Source Emissions Testing Report Dyno Nobel Inc.

Nitrogen Oxides (NO X ) Testing Dynamic Spiking Procedure

Acid Plants #1 and #2 Cheyenne, Wyoming

Report prepared for: Report prepared by: Dyno Nobel Inc.

8305 Otto Road Cheyenne, Wyoming 82001 Matt McGregor

Technical Writer

Test Date: April 14, 2010

APT Project: DYN0116

## Table of Contents

1. Introduction....................................

................................................ 1

2. Methods.........................................

................................................ 2

3. Test Results Summary............................

...................................... 2

4. Test Program Summary............................

..................................... 4

5. Test Method Details...............................

........................................ 4

Tables

Table 1.1: Contact Personnel.......................

............................... 1

Table 3.1: Acid Plant #1 Test Results Summary..............

.......... 3

Table 3.2: Acid Plant #2 Test Results Summary..............

.......... 3

Table 4.1: Sampling and Analytical Methods Summary.

.............. 4

Appendices

Testing Parameters and Sample Calculations......................... Appendix 1

Field Data......

.................................................................. Appendix 2

Calibration Data and Certificates.......................................... Appendix 3

Schematics....................................................................... Appendix 4APT Project DYN0116 Test Report – Acid Plants #1 & #2 NO X Dynamic Spiking

page 1 1. Introduction

1.1. General

Air Pollution Testing, Inc. (APT) was contracted by Dyno Nobel Inc. to conduct a series of source emissions tests at their facility located in Cheyenne, Laramie County, Wyoming.

The purpose of the testing program was to determine the concentrations and mass emission rates nitrogen oxides (NO X ) from the exhaust of Acid Plants #1 and #2 in serv ice at the facility. Concentration data were combined with concurrently collected oxygen (O 2 ), carbon dioxide (CO 2 ), moisture (H 2 O) and gas velocity data to determine NO X mass emission rates.

The Dyno Nobel Inc. Cheyenne Plant is a nitric acid production facility and as such is subject to Subpart V

of the Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases ( 40 CFR, Part 98 ) rule. The data collected during the testing are be ing used to comply with the above

referenced rule.

Table 1.1 below provides key project personnel, com pany affiliations, telephone and fax

numbers.

Dyno Nobel Inc. : Cheyenne, Wyoming Facility

Acid Plants NO X Dynamic Spiking Testing Program Contact Personnel

Name, Title Company Address Phone, FAX

Mr. Scott Horgen,

Environmental Coordinator Dyno Nobel Inc.

8305 Otto Road Cheyenne, Wyoming 82001 307-771-5609,

307-637-2739

Mr. Chris Keefe, Operations Director Air Pollution Testing, Inc.

5530 Marshall Street Arvada, Colorado 80002 303-420-5949 ext. 24,

303-420-5920

Table 1.1: Contact Personnel

1.2. Sampling Location

The identical sampling locations for Acid Plants #1 and #2 were 24" inside diameter (ID) vertical stacks with two sampling ports arranged 90 degrees apart in accordance with EPA Method 1. The sampling ports were located 15’ upst ream and 105” downstream of any flow disturbances. A schematic of the sampling loc ations and sampling points can beAPT Project DYN0116 Test Report – Acid Plants #1 & #2 NO X Dynamic Spiking

page 2 found in Appendix 4

.

2. Methods

The test program was conducted in accordance with t he following USEPA source

emissions test methods referenced in 40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A

.

• Method 1 – Sample and Velocity Traverses for Stati onary Sources

• Method 2 – Determination of Stack Gas Velocity and Volumetric Flow Rate (Type S Pitot Tube)

• Method 3 – Gas Analysis for the Determination of Dr y Molecular Weight

• Method 4 – Determination of Moisture Content in Sta ck Gases

• Method 7E – Determination of Nitrogen Oxides Emissi ons from Stationary Sources (Instrumental Analyzer Procedure)

3. Test Results Summary

The results of the testing program are summarized i n Tables 3.1 and 3.2. Any emission parameters not found in the tables can be found in Appendix 1 – Testing Parameters and Sample Calculations

.

The following abbreviations are used in the tables:

• Temp. – temperature, degrees Fahrenheit

• dscfm – gas flow rate, dry standard (one atm., 68° F) cubic feet per minute

• %vd – diluent concentration, dry volume percentage

• %vw – moisture content, wet volume percentage

• ppmvd – pollutant concentration; parts per million , dry volume basis

• lb/hr – mass emission rate, pounds per hour

• tons/year – mass emission rate, tons per yearAPT Project DYN0116 Test Report – Acid Plants #1 & #2 NO X Dynamic Spiking

page 3 Dyno Nobel Inc. : Cheyenne, Wyoming Facility

Acid Plant #1 NO X Test Results Summary (April 14, 2010)

Parameter Run #1 Run #2 Run #3 Average

Start time 9:30 10:42 11:57

Stop time 10:30 11:42 12:57

Stack Temp. (°F) 335 335 335 335

Gas flow (dscfm) 8,638 8,620 8,661 8,639

O 2 (%vd) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5

CO 2 (%vd) 0.0 0.5 0.5 0.3

H 2 O (%vw) 3.3 4.4 3.4 3.7

Emissions Data

NO X (ppmvd) 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0

NO X (lb/hr) 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

NO X (tons/year) 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 Table 3.1: Acid Plant #1 Test Results Summary

Dyno Nobel Inc. : Cheyenne, Wyoming Facility

Acid Plant #2 NO X Test Results Summary (April 14, 2010)

Parameter Run #1 Run #2 Run #3 Average

Start time 14:07 15:25 16:40

Stop time 15:07 16:25 17:40

Stack Temp. (°F) 319 319 319 319

Gas flow (dscfm) 7,932 7,932 8,070 7,978

O 2 (%vd) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5

CO 2 (%vd) 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.3

H 2 O (%vw) 3.0 4.2 4.0 3.7

Emissions Data

NO X (ppmvd) 5.4 5.5 5.4 5.4

NO X (lb/hr) 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3

NO X (tons/year) 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 Table 3.2: Acid Plant #2 Test Results SummaryAPT Project DYN0116 Test Report – Acid Plants #1 & #2 NO X Dynamic Spiking

page 4 4. Test Program Summary

APT provided all necessary equipment and labor for the determination of all emissions parameters detailed in Table 4.1 below. At each lo cation, NO X emission levels were determined using an on-site chemiluminescent analyz er. The gas analyzer was housed in a mobile analytical trailer to provide a temperatur e-controlled environment for stable, accurate analyzer response.

Three, 1-hour sample runs were conducted at the max imum achievable load at each unit’s exhaust to determine pollutant concentrations. Con centration data were combined with concurrently collected O 2 , CO 2 , H 2 O and gas velocity data to determine NO X mass emission rates.

All testing was conducted in accordance with the ap propriate EPA Reference Method requirements. All QA/QC requirements detailed in t he appropriate reference test methods were strictly followed. All field data were record ed on appropriate data sheets. All pre-test / post-test equipment calibration / preparation wer e conducted as required in the applicable

reference test methods.

Dyno Nobel Inc. : Cheyenne, Wyoming Facility Sampling and Analytical Methods

Gas Parameter Sampling Method Analytical Method Lab oratory

gas flow Methods 1, 2 draft gauge, thermocouple, pi tot tube

O 2 , CO 2 Method 3 wet chemical

H 2 O Method 4 gravimetric

NO, NO 2 Method 7E chemiluminescent analyzer – dynamic spiking and NO 2 calibration APT,

on-site

Table 4.1: Sampling and Analytical Methods Summary

5. Test Method Details

5.1. Stack Gas Flow, Oxygen, Carbon Dioxide, Moistu re

Stack gas velocity, volumetric flow rate, O 2 , CO 2 , and moisture (H 2 O) content were measured in accordance with EPA Methods 1, 2, 3 and 4.

Each sampling period consisted of conducting a temp erature and differential pressureAPT Project DYN0116 Test Report – Acid Plants #1 & #2 NO X Dynamic Spiking

page 5 traverse of the stack using a K-type thermocouple a nd an S-type pitot tube. Concurrent with each traverse, a sample of gas for moisture de termination was extracted from the

stack at a constant flow rate of no more than 0.75 cubic feet per minute. The gas sample passed through a stainless steel probe, through a s eries of 4 chilled glass impingers, and through a calibrated dry gas meter. Please see Appendix 4 – Schematics for a drawing of the EPA Methods 1, 2 and 4 sampling train.

Prior to sampling, the first two impingers were eac h seeded with 100 milliliters of water. The third impinger was empty. The fourth impinger was seeded with 250 grams of silica gel.

Following sampling, the moisture gain in the imping ers was measured gravimetrically to determine the moisture content of the stack gas. A sample of stack gas was collected in a clean, leak-free Tedlar bag for subsequent diluent (O 2 and CO 2 ) analysis using a wet chemical analyzer.

All of the above data were combined to calculate th e stack gas velocity and volumetric flow rate in units of feet per second (ft/sec), actual c ubic feet per minute (acfm), dry standard (1 atmosphere and 68° F) cubic feet per minute (dscfm) , and pounds per hour (lb/hr).

5.2. NO X Emissions

NO X concentrations were measured in accordance with EP A Method 7E.

Each sampling period consisted of extracting a gas sample from the stack at a constant flow rate of approximately four liters per minute. The sample passed through a refrigeration-type gas conditioner to remove moistu re and into a Thermo Environmental Instruments (TECO) Model 42C chemiluminescent NO X analyzer. The NO X concentration was displayed on the analyzer front panel in units of parts per million, dry volume basis (ppmvd) and logged as one-minute averages to a comp uterized data acquisition system (CDAS). Please see Appendix 4 for a schematic of the EPA Method 7E sampling train

schematic.

Before and after each sampling period, the analyzer was challenged with EPA Protocol 1 calibration gases to calibrate the instruments, to verify linearity of response, and to quantify zero and span drift for the previous sampling perio d. To ensure no system bias, the analyzer calibrations were conducted by introducing all gases to the analyzer at the sampling probe tip at stack pressure.

Following sampling, the reference method CDAS data were averaged in one-minute increments, corrected for instrumental drift, and r eported as average NO X emission concentrations for each sampling period in units of ppmvw.APT Project DYN0116 Test Report – Acid Plants #1 & #2 NO X Dynamic Spiking

page 6 5.2.1. Dynamic Spiking

EPA requirements for the acid plant NO X testing included use of a dilution system to avoid a moisture removal system, calibration with NO 2 standards rather than NO standards, and use of the dynamic spiking procedures from Method 7 E. All of these procedures were

followed.

A critical orifice and eductor dilution probe assem bly was used to dilute the stack gas at a 10:1 ratio to allow the Method 7E analyzer to read on a wet basis. EPA Protocol NO 2 (balance nitrogen) calibration standards of 9.94 pp mv and 21.2 ppmv were used to conduct the Method 7E calibrations through the dilution pro be. The dilution factor was then corrected electronically with a 10x multiplier in t he data acquisition system to allow the logged data to be true wet-basis concentration valu es.

The 9.94 ppmv NO 2 standard and an additional 48.9 ppmv NO 2 (balance nitrogen) calibration standard were used for the dynamic spik ing. The dynamic spiking was performed by introducing the low and high level spi ke gases into the stack gas matrix through the same critical orifice eductor dilution probe assembly, using an additional critical orifice. The spike gas dilution ratio, which was n ecessary to allow calculation of spike recovery, was determined by spiking the two gases i nto zero air. The native stack level was determined immediately before and after each 5- minute spiking period, and the pre/post, drift-corrected average was used for spik e recovery calculations.

At each of the two acid plant stacks, the two spike gases were used before and after all testing, and every check met both the recovery perc entage and absolute error limits of

Method 7E.