DAQ-2024-011469

1

DAQC-1101-24
Site ID 10354 (B4)
MEMORANDUM

TO: STACK TEST FILE – UNIVERSITY OF UTAH

THROUGH: Harold Burge, Major Source Compliance Section Manager

FROM: Robert Sirrine, Environmental Scientist

DATE: October 28, 2024

SUBJECT: Location: High Temp Water Plant, Building 303, Salt Lake City, Utah
Contact: Bryan Cracroft – 801-585-1617
Tester: Alliance Technical Group, Ryan Lyons – 708-214-4850
Source: Boilers 6, 7, and 9, Solar Taurus 70 CoGen & Waste Heat Recovery Unit
FRS ID #: UT0000004903500063
Permit# Title V operating permit 3500063004 dated August 25, 2023
Subject: Review of Pretest Protocol received October 22, 2024
On October 22, 2024, the Utah Division of Air Quality (DAQ) received, via email, a pretest protocol for
the Hot Water Plant – Building 303 Boilers 6, 7, and 9, Solar Taurus 70 CoGen & Waste Heat Recovery
Unit. All are located at the University of Utah Campus in Salt Lake City, Utah. The testing will be
performed on January 14-15, 2025, to determine compliance with Title V Permit Conditions II.B.3.a,
II.B.4.a, for NOX and CO emissions.

PROTOCOL CONDITIONS:

1. RM 1 used to determine sample velocity traverses: OK
2. RM 2 used to determine stack gas velocity and volumetric flow rate: OK
3. RM 3A used to determine dry molecular weight of the gas stream: OK
4. RM 7E used to determine NOX concentrations of emissions: OK
5. RM 19 used to determine stack gas moisture and volumetric flow rate: OK
6. ASTM D6522 used to measure the concentrations of NOX and O2 in emissions from
natural gas-fired sources utilizing portable analyzers to collect the data: OK

DEVIATIONS: No deviations were noted.
CONCLUSION: The protocol appears to be acceptable. Boilers 6, 7, and 9 are required to have
an EPA RM 7 test every three years and a portable analyzer test for years 2-3.
The most recent EPA RM 7 test was performed in January 2024, and reviewed
in memo DAQC-201-24.

RECOMMENDATION: Send protocol review and test date confirmation notice.

ATTACHMENT: Pretest protocol received October 22, 2024

Site Specific Test Plan

University of Utah
200 S. University Avenue
Salt Lake City, UT 84112
Sources to be Tested: Building 303 – One (1) Solar Taurus 70 CoGen, One (1) Rentech Waste Heat Recovery Unit, One (1) Gen 9 Boiler & Two (2) NSPS Boilers Proposed Test Dates: January 14 – 15, 2025
Project No. AST-2025-0031

Prepared By Alliance Technical Group, LLC
3683 W 2270 S, Suite E
West Valley City, UT 84120

Site Specific Test Plan
Test Program Summary

AST-2025-0031 University of Utah – Salt Lake City, UT Page i
Regulatory Information

Permit Nos. Utah Department of Environmental Quality (UDEQ) Title V Permit No.
3500063004
DAQE-AN103540028-20
Regulatory Citation 40 CFR 60, Subpart KKKK

Source Information

Source Name Source ID Target Parameters Solar Taurus 70 CoGen Bldg. 303 - Unit 1 NOx & CO Rentech Waste Heat Recovery Bldg. 303 - Unit 1 NOx & CO Gen 9 Boiler LCHTWP Boiler 9 NOx Two (2) NSPS Boilers Units 6 & 7 NOx Contact Information

Test Location Test Company
University of Utah
200 S. University Avenue
Salt Lake City, UT 84112

Facility Contacts
Bryan Cracroft
[e-mail]
[phone]

David Quinlivan
[e-mail]
[phone]
Alliance Technical Group, LLC
3683 W 2270 S, Suite E
West Valley City, UT 84120

Project Manager
Charles Horton [e-mail] [phone] Field Team Leader Ryan Lyons [e-mail] [phone] QA/QC Manager Kathleen Shonk [e-mail] [phone]

Test Plan/Report Coordinator
Delaine Spangler [e-mail]

Site Specific Test Plan
Table of Contents

AST-2025-0031 University of Utah – Salt Lake City, UT Page ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. 1-1
1.1 Process/Control System Descriptions ...................................................................................................... 1-1
1.2 Project Team ............................................................................................................................................ 1-1
1.3 Safety Requirements ................................................................................................................................ 1-1
2.0 Summary of Test Program .......................................................................................................................... 2-1
2.1 General Description ................................................................................................................................. 2-1
2.2 Process/Control System Parameters to be Monitored and Recorded ....................................................... 2-1
2.3 Proposed Test Schedule ........................................................................................................................... 2-1
2.4 Emission Limits ....................................................................................................................................... 2-3
2.5 Test Report ............................................................................................................................................... 2-3
3.0 Testing Methodology .................................................................................................................................. 3-1
3.1 U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 3A – Oxygen ..................................................................................... 3-1
3.2 U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 7E – Nitrogen Oxides ........................................................................ 3-1
3.3 U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 10 – Carbon Monoxide ...................................................................... 3-1
3.4 U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 19 – Volumetric Flow Rate ............................................................... 3-2
3.5 U.S. EPA Reference Test Method ASTM D6522 – Nitrogen Oxides & Oxygen .................................... 3-2
3.6 U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 205 – Gas Dilution System Certification ........................................... 3-2
3.7 Quality Assurance/Quality Control – U.S. EPA Reference Test Methods 3A, 7E and 10 ....................... 3-2
4.0 Quality Assurance Program ......................................................................................................................... 4-1
4.1 Equipment ................................................................................................................................................ 4-1
4.2 Field Sampling ......................................................................................................................................... 4-2
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1-1: Project Team ........................................................................................................................................... 1-1
Table 2-1: Program Outline and Tentative Test Schedule ........................................................................................ 2-2
Table 2-2: Emission Limits ...................................................................................................................................... 2-3
Table 3-1: Source Testing Methodology .................................................................................................................. 3-1
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A Method 1 Data
Appendix B Example Field Data Sheets
Appendix C Sample Train Diagrams

Site Specific Test Plan
Introduction

AST-2025-0031 University of Utah – Salt Lake City, UT Page 1-1
1.0 Introduction
Alliance Technical Group, LLC (Alliance) was retained by University of Utah to conduct compliance testing at the
Salt Lake City, Utah facility. Portions of the facility are subject to 40 CFR 60, Subparts Dc and KKKK. The
facility operates under Utah Department of Environmental Quality (UDEQ) Title V Permit No. 3500063004.
Testing will be conducted to determine the emission rates of nitrogen oxides (NOx) and carbon monoxide (CO) at
the exhausts of one (1) Solar Taurus 70 CoGen and one (1) Rentech Waste Heat Recovery Unit. Testing will also
include determining the emission rate of NOx at the exhaust of the two (2) NSPS Boilers (Unit 6 and 7) and Gen 9
Boiler.

This site-specific test plan (SSTP) has been prepared to address the notification and testing requirements of the
UDAQ permit.

Note: In previous years, Alliance measured volumetric flow rate and moisture content for the emission rate
calculations. Alliance would like to request to use emission factors (in lb/MMBtu) and the firing rate (in
MMBtu/hr) to calculate emission rates in lb/hr.
1.1 Process/Control System Descriptions
The High Temperature Water (HTW) Plant 303 produces electricity and heating water. The plant provides
electricity, heating water, and steam to multiple building on Campus.

One (1) natural gas fired Solar Taurus 70 T7800S (Solar's SoLoNox TM) turbine with one WHRU with duct burner
rated at 85 MMBtu/hr are operated at the HTW Plant 303. Natural gas turbine is site rated at 7.23 MW with heat
input of 72.78 MMBtu/hr. Gas turbine and duct burner are Subject to NSPS, 40 CFR, Part 60, Subpart KKKK.

The Superior boiler is a 72 MMBtu/hr boiler designed to burn natural gas only. It is located at the Central HTW
Plant, Building 303 on the Salt Lake City Campus
1.2 Project Team
Personnel planned to be involved in this project are identified in the following table.
Table 1-1: Project Team
University of Utah Personnel Bryan Cracroft
Regulatory Agency UDAQ
Alliance Personnel Ryan Lyons
other field personnel assigned at time of testing event
1.3 Safety Requirements
Testing personnel will undergo site-specific safety training for all applicable areas upon arrival at the site. Alliance
personnel will have current OSHA or MSHA safety training and be equipped with hard hats, safety glasses with side
shields, steel-toed safety shoes, hearing protection, fire resistant clothing, and fall protection (including shock
corded lanyards and full-body harnesses). Alliance personnel will conduct themselves in a manner consistent with
Client and Alliance’s safety policies.

Site Specific Test Plan
Introduction

AST-2025-0031 University of Utah – Salt Lake City, UT Page 1-2
A Job Safety Analysis (JSA) will be completed daily by the Alliance Field Team Leader.

Site Specific Test Plan
Summary of Test Programs

AST-2025-0031 University of Utah – Salt Lake City, UT Page 2-1
2.0 Summary of Test Program
To satisfy the requirements of the UDAQ permit, the facility will conduct a performance test program to determine
the compliance status of one (1) Solar Taurus 70 CoGen, one (1) Rentech Waste Heat Recovery Unit, two (2) NSPS
Boilers (Unit 6 & 7) and Gen 9 Boiler.
2.1 General Description
All testing will be performed in accordance with specifications stipulated in U.S. EPA Reference Test Methods 3A,
7E, 10, 19, and ASTM D6522-20. Table 2-1 presents an outline and tentative schedule for the emissions testing
program. The following is a summary of the test objectives.

• Testing will be performed to demonstrate compliance with the UDEQ Title V Permit No. 3500063003 and
40 CFR 60, Subpart and KKKK.
• Emissions testing will be conducted on the exhausts of one (1) Solar Taurus 70 CoGen, one (1) Rentech
Waste Heat Recovery Unit, two (2) NSPS Boilers (Unit 6 and 7) and Gen 9 Boiler.
• Performance testing will be conducted with the turbine and boilers operating at >90% of the maximum
rated capacity or the highest achievable load, at the current site conditions.
• Each of the three (3) test runs for methods 3A, 4, 7E and 19 will be approximately 60 minutes in duration
for each source.
• For the boilers, screening with a portable analyzer will be performed in accordance with the portable
manufacturer's specifications. The one (1) test run for ASTM D6522-20 for boiler testing will be 5 minutes
in duration.
2.2 Process/Control System Parameters to be Monitored and Recorded
Plant personnel will collect operational and parametric data at least once every 15 minutes during the testing. The
following list identifies the measurements, observations and records that will be collected during the testing
program:

• Turbine load – MW, MMBtu/hr
• WHRU Duct Burner load – MMBtu/hr
• Natural gas flow rate – scfh
• Boiler load – MMBtu/hr
2.3 Proposed Test Schedule
Table 2-1 presents an outline and tentative schedule for the emissions testing program.

Site Specific Test Plan
Summary of Test Programs

AST-2025-0031 University of Utah – Salt Lake City, UT Page 2-2
Table 2-1: Program Outline and Tentative Test Schedule

Testing Location Parameter US EPA Method No. of Runs Run Duration Est. Onsite Time
DAY 1 – January 13, 2025
Equipment Setup & Pretest QA/QC Checks
10 hr Unit 1 – Turbine
Only
O2 3A
3 60 min NOx 7E
CO 10
VFR 19
DAY 2 – January 14, 2025
Unit 1 – Turbine/WHRU Duct Burner
O2 3A
3 60 min 10 hr NOx 7E
CO 10
VFR 19
DAY 3 – January 15, 2025
NSPS Boilers (Units 6 & 7) NOx / O2 ASTM D6522-20 1 5 min (per source)
10 hr
Gen 9 Boiler NOx / O2 ASTM D6522-20 1 5 min
DAY 4 – January 16, 2025
Contingency Day (if needed)

Site Specific Test Plan
Summary of Test Programs

AST-2025-0031 University of Utah – Salt Lake City, UT Page 2-3
2.4 Emission Limits
Emission limits for each pollutant are below. Table 2-2: Emission Limits

Source Condition Pollutant / Limit Permit Condition
Unit 1
Turbine Only NOx – 2.65 lb/hr, 9 ppmvd @ 15% O2 Condition II.B.4.a.A
Turbine w/ WHRU Duct Burner NOx – 8.97 lb/hr, 15 ppmvd @ 15% O2 Condition II.B.4.a.C
Turbine Only CO – 4.48 lb/hr, 25 ppmvd @ 15% O2 Condition II.B.4.a.B
Turbine w/ WHRU Duct
Burner
CO – 10.84 lb/hr, 30 ppmvd @ 15% O2 Condition II.B.4.a.D
Unit 6 & 7 -- NOx – 0.54 lb/hr, 9 ppmvd @ 3% O2 Condition II.B.3.a
Gen 9 Boiler -- NOx – 0.79 lb/hr, 9.0 ppmvd @ 3% O2 Condition II.B.3.a
2.5 Test Report
The final test report must be submitted within 60 days of the completion of the performance test and will include the
following information.
• Introduction – Brief discussion of project scope of work and activities.
• Results and Discussion – A summary of test results and process/control system operational data with
comparison to regulatory requirements or vendor guarantees along with a description of process conditions
and/or testing deviations that may have affected the testing results.
• Methodology – A description of the sampling and analytical methodologies.
• Sample Calculations – Example calculations for each target parameter.
• Field Data – Copies of actual handwritten or electronic field data sheets.
• Quality Control Data – Copies of all instrument calibration data and/or calibration gas certificates.
• Process Operating/Control System Data – Process operating and control system data (as provided by
University of Utah) to support the test results.

Site Specific Test Plan
Testing Methodology

AST-2025-0031 University of Utah – Salt Lake City, UT Page 3-1
3.0 Testing Methodology
This section provides a description of the sampling and analytical procedures for each test method that will be
employed during the test program. All equipment, procedures and quality assurance measures necessary for the
completion of the test program meet or exceed the specifications of each relevant test method. The emission testing
program will be conducted in accordance with the test methods listed in Table 3-1.

Table 3-1: Source Testing Methodology

Parameter U.S. EPA Reference Test Methods Notes/Remarks
Oxygen 3A Instrumental Analysis
Nitrogen Oxides 7E Instrumental Analysis
Carbon Monoxide 10 Instrumental Analysis
Volumetric Flow Rate 19 Fuel Factors/Heat Inputs
Nitrogen Oxides & Oxygen ASTM D6522 Instrumental Analysis
Gas Dilution System Certification 205 --

All stack diameters, depths, widths, upstream and downstream disturbance distances and nipple lengths will be
measured on site with a verification measurement provided by the Field Team Leader.
3.1 U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 3A – Oxygen
The oxygen (O2) testing will be conducted in accordance with U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 3A. Data will be
collected online and reported in one-minute averages. The sampling system will consist of a stainless-steel probe,
Teflon sample line(s), gas conditioning system and the identified gas analyzer. The gas conditioning system will be
a non-contact condenser used to remove moisture from the stack gas. If an unheated Teflon sample line is used,
then a portable non-contact condenser will be placed in the system directly after the probe. Otherwise, a heated
Teflon sample line will be used. The quality control measures are described in Section 3.7.
3.2 U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 7E – Nitrogen Oxides
The nitrogen oxides (NOx) testing will be conducted in accordance with U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 7E. Data
will be collected online and reported in one-minute averages. The sampling system will consist of a stainless-steel
probe, Teflon sample line(s), gas conditioning system and the identified gas analyzer. The gas conditioning system
will be a non-contact condenser used to remove moisture from the stack gas. If an unheated Teflon sample line is
used, then a portable non-contact condenser will be placed in the system directly after the probe. Otherwise, a
heated Teflon sample line will be used. The quality control measures are described in Section 3.7.
3.3 U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 10 – Carbon Monoxide
The carbon monoxide (CO) testing will be conducted in accordance with U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 10.
Data will be collected online and reported in one-minute averages. The sampling system will consist of a stainless-
steel probe, Teflon sample line(s), gas conditioning system, and the identified gas analyzer. The gas conditioning
system will be a non-contact condenser used to remove moisture from the gas. If an unheated Teflon sample line is
used, then a portable non-contact condenser will be placed in the system directly after the probe. Otherwise, a
heated Teflon sample line will be used. The quality control measures are described in Section 3.7.

Site Specific Test Plan
Testing Methodology

AST-2025-0031 University of Utah – Salt Lake City, UT Page 3-2
3.4 U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 19 – Volumetric Flow Rate
The gas volumetric flow rate will be determined in accordance with U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 19 using the
measured oxygen concentration, the published fuel factor, a calibrated gas meter and the fuel heating value.
3.5 U.S. EPA Reference Test Method ASTM D6522 – Nitrogen Oxides & Oxygen
The oxygen and nitrogen oxides concentrations will be determined in accordance with American Society of Testing
and Materials (ASTM) Test Method 6522-20. Data will be collected online and reported in one-minute averages.
The sampling system will consist of a stainless-steel probe, heated Teflon sample line(s), gas conditioning system
and Testo Model 350 handheld analyzer. The gas conditioning system will use a non-contact condenser to remove
moisture from the stack gas.
3.6 U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 205 – Gas Dilution System Certification
A calibration gas dilution system field check will be conducted in accordance with U.S. EPA Reference Method
205. Multiple dilution rates and total gas flow rates will be utilized to force the dilution system to perform two
dilutions on each mass flow controller. The diluted calibration gases will be sent directly to the analyzer, and the
analyzer response recorded in an electronic field data sheet. The analyzer response must agree within 2% of the
actual diluted gas concentration. A second Protocol 1 calibration gas, with a cylinder concentration within 10% of
one of the gas divider settings described above, will be introduced directly to the analyzer, and the analyzer response
recorded in an electronic field data sheet. The cylinder concentration and the analyzer response must agree within
2%. These steps will be repeated three (3) times.
3.7 Quality Assurance/Quality Control – U.S. EPA Reference Test Methods 3A, 7E and 10
Cylinder calibration gases will meet EPA Protocol 1 (+/- 2%) standards. Copies of all calibration gas certificates
will be included in the Quality Assurance/Quality Control Appendix of the report.

Low Level gas will be introduced directly to the analyzer. After adjusting the analyzer to the Low Level gas
concentration and once the analyzer reading is stable, the analyzer value will be recorded. This process will be
repeated for the High Level gas. For the Calibration Error Test, Low, Mid, and High Level calibration gases will be
sequentially introduced directly to the analyzer. The Calibration Error for each gas must be within 2.0 percent of the
Calibration Span or 0.5 ppmv/% absolute difference.

High or Mid Level gas (whichever is closer to the stack gas concentration) will be introduced at the probe and the
time required for the analyzer reading to reach 95 percent or 0.5 ppm/% (whichever was less restrictive) of the gas
concentration will be recorded. The analyzer reading will be observed until it reaches a stable value, and this value
will be recorded. Next, Low Level gas will be introduced at the probe and the time required for the analyzer reading
to decrease to a value within 5.0 percent or 0.5 ppm/% (whichever was less restrictive) will be recorded. If the Low
Level gas is zero gas, the acceptable response must be 5.0 percent of the upscale gas concentration or 0.5 ppm/%
(whichever was less restrictive). The analyzer reading will be observed until it reaches a stable value and this value
will be recorded. The measurement system response time and initial system bias will be determined from these data.
The System Bias for each gas must be within 5.0 percent of the Calibration Span or 0.5 ppmv/% absolute difference.

High or Mid Level gas (whichever is closer to the stack gas concentration) will be introduced at the probe. After the
analyzer response is stable, the value will be recorded. Next, Low Level gas will be introduced at the probe, and the
analyzer value will be recorded once it reaches a stable response. The System Bias for each gas must be within 5.0

Site Specific Test Plan
Testing Methodology

AST-2025-0031 University of Utah – Salt Lake City, UT Page 3-3
percent of the Calibration Span or 0.5 ppmv/% absolute difference or the data is invalidated and the Calibration
Error Test and System Bias must be repeated.

The Drift between pre- and post-run System Bias must be within 3 percent of the Calibration Span or 0.5 ppmv/%
absolute difference or the Calibration Error Test and System Bias must be repeated.

To determine the number of sampling points, a gas stratification check will be conducted prior to initiating testing.
The pollutant concentrations will be measured at twelve traverse points (as described in Method 1) or three points
(16.7, 50.0 and 83.3 percent of the measurement line). Each traverse point will be sampled for a minimum of twice
the system response time.

If the pollutant concentration at each traverse point do not differ more than 5% or 0.5 ppm/0.3% (whichever is less
restrictive) of the average pollutant concentration, then single point sampling will be conducted during the test runs.
If the pollutant concentration does not meet these specifications but differs less than 10% or 1.0 ppm/0.5% from the
average concentration, then three (3) point sampling will be conducted (stacks less than 7.8 feet in diameter - 16.7,
50.0 and 83.3 percent of the measurement line; stacks greater than 7.8 feet in diameter – 0.4, 1.0, and 2.0 meters
from the stack wall). If the pollutant concentration differs by more than 10% or 1.0 ppm/0.5% from the average
concentration, then sampling will be conducted at a minimum of twelve (12) traverse points. Copies of stratification
check data will be included in the Quality Assurance/Quality Control Appendix of the report.

An NO2 – NO converter check will be performed on the analyzer prior to initiating testing or at the completion of
testing. An approximately 50 ppm nitrogen dioxide cylinder gas will be introduced directly to the NOx analyzer and
the instrument response will be recorded in an electronic data sheet. The instrument response must be within +/- 10
percent of the cylinder concentration.

A Data Acquisition System with battery backup will be used to record the instrument response in one (1) minute
averages. The data will be continuously stored as a *.CSV file in Excel format on the hard drive of a computer. At
the completion of testing, the data will also be saved to the Alliance server. All data will be reviewed by the Field
Team Leader before leaving the facility. Once arriving at Alliance’s office, all written and electronic data will be
relinquished to the report coordinator and then a final review will be performed by the Project Manager.

Site Specific Test Plan
Quality Assurance Program

AST-2025-0031 University of Utah – Salt Lake City, UT Page 4-1
4.0 Quality Assurance Program
Alliance follows the procedures outlined in the Quality Assurance/Quality Control Management Plan to ensure the
continuous production of useful and valid data throughout the course of this test program. The QC checks and
procedures described in this section represent an integral part of the overall sampling and analytical scheme.
Adherence to prescribed procedures is quite often the most applicable QC check.
4.1 Equipment
Field test equipment is assigned a unique, permanent identification number. Prior to mobilizing for the test
program, equipment is inspected before being packed to detect equipment problems prior to arriving on site. This
minimizes lost time on the job site due to equipment failure. Occasional equipment failure in the field is
unavoidable despite the most rigorous inspection and maintenance procedures. Therefore, replacements for critical
equipment or components are brought to the job site. Equipment returning from the field is inspected before it is
returned to storage. During the course of these inspections, items are cleaned, repaired, reconditioned and
recalibrated where necessary.

Calibrations are conducted in a manner, and at a frequency, which meets or exceeds U.S. EPA specifications. The
calibration procedures outlined in the U.S. EPA Methods, and those recommended within the Quality Assurance
Handbook for Air Pollution Measurement Systems: Volume III (EPA-600/R-94/038c, September 1994) are utilized.
When these methods are inapplicable, methods such as those prescribed by the American Society for Testing and
Materials (ASTM) or other nationally recognized agency may be used. Data obtained during calibrations is checked
for completeness and accuracy. Copies of calibration forms are included in the report.

The following sections elaborate on the calibration procedures followed by Alliance for these items of equipment.

• Dry Gas Meter and Orifice. A full meter calibration using critical orifices as the calibration standard is
conducted at least semi-annually, more frequently if required. The meter calibration procedure determines
the meter correction factor (Y) and the meter’s orifice pressure differential (ΔH@). Alliance uses approved
Alternative Method 009 as a post-test calibration check to ensure that the correction factor has not changed
more than 5% since the last full meter calibration. This check is performed after each test series.
• Pitot Tubes and Manometers. Type-S pitot tubes that meet the geometric criteria required by U.S. EPA
Reference Test Method 2 are assigned a coefficient of 0.84 unless a specific coefficient has been
determined from a wind tunnel calibration. If a specific coefficient from a wind tunnel calibration has been
obtained that coefficient will be used in lieu of 0.84. Standard pitot tubes that meet the geometric criteria
required by U.S. EPA Reference Test Method 2 are assigned a coefficient of 0.99. Any pitot tubes not
meeting the appropriate geometric criteria are discarded and replaced. Manometers are verified to be level
and zeroed prior to each test run and do not require further calibration.
• Temperature Measuring Devices. All thermocouple sensors mounted in Dry Gas Meter Consoles are
calibrated semi-annually with a NIST-traceable thermocouple calibrator (temperature simulator) and
verified during field use using a second NIST-traceable meter. NIST-traceable thermocouple calibrators
are calibrated annually by an outside laboratory.
• Digital Calipers. Calipers are calibrated annually by Alliance by using gage blocks that are calibrated
annually by an outside laboratory.
• Barometer. The barometric pressure is obtained from a nationally recognized agency or a calibrated
barometer. Calibrated barometers are checked prior to each field trip against a mercury barometer. The

Site Specific Test Plan
Quality Assurance Program

AST-2025-0031 University of Utah – Salt Lake City, UT Page 4-2
barometer is acceptable if the values agree within ± 2 percent absolute. Barometers not meeting this
requirement are adjusted or taken out of service.
• Balances and Weights. Balances are calibrated annually by an outside laboratory. A functional check is
conducted on the balance each day it is use in the field using a calibration weight. Weights are re-certified
every two (2) years by an outside laboratory or internally. If conducted internally, they are weighed on a
NIST traceable balance. If the weight does not meet the expected criteria, they are replaced.
• Other Equipment. A mass flow controller calibration is conducted on each Environics system annually
following the procedures in the Manufacturer’s Operation manual. Other equipment such as probes,
umbilical lines, cold boxes, etc. are routinely maintained and inspected to ensure that they are in good
working order. They are repaired or replaced as needed.
4.2 Field Sampling
Field sampling will be done in accordance with the Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) for the applicable test
method(s). General QC measures for the test program include:
• Sample trains will be leak checked before and after each test run.
• Appropriate probe and impinger temperatures will be maintained.
• The sampling port will be sealed to prevent air from leaking from the port.
• Dry gas meter, ΔP, ΔH, temperature and pump vacuum data will be recorded during each sample point.
• All raw data will be maintained in organized manner.
• All raw data will be reviewed on a daily basis for completeness and acceptability.
Appendix A
Method 1 Data
Location
Source
Project No.
Date:
Vertical
Circular
59.00 in
6.00 in
53.00 in
15.32 ft2
2
1
14.0 ft
3.2 (must be ≥ 0.5)
30.0 ft
6.8 (must be ≥ 2)
12
12
Measurer (Initial and Date):SPR 1/8/24
Reviewer (Initial and Date):RJL 1/8/24
23456789101112
1 14.6 -- 6.7 -- 4.4 -- 3.2 -- 2.6 -- 2.1 1 4.4 2.33 8.33
2 85.4 -- 25.0 -- 14.6 -- 10.5 -- 8.2 -- 6.7 2 14.6 7.74 13.74
3 -- -- 75.0 -- 29.6 -- 19.4 -- 14.6 -- 11.8 3 29.6 15.69 21.69
4 -- -- 93.3 -- 70.4 -- 32.3 -- 22.6 -- 17.7 4 70.4 37.31 43.31
5 -- -- -- -- 85.4 -- 67.7 -- 34.2 -- 25.0 5 85.4 45.26 51.26
6 -- -- -- -- 95.6 -- 80.6 -- 65.8 -- 35.6 6 95.6 50.67 56.67
7 -- -- -- -- -- -- 89.5 -- 77.4 -- 64.4 7 -- -- --
8 -- -- -- -- -- -- 96.8 -- 85.4 -- 75.0 8 -- -- --
9 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 91.8 -- 82.3 9 -- -- --
10 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 97.4 -- 88.2 10 -- -- --
11 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 93.3 11 -- -- --
12 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 97.9 12 -- -- --
*Percent of stack diameter from inside wall to traverse point.
A = 14 ft.
B = 30 ft.
Depth of Duct = 53 in.
Number of traverse points on a diameter
Stack Diagram
Cross Sectional Area
Distance
from
outside of
port
LOCATION OF TRAVERSE POINTS Traverse
Point
% of
Diameter
Distance
from inside
wall
No. of Test Ports:
Number of Readings per Point:
Distance A:
Distance A Duct Diameters:
Distance B:
Distance B Duct Diameters:
Minimum Number of Traverse Points:
Actual Number of Traverse Points:
CIRCULAR DUCT
Cross Sectional Area of Duct:
University of Utah - Salt Lake City, UT
Unit 1 - Solar Taurus 70 CoGen (Turbine Only)
AST-2024-0023
01/09/24
Stack Parameters
Duct Orientation:
Duct Design:
Distance from Far Wall to Outside of Port:
Nipple Length:
Depth of Duct:
Upstream
Disturbance
Downstream
Disturbance
B
A
Method 1 Data
Location
Source
Project No.
Date:
Vertical
Circular
59.00 in
6.00 in
53.00 in
15.32 ft2
2
1
14.0 ft
3.2 (must be ≥ 0.5)
30.0 ft
6.8 (must be ≥ 2)
12
12
Measurer (Initial and Date):SPR 1/8/24
Reviewer (Initial and Date):RJL 1/8/24
23456789101112
1 14.6 -- 6.7 -- 4.4 -- 3.2 -- 2.6 -- 2.1 1 4.4 2.33 8.33
2 85.4 -- 25.0 -- 14.6 -- 10.5 -- 8.2 -- 6.7 2 14.6 7.74 13.74
3 -- -- 75.0 -- 29.6 -- 19.4 -- 14.6 -- 11.8 3 29.6 15.69 21.69
4 -- -- 93.3 -- 70.4 -- 32.3 -- 22.6 -- 17.7 4 70.4 37.31 43.31
5 -- -- -- -- 85.4 -- 67.7 -- 34.2 -- 25.0 5 85.4 45.26 51.26
6 -- -- -- -- 95.6 -- 80.6 -- 65.8 -- 35.6 6 95.6 50.67 56.67
7 -- -- -- -- -- -- 89.5 -- 77.4 -- 64.4 7 -- -- --
8 -- -- -- -- -- -- 96.8 -- 85.4 -- 75.0 8 -- -- --
9 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 91.8 -- 82.3 9 -- -- --
10 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 97.4 -- 88.2 10 -- -- --
11 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 93.3 11 -- -- --
12 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 97.9 12 -- -- --
*Percent of stack diameter from inside wall to traverse point.
A = 14 ft.
B = 30 ft.
Depth of Duct = 53 in.
Number of traverse points on a diameter
Stack Diagram
Cross Sectional Area
Distance
from
outside of
port
LOCATION OF TRAVERSE POINTS Traverse
Point
% of
Diameter
Distance
from inside
wall
No. of Test Ports:
Number of Readings per Point:
Distance A:
Distance A Duct Diameters:
Distance B:
Distance B Duct Diameters:
Minimum Number of Traverse Points:
Actual Number of Traverse Points:
CIRCULAR DUCT
Cross Sectional Area of Duct:
University of Utah - Salt Lake City, UT
Unit 1 - Solar Taurus 70 CoGen (Turbine and WHRU Duct Burner)
AST-2024-0023
01/08/24
Stack Parameters
Duct Orientation:
Duct Design:
Distance from Far Wall to Outside of Port:
Nipple Length:
Depth of Duct:
Upstream
Disturbance
Downstream
Disturbance
B
A
Method 1 Data
Location
Source
Project No.
Date:
Vertical
Circular
36.00 in
4.00 in
32.00 in
5.59 ft2
2
1
13.0 ft
4.9 (must be ≥ 0.5)
28.0 ft
10.5 (must be ≥ 2)
12
3
Measurer (Initial and Date):AJC 1/10/24
Reviewer (Initial and Date):RJL 1/10/24
23456789101112
1 14.6 16.7 6.7 -- 4.4 -- 3.2 -- 2.6 -- 2.1 1 16.75.349.34
2 85.4 50.0 25.0 -- 14.6 -- 10.5 -- 8.2 -- 6.7 2 50.0 16.00 20.00
3 -- 83.3 75.0 -- 29.6 -- 19.4 -- 14.6 -- 11.8 3 83.3 26.66 30.66
4 -- -- 93.3 -- 70.4 -- 32.3 -- 22.6 -- 17.7 4 -- -- --
5 -- -- -- -- 85.4 -- 67.7 -- 34.2 -- 25.0 5 -- -- --
6 -- -- -- -- 95.6 -- 80.6 -- 65.8 -- 35.6 6 -- -- --
7 -- -- -- -- -- -- 89.5 -- 77.4 -- 64.4 7 -- -- --
8 -- -- -- -- -- -- 96.8 -- 85.4 -- 75.0 8 -- -- --
9 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 91.8 -- 82.3 9 -- -- --
10 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 97.4 -- 88.2 10 -- -- --
11 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 93.3 11 -- -- --
12 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 97.9 12 -- -- --
*Percent of stack diameter from inside wall to traverse point.
A = 13 ft.
B = 28 ft.
Depth of Duct = 32 in.
Cross Sectional Area of Duct:
University of Utah - Salt Lake City, UT
Unit 6
AST-2024-0023
01/10/24
Stack Parameters
Duct Orientation:
Duct Design:
Distance from Far Wall to Outside of Port:
Nipple Length:
Depth of Duct:
No. of Test Ports:
Number of Readings per Point:
Distance A:
Distance A Duct Diameters:
Distance B:
Distance B Duct Diameters:
Minimum Number of Traverse Points:
Actual Number of Traverse Points:
CIRCULAR DUCT
LOCATION OF TRAVERSE POINTS Traverse
Point
% of
Diameter
Distance
from inside
wall
Number of traverse points on a diameter
Stack Diagram
Cross Sectional Area
Distance
from
outside of
port
Upstream
Disturbance
Downstream
Disturbance
B
A
Method 1 Data
Location
Source
Project No.
Date:
Vertical
Circular
36.00 in
4.00 in
32.00 in
5.59 ft2
2
1
13.0 ft
4.9 (must be ≥ 0.5)
27.0 ft
10.1 (must be ≥ 2)
12
3
Measurer (Initial and Date):AJC 1/10/24
Reviewer (Initial and Date):RJL 1/10/24
23456789101112
1 14.6 16.7 6.7 -- 4.4 -- 3.2 -- 2.6 -- 2.1 1 16.75.349.34
2 85.4 50.0 25.0 -- 14.6 -- 10.5 -- 8.2 -- 6.7 2 50.0 16.00 20.00
3 -- 83.3 75.0 -- 29.6 -- 19.4 -- 14.6 -- 11.8 3 83.3 26.66 30.66
4 -- -- 93.3 -- 70.4 -- 32.3 -- 22.6 -- 17.7 4 -- -- --
5 -- -- -- -- 85.4 -- 67.7 -- 34.2 -- 25.0 5 -- -- --
6 -- -- -- -- 95.6 -- 80.6 -- 65.8 -- 35.6 6 -- -- --
7 -- -- -- -- -- -- 89.5 -- 77.4 -- 64.4 7 -- -- --
8 -- -- -- -- -- -- 96.8 -- 85.4 -- 75.0 8 -- -- --
9 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 91.8 -- 82.3 9 -- -- --
10 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 97.4 -- 88.2 10 -- -- --
11 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 93.3 11 -- -- --
12 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 97.9 12 -- -- --
*Percent of stack diameter from inside wall to traverse point.
A = 13 ft.
B = 27 ft.
Depth of Duct = 32 in.
Cross Sectional Area of Duct:
University of Utah - Salt Lake City, UT
Unit 7
AST-2024-0023
01/10/24
Stack Parameters
Duct Orientation:
Duct Design:
Distance from Far Wall to Outside of Port:
Nipple Length:
Depth of Duct:
No. of Test Ports:
Number of Readings per Point:
Distance A:
Distance A Duct Diameters:
Distance B:
Distance B Duct Diameters:
Minimum Number of Traverse Points:
Actual Number of Traverse Points:
CIRCULAR DUCT
LOCATION OF TRAVERSE POINTS Traverse
Point
% of
Diameter
Distance
from inside
wall
Number of traverse points on a diameter
Stack Diagram
Cross Sectional Area
Distance
from
outside of
port
Upstream
Disturbance
Downstream
Disturbance
B
A
Method 1 Data
Location
Source
Project No.
Date:
Vertical
Circular
42.00 in
7.00 in
35.00 in
6.68 ft2
2
1
12.5 ft
4.3 (must be ≥ 0.5)
25.0 ft
8.6 (must be ≥ 2)
12
3
Measurer (Initial and Date):AJC 1/9/24
Reviewer (Initial and Date):RJL 1/9/24
23456789101112
1 14.6 16.7 6.7 -- 4.4 -- 3.2 -- 2.6 -- 2.1 1 16.7 5.85 12.85
2 85.4 50.0 25.0 -- 14.6 -- 10.5 -- 8.2 -- 6.7 2 50.0 17.50 24.50
3 -- 83.3 75.0 -- 29.6 -- 19.4 -- 14.6 -- 11.8 3 83.3 29.16 36.16
4 -- -- 93.3 -- 70.4 -- 32.3 -- 22.6 -- 17.7 4 -- -- --
5 -- -- -- -- 85.4 -- 67.7 -- 34.2 -- 25.0 5 -- -- --
6 -- -- -- -- 95.6 -- 80.6 -- 65.8 -- 35.6 6 -- -- --
7 -- -- -- -- -- -- 89.5 -- 77.4 -- 64.4 7 -- -- --
8 -- -- -- -- -- -- 96.8 -- 85.4 -- 75.0 8 -- -- --
9 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 91.8 -- 82.3 9 -- -- --
10 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 97.4 -- 88.2 10 -- -- --
11 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 93.3 11 -- -- --
12 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 97.9 12 -- -- --
*Percent of stack diameter from inside wall to traverse point.
A = 12.5 ft.
B = 25 ft.
Depth of Duct = 35 in.
Cross Sectional Area of Duct:
University of Utah - Salt Lake City, UT
Gen 9 Boiler
AST-2024-0023
01/09/24
Stack Parameters
Duct Orientation:
Duct Design:
Distance from Far Wall to Outside of Port:
Nipple Length:
Depth of Duct:
No. of Test Ports:
Number of Readings per Point:
Distance A:
Distance A Duct Diameters:
Distance B:
Distance B Duct Diameters:
Minimum Number of Traverse Points:
Actual Number of Traverse Points:
CIRCULAR DUCT
LOCATION OF TRAVERSE POINTS Traverse
Point
% of
Diameter
Distance
from inside
wall
Number of traverse points on a diameter
Stack Diagram
Cross Sectional Area
Distance
from
outside of
port
Upstream
Disturbance
Downstream
Disturbance
B
A
Appendix B
Location:
Source:
Project No.:
Run No. /Method
CO - Outlet Concentration (CCO), ppmvd
CMA
( CM - C0 )
where,
Cobs -= average analyzer value during test, ppmvd
Co -= average of pretest & posttest zero responses, ppmvd
CMA #N/A = actual concentration of calibration gas, ppmvd
CM -= average of pretest & posttest calibration responses, ppmvd
CCO -= CO Concentration, ppmvd
CO - Outlet Concentration (C<COc15>), ppmvd @ 15% O₂
20.9 - 15
20.9 - O₂
where,
CCO -= CO - Outlet Concentration, ppmvd
CO₂-= oxygen concentration, %
C<COc15>--= ppmvd @15% O₂
CO - Outlet Emission Rate (ERCO), lb/hr
where,
HI --= Heat Input, MMBtu/hr
EFCO --= CO - Outlet Emission Factor, lb/MMBtu
ERCO --= lb/hr
CO - Outlet Emission Factor (EFCOO₂d), lb/MMBtu
20.9
20.9 - CO₂
where,
CCO -= CO - Outlet Concentration, ppmvd
K 7.275E-08 = constant, lb/dscf · ppmvd
Fd --= fuel factor, dscf/MMBtu
CO₂-= oxygen concentration, %
EFCOO₂d --= lb/MMBtu
EFCOO₂d = ERCO x K x Fd x
ERCO =HI x CCO
C<COc15> = C<CO> x
CCO = ( Cobs - C0 ) x
-
--
--
Run 1 / Method 10

Location:
Source:
Project No.:
Run No. /Method
NOx - Outlet Concentration (CNOx), ppmvd
CMA
( CM - C0 )
where,
Cobs -= average analyzer value during test, ppmvd
Co -= average of pretest & posttest zero responses, ppmvd
CMA #N/A = actual concentration of calibration gas, ppmvd
CM -= average of pretest & posttest calibration responses, ppmvd
CNOx -= NOx Concentration, ppmvd
NOx - Outlet Concentration (C<NOxc15>), ppmvd @ 15% O₂
20.9 - 15
20.9 - O₂
where,
CNOx -= NOx - Outlet Concentration, ppmvd
CO₂-= oxygen concentration, %
C<NOxc15>--= ppmvd @15% O₂
NOx - Outlet Emission Rate (ERNOx), lb/hr
where,
HI --= Heat Input, MMBtu/hr
EFNOx --= NOx - Outlet Emission Factor, lb/MMBtu
ERNOx --= lb/hr
NOx - Outlet Emission Factor (EFNOxCO₂), lb/MMBtu
100
CCO₂
where,
CNOx -= NOx - Outlet Concentration, ppmvd
K 1.195E-07 = constant, lb/dscf · ppmvd
Fc --= fuel factor, dscf/MMBtu
CCO₂-= carbon dioxide concentration, %
EFNOxCO₂--= lb/MMBtu
EFNOxCO₂ = CNOx x K x Fc x
ERNOx =HI x CNOx
C<NOxc15> = CNOx x
CNOx = ( Cobs - C0 ) x
-
--
--
Run 1 / Method 7E

Emissions Calculations
Location
Source
Project No.
Run Number Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Average
Date -- -- -- --
Start Time -- -- -- --
Stop Time -- -- -- --
Fuel Factor (O2 dry), dscf/MMBtu Fd
-- -- -- --
Heat Input, MMBtu/hr HI -- -- -- --
O₂ Concentration, % dry CO₂- - - --
CO Concentration, ppmvd CCO - - - --
CO Concentration, ppmvd @ 15 % O₂CCOc15 -- -- -- --
CO Emission Rate, lb/hr ERCO -- -- -- --
CO Emission Factor, lb/MMBtu (O2d)EFCO O2d -- -- -- --
NOx Concentration, ppmvd CNOx - - - --
NOx Concentration, ppmvd @ 15 % O₂CNOxc15 -- -- -- --
NOx Emission Rate, lb/hr ERNOx -- -- -- --
NOx Emission Factor, lb/MMBtu (O2d)EFNOx O2d -- -- -- --
Calculated Data - Outlet
-
--
--
Source Data
Run 1 - CEMS Data
Location:
Source:
Project No.:
Date:
Time O₂ - Outlet CO - Outlet NOx - Outlet
Unit % dry ppmvd ppmvd
Status Valid Valid Valid
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Parameter O₂ - Outlet CO - Outlet NOx - Outlet
Uncorrected Run Average (Cobs)---
Cal Gas Concentration (CMA)#N/A #N/A #N/A
Pretest System Zero Response
Posttest System Zero Response
Average Zero Response (Co)---
Pretest System Cal Response
Posttest System Cal Response
Average Cal Response (CM)---
Corrected Run Average (Corr)---
-
--
--
-
Location:
Source:
Project No.:
Date:
Time NOx CO O2
(ppm)(ppm)(%)
A-1
2 0:00
3 0:00
4 0:00
5 0:00
6 0:00
B-1 0:00
2 0:00
3 0:00
4 0:00
5 0:00
6 0:00
------
Single Point Single Point Single Point
Average
Criteria Met
Traverse Point
0
0
0
QA Data
Location
Source
Project No.
O₂ - Outlet CO - Outlet NOx - Outlet
Make ------
Model ------
S/N ------
Operating Range ------
Cylinder ID
Zero NA NA NA
Low NA NA NA
Mid ------
High ------
Cylinder Certifed Values
Zero NA NA NA
Low NA NA NA
Mid ------
High ------
Cylinder Expiration Date
Zero NA NA NA
Low NA NA NA
Mid ------
High ------
Parameter
-
--
--
Response Times
Location:
Source:
Project No.:
O₂ - Outlet CO - Outlet NOx - Outlet
Zero -- -- --
Low NA NA NA
Mid -- -- --
High -- -- --
Average -- -- --
-
--
--
Parameter
Response Times, seconds
Calibration Data
Location:
Source:
Project No.:
Date:
O₂ - Outlet CO - Outlet NOx - Outlet
Expected Average Concentration ------
Span Between
Low ------
High ------
Desired Span ------
Low Range Gas
Low NA NA NA
High NA NA NA
Mid Range Gas
Low ------
High ------
High Range Gas
Low NA NA NA
High NA NA NA
Actual Concentration (% or ppm)
Zero 0.00 0.00 0.00
Low NA NA NA
Mid ------
High ------
Response Time (seconds)------
Upscale Calibration Gas (CMA)------
Instrument Response (% or ppm)
Zero ------
Low NA NA NA
Mid ------
High ------
Performance (% of Span or Cal. Gas Conc.)
Zero ------
Low NA NA NA
Mid ------
High ------
Performance Criteria
Zero 2.00 2.00 2.00
Low NA NA NA
Mid 2.00 2.00 2.00
High 2.00 2.00 2.00
Status
Zero ------
Low NA NA NA
Mid ------
High ------
--
-
Parameter
--
--
Bias/Drift Determinations
Location:
Source:
Project No.:
O₂ - Outlet CO - Outlet NOx - Outlet
Run 1 Date --
Span Value ---
Initial Instrument Zero Cal Response ---
Initial Instrument Upscale Cal Response #N/A #N/A #N/A
Pretest System Zero Response ---
Posttest System Zero Response ---
Pretest System Upscale Response ---
Posttest System Upscale Response ---
Bias (%)
Pretest Zero ------
Posttest Zero ------
Pretest Span ------
Posttest Span ------
Drift (%)
Zero ---
Mid ---
Run 2 Date --
Span Value ---
Instrument Zero Cal Response ---
Instrument Upscale Cal Response #N/A #N/A #N/A
Pretest System Zero Response ---
Posttest System Zero Response ---
Pretest System Upscale Response ---
Posttest System Upscale Response ---
Bias (%)
Pretest Zero ------
Posttest Zero ------
Pretest Span ------
Posttest Span ------
Drift (%)
Zero ---
Mid ---
Run 3 Date --
Span Value ---
Instrument Zero Cal Response ---
Instrument Upscale Cal Response #N/A #N/A #N/A
Pretest System Zero Response ---
Posttest System Zero Response ---
Pretest System Upscale Response ---
Posttest System Upscale Response ---
Bias (%)
Pretest Zero ------
Posttest Zero ------
Pretest Span ------
Posttest Span ------
Drift (%)
Zero ---
Mid ---
Parameter
-
--
--
Location:
Project No.:
Analyzer Make --Pre-Test Date Time
Analyzer Model --Pre-Test Concentration, ppm
Serial Number --Pre-Test Efficiency, %-
Cylinder ID Number Post-Test Date Time
Cylinder Exp. Date Post-Test Concentration, ppm
Cylinder Concentration, ppm Post-Test Efficiency, %-
*Required Efficiency is ≥ 90 %.
-
--
NO2 Converter Check - Outlet
Location:
Source:
Project No.:
Date
EPA
O2
--
--
--
--
Cylinder Number ID
Zero NA
Mid --
High --
Cylinder Certified Values
Zero 0.0
Mid --
High --
Instrument Response (% or ppm)
Zero --
Mid --
High --
Calibration Gas Selection (% of Span)
Mid --
High --
Calibration Error Performance (% of Span)
Zero --
Mid --
High --
Linearity (% of Range)
--
(%) lpm (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%)( ± 2 %)
10L/10L* 90.0 7.0 ----
10L/10L* 80.0 7.0 ----
10L/5L 80.0 5.0 ----
10L/5L 50.0 5.0 ----
10L/1L 20.0 4.0 ----
10L/1L 10.0 4.0 ----
(%)( ± 2 %)( ± 2 %)( ± 2 %)
----
----
----
----
----
----
Mid-Level Supply Gas Calibration Direct to Analyzer
Calibration Injection 1 Injection 2 Injection 3 Average
Gas Analyzer Analyzer Analyzer Analyzer
Concentration Concentration Concentration Concentration Concentration
(%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%)( ± 2 %)
- ---
Analyzer Make: --
-- - --
--
--
Parameter
Make
Model
S/N
Span
Method Criteria
Analyzer Model: --
Analyzer SN: --
Environics ID: --
Component/Balance Gas: O2/N2
Cylinder Gas ID (Dilution):
Cylinder Gas Concentration (Dilution), %:
*Not all AST Environics Units have 2-10L Mass Flow Controllers. For these units the 90% @ 7lpm and 80% @ 7lpm injections will not be conducted.
Cylinder Gas ID (Mid-Level):
Cylinder Gas Concentration (Mid-Level), %:
Target Mass Flow
Contollers
Target
Dilution
Target Flow
Rate
Target
Concentration
Actual
Concentration
Injection 1
Analyzer
Concentration
Injection 2
Analyzer
Concentration
Injection 3
Analyzer
Concentration
Average
Analyzer
Concentration Difference Average Error
Average
Analyzer
Concentration
Injection 1
Error
Injection 2
Error
Injection 3
Error
Difference
Average
Error
Run 3Run 2Run 1Run Number
------Date
------Start Time
------Stop Time
Generator Output, Hz (Gen OP)
Time, 0 min
Time, 15 min
Time, 30 min
Time, 45 min
Time, 60 min
------Average
Pre Catalyst Temperature, °F (PreT)
Time, 0 min
Time, 15 min
Time, 30 min
Time, 45 min
Time, 60 min
------Average
Catalyst Differential Pressure, in WC (ΔP)
Time, 0 min
Time, 15 min
Time, 30 min
Time, 45 min
Time, 60 min
----Average --
Source Speed, RPM (ES)
Time, 0 min
Time, 15 min
Time, 30 min
Time, 45 min
Time, 60 min
------Average
Suction Pressure, psig (SP)
Time, 0 min
Time, 15 min
Time, 30 min
Time, 45 min
Time, 60 min
------Average
Discharge Pressure, psig (DiT)
Time, 0 min
Time, 15 min
Time, 30 min
Time, 45 min
Time, 60 min
------Average
Source Brake Work, HP (EBW)
Time, 0 min
Time, 15 min
Time, 30 min
Time, 45 min
Time, 60 min
------Average
Source Load, % (EL)
Time, 0 min
Time, 15 min
Time, 30 min
Time, 45 min
Time, 60 min
------Average
Fuel Rate, scfh (FR)
Time, 0 min
Time, 15 min
Time, 30 min
Time, 45 min
Time, 60 min
------Average
Source Operational Data
Location -- - --
Source --
Project No. --

Appendix C

Stack
Sp
a
n

G
a
s

C
y
l
i
n
d
e
r
Ze
r
o

G
a
s

C
y
l
i
n
d
e
r
NOx O2 CO
Exhaust
Bypass Flow
RegulatorManifold System
Chiller
3-Way
Valve
Stainless
Probe
Flow
Regulators
Reference Method Monitors Sampling System
(EPA Methods 3A, 7E and 10)
Teflon Calibration Line
Heated Teflon
Sample Line
CO2