SOURCE EMISSIONS TEST REPORT 

Prepared for 

Cargill, Inc. 


Kansas City, Missouri 


Regarding testing of 

Various Particulate Emission 


Points throughout the Plant 


Located at 

Cargill, Inc. 


2306 Rochester St 


Kansas City, Missouri 64120 


Performed January 6 through-February 24, 2009 

By 

AIRSOURCE TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 

20505 W. 67TH Street 


Shawnee, Kansas, 66218-9260 


(913) 422-9001 


Project 1\10. 3203 
PREFACE 


This report was prepared by AirSource Technologies, Inc., and contains the results of 

testing that was conducted on various exhaust stacks at the Cargill, Inc. facility in Kansas 

City, Missouri on January 6 through February 24, 2009. To the best of our knowledge the 

data contained in this report is accurate and complete. Any questions concerning this report 

should be directed to l"1r. Finnegan Schall, Project Manager, or Mr. George Cobb, President. 

AirSource Technologies, Inc. Approved by: 

Finnegan Schall George Cobb 

Project Manager President 

January 21, 2008 

3203 AirSource Technologies; Inc. 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 


SECT'ION 1 - INTRODUCTION .••....•......•••••.•....•.....•....•....••....•••..•...•••..••••..•.....•....... 1 


1.1 TEST SITE INFORMATION .................................................................................... 1 


1.1.1 Description of Facility ................................................................................ 1 


1.1.2 Location of Facility .................................................................................... 1 


1.1.3 Contact Person ......................................................................................... 1 


1.2 PURPOSE OF TESTING ......................................................................................... 1 


1.3 TESTING ORGANIZATION .................................................................................... 1 


1.3.1 Company.................................................................................................. 1 


1.3.2 Personnel ................................................................................................. 1 


1.4 SUlvlIVlARY OF TESTING PERFORIVIED .................................................................... 2 


SECTION 2 - SLIMMARY OF RESULTS..............•••..•••....•...................••..•.••.•......••.••.•• 3 


2.1 OPACITY OBSERVATION RESULTS........................................................................ 8 


2.2 POTENTIAL ERRORS IN TESTING ......................................................................... 8 


2.3 EVALUATION OF PERFORMANCE .......................................................................... 8 


SECTION 3 - PROCESS DATA .............•......•.•.•....•••..••••.......••...•.....•.............•.....•....• 9 


3.1 DESCRIPTION OF THE TEST LOCATIONS .............................................................10 


3.2 SAMPLING AND MEASUREMENT PROCEDURES.....................................................10 


3.2.1 Traverse Point Layout ..............................................................................10 


3.2.2 Velocity and Volumetric Flow Rate Determination.......................................10 


3.2.3 Gas Molecular Weight Determination .........................................................l0 


3.2.4 Moisture Content Determination ...............................................................10 


3.2.5 FilterablejCondensible/Total Particulate Matter Determination ....................10 


3.2.6 Total PMlO Particulate Matter Determination ..............................................11 


3.2.7 Filterable Particulate Matter Sampling in Cyclonic Flow ...............................l1 


3.2.8 Deviations from Sampling Methods ...........................................................12 


3.3 ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES .................................................................................12 


3.3.1 Analysis for Filterable Particulate Matter ....................................................12 


3.3.2 Analysis for Filterable PMlO Particulate Matter ............................................12 


3.3.3 Analysis for Condensible Particulate Matter ................................................12 


3.3.4 Deviations from Analytical Methods ...........................................................13 


SECnON 4 - QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL. .................................... 14 


4.1 COMPLETENESS .................................................................................................14 


4.2 EMISSIONS SAMPLING........................................................................................14 


4.3 ANALYSIS FOR PARTICULATE MATTER ................................................................14 


3203 AirSource Technologies, Inc. 
APPENDICES 

Appendix A Calculation Equations 

Appendix B Calculated Results 

Appendix B-1 Soybean Receiving EP 119 and EP 120 

Appendix B-2 Soybean Conveying, and Jet Drying EP 03, EP 103a, and EP 

103b 

Appendix C Field Data Forms 

Appendix C-l Soybean Receiving EP 119 and EP 120 

Appendix C-2 Soybean Conveying, and Jet Drying EP 03, EP 103a, and EP 

103b 

Appendix C-7 Opacity Observation Field Data EP 03, EP 101, EP 102, EP 

103a, EP 103b\ 

Gravimetric Analysis 

Appendix D Equipment Calibrations 

Appendix E-l Pre-Test Calibrations 

Appendix E-2 Post-Test Calibrations 

Appendix E Process Data 

3203 AirSource Technologies, Inc. 
SECTION 1- INTRODUCTION 


1.1 TEST SITE INFORMATION 

1.1.1 Description of Facility 

Cargill, Inc. in Kansas City, Missouri processes, produces, transports, and sells 

agricultural and other bulk commodities. Primarily, it is a food manufacturer, 

processor, and wholesaler. 

1.1.2 Location of Facility 

The facility and tested sources are located at 2306 Rochester St, Kansas City, 

Missouri 64120. 

1.1.3 Contact Person 

Mr. Thomas A. Parsons, Production Supervisor, was the Cargill project coordinator. 

1.2 PURPOSE OF TESTING 

Emission testing was performed on twenty exhaust stacks in the Soybean Receiving, 

Soybean Conveying, Pre-cleaning, Jet Drying, Soybean Preparation, Meal Processing, Pods 

and Hulls Processing, Meal and Hulls Load Out processes to determine particulate matter 

emissions under normal operating conditions as required by the Kansas City Health 

Department. 

1.3 TESTING ORGANIZATION 

1.3.1 Company 

AirSource Technologies, Inc., located at 20505 W. 6th Street, Shawnee, Kansas 

66218 performed the testing. 

1.3.2 Personnel 

AirSource personnel who conducted the testing were: 


Mr. Finnegan Schall, Project Manager 


Mr. Jim Surman, Laboratory SpeCialist, 


Ms. Joy Mccann, Laboratory SpeCialist, 


Mr. George Cobb, Environmental Scientist, 


Mr. Dan Soderberg, Environmental Scientist, 


Mr. Pete Liebl, Environmental SCientist, 


Mr. David Hotz, Environmental Technician, 


Mr. Todd Brandl, Environmental Technician, 


Mr. Carl Bender, Environmental Technician, and 


Mr. Robert Phillips, Environmental Technician. 


Mr. David Seidel of Seidel Research and Development Co. performed opacity 

observations at several sources. 

3203 1 AirSource Technologies, Inc. 
1.4 SUMMARY OF TESTING PERFORMED 

Emissions in the Exhaust Stacks were measured for particulate matter using EPA Methods 1­

5, 9, 17, 201A, and 202. Three test runs were performed at each source from January 6 

through February 24, 2009. 

The following table identifies the source, emission point identification number, and the run 

numbers for each location: 

Table 1-1 


Source Identification and Run Numbers 


Emission Point Description Identification 

Number Run Numbers 

Truck Receivinq Dust Collector EP 119 1111 1112, 1113 

Rail Receiving Dust Collector EP 120 611,613 

Elevator Dust Collector EP 03 1211 1212, 1213 

Jet Dryer Dust Collector No. 1 EP 103 a 911,912,913 

Jet Dryer Dust Collector No. 2 EP 103 b 1011 1012, 1013 

AirSource Technologies, Inc. 2 3203 
SECTION 2 - SUMMARY OF RESULTS 

Table 2-1 


Filterable Particulate 


Truck Receiving Dust Collector 


EP119 


Parameter Units Run 1111 Run 1112 Run 1113 Average 

Date 

Run Time Period 

Sampling Time 

-

-

min 

01/28/09 

1417-1505 

1518-1606 

96.00 

01/28/09 

138-1356 

1404-1452 

96.00 

01/30/09 

1106-1154 

1204-1252 

96.00 

-

-

- Gas Stream 

Avg. Velocity Head CLlp) in H2O 0.314 0.405 0.467 0.396 

Avg. Temperature OF 45 56 33 44 

Absolute Pressure in Hg 29.34 29.40 29.40 29.38 

Moisture Concentration %V 0.75 0.75 0.60 0.70 

O2 Concentration, Dry %V 20.90 20.90 20.90 20.90 

CO2 Concentration, Dry %V 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Avg. Velocity ft/rnin 1,864 2,137 2,243 2,081 

Flow Rate, Actual acfm 25,419 29,142 30,579 28,380 

Flow Rate, Wet scfm 26,054 29,314 32,191 29,186 

Flow Rate, Dry dscfm 25,858 29,093 31,996 28,983 

ParticlJlat~ Matter 

gr/dscf 

Ib/hr 

0.000176 

0.0390 

0.000215 

0.0535 

0.000209 

0.0573 

0.000200 

0.0499 

Concentration 

Emission Rate 

Sample Volume 

Avg. lsokinetic Variation 

dscf 

% 

49.528 

102.1 

68.226 

102.6 

69.490 

97.4 

-

-

3203 3 AirSource Technologies, Inc. 
Table 2-2 


Filterable Particulate 


Rail Receiving Dust Collector 


EP 120 


Parameter Units Run 611 Run 612a Run 613 Average 

Date 

Run Time Period 

Sampling Time 

-

-

min 

01/29/09 

0854-1015 

1025-1113 

96.00 

01/29/09 

1125-1213 

1215-1303 

96.00 

01/29/09 

1340-1428 

1438-1526 

96.00 

-

-

- Gas Stream 

Avg. Velocity Head (dP) in H2O 1.220 1.372 1.446 1.346 

Avg. Temperature of 36 37 38 37 

Absolute Pressure in Hg 29.25 29.25 29.25 29.25 

Moisture Concentration %V 0.55 0.63 0.63 0.60 

O2 Concentration, Dry %V 20.90 20.90 20.90 20.90 

CO2 Concentration, Dry %V 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Avg. Velocity ft/min 3,645 3,869 3,976 3,830 

Flow Rate, Actual acfm 25,765 27,351 28,106 27,074 

Flow Rate, Wet scfm 26,801 28,396 29,141 28,112 

Flow Rate, Dry dscfm 26,654 28,216 28,958 27,942 

Particulate Matter 

Concentration 

Emission Rate 

gr/dscf 

Ib/hr 

0.000053 

0.0122 

--­

--­

0.000052 

0.0129 

0.000053 

0.0125 

Sample Volume 

Avg. Isokinetic Variation 

dscf 

% 

95.299 

99.7 

69.107 

99.8 

74.038 

99.8 

-

-

a Particulate sample filter was lost during recovery or transfer to analytical laboratory 

AirSource Technologies, Inc 4 3203 
Table 2-3 


Filterable Particulate 


Elevator Dust Collector 


EP03 


Parameter Units Run 1211 Run 1212 3 Average 

Date 01/29/09 01/29/09 01/30/09 

Run Time Period 1351-1531 1622-1816 0758-0952 

Sampling Time min 100.00 100.00 100.00 

Gas Stream 

Avg. Velocity Head CAp) in H2O 0.447 0.464 0.473 0.462 

Avg. Temperature OF 51 50 46 49 

Absolute Pressure in Hg 29.28 29.28 29.23 29.27 

Moisture Concentration %V 0.75 0.49 0.50 0.58 

O2 Concentration, Dry %V 20.90 20.90 20.90 20.90 

CO2 Concentration, Dry %V 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Avg. Velocity ftjmin 2,240 2,280 2,294 2,271 

Flow Rate, Actual adm 17,215 17,523 17,636 17,458 

Flow Rate, Wet sdm 17,397 17,739 17,964 17,700 

Flow Rate, Dry dsdm 17,266 17,652 17,875 17,598 

Patticulate Matt~r 

Concentration gr/dsd 0.00105 0.000854 0.000775 0.0009 

Emission Rate Ib/hr 0.156 0.129 0.119 0.1346 

Sample Volume dsd 59.326 70.861 

Avg. Isokinetic Variation % 99.2 99.9 

AirSource Technologies, Inc. 5 3203 
Table 2-4 


Filterable and Condensable Particulate 


Jet Dryer Dust Collector No. 1 


EP 103 a 


Parameter Units Run 911 Run 912 Run 913 Average 

Date 

Run Time Period 

Sampling Time 

-

-

min 

01/22/09 

1410-1458 

1500-1548 

96.00 

06/30/02 

1635-1723 

1737-1825 

96.00 

01/23/09 

1041-1129 

1239-1227 

96.00 

-

-

-

Gas Stream 

Avg. Velocity Head (ilp) in H2O 0.480 0.419 0.522 0.474 

Avg. Temperature of 164 160 158 161 

Absolute Pressure in Hg 29.07 29.07 29.69 29.27 

Moisture Concentration %V 4.17 4.43 3.52 4.04 

O2 Concentration, Dry %V 20.90 20.90 20.90 20.90 

CO2 Concentration, Dry %V 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Avg. Velocity ft/min 2,591 2,413 2,657 2,554 

Flow Rate, Actual acfm 14,021 13,061 14,379 13,820 

Flow Rate, Wet scfm 11,527 10,797 12,193 11,506 

Flow Rate, Dry dscfm 11,047 10,319 11,764 11,043 

PM Concentration 

Filterable PM gr/dscf 0.000023 0.000176 0.000295 0.000165 

Condensible PM gr/dscf 0.000814 0.00334 0.000645 0.00160 

Total PM 

PM Emission Rate 

gr/dscf 0.000837 0.00352 0.000939 0.00176 

Filterable PM Ib/hr 0.00217 0.0156 0.0297 0.0158 

Condensible PM Ib/hr 0.0771 0.295 0.0650 0.1458 

Total PM Ib/hr 0.0793 0.311 0.0947 0.1617 

Sample Volume 

Avg. Isokinetic Variation 

dscf 

% 

67.411 

99.3 

59.189 

99.6 

71.427 

98.8 

-

-

AirSource Technologies, Inc. 6 3203 
Table 2-5 


Filterable and Condensable Particulate 


Jet Dryer Oust Collector No.2 


EP 103 b 


Parameter Units Run 1011 Run 1012 Run 1013 Average 

Date 

Run Time Period 

Sampling Time 

-

-

min 

01/23/09 

1418-1506 

1517-1605 

96.00 

01/28/09 

0928-1016 

1029-1049 

1315-1339 

96.00 

01/28/09 

1414-1502 

1517-1605 

96.00 

-

-

-

Gas Stream 

Avg. Velocity Head (~p) in HzO 0.397 0.369 0.416 0.394 

Avg. Temperature OF 152 169 162 161 

Absolute Pressure in Hg 29.69 29.64 29.64 29.65 

Moisture Concentration %V 5.28 2.59 3.72 3.87 

Oz Concentration, Dry %V 20.90 20.90 20.90 20.90 

COz Concentration, Dry %V 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Avg. Velocity ft/min 2,313 2,251 2,383 2,316 

Flow Rate, Actual acfm 12,518 12,184 12,897 12,533 

Flow Rate, Wet scfm 10,705 10,129 10,840 10,558 

Flow Rate, Dry dscfm 10,140 9,866 10,437 10,147 

PM ConcentratiQn 

Filterable PM gr/dscf 0.000070 0.000038 0.000088 0.000065

Condensible PM gr/dscf 0.000955 0.000462 0.000473 0.000630 

Total PM gr/dscf 0.00103 0.000500 0.000561 0.000696 

PM Emission Rate 

Filterable PM Ib/hr 0.00611 0.00319 0.00784 0.00572 

Condensible PM Ib/hr 0.0830 0.0391 0.0424 0.0548 

Total PM Ib/hr 0.0891 0.0423 0.0502 0.0605 

Sample Volume 

Avg. Isokinetic Variation 

dscf 

% 

58.593 

100.3 

66.750 

98.1 

63.498 

99.0 

-

-

AirSource Technologies, Inc 7 3203 
2.1 OPACITY OBSERVATION RESULTS 

Mr. David Seidel of Seidel Research and Development performed three one hour opacity 

observations at each emission point. Observations were performed at the following 

locations: 

• EP119 Truck Receiving Dust Collector 

• EP120 Rail Receiving Dust Collector 

Elevator Dust Collector • EP03 

• EP103a Jet Dryer Dust Collector No. 1 

• EP103b Jet Dryer Dust Collector No. 2 

No opacity was observed at any of the above locations. Field data sheets can be found in 

Appendix C-7. 

2.2 POTENTIAL ERRORS IN TESTING 

The filter for Run 612 at location EP120 (Rail Receiving Dust collector) was lost while 

processing the sample in the field laboratory or during transport to the analytical laboratory. 

The other two runs passed all of the method criteria and demonstrate comparable results. 

The facility would ask to waive the third test run at this location. 

There were no other apparent factors that might have adversely affected the test results. 

2.3 EVALUATION OF PERFORMANCE 

All locations observed for opacity passed the visible emission limits. 

AirSol.lrce Technolog;~ Inc. 8 3203 
SECTION 3 - PROCESS DATA 

The process' throughput and control device pressure drops are summarized in Table 3-1 

below. Process data is located in Appendix F, Process Data. 

Table 3-1 


Process Operating Parameters 


Emission 

Point Description Start 

Time 

Rate of 

Product 

Processed 

bushels/hr 

Approx. 

Tons of 

Product 

Processed 

Differential 

Pressure 

in. H2O 

EP 119 

Truck 

Receiving 

Dust 

Collector 

Run 1 2268.8 54.45 2.4 

Run 2 2268.8 54.45 2.5 

Run 3 2612.5 62.70 2.3 

Average 2383.3 57.20 2.4 

EP 120 

Rail 

Receiving 

Dust 

Collector 

Run 1 2818.8 67.65 2.1 

Run 2 2567.1 61.61 2.1 

Run 3 1650.0 39.60 2.1 

Average 2345.3 56.29 2.1 

EP 03 

Elevator 

Dust 

Collector 

Run 1 1711.6 41.08 1.3 

Run 2 2612.5 62.70 1.3 

Run 3 1787.5 42.90 1.2 

Average 2037.2 48.89 1.3 

EP 103 a 

Jet Dryer 

Dust 

Collector #1 

Run 1 2543.8 61.05 3.2 

Run 2 2543.8 61.05 3.4 

Run 3 2062.5 49.50 2.2 

Average 2383.3 57.20 2.9 

EP 103 b 

Jet Dryer 

Dust 

Collector #2 

Run 1 2062.5 49.50 1.1 

Run 2 2268.8 54.45 0.0 

Run ~ 2268.8 54.45 0.7 

Average 2200.0 52.80 0.6 

AirSource Technologies, Inc. 9 3203 
SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES 


3.1 DESCRIPTION OF THE TEST LOCATIONS 

Stack dimensions including diameters, upstream and downstream distances from any flow 

disturbance are include with the field data forms for each location. 

3.2 SAMPLING AND MEASUREMENT PROCEDURES 

3.2.1 Traverse Point Layout 

Traverse point layouts were determined according to procedures in EPA Method 1 

(40 CPR, Part 60 Appendix A-1). Actual traverse point location measurement data is 

in Appendix B, Calculated Results. 

3.2.2 Velocity and Volumetric Flow Rate Determination 

Gas stream velocities and volumetric flow rates were determined according to 

procedures in EPA Method 2 (40 CPR, Part 60 Appendix A-1). A Type S pitot tubeprobe assembly meeting the dimensional specifications in Method 2 for a baseline 

pitot-tube coefficient and inclined manometer were used for measuring velocity 

heads and static pressure. A calibrated thermocouple and temperature meter were 

used for measuring gas stream temperatures. A digital barometer calibrated against 

a mercury barometer was used to measure atmospheric pressure at the sampling 

and metering console locations. 

3.2.3 Gas Molecular Weight Determination 

The dry gas molecular weight of ambient air was used in all applicable gas stream 

parameter calculations. 

3.2.4 Moisture Content Determination 

Moisture (water vapor) content of the stack gas was determined according to 

procedures in EPA Method 4 (40 CPR, Part 60 Appendix A-3). Moisture collected in 

the back half of each sampling train was determined gravimetrically from the 

difference between the initial and final weights of all of the impingers. 

3.2.5 Filterable/Condensible/Total Particulate Matter Determination 

Particulate matter was measured according to procedures in EPA Method 5 or 17 in 

Appendix A-3 of 40 CPR, Part 60. Filterable particulate matter was extracted 

isokinetically from the gas stream and collected in sampling train components 

upstream of and on a filter. Filterable particulate matter, which includes any 

material that condenses at or below the filtration temperature, was determined 

gravimetrically after the removal of uncombined water. 316 Stainless steel or glass 

nozzles and glass fiber filters meeting the speCifications in EPA Method 5 were used 

with all sampling trains. All other sample-contact surfaces in the sampling trains 

were borosilicate glass and Teflon®. Probe heaters and heated filter boxes were 

operated at 248 ± 25 OF during sampling to prevent condensation and maintain a 

stable temperature range for collection of filterable particulate matter. A digital 

barometer calibrated against a mercury barometer was used to measure 

atmospheric pressure at the metering console. 

AirSource Technologies, Inc. 10 3203 
3.2.6 Total PM10 Particulate Matter Determination 

Particulate matter greater than an aerodynamic diameter of nominally 10 IJm (PMlO) 

and less than or equal to PM10 was measured according to procedures in EPA 

Method 201A in Appendix M of 40 CFR, Part 51. Condensible particulate matter less 

than or equal to PM10 was measured according to procedures in EPA Method 202 in 

Appendix M of 40 CPR, Part 51. Particulate matter was extracted at a constant rate, 

with variations in isokinetic sampling conditions maintained within well-defined limits, 

from the gas stream through an in-stack sizing device (cyclone), which separated 

particulate matter greater than PMlO and less than or equal to PMlO, and was 

collected in sampling train components upstream and downstream of and on an instack filter. If dissolved sulfur dioxide gas was suspected to have been collected in 

the impingers and the pH of the solution in the first impinger was not above 4.5, the 

impinger portion of the sampling train was purged with nitrogen following the final 

leak check at the end of the test run. Filterable particulate matter greater than PMlO 

and less than or equal to PMlO, which includes any material that condenses at or 

below the filtration temperature and was collected upstream of and on the filter, was 

determined gravimetrically after the removal of uncombined water. CondenSible 

particulate matter less than or equal to PMlO, which includes any material that 

condenses after passing through the filter and was collected downstream of the 

filter, was determined gravimetrically following separation into organic and inorganic 

fractions by extraction with methylene chloride. 316 Stainless steel nozzles, 

cyclones, and in-stack filter holders, and glass fiber filters meeting the specifications 

in EPA Method 17 (in Appendix A-6 of 40 CFR, Part 60) were used with all sampling 

trains. All other sample-contact surfaces in the sampling trains were borosilicate 

glass and Teflon®. Deionized ultra-filtered water was used in the impingers for 

collection of condensible particulate matter. The filterable particulate matter was 

collected at gas stream temperature. Probe heaters were operated at a temperature 

higher than that of the gas stream to prevent condensation during sampling. A 

digital barometer calibrated against a mercury barometer was used to measure 

atmospheric pressure at the metering console. 

3.2.7 Filterable Particulate Matter Sampling in Cyclonic Flow 

Particulate matter was measured according to procedures in EPA Method 5, and 

filterable particulate matter was extracted isokinetically from the gas stream as 

described above. When particulate matter is measured in a gas stream with cyclonic 

or other nonaxial flow patterns, and another sampling location cannot be found or 

flow straightening vanes cannot be installed upstream of the sampling location, 

modified sampling procedures in EPA EmiSSion Measurement Center Guideline 

Document GD-OOSr, revised January, 2003 are used. 

Before and after each test run a velocity traverse with an unobstructed Type S pitot 

tube was conducted to determine the yaw angle of flow at each sampling point. 

Sampling was conducted isokinetically at each sampling point with the unobstructed 

sampling nozzle rotated to point into the gas flow (i.e., parallel to the measured yaw 

angle) and using the velocity head value measured in the direction of flow to 

determine the isokinetic sampling rate. Each measured velocity head was corrected 

to an axial velocity head using the measured yaw angle. The axial velocity heads 

were used in determining the average axial gas stream velocity and volumetric flow 

rate. The average axial gas stream velocity determined from the traverse conducted 

AirSource Technologies, Inc. 11 3203 
before sampling commenced was used for the test run. The sampling run was 

acceptable if the deviation of the average axial gas stream velocity determined after 

sampling from the one determined before sampling did not exceed 10 percent. 

3.2.8 Deviations from Sampling Methods 

There were no deviations from the published sampling methods. 

3.3 ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES 

3.3.1 Analysis for Filterable Particulate Matter 

AirSource Technologies, Inc. performed the gravimetric analysis of the EPA IVlethod 5 

and 17 sampling train front-half acetone rinse and dry fraction (filtered particulate 

matter) samples according to procedures in EPA Method S. All sampling train 

components upstream of the filters were brushed and rinsed with reagent grade 

acetone. Rinse samples were transferred to tared sO-mL beakers, evaporated to 

dryness at room temperature, and desiccated for 24 hours in a desiccator. Filters 

along with any loose material were recovered and returned to their original petri 

dishes that were also placed in a desiccator for 24 hours before weighing. Front-half 

rinse sample beakers and filters in petri dishes were weighed to a constant weight 

(i.e., <0.5 mg change or <1% of total weight less tare weight change, whichever 

was greater) at intervals of six hours or longer. Each front-half rinse sample volume 

was determined from the difference between the weights of the empty sample 

container and the same container with sample divided by the density of acetone for 

blank correction determination. The analysis data are in Appendix D, Analysis Data 

and Reports. 

3.3.2 Analysis for Filterable PM10 Particulate Matter 

AirSource Technologies, Inc. performed the gravimetric analysis of the nozzle, 

cyclone (>PMlO and PMlO fractions) and filter holder front-half acetone rinses and the 

dry fraction (filtered particulate matter) samples according to procedures in EPA 

Method 201A. All nozzles, cyclones, and filter holder front halves were brushed and 

rinsed with reagent grade acetone. Rinse samples were transferred to tared sO-mL 

beakers, evaporated to dryness at room temperature, and desiccated for 24 hours in 

a desiccator. Filters were recovered and placed in their original petri dishes and 

were also placed in a desiccator for 24 hours before weighing. Front-half rinse 

sample beakers and filters in petri dishes were weighed to a constant weight «0.5 

mg or < 1 % of total weight less tare weight change, whichever is greater) at 

intervals of six hours or longer. The front-half rinse sample volumes were 

determined by weighing the sample containers before and after transfer of the 

samples to the evaporation beakers for blank correction determination. 

3.3.3 Analysis for Condensible Particulate Matter 

AirSource Technologies, Inc. performed the analysis of the samples recovered from 

and the methylene chloride rinses of the EPA Methods 5, 17, 201A and 202 sampling 

train back-halves for condensible particulate matter according to procedures in EPA 

Method 202. The pH of the solution in the first impinger of each of the recovered 

sampling trains was greater than 4.5, and therefore, ammonium hydroxide was not 

added to the aqueous (inorganic fraction) samples for ammonium sulfate formation 

3203 AirSource Technologi~ Inc. 12 
following the extractions and evaporation. Methylene chloride extractions were 

performed on the recovered samples to separate the organic and inorganic 

condensible particulate matter fractions. The methylene chloride (organic fraction) 

and aqueous samples were returned to their respective sample containers after 

extraction. Each sample volume was determined from the difference between the 

weights of the empty sample container and the same container with sample divided 

by the density of water or methylene chloride, whichever was applicable, for blank 

correction determination. The volume of gas stream condensate collected in the wet 

impingers of each sampling train was subtracted from the volume of the aqueous 

sample from that train before blank correction determination. The methylene 

chloride extracts were transferred to tared 50-mL beakers and evaporated to 

dryness at room temperature. The aqueous samples were transferred to 600-mL 

beakers and evaporated on a hot plate to about 50 mLs. These aqueous samples 

were then transferred to tared 50-mL beakers and evaporated on a hotplate to neardryness. The residual moisture that remained was evaporated at room temperature. 

All samples were desiccated for 24 hours and weighed to a constant weight (i.e., 

<0.5 mg change or <1% of total weight less tare weight change, whichever was 

greater) at intervals of six hours or longer. The analysis data are in Appendix D, 

Analysis Data and Reports. 

3.3.4 Deviations from Analytical Methods 

There were no deviations from the published analytical methods. 

3203 13 AirSollrce Technologi~ Inc. 
SECTION 4 - QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL 

The QNQC procedures and requirements speCified in the EPA methods and AirSource 

standard operating procedures were used. Those procedures include test equipment 

calibrations and procedural elements of the methods. Examples of those procedural 

elements are test equipment leak checks, proper traversing and placement of sampling 

probes, and verification of the integrity of measurement systems before and after sampling. 

The performance and results of all QNQC procedures were recorded on appropriate forms, 

data sheets, or in computer workbooks as appropriate. 

An assessment of the overall quality of the data generated for this test project was 

conducted. The data assessment included a review of the sample collection and analytical 

data, including calibrations. The data generated for this report are traceable and of known 

and acceptable quality. 

4.1 COMPLETENESS 

The filter for Run 612 at location EP120 (Rail Receiving Dust collector) was lost while 

processing the sample in the field laboratory or during transport to the analytical laboratory. 

The other two runs passed all of the method criteria and demonstrate comparable results. 

All other samples specified in the test plan were collected and analyzed. 

4.2 EMISSIONS SAMPUNG 

Sample extraction during all of the other test runs was within the EPA Method 201A 100 ± 

20% isokinetic sampling criteria (for PMlO) and the EPA Methods 5 and 17 100 ± 10% 

isokinetic sampling criteria (for filterable particulate matter). All of the other sampling and 

particle cut size criteria in EPA Method 201A were satisfied. All of the final sampling train 

leak checks were within method criteria. All test equipment requiring calibration met the 

method criteria for calibrations before and after the testing. 

4.3 ANALYSIS FOR PARTICULATE MATTER 

All of the initial and final balance-check weight values for the filter and beaker weighings 

were within 0.2 mg of each other. All of the initial and final balance-check weight values for 

the field impinger weighings were within 0.2 g of each other. 

AirSource Technologies, Inc. 14 3203 
APPENDIX A 


CALCULATION EQUATIONS 

APPENDIX B 


CALCULATED RESULTS 

Appendix 8-1 


Soybean Receiving 


EP 119 and EP 120 

Appendix B-2 

Soybean Conveying, 

and let Drying 

EP 03, EP 103a, and EP 103b 
APPENDIXC 


FIELD DATA FORMS 

Appendix C-1 


Soybean Receiving 


EP 119 and EP 120 

Appendix C-2 

Soybean Conveying, 

and let Drying 

EP 03, EP l03a, and EP l03b 
Appendix C-7 


Opacity Observation Field Data 


EP 03, EP 101, EP 102, EP 103a, 


EP 103b\ 

Gravimetric Analysis 


Appendix E-l 


Pre-Test Calibrations 

Appendix E-2 


Post-Test Calibrations 

APPENDIX E 


PROCESS DATA