# C ompliance Stack Emission



# T est Repo rt Determination of Total Front-Half Particulate Matter, Hydrogen Chloride, and Hydrogen

Fluoride Emissions Natural Gas Fired Tunnel Kiln A(P001) and Natural Gas Fired Tunnel Kiln B(P002) EPA Methods l, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 26A Glen-Gerp Corporation - Marseilles Facility

Marseiltes, Illinois Dates Conducted: November 8 and 9, 2006 Job Number: 061109



### Prepared by: 

# Air Compliance z 

# ~

Testing, lnc. PO Box 41156 Cieveland OH 44141-0156 Phone: (800) EPA-AIR1 (372-2471) 

### Report Date: December 23, 2006

### SuperiorQuality A'r 

# C®/np,/a/](;e



# Emission Testing. „ p, - n„ p n . r 

# Valid Results 

# Tesfing ' lnC. Guaranteed. ~ P.O. Box 41156 Cleveland, Ohio 44141 1-800-EPA-AIR1 www.aircomp.com 

### . testing@aircomp.com 

### December 23, 2006 Brett Chronister EHS Manager Glen-Gery Corporation 423 South Pottsville Pike 

### Shoemakersville, Pennsylvania 19555 Dear Brett: The following report provides the results of the compliance emission testing conducted on November 8 and 9, 2006. These results are a product of the application of the U.S. EPA Stationary Source Sampling Methods listed in 40 CFR Part 60 Appendix A that were in effect at the time of this test. Please mail one copy of this report along with any other supportive process operating data collected during this test to your local EPA representative. You should also attach a cover letter (on company letterhead) stating the purpose and the outcome of this test. Additionally, you may address, preferably in a timetable format, any obligations or implications that might be necessary to achieve environmental compliance because of the result of this test. Please do not hesitate to call if you have any questions or eoncerns about these test results. On behalf of Air Compliance Testing, I would also like to personally thank you for the opportunity to work with you on this testing project and would enjoy the opportunity to work with you again on any additional future testing projects. Sincerely, 

# L4 Robert J. Lisy, Jr. Quality Assurance Officer

### Compliance Stack Emission Test Report Glen-Gerv Corgoration - Marseilles Facilitv 

# Table of Contents Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION 2 1.1 Summary of Test Program 2 1.2 Key Personnel 2 2.0 SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION OF TEST RESULTS 3 2.1 Objectives and Test Matrix 3 2.2 Field Test Changes and Problems 3 2.3 Presentation of Results 4 3.0 PLANT AND SAMPLING LOCATION DESCRIPTIONS 8 3.1 Process Description and Operation 8 3.2 Control Equipment Description 8 3.3 Flue Gas Sampling Locations 8 3.4 Process Sarnpling Location 9 4.0 SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES 15 4.1 Test Methods 15 4.2 Procedures for Obtaining Process Data 16 5.0 INTERNAL QA/QC ACTIVITIES 19 5.1 QA Audits 19 5.2 QA/QC Problems 19 6.0 APPENDIX 24

Test Date: November 8 and 9, 2006 Page 1 

### Air Compliance Testing, Inc. 

### - 061109Compliance Stack Emission Test Report Glen-Gerv Corporation - Marseilles Facilitv



### 9.9 Summary of Test Pr®gram Glen-Gery Corporation contracted Air Compliarice Testing, Ine. of Cleveland, Ohio to conduct compliance stack emission testing for the Natural Gas Fired Tunnel Kiln A(P001) and Natural Gas Fired Tunnel Kiln B (P002) at their Marseilles Facility (Fac' rlity ID: 099050AAK) located in Marseilles, Illinois. Testing was performed to satisfy Glen-Gery Corporation - Marseilles Facility's emission testing requirements pursuant to the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Brick and Structural Clay Products Manufacturing (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart JJJJJ). The testing was performed on November 8 and 9, 2006. Simultaneous sampling was performed at the P001 Dry Limestone Adsorber (DLA) Inlet Duct and at the

, P001 DLA Exhaust Stack to determine the mass emission rate of hydrogen chloride (HCI) and hydrogen

fluoride (HF). Sampling was also performed at the P001 DLA Exhaust Stack to determine the mass emission rate of total front-half particulate matter (PM). Testing was conducted during maximum production

, operations and predetermined DLA limestone extraction settings. During this test, emissions from P001 were

controlled by a DLA. Simultaneous sampling was performed at the P002 DLA Inlet Duct and at the P002 DLA Exhaust Stack to determine the mass emission rate of HCI and HF. Sampling was also performed at the P002 DLA Exhaust Stack to determine the mass ernission rate of total front-half particulate matter (PM). Testing was conducted during maximum production operations and predetermined DLA limestone extraction settings. During this test, emissions from P002 were controlled by a DLA. The test methods that were conducted at this test were EPA Methods 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 26A. 1.2 Key Personnel The key personnel who coordinated this test program (and their phone numbers) were: Brett Chronister, EHS Manager, Glen-Gery Corporation, 610-562-3076 Philip J. Billick, President, Air Compliance Testing, Inc. 800-372-2471 Sin Hoi Chiew, Project Manager, Air Compliance Testing, Inc. 800-372-2471

Test Date: November 8 and 9, 2006 Page 2 Air Compliance Testing, Inc. - 061109

### Compliance Stack Emission Test Report Glen-Gerv Corporation - Marseilles Facilitv



## 2.1 Objectives and Test Matrix The purpose of this test was to determine the mass emission rate of HCI and HF at the P001 DLA Inlet Duct and the mass emission rate of HCI, HF, and total front-half PM at the P001 DLA Exhaust Stack. The purpose of this test was to also determine the mass emission rate of HCl and HF at the P002 DLA Inlet Duct and the mass emission rate of HCI, HF, and total front-half PM at the P002 DLA Exhaust Stack. AII sampling was conducted during maximum production operations and predetermined DLA lirnestone extraction set[ings. Testing was performed to satisfy Glen-Gery Corporation - Marseilles Facility's emission testing requirements pursuant to the NESHAP for Brick and Structural Clay Products Manufacturing (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart JJJJJ). The specific test objectives for this test were to: 

### Simultaneously measure the concentrations of HCI and HF at the P001 DLA Inlet Duct and the concentrations of HCI, HF, and total front-half PM at the P001 DLA Exhaust Stack during rnaximum production operations and predetermined DLA limestone extraction settings. Simultaneously ineasure the dry standard and actual volumetric flow rate of the stack gas at the P001 DLA Inlet Duct and at the P001 DLA Exhaust Stack during rnaximum production operations and predetermined DLA limestone extraction sett' rngs. Utilize the above variables to determine the mass emission rate of HCI and HF at the P001 DLA Inlet Duct and the mass emission rate of HCI, HF, and total front-half PM at the P001 DLA Exhaust Stack during maximum production operations and predetermined DLA limestone extraction settings. Simultaneously measure the concentrations of HCl and HF at the P002 DLA Inlet Duct and the concentrations of HCI, HF, and total front-half PM at the P002 DLA Exhaust Stack during maximum production operations and predetermined DLA limestone extraction settings. Simultaneously measure the dry standard and actual volumetric flow rate of the stack gas at the P002 DLA Inlet Duct and at the P002 DLA Exhaust Stack during maximum production operations and predetermined DLA limestone extraction settings. Utilize the above variables to determine the mass emission rate of HCI and HF at the P002 DLA Inlet Duct and the mass emission rate of HCI, HF, and total front-half PM at the P002 DLA Exhaust Stack during maximum production operations and predetermined DLA limestone extraction settings. Table 2.1 presents the sampling and analytical matrix log for this test. 2.2 Field Test Changes and Problems No field test changes or problems occurred at the performance of this test that would bias the accuracy of the results of this test.
Test Date: November 8 and 9, 2006 Page 3 

### Air Compliance Testing, Inc. - 061109

### Compliance Stack Emission Test Report Glen-Gerv Cornoration - Marseilles Facilitv



## 2.3 Presentation of Results A single sampling train was utilized at each run at each location to determine the mass emission rate of HCI and HF at the P001 DLA Inlet Duct, the maes emission rate of HCI, HF, and total front-half PM at the P001 DLA Exhaust Stack, the mass emission rate of HCI and HF at the P002 DLA Inlet Duct, and the mass emission rate of HCI, FIF, and total front-half PM at the P002 DLA Exhaust Stack. These sarnpling trains measured the stack gas volumetric flow rate, dry molecular weight, moisture content, and concentrations of HCI, HF, and total front-half PM where applicable. Table 2.2.1 displays the mass emission rate of HCI and HF measured at the P001 DLA Inlet Duct and the mass emission rate of HCI, HF, and total front-half PM measured at the P001 DLA Exhaust Stack during maximum production operations and predetermined DLA limestone extraction settings. Table 2.2.2 displays the mass emission rate of HCl and HF measured at the P002 DLA Inlet Duct and the mass emission rate of HCI, HF, and total front-half PM measured at the P002 DLA Exhaust Stack during maximum production operations and predetermined DLA limestone extraction settings. Note that the concentrations of HF measured at the P001 DLA Exhaust Stack and at the P002 DLA Exhaust Stack were all below the rninimum detection limit (MDL) of applicable analytical method. Mass emission rates denoted with a"<" in Tables 2.2.1 and 2.2.2 were calculated utilizing the applicable MDL concentration value instead of the "as measured" concentration value.

Test Date: November 8 

### and 9, 2006 Page 4 

### Air Compliance Testing, Inc. - 061109o ^ o ' O O O O ' O ' O ' O ' O r W= o o m m m ~ m m ~ m ~ m o \ m d. m o m o m ~ O n W th ~ ~= W O~ T h Q
a E• M o 'n M M q
1

E . ~ dd o; ~ Q F

. `~ 71

- v~ c n w

oo b:


### V U tV U U U V C Q Q Q V] h Vl Q Q Q y V] +n

OZ C z

m

0 m

0 m

0 m

0 m

0 m

0 m

0 m

0 m

0 m

0 m

0 m

0 c+ o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E 

# t= S C
L C V ~
~ ~ K 

# w

~ .~ R

~ Q ~ R
~ G

. 

# ~


# _ ~ e`1 d L 

### F N

N aV V



### u 

## .0 V V V W

O ~ ~
V 

### °o C5 V V M N N ~ 

### v Qa ^ N N N ~ ,- ~ . V ~ ~

O ~ 0~0

. O V O

M O ~ d' O~ 7.•. O O O

~ M N N N o ~ U ^
G '^

~ Qr

~ 

# a ~ O~ 00 ~ M M N 01 ~ N ~ t

M ^ l~ x o o N 06 6

itl N FG

v ~ °-
W

0 ' mc O

U C

` tl a

y

pW ° E W

p 

# ~

k+ 

# o 0

0 . 0`7 

# c

o

O 

# 's
.Y 3

N O

U v O

fQ

d T''> ^

q

A T



### o ~ (]y U 

### ro y 

## H ~ 0

~ ci
~ b) O m F ~ . U G R. 

# U Q

a ° 

## o w « ~ 

### a+ E 

## 3 q N o i d

eV tV E c ~ 

## a s

~ 

### F Q E 

### ~
~ 0 m 

# > P C

~ o 

### « N ~ G ~ o ~ c m 

### A a



### 0
v ° a ~

N ~ ~ FO ~



### u cc

~ V 

### v

r 

# W

o V <t V ~

y P.i

d v
d N N ~ v

~

v
✓ L ~

~ o



### p 4



### O 72 i o ,/"!



### O

o ~ {Iy U r~ Qr O H 

## C 

# a C O 

### . y .~ fxl

~ 

### N N N 

# _d

~ 

# .~ H 1 

## - m a

### Compliance Stack Emission Test Report Glen-Gerv Corporation - Marseilles Facilitv



## 3.0 PLANT AND SAMPLING LOCATION DESCRIPTIONS 3.1 

## Process Description and Operation Glen-Gery Corporation is a lead'rng manufacturer of molded bricks. The Marseilles facility operates Natural Gas Fired Tunnel Kiln A(P001) and Natural Gas Fired Tunnel Kiln B(P002). Each kiln is 496 ft long and has a natural gas firing rate of —32 MMBtu/hr. The kilns can be used interchangeably to produce brick of various sizes and colors made from clay and shale obtained from the same source. P001 and P002 were in operation during the performance of this test. Figure 3.1 depicts the process schematic. 3.2 

## Contro/ Eguipment Description During this test, emissions from P001 and P002 were each controlled by a DLA. 3.3 Flue 

## Gas Sampling Locations 3.3.1 P001 DLA Inlet Duct 

### The POOI DLA Inlet Duct was elliptical in shape with measured inner diameters of 50.5-inches and 49.7- inches. The duct was oriented in the horizontal plane and was accessed from ground. Two (2) 3.5-inch I.D. sarnpling ports were located 90° apart from one another at a location that met EPA Method I, Section 1 I.1.1 criteria. Prior to emissions sampling, the duct was traversed to verify the absence of cyclonic flow. An average yaw angle of 2.63° was measured. Therefore, the sampling location also met EPA Method l, Section 11.4.2 criteria. During emissions sampling, the duct was traversed for stack gas volumetric flow rate, dry molecular weight, moisture content, and HCI and HF concentration determination. 3.3.2 P001 DLA Exhaust Stack 

### The P001 DLA Exhaust Stack had a measured inner diameter of 47.1-inches, was oriented in the vertical plane, and was accessed from a permanent platform. Two (2) 3.7-inch I.D. sampling ports were located 90 0 apart from one another at a location that met EPA Method 1, Section I l.l.l criteria. Prior to emissions sampling, the stack was traversed to verify the absence of cyclonic flow. An average yaw angle of 6.59 0 was measured. Therefore, the sampling location also met EPA Method 1, Section 11.4.2 criteria. During emissions sampling, the stack was traversed for stack gas volumetric flow rate, dry molecular weight, moisture content, and total front-half PM, HCI, and HF concentration determination.

Test Date: November 8 and 9, 2006 Page 8 

### Air 

### Compliance Testing, Inc. - 061109

### Compliance Stack Emission Test Report GIen-Gery Corporation
- Marseilles Facilitv



### 3.3.3 P002 DLA Inlet Duct The P002 DLA Inlet Duct was elliptical in shape with measured inner diameters of 51.3-inches and 52.4- inches. The stack was oriented in 

### the horizonta) plane and was accessed from ground. Two sarnpling ports one with 3.6-inches and other with 3.4-inches were located 90° apart frorn one another at a location that met EPA Method 1, Section I 1.1.1 criteria. Prior to emissions sampling, the duct was traversed to verify the absence of cyclonic flow. An average yaw angle of 3.25° was measured. Therefore, the sampling location also met EPA Method 1, Section 11.4.2 criteria. During emissions sampling, the duct was traversed for stack gas volumetric flow rate, dry molecular weight, moisture content, and HCI and HF concentration determination. 3.3.4 P002 DLA Exhaust Stack The P002 DLA Exhaust Stack was elliptical in shape with measured inner diameters of 47.3-inches and 47.4- inches. The stack was oriented in the vertical plane, and was accessed from a permanent platform. Two (2) 3.7-inch I.D. sampling ports were located 90° apart from one another at a location that met EPA Method 1, Section 11.1.1 criteria. Prior to emissions sampling, the stack was traversed to verify the absence of cyclonic flow. An average yaw angle of 10.67° was measured. Therefore, the sainpling location also met EPA Method 1, Section 11.4.2 criteria. During emissions sampling, the stack was traversed for stack gas volumetric flow rate, dry molecular weight, moisture content, and total front-half PM, HCI, and HF concentration determination. Figures 3.2 - 3.5 schematically illustrate the traverse point and sample port locations utilized. 3.4 Process Sampling Location The EPA Reference Test Methods performed did not specifically require that process samples were to be taken during the performance of this testing event. It is in the best knowledge of Air Compliance Testing that no process samples were obtained and therefore no process sampling location was identified in this report. See Glen-Gery Corporation - Marseilles Facility personnel for any process sainpling locations which may have been utilized unknowingly to Air Compliance Testing, Inc. during this testing event.

Test Date: November 8 and 9, 2006 

### Page 9 

### Air Complfance Testing, Inc. - 061109

### a 

# o s ~

L 0 U a 

# U a ¢

N ~ N d Q ~ m Q o~

U W U' rn ~

c N ~ 

### a m~ V 

### ~ ~ 8 ~ V ~ h 

# u i~

. 

### Pr N O O
~ L ~ H O ^ 1 H 

### M ~n ~ ~ 

### rn

m a n aaaydsow3y <— rn 0
~ 0

~ ` ~ G 

# . N ti 

# U G G 

## m E 0 

### U
~ Q y 

### N O O C V C m U



### ~ ~ rn ¢ d _ 6 ° w E cV y N



### d N a N

¢ C

U N 

### U ~ N U C U 3 N o o.

c0 _O p N c m
c w N ~ ` N

N m ~ 115

~ N z Y

U m O N t ~ ~ O 

# N oi
~ C N W 

### N s 

### E ~ 

### > 0 z
~ 

# m 0
~ ~ ~

### O N ~ 

### (O N

~ ~ 0
~ 0

~ s ~ ~ ~ F~ . U

~ . Q

~ 

### U ¢



### N a 

# T

~ U N A a ~ m 

### ry N E 

### M E O N_ LL p 

### N C o

v E J
~ c 

## E c 0



### y ~ 

### N O C 

# o~
B 

## 9a ° N 

### N p C L N p p O 0 

### 1 0 1 C

a °

E m d ~ ~ 

### ~ c ~ 

### m g a 6 W N p M GI O 

## ° E i N 

### p 50.5" I.


### —~

p

~ U - m I- cr) 6> "r N _ X U

~ 

### Q

~ w C O 

# a

m 0 O

~
~ C N
~ N a E 0 > 0 z ~ 

## m p N N 

### h N t' a °Compliance Stack Emission Test Report Glen-Gerv Corporation - Marseilles Facilitv

1"

98" 2.08 Equivalent Diameters Upstream from Disturbance Port 1


# ~ I (2) 3.7' I.D. Sampling Ports 

# ~ Located 90°Apart



### 787" 16.7 Equivalent Diameters Downstream from Disturbance I Port 2 Point % of Duct Depth Distance From Inside Wall (in.) 

### 1 4.4 2.1 2 14.6 6.9 3 29.6 13.9 4 70.4 33.2 5 85.4 40.2 6 95.6 45.0



# ~ 7.1" I.D. Stack 

## Figure 3.3 - P001 DLA Exhaust Stack Traverse Point Location Drawing

Test Date: November 8 and 9, 2006 Page 12 Afr Compliance Testing, Inc. - 061109l~



## M, - ~ 

### V (n 

# N _ ~ t6 X V l W — 

# T

E m ~ v~ ~ N m 

### m Q o N N W E2 N 0 N ~ E 2 m LL ~ I N

N~ a ° 

## rn m 

## a

~ 

## OQ (oEo C/) J E ~

o •, ~ . LL @ N V ~ O u • ~ O ~' N •y O C 

# O •, C -,,
_N •y O C t d ~ 

### v 0 O 

### e


### c 'o a ~ 0 co 0 

# U ~ ~ C w 

# N
~ V 

# W Q.
~ O 

### V L Q 

### bu ❑

~ 

# 3 L A ~ O

~ b1 .~ 6i O 

# a G

. a P~ 

### v

~
~ ~ L F
~ 

## u ~ A ti 

### G

~ 

### a A O O 

### N a C ~ Q o . ~ cri ~ ~. s bA 

# W 0

0 

## N 07 ~ C N ~ 

## N
~ 

## E ~ > 0 z a~ m 0 N N H y. m ol 

### m a 

# r —'ci'I

~



### r 0 a 

### ~ m C U
~ C m 

### m 3 n o 

### ~ M W N j5 

### °J 

## °'E 0a
~ E LL O M d V uJ

tD h M 6l hCompliance Stack Emission Test Report Glen-Gerv Corporation - Marseilles Facilitv



# L

Port 2 Distance From Distance From % of Duct Depth Inside Wall (in.) Inside Wall (in.) Port 1 Pnrf 2 1 

### 4.4 2.1 2.1 2 14.6 6.9 6.9 3 29.6 14.0 14.0 

### 4 70.4 33.3 33.4 5 85.4 40.4 40.5 6 95.6 45.2 45.3 _47.3" x 47.4" I. D. Eilipticai Stack



## Figure 3.5 - P002 DLA Exhaust Stack Traverse Point Location Drawing —~

101.3" 2.14 Equivalent Diameters Upstream from 

### Disturbance Port 1
(2) 3.7" LD. 

## ~ - t Sampling Ports Located 90°Apart

784.5" 16.55 Equivalent Point Diameters Downstream from Disturbance

Test Date: November 8 and 9, 2006 Page 14 Air Compliance Testing, Inc. - 061109

### Compliance Stack Emission Test Report Glen-Gerv Corporation - Marseilles Facilitv



## 4.0 SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL PR®CEDURES 4.1 Test Methods 4.1.1 EPA Method 1: Sample and Velocity Traverses for Stationary Source Principle: To aid in the representative measurement of pollutant emissions and/or total volumetric flow rate from a stationary source, a measurement site where the effluent stream is flowing in a known direction is selected, and the cross-section of the stack is divided into a number of equal areas. A traverse point is then located within each of these equal areas. This method was utilized in its entirety as per the procedures outlined in 40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A. 4.1.2 EPA Method 2: Determination of Stack Gas Velocity and Volumetric Flow Rate (Type S) Principle: The average gas velocity in a stack is determined from the gas density and from measurement of the average velocity head with a Type S(Stausscheibe or reverse type) pitot tube. This method was utilized in its entirety as per the procedures outlined in 40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A. 4.1.3 EPA Method 3: Gas Analysis for the Determination of Dry Molecular Weight Principle: A gas sample is extracted from a stack by one of the following methods: (1) single-point, grab sampling; (2) single-point, integrated sampling; or (3) multi-point, integrated sampling. The gas sample is analyzed forpercent CO 2 , 

### percent 0 2 , and if necessary, for percent CO. For dry molecular weight determination a Fyrite analyzer will be used for the analysis. This method was utilized in its entirety as per the procedures outlined in 40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A. 4.1.4 EPA Method 4: Determination of Moisture Content in Stack Gases Principle: A gas sample is extracted at a constant rate from the source; moisture is removed from the sample stream and determined either volumetrically or gravimetrically. This method was utilized in its entirety as per the procedures outlined in 40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A. 4.1.5 EPA Method 5: Detennination of Particulate Emissions from Stationary Sources (Front-Half PM only) Principle: Particulate matter (PM) is withdrawn isokinetieally from the source and collected on a glass fiber filter maintained at a temperature in the range of 120 t 14°C (248 f 

### 25°F) or such other temperature as specified by an applicable subpart of the standards or approved by the Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, for a particular application. The PM mass, which includes any material that condenses at or above the filtration temperature, is determined gravimetrically after removal of uncornbined water. This method was utilized in its entirety as per the procedures outlined in 40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A.

Test Date: November 8 and 9, 2006 

### Page 15 

### Air Compliance Testing, Inc. - 061109

### Compliance Stack Emission Test Report Glen-Gerv Corporation - Marseilles Facilitv



### 4.1.6 EPA Method 26A: Determination of Hydrogen Halide and Halogen Emissions from Stationary SourcesIsokinetic Method Principle: This method is applicable for determining emissions of hydrogen halides (HX) [hydrogen chloride (HCI), hydrogen bromide (HBr), and hydrogen fluoride (HF)] and halogens (X 2 ) [ 

### chlorine (Cl Z ) 

### and bromine (Br 2 )] from stationary sources. This method collects the emission sample isokinetically and is therefore particularly suited for sampling at sources, such as those controlled by wet scrubbers, emitting acid particulate matter (e.g., hydrogen halides dissolved in water droplets). This method was utilized for HCI and HF determination as per the procedures outlined in 40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A. The sampling trains utilized during this testing project are depicted in Figure 4.1 and 4.2. 4.2 Procedures for OBtaining Process Data Process data was recorded by Glen-Gery Corporation - Marseilles Facility personnel utilizing their typical record keeping procedures. Recorded process data was provided to Air Compliance Testing, Inc. personnel at the conclusion of this test event. The process data is located in the Appendix.

Test Date: November 8 and 9, 2006 Page 16 

### Air Compliance Testing, lnc. - 061109LU Z



### ui

EL 

### M LU ui LU < CL LU LU Of Cf W W U) 

### Z M LLI 

### M z 0 LU < Z Z 0 UJ 0 Z) Z 0 LU

LU 

### (D Z 

### 0- :E

I

< o ~ U) wz LU EL CO Lu LLJ 

### m LU Lu ~

Co 

### 0 o

rf Lii UQ 

### m
0 U) W O <

CL w t N §

E 0 0
0 "2 

### to ir

Lil► LU 

### 0 w- 0 

### m

0 0 ~ M w LU ui Lu L 0

x

w 1- 

### 0 z

FL M w Lu a. Z w 

### (D D < W EL 

### > 7(

x

bA
ui eo w V) r4

ti
bA

E

0 z LLi LU z ~ 0 M 0~ m w LU ui

F- >< ¢ ~ LLI w



### I Ul C)'* 

## u. 0

of

w w 

### 0 z

### 0) 0 

# ~ o N ' d U H ~ >~ 

# _ = C

~ 

### ° a N 

# ~ W ; ¢ 

# ~ N 

## Q Z U) _ af O ~ > U 

## g¢ Q Q m

~ 

## U Z O > ~ a 1 0



# ~ 

# ? ° W

~ ~ ~~_~ Q _N Z U ~ 

### 9 W O



### . . ~ 

### 0 W V I = - mQQ is 

## Z J m < 0 Y

~ 

## Z o U`o

~ n 

# . '. a ~o ~.~i~...~



# as.v ~ ~ 

# N g ~m~ oo a► 

## F - a rt o a ~ w

~ en 

# = y_a o O c J E ~ ~ ~ G CL

~ Sn q q 

### a w ~ 

### V1 W IW- °W

. cO w N N 

# W u ~ ~ oo

.._..... ` ~~3 - ~.~ 

### ..= E z p m W Q ~ a

y ~~ : ~ o ~ Oma ~ o=N

--- - ~ 

# o °

o W X P ~

~ 

# _ _ w ~ W 

# S ¢ O Q N U a °

~ 

# °m ~ 

# w m w t- Q w U w O ~ 

### a w J z ~ ~~~~~ 

### F w z ~ 

# _ =o n o- O ~ 

# ¢ en O F = O a U y J Z 

### o ~ 

## w < < ~
~ w W CL O 

### ~ 

## ~ I

= - O 

## h ° O ~ 

## W p O ~ E Il ~W ~ 

## ~ wam 

## ~



# wa~ E 

# ... ... c6 O W

~~ Y 

# o Z

E N O N O E-

### Compliance Stack Emission Test Report Glen-Gerv Corporation - Marseilles Facilitv



## 5.0 INTERNAL QA/QC ACTIVITIES 5.1 QA Audits 

### Tables 5.1.1 - 5.2.2 illustrate the QA audit activities that were performed during this test. All meter boxes and sampling trains used during sampling performed within the requirements of their respective methods as is shown in Tables 5.1.1 - 5.2.2. All pre-test and post-test leak checks were well below the applicable limit. Minimum metered volumes and percent isokinetics were also met where applicable. 

## 5.2 QA/QC Problems No QA/QC problems occurred during this test event.

Test Date: November 8 and 9, 2006 Page 19 

### Air Compliance Testing, lnc. - 061109~ 0

~ p

~ s ~ ~ w y ~ d ~ CL ~ 

# U
~ 

### Q O V 0
~ ~ ~ h

A .i O 

# ° a O 

## O ~

o v M N o 

## O

Y OJ b b N iC iC N h ro U N N U ai ~ i V O o 0 

## C ~ 

## a V U

~ VI C oi O N N C C b C <p O U ~



## 'C v

~ Q ~ o ~ c~ i m a ~

ro U Q 

### N

m N a d 

### .4 ~

~ Es

~ ~

~ i
~ .~ 

### b H

~ 

# a 4C~ ~ Q ~ N
~ ~ 0 

### ~ ~ Q Q9 

## W 1 H H
~
~ .G te M C 

## ~ O O 

### O O
V O O N p H N 

### 0 u 

# R A a? 1 y N pp p h O o 

## A p



## O O a 

## M
a O 

## O O p 

## p Ci 

## v ~ 

## " M N
~ 

## " _

~ p

~ ~ ✓ ' 

### O
U U ?:

,p 

### ro U 

### b U 

### b ? A 

### ro o o N o N ?: A ro O Y N b 2y N i3 N N

~ 4Q 

# o O isf Q b ~ 

# m 0 0

~ E
'a 

# b ~

V O i W

v 

# a N U 

# Q

0

~ a

m U CL CL Q

# ~ 0 ~ 0 ~
_ ~ ~ ~ v C 

# F 

# U L Q

~ N m m a N M

~ 0 O o O O O U ~ " M N ^ ✓ " O
~ i 0
o }' 0 

# u 0 

### Ca 

# G

Q 

# o o cO 0 

# 0

0 0 P.

O

O
U U ro 'O '6 ro N N ro



### E E 

# c v~ rn 

# O a O 

# 4 -C 

# Q

~ 

# Q E
'CY 

# o o
N 

# 0 •=

o ~ ~ m

U Q p
O V O

0
~ ~ C-0 

## m 0 0

V 

# A

~ 

# 0 0 P.
.-i 0

0 0 N

~ 0

O O

U U ro b p ro ro 

## C a a~


## a a~ o 

## u ny 

## u a~ ro ro v



### E"i > N C7 C7 U U 

## ~ 

## a

~ 

## p Q w 0 o

'CS

a C i 

## x

0

N 

## x 0

O
~ Q ~ o ~ v ~

ro U Qd ~

~ a F
~ .^S d ~

~ ~ 

### ~ ~ ~ 

## C5 

# A ~ N

~ .~

Qi 

### W H tV ~ ~ ~ CC F ~ 0

~ 

### 0

~
, ~ ~ H ~ d ~ ~ ~ a ~ 0 

# U

•~ 

### Q

N N 

# a

m 

### 0 

### N oi ~ C N W N a E 

### N > O Z 

### U1 m ~ N 

### N H 

### u a

~ N 

# u N

~ 

# u @

~ 

## O u .0 d L N f N 

### o R y u •° O

v' - ca 

# o y @ ~ 

### V d 

## A y

Y 

## y L ~

L ~ A Q 

### d U 

## ro o 

# F w v d d v 

### a

~ N ~ 

### ~ u U d

~ 

# o u o ~ w 4 n \ G
- K

~ 

# d ^

d u e~+ ~ 

## k a•->w ; ~ 

## g ° > 

# A o uU"

w u"' u ry • ~ + F 0 0 

## a y x 

# u y y F t O ~ G
~ u R •+-+ R ~ L ~ ~ 

### A 

# C U
c N O o ~ y

~ a L 

# U u W rn F d 

# o d ~~ 0

~ 0

~ s ~ C y ~ v ~ 

### C 

# m 

# E 0 U

~ Q Y
~ ~ H h

~ y ~ 

### W 'b O @ s~ 

### . ~ ~ ~
V

F~ 

# N

~ 

## ( "C9 O ~

~ 

# a W N 

## N v~ v ~ ~ H M N m 

### a d s 

## u ~ 

## u Q~

~ 

## o u O C

~ w 

### w o 

### ay 

### o 0 

# co a_ @ ~ 

# U A W p Or C



# U W POr a ~ 

## Q F

ra +j y L ~ «~ U O ~ 

## y M C

~ 

# U

~ 

## a o 

# d U ~ Y L u 

### m a ~ y V 

## v ~ u @
'O V O C S ~ N w
~ 4 a> A e 

### o e 

### 0 p y ~ a ~ 

# n' o w @ d

~

~ 

### A• 

## w

U o a y+ u + U y y 

## O A O y L d



# d U i L d 

### > A R 

### d U c"a o U 

### ~ A • R ~ ~ ~ 

# E w o uCompliance Stack Emission Test Report Glen-Gerv Corporation - Marseilies Pacilitv

1 

## V340 ; . Appendix attached.

Test Date: November 8 and 9, 2006 Page 24 Air Compliance Testing, Inc. - 061109

# /_1»=1ilk171:1 to Compliance Stack Emission Test Report 

# Determination of Total Front-Half Particulate Matter, Hydrogen Chloride, and Hydrogen Fluoride Emissions Natural Gas Fired Tunnel Kiln A(P001) and Natural Gas Fired Tunnel Kiln B(P002) EPA Methods 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 26A Glen-Gerv Corporation - Marseilles Facilitv

Marseilles, Illinois Date Conducted: November 8 and 9, 2006 Job Number: 061109

Prepared by: 

## Air Compliance Testing, Inc.

PO Bo% 41156 

### Cleveland OH 44141-0156 

### Phone: (800) EPA-AIRt (372-2471) 

### Report Date: December 23, 2006

### Kiln Throughput Calculations Marseilles Emissions Testing November 8 and 9, 2006 Kiln Operating Parameters Kiln I Push Interval 

## = 25 Min. Kiln 2 Push Interval 

## = 24 Min. Weight of 1 brick 

## = 3.7 Ibs. 

## # Bricks per Car 

## = 10080 Bricks 

## # Bricks Per Push 

## = 3360 Bricks (1/3 of Car) Kiln 1 Throughput Calculation 3360 Bricks 3.71bs. 1 Ton 60 Min.

-------------- 

## *

----------- 

## *

----------- 

## *

----------- 

## = 14.92 Tons of Brick per Hour 25 Min. Brick 20001bs. 1 Hour Kiln 2 Throughput Calculation 3360 Bricks 3.7 lbs. 1 Ton 60 Min.

-------------- 

## *

----------- 

## *

----------- 

## *

----------- 

## — 15.54 Tons of Brick per Hour 24 Min. Brick 2000 Ibs. I Hour