EMISSION MEASUREMENT SUMMARY REPORT
FILTERABLE PARTI CULATE MATTER
FURNACE NO. 12
FITLERABLE PARTI CULATE MATTER
FURNACE NO. 1 ERAMET MARIETTA, INC. MARIETTA, OHIO

Prepared for:

Eramet Marietta, Inc.
P.O. Box 299
State Route 7 South Marietta, Ohio 45750-0299

EQ PN: 50352.0027

Prepared by:

Environmental Quality Management, Inc.
1800 Carillon Boulevard Cincinnati, Ohio 45240

August 2012ii CONTENTS

Section Page

1. Introduction .................................................................................................................. .... 1-1

2. Summary of Test Results ................................................................................................. 2-1

3. Sampling and Analytical Procedures ............................................................................... 3-1
3.1 Location of Measurement Sites .............................................................................. 3-1
3.2 Stack Gas Volumetric Flow Rate............................................................................ 3-1
3.3 Stack Gas Dry Molecular Weight ........................................................................... 3-1
3.4 Stack Gas Moisture Content ................................................................................... 3-2
3.5 Filterable Particulate Matter ................................................................................... 3-2
3.6 Visible Emissions ................................................................................................... 3-2

4. Process Description/Sampling Locations ........................................................................ 4-1

5. Quality Assurance and Quality Control ........................................................................... 5-1
5.1 Field Sampling ........................................................................................................ 5-1
5.2 Calibration Procedures and Frequency ................................................................... 5-1

APPENDICES
A Calculations
B Raw Field Data C Analytical Data
D Process Data E Quality Assurance/Quality Controliii FIGURES

No. Page

3-1. EPA Method 5 Sampling Train........................................................................................ 3-3
4-1. Sampling Locations ......................................................................................................... 4- 1

TABLES

No. Page

1-1. Sampling Locations and Test Parameters ........................................................................ 1-1
2-1. Furnace No. 12 Stack Gas Conditions ............................................................................. 2-3
2-2. Furnace No. 12 Particulate Emissions and Process Operations ....................................... 2-3
2-3. Furnace No. 1 Stack Gas Conditions ............................................................................... 2-4
2-4. Furnace No. 1 Summary of PM Emissions ...................................................................... 2-5
2-5. Furnace No. 1 Process Operations ................................................................................... 2-5
4-1. Sampling Location Parameters ........................................................................................ 4-2
5-1. Field Equipment Calibrations .......................................................................................... 5-2
5-2. Field Checks of Sampling Equipment ............................................................................. 5-21-1 1. INTRODUCTION

On July 23, 24, and 25, 2012, Environmental Quality Management, Inc. (EQ) personnel

conducted a compliance air emission program at the Eramet Marietta Inc. (Eramet) facility in

Marietta, Ohio. Sampling was conducted following the procedures of EPA Reference Methods 1

through 5, and 9 to quantify emissions of filtera ble particulate matter from Furnace No. 12 and

Furnace No. 1.

EQ utilized EPA Reference Methods 1 and 2 to calculate stack gas velocities and

temperatures. EPA Method 3 was used to determ ine the stack gas molecular weight. Moisture,

filterable particulate matter, and visible emissions were measured following the procedures of

EPA Methods 4, 5, and 9, respectively. An ou tline of the specific sampling methods and

parameters utilized is provided in Ta ble 1-1 and detailed in Section 3.

Mr. John Hughes of Eramet monitored proce ss operations during testing. Mr. Marco

Deshaies of the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (Ohio EPA) observed process operations

and sampling efforts. Mr. Tom Gerstle of EQ ma naged the sampling effort. Messrs. Mike Todd,

Doug Allen, Gary Drexler, Jim Albertz, and Chris Janzen of EQ conducted the emission testing.

Table 1-1. Sampling Locations and Test Parameters

Stack I.D. Test
Method Parameter No. of Samples Run Time/Sample,
min
Furnace No. 12
Scrubber
Exhaust 1-2
3
4
5
9 Flow
CO 2 /O 2 Moisture
Filterable PM Opacity 3
3
3
3
1 60
60
60
60
60

Furnace No. 1 Main and Tap Hole Baghouse Exhausts 1-2
3
4
5
9 Flow
CO 2 /O 2 Moisture
Filterable PM Opacity 3
3
3
3
1 60
60
60
60
602-1 2. SUMMARY OF TEST RESULTS

Furnace No. 12 (scrubber exhaust) was samp led on July 25, 2012 to quantify emissions

of filterable particulate. Fu rnace No. 12 was sampled at a maxi mum furnace load, approximately

20.3 MW. Three 1-hour test runs were conducted at the Furnace No. 12 scrubber exhaust to

determine the concentration and mass emission rate of filterable particulate matter. Sampling

was conducted following EPA Reference Methods 1 through 5.

Furnace No. 1 (2 baghouse exhausts) was sampled on July 23 and 24, 2012 to quantify

emissions of filterable particulate. The Main Baghouse controls emissions from the furnace and

the Tap Hole Baghouse controls emissions from the tapping operations. The furnace was

sampled at a maximum furnace load, approximate ly 24.1 MW. Three 1-hour test runs were

conducted at each baghouse. Sampling was conducted following EPA Reference Methods 1

through 5.

EPA Reference Method 9, “Visible Determinat ion of the Opacity of Emissions from

Stationary Sources,” was used to determine op acity from the furnace r oof monitor for Furnace

Nos. 1 and 12. A 1-hour emission observation was completed in conjunction with the particulate

sampling runs. The opacity averaged 1.6% for the Furnace No. 1 roof monitor with occasional

5% to 30% opacity observed during tapping. The opacity averaged 4.0% for the Furnace No. 12

roof monitor with occasional 5% to 25% opacity observed during tapping.

Table 2-1 summarizes the stack gas conditions measured during each sampling run for

Furnace No. 12. Stack gas velocity and temperat ure, volumetric flow rates, gas composition

(CO 2 and O 2 ), and moisture content are detailed for each test run.

Table 2-2 summarizes the filterable particulate matter and pertinent production data for

each test run for Furnace No. 12. In addition, a tap was conducted during all the first and second

test runs.
Table 2-3 summarizes the stack gas conditions measured during each sampling run for

Furnace No. 1. Stack gas velocity and temperatur e, volumetric flow rates, gas composition (CO 2

and O 2 ), and moisture content are detailed for each test run.

Table 2-4 summarizes the filterable particulate matter and pertinent production data for

each test run for Furnace No. 1. In addition, a tap was conducted during all three test runs.2-2 Table 2-5 presents process operations for Furnace No. 1.

Example calculations are include d as Appendix A, raw field da ta is included as Appendix

B, analytical data is included in Appendix C, process and visible emissi ons observation data are

included in Appendix D, and quali ty assurance/quality control da ta are located in Appendix E.2-3Table 2-1. Furnace No. 12 Stack Gas ConditionsDate: July 25, 2012Plant: Eramet - Marietta, OhioRun No. TimeStack GasVelocity,fpsaVolumetric Flow RateTemp,°FMoisture,% CO2, % O2, %acfmbdscfmc12-1 0800-0906 58.4 173,737 145,610 132 6.2 1.0 19.512-2 0950-1055 58.7 174,773 144,259 135 7.1 1.0 20.012-3 1132-1236 58.9 175,207 146,785 132 6.2 1.5 19.5Average58.7 174,572 145,551 133 6.5 1.2 19.7aFeet per second.bActual cubic feet per minute.cDry standard cubic feet per minute.Table 2-2. Furnace No. 12 Particulate Emissions and Process OperationsDate: July 25, 2012Plant: Eramet - Marietta, OhioRun No. TimeFilterable Particulate MatterProcess ThroughputTons/hr at furnace load(MW)Pressure Drop,inches of waterConcentrationMass Rate,lb/hrcgr/dscfalb/dscfb12-1 0800-0906 5.82E-03 8.31E-07 7.26 28.3 at 21.21 MW 53.5 east 55.3 west12-2 0950-1055 7.19E-03 1.03E-06 8.89 28.3 at 20.86 MW 53.2 east 55.0 west12-3 1132-1236 7.87E-03 1.12E-06 9.90 28.3 at 18.78 MW 53.3 east 55.1 westAverage6.96E-02 9.94E-07 8.68 28.3 at 20.28 MW 53.3 east 55.1 westaGrains per dry standard cubic foot.bPounds per dry standard cubic foot.cPounds per hour.2-4Table 2-3. Furnace No. 1 Stack Gas ConditionsDate: July 23 and 24, 2012 Plant: Eramet - Marietta, OhioRun No. TimeStack GasVelocity,fpsaVolumetric Flow RateTemp,°FMoisture,% CO2, % O2, %acfmbdscfmcFurnace No. 1 Main BaghouseMB-5-1 1248-1402 49.9 235,262 173,616 224 3.4 0.0 21.0MB-5-2 1425-1535 51.0 240,425 177,596 223 3.5 0.0 21.0MB-5-3 0800-0908 52.0 244,997 180,934 222 3.1 0.0 21.0Average51.0 240,228 177,382 223 3.3 0.0 21.0Furnace No. 1 Tap Hole BaghouseTB-5-1 1248-1357 56.8 72,372 64,363 116 2.5 0.0 21.0TB-5-2 1425-1535 56.1 71,577 63,523 116 2.7 0.0 21.0TB-5-3 0800-0906 52.5 66,933 59,216 115 2.6 0.0 21.0Average55.1 70,294 62,367 116 2.6 0.0 21.0aFeet per second.bActual cubic feet per minute.cDry standard cubic feet per minute.2-5Table 2-4. Furnace No. 1 Summary of PM EmissionsDate: July 23 and 24, 2012 Plant: Eramet - Marietta, OhioRun No. TimeFilterable Particulate MatterConcentrationMass Rate,lb/hrcgr/dscfalb/dscfbFurnace No. 1 Main BaghouseMB-5-1 1248-1402 1.91E-03 2.73E-07 2.84MB-5-2 1425-1635 1.12E-03 1.60E-07 1.70MB-5-3 0800-0908 1.58E-03 2.26E-07 2.46Average1.54E-03 2.20E-07 2.33Furnace No. 1 Tap Hole BaghouseTB-5-1 1248-13571.22E-031.74E-07 0.67TB-5-2 1425-15359.29E-041.33E-07 0.51TB-5-3 0800-09061.39E-031.99E-07 0.71Average1.18E-03 1.68E-07 0.63aGrains per dry standard cubic foot.bPounds per dry standard cubic foot.cPounds per hour.Table 2-5. Furnace No. 1 Process OperationsDate: July 23 and 24, 2012 Plant: Eramet - Marietta, OhioRun No. TimeProcess ThroughputTons/hr at furnaceload (MW)Pressure Drop, inches of waterCompartments1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8Furnace No. 1 Main BaghouseMB-5-1 1248-1402 17.7 at 25.32 MW 10.51 7.19 6.53 6.48 11.10 10.69 6.53 6.75MB-5-2 1425-1635 17.7 at 23.57 MW 10.34 7.05 6.72 6.74 10.98 10.99 6.41 6.40MB-5-3 0800-0908 17.7 at 23.44 MW 10.43 7.27 6.46 6.94 10.83 10.93 6.78 6.80Average17.7 at 24.11 MW 10.67 7.17 6.57 6.72 10.97 10.87 6.57 6.65Furnace No. 1 Tap Hole BaghouseTB-5-1 1248-1357 17.7 at 25.32 MW 10TB-5-2 1425-1535 17.7 at 23.57 MW 10TB-5-3 0800-0906 17.7 at 23.44 MW 10Average17.7 at 24.11 MW 103-1 3. SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES

The sampling and analytical procedures used in this test program conformed to EPA

Reference Methods 1 through 5, and 9 as published in the Federal Register.

3.1 Location of Measurement Sites

EPA Method 1, “Sample Velocity Traverses for Stationary Sources,” was used to select

representative measurement sites. Sample locations are discussed in Section 4. Exact

measurements were verified on site.

3.2 Stack Gas Volumetric Flow Rate

EPA Method 2, “Determination of Stack Gas Ve locity and Volumetric Flow Rates,” was

used at each location to determin e stack gas volumetric flow rates. Standard and Type “S” pitot

tubes meeting EPA specifications and an inclined manometer were used to measure velocity

pressures. A calibrated Type “K ” thermocouple attached directly to the pitot tube was used to

measure stack gas temperature. The stack gas velocity was calculated from the average square

root of the stack gas velocity pressure, aver age stack gas temperature, stack gas molecular

weight, and absolute static pres sure. The volumetric flow rate is the product of velocity and

stack cross-sectional area.

3.3 Stack Gas Dry Molecular Weight

EPA Method 3, “Gas Analysis for the Determ ination of Dry Molecular Weight,” was

used to determine the stack gas dry molecular wei ght at all sampling locations. Fyrite analyzer

readings were conducted fo r oxygen and carbon dioxide.3-2 3.4 Stack Gas Moisture Content

EPA Method 4, “Determination of Moisture Content in St ack Gases,” was used to

determine stack gas moisture content. This method was conducted as part of each particulate

measurement run. The initial and final cont ents of all impingers were determined

gravimetrically.

3.5 Filterable Particulate Matter

EPA Method 5, “Determination of Particulate Emissions from Stationary Sources,” was

used to determine filterable particulate matter. The sampling train consisted of a stainless steel

nozzle, glass-lined probe, heated glass-fiber filter , and a series of impingers filled with deionized

water, followed by a vacuum pump, dry gas meter, and calibrated orifice. The probe and filter

temperatures were maintained at 248 o ± 25 o F. Thermocouples were used to monitor

temperatures of the stack gas, sample probe, filt er, and impinger exit gas. Three 1-hour sampling

runs were conducted at Furnace No. 12 and Furn ace No. 1 baghouse exhausts. Figure 3-1 is a

schematic of the sampling system.

3.6 Visible Emissions

EPA Method 9, “Visual Determination of the Opacity of Emissions from Stationary

Sources,” was used to measure visible emissions from the building roof monitor. One 60-minute

test run was conducted at each test site. Opacity readings were recorded every 15 seconds by a

certified observer.3-3Figure 3-1. EPA Method 5 Sampling TrainOrificeThermometersThermometerDry TestMeterAir-TightPumpMainValveBy-PassValveVacuumGaugeVacuumLineCheckValveIce BathImpingersHeatedAreaFilterHolderTemperature SensorPitotManometerType “S”Pitot TubeProbe4-1 4. PROCESS DESCRIPTION/SAMPLING LOCATIONS

Eramet Marietta, Inc., operates a facility in Marietta, Ohio. The No. 12 Furnace and No.

1 Furnace were tested at the facility as part of this test program. The No. 12 Furnace, a

submerged arc furnace, is rated at 22 MW and util izes two wet scrubbers to control primary and

secondary emissions. The scrubbe rs operate simultaneously and exhaust through a single stack.

The No. 1 Furnace, an electric arc furnace, is rated at 31MW and a maxi mum production rate of

35 tons per hour. A Tap Hole Baghouse controls em issions from the furnace tap hole, and a Main

Baghouse controls emissions from the furnace.

Table 4-1 presents a summary of the sampli ng site location. Figur e 4-1 is a general

schematic of the testing locations.

B A

C

Direction of
Flow

Figure 4-1. Sampling Locations4-2 Table 4-1. Sampling Location Parameters

Stack
Identification Stack I.D.,
Inches

(C) Distance from Nearest
Disturbance No. of Sampling Points Required,
Total Upstream,
Inches

(A) Downstream,
Inches

(B)

Furnace No. 12
Scrubber 95.35” >194.0 368.0 24

Furnace No. 1 Main Baghouse 120” 480.0” 480.0” 24

Furnace No. 1 Tap Hole Baghouse 60”x51” >190.0 95.0 245-1 5. QUALITY ASSURANCE AND QUALITY CONTROL

5.1 Field Sampling

The field sampling quality assurance for this project included the use of calibrated source

sampling equipment, reference test methods, and traceability protocols for recording and

calculating data. The analyti cal quality assurance included use of validated analytical

procedures, calibration of analytic al instruments, and analysis of control samples and blanks.

The calibration and quality control procedures used for this test program are described in the

following subsection, and included in Appendix E of this report.

5.2 Calibration Procedures and Frequency

All manual stack gas sampling equipment was calibrated before the test program in

accordance with the procedures outlined in the Quality Assurance Handbook for Air Pollution

Measurement Systems, Volume III , EPA-600/4-72-027B. Summarized in Table 5-1 are the stack

gas sampling equipment calibrations that were pe rformed in preparation for this project. The

meter boxes were re-calibrated after the test.

Listed in Table 5-2 are the additional cal ibration checks that we re performed on the

sampling equipment on site, just prior to the test ing, to ensure that equipment was not damaged

during transport. Calibration checks were conduct ed before and after each test run. Additional

calibration information is included in Appendix E of this report.5-2 Table 5-1. Field Equipment Calibrations a Equipment Calibrated Against Allowable Error

Method 5 meter box Reference test meter Y +0.02 Y
Δ H@ +0.20 Δ H@ post-test Y +0.05 Y Pitot tube Geometric specifications See EPA Method 2 Thermocouple ASTM-3F thermometer +1.5% Impinger (or condenser thermometer) ASTM-3F +2 o F Dry gas meter
thermometer ASTM-3F +5 o F Probe nozzles Caliper High-low +0.004 in. Barometer NBS traceable barometer +0.1 in.Hg

a As recommended in the Quality Assu rance Handbook for Air Pollution Measurement Systems: Volume III. Stationary Source-Specific Methods. EPA-600/4-77-027b, August 1977.

Table 5-2. Field Checks of Sampling Equipment Equipment Checked Against Allowable Difference Pitot tube Inspection No visible damage Thermocouples ASTM 2F or 3F +1.5% Probe nozzles Caliper High-low ± 0.004 in.APPENDIX A

CALCULATIONSAPPENDIX B

RAW FIELD DATAAPPENDIX C

ANALYTICAL DATAAPPENDIX D

PROCESS DATAAPPENDIX E

QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL