2001_0813_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Emission Test Report EMC WA-2-08 Section 4 r.. Revision: 0 Date: September 30.1999 Page 6 of 9 conditioner for moisture removal. Conditioned sample passes through an unheated Teflon sample line to a gas sampling and distribution manifold system. The system contains a pump for distributing sample to the analyzers. The SO, analyzer used was a Western Research Model 721AT photometric instrument using a nondispersive ultraviolet analyzer operating on the principle of differential absorption. The NO, analyzer systems used was a Thermo Electron Model JOAR chemiluminescent NO/NO, analyzer with associated vacuum and bypass pumps. The CO F analyzer used was a Thermo Electron Model 48 gas filter correlation instrument using a nondispersive infrared analyzer with gas filter correlation. The CO, analyzer used was a Horiba Model PIR-2000 NDIR instrument. The 0, analyzer used was a Teledyne Model 320A chemical cell instrument. A Campbell Scientific Model CRIOWP multi-channels stem operating at a rate of p Y p g 60 Hz was used for data acquisition with data storage at 1-minute average values. All operating, calibration, and QC procedures and QC performance criteria specified W� in the methods were used. CO analyzers were operated in accordance with applicable procedures specified in Methods 6C and 10. Calibration of the CO analyzers was conducted with the zero and the high level gases, and two mid-level gases were used during the calibration error test. At the beginning of each test day, the NO„ SO„ 02, and CO, monitors on the sampling system were zeroed using zero nitrogen, and spanned using a certified calibration gas with f a concentration of 80% to 100% of the instrument span. Following calibration, a mid- range gas (40% to 60% of the instrument span) was introduced into each monitor. The mid-range response did not exceed 2% of the instrument span, as required by EPA 4 reference Method 6C. `. The CO monitor was zeroed using zero nitrogen and spanned using a known concentration of CO in nitrogen. Following calibration, the CO monitor was challenged ? with two additional gas concentrations corresponding to approximately 60% and 30% of instrument span. All calibration gases were EPA Protocol 1 certified. After calibrating the SO„ NO„ 0„ and CO, monitors, calibration gas was introduced remotely through the probe to verify the absence of sampling system bias. The bias error did not did not exceed 5% of the instrument span, as required by EPA Method 6C. N After each test run, zero nitrogen and either a mid- or high-range calibration gas were introduced remotely through the sampling train system to each monitor to check for calibration drift error. In accordance with Method 6C, the calibration drift did not exceed 3% of the instrument span for all valid test runs. NMAEMOS 1-0"3 S4.wpd ,°