Document NEjnGQXKKqoKvVNeb1qnXk3yg

\ STATEMENT OF HONORABLE RUSSELL E. TRAIN ADMINISTRATOR ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON FISHERIES AND WILDLIFE 'CONSERVATION AND THE ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE ON MERCHANT MARINE AND FISHERIES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES JANUARY 28, 1976 \ ' Good afternoon Mr. Chairman, and members of the subcommittee. I am appearing today to discuss the problems created by the widespread presence of poly chlorinated biphenyls, or PCBs, in the environment, and actions which the Environmental Protection Agency is taking to reduce or eliminate those problems. PCBs are a significant hazard to human health and the environment. Laboratory tests show they cause reproductive failures, gastric disorders, skin lesions, and tumors ir. mammals. Their destructive effects on fish and wildlife are well documented. However, the PCB problem is but one dimension of a much larger picture of environmental degradation by chemicals. The picture is a dismaying one, as the r.um.ir*-r= of different chenicals, amounts manufactured, the uses, and the accumulation in the environment each increase. Incident of adverse effects on health or the environment have ir. recent years brought home to us that our ever-ir.creas use of toxic chemicals poses an ever laraer and more hazardous threat to the environment. Further, the history of governmental response to these incidents reveals that, while our authority to act ar.d abilitv at develop some form of remedies have both improved, we .-r: still fighting a rear-guard action, all too often m a position only to cure and not prevent. While one prcrier is being solved others are suddenly exploding, cr incur at in - unknown to those who will have to deal with the unhappy results. In the meantime, those other factors -- \ numbers, amounts, uses, and accumulation of chemicals -- ~ environmental burden grows heavier and heavier. ,ACK CCSSS^ 2 Let me recall for you some of the warning signs in recent years. Hexachlorobenzene is a chemical produced as a by-crocuct during the manufacture of several other chemicals. Relatively small amounts have been used as a seed dressing. EPA's concern was triggered when cattle grazing near a chemical wastes disposal dump in Louisiana were found to have levels of the chemical that exceeded the guidelines fcr me The inadvertent mixing of polybrominated biphenyls, a fire retardant added to plastics with cattle feed, has resulted in t of millions of dollars in damages sought by farmers owning contaminated animals. For many years we were unaware of the carcinogenic potential of the major industrial chemical vinyl chloride, and only now are we beginning to effectively contain the chemical. Asbestos, which is used widely throughout cur eccncmy, is known to be a serious health hazard when inhaled. There remain many questions concerning the relative effect of several forms of asbestos fibers, as well as uncertainty as to the effects of ingestion. Finally, limited steps have been taken to reduce exposure to asbestos. Gross population declines of several flesh-eatinm wild tir species in the U.S. have been caused by DDE residues resulnr.r from DDT use. In 1969-1970, for example, 1,952 nesting attemcc by brown pelicans on Anacapa Island off the coast of Galifcrma produced but 9 young. Reproduction of grebes was halted on Lake St. Clair, near Detroit. This was traced to mercury from chlcr-alkali plants in the region. Dozens of dead blue and snow geese were found in `-'issouri in April 1974 during the bird's northward migration. These birds contained lethal levels of dieldrin in the brain although this compound was not used locally., It was hypothesized that exposure occurred 600 miles to the south in rice growing areas. These examples have one thing in common - damage to fish and wildlife or man from chemicals in the environment - but they differ in that E^A has authority to deal with seme crcbler but not others. Thus,'DDT and dieldrir. are both pesticides have no other uses; we have therefore acted under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act to eliminate most uses. Thus, we have controlled their adverse environmental effects, although the full environmental ACM CC8595 3 benefits may not be realized for some time as the amounts already in the environment only gradually degrade or are removed from active biological cycles. The uses of hexachlorobenzene and mercury include pesticides, but pesticide uses are only a small part of-those substances entering the environment. We have no authority to control other uses and must rely on the Federal Water Pollution Control Act and the Clean Air Act to achieve partial control. In the case of mercury we have succeeded in reducing the flow into the aquatic environment, which we judge to be the critical element. On the other hand, reductions in hexachlorobenzene reaching the environment ^ave been due largely to voluntary actions by industry coupled with Stare regulation. Asbestos and PCBs are illustrative of substances where our authority is limited to regulating air and water emissions and ambient levels -- a particularly awkward situation in that persistent chemicals are occurring in different media and having different, uses. PCBs offer an excellent example of the need for more comprehensive authority. We now estimate that over the past 45 years, some 1.4 billion pounds of PCBs have been produced in the United stares. Of that amount more than half has already entered the environment through discharges to the air, water and land. Although seme of this has been chemically or biologically degraded, the vast majority is contained in landfills, contaminated soils, better, sediments of rivers, .lakes, and coastal waters. Unfortunately, there appears to be relatively little we can do to remove PCBs from the environment, and it may be many years before seme of our waters will again be suitable for commercial or recreational fisheries. At present there are over seven hundred million pounds of PCBs currently in use or inventory in electrical equipment such as transformers and capacitors, hydraulic equipment, paper products, and other commercial and industrial products. Wtthrut preventive measures, essentially all of these PCBs could ultimately enter the environment and add to the existing soil, sediment, air and water concentrations that I just describc-d. A large part of this amount can be kept from entering the environment if effective disposal and use practices are followed. The remainder may be virtually uncontrollable and will result in a continuing addition to the environmental burden. AUf*- CCtSSc 4 We are producing domestically 35-40 million pounds per year. We are importing about one-half million pounds as" a chemical, and an unknown amount in PCB-containing products. In 1975 we found that although PCB levels in most foods have steadily declined, PCBs remain present in our environment to a far greater degree and at higher levels than we would have thought. PCBs are highly persistent - more so than DDT and bio-accumulate in the food chain. PCB contamination is pervasive in the environment. We have found high PCB levels -- levels greatly exceeding FDA guidelines of 5 ppm -in fish taken from the Great Lakes, the upper Mississippi River, off the Southern California coast, streams entering the Gulf of Mexico, in the Hudson Riv^r aftd other waterways in :iew York State. Specifically, high concentrations of PCBs have been detected in recent months in fish in Lake Michigan (up to 165 ppm), Lake Pepin (up to 40 ppm), and in the Hudson River (up to 350 ppm), although the average levels are significantly lower. The presence of PCBs in these waters threatens to destroy commercial and sport fishing and associated industries, since contaminated fish are rendered unfit for human consumption and some fish become incapable of effective reproduction. The evidence we have accumulated over the past three years has underscored our original concern over the toxicity of PCBs and over the potential health hazard posed by the presence of high PCB concentrations in water and in fish. It indicates that the most serious potential health problem from PC3s which we are able to identify today would core from eating fish which contain high levels of PC3s. Until environmental levels go down substantially, the human health threat from PCBs.can only te controlled through not eating fish that exceed the limits prescribed by FDA. `With hindsight, KPA probably should have moved more aggressively to attack PCB discharges into the aquatic environment during the past several years. However, it is important to recognize that annual point source discharges from manufacturers of PCBs and electrical equipment containing PCBs -- which represent the bulk of the discharges which we can effectively address under existing authorities -probably total less than 10,000 pounds per year. At the same time we estimate that many millions of pounds of PCBs are probably entering the aquatic environment annually thrruch other routes. CM CCc59 7 5 The PCB problem, and expected similar problems, can be effectively dealt with only through authority we do not yet have. Until the Congress passes toxic substances control legislation, we must rely to a large extent on voluntary actions by industry; Let me explain. In 1971, a Federal inter agency task force was formed to address the question: what do we know and what should be done about PCBs in the environment? At that time, PCBs had been in wide industrial use in the United States for about 40 years. Approximately 80 million pounds were being domestically produced annualiv. These PCBs were used in a great variety of commercial and"*' industrial products. The task force concluded in 1972 tha PCBs were highly persistent, could be found in all parts *o the environment, could "bioaccunulate" to unacceptably high levels in fish, and could have serioua adverse effects on human health. The task force recommended-- and the Federal Government adopted-- a policy of urging private industry to confine PCB use to closed electrical systems, where there were no adequate and safe substitutes. T'-.n ''onsanto Company, the col 2 American producer of PCBs, ''.ad already voluntarily restricted sales of PCBs tc uses 'P. rim"'5 '"tri ral svsters. Tha American Aatinr?! Standards Institute issued guidelines for industry on the use, disposal and labelling of PCBs. The Environmental Protection Agency announced that it would take steps to limit discharges of industrial effluents of PCBs into rivers and lakes. The Food and Drug Administration established temporary tolerances for PCBs in several types of food and set limits on PCB contamination in food packaging and in food processing plants. In addition, the General Services Administration stopped purchase of PCB-containing paper by the Federal government and the Department of the Interior prohibited future use of PCBs in off-shore oil operations. Other nations also took action. Under an Organization for Fconomic Cooperation and Development Courcil ^ccision in 1973, member countries aareed to severely restrict uses of PCBs to certain closed systems: additionally, the OECD Council Decision recommended that member countries further restrict PC3 uses whenever possible. ACM CC0 5S0 6 At that time, we believed that these measures would take care of the PCB problem and enable us to continue to take advantage of the unique properties of PCBs while protecting the.public and the environment from exposure to hazardous levels of these chemicals. Since 1971, annual U.S. sales of PCBs have been cut in half. Today, however, we know much more needs to be done. Despite the voluntary actions described, high levels of PCBs remain in and continue to enter the environment. Last November, EPA sponsored a National Conference on PCBs in Chicago to examine the latest scientific findings on PCB's environmental and health effects, and to identify needed control actions. As a result of new evidence indicating the urgency of the problem, I announced on December 22, 1975, these actions: 1. The immediate establishment of requirements to virtually eliminate PCBs from the process wastes of all manufacturers of PCBs and of capacitors and transformers that utilize ^CEs. I instructed each of our P.ugional Offices to r= steps to review and amend, if necessary, all waste vatar discharge permits for such installations, and this activity is currently under way. By March 1 on-site surveys of 50 facilities will have been conducted and by April 1 the process of revising discharge permits for each cf these facilities will have been initiated. 2. The issuance of proposed regulations to control the environ mental damage that results from spills of hazardous substance including PCBs. EPA will move as rapidly as possible tc finalize these regulations after a public comment period. 3. A request to all State Governors asking ther to examine carefully and to apply their authorities to deal with the PCB problem. We are particularly concerned about solid waste disposal problems and effluent discharges into municipal systems, and believe that the States can be particularly helpful in these areas. 4. A request to the heads of selected Federal agencies asking them to inventory their uses of PCBs and PCB-containing materials and to develop plans to assure .adequate management and safe disposal of these materials. ^Follow-up meetings with the Agencies have been^held, and detailed activities are being worked out. AC* 7 5. Initiation of a number of other programs to find ways to eliminate the environmental discharges from other sources of PCB's including paper recycling operations, the investment casting industry, uses in hydraulic systems, and the disposal of electrical consumer products which contain PCBs/ In addition, during the past several weeks, I have met with representatives of more than 25 companies and trade associations involved in the manufacture of transformers and capacitors containing PCBs and urged their cooperation in seeking alternative approaches to PCBs. Also, I have met with representatives of a number of electrical utilities, transit authorities, and railways who are principal users of electrical equipment containing PCBs to begin to develop additional ways to prevent PCBs from being discharged into* the environment. These consultations will continue in the months ahead until we have these aspects of the problem under control. These actions are based on our conclusion that, ir. order to stop the growth of the PCB threat, the nation must phase cue production and importation of PCBs and products cor.tair.inc PCPs, and assure to the extent possible that PCBs presently ir. use do not enter the environment. But the important question is, how do we get beyond cure to prevention of this kind of problem? Over the five years since Toxic Substances legislation was first proposed, an estimated 1,000 chemical compounds have been introduced into the commercial market each year. This has happened without systematic advance assessment of their potential impact upon public health or the environment. All of the Toxic Substance Control bills now before the Congress set forth essential authorities which would greatly' strengthen our hand in beginning to control the problem of toxic substances entering the environment. The bills would enable us to keep track of chemical substances being manufactured, processed, or imported. We could require testing of chemicals which appear to pose a risk to heal or the environment.and are not covered adequately by other laws. We could takte immediate action against particularly hazardous chemicals. ADb CCctCC rt n 8 There are other important authorities common to all the bills as well, but the point is clear: the bills would plug the serious cap in Federal authority revealed by some of the cases I have described today. . The Administration has announced its support for H.R. 7^64 with amendments and I understand that a formal communication on this bill will be forwarded to the Congress in the near future. In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I believe that the ?C3s and similar problems can be viewed as warning sicr.s. In the face of the burgeoning role of chemicals in the world, we must be able to take all due action to prevent the sort of environmental contamination which PCBs have caused. We cannot rely on half-measures and spotty, limited authority. We cannot wait until a risk-posing chemical is out in the economy before beginning to address the problems it presents. And we should not use our citizens and the nation's fish ar.d wildlife resources to learn what the problems are. Mr. Chairman, that concludes my prepared remarks. I will answer any questions you may have. \ \ ACK ccafcCi F  UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION V 230 SOUTH DEARBORN ST CHICAGO. ILLINOIS 60*04 JUIM 4 1976 Mr. R. V. Flint, Plant Manager Monsanto Industrial Chemicals Company Sauget, Illinois 62201 Dear Mr. Flint: In response to a telephone request from Hr. Paul Helsler of Monsanto ve are sending ''preliminary" materials developed by EPA in regard to atmospheric emissions from the Krumarlch plant. This material is further support of my letter to you of May 7, 1976 and would be dis cussed at the meeting proposed in your letter of May 19, 1976. Questions may be referred to Howard Zar (312-353-1472) or R. Edwin Zylstra of this office. Very truly yours, /b-X J Dale S. Bryson, Acting Director Enforcenent Division Enclosure %March memoraniufl from Chief, Air Surveillance Branch and attachments i JUH 9 197G )S j; y it 1l -- Iwl' & tIrO r-\ t - \ ADM CC11C 4 :-T .'v > ,-*-v **%. 9 r' J S tate of W isconsin \ D E P A R T M E N T OF N A T U R A L RESOURCES L. p. Srcrwtory September 11, 1975 BO* -SO MADISON, WISCONSIN 53? 3t IN REPLY REFER TO: Mr. Arthur T. Hart Director of Field Services National Agricultural Chemicals Assn. 1155 Fifteenth St., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20005 niprar?nn nr? ffti W SEP 15.975 UuLbliDLbU U lit U BY, The Governors' Great Lakes Regional Interdisciplinary Pesticide Council has reviewed the issue of PCB contamination of v&tegs and foods. The Wisconsin Departments of Natural Resources end Health & Social Services have participated in these discussions. In addition, both departments have participated in the Environmental Protection Agency Regional Conference and Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources public hearings concerning the use and discharge of PCBs. Both departments concluded that the use of PC3s should bp itMnatPd or at least restricted on the bas 1s of essential need and an ability to prevent environmental coniaa- Inatlon^ The two Wisconsin Departments therefore propose the attached resolution for consideration at the September 18, 1975 meeting of the Interdisciplinary Pesticide Council. ~ I would request that you offer a position for your agency at that time. Represented nonmember agencies may enter their position, which will be ' advisory. The position of the Council will of course only be advisory to the respective State Executives.. Sincerely * Division of Environmental Standards Lloyd Lsborsto Services Section LAL:poa Attach. \ C S -> 7/3 ^ tue* THIS IS 10* RCCYCLEO PAPER ADM CCtSfc* VHSRLAS, the Lake Michigan Toxic Substance Committee of the E?A has revievcd the nost recent toxicologiesI and analytical data and has concluded that: 1, The effect level cf PCSs in primates reproduction has been recently documented as less than 2.5 ppn and is much lower than has been observed in Standard test mammals (rats). 2# As a result of recent court decisions, the FDA is now enforcing the 5 ppm residue maximum in fish intended for human consumption and is likely to review the 5 ppm max imum allowable based on recent primate toxicological evidence. 3. The concentrations of FC3s in Lake Michigan fish are nrobiiblr not decreasing-and salmonids, particularly larger specimens, currently exceed the 5 ppn maximum allowably levels. k. Reported efforts by the manufacturer to restrict distribution and efforts by the agencies to restrict discharges have not resulted in PCB reductions in the lake. 5. It is probable that w astewater sources of PCBs to Lake Michigan are ubiquitous,and at or below detectable levels. An ppnomi ( 1a <sc ho tfn t.he *1 fishery as a result of FC3 contamination. A much larger economic loss to the coicmercial and sport fishing industry Is imminent in light of current FDA food recommendations and enforcement actions. ~> T. Non-Hastevat er PCBs are still reaching the environment from incineration, land disposal and careless dumping. 8. The presence of PCSs in many processes and products .continues^ to be w idespread in soitg-of the Monsanto Chemical Company ~policy*to restrict sale to closed systems. 9 Many uses of PCBs can be eliminated or renlacedJby using "alternative chemicals, and' WHEREAS, both domestic and foreign PCB pose an environmental hazard, and WHEREAS, current industry efforts to regulate PCBs have not proven effective In reducing environmental cont amratioh" "and WHEREAS, recent analytical data establishes beyond reasonable doubt that PCBs are "contaminating the- environment as a result of nonessential uses, and \ WHEREAS, virtually every use of FC3 is replaceable by an alternative product er engineering design. ACM C08 5 65 -2 - NOW THEREFORE EE I? RESOLVED THAT, renter agencies represented in The Governors' JJreat Lakes Regional Interdisciplinary Pesticide Council _seek Legislation or Administrative Rules to^ban^all uses .of PCEs.,other thun lihriRe*usgs~~gcr:s^(*grad._essential after- public hearing by appropriate legislative committee or regulatory agency. a V ACM C 0 8 5 8 6 A0E7IDA fi" AUS - 4 .75 JjviDlbU-U lii DY. GOVERNORS1 IUTERDISCIPLIIASY CaCHT T E E OU'PESTICIDES SEPTEMBER 1 8 , 1975 Camelot Ina 6565 U. Mannheim Road Rosemount, Illinois 9:00 A.M. Business Meeting ? a. Review of Direction from Governors b. Status of Membership 9:15 A.M. Current Problems in Implementing Amended FIFRA Dr. John Osmund Purdue University 10:15 A.M. The Bird Pesticide Controversy Today William Stlckel Patuxent Wildlife Research Center Laurel, Maryland 11:15 A.M. * Review of FOB Regulatory Efforts John Hesse Michigan Water Resources Commission 12:00 Soon Lunch 1:00 P.M. Implementation and Enforcement of Label Cautions and Warnings ----- - Bob Luss v U5-EPA Chicago, 111. Terrell Hunt ) ^Pesticida Misuse Review Commi ttee ACM CC8 567 I UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY SUBJECT: Emissions of TCB from tfie Incinerator at Monsanto - date: February 11, 1975 Sauget, Illinois. FROM: TO: R, EdwirvfZylstra, Technical Advisor, Special Projects Section IM Chief, Air Surveillance Branch . . . ,0n January 27-28, 1975 sampling was conducted at the Krummrich Plant of Monsanto in Sauget, Illinois to determine emissions to the air. The samples were taken near the exits of the steam jet ejectors of the non-fractionating distillation process. The exits of the fractionating distillation Steam ejector were not sampled because of inaccessibility. The incinerator used to destroy waste PCB's was not sampled because Monsanto had tested the stack and the results were made available to us. *a I have reviewed the test procedures and the data from three stack tests and I feel that the test results accurately indicate the quantity of PCB being emitted into the atmosphere from the incinerator. The Monsanto procedure for stack testing the incinerator for PCB and particulate is shown in Appendix A. The method is a modified EPA Method 5. The front half is identical to Method 5 and consists of a sample nozzle, a heated' probe, and a heated glass fiber filter. The back half is as follows: 1. F.irst-impinger empty; 2. Second iir.pinger with 150 ml. of N, N-dimethyl formamida; 3. Third impinger with 75 ml. NaOH solution and 75 ml. Na2SC3 solution; 4. Fourth impinger with 200 g silica gel. Sampling is performed the same as Method 5. To determine the PCB emissions the sample Is handled as follow: 1* Probe,' nozzle and filter* are rinsed with hexane. The rinse is nixed with any condensate from the first impinger and then analyzed for PCB by means of electron capture gas chromotograph. 2. The NN dimethy formamide in the second impinger is analyzed for PCB by means of electron capture gas chromotograph. The table shows the results of stack'tests for PCB on the incinerator performed by Monsanto. Emission ranged from .00001 to .000243 lbs/hr. Computer printouts of data collected and the results of the last three test performed were supplied to us for evaluation. The calculations were cheeke and no errors were found. Monsanto'-s and our computer printouts are in Append^# B (Xt/i if v CPAF,. 1320. (R... .72) AC H C C B6 C 1 .I xi.Vv '-H; ,, t ^ *' . % *** - ;stack tests 0:1 oksaiito per* iiicinEKAron % 0; T h e f o l lowing tests were tiade using a modification of Illinois V :K e t h d 5 a n d b o t h flow a n d concentrations were determined. P-C-S cone-*n Tnloawv . *t ,* , * , >"/`V ,Date`>/l in pc/m^ m^/tnin. * ** * * * *.'i.. > V- *.* ; - 7/25/73 f 8/7/73 A 6/16/73 --**t# -, 8/24/73 ...10/2G /73 10/7/73 11/20/73 , * . 11/28/73 i* : -i .-..V -8/23/74 ; .`V8/12/74 .*4 ^ - ' ; - ". 5/23/75' * . .=..10/1/75 * * V. :* * .* - - . - ,,%V%. . !.%Oa.-.Vti:%#-*:*-'i^*-..r.:^*#*%/,*..,^ . 0.0063 * . 0*0267 ; . 0.0176 0.0166 . 0.0077 . .0.0066 0.0110 0.0013 . %0.Q149 0.02C9 .0.0300 0 .01^2 " ,. ` 63.5 'r :* ' 9 6 .8 . . . - 106.S 105.8 W 48.3 l `..; 5 8 .1 / *.- 6 3 .8 66.7' ;v:r'* 71.1 51.1 y.v:.. -'44.5 V ' '92.2 2 1 v* /-, . *< 4i * '}* * *v A- *8 * * .-** .* .-**:: ' ADM C C 8 t C 7 I APPENDIX A . I MONSANTO PROCEDURE FOR STIACK TES,.T. I.NO FOR PCBs ? I 1L I J \ . 1 * $ i i V \ CCttCt AD** INCINERATOR STAC:-: TEST rOK PCD1S AND PARTICIPATES SCOPE: .This procedure determines the amount of PCB's and part lates present in the incinerator stack gas. t EQUIPMENT: 1* R.A.C. portable stack gas sampler a. sample box i .. b. unbilical cord"25 Test (2 each) c. -nozzles 0.250 or 0.375 *d. 'clamps (10 each) 23/15 Fisher 5-835? *s. 3* combination probe and pitot tube (glass f. glass connectors (4 each) g, 500 ml Greenburg-Smith impinger (4 each) Fisher Scientific Company* St. Louis, MO .. " 'cat* no, 9-257# or equivalent. The fourth impinger is modified by replacing the standard tip with? a 1/2 inch ID glass tube .extending to one-half inch from bottom of 'impinger flask. 2.. Glass orifice to regulate air flow'through pit tube. (2each) Can be made from broken thermome 3. Thermometer 0-220F \-I Thermocouple and potentiometer .\ 5. Nomograph ** .6. Clip board .. **. * * " /* ; 7* Air Pump (Ityna pump) r . . 8. - Stopv/atch (2 each) .** *. 9*. Tape ruler .10. .3 way plug ' " ;* . . . . - ; 11. Stopcock grease * . ' . 12. 50 ft. of 5/3" rope. " . *t 13. .Adjustable wrenches ( 2 each) FOR PAR'TICULATR TKSg ADD: * * * 1. Cydlone ond Erlonmc-yer flask' * 2. *Clamps.2 each 2Q/15 CK C086CS 57 Glass fiber Tilter holder 4. Glass fiber siae 7-0 CW (Fisher cat. no, 9-872 Dry In oven and leave in desiciator. ac a CC661C REAGENTS:. a. - Sodium Sulfite, Fisher Scientific Company, St. Louis, r.is: Cat, No* S-^rjJO in uast&nddrdlzed solution. Weight 63 gra;; `dissolve in water and make up to 1 ltcr. *I i . : b. N,N-3>inethyl Formamide, Fisher Scientific CO., St. Louis, Missouri, Cat.No. D-119. c. ..Sodium Hydroxide 50# solution, Fisher Scientific Company, *St, Louis, `Missouri, Cat. No* SO-S-25^/ in unstandardized solution. Add 52,4 ml to 500 ml distilled water and make "to a lcter. d. Hexane; nonograde (Kallinccrodt Chemical Works, St.- Louis,, Missouri, Cat. No. 4159) e. Silica Gel Grade 938 Darlson Code 938-08-08-526 Pavison jChemical; Baltimore, dryland, 21|03,. .* Crushed ice. . ... * '/ . .. . ; -- *-> 4 ACK C C f e i l SAMPLING PROCEDURE: 1. Measure stack diameter and determine minimum number ofsamoli points needed. t i 2. Measure stack temperature ,, * 3. * Determine percent moisture. Thi3 may be found from-previous tests. . .4.'-Place sample box on duorail and assemble impingers. Leaving the first impinger empty. Fill the second impinger with 15*0 ml of DliF solution. Add 75 ml in NaOK plus 75 ml in Na2S03 i; the third impinger. The last impinger will contain 200 g . silica gel in a modified impinger. (Weigh silica gel for wat> determination later). -w; 5. `Place the cyclone and glass fiber filter *in the heat chamber and connect to irapingers.. - -- ' 'I ; ' * 6. Connect vacuum line of umbilical cord to inlet or meter box . and outlet of last impinger. .Plug up the inlet to the filter * holder and pull 15 in. Kg vacuum to check for leaks. Leakage rate should not. exceed 0.02 C.F.M. * * *. * '7 ~ Connect glass probe-to cyclone. .8; Complete all connections on umbilical cord. 9* Purge air through pitot tube using tubing which is attached to umbilical cord and connect to air pump. -10. Pack ice around impinger and add water. 11. Make a traverse*.of stack on one side to determine velocity an; 'stack pressure. Be -sure you have balanced draft gage before you take your readings. 12. Heat probe and chamber in box to a temperature of l'O* higher than the stack temperature. .. 13. Record temperature at gas meter, (inlet and outlet.) 14. Use Homograph to determine nozzle size and isokinetic sampling rate. * .' . . 15 Record gas meter readings. 16. As `soon as heat dfcamber in sampling, box is.up to temperature " start your test. .. , AOM C C f c c i i 9 SAMPLE TRAIN OPERATION1 1. . Fop each run, record, the data required on the example sheet shown in Figure 1-2. i- 2. Determine the time required at each sampling point. A . minimum time of one hour is required For this test. 3. To .begin-sampling, position the nozzle at the First traverse point with the tip pointing directly into the gas stream. Immediately start the pump and adjust the Flow to isokinetic conditions. Sample For at least 5 minutes at each traverse point; sampling time must be the same For each point. 4. _Record temperature at gas meter inlet and outiet,' about one **' minute beFore it is time to change traverse points... Also be sure to read temperature oF last$impinger.-. - 3 .Add more ice during test -to keep the temperature of gases . 'leaving -the last impinger as low as.possible .and preferably : at 70 F. or less. .. ; ; 6. Turn off pumps at the conclusion of sample run and record final reading. '. ' - * .**'.'* 7 Remove probe from stack and disconnect from impingers. Take 'probe and impingers and prepare them For lab analysis. i ** 1 * . * 8.' ^Measure the increase in volume of- each impinger plus the- increase in weight of the silica gel to determine percent v;a Rinse probe and cyclone with hexane and pass rinsing t h r o u g h glass fiber filter. Mix this extract with the water (conder. - - from the First -impinger. 10. Carefully remove the Filter pad plus rubber toashor and dry i _ oven then place in desicator before weighing For particulate * 11. Collect all washings and give to lab For analysis. 12*. Upon receipt of analysis From 3ab, record results in grams on sheet shown in Figure 1-1 and complete For computer run. DISCUSSIO!!: "a CM CC6613 The collection system in this test may also be used to dctormJ iaV other components of the stack gas. The ones of most interest WO be HC1, KaPO-j, and Clc. To do this have the lab save all aqua*cw;, layers From washing used in preparing the solutions for PCD or,a.*! ; Take the aqueous layer from the First impinger (water condor.:/..';Lo and run For 1IC1. and IlaPO* ianalysis. Analyze the dimethyl form From the second impinger For Clz and IbPO/, and the KasS0j impiniFor Cl2. t!->-) '' , [ ;y1 Mur.fcor d b cn p on en ts t o be a n a ly z e d `' *7 I 'fK'JJ H J V M l i / j | - U r l I ) 19 1~7131 I 1/ 1: |> |Q | I P l ^ T l |/ b k l / l/ / k l/ ;l.- - liT [ g b l Date (13-20) Time (21-l|ij) S ta ck Sampled I Ti l l I I { . m nu : \ . . . OE z o ,, c s \E B S M n m U f f l u i S i v r l n . r r n m ,V ( 45- ^ 8)201 r c e OpNo. (49~50) . ( 5 i - 56) S t c k D l a m .( 5 y - 6i ) B a r . ( 62--66) Xe ( 67"72^tacV c V 'id th - liiiiM iJU (1 -p ) Process W t. r p |g |g |/ / t o is i WMiirm\'<>\o\n\ 1 "i I T T I T T ' i T ' T T T i I I 1 I T T (6-^0) U nits o f production per hpur .'. i;., ^:i/i?-l is1v1/Jl.11 |ylx1-!//1 l/?-U/I/oi toi/)[/.lgl u il i k v m u iu 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 l 1 u 1 iT T ' (1-50) Sampling d o n e by (gipi-ll Vs\Z\rrP.\ob\ Itfifil f-H Ifltolfl l/i-l/ztol tebjgldtflsl 1/UilPlilfrls-l.el/asi I I I I I I I I (I-J18) S a m p l i n g M e t h o d - I n d i c a t e m o d i f i c a t i o n s * .; KI-, \5io\l>I `* . " lol. Ifbl. (51--5*i> Orifice (55-58)- Pitot Correction Factors Det;rec:[p|n | CEntlcrade or, -- " Fahrenheit (59-60) K TM ^P] * (Gl-64) Meter Jr> nbl^r.l3 i n M o l e F r a t l o n s ( I d e n t i fy C o m p o n e n t 7, I f p r e s e n t h v M.W. and n a me o r f o r m u l a ) ii-i. \o\pak\ itOr'iT^Ti loi.i)iviF| i~Tt>ri^rri n ri r r r n o T f o i e e ^m x e l D- (1-5) 02 (6-10) Ha (11-15) C02 (16-20) C0 (21-25)1120 (26-30) Z Ol-StJm-iZ (35-'i3) r.are of Z i/'Ci Moisture determination by absorption on Accarlte and weighing Leak tost on Sampler fvl*l- .l>!2lJc-p- M OE U Llo|;\0\""r` [2i- iW IX ft IlM -M /l.1> (1-6)SamploVol. (7-ll)Temp. (12-15)Press (16-23) Tare wt.. (2^-31) Cross wt. U2-3WT; vT/uni \<-k\Lhh r H l- r.i. 1 1 r '1 W I-/1 iT iv m i1 i1 1 n Analysis for Components fl 1? ? ~0p 1!) R |o <f yii;7 0 <1JP. ' n\J O to * i U W 0_ f d_ o\o 0 0 4 0 o\o / 0 0 OiC /? . 713 V . Ul$U&U"I?1 ress !1 i 1 1 1 1il 1 1 -.J-- or Car.?, ' Vt.(c) (25-35)Cfi*osa Ht.(c) (36-ll7).Koa e;crr.:-;-d 1 I HP rs r 1 i f l T i k la I- 17Ml. 1/ 3b i k \ol !2' !OT'- i/k 1! \ ) b ijv \o\}K` \o\\A ui !/!',.k ii20 i T,uP.S71ill\ Ik \o <>V5 l b \o laTT bb 1\r,|. ?bb 9'o I'/ob Min . ZONE Cu,ft, Dec. L QT-P7V / O/LV. oITo / ?TnC_i li^ lo b /'V rn-b07 .j / b f L f 1p fX0*01 0/ Ids . --t/\. '/! Is-'0 J ,ii/ .b 1:3k i. >3-</bl. 1-?t/?"1|--T!--r:--f.!ro~ / ZONE ZONE ZONE In iif- (TTiMV_I 10^J < h l.b :l(l.ilb-T.lrli.*o11^*s7XJ*iPo1pHL!IO.jl- 'yk I T \r/7\.}<o V I - 1-7 (X- 0 M !| ! ;. 1 lo v? i- 6 M l ial-b 7P\- i M 1 ZONE Ir. ::.r ?l\2 T-LiL-TU /nHrOrn' 1 l-l 1 M l i 0i>n`o--1*Ij1i--7;,ii!-- \Idl byl'o1 l7 |f 0 1 P-. Id 9\c ' U-- l/l.o\o /'Vb!. ba aL l/b b A . 0 .?v 'yi.i u 7 <0 . '0 9I3I- b :7bl- 0 ! ! i 1 5 1 /! \(AAo ilj j j / B \'kr*4y.loo'-. I/7-b i jlv !d Jfctb M 7/!!yvViL1I ob /5L? 0*<> o!. o lh \o 01 *70 i ?11 i 11 r 1 : 11 1! i r M li 1 ! 11i T IT ! 1 1 IT i --i 1 !m !1 i1 !1 T * 1! l !M 1 i i i i ij i i M il T T - 1 ! ! ! _LI iir~ -- I-- ri ! i 1' i i 1' M M I 1! U !! i lM i TT a 1 i * K> 7\f* QO * 0 t o 1-/1.- b '9 & r r w Q.- 0T T j/T 0 . T i> T i1 i1 i! 0 . !. Ml 1: ! ~'TT11"" ; "i-- p " "r "1-- .1 1 7b -- 1 1 i ~tr ; 1 1; (A0`- 0 ir r 1i ! 1 ;#11 t \T T 11 :; MM 1M T IT -- !! i !!i * //?--,'?--ii--. 0 i 1 --'--*M1--i :1 1 1t I! !I 1i 1i -ii-T'1l" ! 1 !.i. . *! 1iT ! 7b i j 1(1i i ! i I 1 1 i TTTi M il IT T 11 1*1 11 i i1 i! r t t l T: I1T * : t ! :M 1M 1 M !1 jjii m ;r M li ! 11 ii 1i ! M il ijik i 1i ! 11 Ml L 1 ! 1 T*1 ;1: *:1 J_bUbb 1 h i W\9\o .. i b!- 1.71.3b >11 1 M : 11 1 ! 1 1i 1 1 1 i1 M ; _L M 1 i1 : 1! 1 ! 1 ! 1 1 1 : 1i i IL M M 1t 11 _LLLL. 11! i 1 ! 1! j l L L A I L l1 L L 1 ! : ! 11 i i T1 1 | 1 IT _M I L L 1 i J j i 1 1 1 1 1 1 it !* i 1 1 m : i - L T 1i i . . i i 1i l l 11'l -i-M IM 1! *! i J ' l APPENDIX B STACK TEST COMPUTE!! PRINTOUTS \ \ .\ \ :\ v,\ At* cctele MONSANTO INDUSTRIAL CHEMICALS CO* ,* 1' : -H.fi. KRUKNRICH PLANT SAUGET.IL 62201. ID NO. 63 121 AAC OATE SEPT 12*1974 START TIKE 1:00 PM ` STACK SAMPLED- INCINERATOR *SOURCE OPERATION NO. 031 SAMPLING DONE;ttY NEIL SULLIVAN ANO ED nEUKANN L /! ' SAMPLING METHO-EPA METHOD ft5 DMK AN NA2S3 IMPINGERS* DETERMINATION UF EMISSION RaTE OF f I . asparticulate . BrP.C.B. ! :j. ` V ....... * . . CSHCL . . . . . . . . . ...... i * DSH3P04 * PROCESS WEIGHT RaTE=*772.00 POUNDS HER HOUR .TEST .RESULT: *,, j /ACTUAL CFM AT /STO CFM DRY STD CFM / i /STACK CONDITIONS/ AT 70 DEG.F AND 29.92 IN. HG/ STACK VOLUME 1903.1 .. .1803.8 . 1711.6 ,. . DUST KIST*GR GAS CONCENTRATION IN rtET 6 ! STACK GAS AT STD CONDiI GRAINS l b s ; per LBS. PER MGS. PER PARTS - PER MILLION 1OO CUBIC PER COMPONENT CUBIC FT CUrtIC FT LS. GAS METE MILLION a : 0.070 10.1163 0.1331 16P.04R6 134.9248 IN WET a: 0.0746 10.6611 0.1374 /( ... 170.7756 142.19)0 IN DRY B: "0.0000 ' 0.00V6 0.0000 0.0299 0.0028 IN 'WET B: !0.0000 0.0019 0.0000 0.0304 0.0029 IN DRY *\ C: C: D: 0: '' -.0307 0.0323 . -1If1 o.oe?7 0*0071 4.3816 . 4.6176 11.8131 12.4493 *' 0-.0576 0.0S9S 0.1554 0.1604 70.1866 73.9665 189.22B7 199.4194 46.4306 IN WET 48.9313 IN DRY 46.6235 IN WET 49.1344 IN UriY EMISSION RATE:' ' * . * *'** ** LBS. PER COMPONENT HOUR A: 1.0948 B: 0.000? . C: 0.4742 0: 1.275 GRAMS PER SEC. 0.137? 0.0000 0.0597 . 0.1611 LBS. PER 1UNIT OF PRODUCTION 0 0014 0. 0000 0.00C6 0.0017 ` i m U b I H i AL CHEMI CAL S CO W .fi. KRUMMRICH PLANT SA U G E T.IL DATtt ScPT 12 9 7 4 START T`IN STACK SAHPkED- INCINERATOR .lii ! 62201. 1*00 PM ID NO. 63 121 AAC . SOURCE OPERATION NO. 6; f i e l d d a t a / ' ," i1 O R IFIC E CONSTANT K = 0 . 5 0 6 . PITOT TUbE FACTOR. FS= 0 . 3 TEMPS* RECORDED IN FA DEGREES ! METER CORRECTION FACTOR* 1 .0 2 i GAS A N A LY S IS ; 2=N0NE MOLECULAR WT OF 2= 0 .0 MOLECULAR WT'. Or STACK GAS = 2 9 . AO ^ I DRY MOLECULAR WT. OF GAS = 3 0 * 0 2 _ ___ ; . . . . . * t^ ' t._mm.9 m4 . 0 2 N2 C02 CO H20 Z VOL TW PW 1 f: 106 /- ; 0*902 0*092 0 0.f* *O'. 051 0 *0 A O .630 1 0 0.2 0 29 . 6 * 1 PARTIcU LA TE i P * C 8 *i DETERMINED ry -WY WEIGHT DETERMINED GY BY WEIGHT. -T s _ 0 .1 9 8 4 GRAf 0 .0 0 0 0 GRA i r HCL 1 DETERMINED RY BY WEIGHT *S 0 .0 9 1 6 GRa; ? H3P0A __ DETERMINED 8Y BY WEIGHT s 0 *22 0 0 GRAi ; * i . * *** 1 #! . LEAK TEST ON EOUIPMENT=0.001 CFM AT 1 5 .0 0 IN.HG 0 barometer*` 29.64 IN.HG STACK DIAM= 19.OOG IN.5 NOZZLE DIAa = 0, / VEL stack -STACK TIME VOLAI COND iMETER *TEMP iMEIER PRESS Fi .HEAD TEMP PRESS ATEND END TEMP START FIN OF ZONE HP TS H20 ZONE- ZONE IN OUT HG hG o.o.o 95.0 0.8 0.0 935.30 D 90.0 90.0 0.0 0.0 c l 0.060 95.0 o.a 8.0 939.71 64.0 98.0 90.0 0.0 6.0 1 2 0.060 95.0 '0.8 16.0 944.74 64.0 106.0 91.0 c.o 0.0 1 3 0.095. 95.0 0.8 24.0 950.22 65.0 .111.0 92.0 o*.o o.n I 4 0*095 95.0 O.B 32.0 955.71 65.0 111 .Ci 94.0 0.0 0.0 1 5 0.065 95.0 0.8 40.0 960.50 63.0 106.0 *95.0 0.0 o.o 1 6 0.080 95.0 0.8 <6.0 965*28 64.0 1U'.O 96.0 0.0 0.0 1 7 0.090 95.0 O.B 56.0 970.65 65.0 113.0 97.0 0.0 0.0 1 *"8 0.090 95.0 0.8 62.0 975.93 68.Q 114.0 97.0 0.0 0.0 1 I i C* CC6fcl /VilJSANTO INDUSTRIAL CHEMICALS CO. w/fi. KRUMMRtCH PLANT SaUET.IL 62201. I NO. 63 121 AAC IMG-SEPT 12 1974 START TIMt 1iUO PH . ' , IACK SAMPLFD- I n CTNF.&AYOR r /. | CULATION ANO EVALUA r iLl.Ni: SOURCE OPERA TI UN NO. 831 .` t i l u IS O K IN E T IC CONSTANT hG / hP FOR THIS EUUIPMENT IS 2 3 ,6 2 6 a n o 1 TAtTE BFLO.'V SHOWS.F * c *\CN 20>;E.Tri N t t K VOL*. ANO IHE AV6. k?; ! , / ; ) PRESS. IN AP.SOLtm: U N I I S . FRC M THIS S CALCULA7FU THE EQUIVALE: 5 TACf CON!)ITIOrS ANO 1)1 VIDEO rlY TIME TO GIVE THE FLOU IN TuE rO^PAPEO V'ITH The ISOKlMfeTIC FLOv Ra TE CALCULATE!) FRUM THE STa CK V pWCt` NTAGE D t V A T I O N - I S KECORDcO. - ' . S4MPLE/STACK/AV5. PRESS/ AVG. TfiMP/SAMPLE VOL./SAKPLE RaTE /:- ZONE TIME VEL. METER stack METERNSTACK metek stack ACTUal isokin r. 1 8.0` 13.8 ?y.7 29.7 552.0 555.0 4.4 .. 4.e 0.60 .0.64 -e z 3 8*0 16.0 29.8 29.7 556.3 555.0 5.0 5..4 0.68 0.74 - 8.0 17.4 ?9.8 29.7 560.0 555.0 5.5 5.9 0.73 0.80 -8 4 8.0 17.4 29.fl 29.7 562.0 555.0 ... 5.5 . 5.8 ...0.73 ,0.80 -d <5 8.0 14.4 29.7 29.7 561 .S 555.0 4.8 5.1 064 0.66 -3 6 8.0 16.0 ?9.a 29.7 562/3 555.0 d*.a 5.1 0.64 0.74-13 7 6.0 16.9 29.8 29.7 564.5 555.0 .. '5.4 .5.7 0.71. 0.78 -h 8 6.0 16.9 29.8 29.7 565.3 555.0 .5.3 ' 5.6 0.93 0.78 19 TOTAL X 62.0. 16.1i1. .29.8. .29.7 .560.5 S55.0 .>0.6 ..43.3 0.70 .0.074 -5 T AV, .AV AV AV AV 1 T AV AV TOTAL SAMPLE VOL. CORRECTED FROM STACK CONDITIONS TO STO CONDITIONS AI.06 CU8I-C FT. OF NET GAS TOTAL SAMPLE VOL. CORRECTED TO DRY*SID CONDITIONS = 38.96 CUBIC v \ ADH C G f i t l 9 MONSANTO INDUSTRIAL CHEMICALS CO. ** W.G. KRUMMRICH PLANT SAUGET. IL 62201.'. 10 NO. 63 1?1 AAC " DATE OCT 1 1975 ' I START TIME 1:30 PM STACK SAMPLED- INCINERATOR .. ... .SOURCE OPERATION N. 831 SAMPLING DONE*BT NEIL SULLIVAN AND ED HEUHANN . --- I * '. ** SAMPLING METHOD-EPA .METHOD 5 . .DMF AND NA2S03 ..IMPINGERS;________ DETERMINATION OF EMISSION RATE OF __________-___ ___ L______ ! :___A:PARTICULAR * SP.C.B. CSCL2 TEST RESULT :. * #**,* * * ." 's'- /ACTUAL CFM AT /STD CFM DRY STD CFM / /;STACK CONDITIONS/ AT 7 OEG.F AND 29.92 IN..HG/ STACK VOLUME . 3749.6 3257.1 0 2353.4 * * - * - .. OUST.MIST* OR GAS CONCENTRATION IN WET.A DRY.STACK.3AS.At_S.TD.CONDITIONS.. GRAINS LBS. PER LBS. PER MGS. PER PARTS * .. PER ,, .. MILLION. .__ 1000... ....CUBIC__ .. PER COMPONENT CUBIC FT CUBIC FT LBS. GAS METER MILLION * AS 0.0725 10.3620 0.1494 165.9635 138.2010 IN WET GAS ____ __.0.1.004 _14.340B, __ 01836_._229.716,3 ..191.2679, IN DRY_.GAS__ B: 0.0000 0.0011 - .0.0000 0.182 0.0018 IN WET GAS -- -_PS _____ __ 0.0.000 . ,,..0.0016...... 0.0000 ___0.0252,. ... 0.0024 IN DRY GA.S__ . c: .. C . .. 0.0079 .0.0110 1.1335 0.0163 10.1570 6.1749 IN WET GAS 1.56B7 . 0.0201 25.1290 . 8.5460 IN DRY GAS EMISSION RATE: - . - - * **.* .'m\ * * . -* LBS. PER GRAMS . LBS. PER UNIT COMPONENT HOUR PER SEC." OF PRODUCTION __ .AL . 2.0250 ..... 0.2551...___ .. 2.2450.. B-* 0.0002 0.0000 O.OOU2 cs 0.2215 0.0279 0.2456 <* 4 *. ACH CCfet-------- - r-L.*\Wl SAUGETlL 62201 10 NO*! 63 *121* AAC o : RATE OCT 1 1975 . st Ara t im e : 1 : 3 0 PM STACK s a m p l e d - . INCINERATOR......... ......... . source.D eration n o . FIELD d a t a : . t O ORIFICE CONSTANT K=0.506 PITOT TUt3 FACTOR FS= 0.B3 TEMPS. RECORDED .IN FA DEGREES____________ _______ METER CORRECTION FACTORS 1.02 O 1* * k* :GAS ANALYSIS:.Z=NONE. . _______MOLECULAR. UT OF 7=__ 0..0 o H 'm OLECULAR WT. OF STACK GAS = 26.83 ! ORY MOLECULAR WT. Of GAS = 30.22.. . .. o . 02 N2 C02 CO H20 Z VOL TW pw .0 6 8 0 . 8 1 8 0 . 1 1 4 0 . 0 . 0 . 2 7 7 0 . 0 3 0 .2 0 0 .70*89 29.902' o II I PARTICULATE . DETERMINED BY BY WEIGHTq r a 0.2002 GRAH! L,.P.C.B<_____ DETERMINED BY.______ BY.'WTIi,tfUN.._.g____ 0.0000 GRAM! CL2 ,, ; DETERMINED BY BY TITRATION = 0.0219 GRAM! o LEAK TEST ON EQUIPMENTcO.005 CFM AT_.1S.00 IN.HG _ _ '_ BAROMETER* 29.90 IN.HG5 STACK DIAM= 19.000 IN.: NOZZLE DIAm' V o7l :O ! . VEL HEAD : O ZONE HP . 0 0.0 1 0,200 02 0.300 3 0-. 340 4 0.330 O ' s o ;i7 o ____ 6 0 . 2 3 0 O: T 0.300 .6 0.270 . 1_ , STACK STACK TIME VOLAT COND METER TEMP METER PRE35 FLC TEMP PRESS ATEND END temp START F N ORI TS H20 ZONE ZONE IN OUT HG HG HZ 349.0 - 0 . 4 0.0 428.50 . 0 6 4 . 0 ! , 6 4 . 0 ......0 . 0 . . - 0 . 0 0. 149.0 - 0 . 4 8.0 431.84 51 .0 68.0 64.0 0.0 0.0 0. 149.0 - 0 .4 16.0 435.82 51.0 74.0 64.0 0.0 ' 0 . 0 0 . 1 4 9 . 0 - 0 . 4 . 2 4 . 0 . 4 3 9 . 9 7 .. 5 3 . 0 HO.O . 6 5 . 0 . . ,, . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 .1. 1 4 9 .0 - 0 . 4 3 2 . 0 4 4 4 .1 1 5 5 . 0 8 0 . 0 6 6 .0 - o. o 0 . 0 1. 149.0 - 0 . 4 ' 4 0 .0 447.29 53.0 74.0 66.0 0.0 0.0 0. 1 4 9 . 0 ..= .0 .4 4 8 . 0 4-50.84 .. .5 4 .0 8 0 . 0 . 6 6 . 0 . ,, 0 .0 0 . 0 0. 1 4 9 .0 - 0 . 4 5 6 .0 4 5 4 .8 4 5 6 .0 8 3 .0 6 8 . 0 0 . 0 0. 0 0. 1 4 9 . 0 - 0 . 4 6 4 . 0 4 5 8 . 7 0 5 8 . 0 <32.0 6 8 . 0 0 . 0 - 0 .0 o.. O '.. .ii1 1 # >. * * . . .. -- .. . . . , .r. ..... . . . "9 (t #_. _. ___. -- .. ---- .. -- -- --------- c 'I 1' A I I IW. DATE OCT 1 1975 - ...* ur.ctii. R) NJO. 63 1?1 AAC START T1HE 1:30 PM STACK 'SAMPLED-. INCINERATOR.. ---------- SOURCE OPERATION. KO. G CALCULAT ION ANO EVALUAT ION: .o;: THE 1S0KINETJC CONSTANT HO/HP f"OR JrllS EOUlPMENT*IS 13,0114 THE TAHLE OELOW SHOWSFOR EACH ZONETHE METER VOL. AND THE'avG. ME AND PRESS. IN ABSOLUTE UNITS. FROM THIS IS CALCULATED T H E EQUIVALE o STACK CONDITIONS AND DIVIDED HY TIME TO GIVE THE FLOW In THE NOZZL COMPARED- WITH THE ISOKINETIC FLOW RATE CALCULATED. FROM THE STACK VI PERCENTAGE DEVIATION IS RECORDED ...... o _ ...s a m p l e /s t a c k /a v g . PRESS/ AVG.. .TEm p /s a m p l e .v o l ./s a m ple Rate /t ZNE TINE VEL. METER STACK METER STACK.METER STACK ACTUAL o 6.0 27.6 29.9 29.9 525.0 609.0 3.3 . S.S ' 0.69 1.27-4C ! _ i _ . 6.0. 33.8 ..30.0 ...29.9 527.5.. 609.0_ .4.0 . 6.5.. 0.8] ...1.56-41 > P 8.0 36.0 '30.0 29.9 530.8 609.0 4.2 6.7 0.84 1.66-4S o -,** 8.*0 35.5 30.0 29.9 532.8 609.0 4.1 6.7 0.84 1.63-40 r . 5...,, 8.0 25.5 29.9 29.9 531.5 609.0 _.3.2 5.2.. 0.64 1.17-45 r 6 8.0 29.6 30.0 29.9 531.5 609.0 3.6 5.8 0.7?. 1.36-47 o 8.0 33.8 30.0 29.9 534.3 609.0 4.0 6.5 0.81 1.56-40 L L. TOTAL 8.0._.32.1,.. 30.0 -.29.9 535.3.609.0_...3,9.,-6.2. . - . r .-0.78 1.48-47 i 0 64i 0 31.7 30.0 29.9 S31.1 609.0 311.2 49.0 0.77 1.46-47 - 1 * -- o T AV AV AV : AV AV * T T (I .* .*'p " - *. * AV 1 AV 1 t__..... TOTAL SAMPLE VOL. CORRECTED FROM STACK CONDITIONS TO* STD CONDITIONS: o 42.59 CUBIC FT. OF WET GAS . *....TOTAL,.SAMPL_yOL._CORRECTED JU..PRY. STD_CPNDI.TI0NS_=____30. 78. CUBIC, .1 . 0 !' 4 t *'`*j ' 1 *.** * o' . * -* * * . ` . o o > **. . `-- ' . * -. L.y* /* %/ m ; ./1 ^ -*', \ l/* * " '"i . 0 0* 0; i ir O'* '111... : : - * # * *# * * - .#< ~~ -"-- * *"mm * . . '* b ...--\ - - , .. \ *. I .*` ... *' * * -- -- -- -- ' .---- -- '" ^_.. ;-- . 4 * 0 T .... ACK CC622. r 1 feuJKsAN TO IN iHISTk IAL CHEMICALS CO. V? fi tfiilK M R lC H P LA N T SAUGET TL 62201. ID iv'O. 63 121 AAC DATE fc*Y 23 1975/ START TU'-E 10: J 0 AM * STACkV av^IJui^^iNCTNERA fDR STACK SOURCE OPERATION NO. 831 SAILING CONE BY NEIL SULLIVAN AND ED H II - ` SAMPLING METHOD-EPH METHOD S & MF AND NA2S03 IMPINGERS ` DETERMINATION OF EMISSION RATE OF ajparticulate ! ' *PC* i r 1* * " CiHCL ' - ' i . 0 :CL2 * PROCESS WEIGHT RATEs .OQ. THOUSAND POUNDS PER HOUR TEST r e s u l t s ; . - --- * 1 j /ACTUA1. CFM a t /S TD CFrt DRY STD CFM / 1 / STACK CO NDITIO NS/ AT 70 DEG.F AND 29 92 IN . HG/ STACK VOLUME 1 `: 1711.6 r . 1649.0 1569.5 . :. - OUSTfMIST * OR GAS CONCENTRATION.IN WET & DRY STACK GAS AT STO CONDITIO %* . * COMPONENT AS . AS B: GRAINS PER CU.SIC FT ' 0.0522 0.0549 . 11 o.nooo 0 * 1)000 LBS. PFR LBS. PER MGS. PER PARTS m il l io n . 1000 CUBIC PER CUBIC FT LBS. GAS METER MILLION 7.4602 0.0962 119.5003 99.4956 IN K2 T GA 7.8353 ' * 0.0991 125. 55AQ 104. 542 IN DRY GA 0.0016 .0.0017 U..UOOO O-.OPSY 0.0000 . 0.0270 0.0025 IN WET GA! 0. 002& IN DRY GA - Cs ' cs -\\ D: Os 0.0027 0.0028 0.0021 0. 0022. 0. 37B7 0.3979 0.2970 0.3121 0*0049 0.0050 0.0038 0.0039 6.0656 . 6.3731 4 . 7SR0 4.9991 4.0126 IN WET ga< 4.2160 IN DRY GAS 1. 61R1 IN WET GAS 1.7001 IN ORY GAS EM ISSION RATES *. '* * <- - L B S . PER -- GRAMS COMPONENT HOUR PER SEC. AS 0.7331 0.0930 B: 0.0002 0.0000 * C: 0.0375 0.0047 Os 0.0294 0.0037 LRS. PER UNIT OF PRODUCTION 0. 73A1 \ 0.0002 0.0375 0.0294 -- - -- .. -- .. - ' 0* * * .... ACM GG06 3 t_<*w /\t_,7k Ulf * W .G . KRUMMRICH *LAN.T 5 A U G E T .I L 6 2 2 0 1 . ID N O . 63 121 AAC DATE'MAT 23 *1975 ST A R T T IM E 1 0 : 3 0 AM . STACK SAMPLED-, j INCINERATOR STACK SOURCE OPERATION NO. 31 FIELD DATAj j . O R IF IC E CONSTANT K = n .5 0 6 PITOT TUBE FACTO F S - 0 .8 3 " * ` TEM PS. RECORDED IN FA DEGREES METER CORRECTION FACTOR= 1 .0 2 GAS A N A L Y SIS: Z=NONF . MOLECULAR WT. O F'ST A CK 'GAS DRY MOLECULAR W OF GAS = MOLECULAR WT OF Z = 0 . 0 3 0 .0 0 3 0 . - 6 0 ------ :---------------------- :------------- -I * 0 2 N2 C O ? - CO H20 * -*Z VDL TW . PW W( Pi 0 . 0 2 B 0 . 8 2 4 0 . 1 4 8 0 . 0 0 . 4 6 0 . 0 * 4 5 . 6 3 0 1 1 4 .4 0 2 9 . 6 4 4 4 . : PAHTICUL4TE - ;DETERMINE!) BY - KY WEIGHT.... .... 0 P .C .B . j iOETERMlMEO GY KY WEIGHT # =' r. ^ ! DETERMINED RY KY WEIGHT = olon" C L 2 ............. D E T E R M IN E D B Y ' - K Y WEIGHT - . -- 0 . 0 0 6 0 W w lff- CRAMS GRAMS L E A K T E S T ON E O U IP M F N T = 0 . 0 0 4 CFM AT 1 5 .0 0 I N .H G BAROMETERS 2 9 .6 4 I N .H G STACK DIAM= 1 9 .0 0 0 I N .; NOZZLE DlAM = '0 .3 7 5 VEL STACK STACK TTME `VOLAT COND METER TEMP METER !PRESS FlOv>` HEAD TEMP PRESS ATEND END TEMP START FIN OR IK IC ZONE HP TS H2 ZONE 70NE IN OUT HG HG H20 0 0.0 86.0 0.8 0.0 926.60 D 86.0 86.0 0.0 0.0 (3.0 1 0.080 46.0 0.6 8.0 932.60 0.0 106.0 94.0 0.0 0.0 1L920 2 0.090 A6.0 0.6 16.0 936.71 0.0 122.0 104.0 0.0 0.0 2.160 3 0.060 66.0 0.8 ?4.0 944.46 0.0 132.0 104.0 0.0 o.o :L.450 . 4 0.060 66.0 0.8 32.0 950.04 0.0 134.0 108.0 0.0 0.0 1.450 5 0.050 86.0 0.8 40.0`955.74 0.0 126.0 110.0 0.0 0.0 1.200 6 0.1)70 86.0 0.8 48.0 960.50 .0 134.0 112.0 0.0 0.0 1.700 7 0.070 66.0 O.B 56.0 967.85 0.0 134.0 114.0 - 0.0 : 0.0 1.700 8 0.070 86.0 0.8 64.0 972.23 0.0 134.0 118.0 0.0 1 ; .oo * *-- o o * i i* .i * `i 'S m * v** . m * - . .. . \- * ----- - . - .......... -- AG* . CC11 Monsanto industrial chemicals c o . - ..... -- -- -.... . W.G. KRUMMICH PLANT SAUGET.IL 63201. 10 NO. 63 121 AAC ' *OATt MAY 23-1975 START TIME 10:30 AM- -- - * ----- - STACK SAMPLEO- INCINERATOR STACK ' SOURCE OPERATION.NO. 831 CALCULATION AND EVALUATION: ' THE ISOKINETIC CONSTANT HO/HP FOR THIS EQUIPMENT IS 24.7938 ' THE TABLE UELOW SHOWS.FOR Each ZONE, THE METER VOL. AND THE AVG. METER AND PRESS. IN ABSOLUTE UNITS. FROM THIS IS CALCULATED ThE EQUIVALENT V ' STACK CONDITIONS ANn DIVIDED RY TIME TO GIVE THE FLOW IN THE NOZZLE. T. COMPARED VIITH THE ISOKINETIC FLOW RATE CALCULATED FRM THE STACK VELOC PERCENTAGE DEVIATION IS RECORDED. SAMpLe/STACK/AVR. PRESS/ AVG. TEMP/SAM^LE VOL./SAMPLF RATE /P.C. ZONE TtME VEL. METER STACK METER STACK METER STACK ACTUAL ISOKIN DEV .. -- -H.O* 15.7- 29.A *29.7 553.0 546.0--- 6 .0-" 6.4 -- 0.80 -0.72 10.23 2 8.0 16.6 29.8 29.7 566.5 546.0 6 .1 6.3 0.79 0.77 3.38 3 A.0 13.6 29.7 29.7 575.5 546.0 5.8 5.9 *0.71 0.63 17.49 . -. 8.0- 13.6 ?9.7 29.7 579.5 546.0 "5.6 5.6 -*0.70 0.63 12.42 5 8.0 12.4 29.7 29.7 580.0 546.0 5.7 5.B 0.72 0.57 26.08 6 ' 8.0 14.7 29.A 29.7 5Hl*0 546.0 4.8 a 4.8 0.60 0.6-11.06 7 -- *8.0 - 14.7 - 29.8 ?9.Y 583.5 546.0 7.3 * 7.4 0.92 -0.68 36.74 A 8.0 14.7 29.8 29.7 585.0 546.0 4.4 .4.4 0.55 0.68-18.72 TOTAL ,* i . 64.0 u1*4-.5'-.-- 29.8 . 29.7 575.5 546.0- 45.6* 46.5 "" 0.73 -0.67 9.04 0 T AV AV .AV AV AV . T T AV AV : AV l . .. .. .9 ; TOTAL SAMPLE VOL. CORRECTED FROM STACK CONDITIONS TO STD CONDITIONS= `44.83 CUBIC FT. OF WETGAS - TOTAL SAMPLE VOL. CORRECTEO TO DRY STD CONDITIONS = . 42.67 CUBIC FT. \ * \ AC* CC6625 11. x ' l " * ' ' a h ; u.: r.ivx:: yi;.st . . m i . i ` .. . .. :: 'it* '* : .* r u .i / j .v-rfru- v :;,x;: u v : cn: __._______________________ svac:; ii)::`i/i<`ii:ATinr: rr r:cr.-^.vr.v:____________ sinr:ar;K3i______ tv*it;;: snnc. .2..17A 1. 2. . !3. ;A. i I'5. Airline or water collected (:ii 11Ulcers) 43.?.' Volunc ofilter vapor eolleetaJ. (ST!*) 2.<``3 3 ?..';. r* Dry gas racer volune at meter .conditions fcubic rcet) - 40.'' 3 Psroiictrie nrer.sure (indies of nercury) - Avarago orifice pressure .Iron (incites oi water) l.f9n Average rater tseyevaturo* .1 100 *P Cos noear rmluns at ST? (dry cubic feet) " 33.22 i * Percentage of noistura In gna stresh 5.1n Z <I Percent composition of gns straar.: I Oxygen......... 10. *n d lUtrogan........ 63.20* Carbon Dioxide... 9.20" !Carbon !lono:;de.. .003 * 6. Percentage of excess air " 199.25Z 7., Dry stnlceular ueifht of gas stream (lb. /lb-role) " 20.53 Uat molecular weight of gas strear. (I'o./lb-rolc) - 29.23 8 . Pitot tube coefficient (dincasionless) .33 Kucher of pitot tube readings ij "Average of square roots of velocity pressures Average gas screen temperature (*r) 95*P Css strean velnelcy (rt/iae) 1*1.165 Pitot tube readings: .2652 .06i`J .03' .09 .09 .0* .03 .09 . .09 J ' 9. Send; discnsions, circular with diameter (feet) 1.33 . Stad: arcs (square feet) 1.90 Voluaeeric flow at 57? (cubic fact/nla) 1710 10. Nnzxle dimeter used for sonnling (inches) .375 Sampling tine (minutes) 62.93 'Uaight of pareicnlato astter collected (milligram) .93 11. Particulate concentration (Ib./SCF) .99*9909 Particulate concentration (grnin/bCl1) .009913 Particulate concentration correeinJ to 59 T, execs.*, air (Ib./C") .990*''' Particulate concentration corrected to 59 * excess air (grain/cr) - .'i'-- 12. Isol'.inaclc rate (2) 92.15 13. Ilass enlssion rate (lb./hr) * .99 Dacu A ^6- / t97 6 3ignature_ \r.". r.';v!"OTt::::'*.\L r.MviXi'i':' : v Air. s-tvxd K'ix-i w t ..;.* s*:crio:; s v a Cx Tr-sv Rr.vt::: c.rt /l i>- _______________________________ stack inrjmnc.\Tln:;_ Giri jhtl'iKu______ . p-v.t . or mr: 1"7 1. Arount ol water eolleettd (ui.'.liliti-ys) 44.7^ Volune of water vapor collected (3iV) - 2.11373 . *i / ' 2 Dry ."a "tetcr vnlu-e at reter coalitions (euMc feet) 43.S3 Snreretrie pressure (inches of usreury) 23.M Average orifice pressure drop (inches of water) 1.660 Average ncter temperature * 114 *F // 3. 6 u eater volwse at SI? (dry cubic feet) 41.67 I 4. Percentage of rsoisture in gas screen 4.Cl ?, 5. Percent eoapositioa of gas ccroar.: i I .Oarygen.......... 2.807 If /Kltroceo......... 82.4C7 1 i Carbon Dionide... 14. BIZ .If ,Carbon Moaordcle.. .OCT 6.- Percentage of excess air 14.77? 7. Dry mlccular weight or gas strear. (lb./lb-nole) 30.45 Wat nolceular weight of -as streon (lb./lh-r.olc) * 29.57 i vS. Pitot tube coefficient (iutiasioeless) - .S3 Hunber of pitot tube readinrs - 8 Average of square roots of velocity pressures " .2612 Average "as ntreait teiperncure (*P) 8*F Csa strear. velocity (fc/scc) * 14.53? Pitot tube readings: `.OS .09 .06 .06 .05 .07 .07 .07 9. Steel: dlRaosloas, circular with dierctcr (feet) * 1.53 Stack area (square feet) 1.96 Volunatrie flow at Sir (cubic feec/rin) 1568 10. Hassle dinnster used for snarling (inches) .375 Sonplics tine (rinuces) " 64.00 Weight of particulate ratter eolleeeeJ (rilligrin) - ."3 11. Particulate concentration (lb./SC?) .ftjoo'yvj Particulate concentration (grain/CCF) .OP'VJIS Particulate concentration correctul to 50 .7 ci:cesc air (lb./CF> - ,onc*,n*'0 Porcieulacc concentration corrected to 5? 7. e xcess air (praia/CF) " .rr.^ov 12. Isokinetic .rate (7) ln6.64 13. Wise e:doctor ratn (lit./hr) " .on u F~*e /<>.,t?7i Sig1nature Al M CCti6c7 STAt:: : i>:::mriCATio::_ ru n :nzni'.i_________ T'C!`, Incinerator tati: o r nu:: p u t . 1,1075 1. Armant oz va ter collecte.-', (nillilitre) - 244.Al Volume of vater vapor collecte;! (ST") * 11 59431 t 2. Dry 03 noter volur.c at noter condition.? ( c u M e .fect) 30.20 Baronotric pyessure (inciics of ncrcary) 29.90 Average orifice pressure drop (indien of vater) .349 Average reter temprature * 71 *7 3. Cas ne ter volur.e at 5TP (dry cubic fcet) - 39.13 4. Pcrccntago of noisture in gas stream - ,r ' 5. Percent composition of as streas: 27*75 Z f i J O m y c e n ............ N i t r o g e n .......... Carbon Dioxide... Carbon Monoxide.. 6.C02* 81.3^ 11.403 .003 6; Percentage of excess air 45.963 7. Dry molecular vcight of gas stream (In./lb-rolc) " 30.09 Met molecular vcight of gas stream (lb./lk-r-olc) - 26.73 8.. Pitot tube coefficient (dinensioniens) .33 Number of pitot tube readings C Average of square roots of velocity pressures Average gas strean tenperature ( * D -149*? Ca3 stream velocity (ft/scc) " 31.325 Pitot tube readings: .5139 .20* .27 .30 .34 .33 .17 .23 .30 9. Stack dimensions, circular vitli dianctcr (feet) 1.53 Stack area (square feet) * 1.9-*. Volumetric flov at ST? (cubic fcct/nin) 2352 in . Koszlc dianctcr used for nanoling (nc'aes) .375 Sampling tine (minutes) 64.00 Mcight of particulate ratter collected (milligran) .02 U . Particulate concentration (Ih./SCV) " ,00n0009 Particulate concentration (grain/SCF) " .000011 7.Particulate concentration corrected to 50 excess air (lli./C?) .oxoo 7.Particulate concentration corrected to 50 excess air (grain/C7) .n-, 12... Isokinetic rate C O > 51.23 137" e it MOivJSANTO INDUSTRIAL CHEMICALS CO, , . . .... . . . . . . . . . .< _______ KRUMMRiCH PIKANT SAUGET,IL 62*01. ID NO. 63 121 AAC OA7 MAY 23 1975 . START TIME 10:30 AM- ~ - - . . stack sampled- incinerator .stack C A L C U L A T IO N AND E V A L U A T IO N : source operation no. b h t A U O N .N O . 3I THE IS0 K IN E T 4 C CONSTANT HO/UP FOR 'THIS EQUIPMENT IS 24 79 30 THE TAHLE OELOW S H O W S .F O P E * C H Z O N E ,T H E METER V O L . ANO THF A V G . METFR r ANO P R E S S . IN A B S O L U T E U N I T S . FROM T H IS I S CA LC U LA T E D Tn E E O U m L E N T VO S T A C K C O N D IT I O N S a !W D I V I D E D BY T IM E TO G I V E THF FLOW I n THF N O / y fv - l COMPARED WITH THE I S O K I N E T I C FLOW RATE CALCU LATED FROM THF STACK b r , \ r r PERCENTAGE DEVIATION IS RECORDED. THt STAC* . VELOCI SAMPlE/STACK/AVR. PRESS/ AVG. TEMP/SAMJLE VOL./SAMPLE RATE /R.C. *ZONE TIME VEL. METER STACK METER STACK METER STACK ACTUAL ISOKIN1 OEv ..-v--- H.O -15.7 29. *29.7 553.0 546.0 --6.0-'-- T64 --0 .8 0 -0.72 10.23 . 2 B.O 16.6 29.8 29.7 566.5 546.0 6 . 1 6.3 0.79 0.77 3.38 3 a.o 13.6 29.7 29.7 575.5 546.0 5.8 5.9 0.7! 0.63 17.49 -4 * 6.0 13.6 29.7 29.7 S79.5 546.0 -"5.6 5.6 - -0.70 0.63 12.42 5 B.O 12.4 29.7 29.7 50.0 54^. 0 67 B.O 14.7 29.B ...B.O -14.7 -29.8 29.7 581.0 546.0 29.7 583.5 S46.0 5.7 4.8 ?9 45.- 88 0.72 0.57 26.08 0.60 0.6-11.06 7.3 ' 7.4 0.9? -0.68 36.74 fl 8.0 14.7 29.8 29.7 585.0 546.0 4.4 4.4 0.55 0.68-18.72 TOTAL 64.0 14.5--29.8;. -29.7 575.5 546.0 -45.6- 46.5 -0.73 -0.67 9.04 T AV AV .AV AV AV . T #T . AV AV AV TOTAL SAMPLE VOL. CORRECTED FROM STACK CONDITIONS TO STO CONDITIONS* 44..03 CUBIC FT. OF WET GAS TOTAL SAMPLE VOL. CORRECTED TO ORY STO CONDITIONS = . 42.67 CUBIC FT. M O N S A N T O INDUSTRIAL C H E M I C A L sT c O. " .W.G. KIHJMMRICH PLANT SAUGET,IL 62201. ID ND. 63*121 AAC DATE CT 1 XV75 * START TIME 1:30 PM STACK SAMPLED- INCINERATOR ............ SOURCE OPERATION NO.' 831 SAMPLING DONE DY NEIL SULLIVAN AND ED HEUMANN SAMPLING KETHOD-EPA METHOD 5 . DMF AND NA2S03.IMPINGERS____ _____ DETERMINATION OF EMISSION RATE OF . * . V* ___ ________ j___________________ A!PARTICULATE-- ______ '- " " " " `-- *' * BtP.C.B. .CSCL2 .. . PROCESS WEIGHT ;RAtE=__ 0..90 .THOUSAND...POUNDS PER HOUR ,, ____ ` `~ 'TEST r e s u l t : . > ___ ____ /ACTUAL CFM AT /STD CFM DRY STD CFM /* ___ .. ... .. / STACK CONDITIONS/ AT .70 DEG.F AND 29.92 IN. .HG/____ '___ STACK VOLUME - 3749.6 J .* 3257.1 2353.4 DUST aMIST OR GAS CONCENTRATION IN WET .6 DRY.STACK .GAS .AT ..STD CONDITIONS COMPONENT AS A 9 GRAINS . LBS. PER LBS. PER MGS. PER PARTS PER .... MILLION. _-....1000... . .CUBIC___ ..PER ... i* CUBIC FT CURIC FT LBS. GAS METE MILLION 0.0725 10.3620 0.1494 165.9835 138.2010 IN WET GAS ... 0.1004 14.3408... ...0.1836 229.7163 191.2679 IN DRY GAS b: 0.0000 0.0011 0.0000 0.0182 ' 0.0018 IN WET GAS *0.1100 0 . ...-0.0016. ._ 0.00 00._-- 0.0252_...-0.0024 IN .DRY GAS___ CS 0.0079 1.1335 0.0163 18.1570 6.1749 IN WET GAS . _____ c*______ __0.P110. ___1.5687. . .0..0201 .. 25.1290 . 8.5460 IN DRY GAS. _ EMISSION HATE: ! " l b s '.'"per component hour __ AS. . _. 2.0250 B: . 0.0002 C* 0.2215 grams lb's . per'"unTT" per sec. of production . 0.2551...... 2.2450 0.0000 0.0002 0.0279 0.2456 ACM CC663G______ ___ ____ WUUUi u N(J* 63 1?,,1 A A uAit uui l 1975 ST APT TIME I30 PM STACK s a m p l e d -. INCINERATOR. . . SOURCE OPERATION n o , 6 o ; - ..! FIELD"DATAS o ORIFICE CONSTANT K=0.S0f> PITOT TUOE. FACTOR FS= 0.83 TEMPS. RECOROED IN FA DEGREES-______________. METE CORRECTION FACTORS 1.02 o GAS ANALYSIS:. Z=NONE________ MOLECULAR^WT OF 7s__ fl.fl" r MOLECULAR- WT. OF- STACK GAS > 26.83 -- DRY MOLECULAR WT. OF GAS =' 30.22 -L o 02 H2 C02 CO H20 Z VOL TW Pw 0.064 0.818 0.11A 0.0 0.277 0.0 30.200 .70.89 29.902^ o f particulate determined by BY WEIGHTgs* = P.C.S<_:_____ DETERMINED 0Y__ BY ?3 TIM?i0N .. = 0.2002 CRAMS 0.0000 GRAMS CL2 |i ' i DETERMINED BY * BY TITRATION = 0.0219 GRAMS o * 9 , ^ LEAK TEST OM EQUIPMENTS').005 CFM AT,, 15.00 IN.HG BAROMETER* 29.90 IN.HG! STACK OIAM= 19.000 IN.!. NOZZLE DlAM = 0.3< VEl_ STACK STACK TIME VOLAT. COND .1METER. TEMP imeter HEAD TEMP .PRESS ATEND END TEMP START :n o ri f n ZONE HP TS H20 ZONE ZONE IN c OUT HG HG H2: 0 0.0 .1.49.0 -0*4 0.0 42.-50 D 64.0 64.0 0.0 0.0 o.c ; 1 0.200 .149.0 -0.4 8.0 431.84 51.0 66.0 64.0 0.0 0 . 0 0 . 6 2 0.300 149.0 -0.4 16.0 435.82 51.0 74.0 64.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 1___ 3 0.340 149.0. -0.4 24.0 439.97 53.0 BO.O .65.0..0.0 . 0.0 1.1 4 0.330 149.0 -0.4 32.0 444.11 55.0 80.0 66.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 5 01170 149.0 -0.4 40.0 447.29 53.0 74.0 66.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 6 0.230 149.0 -0.4 48.0 450.64 .54.0 ..80.0 .66.0 __ 0.0 . 0.0 0.7 ! 7 0.300 149.0 -0.4 56.0 454.84 56.0 83.0 66.0 0..0 0.0 0.9 j 8 0.270 149.0 -0.4 64.0. 458.70 58.0 82.0 68.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 ;.. :----------- **,-- .... - I* -- - *.- ------- .... .... . . . ------------- . . . .-- .!i f 1 4 t * \ -' '\l ' * i ---- - T - -_ * -- m k -- * r -. . . -- . 1i -- ....... + r* " * ACM ccet: - - t U . G .-KNUMMRICH PLANT SAUOET.IL 62201. ID No 63 I?! i,(> DATE OCT 1 I97S START TIME 130 PM 1 1 A*C STACK-SAMPLEO- INCINERATOR ....... CALCULATION ANO EVALUATION! " SOURCF 0UnCE n0:'ErrR?*TTTfItvN, NO.. 801.. c . the ISOKINETIC'CONSTANT HO/HP FOR THIS EOUIPNENT IS t, ,,,,, the TAHLE BELOW .s h o w s ,FOR each z o n e .THE meter VOL . AND ivr ' ANO PHfSS. IN ABSOLUTE UNITS. FROM THIS IS CALCUI ATF^ThF ^ om?* '-TEi? c, iTAC* CONOUIONS AND DIVIDED JiY TIME TO GIVE THF F'0W r^THc0 1 ^ ' ^ ' 7 ' COMPARED WITH THE ISOKINETIC FLOW RATE CALCULATED?,,' 1 PERCENTAGE DE*VIATION IS RECORDE`D. . '. . ** 1 THE 5TaCK VElOC c- SAMPLE/STACK/AVG. PRESS/ AVG. TEMP/SAMPLE.VOL./SAMPLE RATE /P.c. -- /ONE time VEL.; METER STACK METER STACK METER STAC< ACTUAL ISOKIN'DPV c 1 8*0 27.6 -29.9 *29.9 525.0 609.0 3.3 . 5.5 0.69 1.27-46.07 ...2-- 3 - 8 ;0_ 8.0 33.8. .30.0 36.0 30.0 .29.9 29.9 527.5 530.8 609.0 ....4,0..._6.5 609.0 4.2 6.7 .0.81. 1.56-47.74 0.84 1.66-49.1C c 4 8; 35.5 30.0 29.9 532.8 609.0 4.1 6.7 0.84 1.63-48,6 5.. . .8,0. .25.5. 29.9 29.9 531.5 609.0 - 3.2 . .5.2 . 0.64 .1*17-45.00 6 8*0. 29.6 30.0 29.9 531.5 609.0 3.6 5.8 0.72 1.36-47.19 a 7 8.0 33.8 8 .. .8.0 ...32.1 -- -TOTAL 30.0 29.9 S34.3 609.0 . 4.0 6.5 0.81 1.56-48.U 30.0 t _29..9 53*5.3.,609.0.,,.3..9i.,, 6.2 ....0.78', 1.48-47.35 o 640i 31.7- 30.0 29.9 531.1 609.0 30.2 49.0 0.77 1.46-47.55 i o' T AV AV AV ' ! .* w%*^" -** AV . AV .T . T ' AV * #AV v * 1*"V . * t * *" **, .* - AV -'OTAL SAMPLE VOL. CORRECTED FROM STACK CONDITIONS TO STD CONDITIONS*' 42.59,CUBIC FT. OF WET GAS ,.AL..SAMPLE, VOL.. CORRECTED TO. DRV STD CONDITIONS = _30.78 CUBIC FT o. o o r- o r - 'V i: - * ( I FaciHty: / Monsanto Conpany. ;I W.G. Krummrich Plant .! Route 3 I Sauget, IL 62201 ! Jl Date of Inspection: January 27, 1976 .i r | Participants: | Monsanto Paul Heisler Clarence Buckley I i * * '' j I | : Background: ;. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Edwin Zylstra John Connell Charles Miller 9 .* * ` k' ^' Monsanto is the sole manufacturer of PCB in the United States. Production figures fo r the f i r s t nine months of 1975 are listed below: *. Aroclor 1016 : -1242 . .' 1254 Thousands of Pounds . '10350 *5120 . ` 6980 Starting during the la tte r part of 1972, the only use for PCB compound's is in the manufacture of transformers and capacitors. i Process: ... The chlorinator is charged with, biphenyl and ferric chloride (catalyst) arid then heated. Vaporized chlorine is fed into the chlorinator. The contact time varies from 12 to 36 hours, depending on the type of Aroclor to be produced, which determines the degree of chlorination. The vapor from the chlorinator (HC1 containing PCB) goes to the scrubber where i t is ashed w ith liquid Aroclor, The gaseous HC1 is sent to the purification Section of the plant. The crude Aroclor goes to the Blower tank where t t t s blown with dry a ir for several hours. The a ir is scrubbed with ..- water and vented to the atmosphere through a demister * the crude product tS 'sen t to a storage tank where a few tenths of IX of alkali is added to react with any .Remaining hydrogen chloride or ferric chloride. ACH 006633 T "" T * * % The method of d is tilla tio n of the rav/ Aroclor varies `depending upon the product to be produced. For types 1254, 1242, and*1221, the process is the same. Each is d is tille d in a vacuum s t i l l , the condensate being the finished product and the bottoms being the ton tars which are sent to incineration. For Aroclor 1016, the crude aroclor is d istille d in a vacuum d istillatio n -to w er. The steam from the steam je t ejectors is p a rtia lly condensed; the condensate being discharged into the plant discharge sump and the vapor exhausted to atmosphere. The overhead from the d is tilla tio n tower is the product 1016 and is sent to storage. The bottoms are sent through another chlorination and d istilla tio n cycle. The overhead from th is s t i l l is the finished product and the bottoms are the Montars which are sent to incineration. The three possible places where PC8 can escape into, the atmosphere are: vapor from j e t ejectors, exhaust from the scrubber; and surface area evaporation (in general). All aroclors are stored a t 150*F with a layer of nitrogen on top of the liquid. Incineration: >. There are three points in the process that go to the incinerator: Mortars, bottoms from separator sump, collection from all drip pans. In addition waste material from the users of PC8 is sent to Monsanto to be destroyed. The type and concentration of these waste are unknown but i t is estimated th a t they contain about 90% PCB. The amount of contaminated waste disposed o f for the f i r s t nine months of 1975 is listed below: 1 Thousands of Pounds Customer returns, records exists Monsanto, records exists Total receipts Destroyed by incineration 1109 322 '1 4 3 1 2808 The*liquid waste stream is steam atomized and fed into the fire box. The feed is incinerated at a temperature above2200F with natural gas used for combustion with 5% excess oxygen and a retention time of 2-3 seconds. The 'gases go through a quench pot, the exhaust of which passes through a venturi scrubber and then through a packed tower which is irrigated by the weak muriatic acid originating from the quench pot. The exhausts are vented to atmosphere thrpugh a demister and are monitored. / . i ACH CC863* Loading and Unloading: ` .I-'1 ' The majority of the PCB components and the products made using PCB are liquid and are transported In bulk or in steel drums. Bulk shipments are made in railroad tank car and tank trucks. Waste material shipped in from other locations in 55 gallon drums or tank trucks are unloaded into a concrete p it; the material in this p it is periodically pumped to one of four 20,000 gallon incinerator waste feed tanks. The waste material that Is shipped in by ra il truck is unloaded into a 500,000 gallon storage tank and Is pumped into the feed tanks when required. In the truck or railcar loading area, drainage is directed into a small concrete p it which.is periodically pumped into the basins located in the manufacturing area. Relief valve lines and atmosphere vents are routed through catch tanks or are redirected to underground se ttlin g basins? \ 4 ACM C C 8 6 3 5 %Cmaut*u*w* * *ta(*riCmJ'*)ItiMt. UNITED STATES G O V E R N M E N T Memorandum TO FROM Gerald F. Regan, C hief, A ir Surveillance Branch i Technical Advisor, Special Projects Section A ir S urveillance Branch ATE: arch 5,' 1976 SUBJECT: C alculation o f PCB'Air Emissions from Storage and Dispensing Operations at the Krummrich Plant o f ! Monsanto I P otential a ir emissions from the storage and dispensing of PCB were calculated based on information supplied by Monsanto. The results o f these calculations are: , Storage tanks fo r v irg in product Product loading Storage and handling waste aroclors 9 - 597.A kg/year * 0.'0184 kg/year - 0.00066 kg/year Attachment (Calculations) Si ADM C C e t 3 t cs;- Buy US. Saving:Bonds RegularlyonshePayrollSavingsPlan Clarence Buckley of Monsanto estimated th at storage and loading operations a t the plant would displace the following volume of headspace gases: -. I - ' l l Storage tanks 635000 ft3 2 . Loading 460,000 ft3 I Calculation of emissions: From F ig . 2.2 from the D raft M itre report the vapor pressure of A roclor 1242 is 3 mm Kg a t 100*C and 10"^ at 21 *C. The aroclors are Stored at 100*C. I t may be assumed that the temp, in the tanks being loaded would be approximately 70*F (21*C). Furore Dolton's law o f p a rtia l pressure: Bx Px where Bx proportion by volume of a gas component .f P mix. 1r * Px * p a rtta l pressure o f gas component and i P n ix . absolute pressure o f ygas m ixture. i Bx ' 3 0.039 or 3900 ppm at 100*C 750 l " To change ppm to mg/H3 use the following formula: mg/M3 ppm x mol, wt.'' molecular volume mol. wt. 261 molecular volume 30.62 llte rs /m o l. at 100*C * '* - mg/H3 - 3900 x 261 - 33242 . 30.62 Emissions from storage tanks: Emissions kg/year * V oI. of gas displaced/year x concentration Of PCS Kg/yr - 635000 ft3 x .0283 m3 x 33242 x 1 kg ftd 10 mg kg/year - 597-4 Emissions from loading operations: *" F = V V 9/H3 - -13 * . 24.04 ' K 3 * ,0` 7 r *'3 ppm . 1.41 mg/H3 ACh CCbfc37 2 Emissions Kg/yr. - 460,000 x .0283 x 1.41. x 1 kg 10b mg Kg/yr. 0*01 Emissions from handling of waste aroclors: Total waste m aterial received Into plant as reported by Monsanto fo r 9 mos. of 1975 ~ 1.431.000 lbs. Assume that a ll this I m aterial Is received and stored at 70*F and that i t displaced ari I equal volume o f tank headspace gas a t 70*F. Volume o f produce 1*431,000 lbs. x 1 gal. 11.5 lbs x 3.785 li t e r gal; ^Titers. . h3 i . - The concentration would be the same as In the loading operation th at Is 1.41 mg/M3. .* Emissions: K g/yr. 471 H3 x 1.4 mg/M3 x ` ' ` 1 `kg r-- ACM CC663o * II SUUJECT; pcB Tlonitoring - Monsanto, Krummrich Plant, Sauget, DATE: * / Illinois. p j j FEB 'I o ` FROM: Charles Miller/Ed ^ylstra/John Connell, Technical Advisors, SPS > /! i . ' Gera!d'F. Regan, Chief, Air Surveillance Branch . ;1 . * On January 27, 1975, the SPS field team (Miller, Zylstra, Connell) ! performed ambient a ir monitoring for PCB's at the Monsanto Krummrich 1 Plant, Sauget, Illin o is . Although Monsanto presently manufactures PCB's ' a t th is f a c ility , production of PCB's is to be gradually phased-out. After a b rief discussion and orientation period v/ith Monsanto o fficials, ASB and ILDO personnel toured the PCB manufacturing area including the Incinerator, f a c ility . The "plant" area where PCB's are manufactured is not an enclosed structure per se. I t is an open structure constructed of steel grating (flo o rs, s ta ir s ) , safety railin g s, a, maze of piping, collection and reaction vessels, valves, etc. all of which are completely exposed to the elements. Mr. Claire Buckley of Monsanto was assigned as escort for ASB personnel. * , Only two locations were deemed appropriate as sampling .sites for PCB's. Other possible site s were inaccessible or had recently been tested by Monsanto - ie . - the recent incinerator te s t results were furnished by '`Monsanto. These two sampling locations, the cleaning of glassware, equip ment used, sampling procedure, samples obtained, etc. is described below: S ite Location #1 (SEG) - Steam Ejector - Ground level. ' This steam ejector pipe terminated ju s t above a grate which covered a , recessed concrete trough in the floor a t ground level. For collection of the samples, the SPS field team used the glass bubblers, Y-connector with reducer coupling, U-tube, cold trap and vacuum pump. The H-frame base, and 2x4 manifold support and glass manifold were not used. Sampling was performed for a one-hour period, 1046 *^1146 hours. . S ite Location #2 (SET) - Steam Ejector - Tod Level or 2nd Level Above Ground. These twin steam ejector pipes (somewhat of a candy-cane configuration) terminated out beyond the 2nd level safety railing. Sample collection was performed using the same equipment as at Site Location 1 and included the . H-frame base, one section of 2x4 manifold support, and one section of glass manifold. Sampling was performed for a one-hour period, 1205 - 1305 hours. I -2 The*following narrative defines the process-for cleaning of the sampling glassware, the actual preparation for sampling, and handling of the samples collected in the bubbler train . Irhe ASfi, SPS fie ld team cleaned all.PCB monitoring glassware via the following procedure: 1. .Thoroughly wash all glassware with a solution of PCB free detergent. 'The concentration of the detergent is determined by the manufacturer'; instructions. Rinse thoroughly with tap water. ' - Rinse thoroughly with d is tille d vrater. a I, 4. Rinse thoroughly with acetone (reagent grade or better). 5. Rinse with hexane, rinse each bubbler three times with 50 ml. of hexane for each rinse and discard. *i - ` 6. Wrap all small glass parts in aluminum foil arid ensure proper seeling, \ - crimping of the f o il. Seal all ball joints of the bubblers with . aluminum fo il (altern ately , appropriate ball jo in t fittin g s - sealed . on one end and thoroughly cleaned - may be clamped in place instead \ o f using aluminum fo il; the purpose of the above is to prevent contamination of the now PCB free glassware). Upon determination of a sampling s ite location, the sampling equipment supportive framework is set-up and all glassware bubbler box, pump, etc. are positioned. The sampling procedure is as follows: 1. Remove seals (foil or ground jo in ts and clamps) from the bubblers. 9 2 . - Place 300 ml. hexane into bubbler #1, shake, pour into bubbler #2, Shake, pour into bubbler #3, shake, pour into a sample bottle appropriately designated as a reagent blank. This procedure is performed for both sides (A.and B) of the sampling train. v- AC* ccet<tt 3.. " Pour hexane, 400 m l-,*200 m l., end 300 ml. into bubblers fll, i2, and #3, respectively. 4. Connect the en tire sampling system - U-tube, manifold, reducer coupling, Y-tube-, U-tubes between each bubbler and the copper tee (containing hypodermic needles - one for each side), the quick - disconnects between the tee and the cold trap and between the cold trap and the vacuum pump. Ensure that all ball joints are tightly clamped. Do not use any lubricant/sealing compound on the ground . glass ball, jo in ts . * 5. F ill the plywood box (containing 4 of the six bubblers) and'the cold trap with crushed dry ice. ' 6. S ta rt the vacuum pump; note the time and vacuum gage reading; sample . for one-hour. 7 .: At the conclusion of the one-hour sampling period, not&vacuum gage 1 reading, tig h tly double the rubber hose between the copper tee a^d .the q'uicfc-disconnect thus stopping a ir flow, pull both disconnects : 'ap art, and release the previously clamped or kinked rubber hose; /shut off the vacuum pump. *8.- Disconnect the Y-tube from the tra in . 9. Disconnect the bubbler U-tubes and the rubber hose - glass connection from la s t bubbler to the copper tee on one side of the train. IQ,, pour th e'absorbing solutions from one side of the train (3-bubblers) "into one sample b o ttle appropriately identified. All sample bottle 'screw'caps must have Teflon lin ers. Absorbing solutions and rinses :'from each, side of the tra in must be in separate sample bottles - 1 Bottle per side of train., , I K Introduce'approximately 50 ml., of hexane into bubbler #1, shake, pour tjito bubbler #2, shake, pour into bubbler #3, shake, and pour into the'appropriate sample bottle from Step 10 above. Repeat this with another 50 ml. portion of hexane. Repeat for the second or other side of the sampling tra in .  Im 12. Introduce 300 ml hexane into bubbler #1* shake, pour into bubbler #2* shake, pour into bubbler 3, shake, and pour into another appropriately identified sample b o ttle . This is also a reagent blank* Repeat* for the other side of the tra in . t 13. * The bubblers can now be properly filled, with the designated amounts of hexane (400 m l., 200 ml., 300 ml.) for the next sampling period. ( I f additional sampling is not required, the equipment (glassware) must be wrapped/sealed as defined in Step 36 of the cleaning procedur : ' : . V - . tc\ . Tinm ., teHgren i Torrez Zylstra Connell i > \ .) CCbtH* The table below defines the various samples collected at the Kcnsc PCB manufacturing fa c ility : DATE 1/27/76 1/27/76 1/27/76 1/27/76 1/27/76 1/27/76 1/27/76 1/27/76 1/27/76 1/27/76 1/27/76 1/27/76 . I-LOCATION Reagenit Blank Pre (SEG) Reagent Blank, Pre (SEG) !iI - Sample (SEG) Sample (SEG) :" Reagent Blank, Pre (SET) Reagent Blank, Pre (SET) Sample (SET) Sample (SET) Reagent Blank, After (SEG) Sample Reagent Blank, After (SEG) Sample Reagent Blank, After (SET) Sample Reagent Blank, After (SET) Sample ASB DESIGNATION .* 3A-T27-1 *3B-T27-2 ` 3A-T27-3 .* 3B-T27-4 *3A-T27-5 * 3B-T27-6 %A-T27-7 *3B-T27-B 3A-T27-9 ' 3B-T27-10 ' 3A-T27-11 ' 3B-T27-12 LAB.'HO. 76-13656. 76-13657 76-13653 76-13659 76-13660 .76-13661 76-13662 76-13663 76-1360 64 76-13555 76-13655 76-13657 ACft CCdfc^3 i trim >c X* ifa . ! t i - u//s. 'nw-ImouiUTAL rnoTccTiow ackkcy . .*' ircCXD V, C U N T R A L I w C I O N A L I.AUOKATOIl 101*3.1?. P E R S H I N G ROAD. CHICAGO, I L L I N O I S 00009 . t Pato DATA TRANSMITTAL SLIP Feb. 26# 1976 "| ' TO; Chief# Air Surveillance Branch Surv. fi Anal. Division 'I 6P DATA IDENTIFICATION Data - Sample Numbers 13652-- 13667 I. \i 4 - ;1 \ ' HE14ARXS >* j FEB 2 7 1S75 ST/tiUAIiCE B5RPAJNCH . EPA# REGION V *f r o m J DATA C O O R D INALA# CENTRAL REGIONAL LADORATORYj f ACK CCfcfa*6 I ijPPDO WH* "'N J ; I !' * + .+ t Konaanto-Sauget, Illinois Sampling Location Site 01 Steam Ejector-Ground Level tSEC) Site 02 Steam EJcctorrTop Level-(SET) Semple No. Critical Orifice Flowrate t>3/hour Reagent ' Blank Values Before & After Each Sample ug/sample Average Reagent Blank Values ug/sample Sample Values tig/sample DifferenceSample Minus Ave'. Blank Value Final Value ug/cn3 76-13658 3A-0.71402 76-13659 3B-0.63602 7.0 / 16.8 A.7 / 3.3 76-13662 3A-0.71402 N.A. / N.A. 76-13663 3B-0.63602 12.1 / 8.4 11.9 4.0 10.3 31.5 25.0 72.5 N.A. 19.6 21.6 ? 7 .5 33.9 WOV *'Monsanto 1 ' | 1 Interpretation of the data chart i . i Column 1- Sampling Location - corresponds to the preceding narrative defining sampling sites. ! I*' ** Column 2- Sample Numbers - assigned by ASB and for use by the ana lytical laboratory. Column 3- Critical Orifice Flowrate (m3/hour) - calibrated flowrate of the critical orifice utilized on each side of the sampling train. f . Column 4- Reagent Blank Values - Before and After Each Sample (ugf sample - defines the analytical results determined for each reagent blank. -- Column 5* Average Reagent Blank Values - simply the average of the two values in the preceding column. Column 6- Sample Values (ug/sample) - analytical results of the samples submitted. : '*. w \ Column 7t Difference - Sample Value Minus Average Blank Value - defines ^ a value representing only the sample*. *C !. . ' ' \Column 8- Final Value (ug/m3) - defines the final or actual value of FCB's obtained at the particular sampling location; determined by divid ing the true sampling air flowrate into the corrected value (Column 7). v . A O CC bfc S Monsanto Coomants: \ -j I t :Is u n f o r t u n a t e t h a t Reagent Blank'Values (before and a f t e r sampling) are not a v a i l a b l e for a l l such samples th a t were submitted for analysis. A d d i t i o n a l l y ! the lo s s o f one sample (76-13&&3) occurred as a r e s u l t of a manufacturing d e f e e t ( s t r e s s / s t r a i n ) in the p a r t i c u l a r sample b o t t l e . At Ith ls -p o ln t In tim e, the only meaningful conclusion that can be made ls< th a t the manufacturer of PCBs has and maintains s ig n ific a n tly superior control o f atmospheric emissions during PCB manufacture than a does the user or consumer who u tiliz e s PCBs in the manufacture of a PCB containing product. However, the-amount o f PCBs released is s t i l l s ig n ific a n t and should be greatly reduced by more stringent controls. However, a t this point in tim e, Monsanto has publicly declared that PCB fufacture w i l l be gradually reduced and eventually phased out* o ,'ln comparing the data fo r the Sauget and Bloomington monitoring e ffo rts , t it Is noteworthy th a t the accord or agreement between the Sauget reagent blanks and sample values (at the same s ite ) is much improved even though the basic equipment-absorbing solution, sampling and analytical procedur '.and length o f sampling period were Id e n tic a l. \i!. I -t : `h i; i A AC* CC665C */ *-- - - V- Address Secretary at: National Electrical Manufacturers Association 821 Fifteenth St., N.W., Suite 438 Washington, D.C., 20005 i202) 347-4848 23, 1975 TO: ALL MEMBERS AND ALTERNATES OF ANSI SUBCOMMITTEE ON USE AND DISPOSAL OF ASKAREL AND ASKAREL-SOAKED MATERIALS IN ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT, C107 And ALL PARTIES HAVING AN INTEREST IN PCB's Subject: Special Meeting on Polychlorinated Biphenyls Gentlemen: 9 This is to advise you that a special meeting of ANSI Subcommittee C1Q7 is to be held: Monday, January 12, 1976 1:00 P.M. - 5:00 P.M. Tuesday, January 13, 1976 9:00 A.M. ~ Sheraton O'Hare North (near O'Hare Field) 6810 N. M&nheim Road Rosemont, Illinois 60018 Telephone: (312) 297-1234 This notice is being directed to all members of the Committee, according to our latest roster, and to a large number of users of PCB's, government agencies and trade associations. The purpose of this special meeting is to consider revising ANSI Standard C-107.1-1974 "Guidelines for Handling and Disposal of Capacitor- and Transformer-Grade Askarels Containing Poly chlorinated Biphenyls", and also to consider adding new information not in the present document. Most of you, I am sure, are aware that there has been a great deal of recent publicity on the environmental problems associated with PCB's. The work of this Committee has taken on a new sense of urgency and all receiving a.copy of this meeting notice are urged to attend this meeting. AGK CC66C - 2- The rather lengthy agenda is being prepared and should go out of this office before January 1, 1976. If .you plan to attend the meeting, please make your own room reservation advising the hotel that you are attending the ANSI C-107 PCB meeting. We have a block of rooms reserved which will be held for us until January 6, 1976. Please complete the enclosed attendance postal card and return as soon*as possible. Sincerely, CRW:pmk Enel. c. Secretary, ANSI C107 9 cc: J. R. Wessell, FOA G. Bull, GE Svc. R. Rollins, Jard Co. Or. S. D. Ross, Sprague. E. VanBuskink, Mallory W. Courtade, Niagara J. Nay, Hevi-Duty W. A. Richter, Allegheny Power Svc. Corp. X. Klein, ERDA E. Huber, UL R. Gregory, Rollins Environmental Svcs. Corp. W. Phillipbar, - * C. Bremmer, EPA 0. Gebhart, EASA Assn, of Amer. Railroads Factory Mutual, Technical Director American Public Power Assn. AGP. C Q fcC3 i f ,,i '; vv ;<i - i. : >,-L; -i. V v.-w - *<* v .v, . T-:'-1'1 ';.i-,- .,;vtt> 1,. * '\J'5 ,* ' _- ' -- -- ^ ; V---,; i f 3.1 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 173S ACttMOSC - IOOM 249 f6USAS CITT. MtSSOUAI 44101 SVAN-OAHS September 12, 1972 Dr. W. B. Papageorge Monsanto Research Labs 800 North Lindbergh Blvd. St. Louis, Missouri 63166 ^ Dear Dr. Papageorge: We enclose copies of tracings obtained by Dr. Hector Rodriguez from running Samples Nos. 103 and 104 and Aroclor 1242, as promised during our recent telephone conversations. Sample 103 was taken from the top and 104 from the bottom of the oil storage tank at Bliss Waste Oil Disposal Company. We also are sending samples of these oils. If we can be of further assistance, please call either Dr. Rodriguez or myself at (816) 374-4461. Yours very truly E n clo su re V. L. Banks Chief Oil and Hazardous Substance Branch \\ :P L A IN T IF F ': acm ce Jftife AL* CCc5 VX* P3 T laut 'N 1 ^C^ CC6652 *>59903 Wav N* 403M 7 I t ; ' ! ( lO lliO U r CO fH llA te/ \ n> y oC i a> CrUl Ut -^ AOh CC t S t . Ao CI -..!____jo x 4 o 'S o l \ 5 * '9 A aIAZ. * UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY .WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 January 14, 1976 OFFICE 0" EN?IniIMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Regional Administrators Regional Enforcement Directors Regional Surveillance and Analysis Directors NPDES Approved States NEIC Director, Denver NERC Director, Cincinnati RTP Research Director FROM: Acting Director, Permits 1 SUBJECT: Identification and Control of PC3s in Transformer and Capacitor Plants Perspective Our initial considerations, including a check list for surveying transformer and capacitor plants, were given as Exhibit D in the December 22, 1975, memorandum from the Assistant Administrator for Enforcement, Mr. Stanley Legro. Since then, a meeting on this subject was held on January 7, 1976, at Crystal Mall #2, Arlington, Virginia. The purpose of this memorandum is to provide guidance on sampling ana analytical matters as well as additional items for inclusion' to the plant survey checklist as suggested by the conferees at the January 7 meeting. In addition, Office of Solid Waste Management has prepared a checklist for Off-site Disposal, which is also attached. At this time it would be expected that most of the sampling for this program will be for FCBs in water. There would be a limited number of solid samples and no air samples would be taken. At least two regions, i.e., II and V, as well as NEIC-Denver, already have had noteworthy experience with field sampling for PCBs and analyzing down to trace levels, which is reflected in the following guidance. Finally, since EPA's interest in these inspections relates broadly to PCBs destined for the total environment (not only the water environment), the attached Off-site Disposal checklist should assist team members in ascer taining the actual disposition, especially off-site, of waste materials. k -2- This waste management checklist was distributed to the attendees at the January 7 meeting and the Regional solid waste representatives. It is clear that any effective assessment of PCB waste disposal problems from these surveyed plants will require responses to the questions posed in this waste management checklist. Sampling Water samples should be taken in a manner which is consistent with Standard Methods. We are looking for sensitivity of detection to the most' minute trace quantities and are not as yet fully aware of the problems to be encountered with field sampling at-that level of sensitivity. It appeared at the above referenced January 7 mating that appropriately cleaned (hexane solvent) glass containers would be satisfactory for this program. The samples should be received in quart or gallon glass bottles with Teflon lined screw caps. In this regard, it is ejected that the method to. followed for use of solvents, reagents, glassware, and other sampling apparatus would be that which is described in "Method for Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) in Industrial Effluents'* as developed by the section 304g task force involving NERC Cincinnati. There may be some minor modifications of this procedure in the various regions with suitable justifications. However, any questions concerning the availability of the description of the method itself or possible significant deviations therefrom should be called to our attention (Dr. Murray Strier 703-557-742-) Enough sample volume should be taken to allow fcr duplicate and spiked sample analysis, approximately 1 gallon. It is also anticipated that some of the more dilute samples, i.e., less than 1 ppb, will be split among the laboratories in a round robin program to be coordinated by hTEC-Cincinnati. A sample representative of the effluent during an operating day (e.g., composite} should be taken at major outfalls, in'particular, the process outfall, stormwater outfall and sanitary discharge point. For other samples, a well timed grab sample should be adequate. No special precautions for sample preservation have been identified as necessary to date. Solid samples will be collected on a limited basis only. In this regard, it is important to remember that PCBs are mixtures of polychlori nated biphenyl compounds; each singular compound, by itself, is likely to ACM C C t c S c / X. 9 * -3- be a solid and there is a liquid phase only when there are enough components present in suitable composition. Points of interest for solid sampling arc as follow: . a. Soil in shipping and receiving area(s); b. Soil in land disposal area(s); c. Spent filter aid and filter cloth; d. Spent activated carbon, if any; e. Saw dust or other solid particle floor sweeping add; and f. Miscellaneous solid scrapings of insides of storage and transfer vessels, hoods and vents, suspicious-looking floor deposits. 9. Solid samples should be collected in wide-irouth sampling dishes with ground glass covers, cleaned similarly as glass sampling bottles for liquids. Air samples are not required at this time. However, it may be possible to estimate vapor losses from storage tank usage considerations and from filling liquid handling and transfer specifics. Details on these losses may be available from the plant manager. Analysis In general, the standard method referenced above calls for liquidliquid extraction of PCSs from aqueous phase to organic solvent. A combination of the standard Florisil column cleanup procedure ar.d a silica gel microcolumn si?pc-a*ion are employed. Identification is made from gas chrcr^atographic patterns obtained by use of two or more unlike columns. The limit of detection is in the range of 1 ppb. According to Dr. Mieggs of NEIC Denver, his laboratory has a more, expeditious column separation technique involving alumina instead of the florisil-silica gel separation procedure. -Although, obviously, the purpose of this program is not explicitly to depict the better or more desirable procedure, it would be of interest to compare the two methods during the latter stages of the program. At this tim it would be preferred to use the former technique as it is the more familiar and generally accepted method. We wish to recommend the procedures used by Region II S fi A (contact Dr. R. Spear, 201-342-7556) for analysis of soil and fiber samples. Region V (contact Dr. T. Yates, 312-353-6738) may be able to provide comparably acceptable procedures. ACt* CCtifcSS For the concentration range below lppb, mass spectrographic analysis will be necessary. While no standard method has been identified, analyti procedures are in use in certain labs (i.e., NEIC, Regions II and V) that give results down to a range of approximately 10 ppt. Ke will ask NIECCir.cinnati to assist in providing guidance in this area and will forward it at a later date. It is important to continue to realize that PCBs are mixtures of compounds and that the analysis is most credible when individual compound have been identified. At this point, those regions or states which .feel that they do not have adequate laboratory facilities to perform te requisite analytical determinations should contact NEIC-Denver (Director, T. Gallagher at 303-234-4650). Attachments Carl J. Schafer / \ *b i. Off-Sito Disposal Checklist Purpose: To track wastes from plant and/or temporary storage to ultimate destruction or deposition; compare actual disposition of wastes with generators expectations Transport Phase Who is responsible for transport of wastes from'plant and/or temporary storage? (including name of company, address, and responsible officials) 3 , Is transporter licensed for (a) interstate (b) intrastate transport? $ II- 3 Is the transport agent also responsible for disposal? , Is not,, what are normal arrangement for disposal of wastes /. by the transporter? IfI S* What, if any, State restrictions .must be met? H* 1 / What assurances, if any, does the generator have that the wastes reach the expected disposal facility? (In California, Ii hazardous waste manifest should be available for examination).. What precautions if any are taken in the selection of the A transporter? Bonding? License? Knowledgeability? I ti Are the contaminated wastes isolated for the transporter? i* Does the transporter maintain this integrity (by isolation, separate pick-up, etc.)? c- How does the transporter know, if at all, that wastes are ! contaminated with PCD? (e.g. by purchase reguistion, label, I !>' color codes, or other identification showing quantity, concen I* trations of PCB's etc.) i r Does*the transporter take any placarding/labeling precautions I regarding (especially) liquid wastes? What specific label/ I placard is placed on a shipment of PCB-contaminated wastes? On truck-load? On barrels/containers? I t What resources (e.g. guides, references), if any, are available -to the transporter c^r on the vehicle to aid emergency personnel in case of accident?' f 1 2 Treatnent/Disoosal Phase What is the treatment (incineration) or disposal site for the f* wastes? (including name of company, address, and responsible officials). (Note: In advance of visit to site, it is advis able to consult available literature on such facilities - see' list of references). Is the facility permitted by State air, water or'land agencies If so, what are permit conditions? *Kow is the transporter's vehicle directed? & VThat are controls avoid mishandling/misdirecting the wastes? Receipt, transfer, storage area information (especially *y . at incineration facilities) - refer to related check list question from capacitor plant list. For incineration facilities, what kind of incinerator is employed? Is waste treated prior to incineration? VThat are combustion temperatures, dwell times^ excess air reties when PC3s are burned? Kow are these levels assured? . In what form and how are wastes fed into the incinerator? ' ^ . VThat are feed rates, destruction efficiency? What is potential for escape of unburned PCB's to environment? VThat are the pollution control devices on the incinerator? What is their efficiency? VThat happens to the pollution 7- control residuals (e.g. scrubber water)? What monitoring and/or instrumentation is available, on the 8 incinerator? . Is there provision for emergency shut-down of waste feed, etc. j. in the event of malfunctions, especially of the pollution control devices? 6 . What is the disposition of the ash? (Note: In the event that PCB-contaminated wastes are being incinerated during a visit, grab samples of scrubber water and ash as well as data on kind and amount of waste being burned would be useful. Samples of waste type to determine i ACH CCbtc bfr 3 its chemical and physical characteristics would also be interesting. It would also be useful to ascertain if star!; sampling would be permitted'by the owner at soma future time). . For land disposal sites, how are wastes emplaced in the lar.d? ' In what form are they? Are they segregated from other wastes? Are they "treated" in any way before burial? What kind of liner-either natural or articial - is used underneath the PCD disposal area? What is depth to groundwater? What types of soil characterise the area? What provisions are made to avoid air aind v/ater emissions i*2.* during handling? * What provisions exist to prevent surface v/ater contamination !3 during accidents, spills, flooding, etc.? What records are kept of the types and amounts of PCS waste 0* 2. (*/. received? What records are kept regarding location of these ' wastes on the site plot? Is groundwater monitoring conducted? I!ow many wells are used? ^ What parameters are tested and how often? By whom? -Would water samples be available to EPA for analysis? Is any air monitoring conducted? What provisions arc there fer cite security, warning nctrees, ^7. limitation of public access, etc.? Are fire protection, worker safety gear, outside communication links, worker first aid and hygiene facilities available? - Is the local fire authority aware that PCD contaminated wastes are present? Are they prepared to deal with them? % To what extent do workers appear aware of special hazards of the'PCB waste stream vs. others? 4 V" ' - vV. .V '/ k ACK CC6tt3 f -* -V : .T -'V-*-M\ -: r-j .>,* ;- : . .i I> I IliUi IJQII lU PCM -4 ^c -*cc^r--N-- (,,fcM. F. Weishaar - G4WA f /lt O a TC 1 * j CCT J. R. Condray - C2SA {*'o J. H. Craddock - CS1H (w/o W. B. Papageorge - G4WA 'trcftCNcr TO G. W- Daues - 1890 C. M. Davis - 1850 J. G. DePagter - 1220 L. G. Duncan - 1850 J. D. Felder - 1760 J. B.- Gripes - 1090 P. E. Heisler - 1740 F. C. Himes - 1200 G. Lunsford - 1890 R. B. Marquez - 1200 W. W. Perdue - 1220 J. W. Pickering - 1840 D. G. Williams - 1460 R. W. Graham - Rock Springs 9 Attached is a copy of interim inspection guidance for PCB compliance inspections under TSCA" From what I understand this is the criteria , document for compliance inspections; I don't know if it has been officially implemented or not. The portions of immediate interest to us are: Marking Requirements Storage Requirements Decontamination Records and Monitoring Pages 44-46 Pages 80-87 Pages 88-90 Pages 91-97 Can you answer yes to all the issues raised? KFW:ku . Attachment V m-3' k ' u & u v u M. F. Weishaar \ s EXHIBIT ACM C C6 6 t S