Name:

Title:

Company:

Sign Date:

Name: Thomas F. Mattei

Title: Quality Assurance Manager / Techni

Company: Avogadro Environmental Corporatio

Sign Date: 6/29/2010

Permitted Facility Representative / Date Testing Company Representative / Date

PPL Generation, LLC - Montour Station Unit 2

Final Test Report 

for

/ /

Based on information and belief formed 

after reasonable inquiry, I certify that the 

statements and information in this test 

report are true, accurate, and complete.

I have reviewed all testing details and 

results in this test report and hereby 

certify that the test report is authentic 

and accurate.

Tuesday, February 01, 2011 Page 1 of 37
PPL Generation, LLC - Montour Station Unit 2

Facility Information:

PPL Montour, LLC

18 McMichael Road

Washingtonville PA 17884

Contact: Ms. Kathleen Maylath

Phone: 570-437-1362

Fax:

Email: kjmaylath@pplweb.com

Testing Company:

Avogadro Environmental Corporation

1350 Sullivan Trail, Suite A

Easton PA 18040

Contact:Thomas Mattei

Phone: 610-559-8776 x 103

Fax: 610-559-8913

Email: tmattei@avogadro.net

Air Permit Number:

47-00001

Permitted Source ID/Name:

032 Unit 2

Permitted Maximum Process Rate:

N/A

Max. Normal Operation Process Rate:

N/A

Target Process Test Rate

N/A

Description of the source (including control equipment). Please see the attachments for source or

 process flow diagram:

Located in Derry Township about one mile northeast of Washingtonville, Montour County, Pennsylvania, the 

Montour plant has two coal-fired, steam-electric generation units. 

PPL Montour Units 1 and 2 are Combustion Engineering, pulverized, bituminous coal fired boilers. Each boiler 

supplies steam to separate 800 Megawatt General Electric turbines. Exhaust gas from each unit passes through 

unique and optional Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) and Sodium BiSulfite (SBS) systems, before entering the 

Electrostatic Precipitators (ESPs). After passage through the ESPs, exhaust gas is introduced into a recently 

installed, wet limestone, Flue Gas Desulfurization (FGD) system and finally exits through separate, unit specific 

fiberglass flues housed inside a single concrete shell. 

Unit 1 began commercial operation in 1972 and has a nominal generating capacity of 800 MW; Unit 2 came on line 

the following year with a nominal generating capacity of 800 MW.

Industry/SCC/NAIS 221112

Sampling Location Information:

Test Parameter Information:

AFS #: 4209300005 FRS #: 110000492324

SCC / Description 10100202 External Combustion Boilers - Electric Generation - Bituminous/Subbituminous 

Coal - Pulverized Coal: Dry Bottom (Bituminous Coal) 

The following state and federal regulations that apply to the proposed testing:

Location

Round

Duct

Diam.

Distance from 

upstream dist.

Distance from

downstream dist.

Number of

Traverse Ports

Equiv. 

Diam

Min.Travers 

Points

Rect. Duct 

Length /Width

Stack Exit 360 0 0 0 2016 4296 4 12

Target

Parameter 

Test

Method

Number of

Test Runs

Test Run

Duration

Sample 

Location Points Comments

Tuesday, February 01, 2011 Page 2 of 37
PPL Generation, LLC - Montour Station Unit 2

Target

Parameter 

Test

Method

Number of

Test Runs

Test Run

Duration

Sample 

Location Points Comments

% H2O Method 1 - 4 3 60 0 Ranges between 60 

and 240 minutes in 

duration per test run.

Stack Exit

Hydrogen Fluoride Method 26A 3 60 0 The samples were 

collected in a 

combined train with 

HCN using NaOH

impingers only.

Method 26A & CTM033

The MDLs are 

determined by the 

analysis of at least 

seven replicate 

standards at a 

concentration near the 

expected MDL. To 

determine the MDL 

value, the standard 

deviation of the 

replicate analyses is 

calculated and that 

number is multiplied 

by the Student t factor 

that corresponds to the 

number of replicates 

analyzed. The MDL 

value should meet the 

criteria stated in the 

CFR Title 40, Part 136 

B.

If the MDL 

determined does not 

meet these criteria, a 

default MDL value 

will be used which is 

1/10 of the 

concentration of the 

standard used to 

produce the MDL 

value.

Stack Exit

Tuesday, February 01, 2011 Page 3 of 37
PPL Generation, LLC - Montour Station Unit 2

Hydrogen Chloride Method 26A 3 60 0 The samples were 

collected in a 

combined train with 

HCN using NaOH

impingers only. 

Chlorine data for 

Method 26A analysis 

is not available from 

the laboratory.

Method 26A & CTM033

The MDLs are 

determined by the 

analysis of at least 

seven replicate 

standards at a 

concentration near the 

expected MDL. To 

determine the MDL 

value, the standard 

deviation of the 

replicate analyses is 

calculated and that 

number is multiplied 

by the Student t factor 

that corresponds to the 

number of replicates 

analyzed. The MDL 

value should meet the 

criteria stated in the 

CFR Title 40, Part 136 

B.

If the MDL 

determined does not 

meet these criteria, a 

default MDL value 

will be used which is 

1/10 of the 

concentration of the 

standard used to 

produce the MDL 

value.

Stack Exit

Tuesday, February 01, 2011 Page 4 of 37
PPL Generation, LLC - Montour Station Unit 2

Cadmium Method 29 3 240 0 Method 29 

For Method 29 the 

analyst takes the 

statistically 

determined MDL 

(Method Detection 

Limit) value and 

multiplies it by a 

“factor” in order to 

determine the RDL 

(Reporting Detection 

Limit). This process is 

similar to the one 

employed in Method 

23 where the EDL is 

determined based on a 

constant factor of 2.5 

times the signal to 

noise ratio. 

For the ICP/MS this 

“factor” can vary. The 

factor is determined 

by the analyst at the 

bench and takes into 

account all relevant 

factors such as, final 

volumes, 

interferences, matrix 

issues, etc. The RDL 

(Reporting Detection 

Limit) reported is the 

lowest concentration 

that the lab feels can 

be reported within the 

99% confidence 

interval. For values 

below this RDL the 

uncertainty increases. 

Section 5.5.5.2.2.1 

bullet H refers to the 

ICP/MS procedure.

Stack Exit

Tuesday, February 01, 2011 Page 5 of 37
PPL Generation, LLC - Montour Station Unit 2

Manganese Method 29 3 240 0 Method 29 

For Method 29 the 

analyst takes the 

statistically 

determined MDL 

(Method Detection 

Limit) value and 

multiplies it by a 

“factor” in order to 

determine the RDL 

(Reporting Detection 

Limit). This process is 

similar to the one 

employed in Method 

23 where the EDL is 

determined based on a 

constant factor of 2.5 

times the signal to 

noise ratio. 

For the ICP/MS this 

“factor” can vary. The 

factor is determined 

by the analyst at the 

bench and takes into 

account all relevant 

factors such as, final 

volumes, 

interferences, matrix 

issues, etc. The RDL 

(Reporting Detection 

Limit) reported is the 

lowest concentration 

that the lab feels can 

be reported within the 

99% confidence 

interval. For values 

below this RDL the 

uncertainty increases. 

Section 5.5.5.2.2.1 

bullet H refers to the 

ICP/MS procedure.

Stack Exit

Tuesday, February 01, 2011 Page 6 of 37
PPL Generation, LLC - Montour Station Unit 2

Nickel Method 29 3 240 0 Method 29 

For Method 29 the 

analyst takes the 

statistically 

determined MDL 

(Method Detection 

Limit) value and 

multiplies it by a 

“factor” in order to 

determine the RDL 

(Reporting Detection 

Limit). This process is 

similar to the one 

employed in Method 

23 where the EDL is 

determined based on a 

constant factor of 2.5 

times the signal to 

noise ratio. 

For the ICP/MS this 

“factor” can vary. The 

factor is determined 

by the analyst at the 

bench and takes into 

account all relevant 

factors such as, final 

volumes, 

interferences, matrix 

issues, etc. The RDL 

(Reporting Detection 

Limit) reported is the 

lowest concentration 

that the lab feels can 

be reported within the 

99% confidence 

interval. For values 

below this RDL the 

uncertainty increases. 

Section 5.5.5.2.2.1 

bullet H refers to the 

ICP/MS procedure.

Stack Exit

Tuesday, February 01, 2011 Page 7 of 37
PPL Generation, LLC - Montour Station Unit 2

Arsenic Method 29 3 240 0 Method 29 

For Method 29 the 

analyst takes the 

statistically 

determined MDL 

(Method Detection 

Limit) value and 

multiplies it by a 

“factor” in order to 

determine the RDL 

(Reporting Detection 

Limit). This process is 

similar to the one 

employed in Method 

23 where the EDL is 

determined based on a 

constant factor of 2.5 

times the signal to 

noise ratio. 

For the ICP/MS this 

“factor” can vary. The 

factor is determined 

by the analyst at the 

bench and takes into 

account all relevant 

factors such as, final 

volumes, 

interferences, matrix 

issues, etc. The RDL 

(Reporting Detection 

Limit) reported is the 

lowest concentration 

that the lab feels can 

be reported within the 

99% confidence 

interval. For values 

below this RDL the 

uncertainty increases. 

Section 5.5.5.2.2.1 

bullet H refers to the 

ICP/MS procedure.

Stack Exit

Tuesday, February 01, 2011 Page 8 of 37
PPL Generation, LLC - Montour Station Unit 2

Beryllium Method 29 3 240 0 Method 29 

For Method 29 the 

analyst takes the 

statistically 

determined MDL 

(Method Detection 

Limit) value and 

multiplies it by a 

“factor” in order to 

determine the RDL 

(Reporting Detection 

Limit). This process is 

similar to the one 

employed in Method 

23 where the EDL is 

determined based on a 

constant factor of 2.5 

times the signal to 

noise ratio. 

For the ICP/MS this 

“factor” can vary. The 

factor is determined 

by the analyst at the 

bench and takes into 

account all relevant 

factors such as, final 

volumes, 

interferences, matrix 

issues, etc. The RDL 

(Reporting Detection 

Limit) reported is the 

lowest concentration 

that the lab feels can 

be reported within the 

99% confidence 

interval. For values 

below this RDL the 

uncertainty increases. 

Section 5.5.5.2.2.1 

bullet H refers to the 

ICP/MS procedure.

Stack Exit

Tuesday, February 01, 2011 Page 9 of 37
PPL Generation, LLC - Montour Station Unit 2

Selenium Method 29 3 240 0 Method 29 

For Method 29 the 

analyst takes the 

statistically 

determined MDL 

(Method Detection 

Limit) value and 

multiplies it by a 

“factor” in order to 

determine the RDL 

(Reporting Detection 

Limit). This process is 

similar to the one 

employed in Method 

23 where the EDL is 

determined based on a 

constant factor of 2.5 

times the signal to 

noise ratio. 

For the ICP/MS this 

“factor” can vary. The 

factor is determined 

by the analyst at the 

bench and takes into 

account all relevant 

factors such as, final 

volumes, 

interferences, matrix 

issues, etc. The RDL 

(Reporting Detection 

Limit) reported is the 

lowest concentration 

that the lab feels can 

be reported within the 

99% confidence 

interval. For values 

below this RDL the 

uncertainty increases. 

Section 5.5.5.2.2.1 

bullet H refers to the 

ICP/MS procedure.

Stack Exit

Tuesday, February 01, 2011 Page 10 of 37
PPL Generation, LLC - Montour Station Unit 2

Filterable Particulate Method 29 3 240 0 Method 29 

For Method 29 the 

analyst takes the 

statistically 

determined MDL 

(Method Detection 

Limit) value and 

multiplies it by a 

“factor” in order to 

determine the RDL 

(Reporting Detection 

Limit). This process is 

similar to the one 

employed in Method 

23 where the EDL is 

determined based on a 

constant factor of 2.5 

times the signal to 

noise ratio. 

For the ICP/MS this 

“factor” can vary. The 

factor is determined 

by the analyst at the 

bench and takes into 

account all relevant 

factors such as, final 

volumes, 

interferences, matrix 

issues, etc. The RDL 

(Reporting Detection 

Limit) reported is the 

lowest concentration 

that the lab feels can 

be reported within the 

99% confidence 

interval. For values 

below this RDL the 

uncertainty increases. 

Section 5.5.5.2.2.1 

bullet H refers to the 

ICP/MS procedure.

Stack Exit

Tuesday, February 01, 2011 Page 11 of 37
PPL Generation, LLC - Montour Station Unit 2

Lead Method 29 3 240 0 Method 29 

For Method 29 the 

analyst takes the 

statistically 

determined MDL 

(Method Detection 

Limit) value and 

multiplies it by a 

“factor” in order to 

determine the RDL 

(Reporting Detection 

Limit). This process is 

similar to the one 

employed in Method 

23 where the EDL is 

determined based on a 

constant factor of 2.5 

times the signal to 

noise ratio. 

For the ICP/MS this 

“factor” can vary. The 

factor is determined 

by the analyst at the 

bench and takes into 

account all relevant 

factors such as, final 

volumes, 

interferences, matrix 

issues, etc. The RDL 

(Reporting Detection 

Limit) reported is the 

lowest concentration 

that the lab feels can 

be reported within the 

99% confidence 

interval. For values 

below this RDL the 

uncertainty increases. 

Section 5.5.5.2.2.1 

bullet H refers to the 

ICP/MS procedure.

Stack Exit

Tuesday, February 01, 2011 Page 12 of 37
PPL Generation, LLC - Montour Station Unit 2

Cobalt Method 29 3 240 0 Method 29 

For Method 29 the 

analyst takes the 

statistically 

determined MDL 

(Method Detection 

Limit) value and 

multiplies it by a 

“factor” in order to 

determine the RDL 

(Reporting Detection 

Limit). This process is 

similar to the one 

employed in Method 

23 where the EDL is 

determined based on a 

constant factor of 2.5 

times the signal to 

noise ratio. 

For the ICP/MS this 

“factor” can vary. The 

factor is determined 

by the analyst at the 

bench and takes into 

account all relevant 

factors such as, final 

volumes, 

interferences, matrix 

issues, etc. The RDL 

(Reporting Detection 

Limit) reported is the 

lowest concentration 

that the lab feels can 

be reported within the 

99% confidence 

interval. For values 

below this RDL the 

uncertainty increases. 

Section 5.5.5.2.2.1 

bullet H refers to the 

ICP/MS procedure.

Stack Exit

Tuesday, February 01, 2011 Page 13 of 37
PPL Generation, LLC - Montour Station Unit 2

Chromium Method 29 3 240 0 Method 29 

For Method 29 the 

analyst takes the 

statistically 

determined MDL 

(Method Detection 

Limit) value and 

multiplies it by a 

“factor” in order to 

determine the RDL 

(Reporting Detection 

Limit). This process is 

similar to the one 

employed in Method 

23 where the EDL is 

determined based on a 

constant factor of 2.5 

times the signal to 

noise ratio. 

For the ICP/MS this 

“factor” can vary. The 

factor is determined 

by the analyst at the 

bench and takes into 

account all relevant 

factors such as, final 

volumes, 

interferences, matrix 

issues, etc. The RDL 

(Reporting Detection 

Limit) reported is the 

lowest concentration 

that the lab feels can 

be reported within the 

99% confidence 

interval. For values 

below this RDL the 

uncertainty increases. 

Section 5.5.5.2.2.1 

bullet H refers to the 

ICP/MS procedure.

Stack Exit

Tuesday, February 01, 2011 Page 14 of 37
PPL Generation, LLC - Montour Station Unit 2

Antimony Method 29 3 240 0 Method 29 

For Method 29 the 

analyst takes the 

statistically 

determined MDL 

(Method Detection 

Limit) value and 

multiplies it by a 

“factor” in order to 

determine the RDL 

(Reporting Detection 

Limit). This process is 

similar to the one 

employed in Method 

23 where the EDL is 

determined based on a 

constant factor of 2.5 

times the signal to 

noise ratio. 

For the ICP/MS this 

“factor” can vary. The 

factor is determined 

by the analyst at the 

bench and takes into 

account all relevant 

factors such as, final 

volumes, 

interferences, matrix 

issues, etc. The RDL 

(Reporting Detection 

Limit) reported is the 

lowest concentration 

that the lab feels can 

be reported within the 

99% confidence 

interval. For values 

below this RDL the 

uncertainty increases. 

Section 5.5.5.2.2.1 

bullet H refers to the 

ICP/MS procedure.

Stack Exit

Co2 Method 3A CO2 3 234 0 test run duration 

between 234 and 261 

minutes. Associated 

with PM and Metals 

test runs.

Stack Exit

O2 Method 3A O2 3 60 0 Associated with HCN, 

HCl, HF, SO2 and 

NOx test runs

Stack Exit

Co2 Method 3A CO2 3 60 0 Associated with HCN, 

HCl, HF, SO2 and 

NOx test runs

Stack Exit

O2 Method 3A O2 3 234 0 test run duration 

between 234 and 261 

minutes. Associated 

with PM and Metals 

test runs.

Stack Exit

Tuesday, February 01, 2011 Page 15 of 37
PPL Generation, LLC - Montour Station Unit 2

Organic Condensible 

Particulate

Method 5/OTM-28 3 240 0 Back half particulate 

matter (OTM-028) 

mass was calculated 

using the maximum 

allowable blank 

correction value of 

0.002 g. A correction 

value for each fraction 

was calculated by 

dividing the fraction 

blank amount by the 

total back half blank 

amount and 

multiplying that by the 

allowable blank 

correction value of 

0.002 g. 

Method OTM-028

A portion of reagent 

water that has been 

spiked with a known 

amount of material is 

extracted 3 times with 

Methylene Chloride. 

The solvent is 

evaporated to dryness. 

Detection Limits are 

calculated by using the 

standard deviation 

from these 10 replicate 

low level spikes. The 

standard deviation is 

multiplied by the 

appropriate Student T 

value to determine the 

statistically derived 

reporting limit. The 

non-extractable 

portion is determined 

by the weight 

difference on a series 

of 10 vials. Detection 

Limits are calculated 

by using the standard 

deviation from these 

10 replicates. The 

standard deviation is 

multiplied by the 

appropriate Student T 

value to determine the 

statistically derived 

reporting limit.

Stack Exit

Tuesday, February 01, 2011 Page 16 of 37
PPL Generation, LLC - Montour Station Unit 2

Inorganic (Aqueous) 

Condensible Part.

Method 5/OTM-28 3 240 0 Back half particulate 

matter (OTM-028) 

mass was calculated 

using the maximum 

allowable blank 

correction value of 

0.002 g. A correction 

value for each fraction 

was calculated by 

dividing the fraction 

blank amount by the 

total back half blank 

amount and 

multiplying that by the 

allowable blank 

correction value of 

0.002 g. 

Method OTM-028

A portion of reagent 

water that has been 

spiked with a known 

amount of material is 

extracted 3 times with 

Methylene Chloride. 

The solvent is 

evaporated to dryness. 

Detection Limits are 

calculated by using the 

standard deviation 

from these 10 replicate 

low level spikes. The 

standard deviation is 

multiplied by the 

appropriate Student T 

value to determine the 

statistically derived 

reporting limit. The 

non-extractable 

portion is determined 

by the weight 

difference on a series 

of 10 vials. Detection 

Limits are calculated 

by using the standard 

deviation from these 

10 replicates. The 

standard deviation is 

multiplied by the 

appropriate Student T 

value to determine the 

statistically derived 

reporting limit.

Stack Exit

Tuesday, February 01, 2011 Page 17 of 37
PPL Generation, LLC - Montour Station Unit 2

Total Particulate Method 5/OTM-28 3 240 0 Method OTM-028

A portion of reagent 

water that has been 

spiked with a known 

amount of material is 

extracted 3 times with 

Methylene Chloride. 

The solvent is 

evaporated to dryness. 

Detection Limits are 

calculated by using the 

standard deviation 

from these 10 replicate 

low level spikes. The 

standard deviation is 

multiplied by the 

appropriate Student T 

value to determine the 

statistically derived 

reporting limit. The 

non-extractable 

portion is determined 

by the weight 

difference on a series 

of 10 vials. Detection 

Limits are calculated 

by using the standard 

deviation from these 

10 replicates. The 

standard deviation is 

multiplied by the 

appropriate Student T 

value to determine the 

statistically derived 

reporting limit.

Stack Exit

Tuesday, February 01, 2011 Page 18 of 37
PPL Generation, LLC - Montour Station Unit 2

The following describes any modifications and/or deviations to the applicable test 

methods. If alternative methods were requested, see the attachments for documentation 

of request AND approval, including dates.

Filterable Particulate Method 5/OTM-28 3 240 0 Pursuant to Method 5, 

no blank filter was 

analyzed or blank 

filter correction 

performed.

Method OTM-028

A portion of reagent 

water that has been 

spiked with a known 

amount of material is 

extracted 3 times with 

Methylene Chloride. 

The solvent is 

evaporated to dryness. 

Detection Limits are 

calculated by using the 

standard deviation 

from these 10 replicate 

low level spikes. The 

standard deviation is 

multiplied by the 

appropriate Student T 

value to determine the 

statistically derived 

reporting limit. The 

non-extractable 

portion is determined 

by the weight 

difference on a series 

of 10 vials. Detection 

Limits are calculated 

by using the standard 

deviation from these 

10 replicates. The 

standard deviation is 

multiplied by the 

appropriate Student T 

value to determine the 

statistically derived 

reporting limit.

Stack Exit

Stack Exit Sulfur Dioxide Method 6C 3 60 0

Stack Exit Nitrogen oxides (NOx) Method 7E 3 60 0

Tuesday, February 01, 2011 Page 19 of 37
PPL Generation, LLC - Montour Station Unit 2

Sampling / Stack Data Results Summary

Location Stack Exit - Method 26A

Average

Run Number M26A-4 M26A-5 M26A-6

Test Date 3/17/2010 3/17/2010 3/17/2010

Run Start Time 7:10:00 AM 9:00:00 

AM

10:50:00 AM

Run Finish Time 8:24:00 AM 10:22:00 

AM

12:35:00 PM

Net Run Time, minutes 60 60 60

Dry Gas Meter Volume Sampled, dscf 33.111 33.092 33.441 33.215

Moisture Content of Stack Gas, % 15.23 11.07 17.25 14.517

Moisture Saturation at Stack Gas Temperature, % 12.49 12.49 12.81 12.597

Carbon Dioxide, % 12.1 12 12.1 12.067

Oxygen, % 7.1 7.3 7.3 7.233

Average Stack Gas Temperature, °F 123.08 123.08 124.00 123.387

Dry Volumetric Flow Rate, dry scfm 1,764,185.9 1,814,300.1 1,765,019.0 1,781,168.33

3

Actual Wet Volumetric Flue Gas Flow Rate, acfm 2,221,089.2 2,246,960.2 2,233,812.7 2,233,954.03

3

Percent Isokinetic of Sampling Rate, % 106.6 103.6 107.6 105.933

F-Factor, dscfm/MMBtu @ %O2 9780 9780 9780 9,780.000

Fw 10640 10640 10640 10,640.000

Fc 1800 1800 1800 1,800.000

Tuesday, February 01, 2011 Page 20 of 37
PPL Generation, LLC - Montour Station Unit 2

Location Stack Exit - Method 29

Average

Run Number

Test Date

Run Start Time

Run Finish Time

Net Run Time, minutes

Dry Gas Meter Volume Sampled, dscf

Moisture Content of Stack Gas, %

Moisture Saturation at Stack Gas Temperature, %

Carbon Dioxide, %

Oxygen, %

Average Stack Gas Temperature, °F

Dry Volumetric Flow Rate, dry scfm

Actual Wet Volumetric Flue Gas Flow Rate, acfm

Percent Isokinetic of Sampling Rate, %

F-Factor, dscfm/MMBtu @ %O2

Fw

Fc

Location Stack Exit - Method 5/OTM-28

Average

Run Number

Test Date

Run Start Time

Run Finish Time

Net Run Time, minutes

Dry Gas Meter Volume Sampled, dscf

Moisture Content of Stack Gas, %

Moisture Saturation at Stack Gas Temperature, %

Carbon Dioxide, %

Oxygen, %

Average Stack Gas Temperature, °F

Dry Volumetric Flow Rate, dry scfm

Actual Wet Volumetric Flue Gas Flow Rate, acfm

Percent Isokinetic of Sampling Rate, %

F-Factor, dscfm/MMBtu @ %O2

Fw

Fc

Tuesday, February 01, 2011 Page 21 of 37
PPL Generation, LLC - Montour Station Unit 2

Location Stack Exit - Method 6C

Average

Run Number

Test Date

Run Start Time

Run Finish Time

Carbon Dioxide, %

Oxygen, %

Dry Volumetric Flow Rate, dry scfm

F-Factor, dscfm/MMBtu @ %O2

Moisture, %

Fuel Type

Fw

Fc

Location Stack Exit - Method 7E

Average

Run Number

Test Date

Run Start Time

Run Finish Time

Carbon Dioxide, %

Oxygen, %

Dry Volumetric Flow Rate, dry scfm

F-Factor, dscfm/MMBtu @ %O2

Moisture, %

Fuel Type

Fw

Fc

Tuesday, February 01, 2011 Page 22 of 37
PPL Generation, LLC - Montour Station Unit 2

Emissions Summary

Location: Stack Exit - Method 26A

Compound: Hydrogen Chloride

Average

RunNumber M26A-4 M26A-5 M26A-6

Mass_mg 0.413 0.327 0.338 0.359

lb/mmBtuO2 4.07E-04 3.27E-04 3.35E-04 0.000

Compound: Hydrogen Fluoride

Average

RunNumber M26A-4 M26A-5 M26A-6

Mass_mg 0.413 0.327 0.338 0.359

lb/mmBtuO2 4.07E-04 3.27E-04 3.35E-04 0.000

Location: Stack Exit - Method 29

Compound: Antimony

Average

RunNumber M29-1 M29-2 M29-3

Mass_mg 0.003 0.003 0.0038 0.003

lb/mmBtuO2 5.54E-07 5.74E-07 7.31E-07 0.000

Compound: Arsenic

Average

RunNumber M29-1 M29-2 M29-3

Mass_mg 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003

lb/mmBtuO2 5.54E-07 5.74E-07 5.77E-07 0.000

Compound: Beryllium

Average

RunNumber M29-1 M29-2 M29-3

Mass_mg 0.00075 0.00075 0.00075 0.001

lb/mmBtuO2 1.38E-07 1.44E-07 1.44E-07 0.000

Compound: Cadmium

Average

RunNumber M29-1 M29-2 M29-3

Mass_mg 0.00075 0.00075 0.00245 0.001

lb/mmBtuO2 1.38E-07 1.44E-07 4.71E-07 0.000

Compound: Chromium

Average

RunNumber M29-1 M29-2 M29-3

Mass_mg 0.0079 0.00831 0.00821 0.008

lb/mmBtuO2 1.46E-06 1.59E-06 1.58E-06 0.000

Compound: Cobalt

Average

RunNumber M29-1 M29-2 M29-3

Mass_mg 0.00172 0.00001 0.00119 0.001

lb/mmBtuO2 3.17E-07 1.91E-09 2.29E-07 0.000

Tuesday, February 01, 2011 Page 23 of 37
PPL Generation, LLC - Montour Station Unit 2

Compound: Filterable Particulate

Average

RunNumber M29-1 M29-2 M29-3

Mass_mg 140.7 119.9 62.2 107.600

lb/mmBtuO2 2.60E-02 2.29E-02 1.20E-02 0.020

Compound: Lead

Average

RunNumber M29-1 M29-2 M29-3

Mass_mg 0.00358 0.00222 0.00247 0.003

lb/mmBtuO2 6.61E-07 4.25E-07 4.75E-07 0.000

Compound: Manganese

Average

RunNumber M29-1 M29-2 M29-3

Mass_mg 0.00686 0.0051 0.00476 0.006

lb/mmBtuO2 1.27E-06 9.76E-07 9.16E-07 0.000

Compound: Nickel

Average

RunNumber M29-1 M29-2 M29-3

Mass_mg 0.01866 0.02643 0.02036 0.022

lb/mmBtuO2 3.44E-06 5.06E-06 3.92E-06 0.000

Compound: Selenium

Average

RunNumber M29-1 M29-2 M29-3

Mass_mg 0.0318 0.0341 0.0745 0.047

lb/mmBtuO2 5.87E-06 6.52E-06 1.43E-05 0.000

Location: Stack Exit - Method 5/OTM-28

Compound: Filterable Particulate

Average

RunNumber OTM28-1 OTM28-2 OTM28-3

Mass_mg 76.1 43.3 65.7 61.700

lb/mmBtuO2 1.61E-02 9.20E-03 1.34E-02 0.013

Compound: Inorganic (Aqueous) Condensible Pa

Average

RunNumber OTM28-1 OTM28-2 OTM28-3

Mass_mg 79.3 36.3 52.3 55.967

lb/mmBtuO2 1.68E-02 7.71E-03 1.07E-02 0.012

Compound: Organic Condensible Particulate

Average

RunNumber OTM28-1 OTM28-2 OTM28-3

Mass_mg 2.6 7.1 2.1 3.933

lb/mmBtuO2 5.50E-04 1.51E-03 4.29E-04 0.001

Compound: Total Particulate

Average

RunNumber OTM28-1 OTM28-2 OTM28-3

Mass_mg 158 86.7 120.1 121.600

Tuesday, February 01, 2011 Page 24 of 37
PPL Generation, LLC - Montour Station Unit 2

Process Run Data

lb/mmBtuO2 3.34E-02 1.84E-02 2.46E-02 0.025

Location: Stack Exit - Method 6C

Compound: Sulfur Dioxide

Average

Run 4 5 6

lb/mmBtuO2 2.84E-01 2.82E-01 2.66E-01 0.277

ppm 1.15E+02 1.13E+02 1.07E+02 111.667

ppm@7%O2 1.16E+02 1.15E+02 1.09E+02 113.333

Location: Stack Exit - Method 7E

Compound: Nitrogen oxides (NOx)

Average

Run 4 5 6

lb/mmBtuO2 1.12E-01 1.14E-01 1.16E-01 0.114

ppm 6.35E+01 6.35E+01 6.45E+01 63.833

ppm@7%O2 6.40E+01 6.49E+01 6.59E+01 64.933

Tuesday, February 01, 2011 Page 25 of 37
PPL Generation, LLC - Montour Station Unit 2

Process Run Data

Run Name Value UOM Comments

Target

Value

1 Coal Burned 1000 Tons/hr

2 Coal Burned 1000 Tons/hr

3 Coal Burned 1000 Tons/hr

4 Coal Burned 1000 Tons/hr

5 Coal Burned 1000 Tons/hr

6 Coal Burned 1000 Tons/hr

1 Average Heat Input 6404 MMBtu/hr

2 Average Heat Input 6157 MMBtu/hr

3 Average Heat Input 6437 MMBtu/hr

4 Average Heat Input 4451 MMBtu/hr

5 Average Heat Input 5578 MMBtu/hr

6 Average Heat Input 6377 MMBtu/hr

1 Steam Output 5589 1000 lb steam/hr

2 Steam Output 5599 1000 lb steam/hr

3 Steam Output 5655 1000 lb steam/hr

4 Steam Output 5593 1000 lb steam/hr

5 Steam Output 7947 1000 lb steam/hr

6 Steam Output 5605 1000 lb steam/hr

1 Fuel Oil Firing Rate 0 gal/hr

2 Fuel Oil Firing Rate 0 gal/hr

3 Fuel Oil Firing Rate 0 gal/hr

4 Fuel Oil Firing Rate 0 gal/hr

5 Fuel Oil Firing Rate 0 gal/hr

6 Fuel Oil Firing Rate 0 gal/hr

1 Flue Gas Flow Rate 112488 wKscfh

4 Flue Gas Flow Rate 115197 wKscfh

5 Flue Gas Flow Rate 112260 wKscfh

6 Flue Gas Flow Rate 113126 wKscfh

1 Pressure Drop Across FGD (if applicable) 1.9 in H20

4 Pressure Drop Across FGD (if applicable) 1.9 in H20

5 Pressure Drop Across FGD (if applicable) 1.9 in H20

6 Pressure Drop Across FGD (if applicable) 1.9 in H20

1 FGD Scrubber Liquor pH 5.4 pH

Tuesday, February 01, 2011 Page 26 of 37
PPL Generation, LLC - Montour Station Unit 2

4 FGD Scrubber Liquor pH 5.4 pH

5 FGD Scrubber Liquor pH 5.4 pH

6 FGD Scrubber Liquor pH 5.4 pH

1 FGD Scrubber Liquor Flow Rate 304 gal/min

4 FGD Scrubber Liquor Flow Rate 288 gal/min

5 FGD Scrubber Liquor Flow Rate 264 gal/min

6 FGD Scrubber Liquor Flow Rate 274 gal/min

1 Flue Gas Oxygen Content 4.1 %

4 Flue Gas Oxygen Content 4.1 %

5 Flue Gas Oxygen Content 4.1 %

6 Flue Gas Oxygen Content 4.1 %

1 Flue Gas Carbon Dioxide Content 10.7 %

4 Flue Gas Carbon Dioxide Content 10.1 %

5 Flue Gas Carbon Dioxide Content 10.6 %

6 Flue Gas Carbon Dioxide Content 10.7 %

1 Flue Gas Moisture Content %

4 Flue Gas Moisture Content %

5 Flue Gas Moisture Content %

6 Flue Gas Moisture Content %

1 Flue Gas Sampling Point Temperature 122 Deg F

4 Flue Gas Sampling Point Temperature 121 Deg F

5 Flue Gas Sampling Point Temperature 121 Deg F

6 Flue Gas Sampling Point Temperature 122 Deg F

1 Flue Gas Pressure 0.96 atm

4 Flue Gas Pressure 0.96 atm

5 Flue Gas Pressure 0.96 atm

6 Flue Gas Pressure 0.96 atm

1 Standard Pressure 1 atm

4 Standard Pressure 1 atm

5 Standard Pressure 1 atm

6 Standard Pressure 1 atm

1 Standard Temperature 68 Deg F

4 Standard Temperature 68 Deg F

5 Standard Temperature 68 Deg F

6 Standard Temperature 68 Deg F

1 Unit Gross Electrical Output 775 Mwe

Tuesday, February 01, 2011 Page 27 of 37
PPL Generation, LLC - Montour Station Unit 2

APCD Run Data

Process Lab Run Data

4 Unit Gross Electrical Output 779 Mwe

5 Unit Gross Electrical Output 779 Mwe

6 Unit Gross Electrical Output 778 Mwe

1 Unit Net Electric Generation 744 MWh

4 Unit Net Electric Generation 748 MWh

5 Unit Net Electric Generation 748 MWh

6 Unit Net Electric Generation 748 MWh

1 SBS Dilute Flow rate 6 gpm

4 SBS Dilute Flow rate 5.3 gpm

5 SBS Dilute Flow rate 5.9 gpm

6 SBS Dilute Flow rate 6 gpm

1 ESP status i/s or o/s

4 ESP status i/s or o/s

5 ESP status i/s or o/s

6 ESP status i/s or o/s

1 SCR Ammonia flow 546 pph

4 SCR Ammonia flow 543 pph

5 SCR Ammonia flow 560 pph

6 SCR Ammonia flow 570 pph

Run Name Value UOM Comments

Target

Value

1 WET LIMESTONE FLUE GAS 

DESULFURIZATION SYSTEM

0 0

1 SCR (SELECTIVE CATALYTIC REDUCTION) 0 0

1 SODIUM BISULFITE (SBS) SYSTEM 0 0

1 ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR 0 0

Run Name Value UOM Comments

1 Fuel Higher Heating Value 15151 Btu/lb

2 Fuel Higher Heating Value 15268 Btu/lb

3 Fuel Higher Heating Value 15243 Btu/lb

4 Fuel Higher Heating Value 15148 Btu/lb

5 Fuel Higher Heating Value 15140 Btu/lb

6 Fuel Higher Heating Value 15165 Btu/lb

1 Fuel Moisture 1.18 %

Tuesday, February 01, 2011 Page 28 of 37
PPL Generation, LLC - Montour Station Unit 2

2 Fuel Moisture 1.35 %

3 Fuel Moisture 1.23 %

4 Fuel Moisture 1.45 %

5 Fuel Moisture 1.41 %

6 Fuel Moisture 1.39 %

1 Fuel Mercury Content 74.49 ppb

2 Fuel Mercury Content 71.51 ppb

3 Fuel Mercury Content 134.4 ppb

1 Fuel Cadmium Content 0.05 ppm

2 Fuel Cadmium Content 0.05 ppm

3 Fuel Cadmium Content 0.05 ppm

1 Fuel Nickel Content 5.89 ppm

2 Fuel Nickel Content 6.16 ppm

3 Fuel Nickel Content 6.93 ppm

1 Fuel Arsenic Content 2.53 ppm

2 Fuel Arsenic Content 2.21 ppm

3 Fuel Arsenic Content 3.59 ppm

1 Fuel Chromium Content 14.6 ppm

2 Fuel Chromium Content 15.8 ppm

3 Fuel Chromium Content 16.8 ppm

1 Fuel Beryllium Content 0.04 ppm

2 Fuel Beryllium Content 0.04 ppm

3 Fuel Beryllium Content 0.04 ppm

1 Fuel Lead Content 3.66 ppm

2 Fuel Lead Content 4.11 ppm

3 Fuel Lead Content 5.14 ppm

1 Fuel Manganese Content 14.6 ppm

2 Fuel Manganese Content 12.5 ppm

3 Fuel Manganese Content 12.7 ppm

1 Scrubber Slurry 3E+05 mg/L

2 Scrubber Slurry 2E+05 mg/L

3 Scrubber Slurry 2E+05 mg/L

1 Fuel Cobalt Content 0.25 ppm

2 Fuel Cobalt Content 0.25 ppm

3 Fuel Cobalt Content 0.25 ppm

1 Fuel Antimony Content 4.99 ppm

2 Fuel Antimony Content 4.91 ppm

3 Fuel Antimony Content 4.93 ppm

1 Fuel Ash, as received 8.02 %

2 Fuel Ash, as received 8.06 %

3 Fuel Ash, as received 8.57 %

4 Fuel Ash, as received 8.17 %

5 Fuel Ash, as received 8.03 %

Tuesday, February 01, 2011 Page 29 of 37
PPL Generation, LLC - Montour Station Unit 2

6 Fuel Ash, as received 8.18 %

1 Fuel Ash, dry basis 8.11 %

2 Fuel Ash, dry basis 8.17 %

3 Fuel Ash, dry basis 8.68 %

4 Fuel Ash, dry basis 8.29 %

5 Fuel Ash, dry basis 8.14 %

6 Fuel Ash, dry basis 8.29 %

1 Fuel Volatile, as received 39.01 %

2 Fuel Volatile, as received 36.53 %

3 Fuel Volatile, as received 35.63 %

4 Fuel Volatile, as received 38.42 %

5 Fuel Volatile, as received 38.29 %

6 Fuel Volatile, as received 38.24 %

1 Fuel Volatile, dry basis 39.47 %

2 Fuel Volatile, dry basis 37.02 %

3 Fuel Volatile, dry basis 36.07 %

4 Fuel Volatile, dry basis 38.98 %

5 Fuel Volatile, dry basis 38.83 %

6 Fuel Volatile, dry basis 38.78 %

1 Fuel Sulfur, as received 2.661 %

2 Fuel Sulfur, as received 1.892 %

3 Fuel Sulfur, as received 1.813 %

4 Fuel Sulfur, as received 2.545 %

5 Fuel Sulfur, as received 2.485 %

6 Fuel Sulfur, as received 2.437 %

1 Fuel Sulfur, dry basis 2.693 %

2 Fuel Sulfur, dry basis 1.918 %

3 Fuel Sulfur, dry basis 1.835 %

4 Fuel Sulfur, dry basis 2.582 %

5 Fuel Sulfur, dry basis 2.521 %

6 Fuel Sulfur, dry basis 2.471 %

1 Fuel Chlorine, as received 0.12 %

2 Fuel Chlorine, as received 0.12 %

3 Fuel Chlorine, as received 0.12 %

4 Fuel Chlorine, as received 0.11 %

5 Fuel Chlorine, as received 0.12 %

6 Fuel Chlorine, as received 0.14 %

1 Fuel Chlorine, dry basis 0.12 %

2 Fuel Chlorine, dry basis 0.12 %

3 Fuel Chlorine, dry basis 0.12 %

4 Fuel Chlorine, dry basis 0.11 %

5 Fuel Chlorine, dry basis 0.12 %

6 Fuel Chlorine, dry basis 0.14 %

Tuesday, February 01, 2011 Page 30 of 37
PPL Generation, LLC - Montour Station Unit 2

4 Fuel Fluorine, as received 65 ppm

5 Fuel Fluorine, as received 53 ppm

6 Fuel Fluorine, as received 49 ppm

4 Fuel Fluorine, dry basis 66 ppm

5 Fuel Fluorine, dry basis 54 ppm

6 Fuel Fluorine, dry basis 50 ppm

1 Fuel Selenium Content 0.67 ppm

2 Fuel Selenium Content 0.83 ppm

3 Fuel Selenium Content 0.37 ppm

1 Carbon, as received 75.64 %

2 Carbon, as received 76.19 %

3 Carbon, as received 75.51 %

4 Carbon, as received 75.34 %

5 Carbon, as received 75.15 %

6 Carbon, as received 73.87 %

1 Carbon, dry basis 76.27 %

2 Carbon, dry basis 77.03 %

3 Carbon, dry basis 76.2 %

4 Carbon, dry basis 76.2 %

5 Carbon, dry basis 75.95 %

6 Carbon, dry basis 74.7 %

1 Hydrogen, as received 4.87 %

2 Hydrogen, as received 4.85 %

3 Hydrogen, as received 4.69 %

4 Hydrogen, as received 4.78 %

5 Hydrogen, as received 4.81 %

6 Hydrogen, as received 4.83 %

1 Hydrogen, dry basis 4.91 %

2 Hydrogen, dry basis 4.9 %

3 Hydrogen, dry basis 4.73 %

4 Hydrogen, dry basis 4.84 %

5 Hydrogen, dry basis 4.86 %

6 Hydrogen, dry basis 4.88 %

1 Nitrogen, as received 1.8 %

2 Nitrogen, as received 1.88 %

3 Nitrogen, as received 1.97 %

4 Nitrogen, as received 1.68 %

5 Nitrogen, as received 1.65 %

6 Nitrogen, as received 1.83 %

1 Nitrogen, dry basis 1.81 %

2 Nitrogen, dry basis 1.9 %

3 Nitrogen, dry basis 1.99 %

4 Nitrogen, dry basis 1.7 %

Tuesday, February 01, 2011 Page 31 of 37
PPL Generation, LLC - Montour Station Unit 2

5 Nitrogen, dry basis 1.67 %

6 Nitrogen, dry basis 1.85 %

Tuesday, February 01, 2011 Page 32 of 37
PPL Generation, LLC - Montour Station Unit 2

Sampling / Stack Data Results Detail

Location Stack Exit - Method 26A

Average

Run Number M26A-4 M26A-5 M26A-6

Test Date 3/17/2010 3/17/2010 3/17/2010

Run Start Time 7:10:00 AM 9:00:00 AM 10:50:00 AM

Run Finish Time 8:24:00 AM 10:22:00 AM 12:35:00 PM

Net Traversing Points 12 12 12

Net Run Time, minutes 60 60 60

Nozzle Diameter, inches 0.195 0.195 0.195 0.195

Pitot Tube Coefficient 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.830

Dry Gas Meter Calibration Factor 1 1 1 1.000

Barometric Pressure, inches of Mercury 30.05 30.06 30.05 30.053

Average Orifice Meter Differential, inches H2O 1.02 1.03 1.04 1.030

Dry Gas Meter Volume Sampled, cubic feet 33.436 33.711 34.255 33.801

Average Dry Gas Meter Temperature, °F 76.83 81.75 84.58 81.053

Dry Gas Meter Volume Sampled, dscf 33.111 33.092 33.441 33.215

Total Moisture Liquid collected, g 126.4 87.55 148.1 120.683

Volume of Water Vapor, standard cubic feet 5.95 4.12 6.97 5.680

Moisture Content of Stack Gas, % 15.23 11.07 17.25 14.517

Moisture Saturation at Stack Gas Temperature, % 12.49 12.49 12.81 12.597

Dry Mole Fraction 0.8751 0.8893 0.8719 0.879

Carbon Dioxide, % 12.1 12 12.1 12.067

Oxygen, % 7.1 7.3 7.3 7.233

Carbon Monoxide & Nitrogen, % 80.8 80.7 80.6 80.700

Fuel Factor 1.14 1.13 1.12

Dry Molecular Weight, lb/lb-Mole 30.22 30.21 30.23 30.220

Wet Molecular weight, lb/lb-Mole 29.19 28.86 29.46 29.170

Flue Gas Static Pressure, inches of H2O -0.84 -0.84 -0.84 -0.840

Absolute Flue Gas Pressure, inches of Mercury 29.99 30.00 29.99 29.993

Average Stack Gas Temperature, °F 123.08 123.08 124.00 123.387

Average Velocity Head, inches of H2O 0.8177830233

91043

0.827717677

477343

0.833521845

974034

0.826

Average Stack Gas Velocity, feet/second 52.37 52.98 52.67 52.673

Stack Cross-Sectional Area, square feet 706.858 706.858 706.858 706.858

Dry Volumetric Flow Rate, dry scfm 1,764,185.9 1,814,300.1 1,765,019.0 1,781,168.3

33

Actual Wet Volumetric Flue Gas Flow Rate, acfm 2,221,089.2 2,246,960.2 2,233,812.7 2,233,954.0

33

Percent Isokinetic of Sampling Rate, % 106.6 103.6 107.6 105.933

Percent Excess Air, % 49.9 52.1 52.2 51.400

F-Factor, dscfm/MMBtu @ %O2 9780 9780 9780 9,780.000

Round Duct Diameter, inches 360 360 360

Rectangular Duct Width, inches 0 0 0

Rectangular Duct Length, inches 0 0 0

Fw 10640 10640 10640 10,640.000

Fc 1800 1800 1800 1,800.000

Tuesday, February 01, 2011 Page 33 of 37
PPL Generation, LLC - Montour Station Unit 2

Location Stack Exit - Method 29

Average

Run Number

Test Date

Run Start Time

Run Finish Time

Net Traversing Points

Net Run Time, minutes

Nozzle Diameter, inches

Pitot Tube Coefficient

Dry Gas Meter Calibration Factor

Barometric Pressure, inches of Mercury

Average Orifice Meter Differential, inches H2O

Dry Gas Meter Volume Sampled, cubic feet

Average Dry Gas Meter Temperature, °F

Dry Gas Meter Volume Sampled, dscf

Total Moisture Liquid collected, g

Volume of Water Vapor, standard cubic feet

Moisture Content of Stack Gas, %

Moisture Saturation at Stack Gas Temperature, %

Dry Mole Fraction

Carbon Dioxide, %

Oxygen, %

Carbon Monoxide & Nitrogen, %

Fuel Factor

Dry Molecular Weight, lb/lb-Mole

Wet Molecular weight, lb/lb-Mole

Flue Gas Static Pressure, inches of H2O

Absolute Flue Gas Pressure, inches of Mercury

Average Stack Gas Temperature, °F

Average Velocity Head, inches of H2O

Average Stack Gas Velocity, feet/second

Stack Cross-Sectional Area, square feet

Dry Volumetric Flow Rate, dry scfm

Actual Wet Volumetric Flue Gas Flow Rate, acfm

Percent Isokinetic of Sampling Rate, %

Percent Excess Air, %

F-Factor, dscfm/MMBtu @ %O2

Round Duct Diameter, inches

Rectangular Duct Width, inches

Rectangular Duct Length, inches

Fw

Fc

Tuesday, February 01, 2011 Page 34 of 37
PPL Generation, LLC - Montour Station Unit 2

Location Stack Exit - Method 5/OTM-28

Average

Run Number

Test Date

Run Start Time

Run Finish Time

Net Traversing Points

Net Run Time, minutes

Nozzle Diameter, inches

Pitot Tube Coefficient

Dry Gas Meter Calibration Factor

Barometric Pressure, inches of Mercury

Average Orifice Meter Differential, inches H2O

Dry Gas Meter Volume Sampled, cubic feet

Average Dry Gas Meter Temperature, °F

Dry Gas Meter Volume Sampled, dscf

Total Moisture Liquid collected, g

Volume of Water Vapor, standard cubic feet

Moisture Content of Stack Gas, %

Moisture Saturation at Stack Gas Temperature, %

Dry Mole Fraction

Carbon Dioxide, %

Oxygen, %

Carbon Monoxide & Nitrogen, %

Fuel Factor

Dry Molecular Weight, lb/lb-Mole

Wet Molecular weight, lb/lb-Mole

Flue Gas Static Pressure, inches of H2O

Absolute Flue Gas Pressure, inches of Mercury

Average Stack Gas Temperature, °F

Average Velocity Head, inches of H2O

Average Stack Gas Velocity, feet/second

Stack Cross-Sectional Area, square feet

Dry Volumetric Flow Rate, dry scfm

Actual Wet Volumetric Flue Gas Flow Rate, acfm

Percent Isokinetic of Sampling Rate, %

Percent Excess Air, %

F-Factor, dscfm/MMBtu @ %O2

Round Duct Diameter, inches

Rectangular Duct Width, inches

Rectangular Duct Length, inches

Fw

Fc

Tuesday, February 01, 2011 Page 35 of 37
PPL Generation, LLC - Montour Station Unit 2

Location Stack Exit - Method 6C

Average

Run Number

Test Date

Run Start Time

Run Finish Time

Carbon Dioxide, %

Oxygen, %

Fuel Factor

Dry Volumetric Flow Rate, dry scfm

F-Factor, dscfm/MMBtu @ %O2

Moisture, %

Analyzer Make

Analyzer Model

Analyzer Serial Number

Operating Range

Operating Units

No. Readings/Avg.

Calibration Set

Calibration Pre Zero Cylinder ID

Calibration Pre Zero Cylinder Instrument Response

Calibration Pre Zero Cylinder Bias

Calibration Pre Zero Cylinder Drift

Calibration Pre High Cylinder ID

Calibration Pre High Cylinder Instrument Response

Calibration Pre High Cylinder Bias

Calibration Pre High Cylinder Drift

Calibration Post Zero Cylinder ID

Calibration Post Zero Cylinder Instrument Response

Calibration Post Zero Cylinder Bias

Calibration Post Zero Cylinder Drift

Calibration Post High Cylinder ID

Calibration Post High Cylinder Instrument Response

Calibration Post High Cylinder Bias

Calibration Post High Cylinder Drift

Cavg

Cavg Units

Cgas

Cgas Units

Fuel Type

Fw

Fc

Cgasw

Cgasw Units

Tuesday, February 01, 2011 Page 36 of 37
PPL Generation, LLC - Montour Station Unit 2

Location Stack Exit - Method 7E

Average

Run Number

Test Date

Run Start Time

Run Finish Time

Carbon Dioxide, %

Oxygen, %

Fuel Factor

Dry Volumetric Flow Rate, dry scfm

F-Factor, dscfm/MMBtu @ %O2

Moisture, %

Analyzer Make

Analyzer Model

Analyzer Serial Number

Operating Range

Operating Units

No. Readings/Avg.

Calibration Set

Calibration Pre Zero Cylinder ID

Calibration Pre Zero Cylinder Instrument Response

Calibration Pre Zero Cylinder Bias

Calibration Pre Zero Cylinder Drift

Calibration Pre High Cylinder ID

Calibration Pre High Cylinder Instrument Response

Calibration Pre High Cylinder Bias

Calibration Pre High Cylinder Drift

Calibration Post Zero Cylinder ID

Calibration Post Zero Cylinder Instrument Response

Calibration Post Zero Cylinder Bias

Calibration Post Zero Cylinder Drift

Calibration Post High Cylinder ID

Calibration Post High Cylinder Instrument Response

Calibration Post High Cylinder Bias

Calibration Post High Cylinder Drift

Cavg

Cavg Units

Cgas

Cgas Units

Fuel Type

Fw

Fc

Cgasw

Cgasw Units

Tuesday, February 01, 2011 Page 37 of 37