Document M4OOBQBwvVnMwam816ZEw6r7M

AR226-2259 /y Debbie J Mulrooney 02/20/200212:47 PM To: cc: Subject: Todd M Krieger/AE/DuPont@DuPont Steven H Swearingen/AE/DuPont@DuPont, Robert F Pincnot/DEWAE/DuPont@DuPont Re: Environmental Impact Study Q The new stack height is much higher than what we modeled (85 vs. 55 ft) and the new flow rate is also much higher (12,400 scfm vs. 4710 scfm). since these two changes will both improve dispersion, not make it worse, I'm not sure that there is really a reason to revise the modeling and the report. Rob, what do you think? Debbie Todd M Krieger ^ Todd M Krieger 02/20/2002 12:33 PM To: cc: Subject: Steven H Swearingen/AE/DuPont@DuPont Debbie J Mulrooney/AE/DuPont@DuPont, Robert F Pinchot/DEV/AE/DuPontQDuPont Re: Environmental Impact Study Q The stack height is 85ft. The flow rate is 12500 SCFM - (i.e. 11000 from the stack fan and 1500 from the scrubber fan) Sleven H Swearingen y Steven H Swearingen 02/20/2002 09:43 AM To: cc: Subject: Debbie J Mulrooney/AE/DuPont@DuPont Robert P Pinchot/DEV/AE/DuPont@DuPont, Todd IV! Krieger/AE/DuPont@DuPont Environmental Impact Study Several months ago for Rob Pinchot you did a screening study of ground level exposures for APPO. Since that time as a normal course of the project, slack heights and gas flow rates have changed. Todd Can you provide Debbie with updated flow and stack height? Debbie: Can you take revised figures and append 'and re-issue your study. thanks. EDD00686&5