 

NOX, CO, AND NMOC EMISSIONS

TESTING REPORT

North Carolina Air Permit No. 08634T03

UNITS 1 & 2

IREDELL TRANSMISSION, LLC

STATESVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA

December, 2008

CONTENTS

Section	Page

  TOC \o "1-3" \h \z    HYPERLINK \l "_Toc216057638"  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY	
 PAGEREF _Toc216057638 \h  iv  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc216057641"  1. 0 	INTRODUCTION	  PAGEREF
_Toc216057641 \h  1  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc216057642"  2.0	SOURCE DESCRIPTION	  PAGEREF
_Toc216057642 \h  1  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc216057643"  3.0	SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES	 
PAGEREF _Toc216057643 \h  2  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc216057644"  3.1	STACK GAS VELOCITY AND FLOWRATES
(USEPA METHODS 1-2)	  PAGEREF _Toc216057644 \h  3  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc216057645"  3.1.1	Sampling Method	  PAGEREF
_Toc216057645 \h  3  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc216057646"  3.1.2	Method 2 Sampling Equipment	 
PAGEREF _Toc216057646 \h  3  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc216057647"  3.2	OXYGEN AND CARBON DIOXIDE (USEPA
METHODS 3A)	  PAGEREF _Toc216057647 \h  3  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc216057648"  3.2.1	Sampling Method	  PAGEREF
_Toc216057648 \h  3  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc216057649"  3.2.2	O2 / CO2 Sampling Train	  PAGEREF
_Toc216057649 \h  3  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc216057650"  3.2.3	Sampling Train Calibration	 
PAGEREF _Toc216057650 \h  4  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc216057651"  3.3	MOISTURE DETERMINATION (USEPA METHOD
4)	  PAGEREF _Toc216057651 \h  4  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc216057652"  3.3.1	Sampling Method	  PAGEREF
_Toc216057652 \h  4  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc216057653"  3.4	OXIDES OF NITROGEN AND CARBON
MONOXIDE (USEPA METHODS 7E AND 10)	  PAGEREF _Toc216057653 \h  4  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc216057654"  3.4.1	Sampling Method	  PAGEREF
_Toc216057654 \h  4  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc216057655"  3.4.2	NOx, and CO Sampling Train	 
PAGEREF _Toc216057655 \h  4  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc216057656"  3.4.3	Sampling Train Calibration	 
PAGEREF _Toc216057656 \h  5  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc216057657"  3.5	METHANE (USEPA METHOD 18)	  PAGEREF
_Toc216057657 \h  5  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc216057658"  3.5.1	Sampling Method	  PAGEREF
_Toc216057658 \h  5  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc216057659"  3.5.2	CH4 Sampling Train	  PAGEREF
_Toc216057659 \h  5  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc216057660"  3.5.3	Sampling Duration & Frequency	 
PAGEREF _Toc216057660 \h  6  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc216057661"  3.6	TOTAL HYDROCARBON COMPOUNDS (USEPA
METHOD 25A)	  PAGEREF _Toc216057661 \h  6  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc216057662"  3.6.1	Sampling Method	  PAGEREF
_Toc216057662 \h  6  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc216057663"  3.6.2	THC Sampling Train	  PAGEREF
_Toc216057663 \h  6  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc216057664"  3.6.3	Sampling Train Calibration	 
PAGEREF _Toc216057664 \h  6  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc216057665"  3.6.4	Sampling Duration & Frequency	 
PAGEREF _Toc216057665 \h  6  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc216057666"  3.7	QA/QC AND POST TEST PROCEDURES	 
PAGEREF _Toc216057666 \h  7  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc216057667"  3.7.1	Quality Control and Assurance (O2,
CO2, NOx, and CO)	  PAGEREF _Toc216057667 \h  7  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc216057668"  3.7.2	Quality Control and Assurance
(NMOC)	  PAGEREF _Toc216057668 \h  7  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc216057669"  3.8	DATA  REDUCTION	  PAGEREF
_Toc216057669 \h  8  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc216057670"  4.0	OPERATING PARAMETERS	  PAGEREF
_Toc216057670 \h  8  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc216057671"  5.0	RESULTS	  PAGEREF _Toc216057671 \h 
9  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc216057674"  6.0	CERTIFICATION STATEMENT	  PAGEREF
_Toc216057674 \h  10  

 

Result Table

Emissions Testing Results: Unit 1

Emissions Testing Results: Unit 2

Figures

Units 1 & 2 Stack Drawing & Exhaust Sampling Point Location

USEPA Method 3A/7E/10 Sampling Train

USEPA Method 25A Sampling Train

USEPA Method 18 Sampling Train

Appendices

A	NCDER Test Plan and Approval Letter

B	Equipment and Analyzer Calibration Data

C	Example Calculations

D	Flowrate and Moisture Data

E	Raw Analyzer Data

F	Operational Data

G	Analytical Data



EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

DTE Energy Corporate Services, LLC (DECS), a DTE Energy Company (DTE)
performed emissions testing at Iredell Transmission, LLC, located in
Statesville, North Carolina.  The fieldwork, performed on November 5,
2008 was conducted to satisfy requirements of the North Carolina Air
Permit No. 08634T03 and EPA Subpart JJJJ.  Emissions tests were
performed on Units 1 & 2 for oxides of nitrogen (NOx), carbon monoxide
(CO), and non-methane organic compounds (NMOC).

The results of the emissions testing are highlighted below:

Emissions Testing Summary

Iredell Transmission, LLC

Statesville, NC

Units 1 & 2

November 5, 2008

Unit 1	Load

(%)	Oxides of Nitrogen(1)

(ppm)	Carbon Monoxide(1)

(ppm)	NMOC(1)

(ppm)

Test 1	97.0	56.1	410.6	10.5

Test 2	96.7	55.9	403.6	12.2

Test 3	96.9	56.5	410.3	12.2

Average

56.2	408.1	11.6



Unit 2	Load

(%)	Oxides of Nitrogen(1)

(ppm)	Carbon Monoxide(1)

(ppm)	NMOC(1)

(ppm)

Test 1	96.9	54.8	426.6	15.4

Test 2	97.1	55.1	429.4	13.9

Test 3	97.5	54.7	427.6	19.6

Average

54.9	427.9	16.3

Permit Limit(1)

160	540	86

	

(1) ppm, corrected to 15% O2



1. 0 	INTRODUCTION

DTE Energy Corporate Services, LLC (DECS), a DTE Energy Company (DTE)
performed emissions testing at Iredell Transmission, LLC, located in
Statesville, North Carolina.  The fieldwork, performed on November 5,
2008, was conducted to satisfy requirements of the North Carolina Air
Permit No. 08634T03 and EPA sub-part JJJJ.

Testing was performed pursuant to Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations,
Part 60, Appendix A (40 CFR §60 App. A), Methods 1-4, 7E, 10, 18, and
25A.

The fieldwork was performed in accordance with EPA Reference Methods and
DECS Intent to Test1, which was approved by the North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDER) on October 27,
20082.  The following DECS personnel participated in the testing
program: Mr. Mark Grigereit, Environmental Specialist, and Mr. Fred
Meinecke, Environmental Technician.  Mr. Grigereit was the project
leader.  Mr. Grigereit has 20 years of source testing experience testing
for DTE Energy and private consulting firms and Mr. Meinecke has 15
years of source testing experience testing for DTE Energy and private
consulting firms. 

Mr. Thomes Durham, Environmental Engineer, DTE Energy Services, LLC,
provided the process coordination for the testing program.  Mr. Jeffery
Johnson, DTE Biomass Energy, provided on-site operation of the units. 
Mr. Gregg O’Neal with the Technical Services Section of the NCDER
reviewed the Test Plan.  Mr. Jim Westmoreland, NCDER-Mooresville
Regional Office, observed the testing.

2.0	SOURCE DESCRIPTION

The Iredell Transmission, LLC power generating facility, located at 356
Twin Oaks Road, Statesville NC is a power generating facility.  The
facility consists of two (2) landfill gas-fired internal combustion
engines with associated electrical generators.  

The systems are Caterpillar G3520C – 1200 RPM 1600 kW Gas Generator
Sets.  The purpose of the source is to utilize land fill gas from the
Iredell County Landfill to produce energy to be sent to the electrical
grid. 

See Figure 1 for diagrams of the units’ sampling locations and stack
dimensions.

3.0	SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES

DTE Energy obtained emissions measurements in accordance with procedures
specified in the USEPA Standards of Performance for New Stationary
Sources.  The sampling and analytical methods used in the testing
program are indicated in the table below

Sampling Method	Parameter	Analysis

USEPA Methods 1-2	Exhaust Gas Flow rates	

Field data analysis and reduction 

USEPA Method 3A	Oxygen & CO2	

Instrumental Analyzer Method



USEPA Method 4	Moisture content	

Field data analysis and reduction 

USEPA Method 7E	Oxides of Nitrogen	Chemilumenecent

Instrumental Analyzer Method



USEPA Method 10	Carbon Monoxide	NDIR

Instrumental Analyzer Method



USEPA Method 18	Gaseous Organic Compounds (Methane)	GC

Analytical Method

™ Bag Sample)



USEPA Method 25A	Total Hydrocarbon Compounds	FID

Instrumental Analyzer Method





STACK GAS VELOCITY AND FLOWRATES (USEPA METHODS 1-2)

3.1.1	Sampling Method

Stack gas velocity traverses were conducted in accordance with the
procedures outlined in USEPA Method 1, “Sample and Velocity Traverses
for Stationary Sources,” and Method 2, “Determination of Stack Gas
Velocity and Volumetric Flowrate.”  Two (2) sampling ports were
utilized on each Unit’s exhaust duct, sampling at six (6) points per
port for a total of twelve (12) points.  Sampling was conducted in
conjunction with the gaseous emissions testing. 

A Cyclonic flow check was performed prior to performing the flowrate
testing.  Testing in the stacks demonstrated that no cyclonic flow is
present.  Data has been included in Appendix E demonstrating the absence
of cyclonic flow.

3.1.2	Method 2 Sampling Equipment

DTE Energy’s EPA Method 2 sampling equipment consisted of a 0-10”
incline manometer, S-type pitot tube (Cp = 0.84) and a type-K calibrated
thermocouple.  

OXYGEN AND CARBON DIOXIDE (USEPA METHODS 3A)

3.2.1	Sampling Method

Oxygen (O2) and Carbon Dioxide (CO2) emissions were evaluated using
USEPA Method 3A, “Gas Analysis for Carbon Dioxide, Oxygen, Excess Air,
and Dry Molecular Weight (Instrumental Analyzer Method)”.   The
analyzers utilize paramagnetic sensors.

 

3.2.2	O2 / CO2 Sampling Train

™ sampling line, (3) a Universal( gas conditioner with particulate
filter, (4) a flexible unheated Teflon™ sampling line, (5) a Servomax
1400 O2/CO2 gas analyzer, (6) appropriate USEPA Protocol 1 calibration
gases, and (7) a ThermoWestronics( Data Acquisition System.  

Refer to Figure 2 for a schematic of the O2, CO2, NOx, and CO sampling
train.   

3.2.3	Sampling Train Calibration

The O2 and CO2 analyzers were calibrated according to procedures
outlined in USEPA Method 7E.  Zero, span, and mid range calibration
gases were introduced directly into the analyzer to determine the
instruments linearity.  A zero and mid range span gas for each pollutant
was then introduced through the entire sampling system to determine
sampling system bias for each analyzer at the completion of each test.

MOISTURE DETERMINATION (USEPA METHOD 4)

3.3.1	Sampling Method                  

	Determination of the moisture content at the outlet each unit was
performed using the method described in USEPA Method 4, “Determination
of Moisture Content in Stack Gases”.  The moisture was collected in
glass impingers, and the percentage of water was then derived from
calculations outlined in USEPA Method 4.  A 30-minute moisture sample
was collected during each test run.

	

OXIDES OF NITROGEN AND CARBON MONOXIDE (USEPA METHODS 7E AND 10)

3.4.1	Sampling Method

Oxides of nitrogen (NOx) emissions were evaluated using USEPA Method 7E,
“Determination of Oxides of Nitrogen Emissions from Stationary
Sources”.  The NOx analyzer utilizes a Chemilumenecent detector. 
Carbon monoxide (CO) emissions were evaluated using USEPA Method 10,
“Determination of Carbon Monoxide Emissions from Stationary
Sources”.  The CO analyzer utilizes a NDIR detector.

3.4.2	NOx, and CO Sampling Train

The EPA Methods 7E and 10 sampling system consisted of (1) a
single-point sampling probe (placed in the center of the stack), (2) a
heated Teflon™ sampling line, (3) a Universal( gas conditioner with
particulate filter, (4) a flexible unheated Teflon™ sampling line, (5)
a TECO 42i Chemilumenecent NO/NOx gas analyzer, and TECO 48i NDIR CO gas
analyzer, (6) appropriate 

USEPA Protocol 1 calibration gases, and (7) a ThermoWestronics( Data
Acquisition System.  

Refer to Figure 2 for a schematic of the O2, CO2, NOx, and CO sampling
train.   

3.4.3	Sampling Train Calibration

The Sampling train was calibrated according to procedures outlined in
USEPA Method 7E.  Zero, span, and mid range calibration gases were
introduced directly into the analyzer to determine the instruments
linearity.  A zero and mid range span gas for each pollutant was then
introduced through the entire sampling system to determine sampling
system bias for each analyzer at the completion of each test.

 

METHANE (USEPA METHOD 18)

3.5.1	Sampling Method

™ Bag Sampling)”.  This method involves the collection of exhaust
gas in a Tedlar™ bag, which is then analyzed at an off-site laboratory
by gas chromatography (GC). According to the test plan submitted to the
NCDER, DTE was originally going to test for non-methane organic
compounds (NMOC), utilizing a methane/non-methane FID.  Following
discussions with the Agency, Method 18 was substituted as the method
performed to collect the CH4.  This modification to the test plan was
agreed upon with the NCDER prior to the initiation of field activities.

3.5.2	CH4 Sampling Train

™ sampling line (kept to the minimum length required), (3) a sampling
lung with 15-liter Tedlar™ bag, and (4) a vacuum pump with regulator.

Refer to Figure 4 for a schematic of the Method 18 sampling train.   

3.5.3	Sampling Duration & Frequency

	Methane samples were collected simultaneously with the other gaseous
pollutants measured.  The vacuum pump flowrate was set to allow for a
constant rate sample, collected for the duration of each test run.
Analytical results for M18 are located in Appendix G. 

TOTAL HYDROCARBON COMPOUNDS (USEPA METHOD 25A)

3.6.1	Sampling Method

Total hydrocarbon compound (THC) emissions were evaluated using USEPA
Method 25A, “Determination of Total Hydrocarbon Emissions from
Stationary Sources (Instrumental Analyzer Method)”.  The THC analyzer
utilizes a flame ionization detector (FID).  The FID measures total
hydrocarbon compounds.   

3.6.2	THC Sampling Train

™ sampling line, (3) a JUM 109A( THC gas analyzer, (4) appropriate
certified calibration gases, and (5) a ThermoWestronics( Data
Acquisition System.  

Refer to Figure 3 for a schematic of the THC sampling train.   

3.6.3	Sampling Train Calibration

In accordance with USEPA Method 25A, a 4-point (zero, low, mid, and
high) calibration check was performed on the THC analyzer.  The analyzer
was calibrated in the 0-1,600 ppm range.  Calibration drift checks were
performed at the completion of each run.  

 

3.6.4	Sampling Duration & Frequency

The THC gaseous emission testing was performed simultaneously with the
O2, CO2, NOx, and CO sampling.  Data was recorded at 4-second intervals
and average over 1-minute periods. 

3.7	QA/QC AND POST TEST PROCEDURES

3.7.1	Quality Control and Assurance (O2, CO2, NOx, and CO)

All sampling and analytical equipment was calibrated according to the
guidelines referenced in Methods 3A, 7E, and 10.  Calibration gases were
EPA Protocol 1 gases and the concentrations were within the acceptable
ranges (40-60% mid range and span) specified in Methods 3A and 7E. 
Calibration gas certification sheets are located in Appendix B. 

DTE performed converter efficiency testing by directly challenging the
NOx analyzer with a nitrogen dioxide (NO2) calibration gas of 51.5 ppm. 
Results from the converter efficiency test demonstrated that the
analyzer met the requirements of Method 7E(Eq. 1).

Eq. 1

 

 

3.7.2	Quality Control and Assurance (NMOC)

The THC sampling equipment was calibrated with propane (C3H8) according
to the guidelines referenced in Methods 25A.  Calibration gases were EPA
Protocol 1 gases and the concentrations were within the acceptable
ranges (25-35% low range, 45-55% mid range and 80-100 span).  

An analyzer response factor (RF) for CH4 of 3 was applied to the CH4
concentration in the exhaust gas, as determined by Method 18.  The CH4
(as methane) is converted to CH4 (as propane) in order to subtract the
CH4 from the THC measured in the field(Eq. 2).

 

Eq. 2

 

Calibration gas certification sheets are located in Appendix E. 

3.8	DATA  REDUCTION

Data collected during the emissions testing was reported according to
emissions limits specified in the facility’s Air Permit.  NOx, CO, and
NMOC emissions are reported as parts per million, corrected to 15% O2.  

Emissions calculations are based on calculations located in USEPA Method
1-4, 7E, 10, 18, and 25A.  The results are located in the Results
Tables.  

4.0	OPERATING PARAMETERS

	

The test program included the collection of generator load (kW), engine
speed (RPM), inlet manifold air pressure (psi), fuel upper heating value
(BTU), fuel flow (scfm) and generator operating hours (kW-hour).  

	Operational data are located in Appendix F. 

5.0	RESULTS

The Results of the testing indicate that Units 1 & 2 are in compliance
with North Carolina Air Permit No. 08634T03  and EPA sub-part JJJJ. 

.      

Emissions Testing Summary

Iredell Transmission, LLC

Statesville, NC

Units 1 & 2

November 5, 2008

Unit 1	Load

(%)	Oxides of Nitrogen(1)

(ppm)	Carbon Monoxide(1)

(ppm)	NMOC(1)

(ppm)

Test 1	97.0	56.1	410.6	10.5

Test 2	96.7	55.9	403.6	12.2

Test 3	96.9	56.5	410.3	12.2

Average

56.2	408.1	11.6



Unit 2	Load

(%)	Oxides of Nitrogen(1)

(ppm)	Carbon Monoxide(1)

(ppm)	NMOC(1)

(ppm)

Test 1	96.9	54.8	426.6	15.4

Test 2	97.1	55.1	429.4	13.9

Test 3	97.5	54.7	427.6	19.6

Average

54.9	427.9	16.3

Permit Limit(1)

160	540	86

	

(1) ppm, corrected to 15% O2



6.0	CERTIFICATION STATEMENT

“I certify that I believe the information provided in this document is
true, accurate, and complete.  Results of testing are based on the good
faith application of sound professional judgment, using techniques,
factors, or standards approved by the Local, State, or Federal Governing
body, or generally accepted in the trade.” 

_________________________________

Mark R. Grigereit, QSTI

This report prepared by:  							

	  Mr. Mark R. Grigereit, QSTI

	  Specialist, Stationary Source & Ambient Monitoring

	  Environmental Management and Resources

	  DTE Energy Corporate Services, LLC

This report reviewed by:  							

	  Mr. Mark Mullen

	  Supervisor, Stationary Source & Ambient Monitoring

	  Environmental Management and Resources

	  DTE Energy Corporate Services, LLC

	

Results tableS

	

FIGURES

 

APPENDIX a

NCDER TEST PLAN AND 

APPROVAL LETTER



APPENDIX B

EQUIpmENT AND analyzer calibration data

APPENDIX C

EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS



ExAMPLE CALCULATIONS

Note: answers obtained by sample calculations may deviate from that
presented within the report because of rounding differences.  

UNIT 1 – RUN 2

USEPA Method 4 

Moisture Content

Where:	Vwc = volume of water vapor condensed in impingers at standard
conditions (ft3)

		K1 = 0.04707 ft3/mL water

		V1 = volume of water collected in impingers (mL)

Vwsg = volume of water vapor collected in silica gel at standard
conditions (ft3)

K2 = 0.04715 ft3/g water

V2 = mass of water collected by silica gel (g)

For example, 72 g of water were condensed in the impingers and the
silica gel.  The volume of water collected in each section of the
sampling train, in ft3, was calculated as follows: (Note: Impingers and
silica gel were weighed)

The total volume of water collected was 3.3948 ft3.

Gas Volume Standardization

Where:	Vstd = volume of gas sampled at standard conditions

Vm = volume of gas measured by dry gas meter (ft3)

		Ym = dry gas meter correction factor (dimensionless)

		Tstd = standard temperature (oR = 460 + oF)

		Pstd = standard pressure (“Hg)

		Pb = barometric pressure (“Hg)

		(H = average orifice differential pressure (“H2O)

		Tm = average meter temperature (oR)

For example, the volume of gas measured at the dry gas meter for of the
moisture sampling was 22.990 ft3.  The dry gas meter correction factor
was 0.972.  Standard temperature and pressure are 530oR and 29.92”Hg,
respectively.  The barometric pressure at the time of testing was
29.29”Hg.  The average orifice differential, and meter temperature
were 1.70 and 532.72oR, respectively.  The volume of gas sampled was
corrected to standard conditions as follows:

Moisture Fraction

Where:	Bws = exhaust gas moisture content

For example, from previously calculated values, the exhaust gas moisture
fraction was calculated as follows:

Absolute Stack Gas Temperature, Ts (oR)

 

Where:	ts = Measured stack gas temperature (oF)

For example, the average stack temperature was 944.8oF.  The average
temperature in degrees Rankine is therefore 944.8+ 460 = 1,404.8oR.

Absolute Stack Gas Pressure, Ps (in. Hg)

 

Where:	Pbar = Barometric pressure at test site (in. Hg)

		Pstat = Stack static pressure (in. Hg)

For example, the barometric and stack static pressures were 29.29”Hg,
and –0.76” H2O, respectively.  The absolute stack pressure is then:

 



Stack Gas Molecular Weight, Dry Basis (lb/lb mole)

 

For example, the average O2 content of the exhaust gas stream was 7.6%. 
The CO2 content of the gas stream was 11.9%.  The CO content was assumed
to be negligible, and the N2 content is assumed to make up the balance
of the gas content (i.e. 100-7.6-11.9-0.0-0.0 = 80.5%).  The dry stack
gas molecular weight is therefore:

 

Stack Gas Molecular Weight, Wet Basis (lb/lb mole)

 

The stack gas moisture content for at the stack exhaust was 13.55%.  The
wet stack gas molecular weight is then:

 

Stack Gas Velocity, Vs (fpm)

 

 

Cp = Pitot tube coefficient, dimensionless

(P = The average square root of the velocity head of stack gas (in. H2O)

Ms = Molecular weight of the stack gas, wet basis (lb/lb mole)

For example, flowrate testing at the boiler stack exhaust, the average
square root of the velocity head of the stack gas was 1.7148”H2O. 
Using values already calculated, the average stack gas velocity was
calculated as follows:

 

Average Stack Gas Volumetric Flowrate, Qs (cfm)

 

Where:	Vs = Stack gas velocity (fpm)

 

For example, the exhaust stack has a 16” diameter.  The
cross-sectional area of the stack is calculated as follows:

 

The stack gas volumetric flowrate was then calculated as follows:

 

Standard Stack Gas Volumetric Flowrate, Qstd (scfm)

 

 

Ps = Absolute stack gas pressure (in. Hg)

For example, the standard stack gas volumetric flowrate was calculated
as follows:

 

Dry Standard Stack Gas Volumetric Flowrate, Qstd,dry (dscfm)

 

For example, the dry standard stack gas volumetric flowrate was
calculated as follows:

 

USEPA Methods 3A, 7E, And 10

Analyzer Drift Correction

 

 = Effluent gas concentration, dry basis (ppm).

 = Average gas concentration indicated by gas analyzer, dry basis (ppm).

3

 

-

.

/

0

1

2

3

4

5

Q

R

S

T

Y

Z

u

v

w

‘

’

*’

“

”

•

–

—

˜

™

µ

¶

·

¸

»

¼

è

é

ê

-3

—

%

“

ë



 

!

"

#

$

%

&

'

C

D

E

F

I

+I

J

`

p

q

r

s

Ž

‘

’

“

”

•

±

²

³

´

¹

º

É

Ê

Ë

å

æ

ç

è

é

ê

ë

ì

í

$

hÊ~

ᘉ쵨뤺㸀*ᘆ쵨뤺⠀

hÊ~

hÊ~

h

hÊ~

hÊ~

&

hÊ~

hÊ~

hÊ~

hÊx

hÊ~

hÊ~

̝ͪoᔀ餇ᘀ쩨൸䔀嗿Ĉ䩞̥楪텙ੌĈ栖磊

萏ː葞ː摧璲ࠀ-萏ː葞ː摧罴܀␃愃̤摧磊

$

 hÊ~

j

 = Average of initial and final system calibration bias check responses
for the zero gas (ppm).

 = Actual concentration of the upscale calibration gas (ppm).

 = Average of initial and final system calibration bias check responses
for the upscale calibration gas (ppm).

For example, the average of the initial and final NOx outlet zero gas
calibration checks was 2.1ppmv.  The average of the initial and final
NOx midscale gas calibration checks was 190.85 ppmv.  The actual
concentration was 191.8 ppmv.  The average outlet NOx concentration
indicated by the gas analyzer was 126.2 ppmv.  The actual stack gas NOx
concentration, corrected for analyzer drift, is then:

 

Concentration Standardization to 15% Oxygen

Where:	%O2 = measured exhaust gas oxygen content (%)

		C'NOx = NOx concentration (ppmv) 

For example, the measured exhaust gas oxygen content for Run 2 was 7.6%.
 The NOx concentration (C’NOx) was standardized to 15% oxygen as
follows:

USEPA Method 18 & 25A

For example, the measured concentration of methane (per Method 18) was
1,326 ppm (as CH4).  The results must be converted to parts per million
(as C3H8).

Therefore, the non-methane organic compounds (NMOC) are determined as
follows:

The NMOC concentration is then corrected for 15% O2 following the same
procedure used for Methods 7E and 10.

APPENDIX D

Flowrate and moisture data



APPENDIX e

Raw Analyzer Data



APPENDIX F

operational data

APPENDIX g

analytical Data

1 NCDER, Test Plan, Submitted September 22, 2008.  (Attached-Appendix A)

2 NCDER, Approval Letter. (Attached-Appendix A)

 

 PAGE   

  PAGE  iv 

	 PAGE   10 

	

	

	

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

