1

MEMORANDUM

DATE: August 9, 2013

SUBJECT: Ferroalloys 2013 Test Report Review

FROM: Bradley Nelson, EC/R, Inc.

TO: Conrad Chin, EPA/OAQPS/SPPD/MMG

1.0 PURPOSE

The purpose of this memorandum is to present a summary and review of the reported results of 

emission testing at the Eramet Marietta (Eramet) and Felman Production (Felman) ferroalloys 

production facilities, conducted in March 2013. The emission testing was performed in response to 

a December 2012 Information Collection Request (ICR) for additional pollutant test data from the 

furnace and tapping operations. Testing at Eramet was conducted on March 4-7, 2013 and the test 

report was submitted to EPA on April 22, 2013. Testing at Felman was conducted on March 13-20, 

2013 and the test report was submitted to EPA on June 20, 2013. Emission data reported and 

reviewed in this memo are for the following pollutants of interest emitted in exhaust gases from 

control devices (i.e., process emissions): particulate matter (PM), hydrochloric acid (HCl), 

manganese (Mn), lead (Pb), arsenic (As), cadmium (Cd), nickel (Ni), chromium (Cr), mercury 

(Hg), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), polychlorinated dibenzo dioxins (PCDDs), 

polychlorinated dibenzo furans (PCDFs), and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH). Visible 

emissions (VE) observations were made during stack testing but are not reviewed in this memo. 

These emission data are being evaluated as part of the “risk and technology review” (RTR) for the 

Ferroalloy Production source category. 

2.0 BACKGROUND

Under the "technology review" provision of CAA section 112(d)(6), EPA is required to review 

maximum achievable control technology (MACT) standards previously issued for emissions of 

hazardous air pollutants (HAP) and to revise them "as necessary (taking into account developments 

in practices, processes and control technologies)" no less frequently than every 8 years. Under the 

"residual risk" provision of the CAA section 112(f), EPA must evaluate the MACT standards within 

8 years after promulgation and promulgate standards if required to provide an ample margin of 

safety to protect public health or prevent an adverse environmental effect. EPA is currently 
DRAFT FOR INTERNAL REVIEW 8-9-13

conducting and RTR to address these review requirements for the Ferroalloys Production source 

category.

3.0 FERROALLOY FACILITY SUMMARY

The following section provides a brief overview of the submitted test reports by the ferroalloy

production facilities. Eramet submitted a test report1on April 22, 2013 for stack testing conducted 

in March 2013. Felman submitted two test reports2on June 24, 2013 for March 2013 testing 

conducted on Furnaces 2 and 5.

Eramet Marietta

The Eramet facility is located in Marietta, Ohio and produces ferromanganese (FeMn) and 

silicomanganese (SiMn) using two furnaces, identified as Furnace 1 and Furnace 12. Furnace 1 is a 

submerged arc furnace rated at 30 megawatts (MW). Primary process emissions from the furnace 

(e.g., melting) are controlled by a negative pressure fabric filter, installed in 2011 to replace a wet 

scrubber system. A separate fabric filter system is used to control process fugitive (captured 

secondary) emissions from tapping of this furnace. Furnace 12 furnace is a submerged arc furnace 

rated at 22 MW and is equipped with two wet scrubbers to control primary and secondary emissions 

from the furnace and tapping. The scrubbers operate simultaneously and exhaust through a single 

stack. The facility has a third furnace, EAF 18, which is permitted, but is considered to be 

inoperable until extensive repair can be made to the furnace. Other HAP emission sources include: 

a MOR process controlled by a positive-pressure baghouse which also controls emissions captured 

from casting of the product from MOR, and a crushing and sizing system (C2P) that is controlled 

by three negative pressure baghouses. There are also fugitive emissions that are emitted from each 

of these emissions sources (i.e., those that escape capture), in addition to the fugitive emissions 

from the uncontrolled casting operations for Furnace 1 and Furnace 12.During the March 2012 

testing, Furnace 1 was producing FeMn and Furnace 12 was producing SiMn.

Felman Production Inc.

The Felman facility is located in New Haven, West Virginia and produces SiMn using three 

furnaces identified as Furnace 2, Furnace 5, and Furnace 7. Furnaces 2, 5, and 7 are open 

submerged arc furnaces rated at 32, 20, and 20 MW respectively. Each of these furnaces is

equipped with a positive-pressure baghouse to limit primary and secondary process emissions of 

PM and metal HAP from the melting and tapping from their respective furnace, as well as 

controlling emissions from casting operations associated with each furnace. The facility has a 

 

1 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Information Collection Request Emission Summary Report: EAF No. 12 

Scrubber, EAF No. 1 Main Baghouse, EAF No. 1 Tap Hole Baghouse, Eramet Marietta Inc., Marietta, Ohio, April 

2013.

2 Emission Test Report Felman Production Inc., Furnace #2 Baghouse (ID# 001-01); and Emission Test Report Felman 

Production Inc., Furnace #5 Baghouse (ID# 001-02), March 2013.
DRAFT FOR INTERNAL REVIEW 8-9-13

crushing and sizing system controlled using a negative pressure baghouse. There are also fugitive

emissions that are emitted from each of these emissions sources. Felman produced SiMn in the two

furnaces during the March 2013 testing.

4.0 FERROALLOY TEST DATA SUMMARY

The following section provides a summary of each of the reported PM and hazardous air pollutants 

(HAP) concentrations and emissions from 2013 test reports submitted by Eramet Marietta, Inc. and 

Felman. The summary also includes a discussion of the quality of the field sampling, and analytical 

results.

Particulate Matter

The test report from Eramet provided PM results from Furnaces 1 and 12, and the Furnace 1 

tapping baghouse. The Eramet PM tests were conducted using a combined EPA Method 5 and 

EPA Method 29 sampling train. Felman provided PM results from Furnaces 2 and 5 using EPA 

Method 5D. A summary of the results for Eramet and Felman are provided in Table 1. For 

comparison to the PM emission rates shown in the test reports, EC/R independently calculated the 

PM emission rate using the stack gas parameters and the analytical data from the test reports. These 

PM emission rates calculated by EC/R are shown in the tables as “Calculated PM Emissions 

(lb/hr).”

Generally, PM emission rates were calculated as follows:

( )

 

 

 

An example of the specific PM emission calculation by EC/R for Run 1 at the Eramet Furnace 1 

Main Baghouse is shown below:

(11.3 mg + 0.4 mg)/(207.079dscf)*(206,660dscf/min)*(g/1000 mg)*(lb/453.59 g)*(60 min/hr) = 

1.54 lb/hr

Where;

11.3 mg = Reported filter particulate weight gain;

0.4 mg = Reported acetone probe rinse weight gain;

207.079 dscf = Reported volume of dry gas sampled corrected to standard conditions;
DRAFT FOR INTERNAL REVIEW 8-9-13

202,660 dscf/min = Reported volumetric flow rate – dry basis at standard conditions;

g/1000 mg = Unit conversion of particulate milligrams to grams;

lb/453.59 g = Unit conversion of particulate grams to pounds;

60 min/hr = Unit conversion of minutes to hours.

As shown in the Table 1, the calculated PM emissions rates for Eramet were comparable to the 

reported PM emission rates in the test report. However, there are some differences in the reported 

and calculated PM emissions for Felman. Based on a review of the reported results, it appears that 

the reported emission rates in the test report were calculated from the truncated PM concentration

value rather than the full calculation value. As an example, the Run 1 PM concentration for 

Furnace 2 is reported as 0.0004 grains per dry standard cubic feet (gr/dscf). The PM emission rate 

calculates to be 1.54 pounds per hour (lb/hr) using this concentration and the reported volumetric 

flow rate. However, when the significant digits are expanded to three, the PM concentration 

becomes 0.000376 gr/dscf, and the PM emission rate calculates to be 1.448 lb/hr. 

Metal Hazardous Air Pollutants

Eramet reported emissions for manganese (Mn), arsenic (As), cadmium (Cd), chromium (Cr), 

mercury (Hg), lead (Pb), and nickel (Ni) in their test report for the Furnace 1 baghouse outlet, the 

Furnace 12 scrubber outlet, and the Furnace 1 tapping baghouse. The Mn, As, Cd, Cr, Pb, and Ni 

results were measured using EPA Method 29 and the Hg test results were measured using EPA 

Method 30B. Felman reported Furnaces 2 and 5 emissions of Mn, As, Cd, Cr, Pb, and Ni using 

EPA Method 29 and Hg using EPA Method 30B.

The reported results of the Mn, As, Cd, Cr, Pb, and Ni stack tests and the values calculated by EC/R 

using the stack gas parameters and the analytical results are provided in Tables 2 through 7 

respectively. The Hg reported test results and the calculated values using the stack gas parameters 

and the analytical results are provided in Tables 8 and 9. In addition, Tables 8 and 9 provide the 

quality assurance (QA) results of the EPA Method 30B testing, which include comparison of the 

paired samples and percent recovery of the spiked samples. The QA procedures for EPA Method 

30B are designed to provide data of high and known quality for Hg emissions testing and for 

relative accuracy test audits (RATA) testing of Hg monitoring systems, including continuous 

emissions monitoring systems (CEMS) and sorbent trap monitors. These QA procedures include the 

collection of paired sampling sorbent traps to determine measurement precision and verify 

acceptability of the measured emissions data. In addition, a field recovery test which assesses 

recovery of an elemental Hg spike to determine measurement bias is also used to verify data 

acceptability.
DRAFT FOR INTERNAL REVIEW 8-9-13

Table 1. Summary of 2013 Eramet Marietta and Felman Production PM Test Results

Emission Source Run 

Number

Reported PM 

Concentration 

(gr/dscf)

Reported PM 

Emissions(lb/hr)1

Calculated PM 

Emissions(lb/hr)2

Eramet Marietta

Furnace 1 Baghouse 

Outlet

1 0.00087 1.54 1.545

2 0.00063 1.09 1.093

3 0.00119 1.91 1.909

Average 0.00090 1.52 1.515

Furnace 1 Tapping 

Baghouse Outlet

1 0.00148 0.63 0.626

2 0.00122 0.51 0.506

3 0.00123 0.49 0.494

Average 0.00131 0.54 0.542

Furnace 12 Scrubber 

Outlet

1 0.00936 11.43 11.433

2 0.00987 12.24 12.243

3 0.01060 12.51 12.507

Average 0.00994 12.06 12.061

Felman Production

Furnace 2 Baghouse 

Outlet

1 0.0004 1.54 1.448

2 0.0003 1.15 1.210

3 0.0003 1.16 1.334

Average 0.0003 1.28 1.330

Furnace 5 Baghouse 

Outlet

1 0.0003 0.64 0.564

2 0.0003 0.85 0.817

3 0.0004 0.86 0.803

Average 0.0003 0.78 0.728

1 Emission values reported in submitted test report.

2 Emission values calculated by EC/R from stack gas parameters and analytical data in test report.
DRAFT FOR INTERNAL REVIEW 8-9-13

Table 2. Summary of 2013 Eramet Marietta and Felman Production 

Manganese (Mn) Test Results

Emission Source Run 

Number

Reported Mn

Concentration 

(μg/dscm)

Reported Mn

Emissions(lb/hr)1

Calculated Mn

Emissions(lb/hr)2

Eramet Marietta

Furnace 1 Baghouse 

Outlet

1 582 0.450 0.451

2 427 0.323 0.323

3 680 0.510 0.510

Average 563 0.428 0.428

Furnace 1 Tapping 

Baghouse Outlet

1 584 0.108 0.108

2 589 0.107 0.107

3 602 0.107 0.107

Average 592 0.107 0.107

Furnace 12 Scrubber 

Outlet

1 2870 1.53 1.532

2 2380 1.29 1.288

3 2470 1.32 1.319

Average 2570 1.38 1.380

Felman Production

Furnace 2 Baghouse 

Outlet

1 568.11 0.9567 0.954

2 168.33 0.2812 0.279

3 211.26 0.3557 0.353

Average 315.90 0.5312 0.529

Furnace 5 Baghouse 

Outlet

1 105.47 0.0979 0.0966

2 94.10 0.0877 0.0863

3 69.98 0.0656 0.0642

Average 89.85 0.0837 0.0824

1 Emission values reported in submitted test report.

2 Emission values calculated by EC/R from stack gas parameters and analytical data in test report.
DRAFT FOR INTERNAL REVIEW 8-9-13

Table 3. Summary of 2013 Eramet Marietta and Felman Production 

Arsenic (As) Test Results

Emission Source Run 

Number

Reported As

Concentration 

(μg/dscm)

Reported As

Emissions(lb/hr)1

Calculated As

Emissions(lb/hr)2

Eramet Marietta

Furnace 1 Baghouse 

Outlet

1 0.205 0.000158 0.0000792 3

2 0.259 0.000196 0.0000979 3

3 0.259 0.000194 0.0000971 3

Average 0.241 0.000183 0.0000914

Furnace 1 Tapping 

Baghouse Outlet

1 0.260 0.0000482 0.0000241 3

2 0.270 0.0000490 0.0000245 3

3 0.270 0.0000478 0.0000239 3

Average 0.267 0.0000483 0.0000241

Furnace 12 Scrubber 

Outlet

1 0.834 0.000445 0.000433 3

2 0.649 0.000352 0.000341 3

3 0.721 0.000384 0.000374 3

Average 0.734 0.000394 0.000383

Felman Production

Furnace 2 Baghouse 

Outlet

1 0.34 0.0006 0.000284 3

2 0.34 0.0006 0.000288 3

3 0.33 0.0006 0.000278 3

Average 0.34 0.0006 0.000283

Furnace 5 Baghouse 

Outlet

1 0.35 0.0003 0.000161 3

2 0.34 0.0003 0.000160 3

3 0.35 0.0003 0.000164 3

Average 0.35 0.0003 0.000162

1 Emission values reported in submitted test report.

2 Emission values calculated by EC/R from stack gas parameters and analytical data in test report.

3 One or more of the analytical fractions were reported below the detection limit for this test run. The emission rate was 

calculated using 1⁄2 of the detection limit.
DRAFT FOR INTERNAL REVIEW 8-9-13

Table 4. Summary of 2013 Eramet Marietta and Felman Production 

Cadmium (Cd) Test Results

Emission Source Run 

Number

Reported Cd

Concentration 

(μg/dscm)

Reported Cd

Emissions(lb/hr)1

Calculated Cd

Emissions(lb/hr)2

Eramet Marietta

Furnace 1 Baghouse 

Outlet

1 0.737 0.000570 0.000567 3

2 0.587 0.000444 0.000440 3

3 0.774 0.000581 0.000577 3

Average 0.699 0.000532 0.000528

Furnace 1 Tapping 

Baghouse Outlet

1 0.0708 0.0000131 0.0000121 3

2 0.0715 0.0000130 0.0000120 3

3 0.0567 0.0000100 0.0000090 3

Average 0.0664 0.0000120 0.0000110

Furnace 12 Scrubber 

Outlet

1 10.1 0.00537 0.00537 3

2 13.8 0.00748 0.00748 3

3 12.3 0.00653 0.00653 3

Average 12.0 0.00646 0.00646

Felman Production

Furnace 2 Baghouse 

Outlet

1 0.0830.0001

3

0.0000710 3

2 0.0930.0001

3

0.0000720 3

3 0.0830.0001

3

0.0000695 3

Average 0.08 0.0001 0.0000708

Furnace 5 Baghouse 

Outlet

1 0.0930.0001

3

0.0000403 3

2 0.0930.0001

3

0.0000401 3

3 0.0930.0001

3

0.0000410 3

Average 0.09 0.0001 0.0000405

1 Emission values reported in submitted test report.

2 Emission values calculated by EC/R from stack gas parameters and analytical data in test report.

3 One or more of the analytical fractions were reported below the detection limit for this test run. The emission rate was 

calculated using 1⁄2 of the detection limit.
DRAFT FOR INTERNAL REVIEW 8-9-13

Table 5. Summary of 2013 Eramet Marietta and Felman Production 

Chromium (Cr) Test Results

Emission Source Run 

Number

Reported Cr

Concentration 

(μg/dscm)

Reported Cr

Emissions(lb/hr)1

Calculated Cr

Emissions(lb/hr)2

Eramet Marietta

Furnace 1 Baghouse 

Outlet

1 0.288 0.000223 0.000223

2 0.187 0.000142 0.000142

3 0.352 0.000177 0.000015

Average 0.472 0.000181 0.000127

Furnace 1 Tapping 

Baghouse Outlet

1 1.50 0.000278 0.000278

2 1.28 0.000232 0.000232

3 0.735 0.000130 0.000130

Average 1.17 0.000213 0.000213

Furnace 12 Scrubber 

Outlet

1 0.748 0.000399 0.000366

2 0.656 0.000356 0.000356

3 0.687 0.000366 0.000366

Average 0.697 0.000374 0.000363

Felman Production

Furnace 2 Baghouse 

Outlet

1 0.66 0.0011 0.000596

2 1.97 0.0033 0.00276

3 1.07 0.0018 0.00131

Average 1.23 0.0021 0.00156

Furnace 5 Baghouse 

Outlet

1 1.29 0.0012 0.000903

2 6.59 0.0061 0.00585

3 0.63 0.0006 0.000295

Average 2.83 0.0026 0.00235

1 Emission values reported in submitted test report.

2 Emission values calculated by EC/R from stack gas parameters and analytical data in test report.
DRAFT FOR INTERNAL REVIEW 8-9-13

Table 6. Summary of 2013 Eramet Marietta and Felman Production 

Lead (Pb) Test Results

Emission Source Run 

Number

Reported Pb

Concentration 

(μg/dscm)

Reported Pb

Emissions(lb/hr)1

Calculated Pb

Emissions(lb/hr)2

Eramet Marietta

Furnace 1 Baghouse 

Outlet

1 4.39 0.00340 0.00340

2 3.80 0.00288 0.00288

3 5.57 0.00418 0.00418

Average 4.59 0.00348 0.00348

Furnace 1 Tapping 

Baghouse Outlet

1 20.7 0.00383 0.00383

2 21.2 0.00384 0.00384

3 21.1 0.00373 0.00373

Average 21.0 0.00380 0.00380

Furnace 12 Scrubber 

Outlet

1 46.8 0.0250 0.00250

2 57.2 0.0310 0.00310

3 57.5 0.0307 0.00307

Average 53.8 0.0289 0.000363

Felman Production

Furnace 2 Baghouse 

Outlet

1 8.43 0.0142 0.0140

2 4.31 0.0072 0.00696

3 4.67 0.0079 0.00763

Average 5.80 0.0098 0.00951

Furnace 5 Baghouse 

Outlet

1 4.50 0.0042 0.00404

2 6.23 0.0058 0.00567

3 2.45 0.0023 0.00216

Average 4.39 0.0041 0.00396

1 Emission values reported in submitted test report.

2 Emission values calculated by EC/R from stack gas parameters and analytical data in test report.
DRAFT FOR INTERNAL REVIEW 8-9-13

Table 7. Summary of 2013 Eramet Marietta and Felman Production 

Nickel (Ni) Test Results

Emission Source Run 

Number

Reported Ni

Concentration 

(μg/dscm)

Reported Ni

Emissions(lb/hr)1

Calculated Ni

Emissions(lb/hr)2

Eramet Marietta

Furnace 1 Baghouse 

Outlet

1 1.56 0.00121 0.00120

2 0.952 0.000720 0.000720

3 0.360 0.000270 0.000241

Average 0.957 0.000733 0.000721

Furnace 1 Tapping 

Baghouse Outlet

1 2.20 0.000408 0.000408

2 1.59 0.000288 0.000288

3 0.905 0.000160 0.000160

Average 1.57 0.000286 0.000286

Furnace 12 Scrubber 

Outlet

1 0.0901 0.0000481 0.0000481

2 0.334 0.000181 0.000181

3 0.0775 0.0000413 0.0000351

Average 0.167 0.0000902 0.0000881

Felman Production

Furnace 2 Baghouse 

Outlet

1 0.79 0.0013 0.000854

2 1.91 0.0032 0.00271

3 1.50 0.0025 0.00206

Average 1.40 0.0024 0.00187

Furnace 5 Baghouse 

Outlet

1 0.99 0.0009 0.000647

2 2.53 0.0024 0.00208

3 0.75 0.0007 0.000428

Average 1.42 0.0013 0.00105

1 Emission values reported in submitted test report.

2 Emission values calculated by EC/R from stack gas parameters and analytical data in test report.
12

Table 8. Summary of 2013 Eramet Marietta Mercury (Hg) Test Results

Emission Source Spiked/ 

Unspiked

Run 

Number

Reported Hg 

Concentration 

(μg/dscm)

Reported Hg 

Emissions 

(lb/hr)1

Calculated Hg 

Emissions 

(lb/hr)2

Sample Spike 

Recovery (%)

Paired Sample 

Agreement 

(%)

Furnace 1 Baghouse 

Outlet

Unspiked

1 29.91 0.0234 0.0232 --- ---

2 43.52 0.0333 0.0329 --- ---

3 44.37 0.0361 0.0356 --- ---

Average 39.263 0.0309 0.0305 --- ---

Spiked

1 27.30 0.0213 0.0211 89.70 4.6

2 34.47 0.0264 0.0261 72.84 11.6

3 44.30 0.0360 0.0355 99.77 0.1

Average 35.359 0.0279 0.0276 --- ---

Furnace 1 Baghouse 

Tapping Outlet

Unspiked

1 0.03 0.00000551 0.00000551 --- ---

2 0.01 0.00000269 0.00000268 --- ---

3 0.02 0.00000332 0.00000331 --- ---

Average 0.021 0.00000384 0.00000384 --- ---

Spiked

1 0.003 0.000000491 0.000000246 98.10 91.5

2 0.331 0.0000601 0.0000600 101.00 91.4

3 0.004 0.000000627 0.000000313 98.14 82.8

Average 0.112 0.0000204 0.0000202

Furnace 12 Scrubber 

Outlet

Unspiked

1 2.24 0.00126 0.00119 --- ---

2 2.98 0.00170 0.00162 --- ---

3 2.85 0.00156 0.00147 --- ---

Average 2.688 0.00151 0.00143 --- ---

Spiked

1 2.23 0.00126 0.00119 99.98 0.2

2 1.43 0.000814 0.000776 94.80 35.1

3 0.51 0.000280 0.000264 92.54 69.5

Average 1.390 0.000785 0.000743

1 Emission values reported in submitted test report.

2 Emission values calculated by EC/R from stack gas parameters and analytical data in test report.
DRAFT FOR INTERNAL REVIEW 8-9-13

Table 9. Summary of 2013 Felman Production Mercury (Hg) Test Results

Emission Source Sample Set Run 

Number

Reported Hg 

Concentration 

(μg/dscm)

Reported Hg 

Emissions 

(lb/hr)1

Calculated Hg 

Emissions 

(lb/hr)2

Sample Spike 

Recovery (%)

Paired Sample 

Agreement 

(%)

Furnace 2 Baghouse 

Outlet

1

1 0.40 0.000594 0.000594 --- ---

2 0.45 0.000664 0.000665 --- ---

3 0.55 0.000808 0.000808 --- ---

Average 0.467 0.000689 0.000689 --- ---

2

1 0.36 0.000529 0.000529 --- 5.7

2 0.49 0.000721 0.000721 112.7 4.0

3 0.51 0.000743 0.000743 --- 4.2

Average 0.453 0.000664 0.000664 --- ---

Furnace 5Baghouse

Outlet

1

1 0.0208 0.0000151 0.0000151 --- ---

2 0.0273 0.0000197 0.0000197 --- ---

3 0.0355 0.0000256 0.0000256 --- ---

Average 0.0279 0.0000201 0.0000201 --- ---

2

1 0.0176 0.0000128 0.0000128 --- 8.3

2 0.0228 0.0000165 0.0000165 --- 8.9

3 0.0198 0.0000143 0.0000143 103.0 28.4

Average 0.0201 0.0000145 0.0000145 --- ---

1 Emission values reported in submitted test report.

2 Emission values calculated by EC/R from stack gas parameters and analytical data in test report.
14

A comparison of the reported Mn concentration and emissions rate and the Mn emission rate 

calculated by EC/R using the stack gas parameters and the analytical data is provided in Table 2. 

The Eramet Mn emission results were identical to the Mn emissions calculated by EC/R, but 

there was a slight difference between the reported Mn emissions from Felman and the calculated 

Mn emission rate by EC/R. This is because the Felman test results were not corrected for the 

field blank analytical results, whereas the EC/R emission calculations corrected the analytical 

results for the field blank, which reported a total of 8.25 micrograms (μg) of Mn. The reported 

concentrations and emission rates provided in the Eramet test report included the field blank 

correction of the Mn test runs. A summary of the results is provided in Table 2.

The As emission results in Table 3 show some differences in the reported results for both 

Eramet and Felman and the emission rates calculated by EC/R. The difference in calculated 

emission values is due to the treatment of analytical non-detects for As. In cases where the 

analytical results were reported as non-detect, Eramet and Felman used the detection limit to 

calculate the concentration and emission rate. The As emissions calculated by EC/R used 1⁄2 of 

the detection limit for analytical results reported below the detection limit. The use of 1⁄2 of the 

detection limit for calculating emission rates from analytical data results reported below the 

detection limit is based on EPA’s revised procedures3for developing emission factors. 

The Cd emission results calculated by EC/R were comparable to the reported emissions by 

Eramet. The slight differences in values are due to the back half (sample contents after the filter) 

analytical results being reported below the detection limit. Eramet used the detection limit to 

calculate the total analytical results, whereas EC/R used 1⁄2 of the detection limit to calculate the 

analytical result. There was a difference in the calculated emission rates for Cd between the 

reported results from Felman and the EC/R calculated emission rate. This difference is the result 

of the analytical results being reported below the detection limit for Cd. The Felman test report 

used the detection limit to calculate the Cd concentration and emission rate, whereas EC/R used 

1⁄2 the detection limit in their emission calculation. A summary of the test data is provided in 

Table 4.

A comparison of the Eramet reported Cr emission results and the emissions results calculated by 

EC/R were nearly identical with the exception of a few runs. The differences in values are due 

to the back half (sample contents after the filter) analytical results being reported below the 

detection limit. Eramet used the detection limit to calculate the total analytical results, whereas 

EC/R used 1⁄2 of the detection limit to calculate the total analytical result. There were differences

in the calculated emission rates for Cr between the reported results from Felman and the EC/R 

calculated emission rate. The difference is because the analytical results from Felman were not 

corrected for the field blank of 1.80 μg, and the EC/R calculated results included this correction. 

A summary of the test results is provided in Table 4.

 

3 Recommended Procedures for Development of Emissions Factors and Use of the WebFIRE Emissions Factor 

Database, Revised Draft Report, December 17, 2010. 

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/efpac/procedures/procedures_draft122010.pdf
DRAFT FOR INTERNAL REVIEW 8-9-13

The Pb results reported in the test reports were comparable to the Pb emissions calculated by 

EC/R for Eramet. There was a slight difference in the Felman and EC/R Pb emissions because 

the Felman test report concentrations and emissions were not field blank corrected, whereas the 

EC/R calculated emissions include the field blank correction. The field blank for the Felman test 

was reported as 0.84 μg. The results from the test reports and the calculated EC/R emissions are 

provided in Table 6.

As shown in Table 7, the emission results for Ni calculated by EC/R were comparable to the 

reported emissions by Eramet. The slight differences in the emissions are a result of back half 

(sample contents after the filter) analytical results being reported below the detection limit. To 

calculate the total analytical result, Eramet used the detection limit, whereas EC/R used 1⁄2 of the 

detection limit to calculate the total analytical result. The emission rates reported in the Felman 

test report were higher than the EC/R calculated emission rates. The reason for this is because 

the test report did not correct for a field blank Ni result of 1.69 μg. The EC/R calculated results 

include this field blank correction for Ni in the emission results.

The Hg concentrations were measured using EPA Method 30B for both of the facilities. The 

analytical results for all of the Hg runs from all of the test sites were measured above the 

detection limit. The Hg result for the run blank at Eramet was measured to be 2.37 nanograms 

(ng). The Hg result for the field blank and trip blank for the Felman tests averaged 1.60 ng and 

1.21 ng respectively. The facilities each included spiked sorbent trap runs with the Hg test runs 

to meet the QA requirements of the method, but these spiked sorbent traps were collected using 

different procedures. The spiked sorbent traps are used to assess the recovery of elemental Hg 

spike to determine measurement bias, and are also used to verify data acceptability. Eramet 

collected a spiked and unspiked sorbent trap for each test run, whereas Felman collected one 

spiked sorbent trap per 3-run test. Tables 8 and 9 list the sample spike recovery percentages for 

each of the sorbent traps, and the paired sample agreement for each of the sorbent trap pairs. 

There were some differences in the paired sample agreement for the sorbent trapped pairs at 

Eramet. Only 2 of the 3 runs collected at Furnace 1, and 1 of 3 runs collected at Furnace 12 meet 

the less than or equal to 10% criteria for paired sample agreement for concentrations greater than 

1 microgram per dry standard cubic meter (μg/dscm). The Furnace 1 tapping baghouse paired 

sample agreements were all greater than 20% criteria for samples less than or equal to 1 

μg/dscm, but the absolute differences of the paired sample agreements were less than 0.2 

μg/dscm. Therefore all of the runs were used to calculate the average Hg emission rate. The 

paired sample agreements for Felman were less than 10% for all of the runs except for Run 3 on 

Furnace 5. This run was omitted from the calculation of the average. A summary of the Hg 

emissions and the QA/QC results for Eramet and Felman are provided in Table 8 and 9 

respectively.
DRAFT FOR INTERNAL REVIEW 8-9-13

Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons

The polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) emissions were measured at both Eramet and 

Felman using California Air Resources Board Method 429 (CARB 429). The results are 

presented in Tables 10 and 11. 

The reported emission results for the Eramet tests were significantly different for the Furnace 1 

baghouse outlet in comparison to the EC/R calculated results. A review of the test report 

calculations found an error in the reported catch for naphthalene. The analytical laboratory 

report reported the Run 1 naphthalene result to be 143,000 nanograms (ng) for the Furnace 1 

baghouse outlet. The run summary in the test report listed the Run 1 naphthalene result to be 

1,431,690 ng. This appears to be a typographical error in the test report, which caused the 

reported emission rate to be much higher than the emissions calculated by EC/R. The other test 

results for the Eramet emission sources and PAHs were all comparable to the calculated 

emissions by EC/R. The sample to blank train PAH mass ratio for these analyses were less than 

five and no further corrections to the sample data were needed.

The Felman PAH results reported in the test report matched the laboratory analysis report 

provided in the test report appendix. The reported emission results for Felman were comparable 

to the calculated emissions by EC/R, with the exception of benzo(a)pyrene, perylene, and 

dibenzo(a,h)anthracene. These compounds reported non-detects in the analytical report and the 

detection limit was used in the test report to calculate the emission rate. The emissions by EC/R 

were calculated using 1⁄2 the detection limit for these compounds. There were some detected 

values for the train and trip blank in the Felman samples, however the sample to blank train PAH 

mass ratio was less than five and no further corrections to the sample data were needed.

Hydrochloric Acid

The hydrochloric acid (HCl) emissions were measured using EPA Method 26 at Eramet and EPA 

method 26A at Felman. At Eramet, HCl data were collected at the outlet of the Furnace 1 

baghouse, the outlet of the Furnace 1 tapping baghouse, and the outlet of the Furnace 12 

scrubber. Felman measured HCl using EPA Method 26A at the baghouse outlets of Furnace 2 

and Furnace 5. The test results for the Eramet and Felman HCl emissions are provided in Table 

12. The analytical results for all of the runs for the Eramet tests were measured as non-detect. In 

the test report, the detection limit was used to determine the total HCl in the sample and to 

calculate the reported HCl emission rate. By contrast, EC/R calculated the HCl emission rates in 

Table 12 using 1⁄2 of detection limit based on guidelines in EPA’s revised procedures for 

developing emission factors. 
DRAFT FOR INTERNAL REVIEW 8-9-13

Table 10. Summary of 2013 Eramet Marietta PAH Test Results

Emission Source

Reported Average

Concentration 

(ng/dscm)

Reported Average 

Emissions (lb/hr)1

Calculated Emissions 

(lb/hr)2

Furnace 1 Baghouse Outlet

Naphthalene 375000 0.27337 0.06833

2-Methylnaphthalene 12900 0.00963 0.00963

Acenaphthylene 64600 0.04850 0.04836

Acenaphthene 7600 0.00569 0.00569

Fluorene 6770 0.00505 0.00512

Phenanthrene 184000 0.13603 0.13835

Anthracene 26800 0.01997 0.02014

Fluoranthene 169000 0.12522 0.12758

Pyrene 131000 0.09722 0.09876

Benzo(a)Anthracene 20900 0.01563 0.01583

Chrysene 60300 0.04453 0.04584

Benzo(b)Fluoranthene 20300 0.01497 0.01536

Benzo(k)Fluoranthene 5260 0.00390 0.00401

Benzo(e)Pyrene 28600 0.02088 0.02143

Benzo(a)Pyrene 2900 0.00215 0.00221

Perylene 288 0.00021 0.00022

Indeno(1,2,3-cd)Pyrene 396 0.00029 0.00030

Dibenzo(a,h)Anthracene 96.8 0.00007 0.00007

Benzo(g,h,i)Perylene 585 0.00043 0.00046

Total PAH 1117296 0.82374 0.62768

Furnace 12 Scrubber Outlet

Naphthalene 24000 0.01362 0.01418

2-Methylnaphthalene 6890 0.00392 0.00393

Acenaphthylene 11100 0.00635 0.00634

Acenaphthene 2690 0.00153 0.00153

Fluorene 4820 0.00276 0.00277

Phenanthrene 21100 0.01199 0.01202

Anthracene 4630 0.00262 0.00264

Fluoranthene 8370 0.00476 0.00480

Pyrene 7430 0.00423 0.00426

Benzo(a)Anthracene 537 0.00031 0.00031

Chrysene 1000 0.00057 0.00059

Benzo(b)Fluoranthene 556 0.00032 0.00033

Benzo(k)Fluoranthene 404 0.00023 0.00023

Benzo(e)Pyrene 499 0.00028 0.00030

Benzo(a)Pyrene 90.2 0.00005 0.00006

Perylene 8.99 0.00001 0.00001

Indeno(1,2,3-cd)Pyrene 122 0.00007 0.00007

Dibenzo(a,h)Anthracene 39.8 0.00002 0.00002

Benzo(g,h,i)Perylene 174 0.00010 0.00012

Total PAH 94460.99 0.05376 0.05450
DRAFT FOR INTERNAL REVIEW 8-9-13

Table 10. Summary of 2012 Eramet Marietta PAH Test Results (Continued)

Emission Source

Reported Average

Concentration 

(ng/dscm)

Reported Average

Emissions (lb/hr)1

Calculated Emissions 

(lb/hr)2

Furnace 1 Tapping Baghouse Outlet

Naphthalene 14700 0.002866 0.003057

2-Methylnaphthalene 9490 0.001847 0.001852

Acenaphthylene 7690 0.001493 0.001495

Acenaphthene 3720 0.000723 0.000726

Fluorene 4170 0.000811 0.000835

Phenanthrene 14500 0.002822 0.002834

Anthracene 2860 0.000556 0.000558

Fluoranthene 2800 0.000547 0.000552

Pyrene 2160 0.000421 0.000426

Benzo(a)Anthracene 233 0.000045 0.000046

Chrysene 393 0.000077 0.000078

Benzo(b)Fluoranthene 192 0.000037 0.000038

Benzo(k)Fluoranthene 97.2 0.000019 0.000019

Benzo(e)Pyrene 254 0.000049 0.000050

Benzo(a)Pyrene 70.6 0.000014 0.000014

Perylene 11.1 0.000002 0.000002

Indeno(1,2,3-cd)Pyrene 45.5 0.000009 0.000009

Dibenzo(a,h)Anthracene 16.6 0.000003 0.000003

Benzo(g,h,i)Perylene 97.7 0.000019 0.000021

Total PAH 63500.7 0.01236 0.012615

1 Emission values reported in submitted test report.

2 Emission values calculated by EC/R from stack gas parameters and analytical data in test report.
DRAFT FOR INTERNAL REVIEW 8-9-13

Table 11. Summary of 2012 Felman Production PAH Test Results

Emission Source Reported Average 

Concentration (ng/dscm)

Reported Average 

Emissions (lb/hr)1

Calculated Emissions 

(lb/hr)2

Furnace 2 Baghouse Outlet

Naphthalene 16573.54 0.0245 0.0245

2-Methylnaphthalene 13040.11 0.0193 0.0193

Acenaphthylene 1409.98 0.0021 0.0021

Acenaphthene 894.38 0.0013 0.0013

Fluorene 1242.31 0.0018 0.0018

Phenanthrene 8410.61 0.0124 0.0124

Anthracene 530.93 0.0008 0.0008

Fluoranthene 13845.23 0.0205 0.0205

Pyrene 7736.04 0.0114 0.0114

Benzo(a)Anthracene 631.89 0.0009 0.0009

Chrysene 5073.21 0.0075 0.0075

Benzo(b)Fluoranthene 655.52 0.0010 0.0010

Benzo(k)Fluoranthene 240.02 0.000355 0.000355

Benzo(e)Pyrene 393.10 0.0006 0.0006

Benzo(a)Pyrene 16.37 0.0000242 0.0000142 3

Perylene 14.30 0.0000212 0.0000106 3

Indeno(1,2,3-cd)Pyrene 20.92 0.0000309 0.0000309

Dibenzo(a,h)Anthracene 3.30 0.00000487 0.00000439 3

Benzo(g,h,i)Perylene 25.20 0.0000372 0.0000373

Total PAH 70756.96 0.10457 0.10458

Furnace 5 Baghouse Outlet

Naphthalene 15620.68 0.0113 0.0113

2-Methylnaphthalene 8091.02 0.0059 0.0059

Acenaphthylene 2611.89 0.0019 0.0019

Acenaphthene 1350.54 0.0010 0.0010

Fluorene 1531.52 0.0011 0.0011

Phenanthrene 23353.83 0.0169 0.0169

Anthracene 913.80 0.0007 0.0007

Fluoranthene 15788.90 0.0114 0.0114

Pyrene 8713.78 0.0063 0.0063

Benzo(a)Anthracene 250.20 0.0002 0.0003

Chrysene 1915.60 0.0014 0.0014

Benzo(b)Fluoranthene 250.20 0.0002 0.0002

Benzo(k)Fluoranthene 84.86 0.0000615 0.0000614

Benzo(e)Pyrene 281.69 0.0002 0.0002

Benzo(a)Pyrene 7.86 0.00000569 0.00000284 3

Perylene 5.37 0.00000389 0.00000194 3

Indeno(1,2,3-cd)Pyrene 11.14 0.00000807 0.00000806

Dibenzo(a,h)Anthracene 1.97 0.00000143 0.00000117 3

Benzo(g,h,i)Perylene 14.06 0.0000102 0.0000102

Total PAH 80798.91 0.05859 0.05856

1 Emission values reported in submitted test report.

2 Emission values calculated by EC/R from stack gas parameters and analytical data in test report.

3 The analytical results were reported below the detection limit for this test run. The emission rate was calculated 

using 1⁄2 of the detection limit.
DRAFT FOR INTERNAL REVIEW 8-9-13

Table 12. Summary of 2012 Eramet Marietta and Felman Production

Hydrochloric Acid (HCl) Test Results

Emission Source Run 

Number

Reported HCl

Concentration 

(mg/dscm)

Reported HCl

Emissions 

(lb/hr)1

Calculated 

HCl Emissions 

(lb/hr)2

Eramet Marietta

Furnace 1 Baghouse Outlet

1 0.375 0.27 0.135 3

2 0.381 0.29 0.145 3

3 0.379 0.28 0.150 3

Average 0.378 0.28 0.140

Furnace 1 Tapping Baghouse 

Outlet

1 0.385 0.07 0.033 3

2 0.388 0.07 0.034 3

3 0.391 0.07 0.036 3

Average 0.388 0.07 0.034

Furnace 12 Scrubber Outlet

1 0.315 0.17 0.087 3

2 0.304 0.17 0.086 3

3 0.349 0.19 0.098 3

Average 0.321 0.18 0.090

Felman Production

Furnace 2 Baghouse Outlet

1 1.05622 1.753 1.752

2 0.86445 1.449 1.449

3 0.65858 1.095 1.095

Average 0.85975 1.432 1.432

Furnace 5 Baghouse Outlet

1 0.08566 0.0713 0.0713

2 0.07678 0.0643 0.0321 3

3 0.07710 0.0675 0.0338 3

Average 0.07985 0.0677 0.0457

1 Emission values reported in submitted test report.

2 Emission values calculated by EC/R from stack gas parameters and analytical data in test report.

3 The analytical results were reported below the detection limit. The emission rate was calculated using 1⁄2 of the 

detection limit.
DRAFT FOR INTERNAL REVIEW 8-9-13

All of the Felman analytical results for Furnace 2 and 1 of the 3 runs for Furnace 5 were 

measured above the detection limit. For the runs measured above the detection limit, the 

reported and calculated emission rates were comparable. For the runs measured below the 

detection limit, the test report calculated the HCl concentration using the detection limit, whereas 

the EC/R calculated HCl emission rates were calculated using 1⁄2 of the detection limit. None of 

the run samples shown in Table 12 were blank corrected.

Polychlorinated Biphenyls

The emissions of PCB were measured at both Eramet and Felman using California Air Resources 

Board Method 428 (CARB 428). At Eramet, three runs were measured at each of the sample 

locations; the outlet of the Furnace 1 baghouse, outlet of the Furnace 1 tapping baghouse, and 

outlet of the Furnace 12 scrubber. The PCB testing at Felman consisted of three runs captured at 

the baghouse outlet of Furnace 2 and 5. The reported PCB concentration and emission rates for 

Eramet and Felman are provided in Tables 13 and 14 respectively, along with emission rates 

calculated by EC/R for comparison.

The analytical results for Eramet reported PCB detected values for PCB-77 and PCB-118 for the 

Furnace 12 scrubber outlet and the Furnace 1 baghouse outlet. The Furnace 1 tapping baghouse 

outlet reported PCB detected values for PCB-77, PCB-15, and PCB-118. All other PCB 

compounds were reported as non-detect. For the PCB compounds that were reported as nondetect, the test report used the detection limit to calculate the concentration and emission rate. 

The EC/R calculated emissions used 1⁄2 the detection limit to calculate the emissions rate. 

Therefore, the Eramet emissions are lower than the emissions reported by Eramet.

The run samples for the Felman tests were all measured above the detection limit with the 

exception of PCB-169 and PCB-189. For these PCB compounds, the test report values reported 

for concentration and emission rate are based on the detection limit for the analysis. The 

emission rates shown by EC/R for these PCB compounds were calculated using 1⁄2 of the 

detection limit based on guidelines in EPA’s revised procedures for developing emission factors. 

The PCB emission rates calculated by EC/R for the other run samples were comparable to the 

reported emission rates in the test report. It should be noted that some of the PCB concentrations 

and emission rates listed in Tables 4b, 4c, and 4d are based on the percent recovery of the PCB 

compound and not the actual analytical result. 

Polychlorinated Dibenzo Dioxins and Polychlorinated Dibenzo Furans

The emissions of PCDD and PCDF were measured at both Eramet and Felman using California 

Air Resources Board Method 428 (CARB 428). At Eramet, three runs were measured at each of 

the sample locations; the outlet of the Furnace 1 baghouse, outlet of the Furnace 1 tapping 

baghouse, and outlet of the Furnace 12 scrubber. The PCDD and PCDF testing at Felman 

consisted of three runs captured at the baghouse outlet of Furnace 2 and 5. The reported PCDD 
DRAFT FOR INTERNAL REVIEW 8-9-13

and PCDF concentration and emission rates for Eramet and Felman are provided in Tables 15 

and 16 respectively, along with emission rates calculated by EC/R for comparison.

The emissions reported by Eramet were based on mostly non-detect analytical results for 

PCDD/PCDF. No detected values for any of the PCDD/PCDF compounds were reported for the 

Furnace 12 scrubber outlet in the analytical report. Only 1 run reported a single detected 

PCDD/PCDF value for the Furnace 1 baghouse outlet, and only 4 PCDD/PCDF compounds were 

detected for 2 of the runs for the Furnace 1 tapping baghouse. For those analytical results that 

were reported below the detection limit, the Eramet test report values reported the concentration 

and emission rate using the detection limit of the analysis. The EC/R emission rates were 

calculated using 1⁄2 of the detection limit based on guidelines in EPA’s revised procedures for 

developing emission factors. Therefore, the emission rates calculated by EC/R are roughly 1⁄2 of 

the emissions reported by Eramet.

The emissions reported by Felman in their test reports were considerably different than the 

emissions calculated by EC/R from the stack parameters and the analytical report. A review of 

the submitted test reports found that the company that produced the test report listed the 

PCDD/PCDF compounds in nanograms (10-9grams), however the analytical reports lists the 

results of the analysis of PCDD/PCDF compounds in picograms (10-12 grams). Therefore, the 

comparison of the reported emissions and the EC/R calculated emissions is off by a factor of 

1000. There are also differences in the way that non-detect results were used for the 

PCDD/PCDF emission calculations. The test report values reported for concentration and 

emission rate are based on the detection limit of the analysis. The EC/R emission rates were 

calculated using 1⁄2 of the detection limit based on guidelines in EPA’s revised procedures for 

developing emission factors. In addition, in cases where the analytical report listed the 

PCDD/PCDF concentration as estimated maximum concentration (EMPC), the test report used 

the detection limit rather than the EMPC value. Therefore, there are many discrepancies 

between the reported emission rates the EC/R calculated emission rates.
DRAFT FOR INTERNAL REVIEW 8-9-13

Table 13. Summary of 2013 Eramet Production PCB Test Results

Emission Source

Average 

Concentration 

(ng/dscm)

Average 

Emissions 

(lb/hr)1

Calculated 

Emissions 

(lb/hr)2

Furnace 1 Baghouse Outlet

PCB-77 [33'44'-TeraCB] 1.50E-02 1.14E-08 1.14E-08

PCB-81 [344'5-TeraCB] 2.95E-03 2.31E-09 1.16E-09 3

PCB-105 [233'44'-PentaCB] 1.59E-02 1.23E-08 1.08E-08 3

PCB-114 [23'44'5-PentaCB] 6.50E-03 5.09E-09 2.55E-09 3

PCB-118 [23'44'5-PentaCB] 3.30E-02 2.54E-08 2.54E-08

PCB-123 [23'44'5-PentaCB] 7.87E-03 6.17E-09 3.08E-09 3

PCB-126 [33'44'5-PentaCB] 1.20E-01 9.22E-08 4.61E-08 3

PCB-156 & 157 [HexaCB] 5.30E-03 4.12E-09 2.06E-09 3

PCB-167 [23'44'55'-HexaCB] 4.09E-03 3.17E-09 2.89E-09 3

PCB-169 [33'44'55'-HexaCB] 2.55E-03 2.01E-09 9.99E-10 3

PCB-189 [233'44'55'-HeptaCB] 2.29E-03 1.81E-09 9.04E-10 3

Total PCB 2.15E-01 1.66E-07 1.07E-07

Furnace 1 Tapping Baghouse Outlet

PCB-77 [33'44'-TeraCB] 2.79E-02 4.94E-09 4.49E-09

PCB-81 [344'5-TeraCB] 1.36E-02 2.40E-09 1.20E-09 3

PCB-105 [233'44'-PentaCB] 4.78E-02 8.47E-09 8.03E-09 3

PCB-114 [23'44'5-PentaCB] 7.22E-03 1.30E-09 8.77E-10 3

PCB-118 [23'44'5-PentaCB] 1.02E-01 1.81E-08 1.81E-08

PCB-123 [23'44'5-PentaCB] 1.91E-02 3.40E-09 1.69E-09 3

PCB-126 [33'44'5-PentaCB] 8.78E-02 1.58E-08 7.89E-09 3

PCB-156 & 157 [HexaCB] 1.18E-02 2.09E-09 1.59E-09 3

PCB-167 [23'44'55'-HexaCB] 1.31E-02 2.31E-09 2.23E-09 3

PCB-169 [33'44'55'-HexaCB] 2.69E-03 4.85E-10 2.41E-10 3

PCB-189 [233'44'55'-HeptaCB] 1.83E-03 3.31E-10 1.64E-10 3

Total PCB 3.35E-01 5.96E-08 4.70E-08
DRAFT FOR INTERNAL REVIEW 8-9-13

Table 13. Summary of 2013 Eramet Production PCB Test Results (Continued)

Emission Source

Average 

Concentration 

(ng/dscm)

Average 

Emissions 

(lb/hr)1

Calculated 

Emissions 

(lb/hr)2

Furnace 12 Scrubber Outlet

PCB-77 [33'44'-TeraCB] 1.02E-02 5.49E-09 5.49E-09

PCB-81 [344'5-TeraCB] 3.81E-03 2.07E-09 1.04E-09 3

PCB-105 [233'44'-PentaCB] 1.78E-02 9.68E-09 9.68E-09

PCB-114 [23'44'5-PentaCB] 8.09E-03 4.41E-09 2.21E-09 3

PCB-118 [23'44'5-PentaCB] 3.12E-02 1.69E-08 1.81E-08

PCB-123 [23'44'5-PentaCB] 9.46E-03 5.16E-09 2.58E-09 3

PCB-126 [33'44'5-PentaCB] 1.05E-01 5.77E-08 2.88E-08 3

PCB-156 & 157 [HexaCB] 6.28E-03 3.44E-09 1.72E-09 3

PCB-167 [23'44'55'-HexaCB] 4.23E-03 2.29E-09 1.60E-09 3

PCB-169 [33'44'55'-HexaCB] 3.04E-03 1.65E-09 8.30E-10 3

PCB-189 [233'44'55'-HeptaCB] 1.27E-03 7.05E-10 3.48E-10 3

Total PCB 2.00E-01 1.09E-07 7.12E-08

1 Emission values reported in submitted test report.

2 Emission values calculated by EC/R from stack gas parameters and analytical data in test report.

3 One or more of the analytical results were reported below the detection limit. For those runs that were reported 

below the detection limit, 1⁄2 of the detection limit was used to calculate the emissions rate.
DRAFT FOR INTERNAL REVIEW 8-9-13

Table 14. Summary of 2012 Felman Production PCB Test Results

Emission Source

Average 

Concentration 

(ng/dscm)

Average 

Emissions (lb/hr)1

Calculated 

Emissions (lb/hr)2

Furnace 2 Baghouse Outlet

PCB-77 [33'44'-TeraCB] 0.96 1.60E-06 1.60E-06

PCB-81 [344'5-TeraCB] 0.06 9.41E-08 9.41E-08

PCB-105 [233'44'-PentaCB] 0.95 1.58E-06 1.58E-06

PCB-114 [23'44'5-PentaCB] 0.08 1.29E-07 1.29E-07

PCB-118 [23'44'5-PentaCB] 2.59 4.30E-06 4.30E-06

PCB-123 [23'44'5-PentaCB] 0.05 8.01E-08 8.01E-08

PCB-126 [33'44'5-PentaCB] 0.02 3.08E-08 3.08E-08

PCB-156 & 157 [HexaCB] 0.10 1.67E-07 1.67E-07

PCB-167 [23'44'55'-HexaCB] 0.04 6.81E-08 6.81E-08

PCB-169 [33'44'55'-HexaCB] 0.01 2.07E-08 1.03E-08 3

PCB-189 [233'44'55'-HeptaCB] 0.01 1.40E-08 7.02E-09 3

Total PCB 4.87 8.08E-06 8.06E-06

Furnace 5 Baghouse Outlet

PCB-77 [33'44'-TeraCB] 2.62 2.19E-06 2.19E-06

PCB-81 [344'5-TeraCB] 0.16 1.31E-07 1.31E-07

PCB-105 [233'44'-PentaCB] 2.58 2.16E-06 2.16E-06

PCB-114 [23'44'5-PentaCB] 0.21 1.76E-07 1.76E-07

PCB-118 [23'44'5-PentaCB] 7.14 5.96E-06 5.96E-06

PCB-123 [23'44'5-PentaCB] 0.13 1.05E-07 1.05E-07

PCB-126 [33'44'5-PentaCB] 0.06 4.66E-08 4.65E-08

PCB-156 & 157 [HexaCB] 0.24 2.04E-07 2.04E-07

PCB-167 [23'44'55'-HexaCB] 0.10 8.35E-08 8.35E-08

PCB-169 [33'44'55'-HexaCB] 0.01 1.23E-08 6.13E-09 3

PCB-189 [233'44'55'-HeptaCB] 0.01 9.22E-09 4.61E-09 3

Total PCB 13.26 1.11E-05 1.11E-05

1 Emission values reported in submitted test report.

2 Emission values calculated by EC/R from stack gas parameters and analytical data in test report.

3 One or more of the analytical results were reported below the detection limit. For those runs that were reported 

below the detection limit, 1⁄2 of the detection limit was used to calculate the emissions rate.
DRAFT FOR INTERNAL REVIEW 8-9-13

Table 15. Summary of 2013 Eramet Production PCDD/PCDF Test Results

Emission Source

Average 

Concentration 

(ng/dscm)

Average Emissions 

(lb/hr)1

Calculated Emissions 

(lb/hr)2

Furnace 1 Baghouse Outlet

2,3,7,8-Tetra PCDD 1.29E-03 1.01E-09 5.06E-10 3

1,2,3,7,8-Penta PCDD 1.03E-03 8.16E-10 4.06E-10 3

1,2,3,4,7,8-Hexa PCDD 8.46E-04 6.61E-10 3.34E-10 3

1,2,3,6,7,8-Hexa PCDD 8.15E-04 6.39E-10 3.22E-10 3

1,2,3,7,8,9-Hexa PCDD 8.36E-04 6.61E-10 3.30E-10 3

1,2,3,4,6,7,8-Hepta PCDD 1.14E-03 9.04E-10 4.48E-10 3

1,2,3,4,6,7,8,9-Octa PCDD 3.17E-03 2.49E-09 1.25E-09 3

2,3,7,8-Tetra PCDF 1.58E-03 1.23E-09 6.20E-10 3

1,2,3,7,8-Penta PCDF 7.43E-04 5.95E-10 2.92E-10 3

2,3,4,7,8-Penta PCDF 6.78E-04 5.29E-10 2.67E-10 3

1,2,3,4,7,8-Hexa PCDF 6.87E-04 5.51E-10 3.48E-10 3

1,2,3,6,7,8-Hexa PCDF 6.19E-04 4.85E-10 2.46E-10 3

2,3,4,6,7,8-Hexa PCDF 6.70E-04 5.29E-10 2.67E-10 3

1,2,3,7,8,9-Hexa PCDF 8.14E-04 6.39E-10 3.24E-10 3

1,2,3,4,6,7,8-Hepta PCDF 6.86E-04 5.51E-10 2.71E-10 3

1,2,3,4,7,8,9-Hepta PCDF 1.01E-03 7.94E-10 3.98E-10 3

1,2,3,4,6,7,8,9-Octa PCDF 2.58E-03 2.03E-09 1.02E-09 3

Total PCDD/PCDF 1.92E-02 1.51E-08 7.64E-09

Furnace 1 Tapping Baghouse Outlet

2,3,7,8-Tetra PCDD 1.57E-03 2.87E-10 1.41E-10 3

1,2,3,7,8-Penta PCDD 2.15E-03 3.97E-10 1.93E-10 3

1,2,3,4,7,8-Hexa PCDD 1.46E-03 2.65E-10 1.31E-10 3

1,2,3,6,7,8-Hexa PCDD 1.42E-03 2.65E-10 1.27E-10 3

1,2,3,7,8,9-Hexa PCDD 1.43E-03 2.65E-10 1.29E-10 3

1,2,3,4,6,7,8-Hepta PCDD 2.68E-03 4.85E-10 2.40E-10 3

1,2,3,4,6,7,8,9-Octa PCDD 1.32E-02 2.34E-09 1.99E-09 3

2,3,7,8-Tetra PCDF 2.27E-03 4.19E-10 2.06E-10 3

1,2,3,7,8-Penta PCDF 1.73E-03 3.09E-10 1.55E-10 3

2,3,4,7,8-Penta PCDF 1.96E-03 3.53E-10 2.45E-10 3

1,2,3,4,7,8-Hexa PCDF 1.38E-03 2.43E-10 1.54E-10 3

1,2,3,6,7,8-Hexa PCDF 1.33E-03 2.43E-10 1.19E-10 3

2,3,4,6,7,8-Hexa PCDF 1.52E-03 2.65E-10 1.79E-10 3

1,2,3,7,8,9-Hexa PCDF 1.57E-03 2.87E-10 1.41E-10 3

1,2,3,4,6,7,8-Hepta PCDF 2.66E-03 4.85E-10 3.50E-10 3

1,2,3,4,7,8,9-Hepta PCDF 1.46E-03 2.65E-10 1.31E-10 3

1,2,3,4,6,7,8,9-Octa PCDF 3.91E-03 7.05E-10 3.51E-10 3

Total PCDD/PCDF 4.37E-02 7.88E-09 4.98E-09
DRAFT FOR INTERNAL REVIEW 8-9-13

Table 15. Summary of 2013 Eramet Production PCDD/PCDF Test Results (Continued)

Emission Source

Average 

Concentration 

(ng/dscm)

Average Emissions 

(lb/hr)1

Calculated Emissions 

(lb/hr)2

Furnace 12 Scrubber Outlet

2,3,7,8-Tetra PCDD 1.49E-03 8.16E-10 4.08E-10 3

1,2,3,7,8-Penta PCDD 1.62E-03 8.82E-10 4.45E-10 3

1,2,3,4,7,8-Hexa PCDD 1.35E-03 7.50E-10 3.71E-10 3

1,2,3,6,7,8-Hexa PCDD 1.32E-03 7.28E-10 3.63E-10 3

1,2,3,7,8,9-Hexa PCDD 1.34E-03 7.28E-10 3.67E-10 3

1,2,3,4,6,7,8-Hepta PCDD 1.98E-03 1.10E-09 5.47E-10 3

1,2,3,4,6,7,8,9-Octa PCDD 5.71E-03 3.15E-09 1.57E-09 3

2,3,7,8-Tetra PCDF 1.67E-03 9.04E-10 4.56E-10 3

1,2,3,7,8-Penta PCDF 1.49E-03 8.16E-10 4.07E-10 3

2,3,4,7,8-Penta PCDF 1.41E-03 7.72E-10 3.85E-10 3

1,2,3,4,7,8-Hexa PCDF 1.25E-03 6.83E-10 3.45E-10 3

1,2,3,6,7,8-Hexa PCDF 1.21E-03 6.61E-10 3.33E-10 3

2,3,4,6,7,8-Hexa PCDF 1.32E-03 7.28E-10 3.63E-10 3

1,2,3,7,8,9-Hexa PCDF 1.63E-03 9.04E-10 4.49E-10 3

1,2,3,4,6,7,8-Hepta PCDF 1.23E-03 6.83E-10 3.37E-10 3

1,2,3,4,7,8,9-Hepta PCDF 1.58E-03 8.60E-10 4.35E-10 3

1,2,3,4,6,7,8,9-Octa PCDF 3.68E-03 2.03E-09 1.02E-09 3

Total PCDD/PCDF 3.13E-02 1.72E-08 8.60E-09

1 Emission values reported in submitted test report.

2 Emission values calculated by EC/R from stack gas parameters and analytical data in test report.

3 One or more of the analytical results were reported below the detection limit. For those runs that were reported 

below the detection limit, 1⁄2 of the detection limit was used to calculate the emissions rate.
DRAFT FOR INTERNAL REVIEW 8-9-13

Table 16. Summary of 2012 Felman Production PCDD/PCDF Test Results

Emission Source

Reported Average 

Concentration 

(ng/dscm)

Reported Average 

Emissions (lb/hr)1

Calculated Emissions 

(lb/hr)2

Furnace 2 Baghouse Outlet

2,3,7,8-Tetra PCDD 1.27 2.10E-06 1.05E-09 3

1,2,3,7,8-Penta PCDD 1.28 2.12E-06 1.06E-09 3

1,2,3,4,7,8-Hexa PCDD 1.42 2.35E-06 1.18E-09 3

1,2,3,6,7,8-Hexa PCDD 1.37 2.27E-06 1.14E-09 3

1,2,3,7,8,9-Hexa PCDD 1.38 2.29E-06 1.15E-09 3

1,2,3,4,6,7,8-Hepta PCDD 2.58 4.26E-06 3.62E-09 3

1,2,3,4,6,7,8,9-Octa PCDD 5.78 9.57E-06 9.57E-09

2,3,7,8-Tetra PCDF 36.68 6.07E-05 3.03E-08 3

1,2,3,7,8-Penta PCDF 4.20 6.95E-06 6.95E-09

2,3,4,7,8-Penta PCDF 4.79 7.93E-06 7.92E-09

1,2,3,4,7,8-Hexa PCDF 6.20 1.03E-05 9.06E-09 3

1,2,3,6,7,8-Hexa PCDF 2.68 4.44E-06 3.65E-09 3

2,3,4,6,7,8-Hexa PCDF 2.33 3.86E-06 3.09E-09 3

1,2,3,7,8,9-Hexa PCDF 1.53 2.54E-06 1.27E-09 3

1,2,3,4,6,7,8-Hepta PCDF 4.44 7.34E-06 7.34E-09

1,2,3,4,7,8,9-Hepta PCDF 1.34 2.21E-06 1.11E-09 3

1,2,3,4,6,7,8,9-Octa PCDF 3.06 5.06E-06 4.54E-09 3

Total PCDD/PCDF 82.33 1.36E-04 9.40E-08

Furnace 5 Baghouse Outlet

2,3,7,8-Tetra PCDD 3.23 2.69E-06 3.04E-09

1,2,3,7,8-Penta PCDD 2.32 1.94E-06 1.94E-09

1,2,3,4,7,8-Hexa PCDD 1.43 1.19E-06 8.40E-10 3

1,2,3,6,7,8-Hexa PCDD 1.54 1.29E-06 9.48E-09 3

1,2,3,7,8,9-Hexa PCDD 1.61 1.34E-06 1.32E-09 3

1,2,3,4,6,7,8-Hepta PCDD 2.85 2.39E-06 2.69E-09

1,2,3,4,6,7,8,9-Octa PCDD 7.04 5.90E-06 8.24E-09

2,3,7,8-Tetra PCDF 122.25 1.02E-04 6.30E-08 3

1,2,3,7,8-Penta PCDF 13.37 1.11E-05 1.11E-08

2,3,4,7,8-Penta PCDF 11.36 9.46E-06 9.46E-09

1,2,3,4,7,8-Hexa PCDF 7.80 6.49E-06 6.49E-09

1,2,3,6,7,8-Hexa PCDF 3.92 3.26E-06 3.26E-09

2,3,4,6,7,8-Hexa PCDF 2.19 1.83E-06 1.64E-09 3

1,2,3,7,8,9-Hexa PCDF 1.55 1.29E-06 6.46E-10 3

1,2,3,4,6,7,8-Hepta PCDF 3.32 2.77E-06 2.77E-09

1,2,3,4,7,8,9-Hepta PCDF 1.57 1.31E-06 6.56E-10 3

1,2,3,4,6,7,8,9-Octa PCDF 7.22 5.99E-06 5.99E-09

Total PCDD/PCDF 194.57 1.62E-04 1.24E-07

1 Emission values reported in submitted test report.

2 Emission values calculated by EC/R from stack gas parameters and analytical data in test report.

3 One or more of the analytical results were reported below the detection limit. For those runs that were reported 

below the detection limit, 1⁄2 of the detection limit was used to calculate the emissions rate.
DRAFT FOR INTERNAL REVIEW 8-9-13

5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS

The test data described in this summary provides additional pollutant emissions that can be used 

for determining modeling emissions and the MACT Floor. The PM, metals, PAH, PCB, 

PCDD/PCDF and HCl test data provide additional emission results that can be used to enhance 

the current emissions data sets used for modeling and developing the MACT Floor. As noted in 

this summary, there are also some issues with reported results of the PCDD/PCDF testing 

conducted at Felman. It is recommended that the EC/R calculated emissions be used for 

modeling and development of the MACT Floor.