw ppmw Wt . 7,
MC** MC <0.0l
4 4 <0.01 \
860 790 <0.0.l
<0.3 <0.5 <0.0,l
MC MC < 0.0.1
MC 840 0.11
140 40 0,05
MC MC <0.01
29 54 <0.01
200 MC < 0.0.1
<0,3 <0.01
550 300 0.11
MC MC <0.0l
5 36 0.01
MC MC <0.01
<0.3 0.5 <0.01
MC MC <0.01
4 5 <0.01
100 150 <0.01
130 260 0.07
. _ 22.6
_ _
- - J.8.0
5.9
4.3


33 (B)
Wt. %
-
0.01
0.02
<0.01
-
0.01
0.09
-
<0.01
-
<0.01
0.01
_
<0.01
-
-
_
-
0.01
0.13
20.0
_
29.0
1.8
0.3


U 19 29
Wt. Z Wt. %
NQ**
d**
_
_
NQ . t**
_
0.03
0.95 t
d
-
-
0.03 d
_
_
NQ 10
_
NQ
..

-------
. TABLE 2-4. I'CCU PAHTJ.CULATE P01.YCYCU.C ORGANIC MATTER CONTENT


Component
Ben 7.o(n) Py rene
Pyrcne
Bcnzo(6) Pyrcne
Peryleiie
Ben?.o[ghi]Perylene
AJI tli rene
Coronene
Phenanthrene
Fluoranthrene
Emission Factor ib/106 Bh.l. of Fresh Feecl
R//32. Facility //I
CO Boiler Inlet
3.52
3.74
1.17
nd*
0.33
nd*
nd*
nd*
3.52
CO Boiler Outlet
0.24
1.92
0.46
ml*
nd*
nd*
nd*
nd*
1.59
U032. Facility 02
CO Boiler Inlet
10.1.3
616.7
79.29
nd*
9.25
46.3
nd*
8811
440.5
CO Boiler Outlet
0.483
3.74
0.4
nd*
1.21
nd*
nd*
nd*
1.87

*nd - not detected.

-------
RADIAN

                                              % of US FCCU's Using
          Regeneration Technique           That Technique_Augus t,19_78
       Conventional Regeneration                   53% (R$37)
       High Temperature Regeneration               26%
       Combustion Promoting Catalyst               10%
       Combustion Promoters                        11%
       (separate from the catalyst)

           The. type of regeneration can affect particulate emissions in several
 ways.  The regeneration temperature has an effect on. the rate of sintering
 of catalyst particles.  It is this fracturing of catalyst particles which is
 largely responsible for the formation of particulate matter which is fine
 enough to escape the internal cyclones.  Thus, the severity of regenerator
 conditions can affect both the particulate emission rate and size distribu-
 tion.  The particulate composition is also affected, since conventional re-
 generation results in a coke content on catalyst of 6 to 7 weight percent,
 while high temperature and combustion promoted regeneration can. achieve coke
 levels below 5 weight percent.

           FCCU catalyst has evolved significantly over  the last 20 years,
 going from natural clays to synthetic zeolites to present day  combustion
 promoted and/or S02 adsorbing catalyst.  Each type of catalyst has different
 characteristics in terms cf fracture resistance  due to  mechanical and  thermal
 stresses.  As previously explained, it is the rate and  nature  of the catalyst
 fracturing that largely determines the particulate emission rate and size
 distribution.  Since each of these catalysts may have different formulations,
 the  particulate composition is also affected.

           The feedstock to be cracked can also have a noticeable effect on
 particulate emissions.  A heavier  (more refractive) feedstock  is more  diffi-
 cult to crack and may require higher catalyst circulation rates.  Heavier
 feedstocks tend to produce more coke, which  requires more severe regeneration.
 Heavier feedstocks typically contain higher  metals content, much of which  is
 deposited on the  catalyst as coke.  The combined effects of higher catalyst
 circulation, higher  coke yield, and higher metals content could cause  a
 significant effect in particulete  emissions  rates, sizes, and  compositions.
                                      2-18

-------
RADIAN
 2.1.1.2   Other Catalytic Cracking Processes

           Particulate emission data were also found for Thermofor Catalytic
 Cracking Units (TCCU),  Moving Bed Catalytic Crackers,  and Houdriflow Catalytic
 Cracking Units (HCCU).   Most of the available data were in the form of mass
 emission factors and are summarized in Table 2-5.  Sotae PPOM data were also
 identified and are presented in Table 2-6.

 2.1.2     Fluid Coking

           A limited -amount of data were found on particulate emissions from
 fluid coking.  The mass emissions data are summarized below:

       Reference               Control                 Emission Factor
      R//30 (AP-42)      Internal Cyclone             523 lb/103 Bbl. Fresh Feed
      Ri?34              Internal Cyclone             437
      Ri'34              Scrubber and CO Boiler       153
      Ri'5               Internal Cyclone             523
      R??5               ESP and CO Boiler            6.85

 In addition, PSD data from two sources are presented graphically in Figure
 2-11.  No composition data were found.

 2.1.3     Sulfur Species Control Operations

           Sulfur species, primarily H2S from desulfurizing units,  are typically
 controlled in refineries by either sulfur recovery or sulfuric acid plants.
 Both operations have some potential for producing particulate emissions.

 2.1.3.1   Sulfur Recovery

           Only very limited data on particulate emissions from sulfur recovery
 vere found.  Groenendaal (Ri:3) reported Sg aerosols as 0.3 volume  percent in
 Claus tail gas, but found none after  incineration.  An unpublished source
                                      2-19

-------
RADIAN
          TABLE 2-5.   MASS EMISSION DATA FOR OTHER CRACKING  PROCESSES
            Process
   Emission Factors
lb/103Bbl (Reference //)
                   Range
                   (Mean)
 Thersofor Catalytic Cracking
      Uncontrolled
      Cyclones
      CO Boiler
  17     (M30) (AP-42)
  18.3        (R#9)
  15         (R*34)
                   15-18.3
                    (16,8)
 Moving Bed Catalytic Cracking
  17
(R//5)
(17)
 Houdriflov Catalytic Cracking
     No data
                                      2-20

-------
                       TABLE  2-6.   OTHliK CRACK J NO PAKTICULATE POLYCYCLIC OKOANJ.C  MATTl-R CONTKNT
ro
I
K)
Component
zo(a) Pyrene
Pyrenc
izo(n) Py rene
Perylene
z.o[ghi] Perylene
Antlirene
Coroncne
Phenanthrene
Fluoranthrene
Emission Factor Ib PPOM/106 Bill. Fresh Fecxl
(K/?32) TCCU //I
COB Outlet
26/i3
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
(R//32) TCCU 112
COD Inlet
1299
5617
1443
157.5
1080
23.1.3
7.93
7510
440.5
(R//32) TCCU n
COB Outlet
680
6170
1810
-
-
-
_ •
-
-
(R//32) IICCU with CO Boile.r
COB Inlet
45.15.4
2885
6828
748.9
660.8
20.83
242.3
462.55
182.82
COn Outlet
0.99
0.86
2 . 1.4
0.11
2.86
0.18
0.18
1.83
0.51
                                                                                                                         i

-------
C) ()
R fl
rr\ 7 0
Z 60
o
CT. nn
u 5
? 40

of
UJ 30
t
5
< 20
Q
UJ
U
h-
cr
- n 1
Q
O 04
rc °-4
** ni
IU
>
P
On ?
til
u_
IL
UJ
0 1
c
c




























iy
3 C
3 C




























> •-
'-




























f>
C




























i 












. _, J
/
(
I
d
Y











> c
i r












4
I














> c
» -i









}
fa
V
















' S







0
/
U
r

















> c
1 U



_ s<
/
/

/
/



















> c
J <>.


/
1
/
J
t





















' S
t
/

/
























}

/
'

























c
c
o—



























i S

























































a
a




























i a
i a




























1 CC
g




























> 0
i a
1 C




























n g>
ri *
B O)
                                                                  O  Unpublished Source I? Iti
                                                                  D  7.   Byers
         CUMULATIVE HERCENTAGE
        '(% BY WEIGHT < DIAMETER)
70A2QB7
Fl.gi.ire 2-.U. PSD for Fluid Cokcrs

-------
RADIAN
(U24) reported 0,91 pounds per hour of particulate matter in  a sulfur  storage
tank vent.  Two other unpublished sources  (U2, 153) reported 0.39  and 0.35
pounds particulate per ton of sulfur produced, respectively.  These  figures
are for Claus units with Beavon/Stretford  tail gas treating.  There  is  no
parciculate matter emission factor for sulfur recovery units  in AP-42.

2,1.3.2   Sulfuric Acid Production

          Only one data element concerning mass emissions from sulfuric acid
plants was located.  Donovan  (R#10) reported particulate emissions of  0.064
pounds per ton of acid produced, based on  testing several umi_s ranging irum
800 to 2000 tons per day production.  AP-42  (R//30) presents emission  factors
for 985 acid plants with'ESP's as 0.10 Ib/tonjand for (iiber. misj.. elimina.to-r-s
as 0.02, 0.10, 0.11 Ib/ton for tubular, panel, and dual pad configurations..
respectively,  "Several sources presented PSD data which are graphically sum-
marized in Figures 2-12, 2-13, and 2-14.  _No data were found  pertaining to
:.he che£Tc~ar~coinposiTi"on of the particulate  from sulfuric acid plants,  but
it c£~ be safely assumed that the bulk is  sulfuric acid mist.

2.1.4"     pooling Towers

          The literature contains many papers on cooling tower drift,  but
cost of those are slanted  toward plume deposition models and  data.   Most drift
calculations, are expressed as a percent of  the circulating  water  lost.   The
accepted industry standard for drift was 0.2% loss,  but advances  in  mist
eliminator design and in direct measurement  of drift rates  have greatly re-
duced that factor.  Roffman (R#24) reports  a range of 0.001 to 0.02% loss  for
both mechanical and natural draft  towers,  based on a summary  of previous test-
ing.  Furlong (R#12) reports  on a mechanical draft cooling  tower  that  was
guaranteed by the manufacturer to have drift losses  less than 0.008% of circu-
lation.  Holmberg (Ri!-15) reported a 0.002% drift loss  for a natural  draft
towe r,
                                      2-23

-------
I
ro
          z
          o
          IX
          o
          o
          01

          LU
D
UJ
_J
O
P
tr
<
IX

O

2
<
Z
>
o
O
(T
UJ
<
LU
>
I-
o
ui
u_
IL
UJ
             0 I
                                                                                          Drying  Column
•  Primary Absorber

   (98% Acid)


A  Primary Absorber

    (Oleum)


9  Secondary Ahsorhei
                                        CUMULATIVE PERCENTAGE

                                       (% BY WEIGHT < DIAMETER)
                                                                           70A2U87
                             Figure 2-12.  PSD Tor Sulfurf.c  Acid  Plants (Duros, R/Ml)

-------
NJ
 I
ro
l-n
           CO
           2
           O
           QC
           U
          DC
          <
          n.
          U
          D
          O
          DC
          ill
          <
          ILJ
          O
          UJ
          IL
          U.
          IU
IUO
 <).()
 80
 7.0
 6.0

 50

 4.0
           rr
           UJ   3
           UJ

           -*   20
           Q
           ID
           _j
           O
 1.0
 09
 08
 07
 O.G

 0.5

 0.-1

 0.3
 0.2 i
               0.1
                             ui —
                             o'
                                              o  o
                                              ta  t^
CO O)
O CT^
0> 01
                                                                                                  %
                                             CUMULATIVE PERCENTAGE
                                            (% BY WEIGHT <  DIAMETER)
                                Figure.  2-13.   PSD for  Sulfur.ic Acid  Plants (Brink. R/M)

-------
*u.u
<> fl
fl o
in 7 0

O *'
CT r. n
o °°
"^ A o

of
ID TO
H
LU
<
Q
LU
F
DC
^ 10


^ ^ fi 3
*( 06


O
O 04
QC
< 0 -j
LU
O n ?
yi
IL
IL
UJ
0 1
c
<:




























ir
3 C
3 C




























> r-
> C




























- f>
i c




























> c




























j *.
3













^*^














6













^














l




























L|




























1 C












.*•"-•
--














>












-
•^














c
r-












^















3 C
j r1












^















J C
•) 1










I
^"
/















> c
F I/











•^
















3 C
1  in
> en

























































c{
a




























3 0
1 O




























r> a
» 0
o




























3 e
) C
i e




























n CT
' Z







P
-------
RADIAN
          PSD data for mechanical draft cooling  towers  are  presented  in Figure
 2-15.  Similar data  for natural draft  towers  are  presented  in  Figure  2-16.

          Ko data were found pertaining to  the chemical  composition of drift
 fro~ cooling towers, but  it can be  assumed  that  the  composition  of the drift
 would be the same as that  of the circulating  water.   Although  a  dedicated
 search was not performed  for circulating water composition,  two  sources were
 found in the drift-related literature.  Susstnan  (R,;28)  reported  the following:
          .    pH       =  4.3
          •    Chloride =   931  mg/1
          •    Sulfate  =  3500  mg/1
          •    CaCOa    =   860  mg/1
          •    Iron     =   250  mg/1
woffinden  (Rf/36)  presented  a  list  of elements  and  classified  them  as  trace
quantities  or predominant elements.  The  exact salts  and  their  concentrations
oresent in  the  drift will vary  widely  with  chemical  treatment,  makeup water
quality, and tower  operation.

           Cooling towers emit a different type of  particulate than the other
sources covered  in  this study.   The bulk  of cooling  tower participates are
water droplets  of comparatively large  diameter (from  100  to 10,000 microns).
Tne  salt content  of the circulating water will contribute some."permanent"
particulate mass, but  there are no data in the literature.to  characterize
this.  Tne  range  of cooling tower  particulate  impact  is  also  small compared
to other sources, with 80%  of the  particulace  mass deposited  within 500 feet
(Reference  #12).  Of the smaller particulates  which  are  dispersed  in the
plume, much is  "fog" rather than drift.   Here, drift  is  defined as a water
particle sheared  away  from  the  circulating water and  having much the same
mineral concentration.  Fog is  a water particle which condenses in the air
stream and  is  relatively pure water  (Reference £14).
                                      2-27

-------
NJ
I
         o
         cc
         O
a:
IU
H-
UJ
5
<
o
ai
_j
O

IT
<
OL
O
         Z
         >
         D
         O
         PC
         UJ


         UJ
         U
         UJ
         u_

         UJ
HO)
rYH


'
w;
fjn
WJ

'00




IrY


u
rr


5C

1

*•



t



























/
™ U
3 C


























,

i -
3. c


























/

- r
3 C

























/


g i
3 f
























/



1 -
a






















,
/




f





















/






g




















^







u

















,/
/









n c















.
/











5














/I













c
f













^














D C
\j r













/














5 e
•> ^













/-














3 C
r U













"














3 C
T U




























3 C
n r-












x-















? §












^















3
0




























C
C











^
















3 U
n c




























T
r>







































^-

















a
c










•^

















3 C
n c








, ,,,-^



















n a
n c
c








x'



















3 C
•> e
n c





-
^X^
^^




















n 01
ri w
n 3?
                                                                                                     24. Ro f F ma n
                                        CUMULATIVE PERCENTAGE

                                       (% BY WEIGHT < DIAMETER)
                                                                             70A29B?
                             Figure 2-15.  PSD  for  Mechanical. Draft  Cooling Towers

-------
K3
I
         to
         2
         o
         OC
         O
         
TO

MO

sro


•101)


30)
l«


 K
 K
     yo
              10
             //
                                    U-
                                        X
                                          X
                                               X
                                                    -\—r
                                                  X
                                                             i
                   -: o o  o
                                           o
                                           »n
                                                            o   o
                                                            co   o>
                                                                   oq  a;
                                                                   oi  oi
                                                                                          R//2A
                                                                                          R//15
                                                                                         "»  Fish and Duncan
                                                                                            Research Cottrc.ll
                                                                                                     GPU
                                                                                    rO
Sine Wave Mist

Eliminator



Duplex Mist

Eliminator
                                        CUMULATIVE PERCENTAGE

                                       (% BY WEIGHT < DIAMETER)
                                                                             70A2987
                             Figure 2-16.   PSD £or Natural Draft  Cooling Towers

-------
RADIAN
2.1.5     Asphalt Bloving.

          Very little data on psrticuiates from asphalt bloving were located,
An EPA report (R/-32) gave emission factors for aerosols of pyrene and anthra-
cene as O.OOS and 0,0006 pounds per ton of asphalt respectively.

2.1.6     Miscellaneous Solids Handling

          No data were found tc characterize  particulate emissions from other
solids handling processes in refineries.

2.2       S tudy_ Limit at ions

          A significant effort was made to gather all  available particulace
emission  data pertaining to non-fired  sources in petroleum refineries.  An
extensive on-line search for published data was supplemented by a manual searc
of receni issues of  major journals.  In addition, a  list of agencies and
companies that would potentially  have  pertinent unpublished dats was contacted
That group included  the U.S. EPA, state air pollution  control  agencies in
heavily industrialized states, vendors of emission control equipment, and six
major oil"companies. The" result  of  these searches is  a large,  and  fairly
comprehensive, data  base.   In  spite  of this,  some limitations  to the data
base should be noted.

          The published data base should be  relatively - complete, especially
for  data  sources specific  to  refining  that were published  in  a najor journal
within  the last 5  to 10 years.   It  is  possible that  some  older publications,
some foreign  data,  or  some  papers from minor  conferences  may  have  been missed.
The  one significant  area where additional published  data  may  exist  is  in
other industries vith  similar  sources.  Such  possibilities were investigated
on a limited  basis when little refinery—specific  data were  found.   For  in-
stance, data  from  electric  utility  and other  industries were  usec  to supple-
ment the  cooling  tower  data base.  The scope  of  this project,  however,  did
not  wllov a  full  exploration  of  such "technology  transfer" possibilities.
                                      2-30

-------
RAEMAN
 me search  for  unpublished data was also  quite  successful, yielding nearly as

 much quantity as published data,  and niuch of  it was of higher  quality.


 2.3       Data Source References
 i.        Arnold, B.W. and I.E. Gvyn, "Optimum Cat Fines Recovery Benefits
           FCC Unit," Oil and Gas Journal, Tl_  (22), 1979.

 2.        Balfour, W.D., FCCU Emissions Study, confidential Radian report,
           February 1978.

 3.        Blanton, W.A., "FCC S0x Controlled  Catalytically in Plants," Oil
           and_ Ga_s_ Journal, May 24, 1982.

 4.        Brink, I.A. and R.W. Karek, "Cascade Irapactor for Adiabatic
           Measurements," Inidustrial and E ng inee r i ng Chemistry, M) (647),
           April, 1968.

 5.        Burklin, C.E., Revision of Emission Factors f_or Petroleum Refining,
           EPA-450/3-77-030, March, 1977.

 6.        Byers, R.L., "Evaluation of Effluent Gas Particulate Collection and
           Sizing Methods," presented at 38th API Division of Refining Mid-
           year Meeting. Philadelphia, May 14-17, 1973.

 7.        Byers, R.L., "Multicyclones for Control of Petroleum Coke
           Emissions," Chemical Engineering Progress, December, 1981.

 8.        Cunic, J.D., "Scrubber Controls Cracker SO  Emissions," Hydrocarbon
           Processing, 47_ (9), pg. 31, May, 1978.'                   	

 9.        Danielson, D.A., Air Pollution Engineering Manual, AP-40, May 1973.

 10.       Donovan, J.R.S et al. "Analysis and Control of Sulfuric Acid
           Plant Emissions" Chemical Engineering Progress, June 1977.

 lly       Duros, D.R. and E.D. Kennedy, "Acid Mist Control," Chemical
           Engineering Progress, September, 1978.

 12.       Furlong, D. "The Cooling Tower Business Today," Environmental
           Science_anc Technology, V8, #8 August, 1974.

 13.       Groenendaal, "Shell Launches  Its Claus Off-Gas Desulfurization
           Process,"  Petroleum and Petrochemical International, 12 (9) pg. 54,
           1972.

 14.       Hanna, S.R. "Fog and Drift Deposition from Evaporative Cooling
           Towers," Kuclear Safety, Vol. 15, No. 2, March-April, 1974.
                                     2-31

-------
RADIAN
 15.       Holmberg, J.D., "Drift Management in the Chalk Point Cooling
           Tower," from Cooling^Tower Environment, edited by J. Pell and S.R.
           Hanna, ERDA Symposium Series, pp. 128-146, 1974.

 16.       Jones, 5.G., "Refinery Improves Particulate Control," Oil and Gas
           Journal, 6_9 (26)', 1971.

 17.       Kalen, B. and F.A. Zenz, "Filtering Effluent from a Cat Cracker,"
           Chemical Engineering^Progress, June, 1973.

 18.       Little, A.D., Inc.,  Screening Study to Determine Need for NSPS
           for New FCC Regenerators, prepared under U.S. EPA contract No.
           68-02-1332, June 1976.

 19.       Malarkey, E.J., and  C. Rudosky, "The Role of Electrostatic
           Precipitators in Petroleum Refining," Paper No. AM-71-11, presented
           at the National Petroleum Refiners Association meeting, San
           Francisco, March 21-23, 1971.

 20.       Manshilin, et al., "Trapping Fine Fractions of Aluminosilicate
           Catalyst," Chemical  Technical Fuels and Oils, 14 (3-4), 1978.

 21.       Reisman, E., et al. , I_n-S tack Tr ansmissome ter Mea sur ement o f
           Particulate Opacity  and Mass Concentration, EPA-650/2-74-120,
           November 1974.

 22.       Rochow, J.J., "Measurements and Vegetational Impact cf Chemical
           Drift  from Mechanical Draft Cooling Towers," Environmental Science
           andTechnology, Vol. 12, No. 13, December, 1978.

 23.       Rodriguez, D.G., "The Measurement of Opacity and Dust Loading in
           Fluid  Catalytic Cracker Flue Gas," Paper No- 36D, presented at
           the 75th AICHE National Meeting, Detroit, June  3-6, 1973.

 24.       Roffman, A. and L.D. Van Vleck," The State of  the Art cf Measuring
           and Predicting Cooling Tower Drift and  Its Deposition," Journal of
           the Air Pollution Control Association,  24  (9)  September, 1974.

 25.       Senges, D.C., et al, Closed-Cycle Cooling Sys terns for Steam-Ele ctric
           Power  Plants: A State-of-the-Art Manual, EPA 600/7-79-001, PB
           299290, January, 1979.

 26.       Shannon, L.J., et al., Particulate Pollutant System Study,Volume
           II: Fine Particle Emissions, APTD-0774, August  1977.

 27.       Shea,  E.P., Source Testing, EPA Test No. 6. Atlantic Richfield Co.,
           Wilmington^ CA, EPA  contract No. 68-02-0228, April  1972.
                                      2-32

-------
RADIAN
 28.       Sussman, S., "Facts on Water Use in Cooling Towers," Hydrocarbon
           Processing. July, 1975.

 29.       Taback, K.J., et al. , Fine Particle Emissions from Stationary
           Miscellaneous Sources in the South Coas^t Air Basin, California
           Air Resources Board contract No. A6-191-30, February 1979-

 30.       U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Compilation^ of Air
           Pollution  Emission Factors, Publication No. AP-42. August, 1977.

 31.       U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Background Information on
           Proposed New Source Performance Standards, APTD-13526, June 1973.

 32.       U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Sclent if i c and Technical
           Assessment Report on Particulate Polycyclic Organic Matter, EPA
           600/6-75-001, March 1975.

 33.       Weston, Roy F.,  Summary of Particulate Test Data and Test Results
           From 2 FCCU Sources, Roy F. "Weston, Inc., Weston Way, West Chester,
           Pennsylvania, 19380, Project No. 2184-01-01. August, 1982.

 34.       Wetherold, R.G., et al., Assessment of Atmospheric'Emissions from
           Petroleum  Refining, EPA -  600/2-80-075, Radian Corporation,
           April 1980.

 25.       Wilson, J.G. and D.W. Miller, "The Removal of Particulate Matter
           from Fluid Bed  Catalytic Cracking Unit Stack Gasses," JAPCA, 17
            (10),  October,  1967.

 36.       Woffinder, G.J., "Airborne Monitoring of Cooling Tower Effluents,"
           Electric Power  Research Institute, EA-420, June, 1977.

 37.        Kemp,  V.E.  and  O.W.  Dykerca,  Inventory  of  Combustion-Related
           Emissions  From Stationary  Sources,  Update No.  2,  EPA-600/7-78-100,
           Aerospace  Corporation,  Environmental  and  Energy  Conservation
           Division,  El  Segundo,  CA,  June  1978.

 U  1.       Unpublished source  If 1 (FCCU  with  COB  and ESP).

 U  2.       Unpublished source  # 2 (SRU with Beavon/Stretford).

 "u  3.       Unpublished source  1! 3 (SRU with Beavon/Stretford).

 U  A.       Unpublished source  it A (FCCU  with  COB).

 U  5.       Unpublished source  it 5 (FCCU  with  COB  and Scrubber).

           Unpublished source  i- 6 (FCCU) .

           Unpublished source  it 1 (FCCU) ,

           Unpublished source  // 8 (FCCU).


                                      2-33

-------
RADIAN
 U 9.      Unpublished  source $ 9 (FCCU).




 I" 10.     Unpublished  source i; 10 (FCCU  with External Cyclone)




 U II.     Unpublished  source // 11 (FCCU).




 U 12.     Unpubulished source ;/ 12 (FCCU).




 l; 13.     Unpublished  source // 13 (FCCU).




 V 14.     Unpublished  source ff 14 (FCC'J).




 U 15.     Unpublished  source $ 15 (FCCU).




 I 16.     Unpublished  source. ''• 16 (FCCU).




 U 17.     Unpublished  source if 17 (FCCU).




 U 18.     Unpublished  source // IS (Fluid Coker) .




 U 19.     Unpublished  source if 19 (FCCU  with HSF  and CGB) .




 U 20.     Unpublished  source ;/ 20 (FCCU  with ESF) .




 U 21.     Unpublished  source // 21 (FCCU  with ESP).




 U 22.     Unpublished  source £ 22 (FCCU  with ESP).




 U 23.     Unpublished  source ••' 23 (FCCU  with ESP and COB).




 U 24.     Unpublished  source # 24 (SRU Storage Vent).




 U 25.     Unpublished  source •! 25 (HCCU)
                                      2-34

-------
                                             ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT DATA SYSTEMS                                  PAGE        1
                                                       FPEIS SERIES REPORT                         SERIES FORM 1    DATE 06/21/83
              IS MO:   236  DESCRIBES SAMPLING AT SITE FROM 12/l«/77 TO 12/14/77 BY K.VB,  INC.
                        SPONSOR ORGANIZATION:   CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD
                        CONTRACT HU11BER:        A6-191-30          PURPOSE OF TEST: ENVIRONHENTAL ASSESSMENTS IHULTIMEDIAJ
                        TASK/DIRECTIVE NUMBER:  000
 SOURCE DESCRIPTION-
                  SOURCE CATEGORY:         CHEMICAL MANUFAC             SOURCE NAME:    CONFIDENTIAL
                  SOURCE TYPE:             INDUSTRIAL INORGANIC         SITE  NAME:
                  PRODUCT/DEVICE:          BORIC ACID                   ADDRESS:
                  PROCESS TYPE:            BORAX * SULFURIC                            LOS ANGELES        ,CA     00000
                  DESIGN PROCESS RATE: '      10800   KG/HR
                  FEED MATERIAL CATEGORY:   INORG CHEH
                  PRIMARY CONTROL DEVICE:                                SIC CODE:         2819
 EADS NASTE STREAM DATA BASES-
                  HASTE STREAM DATA FROM OTHER MEDIA HHICH MERE COLLECTED CONCURRENTLY WITH THIS TEST  SERIES
                  ARE AS FOLLOWS!TEST SERIES NUMBER-TSN):
                       LED5 TSN:          GEDS TSN: 00088     SDDS TSN:
REFERENCE REPORT-
                  TITLE
                  AUTHOR
                  SPONSOR REPORT NUMBER     NTIS NUMBER           PUBLICATION DATE

                  FINE PARTICLE EMISSIONS FROM STATIONARY AND MISCELLANEOUS SOURCES
                  IN THE SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN.
                  TABACK H.J.
                  KVB REPORT 5806-783      PB 293 923/AS  •--      FEBRUARY 1979

TEST SERIES COMMENTS—-	
                        PROGRAM OBJECTIVES TO INVENTORY TSP EMISSIONS,TO PREPARE  A  COM-
                        PREHENSIVE INVENTORY OF EMISSIONS)I.E.  BY SIZE  DISTRIBUTION AND
                        CHEMICAL COMPOSITION),AWJ TO DESCRIBE ALT. METHODS OF CONTROL.

-------
FPEIS TEST SERIES NO: 00236
EFFLUENT STREAM DESIGN CH
COMPONENT
NO NAME
1 PROBE»10 CYC




2 3 UM CYCLONE


3 1 UH CYCLONE


4 FILTER



STAGE •
D50( MICRONS 1
STAGE WEIGHTSr MILLIGRAMS)
MICROGRAMS/OHCM/STAGE
NUHBER/DNCM/STAGE
CUM. KMASS
DH-LOGD/I NUMBER/DHMJ)
fTIMMFMTT** flW THF FFF I I1FMT
In.Ut if IC.ril.3 %lrt I F 1C CF F uwCri I
COMPONENT
NO, NAME
STREAM NO: ol TEST ID NO: 1 SAMPLE NO:
DESCRIPTION

STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE:
STAGE WEIGHT:
COMPONENT ( ALIQUOT 1 MASS/VOLUME:
CHEMICAL ANALYSIS LABORATORY NAME:

STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE:
STAGE HEIGHT:

STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE:
STAGE HEIGHT:

STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE:
STAGE HEIGHT:

1234
8.30 1.90 .60 .01
1.41E*03 6. OOE-01 1.50E*00 8. OOE-01
9.77E + OS 4.16E+D2 1.0<»E*03 5.S<«E*02
3.08E+11 1.27E*10 1.63f*12 2.28E»15
.21 .16 .06
1.23E+03 9.75E«02 3.39E*02 O.OOEtOO
2.01E»D3 1.59E + 03 5.5^tE»02 O.OOE^OO
1.8EE*01 J.97E*00 1.07E*OB 7.7SE-08
1.43E»06 6.49E*02 2.06E*03 3.12E+02
4.51E»11 1.98E«10 3.26E»12 1.26E*15
f H 4C A f T F D T *IT 1 f" *5 ™ — — ___,_„_

REMARKS
01 PAGE 7
SERIES FORM 7 DATE 06/21/83
VALUE

8.30 UM
1.41E»03 MG
114.000 MG
ARMAME

1.90 UM
6. OOE-01 MS

.60 UM
l.SOEtOO MG

.01 UM
8. OOE-01 MG















PROBE«10 CYC
               ARMAMENT LAB DID THE ELEMENTAL ANALYSIS  AND ROCKWELL DID  THE
               SULFATEi NITRATE t TOTAL CARBON.  PROBE MT  IS  1.36.

-------
FPEIS TEST SERIES NO! 00236
           STREAM NO:  01
                                                TEST ID NO:
                                               SAMPLE NO!  02
                                                                                                      SERIES FORM 7
PAGE       10
DATE 06/21/83
  EFFLUENT STREAM DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS-
          COMPONENT
          NO  NAME
                            DESCRIPTION
                                                                                  VALUE
           1  PROBE+10 CYC
           2  3 UH CYCLONE
           3  1 UH CYCLONE
           <«  FILTER
                            STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE:
                            STAGE HEIGHT:
                            COMPONENT (ALIQUOTI MASS/VOLUME:
                            CHEMICAL ANALYSIS LABORATORY NAME:
                            STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE:
                            STAGE WEIGHT:
                            STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE:
                            STAGE WEIGHT:
                            STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE:
                            STAGE WEIGHT:
                                                                9,20      UH
                                                               2.25E»02 MG
                                                               154.000  MS
                                                              ARMAME
                                                                3,80     UM
                                                               5.50E*QO MG
                                                                1.30     UM
                                                               3.60E*00 MG
                                                                 .01     UH
                                                               2.60E*00 MG
STAGE a
D501 MICRONS)
STAGE WEIGHTSCHILLIGRAMSJ
MICROGRAMS/ONCM/STAGE
NUHBER/DNCM/STAGE
CUM. XHASS<050
CUM. MICROGBAMS/ACM<050
CUM. MICROG1AMS/DNCM
ON- LOG0/( NUMBER/ONUS)
COMMENTS ON THE EFFLUENT CHAF
COMPONENT
NO. NAME


Z
8
1

Z
it
1
1
I
j*l*Tr
\ Mw 1 C

1
9.20
.25E+02
.2SE+03
.23E+35
4.9%
.5BE*02
.29E»02
.92E+01
.291+0%
-50E+35
BTGTf f«5

REMARKS


5
2
7

1
2
5
5
2



Z
3.80
.50E+00
.02E»02
.79E+34
2.62
.37E+OZ
.27E+02
.91E»00
.25E»02
.31E+35





3
1
1

5
9
2
2
2



3
1.30
.60E+00
.32E*02
.32E+36
1.10
.73E+01
.54E+01
.22E»00
.83E«02
.66E+36



4
.01
2.60E»00
9.54E*01
5.31E*36

O.OOEtOO
O.OOE»00
1.14E-01
4.51E*01
1.16E+36



PROBE+10 CYC
                                   ARMAMENT LAB DID THE ELEMENTAL ANALYSIS AND ROCKWELL DID THE
                                   SULFATE, NITRATE ( TOTAL CARBON.  PROBE WT IS 70.5 MG.

-------
         Air
&EPA
Potash
                 Test Report
        Kerr Me Gee
        Trona, California

-------
                                   SET 2653-01-0679

                                    FINAL  REPORT
                             Particulate Emissions From A
                        Potassium Chloride Drier Controlled  By
                      Two Cyclones And  A Venturi Scrubber, And A

                   Potassium Sulfate Drier Controlled  By A Baghouse
                              EPA Contract No.  68-02-2813
                                Work  Assignment No.  31

                                EMB Report No.  79-POT-4
                                     Prepared  for:


                            Environmental  Protection  Agency
                             Emissions  Measurement  Branch  *'
                                  ESED  Mail  Drop #13
                          Research Triangle  Park, N.C.  27711
                                      May 1,  1979
                                          by

                         SCOTT ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY,  INC.
                                 2600 Cajon  Boulevard
                         • San  Bernardino,  California  92411
i iAn "]
j{SJ! ScotiEnvironmentallechndb^ylnc

-------
       12653-01-0679
           2-3
                                     TABLE  2.3

                       PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION ANALYSIS
      Date:   4-18-79
      Location:  Kerr-McGee  Plant
      Sampling Location:  Cyclone  Inlet,  Run No,
      Traverse Point No. Sampled: 25
                     bar
                    Stack Temp. (°F)	
                    Sample Time (Min)	-.
                    Sample Volume (cf)	
                    Moisture (% H20)	
                    Meter Temp (°F)		
                    Flow Setting, £H (in H20)
                    Nozzle Diameter (Inches).
28.14

549
3
1.79
11.9
91
0.85
0.250
     Sample Flow Rate (at stack conditions):  0.72 cfm
Plate
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Back-up
Filter
Net Wt.
(mg)
1171. 452
1.10
4.60
6.15
3.90
4.90
4.25
0.00
0.00
%
97.91
0.09
0.38
0.51
0.32
0.40
0.35
0.00
0.00
Cumulative
%
100.00
2.08
1.98
1.60
1.09
0.76
0.35
0.00
0.00
                                                             ECD1
                                                          (Microns)

                                                           14.46 and larger
                                                            8.96
                                                            5.89
                                                            4.35
                                                            2.69

                                                            1.38
                                                            0.86
                                                            0.56


                                                          <0.56
     TOTAL   1196.35
     1
      ECD = Effective tutoff Diameter of preceding plate.
     2
     Weight includes participate collected on Plate No. 0 and in nozzle, cyclone
     and head of sampler upstream of the collection plates.
Q*n
it wI Score Environmental
>\/ Irvr

-------
  12653-01-0679
2-4
                                TABLE 2.4

                  PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION ANALYSIS
Date:  4-19-79  Time:  1631
Location:   Kerr-McGee Plant
Sampling Location:  Cyclone Inlet, Run No,
Traverse Point No.  Sampled:  30
          Pbar  (in Hg)	
          Stack Temp.  (°F)	,
          Sample Time  (Min)	
          Sample Volume  (cf)	,
          Moisture (%  pO)	...,
          Meter Temp ( F)	
          Flow Setting,  AH  (in H20),
          Nozzle Diameter  (Inches).
28.25

494
6
4.59
18.0
91
1.52
0.250
Sample Flow Rate (at stack conditions):   1.00 cfm
Plate
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Back-up
Filter
Net Wt.
(ing)
3219. 22
33.10
49.65
40.45
27.25
9.95
2.80
2.70
1.65
,
95.05
0.97
1.46
1.19
0.80
0.29
0.08
0.07
0.04
Cumulative
100.00
4.94
3.96
2.50
1.30
0.50
0.21
0.12
0.04
                                                        ECD1
                                                     (Microns)
                                                      12.05 and larger

                                                       7.53
                                                       5.02
                                                       3.45
                                                       2.26

                                                       1.13
                                                       0.68
                                                       0.45


                                                     <0.45
TOTAL  3386.75
1
 ECO = Effective Cutoff Diameter of preceding plate.

"Weight includes participate collected on Plate No. 0 and in nozzle, cyclone
 and head of sampler upstream of the collection plates.
   ort Environ mental Technology tnr

-------
  #2653-01-0679
2-5
                                TABLE  2-5

                  PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION ANALYSIS
Date:  4-19-79    Time:  2125
Location:   Kerr-McGee Plant
Sampling Location: Cyclone Inlet, Run No,
Traverse Point  No.  Sampled:  30
           bar
          Stack Temp.  (F)	
          Sample Time  (Min)	
          Sample Volume  (cf)	
          Moisture  (%  tbO)	
          Meter Temp ( F)	
          Flow Setting,  AH  (in H20)
          Nozzle Diameter  (Inches),
28.25
494
6
4.45
18.0
91
1.52
0.250
Sample Flow Rate (at stack conditions):    0.97 cfm
Plate
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Back-up
Filter
Net Wt.
(nig)
3539. 42
21.80
73.60
71.35
47.90
15.05
2.15
3.60
1.70
%
93.72
0.57
1.94
1.88
1.26
0.39
0.05
0.09
0.04
Cumulative
100.00
6.27
5.70
3.75
1.86
0.59
0.19
0.14
0.04
                                                        ECD1
                                                     (Microns)
                                                      12.05 and larger

                                                       7.66

                                                       5.08

                                                       3.51
                                                       2.26

                                                       1.15
                                                       0.68
                                                       0.46


                                                     * 0.46
TOTAL    3776.55
1
 ECD = Effective Cutoff Diameter of preceding plate.

"Weight includes participate collected on Plate No. 0 and in nozzle, cyclone
 and head of sampler upstream of the collection plates.

-------
  #2653-01-0679
2-6
                                TABLE  2.6
                  PARTICLE SIZE  DISTRIBUTION ANALYSIS
Date:   4-19-79      Time:  1951
Location:  Kerr-McGee  Plant
Sampling Location:  Scrubber Outlet
Traverse Point  No.  Sampled:  9
         Pbar  (in Hg)	    28.35
         Stack Temp.  (°F)
141
         Sample Time  (Min)	    60
         Sample Volume  (cf)	    52.92
         Moisture  (X  IfcO)	    14-4
         Meter Temp (°F)	    101
         Flow Setting,  AH  (in H20)	    2-18
         Nozzle Diameter  (Inches)	    0.250
Sample Flow Rate (at stack conditions):   1-01 cfm
Plate Net Wt.
No. (mg) %
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 i
Back-up
Filter
21. 902
0.25
0.25
1.00
1.80
10.15
13.50
15.70
37.10
21.54
0.24
0.24
* 0.98
1.77
9.98
13.28
15.44
36.49
Cumulative
%
100.00
78.45
78.20
77.96
76.97
75.20
65.22
51.94.
36.49
                                                        ECD1
                                                     (Microns)
                                                      10.02 and larger
                                                       6.39
                                                       4.20
                                                       2.90

                                                       1.86
                                                       0.94
                                                       0.56
                                                       0.38


                                                      <0.38
TOTAL    101.65
1
 ECD = Effective Cutoff Diameter of preceding plate.

'Weight includes particulate collected on Plate No. 0 and in nozzle, cyclone
 and head of sampler upstream of the collection plates.

-------
  #2653-01-0679
                          2-7
                                TABLE 2.7

                  PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION ANALYSIS
Date:   4-19-79     Time:   1745
Location:  Kerr-McGee  Potash Plant
Sampling Location:  Baghouse Outlet
Traverse Point No.  Sampled:  4
'bar *"
Stack Temp. (UF)	
Sample Time (Min)	
Sample Volume (cf)...
Moisture (% HgO)	
Meter Temp ( F)	
Flow Setting, ^H (in
Nozzle Diameter (Inches).
                                                                  28.25

                                                                  233
                                                                  50
                                                                  41.03
                                                                  9.6
                                                                  106
                                                                  1.80
                                                                  0.250
Sample Flow Rate (at stack conditions):   0.91 cfm
Plate Net Vlt.
No. (mg) %
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Back-up
Filter
55.95Z
2.90
3.00
1.30
7.25
19,55
3.95
0.45
0.45
59.01
3.05
3.16
1.37
7.64
20.62
4.16
0.47
0.47
Cumulative
100.00
40.98
37.92
34.75
33.38
25.73
5.11
0.94
0.47
                                                        ECD1
                                                     {Microns)
                                                      11.14 and larger

                                                       7.09
                                                       4.67

                                                       3.23

                                                       2.06
                                                       1.05

                                                       0.63

                                                       0.42


                                                     <.0.42
TOTAL
94.80
1
 ECD = Effective Cutoff Diameter of preceding plate.

"Weight includes particulate collected on Plate No. 0 and in nozzle, cyclone
 and head of sampler upstream of the collection plates.

-------
                      99   98     95   ,  90   /   80    70	60  50  40   30    20
                                                                                10
                                                                                                 I   0.5   0.2  0.1  0.05   ' 0.01
                                                                     PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS-CYCLONE INLET
                                                                     KERR-McGEE CHEMICAL CORP.
                                                                     4-18-79 AND 4-19-79
                                                                It±tt±r±i±ttffillllt.
                                       Cumulative %, Less  Than Stated
                                                Particle Size
                                      LiDiiiiifflinTrrmTnTniiTiTn 11 rrm
0,01    O.fli O.|  O.Z    0.5   1
                                       10
                                                   30
                                                           5Q
                                                                         BO
                                                                                50 _   05
. __ 25.8

-------
10-

8_


a.
    99 99
             99 9 99 8
                         99   98
                                    95     90
                                                 80    70   50   SO  40   30    20
                                                                                   10
                                                                                               2    1   0.5    0.?  O.t 0.05   .- O.i
                                                                                              ^&
e



•

 9_.
Particle Size
Microns
 t —
ii
•FJ
                             I
                               =£=»:
                               .  i  j.

                               """"
                                               r'
                  1ft
                                            iui
                                            SI.!!
                                            TT
                                            i
                       ii
                      iff'
                                               HU
                                               -t4i j

                                               fll!
                       4
                         F
                                                    a-
                                  M:!.
                                  .1
                                                         t
                                                       M
                                  W
                                    -i
                                    1 : t
                                        Ui.
                                         1
                                                                ! 'L
                                                                sirri
                                                                 •.
                                                                i it
                                                                111.

                                                                iii'
                                                                    ilJ.
                                                ^
                                                    > :i
                                                    1
                                                    Hi
iTn

Wt
                                                            ^ffl*
                                                            4:
                                                           TI_
                                                            T.LjJr
                                                                        ipi
                                                                         Tl
                                                                                3
                                                                                                                 III
                                                                                                                 J,
                                                                                                                 it
                                                                                                                      CJl


                                                                                                                      I
                                                                                              i  —

                                                                                             O ~;
                                                                                             Cfi ^


                                                                                             tO •^•-
                                                                                                                     ro
                                                                                                                    • i
                                                                                        FIGURE  2.2


                                                                       PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS-SCRUBBER OUTLET

                                                                       KERR-McGEE  CHEMICAL  CORPORATION

                                                                       4-19-79
                                                               ttttmiLLUiiitffitmj.
                                          Cumulative %t Less  Than Stated

                                                   Particle Size
                                          -irrTn^fTTn.Trm]TTTniJjTi'!Tifrrrrj.iii!iii!i!

-------
EPA
          Wrtfeb 3«tes
          Environmental Protection
          Agency
            Office of Air Quality
            Planning and Standards
            Research Triangle Park NC 27711
EMB Report 79-POT-5
April 1979
          Air
Potash
          Emission Test Report
          Kerr Me Gee
          Trona,  California

-------
                               SET  2674-01-0979

                                 FINAL REPORT
                         Particulate  Emissions  From A
                    Potassium Chloride  Drier Controlled  By
                  Two  Cyclones  And  A  Venturi  Scrubber, And A
               Potassium  Sulfate  Drier  Controlled  By A Baghouse
                          EPA  Contract  No.  68-02-2813
                           Work  Assignment No.  35
                            EMB Report No.  79-POT-5
                                Prepared  For:

                       Environmental  Protection  Agency
                        Emissions  Measurement  Branch
                             ESED  Mail  Drop  #13
                     Research Triangle  Park, N.C.  27711
                               September 4»  1979

                                      by

                     SCOTT  ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY,  INC,
                             2600  Cajon  Boulevard
                      San Bernardino,  California 92411
Scott Environmental Technology Inc.

-------
 #2674-01-0979
          2-3
                                 TABLE 2.4

                       PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION ANALYSIS
Date:   7-10-79
Time:   1922
Sampling Location:   Cyclone  Inlet
Traverse Point  No.  Sampled:  15
Run No.: 1
                  Pbar(in. Hg):  28.15
                  Stack Temp. (°F): 487
                  Sample Time (Min):  5
                  Sample Volume (cf):3.57
                  Moisture (% H?0): 12.0
                  Meter Temperature (  F):   160
                  Flow Setting, AH (in.  H»0): 1.24
                  Nozzle Diameter (In.):  0.250
Sample Flow Rate (at stack conditions)  -   0.84 cfm
Plate
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Net Wt.
(mg)
7895. 72
12.45
17.75
15.80
10,65
7.15
5.80
5.25
                                     Cumulative
Back-up
Filter   2.05
99.03
0.15
0.22
0.19
0.13
0.08
0.07
0.06
100.0
0.96
0.80
Q.58
0.38
0.25
0.16
0.09
0.02
0.02
    ECD1
(Micrometers)
    13.26 and  larger

     8.43
     5.56

     3.84

     2.45

     1.25

     0.75

     0.50


    <0.50
Total    7972.6
1
 ECO - Effective Cutoff Diameter of preceding plate.

'Weight includes particulate collected on Plate No.  0 and in nozzle and
 head of sampler upstream of the collection plates.

-------
 #2674-01-0979
                          2-4
                                 TABLE   2.5

                       PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION ANALYSIS
Date:   7-11-79
Time:     1255
Sampling Location:   Cyclone  Inlet
Traverse Point No.  Sampled:   15
Run No.:  2
                                   Pbar(in.  Hg):  28.22
                                   Stack Temp.  (°F): 466
                                   Sample Time  (Win): 5
                                   Sample Volume  (cf):  3.88
                                   Moisture  (%  H?0):   J1.6
                                   Meter Temperature  (  F):  147
                                   Flow Setting,  AH (in.  O):  1-40
                                   Nozzle Diameter  (In.):   0.250
Sample Flow Rate (at stack conditions)  -    0.91 cfm
Plate
'No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Net Wt.
(mg)
5291. 22
6.35
15.15
10.20
7.25
3.25
1.Z5
0.00
%
99.17
0.11
0.28
0.19
0.13
0.06
0.02
0.00
Back-up
Filter   0.6D
                0.01
Cumulative
     %

  100.0

  0.82
  0.70

  0.42

  0.23
  0.09

  0.03

  0.01


  0.01
    ECD1
(Micrometers)

   12.61 and larger

   8.03

   5.28

   3.65

   2.33

   1.19

   0.71

   0.48


   <0.48
Total
5335.25
1
 ECD - Effective Cutoff Diameter of preceding plate.

"Weight includes participate collected on Plate No.  0 and in nozzle and
 head of sampler upstream of the collection plates.

-------
 #2674-01-0979
2-5
                                  TABLE  2.6
                       PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION ANALYSIS
Date:  7-11-79
Time:   1937
Sampling Location:   Cyclone Inlet
Traverse Point No.  Sampled:  15
Run No.:   3
        Pbar(in- Hg):  28.11
        Stack Temp.  (°F):  431
        Sample Time  (Min):  5
        Sample Volume (cf): 3.92
        Moisture (55 H^O):   16.0
        Meter Temperature ( F):  150
        Flow Setting, AH (in. H20):  1.62
        Nozzle Diameter (In.):   0.250
Sample Flow Rate (at stack conditions) -    0.96
Plate
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Back-up
Filter
Net Wt.
(ing)
8160. 42
3.75
19.65
13.80
9.85
6.90
9.85
2.35
0.85
                       99.18
                        0.04
                        0.23
                        0.16
                        0.11
                        0.08
                        0.11
                        0.02

                        0.01
  Cumulative
       %
    100.0
    0.81
    0.76
    0.52
    0.36
    0.24
    0.15
    0.03

    0.01
    ECD1
(Micrometers)
   12.02 and  larger
    7.66
    5.04
    3.49
    2.23
    1.13
    0.68
    0.45

   <0.45
Total    8227.4
1
 ECD - Effective Cutoff Diameter of preceding plate.
 Weight includes particulate collected on Plate No. 0 and in nozzle and
 head of sampler upstream of the collection plates.

-------
 #2674-01-0979
           2-6
                                  TABLE   2.7

                       PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION ANALYSIS
Date:  7-12-79
Time:  1206
Sampling Location:   Cyclone Inlet
Traverse Point No.  Sampled:   15
Run No.:  4
                   Pbar(1n. Hg):   28.17

                   Stack Temp. (°F):  454
                   Sample Time (Min):  5
                   Sample Volume (cf): 4.19
                   Moisture (% H?0):   15.2
                   Meter Temperature ( F):  134
                   Row Setting, AH (in.  O): 1.70
                   Nozzle Diameter (In.):  L   0.250
Sample Flow Rate (at stack conditions) -   1.03
Plate
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Net Wt.
(rag)
6345. 92
7.85
18.35
15.80
8.75
8.65
9.75
4.50
%
98.85
0.12
0.28
0.24
0.13
0.13
0.15
0.07
Back-up
Filter   0.15
0.00
Cumulative
     %

  100.0

  1.14

  1.02
  0.74

  0.49
  0.35

  0.22

  0.07


  0.00
     ECD1
(Micrometers)

   11.75 and larger

    7.50

    4.93

    3.41

    2.18

    1.11

    0.66

    0.44


   <0.44
Total   6419.7
1
 ECD - Effective Cutoff Diameter of preceding plate.

"Weight includes particulate collected on Plate No. 0 and in nozzle and
 head of sampler upstream of the collection plates.

-------
JQ 95.99 99.9 39.8 99 98 95
9
8 '
7 	 	
R
5 .
4


J
9
7
6 	
5--
\
4
a
2
1
Particle Size, Hicrometers —

—


_____
_T^-
_,,__.,





_.-..




f1
i
"J Xi
H:/ I
'$1

TTJf-/-
-4^

--..
~=r

— ,


—







-_

.


-







j
i
j
--)-
-
f
1






; E .
'-
._
_l_

-
—
I.
- .'-(—'
;r

—

,/

/I "
/
1

V
-



i -.J/
Ii 'I/

1! f
| ! /
r , / ~
Hi/

-
|J
1
i
j z
ij -
r
J T"1

i 1
I-J

1
i




-

-

-


i t _..
-



-
V"


-_
__



i


•'• f
™-*~
/-
—

^
1
f--


....


f.
i




-


-1

-
EJ£|..



-
.-
•if
1


—i-
—


—






-
-:







-
-
-


-


— — y^-f-
; '-ft /
jl
•/ill
//ii
111
44-L
'i!

-_[_;(•
- - "- <:



.iti
S. i •
f" •1,1
]:
~fi~
	 L- .
•t!l-
i
i ,

-


-• •• •
jr.-;: I-v. _


i i »'

Tr

!?
: 	 —


• — —

. —
. —





) i' --•..
0
A


—

...
—




•~
-







...
_

—


_-•
(• • -Irlj-^rr/.-
• --E-'K-
£__ Zp-fc
Ht"^^
ih i
-
j _- -,.-
III -

-i • -p
z

I f
v~ Cur
Pa

~=\
^
,-
—
nu
rt
-
—
la
1C
n
so
-•J-r'p j-
: ' 	 S 	 i,j.
.Vi."
-i
•H-
Run
Run
T.np:





-
....

-


-=



-

_
.:*.-
-:».".
-. :;
..i..
i
_
_

;
:
N
N






'i
- i-
.J_r_j.

.

-


t
1
1
_1_»-
! i t
" ! 1
•* l
rjT|~f

_~
._
H
i\
B
1
0.01 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 5
-
-
-;.
- •
it;.
1 _______
0. ]
0. t
f
i

I

- i
i
f '
— — -
i i
1 i
: i ;
L
>
f
! T
1
i
t



-
! f

1 i
Ii
F:.

J
—
jj
|
^e % Less
Size
IT Tin in

70 60 50 40 30 20 ID

'I "

—
i
i

i
— i— *. ^~
* i. "
"1: '
•:•!::
-i_bc.

j_-r •
S

-




"


f J
1
j ,|
""'„
i
i
j. •
1 -i - t
f" "}-r
a-j^.j.
{- --T-
i 1 !
Than
']
10 20


^t;t
..I, i: - .!
"i -:'l

! I
• !
i j
ij 	 _i
T .1 :
•W ':-"-\
I i't'

1 i ! i ! '
i, j - J
i L
ll
. if.
.. .
i j.
; " !

•
!> ' '• •
— • - — - •
i


I '
1 .-.
•} . ••)••• . -
tii . ...
.jrrjd. ..a-..
;r; IT f :ri '
' r i
till 1 1 i j
Stated
•;!; ,::J_i: vrPi: i,.
'..'-. - Tf: T. :.-f i'
J!l: i
; ! 1 . ! i

i :• j " i
: i ! ; • i
_.y- **™_.™p .-. ... £7f™~ ~*
l . |T| . J

,i n't
t-l I-f -1 I-*-!-
tl .1 1]:::
.1 ., ,.,].! „
,lT;.-i
^._L-:x:.i
TttTJTl.u. i!
1 ..!.., l
. . .;|
•It! :.!--!.:: i
: ': i i' !'1 : ;
:.! :. i : • • • ; t

""" CYCLONE
KERR

La-
July
|j.|--..iSTJr|!J
h. • -i±r Jitl; L:
j' , xi J. ' L. n
... j-jLp-KH-,,.;
I -i I- U
"t:: JICTLL::: •
l r l
-.l-lILplU


n i
i_! TlITT
,. ; ' =r
1 1.
"F ™ "r.t.""
*
j j
j. !
1"*"
. 	
i " '.t.'
1- a
H--
t * .
i
r ; ! • :
! i- !
.Ii
<
;

£


* .
rrl


5
_ ,
"

~
-
: "i.
~


_
"


^.


.-.
iM-.j=l:?
vi£
r *



~
-
_
1.
.
:



I
_
..
-
~


-_
1
.





2
H;~-
JEfc
- :.. .
•_: • :•
" '.. _.:;
r. ::.vl?;-r

r., .in .nil
T
—
_..7'

ri4 i
1 I

f

-4—

-
—

—


—
—

—






—
—

—

', - ' J2 r tn. • ~- L __ i,_t; •:
* "LtJTt.r
£K^H^'
1 C..
.: ' \: '
_._._
I.Llri

j.
:


~* I™



{
-T


j.
1,
.*
i
fi
i_

-
-
j* "£ '
j; : ':.
IH"
ft;
\

j ;
I
!
H;-i
r
JZ
„
—

0.2 O.I 0.05 0,01

fr
_H "
.• .-:•-•.
L _.j...

* *
t! i^i_^
-!
i
r"
r
!
: i
:1-
T
!
+
1



;•;::

m
. i _

-

-
:




~~,
—
E[£


1 —
i.
_
-


-



—


—

'-:i.--H:
.-.—•;:._•.

•— -t 	

il
'"T"
•::t.~-
.jHr
,,

:l_z
" [ — |

-E: t
:_~ JL

„!__. j
—

	 I

—

'. i, _
:ii.i
FIGURE 2.1
INLET-PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS
HIGH PRESSURE DROP
McGEE CHEMICAL CORPORATION
TRONA, CALIFORNIA
10, 1978 and July 11, 1979
! .fl;
*. j i t.
U- 3 'J™L-
r-T'Jl-
v ' *.i:L
.. ..|
"'."
(.}.
	 i L

•\\
xjij-^
-j-i-H-
1:
t
t
-
30 40 SO 60 70 80 90

i_
q
-


b
i
>-


J

—




-


!

-
1 : ; : ;
1

Lj_i —
j


_


95












m
4
.i..
::tt
..t
[•
Ui™
.L
1

1.
98

-
j,i ... .
j . _
.L i—
.fcr.,L-
•it

•
f
r

..-_! 	
—
_
-J
_
	
—
) 1
I
"

-


d
_

:
99
	






— H"'
-i — :f
4- j!
	 i 	 „.. i.;."
I :l.
_______ |_j
i1 1
..... ii





-±i^



; • '"- ~"
, . _. 	
; ..; znz
. • '.:•!-.:}'—

:^SEE:
1 1
i
i. . ..I........ 	

' 1 ' 1
1 1
j
	 ! ._
1 	 	 1

.. 	 _


".". zr :^ —
! ;,. :r 	 :;..::: .
" 'ifl^.
-^— "— —

•• •;'-'"5:
^l=:
.:b^|EE|
' "iii,"^ —
.-4ii=j=:.
j
.xtpi:





'
10
9
3
7
6
S
4
3
2
I
9
B
7
S
5
4
3
2
1
99.8 99.3 59.99

-------
99.99
                39.9  99.8
                                      99     98
                                                         95
                                                                   90
                                                                                                                                                                       1     O.S      0,2   O.I  0.05      0.01

-------
 12674-01-0979
           2-9
                                   TABLE  2,8

                       PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION ANALYSIS
Date: 7-11-79
Time;  1510 to 1610
Sampling Location: Scrubber Outlet
Traverse Point No. Sampled: 23
Run No.:   l
 High Pressure Drop
                   Pbar(in.  Hg):   28.11

                   Stack Temp.  (°F):  139
                   Sample Time  (Min): 60
                   Sample Volume  (cf):  28.49
                   Moisture  (%  HO):   16.8
                   Meter Temperature  (  F): 145
                   How Setting,  aH (in.  H?0):  0.56
                   Nozzle Diameter (In.):     0.1875
Sample Flow Rate (at stack conditions) -   0.55 cfm
Plate
No.
1
2
3
4
5
•-6
7
8
Net Wt.
(mg)
23.20
0.05
0.30
0.25
0.35
0.20
0.05
0.00
                                     Cumulative
Back-up
Filter  0.70
92.42
0.19
1.19
0.99
1.39
0.79
0.19
0.00
100.00
7.57
7.37
6.17
5.17
3.78
2.98
2.78
2.78
2.78
   ECD1
(Microns)

  13.70 and  larger

   8.64
   5.72
   3.96

   2.52

   1.30   .
   0.79

   0.53


  <0.53
Total  25.10
1
 ECD - Effective Cutoff Diameter of preceding plate.

"Weight includes particulate collected on Plate No. 0 and in nozzle and
 head of sampler upstream of the collection plates.

-------
 ^2674-01-0979
2-10
                                 TABLE   2.9

                       PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION ANALYSIS
Date:  7-12-79
Time:  1245 to 1345
Sampling Location:   Scrubber Outlet
Inverse Point No.  Sampled:   23
Run No.:    2
    Low Pressure Drop
                        28.17

        Stack Temp. (°F):  141
        Sample Time (Min):  60
        Sample Volume (cf): 10.88   ,
        Moisture (% H?0):   18.4
        Meter Temperature  ( F):   148
        Flow Setting, M (in.  H?0):  1.10
        Nozzle Diameter (In.):    0.1875
Sample Flow Rate (at stack conditions)  -   0.80 cfm
Plate
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6

7
8
Back-up
Filter
Net Wt.
(mg)
18. 202
0.00
0.40
0.35
1.15
6.90
i
21.15
24.25

9.80
                       22.14

                        0.00

                        0.48

                        0.42

                        1.39

                        8.39

                       25.72

                       29.50


                       11.92
  Cumulative


    100.0

    77.85

    77.85

    77.37

    76.94

    75.54

    67.15

    41.42


    11.92
   ECD1
|Microns)

  11.31 and  larger

   7.18

   4.74

  ' 3.27

   2.09

   1.07

   0.64

   0.43


  <0.45
Total  82.20
1
 ECD - Effective Cutoff Diameter of preceding plate.

'Weight includes particulate collected on Plate No.  0 and in nozzle and
 head of sampler upstream of the collection plates.

-------
   99.33
               59.8
                                               KU    /J
                                                               "TO—'  30 	TO
                                                                               ,0
                                                                     raiF
                                                                 rnmjK
,9

,8


,7-


.6..



,3-.
,3-.
,2-

          lili
    ii
»
n
rt
H-
O
        H-
        N
        ro
n
ft
o
S
ro
rt
fD
H
           IJ
                  ::L-
             j.l!
             mi
                     44

                  1  1
                 fill

                           -!:.

11
I!
                                   tFf
                                          III
                                         j
                                  M
                                 • i • < . i
                                 TTfitr
                                 Li 1111
                                           TOP
                                           1.
                                                  .ITi.
                                             1  !
                                             1TM

                                                      J.l.


                                                           I
                                                          .it.
                                                 iUl
                                                         --
                                                      ll
                                                             f
                                                             .LLL.

                                                        A
                                                             " iiL
                                                             i! at.
                                                              i : t
                                                                      j#

                                                                             •— p

                                                                        frf O Run No. 1    drr
                                                                        ! •« 1 - V^'              • f ••'
                                                  Hi Press. Dror
                                           ;U             -     I
                                               ^ Run NQ^ 2

                                           M      Lo Press. Drop
                                                                                . -. -.t.
                                                                                 'J~IZ
                                                                                 Lr;
                                                                                 i
                                                                           ±
                                                                              ^
                                                                              EEE
                                                                                     T.



                                                                                     H-
                                                              m
                                                                                                         iil'..
                                                                                                        -R?
                                                                                                                   o

                                                                          FIGURE  2.3

                                                              SCRUBBER OUTLET-PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS


                                                                   KERR McGEE CHEMICAL CORPORATION
                                                                   IRONA, CALIF.
                                                                                                         "T~
                                                                                                                3	[	
                                                                                                        itt
                                                                 .dttt.i
                                        Cumulative %, Less Than Stated

                                                 Particle Size
                                                TnTrrmmTmTnimin
                                                                       ttttfc
                                                                         i i i i
                                                                        iEE
                                                                                       7-11-79 and  7-12-79-+
                                                                                                       rdiz
                                                                                             J
                                                                                         ii
                                                                                         it
                                                                                            :rn
                                                                                                    nit
                                                                                                    in.
                                                                                                    ': 1
                                                                      !Uf
                                                                      ILIJJ
                                                                                                                 i  i
   0.01    O.Oi 01 02   0.5   1
                                        10
                                               20
                                                    30   40   50   GO   70    80
                                                                               90
                                                                                     ss
                                                                                           IS   53
                                                                                                       D3.8 99.9
                                                                                                                   93,93

-------
                                             ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT DATA SYSTEMS                                  PAGE         1
                                                       FPEIS SERIES REPORT                         SERIES  FORM 1     DATE  06/20/83


              ES NO:     27  DESCRIBES SAMPLING AT SITE FROM          TO          BY U.S.  EPA

                        SPONSOR ORGANIZATION:   u.s.  EPA
                        COflTRACT NUII3ER:                            PURPOSE OF  TEST: SOURCE  CHARACTERIZATION STUDY
                        TASK/DIRECTIVE NUMBER:  000


 SOURCE DESCRIPTION	

                  SOURCE CATEGORY:          NATURAL PRODUCTS             SOURCE NAME:
                  SOURCE TYPE:              AGRICULTURAL                 SITE NAME:
                  PRODUCT/DEVICE:          COTTON                       ADDRESS:
                  PROCESS TYPE:            GINNING                                                        ,CA      00000   USA
                  DESIGN PROCESS RATE:        136   M6G/D
                  FEED MATERIAL CATEGORY!   AGRI FEED
                  PRIMARY CONTROL DEVICE:                                SIC CODE:         724


 EADS WASTE STREAH DATA BASES	

                  HASTE STREAM DATA FROM OTHER MEDIA WHICH MERE COLLECTED CONCURRENTLY WITH THIS TEST  SERIES
                  ARE AS FOLLOWSITEST SERIES NUI1BER-TSH):
                       LEDS TSN:          GEDS TSN:          SODS TSH'-

REFERENCE REPORT	

                  TITLE
                  AUTHOR
                  SPONSOR REPORT NUMBER     NTIS NUMBER           PUBLICATION  DATE

                  CONCENTRATION AND SIZE OF TRACE METAL EMISSIONS FROM A POWER
                  PLANT, A STEEL PLANT, AND A COTTON GIN.
                  LEE.R.E..ET.AL.
                  ENV.SCI. < TECH                             JULY 1975

TEST SERIES COMMENTS	

-------
FPEIS TEST SERIES NO: OOOE7    STREAM HO'- 01    TEST ID NO:
                                       SAMPLE »o: 01
                                                                                                      SERIES FORM 7
PAGE        7
DATE 06/20/83
  EFFLUENT STREAM DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS-
          COMPONENT
          NO  NAME
DESCRIPTION
                                                      VALUE
           1  STAGE 1
           2  STAGE Z
           3  STAGE 3
           <»  STAGE
           5  STAGE 5
           6  FILTER
                            STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE:
                                        STAGE MASS:
                            STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE:
                                        STAGE MASS:
                            STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE:
                                        STAGE MASS:
                            STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE:
                                        STAGE MASS:
                            STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE:
                                        STAGE MASS:
                            STASE/FILTER CUT SIZE:
                                        STAGE MASS:
                                                       30.00     UM
                                                       1.98E»03 UG/DMM3
                                                       20.00     UN
                                                       9.8<*E*02 UG/DNM3
                                                       10.00     UM
                                                       5.25E*03 UG/DHM3
                                                        S.OO     UM
                                                       4.76E+03 UG/DNM3
                                                        1,00     UM
                                                       2.62E*03 UG/DNM3
                                                         .50     UM
                                                       8.20E*OZ UG/ONM3
PARTICLE SIZE TABLE

  STAGE f

  D50(MICRONS I
  MICROG!UMS/DNCH/STAGE
  NUtTBER/DNCM/STAGE
  CUM. XMASS
-------
FPEI5 TEST SERIES NO: 00027
   STREAM NO: 01
TEST ID NO:
SAMPLE NO: 02
                                                                                                      SERIES FORM 7
                                                                       PAGE       10
                                                                       DATE 06/20/83
  EFFLUENT STREAM DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS-
          COMPONENT
          HO  NAME
DESCRIPTION
                                                                                  VALUE
           1  STAGE 1
           2  STAGE I
              STAGE 3
              STAGE 
-------
                                              PAPER NO._
       COLLECTING PARTICLES FROM GIN LINT CLEANER AIR  EXHAUSTS
                                     by
             S,  E.  Hughs,  M. N. Gillum, and  D.  M. Armijo
Research Leader,  Agricultural Engineer, and  Engineering Technician,
                               res pecCively
              For  presentation at  the 1981 Winter Meeting
              AMERICAN SOCIETY OF  AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERS
                               Palmer  House
                            Chicago,  Illinois
                           December  15-18, 1981

        SUMMARY:
        An evaluation was made of  the effectiveness  of cyclone
         collectors as primary, and  a cyclone  wet scrubber as  a
         secondary particulate collector on  a  lint cleaner ex-
         haust.   The cyclone collectors captured an average of
         90,8%  by weight  of the particles  as a primary cleaner.
         The scrubber removed an average of  73.57. by  weight as
        .a secondary ,cl,ea/iexx  _.(_ „,,„, ^...^  ._.._..,.„„,._.„,.,*.   ,*,..<

        American Society of Agricultural Engineers
                          :&.•"  >
         Papers presented boforo ASAE meetings are considered !o ba the propany of the Socioty.
         In general, Iho Socioiy rosorvoa ihu right of lifsl publicaiion of such papers, in complete
         form. Howovof, it has no objeciion to publication, in condanscd form, wijh credit to the
         Society and the author. Permission to publish a paper in full may be requested Imm ASAE,
         P.O. Box 410, Si, Joseph, Michigan 49085.
         The Society is no\ icsporuubto tor statements or opinions advanced in papers or discussions
         81 its meetings. Papers have noi bean subjected !o the review process by ASAi editorial
         committees; therefore, ere not w bo considered «s relofeed.

-------
                   COLLECTING  PARTICLES  FROM  GIN LINT





                          CLEANER  AIR  EXHAUSTS








                                   by





                S.  E. Hughs, M. N. Gillum, and  B. M Armijo








                              Introduction





     The encroachment of  cities into  once rural areas coupled with the





 increased public concern  about air pollution is putting pressure on the





 ginning industry to reduce particulate  emissions.  Gins have used or are





 using sma11-Jiameter cyclones (Harrell  and Moore, 1962), skimmers





 (Kirk et al,  1976), and unifilter collectors (McCaskill and Wesley, 1976)





 on many of their high-pressure exhausts and unifilter collectors, screen





 cayes (Harrell  and Moore, 1962),  and  inline air filters (Alberson and





 Baker, 1964) on their low-pressure exhausts to reduce pnrCiculate emissions





 However, very low  permissible emission  levels and increased public pressure





 is forcing the  ginning industry to search for still better methods of





 particulate emission control.





     The staff at  the Southwestern Cotton Ginning Research Laboratory has





 been conducting research concentrating on finding new ways of applying





 current  technology to the gin particulate emission problem.  An earlier





 paper (Gillura ec. al, 1980) gave  a preliminary report of the effectiveness





 of cyclone  collectors as primary and a wet scrubber as a secondary particu-





 late collector on a lint-cleaner exhaust.  Gillum et al gave data of





Environmental Protection Agency  (EPA)  source emission tests of cotton gins

-------
                                                                       S.  E.  Hughs   2

           in  Arizona  and  California  (see Table  1).   The  seed-cotton  system or  the

           lint  system exhaust  alone  exceeded  allowable emissions  in  the majority of

           the cases,  shown  in  Table  1.  In all  cases,  the  sum of  the emissions  of  the

           two systems  exceeded allowable levels by  factors anywhere  from  1.26  to

           3,38.

               Gillum  et  al, showed  preliminary results  that indicated that  unabated

           lint-cleaner exhaust emissions could be reduced by as much as 977,, and

           that controlled lint exhaust emissions could be further reduced  by at least

           50%.  This paper gives a description of the emission control system tested

           by Gillum et al and the final test results.

                          , Table 1.--Cotton gin source test results
State

Arizona 	
Arizona 	
California--
California--
California--
Seed cotton
process
rate**

kR/h(Lb/h)
2318(5100)
5864(12900)
8864(19500)
14045(30900)
15682(34500)
Lint process
rate
Bales/
hr
3.4
8.6
13.0
20.6
23.0
Total
emissions

kR/h(lb/h).
3.4(7.5)
13.4(29.5)
23.7(52.2)
15.6(34.3)
18.0(39.6)
Seed
cotton
system
emissions

kR/h(lb/h)
1.9(4.i)c
7. 3(16. l)c
ll.9(26.2)c
10.0(22,0)u+c
9.5(20.9)*u+c
Lint
system
emissions

kg/hUb/h)
1.5(3.4)1
6.1(13.5)1
11.8(26,0)1
5.6(12.4)*u+c
8,5(18.8)u+e
Total
a llowahle
emissions***

kg/h(lb/h)
2.7(6.0)
5.1(11.2)
7.0(15.4)
9.3(20.4)
9.9(21,8)
     *Not measured,  a  calculated estimate,  c *» cyclones,  1 = lint cages,  u * unffilter.
Some of the low-pressure  exhausts raay have  not been going into the unifilter.
    **Using 682 kg(1500 Ib)  of seed cotton  per bale of cotton lint.
           process  weight table for appropriate state, at time of test.

-------
                                                             S.  E.  Hughs   3





                             Test  Installation





      Figure  1  shows  a  schematic of  Che  long-cone  cyclone  and  cyclone wet-





 scrubber  test  installation  at a commercial  gin.   A  set of small-diameter





 (1D3D design)  long-cone cyclone collectors  were installed on  the No. 1





 lint-cleaner air exhaust  to  serve as  primary collectors (see  Fig.  2).  A





 second vaneaxial fan was  installed  prior to the cyclones  to overcome the





 additional back pressure  created  in the lint-cleaner exhaust  line  by the





 addition of the cyclones.





      A cyclone wet scrubber was installed after the long-cone cyclones to





 serve as a secondary particulato collector.  The  scrubber  consisted of n





 sheet metal cylinder 1.14 m  (3.75 ft) in diameter and 4.88 m  (16 ft) tall.





The exhaust air from the  primary long-cone cyclones .was induced tangen-





 tially at the bottom of the scrubber with an average velocity of 384.6 m/min.





 (1262 ft/min.) and flowed out the top of the scrubber.  The average pressure





drop  through the cyclone wet scrubber at the 384.6 m/min  (1262 ft/min.)





inlet air velocity was approximately 10 mm  (0.4 in. of water).  The air





inlet section of the cyclone wet scrubber resembled the inlet section of





a cyclone.  There were two high-volume water-spray nozzles located along





the center line of the cyclone wet scrubber.  These nozzles sprayed down-





ward  against the airflow through the scrubber.   The nozzles were 33 cm





 (13 in.) apart with the lower nozzle 45.7 cm (18  in.)  above the top of the





scrubber air inlet.  The nozzles were rated at 76.8 1/min. (20.3 g.p.m.)





at the operating pressure of 197 kPa  (28.6 p.s.i.).  Spray water collected

-------
                                                             S. E. Hughs  4





 ac  the  bottom of  the  scrubber  and was  drained  by .gravity  to  the  settling





 tank.   From  the settling  tank,  Che water was then recirculated by two  2-hp





 pumps back  through  the  spray nozzles in the cyclone wet scrubber.





     The  test  installation was  constructed so  that dust sampling could be





 done at the  long-cone cyclone  collectors, between the long-cone cyclone





 collectors and the  cyclone wet  scrubber, and after the wet scrubber.  The





 dust-sampling  station at  the long-cone cyclone collectors consisted of a





 "Y-valve" installed at  the bottom of each cyclone collector.  Plastic bags





 were attached  to  the outlets of the valves.  Dust and cotton lint removed





 from the exhaust  air stream were collected in the plastic bags during





 sampling periods.   The bags were removed at the end of each 4-hour test





 run and weighed to determine the total amount of trash caught by the





 cyclone collectors.   Sampling at other points was done using Environmental





 Protection Agency (EPA) Method 5 procedures.   A sampling station for a





Method 5 sampling train was located on the air discharge duct of the long-





cone cyclone collectors.  Another Method 5 sampling station was located on





 the air discharge  of the cyclone wet scrubber.   The two Method 5 sampling





stations were used simultaneously to determine the rate of particulate





emissions  from the long-cone collectors and the cyclone wet scrubber.   Data





from all three sampling points gave a complete  picture of the rate of





emissions  and effectiveness of the devices used to control emissions.





Measurements were  taken during the ginning season and while processing





both machine-picked  and ground-harvested upland cotton.

-------
                                                             S. E.  Hughs   5





                          Results  and  Discuss ion





      The  primary  long-cone  cyclones and  secondary  cyclone wet  scrubber





 equipped  with  a recirculating water system and  settling  tank were  operated





 425  hours while ginning  about 2500 bales.   Tables  2  and  3 give the  partic-





 ulate emission test  results.  Table 2  shows  that the  long-cone cyclones





 collected an average of  0.689 g/s  (5.47  Ib/h) of trash and emitted  an





 average of  .069 g/s  (0.549  Ib/h)  of trash  at an average  ginning rate of





 6.8  bales of lint per hour.  This collection rate  yields an  average





 cyclone collection efficiency of  90.85%.





     Table 3 siiows that  of  the average .069 g/s (0.549 Ibs/h) of particu-





 lates emitted by the cyclones, the cyclone wet  scrubber  captured all but





0.017 g/s (0.135 ib/h) for  an average collection efficiency of 73.53%.      *•





The average combined cyclone and cyclone wet scrubber system efficiency





was 97.58%.   This system collection efficiency did not vary appreciably





through the  ginning season on input material that varied from clean first-





picked to late-season ground-harvested seed cotton.  Total first lint-





cleaner-exhaust loading rates varied during this time from 0.446 g/s





(3.54 Ib/h)  to  1.585 g/s (12.58 Ib/h) .





     Figure  3 gives  the cumulative percentages of particle sizes  determined





by the Coulter  counter from EPA Method 5  particulate samples  taken from the





long-cone-cyclone  and wet-scrubber exhausts.  There are  virtually  no





particles  greater  than 32 microns  exhausted from the cyclones and  95% of

-------
Table 2.--Results of the eleven test runs of the long-cone cyclone on the first lint-cleaner exhaust


1-1
o
*3

No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Avg


one outlet
craturc
^4 P.
u e
>\ 

m/s(ft/tnin)
13.5(2648)
13.2(2592)
13.1(2575)
13.7(2700)
13,5(2662)
13.6(2673)
13.0(2551)
13.1(2570)
12.7(2508)
12.9(2549)
12.6(2487)
13.2(2592)


3
O
U-l
k>
•fj
<

m /s(dscfm)
2.62(5561)
2.64(5598)
2.59(5489)
2.74(5802)
2.65(5607)
2.70(5727)
2.73(5781)
2.75(5824)
2.63(5573)
2.64(5602)
2.58(5473)
2.66(5640)


moisture
olume
p>
v«
1-t r**t
^C *"*

Pet
0.8
0.7
0.8
1.0
1.1
0.9
0.6
0.6
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8


inettc
atlon
^ *M
o s-i
Ul Q
l-l >

Pet
104
106
104
108
107
105
100
103
103
102
102
104


ust
icula te
cntration
a u u
J= U C
X <3 O
w o- u

mg/m
16.48
19.78
29.06
20.05
23.06
19.21
15.98
20.15
23.86
59.41
40.05
26.10


a)
I-.
CO
a
c
c.
•H
O
Bales/
hr
8.5
5.5
5.3
7.5
7.8
7,3
6.5
7.3
8.3
5.0
6.3
6.8


o
u
£. CJ
03 «-•
Q —>
>-< O
H w

g/s(lb/hr)
0.431(3.42)
0.394(3.13)
0.605(4.80)
0.546(4.33)
0.743(5.90)
0.649(5.15)
0.592(4.70)
0.489(3.88)
0.706(5.60)
1.428(11.33)
0.993(7.88)
0.689(5.47)


c
o
n
U) 01
*rW U

U K

R/s(lb/hr)
.0432(0.343)
.0523(0.415)
.0753(0.598)
.0549(0.4*36)
.0610(0.484)
.0519(0.412)
.0436(0.346)
.0554(0.440)
.0627(0.498)
.1571(1.247)
.1034(0.821)
.0692(0.549)


>J U
Q C
XJ Q)
U iJ
6J U
~-i -H
J 't I
o <*-<


Pet
90.86
88.29
88.93
90.85
92.41
92.59
93.14
89.81
91.83
90.08
90.56
90.85
w
re
                                                                                                               w



                                                                                                               en

-------
    Table  3.--Results of the eleven  test  runs  of  the wet  scrubber on  the  first  lint-cleaner exhaust
o
-1

No.
1
2
3
4
-"5
-6
7
8
9
10
11
Avg
Scrubber
outlet
temperature
Deg. C,
(Deg, F)
18(65)
15(59)
16(61)
16(61).
19(66)
17(62)
9(49)
8(46)
13(55)
12(54)
12(53)
14(57) »
Inlet
velocity

m/s (f t/min)
6.25(1231)
6.46(1272)
6.40(1259)
6.44(1267)
6.51(1282)
6.35(1250)
6.74(1326)
6.65(1309)
6.27(1235)
6.14(1209)
6.31(1242)
6.41(1262)


m
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Airflow
3
/s(dscfm)
.28(4822)
.40(5087)
.33(4940)
.37(5016)
.36(5002)
.32(4918)
.57(5456)
.55(5402)
.35(4979)
.29(4850)
.35(4985)
.38(5042)
Air moisture
by volume

Pet
1.6
1.6
1.7
1.9
2.0
1.5
1.1
1.1
1.4
1.3
1.4
1.5
Isokinetic
vnria tion

Pet
103
104
105
106
106
106
104
102
104
103
103
104
Exhaust
particulate
concentration
3
mg/m
8.26
4.53
8.12
5.11
5.88
4.06
3.87
5.65
6.55
9.75
8.78
6.41
c
o .
•H ^%
W ft)
•H 4J
e 03


g/sQb/hr)
.0217(0
.0120(0
.0210(0
.0140(0
.0156(0
.0110(0
.0106(0
.0155(0
.0173(0
.0258(0
.0227(0
.0170(0
.172)
.095)
.167)
.111)
.124)
.087)
.084)
.123)
.137)
.205)
.180)
.135)
Collector
efficiency

Pet
49.91
77.11
72.07
74.53
74.49
78-84
75.80
71-95
72.53
83.58
78.07
73.53
Combined
efficiency

Pet
95.42
97.32
96.91
97.67
98.07
98.43
98.34
97-14
97.76
98.37
97.93
97.58
     \J  SCFM from cyclone exhaust and concentration from scrubber exhaust were  used to find scrubber
emission rate.
                                                                                                                32
                                                                                                                C

-------
                                                             S.  E.  Hughs   8





 the  particles   have  a  diameter  of  approximately  22  microns  or  less.  These





 data  are  in  close  agreement with Parnell  and  Davis  (1979).   Parnell  and





 Davis  found  that  long-cone cyclones  did not emit  particles  above  18  microns





 in diameter  when  tested under different loading conditions  using  grain dust.





 Cotton  trash emissions would probably  tend to be  made up of  particles some-





 what  larger  than  grain dust which would account for the particle  cutoff to





 be somewhat  higher for the lint-cleaner exhaust emissions.   Even  at





 collection efficiencies above 997*,  a few  large particles will be emitted





 from a  cyclone exhaust.





     The cyclone wet scrubber greatly reduced the larger fraction of





 particles emitted from the cyclone.  Referring to Figure 3,   957. of the





 particles emitted from the scrubber had a diameter of 12.7 microns or less





 compared to  approximately 22 microns for  the cyclone.   Figure 4 shows the





 cumulative weight of particles  emitted from both the cyclone and cyclone





wet scrubber versus particle sire.   Figure 4 shows that the  cyclone wet





 scrubber is not effective on particles 5 microns in diameter or less, but





 the scrubber's  collection efficiency increases rapidly on particles whose





 diameter exceeds 5 microns.   Figures 3 and 4 show that the cyclone wet





scrubber collected virtually everything whose diameter exceede  12.7 microns.








                                Application





      The  first three gins shown in Table  1 used lint  cages  on  their  lint





 system exhausts.   The  particulate  collection  efficiency of  screen cages  is






 unknown but  is undoubtedly low. This study shows that a cyclone-cyclone

-------
                                                             S.  E.  Hughs   9

 wet-scrubber system added  to  an unabated  lint  system  exhaust  has a

 collection efficiency  of 977..   It  should  be  a  reasonable  assumption  that

 replacing  the lint  cages on the first  three  gins  in Table  1 with a cyclone-

 cyclone  wet-scrubber system would  result  in  at  least  an additional reduction

 in  lint  system  emissions of 80%.

     McCaskill  and  Wesley  (1976) showed that the  unifilter had  an  average

 particulate  collection efficiency  on cotton  gin emissions of  99.57..

 Gillum et  al  (1980) showed that high-efficiency cyclones had  collection

 efficiencies  that averaged 99.67. on gin trash.  The size characteristics

 of  the particulntes emitted by  cyclones and unifilters should be very

 similar  given their nearly identical collection efficiencies.   It  has been

 shown that a  cyclone wet scrubber  has an average  collection efficiency of

 73.57. on cyclone particulate emissions.  Therefore, a cyclone wet  scrubber

 should have a collection efficiency of at least 707, on unifilter particulate

 emissions.  The last two gins using unifilters shown in Table 1, should be
                                                  t
 able to  reduce  their emissions by  707. with the addition of a cyclone wet

 scrubber on their unifilter exhausts.   The characteristics of the  particu-

 lates in seed-cotton system and lint system exhausts using cyclones as

 collectors should be identical, other than perhaps for loading rates.

Therefore, the gins in Table 1 using cyclones on  their seed-cotton system

 exhaust  should be able to reduce those emissions by an additional  707..

     Taken all assumptions  together,  807. reduction of  lint-cage  emissions,

707.  reduction of unifilter  emissions and 707.  reduction of  seed-cotton

-------
                                                            S. E. Hughs  10




 system cyclone emissions^  the figures in Table 1 would look like the





 figures in Table 4.  If the assumptions are correct, all the gins shown





 would be able to meet their total allowable emission requirements as shown




 in, Table 1.  It may not be necessary to install a cyclone wet scrubber or





 a cyclone-cyclone wet scrubber system of all gin exhausts to bring them in





 compliance with emission standards.  Many gin exhausts such as the seed




 handling system and press-condervser exhausts are lightly loaded compared




 to seed-cotton unloading and number one lint cleaning exhausts.  Additions




of a cyclone wet scrubber or a cyclone-cyclone wet-scrubber system on only




 these more heavily loaded exhausts may bring a gin in compliance with




emission standards.

-------
                                                           S.  E. Hughs   11
                Table 4.--Assumed gin source  tesc results



Scace

Arizona
Arizona
California
Ca lifornia
Ca li fornia

Lint
process
race
Bales/h
3.4
8.6
13.0
20.6
23.0
Seed
cotton
system
emissions
kR/h(lb/h)
.56(1.23)
2.19(4.83)
3.56(7.86)
2.99(6.60)
2.84(6.27)

Lint
system
emissions
kg/h(lb/h)
.31(.68)
1.22(2.70)
2.36(5.20)
1.69(3.72)
2.56(5.64)


Total
emissions
kR/h(lb/h)
.87(1.91)
3.42(7.53)
5.92(13.06)
4.68(10.32)
5.40(11.91)

Total
a 1 lovable
emissions*
ks/h(lb/h)
2.7 (6.0)
5.1(11.2)
7.0(15.4)
9.3(20.4)
9.9(21.8)
>'fAs shown in Table 1, current standards may have changed,

-------
                                References








 I  Harrell, E. A. and V, P. Moore.   1962.  Trash collecting systems at





   cotton gins.  USDA ARS 42-62.  22 p.





 2  Kirk, I. W., A. L. Vandergriff, M. N. Giilum, and C. G. Leonard.  1976.





   An alternate method of emission control for cotton gin exhausts,  Texas





   Cotton Ginners' Journal and Yearbook,  March 1976.





 3  McCaskill,  0. L. and R, A.  Wesley.  1976.   Unifilter collecting system





   for cotton-gin waste materials.  USDA-ARS-S-144.





4  Alberson, D. M. and R.  V.  Baker.   1964.   An inline air filter for





   collecting  gin condenser air pollutants.   USDA-ARS 42-103.





5  Gillum,  M.  N.,  S.  E.  Hughs,  R.  N.  Rakoff,  and T. E.  Wright.   1980.





   Primary  and secondary cleaning  of  lint cleaner exhaust air:   a  progress





   report.   Presented at the  1980  Summer Meeting ASAE,  San Antonio,  Texas.





6  Parncll,  C. B.,  Jr.  and  D.  Davis.   1979.   Predicted  effects  of  the  use





   of new cyclone  designs  on agricultural processing particulate emissions.





   Southwest Region Meeting, ASAE, Hoc  Springs,  Ark.

-------
F1CVJKE I - CYCLONE TEST INSTALLATION
LINT
CLEANER
#1


VANEAXIAL
FAN
29" DIA.


VANEAXIAL
FAN
26" DIA.
6000 CFM

    EXHAUST
     TO
    ATMOSPHERE
            h-
2D*^


1
1
SAMPLING




POINT
CYCLONE
WET
SCRUBBER
45" DIA.

S3


SETTLING
TANK
                                                                   SAMPLING
                                                                    POINT
SAMPLING
 POINT
   02
* "D" DENOTES AIR DUCT DIAMETER

-------
Figure 2.--Cyclone and wet scrubber installation--long-conc
           cyclones, right of center by seed hopper,  cyclone
           wet scrubberj  center,  and sludge tankSj  left side
           directly in front of car.

-------
if)
o
o
   403
   32.0
   25.4
   20.2
o
H
DC
<
Q.
 ;  16.0
 ~ 12.7
 i  10.1
 5  8.0
   6.4
   5.0
   4.0
   3.2
   2.5
    2.0
O-CYCLONE  EXHAUST
Q-SCRUBBER  EXHAUST
Average  of lots 5, 6,  8, 10
      0.1   0.5 !   2   5  10  20    40   60   80  90 95  9899
              CUMULATIVE  PERCENTAGE OF  PARTICLES
                                                                  99.9
     Figure 3.--Particle size versus cumulative weight percentage of particles in exhaust sample.

-------
X
o

LU
   .6
   .5
   .4
   .3
   .1
o
   0
    0
         o  - CYCLONE  EXHAUST

         Q  - SCRUBBER EXHAUST
5      10      15      20     25

     PARTICLE  SIZE,  MICRONS
30
35
         Figure 4.--Cumulative weight of particles emitted versus particle size.

-------
                                             ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT DATA  SYSTEMS
                                                       FPEIS SERIES REPORT
                                                        SERIES FORM 1
                                                                         PAGE        1
                                                                         DATE 06/21/63
          3EBIE5 NO:   229  DESCRIBES SAHPLING AT SITE  FROM 01/23/78 TO 03/23/78 BY  KVB,  INC.
                        SPONSOR ORGANIZATION:    CALIFORNIA AI«  RESOURCES BOARD
                        CONTRACT NUMBER:         A6-191-30           PURPOSE  OF TEST:  ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS fMULTIMEDIA I
                        TASK/DIRECTIVE NUMBER:  000
 SOURCE DESCRIPTION-
                  SOURCE CATEGORY:
                  SOURCE TYPE:
                  PRODUCT/DEVICE:
                  PROCESS TYPE:
                  DESIGN PROCESS RATE:
                  FEED MATERIAL  CATEGORY:
                  PRIMARY CONTROL DEVICE:
FOOD INDUSTRY
GRAIN MILL PRODUCTS
CAROB KIBBLE
ROASTING
   300   KG/HR
AGRI FEED
SOURCE NAME:
SITE NAME:
ADDRESS:
                             sic CODE:
CONFIDENTIAL
LOS ANGELES
                                  ,CA
00000
 EAOS HASTE STREAM DATA BASES-
REFERENCE REPORT-
                  HASTE STREAM DATA FROM OTHER MEDIA HHICH HERE  COLLECTED  CONCURRENTLY HITH  THIS TEST SERIES
                  ARE AS FOLLOHS(TEST SERIES NUHBER-TSN):
                       LEDS TSN:           GEOS TSN:  00081     SODS TSN:
                  TITLE
                  AUTHOR
                  SPONSOR HEPOBT NUMBER     NTIS NUtBEB
                       PUBLICATION DATE
                  FINE PARTICLE EMISSIONS FROM STATIONARY AND  MISCELLANEOUS  SOURCES
                  IN THE SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN,
                  TABACK H.J,
                  KVB REPORT 5806-783      PB Z93 923/AS          FEBRUARY 1979
TEST SERIES COMMENTS-
                        PROGRAM OBJECTIVES TO INVENTORY TSP EMISSIONS,TO PREPARE  A  COM-
                        PREHENSIVE INVENTORY OF EMISSIONS!I,E.  BY SIZE  DISTRIBUTION AND
                        CHEMICAL COMPOSITION!,AND TO DESCRIBE ALT. METHODS OF  CONTROL.
                        ROASTER HEAT INPUT IS 795H KJ/HR OF NATURAL GAS.

-------
PEIS TEST SERIES NO: 00229
                     STREAM NO: 01
TEST ID »«K
SAMPLE NO: 01
                                                                                                     SERIES FORM 7
PAGE        7
DATE 86/21/83
 EFFLUENT STREAM DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS-



                           OESCRIPTIOM
COMPONENT
NO  NAME
                                  VALUE
          1  PROBE«1Q CYC
          Z  3 UH CYCLONE
          3  1 UM CYCLONE
          4  FILTER
                           STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE!
                           STAGE WEIGHT:
                           COMPONENT (ALIQUOT I MASS/VOLUME:
                           CHEMICAL ANALYSIS LABORATORY NAME:
                           STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE:
                           STAGE WEIGHT:
                           STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE:
                           STAGE WEIGHT:
                           STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE!
                           STAGE HEIGHT:
                                                                          a. 30     UH
                                                                         1.65E+OZ H6
                                                                         385.000  HG
                                                                        ARHAME
                                                                          1.90     UM
                                                                         1.00E«00 MG
                                                                           .60     UH
                                                                         8.10E+00 KG
                                                                           .01     Urt
                                                                         Z.10E*00 MG
'ARTICLE SIZE TABLE-


 STAGE ff
D5EM MICRONS)
STAGE WEI6HTS( MILLIGRAMS!
MICROGRAhS/DNCM/STAGE
NUtlBER/DNCM/STAGE
CUM. KMASSnnMFM"T*t fiw TUP FFFI IIFMT TMAI
i>unnc,n 1 3 un inc. err i_ucn i L.nAi
COMPONENT
HO. NAME

5
9
3

1
1
1
1
4
3 Af-TC
t At. 1 C

8.30
.65E+02
.60E404
.03E+10
1.94
.08E+03
.90E»03
.82E+01
-41E+05
.44E+10
DT*STTf*
-------
RJ£-I "T
             ype.
                              , Ech )
/
                         ~V7



                          -53
                                           -3C.

-------
Number ©-F
                            ueft row »3* a. p»iWt «'
 «s     ,             __


       of X^pq-r-t^r*J1^^3*^ Mark JJI	
                                ^/l   * "
                                                                     6rJI
          Melfboef ^ " /mp/'e^s m,€lhoj^5 procedure3 6Jefg> U5eo

-------

-------
             Emission Testing  Report
             EMB Test No.:   74-GRN-7
       BUNGE    CORPORATION

              Destrehan,  Louisiana
                Project  Officer
                Roger 0.  Pfaff
        Environmental Protection  Agency
 Office of Air Quality Planning and  Standards
Research Triangle Park, North  Carolina   27711

:;•.'-;• '•'/•          January  1974

-------
       TABLE 5
Particle Size Results

Run 1
Characteristic • • '
Diameter, Dn
Stage urn yg
Probe & cyclone
1 3.14
2 1.63
3 1.10
4 0.57 .
5 . 0.33

«
Probe & cyclone
1 3.14
2 1.63
3 1.10
4 0.57
5 0.33

22,450
1 ,480
190
210
120
	 70
TOTAL 2,070 ••'
Run 2
44,900
1,260
"90
30
40
. 	 20
TOTAL 1 ,440

Weight
Percent
71.5
9.2
10.1
5.8
3.4


87.5
6.3
2.1
2.8
1.4


Cumulative Weight
Percent, 
-------
                                             ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT DATA SYSTEMS                                  PAGE        1
                                                       FPEIS SERIES REPORT                         SERIES FORM 1    DATE 06/eO/83


                ! NO:   154  DESCRIBES SAMPLING AT SITE FROM 09/07/75 TO 09/07/75  BY  HASH.  DEPT. OF  ECOLOGt

                        SPONSOR ORGANIZATION:   WASHINGTON DEPT.  OF ECOLOGY
                        CONTRACT NUMBER:                           PURPOSE OF  TEST:  ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS (MULTIMEDIA)
                        TASK/DIRECTIVE NUMBER:  000


 SOURCE DESCRIPTION	

                  SOURCE CATEGORY:       .  FOOD INDUSTRY                SOURCE NAME:
                  SOURCE TYPE:             GRAIN MILL PRODUCTS          SITE NAME:      UNIONTOWN
                  PRODUCT/DEVICE:          GRAIN                        ADDRESS:
                  PROCESS TYPE:            PROCESSING                                                    ,       00000
                  DESIGN PROCESS RATE:
                  FEED MATERIAL CATEGORY:  AGRI FEED
                  PRIMARY CONTROL DEVICE:                               SIC CODE:         2041


 EADS HASTE STREAM DATA BASES	

                  WASTE STREAM DATA FROM OTHER MEDIA WHICH WERE COLLECTED  CONCURRENTLY  WITH  THIS TEST  SERIES
                  ARE AS FOLLOWSITEST SERIES NUMBER-TSN):
                       LEOS TSN:          GEDS TSN:          SODS TSN:

REFERENCE REPORT	

                  TITLE
                  AUTHOR
                  SPONSOR REPORT NUMBER     NTI3 NUMBER           PUBLICATION  DATE



                  NELSON,P.A.


TEST SERIES COMMENTS	

-------
 FPEIS  TEST  SERIES NO:  0015*
   STREAM NO: 01
TEST ID NO:
SAMPLE NO: 01
                                                                                                       SERIES FORM 7
PAGE        9
DATE 06/20/63
   EFFLUENT STREAM DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS-
           COHPOHENT
           NO  NAME
DESCRIPTION
                                  VALUE
           11   STAGE 11
               STAGE 12
           13  STAGE 13
               FILTER
                             STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE:
                                         STAGE MASS:
                             STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE:
                                         STAGE MASS:
                             STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE:
                                         STAGE MASS:
                             STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE:
                                         STAGE MASS?
                                                         ,06     UH
                                                       1,OOE»00 UG/DNM3
                                                         .03     UM
                                                       1.15E*01 UG/DNM3
                                                         .02     UH
                                                       2.04E*00 UG/DNM3
                                                         .01     UM
                                                       3.28E*01 UG/BNM3
 PARTICLE SIZE TABLE	

   STAGE 8

   D501MICRONS I
   MICROGRAMS/DNCM/STAGE
   NUMBER/DNCM/STAGE
   CUM.  XMASS<050
   CUM.  HICROGRAMS/DNCH
-------
FPEIS TEST SERIES NO: 00154
                     STREAM NO: 01
TEST ID N0=
                                                         SAMPLE NO: 02
                                                                                                      SERIES FORM 7
PAGE       12
DATE 06/20/83
  fFFLUENT STREAM DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS-


                            DESCRIPTION
COMPONENT
NO  NAME
                                  VALUE
          11  STAGE II
          12  STAGE 12
          13  STAGE 13
              FILTER
                            STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE:
                                        STAGE MASS:
                            STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE:
                                        STAGE MASS'-
                            STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE:
                                        STAGE HASS:
                            STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE:
                                        STAGE MASS-'
                                                                           .06     UH
                                                                         1.00E+00 UG/DNM3
                                                                           .03     UH
                                                                         Z.67E*01 UG/DNMJ
                                                                           ,02     UM
                                                                         1.29E+01 UG/DNMJ
                                                                           .01     UM
                                                                         S.71E+02 US/DNM3
PARTICLE SIZE TABLE	

  STAGE •

  D50(MICRONS)
  MICR06RAMS/DNCM/STA6E
  HUHBER/ONCM/STAGE
  CUM.  XMASS
-------
FPEIS TEST SERIES NO:  0015*
                     STREAM HO:  01
TEST ID NO:
SAMPLE NO: 03
                                                                                                        SERIES FORM 7
PAGE       IS
DATE 06/20/83
  EFFLUEMT STREAM DESIGN  CHARACTERISTICS-


                             DESCRIPTION
COMPONENT
NO  HAHE
                                                                         VALUE
          11   STAGE  11
           12  STAGE  12
           13   STAGE  13
               FILTER
                             STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE:
                                         STAGE MASS:
                             STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE:
                                         STAGE MASS:
                             STABE/FILTER CUT SIZE:
                                         STAGE HASS:
                             STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE:
                                         STAGE HASS:
                                                                             .06     UM
                                                                          0,OOE*00 UG/BNM3
                                                                                    UM
                                                                                   UG/DHH3
                                                                            .02     UM
                                                                          8.03E*00 UG/DNM3
                                                                             .01     UM
                                                                          <».C6E»01 UG/DNH3
.PARTICLE SIZE  TABLE ---------

  STAGE 1

  D50( MICRONS I
  NICROGRAMS/DNCM/STAGE
  NUHBER/DNCH/STA6E
  CUM. ZMASS
-------
                                             ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT DATA SYSTEMS
                                                       FPEIS SERIES REPORT
                                                                                                   SERIES  FORM  1
                                                                         PAGE         1
                                                                         DATE  06/21/83
                I NO!   228  DESCRIBES SAMPLING AT SITE FROM 10/11/77 TO 10/11/77 BY  KVB,  INC.
                        SPONSOR ORGANIZATION;    CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD
                        CONTRACT NUMBER:         A6-191-30          PURPOSE  OF  TEST:. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS  (MULTIMEDIA)
                        TASK/DIRECTIVE NUMBER:  000
 SOURCE DESCRIPTION-
                  SOURCE CATEGORY:
                  SOURCE TYPE:
                  PRODUCT/DEVICE:
                  PROCESS TYPE:
                  DESIGN PROCESS RATE:
                  FEED MATERIAL CATEGORY:
                  PRIMARY CONTROL DEVICE:
FOOD INDUSTRY
GRAIN MILL PRODUCTS
RICE
PROCESSING
 90800   KG/HR
AGRI FEED
SOURCE NAME:   CONFIDENTIAL
SITE NAME:
ADDRESS:
               LOS ANGELES
                             sic CODE:
                                  >CA
                                          00000
                 2044
 EAOS HASTE STREAM DATA BASES-
                  HASTE STREAM DATA FROM OTHER MEDIA HHICH WERE COLLECTED  CONCURRENTLY  HITH  THIS  TEST SERIES
                  ARE AS FOLLOHSITEST SERIES NUHBER-TSN):
                       LEDS TSN:          GEDS TSN:  00080     SDDS TSN:
REFERENCE REPORT-
                  TITLE
                  AUTHOR
                  SPONSOR REPORT NUMBER     NTIS NUMBER
                       PUBLICATION DATE
                  FINE PARTICLE EMISSIONS FROM STATIONARY AND MISCELLANEOUS SOURCES
                  IN THE SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN.
                  TABACK H.J.
                  KVB REPORT 5806-783      PB Z93 923/AS          FEBRUARY 1979
TEST SERIES COMMENTS-
                        PROGRAM OBJECTIVES TO INVENTORY TSP EMISSIONS,TO PREPARE  A COM-
                        PREHENSIVE INVENTORY OF EMISSIONS!I.E.  BY SIZE  DISTRIBUTION AND
                        CHEMICAL COMPOSITION LAND TO DESCRIBE ALT. METHODS OF  CONTROL.
                        RICE DRYER IS A HOLLOW,DOUBLE-WALL CYLINDER ENCLOSED  IN A BLDG.
                        VENTED THRU 6-4.1M DIA. SCREENS ft HEATED BY 4-9.54KJ/HR BURNERS

-------
FPEIS TEST SERIES NO:  00228
                     STREAM NO: 01
                                                TEST ID NO!
                                                         SAMPLE NO:  01
                                                                                                      SERIES  FORM 7
                                                                                                             PAGE        6
                                                                                                             DATE 06/31/83
  EFFLUENT STREAM DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS-


                            DESCRIPTION
COMPONENT
NO  NAME
                                                                                  VALUE
           1  PROBE»10 CYC
           Z  3 UM CYCLONE
           3  1 UM CYCLONE
              FILTER
                            STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE:
                            STAGE HEIGHT:
                            COMPONENT (ALIQUOT) MASS/VOLUME:
                            STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE:
                            STAGE HEIGHT:
                            COMPONENT (ALIQUOT) MASS/VOLUME:
                            STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE:
                            STAGE HEIGHT;
                            STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE:
                            STAGE HEIGHT:
                                                                          9.20     UM
                                                                         3.65E+02  MG
                                                                         327.800   MG
                                                                          3.SO     UM
                                                                         6.49E«01  MG
                                                                          64.900   MG
                                                                          1.30     UM
                                                                         7.60E*00  MG
                                                                           .01      UM
                                                                         1.00E»00  MG
PARTICLE SIZE TABLE	

  STAGE 9

  D50(MICRONS!
  STAGE HEIGHTS!MILLIGRAMS)
  MICROGRAMS/ONCM/STAGE
  NUMBER/DHCM/STAGE
  CUM. XMASS<050
  CUM. MICROGRAMS/ACM
-------
FPEIS TEST SERIlS MO:  00228
   STREAM NO: 01
TEST JO HO:
SAMPLE NO:
                                                                                                      SERIES FORM 7
                                                                                           PAGE       11
                                                                                           DATE 06/21/63
  EFFLUENT STREAM DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS-
          COMPOMEHT
          NO  NAME
DESCRIPTION
                                  VALUE
           1  PROBE+10 CYC
           2  3 UM CrCLONE
           1  1 UH CYCLONE
           4  FILTER
                            STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE:
                            STAGE HEIGHT:
                            COMPONENT tALIQUOT 1 MASS/VOLUME:
                            STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZES
                            STAGE WEIGHT:
                            STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZES
                            STAGE WEIGHT!
                            STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE!
                            STAGE WEIGHT:
                                                        a.so     UH
                                                       1.78E+02 MS
                                                       141.000  MG
                                                        1.90     UM
                                                       2.20E+00 MG
                                                         .60     UM
                                                       l.OOEtOO MS
                                                         .01     UM
                                                       7.00E-01 MG
STAGE t
050 (MICRONS)
STAGE HEIGHTS! MILLIGRAMS!
HICROGRANS/DNCM/STAGE
NUMBER/ONCM/STAGf.
CUM. XHASS<050
CUM. HICROGRAMS/ACHm y IK. n i >j un i nt tr r E.WCFI •
COMPONENT
NO. NAME


1
3
2
l{,1
7
7
1
4
6
1
a. 30
.76E+02
.26E*04
-B3E*35
1 2.14
.!<«Et02
.14E+02
.82E*01
.77E+04
.22E+3S


2
4
6

3
3
3
6
1
2 3
1.90 .60
.20E«00
.03E+02
.54E*35
),gC .93
. 11E+02
7llE«02
.97E*00
.29E*02
.OOE*00
.83E492
-06E+37
(?.~1C? * 38
. 26E+02
.28E*02
.07E»00
.66E+02
.15E436 2.12E+37


7.
1.
0.

0.
0.
7.
4
.01
OOE-01
28E«02
OOE-0

OOE+00
OOE+00
75E-02
7.21E«01
0.
OOE-0


REMARKS
                    PROBE«10 CYC   ARMAMENT LAB DID ELEMENTAL ANALYSIS I ROCKWELL DID SULFATE.
                                   NITRATE • TOT.CARBON. PROBE WT. IS 36.6 MG I CYCLONE IS 141  MG.

-------
SEPA
         United States
         Environmental Protection
         Agency
           Office of Air Quality
           Planning and Standards
           Research Triangle Park NC 27711
 =>A-450/3-79-034a
"December "-"" '
         Air
Ammonium Sulfate
Manufacture —
Background Information
for Proposed Emission
Standards

-------
                               EPA-450/3-79-034a
Ammonium Sulfate Manufacture —
     Background Information for
    Proposed  Emission Standards
           Emission Standards and Engineering Division
          U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
              Office of Air. Noise, and Radiation
           Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
          Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711

                  December 1979

-------
0.1
 0.01  .05 .1 .2  .5   1   2
10   20 30 40 SO 60 70  80   90   95  98  99   99.1 99.9  99.99
                                    Cumulative Percentage
                                    (Z Weight  
-------
              Table C-14.   AMMONIUM SULFATE PARTICLE
                           SIZE DISTRIBUTION ANALYSIS
Facility:  B
Date:  10/4/78
Sampling Method:  Brinks Cascade Impactor
Impactor
Fraction
Cyclone
Stage 1
Stage 2
Stage 3
Stage 4
Stage 5
Back-up i
Filter
Range of
Effective
Diameter Net Wt.
Microns (mg)
>8.04 289.2
2.74-8.04 2.0
1.62-2.74 <0.1
1.10-1.62 <0.1
0.58-1.10 <0.1
0.36-0.58 <0.1
'' <0.36 0.06
Size Distribution by Weight
Cumulat ive
Percent Percent
99.3 100
0.7 0.7
<0.1 <0.1

-------
              Table C-13,   AMMONIUM SUIFATE PARTICLE SIZE
                           DISTRIBUTION ANALYSIS
Facility:  A
Date:  9/13/78
Sampling Method;  Anderson Cascade Impactor
Plate No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
8
Back-up
Filter
Total
Effective
Diameter,
Microns
9.5
6.0
4.0
2.72
1.72
0.87
0.83
0.35


Net Wt.
mg.
45.7
3.7
1.8
1.0
1.5
0.8
0.8
1.3
0,8
57.4
Weight
Percent
79.6
6.4
3.2
1.7
2.6
1.4
1.4
2.3
1.4
100
Cumulative
Wt. Percent
100
20.3
13.9
10.8
9.1
6.5
5.1
3.7
1.4

                                 C-25

-------
          Table 3-3. -SUMMARY OF UNCONTROLLED AS EMISSION DATA -
                      EPA EMISSION TESTS OK AS DETERS*
                                 Average uncontrolled AS emissions
          Dryer
Plant     type                 gm/dscn Igr(dscf)]     fcg/Mg (Ib/ton)


  A   lotary Dryer              4.38     (1.93)       0.41   (0.82)


  B   Fluidized Bed Dryer       39.0     (17.2)       110    (221)



  C   Rotary Dryer              8.87     (3.91)       3.4i   (6.92)



  D   Rotary Dryer              98.3     (43.3)       77     (153)
*Detalled uncontrolled emission data for the individual plants  is
 given in Appendix C, Tables C-l, C-4,  C-6. and  C-8.
                                  3-11

-------
             Table C-15.  AMMONIUM SULFATE PARTICLE
                          SIZE DISTRIBUTION ANALYSIS
Facility:  C
Date:  12/6/78
Sampling Method:  Anderson Cascade Impactor
'Plate No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Back-up
Filter
Total
Effective
Diameter ,
Microns
ni.8
7.49
4.94
3.42
2.18
1.11
0.67
0.45
<0.45

Net ¥t.
ng.
450.4*
200.8
818.3
253.4
42.2
56.0
11.5
11.5
31.3
1875.4
Weight
Percent
24.0
10.7
43.6
13.5
2.3
3.0
0.6
0.6
1.7

Cumulative
Wt. Percent
100.0
76.0
65.3
21.7
8.2
5.9
2.9
2.3
1.7

*Weight includes particulate collected in Plate No. 0 and in
 nozzle and head of sampler up stream of the collection plates,
                                 C-27

-------
             Table C-16.  AMMONIUM SULFATE PARTICLE
                          SIZE DISTRIBUTION ANALYSIS
Facility;  D
Dace:  12/13/78
Sampling Method:  Anderson Cascade Impactor
Plate No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Back-up
Filter
Total
Effective
Diameter,
Microns
>14.73
9.28
6.15
4.26
2.11
1.40
0.85
0.58
<0.58

Net Wt.
ng.
157.3
789,5
1271.6
413.8
71.2
13.2
0.5
0.0
0.3
2717.4
Weight
Percent
5.8
29.1
46.8
15.2
2.6
0.5
0.0
0.0
0.0

Cumulative
¥t. Percent
100.0
94.2
65.1
18.3
3.1
0,5
0.0
0.0
0.0

                                C-28

-------
4.6  REFERENCES

     1.  Perry, J. H.» Chemical  Engineering Handbook,  McGraw Hill
         Publishing Company, N.Y., N.Y., 3rd Ed.f o.  196.

         JacksonTTTT'IT. ancI'Marks", P. J.7 Source Emissions  Test
         Report, Occidental  Chemical Co., Houston, .Texas,  Ammonium
         Sulfate Dryer Baghouse, R. F. Weston, Inc.,  EPA Contract
         No. §8-02-2816, Drift Report, p. 24.

         Clayton Environmental Consultants, Inc., Draft Report,
         Emission Testing at an Ammonium Sulfate Manufacturing
         Plant, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency  Report
         No. 78-NHF-l, Southfield, Michigan, November, 1978, p. 13.

    A'.  Scott, Environmental Technology, Inc., Particulate Emissions
         From An Ammonium Sulfate Plant Controlled by a Cyclonic
         Scrubber.  U.S. EPA Contract No. 68-02-2813,  Work Assignment
         No. 27, Draft Report, p. 2-4.

     •5^  Scott, Environmental Technology, Inc., Particulate Emissions
         From An Ammonium Sulfate Plant Controlled by a Venturl
         Scrubber.  U.S. EPA Contract No. 68-02-2813,  Work Assignment
         No. 28.  Draft Resort. D. 2-4.

     6.  Cheremisinoff, P. N. and Young, R. A., Wet Scrubbers - A
         Special Report, Pollution Engineering, Volume 6, No. 5,
         p. 34, May, 1974.

     7.  Cheremisinoff, P. M. and Young, R. A., Air Pollution Control
         and Design Handbook, Marcel Dekker, Inc., N.Y., N.Y., 1977,
         Part 2, p. 751.

     8.  Data provided by the Ducon Company, Mineola, N.Y., in a
         telephone conversation between H. Krockta and Craig Sherwood
         of U.S. EPA,  OAQPS on December 20, 1978.

     9.  Data provided by American Air Filter, Inc.,  Louisville,
         Kentucky, in  a telephone conversation between W. Klimczak
         and Craig Sherwood of U.S. EPA, OAQPS on December  11, 1978.

    10.  Op. Cit., Ref. 34, p. 3S.

    11.  Response of Occidental Petroleum Corp., Plalnview, Texas,
         to EPA 114 request.

    12.  Magill, P. C., et al., Air Pollution Handbook, McGraw-Hill
         Book Co., N.Y., N.Y., 1956, p. 13-48.

-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park NC 27711
EMB Report 80-MET-8
May 1980
Air
Metallic  Minerals

Emission Test Report
Reynolds Metals
Company
Corpus Christi, Texas

-------
              SOURCE EMISSIONS TEST REPORT
                Reynolds Metals Company
                     Sherwin Plant
                 Corpus Christ!, Texas
                    Sources Tested:

          *    Ship Unloading Process

          •    Fine Ore Storage Area
August 1980
                                David A. Ralston
                                Assistant Project Scientist
                                       ~t,
                                Barry I^A Jack
                                Project wanag e1
                                Air Testing
                RFW  Report No. 0300-81-16
                Contract No. 68-02-2816
                 Work Assignment No,  14
                      Prepared by

                   Roy F. Weston, Inc.
                 Designers - Consultants
                       Weston Way
               West Chester,  Pennsylvania
                    (215)    692-3030

-------
                              Table 10
                     PARTICLE SIZE  DISTRIBUTION
 Date:   6-24-80                            P   '  (in.  Hg.)    23.3k
 Location:   Reyno1ds Meta1s Company        Stack Temp (  F)   76
 Sampling  Location:  Shfp Unloading Scb.0utls.amPle Time (Mln.) 95.0
 Traverse  Point No.  Sampled:  X-15         Sample Volume (cf) 59.3
Run No. 1                                   Moisture  (% £0)     3.5
                                           Meter Temp (°F)   IQQ
                                           Flow Setting,  AH   1.2
                                               (in.  H20)
                                           Nozzle  Diameter (in.) 0.188
Sample Flow  Rate  (at stack conditions):0-61 cfm
Plate          Net  Wt.          %          Cumulative             EAD
  No.           (mg)                            I              (Microns)
  1             18.9          32.7            100.0             12.5
  2             0-5           0.8             67.3              7.8
  3             0.9           1.6             66.5              5.2
  4             1-8           3.1             6^.9              3.6
  5             *».5           7.8             61.8              2.7
  6             IS.**          26.6             5^.0              1.2
  7 -            8.7          15.1             27.**              0.71
  8             4-8           8.3             12.3              0.48
Backup
 Filter         2.3           '».0              4.0
TOTAL          57.8

                                -31-

-------
                                                             Figure  7
        (A
        o
        u
 i
u»
ro
 i
       o
       cc
       LU
       «t
       LU
       o
       LU
       LU
10.0
 2'°
 8.0
 7.0
 6.0
 5.0

 k.O

 3.0
              2.0
 1.0
 0.9
 0.8
 0.7
 0.6
 0.5
              0.3
              0.2
              0.1
                                                 Ship  Unloading Scrubber Outlet
                                              Run No.  1  Particle Size  Distribution
                 0.01  B.05 I.I 0.7 0.5  I
                                  ID     20  30   40 M   SO  70   00    10

                                       CUMULATIVE  PERCENTAGE

                                   Bv Weight  Less Than Diameter
                                                                                   OS
96  90
ao.i at.8
9S.09

-------
                              Table 11

                     PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION
 Date:   6-25-80                           Pbgr (fn. Hg.)   30.00
 Location: Reynolds Hetals Company         Stack Temp  ( F)  9°
 Sampling  Location: No.  T  6- No.  2 Fine Ore Sample Time (Min.)90.0
                    Bins Exhaust Stack                    .  . --. c
 Traverse  Point No. Sampled;  X-3         Sample Volume  (cf)-'/»P
 Run No. 1                                 Moisture (| H20) 2.0
                                          Meter Temp  (°F)
                                          Flow Setting. & H]-35
                                              (in. H20)
                                          Nozzle Diameter On.)o.l85
Sample Flow Rate  (at  stack conditions):0,63 cfm
Plate
No.
1
2
3
*
5
6
7
8
Met Wt.
(mg)
2.4
1.0
1.1
• 0.8
1.5
1.6
1.3
1.5
%
17.8
7.4
8.2
•5.9
11.1
11.9
9.6
11.1
                                          Cumulative            EAD
                                               %             (Microns)
                                              100              12.2
                                               82.2             7.6
                                               74.8             5.2
                                               66.6             3.6
                                               60.7             2.4
                                               49.6             1.2
                                               37.7             0.71
                                               28.1             0.47
Backup
 Filter          2-3          17.0              17.0
TOTAL           13-5
                                 -33-

-------
                                               Ftgure 8
                             No. 1 and No.  2 Fine Ore Bins  Exhaust Stack
                                Run No.  1 Particle Size Distribution
EFFECTIVE AERODYNAMIC PARTICLE DIAMETER, microns
O O O O O O O OO— N> \>i 4- vn 0\ -%j OtHOC
— Kl Ul f \n O\ *4 OOU> O O O OOOOOOC
































































































































































/















/
/












/
/
/
/












/
/
















/















*
j
•1














« /
/
/











/
/
•/
/


























































































































0.01  D.05 0.1 0.2 0.5  1
ID    2D  3D  40 SO  SB  70  SO

     CUMULATIVE PERCENTAGE
 By Weight Less Than Diameter
                                                             10
IS
M  II
II.I II.I
99.89

-------
                              Table 12

                     PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION
 Date:   6-25-80                           P,    (!n. Hg.) 29-99

 Location:  Reynolds Hetals                Stack Temp  ( F)  9°

 Sampling  Location: No, f & No, 2 Fine Ore Sample Time  (Mln.) 180
                   Bins Exhaust Stack         .    .     .  .   „  _
 Traverse  Point  Mo. Sampled:  X-3          Sample Volume  (cf) 113.152

 Run No. 2                                 H°lsture (* H20)   2'°
                                          Meter Temp  (°F) 95
                                          Flow Setting, AH    1.35
                                              (In. H20)
                                          Nozzle Diameter  (in.)°-l85
Sample Flow  Rate  (at  stack conditions) :0,62 cfrn
              Net Wt.          %          Cumulative            EAO
                                               %             (Microns)
  1            12.2         55.5             100                12.2

  2             1.5          6.8              kk.S                7.6

  3             1.3          5.9              37,7                5.2
  **             0.5          2.3              31.8                3.6

  5             1.2          5.5              29.5                2.b
  6             0.8          3.6              2^.0                1.2
  7             1.1          5.0              20.4                0.71

  8             1.0          k.S              15.*                0.47
Backup          2,k         10.9              10.9
 FiIter
TOTAL          22.0
                                 -35-

-------
                                                          Figure 9
 o
 o

"i
LU
o


QC
O
cc.
LU
<

LU
>

H
<_>
      10.0
       9.0
       8.0
       7.0

       6.0

       5.0
       3.0
       2.0
       1.0
       0.9
       0.8

       0.7
       0.6

       0.5
       0.3
       0.2
       0.1
                                       No.  1  and No.  2  Fine Ore Bins  Exhaust Stack

                                           Run No.  2  Particle Size  Distribution
          0.01   0.OS 1.10.2 0.5  I   2
10    20  10  40 SO  80  70  10    10


     CUMULATIVE PERCENTAGE
M  11
                                                                                          ii.i ii.t
                                                                                                     99.88

-------
                            REPORT NO. 76-BAT-4
               AIR  POLLUTION
               EMISSION  TEST
O
                     GLOBE UNION, INC.
                      CANBY, OREGON

         UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
               Office of Air and Waste Management
             Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
                Emission Measurement Branch
              Research Triangle Park, North Cnroltnn

-------
      SOURCE TESTING OF A LEAD ACID BATTERY

              MANUFACTURING PLANT
               Globe Union, Inc.
                 Canby, Oregon
               Test No. 76-BAT-4
               Test Conducted by

     U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
         Emission Measurement Branch
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina  27711
               Report Prepared by

                Robert M. Martin
       Environmental Protection Specialist
           Emission Measurement Branch
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina  27711

-------
               GLOBE UNI DM
9 SFPTEMBFR Ig7f,
CD
              CASCADE  I^PACTOR  PAKTICLE  SIZE DISTRIBUTION FOR RUM
              INPUT VARIABLE           UNITS       INPUT DATA









STATE
CYCLONE
1
2
5
4
5
FILTER
SAHHLIN& TIME MIN
PRESSURE DROP IN HG
STATIC PRESSURE IN H20
PARTICLE DENSITY G/CC
BAROMETRIC PRESSURE IN HG
GAS MOL WT
GAS TEMPERATURE DEC F
GAS VISCOSITY POISE
GAS DENSITY li/CC
WT OF MATERIAL DPC MG/ACF
0.300 0.27
U.705 U.99 0.6?
0,030 0,56 0.03
0.010 0,36 0.01
O.OH1 0.15 0.04
0.010 0.07 0.01
0,000 0.00
10.0
5.50
-5.00
9.53
29.76
28.8
96.0
0,00019
0.00100
WT PCNT
27.37
6«4.32
2,7%
0,91
3.7<*
0.91
0.00









CUM WT PCNT
100.00
72.63
8.30
5,57
<*,&5
0.91
0.00
                                          Table 21.

-------
               GLOpt  UNION
9 SEPTEMBER
oo
oo
              CASCADE IMPACTOR PA«TICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION  FOR  RUN  2X


              INPUT VARIABLE          UNITS        INPUT  DATA









STATE
CYCLONE
1
2
3
«t
5
FILTER
SAMPLING TIME MIN
PRESSURE DROP IN HG
STATIC PRESSURE IN H20
PARTICLE DENSITY G/CC
BAROMETRIC PRESSURE IN Ht
GAS MOL WT
GAS TEMPERATURE OEG F
GAS VISCOSITY POlSE
GAS DENSITY G/CC
WT OF MATERIAL DPC MG/ACK
1.200 1.07
0.701 1.00 0.62
0.016 0.56 0.01
0.028 0.36 0.02
0.019 0.15 0.02
0.01U 0,07 0,01
0.050 O.OH
10.0
5.50
-6.00
9.53
29.92
28. H
93.0
0.00019
0.00100
WT PCNT
59.29
3H.63
0.79
l.Sfl
0.9H
0.<+9
2.H7









CUM WT PCf^T
100.00
<*0.71
6,oa
5.29
3.90
2.96
2.»47
                                               Table 23.

-------
               GLURL UNION
9 SEPTEMBER 1976
o
              CASCADE IMPACTOR PAKTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION  FOR  RUN  3X
              INPUT VARIABLE          UNITS        INPUT  DATA









STATE
CYCLONE
1
2
3
H
5
FILTER
SAMPLING TIME MIN
PRESSUHE DNOP IN HG
STATIC PRESSURE IN H20
PARTICLE DENSITY 6/CC
BAROMETRIC PRESSURE IN Ht
GAS MCL WT
GAS TEMPERATURE DEG F
GAS VISCOSITY POISL
GAS DENSITY G/CC
WT OF MATERIAL OPC IG/ACF
2.300 2.05
0.700 1.00 O.h?
0,001 0.56 0.00
0.006 0.36 0.01
O.OOM 0.15 0.00
O.OOt U.07 0.00
1.600 1.43
10.0
5.50
-6.10
9.53
29.92
26.8
90.0
0,00019
0.00100
WT PCNT
«+9.8«t
15.17
0.02
0.13
0.09
0.09
3^.67









CUM WT PCNT
100.00
50,16
3%, 99
3^.97
S'+.fl'*
3I»,76
3«*,67
                                              Table 25.

-------
    Table  42.  Andersen Particle Size Data - Continued
RUN IB
            DPC

            >4.13
            4.13
            2.58
            1.71*
            1.22
              .796
              .393
              .240
              .161
  of Material  (m&)      WT POT
        1.1
        0.1
        0.4
        0.2
        0.2
        0
        0.1
        0. 3
        0.2
        0.5
               35.
                3.
               12
                6
                6
                0
                3
                9
                6
                16
   48
   23
   90
   45
   23
   68
   45
   13
CUM V/T PCT

 100.00
  64.52
  61.29
  48.39
  Hi. 9"
  35.^9
  35.^9
  32.26
  22.58
  16.13
             DPC

            >4,06
             4.06
             2.55
             1.71
             1.21
              .822
              .333
              .235
              .155
             <.158
Vit of Material  (mg)
        1.2
        0.1
        0
        0
        0
        0
        0
        0.2
        0.2
          . 2
n
WT_PCT

63-16
 5.26
 0
 0
 0
 0
 0
10.53
10.53
10.53
                           CUM V.'T PCT

                            100.00
                             36.85
                             31.59
                             31-59
                                59
                                r— r.
   31
   31.53
   31-59
   31.59
   21.06
   10.53
             DPC

             ^J. 00
             4.00
             2.51
             1.68
             1.18
               .739
               .377
               .232
               -155
              <-155
    jf  Material
                                      , mi
                                               V/T PCT
         0.9
         0.1
         0.2
         0
         0
         0
         0.2
         0.2
         0:2
         0.6
17. ^O
4.17
8.333
0
0
0
8,333
8.333
8.333
25.00
"i 00.
62.
55.
49.
• 43.
4 9 .
50.
41.
33-
25.
00
50
33
99
99
99
00
67
33
00
                                  10?

-------
 GLOBE UNION
9 SEPTEMBER 1976
CASCADE IMPACTOR PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION FOR RUN  2A
INPUT VARIABLE          UNITS       INPUT DATA
SAMPLING TIME NIN
PRESSURE DROP , IN HG
STATIC PRESSURE IN H20
PARTICLE DENSITY G/CC
BAROMETRIC PRESSURE IN HG
GAS MOL WT
GAS TEMPERATURE UEG F
GAS VISCOSITY POISE
GAS DENSITY G/CC
STATE WT OF P-ATERIftL DPC MG/ACF
10
*• CYCLONE 2.1.00 2.78
1 0.103 1.10 0,«*3
2 0,001 0,63 0.00
3 0.000 O.HI 0.00
«* o.oos o.ia o.oi
5 0,002 0,09 0.00
FILTER 1,«»00 l.«*9
10.0
3. BO
-5.60
9.53
29.92
28. &
70.0
0.00019
0.00100
WT PCNT

58, 9<*
9.14
0.02
0.00
0.11
0,05
31. 7<*









CUM WT PCNT

100.00
Hi. 06
31,92
31.90
31.90
31.78
31.74
                                 Table 29.

-------
               GLOBE  UNION
9 SEPTEMBER 197ft
vo
              CASCADE IMPACTOR PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION FOR RUM
              INPUT  VARIABLE          UNITS       INPUT DATA









STATE
CYCLONE
1
2
3
*
5
FILTER
SAMPLING TIME MIN
PRESSURE D&OP IN HG
STATIC PRESSURE IN HPO
PARTICLE DENSITY G/CC
BAROMETRIC PRESSURE IN HG
GAS MOL WT
GAS TEMPERATURE DE6 f
GAS VISCOSITY PQlSE
GAS DENSITY G/CC
WT OF MATERIAL DPC MG/ACF
1.060 1.11
o.iaa 1.09 0.20
O.OOb 0.62 0.01
0.002 0.40 0.00
0.006 0.18 0.01
0.15b 0.08 0,16
0.066 0.07
10.0
3.80
-5.00
9.53
29.92
28.8
98.0
0.00019
0.00100
WT PCNT
71.48
12.68
Q.4Q
0.13
0.40
10.45
4.45









CUM WT PCNT
100.00
28.52
15.85
15.44
15.31
14.90
4.45
                                                                                              US
                                               Table 27.

-------
 GLOBE UNION
9 SEPTEMBER 1976
CASCADE IMPACTOR PAKTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION  FOR  RUN  3A




INPUT VARIABLE          UNITS        INPUT  DATA









STATE
CYCLONE
1
2
3
H
5
FlLTfR
SAMPLING TIME MIN
PRESSURE DROP IN HG
STATIC PRESSURE IN H20
PARTICLE DENSITY G/CC
BAROMETRIC PRESSURE IN HG
GAS MOL WT
GAS TEMPEHATURE OEG F
GAS VISCOSITY POISE
GAS DENSITY G/CC
yT OF MATERIAL DPC MG/ACF
0.200 0,21
1.005 1.10 1,07
0,001 0.62 0,00
0.000 0.
-------
                                             ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT DATA  3T3TEH3
                                                       FPEIS SERIES REPORT
                                                                           SERIES ram i
                                            PAGE        1
                                            DATE 06/20/83
              E3 N0>   117  DESCRIBES SAMPLING AT SITE FROM 01/26/73 TO 04/26/73 BY SOUTHERN RESEARCH INST

                                                NOT SPECIFIED
SPONSOR ORGANIZATIONi
CONTRACT NUMBER:
TASK/DIRECTIVE NUMBER*  000
                                                                   PURPOSE OF TESTI SOURCE CHARACTERIZATION STUDY
 SOURCE DESCRIPTION-
                  SOURCE CATEGORY"
                  SOURCE TtPE:
                  PRODUCT/DEVICE:
                  PROCESS TTPEI
                  DESIGN PROCESS RATE:
                  PEED MATERIAL CATESOPT:
                  PRIMARY CONTROL DEVICE!
                   METALS
                   SECONDARY FERROUS
                   STEEL
                   FOUNDRY

                   NOT SPECFD
SOURCE NAME:
SITE NAME:
ADDRESS:
                                                SIC CODEi
CONFIDENTIAL
CONFIDENTIAL
                 3320
                                          00000
 EAOS HASTE STREAM DATA BASES-
                  HASTE STREAM DATA FROM OTHER MEDIA WHICH HERE COLLECTED CONCURRENTLY KITH THIS TEST SERIES
                  ARE AS FOLLOWS!TE3T SERIES NUMBER-TSNH
                       LEDS TSN!          BEDS TSH:           SODS TSN:
REFERENCE REPORT-
                  TITLE
                  AUTHOR
                  SPONSOR REPORT NUMBER     NTIS NUMBER
                                          PUBLICATION DATE
                  BIRD, ALVIN N.
                  SORI-EAS-7J-ZOO
TEST SERIES COMMEMTS-
                        THE PURPOSE HAS TO CONDUCIpPARTICLE SIZE MEASUREMENTS  TO DETER-
                        MINE THE SIZE RANGE OF PARTICLES FROM HOOD  DUCTS IN A  STEEL
                        FOUNDRY. WHEN PIPE MOLDS ARE BROKEN SMALL PARTICLES ARE RELEASE
                        0 AND DRAWN THROUGH HOOD DUCTS.

-------
FPCIS TEST SERIES NUMBERi  00117   STREAM NO:  001  TEST ID NO!    1                                                       PAGE         5
                                                                                                     SERIES  rORH C6    PATE  0*/20/83

         PARTICLE DIAMETERS BASED ON CLASSIC  AERODYNAMIC DEFINITION I TASK GROUP  ON LUNG DYNAMICS!

 PARTICLE SIZE SUMMARY	
                                                               PARTICLE  DIAMETER IN MICROMETERS
               SAMPLE LOCATIONS       UG/DNN3
   SAMPLE NO.  DEVICE     SYSTEM                    20.II      li.O      10.0      6.0       2.S       1.2S      1.0      0.625
      01       OUTLET              CUM MASS CONC  4.62E*04  4.I1E«04  3.§9E*f>4  3.21E*04   1.00E*04   3.07E404  3.0frE*04  3.02E*04
                                   DM/DLOG D      4.41E*04  3.73E*04  2.07E+04  1.24E*04   O.OOE«00   9,14E*02  1.11E*03  3.25E+OJ
                                                  EXTRAPOL  EXTRAPOL  EXTRAPOL  INTERPOL   INTCRPOL   INTERPOL  INTERPOL  INTERPOL
      02       OUTLET              CUM MASS CONC  4.90E«04  4.56E*04  4.23E*04  4.07E«04   3.80E*04   3.66E*04  3.48E*04  Z.38E*04
                                   DH/DL06 0      E.96E*04  2.44E*04  l.IBE«04  4.ME*03   4.70C*03   4.75E*03  3.741*04  6.92E»04
                                                  EXTRAPOL  EXTRAPOL  EXTRAPOL  INTERPOL   INTERPOL   INTERPOL  INTERPOL  INTERPOL

-------
PPEI3 TEST SERIES NO!  00117
STREAK NO: 01
TEST ID NO:
                                                                   SAMPLE HO'- 02
                                                                                                      SERIES roan cr
PAGE       11
DATE 06/20/83
PARTICLE SIZE TABLE	

  STAGE t

  DSOINICRONS)
  HICROGRAHS/DNCM/STA6E
  NUHBER/DtCN/STAGE
  CUM. XHASS
-------
                                             ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT DATA SYSTEMS
                                                       FPEI3 SERIES REPORT                         SERIES FORM

             ;ES NO:   233  DESCRIBES SAMPLING AT SITE FROM 03/21/76 TO 03/21/78 BY  KVB,  INC.
                        SPONSOR ORGANIZATION:   CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD
                        CONTRACT NUMBER:        A6-191-30          PURPOSE OF  TEST:  ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS  I MULTIMEDIA)
                        TASK/DIRECTIVE NUMBER:  000
                                                                         PAGE        1
                                                                         DATE 06/21/63
 SOURCE DESCRIPTION-
                  SOURCE CATEGORY:
                  SOURCE TYPE:
                  PRODUCT/DEVICE'
                  PROCESS TYPE:
                  DESIGN PROCESS RATE>
                  FEED MATERIAL CATEGORY:
                  PRIMARY CONTROL DEVICE:
METALS
SECONDARY FERROUS
STEEL
OPEN HEARTH
  6260   K6/HR
HTL SCRAP
SOURCE NAME:   CONFIDENTIAL
SITE NAME:
ADDRESS:
               LOS ANGELES
>CA
00000
                             sic CODE:
                 3320
 EADS HASTE STREAM DATA BASES-
REFERENCE REPORT-
                  HASTE STREAM DATA FROM OTHER MEDIA MHICH MERE COLLECTED CONCURRENTLY UITtf THIS TEST  SERIES
                  ARE AS FOLLOMSCTEST SERIES NUMBER-TEN):
                       LEDS TSN:          BEDS TSN: 00065    SODS TSN:
                  TITLE
                  AUTHOR
                  SPONSOR REPORT NUMBER     NTIS NUMBER
                       PUBLICATION DATE
                  FINE PARTICLE EMISSIONS FROM STATIONARY AND MISCELLANEOUS SOURCES
                  IN THE SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN.
                  TABACK H.J.
                  KVB REPORT 5806-783      PB 293 923/A3          FEBRUARY 1979
TEST SERIES CtJMHENTS-
                        PROGHAH OBJECTIVES TO INVENTORY TSP EMISSIONS,TO PREPARE A COM-
                        PREHENSIVE INVENTORY OF EMISSIONS!I.E.  BY SIZE  DISTRIBUTION AND
                        CHEMICAL COMPOSITION I,AND TO DESCRIBE ALT. METHODS OF CONTROL.

-------
SERIES NO: 00233
STREAM DESIGN CM A
COMPONENT
NO NAME
1 PROBE*10 CYC
2 3 UM CYCLONE
3 1 UM CYCLONE
4 FILTER
IIZE TABLt— -------
WNS)
EIGHTS(MILLIGRAMS)
AMS/DNCM/STAGE
DNCM/STAGE
ASS MASS/VOLUME» - .!«?«
CHEMICAL ANALYSIS LABORATORY NAME: ARMAME
STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE: »l;?L«i JT
STAGE HEIGHT: 9.91E.01 MG
STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE: itlLn* Jf
STAGE WEIGHT: !;!„«« MR
COMPONENT 1 ALIQUOT! MASS/VOLUME » 5B5.000 MG
STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE: .« «1
STAGE HEIGHT: •;• "*" J
COMPONENT (ALIQUOT) MASS/VOLUME: 683.000 MS
1 2 3 *
8.30 1.90 .60 .01
4.97E*02 9.91E*01 5.85E+02 B.83E+02
1.02E»05 Z.03E*04 1.20E*05 1.81E*05
3.21E»10 6.19E«11 1.88E*1* 7.43E+17
75.92 71.12 <»2.78
1.77E+05 1.66E*05 9.96E*0* O.OOE*00
3.21E»05 3.01E«05 1.81E*05 O.OOEtOO
1.82E»01 3.97E+00 1.07E»00 7.75E-02
1.49E*05 3.17E»04 2.39E»05 1.02E»05
4.71E»10 9.67E*11 3.76E*1<» <».18E*17
CHARACTERISTICS— 	 "
REMARKS
1 PROBE+10 CYC ARMAMENT LAB DID ELEMENTAL ANALYSIS ft ROCKWELL DID JULFATE, NI-
TRATE ft TOTAL CARBON. PROBE WT IS 228MG ft CYCLONE HT IS 269 MG
       8
06/21/83

-------
SERIES NO: 00233    STREAM HO: 01    TEST ID NO:   1    SAMPLE HO: 02
                                                                                           SERIES Fn»1 7
                                     PAGE       12
                                     DATE 06/21/83
STREAM DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS-

:OMPONENT
10  NAME          DESCRIPTION
VALUE
 1  PROBEUO CYC
 2   3 UH CYCLONE
 3   1 UM CYCLONE
                 STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE:
                 STAGE HEIGHTS
                 STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE:
                 STAGE HEIGHT:
                  STAGE/FILTER  CUT  SIZE:
                  STAGE  HEIGHT:
                  COMPONENT (ALIQUOT!  MASS/VOLUME:
                  CHEMICAL ANALYSIS LABORATORY  NAME:
  9.20     UH
 4.43E*02 KG
  3.80     UM
 6.61E»01 KG
  1.30     un
 1.61E*02 KG
 161.000  MG
ARHAME
    FILTER
                  STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE:
                  STAGE HEIGHT:
                  COMPONENT 
-------
1

                                       Report  No.  76-BAT-3
                            ESB CANADA LIMITED

                           MISSISSAUGA,  ONTARIO
 UNITED STATES ENV.'RGNMENTAL  PROTECTION AGENCY
             Office of Air and Waste Management
         Office of Air Quasity Planning and Siandards
               Emission Measurem<;ni Bcnuch
          Research Triangle Park. North

-------
             SOURCE TESTING

                  AT A

LEAD ACID 3ATTERY MANUFACTURING COMPANY
           ESB Canada Limited
          Mississauga, Ontario
            Test Conducted By
      Monsanto Research Corporation
              Dayton, Ohio
           August 16-20, 1976
           Report-Prepared by
              Robert Martin
   Environmental  Protection Specialist
   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
      Research Triangle Park, N. C.

-------
                          Misstss.'iuga, Ontario
               D?C
            (microns )      ivt.  of Material (nig)     Wt.  %      Cum.
*un 3A
   D?C
£rni__c r on s)     V/c . o f_ ?•!a terial  (rnp)
                                                       %
              >5.^2               4.04              54.30        100.00
               5-42               0.1                 1-3-         ^5-70
   1           3.3S               0.3                 ^.03         ^-36
   2           2.26               0.1                 1.34         40.33
   3           1.5S               0.5                 6.72         33.99
   4           0.98               0.7          -       9-41         32.27
   5           0.51               0.9               12.10         22.86
   6           0.31               0.5                 6.72         10.76
   7           0.20               0.1                 1.34          4.0'!
   ?          <0,20               0.2                 2.70          2.70


Run 2 A
               DPC
.	     (microns )      Wt.  of Material (mg)     \ft.  %_      pJiiBju-iiL:
r.c-zle       >5-32            .   3.7^               78.90        100.00
   ''0          5.32            !   0                  0            21.10
   1          3.38               0,2                4,22         21.10
   2          2.23               0.1                2.11         16.88
   3          1.57               0.2                M.22         14.77
   b-          0.98               0.2                iJ.22         10.55
   5          0.50               o.l                2.11          6.33
   6          0.31               0.1                2.11          4.22
   7          0.20               0                  0             2.11
   ?'         <0.20               0.1                2.11
             >5-32               1.34               '19.19        100.00
   0          5-32               0                   0            50.31
   1          3-32               0.1                 2.6?         c.0.5l
   2          2.25               0.4                10.70         48.14
   3          1-55               0.4                10.70         37-44
   4          0.96               0.4                10.70         26.74
   5          0.50               0                   0            16.04
   5          0.31               0.5                13-37         15.04
   7          0.20               0.1                 2.67         2.5"
   ?         <0.20               0                   0            0
                                   T-2
                                    24                                         [

-------
                      Andersen Particle Size Data
                            ESS Canada Ltd.
                         Mississauga,  Ontario
Hun I'D)
              DPC
Stage      (microns)      Wt.  of Material (mg)     Wt.  %     Cum.  Wt.  %
nozzle       >4.26               2.34               35.40       100.00
   0          4.26               0.1                 3-65        14.60
   1          2.67               0.1                 3-65        10.95
   2          1.75               0                   0            7-30
   3          1.25               0.1                 3-65         7.30
   4          0.78               0                   0            3-65
   5          0.40               0                   0            3.65
   6          0.24               0                   0            3-65
   7          0.16               0                   0            3-65
   F         <0.l6               0.1                 3-65         3-65
            >4.33               2.14               78.10        100.00
             4.33               0.2                 7.30         21.90
             2.73               0                   0            14.60
             1.80               0                   0            14.60
             1.26               0                   Q            14.60
             0.79               0.3                10.95         14.60
   5          0.41'              0                   0             3.65
   6          0.25               0                   0             3-55
   7          0.17               0.1                 3.65          3-65
   ?         < 0. 17               0                   0             0
                                                                     13
              DPC
Stage      (microns)      Wt.  of Material (mg)      Wt.  %_     Cum.  Wt.  *

nozzle        >4.20               2.54               86.40  '     100:00
   0          4.20               0                   0           13-60
   1          2.62               0.1                 3-40        13-60
   2          1.74               0                   0           10.20
   3          1.23               0                   0           10.20
   4          0.77               0.2                 6.30        10.20
   5          0.39               0.1                 3-40         3-40
   6          0.24               0                   00
   7          0.16               0                   00
   F         <0.l6               0                   0            0


Hun 3D
              DPC
                         Wt.  of Material
                                  1-3

-------
                                                1976
CASCADE IMPACTOR PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION FOR RUN ic



INPUT VARIABLE          UNITS       INPUT DATA









STATE
CYCLONE
1
2
i
1
5
FILTER
SAMPLING TIME WIN
PRESSURE DROP IN HG
STATIC PRESSURE IN H20
PARTICLE DENSITY G/CC
BAHOi«ETRIC PRESSURE IN HG
GAS I^CL WT
GAS TEMPERATURE DEG F
GAS VISCOSITY POISE
GAS DENSITY G/CC
WT OF MATERIAL DPC KG/ACF
20,600 9.6i+
3.787 1.25 1.81
5,383 0.72 2.57
5,137 U.it7 2,<+5
^.0^6 0.22 1.93
3,802 0/12 1.62
0,200 0,10
30,0
1.66
-4. 15
9,53
29.99
28.8
156.0
0, OOOlta
0.00100
WT PCMT CUM WT PCMT
H7.95 100.00
8.82 52.05
12.53 ^3,23
11.96 30,70
9.42 10, 7f
6.85 9.32
0.^7 0.47
                        T-4




                         26

-------
                                       NOVEMBER  1976
CASCADE IMPACTQR  PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION FOR  RUN  1C




INPUT VARIABLE           UNITS       INPUT DATA









STAGE:
CYCLONE
i
2
3
IT
5
FILTER
SAMPLING TIME MIN
PRESSURE DROP CM HG
STATIC PRESSURE CM H20
PARTICLE DENSITY G/CC
BAROMETRIC PRESSURE CM HG .
GAS FOL WT
GAS TEfPEHATURE DEG C
GAS VISCOSITY POISE
GAS DENSITY G/CC
WT OF MATERIAL OPC MG/ACM
20,600 0,23
3.737 1.25 0,05
5.333 0,72 0,07
5.137 U,^7 0.07
H. DHfl 0 .22 0,05
3.302 0,12 0.05
0.20U 0.00
30 .0
!*.27
-10.5"*
9,53
76.17
28.8
68.9
o.oooia
0.00100
WT PCNT CUM WT PChT
H7.95 100,00
B.82 52,05
12.53 ^3.23
11.96 30.70
9.42 13.74
8. d5 9 ..32
0.47 O.H7
                          T-5




                          27

-------
                                      V 1\.OV£"..J!B£.^  I-; 76


CASCADE  IHPACTOR  PARTICLE. SIZE  DISTRIBUTION FOH MUH
INPUT VARIABLE           UNITS        INPUT DATA









S T A 7 L
CYCLONE
1
2
3
4
5
FILTER
SAMPLING TIME MIN
PRESSURE ORCP IN n'6
STATIC PRESSURE IN H20
PARTICLE DENSITY G/CC
BAROMETRIC PRESSURE IN KG
GAS MOL WT
GAS TFMPEKATJRE DEG f
GAS VISCOSITY POISE
GAS DENSITY G/CC
WT OF MATERIAL DPC MG/ACF
15.400 10 ,00
4.172 1.23 2.92
3.533 0.71 2.46
2.487 0,46 1.74
1.762 0,22 1.24
3.1-93 0.11 2.59
o. ncc o.oo
20.0
l.=6
-4.10
9.53
29.99
28.8
. 188.0
0 . G 0 0 i 5
0 , GOiOO
WT PC. NT CUr, WT PCNT
49.feO 100. 00
1J.44 50.^0
11.33 3i,9&
3. 01 25.53
5.68 17.57
11.69 11,39
0 . G 0 0.00
                          T-6
                          28

-------
                                     4 NOVEMBER  1976
CASCADE IMPACTCR PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION FOR  RUM  ac



INPUT VARIABLE          UNITS       INPUT DATA









STAGE
CYCLONE
1
2
3
4
5
FILTER
SAMPLING TIf.E MIN
PRESSURE DROP CM HG
STATIC PRESSURE CM h'20
PARTICLE DENSITY G/CC
BAROMETRIC PRESSURE CM HG
GAS MOL WT
GAS TEMPERATURE CEG C
GAS VISCOSITY POISE
GAS DENSITY G/CC
WT OF MATERIAL DPC MG/ACM
15.4-00 0,31
4.172 1.23 0.08
3.533 0.71 0.07
2.^87 0.46 0.05
1.762 0.22 0.03
3.693 0.11 0.07
0.000 0.00
2C.C
4,27
-10.41
9.53
76.17
28.8
86.7
0.00018
0 . 00100
WT PCNT CUM WT PCNT
49.60 100.00
13.44- 50.40
11.38 36.96
8.01 25.58
5.68 17.57
11.89 11 ,89
0,00 0.00
                         T-7



                         7Q

-------
                                     4 NOVEMBER  1976
^CASCADE  IMPACTOR  PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION  FOR  RijNi  3C
 INPUT  VARIABLE           UMITS        INPUT DATA









STATE
CYCLONE
1
2
3
4
5
FILTER
SAMPLING TIME WIN
PRESSURE DROP IN HG
STATIC PRESSURE IN H20
PARTICLE DENSITY G/CC
BAROMETRIC PRESSURE IN HG
GAS MOL WT
GAS TEMPERATURE DEG F
GAS VISCOSITY POISE
GAS DENSITY G/CC
WT OF MATErlflL OPC MG/ACF
23.500 11. 20
7.775 1.25 3.71
2.106 U.72 1.00
3.104 0.47 1.48
3.342 ' 0.22 1.59
2.720 0.12 1.30
0 .000 0 .00
30.0
1.66
-3.70
9.53
29.99
23.8
160.0
O.OOOlfc
u .00100
WT PCf'JT
55.23
18.27
4.95
7.30
7.85
6.39
0.00









CUM WT PCN'
100,00
44.77
.26.49
21.54
14.25
6.39
0 .00
                        7-3

-------
                                        4 NOVE.1J?eE!P 1976












CASCADE  IMPACTCR  PARTICLE  SI2E DISTRIBUTION  FOR PUN 3C




INPUT  VARIABLE           UNITS        IMPUT DATA









STAGE
CYCLONE
1
2
3
H
5
FILTER
SAMPLING TIME MIM
PRESSURE DROP CM HG
STATIC PRESSURE CM H20
PARTICLE DEMSITY G/CC
BAROMETRIC PRESSURE CM HG
GAS i^QL WT
GAS TEMPERATURE " DEG C
GAS VISCOSITY POISE
GAS CEivSITY G/CC
WT OF MATERIAL DPC l^G/ACM
23.500 0.32
7.775 1.25 0.10
2.106 0.72 0,03
3. 104 0,47 0 , 0«
3.342 0.22 0.05
2.720 U.12 0.04
0. 000 0,00
30.0
4.27
,-9.40
9.53
76.17
28.8
71.1
0.00018
0,00100
WT PCNT CUH WT PCMT
55.23 100,00
18.27 44.77
4,95 26,49
7.30 21.54
7.85 14.25 '
6.39 6,39
0.00 0,00
                          T-9




                          31

-------
  .Source.
—Source. Foe I "Type. •
                                    - )

                           '•5"



-------
BATCH TINNER
     Pre-formed tubes are fed into the batch tinner, a maximum of
six at a time.  These tubes pass through a flux bath to remove
oxides from the tubing before the lead-tin coating is applied in
the tinner.  The batch tinner has an exhaust system which col-
                                       %
lects any vapors produced in the tinner.  Under operating con-
ditions utilizing the scrubber, it is reported that the gases are
exhausted at 70 acfm.  During this test series, all vapors were
exhausted through the bypass system.

-------

-------
REPORT NO.
Y-7730-G
PAGE
OF
PAGES
                            REPORT
                  .:           by

                  YORK RESEARCH CORPORATION
                             on
                     EMISSIONS FROM THE
                    FLORENCE HIKING COMPANY
                     COAL PROCESSING PLANT
                             at
                     SEWARD, PENNSYLVANIA
                             By

                         Richard W.  Kling
                         Project Engineer
      February 18, 1972  :
                              REPORT NO. Y-7730-G
YORK RESEARCH CORPORATION
                                  STAMFORD, CONNECTICUT

-------
                                                                                         COMMERCIAL TESTING & ENGINEERING Co.
        COULTER COUNTER'
                                      PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS
                                                                         CHICAGO. ILLINOIS 6O6O1
                                                                         226 NORTH LA 5«i_i_c Sinter
                                                                             312/726.B434

w
u
A
V
• 	 	 	 . 	 — — . 	 ujje: j. a LDL |jat-£»
material and sample no. electrolyte & disoersant aoerture
Y-7730-G (out)



Isoton Aerosol OT
Ultrasonic
bath

400 p.
280 p
100 u
3O u




100
 10
   0
0.2
0.5
                                                            5         10
                                                     microns  diameter
                                                                   20
                                                                     50
100
JO

-------
REPORT NO.  Y-7730-H
                                               PAGE
OF
       February
                                REPORT

                                  by

                       YORK RESEARCH CORPORATION

                                  on

                          EMISSIONS FROM THE

                       ISLAND CREEK COAL COMPANY
                         COAL PROCESSING PLANT

                                  at

                        VANSANT. VIRGINIA  2U656
                                  By

                           Richard W. Kling
                           Project Engineer
                    1972
YORK RESEARCH
                                                   STAMFORD, CONNECTICUT

-------
REPORT NO.  Y-7730-H
PAGE
OF 64  PAGES
TABLE I
. : . SUMMARY OF RESULTS - TEST #1
Inlet
Date: . 1/25/72
Stack Flow Rate - SCFM 156,000
. • % Water Vapor - Vol. % 15.0
% C02 - Vol. % Dry ... - 1.1
% 02 - Vol. % Dry 17.4
•v % N2 - Vol. % Dry . 81.5-
362 Emission - ppm , ^37.1
• . NO? Emission - ppm
#1 ' ; • - •
' • • • #2 • '•'..-.
#3 ....-_'
. * Hydrocarbons - ppm
- #1
#2 -
-. :• #3 . • -
Particulate Emission - Filter,
Cyclone and Probe
Gr./CF @ Stack Conditions '1.2719
Gr./SCFD 1.8360
Lb./hr. 2450.
. Particulate Emission - Total
Gr./CF @> Stack Conditions . 1.2763
Gr./SCFD . 1.8423
Lb/hr. 2460.
^~x\\
YORK RESEARCH CORPORATION RY;I:I:^
Outlet
1/25/72
162,000
13.3
1.1
17.4 '
81.5
% 6.71
73.9
69.6
53.9
44.91
64.53
62.78
0.0177
0.0236
32.8
.0229
0.0305
42.3
STAMFORD, CONNECTICU1

-------
DEPORT NO.   Y-7730-H
                          PAGE  5  OF GH  PAGES
       Date:
        TABLE II

SUMMARY OF RESULTS - TEST #2

                   Inlet  .

             .     1/26/72
       Stack Flow Rate - SCFM
       % Water Vapor - Vol. %
       % C02 - Vol. % Dry
       % 02  - Vol. % Dry
       % N2  - Vol. % Dry

       SOj) Emission -_ppm

       NO? Emission - ppm
             #1
             #2
           •  #3

       Hydrocarbons - ppm
             #1
             #2
             #3

       ParticulateEmission - Filter,
       Cyclone and Probe
         Gr./CF © Stack Conditions
         Gr./SCFD
         Lb,/hr.

       Par ticulate Emiss i on - Tota 1
         GrTcF i> Stack Conditions
         Gr/SCFD                  .
         Lb./hr
                            \
                  157,000
                  8.1
                  1,6
                  17.3
                  81.1

                  m.o
                  .5518
                  .73S6
                  990.
                  .5627
                  .7502
                  1010.
Outlet

1/26/72

157,000
13.H
1.6
17.7
80.7

2.68
                                 17.2
                                 71.7
                                 88.3
                                 53.6^
                                 65.40
0.0088
0.0118
15.9
0.0117
0.0157
21.1
YORK RESEARCH CORPORATION
                             STAMFORD, CONNECTICUT

-------
' REPORT NO,   Y-7730-H
                                                  PAGE  6   OF 64 PAGES
            :,-v;;;;v;-.' •'-• '•• •    ;  TABLE  HI  '

         : V •'. •'•'•" :-•'•':• •;SUMMARY OF RESULTS  - TEST
        Date;

        Stack  Flow Rate - SCFM
       •% Water  Vapor - Vol.  %
        % C02  -  Vol.  % Dry ''.'•
        % 02 - Vol. % Dry   •  '
       "% N2 - Vol. % Dry   :.:j

        50^ Emissions- ppm
        N 02 Em i s s i ons -
          -#!      .
            . '-#2  •-.-,.
         ---   ' #3 .-  ''   . ••
Hydrocarbons  -  ppm    ''•."''    /  :."
.  .   .#1  •         '  V  'v'.-!. i.-'-
•; '   '  #2      '   •••••-.".. '',
      #3          '        ;••••   •

Particulate Emission -  Filter,
Cyclone and Probe
.  Gr/CF @ Stack Conditions
•  Gr/SCFD
  Lb. /hr                .    .'•, ;
        Parti culate Emission - TptaJL
          Gr/CF @-Stack Conditions;
        •V..! iGr/SCFD:-.-.:'.:>..•..•/.•.-'''.I. .V . ..;. .
                '''
                                    Inlet

                                  ,1/27/72

                                   170,000
                                   9.6
                                   1.6
                                   17.8
                                   80.6 " •'••.

                                   44.5
                                           1.6255
                                           2.164^
                                           3150.
                                         .1.6285
                                          2.1684
                                          3160.
                                                           Outlet

                                                           1/27/72

                                                           157,000
                                                           12.7
                                                           1.5
                                                           17.7
                                                           80.8
                                                           25.7
                                                          13.1
                                                          72.5
                                                          71.8
                                                           175.5
                                                           160.5
                                                          0.0120
                                                          0.0159
                                                          21.M
                                                   0.0157
                                                   0.0208
                                                   28.0
YORK RESEARCH CORPORATION
                                                      STAMFORD, CONNECTICUT

-------
REPORT NO. 'JY-7730-H
                                                PAGE  7  OF OH  PAGES
       •!. PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS

       ;;. The  following two graphs show the  particle size distribution
       -; of the  inlet and the outlet samples on the first test.

        ' This report was submitted to York  Research by Commercial
       '/:'.Testing and Engineering Company of Chicago, Illinois.

       •'; All  analyses were done on the Coulter Counter.  Each sample
         was  dispersed with Aerosol OT/ and further dispersed using
       ,'" an ultrasonic bath'. . Ispton was .the electrolyte used.
YORK RESEARCH CORPORATION
                                                    STAMFORD, CONNICTICLT

-------
                                                                                     COMMERCIAL TESTING a ENGINEERING Co
        COULTER COUNTER*
                                    PARTICLE  SIZE ANALYSIS
                                                                     CHICAGO. ILLINOIS 6O6OI
                                                                     220 NORTH LA SALLI STRUT
                                                                         912/726-6434
 Source
             YORK RESEARCH CORPORATION
                                                         Operator^
                                                                        LSB
                                                                               2-16-72
material and sample no. electrolyte & dispersant aperture
0
LJ
A
$
Y-7730-H (in)



Isoton Aerosol OT
Ultrasonic
bath

1OO u
30 u




•

100


 90


 80


 70


 60


 50


 40


• 30


 20


 10

                   •
                      f

                                        \
                                               \
   0.1
0.2
0.5
10
                                                                             •H!
                                                                             1

                                                                                      I
50
100
200

-------
                                                                                     COMMERCIAL TESTING & ENGINEERING Co,
        COULTER COUNTER*
  Source     YORK RESEARCH CORPORATION
PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS
CHICAGO. ILLINOIS 606OI
22B NOVTH LA SAL LI
    312/726-8434
                     Operator.
                                     LSB
                                                                                                 Date.
            2-18-72
material and sample no. electrolyte & dispersant aperture
0
LJ
A
$
Y-7730-H (outh



Isoton Aerosol OT
Ultrasonic
bath

28O )i
1OO u
30 p


. •
.

 100
:  20
                                                                                                   100
                                                             200

-------
.5
ource-
              A^o
           Fuel "Type. •

  -Souroe. IbfiLseripioM  C*Siie..<,'K*h»M , Ecf". )
                 ls  pmnwy-Wbo* 15 to
 »K/c)tcaJ
-------
       Vf
Number crF  tests  Tub/  *
                          A/  ^rbqtk.^5'
                          '*&    '^
I crit
                                          eria.
 are OA/ a^vtraac,  of -j-h
                                                aa
Example.  Mciliod v5 - /mp/i£^s ^^fhoj^5 pr0ce.cJor<*3  Were,

-------
STATIONARY SOU1CE TESTING OF A PHOSPHATE ROCK PLANT
                        At
         The Beker Industries Corporation
                   Conda,  Idaho
                        By

                   Emile Baladi
            Midwest Research Institute
          EPA Project Report No. 75-PRP-4

                   FINAL REPORT

            EPA Contract No. 68-02-1403
            Mil Project No. 392?-C(13)
                        For

          Environmental Protection Agency
              Research Triangle Park
              North Carolina  27711

           Attn:   Mr.  R, Terry Harrison

-------

                           EMB REPORT NUMBER 75-PRP-4
O
               AIR  POLLUTION
               EMISSION  TEST
                    BEKER INDUSTRIES, INC.

                       Conda, Idaho

         UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENC.Y
               Office of Air and Waste Management
             Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
                Emission Measurement Branch
              Research Triangle Park, North Carolina

-------
                                WEIGH! % GREATER THAN STATED SIZE
                          95  90              50              10   5
O.I
 0.01     O.I   0.5  I
5   10              50              90   95
     WEIGHT % IfSS THAN SlATID SIZE
                                                       0.1     0.01
                                    I—I	I	I—I	1    I     II
                                                                                 99.9   99.99
   Figure 2 -  Particle  Diameter  Versus Weight Percent Less/Greater Than Stated
                     Size for Brink Tests  (Baghouse  Inlet)

-------
tn
                   99.99    99.9
                 10.0
               o


               u
               I—
               a;
               <
                   0.01
    99
     WEIGHT % GREATER THAN STATED SIZE

95   90               50              10    5
0.5  1
    10               50               90   95

      WEIGHT % IfSS THAN STATED SIZE
                                                                                                  99
0.1      0.01
                                                                          99,9    99.99
                     Figure 7  -  Particle Diameter Versus Weight Percent Less/Greater Than Stated Size

                                         for Andersen Tests  (Scrubber Outlet  Runs)

-------
                                                                      TABLE 20

                                                       SUMHARY OF ANDERSEN SAMPLING PARAMETERS
vo

Run
1
2
4
5
6
7

Run
1
2
4
5
6
7
Start
Date Time
4-8-75 13:26
4-8-75 15:06
4-9-75 16:10
4-9-75 17 5 33
4-9-75 18:36
4-9-75 19:53
Stack
Temperature
('F)S/
150
148
148
154
156
154
Duration
(rnin)
45
40
35
35
35
35
Barometric
Pressure
(In. Hg)»/
24.32
24.32
24.37
24.32
24.32
24.37
Stack Gas Compos it ion(%)
Sampling Location
Scrubber outlet
Scrubber outlet
Scrubber outlet
Scrubber outlet
Scrubber outlet
Scrubber outlet
Static Sample
Pressure Volume
(in. H20)2/ (cf)fi/
0.0 25.90
0.0 Z3.10
0.0 19.83
0.0 20.50
0.0 20.10
0.0 20.50
oo2
9.3
9.5
9.7
9.7
9.7
9.7
Sample
Rate
(«cfm)
0.791
0.758
0.722
0.762
0.777
0.794
02 CO
11.7 0.0
11.4 0.0
10.4 0.0
10.4 0.0
10.4 0.0
10.4 0.0
Sample
Volume
(d«cf)S/
20.08
17.51
14.64
15.27
15.00
15.42
Molecular Wt .
N2 H20 Dry Wet
79.0
79.0
79.9
79.9
79.9
79.9
Nozzle
Diameter
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
20.1 29
18.5 29
18.4 29
18.4 29
21.2 29
21.1 29

Grain
gr/scia/
0.016
0.018
0.030
0.026
0.030
0.026
.95 27.55
.95 27.73
.97 27.77
.97 27.77
.97 27.43
.97 27.44

Loading
ng/in%/
36.57
41.14
68.57
59.43
68.57
59.43
      a/  °F - degrees Fahrenheit
          in. Kg * Inches of mercury
          In. HjO ° Inches of water
          cf « cubic feet (meter condition)
          dscf •> dry standard cubic feet
          tn. = inches
          gr/scf = grains per standard cubic foot
          mg/m3 = milligrams per cubic meter.

-------
                                                        TABLE 21

                                                       ANALYSIS  SUMHARf (RUN NUMBER 1-S)
out
           b«OB7
                         tENSHr-   l.OQO
                                                               CF*
                                                                                          GH
                                                                                   .0213-
                                                                               FltH»~  —
STAGt/
KLATE
/O
0/1
1/2
i/3
3/4
4/5
5/6
6/7
7/8
PlATt
» PAN
.49935
.70636
.68799
.702*4
.6*303
.70568
.68721
.701^7
.6S9&7
F0>-
SAMPLE
D. 00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0,00000
0.00000
0.00000
O.OObOO
0.00000
JAKt
 .ate
  PAN
                            .4993S
                            .70660
                            .6879V
                            .70213
                            .68303
                            .70517
                            .66614
                            .69655
                                      FOrf
           0.00000
           0.00000
           D.00000
           0.00000
           0.00000
           0.00000
           0.00000
           0.00000
           0.00000
TAKC"  •     S*H-
UF
Pl_ATt      IGMi


 . »ic/Jt>   0.00000
 .70660    ,Q002d
 .6o799   0.00000
 .70213    .00031
 .bd303   0.00000
 .70517    .00051
           .00107
'EIGHT
>e«C£Nr
0.00
2.36
0.90
2.62
0.00
4.31
9.04
40.71
40.96
CUM.
HEIGHT
PERCENT
0.00
2.36
2.36
4.98
4.9B
9.29
18.33
S9.04
100.00
KUGHT
pe*««r
0.00
1.31
a. oo
1.45
0.00
2.39
S.OI
22.58
22.72
I.UK.
Peitf.1
0.00
1.31
I.J1
z . i*


6o.au
113-32
1P9.40
Jl J.OV
556.61
1346,86
2434.66
49HS. 31
••--TIC
I Htfil

10. 42
6. el
* ,62
J.I*
2.01
1.00
,«, |
.« 1

-------
          TABLE 22

ASOERSEN ANALYSIS  SUMMAHY (RUN NUMBER 2-S)



UENSITY*
0*TE 0-.0875 I»»P.EfF.C=

STAGE/
PLATE
/O
0/1
1/2
2/3
3/4
4/5
5/6
6/7
T/e
SAMPLE
PLATE
* PAN
.53297
.7081*
.69299
.69572
,69327
.71109
.66662
.T2U9
.69*11
PAN
F(JM
SAMPLE
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
TAME
PLATE
* PAN
.53297
.T0787
.69299
.69S72
,6933?
.71145
.68688
.71566
,68d26
1.000
.1*0
PAN
Fu*
T*ȣ
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
                         MLTEH *T =    .00648 CM
  HATE a   .75767  CF«    TOTAL  »T*=    .02061 GM
                         -*ITHt,UT FILTER-  —i
T*KC
OF '
PLATE
,>3ii7
I?fl?»T
.69299
.69a72
.69327
.71145
.68668
.71566
.b8b26
isANHLt
MEII.HT
(bNl
0.00000
.00027
0.00000
0,00000
0.00000
.00044
.00194
.00573
.005d5

•tIGHT
PERCENT
0.00
1.90
0.00
0.00
9.00
3.09
13.63
40.27
41.11
CUM,
riEISHT
PERCENT
0.00
1.90
1.90
1.90
1.90
4.99
18.62
58.89
100.00

riEIGnT
PEflCEUT
- 0.00
1.31
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.13
9.41
27.80
20.38
'. •-»'««
•ElbnT
•WENT
O.UO
1.31
1.31
1.31
1.31
3.44
12.86
40.66
SV.O*
JtT
vtL.
(M/SI

58.3*
108.79
181.51
300.04
533.41
1290.71
23S2.33
4704.63
furtl \C
JlA*»
(M1CRI

11.16
6.96
4.T2
3.21
2.06
1.02
.63
.42

-------
                                                         TABLE 23

                                               »N, t-SE.*  ANALYSIS SUMMARY  (RUH NUMBER i.-S)
0»TE
 uENSlTV:  1.000
«F.CFF.C=   .!«..!
                                                                                »T =
                                                                        T;»T«L
                                                                        -•ITHOUI  FlLJcB-  —K

STdCE/
PLATt
/O
0/1
1/2
2/3
3/4
4/5
i>/6
6/7
7/fl
SAMPtt
PLATE
« PAN
.61bl7
.0*601
.d3*33
.81663
.nl 1 15
.80362
.60806
.63588
.83753
PAN
F<»<-
!>ANPLi
0,00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
                           TAht
                           PLftTt
                           * PAN
                             .Blbir
                             .82732
                             .83210
             PAH
             Fu-
             0.00000
             0.00000
             0.00000
             0.00000
             0.00000
             0.00000
             0,00000
             0,00000
             0.00000
TA>«i
UF
PLATE
.61317
,84521
.03405
.B1617
.olO:a2
.00201
.80239
.82732
.03210
,MMk |.
*£I(»HT
luHI
0.00000
.000*0
.ooo<>e
,00u»6
.00063
.00161
.OOS67
.00056
.005*3

*EI6HT
PERCENT
0,00
3.41
1.19
1.96
2.69
6.87
24.19
36.5
-------
          TABLE 24

ANOErtSEN ANALYSIS SUMMARY (RUN NUMBER 5-S)



•JENS1TY"
D»TE 0*0975 1»P.EFF.C*

STAGE/
PLATE
/O
0/1
1/2
2/3
3/4
*/5
5/6
6/7
7/8
SAHHU
PLATE
. PAN
.61902
.83151
.82199
.83351
.80700
.84024
.84146
,B»ao5
.83962
PAN
FD-
SAHPLt
0.00000
0,00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
o.ooooo
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
TARt
f-LATE
• PAN
.61902
.U3143
.62191
.83316
.80652
.83895
.83641
.84045
.03396
1.000
.100
HAN
F(Jn
TAME
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
SAMPLING                 rlLTtR ml*    .00513 liN
  tfAIt. a   .76257  CFM    TJTAL  «T»
                                  FILTER-   —«ITrt
TArifc
OF
PLATE
.6M02
.83143
.82191
.83318
.80652
.83895
.836*1
.8*0*5
.83396
SANr-Lt
•EIGHT
I'JM)
U. 00000
.OOOOrt
.00008
.OOU33
.00046
.00129
.00505
.00760
.00566

HEIGHT
PERCENT
0.00
.39
,39
1 »hO
2.33
6.27
24.55
36.95
27.52
CUM.
•EIGHT
PERCENT
0.00
.39
.78
2.3B
4. 72
10.99
35.54
72. *a
100.00

HEIGH
PERCEI
0.00
.31
.31
I. 2s
1.87
5.02
19.65
29.57
22.02
                                                     Cor.
                                                      9.GO
                                                       .31
                                                      3.77
                                                      D. 7*
                                                     dO.04
                                                                 JET
                                                                vCL.
 Ifl9.*9

 3r>l.*e>
 536.86
1299.06
2367.54
                                                                        CilAr>.
                                                                        (MICRI
11.12
 6.94

 3.20
 e.os
 1.02
  .62
  .42

-------
                                                                 TABLE 25

                                                       *Njt>-SEN ANALYSIS  SUMM*UY(RUN NUHBEK 6-S)
      OtIE
                  0«.097S
                               !-.(-.EFF.C*
                                            l.ObU
                                                         -»»It =  .77667  CfN
                                                                                -"JlTMi.UT  FILTM-  — -IfM Flul".- —
HLATE
  /O
 0/1
 1/2
 2/3
 3/4
 4/6
 5/6
 6/7
 7/H
SANPit
PLAlt
. PAN
.txflOO
.82B6S
.8242B
.84281
.02711
.83132
.82*25
.87961
,87225
PAH
fill
«HPLC-
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.90000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.90000
LflTt
PAN
.biflOO
.82818
.82383
.U42S1
.82656
.03039
.82077
.872T&
.IS6421
Fo-
T«-£
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
o.ooooo
O.&ffOOO
F
' «t lliHT
CUM.
•£IbMT WEIGHT
t.ATt ' (OH) PERCENT
.C4100
. B2dlS
.S23H3
.8*251
.82656
,8303V
.82077
.872TS
.81*21
0.00000
.000*7
.000*5
.00030
.00055
.00093
.003*8
.00686
.OOdO*
0
2
2
1
2
4
It,
32
30
.00
.23
.11
.42
.61
.41
.51
.5*
.1*
PERCENT
0.
2.
*.
5.
«.
12.
29.
61.
100.
00
23
36
79
40
81
32
66
00
• t
16hT
*>t
PEHCtNT -E
0
1
1
1
1
3
11
23
27
.00
.60
.S3
.02
.87
.16
.81
.29
.29
0
1
3
*
%
9
,»y
".«
71
1 '-"I T . tL .
»-Ct i 1
.C J
• CO
« li
.1*
. L 1
.16
• •»*>
«<^t>
.55
' < C

-."»
Ill
Idb
3U7
646
1323
^-11
•»• 2
-------
          TABLE 26

ANOC4SEN ANALYSIS SUHMASY (aim NUMBER 7-S)



OENS1TY=
DATE o*Q4?s IHP.EFF.CS

STAGE/
PLATE
/O
0/1
1/2
*/3
3/4
*/5
5/6
6/7
7/6
SAMPLE
PLATE
• PAN
.66990
.6655*
.85830
.87362
.86899
.877*3
,82517
.84*25
.8*519
PAN
FO*
SAMPLE
O.DOOOO
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0,60000
o.ooooo
0.00000
0.00000
TANt
PLAU
* PAN
.6699a
.86*89
.85818
.87329
.86*»S9
.87585
.82006
.83802
.83950
1.000
.1*3
PAN
FU«
TAKE
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
SAMPLING
  HATc =
                                             GK
   OF
    .6699B
    .86*89
    .85818
    .87329
    .86859
    .87595
    .02006
    .83802
    .83950
                 CF"
                  «T«   .02559
                         -•ITnliUT  FILTER-  —.ITH FlLTc« —
                   CUH.                : .-:.        JET
 •tlOHl   HEIGHT   HE16H\    HEIGHT    «EK'«T    V£L.
 (oM)     PERCENT  PERCENT   PERCENT   PErfCtNT
0.00000
 .00066
 .00012
 .00033
 .000*0
 .00511
 .00623
 .00569
 0.00
 3.28
  .60
 l.b*
 1.99
 7.85
25. *0
30.96
28.28
  0.00
  3.28
  3.8B
  5.52
  7.5U
 15.36
 *0.7t>
 71.72
100.00
0.00
2.SB
 ,*7
t
 k.5b

19.^7

22.2*'.
 o.ou

 J.OS
 *.J*
 S.'*u
12.08
32.0*
56.39
  61.17
 11*.07

 31*159
 559.27
1353.40
2*66.39
10.90
 6.80
 *.61
 3.13
 2.01
 1.00
  .61

-------
» z,«
                                  REPORT NO. 75-PRP-2

o
                AIR   POLLUTIO
                EMISSION  TEST
                       THE ROYSTEE COMPANY

                       MULBERRY, FLORIDA
          UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                Office of Air and Waste Management
              Office of Air Qualify Planning and Standards
                 Emission Measurement Branch
               Research Triangle Pfirk, North Caroliii.'i

-------
          EPA REPORT FOR

        THE ROYSTER COMPANY

      PHOSPHATE ROCK FACILITY

         MULBERRY, FLORIDA

      EPA REPORT NO. 75-PRP-2
               TASK NO. 14

         CONTRACT NO. 68-02-1406
      Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
       Emission Measurements Branch
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
               Submitted by

         Engineering-Science,  Inc.
            7903 Westpark Drive
          McLean, Virginia 22101
              January 1976

-------
                                 TABLE 11-12

      PARTICULATE MASS COLLECTED IN THE BRINK PARTICLE  SIZING  TRAIN
Cyclone
   1
   2
   3
   4
   5
Filter
(Royster Chemical)
Run 4
Grams
e 0.04117
0.00583
0.00727
0.00457
0.00331
0.00092
0.00016
•
&ryscfa/
1.241
0.176
0.219
0.138
0.100
0.028
0.005
Run 5
Grams
0.04427
0.00491
0.00982
0.00612
0.00144
0.00111
0.00004

gr/scfl/
1.335
0.148
0.296
0.185
0.043
0.033
0.001
  Total
0.06323
1.907
                                0.06771
2.041
 a/   gr/sef = grains per  standard  cubic  foot.

                                TABLE 11-13

                                a/
       CUMULATIVE WEIGHT PERCENT-  VERSUS PARTICLE SIZE FOR THE
                         BRINK SAMPLING TRAIN
Filter^'
                          (Royster Chemical)
                        Run 4
Cum. Jtt'L

  65.11
  74.33
  85.83
  93.06
  98.29
  99.75
 100.00
                                       Run 5
                                                 Cum.
                                                         a/
                                  65.38
                                  72.63
                                  87,14
                                  96.17
                                  98.30
                                  99.94
                                 100.00
                                 7
                                 2.93
                                 1.73
                                 1.18
                                 0.63
                                 0.40
                                 0.30
ai/  Dp = Effective cutoff diameter (microns) based on unit density particles,
    Cum. wt7, = Cumulative weight percent includes particulate collected on
                 the back-up filter,  all stages, and the cyclone,
b_/  Dp for the filter was assumed to  be 0.3 pm (over 99% of particulate
      2t 0.3 um are collected on the filter according to manufacturer data).
                                    11-17

-------
1-1
I
OS
                          99.99    99.9        99

                        10.0
                WEIGHT % GREATER THAN STATED SIZE


         95   90               50               10    5
                      c
                      o
                         1.0
Q


IAJ
_I
                         0.1
                                                                i    I   i
          J—J	L
                          0.01     O.I    0.5  t
J	1	1	1	1	S	i   I   »
                                                                                          J
                                   10               50               90   95


                                     WEIGHT % IfSS THAN STATED SIZE
                                                                                                       99
                                                                                          0.1     0.01
                                                                    99.9   99.99
                           FIGURE II-l    - Particle Diameter Versus  Weight  Percent Less/Greater

                                              Than  Stated  Size (Inlet)

-------
                                                             •TABLE  11-16

                                                          ANDERSEN ANALYSIS SUMMARY
                                                 i.ooo
                                                                        MLTt-
DtTE
                        03*575
10
U!

STASE/
FLATf
/O "
0/1
1/2
?/3
3/4
4/5
5/6
h/7
7/3
S-AHPLt
PLATt
• PAN
.4D640
.61887
.C£»707
.600 .6
.597B6
.61652
.69679
.71924
.6912-
MAti
F0>-
SAMPLr
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
U. 00000
0.00000
0.001)00
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
. EFF.C«
TAKC"
*L;™
.4*640
.61667
.59662
.600*2
.59740
.61611
,6-<&*5
.71^21
.6-J125
»*t*
K«
U. 00000
0.00000
0.00000
O.OUOOO
0.00000
o.ooooc
b.UUOOO
o.uoooo
0.00000
0.00000
 ,00<»43
                                                                                    -WITHOUT FILTtH-  —WITH
T*1**:
CF
PLATE
.4(^40
.61B67
.54662
.60042
.59740
.61611
.6964S
•71v21
.6-U23
' ^A**"'. f
•*ilf'HT
1-iM)
0.00000
.00020
.OOIK5
.00054
.OOU4b
.00041
.U0034
.00003
0.00000

HEIGHT
PEHCENT
0.00
8.23
18.52
22.22
18. 93
16.87
13.99
1.23
0.00
CUM.
WEIGHT
PERCENT
0.00
8.23
26.75
48.97
67.90
84.77
96.77
100.00
100.00

W RIGHT
PEHCENT
0.00
a. 23
IB. 52
32.22
Id. 43
16.67
13.99
1.23
0.00
. Ll/S.
WE.I6NT
PEKCENT
0.00
a. 23
26.75
43.97
67.90
a*. 77
9H.77
100.00
100.00
JET
VEL.
(CH/S>

67.68
126.21
210.57
3*8.09
618.82
1497.40
2729.02
5<.5b.03
                                                                                                                                   DIftf'
                                                                                                                                    10.35

                                                                                                                                     4.37
                                                                                                                                     2.98
                                                                                                                                     1.91
                                                                                                                                      ,95

                                                                                                                                      .39

-------
                                                              TABLE 11-17
                                                          ANDERSEN ANALYSIS SUMMARY
M
t->
I
     PLATE
 /O
0/1
1/2
2/3
3/4
4/5
5/6
6/7
7/8
           KUN NUMaE»     f
           0& TE        0
                SAMPLE
                PLATE
                *  PAN
                 .65152
                 .67685
                 .64572
                 .65351
                 .66353

75
PAN
F OS--
SAMPLE
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
IȣNSITT =
1"U.EFF.C=
TARE
PLATE
» PAN
.4*884
.65152
.6529fc
.67685
.64569
.66194
.6534o
.66355
«670tt5
1.000
.140
PAN
FIV-.
TAt-t
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
o.ouooo
0.00000
0.00000
«r>LlNfj
•*Tt = .90400 f.FK
TARE
OF
PLATE
.46*84
.65152
,6'i£9li
.6T685
.64569
.6*»l-*4
.65J4-*
.66355
.67(iB;'
' b«MCi.c
h El GMT
IbHI
o.ooooo
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
.00003
O.OOQOU
.00003
0.00000
0.00000
FILTK*' wT= .0022a 6N
Tl»TiL iT= .00231 G*
-WITHOUT FILTER- — WITH FILT£« —

HEIGHT
PEKCENT
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
50.00
0.00
50.00
0.00
0.00
CUM.
HEIGHT
PERCENT
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
50.00
50.00
100.00
100.00
100.00

WEIGHT
PERCENT
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.30
0.00
1.30
0.00
0.00
CUM.
FLIGHT
P£»CENT
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.30
1.30
1.60
2.60
if .60
JET
VEL.
ICM/S1

69.60
129. -SO
216.56
357.99
636.43
1539.99
21*06.63
5613.2?
PA3TIC
DU'-'.
tflCR)

10.21
6.3T
4.31
2.93
i.aa
.93
.57
.38

-------
K>
CD
              0.1
                0.01
                        99.9
          99
      WEIGHT % GREATER THAN STATED SIZE

95   90               50              10 .   5
0.1    0.5  1
     10               50               90   95       99
      WEIGHT % LESS THAN STATED SIZE
                                                                                                       0,\     0.01
                                                      I	1—_l	It   I
                                                                                                       99.9    99.99
                         FIGURE II-6  - Partlculate Diameter Versus Weight Percent  Less/Greater
                                           Than  Stated Size  (Outlet)

-------
    •  '-^^^a
        •* ,  .»"-• ..- .<<' i r-.i^r-^-:.
                                                           EMB REPORT NUMBER 75-PRP-3

        '-WM i  $?$$





   !" * • * /"';"•;'•• '"'• ••- •  '.--•-- -:^;^
   *: •"v. ;.'; :'"•* ",• • > v :.- '"'' ••' >'.':_i'.:''<:.^
    .-•"-  V*V:', j* **":'.*' '• ^- ;-:'.t *.-.-;!• -":.
          '•'
       •  •  :  &?$%&&
             •'*•"•*•'•»<3s98
    •. ,i';.^i|^^S&
     • /  '•~<.'y,'Wfi ^*4^S^*j*';r f&*'*M2b>4>%5
  •  :.f--*-/r^ "'^r*-%|
•> ••••';..;"':.-.v   .'^.^tvW^w*

  ••/v>*   .>^?-*^«
 ' • \ •••   ": • --r-t'-^^
       ;:-;-:..;-::^*-;*^5es
      .
:;C'S^

^h
  •    ,;., .-to V,;K

 =»•     -..i  :Cu
                                                 MOBIL  CHEMICAL



                                                Nichols,  Florida
      ..-.^ .^-.--.u
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

             OMice or Air and Waste Management

        OKice ol Air  Qualily Planning  and Standards

               Emission Measurenuml  Branch

          Rcsoarch Triangle* Park, Noilh Carolina

-------
               EPA REPORT FOR

               MOBIL CHEMICAL

              NICHOLS, FLORIDA

                NO. 75-P1P-3
                 Task No. 15

           Contract No. 68-02-1406
                Submitted to

       Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air Quality Programs and Standards
        Emission Measurement Branch
                Submitted by

           Engineering-Science, Inc.
              7903 Westpark Drive
            McLean, Virginia 22101
                 January 1976

-------
                               TABLE II-6

      PARTICULATE MASS COLLECTED IN THE BRINK PARTICLE SIZING TRAIN
                   Run 1
Run 2
Run 3
Stage
Cyclone
1
2
3
4
5
Filter
Total
Grams
0.06835
0.03600
0.01100
0.00452
0.00300
0.00141
0.00205
0.12633
K/sct
1.340
0.710
0.216
0.089
0.059
0.028
0.040
2.4772
Grams
0.05120
0.01029
0.01062
0.00387
0.00166
0.00050
0.00040
0.07854
R/scf
1.434
0.288
0.297
0.108
0.046
0.014
0.011
2.198
Grams
0.02811
0.00179
0.00509
0.00242
" 0.00197
0.00074
0.00109
0.04121
R/scf
0.966
0.061
0.175
0.083
0.068
0.025
0.037
1.415
                               TABLE II-7

           CUMULATIVE WEIGHT PERCENT^/ VERSUS PARTICLE SIZE
                     FOR THE BRINK SAMPLING TRAIN
Sta^e
Cyclone
1
2
3
4
5
Filter^/
Run
Cum. Wt 7,-
54.10
82.60
91.31
94.89
97.26
98.38
100.00
1
Dp („„,)£/
7
3.55
1.99
1.37
0.72
0.47
0.30
Run 2
Cum. Wt % Dj
65.19
78.29
91.81
96.74
98.85
99.49
100.00

? (»m)
7
3.35
1.99
1.37
0.72
0.47
0.30
Run
Cum. Wt %
68.21
72.56
84.91
90.78
95.56
97.36
100.00
3
Dp (urn)
7
3.19
1.89
1.29
0.69
0.44
0.30
§_/  Dp = Effective cutoff diameter (microns) based on unit density particles,
      Cum. wt. 7, = Cumulative weight percent includes particulate collected
      on the back-up filter, all stages, and the cyclone.
b/  Dp for the filter was assumed to be 0.3 pra.  (Over 99% of particulate
      ^ 0.3 Jim are collected on the filter according to manufacturer data.)
                                   12

-------
   99,99
  10.0
99.9
99
         95
 WEIGHT % GREATER THAN STATED SIZE

90               50              10
0.1     0.0!
c
2
u
I i.o
IX
<
o.
  0.1
               Run 1
                                                              T      I
                   Run 2
                                                INLET RUNS

                                            SIZE DISTRIBUTION
                                  -Run 3
                   J	L
                                  I   I   1   I    I
                                             J	1     1    '
    0.01     O.I    0.5   1



            FIGURE II-l
                        10               50

                         WEIGHT % LESS THAN STATED SIZE
                                             90   95
               Particle Diameter Versus Weight  7. Less/Greater Than
                  Stated Size - Scrubber Inlet
                                                      99.9   99.99

-------
TABLE 11-11
ANDERSEN ANALYSIS SUMMARY
fcUN "bUnhErf 1 CtNSITf*
DUE 041B75 lfi>.EFF.C=
SAMPLE »*« TAME
$TASE/ PL«TE • FO- - PL^TE
PLATE • PAN SAMPLfc * P»W
/o
0/1
1/2
2/3
3/4
4/5
5/6
D/7
7/8
.48875
.6335J*
.6264*
.63361
.63497
.643^6
.65172
.63601
.655PO
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
o.oouoo
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
.48851
.63326
.62606
.633bO
.6348?
.64300
.64V74
.6U360
.6547<»
1.000 SAMPLING
.140 -»AT£ a .dNQOO LFM
•>*N TARE S-AHU e
Fit- OF Htl&HT
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
.4»H51
.63326
.62606
.63350
.634*7
.64360
.64V74
.6H360
.o»47*
.00024
.00032
.00043
.00011
.00010
.00036
,ooi vh
.00*41
.OOlu^i
FILT-N NT= .00X33 GM
TafAl iff* .00*39 (j«
-tflTrt.'lUT F.1LTE1- --«ITM FILTFN —
CUM. LUh.
UEISHT WEIGHT WEIGHT *Ei'iMT
PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT
3.42
4.56
6.13
1.57
1.43
.5.14
2H.cfS
34. 3H
15.12
.3*. 4*
7.99
14.12
15.63
17.12
22.25
50.50
t»4.8a
100.00
2.56
3.41
4.5^
1.17
1.06
3^3
21.09"
25.67
11. ZV
i.56
S.1**1
1U.54
"11.71
I?. 78
16.61
~ 37.73
63.37
7».65
JtT
•VEL.
(CM/SI

66.22 .
123. 4*
206.02
340.56
605.45
1465.04
2670.03
b340.06
P4*TtC
CIA",

10.47
6.53
4.42
3.01
1.93
.VA
.t>8
.3s*

-------
                                                          TABLE 11-12
                                                 ANDERSEN ANALYSIS  SUMMARY
     HUH
     UftfE
   J
J>1975
         1.000
.EFF.C=   .140
                                                   sa»»
                                                                           Tf'T«l
                                                                           •»'ITH')OT  FJLTE.R-   —WITH
ST«S€/
         PLSTC
         * PAN
 /o
0/1

2/3
3/4
4/5
5/6
-3/7
7/a
           .65482
           .64536
           .64676
                     PAH
           .62226
    0.00300
    0*00000
    0.00000
    0.00000
    0.00000
    0.00000
    0.00003
    o.oouoo
    0.00000
TANK
PLATE
* PAN
.45700
.1*7112
.65472
.6B475
.bh-vlO
.644>-4
,6441V
.6S704
.620i<7
PAN
f 0»-
TMc
0.00000
O.OOOUD
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
                                     Tflf-t
                                     OF
                                     Pl.STt
                                                       .45700
                       .60475
                       .66*10

                       .64419
                       .6i704
                                                                 !*,•».
MIC.1-!

10
b
4
3
1




.42
.SO
.40
.00
.92
.95
• 58
.39

-------
Ul
                  99.99    99,9
                10.0
               o
               u

               s
Q

UJ
_l

U

t—

<
                 0.1
                                     WEIGHT % GREATER THAN STATED SIZE

                               95   90               50               10
                         i   i
                               J	I
                                                        I    1    I   1
                                                          J	I
                                                                                           Rl»n3
                                        J	I
0.01     O.I    0.5  I




        FIGURE 11-6
                                                                                  90   95
                                                                                  99
    5    10               50

         WEIGHT %  If SS THAN STATED SIZE


Particle Diameter Versus Weight  7. Less/Greater Than

  Stated Size  -  Scrubber Outlet
                                                               o.l     o.oi
99,9    99.99

-------
                                 REPORT NO. 75-PRP-l
L\\
 o
                AIR  POLLUTION
                EMISSION  TEST
                    W. R. GRACE CHEMICAL CO.

                      BARTOW, FLORIDA
          UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                Office of Air and Waste Managemenl
              Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
                 Emission Measurement Branch
              Research Triangle Park. North Carolina

-------
              EPA REPORT FOR

        W.R. GRACE CHEMICAL COMPANY

             BARTOW, FLORIDA


          EPA REPORT NO. 75-PRP-l
                TASK NO, 14

          CONTRACT NO. 68-02-1406
               Submitted to
      Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
       Emission Measurements Branch
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
                Submitted by
          Engineering-Science, Inc.
             7903 Westpark Drive
           McLean, Virginia 22101
                January 1976

-------
STAGE/
PLATE
/o
0/1
1/2
if/3
"J/4
4/5
5/6
6/7
7/e
PLATfc
* PAN
,4.-9S«
.67971
.67036
.rif 123
.6545J
.6632^
,6'-S--0
.65b8S
.6-?t>».'
Ff--.
SAMPLE
b. 00000
0.00000
O.ObOQO
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
         =  1.000
I««P.eFF.C=   .140
   TAN?,
    .hTI
     PAN
    .67^63
    .67035
    .6*712
    ,t.H7o5
0.00000
O.OOOOD
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
o.ooooj
0.00000
O.ObOOO
o.uooou
TABLE II-8
AN Jt-StN ANALYSIS StlKHAPV
^U»,

'-.* If » . If -"OH CFN

TA-£
OF
PI.ATE
.4 -.939
,67V6'i
. 6 7 0 JS
. 63121
md^t^l
,6631-i
.64*55
.6S71?
.65T45

1 i"«N-- '*
• F.IfaHT
«.m
.0001-.
.OOOU6
O'.OOOOO
.0000?
.0000"»
.00004
. oo i jS
.00173
.00107
FKT-.. V.
T'lTAl, *
-•ITH.1UT

'WEIGHT
PERCENT
3. if.
1.3H
0.00
.45
. 6rl
.90
30.41
3fa.V6
<4.1«
T« .000^1' "jrt
T» .00*
FlLTF.rt-
r.UM,
WEIGHT
PERCENT
3.15
4.5U
4 .-.0
*.9i
5.63
6.-J3
3ft. 9*
75.90
100.00
». 0M
— fITH Fl

HEIGHT
PEHCENT
3.02
l .<;*»
0.00
.43
' .65
. C6
<»V.rt9
37 ,^h
«;3.0b

ILT..-K-
tUM.
•tldHT
PEwCENT
.1.02
4.31
4.T1
4.74
5. 3^
6.2b
35.34
7?. 63
93.b9


JET
VEL.
tCM/S)

41.43
vO» 3?
150, 6R
?«9. '1 9
44
-------
                                                     TABLE II-9
                                                       ANALYSIS  SUMMARY
-«UN NU--E*-
           475
l.OOU
 .140,
          **aTt. »
Iff-



H
l-t
I
NJ







STAGE/
PLATE
/O
0/1
1/2
2/.1
3/4
4/5
5/6
6/7
7/8
SAHCL?
PL»TE
* PAN
.47089
.61770
.63295
.62252
.57386
.5965i
.652-* 
0.00000
.00036
.00046
.00060
.00037
.OOOii*
Iool?o
.OOOSJ
f ILTC>- VT» .0003'' GM
TOTAL fcT = .0066* 
21.6V
27.26
40.51
6
-------
                                                  WEIGHT % GREATER THAN STATED SIZE
I
t->
u>
                  99.99    99.9
                 10.0
                                                 10/5
                 0.1
                  o.ot
0.5   1
10               50               90   95

 WEIGHT % LESS THAN STATED SIZE
                                                                                              99
                                                      0.1     0.01
                                                                       99.9    99.99
                              Figure II-l - Particle Diameter Versus Weight  Percent Less/Greater

                                              Than Stated  Size (Outlet)

-------
                            Project No. 76-NMM-l
O
               AIR  POLLUTION
               EMISSION  TEST
                    INTERNATIONAL MINERALS AND

                       CHEMICAL COMPANY

                      SPRUCE PINE, N. C.
         UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
               Office of Air and Waste Management
             Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
                Emission Measurement Branch
              Research Triangle Park. North Caroliiui

-------
                 EMISSION STUDY

                      a t a

     FELDSPAR CRUSHING AND GRINDING FACILITY
International Minerals and Chemicals Corporation
           Spruce  Pines  North Carolina
              September  27-29, 1976
                Prepared for the

      U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

                       by

     Clayton Environmental Consultants, Inc
              25711  Southfield  Road
          Southfield, Michigan   48075
                  Project NMM-1

                     fask 25

             Contract No. 68-02-1408

-------
           PARTICLE
         NO.  2  MILL
                     -  26  -
TABLE IV-1

 SIZE DISTRIBUTION
 BAGHOUSE  NORTH INLET
International Minerals and  Chemicals  Corporation
           Spruce Pine,  North Carolina
              September  27-29, 1976
Characteristic
Diameter
n f
xf ^
Particles
(microns )
>45
30 - 45
20 - 30
10 - 20
8.0 - 10
6.3 - 8.0
5.0 - 6.3
4.0 - 5.0
3.2- 4.0
2.5-3.2
2.0-2.5
1.6 - 2.0
1.3- 1.6
1.0 - 1.3
0.5 - 1.0
<0.5
TOTAL

Weight
(go)
11.400
4.175
3.345
7.834
0.147
0.405
0.710
0.666
0.841
1.028
0.902
0.621
0.349
0.401
0.396
0. 119
33.339
'Size Distribution
by Weight
Percent
34.2
12.5
10.0
23.5
0.4
1.2
2.1
2.0
2.5
3.1
2.7
1.9
1.1
1.2
1.2
0.4
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
100.0
65.8
53.3
43.3
19.8
19.4
18,2
16.1
14.1
11.6
8.5
5.8
- 3.9
2.8
1.6
0.4
—
                        Clayton Environmental  Consultants, Inc

-------
                     -  27  -
                   TABLE  IV-2

           PARTICLE SIZE  DISTRIBUTION
         NO.  2  MILL BAGHOUSE SOUTH INLET

International Minerals and  Chemicals Corporation
           Spruce  Pine,  North Carolina
              September  27-29,  1976
Characteristic
Diameter
_ c
o t
Particles
(microns )
>45
30 - 45
20-30
10 - 20
5.0 - 10
4.0 - 5.0
3.2 - 4.0
2.5 - 3.2
2.0 - 2.5
1.6 - 2.0
1.3 - 1.6
1.0 - 1.3
0.5 - 1.0
<0.5
TOTAL

Weight
(gn»)
0.366
0.271
0.233
0.141
0.094
0.006
0.016
0.030
0.040
0.044
0.036
0.034
0.073
0.039
1.423
Size Distribution
by Weight
Percent
25.7
19.1
16.4
9.9
6.6
0.4
1. 1
2.1
2.8
3.1
2.5
2.4
5.1
2.8
100.0
Cumulative
Perc ent
100.0
74.3
55.2
38.8
28.9
22.3
21.9
20.8
18.7
15.9
12.8
10.3
7.9
2.8
	
                        Clayton Environmental Consultants,  Inc,

-------
^9°° Jmm
90.0
80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
1 i fflV


..

..
—
....

-•'
Effective
Particle
Diame ter
(microns )
10.0
9.0
8.0
7.0
6.0
5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
- i
—

—

.__.
—
...
—
...



—
V~
...
-
_
.i
. i
j
— j-



• •

1
"f
- -
--
---
._.
i !
1 ' :
: T'
i:
• i •
i

•I
* i
t : ;
i

i
-•


i

•
. - " T '
! "i
H-
"T
1

i " '






-.'.
r —

!
i •


1
-.
-


"
—
t






H. ..
_

-

-•





--;



T."



—








-

•
-

~


-



—


-






.
••

-
-
-


...




-4- . . i
1 '
-r • > —
; - • J
. . . .





if" r
•• -i- \ •
\
j.

.....
i
..I.





rf^
••-



•• - .;•—
: • -7:':-:


;. 	 "
T..11
- • • —'_-
- 	 	 	

.. 	




.
:.(...._

. . . —
. j.
F*
'
	 -:
i|:: 5E
• - —


. —

~L

....

. ....


".-:-


•-.:



—

—




-




".:.
-~

~-
_ ~
— -



A

^•H JHH ff


:: . ; 1 " -

• • 	
T-: 7K .. ;
-:" '-- .i ;; '• r . . '


... '...i 	 . . „._ 	

:;•:.:.'.:_ 	
. . L.
	 	 . . .. -

	 	 - 	 ^ . I -
.



...... . .)'.,..
•••'•• T r F n
! , | I J ' J
,,, 1^17
4il/
- • • 1' j
: : :;.- 1- .:.::... | y .
"i L- [7': • T yf" •
:; -• " ' T H" L\ "T
----7-1-j*--::
v- •:- / hi.
tvj|| :i-
£;;':;/••.: , •''
= -f -.:;:.. ' :. .
. '
'A 	 - . _ .
/::;::••:• ;-

":::;;.... 	 i. ;_
3.01 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 D 10 20
• £•• ^^H '"•
J I
.. j " 	

" t j ' i r


t'-.
• • t ii/ji
t . • ^-.••'•yjii
1 	 -iL.::..
X |UJ.:::;
-.:::••[ I?::: :::::::


~ 	 ' • •• 	 ..---..
j
/
i
-y 	 f —
fl'-jJTJ-'- t-,--]— -
4...1..4...J :.

I!
J Tr
i. .1.
1 NO
	 1., internatio
-'-
_ _. .._
j 	 - -

' r . '.:.:

•











. _






t
--

1










-
_.
























-
-


"

'"












i
T
.. . . . .
.. . . . .


-
il
1


•LI
*

• : .

1




	
'. :: " "
: : :

	











•














-

'


•



.

i
-.'

:_"
.;
~.
-
-





^

r




::

-
'-


--
-


-












-;-.
-
•-:
:?i

"
-
—





-



-
IB




.— .

.-":
~-

~
—

—

—
....



....
^T"


!

. -::.


.^'- :
'.-":~:
:.:"
	

— . .
	 r •


... .
I
* -


nt
i
1 1
... ,
1 i!
i
1

1
i
i i
T '.;rr

' r . I
i


. i
j ~

	 *^^ 	 -«^iB,; 	 -^H











"-"-



-
'



~


-


^
-•






—


•'-r


:'.'-

~
~





...

—













_-
r.

...


-


11
jj

i
'• il
"' M-

:
'.'.'
•.:.'• 1
.--. 1
E.
~


—
—

!
. — Tl
I ;

•


l-




::'.-
: :
. -
. . .





i


..
-



-
:





-






.._ —


-



::
:....;
—





-
''•:.
•:.
E.

—



_..


i
FIGURE 3
PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION
. 2 MILL BAGHOUSE NORTH INLET
nal Minerals and Chemicals Corporation
Spruce Pine, North Carolina
September 27-29, 1976
















30 40 50 60 70 60
....







-

.

-

:



"

....
	
..

".:: 1
• i
.._..
90 9G 98

i
99


-


...
-
i
i
99.8 99,9
....
-




...


...
i
u_
..::
—

—
99.09
00
i
Cumulative Percentage Less Than Indicated Diameter

-------
Effective
 Particle
 Diame ter
 (microns)
                                                       1
                                                     US
                                                                         FIGURE  4
                                                                PARTICLE SIZE  DISTRIBUTION
                                                             NO.  2  MILL BAGHOUSE SOUTH  INLET
                                                     International Minerals and Chemicals Corporation
                                                               Spruce  Pine, North Carolina
                                                                   September 27-29, 1976
   1.0
       0.01  0.05 0.1 0.2
2    5   ' 10     20   30   40  50  60  70   BO     90    95    98  99

 Cumulative  Percentage Less  Than Indicated  Diameter
                                                                                             99.8 99.9
99.99

-------
         -J)ad"
—Source. Fuel  "Type. *
 5

/O
                y
                      (r«5i«e.,"R*t»i
-------
    /
-F
            o-
                              Tuu «LI
 "Test" A\eJ"hocl  *    * "^lg- pat»»tof aueifcy.ugidc.ty
                          '    •-
Wo IDnwi-or Hade-       °       , Wo.5

                                         **
                                             rate,
                                                     U5e,
                                                                      c/

-------
                                                       FPEIS SERIES REPORT                         SERIES FORM 1    DATE 06/20/63


                  to:     88  DESCRIBES SAMPLING AT SITE  FROM 02/14/73 TO  02/15/73 BY SOUTHERN RESEARCH  INST

                        SPONSOR ORGANIZATION:    TQMBIGBEE  LTMT  AG,  co.
                        CONTRACT HUflBER:                            PURPOSE  OF  TEST: CONTROL TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
                        TASK/DIRECTIVE NUMBER:   000


 SOURCE DESCRIPTION	

                  SOURCE CATEGORY:          MINERALS                      SOURCE NAME;   CLAY DRYER
                  SOURCE TYPE:              BUILDING  MATERIALS           SITE NAME:     TQHBIGBEE LTMT  A6GRT CO.
                  PRODUCT/DEVICE:          CERAMIC/CLAY                 ADDRESS:
                  PROCESS TYPE:            PRODUCTION      -                           LIVINGSTON         ,AL     35470  USA
                  DESIGN PROCESS RATE:
                  FEED MATERIAL CATEGORY:   NOT SPECFD
                  PRIMARY CONTROL DEVICE:                                SIC CODE:         3259


 EADS HASTE STREAM DATA BASES	

                  WASTE STREAM DATA FROM OTHER MEDIA WHICH HERE COLLECTED CONCURRENTLY MITH THIS TEST  SERIES
                  ARE AS FOLLOHSCTEST SERIES HUMBER-TSNJ:
                       LEDS TSN:          GEDS TSN:           SDD5 TSN:

REFERENCE REPORT	•	

                  TITLE
                  AUTHOR
                  SPONSOR REPORT NUMBER     NTIS NUMBER           PUBLICATION  DATE



                  MCCAIN,J,D.
                  SORI-EAS-73-052                                 FEBRUARY  1973

TEST SERIES COMMENTS	—

-------
FPEIS TEST SERIES NO: 00088
STREAM NO: 01
TEST ID NO'-
SAMPLE NO: 01
                                                                                                      SERIES FORM C7
PAGE        7
DATE 06/20/81
PARTICLE SIZE TABLE	

  STAGE f

  D50( MICRONS 1
  MICRQGRAflS/DNCH/STAGE
  HUM8ER/Dl!CM/STAGE
  CUM. *MASS
1

-------
FPEIS TEST SERIES NO:  00088
STREAM NO: 01
TEST ID NO:
SAMPLE NO: 02
                                                                                                     SERIES FORM C7
PAGE       10
DATE 06/20/83
PARTICLE SIZE TABLE	

  STAGE 9

  0501 MICRONS)
  MICROGRAHS/DNCM/STAGE
  HUMBER/DNCM/STAGE
  CUM.  XMASS<050
  CUM.  MICROGRAMS/ACM
  DN-LOGD/C NUHBER/ONM3 >
30.02
8,Z3E»05
9.57E»09
68.31
8.45E+05
1.77E+06
5.4BE+01
1.58E+06
l.83E*10
7.50
Z.30E«Q5
1.3QE*11
59.45
7.36E+05
l.SOE+01
3.82E+05
2.16E+11
5
B
9
5
Z
Z
4. 23
.50E»05
.88E+12
38.27
.63E*00
.21E»06
.36E*13
2,49
3.13Ef05
1.75E+13
26,22
3.25E»05
6.81E+05
3.25E»00
1.36E*06
7.60E+13
1
3,
2,
5,
Z,
9.
2,
1.69
.65E*Q5
.65E«13
19,87
.16E+05
.OSEtOO
.17E+14
1
1
3
1
5
5
.88
-51E«14
.78E+05
.73E405
-22E+00
.05E+05
.31E+1*
1
6
1
2
6
5
Z
.54
.07E»05
10.24
.27E*OS
.66E+05
-89E-01
.05E»05
.27
2.66E*05
9.13E+15
O.OOE+00
O.OOE*00
3.82E-01
3.03E416

-------
FPE1S TEST SERIES NO:  00088
STREAM NO: 01
TEST ID NO:
SAMPLE NO: 03
                                                                                                      SERIES  FORM C7
PAGE       13
DATE 06/20/83
PARTICLE SIZE TABLE	

  STAGE t

  D50(MICRONS)
  MICROGRAMS/DNCH/STAGE
  NUMBER/DNCH/STAGE
  CUM.  XMASS
4.82
9.08E+05
1,64E»11
54.47
5.18Et05
1.09E*06
E.19E+01
6.90E+05
1.25£*I1
3.02
3.90E+05
1.34E+13
34,92
3.33E+0§
6.96E+05
3.82E+00
1.92E*06
6.61E+13
1.76
2.19E+OS
3.41E*13
23.94
2.28E*05
4.77E+05
2.31E»CO
9.34E»OS
1.46E+14
1.18
1.30E405
a.30E*13
17.42
1.66E+05
3.47E»05
1.4'
-------
FPEIS TEST SERIES NO:  00088
                               STREAM NO*.  01
TEST 10 HO:
                                                                   SAMPLE NO:  04
                                                                                                      SERIES FORM C7
                                                                       PAGE       16
                                                                       DATE 06/20/83
PARTICLE SIZE TABLE	

  STAGE t

  DSOtMICROHSI
  HICROGRAHS/DHCM/STAGE
  NUJI8ER/DHCM/STAGE
  CUM. XHASS
  DN-LOGD/(NUMBER/DNM3)
28.56
1.05E+06
1.3ZE*10
62.28
8.26E*05
1.73E+06
B.S'iE+Ol
1.93E*06
2.42E410
7.3
-------
FPEI5 TEST SERIES NO:  00088
                               STREAM NO:  01
                                                TEST  ID  NO:
                                                                   SAMPLE NO: 01
                                                                                                     SERIES FORM C7
PAGE       21
DATE 06/20/83
PARTICLE SIZE TABLE	

  STAGE S

  D5005
6.44E-01
8.66E+05
6.20E+15
.25
2.54E>05
1.10E+16

O.OOE+00
O.OOEtOO
3.54E-01
8.44E>05
3.65E+16

-------
                                             ENVIRONMENTAL  ASSESSMENT DATA SYSTEMS                                  PAGE        1
                                                        FPEIS  SERIES REPORT                         SERIES FORM 1    DATE 06/21/03


                  Q:   342  DESCRIBES SAMPLING AT SITE  FROM 10/21/80 TO 10/22/60 BY PEDCO ENVIRONMENTAL

                        SPONSOR ORGANIZATION:   EPA/OAQPS/EMB
                        CONTRACT NUMBER:        66-02-3546          PURPOSE OF  TEST: STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT
                        TASK/DIRECTIVE NUMBER:  001


 SOURCE DESCRIPTION	

                  SOURCE CATEGORY:         MINERALS                      SOURCE NAME:   CLINKER COOLER
                  SOURCE TYPE:             BUILDING MATERIALS           SITE NAME:     ARKANSAS LGTWST AGGREGATE
                  PRODUCT/DEVICE!          CERAMIC/CLAY                 ADDRESS!
                  PROCESS TYPE:            PRODUCTION                                   WEST MEMPHIS       ,AR     ooooo  USA
                  DESIGN PROCESS RATE:
                  FEED MATERIAL CATEGORY:  COAL
                  PRIMARY CONTROL DEVICE:                                SIC CODE:        3259


 EADS HASTE STREAM DATA BASES	—	

                  WASTE STREAM DATA FROM OTHER MEDIA WHICH  MERE  COLLECTED  CONCURRENTLY WITH THIS TEST SERIES
                  ARE AS FOLLOWS!TEST SERIES NUHBER-TSNIS
                       LEDS TSN:          6EDS TSN:           SDDS TSN:

REFERENCE REP^^ !•"-"'••• «*•»••«-«---••-••»'•«••• >*^——-•••«-*••—•*«*»*»——•»

                  TITLE
                  AUTHOR
                  SPONSOR REPORT NUMBER     NTIS NUMBER           PUBLICATION  DATE

                  EMISSION TEST REPORT-METHOD DEVELOPMENT AND TESTING FOR  CLAY,
                  SHALE,AM) SLATE AGGREGATE INDUSTRY

                  EMB RPT 80-LWA-2                                 MAY 1981

TEST SERIES COMMENTS	
                        CLINKER COOLER IS RECIPROCATING 6RATE TYPE

-------
FPEIS TEST SERIES NO: 00342
PARTICLE SIZE TABLE	

  STAGE •

  D50(MICRONS 1
  MICROBRAMS/DNCM/STASE
  NUMB Efi/DNCM/STAGE
  CUM. XMASS
-------
FPEI5 TEST SERIES NO:  00342
STREAM NO: 01
                                                TEST  10 NO:
                                                                  SAMPLE NO: 02
                                                                                                     SERIES FORM C7
                                                                                       PAGE       12
                                                                                       DATE 06/21/83
PARTICLE SIZE TABLE	
                   *
  STAGE 9

  D50
-------
FPEIS TEST SERIES NO: 00342
STREAM NO: 01
                                                TEST ID NO:
SAMPLE HO: 03
                                                                                                      SERIES FORM C7
PASE       15
DATE 06/21/83
PARTICLE SIZE TABLE	

  STAGE *

  D50
-------
FPEIS TEST SERIES NO: 0034Z
PARTICLE SIZE TABLE	

  STAGE 8

  D50(MICRONS)
  MICHOGRAHS/DNCM/STAGE
  NUMBER/ONCH/STAGE
  CUM. ZMASSEAM NO: 01
1
10.29
6.94E*04
4.02E*09
50.93
6.38E»04
7.20E+04
3.21E+01
7,03E*04
4.07E*09

2
5

6
6
9
8
1
TEST
2
9.S2
.82E+05
.55E+09
48.94
.13E404
.92E+0*
.90E+00
.35E+0*
.64E*11
ID NO: 1
3
6.18
1.02E*04
4.32E+10
«1.73
5.Z3E*04
5.90E + 0'*
7.&7E+00
S.44E*04
2.301*11
SAHPLE
4
3.98
1.10E+04
l.7ZE*ll
33.95
4.25E+04
4.80E+04
4.96E400
5.76E*0
-------
FPEIS TEST SERIES NO:
PARTICLE SIZE TABLE	

  STAGE •

  050CMICRONSJ
  HICRDGUAHS/DNCN/STAGi
  NUMBER/DNCM/STAGE
  CUM. ZHASS
  DN-LOGD/INUMBEH/DNH31
EAM NO: 01 TEST
1 Z
10.26
7,58E*04
4.41E+09
54.24
7.96E*04
8.99E+04
3.20E+01
7.67£*04
4.45E+09
9.50
4.91i»03
9.74E»09
51. 28
7.52E*04
a.49C*04
9.87E+00
1.47E»05
2.92E*11
ID

1
5

6
7
7
6
2
NO: 1
3
6.17
,30E*04
.53E+10
43.43
,37E*04
.19E+04
.66E»00
.94E*04
-95E+11
SAMPLE
3.97
1.61E*0<*
2.54E»11
33.71
4.94E*04
5.5flE+04
4.95E+00
8.41E*04
1.32E+12
NO: 05
. §

2.
1.

3.
3.
3.
9.
6.
2. 12
lflE + 0<+
49E*12
20.55
01E404
40E+04
03E+00
34E«04
38E+12
6
1.15
1.51E+04
6.62E+12
11.44
1.68E+04
1.89E+0<4
1.63E+00
4.95E«04
2.17E*13
PAGE 21
SERIES FORM C7 DATE 06/21/83
789
.75
7.37E*03
1.76E»13
6.99
1.03E*04
1.16E«04
9.29E-01
3.97C+04
9.47E+13

2
Z

a
9
5
1
1
.45
.46E*03
.4QE*13
5.51
.07E+03
-12E+03
.81E-01
.11E+04
.08E+14
.10
9.12E*03
1.82E+15

O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
2.12E-01
l.40E*04
2.79E*15

-------
FPEIS TEST SERIES NO: 00342
PASTICLI SIZE TABLE	

  STAGE t

  D50(MICRONS)
  HlCROGR*tfS/ONCH/STA6E
  NUMBER/BNCM/STAGE
  CUM.  XMASS
-------
FPEIS TEST SERIES NO'. 00342
PARTICLE SIZE TABLE	

  STAGE f

  D5DIMICRONS)
  MICROGRAMS/DNCM/STAGE
  NUMBER/DNCH/STA6E
  CUH.  XHASS
-------
FPEIS TEST SERIES NO: 00342
PARTICLE SIZE TABLI	

  STAGE 8

  D50(MICRONS)
  MICROGRAHS/DNCH/STAGE
  NUH8ER/DNCM/STAGE
  CUM. XHASS
-------
            United States
            Environmental Protection
            Agency
Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park NC 2771
EM«
RO-LWA-3
            Air
            Lightwei
            Industry
            (Clay, Shale,

            Emission Test
            Texas Industrie
            Clodine, Texas

                          ~^
                                    ^&&5T^mm*fL>!:-&-,,>,^,;:>f-!
..mLI Hi iij . i I.L .

-------
            0 EMISSION TEST REPORT  °

       METHOD DEVELOPMENT AND TESTING FOR
   CLAY, SHALE, AND SLATE AGGREGATE INDUSTRY:
             Texas Industries, Inc.
                 Clodine, Texas
                   ESED 80/12
                     By
          PEDCo Environmental, Inc
             11499 Chester Road
           Cincinnati, Ohio   45246
           Contract No. 68-02-3546
            Work Assignment No. 1
                   PN 3530-1
              EPA Task Manager

                 Frank Clay
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
         EMISSION MEASUREMENT BRANCH
 EMISSION STANDARDS AND ENGINEERING DIVISION
RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, NORTH CAROLINA   27711


                  May 1981

-------
CJ
I
                                                                         10.0
100
                                                    PARTICLE SIZE, microns
                     Figure 3.1-1.   Particle size  distribution, kiln  exhaust scrubber outlet.

-------
       -Source-
—Source, rue. I   !vpe_«  C
     J3ourc£_. -
           k,\*
UWcow
     ,-tfbileJ
v
          CKL
                       lf
                                          Suur
a proCfi-SS   "4o"to w 5
                                     KI(H
                            to le.55
/a
Zo
/o
Zo
                                                        er-
                                                 I / /)
                               ro
                                 IkJ
                       *
                                     3 '
                                                                  33

                                                                              c J

-------
/e. J 7
              ^f

        .-H, J :
                UMc.rfr.HO-
/¥£_
¥p£_ o
                   >
      Ay

      Specific-
                                              l
                                           ,        ,
                                J - 6.d» -4*1 rf /H

                                - Anxk.rse.iJ /f»rfc. HI
                                            7.
                                 I  cnt
                                        en*.
                                      ^

                                              y
                                                  V
                                                           /oat/oft -
Methoc/
                     im
                        pies
                                                    OJere, U5e
                                                              c/

-------
                                             ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT DATA  SYSTEMS                                   PAGE         1
                                                       FPEIS SERIES REPORT                         SERIES  FORM  1     DATE  06/21/63


                  0:   341  DESCRIBES SAMPLING AT SITE FROM 10/21/60 TO 10/22/80  BY  PEDCO  ENVIRONMENTAL

                        SPONSOR ORGANIZATION:   EPA/OAQPS/EMB
                        CONTRACT NUMBER:         68-02-3546         PURPOSE  OF  TEST:  STANDARDS  DEVELOPMENT
                        TASK/DIRECTIVE NUMBER:  001


 SOURCE DESCRIPTION	

                  SOURCE CATEGORY:          MINERALS                     SOURCE NAME:   ROTARY  KILN                             >
                  SOURCE TYPE:             BUILDING MATERIALS           SITE NAME:     ARKANSAS  LGTWGT AGGREGATE
                  PRODUCT/DEVICE:          CERAMIC/CLAY                 ADDRESS:
                  PROCESS TYPE:            PRODUCTION                                 WEST MEMPHIS        ,AR     00000   USA
                  DESIGN PROCESS RATE:
                  FEED MATERIAL CATEGORY:   COAL
                  PRIMARY CONTROL DEVICE:                                SIC CODE:        3259


 CADS HASTE STREAM DATA BASES	

                  HASTE STREAM DATA FROM OTHER MEDIA WHICH HERE COLLECTED CONCURRENTLY WITH THIS TEST SERIES
                  ARE AS FOLLOWS(TEST SERIES NUMBER-TSN):
                       LEDS TSN:          GEDS TSN:          SODS TSN:

REFERENCE REPORT	

                  TITLE
                  AUTHOR
                  SPONSOR REPORT NUMBER     NTIS NUMBER           PUBLICATION  DATE

                  EMISSION TEST REPORT-METHOD DEVELOPMENT AND TESTING FOR CLAY,
                  SHALE,AND SLATE AGGREGATE INDUSTRY

                  80-LMA-4                                        NOVEMBER  1980

TEST SERIES COMMENTS	

-------
FPEI3 TEST SERIES NO:  00341
PARTICLE SIZE TABLE-
  STAGE 8

  D50CHICRONS)
  HICROGRAMS/ONCH/STA6E
  NUMBER/0HCM/STA5E
  CUM. XHASS
-------
FPEIS TEST SERIES NO:  00341
PARTICLE SIZE TABLE	

  STAGE t

  05Q(HICRONS>
  HICROGRAHS/ONCM/STAGE
  NUHBER/DNCH/STASE
  CUH. XHASS
-------
FPEIS TEST SERIES NO: 00341
PARTICLE SIZE TABLE	

  STAGE •

  D50(MICRONS I
  MICROGHAHS/DNCM/STASE
  NUHBER/DNCH/STAGE
  CUM.  KMASS<050
  CUM.  NICROGRAMS/ACmOSO
  CUM.  HICROGRAMS/DNCWDSO
  GEOn 050
  OM/OLOGO-t UG/DW131
  DN-LOGD/IWMBER/DNM3J
EMI NO: 01 TEST
1 2
10.1*
1.64E+05
9.70E+09
69.55
3.32E+05
3.75E+OS
3.18E+01
1.65E+OS
9.76E+09
9.39
5.44E+04
1.12E+11
59.45
2.83E+Q5
3.20E+05
9.76E+00
1.63E+06
3.35E*12
ID

4
2

2
2
7
2
1
HO: 1
3.
6.09
.83E+04
.13E+11
50.48
.41E+05
.72E+0S
.56E*00
.57E*05
»13E*12
SAMPLE
3.92
NO: 03
5

2.29
1,57E*04 3.14E404
2.57E+11
47.57
2.27E+05
2.S6E405
4.09E»00
8.21E*04
1.34E*12
2

1
2
3
1
9
.23EU2
41.74
.99E*05
.25E+05
.OOE«00
.35E+05
.55E+12
6
1.13
4.23E-I04
1.94E+13
33.88
1.62E*05
1.62E+05
1.61E+00
1.38E+05
6.33E*1S
PA5E 15
SERIES FORM C7 DATE 06/21/83
789

5
1

1
1
9
2
7
.74
.20E404
.30E*14
24.23
.16E+05
.30E+05
.14E-01
.63E+05
,06E*14
.44
7.61E-»0<»
7.82E+14
10.10
4.82EfQ4
5.44E+04
5.71E-01
3.37E+OS
3.46E*15
.10
5.44E+Q4
1.13E+16

O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
2.10E-01
8.45E+04
1.75E+16

-------
FPEIS TEST SERIES NO:  00341
                               STREAM NO:  01
                                                TEST ID NO:
                                                                   SAMPLE  NO:  04
                                                                                                     SERIES FORM C7
PAGE       18
DATE 06/21/63
PARTICLE SIZE TABLE	

  STAGE 8

  050(MICRONS)
  MICROGRAMS/DNCM/STA6E
  NUMBER/DNCM/STAGE
  CUM. XMASS
-------
FPEI5 TEST SERIES NO: 00341
PARTICLE SIZE TABLE	—

  STAGE *

  D50(MICROMS)
  MICROGRAnS/DNCM/STA6E
  NWBER/DNCM/STA6E
  CUM. XMASS<050
  CUM. f1ICROBRAMS/ACM.36E+05
4.93E*05
4.52E+00
O.OOEtOO
O.OOE-0
NO: 05
5
2.12
4.&4E+04
4.33E+1Z
59.25
3.93E+05
4.44E+05
2.77E+00
2.07E405
1.85E+13
6
1.05
9.67E+0*
5.S6E+13
46.35
3.08E+05
3.
-------
FPEIS TEST SERIES NO: 00341
PARTICLE SIZE TABLE	

  STAGE t

  0501 MICRONS)
  HICROGRAHS/DNCH/STA6E
  NUMBER/DNCM/STAGE
  CUM.  XMASS
-------
FPEIS TEST SERIES NO'-  00341
PARTICLE SIZE TABii	

  STAGE •

  D50(MICRONS)
  MICROGRAMS/DNCM/STA6E
  NUHBER/DNCM/STAGE
  CUM.  XHASS
-------
FPEIS TEST SERIES NO: 00341
STREAM HO'- 01
TEST ID KO:
SAMPLE HO: 03
                                                                                                      SERIES FORM C7
PAGE       35
DATE 06/21/83
PARTICLE SIZf TABLf	

  STAGE 8

  D50
1
10.45
5.53E+04
3.13E»09
84. S7
2.75E*OS
3.10E+05
3.23E+01
5.64E»04
3.19E+09
Z
9.67
4.50E+04
8.46E410
72.56
2.35E+05
Z.65E»05
1.01E*01
2.51E+12
3
6.28
3.9BEtOt
61,67
2.00E»05
2.25E+05
7.79E»00
2.12E+05
8.57E+H
4
4.04
2.11E*11
57.81
1.67E«05
2.11E+05
7.36E*04
5
2.36
O.OOE-0
O.OOE-0
57.81
1.67E+05
e.HE+05
3.09E+00
O.OOE»00
O.OOE-0
6
1.17
4.63E+12
54.64
1.77E+05
2.00E405
1.66E*00
3.61E*04
1.58E»13
7
.76
5.14E+03
1.17E+13
53.23
1.72E+05
1.95E*05
9.43E-Q1
6.25E*13
a
.46
E,57E*03
2.37E»13
52.53
1.70E*05
1.92E+05
5.91E-01
1.09E414
9
.10
1.92E+05
3.72E*16
O.OOE+00
O.OOEtOO
2.14E-01
2.90E+05
5.61E+16

-------
If*
               united states       •  unice ot Air duality
               Environmental Proiection   Planning and Standards        EMB Report 80-LWA-4
               Agency            Rssearch Triangle Park NC 27711 ,

               A7r' '      '        	  	
                ndu-stry
               (Clay,            ar
               Emission Te
               Vulcan
                                     S-^Mii1.; '•"••TT^T*!^*^~$JV^i&*.^*r ••^Tj

-------
           0 EMISSION TEST REPORT °

      METHOD DEVELOPMENT AND TESTING FOR
            CLAY, SHALE, AND SLATE
              AGGREGATE INDUSTRY
           Vulcan Materials Company
               Bessemer, Alabama
                  ESED 80/12
                     by

          PEDCo Environmental, Inc
             11499 Chester Road
           Cincinnati, Ohio  45246
           Contract No. 68-02-3546
            Work Assignment No. 1
                 PN:  3530-1
              EPA Task Manager
                 Frank Clay
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
         EMISSION MEASUREMENT BRANCH
 EMISSION STANDARDS AND ENGINEERING DIVISION
RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, NORTH CAROLINA  27711
                  March  1982

-------
 I
NJ
UJ
                                                     PARTICLE SIZE, microns
                   Figure 3-3.   Particle size distribution - clinker  cooler exhaust.

-------
     PARTICLE SIZE, micron*




Figure  3-3  (continued)

-------
LJ
 I
K)
in
                                                         PARTICLE SIZE, microns
                                                    Figure  3-3 (continued)

-------
UJ
 i
to
or>
                                                         L_14imjLUM.M'M 1 P
                                                            i  T  iiin if  ,.t 73 ri n.i h:i
                                                                                                                       nnn ijlinrj
                                                                                   10.0
                                                                                                                     100
                                                           PARTICLE SIZE, microns
                                                     Figure  3-3  (continued)

-------
.5
ource-
        ource-

   — Source. RJe.
-Vb-c_
                                                  r cooler
                                 Cooler
                                                Coofrolkcy bva. 5ettmvy ch
 /o
                       4.
                         'e
                     /
                    rg
                                                            Co ?ym
                                     Ib part
                                           TON pr<

-------
          o-F "fe-^ti  Purs/  S     r.oMtfrtlle.d =    /
s
   st                      ***<•
        of  T^   <• ^ r-r . ^^fcfaeij l^ar k
                                                  70 .^.M
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park NC 27711
EMB Report 80-LWA-6
February 1982
Air
                                                                        g>«.-lt> -V-  *vV-%:
                                                                      gc4 ^'-if'.I ^'..^J&

-------
            EMISSION TEST REPORT

     METHOD DEVELOPMENT AND TESTING FOR
           CLAY, SHALE, AND SLATE
             AGGREGATE INDUSTRY
             Galite Corporation
              Rockmart, Georgia
                 ESED 80/12
                     by

          PEDCo Environmental, Inc,
             11499 Chester Road
           Cincinnati, Ohio  45246
           Contract No. 68-02-3546
            Work Assignment No. 1
                 PN: 3530-1
              EPA Task Manager
                 Frank Clay
    U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
         EMISSION MEASUREMENT BRANCH
 EMISSION STANDARDS AND ENGINEERING DIVISION
RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, NORTH CAROLINA  27711
                 April 1982

-------
OJ
 I
U)
o
                                                         HHmJliijTO^
                                              1.0
10.0
                                                      PARTICLE SIZE, micrometers
                       Figure 3-10.  Average  particle  size distribution  for the clinker cooler.

-------
UJ
I
U)
                 •.1
                                                1.0
10.0
                                                         PARTICLE Sill, afcrometers
                                Figure  3-11.  Particle size  distribution for Run  No.  CCPS-1.

-------
              004
UJ
 I
u»
NJ
                                                      PARTICLC SIZE, nlcromelers
                             Figure 3-12.   Particle size  distribution  for Run No.  CCPS-4,

-------
u»
 I
u>
UJ
                                                      PARTICLE SUE, micrometers
                              Figure 3-13.  Particle size distribution for Run  No.  CCPS-5.

-------
 I
U)
                                                         44- U.. Ill Ui Uli iiM 1U im lyuJVt	i  1   UL  II... .11 ,i
                                                            iT 111 T ™ it- .  • II.. .1  i », Ii. •".  .  T   ' i I  TT  T T i
                                  Figure  3-14.
        PARTICLE SIZE, micrometers


Particle  size  distribution for  Run  No.  CCPS-7.

-------
u>
i
LTl
                                           ^ ALII U   " -Tp[ ipp jM|iiJlipl^u||

                                             i.o
10,0
                                                     PARTICLt SIZE, micrometers
                               Figure 3-15.  Particle  size distribution  for Run No. CCPS-8.

-------
          United States
          Environmental Protection
          Agency
Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standard*
Research Triangle Ptrfc NC 27711
EMB Report 80-IWA-2
May 1981
          Air
<&ERfV     Lightweight AggregatA

          Emission Test Report
          Arkansas Lightweight
          Aggregate Corporation
          W. Memphis, Arkansas

-------
    TABLE 2-1.   PROCESS  DATA  FOR  EMISSION  TEST AT ARKANSAS LIGHTWEIGHT
       AGGREGATE PLANT,  WEST  MEMPHIS,  ARKANSAS:  OCTOBER  20-23,  1980;
                  ESEO PROJECT 80/12;  MRI  PROJECT 4659-L
                    Production report, Monday. October 20
First
shift
Coal input, tons 0
Gas input, MCF* 509
Clay input, tons 278.7
Product output, yd3 317.7
Second
shift
11.65
205
298.8
340.6
Third
shift
16.90
55
317.0
361.4
24- h
Total
28.55
769
894.5
1019.7
Product density (average composite);   33 lb/ft3
                    Productionreport, Tuesday. October 21

Coal input, tons
Gas input, MCF
Clay input, tons
Product output, yd3
First
shift
18.81
36
317.7
362.2
Second
shift
17.99
29
317.2
361.6
Third
shift
17.56
45
317.4
361.8
24- h
Total
54.36
110
952.3
1085.6
Product density (average composite):   33 lb/ft3
*Mi11ion cubic feet.
(continued)
                                    2-2

-------
both of which were heated to approximately 121°C (250°F).  The



condensible organic and inorganic fractions represent material



that condensed out or was trapped in the impinger section of the



sample train at a temperature of approximately 20°C (68°F).



     The volumetric flow rate averaged 31,283 dscmh (1,104,749



dscfh) at an average temperature of 89 °C (191°F).  The moisture



content averaged 1.9 percent; and oxygen, carbon dioxide, and



carbon monoxide contents averaged 18.8, 1.6, and 0.0 percent,



respectively.



     Filterable particulate concentrations averaged 175.6 mg/dscm



(0.076 gr/dscf) with a corresponding mass emission rate of 5.5



kg/h  (12.1 Ib/h).  The condensible organic and inorganic concen-



trations averaged 1.5 mg/dscm (0.0007 gr/dscf)  each with a. corre-



sponding mass emission rate of 0.05 kg/h (0.105 Ib/h).



3.2.2  Partic 1 e 5iz eD i s t r ibut i on



     A total of nine samples were collected from the clinker



cooler cyclone exhaust.  The first test was a preliminary run and



is not considered representative; therefore, it is not included



in the overall data averages.  The sampling and analytical pro-



cedures as well as the data reduction technique are the same as



those described in Section 3.1.2 and Appendix A of this report.



     Figures 3.2-1 and 3.2-2 present the distribution curves for



each set of four samples collected.  Individual data points for



each test were plotted manually.  The distribution curve was



plotted manually and represents the best-fit average curve for



the specified number of test runs.  All particle size results are



based on aerodynamic diameters and unit density  (1 g/cc) .*




                                3-18

-------
^••S
^•^#p
                                                                 Appendix
                                                                 C.I
                                                                 Reference  60
                                   PFIZER, INC.

                              VICTORVILLE, CALIFORNIA
      UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                  Office of Air and Waste Management
              OUice of Air Quality Planning and Standards
                    Emission Measurement Branch
                Research Triangle Park, North Carolina

-------
                  EMISSION  SOURCE TEST  FROM  A  BAGHOUSE
                      SERVING  A  TALC_GRINDING  MILL
                                     AT
                                 PFIZER, INC.
                            Victor-vine, California
                                Task Order 112
                            Contract No. 68-02-1405
                                  July, 1977
                 Robert  J.  Bryan, Director of  Field Services
                       Robert L,  Norton, Project Manager
                      Pacific Environmental Services, INC.
CORPORATE AND ENGINEERING  1930 14thStr»«l S»ntt Monica. California 90404  Ttltphone (213> 393-9449
MIDWEST OPERATIONS Suite 228N  2625 Buuerfieid Road Q»k Brook, Illinois 60521 Telephone (312! 325-5586

-------
                                              Table III-3.   PARTICLE SIZE DATA
Particle Size
Range
1-5
5-10
10-15
15-20
20-25
25-30
30-35
35-40
40-45
45-50
50-55
55-60
60-65
65-70
70-75
Total Count
Sampl
Particle
Count
2925
1855
1024
759
476
334
210
139
87
67
34
21
12
9
7
7959
e #1
% of
Total
36.8
23.3
12.9
9.5
6.0
4.2
2.6
1.7
1.1
0.8
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.1
100
Sample
Particle
Count
3181
1898
998
895
497
366
229
142
104
94
45
36
15
9
11
8520
12
% of
Total
37.3
22.3
11.7
10.5
5.8
4.3
2.7
1.7
1.2
1.1
0.5
0.4
.0.2
0.1
0.1
100
Average
Particle
Count
3053
1876
1011
827
. 486
350
220
140
96
80
40
28
14
9
9
8239
% of
Total
37.1
22.8
12.3
10.0
5.9
4.2
2.7
1,7
1.2
1.0
0.5
0.3
0,2
0.1
0.1
100
I
CO

-------
                                             ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT DATA SYSTEMS
                                                       FPEIS SERIES REPORT
                                                        SERIES FORM 1
                                                                         PAGE        1
                                                                         DATE 06/21/63
             IES NO:    2M  DESCRIBES SAMPLING AT SITE FROM 02/24/78 TO  02/24/78 BY  KVB,  INC.
                        SPONSOR ORGANIZATION:
                        CONTRACT NUMBER:
                        TASK/DIRECTIVE NUMBER:
     CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD
     A6-191-30          PURPOSE OF TEST:  ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS (MULTIMEDIA)
     000
 SOURCE DESCRIPTION-
                  SOURCE CATEGORY:
                  SOURCE TYPE:
                  PRODUCT/DEVICE:
                  PROCESS TYPE:
                  DESIGN PROCESS RATE:
                  FEED MATERIAL CATEGORY:
                  PRIMARY CONTROL DEVICE:
LUMBER & HOOD PROD
MILLWORK
HOUSING PRODUCTS
FINISHING
  1110   MZ/HR
MOOD
SOURCE NAME:   CONFIDENTIAL
SITE NAME;
ADDRESS:
               LOS ANGELES
                                                                        sic  CODE:
>CA
        00000
                                                                                         2431
 EADS WASTE STREAM DATA BASES-
REFERENCE REPORT-
                  WASTE STREAM DATA FROM OTHER MEDIA WHICH WERE COLLECTED  CONCURRENTLY WITH  THIS  TEST SERIES
                  ARE AS FOLLOWS!TEST SERIES NUMBER-TSN):
                       LEDS TSH:          GEDS TSN:  00090     SODS TSN:
                  TITLE
                  AUTHOR
                  SPONSOR REPORT NUMBER     NTIS NUMBER
                       PUBLICATION DATE
                  FINE PARTICLE EMISSIONS FROM STATIONARY AND MISCELLANEOUS  SOURCES
                  IN THE SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN.
                  TABACK H.J.
                  KVB REPORT 5806-783      PB 293 923/AS          FEBRUARY 1979
TEST SERIES.COMMENTS-
                        PROGRAM OBJECTIVES TO INVENTORY TSP EMISSIONS,TO PREPARE  A  COM-
                        PREHENSIVE INVENTORY OF EMISSIONStI.E.  BY SIZE  DISTRIBUTION AND
                        CHEMICAL COMPOSITION I,AND TO DESCRIBE ALT. METHODS OF  CONTROL.

-------
FPEIS TEST SERIES NO: 00238
   STREAM MO: 01
                                                TEST ID NO:
                                 SAMPLE NO: 02
                                                                                                      SERIES FORM 7
                                                       PAGE       10
                                                       DATE 06/21/83
  EFFLUENT STREAM DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS-
          COHPONEMT
          NO  NAME
DESCRIPTION
                                                VALUE
           1  PHOBEtlO CYC
           Z  3 UM CYCLONE
           3  1 UM CYCLONE
              FILTER
                            STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE:
                            STAGE WEIGHT:
                            STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE:
                            STAGE HEIGHT:
                            STASE/FILTER CUT SIZE:
                            STAGE HEIGHT:
                            STAGE/FILTER CUT SIZE:
                            STAGE HEIGHT.-
                                                        8,30     UM
                                                       8.19E*01 MG
                                                        1.90     UM
                                                       Z.13E+01 MG
                                                         .60     UM
                                                       2,38E*01 MB
                                                         .01     UM
                                                       7.00E-01 MS
PARTICLE SIZE TABLE	—

  STAGE •

  050CMICRONS 1
  STAGE HEIGHTStMILLIGRAMS I
  HICROGRAHS/OHCM/STAGE
  NU116ER/ONCM/STASE
  CUM. ;
-------
FPEIS TEST SERIES NO: 0023d

STREAM NO: 01

TEST ID NO: 1 SAMPLE NO: 03 PAGE 12
SERIES FORM 7 DATE 06/21/83
pec 1 1 ICMT «STOFAH nP«iTfiM rMADarTPDT«ETTr  •'••••••'•""••••••«•
COMPONENT
NO NAME
i pR06E«io crc


2 3 UM CYCLONE


3 1 UM CYCLONE


4 FILTER

TACll C______.,___
STAGE •
050 (MICRONS!
STAGE WEIGHTS( MILLIGRAMS!
HICROGRAHS/OHCM/STAGE
NUMBER/OHCM/5TAGE
CUtt. XMAS5
-------