P.1 

OAR Box 1814 

Prepped by Ollie Stewart 

Document Number: 

60) ll-B-38 

Docket Number: 

A-88-02 

Printed 11/7/2008 7:22:08 AM Sheet 60 of 63 
P.2 

sr4, 

A-88-02 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards 

Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711 

1 9 MAY 1988 rj ' 

* t^y *-|*f 

MEMORANDUM 

SUBJECT: Trip Report - Collection of Chromium Samples from a Decorative 

Chrome Plating Plant 

FROM: J.W. Brown, Test Support Section 

Emission Measurement Branch, TSD (MD-19) 

TO: R.T. Shigehara, Chief, Test Support Section 

Emission Measurement Branch, TSD (MD-19) 

51 

Place and Date: Automatic Die Casting 

Harper Street 

St. Claire Shores, Michigan 

Participants : 

Discussion: 

Apri l 16-28, 1988 

Automatic Die Casting 

Peer Associates 

- Fred Taft 

Scott Verhelle 

- Don Duval 1 

Eric Holland 

Helen Owens 

Andy Wiseman 

Pacific Environmental Services - Jim Blau 

MRI - Robin Barker 

Chrome Tech - Larry Zitko 

Environmental Protection Agency - John Brown 

Frank Clay 

Test personnel traveled to St. Claire Shores on the weekend so that 

sampling could start on Monday, Apri l 18th. 

/ 

. 
P.3 

A total of 14 chromium screening test runs were made with quad nozzles 

enabling collection of four samples per test. The chromium screening 

samples were collected either simultaneously or overlapping with the 

reference Modified Method 13B samples. All test samples were collected at 

the inlet to a scrubber control device. There was no plan to collect 

samples from the scrubber outlet because a principal objective of this 

field test was to evaluate the emission reduction effectiveness of fume 

suppressants and surface tension additives on the plating tank solution 

surface. 

Analysis for CR+ 6 was conducted on site for both reference and 

screening samples by photometry on a Spec 20 analyzer. A stalagtometer was 

set up for measurement of the plating bath surface tensions. 

The first set of runs was completed on Monday. The second two sets, 

without plating tank emission control, were made on Tuesday. The third 

chromium screening test run was traversed to check for uneven distribution 

in the duct. A comparison of results indicated that representative 

sampling could be achieved without traversing. 

Two sets of runs with fume suppressant control were completed on 

Wednesday. One of these screening tests included single point sampling at 

the lowest point on the vertical axis to check for possible 

stratification in the horizontal duct. Test results indicated that no 

significant stratification was present. Sample catch on the first run, 

using fume suppressant, was quite small so sampling time was extended for 

all subsequent tests. Cleaned, used Teflon nozzles were used for the 

fifth chromium screening test. No desirable sample bias was indicated by 

test results. The last set of runs, with the first plating bath suppressant, 

was completed on Thursday. An extra chromium screening test using 

polyethylene nozzles was run. The plant shut down plating operations on 

Friday so no further testing could be done until production resumed on the 

following Monday. 

Slow depletion of the first foam suppressant delayed collection of 

samples on April 25th. The seventh chromium screening run was extended to 

6 hours to increase catch quantity. The individual samples of Run 7 were 

split for analysis, two were analyzed immediately, and two were tested 

after standing overnight. Test results confirmed the expected stability. 

The last two sets of samples were collected on Tuesday. The chromium 

screening runs were conducted for 4 hours each. Two extra washes were 

recovered for analysis on the last run, one from the tubing connector, and 

one from the long Tygon sample line. A post-test leak check and 

calibration check was performed. 

o ^ 
P.4 

Conclusions and Recommendations: 

The screening sample results were good in terms of reproducibility, 

even at the very low concentrations encountered with high efficiency 

plating bath control. Accuracy was only marginal compared to the 

reference test results. The screening samples were about 25 percent lower 

than the reference samples. 

cc: Dan Bivins (MD-14) 

Frank Butler (MD-77A) 

Frank Clay (MD-14) 

.^Cl Vervaert (MD-13) 

George Walsh (MD-14) 

JZ