1 

## From: Fairchild.Susan@epamail.epa.gov

Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2011 8:52 AM

To: Hancy, Cindy Wang; Marinshaw, Richard

Subject: Fw: Inquiry from Susan Fairchild - EPA

Attachments: 10-3990.15 Final Thermafiber Wabash Indiana NAIMA EPA Test Report.pdf

Categories: Blue Category

Thermafiber test report

----- Forwarded by Susan Fairchild/RTP/USEPA/US on 02/24/2011 08:51 AM -----

From: Angus Crane < acrane@naima.org >

To: Susan Fairchild/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 02/22/2011 10:46 AM

Subject: FW: Inquiry from Susan Fairchild - EPA



## Angus E. Crane

Executive Vice President, General Counsel

North American Insulation Manufacturers Association

Ph: (703) 684

‐ 0084 ext. 123

Fax: (703) 684

‐ 0427

Visit NAIMA online at:

www.NAIMA.org

www.PipeInsulation.org

From: Steve Edris [ mailto:sedris@thermafiber.com ]

Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 10:30 AM

To: Angus Crane

Cc: Kale Sparling

Subject: RE: Inquiry from Susan Fairchild - EPA

Angus

– Attached is the non

‐ confidential full report. Please forward it to Mrs. Fairchild. If Robert Morales needs the confidential full report,

advise.

Best regards,



## Steve Edris

President & CEO

Thermafiber, Inc.

Phone: (260) 563

‐ 2111 ext. 214

Fax: (260) 563

‐ 8979

www.thermafiber.com

Attention:

The contents of this message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader of the

message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any d issemination, retransmission, or other use of this

communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, notify the sender immediately by return email and delete the message and any attachments from

your system. 

# 

Please consider the environment before printing this e

‐ mail.2 

## From: Angus Crane [ mailto:acrane@naima.org ]

Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 10:23 AM

To: Steve Edris; Kale Sparling

Subject: Inquiry from Susan Fairchild - EPA

This morning I received an e

‐ mail message from Susan Fairchild. According to Ms. Fairchild, Thermafiber only submitted a hard copy of the

ERT Printout. EPA is requesting the electronic copies of the actual test reports with all appendices. If this is correct, could you please forward

the electronic version of the report referenced above to me or Ms. Fairchild. If you send it directly to Ms. Fairchild, would you please let me

know. If you have indeed already provided that information, please let me know that, too. Thank you. Call me if you have any questions.

Angus E. Crane

Executive Vice President, General Counsel

North American Insulation Manufacturers Association

Ph: (703) 684

‐ 0084 ext. 123

Fax: (703) 684

‐ 0427

Visit NAIMA online at:

www.NAIMA.org

www.PipeInsulation.org

### Thermafiber, Inc. BTEC Project No. 10-3990 .15

NAIMA/U.S. EPA Emissions Test Report January 24, 2011 

## i Executive Summary

U.S. EPA has agreed with the North American Insulat ion Manufacturer’s Association (NAIMA)

and its members to a voluntary collection of residu al risk-related data for the National Emission

Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Mineral Wool Production 1 

## as well as for

the NESHAP for Wool Fiberglass Manufacturing 2 

## . To assist in collecting the agreed upon data,

BT Environmental Consulting, Inc. (BTEC) was retain ed by NAIMA to evaluate emission rates

of the following pollutants from the Cupola #4 exha ust stack located at the Thermafiber, Inc.

(Thermafiber) site in Wabash, Indiana:

• Particulate matter (PM) and particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter (PM 2.5 

## )

• Antimony, arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, co balt, lead, manganese, nickel, and

selenium

• Mercury

• Hexavalent chromium

• Hydrogen fluoride and hydrogen chloride

• Carbon Monoxide and Carbonyl Sulfide

Reference test methods used and test program method ologies were agreed upon by U.S. EPA and

NAIMA prior to initiating test program fieldwork. Table I on the following page summarizes the

overall results of the emissions test program.

1 

### Codified at Title 40, Part 63, Subpart DDD of the Code of Federal Regulations (40 CFR 63, Subpart DDD )

2 

### Codified at 40 CFR 63, Subpart NNN

### Thermafiber, Inc. BTEC Project No. 10-3990 .15

NAIMA/U.S. EPA Emissions Test Report January 24, 2011 

## ii Table I

Cupola #4 Emissions Test Program Results Summary

Test Date(s) Pollutant Emission

Rate

(lbs/hr) Emission Rate

(lbs/ton melt) Emission

Rate

(mg/dscm)

Filterable PM 2.5 

## 0.23 5.2

Organic Condensible PM 2.5 

## 0.02 0.36

Inorganic Condensible PM 2.5 

## 0.37 8.2 October 19 & 20,

2010

Total PM 2.5 

## 0.62 14.0

Filterable Particulate 0.33 7.5

Antimony < 4.5 x 10 -5 

## < 1.0 x 10 -3



## Arsenic 8.2 x 10 -5 

## 8.2 x 10 -5



## Beryllium < 1.1 x 10 -5 

## < 2.5 x 10 -4



## Cadmium 1.2 x 10 -4 

## 2.6 x 10 -3



## Chromium 4.8 x 10 -5 

## 1.1 x 10 -3



## Cobalt 1.6 x 10 -5 

## 3.7 x 10 -4



## Lead 1.5 x 10 -4 

## 3.4 x 10 -3



## Manganese 1.1 x 10 -3 

## 2.6 x 10 -2



## Nickel < 7.6 x 10 -5 

## < 1.7 x 10 -3 

## October 20 & 21,

2010

Selenium 6.8 x 10 -3 

## 1.5 x 10 -1



## October 19, 2010 Mercury 1.5 x 10 -6 

## 3.5 x 10 -5



## October 20 & 21,

2010 Hexavalent Chromium < 4.4 x 10 -6 

## < 9.7 x 10 -5



## Hydrogen Chloride 9.3 x 10 -1 

## 23 October 19 & 20,

2010 Hydrogen Fluoride 5.7 x 10 -1 

## 14

Carbon Monoxide 86.36 2,013.8 October 19, 2010 Carbonyl Sulfide < 1.00 < 22.5

Notes: (1) Pollutant emission rates in terms of m g/dscm were not corrected to 7% O 2 

### because exhaust from the

process is essentially ambient (i.e., approximately 20.9% O 2 

### ).

(2) The “less than” symbol (<) included in the tab le indicates that the emission rate was calculated using the method

detection limit (MDL) value instead of zero because the analytical result was below the MDL for one or more of the

sample fractions.

### Thermafiber, Inc. BTEC Project No. 10-3990 .15

NAIMA/U.S. EPA Emissions Test Report January 24, 2011 

## i TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION.......................................

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

2.0 PROCESS DESCRIPTION ................................

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

2.1 P ROCESS 

## M ONITORING



## ................................................... ................................................... . 2

3.0 SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL METHODOLOGIES.............. ................................ 2

3.1 E XHAUST 

## G AS 

## V ELOCITY



## , M OLECULAR 

## W EIGHT



## , AND 

## M OISTURE 

## C ONTENT 

## .................... 2

3.2 PM AND 

## PM 2.5 

## C ONCENTRATIONS AND 

## E MISSION 

## R ATES



## ................................................... 3

3.3 T OTAL 

## S ELECTED 

## M ETALS 

## C ONCENTRATIONS AND 

## E MISSION 

## R ATES 

## ................................ 3

3.4 H G 

## C ONCENTRATIONS AND 

## E MISSION 

## R ATES



## ................................................... .................. 4

3.5 H EXAVALENT 

## C HROMIUM 

## C ONCENTRATIONS AND 

## E MISSION 

## R ATES 

## ................................. 4

3.6 HF AND 

## HC L 

## C ONCENTRATIONS AND 

## E MISSION 

## R ATES



## ................................................... .. 4

3.7 CO AND 

## COS C ONCENTRATIONS AND 

## E MISSION 

## R ATES



## ................................................... . 5

4.0 TEST RESULTS .......................................

................................................... ....................... 6

TABLES

Table 1 – Test Personnel

Table 2 – Cupola #4 Emissions Test Program Summary

FIGURES

Figure 1 – Exhaust Stack Traverse Point Diagram

Figure 2 – Method 3A Sampling Train Schematic Drawi ng

Figure 3 – OTM 27/OTM 28 Sampling Train Schematic D rawing

Figure 4 – Method 29 Sampling Train Schematic Drawi ng

Figure 5 – Method 30B Sampling Train Schematic Draw ing

Figure 6 – Method 0061 Sampling Train Schematic Dra wing

Figure 7 – Method 26A Sampling Train Schematic Draw ing

Figure 8 – Method 318 Sampling Train Schematic Diag ram

APPENDICES

Appendix A – Detailed Test Run Results

Appendix B – Process Data

Appendix C – Field and Computer-Generated Data Shee ts and Notes

Appendix D – Equipment Calibration Documents

Appendix E – Laboratory Analytical Reports

Appendix F – Method 320 Analytical Report

### Thermafiber, Inc. BTEC Project No. 10-3990.15

NAIMA/U.S. EPA Emissions Test Report January 24, 2011 1 

## 1.0 Introduction

U.S. EPA has agreed with the North American Insulat ion Manufacturer’s Association (NAIMA)

and its members to a voluntary collection of residu al risk-related data for the National Emission

Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Mineral Wool Production 3 

## as well as for

the NESHAP for Wool Fiberglass Manufacturing 4 

## . To assist in collecting the agreed upon data,

BT Environmental Consulting, Inc. (BTEC) was retain ed by NAIMA to evaluate emission rates

of the following pollutants from the Cupola #4 exha ust stack located at the Thermafiber, Inc.

(Thermafiber) site in Wabash, Indiana:

• Particulate matter (PM) and particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter (PM 2.5 

## )

• Antimony, arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, co balt, lead, manganese, nickel, and

selenium

• Mercury

• Hexavalent chromium

• Hydrogen fluoride and hydrogen chloride

• Carbon Monoxide and Carbonyl Sulfide

Reference test methods used and test program method ologies were agreed upon by U.S. EPA and

NAIMA prior to initiating test program fieldwork. The emissions test program was conducted on

October 19, 20, and 21, 2010. The test program con sisted of triplicate emission tests at each

location for each parameter. The field sampling po rtion of the emissions test program included

the personnel summarized by Table 1.

Table 1

Emissions Test Program Personnel

Personnel Affiliation

James Sharp BTEC

Jeff Peitzsch BTEC

Jeff Monache BTEC

John Beach BTEC

Matthew Young BTEC

Lora Kralik Prism Analytical

Kale Sparling Thermafiber

3 

### Codified at Title 40, Part 63, Subpart DDD of the Code of Federal Regulations (40 CFR 63, Subpart DDD )

4 

### Codified at 40 CFR 63, Subpart NNN

### Thermafiber, Inc. BTEC Project No. 10-3990.15

NAIMA/U.S. EPA Emissions Test Report January 24, 2011 2 

## 2.0 Process Description

For the Granulated Mineral Wool Line, slag, rock, a nd coke are charged into Cupola #4 to be

melted. Molten material from the cupola is spun in to fibrous form and coated with dedusting oil.

Fibers are collected in a forming chamber using a f orming screen. Material is further processed

into a loose form and conveyed to packaging equipme nt. Final packaged product is sent to

customers.

2.1 Process Monitoring

During the emissions test program, Cupola #4 was op erated under normal conditions. In

addition to production rate during each test run, p rocess operating data recorded during the

emissions test program included raw material feed r ates, baghouse pressure drop, and thermal

oxidizer operating temperature. Process production data is available in Appendix B. Control

equipment data will be available to U.S. EPA on req uest.

3.0 Sampling and Analytical Methodologies

Sampling and analytical methodologies for the emiss ions test program can be separated into

seven categories as follows:

(1) Measurement of exhaust gas velocity, molecular weig ht, and moisture content;

(2) Measurement of exhaust gas PM and PM 2.5 

## concentrations and emission rates;

(3) Measurement of exhaust gas total selected metals co ncentrations and emission rates;

(4) Measurement of exhaust gas Hg concentrations and em ission rates;

(5) Measurement of exhaust gas hexavalent chromium conc entrations and emission rates;

(6) Measurement of exhaust gas HF and HCl concentration s and emission rates; and,

(7) Measurement of exhaust gas CO and COS concentration s and emission rates.

Descriptions of sampling and analytical methodologi es by category are summarized by Sections

3.1 through 3.7, respectively.

3.1 Exhaust Gas Velocity, Molecular Weight, and Moistur e Content

Measurement of exhaust gas velocity, molecular weig ht, and moisture content was conducted

using the following reference test methods codified at Title 40, Part 60, Appendix A of the Code

of Federal Regulations (40 CFR 60, Appendix A):

• Method 1 - “Location of the Sampling Site and Sampling Points”

• Method 2 - “Determination of Stack Gas Velocity and Volumetric Flowrate”

• Method 3A - “Determination of Oxygen and Carbon Dioxide Concent rations in

Emissions from Stationary Sources”(Instrumental Ana lyzer Procedure)

• Method 4 - “Determination of Moisture Content in Stack Gases”

### Thermafiber, Inc. BTEC Project No. 10-3990.15

NAIMA/U.S. EPA Emissions Test Report January 24, 2011 3 

## These test methods were used to evaluate exhaust ga s flowrates in conjunction with the

isokinetic sampling methodologies used to evaluate pollutant emission rates.

Stack gas velocity traverses were conducted in acco rdance with the procedures outlined in

Method 1 and Method 2 (see Figure 1 for a traverse location drawing). An S-type pitot tube with

a thermocouple assembly, calibrated in accordance w ith Method 2, Section 4.1.1, was used to

measure exhaust gas velocity pressures (using a man ometer) and temperatures at each location

during testing. The S-type pitot tube dimensions w as within specified limits, therefore, a

baseline pitot tube coefficient of 0.84 (dimensionl ess) was assigned.

Molecular weight was determined according to USEPA Method 3A. The O 2 

## content of the

exhaust gas was measured using a M&C Products PMA 1 00-L O 2 

## gas analyzer (or equivalent)

and the CO 2 

## content of the exhaust gas was measured using a Ca lifornia Analytical Instruments

(CAI0 600 Series CO 2 

## gas analyzer (or equivalent). An integrated sampl e of the gas stream was

drawn through an insulated stainless-steel probe wi th an in-line glass fiber filter to remove any

particulate and into a tedlar sample bag utilizing an evacuated sample lung. At the completion of

each test the gas sample was introduced to the anal yzers. Data was recorded at 4-second

intervals on a PC equipped with data acquisition so ftware. A schematic drawing of the emission

monitoring system is provided as Figure 2.

Exhaust gas moisture content was evaluated using Me thod 4. Exhaust gas moisture content was

determined volumetrically (liquid impingers) and gr avimetrically (silica gel impinger).

3.2 PM and PM 2.5 

## Concentrations and Emission Rates

PM/PM 2.5 

## concentrations and emission rates were measured us ing U.S. EPA Other Test

Methods (OTM) 27 and OTM 28. PM, PM 2.5 

## , and CPM concentrations and emission rates were

measured using BTEC’s Nutech ® Model 2010 modular isokinetic stack sampling syste m. This

system consisted of (1) a tapered nozzle, (2) a PM 10 

## particle sizer cyclone followed by a PM 2.5 

## particle sizer cyclone, (3) a glass or quartz fiber filter assembly and heated probe, (4) a glass

recirculating ice water condenser system, (5) a set of four GS impingers, (6) a length of sample

line, and (7) a Nutech ® control case equipped with a pump, dry gas meter, and calibrated

orifice. Prior to each test, the second and third impingers were filled with 100 ml of HPLC

water, the first and fourth impingers were empty, a nd the fifth impinger contained

approximately 300 g of silica gel desiccant. A sch ematic drawing of the PM 2.5 

## /CPM sample

train is provided as Figure 3. The total filterabl e PM fraction was collected on the front half of

the M29 Metals sampling train as per the QAPP.

3.3 

## Total Selected Metals Concentrations and Emission R ates

Total selected metals concentrations and emission r ates were measured using the procedures of

40 CFR 60, Appendix A, Method 29. Selected metals concentrations and emission rates were

measured using BTEC’s Nutech ® Model 2010 modular isokinetic stack sampling syste m. This

system consisted of (1) a borosilicate glass or qua rtz nozzle, (2) a steel probe w/glass liner, (3) a

heated quartz fiber filter assembly, (4) a set of s ix GS impingers, (5) a length of sample line,

### Thermafiber, Inc. BTEC Project No. 10-3990.15

NAIMA/U.S. EPA Emissions Test Report January 24, 2011 4 

## and (6) a Nutech ® control case equipped with a pump, dry gas meter, and calibrated orifice.

Prior to each test, the first two impingers were fi lled with 100 ml of a 5% nitric acid

(HNO 3 

## )/10% hydrogen peroxide solution, the third impinge r was empty, and the fourth

contained approximately 300 g of silica gel desicca nt. A schematic drawing of the metals

sampling train is provided as Figure 4.

3.4 Hg Concentrations and Emission Rates

Hg concentrations and emission rates were measured using the procedures of 40 CFR 60,

Appendix A, Method 30B and using BTEC’s Nutech ® Model 2010 modular isokinetic stack

sampling system. This system consisted of (1) a so rbent trap, (2) a steel probe, (3) Teflon

tubing, (4) three GS impingers, (5) a length of sam ple line, and (6) a Nutech ® control case

equipped with a pump, dry gas meter, and calibrated orifice. The first impinger was left empty

as a water knockout, and the remaining two impinger s contained approximately 300 g of silica

gel desiccant. A schematic drawing of the Hg sampl ing train is provided as Figure 5.

3.5 Hexavalent Chromium Concentrations and Emission Rat es

Hexavalent chromium concentrations and emission rat es were measured using the procedures of

Method 0061 with analysis by NCASI CI/WM-98.01. He xavalent chromium concentrations and

emission rates were measured using BTEC’s Nutech ® Model 2010 modular isokinetic stack

sampling system. This system consisted of (1) a gl ass nozzle, (2) a heated steel probe with a

glass probe liner, (3) a Teflon tee with a recircul ating pump, (4) five GS impingers, (5) a length

of sample line, and (6) a Nutech ® control case equipped with a pump, dry gas meter, and a

calibrated orifice. Prior to each test, the first impinger was filled with 150 mL of 0.1N KOH, the

next two were filled with 75 mL of 0.1 N KOH, the f ourth was empty, and the last impinger

contained approximately 300 g of silica gel desicca nt. A schematic drawing of the Method 0061

sampling train is provided as Figure 6.

3.6 HF and HCl Concentrations and Emission Rates

Measurement of hydrogen halide concentrations and e mission rates were conducted using the

procedures of 40 CFR 60, Appendix A, Method 26A. T he Method 26A sampling train consisted

of: (1) a heated borosilicate or quartz probe liner ; (2) a heated borosilicate or quartz glass filter

holder containing a pre-weighed 110-mm diameter was hed quartz filter with Teflon filter

support; (3) a set of three Greensburg-Smith (GS) i mpingers each containing 100 ml of 0.1

Normal Sulfuric Acid (0.1 N H 2 

## SO 4 

## ), (4) a modified GS impinger containing a known we ight of

silica gel desiccant; (5) a length of sample line, and (7) a Nutech control case equipped with a

pump, dry gas meter, and calibrated orifice. Figur e 7 provides an illustration of the Method 26A

sample train.

### Thermafiber, Inc. BTEC Project No. 10-3990.15

NAIMA/U.S. EPA Emissions Test Report January 24, 2011 5 

## 3.7 

## CO and COS Concentrations and Emission Rates

Measurement of CO and COS concentrations and emissi on rates were conducted using the

procedures of 40 CFR 63, Appendix A, Method 318. S tack exhaust gas was continually purging

through the sampling system and the Fourier Transfo rm Infrared (FTIR) spectrometer. The

sample gas was extracted from the stack using a hea ted, stainless steel probe, maintained at

191 ° C. A heated filter box (191 ° C) connects from the probe to the filter assembly t o a heated

transfer line. A 0.1 μ glass filter was used for particulate matter remov al. A heated, diaphragm

pump was used to pull the sample from the stack.

The heated transfer line, held at 191 ° C, connected the probe/filter assembly to the FTIR. The

FTIR was equipped with a temperature-controlled, 5. 11 meter multipass gas cell maintained at

191 ° C. Gas flows and sampling system pressures were mo nitored using a rotometer and

pressure transducer.

FTIR data was collected using an MKS MultiGas 2030 FTIR spectrometer. All data was

collected at 0.5cm -1 

## resolution. Each sample spectrum was derived from the co-addition of 60

scans, with a new data point generated every one mi nute. Figure 8 provides an illustration of the

Method 318 sample train.

### Thermafiber, Inc. BTEC Project No. 10-3990.15

NAIMA/U.S. EPA Emissions Test Report January 24, 2011 6 

## 4.0 Test Results

The overall results of the emissions test program a re summarized by Table 2 below.

Table 2

Cupola #4 Emissions Test Program Results Summary

Test Date(s) Pollutant Emission

Rate

(lbs/hr) Emission Rate

(lbs/ton melt) Emission

Rate

(mg/dscm)

Filterable PM 2.5 

## 0.23 5.2

Organic Condensible PM 2.5 

## 0.02 0.36

Inorganic Condensible PM 2.5 

## 0.37 8.2 October 19 & 20,

2010

Total PM 2.5 

## 0.62 14.0

Filterable Particulate 0.33 7.5

Antimony < 4.5 x 10 -5 

## < 1.0 x 10 -3



## Arsenic 8.2 x 10 -5 

## 8.2 x 10 -5



## Beryllium < 1.1 x 10 -5 

## < 2.5 x 10 -4



## Cadmium 1.2 x 10 -4 

## 2.6 x 10 -3



## Chromium 4.8 x 10 -5 

## 1.1 x 10 -3



## Cobalt 1.6 x 10 -5 

## 3.7 x 10 -4



## Lead 1.5 x 10 -4 

## 3.4 x 10 -3



## Manganese 1.1 x 10 -3 

## 2.6 x 10 -2



## Nickel < 7.6 x 10 -5 

## < 1.7 x 10 -3 

## October 20 & 21,

2010

Selenium 6.8 x 10 -3 

## 1.5 x 10 -1



## October 19, 2010 Mercury 1.5 x 10 -6 

## 3.5 x 10 -5



## October 20 & 21,

2010 Hexavalent Chromium < 4.4 x 10 -6 

## < 9.7 x 10 -5



## Hydrogen Chloride 9.3 x 10 -1 

## 23 October 19 & 20,

2010 Hydrogen Fluoride 5.7 x 10 -1 

## 14

Carbon Monoxide 86.36 2,013.8 October 19, 2010 Carbonyl Sulfide < 1.00 < 22.5

Notes: (1) Pollutant emission rates in terms of m g/dscm were not corrected to 7% O 2 

### because exhaust from the

process is essentially ambient (i.e., approximately 20.9% O 2 

### ).

(2) The “less than” symbol (<) included in the tab le indicates that the emission rate was calculated using the method

detection limit (MDL) value instead of zero because the analytical result was below the MDL for one or more of the

sample fractions.



## Detailed results for individual emission test runs are summarized in Appendix A. Process data

associated with the emissions test program is provi ded in Appendix B. Field and computergenerated data sheets are included in Appendix C. Appendix D includes calibration documents

and Appendix E includes laboratory analytical repor ts. Appendix F includes the Method 318

analytical report.

### Thermafiber, Inc. BTEC Project No. 10-3990.15

NAIMA/U.S. EPA Emissions Test Report January 24, 2011 7 

## Limitations

The information and opinions rendered in this repor t are exclusively for use by NAIMA and/or

Thermafiber, Inc. BTEC will not distribute or publ ish this report without NAIMA’s consent

except as required by law or court order. BTEC acc epts responsibility for the competent

performance of its duties in executing the assignme nt and preparing reports in accordance with

the normal standards of the profession, but disclai ms any responsibility for consequential

damages.

This report was prepared by:

Brandon V. Chase

Staff Environmental Engineer

This report was reviewed by:

Randal J. Tysar

Senior Environmental Engineer

# Figures

### Diameter:

36.00 in

Points Distance "

12 0.8

11 2.4

10 4.2

9 6.4

8 9.0

7 12.8

6 23.2

5 27.0

4 29.6

3 31.8

2 33.6

1 35.2

Site:

Thermafibe r

Wabash, Indiana

Cupola #4 BT Environmental Consulting,

Inc.

2615 Wolcott Street

Ferndale, Michigan 

## Figure 1 N ot to Scale <0.5 diameters

<2 diameters

### Bags Samples

to analyzers



## Figure 2

Site:

USEPA Method 3 A

Thermafibe r

Wabash, Indiana BT Environmental Consulting,

Inc.

2615 Wolcott Street

Ferndale, Michigan Data Acquisition System



### Calibration Gases

(Fed to Probe Tip) Environics Gas

Dilution System M&C Model 100-L

O 2 

### Analyzer CAI Series 600

CO 2 

### Analyzer pump tedlar

bagFigure 3Site:USEPA OTM27/28ThermafiberWabash, IndianaBT Environmental Consulting, Inc.2615 Wolcott Ferndale,MichiganPumpSilica gelHeated Filter BoxS-Type Pitot w/ ThermocoupleHeated Probe w/ Glass Liner & NozzleMeter RigTemp.ProbeFilterOnOff-+00:001 2 3 4 545mm Filter HousingFilter Holder W/ Teflon FilterVerticle CondenserPot Belly Impinger100 mL DI H2OFigure 4Site:USEPA Method 29ThermafiberWabash, IndianaBT Environmental Consulting Inc.2615 Wolcott FerndaleMichigan 48220PumpSilica gel100 mL 5% HNO3 / 10% H2O2 solutionHeated Filter BoxS-Type Pitot w/ ThermocoupleHeated Probe w/ Glass Liner & NozzleMeter RigTemp.ProbeFilterOnOff-+00:001 2 3 4 5Figure 5Site:USEPA Method 30B Sampling TrainThermafiberWabash, IndianaBT Environmental Consulting, Inc.2615 WolcottFerndale, Michigan 48220Knock outPumpTemperature sensorMeter RigTemp.ProbeFilterOnOff-+00:001 2 3 4 5Sample LineDessicantMercuryTrapProbeFigure 6Site:USEPA Method 0061ThermafiberWabash, IndianaBT Environmental Consulting, Inc.2615 WolcottFerndale, MichiganPumpMeter RigTemp.ProbeFilterOnOff-+00:001 2 3 4 5150 mL 0.1 N KOHEmptySilica GelPerastaltic pumpTeflon tee75 mL 0.1 N KOHEmptyFigure 7Site:USEPA Method 26A Sampling TrainThermafiberWabash, IndianaBT Environmental Consulting, Inc.2615 Wolcott Ferndale,MichiganPumpHeated Filter BoxS-type pitot w/ thermocoupleHeated probe with glass linerMeter RigTemp.ProbeFilterOnOff-+00:001 2 3 4 5Empty100 mL 0.1NSilica Gel

## Figure 8

Site:

USEPA Method 318

Thermafiber

Wabash, Indiana BT Environmental Consulting, Inc.

2615 Wolcott Street

Ferndale, Michigan Data Acquisition System 

### Heated Sam p le Line

Filter

FTIR Probe

# APPENDIX A

DETAILED TEST RUN RESULTS

### Plant Job #

Location OTM27/OTM 28 Testing

**Copyright by Walter Smith**

**Run Number** 1 2 3 Average

**Date Test Date** 10/19/2010 10/19/2010 10/20/2010

**Start Run Start Time** 8:01:00 12:50:00 8:03:00

**Run Finish Time** 12:23:00 16:28:00 13:38:00

**Net Traversing Points** 12 12 12



### Θ **Net Run Time, minutes** 253.84 236.28 252.08 247



### D N **Nozzle Diameter, inches** 0.200 0.200 0.200 0.200



### C

p **Pitot Tube Coeficient** 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84



### Y **Dry Gas Meter Calibration Factor** 1.003 1.003 1.003 1.003



### P Br **Barometric Pressure, inches of Mercury** 29.99 29.99 29.88 29.95



### ∆ H **Average orifice meter Differential, inches H 2**  **O** 0.41 0.43 0.46 0.43



### V

m **Dry Gas Meter Volume Sampled, cubic feet** 90.310 90.560 92.770 91.213



### t

m **Average Dry Gas Meter Temperature, °F** 63.38 81.54 70.46 71.79



### V mstd **Dry Gas Meter Volume Sampled, dscf** 91.688 88.860 92.597 91.048



### V lc **Total Moisture Liquid collected, ml** 66 64 51 60.3



### V wstd **Volume of Water Vapor, standard cubic feet** 3.11 3.01 2.40 2.84



### % H 2 

### O **Moisture Content of Stack Gas, %** 3.3 3.3 2.5 3.0



### M fd **Dry Mole Fraction** 0.967 0.967 0.975 0.970



### %CO 2 **Carbon Dioxide, %** 9.4 8.3 9.3 9.0



### %O 2 **Oxygen, %** 12.0 12.9 12.0 12.3



### % CO+ N 2 **Carbon Monoxide & Nitrogen, %** 78.6 78.8 78.7 78.7



### M d **Dry Molecular Weight, lb/lb-Mole** 29.98 29.84 29.97 29.93



### M

s **Wet Molecular weight, lb/lb-Mole** 29.59 29.46 29.67 29.57



### P

g **Flue Gas Static Pressure, inches of H 2**  **O** -19.0 -19.0 -19.0 -19.0



### P

s **Absolute Flue Gas Pressure, inches of Mercury** 28.59 28.59 28.48 28.56



### t

s **Average Stack Gas Temperature, °F** 293 294 288 291



### ∆ P

avg **Average Velocity Head, inches of H 2**  **O** 0.428 0.370 0.422 0.406



### v

s **Average Stack Gas Velocity, feet/second** 44.1 41.2 43.7 43.0



### A

s **Stack Crossectional Area, square feet** 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.1



### Q sd **Dry Volumetric Flow Rate, dry scfm** 12,126 11,305

12,135

11,855



### Q

aw **Actual Wet Volumetric Flue Gas Flow Rate, acfm** 18,706 17,457

18,522

18,228



### %I **Percent Isokinetic of Sampling Rate, %** 96.6 107.9 98.2 100.9



### W

p **Production, tons melt per hour**



### W **Filterable PM 2.5**  **Catch Weight, mg** 12.8 11.5 16.3 13.5



### C mg/dscm **Filterable PM 2.5**  **Concentration, mg/dscm** 4.9E+00 4.6E+00 6.2E+00 5.2E+00



### C mg/dscm@7%O2 **Filterable PM 2.5**  **Concentration, mg/dscm @ 7% O 2**  N/A N/A N/A



### E lb/hr **Filterable PM 2.5**  **Emission Rate, pounds/hr** 2.2E-01 1.9E-01 2.8E-01 2.3E-01



### E lb/ton product **Filterable PM 2.5**  **Emission Rate, pounds/ton product**



### W **Organic Condensible PM 2.5**  **Catch Weight, mg** 2.0 0.5 0.3 0.9



### C mg/dscm **Organic Condensible PM 2.5**  **Concentration, mg/dscm** 7.7E-01 2.0E-01 1.1E-01 3.6E-01



### C mg/dscm@7%O2 **Organic Condensible PM 2.5**  **Concentration, mg/dscm @ 7% O 2**  N/A N/A N/A



### E lb/hr **Organic Condensible PM 2.5**  **Emission Rate, pounds/hr** 3.5E-02 8.4E-03 5.2E-03 1.6E-02



### E lb/ton product **Organic Condensible PM 2.5**  **Emission Rate, pounds/ton product**



### W **Inorganic Condensible PM 2.5**  **Catch Weight, mg** 29.0 12.0 23.0 21.3



### C mg/dscm **Inorganic Condensible PM 2.5**  **Concentration, mg/dscm** 1.1E+01 4.8E+00 8.8E+00 8.2E+00



### C mg/dscm@7%O2 **Inorganic Condensible PM 2.5**  **Concentration, mg/dscm @ 7% O 2**  N/A N/A N/A



### E lb/hr **Inorganic Condensible PM 2.5**  **Emission Rate, pounds/hr** 5.1E-01 2.0E-01 4.0E-01 3.7E-01



### E lb/ton product **Inorganic Condensible PM 2.5**  **Emission Rate, pounds/ton product**



### W **Total PM 2.5**  **Catch Weight, mg** 43.8 24.0 39.6 35.8



### C mg/dscm **Total PM 2.5**  **Concentration, mg/dscm** 1.7E+01 9.5E+00 1.5E+01 1.4E+01



### C mg/dscm@7%O2 **Total PM 2.5**  **Concentration, mg/dscm @ 7% O 2**  N/A N/A N/A



### E lb/hr **Total PM 2.5**  **Emission Rate, pounds/hr** 7.7E-01 4.0E-01 6.9E-01 6.2E-01



### E lb/ton product **Total PM 2.5**  **Emission Rate, pounds/ton product** 

### 10-3990.15

Thermafiber

Wabash Address

MY PersonnelPlant Job #

Location Method 29 Metals

Copyright by Walter Smith

Run Number 1 2 3 Average

Date Test Date 10/20/2010 10/21/2010 10/21/2010

Start Run Start Time 14:21:00 7:28:00 10:35:00

Run Finish Time 17:08:00 10:15:00 13:22:00

Net Traversing Points 24 24 24

Θ Net Run Time, minutes 160 160 160 160

D N Nozzle Dianeter, inches 0.311 0.311 0.311 0.311

C

p Pitot Tube Coeficient 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84

Y Dry Gas Meter Calibration Factor 1.003 1.003 1.003 1.003

P Br Barometric Pressure, inches of Mercury 29.88 29.83 29.83 29.85

∆ H Average orifice meter Differential, inches H 2 O 2.36 2.29 2.20 2.28

V

m Dry Gas Meter Volume Sampled, cubic feet 150.425 146.239 144.211 146.958

t

m Average Dry Gas Meter Temperature, °F 99.44 84.55 90.61 91.53

V mstd Dry Gas Meter Volume Sampled, dscf 143.033 142.592 139.037 141.554

V lc Total Moisture Liquid collected, ml 96 95 101 97.3

V wstd Volume of Water Vapor, standard cubic feet 4.52 4.47 4.75 4.58

% H 2 O Moisture Content of Stack Gas, % 3.1 3.0 3.3 3.1

M fd Dry Mole Fraction 0.969 0.970 0.967 0.969

%CO 2 Carbon Dioxide, % 8.3 7.6 7.0 7.6

%O 2 Oxygen, % 13.2 13.9 14.4 13.8

% CO+ N 2 Carbon Monoxide & Nitrogen, % 78.5 78.5 78.6 78.5

M d Dry Molecular Weight, lb/lb-Mole 29.86 29.77 29.70 29.77

M

s Wet Molecular weight, lb/lb-Mole 29.49 29.41 29.31 29.41

P

g Flue Gas Static Pressure, inches of H 2 O -19.0 -19.0 -19.0 -19.0

P

s Absolute Flue Gas Pressure, inches of Mercury 28.48 28.43 28.43 28.45

t

s Average Stack Gas Temperature, °F 295 301 302 299

∆ P

avg Average Velocity Head, inches of H 2 O 0.421 0.424 0.400 0.415

v

s Average Stack Gas Velocity, feet/second 44.1 44.6 43.3 44.0

A

s Stack Crossectional Area, square feet 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.1

Q sd Dry Volumetric Flow Rate, dry scfm 12,056 12,077

11,703

11,945

Q

aw Actual Wet Volumetric Flue Gas Flow Rate, acfm 18,688 18,896

18,376

18,653

%I Percent Isokinetic of Sampling Rate, % 99.5 99.0 99.6 99.4

W

p Production, tons melt per hour

W Particulate Method 5 Catch Weight, mg 32.6 32.6 24.7 30.0

C mg/dscm Particulate Concentration, mg/dscm 8.0 8.1 6.3 7.5

C mg/dscm@7%O2 Particulate Concentration, mg/dscm @ 7% O 2 N/A N/A N/A

E lb/hr Particulate Emission Rate, pounds/hr 0.36 0.37 0.28 0.33

E lb/ton product Particulate Emission Rate, pounds/ton product

W Antimony Catch Weight, μg 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0

C mg/dscm Antimony Concentration, mg/dscm 9.9E-04 9.9E-04 1.0E-03 1.0E-03

C mg/dscm@7%O2 Antimony Concentration, mg/dscm @ 7% O 2 N/A N/A N/A

E lb/hr Antimony Emission Rate, pounds/hr 4.5E-05 4.5E-05 4.5E-05 4.5E-05

E lb/ton product Antimony Emission Rate, pounds/ton product

W Arsenic Catch Weight, μg 8.1 7.5 6.2 7.3

C mg/dscm Arsenic Concentration, mg/dscm 2.0E-03 1.9E-03 1.6E-03 1.8E-03

C mg/dscm@7%O2 Arsenic Concentration, mg/dscm @ 7% O 2 N/A N/A N/A

E lb/hr Arsenic Emission Rate, pounds/hr 9.1E-05 8.4E-05 6.9E-05 8.2E-05

E lb/ton product Arsenic Emission Rate, pounds/ton product

W Beryllium Catch Weight, μg 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0

C mg/dscm Beryllium Concentration, mg/dscm 2.5E-04 2.5E-04 2.5E-04 2.5E-04

C mg/dscm@7%O2 Beryllium Concentration, mg/dscm @ 7% O 2 N/A N/A N/A

E lb/hr Beryllium Emission Rate, pounds/hr 1.1E-05 1.1E-05 1.1E-05 1.1E-05

E lb/ton product Beryllium Emission Rate, pounds/ton product

W Cadmium Catch Weight, μg 9.5 13.3 9.1 10.6

C mg/dscm Cadmium Concentration, mg/dscm 2.3E-03 3.3E-03 2.3E-03 2.6E-03

C mg/dscm@7%O2 Cadmium Concentration, mg/dscm @ 7% O 2 N/A N/A N/A

E lb/hr Cadmium Emission Rate, pounds/hr 1.1E-04 1.5E-04 1.0E-04 1.2E-04

E lb/ton product Cadmium Emission Rate, pounds/ton product

W Chromium Catch Weight, μg 3.0 7.0 3.0 4.3

C mg/dscm Chromium Concentration, mg/dscm 7.4E-04 1.7E-03 7.6E-04 1.1E-03

C mg/dscm@7%O2 Chromium Concentration, mg/dscm @ 7% O 2 N/A N/A N/A

E lb/hr Chromium Emission Rate, pounds/hr 3.3E-05 7.8E-05 3.3E-05 4.8E-05

E lb/ton product Chromium Emission Rate, pounds/ton product

W Cobalt Catch Weight, μg 1.5 1.3 1.6 1.5

C mg/dscm Cobalt Concentration, mg/dscm 3.7E-04 3.2E-04 4.1E-04 3.7E-04

C mg/dscm@7%O2 Cobalt Concentration, mg/dscm @ 7% O 2 N/A N/A N/A

E lb/hr Cobalt Emission Rate, pounds/hr 1.7E-05 1.5E-05 1.8E-05 1.6E-05

E lb/ton product Cobalt Emission Rate, pounds/ton product

W Lead Catch Weight, μg 15.6 12.0 12.9 13.5

C mg/dscm Lead Concentration, mg/dscm 3.8E-03 3.0E-03 3.3E-03 3.4E-03

C mg/dscm@7%O2 Lead Concentration, mg/dscm @ 7% O 2 N/A N/A N/A

E lb/hr Lead Emission Rate, pounds/hr 1.7E-04 1.3E-04 1.4E-04 1.5E-04

E lb/ton product Lead Emission Rate, pounds/ton product

W Manganese Catch Weight, μg 115.8 105.8 85.6 102.4

C mg/dscm Manganese Concentration, mg/dscm 2.9E-02 2.6E-02 2.2E-02 2.6E-02

C mg/dscm@7%O2 Manganese Concentration, mg/dscm @ 7% O 2 N/A N/A N/A

E lb/hr Manganese Emission Rate, pounds/hr 1.3E-03 1.2E-03 9.5E-04 1.1E-03

E lb/ton product Manganese Emission Rate, pounds/ton product

W Nickel Catch Weight, μg 7.6 7.9 5.0 6.8

C mg/dscm Nickel Concentration, mg/dscm 1.9E-03 2.0E-03 1.3E-03 1.7E-03

C mg/dscm@7%O2 Nickel Concentration, mg/dscm @ 7% O 2 N/A N/A N/A

E lb/hr Nickel Emission Rate, pounds/hr 8.5E-05 8.9E-05 5.6E-05 7.6E-05

E lb/ton product Nickel Emission Rate, pounds/ton product

W Selenium Catch Weight, μg 751.5 592.5 479.0 607.7

C mg/dscm Selenium Concentration, mg/dscm 1.9E-01 1.5E-01 1.2E-01 1.5E-01

C mg/dscm@7%O2 Selenium Concentration, mg/dscm @ 7% O 2 N/A N/A N/A

E lb/hr Selenium Emission Rate, pounds/hr 8.4E-03 6.6E-03 5.3E-03 6.8E-03

E lb/ton product Selenium Emission Rate, pounds/ton product 10-3990.15

Thermafiber

Wabash Address

JB/JP PersonnelM30B Mercury TestingCompany NamePlant Location CityPlant Location StateSource NameSource ID**Thermafiber Wabash Indiana Cupola 4 Cupola 4 Please note QA/QC documentation starting in Column "S"** Measured Value(mg/dscm)CorrectedConcentration(mg/dscm at 7% O2)Basis (Wet or Dry)Test Method Used(EPA Method 30B)Data Flag (ADL,BDL, DDL)Test MethodCommentsCalculatedEmission Rate(lb/hr)ProcessProduction Rate(tons melt/hr)CalculatedEmission Rate(lb/ton)**1 10/19/2010 8:00 10/19/2010 10:00 3.70E-05 N/A Wet EPA Method 30B 1.68E-06** **2 10/19/2010 10:21 10/19/2010 12:21 3.88E-05 N/A Wet EPA Method 30B 1.76E-06** **3 10/19/2010 12:59 10/19/2010 14:59 2.77E-05 N/A Wet EPA Method 30B 1.17E-06** Test End TimeRun Number Test Start Date Test Start Time Test End DateTotal Vapor Phase Mercury Emission Test Results**Page 1 of 3 1/21/2011** M30B Mercury TestingQA/QC DocumentationTrap IDSection 1Mass (ng)Section 2Mass (ng)TotalMass (ng)InitialSpike(ng)Total Non-Spike (ng)SampleVolume(dscm)VolumeDifference (%)Volume Diff.LimitBreaktrough(%)BreaktroughLimitConcentration(μg/dscm)**3.3 9.4 12 18706 12126 293 Stack information is from OTM** **27/28 Run 1 (8:01-12:23) R1, A 4.83 0.44 5.27 0 5.27 0.14 5% 9** **0.04 3.3 9.4 12 18706 12126 293** **Stack information is from OTM 27/28 Run 1 (8:01-12:23)** **R2, A 4.7 0.95 5.65 0 5.65 0.15 0% 20 0.04** **3.3 8.3 12.9 17457 11305 294 Stack information is from OTM** **27/28 Run 2 (12:50-16:51) R3, A 3.95 0 3.95 0 3.95 0.14 0% 0** **0.03**Flue GasTemperature (F)Other Supporting InformationFlue GasMoisture(%)Flue GasO2(%)Flue GasCO2(%)Flue Gas FlowRate (dscfm)Flue GasFlow Rate(acfm)Trap #1≤**20% of field recovery test** ≤**10% of Section 1 Hg mass for** **Hg conc. >1**μ**g/dscm: or**≤**20% of Section 1 for Hg conc.** **≤1 μg/dscm** **Page 2 of 3 1/21/2011** M30B Mercury TestingTrap IDSection 1MassSection 2MassTotalMassInitialSpikeTotal Non-SpikeSampleVolumeVolumeDifference (%)Volume Diff.LimitBreaktrough (%)BreaktroughLimitConcentration(μg/dscm)Abs. diff. RD (%) LimitCrecR (%) by RunRavg(%)Limit**R1, B 22.1 0.00 22.10 20 2.1 0.15 5% 0 0.01** **0.02 45 0.1106 83 R2, B 22.9 0.45 23.35 20 3.35 0.15 0% 2** **0.02 0.02 25 0.1222 89** **R3, B 23.8 0.94 24.74 20 4.74 0.14 0% 4 0.03** **0.01 9 0.1456 104 92** **Average Recovery,** **between 85 and 115%** Trap #2Paired Trap Agreement (RD) Measured Spike Recovery ( R )≤**20% of field recovery test** ≤**10% of Section 1 Hg mass for Hg** **conc. >1**μ**g/dscm: or**≤**20% of Section 1 for Hg conc.≤1** **μg/dscm**≥**10 % RD mass for Hg conc. >1** **μg/dscm: or**≤**20% RD or**≤**0.2 μg/dscm abs.diff.** **for Hg conc.**≤1**μg/dscm Page 3 of 3** **1/21/2011**

## Plant Job #

Location Hex Chrome Testing

Copyright by Walter Smith

Run Number 1 2 3 Average

Date Test Date 10/20/2010 10/21/2010 10/21/2010

Start Run Start Time 14:21:00 7:28:00 10:35:00

Run Finish Time 17:10:00 10:16:00 13:21:00

Net Traversing Points 24 24 24



### Θ Net Run Time, minutes 160 160 160 160



### D N Nozzle Dianeter, inches 0.310 0.310 0.310 0.310



### C

p Pitot Tube Coeficient 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84



### Y Dry Gas Meter Calibration Factor 1.003 1.003 1.003 1.003



### P Br Barometric Pressure, inches of Mercury 29.88 29.83 29.83 29.85



### ∆ H Average orifice meter Differential, inches H 2 O 2.77 2.82 2.80 2.79



### V

m Dry Gas Meter Volume Sampled, cubic feet 148.220 148.240 149.450 148.637



### t

m Average Dry Gas Meter Temperature, °F 89.61 80.69 85.63 85.31



### V mstd Dry Gas Meter Volume Sampled, dscf 143.599 145.766 145.617 144.994



### V lc Total Moisture Liquid collected, ml 110 164 170 148.0



### V wstd Volume of Water Vapor, standard cubic feet 5.18 7.72 8.00 6.97



### % H 2 

### O Moisture Content of Stack Gas, % 3.5 5.0 5.2 4.6



### M fd Dry Mole Fraction 0.965 0.950 0.948 0.954



### %CO 2 Carbon Dioxide, % 8.3 7.6 7 7.6



### %O 2 Oxygen, % 13.2 13.9 14.4 13.8



### % CO+ N 2 Carbon Monoxide & Nitrogen, % 78.5 78.5 78.6 78.5



### M d Dry Molecular Weight, lb/lb-Mole 29.86 29.77 29.70 29.77



### M

s Wet Molecular weight, lb/lb-Mole 29.44 29.18 29.09 29.24



### P

g Flue Gas Static Pressure, inches of H 2 O -19.0 -19.0 -19.0 -19.0



### P

s Absolute Flue Gas Pressure, inches of Mercury 28.48 28.43 28.43 28.45



### t

s Average Stack Gas Temperature, °F 297 303 305 301



### ∆ P

avg Average Velocity Head, inches of H 2 O 0.430 0.448 0.441 0.440



### v s Average Stack Gas Velocity, feet/second 44.7 46.0 45.8 45.5



### A

s Stack Crossectional Area, square feet 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.1



### Q sd Dry Volumetric Flow Rate, dry scfm 12,147 12,196

12,078

12,141



### Q

aw Actual Wet Volumetric Flue Gas Flow Rate, acfm 18,950 19,530

19,416

19,299



### %I Percent Isokinetic of Sampling Rate, % 99.7 100.8 101.7 100.7



### W

p Production, tons melt per hour



### W Hexavalent Chromium Catch Weight, μg 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4



### C mg/dscm Hexavalent Chromium Concentration, mg/dscm 9.8E-05 9.7E-05 9.7E-05 9.7E-05



### C mg/dscm@7%O2 Hexavalent Chromium Concentration, mg/dscm @ 7% O 2 N/A N/A N/A



### E lb/hr Hexavalent Chromium Emission Rate, pounds/hr 4.5E-06 4.4E-06 4.4E-06 4.4E-06



### E lb/ton product Hexavalent Chromium Emission Rate, pounds/ton product 

## 10-3990.15

Thermafiber

Wabash Address

MY Personnel

## Plant Job #

Location HCl and HF Testing

Copyright by Walter Smith

Run Number 1 2 3 Average

Date Test Date 10/19/2010 10/20/2010 10/20/2010

Start Run Start Time 16:06:00 7:29:00 12:40:00

Run Finish Time 17:18:00 9:56:00 13:50:00

Net Traversing Points 24 24 24



### Θ Net Run Time, minutes 64 64 64 64



### D N Nozzle Dianeter, inches 0.311 0.311 0.311 0.311



### C

p Pitot Tube Coeficient 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84



### Y Dry Gas Meter Calibration Factor 1.003 1.003 1.003 1.003



### P Br Barometric Pressure, inches of Mercury 29.99 29.88 29.88 29.92



### ∆ H Average orifice meter Differential, inches H 2 O 1.77 1.69 2.10 1.85



### V

m Dry Gas Meter Volume Sampled, cubic feet 51.258 49.462 56.061 52.260



### t

m Average Dry Gas Meter Temperature, °F 86.94 66.28 89.06 80.76



### V mstd Dry Gas Meter Volume Sampled, dscf 49.964 49.913 54.278 51.385



### V lc Total Moisture Liquid collected, ml 37 32 25 31.3



### V wstd Volume of Water Vapor, standard cubic feet 1.74 1.51 1.18 1.47



### % H 2 

### O Moisture Content of Stack Gas, % 3.4 2.9 2.1 2.8



### M fd Dry Mole Fraction 0.966 0.971 0.979 0.972



### %CO 2 Carbon Dioxide, % 8.3 9.3 9.3 9.0



### %O 2 Oxygen, % 12.9 12 12.0 12.3



### % CO+ N 2 Carbon Monoxide & Nitrogen, % 78.8 78.7 78.7 78.7



### M d Dry Molecular Weight, lb/lb-Mole 29.84 29.97 29.97 29.93



### M

s Wet Molecular weight, lb/lb-Mole 29.45 29.62 29.71 29.59



### P

g Flue Gas Static Pressure, inches of H 2 O -19.0 -19.0 -19.0 -19.0



### P

s Absolute Flue Gas Pressure, inches of Mercury 28.59 28.48 28.48 28.52



### t

s Average Stack Gas Temperature, °F 296 288 287 291



### ∆ P

avg Average Velocity Head, inches of H 2 O 0.335 0.319 0.376 0.344



### v s Average Stack Gas Velocity, feet/second 39.4 38.2 41.3 39.6



### A

s Stack Crossectional Area, square feet 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.1



### Q sd Dry Volumetric Flow Rate, dry scfm 10,760 10,553

11,542

10,952



### Q

aw Actual Wet Volumetric Flue Gas Flow Rate, acfm 16,693 16,183

17,534

16,803



### %I Percent Isokinetic of Sampling Rate, % 97.3 99.0 98.5 98.3



### W

p Production, tons melt per hour



### W HCl Catch Weight, μg 30,000 37,000 32,000 33,000



### C mg/dscm HCl Concentration, mg/dscm 2.1E+01 2.6E+01 2.1E+01 2.3E+01



### C mg/dscm@7%O2 HCl Concentration, mg/dscm @ 7% O 2 N/A N/A N/A



### E lb/hr HCl Emission Rate, pounds/hr 8.5E-01 1.0E+00 9.0E-01 9.3E-01



### E lb/ton product HCl Emission Rate, pounds/ton product



### W HF Catch Weight, μg 14,000 21,000 26,000 20,333



### C mg/dscm HF Concentration, mg/dscm 9.9E+00 1.5E+01 1.7E+01 1.4E+01



### C mg/dscm@7%O2 HF Concentration, mg/dscm @ 7% O 2 N/A N/A N/A



### E lb/hr HF Emission Rate, pounds/hr 4.0E-01 5.9E-01 7.3E-01 5.7E-01



### E lb/ton product HF Emission Rate, pounds/ton product 

## 10-3990.15

Thermafiber

Wabash Address

JP Personnel**Company Name Plant Location City** **Plant Location State Source Name** **Source ID Thermafiber Wabash Indiana Cupola 4 Cupola 4** **Measured Value (ppm)** **Corrected Concentration** **(ppmvd at 7% O 2** **) Basis (Wet or Dry)** **Test Method Used (EPA Method 318)** **Data Flag (ADL, BDL, DDL)** **Test Method Comments** **Run 1 10/19/2010 9:47 10/19/2010 10:47 2819 NA wet Method 318 ADL 148.58 3.3 9.4 11.9 18706 12536 12126 293** **Stack information is from OTM 27/28 Run 1 (8:01-** **12:23) Run 2 10/19/2010 12:01 10/19/2010 13:01 1307 NA wet Method 318 ADL 66.56** **3.3 8.85 12.4 18082 12112 11716 293 Stack information is** **average from OTM 27/28 Run 1 and Run 2** **Run 3 10/19/2010 13:28 10/19/2010 14:28 894 NA wet Method 318 ADL 43.93 3.3 8.3 12.9 17457 11688 11305 294** **Stack information is from OTM 27/28 Run 2 (12:50-** **16:51) Process** **Production Rate** **(tons melt/hr) Test End Time** **Carbon Monoxide Emission Test Results Run Number Test Start Date Test Start Time Test End Date** **Calculated Emission Rate** **(lb/ton) Flue Gas** **Flow Rate (scfm)** **Other Supporting Information** **Calculated Emission Rate** **(lb/hr) Flue Gas** **Moisture (%) Flue Gas** **O 2** **(%) Flue Gas** **Flow Rate (acfm)** **Flue Gas CO** **2 (%)** **Flue Gas Flow Rate** **(dscfm) Flue Gas** **Temperature (** **o F)** **Method 318 Sheet.xls CO Emission Data-318** **1/21/2011**

# APPENDIX B

PROCESS DATA

# APPENDIX C

FIELD AND COMPUTER-GENERATED DATA

SHEETSBT Environmental ConsultingIsokinetic Run SheetProject No.: 10-3990.15 Probe # 5 ft ptf Pollutant HCl Points/Port 8Start Finish Pre PostCompany Thermafiber DGM # MB 5 Method 26A Total Points16Location WabashRate (cfm)Run # 1 Time/pt (min) 4.0Source Cupola #4 Delta∆H@ 1.53 Date 19-Oct-10 Time/reading 4.0Operator JPBws (%)3.37 # of Ports 2 Total Run64.0Filter Number Condensate Volume 23Cp0.840Ps (in Hg)28.59Barometric29.99 Silica Gel Weight Gain 14DGM Y1.003Pm (in Hg)29.99Ref Temp 68Static (in H2O)-19Actual Dn (in)0.311O2 (%)12.9 Ref Press 29.92Stack Dia (ft) 3.00 An (ft^2)0.00053CO2 (%)8.3Md29.84Stack Area (sf)7.07Est.DH(in H2O) Ms29.45Act. Flow (cfm)16,693Must delete extra zeros in the Velocity columnPreliminary dP (in H20) Total Vol.(cf)0.0Wet Ref Flow (cfm)11,135Preliminary Ts (oF) Est. Us (ft/s)0.0Dry Ref Flow (cfm)10,760Preliminary Tm (oF) Theor Dn (in)#DIV/0! Comments:"Data Entry Cells""Calculated CellsDo Not Touch"PT # Start Time End TimeClock Time(24hr)DGM Vol. Delta P Stack Temp Meter In Meter OutDesired DeltaHActualDelta HProbe Temp.(*F)Filter Temp(*F)Imp temp.(*F) Pump Vac.80.0 4.0 16:0681.97 0.32 302 80 801.781.67 263 257 66 474.0 8.0 16:1084.96 0.35 300 83 811.941.83 271 270 61 468.0 12.0 16:1488.17 0.36 294 85 812.001.89 273 272 61 4512.0 16.0 16:1891.46 0.37 297 86 812.061.94 270 269 59 4416.0 20.0 16:2294.79 0.37 293 88 812.061.95 271 272 57 4320.0 24.0 16:2698.13 0.39 293 90 822.172.06 269 271 55 4.5224.0 28.0 16:30101.57 0.31 295 91 821.721.64 270 269 54 4128.0 32.0 16:38104.72 0.30 298 92 831.671.59 271 270 55 4832.0 36.0 16:46107.80 0.30 300 93 831.671.59 270 266 56 4736.0 40.0 16:50110.82 0.33 304 93 841.831.75 269 270 57 4640.0 44.0 16:54113.98 0.37 301 94 852.061.96 270 274 57 4.5544.0 48.0 16:58117.34 0.34 294 94 851.891.8 270 269 56 4.5448.0 52.0 17:02120.59 0.32 293 95 851.781.7 269 272 57 4352.0 56.0 17:06123.73 0.31 294 95 851.721.64 270 272 57 4256.0 60.0 17:10126.85 0.33 293 96 861.831.75 271 268 57 4160.0 64.0 17:14130.08 0.29 292 97 861.611.54 270 270 57 464.0 17:18133.23Average:51.26 0.34 296.4 90.8 83.11.861.77 270 269 57.625 4Leak CheckBT Environmental ConsultingIsokinetic Run SheetProject No.: 10-3990.15 Probe # 5 ft ptf Pollutant HCl Points/Port 8Start Finish Pre PostCompany Thermafiber DGM # MB 5 Method 26A Total Points16Location WabashRate (cfm)Run # 2 Time/pt (min) 4.0Source Cupola #4 Delta∆H@ 1.53 Date 20-Oct-10 Time/reading 4.0Operator JPBws (%)2.93 # of Ports 2 Total Run64.0Filter Number Condensate Volume 14Cp0.840Ps (in Hg)28.48Barometric29.88 Silica Gel Weight Gain 18DGM Y1.003Pm (in Hg)29.88Ref Temp 68Static (in H2O)-19Actual Dn (in)0.311O2 (%)12 Ref Press 29.92Stack Dia (ft) 3.00 An (ft^2)0.00053CO2 (%)9.3Md29.97Stack Area (sf)7.07Est.DH(in H2O) Ms29.62Act. Flow (cfm)16,183Must delete extra zeros in the Velocity columnPreliminary dP (in H20) Total Vol.(cf)0.0Wet Ref Flow (cfm)10,872Preliminary Ts (oF) Est. Us (ft/s)0.0Dry Ref Flow (cfm)10,553Preliminary Tm (oF) Theor Dn (in)#DIV/0! Comments:"Data Entry Cells""Calculated CellsDo Not Touch"PT # Start Time End TimeClock Time(24hr)DGM Vol. Delta P Stack Temp Meter In Meter OutDesired DeltaHActualDelta HProbe Temp.(*F)Filter Temp(*F)Imp temp.(*F) Pump Vac.80.0 4.0 7:29133.60 0.32 298 57 571.741.66 267 270 41 474.0 8.0 7:33136.68 0.25 293 59 571.361.30 262 271 44 468.0 12.0 7:37139.35 0.24 294 62 581.311.25 266 271 42 4512.0 16.0 7:41141.97 0.29 288 65 581.581.52 274 270 48 4416.0 20.0 7:45144.87 0.33 282 68 591.801.74 266 269 49 4320.0 24.0 7:49147.98 0.36 287 70 601.961.90 276 270 52 4224.0 28.0 7:53151.27 0.36 289 72 611.961.90 269 271 56 5128.0 32.0 8:01154.55 0.35 288 73 611.911.85 270 271 63 5832.0 36.0 8:06157.81 0.35 289 71 631.911.86 265 273 65 5736.0 40.0 8:10161.01 0.33 290 73 631.801.75 270 273 65 5640.0 44.0 8:14164.21 0.32 289 75 641.741.70 257 266 65 5544.0 48.0 8:18167.33 0.30 288 76 651.631.60 250 270 65 5448.0 52.0 8:22170.37 0.32 283 76 661.741.71 245 266 65 5352.0 56.0 8:26173.47 0.31 284 77 661.691.65 255 270 65 5256.0 60.0 8:32/9:50176.57 0.32 280 77 671.741.71 255 270 65 5160.0 64.0 9:52179.72 0.36 289 74 711.961.93 242 272 53 564.0 9:56183.06Average:49.46 0.32 288.2 70.3 62.31.741.69 261.8 270.2 56.4 5Leak CheckBT Environmental ConsultingIsokinetic Run SheetProject No.: 10-3990.15 Probe # 5FT F Pollutant HCl Points/Port 8Start Finish Pre PostCompany Thermafiber DGM # MB5 Method 26A Total Points16Location WabashRate (cfm)Run # 3 Time/pt (min) 4.0Source Cupola #4 Delta∆H@ 1.53 Date 20-Oct-10 Time/reading 4.0Operator JB/JPBws (%)2.12 # of Ports 2 Total Run64.0Filter Number Condensate Volume 12Cp0.840Ps (in Hg)28.48Barometric29.88 Silica Gel Weight Gain 13DGM Y1.003Pm (in Hg)30.10Ref Temp 68Static (in H2O)-19Actual Dn (in)0.311O2 (%)12 Ref Press 29.92Stack Dia (ft) 3.00 An (ft^2)0.00053CO2 (%)9.3Md29.97Stack Area (sf)7.07Est.DH(in H2O)3.00Ms29.71Act. Flow (cfm)17,534Must delete extra zeros in the Velocity columnPreliminary dP (in H20)0.36Total Vol.(cf)0.0Wet Ref Flow (cfm)11,792Preliminary Ts (oF)125Est. Us (ft/s)35.8Dry Ref Flow (cfm)11,542Preliminary Tm (oF)85Theor Dn (in)0.2649 Comments:"Data Entry Cells""Calculated CellsDo Not Touch"PT # Start Time End TimeClock Time(24hr)DGM Vol. Delta P Stack Temp Meter In Meter OutDesired DeltaHActualDelta HProbe Temp.(*F)Filter Temp(*F)Imp temp.(*F) Pump Vac.80.0 4.0 12:40183.32 0.32 283 84 841.841.78 245 269 61 874.0 8.0 12:44186.47 0.39 290 85 842.252.16 246 271 63 1068.0 12.0 12:48190.15 0.41 285 85 842.362.27 269 270 64 10512.0 16.0 12:52193.91 0.43 284 86 842.482.39 262 271 61 5416.0 20.0 12:56197.57 0.37 281 88 842.132.06 273 267 60 5320.0 24.0 13:00200.92 0.33 286 89 841.901.84 271 271 60 5224.0 28.0 13:04204.18 0.38 291 91 842.192.11 271 268 60 5128.0 32.0 13:08207.68 0.31 286 93 851.781.73 272 268 61 5832.0 36.0 13:18210.90 0.32 287 94 851.841.78 270 271 61 5736.0 40.0 13:22214.17 0.40 288 95 862.302.23 270 266 62 5640.0 44.0 13:26217.72 0.38 291 96 862.192.12 269 275 61 5544.0 48.0 13:30221.22 0.38 291 98 892.192.12 267 270 61 5448.0 52.0 13:34224.75 0.42 293 98 872.422.34 271 285 61 5352.0 56.0 13:38228.45 0.41 292 99 882.362.29 272 255 61 5256.0 60.0 13:42232.18 0.41 284 99 882.362.29 271 274 61 5160.0 64.0 13:46235.85 0.36 286 99 892.072.01 266 268 61 564.0 13:50239.38Average:56.06 0.38 287.4 92.4 85.72.172.10 266.6 269.9 61.1875 5.8Leak CheckBT Environmental ConsultingIsokinetic Run SheetProject No.: 10-3990.15 Probe # 5ft A Pollutant PM2.5 Points/Port 6Start Finish Pre PostCompany Thermafiber DGM # MB-3 Method OTM27/28 Total Points12Location WabashRate (cfm)0.75 Run # 1 Time/pt (min) 21.2Source Cupola 61 Delta∆H@ 1.83 Date 19-Oct-10 Time/reading 21.2Operator MYBws (%)3.28 # of Ports 2 Total Run253.8Filter Number 10090240 Condensate Volume 45Cp0.840Ps (in Hg)28.59Barometric29.99 Silica Gel Weight Gain 21DGM Y1.003Pm (in Hg)29.99Ref Temp 68Static (in H2O)-19Actual Dn (in)0.2O2 (%)12.00 Ref Press 29.92Stack Dia (ft) 3.00 An (ft^2)0.00022CO2 (%)9.4Md29.98Stack Area (sf)7.07Est.DH(in H2O) Ms29.59Act. Flow (cfm)18,706Must delete extra zeros in the Velocity columnPreliminary dP (in H20) Total Vol.(cf)190.4Wet Ref Flow (cfm)12,536Preliminary Ts (oF) Est. Us (ft/s)0.0Dry Ref Flow (cfm)12,126Preliminary Tm (oF) Theor Dn (in)#DIV/0! Comments:PT # Start Time End TimeClock Time(24hr)DGM Vol. Delta P Stack Temp Meter In Meter OutDesired DeltaHActualDelta HProbe Temp.(*F)Filter Temp(*F)Imp temp.(*F) Pump Vac.60.0 21.2 8:01747.82 0.56 297 55 550.610.403 251 250 35 6521.2 42.3 8:22756.28 0.57 302 58 560.630.403 250 251 36 6442.3 63.5 8:43764.90 0.49 291 62 580.540.399 250 249 36 6363.5 84.6 9:04772.97 0.35 288 64 600.380.412 247 250 38 7284.6 105.8 9:25779.65 0.34 292 64 610.370.417 250 250 37 71105.8 126.9 9:46786.45 0.33 291 64 610.360.413 250 250 37 76126.9 148.1 10:07793.06 0.37 289 64 610.410.414 251 260 40 75148.1 169.2 10:28799.76 0.35 291 65 620.380.416 249 259 40 74169.2 190.4 10:49806.99 0.40 289 66 620.440.415 251 261 42 73190.4 211.5 11:10813.94 0.44 294 69 660.480.417 249 261 44 82211.5 232.7 11:31821.66 0.45 296 72 680.490.415 249 261 46 81232.7 253.8 11:52829.50 0.48 295 76 720.530.414 250 261 49 8253.8 12:23838.13Average:90.31 0.43 292.9 64.9 61.80.470.41 250 255 40 7Leak CheckBT Environmental ConsultingIsokinetic Run SheetProject No.: 10-3990.15 Probe # 5ft A Pollutant PM2.5 Points/Port 6Start Finish Pre PostCompany Thermafiber DGM # MB-3 Method OTM27-28 Total Points12Location WabashRate (cfm)0.75 Run # 2 Time/pt (min) 19.7Source Cupola 61 Delta∆H@ 1.83 Date 19-Oct-10 Time/reading 19.7Operator MYBws (%)3.28 # of Ports 2 Total Run236.3Filter Number 10090240 Condensate Volume 38Cp0.840Ps (in Hg)28.59Barometric29.99 Silica Gel Weight Gain 26DGM Y1.003Pm (in Hg)29.99Ref Temp 68Static (in H2O)-19Actual Dn (in)0.2O2 (%)12.90 Ref Press 29.92Stack Dia (ft) 3.00 An (ft^2)0.00022CO2 (%)8.3Md29.84Stack Area (sf)7.07Est.DH(in H2O) Ms29.46Act. Flow (cfm)17,457Must delete extra zeros in the Velocity columnPreliminary dP (in H20) Total Vol.(cf)177.2Wet Ref Flow (cfm)11,688Preliminary Ts (oF) Est. Us (ft/s)0.0Dry Ref Flow (cfm)11,305Preliminary Tm (oF) Theor Dn (in)#DIV/0! Comments:"Data Entry Cells""Calculated CellsDo Not Touch"PT # Start Time End TimeClock Time(24hr)DGM Vol. Delta P Stack Temp Meter In Meter OutDesired DeltaHActualDelta HProbe Temp.(*F)Filter Temp(*F)Imp temp.(*F) Pump Vac.60.0 19.7 0:00845.14 0.45 294 76 760.510.423 253 250 60 6519.7 39.4 0:19853.34 0.43 295 79 760.490.423 251 250 60 6439.4 59.1 0:38861.55 0.42 297 80 770.480.422 250 251 59 6359.1 78.8 0:57869.66 0.30 295 82 790.340.42 248 250 61 6278.8 98.5 1:16876.58 0.31 296 83 800.350.424 248 251 58 6198.5 118.1 1:35883.62 0.29 290 84 810.330.424 252 250 57 66118.1 137.8 1:54890.34 0.47 294 85 820.530.431 251 249 53 65137.8 157.5 2:13899.01 0.43 298 84 820.490.428 248 249 52 74157.5 177.2 2:32907.25 0.37 298 84 820.420.423 249 250 53 73177.2 196.9 2:51914.82 0.28 297 85 820.320.423 248 249 53 72196.9 216.6 3:10921.34 0.33 284 86 830.370.424 252 251 52 71216.6 236.3 3:29928.45 0.36 285 86 830.410.44 249 249 51 7236.3 14:30935.70Average:90.56 0.37 293.6 82.8 80.30.420.43 249.9 249.9 55.8 6Leak CheckBT Environmental ConsultingIsokinetic Run SheetProject No.: 10-3990.15 Probe # 5ft A Pollutant PM2.5 Points/Port 6Start Finish Pre PostCompany Thermafiber DGM # MB-3 Method OTM27-28 Total Points12Location WabashRate (cfm)0.75 Run # 3 Time/pt (min) 21.0Source Cupola 61 Delta∆H@ 1.83 Date 20-Oct-10 Time/reading 21.0Operator MYBws (%)2.53 # of Ports 2 Total Run252.1Filter Number 10090236 Condensate Volume 28Cp0.840Ps (in Hg)28.48Barometric29.88 Silica Gel Weight Gain 23DGM Y1.003Pm (in Hg)29.88Ref Temp 68Static (in H2O)-19Actual Dn (in)0.2O2 (%)12.00 Ref Press 29.92Stack Dia (ft) 3.00 An (ft^2)0.00022CO2 (%)9.3Md29.97Stack Area (sf)7.07Est.DH(in H2O) Ms29.67Act. Flow (cfm)18,522Must delete extra zeros in the Velocity columnPreliminary dP (in H20) Total Vol.(cf)189.1Wet Ref Flow (cfm)12,449Preliminary Ts (oF) Est. Us (ft/s)0.0Dry Ref Flow (cfm)12,135Preliminary Tm (oF) Theor Dn (in)#DIV/0! Comments:"Data Entry Cells""Calculated CellsDo Not Touch"PT # Start Time End TimeClock Time(24hr)DGM Vol. Delta P Stack Temp Meter In Meter OutDesired DeltaHActualDelta HProbe Temp.(*F)Filter Temp(*F)Imp temp.(*F) Pump Vac.60.0 21.0 0:00936.06 0.29 287 56 560.330.446 250 250 43 5521.0 42.0 0:21942.44 0.32 290 60 580.360.446 252 250 46 6442.0 63.0 0:42949.16 0.34 283 62 610.390.444 250 248 53 6363.0 84.0 1:03956.01 0.54 278 66 630.610.455 249 250 55 6284.0 105.0 1:24964.44 0.50 286 69 650.570.463 249 251 56 61105.0 126.0 1:45972.94 0.44 289 73 630.500.455 248 249 57 66126.0 147.0 2:06980.82 0.51 294 76 720.580.45 253 253 59 75147.0 168.1 2:27989.24 0.48 290 79 760.540.451 250 249 62 84168.1 189.1 2:48997.57 0.48 289 81 780.540.46 253 250 66 83189.1 210.1 3:091006.06 0.37 287 81 780.420.463 257 251 65 82210.1 231.1 3:301013.60 0.39 288 81 780.440.465 250 253 57 81231.1 252.1 3:511021.20 0.40 293 81 780.450.464 249 250 57 8252.1 4:121028.83Average:92.77 0.42 287.8 72.1 68.80.480.46 250.8 250.3 56.3333333 6.8Leak CheckBT Environmental ConsultingIsokinetic Run SheetProject No.: 10-3990.15 Probe # 5FT A Pollutant Metals Points/Port 8Start Finish Pre PostCompany Thermafiber DGM # MB5 Method M29 Total Points16Location WabashRate (cfm)Run # 1 Time/pt (min) 10.0Source Cupola #4 Delta∆H@ 1.53 Date 20-Oct-10 Time/reading 5.0Operator JB/JPBws (%)3.06 # of Ports 2 Total Run160.0Filter Number 10081657 Condensate Volume 64Cp0.840Ps (in Hg)28.48Barometric29.88 Silica Gel Weight Gain 32DGM Y1.003Pm (in Hg)30.10Ref Temp 68Static (in H2O)-19Actual Dn (in)0.311O2 (%)13.2 Ref Press 29.92Stack Dia (ft) 3.00 An (ft^2)0.00053CO2 (%)8.3Md29.86Stack Area (sf)7.07Est.DH(in H2O)3.00Ms29.49Act. Flow (cfm)18,688Must delete extra zeros in the Velocity columnPreliminary dP (in H20)0.36Total Vol.(cf)0.0Wet Ref Flow (cfm)12,437Preliminary Ts (oF)125Est. Us (ft/s)36.0Dry Ref Flow (cfm)12,056Preliminary Tm (oF)85Theor Dn (in)0.2657 Comments:"Data Entry Cells""Calculated CellsDo Not Touch"PT # Start Time End TimeClock Time(24hr)DGM Vol. Delta P Stack Temp Meter In Meter OutDesired DeltaHActualDelta HProbe Temp.(*F)Filter Temp(*F)Imp temp.(*F) Pump Vac.80.0 5.0 14:21239.85 0.32 290 89 891.831.78 246 262 66 55.0 10.0 14:26243.96 0.34 294 93 901.941.89 266 272 66 5710.0 15.0 14:31248.13 0.41 297 97 902.342.28 265 269 66 515.0 20.0 14:36252.67 0.43 296 101 912.462.4 249 253 62 5620.0 25.0 14:41257.31 0.45 296 102 912.572.51 247 248 63 5.525.0 30.0 14:46262.19 0.46 299 102 922.632.57 250 248 62 5.5530.0 35.0 14:51267.06 0.41 300 104 922.342.29 250 260 62 5.535.0 40.0 14:56271.7 0.44 300 104 932.512.45 251 257 62 5.5440.0 45.0 15:01276.45 0.49 300 104 942.802.73 249 245 63 645.0 50.0 15:06281.50 0.52 302 105 942.972.9 249 250 64 6350.0 55.0 15:11286.62 0.48 298 105 952.742.68 252 250 64 5.555.0 60.0 15:16291.69 0.49 301 106 952.802.74 251 251 65 5.5260.0 65.0 15:21296.8 0.35 296 106 962.001.96 249 253 66 5.565.0 70.0 15:26301.19 0.37 293 105 962.112.07 249 254 66 5.5170.0 75.0 15:31305.66 0.35 297 105 962.001.96 250 253 66 5.575.0 80.0 15:41309.99 0.36 292 105 972.062.02 249 248 66 5.5880.0 85.0 15:48314.41 0.50 300 98 962.862.79 245 251 65 685.0 90.0 15:53319.48 0.52 299 103 972.982.92 259 251 65 6790.0 95.0 15:58324.62 0.52 298 105 972.972.91 273 252 57 695.0 100.0 16:03329.83 0.50 298 105 972.862.8 270 252 59 66100.0 105.0 16:08335.04 0.45 297 106 972.572.52 260 247 60 6105.0 110.0 16:13339.95 0.47 297 106 972.682.64 246 250 60 65110.0 115.0 16:18344.9 0.43 295 106 972.462.41 252 250 61 6115.0 120.0 16:23349.62 0.43 295 106 972.462.42 249 250 61 64120.0 125.0 16:28354.45 0.37 293 106 972.112.08 251 250 60 6125.0 130.0 16:33358.86 0.35 295 106 982.001.97 251 251 61 63130.0 135.0 16:38363.25 0.30 291 106 981.711.69 250 247 62 5.5135.0 140.0 16:43367.35 0.28 287 106 981.601.57 250 250 62 5.52140.0 145.0 16:48371.33 0.41 290 105 982.342.31 251 252 62 6145.0 150.0 16:53375.95 0.42 284 106 982.402.36 251 251 61 61150.0 155.0 16:58380.66 0.41 290 106 982.342.31 251 251 62 6155.0 160.0 17:03385.36 0.45 290 106 982.572.53 246 252 63 6160.0 17:08390.27Average:150.43 0.42 295.3 103.6 95.32.412.36 252 253 62.8125 6Leak CheckBT Environmental ConsultingIsokinetic Run SheetProject No.: 10-3990.15 Probe # 5FT A Pollutant Metals Points/Port 8Start Finish Pre PostCompany Thermafiber DGM # MB5 Method M29 Total Points16Location WabashRate (cfm)Run # 2 Time/pt (min) 10.0Source Cupola #4 Delta∆H@ 1.53 Date 21-Oct-10 Time/reading 5.0Operator JB/JPBws (%)3.04 # of Ports 2 Total Run160.0Filter Number 10081651 Condensate Volume 64Cp0.840Ps (in Hg)28.43Barometric29.83 Silica Gel Weight Gain 31DGM Y1.003Pm (in Hg)30.05Ref Temp 68Static (in H2O)-19Actual Dn (in)0.311O2 (%)13.9 Ref Press 29.92Stack Dia (ft) 3.00 An (ft^2)0.00053CO2 (%)7.6Md29.77Stack Area (sf)7.07Est.DH(in H2O)3.00Ms29.41Act. Flow (cfm)18,896Must delete extra zeros in the Velocity columnPreliminary dP (in H20)0.36Total Vol.(cf)0.0Wet Ref Flow (cfm)12,455Preliminary Ts (oF)125Est. Us (ft/s)36.0Dry Ref Flow (cfm)12,077Preliminary Tm (oF)85Theor Dn (in)0.2653 Comments:"Data Entry Cells""Calculated CellsDo Not Touch"PT # Start Time End TimeClock Time(24hr)DGM Vol. Delta P Stack Temp Meter In Meter OutDesired DeltaHActualDelta HProbe Temp.(*F)Filter Temp(*F)Imp temp.(*F) Pump Vac.80.0 5.0 7:28390.56 0.32 284 73 731.771.74 245 250 52 55.0 10.0 7:33394.56 0.36 307 74 731.991.93 245 251 52 5710.0 15.0 7:38398.78 0.47 304 77 742.592.52 251 251 45 5.515.0 20.0 7:43403.43 0.50 305 78 742.762.67 251 250 45 5.5620.0 25.0 7:48408.25 0.52 306 80 742.872.78 250 250 44 5.525.0 30.0 7:53413.21 0.54 308 81 742.982.88 250 249 45 5.5530.0 35.0 7:58418.23 0.48 303 83 742.652.57 249 250 46 5.535.0 40.0 8:03423.12 0.50 309 84 852.762.67 252 250 46 5.5440.0 45.0 8:08428.02 0.40 305 85 762.212.14 249 249 48 545.0 50.0 8:13432.40 0.39 306 85 762.152.09 250 252 47 5350.0 55.0 8:18436.69 0.41 307 86 772.262.2 248 248 48 555.0 60.0 8:23441.15 0.42 302 87 772.322.25 248 250 47 5260.0 65.0 8:28445.66 0.35 298 88 781.931.88 251 250 48 565.0 70.0 8:33449.87 0.34 286 89 781.881.83 251 2250 49 5170.0 75.0 8:38454.1 0.34 284 89 791.881.83 250 249 49 575.0 80.0 8:43458.29 0.37 285 89 792.042 251 251 51 5880.0 85.0 8:55462.57 0.40 298 82 792.212.16 240 251 50 5.585.0 90.0 9:00466.99 0.43 300 87 802.372.32 240 251 51 5.5790.0 95.0 9:05471.56 0.38 301 90 812.102.05 244 251 48 5.595.0 100.0 9:10475.98 0.45 304 92 812.482.43 247 251 48 5.56100.0 105.0 9:15480.69 0.41 302 93 822.262.22 250 252 49 5.5105.0 110.0 9:20485.22 0.42 305 93 822.322.27 246 249 47 5.55110.0 115.0 9:25489.73 0.42 306 94 832.322.27 250 248 47 5.5115.0 120.0 9:30494.26 0.44 307 95 842.432.39 245 251 48 64120.0 125.0 9:35498.88 0.42 308 95 842.322.27 247 249 48 6125.0 130.0 9:40503.40 0.46 306 96 852.542.49 243 250 50 63130.0 135.0 9:45508.2 0.42 306 97 862.322.28 247 250 49 6135.0 140.0 9:50512.91 0.43 302 99 872.372.33 242 250 50 62140.0 145.0 9:55517.58 0.45 301 99 882.482.44 243 250 52 6145.0 150.0 10:00522.25 0.45 296 99 882.482.44 246 250 52 61150.0 155.0 10:05527.1 0.45 297 100 902.482.44 247 250 52 6155.0 160.0 10:10531.95 0.44 301 100 912.432.39 246 250 53 6160.0 10:15536.79Average:146.24 0.42 301.2 88.7 80.42.342.29 247.3 312.6 48.6 5Leak CheckBT Environmental ConsultingIsokinetic Run SheetProject No.: 10-3990.15 Probe # 5FT A Pollutant Metals Points/Port 8Start Finish Pre PostCompany Thermafiber DGM # MB5 Method M29 Total Points16Location WabashRate (cfm)Run # 3 Time/pt (min) 10.0Source Cupola #4 Delta∆H@ 1.53 Date 21-Oct-10 Time/reading 5.0Operator JB/JPBws (%)3.31 # of Ports 2 Total Run160.0Filter Number 10081654 Condensate Volume 71Cp0.840Ps (in Hg)28.43Barometric29.83 Silica Gel Weight Gain 30DGM Y1.003Pm (in Hg)30.05Ref Temp 68Static (in H2O)-19Actual Dn (in)0.311O2 (%)14.4 Ref Press 29.92Stack Dia (ft) 3.00 An (ft^2)0.00053CO2 (%)7.0Md29.70Stack Area (sf)7.07Est.DH(in H2O)3.00Ms29.31Act. Flow (cfm)18,376Must delete extra zeros in the Velocity columnPreliminary dP (in H20)0.36Total Vol.(cf)0.0Wet Ref Flow (cfm)12,103Preliminary Ts (oF)125Est. Us (ft/s)36.1Dry Ref Flow (cfm)11,703Preliminary Tm (oF)85Theor Dn (in)0.2655 Comments:"Data Entry Cells""Calculated CellsDo Not Touch"PT # Start Time End TimeClock Time(24hr)DGM Vol. Delta P Stack Temp Meter In Meter OutDesired DeltaHActualDelta HProbe Temp.(*F)Filter Temp(*F)Imp temp.(*F) Pump Vac.80.0 5.0 10:35536.99 0.42 298 92 892.332.32 240 235 60 55.0 10.0 10:40541.54 0.39 306 93 892.162.14 241 242 59 5710.0 15.0 10:45546.01 0.37 307 95 892.052.03 241 250 52 515.0 20.0 10:50550.34 0.37 306 96 882.052.03 250 251 51 5620.0 25.0 10:55554.67 0.35 304 97 891.941.92 249 251 51 525.0 30.0 11:00558.94 0.36 306 98 892.001.98 251 250 52 5530.0 35.0 11:05563.28 0.35 305 98 891.941.92 249 251 51 535.0 40.0 11:10567.56 0.35 307 98 891.941.92 250 250 53 5440.0 45.0 11:15571.85 0.44 307 98 892.442.42 251 251 53 545.0 50.0 11:20576.59 0.45 308 98 892.502.47 251 251 53 5350.0 55.0 11:25581.43 0.39 311 97 902.162.14 250 248 54 555.0 60.0 11:30585.88 0.43 304 96 892.392.36 248 252 54 5260.0 65.0 11:35590.5 0.40 298 95 892.222.2 247 250 55 565.0 70.0 11:40594.97 0.49 298 95 882.722.69 247 250 54 5.5170.0 75.0 11:45599.93 0.48 300 96 882.662.64 250 251 56 5.575.0 80.0 11:50604.78 0.46 302 95 882.552.53 250 250 56 5.5880.0 85.0 12:02609.58 0.40 290 87 862.222.2 255 248 58 585.0 90.0 12:07614.09 0.44 300 90 862.442.42 250 251 58 5790.0 95.0 12:12618.72 0.49 307 91 852.722.69 251 249 51 5.595.0 100.0 12:17623.7 0.46 307 93 852.552.53 251 251 49 5.56100.0 105.0 12:22628.6 0.48 305 94 852.662.64 251 248 49 5.5105.0 110.0 12:27633.57 0.47 304 95 852.612.58 253 251 49 5.55110.0 115.0 12:32638.44 0.45 306 95 862.502.47 250 251 49 5.5115.0 120.0 12:37643.23 0.46 306 95 862.562.53 250 250 50 5.54120.0 125.0 12:42648.07 0.39 306 94 862.162.14 249 249 51 5125.0 130.0 12:47652.56 0.34 304 93 851.891.87 252 250 53 53130.0 135.0 12:52656.71 0.34 297 92 861.891.87 249 248 53 5135.0 140.0 12:57660.89 0.36 293 92 852.001.98 251 250 53 52140.0 145.0 13:02665.23 0.34 295 92 851.891.87 251 250 52 5145.0 150.0 13:07669.29 0.31 290 92 851.721.7 250 250 53 51150.0 155.0 13:12673.3 0.30 292 91 851.671.65 251 250 54 5155.0 160.0 13:17677.31 0.28 289 90 841.551.54 247 251 53 5160.0 13:22681.20Average:144.21 0.40 301.8 94.2 87.12.222.20 249.3 249.4 53.09375 5.1Leak CheckBT Environmental Consulting30B Run SheetProject No.: 10-3990.15 Probe # Hg Probe Pollutant Hg Points/Port 1Company Thermafiber DGM # 2033 Method 30B Total Points1Location Wabash Rate (L/m) 1.25 Run # 1 Time/pt (min) N/ASource Cupola #1 Delta∆H@ N/A Date 19-Oct-10 Time/reading 5.0Operator JP Bws (%) 6 # of Ports 1 Total Run120.0Filter Number NA Condensate Volume N/ACpN/APs (in Hg)28.59Barometric29.99 Silica Gel Weight Gain N/ADGM Y0.999Pm (in Hg)29.99Ref Temp 68Static (in H2O)-19Actual Dn (in)N/AO2 (%)12 Ref Press 29.92Stack Dia (ft) 3.00 An (ft^2) CO2 (%) 9.4 Md29.98Stack Area (sf)7.07Est.DH(in H2O) Ms29.26Act. Flow (cfm)#DIV/0!Preliminary dP (in H20) Total Vol.(cf)150.0Wet Ref Flow (cfm)#DIV/0!Preliminary Ts (oF) Est. Us (ft/s)#VALUE!Dry Ref Flow (cfm)#DIV/0!Preliminary Tm (oF) Theor Dn (in)#VALUE!Clock Time Sample TimeStack TempCondenser FilterTemp (*F)A B A B A B AB A B A B8:00:00 AM 0.0 300.0 256 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 0.00 0 58 58 4.967 5.876 N/A5.0 299.0 250 256 1.25 1.25 8 8 6.17 6.22 56 56 N/A10.0 299.0 250 256 1.25 1.25 8 8 12.57 12.56 58 58 N/A15.0 303.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 18.95 19.01 60 60 N/A20.0 292.0 249 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 25.45 25.55 62 62 N/A25.0 284.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 32.54 32.51 65 66 N/A30.0 286.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 38.96 38.95 66 66 N/A35.0 288.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 45.23 45.11 68 71 N/A40.0 293.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 51.28 51.16 70 69 N/A45.0 294.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 57.14 57.13 72 71 N/A50.0 292.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 63.05 63.12 73 72 N/A55.0 295.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 69.10 69.13 74 73 N/A60.0 293.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 75.17 75.14 74 74 N/A65.0 294.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 81.25 81.19 76 73 N/A70.0 294.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 87.52 87.38 76 77 N/A75.0 298.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 93.83 93.63 77 77 N/A80.0 295.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 100.04 99.99 78 78 N/A85.0 295.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 106.48 106.42 78 78 N/A90.0 294.0 249 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 112.84 112.87 79 79 N/A95.0 296.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 119.22 119.27 79 79 N/A100.0 295.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 125.58 125.62 79 79 N/A105.0 294.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 132.07 132.13 803 80 N/A110.0 293.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 138.26 138.29 80 80 N/A115.0 293.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 144.60 144.62 80 80 N/A10:00:00 AM 120.0 293.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 150.740 150.74 80 80 5.118 6.0265 N/AAverage 120.0 294.1 250.2 250.5100.84 71.84Volume150.740 150.740 0.151 0.1505dscm0.14 0.15 0.14 0.15Trap/ Probe TempPost Test0.002 L @ 15" for 1 min. 0.000 L@10" for 1 min. 0.003 L @ 15" for 1 min. 0.000 L@12" for 1 min.Leak Check Train "A" UnspikedRotameter Setting (LPM) Meter Vacuum ("Hg) Meter Reading (liters) Meter Temp (*F)Leak Check Train "B" SpikedDGM Reading m3Pre Test Post Test Pre TestBT Environmental Consulting30B Run SheetProject No.: 10-3990.15 Probe # Hg Probe Pollutant Hg Points/Port 1Company Thermafiber DGM # 2033 Method 30B Total Points1Location Wabash Rate (L/m) 1.25 Run # 2 Time/pt (min) N/ASource Cupola #1 Delta∆H@ N/A Date 19-Oct-10 Time/reading 5.0Operator JP Bws (%) 6 # of Ports 1 Total Run120.0Filter Number NA Condensate Volume N/ACpN/APs (in Hg)28.59Barometric29.99 Silica Gel Weight Gain N/ADGM Y0.999Pm (in Hg)29.99Ref Temp 68Static (in H2O)-19Actual Dn (in)N/AO2 (%)12 Ref Press 29.92Stack Dia (ft) 3.00 An (ft^2) CO2 (%) 9.4 Md29.98Stack Area (sf)7.07Est.DH(in H2O) Ms29.26Act. Flow (cfm)#DIV/0!Preliminary dP (in H20) Total Vol.(cf)150.0Wet Ref Flow (cfm)#DIV/0!Preliminary Ts (oF) Est. Us (ft/s)#VALUE!Dry Ref Flow (cfm)#DIV/0!Preliminary Tm (oF) Theor Dn (in)#VALUE!Clock Time Sample TimeStack TempCondenser FilterTemp (*F)A B A B A B AB A B A B10:21:00 AM 0.0 290.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 0.00 0 78 78 5.118 6.027 N/A5.0 289.0 251 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 6.10 6.13 77 77 N/A10.0 291.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 12.58 12.54 77 77 N/A15.0 291.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 18.96 18.93 79 79 N/A20.0 290.0 249 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 25.16 25.16 80 80 N/A25.0 290.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 31.47 31.42 80 81 N/A30.0 290.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 37.62 37.59 82 82 N/A35.0 290.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 43.90 43.84 83 83 N/A40.0 293.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 50.02 50 85 85 N/A45.0 293.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 56.26 56.27 86 86 N/A50.0 293.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 62.50 62.52 88 88 N/A55.0 295.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 68.78 68.81 89 89 N/A60.0 293.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 75.05 75.06 90 90 N/A65.0 295.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 81.35 81.34 92 92 N/A70.0 295.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 87.64 87.64 92 92 N/A75.0 297.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 93.96 94.01 93 93 N/A80.0 295.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 100.18 100.29 94 94 N/A85.0 296.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 106.43 106.58 94 95 N/A90.0 295.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 112.76 112.83 95 95 N/A95.0 297.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 119.06 119.04 96 96 N/A100.0 299.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 125.35 125.32 96 96 N/A105.0 293.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 131.60 131.63 96 97 N/A110.0 295.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 137.88 137.07 97 97 N/A115.0 294.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 8 8 144.19 144.14 97 98 N/A12:21:00 PM 120.0 293.0 250 130 1.25 1.25 8 8 150.398 150.267 98 97 5.269 6.1774 N/AAverage 120.0 293.3 250.0 245.288.56 88.68Volume150.398 150.267 0.151 0.1504dscm0.15 0.14 0.15 0.15Leak Check Train "A" UnspikedRotameter Setting (LPM) Meter Vacuum ("Hg) Meter Reading (liters) Meter Temp (*F)Leak Check Train "B" SpikedDGM Reading m3Pre Test Post Test Pre Test Post Test0.002 L @ 12" for 1 min. 0.002 L@10" for 1 min. 0.003 L @ 12" for 1 min. 0.000 L@10" for 1 min.Trap/ Probe TempBT Environmental Consulting30B Run SheetProject No.: 10-3990.15 Probe # Hg Probe Pollutant Hg Points/Port 1Company Thermafiber DGM # 2033 Method 30B Total Points1Location Wabash Rate (L/m) 1.25 Run # 3 Time/pt (min) N/ASource Cupola #1 Delta∆H@ N/A Date 19-Oct-10 Time/reading 5.0Operator JP Bws (%) 6 # of Ports 1 Total Run120.0Filter Number NA Condensate Volume N/ACpN/APs (in Hg)28.59Barometric29.99 Silica Gel Weight Gain N/ADGM Y0.999Pm (in Hg)29.99Ref Temp 68Static (in H2O)-19Actual Dn (in)N/AO2 (%)12.9 Ref Press 29.92Stack Dia (ft) 3.00 An (ft^2) CO2 (%) 8.3 Md29.84Stack Area (sf)7.07Est.DH(in H2O) Ms29.13Act. Flow (cfm)#DIV/0!Preliminary dP (in H20) Total Vol.(cf)150.0Wet Ref Flow (cfm)#DIV/0!Preliminary Ts (oF) Est. Us (ft/s)#VALUE!Dry Ref Flow (cfm)#DIV/0!Preliminary Tm (oF) Theor Dn (in)#VALUE!Clock Time Sample TimeStack TempCondenser FilterTemp (*F)A B A B A B AB A B A B12:59:00 PM 0.0 298.0 249 250 1.25 1.25 7 7 0.00 0 93 93 5.27 6.178 N/A5.0 298.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 7 7 6.71 6.65 89 90 N/A10.0 302.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 7 7 12.80 12.71 90 91 N/A15.0 301.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 7 7 18.87 18.85 91 92 N/A20.0 302.0 251 250 1.25 1.25 7 7 25.07 25.02 92 92 N/A25.0 299.0 249 250 1.25 1.25 7 7 31.24 31.18 92 93 N/A30.0 298.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 7 7 37.41 37.44 93 94 N/A35.0 298.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 7 7 43.83 43.78 94 94 N/A40.0 295.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 7 7 50.17 50.11 95 96 N/A45.0 297.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 7 7 56.48 56.48 97 97 N/A50.0 298.0 251 250 1.25 1.25 7 7 62.71 62.75 97 98 N/A55.0 299.0 249 250 1.25 1.25 7 7 68.79 68.86 98 98 N/A60.0 296.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 7 7 75.15 75.19 99 99 N/A65.0 299.0 251 250 1.25 1.25 7 7 81.36 81.31 99 99 N/A70.0 300.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 7 7 87.53 87.47 99 100 N/A75.0 301.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 7 7 93.68 93.7 100 100 N/A80.0 299.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 7 7 99.93 99.95 100 100 N/A85.0 302.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 7 7 106.25 106.2 101 101 N/A90.0 301.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 7 7 112.63 112.54 101 101 N/A95.0 301.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 7 7 118.91 118.94 101 101 N/A100.0 300.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 7 7 125.11 125.17 101 101 N/A105.0 296.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 7 7 131.38 131.45 102 102 N/A110.0 298.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 7 7 137.65 137.67 102 102 N/A115.0 297.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 7 7 143.81 147.77 102 102 N/A2:59:00 PM 120.0 299.0 250 250 1.25 1.25 7 7 150.272 150.28 102 103 5.42 6.33 N/AAverage 120.0 299.0 250.0 250.097.2 97.56Volume150.272 150.280 0.15 0.1504dscm0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14Trap/ Probe TempPost Test0.003 L @ 12" for 1 min. 0.000 L@10" for 1 min. 0.003 L @ 12" for 1 min. 0.000 L@10" for 1 min.Leak Check Train "A" UnspikedRotameter Setting (LPM) Meter Vacuum ("Hg) Meter Reading (liters) Meter Temp (*F)Leak Check Train "B" SpikedDGM Reading m3Pre Test Post Test Pre TestBT Environmental ConsultingIsokinetic Run SheetProject No.: 10-3990.15 Probe # 3W-2 Pollutant Hex ChromePoints/Port 8Start Finish Pre PostCompany Thermafiber DGM # MB3 Method 61 Total Points16Location WabashRate (cfm)0.75 Run # 1 Time/pt (min) 10.0Source Cupola 4 Delta∆H@ 1.82 Date 20-Oct-10 Time/reading 5.0Operator MYBws (%)4.00 # of Ports 2 Total Run160.0Filter Number Condensate Volume 44Cp0.840Ps (in Hg)28.48Barometric29.88 Silica Gel Weight Gain 66DGM Y1.003Pm (in Hg)30.10Ref Temp 68Static (in H2O)-19Actual Dn (in)0.31O2 (%)13.2 Ref Press 29.92Stack Dia (ft) 3.00 An (ft^2)0.00052CO2 (%)8.3Md29.86Stack Area (sf)7.07Est.DH(in H2O)3.00Ms29.44Act. Flow (cfm)18,950Must delete extra zeros in the Velocity columnVmnstd 135.96Preliminary dP (in H20) Total Vol.(cf)120.0Wet Ref Flow (cfm)12,585Moisture % 3.67Preliminary Ts (oF) Est. Us (ft/s)0.0Dry Ref Flow (cfm)12,082Preliminary Tm (oF) Theor Dn (in)#DIV/0! Comments:"Data Entry Cells""Calculated CellsDo Not Touch"PT # Start Time End TimeClock Time(24hr)DGM Vol. Delta P Stack Temp Meter In Meter OutDesired DeltaHActualDelta HProbe Temp.(*F)Filter Temp(*F)Imp temp.(*F) Pump Vac.80.0 5.0 14:2129.18 0.40 290 79 792.582.56 67 65.0 10.0 14:2633.55 0.39 298 84 792.522.49 64 6710.0 15.0 14:3137.89 0.41 298 85 792.652.61 61 615.0 20.0 14:3642.29 0.42 297 87 802.712.69 59 6620.0 25.0 14:4146.78 0.37 296 89 802.392.36 59 625.0 30.0 14:4651.04 0.39 295 90 812.522.49 59 6530.0 35.0 14:5155.39 0.35 294 91 822.262.24 59 635.0 40.0 14:5659.57 0.36 298 92 832.322.31 59 6440.0 45.0 15:0163.8 0.43 299 92 842.772.76 58 745.0 50.0 15:0668.43 0.49 301 94 853.163.14 58 7350.0 55.0 15:1173.29 0.50 301 95 853.233.21 59 755.0 60.0 15:1678.23 0.49 303 96 863.163.14 60 7260.0 65.0 15:2183.16 0.48 302 97 873.103.08 61 765.0 70.0 15:2688.04 0.51 302 96 883.293.28 62 7170.0 75.0 15:3193.1 0.50 301 96 883.233.22 63 775.0 80.0 15:4198.05 0.50 302 96 883.233.21 64 7880.0 85.0 15:50103.25 0.36 293 88 882.322.32 67 685.0 90.0 15:55107.45 0.40 297 93 892.582.58 66 6790.0 95.0 16:00111.95 0.41 296 94 882.652.64 62 695.0 100.0 16:05116.54 0.40 296 95 882.582.57 61 66100.0 105.0 16:10121.1 0.41 296 95 882.652.64 62 7105.0 110.0 16:15125.65 0.44 297 95 882.842.83 63 75110.0 115.0 16:20130.35 0.43 296 96 892.772.78 63 7115.0 120.0 16:25134.95 0.45 302 96 892.912.91 62 74120.0 125.0 16:30139.72 0.44 300 96 892.842.84 63 7125.0 130.0 16:35144.45 0.41 294 96 892.652.65 63 73130.0 135.0 16:40148.89 0.43 292 96 892.772.78 63 7135.0 140.0 16:45153.57 0.44 293 96 892.842.85 63 72140.0 145.0 16:50158.32 0.43 291 96 892.772.78 64 7145.0 150.0 16:55162.99 0.44 293 96 892.842.85 64 71150.0 155.0 17:00167.69 0.44 294 97 892.842.85 65 7155.0 160.0 17:05172.44 0.44 292 97 902.842.85 66 7160.0 17:10177.40Average:148.22 0.43 296.8 93.2 86.12.772.77 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 62.15625 7Leak CheckBT Environmental ConsultingIsokinetic Run SheetProject No.: 10-3990.15 Probe # 3W-2 Pollutant Hex Chrom Points/Port 8Start Finish Pre PostCompany Thermafiber DGM # MB3 Method 61 Total Points16Location WabashRate (cfm)0.75 Run # 2 Time/pt (min) 10.0Source Cupola 4 Delta∆H@ 1.82 Date 21-Oct-10 Time/reading 5.0Operator MYBws (%)4.0 # of Ports 2 Total Run160.0Filter Number Condensate Volume 94Cp0.840Ps (in Hg)28.43Barometric29.83 Silica Gel Weight Gain 70DGM Y1.003Pm (in Hg)30.05Ref Temp 68Static (in H2O)-19Actual Dn (in)0.31O2 (%)13.9 Ref Press 29.92Stack Dia (ft) 3.00 An (ft^2)0.00052CO2 (%)7.6Md29.77Stack Area (sf)7.07Est.DH(in H2O)3.00Ms29.30Act. Flow (cfm)19,489Must delete extra zeros in the Velocity columnVmnstd 137.98Preliminary dP (in H20)0.36Total Vol.(cf)120.0Wet Ref Flow (cfm)12,815Moisture % 5.30Preliminary Ts (oF)125Est. Us (ft/s)36.1Dry Ref Flow (cfm)12,303Preliminary Tm (oF)85Theor Dn (in)0.2664 Comments:"Data Entry Cells""Calculated CellsDo Not Touch"PT # Start Time End TimeClock Time(24hr)DGM Vol. Delta P Stack Temp Meter In Meter OutDesired DeltaHActualDelta HProbe Temp.(*F)Filter Temp(*F)Imp temp.(*F) Pump Vac.80.0 5.0 7:28178.61 0.40 293 71 712.522.52 45 85.0 10.0 7:33182.86 0.43 302 74 712.712.69 45 8710.0 15.0 7:38187.17 0.45 300 74 712.842.82 45 815.0 20.0 7:43191.66 0.45 305 79 722.842.82 45 8620.0 25.0 7:48196.24 0.47 305 80 732.962.94 45 825.0 30.0 7:53200.89 0.50 304 81 733.153.13 45 9530.0 35.0 7:58205.7 0.50 305 82 743.153.13 44 935.0 40.0 8:03210.55 0.49 306 82 743.093.07 45 9440.0 45.0 8:08215.38 0.44 300 83 752.782.76 44 845.0 50.0 8:13219.94 0.43 305 83 752.712.7 45 8350.0 55.0 8:18224.5 0.40 302 83 752.522.51 46 855.0 60.0 8:23228.94 0.42 301 84 762.652.64 46 8260.0 65.0 8:28233.43 0.39 300 85 762.462.45 47 865.0 70.0 8:33237.93 0.41 304 85 762.592.58 48 8170.0 75.0 8:38242.41 0.51 304 85 773.223.21 50 975.0 80.0 8:48247.32 0.45 299 86 772.842.83 50 8880.0 85.0 8:56252.01 0.37 300 78 782.332.33 52 785.0 90.0 9:01256.56 0.45 303 83 782.842.83 51 7790.0 95.0 9:06260.77 0.35 303 85 782.212.2 49 795.0 100.0 9:11264.93 0.42 296 87 792.652.65 50 86100.0 105.0 9:16269.49 0.36 306 88 792.272.27 51 7105.0 110.0 9:21273.76 0.39 305 88 802.462.46 52 75110.0 115.0 9:26278.06 0.42 306 88 802.652.65 52 7115.0 120.0 9:31282.54 0.44 310 89 802.782.78 52 74120.0 125.0 9:36287.10 0.48 307 89 813.033.03 52 9125.0 130.0 9:41291.93 0.53 308 89 813.343.34 53 93130.0 135.0 9:46296.94 0.54 305 89 813.413.41 54 9135.0 140.0 9:51302.04 0.53 302 89 823.343.35 57 92140.0 145.0 9:56307.12 0.50 301 89 823.153.16 58 9145.0 150.0 10:01312.11 0.49 301 89 823.093.1 61 91150.0 155.0 10:06317.08 0.47 304 88 822.962.97 63 9155.0 160.0 10:11321.92 0.47 306 88 822.962.97 64 9160.0 10:16326.85Average:148.24 0.45 303.1 84.2 77.22.832.82 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 50.2 8Leak CheckBT Environmental ConsultingIsokinetic Run SheetProject No.: 10-3990.15 Probe # 3W-2 Pollutant Hex ChromePoints/Port 8Start Finish Pre PostCompany Thermafiber DGM # MB3 Method 61 Total Points16Location WabashRate (cfm)0.75 Run # 3 Time/pt (min) 10.0Source Cupola 4 Delta∆H@ 1.82 Date 21-Oct-10 Time/reading 5.0Operator MYBws (%)4.0 # of Ports 2 Total Run160.0Filter Number Condensate Volume 113Cp0.840Ps (in Hg)28.43Barometric29.83 Silica Gel Weight Gain 57DGM Y1.003Pm (in Hg)29.83Ref Temp 68Static (in H2O)-19Actual Dn (in)0.31O2 (%)14.4 Ref Press 29.92Stack Dia (ft) 3.00 An (ft^2)0.00052CO2 (%)7.0Md29.70Stack Area (sf)7.07Est.DH(in H2O) Ms29.23Act. Flow (cfm)19,369Must delete extra zeros in the Velocity columnVmnstd 137.85Preliminary dP (in H20) Total Vol.(cf)120.0Wet Ref Flow (cfm)12,711Moisture % 5.49Preliminary Ts (oF) Est. Us (ft/s)0.0Dry Ref Flow (cfm)12,203Preliminary Tm (oF) Theor Dn (in)#DIV/0! Comments:"Data Entry Cells""Calculated CellsDo Not Touch"PT # Start Time End TimeClock Time(24hr)DGM Vol. Delta P Stack Temp Meter In Meter OutDesired DeltaHActualDelta HProbe Temp.(*F)Filter Temp(*F)Imp temp.(*F) Pump Vac.80.0 5.0 10:35327.53 0.38 298 78 792.412.41 58 75.0 10.0 10:40332.14 0.38 301 80 782.412.41 58 7710.0 15.0 10:45336.47 0.35 303 81 782.222.21 49 615.0 20.0 10:50340.6 0.34 304 83 782.162.15 48 6620.0 25.0 10:55344.61 0.42 308 84 782.672.65 47 725.0 30.0 11:00349.09 0.37 307 85 782.352.34 47 6530.0 35.0 11:05353.31 0.38 306 85 782.412.4 47 735.0 40.0 11:10357.59 0.39 306 86 792.482.46 48 7440.0 45.0 11:15361.93 0.45 307 87 792.862.84 49 745.0 50.0 11:20366.59 0.49 306 88 803.113.09 51 7350.0 55.0 11:25371.44 0.47 302 88 802.992.97 51 755.0 60.0 11:30376.17 0.50 303 89 813.183.16 54 7260.0 65.0 11:35381.06 0.50 308 89 813.183.16 55 765.0 70.0 11:40385.99 0.53 303 90 823.373.35 55 8170.0 75.0 11:45391.04 0.50 301 91 833.183.17 57 775.0 80.0 11:50395.96 0.50 304 91 833.183.16 58 8880.0 85.0 12:01400.93 0.40 302 84 842.542.54 64 785.0 90.0 12:06405.44 0.39 306 89 842.482.47 57 6790.0 95.0 12:11409.81 0.45 305 91 842.862.85 59 695.0 100.0 12:16414.41 0.41 306 92 852.602.6 61 66100.0 105.0 12:21418.93 0.49 304 93 853.113.11 61 7105.0 110.0 12:26423.82 0.48 304 94 863.053.05 61 75110.0 115.0 12:31428.68 0.50 309 95 863.183.18 62 7115.0 120.0 12:36433.64 0.51 309 94 873.243.25 63 84120.0 125.0 12:41438.77 0.40 307 94 872.542.54 62 7125.0 130.0 12:46443.16 0.39 307 93 872.482.48 61 73130.0 135.0 12:51447.56 0.43 301 92 862.732.74 60 7135.0 140.0 12:56452.18 0.42 303 92 862.672.67 59 72140.0 145.0 13:01456.71 0.45 304 92 862.862.86 59 7145.0 150.0 13:06461.41 0.47 306 91 852.992.99 60 71150.0 155.0 13:11466.19 0.49 303 89 843.113.12 61 7155.0 160.0 13:16471.07 0.49 303 89 843.113.12 61 7160.0 13:21476.98Average:149.45 0.44 304.6 88.7 82.52.802.80 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 56.34375 6.9Leak Check

# APPENDIX D

EQUIPMENT CALIBRATION DOCUMENTSMETHOD 5 DRY GAS METER CALIBRATION USING CRITICAL ORIFICES1) Select three critical orifices to calibrate the dry gas meter which bracket the expected operating range.2) Record barometric pressure before and after calibration procedure.3) Run at tested vacuum (from Orifice Calibration Report), for a period of timenecessary to achieve a minimum total volume of 5 cubic feet.4) Record data and information in theGREENcells, YELLOW cells are calculated.INITIAL FINAL AVG (Pbar)DATE: 8/30/2010 METER SERIAL #: C-5000 BAROMETRIC PRESSURE (in Hg): 30.33 30.33 30.33 IF Y VARIATION EXCEEDS 2.00%,METER PART #: MB3 CRITICAL ORIFICE SET SERIAL #: 1447ORIFICE SHOULD BE RECALIBRATEDK' TESTEDTEMPERATURES °F ELAPSEDFACTOR VACUUM DGM READINGS (FT3) AMBIENT DGM INLET DGM OUTLET DGM TIME (MIN) DGMΔH(1)(2)(3)YORIFICE # RUN # (AVG) (in Hg) INITIAL FINALNET (Vm)INITIAL FINAL INITIAL FINAL AVGθ(in H2O) Vm(STD) Vcr(STD)YVARIATION (%)ΔH@1 0.3367 16 696.810 702.190 5.380 81 80 83 80 81 81 12.00 0.62 5.33165.27010.9881.792 0.3367 16 702.190 707.570 5.380 81 83 86 81 83 83.25 12.00 0.62 5.30955.27010.9931.783 0.3367 16 707.570 712.980 5.410 82 86 88 83 84 85.25 12.00 0.62 5.31955.26530.9901.78AVG = 0.990-1.301 0.5057 16 713.050 718.340 5.290 83 88 91 85 86 87.5 8.00 1.4 5.18995.26721.0151.782 0.5057 16 718.340 724.320 5.980 85 91 93 86 87 89.25 9.00 1.4 5.84825.91471.0111.783 0.5057 16 724.320 730.320 6.0 83 93 92 87 88 90 9.00 1.4 5.85975.92561.0111.77AVG = 1.0130.911 0.8778 16 730.570 737.510 6.940 85 95 98 89 90 93 6.00 4.5 6.79146.84451.0081.902 0.8778 16 737.510 744.470 6.960 85 98 99 90 91 94.5 6.00 4.5 6.79266.84451.0081.903 0.8778 16 744.470 751.450 6.980 86 99 101 91 92 95.75 6.00 4.5 6.79686.83831.0061.90AVG = 1.0070.39AVERAGE DRY GAS METER CALIBRATION FACTOR, Y =1.003AVERAGEΔH@=1.82(1) =Net volume of gas sample passed through DGM, corrected to standard conditionsK1=17.64oR/in. Hg (English), 0.3858oK/mm Hg (Metric)Tm=Absolute DGM avg. temperature (oR - English,oK - Metric)ΔH@=0.75θΔH Vm(std)Vcr(std)Vm(2) =Volume of gas sample passed through the critical orifice, corrected to standard conditionsTamb=Absolute ambient temperature (oR - English,oK - Metric)K' = Average K' factor from Critical Orifice Calibration(3) =DGM calibration factor121832ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLY COMPANYUSING THE CRITICAL ORIFICES AS CALIBRATION STANDARDS:The following equations are used to calculate the standard volumes of air passed through the DGM, Vm(std), and the criticalorifice, Vcr(std), and the DGM calibration factor, Y. These equations are automatically calculated in the spreadsheet above.()2()TmHPbarVmKVmstd)6.13/(1)(Δ+∗∗=TambPbarKVcrstdΘ∗∗=')()()(stdstdVmVcrY=Meter box 3 cals.xlsMETHOD 5 DRY GAS METER CALIBRATION USING CRITICAL ORIFICES1) Select three critical orifices to calibrate the dry gas meter which bracket the expected operating range.2) Record barometric pressure before and after calibration procedure.3) Run at tested vacuum (from Orifice Calibration Report), for a period of timenecessary to achieve a minimum total volume of 5 cubic feet.4) Record data and information in theGREENcells, YELLOW cells are calculated.INITIAL FINAL AVG (Pbar)DATE:11/22/2010METER SERIAL #: C-5000 BAROMETRIC PRESSURE (in Hg): 29.97 29.92 29.945 IF Y VARIATION EXCEEDS 2.00%,METER PART #: MB3 CRITICAL ORIFICE SET SERIAL #: 1447ORIFICE SHOULD BE RECALIBRATEDK' TESTEDTEMPERATURES °F ELAPSEDFACTOR VACUUM DGM READINGS (FT3) AMBIENT DGM INLET DGM OUTLET DGM TIME (MIN) DGMΔH(1)(2)(3)YORIFICE # RUN # (AVG) (in Hg) INITIAL FINALNET (Vm)INITIAL FINAL INITIAL FINAL AVGθ(in H2O) Vm(STD) Vcr(STD)YVARIATION (%)ΔH@1 0.3367 16 126.20 131.085 4.885 66 67 69 67 67 67.5 11.00 0.62 4.90214.83720.9871.812 0.3367 16 131.085 136.430 5.345 65 69 71 67 68 68.75 12.00 0.62 5.35105.28200.9871.803 0.3367 16 136.430 141.320 4.890 66 71 72 68 69 70 11.00 0.62 4.88394.83720.9901.80AVG = 0.988-1.191 0.5057 16 141.40 147.310 5.910 66 70 74 69 70 70.75 9.00 1.5 5.90715.94421.0061.932 0.5057 16 147.310 152.560 5.250 66 74 76 70 71 72.75 8.00 1.5 5.22775.28381.0111.933 0.5057 16 152.560 157.820 5.260 66 76 76 71 71 73.5 8.00 1.5 5.23035.28381.0101.92AVG = 1.0090.901 0.8778 16 157.930 165.935 8.005 66 75 80 71 72 74.5 7.00 4.6 8.00518.02511.0031.972 0.8778 16 165.935 172.815 6.880 66 80 81 72 73 76.5 6.00 4.6 6.85446.87871.0041.963 0.8778 16 172.815 179.710 6.895 66 81 81 73 74 77.25 6.00 4.6 6.85986.87871.0031.96AVG = 1.0030.29AVERAGE DRY GAS METER CALIBRATION FACTOR, Y =1.000AVERAGEΔH@=1.90(1) =Net volume of gas sample passed through DGM, corrected to standard conditionsK1=17.64oR/in. Hg (English), 0.3858oK/mm Hg (Metric)Tm=Absolute DGM avg. temperature (oR - English,oK - Metric)ΔH@=0.75θΔH Vm(std)Vcr(std)Vm(2) =Volume of gas sample passed through the critical orifice, corrected to standard conditionsTamb=Absolute ambient temperature (oR - English,oK - Metric)K' = Average K' factor from Critical Orifice Calibration(3) =DGM calibration factor121832ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLY COMPANYUSING THE CRITICAL ORIFICES AS CALIBRATION STANDARDS:The following equations are used to calculate the standard volumes of air passed through the DGM, Vm(std), and the criticalorifice, Vcr(std), and the DGM calibration factor, Y. These equations are automatically calculated in the spreadsheet above.()2()TmHPbarVmKVmstd)6.13/(1)(Δ+∗∗=TambPbarKVcrstdΘ∗∗=')()()(stdstdVmVcrY=Meter box 3 cals.xlsMETHOD 5 DRY GAS METER CALIBRATION USING CRITICAL ORIFICES1) Select three critical orifices to calibrate the dry gas meter which bracket the expected operating range.2) Record barometric pressure before and after calibration procedure.3) Run at tested vacuum (from Orifice Calibration Report), for a period of timenecessary to achieve a minimum total volume of 5 cubic feet.4) Record data and information in theGREENcells, YELLOW cells are calculated.INITIAL FINAL AVG (Pbar)DATE: 9/8/2010 METER SERIAL #: 1672 BAROMETRIC PRESSURE (in Hg): 30.67 30.67 30.67 IF Y VARIATION EXCEEDS 2.00%,METER PART #: MB5 CRITICAL ORIFICE SET SERIAL #: 1447ORIFICE SHOULD BE RECALIBRATEDK' TESTEDTEMPERATURES °F ELAPSEDFACTOR VACUUM DGM READINGS (FT3) AMBIENT DGM INLET DGM OUTLET DGM TIME (MIN) DGMΔH(1)(2)(3)YORIFICE # RUN # (AVG) (in Hg) INITIAL FINALNET (Vm)INITIAL FINAL INITIAL FINAL AVGθ(in H2O) Vm(STD) Vcr(STD)YVARIATION (%)ΔH@1 0.8778 16 546.40 553.240 6.840 78 78 78 78 78 78 6.00 3.75 6.94426.96621.0031.592 0.8778 16 553.240 560.090 6.850 78 78 78 78 78 78 6.00 3.75 6.95446.96621.0021.593 0.8778 16 560.090 566.890 6.80 78 78 79 78 79 78.5 6.00 3.75 6.89726.96621.0101.59AVG = 1.0050.181 0.5057 16 564.640 570.560 5.920 78 79 81 79 79 79.5 9.00 1.2 5.95726.01981.0111.522 0.5057 16 570.560 576.480 5.920 78 81 82 79 79 80.25 9.00 1.2 5.94896.01981.0121.523 0.5057 16 576.480 582.420 5.940 79 82 84 79 80 81.25 9.00 1.2 5.95806.01421.0091.52AVG = 1.0110.751 0.3367 16 582.420 587.790 5.370 79 83 83 80 80 81.5 12.00 0.52 5.37505.33910.9931.482 0.3367 16 587.790 593.160 5.370 79 83 83 80 81 81.75 12.00 0.52 5.37255.33910.9941.483 0.3367 16 593.160 598.530 5.370 79 83 83 81 81 82 12.00 0.52 5.3705.33910.9941.48AVG = 0.994-0.93AVERAGE DRY GAS METER CALIBRATION FACTOR, Y =1.003AVERAGEΔH@=1.53(1) =Net volume of gas sample passed through DGM, corrected to standard conditionsK1=17.64oR/in. Hg (English), 0.3858oK/mm Hg (Metric)Tm=Absolute DGM avg. temperature (oR - English,oK - Metric)ΔH@=0.75θΔH Vm(std)Vcr(std)Vm(2) =Volume of gas sample passed through the critical orifice, corrected to standard conditionsTamb=Absolute ambient temperature (oR - English,oK - Metric)K' = Average K' factor from Critical Orifice Calibration(3) =DGM calibration factor321812ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLY COMPANYUSING THE CRITICAL ORIFICES AS CALIBRATION STANDARDS:The following equations are used to calculate the standard volumes of air passed through the DGM, Vm(std), and the criticalorifice, Vcr(std), and the DGM calibration factor, Y. These equations are automatically calculated in the spreadsheet above.()2()TmHPbarVmKVmstd)6.13/(1)(Δ+∗∗=TambPbarKVcrstdΘ∗∗=')()()(stdstdVmVcrY=Meter box 5 cals.xlsMETHOD 5 DRY GAS METER CALIBRATION USING CRITICAL ORIFICES1) Select three critical orifices to calibrate the dry gas meter which bracket the expected operating range.2) Record barometric pressure before and after calibration procedure.3) Run at tested vacuum (from Orifice Calibration Report), for a period of timenecessary to achieve a minimum total volume of 5 cubic feet.4) Record data and information in theGREENcells, YELLOW cells are calculated.INITIAL FINAL AVG (Pbar)DATE:11/23/2010METER SERIAL #: 1672 BAROMETRIC PRESSURE (in Hg): 29.79 29.84 29.815 IF Y VARIATION EXCEEDS 2.00%,METER PART #: MB5 CRITICAL ORIFICE SET SERIAL #: 1447ORIFICE SHOULD BE RECALIBRATEDK' TESTEDTEMPERATURES °F ELAPSEDFACTOR VACUUM DGM READINGS (FT3) AMBIENT DGM INLET DGM OUTLET DGM TIME (MIN) DGMΔH(1)(2)(3)YORIFICE # RUN # (AVG) (in Hg) INITIAL FINALNET (Vm)INITIAL FINAL INITIAL FINAL AVGθ(in H2O) Vm(STD) Vcr(STD)YVARIATION (%)ΔH@1 0.8778 16 885.520 893.360 7.840 62 73 77 72 72 73.5 7.00 3.8 7.80588.02091.0281.622 0.8778 16 893.360 900.080 6.720 62 77 78 72 73 75 6.00 3.8 6.67196.87501.0301.623 0.8778 16 900.080 906.820 6.740 62 78 78 73 73 75.5 6.00 3.8 6.68556.87501.0281.61AVG = 1.0291.331 0.5057 16 866.910 872.080 5.170 62 72 74 69 70 71.25 8.00 1.2 5.13645.28091.0281.542 0.5057 16 872.080 879.230 7.150 62 74 75 70 71 72.5 11.00 1.2 7.08697.26131.0251.543 0.5057 16 879.230 885.070 5.840 62 75 76 71 72 73.5 9.00 1.2 5.77765.94111.0281.53AVG = 1.0271.161 0.3367 16 850.330 856.130 5.80 62 68 69 67 68 68 13.00 0.47 5.78745.71370.9871.372 0.3367 16 856.130 861.480 5.350 62 69 71 68 69 69.25 12.00 0.47 5.32585.27420.9901.363 0.3367 16 861.480 866.830 5.350 62 71 72 69 69 70.25 12.00 0.47 5.31575.27420.9921.36AVG = 0.990-2.49AVERAGE DRY GAS METER CALIBRATION FACTOR, Y =1.015AVERAGEΔH@=1.51(1) =Net volume of gas sample passed through DGM, corrected to standard conditionsK1=17.64oR/in. Hg (English), 0.3858oK/mm Hg (Metric)Tm=Absolute DGM avg. temperature (oR - English,oK - Metric)ΔH@=0.75θΔH Vm(std)Vcr(std)Vm(2) =Volume of gas sample passed through the critical orifice, corrected to standard conditionsTamb=Absolute ambient temperature (oR - English,oK - Metric)K' = Average K' factor from Critical Orifice Calibration(3) =DGM calibration factor321812ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLY COMPANYUSING THE CRITICAL ORIFICES AS CALIBRATION STANDARDS:The following equations are used to calculate the standard volumes of air passed through the DGM, Vm(std), and the criticalorifice, Vcr(std), and the DGM calibration factor, Y. These equations are automatically calculated in the spreadsheet above.()2()TmHPbarVmKVmstd)6.13/(1)(Δ+∗∗=TambPbarKVcrstdΘ∗∗=')()()(stdstdVmVcrY=Meter box 5 cals.xls

# APPENDIX E

LABORATORY ANALYTICAL REPORTSOxygen and Carbon Dioxide Concentration Results SummaryThermafiber - Wabash, Indiana PlantBTEC Project No. 10-3990.15Sampling Dates: October 19-21, 2010Cupola 4Parameter Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Run 4 Run 5 Run 6 AverageTest Run Date10/19/2010 10/19/2010 10/20/2010 10/20/2010 10/21/2010 10/21/2010Oxygen concentration (%) 12.0 12.9 11.9 13.1 13.8 14.3 13.0Oxygen concentration (%) (corrected as per USEPA 3A) 12.0 12.9 12.0 13.2 13.9 14.4 12.3Carbon Dioxide concentration (%) 9.6 8.3 9.4 8.3 7.7 7.1 8.4Carbon Dioxide concentration (%) (corrected as per USEPA 3A) 9.4 8.3 9.3 8.3 7.6 7.0 9.0CO2CorrectionO2Correction1 2 3 4 5 6 123456Co0.11 0.04 -0.08 -0.08 -0.01 -0.01Co0.03 0.03 -0.05 -0.05 -0.05 -0.05Cma10.10 10.10 10.10 10.10 10.10 10.10Cma9.95 9.95 9.95 9.95 9.95 9.95Cm10.2 10.1 10.18 10.18 10.26 10.26Cm9.95 9.97 9.86 9.86 9.88 9.88Co= Average of initial and final zero gasesCma=Actual concentration of the calibration gasCm= Average of initial and final calibration gasesAcetoneRinseVolume(mL)ParticulateWeight inAcetone(mg)ParticulateWeight onFilter(mg)Organic(mg)Inorganic(mg)FilterablePM2.5 CatchWeight (mg)OrganicPM2.5 CatchWeight (mg)InorganicPM2.5 CatchWeight (mg)Run 132 1.5 11.30 3 3012.80 2 29Run 239 1.9 9.60 1.5 1311.50 0.5 12Run 353 2.0 14.30 1.3 2416.30 0.3 23Blank:62 ND ND 2.1 1.2RDL:1 0.5 0.30 1.0 0.50CorrectedOTM 27/28 PM2.5Lab Results Blank CorrectionThermafiber, Inc.Wabash Indiana, Cupola #4BTEC job # 10-3990.15Sampling Dates: October 19 and 20, 2010OTM28OTM27AcetoneRinseVolume(mL)ParticulateWeight inAcetoneRinse (mg)ParticulateWeight onFilter (mg)ParticulateWeight inAcetoneRinse (mg)CombinedParticulateWeight (mg)Run 1120 5.9 26.70 5.932.6Run 2130 7.8 24.80 7.832.6Run 3120 4.7 20.00 4.724.7Blank130 ND NDMethod 5 PM Lab ResultsCorrectedSampling Date: October 20 & 21, 2010BTEC job # 10-3990.15Wabash Indiana, Cupola #4Thermafiber, Inc.Compound/FractionBlankFilterResult(μg)FilterRDL(μg)R1Result(μg)R2Result(μg)R3Result(μg)R1(μg)R2(μg)R3(μg)Test RunDetectionLimit (RDL)(μg)Antimony ND 0.40 ND ND ND4.00 4.00 4.004.0Arsenic 0.86 0.40 9.0 8.4 7.18.14 7.54 6.244.0Berylium ND 0.10 ND ND ND1.00 1.00 1.001.00Cadmium ND 0.10 9.50 13.30 9.109.50 13.30 9.101.00Chromium 1.04 0.30 3.90 8.0 ND3.00 6.96 3.003.0Cobalt ND 0.10 1.50 1.30 1.601.50 1.30 1.601.00Lead 0.41 0.20 16 12.4 13.315.59 11.99 12.892.00Manganese 1.19 0.75 117 107.0 87115.8 105.8 85.67.5Nickel 0.50 0.50 8.1 8.4 ND7.60 7.90 5.005.0Selenium 3.50 1.0 755.0 596.0 482751.5 592.5 47910.0CorrectedMethod 29 Lab ResultsSampling Date: October 20 & 21, 2010BTEC job # 10-3990.15Wabash Indiana, Cupola #4Thermafiber, Inc.CorrectedTotal Volume(ml)ImpingerKOH (ml)HexavalentChromium,Cr6+ [μg]HexavalentChromium,Cr6+ [μg]Run 1760300ND0.40Run 2800300ND0.40Run 3850300ND0.40Blank H2O440 NDBlank KOH300 0.80RDL1 0.40Method 0061 Lab ResultsSampling Date: October 20 and 21, 2010BTEC job # 10-3990.15Wabash Indiana, Cupola #4Thermafiber, Inc.Volume (mL)HydrochloricAcid (μg)HydrofluoricAcid (μg)HydrochloricAcid (μg)HydrofluoricAcid (μg)Run 1330 30000 1400030000 14000Run 2390 37000 2100037000 21000Run 3360 32000 2600032000 26000Blank H20160 ND NDBlank H2SO4340 ND NDRDL1 200 200CorrectedMethod 26A Lab ResultsThermafiber, Inc.Wabash Indiana, Cupola #4BTEC job # 10-3990.15Sampling Date: October 19 and 20, 2010

### Your Project #: 10-3990.15

Site: THERMAFIBER

Your C.O.C. #: N/A

Attention: Barry

Boulianne

BT Environmental Consulting

2615 Wolcott St.

Ferndale, MI

USA 48220

Report Date: 2010/11/11



## CERTIFICATE

OF ANALYSIS

MAXXAM JOB #: B0F3773

Received: 2010/10/28, 12:00

Sample Matrix: Stack

Sampling Train

# Samples Received: 10

Date Date Method

Analyses Quantity Extracted Analyzed Laboratory Method Reference

Hexavalent Chromium (M0061) 5 2010/10/29 2010/11/03 BRL SOP-00106 EPA 7199 (M0061)

Hydrogen Halides in H2SO4 Imp. ( 1 ) 5 2010/11/09 2010/11/09 BRL SOP-00108 EPA Method 26A

Volume of Sulfuric Acid Impinger 5 N/A 2010/11/09

Final Volume of KOH Impinger 5 N/A 2010/10/29

* RPDs calculated using raw data. The rounding of final results may result in the apparent difference.

(1) This test was performed in Maxxam Mississauga under Maxxam Burlington SCC Accreditation



### Encryption

Key

Please direct all questions regarding this Certificate of Analysis to your Project Manager.

LINA BARRETO, Project Manager

Email: LBarreto@maxxam.ca

Phone# (905) 817-5700

====================================================================

Maxxam has procedures in place to guard against improper use of the electronic signature and have the required "signatories", as per section

5.10.2 of ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E), signing the reports. For Service Group specific validation please refer to the Validation Signature Page.

Total cover pages: 1

Page 1 of 6

### BT Environmental Consulting

Maxxam Job #: B0F3773 Client Project #: 10-3990.15

Report Date: 2010/11/11 Project name: THERMAFIBER



### RESULTS OF ANALYSES OF STACK SAMPLING TRAIN

Maxxam ID H Q 9 8 9 7 H

Q 9 8 9 8 H

Q 9 8 9 9 H

Q 9 8 9 9

Sampling Date 2010/10/20 2010/10/20 2010/10/19 2010/10/19

COC Number N/A N/A N/A N/A

U n i t s BLANK-H2O-M26A BLANK-H2SO4-M26A RDL RUN RUN RDL QC Batch

1-M26A-H2SO4 1-M26A-H2SO4

Lab-Dup

Volume ml 160 340 1 330 1 2324479

Hydrochloric Acid ug ND ND 200 30000 30000 400 2324503

Hydrofluoric Acid ug ND ND 200 14000 14000 200 2324503

ND = Not detected

N/A = Not Applicable

RDL = Reportable Detection Limit

QC Batch = Quality Control Batch

Maxxam ID H Q 9 9 0 0 H

Q 9 9 0 1 H Q 9 9 0 2 H

Q 9 9 0 3

Sampling Date 2010/10/20 2010/10/20 2010/10/21 2010/10/21

COC Number N/A N/A

U n i t s RUN RUN QC Batch BLANK-H2O-M0061 BLANK-KOH-M0061 RDL QC Batch

2-M26A-H2SO4 3-M26A-H2SO4

Volume ml 390 360 2324479 440 300 1 2314624

Hexavalent Chromium (Cr 6+) ug ND 0.8 0.2 2314621

Hydrochloric Acid ug 37000 32000 2324503 200

Hydrofluoric Acid ug 21000 26000 2324503 200

ND = Not detected

N/A = Not Applicable

RDL = Reportable Detection Limit

QC Batch = Quality Control Batch

Maxxam ID H Q 9 9 0 4 H

Q 9 9 0 4 H

Q 9 9 0 5 H

Q 9 9 0 6

Sampling Date 2010/10/20 2010/10/20 2010/10/21 2010/10/21

COC Number

U n i t s RUN RUN RUN RUN RDL QC Batch

1-M0061 1-M0061 2-M0061 3-M0061

Lab-Dup

Volume ml 760 800 850 1 2314624

Hexavalent Chromium (Cr 6+) ug ND ND ND ND 0.4 2314621

ND = Not detected

RDL = Reportable Detection Limit

QC Batch = Quality Control Batch

Page 2 of 6

### BT Environmental Consulting

Maxxam Job #: B0F3773 Client Project #: 10-3990.15

Report Date: 2010/11/11 Project name: THERMAFIBER



### Test Summary

Maxxam ID HQ9897 Collected 2010/10/20

Sample ID BLANK-H2O-M26A Shipped

Matrix Stack Sampling Train Received 2010/10/28

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

Hydrogen Halides in H2SO4 Imp. IC /SPEC 2324503 2010/11/09 2010/11/09 A_S

Volume of Sulfuric Acid Impinger 2324479 N/A 2010/11/09 A_S

Maxxam ID HQ9898 Collected 2010/10/20

Sample ID BLANK-H2SO4-M26A Shipped

Matrix Stack Sampling Train Received 2010/10/28

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

Hydrogen Halides in H2SO4 Imp. IC /SPEC 2324503 2010/11/09 2010/11/09 A_S

Volume of Sulfuric Acid Impinger 2324479 N/A 2010/11/09 A_S

Maxxam ID HQ9899 Collected 2010/10/19

Sample ID RUN 1-M26A-H2SO4 Shipped

Matrix Stack Sampling Train Received 2010/10/28

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

Hydrogen Halides in H2SO4 Imp. IC /SPEC 2324503 2010/11/09 2010/11/09 A_S

Volume of Sulfuric Acid Impinger 2324479 N/A 2010/11/09 A_S

Maxxam ID HQ9899 D u p Collected 2010/10/19

Sample ID RUN 1-M26A-H2SO4 Shipped

Matrix Stack Sampling Train Received 2010/10/28

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

Hydrogen Halides in H2SO4 Imp. IC /SPEC 2324503 2010/11/09 2010/11/09 A_S

Maxxam ID HQ9900 Collected 2010/10/20

Sample ID RUN 2-M26A-H2SO4 Shipped

Matrix Stack Sampling Train Received 2010/10/28

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

Hydrogen Halides in H2SO4 Imp. IC /SPEC 2324503 2010/11/09 2010/11/09 A_S

Volume of Sulfuric Acid Impinger 2324479 N/A 2010/11/09 A_S

Maxxam ID HQ9901 Collected 2010/10/20

Sample ID RUN 3-M26A-H2SO4 Shipped

Matrix Stack Sampling Train Received 2010/10/28

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

Hydrogen Halides in H2SO4 Imp. IC /SPEC 2324503 2010/11/09 2010/11/09 A_S

Volume of Sulfuric Acid Impinger 2324479 N/A 2010/11/09 A_S

Page 3 of 6

### BT Environmental Consulting

Maxxam Job #: B0F3773 Client Project #: 10-3990.15

Report Date: 2010/11/11 Project name: THERMAFIBER



### Test Summary

Maxxam ID HQ9902 Collected 2010/10/21

Sample ID BLANK-H2O-M0061 Shipped

Matrix Stack Sampling Train Received 2010/10/28

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

Hexavalent Chromium (M0061) IC /SPEC 2314621 2010/10/29 2010/11/03 LLE

Final Volume of KOH Impinger 2314624 N/A 2010/10/29 FMO

Maxxam ID HQ9903 Collected 2010/10/21

Sample ID BLANK-KOH-M0061 Shipped

Matrix Stack Sampling Train Received 2010/10/28

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

Hexavalent Chromium (M0061) IC /SPEC 2314621 2010/10/29 2010/11/03 LLE

Final Volume of KOH Impinger 2314624 N/A 2010/10/29 FMO

Maxxam ID HQ9904 Collected 2010/10/20

Sample ID RUN 1-M0061 Shipped

Matrix Stack Sampling Train Received 2010/10/28

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

Hexavalent Chromium (M0061) IC /SPEC 2314621 2010/10/29 2010/11/03 LLE

Final Volume of KOH Impinger 2314624 N/A 2010/10/29 FMO

Maxxam ID HQ9904 D u p Collected 2010/10/20

Sample ID RUN 1-M0061 Shipped

Matrix Stack Sampling Train Received 2010/10/28

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

Hexavalent Chromium (M0061) IC /SPEC 2314621 2010/10/29 2010/11/03 LLE

Maxxam ID HQ9905 Collected 2010/10/21

Sample ID RUN 2-M0061 Shipped

Matrix Stack Sampling Train Received 2010/10/28

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

Hexavalent Chromium (M0061) IC /SPEC 2314621 2010/10/29 2010/11/03 LLE

Final Volume of KOH Impinger 2314624 N/A 2010/10/29 FMO

Maxxam ID HQ9906 Collected 2010/10/21

Sample ID RUN 3-M0061 Shipped

Matrix Stack Sampling Train Received 2010/10/28

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

Hexavalent Chromium (M0061) IC /SPEC 2314621 2010/10/29 2010/11/03 LLE

Final Volume of KOH Impinger 2314624 N/A 2010/10/29 FMO

Page 4 of 6

### BT Environmental Consulting

Maxxam Job #: B0F3773 Client Project #: 10-3990.15

Report Date: 2010/11/11 Project name: THERMAFIBER

GENERAL COMMENTS

Results relate only to the items tested.

Page 5 of 6

### BT Environmental Consulting

Attention: Barry Boulianne

Client Project #: 10-3990.15

P.O. #:

Project name: THERMAFIBER



### Quality Assurance Report

Maxxam Job Number: GB0F3773

QA/QC Date

Batch Analyzed

Num Init QC Type Parameter yyyy/mm/dd Value %Recovery Units QC Limits

2314621 LLE Matrix Spike

(HQ9904) Hexavalent Chromium (Cr 6+) 2010/11/03 94 % 80

- 120

Spiked Blank Hexavalent Chromium (Cr 6+) 2010/11/03 101 % 90

- 110

Method Blank Hexavalent Chromium (Cr 6+) 2010/11/03 ND, RDL=0.2 ug

RPD

- Sample/Sample

Dup Hexavalent Chromium (Cr 6+) 2010/11/03 NC % 20

2324503 A_S Matrix Spike

(HQ9899) Hydrochloric Acid 2010/11/09 101 % 80

- 120

Hydrofluoric Acid 2010/11/09 105 % 80

- 120

Spiked Blank Hydrochloric Acid 2010/11/09 101 % 90

- 110

Hydrofluoric Acid 2010/11/09 102 % 90

- 110

Method Blank Hydrochloric Acid 2010/11/09 ND, RDL=200 ug

Hydrofluoric Acid 2010/11/09 ND, RDL=200 ug

RPD

- Sample/Sample

Dup Hydrochloric Acid 2010/11/09 0.08 % 20

Hydrofluoric Acid 2010/11/09 1.2 % 20

Matrix Spike: A sample to which a known amount of the analyte of interest has been added. Used to evaluate sample matrix interference.

Spiked Blank: A blank matrix to which a known amount of the analyte has been added. Used to evaluate analyte recovery.

Method Blank: A blank matrix containing all reagents used in the analytical procedure. Used to identify laboratory contamination.

NC (RPD): The RPD was not calculated. The level of analyte detected in the parent sample and its duplicate was not sufficiently significant to permit a

reliable calculation.

Page 6 of 6

### Your Project #: 10-3990.15

Site: THERMAFIBER

Your C.O.C. #: 0698

Attention: James K. Sharp

BT Environmental Consulting

2615 Wolcott St.

Ferndale, MI

USA 48220

Report Date: 2010/11/08



## CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS

MAXXAM JOB #: B0F3790

Received: 2010/10/28, 12:00

Sample Matrix: Stack Sampling Train

# Samples Received: 8

Date Date Method

Analyses Quantity Extracted Analyzed Laboratory Method Reference

Organic Condensable PM (OTM28) ( 1 ) 4 2010/11/03 2010/11/03 BRL SOP-00120 EPA OTM 28

Inorganic Condensable PM (OTM28) ( 1 ) 4 2010/11/04 2010/11/04 BRL SOP-00120 EPA OTM 28

2.5 um Particulates on Filter (OTM-027) (

2 ) 4 N/A 2010/11/02 BRL SOP-00109 EPA OTM

- 027

<2.5um Particulates in Rinse(OTM-027) ( 2 ) 4 2010/10/29 2010/11/04 BRL SOP-00109 EPA OTM

- 027

Final Volume of Acetone Probe Rinse 4 N/A 2010/11/03

Weight of DCM Received 4 N/A 2010/11/03

Weight of Water

from Impingers 4 N/A 2010/11/03

* RPDs calculated using raw data. The rounding of final results may result in the apparent difference.

(1) This is a non-accredited test.

(2) This test was performed in Maxxam Mississauga under Maxxam Burlington SCC Accreditation



### Encryption Key

Please direct all questions regarding this Certificate of Analysis to your Project Manager.

LINA BARRETO, Project Manager

Email: LBarreto@maxxam.ca

Phone# (905) 817-5700

====================================================================

Maxxam has procedures in place to guard against improper use of the electronic signature and have the required "signatories", as per section

5.10.2 of ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E), signing the reports. For Service Group specific validation please refer to the Validation Signature Page.

Total cover

pages: 1

Page 1 of 6

### BT Environmental Consulting

Maxxam Job #: B0F3790 Client Project #: 10-3990.15

Report Date: 2010/11/08 Project name: THERMAFIBER



### RESULTS OF ANALYSES OF STACK SAMPLING TRAIN

Maxxam ID H Q 9 9 8 0 H

Q 9 9 8 1 H

Q 9 9 8 2 H

Q 9 9 8 3 H

Q 9 9 9 6

Sampling Date 2010/10/19 2010/10/19 2010/10/19 2010/10/20 2010/10/19

COC Number 0698 0698 0698 0698

U n i t s TRAIN R1-OTM28 R2-OTM28 R3-OTM28 TRAIN RDL QC Batch

BLANK-OTM28 BLANK-OTM27

< 2.5 Particulate Weight in Acetone Rinse mg ND 0.5 2314080

< 2.5 Particulate Weight on Filter mg ND 0.30 2315878

Acetone Rinse Volume (2.5) ml 62 1 2314077

Weight g 240 300 290 240 0.1 2316581

DCM Weight g 130 150 220 160 0.1 2316579

Inorganic Condensible PM mg 1.2 30 13 24 0.50 2319573

Organic Condensible PM mg 2.1 3.0 1.5 1.3 1.0 2316574

ND = Not detected

RDL = Reportable Detection Limit

QC Batch = Quality Control Batch

Maxxam ID H Q 9 9 9 7 H

Q 9 9 9 8 H

Q 9 9 9 9

Sampling Date 2010/10/19 2010/10/19 2010/10/20

COC Number

U n i t s R1-OTM27 R2-OTM27 R3-OTM27 RDL QC Batch

< 2.5 Particulate Weight in Acetone Rinse mg 1.5 1.9 2.0 0.5 2314080

< 2.5 Particulate Weight on Filter mg 11.3 9.60 14.3 0.30 2315878

Acetone Rinse Volume (2.5) ml 32 39 53 1 2314077

RDL = Reportable Detection Limit

QC Batch = Quality Control Batch

Page 2 of 6

### BT Environmental Consulting

Maxxam Job #: B0F3790 Client Project #: 10-3990.15

Report Date: 2010/11/08 Project name: THERMAFIBER



### Test Summary

Maxxam ID HQ9980 Collected 2010/10/19

Sample ID TRAIN BLANK-OTM28 Shipped

Matrix Stack

Sampling Train Received 2010/10/28

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

Organic Condensable PM (OTM28) 2316574 2010/11/03 2010/11/03 MGE

Inorganic Condensable PM (OTM28) 2319573 2010/11/04 2010/11/04 FMO

Weight of DCM Received 2316579 N/A 2010/11/03

Weight of Water

from Impingers 2316581 N/A 2010/11/03 FMO

Maxxam ID HQ9981 Collected 2010/10/19

Sample ID R1-OTM28 Shipped

Matrix Stack

Sampling Train Received 2010/10/28

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

Organic Condensable PM (OTM28) 2316574 2010/11/03 2010/11/03 MGE

Inorganic Condensable PM (OTM28) 2319573 2010/11/04 2010/11/04 FMO

Weight of DCM Received 2316579 N/A 2010/11/03

Weight of Water

from Impingers 2316581 N/A 2010/11/03 FMO

Maxxam ID HQ9982 Collected 2010/10/19

Sample ID R2-OTM28 Shipped

Matrix Stack

Sampling Train Received 2010/10/28

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

Organic Condensable PM (OTM28) 2316574 2010/11/03 2010/11/03 MGE

Inorganic Condensable PM (OTM28) 2319573 2010/11/04 2010/11/04 FMO

Weight of DCM Received 2316579 N/A 2010/11/03

Weight of Water

from Impingers 2316581 N/A 2010/11/03 FMO

Maxxam ID HQ9983 Collected 2010/10/20

Sample ID R3-OTM28 Shipped

Matrix Stack

Sampling Train Received 2010/10/28

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

Organic Condensable PM (OTM28) 2316574 2010/11/03 2010/11/03 MGE

Inorganic Condensable PM (OTM28) 2319573 2010/11/04 2010/11/04 FMO

Weight of DCM Received 2316579 N/A 2010/11/03

Weight of Water

from Impingers 2316581 N/A 2010/11/03 FMO

Maxxam ID HQ9996 Collected 2010/10/19

Sample ID TRAIN BLANK-OTM27 Shipped

Matrix Stack

Sampling Train Received 2010/10/28

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

2.5 um Particulates on Filter (OTM-027) BAL 2315878 N/A 2010/11/02 BLM

<2.5um Particulates in Rinse(OTM-027) BAL 2314080 2010/10/29 2010/11/04 NUA

Final Volume of Acetone Probe Rinse 2314077 N/A 2010/11/03 NUA

Page 3 of 6

### BT Environmental Consulting

Maxxam Job #: B0F3790 Client Project #: 10-3990.15

Report Date: 2010/11/08 Project name: THERMAFIBER



### Test Summary

Maxxam ID HQ9997 Collected 2010/10/19

Sample ID R1-OTM27 Shipped

Matrix Stack

Sampling Train Received 2010/10/28

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

2.5 um Particulates on Filter (OTM-027) BAL 2315878 N/A 2010/11/02 BLM

<2.5um Particulates in Rinse(OTM-027) BAL 2314080 2010/10/29 2010/11/04 NUA

Final Volume of Acetone Probe Rinse 2314077 N/A 2010/11/03 NUA

Maxxam ID HQ9998 Collected 2010/10/19

Sample ID R2-OTM27 Shipped

Matrix Stack

Sampling Train Received 2010/10/28

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

2.5 um Particulates on Filter (OTM-027) BAL 2315878 N/A 2010/11/02 BLM

<2.5um Particulates in Rinse(OTM-027) BAL 2314080 2010/10/29 2010/11/04 NUA

Final Volume of Acetone Probe Rinse 2314077 N/A 2010/11/03 NUA

Maxxam ID HQ9999 Collected 2010/10/20

Sample ID R3-OTM27 Shipped

Matrix Stack

Sampling Train Received 2010/10/28

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

2.5 um Particulates on Filter (OTM-027) BAL 2315878 N/A 2010/11/02 BLM

<2.5um Particulates in Rinse(OTM-027) BAL 2314080 2010/10/29 2010/11/04 NUA

Final Volume of Acetone Probe Rinse 2314077 N/A 2010/11/03 NUA

Page 4 of 6

### BT Environmental Consulting

Maxxam Job #: B0F3790 Client Project #: 10-3990.15

Report Date: 2010/11/08 Project name: THERMAFIBER

GENERAL

COMMENTS

Sample HQ9981-01: ORGANIC EXTRACTION : Yellowish oily material found in vial.

INORGANIC EXTRACTION : Whitish residue found in aluminum dish.

Sample HQ9982-01: ORGANIC EXTRACTION : Pinkish oily material found in vial.

INORGANIC EXTRACTION : Whitish residue found in aluminum dish.

Sample HQ9983-01: ORGANIC EXTRACTION : Yellowish oily material found in vial.

INORGANIC EXTRACTION : Pinkish residue found in aluminum dish.

RESULTS OF

ANALYSES OF

STACK SAMPLING TRAIN

2.5 um Particulates on Filter (OTM-027): Maxxam # Filter Condition

HQ9994-01R Normal

HQ9996-01R Normal

HQ9997-01R FT

HQ9998-01R Normal

HQ9999-01R Normal

Normal Filters received in normal condition

FT Filter

torn

Results relate only to the items tested.

Page 5 of 6

### BT Environmental Consulting

Attention: James K. Sharp

Client Project #: 10-3990.15

P.O. #:

Project name: THERMAFIBER



### Quality Assurance Report

Maxxam Job Number: GB0F3790

QA/QC Date

Batch Analyzed

Num Init QC Type Parameter yyyy/mm/dd Value %Recovery Units QC Limits

2314080 NUA Method Blank < 2.5 Particulate Weight in Acetone Rinse 2010/11/04 ND, RDL=0.5 mg

2316574 MGE Spiked Blank Organic Condensible PM 2010/11/03 95 % 70

- 130

Spiked Blank DUP Organic Condensible PM 2010/11/03 93 % 70

- 130

RPD Organic Condensible PM 2010/11/03 2.3 % 20

Method Blank Organic Condensible PM 2010/11/03 ND, RDL=1.0 mg

2319573 MGE Method Blank Inorganic Condensible PM 2010/11/04 ND, RDL=0.50 mg

Duplicate: Paired analysis of a separate portion of the same sample. Used to evaluate the variance in the measurement.

Spiked Blank: A blank

matrix to which a known amount of the analyte has been added. Used to evaluate analyte recovery.

Method Blank: A blank matrix containing all reagents used in the analytical procedure. Used to identify laboratory contamination.

Page 6 of 6

### Your Project #: 10-3990.15

Site: THERMAFIBER

Attention: Barry

Boulianne

BT Environmental Consulting

2615 Wolcott St.

Ferndale, MI

USA 48220

Report Date: 2010/11/09



## CERTIFICATE

OF ANALYSIS

MAXXAM JOB #: B0F3754

Received: 2010/10/28, 12:00

Sample Matrix: Stack

Sampling Train

# Samples Received: 4

Date Date Method

Analyses Quantity Extracted Analyzed Laboratory Method Reference

Metals in Combined Train (6020) ( 1 ) 4 2010/11/05 2010/11/08 BRL SOP-00103/ BRL EPA 6020 / M29

SOP-00102

Particulates/Acetone Rinse (M5/315/M201) ( 1 ) 4 2010/10/29 2010/11/04 BRL SOP-00109 EPA 5/315

Particulates/Filter (M5/315/NJATM1/M201) ( 1 ) 4 N/A 2010/11/04 BRL SOP-00109 EPA 5/315/NJATM1

Final Volume of Acetone Probe Rinse 4 N/A 2010/11/02

* RPDs calculated using raw data. The rounding of final results may result in the apparent difference.

(1) This test was performed in Maxxam Mississauga under Maxxam Burlington SCC Accreditation



### Encryption

Key

Please direct all questions regarding this Certificate of Analysis to your Project Manager.

LINA BARRETO, Project Manager

Email: LBarreto@maxxam.ca

Phone# (905) 817-5700

====================================================================

Maxxam has procedures in place to guard against improper use of the electronic signature and have the required "signatories", as per section

5.10.2 of ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E), signing the reports. For Service Group specific validation please refer to the Validation Signature Page.

Total cover pages: 1

Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics Burlington:5555 North Service Road, Burlington, Ontario L7L 5H7 Telephone(905) 332-8788 Fax(905) 332-9169

Page 1 of 8

### BT Environmental Consulting

Maxxam Job #: B0F3754 Client Project #: 10-3990.15

Report Date: 2010/11/09 Project name: THERMAFIBER



### RESULTS OF ANALYSES OF STACK SAMPLING TRAIN

Maxxam ID H Q 9 7 8 8 H

Q 9 7 8 9 H

Q 9 7 9 0 H

Q 9 7 9 1

Sampling Date 2010/10/21 2010/10/20 2010/10/21 2010/10/21

U n i t s BLANK-M5/29 RUN RUN RUN RDL QC Batch

1-M5/29 2-M5/29 3-M5/29

Acetone Rinse Particulate Weight in Acetone Rinse mg ND 5.9 7.8 4.7 0.5 2313901

Front Half Particulate Weight on Filter mg ND 26.7 24.8 20.0 0.30 2315865

Acetone Rinse Volume ml 130 120 130 120 1 2314070

ND = Not detected

RDL = Reportable Detection Limit

QC Batch = Quality Control Batch

Page 2 of 8

### BT Environmental Consulting

Maxxam Job #: B0F3754 Client Project #: 10-3990.15

Report Date: 2010/11/09 Project name: THERMAFIBER



### ELEMENTS BY ICP/MS (STACK SAMPLING TRAIN)

Maxxam ID H Q 9 7 8 8 H

Q 9 7 8 9 H

Q 9 7 8 9 H

Q 9 7 9 0 H

Q 9 7 9 1

Sampling Date 2010/10/21 2010/10/20 2010/10/20 2010/10/21 2010/10/21

U n i t s BLANK-M5/29 RDL RUN RUN RUN RUN RDL QC Batch

1-M5/29 1-M5/29 2-M5/29 3-M5/29

Lab-Dup

Total Antimony (Sb) ug ND 0.40 ND ND ND ND 4.0 2321118

Total Arsenic (As) ug 0.86 0.40 9.0 9.2 8.4 7.1 4.0 2321118

Total Beryllium (Be) ug ND 0.10 ND ND ND ND 1.0 2321118

Total Cadmium (Cd) ug ND 0.10 9.5 9.6 13.3 9.1 1.0 2321118

Total Chromium (Cr) ug 1.04 0.30 3.9 3.6 8.0 ND 3.0 2321118

Total Cobalt (Co) ug ND 0.10 1.5 1.5 1.3 1.6 1.0 2321118

Total Lead (Pb) ug 0.41 0.20 16.0 15.5 12.4 13.3 2.0 2321118

Total Manganese (Mn) ug 1.19 0.75 117 115 107 86.8 7.5 2321118

Total Nickel (Ni) ug 0.50 0.50 8.1 8.1 8.4 ND 5.0 2321118

Total Selenium (Se) ug 3.5 1.0 755 738 596 482 10 2321118

ND = Not detected

RDL = Reportable Detection Limit

QC Batch = Quality Control Batch

Page 3 of 8

### BT Environmental Consulting

Maxxam Job #: B0F3754 Client Project #: 10-3990.15

Report Date: 2010/11/09 Project name: THERMAFIBER



### Test Summary

Maxxam ID HQ9788 Collected 2010/10/21

Sample ID BLANK-M5/29 Shipped

Matrix Stack Sampling Train Received 2010/10/28

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

Metals in Combined Train (6020) ICP1 /MS 2321118 2010/11/05 2010/11/08 N_R

Particulates/Acetone Rinse (M5/315/M201) BAL 2313901 2010/10/29 2010/11/04 NUA

Particulates/Filter (M5/315/NJATM1/M201) BAL 2315865 N/A 2010/11/04 BLM

Final Volume of Acetone Probe Rinse 2314070 N/A 2010/11/02 NUA

Maxxam ID HQ9789 Collected 2010/10/20

Sample ID RUN 1-M5/29 Shipped

Matrix Stack Sampling Train Received 2010/10/28

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

Metals in Combined Train (6020) ICP1 /MS 2321118 2010/11/05 2010/11/08 N_R

Particulates/Acetone Rinse (M5/315/M201) BAL 2313901 2010/10/29 2010/11/04 NUA

Particulates/Filter (M5/315/NJATM1/M201) BAL 2315865 N/A 2010/11/04 BLM

Final Volume of Acetone Probe Rinse 2314070 N/A 2010/11/02 NUA

Maxxam ID HQ9789 D u p Collected 2010/10/20

Sample ID RUN 1-M5/29 Shipped

Matrix Stack Sampling Train Received 2010/10/28

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

Metals in Combined Train (6020) ICP1 /MS 2321118 2010/11/05 2010/11/08 N_R

Maxxam ID HQ9790 Collected 2010/10/21

Sample ID RUN 2-M5/29 Shipped

Matrix Stack Sampling Train Received 2010/10/28

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

Metals in Combined Train (6020) ICP1 /MS 2321118 2010/11/05 2010/11/08 N_R

Particulates/Acetone Rinse (M5/315/M201) BAL 2313901 2010/10/29 2010/11/04 NUA

Particulates/Filter (M5/315/NJATM1/M201) BAL 2315865 N/A 2010/11/04 BLM

Final Volume of Acetone Probe Rinse 2314070 N/A 2010/11/02 NUA

Maxxam ID HQ9791 Collected 2010/10/21

Sample ID RUN 3-M5/29 Shipped

Matrix Stack Sampling Train Received 2010/10/28

Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst

Metals in Combined Train (6020) ICP1 /MS 2321118 2010/11/05 2010/11/08 N_R

Particulates/Acetone Rinse (M5/315/M201) BAL 2313901 2010/10/29 2010/11/04 NUA

Particulates/Filter (M5/315/NJATM1/M201) BAL 2315865 N/A 2010/11/04 BLM

Final Volume of Acetone Probe Rinse 2314070 N/A 2010/11/02 NUA

Page 4 of 8

### BT Environmental Consulting

Maxxam Job #: B0F3754 Client Project #: 10-3990.15

Report Date: 2010/11/09 Project name: THERMAFIBER

RESULTS OF ANALYSES OF STACK SAMPLING TRAIN

Particulates/Acetone Rinse (M5/315/M201): Sample #HQ9791 contained 5ml of water. The sample was was evaporated in the oven at 85C.

ELEMENTS BY ICP/MS (STACK SAMPLING TRAIN)

Metals in Combined Train (6020): Extra 10x dilution was required for all samples except HQ9788, due to the matrix (high S content)

Post digestion duplicate and spike was done on sample HQ9789.

Trace level Ni and As were observed in the Processed Blank.

Results relate only to the items tested.

Page 5 of 8

### BT Environmental Consulting

Attention: Barry Boulianne

Client Project #: 10-3990.15

P.O. #:

Project name: THERMAFIBER



### Quality Assurance Report

Maxxam Job Number: GB0F3754

QA/QC Date

Batch Analyzed

Num Init QC Type Parameter yyyy/mm/dd Value %Recovery Units QC Limits

2313901 NUA Method Blank Acetone Rinse Particulate Weight in Acetone 2010/11/04 ND, RDL=0.5 mg

2321118 N_R Matrix Spike

(HQ9789) Total Antimony (Sb) 2010/11/08 96 % 70

- 130

Matrix Spike DUP

(HQ9789) Total Antimony (Sb) 2010/11/08 98 % 70

- 130

MS/MSD RPD Total Antimony (Sb) 2010/11/08 2.1 % 20

Matrix Spike

(HQ9789) Total Arsenic (As) 2010/11/08 97 % 70

- 130

Matrix Spike DUP

(HQ9789) Total Arsenic (As) 2010/11/08 97 % 70

- 130

MS/MSD RPD Total Arsenic (As) 2010/11/08 0 % 20

Matrix Spike

(HQ9789) Total Beryllium (Be) 2010/11/08 91 % 70

- 130

Matrix Spike DUP

(HQ9789) Total Beryllium (Be) 2010/11/08 90 % 70

- 130

MS/MSD RPD Total Beryllium (Be) 2010/11/08 1.1 % 20

Matrix Spike

(HQ9789) Total Cadmium (Cd) 2010/11/08 97 % 70

- 130

Matrix Spike DUP

(HQ9789) Total Cadmium (Cd) 2010/11/08 96 % 70

- 130

MS/MSD RPD Total Cadmium (Cd) 2010/11/08 1.0 % 20

Matrix Spike

(HQ9789) Total Chromium (Cr) 2010/11/08 99 % 70

- 130

Matrix Spike DUP

(HQ9789) Total Chromium (Cr) 2010/11/08 97 % 70

- 130

MS/MSD RPD Total Chromium (Cr) 2010/11/08 2.0 % 20

Matrix Spike

(HQ9789) Total Cobalt (Co) 2010/11/08 99 % 70

- 130

Matrix Spike DUP

(HQ9789) Total Cobalt (Co) 2010/11/08 97 % 70

- 130

MS/MSD RPD Total Cobalt (Co) 2010/11/08 2.0 % 20

Matrix Spike

(HQ9789) Total Lead (Pb) 2010/11/08 97 % 70

- 130

Matrix Spike DUP

(HQ9789) Total Lead (Pb) 2010/11/08 98 % 70

- 130

MS/MSD RPD Total Lead (Pb) 2010/11/08 1.0 % 20

Matrix Spike

(HQ9789) Total Manganese (Mn) 2010/11/08 98 % 70

- 130

Matrix Spike DUP

(HQ9789) Total Manganese (Mn) 2010/11/08 97 % 70

- 130

MS/MSD RPD Total Manganese (Mn) 2010/11/08 1.0 % 20

Matrix Spike

(HQ9789) Total Nickel (Ni) 2010/11/08 97 % 70

- 130

Matrix Spike DUP

(HQ9789) Total Nickel (Ni) 2010/11/08 96 % 70

- 130

MS/MSD RPD Total Nickel (Ni) 2010/11/08 1.0 % 20

Matrix Spike

(HQ9789) Total Selenium (Se) 2010/11/08 103 % 70

- 130

Matrix Spike DUP

(HQ9789) Total Selenium (Se) 2010/11/08 99 % 70

- 130

MS/MSD RPD Total Selenium (Se) 2010/11/08 4.0 % 20

Spiked Blank Total Antimony (Sb) 2010/11/08 96 % 85

- 115

Spiked Blank DUP Total Antimony (Sb) 2010/11/08 94 % 85

- 115

RPD Total Antimony (Sb) 2010/11/08 1.8 % 20

Spiked Blank Total Arsenic (As) 2010/11/08 98 % 85

- 115

Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics Burlington:5555 North Service Road, Burlington, Ontario L7L 5H7 Telephone(905) 332-8788 Fax(905) 332-9169

Page 6 of 8

### BT Environmental Consulting

Attention: Barry Boulianne

Client Project #: 10-3990.15

P.O. #:

Project name: THERMAFIBER



### Quality Assurance Report

(Continued)

Maxxam Job Number: GB0F3754

QA/QC Date

Batch Analyzed

Num Init QC Type Parameter yyyy/mm/dd Value %Recovery Units QC Limits

2321118 N_R Spiked Blank DUP Total Arsenic (As) 2010/11/08 95 % 85

- 115

RPD Total Arsenic (As) 2010/11/08 3.4 % 20

Spiked Blank Total Beryllium (Be) 2010/11/08 94 % 85

- 115

Spiked Blank DUP Total Beryllium (Be) 2010/11/08 95 % 85

- 115

RPD Total Beryllium (Be) 2010/11/08 0.5 % 20

Spiked Blank Total Cadmium (Cd) 2010/11/08 94 % 85

- 115

Spiked Blank DUP Total Cadmium (Cd) 2010/11/08 94 % 85

- 115

RPD Total Cadmium (Cd) 2010/11/08 0.3 % 20

Spiked Blank Total Chromium (Cr) 2010/11/08 97 % 85

- 115

Spiked Blank DUP Total Chromium (Cr) 2010/11/08 94 % 85

- 115

RPD Total Chromium (Cr) 2010/11/08 3.0 % 20

Spiked Blank Total Cobalt (Co) 2010/11/08 98 % 85

- 115

Spiked Blank DUP Total Cobalt (Co) 2010/11/08 96 % 85

- 115

RPD Total Cobalt (Co) 2010/11/08 2.5 % 20

Spiked Blank Total Lead (Pb) 2010/11/08 96 % 85

- 115

Spiked Blank DUP Total Lead (Pb) 2010/11/08 93 % 85

- 115

RPD Total Lead (Pb) 2010/11/08 3.3 % 20

Spiked Blank Total Manganese (Mn) 2010/11/08 97 % 85

- 115

Spiked Blank DUP Total Manganese (Mn) 2010/11/08 94 % 85

- 115

RPD Total Manganese (Mn) 2010/11/08 2.9 % 20

Spiked Blank Total Nickel (Ni) 2010/11/08 97 % 85

- 115

Spiked Blank DUP Total Nickel (Ni) 2010/11/08 94 % 85

- 115

RPD Total Nickel (Ni) 2010/11/08 3.2 % 20

Spiked Blank Total Selenium (Se) 2010/11/08 98 % 85

- 115

Spiked Blank DUP Total Selenium (Se) 2010/11/08 96 % 85

- 115

RPD Total Selenium (Se) 2010/11/08 2.3 % 20

Method Blank Total Antimony (Sb) 2010/11/08 ND, RDL=0.40 ug

Method Blank DUP Total Antimony (Sb) 2010/11/08 ND, RDL=0.40 ug

RPD Total Antimony (Sb) 2010/11/08 NC % 20

Method Blank Total Arsenic (As) 2010/11/08 1.02, RDL=0.40 ug

Method Blank DUP Total Arsenic (As) 2010/11/08 1.00, RDL=0.40 ug

RPD Total Arsenic (As) 2010/11/08 NC % 20

Method Blank Total Beryllium (Be) 2010/11/08 ND, RDL=0.10 ug

Method Blank DUP Total Beryllium (Be) 2010/11/08 ND, RDL=0.10 ug

RPD Total Beryllium (Be) 2010/11/08 NC % 20

Method Blank Total Cadmium (Cd) 2010/11/08 ND, RDL=0.10 ug

Method Blank DUP Total Cadmium (Cd) 2010/11/08 ND, RDL=0.10 ug

RPD Total Cadmium (Cd) 2010/11/08 NC % 20

Method Blank Total Chromium (Cr) 2010/11/08 ND, RDL=0.30 ug

Method Blank DUP Total Chromium (Cr) 2010/11/08 ND, RDL=0.30 ug

RPD Total Chromium (Cr) 2010/11/08 NC % 20

Method Blank Total Cobalt (Co) 2010/11/08 ND, RDL=0.10 ug

Method Blank DUP Total Cobalt (Co) 2010/11/08 ND, RDL=0.10 ug

RPD Total Cobalt (Co) 2010/11/08 NC % 20

Method Blank Total Lead (Pb) 2010/11/08 ND, RDL=0.20 ug

Method Blank DUP Total Lead (Pb) 2010/11/08 ND, RDL=0.20 ug

RPD Total Lead (Pb) 2010/11/08 NC % 20

Method Blank Total Manganese (Mn) 2010/11/08 ND, RDL=0.75 ug

Method Blank DUP Total Manganese (Mn) 2010/11/08 ND, RDL=0.75 ug

RPD Total Manganese (Mn) 2010/11/08 NC % 20

Method Blank Total Nickel (Ni) 2010/11/08 1.63, RDL=0.50 ug

Method Blank DUP Total Nickel (Ni) 2010/11/08 1.58, RDL=0.50 ug

RPD Total Nickel (Ni) 2010/11/08 NC % 20

Method Blank Total Selenium (Se) 2010/11/08 ND, RDL=1.0 ug

Method Blank DUP Total Selenium (Se) 2010/11/08 ND, RDL=1.0 ug

Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics Burlington:5555 North Service Road, Burlington, Ontario L7L 5H7 Telephone(905) 332-8788 Fax(905) 332-9169

Page 7 of 8

### BT Environmental Consulting

Attention: Barry Boulianne

Client Project #: 10-3990.15

P.O. #:

Project name: THERMAFIBER



### Quality Assurance Report

(Continued)

Maxxam Job Number: GB0F3754

QA/QC Date

Batch Analyzed

Num Init QC Type Parameter yyyy/mm/dd Value %Recovery Units QC Limits

2321118 N_R RPD Total Selenium (Se) 2010/11/08 NC % 20

RPD

- Sample/Sample

Dup Total Antimony (Sb) 2010/11/08 NC % 20

Total Arsenic (As) 2010/11/08 NC % 20

Total Beryllium (Be) 2010/11/08 NC % 20

Total Cadmium (Cd) 2010/11/08 1.3 % 20

Total Chromium (Cr) 2010/11/08 NC % 20

Total Cobalt (Co) 2010/11/08 NC % 20

Total Lead (Pb) 2010/11/08 3.4 % 20

Total Manganese (Mn) 2010/11/08 1.2 % 20

Total Nickel (Ni) 2010/11/08 NC % 20

Total Selenium (Se) 2010/11/08 2.2 % 20

Duplicate: Paired analysis of a separate portion of the same sample. Used to evaluate the variance in the measurement.

Matrix Spike: A sample to which a known amount of the analyte of interest has been added. Used to evaluate sample matrix interference.

Spiked Blank: A blank matrix to which a known amount of the analyte has been added. Used to evaluate analyte recovery.

Method Blank: A blank matrix containing all reagents used in the analytical procedure. Used to identify laboratory contamination.

NC (RPD): The RPD was not calculated. The level of analyte detected in the parent sample and its duplicate was not sufficiently significant to permit a

reliable calculation.

Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics Burlington:5555 North Service Road, Burlington, Ontario L7L 5H7 Telephone(905) 332-8788 Fax(905) 332-9169

Page 8 of 8

### Ohio Lumex Co., Inc.

9263 Ravenna Rd., Unit A-3

Twinsburg, OH 44087

Phone: (330) 405-0837

Fax: (330) 405-0847

www.ohiolumex.com

Other



## Client Name 

# BT Environmental Consulting, Inc. Report Number BTEnvironmental110310 Report



## Date

Contact Name Phone

**Trap I.D. Test Location**  **Date Analyzed Scientist**  **Mass ng**

**Sect.1 Mass ng** 

**Sect.2 Spike** 

**Level % Spike** 

**Recovery Date(s) in** 

**Stack Comments** 

70650 Cupola #4 11/3/2010 Matt Carhart 3.95 0 10/19/2010 Run 3, Trap A

80463 Cupola #4 11/3/2010 Matt Carhart 23.8 0.94 20 10/19/2010 Run 3, Trap B

70658 Cupola #4 11/3/2010 Matt Carhart 4.70 0.95 10/19/2010 Run 2, Trap A

80376 Cupola #4 11/3/2010 Matt Carhart 22.9 0.45 20 10/19/2010 Run 2, Trap B

70537 Cupola #4 11/3/2010 Matt Carhart 4.83 0.44 10/19/2010 Run 1, Trap A

80378 Cupola #4 11/3/2010 Matt Carhart 22.1 0 20 10/19/2010 Run 1, Trap B

80305 Cupola #4 11/3/2010 Matt Carhart 0.59 0 10/19/2010 Train Blank, Trap A

80460 Cupola #4 11/3/2010 Matt Carhart 19.7 0.28 20 10/19/2010 Train Blank, Trap B

Variability +- 10% 

## Plant/Source 

# Thermafiber 

# Sorbent Trap Analysis Report

11/3/2010

Barry Boulianne bboulianne@sbcglobal.net Matthew

Smith msmith@btecinc.com Turn - Around Time

Standard

48 hour rush

Less than .257 ng is considered "< LDL." Which is less

than the lowest detection limit.

Calibration Report Available 

## (248)-548-8072

## 1200 N. Fancher

· Mount Pleasant, MI 48858

· (989) 772-5088

· Fax (989) 772-5870 

# Thermafiber

Wabash, Indiana

FTIR Emission Testing

October 19, 2010

Pro j ect No. 1681



# Prepared For

BT Environmental Consulting, Inc.

By

Phillip J. Kauppi

Chemist / FTIR Specialist

November 17, 2010

# Thermafiber

Wabash, Indiana – FTIR Emission Testing

October 19, 2010

Project No. 1681



# Scope

Prism Analytical Technologi es, Inc. (PATI) was contracted by BT Environmental

Consulting (Ferndale, MI) to c onduct air testing for Therma fiber (Wabash, IN). Cupola

#4 emissions were tested for gaseous carbonyl sulfide (COS) and car bon monoxide (CO).

Testing was performed October 19, 2010.

Extractive Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectromet ry following EPA Method 320

was used to quantify gaseous emissions from Cupola #4. Lora Kralik (PATI) performed

data collection. Phillip Kauppi (PATI) perf ormed data validation, and report generation.



# Procedures

FTIR data were collected using an MKS MultiGas 2030 FTIR spectrometer, serial

number 016252291. An 18”, 1⁄4” diameter, stainl ess steel probe was used to direct

effluent gas from the stack to the FTIR. Th e probe was connected to a 100 ft., heated, 3/8

inch transfer line, maintained at 191 ° C. A heated filter box (191 ° C) made the connection

from the heated transfer line to the FTIR. A 0.1 μ glass filter was used for particulate

matter removal.

The FTIR was equipped with a temperatur e-controlled, 5.11 mete r multipass gas cell

maintained at 191 ° C. Gas flows and sampling system pressures were monitored using a

rotometer and pressure transducer. All data were collected at 0.5 cm -1 

## resolution. Each

spectrum was derived from the coaddition of 60 scans, with a new data point generated

every minute.

A calibration transfer standard (CTS), 100.0 ppm ethylene gas standard (Airgas, cylinder

#CC156258), was analyzed before and after the three test runs. The concentration

determined for all CTS runs were within ± 5% of the certified value of the standard. The

ethylene was passed through the entire system (system purge) to determine the sampling

system response time and to ensure that the sampling system was leak-free at the stack

location. Nitrogen was purged through the sa mpling system to confirm the system was

free of contaminants. See the FTIR QA/QC appendix for results.

Direct measurements of carbon monoxi de (The American Gas Group, cylinder

#CC56451) and ethylene gas standards were made to confirm standard concentrations.

## prism analytical technologies, inc.

Thermafiber, Wabash, IN – FTIR Emission Monitoring, October 19, 2010

Project No. 1681

page 2 

## The carbon monoxide standard was passed throu gh the sampling system to determine the

response time and confirm recovery. See the FTIR QA/QC Appendix for results.

Carbon monoxide spiking was performed in am bient air to verify the ability of the

sampling system to quantitatively deliver a sample containing carbon monoxide from the

base of the probe to the FTIR. The native carbon monoxide concentrations from Cupola

#4 changed widely over short pe riods of time, thus making it making difficult, if not

impossible, to perform carbon monoxide spiking at the cupola using one FTIR. For these

reasons, carbon monoxide spiking was performed in ambient air.

Samples from ambient air were measured to determine carbon monoxide concentrations

to be used in the spike recove ry calculations. The water (H 2 

## O) concentrations of the

spiked and unspiked samples were used to determine the diluti on factor and thus

determine the spiked concentration and expected result. See the Spike Calculation below.

ܨܦ ൌ 1 െ ௑ሺ௦௣௞ሻ

௑ሺ௡௔௧௜௩௘ሻ 

## (Where X = H 2 

## O)



## ܥܵ ൌ ܨܦ כ ܵ݌݅݇݁ ሺ ݀݅ݎ ሻ ൅ ܷ݊݌ݏ݅݇݁ሺ1 െ ܨܦሻ (Sec. 9.2.3 (4) USEPA Method 320)

DF = Dilution Factor of the spike gas

Spike(dir) = Analyte concentration of the undiluted spike gas

CS = Expected concentration of the spiked samples

Unspike = Native concentration of analytes in unspiked samples

X(spk) = Concentration of spiked H 2 

## O

X(native) = Concentration of native H 2 

## O



## Analyte spikes were introduced using an instrument grade stai nless steel rotometer. The

spike target dilution ratio was 1:10 or less. All carbon monoxide spike recoveries were

within the EPA Method allowance of ±30%. See Spike Summary Appendix for results.

As part of the data validation procedure, reference spectra are manually fit to that of the

sample spectra and a concentration is determ ined. The reference spectra are scaled to

match the peak amplitude of the sample, thus providing a scale factor. The scale factor

multiplied by the reference spectra concentration is used to determine the concentration

value for the sample spectra. Sample pressure and temperature corrections are then

applied to compute the final sample concentration. The manually calculated results are

then compared with the software-generated results. The data is then validated if the two

concentrations are within ± 5% agreement. If there is a difference greater than ± 5% the

spectra are reviewed for possible spectra interferences or any other possible causes

leading to misquantified data.

## prism analytical technologies, inc.

Thermafiber, Wabash, IN – FTIR Emission Monitoring, October 19, 2010

Project No. 1681

page 3 

# Results and Discussion

Detection Limits

The detection limit of each analyte was calculated following Annex A2 of ASTM

D6348-3 procedure using spectra that c ontained similar amounts of moisture.

Table 1 - FTIR Detection Limits

Analyte Carbonyl Sulfide Carbon Monoxide

Det. Lim. (ppmv wet) 1.0 0.2



## Cupola #4

Three, 3-hour test runs were performed at Cupola #4 on October 19, 2010 (See Table 2

for Test Run detail). Carbonyl sulfide a nd carbon monoxide were detected during the

three test runs. Analyte spiking was pe rformed before each run to confirm the

measurement system’s ability to delive r and quantify carbon monoxide (See FTIR

QA/QC Appendix for results). All concentra tion data were calcul ated on a wet volume

basis. The sample and data collection followed the procedures outlined in USEPA

Method 320 and PATI’s SOP 207. See the Test Run Data - Cupola #4 appendix for all

concentration data.

Table 2 – Summary of FTIR Data, Cupola #4

Test Run 1

9:47 – 10:47, 10/19/2010 Carbonyl Sulfide

(ppmv wet) Carbon Monoxide

(ppmv wet)

Minimum < 1 11.4

Maximum 155.5 21,540

Average 14.2* 2819

Test Run 2

12:01 – 13:01, 10/19/2010 Carbonyl Sulfide

(ppmv wet) Carbon Monoxide

(ppmv wet)

Minimum < 1 11.4

Maximum 139.3 19,889

Average 7.7* 1307

Test Run 3

13:28 - 14:28, 10/19/2010 Carbonyl Sulfide

(ppmv wet) Carbon Monoxide

(ppmv wet)

Minimum < 1 10.8

Maximum 33.8 6,248

Average 4.3* 894

*For average calculation, Values below the detection limit we re replaced with the actual detection limit concentration

## prism analytical technologies, inc.

Thermafiber, Wabash, IN – FTIR Emission Monitoring, October 19, 2010

Project No. 1681

page 4 

## The following appendices include FTIR data and QA/QC procedures:

- Test Run Data - Cupola #4

- QA/QC Data – Cupola #4

- Gas Certificates and Field Notes

Phillip J. Kauppi (electronic) ________ Date: November 17, 2010

Phillip J. Kauppi

Chemist / FTIR Specialist

Thermafiber_Prj_1681_RPT.doc

# APPENDIX

Test Run Data - Cupola #4

## Thermafiber, Wabash, IN, October 19, 2010

‐ FTIR Data

‐ Test Run 1

Spectrum Date Time COS

(ppmv wet) CO

(ppmv wet) FTIR Gas Cell

Temp (C) FTIR Gas Cell

Pressure (Atm)

R1_000166.LAB 10/19/2010 9:46:35 24.8 8107.9 190.9 0.920

R1_000167.LAB 10/19/2010 9:47:36 28.8 8022.1 190.9 0.920

R1_000168.LAB 10/19/2010 9:48:37 108.6 19307.3 190.9 0.921

R1_000169.LAB 10/19/2010 9:49:38 38.2 7770.0 190.9 0.920

R1_000170.LAB 10/19/2010 9:50:38 2.0 239.5 190.9 0.920

R1_000171.LAB 10/19/2010 9:51:39 < 1 32.2 190.9 0.921

R1_000172.LAB 10/19/2010 9:52:40 < 1 19.3 190.9 0.920

R1_000173.LAB 10/19/2010 9:53:41 1.1 434.3 190.9 0.921

R1_000174.LAB 10/19/2010 9:54:41 4.0 2406.5 190.9 0.920

R1_000175.LAB 10/19/2010 9:55:42 10.8 4074.9 190.9 0.921

R1_000176.LAB 10/19/2010 9:56:43 5.2 1496.2 190.9 0.920

R1_000177.LAB 10/19/2010 9:57:44 < 1 112.9 190.9 0.920

R1_000178.LAB 10/19/2010 9:58:44 < 1 17.2 190.9 0.920

R1_000179.LAB 10/19/2010 9:59:45 6.3 264.1 190.9 0.921

R1_000180.LAB 10/19/2010 10:00:46 113.6 18279.6 190.9 0.921

R1_000181.LAB 10/19/2010 10:01:47 155.5 21539.5 190.9 0.921

R1_000182.LAB 10/19/2010 10:02:47 29.1 4268.1 190.9 0.921

R1_000183.LAB 10/19/2010 10:03:48 1.9 200.2 190.9 0.920

R1_000184.LAB 10/19/2010 10:04:49 < 1 26.2 190.9 0.920

R1_000185.LAB 10/19/2010 10:05:50 < 1 73.9 190.9 0.920

R1_000186.LAB 10/19/2010 10:06:50 < 1 67.1 190.9 0.920

R1_000187.LAB 10/19/2010 10:07:51 < 1 25.7 190.9 0.920

R1_000188.LAB 10/19/2010 10:08:52 < 1 65.5 190.9 0.920

R1_000189.LAB 10/19/2010 10:09:52 5.0 860.2 190.9 0.920

R1_000190.LAB 10/19/2010 10:10:53 26.8 7431.4 190.9 0.920

R1_000191.LAB 10/19/2010 10:11:54 40.3 8446.5 190.9 0.920

R1_000192.LAB 10/19/2010 10:12:55 3.4 412.4 190.9 0.920

R1_000193.LAB 10/19/2010 10:13:55 < 1 30.0 190.9 0.920

R1 000194 LAB 10/19/2010 10 14 56 1 24 0 190 9 0 920 R1_000194.LAB 10/19/2010 10:14:56 < 24.0 190.9 0.920

R1_000195.LAB 10/19/2010 10:15:57 < 1 141.3 190.9 0.921

R1_000196.LAB 10/19/2010 10:16:58 7.5 3956.5 190.9 0.921

R1_000197.LAB 10/19/2010 10:17:58 40.1 12170.2 190.9 0.920

R1_000198.LAB 10/19/2010 10:18:59 50.0 11209.7 190.9 0.921

R1_000199.LAB 10/19/2010 10:20:00 3.3 398.2 190.9 0.920

R1_000200.LAB 10/19/2010 10:21:01 < 1 33.5 190.9 0.920

R1_000201.LAB 10/19/2010 10:22:01 < 1 14.8 190.9 0.920

R1_000202.LAB 10/19/2010 10:23:02 < 1 62.8 190.9 0.921

R1_000203.LAB 10/19/2010 10:24:03 < 1 185.2 190.9 0.921

R1_000204.LAB 10/19/2010 10:25:04 < 1 35.0 190.9 0.921

R1_000205.LAB 10/19/2010 10:26:04 < 1 31.3 190.9 0.922

R1_000206.LAB 10/19/2010 10:27:05 < 1 41.5 190.9 0.921

R1_000207.LAB 10/19/2010 10:28:06 < 1 55.2 190.9 0.923

R1_000208.LAB 10/19/2010 10:29:07 2.7 1272.5 190.9 0.921

R1_000209.LAB 10/19/2010 10:30:07 3.6 1288.0 190.9 0.920

R1_000210.LAB 10/19/2010 10:31:08 < 1 189.6 190.9 0.920

R1_000211.LAB 10/19/2010 10:32:09 < 1 15.5 190.9 0.921

R1_000212.LAB 10/19/2010 10:33:10 < 1 71.7 190.9 0.921

R1_000213.LAB 10/19/2010 10:34:10 < 1 122.1 190.9 0.921

R1_000214.LAB 10/19/2010 10:35:11 < 1 66.0 190.9 0.921

R1_000215.LAB 10/19/2010 10:36:12 < 1 32.2 190.9 0.920

R1_000216.LAB 10/19/2010 10:37:13 < 1 15.2 190.9 0.920

R1_000217.LAB 10/19/2010 10:38:13 < 1 11.4 190.9 0.920

R1_000218.LAB 10/19/2010 10:39:14 < 1 12.3 190.9 0.920



## Prj No 1681

## Thermafiber, Wabash, IN, October 19, 2010

‐ FTIR Data

‐ Test Run 1

Spectrum Date Time COS

(ppmv wet) CO

(ppmv wet) FTIR Gas Cell

Temp (C) FTIR Gas Cell

Pressure (Atm)

R1_000219.LAB 10/19/2010 10:40:15 1.9 252.8 190.9 0.921

R1_000220.LAB 10/19/2010 10:41:16 22.6 5882.9 190.9 0.920

R1_000221.LAB 10/19/2010 10:42:16 67.4 13961.2 190.9 0.920

R1_000222.LAB 10/19/2010 10:43:17 27.4 5919.5 190.9 0.920

R1_000223.LAB 10/19/2010 10:44:18 1.6 215.5 190.9 0.920

R1_000224.LAB 10/19/2010 10:45:19 < 1 36.6 190.9 0.920

R1_000225.LAB 10/19/2010 10:46:19 < 1 47.7 190.9 0.921

R1_000226.LAB 10/19/2010 10:47:20 < 1 147.8 190.9 0.920

Minimum < 1 11.4

Maximum 155.5 21539.5

Average 14.2* 2818.9

*For average calculation, Values below the detection limit were replaced with the actual

detection limit concentration



## Prj No 1681

## Thermafiber, Wabash, IN, October 19, 2010

‐ FTIR Data

‐ Test Run 2

Spectrum Date Time COS

(ppmv wet) CO

(ppmv wet) FTIR Gas Cell

Temp (C) FTIR Gas Cell

Pressure (Atm)

R2_000343.LAB 10/19/2010 12:00:55 139.3 19889.2 190.9 0.919

R2_000344.LAB 10/19/2010 12:01:56 79.4 12932.4 190.9 0.919

R2_000345.LAB 10/19/2010 12:02:56 9.5 811.4 190.9 0.919

R2_000346.LAB 10/19/2010 12:03:57 < 1 56.0 190.9 0.919

R2_000347.LAB 10/19/2010 12:04:58 < 1 20.2 190.9 0.918

R2_000348.LAB 10/19/2010 12:05:59 < 1 80.4 190.9 0.919

R2_000349.LAB 10/19/2010 12:06:59 9.8 3440.6 190.9 0.918

R2_000350.LAB 10/19/2010 12:08:00 11.1 3478.9 190.9 0.919

R2_000351.LAB 10/19/2010 12:09:01 39.2 9489.2 190.9 0.919

R2_000352.LAB 10/19/2010 12:10:02 18.2 2021.1 190.9 0.918

R2_000353.LAB 10/19/2010 12:11:02 1.1 152.6 190.9 0.919

R2_000354.LAB 10/19/2010 12:12:03 < 1 23.0 190.9 0.919

R2_000355.LAB 10/19/2010 12:13:04 < 1 251.5 190.9 0.919

R2_000356.LAB 10/19/2010 12:14:04 11.0 3636.3 190.9 0.919

R2_000357.LAB 10/19/2010 12:15:05 3.2 656.8 190.9 0.919

R2_000358.LAB 10/19/2010 12:16:06 < 1 42.3 190.9 0.919

R2_000359.LAB 10/19/2010 12:17:07 < 1 16.9 190.9 0.918

R2_000360.LAB 10/19/2010 12:18:07 < 1 14.8 190.9 0.918

R2_000361.LAB 10/19/2010 12:19:08 < 1 16.5 190.9 0.918

R2_000362.LAB 10/19/2010 12:20:09 < 1 20.1 190.9 0.918

R2_000363.LAB 10/19/2010 12:21:10 < 1 19.9 190.9 0.918

R2_000364.LAB 10/19/2010 12:22:10 < 1 17.7 190.9 0.919

R2_000365.LAB 10/19/2010 12:23:11 < 1 23.6 190.9 0.918

R2_000366.LAB 10/19/2010 12:24:12 < 1 32.7 190.9 0.919

R2_000367.LAB 10/19/2010 12:25:13 < 1 25.1 190.9 0.919

R2_000368.LAB 10/19/2010 12:26:13 < 1 15.9 190.9 0.919

R2_000369.LAB 10/19/2010 12:27:14 < 1 14.4 190.9 0.918

R2_000370.LAB 10/19/2010 12:28:15 < 1 12.0 190.9 0.917

R2 000371 LAB 10/19/2010 12 29 15 1 33 6 190 9 0 918 R2_000371.LAB 10/19/2010 12:29:15 < 33.6 190.9 0.918

R2_000372.LAB 10/19/2010 12:30:16 < 1 45.6 190.9 0.919

R2_000373.LAB 10/19/2010 12:31:17 < 1 59.8 190.9 0.918

R2_000374.LAB 10/19/2010 12:32:18 < 1 46.4 190.9 0.919

R2_000375.LAB 10/19/2010 12:33:18 < 1 16.4 190.9 0.918

R2_000376.LAB 10/19/2010 12:34:19 < 1 13.2 190.9 0.918

R2_000377.LAB 10/19/2010 12:35:20 < 1 11.4 190.9 0.918

R2_000378.LAB 10/19/2010 12:36:21 < 1 13.3 190.9 0.918

R2_000379.LAB 10/19/2010 12:37:21 < 1 15.0 190.9 0.918

R2_000380.LAB 10/19/2010 12:38:22 < 1 23.2 190.9 0.918

R2_000381.LAB 10/19/2010 12:39:23 < 1 60.0 190.9 0.918

R2_000382.LAB 10/19/2010 12:40:23 < 1 49.8 190.9 0.918

R2_000383.LAB 10/19/2010 12:41:24 < 1 27.6 190.9 0.918

R2_000384.LAB 10/19/2010 12:42:25 < 1 23.7 190.9 0.918

R2_000385.LAB 10/19/2010 12:43:26 < 1 13.7 190.9 0.918

R2_000386.LAB 10/19/2010 12:44:26 < 1 13.7 190.9 0.918

R2_000387.LAB 10/19/2010 12:45:27 < 1 12.3 190.9 0.918

R2_000388.LAB 10/19/2010 12:46:28 < 1 14.0 190.9 0.918

R2_000389.LAB 10/19/2010 12:47:29 < 1 16.0 190.9 0.918

R2_000390.LAB 10/19/2010 12:48:29 < 1 18.0 190.9 0.918

R2_000391.LAB 10/19/2010 12:49:30 < 1 33.4 190.9 0.918

R2_000392.LAB 10/19/2010 12:50:31 < 1 30.1 190.9 0.919

R2_000393.LAB 10/19/2010 12:51:32 < 1 21.9 190.9 0.918

R2_000394.LAB 10/19/2010 12:52:32 3.8 411.1 190.9 0.918

R2_000395.LAB 10/19/2010 12:53:33 16.4 4742.0 190.9 0.917



## Prj No 1681

## Thermafiber, Wabash, IN, October 19, 2010

‐ FTIR Data

‐ Test Run 2

Spectrum Date Time COS

(ppmv wet) CO

(ppmv wet) FTIR Gas Cell

Temp (C) FTIR Gas Cell

Pressure (Atm)

R2_000396.LAB 10/19/2010 12:54:34 24.3 5734.3 190.9 0.917

R2_000397.LAB 10/19/2010 12:55:34 8.4 2067.8 190.9 0.918

R2_000398.LAB 10/19/2010 12:56:35 10.1 1480.6 190.9 0.918

R2_000399.LAB 10/19/2010 12:57:36 < 1 104.0 190.9 0.918

R2_000400.LAB 10/19/2010 12:58:37 < 1 17.7 190.9 0.918

R2_000401.LAB 10/19/2010 12:59:37 < 1 31.7 190.9 0.918

R2_000402.LAB 10/19/2010 13:00:38 4.0 580.5 190.9 0.919

R2_000403.LAB 10/19/2010 13:01:39 29.5 6713.2 190.9 0.918

Minimum < 1 11.4

Maximum 139.3 19889.2

Average 7.7* 1306.7

*For average calculation, Values below the detection limit were replaced with the actual

detection limit concentration



## Prj No 1681

## Thermafiber, Wabash, IN, October 19, 2010

‐ FTIR Data

‐ Test Run 3

Spectrum Date Time COS

(ppmv wet) CO

(ppmv wet) FTIR Gas Cell

Temp (C) FTIR Gas Cell

Pressure (Atm)

R3_000460.LAB 10/19/2010 13:28:09 < 1 73.6 190.9 0.917

R3_000461.LAB 10/19/2010 13:29:10 < 1 27.5 190.9 0.917

R3_000462.LAB 10/19/2010 13:30:10 < 1 52.2 190.9 0.917

R3_000463.LAB 10/19/2010 13:31:11 < 1 56.9 190.9 0.917

R3_000464.LAB 10/19/2010 13:32:12 < 1 108.0 190.9 0.916

R3_000465.LAB 10/19/2010 13:33:13 < 1 1040.7 190.9 0.917

R3_000466.LAB 10/19/2010 13:34:13 11.0 3472.7 190.9 0.917

R3_000467.LAB 10/19/2010 13:35:14 7.4 2590.0 190.9 0.916

R3_000468.LAB 10/19/2010 13:36:15 16.3 4064.7 190.9 0.916

R3_000469.LAB 10/19/2010 13:37:15 2.5 509.8 190.9 0.916

R3_000470.LAB 10/19/2010 13:38:16 < 1 48.6 190.9 0.916

R3_000471.LAB 10/19/2010 13:39:17 < 1 26.8 190.9 0.916

R3_000472.LAB 10/19/2010 13:40:18 1.3 407.4 190.9 0.916

R3_000473.LAB 10/19/2010 13:41:18 20.8 4830.4 190.9 0.916

R3_000474.LAB 10/19/2010 13:42:19 7.7 1794.7 190.9 0.916

R3_000475.LAB 10/19/2010 13:43:20 1.9 665.8 190.9 0.917

R3_000476.LAB 10/19/2010 13:44:20 < 1 48.1 190.9 0.916

R3_000477.LAB 10/19/2010 13:45:21 < 1 10.8 190.9 0.917

R3_000478.LAB 10/19/2010 13:46:22 < 1 62.7 190.9 0.916

R3_000479.LAB 10/19/2010 13:47:23 < 1 54.7 190.9 0.916

R3_000480.LAB 10/19/2010 13:48:23 < 1 47.7 190.9 0.916

R3_000481.LAB 10/19/2010 13:49:24 < 1 436.1 190.9 0.916

R3_000482.LAB 10/19/2010 13:50:25 < 1 113.0 190.9 0.916

R3_000483.LAB 10/19/2010 13:51:26 1.7 590.1 190.9 0.916

R3_000484.LAB 10/19/2010 13:52:26 2.5 1207.0 190.9 0.916

R3_000485.LAB 10/19/2010 13:53:27 < 1 164.8 190.9 0.916

R3_000486.LAB 10/19/2010 13:54:28 < 1 20.3 190.9 0.916

R3_000487.LAB 10/19/2010 13:55:28 < 1 24.0 190.9 0.916

R3 000488 LAB 10/19/2010 13 56 29 5 6 484 4 190 9 0 916 R3_000488.LAB 10/19/2010 13:56:29 5.6 484.4 190.9 0.916

R3_000489.LAB 10/19/2010 13:57:30 26.2 4940.6 190.9 0.916

R3_000490.LAB 10/19/2010 13:58:31 2.1 335.7 190.9 0.915

R3_000491.LAB 10/19/2010 13:59:31 < 1 49.0 190.9 0.915

R3_000492.LAB 10/19/2010 14:00:32 < 1 19.5 190.8 0.915

R3_000493.LAB 10/19/2010 14:01:33 < 1 31.2 190.8 0.916

R3_000494.LAB 10/19/2010 14:02:33 9.1 1414.7 190.9 0.916

R3_000495.LAB 10/19/2010 14:03:34 14.5 3740.3 190.9 0.915

R3_000496.LAB 10/19/2010 14:04:35 1.4 270.1 190.8 0.916

R3_000497.LAB 10/19/2010 14:05:36 < 1 20.6 190.9 0.916

R3_000498.LAB 10/19/2010 14:06:36 < 1 46.1 190.9 0.916

R3_000499.LAB 10/19/2010 14:07:37 < 1 134.9 190.9 0.916

R3_000500.LAB 10/19/2010 14:08:38 < 1 58.6 190.9 0.916

R3_000501.LAB 10/19/2010 14:09:39 < 1 77.2 190.9 0.916

R3_000502.LAB 10/19/2010 14:10:39 < 1 37.0 190.8 0.916

R3_000503.LAB 10/19/2010 14:11:40 < 1 18.4 190.9 0.915

R3_000504.LAB 10/19/2010 14:12:41 < 1 16.8 190.9 0.916

R3_000505.LAB 10/19/2010 14:13:41 < 1 104.9 190.9 0.916

R3_000506.LAB 10/19/2010 14:14:42 1.7 299.5 190.9 0.916

R3_000507.LAB 10/19/2010 14:15:43 19.2 4488.2 190.9 0.916

R3_000508.LAB 10/19/2010 14:16:44 5.2 768.1 190.9 0.916

R3_000509.LAB 10/19/2010 14:17:44 < 1 96.3 190.9 0.916

R3_000510.LAB 10/19/2010 14:18:45 < 1 30.3 190.9 0.916

R3_000511.LAB 10/19/2010 14:19:46 2.4 567.7 190.9 0.915

R3_000512.LAB 10/19/2010 14:20:47 10.1 2928.5 190.9 0.916



## Prj No 1681

## Thermafiber, Wabash, IN, October 19, 2010

‐ FTIR Data

‐ Test Run 3

Spectrum Date Time COS

(ppmv wet) CO

(ppmv wet) FTIR Gas Cell

Temp (C) FTIR Gas Cell

Pressure (Atm)

R3_000513.LAB 10/19/2010 14:21:47 1.3 290.0 190.9 0.915

R3_000514.LAB 10/19/2010 14:22:48 < 1 25.7 190.9 0.916

R3_000515.LAB 10/19/2010 14:23:49 < 1 93.0 190.9 0.916

R3_000516.LAB 10/19/2010 14:24:49 33.8 6247.5 190.9 0.916

R3_000517.LAB 10/19/2010 14:25:50 14.3 2751.6 190.9 0.915

R3_000518.LAB 10/19/2010 14:26:51 9.0 1389.1 190.9 0.915

R3_000519.LAB 10/19/2010 14:27:52 1.1 178.2 190.9 0.915

R3_000520.LAB 10/19/2010 14:28:52 < 1 22.5 190.9 0.916

Minimum < 1 10.8

Maximum 33.8 6247.5

Average 4.3* 893.9

*For average calculation, Values below the detection limit were replaced with the actual

detection limit concentration



## Prj No 1681

# APPENDIX

QA/QC Data – Cupola #4

## Thermafiber, Wabash, IN, October 19, 2010

‐ FTIR QAQC Data

Nitrogen Direct to FTIR

Spectrum Date Time COS

(ppmv wet) CO

(ppmv wet) H2O

(%v) Ethylene

(ppmv wet)

N2_DIR_000001.LAB 10/19/2010 7:17:22 < 1 < 0.2 < 0.05 < 0.5

N2_DIR_000002.LAB 10/19/2010 7:17:38 < 1 < 0.2 < 0.05 < 0.5

N2_DIR_000003.LAB 10/19/2010 7:17:54 < 1 < 0.2 < 0.05 < 0.5

N2_DIR_000004.LAB 10/19/2010 7:18:09 < 1 < 0.2 < 0.05 < 0.5

N2_DIR_000005BKG.LAB 10/19/2010 7:20:25 < 1 < 0.2 < 0.05 < 0.5

N2_DIR_000006.LAB 10/19/2010 7:20:43 < 1 < 0.2 < 0.05 < 0.5

CTS, 100.0 ppm Ethylene Direct Purge

Spectrum Date Time COS

(ppmv wet) CO

(ppmv wet) H2O

(%v) Ethylene

(ppmv wet) Ethylene Recovery

(%)

100.0PPM_CTS_DIR_000007.LAB 10/19/2010 7:23:14 < 1 < 0.2 < 0.05 98.4 98.4%

100.0PPM_CTS_DIR_000008.LAB 10/19/2010 7:23:30 < 1 < 0.2 < 0.05 98.6 98.6%

100.0PPM_CTS_DIR_000009.LAB 10/19/2010 7:23:45 < 1 < 0.2 < 0.05 98.7 98.7%

100.0PPM_CTS_DIR_000010.LAB 10/19/2010 7:24:01 < 1 < 0.2 < 0.05 98.7 98.7%

100.0PPM_CTS_DIR_000011.LAB 10/19/2010 7:24:17 < 1 < 0.2 < 0.05 98.9 98.9%

100.0PPM_CTS_DIR_000012.LAB 10/19/2010 7:24:32 < 1 < 0.2 < 0.05 98.3 98.3%

100.0PPM_CTS_DIR_000013.LAB 10/19/2010 7:24:48 < 1 < 0.2 < 0.05 98.2 98.2%

100.0PPM_CTS_DIR_000014.LAB 10/19/2010 7:25:04 < 1 < 0.2 < 0.05 98.4 98.4%

2423 ppm Carbon Monoxide Direct Purge

Spectrum Date Time COS

(ppmv wet) CO

(ppmv wet) H2O

(%v) Ethylene

(ppmv wet) Carbon Monoxide

Recovery (%)

2423PPM_CO_DIR_000015.LAB 10/19/2010 7:30:58 < 1 2352.5 < 0.05 < 0.5 97.1%

2423PPM_CO_DIR_000016.LAB 10/19/2010 7:31:13 < 1 2360.3 < 0.05 < 0.5 97.4%

2423PPM_CO_DIR_000017.LAB 10/19/2010 7:31:29 < 1 2356.8 < 0.05 < 0.5 97.3%

2423PPM_CO_DIR_000018.LAB 10/19/2010 7:31:45 < 1 2360.6 < 0.05 < 0.5 97.4%

2423PPM_CO_DIR_000019.LAB 10/19/2010 7:32:00 < 1 2359.2 < 0.05 < 0.5 97.4%



## Prj No 1681

## Thermafiber, Wabash, IN, October 19, 2010

‐ FTIR QAQC Data

2423 ppm Carbon Monoxide System Purge and Response Time Test (using determined direct CO concentration as expected concentration)

Spectrum Date Time COS

(ppmv wet) CO

(ppmv wet) H2O

(%v) Ethylene

(ppmv wet) Carbon Monoxide

Recovery (%) Response Time*

(sec)

CO_RESP_000020.LAB 10/19/2010 8:26:04 < 1 0.2 0.685 < 0.5 0.0% 4

CO_RESP_000021.LAB 10/19/2010 8:26:08 < 1 0.3 0.704 < 0.5 0.0% 8

CO_RESP_000022.LAB 10/19/2010 8:26:12 < 1 493.1 1.142 1.2 20.9% 12

CO_RESP_000023.LAB 10/19/2010 8:26:15 < 1 1528.8 0.445 < 0.5 64.8% 16

CO_RESP_000024.LAB 10/19/2010 8:26:20 < 1 1138.1 0.390 < 0.5 48.2% 20

CO_RESP_000025.LAB 10/19/2010 8:26:23 < 1 1130.6 0.373 < 0.5 47.9% 24

CO_RESP_000026.LAB 10/19/2010 8:26:27 < 1 1132.6 0.345 < 0.5 48.0% 28

CO_RESP_000027.LAB 10/19/2010 8:26:31 < 1 1131.4 0.360 < 0.5 47.9% 31

CO_RESP_000028.LAB 10/19/2010 8:26:35 < 1 1132.6 0.340 < 0.5 48.0% 35

CO_RESP_000029.LAB 10/19/2010 8:26:39 < 1 1151.6 0.339 < 0.5 48.8% 39

CO_RESP_000030.LAB 10/19/2010 8:26:43 < 1 1246.6 0.341 < 0.5 52.8% 43

CO_RESP_000031.LAB 10/19/2010 8:26:47 < 1 1718.3 0.221 < 0.5 72.8% 47

CO_RESP_000032.LAB 10/19/2010 8:26:51 < 1 1818.7 0.159 < 0.5 77.1% 51

CO_RESP_000033.LAB 10/19/2010 8:26:55 < 1 1847.1 0.145 < 0.5 78.3% 55

CO_RESP_000034.LAB 10/19/2010 8:26:59 < 1 1876.6 0.125 < 0.5 79.5% 59

CO_RESP_000035.LAB 10/19/2010 8:27:03 < 1 1949.6 0.138 < 0.5 82.6% 63

CO_RESP_000036.LAB 10/19/2010 8:27:06 < 1 2188.5 0.079 < 0.5 92.7% 67

CO_RESP_000037.LAB 10/19/2010 8:27:11 < 1 2248.5 0.052 < 0.5 95.3% 71

CO_RESP_000038.LAB 10/19/2010 8:27:14 < 1 2264.6 < 0.05 < 0.5 96.0%

CO_RESP_000039.LAB 10/19/2010 8:27:18 < 1 2256.3 < 0.05 < 0.5 95.6%

CO_RESP_000040.LAB 10/19/2010 8:27:22 < 1 2248.1 < 0.05 < 0.5 95.3%

CO_RESP_000041.LAB 10/19/2010 8:27:26 < 1 2250.9 < 0.05 < 0.5 95.4%

CO_RESP_000042.LAB 10/19/2010 8:27:30 < 1 2267.7 < 0.05 < 0.5 96.1%



### * Response Time = Time to recovery 95% of calibration gas delivered through the sampling system

CTS, 100.0 ppm Ethylene System Purge and Response Time Test

S p ectrum pectrum Date Time COS

(pp v wet ) m CO

(pp wet ) mv H2O

( %v) Ethylene

(pp v wet ) m Ethylene Recovery

( %) Response Time*

( ec s )

CTS_RESP_000050.LAB 10/19/2010 8:30:13 < 1 4.0 0.740 < 0.5 0.0% 4

CTS_RESP_000051.LAB 10/19/2010 8:30:17 < 1 35.1 0.703 < 0.5 0.0% 8

CTS_RESP_000052.LAB 10/19/2010 8:30:21 < 1 504.2 0.335 39.2 39.2% 12

CTS_RESP_000053.LAB 10/19/2010 8:30:24 < 1 45.2 0.099 94.7 94.7% 16

CTS_RESP_000054.LAB 10/19/2010 8:30:28 < 1 6.1 0.064 98.6 98.6% 20

CTS_RESP_000055.LAB 10/19/2010 8:30:32 < 1 2.8 < 0.05 98.4 98.4%

CTS_RESP_000056.LAB 10/19/2010 8:30:36 < 1 2.0 < 0.05 97.9 97.9%

CTS_RESP_000057.LAB 10/19/2010 8:30:40 < 1 1.6 < 0.05 98.1 98.1%

CTS_RESP_000058.LAB 10/19/2010 8:30:44 < 1 1.2 < 0.05 98.4 98.4%

CTS_RESP_000059.LAB 10/19/2010 8:30:48 < 1 1.3 < 0.05 98.8 98.8%

CTS_RESP_000060.LAB 10/19/2010 8:30:52 < 1 1.2 < 0.05 98.8 98.8%

CTS_RESP_000061.LAB 10/19/2010 8:30:56 < 1 0.8 < 0.05 98.7 98.7%

CTS_RESP_000062.LAB 10/19/2010 8:31:00 < 1 0.9 < 0.05 98.8 98.8%



### * Response Time = Time to recovery 95% of calibration gas delivered through the sampling system

Nitrogen System Purge

Spectrum Date Time COS

(ppmv wet) CO

(ppmv wet) H2O

(%v) Ethylene

(ppmv wet)

N2_SYS_000063.LAB 10/19/2010 8:32:47 < 1 0.5 < 0.05 < 0.5

N2_SYS_000064.LAB 10/19/2010 8:33:03 < 1 0.5 < 0.05 < 0.5

N2_SYS_000065.LAB 10/19/2010 8:33:18 < 1 0.4 < 0.05 < 0.5



## Prj No 1681

## Thermafiber, Wabash, IN, October 19, 2010

‐ FTIR QAQC Data

Ambient Air, Prior to Anylte Spike #1

Spectrum Date Time COS

(ppmv wet) CO

(ppmv wet) H2O

(%v) Ethylene

(ppmv wet)

AMBIENT_AIR_000158.LAB 10/19/2010 9:27:21 < 1 0.6 0.775 < 0.5

AMBIENT_AIR_000159.LAB 10/19/2010 9:27:37 < 1 0.5 0.771 < 0.5

AMBIENT_AIR_000160.LAB 10/19/2010 9:27:52 < 1 0.5 0.780 < 0.5

AMBIENT_AIR_000161.LAB 10/19/2010 9:28:08 < 1 0.2 0.792 < 0.5

Ambient Air Analyte Spike #1

‐ Using 2423 ppm CO

Spectrum Date Time COS

(ppmv wet) CO

(ppmv wet) H2O

(%v) Ethylene

(ppmv wet) Dilution Factor Carbon Monoxide

Recovery (%)

CO_SPK_000162.LAB 10/19/2010 9:35:30 < 1 177.3 0.710 < 0.5 0.089 82.2%

CO_SPK_000163.LAB 10/19/2010 9:35:46 < 1 177.3 0.712 < 0.5 0.086 84.9%

CO_SPK_000164.LAB 10/19/2010 9:36:01 < 1 177.9 0.712 < 0.5 0.087 84.2%

CO_SPK_000165.LAB 10/19/2010 9:36:17 < 1 177.0 0.711 < 0.5 0.088 83.3%

Ambient Air, Prior to Anylte Spike #2

Spectrum Date Time COS

(ppmv wet) CO

(ppmv wet) H2O

(%v) Ethylene

(ppmv wet)

AMBIENT_AIR_000321.LAB 10/19/2010 11:42:26 < 1 0.6 0.704 < 0.5

AMBIENT_AIR_000322.LAB 10/19/2010 11:42:34 < 1 0.3 0.726 < 0.5

AMBIENT_AIR_000323.LAB 10/19/2010 11:42:42 < 1 0.3 0.736 < 0.5

AMBIENT_AIR_000324.LAB 10/19/2010 11:42:50 < 1 0.3 0.792 < 0.5

AMBIENT_AIR_000325.LAB 10/19/2010 11:42:57 < 1 0.5 0.774 < 0.5

AMBIENT_AIR_000326.LAB 10/19/2010 11:43:05 < 1 0.5 0.770 < 0.5

AMBIENT_AIR_000327.LAB 10/19/2010 11:43:13 < 1 0.3 0.735 < 0.5

Ambient Air Analyte Spike #2

‐ Using 2423 ppm CO

Spectrum Date Time COS

(ppmv wet) CO

(ppmv wet) H2O

(%v) Ethylene

(ppmv wet) Dilution Factor Carbon Monoxide

Recovery (%)

CO_SPK_000328.LAB 10/19/2010 11:47:20 < 1 156.4 0.683 < 0.5 0.087 74.4%

CO_SPK_000329.LAB 10/19/2010 11:47:28 < 1 156.2 0.686 < 0.5 0.082 78.2%

CO_SPK_000330.LAB 10/19/2010 11:47:36 < 1 157.0 0.696 < 0.5 0.069 93.7%

CO_SPK_000331.LAB 10/19/2010 11:47:44 < 1 158.5 0.699 < 0.5 0.066 99.8%

CO_SPK_000332.LAB 10/19/2010 11:47:52 < 1 157.5 0.686 < 0.5 0.083 78.1%

CTS, 100.0 ppm Ethylene System Purge and Response Time Test

Spectrum Date Time COS

(ppmv wet) CO

(ppmv wet) H2O

(%v) Ethylene

(ppmv wet) Ethylene Recovery

(%) Response Time*

(sec)

CTS_RESP_000333.LAB 10/19/2010 11:51:20 < 1 4.8 0.735 < 0.5 0.0% 4

CTS_RESP_000334.LAB 10/19/2010 11:51:24 < 1 7.5 0.730 < 0.5 0.0% 8

CTS_RESP_000335.LAB 10/19/2010 11:51:28 < 1 446.9 0.376 38.8 38.8% 12

CTS_RESP_000336.LAB 10/19/2010 11:51:32 < 1 41.4 0.082 94.7 94.7% 16

CTS_RESP_000337.LAB 10/19/2010 11:51:36 < 1 7.2 < 0.05 98.1 98.1% 20

CTS_RESP_000338.LAB 10/19/2010 11:51:40 < 1 2.3 0.055 98.6 98.6%

CTS_RESP_000339.LAB 10/19/2010 11:51:43 < 1 1.6 < 0.05 98.9 98.9%

CTS_RESP_000340.LAB 10/19/2010 11:51:47 < 1 1.3 < 0.05 98.1 98.1%

CTS_RESP_000341.LAB 10/19/2010 11:51:51 < 1 1.0 < 0.05 98.0 98.0%



### * Response Time = Time to recovery 95% of calibration gas delivered through the sampling system



## Prj No 1681

## Thermafiber, Wabash, IN, October 19, 2010

‐ FTIR QAQC Data

< 1 4 < 5 CTS, 100.0 ppm Ethylene System Purge and Response Time Test

Spectrum Date Time COS

(ppmv wet) CO

(ppmv wet) H2O

(%v) Ethylene

(ppmv wet) Ethylene Recovery

(%) Response Time*

(sec)

CTS_RESP_000408.LAB 10/19/2010 13:05:45 < 1 14.2 3.320 < 0.5 0.0% 4

CTS_RESP_000409.LAB 10/19/2010 13:05:49 < 1 14.8 3.281 < 0.5 0.0% 8

CTS_RESP_000410.LAB 10/19/2010 13:05:52 < 1 52.1 2.986 51.7 51.7% 12

CTS_RESP_000411.LAB 10/19/2010 13:05:56 < 1 18.9 0.775 94.1 94.1% 16

CTS_RESP_000412.LAB 10/19/2010 13:06:00 < 1 3.5 0.209 97.6 97.6% 20

CTS_RESP_000413.LAB 10/19/2010 13:06:04 < 1 2.6 0.117 97.8 97.8%

CTS_RESP_000414.LAB 10/19/2010 13:06:08 < 1 2.2 0.069 98.4 98.4%

CTS_RESP_000415.LAB 10/19/2010 13:06:12 < 1 1.5 0.087 98.5 98.5%

CTS_RESP_000416.LAB 10/19/2010 13:06:16 < 1 1.6 0.085 98.2 98.2%

CTS_RESP_000417.LAB 10/19/2010 13:06:20 < 1 1.9 0.085 98.1 98.1%

CTS_RESP_000418.LAB 10/19/2010 13:06:24 < 1 1.9 0.073 98.8 98.8%

CTS_RESP_000419.LAB 10/19/2010 13:06:28 < 1 1.8 0.073 98.4 98.4%



### * Response Time = Time to recovery 95% of calibration gas delivered through the sampling system

Ambient Air, Prior to Anylte Spike #3

Spectrum Date Time COS

(ppmv wet) CO

(ppmv wet) H2O

(%v) Ethylene

(ppmv wet)

AMBIENT_AIR_000442.LAB 10/19/2010 13:15:06 < 1 6.6 0.818 < 0.5

AMBIENT_AIR_000443.LAB 10/19/2010 13:15:10 < 1 6.6 0.795 < 0.5

AMBIENT_AIR_000444.LAB 10/19/2010 13:15:14 < 1 5.9 0.809 < 0.5

AMBIENT_AIR_000445.LAB 10/19/2010 13:15:18 < 1 5.5 0.810 < 0.5

AMBIENT_AIR_000446.LAB 10/19/2010 13:15:21 < 1 5.3 0.813 < 0.5

AMBIENT_AIR_000447.LAB 10/19/2010 13:15:25 < 1 5.9 0.810 < 0.5

AMBIENT_AIR_000448.LAB 10/19/2010 13:15:29 < 1 5.1 0.812 < 0.5

AMBIENT_AIR_000449.LAB 10/19/2010 13:15:33 < 1 4.7 0.804 < 0.5

AMBIENT_AIR_000450.LAB 10/19/2010 13:15:37 < 1 4.8 0.809 < 0.5

AMBIENT_AIR_000451.LAB 10/19/2010 13:15:41 < 1 5.3 0.813 < 0.5

AMBIENT AIR 000452.LAB AM B I ENT

_ AIR

_ 000452

. LAB 10 / 19 / 2010 /19/2010 13:15:45 < 1 4.9 .796 0 < 0.5

Ambient Air Analyte Spike #3

‐ Using 2423 ppm CO

Spectrum Date Time COS

(ppmv wet) CO

(ppmv wet) H2O

(%v) Ethylene

(ppmv wet) Dilution Factor Carbon Monoxide

Recovery (%)

CO_SPK_000457.LAB 10/19/2010 13:21:36 < 1 159.4 0.746 < 0.5 0.077 85.5%

CO_SPK_000458.LAB 10/19/2010 13:21:51 < 1 159.4 0.742 < 0.5 0.082 80.0%

CO_SPK_000459.LAB 10/19/2010 13:22:07 < 1 159.1 0.743 < 0.5 0.080 81.6%



## Prj No 1681

## Thermafiber, Wabash, IN, October 19, 2010

‐ FTIR QAQC Data

< 1 4

. 0 < 2423 ppm Carbon Monoxide System Purge and Response Time Test (using determined direct CO concentration as expected concentration)

Spectrum Date Time COS

(ppmv wet) CO

(ppmv wet) H2O

(%v) Ethylene

(ppmv wet) Carbon Monoxide

Recovery (%) Response Time*

(sec)

CO_RESP_000586.LAB 10/19/2010 15:00:31 < 1 3.0 0.738 < 0.5 0.1% 4

CO_RESP_000587.LAB 10/19/2010 15:00:35 < 1 15.2 0.741 < 0.5 0.6% 8

CO_RESP_000588.LAB 10/19/2010 15:00:39 < 1 1561.8 0.342 < 0.5 66.2% 12

CO_RESP_000589.LAB 10/19/2010 15:00:43 < 1 2190.1 0.087 < 0.5 92.8% 16

CO_RESP_000590.LAB 10/19/2010 15:00:47 < 1 2214.2 0.071 < 0.5 93.8% 20

CO_RESP_000591.LAB 10/19/2010 15:00:51 < 1 2223.4 < 0.05 < 0.5 94.2% 24

CO_RESP_000592.LAB 10/19/2010 15:00:54 < 1 2236.5 < 0.05 < 0.5 94.8% 28

CO_RESP_000593.LAB 10/19/2010 15:00:58 < 1 2237.9 < 0.05 < 0.5 94.8% 31

CO_RESP_000594.LAB 10/19/2010 15:01:02 < 1 2209.9 < 0.05 < 0.5 93.6% 35

CO_RESP_000595.LAB 10/19/2010 15:01:06 < 1 2223.0 < 0.05 < 0.5 94.2% 39

CO_RESP_000596.LAB 10/19/2010 15:01:10 < 1 2210.3 < 0.05 < 0.5 93.7% 43

CO_RESP_000597.LAB 10/19/2010 15:01:14 < 1 2225.1 < 0.05 < 0.5 94.3% 47

CO_RESP_000598.LAB 10/19/2010 15:01:18 < 1 2231.1 < 0.05 < 0.5 94.5% 51

CO_RESP_000599.LAB 10/19/2010 15:01:22 < 1 2233.8 < 0.05 < 0.5 94.7% 55

CO_RESP_000600.LAB 10/19/2010 15:01:26 < 1 2228.4 0.053 < 0.5 94.4% 59

CO_RESP_000601.LAB 10/19/2010 15:01:30 < 1 2244.6 < 0.05 < 0.5 95.1% 63



### * Response Time = Time to recovery 95% of calibration gas delivered through the sampling system

CTS, 100.0 ppm Ethylene System Purge and Response Time Test

Spectrum Date Time COS

(ppmv wet) CO

(ppmv wet) H2O

(%v) Ethylene

(ppmv wet) Ethylene Recovery

(%) Response Time*

(sec)

CTS_RESP_000602.LAB 10/19/2010 15:03:20 < 1 2.7 0.745 < 0.5 0.0% 4

CTS_RESP_000603.LAB 10/19/2010 15:03:24 < 1 36.9 0.683 < 0.5 0.0% 8

CTS_RESP_000604.LAB 10/19/2010 15:03:28 < 1 1182.7 0.316 18.2 18.2% 12

CTS_RESP_000605.LAB 10/19/2010 15:03:32 < 1 129.6 0.096 91.3 91.3% 16

CTS_RESP_000606.LAB 10/19/2010 15:03:36 < 1 18.3 0.056 97.8 97.8% 20

CTS_RESP_000607.LAB 10/19/2010 15:03:40 < 1 7.5 < 0.05 97.8 97.8%

CTS RESP 000608.LAB CT S

_ RESP

_ 000608

. LAB 10 / 19 / 2010 /19/2010 15:03:44 < 1 4.0 < 0.05 .3 98 98.3%

CTS_RESP_000609.LAB 10/19/2010 15:03:48 < 1 3.0 < 0.05 98.9 98.9%

CTS_RESP_000610.LAB 10/19/2010 15:03:52 < 1 2.7 < 0.05 98.7 98.7%

CTS_RESP_000611.LAB 10/19/2010 15:03:56 < 1 2.0 < 0.05 99.2 99.2%

CTS_RESP_000612.LAB 10/19/2010 15:04:00 < 1 2.2 < 0.05 98.7 98.7%

CTS_RESP_000613.LAB 10/19/2010 15:04:04 < 1 1.7 < 0.05 98.9 98.9%

CTS_RESP_000614.LAB 10/19/2010 15:04:07 < 1 1.4 < 0.05 99.0 99.0%

CTS_RESP_000615.LAB 10/19/2010 15:04:11 < 1 1.4 < 0.05 98.8 98.8%



### * Response Time = Time to recovery 95% of calibration gas delivered through the sampling system

Nitrogen System Purge

Spectrum Date Time COS

(ppmv wet) CO

(ppmv wet) H2O

(%v) Ethylene

(ppmv wet)

N2_SYS_000616.LAB 10/19/2010 15:06:06 < 1 1.1 < 0.05 < 0.5

N2_SYS_000617.LAB 10/19/2010 15:06:22 < 1 1.0 < 0.05 < 0.5

N2_SYS_000618.LAB 10/19/2010 15:06:38 < 1 0.8 < 0.05 < 0.5

N2_SYS_000619.LAB 10/19/2010 15:06:53 < 1 0.9 < 0.05 < 0.5

N2_DIR_000690.LAB 10/19/2010 15:38:58 < 1 0.3 < 0.05 < 0.5

N2_DIR_000691.LAB 10/19/2010 15:39:13 < 1 0.5 < 0.05 < 0.5

N2_DIR_000692.LAB 10/19/2010 15:39:29 < 1 0.3 < 0.05 < 0.5



## Prj No 1681

# APPENDIX

Gas Certificates and Field Notes

# Certificate of Analysis

Date of Analysis: 6/22/2006 Reference Number: 54-124068388-1

Part Number: X02NI99P15AD524

Grade of Product: PRIMARY

STANDARD

Cylinder Number Component Requested

Concentration Actual Concentration

(Mole %)



## CC156258 ETHYLENE 100.0 PPM 100.0 PPM

NITROGEN Balance Balance

Notes:

Relative Uncertainty of Analytical Value: +/- 1% of component or +/- 0.02% of absolute, which

ever is lower.

Primary Standard gas mixtures are traceable to N.I.S.T weights and/or N.I.S.T gas mixture

reference materials.

Signature on File

__________________________________

Approval Signature

Page 1Qhj— gI

w- ,t’’ ,rc’—- &i —n”

‘z)I a. —,Jos;niOn.

m”sc(4)

Lo,— 1 jjn’arw. 2! —

U U flLtNYLi flS t _Pt’— :jt? ‘P

I 1 7 I

LI.— c)

vOtøQr ufr

Sic - iN

dSy s 1

Q!) lit

01 cJs3CcflQ) tfv/ oiy

, -Gi

hi — L wdth’ M ‘7-NI t.4il1*9

c1 j

IZ1 th*(ii) 11bncz

VflpcJs fcJsrc*-ffl Jh1CAt,tPL4A1?4J_-

...



## ‘S

-4

. ...



## J

. 

## -4

.

(A) 

# j.

;vJ. 

# R;’S.

tJp __•

cL

\:; 4 , :...j

; ) 0 1 /1) )

c) %s2 •:.

L-jL (L- -Lc flLjS (t)

c/7

— c1s -(h)

-

•-; i-4 cG±’I’vL 9 J ,fliiJO,i4 _7j

- /

22

1°7 — hL9

— iI7

QL5 — 99 iic

zhc —ic

CS -. / Q±l( flA is 1) 12- /

(i Vi)) f/i V e I/““m—‘7)Wcthtsh)riqAJLDi6-rhcrrno43⁄4rEs’D-,vz_I.p/Sta..