24412 South Main Street, Suite 106 Carson, California 90745 

Phone: 310-834-8996 Fax: 310-834-8997 

SOURCE TEST REPORT 

Determination of Partictflate Matter(PM), HF and SO2 Emissions 

at Kilns #4 & 5 of the US Tile Company in Corona, CA 

Prepared For: 

US Tile Company 

909 W. Railroad Street 

Corona, California 91720 

Test Date: 

December 2•d & 15 t•, 1999 

Issue Date: 

January 12, 2000 

Revision Date: January 28, 2000 

Tested By: 

Almega Environmental & Technical Services, Inc. 

.Report Number: C7654 

Micha,eJ Z Ro•l•,ii.roject Manager 

 oviow .y: --7 4Z 7: 

Tim Din,h, .Source Testing Manager 
1.0 

2.0 

3.0 

4.0 

5.0 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Executive Summary 

Summary of Test Results 

Introduction 

Process Description 

Sampling and Analytical Procedures '- 

5.1 SCAQMD Method 1.1 • 

Sampling and Velocity Traverses for Stationary Sources 

5.2 

5.3 

5.4 

5.5 

SCAQMD Method 2.1 "t r.,. 

Determination of Stack Gas Velocity and Volumetric Flow Rate 

SCAQMD Method 4.1 

Stack Gas Moisture Content Determination 

EPA Method 5/26A ' 

t-IF & Particulate Matter Emissions Dete•nation 

SCAQMD Modified Method 6.1 

-Determination of SOx as SO2 Concentrations 

Test Results and Discussion 

Quality Assurance/Quality Control '• ':•" 

PAGE 

1 

2 

3 

4 

6 

7 

9 

11 

12 

,; 
APPENDICES 

Appendix A Test Results for Kiln's 4 & 5 

Appendix A-1 EPA 5/26A PM Results and Field Data 

Appendix A-2 EPA 5/26A HF Results and Field Data 

Appendix A-3 SCAQMD Modified Method 6.1 SO2 Results and Field Data 

Appendix B Laboratory Results for Kiln's # 4 & 5 

Appendix B-1 EPA 5/26A PM Lab Results and Data 

Appendix B-2 EPA 5/26A HF Lab Results and Data 

Appendix B-3 SCAQMD Modified Method 6.1 SO2 Results and Data 

Appendix C Calibration Data 

Appendix D Certificate of No Conflict of Interest 

Appendix E SCAQMD Check List for Source Test Report 
Page 

US Tile 

C7654 

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

Plant 

Address 

Equipment Type 

Test Objective 

Test Date 

Test Performed By 

Test Conducted By 

Testing Firm Contact 

Plant Contact 

Air Pollution Control District 

US Tile Company 

US Tile Company 

909 W. Railroad Street 

Corona, California 91720 

Kiln # 4 & 5 

To measure emissions of particulate matter, HF, and SO2 

from Kiln's # 4 & 5 

December 2 no and 15 t•, 1999 

Alme8a Environmental & Technical Services, Inc. 

John Such and Jose Vital 

Tim Dinh, Source Testing Manager 

(310) 834-8996 

Mark Thompson 

(904) 739-4601 

South Coast Air Quality Management District 
PAGE 2 

U.S. Tile 

C7554 

2,0 SUMMARY OF RESULTS 

Particulate Matter (PM) 

Concentration, (grains/dscf) 

Emission Rate, Obs/hr) 

Hydrogen Fluoride (HF) 

Concentration, (ppm) 

Emission Rate, dbs/hr) 

Sulfur Dioxide (SO•) 

Concentration, (ppm) 

Emission Rate, 0bs/hr) 

0.0065 

O.55 

42.83 

1.35 

94.89 

9.56 

0.0018 

0.15 

41.17 

1.28 

59.63 

5.93 

0.0025 

0.21 

27.24 

0.83 

78.52 

7.68 

0.0036 

0.30 

37.1 

1.15 

77.68 

7.72 

Particulate Matter (PM) 

Concentration, (grains/dscf) 

Emission Rate, (lbs/hr) 

Hydrogen Fluoride (HF) 

Concentration, (ppm) 

Emission Rate, (lbs/ltr) 

Sulfur Dioxide (SO•) 

Concentration, (ppm) 

Emission Rate, (lbs/hr) 

0.0085 

0.86 

32.20 

1.20 

16.26 

1.95 

0.0064 

0.65 

28.76 

1.08 

13.37 

1.60 

0.0066 

0.67 

37.14 

1.39 

20.93 

2.51 

0.0072 

0.73 

32.70 

1.22 

16.85 

2.02 
Page 3 

US'rile 

C7654 

3.0 INTRODUCTION 

On December 2 nd and 15 th, 1999 Almega Environmental & Technical Services, Inc. conducted a 

series of tests to determine the emissions of particulate matter, I-IF, and Sulfur Dioxide from the two 

kilns at the US Tile Facility in Corona, California. Gaseous HF was tested only on Kiln #5. Kiln #4 

was tested on the 15 th while kiln #5 was tested on the 2 "d of December. 

Particulate matter and HF emissions were measured according to EPA Method 5/26A. The SO2 was 

measured using SCAQMD Modified Method 6.1. Both tests were conducted simultaneously. 

Three 60-minute test runs were conducted at each kilns exhaust. The gas volumetric flow rate and 

moisture content were measured according to SCAQMD Method 1.1, 2.1, and 4.1. 

Testing was performed by Mr. John Such and Mr. Jose Vital of Almega Environmental. 

Arrangements for the source test were made through Mr. Mark Thompson of US Tile. 
Page 4 

US Tile 

C7654 

4.0 PROCESS DESCRIPTION 

The US Tile Company, located in Corona, California, manufactures various forms of tile. Kiln #4 

exhaust stack is 28" x 28" and has three 3" sample ports. The stacks are located on the roof and the 

ports are located approximately 1⁄2 equivalent diameters upstream and greater than 8equivalent 

diameters downstream. Kiln #5 stack is 30" x 30" and has three 3" sample ports. The ports are 

located approximately 1 equivalent diameter upstream and greater than 8 diameters downstream. A 

process diagram is located in Figure 4-1 on page 5. 
FIGURE 4-1 

[• Process Diagram 

c- i 

Page 5 

US Tile 

C7654 
Page 6 

US Tile 

C7654 

5.0 SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES 

5.1 SCAQMD Method 1.1 Sampling and Velocity Traverses for Stationary_ Sources 

A preliminary source test site assessment was performed prior to the source test in order to 

determine applicable testing port locations and sample point traverse locations. The stack 

diameter and the distance upstream and downstream from sample ports to disturbances, (i.e. 

bends, flanges, etc.) were measured. This information was utilized to determine the minimum 

number of sampling points per traverse and the distance from the inner stack wall to each sample 

point location. This assessment was performed during the required pre-test volume flow rate 

measurement. 

5.2 SCAQMD Method 2.1 Determination of Stack Gas Velocity and Volumetric Flow Rate 

The velocity of the gas stream was determined using an "S" type pitot tube, a magnehelic 

differential pressure gauge or inclined manometer and type "K" thermocouple with a digital 

temperature measuring device. The calibrated pitot tube was connected to the calibrated 

magnehelic gauge or inclined manometer and leak checked at 80-100% of full scale. A 

temperature and delta P was obtained at each traverse point and the duct's static pressure was 

measured and recorded. The dry standard volumetric flow rate was determined from the gas 

velocity data, stack pressure, stack gas moisture content, stack gas molecular weight and crosssectional area of duct. 

5.3 SCAQMD Method 4.1 Stack Gas Moisture Content Determination 

Moisture content was determined using a sampling train consisting of a stainless steel probe, 

Teflon line, four impingers in an ice water bath, a leak-free pump, a vacuum gauge and a dry gas 

meter. Impinger #1 and #2 were charged with 100 ml of water. Impinger #3 was left empty and 

impinger #4 was charged with approximately 200 g of silica gel which was appropriately tared, 

to the nearest 0.1 g using a digital scale. These volumes and weights were recorded prior to the 

sample test. Prior to sampling, a leak check of the sampling train was performed to ensure 

system integrity. After the leak check, the initial meter reading, and inlet and outlet meter 

temperatures were recorded and the sample pump started. The sample rate was adjusted to the 

desired sampling rate and sampled for approximately 120 minutes. 

After sampling, the final readings and final volumes/weights of each impinger were determined 

and recorded. Percent moisture content was calculated from the weight of water collected and 

the dry gas volume sampled. 

In this test the moisture content was measured with the PM/HF sampling train, according to 

EPA Method 5/26A. 
Page 7 

US Tile 

C7654 

CALCULATIONS 

Moisture (bws) Vwstd 

(Vmstd + Vwstd) 

Where: 

Vwstd 0.04707 tI._•_ • 

x Vol. H20 collected (ml) 

ml 

Vmstd 17.64 x Ym x Vm x Pm/Tm 

where: 

0.04707 

17.64 

Ym 

Vm 

Pm 

Tm 

volume of water vapor @ 68°F/ml of water 

528°R/29.92 in.Hg 

meter correction factor 

sample gas volume collected 

sample gas pressure in Hga 

sample gas temperature in °R at meter 

5.4 EPA Method 5/26A Particulate Matter & HF Emissions Determination 

A series of preliminary measurements was made prior to conducting the PM/HF test. SCAQMD 

Methods 1.1, 2.1, and 4.1 were performed to determine location and number of traverse points, 

average gas velocity, molecular weight, and moisture content, respectively. The results of these 

measurements were used to determine the appropriate nozzle size for isokinetic sampling. 

The sampling train used, shown in Figure 5-1, consisted of a stainless steel nozzle, heated glass 

probe, a heated filter housing before the 1 •t iminger, a set of five glass impingers, a 30 foot 

umbilical line, a vacuum pump, dry gas meter, and calibrated orifice. Impingers #1 and #2 in the 

absorption train were charged with 100 ml ofH2SO4, impingers #3 and impinger #4 were filled 

with 100 ml of NaOH, and impinger #5 was filled with approximately 200 g of silica gel. The 

probe was brushed out, rinsed with DI water. The filter was tared and placed in the filter holder. 

The sampling apparatus was sealed and transported to the sampling site where it was assembled 

and leak tested at 15 inches of mercury (Hg.) vacuum. 

After the initial gas meter reading was appropriately recorded, the nozzle was positioned into the 

gas flow. The vacuum pump was started immediately and adjusted to obtain an isokinetic 

sample rate. A complete traverse was performed. Stack gas temperature, velocity pressure (dP), 

meter temperature, gas volume, meter pressure, and absorption train vacuum were monitored and 

recorded at each sample point. A leak check was also performed at the end of the test. The 

samples were rinsed with DI water and stored in glass containers. A chain of custody was 

completed and the samples were transported to the laboratory for analysis. 
Page 8 

US Tile 

C7654 

FIGURE 5-1 

EPA Method 5/26A 

Ca1•bra•ed Co,rs• 

In¢1•-a•d Dry Ga• Vacuum 

Raaome%er •eter Pump 
Pag• 9 

US Tile 

C7654 

Sample recovery was performed as follows: 

5.4.1 

5.4.2 

5.4.3 

5.4.4 

Sample was recovered from the nozzle and pre-filter components by brushing while 

irrigating with DI water, and was collected and stored in a polypropylene bottle. 

The filter was recovered and stored in a petri dish. 

The volume of liquid in the four impingers was measured to an accuracy of 1 ml. The 

first two impingers were placed in one sample bottle and the next two were placed in a 

separate container. The impingers and the connecting glassware from the back half of the 

filter housing, were rinsed three times with DI water and the rinse was added to the 

appropriate sample bottles. 

The silica gel was recovered from the fifth impinger and was stored in a polypropylene 

bottle and re-weighed. 

Sample analysis was performed as follows: 

5.4.5 

5.4.6 

The catch/wash collected in 5.4.1 above was evaporated at room temperature: The 

residue was desiccated and weighed to constant weight (+ 0.1 mg) for particulate 

determination. 

The filter was desiccated and weighed to constant weight (+ 0.1 mg) for particulate 

determination. The samples collected in 5.4.3 were analyzed for I-IF by ion 

chromatography. 

Calculation of concentration and emission rate followed the procedure detailed in the method, 

5.5 SCAQMD Modified Method 6.1-Determination of Sulfates and SO z Concentrations 

The sampling train used is shown in Figure 5-2 on Page 10. It consisted of a stainless steel 

probe, an unheated Teflon sampling line, a set of glass impingers, a 30 foot umb.ilical line, a 

vacuum pump, dry gas meter, and calibrated orifice. Impingers #1 and #2 in the absorption train 

were charged with 100 ml of 3% H20/, impinger #3 was empty, and impinger #4 was filled with 

approximately 200 g of silica gel. The probe was brushed out, rinsed with DI water. The 

sampling apparatus was sealed and transported to the sampling site where it was assembled and 

leak tested at 15 inches of mercury (Hg.) vacuum. 

After the initial gas meter reading was appropriately recorded, the probe was positioned into the 

gas flow. The vacuum pump was started immediately and adjusted to obtain a non-isokinetic 

sample rate. Meter temperature, gas volume, meter pressure, and absorption train vacuum were 

monitored and recorded at each sample point. 

At the end of the test, the samples were recovered in a sample bottle and transported back to 

Almega's laboratory for chain of custody recording and shipped to the Health Sciences 

Laboratory for analysis for SO2. 
FIGURE 5-2 

SCAQMD Method 6.1 

Page 10 

US Tile 

C7654 

4 

7 7 6 8 

15 

16 

1. Heated Glass Probe 

2. Stack Wall 

3. Dial Thermometer 

4. Whatman Thimble Filter 

(Inside Hot Box) 

5. Impinger with 200 ml 

Isopropanol 

6. Empty Bubbler 

7. Impinger with 100 ml H20 = (3%) 

8. Bubbler with Silica Gel 

9. Ice Bath 

i0. Sealed Pump (Leak Free) 

11o Filter for Pump 

12. Metering Valve 

13. Vacuum Gauge 

14. By-pass Valve 

15. Temperature Compensated 

Dry Gas Meter 

16. Orifice 

17. Orifice Inclined Manometer 
Page 

US 

C7654 

6.0 TEST RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 

On December 2 nd and 15 t•, 1999, Almega Environmental & Technical Services, Inc. conducted a 

source emissions test of the US Tile facility in Corona, California. Field data, calculations, and the 

results for all the tests can be found in Appendix A. Appendix B contains the laboratory results. 

The results of the source test are summarized on page 2. Kiln #4 had a 3-run average concentration 

of 0.0036 gr/dscf and a mass emission rate of 0.30 lb/hr for particulate matter. The SO2 average 

was 77.7 ppm's with an average emission rate of 7.72 lbs/hour. 

Kiln #5 had an average concentration of 0.0072 grains/dscfwith a mass emission rate of 0.73 lbs/hr 

for particulate matter. The gaseous I-IF and SO2, averaged 32.7 and 16.9 ppm's, with an emission 

rate of 1.2 and 2.0 lbs/hour, respectively.